look on at

[Maybo]

Only a few weeks ago, Britons looked on at the unfolding horror in Italy and Spain. (Boris Johnson is getting better, but the nation he leads is not by Luke Mcgee)

Can I say "looked on in"? Why use "at"?

 

[emsr2d2]

To "look on" suggests a longer look than just a "look". It's more akin to "watch". It needs "at" because there needs to be a preposition before the relevant noun after "look" or "look on".

They looked on at the unfolding horror ...
They watched the unfolding horror ...

"look on" gives the idea of being a spectator.

 

[GoesStation]

Can I say "looked on in"? Why use "at"?

No. I'm not crazy about the sentence as it is, though it may work in British English. I prefer this wording: Britons looked on as the horror in Italy and Spain unfolded.

 

[emsr2d2]

I would have much preferred that too.

 

[jutfrank]

No. I'm not crazy about the sentence as it is, though it may work in British English. I prefer this wording: Britons looked on as the horror in Italy and Spain unfolded.

It's no better in British English. I don't think the original sentence is right, (though it makes sense enough).

The speaker is fusing the phrasal verb look on with look at something.

 

[Tdol]

It's ungainly, but I wouldn't say it's wrong. I would recommend a rewrite, preferably with as.