title: How should I use the phrasal verb “to d**k around”?

text: >   1. To waste time > >     * Stop dicking me around and get to the point. >     * Would you please stop dicking around with her? >   2. To take advantage of > >     * You're dicking him around, you know? >     * Don't dick around with her. > As far as I know, this meaning can be used with this structure _dick someone around_ and _dick around with someone_. My actual question is about the structure. If _dick someone around_ and _dick around with someone_ could be used with the example meanings. I didn’t type any more meanings because I only know these meanings.


title: How can I greet a group of teachers?

text: Suppose I'm walking in my school corridor and there are 4–5 teachers standing in the hallway. How can I greet them all at once? Anything better than "Greetings, teachers"?


title: Antonym of "deepen"

text: Since there is no word "shallowen", is there a good antonym of "deepen"? The meaning of "deepen" that I am referring to here is "to cause to become deeper." It doesn't necessarily refer to digging a hole. For example, a temporary deformation in a soft surface: > Putting the anvil on the mattress deepens the depression in it, but removing > the anvil **___ __ ___ __** it. I would also be happy with an antonym of the intransitive version "to become deeper."


title: Variations of the word "Schadenfreude"

text: _Schadenfreude_ is pleasure derived from the misfortune of others. Is there a word which means to take pleasure in the misfortune of another _when previously that misfortune was inflicted on you by that other person_? I won't describe here (in public) the particular circumstances in which I find myself looking for such a word, instead please enjoy this example from Three Men In A Boat. > Rather an amusing thing happened while dressing that morning. I was very > cold when I got back into the boat, and, in my hurry to get my shirt on, I > accidentally jerked it into the water. It made me awfully wild, especially > as George burst out laughing. I could not see anything to laugh at, and I > told George so, and he only laughed the more. I never saw a man laugh so > much. I quite lost my temper with him at last, and I pointed out to him what > a drivelling maniac of an imbecile idiot he was; but he only roared the > louder. And then, just as I was landing the shirt, I noticed that it was not > my shirt at all, but George’s, which I had mistaken for mine; whereupon the > humour of the thing struck me for the first time, and I began to laugh. And > the more I looked from George’s wet shirt to George, roaring with laughter, > the more I was amused, and I laughed so much that I had to let the shirt > fall back into the water again.


title: Differences between "Pay attention to" and "Keep an eye on"

text: What is the difference in meaning between "Pay attention to" and "Keep an eye on"? Can I use both in the same way? Or is one of them stronger than the other?


What is a respectful way to refer to a person who has died? Is it OK to call that person "rest in peace"? > The rest in peace guy was a very generous man.


title: What evidence is there that 'to' belongs to any particular part of speech?

text: What part of speech is _to_ as in:   * I need _to_ know.   * _To_ err is human, _to_ forgive divine.   * What am I _to_ do? This question is not really about the difference in meaning between the examples. It is a question about what grammatical or syntactic reasons we have to classify this item as a particular part of speech. If arguing that it is 'its own part of speech', I'd like to know what grammatical - but not historical - reasons you have for your claim. Just to clarify, I'm not asking about what assignment any particular authority or publication gives it. I'm interested to know the reasons _why_ and particularly to find out what you yourself think. If you're a grammar anorak - like me - then you may want a list of the contenders out there from other grammarians. In no particular order:   * preposition   * subordinator   * non-finite auxiliary verb   * modal verb   * inflectional element Can you help?


title: This positively affects patient lives and

text: I am not sure whether patient needs to be plural or singular in the title sentence. If it's plural is it then "patients' lives"?


title: "was able to" vs "could"

text: According to my grammar book, here are some usages of **_was able to_** and **_could_**   * **could** can be used to refer _in general_ that someone has a skill.   e.g. _At that time I **could** still read without spectacles._ In that sentence, could _could_ be replaced by _was able to_?   Would there be any difference in meaning ?   * When **could** is used with words such as **_hear, see, understand,_** etc., it means that someone can do something _specific_.   e.g. _I **could** hear the phone ringing._ In that sentence, could _could_ be replaced by _was able to_?   Would there be any difference in meaning ?   * When **could** is _not_ used with ***hear, see, understand,** *etc., it can't indicate that someone has the ability to do something specific.   e.g.:     1. _After treatment he **could** return to work._ ( **wrong** )     2. _After treatment he **was able to** return to work._ ( **correct** )  Why is the first sentence wrong?   What if it comes to someone gets approval to do something? Which form is better in that case? Can **was/were able to** refer _both_ to having the skill or ability to do something? When are **could** and **was/were able to** interchangeable? I would like to know how native speakers use these two terms in daily life.


title: Single word for "trust breaker"?

text: I was just wondering if there a single English word or term that means "trust breaker" (that is, a person who breaks a trust).


title: Usage of "by the way" in an essay

text: Can I use the phrase "by the way" in a formal essay? The essay is almost a tech paper (not an article — rather a university paper). Is that literary language or slang?


title: Do the verb "muse" and the noun "Muse" have a common etymology?

text: I was wondering about that: the _New Oxford American Dictionary_ says _to muse_ comes from the French _muser_ , which comes from the Latin _musum_. The _Muse_ comes form the Latin _musa_ , which comes from the Greek _mousa_. Those sound close, but my Latin is too weak (and my Greek inexistent) to tell if they were related back in the antique days.


title: Meaning of "deep" in "deep, acute curves suggest confusion"

text: > Deep, acute curves, on the other hand, suggest confusion, turbulence, even > frenzy, as in the violence of waves in a storm, the chaos of a tangled > thread, or the turmoil of lines suggested by the forms of a crowd. The > complicated curves used to form the mother in the family group shown above > suggest a fussy, frivolous personality. Been googling for a while but couldn't find the answer. Google Translate also gave me a translation in my language that I could not understand. Maybe if someone gave me the synonym of _deep_ for the context above, Google Translate would provide a more obvious translation. Copied from http://char.txa.cornell.edu/language/element/element.htm


title: When to use wrong or wrongly as adverbs?

text: It seems that _wrong_ is not only an adjective, but is also a proper adverb ("You're doing it wrong!", right?). There's, however, an adverb _wrongly_ , which probably means the same thing. Talking about **adverbs** , when does one use _wrong_ or _wrongly_?


title: What is the the role of the two a’s in “we planned to meet a few times a year”?

text: How can I rewrite this sentence without the two _a_ ’s? > We planned to meet a few times a year. I think this would be the best way to show the role that the two _a_ ’s play in the sentence.


Words to describe people with good/poor vocabularies. I am looking for words which I can use to describe characters and I would also like to describe their vocabularies, and explain how their vocabularies stem from their upbringing


title: What is the meaning of the line "Upon a homely object Love can wink" in this context

text: What's the meaning of the last line of this extract from Shakespeare's _Two Gentlemen of Verona_? > _Valentine._ This is the gentleman I told your ladyship   >  Had come along with me, but that his mistress   >  Did hold his eyes lock'd in her crystal looks. > > _Silvia._ Belike that now she hath enfranchised them   >  Upon some other pawn for fealty. > > _Valentine._ Nay, sure, I think she holds them prisoners still. > > _Silvia._ Nay, then he should be blind; and, being blind   >  How could he see his way to seek out you? > > _Valentine._ Why, lady, Love hath twenty pair of eyes. > > _Thurio._ They say that Love hath not an eye at all. > > _Valentine._ To see such lovers, Thurio, as yourself:   >  **_Upon a homely object Love can wink_**.


title: An expression for very tightly secured/mounted/fastened

text: I am trying to find a way describe a product feature, this would be that once the product is mounted, it cannot be easily un-mounted by shock, movement. The expression in German _Hält Bombenfest_ which approximately means bomb proof, describes it very well, please not that I am not looking for a translation of this, rather a natural way of saying it in English. My first intuation was shockproof, but I don't feel this accurately describes it, since I think more of a camera falling down. The closest I've found so far is something like securely fastened, since fastened describes the holding pretty well though I'm still not satisfied. Just in case it's relevant, the product itself is a silicone mount that holds a smartphone to a bike's handlebar.


title: What are the short answers in sad situations?

text: I'm not a native English speaker, but I have many English friends. So in conversations I always short of quick but formal answers or exclamations in a sad situation. Like; Yesterday a strong tornado struck Oklahoma taking many human lives. I was talking with my friend about this tornado and he's telling me about the danger and its magnitude and also his close friend and a relative was just a few miles away from this storm, but I didn't know what to reply for this sentence. I simply said "Oh my God!". So therefore **I need different expressions for these kind of situations.** Thanks


title: usage of "Made for"

text: eg. I would've made for a bad lawyer. conveying the meaning that if I had been a lawyed, I would have been a bad one. is it correct usage?


title: Why did "insofar" become a word, not "insofaras"?

text: So I'm thinking about how "insofar" became a word. This slightly unfair comparison shows that it happened relatively recently. ![in so far vs insofar](http://i.stack.imgur.com/jamTk.png) Now, whenever I've seen it written, "insofar" is followed by "as". So I did some more digging.   * insofar versus insofar as   * in so far versus in so far as ![insofar vs insofar as](http://i.stack.imgur.com/ZbOVo.png) ![in so far vs in so far as](http://i.stack.imgur.com/klxWm.png) This is terribly unscientific, I know. But it seems like the majority of uses of "insofar" are followed by "as". So here's the question: > Why did "insofar" become a word, and not "insofaras"? Put differently (from a comment below): Long and regular association of these words in this order: "in so far" led to them being written as one word. Why didn't the same process produce "insofaras" given that almost all case of the former are cases of the latter? A similar question could be asked of "inasmuch"… I'm not looking for a historical explanation, rather a (possibly speculative) linguistic answer that explains why this happened as it did.


title: "Read the values of a and b" vs. "read the values a and b"

text: >   * Read the values of a and b. >   * Read the values a and b. > The context is programming. Do I need to use _of_? What is the rule to use _of_ before variables?


title: "The people with whom you are talking" vs. "The people you are talking with"

text: Is it grammatically correct to say > "One of the disadvantages of chatrooms is that you do not know the people > with whom you are talking"? I think it is better to say _"the people you are talking with"_ but I do not know if the first option would be possible.


