AAVE preserves use of subjunctive mood??

I often here people (african americans) say the following:


"If she *BE* good today, i'll take her to the park", when most people would say "If she IS good today...."


"I dont care if he *GO* there or not.", when we would usually say "I don't care if he GOES there or not".


This sounds like incorrect english to most, but I was thinking that it may actually be a use of the subjunctive that was lost from modern standard english, that is preserved in their dialect.

It sounds kind of like archaic english, such as the title of the poem “If She *Be* Made of White and Red” by Herbert P. Horne, with "be" being the subjunctive form.

What do you think?

I think its just that they use uninflected verb forms for EVERYTHING, so it looks like a preserved use of the subjunctive when they happen to say it in the right context (like in those hypothetical statements starting with "if")

They also use the same verb forms when making factual statements that should be in the indicative mood.

For example:

"She usually be good, but today shes acting up"

which is definately incorrect.

I think it acts as an effective morphological simplifier: they use it in an indicative and a subjunctive sense, as well as for different tenses.

Here's DMX explaining how he got raped by a woman:

"She raped me… That might sound like some bull****, [but] is that the only thing in the world that's not possible? Because when I sleep, my [penis] be out… DNA says it is [my child]. I don't know… If I did [have sex with her], I would remember. It ain't like she's a pretty girl."

Well, linguists wouldn't call it "incorrect" since it's understood and used by all AAVE speakers -- just a feature of another dialect.

<<I think its just that they use uninflected verb forms for EVERYTHING, so it looks like a preserved use of the subjunctive when they happen to say it in the right context (like in those hypothetical statements starting with "if") >>


I agree. If it were a preserved use of the subjunctive, they wouldn't use the same form in indicative statements.

While hypothetical statements like "IF she DO have it, i'll ask her to give you one", are technically correct usage of the subjuctive mood, they also use the same verb form for factual statements like "She do have it." So I think that its just a coincidence, and not preservation of archaic grammar.

<<While hypothetical statements like "IF she DO have it, i'll ask her to give you one", are technically correct usage of the subjuctive mood, they also use the same verb form for factual statements like "She do have it.">>

I think in the example you give, both statements are wrong.

I believe correct use of the subjunctive would be " If she HAVE it, i'll ask her to give you one".

What is happening in this case is not the subjunctive mood. "Be" is the standard translation for all numbers and persons in the present tense in AAVE. Paul is close, but instead of "she's acting up" it would be "she acting up" without the copula.

Skippy, you're close, but instead of "she acting up" it would be "she actin' up" without the "g".

I think there might be something to this.

Its possible that standard american english abandoned the use of the subjunctive in certain types of clauses (like if/then statements), in addition to other grammatical features, that some groups (i.e African-Americans) retained.

I too have often noticed the eerie similarities between the grammar in some earilier literature and AAVE.


"Unmoved—an Emperor be kneeling
Upon her Mat—"

-- Emily Dickinson


^^ sound familiar??