Unnamed: 0 int64 0 40.2k | id int64 1 196k | chunk_id stringclasses 1
value | text stringlengths 18 6.44k |
|---|---|---|---|
1,500 | 45,371 | 76823_0 | > He's a friend of **mine**. > That's a car of **his**. Why do we use the possessive when the meaning would be the same while not using it (e.g. _a friend of me_ and _a car of him_ )? I thought maybe it is short for _That's a car of **his [cars]_** , but I have no way of making sure; it sounds a little odd that way to me. |
1,501 | 11,708 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > My wife and I's seafood collaboration dinner I've never known what the proper way to use a sentence in which you and a specific person (as in you can't just say "our" because you want to specify who) possess something. Is it "Julie's and mine", "Mine and Julies", "Julie and my"...? For instance, "Julie and my favorite band is Eluveitie." "That sandwich is Ben and mine." They all sound a bit strange, which is the correct way to say this? |
1,502 | 192,922 | 76823_0 | Is it grammatically correct to use "heretofore" in the past perfect? > ...the king's power, which had heretofore been absolute. The meaning of "heretofore" is "before now", but would it still work in the past? What I really want to say is "before then." Is there a word for that, or would "heretofore" still work for that? |
1,503 | 168,547 | 76823_0 | I think this might be a Pennsylvania thing: every so often, you'll see a van or small bus labeled, not "School Bus" or anything ~~sane~~ normal like that, but "School Students".  Whenever I see a van like that, I find myself wondering, _school_ students? Is that as opposed to... ... uh... nursing home students? Courthouse students? Bacon students? **I mean, what other kind of student is there?** Can anyone shed some light on this tautology? _Is_ it a tautology? Does it sound normal to anyone who didn't grow up in Pennsylvania? [Aside: Lord help me, I'm using the meaning tag...] |
1,504 | 180,093 | 76823_0 | Is it necessary to add the word "one" in the following sentence? > Mary was clearly not a typical child; she was more quiet and inexpressive > than the average (one). Does that _one_ belong there? |
1,505 | 118,396 | 76823_0 | Is there a difference in these two sentences, and if so, what is the difference? 1. Immediately afterwards I remembered having met her. 2. I remembered having met her immediately afterwards. I think there is a difference but cannot identify what it is. |
1,506 | 121,509 | 76823_0 | Here are three ways to say the same thing. I wonder if there are particular rules regarding to the position of adverb phrases: > Then play those passages over and over again in your memory Or, > Then play those passages in your memory over and over again Or, > Then play over and over again those passages in your memory I think the last is the worst choice but the first twos seem ok. The first is better because "over and over again" is closer to "play" so it is emphasized. Agreed? |
1,507 | 9,600 | 76823_0 | For example: > Ever wish you could share information **broadly** Could it be rewritten to: > Ever wish you could **broadly** share information Are there any rules for the position of the adverbs. |
1,508 | 80,240 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > Are there any rules on the positioning adverbs should take in a sentence? My question concerns the adverb position in perfect tenses. For example look at these sentences: > Your settings have been successfully saved. > > Your settings have been saved successfully. In our English lessons at school we have learned that adverbs _usually_ follow verbs. Is only one of the above sentences gramatically correct or is it rather a question of language style? If you search for these phrases using Google, you will find out that both are frequently used. And again: > Both are frequently used. > > Both are used frequently. Both sentences sound correct. |
1,509 | 192,732 | 76823_0 | I have two variants of one sentence and I want to find out which of them is correct and why: 1. So you'll see immediately the notification when the crucial for you information changes. 2. So you’ll immediately see the notification when information crucial for you changes. Main concern is position of "immediately". |
1,510 | 44,752 | 76823_0 | A British colleague asked if these two sentences are grammatically acceptable in American English: > They found already high recognition in Europe and we wish to carry that > further. > > Furthermore, they will perform a Shostokovich cycle at London's Wigmore > Hall, which they presented already in Chicago and New York. He says that the "already" directly after the verb sounds off key in British English. |
1,511 | 169,495 | 76823_0 | Is _out_ a preposition or an adverb in these sentences? 1. "We need to get the hell out of this place." 2. "We need to get out and leave this place." |
1,512 | 91,452 | 76823_0 | Which one would you prefer: "quick question" or "short question" for a question that you know is simple and will only take a moment to answer? Or maybe "simple question"? The problem I have with "quick question" is that I don't think a question may be "quick", because it is not moving anywhere. |
1,513 | 28,403 | 76823_0 | Pronouncing _asterisk_ as _asterix_ /æstərɪks/ is called metathesis. Some common examples of this phenomenon that I have heard are _ask_ -> _aks_ and _introduce_ -> _interduce_ /ɪntərˈdjuːs/. So this phenomenon has a fancy name. But is it correct to say _asterisk_ as _asterix_? How does one decide whether it's metathesis or just a mispronounced word? |
