Unnamed: 0 int64 0 40.2k | id int64 1 196k | chunk_id stringclasses 1
value | text stringlengths 18 6.44k |
|---|---|---|---|
39,400 | 174,190 | 76823_0 | Subject or subject? Which is proper to use if subject refers to person, inmate,etc.... |
39,401 | 174,191 | 76823_0 | We say apocryphal when something is well known, but is probably not true. I was just wondering if there is a word that describes something that is widely known as only "a rumour" but is probably really true. Is there such a word? |
39,402 | 192,391 | 76823_0 | There are many special words surrounding coins. Wikipedia lists a view. I'm interested in a name for the distribution of coin values in a currency. The Euro has 1ct, 2ct, 5ct, 10ct, 20ct, 50ct, 1€, 2€ pieces. Harry Potter has 1knut, 29knut, 493knut pieces. And I want a name for that. 1 word is appreciated, if there is none, multi- word terms are ok, as well. **Update** : so far, we got(order has no meaning): * (set of|circulating|range of|available) (coin) denominations * denomination (set|list|mix) * circulated denominations * (denominations|coin types) in circulation * coinage system * coin (range|palette|coterie) * currency genus[proposed, not seen] ambiguous (can also mean mass of all coins existing e.g. all 1ct + all 2ct...): * coin species * (circulating) coinage * coins in circulation |
39,403 | 174,197 | 76823_0 | What's the difference between _employee in accounting_ and _employee in accounts_? Are these correct names for an occupation? |
39,404 | 11,053 | 76823_0 | What literary sound device/technique is expressed through the phrase " _sudden departures_ ", involving the articulation of the words? (alliteration, assonance, sibilance etc.) |
39,405 | 11,058 | 76823_0 | I have just read the newest post of DOGHOUSEDIARIES, and I am wondering whether the words for characters are fixed in the USA or the UK, as I am not a native English speaker. For example: > _A_ as in _apple_ |
39,406 | 17,849 | 76823_0 | > This question is way too vague Why not just: "This question is too vague"? What's the meaning of 'way' in this sentence? |
39,407 | 122,328 | 76823_0 | For this text: > ... dreaming of houses uncluttered by reality, by half a lifetime of > memories, perhaps. What does this mean? It means that the one who was leafing through _Country Living_ magazine was dreaming of houses uncluttered and comparing it to his house in his reality? And perhaps in his half-a-lifetime of memories? The context is excerpted from David Mitchell's novel _The Gardener_ (my emphasis): > Satin white, Persian purple, oil-paint yellow. When I planted these birches > they were broomstick-height, and now look at them. They tap our bedroom > window on stormy nights. Hyacinths on (what I fondly call) my rockery. Boy- > blue and girl-pink. Through the kitchen double-doors I watch you eating > supper – carrot and coriander soup – and leafing through Country Living > Magazine, **dreaming of houses uncluttered by reality, by half a lifetime of > memories, perhaps.** But my, how well you look. White hair endows you with > the demeanour of a friendly witch. Our geriatric radio – a wedding-present > from my brother – is twittering away to itself. |
39,408 | 122,329 | 76823_0 | How can I say that I am committed to the environment in one word? |
39,409 | 17,846 | 76823_0 | > Maybe it's a little long story. > Maybe it's a little longer story. |
39,410 | 17,843 | 76823_0 | Do these two sentences imply the same action? |
39,411 | 190,089 | 76823_0 | What do you call a water tap placed on the outside of a house?  I'm looking for the correct technical term in English. here in sweden there seems to be only one vendor and model, which I'm not so fond of, so with the right technical term I can search the internet for alternatives. Very greatful for any help and input! |
39,412 | 128,051 | 76823_0 | I have some problems to understand the true usage of “would” and “would have pp”. I have already reviewed many forums and websites, but I have not managed to come to any conclusion. For instance, in these sentences: 1- People in the area had never seen this phenomenon before, but they also reported that there less mosquitoes than they **would have expected** , given the amount of standing water. Why “would have expected”? And to be precise: Why not “would expect”? 2- _Another reason to use a hybrid format is when you want to highlight skills and achievements from earlier in your career that **would otherwise be buried** at the bottom of the second page of your resume_ Why “would be buried”? And to be precise: Why not “would have been buried”? 3- _Without SuperM, I **would never have trusted** my memory to keep a word for 10 days._ Why “would never trusted”? And to be precise: Why not “would never trust”? 4- _People in the area had never seen this phenomenon before, but they also reported that there less mosquitoes than they **would have expected** , given the amount of standing water._ Why “would have expected”? And to be precise: Why not “would expect”? 5- _My life **would have been** completely empty without you._ Assuming ‘without you=if you were not in my life”, is this sentence correct as well: My life would be completely empty without you (if you were not in my life) Please forgive me if my question is a bit basic. Thanks in advance for your kind helps. |