title: Passive clauses without auxiliaries

text: Sentences such as _I came across a letter that was typed by her secretary,_ can be "reduced" by removing _that_ and the auxiliary verb, yielding _I came across a letter typed by her secretary._ In this particular case, the _by_ phrase, or some other modifying phrase such as _that morning_ or _in red ink_ appears to be obligatory. You can't simply say, * _I came across a letter typed,_ although you can say _I came across a typed letter._ In other cases, though, this seems to be OK; consider _All the students arrested were from King's College._ In what cases is a dependent required to make the clause grammatical? Can anyone point me to a discussion of this in a reliable reference grammar, preferably the _Cambridge Grammar of the English Language?_ I see it mentioned there on p. 78, but this particular issue is not discussed.


title: What is the difference between nominative and accusative case?

text: Also in Linguistics what is a subject?


title: Can you "cram" a liquid?

text: I heard a joke last night about cramming one's mouth with a liquid. I've looked at several definitions, including this one, which seem to allow _cram_ to be used in this way by saying something like: > To force, press, or squeeze into an insufficient space; stuff. But then it seems to be more related with solid than liquid, in the case of food and drink: > 3. > > a. To gorge with food. > > b. To eat quickly and greedily. Can _cram_ be used to mean "to fill by force a space to full capacity with liquid"? If not is there a better word?


title: Word for "coin-enamouredness"

text: For a project of mine, I am looking for an English word for "the addiction of a person to coins". Right now I am thinking of _coin-enamouredness_. It will be used as an indicator in the following manner: >   * With [coin-enamouredness] of value 1, the person is inclined to trade > his cash with coins, even if there is no profit after paying the sales tax. >   * With [coin-enamouredness] of 5, the person is inclined to trade his cash > with coins, even if he has to pay tax from his own money. >   * With [coin-enamouredness] of −5, the person does the opposite, willing > to trade his coin to money even if he has to cover the tax himself. > Is there a better word?


title: Idiom origins: "Piece of cake" and "Walk in the park" and "Close, no cigar"?

text: Anyone know the origins/etymology of the following idioms: "Piece of cake" "Walk in the park" "Close but no cigar"


title: Using "one" in scientific work

text: I'm currently writing my Bachelor's Thesis, and was wondering whether it is appropriate to use the term "one" in a context like this: > since a couple of years, one can observe or would it be better to write > since a couple of years, it can be observed that Thank you


title: What do you say when something is possible to parse or process?

text: When you want to process or parse something and you say it can be done, how do you say that the right way? Is it parsable, pars **e** able, or processable? Which is right? I can't find any of them in dictionaries.


title: Meaning of "have head in the wrong place"

text: What's the meaning of _have head in the wrong place_? > Is a 19 year old too young for a 28 year old? > > I don't see it working out but there is no harm in trying. Most 19 year olds > have their heads in the wrong place though.


What's the difference between "paltry" and "meager"? Any connotations?


What's the difference between "umbrage", "offense" and "affront"? Is it like only the second word is now in use?


title: "Bikeway" vs. "bike route" vs. "bike path" vs. "bike trail" vs. "bike track" vs. "bike lane" on US road signs

text: To proceed further on with the "cycling topic", which of these terms are most commonly found on US roads to designate respectively a path or part of a road in an urban area marked off or separated for the use of bicyclists --- and a path or road in suburban or rural surroundings marked off for the use of bicyclists, but which also can be used occasionally for strolling, jogging, and other outdoorsy activities? My impression is that "bike route" and "bike lane" are used almost exclusively to refer to a path, street or lane alongside a roadway, whereas the terms "bike track" and "bike trail" sound a lot more appropriate for a peripheral or rural bikeway. As regards the expressions "bikeway" and "bike path", I think these can be used just about interchangeably for a bicycle path in both urban and rural surroundings. > http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bike+path?s=t > > http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bike+lane?s=t > > http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/CYCLETRACK > > http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bikeway?s=t


title: Usage of the word 'only'

text: Is the phrase 'only 4 japanese out of 8 people' grammatically correct?   Can 'only' be used like this?


title: convert this sentence to "not only but also"

text: > The sheepdog did not allow the tigers to lay their paw on sheep and tied > them in a daisy chain.


title: "Lived" vs "lived in."

text: > Erin no longer recognized her home. She felt as if she had entered a recent > battlefield, or a recycling center. It could have been anything—anything > except the place she lived (in). Do I have to add the final **in** in cases like the one above?


title: A suicide bomber blew himself off, or blew himself up in a mosque?

text: We meet twice a week to practice listening of English language news among English language enthusiasts in our community. We listen to mostly AP news broadcasted through FEN (Far East Net Work). At yesterday’s meeting, the opinions of the circle members were divided as to whether the female announcer pronounced ‘off’ or ‘up’ in the part of “an attacker blew himself off / up” in the following news. > “A wave of attacks across Iraq has left 46 people dead today. Deadliest > assault happened when an attacker **blew himself (off / up?)** inside a > Shiite mosque during a funeral in a former insurgent stronghold south of > Bagdad, killing at least 25 people and wounding 40.” We replayed the tape to make sure of which side heard right, without a conclusion, which partly could be blamed to noises of the tape, not entirely to our ears. We checked the meaning of the difference of "blow off" and "blow up" in each own dictionary to comfirm which one is more relevant to the context, but nobody seemed to come up with a very clear notion. A bomber “blew oneself **off** ” or “blew oneself **up** ,” which is grammatically right? If both expressions should be viable, what is the difference between them?


title: Which one is grammatically correct?

text: a. I didn't realize that you were a cop. or b. I didn't realized that you were a cop.


title: we are in receipt of something

text: what does it mean "`to be in receipt of something`"? I have checked the meaning but have not figured it out fully, since I am a translator I need a literal translation for me to build out a meaningful, usable sentence in my own language. Thanks in advance


title: "Buildings" are to "blueprints" as "units" are to what?

text: I am creating an indie game and since English is not my first language, I would like some help on this. In my game, you have buildings and units (soldiers and such). The overall theme is militaristic, so I would like something in that area. Now, here are the expressions used by the players: > To make a building, you need a blueprint associated to it.   >  To make a building, you perform a "build building" from a blueprint. Now I need the equivalent for units: > To make a unit, you need an ABC associated to it.   >  To make a unit, you perform a DEF from an ABC. I would like some suggestions for ABC and DEF please.


title: Why 'in itself', why not just 'itself'?

text: > Life **in itself** is neither good nor evil. It is the place of good and > evil, according to what you make it.


title: If two clauses are connected by "and", do they necessarily have the same tenses?

text: If two sentences are connected by "and", do they necessarily have the same tenses? For example, is the following sentence correct? "I enjoyed the trip, and I like the food"


title: Word to describe the quality of being optional or mandatory

text: Something like 'Optionality' or 'Ordinality'? (It's similar in kind to the words "Arity" and "Cardinality") Example: "Fred listed the XXXity of each parameter, noting whether it was optional or mandatory" Follow-up question: What part of speech is this?


title: Word for "invisible god-like voice"

text: I am Asian and in Asian mythology like epics like Mahabharatha, when some person is going to do something bad then a voice from nowhere comes from background, after a thunder or something, to stop him or to warn him. A specific case would be (Some one who knows Mahabharatha could relate to it): When Bhisma uses a Powerful arrow against the rival in a competition, a voice comes after a thunder warning him the supernatural arrows should not used for fun and selfish reasons Video clip. Like this, God's voice comes multiple times in this epic. I would like to know the word for it in English. In Tamil my regional language, it is called "Asariri". But this word is also used in situations where you tell something and the bell rings then it is a confirmation from god or nature accepting the statement.


title: Conventions for dates spoken without year

text: Today is April 4th, 2013. What is meant when someone says "May 1st"? I would assume its May 1, 2013. And "last May 1st" as May 1, 2012. As for "next May 1st", I would assume "next" is a redundancy if its a day in January. But if spoken on a November 2012 day, I assume its May 1, 2013. And "May 1" means May 1, 2012 (when spoken on that November day). Is this unambiguously true in **all conventions** in English? What are the **rules** for "last", "next" or avoiding both adverbs depending on the **current date** and the date the person is talking about? Are there phrases which when combined with "May 1st", specify the year compared to the plain "on May 1st"? It seems to be the convention for me in India. But I want to correct it if its ambiguous elsewhere.


title: Which is grammatically more correct - "The sight of her pale face stings my eyes." or "her pale face stings my eyes.?

text: I am wondering which is grammatically more correct - "The sight of her pale face stings my eyes." or "her pale face stings my eyes.?". I guess its the first one. The second one makes little sense.


title: A Replacement for "Free tour guide"

text: In France, there are people who welcome tourists into cities in a _free_ manner, where said tourists do not need to pay for a guided visit around town, who are introduced to the local scene without needing to pay and without any restrictions nor commitments. The closest English equivalent I could come up with was "greeter". But "greeter" for me has a more 'temporary' sense, that is to say that (normally) one doesn't 'greet' a person for several hours with a visit around town. "Volunteer tour guide" also comes to mind, but it just doesn't seem right... Is there a good term to describe this kind of person?


title: Origin of the phrase "mother's ruin"?

text: I was under the impression that the phrase "mother's ruin" came from the England in the 1800's, where many people living in London did so in absolute poverty, and gin (the so-called "mother's ruin") was the cheapest way of forgetting your worries. But I've just heard a new possible origin: Canadians used _actual_ jugs of gin as contraceptives. Hmm. Anyone got anything solid about its origin?


title: Do "it is time for someone to do something" and "it is time someone did something" mean the same thing?

text: I know that _It is time (understood: for the speaker or for a group of people including the speaker) to do something._ and _It is time I or we did something._ do not mean the same thing: the **first** is a simple **statement of fact** , whereas the **second** means there is some king of **emergency**. How about these same structures when the action is to be performed by a second or third person? Does the nuance stated above cease to exist between _It is time for you/him/her/them to do something._ and _It is time you/he/she/they did something._ ?


title: Difference between “please note” and “I would like to point out”

text: Received an e-mail from a company I work with saying: > Please note that. . . Personally I prefer to say “I would like to point out that...” Are both sentences correct?


title: Antonym for "Virgin"

text: What's an antonym for "virgin"? A single word would be preferable.


title: English - Grammar

text: Please tell me which is the correct phrase below: > One of my favorite movies or > One of my favorite movie


title: usage of please

text: Should 'please' be stated at the beginning of the sentence like: 'Please can you do this for me', or 'Can you do this for me please' Which one of the above is the correct expression.


