'In/on the street'?

[Mehrgan]

Hi,

Is there any general rule or any known idea that in the street is mostly used in BrE?


Thanks.

 

[Barb_D]

I can confirm that it's not used in the US unless you mean the part where the cars go.

 

[cubezero3]

Hello, Mehrgan.

Our kind teachers have recently answered a similar question. I find their answers extremely helpful. Perhaps you will equally benefit from their posts.

Here is the URL adress of that post.

https://www.usingenglish.com/forum/ask-teacher/145315-street-name.html

Richard

 

[TheParser]

Hi,

Is there any general rule or any known idea that in the street is mostly used in BrE?


Thanks.

NOT A TEACHER


(1) What a coincidence!!!

(2) After I had read your post and the great answers, I turned

off my computer and decided to force myself to read a little

Shakespeare (because everyone says Shakespeare is good

for you).

(3) Guess what I read in Othello (act iv, scene i, line 170):

IAGO: After her, after her.

CASSIO: Faith, I must, she'll rail i' the street else.

NOTES: My dictionary tells me that "to rail" = to complain;

"Faith," I think (think!!!) is an Irish interjection meaning something

like "indeed."


Respectfully yours,


James

 

[Allen165]

NOT A TEACHER


(1) What a coincidence!!!

(2) After I had read your post and the great answers, I turned

off my computer and decided to force myself to read a little

Shakespeare (because everyone says Shakespeare is good

for you).

(3) Guess what I read in Othello (act iv, scene i, line 170):

IAGO: After her, after her.

CASSIO: Faith, I must, she'll rail i' the street else.

NOTES: My dictionary tells me that "to rail" = to complain;

"Faith," I think (think!!!) is an Irish interjection meaning something

like "indeed."


Respectfully yours,


James

Off-topic question: Is there a reason you used the past perfect in point no. 2? "After I had read ...." It's not necessary, and I'm sure you're aware of this, so I'd like to know why you nevertheless used it.

Thank you in advance for the explanation!

 

[birdeen's call]

I [...] decided to force myself to read a little Shakespeare (because everyone says Shakespeare is good for you).

:-D

"Faith" does indeed mean indeed, and perhaps the Irish still use it, but it wasn't Irish when Shakespeare used it. The interjection was used in England at the time.

 

[emsr2d2]

I might be wrong but I seem to recall seeing "i'faith" in Shakespeare at school. I believe it was a contraction of "In faith". Seems to have been shortened to just "Faith" quite a lot though.
My Irish grandfather certainly used it.

 

[birdeen's call]

I might be wrong but I seem to recall seeing "i'faith" in Shakespeare at school. I believe it was a contraction of "In faith". Seems to have been shortened to just "Faith" quite a lot though.
My Irish grandfather certainly used it.

There are examples of "faith" without "in" meaning indeed here. (Some time after Shakespeare.)

 

[TheParser]

Off-topic question: Is there a reason you used the past perfect in point no. 2? "After I had read ...." It's not necessary, and I'm sure you're aware of this, so I'd like to know why you nevertheless used it.

Thank you in advance for the explanation!

NOT A TEACHER


(1) You are certainly an eagle-eyed lawyer!!!

(2) I actually agonized over whether or not to use the simple past

(past simple?) or the past perfect.

(3) I thought that the past perfect would be "perfect" English.

"After I had read your post [at 3 p.m.], I decided [at 3:15 p.m.] to read

some Shakespeare." / "I decided to read some Shakespeare after I had

read your post."

(4) I agree that it was not necessary, but was it wrong? If it was

wrongly used, please let me know so that I can improve my

English.


Respectfully yours,


James

 

[5jj]

"After I had read your post [at 3 p.m.], I decided [at 3:15 p.m.] to read some Shakespeare." / "I decided to read some Shakespeare after I had read your post."

(4) I agree that it was not necessary, but was it wrong?

No; it is not necessary, as 'after' makes the sequence of the actions clear, but it is certainly not wrong.

 

[Allen165]

NOT A TEACHER


(1) You are certainly an eagle-eyed lawyer!!!

(2) I actually agonized over whether or not to use the simple past

(past simple?) or the past perfect.

(3) I thought that the past perfect would be "perfect" English.

"After I had read your post [at 3 p.m.], I decided [at 3:15 p.m.] to read

some Shakespeare." / "I decided to read some Shakespeare after I had

read your post."

(4) I agree that it was not necessary, but was it wrong? If it was

wrongly used, please let me know so that I can improve my

English.


Respectfully yours,


James

I didn't mean to imply that the past perfect was wrong, but it jumped out at me when I read the sentence. In the second edition of Woe Is I (p. 78), Patricia O'Conner writes:

"No matter what the tense of the main part of a sentence, and no matter how complicated, the verb that follows after should be in either the simple present or the simple past."

 

[5jj]

I didn't mean to imply that the past perfect was wrong, but it jumped out at me when I read the sentence. In the second edition of Woe Is I (p. 78), Patricia O'Conner writes:

"No matter what the tense of the main part of a sentence, and no matter how complicated, the verb that follows after should be in either the simple present or the simple past."

Ms O'Conner is wrong.

 

[TheParser]

NOT A TEACHER


(1) I cannot vote in the poll because it lacks context.

(2) American English:

(a) What does the man ON the street think about the matter? (I think some

Americans are also comfortable with "in." I once heard a 100% American

TV reporter say that he loved covering the activities of the ordinary man "in"

the street.)

(b) Call 911. There's a man lying IN the street. (As the moderator said, where the cars

are.) I believe, however, that many (most?) Americans would be comfortable with

a sentence such as:

As prosperity grows in that country, you will see a growing number of cars ON the

streets.


Respectfully yours,


James