on the condition that he should be released

[High on grammar]

Hello everyone:

Is <should> in the following sentence correct?

"He at first made an effort to bluff the officers, but failing in this, agreed to make a full confession on the condition that he should be released from custody."

HANDS UP

David J. Cook, John W. Cook

https://www.google.com

Thanks

 

[lingobingo]

It would be correct with should either deleted (making be subjunctive) or replaced by would. There’s no good reason to use should, and in American English I expect it would be considered quite wrong.

 

[High on grammar]

It would be correct with should either deleted (making be subjunctive) or replaced by would. There’s no good reason to use should, and in American English I expect it would be considered quite wrong.

The following is from “CONDITIONALS” by Renaat Declerck, Susan Reed



A fourth remark in connection with “should” is that it can be used after IF, UNLESS and IN CASE, but not after conjunctions expressing a necessary condition (PROVIDING, ON CONDITION THAT, ON THE UNDERSTANDING THAT)

 

[dojibear]

Is <should> in the following sentence correct?

This is 120-year-old English, not modern English. Usage has changed.

The book ("Hands Up" by David and John Cook) is a recent re-print of an old book. An Amazon review says:

"Here are real Old West stories told in thrilling episodes by David Cook himself. Nearly 120 years since its first publication have not dulled the excitement and danger."

 

[dojibear]

Here is the book's author, in Wikipedia:

David J. Cook - Wikipedia

It says "In 1882 Cook published a memoir titled Hands Up! or Thirty-five Years of Detective Work in the Mountains and on the Plains"

 

[kentix]

It actually doesn't sound that odd to me. I didn't notice it as unusual until pointed out by lingo. Of course, if I had thought up the sentence on my own I would have probably used the subjunctive form out of habit, but "should" seems good enough for the context to me. "Would" seems to have a slightly different meaning.

 

[dojibear]

Since the 1950s there have been changes in the use of "shall/will/should/could/would/may" in US English.

These changes happened gradually, in different times in different places, with a great deal of old/new overlap. So there was no dramatic change in one year. But the change over 70 years is noticeable.

EDIT: Most of us read older books. So older usage sounds natural to us, from our reading.

 

[lingobingo]

The following is from “CONDITIONALS” by Renaat Declerck, Susan Reed

A fourth remark in connection with “should” is that it can be used after IF, UNLESS and IN CASE, but not after conjunctions expressing a necessary condition (PROVIDING, ON CONDITION THAT, ON THE UNDERSTANDING THAT)

Precisely. It specifically advises against the use of should after a conjunction such as “on condition that…”. And you’ve omitted the example a. that immediately follows that statement, in which the asterisks show the uses that are considered incorrect.

 

[High on grammar]

Precisely. It specifically advises against the use of should after a conjunction such as “on condition that…”. And you’ve omitted the example a. that immediately follows that statement, in which the asterisks show the uses that are considered incorrect.

Oh, yes. Here is the example from the source I referred to in#3.

"She would be very upset {if/ *providing/*on condition that} she should come while he's out."

 

[sinukg]

It would be correct with should either deleted (making be subjunctive) or replaced by would. There’s no good reason to use should, and in American English I expect it would be considered quite wrong.

If the usage of the word "should" is wrong, could you please tell me how to write the sentence naturally?

 

[High on grammar]

If the usage of the word "should" is wrong, could you please tell me how to write the sentence naturally?

".......on (the) condition that he be released from custody."

 

[lingobingo]

If the usage of the word "should" is wrong, could you please tell me how to write the sentence naturally?

The answer to this is in post #2 – which you quoted when asking the question.