Indicate direction or point to object by gesture of the head. Visually, it is a short jerk of the head in the said direction. Say a SWAT team leader silently directs his men to go to the left. Would you say "nods at"? There has to be something better.


title: Grammar in proverbs

text: "Tomorrow come never" I have seen it in a dictionary of English idioms. Not "never comes", not "will never come". I am confused. "Tomorrow come never" - is it correct?


title: Why does "tanking" at something mean failing at it?

text: Why does _tanking_ at something mean failing at it? As an example: > Mate, I tanked that maths exam.


title: What's the word for someone who always likes being different?

text: ...particularly with respect to the use of technology, taste in music, movies etc. I have seen my share of people like this who like to go "alternative" just to set themselves apart and I would like to know if there's a word for them? I wouldn't mind a casual/Internet-born word either. Just need a term I can label them with in my book. :) TIA **EDIT:** I am looking for a word that's disapproving in nature. :) **EDIT 2:** I am actually looking for a term that signifies "fake" in more particular terms with this scenario. Think about the people that only use Linux, only listen to Death Metal, only watch cult movies with the sole motive of being NOT mainstream. I am sorry that I didn't made myself clear enough.


title: High, low, deep,?

text: If a low pitch is the same as a deep tone then what is the equivilant of a high pitch ? Shallow? I have heard people say high for both but is this correct ?


title: "Many lost their life" or "Many lost their lives"

text: Many individuals lost their individual life. or Many individuals list their individual lives. Each person has one life right?


title: What is the correct way to write the statement "Employed from September till date"?

text: I want to add the following statement in an email . _**This is being written to confirm that Mr.XYZ has been employed in our organization from September 2013 till date._** The till date part sounds incorrect to me.Is there any alternate usage for the same. Any help would be appreciated.


title: Does standard English include non-trivial sentences which admit no verb?

text: One of the interesting aspects of the Maori language, as I understand it, is that it includes a class of sentences which not only have no verb, it is positively wrong to form them with a verb. Does standard English include any non-trivial sentences which have no verb, and are not simply ellipses of sentences which do include a verb? African-American Vernacular English includes sentences like, "Where you at?", that have no verb. The corresponding sentence, "Where are you at?", doesn't sound like African American Vernacular English. Adding the verb "are" seems to transform it into White American English. Phrases like, "Hey!" are interjections, and don't meet my threshold of being non-trivial. Answers like "Tomorrow." to "When will you file your story?" seem to be ellipses; in this case, of the verb-laden "I will file my story tomorrow." I found a related question here in in EL&U, _Is a sentence always grammatically incorrect if it has no verb?_. The title notwithstanding, the question actually seemed to be asking for an explanation why a certain phrase was in fact not grammatical. I realise that "standard English" is a bit of a contradiction. Sorry. I refer to any of the mainstream English language dialects, steering clear of pidgins and creoles, where no doubt lurk all manner of interesting grammatical structures.


title: Is there any semantic difference to have a particle after transitive verb?

text: > “There was a time when I supposed my job was to pass **on** the teaching of > the Church.” (The Secret Intensity of Everyday Life) The example has the phrasal verb, pass on, and its object (the teaching of the Church). Is there any semantic difference to have the particle ‘ _on_ ’ after the transitive verb, or is it just a habitual, idiomatic phrase?


title: When to use "include" and "including"?

text: I know that _include_ is a verb while _including_ is a preposition but they made me confuse when it comes to their usage. I usually confuse when to use _include_ with _including_. >   * Most Thais like spicy food, (include/including) myself." (My guess is > including) > >   * Many Asians (include/including) Thais like to learn English." (My guess > is including) > >   * The price is (include/including) free-flow water." (My guess is include) > >   * This book is (include/including) a free CD." (My guess is include) > > Please give me an example of their usage.


title: What's the most appropriate name for non-italicized text: "roman" or "upright"?

text: Let's say I am reviewing galley proofs, and the author has written some text in italics which shouldn't be. Would I write: “please typeset this word **in roman** ” or “please typeset this word **upright** ”? If both are clear and understandable, what are the differences?


title: Everybody knows that [...] VS Everyone knows that [...]

text: I was wondering if we should use one expression rather than the other? For example the sentence could be: > Everybody knows that global warming is an important problem Or > Everyone knows that global warming is an important problem Which is better? Which is mostly used for reports?


title: What's the English equivalent to the German "Manufaktur"?

text: I'm looking for the English equivalent to the German word _Manufaktur_. Basically, a Manufaktur is just a factory, but in German it is assigned with "premium" and "hand-made". The term comes up as a little bit old-fashioned, but it is used for factories that work in a rock-solid way and produce very high quality products. When you call a factory a Manufaktur, you think of the products as being "art", not just "products". E.g., there may be a Manufaktur for jewelry or watches. But also luxury and premium-brand clothes are made in a Manufaktur, not just in a factory. The Latin origin (manus = hand, facere = to make) has a big influence to the German meaning of the word. When I looked it up in the dictionary, I was given _manufactory_ and _manufacture_ as translations. A little Googling pointed me in the direction that both words are highly assigned with industrial production - and the premium approach is not given in the English word. So, to cut a long story short: What might be an appropriate translation of the German word "Manufaktur"?


title: Zero Article in Family Names

text: This is from an article in a recent issue of _Time_ magazine: "Barbara Bush has said on several occasions that she suspects Americans are tired of Bushes even as she asserts that Jeb would be the best imaginable President." Shouldn't it be " _the_ Bushes"? I've never seen a family name pluralized without "the" before. Many thanks in advance for your help.


title: Correct verb form in two sentences

text: I can't explain why the following sentences are wrong, although I can correct them.   1. > (a) INCORRECT -- The table shows the average amount of time advertisements on the Internet **lasting**. > > (b) CORRECT -- The table shows the average amount of time advertisements on > the Internet **last**.   2. > (a) INCORRECT -- The graph shows what proportion of UK adolescents **following** a vegetarian diet. > > (b) CORRECT -- The graph shows what proportion of UK adolescents **follow** > a vegetarian diet. > > (c) CORRECT -- The graph shows **the** proportion of UK adolescents > **following** a vegetarian diet. What's the actual grammar going on here?


title: What is difference between "faulty" and "broken"?

text: I was working as an intern in Malaysia. Once day, my advisor asked me to check some electronic device. He said: "Can you check them for me if which one is **faulty** please separate it to another heap?" I wander that why did they prefer to use the word of **"faulty"** than **"broken"**?


title: Can something be "ratable"?

text: As I explained in my other question, I'm writing up specs for a website with learning materials for our alpha testers to comment on. Among others, I'm describing the rating system, which has multiple criteria. I imagine that there might be criteria that only teachers (and not students) should be able to rate, while all users might be able to see the resulting ratings (the averages or whatnot). I'd like to write something along the lines of: > _"What do you suggest would be good rating criteria? Should some criteria be > only ratable by teachers, but viewable by all users? If so, which ones?"_ ...but "ratable/rateable" sounds awkward to me, and Cambridge thinks the word has to do with taxes or insurance but not with rating things (Oxford defines it as "able to be rated or estimated", which doesn't really make it clear that it also applies to the 1-5 stars type of rating). Is this just me? If not, what would you suggest as suitable alternatives in this case?


title: "...must be running"

text: I'm trying to understand the meanings of _must_ with a lexical verb in present continuous. Usually "must" means the judgement of the speaker (epistemic modality). Can it have a non-epistemic meaning (obligation or necessity) with a lexical verb in present continuous? For example, > It’s 10.30, he must be running now, why isn't he here? Is this a correct sentence?


title: " How perfect is that ?"

text: Is this proper usage ? seems to me "perfect" is like "best" (it can't be more or less "perfect or "best"). Thanks


title: What's the most common verb to use when you are undergoing medical exams?

text: I think you can say the following: > I'm at the hospital, doing medical exams. > > I'm at the hospital, undergoing medical exams. > > I'm at the hospital, having medical exams. > > I'm at the hospital, taking medical exams. I'm not very sure if some of them may be confused with taking a _written_ medical exam (you can't discard the possibility that someone could be at the hospital _writing_ a exam). Which of them is less ambiguous? Is there a better choice?


title: What's the difference between "day" and "date"?

text: _Day_ may refer to:   * the day of the week (e.g., Monday, Tuesday);   * the day of the month (e.g, 2nd day of February);   * a unit of time (e.g., _this task would take 2 days to complete_ ). A date on the other hand usually has the month and the year along with the day: the 21st February 2011. It also has a fixed quality I think. I was wondering if there are any other differences between _day_ and _date_ , and when it's correct to choose one over the other. By that I mean I am interested in the meanings and usage of date that pertain to time.


title: Most difficult word to pronounce

text: This question is mainly for all those that are not speaking English as their first language. For me there has been some words that are difficult to pronounce correctly. Maybe saying word aloud gives you a feeling that you're doing something wrong. It would be interesting to know which words you find difficult? My favourites are _squirrel_ , _miscellaneous_ (plus I have to always check how is this written correctly) and murderer (it's mumbling when I say it)


title: How to punctuate lists in general?

