|
Post by TfS on Jul 20, 2008 19:04:21 GMT
That's sort of my point, TfS. I suspect there's a different mental model going on; unfortunately, as I know no Swedish, I have no idea what it might be! No, nor me. I just know, as will others who have learned another language, that one simply has to learn which is which. Actually a visualization of someone sitting in a telephone is an aide-memoir to the correct usage. The Swedes, however, would not find this funny even were the humour pointed out to them as this is taken as a perfectly normal statement.
|
|
|
Post by Twoddle on Jul 20, 2008 19:33:54 GMT
That's sort of my point, TfS. I suspect there's a different mental model going on; unfortunately, as I know no Swedish, I have no idea what it might be! No, nor me. I just know, as will others who have learned another language, that one simply has to learn which is which. Actually a visualization of someone sitting in a telephone is an aide-memoir to the correct usage. The Swedes, however, would not find this funny even were the humour pointed out to them as this is taken as a perfectly normal statement. Might the Swedes find our being on the 'phone, or even travelling on a train quite amusing, though? There doesn't seem to be much rhyme or reason to it. We're at the theatre but in the church, on a bus but in a car, and in my house but at my home. And as for travelling on the Underground ... .
|
|
|
Post by Tone on Jul 20, 2008 19:55:51 GMT
>I don't see the need for any rule.<Which is precisely NOT what I was asking. I deliberately put "rule" in inverted commas -- to indicate that I meant a mental rule, not a grammatical one. And, as oft it happens, I think Paul has summed it up well. (I already had a good idea of how they were selected. I just felt that it might be a good discussion point. ) >(Tone likes to insist on "in arrears")<Does he really? (Or, no, he doesn't.) Tone thought that he had raised the difference between "in arrear" and "in arrear s". He sees no question about a foolish substitution of "on" or "at" for that used "in". Tone
|
|
|
Post by Bertie on Jul 20, 2008 23:01:54 GMT
Tone,
While you were rolling your eyes I was removing my tongue from my cheek.
|
|
|
Post by SusanB on Jul 20, 2008 23:47:23 GMT
I sit on the sofa and in the chair (not at the same time).
|
|
|
Post by Vadim on Jul 21, 2008 7:33:48 GMT
I sit on the sofa and in the chair (not at the same time). I think that comes back to Paul's mental image! I too, sit on the sofa and in the chair. I feel I can't sit in the sofa as it is not completely surrounding me. I do however sit in the car on the motorway. It's a funny one though, as I can sit both in a train, and on the train! No wonder the foreigners have trouble!
|
|
|
Post by TfS on Jul 21, 2008 9:19:52 GMT
No wonder the foreigners have trouble! I don't believe that "native" English speakers have an easy time of it either, Vadim.
|
|
|
Post by Vadim on Jul 21, 2008 10:55:19 GMT
No wonder the foreigners have trouble! I don't believe that "native" English speakers have an easy time of it either, Vadim. Sorry if my post caused the sad face from you, Tfs. I thought about changing the word to "non-native", or something to do with native, or some-such-similar word. I thought that the way I typed it would, in fact, portray that I was joking in the sense that I too, am completely "rubbish" (used for effect) at the English language! ;D?
|
|
|
Post by TfS on Jul 21, 2008 12:39:22 GMT
I don't believe that "native" English speakers have an easy time of it either, Vadim. Sorry if my post caused the sad face from you, Tfs. I thought about changing the word to "non-native", or something to do with native, or some-such-similar word. I thought that the way I typed it would, in fact, portray that I was joking in the sense that I too, am completely "rubbish" (used for effect) at the English language! ;D? I think we are at cross-purposes here, Vadim. I have no problem with your use of the word "foreigners", I just wished to point out that also those whose mother-tongue is English have problems with prepositions and the sad face was for them.
|
|
|
Post by Vadim on Jul 21, 2008 13:54:52 GMT
Sorry if my post caused the sad face from you, Tfs. I thought about changing the word to "non-native", or something to do with native, or some-such-similar word. I thought that the way I typed it would, in fact, portray that I was joking in the sense that I too, am completely "rubbish" (used for effect) at the English language! ;D? I think we are at cross-purposes here, Vadim. I have no problem with your use of the word "foreigners", I just wished to point out that also those whose mother-tongue is English have problems with prepositions and the sad face was for them. So it was, indeed, for me then! ;D
|
|
|
Post by TfS on Jul 21, 2008 15:31:32 GMT
So it was, indeed, for me then! ;D For you, for me, and for any other who struggles with the vagaries of the English language. ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by SusanB on Jul 21, 2008 16:00:53 GMT
When I'm on a bus, train or plane, I can walk around on the floor. When I'm in a car or a cupboard, there isn't much space to move about on.
This may trigger some counter-examples!
|
|
|
Post by Vadim on Jul 22, 2008 7:08:04 GMT
When I'm on a bus, train or plane, I can walk around on the floor. When I'm in a car or a cupboard, there isn't much space to move about on. This may trigger some counter-examples! 'On your bike Susan!
|
|
|
Post by TfS on Jul 22, 2008 8:29:06 GMT
When I'm on a bus, train or plane, I can walk around on the floor. No fun in that; try the walls or ceiling next time. Raises a few eyebrows.
|
|
|
Post by Alan Palmer on Jul 22, 2008 15:01:04 GMT
The "Vomit Comet" (used for training potential astronauts) will allow you to do just that!
|
|