2

What is better English?

'We'd love to see you joining us as a helper!'

or

'We'd love to see you join us as a helper!'

What is the rule?

Edit: Also, after Joe's comment, I should add that I'd like to have at least some formal side to this (meaning, that joining is something that has to be announced formally).

Zubo
  • 141
  • Do you TRULY want to ask about the "action of the person joining"? Would you rather say "We'd love it if you were a helper" ...? or "We'd love it if you became a helper" ...? – Fattie Apr 30 '15 at 15:13
  • @JoeBlow Well, yes, as there's a formal side to joining. Also, 'became a' and 'join as a' doesn't seem all that different to my non-native ears; is it? – Zubo Apr 30 '15 at 15:21
  • Well yes, my comment was pointing you to the fact that you may, indeed, prefer to say "We'd love it if you became a helper" and NOT use the "ad-language" approach of "see you join!". Yes, they feel quite different to native ears. English speakers are incredibly sensitive to the variations of marketing bullshit, since English is hugely driven by, well, marketing bullshit. TBC your question (per se) is valid and a good one, someone who can be bothered will answer it at length. – Fattie Apr 30 '15 at 15:28
  • My gut reaction is "We'd love to see you join us as a helper," but I have no rules to back that up with. I'd also agree with Joe, the "see you join" portion of that sentence is a bit awkward. – Taejang Apr 30 '15 at 15:40

2 Answers2

2

Neither are very good for the intended purpose. The following is better:

We'd love to have you work with us as a helper.

Anyway here are some brief comments on your original sentences:

We'd love to see you join us as a helper.

This is correct English, except that it is strange to say that we would love to see people join if we are part of the organization that we would like them to join. It makes it sound as if we are merely observing them from a distance rather than welcoming them.

We'd love to see you joining us as a helper.

This is even stranger, because "joining us ..." now refers to the action of the joining itself. I would say that the sentence isn't quite correct in English because the semantic meanings of "join" and "as a helper" are incompatible. To see more clearly why this is so, consider "he joined us as a helper" and "*he was joining us as a helper". The former has "as a helper" specifying what "he joined us" as, but the latter is clearly incorrect because you cannot use "as a helper" to specify how "he joined us".

user21820
  • 2,140
1

As a native speaker but neither a grammar specialist nor an elitist, I'm fine with your "to see" construct but I have a slight preference for your second form with "join" rather than "joining". To my Joe Average ear, there is an ongoing quality to the -ing form. Consider, "I would love to see you strip" versus "I would love to see you stripping". The former sounds like a one-time proposition, the latter sounds like a vocational recommendation.

LayNative
  • 11