Search results for 'tag:Modal verbs tag:Subjunctives' matching tags 'Modal verbs' and 'Subjunctives'

imperative mood in the third person?

Tanit — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 20:45:36 GMT

Hi,

Here goes the long story... Yesterday, I was talking with a girl from England who's been living here for nearly a year. She told me she was looking for an organization to join here, and on the basis of her background and beliefs I suggested she should join an Italian organization against death penalty named "Nessuno tocchi Caino" (sort of "Nobody is allowed to touch Cain", but in the imperative, so stronger, more emphatic and possibly literary). Even though she has a reasonable command of Italian, she couldn't understand that grammar structure in Italian, so I tried to translate it (and I did it, albeit with a long paraphrase).

However, that left me with a question: how do we express imperative mood in the third person (either plural or singular)? In Italian, the imperative mood only exists in the first plural person and in the second person, while for the third person (both singular and plural) we use the present subjunctive to express the idea of command or prohibition.
Let me try to write down some examples:

(2nd singular, command) Mangia la mela => Eat the apple
(2nd plural, command) Mangiate la mela => Eat the apple
(2nd singular, prohibition) Non mangiare la mela => Don't eat the apple
(2nd plural, prohibition) Non mangiate la mela => Don't eat the apple

Now, when I want to tell Mary what [John | John and Tom | nobody | everybody] must do, is that possible without any modal verb, using the imperative mood?
Which (if any) of the following would be fine?

(3rd singular, command) (che John) mangi la mela => John eat his apple [... hmm, don't think so, it could easily be mistaken for infinitive, right?] | Let John eat his apple (?)
(3rd plural, command) (che John e Tom) mangino la mela => John and Tom eat their apples (?) | Let John and Tom eat their apples (?)
(3rd plural, command) (che tutti) mangino la mela => Everybody eat their apples | Let everybody eat their apples (?)
(3rd, prohibition) (che) nessuno mangi la mela => Nobody eat their apples | Let nobody eat his apple (???) | Don't anybody eat their apples

(I've done a bit of search, but couldn't find anything both extensive and reliable )

Back to the original question, how should I have translated the name of that organization?
Nessuno tocchi Caino => Let nobody touch Cain | Don't anybody touch Cain | Nobody touch Cain (???)

Also, if you happen to know of any relevant references, please post them here.

Thank you!

Hope + would

Mighty Joseph — Sat, 17 May 2008 16:47:28 GMT

Hello... Can somebody help me this?

"I hope you'd be successful." (would be...)
Is this correct? Because I know the subjunctive hope can also work with the modal verb would, meaing that the speaker is expressing the suppostional and unreal nature of that hope. Please help me. I am a little confused with the subjunctive use of hope. I've read a lot of materials and each of them says a different thing about the usage of hope in the "subjunctive" sense. Thanks!

Re: case of subjunctive in the 'if' clause?

CalifJim — Tue, 18 Mar 2008 17:15:22 GMT

It's not subjunctive. It's the modal use of need. Modal need can occur in non-assertive contexts. Modals never take the s in the first person singular of the present tense the way non-modal verbs do. In that way they resemble subjunctive forms, which are also missing the s.

The subject of the clause is missing, however (if it need be), but that's because if need be has become a fixed idiomatic expression.

Re: if

Taka — Sun, 11 Nov 2007 14:12:29 GMT

Yankee wrote:
Yes, Taka, that's how I see it.

Thank you, Amy!

Marius Hancu wrote:
I see where Yankee's coming from and there's some argument for it, but the would at the end of the sentence is decisive, IMO: it's subjunctive because it's a hypothetical situation:

MH,

For your information:

Remember, just because the modal verb 'would' appears in the main clause, this doesnt mean that the verb in the if clause must be in the subjunctive if the content of that clause is not presupposed to be false

http://www.bartleby.com/64/C001/061.html

Re: Subjunctive using modal verb

Anonymous — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 10:25:25 GMT

Thank you for helping me out or trying to help me, Mr. M. As to your request for the online source of that kind, how about Wikipedia, a free encyclopedia? On its article on the Subjunctive Mood, under the sub-heading of "Construction using a modal verb," it gives four sentences:

I recommend that he (should) be taken away.

(May) the Lord bless you and keep you.

I put your dinner in the oven so that it (should) keep warm.

He wrote it in his diary so that he (might) remember.

