|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
raewon
Joined: 16 Jun 2009
|
 Posted: Mon Aug 12, 2013 1:30 am Post subject: Grammar question on if there were (not subjunctive) |
 |
|
I have a grammar question I hope someone can help with, as I'm a bit confused after reading something in Wikipedia.
Please take a look at the following two sentences:
1. If there were any questions, the professor stayed after class.
2. If there were enough water and soil, plants grew well.
In the second sentence, I want to use "were" (because 'water' and
'soil' = plural) but someone has said that "was" is correct. My question:
which is correct - was or were?
I found the following in Wikipedia:
| Quote: |
Distinguishing from past indicative after if
Confusion sometimes arises in the case of if clauses containing an ordinary past indicative was.
Compare:
1. If he was in class yesterday, he learned it.
2. If he was/were in class today, he would be learning it.
The first if clause contains a simple past indicative, referring to past time (it is not known whether or not the circumstance in fact took place). The second, however, expresses a counterfactual circumstance connected with the present, and therefore contains (or may contain) a past subjunctive.
Since in sentences like the second example were is preferred in formal registers, failure to distinguish between the two types sometimes leads were to be inappropriately substituted for was in sentences like the first. This is an example of hypercorrection. |
I want to make sure that I'm not making the mistake they talk of in the underlined part.
Thanks for any help you can offer. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 12, 2013 1:53 am Post subject: Re: Grammar question on if there were (not subjunctive) |
|
|
| raewon wrote: |
I have a grammar question I hope someone can help with, as I'm a bit confused after reading something in Wikipedia.
Please take a look at the following two sentences:
1. If there were any questions, the professor stayed after class.
2. If there were enough water and soil, plants grew well.
In the second sentence, I want to use "were" (because 'water' and
'soil' = plural) but someone has said that "was" is correct. My question:
which is correct - was or were? |
Hmm. "There was soil." "There was water." "There was water and soil." Even if you include two kinds of uncountables, they're still collectively uncountable, and my intuition tells me to use was. I do not, however, know the grammatically prescribed answer. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
raewon
Joined: 16 Jun 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 12, 2013 2:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
Fox - thanks for your reply. I understand your point, but wouldn't we say:
The oil and vinegar are on the table.
Isn't that a similar situation?
Thanks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 12, 2013 2:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| raewon wrote: |
Fox - thanks for your reply. I understand your point, but wouldn't we say:
The oil and vinegar are on the table.
Isn't that a similar situation?
Thanks. |
Well let's try this:
"The water and soil are on the table." That evokes for me two distinct objects, a bucket of water, and pile of soil.
"The water and soil is on the table." That evokes for me an admixture of the two, with the water and soil all mixed together in a bucket or some such. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
raewon
Joined: 16 Jun 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 12, 2013 2:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks. I see your point. And I agree with your example.
Hmm... perhaps both "was" and "were" could be correct in my original question? I'm hoping someone will chime in with some support for
were.
Thanks! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
transmogrifier
Joined: 02 Jan 2012
Location: Seoul, South Korea
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 12, 2013 3:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm sure we had this exact same discussion a couple of weeks back, in this very forum.
In a nutshell:
If the "there is" construction is followed by a compound subject (A & B) you can either treat them as a plural subject ("There are a boy and a girl in the playground") or you can simply follow the first subject of the two ("There is a boy and a girl in the playground," "There are 2 boys and a girl....," "There is a boy and 2 girls...."). The latter is probably more common, though neither are technically wrong.
In the case of "A & B + verb." always treat it as a plural.
Subjunctive is not an issue, because the conditional you use is regarding a past situation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Allthechildrenareinsane
Joined: 23 Jun 2011
Location: Lost in a Roman wilderness of pain
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 12, 2013 4:00 am Post subject: Re: Grammar question on if there were (not subjunctive) |
|
|
| raewon wrote: |
I have a grammar question I hope someone can help with, as I'm a bit confused after reading something in Wikipedia.
