Can I bother you with a question about a past-tense subjunctive?

[BuyingThyme]

I think I understand the present tense, as in, "If I were to vote for Hillary, I wouldn't be able to live with myself."

But what about if I look back on the situation? Does the verb revert back to was as in, "If I was to vote for Hillary then, I wouldn't be able to live with myself today"?

(Or is it still were? Or is it all wrong?)

Yes, I understand that it would be easier to start off the second example with, "Had I not voted for Hillary...," but that doesn't help me.

[Captain Hilts]

1. I don't know! Someone please explain!!! GREAT question! nt

[King Coal]

25. In that case you use the subjective subjunctive, for example:

You could use "werpt". "If I werpted to have voted for Hillary, I would have seen spot run."

[BuyingThyme]

39. I don't even remember werpt.

I'll werp it up in the dictionary.

[AzDar]

2. Simple : Just. Don't. Vote. For. Hillary.

;)

[CT_Progressive]

3. "If I had voted for hillary..."

Hope that helps.

[BuyingThyme]

44. I'm trying to avoid the hads.

But thanks, CT_Progressive.

:hi:

[Demit]

4. "If I were to have voted for Hillary then..."

But it's less awkward (and shorter) to say, "If I had voted for Hillary then, I wouldn't be..." The subjunctive is still expressed in the 'wouldn't be' part. Edited to add: You're not talking about something that might happen, but something that definitely didn't. So it's not a subjunctive situation anymore. Right?

[BuyingThyme]

24. Well, it definitely was then.

I guess nothing is subjunctive forever.

I think I just burst something.

Thanks.

:hi:

[Der Blaue Engel]

5. I'm not certain, but as a copy editor I would strike any combination of "were/was to"

in favor of "If I had voted for." I'm not sure that using a reference to a future possibility in the past tense is absolutely wrong, but it sounds awful to me.

[BuyingThyme]

10. I agree with you, but

the examples I'm working on don't work with the "If I had..." or "Had I..." models.

Thanks for your help, though. I really appreciate it.

[L. Coyote]

6. Don't bother to read this thread. It is really a stealth DEM bashing thread.

May I suggest an English Grammar discussion thread if you really want to know.

Answer is simple. The past tense subjunctive is "had voted"

[Demit]

8. If it were a bashing thread, it would be a Hillary-bashing thread, not a Dem-bashing one.

Would that you had been such a stickler for accuracy :)

[L. Coyote]

22. Hillary is a DEM! Being a candidate does not change the fact that a DEM was bashed!

Likely the OPer is not getting $36 an hour to be a ratf**ker, but still.... it was a bash!!!

[BuyingThyme]

34. If I want to bash, I just bash.

And it probably wouldn't be Hillary; it'd be Pelosi.

But I understand your concern. Next time I'll use Al Gore.

draftgore.com

[BuyingThyme]

14. Not really.

I just used Hillary to sneak past the guards.

As indicated, the "had voted" option is not available.

[DemBones DemBones]

18. The header indicates it is about English grammar,

though the OP suggests the poster is not fond of HRC.

Rudy would have been a better choice.

[lumberjack_jeff]

7. "If I had voted for Hillary then..." n/t

[Enrique]

9. I don't think subjunctive makes sense in the past

you could say "If I had voted for Hillary..."

[immoderate]

11. It's "If I were to have voted..."

Or maybe that's the subjunctive past pluperfect conditional...

Anyway, what I wrote, though awkward is right for some tense or other. :crazy:

--IMM

[BuyingThyme]

48. Thank you, IMModerate.

:hi:

[Lasher]

12. If I had voted for Ron Paul I would shoot myself in the head.

Past perfect tense, you see. Hope this helps.

[frogmarch]

13. When I was

in grade school, I was taught to use "were" when there's an "if."

I just found this:

snip:

The subjunctive mood, always weak in English, has been dwindling away for centuries until it has almost vanished. According to traditional thought, statements about the conditional future such as “If I were a carpenter . . .” require the subjunctive “were”; but “was” is certainly much more common. Still, if you want to impress those in the know with your usage, use “were.”

http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/were.html

But I don't think that either "were" or "was" works with "If I were/was to vote for Hillary then, I wouldn't be able to live with myself today." I'd have said, "If I had voted for Hillary then..."

[BuyingThyme]

42. Thank you, Frogmarch.

:hi:

[annabanana]

15. BuyingThyme had had a tricky question...

And hadn't had it answered by the time I got here.

[DemBones DemBones]

16. In my opinion, the sentence

"If I was to vote for Hillary then, I wouldn't be able to live with myself today" is very awkward. It would be more logical and less awkward to say "If I had voted for Hillary, etc." But of course you want to know if it's grammatically acceptable.


