Unnamed: 0 int64 0 40.2k | id int64 1 196k | chunk_id stringclasses 1
value | text stringlengths 18 6.44k |
|---|---|---|---|
3,000 | 133,639 | 76823_0 | I'm not sure of the meaning of the last word in the last line of G.M. Hopkin's "In the valley of the Elwy": God, lover of souls, swaying considerate scales, Complete thy creature dear O where it fails Being mighty a master, being a father and fond. Is that an adjective, i.e. _fond_ = affectionate? Or is that a noun, since _father_ is a noun too? If that's a noun, what's the meaning? Foundation? |
3,001 | 185,421 | 76823_0 | How would you describe _one who works hard with full interest and consciousness, including spending sleepless nights_. In such a scenario, sleep is deprived deliberately by the person. What is such hard work called where sleep is not given priority, and days and nights are devoted to work. Words like _workaholics_ don't implicitly speak of sleepless nights. Many programmers, writers and solution providers do it. I am looking for one word for such efforts. |
3,002 | 133,636 | 76823_0 | There are two sentences in _David Copperfield_ that I don't quite understand, with regards to their (possible) figurative meaning. **Chapter XIII:** > [...] a muslin curtain partly undrawn in the middle, a large round green > screen or fan fastened on to the window-sill, a small table, and a great > chair, suggested to me that my aunt might be at that moment seated in awful > state. What does "to be seated in awful state" mean? **Chapter XXXVII:** > [...] I would sit sometimes of a night, opposite my aunt, thinking how I had > frightened Dora that time, and how I could best make my way with a guitar- > case through the forest of difficulty, until I used to fancy that my head > was turning quite grey. What does David mean when he says that he imagines his head "turning quite gray"? |
3,003 | 185,423 | 76823_0 | The word 'spatial' is obviously derived from the word 'space'. So why is it usually written with a 't' instead of a 'c'? Is there a historical reason or is it because of some grammar rule I do not know about? |
3,004 | 10,684 | 76823_0 | If you are talking on behalf of you and someone else what is the correct usage? > On behalf of my wife and me > > On behalf of my wife and I > > On behalf of me and my wife > > On behalf of myself and my wife > > On behalf of my wife and myself > > ... My understanding is that after that phrase you would carry on talking in first person. |
3,005 | 75,233 | 76823_0 | > “Please, don't mock me.” > “Oh, no, ~~I don't!~~ **I’m not!** I'm completely serious about that.” This is a correction I received from a proofreader of my story. How does that work? What happens here so that "I don't mock you" should be replaced with "I'm not mocking you"? |
3,006 | 173,876 | 76823_0 | The question I need to rewrite has to be open ended, versus a yes or no. The question is, "Would you suggest more visuals in any of the rooms?" Visuals refer to pictures and other motivational displays. |
3,007 | 173,877 | 76823_0 | Joel Spolsky: > We started with Stack Overflow, a Q&A site for programmers about programming > questions. StackExchange is an attempt to bring that same technology to > other fields besides programming. Cooking, photography, etc. Each of these > sites is a StackExchange. Collectively they are the StackExchange Network. > **So when we say "StackExchange" we mean all these sites, of which there is > one big honking granddaddy called Stack Overflow.** The entries in Webster suggest that _honking_ refers to an object making a loud noise, but that meaning seems off in this context. What does "honking" mean in this context? |
3,008 | 42,895 | 76823_0 | Some find it difficult to form an "r" sound, and some are able to, but just don't. I'm looking for a word which means "not pronouncing r's", without implying inability to pronounce them, though that may be the case. Specifically, I'd like a word which mean "not pronouncing _any_ r's", but if there's a word which means "not pronouncing _some_ r's" (as in many dialects), that would be interesting to know too. |
3,009 | 173,870 | 76823_0 | Is there some word or phrase which gets the idea of "able to be accommodated" across without using the (apparently nonexistent) word "accommodatable"? I am going for the idea of "able to be made to happen." |
3,010 | 39,652 | 76823_0 | I am confused about when to use _finish_ instead of _complete_ and vice versa. May you help me in understanding when to use those words? |
3,011 | 39,655 | 76823_0 | I've read somewhere that some adjectives cannot be used in the predicative position; for example "this is a major problem" is acceptable, but "the problem is major" is not acceptable. I'm wondering what other adjectives cannot be used in predicative position other than _major_. Is it the only one we have in English? |
3,012 | 39,659 | 76823_0 | The article of today’s (August 27) Washington Post titled, “Obama offers 2012 election supporters change they can believe in — next term” begins with the following sentence: > Three years after storming the White House with the “fierce urgency of now,” > President Obama has a new message for his reelection campaign: Be patient, > democracy is big and tough and messy. “When I said, _Change we can believe > in_ ,’ I didn’t say, ‘ _Change we can believe in tomorrow_ ,’ ” Obama told a > crowd of 2,400 during a birthday celebration in Chicago this month. For a foreign English student, it’s difficult to comprehend and discern the difference between “Change we can believe in” and “Change we can believe in tomorrow.’” What was wrong with President Obama for Americans to make change they can believe in tomorrow,”? I think most people want to believe in tomorrow, not only living today. Can somebody elaborate the difference of meaning of “believe in,” and “believe in tomorrow”? |
