Unnamed: 0 int64 0 40.2k | id int64 1 196k | chunk_id stringclasses 1
value | text stringlengths 18 6.44k |
|---|---|---|---|
4,000 | 148,893 | 76823_0 | What does this expression mean? > Who doors wins Is it an idiom? Or is it a typo? Apparently, it makes no sense. |
4,001 | 28,698 | 76823_0 | I don't remember ever hearing "competency" until circa 1970. When I first heard that form it sounded very silly, as if someone was trying to sound lofty via the addition of superfluous syllables. Is there a context where "competency" is correct usage, and "competence" wouldn't do just as well? Is it a recent (last 40 yrs) permutation, or is it my sheltered background that made it sound that way? (Is anyone here old enough to know?) Okay, that's _three_ questions, sorry! |
4,002 | 28,699 | 76823_0 | While there are homophones like bear and bare, and homographs like sow, the pig, and to sow a seed, is there a term for words that cover both categories? The example that comes to mind for me is to cleave. Is there a term for when they overlap? |
4,003 | 148,897 | 76823_0 | I’m trying to correctly identify the reason why the past tense of ‘’to be’’ is used in the following context: Sherlock Season 3 Episode 3 The scene: Dr. Watson is about to enter a drug den. His wife spots some kind of weapon tucked into his trousers and the following dialogue takes place: > – What is that? > – It’s a tyre lever. > – Why? > – ‘cos there **were** loads of smack heads in there and one of them might > need help with a tyre. The only guess I’ve got is that ‘were’ is used to express uncertainty and therefore add sarcasm, and the intended meaning is ’’there is a slight possibility that there may be a lot of smack heads in this drug den’’. But I’m not sure if this is the right interpretation, as I’ve never come across this kind of tense use before. |
4,004 | 148,894 | 76823_0 | > There was no way, however; my mind was still wide awake. I always see however after semicolons but never like the case above. Is the example grammatically correct? |
4,005 | 91,667 | 76823_0 | I'm not sure exactly how to ask this question without giving an example, so here it is. What's the best way to phrase something like this: > Found 3 errors (and gave 2 suggestions) for 'Some Book' If these were to be written separately, you would want to write "Found 3 errors **in** 'Some Book'" and "Gave 2 suggestions **for** 'Some Book'". However, I want to write it as tersely as possible, in a single sentence, but all these ways seem awkward to me: 1. Found 3 errors (and gave 2 suggestions) **for** 'Some Book' 2. Found 3 errors (and gave 2 suggestions) **in** 'Some Book' 3. Found 3 errors in (and gave 2 suggestions for) `Some Book' I think the first is the best, but is there a correct way to have a compound statement like this? |
4,006 | 91,666 | 76823_0 | The contexts of the usage of this phrase is given below. _SAP Business Suite customers can now run the software **in production form** on Amazon Web Services, the companies announced this week during the Sapphire and Tech Ed conferences in Madrid._ Source: http://www.cio.com/article/721825/SAP_Certifies_Business_Suite_for_Production_Use_on_Amazon_Web_Services _After being displayed as a thinly disguised concept model at this year's Auto China Show in Beijing, the revamped Seat Ibiza Cupra has now been revealed **in production form**._ Source: http://carscoop.blogspot.com/2012/11/seat-ibiza-cupra-facelift- appears-in.html How is this phrase different from saying "generally available" or "generally released"? I appreciate all your intelligent answers. |
4,007 | 106,926 | 76823_0 | > "Would you mind completing the following?:" Is the above correct? |
4,008 | 95,952 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > What is the plural form of “iPad 2”? > When can an adjective be postposed? I'm curious particularly with iPod Touch and iPad Mini The plural would be iPod Touches and iPad Minis, or iPods Touch and iPads Mini |
4,009 | 17,366 | 76823_0 | With the introduction of the iPad 2, I find myself hesitating when trying to refer to several of them. Is it iPads 2 or iPad 2's? |
4,010 | 91,663 | 76823_0 | What is the correct order for combinations of suffixes `-less` and `-ness`? Are they combined in any order, or is there any rule governing a proper usage? > hope **lessness** > help **lessness** But: > weak **nessless** A side point; not sure if it is related to above. Although the suffixes `-less` makes an adjective while `-ness` makes a noun, it seems that people treat `-nessless` words as nouns: * **Eventfulnessless**. Guys, I was serious about my running out of ideas. * Office staff needs work, lack of **timelinessless** than expected follow through listening skills need attention... What am I missing? |
4,011 | 91,662 | 76823_0 | What is a good word for describing how a pursuit or occupation requires a lot of effort without there being much reward or recognition? > eg. So much of his time and effort went into practicing the piano. He was a > mildly depressed person, knowing at the back of his mind that a career in > classical music is always difficult and often **___ __ ___ ___**. |
4,012 | 106,922 | 76823_0 | What's the difference in meaning between the following two sentences? > 1. He thought that he **would remain** young. > 2. He thought that he **would have remained** young. > |
4,013 | 67,741 | 76823_0 | I found the following expression in dictionary. > large herds of elephant and buffalo A herd must be more than one, why using singular not plural? |
4,014 | 67,740 | 76823_0 | I read the above headline in the New York Times. From the context, I understood that it means that Biden was a little too hasty. I would like to know the origins of this expression |
4,015 | 67,742 | 76823_0 | According to AP and other news sources, Jamie Dimon, CEO of JPMorgan Chase acknowledged that his bank slipped-up $2 billion losses incurred by their trading and that the matter is now under investigation by regulators. Dimon told in NBC’s “Meet the Press”: > “Of course, regulators should look at something like this. It’s their job. > _We are totally open kimono with_ regulators. And they will come to their > own conclusion and we intend to fix it, learn from it and be a better > company when it’s done.” I am interested in the phrase, “We are totally open kimono with regulators” as I understand ‘Kimono’ is Japanese equivalent to dress. Is “ _Open kimono with somebody_ ” a popular English (or American) idiom or phrase? Can I say “open dress with somebody” instead of using “Kimono”? If not, what are alternative idioms meaning “open up one’s mind”? |
4,016 | 67,748 | 76823_0 | In the following examples: * Why would anyone want to eat something so horrible? * Who would live for forever? * Why would I ever lie to you? Is 'would' being used to refer to time in future or past Or Is it just being used to form facts and reasons or arguments? |
