An Englishism

[Bill O'Meally]

In a letter to Sir Stanley Unwin (_Letters_ #124), Tolkien states,
"Ridiculous and tiresome as you may think me, I want to publish them
both -- _The Silmarillion_ and _The Lord of the Rings_ -- in
conjunction or connexion. 'I want to' -- it would be wiser to say 'I
should like to'....

In way of background, Tolkien had recently conversed with another
publisher, Milton Waldman, who offered to publish Silm along with LotR,
which Allen and Unwin were reluctant to do.

Americans will use "I want to" and "I would like to" pretty much
interchangeably, but you seldom if ever hear an American say "I should
like to".

What subtle difference was Tolkien getting at in his letter?

[Julian Bradfield]

Post by Bill O'Meally
In a letter to Sir Stanley Unwin (_Letters_ #124), Tolkien states,
"Ridiculous and tiresome as you may think me, I want to publish them
both -- _The Silmarillion_ and _The Lord of the Rings_ -- in
conjunction or connexion. 'I want to' -- it would be wiser to say 'I
should like to'....
In way of background, Tolkien had recently conversed with another
publisher, Milton Waldman, who offered to publish Silm along with LotR,
which Allen and Unwin were reluctant to do.
Americans will use "I want to" and "I would like to" pretty much
interchangeably, but you seldom if ever hear an American say "I should
like to".
What subtle difference was Tolkien getting at in his letter?

The difference between "I want to" and "I should like to" is one of
conditionality, diffidence, etc.

"I want to" is a straightforward expression of wish.
"I should like to" carries an implied condition..usually this is
simply politeness, and the implied condition is "if you are in
agreement with me". In this case, the implied condition may be more
substantive, such as "if the publisher meets my demands".

The use of "should" vs "would" is merely the conjugation:
I/we shall/should, you/he/she/it/they will/would

[Barry Schwarz]

On Sat, 16 Nov 2019 14:40:47 +0000 (UTC), Julian Bradfield

Post by Julian Bradfield

Post by Bill O'Meally
In a letter to Sir Stanley Unwin (_Letters_ #124), Tolkien states,
"Ridiculous and tiresome as you may think me, I want to publish them
both -- _The Silmarillion_ and _The Lord of the Rings_ -- in
conjunction or connexion. 'I want to' -- it would be wiser to say 'I
should like to'....
In way of background, Tolkien had recently conversed with another
publisher, Milton Waldman, who offered to publish Silm along with LotR,
which Allen and Unwin were reluctant to do.
Americans will use "I want to" and "I would like to" pretty much
interchangeably, but you seldom if ever hear an American say "I should
like to".
What subtle difference was Tolkien getting at in his letter?

The difference between "I want to" and "I should like to" is one of
conditionality, diffidence, etc.
"I want to" is a straightforward expression of wish.
"I should like to" carries an implied condition..usually this is
simply politeness, and the implied condition is "if you are in
agreement with me". In this case, the implied condition may be more
substantive, such as "if the publisher meets my demands".
I/we shall/should, you/he/she/it/they will/would

I always thought "should" carried with it a sense of obligation while
"would" was more of a desire.

[Paul S Person]

Post by Barry Schwarz
On Sat, 16 Nov 2019 14:40:47 +0000 (UTC), Julian Bradfield

Post by Julian Bradfield

Post by Bill O'Meally
In a letter to Sir Stanley Unwin (_Letters_ #124), Tolkien states,
"Ridiculous and tiresome as you may think me, I want to publish them
both -- _The Silmarillion_ and _The Lord of the Rings_ -- in
conjunction or connexion. 'I want to' -- it would be wiser to say 'I
should like to'....
In way of background, Tolkien had recently conversed with another
publisher, Milton Waldman, who offered to publish Silm along with LotR,
which Allen and Unwin were reluctant to do.
Americans will use "I want to" and "I would like to" pretty much
interchangeably, but you seldom if ever hear an American say "I should
like to".
What subtle difference was Tolkien getting at in his letter?

The difference between "I want to" and "I should like to" is one of
conditionality, diffidence, etc.
"I want to" is a straightforward expression of wish.
"I should like to" carries an implied condition..usually this is
simply politeness, and the implied condition is "if you are in
agreement with me". In this case, the implied condition may be more
substantive, such as "if the publisher meets my demands".
I/we shall/should, you/he/she/it/they will/would

I always thought "should" carried with it a sense of obligation while
"would" was more of a desire.

Per https://www.thoughtco.com/should-and-would-1692779 :

"Should" is actually the past tense of another of these modal verbs,
"shall." Used as an auxiliary, "should" expresses a condition, an
obligation, futurity, or probability. "Would" is the past tense of the
modal verb "will." Used as an auxiliary, "would" expresses a
possibility, an intention, a desire, a custom, or a request. Use
"should" to express an obligation, a necessity, or a prediction; use
"would" to express a wish or a customary action.

I would have thought that the meanings /reversed/ for 1st person vs
2nd or 3rd, as "shall" and "will" do, and this may be the case in
Britain:

As noted, in general usage, "should" implies an obligation or
something that ought to be done, and "would" implies something that is
possible. However, in formal British English, there is an alternative
use for "should," which reverses its meaning compared to American
English.

I think things are sufficiently muddled for the present.

