"Blunkett claimed, at the beginning of his latest saga, that he didn't realise that as an ex-minister he had to consult an independent advisory committee before taking on outside jobs. What the official guidance says is that a former minister "should seek advice" from the committee. When I was first taught English (not my mother tongue) the word "should" was not regarded as an absolute imperative. It was a persuasive nudge to do whatever it was, but not an order. It was not until I had spent some time working in Britain that I fully appreciated the nuance of "should" which amounted to a command.
But why use an ambiguous word when there's a perfectly good word - "must" - that has no alternative meaning? Guidance that an ex-minister "must seek advice" would have put it beyond doubt.
However, I have found that English officials and employers, especially at senior levels, don't like to be seen to be giving direct orders; it is more polite to use a more subdued form of words. When first in London, I had a boss whose commands began "Perhaps you'd like to ..." The first time she said this to me, I considered her kind suggestion, and declined it. I had to be taken aside by a colleague who explained that I wasn't in fact being given a choice."
But Mr Blunkett is a native English speaker and an experienced politiician - he should have known what "should" means.
No comments:
Post a Comment