In Grammar and Vocabulary for First Certificate (Prodromou, 2005), Chapter 2 covers "the future", "be going to", "present continuous", and "present simple". I put three of the End-Of-Chapter questions below with the corresponding back-of-the-book answers.  My concern is with Question #1 only. (I wrote #2 and #3 for context.)  Put the verb in brackets into the most suitable form of the future.*   "What ________ you __________ this evening?" (do) 'Nothing.' [Answer: are ... doing] "Well, _______ we ___________ to that new pizzeria?" (go) [Answer: shall ... go] In 2004 the Olympic Games _________ in Athens. (take place) [Answer: will take place]   For Question #1, the only answer in the back-of-the-book answer is the present continuous: "What are you doing this evening?"  This has effectively ruled-out the possibility of using 'be going to' to complete the sentence. In other words, I think what he is saying is that "What are you going to do this evening?" is incorrect.  Do you think he is right?
122206
In his book, Grammar and Vocabulary for First Certificate, Luck Prodromou has ruled out the possibility of using 'be going to' to complete the following sentence :     'What .......... you .......... this evening?' (do) 'Nothing'.   And the only correct answer he offers is using :     'What are you doing this evening?' ' Nothing'.   However, I feel 'be going to' can also be used.     'What are you going to do this evening?' ' Nothing'.   Is it valid or will it change the meaning of the sentence?
102414
What's the difference between:  I will be eating cakes tomorrow. I will eat cakes tomorrow.   And, when should I use the first form?
577
Non-na­tive speak­ers of­ten get con­fused about what the var­i­ous tens­es  and as­pects mean in English. With in­put from some of the folk here I've put to­geth­er a di­a­gram that I hope will pro­vide some clar­i­ty on the mat­ter.  I of­fer it as the first an­swer to this ques­tion. Con­sid­er it a liv­ing doc­u­ment. In­put is wel­come, and good sug­ges­tions will be  in­cor­po­rat­ed in­to the di­a­gram.    No­ta bene: What this is not is a dis­cus­sion of whether there are  more than two tens­es in English. , to which this ques­tion is not in­tend­ed to sup­ply ar­gu­ments one way or the oth­er.  Here, the aim is to pro­vide an overview of what con­struc­tions English-speak­ing peo­ple use for con­vey­ing in­for­ma­tion about ac­tions re­fer­ring to past, present, and fu­ture, and to pro­vide it first and fore­most to pre­cise­ly the peo­ple who are like­ly to use "tense" as a catch-all term in their search, rather than to lin­guists who know bet­ter.  Break­ing News There is now an ex­cel­lent ELU blog ar­ti­cle ti­tled  . It is high­ly rec­om­mend­ed read­ing.
67271
When I am using the future tense, why do "while"  and "when" clauses have to be in the present tense?     For instance,       "While I am eating you will be speaking on the phone"   and    "I will be waiting when your plane arrives"   Both sentences are grammatically correct.     But,  doesn't it make more sense to say   "While I will be eating you will be speaking on the phone"  and      "I will be waiting when your plane will arrive."  ?
110048
I am now reading  book and have noticed a couple of cases of weird (for non-native speaker) future tense usages.   The point of the kata is to train your fingers and your brain. I'll do a kata or two every day, often as part of settling to work. I might do it in Java, or in Ruby, or in Clojure, or in some other language for which I want to maintain my skills.`   The phrase about doing a kata or two every day looks perfect for Present Simple. Why does the authoer use Future Simple instead?   However, a professional also knows that there will be times when he will fail, his risk calculations will be wrong, his abilities will fall short; he'll look in the mirror and see an arrogant fool smiling back at him.   Shouldn't we use Present Simple after when/if in this kind of cases? I am especially curious about this case as sometimes I forget to switch to Present Simple after if/when and I thought it is a critical error (which I didn't expect to see in a book).
117607
We are currently in the process of finishing planning for the outage.    It the preceding sentence grammatically correct?    Is the preceding sentence ideally structured?   If not, what would be a better way of saying it?
7181
At the dentist's:     I was on time for my dentist's appointment, but the dentist was still busy with another patient, so I sat in the waiting room and read some of the old magazines lying there. All the while I was wondering whether to leave and come back another day .   Why past simple here and not past continuous? To me both actions are in progress they are not completed
102066
It’s not easy to discern which to choose among ‘be going to’ and ‘will’ to express a near future plan or intention. I’m going to bring up two cases.  [A] In a situation that when one says “Oh, I’m hot,” while two are in the room, what can the other one say?: [A-1] I’m going to open the window. [A-2] I’ll open the window.  For ‘be going’ is concerned with ‘present intention’(CGEL,p.211-2), [A-1] seems to be possible; yet it’s also concerned with ‘present arrangement,’ it doesn’t seem to. How could I have arranged the opening window before his saying 'hot'?  However, [A-2] seems to be quite wilful to say in the situation. When it’s not a big deal to open the window, do I have to use my will? It could be said that 'will' is used in a implication that 'if you want, I will open the window'- as a conditional consequence.  How about this?: [B] In a situation that I’ve planned that I would learn to play the guitar after deeply impressed by a guitarist, what can I say?: [B-1] I’m going to learn to play the guitar. [B-2] I will learn to play the guitar.
