# If you will go, you shall.



## wolfbm1

Witam.

Zastanawiam się jak przetłumaczyć zdanie: If you will go, you shall.
Jeśli pójdziesz, to ?

Kontekst - zdania przykladowe napisane przez owlmana:
If you could go, then you would.
If you will go, then you shall.
If you may go, then I'll pick you up at eight tonight.


----------



## LeTasmanien

wolfbm1 said:


> If you could go, then you would.
> If you will go, than you shall.
> If you may go, then I'll pick you up at eight tonight.




If you could go, then you would. This is fine, "then" is optional.
If you may go, then I'll pick you up at eight tonight. This doesn't look right.
More likely to hear/read something like... If you can go, then I could pick you up at eight tonight. It is a conditional sentence after all.

If you will go, than you shall. 
"will' and "shall" have a similar meaning and I think in your sententence they are quite interchangeable, so to me the sentence doesn't mean much. 
I believe that there is a fair bit of disagreement between grammarians on the precise difference in meaning between the two. For the general English speaking public therefore, as you might expect, the distinction is even more vague.
In my understanding shall carries a little more force, eg a mother might say to a naughty child, "You shall do as you are told!"
The good news that "shall" is unfashionable these days and rarely heard and I would suggest probably best avoided unless you are studying older English texts?

But will be interested to hear other views on this....


----------



## Thomas1

If you could go, then you would. -- Jeśli/Kiedy mogłeś (iść/pójść), to chodziłeś/szedłeś. 
If you will go, th*e*n you shall. -- Jeśli chcesz iść, to pójdziesz. 
If you may go, then I'll pick you up at eight tonight. -- Jeśli możesz iść, to przyjadę po Ciebie o ósmej (wieczorem). 
 W zdaniu, o które pytasz, "will" traci już swoją modalność, a widać w nim bardziej jego pierwotne znaczenie (chęć), podczas gdy "shall" wskazuje na obietnicę i/lub determinację ze strony osoby mówiącej.


----------



## wolfbm1

Thomas1 said:


> If you could go, then you would. -- Jeśli/Kiedy mogłeś (iść/pójść), to chodziłeś/szedłeś.
> If you will go, then you shall. -- Jeśli chcesz iść, to pójdziesz.
> If you may go, then I'll pick you up at eight tonight. -- Jeśli możesz iść, to przyjadę po Ciebie o ósmej (wieczorem).
> W zdaniu, o które pytasz, "will" traci już swoją modalność, a widać w nim bardziej jego pierwotne znaczenie (chęć), podczas gdy "shall" wskazuje na obietnicę i/lub determinację ze strony osoby mówiącej.



Dziękuję Thomas.


----------



## wolfbm1

LeTasmanien said:


> If you will go, than you shall.
> "will' and "shall" have a similar meaning and I think in your sententence they are quite interchangeable, so to me the sentence doesn't mean much.
> I believe that there is a fair bit of disagreement between grammarians on the precise difference in meaning between the two. For the general English speaking public therefore, as you might expect, the distinction is even more vague.
> In my understanding shall carries a little more force, eg a mother might say to a naughty child, "You shall do as you are told!"
> The good news that "shall" is unfashionable these days and rarely heard and I would suggest probably best avoided unless you are studying older English texts?
> 
> But will be interested to hear other views on this....



Entangledbank told me it is a rare construction and that we can see the original difference between *will* and *shall*, while *will* denotes determination.

I concluded that: If you *will* go, then you *shall*. = if you are determined to go (condition), you will ensure it is done (result). -- Jeśli (bardzo) chcesz iść, to pójdziesz.


----------



## Thomas1

I generally agree that 'shall' isn't used in common parlance that much with the meaning discussed in this thread*. However, I'd say it is fairly common when used in questions such as 'Shall we go?'.

*Not rarely have I seen it used like that in legal documents, though.


----------



## LilianaB

_Shall_ is only really used in legal language, especially contracts, and that not all, in AE, unless for some stylistic purposes; _Shall we?_ for example -- if suggesting something to someone. (some people speak like that, but it is not really common). I am not sure how it is used in BE these days. It was often used instead of _will_ in the past. I don't really have that much contact with British English these days.


----------



## wolfbm1

LilianaB said:


> _Shall_ is only really used in legal language, especially contracts, and that not all, in AE, unless for some stylistic purposes; _Shall we?_ for example -- if suggesting something to someone. (some people speak like that, but it is not really common). I am not sure how it is used in BE these days. It was often used instead of _will_ in the past. I don't really have that much contact with British English these days.


