The category of Mood

Contents
 
Introduction
1. TheCategory of Mood
2. The Indicative Mood
3.The Subjunctive Mood
4.The Imperative Mood
Conclusion
Bibliography


Introduction
The theme of my course paper sounds as following: «Categoryof Mood». Before beginning of investigation in our theme, I would like to saysome words dealt with the theme of my course paper.
Moodis the grammatical category of the verb reflecting the relation of the actiondenoted by the verb to reality from the speaker's point of view. In thesentences He listens attentively; Listen attentively; You would havelistened attentively if you had been interested, we deal with the sameaction of listening, but in the first sentence the speaker presents the actionas taking place in reality, whereas in the second sentence the speaker urgesthe listener to perform the action, and in the third sentence the speakerpresents the action as imaginary. These different relations of the action toreality are expressed by different mood-forms of the verb: listens, listen,would have listened.
Standing on such ground, I would like to point out tasks andaims of my work
1. The first task of my work is to give definition to term «mood».
2. The second task is to give the classification of moods inEnglish.
3. The last task of my work is to characterize each mood fromgrammatical point of view.
In our opinion the practical significance of our work is hardto be overvalued. This work reflects modern trends in linguistics and we hopeit would serve as a good manual for those who wants to master modern Englishlanguage. Also this work can be used by teachers of English language forteaching English grammar.
The present work might find a good way of implying in thefollowing spheres:
1. In High Schools and scientific circles oflinguistic kind it can be successfully used by teachers and philologists asmodern material for writing research works dealing with English verbs.
2. It can be used by teachers of schools, lyceums andcolleges by teachers of English as a practical manual for teaching Englishgrammar.
3. It can be useful for everyone who wants to enlarge his/herknowledge in English.
After having proved the actuality of our work, I would liketo describe the composition of it:
My work consists of four parts: introduction, the main part,conclusion and bibliography. Within the introduction part we gave the briefdescription of our course paper. The main part of the work includes severalitems. There we discussed such problems as the number of moods in English,their classification, and etc. In the conclusion to our work we tried to drawsome results from the scientific investigations made within the present coursepaper. In bibliography part we mentioned some sources which were used whilecompiling the present work. It includes linguistic books and articles dealingwith the theme, a number of used dictionaries and encyclopedias and also someinternet sources.


1.The Category of Mood
Moodis the grammatical category of the verb reflecting the relation of the actiondenoted by the verb to reality from the speaker's point of view.
Inthe sentences He listens attentively; Listen attentively; You would havelistened attentively if you had been interested, we deal with the sameaction of listening, but in the first sentence the speaker presents the actionas taking place in reality, whereas in the second sentence the speaker urgesthe listener to perform the action,; and in the third sentence the speakerpresents the action as imaginary.
Thesedifferent relations of the action to reality are expressed by differentmood-forms of the verb: listens, listen, would have listened.
Thereis no unity of opinion concerning the category of mood in English. Thus A.I.Smirnitsky, O.S. Akhmanova, M. Ganshina and N. Vasilevskaya find six moodsin Modern English ('indicative', 'imperative', 'subjunctive I', 'subjunctiveIF, 'conditional' and 'suppositional'), B.A. Ilyish, L.P. Vinokurova,V.N. Zhigadlo, I.P. Iva-nova, L.L. Iofik find only three moods –'indicative', 'imperative' and 'subjunctive'. The latter, according to B.A. Ilyishappears in two forms – the conditional and the subjunctive. L.S. Barkhudarovand D.A. Shteling distinguish only the 'indicative' and the 'subjunctive'mood. The latter is subdivided into 'subjunctive I' and 'subjunctive IF. The'imperative' and the 'conjunctive' are treated as forms outside the category ofmood.
G.N. Vorontsovadistinguishes four moods in English: 1) 'indicative', 2) 'optative',represented in three varieties ('imperative', 'desiderative', 'subjunctive'),3) 'speculative', found in two varieties ('dubitative' and 'irrealis') and 4)'presumptive'.
Ingeneral the number of English moods in different theories varies from two toseventeen.
Inthis work the indicative, imperative and subjunctive moods are considered.
Thedifficulty of distinguishing other moods from the indicative in English isconnected with the fact that, barring be, they do not contain a single formwhich is not used in the indicative mood. At the same time the indicative moodcontains many forms not used in other moods. The subjunctive mood is richer informs than the imperative mood.
Sothe meaning of the three moods are distinguished in the language structure notso much by the opposition of individual forms (as is the case in the opposemesof other categories), as by the opposition of the systems of forms each moodpossesses. By way of illustration let us compare the synthetic forms of thelexeme have in the three moods.Indicative Subjunctive Imperative have, has, had have, had have
Thisis why it is difficult to represent the category of mood in opposemes, likeother categories.
Inspeech, the meanings of the three moods are distinguished not so much by theforms of the verbs, as by their distribution.
Cf.When I need a thing, I go and buy it. We insist that he go and buy it. Go andbuy it.
Oneof the most important differences between the indicative and the other moods isthat the meaning of 'tense' does not go with the meanings of subjunctive moodand imperative mood. 'Tense' reflects the real time of a real action. Theimperative and subjunctive moods represent the action not as real, but asdesired or imagined, and the notions of real time are discarded 1.
Themeaning of 'perfect order' does not go with the meaning of imperative moodbecause one cannot require of anyone to fulfill an action preceding therequest. But it is easy to imagine a preceding action. Therefore the system ofthe subjunctive mood includes opposites of order.
Aspectand voice opossums are characteristic of the systems of all moods, but the'passive' and 'continuous' members of the opossums are very rarely used in theimperative mood. There are person opossums (though not systematically used) ofonly one type in the subjunctive mood system (should go – would go) and none inthe imperative mood. The number oppose me was – were is sometimes realized inthe subjunctive mood (colloquial). Opposites of the category of posteriority(shall go – should go; will go – would go) are typical only of the indicativemood.
 
2.The Indicative Mood
Theindicative mood is the basic mood of the verb. Morphologically it is the mostdeveloped system including all the categories of the verb.
Semanticallyit is a fact mood. It serves to present an action as a fact of reality. It isthe «most objective» or the «least subjective» of all the moods. It conveysminimum personal attitude to the fact. This becomes particularly manifest insuch sentences as Water consists of oxygen and hydrogen where consists denotesan actual fact, and the speaker's attitude is neutral.
Weshall now proceed to the analysis of the grammatical categories of theindicative mood system.
Thecategory of tense is a system of three-member opposemes such as writes – wrote –will write, is writing – was writing – will be writing showing the relation ofthe time of the action denoted by the verb to the moment of speech.
Thetime of an action or event can be expressed lexically with the help of suchwords and combinations of words as yesterday, next week, now, a year ago, athalf past seven, on the fifth of March, in 1957, etc. It can also be showngrammatically by means of the category of tense.
Thedifference between the lexical and the grammatical expression of time issomewhat similar to the difference between the lexical and the grammaticalexpression of number.
a)     Lexically it is possible to name any definite moment or period of time: acentury, a year, a day, a minute. The grammatical meaning of 'tense' is anabstraction from» only three particular tenses: the 'present', the 'past' andthe I future*.
b)      Lexicallya period of time is named directly (e. g. on Sunday). The grammaticalindication of time is indirect: it is not time that a verb like asked names,but an action that took place before the moment of speech.
c)       Asusual, the grammatical meaning of 'tense' is relative. Writes denotes a'present' action because it is contrasted with wrote denoting a 'past' actionand with will write naming a 'future' action. Writing does not indicate the timeof the action because it has not tense opposites. Can has only a 'past tense'opposite, so it cannot refer to the past, but it may refer to the present andfuture (can do it yesterday is impossible, but can do it today, tomorrow isnormal).
No t e. By analogy with can, must has acquired the oblique meaning of'present-future' tense, but sometimes it refers to the past.
Itis usual to express the notions of time graphically by means of notions ofspace. Let us then imagine the limitless stretch of time – a very long railwayalong which we are moving in a train.
/>
Letus further suppose that the train is now at station C. This is, so to say, thepresent. Stations A, B and all other stations passed by the train are the past,and stations D, E and all other stations the train is going to reach are in thefuture.
Itwould seem that the present is very insignificant, a mere point in comparisonwith the limitless past and future. But this point is of tremendous importanceto the people in the train, because they are always in the present. When thetrain reaches station D, it ceases to be the future and becomes the present,while station C joins the past.
