Unnamed: 0 int64 0 40.2k | id int64 1 196k | chunk_id stringclasses 1
value | text stringlengths 18 6.44k |
|---|---|---|---|
39,500 | 11,732 | 76823_0 | What is the difference between _increase_ , _growth_ , _go up_ and _rise_? And what is the difference between _decline_ , _fall_ , _go down_ and _drop_? I really don't know which is the best to describe parts of a graph. :/ I can't find information in the dictionary about this. :/ |
39,501 | 192,632 | 76823_0 | In the US media, news reporters enjoy saying "the feds" with authority, but this using of a slang term without an agreed upon definition frustrates me. Let me elaborate. Speaking as a native speaker, I've heard each of these groups referred to as "the feds": * FBI * DEA * most everything else in DoJ, but not everything * IRS My guess is that to be a "fed", you must have standing that overlaps with another organization that exists at the State level? And, all of the "feds" must also be in the Executive Branch of the federal government? After all, the Supreme Court is not "the feds", right? Nor is Congress "the feds", right? Further, my sense is that everyone considers the term, "the feds", to have a _negative connotation_. I sense that the media who demagogue "States rights" created this negative connotation? Yet, I just heard that "the feds" are going to Ferguson, Missouri to investigate an incident there; this is framed as a good thing. And anyway, which "feds" are going to Ferguson? Federal Prosecutors? FBI? Some other people from the DoJ that deal with hate crimes? Rather than say exactly who is going, it seems everyone just says "the feds" are going. Please educate me about the political slang of my own native language. thank you. |
39,502 | 11,738 | 76823_0 | For a non native English speaker, the introductory part of today’s Washington Post article commenting on the flood of TV commercials during the Super Bowl contains a bunch of unfamiliar phrases and is quite a puzzle. Can somebody explain me what ‘Have the color and consistency of old gum,’ ‘The cheese is baked into crust’ and ‘Tweet one’s delight that seven-layer dip has become nine,’ in the following sentence imply ? Is a sentence studded with all-Greek-to-me the writer’s special style or just an ordinary pattern of newspaper article? > The effects of 45 (or XLV, if you must) direct slams to the head could be > clearly seen Sunday night on that annual American CAT scan called the Super > Bowl. Whole parts of our collective cerebellum now show up as having the > color and consistency of old gum. Too many insipid Black Eyed Peas songs > will do that to a civilization. The cheese really is baked into the crust. > But willingly, like achy old pros, we returned to the holy rituals of this > brutal game, this billion-dollar boondoggle, tweeting our delight that > seven-layer dip has somehow become nine. Distraction is the real attraction, > which gets a little more true each year. |
39,503 | 43,622 | 76823_0 | What is the preferred way to write words such as _exposé_ in English? My Firefox spellchecker even tells me that _exposé_ is incorrect and suggests _expose_. If _exposé_ is correct, then how does this sit in the grand scheme of things? Does this mean that _é_ is also part of our alphabet, or is this word special in that is not formally recognised as being part of the English language? |
39,504 | 190,701 | 76823_0 | In a sentence with four parts, 1. As sharing crime statistics for 2. the year 2011, the Commissioner admitted that 3. there had been an undue delay in 4. the setting up of an anti-narcotics cell. I am told there is an error in part 1: _as_ should not be used. But I don't understand why that's so. What is wrong with _as,_ and what should go there instead? |
39,505 | 49,487 | 76823_0 | > services > > Listing off registered services (nova-scheduler, nova-compute and so on) and > their current state. The updated_at field is used to determine if a given > service is considered healthy or not. "services" is a database table. If you don't known what a database table is, think of it as a listing. |
39,506 | 49,484 | 76823_0 | In US and in UK respectively, which is more popular as the past participle of _forget_ : _forgotten_ or _forgot_? Which is more formal/informal? Examples: > I haven't **forgot(ten)** you. > > You will not be **forgot(ten)**. |
39,507 | 94,677 | 76823_0 | I had sent an express mail to my friend several days ago, which contained some documents. After checking online, I can see the express mail has been delivered. Now I'd like to write an email to my friend to ask her about it. When referring to the delivery, should I ask her if she "accepted the documents", "signed the documents", or something else? In Chinese, we usually say something like "Have you signed and accepted the express mail?" But I'm not sure what the proper way is to say it in English. |
39,508 | 94,676 | 76823_0 | Today, while reading an online article, I came across the following comment: > Young people regret their mistakes. Old people regret not deciding. **_In > the contest of prevaricating_** between which choices we predict we will one > day celebrate and those we will one day regret and the alternative of taking > decisive action now, it is the latter that should win. Go for it! It seems to me that the word "prevaricate" is being used incorrectly here- my understanding is that the word denotes evasive behaviour. Am I correct in thinking that the above sentence makes no sense? I'm inclined to think that the poster should have used 'vacillate'instead. Thank you. |
39,509 | 94,674 | 76823_0 | What is the difference between _I am doing lunch_ and _I am having lunch_? Both indicate progress of action. |
39,510 | 17,066 | 76823_0 | * How long has your sister played the harp? * For almost five years. Can I leave off "for" here or it will sound strange then? |
39,511 | 17,064 | 76823_0 | Imagine yourself walking in the woods with children. One child is saying, "there is a big hole in that tree's trunk." You answer, "perhaps a/some bird lives in there." Would you use _a_ or _some_? Please, elaborate. |
39,512 | 157,153 | 76823_0 | Many words (such as _imbecile_ and _idiot_ ) used to be technical terms or proper names, however, eventually came to be used mainly for insults, and are today considered negative. Has the word _"freak"_ always carried a negative connotation, or was it once a technical term for meaning "different" or "abnormal"? |