3,013 | 71,264 | 76823_0 | Reading a J.K Rowling book, I came across the following: > It's only dying a bit later than I _would have_ , because I am never going > to the dark side! Is the _would have_ part compete here or does it have an implied unspoken verb after it? For example: would have _died_. And is it a future or a past conditional in this context? If it's a past one then how could it be used in a future context? |
3,014 | 37,598 | 76823_0 | In sentences like "Go home," the 'You' is implied, as in 'You go home.' What would be the implied words/full form of the sentence "Poor you"? It certainly isn't "You are poor." ** I am editing this question to clarify what I'm looking for - I know what the meaning of this sentence is (both meanings and the difference). I'm merely curious as to how to write it out with the verb so as to make it a grammatically complete sentence. Just like 'Go' would be 'You go.' ** |
3,015 | 152,739 | 76823_0 | During the third episode of the HBO show "True Detective" the following dialogue is exchanged: > Cop 1: "Certain linguist anthropologists think that religion is a language > virus that rewrites pathways in the brain; dulls critical thinking." > > Cop 2: "Well, I don't use ten dollar words as much as you, but for a guy who > sees no point in existence you sure fret about it an awful lot. And you > still sound panicked." > > Cop 1: "At least I'm not racing to a red light." I had not heard this phrase before, and am curious of its origin and meaning? EDIT: Before transcribing the dialogue, I had written the phrase as "racing to a stoplight." |
3,016 | 125 | 76823_0 | "Into" (one word) and "in to" (two words) are frequently confused. In what situations should the former be used? The latter? |
3,017 | 18,144 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > When should "into" be used rather than "in to," and vice versa? I often get confused about which one to use: _in_ or _into_? Kindly tell me what the difference is between the two. |
3,018 | 5,653 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > When should "into" be used rather than "in to," and vice versa? I am sorry if the question is silly, but I think I heard both options spoken by native speaker. So, which one is correct? |
3,019 | 31,777 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > "Checked into the database" versus "checked in to the database" I understand the difference between "into" and "in to". The first involves the movement towards the inside of a place. The latter, is a combination of an adverb and preposition. This is explained here. But, does "into" require that the place be a physical location? If so, I would guess using "in to" would be correct since SVN (or Git, or...) is not a physical location. Is it more correct to check code into svn or check code in to svn? |
3,020 | 68,621 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > When should "into" be used rather than "in to," and vice versa? > Difference between "in" and "into" I had to write a business plan the other day, and one of my coworkers found that I was using _in to_ incorrectly in the sentence > Data will be imported **in to** the database. What is the difference between _in to_ and _into_? |
3,021 | 42,850 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > When should "into" be used rather than "in to," and vice versa? Google Support: > 1. Visit Google.com. > 2. Search for NS lookup. > 3. Select a search result from the list. > 4. Type your web publishing address **in to** the field. > 5. Select CNAME record if it's not the default search query. > 6. Click Submit, or Lookup. > Shouldn't it have been _into_ instead of _in to_? Or am I misunderstanding something with regard to the language used here? |
3,022 | 5,219 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > When should "into" be used rather than "in to," and vice versa? I was recently submitting ("checking in") some data to a database and composed an email to my team informing them of the submission. What's the proper grammar to use here: > The changes are checked into the database or > The changes are checked in to the database What's the rule of thumb for proper usage between the two? Is there even a difference? |
3,023 | 141,216 | 76823_0 | Which is more correct? I’ve created a web page that you can just drag and drop the videos **in to** : http://... OR I’ve created a web page that you can just drag and drop the videos **into** : http://... |
3,024 | 194,270 | 76823_0 | "As I suddenly transitioned from being an overweight pimply-faced middle- schooler with confidence issues into a slim and active high schooler..." or "As I suddenly transitioned from being an overweight pimply-faced middle- schooler with confidence issues in to a slim and active high schooler..." |
3,025 | 18,810 | 76823_0 | What is the etymology of the word _beaver_ as it relates to a woman's vagina? |
3,026 | 18,817 | 76823_0 | Is there a feminine form of the word _bastard_? It seems like _bastard_ is a word that’s applied to male children only. |
3,027 | 33,030 | 76823_0 | Are there any recurring uses of the word "figment" other than in the expression "figment of the imagination"? |
3,028 | 125,753 | 76823_0 | I've heard that the word _Oriental_ , if used to people, is racism. Is it true? And if it is, why? |
3,029 | 123,324 | 76823_0 | I had to deal with typographically printed sheets with some generic text and fields to fill in information by hand (dates, signatures etc.) or through printing (if you are lucky to hit the fields). Each sheet has a watermark, its own serial number, and is unique. Literally translated from Russian they are called "forms of strict reporting", but I would like to know what a native English speaker calls them.  |
3,030 | 123,323 | 76823_0 | I wrote the following line in my thesis acknowledgment, while talking about my supervisor who carefully edited my thesis. > If this thesis reads uncluttered and effective, it would be for his > elaborate, meticulous feedback. I am not sure if this sentence is grammatically right (reads - would). Also does it make a claim that my thesis is so and so, or rightly conveys the conditional context? My brain became completely numb after two months of writing. Can anyone please edit this sentence for me? |
