Advertising - LEO without ads? LEO Pur
LEO

It looks like you’re using an ad blocker.

Would you like to support LEO?

Disable your ad blocker for LEO or make a donation.

LEO Pur
 
  •  

  • Forum home

    Language lab

    should vs. shall or must or have to

    5­ Replies
    Topic

    should vs. shall or must or have to

    Comment
    Talking to native English speakers (mostly AE), I learned taht should is as imperative as shall or must, etc.
    Talking to non-native English speakers (French, Spanish, German, Italian, Russian, Noridc, etc), I learned that they do not see the implicit imperative with should as they do with the other words. Hence it appears to be questionable to use "should" in certification questions such as "After you have done this and that, what should you do next?", or in instructions, "Before going home you should take a shower". Most of the non-native English speaking audience understands this as "may".
    What are your interpretations of this verb "should"?
    AuthorGregor24 Jun 02, 14:10
    Comment
    To my understanding 'should' conforms pretty close to 'sollen'. If you see somebody using should in a text, it is a strong recommendation. In case you don't follow this recommendation you might experience negative consequences. That is similar to German 'sollen'. Check in German the difference between a 'Soll-Vorschrift' and a 'Kann-Vorschrift'. A 'Kann-Vorschrift' gives you the possibility, a 'Soll-Vorschrift' strongly recommends.
    #1AuthorAGB24 Jun 02, 14:41
    Comment
    I am not sure whether "Soll-Vorschriften" and "Kann-Vorschriften" are a good example, as neiter the former nor the latter are mere "recommendations" (but refer to different degrees of "Ermessen"). And at least in legal texts, there is a definite distinction between shall and should: "shall" does not mean "soll", but implies a command as strict as "has to".
    #2AuthorBrummie24 Jun 02, 15:02
    Comment
    Ok, then let us check with the ten commandments.
    In English you will find 'thou shallst' (not sure about the actual spelling) in German 'Du sollst'

    I find very often that especially when a person doesn't want to exercise the authority held too bluntly this person often choses should.
    Or look at the old saying: 'Kinder soll man sehen, aber nicht hoeren.' (bin ich froh, dass das zu meiner Jugendzeit bereits nicht mehr galt :-))
    #3AuthorAGB24 Jun 02, 15:10
    Comment
    The newer RFCs (kind of the standard documents of the internet) refer to RFC2119, that defines shall and should as follows:

    1. MUST This word, or the terms "REQUIRED" or "SHALL", mean that the definition is an absolute requirement of the specification.

    3. SHOULD This word, or the adjective "RECOMMENDED", mean that there may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a particular item, but the full implications must be understood and carefully weighed before choosing a different course.

    [ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2119.txt]
    #4AuthorStefan24 Jun 02, 15:56
    Comment
    @AGB: "thou shalt" is the second person singular of "shall"
    #5AuthorGhol- ‹GB›24 Jun 02, 19:43
     
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  
 
 
 
 
 
en
English ⇔ German
 
de
ForumsTrainerCourses
 
en
English ⇔ Spanish
 
es
ForumsTrainerCourses
 
en
English ⇔ French
 
fr
ForumsTrainerCourses
 
en
English ⇔ Russian
 
ru
ForumsTrainerCourses
 
fr
French ⇔ German
 
de
ForumsTrainerCourses
 
es
Spanish ⇔ German
 
de
ForumsTrainerCourses
 
it
Italian ⇔ German
 
de
ForumsTrainerCourses
 
zh
Chinese ⇔ German
 
de
ForumsTrainerCourses
 
ru
Russian ⇔ German
 
de
ForumsTrainerCourses
 
pt
Portuguese ⇔ German
 
de
ForumsTrainerCourses
 
pl
Polish ⇔ German
 
de
ForumsTrainerCourses
 
es
Spanish ⇔ Portuguese
 
pt
ForumsTrainerCourses
Hello
 ­ automatisch zu ­ ­ umgewandelt