Inreality, and accordingly in speech, the relation between the present, the pastand the future is much more complicated. The present is reflected in speech notonly as a mere point, the moment of speaking or thinking, but as a more or lesslong period of time including this moment. Compare, for instance, the meaningsof the word now in the following sentences:
1.      Aminute ago he was crying, and n o w he is laughing.
2.      Acentury ago people did not even dream of the radio, and now we cannot imagineour life without it.
Theperiod of time covered by the second now is much longer, without, definitelimits, but it includes the moment of speaking.
Inthe sentence The Earth rotates round the Sun we also deal with the present. Butthe present in this case not only includes the present moment, but it covers animmense period of time stretching: in both directions from the present moment.
Thusthe 'present' is a variable period of time including the present moment or themoment of speech.
The'past' is the time preceding the present moment, and the 'future' is the timefollowing the present moment. Neither of them includes the present moment.
Thecorrelation of time and tense is connected with the problem of the absolute andrelative use of tense grammemes.
Wesay that some tense is absolute if it shows the time of the action in relationto the present moment (the moment of speech).
Thisis the case in the Russian sentences:
Онработает на заводе.
Он работална заводе.
Он будетработать на заводе.
Thesame in English:
Heworks at a factory.
Heworked at a factory.
Hewill work at a factory.
Butvery often tense reflects the time of an action not with regard to the momentof speech but to some other moment in the past or in the future, indicated bythe tense of another verb.
E.g.
он работаетна заводе
Он сказал,что он работал на заводе
он будетработать на заводе
он работаетна заводе
Он скажет,что он работал на заводе
он будетработать на заводе
Herethe tenses of the principal clauses сказал and скажет are used absolutely, while all the tensesof the subordinate clauses are used relatively. The present tense does notrefer to the present time but to the time of the action сказал in the firstcase and скажет in thesecond. The future tense он будет работать does not indicate the time following the presentmoment, but the time following the moment of the action сказал in the firstcase and скажетinthe second. The same holds true with regard to the past tense.
InEnglish such relative use of tenses is also possible with regard to some futuremoment.
heworks at a factory
Hewill say that he worked at a factory.
hewill work at a factory.
Butas a rule, this is impossible with regard to a moment in the past, as in
heworks at a factory.
Hesaid that he worked at a factory.
hewill work at a factory.
Insteadof that an Englishman uses:
heworked at a factory.
Hesaid that he had worked at a factory.
hewould work at a factory.
Whyis the first version impossible, or at least uncommon? Because the tenses of works,worked, will work cannot be used relatively with regard to the past momentindicated by the verb said (as it would be in Russian, for instance). InEnglish they are, as a rule, used absolutely, i.e. with regard to the moment ofspeech.
Thereforea 'present tense' verb may be used here only if the time of the action itexpresses includes the moment of speech, which occurs, for instance, in clausesexpressing general statements (He said that water boils at 100o C),in clauses of comparison (Last year he spoke much worse than he does now),and in some other cases.
Similarly,a 'future tense' verb may be used here if the action it expresses refers tosome time following the moment of speech.
E.g. Yesterday I heard some remarks about the plan we shall discuss tomorrow.
Thepast tense of worked in the sentence He said that he worked at afactory also shows the past time not with regard to the time of the actionof saying (as would be the case in the Russian sentence он сказал, что работаетна заводе),butwith regard to the moment of speech.
SinceEnglish has special forms of the verb to express 'precedence' or 'priority' – theperfect forms – the past perfect is used to indicate that an action precededsome other action (or event) in the past. He said that he ha d worked at afactory. But both in the principal and in the subordinate clause the tenseof the verb is the same – the past tense used absolutely.
Summingup, we» may say that a 'past tense' verb is used in an English subordinateclause not because there is a 'past tense' verb in the principal clause, i.e.as a result of the so-called sequence of tenses, but simply in accordance withits meaning of 'past tense'.
Thecategory of posteriority is the system of two-member opposemes, like shallcome – should come, will be writing – would be writing, showingwhether an action is posterior with regard to the moment of speech or to somemoment in the past.
Aswe know, a 'past tense' verb denotes an action prior to the moment of speechand a 'future tense' verb names a posterior action with regard to the moment ofspeech. When priority or posteriority is expressed in relation to the moment ofspeech, we call it absolute. But there may be relative priority orposteriority, with regard to some other moment. A form like had written,for instance, expresses an action prior to some moment in the past, i.e. itexpresses relative priority. The form should enter expresses posteriority withregard to so Tie past moment, i.e. relative posteriority.
