title: Is there a rule for the correct pronunciation of words starting with "ex"?

text: The following words are pronounced starting with an **`iks`** / **`igz`** :   * extent [ɪkˈstent]   * expect [ɪk'spekt]   * exterminate [ɪk'stɜːmɪneɪt]   * external [ɪkˈstɜːn(ə)l]   * exhaust [ɪg'zɔːst]   * examine [ɪg'zæmɪn]   * exact [ɪɡˈzækt] The following words are pronounced starting with an **`eks`** :   * extant [ek'stænt]   * extra ['ekstrə]   * execute ['eksɪkjuːt]   * exhale [eks'heɪl]   * excellent [ˈeksələnt]   * excavate [ˈekskəveɪt] So, I have this question on my mind for a while: Is there a rule of thumb to determine whether the words starting with an _ex_ must be pronounced with **`iks`** or **`eks`**?


title: Was vs had been

text: I guess this question has been asked before, but please take a look the following sentence and tell me if there is a difference between them.   1. When the transaction had been completed, A was still a partner of ABC & co.   2. When the transaction was completed, A was still a partner of ABC & co.


title: What measures the Byte unit?

text: Well,   * _meters_ measures _distances_ or _lengthes_ ,   * _volt_ measures _tension_ or voltage, ,   * _kelvin_ measures _temperature_ ,   * _second_ measures _time_ ,   * _ampere_ measures _electric current_ ,   * _kilogram_ measures _mass_ , But what measures the "Byte" unit ? I'm looking for a word that would take the same place than _mass_ takes for _kilogram_ , but for _Byte_ (or _bit_ , as 8 _bit_ makes a _Byte_.). There's only very unspecific terms that springs to my mind ( _size_ , _capacity_ , ...):   * My file is 3.2 KB in `<fill the blank>` ?   * My hard drive has a `<fill the blank>` of 2TB.   * Byte measures `<fill the blank>`. Could it be _information_ ? But the word alone doesn't seem to refer to something that can be measured. And you don't use it as naturally. For example, in a technical specification you could see:   * mass: 3kg   * temperature: 2°   * voltage: 3V   * `<fill the blank>`: 3TB But what would you use here in front of "3TB" for instance ? It seems we must use 2 words, for example: "information size". But even this doesn't seem so natural. Have you any word suggestions that I've might missed, references on this topic, if not, do you know other units that don't have a proper word to name what they measures ? **Edit:** I'm a software developer and I know relatively well what a Byte measures. I'm looking for a specific English word that could be used as naturally as you would use the word "mass" to qualify what you measure when you say "3 kilograms".


title: "Him/Her" vs "Himself/Herself"

text: As a unit admin I’m often typing award certificates. The last line of the award citation usually goes something like this: > Private Joan Smith actions reflect great credit upon **herself** , the 120th > Jumping Jacks Company, the 13th fighter Battalion and the United States > Army. It was recently pointed out to me that the below is correct: > Private Joan Smith actions reflect great credit upon **her** , the 120th > Jumping Jacks Company, the 13th fighter Battalion and the United States > Army. The first way is what I’m used to seeing and it looks right to me, but has always sounded awkward when reciting it. When I say the other way out loud it sounds better, but both seem to work. Which is correct?


What adjective is between "intermediate" and "advanced"? Specifically, my academic program already has an intermediate programming course, and a proposed course does not seem to meet the standards for what I would consider advanced, so I would like to propose another term that can be used for it.


title: Possessive of a word that is already possessive

text: If the cricket ground Lord's is a possessive, what if you want to describe something belonging to Lord's? Would you say "I was very impressed by Lord's's customer services"? It doesn't look right, so what is the correct way of writing it?


title: Apostrophe usage on proper nouns already having one

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Possessive of a word that's already possessive? There is a famous pizza restaurant named "Domino's". In our city their rivals accept vouchers issued by Domino's. The sign reads "We accept all Domino's vouchers". Given that the name already has an apostrophe is this correct? Why not "We accept all Domino's' vouchers"? Okay, I accept that perhaps that looks very strange but my point is that the registered name already has an apostrophe, does that now do the two jobs of being part of the name and indicating possession?


title: Confusion regarding apostrophe

text: To talk about something or someone, we usually give an apostrophe, like John's pen. If the word ends with s, we say Adams' pen . But what if we are talking of something that ends with an apostrophe s like Jack's (what we sometimes say in short for Jack's home, or Jack's kitchen etc.). How do I use an apostrophe for words like these? (For eg. If I want to say "Jack's house is closed" but I want to write _Jack's_ instead of _Jack's house_ , How do I manage the apostrophe?)


title: Possessive of Queen's?

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Possessive of a word that's already possessive? I ran into this issue today. Referring to Queen's University, how would you say "I've been accepted to Queen's MA program?" Would you move the apostrophe over to make it Queens'?


title: What is the best use of the apostrophe in a church name when the church also "possesses" something?

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Possessive of a word that’s already possessive? For example, would it be correct to write St. Marys' basketball team for the basketball team belonging to St. Mary's church?


title: St. John's greatest dinner: how to indicate a possessive of a noun which already ends apostrophe - s

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  If the cricket ground Lord's is a possessive, what if you want to describe > something belonging to Lord's? Here's a tricky one that I can't quite figure out the correct punctuation for. How do you write the possessive of a noun which is already possessive? The example which spawned this question: How would you describe something belonging to St. John's, where St. John's is any of the colleges, towns or hospitals which bear this name, including the apostrophe, and not the saint? _edit_ @waiwai933: This is what I've always done, I just wondered if there was any clever punctuation you could use to avoid this kind of rephrasing. I'm guessing from your immediate reply that the answer is probably no, but I'll see if anyone else comes up with something interesting.


title: Proper Apostrophe Use: Possessive Apostrophe In Brand/Corporate Names

text: Wondered the same thing as this person: but could not find here on EL&U What is the proper way to indicate possession when the proper noun itself already has a possession-indicating apostrophe? (such as "McDonald's") http://levynewsnetwork.wordpress.com/2011/05/20/proper-apostrophe-use- possessive-apostrophe-in-brandcorporate-names/


title: Is “ O’Leary’s’s ” orthographically correct?

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Possessive of a word that's already possessive? There’s a bar near me named O’Leary’s Irish Pub—or just O’Leary’s for short. One day, they changed their menu. I wrote to a friend: > “O’Leary’s has changed their menu. **O’Leary’s’s** menu no longer has beer- > battered onion rings.” Is this usage correct? I _always_ use “ ’s ” to denote singular possessive—Charles’s office, Russ’s phone, Lars’s car, Baggins’s sword—so O’Leary’s’s seems completely natural to me. But several of my friends say it is wrong. Why? The way I see it, it’s like this: Finnegan **O’Leary** works hard at **O’Leary’s** Irish Pub. The **O’Learys** are a friendly family. The **O’Learys’** house is on Beacon Street. **O’Leary’s’s** menu is new. Many **O’Leary’s’** doors have closed (meaning: the doors of many places named O’Leary’s over the years have closed). * * * p.s.—What about “ _My Night at Maud’s_’s plot”?


title: Is a "misspelled" word which subsequently creates another word still considered misspelled?

text: According to Dictionary.com: > **mis·spell·ing** [mis-spel-ing]   >  _noun_ > >   1. the act of spelling incorrectly: Note his misspelling of that word. >   2. an incorrectly spelled word: You have three misspellings in your > letter. > Some people have told me that as long as the letters actually create a word, it's spelled correctly. This doesn't make sense to me, though. The example I'm using occurred in a recent Stack Exchange blog. They had accidentally typed in "word" instead of "world." I pointed out that "world" was misspelled (missing an "l") and another person said that it was technically not misspelled. So when do we consider a word misspelled?   Only when our computer puts a red zig-zag line below it? Isn't the word "word" still considered misspelled since it was _meant_ to be "world" and it is not spelled correctly, and just happens to become a different word when this particular misspelling occurs? Is there perhaps a better definition of the word "misspelling" out there somewhere that can more accurately represent what exactly the word means? **Note:** This isn't meant to be subjective. I'm hoping for _factual_ information that supports it one way or the other.