"If I were to vote for Hillary, I wouldn't be able to live with myself" uses the correct present subjective verb "were" but many people would say,

"If I was to vote for Hillary, etc." and many people don't know it's not grammatically correct.


Here's a link that goes into lots of detail about the subjunctive, both past and present tense. I'm not sure your answer is there because I just skimmed it, will read it later when I have time because I'm curious about it myself.

http://www.bartleby.com/64/C001/061.html

I tried to copy and past part of it but the formatting screwed up so much that you'd be better off reading it at the site.

Tell us if you get an answer to your question there.

[BuyingThyme]

20. Thanks for the link, DemBones DemBones.

Here's the thing: What if a past-tense subjunctive depends on another subjunctive with in the same sentence? ("If I were to (or was to)..., then I would...) It generally precludes one from using "had."

[DemBones DemBones]

53. You're welcome. Why don't you try

posting in the Linguistics Group?

[BuyingThyme]

54. That's no fun.

Well, it might be fun; I shouldn't judge cause I've never even been there.

But I'm starting to ponder whether a subjunctive in the past tense is actually a subjunctive.

Maybe it's more of a philosophical pondering than a grammatical one.

[DemBones DemBones]

55. I think it is philosophical as well as grammatical.

The site says:

"English has had a subjunctive mood since Old English times, but most of the functions of the old subjunctive have been taken over by auxiliary verbs like may and should, and the subjunctive survives only in very limited situations. It has a present and past form. The present form is identical to the base form of the verb, so you only notice it in the third person singular, which has no final -s, and in the case of the verb be, which has the form be instead of am, is, and are. The past subjunctive is identical with the past tense except in the case of the verb be, which uses were for all persons: If I were rich …, If he were rich …, If they were rich…."

A philosophical question: why does the subjunctive survive only in very limited situations? Did people quit using it because they didn't learn it in school?

[hlthe2b]

17. Maybe just revert to the original

German! :evilgrin:


or seek an Oxford Scholar... Always trust the British in questions regarding the Queen's English...LOL

[DemBones DemBones]

19. Here's a link for anyone who wants to know about past and present subjunctive tenses:

(Yes, Virginia, there is a past subjunctive tense!)

http://www.bartleby.com/64/C001/061.html

[supernova]

21. No, you're always using the plural with the conditional

"If." That is the basic rule. And yes people make this mistake all the time. And yes, it clangs in the ears. x(

If the time frame is looking into the past from some vantage point in the future, then...

"If I were to have voted for Hillary..."

Technically, you could get away with

"If I had voted for Hillary..."

[BuyingThyme]

27. But what if the subjunctive is conditional to another subjective in the sentence?

And if you're narrative is trying to put the reader into the mind of the subject as far as the decision making? (In a progressive form.)

Like, "If I were to vote for Hillary then, I would first have to make amends with the liberal base."

Or is it, "If I was to vote for Hillary then, I would first have to make amends with the liberal base."

[supernova]

33. No No No!

*Smacks Buying Thyme across the knuckles with a ruler*

:crazy:

It's not the first part that's your problem; it's the second verb phrase. You have to make it the same tense as the first verb phrase. That's why your sentence doesn't work either time.

And in the second part, who is making amends, really? You the voter or Hillary the candidate. You the voter doesn't really make sense here. Are you talking about Hillary making amends with the liberal base?


"If I were to have voted for Hillary then, I would first had to have made amends with the liberal base."


"If I were was to vote for Hillary then, she would first have hadto make amends with the liberal base."


That's what you wrote. It's very awkward and you're chasing your tail for no good reason. Here's the way I would express this thought. (Disclaimer: The following sentence is for educational purposes only. No express endorsement of a candidate is hereby proclaimed.)

I voted for Hillary because she made amends with the liberal base. (Past tense, after the election)

If I were to vote for Hillary, it would be because she would have made amends with the liberal base. (Future but before the election)

[BuyingThyme]

37. That's just a case of failing to read what I writ.

Sorry to drag you so far off course.

The question is simply in regards to the possibility of using "was" when looking into the past at a subjunctive.

ON EDIT: Hey, that ain't what I writ!

[supernova]

38. And the answer is "was"

is always incorrect grammar with past subjunctive or conditional.

I know it's common. It's popular, but it's still incorrect grammar.

[BuyingThyme]

41. That's the assumption that prompted my question,

because was flows so nicely and were seems to confuse. (In the unusual contexts I'm struggling with, anyways.)

[L. Coyote]

23. MODS. We need a AVOID choice along with the REC choice! This is why.

[treestar]

29. You have "hide thread"

An "avoid" choice would undoubtedly attract even more people than a recommend.

[Quantess]

36. No, people just need to post their threads in the appropriate boards.

This one would be good for The Lounge.

[nancyharris]

26. Almost.

"If I was to vote for Hillary then, I wouldn't be able to live with myself today"?

You can use either "was" or "were" ("were" is preferred) in the sentence above. However, you cannot end the sentence with the word "today". That's like saying: "If I were to rob a bank, I would be sent to jail today".

[BuyingThyme]

28. If feel that the alert threshold may be approaching, so THANK YOU to all who participated!

(This thread has absolutely nothing to do with Hillary.)

[treestar]

30. "Were I to have voted for Hillary, I would not have been able to live

with myself today." Could that do it?

[BuyingThyme]

31. I'm not looking for alternative ways of saying it as much as

I'm trying to figure out the "were" or "was" of it.

Thanks treestar.

:hi:

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

32. ....

:rofl:

[librechik]

35. the first sentence is future subjunctive, not present tense

subjunctive changes the person to plural (from I was to if I were, )

Key word for future tense is "if"

Looking back changes the tense to past subjunctive. The normal verb would be had, has etc. But if you insist on using to be, then the iteration would be,
Back then if I were to have voted...

I can't say it with just to be alone. Past tense wants a have had or has been .

[mahatmakanejeeves]

40. If it ever were to have been dismaying,

is it not still?

[Igel]

43. Examples.

> If I were to vote for Hillary, I wouldn't be able to live with myself.
Present subjunctive, contrary to fact (you have no intention of voting for Hillary); "contrary to fact" is also called "irrealis". The "would" is predictable given the "if".

> If I were to have voted for Hillary, I wouldn't have been able to live with myself.
Now the entire thing is past tense. But you can't tell well because 'were' is also past subjective:
> If I were a rich man when I was younger, I would have ditched engineering and gone into the arts.
> If I were a rich man, I would ditch engineering and go into the arts.

In these examples, all moods are irrealis.

But it doesn't have to be subjunctive if there's no doubt or contrary-to-factness (can I say that?).
"If I was rich, then why did I go into engineering?"
It posits a fact, and neither denies it nor affirms it. It merely asserts a possible state ("rich"), and provides a contingency ("then"). In the present, you get, "If I am rich, then why am I going into engineering?" Having negation in either clause helps, but I'm not going to commit to some sort of requirement.

The subjunctive is also normative after verbs and adjectives stating some sort of requirement or preferred state that is not currently real:
> It's important that he go to the store.
It's saying he is not currently on his way to the store, but it's desirable that he be on his way to the store. (Note the "be", another subjunctive).
> I require that my assistant wake me every morning at precisely 6:47.
>*? I require that my assistant wakes me every morning at precisely 6:47.
The *? means I can't think of a circumstance in which it could be grammatical; perhaps it's always wrong for me, but I'm willing to say that it just might be licit in the right context.

>It's important that he goes to the store (adding "on Tuesdays" helps).
"He" usually goes to the store, and this fact is important for some reason: Perhaps the next sentence is, "Otherwise he'd see his wife with the milkman, and he just couldn't take it after losing his job." I can say, "It's important that he goes to the store for milk, otherwise the hitman won't be in the proper position", but that might be a case of my assimilation to mainstream non-subjunctive norms.

The difference is that the first sentences, the subjunctive ones, assert a desirable condition without asserting that it's a real or repeating state, while the second (indicative) state that the condition is a fact.

Putting this in the past tense isn't tough, but note the "that" clause can stay present tense.
>It was important that he go to the store ...
>It was important that he goes to the store (on Tuesdays) ... (note that this implies repeated, customary, store-going, not a one-off event, or a process, and I can see people disagreeing with my judgments here and requiring "went").
>It was important that he was going to the store ... (this implies a one-off deal, or allows for him planning to be going ... it's ambiguous and the context resolves the ambiguity).

My little backwater of Maryland, at least when I was a kid, preserved the subjunctive quite nicely, steel workers or not, and I find myself befuddled

[BuyingThyme]

45. Great post, Igil.

I'm going to get this thing.

Thank you.

:hi:

[immoderate]

46. I said that in my post #11.

Just sayin'

--IMM

[BuyingThyme]

47. Thank you too, IMModerate.

I'm very appreciative of all of the responses and wouldn't want to leave you out. In fact, I'm going to thank you twice.

:hi:

[immoderate]

49. That's what friends are for...

I can't believe I got it right. :)

--IMM

[angstlessk]

50. I think in looking back this tense would be applicable..

If only I were to have voted for Hillary, I might not now be in this muther fricking detention camp Rudy constructed!

[BuyingThyme]

51. Thank you, Angstlessk.

:hi:

[Deep13]

52. "If I voted for Hillary then,...

...I would not be drafted today."

I think that's the way to put it. Geeze, that's tough.