0
Grammarian-bot Posted 19 years ago
Grammar

Is this subjunctive?

Congress is debating a bill requiring certain employers to provide workers with unpaid leave so that they can care for sick or newborn children.

Is this sentence in subjunctive mood? If yes then how?
Also can we drop the to before provide?

I have a serious problem with deciding when to use prepositions before verbs and when not to. Any help/suggestions.

Thanks in advance.

GB
  

Top answer

As written, this would not be considered a subjunctive, no. You could omit to , but that would be a little awkward sounding, in my opinion. More likely, if a writer omitted to , he would also add that , like this: ...

— CalifJim

  • As written, this would not be considered a subjunctive, no.
  • You could omit to , but that would be a little awkward sounding, in my opinion.
  • More likely, if a writer omitted to , he would also add that , like this: ...
  • requiring that certain employers provide ...
  • In this form, it is subjunctive, even though it is indistinguishable in form from the indicative.
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.

12 Answers
0
As written, this would not be considered a subjunctive, no.

You could omit to, but that would be a little awkward sounding, in my opinion.

More likely, if a writer omitted to, he would also add that, like this:

... requiring that certain employers provide ...

In this form, it is subjunctive, even though it is indistingui
0
0
>... requiring that certain employers provide ...

BTW, it's provide which is in the subjunctive in CJ's sentence
0
0
Grammarian-botCongress is debating a bill requiring certain employers to provide workers with unpaid leave so that they can care for sick or newborn children.

I have a serious problem with deciding when to use prepositions before verbs and when not to. Any help/suggestions.
Hi GB

The to in your sentence isn't a prep
0
0
Grammarian-botCongress is debating a bill requiring certain employers to provide workers with unpaid leave so that they can care for sick or newborn children.
There's nothing subjunctive there. The portion in red is just one big long noun phrase which could be subsequently replaced with "it".
0
0
On the other hand, that sort of 'it' could theoretically include a subjunctive:

Congress is debating a bill requiring that ballots be printed in both Spanish and English.
0
0
YankeeCongress is debating a bill requiring that ballots be printed in both Spanish and English.
Hmm! In Spanish, (which has a clearly defined subjunctive,) the verb "to be" would always take the indicative in that context as it is merely a description, not that that has anything to do with English but I wonder if it
0
0
Bokeh
YankeeCongress is debating a bill requiring that ballots be printed in both Spanish and English.
Hmm! In Spanish, (which has a clearly defined subjunctive,) the verb "to be" would always take the indicative in that context as it is merely a description, not that that has anything to do wi
0
0
Cool BreezeThe present subjunctive after require is considered correct by all traditional grammarians in your example.
I know.
0
0
In Spanish, (which has a clearly defined subjunctive,) the verb "to be" would always take the indicative in that context as it is merely a description
Bokeh,
Actually, it would be the same as in English; it's a case of a requirement: that ballots be printed, not that they are printed. The translation will have something like: ... que las papele
0
0
CalifJimall I can suggest is that you ask this question on a couple of Spanish forums
Hi CJ,

I wasn't asking a question about Spanish; it's my second language, and as Cool Breeze points out thinking about one language can often be a helpful tool in understanding another. My point about Amy's sentence was that although it sounds perfectly natural
0

Related Questions