1,514 | 28,402 | 76823_0 | Is the word "Lingo" appropriate in a formal context? It sounds much more professional to me than "jargon", but I still have it in the back of my mind that it is slang. Is there a synonym that would be better? |
1,515 | 58,551 | 76823_0 | When you would use the words "quoting" and when "citing" , where "quote" and where "citation"? |
1,516 | 80,822 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > Plural/singular verb agreement with units > Does modifying a collective noun with a number make the subject plural? Can anyone help me determine the correct verb in this sentence? I am not sure what to do. If it were not such a complex introductory phrase, it would be more obvious. The general consensus of my friends who are not professional writers is that the verb should be _are_. To me the question is whether or not the subject is singular (i.e., “a large collective volume of paint”, perhaps in a tank) or plural (a lot of the individual gallon containers of paint). If simplified to other options, it would be like these: 1. Paint is sold. 2. Gallons of paint are sold. 3. More paint is sold. 4. More gallons of paint are sold. 5. More than 1000 gallons of paint is sold. [emphasis on total volume] 6. More than 1000 gallons of paint are sold. [emphasis on individual containers] |
1,517 | 107,128 | 76823_0 | Need we use _sums_ in the case that the sentence describes the sum of plural objects? For example, “100 centimeters sums to one meter” versus “100 centimeters sum to one meter”. They both seem make some senses. For one thing, it is the sum of 100 objects, so it is suitable to use plural. For the other, in spite of how many things summed, the sum itself is a singular, so we’d better to use it in the singular way. Which side is correct? |
1,518 | 131,960 | 76823_0 | Which one is grammatically correct? > 1. One hour and a half is all you have left. > 2. One hour and a half are all you have left. > 3. Two hours is all you have left. > 4. Two hours are all you have left. > And why? |
1,519 | 41,155 | 76823_0 | When writing about specific quantities, should the verb reflect a singular or a plural value? Do abbreviations vs. spelled-out words make any difference? > I took 2 ml of water, which was/were then added... > > Six microliters of protein solution was/were placed in a centrifuge... |
1,520 | 62,128 | 76823_0 | If one were to describe a statement by referring to "black humour", how should he/she go about forming the adjectival form of the term? > "blackly humourous" or > "black humourous" |
1,521 | 115,073 | 76823_0 | What are the differences between the following? > 1. He is planning **to do** something. > 2. He is planning **on doing** something. > When to use each? |
1,522 | 115,070 | 76823_0 | I want to say that in the past I decided something that I will do in the future: > Already in my bachelor years I decided that I want work at [. . .] after my > master. Is _want_ here correct, or should it be written in another tense? |
1,523 | 1,655 | 76823_0 | As a programmer, I have no problem with seeing or using "and/or" in technical documentation. For example, > I can upvote an answer that satisfies me and/or mark it as accepted. That's perfectly good English to me. However, if I were writing a novel, or even just an essay, or — heaven forbid — a poem, "and/or" would seem extremely out of place. My question is, what should I be using instead? (I solemnly swear I will not use that knowledge to actually write a poem.) |
1,524 | 12,663 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > Alternatives to "and/or"? Is it okay to say "and/or"? How else might I phrase a sentence like the following? > The amount of happiness displayed by the bunny increased when either the > bunny was well fed and/or when the bunny was watching a sunset. I am writing a scientific paper, and it is important that the events have the same effect when they occur separately or together; I have written a trivial example replacing esoteric words with more familiar ones. |
1,525 | 121,577 | 76823_0 | So when I want to say "You can choose an apple and/or pear, and a bottle of soda and/or juice." Is there a better way to say this, without the clump of and/or? |
1,526 | 63,998 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > Alternatives to "and/or"? This has bothered me for a long time. As a software developer, the `or` is inclusive (`xor` is exclusive and rarely used / not needed). However, in speaking English, "or" is traditionally exclusive. > You can have an apple or an orange The above would imply that you can have one or the other (without the "either," it is not strictly clear, but it is implied). Is there any preferred way to say an inclusive or? > We can restrict registration and/or purchase "and/or" is kind of clunky, especially when speaking. Is there another inclusive or word or a way of phrasing a sentence to make options inclusive? |
1,527 | 115,074 | 76823_0 | For example whether an organism is unicellular or multicellular would be its **_**. There is a word 'cellularity', though I don't think that is quite the word I am looking for. |
1,528 | 172,445 | 76823_0 | I am an aspiring novelist, and there's this "science fiction & fantasy" story I am working on, wherein I have coined some new words here and there. I am sending this question to the proficient wordsmiths in the _stackosphere_ , and beseech them to yield a proper way, say a literary technique, to introduce a brand new word without offending the multitudinous readers and publishers who maybe inclined to consider a word not included in Oxford Dictionary a heresy. Thanks. |