39,413 | 15,998 | 76823_0 | I'm looking for a term that a crazy cult member would apply to an outsider, a term that implies that such a "non-believer" is ignorant and of lesser worth -- ideally, something that is humorous because it is slightly ridiculous. For example, an Islamic radical might use "filthy infidel" or an over-the-top Catholic may say "hell-bound heathen," but I'm looking for something that may be uttered by a member of a run-of-the-mill Kool-Aid cult. |
39,414 | 8,651 | 76823_0 | It is such a sterotype that Chinese speakers mix up 'r's and 'l's that I always assumed it to be true. Is this the case and, if so, why? The tongue position is totally different. |
39,415 | 15,994 | 76823_0 | When was _antimatter_ first used? Who was the person that used it? |
39,416 | 8,652 | 76823_0 | What would be a good way to express the following: "I like to see the beauty in ugly things"? (This is related to drawings, paintings and photography.) |
39,417 | 8,654 | 76823_0 | > Unless disciplined, a dog becomes a household pest. Is the use of unless in this sentence correct? It sounds to my naive ear to be fine, but I always think of unless as a conjunction, which does not seem to be the case here. I looked up _unless_ in an online dictionary and discovered that it can additionally be used as a preposition in the sense of "except for", but again that would not seem to apply to this sentence as disciplined is an adjective. Since the sentence is taken from _Strunk and White_ and sounds right to my ear, I am sure it is correct, so my main interest is to discover what the underlying construction is here. |
39,418 | 66,874 | 76823_0 | I came across the phrase, “ _tame the infinite_ ” in the following sentence of the article of New York Times (May 4) Travel column, titled “Easy China, 3 Ways”: “For the first-time visitor to China, planning a trip to the most populous country on earth can be _an exercise in trying to tame the infinite._ Where to begin? Since most people will be flying into Beijing, Hong Kong or Shanghai, we suggest basing yourself in one of these three cities, each in its own state of frenzied transformation.” I guessed “tame the infinite” means “It’s a very difficult question like challenging the infinite of mathematics” from the context of the sentence, and checked the phrase with Cambridge, Oxford and Merriam-Webster online dictionaries to make sure of its meaning. None of them registers “tame the infinite” as an idiom. Google Ngram shows no incidence either. I found however, the book written by Kim Stewart, titled “Taming the Infinite - the Story of Mathematics” on amazon. Does the use of the phrase (an exercise / attempt /plan to) “tame the infinite” by the New York Times writer suggests that the phrase is getting currency as a popular phrase or trendy expression? |
39,419 | 110,659 | 76823_0 | There was the following sentence in the article under the caption “Find your happiness “in iVillage. com.: http://www.ivillage.com/what-learn-annoyingly- happy-people/4-b-479266#ixzz2PiSjFoXw > “If there are two words that are keys to contentment, they are ‘limits’ and > ‘boundaries,’” says Reiss. “Prioritizing **the must-do items** on our lists > is essential, after which **the should-do list** must be narrowed down with > polite but firm no-can-do responses.” It seems the “must-do” things should be prioritized to “should-do” things in making decisions. Is “Must” an order you must obey, and “should” is a mere recommendation that you can always or easily neglect? What is the basic difference of “must-do” from “should-do” in terms of the level of obligation, moral and motivational aspects? |
39,420 | 50,962 | 76823_0 | This is actually a question that came up when I was studying Japanese. Unfortunately my grasp of the technical language of syntax is very limited, and I never fully comprehended the idea of a _noun modifying clause_. The phrase given in my Japanese study guide to demonstrate the difference is (without) > I took a photograph. and with > This is a photograph taken by me. Can someone break this example down for me, and perhaps provide a few other examples like this for simple and complex situations (if this even makes sense) to help me understand this construct? It is also possible that the guide has been poorly translated and there is a different name for this. If so, what is it? **Revision** It seems that the question is not entirely clear to some, so although I have my answer I want to add some more information to (hopefully) raise the quality of the question. None of the text above this was edited. The block quoted text is an example lifted _exactly_ from a study guide, not from notes taken in a class, and not translated from Japanese. It appears to have been designed to show a reader who does not know what a "noun modifying clause" is is and how to apply it in English, before doing it in Japanese. To clarify, the first block quote is a sentence _without_ a "noun modifying clause" and the second is a sentence _with_ one. |
