Recent from talks
Contribute something
Nothing was collected or created yet.
Subjunctive mood
View on WikipediaThe subjunctive (also known as the conjunctive in some languages) is a grammatical mood, a feature of an utterance that indicates the speaker's attitude toward it. Subjunctive forms of verbs are typically used to express various states of unreality, such as wish, emotion, possibility, judgment, opinion, obligation, or action, that has not yet occurred. The precise situations in which they are used vary from language to language. The subjunctive is one of the irrealis moods, which refer to what is not necessarily real. It is often contrasted with the indicative, a realis mood which principally indicates that something is a statement of fact.
Subjunctives occur most often, although not exclusively, in subordinate clauses, particularly that-clauses. Examples of the subjunctive in English are found in the sentences "I suggest that you be careful" and "It is important that she stay by your side."
Indo-European languages
[edit]Proto-Indo-European
[edit]The Proto-Indo-European language, the reconstructed common ancestor of the Indo-European languages, had two closely related moods: the subjunctive and the optative. Many of its daughter languages combined or merged these moods.
In Indo-European, the subjunctive was formed by using the full ablaut grade of the root of the verb and appending the thematic vowel *-e- or *-o- to the root stem, with the full, primary set of personal inflections. The subjunctive was the Indo-European irrealis, used for hypothetical or counterfactual situations.
The optative mood was formed with a suffix *-ieh1 or *-ih1 (with a laryngeal). The optative used the clitic set[clarification needed] of secondary personal inflections. The optative was used to express wishes or hopes.
Among the Indo-European languages, only Albanian, Avestan, Ancient Greek, and Sanskrit kept the subjunctive and the optative fully separate and parallel. However, in Sanskrit, use of the subjunctive is found only in the Vedic language of the earliest times, and the optative and imperative are comparatively less commonly used. In the later language (from c. 500 BC), the subjunctive fell out of use, with the optative or imperative being used instead, or merged with the optative as in Latin. However, the first-person forms of the subjunctive continue to be used, as they are transferred to the imperative, which formerly, like Greek, had no first person forms.
Germanic languages
[edit]In the Germanic languages, subjunctives are also usually formed from old optatives (a mood that indicates a wish or hope), with the present subjunctive marked with *-ai- and the past with *-ī-. In German, these forms have been reduced to a schwa, spelled -e. The past tense, however, often displays i-umlaut. In Old Norse, both suffixes evolved into -i-, but i-umlaut occurs in the past subjunctive, which distinguishes them.[1]
| Present | Past | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Person | Indicative | Subjunctive | Indicative | Subjunctive |
| 1st singular | gref | grafa | gróf | grœfa |
| 2nd singular | grefr | grafir | gróft | grœfir |
| 3rd singular | grefr | grafi | gróf | grœfi |
| 1st plural | grǫfum | grafim | grófum | grœfim |
| 2nd plural | grafið | grafið | grófuð | grœfið |
| 3rd plural | grafa | grafi | grófu | grœfi |
English
[edit]In Modern English, the subjunctive is realised as a finite but tenseless clause where the main verb occurs in the bare form. Since the bare form is also used in a variety of other constructions, the English subjunctive is reflected by a clause type rather than a distinct inflection.[2]
German
[edit]German has:
- Konjunktiv Präsens, which is a Konjunktiv I, e.g. "er gehe"
- Konjunktiv Imperfekt (or Präteritum), which is a Konjunktiv II, e.g. "er ginge"
- Konjunktiv Perfekt, which is a Konjunktiv I too, e.g. "er sei gegangen"
- Konjunktiv Plusquamperfekt, which is a Konjunktiv II too, e.g. "er wäre gegangen"
If the Konjunktiv II of the Futur I (e.g. "ich würde gehen") and of the Futur II (e.g. "ich würde gegangen sein") are called "conditional", the numbers (I, II) can be dropped.
Konjunktiv I
[edit]The present subjunctive occurs in certain expressions (e.g. Es lebe der König! "Long live the king!") and in indirect (reported) speech. Its use can frequently be replaced by the indicative mood. For example, Er sagte, er sei Arzt ('He said he was a physician') is a neutral representation of what was said and makes no claim as to whether the speaker thinks the reported statement is true or not.
The past subjunctive can often be used to express the same sentiments: Er sagte, er wäre Arzt. Or, for example, instead of the formal, written Er sagte, er habe keine Zeit 'He said he had no time' with present subjunctive habe, one can use past subjunctive hätte: Er sagte, er hätte keine Zeit.
In speech, however, the past subjunctive is common without any implication that the speaker doubts the speech he is reporting. As common is use of the indicative Er sagte, er ist Arzt and Er sagte, er hat keine Zeit. This is often changed in written reports to the forms using present subjunctive.
The present subjunctive is regular for all verbs except the verb sein ("to be"). It is formed by adding -e, -est, -e, -en, -et, -en to the stem of the infinitive. The verb sein has the stem sei- for the present subjunctive declension, but it has no ending for the first and third person singular. While the use of present subjunctive for reported speech is formal and common in newspaper articles, its use in colloquial speech is in continual decline.
It is possible to express the subjunctive in various tenses, including the perfect (er sei da gewesen 'he has [apparently] been there') and the future (er werde da sein 'he will be there'). For the preterite, which forms the Konjunktiv II with a somewhat other meaning, indirect speech has to switch to the perfect tense, so that: Er sagte: "Ich war da." becomes Er sagte, er sei da gewesen.
Konjunktiv II
[edit]The KII, or past subjunctive, is used to form the conditional and, on occasion, as a replacement for the present subjunctive when both indicative and subjunctive moods of a particular verb are indistinguishable.
Every German verb has a past subjunctive conjugation, but in spoken German, the conditional is most commonly formed using würde (Konjunktiv II form of werden which in here is related to the English will or would rather than the literal to become; dialect: täte, KII of tun 'to do') with an infinitive. For example: An deiner Stelle würde ich ihm nicht helfen 'I would not help him if I were you'. In the example, the Konjunktiv II form of helfen (hülfe) is very unusual. However, using 'würde' instead of hätte (past subjunctive declension of haben 'to have') and wäre (past subjunctive declension of sein 'to be') can be perceived anywhere from awkward (in-the-present use of the past subjunctive) to incorrect (in the past subjunctive). There is a tendency to use the forms in würde rather in main clauses as in English; in subclauses even regular forms (which sound like the indicative of the preterite and are, thus, obsolete in any other circumstances) can still be heard.
Some verbs exist for which either construction can be used, such as with finden (fände) and tun (täte). Many dictionaries consider the past subjunctive declension of such verbs the only proper expression in formal written German.
The past subjunctive is declined from the stem of the preterite (imperfect) declension of the verb with the appropriate present subjunctive declension ending as appropriate. In most cases, an umlaut is appended to the stem vowel if possible (i.e. if it is a, o, u or au), for example: ich war → ich wäre, ich brachte → ich brächte.
Dutch
[edit]Dutch has the same subjunctive tenses as German (described above), though they are rare in contemporary speech. The same two tenses as in German are sometimes considered a subjunctive mood (aanvoegende wijs) and sometimes conditional mood (voorwaardelijke wijs). In practice, potential subjunctive uses of verbs are difficult to differentiate from indicative uses. This is partly because the subjunctive mood has fallen together with the indicative mood:
- The plural of the subjunctive (both present and past) is always identical to the plural of the indicative. There are a few exceptions where the usage is clearly subjunctive, like: Mogen zij in vrede rusten (May they rest in peace); compare to singular: Moge hij/zij in vrede rusten (May he/she rest in peace).
- In the present tense, the singular form of the subjunctive differs from the indicative, having an extra -e. E.g., the subjunctive God zegene je, mijn kind (May God bless you, my child) differs from the indicative God zegent je, mijn kind (God blesses you, my child.)
- In the past tense, the singular form of the subjunctive of weak verbs (the vast majority of verbs) does not differ from the indicative at all, so that for those verbs there is no difference between indicative and subjunctive whatsoever in the past tense. Only for strong verbs, the preterite-present verbs and some irregular weak verbs does the past subjunctive differ from the past indicative, and only in the singular form. E.g., the subjunctive hadde, ware and mochte differ from the indicative "had", "was" and mocht ("had", "was" and "could").
Archaic and traditional phrases still contain the subjunctive mood:
- Men neme ... ("Take ..." – literally "one take ..." – as found in recipes)
- Uw naam worde geheiligd ("Thy name be hallowed" – from the Lord's Prayer)
- Geheiligd zij Uw naam ("Hallowed be thy name" – from the Lord's Prayer, as used in Belgium until 2016)
- Zo waarlijk helpe mij God almachtig ("So truly help me God almighty" – when swearing an oath)
- Godverdomme (now a common Dutch curse; originally a request to God to curse something)
- God zij dank ("Thanks be to God")
- Dankzij ... ("Thanks to ..." – literally "Thank be ...")
- Leve de koning ("Long live the king")
Luxembourgish
[edit]Luxembourgish has the same subjunctive tenses as German (described above). For the periphrasis however, géif is used instead of würde or (dialectal) täte.
Swedish
[edit]The subjunctive mood is rarely used in modern Swedish and is limited to a few fixed expressions like leve kungen, "long live the king". Present subjunctive is formed by adding the -e ending to the stem of a verb:
Infinitive Present tense indicative Present tense subjunctive att tala, "to speak" talar, "speak(s)" tale, "may speak" att bli, "to become" blir, "become(s)" blive, "may become" (the -v- comes from the older form bliva) att skriva, "to write" skriver, "write(s)" skrive, "may write" att springa, "to run" springer, "run(s)" springe, "may run"
Infinitive Past tense indicative Supine indicative Past tense subjunctive att finnas, "to exist (be)" fanns, "existed (there was)" funnits, "has existed (there has been)" om det funnes tid, "if only there were time" (changes past tense -a- to supine -u-) att bli, "to become" blev, "became" blivit, "have/has become" om det bleve så, "if only it became so" (regular: just appends -e to the past tense) att skriva, "to write" skrev, "wrote" skrivit, "written" om jag skreve ett brev, "if I should write a letter" (regular: appends -e)
Latin and the Romance languages
[edit]Latin
[edit]The Latin subjunctive has many uses, contingent upon the nature of a clause within a sentence:[3]
Within independent clauses:
- Exhortation or command
- Concession
- Wish
- Question of doubt
- Possibility or contingency
Within dependent clauses:
- Condition
- Purpose
- Characteristic
- Result
- Time
- Indirect questions
Historically, the Latin subjunctive originates from the ancestral optative inflections, while some of the original subjunctive forms went on to compose the Latin future tense, especially in the Latin third conjugation.[citation needed] The *-i- of the old optative forms manifests itself in the fact that the Latin subjunctives typically have a high vowel even when the indicative mood has a lower vowel; for example, Latin rogamus, "we ask", in the indicative mood, corresponds to the subjunctive rogemus, "let us ask", where e is a higher vowel than a.
| Conjugation | 1st | 2nd | 3rd[4] | 3rdIO | 4th |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1st singular | rogem | habeam | curram | excipiam | veniam |
| 2nd singular | roges | habeas | curras | excipias | venias |
| 3rd singular | roget | habeat | currat | excipiat | veniat |
| 1st plural | rogemus | habeamus | curramus | excipiamus | veniamus |
| 2nd plural | rogetis | habeatis | curratis | excipiatis | veniatis |
| 3rd plural | rogent | habeant | currant | excipiant | veniant |
The subjunctive mood retains a highly distinct form for nearly all verbs in Portuguese, Spanish and Italian (among other Romance languages), and for a number of verbs in French. All of these languages inherit their subjunctive from Latin, where the subjunctive mood combines both forms and usages from a number of original Indo-European inflection sets, including the original subjunctive and the optative mood.
In many cases, the Romance languages use the subjunctive in the same ways that English does; however, they use them in other ways as well. For example, English generally uses the auxiliary 'may' or 'let' to form desiderative expressions, such as "Let it snow". The Romance languages use the subjunctive for these; French, for example, says, Qu'il neige and Qu'ils vivent jusqu'à leur vieillesse. However, in the case of the first-person plural, these languages have imperative forms: "Let us go" in French is Allons-y. In addition, the Romance languages tend to use the subjunctive in various kinds of subordinate clauses, such as those introduced by words meaning although, e.g. English: "Although I am old, I feel young"; French: Bien que je sois vieux, je me sens jeune.
In Spanish, phrases with words like lo que (that which, what), quien (who), or donde (where) and subjunctive verb forms are often translated to English with some variation of "whatever" or sometimes an indefinite pronoun. Spanish lo que sea, which is, by a literal interpretation, along the lines of "the thing which is", is translated as English "whatever" or "anything"; similarly, Spanish donde sea is English "wherever" and Spanish quien sea is English "whoever". For example, Spanish lo que quieras, literally "that which you want", is translated as English "whatever you may want"; Spanish cueste lo que cueste is translated to English as "whatever it may cost"; and Spanish donde vayas, voy is translated to English as "wherever you go, I go". The acronym W.E.I.R.D.O. is commonly used by English-speaking students of Spanish to learn the subjunctive. It usually stands for Wish Emotion Impersonal Expressions Recommendations Doubt Ojalá. With the exception of negative commands, the subjunctive is always activated in the second clause when a situation of "W.E.I.R.D.O" is present.
French
[edit]Present and past subjunctives
The subjunctive is used mostly with verbs or adverbs expressing desire, doubt or eventuality; it may also express an order. It is almost always preceded by the conjunction que (that).
Use of the subjunctive is in many respects similar to English:
- Jussive (issuing orders, commanding, or exhorting): Il faut qu'il comprenne cela ("It is necessary that he understand that")
- Desiderative: Vive la république! ("Long live the republic!")
Sometimes it is not:
- Desiderative: Que la lumière soit! ("Let there be light!")
- In certain subordinate clauses:
- Bien que ce soit mon anniversaire: ("Even though it is my birthday") (although English does introduce a similar subjunctive element in an alternative: "It might be my birthday, but I am working"
- Avant que je ne m’en aille ("Before I go away")
| English | French | |
|---|---|---|
| It is important that she speak. (subjunctive) | Il est important qu'elle parle | |
| That the book pleases you does not surprise me. (indicative) | Que le livre te plaise ne me surprend pas. | |
| present subjunctive | ||
French uses a past subjunctive, equivalent in tense to the passé composé in the indicative mood, called "passé du subjonctif". It is the only other subjunctive tense used in modern-day conversational French. It is formed with the auxiliary être or avoir and the past participle of the verb. Unlike other Romance languages, such as Spanish, it is not always necessary that the preceding clause be in the past to trigger the passé du subjonctif in the subordinate clause:
| English | French | |
|---|---|---|
| It is important that she have spoken. (subjunctive) | Il est important qu'elle ait parlé. | |
| That the book pleased you does not surprise me. (indicative) | Que le livre t'ait plu ne me surprend pas. | |
| past subjunctive | ||
Imperfect and pluperfect subjunctives
French also has an imperfect subjunctive, which in older, formal, or literary writing, replaces the present subjunctive in a subordinate clause when the main clause is in a past tense (including in the French conditional, which is morphologically a future-in-the-past):
| English | French | |
|---|---|---|
| modern spoken | older, formal, or literary | |
| It was necessary that he speak | Il était nécessaire qu’il parle | Il était nécessaire qu’il parlât |
| I feared that he act so. | Je craignais qu'il agisse ainsi | Je craignais qu'il agît ainsi |
| I would want him to do it. | Je voudrais qu’il le fasse | Je voudrais qu’il le fît |
| present subjunctive | imperfect subjunctive | |
Pour une brave dame, / Monsieur, qui vous honore, et de toute son âme
Voudrait que vous vinssiez, à ma sommation, / Lui faire un petit mot de réparation.
— Jean Racine (1669), Les Plaideurs, 2.4.16–19
[...] je voudrais que vous vinssiez une fois à Berlin pour y rester, et que vous eussiez la force de soustraire votre légère nacelle aux bourrasques et aux vents qui l'ont battue si souvent en France.
— Œuvres complètes de Voltaire (1828), Paris, page 595
J'aimerais qu'ils fissent leur début comme sous-maîtres dans les écoles importantes.
