# If she were/was more polite



## Quiendijo

Hello 

I've learnt to use 'were' for the third person singular (he - she - it) in the conditional type 2. Lately, I've noticed that 'was' has become more frequently used than before, even in British English text books.

Examples:

If *she were* more polite, she would have more friends.
If *he were* rich, he would travel around the world.
If *it were* warmer, I would go swimming.

What do you think about it?
Thank you in advance


----------



## Dryan

The subjunctive is definitely the recommended version in my opinion. Used like this, it's never _wrong._

The thing is that the preterite and the past subjunctive are pretty much always identical. Literally the only unexpected form is _were._
Native speakers recognize that they almost always use a verb that sounds like the preterite here, so it's a natural instinct to try and use the preterite form, _was_.

Doing this is so common that it's hard to call it a mistake. I try to avoid doing it, personally.


----------



## Quiendijo

I see your point Dryan. I personally use the subjunctive too, and tell the students who have to take exams to stick to it.
I just needed to make sure that it hadn't changed.
Thanks a lot


----------



## SevenDays

Quiendijo said:


> Hello
> 
> I've learnt to use 'were' for the third person singular (he - she - it) in the conditional type 2. Lately, I've noticed that 'was' has become more frequently used than before, even in British English text books.
> 
> Examples:
> 
> If *she were* more polite, she would have more friends.
> If *he were* rich, he would travel around the world.
> If *it were* warmer, I would go swimming.
> 
> What do you think about it?
> Thank you in advance



_If she *were*/If she *was *more polite_

It's just two ways of saying the same thing. The difference is in _origin_, not in _meaning_. The origin of _*were* _is Old English, where the subjunctive was actually inflected; the origin of _*was*_ is modern English, where subjunctive inflections no longer exist, and the past verb form is what's actually used in counterfactual "if" constructions. And so _were _and _was _are interchangeable, without affecting counterfactual meaning. (In _traditional grammar, _the choice is _were._)

<  --- > 

<Only English in the English Only forum, please.  Cagey, moderator >


----------



## Quiendijo

SevenDays, thanks for such good explanation 

< ---- > Nevertheless, I'm not sure about 'was' and 'were'. Some British have told me that 'was' has become more frequently used  (but not correct) whereas 'have' has fallen in disuse. I was also told that 'were' is recommended if you need to take the IELTS exam.

< Response to deleted comment removed. Cagey, moderator >


----------



## Uncle Jack

Personally, I use "was" and "were" with more or less equal frequency for hypothetical situations in the first and third persons, but then I belong to a generation or two of Britons who were never taught the subjunctive. I have managed to pick it up through the wide variety of books I have read, but in modern British English it seems to me to be as obsolete and unnecessary as the shall/will distinction.

English grammar is now taught again in schools in Britain, but I have no idea whether the subjunctive is included, or what emphasis is placed on it.

Examination boards tend to lag a few decades behind popular usage, so in an exam, always use "were".


----------



## SevenDays

Quiendijo said:


> SevenDays, thanks for such good explanation
> 
> < ---- > Nevertheless, I'm not sure about 'was' and 'were'. Some British have told me that 'was' has become more frequently used  (but not correct) whereas 'have' has fallen in disuse. I was also told that 'were' is recommended if you need to take the IELTS exam.
> 
> < Response to deleted comment removed. Cagey, moderator >



If you are taking an exam (such as IELTS), then use "were," not because this is the "right/correct/grammatical" answer, but simply because it's the answer the exam _expects_ to see. This is just test bias, not grammar. Any linguist would tell you that _was_ and _were _are interchangeable, though _was _is generally considered "informal" and _were _"formal." Now, try this:

(a) _If I *had* a million dollars_

which is the equivalent of

(b) _If I *were* a millionaire_

In (a), what's "had"? It's simple past, just like "was" is simple past in

(c) _If I* was *a millionaire_

To get caught up in "subjunctive" misses the larger point. All three (a, b, c) are _counterfactual_ (all three start with "if") and therefore "subjunctive" (in the sense that they are "contrary to fact" or "hypothetical"). More importantly, when a predicate isn't a verb (as in b and c, where the predicate is "millionaire," a noun), syntax requires the use of auxiliary "be." Obviously, "If I a millionaire" is ungrammatical, but If _I *was*/*were* a millionaire_ is grammatical. Syntax doesn't care if it's "was" or "were," because they are both _*auxiliary be*_, which is what the construction requires. (Shoot, you can even say_ If I *am* a millionaire_.)