39,513 | 52,619 | 76823_0 | Order of magnitude usually denotes a change of a factor of 10. Is there a similar term for a change by a factor of 1000? For example: Kb -> Mb Tb -> Gb Edit: I agree that you can just say "three orders of magnitude" but I am wondering if there is a more concise or appropriate term. |
39,514 | 157,150 | 76823_0 | > _A. He still hasn't told us the time and place of the meeting._ > _B. He still hasn't told us the time and **the** place of the meeting._ Q1: Which of the above sentences is correct and why? More specifically, do we say "the time and place of..." or "the time and the place of..."? Q2: Do they sound unnatural or uncommon in any way other than what I already asked in question 1? For example, is it more common to say "the meeting time and place" or "the time and place of the meeting"? |
39,515 | 68,055 | 76823_0 | We have created a game where children can learn Vegetables and Fruits. When the child answers a question they receive a notification to tell them whether they got it wrong or right. My opinion is that the capitalization of the letters should not be in sentence case, so for example, > Wrong Answer - Try Again is incorrect in my opinion. I think it should be > Wrong answer - try again i.e. written as a normal sentence. Is there a particular way it should be? For reference purposes, here is the game just in case my question does not make sense. Click on a vegetable to see the message. http://freeteacher.co.uk/game.aspx?qf=game_vegetables |
39,516 | 94,678 | 76823_0 | I'm doing a school exercise where I have to give an explanation of the underlined (or in this case **bold** ) verb usage in given sentences, following this format: > **I was waiting.** > > past continuous (or progressive) = subject + was / were + verb + ‘-ing’ (or > present participle) The last sentence I am to anaylse is giving me trouble: > Toyota **cars are made** in Japan. I've indentified the tense as present simple, and cars is clearly the subject, and "are" at least one of the verbs. But what is the rule for past participles in simple present tense? I've done fairly extensive searches online and found grammar websites that give examples of the same format as present simple tense, but none that give any explanation or rule for how the past participle is used in this case. My best guess for the desired analysis is: > **cars are made** > > Simple present = subject + is / are + past participle But this is only an inference, and I don't know if it accurately reflects any actual grammatical rule. Any help will be appreciated. (And don't worry, I'm allowed to use the internet, several links are even included with the exercise, so you're not helping me cheat) |
39,517 | 102,252 | 76823_0 | While thinking about good antonyms for _reckless_ , I noticed there’s no _reckful_ nor any _reck_ in English, for that matter. So, what would that _reck_ be? Etymonline offers the following scrap: > _rece, recce_ “care, heed” from _reccan_ “to care” A very pretty word, and I’d love to learn more about it. When did it die out? Did it differ subtly from _care_ as _careless_ differs from _reckless_ , with special connotations? How was it pronounced? Did it function just like _care_ or did it have its own set of prepositions for use in various contexts? Could it be used in role of “tender care”, related to love? _“I recce for thee”_? |
39,518 | 90,744 | 76823_0 | I stumbled upon a video having this phrase in its narration, _"[The university] has been equipped with **computer network** , electric systems, and internet"_. Personally, I never use _"network"_ as a mass noun like the above usage. If it were me, I would rather use _"equipped with computer networks"_ , or _"equipped with computer network access"_. Anyway, it made me curious... Is such a usage good English? |
39,519 | 102,256 | 76823_0 | My point in the quoted sentence is to introduce a new section where I will list all the machines that are currently available for a given task. > Optional machines to work with Is the sentence above conveying my point? Secondly, is it idiomatic as written right now? |
39,520 | 90,741 | 76823_0 | My own understanding of the term _camp followers_ was that it was synonymous with _prostitutes_ who followed armies around plying their trade. However, according to Wikipedia: > Camp-follower is a term used to identify civilians and their children who > follow armies. There are two common types of camp followers; first, the > wives and children of soldiers, who follow their spouse or parent's army > from place to place; the **second type** of camp followers have historically > been informal army **service providers** , servicing soldiers needs whilst > encamped, in particular selling goods or services that the military does not > supply, these have included cooking, laundering, liquor, nursing, **sexual > services** and sutlery. ODO's BrE and AmE entries are both identical and similar to the above: > a civilian who works in or is attached to a military camp. Webster, on the other hand, appears to concur with _me_: > a civilian (as a **prostitute** ) who follows a military unit to attend or > exploit military personnel Wiktionary offers a fence-sitting definition albeit one leaning towards my side a wee bit: > A civilian who works for a military organization, **often a prostitute**. None of the dictionary entries explicitly include the families of soldiers in their definitions. So, are _camp followers_ all the civilians employed in the service industry who follow armies around? Or has the term dwindled to only imply those who provide sexual services? I'd also appreciate any information on the evolution of the term, if applicable. |
39,521 | 90,740 | 76823_0 | What is the role of the single quote sign in transliterations? I have the following example: > Malkat Sh'va in Modern Hebrew > (From Wikipedia Queen of Sheba Article) What is the `'` sign called in this context? And what does it do? I have already browsed the internet, but couldn't find an explanation. I have even looked into ISO 259-3, but got only confused. |
