Navigation bar
  Print document Start Previous page
 69 of 178 
Next page End  

69
future action conveyed as a promise); those in the second example render a command.
Moreover, in the system of the Russian tenses there is a specialized modal form of analytical future
expressing intention (the combination of the verb стать with the imperfective infinitive). E.g.: Что же вы
теперь хотите делать?-Тебя это не касается, что я стану делать. Я план обдумываю (А. Толстой).
Within the framework of the universal meaningful features of the verbal future, the future of the English
verb is highly specific in so far as its auxiliaries in their very immediate etymology are words of obligation and
volition, and the survival of the respective connotations in them is backed by the inherent quality of the future
as such. Still, on the whole, the English categorial future differs distinctly from the modal constructions with
the same predicator verbs.
§ 6. In the clear-cut modal uses of the verbs shall and will the idea of the future either is not expressed at
all, or else is only rendered by way of textual connotation, the central semantic accent being laid on the
expression of obligation, necessity, inevitability, promise, intention, desire. These meanings may be easily seen
both on the examples of ready phraseological citation, and in genuine everyday conversation exchanges. Cf.:
He who does not work neither shall he eat (phraseological citation). "I want a nice hot curry, do you hear?" -
"All right, Mr. Crackcnthorpe» you shall have it" (everyday speech). None are so deaf as those who will not
hear (phraseological citation). Nobody's allowed to touch a thing-I won't have a woman near the place
(everyday speech).
The modal nature of the shall/will + Infinitive combinations in the cited examples can be shown by means of
equivalent substitutions:
... > He who does not work must not eat, either. ... > All right, Mr. Crackenthorpe, I promise to have it
cooked. ... > None are so deaf as those who do not want to hear. ... > I intend not to allow a woman to come
near the place.
Accounting for the modal meanings of the combinations under analysis, traditional grammar gives the
following rules: shall + Infinitive with the first person, will + Infinitive with the second and third persons
express pure future; the reverse combinations express modal meanings, the most typical of which are intention
or desire for I will and promise or command on the part of the speaker for you shall, he shall. Both rules apply
to refined British English. In American English will is described as expressing pure future with all the persons,
shall as expressing modality.
However, the cited description, though distinguished by elegant simplicity, cannot be taken as fully agreeing
with the existing lingual practice. The main feature of this description contradicted by practice is the British use
of will with the first person without distinctly pronounced modal connotations (making due allowance for the
general connection of the future tense with modality, of which we have spoken before). Cf.:
I will call for you and your young man at seven o'clock (J. Galsworthy). When we wake I will take him up
and carry him back (R. Kipling). I
will let you know on Wednesday what expenses have been necessary (A.
Christie). If you wait there on Thursday evening between seven and eight I will come if I can (H.C. Merriman).
That the combinations of will with the infinitive in the above examples do express the future time, admits of
no dispute. Furthermore, these combinations, seemingly, are charged with modal connotations in no higher
degree than the corresponding combinations of shall with the infinitive. Cf:.
Haven't time; I shall miss my train (A. Bennett). I shall be happy to carry it to the House of Lords, if
necessary (J. Galsworthy). You never know what may happen. I shan't have a minute's peace (M. Dickens).
Granted our semantic intuitions about the exemplified uses are true, the question then arises: what is the real
difference, if any, between the two British first person expressions of the future, one with shall, the other one
with will Or are they actually just semantic doublets, i.e. units of complete synonymy, bound by the
paradigmatic relation of free alternation?
A solution to this problem is to be found on the basis of syntactic distributional and transformational
analysis backed by a consideration of the original meanings of both auxiliaries.
§ 7. Observing combinations with will in stylistically neutral collocations, as the first step of our study we
note the adverbials of time used with this construction. The environmental expressions, as well as implications,
of future time do testify that from this point of view there is no difference between will and shall, both of them
equally conveying the idea of the future action expressed by the adjoining infinitive.
As our next step of inferences, noting the types of the infinitive- environmental semantics of will in contrast
to the contextual background of shall, we state that the first person will-future expresses an action which is to
be performed by the speaker for choice, of his own accord. But this meaning of free option does not at all
imply that the speaker actually wishes to perform the action, or else that he is determined to perform it,
possibly in defiance of some contrary force. The exposition of the action shows it as being not bound by any
Сайт создан в системе uCoz