Timeline for Odd British pluperfect subjunctive construction?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 7, 2014 at 21:39 | comment | added | R Mac | @Medica you're right, I wasn't paying too good attention there. It is subjunctive, but "keep" is still the correct subjunctive form. | |
| Nov 7, 2014 at 21:30 | history | edited | R Mac | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Elaboration and clarification
|
| Nov 7, 2014 at 20:25 | comment | added | Janus Bahs Jacquet | @Fumble The distinction drawn here is very relevant. Keep is the only option traditionally and prescriptively considered ‘correct’ (though kept has made its way into BrE vernacular in this sense, too) if the court was mandating that people [should] keep quiet. If someone had claimed that there was noise and the court had insisted upon the fact there wasn't and everyone was quiet, kept is the only possible option. Compare: “The court insisted that everyone be quiet” vs. “The court insisted that everyone was quiet”. | |
| Nov 7, 2014 at 20:17 | comment | added | anongoodnurse | A mandate takes the subjunctive form. "I demand that he be removed at once." | |
| Nov 7, 2014 at 18:43 | comment | added | R Mac | I hadn't seen the article when I wrote my answer. I'll edit it. But the court isn't exactly the type that has "sessions" per se. It was more a kind of authority on artistic works than a court of law, and that authority held that portrait subjects should keep straight faces in portraits. We can split hairs all day long about how much one should care which form is right, if either, but since this question asks exactly that question, I'm happy to contend that "keep" is right. :) | |
| Nov 7, 2014 at 18:39 | comment | added | R Mac | It's not subjunctive. It's a mandate. You use the present tense of the verb the same way as you do for other kinds of mandate. You would say, "I always had insisted that he stop it at once," instead of, "I always had insisted that he stopped it at once," because you're describing the object of the preposition that. The prepositional phrase describes your past, ongoing insistence. You don't ever insist that people do things in the past because it's impossible. You use the same good sense when forming language which discusses events in the past. :) | |
| Nov 7, 2014 at 18:38 | comment | added | Martin | If the court were still in session and it were reported that, "the court insists that evetyone be/keep quiet", the correct use of the English subjunctive mood is more apparent. | |
| Nov 7, 2014 at 18:34 | comment | added | FumbleFingers | Ah, right. I put too much weight on your first sentence (which I agree with), and didn't pay sufficient attention to your distinction as drawn in the next two paragraphs (which I don't agree with). It's obviously all well in the past and long over now. The matter of whether straight faces were required continuously or only on a specific occasion seems irrelevant to me. | |
| Nov 7, 2014 at 18:28 | history | edited | FumbleFingers | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1 character in body
|
| Nov 7, 2014 at 18:26 | comment | added | FumbleFingers | I'm not sure of the terminology for fast-becoming-outdated grammatical terminology, but I'm guessing OP's suggested keep is subjunctive. I don't much like it there, but it's a bit of a sterile debate to identify either usage as right/wrong. | |
| Nov 7, 2014 at 18:12 | comment | added | FumbleFingers | Yes, except it's not "old" journalism - it's only a few weeks ago. And in the exact context, I much prefer what looks to me like simple past. | |
| Nov 7, 2014 at 17:55 | history | answered | R Mac | CC BY-SA 3.0 |