text: (1) How to punctuate lists in general? (2) also, what case to use?               In the case study, signal comparison could be used for:      • signals from redundant channels of emergency stop button,      • output signals of redundant processing units,      • feedback signals from frequency converter and contactor,      • also result comparison of diagnostic techniques and measures, that have dependencies.       VS.               In the case study, signal comparison could be used for:      • signals from redundant channels of emergency stop button;      • output signals of redundant processing units;      • feedback signals from frequency converter and contactor;      • also result comparison of diagnostic techniques and measures, that have dependencies.       VS.               In the case study, signal comparison could be used for:      • signals from redundant channels of emergency stop button      • output signals of redundant processing units      • feedback signals from frequency converter and contactor      • also result comparison of diagnostic techniques and measures, that have dependencies      VS.               In the case study, signal comparison could be used for:      • Signals from redundant channels of emergency stop button      • Output signals of redundant processing units      • Feedback signals from frequency converter and contactor      • Also result comparison of diagnostic techniques and measures, that have dependencies      (3) is ":" necessary? (4) is it (everything) the same for all cases?


title: Numbering series with "through" or "to"

text: I would like to know if a construction that I've read few times is indeed correct. When referring to a number of items, is it correct to say "The item numbers ranged from 4 **through** 7"? Is it better to say ""The item numbers ranged from 4 **to** 7"? Moreover, if both sentences were correct, any hint about their usage?


title: A Good Phrase to Replace "Get To Know"

text: This is what I want to express: > I want to _get to know_ more algorithms that have been created. I have thought about changing the sentence into > I want to _gain a better insight into_ algorithms that have been created. But it seems inappropriate. Any better phrase (or single word) to replace _get to know_? (Or better way to construct the sentence?)


title: Why does this abbreviation "tl;dr" have a punctuation mark in it?

text: The abbreviated form of "Too long; didn't read" is _tl;dr_. To me it kind of defeats the purpose of typing an abbreviation quickly, if I have to type the `;` key too. Why is _tl;dr_ more common than _TLDR_ , and usually used with ";"? I have read the wiki discussion but am not too clear on this. _SNAFU_ comes to mind as one which could be _SN-AFU_. Are there any other such abbreviations which have punctuations in them?


title: What can "Think flow" mean?

text: I'm investigating a Tom'n'Jerry sketch for cartoonists, containing basic graphics and tips how to draw the characters right. Unfortunately I don't have a digital version. So the problem is with the phrase: "Think flow when connecting ear to head". I can't figure out what "flow" or "think flow" means in this context. The surrounding graphics is just general character view (full-body and head-only) and most of the other tips just describe graphical details (such as number of whiskers or toes etc.). Does anyone get it?


title: Presence or absence

text: This may really be nitpicking... but how would you best phrase this sentence (the context is a scientific paper)? > _[parameter]_ was measured in the presence or absence of _[drug name]_. or rather > _[parameter]_ was measured in the absence or presence of _[drug name]_. The first one sounds better to me, but I cannot say why, nor I would say the second is wrong... **EDIT** : to better clarify, I have control experiments where the parameter was measured without drug and other experiments where it was measured in its presence.


title: Capitalising "for" depending on the usage in the title?

text: Prepositions _are not_ capitalised in titles. Subordinate conjunctions _are_ capitalised. The word “for”, as per Oxford, is mostly a preposition but can also be a conjunction (I assume _subordinating conjunction_ ) meaning “because”. So, would I be right in the capitalisation of the following title: **_For_** _as preposition:_ > A Crown for a King **_For_** _as subordinating conjunction:_ > He Killed Her, For He Loved Her


title: Idiom/word for someone who kowtows to his superiors and kicks his subordinates

text: Apparently, a "bicycle rider" is "a current German idiom for someone who kowtows to his superiors and kicks his subordinates". (Source: Hannah Arendt, _Eichmann in Jerusalem_.) Any similar expression in English to describe this sort of person?


title: Is there any phrasal verb to mean "teeth are falling out because one is getting older"?

text: The sentence would be: > He is Xing now. Where X means "losing teeth" or "teeth are falling out" because he is getting older. I am assuming such phrasal verbs or words exist because it would be awful/dumb to speak as: > He is losing his teeth now because he is getting older. I might be wrong though. Please suggest how it should be expressed.


title: Meaning of "shot" cloth

text: > "A truly beautiful shade! A cloth of smoked grey, shot with flame colour!" —Gogol, trans. by D. J. Hogarth 'Shot' is what is confusing me. In my mind I imagine it refers to a repeated pattern. My best guess as to what it would look like is this, on the right: ![Image of silk scarves](http://i.stack.imgur.com/PaJgC.jpg)


title: Is "these are also hidden features as well" a redundant sentence?

text: > These are also hidden features as well. Is this redundant? I do this a lot, where I say "also" followed by "as well".


title: Single word for "mental endurance"?

text: Could anyone tell me what a single word for **mental endurance** could be... I'm thinking something along the lines of willpower, but less ambiguous, it should fit in the following sentence: "...has a great desire for improvement and puts a lot of effort in it, but has issues in terms of confidence and (?)" Thanks!


title: Was "terror" ever a positive thing?

text: A friend has just told me that "terror" used to be a good thing, as opposed to the negative thing it is today: > **ter·ror** (trr) n. > >   1. Intense, overpowering fear. See Synonyms at fear. >   2. One that instills intense fear: a rabid dog that became the terror of > the neighborhood. >   3. The ability to instill intense fear: the terror of jackboots pounding > down the street. >   4. Violence committed or threatened by a group to intimidate or coerce a > population, as for military or political purposes. > He claims this is why we have the English word "terrific". I also know that the French word "terrible" means "great". Is he right, and if so when did it change?


title: What does ring-fenced mean?

text: I've been reading research. But I don't know word ring-fenced. > Local, state and federal governments—will require “private” clouds, which > are ring-fenced infrastructures that use cloud technologies Is it a financial term or technology term?


title: How can I say "You should save your work 'at short regular interval'?"

text: I want to say that "You should save your file _frequently at regular interval_ " because this area has electricity problem. I want **frequently at regular interval** in a word.


title: How do I use 'refer to'?

text: > You can use arithmetic to **refer to** the process of doing a particular sum > or calculation. I don't quite understand what 'refer to' means – even after consulting the dictionary! Can somebody explain it in a practical way, and give some more examples about it? And I'd also like to know other meanings and usages of it if there is any. Thanks a lot!


title: "Experienced" vs. "seasoned"

text: Are these two words interchangeable? According to the Oxford dictionary, _experienced_ means having knowledge or skill in a particular job or activity, while _seasoned_ having a lot of experience in a particular activity. But, people still do say "seasoned pilot". Then, what is the difference these two?


title: Recommend someone

text: I'd like to ask about the use of the verb "recommend" in the following sentences: > We'd recommend you to book your flight early. > > The plumber recommended me to buy a new water heater. The first sentence is taken from the entry for the verb "recommend" in the online Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary and the other is from a grammar site. I'm still unsure if the usage "recommend someone" instead of "recommend to someone" is widely acceptable. While the first sentence seems have only one possible interpretation: "recommended to you", the other one, although less likely, could also be interpreted like: "The plumber recommended me, not someone else, to buy a new water heater". My question is whether it is possible to reinterpret the given examples as: > We'd recommend _that you book your flight early._ > > The plumber recommended _that I buy a new water heater._ meaning that the interpretation is not that "you" or "me" are the objects of "recommend" but the whole proposition following it: "you to book your flight early" and "me to buy a new water heater", same as "that" clauses are in the rephrased examples? **Edit:** Thanks to all the contributors for the help! The meaning of the rephrases of the examples with "that" clause that I gave do tell essentially the same, but I was looking for the nuance in the interpretation of: > We'd recommend you to book your flight early by comparing it with "that" clause rephrase: > We recommend that you book your flight early. The salient reading of the first sentence for me would be : We'd recommend to you..and here is what we recommend.., meaning that there's a prosodic pause between "We'd recommend **to you**.." and the content of the recommendation which is "to book your flight early", while the second sentence I'd read as "We recommend..and here is what we recommend", which is "that you book your flight early", meaning that now the person who is recommended something is part of the content of the recommendation. In other words, this person **doesn't stand prominently as the explicit object of the recommendation as it does in the former sentence**. In brief, I was thinking that sentence 1 above may be interpreted as 2 too, not only as "recommend to you". When I use "for" in between the verb "recommend" and the person recommended this is more clearly shown: > I'd recommend for you to book your flight early. Here again I'd read the sentence as "I'd recommend..and here is what I recommend". The person recommended is part of the whole proposition recommended — "for you to book your flight early", same as with "that-clause" phrasing, and it is not a clear object of the verb "recommend" as it is in "recommend to you" interpretation . By the way,I'd like to know how acceptable "recommend for someone to do something" construction is to you, as I haven't found it noted in Oxford ALD. To clarify my question, I'd like to add that in the original sentences "recommend" takes "to-infinitival" complement, not a bare verb which would be understood as a "that"-clause with "that" elided: "recommend you book your flight early", would stand for "recommend that you book your flight early". Again, my question is if "that-clause" complement, (nevermind if "that" is elided or not) is comparable with "you to book your flight early" or "for you to book your flight early" in the given sentence. Finally, as native speakers you're entitled to question any dictionary or book as it is up to you to decide what works and what not, there's no single ultimate authority for the language people speak, so you can argue even with Oxford guys. "Grammatical" is what is acceptable to the majority of the speakers.


title: What is the grammatical function of 'brand' in the phrase 'brand new'

text: A previous question on the forum asks what the meaning of 'brand' is in the phrase 'brand new' and the overall view seems to be that it means fire. Ie fresh from the fire. But what is its grammatical function of 'brand' in this phrase? If we say it is a noun then the adjective 'new' is in the wrong place - plus no dictionaries label it as an adjective. And if we say it is an adverb (like you would say 'very new') then no dictionaries I have looked at label it as an adverb.


title: How do you punctuate around parentheses?

text: Which of these punctuation examples is more correct? >   * On December 7, 1941, ("a date which will live in infamy") Japan bombed > Pearl Harbor. > >   * On December 7, 1941 ("a date which will live in infamy"), Japan bombed > Pearl Harbor. > >   * On December 7, 1941, ("a date which will live in infamy"), Japan bombed > Pearl Harbor. > > **Edit:** A little background on my question may be in order. According to most, if not all, online references I could find, a comma is required after the year when writing a date in the above American style. For example, from Wikipedia: "most style manuals, including The Chicago Manual of Style and the AP Stylebook, recommend that the year be treated as a parenthetical, requiring a second comma after it." See also, Chicago Manual of Style Online, the Language Portal of the Canadian Government, and Wikipedia's own style guide. I couldn't find a reference for how to punctuate serial parentheticals.


