EvidentlySteven, you've completely missed the point here,
Yea, but he is quite likely to say "Ok. I will, stop nagging me" or "I'll do it later." The form of the quesiton is exactly the same.only a total smart arse would reply "I will" to such a question
Incidentally last wedding I went to where they used Englsih the quesiton was
Do you take this woman to be your lawful wedded wife?
I suspect you're trying to get me to fall into a trap hereit follows from that the same argument can be made for will (i.e. future reference comes from context, not the modal itself)? And will you accept that that means you don't have to resort to claims that will = future to account for sentences which refer to future time and contain said modal?

My view is that 'will' like other modal verbs has a variety of meanings that can only be derived from the context. Whether you want to say that in a sentence where will refers to the future such as
When the train comes into the station, the band will strike up a tune"
it is will that determines the future or not doesn't seem that important to me.
It is clear that that sentence is different from
When the train comes into the station, the band strikes up a tune.
When the train comes into the station, the band may strike up a tune.
Wnen the train comes into the station the band will have struck up a tune.
When the train comes into the station, the band must strike up a tune.
and that what makes that sentence different from these is that we have 'will' used with the base form of the verb, and that the salient fact about that main clause is that it happens in the future.
I have not said that 'wll' = future. I have said that 'will' often is used to convey the idea of the future (and of course I accept the fact that a pure future is unlikely because of the inherent uncetainty present in the idea of the future) and that you can often translate other languages future tenses by 'will'. In particular I cannot think of a single example where the Spanis future cannot be translated by 'will' though I can think of myriad examples where 'will' cannot be translated by the Spanish Future. Now if you are prepared to admit that the future tense in other languages does not primarily talk about the future I am not going to argue with you.
What I do not believe is that there is some nebulous "fundamental meaning" of "will" or "can" or "modality" and that we can or should, try to explain the mutliple uses of these words or concepts from an idea that has no apparent base either in etymology or the mind of the speaker. If Lewis suggests this, - and I am waiting for our college library to buy the booklist Larry suggested some months previously, so I can read him for myself - then I believe he is tilting at windmills.
I will carry those books. is contrastive stress suggesting that the other person was sceptical of the initial offer (I {b]will[/b] marry you, I really will! Believe me. All we have to do is wait for the divorce") or that the other person was reluctant to accept the offer and the second person has to insisit on it. (I will carry those books. I'm not going to let a poor, old decrepit teacher such as yourself to carry them wnen you should be in bed in a nursing home anyway.So saying "I will carry those books for you" doesn't have different nuances from "I'll carry those books"?
Neither, 'I'll' is 'I'll'. It's the normal formSo saying "I will carry those books for you" doesn't have different nuances from "I'll carry those books"?