[Julian Bradfield]

Post by Barry Schwarz
On Sat, 16 Nov 2019 14:40:47 +0000 (UTC), Julian Bradfield

Post by Julian Bradfield
I/we shall/should, you/he/she/it/they will/would

I always thought "should" carried with it a sense of obligation while
"would" was more of a desire.

That's also true. The use of shall/will and should/would is enormously
variable over time and space. However, the use of shall/should as the
first person of will/would was Standard English in Tolkien's day, and
for more conservative speakers (such as myself) it still is to some extent.
Whether "should" carries obligation depends on context and stress.

"I should like to" is pretty much a fixed idiom in any case. Similarly
for all other politeness uses, such as "I should be grateful if you
would".

But I can also say, "As an immigrant to Scotland, I *should* like
haggis." Stress on the "should" means it has the obligation sense.

For pure conditionality, I no longer use "should". For example, "I
would eat haggis, if it weren't so heavily spiced."
Looking through Letters, Tolkien varies between "I should" and "I
would". Apart from set politeness phrases (like "I should like to"),
I get the impression he uses "would" more with friends and family, and
"should" more in formal letters. But I haven't done any stats.

[Bill O'Meally]

Post by Julian Bradfield
That's also true. The use of shall/will and should/would is enormously
variable over time and space. However, the use of shall/should as the
first person of will/would was Standard English in Tolkien's day, and
for more conservative speakers (such as myself) it still is to some extent.
Whether "should" carries obligation depends on context and stress.
"I should like to" is pretty much a fixed idiom in any case. Similarly
for all other politeness uses, such as "I should be grateful if you
would".
But I can also say, "As an immigrant to Scotland, I *should* like
haggis." Stress on the "should" means it has the obligation sense.
For pure conditionality, I no longer use "should". For example, "I
would eat haggis, if it weren't so heavily spiced."
Looking through Letters, Tolkien varies between "I should" and "I
would". Apart from set politeness phrases (like "I should like to"),
I get the impression he uses "would" more with friends and family, and
"should" more in formal letters. But I haven't done any stats.

But in the case of Letter #124, Tolkien is clearly differentiating
between the meaning of 'I want' and 'I should like', stating that it
would be wiser for him to say the latter. At this point in time, I
think Tolkien is feeling somewhat emboldened by another publisher's
offer to publish his two magna opera together, while feeling some
frustration with Allen and Unwin for not doing this, all while possibly
feeling a pang of guilt for seeking another publisher. Sir Stanley, I
believe, does not yet know about a possible competitor.

You alluded to the how Tolkien's language applies to this situation in
your initial post. Why "wiser"? But could you translate into American
English exactly what Tolkien was saying to Sir Stanley? :-)

[Julian Bradfield]

Post by Bill O'Meally
But in the case of Letter #124, Tolkien is clearly differentiating
between the meaning of 'I want' and 'I should like', stating that it
would be wiser for him to say the latter. At this point in time, I
think Tolkien is feeling somewhat emboldened by another publisher's
offer to publish his two magna opera together, while feeling some
frustration with Allen and Unwin for not doing this, all while possibly
feeling a pang of guilt for seeking another publisher. Sir Stanley, I
believe, does not yet know about a possible competitor.
You alluded to the how Tolkien's language applies to this situation in
your initial post. Why "wiser"? But could you translate into American
English exactly what Tolkien was saying to Sir Stanley? :-)

My take is precisely that Tolkien is hinting at the existence of a
possible competitor.

Not sure I can do American, but a translation might be
"I had wanted to publish them together with you, but since you don't want
to publish them together, I no longer want to publish with you, and
am looking elsewhere".

[Bill O'Meally]

Post by Julian Bradfield
My take is precisely that Tolkien is hinting at the existence of a
possible competitor.
Not sure I can do American, but a translation might be
"I had wanted to publish them together with you, but since you don't want
to publish them together, I no longer want to publish with you, and
am looking elsewhere".

I am suspecting that you are correct because in a subsequent letter to
Tolkien from Sir Stanley, he says something to the effect (IDHTBIFOM),
"Since you are demanding a 'yes' or 'no', I am saying 'no'". There was
no interim letter from Tolkien that appears to give a more blatant
ultimatum, unless it was lost or was unpublished.

Thanks for clarifying Julian.

[theswain]

Post by Bill O'Meally
In a letter to Sir Stanley Unwin (_Letters_ #124), Tolkien states,
"Ridiculous and tiresome as you may think me, I want to publish them
both -- _The Silmarillion_ and _The Lord of the Rings_ -- in
conjunction or connexion. 'I want to' -- it would be wiser to say 'I
should like to'....
In way of background, Tolkien had recently conversed with another
publisher, Milton Waldman, who offered to publish Silm along with LotR,
which Allen and Unwin were reluctant to do.
Americans will use "I want to" and "I would like to" pretty much
interchangeably, but you seldom if ever hear an American say "I should
like to".
What subtle difference was Tolkien getting at in his letter?
--
Bill O'Meally

Should is subjunctive, expressing a potentiality and a wish or desire. Want is indicative. Tolkien was not in a position to "want" to publish in the sense that this was going to happen, he expressed his wish to his publisher. Part of it is grammar that we've all but lost, the other part is politeness.