1,529 | 144,628 | 76823_0 | There was the following sentence in New York Times (January 4th) article titled “The commish, the 2nd time around”: > "On the eve of leaving office, Bloomberg, defensive about the scar on his > legacy, noted to Capital New York that in L.A. Bratton — considered the > godfather of the sort of aggressive policing tools that have come under fire > — was just as much a proponent of stop-and-frisk as Kelly was. “Bratton did > more stop and frisks per capita than Kelly did,” Bloomberg said. “They’ll > call it ‘ **frisk and stop’** instead of ‘ **stop-and-frisk**.’” > > http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/05/opinion/sunday/dowd-the-commish-the-2nd- > time-around.html?pagewanted=2&hp&rref=opinion I understand ‘stop and frisk’ as a flow of in investigating action, but can’t understand how you can physically ‘frisk someone, then stop him.’ Though I may be too literal, it sounds somewhat illogical to me. What is the difference of meaning here between ‘stop-and-frisk‘and ‘frisk and stop’? |
1,530 | 115,078 | 76823_0 | Let's take the following two sentences as examples: 1. I kindly ask you to send the letter to your boss. 2. I ask you to kindly send the letter to your boss. 3. It would be kind of you to send the letter to your boss. (this one would be understood the same way in English and my native language) In our language we use the first one 99% of the time and the second seems to have opposite meaning of its English meaning. What does "to kindly send" mean for English people? 1. Doesn't it sound rude in English? As if I was ordering someone to do something kindly (as if they weren't kind usually) - that's what would be the meaning in my native language. My interpretation is: "Go and do this kindly this time." and I think that this expression shouldn't be used unless someone wants to offend another party. But I've seen this expression more than once so that makes me think that it really means... 2. ...quite the opposite and it is equivalent to "I sincerely believe that you are a very kind person, I'm counting on your kindness to send this letter" - this is a bit persuasive, isn't it? If they don't send it they will make themselves look not kind. So, what's the true meaning of each of the example sentences? To me it's ambiguous. |
1,531 | 34,321 | 76823_0 | I have always had the view that the term "Asian", when pertaining to cultures, primarily refers to the cultures of the Far East. Recently I have been told that it also includes Indian and other cultures located on/around the Indian subcontinent. For reference, I am a native speaker of American English. Would anyone be able to shed some light on whether there is a generally accepted usage in the various English-speaking countries? For example, it seems unnatural _to me_ to refer to a person from India as "Asian", even though I am aware India is geographically located within the continent of Asia. |
1,532 | 9,951 | 76823_0 | When one says _I was washing my hair_ , is it singular or plural? What is the singular for _hair_? |
1,533 | 189,253 | 76823_0 | When we add 's' at the end of a word, it refers to more (unit) of the thing. I.e. A car vs Cars Why is it when we refer to "hair", it is kind of the other way around? i.e. 1) Your hair looks great (comment on ALL your hair) 2) You dyed some of your hairs (comment on SOME of your hair) |
1,534 | 188,960 | 76823_0 | Is there any specific term in English for the stick running through the small and narrow leaf of a big coconut leaf? > In coconut tree, there is a stick(resembling a spinal cord) running through > the small and narrow leaf of its main big leaf. In my mother tongue > Malayalam, we call it "eerkili". I have encountered several occasions where > I had to reluctantly use the Malayalam word for this while communicating in > English. |
1,535 | 145,576 | 76823_0 | The word **'Dogma'** , does it mean: _This is the truth_ or _Something that is **believed** to be true_ I did search but I have hard time grasping what it really means. Edit: What I really want answered is: Can dogmas be false? Or is the very meaning absolute. |
1,536 | 145,574 | 76823_0 | A recent question on EL&U asks Is it correct to use "how's" as short for "how does"? I have a series of tangentially related questions about a fairly common (in American English) phrase usually spelled as "how's about": 1. Does the spelling "how's about" make sense under normal conventions of punctuation, and (if so) is the "how's" component of the phrase a contraction or a possessive? 2. If "how's" is a contraction here, what words is it a contraction of? 3. If "how's" is a possessive here, how might we restate the underlying idea to indicate the possessive aspect of _how_ , without including the apostrophe- _s_? 4. If the spelling "how's about" (with an apostrophe) doesn't make complete sense, is there a better way to spell it? By way of background, I note that Robert L. Chapman & Barbara Ann Kipfer, _Dictionary of American Slang_ , Third Edition (1996) offer the following entry on "how's about": > **how's about** _**prep phr_** _by 1925_ What do you feel or think about: > _How's about a drink?_ —Budd Schulberg The first edition of this dictionary (1961) reported that "how's about" means "how about," suggesting that the apostrophe- _s_ is simply an instance of proparalepsis (adding an extra syllable or letters to the end of a word). But even if we attribute the additional sound to proparalepsis, we have not yet explained why orthographically the spelling came out as "how's." Not surprisingly, an Ngram Viewer graph of Google Books content shows "how's about" as being generally far more common than "hows about," "howsabout," and "howzabout"—three possible alternative spellings. |
