English Language & Usage Asked by Rishabh Raj on December 29, 2020
Question is simple and direct and is very specific to usage in a particular scenario.
The person, xyz, who works ‘at’/’on’ the post of a typist does a good job.
I am having a healthy debate with multiple people in this regard and the opinion is divided.
Please refrain from saying "both usages are correct" unless you can strictly back the same with source.
Step by step constructive interpretation would be appreciated.
Neither. You work at a place, at or on a task, but in a post. However, it would be much more idiomatic to say who works as a typist or who holds the post of typist.
Answered by Kate Bunting on December 29, 2020
A relevant definition of post is "place when on duty," 1590s, from Middle French poste "place where one is stationed," also, "station for post horses" (16c.), from Italian posto "post, station," from Vulgar Latin *postum, from Latin positum, neuter past participle of ponere "to place, to put" (see position (n.)). Earliest sense in English was military; meaning "job, position" is attested 1690s.
There is therefore strong connotation of place to post, which strongly justifies “working at a post” but not on it.
The use of on might be more weakly justified by the implication that someone working at a typing post would necessarily be working on tasks to do with typing.
Answered by Anton on December 29, 2020
Get help from others!
Recent Answers
Recent Questions
© 2024 TransWikia.com. All rights reserved. Sites we Love: PCI Database, UKBizDB, Menu Kuliner, Sharing RPP