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

Re: "If one looks at..." or "If one look at..."

Avangi — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 16:43:59 GMT

You're correct. "One" is singular and takes the verb "looks."

The thing is that "if" clauses can take the subjunctive.

You'll also sometimes find the infinitive with it: If one were to look at the evidence, it would become apparent.

Best wishes, - A.

Re: subjunctive mood

CalifJim — Sun, 21 Sep 2008 08:37:52 GMT

Anonymous
why ~~it uses~~ does it use the past form of the verb to ~~present~~ indicate the present in subjunctive mood?

There is no real reason. Some grammarians explain it this way: The past is remote in time, and the condition expressed by an if clause is remote in possibility. What they have in common is remoteness. So the same verb form is used for both concepts.

It is also possible that since would was originally a past tense itself, when the main clause has would, the if clause that goes with it should also be in the past tense.

Re: subjunctive mood

Huevos — Sun, 21 Sep 2008 00:24:19 GMT

This is just a negative of a standard type 2 conditional. I would sell it to you if it shot straight. This construct is used where fulfilment of the if clause is improbable or impossible, but still current. By the way it is not past tense, its imperfect subjunctive, although the two are identical in form.

Re: Noun clause or Adejctive clause

Fandorin — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 21:57:34 GMT

Subjunctive is used when the action is not REAL or PREFFERED. And it's rarely used in contemporary English, in idiomatic expression or in more formal speech.

Relative clause (Subordinate Clause, Adjectival Clause ) is used when you want to give more information about event or person or thing is described in the sentence.

Re: Noun clause or Adejctive clause

Raen — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 21:34:16 GMT

Thanks Fandorin, "nominal" and "subjunctive" are 2 new terms I haven't learned, and I will look them up.

My first instinct said adjective clause (now you revised it to nominal clause, does it still full under adjective clause?) and decided that the book make an innocent mistake until I encountered other similiar questions with the same result:

My hope that we visit Mount Rushmore is now a family idea.

(A: that we visit Mount Rushmore = appositive) and,

The news that he had escaped frightened the whole town.

(A: that he had escaped = appositive)

It's hard to imagine an obvious mistake is repeated multiples times. So I'm wondering if there's some insight that I overlooked? Does anyone have any thoughts? Thanks.

Here's another one:

Then I learned the truth, that I had been cheated.

A: that I had been cheated = appositive

Raen

Re: Noun clause or Adejctive clause

Fandorin — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 21:06:06 GMT

I'm sorry I made a mistake. Of course it's a Nominal Clause. I hurried up.

Her idea that I hire you was a very fun one.

It's kind of Subjunctive. And as I know only Present Tense can be used in Nominal Clause.

Her idea that I hire you is a very fun one.

Re: Some very basic grammar questions

CalifJim — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 17:40:49 GMT

They are all correct.

For lengthier discussions with lots of examples of the use of the past perfect tense after before,

see Re: before past perfect tense , past tense and Re: Past Simple or Past Perfect.

This is a common pattern for expressing "interruptive relationships" between actions. (Leaving university "interrupts" the normal course of events which would have led to exams; the sacking "interrupts" the normal course of events which would have led to an explanation of the behavior.) The main clause contains the "interrupting" action. The before clause contains the "interrupted" action. Because the interrupted action has not taken place, the past perfect may be considered a way of expressing a counterfactual, that is, it may be considered a subjunctive with family resemblances to the if clause of the third conditional, thus: if I had taken the final exam or if he had had a chance to explain.

If I didn't hang on now, all of my past efforts would have been in vain.

Angliholic — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 02:32:34 GMT

If I didn't hang on now, all of my past efforts would have been in vain.

HI,
I try to make a subjunctive sentence with an unreal presence in the if-clause and an unreal past in the main clause. But I am not sure if the above make sense to you. If not, could you make one similar sentence? Thanks.

Re: would have had

CalifJim — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 22:23:38 GMT

Kooyeen
You never taught me those conditionals!

Maybe I thought you were better off not knowing. Or maybe you didn't ask.

Kooyeen
use the simple past instead of the subjunctive formed with the past perfect, in informal and casual English?

No. While it's true that people do often use the indicative for the subjunctive, that is not at issue here.

These are truly indicative all the way through. There is nothing subjunctive about them. The simple past in the if-clause is truly past in time, not a present hypothesis. Usually both clauses are in the past.

If you got there at 6, you were way too early. I'll bet no one was there.

If it was not OK with him for me to take the books, he certainly didn't show it.

If the suspect was at the Blue Gardenia at 8:00, he wasn't in the vicinity of the crime. Someone else must be the criminal.

The teacher was impossible to please. If you said "grammatical", he showed it was ungrammatical. If you said "ungrammatical", he proved it was grammatical. You couldn't win. If you took the course, you probably hated it as much as I did.

There's one thing you can be sure of: If a hurricane passed through that area, there was damage. No doubt about it.

It was well known in our town: If Brian was invited to a party, he got drunk, and if he got drunk, there was trouble.

Do you remember how Barney got so fat that year? If it was in the fridge, he ate it, no matter what "it" was!

Less formally, many of the main clauses above could have been said with "would have" with hardly any change in meaning, e.g., If it was in the fridge, he would have eaten it. Or even just "would": If it was in the fridge, he would eat it. (These use the "would of habit".)

_____

If he saw the bridge through the fog, it would have been a miracle.
I'd take the above example as the backshifted version of...
If he sees the bridge through the fog, it would be a miracle.
...and so "saw" should be taken as a simple past tense with the same meaning as the subjunctive "had seen". If he saw the bridge (but I don't think he did), it would have been a miracle!

Yes. Your backshift interpretation seems right to me. But I don't see this as necessarily subjunctive. It comes off as a sort of borderline case to my ear.

PS. ... would have baked you a cake is the usual expression!

subjunctive:if it were not vs. if there were/was not

Anonymous — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 13:48:26 GMT

Hi,

In the subjunctive, how would the two cases, one that has 'it were not' in the if-clause, and the other with 'there were/was not." be different? Are they both the subjunctive? Are they the same in terms of their structures?

If it were not for his financial support, we would not/could not manage.
If there were/was (which one is right?) not his financial support, we couldn't/wouldn't not manage.