39,421 | 160,579 | 76823_0 | There are a number of compounds in English of the form " _noun_ wars," e.g. "Star Wars," "mommy wars," "culture wars." Why do these show "wars" in the plural? It seems like normally "wars" would pertain to a _sequence_ of conflicts with more or less well-defined endpoints, whereas these phrases actually describe conflicts that have been going on more or less continually (I'd hesitate to say the conflicts are _unitary_ since at least the latter two are quite complex and multifaceted phenomena; but then again actual armed conflicts are often complicated too). I wonder if this is perhaps a snowclone; if so, what would the original member of the set be? |
39,422 | 160,572 | 76823_0 | Was the word "few" used **exclusively** to refer to groups of **eight** people (or things) at some point of time? There is a well-known verse in the New Testament which implies the plausibility of such a situation: namely, 1 Peter 3:20. This is what we read therein: > Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited > in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein **few** , that > is, **eight souls** were saved by water. What do you people know about this? |
39,423 | 118,402 | 76823_0 | It seems that the exact meaning of between is very tied to its specific usage. What should I assume in a general situation about the inclusivity of between. Consider: "Pick a number between 1 and 10." Most people would consider between inclusive. "How many numbers are there between 1 and 10?" Most people would consider between exclusive, i.e. 8 to be the correct answer. Could the meaning of the word _between_ have something to do with the grammatical structure of the sentence in which it is used? |
39,424 | 118,404 | 76823_0 | I'm assuming the entire phrase would be "don't have a coronary occlusion" meaning "don't have a heart attack." I haven't been able to find anything useful regarding when or where it might have originated. |
39,425 | 182,892 | 76823_0 | This is for a thesis title so I want to be sure it makes sense. Would it be more correct to write: 1. "defects and structural deformations" (plural); as in, there are a number of possible deformations that can take happen, or 2. "defects and structural deformation" (singular); where I take deformation to represent the 'family' of possible things that can happen? |
39,426 | 118,406 | 76823_0 | I've seen the expression "to do someone in" for the first time today and from what I found, it means "to kill someone." Where does it come from? The trailing "in" implies something following and makes the expression sound incomplete. |
39,427 | 14,586 | 76823_0 | Or, in the same manner, "John Smith for Olympics" meaning any place in a team, crew, etc? I know that it's common practice to say "John Doe for president," but here "president" is a profession/title, while "World cup" and "Olympics" aren't. |
39,428 | 189,841 | 76823_0 | Unfortunately I could not find an authentic example of the rare construct I have in mind, but I am just as sure as I am typing this question that I have read so many sentences from older prose where the relative pronoun "which" and the noun it refers to are _both_ there. In this case, it sounded almost as though "which" were used as "such." Which + its antecedent. The following example is mine, not taken from any authentic author; but it attempts accurately to emulate many sentences I have read: > Yet a certain problem still persists in this society, which problem has been > handed down from one generation to another. Could it be that a writer is allowed to do so to avoid the syntactic ambiguity of whether "which" refers back to "society" or "problem"? Now of course the rest of the sentence may clarify for the reader what the antecedent for "which" is (without having to mention it); meaning that ". . . handed down from generation to another" gives the impression that the antecedent is indeed "problem." But still, could the combination of "which" followed by its antecedent "problem" be used to give the reader a more fluid and smooth reading experience? |
39,429 | 127,316 | 76823_0 | For a present participle phrase, I've seen: > 1. Seeking advice from the pros, she visited the website. > > 2. She visited the website, seeking advice from the pros. > > For a past participle phrase, I've seen: > Advised by the pros, she started her own business. But not: > She started her own business, advised by the pros. Does it exist? Thanks. |
39,430 | 129,921 | 76823_0 | Media depictions would have it that in some militaries, soldiers traditionally paint icons representing enemies they have killed or materiel they have disabled on the weapons used or vehicles operated in doing so. What terminology is used for these images? |
39,431 | 174,407 | 76823_0 | > **_Today any accessible, fast-moving story written in unaffected prose is > deemed to be "genre fiction"—at best an excellent "read" or a "page turner," > but never literature with a capital L._** I cant understand the reason for using the dash in **_—at best an_ excellent "read" or a "page turner," but never literature with a capital L.** Can you explain this to me and give me the different uses of dashes and their functions in the English sentence? |
39,432 | 189,845 | 76823_0 | For title case that does not capitalize articles, conjunctions, and small prepositions, how should one capitalize compound verbs and idiomatic phrases containing one of these elements? For example, > when in doubt, smash it Following the title case I described, it could be written as: > When in Doubt, Smash It However, the "in" is part of the idiom "in doubt" rather than being used alone. Using that logic, it might be more appropriate to write it as: > When In Doubt, Smash It Which way is most appropriate? Do any style guides address this problem or similar ones? |
