Unnamed: 0 int64 0 40.2k | id int64 1 196k | chunk_id stringclasses 1
value | text stringlengths 18 6.44k |
|---|---|---|---|
700 | 186,426 | 76823_0 | For example, the fraction ⅓ cannot be written, because it repeats infinitely (0.33333333... etc). Is there a particular word for numbers that cannot be written directly, but must be expressed as fractions? |
701 | 111,951 | 76823_0 | What is the difference between nouns "size" and "dimension". When I want to set dimensions/sizes of an object which noun should I use? |
702 | 2,056 | 76823_0 | I have been learning English for many, many years now and think I have acquired quite some mastery. Yesterday I saw just another English (American) flick and thought it was a different language, but definitly not English. I had to turn the (English) subtitles on... :-( Why is it so very hard to understand movies - and do you have a panacea to it? |
703 | 186,422 | 76823_0 | What is the proper punctuation for the following? Have you heard, I like chocolate ice cream (?) (.) Should it be two separate sentences? Have you heard? I like chocolate ice cream. Is there a way to create a compound sentence? |
704 | 91,210 | 76823_0 | I was informed earlier today that the word _ago_ is actually a _postposition_ and the only one of its kind in English. Is this correct? If so, why do dictionaries not use this classification and prefer to label it an adverb instead? |
705 | 91,215 | 76823_0 | The context is as follows. I say that X is true. The (dismissive) response I receive is "Anyone knows that". Is that a complete sentence? Yes, it is grammatical. Yes,it has some semblance of meaning. Firstly: most people wouldn't see a problem — they would interpret _anyone_ as _everyone_ without thinking about it. But, as other discussions in this forum note, _anyone_ and _everyone_ are not precise synonyms. Secondly: by inferring an implied set of people, the sentence "Anyone knows that" makes sense, e.g., "Anyone (you could possibly ask) knows that." I agree that most listeners/readers would make this inference without thinking about it. But note that this interpretation of "Anyone knows that", is only an example. There are other possibilities for implied sets of people. Therefore, it seems to me that if the meaning of _anyone_ is intended to mean all, the sentence is incomplete. What do you think? |
706 | 180,141 | 76823_0 | I'm about to take a degree in Linguistics and Japanese. I want to explain my thought that linguistics supplements Japanese, and Japanese supplements linguistics. Is there a single verb that implies two entities support each other in this way? "Symbiotic" is a useful adjective, but it's not quite appropriate, because it suggests that the two entities depend on one another for survival. I'm merely trying to express that the two entities enhance or add to one another in some way. I was thinking that a verb like "cosupplement" and "cosupport" would work, but they don't appear to exist as words. > Linguistics and Japanese [mutually add to/supplement] one another. A noun that refers to two entities adding to one another would also work nicely, as in: > Linguistics and Japanese are [mutually supplementary]. |
707 | 145,772 | 76823_0 | I'm looking for an appropriate word for a certain kind of a smile. > Are you in love with that girl' asked she with a grin on her face. I have used the word _grin_ but I guess _grin_ is a broad smile. The situation here is the girl who is asking the question is in love with the guy. But she hasn't told him yet. She heard from someone that he likes someone else. So the degree of smile is actually a small smile which doesn't reveal much. |
708 | 180,143 | 76823_0 | I try to use the 2nd or 3rd definition of words (to slow down speed readers). However, I am not sure if "ignorance" has a 2nd definition. (common meaning) is "a lack of knowledge". With this meaning, no syllable is stressed. * _My ignorance of hardware means I cannot build my own pc._ (2nd meaning?) If pronounced differently, I think that "ignorance" can also mean "a willful and careless disregard of something". The "nor" syllable in "ig-NOR-ance" must be stressed. * _The French were aware of the strategic weakness of the Maginot Line, and their ignorance of it enabled the German blitz through the Low Countries_. * _My ignorance of my girlfriend's hourly text messages quickly caused our break-up._ In a dictionary, "ignorance" is only defined as "lack of knowledge". But, I am not talking about that "ignorance". I am talking about the "ignorance" that is derived from "to ignore" and thus pronounced just like "to ignore", and thus has the meaning of "to ignore". There is precedence for this: "to accept" --- derive ---> "acceptance" "to ignore" --- derive ---> "ignorance" .... Anyone agree with me? |
709 | 35,219 | 76823_0 | I know it is something to do with universities, but as I have never come across the term before today (and have lived in England all my life including going to an English university), I am assuming it is only used by none native English speakers. Senior common room is the common room that cannot be used by students doing their 1st degree, so I assume “rising senior” must in some way be related to students doing a 2nd degree. |