39,522 | 102,259 | 76823_0 | > Although I could not see it in the fog, I knew that Gibbet Wood lay not far > ahead at the top of Gibbet Hill. It would be wet and soggy in among the > trees, but I **was willing to bet** that the police had not been there > before me. (from _The Weed that Strings the Hangman’s Bag_ ) Oxford says ‘I bet’ is ‘used to express certainty.’ If the word ‘willing’ (Oxford says; ready, eager, or prepared to do something) is added like the example, does it intensify or weaken the meaning of “I bet”? |
39,523 | 90,748 | 76823_0 | (I’m asking this for someone else who doesn’t know about this site (yet).) Could _fornicate_ be used as a transitive verb, as in > We have to keep A from fornicating B. I don’t believe it can. |
39,524 | 113,654 | 76823_0 | For example: We always get work done, regardless of what mood Bill or I is/am/are in. Which tense of 'be' would be used here? |
39,525 | 118,385 | 76823_0 | Question says it all and again it should be from literature or fiction. I was told that the future perfect continuous does not exist. So I am looking for examples from “real published and acclaimed books”. |
39,526 | 113,657 | 76823_0 | (Physics) experiments yield results, but I'm looking for a verb for the finding of a result. "Find" seems to underestimate personal input in the experiment. Other words like "Obtain" seem strange. Is there a proper term? |
39,527 | 118,383 | 76823_0 | Just wanted to know if there are any rules on usage "to" or "for" with the word "difficult". |
39,528 | 113,651 | 76823_0 | In conversation today I wanted to find a set of words that have an "or" sound in their middles, as in "torrent" and "sorcerer". I couldn't find one. Most rhyming dictionaries I found only concerned themselves with the last syllable. I think that part of the problem is that I'm not aware of the correct term for what I'm looking for. "Rhyme" almost always means the final syllable, not anything in the middle of the word. Thus, I'm hoping English.SE can help. Is there a term for words which share a common middle syllable? Do you know of any sources that contain sets of such words? |
39,529 | 147,359 | 76823_0 | Is _to hear of_ perfectly synonymous with _to hear about_? Or are there contexts in which one excludes the other? Hearing _of_... is great news. Hearing _about_... is great news. |
39,530 | 142,188 | 76823_0 | I have not been able to find an explanation for this use of an infinitive without _to_ : > The first thing I do in the morning is go to the bathroom. > > The first thing I do in the morning is open my eyes. > > The first thing I do in the morning is turn off the alarm clock. Infinitives without to are used in the following cases: -After modal auxiliary verbs (We can managed it) -After _do_ (I do admit I was wrong) -After certain verbs like _let_ , _make_ , _see_... (They made me wait) -After _rather_ , _better_ and _had better_ (I would rather go alone) -After _and, or, except, but, than, as_ and _like_ (It is as easy to smile as frown) -After _why_ (Why pay more at other shops?) [ http://www.perfectyourenglish.com/grammar/infinitives-without-to.htm ] I have found no mention of using an **infinite without _to_** after the verb **_to be_**. Are the examples above a special case? Are they very colloquial? Or are they incorrect? |
39,531 | 104,948 | 76823_0 | In Dutch we have a saying "Vijgen na pasen". Translated: "figs after Easter". It means a solution comes too late to be of any use. What is the English equivalent for this? Some googling gives me "Closing the barn door when the cow has bolted", but the explanation seems to point more towards the wrong solution for a problem. |
39,532 | 112,528 | 76823_0 | Do tenses in a time clause never back-shift in reported speech? For example, does "I went to Italy when I finished school." become "She said she had gone to Spain when she finished school." and "I will go to Italy when I finish school." becomes "She said she would go to Italy when she finishes school."? |
39,533 | 54,611 | 76823_0 | I came across the sentence _"It's been thirty years since my parents first met."_ I am sure that if I heard _"It's been thirty years **that** my parents first met"_, I would accept it as grammatical, but I can't find any reference to support this. Am I wrong? |
39,534 | 147,351 | 76823_0 | I am writing the acknowledgment of my article and so I wrote: _I would like to appreciate the Reviewers' subtle comments on improving this article._ My main problem is to use _in improving_ or _on improving_. I found both forms used in different sentences on the web. And so I am in a doubt which one has a better taste in English? Thanks. |
39,535 | 112,527 | 76823_0 | Am I wrong to assume a heist in someway implies the existence of a particular plan? Is it more of an anglo or american term? Does it mean the same thing across the pond? (Also: is it pronounced more like heest or hyst?) |
39,536 | 104,947 | 76823_0 | In a textbook, I read this sentence: > Stretch your arms as much as **is** comfortable for you. But can you say it without the _is_? > Stretch your arms as much as comfortable for you. Is there any difference? |
39,537 | 147,354 | 76823_0 | I have a question regarding the usage of the Present Perfect and the Present Perfect Continuous. So first, here's the context: I was playing an online game with a couple friends and in this game you have to go into dungeons which have treasure chests at their end and these chests normally contain valuable items (some do not) and normally you do those dungeons just to make money. Anyway, we made our way through a dungeon right to the end of it and then one of my buddies opened the chest and we looted the items. Then I asked him if there was anything valuable you could get out of the chest in that specific dungeon as I hadn't been sure about it. We were still in the dungeon. He told me there actually was something of high value obtainable and I replied with either (I've forgotten what EXACTLY I said but I'll try to recall as best as possible): * **Oh I didn't know, I've always been playing this dungeon only for fun.** (but now I might consider playing it for the valuable items) or * **Oh I didn't know, so far I've been playing this dungeon only for fun.** (but now I might consider playing it for the valuable items) Now my question is that if I had used the "simple" Present Perfect, would the meaning drastically change? Could I have said it like this: * **Oh I didn't know, I've always played this dungeon only for fun.** (but now I might consider playing it for the valuable items) or * **Oh I didn't know, so far I've played this dungeon only for fun.** (but now I might consider playing it for the valuable items) To me it feels like both are right, there's only a slight nuance namely that in the version with the PrP Contionuous I convey that I played the dungeon more frequently or habitually than in the simple PrP version but maybe I'm completely wrong, I don't know. So, what do feel or think when hearing something like that and which version would you choose? I'm looking forward to reading your answers. :) |