39,433 | 126,954 | 76823_0 | What does " Hammer it home" mean? I want to know if it refers to a sport event or not. |
39,434 | 28,838 | 76823_0 | I know what it means, but can't really see the reasoning of this phrase. Anyone with an insight? |
39,435 | 195,627 | 76823_0 | I often hear this in elections where people justify not going to vote, because (according to them) _"their vote doesn't change anything"_ or the like. This kind of reasoning is also used to discard vegetarianism, because _"if I eat meat or not - that cow is gonna get killed"_. Although it seems to be true at first, the decision does have an effect in the end due to accumulation and the butterfly effect. (If everybody would reason that way, there would be nobody doing it.) |
39,436 | 163,906 | 76823_0 | Whilst reading To Kill A Mocking-Bird I came upon this sentence (Full extract below): > It is better to say, built in spite of them. To me, this sentence seems poorly structured, possibly even incorrect grammatically. I wouldn't have thought that a comma should be used where it is. I would've thought it'd be more appropriate to use a colon and perhaps even quotes around the correction. I consulted someone I knew who said that they thought the sentence was perfectly fine as it was. I have thought that it might have been written in this way so as to give the impression of Scout herself saying it but I am unsure. Any opinions on the validity of this sentence will be very helpful, thanks! The full quote is below: > The Maycomb County courthouse was faintly reminiscent of Arlington in one > respect: the concrete pillars supporting its south roof were too heavy for > their light burden. The pillars were all that remained standing when the > original courthouse burned in 1856. Another courthouse was built around > them. It is better to say, built in spite of them. But for the south porch, > the Maycomb County courthouse was early Victorian, presenting an unoffensive > vista when seen from the north. From the other side, however, Greek revival > columns clashed with a big nineteenth-century clock tower housing a rusty > unreliable instrument, a view indicating a people determined to preserve > every physical scrap of the past. |
39,437 | 28,830 | 76823_0 | In this text: > The Dean's Office consists of the Dean, the Vice-Dean of Undergraduate > Studies, the Vice-Dean for External Affairs, the Vice-Dean of Graduate > Studies and Research, and the Secretary General. What would you capitalize (or what wouldn't you capitalize) and why? How about in future references? I've found plenty of style guides and examples, but then also plenty of actual documents that don't follow what I've found in the style guides. |
39,438 | 195,473 | 76823_0 | I'm trying to write that I'm working as a therapist with a client but using coaching informed approaches. That is you are entering a legal agreement as a therapist and client and we'll be using Coaching dynamics. |
39,439 | 12,501 | 76823_0 | In the following Washington Post's article (Feb. 13) reporting the outcome of CPAC 2011, I found the phrase _if you must know_. I think this phrase means _though it may not be essential knowledge that you are supposed to have_ , or _just for your reference_. What is the difference of nuance among _if you must know_ , _you may know_ , and _you might know_ , which is difficult for non-native English learner to discern? > The three-day Conservative Political Action Conference ended Saturday > afternoon with a meaningless presidential straw poll (if you must know, > libertarian gadfly Ron Paul won for the second year in a row). |
39,440 | 70,555 | 76823_0 | I was interested in the following sentence which appeared in an article titled “FROM SOUTH CAROLINA.; PUBLIC FEELING IN CHARLESTON THE LEADING MEN IN THE SECESSION MOVEMENT MISGIVINGS ABOUT THE ISSUE." in The New York Times (Dec. 9, 1860). > The ensuing Convention will immediately pass the secession ordinance; but > there is considerable doubt whether it will **not** be made to take effect > at a much later day than was first contemplated. Can someone clarify if the meaning of this sentence can wrongly influenced by the use of the word "not", as I think it is? I would drop "not"; but I'm not sure on this correction because the presence of the fragment "doubt whether" that precede "not" confused me. |
39,441 | 193,276 | 76823_0 | I am writing a novel and would like to know which is a better choice: > He walks over to the member’s table Or > He walks to the member’s table Thank you! |
39,442 | 12,509 | 76823_0 | Physics problems are usually written like: > The rate of change of the soup's temperature ... Is there a **common** English word that captures "rate of change" or "speed of change" in a single word, other than _derivative_? |
39,443 | 7,435 | 76823_0 | Please elaborate what does it mean by _soft skill_ in term of English language. |
39,444 | 7,436 | 76823_0 | Please elaborate, when we say "who is", why does it sound "whiz"? Also one more example I would like to include: why "visit us" sounds "visi- tas"? |
39,445 | 162,507 | 76823_0 | What is the past perfect of "have"? Is it * "have", * "had", or * "had had"? And if it is "had had", * doesn't it sound weird and awkward? * when and how do I use it? Thanks. |
