Unnamed: 0 int64 0 40.2k | id int64 1 196k | chunk_id stringclasses 1
value | text stringlengths 18 6.44k |
|---|---|---|---|
2,000 | 86,841 | 76823_0 | Is there a word for a word whose form is contrary to its meaning? For example, "quotidian" is anything but quotidian. |
2,001 | 140,463 | 76823_0 | There are a number of questions (example, example) that deal with the slightly different connotations of the words "speak" and "talk". However, there also seem to be some grammatical differences between the two words. This question is about whether there's a way to formally pin down these differences, or whether they're just contingent features of the two words having different histories. Some examples of grammatical differences are as follows: * be talkative ... ~~be speakative~~ * speak French ... ~~talk French~~ * give a talk ... give a **speech** (as opposed to a speak) * speak up ... talk up (the meanings of the two phrases being completely different, with "up" being a preposition only in the latter case) * speaking of which ... ~~talking of which~~ * grammatically speaking ... ~~grammatically talking~~ On the other hand, many other constructions work just as well with either (though they might have subtly different meanings), for example * speak to ... talk to * speak with ... talk with * speak about ... talk about I'm interested in whether there's a way to pin down these differences (e.g. are the two words classified as different types of verb in some way?), or whether they're essentially just arbitrary. I'm also interested in why we have these two different words with subtly different meanings. Is the distinction between "speak" and "talk" a feature of many languages, or is it just a peculiarity of English? Etymologically, both words are from Germanic origins. "Talk" seems to have been formed from the Middle English "tale", even though "speak" already existed in the English language by then (as far as I can tell). This makes it even more mysterious: why did we form a new word as a synonym of one that was already established? Or were the meanings different at that time? |
2,002 | 12,126 | 76823_0 | Think of the simple phrase "Bill's friend". If you were going to turn this around using the preposition 'of' would you say: * A friend of Bill's or * A friend of Bill It appears to me that, in the US anyway, people always say "A friend of Bill's". Even though I'm a native American English speaker, this just sounds weird to me. It seems to create a 'double possessive' (a term I just invented). I always want to respond: "A friend of Bill's what?" A friend of Bill's aunt? So what's at work here, and do British English speakers also do this? |
2,003 | 50,588 | 76823_0 | As this NGram shows, we nearly always use the possessive form of personal pronouns for _friend of mine/his/ours/etc._ But when it comes to actual names, we prefer friend of Peter _without the possessive apostrophe_. That preference is even more marked with, say, friend of America. Not that I think the usage itself is particularly American - it's much the same with Britain. Personally, I find _friend of him_ grates. In general I've no strong feelings either way as to whether it's _friend of Peter_ or _friend of Peter's_ (though I deplore the possessive in this example), but in line with many others, I really don't like the possessive in relation to things like countries. Why is this? Edit: Noting an apparent "progression" (pronoun -> person -> nation) marked by reduction in use of the possessive, I checked at a finer "granularity". NGram shows that although it does occur, friend of me virtually "flatlines" against _friend of mine_. But the bias reduces through _of you, of us,_ and by the time I get to of them it's much less extreme. There seems to be something "egocentric" about the double possessive. Presumably when babies learn to speak, they soon notice that possessive pronouns, possessive apostrophes, and the word "of", all do the same job. Parents would correct a child who says _"of mine's"_ , but probably wouldn't even notice the same "redundancy" in _"of Peter's"_. Younger speakers are unlikely to even be talking about something _"of America's"_. Perhaps as we mature we tend to discard the "double possessive" for the more "distant" things that only adults are likely talk about, but we keep it for "closer" people because that's how we spoke when we were younger. **EDIT2** I note that _I'm a great fan of him_ is vanishingly rare compared to _...fan of his_ , but with **...fan** _(of John)_ the double possessive occurs far less often than **...friend** _(of John's)_. Usage seems to be affected by the noun **before** "of" as well as the one **after** it. This is getting complicated... |
2,004 | 126,249 | 76823_0 | I have seen them both in my reference book, which is written by a native speaker. I wonder why there are two different phrases to describe the same meaning and am looking forward to some reasonable details to explain why this is so. |
2,005 | 189,633 | 76823_0 | I would like to ask why the following sentence is only possible according to grammatical rules: > I'm reading a novel of Steinbeck's What's wrong with "I'm reading a novel of Steinbeck" or "I'm reading Steinbeck's novel"? |
2,006 | 144,286 | 76823_0 | He was a friend of Mike. He was a friend of Mike’s. Which one is correct, and why? Thank you. |
2,007 | 187,838 | 76823_0 | Is there a difference in whether _brother_ is explicitly possessive in sentences like this? > * A friend of her brother's called > > * A friend of her brother called > > Perhaps both are correct; do they have a subtle (or not-so-subtle) difference? |
2,008 | 152,776 | 76823_0 | > The woman over there is a friend of my sister's Would you let me know the reason why we must use 'S? |