39,538 | 112,523 | 76823_0 | I found some translations but am not sure if there are better and shorter alternatives: 1. "children playground" — I am thinking about a small place inside, not a large playground; 2. "corner for children" — maybe this is the only one valid. Is there any other short idiomatic phrase to describe it? |
39,539 | 54,616 | 76823_0 | Usage situation: Joan submits a document to an office. The office validates the document; if it is not valid, they return it to her. Joan sees the error, _makes it valid_ , and resubmits it. I'm looking for a word that means "to make valid". Any ideas? |
39,540 | 186,046 | 76823_0 | I'm looking for an expression similar to _be consistent with_ , when reporting studies which have the same results, such as: > The results of X's research **consist with / are consistent with** Y's > findings. Alternatives such as _do not contradict_ or _agree with_ do not fit the context, which is formal, and _do not contradict_ somehow changes the meaning. There's nothing wrong with _be consistent with_ , but sometimes I need to write such an expression in an article 10 times; its language must not be the same everywhere. How about _are parallel with_? Does it convey the same meaning? |
39,541 | 48,281 | 76823_0 | Is it always ok to have a superlative hyphenated with a present participle ending in -ing acting as an adjective (so long as the superlative describes the base verb of the participle)? For example: > * most-burping woman > * fastest-drinking college student > * quietest-singing bird > Such a phrase that is commonly used is "highest-grossing film." Is this just a particular idiom? |
39,542 | 62,709 | 76823_0 | Here is a sentence similar to the one in the text I'm proofreading right now: **Groundwork for (the) development and implementation of my cunning plan.** The text is very formal and there're multiple instances of this "the" that to me appears to be doing nothing but the author is so insistent that I have lost my certainty :-) Googling gives no definite confirmation of whether I'm to take it out or leave it be so I decided to try and ask for advice. **Should the definite article be used with nouns denoting process in formal texts and circumstances?** |
39,543 | 186,043 | 76823_0 | There is a fairly well known recipe for _Triple Cooked Chips_. It involves cooking chips three different ways / times. Is _triple_ cooked correct or should it be called _Thrice Cooked Chips_ as they have been cooked three times? |
39,544 | 48,286 | 76823_0 | I translated a sentence from my native language Tamil to English using Google Translate and got this: > What qualifications do you have to talk about it? Is there a better alternative for this question? |
39,545 | 143,851 | 76823_0 | > seed·y ˈsēdē adjective 1.sordid and disreputable. > "his seedy affair with a soft-porn starlet" synonyms: sordid, disreputable, > seamy, sleazy, squalid, unwholesome, unsavory shabby and squalid. "an increasingly seedy and dilapidated property" synonyms: dilapidated, tumbledown, ramshackle, falling to pieces, decrepit, gone to rack and ruin, run-down, down-at-heel, down-at-the-heel(s), shabby, dingy, slummy, insalubrious, squalid; antonyms: classy My wife and I live in NYC and we like to joke that this terms comes from Avenue C and Avenue D, a particularly run-down and, well, seedy part of Manhattan. I doubt this is true. What is the origin of the word and how did it come to mean "sordid and disreputable" and "shabby and squalid"? |
39,546 | 143,850 | 76823_0 | I've seen this word many times but I never understand what that exactly means. AFAIK it is used to refer to a known object but sometimes I see different usages. Can any one explain exact usage and meaning of this word? Regards |
39,547 | 62,700 | 76823_0 | I'm a bit confused with the usage of the prepositions for the word _globalization_. Should I say: > In order to achieve globalization of digitization... or > In order to achieve globalization for digitization... or > In order to achieve globalization on digitization... or something more applicable? _PS: I'm developing a facebook app that's like Branchout. However, instead of finding jobs, networking professionally, and recruiting employees, this app is about meeting new people - it is a combination of a dating site, Branchout, an internet forum and anything you can think of that have to do with interacting with strangers. It connects people together in different ways. (As the application is still under development, I can't tell you about the key ingredient that digitizes people's lives. Just bear in mind that this is the digitization I am talking about.)_ |
39,548 | 62,701 | 76823_0 | > _**someone_** > > Used for referring to a person when you do not know or do not say who the > person is. So in the sentence: > I will need someone from different continents who can help me to spread this > application and you are the first person that I approach. Should the pronoun _someone_ be plural and does it even have a plural form? Or.. Should I just use the word _people_ to replace the pronoun? |
39,549 | 62,704 | 76823_0 | I heard the following on 'The Office' in episode Downsize (#1.1): > David Brent: I'm going to have to let you go first. > > Dawn: What? Why? > > David Brent: Why? Stealing. Thieving. > > Dawn: Thieving? **What am I meant to have stolen?** > > David Brent: Post-It notes. What does the 'what am I meant' part mean here? Is it a common expression used in BrE or AmE? Cant we simply say: What have I stolen? What might have I stolen? |
39,550 | 159,490 | 76823_0 | > **Besides** gaining my career, the course will surely contribute to our > country’s wealth. Is this use of _besides_ correct? |
39,551 | 80,307 | 76823_0 | In a document I have a plot where one of the labels represents the total time taken for the process to complete. Should I label it as "Elapsed Time" or "Time Elapsed"? Which one is correct? |