— Théodore Henri Barrau (1842), De l'éducation morale de la jeunesse, page 191
Je craignais que vous ne voulussiez pas me recevoir.
— Eugène Sue (1847), Martin et Bamboche, 3.3.7
Similarly, pluperfect subjunctive replace past subjunctive in same context:
| English | French | |
|---|---|---|
| modern spoken | older, formal, or literary | |
| It was necessary that you have spoken | Il était nécessaire que tu aies parlé | Il était nécessaire que tu eusses parlé |
| I regretted that you had acted so. | Je regrettais que tu aies agi ainsi | Je regrettais que tu eusses agi ainsi |
| I would have liked you to have done it. | J'aurais aimé que tu l'aies fait | J'aurais aimé que tu l'eusses fait |
| past subjunctive | pluperfect subjunctive | |
Ma lettre, à laquelle vous venez de répondre, a fait un effet bien différent que je n'attendois : elle vous a fait partir, et moi je comptois qu'elle vous feroit rester jusqu'à ce que vous eussiez reçu des nouvelles du départ de mon manuscrit; au moins étoit-ce le sens littéral et spirituel de ma lettre.
— Montesquieu, Lettres familières, 18
Italian
[edit]The Italian subjunctive (congiuntivo) is commonly used, although, especially in the spoken language, it is sometimes substituted by the indicative.[5]
The subjunctive is used mainly in subordinate clauses following a set phrase or conjunction, such as benché, senza che, prima che, or perché. It is also used with verbs of doubt, possibility and expressing an opinion or desire, for example with credo che, è possibile che and ritengo che, and sometimes with superlatives and virtual superlatives.
- English: I believe (that) she is the best.
- Italian: (Io) credo (che) (ella/lei) sia la migliore.
Differently from the French subjunctive, the Italian one is used after expressions like Penso che ("I think that"), where in French the indicative would be used. However, it is also possible to use the subjunctive after the expression Je ne pense pas que... ("I don't think that..."), and in questions like Penses-tu que... ("Do you think that..."), even though the indicative forms can be correct, too.
Present subjunctive
[edit]The present subjunctive is similar to, but still mostly distinguishable from, the present indicative. Subject pronouns are often used with the present subjunctive where they are normally omitted in the indicative, since in the first, second and third person singular forms they are the same, so the person is not implicitly implied from the verb. Irregular verbs tend to follow the first person singular form, such as the present subjunctive forms of andare, which goes to vada etc. (first person singular form is vado).
The present subjunctive is used in a range of situations in clauses taking the subjunctive.
- English: "It is possible that they have to leave."
- Italian: "È possibile che debbano partire."
- English: "My parents want me to play the piano."
- Italian: "I miei genitori vogliono che io suoni il pianoforte."
The present subjunctive is used mostly in subordinate clauses, as in the examples above. However, exceptions include imperatives using the subjunctive (using the third person), and general statements of desire.
- English: "Be careful!"
- Italian: "Stia attento!"
- English: "Long live the republic!"
- Italian: "Viva la repubblica!"
Imperfect subjunctive
[edit]The Italian imperfect subjunctive is very similar in appearance to (but used much more in speech than) the French imperfect subjunctive, and forms are largely regular, apart from the verbs essere, dare and stare (which go to fossi, dessi and stessi etc.). However, unlike in French, where it is often replaced with the present subjunctive, the imperfect subjunctive is far more common. Verbs with a contracted infinitive, such as dire (short for dicere) revert to the longer form in the imperfect subjunctive (to give dicessi etc., for example).
The imperfect subjunctive is used in subordinate clauses taking the subjunctive where the sense of the verb requires the imperfect.
- English: "It seemed that Elsa was not coming."
- Italian: "Sembrava che Elsa non venisse."
- English: "The teacher slowed down, so that we would understand everything."
- Italian: "L’insegnante rallentava, affinché capissimo tutto."
The imperfect subjunctive is used in "if" clauses, where the main clause is in the conditional tense, as in English and German.
- English: "If I had a lot of money, I would buy many cars."
- Italian: "Se avessi molti soldi, comprerei tante automobili."
- English: "You would know if we were lying."
- Italian: "Sapresti se mentissimo."
Perfect and pluperfect subjunctives
[edit]The perfect and pluperfect subjunctives are formed much like the indicative perfect and pluperfect, except the auxiliary (either avere or essere) verb takes the present and imperfect subjunctive respectively.
They are used in subordinate clauses which require the subjunctive, where the sense of the verb requires use of the perfect or pluperfect.
- English: "Although they had not killed the doctor, the police arrested the men."
- Italian: "Benché non avessero ucciso il medico, la polizia arrestò gli uomini."
- English: "I would have done it, provided you had helped me."
- Italian: "Lo avrei fatto, purché tu mi avessi assistito."
Spanish
[edit]The subjunctive mood (subjuntivo) is a fundamental element of Spanish. Its spoken form makes use of it to a much larger degree than other Latin languages and it is in no case homonymous to any other mood. Furthermore, it is common to find long complex sentences almost entirely in the subjunctive.
The subjunctive is used in conjunction with impersonal expressions and expressions of emotion, opinion, desire or viewpoint. More importantly, it applies to most hypothetical situations, likely or unlikely, desired or not. Normally, only certitude of (or statement of) a fact will remove the possibility of its use. Unlike French, it is also used in phrases expressing the past conditional. The negative of the imperative shares the same form with the present subjunctive.
Common introductions to the subjunctive would include the following:
- que... or de que... as in que sea (present subjunctive) lo que Dios quiera (present subjunctive): "Let it be what God wills".
- Si...: "If.." (e.g. si estuvieras: "if you were...")
- Donde: "Where.." (e.g. donde sea, "anywhere")
- Cuando: "When.." (referring to a future time, e.g. cuando vaya, "when I go")
- Aunque: "Despite/although/even if..."
- Ojalá... "I hope..." (derived from Arabic إن شاء ألله, in šāʾ ʾallāh, 'God willing') e.g. Ojalá que llueva (present subjunctive) "I hope it rains" or Ojalá que lloviera (past subjunctive) "I wish it would rain".
Nevertheless, the subjunctive can stand alone to supplant other tenses.
For example, "I would like" can be said in the conditional Querría or in the past subjunctive Quisiera, as in Quisiera (past subjunctive) que vinieras (past subjunctive), i.e. "I would like you to come".
Comfort with the subjunctive form and the degree to which a second-language speaker attempts to avoid its use can be an indicator of the level of proficiency in the language. Complex use of the subjunctive is a constant pattern of everyday speech among native speakers but difficult to interiorize even by relatively proficient Spanish learners (e.g. I would have liked you to come on Thursday: Me habría gustado (conditional perfect) que vinieras (past subjunctive) el jueves.
An example of the subtlety of the Spanish subjunctive is the way the tense (past, present or future) modifies the expression "be it as it may" (literally "be what it be"):
- Sea lo que sea (present subjunctive + present subjunctive): "No matter what/whatever."
- Sea lo que fuera (present subjunctive + past subjunctive): "Whatever it were."
- Fuera lo que fuera (past subjunctive + past subjunctive): (Similar meaning to above).
- Sea lo que fuere. (Present subjunctive + future subjunctive): "Whatever it may be."
- Fuera lo que hubiera sido. (Past subjunctive + past pluperfect subjunctive): "Whatever/no matter what it may have been".
The same alterations could be made to the expression Sea como sea or "no matter how" with similar changes in meaning.
Spanish has two past subjunctive forms. They are almost identical, except that where the "first form" has -ra-, the "second form" has -se-. Both forms are usually interchangeable although the -se- form may be more common in Spain than in other Spanish-speaking areas. The -ra- forms may also be used as an alternative to the conditional in certain structures.
Present subjunctive
In Spanish, a present subjunctive form is always different from the corresponding present indicative form. For example, whereas English "that they speak" or French qu'ils parlent can be either indicative or subjunctive, Spanish que hablen is unambiguously subjunctive. (The corresponding indicative would be que hablan.) The same is true for all verbs, regardless of their subject.
When to use:
- When there are two clauses, separated by que. However, not all que clauses require the subjunctive mood. They must have at least one of the following criteria:
- As the fourth edition of Mosaicos[6] states, when the verb of the main clause expresses emotion (e.g. fear, happiness, sorrow, etc.)
- Impersonal expressions are used in the main clause. (It is important that...)
- The verb in the second clause is the one that is in subjunctive.
Examples:
- Ojalá que me compren (comprar) un regalo. (I hope that they will buy me a gift.)
- Te recomiendo que no corras (correr) con tijeras. (I recommend that you not run with scissors.)
- Dudo que el restaurante abra (abrir) a las seis. (I doubt that the restaurant might open at six.)
- Lo discutiremos cuando venga (venir). (We will talk about it when he/she comes.)
- Es importante que (nosotros) hagamos ejercicio. (It is important that we exercise.)
- Me alegro de que (tú) seas mi amiga. (I am happy that you are my friend.)
Past (imperfect) subjunctive
Used interchangeably, the past (imperfect) subjunctive can end either in -se or -ra. Both forms stem from the third-person plural (ellos, ellas, ustedes) of the preterite. For example, the verb estar, when conjugated in the third-person plural of the preterite, becomes estuvieron. Then, drop the -ron ending, and add either -se or -ra. Thus, it becomes estuviese or estuviera. The past subjunctive may be used with "if... then" statements with the conditional mood. Example:
- Si yo fuera/fuese el maestro, no mandaría demasiados deberes. (If I were the teacher, I would not give too much homework.)
Future subjunctive
In Spanish, the future subjunctive tense is now rare but still used in certain dialects of Spanish and in formal speech. It is usually reserved for literature, archaic phrases and expressions, and legal documents. (The form is similar to the -ra form of the imperfect subjunctive, but with a -re ending instead of -ra, -res instead of -ras and so on.) Example:
- Si así yo no lo hiciere, que Dios y la patria me lo demanden. (If I don't do it, may God and the fatherland demand it from me.)
Phrases expressing the subjunctive in a future period normally employ the present subjunctive. For example: "I hope that it will rain tomorrow" would simply be Espero que llueva mañana (where llueva is the third-person singular present subjunctive of llover, "to rain").
Pluperfect (past perfect) subjunctive
In Spanish, the pluperfect subjunctive tense is used to describe a continuing wish in the past. Desearía que (tú) hubieras ido al cine conmigo el viernes pasado. (I wish that you had gone to the movies with me last Friday). To form this tense, first the subjunctive form of haber is conjugated (in the example above, haber becomes hubieras). Then the participle of the main verb (in this case is added, ir becomes ido).
- Me gustaría que 'hubieras ido'/'hubieses ido', pero él suspendió su examen de matemáticas. (I would have liked if you had gone, but he failed his math test.)
Though the -re form appears to be more closely related to the imperfect subjunctive -ra form than the -se form, that is not the case. The -se form of the imperfect subjunctive derives from the pluperfect subjunctive of Vulgar Latin and the -ra from the pluperfect indicative, combining to overtake the previous pluperfect subjunctive ending. The -re form is more complicated, stemming (so to speak) from a fusion of the perfect subjunctive and future perfect indicative—which, though in different moods, happened to be identical in the second and third persons—before losing the perfect in the shift to future subjunctive, the same perfect nature that was the only thing the forms originally shared. So the -ra and -se forms always had a past (to be specific, pluperfect) meaning, but only the -se form always belonged with the subjunctive mood that the -re form had since its emergence.[7]
Portuguese
[edit]In Portuguese, as in Spanish, the subjunctive (subjuntivo or conjuntivo) is complex, being generally used to talk about situations which are seen as doubtful, imaginary, hypothetical, demanded, or required. It can also express emotion, opinion, disagreement, denial, or a wish. Its value is similar to the one it has in formal English:
Present subjunctive
- Command: Faça-se luz! "Let there be light!"
- Wish: Viva o rei! "Long live the king!"
- Necessity: É importante que ele compreenda isso. "It is important that he understand that."
- In certain, subordinate clauses:
- Ainda que seja o meu aniversário... "Even though it be my birthday..."
- Antes que eu vá... "Before I go..."
Imperfect (past) subjunctive
As in Spanish, the imperfect subjunctive is in vernacular use, and it is employed, among other things, to make the tense of a subordinate clause agree with the tense of the main clause:
- English: It is [present indicative] necessary that he speak [present subjunctive]. → It was [past indicative] necessary that he speak [present subjunctive].
- Portuguese: É [present indicative] necessário que ele fale [present subjunctive]. → Era necessário [past (imperfect) indicative] que ele falasse [past (imperfect) subjunctive].
The imperfect subjunctive is also used when the main clause is in the conditional:
- English: It would be [conditional] necessary that he speak [present subjunctive].
- Portuguese: Seria [conditional] necessário que ele falasse [imperfect subjunctive].
There are authors[who?] who regard the conditional of Portuguese as a "future in the past" of the indicative mood, rather than as a separate mood; they call it futuro do pretérito ("future of the past"), especially in Brazil.
Future subjunctive
Portuguese differs from other Ibero-Romance languages in having retained the medieval future subjunctive (futuro do subjuntivo), which is rarely used in Spanish and has been lost in other West Iberic languages. It expresses a condition that must be fulfilled in the future, or is assumed to be fulfilled, before an event can happen. Spanish and English will use the present tense in this type of clause.
For example, in conditional sentences whose main clause is in the conditional, Portuguese, Spanish and English employ the past tense in the subordinate clause. Nevertheless, if the main clause is in the future, Portuguese will employ the future subjunctive where English and Spanish use the present indicative. (English, when being used in a rigorously formal style, takes the present subjunctive in these situations, example: "Should I be, then...") Contrast the following two sentences.
- English: If I were [past subjunctive] king, I would end [conditional] hunger.
- Spanish: Si fuera [imperfect subjunctive] rey, acabaría con [conditional] el hambre.
- Portuguese: Se fosse [imperfect subjunctive] rei, acabaria com [conditional] a fome.
- English: If I am [present indicative] [technical English is "should I be" present subjunctive] elected president, I will change [future indicative] the law.
- Spanish: Si soy [present indicative] elegido presidente, cambiaré [future indicative] la ley.
- Portuguese: Se for [future subjunctive] eleito presidente, mudarei [future indicative] a lei.
The first situation is counterfactual; the listener knows that the speaker is not a king. However, the second statement expresses a promise about the future; the speaker may yet be elected president.
For a different example, a father speaking to his son might say:
- English: When you are [present indicative] older, you will understand [future indicative].
- Spanish: Cuando seas [present subjunctive] mayor, comprenderás [future indicative].
- French: Quand tu seras [future indicative] grand, tu comprendras [future indicative].
- Italian: Quando sarai [future indicative] grande, comprenderai [future indicative].
- Portuguese: Quando fores [future subjunctive] mais velho, compreenderás [future indicative].
The future subjunctive is identical in form to the personal infinitive in regular verbs, but they differ in some irregular verbs of frequent use. However, the possible differences between the two tenses are due only to stem changes. They always have the same endings.
The meaning of sentences can change by switching subjunctive and indicative:
- Ele pensou que eu fosse alto (He thought that I was tall [and I am not])
- Ele pensou que eu era alto (He thought that I was tall [and I am or I am not sure whether I am or not])
- Se formos lá (If we go there)
- Se vamos lá (equivalent to "if we are going there")
Below, there is a table demonstrating subjunctive and conditional conjugation for regular verbs of the first paradigm (-ar), exemplified by falar (to speak) .
| Grammatical person | Past subjunctive | Present subjunctive | Future subjunctive | Conditional (future of past) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eu | falasse | fale | falar | falaria |
| Tu | falasses | fales | falares | falarias |
| Ele/Ela | falasse | fale | falar | falaria |
| Nós | falássemos | falemos | falarmos | falaríamos |
| Vós | falásseis | faleis | falardes | falaríeis |
| Eles/Elas | falassem | falem | falarem | falariam |
Compound subjunctives
Compound verbs in subjunctive are necessary in more complex sentences, such as subordinate clauses with embedded perfective tenses e.g., perfective state in the future. To form compound subjunctives auxiliar verbs (ter or haver) must conjugate to the respective subjunctive tense, while the main verbs must take their participles.
- Queria que houvesses sido eleito presidente (I wish you had been elected president)
- É importante que hajas compreendido isso. (It is important that you have comprehended that)
- Quando houver sido eleito presidente, mudarei a lei (When I will have been elected president, I will change the law)
- A cidade haver-se-ia afundado se não fosse por seus alicerces (The city would have sunk, if not for its foundation)
| Grammatical person | Past subjunctive | Present subjunctive | Future subjunctive | Conditional |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eu | houvesse/tivesse falado | haja/tenha falado | houver/tiver falado | haveria/teria falado |
| Tu | houvesses/tivesses falado | hajas/tenhas falado | houveres/tiveres falado | haverias/terias falado |
| Ele/Ela | houvesse/tivesse falado | haja/tenha falado | houver/tiver falado | haveria/teria falado |
| Nós | houvéssemos/tivéssemos falado | hajamos/tenhamos falado | houvermos/tivermos falado | haveríamos/teríamos falado |
| Vós | houvésseis/tivésseis falado | hajais/tenhais falado | houverdes/tiverdes falado | haveríeis/teríeis falado |
| Eles/Elas | houvessem/tivessem falado | hajam/tenham falado | houverem/tivermos falado | haveriam/teriam falado |
Romanian
[edit]Romanian is part of the Balkan Sprachbund and as such uses the subjunctive (conjunctiv) more extensively than other Romance languages. The subjunctive forms always include the conjunction să, which within these verbal forms plays the role of a morphological structural element. The subjunctive has two tenses: the past tense and the present tense. It is usually used in subordinate clauses.
Present subjunctive
The present subjunctive is usually built in the 1st and 2nd person singular and plural by adding the conjunction să before the present indicative (indicative: am I have; conjunctive: să am (that) I have; indicative: vii you come; conjunctive: să vii (t/hat) you come). In the 3rd person most verbs have a specific conjunctive form which differs from the indicative either in the ending or in the stem itself; there is however no distinction between the singular and plural of the present conjunctive in the 3rd person (indicative: are he has; conjunctive: să aibă (that) he has; indicative: au they have; conjunctive: să aibă (that) they have; indicative: vine he comes; conjunctive: să vină (that) he comes; indicative: vin they come; conjunctive: să vină (that) they come).
The present tense is by far the most widely used of the two subjunctive tenses and is used frequently after verbs that express wish, preference, permission, possibility, request, advice, etc.: a vrea to want, a dori to wish, a prefera to prefer, a lăsa to let, to allow, a ruga to ask, a sfătui to advise, a sugera to suggest, a recomanda to recommend, a cere to demand, to ask for, a interzice to forbid, a permite to allow, to give permission, a se teme to be afraid, etc.
When used independently, the subjunctive indicates a desire, a fear, an order or a request, i.e. has modal and imperative values. The present subjunctive is used in questions having the modal value of should:
- Să plec? Should I leave?
- Să mai stau? Should I stay longer?
- De ce să plece? Why should he/she leave?
The present subjunctive is often used as an imperative, mainly for other persons than the second person. When used with the second person, it is even stronger than the imperative. The first-person plural can be preceded by the interjection hai, which intensifies the imperative meaning of the structure:
- Să mergem! Let us go! or Hai să mergem! Come on, let's go!
- Să plece imediat! I want him to leave immediately!
- Să-mi aduci un pahar de apă! Bring me a glass of water!
The subjunctive present is used in certain set phrases used as greetings in specific situations:
- Să creşti mare! (to a child, after he or she declared his or her age or thanked for something)
- Să ne (să-ţi, să vă) fie de bine! (to people who have finished their meals)
- Să-l (să o, să le etc.) porţi sănătos / sănătoasă! (when somebody shows up in new clothes, with new shoes)
- Dumnezeu să-l (s-o, să-i, să le) ierte! (after mentioning the name of a person who died recently)
Past subjunctive
The past tense of the subjunctive mood has one form for all persons and numbers of all the verbs, which is să fi followed by the past participle of the verb. The past subjunctive is used after the past optative-conditional of the verbs that require the subjunctive (a trebui, a vrea, a putea, a fi bine, a fi necesar, etc.), in constructions that express the necessity, the desire in the past:
- Ar fi trebuit să fi rămas acasă. You should have stayed home.
- Ar fi fost mai bine să mai fi stat. It would have been better if we had stayed longer.
When used independently, the past subjunctive indicates a regret related to a past-accomplished action that is seen as undesirable at the moment of speaking:
- Să fi rămas acasă We should have stayed at home. (Note: the same construction can be used for all persons and numbers.)[8]
Celtic languages
[edit]Welsh
[edit]In Welsh, there are two forms of the subjunctive: present and imperfect. The present subjunctive is barely ever used in spoken Welsh except in certain fixed phrases, and is restricted in most cases to the third person singular. However, it is more likely to be found in literary Welsh, most widely in more old-fashioned registers. The third-person singular is properly used after certain conjunctions and prepositions but in spoken Welsh the present subjunctive is frequently replaced by either the infinitives, the present tense, the conditional, or the future tense (this latter is called the present-future by some grammarians).
| Present indicative | Present subjunctive | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| English | Welsh | English | Welsh |
| I am | (Ry)dw i/... ydw i | (that) I be | bwyf, byddwyf |
| Thou art | (R)wyt ti/... wyt ti | (that) thou be[est] | bych, byddych |
| He is | Mae e/... ydy e Mae o/...ydy o |
(that) he be | bo, byddo |
| One is | Ydys | (that) one be | bydder |
| We are | (Ry)dyn ni/...dyn ni (Ry)dan ni/... dan ni |
(that) we be | bôm, byddom |
| You are | (Ry)dych chi/...dych chi (Ry)dach chi/... dach chi |
(that) you be | boch, byddoch |
| They are | Maen nhw/...dyn nhw | (that) they be | bônt, byddont |
| Literary English | Literary Welsh | Spoken English | Spoken Welsh |
|---|---|---|---|
| When need be | Pan fo angen | When there'll be need | Pan fydd angen |
| Before it be | Cyn (y) bo | Before it's | Cyn iddi fod |
| In order that there be | Fel y bo | In order for there to be | Er mwyn bod |
| She left so that she be safe | Gadawodd hi fel y bo hi'n ddiogel | She left so that she'd be safe | Gadawodd hi fel y byddai hi'n ddiogel |
| It is time that I go | Mae'n amser yr elwyf | It's time for me to go | Mae'n amser imi fynd |
The imperfect subjunctive, as in English, only affects the verb bod ("to be"). It is used after pe (a form of "if") and it must be accompanied by the conditional subjunctive e.g. Pe bawn i'n gyfoethog, teithiwn i trwy'r byd. = "If I were rich, I would travel throughout the world."
| Imperfect indicative | Conditional subjunctive | Imperfect subjunctive | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| English | Welsh | English | Welsh | English | Welsh |
| I was | (R)oeddwn i | I would be | byddwn i | (that) I were | bawn i |
| Thou wast | (R)oeddet ti | Thou wouldst be | byddet ti | (that) thou wert | baet ti |
| He was She was |
(R)oedd e/o (R)oedd hi |
He would be She would be |
byddai fe/fo byddai hi |
(that) he were (that) she were |
bai fe/fo bai hi |
| One was | (R)oeddid | One would be | byddid | (that) one were | byddid |
| We were | (R)oeddem ni | We would be | byddem ni | (that) we were | baem ni |
| You were | (R)oeddech chi | You would be | byddech chi | (that) you were | baech chi |
| They were | (R)oedden nhw | They would be | bydden nhw | (that) they were | baent hwy |
For all other verbs in Welsh, as in English, the imperfect subjunctive takes the same stems as do the conditional subjunctive and the imperfect indicative.
Scottish Gaelic
[edit]In Scottish Gaelic, the subjunctive does exist but still takes the forms from the indicative: the present subjunctive takes the (dependent) future forms and the past subjunctive takes the conditional forms. The subjunctive is normally used in proverbs or truisms in phrases that start with 'May...' For example,
- Gum bi Rìgh Ruisiart beò fada! – Long live King Richard (lit. May King Richard live long).
- Gum bi beanachd Dè oirbh uile! – May God bless you all!
- Gun gabh e a fhois ann sìth – May he rest in peace.
Or when used as the conjunction, the subjunctive is used, like every other language, in a more demanding or wishful statement:
- Se àm gum fàg e a-nis. – It is time that he leave now.
- Tha e riatanach gun tèid iad gu sgoil gach là. – It is necessary that they go to school every day.
- Dh'fhaighnich e nach faic mi ise. – He asked that I not see her.
The subjunctive in Gaelic will sometimes have the conjunction gun (or gum before verbs beginning with labial consonants: p, b, m or f) can be translated as 'that' or as 'May ...' while making a wish. For negatives, nach is used instead.
Note that the present subjunctive is identical to the dependent future tense form, which lacks the ending -idh!
| Present indicative | Future | Present subjunctive | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| English | Gaelic | English | Gaelic | English | Gaelic |
| I am | Tha mi/ Is mise | I will be | Bidh mi | (that) I be | (gum) bi mi |
| Thou art | Tha thu/ Is tusa | Thou wilt be | Bidh tu | (that) thou be[est] | (gum) bi thu |
| He is | Tha e/ Is e | He will be | Bidh e | (that) he be | (gum) bi e |
| One is | Thathar | One will be | Bithear | (that) one be | (gum) bithear |
| We are | Tha sinn/ Is sinne | We will be | Bidh sinn | (that) we be | (gum) bi sinn |
| You are | Tha sibh/ Is sibhse | You will be | Bidh sibh | (that) you be | (gum) bi iad |
| They are | Tha iad/ Is iadsan | They will be | Bidh iad | (that) they be | (gum) bi iad |
In Scottish Gaelic, the past subjunctive of the verb bi 'be' is robh, exactly the same as the dependent form of the preterite indicative.
| Preterite indicative | Conditional | Past subjunctive | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| English | Gaelic | English | Gaelic | English | Gaelic |
| I was | Bha mi/ Bu mhise | I would be | Bhithinn | (that) I were | (gun) robh mi |
| Thou wast | Bha thu/ Bu tusa | Thou wouldst be | Bhiodh tu | (that) thou wert | (gun) robh thu |
| He was | Bha e/ B' e | He would be | Bhiodh e | (that) he were | (gun) robh e |
| One was | Bhathar | One would be | Bhite | (that) one were | (gun) robhas |
| We were | Bha sinn/ Bu sinne | We would be | Bhiodh sinn | (that) we were | (gun) robh sinn |
| You were | Bha sibh/ Bu sibhse | You would be | Bhiodh sibh | (that) you were | (gun) robh sibh |
| They were | Bha iad/ B' iadsan | They would be | Bhiodh iad | (that) they were | (gun) robh iad |
For every other verb in Gaelic, the past subjunctive is identical to the conditional.
Examples:
- Nan robh mi beairteach, shiubhlainn air feadh an t-saoghail. – If I were rich, I would travel all over the world.
- Mura dèanainn m' obair-dhachaigh, bhithinn ann an trioblaid. – If I had not done my homework, I would have been in trouble.
Or: Mura robh mi air m' obair-dhachaigh a dhèanamh, bhithinn (air a bhith) ann an trioblaid.
Irish
[edit]In the Irish language (Gaeilge), the subjunctive, like in Scottish Gaelic (its sister language), covers the idea of wishing something and so appears in some famous Irish proverbs and blessings. It is considered an old-fashioned tense for daily speech (except in set phrases) but still appears often in print.[9]
The subjunctive is normally formed from "Go" (which eclipses, and adds "n-" to a verb beginning with a vowel), plus the subjunctive form of the verb, plus the subject, plus the thing being wished for. For instance, the subjunctive form of "téigh" (go) is "té":
- Go dté tú slán. – May you be well. (lit: may you go well)
Or again, the subjunctive of "tabhair" (give) is "tuga":
- Go dtuga Dia ciall duit. – May God give you sense.
Or to take a third example, sometimes the wish is also a curse, like this one from Tory Island in Donegal:
- Go ndéana an Diabhal toirneach de d'anam in Ifreann. – May the Devil make thunder of your soul in Hell.
The subjunctive is generally formed by taking the stem of the verb and adding on the appropriate subjunctive ending depending on broad or slender, and first or second conjugation. For example, to the stem of bog (to move) is added -a giving as its subjunctive in the first person boga mé:
First conjugation:
| mol (to praise) | mola mé | mola tú | mola sé/sí | molaimid | mola sibh | mola siad |
| bris (to break) | brise mé | brise tú | brise sé/sí | brisimid | brise sibh | brise siad |
Second conjugation:
| beannaigh (to bless) | beannaí mé | beannaí tú | beannaí sé/sí | beannaímid | beannaí sibh | beannaí siad |
| bailigh (to collect) | bailí mé | bailí tú | bailí sé/sí | bailímid | bailí sibh | bailí siad |
E.g. "go mbeannaí Dia thú" – May God bless you.
There is also some irregularity in certain verbs in the subjunctive. The verb bí (to be) is the most irregular verb in Irish (as in most Indo-European languages):
| Present indicative | tá mé/táim | tá tú | tá sé/sí | tá muid/táimid | tá sibh | tá siad |
| Present subjunctive | raibh mé | raibh tú | raibh sé/sí | rabhaimid | raibh sibh | raibh siad |
The Irish phrase for "thank you" – go raibh maith agat – uses the subjunctive of "bí" and literally means "may there be good at-you".
Some verbs do not follow the conjugation of the subjunctive exactly as conjugated above. These irregularities apply to verbs whose stem ends already in a stressed vowel and thus due to the rules of Irish orthography and pronunciation, cannot take another. For example:
| Present indicative | Present subjunctive | |
|---|---|---|
| téigh (to go) | téann tú | té tú |
| sáigh (to stab) | sánn tú | sá tú |
| luigh (to lie down) | luíonn tú | luí tú |
| *feoigh (to decay; wither) | feonn tú | feo tú |
- Although feoigh doesn't have a síneadh fada (accent), the 'o' in this position is stressed (pronounced as though it is ó) and thus the subjunctive is irregular.
Where the subjunctive is used in English, it may not be used in Irish and another tense might be used instead. For example:
- If I were (past subjunctive) you, I would study for the exam tomorrow. – Dá mba (past/conditional of the copula) mise tusa, dhéanfainn (conditional) staidéar le haghaidh an scrúdaithe amárach.[10]
- I wish *(that) you were (past sub.) here. – Is mian liom go raibh (present sub.) tú anseo.
- It is important that he choose (present sub.) the right way—Tá sé tábhachtach go roghnóidh (future indicative) sé ar an mbealach ceart.
- When you're older (present ind.), you'll understand – Nuair a bheidh/bheas (future ind.) tú níos sine, tuigfidh tú.
- Note that in English, the relative pronoun that can be omitted; in Irish, the corresponding go must be retained.
- Note that in English, the present tense is often used to refer to a future state whereas in Irish there is less freedom with tenses (i.e. time is more strictly bound to the appropriate tense, present for present, past for past, future for future). In this particular example, you will be older and it is then that you will understand.