2,009 | 152,436 | 76823_0 | Can you please correct these sentences. 1.Can I click a picture of yours. 2.Do you know the email address of John's? 3.I think of both of yours betterment. 4.You are a friend of John's. |
2,010 | 90,063 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > Why is it usually “friend of his”, but no possessive apostrophe with > “friend of Peter”? I'm currently having hot debates with a friend of mine about which one is more natural and more grammatically correct: > * A friend of Susan > * A friend of Susan's > I vote for the first, but I don't have anything to prove I'm right. |
2,011 | 78,762 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > Why is it usually "friend of his", but no possessive apostrophe with > "friend of Peter"? We built an engine for the boat of Mr. Sander or We built an engine for the boat of Mr Sander's ? |
2,012 | 110,720 | 76823_0 | I was reading Agatha Christie’s _The Murder of Roger Ackroyd_ and noticed following sentence: > About those boots of Ralph Paton’s. It is really in old (old as in early or mid twentieth century) English that they use apostrophe and _of_ together? Would it not be proper to say: > About those boots of Ralph Paton. |
2,013 | 138,889 | 76823_0 | What is the difference between this two sentences - 1\. An friend of my father 2\. A friend of my father's |
2,014 | 194,624 | 76823_0 | What would be grammatically correct? Would I need to use `'s` after "Supreme Court"? > ...overruled a prior decision of the Supreme Court, defined in the... or > ...overruled a prior decision of the Supreme Court's, defined in the... ...I know I can structure the sentence in a better format as so: > ...overruled a prior decision made by the Supreme Court, defined in the... However, I want to know which one from the first two is correct. |
2,015 | 1,535 | 76823_0 | I think _friend of mine_ can be translated to _my friend._ In that case, doesn't _friend of me_ make more sense? If we translate _friend of mine_ to _one of my friends_ then I guess _friend of mine_ makes sense for _my friends_ being _mine._ Is there a difference? When do you say _... of mine_ instead of _my ..._? Is there a specific situation when you use one or the other? |
2,016 | 103,594 | 76823_0 | Question: Is the first one redundant and proper, or is it redundant and not necessarily correct? > (1) He is a friend of Doug's. > > (2) He is a friend of Doug. |
2,017 | 141,875 | 76823_0 | In Homeland S03E11 00:10:06,353 --> 00:10:07,987 - Carrie Mathison: Masud Sherazi? - Yes? - Carrie Mathison: I'm a friend of your niece. ----/--- 00:11:16,356 --> 00:11:18,824 - You're CIA, aren't you? - Carrie Mathison: I'm a friend of your niece's. **Q: what's the meaning of the "'s" in the last sentence** "I'm a friend of your niece's." (Carrie is speaking to the same person: Masud Sherazi) Thanks |
2,018 | 14,211 | 76823_0 | How would you explain to a person who is learning English, and whose native language does not have attributive nouns, when the possessive should be used instead of an attributive noun? In particular, how would you explain it referring to the following list of sentences? * Today's news is bad * This week's schedule has been changed * Tomorrow's lunch will be at the French restaurant * This year's report will be communicated in the reunion room * Last summer's vacations were memorable * Last year's meetings were a complete disaster |
2,019 | 140,467 | 76823_0 | "Please hand _me_ the comb." My textbook says to identify what 'me' is, I was able to do that for sentences in which the subject before the verb but I cannot do that for this sentence? I know that hand is the verb, and the comb is the object but what would me be? The indirect object? |
2,020 | 140,465 | 76823_0 | What is the difference between the phrases "hypothetically speaking" and "theoretically speaking"? If one wants to make a point using an example that would likely never happen, which phrase would be more appropriate? |
2,021 | 80,144 | 76823_0 | I have some doubts whether the word "usurp" is still used in the modern language. The doubts are based on reading newspapers and magazines. It looks like expression like "to seize" or "to hold" are used more often in this meaning. So I am interested whether this word is used. Maybe I just didn't came across it somehow. |
2,022 | 80,145 | 76823_0 | I have the following sentences, of which I don't know whether the prepositions are correctly positioned: > The solution depends _not only on_ Condition A, _but also on_ Condition B. > But when C happens, it depends _only on_ Condition A. Another possible way is: > The solution depends _on not only_ Condition A, _but also_ Condition B. But > when C happens, it depends _on only_ Condition A. Thank you very much for your help! |
2,023 | 80,147 | 76823_0 | When I was posting a question about the difference between “Strike _a_ match” and “Strike _the_ match” today, I recalled a made-in-Japan English compound, “ _Match-pump_ ,” which means a person who instigates others to do something, e.g., to call a strike, or make a fuss, and scurries about to stop or quell the subsequent movement / commotion when the matter gets serious. Pump in this compound means water-pump. In other words, it means the person who strikes a match to burn something (in a fun more often than not) and tries to extinguish a fire when it flames up. I wonder if there is the English word that purports the same meaning _in a single word_. |
2,024 | 139,518 | 76823_0 | How do we say Canon - the camera company name? Is it Keh-nun or Keh-non? |