39,552 | 80,300 | 76823_0 | Let us read the dialogue below between two people, A and B: > A : _Have you even eaten squid fried?_ > > B : _Yes._ > > A : _How was it?_ > > B : _Better than when I was sober._ Can the adjective _fried_ be understood to modify either the subject or the object? If so, is there some way to disambiguate the dialogue? |
39,553 | 80,301 | 76823_0 | I'm familiar with the phrase from a US advertising campaign some years ago. It was used to promote consumption of "cow juice" when it was getting a bad press because of its fat content. Later the phrase was adapted in "gotta have park, " a campaign to get local support of a particular park in NYC. I'd like to know the derivation of the phrase, assuming it predates the milk campaign. |
39,554 | 138,705 | 76823_0 | Is there a grammatical rule for the pronunciation of words such as _dance, castle_ and _prance_? I believe the British English pronunciation is "ah", while in American English it is a short "a" sound. |
39,555 | 148,752 | 76823_0 | Is there a word for the final stone of a foundation? Analogous to the word "cornerstone"? |
39,556 | 80,308 | 76823_0 | From the _Dictionar o the Scots Leid_ : > **Quha** , **Quhay** , interrog. and rel. pron. Also: **qwha** , **qha** , > **qua** , **qwa** , **wha** , **vha** , **hua** ; **qhaa** ; **quhaw** ; > **quhai qwhay** , **whay** , **quay** ; **quhae** , **whae** ; **quhe** , > **quhey** , **qwhey**. > > [North. ME _qua_ (Cursor M.), _wha_ (Rolle), mid. and south. _hwo_ (c 1200) > etc. (see **Quho** ), early ME _wha_ (Orm), _hwa_ (c 1230), _wa_ (12th c.), > OE _hwá_ nom. personal interrog. pron. sing. or _pl._ cf. **Quho**.] Who. There are other such spellings: “quhat” for “what”, “quham” for “whom”, “quhamto” for “to whom”. I’ve been trying to find some explanation for that on the web but with little success. One thing I found is what follows. I do believe I’m not infringing any copyrights by the looks of the text. I don’t know who wrote it and when though. I took it from here. My notes are italicized. > 8\. To clere this point, and alsoe to reform an errour bred in the south, > and now usurped be our ignorant printeres, I wil tel quhat befel my self > quhen I was in the south with a special gud frende of myne. Ther rease, upon > sum accident, quhither quho, quhen, quhat, etc., sould be symbolized with q > or w, a hoat disputation betuene him and me. After manie conflictes (for we > ofte encountered), we met be chance, in the citie of Baeth, with a Doctour > of divinitie of both our acquentance. He invited us to denner. At table my > antagonist, to bring the question on foot amangs his awn condisciples, began > that I was becum an heretik, and the doctour spering how, ansuered that I > denyed quho to be spelled with a w, but with qu. Be quhat reason? quod the > Doctour. Here, I beginning to lay my grundes of labial, dental, and guttural > [ _velar?_ ] soundes and symboles, he snapped me on this hand and he on > that, that the doctour had mikle a doe to win me room for a syllogisme. Then > (said I) a labial letter can not symboliz a guttural syllab. But w is a > labial letter, quho a guttural sound. And therfoer w can not symboliz quho, > nor noe syllab of that nature. Here the doctour staying them again (for al > barked at ones), the proposition, said he, I understand; the assumption is > Scottish, and the conclusion false. Quherat al laughed, as if I had bene > dryven from al replye, and I fretted to see a frivolouse jest goe for a > solid ansuer. My proposition is grounded on the 7 sectio of this same cap., > quhilk [ _whilk=which_ ] noe man, I trow [ _believe_ ], can denye that ever > suked the paepes [ _I have no idea quhat “suked the paepes” might mean._ ] > of reason. And soe the question must rest on the assumption quhither w be a > labial letter and quho a guttural syllab. As for w, let the exemples of wil, > wel, wyne, juge quhilk are sounded befoer the voual with a mint of the > lippes, as is said the same cap., sect. 5. [ _I don't understand this > sentence._ ] As for quho, besydes that it differres from quo onelie be > aspiration, and that w, being noe perfect consonant, can not be aspirated, I > appele to al judiciouse eares, to quhilk Cicero attributed mikle, quhither > the aspiration in quho be not ex imo [ _what does_ ex imo _mean_?] gutture, > and therfoer not labial. That does seem to give some insight so I would like to divide my question in two parts now. The first part will be about the interpretation of the above, and the second part will be about the spellings in general. ## Part 1. I understand that the text is about a discussion between the author on one side and two other people (his friend and the Doctour of divinitie) on the other side. The discussion was about the spelling of the words which have “wh” in them in standard Present-day English. The author said that these words should be spelled with “quh” instead of “wh”. The friend and the Doctour disagreed. The author said that the reason for his conviction that the “quh” spellings are right is that the sound in these word is guttural, which I understand means velar, and not labial. What was the sound the author used in this word? Was it [ʍ]? He said the sound was velar, and clearly said it wasn’t labial. Could it mean that he produced a sound that wasn’t labialized? I have never heard of such a realization of this phoneme in any historical dialect of English, but I know very little about these things and it's perfectly possible that it existed from my point of view. The author seems to have been Scottish. First, he advocates the spellings I have only encountered in Scottish texts, and second, according to the Doctour, he made a “Scottish assumption” about the sound. I think it could mean that the Doctour was English (did he live in Bath?) and used the delabialized allophone. I don’t know when the split occurred, or when the text was written, so I can’t judge whether it’s possible. He says, “As for quho, besydes that it differres from quo onelie be aspiration, and that w, being noe perfect consonant, can not be aspirated, I appele to al judiciouse eares, to quhilk Cicero attributed mikle, quhither the aspiration in quho be not ex imo gutture, and therfoer not labial.” I understand the “quo” he’s talking about is the Latin word. I think that this might be a clue that the spellings were a Latin