3,031 | 2,174 | 76823_0 | For example, in this sentence where the subject is qualified by a clause: > The assumption that a new airport will for sure make Tudor a flight hub is > highly dubious. I thought we could move _highly dubious_ to the head of the sentence but I forgot the general rules. |
3,032 | 123,329 | 76823_0 | Is it true to say we are new to social media (in order to say that we are not familiar with social media) thanks |
3,033 | 7,128 | 76823_0 | I have seen both forms in usage. |
3,034 | 7,129 | 76823_0 | Taking us behind the scenes, Paulson shows, day by day, how the U.S. government and Federal Reserve got sucked into a vertiginous game of chicken with Wall Street bankers (link) |
3,035 | 106,453 | 76823_0 | > The dog attacked the cat and its friends. Does the sentence imply that the dog attacked the cat and the cat's friends or that it attacked the cat and the dog's friends? How would one properly construct the sentence for each meaning? |
3,036 | 88,490 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > When do you use “learnt” and when “learned”? It was my understanding that ending verbs with "t" / "nt" in the perfect tense was merely to accommodate irregular verbs > I go > > I went ~ > I sleep > > I slept etc. But more and more often I'm hearing people using it (particularly in the media) with verbs that are totally regular. > I learn > > I learnt Which is correct, and why? |
3,037 | 37,624 | 76823_0 | References for _"glad hand"_ in its common meaning of "effusive but perhaps insincere greeting" seem easy to find [1], and it's easy to find definitions for the truck-hose-coupler meaning of _gladhand_ [2], [3] but I'm at a loss for finding out the origin of the latter usage (aside from imagining gladhand might derive from a manufacturer's name). Is any evidence available? |
3,038 | 37,622 | 76823_0 | I have seen _shameful_ and _shameless_ being used interchangeably, but it is surprising that they would mean the same. Is there a difference? |
3,039 | 37,629 | 76823_0 | The word _mischievous_ is sometimes pronounced with a long e sound between the v and the last vowel (mis-chee-vee-us), although this is controversial. Is there a name for this type of word, where the pronunciation is made more complex than the spelling indicates? |
3,040 | 17,949 | 76823_0 | In what contexts are those two words used? It's been a while since I've read the grammar books and I don't exactly remember the definitions of a few terms like adjective, so I would really appreciate it if the answers didn't leave it off by saying _x_ is verb and _y_ is adjective - I learn more by practical examples. Please do mention similar words as well. |
3,041 | 77,831 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > "Advise" vs "advice" I found few Q&As, about advice vs advice, But Still I couldn't figure out how to use it in a particular context. In EMails or Letters after sending some spefic instrictions that need support from the person receieving, "Please Advice" or "Please advice" is used. > The requested task cannot be handled as you explained, and we have attached > the technically feasibility and an alernate to resolve this issue with time > and cost involved. Please go through it and advise. Should I use "Please advice" or "Please advise". In this is case the person writing is not less knowledgeable, but still seeking opening/approval for the cost. |
3,042 | 4,934 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > "Advise" vs "advice" I've seen twice in in 30 minutes how someone had said that they wanted advise on [...] subject, or how they needed advise on [...]. Is this correct? |
3,043 | 85,131 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > "Advise" vs "advice" What is wrong with the statement "Please advise on this..."? Word suggests to change it to "Please advice on this...". |
3,044 | 170,630 | 76823_0 | When we can use advice instead of advise? Can somebody help me? |
3,045 | 84,541 | 76823_0 | I found the phrase, “the message is the same every time, _almost down to the word_ ” in the article titled “As debates loom, Romney grasps for a closing argument” appearing in October 1st Time magazine. The article reports that everywhere he goes lately, President Obama begins his stump speech with a story about a four-year-old boy named Samm. When Samm’s parents asked their son if he recognized the leader of the free world, he did. “What does Barack Obama do?” they asked Sammy, and Sammy replies: “He approves this message.” Then the writer follows: > “It’s a funny little ice-breaker. But it’s also a bridge to the message > itself, which is that Obama wants to emphasize the middle class as the > foundation of a strong economy, whereas Romney’s top-down economics benefits > the rich. The message is the same every time, _almost down to the word_.” From the context, I guessed “ _almost down to the word_ ” is synonymous with “almost verbatim.” But I don’t find “down to the word” in any of Cambridge, Oxford and Merriam-Webster dictionary as an idiom, though they register “down to earth,” “down to the wire,” “down to the present day,”and “down to there.” On the other hand, Google Ngram registers “down to the word.” It shows usage of this phrase existed ever since before 1840, but its currency has been declining sharply after peaking during 1860 to 1920. Is my understanding of “down to the word” as synonymous with “verbatim” right? Is “down to the word” an idiom, or a simple set of words. Is it still a popular phrase , or pretty old-fashioned expression because I can’t find it in any dictionaries I’ve checked? |
3,046 | 84,544 | 76823_0 | Say you need to read someone their password over the phone and you spell it phonetically so that there is no confusion between M and N etc. Now that is straight forward but what if the password is mixed letter case? Let's take this password: "AbcDe". What is the correct way to spell out this password so that the user at the end of the phone knows which characters are upper case and which are not? |
