Is this rule ever used in conversational English?

I've never heard of this (USA) You can use "I would" or "you should" to give advice

"I'd wear a coat." is usual conversational English in this case.

This is 100% completely wrong in all contexts in modern English, never do this. Which book is this? Edit: in American English

If I (US southeast GenX) have ever used the construction, it’s with the awareness that it’s archaic, at least in the U.S. I do still use “Shall I…”, but even that is rare. Most people will say “Should I…”. My only familiarity with “I should X, if I were you” is from British media.

In my 50+ years of living I’ve never heard anyone say, and I’ve never read , “I should _____” when the speaker is recommending what someone else does. That’s said I haven’t lived outside of the US so maybe somewhere it’s still utilized.

No one I know talks like that.

UK English here, I use this very often and it is natural in a sentence. It could be different in US English though.

‘Muricans: we never say that! Why do you make up rules.

The only way I hear this still is in the phrase "I should be so lucky." Which I don't hear often at all, and I would interpret as "if the event that we are discussing happened to me, I would be very lucky." Typically this is in response to hearing news about someone else, but even then, it's not at all common. I would not recommend incorporating it into your vocabulary for casual speech.

It sounds like something my British grandmother would say. I'm sure it's correct, but it sounds retro af

If you are a wizard, the yes you shall use this.

I sometimes say “I should think so”, or “I should imagine” .. was this originally meant to mean “you should think so” and “you should imagine”? I certainly don’t think of it that way when I’m saying it.

I"m surprised by the amount of people saying they do not use this type of language. I say this, but I would say I do not use it every day. Perhaps more just when I am in the mood to do so or if the situation permits it. I will admit I like to read and watch some historical shows and books so that could influence my speaking patterns. (Context: I live in ohio and am Gen z)

I’ve never heard even any regional dialect of English that uses “should” that way. Giving advice with “should” is always in second person: “You should wear a coat.” Perhaps this source is confusing “should” with “would”, which is often used in that way. When you say, “I would wear a coat”, you are basically saying, “If I were you, I would wear a coat.” You can say “if I were you” or not, but even if you leave it out, it is still understood as an implied part of the statement.

As others rightly say, this is (a) British English and (b) quite dated. It's the kind of thing my grandmother would have said. I disagree that it's *wrong* per se, but in most cases people would say "I would" (or would use contractions: "I'd"). The exception is that the structure lives on (at least in my fairly posh Southern English dialect) in some set phrases, e.g. "I should think/shouldn't think \[...\]". For example: "*Do I need to leave now to get there on time?" "No, I shouldn't think so/shouldn't think it will take that long."* I don't think that is used in American English, though, and even in British English it's probably falling out of use.

the name of this book plz?

I would say "you shouldn't"

If someone is asking me if I think it's cold out, I'd say, "well, I'd wear a sweater\[, but I'm a little bitch\]." (Don't add the last part, I just hate the cold.) If they ask, "Should I go now?", I'd say "Yes, you should leave \[before my sister punches you\]". Note the difference between that and "**I** would leave\[, it takes a while to get there\]." Should is stronger. And I literally have never heard anyone say "I should" in the US.

As a non American. I have to say that I would use "I would" for all of these examples given. That to me seems the most normal. Or as comments have said saying "I'd" as an abbreviation is perfectly acceptable in most cases.

Im not sure this isnt a typo or something because none of these seem correct to me and im a native speaker. however if you replace "should" with "would" then they make sense and convey the meaning the book suggests.

What in the Victorian blazes is this? You will get some very odd looks from native speakers using that phrasing. The correct phrasing is "I would..." or "You should...."

never heard that in my life

no

I still do that, especially when talking to myself.

I’ve certainly never heard it here in the US. However, when you replace ‘should’ with ‘would’ in the advice-givers sentence, you get something fairly normal. “Is it cold out?” “I would wear a coat.” “Should I leave now?” “I would wait a bit.” “I wouldn’t stay up too late, you have to be up early tomorrow.”

I'm from Midwest America and have also lived in California and the South. I'm confused about people saying that it sounds old fashioned because I use this constantly as does everyone around me? "I shouldn't be too late" for "I'm running late because of something unexpected, but I know it will only be late by a few minutes" "You should really think about talking to him" meaning "I'm not TELLING you that you need to have a conversation with him, but I'm politely telling you that you need to have a conversation with him" Etc

I might occasionally use "I'd" in this kind of way but it's rare. Visitor at my house: - It has stopped raining. Should I leave now? - I'd wait a bit. (referring to the other person; I'm not intending to leave at all) "I should" in any context does seem a bit much for everyday conversation and I don't think I've heard it in many years.

I am an Australian. I have never heard anyone speak this way in my life. If you said it to me I would have no idea what you meant.

>["The busiest we've seen it so far? I should think so, yes," he said, pushing a scooter up against the barriers.](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19121989) —"London Olympics: Can Park cope with busiest days?", *BBC News*, 3 August 2012. >["You should hang your bloody heads in shame," she says, before quickly apologising to the presiding officer who says "I should think so Ms McAlpine." Presiding Officer Linda Fabiani reminds all those in the chamber to be courteous.](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-41226017?post=asset%3Acb9fe699-ad4d-4e13-bf0b-f85b3cf3b4a3#post) —*BBC News* report on a debate in the Scottish Parliament, 2017.

“Should” is archaic in American English when used this way. Americans say “would” instead, when giving advice. 

It's not often used, but probably more used where followed up by "...if I were you". It's definitely grammatically correct though.

I’ve never said “should” but I have used “would” as in “I would X if I were you” but sometimes cut the “if I were you” “Shall I leave now?” “No, I would wait a bit.”

The first example is if they're talking to themselves but it's muddled by the second example being two different people. If the first one is also two people, it'd be 'would'.

Yes this is used commonly in Commonwealth English

The unspoken end of the sentence is " if I were you" My nan might have said this, no one now would.

No. It’s either “YOU should wear a coat” or “ I would wear a coat”

This sounds like something they would say in Downton Abbey. Either old fashioned or British

I shouldn’t think you’d need to use it frequently but it’s nice to know about in case you encounter it in the wild.

