Unnamed: 0 int64 0 40.2k | id int64 1 196k | chunk_id stringclasses 1
value | text stringlengths 18 6.44k |
|---|---|---|---|
38,600 | 67,774 | 76823_0 | I would like to know what is the difference between _to thump_ and _to punch_? For example: > I punched him and knocked his teeth out. or > I thumped him and knocked his teeth out. |
38,601 | 156,515 | 76823_0 | Take these two sentences. 1.I want him dead. 2.I want him to be dead. What is the differences between two sentences? What does the "to be" mean? |
38,602 | 67,776 | 76823_0 | Since present perfect continuous is used to talk about an activity that has finished, but whose results are visible now, can I use it for an action like these two ones; 'I have been living in Los Angeles.' 'I have been living in Los Angeles my whole life.' Meaning that both actions are finished actions, as I have relocated recently to another location and the result of my relocation is obvious. If present perfect continuous doesn't show that these two actions above are finished actions, then in what cases does present perfect continuous express that the action has finished? Thanks |
38,603 | 1,234 | 76823_0 | I'm wondering which one of these expressions is correct? _This stuff_ or _these stuff_? |
38,604 | 23,663 | 76823_0 | I can describe "IMHO" as an acronym for "in my humble opinion." How can I describe the reverse processes of translating the acronym into the actual phrase? That is to say, if "IMHO" is the acronym, what do we call "in my humble opinion"? |
38,605 | 28,390 | 76823_0 | I hear both (and their negatives: "I'm not sure" and "I'm not for sure"). I want to classify the "for sure" variety as regional Southern, since that's the context I most often hear it. For example, take the "gimp" scene from _Pulp Fiction_. (Not that usages in the movies prove anything, mind you, but this is an example most people will recognize.) The character Zed is asked which of the captives he wants to "do" first, and he replies, with a distinct Southern accent, "I ain't for sure yet." Can anyone point to evidence that this usage is regional, or class-based, or particular to any group of speakers? EDIT: Since @MrHen asked for more examples, I googled "I'm not for sure" and picked these off the first page: > "I'm really not for sure ~ what to do with you." > > "I'm not for sure if I'm allowed to bump this ..." > > "I'm not for sure which religion I am?" > > "I'm not for sure when ..." I think it's heard more in the negative than the positive. But I do hear it a lot. In the positive form, it's usually used in the form of a question? "Are you for sure?" instead of "Are you sure?" **UPDATE** I was listening to NPR last night and someone from Alabama who was being interviewed used "for sure" in the positive, as in "I was for sure that I wanted to do that." |
38,606 | 66,420 | 76823_0 | I have just read this comic, and not quite sure what is the mistake in the last sentence "How pacific do these errors have to be?". Should it be peaceful instead of pacific? (English is my second language.)  |
38,607 | 66,427 | 76823_0 | I'm interested in reading a series of the art and craft of writing by Constance Hale, a San Francisco-based journalist in the New York Times. The 4th in the series on NYT April 30 issue deals with the use of passive voice under the title, “The pleasures and perils of the passive," which reads as follows; > The word passive gets a bad rap. Maybe a high school teacher forbade > “passive constructions.” Or we recall authorities like Strunk and White, who > famously told us to “use the active voice.” > > There is certainly some merit to this rule of thumb; some of the worst > writing around suffers from inert verbs and the unintended use of the > passive voice. Yet the passive voice remains _an important arrow in the > rhetorical quiver_. After all, it exists for a reason. I don't understand the line – "the passive voice ' _remains an important arrow in the rhetorical quiver'_ " in the above quotation. I assume it's a metaphorical expression. Though it may sound like sour grapes, I think clarity is the best art and craft of writing preceding to any other techniques. Can you explain the line in plainer English for me? Is "an important arrow in something" a well-used expression? |
38,608 | 89,821 | 76823_0 | I often overuse the idiom "with respect to" - it's my default phrase when I'm writing formally and want to restrict the domain of a statement. e.g. X is changing with respect to Y ... Changes with respect to Z ... With respect to A, ... What are some alternatives to using this idiom? |
38,609 | 126,234 | 76823_0 | If you use the term "almost all" in a sentence what percentage would you attribute to that? Example 1: Dan at almost all of the pie. Mary had the rest. Example 2: Almost all kids who go to college have student loans. Just looking for expectations and an estimate. If I knew that Dan ate 90% of the pie I would just say that, but I see he at almost all of the pie but not sure the exact percentage. When I say almost all what would people think? |
38,610 | 126,235 | 76823_0 | The context is comparing air travel vs overnight train travel. In this case, air travel takes 1 hour, plus time required to travel from city to airport, arrive early for check-in & security, then travel from destination airport to city, altogether I probably lose around 4-5 hours of [the word I'm looking for]. Train travel between the same cities is much slower, but there is an overnight schedule, which leaves at 21.00 and arrives 6.00. So I don't have to lose any [the word I'm looking for]. What is a suitable word(s) to fill the bracketed part? Daytime may be close, but it's not very accurate because I also don't like losing non-daytime like 18.00-21.00. |
38,611 | 150,913 | 76823_0 | Are verbal constructions with "on" somewhat more typical of AE than BE? e.g. beat (up) on someone, miss out on something, pass up on something, check (up) on something, catch up on something, someone, etc. |
