Queen Elizabeth and the Rohirrim

[Louis Epstein]

The present monarch of Great Britain has now reached the age of ninety-four,
never reached by Eomer (or Thain Isumbras III,or the Masters of Buckland
Marmadoc and Saradoc Brandybuck)...only Aldor the Old among the Kings of
the Mark remains as having reached a greater age.

Shall she surpass him?

-=-=-
The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again,
at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.

[Paul S Person]

On Wed, 22 Apr 2020 00:00:17 +0000 (UTC), Louis Epstein

Post by Louis Epstein
The present monarch of Great Britain has now reached the age of ninety-four,
never reached by Eomer (or Thain Isumbras III,or the Masters of Buckland
Marmadoc and Saradoc Brandybuck)...only Aldor the Old among the Kings of
the Mark remains as having reached a greater age.
Shall she surpass him?

Interesting question.

But would not "Will she surpass him?" have been better?

Or is this some Brit/American English thing?

[Louis Epstein]

Post by Paul S Person
On Wed, 22 Apr 2020 00:00:17 +0000 (UTC), Louis Epstein

Post by Louis Epstein
The present monarch of Great Britain has now reached the age of ninety-four,
never reached by Eomer (or Thain Isumbras III,or the Masters of Buckland
Marmadoc and Saradoc Brandybuck)...only Aldor the Old among the Kings of
the Mark remains as having reached a greater age.
Shall she surpass him?

Interesting question.
But would not "Will she surpass him?" have been better?
Or is this some Brit/American English thing?

I'm really not sure which word works best to what listener...
but my intention is to ask whether it is going to happen,
without implying a deliberate act unnecessarily.
(To what extent is survival consciously willed and to what extent
a consequence of life processes?)

Interestingly,Her Majesty is entering into a gap between the
lifespans of the various Kings,Chieftains,Thains,Masters,and Stewards
with whom,besides Aldor,she is contending for longevity.
None died at 94,95,96,or 97...but there were multiple
deaths at surrounding ages.

Rorimac Brandybuck 106
Fortinbras I 103
Gorbadoc Brandybuck 103
Denethor I 102
Isengrim II 102
Fortinbras II 102
Gormadoc Brandybuck 102
Madoc Brandybuck 102
Aldor the Old 101
Isumbras IV 101
Paladin II 101
Arveleg I 100
Aragorn I 100
Thorondir 100
Ferumbras II 100
Turin II 99
Ferumbras III 99
Ecthelion I 98
Turgon 98
Ecthelion II 98
Isengrim III 98
Isumbras III 93
Marmadoc Brandybuck 93
Eomer 93
Saradoc Brandybuck 92

-=-=-
The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again,
at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.

[Paul S Person]

On Wed, 22 Apr 2020 18:04:19 +0000 (UTC), Louis Epstein

Post by Louis Epstein

Post by Paul S Person
On Wed, 22 Apr 2020 00:00:17 +0000 (UTC), Louis Epstein

Post by Louis Epstein
The present monarch of Great Britain has now reached the age of ninety-four,
never reached by Eomer (or Thain Isumbras III,or the Masters of Buckland
Marmadoc and Saradoc Brandybuck)...only Aldor the Old among the Kings of
the Mark remains as having reached a greater age.
Shall she surpass him?

Interesting question.
But would not "Will she surpass him?" have been better?
Or is this some Brit/American English thing?

I'm really not sure which word works best to what listener...
but my intention is to ask whether it is going to happen,
without implying a deliberate act unnecessarily.
(To what extent is survival consciously willed and to what extent
a consequence of life processes?)

No doubt it reflects my age and education, but, in that case, "will"
would be what you want -- for second and third person -- and "shall"
would be a command to do what you ordered.

In first person, just to make this even more pedantic, these meanings
/reverse/: "I shall" indicates what you intend to do; "I will"
indicates what you are going to do (or, at least, are determined to
do, or are promising to do).

With all that confusion, it is no wonder that these details are
vanishing.

I mean, really -- the meaning depends on the /person/ (1st vs 2nd or
3rd, not who is being addressed or referred to).

[Steve Hayes]

On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 09:20:09 -0700, Paul S Person

Post by Paul S Person
No doubt it reflects my age and education, but, in that case, "will"
would be what you want -- for second and third person -- and "shall"
would be a command to do what you ordered.
In first person, just to make this even more pedantic, these meanings
/reverse/: "I shall" indicates what you intend to do; "I will"
indicates what you are going to do (or, at least, are determined to
do, or are promising to do).

In my idiolect "shall" in that context implies that the person asking
wants to know whether surpassing him is a good idea or not, whereas
"will" implies simple prediction.

But according to Fowler's "Modern English Usage", the difference is
north and south rather than East and West, and cites the case of a
Scot who fell into an English river and was misunderstood when he
shouted out "I shall drown, no one will save me."

[Julian Bradfield]

Post by Steve Hayes
But according to Fowler's "Modern English Usage", the difference is
north and south rather than East and West, and cites the case of a
Scot who fell into an English river and was misunderstood when he
shouted out "I shall drown, no one will save me."

You have that the wrong way round.
he shouted "I will be drowned, no one shall save me."

[Stan Brown]

Post by Julian Bradfield

Post by Steve Hayes
But according to Fowler's "Modern English Usage", the difference is
north and south rather than East and West, and cites the case of a
Scot who fell into an English river and was misunderstood when he
shouted out "I shall drown, no one will save me."

You have that the wrong way round.
he shouted "I will be drowned, no one shall save me."

In any case, a couple of more recent books that I consulted say that
the distinction is no longer observed by most people, with a few
exceptions like "Shall we go?"

[Thomas Koenig]

Post by Paul S Person
No doubt it reflects my age and education, but, in that case, "will"
would be what you want -- for second and third person -- and "shall"
would be a command to do what you ordered.

When I started learning English in the late 1970s, I learned that
the future tense of the first person singular was "I shall".
The books we were using were probably a bit dated, the text
still had something about flying with BOAC.

[Julian Bradfield]

Post by Paul S Person
On Wed, 22 Apr 2020 00:00:17 +0000 (UTC), Louis Epstein

Post by Louis Epstein
The present monarch of Great Britain has now reached the age of ninety-four,
never reached by Eomer (or Thain Isumbras III,or the Masters of Buckland
Marmadoc and Saradoc Brandybuck)...only Aldor the Old among the Kings of
the Mark remains as having reached a greater age.
Shall she surpass him?

Interesting question.
But would not "Will she surpass him?" have been better?
Or is this some Brit/American English thing?

Don't think so - it's just wrong in both.
"Shall she surpass him" only makes sense if you're holding a gun to
her head in the minutes before she does, and asking somebody to decide
whether you pull the trigger.