title: Did people ever use the word "cock" as a euphemism for "God"?

text: English has a lot of surprises. When I was checking the etymology of " **cocksure** ", I found this entry in Oxford Dictionaries: ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/DAJ4B.png) > **1** _British_ A male bird, especially of a domestic fowl. * * * Below is another definition from "An Etymological Dictionary of Modern English" _By Ernest Weekley_ (originally published in 1921): ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/HrckS.png) * * * Moreover: > **By cock and pie:** an adjuration equivalent to "by God and the service > book." * * * **Questions:**   * How in the world is/was cock a euphemism for God? And how is it related with God?   * Are there any references to this in the current vernacular?   * Are there any connotations to vulgarism also?


title: Is a possessive noun a contraction?

text: I was told not to use contractions in an essay. My classmate wrote "the argument of Emily" but I preferred "Emily's argument". He disagreed and claimed "Emily's" is a contraction.


title: How to politely request to be called by first name instead of Mr. Surname?

text: Let's say that somebody from a partner firm with whom I've never spoken before starts an email to me with "Dear Mr. Rossi,". When a reply to her, I think I will then have to start with "Dear Ms. Her- Surname," to not sound disrepectful. But I would like to make this email conversation less formal next time. Is there any better alternative to the sentence below? > Dear Ms. Her-Surname, > > First of all, feel free to call me Ivo. Regarding your...


title: How to deal with abbreviations like 'etc.' at the end of parentheses which are closing a sentence?

text: In Hungarian, when there's a dot both inside and outside parentheses at the end of a sentence, we write it as follows: > Sok állatom van (kutya, macska stb.). ( **Meaning:** _I've got many animals [dogs, cats, etc.]_ ) I'm not sure though how do we write it in English.   1. _I've got many animals (dogs, cats, etc.)._   2. _I've got many animals. (dogs, cats, etc.)_   3. _I've got many animals (dogs, cats, etc.)_   4. _I've got many animals (dogs, cats, etc)._


title: A couple of quick questions related to "Messrs"

text: How is "Messrs" pronounced? The meaning is the plural of "Mister", right? Does that mean that "Misters" is not a word? Is "Messrs" a word that is more commonly used in England than the United States?


title: Correct usage of FAQ

text: FAQ stands for 'Frequently asked questions', with the plural being implicit in the acronym FAQ. But it is common to see the word 'FAQs' being used, which treat the word FAQ as an object in itself, and an s being added to its end in order to pluralize it. Which one is the correct usage for FAQ ?


title: How to pronounce "Zoubin Ghahramani"?

text: Zoubin Ghahramani is a computer scientist and statistician. I tried Google translate but it sound a little weird. Does anyone know the pronunciation of his name? Is it from another language other than English? Or as Google translate suggests, is it a Turkish name? Thank you.


title: Does "reinventing the wheel" have negative or positive connotation?

text: I've always assumed that the expression "reinventing the wheel" meant something negative. For me it means doing something that has already be done without making any improvement. However, a few times I've seen the expression use in a positive way too. For example, in this article, it's written: > Eminem's progressive rap style has raised the bar for Hip-Hop lyricism > across the board. [...] he's continued to reinvent the wheel, putting his > life on display, through a bevy of syllable-heavy, metaphor-driven cuts. So it's clearly meant as a praise. Is this usage correct?


title: How to call natural listeners for other people's desire to talk

text: ... or in other words, what is the complement of "talkative"? Like in > She has a couple of good friends that trust in her, who share their private > issues with her and who phone her whenever they have something to talk > about. She is ...


title: Is there a secular, non vulgar alternative to "for heaven's sake"?

text: I know _for heaven's sake_ , _for Pete's sake_ , for _God's sake_ and for _Christ's sake_. All of those, however are religious references. The only non- religious equivalent phrases I know are _for fuck's sake_ and its variations. Are there any non-vulgar, non-religious alternatives? I am very used to the general construct of _for X's sake_ and am looking for something along the same lines that I could use in cases like > C'mon, it's just a scratch for X's sake! > > That's not even true for X's sake! It does not need to also be applicable as a general exclamation of frustration ( _Oh, for chrissake!_ ) but that would be nice. Basically, I'm looking for a synonym for the "Oh come _on_!" sense of _for fuck's sake_ rather than the _Oh shit!_ one. * * * EDIT: Since this has gotten quite a bit of attention, I would like to urge those who answer to read the entire question, not just the title. I am not just looking for polite swearwords but for something that can be used in the example phrases above.


title: Word for child talk

text: What is a word for talk or conversation done by a child? The aspects I wish to portray is the way in which they speak continuously, in an animated and enthusiastic way, and often nonsensically. Preferably the word should convey this in a positive light.


title: Synonyms for multiplexing and demultiplexing

text: I have developed a software mechanism which operates on a certain kind of software entities which are called _interfaces_. If you want technical details about the mechanism you can read this post on StackOverflow, but it should not be necessary in order to understand the question and give an answer. The mechanism consists of two parts: one performs an operation upon interfaces which could be called _multiplexing_ , and the other performs an operation which could be called _demultiplexing_. Now, these terms are already used for various other things in the general domain of computers and electronics, so if I were to use them I would have to always be speaking of _interface multiplexing_ and _interface demultiplexing_ , otherwise I would be confusing people. The problem is that these terms are now way too long and cumbersome. I need to come up with simpler terms, preferably unique, so that when people hear them either they realize immediately what I am talking about, or they realize that I am referring to something previously unknown to them, about which they might wish to ask for explanations. So, I need to give you non-technical descriptions of what these things do, and ask you to help me find better terms. Of course, there is no way to do this but with similes. There are a few similes that I can give, and terms that satisfy any single one of them would be fine. (I do not expect to find a single term that would satisfy more than one simile.) **Simile #1: wires through a tube** The job of the multiplexer is akin to taking a bunch of wires and making them fit into a tube, so that we have a single inconspicuous tube crossing the room instead of a bunch of separate wires dangling around. The job of the demultiplexer is akin to taking the wires out of the other end of the tube and separating them from each other so that we have the wires that we started with. Note that in actual cabling this process usually involves twisting the wires, but for my purposes conveying such a notion is entirely optional, perhaps even slightly undesirable. **Simile #2: generalization-specialization** The job of the multiplexer is akin to taking objects, each one of which is unique in shape, color and function, stripping them of their properties, and making them completely homogeneous and barren of any characteristic features. The job of the demultiplexer is akin to taking these homogenized objects and restoring their properties and their characteristic features back to what they originally used to be. **Simile #3: assembly-disassembly** The job of the multiplexer is akin to taking things and putting them together into conglomerations thereof; the job of the demultiplexer is akin to taking these conglomerations and breaking them down into their constituent parts. **Simile #4: translation** The job of the multiplexer is akin to translating the language that someone speaks to some cipher suitable for transmission, and the job of the demultiplexer is akin to translating from the cipher back to the original language so that someone else can understand it. (But note that cipher/decipher are not applicable because they already mean other things.) Please consider the fact that I need six terms:   1. a synonym for the act of multiplexing.   2. a synonym for the performer of the act. (The multiplexer.)   3. a synonym for the verb of the act. (To multiplex.)   4. a synonym for the act of demultiplexing.   5. a synonym for the performer of the act. (The demultiplexer.)   6. a synonym for the verb of the act. (To demultiplex.) (I am mentioning this because someone suggested "fusion" and "fission", which would have been fine if all I needed was names for the acts, but then I tried to think of the corresponding names for the performers and for the verbs for "fusion" and "fission" and I realized that there is a slight problem.) It goes without saying that the terms need to be as symmetric as possible, preferably even with the same number of letters for each part. To help to get things started, here are some sets of terms that I have been able to come up with so far. I do not know which, if any, I should choose. You can pick one of these sets, or suggest your own set.                               name of action   name of performer  verb     multiplexing:   generalizing     generalizer        generalize     demultiplexing: specializing     specializer        specialize                          name of action   name of performer  verb     multiplexing:   normalizing      normalizer         normalize      demultiplexing: denormalizing    denormalizer       denormalize                          name of action   name of performer  verb     multiplexing:   entwining        entwiner           entwine     demultiplexing: untwining        untwiner           untwine                          name of action   name of performer  verb     multiplexing:   enmeshing        enmesher           enmesh     demultiplexing: unmeshing        unmesher           unmesh                          name of action   name of performer  verb     multiplexing:   enplexing        enplexer           enplex     demultiplexing: deplexing        deplexer           deplex                          name of action   name of performer  verb     multiplexing:   coalescence      coalescer          coalesce     demultiplexing: separation       separator          separate                          name of action   name of performer  verb     multiplexing:   twisting         twister            twist     demultiplexing: raveling         raveler            ravel                          name of action   name of performer  verb     multiplexing:   folding          folder             fold     demultiplexing: unfolding        unfolder           unfold                          name of action   name of performer  verb     multiplexing:   braiding         braider            braid      demultiplexing: unbraiding       unbraider          unbraid                          name of action   name of performer  verb     multiplexing:   enlacing         enlacer            enlace     demultiplexing: unlacing         unlacer            unlace      The answer that I will accept is the one that I will end up using.


