Subjunctive mood

The subjunctive mood is one of the English tongue's three moods. This writ is meant to show the subjunctive's uses, both current and historical.

Form
The verbal inflections for the indicative and the subjunctive are the following (call is as a ):

As one may expect, the inflections for be are irregular:

Also, the subjunctive has auxiliary forms, e.g., that he have been, if I had seen.

Obviously, English verbs are rather plain in their inflections; formerly, English once had a much more distinct inflectional system, but over time, the inflections were simplified and were then merged or lost because of sound changes. Thus, the only wherein the subjunctive is formally distinct are:


 * The second-person singular present
 * The third-person singular present
 * The present tense for both numbers and all persons for be
 * The past tense for all persons singular for be (though wert is sometimes benoted for wast)

Because of the lack of formal distinction between the indicative and the subjunctive in many cases, the subjunctive forms have fallen into disuse in many contexts.

Note that for negation, it is now to put a not before the verb if it is in the present subjunctive, e.g., that he not call (though for be, either way works, e.g., that he be not or that he not be). But for the other subjunctive tenses, it is negated the usual way, e.g., that he have not broken any laws, if I were not alive, if I did not call. Formerly, not simply needed to be put after the verb, e.g., lest he live not, if I went not.

The present subjunctive refers to present or future time, and historically, the past subjunctive was commonly used if one talked about the past, as it still is in a few other tongues like French. But over time, the past subjunctive has mainly become benoted in reference to present or future time, as it is in German (in which it is called Konjunktiv II). Also, nowadays, in terms of backshift:


 * The present subjunctive in most contexts is not changed to the past subjunctive, e.g., demanded that he leave.
 * The past subjunctive is not changed to the past perfect subjunctive, e.g., I said that if I were you, I would not listen to her.

It may thus be helpful to think of present subjunctive and past subjunctive as subjunctive I and subjunctive II, respectively.

Use
First of all, what does subjunctive mean? The word comes from Latin subiunctivus, which is gotten from subiungo (to subjoin). Thus, it seems as if the subjunctive were benoted in subordinate clauses only. However, the problem with this name is twofold:


 * Not all subordinate clauses benote the subjunctive, e.g., because I am the manager, since he died (both verbs are indicative).
 * It suggests that the subjunctive never appears in the main clause, but this is false, e.g., God bless America, suffice it to say.

Another name for this is conjunctive, but it is hardly any better than subjunctive. It would be better to call it something like conceptual.

Command
As the subjunctive is the mood of desire, it is not surprising to find the present subjunctive in constructions that look like imperatives. It is benoted for the first and third persons.


 * Suffice it to say.
 * Be it resolved.
 * Well, sit we down, / And let us hear Bernardo speak of this. (Hamlet)

Nowadays, the subjunctive construction is not benoted; instead, it has been replaced with the imperative construction that uses let, e.g., let us sit down, let them eat cake.

Wish
The present subjunctive can be found in wishes expected to be carried out somehow.


 * God bless you.
 * Long live the king.
 * Woe betide you.
 * So be it.
 * Thy kingdom come.

Nowadays, wishes are made with the present subjunctive may.


 * May the Force be with you.
 * May we never have to deal with that again!
 * May you have a safe journey.
 * Long may he reign.

Softened statement
The past subjunctive is often used instead of their present indicative forms to soften the statement, which is why these forms are often used in polite requests. There are now only four past subjunctive forms commonly used for softened effect: could, might, would, and should.


 * Could I use your pencil? (politer than can I use your pencil?)
 * Might I see your passport? (politer than may I see your passport?)
 * Would you pass me the salt? (politer than will you pass me the salt?)
 * I should like to talk with you. (politer than I want to talk with you, though nowadays, would is used instead of should here).

As for would, because of the past subjunctive's softened effect, it is often used to sound tentative.


 * It would seem so, sir.
 * It would appear that you are wrong.
 * It would be best that we leave him alone.

The past subjunctive were was once common for this purpose, but it is now archaic.


 * 'Twere good you let him know. (Hamlet)

This softened effect is also found in the set expression would that, e.g., would that it were true!. The reason that would is used is that will originally betokened desire, and so the past subjunctive naturally became used as a way to make wishes.

As for should, it is occasionally used in the same way as would above, except that the subject must be of the first person.


 * I should imagine that he is rich.
 * We should like to congratulate you.

This pertains more to the traditional distinction between shall and will, which is nowadays mostly neglected in today's speech.

Moreover, should is clearly softer than shall, which originally meant owe and thus betokened obligation. One can see the difference in these two sentences:


 * You shall leave these premises at once.
 * You should leave these premises at once.

The former sounds incredibly forceful and betokens strong obligation, whereas the latter has a weakened sense of obligation and thus sounds more like a recommendation.

Historically, must was the past subjunctive of the obsolete verb mote, and it is from its use as a past subjunctive that must overtook mote and is now seen as its own verb. The same goes for ought, which was historically the past subjunctive of owe.

In such expressions as had better and had rather (had liefer being an archaic variant), the had is truly the past subjunctive of have. That is, in I had better leave, it comes from a sentence that meant something like I would hold it better to leave. Originally, this construction was simply expressed with be and the dative, e.g., me is lief, him were better, that is, it is lief for me, it would be better for him. The use of the past subjunctive of have and the nominative arose in Middle English. Note that better and liefer were historically comparative adjectives, but better and liefer were later apparently felt to be adverbs, whence came expressions like had rather and had sooner (it is not hard to see how saying that one would do one thing before another is a way of showing preference). Also, use of the positive and superlative forms arose later, e.g., had as lief, had best, had liefest.

Note that variants with would like would rather and would sooner also appeared and later became seen by some such critics as Samuel Johnson as the only correct forms (on the incorrect assumption that had was a corruption of would since both sound the same when contracted as 'd.).

Desire
The present subjunctive is used to show desire in clauses following nouns, adjectives, and verbs of desire.


 * I insist that he be rewarded for his work. (verb: insist)
 * We ask that the secretary tell us everything that he knows. (verb: ask)
 * It is important that she leave at once. (adjective: important)
 * I thought it best that he be released from jail. (adjective: best)
 * My father has accepted our neighbor's request that he make him a drawer. (noun: request)
 * I refused to follow the kidnapper's demand that I give him two thousand dollars. (noun: demand)

The difference between the indicative and the subjunctive is apparent with a few of these words:


 * I insist that John works at the shop.
 * I insist that John work at the shop.

In the former, the speaker is sure that John works at the shop, whereas in the latter, John does not work at the shop, but the speaker desires otherwise.

In this kind of construction, the present subjunctive is sometimes replaced with the past subjunctive should.


 * I ask that I should be given leave.
 * The king has ordered that his guards should investigate the incident at once.

In the expression (about/high) time, both the present and the past subjunctive are benoted with no difference in meaning.


 * It is time that we be honest with everyone.
 * It is about time that we headed out.
 * It is high time that you cleaned your room.

Purpose
In purpose clauses, the present subjunctive may be found after that and lest.


 * Judge not, that ye be not judged. (Matthew 7:1)
 * See to it that it be done.
 * Take heed that no man deceive you. (Matthew 24:4)
 * One must not work too much, lest one's health suffer.
 * Lest we forget.

The subjunctive's with that is now archaic; it is much more usual to benote may, might, or should.


 * I eat that I may live.
 * To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. (1 Corinthians 9:22)
 * I pray that no misfortune should befall me.

With lest, one may find the aforesaid auxiliaries, but the subjunctive is far.


 * Make sure to shut the window, lest smoke come in.

Time
Formerly, the subjunctive was benoted in clauses denoting time. The action in the subordinate clause is thought not to have been realized yet.


 * Before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice. (Matthew 26:34)
 * I shall wait here until the sun rise.
 * He insisted that before a decision were made, the counsel should talk about it more.

Nowadays, the indicative forms are benoted for this, e.g., before the cock crows, until the sun rises.

Note that come in come next year is a relic of the subjunctive form in this context.


 * Come next year (that is, when next year come), things will look different.

Concession
Formerly, the subjunctive can be found in concessive clauses introduced by though and the like. The condition is not assumed to be true.


 * Though this be madness, yet there is madness in 't. (Hamlet)
 * Be it ever so humble, there's no place like home.
 * Though he slay me, yet will I trust in him: but I will maintain mine own ways before him. (Job 13:15)
 * But the praetor told him, that where the law required two witnesses he would not accept of one, though it were Cato himself. (Joseph Addison, Spectator)

Nowadays, the subjunctive is seldom used with though; to express such meaning, either may or might is used, or the conjunction is replaced with even if (which generally does not assume the condition to be true).

Note that for whether, the subjunctive is sometimes used, though the indicative is now common.


 * Whether it be true or not, there is nothing I can do about it.
 * Be he alive, or be he dead, I'll grind his bones to make my bread.