Marko Karan Marko urii Boris Blakovi Sreten Panti

Engleski glagolski sistem 1 - Kontrastivni pristup

Subjunctive in English and Serbian

The subjunctive mood (in English)
The subjunctive in modern English is generally an optional and stylistically somewhat marked variant of other constructions, but it is not as unimportant as is sometimes suggested. There are two forms of the subjunctive, traditionally called the present and past subjunctive, although the use of these forms relates more to mood than to tense (Quirk, R. et al., 155). Terms for the two major categories of the present subjunctive are the mandative and the formulaic subjunctive. These are realized by the base form of the verb. Consequently, where the clause has a plural subject, there is normally no difference between the indicative and subjunctive forms. Except with be, where the subjunctive form be is distinct from the indicative forms am, is, and are, the subjunctive is distinctive only in the third person singular (Quirk, R. et al., 155): 1. Indicative or subjunctive I insist that we reconsider the Councils decisions. 2. Subjunctive I insist that the Council reconsider its decisions. 3. Subjunctive I insist that the Councils decisions be reconsidered. The past subjunctive is conveniently called the were-subjunctive, since it survives as a distinguishable form only in the past tense of the verb be. Whereas the indicative form shows a contrast between was (1st and 3rd person singular) and were (plural and 2nd person singular), the subjunctive is invariably were, and hence is a form distinct from the indicative only in the 1st and 3rd persons singular (Quirk, R. et al., 155-156): 1. If I/he/she was leaving, you would have heard about it. [indicative] 2. If I/he/she were leaving, you would have heard about it. [subjunctive] The subjunctive verb phrase allows few morphological or syntactic variations. As [3] above shows, a passive subjunctive is a possibility for the mandative subjunctive, as well as for the formulaic and were-subjunctive (Quirk, R. et al., 156): 1. God be praised! [restricted use] 2. It would be odd if she were awarded the first prize.

Marko Karan Marko urii Boris Blakovi Sreten Panti

Engleski glagolski sistem 1 - Kontrastivni pristup

With all verbs except be, the verb phrase is made negative by placing not before the subjunctive form. In the case of be, not may be placed either before or after the verb, whereas with were it follows it (Quirk, R. et al., 155): 1. It is essential that this mission not fail. 2. It is essential that this mission does not fail. [indicative] 3. The Senate has decreed that such students be not / not be exempted from college dues. 4. If I werent / were not your best friend, you would regret that remark.

The subjunctive construction (in Serbian)

In Serbian language, a German term konjuktiv is used for this type of construction (subjunctive). However, subjunctive does not exist in Serbian as a special verb form. When we translate, the most common term for subjunctive is eljne reenice or optativne reenice. With these sentences, a wish for the meaning of the sentence to come true is expressed; therefore the communicative function is a wish. Their feature is the use of the truncated perfect (krnji perfekat) or neka + prezent or da + prezent. Also, exclamatory intonation, i.e. exclamation mark is present (Stanoji, . i Popovi, Lj., 384; 382-386): 1. iveo/Neka ivi/Da ivi kralj! 2. Neka bolji pobedi! 3. iv mi bio! In some cases, it is necessary to use the dependent da-sentence (da reenica): 1. elela je da se vrati. or even potencijal or futur 2. However, these cases are rare (Stanoji, . i Popovi, Lj., 382386).

Distinguishing the subjunctive from an ordinary declarative

The subjunctive construction contains the plain form of the verb, which is overtly distinct from a present tense only with the verb be or a 3rd person singular subject (Huddleston, R. D. and Pullum, 993): Its vital that they be informed. (subjunctive) Its vital that they are kept informed. (non-subjunctive) rd 2. 3 sg subject: Its vital that he keep them informed. (subjunctive) Its vital that he keeps them informed. (non-subjunctive) 3. Other: Its vital that we keep them informed. (indeterminate) 1. Be as a verb: 2

Marko Karan Marko urii Boris Blakovi Sreten Panti

Engleski glagolski sistem 1 - Kontrastivni pristup

In [1] be and are contrast overtly as plain form vs. present tense, and thus we are left with two clauses respectively subjunctive and non subjunctive (ordinary declarative). In [2] the absence of agreement in he keep shows the keep to be a plain form and hence the clause to be subjunctive, while keeps can only be a 3rd person singular present tense form, making the clause nonsubjunctive. But in [3] keep could be either plain form or the plain present tense form, and the clause could therefore be either subjunctive or non-subjunctive. This is not an ambiguity, however, since there is no semantic difference between the subjunctive and non-subjunctive in examples [1] and [3]. Now here are two examples where the morphological indeterminacy can be resolved in favor of the subjunctive (Huddleston, R. D. and Pullum, 993): 1. The nuns insisted [that their young ladies wear stocking]. 2. It is vital [that they not accept the offer without first taking legal advice].

