The subjunctive has faded from everyday English, but four patterns have survived intact. Recognizing them matters more than producing them: you will meet all four in formal writing, news, contracts, and set phrases long after this lesson. Each pattern below is a separate survival, with its own rules and its own register.
The mandative subjunctive
After verbs of suggesting, demanding, requiring, proposing, recommending, and insisting, a that-clause takes the bare infinitive — the verb with no tense marker, no -s, no is/are.
Notice what doesn't happen: no is, no leaves, no apologizes. The verb stays in its base form regardless of the subject.
The same pattern follows certain adjectives after it is — essential, important, necessary, crucial, imperative, vital.
For the negative, put not directly before the bare verb: that he not be late, that we not miss the deadline.
Mandative: US and UK preferences
American English keeps the bare subjunctive as the default. British English often softens it with should or drops it entirely for the plain present.
| VARIANT | EXAMPLE |
|---|---|
| US (bare subjunctive) | We insist he be punctual. |
| UK (with should) | We insist he should be punctual. |
| UK (plain present) | We insist he is punctual. |
All three are grammatical. The bare form sounds most formal and is safest in academic or legal writing on either side of the Atlantic.
The formulaic subjunctive
A handful of fixed expressions have kept the subjunctive frozen inside them. They are idioms, not rules — you learn them as whole units and don't extend the pattern.
The verbs here are bare (save, bless, live, be, forbid) where ordinary grammar would use saves, blesses, or lives. Don't try to invent new formulas on this model — only the established phrases survive.
"As if" and "as though" with *were*
When as if or as though introduces a hypothetical comparison — something that is not actually the case — careful writing uses were for all subjects, including he, she, and it.
In informal speech, was is extremely common and sounds natural:
Both forms are understood. The subjunctive were signals attention to register: it belongs in formal writing, journalism, and literary prose. Was fits conversation and casual writing without a problem.
"Were to" for remote hypotheticals
Were to + infinitive is a formal way to frame a condition as highly hypothetical — a thought experiment rather than a live possibility.
The meaning is close to a plain second conditional (If I accepted the job, I would relocate), but were to adds distance and formality. It also works with inversion, dropping if entirely:
The inverted form is markedly formal and appears most often in legal drafting, business writing, and careful argument. The subject stays the same; only the auxiliary were moves to the front. Inversion has its own rules covered separately.
Common mistakes
Bare form after suggest, demand, insist
Essential / important / imperative + that
Over-applying the subjunctive
As if / as though with were
Inversion with were to