# ''in the list'' or ''on the list''



## talivan

how do you say some one is written down *on *or* in a list??*
or SOMEONE is in/or a waiting list.


*thanks in advance*


----------



## winklepicker

talivan said:


> some one is written down *on **a list  *


----------



## Suehil

I would have said '*someone* is on a list'


----------



## Hese

Excellent question. At university, we were told we should absolutely use on the list, but as time goes by, I come across more and more texts on the internet where 'in' is used. I'd rather use 'on the list', just to be on the safe side.


----------



## screzic

I am 100% sure the answer is ON. Peeps that use IN are victims of rap abuse.


----------



## panjandrum

screzic said:


> I am 100% sure the answer is ON. Peeps that use IN are victims of rap abuse.


What are peeps?
What is rap abuse?
Please try to write using language that can be readily understood.

Generally speaking, people on a waiting list are _on _the list 
But there is nothing whatever wrong, or uncommon, about saying "in the list".

I don't know what determines which is most appropriate, but certainly when I look at examples there are many where in the list seems a better choice - marginally.


----------



## screzic

Sorry about saying peeps. I was trying to make a point with the whole rap thing. 

You are RIGHT, IN the list is used often. And it is very common. That does not make it correct though. It simply means that many "peeps" (people) are making mistakes. And they make mistakes because they listen to rap music... where it is acceptable to be gramatically incorrect. But I'm not "hate'n" on rap. Timberlake rocks. 

I can't think of any instances where IN would be appropriate.


----------



## panjandrum

I don't see how _in the list_ could possibly be a mistake, especially when it is used almost as often as _on the list_ (Google) or about 50% as often (British National Corpus)
It would be a very brave prescriptive grammarian who condemned _in the list_ without sound justification.

(I don't think that BBC editors are especially addicted to rap.)


----------



## screzic

HAHAHA!

BBC editors. That was kinda funny.
Okay, then please give me a specific example of when IN the list would be correct.

Also: you ask me for specific evidence when you have provided none? Your google fact about the 50% thing just means that half of the world is wrong.


----------



## panjandrum

screzic said:


> HAHAHA!
> 
> BBC editors. That was kinda funny. LOL
> 
> Okay, then please give me a specific example of when IN the list would be correct.
> 
> Also: you ask me for specific evidence when you have provided none? Your google fact about the 50% thing just means that half of the world is wrong.


Please look for yourself.
If you think that your point about half the world is valid, it seems that you don't understand English and how it develops.

You have put forward a suggestion that the use of in the list is a mistake, contrary to overwhelming evidence that it is in widespread use in spoken and written English of all registers.
Yet you haven't explained why it is incorrect.


----------



## screzic

Your argument makes sense, but it seems like perhaps it supports my view as well.


You can't explain why it IS correct, and I can't explain why it ISn't correct. And so what happens now? Do we just agree to disagree on this?


----------



## panjandrum

There is no grammatical or usage reason for anyone to consider _in the list_ incorrect.
In the list is frequently used by reputable sources.
As is generally the pattern in this forum in such circumstances, the conclusion is that both are correct, but minority views are respected.


----------



## Eigenfunction

A list can be regarded as a collection of items organised consecutively, in which case the items are _in_ the list.

A list can be regarded as a piece of paper etc. on which the items are listed, in which case, they are _on_ the list.


----------



## Matching Mole

"In the list" is perfectly logical—in my view, more logical than "on". A list is a succession of items, like a queue. You would not say "on a queue", and "in" generally denotes inclusion or containment: "in the book", "in my letter", etc., and an item is certainly contained in a list. "On" generally refers to being in contact with the surface of something; not that there aren't numerous figurative and other uses, but still, it seems to me that if an argument needs to be made it needs to be made for the use of "on", rather than "in". However, this is immaterial, as correctness, in the English language, such as it exists, is determined by usage and "in" is used to great extent, and without comment from authorities that take account of usage.


