Skip to main content

I want to know using "so should you" is possible.

in principle, If a preceding sentence start with be-verb, the following sentence has be-verb as a tag question

I am getting out of this business and she is getting out of this business, too.

I am getting out of this business and so is she.



Whereas, in this case, is it possible?

I am getting out of this business and you should get out of this business, too.

→ I am getting out of this business and so should you.

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Hi, TaeBbongE,

@TaeBbongE posted:

If a preceding sentence start with be-verb, the following sentence has be-verb as a tag question

I am getting out of this business and she is getting out of this business, too.

I am getting out of this business and so is she.

"so is he" is not a question tag, but a reduced form of the coordinate clause "she is getting out of this business too."

@TaeBbongE posted:

I want to know using "so should you" is possible.

[...]
I am getting out of this business and you should get out of this business, too.

→ I am getting out of this business and so should you.

Yes, "should" is correct.

Under (e) Operator in reduced clauses, item 3.26, on page 126 of A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language, Quirk et al say:

[...] there are also reduced constructions in which the two auxiliaries may differ:

Ann hoped that we would stay, but unfortunately we couldn't.
You should take a break whenever you can.

Although Quirk et al do not provide an example with so, Huddleston and Pullum do under (b) Other cases of initial so with subject-auxiliary inversion on page 1539 of The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language:

(68) [...] ii. A: Tom is very nervous. B: So would you be in his position.

Note has to be taken of the fact that, if I'm not mistaken, in AmE speaker B would say: So would you in his position.

Last edited by Gustavo, Co-Moderator

Hi~ Long time no see~! Happy New Year~~~ I hope you always keep safe and happy~

Okay after watching your reply over and over again, my understanding is as follows.

Even though the preceding sentence starts with be-verb or has PP/have PP or has/have, the subsequent sentence can begin with so with subject-auxiliary inversion. Am I right?

But except for that case, are other cases also possible like the under?

aa) I am getting out of this business and you got out of this business, too.

→ I am getting out of this business and so did you.


bb) I am getting out of this business and you will get out of this business, too.

→ I am getting out of this business and so will you.


cc) I am getting out of this business and you may get out of this business, too.

→ I am getting out of this business and so may you.


And this is minor question. I am sorry for not figuring out a sentence of yours,

Note has to be taken of the fact that, if I'm not mistaken, in AmE speaker B would say: So would you in his position.

I mean what is original sentence before it became the passive sentence?

Haha I guess your expression is something I desire with good writing skills. As I am not native speaker so I would like to admire you.

Last edited by TaeBbongE
@TaeBbongE posted:


aa) I am getting out of this business and you got out of this business, too.

→ I am getting out of this business and so did you.

bb) I am getting out of this business and you will get out of this business, too.

→ I am getting out of this business and so will you.

cc) I am getting out of this business and you may get out of this business, too.

→ I am getting out of this business and so may you.



Yes, after so you can use any auxiliary that differs from the one in the first clause, as long as its use is consistent with the meaning intended to be conveyed.

@TaeBbongE posted:

Note has to be taken of the fact that, if I'm not mistaken, in AmE speaker B would say: So would you in his position.

I mean what is original sentence before it became the passive sentence?

That's not a passive sentence, but a sentence with copulative be:

A: Tom is very nervous. B: You would also be nervous in his position ⇒ So would you be in his position (BrE) / So would you in his position (AmE). (David, please correct me if I am wrong).

The point is that in BrE modal auxiliaries can be followed by do or be in elliptical constructions, while in AmE this is considered ungrammatical  This use of pro-form “do,” which is typical of BrE and is usually referred to as “British do,” jars on the ears of American speakers, who will use either the auxiliary alone or “do so.” Thus, in answer to this question: Will you come with us?, a British speaker could reply: I might do (where "do" substitutes for "come") while an American one will answer: I might. I'm not sure (I need David's confirmation here) if this also applies to "be": A- Are you coming with us? B- I might be (coming with you) while an American one will answer: I might.

Hi again.

Ah ha I think I almost get usage of pro-verb.



By the way, could you explain the meaning and structure of this sentence of yours.

Note has to be taken of the fact that

Do I have to separately post a new question for it?

If there is no problem, I'd like to continue.



To begin with, I thought that sentence is a passive one but you said it is not.

My initial thought:

Someone has to take note of the fact that, if I'm not mistaken, in AmE speaker B would say ~~~.

→ Note has to be taken of the fact that, if I'm not mistaken, in AmE speaker B would say ~~~.

However, you said it is a copulative be rather than the passive sentence.

Last edited by TaeBbongE
@TaeBbongE posted:

By the way, could you explain the meaning and structure of this sentence of yours.

Note has to be taken of the fact that

[...]

To begin with, I thought that sentence is a passive one but you said it is not.

My initial thought:

Someone has to take note of the fact that, if I'm not mistaken, in AmE speaker B would say ~~~.

→ Note has to be taken of the fact that, if I'm not mistaken, in AmE speaker B would say ~~~.

However, you said it is a copulative be rather than the passive sentence.

Yes, that IS a sentence in the passive voice, and the active form is You have to take note of  the fact that... I thought you were referring to So would you (be) in his position.

Last edited by Gustavo, Co-Moderator


A: Tom is very nervous. B: You would also be nervous in his position ⇒ So would you be in his position (BrE) / So would you in his position (AmE). (David, please correct me if I am wrong).

The point is that in BrE modal auxiliaries can be followed by do or be in elliptical constructions, while in AmE this is considered ungrammatical  This use of pro-form “do,” which is typical of BrE and is usually referred to as “British do,” jars on the ears of American speakers, who will use either the auxiliary alone or “do so.” Thus, in answer to this question: Will you come with us?, a British speaker could reply: I might do (where "do" substitutes for "come") while an American one will answer: I might. I'm not sure (I need David's confirmation here) if this also applies to "be": A- Are you coming with us? B- I might be (coming with you) while an American one will answer: I might.

Hi, Gustavo and TaeBbongE—As a native AmE speaker, I would indeed be unlikely to reply to the sentence "Tom is very nervous" with "So would you be in his position"; however, I would also be unlikely to respond, "So would you."

The elliptical response I would likely use is the construction with "too," and I would use "be" after the modal. That is, in response to "Tom is very nervous," I might say, "You would be, too."

Regarding the second example, with the progressive, I would use "be" after the modal in the elliptical response: "Are you coming?" --> "I might be." I view this issue as slightly different from British "do," which I do find ungrammatical:

Q: Will you come with us?
A:*I might do.

As a native AmE speaker, I would indeed be unlikely to reply to the sentence "Tom is very nervous" with "So would you be in his position"; however, I would also be unlikely to respond, "So would you."

The elliptical response I would likely use is the construction with "too," and I would use "be" after the modal. That is, in response to "Tom is very nervous," I might say, "You would be, too."

Regarding the second example, with the progressive, I would use "be" after the modal in the elliptical response: "Are you coming?" --> "I might be." I view this issue as slightly different from British "do," which I do find ungrammatical:

Q: Will you come with us?
A:*I might do.

Thank you, David, for clarifying that.

TaeBbongE, please take note of it.

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×