How to use "as if"
|
|
Thread rating:  |
gloria0402@gmail.com - 28 Nov 2006 05:21 GMT Hi,
Here is a test question. I was wondering if another answer will do.
... I chose neither of my first quick solutions. Instead, I told myself only when I faced this unexpected obstacle head-on could I be the victor. Then I closed my eyes to still my quaking limbs. I took a deep breath, and continued, as if I ___ a bird, singing out for the very first time.
a) am b) was c) were d) will be
The answer is c), but since we were talking about a previous event, would it be better if we use " had been" instead. I know "as if" can also be used in describing an event, then can I choose " was" as an answer? Thanks,
Gloria
georgeh@ankerstein.org - 28 Nov 2006 13:54 GMT > Hi, > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > also be used in describing an event, then can I choose " was" as an > answer? 99 out of 100 Americans would say "was", but it is incorrect. Since you are not a bird (I am making an assumption there<g>), you should use the subjunctive "were" (condition contrary to fact). Note that "were" in this case is the present tense subjunctive. (You are still not a bird.)
Clearly your native language is not German, as the whole range of English language subjunctive forms come from German roots.
GFH
Eric Walker - 28 Nov 2006 21:13 GMT > "I took a deep breath, and continued, as if I ___ a bird, > singing out for the very first time." [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > also be used in describing an event, then can I choose " was" as an > answer? Because the act expressed by the verb exists (or existed) only as a concept in the mind of the speaker, not as a fact, the verb needs to be in the subjunctive mood. The past subjunctive form of "be" is "were", choice (c).
The form "had been" would be the past perfect tense, indicating an act already completed at the past time to which the speaker is referring, and so is not appropriate.
(One could use that tense if the entire statement were established in that way: "I had taken a deep breath, and continued, as if I had been a bird, singing out for the very first time"; but the rest of the context paragraph would also have to match that temporal point of view.)
georgeh@ankerstein.org - 29 Nov 2006 00:16 GMT > The past subjunctive form of "be" is "were" No, it is not, unles you mean the "present subjuctive using the past form". There are three sujunctive forms in English: 1) the "would" form; 2) the use of the simple past form ("were" for "be") for the present ("had been" is the past subjunctive form:; 3) the infinitive (God be praised.) for uses such as pious wishes. ("God shed his grace on thee" iswell known in song.)
Each has its origins in the equivilent German forms.
I hate to argue with the owl.
GFH
Eric Walker - 29 Nov 2006 02:12 GMT > > The past subjunctive form of "be" is "were" > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > for uses such as pious wishes. ("God shed his grace on thee" > iswell known in song.) We need to take particular care with terminology when discussing tenses in the subjunctive mood. The verb "be" in the subunctive mood, past tense, is "were" in all persons; that's a flat fact. What makes for confusion is that the *significances* of tenses in the subjunctive do not parallel those in the indicative. The subjunctive past tense--as manifested by the accidence--very often refers to the temporal present or even future. "If I were master here, what a reckoning there would be!" The accidence is that of the subjunctive past, but the temporal association is not.
If you have a copy of Curme, the matter is discussed at some length at 118. (I should say here that my occasional internal references to Curme are to the one-volume Barnes & Noble edition; the original, full, two-volume work has a different, and inferior, indexing system--B&N, or rather Dr. Roger A. Walterhouse of B&N--put quite some work into the new index, and it shows.)
> I hate to argue with the owl. Why not? Everyone else does (albeit rarely to much profit).
georgeh@ankerstein.org - 29 Nov 2006 14:20 GMT > > > The past subjunctive form of "be" is "were" > > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > in the subjunctive mood. The verb "be" in the subunctive mood, past > tense, is "were" in all persons; that's a flat fact. Were I to go, I would be there. (Action not yet taken.) In the subjunctive "were" is present; "had been" is past. Had I been going, I would have been there. (Action in the past.)
As I pointed out, there are three different sujunctive forms.
GFH
Eric Walker - 29 Nov 2006 22:23 GMT > Were I to go, I would be there. (Action not yet taken.) > In the subjunctive "were" is present; "had been" is past. > Had I been going, I would have been there. (Action in the past.) I repeat: the name of the tense does not equate to the temporal significance it carries. In the subjunctive, we often use what is rightly designated "the past tense" to speak of events temporally present or future. That does not affect the right name of the form, "past tense", as it is given in tables of verb forms.
> As I pointed out, there are three different sujunctive forms. The very word "form" is there ambiguous. There are several qualities of the subjunctive that one might refer to as "form":
. the tense . the method of expression (inflection or auxiliaries, aka "simple" & "modern") . the class (potential, optative)
You seem to be using it for the second of those, which is fine if one makes that clear, but it is not a standard terminology.
It is unclear to me why you refer to three such forms; the normal reckoning is just two.
The modern style is to use one of the "past-present" modals (can, dare, may, shall, will, must, ought, wot) with the bare infinitive.
The older form does not use the infinitive as such, though it is typically the same; but we do not say that the statement "I walk" is composed of a pronoun and an infinitive, even though "walk" is the same mechanically as the infinitive form. Likewise, "God be praised" is not a noun, an infinitive, and a participle.
|
|
|