Your point of view is interesting because Americans seem to have preserved "older" English, e.g. you use the subjunctive (that she not do) more often than the British. In Poland, the coursebooks written by British authors are used most often.


----------



## LilianaB

Nobody uses _shall_, in contexts other than legal, and, as I said, specially stylized speech. (in AE). They used to. The famous song starts "We shall overcome", but not anymore, in everyday speech, or even in fore formal speech, except legal documents.


----------



## Roy776

LeTasmanien said:


> If you could go, then you would. This is fine, "then" is optional.
> If you may go, then I'll pick you up at eight tonight. This doesn't look right.
> More likely to hear/read something like... If you can go, then I could pick you up at eight tonight. It is a conditional sentence after all.
> 
> If you will go, than you shall.
> "will' and "shall" have a similar meaning and I think in your sententence they are quite interchangeable, so to me the sentence doesn't mean much.
> I believe that there is a fair bit of disagreement between grammarians on the precise difference in meaning between the two. For the general English speaking public therefore, as you might expect, the distinction is even more vague.
> In my understanding shall carries a little more force, eg a mother might say to a naughty child, "You shall do as you are told!"
> The good news that "shall" is unfashionable these days and rarely heard and I would suggest probably best avoided unless you are studying older English texts?
> 
> But will be interested to hear other views on this....



Don't forget that there's also the verb 'to will' (chcieć). If we take this more literally, I understand it as "If you want to go, then you shall." Here, I also take 'shall' not to mean the future tense, but rather a little less strong a version of 'must'.


----------



## LeTasmanien

Roy776 said:


> Don't forget that there's also the verb 'to will' (chcieć). If we take this more literally, I understand it as "If you want to go, then you shall." Here, I also take 'shall' not to mean the future tense, but rather a little less strong a version of 'must'.



Hi Roy,
Interesting comment.
The verb "to will" is archaic and rarely used in English these days apart from it's important function of expressing the future tense of a verb. In this role I guess it would be described as an auxiliary verb, like to have, to be and to be able.
I have traveled
I was running
I can swim etc

In my understanding "chcieć" is simply translated as "to want",i.e. have a need or desire.

Thomas made the same incorrect (IMHO) connection when he wrote; 
If you will go, th*e*n you shall. -- Jeśli chcesz iść, to pójdziesz. 
I think this should be translated as If you want to go then you will (or "shall" if you must)

 Really the sentence "If you will go, you shall" makes no sense at all.
It's equivalent to saying "if you will go, you will (go)".

Cheers
Phil


----------



## jarabina

I realise that this forum is really for discussing Polish, but since British English is what is generally taught in Poland, I thought it might be wise to confirm that will/shall distinctions still exist in BE and that the verb 'to will' is not entirely archaic but still used.



LeTasmanien said:


> Hi Roy,
> The verb "to will" is archaic and rarely used in English.



I'm really surprised to hear that 'to will' is archaic in Tasmania. Would you really not say: 'I willed her to stop'? Or, 'I sat there willing her to go away'? What would you say instead? I can't think of anything In BE that is really an equivalent.



> Really the sentence "If you will go, you shall" makes no sense at all.
> It's equivalent to saying "if you will go, you will (go)".



This is not true in British English. It makes perfect sense. Entangledbank is right.





> Entangledbank told me it is a rare construction and that we can see the original difference between *will* and *shall*, while *will* denotes determination.
> 
> I concluded that: If you *will* go, then you *shall*. = if you are determined to go (condition), you will ensure it is done (result). -- Jeśli (bardzo) chcesz iść, to pójdziesz.




The use of will here relates to willpower (insistence) and shall is distinct from will in that it means it really will happen. The distinction exists because of the use of the modal 'will' for prediction. And this is not a prediction but a foregone conclusion. Shall is disappearing, but it's still common enough in certain situations.

Cf: 'If you *will* do that then what do you expect?' (Will = insistence)


----------



## LilianaB

Yes, I agree. In British English it might be perfect. _If you want to go, you should go_ (approximation). Or, you _will_ _go_ -- another possibility. It it will happen, depending on the context.


----------



## dreamlike

As an side, I don't think that 'shall' in the sense of 'will' is much in vogue these days, so I'd actually advise against using it altogether. I, for one, could only use it jokingly or to mimic one's way of speaking, as in:

_A) I hope you'll keep up the good work!
B) I shall!_ 

Is it even used in speech outside of formal contexts?


----------



## LeTasmanien

jarabina said:


> I'm really surprised to hear that 'to will' is archaic in Tasmania. Would you really not say: 'I willed her to stop'? Or, 'I sat there willing her to go away'? What would you say instead? I can't think of anything In BE that is really an equivalent.