39,446 | 189,347 | 76823_0 | I would write an academic research report and i would like to know how to write : > "Ocean of knowledge" to describe an enormous source of knowledge ? |
39,447 | 7,433 | 76823_0 | Cryptic clue: _Horse-drawn vehicle industry_ Answer: _Diligence_ How do we figure this one out? |
39,448 | 13,634 | 76823_0 | > Hegel asserted that in order for the thinking subject (human reason or > consciousness) to be able to know its object (the world) at all, there must > be in some sense **an identity of thought and being**. Could you give me an example? |
39,449 | 13,635 | 76823_0 | In managementese, "actionable" means "able to be acted upon". Unfortunately, its primary meaning is "giving sufficient reason to take legal action" in legalese. I'm looking for a better alternative to the managementese meaning that doesn't have the unfortunate associations, but still has good Sexy Buzzword Value; help? Example sentence per request: "This has now become one of our actionable items." Another, related meaning that's within the range of what I'm looking for is _able to be actively used_. To illustrate, the best alternative to "actionable" that we've come up with in the original context is _deployable_. |
39,450 | 138,111 | 76823_0 | Which sentence is correct and why? > The World Cup **is held** every four years. or, > The World Cup **is being held** every four years. |
39,451 | 16,080 | 76823_0 | Inside a piece of text, I have a word in another language. I'd like to keep it that way, and add a translator's note with the translation to English. What is the common practice of doing that? I'd prefer to do it inline. I'm thinking of something like this: > _word_ (TN: _translation of word_ ) But I haven't seen this notation used anywhere. |
39,452 | 16,081 | 76823_0 | I know there are differences between American and British English in this area. So when answering, please specify whether you speak American or British English. |
39,453 | 117,001 | 76823_0 | Let's imagine, I'm speaking about someone's three specific cars, which are over there, there, and there. Now I'm saying that I have installed a new sound system in all of them. Which is right: > * [...] I have installed a new sound system in all the three cars. > * [...] I have installed a new sound system in all three cars. > |
39,454 | 117,000 | 76823_0 | What is the way to say that something "should be done" in the past? I know there is a "should have" structure, but it is used for situations, when something was to be done in the past, but it wasn't. E.g. "You should have called me yesterday. Why didn't you?" So, would it be correct to say "It should have been done" in a situation when something was to be done and in fact it WAS DONE? |
39,455 | 117,002 | 76823_0 | Could you help me with the meaning of the phrase “bound together by some necessity of nerve that excluded him” in the extract below? What does "nerve" mean here? Does it mean "courage" or "nervous system?" Please help me. > “...The boy shrugged and got up. He walked off, across the room to the > screen door where he stood looking out. At once Bishop climbed down off his > chair and started after him, putting on his hat as he went. Tarwater > stiffened when the child approached but he did not move and Rayber watched > as the two of them stood there side by side, looking out the door --the two > figures, hatted and somehow ancient, bound together by **_some necessity of > nerve that excluded him_**. He was startled to see the boy put his hand on > Bishop's neck just under his hat, open the door and guide him out of it...” |
39,456 | 31,886 | 76823_0 | When narrating a story from the first-person perspective in the present tense, would the following be correct? > I wake up at 7 am and see no sunlight entering my room. Thinking I'm up too > early, I decide to rest for a few more minutes. I'm specifically asking whether the _I wake up_ part is correct, or whether it should be _I woke up_ instead. |
39,457 | 161,225 | 76823_0 | What are **the main purposes** to ask someone 'Where do you work?' apart from to find out the type of place he or she works in? I can answer: > I work in a shop. > I work in a hospital. > I work in an office. But what other things can (or should) I use as a reply to this question? * * * ### Extra question: sometimes I see > I work **at** a shop. I work **at** a hospital. I work **at** an office. What's the difference between 'at' and 'in' in this case? |
39,458 | 110,384 | 76823_0 | I am looking for a phrase similar to the phrase "friend or foe". I have come up with _"help or hindrance"_ but I am hoping you might come up with something else. edit - I am writing an article on electronic cigarettes. I want the article to present the for and against - I have already used the friend or foe phrase in a similar article, just looking for something different. |
39,459 | 110,382 | 76823_0 | > I am resigning from my post with effect from 15th April. Does this imply that April 14th will be my last working day, or will it be April 15th? |