Indo-Aryan languages
[edit]Hindi-Urdu
[edit]There are two subjunctive moods in Hindi-Urdu (Hindustani), first the regular subjunctive and the second, the perfective subjunctive which superficially has the same form as the perfective aspect forms of verbs but still expresses future events, it is only ever used with if clauses and relative pronouns. In a semantic analysis, this use of the perfective aspect marker would not be considered perfective, since it is more closely related to subjunctive usage. Only the superficial form is identical to that of the perfective.[11]
The regular subjunctive mood can be put in two tenses; present and future.[11] There is another mood, called the contrafactual mood, which serves as both the past subjunctive and the past conditional mood in Hindustani.[12] Hindi-Urdu, apart from the non-aspectual forms (or the simple aspect) has three grammatical aspects (habitual, perfective & progressive) and each aspect can be put five grammatical moods (indicative, presumptive, subjunctive, contrafactual & imperative). The subjunctive mood can be put in the present tense only for the verb honā (to be) for any other verb only the future sujunctive form exists. Subjunctive mood forms for all the three grammatical aspects of Hindustani for the verbs honā (to be) and karnā (to do) are shown in the table below.
| mood | tense | singular | plural | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1P ma͠i | 2P tum[a] | 3P yah/ye, vah/vo | 1P ham | |||||||
| 2P āp[a] | ||||||||||
| 2P tū | 3P ye, ve/vo | |||||||||
| ♂ | ♀ | ♂ | ♀ | ♂ | ♀ | ♂ | ♀ | |||
| subjunctive | regular | present | hū̃ | ho | ho | hõ | ||||
| future | hoū̃ | hoo | hoe | hoẽ | ||||||
| perfective | huā | huī | hue | huī | huā | huī | hue | huī̃ | ||
| contrafactual | past | hotā | hotī | hote | hotī | hotā | hotī | hote | hotī̃ | |
| mood | tense | singular | plural | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1P ma͠i | 2P tum[a] | 3P yah/ye, vah/vo | 1P ham | |||||||
| 2P āp[a] | ||||||||||
| 2P tū | 3P ye, ve/vo | |||||||||
| ♂ | ♀ | ♂ | ♀ | ♂ | ♀ | ♂ | ♀ | |||
| HABITUAL ASPECT[b] | ||||||||||
| subjunctive | regular | present | kartā hū̃ | kartī hū̃ | karte ho | kartī ho | kartā ho | kartī ho | kartā hõ | kartī hõ |
| future[c] | kartā rahū̃ | kartī rahū̃ | karte raho | kartī raho | kartā rahe | kartī rahe | karte rahẽ | kartī rahẽ | ||
| perfective | kartā rahā | kartī rahī | karte rahe | kartī rahī | kartā rahā | kartī rahī | karte rahe | kartī rahī̃ | ||
| contrafactual | past | kartā hotā | kartī hotī | karte hote | kartī hotī | kartā hotā | kartī hotī | karte hote | kartī hotī̃ | |
| PERFECTIVE ASPECT | ||||||||||
| subjunctive | regular | present | kiyā hū̃ | kī hū̃ | kiye ho | kī ho | kiyā ho | kī ho | kiye hõ | kī hõ |
| future[c] | kiyā hoū̃ | kī hoū̃ | kiye hoo | kī hoo | kiyā hoe | kī hoe | kiye hoẽ | kī hoẽ | ||
| perfective | kiyā rahā | kī rahī | kiye rahe | kī rahī | kiyā rahā | kī rahī | kiye rahe | kī rahī̃ | ||
| contrafactual | past | kiyā hotā | kī hotī | kiye hote | kī hotī | kiyā hotā | kī hotī | kiye hote | kī hotī̃ | |
| PROGRESSIVE ASPECT[d] | ||||||||||
| subjunctive | regular | present | kar rahā hū̃ | kar rahī hū̃ | kar rahe ho | kar rahī ho | kar rahā ho | kar rahī ho | kar rahe hõ | kar rahī hõ |
| future | kar rahā hoū̃ | kar rahī hoū̃ | kar rahe hoo | kar rahī hoo | kar rahā hoe | kar rahī hoe | kar rahe hoẽ | kar rahī hoẽ | ||
| perfective | kar rahā huā | kar rahī huī | kar rahe hue | kar rahī huī | kar rahā hua | kar rahī huī | kar rahe hue | kar rahī huī̃ | ||
| contrafactual | past | kar rahā hotā | kar rahī hotī | kar rahe hote | kar rahī hotī | kar rahā hotā | kar rahī hotī | kar rahe hote | kar rahī hotī̃ | |
| mood | tense | singular | plural | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1P ma͠i | 2P tum[a] | 3P yah/ye, vah/vo | 1P ham | |||||||
| 2P āp[a] | ||||||||||
| 2P tū | 3P ye, ve/vo | |||||||||
| ♂ | ♀ | ♂ | ♀ | ♂ | ♀ | ♂ | ♀ | |||
| subjunctive | regular | future | karū̃ | karo | kare | karẽ | ||||
| perfective | kiyā | kī | kiye | kī | kiyā | kī | kiye | kī̃ | ||
| contrafactual | past | kartā | kartī | karte | kartī | kartā | kartī | karte | kartī̃ | |
- ^ a b c d e f The pronouns tum and āp in Hindi-Urdu can be used as both singular and plural pronouns, akin to the English pronoun "you".
- ^ Habitual aspect in Hindi-Urdu requires the copula rêhnā (to stay) to form future tense forms, progressive and perfective mood can use rêhnā (to stay) as well to form synonymous future subjunctive forms.
- ^ a b Perfective aspect in Hindi-Urdu requires the perfective past forms of the copula rêhnā (to stay) to form the perfective (future) subjunctive forms.
- ^ Unlike English, in which both the continuous and the progressive aspect have the same -ing form, the progressive aspect of Hindi-Urdu cannot convey the continuous aspect.
| Example Sentence | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Subjunctive | Regular | Present | uskī his/her.GEN tabiyat health.NOM sahī correct.ADJ ho be.SBJV.PRS bas. only (I only hope that) his/her health is in good condition. |
| Future | ummīd hope kar do rahī stay.PTCP hū̃ be.1P.SG. ki that bole tell.SBJV.FUT. vo he/she.NOM kuch something use. him/her.DAT I am hoping he/she tells something to him/her. | ||
| Perfective | Future | ma͠i I.NOM usse him/her.INST pūchū̃ ask.1P.SBJV.SG aur and usne he/she.ERG nahī̃ not batāyā tell.SBJV.PFV.FUT to? then (In the case that) I ask him and he doesn't tell (me) then? | |
| Contrafactual | Past | kāsh I wish usne he/she.ERG usī that.DEM.EMPH din day.NOM ye this.DEM bāt matter.NOM.FEM batā dī hotī. tell.CONTRA.FEM I wish he/she had told me about this thing on that day itself. | |
Slavic languages
[edit]The Slavic languages lost the Proto-Indo-European subjunctive altogether, while the old optative was repurposed as the imperative mood. Some modern Slavic languages have developed a new subjunctive-like construction,[13][14] although there is no consistent terminology. For example, some authors do not distinguish the subjunctive mood from the optative ("wishing") mood,[15] others do.[16]
Polish
[edit]The subjunctive mood is formed using the by particle, either alone or forming a single word with the complex conjunctions żeby, iżby, ażeby, aby, coby.[16][17] The mood does not have its own morphology, but instead a rule that the by-containing particle must be placed in front of the dependent clause.[13] Compare:
- Upieram się, że wychodzi indicative – I insist that he is leaving;
- Upieram się, (że)by wyszedł subjunctive – I insist that he leave;
- Upieram się, że wyszedłby conditional – I insist that he would leave.
The subjunctive mood in the dependent clause is obligatory in the case of certain independent clauses, for example it is incorrect to say chcę, że to zrobi, but the subjunctive mood must be used instead: chcę, by to zrobił.
The subjunctive can never be mistaken with the conditional,[13] despite that in the case of the conditional mood the clitic by and derivatives can move. See that in the following examples:
- Upieram się, że wtedy by nie wyszedł conditional – I insist that he would not have left then [at that time];
- Upieram się, że by wówczas nie wyszedł conditional – I insist that he would not have left then/[at that time]/[in that case];
- Myślę, że on by akurat wyszedł conditional – I think that he would have just left [a moment ago];
- Myślę, że gdyby wyszedł, ... conditional – I think, that if he would have left, ...
There is no conjunction, which would indicate the subjunctive. In particular, there is no żeby.
Compare to the closely related optative mood, e.g. the subjunctive nie nalegam, by wysłał list vs the optative oby wysłał list.
Bulgarian
[edit]Modal distinctions in subordinate clauses are expressed not through verb endings, but through the choice of complementizer – че (che) or да (da) (which might both be translated with the relative pronoun "that"). The verbs remain unchanged. In ordinary sentences, the imperfective aspect is most often used for the indicative, and the perfective for the subjunctive, but any combination is possible, with the corresponding change in meaning.
- e.g. iskam da stanesh (perfective) / iskam da stavash (imperfective) – i want you to get up.
The latter is more insisting, since the imperfective is the more immediate construction. Thus:
- Indicative – че –
- e.g. знам, че си тук – znam, che si tuk – I know that you are here;
- Subjunctive – да –
- e.g. настоявам да си тук – nastoyavam da si tuk – I insist that you be here.
Semitic languages
[edit]Arabic
[edit]In Classical Arabic, the verb in its imperfect aspect (al-muḍāri‘) has a subjunctive form called the manṣūb form (منصوب). It is distinct from the imperfect indicative in most of its forms: where the indicative has "-u", the subjunctive has "-a"; and where the indicative has "-na" or "-ni", the subjunctive has nothing at all. (The "-na" ending in the second and third-person plural feminine is different: it marks the gender and number, not the mood, and therefore it is there in both the indicative and subjunctive.)
- Indicative third singular masc. yaktubu "he writes / is writing / will write" → Subjunctive yaktuba "he may / should write"
- Indicative third plural masc. yaktubūna "they write" → Subjunctive yaktubū "they may write"
- Indicative third plural fem. yaktubna "they write" = Subjunctive yaktubna "they may write"
The subjunctive is used in that-clauses, after Arabic an: urīdu an aktuba "I want to write." However, in conditional and precative sentences, such as "if he goes" or "let him go", a different mood of the imperfect aspect, the jussive, majzūm, is used.
In many spoken Arabic dialects, there remains a distinction between indicative and subjunctive; however, it is not through a suffix but rather a prefix.
In Levantine Arabic, the indicative has b- while the subjunctive lacks it:
- third sing. masc. huwwe byuktob "he writes / is writing / will write", versus yuktob "he may / should write"
- third plural masc. homme byukotbu, versus yukotbu
Egyptian Arabic uses a simple construction that precedes the conjugated verbs with (law "if") or (momken "may"); the following are some examples:
- (Law/Momken enti tektebi. "If /Maybe you write") (s.f)
- (Law/Momken enti katabti. "If /Maybe you wrote") (s.f)
- (Law/Momken enti konti tektebi."If /Maybe you would write") (s.f)
- (Law/Momken enti ḥatektebi. "If /Maybe you will write") (s.f)
Tunisian Arabic often precedes the imperfective indicative verb by various conjunctions to create the subjunctive:
Ma:
- Mē ʕandak ma tekteb. You have nothing to write
Literally: not at.you subj_tool you_write
Ken for wish, hope or opinion:
- Netmanna, ken nʃūfak nējeħ nhār. I wish i'd see you successful one day: Wish
- Ken yeʃlēqu. (I) hope they find out: Hope
- (Men rayi,) Ken temʃi tertēħ. (In my opinion,) It's better [for your health] to relax: Opinion
Taw for a highly expected possibility:
- Abqa hne, taw toxles. Stay here (and) you will/could get paid
Ra for inevitability but it's, in most cases, accompanied with "ken" in the other clause:
- Ken tkūn ðˤʕīf, rak bēʃ tetʕeb fe ħyētak. Once you get weak, you'll suffer in life
Hebrew
[edit]Final short vowels were elided in Hebrew in prehistoric times, so that the distinction between the Proto-Semitic indicative, subjunctive and jussive (similar to Classical Arabic forms) had largely been lost even in Biblical Hebrew. The distinction does remain for some verbal categories, where the original final morphemes effected lasting secondary changes in word-internal syllabic structure and vowel length. These include weak roots with a medial or final vowel, such as yaqūm 'he rises / will rise' versus yaqom "may he rise" and yihye 'he will be' versus yehi 'may he be', imperfect forms of the hiphil stem, and also generally for first person imperfect forms: אֵשֵׁב (imperfect indicative of 'sit') vs. אֵשְׁבָה (imperfect cohortative=volitive of 'sit'). In modern Hebrew, the situation has been carried even further, with forms like yaqom and yehi becoming non-productive; instead, the future tense (prefix conjugation) is used for the subjunctive, often with the particle she- added to introduce the clause, if it is not already present (similar to French que).
- שיבוא Sheyavo – 'Let him come' or 'May he come' (literally, 'That (he) will come')
- אני רוצה שיבוא Ani rotzeh sheyavo – 'I want him to come' (literally, 'I want that (he) will come')
Biblical subjunctive forms survive in non-productive phrases in such forms as the third-person singular of 'to be' (להיות lihyot, יהי/תהי or יהא/תהא) and 'to live' (לחיות likhyot, יחי/תחי), mostly in a literary register:
- יחי המלך Y'khi ha-melekh – 'Long live the king' (literally, 'Live the-king')
- לו יהי Lu Y'hi – 'Let it be' (literally, 'if it be') (a popular song in Hebrew, by Naomi Shemer)
Akkadian
[edit]Subordinate clauses in Babylonian and Standard Babylonian Akkadian are marked with a -u on verbs ending in a consonant, and with nothing after vocalic endings or after ventive endings. Due to the consonantal structure of semitic languages, and Akkadian sound laws, the addition of the -u might trigger short vowels in the middle of the word to disappear. Assyrian Akkadian uses a more complicated system with both -u and -ni as markers of subordination. The ending -ni was used in the instances where -u could not be used as stated above. During Middle and Neo Assyrian the -ni ending became compulsory on all subordinate verbs, even those that already had the -u, resulting in -ni and-ūni as markers of subordination.[18]
Uralic languages
[edit]Hungarian
[edit]This mood in Hungarian is generally used to express polite demands and suggestions. The endings are identical between imperative, conjunctive and subjunctive; it is therefore often called the conjunctive-imperative mood.
Examples:
- Add nekem! – 'Give it to me.' – demand
- Menjünk! – 'Let's go.' – suggestion
- Menjek? – 'Shall I go?' – suggestion or question
- Menj! – 'Go!' – demand
Note that "demand" is nowhere near as rude as it might sound in English. It is a polite but firm request, but not as polite as, say, "would you...".
The characteristic letter in its ending is -j-, and in the definite conjunctive conjugation the endings appear very similar to those of singular possession, with a leading letter -j-.
An unusual feature of the mood's endings is that there exist a short and a long form for the second person singular (i.e., "you"). The formation of this for regular verbs differs between the indefinite and definite: the indefinite requires just the addition of -j, which differs from the longer ending in that the last two sounds are omitted (-j and not -jél for example in menj above, cf. menjél). The short version of the definite form also drops two letters, but another two. It drops, for example: the -ja- in -jad, leaving just -d, as can be seen in add above (instead of adjad).
There are several groups of exceptions involving verbs that end in -t. The rules for how this letter, and a preceding letter, should change when the subjunctive endings are applied are quite complicated, see the article Hungarian verbs. As usual, gemination of a final sibilant consonant is demonstrated when a j-initial ending is applied:
- mos + -jak gives mossak 'let me wash' (-j- changes to -s-)
When referring to the demands of others, the subjunctive is demonstrated:
- kérte, hogy menjek. 'He asked that I go. (He asked me to go.)' Here, "I go" is in the subjunctive.
Turkic languages
[edit]Turkish
[edit]This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these messages)
|
There is no one-to-one relationship between the subjunctive mode in other languages and the modes in Turkish. The subjunctive mode of other languages can be compared with the imperative mood (emir kipi),[19] the necessitative mood (gereklilik kipi),[20][21] the optative mood (istek kipi),[22][23] desiderative mood (dilek kipi),[24][25] conditional mood (şart kipi)[26] in Turkish. Of the above 5 moods, 3 moods (istek kipi, şart kipi, dilek kipi) are additionally translated as "subjunctive mode".
Examples of the optative mood (istek kipi) are gideyim 'Let me go', gitsin 'Let him go', gidelim 'Let us go', and gitsinler 'Let them go'.[27] Suggested actions and desires are expressed with the optative verb. The suffixes -(y)eyim, -(y)elim, and other forms are used to form an optative verb. The Turkish optative means 'let someone do something' in English. Forming the optative:[28]
- The suffix -(y)eyim/-(y)ayım. The suffix -(y)eyim or -(y)ayım is used for the singular form of the first person according to the last vowel of the verb and it means 'let me do'. Use the suffix -(y)ayım if the last vowel of the word is ⟨a, ı, o, u⟩. Use the suffix -(y)eyim if the last vowel of the word is ⟨e, i, ö, ü⟩. If the verb root ends in a vowel the letter ⟨y⟩ is added after the verb root: ağlamak 'to cry' → ağlayayım 'let me cry'; uyumak 'to sleep' → uyuyayım 'let me sleep'.
- The suffix -(y)elim/-(y)alım. The suffix -(y)elim or -(y)alım is used for the plural form of the first person according to the last vowel of the verb and it means 'let us do'. Use the suffix -(y)alım if the last vowel of the word is ⟨a, ı, o, u⟩. Use the suffix -(y)elim if the last vowel of the word is ⟨e, i, ö, ü⟩. Bugün araba sürelim. 'Let's drive a car today.' Bu akşam için kek yapalım. 'Let's make a cake for tonight.'
An example of a conditional mode (şart kipi) is Çalışırsa kazanır 'If he works, he wins. (simple present), he will win (simple future)', çalıştıysa kazanır 'If he has worked, he might win. (simple present)'.[29]
An examples of a necessitative mood (gereklilik kipi) is: Benim gelmem gerek 'I must/have to come', Dün toplantıya katılman gerekirdi 'You should have attended the meeting yesterday (but you didn't).'[30][31]
An example of an imperative mode (emir kipi) is siz gelin 'Let you come', onlar gelsinler 'Let them come'.[32]
An examples of a desiderative mood (dilek kipi) is Ah! şimdi burada olsaydı 'Oh! If/ if only he were here now'; Keşke burada olaydı 'I wish he were here.';[33] Keşke arabam olsa da otobüse binmesem 'I wish I had a car, so I don't (need to) get on the bus.'; Keşke arabam olsaydı da otobüse binmeseydim 'I wish I had a car, so I didn't (need to) get on the bus.'; Keşke arabam olsa o zaman otobüse binmem 'If I had a car, I wouldn't get on the bus.'; 'Keşke arabam olsaydı o zaman otobüse binmezdim' 'I wish I had a car then I wouldn't get on the bus.'
References
[edit]- ^ An Icelandic-English Dictionary, Cleasby-Vigfússon, Outlines of Grammar; Gen. Remarks on the Strong & Irreg. Verbs Archived 2007-12-12 at the Wayback Machine; Note γ
- ^ Huddleston, Rodney; Pullum, Geoff (2002). The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0521431460.
- ^ Allen and Greenough's New Latin Grammar, §438. Dover Publications, 2006. Print.
- ^ "Languages: Latin: curro." Verbix. N.p., 2010. Web. 22 Mar. 2010. <"Latin verb 'curro' conjugated". Archived from the original on 2011-06-05. Retrieved 2010-03-22.>.
- ^ STEFANO, PAOLO DI (2016-11-12). "Congiuntivo in calo, nessun dramma. La Crusca: la lingua è natura, si evolve". Corriere della Sera (in Italian). Archived from the original on 2024-08-29. Retrieved 2020-01-08.
- ^ Matilde-Olivella de Castells; Elizabeth Guzmán; Pavlova Lapuerta; Carmen García (1 January 2006). Masaicos: Spanish as a world language (Custom for Arizona State University ed.). Person Custom Publishing. p. 401. ISBN 9780536963505. Retrieved 28 July 2025.
- ^ Wright, Leavitt O. (1931). "The Disappearing Spanish Verb Form in -re". Hispania. 14 (2). American Association of Teachers of Spanish and Portuguese: 107–114. doi:10.2307/332496. ISSN 0018-2133. JSTOR 332496. OCLC 5552696109.
- ^ Romanian Grammar Archived 2005-05-12 at the Wayback Machine detailed guide of Romanian grammar and usage.
- ^ "Ireland First! – Gaelic/Irish lessons: lesson 14". www.eirefirst.com. Archived from the original on 11 October 2017. Retrieved 5 May 2018.
- ^ "Foclóir Gaeilge–Béarla (Ó Dónaill): staidéar". www.teanglann.ie. Archived from the original on 6 November 2017. Retrieved 5 May 2018.
- ^ a b Van Olphen, Herman (1975). "Aspect, Tense, and Mood in the Hindi Verb". Indo-Iranian Journal. 16 (4): 284–301. doi:10.1163/000000075791615397. ISSN 0019-7246. JSTOR 24651488. Archived from the original on 2020-07-10. Retrieved 2020-08-17.
- ^ "Lesson 18 - Past Subjunctive in Hindi". taj.oasis.unc.edu. Archived from the original on 2024-08-29. Retrieved 2020-09-01.
- ^ a b c Anastasia Smirnova, Vedrana Mihaliček, Lauren Ressue, Formal Studies in Slavic Linguistics, Cambridge Scholar Publishing, Newcastle upon Type, Wielka Brytania, 2010: Barbara Tomaszewicz, Subjunctive Mood in Polish and the Clause Typing Hypothesis
- ^ Kagan Olga, Semantics of Genitive Objects in Russian, Springer 2013: Subjunctive Mood and the Notion of Commitment, series Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, ISBN 978-94-007-5225-2
- ^ Mędak Stanisław, Praktyczny słownik łączliwości składniowej czasowników polskich, Universitas, Kraków, Polska, 2003
- ^ a b Muczkowski Józef, Gramatyka języka Polskiego, Kraków 1836, pp. 228
- ^ Migdalski K. The Syntax of Compound Tenses in Slavic, Utrecht 2006
- ^ Huenergard, John, Grammar of Akkadian Third Edition, Eisenbrauns 2011
- ^ "Translated from emir kipi in Tureng dictionary". Archived from the original on 2024-08-29. Retrieved 2020-05-18.
- ^ Translated from gereklilik kipi in Tureng dictionary
- ^ [or Mood of Obligation Conjugation, Subjunctive with Imperative]
- ^ from istek kipi in Tureng dictionary
- ^ or hortatory
- ^ Translated from dilek kipi in Tureng dictionary
- ^ or subjunctive mode
- ^ Translated from Şart kipi in Tureng dictionary
- ^ "Example of the optative mood (istek kipi)". 19 May 2016. Archived from the original on 2024-08-29. Retrieved 2020-05-18.
- ^ "Subjunctive verbs in Turkish (This source naming optative mood how as Subjunctive)". Archived from the original on 2024-08-29. Retrieved 2020-05-18.
- ^ "An examples of an conditional mode (şart kipi)". 19 May 2016. Archived from the original on 2024-08-29. Retrieved 2020-05-18.
- ^ An examples of an necessitative mood (gereklilik kipi)
- ^ "Subjunctive with Imperative". Archived from the original on 2024-08-29. Retrieved 2020-05-18.
- ^ "An examples of an imperative mode (emir kipi)". Archived from the original on 2024-08-29. Retrieved 2020-05-18.
- ^ "An examples of desiderative mood (dilek kipi)". 19 May 2016. Archived from the original on 2024-08-29. Retrieved 2020-05-20.
External links
[edit]Subjunctive mood
View on GrokipediaOverview
Definition and Characteristics
The subjunctive mood is a verbal mood in grammar that expresses irrealis situations, including hypotheticals, wishes, doubts, or necessities, which are not presented as actual or factual.[6] It contrasts with realis moods, such as the indicative, which encode propositions assumed to be true or realized in reality.[7] This irrealis-real distinction represents a universal grammatical category, where the subjunctive signals non-actualized or uncertain events, often with lower epistemic certainty or weaker speaker control compared to realis forms.[8] Morphologically, the subjunctive is typically marked through inflectional modifications to the verb, such as affixes (prefixes, suffixes, or circumfixes), stem alternations via suppletion, or reduced paradigms with fewer distinctions in tense, person, or number than the indicative.[6] These markers can also include particles or suprasegmental features like tone changes in some languages, though they vary cross-linguistically and may be synthetic (fused with other categories) or periphrastic (using auxiliary constructions).[8] The subjunctive often integrates morphosyntactically with categories like person, number, tense, and voice, but its forms are generally less differentiated, emphasizing its role in non-factual contexts over precise temporal or participant encoding.[7] Syntactically, the subjunctive predominantly appears in subordinate clauses, such as those introduced by conjunctions expressing conditionality or purpose, where it conveys non-asserted propositions tied to the main clause's semantics.[6] It can also occur in independent clauses for exclamatory or optative expressions, though this is less common and often contextually driven.[8] For illustration, a generic structure like "if the condition were met, the outcome would follow" highlights the subjunctive's use in hypotheticals, where the verb form deviates from the realis to signal unreality.[7] As a core non-indicative mood alongside the imperative, the subjunctive is widely attested cross-linguistically, underscoring its fundamental role in encoding modality in many languages.[6]Typical Functions Across Languages
The subjunctive mood typically serves to express irrealis situations, including wishes, possibilities, obligations, emotions, doubts, and hypothetical scenarios, contrasting with the indicative mood's focus on factual or real events. Across languages, it conveys non-actualized states, such as a speaker's desire for an outcome (e.g., Italian "Che Dio ci aiuti!" meaning "God help us!") or uncertainty about an event (e.g., French "Il est possible qu'il le fasse" meaning "It is possible that he’ll do it").[1] These functions highlight the mood's role in marking epistemic or deontic modality, where the speaker distances the proposition from reality. In syntactic contexts, the subjunctive often appears in subordinate clauses following specific triggers, such as matrix verbs of doubt (e.g., Italian "Credo che lei sia stanca" meaning "I think she is tired") or desire (e.g., Modern Greek "Thélo na diaváseis" meaning "I want you to read").[1] It is commonly used after conjunctions like "if" for hypotheticals, "that" in reported speech with volitional elements, or in purpose clauses to indicate intent (e.g., Spanish "No me hagas enfadar!" meaning "Don’t make me angry!" for prohibition).[1] These clause types underscore the subjunctive's pragmatic function in embedding non-assertive propositions, avoiding the indicative's commitment to truth. Cross-linguistically, patterns vary by family: in Indo-European languages, the subjunctive frequently encodes volition, as in complements to verbs of wanting or emotion (e.g., Romanian "Să nu pleci!" meaning "Don’t leave!").[1] In agglutinative languages like Turkish and Hungarian, it often signals politeness through softened suggestions or requests (e.g., Turkish optative "-eyim" for "Let me do it" as a polite offer; Hungarian subjunctive for formal wishes like "Menjen el!" meaning "May he go!").[9][10] In non-Indo-European cases, such as St'át'imcets (Salish), the subjunctive weakens modal force for politeness or uncertainty, turning imperatives into requests (e.g., restricting backgrounds in questions to express doubt).[11] A general trend in modern languages involves the subjunctive's decline, particularly in spoken forms, with speakers favoring periphrastic constructions like modal verbs or indicative alternatives over inflectional marking (e.g., English "If I were" increasingly replaced by "If I was").[12] This shift reflects simplification in analytic languages, though the mood persists in formal or literary registers across families.[13]Cross-Linguistic Typology
Common Patterns and Variations
The subjunctive mood manifests morphologically in diverse ways across languages that employ it. In Indo-European languages, it is typically realized through inflectional paradigms, where dedicated verbal endings distinguish subjunctive forms from indicative ones; for example, in ancient Greek and Latin, these inflections often derive from Proto-Indo-European optative elements adapted for non-factual contexts. In contrast, non-Indo-European languages may use analytic constructions, such as auxiliaries or particles, to mark subjunctivity, while in some Salishan languages the subjunctive fuses with subject agreement into portmanteau morphemes.[14] This inflectional-analytic divide highlights a key typological pattern, with synthetic marking predominant in fusional languages and periphrastic strategies in isolating or agglutinative ones.[15] Syntactically, the subjunctive is commonly triggered in subordinate clauses, particularly those governed by predicates expressing doubt, volition, emotion, or necessity, a pattern observed across multiple families. For instance, complement clauses under verbs like "hope" or "fear" frequently require subjunctive marking to signal non-veridicality, ensuring the embedded proposition is interpreted as hypothetical or unrealized.[14] This trigger is not universal, however; in some languages, such as St’át’imcets (a Salish language), the subjunctive appears obligatorily under specific complementizers or evidentials, weakening the modal force of the clause without reliance on attitude verbs.[14] Variations in subjunctive expression include fusions with other modal categories, such as the conditional or optative, which blur distinct mood boundaries in certain families. In Romance languages, the subjunctive often overlaps with conditional functions in hypothetical constructions, using shared forms to convey counterfactuality. Similarly, in some Caucasian languages, optative inflections may incorporate subjunctive-like non-actuality, leading to partial mergers.[15] Partial loss of distinction occurs in other branches, where subjunctive paradigms erode, relying instead on contextual cues or auxiliaries, though full erosion is rarer in languages retaining it. Cross-family comparisons reveal stark divergences: the subjunctive remains robust and morphologically distinct in Romance languages, where it permeates a wide array of subordinate contexts, contrasting with its marginal role in Slavic languages, limited often to a subset of volitional or concessive clauses.[14] In non-Indo-European families like Salishan or Bantu, the subjunctive operates as part of a broader "gradient" mood system, blending seamlessly with irrealis categories to encode degrees of non-actuality rather than a binary indicative-subjunctive opposition.[14] This gradient nature underscores the subjunctive's flexibility, adapting to typological pressures while serving core functions like expressing wishes or uncertainties.Languages Without Distinct Subjunctive
Some languages achieve the semantic functions typically associated with the subjunctive mood—such as expressing hypotheticals, wishes, or non-factual events—without a dedicated morphological category, relying instead on functional equivalence through alternative grammatical mechanisms.[16] This absence of a distinct subjunctive form often stems from historical grammaticalization paths that prioritize other mood or aspect systems, or from language contact that leads to simplification or borrowing of strategies from neighboring languages.[17] For instance, in isolating languages like Mandarin Chinese, which lacks overt mood inflections, subjunctive-like meanings are conveyed via modal verbs (e.g., yào for desires or huì for possibilities) or contextual particles, allowing expression of unreality without verb conjugation changes.[18] In many Slavic languages, such as Russian, there is no robust morphological paradigm for the subjunctive; instead, subjunctive functions are compensated by syntactic constructions, including the particle by combined with the l-participle (a past tense form) for counterfactuals or conditionals, or by infinitives and indicative forms in subordinate clauses to denote wishes and hypotheticals.[19] This analytical approach provides functional equivalence, as seen in examples like Esli by on prišël ("If he were to come"), where by signals irrealis without altering the verb's core inflection.[20] Similarly, periphrastic constructions emerge as a common strategy in languages with reduced morphology, such as modern English alternatives to its fading subjunctive, using auxiliaries like "should" + infinitive (e.g., "It is important that he should go") to mark obligation or suggestion.[21] Austronesian languages frequently employ preverbal particles or affixes to mark irrealis moods that overlap with subjunctive roles, such as future intentions, conditionals, or unrealized states, without a unified subjunctive paradigm.[22] In Oceanic languages like Koro, the particle k- precedes the verb to indicate non-specific or habitual irrealis events (e.g., K-Ø-toro-a na tamwae "The child might hit the dog"), fulfilling expressive needs akin to subjunctive in other families through aspect-mood distinctions rather than tense-based moods.[23] These particles often arise from grammaticalized verbs or pronouns, reflecting evolutionary paths where realis-irrealis oppositions supplant more differentiated mood systems.[24] Overall, such compensatory mechanisms highlight how languages maintain conceptual nuances of unreality via lexical, syntactic, or particle-based innovations, adapting to typological constraints without morphological subjunctive marking.[16]Historical Development
Proto-Indo-European Origins
The subjunctive mood in Proto-Indo-European (PIE) is reconstructed as a category that expressed potentiality and volition, serving as the ancestor for similar moods in all Indo-European branches. It derived from verbal forms indicating non-factual or prospective events, with key evidence drawn from the archaic features preserved in Hittite and Vedic Sanskrit.[25] This reconstruction relies on comparative analysis of daughter languages, highlighting how the mood conveyed hypothetical scenarios, obligations, and desires beyond the indicative's factual assertions.[26] Morphologically, the PIE present subjunctive was characterized by forms such as the first-person singular ending -ōi, which extended across active and middle voices to mark the mood on thematic and athematic stems.[25] For instance, the paradigm for the root bʰer- 'carry' contrasts the indicative bʰéreti (3sg present) with the subjunctive bʰérōi (1sg), where the subjunctive employs a lengthened vowel and primary ending to shift from declarative to modal nuance.[25] Thematic subjunctives often featured long-vowel variants like -ēti (3sg), derived from present stems, while athematic ones borrowed secondary personal endings from imperfective aspects, reinforcing the mood's ties to ongoing or anticipated actions.[26] These forms, including prohibitions via negative particles and future projections, underscore the subjunctive's versatility in embedding volitional intent within PIE syntax.[25] Evidence for this reconstruction emerges prominently from Vedic Sanskrit, where subjunctive uses in wishes (e.g., yajāti 'let him sacrifice') and prohibitions (e.g., ná duṣṭutí 'do not revile') mirror PIE functions, often in ritual or hortatory contexts from the Rigveda.[26] Hittite provides complementary archaic traces, with the present indicative often substituting for modal futures and prohibitions, and middle-voice forms expressing necessitative meanings, such as in Old Hittite texts.[25] Together, these languages illustrate how the PIE subjunctive's role in expressing unrealized potential influenced its evolution across Indo-European, without direct survivals in all branches.[27]Evolution in Indo-European Branches
