Someone correct me, but is "God save the king" a third person imperative
if translated in Latin--or is it subjunctive? My Latin books are missing
and my memory fading fast.
Scott Catledge
-----Original Message-----
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of ATEG automatic digest system
Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2008 12:00 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: ATEG Digest - 14 Mar 2008 to 15 Mar 2008 (#2008-66)
There are 2 messages totalling 652 lines in this issue.
Topics of the day:
1. Subjunctive (2)
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 11:31:48 -0400
From: "Veit, Richard" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Subjunctive
As I said, I never gave it any thought until Karl's message gave me an =
"aha" moment.
So when people say "Lord(,) help us," are they using the imperative or =
subjunctive?
Dick Veit
-----Original Message-----
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar on behalf of Susan =
van Druten
Sent: Fri 3/14/2008 9:53 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Subjunctive
=20
You mean you thought it was direct address: God, bless the queen. =20
Do it now. Hurry. Faster.
On Mar 14, 2008, at 2:44 PM, Veit, Richard wrote:
> And all these years I have been incorrectly assuming "God bless the
> queen" was imperative. I learn a lot from this list.
>
> Dick
>
> ________________________________
>
> Richard Veit
> Department of English
> University of North Carolina Wilmington
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Karl Hagen
> Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 3:14 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Subjunctive
>
> At the risk of perpetuating the pointless dispute, I should note =20
> that I
> agree with you about the counterfactual "were" not deserving the =20
> name of
>
> a subjunctive.
>
> However, I do think it is justified in the so-called present
> subjunctive, although I would drop the "present" and refocus the =20
> term a
> bit. It's not an inflectionally distinct form, as you correctly note,
> but it is a syntactically distinct one.
>
> Clauses like
>
> (I demand) that the prisoner be released.
>
> or
>
> God bless the Queen.
>
> have a different syntactic pattern from those of other clauses that =20
> use
> the base form of the verb (imperatives or infinitives), that clause =20
> form
>
> deserves a distinct label, and "subjunctive" is as good a term for =20
> it as
>
> any.
>
> So for me, the term "subjunctive" is useful for English as long as we
> keep in mind that it does not mean exactly the same thing for =20
> English as
>
> it does for Latin.
>
> Karl
>
> STAHLKE, HERBERT F wrote:
>> "Subjunctive" is one of those terms that causes endless confusion
> among
>> students of grammar and pointless dispute among grammarians. In most
>> languages the term is used to identify an inflectional category of =20
>> the
>> verb, as in the Latin "porto" (I carry)
>>
>> Indicative Subjunctive
>> 1s porto portem
>> 2s portas portes
>> 3s portat portet
>> 1p portamus portemus
>> 2p portatis portetis
>> 3p portant portent
>>
>> a category of forms used in unfulfilled conditions, counterfactuals,
> and
>> other irrealis constructions.
>>
>> The forms sometimes called "subjunctive" in English, namely, bare
> forms
>> and "were," are indistinguishable morphologically from infinitives,
>> imperatives, and non-third-person present forms in the former case =20
>> and
>> the past plural of "be" in the latter. So we don't have a form of =20
>> the
>> verb that can be identified as subjunctive. We have constructions
> that
>> are used where Old English other languages use subjunctive =20
>> inflection,
>> but these are syntactic structures, not morphological contrasts.
>>
>> "If it were raining" is counterfactual, as is "Were it raining."
>>
>> "I demand that the prisoners be released" has a tenseless, irrealis
>> clause, a clause describing something that has not happened.
>>
>> Constructions like these have a modal quality of unreality, or
> irrealis,
>> in grammatical terms, but to call them subjunctive is to preserve a
>> label for a form the language has long since lost.
