Can someone please give me a short explanation of when to use lie and when to use lay.... Thx!
Lie vs lay
Traditionally ''lay'' is for laying down objects, and ''lie'' is for lying down on the bed. However, many people (including me) use ''lay'' and ''lie'' interchangeably for the second. It's no big deal if you do.
I'd stick to the rules...though.
"Lay" is used when talking about an object/inanimates.
*Keep in mind, Lay is the past tense of "lie" also. As In: "I lay on the bed for two hours before I got up."
"Lie" is a more reflective verb, usually referring to oneself.
ie. I need to lie down. ---or--- Go lie down.
"Lay" is used when talking about an object/inanimates.
*Keep in mind, Lay is the past tense of "lie" also. As In: "I lay on the bed for two hours before I got up."
"Lie" is a more reflective verb, usually referring to oneself.
ie. I need to lie down. ---or--- Go lie down.
<<I'd stick to the rules...though.>>
Well those "rules" are actually prescriptivist rules that don't necessarily reflect how millions of native speakers speak. As a native speaker of English I by definition obey the (true) rules of English as I've grown up speaking it and how it's spoken around me. Whether or not this usage conforms with formal prescriptivist written rules is another matter. Prescriptivist rules are fine for the formal written language but the problem starts when people begin insisting that they be used in the everyday spoken language, as well, which is clearly a few bricks short of a pallet in terms of linguistic reality.
Well those "rules" are actually prescriptivist rules that don't necessarily reflect how millions of native speakers speak. As a native speaker of English I by definition obey the (true) rules of English as I've grown up speaking it and how it's spoken around me. Whether or not this usage conforms with formal prescriptivist written rules is another matter. Prescriptivist rules are fine for the formal written language but the problem starts when people begin insisting that they be used in the everyday spoken language, as well, which is clearly a few bricks short of a pallet in terms of linguistic reality.
Actually, those rules are followed by the majority of educated speakers, and discarding them to avoid offending an uneducated few impedes communication for the majority. The "true" rules of English with which you grew up may or may not be congruent with the established rules that the other billion speakers of the language depend upon for their communication, but the safe route is to learn to speak and write English by the established rules, whether the semi-literate minority approves of this or not. Nobody will reject your job or university application if you use correct English, but it might well be rejected if you don't. And not following the rules can lead to confusion and misunderstanding as well.
Pretending that rules aren't important is a slippery slope greased by political correctness, and that's just about the last thing that ESL students need. They need to communicate, not to pander to the prescriptivist rules of political correctness.
Pretending that rules aren't important is a slippery slope greased by political correctness, and that's just about the last thing that ESL students need. They need to communicate, not to pander to the prescriptivist rules of political correctness.
<<Actually, those rules are followed by the majority of educated speakers, and discarding them to avoid offending an uneducated few impedes communication for the majority.>>
You act as if by "discarding" prescriptivist rules that somehow that's leaving the language with a lack of rules. Not true. Language changes but rules always remain governing language even if the rules happen change (which they will).
Also, no one is worrying about "offending" an "uneducated few" here. I'm describing how the language is *actually* used by many native speakers, yes, even the most educated ones. My parents are both well-educated (my dad has a doctorate and my mom a degree in biology from Berkeley, if it matters) and they, like many other native speakers (whether they be well-educated or not) use "lie" and "lay" interchangeably in the senses mentioned above when speaking informally. It has not impeded upon their life situations to speak like everyone else around them, nor have I experienced any disadvantage in my life in continuing the usage I grew up with natively.
And, I can confidently say it's not a "small uneducated minority" that interchanges "lie" and "lay" in the aforementioned conditions. It's millions and millions of native speakers, many of whom are quite well educated, as I indicated above.
<<The "true" rules of English with which you grew up may or may not be congruent with the established rules that the other billion speakers of the language depend upon for their communication, but the safe route is to learn to speak and write English by the established rules, whether the semi-literate minority approves of this or not. Nobody will reject your job or university application if you use correct English, but it might well be rejected if you don't. And not following the rules can lead to confusion and misunderstanding as well>>
I have no problem with prescriptivist rules for formal writing (job applications would definitely be included under such an umbrella) but you implying that such rules should be strictly adhered to in informal native speech is quite misguided.