4,017 | 164,710 | 76823_0 | Since we have a single word like _birthday_ , is there a corresponding term for the date of someone’s death? |
4,018 | 126,265 | 76823_0 | The following dialog is an excerpt from Terry Pratchet's _Making Money_ : > “Isn’t the fornication wonderful?” > > After quite a lengthy pause, Moist ventured, “Is it?” > > “Don’t you think so? There’s more here than anywhere else in the city, I’m > told.” > > “Really?” said Moist, looking around nervously. “Er . . . do you have to > come down here at some special time?” > > “Well, during banking hours usually, but we let groups in by appointment.” > > “You know,” said Moist, “I think this conversation has somehow got away from > me . . .” > > Bent waved vaguely at the ceiling. > > “I refer to the wonderful vaulting,” he said. “The word derives from fornix, > meaning ‘arch’.” > > “Ah! Yes? Right!” said Moist. “You know, I wouldn’t be surprised if not many > people knew that.” I do not dispute the origin of the word which is confirmed by this definition: > Sexual intercourse between partners who are not married to each other. > > > Word History: The word fornication had a lowly beginning suitable to what > has long been the low moral status of the act to which it refers. The Latin > word fornix, from which fornicti, the ancestor of fornication, is derived, > meant "a vault, an arch." The term also referred to a vaulted cellar or > similar place where prostitutes plied their trade. This sense of fornix in > Late Latin yielded the verb fornicr, "to commit fornication," from which is > derived fornicti, "whoredom, fornication." Our word is first recorded in > Middle English about 1303. My question is whether the word _fornication_ ever actually meant _vaulting_ in English as opposed to Latin. The definition above states that 'our' word first appeared in 1303 but did it carry both meanings or only the modern one? For that matter, does it carry both meanings today? None of the dictionaries I checked has that usage. |
4,019 | 35,180 | 76823_0 | How do I represent the - _ed_ in _witnessed_ (or any other similar word) phonetically? Is there a reference sheet somewhere for these? I notice that other endings do not get shown in most dictionaries either (for example _-es_ in _phrases_) I use Word web which has a pronunciation guide for the root of the word, but I can't find anything to write the _-ed_ part phonetically. It does not seem to be on this Wikipedia page. I would prefer the same format as Word web. Many people could probably figure this out for themselves (without a direct reference), but I do not trust myself. |
4,020 | 126,261 | 76823_0 | For instance, if someone says to you, "I like cake," and you reply, "I like to take care of my body," your response is a passive-aggressive way of implying that they don't like to take care of their body because they eat cake. I'm looking for an adjective to describe this type of response, something akin to passive-aggressive but more specific to the situation. |
4,021 | 188,347 | 76823_0 | I'm looking for another term for "instant feedback". Something perhaps similar to how common the phrase "instant gratification" is used to mean instant results from an action. For context, I'm trying to describe the way a video game's camera will capture and immediately display a player's movements on screen so they can react/correct their movements. |
4,022 | 89,812 | 76823_0 | > * It's partially correct. > * It's partial correct. > Which of the following is grammatical? |
4,023 | 130,501 | 76823_0 | For example, "This doesn't cause any crash but later it can cause unknown memory-crashes." I see here that the subject 'it' is not immediately after 'but'. Do I still need to use a comma before 'but' as it links another subject? |
4,024 | 130,505 | 76823_0 | I can't figure out any ways to speak fast and smoothly some sound combinations. Would you nativer speakers provide any help? Could you tell me how your tongues move while speaking them? * The dental fricatives must be the damnedest, because it make me push my tongue forward to much. And they're even harder to speak if they're preceded by an alveolar sound such as /d/ or /n/. Some people (especially black American people) speak them like they're dropped, but I'm not sure speaking that way would be a good idea. * A dental fricative followed by a labiodental fricative could be hard to speak fast, since they're pronounced in the same manner and they both require using upper teeth. I have to put my tongue blade after the my upper teeth instead of right under them to produce the dental one, because that's the place I've just used for the labiodental one. * The /sts/ combination or any other alveolar ones like that are really big challenges. I can only speak them seperately, or sometimes I have to drop the /ts/, or replace the /t/ with a short i (which is how black people do it). * An alveolar flap is a problem if it goes after an /n/ and a vowel, as in "don't I" or "can't I". After all, sorry about my bad English. |
4,025 | 23,618 | 76823_0 | Are they both correct? Should there be singular or plural that right after "any"? If they are both correct, what's the difference? Here, I quote some sentences from the Internet and I wonder if the word "problem" can be changed into "problems" or vise versa. > * I don't think there was any _question_ she wore the pants. > * I can ask you any _question_ , and you will answer? > * We were never asked any _questions_. > * Any _questions_ about what is happening in mine are put aside until > dessert is served. > |
4,026 | 169,332 | 76823_0 | I'm looking for a word that describes a curious, interested state of mind- open minded, exploring, wondering, but without being nosy. |
4,027 | 169,333 | 76823_0 | I need to explain the difference between "proactive" and "preemptive" and come up with a sample of the proper context of each word. Can someone point me to a previous post or give me their thoughts? |
4,028 | 51,475 | 76823_0 | What is a word to describe the color of a person's hair whose hair is nearly jet-black, but slightly brown? For what it's worth, the person whose hair I have in mind is female with long, straight hair. |
4,029 | 13,975 | 76823_0 | When something is called _peculiar_ or _having a peculiarity_ what does that mean? Does it just mean it has some specific features or does it mean that those specific features are unusual, not normally expected? |
4,030 | 23,611 | 76823_0 | Which abbreviation is most used for "Health, Safety and Environment"? I keep seeing different abbreviations, and a quick search on Google shows that they are all used widely. But does anyone actually know if there is one "correct" abbreviation? |
