5

Someone said "what would you rather her do?". It didn't sound correct to me. So, I said it's "what would you rather she does?". Someone else said it isn't correct either and said it's "what would you rather have her do?". This sounded better to me, but I want to know if I was wrong.

Jackson
  • 51

8 Answers8

2

It is difficult for one who is not a trained linguistics/grammar expert to sort this one out. However my native ear tells me that all of the following are idiomatic, and in daily use in GB.

What would you rather she do. (Some might argue that does could be substituted here, but I certainly prefer do)

What would you rather her do.

What would you rather have her do.

WS2
  • 64,657
  • I'm fine with all three verb forms in What would you rather she do / does / did? in the cited context, but I can't go along with your second example above (though the final one is fine with *have*). – FumbleFingers Aug 15 '22 at 16:03
  • If you find #2 "okay", how do you react to Where would you rather him* go?* and What would you rather me* say?* Your "her" version puts me in mind of Somerset dialect. But I can't get my head round those "him" and "me" alternatives at all, even though syntactically they seem to be doing the same thing. – FumbleFingers Aug 15 '22 at 17:20
  • 1
    @FumbleFingers Is it not simply elision? The "have" is still there, in all cases, but just not spoken. However I do rather agree with you that the shorter versions come across as a bit downmarket. My own original dialect was Norfolk which - as a county both linguistically and culturally of the south - has more in common with Somerset than it does with neighbouring Lincolnshire, which is linguistically northern. So perhaps my affinity for #2 is down to something I heard with a pitchfork in my hand. – WS2 Aug 15 '22 at 20:03
  • I guess it's up to you how you "internally rationalise" the syntax of #2. Obviously it's somehow "acceptable" to you, or you wouldn't have written it. If you put it down to elision, doesn't that suggest you should also be familiar with a kind of slurred "intermediate" version between #2 and #3 (What would you rather've her do?) In my experience, elided words like that usually had and often retain a half-hearted attempt to semi-articulate the "missing" element. But personally I find that particular *'ve* almost impossible to generate - it certainly doesn't sound / feel natural to me! – FumbleFingers Aug 16 '22 at 03:03
  • ...anyway, I'm terrifically glad to see that you find #2 acceptable. I'm not consciously aware that I've ever heard it myself - but sometimes I'm quite capable of simply not noticing some usage that doesn't make sense to me (unless and until I've heard it so often it's impossible to ignore! :) So I might have just dismissed that first sentence in OP's text as a meaningless example of "Funny things non-native speakers say". Whereas in fact it's obviously an "authentic" (albeit imho "exotic") form lurking among the natives! – FumbleFingers Aug 16 '22 at 03:18
1

Here are two (of many more) ways to express the sentiment:

  1. What would you rather have her do?

and

  1. What would you rather she did?
Ricky
  • 20,450
1

Yes, rather her do is grammatical.

Compare rather me do.

A pronoun in the objective case is licensed by the verb rather.

This is also valid:

What would you rather she say?

