Page:The king's English (IA kingsenglish00fowlrich).pdf/154

140 questions asked for information are commoner than rhetorical ones. But observe the common Would you believe it? Answer, No, of course you would not. Should you believe it? also possible, would indicate real curiosity about the other person's state of mind, which is hardly ever felt. Would you believe it? however, might also be accounted for on the ground that the answer would be No, I would not, which would be a coloured-future form, meaning I should never consent to believe.

Second-person questions invariably have Sh. or W. by assimilation to the answer expected.

It may be added, since it makes the application of the rule easier, that the second-person questions belonging not to the plain future but to the pure system are also, though not because of assimilation, the same in regard to Sh. and W. as their answers. Thus ''Will you come? Yes, I will (each on its merits), as well as Shall you be there? Yes, I shall'' (assimilation). ''Should you not have known? Yes, I should (each on its merits; should means ought), as well as What should you think? I should think you were right'' (assimilation). The true form for all second-person questions, then, can be ascertained by deciding what the expected answer is.

This completes what need be said about principal sentences, with the exception of one important usage that might cause perplexity. If some one says to me 'You would think so yourself if you were in my position', I may either answer 'No, I should not' regularly, or may catch up his word, and retain the W., though the alteration of person requires Sh. Thus—'Would I, though? No, I wouldn't'. Accordingly,

A speaker repeating and adapting another's words may neglect to make the alteration from Sh. to W., or from W. to Sh., that an alteration of the person strictly requires.