• ryven@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    I think death is the subject and it’s actually the subject-verb agreement that’s wonky. It could be rephrased as “Until death parts us.” I’m not sure why it’s not “'Til death does us part.”

    (Edited to add thoughts/be less certain)

    • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      7 days ago

      No, it’s “We do not part until death”. You can tell because of word order that the entity enacting the parting is “we” because it comes right before “part”. You can also tell because it’s “part” and not “parts” while being in the simple present, so it must not have a third person singular subject, which “death” would be.

      “Until death” in both cases is a prepositional phrase tacked on in both cases, so it does not contain the subject.

      • courier8377 [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        6 days ago

        “[Something will happen] until death parts us” is always how I interpreted it, perhaps to make the pronoun work in my mind, but “death” would be the subject of the subordinate phrase in my interpretation. Ig it comes down to whether you see it as a subordinate clause or a prepositional phrase

      • MuinteoirSaoirse [she/her]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        6 days ago

        Death is the subject in the phrase. It’s from a 16th century Anglican prayer book, The Book of Common Prayer, in which it was “till death us depart,” with death being that which would depart (separate) the people making the vow (“us”). However, something that was more common in the 16th century (and is rather more rare in English now though many common phrases still use it), is the subjunctive mood, in which conjugation of verbs has a different form (usually the bare form).