In the UK, it sounds old fashioned but does get used. Probably more by older people now. Good to be able to recognise if you hear it, but no one would expect a non-native speaker to use it.

1) Most people (outside some UK regions? strikes me as a British accent) dont say shall so dont say it cuz itll sound ridiculous unless u have an overall British accent, and even then just better not to use it 2) "i should" instead of "i would if i were you" would probably confuse alot of people lol, actually i didnt even realize it meant that at first when i read this (i dont even remember being taught this in school, but either way ive never heard it in actual speech), and it says like very old fashioned. In actual speech ud say "i would ..." or "i would if i were you" (the latter is like more emphasizing i think, not sure how to correctly explain this), or "id" /a(ɪ)d/ (contraction) (i transcribed the vowel as /a/ in IPA but im not exactly sure what it actually is, idt its an actual /a/)

You can say "I would do this if I were you" but not "I should do this" when you really mean "you should so this."

If you were trying to be very posh, but in conversational english you say: "Is it could outside?" "Yes, I *would* wear a coat" OR "Yes, *you* should wear a coat". I've never heard it said the way the textbook describes outside of period dramas or people putting on a fake posh voice

Yes, but not in conversational American.

I should use a coat, but I would rather use a sweater.

Yes, it’s ok. Usually appended (or prepended) with “if I were you”

No. Sounds like something from a British period film. 1800’s. As an American I found it confusing. We would say, “It’s cold out. YOU should wear a coat.” Edit to add; You could replace “should” with “would” and it would make sense (as in giving advice). “It’s cold out. I WOULD wear a coat.” This is a little less direct than saying “you should”, but both are a way of suggesting what you think the other person ought to do.

It sounds old fashioned. I would use would instead.

Still fairly common in rural southern england at least - and it sounds less imposing/bossy than saying "you should"

In my variety it's just "I'd", or maybe if you really want to emphasize the "I" part then "I would", e.g. "Well /YOU/ can do whatever you want but /I/ would wear a coat."

This is incorrect. In these instances it would be either “I would,” or “you should.” The only exception I can think of is when one action is expected, for example: It’s cold out, I’m going to wear a coat. I should hope so. In this instance you’re not suggesting an action but indicated that the persons course of action is what is to be expected.

Never heard this or if i have i cant recall. Canada 🇨🇦

Grammar in use by Raymond Murphy

I definitely would and have said that in the past. I also hear it occasionally. However, it is something my parent's generation used frequently but my children's generation probably use less often. I think that is a typical answer from the UK. I dont think I have ever heard an American say it though.

It's used in the UK, but might be a touch old-fashioned. My dad used it all the time, but he died a few years ago.

I’ve heard this my whole life and use it all the time. Once again, American defaultism presuming that if they aren’t familiar with something it can’t be real or relevant. I’ve lived in the midlands and south England and Wales.

Old textbooks teach *should* as the first-person of *would*, which isn’t the case in a lot of the English speaking world anymore. That’s probably where this is coming from. Had to re-read the example and see what it was saying four or five times to figure it out.

Yes. British English, aged 62. But I might say would instead. I think should in these circumstances may be disappearing.

This is old fashioned and probably only found in British English. The negative is more common these days "I shouldn't do that" is a stronger suggestion not to do something than "I wouldn't do that". I like the way they describe it as "giving advice", I think it's a good way to describe it. It's an idiom, it doesn't carry the same meaning if you substitute you/he/she/they/we etc., only "I should/shouldn't" has this meaning. It's roughly equivalent to saying one ought to/not to do something.

It works if you swap the I into You, "You should wear a coat". or if you swap should for would, "I would wear a coat". Doesn't work otherwise.

Not really anymore.

Very antiquated linguistic style.

If somebody talked like this, I would worry they were having some kind of weird nervous breakdown.

I only use “I should” if I’m thinking to myself I will use “I would ___” to gently suggest something or “you should” as slightly more firm to advice someone else

No, I’ve never heard anything like that. It would be extremely confusing.

I've never seen this before

Either say I would or you should

<American English> No. **You** should wear a coat. \- or - I **would** wear a coat. That entire page is full of bad advice, friend. Edited to Add: It's a useful construction to be aware of for advanced learners because it shows up in old literature. But it's not useful for modern conversational American English.

USA native speaker. I've never heard should used in this way. I've heard it in very old movies but thats it. I would use "you should" or "i would"

It’s definitely British and it’s definitely old fashioned. I remember the Dowager Countess of Grantham saying something like this in Downton Abbey. It went something like this. I can’t remember what Shirley McClaine’s character said 100%. Shirley McClaine: Well, if I’m going to theatre, I ought to get dressed. Dowager: Yes, I should. (But referring to Shirley not herself).

This is not common in mainstream American English. In all those usages I'd say either "You should" or "I would". And other than in a very few set expressions I've never heard an American say "shall". If this book is mostly teaching American English, I'd get a different one that's put out by an American publisher. If this book is mostly teaching UK English with a few subsections on American English then I'd take all their American sections with a grain of salt - double check every one of them with an American source.

we use would but the contraction of it being "i'd do this" fits kinda, maybe its from that.

In America this is literally never used and would likely get strange looks. It would confuse people. In certain parts of England its used though.

It’s the Murphy book of English Grammar. Looks like in this new edition, they mistakenly wrote “I” instead of “you”. - Is it cold out? - Yes, you should wear a coat.

using should is fine, but these examples are using it wrong. If you’re giving someone advice, it’s “YOU should….” “I should” is used when you are actually talking about yourself. There is a way to talk about yourself as a way to give advice: “I would wear a coat if I were you”

"I would" and "you should" both make sense, but "I should" doesn't really, and "you would" feels too much like you're trying to predict their actions than give advice. 

It’s a bit dated and overly formal. Here is a similar example from Winnie the Pooh which I immediately thought of as being somewhere you would read that type of language. It’s a kids book so it emphasises it, ‘I shouldn’t think’ -> ‘You shouldn’t think’ “Sure to be a pole,” said Rabbit, “because of calling it a pole, and if it’s a pole, well, I should think it would be sticking in the ground, shouldn’t you, because there’d be nowhere else to stick it.”

Never heard this in my life

Nope. It sounds like something a stuffy British nanny would say in an old movie.

