A common idiom I’ve heard and used for 40+ years to express disapproval is “I’d never set foot in [insert place name here].” e.g. “I’d never set foot in Denny’s; their food & service are awful.” “I’d never set foot in a Baptist church; they’re no fun.” etc.
Over all the years & all the various places I’ve lived I’ve also heard many other people use the same idiom.
Here on the SDMB I’ve read some posts where some people use “step foot” instead. “I’d never step foot in a Walmart. The other customers are too skeevy.” etc.
I have never heard a live person say “step foot” though. And it sounds really wrong, bordering on meaningless, to me. I suspect they think the same of folks who say “set foot” though.
So which do you use? how old are you and from where? Which do you hear where you are now? Where is that? Does anyone know of any real academic linguistic research on the topic?
Me? I’m in my fifties & grew up in SoCal. I’ve lived in the West, South, & now Midwest, plus travelled a lot in the bigger cities throughout the US.
Ug. I didn’t know it was multiple choice. I both do and hear “set foot,” but “step foot” in the negative sounds good to me, although I doubt I’ll ever use it.
Imho, my WAG is “step foot” could be used as a critique of something you’ve done:
I’ll never step foot in there again.
while “set foot” could be used to show inexperience:
I say and hear set foot. In keeping with this thread, the other day I saw a sidewalk sign advertising the services of a medium – she can tell your “pass, present and future.”
After more thought, I think it’s an overgeneralization error:
I’ll never set foot in there again.
I’ll never step in there again.
set foot in + step in = step foot in.
When you have two expressions that mean almost the same thing, it’s very common for people to combine them and it will sound decent to a native speaker.