Following the divergence of Proto-Indo-European (PIE), the subjunctive mood, originally marked by thematic vowel lengthening (-ē-/-ō-) or the s-aorist augment (-s-), adapted variably across branches, often shifting from prospective or volitive functions to more specialized irrealis roles.[27] In the Germanic branch, the subjunctive experienced substantial simplification, with the present subjunctive largely disappearing in favor of indicative forms, while counterfactual and remote modal senses grammaticalized into preterite-present constructions, as seen in the merger of optative and subjunctive elements into a unified irrealis category. This loss reflects broader morphological reduction, where modal remoteness in conditionals and hypotheticals relies on past tense markers rather than dedicated subjunctive endings.[28][27] The Romance branch, descending from Latin, preserved and expanded the subjunctive's synthetic forms, particularly the ā-subjunctive derived from PIE optative elements, which became entrenched in subordinate clauses for expressing non-veridicality, volition, and doubt. This retention facilitated grammaticalization into procedural markers of subordination, while analytic periphrases—such as infinitive + modal verb constructions—emerged to handle future and conditional nuances, reducing reliance on purely synthetic subjunctives in spoken varieties.[29][27] In other branches, such as Celtic, the subjunctive incorporated s-aorist formations with limited fusion to optative relics, maintaining productivity for purpose and potentiality clauses despite phonological erosion like i-apocope, though it marginalized in later stages toward periphrastic expressions. Slavic languages show further marginalization of a distinct subjunctive morphology, with irrealis functions—especially conditionals and counterfactuals—replaced by analytic structures involving l-participles (e.g., in conditional periphrases) or complementizers like čtoby, which grammaticalize reported or non-factive speech without dedicated verbal mood markers. Across these branches, a common trajectory involved the subjunctive's grammaticalization into conditional systems, deriving from its PIE future-oriented semantics. By late Indo-European stages, the subjunctive frequently specialized for reported speech in indirect discourse, signaling non-assertion in embedded contexts.[30][31][27]Germanic Languages
English
The subjunctive mood in English is a verbal category used primarily to express hypothetical, counterfactual, or non-factual situations, as well as wishes, demands, and resolutions. Unlike in many other languages, the English subjunctive has largely lost its distinct inflectional forms over time, merging with the indicative in most contexts, and now relies on specific syntactic environments and a few surviving morphological markers. It persists mainly in formal writing and fixed expressions, with its usage declining in spoken and informal varieties.[32] The present subjunctive employs the base form of the verb for all persons and numbers, without the third-person singular -s ending or other indicative inflections; for the verb "to be," it uses "be" uniformly (e.g., "It is essential that she be present"). This form is most prominent in the mandative subjunctive, triggered by verbs of suggestion or demand such as "suggest," "recommend," or "insist" in clauses expressing volition or necessity (e.g., "The committee recommends that the proposal be approved"). It also appears in independent clauses for wishes or exclamations, as in fixed phrases like "be that as it may" or "so be it." Historically, this present subjunctive traces back to Old English, where it had more robust distinctions, but by Middle English, phonological changes like vowel reduction led to a merger with the indicative, particularly in plural forms and certain tenses.[33][32][34] The past subjunctive, used for unreal or hypothetical conditions, is identical to the simple past indicative except for the verb "to be," which takes "were" across all persons (e.g., "If I were rich, I would travel"). This is evident in inverted constructions without "if," such as "Were I to know the answer, I would tell you," or in wishes like "I wish it were true." These forms convey counterfactuals and are common after "if" in type 2 conditional clauses. The distinction between "was" and "were" has weakened in casual modern English, with "was" increasingly substituting for "were" in informal speech, signaling further erosion.[32][35] In terms of functions, the subjunctive appears in formal wishes (e.g., "Long live the king!"), subordinate clauses after "if" for hypotheticals, and resolutions or oaths like "Be it resolved that..." or "God save the queen." Its decline accelerated after Middle English, where the subjunctive-indicative merger reduced its visibility, leading to replacement by indicative forms or modals like "should" in everyday use. Today, it survives in remnants such as legal or ceremonial phrases (e.g., "until death do us part") and formal prose, but is rare in casual conversation, with American English retaining more mandative uses than British English. Corpus studies show a historical drop from frequent Old English occurrences to near-inflectional extinction in modern varieties, though mandative contexts show some revival in formal American writing since the 20th century.[32][33][34]German
In German, the subjunctive mood is expressed through two distinct forms: Konjunktiv I and Konjunktiv II, each serving specific grammatical functions while retaining a more robust morphological system compared to many other Germanic languages.[36] Konjunktiv I primarily conveys indirect or reported speech, particularly in formal written contexts like journalism or literature, where it distances the speaker from the reported content to indicate it originates from another source.[37] This form is derived from the present tense stem with characteristic endings, often -e in singular and -en in plural, and may involve umlaut (vowel change) in strong verbs for historical reasons tied to Proto-Indo-European origins in the Germanic branch.[36] For regular weak verbs, the forms closely resemble the indicative present but differ notably in the third-person singular by lacking the -t ending. The paradigm for Konjunktiv I in the present tense of the regular weak verb spielen (to play) is as follows:| Person | Conjugation |
|---|---|
| ich | spiele |
| du | spielest |
| er/sie/es | spiele |
| wir | spielen |
| ihr | spielet |
| sie/Sie | spielen |
| Person | Conjugation |
|---|---|
| ich | spielte |
| du | spieltest |
| er/sie/es | spielte |
| wir | spielten |
| ihr | spieltet |
| sie/Sie | spielten |
Dutch
The subjunctive mood in Dutch, known as the aanvoegende wijs, expresses non-factual situations such as hypotheticals, wishes, or counterfactuals, but it has largely merged with conditional constructions in modern usage and is now archaic in standard Dutch.[39] This partial merger reflects broader Germanic trends toward analytic structures, where modal verbs like zou (would) replace distinct subjunctive forms.[40] In contemporary Dutch, the subjunctive survives mainly in fixed expressions and formal or literary contexts, highlighting its decline from a productive category to a relic form.[39] The present subjunctive is formed by adding the suffix -e to the verb stem, yielding forms such as kome (from komen, to come) or worde (from worden, to become), while irregular verbs use specialized endings like zij for zijn (to be).[39] The past subjunctive lacks a unique morphological marker and typically employs the preterite indicative, though vestigial forms like -de appear in expressions such as dat ik ware (that I were, from zijn).[39] In Middle Dutch, stronger distinctions existed, with ablaut changes in strong verbs (e.g., nâme for subjunctive past of nemen, to take, versus indicative nam), but these converged with indicative paradigms over time through analogical leveling.[40] Uses of the subjunctive center on subordinate clauses, particularly hypotheticals introduced by als (if), as in Als het regende, bleven we thuis (If it were raining, we would stay home).[39] It also appears in wishes or incitements, such as Leve de koningin! (Long live the queen!), and fixed phrases like God zij dank (God be thanked) or als het ware (as it were).[39][40] These contexts underscore its role in non-declarative clauses, though modern speakers often substitute indicative or periphrastic alternatives like Als het zou regenen for clarity and simplicity.[40] The subjunctive's decline accelerated in the 19th century due to indicative encroachment during Dutch standardization efforts, rendering it obsolete in everyday speech except for idiomatic survivals.[40] Regional variations show stronger retention in Flemish Dutch, where formal and dialectal speech preserves subjunctive elements more than in Netherlandic varieties, influenced by southern conservative tendencies.[39] This contrast aligns with Flemish's greater use of modal periphrases echoing subjunctive functions, while Netherlandic Dutch favors outright indicative replacement.[40]Other Germanic Languages
In Swedish, the subjunctive mood has largely declined in everyday use, surviving primarily in fixed expressions for wishes or hypotheticals, often marked by the -e ending on certain verbs or periphrastic constructions with the conditional auxiliary skulle. For instance, the form vore (from vara, "to be") is commonly used in phrases like det vore önskvärt ("it would be desirable") or in wishes such as leve kungen ("long live the king"). This limited retention reflects broader optative influences in North Germanic languages, where the subjunctive evolved from Proto-Indo-European optative forms but has simplified over time.[41][42] Luxembourgish employs a subjunctive system closely akin to German's Konjunktiv II, primarily for counterfactuals and hypotheticals, with periphrastic forms using the auxiliary géif (from ginn, "go") plus the infinitive, as in si géifen eng Universitéit bauen ("they would build a university"). It also features synthetic forms like wäre (from sinn, "to be") in past subjunctives for unreal conditions, such as waat waer et ("what if it were"). This mirrors the decline of inflectional subjunctives in continental West Germanic varieties, where analytic constructions increasingly replace older paradigms.[43] Among other Germanic languages, Icelandic stands out for retaining full subjunctive paradigms across tenses and verb classes, expressing wishes, doubt, or unreal situations with distinct present (e.g., sé from vera, "I may see/be") and past forms (e.g., væri, "I would be"). In contrast, Yiddish innovates subjunctive-like irrealis through modal auxiliaries such as zol ("shall"), as in er zol kumen ("he should/may come"), rather than dedicated inflections, reflecting fusion with High German substrates but adapted for hypothetical or volitive contexts. North Germanic languages like Icelandic preserve more optative-derived subjunctives for emotive or uncertain expressions, while continental varieties show marked decline, often shifting to indicatives or modals.[44][45]| Language | Hypothetical "to be" (Past Subjunctive Example) | Use Context |
|---|---|---|
| Swedish | vore ("would be") | Wishes: Det vore bra ("It would be good") |
| Luxembourgish | wäre ("would be") | Counterfactuals: Wa waer et ("What if it were") |
| Icelandic | væri ("would be") | Unreal: Ef ég væri ríkur ("If I were rich") |
| Yiddish | zol zayn ("should/may be") | Volitive: Es zol zayn gut ("May it be good") |
Romance Languages
Latin
In classical Latin, the subjunctive mood derives from the Proto-Indo-European optative, which expressed wishes and possibilities, evolving into a versatile form for denoting uncertainty, volition, and hypothetical situations.[46] Unlike the indicative, which states facts, the subjunctive modifies the verbal idea to convey potentiality, exhortation, or doubt, often appearing in both independent and subordinate clauses.[47] This mood is synthetic, with distinct tense forms that align with the sequence of tenses rules in complex sentences.[48] The Latin subjunctive has four tenses: present, imperfect, perfect, and pluperfect. The present subjunctive is formed by changing the thematic vowel of the present stem—ā to ē in the first conjugation (e.g., amō, amāre becomes amēm), ē to ēa in the second (moneō, monēre becomes moneam), and adding -ā- to the third and fourth stems (regō, regere becomes regam; audiō, audīre becomes audiam)—with personal endings as in the indicative but adjusted for mood.[49] The imperfect subjunctive uses the present infinitive stem plus -r- and secondary endings (e.g., amārem from amāre). The perfect subjunctive combines the perfect stem with -eri- and primary endings (e.g., amāverim from amāvī), while the pluperfect adds -isse- to the perfect stem with secondary endings (e.g., amāvissem).[47] These tenses relate to the main verb's time in subordinate clauses via the sequence of tenses: primary sequence (present/perfect main verb) pairs with present/perfect subjunctive for simultaneous or future action, and secondary sequence (imperfect/pluperfect main verb) uses imperfect/pluperfect subjunctive; the imperfect may also denote prior action in primary sequence.[48] For the irregular verb esse ("to be"), the subjunctive paradigm is as follows:| Tense | 1st Singular | 2nd Singular | 3rd Singular | 1st Plural | 2nd Plural | 3rd Plural |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Present | sim | sīs | sit | sīmus | sītīs | sint |
| Imperfect | essem | essēs | esset | essēmus | essētīs | essent |
| Perfect | fuerim | fuerīs | fuerit | fuerīmus | fuerītīs | fuerint |
| Pluperfect | fuissem | fuissēs | fuisset | fuissēmus | fuissētīs | fuissent |
French
The French subjunctive mood, inherited from Latin, is a grammatical category used primarily to express subjectivity, uncertainty, or hypotheticals in subordinate clauses.[3] Unlike its more versatile Latin counterpart, the French subjunctive has simplified over time, retaining mainly present and past tenses while largely restricting the imperfect to formal or literary contexts.[53] The primary form is the present subjunctive, which conjugates differently across the three main verb groups. For first-conjugation verbs ending in -er (e.g., parler, "to speak"), the endings are -e, -es, -e, -ions, -iez, -ent, yielding forms like que je parle, que tu parles, qu'il parle, que nous parlions, que vous parliez, qu'ils parlent.[3] Second-conjugation -ir verbs (e.g., finir, "to finish") use -isse, -isses, -isse, -issions, -issiez, -issent, as in que je finisse.[3] Third-conjugation -re and -oir verbs (e.g., vendre, "to sell"; recevoir, "to receive") follow irregular patterns, such as que je vende or que je reçoive, often marked by phonetic distinctions from the indicative.[3] Irregular verbs like être ("to be") have unique forms, including the stem soi- for que je sois.[3] The imperfect subjunctive, derived from the Latin pluperfect subjunctive, is rare in modern French and confined to archaic or literary styles; it uses stems from the third-person plural preterite plus -sse endings, as in que je fusse for être.[3] The past subjunctive (passé du subjonctif), formed with the auxiliary avoir or être in the present subjunctive plus the past participle (e.g., que j'aie été for être), expresses completed actions in hypothetical or subjective contexts.[3] Triggers for the subjunctive include expressions of doubt (e.g., il doute que je vienne, "he doubts that I come"), emotion (e.g., je crains qu'il pleuve, "I fear that it rains"), and necessity (e.g., il faut que tu partes, "it is necessary that you leave").[3] These appear in subordinate clauses introduced by que or other conjunctions like avant que ("before") or pour que ("so that"), where the subjunctive conveys non-factual or desired states.[54] The passé du subjonctif specifically denotes prior completion within these clauses, as in il est possible que j'aie commis une erreur ("it is possible that I have made a mistake").[3] In the 20th century, subjunctive use declined sharply in spoken French, becoming restricted to a small set of high-frequency verbs and frozen expressions in casual speech, while indicative often replaces it due to simplification trends.[54] This decline reflects broader grammatical evolution, with normative rules expanding in writing but eroding in oral varieties like Quebec French.[54] Nonetheless, it persists in formal writing and education, maintaining its role in expressing nuance.[53]Italian
The subjunctive mood in Italian, known as congiuntivo, is a verbal mood that expresses subjectivity, including doubt, opinion, desire, and hypothesis, and it remains robustly used in both spoken and written registers compared to some other Romance languages.[55] Unlike in French, where the subjunctive has declined in frequency and is often replaced by the indicative in informal contexts, Italian retains it more consistently, particularly in subordinate clauses, due to its role in marking non-factual or hypothetical scenarios.[56] This retention is influenced by regional dialects, which sometimes introduce variations in usage or substitution with indicative forms, especially in northern areas where casual speech may favor simplification.[57] The subjunctive fully inflects for person and number, agreeing with the subject in subordinate clauses introduced by che ("that") or other conjunctions. It comprises four main tenses: present (congiuntivo presente), imperfect (congiuntivo imperfetto), past (congiuntivo passato, formed with the present subjunctive of avere or essere plus the past participle), and pluperfect (congiuntivo trapassato, formed with the imperfect subjunctive of avere or essere plus the past participle).[58] For regular verbs, the present subjunctive endings are -i (1st/2nd/3rd sg.), -iamo (1st pl.), -iate (2nd pl.), -ino (3rd pl.) for -are verbs, with analogous patterns for -ere and -ire verbs. The imperfect subjunctive uses -ssi endings across persons (e.g., -assi for -are verbs). Irregular verbs like essere ("to be") and avere ("to have") have unique stems: essere present is sia (all singular and 3rd pl.), siano (1st/2nd pl.); imperfect is fossi (1st/2nd sg.), fosse (3rd sg.), fossimo (1st pl.), foste (2nd pl.), fossero (3rd pl.). Avere present is abbia (all singular and 3rd pl.), abbiano (1st/2nd pl.); imperfect follows the -essi pattern: avessi, etc.[59][58]| Tense | Essere (io) | Mangiare (io, regular -are) |