710 | 26,423 | 76823_0 | I'm trying to make more sense of how negation effects how a sentence is parsed and understood if _and_ 's and _or_ 's are used within them. Pop quiz: You are trapped on a bus with a bomb going 50 MPH. You have a radio... (okay enough Keanu Reeves references) :-) Let's say the bomb expert says "Don't cut the red or green wires." I think that means "Do not cut the wires colored red. Do not cut the wires colored green." Now, let's say the bomb expert said on the radio "Do not cut the red and green wires", instead. Do I take that to mean: > "Do not cut the wires colored red. Do not cut the wires colored green." OR > "Do not cut the wires whose insulation has red and green stripes." ? OR > "It's okay to cut the wires colored red or the wires colored green, as long > I don't cut one of each color." Which meaning should I take if the radio breaks and I can't ask follow up questions? |
711 | 72,135 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > How does negation affect the use and understanding of "or" and "and" A's girlfriend doesn't like movies or Roses. What would be the correct interpretation ? Does A's girlfriend not like both, or only one? |
712 | 145,779 | 76823_0 | Here is a line from Sir Walter Scott's journal: > We expect a raid of folks to visit us this morning, whom we must have dined > before our misfortunes. Save time, wine, and money, these misfortunes—and so > far are convenient things. I'm not sure of the whole meaning of the first sentence. Didn't he mean "have dined _with_ " instead of just "have dined"? Surely canibalism is out of the question? I guess Sir Walter Scott is expressing a certain impatience with these folks, and wishing that he was ill so as to avoiding dining with them. And in that case would "whom we will have to dine with before our misfortunes" be more clear? |
713 | 35,210 | 76823_0 | What is the difference between "risk" and "uncertainty"? In what situation should I use each word? |
714 | 187,399 | 76823_0 | Please help me to understand an important email which contains this confusing sentence: > It is recommended that you must delete the videos after use, especially > after your sponsorship expires. I have weak knowledge of grammar, so I don't understand whether it is a suggestion or a requirement that I delete the videos after my sponsorship expires, or if it was suggested that I do so because I had asked for permission to keep the video after my sponsorship expires. Thank you. |
715 | 23,262 | 76823_0 | I am looking for a proper single work term to describe one third of a calendar year. Trimester does not seem correct as it seems to refer to a period of three months (one third of a pregnancy or one third of an academic year). |
716 | 101,709 | 76823_0 | I heard a sentence like this: > _How will Bill ever know that?_ Can someone tell me if this is a positive or negative sentence and what are the guidelines to decide which it is? |
717 | 132,668 | 76823_0 | So I'm reading a book set in the American South in the beginning of the 1900 and I stumble upon the use of the verb _is_ with _you_ ("you is", "is you?") in conversations: eg. "is you Samson Fuller?". I've heard this in rap songs before, but this usage made me wonder how it came about. Could someone give any insight into this? History, usage today? (The writer also adds an _s_ to some verbs, eg. "I doubts that", "I sees", etc. What's with that?) |
718 | 132,669 | 76823_0 | I am looking for a better word than "presenting". I cannot remember this word exactly. The word I am trying to remember is frequently used when talking about apparitions or supernatural beings. Like > Amongst the densest of rain clouds a fire breathing dragon _______ itself. The same word could be used here also. This is something I cannot google my way out of. |
719 | 188,771 | 76823_0 | I listened to the Comcast representative call on soundcloud recently, and although it was infuriating, I couldn't help but start laughing out of sheer disbelief. Other things that seriously aggravate me may lead to me laughing in exasperation, but I don't think of "exasperation" as necessarily including laughter. Is there a word for this kind of laughter, or for anger that is so intense that it causes laughter? |
720 | 23,269 | 76823_0 | Is any of these sentences correct? > 1. Until I played again 2 months ago, I had not played to this game for 5 > years. > 2. Until I played again 2 months ago, I had not played to this game since > 5 years. > 3. Until I played again 2 months ago, I had not played this game for 5 > years. > 4. Until I played again 2 months ago, I had not played this game since 5 > years. > And can I just say, "until 2 months ago" instead of "until I played again 2 months ago"? |
721 | 87,901 | 76823_0 | I came across the word “ _songify_ ” for the first time in the article of October 23 NY Times titled ‘Yes We Chant’ with the sub-head, “The Gregory Brothers songify the debate, with Gregorian chanting.” The article is accompanied with a video, in which CBC’s Bob Schieffer as the moderator of this Monday’s Presidential debate, President Obama and Gov. Mitt Romney all “songify” clips of their statements. The text reads: > “Our only remaining option was to _songify_ the whole thing ourselves, to > imagine the parallel universe where Gregorian chanting monks shepherded the > candidates through the debate as Bob Schieffer dropped verse after verse. We > hope that whoever wins this blasted election will be kind enough to sing his > acceptance speech.” Although www.definition of net. defines “Songify” as “1. to make stuff into a song. 2. to make a song out of stuff that wasn't originally intended to be a song, none of credible English dictionaries including Oxford, Cambridge, and Merriam-Webster registers “songify.” As there is no instance of this word in GoogleNgram viewer either, we cannot tell since when and how the word “ _Songify_ ” came into currency. Is “ _Songify_ ” a well-received word in modern or American English? Or is it just a wild and ephemeral journalism neology? Is it possible to say, or coin “Musicify,” "Medlefy,” “Lyricify” and “Poemify” likewise? |
