How do we know if a sentence that uses “were”
is in the indicative or subjunctive mood?
By Jose A. Carillo
It won’t be surprising at all if this basic grammar question still stumps not just a few English writers and speakers among us: “How do we know if a sentence that uses ‘were’ is in the indicative or subjunctive mood?” I say this because this happens to be a very-often asked reader’s question in the over 21 years that I’ve been writing my English usage column in The Manila Times.
So let’s demystify this usage once and for all by doing a quick refresher of the uses of “were,” which of course is the familiar past-tense form of the linking verb “be” in the third-person plural. In “The villagers were happy,” for example, “be” takes the form “were” because “villagers”—the subject—is in the third-person plural and the action is in the past tense. But when the subject is in the third-person singular “villager” and the action is in the present tense, “be” takes the normal form “is”: “The villager is happy.”)
There are four grammatical situations that specifically need the subjunctive “were” rather than the indicative “was” or “is”:
1. When the sentence indicates a supposition or possibility. In “if”-clauses indicating a supposition or possibility, the subjunctive “were” is used regardless of whether the doer of the action is singular or plural: “If I were to accept that foreign assignment, I’d have to take my family with me.” “Many legislators would be indicted for graft if the Ombudsman were to apply the law regardless of their party affiliation.”
2. When expressing a desire or wishful attitude. In “that”-clauses that follow main clauses expressing a wish, the subjunctive “were” is used: “I wish (that) she were more amenable to a compromise.” “I wish (that) I were the class president.” The wish or desired outcome is neither a present reality nor a future certainty.
3. When describing the outcome of an unreal situation or idea that’s contrary to fact. Given a hypothetical state or outcome, the subjunctive “were” is used in expressing the condition that’s unreal or contrary-to-fact: “If its polar electromagnetic field were not there, Earth would be devastated by intense solar radiation.” Without “if,” such constructions can sometimes take an inverted syntax: “Were its polar electromagnetic field not there, Earth would be devastated by intense solar radiation.”
4. When expressing doubt about certain appearances or raising a question about an outcome. Statements that cast doubt on observed behavior or raise a question about a presumed outcome should take the subjunctive “were” form: “Rod acted as if he were the only knowledgeable newspaperman in town.”
I trust that after reading this clarification, the subjunctive “were” will no longer be an exasperating grammar puzzler to any English writer or speaker among us.
No comments:
Post a Comment