Writing tic
Jan. 15th, 2012 09:10 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
marinessWriting tic
In a recent conversation I joked that I was having problems telling the difference between "discreet" and "discrete." (Well, it wasn't entirely a joke, but I do know the difference. Most of the time. When I'm not dizzy or tired or distracted – this is just not going well, so I'll stop.)
But this reminded me of one of my little writing verbal tics: an almost pathological aversion to using the words lay/lie.
This wasn't always true – back in high school and college I knew the difference and used them without thinking too much about either word. But later, I started teaching English grammar. In my rotating English as a Second Language classes, we usually hit "lay/lie/lie" (the listening part of the TOEFL test also tests whether or not non native speakers can tell if the speaker is talking about dishonesty) right after the nightmare of the multiple meanings of "take" and the excitements of "do" and "make."
This is a bad time to hit "lay/lie," with students already wishing that "take" had never entered the English language, and generally resulted in significant sulking. It did not help that the most common phrase they typically encountered using either word was "get laid," which is not tested on the TOEFL and also offers its own grammatical confusion. As an end result we all became very fond of the word "put." "Put" is a nice easy word to spell, you don't have to change it, and you can put anything anywhere you want to without worrying about how exactly you're going to end it. We all loved "put." We also liked "recline" and "rest." Great words, and you never have to wonder if "recline" means "dishonesty." (Bonus: this also removed some of the "sit" and "set" confusion.)
But the result of years of this was to leave me twitching with the words "lie/lay," partly because when I use either word now, I feel the need to look them up, but mostly because I feel a sense of discomfort around them, a sense that these are words that cause annoyance and pain. It doesn't help that although I know it's grammatically correct, the word "lain" always looks archaic to me, calling up thoughts of the King James Bible and Shakespeare, which is rarely the tone I'm going for – I know a few people that can sort of pull off an imitation of that language in a pinch, but I can't – far too steeped in contemporary America, for all of my medieval/Renaissance reading and studies.
And I just caught myself trying to avoid using one of those words again.
This writing musing brought to you by avoiding watching the Golden Globes.
In a recent conversation I joked that I was having problems telling the difference between "discreet" and "discrete." (Well, it wasn't entirely a joke, but I do know the difference. Most of the time. When I'm not dizzy or tired or distracted – this is just not going well, so I'll stop.)
But this reminded me of one of my little writing verbal tics: an almost pathological aversion to using the words lay/lie.
This wasn't always true – back in high school and college I knew the difference and used them without thinking too much about either word. But later, I started teaching English grammar. In my rotating English as a Second Language classes, we usually hit "lay/lie/lie" (the listening part of the TOEFL test also tests whether or not non native speakers can tell if the speaker is talking about dishonesty) right after the nightmare of the multiple meanings of "take" and the excitements of "do" and "make."
This is a bad time to hit "lay/lie," with students already wishing that "take" had never entered the English language, and generally resulted in significant sulking. It did not help that the most common phrase they typically encountered using either word was "get laid," which is not tested on the TOEFL and also offers its own grammatical confusion. As an end result we all became very fond of the word "put." "Put" is a nice easy word to spell, you don't have to change it, and you can put anything anywhere you want to without worrying about how exactly you're going to end it. We all loved "put." We also liked "recline" and "rest." Great words, and you never have to wonder if "recline" means "dishonesty." (Bonus: this also removed some of the "sit" and "set" confusion.)
But the result of years of this was to leave me twitching with the words "lie/lay," partly because when I use either word now, I feel the need to look them up, but mostly because I feel a sense of discomfort around them, a sense that these are words that cause annoyance and pain. It doesn't help that although I know it's grammatically correct, the word "lain" always looks archaic to me, calling up thoughts of the King James Bible and Shakespeare, which is rarely the tone I'm going for – I know a few people that can sort of pull off an imitation of that language in a pinch, but I can't – far too steeped in contemporary America, for all of my medieval/Renaissance reading and studies.
And I just caught myself trying to avoid using one of those words again.
This writing musing brought to you by avoiding watching the Golden Globes.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-01-16 02:24 am (UTC)I used to know those lay/lie and so forth without any recourse to dictionary or English textbook. Then I a) got sick and b) got on the Internet. (A) undermined the beliefs I'd built from reading hundreds of books by skilled English writers. (B) exposed me to every possible inaccuracy. I never was present at that challenging moment in EFL students' lives, but you sum it up so nicely.
May I propose that your aversion to lay/lie may also be triggered by the significant time spent in that same damn position? Life is better now with lightweight e-readers, but when I was first sick I was stuck with commercial audiobooks because my arms couldn't hold the paper kind. On the plus side, Moby-Dick.
I have yet again turned a comment into "all about me." It has been such a pleasure to read glimpses into your life, and I'm sorry to have contributed not very much.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-01-16 02:32 am (UTC)I think you may be right about my other reason for avoiding those words, too.
I'm not exactly ignoring the GG on purpose, but the other person in the household was watching football, and we watch so little regular TV that it seems pointless to set up a second one for the extremely rare nights like this where we might both want to watch different shows. I'll probably catch up on Downton Abbey tomorrow - one of the few things that has helped is the ability to watch shows when I'm up to it and pause them midway through when needed. It's been easy enough to follow the GG on Twitter and find out that Peter Dinklage won, which was the only one I cared about anyway.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-01-16 04:09 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-01-17 08:55 pm (UTC)http://www.themarysue.com/peter-dinklage-golden-globe/
I loved his snark in the entire role. I still think he's far too good looking for Tyrion Lannister (although yes, yes, I know, it's Hollywood...sigh) and make up should have worked on this, but the line delivery made up for a lot.