722 | 129,835 | 76823_0 | According to my grammar, when we talk about predictions, "will" can be used when we are certain something is going to happen and "going to" for evidences. I think that when we are talking about evidences, we are certain something is going to happen. Am I not right? When the forecasters forecast the weather, I believe they use "will". Well, they are almost 100 sure and they say this because they have some evidence about this because of the satellites and stuff. So why not "going to"? When I am 100 % sure about predictions, I use "going to" and when about true facts I use will. > Look at the sky. It looks as if it's going to rain. > > His birthday will fall on August 12th. |
723 | 193,833 | 76823_0 | So I was going to say something the other day like "After eating this, you are going to want to go there." I wanted to express that after eating that, the person would end up with a wish about going to some place. It's taken out of context, it could be a restaurant or so here. 1. Is this a correct/good way of saying this? What gave me some doubts is that it was kind of a messy sentence to say. It has two "go" in it and everything. 2. Is perhaps the formulation "After eating this, you will want to go to there" better? As I understood from the thread below though, "you will want to" is more intended for instructions. So how would this fit here? What does "you will want to" mean? 1. Is this thing expressed differently in different regions? The other day was one of the first day of my life that I spent in an English speaking country, so I realized that I've got to step up my game a few notches :) |
724 | 87,903 | 76823_0 | In the following, “does not cause” seems to be clear negation, and total negation requires “or”, therefore: > The widget does not cause deformities or cracks However, it is unclear to me whether the following types of words and phrases are strong enough in negation to enable an “or” to clearly express total negation. For example: > The widget leaves a product: > > _without_ X or Y > _free from_ X or Y > _lacking_ X or Y Questions: 1. Would, for example, “. . . without X or Y” above unambiguously mean “having no X and having no Y”? 2. What is the term for this class of words and phrases and are there other common members of the group? |
725 | 181,818 | 76823_0 | In the sentence "They are sweet, not sour, grapes.", is the second comma correct, incorrect, or optional? |
726 | 181,814 | 76823_0 | I have a doubt about this sentence: > They stood in the streetlight through the kitchen window there’d never been > much point putting curtains over The sentence is taken from a book, so it should be correct as it is. It sounds strange to me, because it seems that something is missing between "window" and "there'd", like "where" or something. Is it normal or is something actually omitted on purpose? |
727 | 181,811 | 76823_0 | > I thanked my teacher for **giving me a pass mark** in the exam. Is there a single word or short phrase for the emphasised phrase? |
728 | 181,810 | 76823_0 | What is the difference between **backquote** and **backtick** . Really, i search on this issue . And it seems that are the same . # ` If so , Is it a synonyms ? |
729 | 177,483 | 76823_0 | We are designing an automated ordering system which concerns itself mainly with two entities: * Requests, which express the need of a customer to place an order in the near future * Orders, which are sent to third-party suppliers What noun embraces both Requests and Orders, i.e. a substitute for X in the following sentences? * A request is an X * An order is an X Ideally, X is a term that is 'natural' within the commodity domain. If possible, the fact that an item is being shipped as a consequence of X being processed should be evident. |
730 | 177,481 | 76823_0 | > You (or someone else responsible) have/has to be there tomorrow. Which person should I use? 2nd or 3rd? My opinion is that both should be correct, but I'd like this to be clarified. How about if there is no parenthesis? > Either my team or you have/has to be there tomorrow. > Either you or my team have/has to be there tomorrow. |
731 | 177,487 | 76823_0 | Hello I was wondering what the difference was between these: > * I was having the man leave. > * I was having the man leaving. > * I had the man leaving. > * I had the man leave. > are some of these even correct? and what about these ones: > * The book had me getting bored. > * The book had me get bored. > * The book had me bored. > _Getting_ here is intended to be used instead of _becoming_ as in entering the state of, but I'm not sure if this usage makes any sense given the numerous purposes of the verb have. Thank you in advance. |
732 | 7,998 | 76823_0 | How can I know, precisely, when to differentiate the sounds of the letter a, like in: _apple_ and _vault_? |
