News1 min ago
what sits where
8 Answers
I'm having a hard time understanding when it's possible to use the verb 'sit' (referring to an object) instead of 'lie' or 'stand'. It may be that there aren't any clear rules about this and that you just have to develop a feel for it, but I'll try to explain what it is that confuses me, and then perhaps you'll be able to point me in the right direction.
Take for instance this sentence: "Your glass of Chianti will taste even better when it sits on these fabulous ceramic coasters from (company's name.)" Well, intuitively I would have thought that you'd choose the word 'stand' for something elongated like a glass - something that could easily tip over - and that you'd reserve the word 'sit' for something with a broad base and of more limited height. But that doesn't seem to hold true.
Another for me very confusing example: I bought a small, Japanese print over the internet from an art dealer in London. This was before I had a VISA card, and I asked him to please please please reserve it for me until I had found out how to pay for it. He wrote back: "Don't worry about it, it's sitting right here on my desk." Again, 'sit' is not a word I would have thought possible here. It was just a slip of paper, really, no frame or anything. So here we have the broad base - but no height at all.
I suppose I'm thinking that the object that 'sits' should to some extent resemble a sitting person or a sitting animal. But that doesn't seem to be the case. Is there any way that you could help me understand this...?
Also, does the surface where the object sits (or stands or lies) enter into this consideration at all, or is it just the object itself that determines the word?
(Oh and by the way, can a house 'sit', e.g. in the forest?)
Thanks in advance, it may be a few days before I return. Will thank you then!
Take for instance this sentence: "Your glass of Chianti will taste even better when it sits on these fabulous ceramic coasters from (company's name.)" Well, intuitively I would have thought that you'd choose the word 'stand' for something elongated like a glass - something that could easily tip over - and that you'd reserve the word 'sit' for something with a broad base and of more limited height. But that doesn't seem to hold true.
Another for me very confusing example: I bought a small, Japanese print over the internet from an art dealer in London. This was before I had a VISA card, and I asked him to please please please reserve it for me until I had found out how to pay for it. He wrote back: "Don't worry about it, it's sitting right here on my desk." Again, 'sit' is not a word I would have thought possible here. It was just a slip of paper, really, no frame or anything. So here we have the broad base - but no height at all.
I suppose I'm thinking that the object that 'sits' should to some extent resemble a sitting person or a sitting animal. But that doesn't seem to be the case. Is there any way that you could help me understand this...?
Also, does the surface where the object sits (or stands or lies) enter into this consideration at all, or is it just the object itself that determines the word?
(Oh and by the way, can a house 'sit', e.g. in the forest?)
Thanks in advance, it may be a few days before I return. Will thank you then!
Answers
1 to 8 of 8
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by DaSwede. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
You have made your point very well and raised an interesting point. So thank you for making me think about an everyday in an obtuse way.
I found this which gives a very good explanation:
http://www.getitwriteonline.com/archive/060602 .htm
I think it makes clear that to use the verb 'sit' in the instances you give is clearly wrong - it should be 'set', as in set down.
I found this which gives a very good explanation:
http://www.getitwriteonline.com/archive/060602 .htm
I think it makes clear that to use the verb 'sit' in the instances you give is clearly wrong - it should be 'set', as in set down.
The linked site above appears to be an American one and their 'rules' are rather different from those in British usage. In colloquial, everyday English, the examples you list use 'sit' perfectly correctly...glasses sit on coasters, prints sit on tables, houses sit in forests and so forth quite happily. Dover sits on the Kent coast, certain ideas don't sit very well with me...and a host of other possibilities exist.
you ask the most interesting questions, Swede...
Here are two possibilities:
(a) the advertisers wanted to suggest the wine being as close as possible to the coasters, in order to suggest how much good the coasters will do for the wine (yes, nonsense, I know, but that's advertising for you). 'Sit' implies more contact than 'stand' (more of you touches a seat when you sit on it than when you stand on it), so that's what they used.
(b) I think I would normally say a small inanimate object 'sits' if it is vertical or 'lies' if it is horizontal. I might say 'stands' if I wanted to stress that it is vertical - so if I say a book lies on my shelf, you think of it as flat; if I say it stands, you think of it as upright. But a glass is assumed to be vertical unless the contrary is stated, so you don't need to underline the point by saying 'stands'...
Whew... good question... And I'm not sure my answer is right... But I don't think you would be wrong if you said 'stands'.
Here are two possibilities:
(a) the advertisers wanted to suggest the wine being as close as possible to the coasters, in order to suggest how much good the coasters will do for the wine (yes, nonsense, I know, but that's advertising for you). 'Sit' implies more contact than 'stand' (more of you touches a seat when you sit on it than when you stand on it), so that's what they used.
(b) I think I would normally say a small inanimate object 'sits' if it is vertical or 'lies' if it is horizontal. I might say 'stands' if I wanted to stress that it is vertical - so if I say a book lies on my shelf, you think of it as flat; if I say it stands, you think of it as upright. But a glass is assumed to be vertical unless the contrary is stated, so you don't need to underline the point by saying 'stands'...
Whew... good question... And I'm not sure my answer is right... But I don't think you would be wrong if you said 'stands'.
Thanks, everybody! Just to be clear: I wasn't really questioning whether or not 'my' sentences were correct, I felt sure that they are - it's just that I lack a gut feeling for this usage. I guess that makes me the neurotic in the old What's the difference between a psychotic and a neurotic-joke:
A psychotic thinks that 2 + 2 = 5.
A neurotic knows that 2 + 2 = 4... but it worries her!
Ethel, your link seems like a useful one for me just generally. And by the way: Glad to have introduced you to obtuse thinking! I knew I had a mission on The AnswerBank.
Quizmonster, your additional examples will help me develop 'the feel for it.' Yes, I've noticed that Americans use 'set' in surprising ways - it's Southern idiom, isn't it?
rojash, your reaction is useful, too - it's educational for me to see what people agree on and what they have different opinions on.
jno - yeah, it's on accounta I'm obtuse. (Just kidding, Ethel, I know you didn't say I was.) Seriously, thank you so much for trying to analyze it, that is a great help! I notice that you make the same kind of bodily comparisons that I myself have been trying to apply to this usage. Seems natural, doesn't it. But at least where American English is concerned, that may not be the full story: Yesterday I came across a quotation from William Faulkner's As I lay dying, where a character says something like "...you have to let the water set in the barrel for six weeks." Well thankyou, William... not one bit confusing for me, that. But at least it makes me realize that I will probably have to desert this thought of resemblance with 'the human sitting.' Not to mention stop thinking that everything has to be logical - I certainly know that the Swedish language isn't.
Thanks, all!
A psychotic thinks that 2 + 2 = 5.
A neurotic knows that 2 + 2 = 4... but it worries her!
Ethel, your link seems like a useful one for me just generally. And by the way: Glad to have introduced you to obtuse thinking! I knew I had a mission on The AnswerBank.
Quizmonster, your additional examples will help me develop 'the feel for it.' Yes, I've noticed that Americans use 'set' in surprising ways - it's Southern idiom, isn't it?
rojash, your reaction is useful, too - it's educational for me to see what people agree on and what they have different opinions on.
jno - yeah, it's on accounta I'm obtuse. (Just kidding, Ethel, I know you didn't say I was.) Seriously, thank you so much for trying to analyze it, that is a great help! I notice that you make the same kind of bodily comparisons that I myself have been trying to apply to this usage. Seems natural, doesn't it. But at least where American English is concerned, that may not be the full story: Yesterday I came across a quotation from William Faulkner's As I lay dying, where a character says something like "...you have to let the water set in the barrel for six weeks." Well thankyou, William... not one bit confusing for me, that. But at least it makes me realize that I will probably have to desert this thought of resemblance with 'the human sitting.' Not to mention stop thinking that everything has to be logical - I certainly know that the Swedish language isn't.
Thanks, all!
1 to 8 of 8
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|