Idiomatic preposition choice

[stuartnz]

Or perhaps the subject line could have been "Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"

I'm on the prowl for some good basic material for beginner's ESOL lessons. I came across a 10-question quiz on prepositions, and got one wrong! Here it is:

Q: He works ____ a bank.
(1) in
(2) at
(3) on
(4) to

The answer I chose was "(2) at". This usage is standard in NZ English, and is heard at least as often as the answer that the quizmaster stipulated "(1) in". My question has to do with this sort of idiomatic variation. Am I better to follow the example of the person who set this quiz and tell my students to use "in", marking "at" as "wrong" for the sake of simplicity, or can I tell them that in the English they are going to hear used all around them, either option is like to be used?

 

[Anglika]

Normally in Britain it will be "work in a bank".

 

[stuartnz]

Normally in Britain it will be "work in a bank".

Thanks for the reply. As I mentioned, it's probably 50/50 here, so what I'm wondering is whether I should tell my students this or just get them using the one that is preferred elsewhere.

 

[Anglika]

When you use the verb "work" with a location, do you always use "at"? So far as I can tell, "in" would be the accepted normal preposition, with occasions when "at" is an alternative.

 

[stuartnz]

When you use the verb "work" with a location, do you always use "at"? So far as I can tell, "in" would be the accepted normal preposition, with occasions when "at" is an alternative.

It seems that my own communication skills are lacking in clarity. I thought that I had explained that here in NZ, the choice is 50/50. Both in my personal use in the usage I hear from others in various registers, "at" and "in" are interchangeable. There is no discernible preference. If my meaning is still not clear, please forgive me, but after three attempts to convey the same thought, I'm out of further rephrasing options.

 

[stuartnz]

If anyone is in a position to offer an answer to the question I asked in my original post, I'd be grateful. Thanks!

 

[Anglika]

It's late at night. I had gathered what you said, but you were also asking what to tell your students, and was trying to work out what might be the best answer.

Probably what you suggest - both are to be found but that they may be penalised for using "at".

 

[stuartnz]

It's late at night.

Thanks for staying up past midnight to help me!:-D

 

[NearThere]

I am not rebuting anyone's opinion here, I'm just a student learning English.

I just find it fascinating that different countries have preference even in prepositions. I have been in the united states for 12 years, I can honestly say I more often hear "at" used than "in" in a sentence such as that given by Stuart. Furthur more I remember a little while back a thread with a string of discussion about pp (or pp continueous?) using a sampled sentence: I have worked in the company for 10 years to which a native speaker cautioned a correction from "in" to "for".

So I am simply fascinated. So is it "in" or is it "at"?

NT

 

[stuartnz]

So I am simply fascinated. So is it "in" or is it "at"?

NT

I was interested to read that you have heard "at" more than "in" in the sort of phrase being discussed. Given your location, perhaps that suggests that the use of "at" is more common in Asia-Pacific Englishes. As for which one is "right", I would say "both." I am a passionate defender of the variety and diversity of World English in all its many flavours, and see no need to kowtow to any one variant as being inherently superior or more correct than another. NZ and Australia have long suffered what's called cultural cringw when comes to their varieties of English, with their accents being contemned and their word choices derided. Now, these and other variants of English are beginning to realise that they need not be embarrassed about their differences from other variants, but can instead celebrate them. IN NZ, for example, our accent is moving away from that of Australia and our English vocabulary is adopting a growing number of Maaori words. Indian English gives us the wonderfully useful "prepone". There are any number of examples of this sort of thing, that's why I say that a varietal preposition choice like "at" vs. "in" is simply that, a choice that serves a marker of varietal difference, not an issue of wrong or right. Of course, I only teach English part-time to a few Punjabi friends, so I'm not an expert.

 

[NearThere]

Stuart,

This is all so very interesting to me. So it's becoming a norm that one country uses one variant and other country uses the other and thus "at" is no more right (or righter?) than "in" and vice versa, and Standard English is no more when it comes to subtle differences such as this. Correct?

How about tests? How would students handle that? Would it all depends what country is the test prepared? Geez, like English itself is not hard enough to learn. :-(

By the way, you said:

Given your location, perhaps that suggests that the use of "at" is more common in Asia-Pacific Englishes.

Did you just mean Asia-Pacific region alone, or did you include the United States which is where I am in. I really do think majority of the people here "prefer" using "at" for employment location, in fact I have the impression that using "in" is considered bad English. But I could be wrong. Any American have an opinion on that?

 

[stuartnz]

Stuart,

This is all so very interesting to me. So it's becoming a norm that one country uses one variant and other country uses the other and thus "at" is no more right (or righter?) than "in" and vice versa, and Standard English is no more when it comes to subtle differences such as this. Correct?

I would agree with this. Subtle differences like this one do not damage the mutual intelligibility of the different variants of English, nor do they represent a departure from the core grammatical structure which the variants have in common. Using one or other may cause someone to say, "that's wrong" if the choice made by the speaker is not one the hearer's idiolect uses, but since (praise be!)we don't have an English Academy along the lines of l'Académie Française, there is no one "Standard English".

As for the English variants of the Asia-Pacific region, I would include Nth American variants, since Canadian, NZ and Australian English all show a blend of influence from UK and US English. The extent of the impact of those two major variants differs in each of the others, NZ English is still nearer UK English than is Australian English for example, but in every case the growing impact of US English on other variants is easily seen.

 

[NearThere]

I would agree with this. Subtle differences like this one do not damage the mutual intelligibility of the different variants of English, nor do they represent a departure from the core grammatical structure which the variants have in common. Using one or other may cause someone to say, "that's wrong" if the choice made by the speaker is not one the hearer's idiolect uses, but since (praise be!)we don't have an English Academy along the lines of l'Académie Française, there is no one "Standard English".

As for the English variants of the Asia-Pacific region, I would include Nth American variants, since Canadian, NZ and Australian English all show a blend of influence from UK and US English. The extent of the impact of those two major variants differs in each of the others, NZ English is still nearer UK English than is Australian English for example, but in every case the growing impact of US English on other variants is easily seen.

You said you were not a teacher, correct? :-?

I'm just giving a hard time. Thanks!

NT

 

[RonBee]

StuartNZ might not be a professional teacher, but he is, I think, 100% right.

~R