The mandative construction

Mandative clauses characteristically occur in construction with various verbs, nouns and adjectives, such as demand and mandatory (to cite the two that contain the element mand on which term mandative is based) (Huddleston, R. D. and Pullum, 995): 1. They demanded [that access to the park remain free]. [demand is a mandative verb] 2. It is mandatory [that pools be properly fenced]. [mandatory is a mandative adjective] We will apply the term mandative not only to the subordinate clauses but also to the verb, noun, or adjective which licenses or governs them for example, we will say that as used in the above [1] and [2], demand is a mandative verb and mandatory a mandative adjective (Huddleston, R. D. and Pullum, 995). There are three types of mandative clause (on the basis of their internal structure) (Huddleston, R. D. and Pullum, 995): 1. Subjunctive mandative: They demand(ed) [that the park remain open]. 2. Should-mandative: They demand(ed) [that the park should remain open]. 3. Covert mandative: a) They demand [that the park remains open]. b) They demanded [that the park remained open]. Those with the form of a subjunctive construction we refer to as subjunctive mandatives, those containing the specialized use of should as should-mandatives, and those with the form of an ordinary declarative content clause as covert mandatives. There is nothing in the internal structure of the bracketed clauses [3a] and [3b] to distinguish them from the non-mandative 3

Marko Karan Marko urii Boris Blakovi Sreten Panti

Engleski glagolski sistem 1 - Kontrastivni pristup

content clauses in [Ia] or[ Ib] the mandative meaning derives entirely from the governing verb demand. Covert mandatives contain a present tense verb, or else a backshift preterite, as in 3b: we cant have an ordinary, past-time preterite (e.g. *They demand that the park remained open) (Huddleston, R. D. and Pullum, 995). I a) I know [that the park remains open]. b) He said [that the park remained open]. Clear cases of the covert construction are fairly rare, and indeed in AmE are of somewhat marginal acceptability. In AmE the subjunctive is strongly favoured over the should construction, while BrE shows the opposite preference (Huddleston, R. D. and Pullum, 995).

Semantic contrast between mandative and non-mandative clauses

A content clause in construction with demand or mandatory or require, stipulate, essential, necessary, etc. is always mandative, but other items such as insist, suggest, important can select either a mandative or a non-mandative clause as complement (Huddleston, R. D. and Pullum, 995-996): 1. Mandative: a) She insisted [that he tell her the whole story]. b) I suggest [you go and see a doctor]. c) Its important [that he should take us into his confidence]. 2. Non-mandative: a) She insisted [that he had been lying]. b) I suggest [she doesnt like us very much]. c) Its not important [that the gift wont be a surprise]. The difference in meaning is comparable to that between imperative and declarative clauses. With mandatives it is a matter of bringing about the situation expressed in the content clause. As with imperatives, we can invoke the concept of compliance: in [1a] she insisted on compliance, in [1b] Im advocating compliance in a relatively tentative way, and in [ 1c] compliance is said to be important. With the non-mandatives, it is a matter of the truth of the proposition expressed in the content clause. In [2a] she insisted on the truth of the proposition, in [2b] I put the proposition forward as something that may well be true, and in [2c] the truth of the proposition is taken for granted, presupposed: it is treated as a fact that is said to be not important (Huddleston, R. D. and Pullum, 996).

Marko Karan Marko urii Boris Blakovi Sreten Panti

Engleski glagolski sistem 1 - Kontrastivni pristup

Ambiguity between mandative and non-mandative clauses

The Huddleston and Pullum Gramar of English Language stresses the problem of the ambiguity between mandative and non-mandative clauses. Though the difference between nonmandative and mandative clauses is evident, there are some examples where items allow both mandative and non-mandative complements thus creating an ambiguity between them (Huddleston, R. D. and Pullum, 996): 1. She insists [that he take the eight o'clock train]. (mandative) 2. She insists [that he took the eight o'clock train]. (non-mandative) 3. She insists [that he takes/they take the eight o'clock train]. (ambiguous) The sentence [1] is mandative because it is distinctly subjunctive, while sentence [2] cannot be taken as a covert mandative, and is non-mandative because took is an ordinary past-time preterite, not a backshifted one, meaning that the time of him taking the train is earlier than that of her insisting it. In the sentence [3] both versions are ambiguous. In the first version with he takes can be compared with the covert mandative in example [1] because the meaning is that she insists on him taking the train either on some particular future occasion or habitually. But this version is more likely to be interpreted as non-mandative meaning that she emphatically asserts it to be the case that he takes this train most probably a matter of his habitually doing-so, but it could be a single future occurrence, with a future connotation (She emphatically insists that she take the eight o'clock train.). The other version in this example with they take has the same ambiguity as the first version, but on the mandative reading it is also syntactically indeterminate between the subjunctive and covert constructions (Huddleston, R. D. and Pullum, 996).

