Thread by @gauravsabnis

Wrong usage of "would" instead of "will" is now in headlines and bylines too. It's reached copyediting in India too. To the rest of the English speaking world, that "PM Modi would arrive" line means something else altogether.

People in India in the past couple of decades seem to have decided that "would" is the formal or respectful form of "will". Why? No idea!

I don't remember this being common everywhere in my childhood. Certainly not in newspapers!

Overheard in our school's admin section a few years ago between a prof and an Indian student-worker.

"Hey, can please you make 60 copies of these and spiral them some time today?"

"Sure, mam, I would do it after lunch, mam."

Prof pauses then ask,

"But?"

"But?"

"Are you busy with something else after lunch?"

"No mam, I would do it right after lunch, mam."

At this point, said Prof realized what most profs in US universities have learned to contextually decipher recently. That she meant she *will* do it right after lunch.

I took student worker aside and quickly explained the confusion. Who never used it like that again, hopefully.

Some linguistics scholar should try to find out when and where this exactly started. I have a very strong feeling that it's a 21st century Indian English thing, along with using "revert" to mean "reply". I simply don't remember those usages being common in the 90s.

My theory is it was something that started from the Infosys and Wipro benches. So much of Indian online content until the arrival of smartphones started from Infosys and Wipro benches.

Some fellow felt that "I'll reply soon" seemed like a very casual way to reply to their boss and instead went with "I would revert back at the earliest" and some other people on the email chain were like, ooh, that sounds fancy, and they started doing that too.
That's my theory!