11

The standard model, however, failed to explain gravity. Enter string theory to rectify the problem. (From an ACT test)

As the bold sentence above, it throws me off when I see a verb lead a sentence: where is the subject?

HypnoticBuggyWraithVirileBevy
  • 1,995
  • 1
  • 14
  • 30

3 Answers3

25

The word "Enter" is used in scripts and screenplays - the kind that actors read from - as a stage direction. For example, "Enter Hamlet" means that the character Hamlet enters the stage at that point in the script. A stage direction might also add other detail, for example "enter Hamlet holding a sword".

It is a fairly common idiom to mimic this kind of stage direction in other kinds of speech or writing as a way of saying that something entered the story or timeline at that particular point.

In your example, 'string theory' is the subject. It means that up until the point that string theory was posited, the standard model of physics had failed to explain gravity.

Astralbee
  • 100,700
  • 2
  • 111
  • 222
  • 5
    The Oxford English Dictionary mentions that "enter" as a stage direction is usual even when the subject is singular (as in this case) because the form "was apparently originally subjunctive", though later sometimes interpreted as an imperative. – rjpond Oct 08 '20 at 10:38
  • 6
    To me it gives the whole scene a dramatic effect. I almost expect to read next - Drum roll, fanfare of trumpets. – mdewey Oct 08 '20 at 13:10
  • 2
    Possibly worth noting that this is a now-unusual use of the imperative, which typically takes an implied "you" but didn't always. – chrylis -cautiouslyoptimistic- Oct 08 '20 at 17:39
  • 3
    @mdewey Indeed, this use anthropomorphizes string theory as a character who suddenly joins the action. – Barmar Oct 08 '20 at 20:32
  • 6
    Exit, pursued by a bear. – Darth Pseudonym Oct 08 '20 at 22:16
  • 1
    If you are thinking that stage directions aren't as simple as that, having read the actual stage directions in Hamlet and seen the Latin, then you are right. (-: For an indication of how complex and varied stage directions in plays were, from "Entreth" and "come in" to the various uses of indicative and subjunctive, see chapter 1 of Mariko Ichikawa's Shakespearean Entrances (Macmillan, 2002, ISBN 9780230287907). – JdeBP Oct 09 '20 at 07:43
  • @DarthPseudonym "exeunt" seems more likely in that scenario :-) – Bass Oct 09 '20 at 19:02
0

The word "enter" is being used for dramatic effect (as @Astralbee explains), in a reference to stage direction. However, this usage of "enter" is in the imperative mood. The subject of imperative verbs is second person (i.e. "you"), but it is not said (in linguistics terminology, it doesn't have a surface form).

In English, the syntactic subject of the verb is probably best understood as the noun that has nominative case. Case is mostly marked on pronouns in English, such as "I" (subject) versus "me" (object), "he" versus "him". In this context, *"Enter he to rectify the problem" is clearly ungrammatical (to me, a native speaker of English), while "Enter him to rectify the problem" is fine. So, I would suggest "string theory" is the object of "enter", not the subject.

As suggested, this is a grammatical flourish referencing stage direction. In stage direction notes, the person who is being directed to do something is the director. So, a sentence like "enter Hamlet stage right" this could be rephrased as "You, director, enter Hamlet stage right".

Lastly, "enter" has (at least) two different meanings where what happens to the object differs. "Casey entered the building" means that Casey moved themself into the building. I think this is the meaning that is commonly associated with these stage directions because there is only one noun and it is a moving thing, so it is interpreted as the subject of the sentence. But there is also "Casey entered their card", where Casey is moving the object, not themself.

To put it all together, both "enter Hamlet stage right" and "enter string theory to rectify the problem" use the second meaning, where the director, or some metaphorical director (the arc of history, God, etc.), is entering Hamlet into the play or string theory into the world as one enters an item into a receiver.