38,612 | 150,910 | 76823_0 | Is it correct, and safe to say, that -- _generally speaking_ \-- verbal constructions with "with' are _to a certain extent_ more widely and commonly used in AE **_than** in BE_ and other varieties of English ? E. g. Speak/talk with (as opposed to the shared speak/talk to); visit with (=chat/converse with); meet (up) with (originally chiefly AE); get back with someone (as opposed to the shared "get back to"); stick with (as opposed to the shared "stick to"); check back with (as opposed to "check back to"); compare with (as opposed to the shared "compare to"); correspond with something (as opposed to the shared "correspond to"); interview with someone (as opposed to the shared "interview someone"); consult with someone (as opposed to the shared "consult someone"); conform with (as opposed to the shared "conform to");(...) |
38,613 | 27,711 | 76823_0 | When someone says that "my grandfather built this house", say now or even 20-30 years ago, do they mean their grandfather literally built that house from ground up? Foundation, framing, wiring, plumbing, stucco, roofing — the works?! Or do they mean it to say "My family has lived in this house for 3 generations since my grandfather [paid someone to] build this house?" Potentially based on grandfather's design/vision. Sure maybe grandpa put in the floors or a custom bookshelf, but did grandpa literally build the house? |
38,614 | 27,716 | 76823_0 | Is 'r' in Br/Amr pronunciation of 'Arjmand' (Persian word) silent? (In other words, how is this word pronounced in Br/Amr English?) |
38,615 | 27,718 | 76823_0 | "Slut" can have two meanings: * an immoral woman, or prostitute * a dirty and slovenly woman I would like a term for men that is the equivalent of the second meaning. Is there a term for describing a man that is dirty and slovenly? |
38,616 | 169,302 | 76823_0 | I see this phrase coming after animal names: "A badger is basically a weasel on steroids—you wouldn’t want to upset one". So what is its meaning? |
38,617 | 129,574 | 76823_0 | What is the term for a common expression or colloquialism that is inaccurate or misleading, such as the use of "mental math" to mean "mental calculation" or "mental arithmetic"? |
38,618 | 59,378 | 76823_0 | Which one of these is more common or better to use? > Delete selected Item(s). Or > Delete selected Item/s. * * * Note: It should be used in our _Document_ (not a _Program_ ). |
38,619 | 129,577 | 76823_0 | Why did jazz musicians start referring to an engagement as a "gig"? If any, could anyone provide a couple of quotations from eminent authors to show where a word was first used in this sense? > **gig** | _noun_ , a live performance by a musician or group playing popular > or jazz music. | _verb_ , perform a gig or gigs. |
38,620 | 129,570 | 76823_0 | Can "so as to" be used, and if so in what contexts and in what situations? Can it be used formally and in written documents? Edit: I'm looking more at an IT question for example "You can do 'something' so as to get the variable and process it" |
38,621 | 59,371 | 76823_0 | I received the following email today, we discussed the report before the email where I told the person that **I hadn't** (also can I use hadn't here) received it. I was wondering if it's all grammatical. The reason why I am asking this question is because the person is a native speaker. > "I had sent you the report on the 20th of Feb" |
38,622 | 78,367 | 76823_0 | Is the following sentence (grammatically) correct? I've got a brown and a black horses. The sentence was meant to express the fact that I have two horses, a brown one and a black one. I am especially curious about the plural form of the noun _horses_ , as it seems to be grammatically correct (it's two horses) but unnatural. |
38,623 | 8,939 | 76823_0 | In what situation (if any) you would say "better play positive"? Please, don't add any punctuation between words. |
38,624 | 35,120 | 76823_0 | Over lunch recently, my colleagues and I were discussing the term "hardcore," and speculating on its origin. Our speculations evolved into "What has either a hard or soft core, where the hard cored thing would be used by professionals and the soft cored one by amateurs?" because this is where we figured the terms originated. Following this discussion, I did some research and found that the origins of hardcore (by way of Etymology Online) are most likely from the original definition of hardcore: > material such as stones and broken bricks used as the foundation for > buildings, roads etc. rather than having to do with a fruit or ball as our lunch group had envisioned. The _foundation_ connotation is presumably the important connection between these usages. However, looking into _softcore_ has produced less satisfactory results. I found this description from 1875, which explains hard-core and soft-core and says that soft-core is essentially compostable garbage. What I don't understand is how this word came to be associated with its current, more familiar meaning, which is as a milder or watered down version of "hardcore." Given their relationship, I expected there to be a more explicit connection between the two. For instance, that soft-core was a layer applied after hard- core or that inferior roads used soft-core instead of hard-core, but that doesn't seem to be the case. What is the connection here? |
38,625 | 111,765 | 76823_0 | This question regards the numbers from 1 to 999. We can ignore commas, hyphens, and spaces. What I'm interested in is when and where to use the word "and". There are a few interesting cases: 1) 20 < n < 100 Is it "twenty and one", or "twenty one"? 2) 100 < n < 120 Is it "one hundred and eleven"? "One hundred and one"? Or is it "one hundred one", "one hundred eleven"? 3) n = 190 (for example) Is it "one hundred and ninety"? Or "one hundred ninety"? 4) n = 191 (for example) I'm assuming it's "one hundred and ninety one"... Or is it "one hundred ninety and one"? Thanks so much... I'd be very grateful if someone could answer these 4 cases :-) |