39,460 | 110,381 | 76823_0 | It's always been on in mind, how can a single word have two meanings so opposite as "Swear" has? More specifically, how did the word "Swear" assumed its good and bad face? Was it born as good and then started to be used also as bad? The opposite? Citing a comic I read a couple of days ago, if someone tells you "Swear to God", what do you do by default? An oath or a mean sentence? (They may appear as multiple questions but in the end they all go back to the main one...) |
39,461 | 10,866 | 76823_0 | In this comment, the author uses the expression _the Drude is on board with this_. What does it mean? |
39,462 | 187,830 | 76823_0 | I'm looking for some hard evidence to determine whether syllabus is a word that derives from Greek or Latin. This came about from a discussion asking whether the plural of syllabus is "syllabuses" or "syllabi". We deduced that the plural would be syllabi if it derived from Latin, but views conflicted as to whether the word actually derived from Latin, or if it actually has its roots in Greek. Can anyone come up the answer to this conundrum? |
39,463 | 187,833 | 76823_0 | I wonder why "fat" "carbohydrate" and "protein" can have the plural form as in the following quotes. Aren't those nouns uncountable? 1. The Russian consumer protection agency said Friday it is taking McDonald's to court for selling foods that contain more fats and carbohydrates than are allowed by national regulations. 2. Carbohydrates, proteins, and fats supply 90% of the dry weight of the diet and 100% of its energy. |
39,464 | 19,505 | 76823_0 | If I finish something and the object gets transformed into something else during this process, can this be expressed in english by a sentence similar to the following one? I have completed my plan **into/to** a solution to the problem. (by adding some further steps that final manage to get the thing done) Is _into_ or _to_ correct or does the formulation not work at all? |
39,465 | 19,503 | 76823_0 | Pronouns can be so confusing. Is this appropriate or is there a preferred structure other than this? |
39,466 | 19,500 | 76823_0 | I notice that history books dealing with pre-WW2 times frequently refer to the place where diplomats are to be found as a _legation_ , but nowadays everyone calls this building an _embassy_. Is there any particular reason for this change? |
39,467 | 19,501 | 76823_0 | > Fee-fi-fo-fum; > > I smell the blood of an Englishman. > > Be he alive or be he dead, > > I'll grind his bones to make my bread. _Joseph Jacobs_ , Jack and the Beanstalk (1890) I've read about the origin of 'Fee-fi-fo-fum' but what does it actually mean? |
39,468 | 63,965 | 76823_0 | I have came across this reference: https://www.e-education.psu.edu/styleforstudents/c3_p35.html > This phrase is virtually meaningless, but we often hear it on the news and > in bloated speeches. “In terms of” is really just a wordy and sloppy > transition—usually an unoriginal disguise for a simple preposition, such as > “in,” or a more elegant phrasing, such as “in relation to.” “In terms of the > cost, it is high,” is easily revised to “Its cost is high.” Do not use “in > terms of,” or do so trembling. Is the reference really right? Can I use the following sentence? > The figures are expressed in terms of a percentage/in percentage terms. If so, the phrase "in terms of" seems not to be referred to relation. |
39,469 | 93,992 | 76823_0 | I am not really sure about the use of _among_ , so I have got these expressions which I am not sure are correct: > 1. They were talking among themselves and were completely ignoring me. > 2. These are Giants fan celebrating among themselves their World Series > triumph. > I know I am stretching it too much in the second example to include _among_. |
39,470 | 63,961 | 76823_0 | Why is 'Nothing lasts forever' correct instead of 'Nothing last forever'? |
39,471 | 159,403 | 76823_0 | I would like to know what is the origin of the expression "all over him/her like a cheap coat/suit". I Googled for it but didn't find any relevant entry. Anyone? |
39,472 | 97,291 | 76823_0 | When I learned this, it had a very distinctive name and allowed to make more interesting sentences. For instance, given the sentence > Fred extended his feet, which stopped the car. It can be rephrased as > Fred extended his feet, _stopping_ the car. How is this construct called and is the comma still necessary? |
39,473 | 150,456 | 76823_0 | I've read conflicting information regarding the meaning of the idiomatic phrase **"take the cake"**. I am quite confused, because based on one source it means something is exceedingly good and according to another - exceedingly bad. Could someone shed some light on which of the two is the actual/prevalent meaning of the phrase? For example which of the two uses sounds more natural? "He drank all the milk and left the empty bottle in the fridge! That really takes the cake!" or "Thanks for all the help! You really take the cake!" |
39,474 | 65,756 | 76823_0 | I believe there is a term for words such as _never_ , _always_ , _constantly_ , and so forth; words that generally exaggerate the situation being described. Unfortunately, I can't recall what that term is if I am correct in that there is indeed such a term. Can anyone help me with this question? |
