Lie lady lie
Lie across my big brass bed.
This is how the song SHOULD go if it were grammatically correct. Alternatively, it could be "Lay yourself lady lay yourself, lay yourself across my big brass bed", although that certainly ruins the meter, doesn't it?
This topic arose out of a conversation I had today with my fella, A___. I wanted to pick a music bed for a public service announcement that I'm planning on doing for the radio station. The music needs to be something suggestive and somewhat schmaltzy. After a moment of thinking, I said "Hey how about that 'lay across my big brass bed' song?"
A___ said "What?"
I sang him a few lines. And sang the bendy guitar part too. While this was very amusing, it did not provoke recall. So then it was on to itunes, where we discovered that many many people have covered this song. Among the artists covering the Dylan ditty were Ministry, Duran Duran, and Isaac Hayes. We were in the middle of playing samples of various versions when my good friend R___ (cjblue) called me to say hi and to wish me better moods. I answered laughing and explained what was going on (then I played the clip from Duran Duran's version which just made me laugh harder).
R___ reminded me that in fact this song is grammatically incorrect. "It should be 'Lie lady lie' because 'lay' is the wrong verb," she explained, adding "You're the one who told me that!"
I was a bit horrified to think that I might have been seen as that annoying person who goes around pretentiously lecturing friends on verb usage, but I know myself well enough to realize I probably I wasn't a total tit about it. I'm not a language nazi. And I guess it has served her well because she said she has always remembered since which word to use when.
In case you're interested in correct English usage (as trivia or self edification), you can use the Dylan song to remember when to use lay and when to use lie.
If you're speaking in the present tense, lay is a transitive verb - it takes an object. You lay something (like a book) on a table, on a shelf, or on a bed (big and brass or not). You can lay yourself someplace, as in "now I lay me down to sleep". There's the slang version of lay which is transitive as well, but which isn't so casually confusable with the use of lie since you can lay someone standing, sitting, or reclining.
Lie is intransitive - it doesn't take an object. It is what you do when you recline, as in when you lie on the beach, on a big brass bed, or perhaps in a nest of pillows on the shag floor in the back of a van. Here's where the confusion comes in - lay is also (unfortuately) the past tense form of the intransitive verb lie, as in "Last night, as I lay in his big brass bed, I had strange dreams about the members of Duran Duran dressed as hippies trying to coax me into a van with a shag interior." I'm sure there is a good etymological reason for lay serving double duty as a verb in its own right and as the bastard past tense form of lie, but it's best to just think of the unfortunate past tense of lie as an accident, like George Bush being president of the US or the sound similarity between the words "sum" and "some".
So when you hear "lay across my big brass bed" remember that someone is, grammatically speaking, asking that woman to do more than simply recline.
6 comments:
Excellent observation! I also think it's charming that The Clash sang "...exactly WHOM I'm supposed to be" in "Should I Stay or Should I Go?" It would have been perfect if the verb hadn't been TO BE, in which case you always use WHO, as the subject IS the object with that particular verb.
Grammar aside, the worst use of language in popular songery is the rhyming of GIRL and WORLD. Everyone knows that.
J: Oh sure. I remember that age. It's miserable! I think your seventh graders would eat me alive.
K: True, and good point on The Clash. Hypercorrect forms tend to annoy me, but this one begs for it. Damned monks and their damned latin grammar.
Very interesting and I have no idea why I'm remembering Mrs. Barclay and her wicked wooden ruler...
I suspect Bob D. didn't think it through too carefully. The Nashville Skyline days were before he found religion and quit smoking pot. Interesting though - as he's such a master of language, but seems to have trouble speaking (or remembering lyrics when he performs).
Here's an obscure Dylan tune - with 'lay' again...
LAY DOWN YOUR WEARY TUNE
Lay down your weary tune, lay down,
Lay down the song you strum,
And rest yourself 'neath the strength of strings
No voice can hope to hum.
Struck by the sounds before the sun,
I knew the night had gone.
The morning breeze like a bugle blew
Against the drums of dawn.
Lay down your weary tune, lay down,
Lay down the song you strum,
And rest yourself 'neath the strength of strings
No voice can hope to hum.
