Although I teach math, my students are primarily second-language-learners, and we get into some interesting discussions about English usage. They have me stumped on this one:
We put food on the table and sit in our chairs to eat it. We ride on trains and planes, but we ride in cars. Is there any reason for the choice of in or on in a situation??? When they tell me they rode to work on the car, I can't help picturing them strapped to the roof or the hood.
Good question, Jane, and we'll be discussing it in an upcoming show, so stay tuned! The short answer is there's not a whole lot of rhyme or reason to it. (But then, we English speakers have similar problems when learning a language such as Spanish. Don't even get me started on how many times I've tripped over "por" and "para"!)
We put food on the table and sit in our chairs to eat it. We ride on trains and planes, but we ride in cars. Is there any reason for the choice of in or on in a situation??? When they tell me they rode to work on the car, I can't help picturing them strapped to the roof or the hood.
This is a really good way to put it!
Not to mention that other languages follow different logic. In French, you are "dans l'avion" "dans le bus" "dans le train", and the French chuckle just as much as you did about "on the car" when a non-native French speaker says "sur le bus" or "sur le train", imagining that the person is sitting on top of the vehicle. (which in parts of the developing world is in fact where a lot of people ride trains and buses, though fortunately not planes).
Not to mention "en France" and "a Paris," eh?
Czech uses a different preposition depending whether you are sitting in/on a chair vs a couch.