39,475 | 13,639 | 76823_0 | The song 'Who's That Chick?' by David Guetta featuring Rihanna features the following line in the chorus: > She's been a crazy **dicta** , disco fever and you wonder... Lyrics websites disagree on the word in bold: 'dita' seems to be a common alternative. To my ear it sounds more like /ˈdɪktə/ than /ˈdɪtə/ or /ˈdɪttə/. (You can listen here \- the chorus starts at about 1:10.) I can't find any definitions of 'dita' (or 'ditta' or 'ditter' etc.) that make any sense in the context of this song. As for 'dicta', there is a sole entry on UrbanDictionary: > A woman that appears to be quiet when you first meet her, but once you begin > unraveling her personality you realize that she scarily independent. While this might fit the song, I can't find any evidence for it apart from an anonymous answer on Yahoo! Answers. The wording of the answer is very similar to that of the UrbanDictionary definition; both may well have been written by the same person. The definition happened to appear in December last year, not long after the song was released. Perhaps the lyricist was out of ideas and decided to invent a new word. |
39,476 | 97,299 | 76823_0 | On a blog post I (German native speaker) recently wrote the following sentence: > I forgot to tell my boss that the meeting will start already at 2 tomorrow. Someone then posted a comment that the already doesn't make sense and wouldn't be used by a native speaker of English, correcting my sentence to: > I forgot to tell my boss that the meeting will start at 2 tomorrow. Now, adding **already** to the sentence (in German) does one of the following 2 things: Expressing that the meeting, which was originally scheduled to start at 3, has been "preponed". or Expressing that the starting time, yet unknown to the boss, is early from the perspective of the boss/ myself because maybe usually meetings start at 5 or maybe we are about to work till 5 at night today so 2 tomorrow is early for us. If not using **already** , how would either case be expressed in English then? |
39,477 | 152,139 | 76823_0 | My wife's ex-husband is my __? It sort of felt a bit awkward to see the woman, her current husband, her ex- husband, and her and her ex-husband's children in one room together. They all seem to be at ease and are bonding very well. Anyway, what is the relationship called between the two men? |
39,478 | 158,209 | 76823_0 | what is the difference between; "what if we stop X" and "what if we stopped X" We are trying to write an inspirational statement, not so much a question, to provoke thought around stopping X. For example "what if we stop car theft" vs "what if we stopped car theft" knowing that the audience comprises those who are trying to stop car theft. |
39,479 | 158,203 | 76823_0 | I saw this sentence in a book where two events happened in sequence. The first event was described with the past perfect (ex: After I had woken up, I washed my face.) But in Korea, we learned that when two sentences are linked with after or before to show which event happened earlier, we may use the simple past like this "After I woke up, I washed my face." Is this correct? |
39,480 | 111,258 | 76823_0 | In the movie _Easy A_ , the character Todd said "See you at **salt mines** " to Olive when they met at Melody's party. What does _salt mines_ mean? Does it really mean "a mine for salt"? |
39,481 | 124,839 | 76823_0 | There are already topics very close to my question, but not quite there. Does anyone know what to do about this: > We review our accounts p.a. (at the end of the year). Normally, without the text in parentheses, the "." after "a" would suffice to end the sentence, but then the parentheses come into play. Should there be another period after the parentheses like in my example, or no? |
39,482 | 137,544 | 76823_0 | From Gerard Manley Hopkins' poem, "The Furl of fresh-leaved dogrose down" > Then over his **turnèd** temples—here— > > Was a rose, or, failing that, > > Rough-Robin or five-lipped campion clear > > For a beauty-bow to his hat I wonder what _turned temples_ mean here. Should we read it as "his head girdled round (="turned") with a wreath (of flowers)" ? That is, does the poet use _temples_ as a synecdoche for "head", because there's a wreath at about the temples' level? |
39,483 | 2,369 | 76823_0 | When people see the acronym **FAQ** , I wonder if they really know what it stands for or whether they just understand the concept. Is this true for most native English speakers? |
39,484 | 2,367 | 76823_0 | > He did **nothing***. Which is the correct question tag for the sentence above? 1. _didn't he?_ 2. _did he?_ What is the effect of using nothing for negation? |
39,485 | 154,510 | 76823_0 | Is there a word in English for a person who conducts practice lessons in a university? In Russia, we call these kinds of lessons "семинар", and people who conduct them "семинарист". Unfortunately, the English words "seminarian" and "seminarist" have different meanings (as I understand, they are connected with study of theology, not with study in general). |
39,486 | 137,545 | 76823_0 | I am looking for a word or phrase that communicates a program's phase after it's pilot phase (sorry for the redundancy) So if HUD has a pilot program right now, but I want to formulate a question of when will this program be (blank this is word I am looking for) Thank you |
39,487 | 69,614 | 76823_0 | I know that some/any are used with plural (with some exceptions), but what about this? > I can give you a book...if there is any Is that correct? I want to say that if there is any book, I will give it to him. And what about plural? > I can give you the books...if there are some Or should it be "any? |