influence, which I thought anyway when I first encountered one. But his explanation of the phonetics is puzzling to me. He says that “quho” and “quo” differ only in aspiration. I will not try to give my guesses about that here because it would make this post even longer than it is. I’ll just ask what he could have meant by that. I know of course that he surely knew less about phonetics than we do now and that he didn’t have our standardized terminology, but he must have meant something, mustn't he? And again, how did he pronounce “quho”? ## Part 2. So what were those spellings about? What were their origins? When did they die out? Were they only used in Scotland or in England as well? Why? Here's another, seemingly related spelling: > **WHEEN** , _n_.2 I.Sc. form of Eng. _queen_ (Sh. 1825 Jam.; I.Sc. 1866 Edm. > _Gl_.; Sh. 1916 J. Burgess _Rasmie’s Smaa Murr_ (Maerch 20); I.Sc. 1974). > See P.L.D. § 165 and **W** , letter, 7. (2) (ii). [ʍin] This confuses me even more. Was it some kind of hypercorrectness introduced by those who, like the Doctour, didn’t like the spellings with the “q”? It seems rather inconsistent though, as it is not “quheen”, but “queen”. |
39,557 | 40,731 | 76823_0 | What is the correct word for the thing that gangsters have on their head during hold ups?  |
39,558 | 143,581 | 76823_0 | If something is divided into _principal_ divisions, what is the next level "down"? For example, if a generic term for a US state or Canadian province is a "principal country division", what is a good name for the next level down, like a county? Edit: I'll probably just go with Primary Division and Secondary Division, unless someone has a better idea. |
39,559 | 167,814 | 76823_0 | You gotta be very angry. From an American movie. My intuation is that is to say **you are really very angry** or **it seems you are angry**. Why the guy used **gotta** here. **gotta** implies force, like saying **you have to be very angry** that means ** you do not have any other choices** I have my doubts if the speaker ment something like that! |
39,560 | 167,817 | 76823_0 | An _undergraduate_ is quite clearly: > a student at a college or university who has not yet earned a bachelor's or > equivalent degree. But now that I have received a bachelor's degree what am I? I ask becuase a on a prominent job search site the relevant options for "Highest Qualification" are "Undergraduate" and "Post-graduate degree", with nothing in-between. (I asked and they said "Undergraduate" is the best fit - but I disagree - how would an employee distinguish me from a student then?)  |
39,561 | 143,582 | 76823_0 | I am familiar with the idiom “to root for sth” meaning that I am hoping for something to happen or taking the side of something. But what does this have to do with roots? Does it mean that I am putting my root where somebody else stands? Where did this idiom originate? |
39,562 | 143,585 | 76823_0 | I know that in English 'I tried to go as slow as possible' and 'I tried to go as fast as possible' have a very different meaning, but I'm unsure how 'bovinely', before 'possible', change that difference. > 1. 'I tried to go as slow as _bovinely_ possible.' > > 2. 'I tried to go as fast as _bovinely_ possible.' > > Thus my question is: Can anyone explain what the semantic difference between (1) and (2) is? In other terms, do you think that 'bovinely' nullify the difference between 'slow' and 'fast', so that one can indifferently use either? |
39,563 | 167,812 | 76823_0 | Here's a simple question: Is is possible for a participle -- past or present -- to modify a direct object? "You deserve every ounce of respect garnered." Is this correct? My reasoning is based on the fact that participle phrases can modify nouns, as in "the twins doodling in their tablets" or "the model destroyed by the fire." |
39,564 | 48,750 | 76823_0 | In 19th century English texts, but also seen elsewhere (e.g. Heller's _Catch-22_ ) there is a practice of omitting part of a name such as: > I was going to visit Mrs. P_ ___ _, but decided to remain at home. which is intended to shroud the name of the person. You may also find bowdlerization of a similar form in the same texts: > I'd have been successful if not for the d____d rain. where the author (or publisher) would prefer not to use "damned". Is there a term for this practice? Is there a modern (e.g. TeX, Unicode, HTML etc.) way to represent this typographic convention? The best I can find is the Unicode/ASCII codepoint 0x5f which has the unfortunate habit of being rendered as a continuous line "d____d" where older practice would allow for a small inter-glyph space so you could see that four letters had been omitted in "d····d". |
39,565 | 48,754 | 76823_0 | Is there a common term that covers both groceries & conveniences. Products that one would purchase either at supermarkets or corner stores? Is there a venue type that would describe supermarkets, corner stores, bakeries... in one? This word would not necessarily other shopping products like clothes, electronics, medication, furniture. |
39,566 | 48,756 | 76823_0 | I'm trying to get some clarification on restrictive and non-restrictive appositives (specifically, names) when used at the end of a sentence (as well as multiple names in the form of a list). My friend asks me who I invited to a party, and I tell him: **I invited my cousin, Bill.** Am I saying that . . . a) I have one cousin and I invited him. His name is Bill. or b) The friend who asked the question is named Bill. I am telling Bill that I invited my cousin. I specified in option A that I have only one cousin because I assume the comma causes the name to act as a non-restrictive appositive. If I had _more_ than one cousin, and I wanted to say that I invited _only_ the one named Bill, I would say "I invited my cousin Bill." (As a restrictive appositive.) But then if I've got a list of cousins, does the punctuation change to a colon? I invited my cousins: Bill, Jane, and Andrew. |
39,567 | 67,289 | 76823_0 | Can these words be used interchangeably when referring to a point in the world? |
39,568 | 95,104 | 76823_0 | Please consider the following sentence > "Oh my god, bad opening for the day", the shopkeeper **___ __ ___** while > seeing the trouble making customer and flashed a smile when customer > approached him. Which word of the below suits for the blank. Please find the words along with dictionary meanings: > Whisper= speak very softly using one's breath without one's vocal cords, > esp. for the sake of privacy > > Murmur = a soft, indistinct sound made by a person or group of people > speaking quietly or at a distance > > Mutter = say something in a low or barely audible voice, esp. in > dissatisfaction or irritation: > > Mumble = say something indistinctly and quietly, making it difficult for > others to hear Seems to be all words are suitable for the blank. |
39,569 | 57,827 | 76823_0 | > Elasticity is a measure of how much buyers and sellers respond to changes in > market conditions. The sentence above is from page 95, _Principles of Microeconomics Fifth Canadian Edition_. |
39,570 | 95,103 | 76823_0 | The result of subtraction is called "difference". At first glance it might seem that it shouldn't cause an ambiguity over the value denoted by this word; until we stumble upon subtractions that produce negative results. What do I actually mean? It is clear that: > 2 − 5 = −3 But when we say "the difference between 2 and 5" don't we mean "3" in the first place irrespective of the order in which we place the numbers in the sentence? What expression should we use to make it clear, regardless of the context, that we imply "−3"? |
39,571 | 95,100 | 76823_0 | For example, let us say we were conducting a study of facial features and we were comparing hair color, nose type and eye shape. Those three characteristics would identify something or someone. What would a good term be for the items that are used to identify a unique point in the problem space? I looked at a few similar words in the Thesaurus on thefreedictionary.com. For example, under coordinate (n) it yielded co-ordinate, Cartesian coordinate, polar coordinate and number. Most of those were not even synonyms except in the most trivial sense. "Characteristics" is a superset of what I am referring to, as it includes all characteristics, not simply the ones considered unique or defining. |
39,572 | 17,395 | 76823_0 | In Czech, we have a special word for "leaving a field (agricultural) without seeding, resting." I wonder if English has such a word. |
39,573 | 67,282 | 76823_0 | I was typing in a description and I got the following problem, and I don't know which of the sentences is the right one. * The angel's image, now appears correctly. * The angel's image now appears correctly. * The image of the angel now appears correctly. The phrase is to justify a change/update in an application, where an image of an angel that was not present having been correctly updated. Sorry if it's too silly of a question. But I'm basing my question in the FAQ * Usage, **word choice** , and grammar But in this case, is a small phrase. =D |
39,574 | 57,828 | 76823_0 | > "It is hopeless for the occasional visitor to try to keep up with Chicago > --- she outgrows his prophecies faster than he can make them." wrote Mark > Twain in 1883, when Chicago was just fifty years old. I think "she" refers to "Chicago", and "he" refers to "the occasional visitor". But what does "outgrows his prophecies" mean? Does it mean Chicago grows very fast? |
39,575 | 95,108 | 76823_0 | In an article that I'm writing, I would like to say that some special ideas are at a disadvantage concerning their consistency in producing results. In other words, we use those approaches in the hope of getting a reasonable result, but the methods are presently poorly understood, so we can only hope for a good result. So please help me to correct any grammatical deficiencies in the quoted sentence: > The main disadvantage to these approaches is that they tend to be on the off > chance. "These" refers to the mentioned approaches in a previous sentence. Is _off chance_ correct here? Is it OK to use in a scientific paper? |
39,576 | 95,109 | 76823_0 | Please consider the below sentences > The word X produces meaning Y > The word X produces meaning Y in sentence Z Is "produces meaning" valid in the above sentence? If yes, which seems to be more valid between the both of the above sentences? And if not, may I know why it is not valid? (the sense intended here is _the **word** X has meaning Y_, not **_sentence** Z has meaning Y_). |
39,577 | 78,419 | 76823_0 | When leaving from work, how to say "see you" to colleagues? Which one is appropriate, "see you all" or "see you everyone"? |
39,578 | 183,005 | 76823_0 | Is 'gloomy sunlight' an oxymoron? I don't see how its an oxymoron. I am not sure how else to phrase this question. |
39,579 | 78,411 | 76823_0 | I usually see just format in the emails I receive daily: > Hello Dorian-- > > I'm calling you in regard with the something... > > Thanks, I see comma after the greetings too but I am not sure why double hyphen is being used there. Can someone explain it? |
39,580 | 78,412 | 76823_0 | Today in my city, it's raining very slowly. What is this called in English?. I am from India. In Hindi we say **'Rimjhim'**. What is it called in English? |
39,581 | 30,820 | 76823_0 | In this video, around 0:45, when Amy Chua says "I am a professor at Yale law school". I was wondering why her mouth pouted twice, once at the end of "professor" and the other between "law" and "school"? I read the sentence myself, but my mouth doesn't pout. |
39,582 | 169,418 | 76823_0 | I have this sentence in something I'm writing: > She slipped her head into the helmet with the same enthusiasm she would have > slipped it into a guillotine. This sounds wrong to me. I feel like it should be something like "...with the same enthusiasm _she would have shown_ slipping it into a guillotine". Some kind of problem with the tenses, perhaps. Is this wrong, or is it just me? If so, what rule of grammar is it breaking, and what alternatives exist, ideally less wordy than my proposed alternative? |
39,583 | 674 | 76823_0 | Because of a certain 140 character limit I've learned where I can trim characters on responses but even after all this time I still reply with "Well, so and so . . ." and I go back and have to delete it (even on comments to this site I start with _well_ and then delete it). Is it because that's generally how I would speak a response and I should watch out there too or is this just me? |
39,584 | 676 | 76823_0 | For a non-native English speaker like me, it's always been hard to sound æ and ɛ differently. For example, "salary" and "celery" are two words that I tend to pronounce identically. Is it OK to go on like this or should I practice to get it right? |
39,585 | 169,414 | 76823_0 | I find myself wanting to say that two things have their beginning together (not necessarily in time). The word _coterminous_ came to mind, but that is the opposite of what I'm trying to say. I thought of _simultaneous_ , but that is too punctiliar (whereas I want to express something more enduring, as implied by the word _coterminous_ ) and perhaps a little too time-laden. So, for example: > To know the truth and to begin to know that you know the truth are `<things- > originating-inseparably>`. Is there a single English word for this? |
39,586 | 72,152 | 76823_0 | I was on the Islamic site of Stack Exchange which is currently on beta. We are preparing the website for new users, and one of the moderators and I are confused about some grammar. My answer said "with the insignificant amount of alcohol it is impossible to become intoxicated" and it was edited to "get intoxicated". Would one be more correct or are they equally correct? |
39,587 | 60,298 | 76823_0 | So basically I came through this fallacious argument (image). Which translates into: > "Without stress > Without bombs > Without beggars > Without prisons > Without fast food > Without external debt > Without contamination > Without poverty > And yet they dare to call me PRIMITIVE" The thing is that (without trying to be racist), this native from the Amazon could well be primitive, since none of the previous statements proves that he/she is not. After a lot of research I came through the "argument from fallacy" as the best choice for this fallacy, but I'm not 100% sure. Am I wrong or not? |
39,588 | 194,706 | 76823_0 | In order to be clear enough, I would say that I am a "European Portuguese native speaker" rather than a "Portuguese native speaker". - As a translator, I am expected to let potential clients know my native language as well as (in this case) its variant. My question is: Is it correct to add the variant "European" to the expression? Thank you. |
39,589 | 167,148 | 76823_0 | I came across the word 'rethink' so many times. But it still puzzles me if it is correct to use the word 'rethink' as a noun. Is it okay to use the word 'rethink' as a noun? Your inputs are highly appreciated. Thanks. |
39,590 | 194,702 | 76823_0 | Hemingway said that "It's better to write about what you can write about and try to make it come off than have epoch making canvasses etc." Does this mean you should focus on what you can do instead of striving for groundbreaking achievements? Did he use the word "canvas" here as the one we know from painting? To refer to an artwork in general? |
39,591 | 194,708 | 76823_0 | Are the two sayings proper English? > "Alls I know" and > "All I know" Alls I know just sounds bad to me, but while people agree, no one can tell me if it is right or wrong. |
39,592 | 187,797 | 76823_0 | The following sentence makes sense: * _If you or somebody you know is an experienced such-and-such, please contact us._ However, reversing the subjects (and choosing "are" based on the proximity rule) makes it sound extremely awkward: * _If somebody you know or you are an experienced such-and-such, please contact us._ The is/are verb choice does not really matter, placing "somebody you know" first makes the sentence difficult to read and awkward to say. However, switching subjects in a compound subject doesn't always "ruin" the sentence, e.g.: * _If your dog or your cat is sick, call the vet._ * _If your cat or your dog is sick, call the vet._ My question is: What is wrong with "If somebody you know or you"? Is this violating some grammatical rule? Why is this sentence so hard to parse? I know it doesn't "feel" right but I'd like to know why. |
39,593 | 29,688 | 76823_0 | I suspect that the parent term is "half of a dozen" which is just being shortened to half-a-dozen. But I caught myself using half-dozen earlier today and wondered which of the variants are considered valid. Both half-dozen and half-a-dozen seem odd written out even though they sound fine to my ear. |
39,594 | 29,686 | 76823_0 | What is the difference between the three terms: surname, family name and last name? Do they mean the same? Or are there any particular contexts wherein one is more appropriate than the other? |
39,595 | 43,668 | 76823_0 | For a long time I've been using a word 'toggle' to express change of states (normally button). Now I found out on Dictionary.com / toggle that toggle has such meaning in an _informal_ language as a verb. Which would be the correct word to express verb for 'change state'? |
39,596 | 149,402 | 76823_0 | > Then, as I continued gazing at her, **something** came to my mind. **They** > were the remnants of the dream I had before waking up. Is that grammatically correct? If not, what's the closest alternative? |
39,597 | 175,487 | 76823_0 | 1. You work (too hard/ too much hard). 2. I have (quite a lot of free time/ quite free time). |
39,598 | 142,453 | 76823_0 | I live in the Northeastern part of the US. We've had a lot of snow recently. Part of living in a snowy area is clearing the collected snow pack from the wheel well so that it doesn't interfere with driving. The snow is usually filthy and ice-coated from where the tires have kicked crud up from the road surface. We call these _snow goblins_ and most people make it a habit to kick off the snow goblins before setting out in the car. It's a common expression around here, but I'm wondering how far it extends regionally. Do most snow-experiencing regions in the US and Canada have snow goblins? Or are they called something else? And I'm not asking what _snow goblins_ are called, because they are called snow goblins, so the "duplicate" doesn't have an answer for me. |
39,599 | 186,028 | 76823_0 | I wonder what the reason is to say _These cakes sell well_ instead of _These cakes are being sold well._ I understand that it’s shorter but it doesn’t work with any verb, does it? For example, _The house is being built_ can’t be substituted by _The house is building._ So, what justifies and makes it acceptable to compose such a sentence which we can see in the example with the verb _sell_? Does it have something to do with the verb used or something else? If so, are there many verbs which can be used that way? |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.