----------



## gaer

panjandrum said:


> What are peeps?
> What is rap abuse?
> Please try to write using language that can be readily understood.
> 
> Generally speaking, people on a waiting list are _on _the list
> But there is nothing whatever wrong, or uncommon, about saying "in the list".
> 
> I don't know what determines which is most appropriate, but certainly when I look at examples there are many where in the list seems a better choice - marginally.


Here is just one example:

Results 1 - 10 of about 209,000 for "included in the list".
Results 1 - 10 of about 92,400 for "included on the list".

Results 1 - 10 of about 479 for "it is not included in the list". 
Results 1 - 10 of about 62 for "it is not included on the list".

Here I would say usage and what is correct are in agreement.


----------



## Loob

I'm still puzzling over how to help the OP, talivan, on this.

I think Eigenfunction's comment is illuminating:


Eigenfunction said:


> A list can be regarded as a collection of items organised consecutively, in which case the items are _in_ the list.
> 
> A list can be regarded as a piece of paper etc. on which the items are listed, in which case, they are _on_ the list.


 
Could it also have something to to with the verb used?  "Enter" in a list; "include" in a list. "Be" on a list? (It's certainly "be" _on_ a waiting list, not _in_ a waiting list.)

This is a real toughie!


----------



## gaer

Loob said:


> Could it also have something to to with the verb used? "Enter" in a list; "include" in a list. "Be" on a list? (It's certainly "be" _on_ a waiting list, not _in_ a waiting list.)
> 
> This is a real toughie!


Yes, it is. 

I do think the verb used makes a difference, but so does the kind of list, as in your "waiting list" example.


----------



## cuchuflete

Here's an example, selected at random from the tenth page of Google listings for the string "in the list"-



> Many actors appeared in four films *in the list* of 100 greatest American  films. James Dean was represented by two of his three films. *...*


"In" seems a little better in this context than "on".  Why?  I'm not sure.  It seems that
_in the list_ is used here to be equivalent to_ in a listing/in a compilation of_...
There is certainly no point of grammar that would make me question the use of _in_ here.  Further, it sounds perfectly idiomatic in AE.

I'm left wondering what objection anyone might offer to it.


----------



## TonightsLastSong

cuchuflete said:


> It seems that _in the list_ is used here to be equivalent to_ in a listing/in a compilation of_...



that's precisely the point to be made; along the same lines as Eigenfunction's comment, usage more often than not depends on how one must view the list.  If it's being viewed as if the list were the only intangible idea that we are considering, then one must be "in" the list, as the list represents a compilation of items.

The distinguishing difference in the ways to view such a list is this:
1) we observe the list as representing the actual items being referenced (meriting an "in")
2) the list is a piece of paper, and one needs to directly reference the list as an object, not as the things that it represents. (using "on")


----------



## AntieAnnie

Hi, I'm just adding my two cents here.

It seems that in the context of the original question, I would use "on the list" (here in California).  If I were referring to a list of names (as in a guest list at a club or something like that), I would ask whether the bouncer could find my name "on the list."  

I would even go as far as to say that my normal preference would be to use "on" the list as opposed to "in" the list as a general rule.  (Again, this is just the standpoint of someone in California).  I wouldn't, however, be so confident that "in" the list is wrong.  From this conversation, it sounds to me that it's more common to use "on" in the US and "in" in the UK.  

Maybe I'd use them interchangeably in the following sentence:  

In (or "on") the list of countries that I would like to visit, Poland is a low priority.  (No offense meant to the Polish; I just said that to my coworker -- who happens to be Polish -- last week).


----------



## agustina bsas

Is "*indicated on the list*" OK? Or would it be better to say "*indicated in the list*"?

(I'm not sure whether I should be starting a new thread or not.)


----------



## Copyright

screzic said:


> HAHAHA!
> 
> BBC editors. That was kinda funny.
> Okay, then please give me a specific example of when IN the list would be correct.



