# Subjuntive "To sing"



## Mafalda1976

Hi,

How would you translate the next sentence in present tense of the subjunctive mood in English?  

"Deseo que Jorge cante un par de canciones."

Would it be? 

*"I wish Jorge sing a couple of songs" *or* "I wish Jorge would sing a couple of songs"*  or  *"I wish that Jorge sing..."*

How would it be a proper way?

Thank you very much for your help!!


----------



## Big Lar

Casi:  I wish *that* Jorge would sing a couple of songs

Saludos,
Big Lar


----------



## Forero

Mafalda1976 said:


> Hi,
> 
> How would you translate the next sentence in present tense of the subjunctive mood in English?
> 
> "Deseo que Jorge cante un par de canciones."
> 
> Would it be?
> 
> *"I wish Jorge sing a couple of songs" *or* "I wish Jorge would sing a couple of songs"*  or  *"I wish that Jorge sing..."*
> 
> How would it be a proper way?
> 
> Thank you very much for your help!!



En este contexto, "que Jorge cante" = "(for) Jorge to sing".

Lo díficil es traducir "deseo".  Algunas posibilidades:

I want Jorge to sing a couple of songs.  [Quiero que Jorge cante ...]
I would like (for) Jorge to sing a couple of songs.  [Querría/Me gustaría que Jorge cante ...]
My wish is for Jorge to sing a couple of songs.  [Mi deseo es que Jorge cante ...]
(Esta última frase requiere el "for".)


----------



## valdo

Que te parece - "I'd like to hear him (John) singing a couple of songs"...? o "I wish he sang a couple of songs (for me)"...?

Espero te sirva,


----------



## k-in-sc

"I wish he sang" means he didn't.
"I wish he would sing" means there is still the possibility that he will.


----------



## Forero

valdo said:


> Que te parece - "I'd like to hear him (John) singing a couple of songs"...?"Me gustaría oírlo cantando ...." o "I wish he sang a couple of songs (for me)"...? "¡Ojalá (me) cantase ...!"
> 
> Espero te sirva,



"I'd like to hear Jorge sing a couple of songs." "Me gustaría oírlo cantar ... (a Jorge)." = "Querría que Jorge me cante ...."


----------



## Mafalda1976

k-in-sc said:


> "I wish he sang" means he didn't.
> "I wish he would sing" means there is still the possibility that he will.


 

*Thank you very much for you answer, it clears my doubt, but there are still a couple of things I can`t understand quite well. 

1) Is the present form of the subjuntive mood equal to the past tense of the indicative mood? (For example: "I wish she ran as fast as I do").*

*2)Which are some of the verbs that require the subjunctive mood in the present tense?*


*Thanks a lot for your help K-IN-SC!!*


----------



## GreenWhiteBlue

Modern English really does not use its subjenctive very much.  "_Would sing_" is actually the conditional, and not the subjunctive; the subjunctive is "_sing_" but to use it here sounds too much like a misuse of the indicative.

You might find the subjunctive sounds more natural with another verb, such as "recommend" or "demand" rather with "wish":

_I recommend that George *sing* only popular songs._
_I demand that George *sing* the national anthem._


----------



## Mafalda1976

*thank You All!!!*


----------



## Mafalda1976

GreenWhiteBlue said:


> Modern English really does not use its subjenctive very much. "_Would sing_" is actually the conditional, and not the subjunctive; the subjunctive is "_sing_" but to use it here sounds too much like a misuse of the indicative.
> 
> You might find the subjunctive sounds more natural with another verb, such as "recommend" or "demand" rather with "wish":
> 
> _I recommend that George *sing* only popular songs._
> _I demand that George *sing* the national anthem._


 
So there is no gramatical form for the subjunctive? 
For instances in Spanish:

1)Espero *vuelvas* pronto (presente de subjuntivo)
2) Si te* portaras* bien, no estarìas castigado*.* (imperfecto de subjuntivo)

Are there exact equivalents in English?

*Thank you very much GreenWhiteBlue*


----------



## mal67

The subjunctive does have a specific form, it's just not unique.  

Contrast these two:
You *are *on time.
I demand that you *be *on time.


----------



## Forero

Mafalda1976 said:


> 1)Espero *vuelvas* pronto (presente de subjuntivo)


I hope you come back soon. (present indicative)


> 2) Si te* portaras* bien, no estarìas castigado*.* (imperfecto de subjuntivo)


If you behaved yourself, you would not be punished. ("past" subjunctive, contrary-to-fact)

GWB's "that George sing" is "present" subjunctive.  Indicative would be "that George sings".  I put "present" in comillas because it is also used in past tense sentences: "I recommended that George sing only popular songs." (que cantase)


k-in-sc said:


> "I wish he sang" means he didn't.
> "I wish he would sing" means there is still the possibility that he will.