|---|---|---|
| Present | che io sia | che io mangi |
| Imperfect | che io fossi | che io mangiassi |
| Past | che io sia stato/a | che io abbia mangiato |
| Pluperfect | che io fossi stato/a | che io avessi mangiato |
Spanish
The subjunctive mood in Spanish, known as subjuntivo, is a verbal mode used primarily to express subjectivity, doubt, desire, emotion, or hypothetical situations, often in subordinate clauses. It contrasts with the indicative, which conveys factual or objective information. Unlike the indicative, which has ten tenses, the subjunctive features only five main tenses: present, present perfect (haya), imperfect (with two variant forms: -ra and -se), pluperfect (hubiera/hubiese), and a rare future form, along with its compound counterpart (hubiere). These tenses are formed by altering the verb stem and endings to reflect non-realized or virtual actions, with irregularities in common verbs like ser (to be: present sea, imperfect fuera/fuese, future fuere).[61][62] The present subjunctive is the most frequently used tense, covering both ongoing and future-oriented actions in contexts of uncertainty or volition. For regular verbs like hablar (to speak), it conjugates as hable, hables, hable, hablemos, habléis, hablen; for irregulars like ser, it is sea, seas, sea, seamos, seáis, sean. Stem-changing verbs follow patterns from the present indicative yo-form, such as pensar (to think) becoming piense (e->ie change). It appears after verbs of emotion or doubt (e.g., Me alegro de que vengas – "I'm glad you're coming"), expressions of necessity (Es necesario que estudies – "It's necessary that you study"), or conjunctions introducing purpose or concession, like para que (so that: Estudio para que aprendas – "I study so that you learn") and aunque (although: Aunque llueva, iremos – "Even though it rains, we'll go"). The present perfect subjunctive (haya hablado) extends this to completed actions relative to the present or a future reference point, as in Dudo que haya terminado ("I doubt that he has finished").[63][62] The imperfect subjunctive expresses past or hypothetical situations, with two interchangeable forms derived from Latin: the -ra form (e.g., hablara/hablase) and the -se form (e.g., hablase/hablase, though identical in third person). For ser, these are fuera/fuese, fueras/fueses, etc. The -ra form predominates in Latin American Spanish and narrative contexts, while -se is more common in European Spanish peninsular speech and formal writing; both are equivalent in meaning, except in isolated fixed expressions like ¡Ojalá fuera (may it be). It is triggered in unreal conditional si-clauses (e.g., Si tuviera dinero, viajaría – "If I had money, I would travel") and after conjunctions denoting concession or condition (a menos que vinieras – "unless you came"). The pluperfect subjunctive (hubiera/ hubiese hablado) denotes anteriority in past hypotheticals, as in Si hubiera estudiado, habría aprobado ("If I had studied, I would have passed"). In Latin American dialects, voseo (use of vos instead of tú) modifies these forms slightly, such as seás for present subjunctive of ser in informal address, though the overall paradigm remains similar.[64][62] The future subjunctive, a vestige of Latin origins, is largely obsolete in modern spoken and written Spanish but survives in legal and formal documents for hypothetical future contingencies. Its forms include hablere for regular verbs and fuere for ser, as in archaic clauses like Quien tuviere derecho ("Whoever shall have right"). This tense, along with the future perfect (hubiere hablado), appears in statutes or contracts (e.g., Si hubiere discrepancia, se resolverá por... – "If there should be discrepancy, it shall be resolved by..."), emphasizing potential future events, but is typically replaced by present or imperfect subjunctives in everyday usage. The Spanish subjunctive thus retains a conservative structure from Latin, adapted to express nuanced unreality across dialects.[65][66]Portuguese
The subjunctive mood in Portuguese, known as modo conjuntivo, expresses hypothetical situations, doubts, wishes, and purposes, distinguishing it from the indicative mood used for factual statements.[67] It features three main tenses: present, imperfect, and future, each with specific conjugations that vary slightly by verb class but follow regular patterns for -ar, -er, and -ir endings.[68] Unlike Spanish, which shares Romance roots, Portuguese more frequently employs the personal infinitive as a subjunctive alternative, particularly in subordinate clauses.[69] The present subjunctive (presente do conjuntivo) conveys plausible current or future hypotheticals, such as hopes or necessities. For the regular -ar verb falar (to speak), it conjugates as follows:| Person | Conjugation |
|---|---|
| Eu | fale |
| Tu | fales |
| Ele/Ela/Você | fale |
| Nós | falemos |
| Vós | faleis |
| Eles/Elas/Vocês | falem |
| Person | Conjugation |
|---|---|
| Eu | falasse |
| Tu | falasses |
| Ele/Ela/Você | falasse |
| Nós | falássemos |
| Vós | falásseis |
| Eles/Elas/Vocês | falassem |
| Person | Conjugation |
|---|---|
| Eu | falar |
| Tu | falares |
| Ele/Ela/Você | falar |
| Nós | falarmos |
| Vós | falardes |
| Eles/Elas/Vocês | falarem |
Romanian
The Romanian subjunctive mood is primarily expressed through synthetic forms introduced by the particle să, which marks irrealis contexts and derives historically from Latin conditional sī. Unlike many Western Romance languages, Romanian favors this subjunctive construction over infinitives in embedded clauses, a development influenced by Balkan Sprachbund features shared with neighboring non-Romance languages. The mood encompasses a present tense and a compound perfect tense, with no distinct imperfect or pluperfect forms, reflecting a reduced morphological inventory compared to Latin.[72][73] The present subjunctive is formed by să followed by the verb stem and specific endings that often resemble the present indicative but with subjunctive markers, such as the -u in first-person singular for irregular verbs. The perfect subjunctive uses să plus the auxiliary fi (from Latin fīō) in its short infinitive form followed by the past participle fost. Although a să + infinitive construction existed historically (e.g., să greşire "to err"), modern Romanian predominantly employs the synthetic subjunctive for clarity and integration, limiting the analytic form to archaic or regional variants. This shift underscores the mood's merger with optative functions, particularly in exclamatory or imperative expressions like fie! "may it be!".[72][73] The paradigm for the irregular verb a fi ("to be") exemplifies these forms, showing person and number agreement primarily in the present while the perfect remains invariant in the auxiliary:| Person | Present Subjunctive | Perfect Subjunctive |
|---|---|---|
| Eu (1sg) | să fiu | să fi fost |
| Tu (2sg) | să fii | să fi fost |
| El/ea (3sg) | să fie | să fi fost |
| Noi (1pl) | să fim | să fi fost |
| Voi (2pl) | să fiți | să fi fost |
| Ei/ele (3pl) | să fie | să fi fost |
Other Indo-European Languages
Celtic Languages
The subjunctive mood in Celtic languages, particularly the Insular Celtic branch, retains synthetic verbal forms inherited from Proto-Celtic while exhibiting innovations such as nasal mutations to mark mood distinctions. These languages—Welsh, Irish, and Scottish Gaelic—employ the subjunctive primarily to express wishes, hypothetical conditions in if-clauses, purpose, and possibility, often overlapping with future or conditional semantics due to historical mergers. Unlike periphrastic developments in other Indo-European branches, Celtic subjunctives preserve root-aorist and s-subjunctive patterns, with Insular Celtic innovating nasal mutations (e.g., nasalization of initial consonants after certain particles) as a morphological trigger for subjunctive contexts, distinguishing it from Continental Celtic like Gaulish.[30] In Welsh, the subjunctive is morphologically distinct but archaic in spoken usage, appearing mainly in literary or formal registers to convey unreality or volition. A key form is byddai, the conditional-subjunctive of bod ('to be'), derived from Middle Welsh bych via Proto-Celtic bū-; it features in if-clauses (e.g., Os byddech chi 'If you were') and wishes (e.g., Byddai'n dda 'May it be good'). Irregular verbs show root-aorist subjunctives, such as el (3sg of mynet 'to go'), and enclitic patterns like dy-m-gorwy ('that I may unite'). The subjunctive often pairs with the -h- morpheme in forms like carho ('that he may love'), emphasizing purpose or possibility.[30] Irish maintains a robust synthetic subjunctive with dedicated endings, used after particles like go or go mb' for purpose clauses (e.g., go bhfuighidh sé 'that he may get'), wishes (go mbeannaí Dia dhuit 'May God bless you'), and if-clauses denoting hypotheticals. Present subjunctives include s-subjunctives (e.g., geiss 'that he may ask' from guid-), ā-subjunctives (bera 'that he may carry'), and e-subjunctives (gneith 'that he may do'), often with lenition or nasal mutation after go (e.g., go ndéana with nasal n- before consonants). Root-aorist forms like CeC-se-ti (e.g., tabair 'that he may give') highlight retention of Proto-Indo-European structures, while past subjunctives express counterfactuals. A comparative example of nasal mutation appears in Irish du-nd-órbiamni ('that we may exalt'), where nasal infixation parallels Welsh enclisis but innovates via Insular Celtic nasal spreading absent in Gaulish bueti ('that he may be').[30] Scottish Gaelic shows a partial merger of the subjunctive with the future tense, rendering it less morphologically distinct and often identical to future forms in synthetic paradigms. It serves similar functions, including wishes (gum biodh e 'may it be'), purpose after gu (gu tig e 'so that he may come'), and conditional if-clauses (ma bhiodh e 'if it were'). This syncretism, evident in independent forms like faighidh ('may get' or 'will get'), stems from Goidelic innovations, contrasting with Welsh's clearer distinctions but aligning with Irish's synthetic endings. Nasal mutations occur post-prepositionally (e.g., dhand 'to him' before subjunctive verbs), providing a comparative Insular Celtic parallel to Irish lenition, as in gu'n robh ('that there may be') versus Irish go mb'.[30][75]Indo-Aryan Languages
The subjunctive mood in Indo-Aryan languages originates from Proto-Indo-European distinctions that merged over time, particularly in the Vedic period where subjunctive and optative forms were initially separate but began to overlap in function.[76] In Vedic Sanskrit, the subjunctive (known as leṭ) was highly productive, appearing three to four times more frequently than the optative in the Rigveda, and served to express volition, potentiality, or future-like intentions, often in third-person contexts such as requisitions or wishes.[77] By Classical Sanskrit, the subjunctive largely disappeared, with only residual first-person singular forms surviving, while optative paradigms took over many of its volitive roles, reflecting a merger of moods in later stages.[76] In Sanskrit, the subjunctive paradigm was formed by adding the mode-sign a to the strong present-stem, often with guna strengthening of the root vowel where applicable, and it included both present and aorist varieties.[76] Active voice endings followed indicative patterns but with thematic vowel adjustments, as in yunájāni (1st sg., "I may join" from √yuj), yunájas (2nd sg.), and yunájat (3rd sg.); middle voice forms included yunajāi (1st sg.) and yunájate (3rd sg.).[76] Volitive uses predominated in Vedic texts, such as prohibitions with mā (e.g., mā bhūt "let it not be") or wishes for longevity (e.g., jīvat "he shall live"), though middle forms were rarer outside first-person in early Vedic.[76][77] Modern Indo-Aryan languages retain subjunctive elements, often simplified from Sanskrit antecedents, with the Hindi-Urdu subjunctive marked by the suffix -ē̃ (or variants like -ū̃ for irregulars), derived from the bare stem without future tense endings.[78] This form expresses possibility, desirability, conditionals, or wishes, as in jā-ē̃ "may (I/he/she) go" used in sentences like shāyad vah kal dilli jā-ē̃ "perhaps s/he may go to Delhi tomorrow."[78] In conditionals, it pairs with triggers like agar "if," e.g., agar tum kahō to maĩ bhī tumhārē sāth chal-ū̃ "if you say, I may come with you"; for wishes, it appears in fixed expressions like janmadin mubārak ho "happy birthday (may it be)."[79] Negation uses nah̃ or na, as in shāyad vah kal dilli nah̃̃ jā-ē̃.[78] Hindi-Urdu subjunctive conjugation varies by person and number but remains uniform across gender, with irregular verbs like honā "to be," lenā "to take," and denā "to give" showing distinct stems. The following table illustrates simple present subjunctive forms for these verbs:| Person | honā (be) | lenā (take) | denā (give) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1st sg. (I) | ho-ū̃ | l-ū̃ | d-ū̃ |
| 2nd sg. (you) | ho | lo | do |
| 3rd sg. (he/she/it) | ho | lo | do |
| 1st pl. (we) | ho-ẽ | le-ẽ | de-ẽ |
| 2nd pl. (you pl.) | ho | lo | do |
| 3rd pl. (they) | ho | le | de |
Slavic Languages
The Slavic languages generally lack a distinct morphological subjunctive mood, a feature lost during the evolution from Proto-Indo-European through Proto-Slavic, where the verbal system underwent significant simplification, including the merger of tense-aspect categories such as the aorist and imperfect, leading to the repurposing or elimination of modal distinctions.[81] Proto-Slavic inherited a subjunctive derived from the Proto-Indo-European optative, used for expressing hypothetical, desired, or potential actions, but this mood was not preserved as a separate inflectional category in the daughter languages, with its functions largely absorbed by indicative, conditional, or periphrastic forms.[81] Instead, modern Slavic languages employ analytic constructions to convey subjunctive-like meanings, varying across branches: West and East Slavic favor conditional particles, while South Slavic uses subordinators in clause structures. In West Slavic languages like Polish, subjunctive notions, particularly for conditionals and volition, are expressed through a periphrastic construction involving the l-participle (a non-finite past form) combined with the particle by, often introduced by complementizers such as żeby. For example, żebym był translates to "that I be" or "if I were," appearing in subordinate clauses triggered by verbs of wanting (chcieć) or doubt (wątpić), where it marks irrealis or non-factual events without subject coreference restrictions typical of infinitives.[82] This structure is temporally defective, relying on the matrix clause for anchoring, and contrasts with the indicative by prohibiting certain extractions or scramblings.[82] East Slavic languages, such as Russian, similarly repurpose the conditional mood to fulfill subjunctive roles, forming it with the invariant particle бы attached to the past tense verb form, which morphologically identical to the l-participle in some contexts but functions analytically for hypotheticals, wishes, or purposes. This construction, often embedded under čtoby ("that"), denotes irrealis events like future-oriented desires (Ivan xočet, čtoby Maša pročitala knigu – "Ivan wants Masha to read the book"), exhibiting obviation effects where matrix and embedded subjects cannot corefer via pronouns, unlike in indicative clauses.[83] It permits subject scrambling and wh-extraction from the embedded clause, highlighting its distinct syntactic status despite the absence of dedicated subjunctive morphology.[83] In South Slavic languages like Bulgarian, no dedicated subjunctive mood exists; subjunctive-like functions are instead realized through da-clauses, where da acts as a mood particle introducing finite or non-finite verb forms to express irrealis, volition, or purpose without implying factual certainty. For instance, da piša means "to write" or "that I write," correlating with subjunctive complements in other languages and appearing in contexts like hopes (nadăvax se da dojdeš – "I hoped that you would come") or attempts, supporting tense variation (present, perfect, imperfect) in finite variants while non-finite ones require subject identity like infinitives.[84] Semantically vacuous, da resolves conflicts that would arise with indicative marking, positioning it as a placeholder for non-indicative modality in Balkan Slavic syntax.[84] These periphrastic strategies reflect branch-specific innovations post-Proto-Slavic: East Slavic emphasizes conditional particles like by/бы for broad modal coverage, while South Slavic integrates subordinators like da into clause structures influenced by areal Balkan features, compensating for the morphological loss while preserving conceptual distinctions in unreality and volition.[81]Semitic Languages
Arabic
