1

However the fleet eventually departed without warning after the Zamorin insisted that they left all their assets as collateral.

What is the grammar explanation for the above sentence? This sentence is a extract from Wikipedia. I am sharing the link below. It is in the arrival in 'calicut' section, last paragraph. I know for the subjunctive mood we use the base form of the verb, so how would one explain the above sentence (esp. the use of left)?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portuguese_discovery_of_the_sea_route_to_India

Ansh
  • 81
  • 4
  • 1
    Pedants would prefer the Zamorin insisted that they [should] leave* all their assets*, but it's increasingly common in "relaxed" modern contexts to use Simple Past with such constructions. – FumbleFingers Mar 12 '23 at 13:01
  • 2
    Does this answer your question? Demanding that A is/be a scalar ,, [8] i She insists [that he take the eight o'clock train]. [mandative] ii She insists [that he took the eight o'clock train]. [non-mandative] iii She insists [that he takes/they take the eight o'clock train]. [ambiguous] >>_linguisticturn ... – Edwin Ashworth Dec 05 '23 at 16:19
  • See also Why is American English so wedded to the subjunctive? – Edwin Ashworth Dec 05 '23 at 16:22
  • @FumbleFingers It's pedantry to say leave? Where do you get that from? So, he asked that we left on time? No way. – Lambie Dec 05 '23 at 16:46
  • @Lambie: "This sentence is a extract from Wikipedia". Whoever wrote it obviously didn't feel obliged to use "subjunctive" [would] leave. And either no other Wikipedians had a problem with left*, or the writer ignored their pedantic requests to change it. But it's of little consequence what you (or I!) might prefer* here - the OP just wanted a "grammar explanation" of the version as quoted. – FumbleFingers Dec 05 '23 at 17:12

2 Answers2

4

The third edition of Fowler (1988) has

In BrE the subjunctive mood is most likely to be found in formal writing or speech [apart from some formulaic uses], and particularly (the so-called mandative subjunctive) after verbs such as demand, insist, pray, recommend, suggest, and wish; nouns and adjectives such as demand, essential, important, insistence, proposal, suggestion, vital, and wish; and a number of conjunctions, such as although, as if, as though, if, unless, etc. But it is seldom obligatory, and indeed is commonly (?usually) invisible because the notionally subjunctive and the indicative forms are identical.

It's not obligatory apart from some formulaic uses, which Fowler lists as including

be that as it may; so be it; bless my soul; come what may; far be it from me to; God forbid (that); God bless you; God save the Queen, etc.; heaven forbid/forfend (that); heaven help us; So help me (God); Thy Kingdom come; long live the Queen, etc.; perish the thought; the powers that be; serve you right; suffice it to say that; woe betide; the fixed phrase as it were, in the sense 'in a way, to a certain extent' [when] the phrase is invariable.

The subjunctive mood* is available, and maybe even desirable in formal writing; but it's not incorrect if it's not used.

*Fowler defines the subjunctive mood as "a verbal form or mood expressing hypothesis, usually denoting what is imagined, wished, demanded, proposed, exhorted, etc. Its main contrast is with the indicative mood." Fowler also notes "The subjunctive mood is one of the great shifting sands of English grammar. Its complexity over the centuries is such that the standard reference work on historical English syntax by F. Th. Visser (4 vols., 1963–73) devoted 156 pages to the subject (Visser called it the 'modally marked form') and listed more than 300 items in its bibliography."

There do exist, even in these hallowed halls of ELU.SE, those who eschew the term.