TimR
  • 21,116
  • 1
    Rather is not a verb, but an adverb. “What would you rather her do” is completely ungrammatical to me, and I wouldn’t actually have thought it was grammatical anywhere, but the quotes you link to make a strong case that this isn’t so. I suppose it’s a case of would licensing an infinitival phrase complement with an overt subject for some, but not for others. – Janus Bahs Jacquet Feb 25 '19 at 17:35
  • 2
    @Janus Bahs Jacquet: IMO rather has been reanalyzed as a verb in such constructions. Compare: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22i%20rather%20you%22&tbm=bks&lr=lang_en – TimR Feb 25 '19 at 17:41
  • That seems unlikely to me. If so, it’s a very peculiar one, at least. I am not aware of any other verb in the English language that has no tensed forms and cannot appear as the matrix verb in a clause. There are no such forms as rathers and rathered that I’ve ever heard of, and a number of other matrix verb tests (passivisation, tags, etc.) also fail. I can’t think of anything that would indicate that rather has been reanalysed as a verb. I rather you [verb] is much more easily explained as colloquial deletion of ’d (cf. you better/best go). – Janus Bahs Jacquet Feb 25 '19 at 17:49
  • As a defective verb. – TimR Feb 25 '19 at 17:50
  • Just because some speakers get confused between the nominative and the objective case, it doesn't mean that us can use whichever one us wants. The overwhelming majority of English speakers say rather I do. See Google Ngrams. – Peter Shor Feb 25 '19 at 18:07
  • @Peter Shor: I'd argue that this is not a case of confusion of case. – TimR Feb 25 '19 at 18:08
  • Even as a defective verb, rather would be extremely unusual. It would have to be reanalysed as an auxiliary verb to even partly fit (simple negation without do-support), and even then it wouldn’t fit properly. No other verb, auxiliary or not, requires an auxiliary verb to form interrogatives, but rather would: I will go ≈ I rather go → neg. I will not go ≈ I rather not go → int. Will I go? ≈ *Rather I go? (and also *Do I rather go?). It would simply fit neither the morphological nor the syntactic pattern of any other verb. – Janus Bahs Jacquet Feb 25 '19 at 18:26
  • Native speakers don't process it as an adverb. – TimR Feb 25 '19 at 18:27
  • Also, I question the claim that objective pronouns are “fairly widespread” after rather. I have certainly never heard it, and Ngram and Google Books results are both dwarfed by subjective forms. (What would you have me do is completely different – the objective pronoun there is a complement of have, which is happy to accept overt-subject infinitival complements; cf. I had him do the laundry.) – Janus Bahs Jacquet Feb 25 '19 at 18:28
  • 1
    I'm saying that for some contemporary speakers rather is much like would have there. "What would you have me do?" can be paraphrased as "What do you want me to do then?" Use of the objective pronouns with rather is quite common in AmE. – TimR Feb 25 '19 at 18:29
  • I can assure you that this native speaker does process it as an adverb and absolutely not as a verb. And apart from the comparatively few examples of people mixing up subject- and object-form pronouns, I have never seen any indication that other native speakers do not also process it as an adverb. If rather is like have in that example, how do you explain What would you rather have me do? then? – Janus Bahs Jacquet Feb 25 '19 at 18:30
  • I acknowledge adverbial rather, but I don't think the speakers who use the objective pronoun with rather are processing it adverbially. – TimR Feb 25 '19 at 18:32
  • In that case, it becomes a matter of certain people reanalysing rather (and better, best, sooner, [just] as soon, etc.) as a verb only in one or two very specific constructions, while still processing it as an adverb elsewhere. There’s probably no way to disprove that that is the case, but it seems very unlikely to me. I think they’re more likely to just be mixing up the have + infinitival complement construction with the subordinate clause construction (Would you rather have me do… + Would you rather I do… → Would you rather me do…). – Janus Bahs Jacquet Feb 25 '19 at 18:47
  • 2
    @JanusBahsJacquet: TRomano is correct that at least some speakers have reanalyzed "rather" as a verb. See the quote in my answer here: https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/688/is-rather-shifting-to-become-a-verb/450139#450139 Forms with verbal suffixes like "would have rathered" are attested. – herisson Feb 25 '19 at 18:48
  • @sumelic That is fascinating. I cannot recall ever hearing any of the constructions mentioned on that page (except for the ones that can be seen as simple ’d-deletion) and it seems totally bizarre to me, but apparently not to certain AmE speakers. And as that article says, verbal rather does indeed seem to be unlike any other verb in the language. How utterly weird. – Janus Bahs Jacquet Feb 25 '19 at 18:56
  • 1
    ' “What would you rather her do” is completely ungrammatical to me, '. Not for me! Regardless, the idiom would rather itself licences its own complements which can not only be subjunctive (as is possible but less likely in UK and probable in US), but also tensed clauses and even NPs, which would be impossible if these were complements of the modal auxiliary would. For example, I'm sure you find the following ok: I would rather she left or I would rather you than me, for example. – Araucaria - Him Aug 15 '22 at 16:00
  • @JanusBahsJacquet Sorry, didn't see this post was several years old! – Araucaria - Him Aug 15 '22 at 16:06
-1

Turning to old reliable Will Shakespeare (in As You Like It)

   ...Truly, I would 
The gods had made thee poetical.

The verb in this problem is "would". "Rather" is simply an adverb, with no particular consequence.

An Elizabethan-ish dialogue:

I would she had done something else.
What would you she had done?
But soft! She is still doing that terrible thing.  
What would you she were doing?
Ah, she has stopped and asks now for guidance.
What would you she do?

