President Akufo-Addo and the Tragedy of Governance: “I shall Protect the Public Purse!” – Part 2

Those familiar with the parts of speech (word class) in English know them as nouns, verbs, adjectives, and adverbs (which constitute the “open class”—because new ones can be coined and added to them) and prepositions, conjunctions, interjection, and pronouns (“closed system”—because it is highly impossible for new ones to be coined and added to the list).

So also should those conversant with linguistics/grammar know such concepts as “person” (first, second, and third, and neuter—both singular and plural; e.g., I/we; you; he, she, it/they) and “case marking” (subject, object, possessive, genitive, reflexive), which is the function of pronouns. Perspective is at issue here.

A major strand is where verbs come in. Indeed, as “doing words”, verbs can be described as the livewire of English because they indicate action. For our purposes, I will not bring in anything beyond what I consider to be useful. Thus, the issues of number, concord, tense, time, and aspect are excluded.

What is at issue is the category of verbs that has to do with “helping” and their semantic value. In other words, I will do this analysis of Akufo-Addo’s declaration, isolating the auxiliary verb “SHALL” and pinpoint its implications for what Akufo-Addo has done or failed to do as far as his declaration is concerned and whether he can be taken to task or not.

A quick explanation here. In English, a “helping” verb is also known as an auxiliary verb, a modal, or anomalous finite. Its main function is to reinforce the main verb to substantiate it and validate the “doing” that the main verb entails. There are many modals (is/was, are/were, do, shall, will/would, has/have to, ought, may/might, should, can/could, dare, etc.). Each has its own implications, depending on the context of usage.

For purposes of this analysis, I will isolate “shall” and “will” to interrogate Akufo-Addo’s declaration because of the interesting implications.

Doubtless, the auxiliary verb (“shall”) is regarded as “unmarked” or “expected” when used for the first person (singular or plural). It is non-binding, implying that it is “conditional” and is not expected to shock, surprise or annoy. Neither should it attract any penalty. For example: “I shall attend the meeting tomorrow as scheduled”. Conditions may make it impossible for me to do so and I shouldn’t expect to be punished for failing to attend the meeting.

The obvious implication here is that the onus is on the person making the utterance. If conditions don’t permit that person to do as intended, no penalty is expected to be exacted. In other words, using “shall” in the first-person context is the norm and has no obligation!!

Let’s flip over to “will”. This “helping verb” is traditionally used for case marking in the second and third person voice. Thus used, it is regarded as “unmarked”, conditional, and expected. E.g., “He will come here by 8 am tomorrow.” If he fails to do so, no action is expected to be taken against him because the intention is conditional and not obligatory.

Now, let’s see where the linguistic turn-around regarding these auxiliary verbs matters most. If and when the helping verb “will” is used for case marking in the first person, the matter changes to one of being “marked” and denoting an obligation. It is no longer “conditional”; and there is a penalty to be paid if flouted. E.g., “I will attend the meeting as scheduled” means that come what may, I must attend that meeting. If I fail to do so, I stand being “punished” (whatever that punishment may be) because the utterance binds me to the intention (that is, attending the meeting).

So is it for the second and third-person slots too when “shall” replaces the traditional “will” to make the utterance binding. This aspect is mostly restricted to domains that have legal authority or force, which is why legal documents on transactions affecting/involving individuals are mostly couched with the use of “shall”. Used in this domain, the utterance has a legal authority and binds the individual. Failure to comply carries a penalty. E.g.: “You/he/she shall report to the police every Tuesday”. It’s an order to be obeyed!!

(AN ASIDE: Given these usages, I have always wondered why people shorten “shall” and “will” when they use them in writing. E.g., “We’ll be there as planned” or “They’ll be in court today.” What is implied in either case? Is it “will” or “shall”?).

…To be continued…

By Dr Michael Jarvis Bokor