If you are a mid 20th century posh British man, that is exactly how you would talk. These days it's more of an artifact, not really how anyone talks. You'll only ever hear "I should hope so" which means something like "well, yeah, duh" or "yes, of course".

Not in America. Maybe other English-speaking countries?

I am in central Canada and am a middle aged native speaker, for the sake of Context. I recognize this construction and understand it. I have used it—but very infrequently. I think I would only ever say this as a one-phrase reply of either “I should” or “I shouldn’t” in response to a personal opinion based question. For example, my friend asks “if the wedding invitation says I can wear a hat, do you think I can wear my fascinator?” and I could reply with “I should (or shouldn’t)”. I would expect to encounter this construction in a period drama from the UK (like a dramatization on Agatha Christie or something).

It's old fashioned, but I use it sometimes because I like to play with words. Read a JRR Tolkien book about hobbits. It is the sort of language they would use.

This sounds weird as hell "I should" : talking about *yourself.* [Self] "I should take out the trash" "I would" : advising others on what you would do in their position as a suggestion. [Other] "I'm not sure what to wear" [Self] "I would wear shorts" "You should" : directly advising someone on what to do [Self] "you should get your oil changed, it's long overdue" "You would" : describing actions of someone in a hypothetical situation (either who you are speaking to or a hypothetical person) [Other] "what if I just went hiking in some random forest?" [Self] "you would get lost"

There’s at least one idiomatic phrase of this structure that I haven’t seen mentioned yet: “I should think so/not.”  I think most Americans would be familiar with the idiom “I should think so/not,” but only through historical or literary contexts. Only extremely formal speakers would use it in conversation. I can’t speak to how British English speakers interpret it. Speakers use the phrase to indicate their opinion on something, not necessarily to give advice.  Here’s a link to the Cambridge Dictionary’s entry on it: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/i-should-think-not-so-too#google_vignette

American here, my mom is the only person I know who uses this and only in one situation. If I say something obvious like, “I guess I won’t kiss the alligator.” My mom would say “I should think not”. It’s kind of an emphatic agreement with a negative. But she’s the only person in America who says that.

Never in my entire life have I heard this used colloquially.

Sounds very 1800s English. I would never phrase things that way, but I'm just a normal dude.

This is British English. I, an American, would say "would."

Don't bother learning that. It's too Earl of Dunsmuir.

The only time I’ve heard anybody use this was [Brick Top, in Snatch](https://i.imgur.com/x1Y6kjg.png) > It can get you in a lot of trouble, thinking, Errol. I shouldn’t do so much of it.

I've never heard this before. I think they're meaning to say 'I *would* \[blank\]'. an understandable mistake because the nuance of should/would/could can be pretty confusing. It's a shortening of the construction 'I would\[n't\] \[blank\] if I were you' meaning, if I hypothetically were in your situation, this is how I would behave.

Americans never say it this way in conversation. We use would, not should. Our typical construct is “I’d bring a coat (if I were you.)”

That is more British English than American English, we very rarely hear that usage in the US.

Aussie here! yea absolutely

You can use "you should" or "I would" in this way (at least in American English). The main difference is that saying "I would" sounds like you're offering friendly advice while "you should" sounds more like a warning. Although, I will point out that in these examples, the pronoun usage is weird. It seems like the person is speaking to himself.

Not anywhere I've been in the US

If you used "I should" instead of "I would" in this context, as a native speaker, I wouldn't understand it the same way.

I would be confused if someone spoke to me like this.

That usage is awkward for me. I do use should when indicating action that is required vs would for personal advice for which there are no “permissibility” aspects

Upper Midwest USA here and I definitely never use or hear that construction. As others have said “would” is actually pretty common.

Jesus that book is outdated and wrong.

Not in Murrica in 2025. It wasn’t even common in the 1980s when I was in High school.

It's a little pompous/pretentious/british sounding. "I should put my suit on (if I were you), before the guests arrive for the wedding." It's said by people when they want to advise you to do something because it's what they would do in your position.

In my opinion, the word “shall” is the most outdated part of the lesson. The rest could pass day to day, but “shall” would stand out.

If the subject were "you" it would be correct with should. "Is it cold outside?" "Yes, \*you\* should wear a coat." It sounds wrong to me with the subject being "I".

Scenario: bad date. Usage: “I should go.” Totally used all the time!

It sounds very old fashioned. Using it might actually confuse the listener.

Yes i should advise you to study it. It might come in handy

Woah. Absolutely not.

I'd be a bit surprised to hear it in Australia. "I'd wait a bit" or "I would wait a bit" is what we'd tend to say.

Yes this is common in Yorkshire dialect

Generally you would not use should in directing or giving advice to someone else unless you were in some sort of higher power balance: like if you are giving instructions to a subordinate at work or your child. I could say “It is cold, you should wear a coat” to my child but not to my husband or friend to someone like that I would say “it’s could, you may want to wear a coat”.

That’s very odd that this is supposed to be some “American” English source when this seems to be more British.

Born and raised American English speaker, the only time I’ve seen something close is “I should say so” as a response to a course of action or opinion someone just voiced. Ex. Friend: I better bring an umbrella! Me: I should say so… it’s raining cats and dogs!

Aah. Murphy's. The only grammar book. I think I taught this just the other week.  Not really. It's old fashioned. It's kind of like using 'I concur'.

“wouldn’t” would be better here imo. While this may be a correct rule, I don’t think it’s used much anymore.

There's a lot of arguing semantics in this thread but no, this isn't common phraseology in either current British or North American English.  My advice would be to answer the question the way they want you to and then disregard this rule for day to day conversation. It's not *technically* incorrect, it's antiquated; meaning it is not used in common modern conversation.  "I would wear a coat" is fine though I do feel like that first person transverse where "I" means 'royal we' (I plus you) gets mistranslated with non English speakers.  My recommendation would be to simply say "you should wear a coat"

"I should" sounds archaic for giving advice, but using the inverted form "should I" to ask for advice is normal.

