2

Which is more appropriate or grammatical to use:

  1. He is coming on a bicycle.

  2. He is coming by bicycle.

Community
  • 1
aung
  • 391
  • 3
  • 12
  • 19
  • BTW, we've had several questions similar to this one, e.g. http://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/155/in-and-on-how-can-i-decide-which-one-to-use-for-vehicles and http://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/64426/prepositions-question/64434#64434 . I remembered because I answered the latter... – Victor Bazarov Oct 13 '15 at 18:45

3 Answers3

4

Depends on the context.

"By bicycle" is used to show how you got somewhere.

How did you get here so quickly?

Well, I got here by bicycle.

The road can be dangerous if you travel by bicycle; some drivers don't pay enough attention.

"On bicycle" isn't really a valid phrase as it is. "On a/the bicycle" would work. It is used to show that someone or something is physically on top of the bicycle.

It's hard to sit on a bicycle that's too large for you.

EDIT:

He is coming on a bicycle.

Please never say this. You'll be laughed at. Not for the grammar -- it is wrong, mind you -- but it's an innuendo.

Community
  • 1
Crazy Eyes
  • 3,604
  • 12
  • 13
  • 6
    Almost nobody would perceive any "innuendo" there (and most of the handful that did would be dumb/inarticulate teenagers), so I think it would be better not to have brought it up at all. Things like that don't normally affect most people's choice of phrasing. – FumbleFingers Oct 13 '15 at 16:49
  • 1
    Despite being twenty-three and well into a secure career, I guess I am a dumb and inarticulate teenager. I am not sure how noticing an innuendo renders one inarticulate. If I perceived it, others will, too. The innuendo is exacerbated by the fact that the non-vulgar interpretation results in a grammatically incorrect sentence, thus leaving the listener to posit they must have meant the vulgar version. Without hearing the OP's accent (and thus allowing myself to realize that they are not a native English speaker), I would have no way of knowing. At best, it is an unneeded distraction. – Crazy Eyes Oct 13 '15 at 18:28
  • 1
    I think whether the innuendo springs to mind or not depends largely on context. If I said to a friend, "Joe's car is still in the garage, I think. Does he need a ride here?" My friend could answer, "No, he's coming on his bike," and I wouldn't laugh at the answer or the person who gave it. There's no need for my friend to reword the sentence, and use arriving instead; the innuendo is only glaring when the sentence is presented with no surrounding context, as you wrote it here. – J.R. Oct 13 '15 at 21:10
  • @J.R. I suppose the distinction is largely stylistic then, since I would never say such a sentence. I'd say "No, he's coming by bike/bicycle." – Crazy Eyes Oct 13 '15 at 21:20
  • 2
    And I'd probably say, "No, he's riding his bike." I'm only pointing out that your admonition to "Please never say this" is perhaps a bit strong. "Be careful about saying this" might be better advice. – J.R. Oct 13 '15 at 21:24
1

"by" refers to the thing's instrumentality, the means by which.

Some people arrived by car, some by bicycle.

"on a bicycle" refers to the thing as a surface, something on which to sit:

The circus clown was riding on a child's bicycle with another much larger clown sitting on his shoulders.

"on bicycle" refers to the thing as a mode of transport:

How are the refugees getting to the Arctic Circle?
-- They are on bicycle.

TimR
  • 123,877
  • 7
  • 100
  • 202
  • I've never heard a native speaker use *on bicycle* in that way. Just as nobody goes anywhere or travels *on train / bus / plane / etc.* without an article. – FumbleFingers Oct 13 '15 at 16:53
  • How about "being on bicycle when he called me" ? – MiniMe Oct 13 '15 at 17:57
  • 1
    @FumbleFingers: https://books.google.com/books?id=6jfi0WTJ9tcC&pg=PA92&dq=%22on+bicycle%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CFYQ6AEwCjgUahUKEwiQr5L6kcDIAhVMGT4KHZ9QBnM#v=onepage&q=%22on%20bicycle%22&f=false – TimR Oct 13 '15 at 19:05
  • That's one of half-a-dozen such nonstandard usages in Google Books, compared to over 800 "normal" usages with the article went out on a* bicycle*. It wouldn't be a good idea for learners to suppose the article is in any way "optional" - I suspect virtually all native speakers would register it as "odd / incorrect". – FumbleFingers Oct 14 '15 at 13:27
  • It is not non-standard, merely infrequent. It refers here to the bicycle as a mode of transport/locomotion. Compare: on horseback, on ski(s), on ATV, on stilts, on skates, on showshoe(s), on dogsled, on foot. – TimR Oct 14 '15 at 13:59
  • ... on camel(back) – TimR Oct 14 '15 at 14:05
0

In standard grammar, we do not use an article or possessive pronoun after"by" before the name of any means of transport.For example, we would say " He came by bicycle" and not " He came by a bicycle or he came by a car." In such cases , "by" must be replaced by prepositions such as "on/in/"or possessive pronouns such as "my/his/her" etc.For example, we can say : He came on a bicycle/ He came in a taxi/ He came in his friend's car etc.

T J Joseoh
  • 1
  • 1