TET us close our eyes and imagine that the inquiring student who, in L the Modern Language Journal for January, 1935, asked several questions aboutfalloir and devoir, is an interested member of a somewhat bored class in French composition. Triumphantly he reads from the board the following sentences:1. Apres que Ie roi fut arrive, tout Ie monde se leva. 2. Avec perseverance, il est rare qu'un homme n'arrive pas. 3. II n'avait des oreilles que pour la conversation de Jean et de Francoise.
Je resterai aParis pour huit jours.When the professor has finished his corrections, the sentences read as follows:1. Apres que Ie roi fut arrive, tout Ie monde se leva. 2. Avec de la perseverance, il est rare qu'un homme n'arrive pas. 3. II n'avait d'oreilles que pour la conversation de Jean et de Francoise, 4. Je resterai a Paris pendant huit jours, or, Je resterai huit jours a Paris. "But, sir!" exclaims the inquiring student, "in a letter I got from a French boy, the subjunctive was used with apres que, and sentence (4) is just like one in my reference grammar, and, besides, the book says ... 'At this point, the class is saved by the bell. The inquiring student had some justification for his protest. In the first place, the use of the subjunctive mode after apres que is by no means rare in French. Furthermore, certain American grammars and composition books state simply that the partitive article is omitted after avec, or, in adverbial phrases introduced by avec; that the full form of the partitive article is used after ne ... que; that pendant translates for of past time (or completed action), while pour is equivalent to for of future time (or incomplete action).We shall examine first the question of apres que and the subjunctive, and then take up in detail the remaining points in an effort to determine the degree of truth contained in the statements just mentioned.1. The use of the Subjunctive Mode with "apres que."-The writer has been told on several occasions that the use of the past anterior with apres que is an erroneous and purely modern construction which should be replaced by an historically correct pluperfect subjunctive. The evidence which he has collected, however, seems to show that this use of the subjunctive, while not infrequent, is incorrect and without historical justification.
ILLUSTRATIONS
Subjunctive:5. II n'avait rien repondu a ses supplications, it ses plaintes; et, comme Olivier quiles entendit Ie racontait ensuite a Bernard, elle etait restee, apres que Vincent eut referme sa 502