733 | 177,488 | 76823_0 | My wife, who teaches English to Spanish language students, but is not a native speaker insists that this sentence is wrong: My phone keeps wanting to switch to Spanish. She states the verb form of want here (with ing) must be intransitive and thus can't take an object. I can't help but think on this one she has the unusual distinction of being wrong, but she is alas usually right. So I turn to you fine folks for arbitrators: who is right and why? ;) |
734 | 10,701 | 76823_0 | The word may also be used when referring to really dull signage for a government organization. |
735 | 24,163 | 76823_0 | I'm from Central Pennsylvania, and apparently, we have a strange language construct in this area. I was recently talking about how "my car needs washed" to a friend from NJ, and she told me that my sentence was grammatically incorrect. I realize she's right, and I realize my options are "my car needs _to be_ washed" or "my car needs wash _ing_ ". But I'm not clear on the precise rule being invoked. |
736 | 139,913 | 76823_0 | Is there any difference in meaning between the following two sentences? > 1. My car needs to be repaired. > 2. My car needs reparing. > |
737 | 56,253 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > Using -ed vs. -ing in the "needs washed" construction I used "revisited" in a sentence not unlike this: > In the past we decided policy X should be applied to certain types of users. > > I wonder if this needs **revisited**? The word **revisited** was corrected to **revisiting** : > I wonder if this needs **revisiting**? I then did a search to find out what the difference in usage between the two words are and found these examples: ### Revisited * _Revisited_ at a future meeting. * _Revisited_ regularly through out the school year. * _Revisited_ in the future. ### Revisiting * _Revisiting_ the dream. * _Revisiting_ the treaty at such length, but will instead give a useful overview of its contents. * Tired of constantly _revisiting_ sites to check for new articles? Is **revisited** used when it's something you do in the future, but **revisiting** is something you are doing at a current or past point of time? I felt the original usage was fine because I didn't expect the "revisit" to happen immediately? For clarity, I am a British English _user_ (Scottish to be more precise). |
738 | 5,407 | 76823_0 | In the Central Pennsylvania dialect of English (and possibly elsewhere), the following construction is possible: > * This car needs washed. (=needs to be washed) > * The room needs cleaned. (=needs to be cleaned) > It appears that, if a verb like _needs_ is followed by a passive construction in the infinitive, the "to be" portion is left out. This construction sounds so unnatural to my ear that I have no intuition as to the extent to which it can be extended to other words and contexts. If anyone here is a native speaker of this dialect of English, perhaps they can help to explain the limits on its use. My basic question is: how productive is this particular construction among those who use it? To be more specific, can this construction be used with any verb (if that verb can be immediately followed by a passive construction, of course)? That is, would (any of) the following be acceptable, for example? > * At this restaurant, we always wait seated. (=wait to be seated) > * My kid hates picked last in sports. (=hates to be picked) > * We all want loved. (=want to be loved) > If this construction is restricted, then which verbs can be used, aside from _need_? **Edit** : What I am really hoping for here is that there is someone who happens across this question that can say, "I actively use this construction, and here's what I can and can't say." |
739 | 120,689 | 76823_0 | It should be, I believe "She is having difficulty shopping." But I am not sure how I can explain to someone who is a non-native English speaker why the form "She is having difficulty to shop" is not correct but "She is having difficulty shopping" is okay. |
740 | 329 | 76823_0 | Some verbs are followed by _ing_ , e.g. _I enjoy swimming_. We can't say _I enjoy to swim_. Likewise, some verbs are followed by _to_ , e.g. _I decided to make a plan_. Which particular verbs are followed by _ing_ and _to_? Can you please provide a list for that? Moreover, which verbs can be followed by both without having the meaning changed? |
741 | 68,365 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > Using -ed vs. -ing in the "needs washed" construction "The car needs washed." I can understand what the speaker means to say, but this is strange to me. My question: If this sentence claims there is no ellipsis, and that it is perfectly acceptable, how to understand the grammar? Or is it some kind of usage? |
742 | 79,300 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > Central Pennsylvanian English speakers: what are the limitations on the > "needs washed" construction? > Using -ed vs. -ing in the "needs washed" construction I've noticed in forums and advertisements a surge in the use of this mixed tense phrase. I would never say this- I would write "needs to be fixed" or "needs fixing". Is this a local usage that has gone worldwide recently? I'm not one to be very strict about colloquial English, but this one is grating to me. Edit: For many, many examples, try this Google Search: http://www.google.com/search?q=forum+"needs+fixed" |
743 | 174,084 | 76823_0 | I was raised in California, the son of an English teacher, but when I moved to Indiana, I discovered an idiom that I haven't heard elsewhere. The idiom is to use the past participle form of a verb as a direct object to the word "needs" when referring to something that should happen to another thing. Examples: * The barn needs painted. * The car needs washed. * The child needs spanked. I am assuming this usage came about either by eliding the "to be" of the infinite phrase, or by somehow confusing the present participle which is often used as a gerund with the past participle which never is. My question is two-fold: * Have any of you ever run across this syntax? * Is there something I'm missing that could make this syntax grammatically correct? |
744 | 129,554 | 76823_0 | "Needs closed", "needs resolved", "needs done"... I have never seen this before and it sounds totally incorrect, grammatically speaking. However, I have been hearing this so often, at work and even in written work documentation, that I am starting to doubt that I am right about this not being correct. Could anyone please help with that? Thank you. |
745 | 130,765 | 76823_0 | What is the difference between these two expressions? > 1. Your hair needs brushing. > 2. Your hair needs to be brushed. > |
746 | 101,927 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > When should a verb be followed by a gerund instead of an infinitive? > Part of the reluctance **in accepting/to accept** social arguments about > human nature lies in the fear that many scientist have, of falling into the > Cartesian pit. I'm not able to differentiate between these two choices. Both sound Okay according to my understanding. Is latter one more apt in usage? |
747 | 79,962 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > When should a verb be followed by a gerund instead of an infinitive? What's the difference between the two: > * What materials do they prefer working with? > * What materials do they prefer to work with? > |
748 | 140,163 | 76823_0 | I am writing my bachelor dissertation and several times Microsoft Word has corrected me from "to have" to "having". One of the sentences, for instance, goes like this: > The author recommends **to have** ‘(...)'. Bugeja further recommends > **having** a student blog where prospective... Can anyone enlighten me? |
749 | 191,966 | 76823_0 | Do I have to say always "I enjoy seeing"? |
750 | 101,935 | 76823_0 | Which version of the following sentence is correct/better? > "In particular, it **allows to acquire** a signal using a sample rate > significantly lower than the one dictated by the Nyquist criterion" or > "In particular, it **allows acquiring** a signal using a sample rate > significantly lower than the one dictated by the Nyquist criterion" I searched Google Scholar for "allows to acquire" and "allows acquiring", and it seems people use both more or less with the same frequency. |
751 | 27,976 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicates:** > Central Pennsylvanian English speakers: what are the limitations on the > "needs washed" construction? > Using -ed vs. -ing in the "needs washed" construction > Should I say “Needs cleaned…” or “Needs to be cleaned…” I have a friend who instead of saying something like > The dishes need to be done will say > The dishes need done He seems to use this form for every sentence that I would say as "[subject] need to be [verb]" (i.e., "the car needs washed", "the dog needs fed", etc.). Is one of these forms "more correct" than the other? |
752 | 138,029 | 76823_0 | Do the following two sentences mean the same thing? If so, which is more commonly used? > 1. My car needs repairing. > 2. My car needs to be repaired. > |
753 | 20,420 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > Gerund or infinitive: When to use which? > You like to read books. > > You like reading books. The second second sentence seems to be better than the first. Why is that? Now consider the following two sentences. > He likes to read books. > > He likes reading books. Here they seem to be equivalent and nothing seems wrong with either of them. Neither seems better than the other? Why does the use of "to" in the first set seem less natural? |
754 | 193,048 | 76823_0 | Is there an idiom that is similar in meaning to the last straw that broke the camel's back, except with positive connotations? For eg., how do I idiomatically express that "the My Little Pwny mount was the final factor that helped me decide to install HotS"? |
755 | 43,855 | 76823_0 | When I finished my business trip, my customer unexpectedly invited me to his home for dinner. Can I say "I am flattered" to show my unexpectation of their kindness? And what else can I say in this kind of situation? |
756 | 10,706 | 76823_0 | 1. Are there any differences in the three words in bold below? > cannot perceive it, out of **perception**. > > cannot feel it, have no **feeling**. > > have no **sense**. 1. the **perception** > With microphones, cameras, accelerometers, compasses, temperature gauges, > and brightness detectors, smartphones have become extra-sensory devices, > able to augment your own **perceptions**. We all know human beings' sensors have limitation. If **perception** means knowing something by the human being's physical sensors, then how can we augment it? It seems impossible. If **perception** means not only by sensors but also by mind (see wikipedia), then could you give me an example ? |
