I understand the difference between conversational English and the formal written word, but I cringe when I hear someone say "infer" when he or she really means "imply" or vice versa. And a dagger strikes at my heart when I hear someone say "Roger and I" instead of "Roger and me."
The question is Lie vs. Lay. In the pursuit of grammatical excellence in my NaNoWriMo writing assignment, I got this war hero in bed feeling his dead wife laying next to him. Or is her body "lying" next to him. Pick one. I have tried to decipher this grammatical conundrum, but I don't know the answer.
I consulted one of the giants, Bob Dylan, in my quest, as it is Sunday afternoon and the Hut seems to be closed, the owner apparently in pursuit of fine wine and gourmet wax lips and fangs. But should it be "Lie, Lady, Lie?" I don't know. I should not need a Masters Degree in Grammar or a Ph.D. in Writing to figure this thing out. If people can make up words like "pro-active" or "newk-you-ler" to mean whatever the hell they want them to mean, there should be some kind of legislative enactment to cover the lay vs. lie situation.
I'm an educated man, but I'm afraid I can't speak intelligently about the use of lie vs. lay. I'm going to toss a coin.
Lay is a transitive verb; lie is intransitive, which means that lay requires a direct object, such as:
"Lay that monkey poop next to the shrunken heads."
It's extra confusing because the past tense of lie is lay. So you lie down today, you lay down last week and you have lain down in the past. You also lay the monkey poop next to the shrunken heads today, you laid it last week and you have laid it in the past.
So his dead wife would be laying next to him unless her death has caused her to be considered as nothing more than an object, in which case you should stop writing because that's misogyny and misogynists suck ass.
Posted by: melly mel at November 2, 2003 10:05 PMLying. She would be lying next to him, not laying. He could lay her down, but if she is already there, she is lying.
Posted by: melly mel at November 2, 2003 10:09 PMMel beat me to it. And I was looking forward to breaking out my Fowler's so very much. And mentioning Bro. Joe Chvala (much to Matt's delight, no doubt).
Posted by: Brett at November 2, 2003 11:23 PMAaaahhhh -- yes, now I get it. Just like that language skills website says -- transitive, intransitive; transigent, intransigent; laying, laid, lying; liar, layer; lain, lane; sane, insane; ignorance, arrogance -- yes, we all get it now. I think we need to spend $53 million to make this clear.
Take caution in your tone. I'm a fair guy, but this fuckin' heat's making me absolutely crazy.
I run my blog the way I run my blog. You wanna investigate, roll the dice and take your chances. I eat breakfast 80 yards away from Glynn and Christine Watts, who speak the Queen's English. So don't for one second think you're gonna come here, flash a diploma, and make me nervous.
Posted by: Billy at November 2, 2003 11:59 PMOh, you Americans, changing all of these verbs!! My Oxford Practice Grammar has to devote several pages to 'American English' Hummmph!
Posted by: Anji at November 3, 2003 01:31 AMu are amazing..believe me..its such a talent..from another persian gilr...
ur the best( at lease of the best)
I contact u later via mail...
hmmmm.
Posted by: stacey at November 3, 2003 02:06 PMYou might have avoided all these agitated commenters by rewriting the sentence... the wife was sprawling, reclining, huddled, reposing, prostrate... That's what I usually do. ;)
Posted by: Philip at November 3, 2003 05:51 PMI'm with Phillip! Change the damn sentence!
Posted by: Crazy Girl at November 3, 2003 08:24 PM