Distribution of mandative clauses

The mandative subjunctive, the most common use of the subjunctive, occurs in subordinate that-clauses, and consists of the base form of the verb only. Thus there is a lack of the regular concord of the indicative mood between subject and finite verb, and there is no backshifting of tense; i.e. the present and past variants are formally indistinguishable (Huddleston, R. D. and Pullum, 998): 1. The committee proposes/proposed (that) Mr Day be elected. 2. I demand(ed) that the committee reconsider its decision. 3. His sole requirement is/was that the system work. The mandative subjunctive is productive in that it can be used with any verb in a that-clause when the superordinate clause satisfies the requisite semantic condition, viz. that the that-clause 5

Marko Karan Marko urii Boris Blakovi Sreten Panti

Engleski glagolski sistem 1 - Kontrastivni pristup

be introduced by an expression of demand, recommendation, proposal, resolution, intention, etc. This expression takes the form of a verb, an adjective, or a noun (Quirk R. et al., 156): 1. They recommend / It is appropriate / We were faced with the demand that this tax be abolished. The following are among those expressions which commonly introduce a that-clause containing the mandative subjunctive (Quirk R. et al., 157): 1. Verbs decide, insist, move, order, prefer, request. 2. Adjectives advisable, desirable, fitting, imperative. 3. Nouns decision, decree, order, requirement, resolution. The mandative clause functions as (internal) complement to the governing mandative word or else, with nouns and certain adjectives, as subject or (much more likely) extraposed subject in the clause in which the governing item heads the predicative complement (Huddleston, R. D. and Pullum, 998): 1. the requirement that it be signed by a director. (complement) 2. That it be signed by a director is no longer a requirement. (subject) 3. It is no longer a requirement that it be signed by a director. (extraposed subject)

Other uses of the present subjunctive

Other contexts in which the present subjunctive can be used in subordinate clauses include (Quirk R. et al., 158): (a) Clauses of condition and concession: Even if that be the official view, it cannot be accepted. (b) Clauses of condition or negative purpose introduced by lest or for fear that: The president must reject this proposal, lest it cause strife and violence. This construction is restricted to very formal usage in BrE, but is more current in AmE (Quirk R. et al., 158).

Marko Karan Marko urii Boris Blakovi Sreten Panti

Engleski glagolski sistem 1 - Kontrastivni pristup

The formulaic subjunctive

Like the mandative subjunctive, the formulaic subjunctive consists of the base form of the verb. It tends to be formal and rather old-fashioned in style. It is used in certain set expressions chiefly in independent clauses (Quirk R. et al., 157-158): 1. Come what may, we will go ahead with our plan. 2. God save the Queen! 3. Suffice it to say that we won. 4. Heaven forbid that I should let my own parents suffer. 5. Be that as it may, we have nothing to lose.

The were-subjunctive
The were-subjunctive (or past subjunctive) is hypothetical or unreal in meaning, being used in adverbial clauses introduced by such conjunctions as if, as if, as though, though and in nominal clauses after verbs such as wish and suppose. This subjunctive is limited to the one form were, and thus breaks the concord rule of the indicative verb BE in the 1st and 3rd person singular of the past tense. The indicative form was is substituted in less formal style (Quirk R. et al., 158): 1. If I were/was rich, I would buy you anything you wanted. 2. Tim always speaks quietly on the phone, as though he were/was telling a secret. 3. I wish the journey were/was over. 4. Just suppose everyone were/was to give up smoking and drinking. The were-subjunctive is still in common use, and particularly with clauses introduced by as if, and as though, it is widely preferred to was (Quirk R. et al., 158).

Conclusion
Although some may say that in modern English the subjunctive is optional and not so much important as some other constructions, we can see that it can still be as equally used. The subjunctive is a syntactic construction clause that is finite but tenseless, containing the plain form of the verb. It is traditionally divided into the present and past subjunctive. The present subjunctive is divided further into the mandative and the formulaic subjunctive. However, there is only one form of the past subjunctive, which is also called the weresubjunctive. The Serbian equivalent of the subjunctive is called eljne reenice or uzvine reenice. When translating, we can use krnji perfekat (truncated perfect) or neka + prezent (neka + present) or da + prezent (da + present). 7

Marko Karan Marko urii Boris Blakovi Sreten Panti References:

Engleski glagolski sistem 1 - Kontrastivni pristup

1. Huddleston, R. D. and Pullum, G. K. (2002). The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2. Quirk R. et al. (1985). A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman. 3. Stanoji, . i Popovi, Lj. (2002). Gramatika srpskog jezika. Beograd: Zavod za udbenike i nastavna sredstva. 4. Thomson, A. J. and Martinet, A. V. (1986). A Practical English Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.