6. To the problems of the Imperative Mood

The Imperative Mood implies the action is not completed yet but is due in the future. Nevertheless this form can’t be considered a future verb-forms as the imperative mood expresses not so much the action itself as the command, request, etc. on the part of the speaker.

In form the verb in the imperative Moos coincides with the Infinitive without “to” and the forms of Simple, Present, except 3^rd person singular.

e.g. Stop talking!

Keep working!

Read aloud!

The difference between the indicated forms is as follows the Infinitive is used without “to”, and doesn’t have a special negative form.

Cf: I told you not to talk

Don’t talk

In addition to these peculiarities A.Smirnitsky, emphasized the absence of the interrogative form in the imperative mood.

There is a peculiarity connected with the functioning of the Imperative Mood forms too. Usually the Imperative Mood forms do not require the subject which is obligatory in the Indicative Mood. The use of the subject in some rare cases with verbs in the Imperative Mood is stylistic in nature, expressing strong emphasis.

e.g. You do it!

The subject in the Imperative Mood is not usually expressed but implied, as the addressee in the communicative act. The only deviation in this respect is exemplified by the “let + pronoun/noun” were construction, which is not directed / aimed at the communicant – addressee.

e.g. let us speak now!

Let her go!

7. Subjunctive Mood: Overview

The Subjunctive Mood seems a controversial grammatical category due to a number of forms, both syntactical and analytical used to express its meanings.

The synthetical forms include

• An archaic and stylistically restricted form ”be”

E.g. If it be true….

• The form “were” stylistically not restricted

E.g. If I/he/they were you, I/he/they would do it

• The form, homonymous with the Simple Present except for the 3^rd person singular

e.g. I suggest she tell hem

In American English this form is widely used in comparison with British English where it is viewed as bookish, old, fashioned.

• Besides, there are Subjunctive Mood forms homonymous with the Past Simple and Past Perfect in “appearance” but not possessing temporal and reference.

• There are also analytic forms with “should” and “would”

The views on the Subjunctive Mood range in number from 16 (Deichbein) to 2 (Barkhudarov) as he denied the existence of the Subjunctive Mood.

H. Sweet was of the opinion that in addition to

1. Imperative Mood

2. Indicative Mood

3. There’s “Thought - Mood” subdivided, into a number of Moods due to what auxiliaries form analytical forms:

e.g. a) should _{+ verb → Conditional Mood}

would

b) may _{+ verb → Permissive Mood}

might

As to the synthetic forms which are homonymous with Indicative forms are called ”Tense-moods”

e.g. If he came / if he had come

An interesting approach to the problem of the Subjunctive Mood was developed by A.Smirnitsky on the basis of the combination of the semantic principle and form

1. Subjunctive I / not contradicting / the reality (If he be / I suggest he go)

2. Subjunctive II / contradicting the reality (If it were / if he had known)

3. Suppositional (should + Infinitive) e.g. Should you meet him;

(with all persons)

4. conditional should + Infinitive in the conditional clause of a complementary sentence

would + Infinitive in the conditional clause of a complementary sentence

e.g. What would you answer if you were asked