3,047 | 18,308 | 76823_0 | Does the verb "provide" always have to be used with "with"? For example, > Can you provide me _with_ some good examples? > > Can you provide me some good examples? > > Can you provide some good examples? I suppose it's a transitive verb, isn't it? Moreover, is the following type of usage correct? > You should provide food for your dog before you go on vacation. If you could give me some good examples regarding "provide" with different types of usage, I'd appreciate that. |
3,048 | 66,557 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > Usage of the verb "provide" > Is the sentence “It provides people an easy way to communicate.” > grammatically correct? > Can you provide me a mouse pad? > and > Can you provide me with a mouse pad? This seems to convey the same meaning, if I use 'with' or omit it from the sentence. Is there any difference between the above two sentences? Why do we use 'with' here and in other sentences of such type? |
3,049 | 137,660 | 76823_0 | I am wondering if the following sentence is correct: > We add the information their study provides with to our article. The context is: their study provides with some information. And we add the information to our article. I want to keep the word "add", and someone told me that "provides with to" sounds wired... |
3,050 | 185,600 | 76823_0 | I have a sentence that reads: "To provide you the best possible service..." I'm being asked to add the word _with_ so that it reads "To provide you with the best possible service..." Is there a rule for whether or not I add the word _with_ or is it a preference and the sentence works either way? |
3,051 | 73,309 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > Why is it incorrect to start a sentence with "and"? Is it acceptable to use coordinating conjunctions to start a sentence in standard English? > ...should not be left to a subgroup. And everybody must perform a final > runthrough. I have seen opinions both for and against this practice, and am unsure as to the agreed custom. |
3,052 | 51,723 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > Why is it incorrect to start a sentence with "and"? In grammar school, my English teachers taught me that I should never begin a sentence with a conjunction. Of course, that was before the advent of email, instant messages, text messages, Twitter, and Facebook updates. My Question: Does the conversational nature of email allow us to begin sentences with conjunctions? |
3,053 | 86,981 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > Is it really incorrect to start a sentence with “and”? > Is there any valid rule discouraging the use of a certain word to start a > sentence? > Usage of “And” in the beginning of a sentence > Can I use "but" at the beginning of a sentence? I heard that "but, and, so" are not supposed to be used at the beginning of a sentence. I have noticed, however, a lot of sentences use "but, and, so" as the first word of the sentence. Are the words at the beginning of the sentence grammatically correct? |
3,054 | 152,284 | 76823_0 | View the following text as a generic example, disregarding issues of context, etc. > Stir constantly as the mixture begins to boil, watching the temperature > regularly as the contents begins to settle within the pan. But be warned, > <<[etc, etc]>> I vaguely remember that "but" should never follow directly after a full stop, yet 'but' often falls directly after a pause in spoken conversation. Are there conditions that 'but' can be used after a full stop/period while writing? If not, what is the best way to make a notable pause before a 'but' in such a case? |
3,055 | 30,516 | 76823_0 | Is using a comma then an "and" or an "or" after it proper punctuation? Example: > * I fell over, and hurt my knee. > * Should I go, or not? > |
3,056 | 157,571 | 76823_0 | Is it correct or redundant to say 'and also' together. Would it make a difference to use 'and also' at beginning of sentence, or e.g. after a comma? |
3,057 | 2,765 | 76823_0 | Is there any rule you think is valid that discourages the use of a certain word to start a sentence? Because I suspect the answer is no. But it would be good to have a blanket answer to this kind of question. |
3,058 | 147,146 | 76823_0 | I have been corrected several times recently for putting a comma before a conjunction in a sentence (splitting phrases, not items in a list). To each their own style guide, but my understanding was that (using 'and' as an example): * in the prehistoric era, the rule was to _always_ put a comma before 'and', no matter the context * in the modern era, there are two schools of style about 'and', commas and the final item in a list (which I am not concerned with here) * in the modern era, you _may_ put a comma before 'and' in a _non-list_ to emphasise, indicate a pause, tweak meaning, etc. So that: > We will fight them on the beaches and the landing grounds. has a slightly different meaning to > We will fight them on the beaches, and the landing grounds. ...but both are valid. Is this comma in fact optional, or always to be discarded? Have I half-learned a (possibly out-moded) style rule without realizing it? |
3,059 | 16,976 | 76823_0 | Since I first learned English, I have been holding this understanding that "and", as a conj. but unlike "but", can only connect two clauses, not two sentences ended with periods. But recently, I have seen so many prints, either in entertainment or in academia, where "And" is popularly used in the beginning of a sentence. It seems like the author is trying to connect the sentence just right before and the sentence following "And" in some intended meaning which I don't quite get. I was wondering if I have been wrong all the time, or if there is a new trend that I fail to understand and accept? How to understand such usage of "and" in rigorous English grammar? If I am right, why it is used differently from "but" in terms of what I mentioned at the beginning of this post? |
