Difference between revisions of "Talk:Jissy"
From Felarya
("Would" versus "will".) |
French-snack (Talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
But all this is just food for thought. | But all this is just food for thought. | ||
--[[User:Oldman40k2003|Oldman40k2003]] 03:48, 5 February 2012 (PST) | --[[User:Oldman40k2003|Oldman40k2003]] 03:48, 5 February 2012 (PST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :Hm, yes. If you imagine it as direct speech, it would indeed be "will"; it makes it much more "real" and menacing. But the thing is, here it's indirect speech. And if you put it in the future tense instead of the conditional (in indirect speech), it makes it sound rather unfortunately as though it's going to happen - which is precisely what she's trying to avoid. [[User:French-snack|French-snack]] 09:12, 5 February 2012 (PST) | ||
Revision as of 09:12, 5 February 2012
I changed "would" to "will" because I thought it sounded more forceful and current. Perhaps I am imagining her saying it; maybe it's just me, but I doubt I would tell anyone that I "would" kill them if they harmed my friend. I would say that I "will" kill them; sounds more protective.
"...Jissy has made it widely known that she would kill anyone who ate him." "...Jissy has made it widely known that she will kill anyone who eats him."
But all this is just food for thought. --Oldman40k2003 03:48, 5 February 2012 (PST)
- Hm, yes. If you imagine it as direct speech, it would indeed be "will"; it makes it much more "real" and menacing. But the thing is, here it's indirect speech. And if you put it in the future tense instead of the conditional (in indirect speech), it makes it sound rather unfortunately as though it's going to happen - which is precisely what she's trying to avoid. French-snack 09:12, 5 February 2012 (PST)