Anyway, this is a lot to take in. Bottom line: if you are taking a test, go with "were;" you wanna get a good grade in that test, after all.


----------



## Quiendijo

Once more, thank you very much!


----------



## JungKim

SevenDays said:


> If you are taking an exam (such as IELTS), then use "were," not because this is the "right/correct/grammatical" answer, but simply because it's the answer the exam _expects_ to see. This is just test bias, not grammar. Any linguist would tell you that _was_ and _were _are interchangeable, though _was _is generally considered "informal" and _were _"formal."



I don't know a thing about IELTS, but are you suggesting that IELTS would consider using "was" (to indicate a hypothetical) _inferior to "were" _or even _wrong_ when native speakers do use both forms?


----------



## Steven David

JungKim said:


> I don't know a thing about IELTS, but are you suggesting that IELTS would consider using "was" (to indicate a hypothetical) _inferior to "were" _or even _wrong_ when native speakers do use both forms?



I don't know anything about IELTS either.

However, I do know, or have heard, that academic tests do not account for the reality of English language use among the vast majority of native speakers of English in certain particular cases.

If that's what is going on here, then this is an example of one of these particular cases.

In fact, it's correct to use either "was" or "were" in this particular case regardless of what the test considers to be correct or incorrect.

This is not a recent development either. It's been like this for quite some time though I can't say how long exactly.

Generally, for second conditional sentences with a first or a third person singular subject, I use "were". However, I would never ever ever say that using "was" is wrong -- ever.

The people that write these exams need to be enlightened.


----------



## kentix

SevenDays said:


> (a) _If I *had* a million dollars_


Is there a "were" analog to this sentence?


----------



## Steven David

Quiendijo said:


> SevenDays, thanks for such good explanation
> 
> < ---- > Nevertheless, I'm not sure about 'was' and 'were'. Some British have told me that 'was' has become more frequently used  (but not correct) whereas 'have' has fallen in disuse. I was also told that 'were' is recommended if you need to take the IELTS exam.
> 
> < Response to deleted comment removed. Cagey, moderator >



Some British have told me that 'was' has become more frequently used  (but not correct) <<

I would ask the same British people that told you this how something can be more frequently used and not correct at the same time.

What does that *mean*? It's more frequently used, but it's not correct?? How could it be?


----------



## SevenDays

JungKim said:


> I don't know a thing about IELTS, but are you suggesting that IELTS would consider using "was" (to indicate a hypothetical) _inferior to "were" _or even _wrong_ when native speakers do use both forms?



I was going by what was said earlier in this thread (post 6, "I was also told that 'were' is recommended if you need to take the IELTS exam"), which fits into the test bias for "were" that I've seen here in WR and in my own experience.



kentix said:


> SevenDays said:
> (a) _If I *had* a million dollars_
> Is there a "were" analog to this sentence?
> 
> I suppose,
> _If I were the owner of a million dollars
> If I were in possession of a million dollars_


----------



## Steven David

It's possible for an "if clause" with "was" to not be counterfactual. I do believe that this is something that we must keep in mind.

An example is here.

If Joe was at the trade show, I didn't see him. Are you sure he was there?

Oh, he was definitely there.

Well, if he *was* there, then I definitely didn't see him. I don't think he was there. If Joe was there, then I would have definitely seen him.

He was there. You just didn't see him.


----------



## SevenDays

Steven David said:


> It's possible for an "if clause" with "was" to not be counterfactual. I do believe that this is something that we must keep in mind.
> 
> An example is here.
> 
> If Joe was at the trade show, I didn't see him. Are you sure he was there?
> 
> Oh, he was definitely there.
> 
> Well, if he *was* there, then I definitely didn't see him. I don't think he was there. If Joe was there, then I would have definitely seen him.
> 
> He was there. You just didn't see him.



Right, "were" can only appear in a counterfactual context; so it's fixed/frozen usage.


----------



## Steven David

SevenDays said:


> Right, "were" can only appear in a counterfactual context; so it's fixed/frozen usage.




Yes, that's what it is.

I do believe that we should also note that "were" is not *the* subjunctive. One can only imagine where that idea comes from.

There's no such thing as *the* subjunctive in English, as in the one and only.

We, of course, certainly have ways of expressing subjunctive meaning, which is to say things that are contrary to fact, imaginary, impossible, distant possibilities, or remote possibilities. That's what part of subjunctive is all about.  

But to just say that "were" after "if" is *the* subjunctive is just not right. How could anyone ever possibly think such a thing? This kind of thinking causes native speakers of English to make errors.


----------



## DonnyB

Steven David said:


> Some British have told me that 'was' has become more frequently used  (but not correct) <<
> 
> I would ask the same British people that told you this how something can be more frequently used and not correct at the same time.
> 
> What does that *mean*? It's more frequently used, but it's not correct?? How could it be?





SevenDays said:


> I was going by what was said earlier in this thread (post 6, "I was also told that 'were' is recommended if you need to take the IELTS exam"), which fits into the test bias for "were" that I've seen here in WR and in my own experience.


Well, as a native speaker of British English who has lived in England all his adult life, I can assure you that "the subjunctive mood" is taught in British schools and that its use in semi-formal written English is expected in exams set by UK examining boards.  If you don't _like_ that, then by all means write to them and complain.  However, the currently reality is that if the indicative "was" is used in a public exam where the candidate has been taught that the past subjunctive "were" is the expected 'correct' answer, he or she will lose marks and it's doing a disservice to forum members in my view to pretend otherwise.

So... where does that leave Quiendijo who asked the question? 


Quiendijo said:


> I've learnt to use 'were' for the third person singular (he - she - it) in the conditional type 2. Lately, I've noticed that 'was' has become more frequently used than before, even in British English text books.
> 
> Examples:
> 
> If *she were* more polite, she would have more friends.
> If *he were* rich, he would travel around the world.
> If *it were* warmer, I would go swimming.
> 
> What do you think about it?


Those are very typical Type II conditionals.  There is undoubtedly a noticeable tendency for people to use the indicative "was" instead of the past subjunctive "were" but I agree with Dryan (post #2): if you use the subjunctive "were" it won't be marked as _wrong. _ I personally would use the subjunctive "were" but if someone said to me "If it was warmer I would go swimming", I wouldn't turn round and attempt to 'correct' his grammar.__

Patterns of usage in English are constantly shifting as millions of people all over the world use the language, and we don't have an official body which decrees what is or isn't correct.  If _in ordinary everyday life_ you want to join the ranks of those who use "was" then nobody's going to turn round and tell you you can't.


----------



## JungKim

This is what Geoff Pullum had to say about the 'past subjunctive' _were_:


> The "were" form is often wrongly called a past subjunctive, but of course "it were done" is not a past tense of "it be done". The difference between the two is that the subjunctive construction occurs with any verb: "I demand that this cease" is a subjunctive (notice "this cease", not "this ceases"). The relic form in "I were" is only available for "be". For all other verbs you use the preterite: "I wish I went to New York more often."


The excerpt is from this link, which has some further links, all of which links I think are an interesting read.


----------



## Steven David

Of note is the fact that *were* is one of the very few marked subjunctive forms in everyday use in modern or contemporary English.

I say _marked_ because, with all other verbs, we simply use the past tense form. With the verb "be", there is a choice. Some people say it must be "were", and other people say it can be either "were" or "was".

