19

Consider the following:

I'll probably stay at home.

I'll probably stay home.

Is the second sentence still grammatically correct? Is there any difference at all?

language hacker
  • 5,758
  • 1
    I think this is a North Amreican/British thing. I (a Brit) would say "stay at home"; "stay home" sounds American to me. – TonyK Feb 07 '20 at 14:38
  • Stay home has a secondary pragmatic sense of not attend. Bill's going to graduation, but I'm staying home – John Lawler Oct 16 '23 at 22:50

7 Answers7

24

Both are correct. There are instances where they mean the same thing and some instances where they don't.

If you were telling someone that you didn't intend to go out tonight, you could use either.

"Do you want to go with us to a restaurant tonight?"
"No, I think I'll stay home."
"No, I think I'll stay at home."

However, if someone were asking where you were staying, where the answer might be "a hotel" or "a friend's house", you would definitely say "at home".

"Are you going to get a hotel room for the conference?"
"No, I'm going to stay at home."
"No, I'm going to stay home."

(Note that if you did say the struck-through version, that would tend to imply that you weren't going to go to the conference at all.)

However, that "home" is uncommon in that it also functions as an adverb. You can never leave the preposition out with other similar nouns. For example, this is clearly wrong:

"I'll probably stay work."

In that case, you have to create an adverbial prepositional phrase:

"I'll probably stay at work."

wfaulk
  • 3,287
1

The key question here is whether it is permissible to omit the preposition; I wasn't able to find many references to this other than a business writing instructor who encourages the omission of obvious or superfluous prepositions.

I would suggest that is it permissible to leave it out if the meaning is unchanged and there is no ambiguity introduced.

Bryan Agee
  • 1,592
  • 2
    This is a good point. In general, you cannot omit that preposition. However, "home" functions as an adverb on its own, unlike (most?) other such nouns. For example, "I'll probably stay work" is clearly wrong. – wfaulk Aug 13 '11 at 00:14
  • 1
    I'd guess that the said business writing instructor is not a Brit (if they recommend 'stay home' rather than 'stay at home'). – Edwin Ashworth Oct 02 '16 at 15:58
1

I'm an American, but I'll definitely go along with the British and their use of "stay at home". It just sounds grammatically wanting and uneducated to throw away the preposition. One sounds like a hick, so to speak, using "home" as an adverb when it should always be a noun, never an adverb or an adverbial noun. (A former Latin/English teacher, if you please.)

P. S. The word "home" cannot be compared with the word "work" in that their usage is so dissimilar. Never let a good preposition go to waste! (LOL)

Carolyn C. Jones
  • 11
  • 2
0

Language has been devloped to be used conveniently especially in American English. If we could make it short,the shorter, the better.

'Home' also has the original meaning of being an adverb, it's easier not to use prepostions.I recommend not to use prepositions such as 'at' or 'to' for home like Elvis Presley song lyrics "I'll be home."

KillingTime
  • 6,206
Roger Bae
  • 1
0

It really is a British versus American usage. As a Brit I would never say “Stay home”. I would say “Stay at home”. The US way of speaking would be considered uneducated by many in the UK. Of course, it isn’t, but it’s just what many would think. There are many examples of US and British people speaking differently. For example:

“I live outside London” (UK)

I live outside of New York (US).

Chris Hall
  • 1
-1

It varies. Some sentences you can skip "at", and other sentences you can't. For example:

(be at home/at work) I'll be at work until 7:00, but I'll be at home all evening.

(be/stay home - you don't use at) You can vist me anytime. I'll be home all evening.

Phonics The Hedgehog
  • 990
  • 1
    I disagree. I think you could use "at" or not in either of those examples. (Note that you have to use "at" with "work".) – wfaulk Aug 12 '11 at 23:50
  • @Wfaulk Notice the word "can". The question here asked whether you can omit "at" and still be grammaticaly correct. I didn't say that you can't, but I said that there is a choice. – Phonics The Hedgehog Aug 12 '11 at 23:57
  • 1
    Well, you say that sometimes you can't skip it. If that's the case, you should probably give such an example. – wfaulk Aug 12 '11 at 23:59
  • @wfaulk True. But currently I can't think of one on top of my head. The example I gave was from a sentence I remember reading from a book. – Phonics The Hedgehog Aug 13 '11 at 00:00
-1

Home doesn’t refer to a building. When you intend to say you will be going to or staying at a building, you should use the word “house” instead

E.g: i’ll go back to the house or I’ll stay back at the house

Home usually shouldn’t be used with at or to although we frequently use it with stay-at-Home (which is now considered correct)

Eg: I’ll stay home, I’m on my way home, I’m driving home, I’ll be home, I’ll go home

https://www.google.com/amp/s/dictionary.cambridge.org/amp/british-grammar/house-or-home

Nash
  • 1
  • 1
    Collins has: stay-at-home countable noun: If you describe someone as a stay-at-home, you mean that they stay at home rather than going out to work or travelling. I've been using '[We'll] stay at home in case the post comes' etc for over 60 years; Collins also disagrees with your unsupported statement ('Home usually shouldn’t be used with at'). – Edwin Ashworth Apr 07 '18 at 15:49