In Arabic, the subjunctive mood is a grammatical category primarily applied to imperfective verbs, expressing purpose, intention, possibility, or hypothetical scenarios, and is triggered by specific particles such as ʾan ("that"), li- ("to" or "for"), kay ("so that"), or lan ("not" in future negation). This mood is characteristic of both Classical Arabic (the language of pre-Islamic poetry and the Quran) and Modern Standard Arabic (MSA), where it maintains a formal role in written and spoken discourse, though its usage has evolved slightly in MSA to include more subordinate clauses after conjunctions like ʾinna and its sisters. Unlike the indicative, which marks realis events with a final -u vowel, the subjunctive replaces this with -a, resulting in forms like yukṭub-a from the indicative yukṭub-u ("he writes").[85][86] The subjunctive form overlaps partially with the jussive mood, as both derive from the base imperfective stem and lack the indicative -u, but the subjunctive is distinguished by its consistent -a ending, while the jussive often shortens or elides the final vowel for commands or prohibitions. This overlap arises because both moods serve non-indicative functions, but the subjunctive is strictly particle-induced, whereas the jussive follows verbs like ʾamara ("to command"). In Classical Arabic, the subjunctive frequently appears in purpose clauses (e.g., li-yakṭub-a "so that he writes") and after subordinators expressing doubt or desire, reflecting its volitive nuance seen prominently in the Quran, where it conveys divine intent or exhortation, such as in constructions with li- for purposive actions. In MSA, these uses persist, but the mood is more rigidly tied to formal syntax, avoiding the freer volitive applications of Classical Arabic. The subjunctive traces its origins to the Proto-Semitic *yaqtula form, an ancient subjunctive marker that evolved into Arabic's particle-driven system, distinguishing it from other Semitic languages' more fused modal expressions.[87][88] To illustrate, consider the conjugation of the verb kataba ("to write") in the imperfective subjunctive, based on the Form I triliteral root k-t-b. The following table shows the active voice forms after a subjunctive particle:| Person | Number/Gender | Form |
|---|---|---|
| 1st | Singular | ʾaktuba |
| 2nd masculine | Singular | taktuba |
| 2nd feminine | Singular | taktubī |
| 3rd masculine | Singular | yaktuba |
| 3rd feminine | Singular | taktubā |
| 1st | Dual | naktubā |
| 2nd masculine | Dual | tatktubā |
| 2nd feminine | Dual | tatktubā |
| 3rd masculine | Dual | yaktubā |
| 3rd feminine | Dual | yaktubā |
| 1st | Plural | naktuba |
| 2nd masculine | Plural | tatktubū |
| 2nd feminine | Plural | tatktubna |
| 3rd masculine | Plural | yaktubū |
| 3rd feminine | Plural | yaktubna |
Hebrew
In Biblical Hebrew, the subjunctive mood is primarily expressed through the jussive form of the imperfect conjugation, which conveys volitive nuances such as commands, wishes, permissions, and purposes, often without a distinct morphological marker from the indicative imperfect in all cases. The jussive typically appears in second and third person forms, shortened in certain binyanim (verb stems) like Qal (e.g., yiqṭōl "may he kill") or Hiphil (e.g., yaqṭēl "let him cause to kill"), while remaining identical to the imperfect in others such as Niphal.[93] This form functions to soften direct imperatives or express indirect exhortations, as in Genesis 1:3 (yəhî ʾôr "let there be light").[94] Negated jussives use ʾal for prohibitions (e.g., ʾal-yērāʾ "let no one be seen," Exodus 34:3), and they frequently combine with the waw-conjunctive prefix (we-) to indicate consecutive actions in volitive sequences, such as purpose clauses following imperatives (e.g., we-təḥî nafšî "that my soul may live," Genesis 19:20).[94] The choice of binyanim influences the jussive's realization and semantic role, with active stems like Qal emphasizing simple volition and causative stems like Hiphil adding directive force.[93] The evolution from Biblical to Modern Hebrew reflects a shift from synthetic morphological moods to more analytic constructions, with Modern Hebrew drawing significantly from Mishnaic (Rabbinic) Hebrew during its 19th-20th century revival as a spoken language. In Biblical Hebrew, the jussive and related cohortative forms provided a robust synthetic system for subjunctive expressions, but by the Mishnaic period, modal distinctions began simplifying, incorporating particles and auxiliaries influenced by Aramaic contact.[95] The revival, led by figures like Eliezer Ben-Yehuda, prioritized Biblical syntax for ideological reasons while integrating Mishnaic elements for everyday usage, resulting in reduced morphological mood marking and reliance on context or modals.[95] In contemporary usage, subjunctive equivalents emerge via the particle še- (that) preceding future-tense verbs to embed wishes, recommendations, or hypothetical scenarios (e.g., še-taḥzōr be-šālōm "may you return safely"), often negated with lō for non-factuality (e.g., lō še-yāšēv "not that he sit").[96] This analytic approach parallels classical Arabic's synthetic subjunctives but favors periphrastic structures over dedicated inflections.[96] Binyanim continue to pattern future forms in these constructions, maintaining stem-specific nuances without altering the subjunctive's modal function.[96]Akkadian
Akkadian, an extinct East Semitic language spoken in ancient Mesopotamia from the third millennium BCE, features a subjunctive mood primarily marked by the vowel ending -u on finite verb forms, distinguishing it within the Semitic family.[97] This mood appears in subordinate clauses to indicate dependency, often conveying durative or ongoing aspects, such as in relative clauses where the verb takes the form of the present-future stem with -u appended.[98] For example, in the G-stem (the basic stem of the verb), the subjunctive of parāsum "to decide" is iprasu "that he decide," contrasting with the durative indicative iparras "he decides."[98] The precative, a volitional form related to the subjunctive, expresses wishes, requests, or commands and is formed with the prefix lu- (or li- in third person) on the preterite base, without the -u ending.[98] In the G-stem paradigm for šakānum "to place," the first-person singular precative is lu-škun "let me place," while the third-person masculine singular is li-škun "let him place."[98] This form is distinct from the subjunctive proper and is used independently for optative expressions. Akkadian's verbal system, including these moods, shows influences from prolonged contact with the non-Semitic Sumerian language, particularly in lexical borrowings and syntactic adaptations, though the core morphology remains Semitic.[99] Uses of the subjunctive extend to subordinate clauses beyond relatives, such as temporal or purpose clauses, where it marks the verb as non-independent, e.g., ša šarrum ina sībittim ikallû "the one whom the king holds in a dream."[98] It also appears in oaths and imprecations for emphatic volition, reinforcing the clause's hypothetical or desired nature.[98] The precative similarly functions in oaths, as in lu-illik "may he go," to invoke blessings or curses.[98] Dialectal variations exist between Babylonian and Assyrian Akkadian, particularly in the interaction with the ventive (allative) morpheme, which indicates direction toward the speaker and appears as -am, -m, or -nim. In Babylonian, the subjunctive -u and ventive are mutually exclusive, preventing co-occurrence on the same verb form, whereas in Assyrian, they may combine, as in i-šaknam-u "that he place it here."[97] For the G-stem durative subjunctive with ventive, a paradigm example is i-parras-am-u "that he divide it here" in Assyrian contexts, highlighting the mood's role in expressing continuous action in subordinates.[98]Uralic Languages
Hungarian
In Hungarian, the subjunctive mood is morphologically marked by the insertion of a -j- infix into the verb stem, followed by personal endings that are identical to those used in the conditional mood, creating a shared paradigm for expressing irrealis notions.[100] This overlap distinguishes Hungarian from other Uralic languages like Finnish, where the subjunctive remains a separate category, but reflects a fusion in Hungarian grammar where the same forms serve both subjunctive and conditional functions depending on context.[101] The -j- infix adheres to Hungarian's vowel harmony rules, adjusting vowels in the stem or endings to match the harmony class (back or front unrounded/rounded) of the verb; for instance, in back-vowel verbs like men- ("go"), it yields menjek ("that I go"), while front-vowel verbs like főz- ("cook") produce főzzem ("that I cook [def.]").[102] The subjunctive is primarily used in subordinate clauses to convey wishes, purposes, doubts, or polite suggestions, often introduced by the conjunction hogy ("that"). For example, Azt akarom, hogy jöjjön ("I want him to come") expresses a desire, and Menjünk el! ("Let's go!") offers a polite suggestion. It also appears in future-oriented or potential contexts, such as purpose clauses like Írok levelet, hogy értesítselek ("I write a letter so that I inform you"), emphasizing unrealized intentions.[100] Unlike the indicative, which asserts facts, the subjunctive signals non-veridicality or speaker attitude, and it exhibits obviation effects in complements of verbs like akar ("want"), disallowing coreferential subjects in agentive scenarios (e.g., #Azt akarom, hogy menjek is infelicitous for "I want to go").[101] Historically, the Hungarian subjunctive derives from the Proto-Uralic optative mood, a category preserved across the Uralic family for expressing wishes or desires, though Hungarian has integrated it into a fused system with the conditional.[100][103] For regular verbs, the present subjunctive conjugation follows definite (object-agreeing) or indefinite patterns, with the -j- infix triggering stem changes like gemination in sibilant-ending verbs (e.g., ír- becomes írjak). Below is the paradigm for the indefinite conjugation of the regular back-vowel verb megy ("go") and front-vowel verb eszi ("eat"):| Person | megy (back) | eszi (front) |
|---|---|---|
| 1sg | menjek | egyek |
| 2sg (long) | menjél | egyél |
| 2sg (short) | menj | egy |
| 3sg | menjen | egyen |
| 1pl | menjünk | együnk |
| 2pl | menjetek | egyetek |
| 3pl | menjenek | egyenek |
Finnish
In Finnish, the subjunctive mood is primarily expressed through the conditional mood (konditionaali), which uses the characteristic stem-forming suffix -isi- attached to the verb's infinitive stem, followed by person-agreeing endings.[104] This form undergoes consonant gradation, where strong consonants in the stem (such as kk, tt, pp) weaken to single k, t, p in the conditional, as seen in takku "to stutter" becoming takkuisi "would stutter" instead of *takkisi.[105] For the verb olla "to be," the conditional singular third person is olisi, while first person plural is olisimme.[104] The conditional mood in Finnish derives from a Proto-Uralic conditional-optative category marked by *-ne-, which evolved in the Finnic branch into the -isi- form without developing a distinct future subjunctive; hypothetical future events are instead conveyed through the present conditional or periphrastic constructions. Unlike some Indo-European languages, Finnish lacks a dedicated future tense altogether, relying on contextual indicators or the conditional for prospective hypotheticals, such as Tulisin huomenna "I would come tomorrow."[104] The conditional is employed in several key contexts, including unreal conditionals introduced by jos "if," as in Jos sataisi, jäisin kotiin "If it were raining, I would stay home"; wishes, like Olisi kiva nähdä "It would be nice to see"; and indirect or reported speech, where it softens assertions or reports hypotheticals, for example, Hän sanoi, että tulisi "He said that he would come."[106] It also appears in polite requests, equivalent to English "would you," such as Voisitko auttaa? "Would you help?"[104] Negative forms of the conditional precede the negative auxiliary en/et/ei/emme/ette/eivät with the conditional stem, yielding constructions like en olisi mennyt "I would not have gone" or et tekisi "you would not do."[107] This negation integrates seamlessly with the mood's person agreement, maintaining the -isi- marker on the main verb. Finnish vowel harmony, a phonological rule grouping back vowels (a, o, u) and front vowels (ä, ö, y) separately, influences the conditional's personal endings and interacts with case suffixes like the illative (indicating "into"), ensuring consistent vowel quality across verb and noun forms in a clause, as in taloon menisimme "we would go into the house" where the illative -oon harmonizes with the back-vowel stem.[108]Turkic Languages
General Features in Turkic
In Turkic languages, a dedicated subjunctive mood is notably rare, with optative constructions primarily fulfilling analogous roles in expressing wishes, desires, and hypothetical or conditional scenarios. The optative, which conveys volition or potentiality, is a widespread volitional mood across the family, often traced back to Proto-Turkic desiderative forms that emphasized wanting or wishing.[109] These early desiderative elements evolved into synthetic optative markers, though external influences from Persian and Arabic contact languages contributed to the renewal and adaptation of modal categories, particularly in subordinate clauses where optative-like functions mimic subjunctive uses in Iranian constructions.[110] For instance, patterns involving modal markers in dependent clauses reflect borrowed subjunctive-like behaviors, enhancing the expression of necessity or possibility without a fully distinct subjunctive paradigm.[110] The core pattern for the optative involves the common morpheme -Ay/-e, which attaches to the verb stem to indicate present or non-past volition, and can combine with -dI to form the past optative for counterfactual or retrospective wishes.[111] Conditionals, often overlapping with subjunctive semantics, typically employ the morpheme -sA, which marks hypothetical if-clauses and is shared across most Turkic varieties, prioritizing conceptual irrealis over tense distinctions.[109] These synthetic forms represent a family-wide inheritance, with -Ay/-e and -sA recurring as stable elements from Proto-Turkic onward, though their phonological realizations vary due to vowel harmony and dialectal divergence.[112] Variations in optative development are evident across branches, with the Oghuz group (including languages like Azerbaijani and Turkish) showing more elaborated and fused forms, such as heightened integration of volitional markers that risk merger with imperative or aorist suffixes.[112] In modern Turkic languages, analytic periphrastic constructions—often involving auxiliary verbs or nominalized complements—have gained prominence, supplementing or replacing older synthetic moods to express nuanced conditionals and wishes, particularly under prolonged areal contact influences.[110] This shift underscores a broader trend toward functional diversification without introducing a true subjunctive, maintaining the optative's centrality in irrealis expressions.[111]Turkish
In Turkish, subjunctive-like functions are expressed through the optative mood (also called subjunctive or istek kipi), alongside suffixes, nominalizers, and periphrastic constructions that convey potentiality, hypotheticals, and unrealized actions.[113] [114] The optative mood, used for wishes, suggestions, and desires, is formed on the aorist stem with personal suffixes, such as -eyim (1SG, e.g., geleyim "let me come"), -elim (1PL, e.g., gelelim "let's come"), and -sin (3SG, e.g., gelsin "let him come").[115] These forms appear in root clauses for exhortations or optatives and extend to subordinate contexts. In embedded clauses, the suffix -mA marks non-factive or potential nominalized clauses, often with subjunctive interpretation, as in gel-me ("not coming" in a potential sense, e.g., after verbs of volition like "I fear that I might not come").[113] Meanwhile, -DIK functions as a nominalizer for indicative or factive clauses, contrasting with -mA by indicating realized events rather than hypothetical ones.[116] Subjunctive equivalents often involve future-oriented or past periphrases, such as the combination of the future suffix -yEcEk with the past copula idi, yielding forms like gelecekti ("he/she would come"), used to express unrealized future-in-the-past hypotheticals.[117] A key construction for the "thought mood" (düşünce kipi), which conveys epistemic modality or counterfactuals, is -Er idi, as in gel-er idi ("he/she would come," implying an unreal past possibility).[117] For negative counterfactuals, -mEz idi is employed, such as gel-mez idi ("he/she wouldn't have come"), highlighting situations contrary to fact.[117] These forms serve various subjunctive functions, including hypotheticals (e.g., Yağmur yağ-maz-sa ne yap-ar-ız? "If it doesn't rain, what shall we do?"), clauses following the complementizer ki ("that") to introduce non-factive propositions (e.g., İstiyor ki gel-e-yim "He wants that I come"), and polite requests or suggestions (e.g., Gelse-m mi? "Should I come?").[113] In subordinate clauses governed by verbs of desire or volition like istemek ("to want"), -mA or optative forms trigger a subjunctive interpretation, emphasizing irrealis mood over tense.[116] While Ottoman Turkish featured optative markers like -(y)A, modern Standard Turkish has evolved these into the aorist-based optative forms, which remain productive for expressing wishes and commands rather than being lost.[112] This retention reflects the language's agglutinative nature, with functional periphrases supplementing synthetic moods for nuance in contemporary usage.[112]References
- https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Sanskrit_Grammar_(Whitney)/Chapter_IX
- https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Gesenius%27_Hebrew_Grammar/109._Use_of_the_Jussive
- https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Turkish/Imperative_and_Optitative