Hi Jarabina,
No, I did not actually state that ' "to will" is archaic in Tasmania'. My experience of English is broader than you are implying and includes being educated in the British Grammar School system.
To answer your question though I would say 
"I wanted her to go away" and these days I would expect to hear/read something like
"I sat there wishing she would go away" but I agree that your similar statements are valid.

However really the sentence "If you will go, you shall" makes no sense at all.
It's equivalent to saying "if you will go, you will (go)"



jarabina said:


> This is not true in British English. It makes perfect sense. Entangledbank is right.
> 
> The use of will here relates to willpower (insistence) and shall is distinct from will in that it means it really will happen. The distinction exists because of the use of the modal 'will' for prediction. And this is not a prediction but a foregone conclusion. Shall is disappearing, but it's still common enough in certain situations.
> 
> Cf: 'If you *will* do that then what do you expect?' (Will = insistence)



Could you explain what exactly the statement  "if you will go, you will (go)" means to you? Perhaps put some context around it?

I agree the example you give,'If you *will* do that then what do you expect?' is quite valid and this is a common enough usage.
Cheers
Phil


----------



## LeTasmanien

dreamlike said:


> As an side, I don't think that 'shall' in the sense of 'will' is much in vogue these days, so I'd actually advise against using it altogether. I, for one, could only use it jokingly or to mimic one's way of speaking, as in:
> 
> _A) I hope you'll keep up the good work!
> B) I shall!_
> 
> Is it even used in speech outside of formal contexts?



Yes, it would tend to sound a little pretentious in everyday parlance.


----------



## LeTasmanien

jarabina said:


> I'm really surprised to hear that 'to will' is archaic in Tasmania. Would you really not say: 'I willed her to stop'? Or, 'I sat there willing her to go away'? What would you say instead? I can't think of anything In BE that is really an equivalent.



Hi Jarabina,
No, I did not state that " 'to will' is archaic in Tasmania". My experience of English is broader than you are implying and includes being educated in the British Grammar School system.
To answer your question though I would say 
"I wanted her to go away" and these days I would expect to hear/read something like
"I sat there wishing she would go away" but I agree that your similar statements are valid.

Really the sentence "If you will go, you shall" makes no sense at all.
It's equivalent to saying "if you will go, you will (go)"



jarabina said:


> This is not true in British English. It makes perfect sense. Entangledbank is right.
> 
> The use of will here relates to willpower (insistence) and shall is distinct from will in that it means it really will happen. The distinction exists because of the use of the modal 'will' for prediction. And this is not a prediction but a foregone conclusion. Shall is disappearing, but it's still common enough in certain situations.
> 
> Cf: 'If you *will* do that then what do you expect?' (Will = insistence)



Could you explain what exactly the statement  "if you will go, you shall (go)" means to you? Perhaps put some context around it?

I agree the example you give,'If you *will* do that then what do you expect?' is quite valid and this is a common enough usage.
Cheers
Phil


----------



## Thomas1

Hi, Phil,

How would you interpret 'will' and 'shall' in the following sentence:





> "Sir," she said, "will you fight for my lord, Sir Damas? If you will, you shall be taken from this prison.  If you will not, you shall die here."
> Source


----------



## LeTasmanien

Thomas1 said:


> Hi, Phil,
> 
> How would you interpret 'will' and 'shall' in the following sentence:
> _"Sir," she said, "will you fight for my lord, Sir Damas? If you will,  you shall be taken from this prison.  If you will not, you shall die  here."_


Hi Thomas,
The meaning is fairly clear I think so not much interpretation needed?
It's obviously old English. Here again "shall" and "will" essentially mean the same thing. 
In contemporary English people would tend to use "will" rather than "shall" (and "won't" in place of "will not").
Cheers
Phil.


----------



## LilianaB

I would personally interpret it as: it will happen according to your wishes -- if you want to be free -- you will be freed, if you don't, you have the option of spending the rest of your life in prison.


----------



## Roy776

Thomas1 said:


> Hi, Phil,
> 
> How would you interpret 'will' and 'shall' in the following sentence:
> 
> "Sir," she said, "will you fight for my lord, Sir Damas? If you will,  you shall be taken from this prison.  If you will not, you shall die  here."



'Will' here definitely has the meaning of the future tense, as does shall. I see the difference in the certainity of the action. The sentences with 'will' are yet uncertain, while 'shall' says what will certainly happen if he were to say that he will fight. This distinction still exists in German.