The police found his name in the list of victims.
There appeared to be an error in the list of stolen property.


----------



## Loob

agustina bsas said:


> Is "*indicated on the list*" OK? Or would it be better to say "*indicated in the list*"?


Hello, agustina

I'm not sure I'd say either....  Can you give us some context?


----------



## pickarooney

If I have a list of things which need to be done, or people to be called etc. I would consider all of the elements to be 'on the list' as there is a specific chronological order. 

Then again, if I was checking someone's name for entry into a club I might tell him it was not _on _the list. 

On the other hand, I would say that I had seen all the films _in _the list below:
_The Usual Suspects, Casablanca, Psycho, American Pie_. 
Likewise if they were listed vertically. 

However, if I hadn't yet seen a particular film, I would say that it was _on _my list of films to see (regardless of its position on this theoretical list). 

I can't come up with a rule, but there is definitely some, perhaps arbitrary, distinction between _on _and _in _for lists, in my view. 

As for 'indicated in/on the list', I think 'indicated' is most likely superfluous, but would need a little more context to say for certain.


----------



## agustina bsas

Context: "The insured sum is indicated *IN/ON* the list of coverage and benefits"


----------



## Loob

agustina bsas said:


> Context: "The insured sum is indicated *IN/ON* the list of coverage and benefits"


In that context, I'd use "in".


----------



## agustina bsas

Thanks to both!


----------



## Gatuna

AntieAnnie said:


> in the context of the original question, I would use "on the list" (here in California).  If I were referring to a list of names (as in a guest list at a club or something like that), I would ask whether the bouncer could find my name "on the list."
> 
> I would even go as far as to say that my normal preference would be to use "on" the list as opposed to "in" the list as a general rule.  (Again, this is just the standpoint of someone in California).  I wouldn't, however, be so confident that "in" the list is wrong.  From this conversation, it sounds to me that it's more common to use "on" in the US and "in" in the UK.



Hello!

Could someone please point me to a link where I can find the *grammar rules* to get a criterion on this?

When talking about physical places it may be somewhat easier, but I just haven't figured out the criteria behind things like:
_
<< Additional examples are off topic.  This thread is about in/on lists. >>_

- The insured sum is indicated *IN* the list.
- ...whether the bouncer could find my name "on the list."


Does it have to do with specific and non-specific places/situations?


----------



## holymoog

I've just looked on here because I wanted to say that something was in/on a list. I've gone with 'on' but really the significant thing I wanted to express is that something was a) included, plus also draw attention to b) the placement of it. Therefore, 'in' seems the more poetic choice. Neither the inclusion nor the placement of the object or it's relationship to the list were mentioned, only alluded to. Interesting grammar this.


----------



## Forero

holymoog said:


> I've just looked on here because I wanted to say that something was in/on a list. I've gone with 'on' but really the significant thing I wanted to express is that something was a) included, plus also draw attention to b) the placement of it. Therefore, 'in' seems the more poetic choice. Neither the inclusion nor the placement of the object or it's relationship to the list were mentioned, only alluded to. Interesting grammar this.


Welcome to the forum, Holymoog.

Can you give us more specific context?


----------



## holymoog

Forero said:


> Welcome to the forum, Holymoog.
> 
> Can you give us more specific context?



Is there a need for context here?


----------



## holymoog

we live in a world  where  things are on lists  in English


----------



## wandle

If we are compiling a list and adding items succesively as we think of them (wedding guests, for example), we often speak of 'putting them on the list'.
If we start with a full collection of items and want to list them we might well speak of 'putting them in a list'.


----------



## Forero

holymoog said:


> Is there a need for context here?


Yes.

For example, if the list is a one-page schedule of things to be done, things are more likely to be "on" it, but if the list is a large volume meant to include all of something, things are more likely to be "in" it.

There are in fact hundreds of contexts I can imagine for "in" the list and hundred of contexts I can imagine for "on" the list. Some contexts work well with either; some don't.

I am at a loss as to what you mean by "poetic" choice. Figurative? Mellifluous? How were the unmentioned things alluded to?

American and British usage may be different here, but I believe context matters on either side of the Atlantic.


----------



## holymoog

Is hierarchy relevant?


----------



## Cagey

holymoog said:


> Is hierarchy relevant?


As people have said, we need more information.  Relevant information would be a description of the sort of things you want to list and the purpose of the list. 

As you can see in previous discussion, details like this can affect the answer.


----------



## flamboyant lad

> As you have probably noticed, sometimes _in the_ _list_ is used as well. Most often, _in the list_ is used after some form of the word _include_, as in the example shown below.
> 
> 
> 
> We were included_ in the guest list._


http://www.learnersdictionary.com/qa/is-it-correct-to-say-on-the-list-or-in-the-list


> Except after include, I recommend that you use _on the list. _


*Is that advice correct?*

<< Source: A question asked on MiriamWebster Learning Dictionary "Ask the editor" 
Is it correct to say "on the list" or "in the list"? >>
​


----------



## JustKate

Yes, it's correct. But I hope you realize that it's very difficult to give you a nice, firm rule - English prepositions are so quirky and tricky. This seems like a pretty good guideline, though.


----------



## wandle

> Except after include, I recommend that you use _on the list. _


I disagree. The writer of that web page, when illustrating 'in the list', only offers phrases with some form of the verb 'include'.
Then, on that basis, he makes a rule which agrees with his own examples. So it is no surprise that the rule works for those examples.

'Include' is a word which calls for the preposition 'in'. That is a consequence of the meaning of 'include'. It is not a result of using the word 'list'.
It does show us the right way to proceed, though, and that is simply to think about the meaning. Each preposition has its own meaning.
Where the meaning calls for 'in', write 'in'. Where the meaning calls for 'on', write 'on'. Where the meaning calls for 'to', write 'to'.

Suppose someone asks whether a list includes his or her name. We could say, for example, 
_'Are you on the list? Let me see. No, I am afraid your name does not appear anywhere in this list. I can add you to the list, though, if you wish.'


_


----------



## panjandrum

This is advice. Advice is good advice or bad advice.  It is not correct/incorrect.
In this instance, the advice is good.
In general, "on the list" will be good natural English.
In general, "include in the list" will be good natural English.
This is not a rule.  It is advice.  It is good advice.


----------



## flamboyant lad

panjandrum said:


> This is advice. Advice is good advice or bad advice.  It is not correct/incorrect.
> In this instance, the advice is good.
> In general, "on the list" will be good natural English.
> In general, "include in the list" will be good natural English.
> This is not a rule.  It is advice.  It is good advice.



Thanks for your good advice.


----------



## flamboyant lad

But Google tells me "correct advice" is used.
[url]https://www.google.co.in/search?q=correct+advice&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-USfficial&client=firefox-a&channel=sb&gfe_rd=cr&ei=V5naVNjULYzW8gf_hICgDQ


[/URL]


----------



## JustKate

Panjandrum isn't giving you a lesson in vocabulary. He's giving you a helpful way to look at advice. There are things that are correct that are nonetheless not good ideas. If someone advised you to do them anyway, that would be bad advice.


----------



## wandle

flamboyant lad said:


> But Google tells me "correct advice" is used.
> https://www.google.co.in/search?q=c...hannel=sb&gfe_rd=cr&ei=V5naVNjULYzW8gf_hICgDQ


That is just a Google search on the words 'correct adivice' - and it does not even use quotation marks (it is not an exact phrase search).
I am afraid it does not prove anything relevant to this question.

Whatever you do, please do not go away with the idea that the phrase 'in the list' is only used with the word 'include'.
It is used with many other verbs. It depends on the meaning and the context. Here are a few examples.

