+Caution+.—Use will and would to imply that the subject names the one whose will controls the action; use shall and should to imply that the one named by the subject is under the control of external influence.
+Remark+.—The original meaning of shall (to owe, to be obliged) and will (to determine) gives us the real key to their proper use.
The only case in which some trace of the original meaning of these auxiliaries cannot be found is the one in which the subject of will names something incapable of volition; as, The wind will blow. Even this may be a kind of personification.
+Examples+.—I shall go; You will go; He will go. These are the proper forms to express mere futurity, but even here we can trace the original meaning of shall and will. In the first person the speaker avoids egotism by referring to the act as an obligation or duty rather than as something under the control of his own will. In the second and third persons it is more courteous to refer to the will of others than to their duty.
I will go. Here the action is under the control of the speaker's will. He either promises or determines to go.
You shall go; He shall go. Here the speaker either promises the going or determines to compel these persons to go; in either case the one who goes is under some external influence.
Shall I go? Here the speaker puts himself under the control of some external influence—the will of another.
Will I go?—i. e., Is it my will to go?—is not used except to repeat another's question. It would be absurd for one to ask what his own will is.
Shall you go? Ans. I shall. Will you go? Ans. I will. Shall he go? Ans. He shall. Will he go? Ans. He will. The same auxiliary is used in the question that is used in the answer.
No difficulty shall hinder me. The difficulty that might do the hindering is not to be left to itself, but is to be kept under the control of the speaker.