2,025 | 10,355 | 76823_0 | A colleague and I were reading a corporate memo that contained the phrase 'redouble our efforts'. His claim was that the word _redouble_ was equivalent to _double_ and simply nonstandard. (Similar to, say, using _irregardless_ in place of _regardless_ ). I've heard this phrase fairly frequently, and don't see anything wrong with it in particular, but I was wondering if perhaps there was some style guide that prescribed against it or something similar that marked a preference for simply _doubling our efforts_ rather than _redoubling_ them. |
2,026 | 10,351 | 76823_0 | Which of the following is correct: 1) Don't come in, I'm busy. 2) Don't come in; I'm busy. 3) Don't come in. I'm busy. 4) Don't come in I'm busy. And why? |
2,027 | 10,353 | 76823_0 | According to this Fritinancy entry, the demonym for Norfolk, England is "North Anglian," rather than "Norfolker" or "Norfolkite," for historical reasons. What about Norfolk, Virginia, in the United States? I suppose you could argue for the same historical reasons, since it was named after Norfolk in England, but that just feels wrong to me. |
2,028 | 10,358 | 76823_0 | This question will seem weird to a native speaker because “I better don’t” sounds inherently wrong and unusual. But if you think about it, it’s an irregularity; normally when a verb is negated and there is no auxiliary already present, the auxiliary “do” is inserted and usually contracted with the “not” to form “don’t”. The exceptional construct “I better not” baffles some non-native speakers. What is the etymological history behind the construction “I better not (+verb)”? Did this sentence use to contain an auxiliary which has disappeared? |
2,029 | 182,783 | 76823_0 | I see both (for example) "ProductName v1.0" and "ProductName ver 1.0" and wanted to know what was the proper use for technical/computer literature. Bonus thanks if anyone knows the proper usage in Japanese of the same acronym, e.g. if its more proper to write "商品名バージョン1.0" as "商品名Ver1.0" vs. "商品名v1.0" in Japanese language literature. Thank you. |
2,030 | 139,097 | 76823_0 | In the video JULIA BOORSTIN -- Interview a Broadcaster! -- American English (0:34 to 1:20), a reporter from an American news television channel mentions that it's not a good idea to use the word ' _like_ '. I've tried to find some information about it but nothing comes up in Google. Does anyone know why ' _like_ ' shouldn't be used and in what contexts it's invalid? Below the below line is my first guess but it's completely wrong and can be ignored: * * * I assume that it's not about this kind of sentence: > I **like** learning. But it's more about this kind of sentences: > * Flying a plane is **like** driving a car but it's a bit more > complicated. > * You can multiply a number by two to have an even number, **like** 3*2=6. > |
2,031 | 139,093 | 76823_0 | Is there a single name (word or short phrase) to cover the art of creation of images — _drawing, painting, sketching_ etc. — and specifically excluding sculpture, crafting and other arts that create other products than still images? "Graphic design" is close, but focuses on the utilitarian side, leaving "high art" out. "Traditional art" includes sculpture and excludes digital imagery. |
2,032 | 122,930 | 76823_0 | In Human Resources, we want to implement MOF (Manual of Functions) for each employee based on their area and position, so that when an employee leaves, the functions remains for the next employee. We now lack of a word to name this in HR. What is the best word to describe the position (that is, job title) of an employee in a specific area of an organization? Can anyone please help suggest a word? Possible candidates I found are _vacant_ , _place_ , _employment_ , and _job_. |
2,033 | 6,259 | 76823_0 | Is the following sentence grammatically incorrect? > Is it true that 1+1=2 ? I know it is easier to say: Is 1+1=2 true? |
2,034 | 6,258 | 76823_0 | I have seen this phrasing as > And what's more - > > And what's more, > > And what's more! Which one is most proper? |
2,035 | 67,813 | 76823_0 | If someone has the **wrong** end of the stick it means they've misunderstood something. If they've got the **shitty** end of the stick it means they've got a bad deal in some bargain or share-out. This doesn't seem particularly close to the **wrong** end meaning - so unless someone convinces me different, I'm not inclined to think these idioms share a common origin. Does anyone know where either or both of these expressions come from? |
2,036 | 122,939 | 76823_0 | What is the most common adjective used to describe objects that _can be tied_. I would think of _tieable_ but it does not seem to exist in the wiktionary. |
2,037 | 6,251 | 76823_0 | I guess I've been in mathematics for far too long, and I tend to use the phrase "Not all is lost" as the negative of "All is lost". To me the phrase "All is not lost" suggests that _nothing_ is lost. It doesn't send the message I'm trying to give which is that "at least one thing is not lost". What's your interpretation of the two phrases? |
2,038 | 6,257 | 76823_0 | I have seen the phrase '"Hot" Corned Beef' on several convenience store signs in my area. Since corned beef is is usually served warm or hot, am I missing part of the meaning of the sign? |
2,039 | 70,302 | 76823_0 | For the following sentence: > I haven't been there in a long time. I want to know if the above sentence conveys any connection with time up to now. How can I correct this sentence it if it is incorrect? |
2,040 | 49,679 | 76823_0 | I think the phrase "Don't get me wrong" in conversation means, "I'm about to say something that you might misunderstand, so don't." I'm looking for a similar phrase that sounds better when speaking to a group of people. I sometimes use the phrase "Don't take this the wrong way", but that seems even clunkier. |
