0
Vilwarin Posted 14 years ago
Grammar

I would it were come...

Hello,

I've got a question concerning a grammatical construction and I'd appreciate your help. Here's what has me thinking for days:

"But I would it were come thereto (if it pleased God) that neither of us need care for that."

This is from a letter from Henry VIII rendered into modern spelling. But something seems really odd here. The first part of the sentence looks like a subjunctive, which would make the whole thing a past counterfactual. But the tense in the protasis (the if-clause in the parentheses) just doesn't fit. I don't think, though, that the 'had' was just forgotten. Now I wonder whether I'm missing something crucial.
And if the construction really is a counterfactual, why isn't it had come since counterfactuals have always been dominated by 'have'.

Looking forward to some input.
  

Top answer

My opinion is.... " ---->>> "But I would THAT it were come thereto (if it pleased ***) that neither of us need care for that. Long time ago, "it is come" was used instead of "it has come".

  • My opinion is....
  • " ---->>> "But I would THAT it were come thereto (if it pleased ***) that neither of us need care for that.
  • Long time ago, "it is come" was used instead of "it has come".
Free · every Monday

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.

1 Answers
0
My opinion is....

"But I would it were come thereto (if it pleased ***) that neither of us need care for that."
---->>> "But I would THAT it were come thereto (if it pleased ***) that neither of us need care for that.

Long time ago, "it is come" was used instead of "it has come".

Related Questions