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

Possible Duplicate:
“Covered with” vs “covered in” vs “covered by”

Which is the correct option: "a jungle covered in snow" or "a jungle covered with snow"? If both are possible what is the difference in meaning?

share|improve this question

marked as duplicate by Kris, RegDwigнt Jan 12 '13 at 12:45

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

How about just "a snow-covered jungle"? It shouldn't matter. After all, it doesn't snow in the jungle, only in the mountains that may tower above the jungle. Jungles are tropical. I live in the tropics. While it does snow high up on Taiwan's tits, we're talking at 3500-4000 meters, not the jungles below. – user21497 Jan 12 '13 at 9:24
Why should only one be correct? – Kris Jan 12 '13 at 12:27

There’s little difference in meaning, but each sees the scene from a slightly different aspect. Covered by snow emphasises the fact that it was snow that covered the jungle, while covered in snow describes the result of what the snow did.

share|improve this answer
This feels like a distinction without a difference. – Robusto Jan 12 '13 at 11:06
@Robusto. Really? I rather thought it was a difference without a distinction. – Barrie England Jan 12 '13 at 11:31
What may be difference or distinction between difference and distinction? – Kris Jan 12 '13 at 12:27
@Kris. It's the same as the contrast or variation between dissimilarity and divergence. – Barrie England Jan 12 '13 at 12:34

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