4,031 | 11,637 | 76823_0 | I am developing a coding contest project with multiple contests. The participants can be a team or an independent individual, depending on the contest setting. I want to define only one model for the participant which could understood as a team or an individual. Is there a word that can be used for _team_ and _participating individual_? ### Update I am thinking to chuck the idea of implementing whole project based on smart team management complicating it whole and decided to implement separate team management and complicating that. But I would be very happy to change my mind if I could get a word, maybe even in some other language for this. |
4,032 | 169,339 | 76823_0 | In my Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary the word 'throe' is not listed, only 'throes'. With other nouns, the dictionary clearly indicates whether nouns are countable or uncountable, however, with 'throes' it only indicates that it is plural. I am sitting with a term paper in which I have to comment on the countability and number of a set of given nouns from a text. 'Throes' is one of these words and although it is 'death throes' in the context ('This sudden burst of activity was actually the Expedit in its death throes')only 'throes' is underlined as the one I should comment on. Is the word 'throes' simply neither countable or uncountable? Is that possible? Or why does my dictionary not indicate it, as if it does not know it either? Has it something to do with 'death throes' being part of an idiom? I am unsure of the word and how I should comment. Hope someone can help me :) |
4,033 | 27,769 | 76823_0 | There are various common (often Latin) phrases for various logic fallacies, such as _post hoc ergo propter hoc_ , _argumentum ad populum_ , _slippery slope fallacy_ , etc. Is there a common phrase used to describe the fallacy of saying that because a claim seems so unusual or specific, it must be true, because 'nobody would ever make something that unusual up'? |
4,034 | 161,106 | 76823_0 | An arch might be engraved with "MCMLXII". A company logo might say, "since 1873". A sidewalk might be stamped with "08/2012". What do you call these markings? |
4,035 | 150,949 | 76823_0 | This is the message: > The user might not fall under the scope of this policy. It denotes that a setting is not applied to the user because the user is not part of the policy. He's surely not part of the policy. In this case, which is more appropriate to use? > 1. The user might not fall under the scope of this policy > > 2. The user does not fall under the scope of this policy > > |
4,036 | 150,948 | 76823_0 | Why are these 21st century autonomous vehicles called _drones_? Why was this zoology inspired name chosen for this kind of technology? And who was the first to call this technology by this name? |
4,037 | 97,843 | 76823_0 | As the title shows, can anyone tell me what is the word for _strength of will_? For example, > Her _strength of will_ was extraordinary. |
4,038 | 61,747 | 76823_0 | How should Tennyson's _Maud_ be read? I.e. what is its meter? Here are the first four lines: > I HATE the dreadful hollow behind the little wood, > Its lips in the field above are dabbled with blood-red heath, > The red-ribb’d ledges drip with a silent horror of blood, > And Echo there, whatever is ask’d her, answers “Death.” |
4,039 | 150,946 | 76823_0 | > The Principal will invite the guest of honour to give the National Day > message at 9 o'clock. Is the _guest of honour_ capitalised? |
4,040 | 150,941 | 76823_0 | This is my very first question here on `english.stackexchange.com`, so please don't bite me if I do anything wrong. Also sorry for my English, it's far from perfect. I need a single word (or a short informal conversational phrase) for `"finding company"` (to do something together, opposite to spending time alone), like in "He had finally found someone to watch the movie with". Thanks in advance. |
4,041 | 27,766 | 76823_0 | I love reading about interesting differences in grammar in different languages, e.g. Finnish cases. Is there a good book, site or something else that treats "interesting things in grammar" in any language? |
4,042 | 59,328 | 76823_0 | What is a single word antonym of _censorship_? _Freedom of speech_ is too long. I would like to be able to contrast it like: > ignorance vs knowledge > > submission vs defiance > > oppression vs freedom |
4,043 | 54,566 | 76823_0 | I’ve heard somebody say: > All what is needed is … I thought the correct way to phrase it was: > All that is needed is … However, thinking about it more, the former doesn’t sound _too_ incorrect, albeit a bit odd. Is the former grammatically correct? Am I alone in thinking the latter sounds more natural? |
4,044 | 133,443 | 76823_0 | I got the following sentences from http://www.engvid.com/english- resource/50-common-grammar-mistakes-in-english-2/ > Wrong: You cannot buy all what you like! > Right: You cannot buy all that you like! Why is the first one wrong? I do see the structure "you can do what you..." many times, e.g. "how to talk about what you want". |
4,045 | 169,261 | 76823_0 | * 1.) _Money is_ **_all that_** _I need._ * 2.) _Money is_ **_all what_** _I need._ Which one is right? or which one have you not ever seen? and is there any difference between them? But, what about the following? * If we consider the word **_"all"_** as an **adverb** , not as a **noun** , what would you like to say? ( **In addition:** I am wondering the reason why my question is labeled as an answered question, because if you look at it you will notice that they are not the same at all.) |
4,046 | 113,554 | 76823_0 | I need to find a word to define the products you see in the capture. The best match I've found is _findings_. Is this word the correct one? Is there a better word for these products?  |
4,047 | 129,529 | 76823_0 | In the sci-fi movie _Inception_ by Christopher Nolan, in the first level of dreaming, they kidnap Cilian Murphy and Tom Hardy tries to get some information from him, by impersonating Browning, his uncle. Then they sedate him in a car. Tom Hardy removes the bag from his head, gets down from the car, and says to Di Caprio's character: > That boy's relationship with his father is even worse than we imagined. To which Joseph Gordon Levitt's character replies, > This helps us how? Is this a correct sentence? Why didn't he say > How does this help us? |
4,048 | 129,527 | 76823_0 | I understand the usage, but "out of luck" itself I don't quite grasp. Where does it come from? I want to know the etymology of "out of" in the sense of not having. |
4,049 | 129,526 | 76823_0 | Is the word " **Customizable** " a valid English word? Every time i write that word, the spell checker underlines it, and it suggests using "Customization" or "Customize", I'm not a native English speaker. That word exists in online dictionaries so i wonder why does the spell checker underline it. |
4,050 | 73,728 | 76823_0 | An example situation: > My friend is watching a horror movie. He is lost deep into the movie. Taking > advantage of this situation I wear a mask of a ghost and suddenly appear in > front of him just to scare him for the sake of fun. Does the act I did ie. 'scaring a person for sake of fun' have a single word equivalent? |
4,051 | 129,523 | 76823_0 | When you engage a lawyer or an estate agent, for example, you _instruct_ them. What is the most appropriate word to use when you decide you've had enough and want to get rid of them? There are several good contenders but _'dis- instruct'_ would seem most appropriate - and yet I'm unable to find this word in any of the common reference dictionaries. Is it a legitimate word? Google Ngram yielded the following, but only for ' _dis - instruct_ '. All other possible constructions of this word flatlined. Ngram Other possible constructions are _uninstruct_ (although as back-formation of _uninstructed_ there is potential for misinterpretation) and _de-instruct_. |
4,052 | 74,718 | 76823_0 | > Visa Inc., MasterCard Inc. and some large banks agreed to pay scores of > retailers—from giant Publix Supermarkets Inc. to an interior-design store in > Minnesota—more than $6 billion to settle **a long-running lawsuit, in a > pact** that also permits merchants to charge more to customers who pay with > credit cards. — WSJ How would the meaning change if that comma between "lawsuit" and "in a pact" is removed? Another example: > * The two sides have agreed to stop fighting in a pact that allows further > peace talks. > * The two sides have agreed to **stop fighting, in a pact** that allows > further peace talks. > |
4,053 | 148,125 | 76823_0 | In these sentences, why isn't there an auxiliary verb? I would expect that there will be one after "Who" in both sentences: 1) Who cooks when Karen and Andy have friends round for dinner, 2) Who chatted to people online at the weekend? |
4,054 | 78,849 | 76823_0 | What is the correct hyphenation of "kinetic" (if it matters in British English). I found two possibilities: > **ki-net-ic** (/kə-ˈne-tik/) in the Merriam Webster (which might be US > English) and **kin-et-ic** (/kI'netIk/ or /kaI'netIk/) in the Oxford > Advanced Learners Dictionary 8th edition (British version?). Is there a difference in hyphenation rules between British and US English? |
4,055 | 78,847 | 76823_0 | In my resume, I'm describing several projects I've worked on in the past. Most of them were done in teamwork. What is the best way to say this? Examples: Together with XY, I built ... OR In collaboration with XY, I built ... OR XY and I built ... Are the first two examples grammatically correct? I'm unsure since first I state that something has been done in collaboration with a second person, but then I use "I built ...". |
4,056 | 102,557 | 76823_0 | While researching how to call a person that holds a rank at a foreign (non English speaking) military, I came to very confusing results: Wikipedia is not consistent on the issue: * it sometimes gives the rank in the native language alone, as in the case for Erwin Rommel, Heinrich Himmler, Heinz Guderian, and Gerd von Rundstedt, all of whom are German, and the current Israeli Chief of General Staff Benny Gantz. * In other cases, it gives the rank in the native language with an equivalent rank in English, as in the case for Israel Tal who was an Israeli general. * And sometimes it only gives the equivalent rank, as in the case of Israeli Medal of Valor recipient Zvika Greengold and Japanese military aviator Minoru Genda. Other sources are also confusing: * The Jewish Virtual Library, in their page about Erwin Rommel call Erwin Rommel, Heinz Guderian and Gerd von Runstedt Field Marshal, even though they have different ranks (Rommel and von Runstedt were _Generalfeldmarschall_ and Guderian was a _Generaloberst_ ). * The site's www.auschwitz.dk page about Himmler give's his rank as _Reichsfuhrer-SS_ , while the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum gives his rank as the translation to English with the German rank in parentheses: > Heinrich Himmler (1900-1945) was the Reich Leader (Reichsführer) of the > dreaded SS of the Nazi party from 1929 until 1945 * This article on rt.com about the letters of Erwin Rommel simply call him general. * The articles in the Independent, the English version of Haaratz, The New York Times and Israel's Armored Corps Memorial Site about Israel Tal's Death all call him Major-General without mentioning the Hebrew rank. After all of this I'm left confused as I can't really see any pattern of proper use his, * Should the rank in the original language be used, the equivalent "English" rank be used, or a translation of the rank? * Is there any difference if the original language is a non-Indo-European language vs. an Indo-European language (Hebrew vs. German)? * In the case that an equivalent rank is used, what set of ranks is the standard (Wikipedia uses the NATO Code)? * Finally, since my rank is Rav Samal, should I call myself Rav samal, Sergeant First Class (the NATO corresponding rank) or Master Sergeant (the translation)? |
4,057 | 196,243 | 76823_0 | Which is the correct way to write "Real Estate" - with or without hyphen? And when should we use hyphens? |
4,058 | 196,245 | 76823_0 | Please edit this question's title, if you think it's inconsistent with my question: In an email, I wrote: "I've pasted a link that leads to my application list, **which will be completed** once I hear back from schools about their engineering school admissions policies." Is the use of "to be" in the following sentence an acceptable substitute. "I've pasted a link that leads to my application list, **to be completed** once I hear back from schools about their engineering school admissions policies." |
4,059 | 192,447 | 76823_0 | **Background** Symmetries are a key concept in physics, and describe the invariance of a system under certain operations (for example, rotation). Breaking a symmetry refers to modifying the system in a way so that it is no longer invariant under the same operation. A symmetry can be completely broken, or only partially broken with a lower symmetry remaining. For example: a circle always looks the same, regardless of the angle you rotate it by. A square also has a rotational symmetry, but you have to rotate by multiples of 90 degrees to get the same picture. Hence, the symmetry of the square is lower. **Question** In the scientific literature, people use the expression "to break down a symmetry" when referring to a reduction from high symmetry (circle) to a lower symmetry (square) as compared to a complete breaking (irregular shape). They might write > The original continuous symmetry was broken down to a symmetry under 90 > degree rotations. In my opinion, the expression "to break down" is not appropriate, because it means to separate into its parts or to destroy completely rather than to reduce to a smaller part. I would instead write > The original continuous symmetry was reduced to a symmetry under 90 degree > rotations. Does the use of "to break down" with this meaning deviate from the usual meaning of this phrase in other contexts? Here are some examples, suggesting that the use of "to break down" in the sense of reducing to a smaller part is at least common in the field: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0708.2115 (native speaker, authority in his field) http://arxiv.org/pdf/1312.2934 http://www.science.uva.nl/~bais/broksym.pdf http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W%E2%80%B2_and_Z%E2%80%B2_bosons |
4,060 | 145,325 | 76823_0 | I was proofreading some text for a friend and I stumbled across this sentence: > Glen, along with his close group of friends, took their first trip to Hawaii > in 1986. My question is this: Is this correct, or should _their first trip_ really be _his first trip_? I see the phrase between the commas as an nonessential phrase, and it appears to me that the sentence should be written so that it could stand alone without it. Therefore, to me it seems as though _his first trip_ would be correct. However, the author is of the opinion that since there are multiple people going on the trip, _their first trip_ is appropriate. (My "real" answer would be to rewrite the sentence to avoid this issue in the first place, but I'm still curious.) |
4,061 | 145,322 | 76823_0 | In speaking of propositions, not buildings, are _premise_ and _premiss_ variant spellings of the same word, or are they different terms with different usages? The _American Heritage Dictionary_ (3/e) gives _premise_ as the main entry, with _premiss_ as a variant spelling, which I've assumed was British. But one internet source asserts that _premiss_ is preferable because of its etymology; another suggests that _premiss_ is always the correct term in logic. |
4,062 | 145,321 | 76823_0 | In my home state, there is a statute regarding child seats. > > § 20-137.1. Child restraint systems required. > > > (a) Every driver who is transporting one or more passengers of less than 16 > years of age shall have all such passengers properly secured in a child > passenger restraint system or seat belt which meets federal standards > applicable at the time of its manufacture. > > (a1) _A child less than eight years of age and less than 80 pounds in weight > shall be properly secured in a weight-appropriate child passenger restraint > system._ In vehicles equipped with an active passenger-side front air bag, > if the vehicle has a rear seat, a child less than five years of age and less > than 40 pounds in weight shall be properly secured in a rear seat, unless > the child restraint system is designed for use with air bags. If no seating > position equipped with a lap and shoulder belt to properly secure the > weight-appropriate child passenger restraint system is available, a child > less than eight years of age and between 40 and 80 pounds may be restrained > by a properly fitted lap belt only. Here's the source. I am confused on the first sentence in a1, particularly concerning a child who is older than eight but who weighs less than 80 pounds. Does he have to be secured in a child passenger restraint system? It comes down to the "and." If the "and" means a logical disjunction, then the statute has no bearing on either an 81 pound six-year-old or a 72 pound eleven-year-old. They may sit in the front with a lap and shoulder belt if they wish (and no one else has called "shotgun"). However, if the intent of the law is to keep smaller children from being injured by airbags, then perhaps the lawmakers should have rephrased, removing the age, to something like "A child above 80 pounds may sit in a lap and shoulder belt in the front seat. Children under 80 pounds shall be properly secured in a weight-appropriate child passenger restraint system in a rear seat." I'm having trouble interpreting the letter of the law. I'm not sure what the spirit of the law is, either. In a normal reading (as opposed to being tried in court by lawyers), does this statute apply to my 72 pound, eleven-year-old? That is, does 20-137.1 require me to put my eleven-year-old in a car seat? |
4,063 | 145,320 | 76823_0 | Is it common to address a female sales clerk as Miss in the US? What about ma'am? If neither is proper, what would you suggest? |
4,064 | 92,313 | 76823_0 | Is the following sentence grammatically correct? > I don't like autumn to be honest, neither like I winter that's coming after > it. Can inversion be used in this way? Or does it requires auxiliary _do_? > I don't like autumn to be honest, neither do I like winter that's coming > after it. The meaning should be: _I don't like autumn, I don't like winter_. * * * Is inversion appropriate in this case? Or is it better to use the regular word order? > 1. I don't like autumn to be honest, and neither I like winter that's > coming after it. > 2. I don't like autumn to be honest, and I like winter that's coming after > it either. > Which of the two is preferable? |
4,065 | 73,096 | 76823_0 | The Merriam Webster Dictionary gives the following definitions. * Indicator - "one that indicates" * Indication - "something that serves to indicate" How are they different? Is saying that an "indicator gives an indication" correct? |
4,066 | 20,496 | 76823_0 | According to the Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary, the meaning of "narrative" is defined as: > 1. A description of events, especially in a novel. > 2. The act, process or skill of telling a story. > However, the meanings of "narrative" used in the following three examples of sentences I recently came across don't appear to necessarily match either of the above definitions. Here are three examples of sentences using the word "narrative". Can somebody rephrase the specific meaning of each in an easy-to-understand way for non native English learners like me? * * * > (In Charlie Sheen’s show held in Detroit,) Audience growing restless. This > show is all pump-up, **no narrative**. – The Guardian. * * * > I realize that with hostile Republicans controlling the House, there’s not > much Mr. Obama can get done in the way of concrete policy. Arguably, all he > has left is the bully pulpit. But he isn’t even using that — or, rather, > he’s using it to reinforce his **enemies' narrative**. – New York Times * * * > The story of Capitol Hill's week on the brink — which brought Washington > within an hour of a government shutdown — is a **narrative of three men** , > each with a confining sense of his own limitations. – Washington Post |
4,067 | 55,937 | 76823_0 | I can't find an answer to this question that my students and I are debating about. Is _crevice_ an abstract or concrete noun? |
4,068 | 131,230 | 76823_0 | My question is when passive voice is preferred over active voices and vice versa? 1. I remember that I was taught that in scientific writings, passive voice was preferred over active voice. Is it correct? 2. If I want to describe several actions of mine, for example: > I did thing A. I did thing B. I did thing C. I did thing D. ... If I keep using the active voice, will that make the description boring? That is why I thought juxtaposition of passive and active voice would make the description better: > I did thing A. Thing B was done by me. I did thing C. Thing D was done by > me. ... But a comment led me wonder whether juxtaposition of passive and active voice is good, or when it is good and when it isn't? |
4,069 | 2,809 | 76823_0 | When is it better to use **passive** voice in writing and speech? When is it better to use **active** voice in writing and speech? |
4,070 | 104,388 | 76823_0 | Which are the differences in meaning and usage between the two expressions "much too [something]" and the most common "too much [something]"? Are they completely interchangeable? i.e.: "much too wise" vs "too much wise" |
4,071 | 51,290 | 76823_0 | I puzzled over the first line of the article of December 9’s _Time_ magazine titled "Des Moines Dust-Up", which reads; > '12ers (minus Huntsman) square-off at Drake University for ABC News/Yahoo! > News/WOI-TV/Des Moines Register/Iowa GOP debate from 9 - 11 pm ET. As it didn’t occur to me that _12ers_ means 2012 Presidential candidates (until I reasoned it out by the context), I searched for definitions of _12ers_ on Google, and found that only Wikipedia provides the following definition: > ‘12"ers’ is a 1987/1988 remix album released by Phil Collins. The album > contains six tracks from his 1985 hit album, No Jacket required, > remixed..... Is _12ers_ widely-accepted as the word representing for 2012 presidential candidates? Do Americans immediately associate _12ers_ with Presidential candidates, not Phil Collins’ album? Is this word automatically renewed every 4 years as _04ers_ , _08ers_ , _16ers_ , _20ers_ , and _n＋4ers_ without public consensus? |
4,072 | 104,380 | 76823_0 | To appear to flash as with light. As with any large organisation, Nokia had a unique problem in how to collaborate on a level playing field with 50,000 employees worldwide. (in the first example, the meaning is one of the definitions of the verb "to snap") |
4,073 | 104,381 | 76823_0 | Is a non-verbal predicate a synonymous term for "nominal predicate"? And moreover, do non-verbal predicates only appear with linking verbs or can also appear in other types of constructions? I acknowledge definitions of concepts, because I isn't clarified :) |
4,074 | 165,905 | 76823_0 | I'm reading in a newspaper: > "He is a neither-nor judge." Is the phrase correct? |
4,075 | 104,387 | 76823_0 | I need an abstraction for the above terms. In financial services, _counterparty_ is often used. Another hypernym could be _account_ (although this sounds more like a bank account, or user/login account). Also _third-party account_ (although I've never heard of this one). Which would be the correct way and/or most descriptive term? My reason for asking is that I am designing a new database schema and want a base name from which these three types will inherit. All of these people "transact" in business, and that's what they have in common. |
4,076 | 165,907 | 76823_0 | Could anyone please look at the following sentences and tell me if the reduced version is acceptable, and if any any difference exists between the full and reduced versions? Thank you * * * a) Anyone who touches the wire will get a shock. a') Anyone touching the wire will get a shock. b) Women who look after small children get paid well. b') Women looking after small children get paid well. c) The person who looks after my child every day is sick. c') The person looking after my child every day is sick. d) The student who looks bright is John. d') The student looking bright is John. e) The man who lives is Tokyo is rich. e') The man living in Tokyo is rich. f) The boy who found the cat was Tom. f') The boy finding the cat was Tom. |
4,077 | 104,385 | 76823_0 | I need to mark that someone made some effort to recommend third person services and it was something more than "he is good in that". Checking a dictionary, _much_ is an adverb meaning "to a great extent; a great deal" Is the phrase "He the recommended you much" suitable for showing such praise? Is there a better way? If there is, why? |
4,078 | 117,409 | 76823_0 | I'm curious about the numerous civic names (at least in Canada) which are in the 'of' form, by which I mean: City of Toronto, County of Wellington, etc. To me, this form sounds antiquated. I can accept when 'of' is adding some value to the phrase, like 'hall of fame', 'house of cards', but when it's merely referencing a civic name, where's the value? It's Toronto. It's Wellington County. No 'of' needed! I assume that these sorts of expressions have been part of the language for a long time, but am curious as to how and when this form may have originated. |
4,079 | 149,857 | 76823_0 | When you hear certain people talk, there's something distinct about the way they speak that you insist is not their accent. It's not even the pronunciation (e.g. can't vs. cahn't). It's also not their natural voice or emotion. This happens when you hear someone speak and the "accent" may reveal his or her sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, intelligence, popularity, subculture, sometimes disability, etc. What do you call this kind of classification? |
4,080 | 78,399 | 76823_0 | What's the meaning of p2's comment? > P1: My gf is a doctor and she makes twice as much as I do. F-k I feel like a > weird mother f-ker. She makes all the bling at home. I only make around 42k > a year as a fund accountant :(. Although she owes a sh-t ton in loans and > I'm debt free. > > P2: "I'm debt free." Game. Set. Match. |
4,081 | 190,170 | 76823_0 | I was reading a technical requirement documentation and it says: A Save Event preceded by the user un-checking the "Active" check box... So does it mean: they un-check the "Active" check box and then they Save ? |
4,082 | 142,809 | 76823_0 | The word _infanticide_ means: > killing of babies: the practice of killing newborn babies Is there an equivalent term for killing the elderly? |