As an American I’ve never heard this, and I would be confused if someone said it

I’m 20 and from the UK. This just threw me. I skimmed it, didn’t see anything wrong, went back, then realised I’d misunderstood and I couldn’t actually make sense of any of it. Having looked over it carefully, I now get what they’re saying, but those sound wrong to me (I’m thus going to agree with everyone else saying this is an outdated rule). To me, “I should wear a coat” is talking to yourself. Like, you open a window and see it’s chucking it down with rain, so you go, “Hmm, I should wear a coat”. Then your friend walks in, and says “I’m going out now too, is it cold or wet out?” You’d respond with “Yes, I would wear a coat if I were you.” Basically, to me, “I should” references what I ought to do whereas “I would” is what I’d encourage the person I’m speaking to do. This came to a head when I tried to parse “I shouldn’t stay up too late. You have to be up early tomorrow.” I was thrown by how the speaker seemed to be referring to themselves in the second person, and only for half of their thought at that. Now, again for me the way of phrasing it is “I wouldn’t stay up too late. You have to be up early tomorrow.” To me, “would” is the word that conveys that notion of suggestion, not “should”.

It rings very odd and mannered to my ear. It would sound more natural if either “should” replaced with “would” or “I should” was changed to “you should”. It may be different depending on the English-speaking country but in the States you would more likely say, “Should I leave now?”

I’m English. This is very old fashioned. But people sometimes use “I’d” the same way.

It’s something you’d only hear on Downtown Abbey, or Mary Poppins.

The examples look wrong if they are call and response. I'm going out now. Is it cold out? Should be followed by 'Yes, YOU should wear a coat.' I shouldn't stay up too late. Response : YES, you have to be up early tomorrow. Or, maybe it is a new edition for that teacher's sweet learning book money, and they just lazy edited.

That book is based on British English. (I recognize it because I’m an ESL teacher and I have used that book—until they came out with an American English version, which is the one I use now since I teach in the US). Nobody would say that here, at least on the west coast of the US. I have heard British people say it though.

Sound pretty antiquated to me. Using 'would' or literally 'If I were you' are more common in casual conversations.

This is the first I've ever heard of that and I'm 39.

USA. Absolutely not. I thought I kept misreading your photo. I've never heard this and would assume if someone said the words, "I should wear a coat," then they are saying that they themselves should wear a coat. 

This sounds British to me (USA)

yes you should learn it. While not used often it is used is some conversations. I use it with my friends, “Should I go out guys? Nah i shouldn’t, I have work tomorrow.” While not as common as the other uses of the word should, it’s still valuable to learn when and how it’s used because people in certain areas use it more than others

I use that when talking to parents and grandparents, UK english. Not with people my age though. Just to add that it’s similar to how we say: "I’m going out" "You want to wear a coat" which is similar to "I should". You can also use it like "He wants to wear a coat, he does, otherwise he’ll get cold". Similarly this is more old fashioned english but I use it from time to time.

You might hear 'well I should think so!' as a retort when someone says they'll do something the correct way or says they'll do something you've been waiting for them to do, but it's dying out

I'm 43 and a native American English speaker. Ive never heard of this rule. Ever.

Probably not in American English. I’ve never heard that before in my life, and would be very confused if someone said that to me.

Nah, that's just incorrect. You can give advice with "I would..." or "You should..." (the first form is not applicable if the advice cannot apply to yourself, but is otherwise considered more polite). "I should..." is invariably used for things that you know you ought to be doing, but aren't doing. In some cases it's things you do plan to do in the future. In other cases it's things you're procrastinating about.

The only time I use “should” like this is if I say “I should think so”, meaning I imagine so, or I believe that’s likely. I agree with others that the context given is very traditional English, and not really used in modern day conversation! More likely to come across it in an older book.

Use the conjunction of ‘i would’ and say “I’d wait”

I think this is plain wrong

Wait! Is this for real? or you guys are just trying to confuse those non-native speakers like me? ‘cause this structure is like one of the first things we have to learn, and I thought that it should be the basic of English. How could we not using it anymore? Could it be at some point, non-native speakers would understand English better than native ones???

I think the problem is that the pronoun is wrong in the "advice" examples. If you are giving advice to somebody else, why would you use the first person? You're speaking to a different person. It's cold out. You should wear a coat. (You speaking to somebody else) Is it cold out? (Person responding) Yes. You should wear a coat. An old-fashioned usage might be It's cold out. I should wear a coat if I were you. It still ought to have a subjunctive clause following. But this has been replaced by the conditional "would," as many commenters noted: "It's cold out. I would wear a coat." Or "I would wear a coat if I were you." Similarly "Shall I leave now? No, you should wait a bit." If the person answering is using the first person, we'd use the conditional with "would" since it is a hypothetical for the person who responds: so "Shall I leave now? No, I would wait a bit." (We would also probably be more likely to use "Should I leave now?") "Should the situation change" might be pretty common in certain formal communications, such as with a lawyer. It does not sound unnatural, just formal. Americans don't use "shall" very much and use "should" rather inferquently. Going by other commenters, UK usage isn't too different from that at least in recent years.

Not anymore. My grandmothers spoke like that, but they were born 110-130 years ago.

Lol no

it's technically acceptable, but not very common, and a bit old-fashioned. "Would" is much more common, usually in response to a "should I" question. ex.: "Should I go for a walk?" "I wouldn't, there's a risk for storms."

It’s never used in American English. It’s rarely used in British English.

In British English, yes, it’s perfectly common (not old-fashioned).

I am perplexed by the number of people calling it archaic or British as opposed to "so wrong it makes a native speaker's head hurt to try to imagine it being used". I mean, this boils down to "I should" meaning "You should"/"\[If I were you\] I would", with no explanation of how that could make sense or not be extremely confusing, and no apparent consistency in the examples either. If anyone would like to elaborate and cite real examples of this construction being a thing, archaic, regional or otherwise, I'll put up everything in my bank account for their trouble. I want this book though. If this level of confusion isn't a one-off, could make a nice single-player drinking game...

I use this, i think. Sounds right to me anyway.

This is how grandma and grandad spoke, and I'm an old man. It's definitely old fashioned speech. It's also correct. But more modern speakers will say 'You should', not 'I should'. Example: "It's cold out. You should wear a coat."

Yes it is

It sounds old-fashioned and/or British.

I kind of think that we should go back to talking this way. It's more precise and easier to understand.

