Wordsmith Talk |
About Us | What's New | Search | Site Map | Contact Us | |||
Register Log In Wordsmith Talk Forums General Topics Miscellany half-witicism
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
I must precede my discussion of legal definitions of shall, must, will, should and may with the caveat that common use of these terms can differ from legal use, the efforts of the Plain English in the Law movement notwithstanding. These definitions are based on American law, which, except for Louisiana, is based on the English common law, and thus I suspect that usages are similar in many other English language legal systems.
Shall = has a duty to
Must = (no legal definition, so the lay definition applies) = used to express an imperative
Will = (no legal definition other than that pertaining to the document used to dispose of a decedent’s estate, so a lay definition) = expected or required to
Should = (lay again) = pt of shall, indicative of duty, propriety or expediency
May = is permitted to
In drafting contracts or statutes, "shall" is often used to impose a mandatory duty, but the use of "shall" is in large part attributable to the inertia of legal writing (some of the statutes still in effect were initially drafted over 100 years ago). I use "must" instead. It also conveys imperative, but at least in the US is the more modern and common term, and thus far has not caused confusion over its meaning like "shall" occasionally does. Sometimes, the Legislature will confuse "shall" and "may," or "and" and "or," making interpretation more of an art than a science.
I agree with prior posters that "shall" clearly means an imperative when spoken by one as a command to another, but conveys a meaning closer to expectation when spoken about oneself. In contracts or statutes, of course, only the command nuance arises.
Per Webster’s, the traditional rule says that future time is indicated by "shall" in the first person and "will" in the other persons, and that determination is expressed by "will" in the first person and "shall" in other persons. Webster’s and the Gregg Reference Manual both say that "shall" has largely given way to "will" in all but the most formal writing and speech, and that "should" and "would" similarly have formal and informal distinctions and follow the same rules in expressions of future time, determination, and willingness.
Well, I could go on, but I will not, as there are things I must do and I should get back to work.
I shall return.
Entire Thread Subject Posted By Posted ![]()
half-witicism
Faldage 03/10/2001 9:32 PM ![]()
Re: half-witicism
wwh 03/11/2001 4:06 PM ![]()
Re: Requiem not an opera
Faldage 03/12/2001 1:19 PM ![]()
Re: Requiem not an opera
maverick 03/12/2001 1:31 PM ![]()
Re: grammar
Shoshannah 03/12/2001 10:17 PM ![]()
Re: grammar
Bingley 03/13/2001 5:04 AM ![]()
Re: grammar
Capital Kiwi 03/13/2001 9:12 AM ![]()
Re: grammar
belligerentyouth 03/13/2001 9:58 AM ![]()
Re: grammar
maverick 03/13/2001 12:29 PM ![]()
Re: grammar - time out
Max Quordlepleen 03/13/2001 8:04 PM ![]()
Re: grammar - time out
Anonymous 03/13/2001 8:32 PM ![]()
Re: Year One, second chance
wow 03/14/2001 12:51 AM ![]()
Re: grammar - time out
nancyk 03/14/2001 1:54 AM ![]()
Re: time out
tsuwm 03/14/2001 2:14 AM ![]()
Re: time out
Anonymous 03/14/2001 4:58 AM ![]()
Re: time out
Max Quordlepleen 03/14/2001 6:16 AM ![]()
Re: Of shoes and ships
Capital Kiwi 03/14/2001 6:50 AM ![]()
Re: time out
Fiberbabe 03/14/2001 2:05 PM ![]()
Re: time out
wwh 03/14/2001 2:37 PM ![]()
Re: time out
Fiberbabe 03/14/2001 2:44 PM ![]()
Re: time out
tsuwm 03/14/2001 11:58 PM ![]()
Re: time out
wwh 03/15/2001 1:01 AM ![]()
Re: time out
tsuwm 03/15/2001 2:30 AM ![]()
Re: time out
wwh 03/15/2001 10:50 AM ![]()
Re: time out
Anonymous 03/14/2001 3:39 PM ![]()
ceiling wax!
of troy 03/14/2001 3:47 PM ![]()
Re: sealing wacks!
maverick 03/14/2001 4:00 PM ![]()
Re: ceiling wax!
