Let's see if I can tackle this one
.
First the semantics: the use of the word 'lie' in this sentence is NOT the same as resting on the bed. It definitely is not the word 'lay' as in: to set something somewhere.
He lay on the book on the table.
Here we are dealing with a definition of 'lie,' which refers to an abstract quality - in this case, 'tremendous originality'. Indeed the New Oxford English Dictionary defines lay, as used in this sense:
"lie: (of something abstract) reside or be found."
Of note, this meaning of 'lie' takes an 'in.'
His ability of performing at an Olympic level lies in his capacity to focus for extended periods of time.
Chopin's virtuoso lay not so much in his ability to play thorny passage as his ability to improvise pieces on the spot that most pianists would take weeks to perfect.
Notice how the last example I switched to the past tense of 'lie' which is 'lay' (not 'lay' as in the present tense of the unrelated 'lay' I discussed at the beginning).
As far as Darwin is concerned, his tremendous originality lay in....
Now if that wasn't confusing enough, on to the tricky part
.
Did Darwin's originality lay in his proposal?
No, to claim so would be to imply that Darwin's originality could be found (in the abstract sense) in his proposal. While Darwin's originality was reflected in his proposal the sentence is trying to impart the following meaning: Darwin's originality was based on the fact that he proposed natural selection to explain evolution.
Therefore, we want the construction, "lay in the fact that he..."
So the answer is A.
Please let me know if that made sense, especially the last part, as it is very subtle
.