I have to disagree a little with k-in-sc's post.  "I wish he sang" means that he doesn't.

Demand: "I am asking that he sing." (Estoy pidiendo que cante.)
Hope: "I hope he sings." or "I hope he does sing." (Espero que cante.)
Fact: "He does not sing." (No canta.)
Wish (contrary to fact): "I wish he sang." or "I wish he did sing." (¡Ojalá que cantara!)
Past: "He sang." (Cantó, o cantaba.) or "He did sing." (Sí que cantó, o que cantaba.)
------ "He did not sing." (No cantó, o no cantaba.)

Demand: "I am asking that he have sung." (Estoy pidiendo que haya cantado.)
Hope: "I hope he has sung." (Espero que haya cantado.)
Fact: "He has not sung." (No ha cantado.)
Wish (contrary to fact): "I wish he had sung." (¡Ojalá que hubiera cantado!)
Past: "He had sung." (Había cantado.)
------ "He had not sung." (No había cantado.)

The verb "would" is tricky.  Sometimes it forms a conditional, and sometimes it is just "will" in past tense.  "Will" sometimes implies future, but sometimes willingness.

Demand: "I am asking that he be willing to sing." (Estoy pidiendo que esté dispuesto a cantar.)
Hope: "I hope he will sing." (Espero que esté dispuesto a cantar.)
Fact: "He will not sing." (No está dispuesto a cantar, o no cantará.)
Wish (contrary to fact): "I wish he would sing." (¡Ojalá estuviera dispueso a cantar!)
Past: "He would sing." (Cantaba, cantaría, había de cantar, o estaba dispuesto a cantar.)
------ "He would not sing." (No cantaba, no cantaría, no había de cantar, o no quiso cantar.)

Only the verb _to be_ has a full set of forms, and only in third person singular:

Demand: "I am asking that he be ready." (Estoy pidiendo que esté listo.)
Hope: "I hope he is ready." (Espero que esté listo.)
Fact: "He is not ready." (No está listo.)
Wish: "I wish he were ready." (¡Ojalá estuviera listo!"
Past: "He was ready." (Estaba listo, o estuvo listo.)
------ "He was not ready." (No estaba listo, o no estuvo listo.)


----------



## mal67

> Hope: "I hope he will sing." (Espero que esté dispuesto a cantar.)



"Will" here indicates the future - I hope he will sing at some moment in the future.  I would translate this as "Espero que vaya a cantar / que cante [no ahora sino en el futuro]"




> Only the verb _to be_ has a full set of forms, and only *in third person singular*



Why only in third person singular? It seems to me that you could follow the same constructions for first, second and third persons (singular and plural).  E.g., "He asked that I be ready" etc.


----------



## Forero

mal67 said:


> "Will" here indicates the future - I hope he will sing at some moment in the future.  I would translate this as "Espero que vaya a cantar / que cante [no ahora sino en el futuro]"
> 
> Why only in third person singular? It seems to me that you could follow the same constructions for first, second and third persons (singular and plural).  E.g., "He asked that I be ready" etc.



Hi, mal67.

I forgot about "I wish I were", so make that only a full set of forms (indicative and subjunctive, present and past, four forms) in first and third persons singular.  "To be" does indeed have distinct subjunctive forms throughout the present tense.  Other verbs have distinct subjunctive forms only in third person singular present tense.

Did I get that right this time?

About "will":

I think the most common meaning for "He wouldn't sing", as an unqualified sentence, is that he refused, or was unwilling, to sing. (No quiso cantar.)

"I wish he would sing" has a little more of the idea of futurity in it, but to me it sounds like I am tired of him refusing to sing and I wish he were less self conscious or whatever.

"I hope he will sing" may indeed mean "I hope he is going to sing", but it can also (maybe even more often) mean I hope he can bring himself to sing for us.


----------



## virgilio

Mafalda1976,
                 " "Deseo que Jorge cante un par de canciones.""
 I want Jorge to sing a couple of songs

Cuando se trata de una situación en que la persona A desea que haga algo la persona B, el inglés no utiliza ningún subjuntivo (como lo hace el castellano) sino utiliza una construcción de *acusativo y infinitivo*, en la cual el sujeto del subjuntivo castellano llega a ser acusativo y el verbo subjuntivo llega a ser infinitivo.
p.e.
Qué quieres que yo haga?What do you want me to do?

Best wishes
Virgilio


----------



## oeset

Forero said:


> Wish (contrary to fact): "I wish he sang." or "I wish he did sing." (¡*Ojalá cantara*!)
> Wish (contrary to fact): "I wish he had sung." (¡*Ojalá hubiera cantado*!)
> 
> Just the same you wrote here yourself:
> Wish (contrary to fact): "I wish he would sing." (¡Ojalá estuviera dispuesto a cantar!)
> Wish: "I wish he were ready." (¡Ojalá estuviera listo!"
> 
> Demand: "I am asking that he have sung." (Estoy pidiendo que haya cantado.)What is the meaning of this one?