1,537 | 35,055 | 76823_0 | I often hear "Sure" in response when I say "Thank you" or "Thanks" to someone. I don't know — is this correct usage? If it is considered good, I'll use it someday. |
1,538 | 145,571 | 76823_0 | > But like most young people of my generation, waking up 6 am in the morning > to study things **you** do not understand, is not an idea that appeals to me Is my usage of 'you' in this context wrong? It sounds weird, but it doesn't sound right when I replace it with 'I' and 'We' either. EDIT: It's wrong either way right? Is it better if I replace the whole phrase with > waking up 6 am in the morning to study incomprehensible things, is not.. |
1,539 | 180,098 | 76823_0 | I'm no grammarian and so I am seeking an informal and comprehensible answer. I read the following definition for accusative-absolute, but I don't fully understand it, possibly due to the many technical terms such as: _accusative_ , _finite verb_ and _nominative absolute_. > a construction in English, especially colloquial English, consisting of a > pronoun in the accusative case joined with a predicate that does not include > a finite verb and otherwise identical with the nominative absolute (as **him > being my friend** in “ **him being my friend** , I granted his request”) I first heard this at 54:31 in this video |
1,540 | 148,999 | 76823_0 | I write stuff like this: > Karen, our team can help you. However, in this case I wrote: > Karen, Mike and Joe can help you. I was trying to tell Karen that Mike and Joe could help her. However, she read it as "Karen, Mike and Joe together could help someone else." How was I supposed to punctuate this? |
1,541 | 59,528 | 76823_0 | I heard this sentence in an American film a while ago as I was watching it on DVD (the part after **but** is verbatim): _"I'm doing my best but **I mustn't be doing it right**."_ This is something I occasionally hear in American films: phrases like _"he mustn't have done it"_ or _"she mustn't be studying now"_ , where a logical conclusion is expressed. So far I've thought that the normal thing to say is _"he can't have done it"_ or _"she can't be studying now"_. My question is: Can **mustn't** be used to express a logical conclusion when the speaker is certain that something didn't happen or isn't happening, at least in informal speech? Is this an American usage? (I've never heard this usage in British English, but this doesn't mean it doesn't exist.) Is there a change going on in the usage of the particular modal verb? Note: All the references I've checked don't even mention this use of **mustn't**. Google books aren't of help either. EDIT: I should clarify that I'm asking this question because if I wanted to express that I'm certain I'm not doing something right (as in the sentence quoted from the film) I'd say _"I'm doing my best but I **can't** be doing it right"_. I would think that the use of **mustn't/must not** wouldn't be standard usage (although the meaning is perfectly clear to me; I never mistook it for an injuction). |
1,542 | 165,137 | 76823_0 | Wanted to know which form is better and why One has to cook himself? OR One has to cook themself? |
1,543 | 165,130 | 76823_0 | Let's assume that I wash my car every Saturday at noon. How do I say it using the word _schedule_ : > I wash my car at/by/on schedule. **Update:** It's not about doing something on a regular basis. It's about doing something on schedule — at an exactly defined day and time every week. If I say "I wash my car regularly", it simply means that I don't forget to wash my car, but doesn't imply I do it every time at the same time. |
1,544 | 188,173 | 76823_0 | > “We pride ourselves on being law, less ordinary. How are you less ordinary?” I do not understand how the first sentence makes sense. Anyone care to explain? (Assuming it is not a typo.) |
1,545 | 188,172 | 76823_0 | My coworker uses "for" in a way that just doesn't look right to me and I want to know if he is using it correctly. Examples below: "Let me know, _for_ I’ll need to change the purchase order." "May I have your contact, _for_ I received different information and they need to be placed into the PMM system." |
1,546 | 91,982 | 76823_0 | Is there a single word (similar to Russian _свой_ for those familiar with Russian) which I could put into this sentence? > By tomorrow, one of us will see the money in **__** account. meaning that > By tomorrow either **you** will see the money in **your** account or **I** > will see the money in **my** account. |
1,547 | 91,981 | 76823_0 | We make software for searching video and I am continuously explaining that this product 'avoids the need to watch video manually'. This grates with me because 'manually' means 'by hand' and you don't watch with your hands. Is there a word which is the counterpart for 'manually' but means 'by eye'? |
1,548 | 91,984 | 76823_0 | I have always put a hyphen in the fragment "no-longer X", but neither the BBC website or the Economist seem to put one in. I always thought that > The piece of string was no longer than five inches. should not have one, but > After I cut it, the string was no-longer whole. needed one, because longer is a comparative. Certainly when I read the two sentences above aloud I put a different emphasis on the words. Does anyone know if this is or was common? I'm from the UK, if that makes a difference to the answer. |
