No, I don't see any difference.
Is there a difference between:
1-It is good that you know that I am on your side.
2-It is good that you should know that I am on your side.
3-It is better that you know that I am on your side.
4-It is better that you should know that I am on your side.
No, I don't see any difference.
I'm not a teacher, so please consider any advice I give in that context.
The difference woud come with the third person, where the question of the present subjunctive might rear its ugly head. Many BE speakers would use should to avoid deciding between 'know' and 'knows'.
The first sentence is about present reality. The second one I am not so sure about because I wouldn't use should that way, but it seems to be a conditional sentence. I would say that they are different.Originally Posted by navi tasan
In my opinion, those sentences definitely mean two different things.Originally Posted by navi tasan
Would you use 'It is better that he know'? In BE, we put 'should' in to avoid the present subjunctive, so to us it means more or less the same.
Possibly. I am hestitant to be more definite, because it is not a type of sentence I use often, so absent context I can't be sure.Originally Posted by tdol
In AE I don't think we use should that often. That is, it is used in admonitory sentences, e.g.: "You should mind your manners." Or in conditionals: "He should be here by 5 o'clock."Originally Posted by tdol
Maybe Mike will come by and comment on this one.
Originally Posted by tdol
Yes, in American English we would use "It's better that he know."
2 - Let's wait until tomorrow to tell him.
9 - That's not a good idea.
9 - The sooner he knows the better.
2 - Do you think it'll be too much for him to handle after having heard the other bad news this morning?
9 - No, It's better that he know now.
or: It's better that we tell him now.
or the opposite: It's better that he not know about this until tomorrow.
The present subjunctive used with the third person singular may often go unnoticed, but it is there. I hear it mostly in news broadcasts. I have, by the way, heard the present subjunctive in BE, but it is typically not used in the third person singular in BE. I use the present subjunctive, but I was not always in the habit of taking note of it. I do take note of it now.
The present subjunctive is used by pedants or to lend gravitas to an utterance. Otherwise, it is almost never used. The BBC, say, would rarely use it except for special occasions, like huge disasters, etc.
This is getting interesting, and confusing.
1-It is strange that they should be so rude.
2-It is strange that they are so rude.
I think here 1 implies a bit of doubt as to their being rude. "The whole thing is strange. Maybe we have misinterpreted their acts, although they do seem to be rude."
The second sentence leaves no doubt as to their have being rude. But if one uses "sad" instead of "strange", it will all come down to the same thing.
3-It is good that he should go there.
One meaning could be: it is good that he OUGHT TO go there. But if we leave this aside, we'll have one question: Does he actually go there?
With "good" it seems to me that he does. But what if we use "better"?
4-It is better that he should go there.
I would tend to interpret it as "It would be better if he went there." But I don't think that the second interpretation is excluded. The sentence could be used when he does actually go there.
I have, as is my habit, expressed all this in a very dogmatic manner, because it is easier to speak that way. In reality I am plagued with doubts. Every affirmative sentence I have used should be read as a question, except this one!
I'm not sure it's doubt about the rudeness, but it might suggest that this was not characteristic behaviour in the first example.Originally Posted by navi tasan
It could be used meaning him and not someone else.Originally Posted by navi tasan