title: Would the adjectival form of "on the premises" be on-premise, on premise, or on-premises?

text: I am familiar with the origin of the word premises as it relates to property, both land and structure (relayed here: Is "premises" always plural?). I want to know if there is an accpetable adjectival form. So which of the following is most correct and which are acceptable?   1. Virtual events are less effective than on-premise.   2. Virtual events are less effective than on premise.   3. Virtual events are less effective than on-premises. (I know that reforming the sentence so that it doesn't use an adjective would likely be best, but what is the runner up?)


title: "Money quote": Phrase Origin, metaphors involved?

text: My partner Kate asked me a question today that I could guess about, but not answer. It's a Phrase Origin search, which I'm pretty bad at (because I don't really care when a phrase originated; I'm much more interested in the metaphors it's involved with). So I decided to post it here for her. She frequently encounters the phrase **_money quote_** on her favorite blog, and was unfamiliar with it. She'd like to know where and when it came from, and I'd be interested in any origin stories. I **am** familiar with it, as it happens, and I'm pretty sure I've seen it for years if not decades, but it's probably been on the usage upswing for a while because of the penchant for labelling money quotes as such in blogs. So, does anybody know?


title: What does “typed-out paralysis” mean exactly?

text: I found the article titled “A writing coach becomes a listener” in April 28 New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/29/books/william-zinsser- author-of-on-writing-well-at-his-work.html?pagewanted=allvery) interesting as well as very instructive. The article introduces the profile, career and the latest activity of Mr. William Zinsser, a great teacher of writing and the author of “On Writing Well,” first published in 1976. I was also interested in the word, “stage of typed-out paralysis” in the following sentence in this article: > “People come to him in **stages of typed-out paralysis** , stalled, > uncertain whether they have written too much or too little. He tries to help > them organize their thoughts by condensing, reducing — learning what not to > include.” I imagine “the stage of typed-out paralysis” to be the stage of your typing- out fingers being frozen and your writing work stalled. I’m confortable with ‘typed-out fingers / hands,' or 'typed-out messages/ essays,' but I was hung up on the expression, ‘typed-up paralysis.’ Whether it's phisical or mental, can ‘paralysis' be 'typed-out' by hands phisically as the logic? McMillan English Dictionary defines “type out” as: to write the whole of something using a keyboard. Oxford English Dictionary defines ‘type’ as: write (something) on a typewriter or computer by pressing the keys, with an example ‘He typed out the second draft.’ Cambridge English Dictionary defines “type out” as: to use a computer or a typewriter, to make a copy of something in writing. None of these definitions seems to give me a hint to make out what is exactly meant by “typed-out paralysis,” and again the question, can ‘paralysis’ be typed-out?


title: Anyway v.s. Anyways

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Can "Anyways" be used at the beginning of a sentence?   >  How did 'anyway' become 'anyways,' anyway? Is **Anyways** correct or **Anyway** correct? From chat of EL&U: _Anyways_ is slangy, is dialect used by Americans mostly.. But Anyways is informal AND incorrect both. For example: Sorry for missing our trip. ANYWAY/ANYWAYS, let's make another one some time next month. So, which one is correct? **Anyways** or **Anyway.** **Updated:** Possible Duplicate question.


title: How did 'anyway' become 'anyways,' anyway?

text: All of the time I see people use these two words synonymously. For example: > Why did he move there anyway? Versus: > Why did he move there anyways? I always assumed that there was once just the word _anyway_ that one day had an _S_ added to the end for some reason. Is this assumption correct? What morphological process enables this to happen?


title: Is the phrase ''a little bit'' superfluous?

text: What's the point of saying both words if one of them already implies a small amount of something? Doesn't it seem a bit redundant?


title: Starting a sentence with two subordinating conjunctions

text: Is it grammatical to start a sentence with two subordinating conjunctions? For example: > Because if it rains tomorrow, I will get wet, I hoped for a sunny day. It seems wrong to start a sentence with "Because if..." and the last two clauses feel like a comma splice, but I can't figure out what's actually incorrect about it.


title: Degree Certificate and Diploma

text: I am hoping to apply to a master's program in the USA. They ask for a "Diploma/Degree Certificate", but I don't really know what that means. When I looked for the definition I found only "Degree", as the level and/or paper you get after finishing your studies. "Diploma" is vague, too. When we finish a Bachelor's in my country (Mexico) you get various papers:   1. A paper that testifies that you finished all the courses, but you are not still a "Bachelor". It's called a "Study Certificate" ( _Certificado de Estudios_ ).    2. A symbolic paper that means you finished all the semesters, even if you failed some courses as long as they are not enough to fail the whole semester. This is called "Diploma" (just like in English).   3. When you present a thesis (and you get it approved) you get a "University Title" ( _Título Universitario_ ) and _then_ you can say you have a Bachelor's Degree. Some people have such a high GPA that they give them this paper without presenting a thesis. So, as I couldn't find a specific and detailed definition of "Diploma/Degree Certificate", I am asking for your help please. If this is off-topic, I apologize, please delete.


title: This lack of reliability, can be ..?

text: How to say the factors are responsible for the lack of credibility? > This lack of reliability can be **imputed** to several factors. "imputed" is probably wrong. What word should I use, in an academic environment?


title: What is a finite verb?

text: What's a _finite verb_? It's not just the opposite of an infinitive, is it? Can I get some examples?


title: Should I use present or past tense in indirect speech?

text: Suppose a person has told me this: > I will go home. I want to report what he told me to someone else, but I don’t know whether the condition is still true — that is, whether he has gone home. Now which version should I use? >   1. He told me that he **will** go home. > >   2. He told me that he **would** go home. > > If the person doing the reporting doesn’t know whether the reported event has happened, which tense should be used here?


title: Naming 1, 2, 3, ... millennial celebrations

text: I know that after 100 years there are centennial celebrations, after 200 years bicentennial, tricentennial, etc., Similarly, are there terms for 2000, 3000, etc., years of celebration?


