Sidenote to "don't Should on me"

Subject: Sidenote to "don't Should on me"
From: Dianne Phelan <primate!dphelan -at- CS -dot- UNM -dot- EDU>
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 1994 18:03:54 PST

Barb (BurkBrick -at- AOL -dot- COM) writes:

> As a sidenote, I worked with a writer for a while that
> changed all my "wills" to "shalls," which I think is the
> absolute in condescension. As a contractor, there wasn't much I
> could do about it - he had final say - but I got out of the
> contract as soon as possible!

Continuing the sidenote, I was taught there is a LEGAL
difference between "shall" and "will" (and also between "that"
and "which"). For example, a contract that says "The program
shall walk the dog" is making a different statement than a
contract that says "The program will walk the dog." As I
recall, and my grammar books seem to corroborate, "shall" is a
stronger, legally enforceable promise--if the program doesn't
walk the dog, the purchaser has grounds for breach of contract
or some such. "Will" is a weaker statement.

If you're writing your company's contracts or product
descriptions, you might want to investigate and be aware of the
distinction. Standard disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, just a
writer with sometimes fallible memories.


| Dianne Phelan | | | Mantos Consulting, Inc. |
| Email:dphelan -at- mantos -dot- com | | | | -----+ P.O. Box 90564 |
| Phone/Fax:(505) 291-1047 | | | | | Albuquerque, NM 87199-0564 |

Previous by Author: Re: Transferring postscript files
Next by Author: InBit's FullShot
Previous by Thread: Re: (Non)Degreed and...
Next by Thread: Writing computerese (Was: Enter vs. Type)

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads