# lay a cup on the table



## Frieder

"[He] stopped drinking, laid his latte cup on the steel table before them."

This is a sentence from a book by Jon Land, and the part that puzzles me
is "laid". The author uses this expression more than once.

Is it standard American/British English to say "I _lay _a cup on the table"?

Does the cup then _lie _on the table (I hope not)?

Could it be some kind of colloquialism/regionalism?

The book is set in Texas near the Mexican border. Do they say that
in Texas?

Jon Land was born in (on?) Rhode Island. Does this expression stem from
 there?

Which verb would _you _normally choose?


----------



## pops91710

It's not uncommon in literary works to use image evoking prose to paint a picture of how the cup was set down. It can be said that way instead of just 'set'.


----------



## sb70012

pops91710 said:


> It's not uncommon




Hello Frieder,

*He laid a cup on the table* = He put a cup on the table

Present tense = *lay* = to put something into a flat position
Past tense = *laid* = to put something into a flat position

Present tense = *lie* = to be in a position in which your body is flat
Past tense = *lay* = to be in a position in which your body is flat


----------



## Frieder

pops91710 said:
			
		

> ... paint a picture of how the cup was set down



Could you elaborate on _how _a cup is being set down if you _lay _it on a table?
Does it mean "to set it down (very) carefully"?

@sb70012: I am aware of the difference between_ lie_ and _lay_.
But if you _lay _something, then as a consequence it _lies _after
being laid. That was the reason for my question whether the
cup _lies _on the table after being _laid _there.


----------



## sb70012

Frieder said:


> Does it mean "to set it down (very) carefully"?


Yes. it's usually done carefully.

She *laid* the baby on the bed. = She *put* the baby on the bed *carefully*.



Frieder said:


> it _lies _after being laid.


No not in your context. It depends what you want to lay. A cup is an object and it's solid as well. Cup does not lie because it's not a human or liquid or animal.

*He laid a cup on the table* = He *put* a cup on the table *carefully*.


----------



## entangledbank

We'd normally say we _put_ a cup on the table. I suspect English doesn't differentiate as thoroughly as German does between _standing, setting, _and _laying_ one thing on another, unless they do have clearly different postures or arrangements. People can clearly do all three, and all three are distinct, but cups don't have the choice, so it matters less with cups.


----------



## Myridon

sb70012 said:


> Present tense = *lay* = to put something into a flat position


Generally, you place a cup in an upright position - it doesn't have a "flat position".  It rather suggests that you are placing the cup on its side (in a way which will cause the tea to pour out rapidly. It's more important that a cup full of liquid be "upright" than "level".  People lay on their side, back, stomach, but never their feet. 
I'm not going to say it's wrong, but I would be unlikely to say it myself.


----------



## sb70012

A pen lay in the desk. = look at this picture 

A cup lay on the table. = look at this picture

He laid a cup on the table. = look at this picture


----------



## Frieder

So you could say it, but most people wouldn't.
And you could write it, and most people would think it's OK.

I think I got it now


----------



## kalamazoo

Pens and cups "LIE" on desks and tables, not "LAY".  I could see saying 'He laid his cup down carefully on the table' to describe a sort of deliberate slow action, but it seems to me that just saying "he laid his cup on the table" is a slightly unusual way of saying 'he put his cup down on the table.'


----------



## sb70012

Frieder said:


> I think I got it now


I think I have got it now. 

Good luck my friend.


----------



## sb70012

kalamazoo said:


> Pens and cups "LIE" on desks and tables, not "LAY".



*A pen lay on the desk.*

*Source*: Cambridge Dictionary http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/lie_1?q=lie


----------



## Andygc

This (the original sentence in the OP) is a wholly unremarkable use of "to lay" which is part of my everyday vocabulary and which has been around with this meaning for a few hundred years. The OED definition, under a section heading of "To deposit" is 





> To place in a position of rest on the ground or any other supporting surface; to deposit in some situation specified by means of an adverb or phrase.


The first example quoted dates from c950. It is has little to do with "putting something *somebody* in a flat position", which is a much later meaning - from as late as about 1200


----------



## sb70012

The book *lay* open in front of her.

*Source*: Oxford American Dictionary
http://oaadonline.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/dictionary/lie#lie-1__2


----------



## kalamazoo

"lay" is the past tense of "lie".  A source of endless confusion.


----------



## sb70012

kalamazoo said:


> "lay" is the past tense of "lie".  A source of endless confusion.


Yes. I have mentioned it in post #3.


----------



## Cenzontle

In case it helps:
I found the context in Google Books.
In the dialog of the novel, the person with the cup has just heard another character say something that might be disturbing news (I'm guessing; I don't know the story).
When I first read your post, Frieder, I had a slight intuition that the choice of "laid"—rather than "put", "set", or "placed"—
would focus not on the cup or the table, but on the need to empty his hand 
(for example, if the disturbing news might give him the shakes and he might spill the coffee)
or simply the need to concentrate on the news and not be distracted by drinking coffee.
We also speak of "laying [something] *down*" without mentioning the table or other surface, and I think it can apply to something with a vertical orientation, like a cup or a vase.
Am I over-analyzing?


----------



## Frieder

Andygc said:
			
		

> This (the original sentence in the OP) is a wholly unremarkable use of  "to lay" which is part of my everyday vocabulary and which has been  around with this meaning for a few hundred years.



So I presume, that it is more a British phrase than an American one?

@Cenzontle: In the situation he _lays his cup on the table_, he is not 
about to receive some disturbing news. He just looks at the woman 
facing him without saying anything.

There is another example just a few pages further on:

"[He] puckered his lips and laid his coffee cup atop the table, pushing it 
aside as he rose." Nothing drastic or menacing involved.


----------



## pops91710

Frieder said:


> So I presume, that it is more a British phrase than an American one?


Nope.


----------



## Frieder

So "to lay a cup on the table" can mean "to set a cup on the table carefully and deliberately (in order to make a point)".
Could that be an approximation?


----------



## kalamazoo

Don't overanalyze this!  It means that he set his cup down on the table.  Anything else is an extrapolation or a literary device of some kind.  If the situation is tense somehow, then it might mean he set it down carefully.  If he is tired, it might mean that he set it down carefully. Or maybe he just set it down because he had finished drinking from it.


----------



## Myridon

sb70012 said:


> *A pen lay on the desk.*
> 
> *Source*: Cambridge Dictionary http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/lie_1?q=lie


When a pen is on the desk, it looks like this: ___  
It looks like a person laying flat so "lay" comes very naturally.
When a cup is on the desk, it looks like this: O 
It looks like a person sitting.  The cup sat on the table. is more natural than "The cup lay on the table."
When talking about a cup, I would choose to say "place", "put", "set", "sit" and possibly others before "lay".
When talking about a pen, I would choose to say "place", "put", "set", "lay" and possibly others before "sit".


----------



## Frieder

kalamazoo said:
			
		

> Don't overanalyze this!



You're right, of course. It's just that I never came across
this phrase before - and I read lots of English/American
books.

@Myridon: Thanks for your detailed explanation. That was very helpful.


----------



## Enquiring Mind

Like Cenzontle, I found the text on the net and searched it for the word "laid".  This occurs in many contexts in the book where many native English speakers would simply have said "put", "set", "placed" or something similar, so I think it is an idiosyncrasy of this particular author's use of English to prefer the word "lay".  

Examples: _Caitlin laid her hands on the wrought-iron table... he lifted something from his pocket and laid it down in the sidewalk between them _[the "something" is an ID holder]_ ...he laid the quarter down on the stand ...  found the glasses and laid two of them down on the counter...  _  (and many more examples).


----------



## wandle

I should say that the original example and most of the cases quoted in post 24 are distinctly inappropriate or incorrect uses of the verb 'to lay'.


----------



## Frieder

Enquiring Mind said:
			
		

> [...] so I think it is a personal idiosyncrasy of this particular author [...]



That seems to be the best explanation so far, thank you!


----------



## Andygc

wandle said:


> I should say that the original example and most of the cases quoted in post 24 are distinctly inappropriate or incorrect uses of the verb 'to lay'.


I'm sorry to disagree so firmly, but that is nonsense. I have already given you the relevant definition from the OED  but it seems I have to repeat it





> To place in a position of rest on the ground or any other supporting surface; to deposit in some situation specified by means of an adverb or phrase.


That definition is supported by many examples covering a period of 1,000 years. This is exactly the meaning of all the examples in Enquiring Mind's post, and in the OP. I really cannot understand the objections to a perfectly ordinary use of "to lay".


----------



## PaulQ

That's pretty accurate.


----------



## kalamazoo

I don't see any problem with the examples in post #24


----------



## Loob

I also don't have any problem with the examples in post 24.  But I do find it slightly odd to talk of "laying" a cup on a table.  "Lay", to me, implies "flat" or "horizontal".  So while I'd happily lay a knife/fork/spoon/plate on a table, I probably *wouldn't* lay a cup/glass/vase/decanter on a table.

All that said, I think Enquiring Mind's suggestion was right: the frequent use of "lay" is probably an idiosyncrasy of the author.


----------



## wandle

Andygc said:


> I'm sorry to disagree so firmly, but that is nonsense. I have already given you the relevant definition from the OED  but it seems I have to repeat it.
> 
> 
> 
> To place in a position of rest on the ground or any other supporting surface; to deposit in some situation specified by means of an adverb or phrase.
> 
> 
> 
> That definition is supported by many examples covering a period of 1,000 years. This is exactly the meaning of all the examples in Enquiring Mind's post, and in the OP. I really cannot understand the objections to a perfectly ordinary use of "to lay".
Click to expand...

Personally, I cannot imagine any one with a reading age above, say, five and three quarters not understanding the basic meaning presented in that definition. The question is not whether the word 'lay' has that meaning or how old it is but whether the topic sentence and the other similar cases quoted are appropriate or correct uses of the word 'lay'.


Loob said:


> I do find it slightly odd to talk of "laying" a cup on a table. "Lay", to me, implies "flat" or "horizontal". So while I'd happily lay a knife/fork/spoon/plate on a table, I probably wouldn't lay a cup/glass/vase/decanter on a table.


That is the point. When we place on a table an object, such as a cup, which depends on being vertical to perform its function, we say that we 'set' it or 'place' it there, etc. To speak of 'laying' such an object implies making it horizontal. Thus when the context implies that the object retains its functional application, it follows that it is inappropriate or incorrect to speak of 'laying' it.


> All that said, I think Enquiring Mind's suggestion was right: the frequent use of "lay" is probably an idiosyncrasy of the author.


The usage illustrated may well be an idiosyncrasy: that does not prevent it being an error.


----------



## bennymix

Andy nailed it some posts back,  the sentence in the OP is unremarkable and entirely grammatical.



> "[He] stopped drinking, laid his latte cup on the steel table before them."



Yes, it might mean 'carefully' and yes it almost certainly means 'in vertical position.''

As to a description of the past,  "The cup lay on the table" may be ambiguous, or tend to indicate NOT vertical  (i.e. as if tipped over)--in my opinion.
Again, ordinary grammar, both sides of the Atlantic, to my knowledge.

There is no AE vs BE issue here, to my knowledge.

===
NOTE:  I agree with Wandle that  "He set his cup on the table" would be more natural and clearer.


----------



## Frieder

Thanks for your troubles 

Looks like I stirred up a hornet's nest ...


----------



## bennymix

I know this has been beaten to death, but I want to question, directly what you [Frieder] say, below, as an assumption or method.  In my last post (#32), I agreed that a past tense description, with the verb 'lie' would likely suggest a tipping over.  "The cup lay on the table."

Right now, however, the verbs are pretty clearly defined and separate  (except in popular songs and informal talk).   Hence I would not accept using the proper circumstance of one verb to make inferences regarding the other.  "He laid down his arms" does not imply that afterwards, and speaking of the past event, one might say,   "His arms lay {somewhere}."

Similarly "Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one's life for one's friends." cannot be read as implying that, past tense, after the event, one may say, "His life was lying down...."

====
Frieder said in part, post #4, this thread:



> @sb70012: I am aware of the difference between_ lie_ and _lay_.
> But if you _lay _something, then as a consequence it _lies _after
> being laid. That was the reason for my question whether the
> cup _lies _on the table after being _laid _there.


----------



## Frieder

Appreciated, bennymix. Of course, I know, that the cup doesn't _lie_ after being_ laid_.
It was just some sort of provocative question, in order to make my point more clear,
that _to lay a cup on the table_ is quite unusual, to say the least.

I read Conan Doyle, Dickens, Hardy, Twain, Irving, Vonnegut and many more, but 
nobody ever _lay a cup on a table_.

So I put this question to the forum, and the only consensus is that there is dissent.
So let's just leave it at that.


----------



## bennymix

Hi Frieder,
I thought you and others might be interested in these examples.

===
A.
http://books.google.ca/books?id=uTz...#v=onepage&q="lay a cup on the table"&f=false

*Child Play: Its Importance for Human Development*

by Peter Slade - 1995 - ‎Psychology



> For example, I lay a cup on the table. But I lie down (intransitive) perfectly well without a cup.




Example A. apparently involves 'laying' a cup in vertical position.
=====
http://www.nano-reef.com/topic/111395-no-short-cycle-really/

[sea water cultures, adjusting, with one's urine]

JamesnMandy, 13 Feb 2007



> no problem, you'll only get my honest opinion, take it or leave it, glad to contribute
> 
> yeah, i hear ya about the aiming issue....just lay a cup on the ground outside and pee in that general direction, you don't need alot, based on the syringes i have for testing water, i would say i only added 5-10 ml of urine



Example B. clearly involves an upright position.

===
C.
http://onlinedigitalpublishing.com/article/Get+Up!/1429391/0/article.html

Community Health Ontario County – Summer 2013 : Get Up!



> Why drop dough at a mini-golf course? Create your own putt-putt course in the backyard. Lay a cup on the ground, set up some obstacles and grab your putter.



Example C supports the view that "lay" indicates "on its side."

============
D.
http://www.mysentimentexactlee.com/tommee-tippee-introduces-the-day-baby-was-born/==

Tommee Tippee introduces: 
*The Day Baby Was Born*

by Lee Allport - 


> Dec 29, 2011 - The cup is virtually leak proof which is a huge benefit for me because I have light colored carpet and you know kids, they always lay a cup down on their sides...


==========

http://pbskids.org/designsquad/parentseducators/resources/kicking_machine.html

DESIGN SQUAD . Kicking Machine | PBS KIDS GO!



> Lay a cup on its side 12 inches away and see if you can get the ball in. When we made our machine, we had to debug some problems. For example, the ball ...



===

Examples D and E, I suggest, support an argument that to 'lay a cup down' is, by default, vertical.   Since the qualifier "on its side" is used,
this suggests that vertical is the default.


----------



## wandle

For my money, examples A and B are inappropriate or erroneous, and C, D and E are correct uses of the verb.


bennymix said:


> Examples D and E, I suggest, support an argument that to 'lay a cup down' is, by default, vertical. Since the qualifier "on its side" is used, this suggests that vertical is the default.


I would not draw that conclusion. 
First of all, 'lay a cup down' is a different expression from that in the topic question:


Frieder said:


> Is it standard American/British English to say "I lay a cup on the table"?


Secondly, if 'lay ... on the table' had the default meaning of vertical placement (where that makes a difference), we would hardly be having this discussion at all.
Thirdly, I feel sure that in D and E the careful description of how to lay the cup on its side is given simply because it is the action itself (putting something normally vertical on to its side) which is unusual and needs to be made explicit.
It is far from unusual to use 'lay' for putting something normally vertical on its side.


----------



## Elwintee

Frieder said:


> So "to lay a cup on the table" can mean "to set a cup on the table carefully and deliberately (in order to make a point)".
> Could that be an approximation?



I don't really think that 'laying' something on a table (be it a cup or anything else) necessarily means that the action is careful or deliberate.  In BE, at least, we say we 'lay the table' before guests arrive for a meal.  This merely means that we put the side plates, cutlery, glassware etc in their proper places.  We may put them down gently or roughly.


----------



## sound shift

Frieder said:


> "[He] stopped drinking, laid his latte cup on the steel table before them."
> 
> Which verb would _you _normally choose?


I would normally choose "put".


----------



## wandle

If the intention is to convey a careful or deliberate action, I would choose 'set'.


----------



## PaulQ

Having confirmed my view via OED, there are several meanings of to lay: in some there is a nuance of the object being placed in its most stable position (usually flat), in others not. All other things being equal, the original example is fine and entirely acceptable: to me it indicates that the action was performed with deliberate precision. 

I can't see what the fuss is about.


----------



## Frieder

I wouldn't call it a fuss, just an animated discussion 



			
				Elwintee said:
			
		

> [...]we say we 'lay the table'[...]



I thought that was an idiomatic expression. But "lay the cup on
the table" isn't, or am I wrong there?

Thanks @all  for your input, it really was most instructive.


----------



## PaulQ

"lay the cup on the table" is simply six words put together, each having their normal meaning. As an idiom, you can say, "I'll just lay out a few ideas..." where "lay out" = describe to you.


----------



## Andygc

PaulQ said:


> Having confirmed my view via OED, there are several meanings of to lay: in some there is a nuance of the object being placed in its most stable position (usually flat), in others not. All other things being equal, the original example is fine and entirely acceptable: to me it indicates that the action was performed with deliberate precision.
> 
> I can't see what the fuss is about.





PaulQ said:


> "lay the cup on the table" is simply six words put together, each having their normal meaning. As an idiom, you can say, "I'll just lay out a few ideas..." where "lay out" = describe to you.


Absolutely. To claim that "to lay" *has to* infer horizontality in these sort of usages is, I regret to feel obliged to say, perverse. I agree that that meaning is a commoner meaning than "to deposit", but you can have people laying their gifts before the crib or at the feet of the king. If you put the pot of incense on its side, it'll all run out over the floor. Whether things are laid horizontally, or merely deposited whichever way up may be, depends on the context. Of course "he laid the child on the bed" implies horizontality. But you can lay the glasses on the table, along with the plates and cutlery, and what use is a horizontal glass? 

It seems unlikely that this thread will end in agreement, but I remain perfectly happy that "He laid his latte cup on the steel table before them" is a perfectly normal use of the verb "to lay". Like Paul, the use of "laid" suggests to me that the action was considered - he didn't merely put the cup on the table.


----------



## bennymix

Hi Wandle,
You make some excellent points, below.   I think I'm getting converted [i.e., in good usage, don't use 'lay' for placing a cup upright].   I encountered some difficulties in my search for 'lay' involving placing in upright position.   I think the problem is that 'lay down' is commonly applied to a thing that's vertical and set to begin with:  Tipping it over, or making it lie flat.   You lay down your king to signal a loss in chess.



wandle said:


> For my money, examples A and B are inappropriate or erroneous, and C, D and E are correct uses of the verb.
> 
> I would not draw that conclusion.
> First of all, 'lay a cup down' is a different expression from that in the topic question:
> 
> Secondly, if 'lay ... on the table' had the default meaning of vertical placement (where that makes a difference), we would hardly be having this discussion at all.
> Thirdly, I feel sure that in D and E the careful description of how to lay the cup on its side is given simply because it is the action itself (putting something normally vertical on to its side) which is unusual and needs to be made explicit.
> It is far from unusual to use 'lay' for putting something normally vertical on its side.


----------



## wandle

Andygc said:


> To claim that "to lay" *has to* infer horizontality in these sort of usages is, I regret to feel obliged to say, perverse.


That claim has not in fact been made, though undoubtedly the word has, as the OED says, the 


> General sense: To cause to lie.


The thread question is about the use of the word in the context given.


Frieder said:


> "[He] stopped drinking, laid his latte cup on the steel table before them."
> This is a sentence from a book by Jon Land, and the part that puzzles me
> is "laid". The author uses this expression more than once.
> Is it standard American/British English to say "I _lay _a cup on the table"?
> 
> Does the cup then _lie _on the table (I hope not)?


A key part of that context is (a) the fact that a cup is something which may be placed either in a vertical or a horizontal position, (b) the fact that to perform its function, it needs to be in the vertical position and (c) the fact that the text implies that it continues to perform its function.

Thus the context requires the cup to be in the vertical position. Consequently, the issue is whether the verb 'to lay' is suitable to express necessarily vertical placement of an object which could only realistically be either vertical or horizontal.

My judgement is that it is not. Having reviewed the examples given in the OED under the meaning 'deposit', I have not found one where 'lay' is used to express necessarily vertical placement of something which could only be either vertical or horizontal. That requirement of vertical placement which is created by the thread context seems to me make the use of 'lay' inappropriate or incorrect.


Andygc said:


> Like Paul, the use of "laid" suggests to me that the action was considered - he didn't merely put the cup on the table.


I too interpret it in that way: but I do not consider it good English.


----------



## PaulQ

wandle said:


> A key part of that context is (a) the fact that a cup is something which may be placed either in a vertical or a horizontal position, ... I have not found one where 'lay' is used to express necessarily vertical placement of something which could only be either vertical or horizontal. That requirement of vertical placement which is created by the thread context seems to me make the use of 'lay' inappropriate or incorrect.
> 
> I too interpret it in that way: but I do not consider it good English.


"[He] stopped drinking, laid his latte cup on the steel table before them."

I think the battle’s lost, wandle. How likely is it that he would place a cup on its side on a table?

You lay something in its usual orientation. If you move from the default, you include an explanation: "[He] stopped drinking, laid his latte cup upside down on the steel table before them."


----------



## Andygc

Andygc said:


> It seems unlikely that this thread will end in agreement,


----------



## wandle

PaulQ said:


> I think the battle’s lost, wandle.


 I am not aware of any battle.


> How likely is it that he would place a cup on its side on a table?


The unlikelihood of that is what makes 'lay' an unsuitable term.


----------



## PaulQ

PaulQ said:


> You lay something in its usual orientation. If you move from the default, you include an explanation: "[He] stopped drinking, laid his latte cup upside down on the steel table before them."


----------



## bennymix

Paul, we are not simply talking about what's permissible.    The fact is there are damn few cases of "laying a cup" where vertical position is clearly implied.  I found and cited *one* in an earlier post (post #36).   On the other side it's easy to find--just look at golfing posts, re putting at home-- instances of 'lay a cup down' , sometimes with the addition, 'on its side.'    The habit of babies, 'laying down cups' on their sides was mentioned in another example (post #36).

Obviously people make inferences and assumptions and *do* understand that 'lay' occasionally is meant to suggest a vertical position. People try to make sense of what they hear.    But that's not decisive in my opinion.   Here's a remote analogy:  When a student says to another, "I killed that exam," another will understand and assume that no killing was involved, despite the word.


----------



## kalamazoo

I can't believe how much discussion this has generated, because it seems pretty simple.  We all know that the guy put his cup on the table. No one believes that he laid the cup down on its side.  We think he plopped it down on the table.  This may be an infelicitous use of the word "laid" but it's hardly all that important.  We would say 'he laid the newspaper on the table' or 'he laid his book on the table' or 'he laid his napkin on the table' and it just doesn't seem worth it to go into a frenzy about whether these things are now lying flat on the table or standing up on end. Personally I think (a) laid does kind of suggest a horizontal position but I am not sure this is a hard and fast rule and (b) if I saw this sentence in a book it would not even catch my attention anyway as it's pretty trivial and the meaning is obvious.


----------



## Frieder

But you're a _native reader_ as it were. I am not, and that is why
I observe things that are unusual _to me_. So I come across this
term that I've never ever read nor heard and I turn to the 
WR-forum in search of information.

And the upshot seems to be, that most feel comfortable with the use
of "lay" in conjunction with normally vertical receptacles, but some
 don't. 



			
				Andygc said:
			
		

> It seems unlikely that this thread will end in agreement



So let me thank you again for taking part in this discussion, it was
very helpful!


----------



## kalamazoo

I agree that the original question was perfectly reasonable!


----------



## PaulQ

PaulQ said:


> You lay something in its usual orientation. If you  move from the *default*, you include an explanation: "[He] stopped  drinking, laid his latte cup upside down on the steel table before them."


I seem to have reiterated your own reply





bennymix said:


> Hi Frieder,
> Examples D and E, I suggest, support an argument that to 'lay a cup down' is, by default, vertical.   Since the qualifier "on its side" is used,
> this suggests that vertical is the *default*.


----------



## bennymix

Paul, there certainly are rare instances that support the 'default vertical' approach to 'lay down a cup.'   I really have searched to get a handful.

Here's one:

http://books.google.ca/books?id=Xoaf8L48A70C&pg=PA212

The Atlantic Guardian - Page 212 - Google Books Result

by Richard Lynch - 2006 - ‎Fiction


> She lay a glass down in front of her guest and began to fill it with water from her pitcher.



{slight grammar problem, here!}

===
On the other hand, besides the examples I gave, for horizontal *sometimes NOT specified* here's another.
So the 'default vertical' approach I earlier endorsed may not always hold.

http://www.arpinva.com/movingtips.shtml

Moving Tips - Hampton Roads Moving & Storage


> Lay a glass on the corner of a sheet of packing paper and roll it one or two full rotations (depending on size). Pull the sides of the packing paper up and over the ...


----------



## PaulQ

The reason that a search retrieves so few is the difficulty in searching and the infrequency of laying something that is clearly three dimensional and more or less equal in all dimensions down on something; however, this does not preclude it from being laid.

Things that are laid on something usually, by default, are laid in their most stable or usual position: this accounts for flat things being seen as being laid horizontally. And flat things are laid most.

 Your point however, remains good and convincing, only verbs that deviate from the default need qualification:

Lay the book [on its spine] on the table. -> we assume, "flat".
He could jump four feet [on one leg.] -> we assume, "two".
The bird flew [on flight 723] to Africa - -> we assume, "by itself".

Context give us the default.
"Lay  a glass on the corner of a sheet of packing paper and roll it..." you  cannot roll it if it is upright. "Put/place" would server jut as well. 

The OP's example is fine.


----------



## e2efour

There seems to be a division between those who think that _lay the cup_ implies on its side and those who think that it means to put it down.
My feeling is that _lay the cup down_ is a normal action (i.e. upright), but _lay the cup_ means horizontal (and probably an idiosyncratic use of _lay_).


----------