This whole idea leads to native speakers making errors. Some people end up believing that it's correct, or that they ought, to use _were_ after _if_ for sentences that communicate something that is real, not counterfactual or not subjunctive, but indicative. So this says that they don't really understand the purpose of using _were_ after _if_. They don't match the form with the meaning of the sentence. This can be confusing for non-native speakers. It's already challenging enough as it is.


----------



## Loob

I would normally use "was".  I might, on occasion, use "were", especially in "If I were you".


DonnyB said:


> Well, as a native speaker of British English who has lived in England all his adult life, I can assure you that "the subjunctive mood" is taught in British schools and that its use in semi-formal written English is expected in exams set by UK examining boards.


I'm really intrigued, Donny - I can't think of any examinations in which I would have been penalised for writing "If I was" instead of "If I were". Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you?


----------



## DonnyB

Loob said:


> I would normally use "was".  I might, on occasion, use "were", especially in "If I were you".
> I'm really intrigued, Donny - I can't think of any examinations in which I would have been penalised for writing "If I was" instead of "If I were". Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you?


I only had time to do a quick search, but you might find these results interesting:

From a webpage aimed at parents, showing that the subjunctive is taught to Year 6 pupils (the final year of primary school in the UK) and examined in KS2 SAT tests - The SchoolRun

At the other end of the scale, this test exercise is from the University of Bristol Faculty of Arts, aimed at improving your writing.

I couldn't readily find past exam papers for GCSE or A level English, and I can't really verify the _extent_ to which candidates would lose marks, but the fact that pupils are taught and expected to use "If I were... " as the 'correct' answer surely suggests that for the time being at least it's part of the the key to getting good grades.


----------



## Loob

Thanks, Donny. The Year 6 "recognise the subjunctive" exercise seems very sensible, but I'm surprised by the University of  Bristol test (if that's what it is).


----------



## Uncle Jack

Well I never! Surely the two tests focus on the wrong thing though. Writing the correct verb form when you are told to use the subjunctive is easy - even I can do it. However, knowing when to use the subjunctive if, like me, you were never taught it in the first place, can be fiendishly difficult. Type two conditionals are straightforward enough - you just have to sit pupils through _Fiddler on the Roof_ - but it's all those other uncertain possibilities that cause problems.

Edit: Now I've looked at the University of Bristol test a little closer, I see it includes some red herrings such as question 3.


----------



## Quiendijo

Loob said:


> I can't think of any examinations in which I would have been penalised for writing "If I was" instead of "If I were".



So far, nobody has told me to use 'were' in conditional two statements if I want to take the IELTS exam, for example. Nevertheless, I was strongly recommended that I use it. Then, I think I should recommend that students use it, just in case...
I have totally understood everybody's points. I think that the problem lies in the fact that you don't have an English Royal Academy as we Spanish speakers do have. Anyway, receiving so many comments and seeing different points of view has been very enriching. Many thanks to all of you!


----------



## Thomas Tompion

I have for years regarded _'if I was'_ in Type II conditionals, as the natural, idiomatic, introduction to conditions which might possibly be met: _if I was to congratulate you on your answer, if I was in Paris, etc._

And_ 'if I were_' similarly for conditions which cannot possibly (technical or logical possibility, in particular) be met: _if I were you, if I were to fly to Saturn this afternoon, etc._

People have said that _'if I were_' can never be wrong in either of these cases, and so should be adopted by learners who wish to avoid mistakes.   I'd add that _'if I were'_ applied to conditions which might easily be met -_ if I were wearing a nice shirt_ - can sound insufferably formal and stuffy.

Using _'If I was' _for impossible conditions often seems ill-educated even in the UK - using it under any circumstances seems to be regarded as ill-educated in the States, according to many American members over the years on this forum.


----------



## Steven David

Many Americans use "if I was" for statements that are counterfactual, as well.

[Side comments removed.  DonnyB - moderator]

I've always used "if I were". However, I do not recognize "if I was" as wrong because it's far too common. And it's easy to understand why someone would use "if I was": the verb "be" is the only verb that has a choice for counterfactual statements with a present time reference (2nd conditional). We just use one past tense form with all other verbs. So there should be no reason that it's not the same with "be". However, we know that it is not the same with "be".


