[Grammar] "It is natural for S to V"or"It is natural that S V"

[Takorassyai]

A:It is natural for wild birds to live in nature.
B:It is natural that wild birds (should)live in nature.
C:It is natural that wild birds live in nature.(present tense)

I feel I meet sentences like each of these in even frequency.
I think, when I am to make a statement, if I imagine that some birds may live in nature and others may live in the artificial environment, I can say A or B, and if I imagine that birds "naturally" and "actually" live in nature, I should say C.
But one of my friends says that A is incorrect because the word "natural" refuse subjunctive mood and infinitive includes subjunctive implication, therefore, only B and C is grammatically correct.
There seem to be, indeed, some English textbooks in Japan say so. I am, however, not convinced of it. I suspect that it is a logic of Japanese. Although their claim partly correct, is A impossible? All sentences "It is natural for X to V" are fault? Doesn't it depend on the context?

 

[ChinaDan]

A:It is natural for wild birds to live in nature.
B:It is natural that wild birds (should)live in nature.
C:It is natural that wild birds live in nature.

Honestly, I find "A" to be the natural way an English speaker would make this statement. I'm a native speaker, I've been a voracious reader all my life, and I find that phrasing feels right.

I didn't find anything searching for "natural" as a subjunctive mood. I have doubts about that claim, but I won't make a definitive statement about it.

I like "A".

 

[Raymott]

You can write "It is natural that birds be in the air" if you want a subjunctive sentence. But it doesn't mean anything more than "It is natural for birds to be in the air", which most native speakers would use in this case.
"It is natural that birds are in the air" has a slightly different meaning.

PS: I've changed the verb to "be" only to make the use of the subjunctive more pronounced.

 

[Takorassyai]

Honestly, I find "A" to be the natural way an English speaker would make this statement. I'm a native speaker, I've been a voracious reader all my life, and I find that phrasing feels right.

Thank you for your reply. I also feel A is slightly natural rather than others.

 

[Takorassyai]

If your friend means that it is not possible to use the word 'natural' with a subjunctive mood, they are wrong. She is so affected. I wish she were more natural.

The infinitive form does not have a 'subjunctive implication', whatever that may be.

Thank you for your reply but the claim of my friend is not that it is impossible to use with a subjunctive mood but that what is referred to be natural should be somewhat actual. With this problem, they give an example sentence "It is true that S V." cannot be changed into "It is true for S to V."
Although I am convinced of this example, I doubt the case of "natural" is also true as well.

And, I meant to-infinitive by "infinitive". Every Japanese textbook of English says to-infinitive provably imply that the action or the state is not actually happened and might come true in future. Are they wrong?
I'm afraid that I cannot express grammatical terms exactly, for I don't know very much about English grammar terms (in japan, we usually refer to them in Japanese).

 

[Takorassyai]

You can write "It is natural that birds be in the air" if you want a subjunctive sentence. But it doesn't mean anything more than "It is natural for birds to be in the air", which most native speakers would use in this case.
"It is natural that birds are in the air" has a slightly different meaning.

PS: I've changed the verb to "be" only to make the use of the subjunctive more pronounced.

You say that A and B is same meaning and they are all grammatically possible and there is a slightly difference between A(=B) and C in meaning or intention of someone who says it, don't you?

 

[Raymott]

Close enough, I guess. But I'm hesitant to agree that I have said that things are "the same" unless that's something I said. If two things are different in any way whatsoever, they are not "the same". That is just me.