Please take a look at the following two sentences:
1. If there were any questions, the professor stayed after class.
2. If there were enough water and soil, plants grew well.
In the second sentence, I want to use "were" (because 'water' and
'soil' = plural) but someone has said that "was" is correct. My question:
which is correct - was or were?
I found the following in Wikipedia:
| Quote: |
Distinguishing from past indicative after if
Confusion sometimes arises in the case of if clauses containing an ordinary past indicative was.
Compare:
1. If he was in class yesterday, he learned it.
2. If he was/were in class today, he would be learning it.
The first if clause contains a simple past indicative, referring to past time (it is not known whether or not the circumstance in fact took place). The second, however, expresses a counterfactual circumstance connected with the present, and therefore contains (or may contain) a past subjunctive.
Since in sentences like the second example were is preferred in formal registers, failure to distinguish between the two types sometimes leads were to be inappropriately substituted for was in sentences like the first. This is an example of hypercorrection. |
I want to make sure that I'm not making the mistake they talk of in the underlined part.
Thanks for any help you can offer. |
It's unclear if 1.) and 2.) are meant to be conditional or not. 1.) could go either way -- that is, you could rewrite the sentence as If there were any questions, the professor would stay after class and the meaning wouldn't necessarily change.
However, the use of were in 2.) with the subject water and soil (composed of uncountable nouns) forces a conditional interpretation, so you'd need the modal auxiliary would in the main clause: If there were enough water and soil, plants would grow well. Compare If there was enough water and soil, plants grew well. Rewritten like this, if seems to mean "whenever" -- you could substitute when in its place and the meaning wouldn't change.
Last edited by Allthechildrenareinsane on Mon Aug 12, 2013 4:15 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
YTMND
Joined: 16 Jan 2012
Location: You're the man now dog!!
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 12, 2013 4:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
Give this student the following:
1. If I was king/queen,...
2. If I were king/queen,...
This is similar to:
3. If I was able to fly,...
4. If I were able to fly,...
My understanding is you use "were" for things that are more unlikely to happen or what you perceive will not happen in the real world (just your head).
You are holding a lottery ticket.
5. If I was the winner......
6. If I were the winner......
It's up for grabs. We need more context.
7. If there was enough water and soil (hold on, we can get a few buckets of each near the lake over there), then.......
8. If there were enough water and soil (don't count on it bud, we are out on a desert and it's not going to rain at all), but if there were, then...... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
raewon
Joined: 16 Jun 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 12, 2013 4:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Allthechildrenareinsane wrote:
| Quote: |
It's unclear if 1.) and 2.) are meant to be conditional or not. 1.) could go either way -- that is, you could rewrite the sentence as If there were any questions, the professor would stay after class and the meaning wouldn't necessarily change.
However, the use of were in 2.) with the subject water and soil (composed of uncountable nouns) forces a conditional interpretation, |
Thanks for that reply - it was very helpful. I think I've almost got it.
I see the difference in your examples - especially comparing it with
"If there was enough water and soil, plants grew well."
But why does the use of were in 2.) with the subject water and soil
"force a conditional interpretation"? Why can't "were" be used as the simple past indicative?
If there were enough water and soil (at that time), plants grew well.
* (at that time being implied).
Would it make a difference if "at that time" is included in the sentence?
Thanks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
YTMND
Joined: 16 Jan 2012
Location: You're the man now dog!!
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 12, 2013 6:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| "force a conditional interpretation"? Why can't "were" be used as the simple past indicative? |
We often assume "if" is the only conditional. There is also "when".
If it's my birthday, I blow out the candles and get presents.
When it's my birthday.............................
If is like an on or off switch.
When is "waiting" for the switch to be turned on.
In your examples it sounded like a "simple past indicative blah blah blahdy blah", but if we only report like news reporters then the answer should be "was" because we are only reporting what happened.
To allow were, there has to be some other connotation.
"It was a ghost town. He walked the streets not knowing where anything was, and if he WERE approached by someone he just pretended to be a local to avoid being recognized."
Does this follow the simple past indicative rhetoric? Honestly, you need to look beyond the labels and use a little imagination.
Ignore your left brain for a while, it is suffocating your right. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
