Search results for 'tag:Grammar tag:Subjunctives' matching tags 'Grammar' and 'Subjunctives'

Re: suggest

CalifJim — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 06:14:02 GMT

New2grammar
Isn't suggest subjective?

I think you mean "Doesn't suggest govern the subjunctive?", and the answer is "Yes, but only in its definition as offering advice -- not in its other meanings, such as the one being discussed here."

Re: favor

Avangi — Sat, 12 Jul 2008 01:58:07 GMT

New2grammar
Avangi, are you saying that's the reason "had" must be used?

I'm saying that you have choices, depending on what you wish to convey. You can look at "urgency" as being in your mind, or as being a factual circumstance. If you wish to imply that the asking and the urgency were contemporary, they should have the same tense, unless, as Marius suggests, you wish to use the subjunctive because of the "if."

- A.

Re: is/was/were

Philip — Sun, 22 Jun 2008 13:59:11 GMT

Grammar Geek

Technically, you should not use "was" -- but you're going to hear that more and more as the subjunctive slowly disappears from American English.

We could set up "The Society For the Preservation Of the Use Of the Subjunctive In American English" [SPUSAE]. We could collect $2 annual dues. I'll volunteer to be treasurer for the first year. >>

Re: Grammar rules - check for correctness - a kind teacher please :)

Angle1 — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 12:23:55 GMT

Some another issues to discuss

I saw your old friend, him whom you pointed out at the last meeting

Him whom >> whom

Objective pronoun is redundand, we need only relative pronou

I really donÂ´t know if there is a mistake in this sentence
She flouts her mink coat whenever she goes with us so that we will think she is very wealthy

They threated him like he was their own son

Like >>> as if we have a verb in a comparative sentence, we must use as instead of like

He was >> he were - we need a subjunctive here, but I cannot explain why

Many a box of bananas have been sent to Europe

Many a box + has / many boxes + have

What kind of these structures is commonly used

The two last comeptitors, who had to lose or gain the most were affected deeply

Who had to lose or gain the most >> who had the most to lose or gain

How to explain it? Is this

Were affected deeply >> were deeply affected â the adverb determines the adjective

His serious thoughts were bent irrevocable

Bent irrevocable >> bent irrevocably â But how to explain it??

I think that is everything what I need to to discuss

If you want to discuss only few examples, no problem - I would be glad if you would do anything. Thank you very much for your help

Re: The Coca Cola company

Cool Breeze — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 07:56:54 GMT

MaverickK
The correct answer is D. But I still can not understand why is A incorrect?

I think you have encountered a grammar "expert" who has very strong opinions about correct usage and little understanding of anything or anyone who disagrees with him. I once met a British teacher of English, an Oxford University graduate, who thought this is the only way to do it was wrong. In his opinion only this is the only way of doing it was correct. Everyone is entitled to his opinion, of course.

Any good grammar book and/or grammar expert will tell you that after the verb demand both the present subjunctive and should are correct in a that clause:

He demanded that I gravel the sidewalk. He demanded that I should gravel the sidewalk.

think about subjuctive mood

Anonymous — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 07:06:48 GMT

Ok! Here is a point to think about. When the speker says "it's time that we learned English." it means 'we' does not study English at the momonet. But the speaker of the sentence thinks that 'we' have to study right not. So, the speaker uses 'past subjucntive mood' which reminds 'we' of the fact that they are not studying yet, Do it now. As most grammar book refers, 'a subjunctive mood sentecce' describes opposite situdations or facts. Wish you got the help you need.

Re: Hey Guys, Need Help

Tanit — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 12:37:47 GMT

Hi,

New2grammar
Could you try to convince me why the abrupt change of tense makes sense?

Why should it make sense? After all, we're talking about English grammar!
Anyway, somebody says it's an instance of unreal past ...

BBC Learning English

We sometimes use past tenses to describe things in the present or future that are imagined or unreal.
It's time we went.
We are using It's time... here to say that something is not happening, but it should be happening. Compare also the following:
It's time we left. Our son will be home soon and he doesn't have a house key.
It's about time you started looking for a job. You can't depend on us all the time. It's high time you started to fend for yourself.

...we can use the construction it's time to or it's time for + object + to as alternatives to the unreal use of past forms to express this idea:
It's time for you to think seriously about what you want to do in your life.
It's time you thought seriously about what you want to achieve in your life.
It's time to reflect on how you want your life to proceed.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/learningenglish/grammar/learnit/learnitv347.shtml

UNREAL PAST

The past tense is sometimes used in English to refer to an 'unreal' situation. So, although the tense is the past, we are usually talking about the present, e.g. in a Type 2 conditional sentence:
If an elephant and a mouse fell in love, they would have many problems.
Although fell is in the past tense, we are talking about a hypothetical situation that might exist now or at any time, but we are not referring to the past. We call this use the unreal past.
Other situations where this occurs are:

after other words and expressions like'if'(supposing, if only, what if);
after the verb 'to wish';
after the expression 'I'd rather..'
(http://www.edufind.com/English/Grammar/IF10.cfm)

... and somebody says it's subjunctive. See also:
http://www.englishforums.com/English/ChangingTenses/dqcdx/post.htm
http://www.englishforums.com/English/WhichSentencesAreCorrect/zjbhp/post.htm

Re: Grammar Reference book

Marius Hancu — Sat, 24 May 2008 10:32:20 GMT

This is free, and a classic, esp for BrE:

The King's English
H.W. Fowler
http://www.bartleby.com/116/index.html

It may be old in some areas.

I'm also using:

Curme, George O. (1977). "A Grammar of the English Language". Verbatim. ISBN 0-930454-01-4 (reprint of 1931 edition from D. C. Heath and Company).

The best treatment of subjunctive and verbs I know. The book recommended by many prescriptivists.

Quirk, Randolph; Greenbaum, Sidney; Leech, Geoffrey; Svartik, Jan (1985). "A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language". Longman. ISBN 0-582-51734-6

The modern bible. More up to date, but I prefer Curme. Both quite expensive.

Re: my heart burdened "BE"

Marius Hancu — Tue, 20 May 2008 11:54:15 GMT

>When troubles come and my heart burdened be

It could also mean, and then there's some grammar behind it:

When/If troubles come and my heart be burdened

in which both come and be are present subjunctives

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjunctive_mood

with the meaning:

If troubles should/would come and my heart should/would be burdened

or more approximate:

If troubles are coming and my heart is burdened

Re: "I would be surprised..."

CalifJim — Thu, 15 May 2008 16:49:44 GMT

I was concentrating on the choice between were and was (subjunctive vs. indicative), and I neglected to address the choice between was/were and is (past vs. present).

New2grammar
Could you please 'defend' native speakers' tendency?

You're referring to the use of past throughout once the main clause introduces the past tense. Hmmm. Defend it? That's difficult. If you're right there looking at the boxes, I suppose is is just as good as was or were. The situation is in present time, after all. I suppose that when the native speaker matches the tenses throughout a sentence, it's a matter of habit, not always a matter of logic. The basic principle is that backshifting is always correct. Not backshifting is optional, and depends on the logic of the situation.

I'm not sure if that answers your question, because I'm not sure there's ever actually a 'defense' for how people use language.