English Language & Usage Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

The title is an analogy which appeared in the GRE verbal test, and I yet can't find the analogy in it.

"Snatch" means to "take" hastily or eagerly, but I don't see if "supplant" is a more hasty motion than "replace". Actually, I think to supplant is no different than to replace. Is that true?

share|improve this question
up vote 7 down vote accepted

"Snatch" you have already defined as "to seize by a sudden or hasty grasp"

"Supplant" is similar to 'replace', but has a nuance that "replace" doesn't have:

to take the place of (another), as through force, scheming, strategy, or the like.

"Supplant" has a connotation that the exchange has happened via deceit or scheming.

"Replace" doesn't necessarily have this nuance, as we can "replace the bus stop with a shop" or "Replace the e with the i" and other like sentences, where no "scheming, or strategy" is used.

"Take" is the most general form of all these, and all the previous three describe some action of "taking", all in different ways and means.

share|improve this answer
+1 because I'm pretty sure that's what the GRE folks were thinking. Personally, I don't think "supplant" is typically used that way, and I would have had the same trouble as the OQ. It seems the GRE folks are reading different stuff than we are. – T.E.D. Aug 31 '11 at 13:26

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.