That makes sense. I should have been more emphatic that if/when the subjunctive shows up in speech, it should exist for largely the same purposes it serves in other languages… granted, even in that case, it’s less complex than in other languages.
There’s at least the wiki article on the English subjunctive.
Personal disclaimer: To me (though I’m not a perfect reporter), (American) English feels like it barely has a subjunctive mood in practice anymore. If you’re familiar with the pragmatic application of the subjunctive in your own language or others, that may help, but YMMV for how often and how consistently you’ll hear it used in everyday English speech (at least in the US).
I wonder how random chance works on that snap though: Is it 50% of every sentient population or just 50% of sentient life? What if humanity were wholly spared by the snap just based on statistical chance?
Afaik, English grammar requires utterances with predicates to have a stressed element in those predicates. Contractions of only a subject and an auxiliary verb - ex: I am > I’m, he has > he’s, they will > they’ll - eliminate that independent auxiliary as a prosodic segment and violate that grammar.
A - “Who’s going to the store?”
B - “I am.” [ok] or “I’m going.” [ok] (or “I am going.”), but not “I’m.” [bad, obvs].