>>
>> Old English didn't even have much of a subjunctive. Unlike the
> present
>> indicative paradigm, which has separate forms for 1/2/3 sg., the
>> subjunctive paradigm uses the 1s indicative form for all persons in
> the
>> singular and adds the preterite plural suffix -n for all persons in
> the
>> plural. See the paradigms for "ridan" (to ride). I've left out =20
>> vowel
>> length marking for both Latin and Old English.
>>
>> Indicative Subjunctive
>> 1s ride ride
>> 2s ridest ride
>> 3s rideth ride
>> 1p ridath riden
>> 2p ridath riden
>> 3p ridath riden
>>
>> Modern English has no subjunctive and didn't have much subjunctive to
>> lose in the first place. It can, however, use syntactic =20
>> constructions
>> to say anything that languages that have a subjunctive can say.
>>
>> Herb
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Karl Hagen
>> Sent: 2008-03-13 18:23
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: Subjunctive
>>
>> The subjunctive has been disappearing from our language for a very
> long
>> time. Grammarians have complained that its use has been declining at
>> least as far back as Priestly in the 18th century.
>>
>> I doubt there's really been much of a change in at least the last 100
>> years. It's rare in speech, but still maintained in more formal
> writing.
>>
>> This really isn't an issue of active language change as much as it is
> of
>>
>> different registers, each of which has remained fairly stable for a
> long
>>
>> time.
>>
>> It's also worth noting that the so-called present subjunctive is =20
>> alive
>
>> and well in mandative contexts (e.g., "The teacher required that her
>> students be polite").
>>
>> Karl
>>
>> Veit, Richard wrote:
>>> That fact that half of a group of educated speakers did not use the
>>> subjunctive to describe a hypothetical situation is more evidence
>>> suggesting that the subjunctive is disappearing from our language.
>>>
>>> Dick Veit
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>>
>>> Richard Veit
>>> Department of English
>>> University of North Carolina Wilmington
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
>>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Linda Di Desidero
>>> Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 9:36 AM
>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>> Subject: Re: Subjunctive
>>>
>>> At a recent (large) faculty meeting, one of the administrators ran a
>>> 'warm-up' activity. The idea was for faculty members to stand up,
>>> introduce themselves, and talk about what they would be doing on a
>>> Saturday morning if they were not attending this meeting.
>>>
>>> I kept track: At least half of the speakers said "If I was not here"
>>> while almost half said "If I were not here." I was surprised, given
>>> that this was an educated group of people and the speaking occasion
>> was
>>> not all that informal.
>>>
>>> Oh, the things we find to interest ourselves!
>>>
>>> Linda
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Linda Di Desidero, Ph.D.
>>>
>>> Associate Professor
>>>
>>> Assistant Academic Director of Writing
>>>
>>> Communication, Arts, and Humanities
>>>
>>> University of Maryland University College
>>>
>>> 3501 University Boulevard East
>>>
>>> Adelphi, MD 20783-8083
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> (240) 582-2830
>>>
>>> (240) 582-2993 (fax)
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
>>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Kathleen M. Ward
>>> Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 1:47 PM
>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>> Subject: Re: Subjunctive
>>>
>>> Well, it does, of course (she should have said "If Obama were a =20
>>> white
>>> man") but the subjunctive has been disappearing from English for
>>> centuries now. I think it has become pretty rare in speech. (I
>>> take it that this was an interview quotation?)
>>>
>>> Kathleen Ward
>>> UC Davis
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mar 12, 2008, at 9:30 AM, DD Farms wrote:
>>>
>>>> DD: Am I a bit confused? Consider the quote from Geraldine Ferraro,
>>>> [NYT 12 Mar 08, Maureen Dowd.] "If Obama was a white man, he would
>> not
>>>> be in this position. And if he was a woman (of any color), he would
>>>> not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he
> is.
>>
>>>> And the country is caught up in the concept." I thought High
>> Standard
>>>> English required the use of the subjunctive in stating a condition
>>>> contrary to fact.
