Skip to Content
1-26-2010 @ 1:07PM
Sorry to nitpick, but you've got a grammatical error in your headline: http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/lay-versus-lie.aspx
1-26-2010 @ 1:10PM
How can you nitpick with eyes like that?????????????
1-26-2010 @ 1:16PM
Not necessarily. Yes, "lay" is transitive, but why assume that the object isn't implied or otherwise truncated? :)
1-26-2010 @ 1:17PM
The Grammar Nazi Strikes Again!
1-26-2010 @ 2:04PM
Cheers for grammar geeks!
1-26-2010 @ 2:18PM
and honestly, "lie" instead of "lay" just sounds... i really can't think of a better word so I'll just say pompous, but its closer to sounding like a yuppie, to use a dated term. jus'sayin.
1-26-2010 @ 2:28PM
@kev-dogg:Of COURSE it's "lie" - if it were "lay", there'd be eggs!
1-26-2010 @ 3:02PM
@Chrisas Tokkar pointed out, it is impossible for there to be an object, implied or otherwise, unless the dog is being told to lay eggs. or lay bricks. or lay tile. or what have you...It's an imperative mood sentence, a command. The subject IS implied; it is considered to be "you," or "you dog" in this case. The verb should be "lie."I'm not saying all this to be nitpicky, because in addition to knowing the above, I also know that this distinction between "to lie" and "to lay" is rarely noted anymore, except by those who pompously insist on speaking "the King's English," and I would say it is fast on its way to becoming archaic.I don't use it (except when I have to teach it), and I've seen it misused in newspapers and magazines, by national news broadcasters, and even by Obama.I'm just saying that unless that's an egg-laying or tile-laying dog, there is no object.Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to get moving. I have lain here in bed long enough with my laptop lying upon my lap, heating up my nads.
1-26-2010 @ 3:21PM
@paragorillabear, but that's just not true. "Lay" is a transitive verb that means "to place on a surface". "Lay eggs", "lay brick", etc. are idiomatic uses that have the same basic meaning, but they're not the only uses of the word. "Go lay [your head] down" is a perfectly valid sentence (even if the synecdoche is a little broad).
1-26-2010 @ 3:23PM
Here's the way to remember it: Eric Clapton is wrong. It's not "lay down Sally" unless Sally is dead and he's just placing her corpse somewhere. So either he's got bad grammar or he's a murderer.And Phil, bad grammar isn't a virtue for professional writers, especially if they have aspirations of bigger and better things, which I bet they do.
1-26-2010 @ 5:26PM
back @ ChrisYou are correct. I did not consider the possibility of "Go lay [your head] down," so yes there could be an unstated object.But then again, when people say "Go lay down," especially to their dogs, they probably don't mean "Go lay your head down."But then again, who the hell is going to say "Go lie down" to their dogs??? I mean, dogs are horrible at grammar anyway.If I were proofreading, I would have left it as it is, as a common idiomatic expression, rather than changing it to King's English.
1-27-2010 @ 12:46AM
For more language plice prowess: it's going to be a while yet before anyone can speak King's English, and noone has spoken it for nearly 58 years (on 6th February).
1-27-2010 @ 12:50AM
Whoops. My pedantry failed. It's more like 56 1/2 years.
First time? A confirmation email will be sent to you after submitting.
Members enter your username and password.
Enter your AOL or AIM screenname and password.
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.