<Will there?> or <There will?>

< Previous | Next >

mink-shin

Senior Member
Korean - Korea, Republic of
Someone told me, "Go to 'A' park, there will be a oak tree. We all shall meet under the tree."

But I suspected if there was no tree in the park, because I was told that the tree'd been cut off.

So I asked "There will?", but nobody didn't understand my meaning.

but I think "Will there?" is more correct.

Which one is correct "There will?" or "Will there?"

Is there other phrase which can replace "will there?"
 
  • PaulQ

    Banned
    UK
    English - England
    So I asked "There will?", but nobody didn't understand my meaning. understood what I meant.
    The difficulty is:
    A: ""Go to 'A' park, there will be an oak tree. We all shall will all meet under the tree."
    Mink-shin: "There will?" :cross: <- this is wrong because last thing that was not "There will be a tree."

    A: ""Go to 'A' park, there will be an oak tree. We all shall will all meet under the tree."
    Mink-shin: "What tree?" :tick:-> If you say this in the correct tone, you are questioning the existence of the tree.
     

    goldenband

    Senior Member
    English - American
    Either one is correct, but with slight differences in tone. But first and foremost, I wouldn't use either one unless it comes immediately after the statement you're questioning. Even one intervening sentence ("We all shall meet under the tree") is enough to make things confusing. In such a case I'd use a different phrase, e.g.:

    Wait, wasn't the oak tree cut down?

    Regarding "There will?" and "Will there?", they're close in meaning, but neither one is terribly polite. "There will?" is a fairly direct expression of doubt, and can even seem like a direct contradiction:

    There will? = What you just said is false, isn't it?

    It can also connote disapproval.

    "Will there?" is more likely to sound sarcastic, bored, or condescending. It doesn't have to be those things, but that formulation is often used by writers who want to show that a character is bored by another character:

    Wow, there will be an exhibition of Bolivian sculpture at the museum this week!
    Oh, will there?
    (yawns)

     
    Last edited:

    mink-shin

    Senior Member
    Korean - Korea, Republic of
    The difficulty is:
    A: ""Go to 'A' park, there will be an oak tree. We all shall will all meet under the tree."
    Mink-shin: "There will?" :cross: <- this is wrong because last thing that was not "There will be a tree."

    A: ""Go to 'A' park, there will be an oak tree. We all shall will all meet under the tree."
    Mink-shin: "What tree?" :tick:-> If you say this in the correct tone, you are questioning the existence of the tree.
    Thank you for teaching me. Paul Q.

    Either one is correct, but with slight differences in tone. But first and foremost, I wouldn't use either one unless it comes immediately after the statement you're questioning. Even one intervening sentence ("We all shall meet under the tree") is enough to make things confusing. In such a case I'd use a different phrase, e.g.:

    Wait, wasn't the oak tree cut down?

    Regarding "There will?" and "Will there?", they're close in meaning, but neither one is terribly polite. "There will?" is a fairly direct expression of doubt, and can even seem like a direct contradiction:

    There will? = What you just said is false, isn't it?

    It can also connote disapproval.

    "Will there?" is more likely to sound sarcastic, bored, or condescending. It doesn't have to be those things, but that formulation is often used by writers who want to show that a character is bored by another character:

    Wow, there will be an exhibition of Bolivian sculpture at the museum this week!
    Oh, will there?
    (yawns)
    Thanks, goldenband.

    It's so helpful in my language.
     

    goldenband

    Senior Member
    English - American
    Really?:eek:Most time?
    Then I guess I'd be careful with that ...
    It doesn't have to sound bored or condescending, but it certainly can. It's easier in spoken English, when the tone and facial expression of the speaker can make it clear that they're sincerely interested (or doing a good job of pretending to be). In written English, it could be misunderstood.

    This potentially applies to most two-word responses that use the inversional structure, e.g. "Is there?" "Did he?" "Have you?" These are all very brief, non-specific, formulaic replies, and that's exactly why they lend themselves so easily to sounding bored or condescending.

    But
    , they can also sound completely sincere, as if the person replying is very interested, and is deliberately being brief so that the other speaker can resume.
     

    ljessicahj

    Member
    Chinese
    It doesn't have to sound bored or condescending, but it certainly can. It's easier in spoken English, when the tone and facial expression of the speaker can make it clear that they're sincerely interested (or doing a good job of pretending to be). In written English, it could be misunderstood.

    This potentially applies to most two-word responses that use the inversional structure, e.g. "Is there?" "Did he?" "Have you?" These are all very brief, non-specific, formulaic replies, and that's exactly why they lend themselves so easily to sounding bored or condescending.

    But
    , they can also sound completely sincere, as if the person replying is very interested, and is deliberately being brief so that the other speaker can resume.
    :thumbsup:
    I see. :D
    Thanks, goldenband!
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top