Discussion on question by Franck Dernoncourt: What's the translation of a passdown in French?

Frank

00:02

Pullum est co-auteur avec Huddleston dans cette Cambridge Grammar de l'UNIVERSITÉ DE CAMBRIDGE.

Sous une rubrique "Mood, tense, and factivity" à la page 993 (c'est un gros livre), on lit:

Pullum et Huddleston ont dépensé beaucoup d'encre pour quelque chose qui n'existe pas d'après toi @Lambie

Peut-être la réalité est-elle plus nuancée que ce que tu essaies de nous asséner?

Lambie

You miss the point: First, Geoff's comment, in its entirety:

---------------------

It isn't actually the subjunctive. People often call the "were" of "I wish I were" subjunctive, but that term is much better used (as in The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language) for the construction with "be" seen in "I demand that it be done." The "were" form is often wrongly called a past subjunctive, but of course "it were done" is not a past tense of "it be done". The difference between the two is that the subjunctive construction occurs with any verb: "I demand that this cease" is a subjunctive (…

Frank

Ce que tu ne comprends pas, ma cocotte, c'est que manifestement les grammairiens ne s'accordent pas sur le truc. Donc, ne viens pas nous dire "c'est X! Apprenez et fermez-la!". C'est plutôt toi qui devrais apprendre, l'humilité, et un peu de grammaire un peu plus en profondeur.

Geoff, by the way, dit aussi que le subjonctive existe en anglais, si tu lis bien.

Donc,

C'est patently, blatantly faux.

Tu détruis ta crédibilité à tout bout de champ en essayant de donner des leçons aux autres.

Page 994. Tu l'as jamais ouverte cette grammaire? T'as étudié la grammaire anglaise un jour?

J'ai 113 mentions du terme "subjunctive" sur 1780 pages dans cette grammaire, soit une mention toutes les 15 pages en moyenne.

Tu peux rétracter ton "There is no subjunctive in English" quand tu veux.

Lambie

00:18

The bare form of a verb: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_subjunctive Not everyone agrees with him. It is just the bare form of the verb which also occurs in other constructions.

According to this narrow definition, the subjunctive is a grammatical construction recognizable by its use of the bare form of a verb in a finite clause that describes a non-actual scenario. For instance, "It's essential that he be here" uses the subjunctive mood while "It's essential that he is here" does not.

English subjunctive

While the English language lacks distinct inflections for mood, an English subjunctive is recognized in most grammars. Definition and scope of the concept vary widely across the literature, but it is generally associated with the description of something other than apparent reality. Traditionally, the term is applied loosely to cases in which one might expect a subjunctive form in related languages, especially Old English and Latin. This includes conditional clauses, wishes, and reported speech. Modern descriptive grammars limit the term to cases in which some grammatical marking can be observed...

in which one might expect a subjective form in related languages, especially Old English and Latin.

Frank

Oui, donc, tu nous sors maintenant des références qui disent toutes qu'il y a bien quelque chose qui s'appelle "English subjunctive", qui est reconnu dans la plupart des grammaires...

Lambie

So this: Subjunctive clauses:
a. It's crucial that he be here by noon
b. It's vital that he arrive on time is merely the BARE FORM OF THE VERB.

I don't use the term subjunctive, which comes from Latin and declined verbs. It is merely the bare form of the verb.

Frank

Tu fais ce que tu veux. Ca n'empêche pas Pullum et Huddleston de l'utiliser 113 fois dans la fameuse Cambridge Grammar. Mais tu sais sans doute mieux qu'eux.

Lambie

Huddleston and Pullum are PARTNERS.

Frank

Mais surtout, d'après toi, ils écrivent des ANERIES.

Lambie

00:25

My example re was/were came from Pullum. Geesus.

Frank

Tu peux juste suivre la Cambridge Grammar comme tout le monde, déférer aux VRAIS spécialistes, et arrêter d'essayer de nous bourrer le mou avec tes âneries à toi?

Lambie

FRANK< I AM. You are reading me right., GEESUS

Frank

Si tu les suis, pourquoi tu nous dis que le "subjonctif n'existe pas en anglais"?

T'as dit une connerie, reconnais-le.

Lambie

No, many linguists call the examples like: He should be free. But in fact there's more here to distract Monique from her depression than the simple question of whether to say "I wish I were" or "I wish I was". As Geoff Pullum noted in a comment on a Language Log post back in 2004, this use of were

… isn't actually the subjunctive. People often call the "were" of "I wish I were" subjunctive, but that term is much better used (as in The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language) for the construction with "be" seen in "I demand that it be done."

It is PULLUM

languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/….

Frank

Donc, le subjonctif existe bien en anglais d'après Pullum, lui-même, comme tu le cites?

Lambie

00:36

However, for me, the use of be I recommend they be expelled as a bare infinitive. And I'm not alone. A useful and concise conception of the English subjunctive mood is that it is a mythical beast, like the fairies at the bottom of the garden in summer. English has no subjunctive mood, though Latin did and many European languages (Spanish, German, French, etc) do have a subjunctive mood. But English teachers talk about it all the time, and often have faith that it exists; just like fairies. In fact, though, as you've discovered, there is no simple description; there is only a name and a lot …

John Lawler RIP.

It's ON ELU. Sorry, I lost the link.

He is as important a linguist as Pullum and Huddleston.

