Subjunctive ‘Were’ vs. Indicative ‘Was’ Wish-Clauses: Why the Use of ‘Was’ Should Not Be Considered “Incorrect”

Abstract

While it is recognized that there has been a gradual shift from the subjunctive were to the indicative was in hypothetical, if-contexts (e.g., formulaic If I/he/she were x… statements) (e.g., Leech et al., 2009; Skevis, 2014), it is important to point out that the same kind of variation occurs in clauses of wishing (e.g., I/he/she wish(es) (that) I/he/she were the Queen/King of the world; I/he/she wish(es) (that) I/he/she was more affectionate). Similar to the former, variability between subjunctive and indicative in wish-clauses does not always constitute free variation. In other words, there are certain environments in which one mood may be preferable to the other. The present paper, thus, has as its objective to distinguish between the contexts in which each of the two forms tends to be used. Our discussion leads us to the conclusion that, wish-clauses with the subjunctive were (i.e., as related to desires pertaining to the pronouns ‘I’, ‘she’, and ‘he’) tend to be associated with desires that are unrealistic or quixotic, unattainable or impossible, and/or unnatural or extraordinary, whereas those with the indicative was, are generally tied to aspirations that are realistic or reasonable, attainable or possible, and/or natural or unexceptional.