i have only one sibling that is my elder brother.


title: Is “un-grown-up” a common, or not so common word?

text: I came across a word, “un-grown-up” in Jeffery Archer’s fiction, “The Prodigal Daughter.”   In the scene, the heroine, Florentyna Rosnovski asks her governess if her father, the owner of a hotel empire, doesn’t love her mother any more: > “Then why has Papa stopped coming home?” “That I can not explain, but > whatever his reasons, we must be very understanding and grown-up.” said Miss > Tredgold, brushing back a lock of hair that fallen over Florentyna’s > forehead. Florentyna **felt very un-grown-up** and wondered if Saint Joan > had been so unhappy when she lost her beloved France. – P75. The meaning of “un-grown-up” is obvious, but I don’t think I’ve ever seen the word before. I consulted online CED, OED, Merriam-Webster, and Collins Cobuild English Dictionary at hand, none of which carries ‘ungrown’ or ‘un-grown-up.’ Even Google Ngram shows neither ‘ungrown’ nor ‘un-grown-up.’ Curiously enough however, Kenkyusha’s Readers English Japanese Dictionary published by a leading Japanese foreign language dictionary specialist publisher carries "ungrown" as an adjective meaning “not grown up, immature, or childish.” Is “un-grown-up” a common, or not so common, or taken-for-granted word?


title: Quiet vs Quietly

text: Is it correct to say “I will lie **quiet** beneath his touch”? Shouldn’t it be “I will lie **quietly** beneath his touch”?


title: Alternative phrase to "highly paid job"

text: > James: I make 10000 USD a month.   >  Alice: Wow, you have a highly paid job. Is the phrase “highly paid job” correct? I think yes, but also wish to ask the native speakers here. I assume that “high paid job” is an incorrect alternative.


title: "Go on excursion" vs. "go on an excursion"

text: Is it grammatical to say, "The class is going on excursion"? My thought is that it would be preferable to say "The class is going on an excursion". My colleague thinks that the first sentence is correct. What do you think?


title: "I don't have internet" vs. "I don't have the internet"?

text: When there is no WI-Fi or internet connection, people usually say > I don't have internet. However, I heard someone saying > I don't have the internet. which sounds funny to me. I would assume both are correct, but is the former more natural than the latter?


title: What is the difference between 'tweaking' and 'fine-tuning'?

text: When I say 'after some tweaking and fine-tuning', are they different processes, or am I just being redundant?


title: What does "from hunger" mean?

text: What is the meaning of the phrase "from hunger", as in, "This xyz is from hunger"? From the context I found it in, it appears to mean either very good, or very bad, but it's hard to tell which. The context in which I read this expression… > "I'm going into the city. On the way back I'll get you the biggest jar of > Samoy I can find."   >  Mal rolled his eyes and shook his head. "Samoy pickles are from hunger." —Michael Marshall Smith, _Spares_. The phrase occurred later in a discussion of firearms but I can't find it just this minute (dead tree books — difficult to do a full text search).


title: Consistency of Tense

text: > You have found a job. You get called in by the company for a job interview > and it went great. Is there something wrong with this sentence? Is there an inappropriate shift in tense? If yes, how should it be written?


title: Meaning of "drag" in "lights stretching across the main drag spelled..."

text: What is the meaning of _drag_ in this context? (From first paragraph of “The Sanctuary”, by Elif Batuman, **New Yorker** , December 19, 2011) > Directly outside the window, Vegas-style lights stretching across the main > drag spelled, in two-foot-high letters, “WELCOME TO THE CITY OF PROPHETS.”


title: A list with only one item

text: I have a document where someone is suggesting we have a bulleted list with only one item. That sounds absurd to me. Doesn't a "list" imply more than one item?


title: Difference between 'meant by' and 'meant with'?

text: Is there a difference in meaning or usage between ' ** _meant by_** ' and ' ** _meant with_** '? Many questions about meanings with this tag have the wording ' _What is meant by...?_ '. In the text I am currently reading the verb 'to mean' is always combined with the preposition 'with', when discussing words or passages in the Bible. I mention this because I wonder whether it might be relevant that ' _meant with_ ' is used in a linguistic context. Here are two examples: > With ‘new spirit’ the same must be meant as with ‘my spirit’ in clause e.   >  The suggestion made by several commentators that the doom of Judea’s > downfall is meant with the ‘first things’ that should no longer be > remembered takes too little account of the poem’s own concentric structure. The translator of the Dutch original is an English native speaker coming from South Africa, perhaps that might have something to do with this usage? Afterthought: now that I infer from the comments that 'meant with' sounds strange to English speakers, could it be a Germanism? ('Was ist gemeint mit...')? I


title: When the word period is used after a sentence, what does it mean?

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  What does 'period' mean when someone says "something, period"? When the word period is used after a sentence, like so: > Bacon is awesome. Period. What does it mean?


title: When writing about Mongolian felt tent houses in English should the word "ger" or "yurt" be used?

text: I'm travelling in Mongolia at the moment and being a language buff I've been wondering whether if I were writing about my experiences here whether I ought to use the term _yurt_ or _ger_ when mentioning the traditional round felt tent houses used by nomads and elsewhere. ![A yurt in Mongolia](http://i.stack.imgur.com/rPNWl.jpg) Mongolian _гэр_ used as a restaurant/inn. Photo by hippietrail. Even though the word "yurt" is not very common in English I would regard it as definitely a loanword and would expect others to think so soo. (I might well describe it in the first use anyway.) But the "yurt" is not a Mongolian word but used in Central Asian countries. Here the same dwelling is called a "ger". At least Wiktionary also considers "ger" to be a loanword into English. But it has a very low threshold of _three_ uses in "durably archived" media in an English context to qualify. Or so I belive. I don't know what other dictionaries say or how people feel about it generally. What say ye experts?


title: What's the difference between "abbreviation" and "abbreviature"?

text: What's the difference between these two words, _abbreviation_ and _abbreviature_?


title: When to use "to the ..." vs. "to ..."

text: When talking about going to a local bar one person says, "Let's go to 1020!"   The other says, "Let's go to _the_ 1020!" The first statement without an article seems correct. Yet, by comparison, "Let's go to _the_ supermarket" seems correct, while "Let's go to supermarket" doesn't seem correct. What rule is at work here?


title: phrase: "both delighted and amazed"

text: Am I using this short phrase correctly? > Alibi bin Baz-ar and his Beetle Train from the mysterious East had arrived > and the good folks of The Forest Glade were at once, **both delighted and > amazed** …


title: Is this how to reply to "how is it going?"?

text: Someone asked me "how is it going?" I reply to her: "It's been going pretty good. Thanks for asking! How about you?" Is there any grammar mistake in it or this sentence is alright?


title: Distinction between pagan and heathen?

text: I'm trying to understand the precise distinction between **pagan** and **heathen**. My immediate motivation is that I'm reading Sir Frank Stenton's _Anglo-Saxon England_. Online dictionaries have been imprecise, often offering the words as mutual synonyms. Some issues: are pagans/heathens necessarily polytheists? Did the Romans refer to pagans (as 'others') while having a multitude of gods themselves? Is either word derogatory? Does heathen imply a lower level of civilisation?


title: Cheap talk vs gossip

text: Are _cheap talk_ and _gossip_ close synonyms or are there instances where one cannot be used to substitute the other?


title: What's the best term for "geographical level"?

text: I'm creating an interface where users can choose which geographical level to report on. I.e., they're choosing between "Country", "State", and "City". Is there a better term than "level" to describe these choices? UPDATE: as noted in the comments below, the "geographical" part of this label will actually be "Geo" because that's a standard term in online advertising, FWIW. So I'm looking for something better than "Geo Level", and probably something that tends toward the colloquial, rather than the formal or technical.


title: Definition of "Run a gauntlet of raucous"

text: Can anybody please explain this expression and the reason "run" is there (and not for example run-into) and how this can be related to gauntlet? The expression has been used in sentences like these: >   * You're likely to run the gauntlet of raucous secondary-school children > en route to the nearest shop. >   * ... passes through a gauntlet of raucous protesters. >   * ... negotiated their way through a menacing gauntlet of raucous whites > shouting racial epithets. >   * ... battling the gauntlet of raucous crowds. >


title: What's the noun for an animal's personality?

text: When you describe a cat or dog's personality, what's the noun for it? "My cat has this personality of ..." just sounds wrong.


title: Origin of "bite your tongue" as a response

text: When someone says something unpleasant or rude, often the reply is "Bite your tongue!". But where did this come from? I can find a number of sources explaining that to bite one's tongue is to hold it between the teeth, preventing speech, and thus is a metaphor for not speaking; this makes sense, as I've seen "I bit my tongue" to mean "I didn't say anything". However, I can't find much about the usage as a response to something already said. Is it along the lines of "You should have bit your tongue instead of saying that"? Are the two usages actually related or just similar? For clarification: usage A of the phrase "bite your tongue" is a synonym for "hold your tongue", whereas the usage I'm interested in is used similarly to "Wash out your mouth with soap" (though that's usually used for swear words, whereas this can be used for any negatively-perceived statement, like saying something bad about a public figure who is well respected, or implying that a woman is over a certain age)


title: Was there textspeak before texting?

text: > 2b |! 2b, < = ? With such a rich history of inventive writing and puns, it seemed bizarre to me that the idea of writing in txtspk would be a new one. I found a brief degree of truncation in telegram style, dating back 120 years, but I can't find any further history of people using the phonetic sounds of punctuation or numbers for humour, wit or any other reason. Are cute pieces of wit such as '22' (tutu), ': imflam8ion' and so on unique to recent writers, or do they have a longer running history? Edit: I can't believe I forgot l33tsp34k as @Kathryn points out in an answer below, but the original intent of my question was to find examples of these shortenings much older than the past few decades, if they exist.


title: What word means "taking something to unrealistic extremes"?

