0

Is this good grammar?

I think we all deserve to know what actually happened and what are our chances of getting our funds back.

My inner grammarian says that "are" should follow the subject which is "our chances of getting our funds back", thus giving:

... what our chances of getting our funds back are.

But that sounds even more cumbersome. What's the best way of putting this sentence together?

Sergey Slepov
  • 103
  • What's the subject in "These are our chances of getting our funds back."? – Stuart F Nov 16 '21 at 16:22
  • Yes; the first is ungrammatical. << I think we all deserve to know two things: what actually happened, and what our chances of getting our funds back are. >> – Edwin Ashworth Nov 16 '21 at 16:45
  • What's wrong with "... what our chances are of getting..."? (Not the least of the issues with the original is the awkward juxtaposition of "are our") – Andy Bonner Nov 16 '21 at 18:25
  • The first seems fine to me. It contains a coordination of two subordinate interrogative clauses, so why shouldn't it be OK? – BillJ Nov 16 '21 at 18:32
  • Thanks everyone. So far I'm seeing polar opinions ("Yes; the first is ungrammatical." vs "The first seems fine to me... why shouldn't it be OK?"). Anyone care to elaborate on their POV? – Sergey Slepov Nov 16 '21 at 18:46
  • @Sergey Slepof What makes you think that the subject in your first example is "our chances of getting our funds back"? – BillJ Nov 16 '21 at 18:46
  • @BillJ, Because it is possible to change "what" to, say, "how realistic". Surely, "how realistic" cannot be the subject. Then what is? – Sergey Slepov Nov 16 '21 at 18:57
  • Regardless of what we think the subject is, I just wanted to know whether my first take was even grammatical and if the second take is any better. Thank you. – Sergey Slepov Nov 16 '21 at 19:01
  • @SergeySlepov Yes, your first example is fine for the reason I gave earlier. Btw, "how realistic" can't be a subject because it's an AdjP, not an NP. – BillJ Nov 16 '21 at 19:11
  • 1
    "What are our chances etc." is an interrogative form and therefore a mistake. Very simple. We want to know what our chances are or were. No doubt about it. – Lambie Nov 16 '21 at 20:15
  • It's not a mistake, per se. Some varieties of English, (mainly in the US) allow subj-aux inversion in subordinate interrogatives. Note that "what our chances are" is also an interrogative form. – BillJ Nov 17 '21 at 07:44
  • Related. – tchrist Jun 09 '23 at 00:36

2 Answers2

1

There is nothing wrong with your version, but it may be helped by restructuring:

I think we all deserve to know our chances of getting our funds back and what actually happened.

Greybeard
  • 41,737
  • Thanks. In my case, "us" having "chances of getting our funds back" is a consequence of "what actually happened", thus I'd prefer the subordinate clauses in the original order. – Sergey Slepov Nov 16 '21 at 18:43
  • I think we all deserve to know what actually happened and our chances of getting our funds back. You don't need "what are". It is quite normal to want two things. – Greybeard Nov 16 '21 at 19:10
1

Your first version is nonstandard:

I think we all deserve to know . . . what are our chances of getting our funds back.

In an interrogative or a nominal relative dependent clause (warning: grammar terms vary), we don’t invert the subject and verb:

I think we all deserve to know . . . what our chances are of getting our funds back.

The Yale Grammatical Diversity Project English in North America notes that:

. . . many dialects of English do allow subject-aux inversion with embedded questions, as illustrated by sentence (1) . . . In these dialects, sentence (3b) would also be acceptable even though it is unacceptable in standard English.

1) I don’t know what color are we, but it doesn’t matter. [Chicano English]
3) b. *John asked what color are we.

Source: Yale Grammatical Diversity Project English in North America — Inversion in embedded questions

Tinfoil Hat
  • 17,008
  • "what our chances are of..." I thought of this too! But then my next thought was "No, you can't put 'are' in front of an 'of'!.. Can you?" So this doesn't sound sub-standard to you? Would you recommend this order over putting 'are' at the end? – Sergey Slepov Nov 16 '21 at 21:41
  • To my ear, it sounds better to keep the verb near the subject rather than separate it by a long phrase like of getting our funds back. Something to do with "weight" or "shift." Ask @JohnLawler what he thinks. – Tinfoil Hat Nov 16 '21 at 22:49
  • In "John asked [what color are we]?", "what" is an interrogative determiner, not an interrogative pronoun, which is why "we" is subject and "what color" is PC. As you say, only some varieties (mainly US) allow subj-aux inversion in subordinate interrogatives. – BillJ Nov 17 '21 at 13:50