Let's say you were storytelling something about a hut that was struck by lightning, is there any difference between the two?
The lightning struck the hut and set it alight?
Vs.
The lightning struck the hut and set it on fire?
English Language Learners Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for speakers of other languages learning English. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this communityAlight could simply mean "lit up". It does not specifically tells if the thing is on fire or not. (Especially in American English)
There's not much difference in British usage, but it's better to use set it on fire as this clearly describes the event without leaving a doubt in the reader's mind.
That use of alight sounds awkward to me. Things can be alight, but you don't set them alight. I'm not saying it's technically incorrect, just that IMHO it would be distracting to me as a reader.
On fire is fine, but probably what you're looking for is ablaze.
To me there is a difference between set alight and set on fire and set ablaze. It really depends on what happens next or what you want to draw attention to.
If the hut is far away and you can only see light, then set alight makes sense. You really don't have the sense of fire or of the fire spreading etc. The hut may have just lit up from the lightning and didn't really "catch on fire".
The difference is the second example uses an Idiom to explain what happens
alight adjective [ after verb ] UK /əˈlaɪt/ US /əˈlaɪt/ alight adjective [ after verb ] (BURNING)
The rioters overturned several cars and set them alight.
Reference Cambridge Thesaurus
Idioms set sth/sb on fire set fire to sth/sb
The lightning struck the hut and set it alight.
There are two possible meanings [1](https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/alight"Cambridge Dictionary"):
In my experience (BrE) the former is usually what I would assume, but it honestly would just depend on what the next line of the story was.
The lightning struck the hut and set it on fire
Only has one (synonymous to burning).
Why use alight in all its speculative glory? Simply because it looks better and shows a higher vocabulary level.
I don't agree with whywasinotconsulted and have no issue with being set alight. (Although I'd like to clarify by that I mean the phrase, my opinion would change if you were to actually set me alight/on fire.)
I do also agree with everyone who suggested "ablaze". This is a wonderful word, in my opinion.
I might also suggest:
The lightning struck the hut and it went up in flames.