Hot answers tagged subjunctive-mood
37
When in doubt, always use the subjunctive mood:
If I were you...
It will make you sound smarter and it is technically correct since "the subjunctive mood is used to express a wish or possible situation that is currently not true."
28
Since your name seems Indian, I'll also mention a common Indian-English idiosyncrasy that may clear up matters for you. There is a tendency in Indian speech to use "could" for "can", and "would" for "will". This is wrong (or, to avoid being prescriptive, certainly at variance with other varieties of English, and non-standard even in India). Properly, "could" ...
18
I mentioned this in another question, but just because the morphological inflection is disappearing, that doesn't mean the subjunctive mood is actually disappearing from the language. Just like when most of our verbal inflection disappeared (now it's "I go", "you go", "we go", "they go"), that doesn't mean we lost verbs for first person singular and plural, ...
14
"Could" is the subjunctive form of "can." That means you use it to express possibilities and the like. "I could go to the movies, but I might just stay home."
When "could" is used as the past-tense of "can," you're talking about something you used to be able to do, but can't anymore, so whatever action you're speaking of is hypothetical. "I could have gone ...
13
Prescriptively, you're correct, this should be were since this is being expressed with the subjunctive mood. Descriptively, I think you'll find both in the wild. In informal speech, most people I know would prefer was in this case (and those that don't are sticklers for the subjunctive). I do think that you are much more likely to see were written though, ...
12
In general, the subjunctive mood should be used in "a statement contrary to fact, a wish, a mandative statement" (from this guide). I think "statement contrary to fact" could also often be considered a hypothetical, so I will refer to it as that.
In your first example, you are expressing a wish or possibly a mandative statement, "I suggest" and so it ...
11
Well, both sentences are grammatical, but they mean different things. It depends on what you're trying to say.
The first means, that if you had money, you'd fly there now or some point in the future.
The second can mean one of two things, depending on whether "had" is intended to be 'hypothetical' or a genuine 'past reference': so it could mean either (a) ...
11
The rule that I was taught is that was is for things that could be true but aren't, and were is for things that could never be true.
So, if I was an airline pilot is OK because conceivably I could retrain as a pilot, if I wanted.
But if I were you is right because I will never be you.
11
Even were he not to care himself. . . is an alternative way of saying Even if he were not to care himself . . . The stress in the clause would naturally fall on not.
Another example is Were he to work harder, he might make a success of his business instead of If he were to work harder, he might make a success of his business. It is a rather literary form, ...
10
For those who are a little confused by Barrie England's answer...
She suggested that he go to the cinema. and She suggested that he goes to the cinema. are both correct, but they have different meanings.
Here's how she might suggest that he goes to the cinema:
ALICE: Where do you think he goes every Thursday evening?
JANE: Hmm ... well ... cinema ...
10
Were is the plural past tense form of be, used here in a counterfactual conditional idiom construction that is given various names, including "subjunctive", which often apply to other European languages, though not to English.
In fact, however, tense is not what you need to know here. Tense only has to do with time -- past and present only in English -- and ...
9
Old English most certainly had a subjunctive. In fact, it had two, present and preterite, and they were inflected for person and number.
English now has three kinds of subjunctive (perhaps two, see below), the mandative, the formulaic and the were–subjunctive. The mandative is seen in sentences such as ‘I demand that he go.’ The formulaic appears in fixed ...
9
I suspect the answer is "Neither of them". There are three possible clauses in this situation, and they have subtly different meanings.
If we were to agree, do you think we could start next month? is a remote hypothetical ('I know it's unlikely, but just suppose').
If we are to agree... would normally preface some sort of demand, like ...you will have to ...
8
Well, "if I was" can be valid for the past, I guess.
If I was wrong, please forgive me.
That aside, I think one of the other answers is right that in British English — at least spoken — both are acceptable and probably equally common. (The 'were' version sounds more 'educated'.)
8
Neither of your two questions makes sense as written, and I do not know what the intent is. For one thing, I don’t understand why they are questions; they do not look like such to me.
For another, the formulaic “be they X or Y ”, using present subjunctive and inversion as it does, is of a somewhat elevated register which may not be appropriate for all ...
