English Language & Usage Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I have the impression that the phrase "will be" is using the verb "to be" twice. Is that correct?

share|improve this question
up vote 6 down vote accepted

No. Will is a modal verb expressing, among other things, future tense, intention, request, habitual behavior, or probability.

share|improve this answer
...and there is no etymological connection between will and be or any other 'be' related form (am, are, is, etc). – Mitch Apr 8 '11 at 2:54
@Mitch: ORIGIN Old English willa (noun), willian (verb), of Germanic origin; related to Dutch wil, German Wille (nouns), also to will and the adverb well . – Robusto Apr 8 '11 at 2:57
@Mitch: there is no etymological connection between go and went, either. This is called suppletion. – RegDwigнt Apr 8 '11 at 9:27
I thought they were related because of other conjugations such as "was" and "were" – Jader Dias Apr 8 '11 at 12:14
@Jader: Do you mean that 'will' and 'were' are phonetically similar and so might be cognate? if you follow the etymology links and also look at the full set of conjugations of 'to be' in English (and Germanic, and IE), you'll see that 'to be' has several distinct non-cognate forms. And the modal 'will' (and the other English modals) is not cognate with any of the 'to be' forms. – Mitch Apr 8 '11 at 14:17

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.