"Sir", sagte sie," werdet Ihr für meinen Herren kämpfen, Sir Damas? Falls Ihr es werdet, so sollt Ihr aus der Gefangenschaft entlassen werden. Werdet Ihr es nicht, so sollt Ihr hier sterben."

I would actually be so bold as to call the sentence "If you will go, you shall" an archaic idiom. If it is your will to go, then you shall go.


----------



## LeTasmanien

Roy776 said:


> I would actually be so bold as to call the sentence "If you will go, you shall" an archaic idiom. If it is your will to go, then you shall go.


Hi Roy,
An idiom is an expression in common parlance which has a figurative meaning that is different to it's literal meaning.
EG "Please don't pull my leg" meaning "don't tell me things that aren't true". 
Can you provide one or more actual source examples, from English literature, to support your assertion that 
"If you will go, you shall" is an archaic idiom?
Prior to this thread, I've never come across this expression myself.
Cheers
Phil.


----------



## dreamlike

LeTasmanien said:


> Hi Roy,
> An idiom is an expression in common parlance which has a figurative meaning that is different to it's literal meaning.
> EG "Please don't pull my leg" meaning "don't tell me things that aren't true".
> Can you provide one or more actual source examples, from English literature, to support your assertion that
> "If you will go, you shall" is an archaic idiom?
> Prior to this thread, I've never come across this expression myself.
> Cheers
> Phil.



I can't speak for Roy, but he most likely meant that 'if you will go, you shall'_ is something of_ an idiom, not one in the full sense of the word.


----------



## Roy776

dreamlike said:


> I can't speak for Roy, but he most likely meant that 'if you will go, you shall'_ is something of_ an idiom, not one in the full sense of the word.



Exactly that. I meant to compare it to an idiom, as idioms and sayings sometimes retain archaic features of a language. For example in the Polish saying "Mądrej głowie dość dwie słowie" where "dwie słowie" is the dual. Or the English expression "Holier than thou". Who today would still use thou? It was just a comparison, nothing more.

By the way, take a look at the prescriptivist distinction of shall and will:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shall_and_will#The_prescriptivist_distinction

I quote:


> Nonetheless, even among speakers (the majority) who do not follow the rule about using _shall_ as the unmarked form in the first person, there is still a tendency to use _shall_ and _will_ to express different shades of meaning (reflecting aspects of their original Old English senses). Thus _shall_ is used with the meaning of obligation, and _will_ with the meaning of desire or intention.



And this is exactly how I understand it here.

If you will go, you shall.
(If it is your desire to go, then it is what you have to do/should do.)


----------



## Thomas1

Can 'will' in 'If you will not, you shall die  here.' really not be interpreted to have the shade of volition here? 
Perhaps, I'm shooting from the hip now, but
_If you do not, you shall die here._
is different from:
_If you will not, you shall die here.
_in that the version with 'will' adds the volitional element.
Compare:


> 2 used for showing that somebody is willing to do something
> I'll check this letter for you, if you want.
> They won't lend us any more money.
> Source


----------



## LilianaB

Of course it has the shade of volition -- If you want to live you live live, if you don't, you will die.


----------



## LeTasmanien

dreamlike said:


> I can't speak for Roy, but he most likely meant that 'if you will go, you shall'_ is something of_ an idiom, not one in the full sense of the word.



Hi Dreamlike,
The expression 'if you will go, you shall' is in no way an idiom. . 
It is actually more like a tautology. This conditional statement lacks meaning because the same verb is repeated.
Idiom's are part of the language and are generally well known and well understood by speakers of the language.
This expression satisfies neither of these criteria.  
Cheers
Phil.


----------



## LeTasmanien

Roy776 said:


> Exactly that. I meant to compare it to an idiom...


Hi Roy,
See my reply to Dreamlike above.
Cheers
P.


----------



## LeTasmanien

Thomas1 said:


> Can 'will' in 'If you will not, you shall die  here.' really not be interpreted to have the shade of volition here?
> Perhaps, I'm shooting from the hip now, but
> _1. If you do not, you shall die here._
> is different from:
> _2. If you will not, you shall die here.
> _in that the version with 'will' adds the volitional element.



Hi Thomas,
I think it might be worth clarifying the two statements above as there is no context around them which allows some ambiguity.
In the 1st there is an implied verb but we don't know what it is, eg _If you do not surrender, you shall die here_
This is fine if the context makes it clear what the missing verb is.
The same thing goes for the 2nd conditional statement.
It would be easier to comment if there was a bit of context.
Cheers
Phil.


----------