7
Part of the answer is that the subjunctive ended up with almost no functional load.
In most of its uses it is distinguished syntactically from other constructions, so morphological distinction is redundant. (e.g. 'Long live the King!', 'I demand that he be silenced'
The major exception to this is in conditionals, where it traditionally distinguishes ...
7
The difference is one of mood and tense. kitukwfyer hits all the right notes here.
The subjunctive also helps differentiate the forms in questions. Compare:
Could you run (please)?
Can you run?
Could lends politeness to a question in a request of someone. I’d more likely say, “could you help me”, than “can you help me?”.
7
First off, you shouldn't have a comma after wish. In written English it's generally incorrect to add a comma before that or in a place where that has been omitted, as in the previous sentences.
Either of these is correct:
I wish the documentation warned about that limitation.
I wish the documentation had warned about that limitation.
In either ...
7
No. It sounds old-fashioned, but searching through Google books for such phrases used in the 1800s, I did not find a single instance of anybody using "be it me" or "be it I" in this way. What you're looking for is "were it me" or "were it I"; this usage requires the past subjunctive and not the present subjunctive. Here are some examples:
Why, were it ...
7
The only one that is correct in the scenario you present is #1:
If Jeff is still alive today, he is 30 years old.
The is in the first clause corresponds to the is in the second.
I'd say that numbers 2 and 3 (If Jeff is still alive today, he will be 30 years old and If Jeff is still alive today, he would be 30 years old) would work in speech, but not ...
7
The most common form is "If X is [true/whatever], Y is [true/whatever]".
But "If X is [true/whatever], Y will be [true/whatever]" is neither invalid, nor uncommon. You can interpret such use of "future tense" as implying that Y follows X (logically, or temporally, it makes no difference). Alternatively, see it as meaning that Y will be found to be true ...
7
There is no difference in meaning between your first two examples. However, the construction with were to see is more formal and slightly antiquated.
However, there is a difference between your second two examples, namely that this one is not grammatically correct:
*If you would have seen a lion in a thick forest, what would have you done?
In English ...
6
It's if I were for hypothetical in the present or future and if I was when talking about something presumed true in the PAST. "IF" then means something likened to "since".
If I were class president, I would represent our class very well for the next four years.
If I was at the party last night, I don't remember.
It's an old, residual rule from ...
6
To keep it simple, I answer you without complex grammatical terminology. There are five possible situations of using can.
1. Ability
In the first situation, we use can with a meaning of ability. For example, "I think I can lift the box" means that the speaker thinks that she/he is able to lift the box. The past tense form of the sentence is "I thought I ...
6
"WERE" because it is the past subjunctive of "to be". It's an oversight by the copy-editor. It's not the biggest deal in the world since the verb "to be" is the only verb in Modern English wherein the difference is obvious, although, if one WANT to speak very formal, correct English, stick with the subjunctive.
6
OP's second example is correct, but bring is not an "infinitive" verb form - it's the subjunctive, which happens to look the same in modern English.
The subjunctive mood indicates doubt, supposition, uncertainty, and presumes or imagines an action or state. For example:
It is necessary that he retire
I strongly recommend that he retire or
I strongly ...
6
Use the subjunctive mood here. In order to form the future subjunctive mood for to be in clauses in which there is doubt, you would use if I/he/she/it, etc. were to be as follows:
Were Jerry to be bad, put him in the laundry.
If Jerry were to be bad, put him in the laundry.
or you could say:
Should Jerry be bad, put him in the laundry.
...
6
If you want to use the subjunctive, you should use were; if you do not, the mood is not subjunctive:
He spoke as though he were the only one to tell the truth.
Wikipedia's article on the subjunctive mood, in the section entitled To express a counterfactual hypothesis, states:
[T]he past subjunctive is used following the conjunctions as if and as ...
6
The phrase it is possible that can be followed by just about any tense you please. The adverb entirely has no bearing on the matter.
It is entirely possible that he was here yesterday.
It is entirely possible he's sitting in the library as we speak.
It is entirely possible that it will rain tomorrow.
etc.
It is necessary that is an example of an ...
Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible
