7

A native speaker corrected me when I used this sentence:

Vielleicht hätte sie einen schlechten Tag.

to this sentence:

Vielleicht hatte sie einen schlechten Tag.

Now my understanding was that subjunctive II is used when the statement is one of uncertainty, as stated by Janka here. The statement does speak in an uncertain mood, so why is the subjunctive incorrect to use here?

Wrzlprmft
  • 21,865
  • 8
  • 72
  • 132
Michael
  • 275
  • 1
  • 3
  • This certainly depends on context - we could construct an example where the first version is correct. The second version occurs a lot more frequently, however. – Hulk Jun 03 '20 at 16:02

1 Answers1

8

The subjunctive does not express or accompany uncertainty

This is a common myth is perpetuated by teachers, grammar books, etc. calling the subjunctive Möglichkeitsform or similar. I will try to briefly explain why this is a myth, where it comes from, and what grain of truth it holds.

What the subjunctive does is mainly this:

  1. The subjunctive I expresses indirect speech and similar. Roughly, whenever you could put something into quotes, you can instead use the subjunctive I.

  2. The subjunctive II expresses that something is counterfactual, usually a part of a conditional statement (irrealis).

  3. Both subjunctives are used in fixed and somewhat archaic expressions, most prominently the subjunctive II for politeness and the subjunctive I for “imperatives to the third person”.

  4. For the modal verbs können, sollen, dürfen, müssen, and mögen, the subjunctive leads to weird and potentially complete changes of meaning, sometimes adding the notion of uncertainty. For example, dürfen in the indicative mood means to be allowed to, but in the subjuntive II mood, it can also mean to probably be.

In none of these cases does the subjunctive simply add the notion of uncertainty. In Case 2 it goes further and expresses impossibility instead of possibility; in Case 4, it does something on top of it; in Cases 1 and 3, it does something different altogether.

However, in most applications whatever is described is somehow vaguely associated with uncertainty: For example, we usually are not certain about reported statements, and if we have to politely ask for something, it may or may not happen. But then again, this also holds for the imperative or the future tense and nobody claims that those express uncertainty.

Belles Lettres treated this subject more extensively (in German), but somewhat prescriptively.

How to express uncertainty

The best and most clear way to express uncertainty in German are adverbs like vielleicht, möglicherweise, or wahrscheinlich (without any particular mood). Thus your second example is correct:

Vielleicht hatte sie einen schlechten Tag.

You can also use modal verbs like sollen, dürfen, and müssen in the subjunctive II mood and können in all moods, but beware of other potential meanings.

Wrzlprmft
  • 21,865
  • 8
  • 72
  • 132
  • Why impossibility instead of irreality or counterfactuality for 2.? – David Vogt Jun 03 '20 at 17:15
  • @DavidVogt: Because it is easier to grasp and nicely contrasts with possibility (which was not used here). See my edit. – Wrzlprmft Jun 03 '20 at 17:22
  • You say yourself that (im)possibility is not the domain of the subjunctive. It contrasts with the indicative in that it says that something isn't the case, though it conceivably might be the case. Possibility and factuality are separate dimensions. An example: Sie können nicht nach Hause gehen (bevor die Arbeit erledigt ist) (factual impossibility), Sie würden nach Hause gehen können (wenn die Arbeit erledigt wäre) (counterfactual possibility). – David Vogt Jun 03 '20 at 17:36
  • There are much weirder pragmatic usages of Konjunktiv II in Austrian German. Craftsman ringing at your door: "Grüß Gott, ich wäre wegen der Heizung da." – phipsgabler Jun 04 '20 at 06:56
  • And also, you can use the "future" to express an assumption you believe to be true: Sie wird einen schlechten Tag gehabt haben. – phipsgabler Jun 04 '20 at 06:58
  • @DavidVogt: Your distinction between possibility and factuality is either artificial or needs much further explanation and a clear definition of terms, because their everyday definition does not suffice. Almost everything “might conceivably the case”. From context it should become clear that I use possibility to talk about probability and not about options and ability. However, the subjunctive expresses neither of the things covered by the broad umbrella of possibility. It can only express impossibility in some sense (I did not claim that it couldn’t). – Wrzlprmft Jun 04 '20 at 07:12
  • @phipsgabler: In neither case did I claim to be exhaustive, though the craftsman example is probably a weird case of the subjunctive of politeness. – Wrzlprmft Jun 04 '20 at 07:13
  • Well here's how I see it. 1. Ich lese gerade = "factual", it is a fact that reading is taking place. 2. Ich kann lesen = it is a fact that the ability is present. 3. Wenn du die Anleitung lesen würdest = "counterfactual", (i) the addressee is not in fact reading the manual (ii) the statement you are reading the manual could be true ("conceivably"). 4. Wenn du lesen könntest = "counterfactual", (i) the addressee does not have the ability to read, (ii) him having the ability is conceivable (you can read could be true). – David Vogt Jun 04 '20 at 16:30
  • I still don't understand your sentence In Case 2 it goes further [than uncertainty] and expresses impossibility instead of possibility (and what the subjunctive has to do with impossibility). – David Vogt Jun 04 '20 at 16:31
  • In case I haven't expressed this well: Impossibility strikes me as wrong because the term is needed for, for instance, ich kann nicht lesen: as long as that statement is true, ich lese must always be false, i.e. it cannot possible be true. Wenn ich das gelesen hätte does not portray reading as not having been possible, but merely as not having taken place while being possible. – David Vogt Jun 04 '20 at 16:43
  • @DavidVogt: (Im)possibility can be about probability or option; it never is about ability per se. I get where you are coming from if you interpret (im)possibility as strictly being about options. However, I use it to talk about probabilities which I hope to be clear from context. – Wrzlprmft Jun 05 '20 at 10:22
  • @Wrzlprmft That is not what I am talking about. The double meaning of können is unfortunate, but not relevant. The truth of X cannot do Y implies that X does Y cannot be true under any circumstances, regardless of whether we are talking about possibility or ability. This implication is the essence of "impossibility": Not true under any circumstances. The truth of if X had happened merely implies that X didn't happen, but not that X was impossible (and not improbable, either). Also I don't understand the meaning of probability here – what's the likelihood of me reading a manual? – David Vogt Jun 05 '20 at 10:45