I am watching a talk show. Below is the transcript of that talk:
Lolly’s number one lesson: don’t settle. Don’t settle. Now I’m aware that my well-paying, glamorous career is not exactly the humdrum, “I hate my job” stereotype that most people equate with settling. But it was a settle for me, because when I actually did quit my job at the age of 38, it was with the intention that every day be a great adventure. Now sometimes it was a very scary adventure, like being broke from the age of 40 to 45. But even still, I wouldn’t trade that for the safe and settled version, because if I had, I would not be here with y’all today.
Is that "be" in "be a great adventure" the subjunctive form?
I just read about subjunctive in this link:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/learningenglish/grammar/learnit/learnitv105.shtml
I know that the purpose of using subjunctive is to make the sentence sound formal.
The original sentence:
(1)...because when I actually did quit my job at the age of 38, it was with the intention that every day be a great adventure.
Can I paraphrase the sentence like this? :
(2)...because when I actually did quit my job at the age of 38, it was with the intention that every day would be a great adventure.
Does that (1) sound formal than (2)?
LE HANH 2383Is that "be" in "be a great adventure" the subjunctive form?
Yes.
LE HANH 2383I know that the purpose of using subjunctive is to make the sentence sound formal.
Not true. There is no actual purpose for using the subjunctive, just as there is no purpose for using "is" with "he is" but "are" for "they are". It's just the way the language works.
LE HANH 2383The original sentence:
(1)...because when I actually did quit my job at the age of 38, it was with the intention that every day be a great adventure.
Can I paraphrase the sentence like this? :
(2)...because when I actually did quit my job at the age of 38, it was with the intention that every day would be a great adventure.
Yes. Or 'should be'. A paraphrase of the subjunctive is usually done with 'should'. It's not the usual kind of 'should'. It's called "evaluative should".
Doesthat(1) sound more formal than (2)? No. Not really.
It's the word 'intention' that triggers the use of the subjunctive.
CJ
1 2
Comments
This means in the subjunctive form, "should" doesn't have the meaning of "it is the right thing to do".
Right?
These sentences on the grammar site I provided:
(1)The doctor recommended (that) he should give up smoking.
(2)The doctor recommended (that) he give up smoking. (More formal)
(3)The doctor recommended (that) he gives up smoking. (Less formal)
- > "Should" here is not a usual kind of "should" too. Right?
Yes, that's right.
There's the should of advice, the should of expectation, and the should of evaluation. It's the last of these that paraphrases the subjunctive.
Right. It's evaluative should (should that paraphrases the subjunctive).
Probably because I'm American, I don't accept (3) as "less formal". It sounds wrong to me. Americans are not giving up the subjunctive as quickly or easily as the British are.
CJ
I will remember it. Thank you so much for correcting my mistake.
(1)The doctor recommended (that) he should give up smoking.
How do we know that "should" here is a evaluative "should".
As I see, with the word "recommended", we can think that "should" here is like an the "should" of advice.
It's evaluative should because it occurs where a subjunctive would occur, i.e., it has the same meaning without the should. The terminology doesn't matter. Don't get hung up on the terminology.
CJ
Yes!
*Off topic question 1: Why is "would" there? what does the meaning of "would"?
What is the difference if I rewrite the sentence like this:
It's evaluative should because it occurs where a subjunctive
wouldoccurs,*Off topic question 2:
Americans are not giving up the subjunctive as quickly or easily as the British are.
-> Is "are not giving" is present continuous or a future tense here?
The original sentence we were discussing does not have, strictly speaking, a subjunctive. It has a paraphrase of the subjunctive with should.
(The doctor recommended (that) he should give up smoking.)
Because of that, "evaluative should occurs where a subjunctive occurs" doesn't make sense for that sentence. It makes the claim that there IS a subjunctive in that sentence.
I wanted to say that if the sentence were written with a (true) subjunctive, that (true) subjunctive would occur in that sentence instead of the paraphrase with should.
It's a subtle difference, so it may be hard to work it out in your head.
CJ
Present continuous. All future tenses require the word will.
Don't confuse 'tense' with 'time'.
Sometimes the present continuous tense is used to show future time. (The sentence you quoted is not one of those. It shows present time.)
CJ