 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / July 2009Reachable on or reachable by?
Should the sentence read " I am reachable on my cell phone" or "I am reachable by my cell phone" #1 seems right - when do you use #1 and when do you use #2 Thanks, Meena. > Should the sentence read > " I am reachable on my cell phone" > or "I am reachable by my cell phone" > #1 seems right - when do you use #1 and when do you use #2 A better sentence would be: You can reach me on my cell phone -- preferable because it is more colloquial (uses simpler words than "reachable".)  SignatureDon Phillipson Carlsbad Springs (Ottawa, Canada) >Should the sentence read >" I am reachable on my cell phone" >or "I am reachable by my cell phone" >#1 seems right - when do you use #1 and when do you use #2 I am reachable on my cell phone, and that means that I am reachable by telephone. SignatureTony Cooper - Orlando, Florida > >Should the sentence read > >" I am reachable on my cell phone" [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > I am reachable on my cell phone, and that means that I am reachable by > telephone. The idioms are: "reachable by (cell) phone" or "reachable by telephone" "reachable on my (cell) phone" "on" goes with "my". "by" does not. SignatureRoland Hutchinson He calls himself "the Garden State's leading violist da gamba," ... comparable to being ruler of an exceptionally small duchy. --Newark (NJ) Star Ledger ( http://tinyurl.com/RolandIsNJ ) >> >Should the sentence read >> >" I am reachable on my cell phone" [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >"on" goes with "my". >"by" does not. Isn't that what I said? SignatureTony Cooper - Orlando, Florida > Roland Hutchinson wrote: >>>> Should the sentence read >>>> " I am reachable on my cell phone" [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Isn't that what I said? You had to talk louder -- it was a bad connection. SignatureSkitt (AmE) > >> >Should the sentence read > >> >" I am reachable on my cell phone" [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Isn't that what I said? More or less. You omitted "reachable by (cell) phone", which I thought might be a significant omission to our non-native speaking OP. SignatureRoland Hutchinson He calls himself "the Garden State's leading violist da gamba," ... comparable to being ruler of an exceptionally small duchy. --Newark (NJ) Star Ledger ( http://tinyurl.com/RolandIsNJ ) >> >> >Should the sentence read >> >> >" I am reachable on my cell phone" [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >More or less. You omitted "reachable by (cell) phone", which I thought >might be a significant omission to our non-native speaking OP. Is "reachable by cell phone" correct, though? That implies that the *caller* must use his cell phone to reach me. The caller can use any telephone device, but I receive the call *on* my cell phone. SignatureTony Cooper - Orlando, Florida >>>> Should the sentence read >>>> " I am reachable on my cell phone" [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Isn't that what I said? Yes, but Roland said it more clearly. Signatureathel >>>>> Should the sentence read >>>>> " I am reachable on my cell phone" [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > >Yes, but Roland said it more clearly. Indeed. I read what Tony said, and confess that I didn't really understand why he said it. To explain things fully, it is necessary to explain that you don't usually say "by my telephone". "By" implies something general (such as in "by rail", "by car", "by sea", by air" etc), while "on my phone" is specific (as are "in John's car, "on Fred's bicycle" etc). SignatureIan Ian Jackson filted: >Indeed. I read what Tony said, and confess that I didn't really >understand why he said it. To explain things fully, it is necessary to >explain that you don't usually say "by my telephone". "By" implies >something general (such as in "by rail", "by car", "by sea", by air" >etc), while "on my phone" is specific (as are "in John's car, "on Fred's >bicycle" etc). And yet, I am reachable "on" LinkedIn, YouTube and Chinese Music Blog, while others are reachable on FaceBook, MySpace and TwitTer.... Whether this discussion is taking place "on" or "in" alt.usage.english has in the past been a matter of some controversy....r SignatureA pessimist sees the glass as half empty. An optometrist asks whether you see the glass more full like this?...or like this? > Ian Jackson filted: >> Indeed. I read what Tony said, and confess that I didn't really >> understand why he said it. To explain things fully, it is necessary [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > alt.usage.english has in the past been a matter of some > controversy....r ... and "reachable by phone" is a quite ordinary expression. It's a "my" that screws things up. SignatureSkitt (AmE) > Ian Jackson filted: > > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Whether this discussion is taking place "on" or "in" alt.usage.english has in > the past been a matter of some controversy....r No need for controversy. Prepositions work the same in cyberspace as in the real world, such as it is: "In" a (news)group. "On" a bulletin board (which a.u.e ain't). SignatureRoland Hutchinson He calls himself "the Garden State's leading violist da gamba," ... comparable to being ruler of an exceptionally small duchy. --Newark (NJ) Star Ledger ( http://tinyurl.com/RolandIsNJ ) Roland Hutchinson filted: >> Whether this discussion is taking place "on" or "in" alt.usage.english has in >> the past been a matter of some controversy....r > >No need for controversy. Prepositions work the same in cyberspace as in >the real world, such as it is: "In" a (news)group. "On" a bulletin >board (which a.u.e ain't). A message that's "in" alt.usage.english is "on" Usenet (but, for some who might read it, "in" Google Groups)...if you can formulate a law that accounts for *that* state of affairs, I'd love to hear it....r SignatureA pessimist sees the glass as half empty. An optometrist asks whether you see the glass more full like this?...or like this? > Roland Hutchinson filted: > > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > read it, "in" Google Groups)...if you can formulate a law that accounts for > *that* state of affairs, I'd love to hear it....r "In" Brand-X Groups, just like any other group or group of groups. "On" any communications network (but "in" a network of people) "In" an particular group. Works for me in _my_ real world. SignatureRoland Hutchinson He calls himself "the Garden State's leading violist da gamba," ... comparable to being ruler of an exceptionally small duchy. --Newark (NJ) Star Ledger ( http://tinyurl.com/RolandIsNJ ) |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.