Thursday May 17, 2007
More about that marriage vow phrase
FADZILAH AMIN answers your questions on English usage.
JORDAN MacVay’s answer (May 4) to my question about the archaic phrase “till death do us part” is enlightening but not really adequate to me. What has been full of interest to me now is the subjunctive, of which I am still ignorant.
I looked up the word “subjunctive” in my Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (OALD) with a view to being more enlightened as to how subjunctive expressions are used – thanks to Jordan MacVay’s explanation. But I am still in the dark about how the subjunctive is naturally used.
In any case, one of the examples given by Jordan MacVay and my OALD does shed some light for me on the use of the subjunctive. Also, it reminds me of what my English language teacher was saying when she taught us how to use verbs-to-be when I was in Form Two.
She said it was wrong to say “if I was you” or “if I am you”. According to her, the only correct expression was “if I were you” but she did not mention the subjunctive at all. In fact, her explanation resulted in perplexing the whole class, which consisted of “Set B” students whose English was very poor.
I learned some Arabic when I was in college. In Arabic, there are certain cases in which what appears to have broken the rules of grammar is actually grammatical, if you understand the complexities of its grammar. If the same goes for other languages such as Hebrew, French and German, does it also go for English?
I’m now a bit puzzled by the role of the subjunctive in “till death do us part”. If this phrase is used in many Christian marriage ceremonies, can’t it be used in other situations outside the church as well, for example, at home when a husband expresses his wish to be together with his wife until both of them are parted by death? – Zexabyte, Kuala Lumpur
Thank you to Jordan McVay for pointing out the use of the subjunctive in the expression from the Christian marriage ceremony and the fact that “the use of the subjunctive in English has declined over the years”.
Since answering Zexabyte’s original question (April 25), I have found out that the correct expression is “till death us do part” and NOT “till death do us part”, but the subjunctive mood is still used in this word order. Here is the sentence from which the expression is taken:
“I __________ (the bridegroom or bride’s name) take thee ____________ (the bride’s or bridegroom’s name) to be my wedded wife/husband, to have and to hold from this day forward, for better for worse, for richer for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, till death us do part, according to God’s holy ordinance; and thereto I plight thee my troth.”
I also found out that the marriage vow as quoted above was originally written (in a slightly different form) in The Book of Common Prayer in 1549, but the expression “till death us do part” originated from the revised edition of 1662, which changed the original “till death us depart” to “till death us do part” (an old meaning of “depart” is “to separate”). –http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=20001013
Now, to answer Zexabyte’s question about how the subjunctive is naturally used in English. The subjunctive mood of a verb is used to express what is imagined, wished, possible or desirable, rather than what exists at present. That is why it is sometimes said to express an “unreal situation”. In connection with expressing what is desirable, it is also used to suggest, recommend, ask, insist, and point out what is important or essential.
The usual form of the subjunctive verb in English is the same as the simple form of the verb, whatever the tense of the sentence may be. This can be seen in common expressions like “God bless you” (meaning “May God bless you”), “Long live the King!” (meaning “May the King live long!”), and in sentences like:
“I insist /suggest /recommend that the law be implemented in this case” and “It was essential that she see the doctor on that day”.
However, when using a “be” verb in expressing an “unreal situation”, “were” is used, e.g. in “If I were you ...” (how can “I” ever be “you”?), “if she were a boy”, etc.
The expression “till death us do part”, it seems to me, in the context of the vow that the bride and bridegroom take, is not an expression of a wish, but of what is possible or even inevitable, because death is bound at some time in future to separate a husband from a wife.
In the 16th and 17th centuries, “it was customary to use the subjunctive mood in subordinate clauses describing action to take place in the indefinite future”. (James E. Clapp)
Here are some examples given by the above writer, both from the King James Bible (1611):
“... we will go along by the king’s high way, until we be past thy borders.” (Num. 21:22)
“... if he do not turn from his way, he shall die in his iniquity.” (Ezekiel 33:9)
“Till death does us part” does not sound incorrect to me in current English, because the subjunctive is hardly used any more in describing “action to take place in the indefinite future”. However, the word order does sound odd. It would be more natural to say “till death parts us” or “until we are parted by death” as in the 1979 American Book of Common Prayer. But of course, the original phrase sounds more poetic.
As to Zexabyte’s question about using “till death us do part” in other situations, e.g. by a husband to a wife, of course he can do it, if he is of a poetic bent, and does not mind sounding a little quaint. But he’ll have to add a main clause to the subordinate clause, like “I wish to be with thee till death us do part.”
RSS
