You ___ better go to the doctor (had, have, or nothing)?

Chuck Banshee

unread,

Jan 10, 2012, 12:08:59 PM1/10/12

to

I was recently corrected by a good friend that I should not say:
"You better go to the doctor"

I now know the correct way to say that is:
"You'd better go to the doctor" (i.e., "had better").

I believe that - but - in my mind - I can't formulate a reason. Neither
could my friend.

How can I REMEMBER to use "had better" instead of just "better").

What is "had" anyway (is it a verb? A helper verb? A conjugate verb? What
is it and what is "better")?????

Nick from England

unread,

Jan 10, 2012, 12:45:38 PM1/10/12

to

"Chuck Banshee" <chuckb...@private.com> wrote in message
news:jehrbb$pst$1...@speranza.aioe.org...

Fine in speech, Chuck! :-)

--
NfE

Chuck Banshee

unread,

Jan 10, 2012, 12:47:37 PM1/10/12

to

On Tue, 10 Jan 2012 17:45:38 +0000, Nick from England wrote:
>> What is "had" anyway (is it a verb? A helper verb? A conjugate verb?
>> What is it and what is "better")?????
>

> Fine in speech...

I'm confused by what you mean by 'fine in speech'?

Does that mean both are proper (Am) English?

Nick from England

unread,

Jan 10, 2012, 1:45:17 PM1/10/12

to

"You better go to the doctor" is OK in conversation (fine in speech),
but, as you've said, should be "You'd better go to the doctor" and
would have to be that if you wanted to be gramatically correct in
British English; I don't got the knowledge to comment about English
from the "United States of a Mericle" as Benny Hill once described
your excellent home! :-)

--
NfE trying to help Chuck

Don Phillipson

unread,

Jan 10, 2012, 2:41:07 PM1/10/12

to

"Chuck Banshee" <chuckb...@private.com> wrote in message

news:jehtjj$vu9$1...@speranza.aioe.org...

Neither poster seems to reckon any differences between good spoken
English and good written English. Classical teaching finds the difference
functional and valuable.

E.g. when well-educated Americans say

"You'd better go to the doctor"

the sound d (elided "had") is so faint many acute
ears would hear it as
"You better go to the doctor."

In practical contexts, the faintness of this sound
makes no functional difference. Perhaps because
of this, ill-educated Americans may believe
"You better go to the doctor" is good grammar.
They are mistaken, but this too makes no practical
difference in social speech.

Every well-educated person, however, was taught
early there are differences between good spoken
English and good written English -- notably that
written English must be grammatical, so that the
competent author should write:
"You had better go to the doctor"
even when he is reporting vernacular

"You better go to the doctor"

(unless he is writing specially in dialect, a fashion
which comes and goes . . .)

So we have time-tested rules for both written and
spoken language. Everyone of us is free to defy
those rules, whether totaly uneducated or miseducated
or B.A. Dublin (James Joyce) because there are no
language police. But the rules remain alive so long
as readers and hearers find them useful.

--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)

Glenn Knickerbocker

unread,

Jan 10, 2012, 3:11:03 PM1/10/12

to

On 1/10/2012 12:08 PM, Chuck Banshee wrote:
> What is "had" anyway (is it a verb? A helper verb? A conjugate verb? What
> is it and what is "better")?????

I'm sure there are other analyses, but I'd say that "had" was the main
verb, "better" was an adverb modifying it, and the infinitive "go" was
its direct object.

¬R

Jerry Avins

unread,

Jan 10, 2012, 4:38:08 PM1/10/12

to

On 1/10/2012 2:41 PM, Don Phillipson wrote:
> "Chuck Banshee"<chuckb...@private.com> wrote in message
> news:jehtjj$vu9$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
>> On Tue, 10 Jan 2012 17:45:38 +0000, Nick from England wrote:
>>>> What is "had" anyway (is it a verb? A helper verb? A conjugate verb?
>>>> What is it and what is "better")?????
>>>
>>> Fine in speech...
>>
>> I'm confused by what you mean by 'fine in speech'?
>>
>> Does that mean both are proper (Am) English?
>
> Neither poster seems to reckon any differences between good spoken
> English and good written English. Classical teaching finds the difference
> functional and valuable.
>
> E.g. when well-educated Americans say
> "You'd better go to the doctor"
> the sound d (elided "had") is so faint many acute
> ears would hear it as
> "You better go to the doctor."
>
> In practical contexts, the faintness of this sound
> makes no functional difference. Perhaps because
> of this, ill-educated Americans may believe
> "You better go to the doctor" is good grammar.
> They are mistaken, but this too makes no practical
> difference in social speech.