757 | 128,858 | 76823_0 | > The dog was in space, floating around in/on an asteroid. Is the sentence above ambiguous? I'm not sure but I think it could mean that _the dog was floating on the surface of the asteroid_ and also that _the dog was floating around in space together with the asteroid_ Which one makes the less ambiguous _in_ or _on_? (I'm also open to other suggestions). |
758 | 128,856 | 76823_0 | What is the origin of the phrase (and the principle) "build a house/home, plant a tree, father/raise a son/child" and its derivation (perhaps) "write a book, plant..."? |
759 | 95,790 | 76823_0 | I want to know a hypernym I can use to call products from trees. For example, mangoes, coconuts, oranges, bananas. I want to use this word in a context like below sentences. > 1. Mangoes are .... of mango trees. > 2. Bananas are .... of banana trees. > |
760 | 128,850 | 76823_0 | 1. "We are all mad." 2. "We all are mad." I think each of these conveys the same idea. Besides this, we can use "we are all" alone. I hear the first one more frequently. Does the second one sound worse to a native speaker? I wonder about this. _Note: I'm not a native speaker. Please tell me if you think this question shouldn't be here. If appropriate, I can delete this right away. Thanks._ |
761 | 53,985 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > Where did prefix exceptions originate? * efficient * accessible * consistent * articulate * considerate * conceivable * convenient * inefficient * inaccessible * inconsistent * inarticulate * inconsiderate * inconceivable * inconvenient However _valuable_ to _invaluable_ sits alone, like a trap, not merely an inconvenient irregularity but seemingly almost inconceivable that it's not a deliberate inconsistency, causing an inconsiderate degree of inaccessibility for the inarticulate. So English is even more inefficient and inaccessible than it would otherwise be. Or is there a logical reason why _invaluable_ doesn't mean _unvaluable_? |
762 | 6,771 | 76823_0 | In Russia and the former Soviet Union there is such thing as propiska/registration - an official address of a person where he is entitled to live. It may be a place owned by that person or the place where he/she is included in a rental contract. I wonder to you in English-speaking countries have a legal address (for example for the purposes of tax collection) and how is it called? If you rent a flat from the government (does it happen in your country?) how do you call the right to use this flat? |
763 | 6,773 | 76823_0 | In a work, when you introduce someone by their full name and later refer to them in a context which is not appropriate for a pronoun, do you use their first or last name? Example: "Eli Whitney is credited with inventing the concept of interchangeable parts. [...] Out of this contract, **(Eli or Whitney)** developed a sample of guns which he then presented to the United States Congress" |
764 | 92,745 | 76823_0 | Would I say “Human Services _in_ New York” or “Human Services _of_ New York” if the Human Services serves and is located in New York but is not actually owned or governed by New York? |
765 | 107,287 | 76823_0 | A friend of mine was leaving to start running as an exercise and I said "Have a good run!". Then I found out it is an idiom with a different meaning. What is the right thing to say in that case? |
766 | 73,444 | 76823_0 | Is there an idiomatic saying to say that a distance is _about_ x kilometer, including the connotation of " _a little bit more than_ " or " _a little bit less than_ " as " _just over_ " and " _just under_ " respectively denotes. > The village is located __ 30 km to the south of London. * * * Clarification: I'm not looking for one word that is saying both (like around, approximately, etc.), but for two different (opposite) words with the connotation of either "just over" or "just under". |
767 | 92,749 | 76823_0 | Should taxonomy terms such as Crustacea be capitalized? I think yes, but am unsure. |
768 | 73,449 | 76823_0 | I am sending an e-mail to a colleague to arrange a meeting. In my e-mail I inform her where and when we can meet, and I would like to end the e-mail by saying something like "See you there" or "See you then". But is this correct or am I translating too literally? If it's incorrect, what alternative phrase could I use? |
769 | 32,609 | 76823_0 | E.g. > * speak vehemently > * utter vehemently > When should one use _speak_ and when _utter_? |
770 | 192,573 | 76823_0 | I want to write a title (e.g. "Math Teacher") and one short sentence (e.g. "High School teacher at Kellog's school of Wizards") on my CV that describes the job I had during a summer. The company I worked for had the following business idea: 1. Get people to signup with their names and addresses 2. Take these names to a public bid between companies that provides energy & electricity. 3. The companies fight on who gets the customers - the one with the lowest prize wins. My job was to _call_ the people who had signed up for the email newsletter, and convince them to _signup for an auction_. I thought my title should be "Telemarketer" or "Energy Telemarketer". The sentence: I don't know. |