 
Hello Forero:

Thanks! It has been very helpful. Yet I have a question about the last sentence.

Regards


----------



## virgilio

Mafalda1976,
                 Re your secondary question:"* 1) Is the present form of the subjuntive mood equal to the past tense of the indicative mood? (For example: "I wish she ran as fast as I do")
*It is always difficult for a native to know what is happening in his own language because his primary reaction to it is sensory or emotional rather than analytical but, for what it is worth, here is my answer.
There is a tense of the English subjunctive which is "aorist".  The adjective "aorist" is derived from Greek and means "limitless". An 'aorist' tense therefore is a 'timeless' tense in the sense that it implies that the action of a verb is so not only in the past nor the present nor the future but for all time.
Consider, for example, the English:
"Faint heart never won fair lady" 
Here "won" appears to be a simple past tense but the implication is that "faint heart" never did, never does and never will "win fair lady". That is the nature of things.
Like the Greek aorist tense, aoristic English subjunctives have the same form as the simple past tense of the indicative mood.
e.g.
If I said that, everyone would laugh.

Best wishes
Virgilio


----------



## Forero

virgilio said:


> Mafalda1976,
> Re your secondary question:"* 1) Is the present form of the subjuntive mood equal to the past tense of the indicative mood? (For example: "I wish she ran as fast as I do")*
> It is always difficult for a native to know what is happening in his own language because his primary reaction to it is sensory or emotional rather than analytical but, for what it is worth, here is my answer.
> There is a tense of the English subjunctive which is "aorist". The adjective "aorist" is derived from Greek and means "limitless". An 'aorist' tense therefore is a 'timeless' tense in the sense that it implies that the action of a verb is so not only in the past nor the present nor the future but for all time.
> Consider, for example, the English:
> "Faint heart never won fair lady"
> Here "won" appears to be a simple past tense but the implication is that "faint heart" never did, never does and never will "win fair lady". That is the nature of things.
> Like the Greek aorist tense, aoristic English subjunctives have the same form as the simple past tense of the indicative mood.
> e.g.
> If I said that, everyone would laugh.
> 
> Best wishes
> Virgilio


 
I would say that the English "past" subjunctive implies that the action of the verb is not, and probably neither was nor ever will be:

If I were king, I would fear no one.

By the way, this "I were" is not the same form as past indicative "I was". Another thing different about the form is that it can be moved to the front, replacing if:

Were I king, I would fear no one.
Had faint heart ever won fair lady, there would be no unattached fair ladies.

Past indicative doesn't have that property:

If he was in town, I didn't know it. 
Was he in town, I didn't know it.


----------



## virgilio

forero,
         Re:"Was he in town, I didn't know it. ", how about "Was he in town? I didn't know it."
This may well have been the history of such factual conditional sentences. Such question/answer/predicates are almost certainly the origin of sentences containing correlative clauses:
e.g.
(an imaginary conversation)
A: Which hat did you buy?
B: The white one.
A: I like that hat.

(now as a pair of correlative clauses, B's response having been omitted as immaterial):
Which hat did you buy, I like that hat.
(in modern idiomatic English)
I like the hat, which you bought.

By the way there is a difference (as I'm sure you are aware) between "If I were king,...etc" and "If I was king,........etc.", where "was" is an example - according to me - of the aorist subjunctive.

Best wishes
Virgilio


----------



## Bilbo Baggins

virgilio said:


> forero,
> Re:"Was he in town, I didn't know it. ", how about "Was he in town? I didn't know it."
> This may well have been the history of such factual conditional sentences. Such question/answer/predicates are almost certainly the origin of sentences containing correlative clauses:
> e.g.
> (an imaginary conversation)
> A: Which hat did you buy?
> B: The white one.
> A: I like that hat.
> 
> (now as a pair of correlative clauses, B's response having been omitted as immaterial):
> Which hat did you buy, I like that hat.
> (in modern idiomatic English)
> I like the hat, which you bought.
> 
> By the way there is a difference (as I'm sure you are aware) between "If I were king,...etc" and "If I was king,........etc.", where "was" is an example - according to me - of the aorist subjunctive.
> 
> Best wishes
> Virgilio


 
When would one ever say: If I _was_ king?


----------



## Jeromed

Bilbo Baggins said:


> When would one ever say: If I _was_ king?


 
When one is very young, or British.