title: Where do you place 'please' in a sentence to sound the most polite?

text: An interesting thing just came up at my work place which I did not really know. We got this text that says something like "Insert a flash drive, please." in the English version. Here I was wondering, isn't it more correct/polite to say "Please insert a flash drive."? So my 2 questions are: Are both of these valid? Which one would be more polite in terms of displaying them to a customer?


title: Is there a word to describe a state of not identifying with any common explanation of God?

text: I am trying to describe one who is neither agnostic nor atheist but does not accept any religious order as his own.


title: the future-existence of a currently "nonexisted" object

text: I'm trying to convey the idea of the existence of a determined future object that does not yet exist. In other words, > the **future existence** of a currently non-existing object. I don't think simply using the word existence for it is right since for now the object does not exist. It is only coming into existence in the future. So is there a more technical term to express the **future existence** (or "coming-existence") of a currently non-existing object?


title: Is the word "will" some conjugation of the verb "to be"?

text: I have the impression that the phrase "will be" is using the verb "to be" twice. Is that correct?


title: Right usage of "is due to get"

text: Could anybody tell me is this sentence OK to use in a scientific paper? Do you have any other recommendation? ...and we came to the conclusion that trying to keep a balance between method-1 and method-2 is due to get an appropriate result.


title: Example of Irony

text: Recently I had a test in college that asks us to give an example of irony. I wrote this word by word: > An astronaut had over 200 missions into space over two decades. Ironically, > two days after he returned from his latest mission, he tripped on a banana > peel and died. But I did not get any marks for it (it weighs 3 marks). Is it not an example of irony?


title: The difference between an analogy and a metaphor?

text: Many a time I've asked what the difference is between an analogy and a metaphor. I've asked it to my teacher, on internet sites, to my parents, so on and so forth. I got a different answer every time, and I never fully grasped what the difference is, so what is the difference?


title: Why do people keep mispronouncing my name, Divine?

text: My name is `Divine`\--like the English word, "divine". There are no tildes, no accent marks, no umlauts, or funky letters like _æ_...nothing shady going on here. Yet every time someone reads my name, i always hear: > "Now, excuse me if i mispronounce this...is it {'Divon', 'Devin', 'Div-in', > 'Div-EE-nae' (yes, this one actually happened), etc.}...?" I know my name isn't the most common name in the world, but it's an **English** word! I can understand if you have a "regular-looking" name that has an abnormal pronunciation. I imagine the protocol there would be that you sound it out as best as you can first, _then_ go for the funny pronunciations. But why do people reverse that order with my name? To make matters worse, after learning how my name is pronounced, and its place in the dictionary, a large percentage of those people go on to _misspell_ my name as `D` **e**`vine`! Is there something about dialects, or the history of this word, or something, that makes people's brains start working when they read my name?


title: Abstract noun as a proper name?

text: This might be silly to ask, and possibly more theoretical than anything else, but it's something I've always pondered. My first name is Hope. When I was in Elementary School and first learned about abstract nouns, I fell in love with the idea of having such a name - it feels almost magical to me. However sometimes I wonder, does my abstract name technically become a proper noun because it's my name? Or am I still allowed to keep some of that magic and call it an abstract noun? Thank you!


title: Origin of 'coax'

text: According to the Online Etymological Dictionary the origin of the word is: > 1580s, originally in slang phrase to make a coax of, from earlier noun coax, > cox, cokes "a fool, ninny, simpleton" (1560s); modern spelling is 1706. > Origin obscure, perhaps related to cock. But how did a noun meaning "fool" end up as a verb meaning "to influence?"   Is it just because someone who is influenced easily is a fool?


title: Underlying vs. Overarching

text: In a physical sense, "underlying" and "overarching" have very different definitions, but if we use these words in a more abstract way, their meanings seem to intersect. For example, is there a difference between the phrases: "the underlying theme in this narrative" and "the overarching theme in this narrative"? I think there is some nuanced difference here, but I can't quite identify it.


title: Is British English the one used in European academia?

text: English is used all over Europe in (more or less) academic papers and books that are not necessarily related to reviews and publishing houses based in UK or US, and that are not necessarily intended for UK or US markets. English is largely used between non-English speaking areas as _lingua franca_. What is the main trend in this field concerning the use of British vs American English? Are there certain guidelines (or even EU directives) on the matter?


title: A derogatory definition for a politician

text: I am looking for a definition, a negative one, to describe a politician who is not doing politics in the public interest.


title: Is "The MSO/MSE Split is soon underway" grammatically correct?

text: We're in the middle of a historical time. Two creatures will be separated from each other. Waffles will be torn in two. Meta Stack Overflow will be split. This banner is currently being shown on Meta Stack Overflow and on Stack Overflow itself: ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/wOfr5.png) > The MSO/MSE Split is soon underway. Please bear with us while this is > completed. The first sentence caught my eye, specifically the last few words: _"is soon underway"_. I'm not sure this is grammatically correct - my internal "something-isn't-right" meter doesn't like it. If I had to guess I'd say it should read _"is underway soon"_ , but that doesn't sound quite right either. I can't put a finger on what, exactly, is wrong with the sentence, nor what should be done to fix it. Can anyone explain this to me?


title: Etymology of "computer" before computer referred to a machine

text: Before the term "computer" referred to electronic analog or digital computers, it was said to be used to describe people who did computing. Was "Computer" actually a formal job title? How long did the usage as a description of a person last into the era of electronic computers? (Was there ever a period of confusion?)


title: How should I abbreviate "versus"?

text: There are 4 types of abbreviations I know for "versus":   * v   * v.   * vs   * vs. I generally use the last one in the list, but I want to stick to one and use only that one. Which one is more proper (or more prevalent), and why? Extra question: Which one should be preferred in scientific papers?


title: I need <something> yesterday?

text: Is it correct to say: > I need those reports, and I need them yesterday. Shouldn't it be: > I needed those reports yesterday. Or is this aberrant usage style simply a colloquialism?


title: Alternatives for "installed" when referring to a food establishment

text: > Caroline wondered whether there were coffee shops and restaurants in other > galaxies. She imagined them **installed** on floating asteroids, or in the > rest area of cosmic highways. Since the universe was so infinitely large, > how couldn't there be at least one or two? Is **installed** a good term to use in this case? If not, are there other better options?


title: to fire/ terminate/ lay off

text: What verb would sound more like a legal term (to be used in documents) if one wants to write that he fires a worker from director's position? To fire? To terminate position?


title: What is the equivalent word for "walking like a king"?

text: I am looking for a phrase or an vocabulary that means "walking like a king".


title: And/or vice versa

text: Should one write "and vice versa" or "or vice versa"? Examples: A) Autocomplete can be set to 'on' for the form, but 'off' for specific input fields, _and_ vice versa. B) Autocomplete can be set to 'on' for the form, but 'off' for specific input fields, _or_ vice versa. I'm sorry about the examples, they look weird out of context. I was wiring an HTML5 tutorial when the question popped into my head.


title: How to describe humanities students in one word

text: In several languages, there is a specific, usually rather derogatory word for students of the humanities. Would it be necessary to stick to 'arts students' or 'humanities students' to point out these students in English, or is it possible to describe this in a more direct and short manner? If there is such a noun, either in official or in popular vocabulary, would it be possible to also make this into a adjective - such as 'arts students' and that is such an 'artsy' thing to do but then specifically for the humanities.


title: What is the verb for "apoplexy"?

text: In the following sentence, > He [the verb] apoplexy a few years back and was suffering from numbness on > the left side of the body, hence the need for a cane to walk. what is the appropriate verb for "apoplexy"? Is it "get" like some other diseases? I checked some online dictionaries but none of them has an example except for one that used "suffering" as an example which is not what I am after because I'm referring to the very moment that it happened.


