I ran to my house yesterday.
Fine, we all know that "ran" is the simple past indicative of "to run". No one is arguing this point because it is plainly obvious that all INDICATIONS point to something that has occurred in the past. Now to my next example:
If I ran a drug cartel, I would go to prison.
We see that "ran" here is not talking about something that has occurred in the past; it's talking about something that is hypothetical. I have never run a drug cartel—I didn't run one last week—not the month prior—I have never run one period. In this instance, the verb, "to run" is in the past subjunctive mood.
The past subjunctive is important to understand, but it is only plainly visible in 1st and 3rd person singular in the "to be" verb because this is the only remaining verb in the language that has a different past indicative form for different persons, i.e., I was, You were, she was.
The present indicative can be seen in this example. It indicates something that happens or is happening in the present time:
He has better vision than most people do.
We see that the sentence is indicating that the subject has better vision than the average person does; therefore it must be in third person singular present indicative "to have". Now let's try to put it in the subjunctive mood:
If he have better vision than most people do, he will be able to read this print with no problem.
Here, the person who is speaking isn't 100 percent sure that the person has better vision than most people; he merely has an inclination or he knows that it's possible that this person have this really good vision. If he were positive (which he is not), he would put it in present indicative:
If (Since is what "if" means here) he has better vision than most people do, he will be able to read this print with no problem.
Do you see the semantic difference here? I should hope so. The present subjunctive is normally not spoken like the one above in Modern English because the language is now syncretic, but it does exist. Another way that one can take it out of subjunctive is with the word "should":
Should he have better vision than most people do, he will be able to read this print with no problem.
If he should have better vision than most people do, he will be able to read this with no problem.
Now here are some examples below with the answers next to them:
1. If his father died, he would stand to inherit his fortune. (3rd person singular simple past subjunctive "to die" because his father has not died yet; this is hypothetical.)
2. We went to the store to pick up some eggs yesterday. (1st person plural simple past indicative "to go" because all indications point that this happened yesterday.)
3. I pray that you (all) win. (2nd person plural simple present subjunctive "to win" because the speaker is not talking about any indication that the person wins or has won.)
4. One can only hope that God have mercy on his soul. (Third person singular present subjunctive "to have" because God has not taken time out of His busy day to have mercy on this man's soul; the speaker is making a supplication of some sort or perhaps a wish.)
5. I think he sees us. (Third person singular present indicative "to see" because all indications point to the fact that this person does see them.)6. God be with you. (Third person singular present subjunctive "to be" because I doubt God is with you right now, is He? God may be all around, but He is not visiting you now; He's very busy; I think most of His time is spent talking to Pat Robertson anyway.)
7. You (singular) know your friends well enough. (2nd person singular present indicative "to know" because it is indicating that the person does know this.)
8. If we had gone to school yesterday, we would not have missed our test. (1st person plural past perfect subjunctive "to go" because we did not go to school yesterday; it's a hypothetical condition in the past.)
9. If he [so much as] have looked at my daughter incorrectly, I will break every bone in his body. (Third person singular present perfect subjunctive of "to look" because the speaker is not sure that he HAS looked at his daughter incorrectly; he's just stating that it is possible that he might HAVE looked at her incorrectly and this will be the consequence of that leer.)
10. If I [so much as] be in the same room with him, I know I'll do something that I'll regret. (1st person singular present subjunctive "to be" because I AM not in the same room, but it is possible that I might BE at some point. Try saying "I so much as am" or "he so much as is" and it's almost impossible.)
11. I was home sick yesterday from school. (1st person singular past indicative "to be" because this DID happen.)
12. I wish I were God. (1st person singular past subjunctive "to be" because I am not God; I never have been God; I was not God yesterday; I wouldn't want His job because He's doing a great job.)
13. I wish I knew the answer to your question. (1st person singular past subjunctive "to know" because I do not know the answer; I did not know it yesterday; I have never known it.)
14. What if God were one of us? (3rd person singular past subjunctive "to be" because He is not one of us. Don't you hate that song, too, and it puts "was" there...yuck!)