38,626 | 178,023 | 76823_0 | I commonly see the format: > _Main Character(s)_ and _some other important idea_ Story titles: * Harry Potter and **the Goblet of Fire** * Alexander and **the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day** * The Three Little Pigs and **the Somewhat Bad Wolf** Band names: * Johnny Cash and **the Tennessee Two** * Fitz and **the Tantrums** * Florence and **the Machine** And even slight variants: * Sex and **the City** Is there a name for this common construction? Do the two parts have technical names? |
38,627 | 35,129 | 76823_0 | Can anyone explain the meaning of "bootstrap" to a Spanish Speaker? Here is some context: > One aspect of ... (something) ... is the need to **_bootstrap_** the > configuration. |
38,628 | 78,811 | 76823_0 | The New Yorker magazine August 16 issue carries the article under the title ‘Paul Ryan’s song of himself’ which is posted by Andy Borowitz. I as a non- native English language learner cannot tell whether this is Paul Ryan’s own poem or simply a lampoon by the poster. The ‘Paul Ryan’s Song’ starts with: > "This morning I was at Equinox > Getting ripped and shredded, pumped and jacked, > Cross-training with Jeremy > Who totally kicks my butt." and wraps up with the following 4 lines: > "Because I am Paul Ryan. > Paul Freakin’ Ryan. > _Drop and give me twenty, America:_ > It’s clobberrin time." According to wordreference.com, ‘Drop and give me twenty’ is an imperative, usually said to a soldier by a commanding officer: do twenty push-ups. (But it could be a joke if the speaker is not a commander and the person spoken to is not a soldier.) www.urbandictionary defines it "Heard, Understood, and acknowledged", commonly used in the US military, also used to _show eagerness or joy._ What does ‘Drop and give me twenty, America’ mean? Is ‘Drop and give me twenty’ usually used as an _imperative_ as defined by wordreference, or just for affirmation of the order like ‘understood, Roger’ as defined by urbandictionary? |
38,629 | 117,985 | 76823_0 | Is there a difference between these references to a specific person: > "The implication is clear: as **the** psychologist Jonathan Haidt said..." and > "The implication is clear: as psychologist Jonathan Haidt said..." The first one uses the definite article and is a quote from Daniel Kahneman's book 'Thinking, Fast and Slow', where the article is consistently used in such references. In the second one I've omitted the definite article. It seems more intuitive for me, a non-native speaker, and is something I would use in my own writing. Are both expressions equally correct? Are there situations that require the article and vice versa? |
38,630 | 32,479 | 76823_0 | When Uncle Fred suggests to his nephew a visit to a suburb, once an estate owned by an uncle when he was younger, Pongo is amazed and relieved, believing the suburbs do not hold anything like the opportunities offered by the city for someone like his Uncle **to cut loose and cause havoc**. |
38,631 | 78,817 | 76823_0 | Are these two the same when used to express "keep it up" or "survive a little longer"? Also, I often hear people say "hang in there", but I rarely hear people say "hang on there". |
38,632 | 78,816 | 76823_0 | You write something like this: > I'm interested in your interview with Barack Obama. Most people would take this to mean that it was Obama who was the interviewee (the one answering questions). However, couldn't it technically have been the other way round, i.e. that Obama was the interviewer? |
38,633 | 55,498 | 76823_0 | Does appending an **express** means something is free as the **Visual C# express** may suggests? I cannot find that in a dictionary. |
38,634 | 32,474 | 76823_0 | Where does the figure of speech "at the drop of a hat" come from? I understand the phrase means "Immediately; instantly; on the slightest signal or urging. (Alludes to the dropping of a hat as a signal.)" - TheFreeDictionary.com But I don't understand why anyone would think that dropping a hat were some sort of signal. What's the historical context? |
38,635 | 111,761 | 76823_0 | I'm sensitive to the fact that in light of recent events, the example discussed in this question may be unsettling to some. For that, I apologize, but I cannot think of an effective alternative. In a _Modern Marvels_ documentary on The History Channel, the narrator says, "[...] bombs have evolved into devices that can literally blow mankind off the face of the earth." It's difficult to tell whether "literally" is appropriate in this instance. On one hand, the narrator likely uses the word literally to emphasize that although it may have been common for many years to talk about bombs as being powerful enough to blow up the world, in the modern age of weaponized hydrogen fusion it really is possible to eradicate all of mankind. On the other hand, bombs don't blow people "off" the planet, they merely destroy them and leave their scattered remains. With that in mind, my general question is this: when using the word literally, is it important that every word or phrase be meant to take on its most technically literal interpretation? Or is it enough that there exist two, reasonable, alternative interpretations of the sentence, one of which is a _more_ literal rendering, and that the more literal of the two is intended? |
38,636 | 32,470 | 76823_0 | I want one word that means Date and Time. For example in "the date and time of the event will be announced later" I want to use single word instead of "date and time" |
38,637 | 196,231 | 76823_0 | _On the books_ means "part of the law". > These changes would add little to the civil rights laws now on the books. I know the meaning of this idiom, and idioms are used as they are, but idioms often have stories behind. Why is it not "in the books"? Could it be that in the old days people used slates of rocks to write on? |
38,638 | 8,461 | 76823_0 | Usually, whenever I post a question on Stack Overflow, I have a habit of using the word _but_ excessively. Is there an alternative word can I use? |
38,639 | 115,850 | 76823_0 | What is the difference between _disclaimer_ and _disclosure_ , and when is it appropriate to use each? Often I see (especially on answers on SE) comments like: "Disclaimer: I work for company that makes this product," or "Disclosure: I never actually tested this". It seems to me that this is backwards, "disclosure" should be used for sharing some information that would otherwise be a secret, or considered a hidden agenda; and "disclaimer" for disavowing the information, or stating that this is not actually proven. Am I correct? |
38,640 | 196,234 | 76823_0 | > The external safety unit is therefore responsible for the functions and > applications being correct. What is meant by the sentence above? 1. The external safety unit is therefore responsible for the correctness of functions and applications. 2. The external safety unit is therefore responsible for the functions and applications which are correct. |
38,641 | 111,772 | 76823_0 | What makes these two words so different that 'man' is changed to 'men', but 'German' is changed to 'Germans'? |
38,642 | 160,289 | 76823_0 | I am planning a big career change. In the emails to the people I want to ask for internship, I wrote "I strongly desire to pursue a career in AABBCC and currently looking for internship opportunities to enter the world". I used the phrase "enter the world" because the barrier of the type of job I want is pretty high. Is this correct english? And is there better way to say it? |
38,643 | 111,778 | 76823_0 | I need a word to fill the blank in this sentence: "The hurricane was one of the most _blank_ -deadly events in history." The human death count was recorded, but not the death count not for other species, so it was definitely a deadly event for humans, but the toll taken on other species was not known. At the moment I'm using _human_ for this purpose, but _human-deadly_ doesn't sound quite right, nor as good as possible. I understand that without the word, the statement would generally be taken as referring to humans but I would prefer to specify. |
38,644 | 119,164 | 76823_0 | If I’m not wrong, the verb conjugation in the past used to be: I have we have thou hast ye have he/she/it hath they have This conjugation is closer to its equivalent in the German language: ich habe wir haben du hast ihr habt er/sie/es hat sie/Sie haben The thing is: Every verb in every tense in German ends with _-st_ in the second person singular, and as far as I know, in Elizabethan English the verbs used to end in this way as well in the second person singular ( _thou shouldst_ , _canst_ , _makest_ , _eatest_ , _composest_ , etc.). Why exactly did the old _thou_ disappear, as well as related forms _thy_ , _thee_ , _thyself_ , and _thine_ , as well as the corresponding verb ending _-st_? Same for _-eth_ in third person singular ( _it hath, maketh_ , etc.), why did it just disappear from daily usage? I’m a Brazilian and my mother-tongue is Portuguese, so I’m not well aware of the background of this, and I am very curious. These forms can be found in the old King James Bible and in the poetry of William Shakespeare, as well as in many other sources, but I would like to know exactly why they’re gone, and for what reasons. |
38,645 | 92,344 | 76823_0 | I was reading this blog post and had trouble understanding this comment on the piece: > Or you could **_appropriate the Freudian hermeneutic_** : "Sometimes a > vessel is just a vessel." I understand "hermeneutic" to be a study of interpretation, especially that which concerns the bible. I also understand "Freudian" to be a school of psychoanalysis in which importance is given to theories of sexuality (and that it has come under critical scrutiny of and is at large disregarded by feminists). So I would like to ask whether the above is meant to be ironic? |
38,646 | 119,166 | 76823_0 | In the Wikipedia entry listing the characters from Harper Lee’s 1960 novel, _To Kill a Mockingbird_, there is a line that states the following: > Calpurnia is the Finch family’s housekeeper, whom the children love and > Atticus deeply respects (he remarks in her defense that she “never indulged > [the children] like most **colored nurses** ”). What does the line “never indulged [the children] like most **colored nurses** ” mean? |
38,647 | 105,069 | 76823_0 | Is there an adjective that means "every other day"? I found "bidaily" but it seems to mean "twice a day", not "every second day" (not even both as "biweekly" does). I'd need this word to very concisely describe a questionnaire by its issuing frequency. |
38,648 | 92,348 | 76823_0 | What is the term for words that have changed meaning over time? For example, in relation to this question on Workplace Stack Exchange the term snafu was of military origin and was used to define a person, team, organisation, etc that continually makes mistakes. The first time I saw the term was in relation to a data protection leak and this now seems a pretty common usage e.g this article amongst the tech community. Is there a term to describe words that have changed meaning over time, or words that have been adopted by a particular community and had their meaning altered? |
38,649 | 114,181 | 76823_0 | For example if you wish to do or have something, you can use _aspiration_. What word is the best to use for things that you have and done already? I was thinking about _accomplishment_ , but it only applies to things we did. I want a word that combines the meaning of things we did and things we have right now. It's hard to communicate what I need, so I give one more example: > Alex's aspiration > > * playing piano > * having a piano > * other things that I use to do and have > > > Alex's [word I am looking for] > > * I already learned playing piano > * I bought a piano > |
38,650 | 35,699 | 76823_0 | I'm looking for a word the describes the concluding text of a document, i.e. the opposite of the document's preamble. Is it just "conclusion"? |