text: This has been bugging me for a while, does anyone know what this word is? Maybe I imagined it. I thought it might have been "superfluous", but I don't think that is it, then I thought it might have been "hyperbole" but I do not think that is it either. Any thoughts? Here is some context.               Person A: If a billion people view my web site, my server will crash.      Person B: That is a ___ example.      The difference between the word that I am looking for and "hyperbolic" is that a hyperbole is not meant to be taken literally and this is. Hope that helps.


title: Can "decided" be used this way?

text: Is it possible to use the verb "decide" as follows? I've seen some cases recently, for example: > "I'm decided I'm voting Republican". I've never seen it used this way before. Is it grammatically correct?


title: What kind of phrase/clause is "as far as I know"?

text: I would like to know what kind of phrase/clause "as far as I know" is, and why.


title: "Peeving about grammar disguised as a question"

text: In the FAQ for this site, _peeving about grammar disguised as a question_ is discouraged. The various forms of _peeve_ in Merriam-Webster however does not justify this usage. _Peeve_ is a verb meaning _annoy_ , forming _peeved_ and _peeving_. It is also a noun meaning _grievance_. _Peevish_ is an adjective meaning _ill-tempered_. _Peeving about grammar_ then would suggest one can rewrite the phrase as _annoying about grammar_ which does not make sense. How common then is this usage of _peeving_ and is it legitimate?


title: Which is the suitable preposition for a perspective?

text: Consider several well known phenomena. I would like to describe these phenomena from a different point of view. Do I allow a different perspective **_on_** these phenomena, **_of_** the phenomena, **_at_** all phenomena in focus, or should I use a different proposition?


title: How to make Fisher's exact test plural

text: How would I say the plural form of "Fisher's exact test". Would it be "Fisher exact tests?". Here's a fragment: We also compared different groups using "Fisher Exact Tests". Thank you for your help!


title: How do I reexamine for the first time?

text: I'm about to examine something. This something has been examined before by somebody else. How do I say in one word (or more) that I'm about to examine this something for the first time, but it is not the first time this something is examined? Can I say: I do not trust his examination. I will reexamine this something first thing in the morning.


title: Do you hear "snarky", to imply some level of wry, off-the-cuff, perhaps mildly acerbic, humor?

text: People I know use the word that way, but most online definitions put it, I'd say more in the range between acerbic and acid, with no humor. MW does have a second "irreverent" sense, that's also pretty good for how I have it, but if that's not the common interpretation I'd better make some changes...


title: What do I call my paid account?

text: I have created a web application that has two offerings, one is free, the other is paid. The paid version has exactly the same functionality as the free version, it's just that it can be used with more people. I am struggling with what to call the paid account. Here are some I have rejected.   * "pro" or "professional" - Implies that if you use the free version, your not professional.   * "premium" - Sounds expensive.   * "gold, silver, bronze" - doesn't really work with two offerings, and implies class.   * "restricted/full" - Implies less/more functionality.


title: Is it ever correct to call someone "Great British"?

text: People from Britain are referred to as British. However I recently learned that Britain is not technically the same as _Great_ Britain. > **Source 1** > > Great Britain and Britain do not mean the same thing. Great Britain is made > up of Scotland, England and Wales, where as Britain is just England and > Wales. > > **Source 2** _(emphasis mine)_ > > Great Britain is the official collective name of of England, Scotland and > Wales and their associated islands. It does not include Northern Ireland and > therefore should never be used interchangeably with ‘UK’ – something you see > all too often. Here at Ordnance Survey, we’re responsible for mapping Great > Britain, which is why we don’t make maps of Northern Ireland. > **_Technically, if you lose the ‘Great,’ Britain only refers to England and > Wales._** So is it accurate to describe someone from _Great_ Britain as **Great British**? I've certainly never heard it. But I wonder if there was ever a time when the phrase was ever in common usage? (NGrams seems to suggest it was most commonly used in the 1830s- although some of these uses are for objects not people.) **Update** : _It seems my question has sparked an side-argument about exactly what the differences are between "Britain" and "Great Britain". This was not the intention of the question. I simply wanted to ask whether it has ever been acceptable to call a person "Great British"._


title: Is there a word that describes when two or more people have different understandings of the same word?

text: I'm asking this out of personal curiosity, it's not required for a document or anything. My friends and I often have interesting conversations or debates, and often times we get stuck on an issue merely because we have **_different understandings of the same word_**. I use the word 'semantics' to try to describe it, but I'm sure that isn't the correct word. My 'research' leads me to the word **ambiguity** , which I guess makes sense, but I'd like to know if there's a better word for it. I am NOT asking for the word defining a word that has multiple meanings. (For example, wind meaning the gusts and to turn and/or crank a mechanism.) All other prior research leads to this answer. Example for my question: If two people have the word 'justice', and each person knows the definition of the word, but take the meaning of the word differently, what is that called? If my question doesn't meet some sort of preferred formatting, just tell me what I did wrong in posting this, and I'll rephrase it later.


title: What does "no less than" mean?

text: Can you please explain the meaning of `no less than` with examples? EDIT: WOW! I really didn't think that my question was so inferior! Ok, I will try to add some quality like the one here:               When someone says 'no less than' what does it mean?      So you can give me some Cambridge Dictionary and Wikipedia links.


title: Can “as” ever properly mean “because”?

text: We often encounter _as_ used to mean _because_. As we know, _as_ is not merely ambiguous: it’s hexiguous or octiguous. I’m especially uncomfortable when I find the usage in a technical paper1, where precision (as I claim) trumps written or spoken style. I argue that _as_ cannot stand in for _because_ in a paper as rigorous as a specification. But as I think about it, maybe I’m acting as a mere pedant; maybe I should lighten up a little. Do you folks think as I do? Or should I take it easy, just accept and go with it as the leaf accepts the breeze? * * *   1. As in the current spec for the C programming language spec, for example.


title: Alternative ways to say "I cannot answer that question"?

text: I'm getting bored of repeating the same "I can't answer that" phrase over and over. I'm trying other phrases, like "I'll leave that to your imagination," but that one sounds too weird. Specifically, I'm not trying to avoid answering a question (so deflecting it is not in the question). I'm trying to reply to a question by asserting it's one I cannot answer, and that the asker should understand this. I'm looking for both formal and informal phrases.


title: Difference between "I haven't" and "I've not" etc

text: If I have three consecutive words where each adjacent pair can be contracted, e.g. "I would have" or "You are not", is there a difference between the two possible contractions, e.g. "I would've" or "You aren't" versus "I'd have" or "You're not"? If so, when is each form preferred? Does the preference depend on what comes after it (such as its part of speech), e.g. "You are not a fool" versus "You are not foolish" versus "You are not going to fool me?"


title: Alternatives to "Good Night" when sleeping in the afternoon

text: It seems to be a silly question but I was puzzled when somebody bid me good night, when I was going to sleep at 1:00 PM. If somebody goes to sleep in the afternoon, is it correct to bid him "good night"? I think this is wrong.


title: Mixing verb tenses involving a Past-Belief/Thought/Attitude about timeless facts

text: Is the following sentence grammatically correct? > 1.) Oscar **believed** that the sum of two and two **is** four. In this case it seems to make the most sense to mix the past tense "believed" with the present-tense "is." If the sentence were changed to, > 2.) "Oscar believed that the sum of two and two **was** four," then the meaning of the sentence would be changed. When the verb **is** was used, the sentence meant that Oscar had a belief about the present (relative to him). But when the verb **was** was used, the sentence meant that Oscar had a belief about the past (relative to him). Consider this sentence that is structurally parallel: > 3.) Oscar **believed** that the killer of J.F.K. **was** Lee Harvey Oswald. In this case it seems to make the most sense to not mix verb tenses. Presumably this is because Lee Harvey Oswald's assassination of J.F.K. is an event solely in the past. I find myself needing to write sentences of this form often, and it always puzzles me whether this mixing of verb tenses is acceptable.


title: Offer / Quotation / Proposal?

text: I'm looking for a word to describe a piece of paper I hand to my customer - to offer (well, ...) something for a specified amount of money. Let's say I send my customer a letter with the content "Hey, you can buy this magnificent car for just $400". What is the correct term for that? Offer? Quotation? Proposal? Proposition? **Edit:** The single piece of paper is for a single customer and it's done with a previous request from the customer. So the customer says "I need a red sportscar" and I reply with a note (whether it's letter, fax, e-mail, ...): "Okay, I got the following red sportscar for you which may suit your needs for the price of $$$". Or thinking of real estates, where you end up asking the broker "I'm looking for a shiny new apartment" and the broker replies with a real estate he has in mind selling to you for a specified price.


title: word choice - relative clause for person

text: I know how to say the following in other words but I would like to know how to make relative clause for it: > A boy, the search for whom took a month. or > A boy, for whom the search took a month. Additional question regarding word order: > I know him for what he is. Will the negative clause be like this? > I do not know him for what he is. And question: > Do you know him for what he is?


title: Does this past perfect tense mean ‘completion’ or ‘continuity’ of his doing?

text: > In years to come, Harry would never quite remember how he **had managed** to > get through his exams when he half expected Voldemort to come bursting > through the door at any moment. Yet the days crept by, and there could be no > doubt that Fluffy was still alive and well behind the locked door. > > It was sweltering hot, especially in the large classroom where they did > their written papers. They had been given special, new quills for the exams, > which had been bewitched with an Anti-Cheating spell. (Harry Potter) Does the past perfect tense mean ‘completion’ or ‘continuity’ of his doing? Consulting MacMillan dictionary, if I understand ‘get through’ as ‘deal with something difficult,’ it seems like having the meaning of ‘continuity,’ yet as ‘finish doing something,’ it seems like ‘completion.’


title: Why can we say “worth more than” but not “expensive more than”?

text: Why can we say: > It is worth more than. . . . but not: > It is expensive more than. . . . It’s the position of _more_ which I find so confusing. Also, is _worth_ an adjective in both these cases?


title: This page intentionally left blank

text: If you look at published books and journals that have blank pages, you'll find some with printed statements: > This page intentionally left blank. Why is there no flected verb ("is"): > This page **is** intentionally left blank. There is some information on wikipedia, but no description of why the verb is missing.


