<p>Most of us people who study English know that there is a subjunctive mood that exists, however discreetly, in our language.
Well, I have a question about it...</p>
<p>Usually, when "if" is employed, the verb "to be" in the singular past tense is changed to "were."
So normally, it is proper to say:
If I were you...
or
If it were to do this...</p>
<p>HOWEVER..
it is also occasionally proper to leave the "was" as it is in the indicative even when uncertainty exists.. or so it seems</p>
<p>Such as:
If it was...</p>
<p>so, I want to know how to differentiate it.</p>
<p>I was just posting this question because the phrase, "I wonder if I were like him when I was his age," doesn't sound right... it seems that the indicative should be used
but eh...</p>
<p>I have heard that in general you use "was" of there is a possibility of the thing actually happening, and you use "were" when referring to something that could not possibly happen. </p>
<p>Was:
If I was to move to NYC I would have to live in a smaller home.
If I was married I would have someone to share the expenses with.
Were:
If I were the Jolly Green Giant I could reach the top shelf at the store.
If I were to become an animal I would want to be a cat.</p>
<p>I'm not sure if this is always the case, but it is the rule that I learned for these circumstances.</p>
<p>According to the Associated Press Stylebook:
"Use the subjunctive mood of a verb for contrary-to-fact conditions, and expressions of doubt, wishes, or regrets:
If I were a rich man, I wouldn't have to work hard.
I doubt that more money would be the answer
I wish it were possible to take back my words."</p>
<p>AP goes on to say that sentences that express a contingency or hypothesis may take either subjunctive or indicative -- use subjunctive if there is little likelihood that a contingency will come true:
"If I were to marry a millionaire, I wouldn't have to worry about money."</p>
<p>"I wonder if I were like him when I was his age"</p>
<p>That should be "I wonder if I was ..." Why? Well I can't phrase this gramatically, but the fact is that at one point in your life, you were his age. So it's not a contingency even though what you're asking afterwards is. That kinda makes sense....in my head.</p>
<p>Fowler's English Usage says that "if ... were" is applicable to present or future nonfacts. "If ... was" is applicable to past actualities. "If it were so how angry we should be!" "If it was so it did not appear."
By the way, if you like quirky British humor, his discussion of subjunctives is pretty entertaining; according to Fowler, the "subjunctive is dying" and as far as he is concerned, good riddance.</p>
<p>Actually none of your explanations are true overall. Im in Adept English 3 @ Harvard and I remember we went over this. Although some of your explanations are correct, only to particular situations. In fact, there is no difference between were and was in the If clause if the past tense of the verb is was. You can either substitute for were or was and it is 100% correct. If you've noticed, on the SAT, none of the answer choices will ever be exactly the same with the only difference as were vs. was (not in an IF clause at least). Hope this helps :)</p>
<p>HarvardG is right; they'd be even more sadistic than we know them to be if they included a subjunctive on the SAT. A close reading of Fowler's is in complete agreement with HarvardG; I had oversimplified.</p>
<p>Using was instead of were is just one of the things where so many people make the mistake that it becomes "correct" ... like "Woe was me" (which should be Woe was I) or "irregardless" <em>cringes</em></p>
<p>the most annoying thing about these songs is that they wouldn't even lose anything if they just used "were"! It's not like it disrupts the rhythm or anything</p>
<p>Wait a minute, I think there's a basic problem with the op's question in the first place. Sentences that begin "if" do not take the SUBJUNCTIVE form of the verb, they take the CONDITIONAL form which for the verb "to be" is "were."</p>
<p>"HarvardG is right; they'd be even more sadistic than we know them to be if they included a subjunctive on the SAT. A close reading of Fowler's is in complete agreement with HarvardG; I had oversimplified."</p>
<p>Ummmm they do include the subjunctive on the SAT, at least thats what my review book says.</p>