was/ is

[Casiopea]

Originally Posted by Harry Smith

Is "in the lesson" AmE or Canadian?

The phrase is the same in both dialects.

Harry, take a look at these two sentences. They are different in structure:

[1] He wrote his lessons with a very expensive pen. <Belly T>
[2] He wrote with an expensive pen at the lesson. <Harry>

In [1] "lessons", as fiona nicely points out, is synonymous with "exercises", whereas in [2] it's a different word (it's singular in number, "lesson"), and it has a completely different function (it's the object of the prepsotion "at"), which makes it synonymous with the noun class; i.e., he wrote with an expensive pen in the class/lesson, which is why I suggested "in the lesson" for sentence [2].

Does that help?

[Harry Smith]

Originally Posted by Casiopea

The phrase is the same in both dialects.

Harry, take a look at these two sentences. They are different in structure:

[1] He wrote his lessons with a very expensive pen. <Belly T>
[2] He wrote with an expensive pen at the lesson. <Harry>

In [1] "lessons", as fiona nicely points out, is synonymous with "exercises", whereas in [2] it's a different word (it's singular in number, "lesson"), and it has a completely different function (it's the object of the prepsotion "at"), which makes it synonymous with the noun class; i.e., he wrote with an expensive pen in the class/lesson, which is why I suggested "in the lesson" for sentence [2].

Does that help?

No, because I think we say either "in class" or "at the lesson." Not in the class or in the lesson. Yes I agree I had to write "in class" not "in the class".

[Casiopea]

Originally Posted by Harry Smith

No, because I think we say either "in class" or "at the lesson." Not in the class or in the lesson. Yes I agree I had to write "in class" not "in the class".

That stands to reason. I'm not quite sure, though, who we refers to.