Page 1 of 1
will x 2
Posted: Tue Jul 19, 2005 10:18 am
by metal56
What's your opinion on the sentence marked by asterisks below?
...............
Mark stared at him fiercely. "I'm trying to save his life, okay? Maybe, just maybe, he'll see that this is not working, and maybe he'll decide he should wait or something. Why is that so hard to understand?"
"Because he's crazy. **If he'll kill himself, then he'll kill us. Why is that so hard to understand?"**
Excerpt from John Grisham's The Client.
Posted: Tue Jul 19, 2005 11:08 am
by Andrew Patterson
Metal wrote:
"Because he's crazy. **If he'll kill himself, then he'll kill us. Why is that so hard to understand?"**
Not acceptable but not because will+inf in both clauses.
The first will does not so much refer to future action, but to volition. However, I can't get the idea of of my head that it it's something he would already have had to have done to prove the volition and if he's killed himself, he can't kill us.
Grisham's statement is at best awkward. Better would be, "If he's willing to kill himself, I'm sure he wouldn't hessitate to kill us." Then again, he's building charactors, and this is what one of his charactors says. People sometimes use awkward or ungrammatical sentences in real life. Maybe he's just reflecting that fact.
A more common statement is, "If he'll do that, he'll do anything." This does at least show that "will" can be in both clauses.
This does, however, beg the question as to just what conditional this is. Is this another nail in the coffin for the numbered conditionals?
The best killer of the numbered conditionals has to be:
"Your money back if not completely satisfied," however. No verbs!
Posted: Tue Jul 19, 2005 1:31 pm
by lolwhites
Are you sure this isn't will expressing volition? I take the sentence to mean "If he is prepared/willing to kill himself, then he is capable of killing us". I find it acceptable.
Numbered conditionals may be dead but they are still stumbling around like restless zombies, their fetid, rotting carcases stinking out too many EFL classrooms.
Posted: Tue Jul 19, 2005 2:27 pm
by Andrew Patterson
lolwhites wrote:
Are you sure this isn't will expressing volition? I take the sentence to mean "If he is prepared/willing to kill himself, then he is capable of killing us". I find it a bit awkward, but acceptable.
Lolwhites, I'm sure that it
is expressing volition, I find the expression awkward, however. Perhaps the way I put it was awkward too.
Posted: Tue Jul 19, 2005 3:36 pm
by metal56
Andrew Patterson wrote:Metal wrote:
"Because he's crazy. **If he'll kill himself, then he'll kill us. Why is that so hard to understand?"**
Not acceptable but not because will+inf in both clauses.
The first will does not so much refer to to future action, but to volition. However, I can't get the idea of of my head that it it's something he would already have had to have done to prove the volition and if he's killed himself, he can't kill us.
Grisham's statement is at best awkward. Better would be, "If he's willing to kill himself, I'm sure he wouldn't hessitate to kill us." Then again, he's building charactors, and this is what one of his charactors says. People sometimes use awkward or ungrammatical sentences in real life. Maybe he's just reflecting that fact.
A more common statement is, "If he'll do that, he'll do anything." This does at least show that "will" can be in both clauses.
This does, however, beg the question as to just what conditional this is. Is this another nail in the coffin for the numbered conditionals?
The best killer of the numbered conditionals has to be:
"Your money back if not completely satisfied," however. No verbs!
"If he's willing to kill himself, I'm sure he wouldn't hessitate to kill us."
I couldn't imagine my public school educated, 14-year-old son saying it that way. Sounds extremely writerly, semi-formal and not quite casual spoken English.
Posted: Tue Jul 19, 2005 3:36 pm
by metal56
lolwhites wrote:Are you sure this isn't will expressing volition? I take the sentence to mean "If he is prepared/willing to kill himself, then he is capable of killing us". I find it acceptable.
Me too.
If he will take accept a free spliff whenever it is offered (volition-present), he will definitely accept any stronger drug under the same circumstances (volition-future).
"Will" over "would" because the speaker see the referent's willingness to accept any drug offered as more factual.
Posted: Tue Jul 19, 2005 3:48 pm
by Andrew Patterson
Hey, why is everyone saying that I said it didn't refer to volition. I said it did refer to volition. It's just I thought that it was a bit awkward.
Posted: Tue Jul 19, 2005 4:48 pm
by lolwhites
Sorry, Andrew, should have read your post more carefully.
We all seem to be agreed, at least.