Thefirst, member of the opposeme shall enter – should enter has, themeaning of 'absolute posteriority', and the second member possesses the meaningof 'relative posteriority'.
Thesetwo meanings are the particular manifestations of the general meaning of the –category, that of 'posteriority'.
Thegrammemes represented by should come, would come are traditionally called thefuture in the past, a name which reflects their meaning of 'relativeposteriority'. But there is no agreement as to the place these grammemes occupyin the system of the English verb.
Somelinguists 1 regard them as isolated grammemes, outside the system ofmorphological categories. Others 3 treat them as some kind of 'dependent futuretense' and classify them with those 'finite verb forms' which depend on thenature of the sentence. A.I. Smirnitsky tries to prove that they are not'tense forms' but 'mood forms', since they are homonymous with the so-called'conditional mood forms'.
Cf.I thought it would rain. I think it would rain if it were not so windy.
Inour opinion none of these theories are convincing.
1.      Thegrammemes discussed are not isolated. As shown above they belong to themorphological category of posteriority.
2.      Theyare not «tense forms». In the sentences
Iknow she will come.
Iknew she would come.
Ihad Mown she would come.
neitherwill come – would come, nor knew – had known is a tense opposeme,because the difference between the members of the opposemes is not that oftense. The members of the first opposeme share the meaning of 'future' tense,those of the second opposeme – the meaning of 'past tense'. The only meaningsthe members of the first opposeme distinguish are those of 'absolute' and'relative' posteriority. The members of the second opposeme distinguish onlythe meanings of 'perfect.' – 'non-perfect' order.
3.The grammemes in question are not 'mood forms'. As we know all the grammemes ofthe subjunctive mood (with the exception of be) are homonymous with those ofthe indicative mood. So the fact that would rain is used in both moods provesnothing.
Theexamples produced by A.I. Smirnitsky clearly show the difference between wouldrain in the sentence I thought it would rain and in the sentence Ithink it would rain, if it were not so windy. The first would rainis opposed to will rain (I think it will rain) and denotes a realaction following some other action in the past (I thought…). In otherwords, it possesses the meanings of 'indicative' mood and 'relative'posteriority. The second would rain cannot be opposed to will rain.It denotes an imaginary action simultaneous with or following the moment ofspeech (I think…). Hence, it has the meanings of 'non-perfect' order and'subjunctive mood'.
Thecategory of person in the Indo-European languages serves to present an actionas associated by the speaking person with himself (or a group of personsincluding the speaker), the person or persons addressed, and the person orthing (persons or things) not participating in the process of speech. (Cf. withthe meanings of the personal pronouns.) Thus in Russian it is represented insets of three-member opposemes such as
читаю –читаешь – читает
читаем –читаете – читают
Likewisein Modern German we have
gehe– gehst – geht
gehen– geht – gehen
InModern English the category of person has certain peculiarities.
1.      Thesecond member of the opposemes
speak– speakest – speaks
am– art – is
isnot used colloquially. It occurs in Modern English only in poetry, in solemn orpathetic prose with a distinct archaic flavour, e.g.:
Kindnature, thou art
toall a bountiful mother. (Carlyle).
Thecategory of person is practically represented by two-member opposemes: speak– speaks, am – is.
2.      Personopposemes are neutralized when associated with the 'plural' meaning.
A.I. Smirnitskythinks that owing to the presence of the plural personal pronouns (we, you,they) person distinctions are felt in the plural of the verb as well.
E.g. we know – you know – they know.
Thisidea is open to criticism. If the verb itself (in the plural) does not show anyperson distinctions we are bound to admit that in Modern English the verb inthe plural has no person.
Thusif we overlook the archaic writest or speakest, we should saythat in all verbs (but the defective verbs having no person distinctions at all:he can, she may) the person opposerne is found only in the singular, and itconsists of two members (speak – speaks), the third person with apositive morpheme being opposed to the first person with a zero morpheme.
3.      Persondistinctions do not go with the meaning of the 'past tense' in the Englishverb, e. g. I (he) asked… (cf. the Russian Я (он/ты) спросил).
