Just out of curiosity

[Neal]

Okay, I'm curious on this matter so I'll ask.

The difference between saying you would do something and you are going to do something is clearly distinguishable correct? If you you would do something it's a general statement, but if you say that you're going to do something it can be taken as an action.

For instance:
"I'd headbutt my monitor if it flashed"

or

"I would to headbutt my monitor if it flashes"

So my point is that the two are clearly distinguishable between a statement versus an action. Right?

[txcoker]

Yes, you are correct.

Now what is the back story to ask that question?

[MootWorm]

In those two examples, 'I'd' is short for 'I would', so I'm not exactly understanding the question lol.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[Eric Alan]

Based on your initial question, the two are clearly distinguishable. However, your example is not one that represents your thoughts well (unless I'm clearly missing your point).

"I would/wouldn't xxxx if yyyy," is different than, "I will/won't xxxx when yyyy."

The first statement represents a hypothetical situation regarding a possible reaction from a possible future action (e.g., "last two people on earth"). The second statement represents a guaranteed reaction based on a guaranteed future action.

Put another way: "Will" is used to talk about definite future actions. "Would" is used to talk about preferences.

Way to make me all philosophical-like on a Friday night, BTW...

[BrandiR]

Technically they're distinguishable if I understand you correctly. I still think most people are going to take them as basically the same thing though. Try, "I'd like to..." instead.

"I would punch that guy in the face." - Cause/Effect, if he _______, I'd jack his jaw.

"I will punch that guy in the face." - Gonna Do It, there will come a time, no doubt about it, that you are going to punch that guy in the face.

"I'd like to punch that guy in the face." - You don't like him, you don't like his actions/attitude/whatever, you believe it would be awesome to clock him, but you're not going to.

[Neal]

I was more or so doing it just to make sure that I was correct in what I was thinking. I guess it's all basically on how somebody interprets something even though they're not right about something. Thanks all for your answers

[dr del]

Or you could, sensibly, not say either where you know beforehand they will not be welcome.

[Neal]

Or you could, sensibly, not say either where you know beforehand they will not be welcome.

Yea but it was the general statement, who knew that would be the outcome?

[dr del]

Everyone else who didn't make a similar statement?

Seriously - go look up a version of family friendly that includes statements like that. Post 1920's please.

[Neal]

Everyone else who didn't make a similar statement?

Seriously - go look up a version of family friendly that includes statements like that. Post 1920's please.

Well everybody has their own point of view. It's all good though.