The Free Dictionary  
mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest Forum Search | Active Topics | Members

roll Options
Atatürk
Posted: Tuesday, August 13, 2019 11:36:45 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/25/2018
Posts: 1,381
Neurons: 5,395
Location: İstanbul, Istanbul, Turkey
The car rolled to a stop at the side of the road.
The car went to a stop at the side of the road.

What's the difference in meaning?

Ite, maledicti, in ignem aeternum!
FounDit
Posted: Tuesday, August 13, 2019 12:08:20 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/19/2011
Posts: 11,429
Neurons: 57,718
Atatürk wrote:
The car rolled to a stop at the side of the road. Good. This describes the movement of the vehicle and focuses on the motion of the car.

The car went to a stop at the side of the road. "Went" doesn't really fit here because it describes an action that is a past event. It also sounds odd, like going "up to the down". Normally, we say the car came to a stop at the side of the road. This works because the mind views the action as coming to an end, whereas "went" implies going away, which is hard to do if you've stopped.

What's the difference in meaning?


We should look to the past to learn from it, not destroy our future because of it — FounDit
Wilmar (USA)
Posted: Tuesday, August 13, 2019 12:21:29 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/4/2015
Posts: 2,838
Neurons: 781,610
Location: Vinton, Iowa, United States
Came to a stop and rolled to stop both work, given the little information provided other than the single sentence.

However, they don't mean the same thing. Came to a stop merely means the car stopped, without an importance given to how or why.
Rolled to a stop is an expression commonly used to describe the situation where the car has lost power for any reason, or the driver has "stopped driving" for some reason, and the car on its own, slows down and ultimately comes to a halt.

Atatürk
Posted: Tuesday, August 13, 2019 12:24:39 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/25/2018
Posts: 1,381
Neurons: 5,395
Location: İstanbul, Istanbul, Turkey
Very good explanation.

Is the following okay?

A pickup truck rolled/went to the center of a deserted bridge.

Ite, maledicti, in ignem aeternum!
FounDit
Posted: Tuesday, August 13, 2019 7:48:43 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/19/2011
Posts: 11,429
Neurons: 57,718
Atatürk wrote:
Very good explanation.

Is the following okay?

A pickup truck rolled/went to the center of a deserted bridge.


It's okay, as far as it goes. Using "rolled" beings to mind, the truck moving slowly, but simply saying the truck "went" to the center of the bridge could mean the diver simply stopped in the center.

We should look to the past to learn from it, not destroy our future because of it — FounDit
Drag0nspeaker
Posted: Wednesday, August 14, 2019 5:03:38 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/12/2011
Posts: 32,945
Neurons: 204,246
Location: Livingston, Scotland, United Kingdom
I agree with FounDit and Wilmar.
"Went" - and the verb "to go" in general - are a bit too 'vague' or 'general' in most contexts.

If you are simply describing the route taken (not the speed, manner or anything - just where) - then "go/went" is fine.
We went to London.
The car went down the road, turned left then over to the side of the road and stopped.


"Went to a stop" doesn't work. "The car came to a stop" means that someone drove it, slowed down and put the brake on.

"Rolled to a stop" means the driver turned the engine off - so the car was just "rolling" - and it slowly, naturally stopped (not because of the brakes being used, it just happened to stop).
If a car rolls down a hill, no-one is driving it. Someone forgot to put the brake on when they got out.

******************
The pickup-truck rolled to the centre of the bridge - again, it's not being driven, the engine is not running. It just rolled to a stop in that position.

The pickup-truck went to the centre of the bridge
- The trouble with this as a sentence is it doesn't contain much information. It ONLY says where.
Did someone drive it? Did it simply teleport? was it fast or slow?

I would only use "go/went" (for a vehicle) when I did not know who was driving it and I was reporting exactly what I saw. There are very few occasions when this would be the case.
Probably more likely in my occupation than yours - telling the police "I saw a blue Vauxhall Viva turn into the road outside the building. It went past the front gates three times, then went along to the end of the road and turned left into the goods-entrance. Ten minutes later, it went past the front gates again."

If I had ANY sort of idea who the driver was, the sentence would have HIM/HER as the subject, not the car.
"I could see the driver was male, mid thirties, dark-haired and wore glasses. He drove past the front gate three times, then along to the end of the road and turned left into the goods-entrance. Ten minutes later, he drove out and along the road past the main gates again."

Wyrd bið ful aræd - bull!
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS
Forum Terms and Guidelines | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2008-2019 Farlex, Inc. All rights reserved.