2,041 | 42,995 | 76823_0 | Watching the discussion led by Dana Perino after the GOP debate this evening, Perino asked if "humility" was a good thing. Another commentator remarked, "humility yes, self-abjination no." (The spelling is a guess.) Perino said, "abjination? I don't know that word." Someone else said "must be one of those Harvard words." The commentator said, "it means self deprecating." So what is the word? I tried Googling some variants, but came up dry. |
2,042 | 42,994 | 76823_0 | Can I use "verbally" to refer to textual communication? For example, can I say "Verbally encourage this behavior" meaning "Encourage this behavior in writing"? |
2,043 | 42,992 | 76823_0 | Recently (September 2011), I hear some people would say "last August", which confuses me a little bit. Does "last August" refer to August this year or August last year? And can we also say "this August"? And what does "this August" mean? |
2,044 | 125,056 | 76823_0 | Let _x_ 1, . . . , _x n_ be a collection of mathematical objects. When I refer to them, do I have to say _the x i’s_ or just _the x i_? **Edit:** In this article (written by an American mathematician), one can read > ... is the set of all x's which have the form ... |
2,045 | 125,053 | 76823_0 | Why is "me" pronounced like "me" but "ne" is not pronounced with the same e sound? According to a professor, "ne" is pronounced like "nuh". Why is it like this? And more generally, does there exist a rule set on how to pronounce things so I don't have to ask a question like this again, or is it all word dependent and of unknown origin like idioms? |
2,046 | 148,179 | 76823_0 | I was told: > Glad to come across someone who knows Theology. My (proposed) response: > It's my pleasure to find someone else interested in Theology on the other > side of the World. I am unsure whether to use _interested in_ or _interested by_. Google Translate gives me the impression that I may be wrong. |
2,047 | 11,709 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > What is the longest word in the English language without a repeated letter? What is the longest word in the English language in which no letter repeats itself? |
2,048 | 185,189 | 76823_0 | How should one form the word _company_ when something belongs to a company? Is the correct form _companys_ , or should it be _company’s_ instead? |
2,049 | 128,008 | 76823_0 | I notice that there is a tradition in English of shortening names by omitting given names, which has been formalized in contexts like academia (the theorem of Gauss, the textbook by Young and Geller, citation rules) and law (the firm Baker & McKenzie, the case Roe v. Wade). Should we really be adopting this practice in contexts where surnames show less varied? For instance, I found that the most common surname is the US (Smith) takes 0.7% of the surnames, while the most common in China (王, Wáng) takes 7.3%. |
2,050 | 134,114 | 76823_0 | There was the following sentence in Time magazine (September 16) titled “”America’s weak and waffling. Russia’s rich and resurgent”: > “2008 summer also put Russia’s military to the test when a war broke out > with Georgia. Although Russia crashed its tiny adversary in less than a > week, its war machine was shown to be an inefficient wreck. More tanks were > lost to malfunction than enemy fire, and at one time Russian officers were > forced to use store-bought navigation gadgets after the official ones gave > out. “ **There were a lot of red faces** in the general staff,” recalls > Sivkov, the military strategist. Oxford online English Dictionary doesn’t carry the ‘red-face’ as a headword, but includes ‘red-faced’ as an adjective meaning ‘having a red face, especially as a result of embarrassment or shame.’ Cambridge online English Dictionary has entry of neither ‘red face’ nor ‘red- faced.’ Now, what does ‘red faces’ in the above quote exactly mean? Does it refer to people (Russian army’s general staff) with red face, or their sentiment (anger / embarrassment about the incompetence of their war machine)? Why is it ‘ _in_ ’, not ‘ _among_ ’ the general staff? |
2,051 | 45,340 | 76823_0 | Are there alternative words to 'sleep,' when used as a noun to mean 'the substance that sometimes forms in the corners of your eyes after you have been sleeping?' Are 'eye crust,' 'eye boogers,' 'eye gunk,' 'eye goop,' 'optibooger,' 'sleepy,' or 'gound' acceptable? It seems most dictionaries such as Oxford, Cambridge, Longman, Macmillan, Merriam-Webster, etc., don't include most of those words/terms. Why? |
2,052 | 45,345 | 76823_0 | Which phrase is better: "software developer life" or "life of software developer"? First one sounds better but I would like to get why in a rather formalised way. |
2,053 | 184,906 | 76823_0 | What are some differences between the ways/contexts in which one would use "ephemeral" versus "transient", and vice versa? |
2,054 | 45,349 | 76823_0 | I was pondering the names of haircuts the other day, and I could understand the origins of most of them: _pudding basin_ , _crew cut_ , _duck's arse_ , and _bog brush_ are all reasonably obvious, but I was rather stumped by _mullet_. A _mullet_ is defined here and here as a man's haircut in which the hair is short at the front and sides, but long at the back. Does anyone know how it got this name? The sources both say "etym. unkn.", but differ as to the time of origin, one saying 20th century, and the other 1990s. |
2,055 | 141,739 | 76823_0 | I often hear news reports of rapidly increasing problems use the word "exponentially" for emphasis. For example, tonight's BBC America World News included a segment on the growing Syrian refugee problem, saying the number of refugees was "increasing exponentially". Now clearly this usage is not consistent with mathematically accurate usage and though I'm sure most understand the intent, it still bothers me. For reference, the number of registered Syrian refugees increased from 471,808 on 2012-12-31 to 2,241,100 on 2013-12-13. Neither "five-fold increase" nor "quintupling" seem to have the same impact. Can anyone suggest an alternative word that is not so mathematical in nature to describe such an increase? Of course, I'm looking for a word to describe future growth, not past. |
