Language desk
< January 30	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	February 1 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

January 31

What do/does

I recently received a comment, probably from a native speaker, about the sentence structure "what do/does..." as in the sentence "What do the numbers refer to?" According to him, this "is simply wrong English!" Can anyone please explain me why is it so? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.74.40.58 (talk) 04:12, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on what the Antecedent to the "what" in the sentence is. For example, "What do the numbers refer to" takes "do" because the antecedent of "What" is "the numbers", which is plural, so takes the plural verb "do". If the sentence was "What does the number refer to", then the antecedent of "what" is now the singular "the number" and thus "what" now takes the singular verb "does". Otherwise, however, I don't know what the person in question finds wrong about your sentence. Because the sentence "What do the numbers refer to?" is perfectly fine, grammatically speaking. --Jayron32 04:33, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect the problem they have with it is based on the article "the", which they take to mean that "numbers" are being collectively referred to as a single item. I disagree, however, and think that "What do the numbers..." is correct. On the other hand, if there was a movie called "The Numbers", then it would be a single item, so then "What does 'The Numbers' director think of his own work ?" would be the proper way to phrase it. StuRat (talk) 05:43, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jayron32 -- "What" is not really an antecedent in that sentence; rather, it's an interrogative on the object of the preposition (while "the numbers" is the subject of the verb). In other words, "The numbers refer to XXX", where XXX is unknown and questioned, becomes "What do the numbers refer to?" (with normal do support found in English interrogative sentences). The verb agrees with the subject, as usual. "What" is definitely not the subject... AnonMoos (talk) 06:03, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No, what is a pronoun. Specifically an interrogative pronoun. The antecedent to the pronoun determines whether it is singular or plural. It depends on whether the "What" in the sentence represents a plural or singular thing. Plurals would be "What do..." while singulars would be "What does..." --Jayron32 04:19, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"What" can be considered a pronoun of a certain type, but in its interrogative function, its purpose is not to refer back to things previously mentioned, so that "antecedent" is not too relevant. Interrogative "what" standing alone (i.e. not prefixed to a plural noun) does not normally take plural verb agreement, and in sentences beginning "What do", the "do" agrees with the real subject of the sentence (e.g. "What do you think?" vs. "What does he think?" etc.)... AnonMoos (talk) 12:53, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the answers, but the problem lies with the construction "what do" because the person concerned changed my sentence "What do the numbers 1 and 2 refer to in table 1?" to "Which states the numbers 1 and 2 refer to in Table 1?" There were two-three such changes and when asked for the reason, the person gave the above-mentioned answer that "what do/does" is "simply wrong English!" So, again, my question what is wrong with it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.74.40.58 (talk) 06:06, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There's nothing wrong with the sentence "What do the numbers refer to?" because "What" is not the grammatical subject... AnonMoos (talk) 06:10, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? This other person actually believes that "Which states the numbers 1 and 2 refer to in Table 1?" is somehow coherent English? They're either a non-native speaker who somehow thinks they know better than the natives (arrogance + incompetence), or they're pulling your leg (weird sense of humour). Before I got to this part of the thread, I thought the issue might be about ending a sentence with a preposition, which is frowned upon in some quarters. I was thinking maybe your friend was expecting to see "To what do the numbers refer?", but even in that case, your version was definitely not "wrong" as claimed. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 07:10, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure the "corrected" version wasn't "Which states do the numbers 1 and 2 refer to in Table 1"? That does at least make sense, if Table 1 contains (say) the names of US states. In that case, see answers above as to why the change was unnecessary. Like Jack, I assumed this was going to be about word order, with someone insisting that ending a sentence with a preposition was something up with which they would not put. Either way, I agree that the so-called correction was unnecessary. -Karenjc (talk) 19:20, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What do does really look for in a stag? What does do the trick? A big rack? Clarityfiend (talk) 04:38, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Arabic name

I am trying to find out the name of an Arabic Village Chiefton - Arabic name I have consulted all my Oxford, Collins, Macquary dictionaries including Wikipedia & wikionary to no avail anyone know what the name is?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.168.101.137 (talk) 05:59, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Arabic word for a village headman in some realms during some periods of history was "Mukhtar". The word "chieftain" could imply a greater degree of autonomy than mukhtars were supposed to possess... AnonMoos (talk) 06:07, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Could also be rais (although this now typically means "president") or shaykh. Adam Bishop (talk) 11:27, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]