3,060 | 120,790 | 76823_0 | I try my best to use proper sentence construction and punctuation, and for my amusement, I've taken the quest to find meaningful situations where one might use the various conjunctions at the beginning of sentences. I was told that "because" was the only one that's worthy of being placed at the start of a complete sentence. However, I've taught myself to challenge what I've been taught by attempting to discover flaws or contradictions in the logic. Along my journey, I've noticed that English is full of opposite words thus maintaining harmony and balance. By now, you should see where I'm heading with this idea; I've set out to find the inverse to the word "because." I know of the obvious examples that come to mind such as "except," "albeit," and "not because." None of these seemed to suit a universal role, though, but I believe I have discovered a solution, and I would like to know if this would be acceptable for use in sophisticated writing: > But for the faint, guiding light in the distance, the hallway was completely > dark. Which would have the same meaning as the following statement: > The hallway was completely dark but for the faint, guiding light in the > distance. Here we have the same two clauses and the same idea, but in a different order. You might observe that the phrase "but for" can be a wide-use substitute for the three examples previously listed (not directly, but in combination with other words). Please keep in mind that I follow strict guidelines, and I strive to present myself as professional as possible when conveying my ideas through language, and as such, I would prefer it if your responses would take this proposal in the same perspective. |
3,061 | 48,974 | 76823_0 | For a while, using _but_ to start a sentence was largely frowned upon. But, I think it is possible to use _but_ at the beginning of a sentence, as long as it isn't overused. Am I right? |
3,062 | 50,527 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > Should I use a comma before "and" or "or"? Is it appropriate and/or advisable to use a comma before 'and' in some situations? |
3,063 | 144,657 | 76823_0 | Can we start a sentence with "And"? Is the following example correct? From now on, the biochemistry lecture class on Mondays at 10.30 a.m. will be held on Sundays at 11.30 a.m instead. And the anatomy lecture class on Sundays at 11.30 a.m. will be held on Mondays at 10.30 a.m instead. |
3,064 | 83,016 | 76823_0 | My title may not completely reflect the meaning I am trying to get across. I am writing a card for my dad (who is 58 this year) to go alongside a gift I am getting him. I know he enjoys shooting, but he is finding is harder due to a lasting injury to his left arm he sustained some time ago, so am getting him a shooting stick (specifics not really relevant). Basically, he could take it that I am _patronizing_ (this is the word I am unhappy about) him, and I would like to make a jokey reference to this in the card. So far I've written; > Have a great day - I hope the present is suitable (and not too ...) I would like to write something along the lines of patronizing or belittling, but these do not feel right to me, but I cannot think of the word I would actually like to use. Thanks |
3,065 | 83,014 | 76823_0 | Here is an example sentence: > We carry out life cycle assessments on developed products to determine their > environmental burden throughout the life cycle of the product. I am trying to figure out if this would include products still in the development process such as completed prototypes, or if it only refers to products the company is ready to put on the market. Based solely on grammar it would seem that it would _not_ include prototypes, but I get the feeling actual usage is not quite so simple. |
3,066 | 598 | 76823_0 | It happens all the time. You are in line at the grocery store, Starbucks or anywhere cashiers are employed. Having finished a transaction, one will cheerily offer to help "the _following_ customer." I'm pretty sure that "the _next_ customer" is the correct usage here, unless they call that following customer by name. Am I right? |
3,067 | 71,487 | 76823_0 | How should I punctuate "it doesn't matter if you're [blank]" to disambiguate the following two sentences: 1. Q: "Which hand should I use to shoot a basketball?" A: "It doesn't matter if you're ambidextrous." (if your right hand is as good as the left, you can use either one) 2. Q: "Will I be a better cook if I'm ambidextrous?" A: "It doesn't matter if you're ambidextrous." (motor skills will not improve your cooking) |
3,068 | 40,639 | 76823_0 | I am writing to someone who is a sort of respectful person and I wanted to form a sentence such as below and I am wondering if using _grab_ instead of _learn_ or _get_ is informal and looks odd. > I'd like to invite you to Somewhere where you will be able to grab a lot of > cultural and historical artifacts. _Grab_ should mean "learn", "experience", etc. |
3,069 | 120,485 | 76823_0 | A quote from _The Economist_ : > This was also the young woman—she was 19 or 20 then—who could turn her > aircraft over and dive full-throttle through raking German searchlights, > swerving and dancing, **acting as a decoy** for a second plane that would > glide in silently behind her to drop its payload of bombs. That done, the > second plane would **act as decoy** while she glided in to drop bombs > herself. Please explain why in the second mention the indefinite article is omitted. _Decoy_ is not a mass noun. Is this idiomatic usage? |
3,070 | 3,135 | 76823_0 | Many names seem to get a "-y" or "-ie" at the end when the speaker wishes to denote a hint of familiarity, intimacy, or tenderness. Examples can be seen not just in names, but in terms like _puppy, kitty_. Close friends of Robert might call him _Bobby_ , whereas, if you think about it, it's hard to imagine _Bobby_ used in a more formal setting. What is the origin of this practice? |
