Technically speaking, only this one is correct:
I demand that he/this man leave!
The reason why that one is correct while the other one is not has to do with the fact that what we're dealing here with is an example of something called a subjunctive mood. Wikipedia defines subjunctive mood as follows:
The subjunctive is a grammatical mood found in many ...
I demand that he leave!
I demand that he leaves!
These are both examples of what are known as ᴍᴀɴᴅᴀᴛɪᴠᴇ ᴄᴏɴsᴛʀᴜᴄᴛɪᴏɴs. Sentences such as example (1) are known as sᴜʙᴊᴜɴᴄᴛɪᴠᴇ ᴍᴀɴᴅᴀᴛɪᴠᴇs. Examples such as (2) are known as ᴄᴏᴠᴇʀᴛ ᴍᴀɴᴅᴀᴛɪᴠᴇs. There is a third type of mandative called a sʜᴏᴜʟᴅ-ᴍᴀɴᴅᴀᴛɪᴠᴇ.
Mandative constructions use a content clause which ...
Use were (instead of was) in statements that are contrary to fact.
In your sentences it should definitely be:
"What if the Moon were a Disco ball" - It's not true, that's why we use the subjunctive, it's contrary to fact.
"If + were" expresses the subjunctive mood, which refers to wishes and desires and is known as a "non-factual" mood.
If you're ...
Your quotation is an example of a past unreal conditional sentence with inversion that is more formal than those that follow the usual word order:
SHFs simulate the errors we would have made had we used this forecasting method at those points in the past.
The usual word order would have been as follows:
SHFs simulate the errors we would have made if ...
Because subjunctive mood obligates the following:
The present tense third person singular drops the -s or -es so that it looks and sounds like the present tense for everything else. — source.
Well, many argue that the subjunctive mood is disappearing from English. Somewhat rightfully so, considering that other ...
We use "was" with I, he, she, it when speaking of the past: it is the singular past form of the verb "to be".
We use "were" with you and they and we: it is the plural past form.
But sometimes we can use "were" with I (he, she, it):
I wish I were a sailor.
Here, I've expressed my wish to be a sailor, which I am not.
This is called the subjunctive ...
Both are not quite right.
"It would be better" is how you would phrase a declarative sentence - a statement of fact. To ask a question, start with the question word ("Would it be better...?"). This makes the whole question of the contraction unnecessary :)
But if you still want to know a bit about "it would" read on:
1) The correct contraction for "it ...
I would love to if I could has CAN in the past tense but with present reference as a counterfactual:
SHE: Hey, Marco, we're going to the Thai place for lunch, you wanna come with?
YOU: I'd love to if I could, but I'm waiting for a call.
I would love to if I can has CAN in the present tense but with future reference as a contingent possibility:
Yes, you are using the past subjunctive and yes, you should say "If he were you".
With moods, just like tenses, we know the conjugation. That's because every conjugation happens for some combination of tense and mood. There is a never a verb which has a tense but no mood or a mood but no tense. If we don't name a mood, such as when we talk about the "past ...
"that I be" is a good use of the English present subjunctive (which is what I believe you meant when you said "imaginary format"). In this "mood" the verb is always the same as the infinitive:
that I be
that you be
that he/she/it be
that we be
that they be
If you want to use it with "go", it's still the same as the infinitive:
that I go
that you go
I think you are confusing two different meanings of consider.
If you consider X Y or consider X to be Y (these expressions are equivalent), consider means "believe" or "maintain": you hold or express the opinion that X is Y.
I consider Sartorius a fool.
If you consider X as Y, consider means "take under consideration" or &...
You're missing nothing: as you believe, the correct answer is 1. had met.
When wish takes a complement content clause† the verb is always in 'subjunctive' mood—this requires that the verb group be led by a past-form verb, and in formal use if the lead verb is BE it is uninflected for person or number.
A simple-past-form verb thus has non-past ...
First of all, it might be helpful to get a firm grip on what actually goes on with conditionals. Basically, there are two tense systems that we use. The first is the tense system we generally use when using sentences with subordinate clauses that tell us about when something is going to happen. This is to say we use past verb forms to talk about past time, ...
