0

"I used to think it were my narrow attention span, but later I came to realise it was just the teacher".

In this sentence, I first describe a reality that is contrary to reality. Going by the book, the word "were" in the sentence should describe a subjunctive mood. Yet, to my ears at least, it seems a bit off-putting.

So the question is: was it correct to use "it were" in this sentence, or had it been more correct to use "it was" (if so, then why?)

Thank you.

migrated from english.stackexchange.com Jul 27 '17 at 0:10

This question came from our site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts.

  • It's wrong, as the answer below explains. I would add that modern grammar calls "were" the irrealis mood, not past subjunctive. The term 'subjunctive' is best used for expressions like "It is vital that I be kept informed", where the verb is the plain form. – BillJ Jul 25 '17 at 15:33
1

Subjunctive were cannot be used freely, but only in certain syntactic contexts: primarily, after "if", or in the (rather literary) inverted form which is equivalent to "if".

A non-conditional clause introduced by "think" is not one of these contexts. So no, even among those who use subjunctive were, your example is not grammatical in present-day English.

  • Thank you for your answer. I broke my mind on this for a while now. – He7Man7 Jul 25 '17 at 14:44

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.