Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Thus shall is used with the meaning of obligation, and will with the meaning of desire or intention. An illustration of the supposed contrast between shall and will (when the prescriptive rule is adhered to) appeared in the 19th century, [11] and has been repeated in the 20th century [12] and in the 21st: [13] I shall drown; no one will save me!
The English modal auxiliary verbs are a subset of the English auxiliary verbs used mostly to express modality, properties such as possibility and obligation. [a] They can most easily be distinguished from other verbs by their defectiveness (they do not have participles or plain forms [b]) and by their lack of the ending ‑(e)s for the third-person singular.
For example, the inferred certainty sense of English must developed after the strong obligation sense; the probabilistic sense of should developed after the weak obligation sense; and the possibility senses of may and can developed later than the permission or ability sense. Two typical sequences of evolution of modal meanings are:
A will contract is a term used in the law of wills describing a contract to exchange a current performance for a future bequest. In such an agreement, one party (the promisee) will provide some performance in exchange for a promise by the other party (the testator, because they must draft a will) to make a specific bequest to the promisee party in the testator's will.
Equality before the law is a tenet of some branches of feminism. In the 19th century, gender equality before the law was a radical goal, but some later feminist views hold that formal legal equality is not enough to create actual and social equality between women and men.
In contract law, a choice of law clause or proper law clause [1] is a term of a contract in which the parties specify that any dispute arising under the contract shall be determined in accordance with the law of a particular jurisdiction. [2] It determines the controlling law: the state which will be relied upon in settling disputes. An example ...
The primary author of the Privileges or Immunities Clause was Congressman John Bingham of Ohio. The common historical view is that Bingham's primary inspiration, at least for his initial prototype of this Clause, was the Privileges and Immunities Clause in Article Four of the United States Constitution, [1] [2] which provided that "The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges ...
Clearly this is an exceptional case where shall is better. --Sluggoster 09:31, 5 November 2007 (UTC) As for shall vs should, my (northwestern US) ears prefer shall but the difference is very slight. Shall focuses on your magnimony, and you may already be half-standing when you say it.