title: "Building site" vs. "construction site"

text: Is _building site_ the British English equivalent of _construction site_ in American English, and is it used in American English?


title: Usage of "however"

text: In the below sentence, the word **however** is used at the end. > _New genome editing techniques—in particular the CRISPR system Church and > his team are using—offer new hope, however. In 1987 Japanese scientists > found genetic sequences dubbed...._ But often **however** is used at the beginning of the sentence. For ex : > _However, it is not true..._ Is there any difference between both the usages? If there is no difference is it a style of the author?


title: Is it common for place names to lose their possessive apostrophe?

text: On a road trip, my wife and I drove by Kings Dominion. We debated whether this should in actuality be _King’s Dominion_. It seemed that it ought to be possessive, or possibly plural possessive. Upon doing a little more research we found the origin of the _Kings Dominion_ name. To quote the wikipedia article: > The park was named after its sister park, Kings Island in Kings Mills, Ohio, > which opened in 1972. Which leads to the question: Is it typical in the English language for a place name to lose the possessive in English? If so, I wonder why that should be so.


title: Shifter's Bay or Shifters Bay?

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Is it common for place names to lose the possessive? I am struggling with the meaning of and the difference between Shifter's Bay and Shifters Bay (don't pay attention to what a shifter is or could be). As I understand it Shifter's Bay is a bay belonging to a Shifter and Shifters Bay is a bay with, of or/and for Shifters. Is this correct? Maybe someone can elaborate? Which is better for a name on a (fictive) bay? Maybe someone can motivate? **Edit:** Concrete examples :   * Bakers Cottage (in The Bakers Yard)   * Baker's Yard


title: Term for seeking to reaffirm your existing beliefs

text: The word I'm looking for is similar to 'circlejerk', but rather than it being the participation of multiple people, I'm meaning one person seeking out studies/reading etc, for the sole purpose of reaffirming their existing beliefs or position on something, rather than to get to the truth of a matter. The context this word would be used would be:               The article about messy desks being associated with genius, was a bit [word].       Similar to how you might say:               The atheists in the pub meet up, was a bit of a circlejerk.


title: What does "lemon on" mean in this context?

text: What does the phrase _lemon on_ mean in this context? Is it an idiom? What is its correct usage? Excerpt from where I read this phrase: > ... Hold on, for this deal, one that does not exist anywhere outside a very > fertile imagination, could actually be a **lemon on** at least five counts. > These are the lures that should alert you and beg a recheck before you book > the deal. Source: How to Avoid Common Travel Traps


title: Is it "bear" or "bare" with me?

text: Is it "bear" or "bare" with me?


title: Earthling/s equivalent for Mars and Venus

text: > The first earthling in space was a dog. What about Mars or Venus. marsling? venusling? I am looking for a word for an inhabitant of Mars (and another word for the inhabitant of Venus) that "feels" the same as **earthling**. **Martian** seems to me more like the equivalent of **human/man** than an general living organism living on the planet Mars. For example, most people don't imagine a bacteria from Mars when you say "Martian". They imagine homanoid-like creature from the planet Mars. That is why I see the word martian as an equivalent of human or man and not an equivalent of earthling. Any idea?


title: Is my use of the word "award" to describe a blog tagging game correct?

text: Anybody ever run into the blog post tagging? Like when somebody starts posting about certain topic (for example answering certain questions like what are your 10 habits, etc) and then they tag other people to write about the topic too in their own blog. I've never started a game like that but yes, when friends tag me and when I feel like it, I do the homework and pass the tag. Recently, I realized that the tagging game sometimes has a name. It's called award. I've got the "You're Going Places, Baby!" award from a dear friend of mine. The rules: describe where you think you'll be in 10 years and then pass it along to other bloggers. Until now, my understanding about the 'award' usage is something given or rewarded because of certain acts (honorable acts). Is 'award' normally used in more generalized definition or is it just in that bloggers game case? For the bloggers case, I think award only means something assigned/given.


title: What word describes the amount an object is filled towards its capacity?

text: Given an object that can hold a _capacity_ of something, is there a word which describes the current amount it holds towards that capacity? For example, if an elevator has a capacity of 20 persons, and the current number of occupants is six, the elevator's `<some property of the elevator>` is six? **Update:** The commentary on @jwpat7's excellent answer made me realize something which hadn't occurred to me: the nature of the container and the things it holds have an impact on the appropriate description. I picked an arbitrary example using people, but the reason I've been seeking this word is to describe discrete (i.e. not something like liquid in a tank) _inanimate_ contents. A better example would be: an egg carton has a capacity of 12 eggs. It currently holds 7. How does one describe the amount currently held: **"The carton's`<this>` is 7 eggs"**?


title: Is "not at all" still alive and doing well?

text: I was taught to use "not at all" as a rather polite, standard reply to "thank you". However, I don't see it being used at all nowadays. Can I still use it? Would it be widely understood? Should I be aware of any differences between using it in British, American, Canadian, and Australian English? (As in, are there better alternatives in any particular dialect?) **Edit:** A (German) friend of mine who spent a year studying in Edinburgh says "not at all" is still fairly common there.


title: "in the year 1908" or "in the year of 1908"

text: Do we need preposition **"of"** after a **year**? > Freud is a visitor at James’s Sussex residence, Lamb House, in the year 1908


title: A word for "taking some foods from pot and putting it in to the plate"

text: What word you should use to tell someone to "take some foods from the pot and put it into the plate"? You can say stuff like "take some food" but it does not exactly mean the act of "taking food from the pot and put it into the plate". Is there a word for that in English?


title: How should I greet a close friend from the United States?

text: I (male) have a very good (female) friend over in the south-western United States that I met one year ago and we're exchanging mails or messages from time to time. We're both not older than 22 and I consider her a very open person. Note that this is not about dating her—just casually writing mails. What would you suggest to end the mails with? It shouldn't sound too stiff, but also not too intimate. I definitely don't want to send "Kind regards", but also no "kisses". In addition, I'd like to know if "cheers" is possible with US-American people?


title: what is the difference between 'same', 'typical' and 'similar'?

text: What is the difference between **'same', 'typical' and 'similar'** , as all conveys the same meaning.


title: Use of the word 'relishing'

text: Recently when talking to a friend about the lack of elevators in Asia he told me. > You should be relishing stairs As a native English speaker the use of the word 'relishing' here sounded strange to me, although I can't quite figure out why, it seemed like a very odd thing to say in spoken English. Why does it sound strange? Is there anything wrong with this construction?


title: Meaning of "shed all gentlemanly reticence"

text: Please explain the meaning of the text in bold, taken from this Bloomberg article. > Ah, yes. They have **shed all gentlemanly reticence** over dragging former > allies into court.


title: Term for security checkpoints separated by sex

text: In some places, a security checkpoint has two areas, one for checking men, and another for checking women. I'm looking for the term which describes this segregation by sex. This would be the opposite of how "co-ed" is used for schools which allow students of both genders. An example usage might be: > Just inside the entrance, past the [multi-gender-word] security, sinks were > placed for the washing of hands.


title: Origin of "can't be asked"

text: I was wondering about the phrase "can't be asked" and I haven't been able to find out anything definite about it. Does it have an earliest known usage? Is it an accidental or a deliberate mutation of "can't be arsed"? Is it local to the UK (or even more local than that) or does it come from US English? Thanks


title: What does this phrase mean ‘so much for something’?

text: I was reading an article on ESPN and at the end it said ‘so much for team loyalty’. Can anyone explain what this means?


title: word "suggested" for already accepted proposal

text: Is it possible to say "suggested" about something that was suggested and got accepted/approved? Is it common? For example, > I suggested a tag synonym on this; the suggestion got a few votes and was > accepted.   >  Nobody can accept or reject it now because it is already decided. Is it still possible to say "suggested synonym"?


