[Grammar] The Subjunctive in English

[onegame]

Hello,

I just read for the first time about the use of the subjunctive but I couldn't fully understand it's different usages in English. Could you please explain to me when and how it is used? And, is it acceptable to use it in formal essays?

I'd appreciate your help. Regards

 

[Barb_D]

The subjunctive has a few "flavors." It's generally considered formal use so it would be quite acceptable in formal essays.

When something is contrary to fact, you can use the subjuntive. I'm told that this is more common in the US than in the UK, and I have no idea how common it is in other dialects. It looks like the past.

For example:
If I were rich, I'd buy that painting. (I am not rich. Contrary to fact.)
If I were you, I'd take the job with IBM. (I am not you.)
If you were rich -- this looks the same as the regular mood.
If he were rich --

Here's text from the OWL at Purdue (Purdue OWL) -One of the best online references I know.

When verbs show something contrary to fact, they are in the subjunctive mood.
When you express a wish or something that is not actually true, use the past tense or past perfect tense; when using the verb 'to be' in the subjunctive, always use were rather than was:
Examples:

• If he were here... (Implied: ...but he's not.)
• I wish I had something to eat. (Implied: ...but I don't.)
• It would be better if you had brought your books with you. (Implied: ...but you haven't brought them.)

 

[5jj]

As far as BrE is concerned, the subjunctive is virtually dead.

The present subjunctive survives only in a few expressions that are best regarded as fixed idioms. Examples include: Long live the Queen; Britannia rule the waves Note the absence of the -s ending of the indicative.

The past subjunctive is identical in form with the past indicative for all verbs exept BE, and so there is no need to worry about it, except for BE. Even with BE, many speakers of BrE do not use it except in the phrase if I were you. Even here, probably the majority say if I was you.

The subjunctive is more widely used in AmE. I'll let an American explain how it's used.

ps. I see Barb posted her response while I was writing mine.

 

[SoothingDave]

There is also the subjunctive in "that" clauses, like "I insist that you be quiet."

 

[TheParser]

***** NOT A TEACHER *****


May I just add my two cents to the other posters' excellent answers?

The subjunctive is really awesome.

1. He comes to school early every day.

2. I demand/request/ order that he come to school early every day.

*****

In No.1, we use the indicative because it is a fact. It is true. He does come early every day.

But in No. 2, we use the subjunctive because it is only my demand or request or order. It has nothing to do with the facts. In fact,

he may ignore my demand and continue to come late every day. And there is nothing that I can do about it.

For many Americans, it does not make sense to say "I demand that he comes every day."

 

[Barb_D]

So, as I said, the subjunctive as a couple ways it shows up. One is in the "looks like past" form of "not true" (if I were... but I'm not).

The other is this demand/request/order form. In that case you use the "bare infinitive" form of the verb. That's the main verb, without "to."

I suggest he leave at once.
I required that he come before me.
I ordered he be removed from my presence.

 

[onegame]

Thank you for your help. It made the image clear for me
But I still have one more question. Can we use the subjunctive in formal essays?

 

[Barb_D]

It's generally considered formal use so it would be quite acceptable in formal essays.

I responded in my first post.

 

[Raymott]

As far as BrE is concerned, the subjunctive is virtually dead.
[...]
The past subjunctive is identical in form with the past indicative for all verbs exept BE, and so there is no need to worry about it, except for BE.

The subjunctive is alive and well in English. Whether one needs to worry about it or not from a pedagogical viewpoint is a separate issue. It can certainly be ignored in most cases until some student asks why a certain form is in the past tense in a certain case. And, as we know, this happens often, at least here.
There's a huge difference between the subjunctive being 'dead', and the subjunctive being unrecognisable as such because it looks like a past indicative, or something else.
There's also possibly a huge difference between what is true, and what we should teach our students; that apparently leads to some argumentation over this issue.

 

[5jj]

There's a huge difference between the subjunctive being 'dead', and the subjunctive being unrecognisable as such because it looks like a past indicative, or something else.

Words used in grammar are simply shortcuts to describing how the language works. For many languages, including older forms of English, the word 'subjunctive' is a useful word for talking about the way in which we have to use particular forms of verbs in certain situations.