Anonymous 03/14/2001 10:42 PM ![]()
Re: time out
Jazzoctopus 03/14/2001 10:45 PM ![]()
Re: half-witicism
Shoshannah 03/11/2001 4:50 PM ![]()
Re: half-witicism
tsuwm 03/11/2001 4:57 PM ![]()
Re: half-witicism
wwh 03/11/2001 5:08 PM ![]()
Re: half-witicism
tsuwm 03/11/2001 5:19 PM ![]()
Re: half-witicism
AnnaStrophic 03/11/2001 5:41 PM ![]()
Re: half-witicism
Max Quordlepleen 03/11/2001 5:55 PM ![]()
Re: grammar
Shoshannah 03/11/2001 7:09 PM ![]()
Re: grammar
wwh 03/11/2001 7:27 PM ![]()
Re: grammar
Shoshannah 03/11/2001 7:41 PM ![]()
Re: grammar
AnnaStrophic 03/11/2001 7:55 PM ![]()
Re: grammar
tsuwm 03/11/2001 8:59 PM ![]()
Re: grammar
AnnaStrophic 03/11/2001 9:33 PM ![]()
Re: grammar
wwh 03/12/2001 1:09 AM ![]()
Re: up with which
wow 03/12/2001 1:56 AM ![]()
Re: up with which
of troy 03/12/2001 1:28 PM ![]()
Re: grammar
Faldage 03/12/2001 1:49 PM ![]()
Re: grammar
wsieber 03/12/2001 2:15 PM ![]()
Re: grammar
Faldage 03/12/2001 3:11 PM ![]()
Re: grammar
wwh 03/12/2001 3:28 PM ![]()
Re: grammar
wow 03/12/2001 3:31 PM ![]()
Re: grammar
wwh 03/12/2001 3:48 PM ![]()
Re: will v. shall
Faldage 03/12/2001 3:52 PM ![]()
Re: will v. shall
wwh 03/12/2001 4:07 PM ![]()
Re: will v. shall
Faldage 03/12/2001 4:45 PM ![]()
Re: will v. shall
wwh 03/12/2001 5:03 PM ![]()
Re: will v. shall
tsuwm 03/12/2001 5:17 PM ![]()
Re: will v. shall
maverick 03/12/2001 6:12 PM ![]()
Re: will v. shall
wow 03/12/2001 9:40 PM ![]()
Re: will v. shall
Shoshannah 03/12/2001 10:29 PM ![]()
Re: will v. shall
wwh 03/12/2001 10:36 PM ![]()
Re: will v. shall
Shoshannah 03/12/2001 10:49 PM ![]()
Re: will v. shall
Faldage 03/13/2001 1:44 PM ![]()
Re: will v. shall
Hyla 03/13/2001 12:24 AM ![]()
Shall/must/will/should/may
Sparteye 03/13/2001 3:22 PM ![]()
Re: Shall/must/will/should/may
Faldage 03/13/2001 8:21 PM ![]()
Re: Shall/must/will/should/may
wow 03/14/2001 1:01 AM ![]()
Re: clean slate
wwh 03/14/2001 1:31 AM ![]()
Louisiana law
Sparteye 03/14/2001 2:54 PM ![]()
Re: Louisiana law
of troy 03/14/2001 3:16 PM ![]()
Re: grammar
Sparteye 03/12/2001 5:02 PM ![]()
Re: grammar
Max Quordlepleen 03/12/2001 6:16 PM ![]()
Dr Seuss
Sparteye 03/12/2001 6:28 PM ![]()
Re: Dr Seuss
Max Quordlepleen 03/12/2001 6:36 PM ![]()
Re: grammar
tsuwm 03/12/2001 10:49 PM ![]()
Re: grammar
Shoshannah 03/12/2001 10:52 PM ![]()
Re: grammar
tsuwm 03/12/2001 11:12 PM ![]()
Re: grammar
wwh 03/12/2001 11:24 PM ![]()
Re: half-witicism
wow 03/12/2001 2:05 AM ![]()
Re: half-witicism
Bobyoungbalt 03/12/2001 7:25 PM ![]()
Nice thing about threaded mode
Faldage 03/12/2001 8:43 PM
Moderated by Jackie
Link Copied to Clipboard
Forum Rules · Mark All Read Contact Us · Forum Help · Wordsmith Talk