1. From Shah Alam to Penang, it would normally take about 4 to 5 hours by car, taking into consideration the traffic.
2. By express train, it would take about 7 hours.
2007-10-14 16:24:52 · 8 answers · asked by The Snail 5 in Education & Reference ➔ Words & Wordplay
Ok, ok, let me answer you since those were ''spoken'' by me in your other post...lol.
All the above answerers are correct. (the first answerer is honest...lol).
Let me try to simplify it....
-------------
"Will" is more an exact thing...example, "It will take you 4 hours" meaning it will be 4 hours only....."akan" or ''tentu''...a sure thing.
"Would" is not so exact, not so sure, not definite...example, "It would take about 7 hours"...."tak tentu"..."lebih-kurang" or is that ''kurang lebih"....lol.
1. From Shah Alam to Penang, it would normally take about 4 to 5 hours by car, taking into consideration the traffic.
I mentioned ''taking into consideration the traffic''.....so that means the time taken is not a definite one but approximately only.
-------------
2007-10-14 20:29:36 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
In formal grammar, "will" is an auxiliary to create future (real) tense and "would" is an auxiliary to create the conditional tense (e.g., I would take interstate 75, but it has potholes)
Colloquially, either works, and “would” is often used to be polite or appear less dogmatic. It’s less heavy handed because it doesn’t demand that you “will” do something. In a sense, it implies a question and awaits a response/reaction.
For example, “I would like a Pepsi please,” sounds a little more gracious than “I’ll take that Pepsi.” Or, taking your example, writing "it would take about 7 hours" sounds less dogmatic/arrogant than saying "it WILL take about 7 hours" and suggests that the speaker or writer is open to the possibility he or she may not be 100% precisely correct as to the amount of time it takes.
2007-10-15 02:01:05 · answer #2 · answered by Goldmind 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
im no brainiac with proper english grammar but i beleive the reason they are using would (past tense) rather then will (future tense) is because they are estimating the arrival times based on...PAST trips. Saying it "will" take this long is too definitive of an answer and you'll look foolish when you don't actually arrive at the time you we're told you WOULD.
2007-10-14 23:34:26 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Because the sentances discuss the normal amount of times things take.
They are times that have been experienced in the past, so the past tense of will (would) is used.
2007-10-14 23:33:52 · answer #4 · answered by SwedishFish 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because we do not wish to confine the observation in any particular time frame. "Will" would limit the application to the future.
2007-10-15 00:26:19 · answer #5 · answered by picador 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The modal verb "would" is used in a conditional sense (or in a hypothetical/theoretical situation).
"Will" is used when something is going to be done, not just hypothetically.
2007-10-14 23:36:17 · answer #6 · answered by Princess Leia 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Go question I have no idea!!!!
2007-10-15 06:43:34 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
good question. too bad i have no answer.
2007-10-14 23:31:51 · answer #8 · answered by crazyyyCHICK 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