interrogative enclitic -ne...

In double questions the enclitic particle -ne is used instead of “utrum”. So, say we have the following example:

Utrum hodie mavis abire an cras?

Which sentence is correct (or more proper) if using -ne?

Hodiene mavis abire an cras?

or

Mavisne hodie abire an cras?

Or what else?

Thanks!

I would support the first because it follows the rule that enclitic ne attaches to the most important word. Unless you think the verb is!

Ego primum adjuvo, quod hanc regulam sequatur: ne encliticum ad vocabulum gravissimum adjungitur. Nisi tu gravissimum aestimas verbum!

Indeed, it depends on the emphasis.

Unless my memory is failing me, the -ne is usually attached to the verb. When it is attached to a noun, negativity is implied, but not as strongly as with num.

This may help: A&G §332.
Hoc memoriam adjuvet: A&G §332.

I have to wonder if that has less to do with the nature of “-ne” itself and more to do with the general nature of questions that need the emphasis shifted onto another element in the first place. Compare “Is he coming tomorrow?” (Venitne crās?) and “Is he coming tomorrow?” (Crāsne venit?) – we probably ask questions like the latter most often we don’t want or expect them to be true.

That’s not the case at all, furrykef, I would say. “Crasne venit?” is just a question of fact, unless you would make it otherwise by your tone of voice. It’s interesting, I think, that A&G say verb + “-ne” (“venitne?” ) often implies “nonnè” (“nonnè venit?”)"

Non par ratio est, furrykef, meo judicio. Ea quaestio, “Crasne venit?” enim, tantùm factum spectat, nisi per tonum vocis aliter denotes. Quod A&G dicunt “venitne” vim “nonnè” adverbii habere mihi curae est.