- Must is a bit more forceful. Must means that the event absolutely has to occur, that it is certain, or something bad may happen if it does not occur. Hope this helps. – Andyluciano 19:14, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
In case of
Surely the "if" meaning of "should" is a conjunction? Yet it's under Verb... --OranginaMan 23:00, 2 March 2007 (UTC) I've changed my mind, now reckoning it to be something more sinister, perhaps a form of subjunctive-esque construction (think "Were I a boy, I would..."), though who knows... --OranginaMan 18:56, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
I should hope not
Would a native speaker be kind enough to add details clarifying the use of "should" in this example? Is it my imagination or can "should" be substituted for "would" at some times? TIA. --Utsutsu 23:17, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
- "Would" and "should" can often be more or less substituted only in phrases where the meaning is to indicate a conditional. "Should" adds more emphasis than "would". "If I went to Paris, I would visit the Louvre." "If I went to Paris, I should visit the Louvre."
"Should" is more commonly used for advice. "If YOU went to Paris, YOU should visit the Louvre." which is why it is less neutral than "would" in a conditional sentence. So, a phrase such as "I should hope not" is an emphatic form of "I would hope not".
Other uses of "would" and "should" are not normally interchangeable. One day I hope to have a brief appendix written about usage of English modal verbs. (One day.) -- ALGRIF talk 15:27, 7 March 2009 (UTC)