GentlePurpleRain
  • 484
  • 3
  • 15
dantiston
  • 829
  • 7
  • 9
  • 2
    That's all highly speculative. The OED regards "enter" as in origin a subjunctive, with "string theory" (in this case) as the subject. "Exit" is used when someone exits the stage, but the sentence "you, director, exit Hamlet" would be ungrammatical. Also, I remember seeing in old plays "exeunt" (Lat.: they exit) used when multiple people were leaving the stage at once. (The original usage was the subjunctive "exeant", but at some stage "exeunt" took over. But my point here is that "exeunt" could in no way be an imperative.) – rjpond Oct 08 '20 at 21:51
  • 1
    @rjpond what did I write that was speculative? Everything that I wrote was based on standard methods in linguistics. The OED has history of words, but that doesn't speak to any usage of what how a native speaker actually uses or doesn't use a word in a language. It seems like we're on opposite sides of the divide between literature and linguistics, so I don't want to stoke that argument, but I think you arguing that a child who can understand "enter the hero to save the day" has any inkling of old Latin texts is much more speculative than comparing constructions. – dantiston Oct 08 '20 at 23:57
  • 1
    Imperative is a mood, not a voice. – Acccumulation Oct 09 '20 at 00:09
  • 1
    @rjpond regarding "exit", "exit" and "enter" are different words, so it's entirely probable that they have different behaviors. *"Casey exited their card" is ungrammatical, as well, so I would expect "the director exited Hamlet" to be ungrammatical. I think there's lots of things going on with "exit", but I will leave that as an exercise for another time. – dantiston Oct 09 '20 at 00:13
  • "The director exited Hamlet" is borderline grammatical and certainly understandable. It means something like "the person who was directing a performance of the play 'Hamlet' resigned from that job" (but he might have continued to direct other plays). – alephzero Oct 09 '20 at 01:09
  • @alephzero That’s a difference sense of the word “exit”, and I think the confusion is coming from Hamlet being both the name of the character and the name of the play. I think the ungrammatical form is exiting a person as in causing that person to exit (or directing them to exit). Exiting a play is, as you say, about resigning. If we use an unambiguous example, like “the director exited Casey,” the resigning meaning is unavailable. – dantiston Oct 09 '20 at 01:39
  • 1
    I can believe that synchronically most native speakers might regard the stage direction "enter" as an imperative (though even here I don't see that we have clear evidence). But you go well beyond that in asserting that the imperative is addressed to the director. I just don't see it. I would also prefer "Enter he who will rectify the problem" rather than "...him...". – rjpond Oct 09 '20 at 07:34
  • @dantiston, I just posted an alternative answer, but neglected to tag you on it, so tagging you here. My answer takes a different position from yours, so feel free to comment, if you think that would be constructive. – Gooseberry Oct 09 '20 at 09:11
  • Even in an imperative, in "Enter the room" the subject is implicitly you. It's not the door. If you parse it normally, "Enter string theory" tells you that you should go inside string theory. – user253751 Oct 09 '20 at 11:03
  • "enter he" would be directing the person to enter, perfectly grammatical if slightly archaic. "Enter him", would be a command to the implied subject you to enter inside of him, most definitely not how the string theory usage was meant as you cannot go inside string theory unless it was meant in sense of explore, but then that would mean that "you" were expected to rectify the situation by exploring string theory, rather than string theory rectifying the situation by entering. – Rick Oct 09 '20 at 14:56
-1

You, the reader, are the subject of the sentence. String theory is presented for your consideration, as it were, a theatrical character entering onto a stage.

The subject is implicit, but filling in the gaps, the sentence reads:

[You, observe] string theory enter [the scene] to rectify the problem.

The sentence is phrased imperatively, immediately, and in the present tense. It has the effect of calling the reader's attention momentarily to "new action on the scene".

Primarily, you (as subject) observe/consider (verb) string theory (the object). This is the fundamental structure of the sentence, as written:

[You, observe] string theory

Secondarily, string theory (as subject) enters (verb). As written, this is structured as an infinitive phrase, where "[to] enter" is the infinitive:

...string theory [to] enter [the scene]

Gooseberry
  • 125
  • 3
  • The metaphorical theatrical director is not the subject of the sentence because string theory is being passively presented for consideration. No one is actively directing it onto the stage. – Gooseberry Oct 09 '20 at 08:58
  • Please provide reasons for downvotes. If you disagree with my answer, I'd be happy to discuss! – Gooseberry Oct 09 '20 at 17:57