4,083 | 117,406 | 76823_0 | The AP style guide suggests that things like "Farmers Markets" or "Veterans Cemeteries" cannot "belong" to the members of the groups for which they were set up. I would posit that a thing _for the use of_ a group (e.g., farmers or veterans), has an implied ownership...more collectively, but I feel it's ownership nonetheless, and would write farmers' market and veterans' cemetery. Anyone have any experience with this, and can anyone explain the subtleties of ownership vs non-ownership in these cases? I'm trying to wrap my head around why AP chose the guideline they did. |
4,084 | 52,926 | 76823_0 | I hit the sentence: > The _ProcessPoolExecutor_ class is an _Executor_ subclass that uses a pool > of processes to execute calls asynchronously. I was looking for the word pool which means `swimming pool` in most cases. So, I'm asking the question: Why we're using in concurrent programming terminology the term `pool of processes` and not `list of processes`, `set of processes` etc. How did the term come into existence? Where is the origin? |
4,085 | 25,611 | 76823_0 | **Email:** Dr. Elbert Ainstein, _Dear sir I have read everything you ever wrote. blah blah.. Your paper on so..more blah... I wish to study at your esteemed blahblahb...._ Yours Sincerely, Beststud Youlleverhave Dr. Elbert Ainstein is a professor and Beststud Youlleverhave is a student. Students often write mails to profs before admissions(to get admissions). I have been to a University's webpage. It said we encourage `Professor ________ing`. I can't remember what that word was. What is it? What is the word for this thing? |
4,086 | 190,320 | 76823_0 | If a sentence is starting with both an introductory element and a participial clause, where do I need to set the comma(s) appropriately? Consider the following versions of an example sentence: > (A): Finally, having explained the consequences, we recommend bringing the > car to the dealer's garage. (B): Finally having explained the consequences, > we recommend bringing the car to the dealer's garage. I do know that for short introductory elements (such as "Finally") the comma is not mandatory, but I am unsure if in the given example sentence it is at all possible. Personally, I prefer version A; however, this preference is driven by my gut feeling rather than by a specific formal rule. So, maybe someone knows? I appreciate any help! |
4,087 | 108,213 | 76823_0 | Whenever I write **ok** the spell checkers underline it with a red line and suggest that I should **OK**. Not even **Ok** works. Why is this so? |
4,088 | 60,836 | 76823_0 | While reading an article about persuasive games, I stumble upon this paragraph, which I do not understand the meaning of the sentences from the way they are structured. > The concept of authorship incorporates another feature of art more broadly: > the pursuit of a particular truth irrespective of the demands of reception > or sales. The sense that the artifact has something to relate and will not > relent until that thing is expressed, rather than an experience to be > optimized, is at work here. > > ... > > **Player agency** in games of all kinds leads to unique interpretations of > play experiences; in proceduralist works, such meaning generation is > stimulated by the knowledge that **a specific human being** set the work's > processes into motion. What does it mean to say "player agency"? My interpretation of this term is an organisation of gameplay for the players in he game. But I am not certain. In its following sentence, it says "stimulated by the knowledge that a specific human being set the work's processes into motion". Here, who is the "specific human being" referred to? Is it the author of the work, or the player in the game? |
4,089 | 25,618 | 76823_0 | Say, you have a sheet of paper. It is blank. I begin to write on it. It's no longer blank. But then what it is? I have tried the usual sources for antonyms but came up, well, blank. |
4,090 | 60,834 | 76823_0 | I know it is correct to say "Something is not urgent for me". But it is correct to say > I'm not urgent to do something. If not, how do I state that I really want some problem to be resolved – maybe the problem is quite important in the future – but solving that problem is not urgent, and I would rather wait for some days or some weeks to find the best answer. That is, "I" is the subject, and the object of the verb or term I'm seeking may be a long phrase with long clauses. |
4,091 | 121,915 | 76823_0 | For example, "Apple schmapple" to mean "I scoff at your Apple product". |
4,092 | 190,178 | 76823_0 | So, I was at the bar last week, Behind the bar they have these signs with jokes on them. One of them said "If your drinking to forget, please pay me first"(This isn't the question, I get this joke). Somebody at the bar, noticing it, said to the bartender: "I don't have a drinking to forget, but if I did, what about it?". The bartender, looked confused, and then the guy pointed to the sign. The bartender still didn't get it, and he laughed at her. But I didn't get the joke either. This sentence doesn't make any sense to me. Why is it funny? |
4,093 | 105,381 | 76823_0 | Though a native English-speaker, I've always had trouble understanding bracketed text. It's fairly clear that parenthesis indicate "optional" text, as in below: > The (unusually quick) man stormed into the store and grabbed every lighter > from the stand near the cash register. Above, it's not necessary to include the text "unusually quick," as it can be determined somewhat from the context, but its inclusion indicates a reaction of the author or a point desired to be emphasized. The general idea seems to be that a sentence with parenthesized text should be able to be read without the parenthesized text. While the parethesized text _adds_ to the sentence details, it is not _necessary_ in and of itself. However, square brackets seem to indicate complete literary freedom to rewrite a quotation entirely: > ...[he] had [indicated that he had] made the gesture without [complete > knowledge and] familiarity with [Taiwanese] custom. What are the rules with using square brackets and their general implication? I, as the reader, am completely at the mercy of the author in trusting him that he has conveyed the quote in its proper context and intention. |