Such changes in the present tense of English are very rare for most speakers of modern British English. We change the form of only one verb in the past tense (BE), and then only in the first and third persons Even then, the majority of speakers do not do that, except for posssibly, "If I were you, ...".

We certainly use the past tense of verbs when we wish to distance in reality, but whether there is any justification for claiming that this is a subjunctive in the modern languae is questionable. If a thing is unrecognisable under a different name, is there any point in giving it a different name?

1. I had a pen.
2. I wish I had a pen.

It seems to me that noting that the so-called 'past' tense in #1 distances the 'having' in time, and in #2 in reality is useful. Labelling 'had' in #1 'indicative' and in #2 'subjunctive' seems rather artificial.

 

[TheParser]

Can we use the subjunctive in formal essays?

***** NOT A TEACHER *****


As Barb D. said, the answer is an absolute YES.

May I add:

If you do NOT use the subjunctive in "formal essays," some (many?) American readers may think that you are, well, uneducated.

 

[Tdol]

There's a huge difference between the subjunctive being 'dead', and the subjunctive being unrecognisable as such because it looks like a past indicative, or something else.

The present subjunctive is more easily recognisable, but in BrE, it is close to death IMO- it occurs in some fossilised phrases and crops up in formal rhetoric from time to time, and that's about it. Even If I were is not the most common form, so I would say that it's alive but not that well in BrE- others may disagree with my view.

 

[Raymott]

Words used in grammar are simply shortcuts to describing how the language works.
[...]
We certainly use the past tense of verbs when we wish to distance in reality, but whether there is any justification for claiming that this is a subjunctive in the modern languae is questionable.
Yes, it's probably debatable. I would take the side of the affirmative.

If a thing is unrecognisable under a different name, is there any point in giving it a different name?
Of course not. That's my argument. I recognise it as a subjunctive (the use of a different tense to express a hypothetical event, and thus distancing it) so I call it a subjunctive.
Is your argument that you don't the term 'subjunctive', therefore students don't recognise it as such, therefore you don't use the term?

1. I had a pen.
2. I wish I had a pen.

It seems to me that noting that the so-called 'past' tense in #1 distances the 'having' in time, and in #2 in reality is useful. Labelling 'had' in #1 'indicative' and in #2 'subjunctive' seems rather artificial.

As you mentioned in your first sentence, all such labels are artificial shortcuts. They are tools.
But, if you understand "subjunctive" as meaning (in part) using the so-called 'past' tense in #1 distancing the 'having' in time, and using the past tense for hypothetical events, then you can refer to it as "subjunctive" without having to define everything (the distancing role, the hypothetical nature of the proposition, etc).
If a student is introduced to the meaning of "subjunctive" as it is used in other languages, and arguably in English, I imagine it would be much easier to respond to questions by saying "It's subjunctive" rather than by explaining all the properties of subjunctivity each time and attributing those properties to the example.

I can certainly accept that the labelling of constructions as "subjunctive" is almost dead in British pedagogy. But I'm not convinced that the use of the past subjunctive (under a different label) has changed much.

 

[Tdol]

You can vote on the topic: Poll: I'd be surprised if they won. - Language Polls - UsingEnglish.com

 

[Barb_D]

I always find discussions on the subjunctive interesting because it is so much more alive and well in the US than, apparently, it is in the UK.

 

[Raymott]

I always find discussions on the subjunctive interesting because it is so much more alive and well in the US than, apparently, it is in the UK.

Viva el subjuntivo! May it continue to get the recognition it deserves (especially when it's present).

 

[Barb_D]

If I were asked, I'd sy "If only we could command that it be so!" ;-)

 

[Tdol]

I always find discussions on the subjunctive interesting because it is so much more alive and well in the US than, apparently, it is in the UK.

The difference is remarkable.

 

[5jj]

It seems not to be just the subjunctive. American colleagues with whom I have worked (or, as I'd be more likely to say in conversation, "American colleagues (who) I've worked with") have left me with the impression that educated Americans are rather more observant of prescriptive rules, in writing at least, than many educated British speakers.

ps. On a slightly off-topic note: I have not infrequently argued in this forum against the teaching of the subjunctive in BrE. However, if anyone were to examine what I write, they would notice that I use subjunctive forms myself. I blame it on age.

 

[Barb_D]

Or maybe we're just more used to the songs from Fiddler on the Roof. Well, one song in particular, anyway.