|
Post by theteacher on Oct 29, 2010 19:41:43 GMT -4
"If I were you" is the correct phrasing: it has some Latin-derived name I can't remember for the life of me... Subjunctive :-)
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Oct 29, 2010 20:59:54 GMT -4
Hi again! I got another question in this same matter. According to what I've read, my desired meaning seems to be expressed by the simple past. But I'm unsure if that's actually a hidden past subjunctive. How does the following example fall on your ears? "He wanted to talk to her when she were here." I got a lot of "when it/he/she were" on google. Is that meaningfull in some sense (even if not the desired sense), archaic, or just plain wrong? In the sentence you have "were" is related to the pural. With "she" being singular you should use "was". "He wanted to talk to her when she was here." Of course that would mean that she'd been here and was now gone. If it's still a case of her coming in the future, then Gillianren is quite correct, you could say: "He wanted to talk to her if she were here." though it is a little archaic.
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Oct 29, 2010 21:08:48 GMT -4
Or Gillianren, even.
|
|
|
Post by Jairo on Oct 29, 2010 22:57:59 GMT -4
I think the subjunctive is disappearing in English because it became too similar to the indicative mood. They differ in so few instances that it's hard for people noticing when they do.
I have the inverse problem. My first language is Portuguese, which uses it heavily, even more than in Spanish and French. Learning it's use in English is actually learning when not to use it anymore.
By the way, some time ago, I saw an English grammar from the 1800s, and the subjunctive was applied much more as in Portuguese. I think it would be easier for me back then.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Oct 30, 2010 1:06:40 GMT -4
eep sorry, let me fix that.
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Oct 30, 2010 1:35:28 GMT -4
I think the subjunctive is ebbing in English because most of the native speakers I've known were taught grammar poorly, if at all. I hate to go all Henry Higgins, here, and certainly I'm not coming out in favour of standardized pronunciation. However, knowing the rules and why they're there--even, yes, if it's "the Victorians were trying to make English more like Latin"--is important. Heck, there's a very famous song which uses the subjunctive, and we still don't realize that's what Tevye is saying. If he were a rich man. But he's not.
Oh, and no worries, PW. It just amused me, given the thread.
|
|
|
Post by Jairo on Oct 30, 2010 13:14:22 GMT -4
I think the subjunctive is ebbing in English because most of the native speakers I've known were taught grammar poorly, if at all. Believe me, I also know a lot of people in Brazil with poor grammar knowledge. Yet, they understand it, use it, and even get surprised when it's missing. Usually it doesn't sound uneducated; it sounds alien. They might not even know what a verbal mood is, but they know there's something there. The difference is so clear that I suppose they absorb it from everyday speech. There's one exception in the São Paulo's dialect, which is gradually losing the present subjunctive, even among educated people. However, in this tense, the difference is marked in the last vowell, which their accent often doesn't pronounce. I don't think that's a coincidence.
|
|
|
Post by Jairo on Nov 25, 2010 16:37:45 GMT -4
Here we go again...
Today I heard a construction on the History Channel that gave me a new question. I don't remember the exact words; the point is that it used a past tense to refer to a future event, like:
"Brazil built its stadium before 2014 came."
The main clause is in past tense, but the subordinate clause referes to a future event, yet it's in past tense too. Does it sound correct to you? Any suggestions?
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Nov 25, 2010 19:59:24 GMT -4
If you get your grammar off the TV these days, you're in for a world of literary hurt. There are so many castles sailing up rivers and worse, it's not funny.
For instance "The France football team, on Tuesday, was seen by the press practicing their moves in a open session, he said." (Sorry Gillianren, you can stop twitching now.)
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Nov 26, 2010 16:17:34 GMT -4
Agh! Don't do that!
I'd need better context on that quote, I think. It seems wrong, but I can think of at least one instance in which it would be correct.
|
|
|
Post by Jairo on Nov 27, 2010 20:44:50 GMT -4
So, should I put it in present tense? "Before 2014 comes"?
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Nov 27, 2010 21:39:33 GMT -4
I wouldn't put any verb after "before 2014". If the stadium isn't built yet, then I would say "Brazil will have built its stadium before 2014." If the stadium has been finished already, then I would say "Brazil has built its stadium before 2014."
If you really want to include a tense after "before 2014", then I would say "Brazil will have built its stadium before 2014 will have come" or "Brazil will have built its stadium before 2014 will be over." Or, if the stadium has been finished already, "Brazil has built its stadium before 2014 has come."
I'm not a native speaker myself, so I am not 100% sure on the last sentences, but you should be fine using the first constructions (without anything after "before 2014").
(By the way gillianren, what are the rules on using punctuation together with quotation marks, for example when ending a sentence? I myself prefer to put my full stops or commas outside of quotation marks, but I've seen the other form used a lot in my study books.)
|
|
|
Post by Apollo Gnomon on Nov 27, 2010 22:43:01 GMT -4
Correct usage is all punctuation goes "inside the quotation marks." Internet grammar varies somewhat, and often I put punctuation outside the marks if it helps the visual look.
I used to make signs for a living. Signage uses different rules, so that the reader will be engaged with the message and not get confused.
Quotation marks are overused on the internet. I'm proud to be part of the problem, not part of the solution.
|
|
|
Post by Kiwi on Nov 28, 2010 6:47:49 GMT -4
(By the way gillianren, what are the rules on using punctuation together with quotation marks, for example when ending a sentence? I myself prefer to put my full stops or commas outside of quotation marks, but I've seen the other form used a lot in my study books.) You might find that British and American English differ on this. From The Style Book, New Zealand Government Printing Office, Third Edition (1981) -- based on British English:
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Nov 29, 2010 12:41:40 GMT -4
I was a recipient of some bad English in advertising today - from a Target mailer; "Give Jolly Save Merrily"
"Give Jolly" doesn't work any more than "Save Merry" would have.
|
|