4.      As regards allthose groups of grammemes where the word-morphemes shall and should are opposedto the word-morphemes will, would, one has to speak of the first personexpressed by forms with shall (should) as opposed to the non-firstperson expressed by the forms with will (would): The person distinctionsin such opposemes (shall come – will come) are not connected-with numbermeanings.
Thesedistinctions, however, are being gradually obliterated through the spreading of-'ll and the extensive use of will and would for shalland should.
Thecategory of number shows whether the action is associated with one doer or withmore than one. Accordingly it denotes something fundamentally different fromwhat is indicated by the number of nouns. We see here not the 'oneness' or'more-than-oneness' of actions, but the connection with the singular or pluraldoer. As M. Bryant puts it, «He eats three times a day» does notindicate a single eating but a single eater.
Thecategory is represented in its purity in the opposeme was – were andaccordingly in all analytical forms containing was – were (was writing – werewriting', was written – were written).
Inam – are, is – are or am, is – are it is blended withperson. Likewise in speaks – speak we actually have the 'third personsingular' opposed to the non-'third-person-singular'.
Accordinglythe category of number is but scantily represented in Modern English.
Someverbs do not distinguish number at all because of their peculiar historicaldevelopment: / (we) can…, he (they) must…, others are but rarely used in thesingular because the meaning of 'oneness' is hardly compatible with their lexicalmeanings, e. g. to crowd, to conspire, etc.
Itis natural, therefore, that in Modern English the verb is most closelyconnected with its subject, which may be left out only when the. doer of theaction is quite clear from the context.
 
3.The Subjunctive Mood
Probablythe only thing linguists are unanimous about with regard to the subjunctivemood is that It represents an action as a 'non-fact', as something imaginary,desirable, problematic, contrary to reality. In all other respects opinionsdiffer.
Toaccount for this difference of opinion it is necessary to take intoconsideration at least two circumstances:
1)      Thesystem of the subjunctive mood in Modern English has been and still is in astate of development. There are many elements in it which are rapidly fallinginto disuse and there are new elements coming into use.
2)      Theauthors describing the subjunctive mood often make no distinction betweenlanguage and speech, system and usage. The opposition of the three moods assystems is mixed up with detailed descriptions of the various shades of meaningcertain forms express in different environments.
Thedevelopment of the modal verbs and that of the subjunctive mood – the lexicaland morphological ways of expressing modality – have much in common.
Theoriginal 'present tense' forms of the modal verbs were ousted by the 'pasttense' forms (may, can). New 'past tense' forms were created (could, might,must, ought). The new 'past tense' forms must and ought have again supersededtheir 'present tense' opposites and are now the only forms of these verbs.
Theforms be, have, write, go, etc., which were originally forms of the 'presenttense', 'subjunctive mood' grammemes, have suffered a similar process and arenow scarcely used in colloquial English. They have become archaic and are foundas survivals in poetry, high prose, official documents and certain setexpressions like Long live…, suffice it to say…, etc. The former 'past tensesubjunctive' has lost its 'past' meaning, and its forms are mostly used todenote an action not preceding the moment of speech.
Thenew analytical forms with should have replaced the former present subjunctivein popular speech. Compare the archaic Take heed, lest thou fall (Maxwell) andthe usual
Takeheed, lest you should fall.
InAmerican English where many archaic features are better preserved (Cf. gottenfor got) the former present tense forms are more common.
E.g. She demanded furiously that the old man. be left alone. (Dreiser).
Somenew elements have come and are still coming into the system of the subjunctivemood. In Old English the subjunctive mood system did not contain any 'person'opposemes. They were introduced later together with should and would, but thesedistinctions are observed only in a few types of sentences.
Withthe loss of the – en suffix of the plural the subjunctive mood system lost allnumber opposemes in Middle English. At present such opposemes are beingintroduced together with the word was as opposed to were.
E.g. You'd be glad if I w a s dead. (Bennett).
Barringthe archaic 'present tense' forms, the' subjunctive mood system of ModernEnglish makes use of those forms which express a 'past tense' meaning in theindicative mood system. Since they are not opposed to the 'present tense' and'future tense' grammemes, they have no 'tense' meaning. What unites them is themeaning of 'irreality' as opposed to the meaning of 'reality' common to all theindicative mood grammemes.
