"Would rather" vs "Would sooner"

[Andrew Patterson]

What would you say the difference between "would rather" and "would sooner" is? I have some ideas , but I'd like other people's opinion on this.

Thanks.

[Harzer]

I fancy that "would sooner" offers a rather more drastic pair of alternatives, one of which is less repugnant than the other.

<I would sooner eat (name any offensive substance) than have my mother-in-law with me on a camping trip.?

Harzer

[Andrew Patterson]

I fancy that "would sooner" offers a rather more drastic pair of alternatives, one of which is less repugnant than the other.

<I would sooner eat (name any offensive substance) than have my mother-in-law with me on a camping trip.?

Thanks Harzer,

I want to get this right. Are you saying that,
1. "would rather" implies a genuine preference; and
2. "would sooner" implies the choice of the lesser of two evils.

Sounds good to me, although I think that "would rather" can also be used for 2, "Would sooner" cannot be used for 1 possibly because "would sooner" is a less common expresion.

Does "Would sooner" sound at all old fashioned to you?

[Lorikeet]

I think I never use "would sooner," but it seems to have the meaning suggested above. I can ask a question, "Would you rather play basketball than (or) go to the store?" However, I won't ask, "Would you sooner play basketball than go to the store?" Therefore it seems that "would sooner" is in an even more special category than "would rather." (as least for me anyway)

[Andrew Patterson]

I think I never use "would sooner," but it seems to have the meaning suggested above. I can ask a question, "Would you rather play basketball than (or) go to the store?" However, I won't ask, "Would you sooner play basketball than go to the store?" Therefore it seems that "would sooner" is in an even more special category than "would rather." (as least for me anyway)

Thanks Laurie,

I'm not sure if you were implying this in your post, but I got something from your post that I hadn't thought of before and I'm going to say explicitly:

"Would sooner can be used to express:
1. choices that the speaker could make for him/herself, but not:
2. choices that he or she would like others to make.

"Would rather", on the other hand can be used for both.

I have just realised that this ties in with "could" vs "would"

We say, "I wish someone would" because we do not have the power to control their actions (influence maybe, but not control.) It is, therefore, nonsense to say, "I wish I would," as since we have the ability to control our actions, the only reason that I can have not to do something that I want to do is my inability to do it, which is why I have to say, "I wish I could."

In the same way, if I personally have a choice I have the power to make that choice (otherwise it is Hobson's choice, which is no choice.) It is nonsense to talk about my wishes about that choice as I do indeed have the power to make that choice therefore "would sooner" cannot be followed by the past subjunctive, and I have misclassified it.

Try it, it sounds wrong to say, *"I would sooner I didn't do that."

"Would sooner" is a true modal in all cases. A phrasal modal like "had better".

Its meaning is distinct from "would" and should not be confused with it.

[lolwhites]

I think would rather suggests a genuine preference while would sooner expresses the lesser of two evils.

Would you rather have tea or coffee? sounds more natural than Would you sooner have tea or coffee.

[Andrew Patterson]

I think would rather suggests a genuine preference while would sooner expresses the lesser of two evils.

Would you rather have tea or coffee? sounds more natural than Would you sooner have tea or coffee.

I think we all agree that "would sooner" refers to the lesser of two evils, but it's even more restricted in its use than that:

Round where I teach, there are a lot of Callun schools training students to speak English using the Callun method (I use the word "training" advisedly.)

I don't use the method, but I have seen the books. One of the questions which they have to ask their students is:

"Would you rather be poisoned or shot?"
This is clearly a choice between the lesser of two evils.

Despite the fact that the Callun method uses 1950's English, it still sounds wrong to substitute:

"Would you sooner be poisoned or shot?"

I think that "would sooner" can only be used when the speaker chooses the choices for him or herself, one cannot use it to offer a choice to someone else.

Note also, that the thing that you choose as the lesser of two evils must always be compared to the greater by using "than" Would rather" doesn't require this, for instance if you show some pens and ask, "Which would you rather have?" "I'd rather have the red one," is a perfectly good response.

"would sooner" can also refer to the lesser of three or more evils if you use "or"

eg. I'd sooner have my finger nails pulled out than go on holiday with my mother-in-law or Adolf Hitler.

[Andrew Patterson]

Some of this post was as private messages, I reproduce some of it with Harzer's permission:

In reply to my statement that "would sooner" is a modal verb:

Of course you can post anything I write to you on the main forum.

My only misgivings are that:

"would sooner" is a two-headed creature, unlike the regular modals;

"would sooner" has no present tense form, unlike its cousin "would" (not necessarily a great impediment);

Two greater impediments: "would sooner' has no negative form and the interrogatives "would you sooner?" and "wouldn't you sooner?" seem to have caused "would sooner" to lose the ingredient that we felt distinguishes it from "would rather".

Is this usage also recognised in all the major dialects of English? I speak British English as do you, and cannot attest to its use in the Americas.

My answer:
I too, would like to know if "would sooner" is common in the US. I don't think its particularly common in the UK, although I don't think its old-fashioned.

I don't have any problem with "would sooner" or "would rather" being a "two-headed beast". Other verbs can be phrasal, why not modals?

"Would rather" seems to be a modal except when it is followed by the past subjunctive, and "had better" seems to have ALL the NICE qualities that modal verbs possess. "Had better" surely has as much right to be called a modal as "must" which similarly has no analagous proximal/distant forms.

Interestingly, modals seem to shift to the distant forms over time. "Must" was originally the distant form, the old proximal form was "mote" surviving in the Masonic vow, "So mote it be!"

London English, btw sometimes uses the form "had best". (The word usually used to describe people born within the sound of Bow bells came out as "beep" so I had to use the word "London" anyone know why it isn't derogatory?)

Going back to "would sooner", you can either define something in terms of what it is or, in terms of what it isn't. It seems that the one thing it isn't is a lexical verb, as it doesn't inflect like one. The only NICE properties that it doesn't have, however, are the one's it can't have because it can't form questions and doesn't have a negative. So how should we define it, then?

Modal verbs are already defective as they have no infinitive or past participle, however, we know the other properties that modals are expected to have, therefore I think "would sooner" is best described as a defective phrasal modal

[Harzer]

I guess I can go along with classing "would sooner" as a "defective phrasal modal", but again with reservations.

At least "had better" has an interrogative ("hadn't I better") and a negative form ("I'd better not" or in children's speech "I bettern't"), so in my view it has a greater claim to modality than "would sooner".

Interestingly, "had better" often contracts to "better" colloquially and then has all the attributes of a true modal, other than an interrogative form (*better I go?).

Back to "would sooner": I think its distinguishing feature is that it weighs up unreal alternatives, while "would rather" compares real alternatives. It is simply a stylistic device to express extreme antipathy towards a given eventuality. As such, I would not pay too much attention to its grammatical form.

Harzer