----------



## PaulQ

Quiendijo said:


> If *she were* more polite, she would have more friends.


Were, subjunctive. does not have a time aspect, it implies “at any time” and is thus hypothetical.

If she* was* more polite, she would have more friends.
Was is used for the pure past in the sense of “used to be” and “would” is the past of “will”:
A: I have noticed that Jane does not have many friends.
B: I’m not surprised – she’s very rude.
A: Yes, but she used to have a lot of friends and was quite polite.
B: I am still not surprised - if *she was* [in the past] more polite, she would have more friends[, wouldn’t she?]; that stands to reason.


----------



## Steven David

In a second conditional sentence, "if X were" refers to present time.

Just because something is not true now, it does not mean that it was not true before and cannot be true later.


----------



## Quiendijo

Steven David said:


> In a second conditional sentence, "if X were" refers to present time.
> 
> Just because something is not true now, it does not mean that it was not true before and cannot be true later.



I agree. 
If I had money (at the moment), I would buy a new car! (as soon as possible, I guess   )


----------



## Steven David

Yes, of course.



Referring to your original question, I don't believe that you would find "if X was" in American textbooks. I suppose it's possible.

If "X was" is common enough in American English conversation.

Also, everyone should know that "if X were" is not "*the* subjunctive".

"If X were" is no more "*the* subjunctive" than "if X had" is "the subjunctive".

And "if X were" refers to present time, not all time.

The clause "if X were *to*" refers to future time.

If X were to do Y, (now or at some later time), then Z would happen (now, soon, or in the *future*).

If X were Y, then Z would (be true or be the case *now*).


----------



## Hermione Golightly

TT well expresses my own position in his #25.
The default position for students is to use the subjunctive as they have been taught. If they do it correctly nobody can say they are wrong! When they have passed their exams they can then chose their interpretation of 'formal grammar' vs educated usage.
If I am writing I use the subjunctive because there are too many native speakers keen to judge others for usage they know nothing about.


----------



## Hermione Golightly

Loob wrote
"I might, on occasion, use "were", _especially in "If I were you_"." 

I couldn't say "If I was you", because there is no way or possibility of my being somebody else. It's about as hypothetical as can be! I rank 'If I was you' on the same level as' If he'd of done', or 'Me and him', or 'He done it yesterday' or 'The result of the surveys were'.


----------



## arturolczykowski

For IETLS you should definitely use “were”, otherwise it will be marked as wrong.


----------



## JungKim

Hermione Golightly said:


> I couldn't say "If I was you", because there is no way or possibility of my being somebody else. It's about as hypothetical as can be! I rank 'If I was you' on the same level as' If he'd of done', or 'Me and him', or 'He done it yesterday' or 'The result of the surveys were'.


But that's assuming that only "were" can convey a hypothetical in the if-clause regardless of the person and number of the subject, but the problem is, the usage doesn't back up such an assumption.

The British film 'Kingsman: The Golden Circle' has this line, for example:


> _[as Eggsy approaches him, Charlie pulls out a gun]_
> *Charlie*: It's ironic, isn't it? You look like a gentleman, I look like a pleb. *If I was you*, I'd unlock your cab.



Charlie is a British character in the film and is played by a British actor.
I don't know if the use of 'was' here is intentional on the part of the screenwriter or reflects just what the actor usually uses, but in either case, the use of _was_ here should be accepted as a natural utterance by a British native speaker.


----------



## DonnyB

JungKim said:


> But that's assuming that only "were" can convey a hypothetical in the if-clause regardless of the person and number of the subject, but the problem is, the usage doesn't back up such an assumption.
> 
> The British film 'Kingsman: The Golden Circle' has this line, for example:
> 
> Charlie is a British character in the film and is played by a British actor.
> I don't know if the use of 'was' here is intentional on the part of the screenwriter or reflects just what the actor usually uses, but in either case, the use of _was_ here should be accepted as a natural utterance by a British native speaker.