3,071 | 178,965 | 76823_0 | In the Philippines, they use the honorific _ma'am_ before a name, such as _Ma'am Garcia_ or _Ma'am Karen_. I think this is incorrect use of the word _ma'am_ , but I was told it is acceptable. Is this usage correct? |
3,072 | 44,992 | 76823_0 | If I had a list of awards and wanted to organise that list by the organizations that gave out those awards, what would be a good word to use? I can only think of _by awarder_ which doesn't sound great. |
3,073 | 44,991 | 76823_0 | According to the dictionary, _man_ can refer to both men and women. Take this example: > Understanding the laws of physics allows a man to understand the world > around him in profound ways. Is this considered wrong English these days? Or just old-fashioned? Would it be frowned upon? Would the following be better? > Understanding the laws of physics allows one to understand the world around > him in profound ways. Again, according to the dictionary, _him_ can refer to both sexes. Any more alternatives I should consider? The reason I'm asking: I really dislike the use of the overly lengthy _him or her_. (Not to mention using just _her_ —that's just plain wrong according to any dictionary, if one is referring to both sexes.) I'm trying to simplify my writing as much as possible. |
3,074 | 44,997 | 76823_0 | What is the origin of the term _chemistry_ when used to refer to chemistry between two people? Of all words why is it chosen to describe the feeling? Searching for the term gives different kinds of chemistry that exist between two people. Aren't they describing the same thing? |
3,075 | 40,637 | 76823_0 | Can someone tell me whether we should use "at" when we use where: > The design is so unified and everything is at where they should be. Or it must be like the one below: > The design is so unified and everything is at which they should be. Also please check the sentences below and tell me whether they are correct. > The design is so unified and everything is located at where they should be. > > The design is so unified and everything is located at which they should be. |
3,076 | 178,963 | 76823_0 | Why is the term 'tyre kickers' used to describe potential customers that want something for nothing or are likely to prove troublesome or waste your time? I believe it was likely something to do with car sales and the stero typical, kick the tyre when you go take a look at the car but I assume this is a term that can used in any other sales context? |
3,077 | 47,941 | 76823_0 | As in "that which could be edited," or "editable" if you will. |
3,078 | 14,758 | 76823_0 | What is called a film's info such as year, director, country, actors, actresses, language, length... all the info related to it. I don't want to say metadata or credits. Any other words? EDIT: I want to find film equivalent of masthead (used in print) |
3,079 | 14,755 | 76823_0 | Which one of the following sentences is grammatically better? > I hope she has started doing that by then. > I hope she will have started doing that by then. Now, if I make it indirect, it will probably be: > My hope is that she will have started doing that by then ...Which makes me think the second one might not be correct. Also, is there any difference between American and British English usage? |
3,080 | 14,757 | 76823_0 | I am looking at a corporate brochure that includes the phrase: > Our international **target group** includes governments, businesses and > semi-private organisations. Somehow the word 'target group' does not sit well with me in this context. The company is Dutch (as am I) and we know the word 'doelgroep' to identify those businesses or individuals you are creating your services or products for. 'Target group' is a literal translation of this word. I'm inclined to use '(target) market' instead. What do you think? |
3,081 | 1,482 | 76823_0 | To prevent myself from asking an obvious, silly question multiple times: What are the English language tools you found most useful? I found Corpus Concordance English extremely useful for looking up collocations. Please, one tool per answer. |
3,082 | 112,159 | 76823_0 | I usually use Google Translate to translate from my language into English and vice versa. But sometimes the translation is not right as words have different meanings depending on context, or maybe the source is not verified. For my mother tongue I can find an authoritative source, but what about English? Where can I find a trusted source to be used as reference? |
3,083 | 133,604 | 76823_0 | An example, just a minute ago I was looking for a word to replace _candidate_ _Amongst the candidates for the album title._ since the _candidate_ is a person, not the one-of-many album titles. So, I was wondering. When faced with a problem as such, where do you go to look for a certain word, if you cannot remember it / do not know it? |
3,084 | 152,126 | 76823_0 | I was wondering there are any dictionaries/a dictionary that if I search for a word, for example: news, the dictionary will provide its word family or any types of usages related to this word, for example: news -> {reading, magazine, politics, amusing, global warming, accident, ..}. |
3,085 | 109,901 | 76823_0 | I am looking for a site or tool which would show a word used in actual sentences and expressions, in everyday life, business, scientific books, spiritual books and any other contexts. Looking a word in Merriam Webster, there are a few examples of how it can be used. But I would like to see 100 examples, and each one within a context of at least one paragraph, to feel how and when this word is actually used. Something like google, but limited to word usage. Is there something like this? |