38,651 | 114,183 | 76823_0 | http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Question_mark According to the wikipedia article I've linked to above, "qo" was sometimes used in the middle ages to abbreviate the latin word "questio" in the way that we might use a modern day question mark. I can't find any example of this anywhere online. Help? |
38,652 | 50,519 | 76823_0 | Can anyone clarify for me the differences between these two words, in their senses of "occupation by a tenant"? |
38,653 | 50,514 | 76823_0 | Can I use _of_ instead of _about_ in the following sentence? > I'd like to hear your thoughts and recommendations about my decision **of** > this company and my resignation petition. Also, could you tell me whether I can use _on_ in place of _of_ , if using _of_ is correct in this sentence? |
38,654 | 34,277 | 76823_0 | Though this idiom is by no means very common, one comes across it now and then. (I just came across it again today, which is why I'm asking this question.) Why is a "brown study" so named? |
38,655 | 184,265 | 76823_0 | What does this mean ? I'm on the couch tonight for sure From the movie Judgment Night (1993). |
38,656 | 141,678 | 76823_0 | I was watching a BBC sitcom. The scene is set in a wedding ceremony. In the opening of the speech of the father of the bride, he tends to be humorous, and thus he says: "Welcome to the wedding of Laura and Paul, whether you're friends, family or freeloaders, loved ones or loathed ones, people we like or people we had to invite, and whether you're here for a free meal or a free drink, people who _wouldn't have missed_ this special day for the world or people who had nothing better to do. You are all welcome." I am baffled by his using "wouldn't have missed." According to the context, I reckon what he means is more or less "people who wouldn't like to miss this special day for the world." But if he means exactly like that, why does he use the perplexing "wouldn't have missed?" Alright, he might be trying to be witty, implying "people who thought if they came to the wedding, they wouldn't have missed this special day after the wedding." Is my interpretation right? Even the the implication is like that, I was still wondering how it sounds like in a native speaker's ears? For me, a non-native speaker, all I received was only full of confusion. Not humorous at all. If I were in that wedding, I would get lost and stuck in this "wouldn't have missed" and miss out a bunch of the rest of the speech. |
38,657 | 129,773 | 76823_0 | Punctuate the following sentence. The distance between St George and and and and and dragon is not equal. (That's right, there are five consecutive 'ands'. I promise it is possible. But you may need to know the story behind it.) |
38,658 | 52,914 | 76823_0 | I suppose a year number to be a proper noun, naming a unique year. Therefore, when written as text, it should be spelled with initial capital letters. But there does not seem to be general agreement about this. Few authorities offer a rule at all, probably because year numbers are more commonly written as Arabic numerals. One source treats a year number as a common noun, like any number. A second agrees but says some authors consider a year number to be a _pronoun_ when not preceded by the words "the year". A third says a year number names a unique year and must be treated as a proper noun, citing _The Winston Grammar Program_ by Paul E. Erwin. On wedding invitations, etiquette authorities agree, the year is traditionally written as text. It is for this reason, I suppose, that some authorities think to address capitalization of the year. However, there is no consensus. It is more common to see the advice to capitalize the first word of the year (only). Most Google search results for [ capitalize year wedding etiquette ] give this advice. On the other hand, that paragon of etiquette virtue, Emily Post, specifically prohibits it, saying only the names of weeks and months are to be capitalized. In short, I can find support for three different capitalization rules for year numbers: * no capitalization (written number rule), e.g.: "the year thirteen sixty-one" * capitalize first initial letter (wedding invitation rule), e.g.: "the year Thirteen sixty-one" * capitalize all initial letters (proper noun rule), e.g.: "the year Thirteen Sixty-one" How should the year be capitalized? |
38,659 | 166,689 | 76823_0 | > He is loved. This is something that I've always kind of wondered. In a sentence like this, is _loved_ a verb or an adjective? Can it be considered either? |
38,660 | 166,688 | 76823_0 | I'm translating for a company that creates specialized 3D software. In a lot of the brochures, there are bullet points for things like '3D road design.' or '3D visibility.' To my eye, the words 'road' and 'visibility' should be capitalized in these contexts. To be clear, I'm asking about the cases in which 3D begins a sentence, and whether I should capitalize the word that comes after it. Am I right? Is this basically on a how-you-like-it basis? Additional question (really just curiosity): when I search for questions like this, is 3D an abbreviation or an acronym? I feel like it would technically be an abbreviation of an acronym? |
38,661 | 22,538 | 76823_0 | Can I use "bright example" to mean a good example of something just has been described. For example: > Such devices never work more than a year, my mp3 player is bright example |
38,662 | 22,535 | 76823_0 | **Mathematicians rarely heed the advice of grammarians.** In mathematical writing, one often places equations in a numbered environment outside of the inline text. Consider the following example. Define f to be the function, f(x) = sin x (1) where x is to take values in [0,pi]. Although one rarely finds correct punctuation or consistent grammar in math textbooks or online, I'm inclined to be as anal as physically possible in my Ph.D. thesis and consult the appropriate authorities in the matter. _What is the correct protocol for punctuation in the numbered equation environment?_ In particular, should there be a comma after "sin x"? |
