should

This is the place to post questions and discussions on usage and style. The members of the Wordwizard Clubhouse will also often be able to help you to formulate that difficult letter.

should

Post by Archived Reply » Mon Jan 07, 2002 2:27 am

PHIL WHITE...did you ever get an answer out of all this clap-trap and backslappig? Jesus!

In universal English usage, MUST, and SHOULD or OUGHT are quite different.

MUST means you have no choice. It is imperative that you do this.

Should means that it is advisable to do this.

Ought means much the same.

MUST is clearly the word you need.

Rob


Reply from Robert Masters (Asia - Thailand)
Post actions:
Signature: Reply imported and archived

should

Post by Archived Reply » Mon Jan 07, 2002 2:41 am

Robert,
If you read my post carefully, and if you bothered to read the intelligent answers I received, you would see that I have long ago received the "answer" I wanted. Quite unlike the nonsense you have just written. My question was whether the word "should" is to be interpreted as an imperative with the same meaning as "must" in the context quoted. You say "MUST is clearly the word you need", therefore I assume that you think (in answer to my question) that "should" is to be interpreted as imperative. And yet you write "Should means that it is advisable to do this."
Again, you write "MUST, and SHOULD or OUGHT are quite different" and go on to say that "Ought means much the same(as should)."
Please, less woolly thinking and drivel.
Reply from Phil White (Munich - Germany)
Post actions:
Signature: Reply imported and archived

should

Post by Archived Reply » Mon Jan 07, 2002 2:56 am

Phil, It never ceases to amaze me how the ‘clueless’ (don’t confuse me with the facts) try to suddenly come to the rescue, but I guess this has been and will always be, as the night follows the day!

Ken – November 17, 2004

Reply from Ken Greenwald (Fort Collins, CO - U.S.A.)
Post actions:
Signature: Reply imported and archived

should

Post by Archived Reply » Mon Jan 07, 2002 3:10 am

Let's try again, just to clarlfy:
As Phil has asked about the "real world", to be certain of your meaning, you must use the word "must".There are no shades of meaning here and it is not open to interpretation, unless academically, which, of course, is not the real world.
Robert
Reply from Robert Masters (Asia - Thailand)
Post actions:
Signature: Reply imported and archived

should

Post by Archived Reply » Mon Jan 07, 2002 3:25 am

Robert,
Read the questions. There were two. Obviously, the word "must" is not open to interpretation. That was not the question.
The primary question referred to the use of the word "should" in an official, published guideline (over which I have no control) and whether this is to be understood with imperative meaning. It is a piece of original text written in the English language and I am attempting to understand the precise import of it.
Erik and Ken understood the question and are in agreement with me that in this context, "should" has imperative import. All of us, you included, are in agreement that "should" is an unwise choice when such a meaning is intended, as it is open to interpretation. It should thus be avoided. The authors chose not to avoid it and presented me with precisely the problem I was attempting to discuss.
Reply from Phil White (Munich - Germany)
Post actions:
Signature: Reply imported and archived

End of topic.
Post Reply