Havingno 'tense' opposemes the subjunctive mood system makes extensive use of 'order'opposemes. The 'perfect' forms are used to express an action imagined as priorto some other action or event.
E.g. The Married Woman's Property Act would so have interfered with him if hehadn't mercifully married before it was passed. (Galsworthy).
The'perfect' forms, naturally, express actions imagined as prior to the event ofspeaking, i. e. actions imagined in the past.
E.g.If I had known that, I s ho u I d have acted differently. It is stranget/iat he s h o u I d have spoken so.
Thenon-perfect forms do not express priority. The action they denote may bethought of as simultaneous with some event or even following it. The order ofthe action in such cases is expressed not by the form of the verb but by thewhole situation or lexically.
Cf.I wish he were here now. I wish he were here tomorrow. Even if he c a m eto-morrow that will be too Me. (Ruck).
The'passive voice' and 'continuous aspect' meanings are expressed much in the sameway as in the indicative mood system.
E.g. In a moment he would have been drowned. (Braddon).
Shesat not reading, wondering if he were coming in… (Galsworthy).
Thevarious shades of meaning subjunctive mood grammemes may acquire in certainenvironments, and the types of sentences and clauses they are used in, are notpart of the morphological system of moods and need not be treated here. Stillan, exception can be made.
Somelinguists l think that would help in the sentence If he were here he wouldhelp us represents a separate mood called 'conditional'.
Thearguments are as follows:
1.The form would help expresses 'dependent unreality': the realization of theaction depends on the condition expressed in the subordinate clause(If-clause).
2.It is 'mainly used in the principal clause of a complex sentence with asubordinate clause of unreal condition'.
3.Should is used for the first person and would for the other persons.
Letus analyze these arguments.
1.      Ifthe meaning of 'dependent unreality' is to be treated as the meaning of aseparate mood, then the meaning of 'dependent reality' in a similar sentence Ifhe is here, he will help us must likewise be regarded as the meaning of aseparate mood which is to be distinguished from the indicative mood. Themeaning of tell in the sentence If you see her tell her to come can alsobe defined as 'dependent urging' and be regarded as the meaning of a separatemood distinct from the imperative mood.
2.      Thesecond argument deals with speech environment and is of little value since thesame authors produce examples of the 'conditional mood' in different types ofsentences.
Wouldyou mind my opening the window?
Ishould like to speak to you, etc.
3.      Thethird argument is justly rejected by G.N. Vorontsova who produces manyliterary examples to show that ' would-Forms' are used with the first person asoften as 'should-forms'.
E.g. If I had held another pistol in my hand /would have shot him. I would loveto think that you took an interest in teaching me… I wish I had a lot of money,I wouldn't live another day in London. (Galsworthy).
Besides,the popular use of forms with – ‘d instead of should and would shows theoblitaration of 'person' distinctions.
4.      Thename conditional hardly fits, seeing that the forms with should–would are as arule not used in conditional clauses. They are mostly used in principal clausesor simple sentences, which distinguishes their distribution from that of formswithout should – would used almost exclusively in subordinate clauses.
E.g. After all, if he lost it would not be he who paid. (Galsworthy).
Undernormal conditions Winifred would merely have locked the door. (lb).
Thedifference between the two sets of opposemes
hadwritten (order)
wrotewere written (voice)
werewriting (aspect)
shouldhave written (order)
shouldwrite         should be written (voice)
shouldbe writing (aspect)
wouldwrite (person, irregular)
Isthus a matter of usage. That does not exclude, of course, «the possibility of alanguage category with speech significance (cf. the categories of case, voice).Hence the necessity of further investigation.
Whatunites all the grammemes above and distinguishes them from the homonymousgrammemes of the indicative mood as a system is
1)      themeaning of «non-fact», the presentation of the action as something imaginary,
2)      thesystem of opposemes, as contrasted with that of the indicative mood.
 
4.The Imperative Mood
Theimperative mood represents an action as a command, urging, request, exhortationaddressed to one's interlocutor^). It is a direct expression of one's will.Therefore it is much more 'subjective' than the indicative mood. Its modalmeaning is very strong and distinct.
Theimperative mood is morphologically the least developed of all moods. In fact,the grammeme write, know, warn, search, do, etc. is the only one regularly metin speech (as to don't write, do write). The 'continuous' and 'passive' oppositesof this grammeme (be writing, be searching, etc; be known, be warned, etc.) arevery rare.