>>>> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
>>>> interface at:
>>>> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
>>>> and select "Join or leave the list"
>>>>
>>>> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>>> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
>>> interface at:
>>> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
>>> and select "Join or leave the list"
>>>
>>> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>>>
>>> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
>>> interface at:
>>> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
>>> and select "Join or leave the list"
>>>
>>> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>>>
>>> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
>> interface at:
>>> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
>>> and select "Join or leave the list"
>>>
>>> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>>>
>>>
>>
>> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
>> interface at:
>> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
>> and select "Join or leave the list"
>>
>> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>>
>> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> interface at:
>> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
>> and select "Join or leave the list"
>>
>> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>>
>>
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> interface at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web =20
> interface at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web =
interface at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 14:06:07 -0400
From: "STAHLKE, HERBERT F" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Subjunctive
Karl,
Yours is certainly a legitimate approach to the subjunctive, although I
prefer to keep categories of this sort morphosyntactic rather than
purely syntactic. As syntactic constructions they don't so clearly
represent contrasts the language insists on as they show the
compositional, syntactic potential of the language in expressing
meaning. Since we already of good semantic terms for sentences like
your examples, for example, desiderative for the first and jussive for
the second (both are irrealis, but that's something else again), I don't
see the advantage of adding subjunctive to the set. De gustibus...
Herb
At the risk of perpetuating the pointless dispute, I should note that I=20
agree with you about the counterfactual "were" not deserving the name of
a subjunctive.
However, I do think it is justified in the so-called present=20
subjunctive, although I would drop the "present" and refocus the term a=20
bit. It's not an inflectionally distinct form, as you correctly note,=20
but it is a syntactically distinct one.
Clauses like
(I demand) that the prisoner be released.
or
God bless the Queen.
have a different syntactic pattern from those of other clauses that use=20
the base form of the verb (imperatives or infinitives), that clause form
deserves a distinct label, and "subjunctive" is as good a term for it as
any.
So for me, the term "subjunctive" is useful for English as long as we=20
keep in mind that it does not mean exactly the same thing for English as
it does for Latin.
Karl
STAHLKE, HERBERT F wrote:
> "Subjunctive" is one of those terms that causes endless confusion
among
> students of grammar and pointless dispute among grammarians. In most
> languages the term is used to identify an inflectional category of the
> verb, as in the Latin "porto" (I carry)
>=20
> Indicative Subjunctive
> 1s porto portem
> 2s portas portes
> 3s portat portet
> 1p portamus portemus
> 2p portatis portetis
> 3p portant portent
>=20
> a category of forms used in unfulfilled conditions, counterfactuals,
and
> other irrealis constructions.
>=20
> The forms sometimes called "subjunctive" in English, namely, bare
forms
> and "were," are indistinguishable morphologically from infinitives,
> imperatives, and non-third-person present forms in the former case and
> the past plural of "be" in the latter. So we don't have a form of the
> verb that can be identified as subjunctive. We have constructions
that
> are used where Old English other languages use subjunctive inflection,
> but these are syntactic structures, not morphological contrasts.
>=20
> "If it were raining" is counterfactual, as is "Were it raining."
>=20
> "I demand that the prisoners be released" has a tenseless, irrealis
> clause, a clause describing something that has not happened. =20
>=20
> Constructions like these have a modal quality of unreality, or
irrealis,
> in grammatical terms, but to call them subjunctive is to preserve a
> label for a form the language has long since lost.
>=20
> Old English didn't even have much of a subjunctive. Unlike the
present
> indicative paradigm, which has separate forms for 1/2/3 sg., the
> subjunctive paradigm uses the 1s indicative form for all persons in
the
> singular and adds the preterite plural suffix -n for all persons in
the
> plural. See the paradigms for "ridan" (to ride). I've left out vowel
> length marking for both Latin and Old English.