As another native BE speaker, I'm with Hermione on this: "If I *was* you" grates on me every single time I hear  anyone using it.  People do say it, but I was taught not to, and I don't.

Taking a brief look at some dialogue excerpts from the film you mentioned in the link, it's peppered with things such as "ain't, gonna, wanna, bruv ... ", the list goes on.  It's I assume what the scriptwriters envisaged the characters concerned would say in real life, and they're quite probably right.  I've heard people say all those things. 

But the aim of this forum is to give _good, helpful_ advice in answer to the questions people ask us, and I would echo this sound advice already given:


arturolczykowski said:


> For IETLS you should definitely use “were”, otherwise it will be marked as wrong.


----------



## Loob

DonnyB said:


> "If I *was* you" grates on me


I see _*If I were you* _as something of a set phrase.

Here's one of the many previous discussions: if I was / if I were  [rich; rude, etc.]


----------



## kentix

Loob said:


> I see _*If I were you* _as something of a set phrase.


That's what I were was thinking. For that particular phrase you don't even have to think about the meaning or word choice. It's automatic.

Other phrases (like the OP) might be more uncertain.


----------



## Steven David

JungKim said:


> But that's assuming that only "were" can convey a hypothetical in the if-clause regardless of the person and number of the subject, but the problem is, the usage doesn't back up such an assumption.




I agree, @JungKim. And I don't believe that it is necessary to refer to specific examples. This usage is all around us. We hear it regularly.

The reality of how we speak English tells us that both "if X were" and "if X was" are used in second conditional sentences, which is to say sentences that speak of things that are counterfactual, imaginary, distant possibilities, or impossible.

Both are equally common, for the most part.


----------



## Thomas Tompion

kentix said:


> That's what I were was thinking. For that particular phrase you don't even have to think about the meaning or word choice. It's automatic.
> 
> Other phrases (like the OP) might be more uncertain.


For once I don't agree with Loob, in the sense that I don't think it's an expression which exists in a grammatical world of its own.

I can't be you, so '_If I were you_' fits into the category of impossible conditions, like '_If he were a hippopotamus'_.

This makes _'If I was you' _wrong in the same way as _'If I was the Nizam of Hyderabad'_ is wrong.


----------



## Loob

You and I have never quite agreed on conditionals, TT


----------



## JungKim

Thomas Tompion said:


> For once I don't agree with Loob, in the sense that I don't think it's an expression which exists in a grammatical world of its own.
> 
> I can't be you, so '_If I were you_' fits into the category of impossible conditions, like '_If he were a hippopotamus'_.
> 
> This makes _'If I was you' _wrong in the same way as _'If I was the Nizam of Hyderabad'_ is wrong.


A blockbuster like Kingsman intentionally or unintentionally used the phrase "If I was you" with no intention of making it sound unnatural or ungrammatical on the part of the screenwriter or the actor, and its grammaticality or lack thereof has managed to go completely unnoticed by the viewing public for almost two years.

Go figure.


----------



## RM1(SS)

Uncle Jack said:


> I belong to a generation or two of Britons who were never taught the subjunctive.


The first I ever heard of the subjunctive was in 11th grade (I was 16 at the time), when we covered it in second-year German.  The looks from the other students in the class were just as blank as mine.


----------



## PaulQ

Steven David said:


> Also, everyone should know that "if X were" is not "*the* subjunctive".
> 
> "If X were" is no more "*the* subjunctive" than "if X had" is "the subjunctive".


The subjunctive is correct - it is the absolute use of the adjective:

A: [in the shop] "A dozen eggs please."
B: "Here you are, sir."
A: "Ah... I wanted the large, not the small."


----------



## Steven David

PaulQ said:


> The subjunctive is correct - it is the absolute use of the adjective:
> 
> A: [in the shop] "A dozen eggs please."
> B: "Here you are, sir."
> A: "Ah... I wanted the large, not the small."



It's a misleading statement. So, no, it is not correct. We disagree.


----------