I can't see my wireless network in the list


> Try moving closer to the wireless base station/router and see if the network appears in the list after a while.


The Orlando Consort


> the movie regularly appeared in the list of Top Ten Movies of all time.


Awesome Bar - Find your bookmarks, history and tabs


> Scroll through the autocomplete entries and find the page in the list


Have Questions? - National Speech & Debate Association


> Find your name in the list of students at your school.


parametric tower in my blog!


> this guy "behrang eghbali" has somehow materialised in the 'List of Notable Architects' (of the 21st Century) on Wikipedia.


----------



## JunJiBoy

He's in the names of the list, so he's *in the list*, sometimes you gotta think outside the box!


----------



## wandle

That is not outside the box: it is very natural.


----------



## panjandrum

flamboyant lad said:


> But Google tells me "correct advice" is used.
> https://www.google.co.in/search?q=c...hannel=sb&gfe_rd=cr&ei=V5naVNjULYzW8gf_hICgDQ


Sometimes advice is information, which may be correct/incorrect.
Sometimes advice is recommendation, which may be good/bad.
In this instance, the responder on Merriam-Webster offered a recommendation.


----------



## mokitta

Hi all,

I have a feeling the difference is (also) about whether the list is written down or is figurative. So, if you are talking about something like your shopping list.."I forgot to buy milk because I hadn't written it down *on the list*". But if we are talking about something more abstract..."Her name was included *in the list* of possible candidates".

As I said, this is my view on this (based on BE); feel free to disagree.


----------



## TipOff

My logic here is IN should be preferred to ON.
I think the confusion arises from development and carelessness.
A list is a succession of items and where they present themselves ought not to matter.
For example, his name was on the list incorrectly refers to the list being on something but the succession of names, in other words, the list, has not changed that John's name is 39th in the list of names on that piece of paper.
The list is not the piece of paper so the paper's relevance is minimal.
The question: What is on that piece of paper? The list.
What is in the list? Names of guests.
That gives a clear indication, in my view, of this intrusion by the paper.
Of course, language can also be idiomatically derived from another, which complicates life.
I was reading something recently and the author implies something can be high or low in the list, which I dispute. I think numbering is not necessary to list. The list is still just a list even if the items are unnumbered so there is no general high or low position in the list.


----------



## Forero

TipOff said:


> My logic here is IN should be preferred to ON.
> I think the confusion arises from development and carelessness.
> A list is a succession of items and where they present themselves ought not to matter.
> For example, his name was on the list incorrectly refers to the list being on something but the succession of names, in other words, the list, has not changed that John's name is 39th in the list of names on that piece of paper.
> The list is not the piece of paper so the paper's relevance is minimal.
> The question: What is on that piece of paper? The list.
> What is in the list? Names of guests.
> That gives a clear indication, in my view, of this intrusion by the paper.
> Of course, language can also be idiomatically derived from another, which complicates life.
> I was reading something recently and the author implies something can be high or low in the list, which I dispute. I think numbering is not necessary to list. The list is still just a list even if the items are unnumbered so there is no general high or low position in the list.


Welcome to the forum, TipOff.

Are you claiming that _list_ always refers to a series, never to a roster or a roll? Or are you saying we ought to say "in the roster" and "in the roll"?


----------



## TipOff

I think you should separate the two units, as I would say. There is a list, and there is the paper. You put names on paper whereon they form a list. The list is the succession of items not the piece of paper but the succession of items is on paper.
So same with roster.
So your name is not a list and until I put mine down too.
However, I think roll, in this context, refers to material that would be rolled up after a message has been written on eg scroll. The today's equivalent would be paper.
So, in this case, the list is on the scroll.
Because you can't list (have the names in any order) without writing them down, so this has given the impression that the list and the paper are a unit.
But the word "roll" is a bit complicated in the English language "roll with the punches" - untroubled by difficulties, "he is on the roll" colloquially, he is on fire but those two examples have nothing to do with a succession of items.


----------