title: A word that describes a core feature involved?

text: I have made an application which is mostly programmed in PHP, but have also used some other languages. Now I want to describe that I have made a program that is "corely" programmed in PHP, but still remember that my application have mostly made on PHP. _Corely_ is not in dictionary. What should be a word for that?


title: How to identify licit sequences of doubled prepositions

text: Is a phrase like "go out from the kitchen", which has two prepositions in a row, appears to be good English, and might be paraphrased as "go out, and go from the kitchen." but I have doubts about something like "go out in the kitchen." Can "go out in the kitchen" be paraphrased as "go out and go into kitchen"? If this is so, could a meaning of "go out and go home" be shortened to "go out home"?


title: What is the opposite of loud in the context of alarm or phone ringtone etc.?

text: What word should I use to describe something that is not very loud? for example > I am sick of his loud alarm, it always wakes me up. Should I use _light alarm_ or ringtone or something else?


title: Using the verb entitle

text: Is it really proper to say, "The book is entitled _1984_ "? Entitle seems to be the act of giving one the right to do something or not.


title: Correct usage of replacing cuss words with symbols

text: I've noticed that symbols (i.e. #, $, %, !, *, etc.) are commonly used to filter profanity/foul language. Just out of curiosity, is there a specific way to do this. I've noticed sometimes there isn't a specific number of symbols but normally the number of symbols correspond to the number of letters in the cuss word. E.g.: > Wow dude, you are such an &#%-hole! * * * So, with that all in mind:   1. What symbols are acceptable for doing this?   2. Are there patterns or specific methods for this? (Specific patterns for certain words)   3. Other rules that may pertain to the situation.


title: Which verb do you use to refer to an email conversation?

text: When you are having a conversation with someone through emails, are you "speaking | talking | chatting | ... "?


title: Examples on the usage of "dialectical" and "tautology"

text: I've been coming across both words a lot and understand them in passing; but I was wondering if I may be given some sentence examples which explicitly illustrate their meanings? I feel that I lack the necessary contextual understanding to use the above words myself. Thanks very much.


title: What is the meaning and etymology of "ruthless?"

text: A "standard" definition is something like "cruel," or "remorseless." But what does this have to do with "ruth" (or lack thereof)? Is this a reference to a kind person named Ruth? Perhaps a clue may be found from the German _Rücksicht_ , which translates literally into "back sight," or "looking back." Could it then be that a "ruthless" person is actually one who plows ahead, without "looking back" at what the consequences may be? And how would this evolve into the "standard" definition?


title: Should the comma be in italics?

text: Consider the following two sentences: **Statement 1:** > The parameters were calculated _a priori,_ and the other variables were > calculated iteratively. **Statement 2:** > The parameters were calculated _a priori_ , and the other variables were > calculated iteratively. This may seem trivial, but the only difference between the two sentences is the way in which the `,` has been formatted. In the first statement the `,` is in _italics._ In the second, the `,` is not in _italics_. Does it depend on the writer whether or not to _italicize_ the punctuation marks adjoining the affected words? Or is there a definite rule governing this? The same question can be extended to other types of formatting, e.g. **bold.**


title: Is there a way to articulate "giving up" or "acknowledging defeat" in 1 word?

text: I tried Google and looking around already, but having trouble with the terminology to continue. Thanks in advance!


title: "A dream where I was walking" vs. "a dream when I was walking"

text: I often find it hard to choose between "where" and "when". For instance: >   * One time, I had a dream when I was walking... >   * One time, I had a dream where I was walking... > Should I use _when_ , since I initially mentioned a period in time ("one time")? If so, under what circumstances should I use _where_?


title: When were st, nd, rd, and th, first used

text: When were numeric contractions for ordinals first used, as in _1 st, 2nd, 3rd, 6th_ instead of _first, second, third, sixth_?


title: What does “Do Uncle Sam” mean?

text: I came across the phrase “ _He got a kick out of doing Uncle Sam_ ,” in the following sentence of Jeffery Archer’s novel, “Not a penny more, Not a penny less.” “It amused him (Harvey Metcalfe, a billionaire who climbed up from a NYSE messengerboy) to do a little business in Europe at the same time, giving him the opportunity to make some more money for his Swiss bank account in Zurich. He did not need a Swiss account, but somehow _he got a kick out of doing Uncle Sam_.” What does “ _Do Uncle Sam"_ mean? I don’t find the head of “Do Uncle Sam” in Google Search, or on Ngram. Does “ _got a kick out of doing Uncle Sam_ ” mean “excited in doing American dream business”?


title: What does "Nine Below Zero" mean?

text: There is a Blues Standard "Nine Below Zero" and I wonder what the phrase means. The chorus is > Nine Below Zero, she put me down for another And it would also be super interesting where this phrase comes from!


title: Why do more sentences start with 'data' as a plural, than when it is within the sentence?

text: I recently put together some Google n-grams for a short piece on the transition of the word **data** into a singular (mass) noun: Data are Beautiful: Data's story in grammar. There was one peculiar finding: > When starting a sentence, the trend reverses. "The data are" and "Data are" > are approximately twice as common as "The data is" and "Data is". (n-gram) The best suggestion for why, is that the writer is more careful at the beginning of the sentence (reddit comments). Are there any actual grammatical reasons? Or, do you have any other guesses as to why the trend reverses? If so, I'll add them to the story - and link back to here. _meta:_ * I'm **not** asking about the difference between _data is_ and _data are_ , so this question is not related to the earlier ones on ELU.


title: What punctuation should follow after a list introduced by a colon?

text: > The whole department: John, Jeff, Jean, and the accountant [?] were thrown > into jail.


What do you call a daughter with the same name as her mother? Is there a female equivalent for 'junior' in the english language?


title: Position of adverb "implicitly"

text: In the following sentence I'm not sure where to put _implicitly_ : > The language doesn't support Int and (implicitly) converts (implicitly) Int > to Double (implicitly). First I put it at the end, because I learned: > The man drove the car carefully. But somehow it sounds strange: _converts Int to Double implicitly_. Most natural to my ears is _implicitly_ at position two so I would place it there, although comparing "convert implicitly" to "implicitly convert" indicate to put it at the first place (Same for _converts_ (with s)). But most Google hits show its use with _cannot_ , _should_ , ..., so I'm unsure which one is correct in my example above. Which one is correct and why?


title: A one-word synonym of "to give meaning to"?

text: As the title suggests, I'm looking for a verb whose definition is "to give/assign meaning to", "to define a function of", "to invent a use/meaning for" or something close. This might be a little vague, but I hope I can at least get some guesses or stabs at it. On a similar note, are there web searches that allow for finding words given their meanings?


title: Syntax for marking incorrect examples of language

text: I have noticed various marks in example sentences to denote incorrect examples of English: > This is correct. > > *This incorrectly. The former is left alone; the latter has an asterisk marking the sentence as a bad example ‐ something to avoid and not repeat. Is this notation widely adopted? Are there other marks with similar purposes? I have also seen the following denoting a questionable case: > ? This would have been maybe debated. I _am_ interested in the proper usage and formatting of these marks. How should they be spaced? Should they be placed before or after the sentence? If a particular word is in question, should that _word_ get the mark or the entire sentence?


title: "My another account" vs. "my other account"

text: A little debate going on here so I just want to know which one it is; I'm saying it's _my other account_ since _my another_ would be _my one other account_. The other person insists they both can be used; however, I'm more than positive that it's only _other_ in that context. Plus, _my another account_ just sounds wrong to the ears. Which one is it?


title: Which tense to use with "whole last year"?

text: I would like to say that I worked whole year for my company on one specific project but I am not sure about the tense and word order. I still work for them and had worked before. My idea is: > The whole last year I worked / I was working... or > For the whole year 2010 I worked... Is it the correct tense?


title: Just how important are grammar and spelling?

text: A blog post of mine made it on the Hacker News front page. My blog post was mainly intended for a very, very small audience, but ended up getting around 20,000 views in one day. The most talked about topic in the comments was that I accidentally used: "it's self" instead of "itself" It was an honest mistake, and it didn't make the article unreadable. I got comments like "mistakes like this are inexcusable" and "Once I read 'it's self' I stopped reading" and the harshest "why should we read your post if you can't take the time to proof it?" (although, I never asked anyone to read it, someone posted it on there) My question is, just how important _IS_ grammar and spelling. For example: > "Altho im spelling this wrongly and im not using commas or apostrophes your > still able to read this fine and completely understand itall." And for words like "there", "they're" and "their", I know they have different meanings, but why does it matter if we have proof heteronyms work just fine?


title: If the article title ends in closing punctuation, do we still add a period in an APA reference?

text: I have a question about citing a reference in APA format. The following reference was created by one of the members of my school group for a paper we are working on (let's just dismiss indentation on SE); I do not yet know if it was created manually or generated: > The Standard Group. (2012, September 12). _Is Ghana the next African > economic tiger?._ Retrieved July 19, 2014, from > http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/?articleID=2000065384 The title of the article `"Is Ghana the next African economic tiger?"` ends in a question mark. As shown in the reference, there is a period appended, `"Is Ghana the next African economic tiger?."` Two questions:   * Does the period still get appended to the end?    * Is the period supposed to be italicized?


title: Is “I is free” grammatical

text: I heard the sentence “I is free” in the movie _Django Unchained_. But is that really a well-formed sentence grammatically? Could I use it myself in regular conversation?


title: "Censorship" as a countable noun

text: Is _censorships_ a legitimate word? Obviously it could be used to mean multiple censorships for something.


title: Is there a term to describe words whose pronunciation bears no relationship to their spelling?

text: The English language is peppered with wonderfully weird spelling/pronunciation combinations. For example   * _colonel_ , pronounced _kur-nl_ , probably my favorite there isn't even an _r_ in the word!   * _Gloucester_ , pronounced _glos-ter_   * _Worcestershire_ , pronounced _woos-ter-sheer_ And the list goes on, wikipedia has an extensive list of strangely pronounced names here. No one unfamiliar with these words would be able to guess how to pronounce them, their pronunciation is usually the product of their particular history. _Colonel_ , for example comes from the French _colonel_ and has kept its original spelling but not its pronunciation. So, is there a word to describe words whose pronunciation cannot be inferred from their spelling?