----------



## virgilio

Bilbo,
       Re:"When would one ever say: If I _was_ king?", well, it would have to be when one wasn't.
As I was trying to explain - obviously not very persuasively  - the tense that I call the "aorist subjunctive" shares its spelling with the simple preterite indicative.
e.g.
Do you recognise any difference between these two instances of the verb "said":
(1) If I ever said such a thing, I did so inadvertently.
(2) If I ever said such a thing, people would think ill of me.

In (1) "said" is preterite indicative, whereas in (2) "said" is my "aorist subjunctive"

So changing the verb to "to be":
(1) If I was drunk, nobody seemed to notice  (past tense = Spanish imperfect)
(2) If I was king, would you obey my commands? (my 'aorist subjunctive')

We English are culturally so ashamed of our apparent lack of subjunctives, that we tend to over-emphasize those which have a visibly different form from the indicative, sometimes at the expense of those which haven't. A danger to be avoided!

Best wishes
Virgilio


----------



## Forero

virgilio said:


> (2) If I was king, would you obey my commands? (my 'aorist subjunctive')



Are you saying this has a different meaning than "Were I king, ..." as well as the indicative?


----------



## mal67

> (2) If I was king, would you obey my commands? (my 'aorist subjunctive')



Sorry, but this native of US English doesn't buy that.  For me, it should be "If I were king...", with the subjunctive _were _used to indicate the counterfactual: I am not (nor was I) king.


----------



## Forero

oeset said:


> Demand: "I am asking that he have sung." (Estoy pidiendo que haya cantado.) What is the meaning of this one?
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks! It has been very helpful. Yet I have a question about the last sentence.
Click to expand...

It is not a very useful sentence, but I didn't think it was wrong enough to leave out of the pattern I was demonstrating.  Maybe this will redeem it:

When you get here, he will have sung a good song and the audience will have decided to stay for a while.
I feel it is important for him to have sung a good song so you can enjoy being with the audience.
Yes, it really is important that he have sung a good song by the time you arrive.
I am asking that he have sung a good song by nine o'clock, when I expect you to get here.

- well it may be a hopeless sentence, but the third one in this sequence isn't too bad, is it?

More subjunctive: "Come what may" = "Venga lo que viniere".


----------



## Mafalda1976

virgilio said:


> Mafalda1976,
> Re your secondary question:"* 1) Is the present form of the subjuntive mood equal to the past tense of the indicative mood? (For example: "I wish she ran as fast as I do")*
> It is always difficult for a native to know what is happening in his own language because his primary reaction to it is sensory or emotional rather than analytical but, for what it is worth, here is my answer.
> There is a tense of the English subjunctive which is "aorist". The adjective "aorist" is derived from Greek and means "limitless". An 'aorist' tense therefore is a 'timeless' tense in the sense that it implies that the action of a verb is so not only in the past nor the present nor the future but for all time.
> Consider, for example, the English:
> "Faint heart never won fair lady"
> Here "won" appears to be a simple past tense but the implication is that "faint heart" never did, never does and never will "win fair lady". That is the nature of things.
> Like the Greek aorist tense, aoristic English subjunctives have the same form as the simple past tense of the indicative mood.
> e.g.
> If I said that, everyone would laugh.
> 
> Best wishes
> Virgilio


 

*Thank you for your explanation. I myself studied a little bit of Ancient Greek, but is always hard to think about those grammatical cathegories in other languages... Is the following sentence correct, then?*

*"I wish he sang all day"*


*If this is correct I think I finally got it. *

*Best wishes for you too.*
*Maf*


----------



## Mafalda1976

*Thank you for your explanation, Virgilio. I myself studied a little bit of Ancient Greek, but is always hard to think about those grammatical cathegories in other languages... Is the following sentence correct, then?

"I wish he sang all day"*


*If this is correct I think I finally got it. *

*Best wishes for you too.*
*Maf*


----------



## virgilio

Mafalda1976,
                 Perfectly correct.

Best wishes
Virgilio


----------



## virgilio

Forero,
         Re:"Are you saying this has a different meaning than "Were I king, ..." as well as the indicative?"
Yes, I am. In "if I were king", the verb "were" is past (some would say "imperfect) subjunctive and that tense in a hypothetical conditional sentence represents a *hypothetical present* in English (as it does in Spanish, Latin, Italian and German, for example), whereas what I call the "aorist subjunctive" is *timeless* in the sense that it implies that the apodosis did, does, will and would always automatically follow from the protasis, the two being so intimately linked in the speaker's mind.
I imagine that - for the Greeks too - putting these timeless ideas in a tense indistinguishable from (and perhaps in the Greek mind identical with) the preterite was the linguistic equivalent of carving the thing on stone.
The same thing happens also in the same tense in Latin, although Latin also uses the present subjunctive in aoristic hypothetical conditional sentences.

Best wishes
Virgilio


----------