The ocean wild like an organ played,
The seaweed's wove its strands.
The crashin' waves like cymbals clashed
Against the rocks and sands.
Lay down your weary tune, lay down,
Lay down the song you strum,
And rest yourself 'neath the strength of strings
No voice can hope to hum.
I stood unwound beneath the skies
And clouds unbound by laws.
The cryin' rain like a trumpet sang
And asked for no applause.
Lay down your weary tune, lay down,
Lay down the song you strum,
And rest yourself 'neath the strength of strings
No voice can hope to hum.
The last of leaves fell from the trees
And clung to a new love's breast.
The branches bare like a banjo played
To the winds that listened best.
I gazed down in the river's mirror
And watched its winding strum.
The water smooth ran like a hymn
And like a harp did hum.
Lay down your weary tune, lay down,
Lay down the song you strum,
And rest yourself 'neath the strength of strings
No voice can hope to hum.
Copyright © 1964; renewed 1992 Special Rider Music
I want to clear something up. I am a linguist (sort of). I mean, I studied linguistics, people gave me a degree in it and everything. I haven't taken the vows though. So I'm sort of like a lay linguist. Anyhow, I love language and linguistics and all that shit. Because I love it, I find stuff like this really damned interesting. But I am not a prescriptivist. I am, though, a pragmatist.
Verse shouldn't sacrifice sincerity, emotional intent/impact, scenery, or lyricism for grammar. However, applying a usage rule in a situation like this makes visible the odd holes in language use that are created by the persistence of (or prescribed adherence to) what are possibly obsolete forms. These holes are really very interesting from a linguistic and social perspective.
Lay/lie confusability is interesting, considering that what I've read says forms of the two verbs have been collapsed and confused for many hundreds of years. To me, the interatction reflects either shifts in phonology which changed what could and couldn't be overtly and succinctly encoded in the verb, or shifts in what we english language users choose to encode (semantically speaking) about events involving reclining and placing things. The latter is probably more widely interesting. Now that I think about it, I guess you could argue that modern (intransitive) uses of the two words show an unergative/unaccusative distinction. I.e., the meaning is all "lie" but in some cases the syntactic subject of the verb is seen as being less than an active agent and we get Lay, hence "Lay Lady Lay" and not "Lie Lady Lie". Lying is far too active for a lady, and a lady actively intentfully lying on a bed...well, that's just unheard of. (in this analysis, a lady laying is like a window breaking. Both merely experience the verb but neither is the cause of the event.)
I do respect the reality of prescriptive language use. I realize there are genuine social consequences of using "correct" forms or not, that there are situations in which it will make a big difference not simply in whether or not you're understood but in whether people even want to understand you. I am personally ambivalent about how much is lost and gained in the areas of individual expression and understanding depending on use. I must add that in general, my feeling is that most people who gnash their teeth about the destruction of English based on things like diachronic interactions (spanning nearly a millenium), such as the lay/lie one, may as well be complaining that none sayeth "Thou" nor useth the propere endings on verbes these days.
To highlight how silly this is, below is a sample of English that is more modern than the 1300s.
(Chaucer's Wife of Bath's Tale)
Experience, though noon auctoritee
Were in this world, were right ynogh to me
To speke of wo that is in mariage;
For, lordynges, sith I twelf yeer was of age,
Thonked be God, that is eterne on lyve,
Housbondes at chirche dore I have had fyve -
For I so ofte have ywedded bee -
And alle were worthy men in hir degree.
Anyone who has looked at Chaucer (I say looked at because unless you are a renny or have a glossary handy, you probably didn't READ Chaucer, not directly anyhow) has got to see how silly it is to think that the distinguishing hallmark of modern english is variation and deviation from some fictional historical ideal.
I can't believe I just NOW saw this post! I feel a need to tell you that I learned the proper use of lay/lie from you because I *asked* not because you volunteered it in some anal grammatically correct way.
I love this post and I love you.
Hypercorrect/incorrect grammar bugs me too - like people who use I instead of me when Me is called for. Between you and I... Which I suppose is still better than him and me went to the store.
Oh I am so relieved to hear you actually asked me about the lay/lie usage.
Post a Comment