40516
I am struggling on a sentence here. Let me show u what I come up with;  Would I fail if I won't study?   In this sentence I am trying to indicate a possibility but I am not sure if I use this part  correct : if I won't study  which tense should I be using there?
92336
Over on another network site, a helpful user corrected the grammar of .  The answer now says     I believe it's valid.   where I originally wrote     I believe it valid.   Is the original sentence gramamatically (or at least idiomatically) correct or do I absolutely need a form of 'to be' here? (What's more, is 'to be' a copula or an auxiliary verb if used like this?)  I am quite certain that I have seen sentences like the original one in the past, but I am uncertain where. Given that I am frequently exposed to the somewhat made-up English of authors in the fields of sci-fi and fantasy, I might have fallen into a trap here.  Edit: I don't doubt that the correction is valid and enhances readability.
7603
I cannot make much sense of one in the following passage from :  Now the various species of whales need some sort of popular comprehensive classification, if only an easy outline one for the present, hereafter to be filled in all its departments by subsequent laborers.  If  is a noun in this passage, then  must serve here as a pronoun. If so, isn't the sentence lacking in punctuation? Rewriting would make it less ambiguous:  Now the various species of whales need some sort of popular comprehensive classification, if only an easy outline, one for the present hereafter to be filled in all its departments by subsequent laborers.  Furthermore, I can't help thinking that one is not needed here at all:  Now, the various species of whales need some sort of popular comprehensive classification, if only an easy outline for the present, hereafter to be filled in all its departments by subsequent laborers.  If Melville correctly worded this sentence, what is the function of one in it? What are your thoughts on my modifications?
55823
From a film subtitle:     "What would've happenned if you were a few minutes later, Hani?"   I think that 'What would have happened if you had been a few minutes later,Hani?'is right?  I think this is third conditional sentence. Could you tell me the grammar I don't know? Or is this wrong sentence?
118774
Does going to only express an intention and will some kind of prediction that doesn't necessarily happen?  EDIT: Thanks for all your answers. I asked this question because I always fail to complete exercises like this from an ESL book:   We  will fly to Venice in June. (Correct: But, how can I be sure that I'm not sick in June?) Philipp will be 15 next Wednesday (Correct: Since his birthday is a fixed day, this will happen). They will get a new computer. (Wrong: Why?, If I need a new computer, I simply get a new one) In 2020 people are going to buy more hybrid cars.  (Wrong, Why? Who can tell for sure).
100893
Recently I asked about   I shall come, not will  whether it could be used instead of  I will definitely come, not maybe  How I came to such a question.  Here   I asked about "Shall I win?" pointing that it could have some variants of understanding:  1) Shall I win? = Should I win? (suggestion)  2) Shall I win? = Will I win? (archaic with 1st person)  3) Shall I win? = is it 100% that I will win? (predestination\inevitability)  The excellent guy Mixolydian said either variant was possible, that it didn't matter what person you used "shall" with, it could have this "predestination\inevitability" anyway. Out of this we're getting that nowadays we can use "will" for simple future actions and "shall" for almost predicted (almost 100% surety of happening) future actions.  If I want to say to someone:  Don't be afraid, I will come anyway.  Don't get panicked, I will definitely come  Be sure, I will come in any case  I can use "shall" for it meanining an action into which I will put 100% effort:  I shall come!  And what if my original sentence is  Don't doubt, I will definitely come, not maybe or probably  Can I use  I shall come, not will  pointing that "shall" guarantees me putting all my strengths into it while "will" doesn't give any assuarance that I will do everything to finally come.  As I understood, it wasn't very easy to ask such a question because English was different everywhere - US, UK, Australie, Ireland etc. I heard it was acceptabse to use even "thee\thou" in Ireland or somewhere like that while all other world has already forgotten such words...
50395
I read something in the manga:     When this battle will finally be over... take me out to eat some tasty yakiniku.   "when...will be" seems strange to me, isn't it better saying "When this battle is finally over"? Since this is translated from Japanese, I am not sure whether its grammar is correct or not.
108567
The first sentence of each row is direct speech. The second one is reported speech. The modals will and can change in the reported speech. But I am not sure what to do with should.  &quot;I will go to Europe.&quot; — He said he would go to Europe. &quot;I can play the guitar.&quot; — He said he could play the guitar. &quot;I should go to college.&quot; — He said he [should] go to college.
19624
how are you?  Well, my biggest doubt at the moment is the difference between these two tenses. Actually, the more I study the more I have doubts with these tenses.      /         These similar threads helped me to clarify and reiterate my previous understanding.   I'm not posting in these threads because the site suggests avoiding asking for clarification (I don't know why because it would avoid new threads with the same content).  My main doubt is as follows:     I've lived in New York for two years.   In my understanding, the sentence above implies (1) that I lived in NY for two years and now I live in another place; or (2) I'm moving to another city after two years living in NY; or (3) I lived in NY for two years, then I moved to another place for some period and, finally, I'm returning. Is that correct?     I've been living in New York for two years.   Whereas the sentence above, in my understanding, implies that I lived in NY for two years and I still living there.  Anyway, many sources that I've already read say that these two sentences have the same meaning and are interchangeable. Therein lies my question. Is that correct? Because if these two sentences are interchangeable, it destroys all my understanding.  Thanks in advance.