use of would

Leaving technicalities to Mac, Rog, Con, WB, etc, us US's say it that way too. However more likely "...goes after..."

We might say "...in either the..."

@dalehileman I'm still unclear on the use of would there. Can you explain?

In the first, "would" means "should," "will," "will usually," or "is supposed to"

Not sure about second since don't know the context. But "would be" might be replaced by "is"

Kris maybe tech detail coming from Mac, Rog, Con, WB, etc

It's being used as the subjunctive mood of "will" indicating contingent action.

Could you please tell us quite a bit clearly what your answers mean? Answer should be understable for English Learners. I also want to learn this kind of use of would."

.

And old erstwhile journs like Dale with failing brain and limited vocab in the realm

Hope anyhow Shar my limited response was of some help anyhow

Could be true but it isn't necessarily in these initial examples.



In this case, 'would' could be or IS being used as a polite form. It gets this polite form usage from being the more conditional form of the will/would pair. So it a softer, more polite, not so in your face response.

In British English, the comma [would] goES after the closing quotation mark.
In American English it [would be] IS common to use it in the affirmative or the negative.

Here we see a more direct description which is not as polite, deferential, ... as the first examples.

In British English, the comma [would] WILL go after the closing quotation mark.
In American English, you will/would find that it [would be] WILL be common to use it in the affirmative or the negative.

Hypotheticals are not just flat out counterfactuals on one end of a scale and, on the other, true, realistic, real events.