1,549 | 91,989 | 76823_0 | There is an expression in my native language that goes "Don't try to give birth to a bicycle". It usually encourages someone to use a solution that has already been found, or to refrain from making some trivial process overly complicated. I'm familiar with the canonical "Don't re-invent the wheel", but I don't find it particularly funny. |
1,550 | 55,125 | 76823_0 | I came across the word, “*make a dream board” in the sentence of New York Time’s (December 16) article titled “Split by Race and Wealth, but Discovering Similarities as They Study Steinbeck.” The article deals with the recent program of intermediate schools in two different town of Westfield and Plainfield to let their student read John Steinbeck’s “Of Mice and Men.” “Students in Westfield, about 25 miles southwest of Manhattan, said the project had brought a different world right to their doorstep and taught more empathy. As part of the exchange, each student _made a “dream board” of goals and aspirations_ to be shared with the group on Tuesday.” I searched for meaning of “dream board” on Google, only to find the following description in WikiHow other than the title of internet game. “Setting goals is something we're all familiar with. In fact, it’s almost become a cliché that some people no longer pay attention to. Making a dream board can take the cliché out of setting your life goals, and can even help you to accomplish those goals.” It appears to me “make a dream board” means to “draw a blue print” in our old expression. Did it come from “Dreamboard Game”? Is it a novel expression, because the NY Times writer uses this phrase in parenthesis? |
1,551 | 55,126 | 76823_0 | Which of these sentences are proper? : 1. If we have further questions with regards to x&y, to whom could we direct our questions? 2. If we have further questions with regards to x&y, to whom could we direct our questions to? Or is it true that both are grammatical and either one could do? |
1,552 | 129,374 | 76823_0 | I have come across these many times “Please excuse me. I have to leave now to put my children **_TO SLEEP._** ” “Please excuse me. I have to leave now to put my children **_TO BED._** ” Is there a difference between any of the sentences? Similarly as follows: "Please **_SWITCH_** your mobile phone to silent mode.” “Please **_PUT_** your mobile phone on silent mode.” In any case, is one sentence more grammatically correct than another? |
1,553 | 130,106 | 76823_0 | Full years can be contracted to two digits like > He graduated the university in '92. What I'd like to ask is how would this sentence be spelled out: * _"in 'ninety two"_? * _"in ninety two"_? * maybe, it's pronounced and spelled some other way? |
1,554 | 144,191 | 76823_0 | > He shot a gun. > He fired a gun. Do these sentences mean the same thing? I often hear the former, but it has always felt wrong to me (as if another gun were the target). |
1,555 | 144,190 | 76823_0 | As it is the season of pantomime, I have three questions: > 1. Can anyone think of a name for the traditional comic contretemps > between the show's villain and kids in the audience when the former shouts > something like 'Oh no I didn't (throw the cat in the loo!)' and the audience > screams 'Oh yes you did!'? > > 2. If a 'double entendre' is a joke with two meanings, what is a joke > which has a funny meaning which the kids can laugh at, and a deeper, usually > obscene, meaning which the mums and dads find hilarious? > > 3. What do we call the age at which you stop laughing at the simple > meaning and first understand that the Grand Dame is actually talking about > her testicles? > > |
1,556 | 144,196 | 76823_0 | I believe that these five sentences may be correctly punctuated. Do you agree? I'm using quotes around the movie title (as _The New Yorker_ does) instead of italics. Although it may be ugly, I’m banking on all punctuation as being correct. Please, no suggested recasts. I thank you for any feedback. > 1. He said, “I thought I heard Judy say, ‘ “Gone with the Wind” ’s cast > was unparalleled.’ ” > 2. Joe said, “ ‘Gone with the Wind’ ’s cast was unparalleled.” > 3. “Gone with the Wind” ’s cast was unparalleled. > 4. “ ‘Gone with the Wind’ ’s cast was unparalleled,” Joe said. > 5. Joe said “I thought I heard Judy say, ‘It was "Gone with the Wind” > ’s’.” > |
1,557 | 129,379 | 76823_0 | What is the correct grammar when saying cent or cents? Do you use plural when you are referring to more than 1. For example do you say I have Five Hundred Dollars and 36 cents in the bank or Five Hundred Dollars and 36 "cent". |
1,558 | 6,904 | 76823_0 | > Related to this question and this question. My non-native English speaking friend just asked me: Data _is_ ... or Data _are_ ... I said _both_ but that's because I've been desensitized from reading/writing both (especially from writing code and adding quick comments). **My question** : Is it acceptable to utilize either for a **university paper**? Or is one _safer_ than the other (when confronted with stickler professors) ? |
1,559 | 81,707 | 76823_0 | I have been commissioned to script a series of brief videos on the importance of data accuracy and consistency. The videos are directed to employees of a company with offices around the world--North and South America, Europe (but _not_ the United Kingdom), East and South Asia, Australia and Africa. The videos are to be in English, which is the _lingua franca_ of all company communications, and are to be couched in a "bright" colloquial style. I am drafting these employing the singular construction of _data_ , because this usage is dominant in US business circles, and the plural construction would sound either "odd" or inappropriately "formal" to most employees. My question is: Is the plural construction so dominant among English users in any of the business communities where my client is active that I should advise that two versions of the videos be produced, one employing data in the singular and the other in the plural? I may say that I have consulted these ELU questions: 1, 2, 3, 4, and none appears to address my concern; and the discussions I have found on Google dwell rather on what should be _taught_ globally than what is actually _used_. |
