3

(i) It is important that she be reinstated immediately. [subjunctive]
(ii) It is important that she should be reinstated immediately. [tensed]
(The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language)

What is the semantic difference between the two?

Improve this question
2
  • 3
    Either is just dandy. Be is probably more common in US, but is gaining new life in UK. The choice is really idiolectal: I may write be and see, first, my client change it to is and then the client's lawyers change it to should be.
    – StoneyB on hiatus
    Commented Aug 9, 2013 at 14:24
  • 1
    I don't think either is stronger.
    – Daniel
    Commented Aug 9, 2013 at 16:46

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
2

Per Oxford English Dictionary "should" firstly expresses advisability (as opposed to obligation), so I would think that the second sentence is weaker.

Improve this answer
1
  • 1
    In the U.S., many people (like me) never use the "should" variation. And I believe that in the U.K., where the mandative subjunctive is dying, many people never use the first version. So I would have thought that they're alternative ways of saying the same thing, and that neither is stronger.
    – Peter Shor
    Commented Aug 17, 2013 at 18:07

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .