1

I am wondering how the Subjunctive Mood functions in the past, considering this sentence:

A movement subsequently rose demanding that the King was removed as the head of the Church of England.

My question is, why not:

  • A movement subsequently rose demanding that the King be removed as the head of the Church of England.
  • A movement subsequently rose demanding that the King should be removed as the head of the Church of England.

(06:22, 'GENIUS or MADMAN? Argentina is in Deep Trouble - will Javier Milei Save or Destroy the Economy?', Youtube video link)

tchrist
  • 134,759
Didyougo
  • 21
  • 2
  • Does this answer your question? Tensed verb form or the plain form when used after "that" (in a mandative construction) – Edwin Ashworth Dec 17 '23 at 20:00
  • @EdwinAshworth Does that explain why we don't use tensed forms over here? – tchrist Dec 17 '23 at 21:39
  • @EdwinAshworth Barely. For instance, in 'The sergeant recommended that the corporal who volunteered for the mission keep frosty. UK practice is another animal, however. Some British speakers would say kept there.', I have no idea of what kind of speakers these are or under what circumstances they would say that. – Didyougo Dec 18 '23 at 13:50
  • 2
    It's regarded as perfectly grammatical by many in the UK, many of them well educated and articulate. Pullum says as much. The subjunctive mandative is rare (but considered grammatical) in the UK; periphrastic should is more common, though quite formal. The covert mandative (using the indicative, past or present simple as dictated by the first verb [recommends/recommended, say] is far the commonest in informal registers, especially speech. // In the US, many would consider the covert mandative unacceptable or very iffy. – Edwin Ashworth Dec 18 '23 at 16:19
  • @EdwinAshworth 'the commonest in informal registers, especially speech' answers my question. Thanks a lot!!! – Didyougo Dec 19 '23 at 09:40
  • @tchrist It addresses the divided usage, which is what OP essentially asks about. // Does your answer explain why the covert mandative is largely disapproved of in the US? I remember you claiming in a previous thread that it's better as it disambiguates better, but then someone else pointed out that the periphrastic should construction should then by that logic be chosen, as it disambiguates for all three persons, not merely 3rd person singular. – Edwin Ashworth Dec 19 '23 at 19:34

1 Answers1

1

It was said that way because it was spoken by an Englishman for whom this is not considered ungrammatical. In America, what he said is not grammatical and would have to be be not was.

You do not backshift untensed be into the past. So this is how we would say it:

  1. A movement subsequently rose demanding that the King be removed as the head of the Church of England.

But this is also ok:

  1. A movement subsequently rose demanding that the King must be removed as the head of the Church of England.

But this is likely best:

  1. A movement subsequently rose demanding for the King to be removed as the head of the Church of England.

Careful writers and speakers observe these distinctions worldwide, but particularly in the UK not observing them does not always sound ungrammatical to some of them, so they don't do it. It surprises them that Americans are taught that this is considered an error.

Related:

  1. Use of subjunctive in Britain vs North America
  2. Why is this sentence correct? “She suggested that he go to the cinema.”
  3. Shall & Should & the “Mandative Subjunctive”
  4. Why is American English so wedded to the subjunctive?
tchrist
  • 134,759
  • 1
    "Demanding for"?! We are two peoples ever more divided by a less and less common language. – Andrew Leach Dec 17 '23 at 20:49
  • @AndrewLeach I had never noticed that before, but yes, your observation indeed shows up in the divergent ‘cross-pond-wise’ Google Ngrams plots for this split in usage over the past half-century here and maybe here. – tchrist Dec 17 '23 at 21:16
  • 2
    A movement generally arises, it doesn't usually rise...Otherwise, it's rearing its head. That's much worse in my view that this other stuff. I'm with Andrew here. demand for is ho-hum – Lambie Dec 17 '23 at 21:18
  • @Lambie Yes, I had noticed that oddity as well. – tchrist Dec 17 '23 at 21:20
  • 1
    Sidenote: Is there any way to go from the ngrams to the place where the expressions are found in some books without looking in google books in another search? – Lambie Dec 17 '23 at 21:24
  • 1
    To me, at least, (1) sounds much better than either (2) or (3). – alphabet Dec 17 '23 at 22:35
  • 'it was spoken by an Englishman for whom this is not considered ungrammatical'? What kind of Englishmen speak like that and in what situations? – Didyougo Dec 18 '23 at 13:52
  • Demanding for sounds exceedingly odd to my AmE ear. – Tinfoil Hat Dec 19 '23 at 00:34
  • @TinfoilHat You've never heard demands for people to do something? – tchrist Dec 19 '23 at 00:50
  • 1
    @Didyougo It isn't necessarily heard as a mistake in England. It is considered such in America. But some Englishmen also use the untensed American style with a bare infinitive. I'm told it sounds stuffy and old fashioned to them. To us the tensed version doesn't make grammatical sense; we aren't sure what it even means because we simply never hear it here. Read Edwin's comment about "informal registers, especially speech". – tchrist Dec 19 '23 at 00:51
  • Well, no, not anything comes to mind naturally. – Tinfoil Hat Dec 19 '23 at 02:30