15. If we saw a ghost, we would probably scream. (1st person plural past subjunctive "to see" because we did not see a ghost. It's hypothetical.)
16. If he do bleed, / I'll gild the faces of the grooms withal, for it must seem their guilt. (Macbeth, Act 2, Scene 2, Lines 71-72) (This is not only 3rd person singular present subjunctive "to do", but it could be classified as third person singular emphatic present subjunctive "to bleed".)
17. For murder, though it have no tongue, will speak with most miraculous organ. (William Shakespeare's Hamlet Prince of Denmark (Hamlet at II, ii)) (Third person singular simple present subjunctive "to have" because the speaker is unsure about what he is saying. One could insert the modal "may" or "might" here and it would still be correct, but it would not be subjunctive anymore.)
Need I say more? The subjunctive in English is hard to see because the language has syncretized. If you SPOKE another language, it would jut out like a pimple on a pubescent boy because most languages are inflectional. It just so happens that English is a rarity.
"If he have better vision than most people do, he will be able to read this print with no problem."
ReplyDeleteYou say that subjunctive clauses like this exist in modern English, but this is not part of my English, and I have never encountered this in any grammatical analyses of English.
That's what it is in a nutshell. That's why the subjunctive is dead. If you took a study of English language class, this would appear especially if you were reading work done in the 1600's or 1700's. There are cliches buddy. "whether it be" is one meaning "if it be this of if it not be", "if need be" meaning "if there be a need" "Be that as it may" meaning "if that be as it may look to be" etc.
ReplyDeleteI really don't care whether you say it like this or not. My blog is predicated on prescriptivism, not colloquialism. I deal with semantics, not pragmatics. If you think it sounds wrong, it is your opinion. Do your own research to prove me wrong.
ReplyDeleteI also deal with diachrony in my blog. It's important that one understand what I'm trying to say, my friend. Remember, the subjunctive is a moribund mood in English so constructions like "whether it be" or "if it be" or "if he have" can be considered passe and the indicative can be considered correct. 150 years ago though if you had said it "if he has" in that context, you would have gotten your hands slapped with a ferule.
ReplyDeleteFor terms of Modern English, early Modern English ended around 1700; this grammar was still considered to be correct at the turn of the 20th century. Brush up on your grammar, my friend. Bad English over the last century has whittled away this mood.
ReplyDeleteTherefore this is modern English just not so modern as you might want it to be.
ReplyDeleteThis construction ("if he have") is mentioned in The Columbia Guide to Standard American English, where it is called "stiffly formal"
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bartleby.com/68/30/3230.html
So it seems that you are discussing a very formal prescriptive grammar of written English. What sources are you using?
Ok, listen here, my friend. I think I said it is stiffly formal. My blog is based on a very formal prescriptive grammar. What I am trying to do is convey the subjunctive mood vs. the indicative mood so I have to go formal to do so or no one would get it. If I were speaking informally or something, I probably wouldn't say it like that. The point is to convey the idea of semantics or semiotics to the reader. What is the semantic difference between "if he have" and "if he has" and what is the semantic difference between "if he were" and "if he was"? I could care less how someone might say it in a conversation. I specifically stated in the blog that the above is almost never heard in Modern English. It's something that one might write in a research paper wherein the setting is very formal.
ReplyDeleteAlfred Lord Tennyson wrote a poem once about Love. I wrote a paper on it once discussing the semantics of it all:
In Love, if Love be Love, if Love be ours,
Faith and unfaith can ne'er be equal powers:
Unfaith in aught is want of faith in all.
It is the little rift within the lute,
That by and by will make the music mute,
And ever widening slowly silence all.
The little rift within the lover's lute,
Or little pitted speck in garner'd fruit,
That rotting inward slowly moulders all.
It is not worth the keeping: let it go;
But shall it? answer, darling, answer, no.
And trust me not at all or all in all.
Let me guess...you teach English somewhere, am I right?
ReplyDelete