771 | 10,256 | 76823_0 | I have this question on using _see_ and _refer_ in technical documentation especially for cross-references information. I use _see_ when mentioning another section in the same document, for example, _for more information on xyz, see section abc on page nn-mm_. I use _refer_ when asking the reader to see an external document or any appendices, for example, _for more information on xyz, refer to the ABC Guide_ or _for more information, refer to Appendix A_. My colleagues and I have a disagreement with this logic. They seem to prefer _see_ for everything. As a cross-reference is more like a footnote and also acts like a footnote. Is my logic correct? |
772 | 49,566 | 76823_0 | Any term to describe both of them — coffee and tea collectively? I wanted to call it _beverages_ but that also includes drinks outside coffee and tea. Also, I could call it _hot drinks_ but that would also include any hot beverages. Any ideas to call both of them collectively? |
773 | 49,561 | 76823_0 | Wouldn't 'Wish to differ' be better than 'Beg to differ'? A friend of mine asked me why I like to 'beg to differ', instead of 'wish to differ' or 'want to differ'. Any insight on the history of 'Beg to differ'? I know that 'Beg to differ' looks more polite but another friend told me that it is over-polite, so would 'Wish to differ' be a better choice? |
774 | 182,430 | 76823_0 | The president's wife is often referred to as " _the first lady_ ". What would be the wife of the **vice** president be called (if one had to follow the systematics here)? 1. the first vice lady 2. the second lady 3. the vice first lady Or maybe something totally different? |
775 | 131,319 | 76823_0 | In Northern Ireland people will say 'He went to Bohemia on holiday, so he did', or 'I need to do some shopping, so I do'. Is this correct English? |
776 | 182,437 | 76823_0 | O'Reilly published a series of "cookbooks" which are general-purpose manual- like computer books that usually have wide but shallow coverage of a topic. What's a good word that's less rhetorical than "cookbook" but has a similar connotation? |
777 | 56,246 | 76823_0 | > Think > Thinker > Draw > Drawer Can we call a person who loses thing a _loser_? Of course, I do not mean that they are not successful or failed but what should I call them? |
778 | 124,111 | 76823_0 | In the following sentence, > It was great meeting you at X-Event in [the] beautiful Monterey Bay. is [the] required by grammar, or is it optional? It sounds more fluid and poetic without it but since Monterey Bay is a known location does it require the? On the other hand the refers to 'beautiful Monterey Bay' which is not directly the location but it is subjectively modified by beautiful. |
779 | 124,110 | 76823_0 | Is there an antonym of _client_ for the following context? > The [?] performs services for his clients. Usually one would just specify the profession or job title: > The contractor does home improvement for his clients. But is there a term that is as generic as _client_? I thought of _professional_ , but that obviously implies they are practicing a profession, which they might not be. |
780 | 53,509 | 76823_0 | Related questions: * What does "lemon on" mean in this context? * What is the origin of the phrase "when life gives you lemons, make lemonade"? In the above questions, "lemon" is used to mean a faulty or defective item. A typical use might be to describe a second hand car that, once bought, turns out to have serious faults, as a "lemon". Why is the delicious fruit associated with faulty goods? Etymonline says: * perhaps via criminal slang sense of "a person who is a loser, a simpleton," which is perhaps from the notion of someone a sharper can "suck the juice out of." * A pool hall hustle was called a lemon game (1908); * while to hand someone a lemon was British slang (1906) for "to pass off a sub-standard article as a good one." * Or it simply may be a metaphor for something which "leaves a bad taste in one's mouth." But none of these rings true for me, and words like "may be" and "perhaps" show a lack of confidence. Can anyone shed more light? |
781 | 149,149 | 76823_0 | > Currently there are about 4000 international students from 110 different > nations across the world, **thus/so** the university offers perfect > conditions for socializing and making new friends. Is this sentence correct formal English? I don't know if I can use "thus" here, or if I should use "so" instead. Or is it better to rephrase as follows? > With about 4000 international students from 110 different nations across the > world, the uni offers perfect conditions for socializing and making new > friends. In German we would write the latter, but is it possible to use "with" this way in English? |
782 | 124,117 | 76823_0 | Is there a noun-form of the word 'intrinsic'? If so, what is it? Intrinsicity? I suppose I could say 'the intrinsic nature of...', but it makes grammar awkward when there are multiple subjects to your sentence, eg: "In regards to your belief in the intrinsic nature of the insult which lies in calling someone a **___ __ ___** , I'd argue that..." |
783 | 49,562 | 76823_0 | Would a switch of the word 'assistant' and 'manager' cause differences in a universal corporate context? In my opinion, _assistant manager_ is just a rank below a _manager_. This seems to apply to _manager assistant_. |
784 | 193,792 | 76823_0 | Which of the following is correct? Does the is/are depend on the total number of things in the list, or only on the thing immediately following the is/are? > There is 1 apple and 1 orange available. > There are 1 apple and 1 orange available. Also, would it make a difference if one would put the is/are near the end, like so? > 1 apple and 1 orange is available. > 1 apple and 1 orange are available. |