2,056 | 173,307 | 76823_0 | Doesn't have to be "always", could also just be someone who shows a lot of pity for people around him. Could also be that some people may not always show it, but do feel very inclined most of the time to feel pity for others. |
2,057 | 133,462 | 76823_0 | From _Emma_ by Jane Austen, Chapter 31, the last paragraph: > "There is no charm equal to tenderness of heart," said she afterwards to > herself. "There is nothing to be compared to it. Warmth and tenderness of > heart, with an affectionate, open manner, will beat all the clearness of > head in the world, for attraction, I am sure it will. It is tenderness of > heart which makes my dear father so generally beloved—which gives Isabella > all her popularity.—I have it not—but I know how to prize and respect > it.—Harriet is my superior in all the charm and all the felicity it gives. > Dear Harriet!—I would not change you for the clearest-headed, longest- > sighted, best-judging female breathing. Oh! the coldness of a Jane > Fairfax!—Harriet is worth a hundred such.—And for a wife—a sensible man's > wife—it is invaluable. I mention no names; **but happy the man who changes > Emma for Harriet!"** [emphasis mine] What does the last sentence mean? Does it mean "I wish the man who changes Emma for Harriet to be happy" or does it mean "The man who changes Emma for Harriet is happy"? What does "changes Emma for Harriet" mean? Does it mean "make Emma a better person for Harriet"? And if you've read the book, who does "the man" refer to? My guess is Mr. Elton because he made Emma see some very good sides in Harriet and appreciate her much more. But I'm not sure if this was what the author meant. Thank you! |
2,058 | 133,468 | 76823_0 | I'm looking for a word for the larger amount from which a salesman's commission might be calculated. Something like **sale price** presupposes that his commission is calculated from that particular figure. I have used **principal** before because it's a very similar concept to interest being calculated from the principal of a loan, but it's technically incorrect for this purpose. I've considered **dividend** (i.e. dividend ÷ divisor = quotient) but this has other connotations Whereas **multiplicand** (i.e. multiplicand × multiplier = product) is too obscure. Anyone got a winner? |
2,059 | 80,859 | 76823_0 | Patrick O'Brian wrote the Aubrey/Maturin seafaring novels during the late 20th Century, but the novels read as if they were written during the early 1800s (at least as far as I can tell, which isn't all that far). O'Brian sometimes uses the phrase "old fashioned" in a way that apparently means something like "irked", "angry", or "disconsolate", depending on the situation. Here are two examples from his novels: From _Post Captain_ (second in the series): > “...and John Lakey, maintop. Do you remember him? You sewed him up very > near, the first time you ever sailed with us and we had a brush with an > Algerine. He swears you saved his privates, sir, and is most uncommon > grateful: would feel proper old fashioned without ‘em, he says.” From _Desolation Island_ (fifth in the series): > “I dare say," said Cobb. "But he’s only a blue finner, a nasty, spiteful > thing. You plant a harpoon in his side, and what does he do? He rushes on > you like a thunder-clap and beats the boat to splinters and then runs out a > thousand fathom of line. You don’t want to take notice of him. Now by your > leave, sir, I must go aloft. There’s Moses Harvey looking down quite old- > fashioned, for to be relieved.” The first quotation discusses a man who was wounded in the genitals during a battle and nearly lost them, but for the swift and capable action of the ship's surgeon. Presumably, when he says he would "feel proper old fashioned without 'em" he must mean something like disconsolate. The second quotation refers to Moses Harvey who is waiting to be relieved and is looking down disdainfully on Cobb, who should have already relieved him. I'm curious if this is how "old fashioned" was really used in England, or at least among British sailors, in the early 1800s, or if O'Brian is perhaps taking some literary license and coining a phrase that sounds right for the ambiance he's trying to create. |
2,060 | 164,227 | 76823_0 | I've already looked at Is there a word for "a point in time"?, but there doesn't seem to be any answers other than "timestamp". While I agree that it is the most technically accurate description, is there a term that lends itself more to a business environment? For example, I have a spreadsheet with a list of customer feedback. The date and time that each issue was reported is listed in a single column. What would be a good business-y name to call that column? I'm looking for something that means "timestamp" without using a term that could be…misconstrued…as overly technical. **EDIT:** To be more specific and concise, I'm looking for a term that means "timestamp", is used more popularly in a business environment than "timestamp", and is generic enough to always mean "timestamp" with almost any data. |
2,061 | 164,225 | 76823_0 | A google search came up with almost nothing. Am I just imaging things? I could have sworn one could use the term "on-parade" to mean a succession of something. For example: Life is an on-parade of unexpected events. or something like that. |
2,062 | 177,196 | 76823_0 | I have a document like training manual for troubleshooting networking, and one section in it has a title "Contact Drivers". Since this troubleshooting does not talk about device drivers at all, I have no idea what this means. |