>=20
> Indicative Subjunctive
> 1s ride ride
> 2s ridest ride
> 3s rideth ride
> 1p ridath riden
> 2p ridath riden
> 3p ridath riden
>=20
> Modern English has no subjunctive and didn't have much subjunctive to
> lose in the first place. It can, however, use syntactic constructions
> to say anything that languages that have a subjunctive can say.
>=20
> Herb
>=20
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Karl Hagen
> Sent: 2008-03-13 18:23
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Subjunctive
>=20
> The subjunctive has been disappearing from our language for a very
long=20
> time. Grammarians have complained that its use has been declining at=20
> least as far back as Priestly in the 18th century.
>=20
> I doubt there's really been much of a change in at least the last 100=20
> years. It's rare in speech, but still maintained in more formal
writing.
>=20
> This really isn't an issue of active language change as much as it is
of
>=20
> different registers, each of which has remained fairly stable for a
long
>=20
> time.
>=20
> It's also worth noting that the so-called present subjunctive is alive
> and well in mandative contexts (e.g., "The teacher required that her=20
> students be polite").
>=20
> Karl
>=20
> Veit, Richard wrote:
>> That fact that half of a group of educated speakers did not use the
>> subjunctive to describe a hypothetical situation is more evidence
>> suggesting that the subjunctive is disappearing from our language.=20
>>
>> Dick Veit
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> Richard Veit
>> Department of English
>> University of North Carolina Wilmington
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Linda Di Desidero
>> Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 9:36 AM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: Subjunctive
>>
>> At a recent (large) faculty meeting, one of the administrators ran a
>> 'warm-up' activity. The idea was for faculty members to stand up,
>> introduce themselves, and talk about what they would be doing on a
>> Saturday morning if they were not attending this meeting.
>>
>> I kept track: At least half of the speakers said "If I was not here"
>> while almost half said "If I were not here." I was surprised, given
>> that this was an educated group of people and the speaking occasion
> was
>> not all that informal.
>>
>> Oh, the things we find to interest ourselves!
>>
>> Linda
>>
>> =20
>>
>>
>> -----------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Linda Di Desidero, Ph.D.
>>
>> Associate Professor
>>
>> Assistant Academic Director of Writing
>>
>> Communication, Arts, and Humanities
>>
>> University of Maryland University College=20
>>
>> 3501 University Boulevard East
>>
>> Adelphi, MD 20783-8083
>>
>> =20
>>
>> (240) 582-2830
>>
>> (240) 582-2993 (fax)
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Kathleen M. Ward
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 1:47 PM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: Subjunctive
>>
>> Well, it does, of course (she should have said "If Obama were a white
>> man") but the subjunctive has been disappearing from English for =20
>> centuries now. I think it has become pretty rare in speech. (I =20
>> take it that this was an interview quotation?)
>>
>> Kathleen Ward
>> UC Davis
>>
>>
>> On Mar 12, 2008, at 9:30 AM, DD Farms wrote:
>>
>>> DD: Am I a bit confused? Consider the quote from Geraldine Ferraro,=20
>>> [NYT 12 Mar 08, Maureen Dowd.] "If Obama was a white man, he would
> not
>>> be in this position. And if he was a woman (of any color), he would=20
>>> not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he
is.
>=20
>>> And the country is caught up in the concept." I thought High
> Standard
>>> English required the use of the subjunctive in stating a condition=20
>>> contrary to fact.
>>> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web=20
>>> interface at:
>>> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
>>> and select "Join or leave the list"
>>>
>>> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
>> interface at:
>> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
>> and select "Join or leave the list"
>>
>> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>>
>> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
>> interface at:
>> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
>> and select "Join or leave the list"
>>
>> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>>
>> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> interface at:
>> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
>> and select "Join or leave the list"
>>
>> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>>
>>
>=20
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> interface at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>=20
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>=20
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
interface at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>=20
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>=20
>=20
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
interface at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
------------------------------
End of ATEG Digest - 14 Mar 2008 to 15 Mar 2008 (#2008-66)
**********************************************************
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
|
