 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
71
expression of the future is actively counteracted by the two structural factors. The first is the existence of the
two functionally differing contractions of the future auxiliaries in the negative form, i.e. shan't and won't,
which imperatively support the survival of shall in the first person against the levelled positive (affirmative)
contraction -'ll. The second is the use of the future tense in interrogative sentences, where with the first person
only shall is normally used. Indeed, it is quite natural that a genuine question directed by the speaker to
himself, i.e. a question showing doubt or speculation, is to be asked about an action of non-willful involuntary
order, and not otherwise.Cf.
What shall we be shown next? Shall I be able to master shorthand professionally? The question was, should
I see Beatrice again before her departure?
The semantics of the first person futurity question is such that even the infinitives of essentially volition-
governed actions are transferred here to the plane of non-volition, subordinating themselves to the general
implication of doubt, hesitation, uncertainty. Cf.:
What shall I answer to an offer like that? How shall we tackle the matter if we are left to rely on our own
judgment?
Thus, the vitality of the discriminate shall/win future, characteristic of careful English speech, is supported
by logically vindicated intra-lingual factors. Moreover, the whole system of Modem British future with its
mobile inter-action of the two auxiliaries is a product of recent language development, not a relict of the older
periods of its history. It is this subtly regulated and still unfinished system that gave cause to H.W. Fowler for
his significant statement: "... of the English of the English shall and will are the shibboleth."*
* Fowler H.W. A Dictionary of Modem English Usage. Ldn., 1941, p. 729.
§ 8. Apart from shall/will + Infinitive construction, there is another construction in English which has a
potent appeal for being analysed within the framework of the general problem of the future tense. This is the
combination of the predicator be going with the infinitive. Indeed, the high frequency occurrence of this
construction in contexts conveying the idea of an immediate future action cannot but draw a very dose attention
on the part of a linguistic observer.
The combination may denote a sheer intention (either the speaker's or some other person's) to perform the
action expressed by the infinitive, thus entering into the vast set of "classical" modal constructions. E.g:.
I am going to ask you a few more questions about the mysterious disappearance of the document, Mr.
Gregg. He looked across at my desk and I thought for a moment he was going to give me the treatment, too.
But these simple modal uses of be going
are countered by cases where the direct meaning of intention
rendered by the predicator stands in contradiction with its environmental implications and is subdued by them.
Cf.:
You are trying to frighten me. But you are not going to frighten me any more (L. Hellman). I did not know
how I was going to get out of the room. (D. du Maurier).
Moreover, the construction, despite its primary meaning of intention, presupposing a human subject, is not
infrequently used with non-human subjects and even in impersonal sentences. Cf.:
She knew what she was doing, and she was sure it was going to be worth doing (W. Saroyan). There's going
to be a contest over Ezra Grolley’s estate (E. Gardner).
Because of these properties it would appear tempting to class the construction in question as a specific tense
form, namely, the tense form of "immediate future", analogous to the French futur immediat (e.g. Le spectacle
va commencer- The show is going to begin).
Still, on closer consideration, we notice that the non-intention uses of the predicator be going are not
indifferent stylistically. Far from being neutral, they more often than not display emotional colouring mixed
with semantic connotations of oblique modality.
For instance, when the girl from the first of the above examples appreciates something as "going to be
worth doing", she is expressing her assurance of its being so. When one labels the rain as "never going to stop",
one clearly expresses one's annoyance at the bad state of the weather. When a future event is introduced by the
formula "there to be going to be", as is the case in the second of the cited examples, the speaker clearly implies
his foresight of it, or his anticipation of it, or, possibly, a warning to beware of it, or else some other modal
connotation of a like nature. Thus, on the whole, the non-intention uses of the construction be going +
Infinitive cannot be rationally divided into modal and non-modal, on the analogy of the construction shall/will