2,063 | 4,604 | 76823_0 | I have always been intrigued by the word usage in the title of this Bob Dylan song. Wikipedia mentions that the song was influenced by Irish and Scottish ballads: > Dylan recalled writing the song as a deliberate attempt to create an anthem > of change for the moment. In 1985, he told Cameron Crowe: "This was > definitely a song with a purpose. It was influenced of course by the Irish > and Scottish ballads ...'Come All Ye Bold Highway Men', 'Come All Ye Tender > Hearted Maidens'. I wanted to write a big song, with short concise verses > that piled up on each other in a hypnotic way. The civil rights movement and > the folk music movement were pretty close for a while and allied together at > that time. * Is there a dialect where the form a-< _gerund_ > is common? e.g. a- _cooking_ , a- _cleaning_ , etc. * If so, in what context would you use the form a-< _gerund_ >? |
2,064 | 39,750 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > The times they are a-changin' > The times are a-changing? Why a-? While listening to some Bob Dylan I've noticed how he sometimes uses the construction **a-verb** (e.g. _The Times, They Are A-Changin'_ ) and wondered how to interpret it. Where does this **a-** come from? What does it mean? When can it be used? |
2,065 | 100,515 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > “right” vs “correct” I've had this question for a long time. Which sentence is grammatically correct? > Is this the **right** way? > > Is this the **correct** way? |
2,066 | 122,468 | 76823_0 | Which question is more proper? > _[some statement]_ , is it right? > > _[some statement]_ , is it correct? |
2,067 | 5,243 | 76823_0 | When writing out emails I often find myself replacing semicolons with hyphens or dashes. For example, "Let's meet up at the pub - or would you rather go to a restaurant?" I feel this is wrong, but I don't know why. Would someone care to explain, please? |
2,068 | 172,394 | 76823_0 | First of all some background. An acquaintance asked by email if I'm willing to offer advice on a project he's starting to develop. I answered yes for sure.He responded Wonderful,Stay tuned. I have no idea when I will receive the info to give my advice. This email was a few weeks ago. Today I decided to let him know I'm still interested, a little reminder. I wrote "I'll be looking forward to helping xyz (xyz- his name)." A friend told me my above response sounds like you aren't yet but will be in the future. I didn't consider this before sending it. He knows I want to help and it sounds like this project is a work in progress.I'm waiting to hear from him so I can offer advice. What I wrote does it convey yes I'm looking forward to helping you? My friend is right? Or is this not a correct sentence and should be worded differently? Thank you for your help. |
2,069 | 138,328 | 76823_0 | > A child meets this kind of discipline every time he tries to _do_ something, > which is why it is so important in school to give children more chances to > do things, instead of just reading or listening to someone talk (or > pretending to). _Three Disciplines for Children_ by John Holt And also, what does _pretending to_ mean here? |
2,070 | 138,326 | 76823_0 | I saw something about _Batman_ somewhere online, and for a very brief moment it crossed my mind that it sounds like 'bad man'. A fraction of a second later I noticed the bat logo. Bats are usually considered scary animals, so I came to wonder: > Is there a correlation between the animal _bat_ and _bad_? |
2,071 | 138,325 | 76823_0 | Is re a prefix in respect or just a part of the word? Any guidance on this would be appreciated? |
2,072 | 175,162 | 76823_0 | There was the following sentence in today’s (June 4) New York Times written by its Op-Ed columnist, Nickolas Kristof under the headline, “There’s a Kind of Hush.” > “Aung San Suu Kyi should be one of the **heroes** of modern times. Instead, > as her country imposes on the Rohingya Muslim minority an apartheid that > would have made white supremacists in South Africa blush, she bites her > tongue. > > http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/05/opinion/kritstof-theres-a-kind-of- > hush.html?hp&rref=opinion&_r=0 I understand “ hero” here is used as a generic of brave or great persons to cover both male and female 'heroes' ? However, OALED defines ‘hero’ specifically as male, as; 1. A person, **especially a man** , who is admired by many people for doing sth brave or good. 2. The main **male character** in a story, novel, film / movie etc. 3. A person, **especially a man** , that you admire because of a particular quality or skill that they have. CED also defines ‘hero’ as; 1. A very brave person, **often a man** , that a lot of people admire. 2. **The main man** in a book or movie. Can I apply ‘hero’ when I’m refering to Aung San Suu Kyi singly as “Aung San Suu Kyi is the hero of Burma”? |
2,073 | 40,268 | 76823_0 | I'm having a discussion with someone who thinks that it's a non-sequitur to describe something as X if it's not possible for it to not be X. Here's an example: > It's wrong to say a chair is amoral, because a chair cannot be moral. I don't agree, who is correct and why? |
2,074 | 162,975 | 76823_0 | How should I write this? > * ... shall not be eligible for any salary or compensation or experience > certificate if the Trainee fails to co-operate with XYZ for the exit > formalities > * ... shall not be eligible for any salary certificate or compensation > certificate or experience certificate if the Trainee fails to co-operate > with XYZ for the exit formalities > What I want the reader to understand from this sentence is that they wouldn't be entitled to any certificates (for salary/compensation/experience) if they don't co-operate with XYZ. |
2,075 | 162,976 | 76823_0 | I'm stuck with this example which I don't know how to solve > A: I've said bad things to my mum. > B: If I were you, I'd apologise to **your** mum. Is it supposed to be _your_ or _my_ instead? My feeling tells me that _your_ is right, but _my_ sounds more logical. |
2,076 | 162,979 | 76823_0 | I was reading a novel that used the term moral fiber - defined as strength of character - the other day and it occurred to me that it was a somewhat strange conjunction of terms. It sort of conjured up images of 'the stuff morality is made of'; but morality being an intangible idea it's not usually made up of tangible fibers… I found myself wondering how it originated. |
2,077 | 40,263 | 76823_0 | I was under the impression that every sentence has a subject–verb–object (`SVO`) where `S` and `V` are compulsory and `O` is optional. So basically I was wondering in the sentence "I'm Tom." is the subject "I" and the verb "am" ? But what about the "Tom" ? It simply can't be an object right? |
2,078 | 40,265 | 76823_0 | I used to have a list that showed the increasing strength of these words, but I seemed to have lost it. The words/phrases are: must/mustn't, should/shouldn't, have to/don't have to, can/can't, and are allowed to/aren't allowed to. |
2,079 | 178,533 | 76823_0 | I am looking for nouns for 1. A person who made a complaint; 2. The person who is being complained about. I would have used "complainer" but that sounds wrong as it is closer to saying that person likes to complain a lot. |
2,080 | 178,531 | 76823_0 | Is there any difference between " _ad hoc_ " and " _impromptu_ "? Can you find sentences where only one of the words is acceptable and the other is not? And where they are interchangeable? What about the following use case, which is better? > You have to book meeting rooms in advance, but there are also some meeting > rooms available - for _ad hoc_ meetings / for _impromptu_ meetings - which > you don't have to book. |
2,081 | 14,300 | 76823_0 | How do you add text which provides context to a quote? For example, consider if I were to quote someone as having said: > This is unacceptable! Were that the _whole_ quote, can I add any text to the quote to indicate what "This" refers to? I think I've seen it done with square brackets... > This [the death threats directed towards bloggers] is unacceptable! Is this correct? If no, how can it be done? Note my citation is simply from the top search result for the term "This is unacceptable" |
2,082 | 14,307 | 76823_0 | I do know that there isn't only one pronunciation for syllables, and I also know that there isn't only one way to write a phoneme, but this intrigues me a lot. Lose is spelled with only one O, and it's frequently misspelled with two Os. Choose is spelled with two Os, and it's frequently misspelled with one O. One of the forms of the past tense of "to choose" is "chose", which is pronounced very differently from "lose", even though both words share the same vocals and ending syllable. I'd like to see an explanation for this. Even on origin, or something I'm missing out here. Note: for me, double Os seems way more logical, as every time I read "lose", it seems a little weird. |
2,083 | 14,305 | 76823_0 | I was thinking about the word "acyclic" meaning not having or containing a cycle. Then I thought of the word "bicycle" and wondered if it made sense to call something that an "acycle". As an example I would want to say that stilts are an acycle (because they do not inherently contain a cycle or cyclic motion). |
2,084 | 145,698 | 76823_0 | > The first harbingers of Christmas arrive in October when **jarring** sales > and decorations follow fast on the heels of summer. Does the word _jarring_ here mean _annoying_ , or _early/preliminary_? |
2,085 | 45,961 | 76823_0 | > This candy tastes so sweet. Isn't 'tastes' a state-of-being verb? If it is why do people say there are only 8 state-of-being verbs - _is, am, was, are, were, being, be,_ and _been_? State-of-being verbs seem to be a fairly standard term. |
2,086 | 94,917 | 76823_0 | I think "trust the fact" is more natural than "trust to the fact", but the search result shows that the latter is more popular. What's the difference between them? Thanks. Yet another derived question: What's the difference between "trust to the fact" and "trust in the fact"? |
2,087 | 45,962 | 76823_0 | There is a word similar to _dematerialization_ that represents a slightly different concept. The concept goes something like this: everything eventually becomes invisible. The concept is particularly evident in technology. For example, paper was (and still is) an important technology but it is rapidly disappearing. It's gradually being replaced by computers. So, although the purpose & concept of paper is still around - the physical form is disappearing. Another example is the horn on a car. A century ago it was literally a pump you squeezed. Later the pump was integrated into the center of the steering wheel. And now, many cars there is no pump at all; it's simply an electronic button. That is this concept in action. I want to say _demapherialization_ but couldn't find any matches when Googling. But I do know for a fact there is a Wikipedia entry on it. The term was dubbed many decades ago. Anyway, it's a pretty cool concept. Perhaps someone may know it. |
2,088 | 122,207 | 76823_0 | According to dictionaries, one of the meanings of the word `dynamic` is: > a system with continuous change http://www.thefreedictionary.com/dynamic http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dynamic However, it's used as **adjective**. I'm writing a text in which I need to refer to **continuous change and changeability** and I thought of the word `dynamism`. In other words, I need the noun form of the `dynamic`. However, seems that `dynamism` is not used as that meaning. For example, instead of **the level of changeability and the amount of change in a system** , I'd like to write **system's dynamism level**. Can I use `dynamism` in that meaning? If not, what word should I use? |
2,089 | 17,964 | 76823_0 | I often hear people saying phrases of the type "How are _we_ doing over here?" by servers at restaurants, for example. Obviously they mean "How are _you_ (plural) doing?" Where does this type of usage of "we" come from? Is this pronoun misuse a regional thing? Has it entered mainstream American English? Am I wrong in thinking that it is incorrect? |
2,090 | 122,181 | 76823_0 | There's a book entitled Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead. It's not clear what exactly phrasal verb **Lean in** in it's title means. Does its meaning differ from the meaning of the verb **to lean** in the context of the book's name? |
2,091 | 151,387 | 76823_0 | A book is typically divided into sections, chapters, paragraphs. I'm looking for a noun that can be used to describe all of these - **book** , sections, chapters, **figures** , clusters of paragraphs and individual paragraphs - in a way that can be used recursively. I'm thinking perhaps something around the word "idea", but not sure what exactly and would appreciate other suggestions. Updated: I'd like a word that applies equally well to books as well. Updated again: If possible, I'd like also to be able to apply it to diagrams, tables and other such figures. It does not need to apply to the contents or index in the book. |
2,092 | 63,349 | 76823_0 | My linguistic teacher told me I am speaking like the people who lived hundreds of years ago, when I told him, "The paper fall to the ground when I pass it by," this afternoon. Please tell me which form below is correct when speaking? In addition, which expression seems more modern **in conversational English**? 1.The paper fell to the ground when I passed by. (fell to) 2.The paper fell on the ground when I passed by. (fell on) 3.The paper fell onto the ground when I passed by. (fell onto) 4.The paper fell onto the ground when I passed by it. (add it behind by) 5.The paper dropped onto the ground when I passed by. Please select one answer from these 5 **or type another one that you think is better and more appropriate than them**. |
2,093 | 66,933 | 76823_0 | I'm trying to remember a word that means showing strong opinion for; where someone has to make a choice between two opposite things. For example, say you have to choose what your favorite fruit is, apples or oranges, and in this sense, lets say apples and oranges are total opposites. There are people who strongly agree / favor with apples and people who strongly agree / favor oranges. Inherently, these people strongly disagree / oppose with the opposite choice. It might also be just a single object and there are people who like it and some who don't (1) What would the person be described as when they feel that strong, opinionated way? (2) And what is the word that describes this situation, in which one must decide between two opposites? |
2,094 | 66,937 | 76823_0 | > The whole point that him pretending to be rich is to get a date. > > The whole point of this supposing to be a big wall is to hold off the > barbarians. The first one seems correct, the second one doesn't sound quite right - but why wouldn't it be possible to use the equivalent forms here? I was thinking about > The point of this supposedly being a big wall... but that clearly does't mean the same thing. I am aware that one could say "The point of this being a big wall" even if the wall is not yet big, yet that doesn't seem to work in all cases. > The whole point of this supposing to be a macro is that it shouldn't matter > where it is located. This is the sentence I actually want to construct. I don't want to say "the whole point of this being a macro...", because that would too strongly imply that it is or should be thought of as one. Instead, the idea that it is _supposed to be_ a macro is first raised, and then dismissed. |
2,095 | 114,232 | 76823_0 | I'm looking for the opposite of gilded when used as: > having a pleasing or showy appearance that conceals something of little > worth. Most of the antonyms listed from different sources mean 'dull' or 'boring'. I'm looking for a word that literally means 'mundane on the outside but with a heart of gold'. Does such a word exist? |
2,096 | 114,230 | 76823_0 | I would like to contact my recruiter (via email) asking for updates on my application. What should I put in the title so it is informative, but also at the same time does not sound like I am too impatient? (I also would like to provide additional information about my accomplishments in the email) Thanks |
2,097 | 114,237 | 76823_0 | As far as I know, these are the meanings: * _wordlength_ — for instance, 4 bytes when the bitbreadth is 32 and 8 bytes when the bitbreadth is 64. * _bitbreadth_ — for example, 32 or 64 or 4 bits for a system. Are these spelled correctly, or should they be "word length" and "bit breadth"? Or perhaps different terms entirely should be used to express these meanings? |
2,098 | 173,473 | 76823_0 | The correct answer is "kept" but I don't understand why because shouldn't "over forty years" make it past progressive? This is from an ACT practice test. The passage talks about a guy making the clock on 1753 so maybe it is because the clock is not functional today? |
2,099 | 1,144 | 76823_0 | What is the correct sentence? > Neither Michael nor Albert is correct. > > Neither Michael nor Albert are correct. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.