Talk:shall

RFV discussion
"(archaic) Used to indicate destiny or certainty. 'Goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life.'" I think this is the same as the primary sense ("I shall sing in the choir tomorrow"). Equinox ◑ 21:47, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd favor . Mglovesfun (talk) 14:06, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree with Mglovesfun. bd2412 T 23:01, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Striking: Mglovesfun replaced the tag with  on 3 February and opened an RFD discussion, though he did not comment here about it. (He removed the sense on 26 April after no one commented in the RFD discussion. He or someone else later removed the RFD discussion without archiving.) —Ruakh TALK 14:38, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Confused about "should" being past tense
How does that work? "I should go" isn't a past tense of "I shall go". That would be "I should have gone". Equinox ◑ 01:12, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
 * As in I promised that I should do the job myself https://oed.com/oed2/00221705  --Backinstadiums (talk) 18:20, 16 November 2020 (UTC)


 * That is not past tense any more than "eat" in "I promised to eat the food". Equinox ◑ 22:27, 16 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Oh but I see what you mean: you can't say "I promised that I shall do it" with the same meaning. It's subjunctive then I assume. Equinox ◑ 22:29, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
 * No it's simple past in reported speech. Rules similar to those for choosing between shall and will have long been advanced for should and would, but again the rules have had little effect on usage. --Backinstadiums (talk) 22:47, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

To be able to.
2. (Archaic) a. To be able to --Backinstadiums (talk) 18:16, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

would versus should
Would (and not should) is used to express willingness or promise (I agreed that I would do it) and to express habitual action in the past (In those days we would walk along the canal at night). --Backinstadiums (talk) 19:55, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

'I will drown, and no-one shall save me'
The contrast of I shall drown; no one will save me! versus I will drown; no one shall save me! is fairly well known. But I can't tell from this Wiktionary entry whether it ever had any basis in actual usage. —DIV (1.145.20.105 13:09, 29 October 2022 (UTC))

Corrupted comparison
The entry currently has a corrupted comparison: Shall is about one-fourth as common as will in North America compared to in the United Kingdom. So what is this actually supposed to mean?
 * Shall is about one-fourth as common as will in North America?
 * Note: there should then be a separate comparison added for the UK, such as (hypothetically), ...whereas shall is about half as common as will in the United Kingdom.


 * Shall is about one-fourth as common in North America compared to in the United Kingdom?
 * Note: this then leaves open the possibility that the same ratio could exist for "will" — maybe North Americans just rarely use any modal? To address this a separate comparison should added for will, such as (hypothetically), ...whereas there is little difference in the rates at which will is used in North America and the United Kingdom.

And is this at all up-to-date? Any evidence? Is this assessment for spoken language, written language, or what?
 * The ratio of usage of shall to will in North America is about one-fourth that of the ratio prevailing in the United Kingdom?

—DIV (1.145.20.105 13:27, 29 October 2022 (UTC))

Word classifications missing
Definition 1 has "(modal, auxiliary verb, defective)". But nothing for the following definitions. Why? I think it has to appear at each definition, unless you move it up to the headword. —DIV (1.145.20.105 13:15, 29 October 2022 (UTC))


 * ✅ Equinox ◑ 13:16, 29 October 2022 (UTC)