1,560 | 56,574 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > Is "data" considered singular or plural? Which one the following is right grammar "Limited data **support** the use of ..." or "Limited data **supports** the use of ..." |
1,561 | 172,834 | 76823_0 | Which of the following is correct? > The data was kept in soft form. > The data were kept in soft form. |
1,562 | 132,754 | 76823_0 | While reading SICP, if found the following expression: > Since the Fermat test has O(log n) growth, how would you expect the time to > test primes near 1,000,000 to compare with the time needed to test primes > near 1000? **Do your data bear this out?** Is it correct? Shoudn't it be "Does your data bear this out?" |
1,563 | 169,428 | 76823_0 | I though it was British vs. American but watching Star Trek I've noticed the same character using two different pronunciations. Then I noticed other characters doing the same. Is there any rule for using one or another? I've searched online and found two definitions, one singular and another plural, both uncountable. How can something uncountable be plural? |
1,564 | 121,796 | 76823_0 | consider the following sentence: Once all data are collected, it is exported as ... I am not sure whether it is correct to use the word 'it' in this context? |
1,565 | 50,427 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > Is "data" considered singular or plural? Milton Friedman, the Nobel-prize winning economist used to threaten that he would "take away any graduate student's Ph.D. if they used the word data as a singular." Proper usage of the word data is in the plural: * The data _are_ very hard to gather * The findings follow directly from the data. _They_ unambiguous support our hypotheses I'm wondering though how you refer to data in the following sentence, "The analysis using the data should go quickly since I am familiar with **them (??)** " I'm not sure how to correctly refer to data in the above sentence. Most people (including myself), find it hard to use the first two examples correctly. This last example seems even trickier. Does anyone have advice on the right way to refer to data in the above sentence? |
1,566 | 94,135 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > Is “data” considered singular or plural? I was reading a book in which the author has used the sentence as follows: > _**Data show_** that unemployment in America is in smaller states where > farming is the main occupation. But when I am searching in the internet it reveals that **Data shows** is used more frequently. Can anyone explain the correct usage? |
1,567 | 126,345 | 76823_0 | I know not if I will ~ What does it mean? What is I know not if I ~? |
1,568 | 149,009 | 76823_0 | "What (are:A) you talking (about:B)? (I'm:C) not (understand:D) you." At first, I thought C, so the sentence would be "What are you talking about? I don't understand you." And I chose C because I believe "understand" is a state verb doesn't accept "ing". But then some dudes said to me that D is definitely the correct choice, so the sentence would be "What are you talking about? I'm not understanding you." So what do you say and why? |
1,569 | 151,192 | 76823_0 | `since` is used to refer to a point of time in the past and `for` is used with time interval. However I've come across this phrase "I haven't seen you since ages". Is it correct usage of `since` since `ages` denotes an interval of time? |
1,570 | 130,424 | 76823_0 | When I change Travel to Travelers, what is that? Is that some sort of participle? Also, how is this accomplished with Exodus? As in 'Exodus-ers'. Does one use the Latin ablative? |
1,571 | 110,513 | 76823_0 | I’m having trouble understanding the meaning of _disposal advance_. What do the following sentences mean? > These are the amounts that we believe you are entitled to. You can derive no > rights. The amounts are at your disposal advance. |
1,572 | 110,517 | 76823_0 | I might be mistaken, but I feel odd calling the following "wooden handrails", since _handrails_ are supposed to be made of metal.   Is it OK to call it "handrail", "guard rail", or a "wooden handrail"? Or is there a better term for it? |
1,573 | 38,243 | 76823_0 | I'm searching for a proverb or expression that describes a situation which has two choices or two ways out (that is, somewhat of a forced choice) where both lead to some kind of trouble (but not the same trouble). As an example: Let's say that you can chose to go either left or right. If you go left, you will have to fight your way through an army of trolls. If you go right, you will have to go through a desert without any food or water for one week. |
1,574 | 23,719 | 76823_0 | I’m a little bit hesitant to post this question in view of the gravity and seriousness of the matter to those who are directly involved with the 9/11 tragedies. But as a newspaper reader, I would like to understand the exact meaning of the words delivered by the mother of a firefighter who died on duty in the 9/11 attacks, when she learned that Osama Bin Laden was killed by U.S Military forces on May 1st. She said: > I cried. I took a look up at the sky and said 'They got him!' Now the day > has come, and it's a mixed emotion. It's sad; it's triumphant. I feel > absolutely fantastic. I hope it brings some comfort to the families. _No > closure. That word should be stricken from the English language_. > (New York Times May 3rd. Today’s Quote) Could you explain to me the line - “ _No closure. That word should be stricken from the English language_ ,” so that a non-native English speaker can understand it? |
