Author Topic: The differences in sense when “will” or “would” is used  (Read 4334 times)

Joe Carillo

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4646
  • Karma: +202/-2
    • View Profile
    • Email
The differences in sense when “will” or “would” is used
« on: December 13, 2017, 01:49:17 AM »
This very interesting grammar question was asked by Forum member English Maiden sometime ago:

“I have a grammar question about this line from the lyrics of a popular rock-ballad song by a popular American rock band in the ’90s: ‘I would do anything for love, but I won’t do that.’ It got me wondering why the modal verbs in it are not the same. Why is ‘would’ used in the first half of that compound sentence and ‘will’ in the second half? What really is the difference between saying ‘You would do something’ and saying ‘You will do something’?”

Here’s my reply to English Maiden:

As taught to us early in English grammar, the auxiliary verb “will” expresses these two major senses: (1) the simple futurity of a particular action, as in “She will get married tomorrow morning,” and (2) one’s determination, insistence, persistence, or willfulness at present to do something, as in “I will follow you no matter where you go.” In both senses, “will” inflects to the past-tense “would” in complex sentence constructions like “She said (that) she would get married tomorrow morning” and “He said (that) he would follow me no matter where I go.”


What complicates matters, however, is that the auxiliary “would” doesn’t only serve as the past tense of “will” but also works with verbs to evoke several other senses. I’ll cite only a few of those senses that are directly related to your question, namely: (3) to express an intent, wish, or desire, in “Those who would testify against us will be expelled”; (4) to express choice or consent, as in “The court would terminate the proceedings if it could”; (5) to express possibility or contingency, as in “If she had gone to medical school, she would be a surgeon by now”; and (6) to express custom or habitual action, as in “We would go to our farmhouse during weekends.”

Now let’s take a close look at that line from the song lyrics you cited: “I would do anything for love, but I won’t do that.” Here, the first clause “I would do anything for love” expresses the sense of the speaker’s intent to do something. This, of course, is what’s contemplated in Sense 3 as described above, with “would” serving as an auxiliary to the main verb “do” to express an intent, wish, or desire. It’s a timeless declaration of the speaker’s strong determination to do something.

But why, you ask, does the second clause of that compound sentence, “I won’t do that,” use the verb “will” instead? Of course, that sentence actually doesn’t use “will” in the negative sense but “won’t,” the American English colloquial contraction for “will not.” Whether in the form of “will not” or “won’t,” however, the auxiliary “will” works with the verb “do” here according to Sense 2 as described above, which is to evoke not simple futurity but the speaker’s strong determination, insistence, persistence, or willfulness at present—now—to do something. It would therefore be incorrect here to use the past-tense “would not” or “wouldn’t.”

As to your last question: What’s the difference between saying “You would do something” and saying “You will do something”? The difference is in the degree of modality or strength of the speaker’s expectation or affirmation of the give action. Remember that “will” and “would” are modals, with “will” expressing a speaker’s comparatively stronger expectation or affirmation than “would.”

So, when someone tells you “You will do something for me,” he or she is practically certain that you’ll do what’s being asked; you are just short of being ordered or commanded to do it. In contrast, when someone tells you “You would do something for me,” the speaker’s expectation isn’t as strong and just amounts to a request.  

This essay, 783rd in the series, first appeared in the column “English Plain and Simple” by Jose A. Carillo in the March 17, 2012 issue of The Manila Times, © 2012 by the Manila Times Publishing Corp. All rights reserved.
« Last Edit: December 13, 2017, 09:28:32 AM by Joe Carillo »