38,663 | 22,534 | 76823_0 | I found myself with a sentence like this, using "accept" in the infinitive form after "rather than": > They left the club, rather than accept the terms. But I'm unsure of its grammatical soundness. Conjugating the verb "accept" just sounds wrong: > They left the club, rather than accepted the terms. The gerund sounds right, but I'm not sure why: > They left the club, rather than accepting the terms. What is the grammatically correct way of phrasing this sort of sentence, and why? > [SUBJECT] [PAST_ACTION_1], rather than [PAST_ACTION_2] |
38,664 | 22,537 | 76823_0 | In my current project we are writing a program to convert a newer protocol to an older one. These conversion programs are being referred to as _adapters_ , but the team cannot agree which spelling to use: _adapter_ or _adaptor_. I personally plump for _adapter_ , as _adaptor_ sounds like its a person (like _actor_ , _realtor_ , etc.) rather than a device. Is there a case for using one rather than the other? |
38,665 | 149,801 | 76823_0 | It is generally accepted today that the grammars and vocabularies of the spoken and the written English differ in important ways. Is it known when this distinction between the English grammars become recognized - for example, mentioned in a book or an article? |
38,666 | 52,918 | 76823_0 | If U.N. is the acronym of United Nations, then United Nations is the _what_ of U.N.? Is there an opposite of acronym? |
38,667 | 166,686 | 76823_0 | I heard the following statement of Barron’s magazine piggybacked to today’s (April 28) AP radio news over AFN broadasting: > “Two thirds of the money managers we surveyed think we are due for > collection of 10 per cent in the next twelve months before stocks resume > their rise. Favorable stocks, General Electric currently tops the list. > **The Big Money crowd** also likes bank shares such as Bank of America and > Citi Group.” As I’m unfamiliar with the word, “Big Money crowd,” I looked for the usage of this word and found a pretty old example: With bond yields edging up, about a third of **the Big Money crowd** thinks utility shares will be the worst performers in the next 12 months.” - online.barrons.com 2013/10/21 What does Big Money crowd mean, particularly ‘crowd’ here mean? Is Big Money a proper noun as B and M are shown in uppercase in the above Barron's example? Is "crowd" a mass noun that takes verb in singlar form like "likes" and "thinks"? |
38,668 | 149,804 | 76823_0 | I work at a company with the word "biomedical" in its name. Sometimes I see it capitalized in CamelCase, like a programmer would write it ("BioMedical"), and sometimes as one word ("Biomedical"). The second capitalization looks better to me, but I'm not sure. I've also seen the word written out as "bio-medical". There seem to be too many options. **Can anyone enlighten me on the proper capitalization?** |
38,669 | 60,866 | 76823_0 | The term belay is often used to cancel an order in military settings. The definition indicates it just means to cancel. However, would asking a superior (in a civilian private sector employment situation) add an improper tone to the request? |
38,670 | 60,869 | 76823_0 | I recently encountered this word while reading an article and found that its two basic definitions are "Bewildered" and "Unfazed." How can the word mean both these things as they seem to be direct opposites of each other? Should the sentence in which it's used always explicitly reveal the intended meaning? > And while many of us might be a little taken aback if Mom showed up at our > offices, Secrist is utterly nonplussed, even happy about it. source In the above sentence, it's obvious that Secrist is "unfazed" without even knowing the definition of nonplussed. Instead of adding clarity to the meaning being conveyed, "nonplussed" seems to just add confusion. Then again, maybe I'm missing something. Thoughts? _My first post here so please edit/re-tag as appropriate._ |
38,671 | 60,868 | 76823_0 | What is a word or phrase to describe people who are very practical and shrewd, and more concern about achieving their goals rather than looking at softer sides such as friendships, etc? It is more than just self-centred. It is a kind of character which one who inherits it would not hesitate to do very shallow acts just to emerge as a winner/survive, even if he has to betray his benefactors. It is a very insecure kind of character but on the surface is not obvious to be like so. For example, Tom befriends with Jane in hope of her help at work. Jane helped Tom. Tom, however, may possibly make Jane his enemy one day, when he knows his boss dislikes Jane, so as to appear standing behind his boss. So in some way, Tom in this scenario, is a what kind of person? In casual words, he is practical, shrewd, self-centred, etc. But is there a more concise word that encapsulates all these words and brings about the idea of such a character? |
38,672 | 165,486 | 76823_0 | I'm going for some alliteration in a paper I'm writing discussing the history and once-current state of a particular navy, and one of the three things I want to talk about is the possibility of poorly-constructed ships. The other two are appropriation (some ships were appropriated from conquered peoples) and reparation (many ships had seen multiple battles and had undergone numerous repairs). I want to be able to say something to the effect of, "The history of appropriation, reparation, and ---ation in the fleet significantly influenced the outcome of this battle." I've toyed with 'ill-formation', but that doesn't sound right to me; it brings to mind poorly-constructed syntactic objects, not large physical ones. Thoughts or suggestions? |
