Subjunctive and formulaic survivals — pragmatic deployment at C2

The C1 lesson Subjunctive — mandative and formulaic mapped the live mandative subjunctive (I suggest that he leave, it is essential that the form be signed), the adjectival triggers, the AmE/BrE divide, the were-subjunctive in counterfactuals, and the surviving formulaic inventory (be that as it may, come what may, suffice it to say, if need be, if I may, far be it from me, God forbid, God knows, God willing, God bless, long live the king, perish the thought, may you live in interesting times, so help me God, as it were, so to speak). The earlier C2 lesson 01 added the archaic were-subjunctive, the be-subjunctives, and the wider literary inventory. That is the foundation. This lesson assumes you have it.

The C2 question is not what is the inventory? — you have the inventory. It is what pragmatic work do these forms do in modern AmE, and how do you deploy one without producing pastiche? A C2 writer who reaches for be that as it may is not displaying grammar. She is performing a specific discourse move — register-lift plus concession-pivot — that no other construction in current English performs with the same compression. The skill is selecting the right formulaic move for the right pragmatic effect, then deploying it at the right density.

This lesson covers (1) subjunctive as register-lift — raising formality without bombast; (2) subjunctive as politeness device — modulating directness; (3) subjunctive in hedging and concession — be that as it may as a concessive marker; (4) the genre table — what fits where in current US writing; and (5) affect — how the choice of subjunctive form encodes defiance or deference (Be it ever so humble vs If I may).

Subjunctive as register-lift

The first and most general C2 use of the formulaic subjunctive is raising the register of a passage without recourse to bombast. Latinate vocabulary lifts register one way (utilize for use, commence for start); the formulaic subjunctive lifts it differently — by invoking a stratum of English that descends from the King James Bible, Shakespeare, and 19th-century declamatory speech. Michael Halliday’s framework of register variation locates this as a shift along the tenor axis — the social relationship the writer is performing with the reader — rather than a shift in propositional content.

The register-lift function is most visible in three-way contrasts.

Each cell is the same proposition. The register-lift is not adding information; it is performing seriousness, deliberation, or weight. The form selected signals the relationship the writer wants with the reader.

Pinker, in The Sense of Style, argues that good prose performs an implicit social relationship — the writer-as-knowledgeable-equal speaking to the reader-as-knowledgeable-equal, both looking at the world rather than at each other. The formulaic subjunctive is one resource for performing that relationship without slipping into stiffness. Be that as it may says I have heard your point, I am not refuting it, I am moving past it. The Latinate paraphrase (notwithstanding the foregoing) says the same thing but performs a different relationship — administrative-bureaucratic rather than collegial-considered. The C2 writer chooses the relationship and then the form.

When register-lift fails — bombast

The register-lift effect collapses when density rises. Two formulaic subjunctives per page reads as voice; six in five sentences reads as pastiche. The mechanism is straightforward: each formulaic subjunctive draws attention to itself, and attention divided across six is attention paid to none. The reader stops processing the propositions and starts cataloging the forms.

Pinker calls this the curse of knowledge inverted — the writer who has acquired the formulaic inventory wants to use it, and over-uses it precisely because she is proud of the acquisition. The C2 discipline is restraint: one register-lift formula every page or two, at moments where the prose actually needs to lift.

Subjunctive as politeness device

The second pragmatic function is politeness — specifically, modulating directness in requests, disagreements, and impositions. The relevant theoretical frame is Brown and Levinson’s distinction between positive politeness (claiming solidarity by closing distance: shared vocabulary, casual register, jokes) and negative politeness (showing respect by maintaining distance: hedging, indirection, formal register). The formulaic subjunctive almost always serves negative politeness: it claims distance, it hedges directness, it defers to the addressee’s autonomy.

If I may — the politeness device par excellence

The most-used politeness formula in current AmE editorial register is if I may. The fossilized subjunctive (if I may [be permitted to speak]) has shed its propositional content and become a pure politeness marker.

• If I may, I’d like to register a concern about the timeline. [meeting]
• If I may, the methodology has one assumption that warrants scrutiny. [academic seminar]
• *And here, if I may, I’d like to push back on the framing. [op-ed]

The form does three things simultaneously: it requests permission (negative politeness by claiming the addressee’s right to refuse), it claims the floor (a turn-taking move), and it signals self-awareness (the speaker knows the move that follows is potentially face-threatening). The triple-function compression is why no neutral paraphrase quite replaces it. I’d like to register a concern is more direct but less polite; Excuse me, but I’d like to register a concern is more polite but more obtrusive. If I may threads the needle.

Far be it from me to — disclaimed criticism

When the next move is criticism, far be it from me to — another fossilized subjunctive — performs simultaneous criticism and disavowal:

• Far be it from me to second-guess the chair, but the timeline seems unrealistic.
• Far be it from me to suggest that the data are wrong, but the conclusions don’t follow.

