The man was lying down on the floor.
The man was lying on the floor.
What's the difference between the two sentences?
Add a comment
|
1 Answer
In many contexts, adding preposition down after lying is purely a stylistic choice with no effect on meaning. But sometimes lying down implies a "volitional" action by a conscious agent, so...
1: The man was lying down on the floor (perfectly natural)
2: The body was lying down on the floor (unlikely)
3: The litter was lying down on the floor (very unlikely)
...where all three of the above would be fine without down.
answered Sep 5 at 11:49
-
1Also, don't you think that the man was lying down could imply that he was in the act of getting into a supine position? Commented Sep 5 at 12:02
-
2No. The man was lying on the floor suggests to me that he was already in that position. Commented Sep 5 at 12:27
-
3@gomadeng One important point: "on the floor" clarifies the situation. But "the man was lying," alone, has a totally different meaning than "the man was lying down" (telling falsehoods vs reclining). Commented Sep 5 at 13:31
-
1Consider When I saw John, he was sitting in a chair. In principle it could indeed mean ...he was in the process of sitting down, but I suggest that would be a perverse interpretation without supporting conterxt. Same applies to other verbs, such as lying [down], standing [up],... Commented Sep 5 at 15:44
-
3@GalacticCowboy In fact I would go so far as to say it would be a "perverse interpretation" as FumbleFingers just mentioned, perhaps the sort that Groucho-Marx-style jokes are often built around ("When I found him he was lying in bed. But then he got up and started lying around the house. Then he went to lie in the car, and spent the whole day lying at his desk at work. Did I mention he's a lawyer?") Commented Sep 5 at 20:14