3,086 | 66,140 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > Regulatory bodies and authoritative dictionaries for English What are the most famous or authentic dictionaries? I mean- One can use a dictionary to learn about the meaning of the word, but sometimes, through very rarely, one has to learn the _exact_ meaning of the word, and be really clear about the boundaries of the definitions of that word. I have heard about Merriam-Websters, Collins, American Heritage, Oxford, Cambridge, WordNet (when you use define: keyword in google). All dictionaries give a list of meanings that the word _can_ be used in, so I automatically assume if a usage is not listed, it can't be used in that sense, and if it is, it can absolutely be used in that sense. I am not using a dictionary to 'make sense' of a word while reading something that I just have to understand, but sometimes something that I have to critically analyse and argue against. |
3,087 | 90,765 | 76823_0 | > **Duplicate of:** > Regulatory bodies and authoritative dictionaries for English In other languages there are official institutions which control the development of the language and provide official references so the users of the language can go there to check how to use the language when they have a doubt. For example in Spanish that reference is online and can be freely checked by any user. I wonder if there is any similar official organization which provides references or dictionaries for users. How do native speakers know what is correct or not when they have a doubt? Where can they check it? Is there any free online resource with enough reliability for that? |
3,088 | 92,425 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > Is there an ‘official’ way to suggest a new word become part of the English > language? > What are the criteria to adopt new words into English? > Creating a new word > Regulatory bodies and authoritative dictionaries for English I was reading an article on how the Oxford Dictionary was being updated, and wondered what criteria would make a word suitable for being in a dictionary. I used to assume that all words would be included in a dictionary of such reputation, but this is obviously not the case. So my question is, what makes a word applicable to be added in the Oxford Dictionary? Is there a process for choosing these new words? Thanks. |
3,089 | 26,197 | 76823_0 | Since language evolves over time -- the best example I can think of is slang where it mostly doesn't follow grammar rules -- why is there a need to preserve grammar or stress that proper grammar be used? My second question is if someone can get their exact point across to another person without using proper grammar, then why does grammar matter? Could the reason be that if grammar is used then it implies that there is a standard way of communicating, thus people would be able to spend the least amount of effort getting their point across? Wait! Doesn't slang already do this? |
3,090 | 25,138 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > Regulatory bodies and authoritative dictionaries for English > Creating a new word > What are the criteria to adopt new words into English? I've always been told, at least in English class, that English is so complicated for non-native speakers to learn and has a variety of flaws. These teachers also point out that English's greatest strength is picking up new words. I know we assimilate words from other languages, 'promote' words from slang to standard and sometimes just come up with new words. Opinions of educators aside, how is it that words get added to the language? Does someone call up the folks that write the Oxford English dictionary or what? **Edit** in response to Callithumpian's comment: that's good to know about the Oxford folks, but what about any other standardization groups? If not, how does it usually happen that new words trickle in to different official publications? I've never heard of any International Society of English or anything like that. On the other hand, I haven't looked terribly far. |
3,091 | 110,399 | 76823_0 | What are some great references on English pronunciation practices? The book The Big Book of Beastly Mispronunciations was mentioned in an answer on this site. Is it considered authoritative? What are some other references, especially ones discussing differences between different English accents? |
3,092 | 462 | 76823_0 | Some languages have a "regulatory body" issuing recommendations and guidelines regarding the use of that language. For example in the case of Spanish it's the _Real Academia Española_ whose status is recognised in all Spanish-speaking countries. The Academy, among other things, publishes a dictionary ("DRAE"), in print and online, which is usually given a lot of prestige (but is not without controversies, of course). Are there any such authorative—or at least influential—institution(s) or publication(s) for the English language? |
3,093 | 105,987 | 76823_0 | Who decides what is "proper grammar"? Who decides when to make changes when the grammar of the people change, and why is it important to follow "proper grammar" if languages change so often? Edit: to clarify my question, I'm asking specifically about parts of language that can change over times, such as semantics and phonetics, and not about the grammar rules that are consistent across all languages |
3,094 | 28,193 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > What are your favorite English language tools? I have a question regarding the English language that is too general for this site according to the faq. OTOH, I don't know where to look for the answer. Is there a list of sites, books, etc. that are commonly used to answer questions? |
