0
Tuongvan Posted 17 years ago
Grammar
Would prefer
Dear teachers,
I am very confused about the use of tense in the clause after WOULD PREFER/RATHER .Sometimes I see on the Internet people write in many ways, which are very confusing to me.
1)The Pentagon said It would prefer that the withdrawal plan not be considered with war funding.(here they use Present subjunctive)
2)He said that they would rather my husband not come with me for a holiday.(here they use Present subjunctive)
3) His wife's family would prefer he did not come at Christmas( here they use (past simple)
Could you possibly help me understand this issue?.I've checked many grammar books but was not able to find any explanations.
Thank you in advance
I am very confused about the use of tense in the clause after WOULD PREFER/RATHER .Sometimes I see on the Internet people write in many ways, which are very confusing to me.
1)The Pentagon said It would prefer that the withdrawal plan not be considered with war funding.(here they use Present subjunctive)
2)He said that they would rather my husband not come with me for a holiday.(here they use Present subjunctive)
3) His wife's family would prefer he did not come at Christmas( here they use (past simple)
Could you possibly help me understand this issue?.I've checked many grammar books but was not able to find any explanations.
Thank you in advance
Top answer
I'd say the intention in all three of these is simple present plus present subjunctive: His wife's family prefer [that] he [did] not come , but the "would" form is considered more polite. php (#4)
- I'd say the intention in all three of these is simple present plus present subjunctive: His wife's family prefer [that] he [did] not come , but the "would" form is considered more polite.
- php (#4)
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
5 Answers
0
I'd say the intention in all three of these is simple present plus present subjunctive: His wife's family prefer [that] he [did] not come, but the "would" form is considered more polite.
h
h
00
Hi Tuongvan
The past subjunctive has the same form as the past indicative (except for the verb "be"). Thus what you've got in sentence 3 is the past subjunctive.
The difference to me is that the use of the present subjunctive in sentences 1 and 2 (negative: not be / not come) strikes me as firmer or more insistent, and sentence 3 with the past subjunctive (negative: did not come
The past subjunctive has the same form as the past indicative (except for the verb "be"). Thus what you've got in sentence 3 is the past subjunctive.
The difference to me is that the use of the present subjunctive in sentences 1 and 2 (negative: not be / not come) strikes me as firmer or more insistent, and sentence 3 with the past subjunctive (negative: did not come
00
Sorry, guys, I completely misread the question! I agree with Yankee.
(I recall taking the "did" for a mistake - careless and stupid.)
(I recall taking the "did" for a mistake - careless and stupid.)
00
0
I concur with Yankee's comments. Either the present subjunctive or the past subjunctive is possible. The present subjunctive makes for a stronger statement, something closer to a command. The past subjunctive is weaker; it almost gives away the speaker's resignation to not getting his preference.
Comparing 1 and 3, you can see that the Pentagon has a better chance of getting its prefe
Comparing 1 and 3, you can see that the Pentagon has a better chance of getting its prefe
0
Related Questions