After beginning a sentence with "The question is," should the question itself use inverted or straight syntax? >   * The question is, when is it worth doing, and when is it not? >   * The question is when it is worth doing, and when it is not." >


title: Was making 'dyslexia' hard to spell, a sadistic act?

text: ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/YKihW.jpg) Dyslexic (n.) is first recorded 1961; dyslectic (adj.) from 1964. My point is this - the Latin "legere" was already sufficient, "lexis" was contrived (I jest) out of the 'confusion' (see image) of "legere" and "legein". Unnecessarily I would suggest. The word could have easily been "disleger", without any confusion of readability or spelling whatsoever. Although some negative connotative association surrounding leg removal may have arisen.


title: 'in appreciation' vs. 'appreciatively'

text: Is using the adverbial prepositional phrase _in appreciation_ in place of the adverb _appreciatively_ convey exactly the same meaning? I'm attempting to avoid the use of the adverb "appreciatively" in the following sentence: > I whistled in appreciation. "Wow." Am I missing the spirit of the thing, or is this acceptable (i.e. not likely to lead to the bad habit of showing instead of telling)? If not, what would be a good way to indicate that somebody is whistling to show that they appreciate something? Note: I am not indicating a "wolf-whistle" in this sentence.


title: Meaning of "It's not in the bag."

text: The Context > Important rules of job interviews: > > A. Repeat to yourself: "It's not in the bag." > > B. To answer the question, "What would you do?" think of the correct answer > to "What should I do?" and give that as your response. > > C. Laugh at their jokes, but don't offer your own.


title: Couldn't be parked: Ngaio Marsh

text: In one of her novels, Dame Ngaio Marsh has Roderick Alleyn propose marriage to Agatha Troy, who responds she "couldn't be parked." In context this appears to be equivalent to "couldn't be more certain" that she does lobe him, but I can't see how you get from the latter to the former.


title: Can 'Rock-God' be applied to musicians other than rock musicians?

text: I saw the following sentence in today's New York Times. I understand 'Rock- God' means an artist almost deified by fans because of his or her performance and reputation. Can 'Rock-God' be applied to musicians other than rock singer? > Billie Joe Armstrong, the Green Day frontman, brings a jolt of rock-god > electricity to the Broadway musical "American Idiot."


title: Meaning of "meta-"

text: I am trying to figure out the meaning of prefix "Meta-" in English.   1. Quoted from Wikipedia > Meta- (from Greek: μετά = "after", "beyond", "with", "adjacent", "self"), is > a prefix used in English (and other Greek-owing languages) to indicate a > concept which is an abstraction from another concept, used to complete or > add to the latter. > > In epistemology, the prefix meta is used to mean _about (its own category)_. > For example, metadata are data about data (who has produced them, when, what > format the data are in and so on). Also, metamemory in psychology means an > individual's knowledge about whether or not they would remember something if > they concentrated on recalling it. Furthermore, metaemotion in psychology > means an individual's emotion about his/her own basic emotion, "or somebody > else's basic emotion". > > Another, slightly different interpretation of this term is "about" but not > "on" (exactly its own category). For example, in linguistics a grammar is > considered as being expressed in a metalanguage, or a sort of language for > describing another language (and not itself). Any subject can be said to > have a meta-theory which is the theoretical consideration of its meta- > properties, such as its foundations, methods, form and utility. I was wondering what is the slightly difference between " _about (its own category)_ " and "'about' but not 'on' (exactly its own category)"?   2. My original problem is to understand the meaning of "metalogic" and "logic". Quoted from Wikipedia: > Metalogic is the study of the metatheory of logic. While logic is the study > of the manner in which logical systems can be used to decide the correctness > of arguments, metalogic studies the properties of the logical systems > themselves.1 According to Geoffrey Hunter, while logic concerns itself with > the "truths of logic," metalogic concerns itself with the theory of > "sentences used to express truths of logic."2 > > The basic objects of study in metalogic are formal languages, formal > systems, and their interpretations. The study of interpretation of formal > systems is the branch of mathematical logic known as model theory, while the > study of deductive apparatus is the branch known as proof theory. In this case, is it correct to understand "meta-X" as some study that treat something (here logical system) as a whole without going inside it, whereas "X" study the same thing by going inside it?   3. How would you explain the relation between "metaphysics" and "physics", and between "meta-stackoverflow" and "stackoverflow"?


title: What's a better word for "pensive" in this situation?

text: I just used the word "pensive" to describe the feeling of a system administrator's state of mind while waiting for a long-running task to complete successfully, but I don't think that's the right word. I am trying to describe the feeling of waiting for the results of a task; a feeling of anxious anticipation, hoping things will work out for the best but planning one's next move in case things don't turn out as one had planned. Is there a better word than "pensive"? **EDIT:** I am questioning my word choice because Merriam Webster defines pensive as: > suggestive of sad thoughtfulness and sadness isn't part of the emotion I'm trying to convey.


title: “She got her first child” vs. “She had her first child”

text: I am not a native speaker and yesterday someone told me that "She got her first child" would be misunderstood and "She had her first child" is correct. Now I wonder if this is a 'local' thing here in Wales or a general 'rule'.


title: Educational course nomenclature

text: I am looking for a noun to describe an individual meeting of a **course** , as in a course of study at a university. **Class** is not an option in this case. Thoughts?


title: Is the meaning of "This is it" figurative?

text: The phrase " _kick the bucket_ " is a figurative phrase - it means " _to die_ ", although using it does not imply any actual kicking or any actual buckets. The question I am asking is if the phrase "this is it" is figurative or literal? Let us look at an example: > Well boys, I reckon **this is it**. (from _Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb_ , written by Stanley Kubrick, Peter George, Terry Southern and uncredited Peter Sellers and James B. Harris; based on _Red Alert_ by Peter George) I take the meaning of the phrase as literal, as I can interpret the meaning straight from the definitions in dictionaries; without a need to reach for metaphorical explanation. **NOTE** : this is related to this question/answer. EDIT: I am looking for good _arguments_ to either side.


title: How would you say 'go round the houses' in a formal way?

text: I am writing a memo (quite formal) and I need to mention that the attitudes in the previous meeting were really offtopic, the team didn't focus on the important matters. Were it informal writing I would use **go all round the houses**. Which expression would be adequate for a formal context?


title: Referring to objects as "she"

text: Sometimes people are referring to mechanical objects as "she": > I love my car. She always gets the best service. Are there any rules when it is appropriate to use "she" instead of it, and is "he" ever used in such context?


title: Identifying the implied gender of nouns

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Referring to objects as "she" English officially does not have genders like German or other languages; for example, a chair is an _it_ , not a _he_ or _she_. However, when you refer to a spaceship you say _she_ , and you say _daughter molecule_ in DNA replication narration, which implies a molecule is a she. Where can you find out the “hidden” gender of nouns? Is there a rule to go by? Why not say “son molecule”?


title: "sheds some important insights"?

text: Could we say "sheds some important insights"? E.g. The discussion sheds some important insights for optimizing an HTML parser If this is not appropriate, what is a nice way to express the same idea?


title: Was the word "nigger" an expletive in Mark Twain's day?

text: Was the word "nigger" a deliberately derogatory and offensive word in Mark Twain's time, or was it just a normal word to describe an ethnicity in those days? **Background** : I'm curious as to whether Twain could have anticipated the use of the word being so controversial nowadays (though discussing the Bowderlization of Huckleberry Finn is off-topic for this web site).


title: Is there a classification for words combined with hyphens used as adjectives?

text: Is there a term or classification for words (non-adjectives, for lack of a better classifier) that are combined with hyphens that serve the purpose of an adjective? For example, " **run-of-the-mill** applicant" or " **less-than- ideal** scenario." Are there any specific rules that dictate how these word groupings are handled?


title: Usage of Repetitive words

text: we often repeat few words in like little little , different different etc . Are these valid english usage?