It's non-existent in Australian English. And if people are going to reply to me saying they've heard it. They're British people/raised by British. It's not a normal thing. If I heard this, I would think you're comming with me and be extremely confused.

Of course. In polite company and at work.

I say "I should think so," on occasion. But I've also been known to sprinkle in a bunch of outdated phrases into my speech.

Completely obsolete in American English.

It's not contemporary conversational language where I'm from (Canada). That said, it is phrasing that you should understand, because you may encounter the phrasing in some older (and often British) books, movies, or television, or period pieces. I've def heard a few *specific* phrases where that grammar has survived ("I should think so"/"I shouldn't think so" as one example) in more contemporary works, but they aren't used in my region either so I'm not sure if that's conversational language or heightened fiction language. Conversationally, I should (;P) use "you should" or "I would".

Yes.

I should think would works instead

No, I’ve never heard “I should” to give someone else advice but “I would/n’t X if i were you” is extremely common.

It's a bit archaic, but the rule still holds up as something you *may* choose to do. Might make you sound like a would-be Kingsman, though. ;)

With I it sounds weird with you it sounds fine.

Shall is used more for very formal or legalistic speech. It has a context of requirement in legal writing vs should which is desired, but not required.

It’s actually written incorrectly for today’s grammar. If anything it would be “you should” or “I would”, but not “I should”. Saying I should puts the speaker in the position of taking on the decision that the other person was considering, which is awfully weird. “I would” indicate the what the speaker would do IF they were in the other person’s shoes. And “you should” describes why the speaker thinks the other person should do in their situation. But “I should” indicates what the speaker thinks they should do, in their own situation, which wouldn’t necessarily line up with the other persons situation and could easily lead to confusion.

The last time it was used in actual conversation in this form was when an innkeeper told a woman not to loiter on the streets of 18th-century London because the Ripper was at large ...

In Australian English, if you are saying "should" for yourself and not another person, the usage would oftrn be in the context of 'I should wear a coat, but..." The "should" implies that you are aware that the correct thing to do is wear a coat, but you're not sure you want to. Or maybe you don't normally wear coats out, and you're trying to get into a good habit.

Idk what these other people are talking about. I use should like this all the time and am in America.

The use of 'should' implies some sort of moral choice, that doing so is the correct choice, and is the cognate of 'ought'. Whereas 'would' is simply explains the events if the scenario were to occur.

Literally the only person I've ever heard use this phrasing is me and it's something I just happened to pick up from reading old books. It's extremely antiquated. But most people seem to understand it when I say it.

I recall soem older British books (like Compton McKenzie's \*Cats' Company\*) where it had this construction, i asusme it was common there and then

This usage survives in some atypical phrases like "I should think so" but other than that, it isn't common at all and might confuse people if you use it.

Not really. "You should" or "I would" both work much better in this context than "I should". If I'm giving advice, I'm not the one actually doing the thing, so saying "I should" seems weird. "I would" keeps it hypothetical, and "you should" is directed at the person who's actually going to do the thing. Saying "I should" makes it sound like you're talking to or about yourself in this situation.

Im honestly feeling the vibe that the book is just poorly written.. seriously growing up in brazil, i went to a special school to learn english and we'd often catch mistakes on those lil poor books, coz bebe this here is weird!

Not in America. But as a fan of old British films, yes they used to say it.

Don't listen to the people saying "should" sounds old fashioned. It has an important function in the English language. Consider the difference between these three example questions: 1. `**Could**` *you kill the president of the United States, Donald J Trump if it was easy and you could get away with it?* 2. `**Should**` *you kill the president of the United States, Donald J Trump if it was easy and you could get away with it?* 3. `**Would**` *you kill the president of the United States, Donald J Trump if it was easy and you could get away with it?* `Example 1` is a question about the factual possibility. No person could be convicted for answering yes to this in the USA. `Example 2` is a question regarding the ethics of performing such an act. No person should be convicted for asking the question but answering yes could very well be illegal. `Example 3` is a question that may very well be illegal to ask depending on the context as it might be interpreted as a call for violence. No person would openly answer yes to this without certainty of trust in the person/s with whom they were communicating, either because they understand it to be a joke, or otherwise. I hope this was helpful!

If it helps as a native speaker I feel “should” is more forceful and potentially rude because it is imperative. If I am speaking I feel “would” is less direct and a suggestion, where, if I am very serious I would say something like “You *should * really think twice about what you are going to do next!”.

I might be missing something, as a lot of people are saying no, but like, I use "should/shouldn't" pretty frequently.

Why are you learning English from a satire book? No one has ever talked like that ever, throw it away

No one talks like that it's confusing af

It sounds anachronistic now.  I still read it a lot in turn of the 20th century writing, or in Tolkien, but I've never heard *should* used this way in conversational English in Australia.

It reads as though the questioner is also providing the answer and talking to themselves. As in, “I should request a refund for this crappy English class. I shouldn’t have signed up for the first course I found.”

Assuming you use the word "shall". Otherwise, it'd be Will and Would.

Mid 20s native speaker from Australia. I use this all the time, and so do most of my friends and family. I'm really surprised at everyone saying they've never heard this lol

I'm a native speaker, and the concept of saying "I should...." to suggest that somebody else do something makes absolutely zero sense to me. Maybe I would inherently understand it in context, but as it's explained there, I have never seen that.

No, super weird.

it makes sense but sounds a bit posh. i use it often

Not in American English

If I was giving advice, I would either use “You should…” OR “I would…” Ex: “I was going to leave, but look at this storm!” “Yes, it’s not going to stop. I would spend the night here.” (aka: if I were you, I *would* spend the night where we currently are, instead of going out in the terrible storm)

Based on your comment I think the key is that “would” is a hypothetical word. The suggestion I’m giving is what I would do *if I were you.* “Should” isn’t a hypothetical, it’s direct intention, which makes no sense because I am not actually you, and therefore my own intention has nothing to do with you.

I've heard it used quite a bit in the north east of England. But not other places.

Never used. Anyone can say anything sometime somewhere but if you used that language with an American border guard, you would end up in a prison cell in El Salvador

I've never once heard that in my life. If I did ever hear it, I'd think the speaker stumbled on their words. (I grew up in Virginia USA, and I also have lived in Ohio and Utah)

I should think not

What are the "Should is old fashioned, most people use would" people smoking? They mean different things, they can even be used "opposingly" in the same sentence to express a contrant between duty (should) and will (would), and yes, you SHOULDN'T listen to them. "I would love to go out with you guys, but I should really study for tomorrow's exam, I'm sorry :/ " -> if I had no important things to do, then going out would be my first choice, but since I have a more important (although less pleasant) duty to fulfill, I can't despite wsnting to. "For dinner I'd like a big fat american hamburger... But since I want to lose weight, I know I shouldn't. I'll stick with a salad." -> the preferred choice without thinking of the consequences would be a hamburger, but since I want to lose weight I'll have to stick with something healthier instead. WOULD is will, SHOULD is "perceived duty", the thing that "makes most sense" to do even if it isn't the one you're crazy about doing. I have no idea where this "should is outdated" thing comes from, first time I hear it. These people SHOULD really study english a bit more. Even if they come from England. 😅

Not in American English. Full stop.

Sounds very British to me. Not something an American is likely to say.

Isn't it "one should"? - "Is it cold outside?" - "Yes, one should wear a coat."

people will definitely understand you but it's a bit archaic now. not completely out of use, just not super common and some people will look at you weird. it also sounds very british to american ears. i would say either "you should wait" or "i would wait". would is less direct

Sounds weird. English is my 2nd language and I never paid much attention to stuff like this but I would replace should with would in such sentences, just unnecessary confusion.

I find it perfectly reasonable to use "you Should/Shouldn't" like that. As in "if i were you I would/wouldn't", or maybe slightly more precisely "You should/shouldn't do that (if you want to live up to the unwritten rules of normative society, as I see them)."

If you are in America, it will sound very formal or possibly foreign. If you’re in England, it may sound more natural.

I’m from Leicester in England. I’ve only ever heard ‘you should’ or ‘I would’

If you ever want to see if a word or phrase is commonly used (and also how it is used, pronounced etc) then I find [youglish.com](http://youglish.com) to be very useful. You insert the word or phrase and then you can also filter into different countries. For "should" there are more than 700,000 examples, and some of them are certainly for advice, though not in the format your book has - using the first person singular "I". That does sound out of date. Of course, using should with second or third person pronouns is absolutely normal and frequently used. [Should | 703795 pronunciations of Should in English](https://youglish.com/pronounce/should/english)

I’ve only heard it in the context of “I should coco” meaning “I should say so”. But I think it’s an old fashioned thing.

Yes, it’s fine if probably a little old fashioned. I shouldn’t worry about it if i were you

I've never heard anyone do this in my life

I use it all the time, you should use it too

I mean, should is definitely a word very I commonly use. I'd use it when asking for advice "what should I do?" Or otherwise "I know I really should do this, but I think I'll do that instead." Or sometimes when you are asking a question "should you do that?" It's used to mean something which you ought to do, something which others would do, or if you are supposed to do, but are not obligated. Eg. The following makes sense. "If I were you, I would do this, but you should do what you think is best."

The "I should" in those examples would be normally replaced by the correct "you should" in conversational english. e.g. "Shall I leave now?" "No, YOU should wait a bit". Alternatives would be "I'd wait a bit" or the long form "I'd wait a bit if I were you" where the "I'd" is the short form of "I would". I have never heard "I should" used in the ways that are being suggested.

Honestly, that interaction is likely to go the following way almost 100% of the time these days. “Should I leave now?” “I should wait a bit.” “… I asked about me…” Even those who know what it means will assume you’re talking about yourself. I’ve never heard it in real life, and only used on older TV shows/movies.

This is perfectly acceptable English

No, I’ve never heard that used before either in person or in writing. If I heard someone say that I would assume they had misspoken “Would” is much better

I should think so.

sometimes i feel like i dont know anything about english

“Should” is common usage, though of course that’s not a guarantee that everyone always uses it correctly. In laws, official documents and standards “should” is often a controlled word to mean that something is advised but not mandatory, in contrast to “must” (mandatory) and “may” (permitted).

Yes

I’m an American and I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone say this. Not saying it is, but it sounds grammatically incorrect to me. “I would” is much more common.

In both Canadian and American English, this would be rare and probably misinterpreted. We would hear it as an expression of what you plan to do, rather than advice. All the same, if someone says they are going to wear a coat, most people will think about whether they should too.

“I would,” “you should.” “I would wear a coat” says that if I was the one going outside I would wear a coat. “You should wear a coat” is a strong recommendation that you should wear a coat. “I should wear a coat” in my mind would mean that you’re talking to yourself and suggesting to yourself that you should wear a coat. If someone said to me “I should wear a coat,” I would be very confused and respond with “ok? So put one on then, why are you saying this to me?”

It sounds either old fashioned or British to me. (Midwest American English Speaker) I would use "you should..." "you should wait a bit" "You should wear a coat" etc.

‘Should’ is definitely not the best word to use, would is accurate.

i hear it a fair amount in british english, although personally i'd say i'd instead of either of the above

this is virtually extinct nowadays, you'd either hear "would" or "you should" for what the book is trying to convey, that being said, "I should hope so" is still used like that in British English

Like others have said "I **would** (wear a coat)" is advice I should is more for when you know you should do something but you are likely not going to do that thing anyway. Like "I should go to bed early because I have classes early tomorrow" is setting up an implicit "buuuuut I want to play video games / [other distraction]"

Which grammar book is this? Please share it privately, if possible.

not a single person under the age of 70 and outside of some rural town in appalachia would speak like this.

Yes, among the elites of high society who write such intellectual tutorials... but only when they converse.

Not in modern English

It's appropriate if you're talking to yourself.

I use it a lot as I was raised with it (South West England, but posh school) but it is less widespread these days and some people even question it when they hear it now. But "I'd wait" and "I would wait" is used more now, though I find would feels ever so slightly less polite than should.

I'm not a native but I have never ever heard anyone say it.

I think that's a mistake in the textbook. Using 'I should' when giving somebody else advice sounds completely mad, like you're talking to yourself. You would say, 'You should' or more complicated, 'I would wear a coat (if I were you)'. I added the last bit in brackets as that would be a full second conditional but we often omit the last part.