E.g.B e always searching for new sensations. (Wilde). Be warned in time, mend yourmanner. (Shaw).
Thoughthe system of the 'imperative' mood does not contain 'person' opposemes, itcannot be said that there is no meaning of 'person' in the imperative moodgrammemes. On the contrary, all of them are united by the meaning of 'secondperson' because it is always to his interlocutor (the second person) that thespeaker addresses his order or request expressed with the help of – imperativemood forms. Thus the meaning of «second person» is a lexico-grammatical meaningcommon to all the imperative mood grammemes. This meaning makes it unnecessaryto use the subject you with predicate verbs in the imperative mood. Butsometimes you is used for emphasis, as in Don't you do it!
Somelinguists are of the opinion that Modern English possesses analytical forms ofthe imperative mood for the first and the third person built up with the helpof the semantically weakened unstressed let, as in Let him come, Let us g o,etc.
G.N. Vorontsovagives a detailed analysis of these constructions to prove that they areanalytical forms of the imperative:
1)      Sentenceslike Let’s let newspaper reporters take a crack at her (Gardner) provethat unlike the second let which is a notional verb the first let is devoid oflexical meaning.
2)      Itis quite possible to treat the objective case pronouns in the sentences Letme be frank, Let him look out, Let them both see, as the subjects.
3)      Anorder can be addressed not only to the second person but to the third person aswell.
Compare:  Someone make an offer – and quick! (Barr).
Letsomeone make an offer.
4)      Therecognition of the let-constructions as the analytical forms of the imperativewould make the imperative a developed morphological system.
Allthese considerations are serious enough. Still there are some objections tothese constructions being regarded as analytical forms of the imperative.
1.      Thereis some difference in meaning between Go! and Let him go. In thesecond case no direct urging is expressed as it is typical of the imperativemood.
2.      Caseslike Do not let us ever allude to those times, with the word-morphemedo, alongside of such sentences as Let it not be doubted that they werenice, well-behaved girls (Bennett), without the word-morpheme do, showthat let has not yet established itself as a word-morpheme of theimperative mood.
Tobe on the safe side, we shall assume that the if-constructions are analyticalwords in the making.

Conclusion
In the conclusion of my work, I would like to say some wordsaccording the done investigation. The main research was written in the mainpart of my course paper. So here I’ll give content of it with the descriptionof question discussed in each paragraph.
The main part of my work consists of following items:
· «The Category of Mood» Here I gave thedefinition to the term MOOD, described views of well-known linguists on thisproblem (number of moods in modern English)
·  «The Indicative Mood»
«The Imperative Mood» In these threeparagraphs I determined three types of mood of English verb, which are acceptedby all linguists, also I described when these moods can be used and how can betranslated into Russian (examples are given in the text).
Standing on such ground I will add that investigation in thequestions dealt with English verbs and their category of mood is not finishedyet, so we will continue it while writing our qualification work.
I hope that my course paper will arise the sincere interestof students and teachers to the problem of adjectives in contemporary English.


Bibliography
 
1. B. Ilyish, The Structure of Modern English.
2. V.N. Zhigadlo, I.P. Ivanova, L.L. Iofik» ModernEnglish language» (Theoretical course grammar) Moscow, 1956 y.
3.  Gordon E.M.The Use of adjectives in modern English.
4.  М.М. Галииская.«Иностранные языки в высшей школе», вып. 3, М., 1964.
5. Г.Н. Воронцова.Очерки по грамматике английского языка. М., 1960
6. O.Jespersen. Essentials of English Grammar. N.Y., 1938
7. Иванова И.П., Бурлакова В.В.,Почепцов Г.Г. Теоретическая грамматика современного английскогоязыка. – М., 1981. – 285 c.
8. Ch. Barber. Linguisticchange in Present-Day English. Edinburgh, 1964
9. The Structure ofAmerican English. New York, 1958.
10. World BookEncyclopedia Vol.1 NY. 1993 pp.298–299
11. Internethttp://madrasati2010.bravehost.com/adj.htm
12. Internethttp://www.vestnik.vsu.ru
13. Internet:http://www.englishclub.com/grammar/verbs/theory.htm
14. Inbternet:http://www.englishlanguage.ru/main/verbs_mood.htm