Is there a word for using a word twice to imply something different? eg. > Are you done, or are you done done?


title: What's the deal with "colonel"?

text: Why does the word _colonel_ (as in military rank) have such a strange spelling compared to how it's pronounced (or vice versa, although I don't know how you would pronounce that)?


title: Why is stainless steel "stainless"?

text: Inox steel is stainless because it does not stain, but is stain the same thing as rust? I just want to understand since stain reminds me of clothing stains, for instance, and I am rather curious as to why one would call inox steel stainless steel. Where does it come from? I've just found http://www.stainless-online.com/why-stainless-steel- stainless.htm It doesn't explain what I want to know. Is stainless steel an American word? Would a Brit call inox steel stainless steel?


title: "get well soon" OR "feel better"

text: When to use “Get Well Soon” and “Feel Better”, I mean in what situations? Should “Get Well Soon” be used only when person is unwell for many days? And should I use “Feel Better”, if colleague message me that she will take off as she is not feeling well.


title: Tuques and dialects - What do you call a knitted cap in your region/dialect?

text: In Canadian English the word tuque refers to a knitted cap for use in cold weather. I'd like to know what such an item is commonly called in other dialects and regions since most people are utterly bamboozled when I say "tuque". So sound off and tell me what you call this!


title: Is "not only... but as well..." grammatical?

text: I was given a text to read by my teacher which contains the following sentence: > Speaking a foreign language one can not only read the papers, magazines and > original books by outstanding writers, but as well watch satellite > programmes, use the internet, travel easily to different parts of the world. Is it correct to use _as well_ at the beginning of the phrase after _but_? Should _as well_ be set off by commas in this case?


title: Use of "not merely" in a sentence

text: I'm doing SAT writing practice questions, and I came across a problem I believe has multiple solutions. The incorrect sentence is as follows (i shortened it): > He was _not merely_ expected to work hard, _but_ to help others. And the error occurs at _not merely_. According to the site, the sentence should be corrected like this: > He was expected not merely to work hard, but to help others. Isn't this sentence also gramatically correct though? > He was not merely expected to work hard, but also to help others. Thanks everyone.


title: Two or more words with the same plural

text: Let a _multiplural_ be a word that has more than one singular form with different meanings. For example, AXES is the plural of both AX and AXIS and so is a multiplural. I have found these multiplurals: AXES ELLIPSES TAXES Is there a name for these other than the one I just made up? Are there others without the -ES ending? Can anyone find any others? EDIT: The new list I have after looking at the answers (and adding one more I missed) is as follows: AXES BASES CAVIES DOES ELLIPSES TAXES TRIES


title: Parentheses around more than one paragraph

text: Does English allow one to put parentheses around more than one paragraph? Example: > Paragraph 1. > > (Paragraph 2. > > Paragraph 3.) > > Paragraph 4. (Of course, this is just a simple example. In reality, it looks more clean since the paragraphs are more than one line long, and are not separated by an empty line.)


title: "After all 7 8 9" joke?

text: I know that it is very important to be aware of "hidden meanings" of words and phrases. (Especially if the meaning is sexual.) That is why I love Stephen Colbert's "The Word" segments and usually spend some time to "decipher" all the puns But I am really stuck with the recent one. Particularly I cannot understand the `"After all 7 8 9"` line here. From the reaction of the audience I can tell that it is something pretty funny. And from the context I feel that it is something pretty dirty... I really don't want to be misunderstood by saying bunch of numbers. So can someone explain what is going on here, so I can avoid that?


What is the difference between a phrase and a clause? I tried looking this in dictionary but can not identify the difference. It would be great if I could get an example and formula of what makes a phrase and a clause.


title: Is "ringing somebody up" exclusive to telephone use in British English?

text: Is ringing somebody up exclusive to telephone use, or can it be used to say you made a call on somebody's person? **EDIT** : Note that my question is specifically asking about _British English_ ; I would love to hear from _an actual Brit_ the answer.


title: Narrating a story in simple present

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Why the use of 'would' in the following When we tell a joke or narrate a story in simple present can we use 'would' in some cases? For example: > He goes up to this man and punches him in the face. The man looks straight > into his eyes and tells him that he **_will take revenge_** > > He goes up to this man and punches him in the face. The man looks straight > into his eyes and tells him that he **_would take revenge_**


title: A "Frankenstein's monster" similar metaphors

text: Although originally it's a novel character, a "Frankenstein's monster" became a metaphor for _"something that cannot be controlled and that attacks or destroys the person who invented it."_ However, are there similar _"ruined by own creation"_ metaphors or poetic expressions in British English?


title: Does the word "welfare" have an abbreviation?

text: I was listening to a lecture about Mercantilism where I heard a word that sounded like _Welf_. I tried to find if this word exists but I didn't find. In the lecture I heard this: > The amassing of gold in payment for exports in excess of imports would allow > a nation to build the _welf_. By the context I suppose that _welf_ is an abbreviation of "welfare", but I'm not sure. Can you tell me what is the word heard? Or, if _welf_ sure is an abbreviation of "welfare"?


title: What is the correct word to follow consensus?

text: When using the word _consensus_ in a sentence, is it correct to say consensus _on_ , _over_ , or, _of_? For example if someone were to say, > In 1960s British politics, there was consensus [correct word] the National > Health Service?


title: Should the first word after a dash used as self-interruption be capitalized?

text: When writing dialogue, a dash can be used to denote interruption. For example: > “Hello, can I ask you about—” > > “No.” If a character is interrupting themself, should the first word of the interruption be capitalized? In other words, should the word _oh_ be capitalized in the following quote? > “Have you seen — oh my God, you’re him!”


title: How to call someone that acts only by instinct without being rude?

text: I know there's the phrase "You are an animal", but depending on the context, cultural background, etc. the recipient of the saying may not end very happy. Is there another way to describe someone that acts solely by instincts without the danger of being read as rude?


title: Using the definite article before a country/state name

text: > The Punjab is a rich state. Is it correct to use _the_ before Punjab?


title: Why is it wrong to use “The India”

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Using the definite article before a country/state name We say “The United States of America” but not “The India”. Why is it so?


title: significance of "The" before country name

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Using the definite article before a country/state name I am from India, and I do not say that I am from “the India”. But someone from USA would say “I am from **the** United States of America.” Why do you need to use the extra “the” in the second case?


title: Why is Ukraine often called "the Ukraine"?

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Using the definite article before a country/state name Hearing _the Ukraine_ used to make me unsure whether Ukraine was really a country. Now though I have realized Ukraine to be a country on the same level as Austria, for instance, I still don't understand why it is often _the Ukraine_ in English, but never _the Austria_ or _the Poland_. Where did that odd phrase come from, and why is it in use?


title: Usage of "The" before a nation name

text: If USA is referred as "The USA" , why not "The India" ??


title: Why 'The' is used?