title: "Decide on" vs. "decide for"

text: What's the difference between "decide on something" and "decide for something"? For example, which preposition would you use in the following passage? > After more than a decade of disagreement, residents of Berlin finally > decided ___ _ a monument to celebrate German reunification.


title: Is there an adjective beginning with "dis" and connoting non-negative meaning?

text: Out of curiosity, I would like to know whether there is an adjective beginning with "dis" and connoting non-negative meaning?


title: Looking for a word similar to “optimize”, but for describing articles

text: Suppose I wrote an article, and I want other gurus to make it better, first thought was _optimize my article_ , but after looking up that word, it means _do something most efficiently_ , so it’s far from my meaning. What word should I use in replace of _optimize_? > “ ** ___ __** my article”


title: "I'll do my best" is not good enough?

text: I read somewhere that the expression "I'll do my best" doesn't sound very positive. Is this true? If so, how do you say to assure the listner of your enthusiasm and determination to perform to the maximum extent of your ability.


title: cleft sentence + to be verb

text: **It's in London that he met his wife** \- I've got this sentence in my grammar book under cleft sentences. It's just one of many. I was wondering if it's possible to use to be verb (I've got no single example). **It's from London that I am.** Would that be correct? I know it's not how people usually say something like that but I'm asking about cleft sentences and the way they work


title: Is "wrongly" even a word?

text: I came across a news article using the word _wrongly_. I was told that _wrongly_ isn't a real word. But I saw this in a leading newspaper and wanted a clarification. Also, what is the difference between _practise_ and _practice_?


title: Quoting: original vs different source?

text: On my bag, I have a quote: _Be not inhospitable to strangers lest they be angels in disguise._ I thought the quote was from Shakespeare on my bag. However, it is also a quote from the bible. If I repeat the quote, am I quoting the bible or my bag?


title: Which one is correct? "has been taken already" or "has already been taken"

text: I'm creating a registration form. I want to display a message if a particular username already exists. So which sentence is correct? > This username has already been taken by another user. Please pick another > username. or > This username has been taken already by another user. Please pick another > username.


title: What is the exact meaning of the phrase "Cataract of rippling notes"?

text: I am reading the book "The story of my life" by Helen Keller. Many of the words, idioms and phrases are unfamiliar to me. I have come across the phrase "Cataract of rippling notes". What does it mean? The meaning for each word is below > Cataract = a large waterfall   >  Rippling = a small wave or series of waves on the surface of water, esp. as > caused by an object dropping into it or a slight breeze I didn't found suitable meaning for note here. The most suitable for note here is below > Note = a particular quality or tone that reflects or expresses a mood or > attitude But when combining all of them I am getting the exact meaning. Then sentence is > What a joy it is to feel the soft, springy earth under my feet once more, to > follow grassy roads that lead to ferny brooks where I can bathe my fingers > in a **cataract of rippling notes** or to clamber over a stone wall into > green fields that tumble and roll and climb in riotous gladness Does it mean "A waterfall which is producing a kind of waves" or some thing like that?


title: Correct capitalization for domain specific phrase?

text: I am currently developing a webpage for the local underwater basket-weaving club, and they have a yearly course called "Learn to Weave". Encountering this phrase in multiple pages and e-mails, I am unsure if it should be capitalized, or how. Which one of the following would be the most correct phrase, and why?   * Learn to weave   * Learn to Weave   * Learn To Weave


title: Which word is the closest in meaning to "insouciance" in the given context?

text: > **Insouciance** : His insouciance, which was kept in check by the law of > custom, had its root, like most other evils, in selfishness > > (a) apathy (b) lassitude (c) deceit (d) indecision To me it _apathy_ seems to be correct, but my instructor is of the opinion that _lassitude_ is the correct one. Please explain. **Please Note:** This sentence is taken from The Fijians: A Study of the Decay of Custom, chapter XIV, Page number -228, however we don't have access to this source at the time of solving.


title: What tense uses a modal with "be" and a past tense verb

text: I am trying to determine the tense of a certain verb group. This group uses a modal/auxiliary with "be" and the past tense of the action verb. Examples: >   * He may be finished. >   * She must be loved. >   * It can be done. > These can be modified by adding an adverbial preposition. I can't find help on any tutorial websites, so far. P.S.: I'm trying to determine if this is something like "present perfect" or "past continuous", etc.


title: Is it redundant to say "a spelling bee contest"?

text: A "spelling bee" is an expression usually used to describe the spelling contest, but not necessarily. With that in mind, is it be considered redundant to call it a "spelling bee contest" or a "spelling bee competition"?


title: How to convert passive voice to active voice?

text: I am using a proofreading plugin for Wordpress and it says that I should not use passive voice (the selected parts) in the following phrase. How can I rephrase this to use active voice? > The invalid profile **is discarded** and a new fresh profile **is created**.


title: "the very best" vs. "by far the best" vs. "much the best"

text: What does the following sentence exactly mean? > He is **the very best** student in our class. Is it any different in meaning from the following? > He is **by far the best** student in our class. > > He is **much the best** student in our class.


title: Isn't this a dangling something?

text: > As one of the busiest times of year, people will share moments, plan for the > festivities and search for the perfect gift, every single day — on Facebook. > And this year, it will truly be a mobile holiday season. I came across this little piece of text on facebook business. English is not my native language, so I have a little trouble putting a handle on what it is that bugs me so much about this sentence. The beginning of the sentence does not seem to connect at all with the subject.... right?


title: "Life is where my heart is" - Has "where" been used at the right place here?

text: Here is the sentence - "Life is where my heart is." Has "where" been used at the right place?


title: "Has proven" or "Has proven to be"?

text: Is there a difference between "The medicine has proven effective" and " The medicine has proven to be effective"? Both seem to make sense, but I usually see "has proven to be" followed by a noun ("The man has proven to be a jerk"). Can you use a noun and an adjective with "has proven to be"?


title: Why might the author have used "to be" instead of "is" in this sentence?

text: > ...thinking **it to be** in the green box when **it is** really in the > yellow box. The _to be_ does seem to suggest that the green box does not actually contain it. Is _to be_ , as used in the quotation, a subjunctive construction? If it is, then is that construction the most appropriate subjunctive construction; why or why not? Thank you.


title: "It's taking me forever" vs "It has been taking me forever"

text: If you are writing a long report, which one sounds more natural: "Oh, this report is so long, it's taking me forever" or "Oh, this report is so long, it has been taking me forever"?


title: "More than (what) meets the eye"

text: Is it correct to say _more than what meets the eye_? _More than meets the eye_ sounds incorrect, but I've seen a lot of people use it and that confuses me. _What_ acts like an object to the phrase which otherwise seems incomplete.


title: A few more "hundred" vs "hundreds"

text: If we're talking about 8 hundred (an exact number of hundreds) we use the singular for the ordinal. But what if we use an unspecified quantity such as "more". Or, I just said it: "number of hundreds". So I reckon it's "more hundreds", "more thousands". Is this correct? Exact context: > If you have a larger budget, feel free to go for a few more hundreds of MHz > more for your CPU.


title: Good term for a business partner and competitor?

text: In our line of work we often work with other companies as partners on some jobs, and then compete against them on other jobs. So they are partners and competitors. Is there a good term for this, along the lines of "frenemies"?


title: 'Master of the universe' or 'Nucleus of the universe'

text: Can I say: > No one likes man thinks he is a nucleus of universe. I've just seen on some website the use of "master of the universe" I'd better use this word? And please correct my grammar.


title: When the plural ends in "-ies", how do I know whether the singular ends in "-y" or "-ie"?

text: my question is how am I supposed to recognize a singular form of a noun which plural form ends with "ies"? As you can see "cookies" are a "cookie" when singular, but at the same time "flies" stand for a "fly". It seems there's no rule for this, so I am rather asking for a list of exceptions if you will. Thank you.


title: Raper vs. Rapist; Why the shift in suffix?

text: I’ve always been vaguely aware of _raper_ as an alternative to _rapist_ , as a vaguely wrong sounding, possibly archaic formulation. Nowadays, it’s most often heard from speakers of English as a second language, for whom the construction is slightly irregular compared to other similar verbs. But I’m also aware that I've seen the _-er_ version of the word in older texts. Well, today I happened to be curious while sitting at a computer and fed it into an ngram, and... ![Raper V. Rapist ngram](http://i.stack.imgur.com/uvuCn.png) That is not the sort of graph I expected to see; the use of _-ist_ appears seemingly out of nowhere after over a century of dormancy in the mid 20th century, and by the mid 1960s has skyrocketed in usage. Now I would expect an increase **in general** at this time due to the rise of feminism and increased attention to sexual violence, but I'm curious as to the specific choice of the _-ist_ form over the _-er_ variant; **particularly** in light of the sharp increase in the latters usage during World War II in 1940, presumably connected to growing reports in the west of the Japanese atrocities at Nanking. Is there any documentation or research explaining how the _-ist_ formulation came to be dominant in current usage? What could be the reason for that sudden shift?


title: "Well-being" versus "happiness"

text: What's the difference in meaning? When should I use each one?


title: Question about understandability and correctness of given sentence

text: Please let me know if this sentence is understandable and correct: > Honorable of the change of colors in the sky.


title: What is the meaning of where is it gone/going?

text: I was sitting next to a guy. He dropped something on the ground by accident. Then he said to himslef "where is it gone/going?" or at least that was what I heard. Does this sentence ,if I got it correctly, mean where is my thing? Thanks in advance for any answer.


title: Exercises for pronouncing the r

text: I'm a dutch programmer working in a international team where English is the main language. In my native language I have pretty decent articulation. However, when speaking English I have a lot of trouble using words containing a 'r'. Most of the time I create a 'w' sound instead of pronouncing the 'r'. So words like rabbit will sound like 'wabbit', which makes me feel like I am narrating Tweety in his latest cartoon. Are the any exercises I can do for better pronouncement of words with a 'r'. Thanks for your help.