To the first part, what is being revealed in this passage is what happened. To posit questions like the ones you offered here really offer nothing in understanding the passage and honestly serve no purpose in being asked. Neither situation is implied as possible by the passage and what is being reported is what occurred. The “what if” hypotheticals that would be necessary to develop a response to these questions would serve no purpose in understanding what is being covered by the narrative, and would offer no argument or defense of any particular view. They would be pure speculations that hold no value. So, I am sorry my friend, but I can’t really answer those questions with anything useful.
When it comes to free will, it is clear that they do have free will, and I could have included that in the list of characteristics. It is implied, more or less, that the man has free will in his naming of the creatures and God setting the names of the creatures by what the man called them, even to his wife. So, it is reasonable to conclude that the man had free will, as does his wife, as can be implied due to its necessity for the narrative to cohere.
I will have to address the other matters in your response later. Gotta end my break at work.