Skip to main content

differences - "Prefer to do something" vs. "would prefer to do something"


Are these sentences different?


"I prefer to walk."
"I'd (would) prefer to walk."


In some books I read one is used in general and the other in specific situations.


So when you say "I prefer coffee to tea" you are stating something in general, and when you say "I'd prefer coffee to tea" it is in that specific situation that you would like coffee", and maybe you will want something else in another situation.
Is it correct, or can we use prefer in specific situations, too?



Answer



The "would" implies a conditional and is thus, as already mentioned, more polite. E.g. the host offers you tea but you prefer coffee:



I would prefer coffee, (if that is possible/if you do not mind/if it does not trouble you)



You can of course still say "I prefer coffee" without the conditional, but it just isn't as polite. One could infact understand it as a rejection that comes very close to a "to hell with your tea, I only drink coffe".


As you noticed yourself "I prefer coffee to tea" seems very general. Nevertheless, another possibility to show the difference between both is the general expression:



I would prefer coffe over tea any time



Even thought it is not limited to the situation it has a conditional which implies that you are fine with tea if e.g. no coffee is available.


to your first example applies the same:



Shall we take a cab or walk home?


I would prefer to walk. (If it doesn't bother you, if you ask me, if my opinion counts)



These conditions are normally not phrased since it appears to be even politer not to mention them. Just one condition would reduce the effect, but naming multiple at the same time would be weird/overly polite.


Example:



"I would prefer coffee, if you got any (implies one does not care about the nuisance one might be for the other)"


"I would prefer coffee, if it isn't any trouble to you and if you have any. otherwise i am really fine with tea i am so sorry that I at all brought up my preferences."



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.
Post a Comment
Read more