38,673 | 165,487 | 76823_0 | I'm thinking of starting a 12 step inspired support group, for people struggling with distractions. Basically it would be a group for people with ADHD symptoms, whether they actually have the disorder, or have simply wrecked their attention spans by using the internet too much. What would be a good name to put before "Anonymous" to convey this scope? A tongue in cheek name like "Scatterbrains Anonymous" or "Spaceshots Anonymous" seems like it might put people off. I'm looking for something that would be to "distractible" as "depressive" the noun is to "depressive" the adjective. I've considered the neologism route, with "Distractives Anonymous", but it seems like a reach to get people identifying with a term that doesn't even exist yet. Any other suggestions? |
38,674 | 25,623 | 76823_0 | I have a question about a phrase (an idiom), which can be roughly said as: > You have only one life (to live) and it's not going to happen again. I'm not sure if it's correct, most likely not. What I want is a meaning of this phrase, not said like " _You have only one_ " but like " _Life is just one_ " or " _One has only one_ " if you know what I mean. Not saying to someone: " _You have_ " but saying it like a general statement (" _One have_ " or " _There's a..._ "). Something like: > One has only one life and it's not going to happen again (or repeat). I thought about replacing the part "happen again" with something like "repeat" which would suit better from my point of view but as far as I searched the web, it's not used in this kind of phrase. Suggestions for more less widely used or known phrases welcomed. |
38,675 | 165,488 | 76823_0 | Maybe it's particular (!) to the "particular" adjective. Without it, it's fairly obvious that I "have an interest" is more correct than "I have interest". But when my interest is particular, I'm not sure if the indefinite article is either redundant or even incorrect. Also, "interest" has a slightly different meaning when used with the "particular" adjective, connoting a state of concern, as opposed to a discrete hobby or recreation. Any suggestions? |
38,676 | 25,626 | 76823_0 | > Thinking **of** getting an external keyboard > > Thinking **about** getting an external keyboard Which one is grammatically correct and why? |
38,677 | 65,303 | 76823_0 | I want a word that means "Selected from the pool/set" - randomness is implied but not necessary. What is a good word for this? It would be used in a sentence like: > The parameter is _selected from the set_ and used in the experiment. I want one phrase for _selected from the set_ so that it can be used to form a terminology. |
38,678 | 65,301 | 76823_0 | Which of these forms is correct? > * X will be used both for Y and Z > * X will be used for both Y and Z > * X will be used both for Y and for Z > * Other... > |
38,679 | 75,477 | 76823_0 | I found a sentence in Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary: > open weekdays from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. > > The bookstore opens weekdays from 9 p.m. to 6 p.m. . How do we understand the structure of this sentence? I know it means something is open on weekdays from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. |
38,680 | 65,306 | 76823_0 | The online Oxford Dictionary defines 'phew' as an expression of a strong reaction of relief. It has reported this example: "Phew, what a year!" Could _phew_ express lassitude as follows? > Phew! That was hard work. |
38,681 | 75,472 | 76823_0 | I understand that it's common to spell small numbers in words. However, all examples of this rule I could find use cardinals (i.e. expressing the size of a set of entities) like in: * We met two cats and seven dogs. * She has been driving for six hours. My question is to what degree does this rule apply when one writes numbers as nouns rather than numerals? That is, which is the most 'correct': * He chose the number 2. * He chose the number two. * He chose the number 'two'. |
38,682 | 193,763 | 76823_0 | For example. To be perceived as to being useful, the information tool must provide useful information to user and the user must find the information provided by the information tool is useful is there any problem with my grammar ? I am not really sure how to use to be perceived as to being something |
38,683 | 65,309 | 76823_0 | * Mom: John, stop playing video-games! * John: I can't help it! Could someone explain what John said? |
38,684 | 107,510 | 76823_0 | I want to say that someone is quick at thinking on the fly, but need to communicate with non-English speakers. Is there an equivalent non-idiomatic word or phrase? edit: I want it to imply instantaneous adaptation, "i.e. spur of the moment" but that is idiomatic as well. |
38,685 | 92,961 | 76823_0 | Are there any rules when to write a set of two (or more) words or abbreviations forming a name of some entity as separate, when to hyphenate, and when to stick them together? These are my findings with ngram: > * bitwise, bit-wise, but never _bit wise_ > * sci-fi, but never sci fi, or scifi > * wastelands (increasingly frequent), waste lands (dying out), never > waste-lands > * fanfiction or fan fiction, but almost never fan-fiction, but > * fanfic, never fan fic or fan-fic > * read-only or read only, rarely readonly > * twofold (frequently), two-fold (rarely), two fold (minimal) > * bittersweet (rise), bitter-sweet (decline), bitter sweet (minimal), > but... > * sour-sweet (frequent), sour sweet (less frequent), soursweet (even less > frequent) > * all-nighter (dominant), allnighter (infrequent), all nighter (somewhat > less frequent) > * cross-country (gaining), crosscountry and cross country (about equal, > not infrequent) > * overnight (rise), over night (same as overnight until 1920, then drops > to 0), very rare over-night. > In particular, if I'm coining a new blend, which rules should I follow when deciding which of these three forms to give it? |
38,686 | 194,294 | 76823_0 | For example, can I refer to the main gate of a university as _the school's main gate?_ Or say _school begins in September_ instead of university begins in September (especially in informal speech)? |