The structure is paradoxical and the paradox is the point: the speaker is precisely doing what the formula disavows. Native listeners parse the disavowal as a politeness frame rather than a denial. The C2 deployment trap is using it sincerely — speakers who actually do not want to make the criticism use plainer hedging (I’m hesitant to push back, but). Far be it from me commits to the criticism with a polite frame; it does not retract.

Be it noted that — administrative-formal

In legal and administrative writing, be it noted that and its relatives (be it resolved that, be it enacted that, be it known to all parties that) function as performative-formal openers. The subjunctive carries the performative weight: by saying be it resolved, the speaker performs the resolution. This is J.L. Austin’s speech-act terrain — the formula does not describe an action, it is the action. C2 readers should recognize the performative structure; C2 writers should reserve these forms for genuinely performative contexts (motions in formal meetings, resolutions, legal preambles).

Pronominal-subjunctive politeness in directives

A separate politeness use survives in directives where the subjunctive softens the imposition:

• We request that you refrain from smoking on the premises. [signage register]
• The committee requests that members be advised of the schedule change. [memorandum register]

These mandative-subjunctive directives shift the addressee from object-of-command (you must refrain) to subject-of-resolution (you are requested to refrain by an institution). The grammar offloads the directive onto an impersonal frame. Russian official directives use a similar shift (предписывается, рекомендуется); the English subjunctive performs the same negative-politeness move via a different grammatical resource.

Subjunctive in hedging and concession

The third pragmatic function is the concession-pivot — granting a point in order to move past it. The canonical formula is be that as it may, but the cluster is wider.

Be that as it may as concessive marker

Consider the discourse work be that as it may performs.

The opposition argues that the proposed reform will increase costs. Be that as it may, the costs of inaction are higher.

Three moves in one sentence:

1. Concession: the opposition’s claim is acknowledged. The speaker does not deny the costs will rise.
2. Subordination: the conceded point is reduced to subordinate status — be that as it may literally means let that be however it may be; the granted point is set aside as not determining.
3. Pivot: the speaker advances the main argument from a strengthened position. Having granted the opposition’s premise, the speaker is now demonstrably arguing in good faith.

This is the same discourse move that Aristotle, in the Rhetoric, identifies as a key argumentative resource: epitrope (granting a point to disarm opposition). The formulaic subjunctive compresses the move into a single phrase. No Latinate paraphrase has the same compression: Notwithstanding that consideration, however that may be, granted, but all do partial work. Be that as it may does all three steps at once.

The C2 deployment context is editorial argument — op-eds, legal briefs, policy memos, academic essays where the writer must address the strongest opposing view. A piece that uses be that as it may once at the strongest counterargument is performing argumentative maturity; the same piece using it three times in one section is performing pastiche.

Granted, …; that said, … as alternative concessive

A modern alternative to be that as it may is the Granted, …; that said, … pattern (no subjunctive). The choice between them is a register choice: Granted is mid-formal and current; Be that as it may is high-formal and slightly archaic. The C2 writer selects by the surrounding register.

Other concessive subjunctives

A small cluster of related forms:

• Be it ever so [adj], [main clause] — Be it ever so humble, there’s no place like home. Concessive with affective force; see the affect section below.
• Try as he might, … (subjunctive-imperative concessive) — Try as he might, he could not finish the chapter.
• Come what may, … — concessive over future uncertainty.
• Come hell or high water, … — concessive over future obstacle; high-affect.

Each compresses a concession into a frozen phrase. None is freely productive (you cannot generate try as she struggled, come earthquake or flood). They are idioms.

Genre-specific deployment table

The C2 deployment decision is genre-conditioned. The same formula can be apt in one register and parodic in another. The table below maps formulaic subjunctives to current US genres.

The table operationalizes a principle: each formulaic subjunctive belongs to a register-zone with sharp edges. Be it noted that in a personal email reads as bureaucratic costume. God knows in a Supreme Court brief reads as casual lapse. The C2 deployment decision is matching the formula to the genre, not deploying a formula because you know it.

Reading the genre signal

The genre signal often comes from a single feature of the surrounding text. A document that opens Whereas the parties have … is a resolution; deploying be it resolved that further on is licensed. A document that opens I’m following up on our chat is a Slack-derived email; deploying be that as it may in the same document reads as register-mismatch upward.

The C2 reader catches the genre signal in the first paragraph and tunes formulaic deployment accordingly. The non-native trap is producing a formulaic subjunctive in a document whose surrounding register cannot support it.

Affect — defiance vs deference

The fourth pragmatic function is the affective coloring different formulaic subjunctives carry. The same propositional content can be deployed with different affect by selecting between formulae.

