In or with ?

   Share on Facebook  
Anonymous  #571577  Mon, 29 Sep 08 02:21 PM
This question is from a toeic prep book. A photo question : A lady is working at her desk in front of her computer.  There are post-it notes all over her work area-- on her computer screen, on the walls, and on her desk.

Correct description, according to the book,  is "The woman's work area is covered in post-it notes."

Why not using " is covered with " instead of " is covered in"  ??
Isn't " covered with " is more common than" covered in" ??

  
Clive  #571594  Mon, 29 Sep 08 03:32 PM
Hi,

This question is from a toeic prep book. A photo question : A lady is working at her desk in front of her computer.  There are post-it notes all over her work area-- on her computer screen, on the walls, and on her desk.

Correct description, according to the book,  is "The woman's work area is covered in post-it notes."

Why not using " is covered with " instead of " is covered in"  ?? Both are fine, and they are often interchanged.
But here are a few comments.
'Covered in' - Sometimes suggests more complete coverage. Sometimes suggests the coverage was less intentional, more accidental.


Isn't " covered with " is more common than" covered in" ?? That's my feeling, too.

Howver, Google offers these results.
covered in - 30.6 million hits

covered with - 23.5 million hits

Best wishes, Clive
  
Top 10 Contributor
Joined on Thu, Oct 28 2004
Canada
Veteran Member (22,474)
ModeratorTeachers
El tango argentino es un pensamiento triste que se puede bailar (The tango argentino is a sad thought which can be danced) Enrique Santos Discépolo
Anonymous  #571614  Mon, 29 Sep 08 04:11 PM
Thak you for your replay. BTW, what do you mean by "'Covered in' - Sometimes suggests more complete coverage. Sometimes suggests the coverage was less intentional, more accidental." ??

Could you give me a little more samples or explanation towards this above comments? If it is more complete coverage, how can it be both less intentioanl and more acidental? I would say if it is less intentiaonl but more accidental, it it shuold have less coverage instead of more coverage. Maybe I am wrong, I am not sure,
  
Clive  #571617  Mon, 29 Sep 08 04:22 PM
Hi,

eg I tripped and fell into a deep ditch. When I got out, I was covered in mud. My friends couldn't even recognize me.
The coverage was pretty complete. And it was the result of an accident. I didn't intend to cover myself in mud.

eg I could see John had cut his knee, because it was covered with a bandage. John decided to bandage his knee. And it did not cover his whole body, it ws probably quite a small bandage. 'Covered by' is another common form here.

Clive

  
Anonymous  #571629  Mon, 29 Sep 08 04:40 PM
HI Clive,
You ,entioned that both  in and with are fine, and they are often interchanged.
So in your example : " eg I tripped and fell into a deep ditch. When I got out, I was covered in mud. My friends couldn't even recognize me. "

Can I still use "with" to say " I was covered WITH  mud. My friends couldn't even recognize me, " when I am not sure if I should use "if" or "with" ?

  
Clive  #571640  Mon, 29 Sep 08 05:14 PM
Hi,
Yes.
'In' just makes it sound like you were a bit more completely covered.

Clive
  
AddThis Feed Button RSS Feed: ESL General English Grammar Questions
© 2008 MediaCET Ltd.
Terms and Conditions & Terms of Service