Is there any difference between "it will get destroyed." and "it will be destroyed."?Are they both equivalent?
-
Although it's now idiomatic and commonplace, using get in such contexts is a bit "downmarket", so you should probably avoid it in formal contexts. Also note that it's still not idiomatic for all contexts - for example, If I fail I will get disappointed is unlikely. And The turkey will get cooked at midday tomorrow is more likely to carry the sense of starting to be cooked (it'll go in the oven at that time), whereas will be cooked probably means that's when it will be ready to eat (it'll come out of the oven).– FumbleFingersCommented Dec 31, 2019 at 13:40
-
I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it was cross-posted to ELL.– tchrist ♦Commented Jan 1, 2020 at 1:26
-
One thing you can bank on is if you are in an area where both are used, they are not equivalent. When used with a verb like destroyed that tends to imply a willful agent destroyer, get is used to distance the speaker from having a willful role in the destruction. If there is a fire, the files will get destroyed. After seven years, the files will be destroyed anyway.– Phil SweetCommented Jan 1, 2020 at 1:32
-
1@tchrist Eh? It may be off topic, and it may be cross posted, but it isn't off topic because it was cross posted.– Phil SweetCommented Jan 1, 2020 at 1:33
-
@PhilSweet Fixed that for you. :)– tchrist ♦Commented Jan 1, 2020 at 2:19
Add a comment
|
1 Answer
You should avoid using "get" in formal contexts.
Although "be" is better, you can also use:
it will become destroyed
-
There is nothing wrong with get in formal contexts. The OPs sentence is an example of the passive get, and you indeed should avoid many uses of the passive get, including this one, in formal contexts. But the people who say "don't use get" have somehow a̶c̶q̶u̶i̶r̶e̶d̶,̶ ̶o̶b̶t̶a̶i̶n̶e̶d̶,̶ ̶b̶e̶c̶o̶m̶e̶ gotten the wrong idea. Commented Jan 1, 2020 at 0:52
-
Getting destroyed and being destroyed seem to be similar to me. Commented Jan 1, 2020 at 4:35