Be it ever so humble — affirmative-defiant

Be it ever so humble, there’s no place like home.

The form (originally from John Howard Payne’s 1823 song Home, Sweet Home) carries affirmative-defiant affect: it concedes humility (the home is humble) but transforms the concession into pride (and yet there’s no place like it). The structure is rhetorically powerful — concede the adversary’s premise, then claim that the premise reinforces your conclusion. Compare with the deferential alternative:

I know my home is modest, but I love it. [neutral, mildly deferential]

Be it ever so humble, there’s no place like home. [defiant, lyrical]

Same proposition, opposite affect. The fronted subjunctive carries defiance; the indicative carries deference.

If I may — deferential

If I may, I’d like to register a concern.

The deference is built into the politeness frame: the speaker asks permission, claims the addressee’s autonomy, and lowers the speaker’s claim. Compare with the assertive alternative:

I want to register a concern. [assertive, neutral]

If I may, I’d like to register a concern. [deferential]

Same proposition; deferential affect added by the subjunctive.

Come hell or high water — defiant-determined

Come hell or high water, we’ll finish this project.

The form fronts an extreme conditional clause whose subjunctive verb (come) is hortative — let hell or high water come. The affect is defiant determination: the speaker invites the worst case and commits anyway. Compare:

We’ll finish this project no matter what. [neutral commitment]

Come hell or high water, we’ll finish this project. [defiant commitment]

The fronted subjunctive raises stakes by inviting opposition.

God forbid — fearful-deferential

God forbid the talks collapse.

The form fronts a hortative-optative subjunctive (may God forbid that) and carries fearful-deferential affect — the speaker is admitting the negative outcome is possible and asking the universe to prevent it. Compare:

I really hope the talks don’t collapse. [neutral concern]

God forbid the talks collapse. [fearful, gravity-marked]

The God-fronted subjunctive raises the stakes by invoking a higher referent.

Affect-selection matrix

The C2 writer selects by affect first and form second. I want to mark this as a moment of defiant commitment leads to come hell or high water; I want to mark this as a moment of considered concession leads to be that as it may. The formula is the carrier of the affect; the proposition rides on top.

Density and pastiche

The single largest C2 failure mode is density. Each formulaic subjunctive draws attention; clustered formulae draw attention to themselves rather than to the argument. The native deployment rate in current US editorial prose is roughly one formulaic subjunctive every 800-1500 words — at the moments where register-lift, politeness, concession, or affect is the load-bearing rhetorical move.

A paragraph with three formulae in five sentences reads as pastiche:

✗ Be that as it may, far be it from me to suggest, suffice it to say, come what may, the deadline stands.

A paragraph with one formula at the rhetorical peak reads as voice:

✓ The opposition has marshaled compelling figures. Be that as it may, the cost of inaction is higher, and the figures themselves rest on assumptions worth scrutinizing.

The C2 mark is the discipline to deploy one formula at the load-bearing moment and let the surrounding prose run on neutral grammar. Stacking is the unmistakable sign of a writer trying to demonstrate the inventory rather than deploy it.

What is and is not a subjunctive — boundary cases

A boundary issue worth flagging: not every formula that looks subjunctive is subjunctive. The presidential oath line I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute … is sometimes classified as containing a bare subjunctive swear. It is not. Swear here is the bare infinitive following emphatic do — the standard syntax of periphrastic auxiliary do + bare infinitive (I do think, I do hope, I do swear). The construction is emphatic-auxiliary, not subjunctive. The mood-meaning of solemn commitment is performed by the emphatic do and the surrounding ceremonial frame, not by a subjunctive form. C2 readers should hold the distinction; mislabeling emphatic-do + bare infinitive as bare subjunctive blurs two different constructions.

Similarly, Let us strive on, Let us pray, Let us proceed — the Lincolnian hortative — are imperative-style constructions with the modal-like let us taking a bare infinitive complement. They are not technically subjunctive forms. The mood-meaning of exhortation is performed by let us; the bare verb is the standard complement. Calling these hortative subjunctives stretches the term beyond its grammatical use.

The C2 distinction is between the bare subjunctive proper (I suggest that he leave — verb-form encoding mandative mood) and bare-infinitive complements of modal-like operators (let us strive, I do swear). The pragmatic functions overlap (both can raise register, both carry weight); the grammars are different.