You better watch out ... Santa Claus is coming to town.

> Every well-educated person, however, was taught
> early there are differences between good spoken
> English and good written English -- notably that
> written English must be grammatical, so that the
> competent author should write:
> "You had better go to the doctor"
> even when he is reporting vernacular
> "You better go to the doctor"
> (unless he is writing specially in dialect, a fashion
> which comes and goes . . .)

I "You have better go to the doctor" the present tense of "You had
better go to the doctor"?

> So we have time-tested rules for both written and
> spoken language. Everyone of us is free to defy
> those rules, whether totaly uneducated or miseducated
> or B.A. Dublin (James Joyce) because there are no
> language police. But the rules remain alive so long
> as readers and hearers find them useful.

But for some phrases, there are no rules. How would someone who knows
the words but not the language construe "straightway"? What what would
an anglophone asking directions in Paris make of "Tout le droit"?

Jerry
--
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

Don Phillipson

unread,

Jan 10, 2012, 5:17:16 PM1/10/12

to

"Jerry Avins" <j...@ieee.org> wrote in message
news:2d2Pq.28098$d52....@newsfe22.iad...

> Is "You have better go to the doctor" the present tense of "You had better

> go to the doctor"?

No, because of the peculiar character of modal auxiliary verbs, the
verb HAVE/HAD modulates differently, i.e. may be different as
a modal auxiliary than as a non-modal auxiliary -- thus:
I have had measles = non-modal auxiliary, past tense;
I had better go to the doctor = modal auxiliary, present tense,
and similar to (but not equivalent to)
I have to go to the doctor.

Eric Walker

unread,

Jan 10, 2012, 6:02:04 PM1/10/12

to

The statement is in the subjunctive mood, because it represents a
conception of the mind (here, a wish or suggestion), not an actually
existent thing or state. In the subjunctive, tense does not in general
indicate time, as it does in the indicative, but rather degree of
likelihood, in which the past subjunctive indicates greater doubt or
uncertainty than does the present.

It is conventional--I suppose we could say established idiom--to use the
past subjunctive to indicate a mild wish or suggestion, with the greater
uncertainty used as a conventional form of polite modesty, which is why
the verb is in the past tense ("had"). It is further idiom to use the
infinitive after such constructions, but without the modal "to".

Thus, we get the modest suggestion "You had better [or best] go to the
doctor."

"You better X", no matter what action X is, is just gibberish.

--
Cordially,
Eric Walker

Daniel James

unread,

Jan 11, 2012, 7:17:55 AM1/11/12

to

In article <jeig1b$k5l$2...@dont-email.me>, Eric Walker wrote:
> "You better X", no matter what action X is, is just gibberish.

You better me at chess, every time we play!

Smiling,
Daniel.

(Yeah, OK, "me" isn't an action so you were right ... I just couldn't
resist.)

Daniel James

unread,

Jan 11, 2012, 7:17:55 AM1/11/12

to

In article <2d2Pq.28098$d52....@newsfe22.iad>, Jerry Avins wrote:
> I "You have better go to the doctor" the present tense of "You had
> better go to the doctor"?

No, because "had", here, is a subjunctive form of "have" rather than a
past tense form of "have".

Cheers,
Daniel.

Don Phillipson

unread,

Jan 11, 2012, 12:21:53 PM1/11/12

to

"Daniel James" <dan...@me.invalid> wrote in message
news:VA.0000056...@me.invalid...

> In article <2d2Pq.28098$d52....@newsfe22.iad>, Jerry Avins wrote:

>> Is "You have better go to the doctor" the present tense of "You had

>> better go to the doctor"?
>
> No, because "had", here, is a subjunctive form of "have" rather than a
> past tense form of "have".

No, because "had" in "had better" is a modal auxiliary verbs, so
that its use is not necessarily identical with regular uses of
HAVE/HAD. cf..

I have had measles = non-modal auxiliary, past tense;
I had better go to the doctor = modal auxiliary, present tense,
and similar to (but not equivalent to)
I have to go to the doctor.

ala

unread,

Feb 6, 2012, 10:37:29 PM2/6/12

to

"Nick from England" <paci...@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:d28c8b2a-78af-43c0...@t13g2000vbt.googlegroups.com...

>"You better go to the doctor" is OK in conversation (fine in speech),
>but, as you've said, should be "You'd better go to the doctor" and
>would have to be that if you wanted to be gramatically correct in
>British English; I don't got the knowledge to comment about English
>from the "United States of a Mericle" as Benny Hill once described
>your excellent home! :-)

Fine in speech: better go see a doctor.