This is a tricky one. We use will when describing the actual future:
I'm getting married next month! We'll live in a big house in the suburbs with no neighbors and […]
We also use it after verbs like want and hope, that describe a desired future that we hope will become real:
I want to live in a big house in the suburbs where I won't have noisy ...
Yes, the printer got sick. (Or at least the speaker asserts that he in fact got sick.)
Would is used here in the sense 'be willing, consent', with overtones of the sense 'persist (in a particular action or behavior)'.
And it is used its past form not to express conditional or unreal modality but to express tense.
Nobody was willing to take ...
It should actually be "If I were his age", but yes, the construction is sound. I know "have" is used in this way in some other languages--Spanish for example--but in English we don't say "If I had his age".
When I was your age, we had to walk uphill to school both ways!
Ah, young love. If I were your age...
The above ...
The sentence in question is cast in the present subjunctive, which is now almost dead even in written English. It has mostly been replaced by simple indicative forms or, as you indicate, by constructions with would or should.
However, a use which is widespread in US English (and has in the last 50 years been enjoying a modest revival in British English, too)...
We use the preterite (past tense form) when expressing a counterfactuality.
If she loved me, I would change my job (but she doesn't love me).
But when it's a form of the verb to be, we can use "were" in place of it.
What if the Moon was/were a Disco ball (but it's not).
This form is known as irrealis were. It isn't used for marking tense; it's a mood ...
"had we used this forecasting method" means that the forecasters did not use that forecasting method in the past, but if they had, then a certain amount of error would have occurred. SHF is a technique to simulate what those hypothetical errors would have been.
In short we are dealing with an unreal past here, which is why the "had"-form is used.
I really ...
It is indeed subjunctive. Hawthorne is emulating the diction of the 17th century, when the subjunctive was still very much alive. For instance:
If it were done when 'tis done, then 'twere well
It were done quickly.
Today we would say
If this were [over and] done [with] once it has been done, it would be good to do it quickly.
"I demand that he leave."
is correct English. The verb "to leave" is in the subjunctive mood. To my ear it sounds better than
"I demand that he leaves."
although people understand either one and many would not notice the difference. The second one sounds like a plausible choice because we say "he leaves" all the time when using the ...
I'm no longer sure about my answer. I have been thinking about this over and over in the past few days but cannot reach a definite conclusion for myself. Hence, 'was' instead of 'were' might be the correcter option for the singular. This was also pointed out by @alephzero, here below in the comments.
This is the subjunctive: 'were' is ...
This depends on meaning, on dialect, and potentially on speaking style. Your original sentence:
Young people are expected to be polite to the elderly.
is ambiguous, since expect has two potentially relevant senses: "to think that something will probably or certainly happen" and "to consider (something) to be reasonable, required, or necessary" [link]. So ...
Arguably this question isn't a good fit for a learners site, but we are where we are. First of all, note...
...showing that this dated/poetic/archaic construction has little relevance to contemporary English.
The exclamation O (more commonly transcribed as Oh today) can have a wide range of meanings. That MW list is only partial - it doesn't even include ...
"Won't" is the short form of "will not".
'Wouldn't" is the short form of "would not" and would is the past form of will.
Won't and wouldn't are very common and informal in use, whereas will not and would not are usually formal.
Won't = will not is used when you are certain/have planned for something that is not going to take place in the future, for ...
Not sure what the grammatical name for this is, but the correct answer is the simple past tense of the verb:
It's time you went to bed.
It's time you got a haircut.
This might be considered a slightly pedantic construct. Most native speakers of English would probably be more inclined to say:
It's time for you to go to bed.
It's time for you to get a ...
In the case of your question, it is interesting that your sentence can actually mean BOTH options.
Consider a son talking to his parents about going to college. He doesn't want to go to college, and his parents are trying to convince him otherwise:
Parents: A college education will open so many doors for you! It's crucial for getting a job.
Son: So ...
I wonder whether this question is involved enough to belong over on English.SE for a purely academic treatment.
In a language-learner’s context, though, I’d suggest that the more idiomatic answer is to rephrase the problem away:
If I had a cute daughter, I would be very happy.
This contains the subjunctive so there’s no confusion.