38,687 | 35,863 | 76823_0 | I was reading G.K. Chesterton's stories of Father Brown, and in the story "The Mistake of the Machine" (c.1914), I saw this phrase : > It seemed to be an extract from one of the pinkest of American Society > papers, and ran as follows: What does "pinkest of papers" mean? I did a little bit of research, and it seems that in Chesterton's time, people who were of high society standing had their note-papers tinted pink. In Sherlock Holmes, one of his very rich clients send in a letter on: > a sheet of pink-tinted note-paper which had been lying open on the table. So, does "pinkest of American Society papers" here imply a society newspaper that was of very high social standing, something like _The Telegraph_ or _Washington Post_? Or does it mean something else? |
38,688 | 26,199 | 76823_0 | Is incorrect capitalization, such as the lowercase "i" in > can [this is not the sic you're after] i [this sic] have an if statement > within a dialog box code? considered a spelling mistake, or some other type of error? |
38,689 | 194,297 | 76823_0 | I see a lot of examples of _be intended to_ and _intend to_. Both of them mean **_plan to do_**. Some examples: > Selling was my game and I **intended to** be a winner. > > The ban **is intended to** be permanent. I guess the difference between them is if the subject is human, it should use **be intended to**. Otherwise use **intend to**. Is that right? |
38,690 | 107,515 | 76823_0 | I am confused on how to properly describe an all expense paid vacation. Is it an _all expenses paid vacation_ or an _all expense paid vacation_ , and are there any hyphens between all, expense or expenses, and paid? I ask because it seems to be all over the place on google search. |
38,691 | 26,196 | 76823_0 | The pronoun 'he' used generically, as well as a lot of words including "man- kind" or generic "man" are sex-biased and are not acceptable. However, not so long ago, they were the proper used terms for describing the general. For example, "Man must adjust to his environment." or "He that loves must forgive." etc. Was this always the case or did there use to be a difference in terms between male and female? |
38,692 | 96,047 | 76823_0 | I've noted that English word **issue** sounds like Russian word **ищу** , which means "I search for". Issue is something for which a solution needs to be found. So having an issue is closely related with searching for the way to solve it. Is it an accident only or have those words some common ancestor deeply in etymological history (maybe even dating to PIE)? |
38,693 | 35,860 | 76823_0 | It seems both _normalization_ and _canonicalization_ are used to describe the effort to transform from an arbitrary form to a unique form. Is there any difference between the two words? Why is there _XML normalize-space_ but not _canonicalize-space_? And a file name in a canonical-form but not a file name in a normalized-form? |
38,694 | 145,349 | 76823_0 | I sometimes find myself doing something I did not intend, just because the force of habit is so strong. For instance: On the way back from work, turning toward home instead of the grocery store, even though I was planning on doing the shopping. Or tossing the newspaper in the recycling bin right after my wife asked me to save an article for her. Is there a verb for this behavior? As in "Sorry, I just {screwed up by habit}." |
38,695 | 159,192 | 76823_0 | In the _Cambridge Grammar of the English Language_ , Huddleston and Pullum use the term "determinative" for the lexical category of words like _the_ , etc. And they use "determiner" for the grammatical function that is characteristically filled by determinatives (but which can also be filled by things such as genitive noun phrases). In an older generation of reference grammars, however, notably Quirk, et alia's _Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language_ , the use of these terms is exactly reversed. That is, "determiner" is the lexical category and "determinative" is the grammatical function. The difference has been bugging me for a long time. Can anyone provide a principled explanation as to why we should prefer one over the other? I'm sure Huddleston and Pullum had a motivation to alter terminology that's been in use since Bloomfield's day, but I can't find any discussion in their work. |
38,696 | 116,763 | 76823_0 | This sentence is from my essay. Is the semi-colon correct? > His most famous residence is the Kaufmann Residence; esteemed for its use of > organic architecture with Japanese architectural components to create > harmony with the residence and nature. |
38,697 | 116,762 | 76823_0 | After much searching, I am still finding (potentially) conflicting information regarding commas before subordinate conjunctions when they come at the end of the sentence. Specifically, I have read that a comma before _while_ indicates 'whereas.' No comma indicates time. However, commas are also used before subordinate conjunctions when the subordinate clause is non-essential to the meaning of the sentence. Therefore, I am confused whether to use a comma before _while_ in the following sentence. Is there a rule you can refer me to? > "Stick to your guns, Lola," he replied happily, while pinching both of my > cheeks. Based on the above information, there should be no comma since the two actions are happening at the same time. However, the information also seems non- essential to the meaning of the sentence, which means that it would require a comma. Very confusing! |
38,698 | 116,760 | 76823_0 | In the UK there is a popular idiomatic saying: > **To pull a bird.** "Bird" is a well known Brit expression for a young woman. In the USA, I think "chick" is more popular. The above expression means to have success in fixing a date or going to bed with an attractive woman. I'd like to know why the verb, "pull" was preferred and not _catch_ , _get_ , _take_ , _trap_ , or even _grab_. And why do Americans go for "chicks" and never "birds"? |
38,699 | 25,088 | 76823_0 | In layman's terms, what is the relationship between fame and infamy? Is fame required to be infamous? Are they (definitively) mutual exclusive? |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.