Put in "rather," well, as you like it.

remarkl
  • 715
-1

I agree with Ricky that what would you rather have her do? and what would you rather she did? are the only correct options with the construction "would rather".

Here's why: Because there are two constructions with "would rather".

1st construction: Pronoun + would rather + bare infinitive

So following that construction, the sentence "what would you rather have her do?" is 100% correct. Rearrange it as so:

"You would rather have her do what?"--> pronoun (you) + would rather + bare infinitive (have)

2nd construction: Pronoun 1 + would rather + pronoun 2 + past simple

Following the second construction, the sentence "what would you rather she did?" is also 100% correct. Rearrange it as so:

"You would rather she did what?"--> pronoun 1 (you) + would rather + pronoun 2 (she) + past simple (did)

Here is a website that explains well: https://www.gymglish.com/en/gymglish/english-grammar/would-rather

Eren8hisfather
  • 139
  • The second version is technically an irrealis use as in I’d rather she were* here, but you can't see that in the morphology of any verb except be*. It's a vestige of the old past subjunctive. – tchrist Aug 15 '22 at 14:11
  • Yes, I wrote "past simple" since the conjugation of the past subjunctive is basically the one of the past simple except that "was" becomes "were". British English also tends to use "was" instead of "were" for the construction "would rather + pronoun", here is an example from the Cambridge dictionary "would you rather I wasn’t honest with you?" while Americans tend to use "were" for this particular construction as well as others. – Eren8hisfather Aug 15 '22 at 15:22
-1

The "I'd rather" shows that the speaker was talking about a (preferred) hypothetical situation. An irrealis form of the verb is therefore required. Two possibilities.

If the speaker wanted to ask about a preference for her future action, then it's "What would you rather she do?", just as the person had said, as reported in the OP.

If they wanted to ask about a preference for her past action, then it's "What would you rather she had done?".

"... she does?" (as suggested by the OP) and "... she did?" are incorrect. They are ordinary present and past tense forms, respectively, not irrealis forms.

Rosie F
  • 5,009
-2

Examples of subject + would rather

  • I'd rather he leave now. Or: I'd rather he left now.
  • I'd rather he do the work now. Or: I'd rather he did the work now.

  • What would you rather she do? Or: What would you rather she did?

  • I'd rather he left now. [also]

  • I'd rather he did the work now. [also]
  • What would you rather she did? [also]

she does and her do don't work here.

The third-person singular s or es morpheme is not used after "would rather": subject ][I,we, etc.] would rather.

The choices are present simple without the third person singular morphemes (s or es) or simple past.

Real World Examples:

Arsenal can’t win for losing 20 What would you rather they do: something or nothing?What would you rather they do?

"Seriously - read what you typed. By far the biggest element of fuel is tax. The government should reduce the tax. And pay for what how???? Sadly the only means of raising revenue is.... tax. What would you rather they do? Shut your local hospital to pay for your drive down the motorway? Jeez."

what would you rather they do?

"The public has indicated that they would rather he do this than increase taxes." would rather he do

Followed by simple past:

But Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn told ITV News that he would "have a discussion" with Rosena Allin-Khan, who is a shadow minister, about her appearance at the rally: "She's entitled to her point of view. I would rather she and every other Labour MP spent today and tomorrow and Tuesday concentrating solely on making sure we defeat this deal."

would rather plus simple past

Firstly, according to 3,000 voters asked by the website Politico, 47 per cent of voters want Theresa May to compromise and reach a deal with the European Union, compared to 35 per cent who would rather she walked away without one. Indeed, 53 per cent of voters to 47 would rather we stayed in the European Union than exited with no deal in place. https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/theresa-may-conservatives-brexit-no-deal-politics-westminster-leadership-a8618456.html