Subjunctive using modal verb

Anonymous — Sun, 10 Jun 2007 08:28:15 GMT

Hi,

It has been shown to me that the subjunctive can be created using modal verbs like 'shall' and 'should' and 'may' and 'might'.

Are the modal verbs in parentheses optional or they should be in the sentences for the subjunctive to exist?

1. I recommend that he (should) be put in jail.

Doesn't the subjunctive exist eventhough 'should' isn't in the sentence like this?

I recommend that he be put in jail.

2. I gave him some very personal gifts as he was leaving so that he (might) remember.

Doesn't the subjunctive exist still without the 'might'?

I gave him some very personal gifts as he was leaving so that he remember.

question on subjunctive

Believer — Sun, 13 May 2007 10:35:18 GMT

Hi,

I was checking out the us.geocities.com website for its help on subjunctive online and came upon these two sets of examples and want to ask you the question "What is the relationship between 'may' and 'might' and also between 'will' and 'would' to make the second sets appropriate to be used as reported modal verbs?"

-- John said, "The pupils may go home earlier this afternoon"

-- John said that the pupil might go home earlier that afternoon.

-- The teacher said, "The best students will be rewarded."

-- The teacher said that the best students would be rewarded.

Re: subjunctive or past conditional

Bokeh — Tue, 08 May 2007 13:16:24 GMT

Taka wrote:
Remember, just because the modal verb 'would' appears in the main clause, this doesn't mean that the verb in the if clause must be in the subjunctive if the content of that clause is not presupposed to be false.

The above is related to the following example sentence:

He would always call her from the office if he was (not were) going to be late for dinner.

Note: The above example is a repetative action, not a hypothosis as in the OPs post. Repetative actions take the present tense.

Also from the same article:

if clausesâthe reality. In practice, of course, many people ignore the rules. In fact, over the last 200 years even well-respected writers have tended to use the indicative was where the traditional rule would require the subjunctive were. A usage such as: If I was the only boy in the world may break the rules, but it sounds perfectly natural.

Isn't that saying to use the indicative is wrong but widely accepted?

Re: subjunctive or past conditional

Taka — Tue, 08 May 2007 12:44:41 GMT

Yankee wrote:
Hi Taka

In case you haven't found this yet, here is a link to what the American Heritage Book of English Usage has to say about the subjunctive:
http://www.bartleby.com/64/C001/061.html

Good, Yankee. Thanks for the URL. And I was particularly interested in these parts.

First, this part:

The past subjunctive is identical with the past tense except in the case of the verb be, which uses were for all persons: If I were rich â¦, If he were rich â¦, If they were richâ¦... The past subjunctive is sometimes called the were subjunctive, since were is the only subjunctive form that is distinct from the indicative past tense.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but my reading of this part is that the past subjunctive is sometimes called the 'were' subjunctive, not because only 'were' could be used as subjunctive, but because the subjunctive 'were' is quite unique in that it is used for all persons as subjunctive.

Another interesting partâvery interesting, indeedâwas this:

Remember, just because the modal verb 'would' appears in the main clause, this doesn't mean that the verb in the if clause must be in the subjunctive if the content of that clause is not presupposed to be false.

So, it seems that Goodman's analysis here is not necessarily valid:

Goodman wrote:
<<He thought his mother would understand why he was living in Japan only if she saw his life there with her own eyes.

I'll say "subjunctive".

,and MrP's got the point:

MrPedantic wrote:
So perhaps the most we can say is "indeterminate"...

MrP

Re: How can you tell whether someone is a non-native speaker?

MrPedantic — Mon, 25 Sep 2006 23:09:12 GMT

Julielai wrote:

Just out of curiosity, Mr. P, how do you distinguish a native speaker who's learned a non-standard form of English from a decent non-native speaker? (e.g. How can you tell if a speaker born in India, Singapore or other Asian countries is native?)

Hello Julie

I'm not sure I always could â sometimes I'm not sure whether a poster is speaking erratic non-native English, or a US dialect, for instance (especially if the erraticism resides in the modal verbs!).

But on the whole, non-standard natives make different mistakes from non-native standards. NSNs may be unusual in grammar, but they're usually strong in idiom. And a very good NNS will often hyper-correct (in the use of the subjunctive, for instance, or the past perfect).

(I'm speaking very theoretically here, though â merely spouting impressions!)

MrP