[Grammar] Why/How the subjunctive has been replaced with indicative?

[5jj]

Further to post #19.

The word 'conditional' is usually applied to the whole sentence, or to a clause. Conditional clauses/sentences usually contain the word 'if', though there are other possibilities.

The word 'subjunctive' is applied to the 'mood' of the verb. This is a concept that is very important in some languages, but less so in English, particularly British English.

In those languages that use the subjunctive, the subjunctive form is often very different from the indicative; for example, in German, the present indicative of 'sein' (=BE) is ich bin, and the present subjunctive is ich sei. In English, there is only one verb, BE, that has different forms for the past indicative and subjunctive - I/he was/were. For all other verbs, the two forms are identical, which perhaps explains why most native speakers don't think that they might be using a subjunctive form.

In the present subjunctive (rarely used in BrE) all verbs except BE have only one recognisably different form, the third person singular he she come/have/go/etc. For BE, the subjunctive form is be for all persons: if that be so, ...

 

[5jj]

I do agree. It also applies to Japanese.
However the evolving speed of English is much faster than I have imagined.
What was wrong in the textbook which I learned with in my high school is already correct today.

"I play guitar" was regarded, and is even now at most schools in Japan, wrong.
Students are taught that it should be "I play THE guitar", using the 'instrumental THE'.
If the write "I play guitar", most teachers would not give a score, even though "play guitar" is far more often used than "play the guitar" both in US and UK today (according to what I searched on the net).

That is a completely different point that has nothing to do with the subjunctive. If you want to follow that up, please start a new thread.

 

[Barb_D]

I think I'm just not smart enough to understand all that. I know that I use the subjunctive all the time for "If I were" but it would have never occurred to me to use it for a future "If it rain tomorrow."

Thank you for trying to make me smarter, but I think it's just too difficult a task!

 

[KEN JPN]

I doubt if many people have regarded it as grammatically wrong for sixty years or more.

When the subjunctive present was still widely used, to use the predicative for that used be regarded as wrong.
In time, more and more people started to make the same 'mistake' until it was completely believed to be correct.

The point of my question is why/how this change started (possibly in 16th century or so?).

 

[5jj]

I think I'm just not smart enough to understand all that. I know that I use the subjunctive all the time for "If I were" but it would have never occurred to me to use it for a future "If it rain tomorrow."

Thank you for trying to make me smarter, but I think it's just too difficult a task!

Don't worry. I have never met anyone who would say 'If it rain tomorrow, ...'. The only reason that I did not say, "It is wrong", is that I am not an expert on AmE. It is wrong in BrE.

A simple answer to the subjunctive problem, and I must warn you that some will disagree with me, is that (in modern BrE) the subjunctive is dead. I, when I am in the classroom, present forms such as 'If I were you', 'Long live the Queen', 'Rule Britannia, Britannia rule the waves' as fossilised phrases rather than as examples of a living, vibrant, subjunctive.

 

[TheParser]

(possibly in 16th century or so?).

NOT A TEACHER

1. "In modern English, especially from the middle of the 17th century, the subjunctive is much less used than formerly ...

partly because the English people has [sic] become increasingly careless of distinctions of thought; partly because, in

subordinate clauses, may, might, shall, should have been increasingly substituted for the true or simple subjunctive ...

Actually, these auxiliary words (may, should, etc.) are Subjunctive in origin."

Source: Eric Partridge, Usage and Abusage (Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1963), p. 310. He credits many of his comments to Dr. C.T. Onions's An Advanced English Syntax.

*****

"The syntax, also, of the subjunctive has greatly shrunk since Middle English days, and is still shrinking. At times, however, the tendency has been checked. In the seventeenth and eighteenth century, were of rejected conditions and unfulfilled wishes seemed to be regularly giving place to was. But it has recovered lost ground, and in such constructions was for were is now a distinct vulgarism."

Credit: This article on the Web comes from The Cambridge History of English and American Literature; XV. Changes in the Language since Shakespeare's Time; 4. Changes in grammar.

 

[TheEditor]

"I play guitar" was regarded, and is even now at most schools in Japan, wrong.
Students are taught that it should be "I play THE guitar", using the 'instrumental THE'.
If the write "I play guitar", most teachers would not give a score, even though "play guitar" is far more often used than "play the guitar" both in US and UK today (according to what I searched on the net).

Ken, you might be interested to know that one of the better-known songs by American pop singer John Mellencamp is titled "Play Guitar."

The lyrics have a whimsical edge, with Mellencamp representing a veteran musician who is giving advice to a less confident teenage male. At one point the singer explains that if the younger male wants to attract a beautiful cheerleader without having a lot of money or a brand-new car ... "Let me give you some good advice, young man/You better learn to play guitar."

The chorus repeats his advice -- "Play guitar" -- several times.