AmE-specific notes

• AmE preserves the formulaic subjunctive inventory more than contemporary colloquial BrE. American legal, political, and ceremonial prose draws on these forms heavily.
• God-formulae (God knows, God forbid, God willing, God bless) are alive across AmE registers; their use does not commit the speaker to theism — they have largely become idiomatic in modern AmE.
• If I may and far be it from me are AmE editorial-politeness staples; both are workable in business email to a senior audience and standard in op-eds.
• Come hell or high water is American idiom — Southern/rural origins, now national.
• So help me God is the official US oath ending; secular alternatives (so help me, on my honor) are constitutionally permitted.
• Long live in AmE attaches to non-royal referents — Long live the republic, Long live free speech — as rhetorical extension.
• The legal-preamble formulae (Whereas …; Be it resolved that …; Be it enacted that …) are alive in current US statutes, resolutions, and constitutional documents.

Literary and oratorical inheritance

The current US formulaic subjunctive inventory descends from three reservoirs.

1. The King James Bible (1611) — Be still and know, Suffer the little children, Heaven forbid, Blessed be, May the Lord bless and keep you. The Biblical cadence shapes US ceremonial and sermon registers and reaches secular oratory through Lincoln, Frederick Douglass, MLK, Baldwin, and Obama.
2. Shakespearean and early-modern English — Long live the king, So be it, Be it ever so humble, Perish the thought. Theatrical formulae that crossed into elevated speech.
3. 19th-century declamatory speech — Come what may, Suffice it to say, Far be it from me. The Hawthorne-Melville-Emerson-Webster stratum of high-19th-century US prose, which fixes many of these forms in the American literary record.

The Black homiletic tradition — Douglass, Baldwin, MLK, Obama — re-energizes these forms in oratory and essay. Come what may, be that as it may, and suffice it to say are signature moves of high AmE oratorical style. The C2 reader who knows the inheritance hears the resonance; the C2 writer who deploys one of these forms is participating in a register tradition.

Common Russian-speaker mistakes

1. Generalizing from frozen formulae. If need be is fixed; if want be, if necessary be are ungrammatical. The C2 move is treating each formula as an idiom, not as a productive pattern.
2. Calquing Russian Дай Бог uniformly as God willing. Дай Бог тебе здоровья maps to May you be well, not God willing you’ll be well. God willing hedges plans (= if circumstances permit); Russian Дай Бог often introduces blessings. Match function, not surface.
3. Wrong word order in long live. Live long the queen is wrong; long live the queen is fixed. The optative-fronting pattern does not permit re-ordering.
4. Density failure — pastiche by accumulation. Russian formal register tolerates higher density of fixed phrases than English editorial register. Importing the density produces pastiche. The C2 cap is approximately one formulaic subjunctive per 800-1500 words at load-bearing moments.
5. Reading God forbid and God knows as devout statements. In modern AmE these are idiomatic and do not commit the speaker to theism. The C2 reading parses idiomatically; the C2 production deploys idiomatically.
6. Calque from Russian Не дай Бог. Maps loosely to God forbid or Heaven forbid; do not literal-translate as Don’t give God.
7. Mid-sentence if I may without comma offset. If I may would like to add is wrong; If I may, I would like to add is correct. The phrase is parenthetical and requires comma offset.
8. Genre-mismatched deployment. Be that as it may, I’m going to the store — concessive register-lift formula deployed in casual planning. Use Anyway or In any case in casual register.
9. Producing be it noted that outside performative contexts. The formula is performative — it performs the noting. Outside legal/administrative/parliamentary contexts it reads as bureaucratic costume.
10. Stacking politeness disclaimers (if I may + far be it from me + with all due respect). Each one performs negative politeness; three in one paragraph perform anxiety rather than politeness. The C2 cap is one disclaimer per face-threatening move.

Summary

• The formulaic subjunctive inventory is the C1 material; the C2 layer is pragmatic deployment.
• Four pragmatic functions: register-lift (raising formality without bombast), politeness (modulating directness), hedging/concession (granting points to move past them), and affect (defiance vs deference vs gravity).
• The genre table is operational: each formula belongs to a register-zone, and mismatch reads as costume.
• Affect-selection: defiant-affirmative (be it ever so humble), defiant-determined (come what may), deferential-polite (if I may), fearful-grave (God forbid), concessive-considered (be that as it may), resigned-fatalistic (so be it), ceremonial-solemn (long live).
• Density at native deployment is roughly one formulaic subjunctive per 800-1500 words at load-bearing rhetorical moments; stacking is the giveaway of writing trying to demonstrate the inventory.
• Boundary cases: I do solemnly swear is emphatic-do + bare infinitive, not bare subjunctive; let us strive is hortative let us + bare infinitive, not a subjunctive form proper. C2 readers hold the distinction.
• The C2 mark is selecting by affect and genre, deploying sparingly, and letting one formula carry the rhetorical load that a less disciplined writer spreads across six.

You have completed the C2 Grammar module. From here, the work is in lexicon, register, style, and pragmatic mastery — the layers on top of the grammar.