It is very old-fashioned. The closest thing in modern usage (BrE) that I can think of is "*I should say...*", which we use to mean "*I would guess / estimate / predict*" *e.g. "There were, I should say, 20 or 30 people at the party"* This usage is different to the one described in the grammar book, but related.

I agree with the comments I have seen so far: "I would" makes more sense than "I should." I might say about myself, "I should wear a coat... I heard it'll get colder later..." but if I'm giving advice to someone else, I'd either say, "I would wear a coat if I were going out today" or "You should wear a coat. It's supposed to get chilly later."

The intent of this rule is a bit odd. We definitely do you "should" when givng advice, but not normally in this way. "Should" (in America) implies some dort of obligation or need to do something. "I want to stay, but I should go." This means that I need to leave for some reason. I'm being conpelled to leave, either because I have to get up early or I'm late for something, or some other reason. One can definitely use should when giving advice too. But typically it uses the phrase "you should" rather than "I should." For example: "The roads are icy, so you should drive slow." This implies giving them a directive. Using should in this way is a sort of implied polite command. Compare to: "The roads are icy, so drive slow." This is definitely a command without the politeness of adding should. If I want to give advice without telling someone what to do, I will soften it further by stating the actions I take in a similar circumstance. "The roads are icy... I would drive slow if I were you." This adds an extra layer of separation and is usually even more polite. I have seen older English (as in from England) books interchange should and would in certain cases. I don't know the grammatical intent behind it because it isn't common here. It tenss to sound more posh and old fashioned, and definitely sounds weird if you aren't expecting it. I most often see it with "I should think..." when they're expressing an opinion. For example: "Do you want to go for a drive with me?" "I should think not! You're a terrible driver!" In America (possibly modern England too, but I'm no expert), we're more likely to say "I (don't) think so" instead.

To me, personally "should(n't)" sounds more like you really (don't) have to do it. As if I'm giving permission to you. Would(n't) sounds better, as a lot of people already suggested.

Hell no. I mean, occasionally, but it sounds too old fashioned and "proper" in a way. I wouldn't even say "shall" in this context. "Shall" is more of a formal term with an ironic use sometimes in casual conversations. I would say "I'd x" or "I would x" if I'm taking about something that someone else should do something, but I'd say "I'm gonna x" (where "gonna" is a casual shortening of "going to") if it's something I'm doing.

That’s probably the best grammar book for English learners there are. It helped me so much.

I’m 65 years old - born and raised in the U.S. I have never heard this usage in my entire life. So, while technically correct, it is never used.

I use it for myself sometimes, especially with 'I should like to try that'

Yes, in England. I think it might be accent/area dependant. But it's still quite commonly used by some.

I have never heard it used in *any* English, let alone conversational English. "I **would**" is a hypothetical where you hope they learn from what you would do and emulate you. "**You** should" is direct advice.

I‘m going to say it if no one else does. Using the more straightforward stuff you presumably already know and reading a book/magazine/comic and picking up all the fancy stuff from context is not only more fun but a far more effective way of mastering a language. The idea of slogging through lists of rather subtle rules such as these in the belief they will stick is absolutely BONKERS! This is just not how language works. Aaah, feeling better already 😀

We still have this leftover in the phrase “I should think not!” and “I should think so!” - which can both be replace on more casual speak today with “I wouldn’t think so” and “I’d think so”. Apart from these two examples, using I + should to refer to what someone else should do is no longer common.

Not in the US, near as I can tell. There’s an old joke re UK English where a tony lady falls off a boat, and since she says in her panic “I will drown and no one shall save me!” her compatriots just…watch her sink. “I will drown” is essentially “I intend to drown,” and “no one shall save me” is roughly “no one should save me” or “I demand no one save me.” If she had expressed her fear of drowning with “shall” and her fear of not being saved with “will” her fellows may have lent a hand. But who is going to remember all of that?

This isn't used. The correct version is "I would/wouldn't do X"

Yes

I don’t believe this was ever an American style. I vaguely recall it being used in the UK, but it is very archaic now.

I'd say this is entirely normal English for me... coming from London. Using "would" also sounds normal to me ("I would wear a coat if I were you") but I'd probably use "should" if I wasn't thinking about it. 

I've seen it in English sitcoms from the 80s

I should think so, yeah But seriously; it's a mite old-fashioned, to be sure, but there's nothing wrong with it. I've said it a few times.

In Yorkshire, I should is used like this pretty regularly

This only sounds right to me if you’re a member of the family from Downton Abbey 😝

New Zealand: I would generally only associate it with British upper class speech, but as another commenter pointed out, it can crop up in some regional dialects, e g. Yorkshire.

It just sounds like some old people at a country club talking. Either say "I would wear a coat" or "You should wear a coat"

If the conversation is with yourself then yes. But if it's with somebody else just use "would" and "will"

Depends on where you’re from. English in the americas does not speak like this. The more recent the ties to England are the more likely to use that. England, India are the most likely. You don’t really hear it in the Caribbean much except in the older crowd.

No. That is not idiomatic.

I have never heard about this rule in any of my British English courses and have never heard someone talk like that in th US - and I would definitely have noticed, since it sounds very off.

I’d say, “I’d wear a coat”. I would never use “should” or “shouldn’t” there. It’d sound really odd. Most common would be a, “I’d wear a coat if I were you”. That sounds like the most natural response to my ear.

As a british person, I use this all the time. Anyone who says 'no that sounds strange' has just been americanized.

Who’s teaching you this

i’d use should or ought. so yes correct and commonly used. though i use british english, might be different. sometimes it’s helpful to state which you’re learning 😅

“What should I do” “Which dress should I wear?” “Do you think I should call in sick?” “I should be better at this by now” “I should be able to do it but I can’t!” “I should have left earlier” I’m American, lived all over, and I yes I use should, and usually in situations like this. I will also tell my son “you should take a jacket” but I would not say that to a coworker or someone my own age because it’s very mother-y. I also literally told a friend yesterday to stop “should-ing” all over herself (sounds like “shitting all over herself”) because she was sad and kept saying “I should be happy” and “I should have talked to my husband about this” and “I should have listened to my doctor”. It was her expressing regret and frustration.