1,575 | 23,716 | 76823_0 | What's the difference between a picture and an image? I think this is the missing question as these have already been asked: Picture/Photo Image/Glyph Photo/Image |
1,576 | 93,583 | 76823_0 | I'm looking for a word to describe the rhetorical style where one uses different arguments that are not additional, but rather get weaker and weaker. I'm not explaining it very well, so let me give an example. If _Alice_ argues that _X_ is true because of _Y_ , _Bob_ might say: 1. _X is not true_. 2. _Even if X were true, it's irrelevant_ 3. _Even if X were true and relevant, it doesn't speak in favour of Y_. I'm quite sure I've seen a word to describe such a kind of reasoning, but it was a long time ago and I don't have a clue what it was (I'm not even 100% sure the word was in English). Is there a word to describe this? |
1,577 | 59,200 | 76823_0 | In the first definition of the word _virtually_ there is written: > almost [= practically]: > > * Virtually all the children come to school by bus. > * He was virtually unknown before running for office. > which makes me wonder whether _virtually_ means _almost_ or _practically_ , because the meaning of _almost_ is not the same as _practically_ , is it? Could you explain what they mean by this? If you will take a sentence "You'll be able to understand virtually every aspect of computing", it seems that the word _virtually_ has no effect if it means _practically_ because understanding is theory, not praxis, and I feel that they don't mean "understand almost every aspect" either. Does "understand virtually" mean "be able to apply the knowledge in praxis"? |
1,578 | 27,008 | 76823_0 | In written and standard semi-formal (and above) spoken English, one would use "try to": > Try to be a better person. > > Try to get the fishhook out of my thumb, please. > > Try to find a pharmacy when you need one. But in spoken English, we (Americans, at least) usually substitute "try and" for all those cases. "Try to" makes sense because the "to" begins the construction of an infinitive: "try to be", "try to do", "try to act" and so on. "Try and" on the other hand doesn't seem to make any sense. I'm curious how the "try and" crept in, and when. It's really tough to Google small words like these, so I'm not finding anything on the Web. Is it a contraction of something like "Try hard, and ..."? Note: I've seen this question and it is somewhat related but doesn't tell me what I want to know. **Edit** Observe how, even on this site, people tend to gravite toward the "try and" construction. **Turning it on its head** Note that you can't make a negative construction with "try and": > It's raining. Try not to get wet. > > It's raining. Try not _and_ get wet. [?] Even adding _do_ doesn't help. The following means something different from "try not to get wet." > It's raining. Don't try and get wet. Even use of _to_ instead of _and_ there means something else: > It's raining. Don't try to get wet. "Try not to get wet" means try to stay dry. "Don't try to get wet" means avoid actively seeking out a soaking, and implies that a soaking might in fact be what you are looking for. |
1,579 | 27,009 | 76823_0 | To thrash someone within an inch of his life is sometimes referred to has _beating seven bells out of_ him. But why should _seven_ be the number chosen? This source here acknowledges the phrase exists but is silent as to the etymology, and here the phrase appears as _kick seven bells..._ and alternatively _ten bells_ , which I have never come across. I've heard it suggested that the term derives from _seven bells_ , the nautical expression for half-an-hour before the end of the watch (so one would beat someone within a small space of the end of his life). But how do we reconcile that with the alternative _beat seven shades (of shit) out of_? |
1,580 | 150,826 | 76823_0 | In British English, we pronounce the word 'progress' as pro--gress. Whereas in American English it's pronounced as prog--ress. So how would Americans pronounce the word 'progression'? It sounds wrong to me to be pronounced as anything other than pro--gresh--on. |
1,581 | 59,208 | 76823_0 | USSR stands for Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The adjective "Soviet" is formed from the noun "Soviet" which in Russian means "Council". (That was roughly the idea behind the revolution and USSR formation that the workers and peasants should rule the state by means of "councils"). So why was some analogous word not created in English? Like "Councillous" or something. Is there some explanation or this "just happened"? |
1,582 | 92,183 | 76823_0 | Here is an example of something I occasionally encounter, and it always trips me up. The title of an applied mathematics book from Stanford University in 1959 is (bold mine) > Partial Differential Equations with More **that** Two Independent Variables > in the Complex Domain I myself would certainly use _more than_ in all instances of constructions like the example above, but I also see _more that_ from time to time. Whence comes this alternate construction? |
