What is the difference between the following two:
A young bird was flying in cold weather; after awhile, her wings froze up and she fell to the ground.
A young bird was flying in cold weather; after awhile, her wings froze up and she fell on the ground.
I understand that the first conveys the movement toward the ground, while the second merely says that she fell on the ground. But I am not sure which one to pick. Is there something more to the usage of these two prepositions?
Best Answer
This may sound obvious, but on emphasizes what was landed on. What if the bird didn't land on the ground? There's a good chance that you'd use on if the bird landed atop something, and in if the bird landed inside something.
So, on the ground is perfectly fine, but you can also use to the ground, when you'd rather emphasize the direction of the fall, as opposed to the landing place. Both can be found in literature:
although, after running some Ngrams, fell to the ground seems much more common than fell on the ground,3 but there are some apparent exceptions.
1from The Bat and the Weasel, as told in 365 Bedtime Stories by Christine Allison, 1998.
2from Sky Stories: Ancient and Modern by Roger Ptak, 1998.
3It should be noted that not too many Ngram results link to references of birds falling to (or on) the ground, but far more refer to people instead – sometimes in drunken stupors, sometimes from sheer exhaustion, sometimes in shows of repentence or thanksgiving, or even as a result of battle wounds.