A Linux system running over JavaScript [LWN.net]

A Linux system running over JavaScript

Posted May 17, 2011 15:01 UTC (Tue) by tjc (guest, #137)
In reply to: A Linux system running over JavaScript by lkundrak
Parent article: A Linux system running over JavaScript

> I'm amazed at how fast it is.

I'd be amazed even if it were slow!

to post comments

A Linux system running over JavaScript

Posted May 17, 2011 15:05 UTC (Tue) by tjc (guest, #137) [Link] (6 responses)

...was slow. A little midlands creeping in there...

A Linux system running over JavaScript

Posted May 17, 2011 15:16 UTC (Tue) by endecotp (guest, #36428) [Link]

"were slow" is correct - it's the subjunctive.

A Linux system running over JavaScript

Posted May 17, 2011 15:19 UTC (Tue) by tseaver (guest, #1544) [Link] (4 responses)

"...if it were slow" is actually correct here, because the clause is subjunctive (a hypothetical-but-not-true case).

A Linux system running over JavaScript

Posted May 18, 2011 0:09 UTC (Wed) by JoeBuck (subscriber, #2330) [Link] (3 responses)

The subjunctive appears to be disappearing from American English at a rapid rate, and soon only Brits, pedantic Americans, and students of English as a second language will know what it is. Perhaps this is part of language evolution; around 1600 English still had Germanic verb endings (he maketh, thou makest) and they all went away.

Grammar pundits

Posted May 18, 2011 4:00 UTC (Wed) by ncm (guest, #165) [Link] (2 responses)

In fact they are both right, in England as elsewhere, and have been as long as there's been an English. "Were" makes it a subjunctive construction, where "was" just makes it trivially conditional. The subjunctive isn't really being lost, it's just falling out of fashion, as it's done before and may have many opportunities to do again.

In the meantime, do you drive a car, or an automobile, or a motor vehicle? Is that a gadget or a device? Is 'a' or 0x61 right? In all cases, the answer is (for inclusive interpretations of "or") yes.

Grammar pundits

Posted May 18, 2011 9:12 UTC (Wed) by pboddie (guest, #50784) [Link] (1 responses)

I think the original commenter's confusion lay in the observation that in various northern English dialects "were" has replaced "was" in various unconditional constructs, such as "I were going" and "he were eating", giving "was" fewer appearances than may have seemed fair. Having said that, I imagine that "was" could get introduced in the original case by speakers of those dialects.

Grammar pundits

Posted May 19, 2011 16:45 UTC (Thu) by tjc (guest, #137) [Link]

You are correct. Sorry for starting such an off-topic sub-thread. It were bad!