Andrew Leach
  • 101,901
  • 1
    Thank you for this well-informed common sense. The imperative, subjunctive and (in ancient Greek) optative are distinct forms, usually signalled by subordinating conjunctions. Modal clauses are not claims to what was, is or will be the case, but commands, purposes, conditions or imagined/wished for states of affairs. It has turned out over centuries that the cumbersome apparatus of the ancient world is not really necessary. We can express and understand modality, except the ones whose absence is still marked wrong by teachers in schools. The indicative states the 'actual' (or fictional). – Tuffy Mar 12 '23 at 10:31
  • @PeterShor (in relation to your now-deleted comment) Actually 1988 was edited by Burchfield. Fowler himself wrote "the subjunctive is moribund except in a few easily specified uses" in the First Edition, as early as 1926! – Andrew Leach Mar 12 '23 at 12:27
  • Actually, looking at Ngrams, it seems like the subjunctive was completely dead in British English when Fowler wrote that in 1926, but is now coming back in British English, probably driven by the corrupting influence of Americans. – Peter Shor Mar 12 '23 at 12:32
  • 5
    In American English, anyway, The Zamorin insisted that they left all their assets flat out means something different. That’s an indicative utterance; the Zamorin is telling them that they did, in fact, leave all their assets. – Tinfoil Hat Mar 12 '23 at 14:19
  • 2
    Also, who made this rule: it’s not incorrect if [the subjunctive]’s not used? Your editors beg to differ. – Tinfoil Hat Mar 12 '23 at 14:23
  • 1
    @TinfoilHat Fowler is definitely geared towards British English. If you want to write an answer for American English, feel free to do that. – Andrew Leach Mar 12 '23 at 18:51
  • And that's why it's flying off to Neverland…because it tried to boss around imperatives. Reporting an imperative is not a subjunctive's business. 'They insisted/demanded/etc. that she [insert imperative verb here]…' That's what's really happening, in America. You know who taught us subjunctive mood? Alexis Carrington. Haha, but that's my story… IDK enough to post an answer; it's just what we do here, but I appreciate the lesson. – HippoSawrUs Mar 13 '23 at 07:42
  • We love our mandative subjunctive/indicative distinction in AmE with that verb class, especially in the past: "On their first anniversary, she insisted that she and her husband go back to the same Italian place they ate at on their first date." vs. "She insisted that she and her husband went to an Italian restaurant on their first anniversary, but he remembers it as Indian." – DjinTonic Mar 13 '23 at 12:00
  • @HippoSawrUs: the subjunctive has been used for imperative constructions in English since at least the time of Shakespeare, and probably well before: "I charge you see that he be forthcoming," and "we charge and command that their wives be as free as heart can wish or tongue can tell." We in America are merely continuing this grand tradition of the English language whereas you in England have lost this piece of it. – Peter Shor Mar 13 '23 at 14:00
  • 1
    @Peter Shor - I'm not in England. I wasn't clear. I'm saying it's not optional. Americans who have no idea what subjunctive mood is, never heard of it, will repeat the imperative verb that would've been used (Leave all yer stuff here!) and still be correct nonetheless. That's what I meant. If the subjunctive is optional, then it's not that. Chief: 'Did you check his alibi?' Detective: 'Yes, they insisted that he left the party, but he didn't.' Chief: 'Had left' or 'leave'? Detective: 'Around 10 pm.' Nobody has time for all that. – HippoSawrUs Mar 13 '23 at 20:27
  • @Tinfoil Hat In 'BrE' (ie how most use the language in the UK), 'The Zamorin insisted that they left all their assets' is ambiguous between 'The Zamorin insisted that they had left all their assets flat out' and ''The Zamorin insisted that they must leave all their assets flat out'. Context almost always disambiguates, and the periphrastic should option is usually chosen in the UK if really necessary. It disambiguates even better than the mandative subjunctive ('They insist that I/we/you/they sleep in a hammock'). // 'AmE' and 'BrE' assumes a fanciful national uniformity. – Edwin Ashworth Dec 05 '23 at 15:57
1
  • In American English, anyway, The Zamorin insisted that they left all their assets flat out means something different. That’s an indicative utterance; the Zamorin is telling them that they did, in fact, leave all their assets.                                                                                     – Tinfoil Hat

.........................

  • We love our mandative subjunctive/indicative distinction in AmE with that verb class, especially in the past:

                     "On their first anniversary, she insisted that she and her husband go back to the same Italian place they ate at on their first date."

vs.

                     "She insisted that she and her husband went to an Italian restaurant on their first anniversary, but he remembers it as Indian."                                                                – DjinTonic

.........................

In 'BrE' (ie how most use the language in the UK),

  • The Zamorin insisted that they left all their assets

is ambiguous between

  • The Zamorin insisted that they had left all their assets and

  • The Zamorin insisted that they must leave all their assets.

Context almost always disambiguates, and the periphrastic should option is usually chosen in the UK if really necessary. It disambiguates even better than the mandative subjunctive, with persons other than just the third person singular (They insist that I/we/you/they sleep in a hammock).

'AmE' and 'BrE' assumes a fanciful national uniformity.

These different attitudes towards the use of the mandative subjunctive have been discussed before [see FE's answer].                                                                                                     – Edwin Ashworth

Edwin Ashworth
  • 83,272