1,583 | 73,604 | 76823_0 | I was telling a friend of mine that I was getting my child ready to go to sleep when I heard an audible gasp. I was told that "putting my child down to sleep" is a phrase used in connection when euthanizing pets. What is the proper was of saying that you are getting your child to sleep? |
1,584 | 73,607 | 76823_0 | I'm interested in the etymology of the word " **doozy** ". And primarily whether it is a _good_ or _bad_ thing? I always understood it to mean something exceptionally bad. e.g. > Watch out for that first step. It's a doozy. But I've just read it used in a positive sense here. > "[Kerber hits a] backhand winner from behind the baseline, that's a doozy." |
1,585 | 73,608 | 76823_0 | I've heard this phrase in a couple of movies, it was being used like this: > -Hey, John! > > -Well, hey yourself, Mike! Sounds pretty simple, but my question is about how appropriate is it to say that in a conversation. It sounds a little "offensive" to me, and in the movies it was being used with a negative meaning (e.g. greeting a person who you don't really like to see/talk with). So does it really have a "negative" meaning, or am I wrong? |
1,586 | 92,189 | 76823_0 | I have trouble telling when I’m overusing commas. My question is if the comma between _undertake_ and _whether_ is needed: > I am passionate about the quality of work I undertake, whether it be school > work, or cooking food in the kitchen. |
1,587 | 74,053 | 76823_0 | I would like to state a fact, and then, if possible, in the same sentence, iterate over a list of properties related to that fact. Here are a few examples: > The construction site had two entrances: one to the east, and one to the > west. > > or > > The construction site had two entrances, one to the east; and one to the > west. Is either of these the preferred method? Are there ways of saying this in a similar fashion that would be correct or 'more preferable'? EDIT: I've recently found this > http://theoatmeal.com/comics/semicolon < which suggests the semicolon method is the right way to go. I'll leave the question here to invoke any comments. |
1,588 | 74,055 | 76823_0 | I always forget that "elative" is no grammar term in English. In Latin grammars (at least in German ones) "Elativ" is a superlative form that is not translated as superlative but with "very/highly", expressing a high degree but not the absolutely highest degree. What is the English term for an expression such as: \- a most interesting novel |
1,589 | 74,054 | 76823_0 | In "US Sign and Safety" I came across the road sign shown in the image below. Can someone explain what part of speech the word "before" is? I'm asking because it seems that these two graphs are both valid, so "before" can be a sub- conjunction (temporal connotation) or a preposition (spatial connotation).   |
1,590 | 165,797 | 76823_0 |  I want to understand what Chandler means when he says he's maxed out after thinking he's embarrassed by his bunny costume. |
1,591 | 74,059 | 76823_0 | i want to get a professional photographer to take my photo. which question is grammatically correct? 1. do you know where I can get a professional photographer take my photo? 2. do you know where I can have a professional photographer to take my photo? I saw the difference is only "get" and "have" part. and also "to" in sentence 2. please tell me the true answer.. thank you |
1,592 | 32,589 | 76823_0 | A non-native speaker is asking ... Which should you use, 'which' or 'that,' in the following statement? Since this is mainly talking about the types of persons (within 'her'), you might use 'that,' but would you also use 'who'? > Sam was praising the industrious worker **_who/that_** she was when she was > in the office, not the lazy housewife **_who/that_** she was when she was at > home. |
1,593 | 78,927 | 76823_0 | Is there a comma after and/or before "though" in a sentence? For example, I am talking about a method that is very slow. At the end of the paragraph I say: > We will see in the following sections _though_ there is a workaround to > reduce the exponential explosion of the computational time. |
1,594 | 32,585 | 76823_0 | If _jail_ and _prison_ are (at least nearly) synonymous, why does _jailer_ refer to the captor, and _prisoner_ refer to the captive? |
1,595 | 55,781 | 76823_0 | What is the difference between _to_ and _for_ in the following statements? > * I am headed to the airport. > > * I am headed for the airport. > > |
1,596 | 9,702 | 76823_0 | For example: > The word **rarely** turns up outside of those contexts. > > The word turns up **rarely** outside of those contexts. Which one is correct and why? |
1,597 | 102,244 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > Should an adverb go before or after a verb? Is it correct to write a sentence this way? > Now we can speak about the steps that I’ve **previously** listed. Or it would be better move the temporal adverb to the end? > Now we can speak about the steps that I’ve listed **previously**. |
1,598 | 115,511 | 76823_0 | I am not sure about the position of 'of course' inside a sentence. Please consider these two versions and comment on that: > 1. A comprehensive documentation would _of course_ be highly valuable... > 2. A comprehensive documentation _of course_ would be highly valuable... > |
1,599 | 55,775 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > Position of the adverb "of course" > Should an adverb go before or after a verb? I was wondering what position of an adverb relative to more than one auxiliary verbs are generally? For example, "have basically been doing something" or "have been basically doing something"? Thanks! |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.