I'll throw another wrench in the mix. "Should" often suggests ethical or value-based judgment, while "Would" often suggests a preferable experience. Depending on context, "Would" can be a passive-aggressive way of asserting opinion. The contraction "I'd" is non-committal since it can be a contraction of should, would, or could and share the meanings (I would and could). imo I'd is more common in conversation. "I should wear a coat." - I appear dressed more appropriate and sensible or prudent. "You should wear a coat." - You will appear dressed for the weather and sensible. "I would wear a coat." - My personal experience is that wearing one is better, but yours may tell you otherwise. "I would wear a coat," said Father. - His experience is authoritative and may influence your choice. "I'd wear a coat." - Either, both or neither (I could wear a coat)

Never heard this in my life. I should use 'would' instead

Not in standard US English, but maybe in other dialects.

Yes, in the U.K.

It's more of a UK thing, but Americans often understand it, at least in context.

Extremely rare. I've only ever encountered it in a few older books.

No, I have heard it before but it's not used commonly. It'll make you sound pretentious. Or even just wrong, if said to someone who isn't familiar with it.

I’ve heard “I would” and “you should” but never “I should”

Italian living in UK. I heard people using shall and should somethimes, although in your book the answers are strange. "Is it cold outside?" "Yes, you should wear a coat. / Yes, I would wear a coat, if I were you"

These comments saying the term is dated have surprised me, I feel I use ‘should’ fairly often. “I should wear a coat” “you shouldn’t go out without sun cream” “we should check what time the show starts” etc.

I’m wondering how old all the commenters are. The example is correct and sounds perfectly nature to this old fart. “Should" and "would" have distinct uses. "Should" primarily indicates obligation, suggestion, or probability, while "would" is often used for hypothetical situations, polite requests, or expressing something that might happen.

This is a very real thing and technically correct English, however no one in the world (even in posh upper-class English households) would use this anymore...the late Queen was probably the last person to talk like this. It sounds very Victorian. The only time I can think one might use it is in the expression 'I should like to think that...' but even then, it would be far more common to hear 'I WOULD like the think that...'

It sounds a bit formal. Shall always sounds a bit 19th century.

Its "I would", or "You should"

Yes

It's correct British English, but a touch old fashioned. It wouldn't surprise me to hear it - especially from an older or more upper class person - but I would fairly rarely use it myself.

I would sounds much more natural.

its more like “I would/wouldn’t”

I use it just to be silly :p

I've never heard it in the US

Telling someone else 'you should' do something can be seen as disrespectful. But if you're teaching someone or they're expecting you to tell them how to do something then it's fine. If it's something more casual, saying 'I would' is a bit nicer as you're not just telling them what to do. It's just a short way of saying 'if I were in your situation, I would do this'

yeh

Only if it’s ’I should(n’t) think that…’

I would use 'would' in both these examples. For me, 'would' is my opinion and for what I, personally, would do. 'Should' is directive.

I’d only use should if I was using « you ». Like « you should wear a coat », « I should wear a coat » makes it sound like I’m considering wearing a coat, not giving another advice to wear it. Hence I agree with everyone else that « would » is the most appropriate alternative but realistic id say « I’d [probably] wear a coat [if I were you]. »

My husband tells me "I would wear a coat" when I ask about the weather forecast. My mother tells me "You should wear a coat. It's too cold for you to be out there with no coat on."

This is an example of how it could be used, but this isn’t really giving advice. It’s more of an agreement; one that has the same tone as “of course you should”. Person 1: “I have nothing to make for dinner, I better go to the grocery store.” Person 2: “I should think so, otherwise you’ll starve.”

Yes, it’s used. I’m from UK and use should in this way, it’s like ought “You should wear a coat” or “you ought to wear a coat” mean similar things although ought feels more forceful to me. I’ve seen some comments say “you would wear a coat” means the same too, but it doesn’t. Would is the conditional version of will (you will wear a coat). “You would wear a coat” doesn’t make sense grammatically as a response, you’d need to add a verb e.g. “you would *need to* wear a coat”. You could also answer it as “I would wear a coat if I were you” this is because you are definitely going to do that, it’s not conditional on anything. This rule is referring to advice, if someone asks if it’s cold outside, you would respond in the manner described in the rule, you are not saying it’s compulsory.

Should is fine and commonly used in the UK

This is how a spy gets caught.

That's extremely old fashioned, to the point that I've never heard someone say it out loud, I've only read it in books. Replacing 'should' with 'would' makes it totally fine though.

That's a good phrase if you want to sound like a wealthy 70 year old English woman

From my understanding, it's used in parts of the UK, but would be considered archaic in most other English-speaking countries. It sounds really strange to most people in the 21st century. Originally, "should" was the past tense of "shall", and it was used with "I" or "you" in sentences like these. I might sometimes say things like, "I should think so", but this usage is disappearing in most places. One of my students has been reading a book with "should" in sentences similar to this, and I feel a little annoyed when I see it. It's a children's book, and it's not specifically for learners, but I feel that it's quite unnatural. I had to explain that we don't normally use this kind of structure. Having said that, though, conversational English varies quite a lot from country to country, and even sometimes within a single country. I'd recommend checking with locals in the area where you're living to see what they think of these sentences.

This is one of those weird, technically correct things that make you sound like a psychopath when you say them. "Would" works better in this situation, and it won't make you sound like a bossy asshole

Correct old English English, not used these days by anyone under 80, I shouldn't think

People should on themselves all day long, and then should on others. It doesn’t feel good to either person.

In my understanding, "I'd wear a coat if I were you." Is a common saying to suggest that wearing a coat would be a good idea in the situation (cold/rainy weather). "You should wear a coat." Is more direct and suggests the speaker is trying to influence the listeners behavior directly rather than just offer advice, but can still be polite. The example in the book sounds nonsensical to the average speaker and might only make sense if heard in a British English accent and understood to be an archaic phrasing meant to be overtly polite.

Don’t do this. Just no.

This is truly bizarre lol.

An oldie. Haven’t heard it outside old British movies set in 1800. But i do say ‘ I WOULD not do that if I were you.’

Burn this book. Very outdated. Use would instead