Lambie
  • 14,826
  • -s is the third person singular morpheme, not plural. – Janus Bahs Jacquet Mar 28 '19 at 08:07
  • @JanusBahsJacquet Yep, I dyslexiaed myself. I have fixed it. – Lambie Mar 28 '19 at 13:17
  • I searched Google Books for the sequence *what would you rather he*, and got back 6 pages of results. Just looking at the first page, I see contextually relevant examples of "Past" Tense (believed), true Subjunctive (do), and "Present" Tense (does). Disregarding misplaced pedantry, I'd say they're all fine. – FumbleFingers Aug 15 '22 at 16:14
  • @FumbleFingers Google books does not speak. "What would you rather he does". is non-standard. If you want to use does and teach does here, be my guest. I would advise against it and would mark it as non-standard. Like I always say, it's all about internalizing stuff. Books with hits show nothing at all. – Lambie Aug 15 '22 at 16:58
  • 1
    As you presumably know, I have little time for grammarians' notions of "non-standard". I'm firmly in the "descriptive linguistics" camp, so it's quite enough for me to find examples of all three usages on the first page of my Google Books search. Partly the result of studying English as used over many centuries to degree level, and having lived through many decades of "usage shifts over time" myself, I take all notions of "correctness" with a large pinch of salt. Correct according to who? When? – FumbleFingers Aug 15 '22 at 17:05
  • @FumbleFingers The question was: What would you rather her do. – Lambie Aug 15 '22 at 17:09
  • 1
    No it isn't. Read the question again. Both the title and the bulk of the question text concern the *do / does* choice, not *she / her. But as I commented to @WS2, I don't like her* at all. It sounds very "dialectal" to me. – FumbleFingers Aug 15 '22 at 17:13
  • I never said it was ungrammatical, did I? I said it wouldn't do. Not the same thing. – Lambie Aug 15 '22 at 17:34
-3

This is called causative.

The subject of the action/sentence is you, who is the cause of an action of a second person. Even though it might seem that the verb is an action that she will do, this is not the case. The action is done by you. The action is to make her do or have her do. In your case, it has been shortened to her do. This is the verb that you do.

I am not sure if the omission of the verb make or have is considered undesirable. It is definitely used as you wrote it.

It is very common to express causative value using make/have + noun + bare infinitive. The bare infinitive is the action that noun will do. In your case the do is the bare infinitive.

But since the sentence is really expressing an action of its subject you, it would be the verb make/have the one that carries the declination by person. For example:

She makes her do.

Because some are confused about it. - There are many ways in which a sentence can have causative value. Your example is but one of them. Causative value can be constructed also using have + noun + past participle as in

She had him killed.

user337754
  • 1
  • good ... add a dictionary or similar citation. – lbf Feb 25 '19 at 15:24
  • 4
    This seems more like a subjunctive situation. I'd rewrite the OP's question as: "What would you rather she do?" – user888379 Feb 25 '19 at 15:50
  • @user888379 Causative and subjunctive are not exclusive categories. The former is valency, while the latter is mood. What you wrote is still causative. Moreover, mood doesn't explain why do remains as infinitive. The fact that causative is constructed as [make/have] + noun + bare infinitive verb does tell what is the construction being used. His sentence is correct. Changing it would avoid even more answering his question. – user337754 Feb 25 '19 at 16:18
  • 1
    I would rather she do/did/does is not causative. It doesn't mean I would rather make her do ... – Peter Shor Feb 25 '19 at 16:31
  • @PeterShor You are simply wrong about that. That is a sentence with causative value too. – user337754 Feb 25 '19 at 16:33
  • 1
    I would rather the sun was shining does not mean I would rather make the sun shine. – Peter Shor Feb 25 '19 at 16:34
  • @PeterShor The wish has also causative value. That is independent on whether or not you believe, or whether it makes sense or not that a wish can be a cause. After all, causation is always postulated. – user337754 Feb 25 '19 at 16:36
  • I agree that the subjunctive is correct. But if a contrary action has been completed, the past subjunctive would be used "What would you rather she had done?" If a contrary action is ongoing, "What would you rather she were doing?" Otherwise, if there is no counterfactual element, "What would you rather she do?" – remarkl Feb 25 '19 at 17:04
  • I don't get the example "She makes her do.". She makes her do what? It doesn't seem grammatical at all, nor does it make sense as a non-grammatical counter-example. – Mitch Feb 25 '19 at 19:23
  • I think unquestionably @user888379 has the right of it here. Most "careful" speakers / writers would still use subjunctive *do* in such contexts. But the subjunctive is increasingly falling out of favour, and there's nothing particularly "unusual" about the usage as cited. Past Tense *did* is also a common "acceptable" alternative to the subjunctive, along with Present Tense *does*. (Unless you're a grammar nazi looking for something to vent your spleen on! :) – FumbleFingers Aug 15 '22 at 15:55