Which is correct?
I’d feel so much better if it was Obama instead of Trump.
I’d feel so much better if it were Obama instead of Trump.
Is there a rule when to use one or the other. For some reason they both sound correct to me.
I think it should be ‘were’ because it’s hypothetical. I don’t think anyone would be confused by using ‘was’ either.
“were” is the past subjunctive/irrealis of “to be”, which should be used in a counterfactual clause. Since it is not, in fact, Obama instead of Trump, only the second sentence is strictly correct.
ETA compare German: “er wäre”
The subjunctive is rarely used these days. You need it only in the most formal writing.
Where would the OP use this sentence? In the New York Review of Books for an audience of intellectuals? Or on a message board where casual and colloquial writing is the standard?
The use of the subjunctive has become a usage question, not a grammar question. There are few objectively “correct” answers about usage. Usage always depends on context.
“Were” would be the correct one here, for the reasons stated above.
From my observation, usage is shifting/has shifted towards “was” in the irrealis mood. I also note that there also seems to be a bit of a US/UK divide here, with the “if I were” construction being much more common in US English than UK English in the same grammatical situations. Once again, from my observation, it’s not really reserved for “the most formal writing” here. I hear it quite commonly in colloquial speech, especially in phrases like “if I were you, I’d …” or “if I were to [DO X], I’d …”
Okay, I think I got it. I hope TriPolar’s answer is correct because it is the easiest for me to understand.
BTW: It was for a text message, and I did use “were”. Lucky guess!
You want ‘were’, the subjunctive. An alternative, if you are referring to a specific event in the past would be ‘had been’.
“If I were you…” is an exception, in my experience. It’s an odd case of the formal grammar becoming an idiomatic usage. “If I was you…” definitely sounds wrong and subliterary.
But many other examples blur the obviousness of a hypothetical.
“If I was a better cook, I’d entertain more.”
Does that mean that the intention of the speaker is to improve skills so that more entertainment would occur? A plan is not necessarily a hypothetical. Whenever people need to think about “correctness” they will likely default into common usage. Over time, this has blurred any lines between was and were in non-formal usage.
Some good quotes on this page about the irrealis. This one is closest to my point.
It would be interesting to do a poll on some famous uses. How many people sing “If I *was *a rich man” instead of Fiddler’s “If I *were *a rich man”? “If I was a rich man” seems closer to ordinary spoken language.
I’m not arguing about whether it should or shouldn’t be used, but I think this overstates its demise. You don’t hear it as much colloquially but I see it all the time in well-edited news publications.
This guy used it but I guess that was about 80 years ago.
The subjunctive is a lot less used in English than in any other language (as students of French and Spanish can attest).
Subjunctive as mentioned in previous posts, refers to hypothetical. If it’s never going to happen - or extremely unlikely - then it’s a hypothetical and the subjunctive is called for. The most common use we all know and love is “If I were you…” (To most of us, “If I was you…” sounds vaguely backwoods hillbilly uneducated.)
I am old enough to regularly use the subjunctive (so I would use “were” in the OP), but I recognize that it is a dying form so I don’t really care (although I sure wish Obama were still president). But I was startled when a book I co-authored that was published in England came back with a dozen or so places where the copy editor wanted a “were” changed to “was” because they didn’t even understand the subjunctive over there. We told them to leave it alone. (And note my use of “they” when I was tempted to say “she” because I somehow assume that most copy editors are women–my daughter is one.)
Anyway, don’t sweat it. In 100 years the subjunctive in English is likely to be defunct.
If it does die out it will be a further detriment to the richness of the language. The distinction is useful to help avoid confusion. Without it, I think we’ll end up assuming that all thoughts starting with “if” are hypothetical even when they are not (if I were clever or a faster thinker I would have been able to make that sentence itself illustrate the problem; but I’m not).
“Whom” will be right on its heels.
OK, so it’s not just me who noticed a bit of a US/UK divide. I’ve definitely noticed in books I read and speakers I’ve listened to that UK books will use “was” in places I would use “were,” and that US English writers and speakers are much more likely to use the “were-subjunective.” This is not to say it’s not dying out in the US, but, it shows much more life over on this side of the pond.
See, “if I was you” sounds fine to me, too, as fine as any other usage of “was” for “were” in colloquial English. Certainly people around me (and possibly even I sometimes) say “if I was you” all the time. But “if I were you” is also not unusual.
“Were” in this situation is already essentially dead and gone in England. It’s not dead yet on this side of the water. The truth is it doesn’t matter, so use the one you prefer.
So it’s “God saves the Queen” now? The question is, what do they formally teach kids in English grammar class, that there is no longer a distinct subjunctive mood?
The second am more better.
I didn’t learn the subjunctive tense until I took high school Spanish. The teacher was trying to explain it but we students just weren’t getting it. Finally, she realized we didn’t understand because we’d never used it in English. So she taught us how to use subjunctive in English and then how to use it in Spanish.
We were in rural Ohio and would’ve been offended to be called hillbillies, but it wouldn’t’ve been an unfair characterization.
How recent is this trend in Britain? Over the past 18 months I have reread all of Terry Pratchett’s Discworld novels (in order), and was surprised to note that he almost never used “were” when the subjunctive was called for. The first of these books was written 35 years ago. Was this just one of Pterry’s quirks, or have Brits been eschewing the subjunctive that long? (Or did he start the trend?)