3,095 | 93,944 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > Regulatory bodies and authoritative dictionaries for English > Where do accents and dialects come from? > I can run faster than **_**. (1) him (2) he? > If the English language is always evolving, why do we need to learn and > follow grammatical rules? First of all, I'd like to say I hope that this won't be considered completely out of topic as my question is rather general (and too long) but after all, I don't know where else to ask if not here. I'm a non-native speaker (Czech) and in the process of learning I, obviously, encountered a number of cases when I wasn't sure and asked the teacher, a native speaker, or looked the answer up in a book. No problem so far. I later became an English teacher myself (thank god, those days are gone :) and started being asked various questions, too. This wasn't a problem either - I answered them according to the books and sometimes added a little more of what I knew about "real-life" usage. Nevertheless, the more you learn about any language (including your own), the more you realize that there are certain truths written in books that are rather simplifications and generalizations - needed for the student to be able to learn things without being overwhelmed by too much information but not precise and exact facts. That wouldn't be a problem either. It's obvious that you can't discuss all details at the very beginning. But to my surprise (which still lasts), I also found out that there was actually no standardization authority that would have a final say in terms of what is right and what is wrong. And if you study English books carefully, you will realize that even Cambridge (as the main English testing authority in mainland Europe) and Oxford (as the unofficial language authority) often differ in their interpretations of what is correct and what is not. And American English (which I tend to use) doesn’t even seem to have these. I do understand that there are big differences not only among American, British, Australian, Canadian, South African... variations of the language but even among regions, classes etc. But someone from a country like mine would somewhat automatically expect that at least for each country there would be an "ultimate authority" which could say that I should use this or that if I want to speak/write correctly. There are a lot of different dialects in the Czech Republic. Surprisingly many for such a small country. And that's perfectly fine. But if you're not sure what the standard, formal form is, there is the "Dictionary of Standard Czech" and the "Rules of the Czech Language" where you find the ultimate answer. And if you don't, there is the "Institute for the Czech Language" where you can get answers even to the most complicated questions. Germans have the same for their language (remember the argument over the sharp s not so long ago) and I believe so do most European countries. If you've read this far, you must be curious what my question actually is. OK, here it comes: is all the language talk really just a matter of personal preference or is there any source of information that I can consider final? Does correctness really depend only on how often something is used? To pick just a few “ever green examples”, is "better than I" or "better than me" correct? Who’s the one to say that “color” is American while “colour” is British or Canadian? When my American friends say "If I would've done that", can they argue that it's correct just because it's used where they're from? Where can I find the line between “generally used” and “accepted as grammatically correct”? And an additional question: have there ever been attempts (that probably failed) to introduce a general English authority that would have the final say? I have absolutely nothing against colloquial, slang, spoken language. Actually, who doesn't use it and tries to be hypercorrect at any cost sounds like a moron. But there are moments when you want to consult someone you can trust. And no offense to this site (which I really love) but the answers often resemble rather personal opinions than definite facts. And therefore I'm asking this question to which there is probably no true, correct answer. But it was biting my brain for too long so it had to get out. |
3,096 | 80,006 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > What are your favorite English language tools? This may seem like a meta question but I feel it is really about English Language and Usage. What is the preferred online free dictionary of this community? There are so many out there? Some internet based seems to be very advertising oriented while some other only seem to aggregate crowdsourced content from other sites. |
3,097 | 50,880 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > Regulatory bodies and authoritative dictionaries for English Many times I searched across several books for the usage of some words and many times I've found my results quite contradictory. For example, if you look for the plural of "sorry" you will find many dictionaries that don't even consider "sorries" or "sorrys" as a word, but you can find others that do, and/or find many references in books to such terms (both of them in this case). So, which one to believe? And how is one to back that decision up? Try this case: sorries sorrys and you won't find any of those terms in the Collins English Dictionary for example. |
3,098 | 118,143 | 76823_0 | I am constantly correcting people when they use they say "this begs the question" incorrectly intending to suggest that some other assertion requires more information, rather than to point out that the statement that begs the question is a circular argument. This happens so frequently (or at least I notice it being used wrong so often) that I actually can't recall the last time I heard anyone use it the way it was originally intended. So, I'm curious, at what point does the official definition start to include the erroneous usage? Is there an official officiating body that decrees when a phrase has been adopted so widely that it becomes the correct (or at least *a correct) way to employ it? |
3,099 | 151,765 | 76823_0 | Is there any website to learn all tenses for a given regular verb or irregular verb with search option. I've searched on google. But i'm not get exact website url. If anyone knows share with me. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.