She always treated me as if I were the invalid

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Marius Hancu - 14 Jan 2004 13:02 GMT

Hello:

Wrt the CAPITALIZED items:

-------
By God, she looked at me as if I were an invalid--as any kind woman
may look at a poor chap in a bath chair. And, yes, from that day
forward she always treated me and not Florence as if I WERE the
invalid.
[The Good Soldier, By Ford Madox Ford, Ch. III, p. 37]
-------

The **time** seems to be here the past. The presence of an unreal event
after "if" should have caused, in my opinion, a backshift in
**tenses**, as per:

---------
http://www.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/conditional.htm

For past unreal events -- things that didn't happen, but we can
imagine -- we put the verb in the condition clause a further step back
-- into the past perfect:

* I wish I had lived in Los Angeles when the Lakers had Magic Johnson.
---------

Thus I would have expected to find:

"And, yes, from that day forward she always treated me and not Florence
as if I HAD BEEN the invalid."

What gives?

Thank you.
Marius Hancu

Reply to this Message

Cece - 20 Jan 2004 18:24 GMT

> Hello:
>
[quoted text clipped - 31 lines]
> Thank you.
> Marius Hancu

I don't see anything wrong with "were" there. In fact, "had been"
sounds off. The site you provide a link to has some strange examples.
"Would" isn't really a past tense, for instance. The first sentence
under "Present Unreal" doesn't work at all.

The subjunctive mood is a strange and fearful thing, which was never
mentioned in any grammar class I ever attended. I can't explain a lot
of this, but I know what sounds right. And that website doesn't.
Your objections to Ford Madox Ford don't either.

Perhaps someone else here understands subjunctive?

Cece

Reply to this Message

Marius Hancu - 20 Jan 2004 22:56 GMT

> > Wrt the CAPITALIZED items:
> >
[quoted text clipped - 29 lines]
> "Would" isn't really a past tense, for instance. The first sentence
> under "Present Unreal" doesn't work at all.

Thus, just to clarify, you seem to object to the sentence with Roberto here?
------------
http://www.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/conditional.htm

For present unreal events, we put the verb in the condition clause one
step back -- into the past:
* If the Bulls won another championship, Roberto would drive into
Chicago for the celebration.
* I wish I had tickets.
* If they were available anywhere, I would pay any price for them.
* If he were a good friend, he would buy them for me.
------------

Perhaps other members will jump in:-))

Marius Hancu

Reply to this Message

Marius Hancu - 20 Jan 2004 23:18 GMT

> > -------
> > By God, she looked at me as if I were an invalid--as any kind woman
[quoted text clipped - 37 lines]
> of this, but I know what sounds right. And that website doesn't.
> Your objections to Ford Madox Ford don't either.

I am only questioning some paragraphs. I have many others which are along
the lines of what the grammar site quoted in the above suggests:

---------------
Or it would have been better if she HAD ACTED--if, for instance, she
HAD so CHAPERONED Florence that private communication between her and
Edward became impossible.

If it HAD NOT BEEN Florence, it would have been some other . . .

If I HAD HAD the courage and virility and possibly also the physique
of Edward Ashburnham I should, I fancy, have done much what he did.
[p. 168, 225]
---------------

It might be that grammar has changed in the meanwhile a bit ...

Marius Hancu

Reply to this Message

Christopher Green - 21 Jan 2004 00:05 GMT

> > Hello:
> >
[quoted text clipped - 45 lines]
>
> Cece

I think Marius has a reasonable technical point about using a tense
further down the sequence of tenses for the subjunctive -- but here as
in his other posts, he's attempting to interpret Ford Madox Ford as if
FMF stuck to standard English grammar and usage. He didn't, and trying
to read him as if he did is an exercise in distraction.

Signature

Chris Green

Reply to this Message

Marius Hancu - 21 Jan 2004 01:44 GMT

> I think Marius has a reasonable technical point about using a tense
> further down the sequence of tenses for the subjunctive -- but here as
> in his other posts, he's attempting to interpret Ford Madox Ford as if
> FMF stuck to standard English grammar and usage. He didn't, and trying
> to read him as if he did is an exercise in distraction.

I think each writer uses a multitude of grammatical constructions of
his time, some more standard than others, and I for myself accept all
of them to the extent they are understandable to the readers, and I
found FMF not difficult in this respect.

What I personally am trying to understand is how much play was allowed
in his time and how much play is allowed nowadays. I do not possess a
clear history of the evolution of the English language and I am trying
to grasp bits and pieces while enjoying the novels I am reading. I
think one can always explore in depth and sideways in feeling, meaning and
structure and I think one reading mode can function in parallel with
the others.

Just simply trying to learn the language while reading away ....

Best,
Marius Hancu

Reply to this Message

Dr Robin Bignall - 21 Jan 2004 14:32 GMT

>> I think Marius has a reasonable technical point about using a tense
>> further down the sequence of tenses for the subjunctive -- but here as
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
>
>Just simply trying to learn the language while reading away ....

That's one of the two best ways, Marius (the other being speaking to native
speakers). Your question on latitude is not an easy one to answer. There
are some writers, both past and present, who are considered by a majority
of educated readers to be 'good' in some way or another, almost regardless
of their 'bending' of the grammatical or stylistic 'rules'. You will find
them on reading lists in various places: schools, universities, informed
comments by critics etc. There are also writers who have been on such lists
in the past but have dropped off, and writers who never made any list, but
who all probably can and could write equally well. A lot of it has to do
with changing fashions or modern taste.

Signature

wrmst rgrds
Robin Bignall

Quiet part of Hertfordshire
England

Reply to this Message

Christopher Green - 21 Jan 2004 18:47 GMT

[snip]

> What I personally am trying to understand is how much play was allowed
> in his time and how much play is allowed nowadays. I do not possess a
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> Best,
> Marius Hancu

I suppose one answer would be that any amount of play is allowed in a
work of manifest literary merit. While many authors of FMF's time took
care to observe the niceties of grammar and usage, FMF did not -- but
his writing is not the worse for it.

Signature

Chris Green

Reply to this Message

Discussion Groups / English Usage / January 2004

She always treated me as if I were the invalid