‘If there is anything that needs doing when you get home, it can be HER that does it.’
‘If there is anything that needs doing when you get home, it can be SHE that does it.’
As a native English speaker both of these sentences feel wrong, which one is correct and why?
“She” is correct as the subject of “it can be she.” Think of “she can be it” vs. “her can be it.” You’ve just turned that construction around.
To nitpick, you should say “it can be she who does it,” not “that.”
And yes, the whole thing is awkward. You could just recast as “She can do anything that needs doing when you get home.”
It’s the difference between subject and object.
Subject: She does the thing.
Object: The thing was done to her.
So this is the correct sentence:
“Be” verbs do complicate things. If the verb were a normal verb, ‘twould definitely be her and not *she". That’s what sounds correct to my ears. But I suspect my ears are wrong because of special rules for ‘to be’. I tend to say “It’s me” and not “It is I” but that don’t make me right or nuthin’…
As a non-native speaker, I would say the natural thing to say would be “she can do it”. Both your options feel wrong to you because that is not the way people speak. They are artificial.
Thanks. My education from Middle School was failing me here.
I assure you, as a native speaker I hear the two sentences IRL all the time from others. There is nothing artificial about this question for us.
Native English speaker, can’t say I’ve heard a sentence like that before. A more natural construction would be “If there is anything that needs doing when you get home, she can do it”
I began this thread because I sent a text with the first sentence to my wife concerning our daughter.
I’m not going to argue about this any more.
My layman’s understanding is that, whereas “normal” transitive verbs have objects (“It hit her”), “be” verbs have predicate nominitives (“It was she”).
When both options feel wrong, I’d try to find a less awkward wording, like “…she can be the one that does it.” But it’s still an interesting grammatical question.
Prescriptively, “she” is definitely correct, here.
But “her” sounds a lot more natural to my ears.
I believe you are correct.
My mother taught me this. But I’m afraid that battle has been fought, and we lost. “That” and “who” are now almost universally equally accepted to refer to people.
Yeah, that’s why they both feel weird I think; they’re awkward even if one of them was right.
‘If there is anything that needs doing when you get home, she can do it. ’
Some of it depends on what is meant by ‘can’ - it could denote either capability or responsibility; if the latter, then it might be better to say ‘She must do it’ or ‘She should do it’ or maybe ‘She will do it’.
Yes, it’s the whole problem with the verb “to be”. verbs are normally transitive (action on a possible object of the sentence) or intransitive (no object of the sentence). “To be” is (as Sesame street says) “not like the other ones”. It is copulative.
A copulative verb is a verb form that joins a subject to an adjective or to another noun. The verb to be is a copulative verb. So are the linking verbs (seem, appear, look, become, and others).
The verb to be may join a subject to a noun or an adjective.
So grammar-wise, “to be” joins a noun with a noun. (or…pronouns) The joined noun is not an object of verbal action, so the appropriate form of pronoun in that regard is the subject form. Hence, for example when someone says “It is me!” the grammar Nazis will immediately point out the correct wording is “It is I!” - even though popular speech has immortalized “It’s me!” as sounding bigly good.
Rearrange these, and “…it can be that she does it.” also works (IMHO sounds less awkward). In this case “that” works as the copulative noun, and the subject of the clause is obviously “she” since it is the subject of “can do”. (and obviously “it” is the object receiving the action…)
Either way, she can do it. What’s more important, completing the tasks or good grammar?
The arguing. That’s what most important. This is the Dope; you knew that.
Actually, all these forms are wrong since the subject person’s pronouns are E and they. 
Both are bizarrely convoluted to me, but the second sounds correct. Neither construction would necessarily leap out at me as wrong, just a bit Byzantine in phrasing.
Phrasing so convoluted bizarrely is yet another thing up with which one should not needs put.
I think this sentence sounds so weird because it has two dummy subjects (‘there’ and ‘it’). Not that there is anything wrong with dummy subjects but they leave the actor/agent role a bit up in the air, and this sentence indicates ‘she’ very clearly as an agent. How about:
‘If there is anything that needs doing when you get home, she can be the one to do it.’