I found the link: english.stackexchange.com/questions/155893/…

So, again, you make personal comments because you are clueless and don't know how to discuss anything at all.

For the was/were Pullum does not call it subjunctive. AND John Lawler agrees the subjunctive does not exist. Got it now?

You can take your personal comments and apply them to yourself.

Frank

So silly.

I think you never really understood what subjunctive means, that's the problem.

Got it now?

Lambie

HAHAHAH. Spanish, Portuguese, and French and I don't know what a subjunctive is? Ojalá que fuera una mentir lo que dices.

Frank

We insist that she be kept informed, is an example given by Pullum of a subjunctive.

Can you even read?

What kind of mood does your bare infinitive indicate?

You are confusing form and function.

It's vital that they be kept informed versus It's vital that they are kept informed.

Do you understand there is a difference?

The example is from Pullum again, the first he says is "subjunctive", the second not.

It's all above for you to read, if you can read.

It's vital that they be kept informed versus It's vital that they are kept informed.

Got it NOW?

Lambie

01:09

No, there is no significant difference in meaning there.

Frank

01:30

The first is still called "subjunctive" by Pullum.

jlliagre

01:41

184

Q: When to use "If I was" vs. "If I were"?

If I was... If I were... When is it correct to use "If I was" vs. "If I were" in standard English?

> However, you should not flinch if — nay, when — you hear someone say “If I was... I would...” as a Class C conditional in casual speech. This sometimes happens even in educated speakers and writers, so you should not make anything of it. Some writers prefer not to do that, but unless the person complaining is your English teacher, you shouldn’t let it get to you. (Yes, this is ungrammatical for some people. For others, it is not.)

@Lambie Tu devrais apprendre à avoir des positions moins tranchées, moins agressives au lieu de me balancer un you learned wrong. Non, je n'ai pas learné wrong.

Fuck'Murica

04:38

You always present your perspective as the only one! There's a wide range of usages among native Anglophones, and in a context like this it's effectively disrespectful of you to imply that I don't know my own language. You subscribe to slightly different preferences to me, and it's not helpful for learners for you to imply there's a single correct version of English (that you know, and I don't). Sometimes if we have different opinions it may be a relatively widespread AmE/BrE split, but it feels to me like sometimes you're simply unaware of anything other than your own preferences. — FumbleFingers yesterday

Pretty much spot on.

Fuck'Murica

05:25

@Lambie When you quoted the late J. Lawler, you failed to mention tchrist comments...

@JohnLawler You really must qualify such statements for folks unfamiliar with how you are using those terms, because you and they are using the same words but meaning quite different things. See below for how you’ve just caused me to lose whatever hour’s grace was granted me by last night’s clock-switching myth. — tchrist ♦ Mar 9, 2014 at 16:16

And this links to his answer...

17

A: How is the English Subjunctive Composed?

In response to the originally posed question, John Lawler wrote a somewhat amusing, (pedantically) accurate, but highly confusing comment, one which I feel deserves translation and further elaboration into something more resembling an actual answer. John said: A useful and concise conception...

Which includes a statement "What I believe John meant (and he is free to correct me) [...]".

And he did not.

Your oversimplification and careless use of the late Lawler comment is quite offensive.

It's a real shame I need to debunk your statements, once again. This could all have been avoided had you made yourself correct by making sure you don't confuse your preferences for the only thing there is to know or in this case by shamelessly re-purposing a quote from an esteemed linguist to prop your preference.

Fuck'Murica

05:46

I'll take this opportunity to showcase J. Lawler's web page because his work made way more ripples than merely one comment.

websites.umich.edu/~jlawler

Lambie

14:03

John Lawler does not mention the term subjunctive on that entire page. Here's what he said about it on ELU: 1) "The reason why they're both called "subjunctive" is because Latin had a subjunctive mood that was used in many ways, and these constructions reminded classically-educated grammarians of certain uses of the Latin subjunctive mood.

But in English they're just a couple more mildly idiomatic constructions, out of thousands. That's why obsessing about the English "subjunctive mood" is a waste of time and effort, and always ends up in confusion." The reason why they're both called "sub…

Second post by John Lawler: 2) You're confusing traditional Latin grammar terminology with English grammar terminology,
and with modern linguistic terminology, as well.

Mood, Voice, and Tense were traditional inflectional categories of Latin verbs. I.e,
every verb in Latin was inflected (marked uniquely) for some mix of mood, voice, and tense.
Latin had six tenses (by a strange coincidence the same six you listed),
four moods (indicative, subjunctive, imperative, and interrogative),
and two voices (active and passive). That was Latin.

3) What is called the "subjunctive" or the "present subjunctive" is in fact just a simple untensed variant of normally tensed that-complement clauses.

Unlike real subjunctive systems in languages like German or Spanish, this construction appears
- only in subordinate complement clauses,
never in main clauses, or other kinds of subordinate clauses;
- only in one variety of subordinate clause (that-complements);
- only with one variety of predicate (impositives).
It's what you call extremely limited in distribution.

17

A: When should I use the subjunctive mood?

What is called the "subjunctive" or the "present subjunctive" is in fact just a simple untensed variant of normally tensed that-complement clauses. Unlike real subjunctive systems in languages like German or Spanish, this construction appears - only in subordinate complement clauses, never ...

Lambie