Saturday, December 6, 2014

As the Land Lies



I recently read a book by an Anglo-Irish writer who referred to "the lie of the land."

"Yes!," I thought to myself.  "That makes a whole lot more sense than speaking of 'the lay of the land.'"  The land doesn't lay, it simply lies there doing its thing.  If it, or the rest of us, were chickens, then we could speak of the land laying.  But of course, we're not and it isn't.  So, I looked it up and found that the Brits tend to speak of the lie of the land; we Americans refer to the lay of the land.

As confirmation, when recently re-reading Robert Louis Stevenson's classic, Kidnapped, I found this:  "When we must pass an open place, quickness was not all, but a swift judgment not only of the lie of the whole country, but of the solidity of every stone ....." etc.

Okay, I'll leave that there.  But ... I've spoken of this lie/lay grammatical problem before in other usage ... and maybe it's time to speak of it again.  "Lie" means "rest."  "Lay" means "put" or "place" and takes an object unless you're a chicken.

(In the following sentences objects are underlined.) 
  • You lie down.  (You don't lay down.)
  • You tell your dog, "Fido, lie down!"
  • A chiropractor has you lie on the table.
  • You lay your pet armadillo out in the arroyo.
  • A hen lays. ("An egg" is assumed.)
  • Now I lay myself down to sleep.
  • Now I lie down to sleep (which is how the above sentence would be written if you deleted "myself").
  • Let sleeping dogs lie.
It's really quite easy.  But I'm afraid even our teachers have forgotten.  And grammar doesn't seem to be considered a bottom line enough subject to be included in curricula any longer.

P.S.  Also noted recently:
  • Being in the throws of something
  • Do to the fact
  • Pouring over a book
 Well, no.  Let's try:
  • Being in the throes of something
  • Due to the fact
  • Poring over a book 
Finally, I recently heard George W. Bush being asked about his friendship with Tony Blair.  This was his answer in part:  "Laura and I spent a lot of time with he and Cherie."  Ooooooooo.  So, class, who can see the problem here?

You wouldn't say that they spent a lot of time with he.  But rather with him.  So adding "Cherie" doesn't change "him" to "he." 

Pass it on.

No comments:

Post a Comment