39,488 | 154,514 | 76823_0 | Here I am again to ask a question about a vocabulary item. What word is used to describe yourself as the fan of a team, that you support it, cheer for it and want it to win ? If I say, "I am cheering for the Czech team" it doesn't sound good English. So what should I say? Many thanks in advance for your contribution. Mel. |
39,489 | 21,220 | 76823_0 | > The user is redirected to your web page after the click. > > After the click, the user is redirected to your web page. Which kind of sentence should be used, the first, the second, or neither? |
39,490 | 21,228 | 76823_0 | I've always spelt it with an "a". But my friend insists on spelling it with an "o". Is this an acceptable variant? |
39,491 | 46,368 | 76823_0 | Is it allowed to have multiple hyphens in one word? I want to use the word _semi-self-sustaining_ in the sentence > However, the ability to produce **semi-self-sustaining** stations is > possessed by up to a quarter of all nations. Should we use _semi-selfsustaining_ or avoid it by using _partially self- sustaining_? |
39,492 | 1,861 | 76823_0 | If I am writing a sentence where both a noun and an adjective are used as modifiers, shall I write first the adjective, or the noun? > It's a nice C code snippet. > ( **?** ) It's a C nice code snippet. Is the same "rule" valid for the following sentence? > Reserved SQL keywords are written in uppercase. > SQL reserved keywords are written in uppercase. |
39,493 | 157,422 | 76823_0 | What is the correct use of the verb in the following sentences: 1. Could you tell me what kind of qualifications does a deputy coroner **have**? 2. Could you tell me what kind of car he **owns**? 3. What kind of underwear does he **wear**? In the first and second example, I think the question is `Could you`, so the rest of the sentence should be written in simple form. The second example follows this "rule", however, the first insists on adding another interrogative form in `does a deputy coroner have`. In the third example I think that `What kind` is the question, but there is an additional interrogative form at the end. Which one is correct? Thank you! |
39,494 | 81,076 | 76823_0 | > He has to do it. Hasn't he (to)? Is the ' _to_ ' correct/ incorrect/ unnecessary? Is that a case of an infinitive in interrogative tail (question tag)? |
39,495 | 167,104 | 76823_0 | After a discussion on the topic I found out that the oxford dictionary describes that > Historically, dice is the plural of die, but in modern standard English dice > is both the singular and the plural: ' _throw the dice_ ' could mean a > reference to either one or more than one dice. and > dice. NOUN (plural same) Source: oxforddictionaries.com Which unsurprisingly surprised me. Now, I have long ago accepted that languages are living things and I am fine accepting change, however in this particular case I am not sure just how accepted this use is. The Oxford dictionary makes no mention of this use being _slang_ which suggests it should be valid in 'proper' English as well and no reference is even made to _die_ except as a 'see also' and the historical use. So, does this mean uses like > We lost one dice whilst playing the game yesterday. and > The 3D artist was developing a dice model, to be printed later. are both valid? |
39,496 | 81,073 | 76823_0 | How is the meaning of "once upon a time" different from "a long time ago"? Literally, is that what it means? There seems to be repetition in _once_ and _upon a time_. How is this sentence broken up? |
39,497 | 57,173 | 76823_0 | In the latest episode of the sitcom _The Big Bang Theory_ , there was this joke: > I’ve got a lab full of alcoholic monkeys and tomorrow is the day we switch > ‘em to O’Doul’s. I can't really understand the joke, because I don't know what or who O'Doul is. I tried googling, but all I got was a baseball player named Lefty O'Doul, which doesn't help me in understanding the joke. |
39,498 | 43,628 | 76823_0 | On a particular piece of dialogue and I wasn't sure if this was correct or just a matter of style. > "[...] your shield, you don’t deserve..., nor how can I put into the line?” My question is the use of ellipsis in quotes, here 'you don't deserve' is its own clause, is it ok to use the "..." to denote an additional pause, or should I just stick with the comma? Edit: There is more preceding _your shield_ , I just kept it short for brevity sake. |
39,499 | 11,730 | 76823_0 | In an article I see this phrase "Faustian bargain". Both I and my teacher were unable to translate or understand it. Can you help me and explain this phrase? Context: > The reason for linking all the modules together in a single address space, > with no protection between the modules, is that designers have made a > **Faustian bargain** : better performance at the cost of more system > crashes. We will quantitatively examine the price of this trade-off below. This comes from the first page of this work: http://docs.huihoo.com/minix/reliable-os.pdf or http://74.125.155.132/scholar?q=cache:_sabEZ3IFvsJ:scholar.google.com/&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5 (preloaded as google html view) |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.