"Putative Should"

Hi Paco,

A grammar book of mine talks about "putative should" as follows.

[1] I'm surprised that there should be any objection.
[2] I'm surprised that there is an objection
There is a difference between [1] and [2]. In [1], it is the 'very idea' of the objection that surprises me, not the objection as a fact.

Hello Clive

Thank you for the quick reply. So what the two sentences differ in is simply the degree of likelihoods of an objection occurring? Or do they differ in the degree of the strength of the speaker's belief that there will be not any opposition?
Paco

Hi,

So what the two sentences differ in is simply the degree of likelihoods of an objection occurring? No.

Or do they differ in the degree of the strength of the speaker's belief that there will be not any opposition? No again.

It's not a matter of degree,

Clive

Thank you again. I'm sorry for bothering you so much. But may I continue? Frankly I did not still get clear so called putative use of "should". The book gives another example: "It's a pity that you should have to leave". How different it is from "It's a pity that you have to leave"? In this case, the speaker should know "you"

Good morning, Paco,

"It's a pity that you should have to leave". How different it is from "It's a pity that you have to leave"? In this case, the speaker should know "you" is going to leave, and so the sense of "should" would be different from that in "I'm surprised that there should be an objection".

>>>>>

Hello Clive

Good morning!Here in Japan we have a few hours till the daybreak. I'm afraid I would sleep in the meeting this noon.

Thank you for the kind explanation. Reading your message now I got what "putative should" is. One of the factors that have led me astray was that the authors of my grammar book are using the term "putative". "Putative" is a word rather unfamiliar to m

I have seen similar putative sentences. "I am suprised that he should feel lonely."(1) "I am suprised that he feels lonely." I don't remember the exact sentences in Quirk's "A Comprehensive English Grammar". I wonder if the first sentence can be written as "I will be suprised that he should feel lonely", since "feel lonely" is not a certain fact. I will be suprised if this is a fact. In the book,

My two cents.

I think [1] is a commentary on
I believe there should not be any objection. (I believe that an objection is not to be expected.)
An objection occurs, and I say:
I'm surprised that there should be any objection. (I certainly didn't expect one. / I wouldn't have expected one.)

I think [2] is a commentary on
I believe ther

Throwing my 2 cents on the growing pile:

I hear a little more distance in #1 between the speaker and the fact of the objection.

If someone makes an objection to my proposal, and I say #1, I am talking about proposal and objection as something remote and almost hypothetical. If I say #2, it's a more direct response, and directly challenges my interlocutor.

MrP

OK. One more cent.

Does anyone (besides me) see a similarity to this contrast? (In some nameless way, I think it does connect with your observations about distance, Mr. P.)

I'm surprised that anyone objected.
I'm surprised that someone objected.

CJ