785 | 178,414 | 76823_0 | I'm aware of (multitudinous) related, similar questions concerning this, but I still feel tentative for the following example. I also referenced http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/oddness-when-you-start-a- sentence-with-there-is?page=1. Predicated on these, I'd guess that > "there are happiness and joy" is correct, > and "there is happiness and joy" is wrong. Here, there is (I know why it's NOT there are here) a compound subject containing two nouns, thus the verb must be conjugated for a plural subject. Yet Google Ngram contradicts this significantly? Why? I fear that I misconstrued something? |
786 | 146,465 | 76823_0 | As of this report, there are/is confirmed cases in the county and city 1, but not city 2. |
787 | 166,825 | 76823_0 | Which sounds better? * _There_ **_is_** _water and butter in my fridge._ * _There_ **_are_** _water and butter in my fridge._ I think it should be: **_is_**. But what if we said: * _How much flour and butter_ **_is_** _needed to make a pizza?_ * _How much flour and butter_ **_are_** _needed to make a pizza?_ In that case, I think the plural verb: **_are_** , is the correct choice, which means (I think) there is a contradiction between both sentences. |
788 | 160,015 | 76823_0 | I've often written sentences like these: 1. The structure and linearity here **is** [are?]what is [are?] stifling creativity. 2. Compare: The pencil and pen **are** in the room. [Where is seems wrong] 3. The project is based on chapter information and book category, which **is** [are?] useless when guiding you toward the actual objectives. 4. There **is** [are?] a table and chair in the room. 5. Compare: A table and chair _are_ in the room Is the **is** appropriate in these sentences? Especially the first one; I don't quite get the rules at play here, so am only going by what sounds right. |
789 | 196,094 | 76823_0 | Here's the sentence: > I know what if, him, his, and will means/mean. |
790 | 60,888 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > [Singular] Is/Are [Plural]? In this sentence: > The only exception are questions that are narrow enough that they can be > reasonably answered definitively with one or two possible solutions. Should it be "The only exception is" because "exception" is singular, or "The only exception are" because "questions" is plural? |
791 | 28,604 | 76823_0 | > 1. How are the wife and kid? > 2. How is the wife and kid? > Which is more correct? |
792 | 17,766 | 76823_0 | 1. My fish's native habitat is rice fields. 2. My fish's native habitat are rice fields. I'm pretty sure the first is correct, since 'is' modifies 'habitat,' but it still sounds weird... |
793 | 185,448 | 76823_0 | Examples: > **There's** six seasons, dude. Wouldn't it be: > There're six seasons, dude. We are talking about multiple items; six seasons. If we refer to multiple items, **we should use "Are" in most cases, no?** > There's cats everywhere! > > There's vans chasing us! People often use the contraction "There is", plural or not. Wrong? |
794 | 105,258 | 76823_0 | > Another category of vision-based methods for fall detection **are** > appearance-based methods, which can be applied even with a single camera, > but can also benefit from multiple cameras so that they cover larger areas. In the above sentence, is it wrong to use _are_? |
795 | 19,656 | 76823_0 | Can anyone tell me if I should use _inspire_ or _inspires_ in this phrase? > An extraordinary leader whose vision, values, integrity and boundless > curiosity inspires all who follow in his footsteps. |
796 | 132,686 | 76823_0 | For E.g - The Swedish government’s recent efforts and investments in elevating education standards are/is nothing short of commendable. "Are" sounds a bit awkward to me, but it seems to be the correct choice? |
797 | 23,170 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > "There are so many" vs. "There is so many" I know this is correct: > There's no problem. But what if it was plural, i.e. `problems`? Would this be correct, too: > There **are** no problems. Or should it be: > There **is** no problems. I always wondered about the usage of `there is`. |
798 | 12,865 | 76823_0 | > Q: "Do you have any juice?" > A: "Yes, **there's** some in the fridge." Sounds perfectly fine to me, but: > Q: "Do you have any towels?" > A: "Yes, **there's** some in the closet." Does not. I asked for towels - plural - so wouldn't "Yes, **there're** some in the closet," in which **there are** is turned into a contraction be the correct way to say it? Spellcheck, however, doesn't like "there're", and I think I'm the only person I've ever heard use the word "there're". Even folks who I know say "there are" shorten it to "there's" when possible. Am I saying it wrong, or are both forms acceptable? |
799 | 96,801 | 76823_0 | > **Possible Duplicate:** > Singular or plural following a list Would I use _is_ or _are_ in the following sentence? > The Pohutakawa Coast, Hauraki Gulf, and Waiheke Island **is/are** the > backdrop for our day. If I rewrote it so the subject (backdrop) starts the sentence, then it seems to me that as it is singular, the verb should be the singular _is_. But as it is written above, _are_ seems less clumsy. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.