. . . that I was never again to be committed in ignorance

[shootingstar]

. . .
Well, I was in for it - in for Pinkerton, in for the portrait, in for the type-written lecture. One promise I extorted - that I was never again to be committed in ignorance. Even for that, when I saw how its extortion puzzled and depressed the Irrepressible (the nickname of Pinkerton), my soul repented me, and in all else I suffered myself to be led uncomplaining at his chariot-wheels.
. . .
(The Wrecker by R. L. Stevenson and L. Osbourne, Chapter vi)

How do you interpret was to there? Do you take it to be indicative or subjunctive?
Thank you.

 

[Piscean]

It's indicative. What made you think it might be subjunctive?

 

[shootingstar]

It's indicative. What made you think it might be subjunctive?

In this context I take it as a quasi - (reported) indirect speech: One promise I extorted, though- I said (that) I was never again to be committed in ignorance.

 

[Piscean]

It is not I said that I was never again to be committed but one promise that I was never again to be committed.

Subjunctive forms are not required in reported speech in English; subjunctive were would be incorrect.

 

[shootingstar]

It is not I said that I was never again to be committed but one promise that I was never again to be committed.

I think we are getting closer to the core of the matter: One promise I extorted - he promised I was never again to be committed in ignorance.

. . . that is to say I was (never again) to is the backshift of I am (never again) to.

 

[Piscean]

Yes.

 

[shootingstar]

Thank you.
Still, there is an open question: Does I was never again to be committed (that is to say the backshift) have an indicative meaning or a subjunctive meaning for the English or Americans? In other words: Do the English or Americans get an 'indicative feeling' or a 'subjunctive feeling' hearing a 'backshiftted' verb?

 

[jutfrank]

I don't know what you mean by 'an indicative meaning' and I can't see why you're talking about the subjunctive mood.

Are you just trying to understand what the sentence means? The part reading 'I was never again to be committed ...' is future in the past. It's in the past tense (was) because the whole narrative of the text is past, but it has a future meaning. He promised himself never again to be committed in ignorance, from that moment on.

 

[shootingstar]

I don't know what you mean by 'an indicative meaning' and I can't see why you're talking about the subjunctive mood

For me an indicative meaning of a verb is a meaning of a verb that isn't 'backshifted', that isn't future in the past and exclusive of subjunctive forms like were and conditional sentences. However, it seems to be a German problem because we mostly render those forms as German subjunctive verb forms.

Are you just trying to understand what the sentence means? The part reading 'I was never again to be committed ...' is future in the past. It's in the past tense (was) because the whole narrative of the text is past, but it has a future meaning. . .

I think I understand this sentence. I would like to know how the English native speaker feels when she/he is hearing a 'backshifted' verb or a verb in the future in the past. Does an English native speaker attribute to such a verb any subjunctive meaning or feeling?

. . .
He promised himself never again to be committed in ignorance, from that moment on.

No, he (neither Loudon Dodd nor Pinkerton) didn't promise himself anything. He (Pinkerton) promised Loudon Dodd that Loudon Dodd was never again to be committed in ignorance. Loudon extorted that promise from Pinkerton! Maybe the source is too scanty.

 

[emsr2d2]

I would like to know how the English native speaker feels when she/he is hearing a 'backshifted' verb or a verb in the future in the past. Does an English native speaker attribute to such a verb any subjunctive meaning or feeling?

I can guarantee you that the vast majority of English speakers hearing it would think absolutely nothing. We don't analyse sentences we hear/see unless we're studying English syntax and need/want to analyse or diagram a sentence.

 

[Piscean]

For me an indicative meaning of a verb is a meaning of a verb that isn't 'backshifted', that isn't future in the past and exclusive of subjunctive forms like were and conditional sentences.[...]
I would like to know how the English native speaker feels when she/he is hearing a 'backshifted' verb or a verb in the future in the past. Does an English native speaker attribute to such a verb any subjunctive meaning or feeling?

I'd hazard a guess that 90+% of speakers of BrE have never heard of the word 'subjunctive' , and that most of those who have encountered it don't know what it means. Apart from a few fossilised expressions, the present subjunctive is effectively dead in modern BrE. Past subjunctive forms are identical in form to past indicative forms with the sole exception of the third person singular form of BE (for a dying minory of elderly pedants like me).

Questions about subjunctive meaning or feeling are meaningless.

 

[shootingstar]

I can guarantee you that the vast majority of English speakers hearing it would think absolutely nothing. We don't analyse sentences we hear/see unless we're studying English syntax and need/want to analyse or diagram a sentence.

I'd hazard a guess that 90+% of speakers of BrE have never heard of the word 'subjunctive' , and that most of those who have encountered it don't know what it means. Apart from a few fossilised expressions, the present subjunctive is effectively dead in modern BrE. Past subjunctive forms are identical in form to past indicative forms with the sole exception of the third person singular form of BE (for a dying minory of elderly pedants like me).

Questions about subjunctive meaning or feeling are meaningless.

I feel as though I'd opened a can of worms

 

[emsr2d2]

I feel as though I'd I've opened a can of worms. ‍