My feed
Premium

Please
or
to access all these features

Pedants' corner

Can someone give me a hand with 'were to' & 'was to' please?

11 replies

tearinghairout · 06/09/2008 11:43

OK, I'm editing a document & getting tied up with if something 'was to' happen, eg. quite a lot of discussion along the lines of...
"...if there was no [cost] ceiling in place and an operator was to make an insurance claim..."

OK, so a)operator is singular, and b) we're talking about something that might happen, not that did (as in was, in the past).

So my question is, do I have to pull out every 'was' & change it to a 'were to' or 'were to be'?
Is awfully clumsy.

Thanks

OP posts:
Report
themildmanneredstalker · 06/09/2008 11:46

it should read[i think]

if there was no cost ceiling in place and an operator were to make a laim

but don't take my word

Report
BitOfFun · 06/09/2008 11:51

I think "were to" as well- you are talking about something that mighthappen as a consequence of something else, so it's subjuctive. Probably

Report
tearinghairout · 06/09/2008 11:55

Yes, my brain has gone to sponge (deadline coming up, eyes propped open with matchsticks.

The thing is that they are discussing scenarios where the potential cost is or isn't capped... but 'If there were to be no ceiling in place and an operator were to ...' sounds wrong.

So, thank you!

OP posts:
Report
Ellbell · 06/09/2008 12:34

'Were to' is correct, but the subjunctive is increasingly not used in modern English, which is why it sounds odd.

Report
tearinghairout · 06/09/2008 15:49

So, does that make 'was' wrong? Another example, (it's in a report): 'If £6million was invested today at X interest rate,in ten years it would be worth....'

If it's wrong I ought to change it to 'were to be', no?

OP posts:
Report
SqueakyPop · 06/09/2008 15:51

Subjunctive voice - if I were to ...

Report
Habbibu · 06/09/2008 15:53

doesn't have to be "were to be" - "were invested" is fine - just the subjunctive of the same verb

Report
tearinghairout · 06/09/2008 15:54

So do you think 'was', in the 'investment' example, is actually wrong, even though we'd all say it (most of us!)?

OP posts:
Report
Habbibu · 06/09/2008 15:58

I don't really mind either - the subjunctive survives pretty rarely these days, and isn't crucial for communication. On balance I do prefer "were", but as a direct replacement for was in all your examples, not with the "to be" added.

Report
itwasntme · 06/09/2008 16:00

I agree with were, you should us the subjunctive.

Report
tearinghairout · 06/09/2008 16:20

Thanks. Much appreciated.

OP posts:
Report
Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.