<<Pretending that rules aren't important is a slippery slope greased by political correctness, and that's just about the last thing that ESL students need.>>
Who said anything about rules being unimportant? All language usage is rule-bound whether or not it conforms with formal written prescriptivistic norms.
<<They need to communicate, not to pander to the prescriptivist rules of political correctness.>>
No, no. This has nothing to do with political correctness or touchy-feely "making people feel better." I am simply describing language as it's used.
Yes, ESL students should be made familiar with formal written norms but they should also be made familiar with the ways actual native speakers' speech differs (even amongst well-educated native speakers) from that.
You act as if by "discarding" prescriptivist rules that somehow that's leaving the language with a lack of rules. Not true. Language changes but rules always remain governing language even if the rules happen change (which they will).
Also, no one is worrying about "offending" an "uneducated few" here. I'm describing how the language is *actually* used by many native speakers, yes, even the most educated ones. My parents are both well-educated (my dad has a doctorate and my mom a degree in biology from Berkeley, if it matters) and they, like many other native speakers (whether they be well-educated or not) use "lie" and "lay" interchangeably in the senses mentioned above when speaking informally. It has not impeded upon their life situations to speak like everyone else around them, nor have I experienced any disadvantage in my life in continuing the usage I grew up with natively.
And, I can confidently say it's not a "small uneducated minority" that interchanges "lie" and "lay" in the aforementioned conditions. It's millions and millions of native speakers, many of whom are quite well educated, as I indicated above.
<<The "true" rules of English with which you grew up may or may not be congruent with the established rules that the other billion speakers of the language depend upon for their communication, but the safe route is to learn to speak and write English by the established rules, whether the semi-literate minority approves of this or not. Nobody will reject your job or university application if you use correct English, but it might well be rejected if you don't. And not following the rules can lead to confusion and misunderstanding as well>>
I have no problem with prescriptivist rules for formal writing (job applications would definitely be included under such an umbrella) but you implying that such rules should be strictly adhered to in informal native speech is quite misguided.
<<Pretending that rules aren't important is a slippery slope greased by political correctness, and that's just about the last thing that ESL students need.>>
Who said anything about rules being unimportant? All language usage is rule-bound whether or not it conforms with formal written prescriptivistic norms.
<<They need to communicate, not to pander to the prescriptivist rules of political correctness.>>
No, no. This has nothing to do with political correctness or touchy-feely "making people feel better." I am simply describing language as it's used.
Yes, ESL students should be made familiar with formal written norms but they should also be made familiar with the ways actual native speakers' speech differs (even amongst well-educated native speakers) from that.
<<I'd stick to the rules...though.
"Lay" is used when talking about an object/inanimates.
*Keep in mind, Lay is the past tense of "lie" also. As In: "I lay on the bed for two hours before I got up."
"Lie" is a more reflective verb, usually referring to oneself.
ie. I need to lie down. ---or--- Go lie down.>>
I'll stick to my own rules for use those words which are shared by millions of people.
"Lay" is used when talking about an object/inanimates.
*Keep in mind, Lay is the past tense of "lie" also. As In: "I lay on the bed for two hours before I got up."
"Lie" is a more reflective verb, usually referring to oneself.
ie. I need to lie down. ---or--- Go lie down.>>
I'll stick to my own rules for use those words which are shared by millions of people.
<<I'll stick to my own rules for use those words which are shared by millions of people.>>
Typo.
I'll stick to my own rules for using those words which are shared by millions of people.
Typo.
I'll stick to my own rules for using those words which are shared by millions of people.
<<It's quite simple, really, and doesn't need all this debate.>>
Well, in my usage once again ''lay'' is for objects, and ''lay'' and ''lie'' are used interchangeably for referring to oneself. There's nothing wrong with that.
Well, in my usage once again ''lay'' is for objects, and ''lay'' and ''lie'' are used interchangeably for referring to oneself. There's nothing wrong with that.
<<"Lie" is present tense and "lay" is past tense.>>
Yeah, well ''lay'' can also be used as the present tense, as in ''I will lay on the bed''. There's nothing wrong with that.
Yeah, well ''lay'' can also be used as the present tense, as in ''I will lay on the bed''. There's nothing wrong with that.
<<It's quite simple, really, and doesn't need all this debate.>>
I'm not debating anything. I'm describing my own usage.
I'm not debating anything. I'm describing my own usage.