​

The song comes from an album released in 1983. So obviously the expression "play guitar" has been accepted and understood in the United States for quite a while.

(Not a teacher.)

 

[KEN JPN]

NOT A TEACHER

1. "In modern English, especially from the middle of the 17th century, the subjunctive is much less used than formerly ...

partly because the English people has [sic] become increasingly careless of distinctions of thought; partly because, in

subordinate clauses, may, might, shall, should have been increasingly substituted for the true or simple subjunctive ...

Actually, these auxiliary words (may, should, etc.) are Subjunctive in origin."

Source: Eric Partridge, Usage and Abusage (Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1963), p. 310. He credits many of his comments to Dr. C.T. Onions's An Advanced English Syntax.

*****

"The syntax, also, of the subjunctive has greatly shrunk since Middle English days, and is still shrinking. At times, however, the tendency has been checked. In the seventeenth and eighteenth century, were of rejected conditions and unfulfilled wishes seemed to be regularly giving place to was. But it has recovered lost ground, and in such constructions was for were is now a distinct vulgarism."

Credit: This article on the Web comes from The Cambridge History of English and American Literature; XV. Changes in the Language since Shakespeare's Time; 4. Changes in grammar.

Thank you really so much for your very instructive information w/ source specified.
The history of was-were is very interesting.

 

[KEN JPN]

Thank you very much.
Since the "play guitar" topic is out of this thread, I will start a new thread about this if needed.
If I start a new thread on this, I hope you will post your comments again.

 

[abaka]

It's a little hard to argue the present subjunctive is completely dead, even in British English:

The party demanded that Mr Cameron disclose which Tory donors had visited Downing Street or Chequers since May 2010 and what policy representations they had made.

Source: The Telegraph, 26 Mar 2012.

It's true, however, that this is the only remaining live construction for the present subjunctive.

 

[5jj]

It's a little hard to argue the present subjunctive is completely dead, even in British English:

The party demanded that Mr Cameron disclose which Tory donors had visited Downing Street or Chequers since May 2010 and what policy representations they had made.

It's very easy to argue that, though I should have added ,"for most speakers". In your sentence from the Telegraph, many speakers of BrE would have used 'should disclose' or 'disclosed'

I did warn that some would disagree with me. There are some who agree: (my emphasis is added in these quotes)


In BrE the subjunctive mood is most likely to be found in formal writing or speech […] But it is seldom obligatory, and indeed is commonly (?usually) invisible because the notionally subjunctive and the indicative forms are the same.
Burchfield, R W (1996) The New Fowler’s Modern English Usage, Oxford, OUP


The Past Subjunctive […] survives as a form distinct from the ordinary Indicative Past Tense only in the use of were, the Past Tense form of the verb to be with a singular subject […]. Like the Present Subjunctive, this is nowadays fairly infrequent, and is often replaced by Past Indicative was.
Leech, Geoffrey, (2004) Meaning and the English Verb. 3rd edn, Harlow, Pearson Longman, page 115.



... the true subjunctive form is dead in English. It survives in a few main sentences of wish or desire like “God save the King” […] .
Were as the past singular subjunctive form has held out a little more tenaciously, partly because in the stereotyped phrase “If I were you” the complement you has by attraction tended to establish it […] In the following sentence, for example, our modern tendency would be to turn the subjunctive were into a blunt indicative:

It is high time the wide field of Tudor music, both secular and sacred, were explored by many more schools.
Vallins, G H, (1951) Good English, London: Pan


The subjunctive mood is in its death throes, and the best thing to do is put it out of its misery as soon as possible.
Maugham, WS (1949) A Writer’s Notebook, Garden City, NY: Doubleday.

Because of my advanced age and rather formal school, I tend to use the subjunctive myself, and I have no objection to its being used. I do feel, however, that it is pointless to burden leaarners of British English with a form that most native speakers do not use.

 

[abaka]

5jj, it may very well be true that the majority of British English speakers would not use the deliberately stiff "demand/suggest/request that something be". But here it is in a British newspaper from this year. Dead? Really?

In any case, this is a common usage in the New World. Even if most of the people who say it when called for couldn't identify it as a present subjunctive, that's exactly what it is.

 

[5jj]

5jj, it may very well be true that the majority of British English speakers would not use the deliberately stiff "demand/suggest/request that something be". But here it is in a British newspaper from this year. Dead? Really?

I have already admitted that I should have added "for most speakers". For many it sounds stiff and. for some, it can even appear 'incorrect'. I would guess (and I admit that it is only a guess) that 95% of speakers of British English never use a present subjunctive in their lives, except in a few fossilised expressions. Even some of these are under threat - Many people believe that the line in our jingoistic Rule Britannia is "Britannia rules the waves".

In any case, this is a common usage in the New World.

I have never denied this, and try always to make it clear that I am speaking only of modern British English.