4,094 | 105,382 | 76823_0 | **Background:** A friend mentioned that he wanted to organise a board gaming tournament with 21 players. He opined that there ought to be a way to schedule seven 3-player games so that each player plays each of the seven games, and no player plays any opponent more than once. I replied that there is indeed such a way to schedule games: ABC DEF GHI JKL MNO PQR STU SQO ATR DBU GEC JHF MKI PNL PKF SNI AQL DTO GBR JEU MHC MER PHU SKC ANF DQI GTL JBO JTI MBL PEO SHR AKU DNC GQF GNU JQC MTF PBI SEL AHO DKR DHL GKO JNR MQU PTC SBF AEI My friend asked me to explain how I had come up with this scheme. I replied as follows: "The players are arranged in three cohorts: ADGJMPS, BEHKNQT and CFILORU. The players in the first cohort appear first in each group, the players in the second cohort appear second in each group, and the players in the third cohort appear third. Each round, the players in the first cohort advance one group to the right; the players in the second cohort advance two groups to the right; and the players in the third cohort advance three groups to the right. The crucial reason why this approach works is that 7 is a prime number." * * * **Question:** The substance of my question is as follows. In my reply above, I used the words "cohort" and "group". These terms are synonymous, but I am using them to describe different things in an ad hoc fashion. I am using the term "group" to mean the sets of three letters (players) that are written with no spaces in between, representing players that are playing in the same game in that timetable slot. Meanwhile, I am using "cohort" to mean the three groups of seven players who never face one another because they move "in parallel" between the groups. Even though I am using two words that in principle mean the same thing, I am purposefully lending each of them a technical meaning and distinguishing between two concepts by choosing to describe each of them with one of those ostensibly synonymous words. Is there a term for this practice? Another examples would be the terms "set" and "group" in pure mathematics (in general English usage these words mean the same thing, yet in mathematics a "group" is a special kind of "set"). |
4,095 | 75,448 | 76823_0 | What's the difference between _scenery_ and _landscape_? In what situations can I use them interchangeably? > The **scenery/landscape** at the school is beautiful. Does _landscape_ sound natural in the sentence above? |
4,096 | 79,581 | 76823_0 | I have a menu item and a category that is called "Ending projects". It means that in this section are projects(contests) that will end soon (like in 1-2 days). I have also a block on my page called Ending Projects, to take attention. My question is if I can use this form or not. If not, what other form do you suggest, thanks. |
4,097 | 4,075 | 76823_0 | I have looked in a number of places, with contradicting results. The Urban Dictionary provides a whopping 73 "explanations", of which I will quote just a few. (Original spelling and punctuation preserved.) > * ZOMG is a varient of the all-too-popular acronym "OMG", meaning "Oh My > God". ZOMG originated from the imageboard 4chan.org and one of it's members > Zardoz. > Even though 4chan is _the_ Internet meme machine, I would like to see supporting evidence for this particular claim. > * zOMG is a varient of the all-too-popular acronym "OMG", meaning "Oh My > God". The "z" was originally a mistake while attempting to hit the shift key > with the left hand, and type "OMG" > The first sentence is copied verbatim from the previous (and older) explanation, with the "Z" changed into a "z". It appears that the author hasn't quite thought it through — if you mistakenly hit `Z` instead of `Shift`, you'll end up with "zomg", not with "zOMG". Besides, on my keyboard, there's the `>` key between the `Z` and the left shift key. > * A more enthusiastic (if not sarcastic) way of saying OMG. The Z doesn't > stand for anything, but rather is added onto the O, thus making it > pronounced "ZOH MY GOD!!1" > Doesn't address the origin and is not very convincing anyway — why "Z" and not "S", "X", "W", "J", or in fact any letter? > * ZOMG was the ruler of the planet XYRZON until 2451 AD, when he was > overthrown by KFOP after the battle of SHMUR. > Oh well. > * zombies! oh my god! > This is actually the most convincing so far, since over at the Wiktionary I am told that _ZOMG_ is an initialism. Then again, I am not told anything about etymology, and in the usage notes for _OMG_ , I am told that _ZOMG_ is "emphatic, in the same sense of _LOLZ_ ". Which contradicts the idea that it's an initialism. On the talk page for _ZOMG_, there's only this brief exchange: > This entry should be amended to note that the "z" is added emphasis from the > common typo committed when hitting the "shift" key. [Unsigned, but the > history attributes this to Adjwilli, 19:50, 4 November 2008] > > * Except that it's not: see [1]. Unfortunately, although this FAQ is > accurate, the fact that it has not been cited in a reliable source means > that we cannot include it on Wiktionary. Shii 14:21, 12 December 2008 (UTC) > That last link is dead, so I went to archive.org and dug up an old copy of the page: > ZOMG was originally coined in January 2003 by two individuals, James Curbo > and Matthew Milan, over ICQ > > The following chat log may or may not be exact, so apocraphycal information > has been used to recreate this event. > > Hannibal Smith: d00der! > Rick Feynman: zomg! > Hannibal Smith: ZOMG! > Rick Feynman: fag! ZOMG! > I can see why reliable sources are hesitant to cite this FAQ, especially given the fact that it was written by Matthew Milan himself. Lastly, over at The Free Dictionary, I am told that _ZOMG_ is an acronym with the following definitions: > * Zoh My God! _(gaming, World of Warcraft)_ > * Zombies Oh My God > * Zeus, Oh My God > * Zerg! Oh My God! > * Zebras on my Grass _(gaming clan)_ > Now I am utterly confused. Some of these suspiciously look like backronyms. So, can anyone, by any chance, provide a definite answer on the origin of _ZOMG_? Or is it lost forever? |
4,098 | 26,143 | 76823_0 | I know "Might" and "Might not" means the lack of certainty, but is there an implied probability in the use of these terms? In other words, does "I might be coming" imply that "It is extremely likely I will be coming" or is it a case of "It is likely that I will be coming" or moving down even lower "It is feasible that I will be coming" ? Is the situation identical with the use of "Might not" ? When someone says, "I might not be coming" what approximate probability level are we talking about regarding their "not coming"? I realize this is a basic question -- sorry about that; Just was not sure about the usage. |
4,099 | 104,365 | 76823_0 | > First and foremost I'm not from an English speaking country hence the > question. When reading Wikipedia's article about Dublin it says that the meaning of original Irish name for Dublin is **town of the hurdled ford**. I know what _town_ is, I also know what _hurdle_ is, but to the best of my ability I really don't know what a _ford_ is. Could this be a spelling mistake and it should say _fort_ instead? Please help me clear the original meaning out? ## Edit ### ...after getting the _ford_ definition After checking dictionary meaning of word _ford_ I get the meaning of it that it's a shallow river passage. But then again _hurdle_ and _ford_ somewhat contradict each other. If a shallow section of a river is hurdled it can't be a ford any more, can it? |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.