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Using the definite article before a country/state name Why do we write: > The UCI Road World Championships 2012 (when the year is mentioned) > The Republic of India (when there is only one nation) but NOT The India? > The Monaco Grand Prix (only one place which holds GP with that name) > Lake Baikal in South of the Russia (why not Lake Baikal in the Russia?) I know the answer: The grammar usage is **Definite Article** but I'm looking for a clear explanation to this question.


title: The meaning of "all the world"

text: "All the world and his wife were at the ball." This is a sentence I found in a text book. Does "all the world" simply means "everybody"? China is experiencing a great change, all the world is looking at it, because it is also consequential for them (self-made). In the second sentence, is "people all around the world" better than "all the world"? I tend to think that "all the world" is better than people all around the world, because the latter only refers to individuals ,whereas the former may mean Brookings Institute or the Pentagon.


title: When to use "nowhere" and when "not anywhere"

text: What is the difference between "nowhere" and "not anywhere"; both means the same thing, I guess. Is one of them more polite or more formal? What is the defining factor to decide which one to use?


title: What is the formal plural of the word theorem?

text: The word _theorem_ comes from late Latin theōrēma and the Greek θεώρημα . If one wanted a plural form other than _theorems_ that reflected its etymology, what would it be? I understand the standard plural is _theorems_ but I would still be interested to know.


title: What is "outheroding"?

text: I have been reading Scott's _Ivanhoe_ recently and have come across a word I cannot find a meaning for: _outheroding_. In the novel it appears in a discussion of footwear: > Fur and gold were not spared in his garments; and the point of his boots, > _outheroding_ the preposterous fashion of his time, turned up so very far, > as to be attached, not to his knees merely but to his very girdle, and > effectually prevented him from putting his foot into the stirrup. A search of the internet produces a reference here where it appears as > The characters in this act frisk about, here, there, and every where, as > teasingly as the Jack o' Lantern-lights which mischievous boys, from across > a narrow street, throw with a looking-glass on the faces of their opposite > neighbours. Bertram disarmed, _outheroding_ Charles de Moor in the Robbers, > befaces the collected knights of St. Anselm, (all in complete armour) and > so, by pure dint of black looks, he outdares them into passive poltroons. which doesn't help much in establishing what the word means. Does anyone know what _outheroding_ is?


title: What's another way to say "Is this on your horizon?"

text: What's another way to say, "Is X on your agenda?" or   "Is X on your horizon?"


title: What is the word for "showing that something is meaningful"?

text: If I conduct an experiment and get results, and I can then relate those to real life in a way, what is the verb that this link to is doing? My first thought was validate, but that isn't correct.


title: "As if" & "As would be the case if"; Also, "As though"

text: On a Q&A site in Japan, I read an expression that **_as if_** comes from _as (would be the case) if_.   1. Are both about the same thing?   2. Is this claim historically true?   3. If so, what does " ** _as though_** " come from?


title: "It was still bright/light outside." Is one of these incorrect?

text: If I want to say it's still somewhat early in the evening and it's not so dark outside so that you can still see things quite clearly almost like during daytime, which of the following sentences would be a better fit? >   1. It was still **bright** outside. >   2. It was still **light** outside. > I was told that one of them is incorrect, but both of them seem right to me.


title: Party organized by the students of a department

text: At German universities, there student councils, called "Fachshaft", which is an extracurricular representative structure for students. Each year (or semester), the student councils organize parties for students of their universities, called "Fachschaftsparty", in order to collect money for serious things and to provide socializing activity for the students. How do you translate "Fachschaftsparty"?


title: Meaning of "How'd you know?": "would", "did", or "do"?

text: Does the question "How'd you know" mean: >   1. How **do** you know? >   2. How **did** you know? >   3. How **would** you? >


title: What is the meaning of "within next two days"?

text: Is it, within today and tomorrow or within tomorrow and day after?


title: Does the term "within 7 days" mean include the 7th day?

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Is "in [some period]" different from "within [some period]"? The title states it all: When an author says "within 7 days", does the author mean include the 7th day? Or, does it mean up to but not including the 7th day?


title: Word, idiom or expression to describe feeling full (after eating)

text: For example: > I like how you conveniently informed us after most of us had eaten already > and we are [feeling full]. The phrase in brackets sounds unnatural to me. Would you suggest how to rephrase that better?


title: Difference between "unlikeable" and "dislikeable"?

text: Is there a difference between _unlikeable_ and _dislikeable_? It feels like there is, but I'm uncertain how to explain it.


title: English, Latin, or Malay pronunciation of betta fish

text: The genus name of the aquarium fish _Betta splendens_ derives from the Malay word "ikan betah." The common name of the fish is also "betta," which in English we'd pronounce with a soft e. I often hear the pronunciation "bay- tuh," for both common and genus name, and just as often hear fish fanciers loudly object and insist on the soft e. But would it also be correct to use a Latin pronunciation for the genus name, which I think (not sure) would be closer to "bay-tuh"?


title: Can there be a hyphen in "nonlinear"?

text: As the title says, I'm wondering if "non-linear" is an acceptable spelling of the word "nonlinear." A bit of research on this site turns up Is the use of a hyphen between "non" and an adjective strictly necessary?, in which Monica Cellio commented that some of these "non"-prefixed words have entered the language in unhyphenated form. This is the way I'm used to seeing "nonlinear." But other people I work with spell it with the hyphen, "non-linear." Is that valid, or should I point it out as a correction? (This is in a scientific paper going to publication; I wouldn't care in a less formal context) More generally, what reference(s) would I look at to answer questions like this in the future, about whether a particular compound can/should be spelled with or without a hyphen?


title: An expression with the meaning of "don't care" and "do not make a ceremony of"

text: I wanted to explain to a seller on online auction to pack the item with care because it can be damaged in transit. I looked for the right expression to say that our postal workers sometimes don't care much about packages (at least here in Russia). In my native language, which is Russian, we use expression like "ne tseremonitsya" (не церемониться). Which is "do not make a ceremony of smth". The online dictionary gave me examples like: >   1. make no bones of... >   2. handle without gloves >   3. deal shortly >   4. pull no punches >   5. didn't mince matters with ... > Could you please assist me in finding a good expression?


title: A word that describes giving its name to something else: iron is ... for ferromagnetism

text: I am writing about unusual ferromagnetic materials. For the introduction I want to use the "namegiver" for ferromagnetism, iron, as an example but I am stuck finding the right word or expression. >   * In iron the _namegiving_ element for ferromagnetism the Curie > temperature... >   * In iron, which coined the term ferromagnetism the Curie temperature ... >   * In iron, from which the term ferromagnetism is derived, the Curie > temperature ... > Is there an English word that expresses that iron, or to be more precise, its Latin counterpart "ferrum", gave its name to the phenomenon _ferromagnetism_?


title: "The day before yesterday"

text: I was wondering, what single word could I use to describe the day before yesterday? E.g. > My birthday was the day before yesterday.


title: "Make easy" vs. "make it easy"

text: I need to know which of these options is the correct one and why: >   * The Spanish cooking makes it easy to have a nice meal. >   * The Spanish cooking makes easy to have a nice meal. > I don't know if I need the pronoun _it_ or not. By the way, is "a nice meal" correct, or should I use any other adjective, such as "good"?


title: What is the name of this stylistic device?

text: There is a stylistic device where you begin and end a text with the same metaphor.I'm sorry I don't have a "real-world" example in English, but I'll try to describe what I mean. Let's say there's an article on software development. The article begins by likening the development process it to the construction of a car. Then it goes on talking about software, and in the last phrase it goes back to the car metaphor, achieving a "closure" effect. Is there a proper name for this?


title: "Clod" vs. "chunk" vs. "lump"

text: Are there usage differences between _clod, chunk,_ and _lump_? Are they interchangeable? For example, is it better to use _lump_ or _clod_ for wood?


title: "former" vs "last" as in "my former, only and last husband"

text: I was reading a book and found this expression: > [...] my former, only and last husband. Could anyone tell me what are the differences between _former_ and _last_ in this case?   Also, would **_former and only_** suffice to express this idea?


title: Can I say 'I feel connected' when I think a movie tells my story?

text: Recently I saw a movie that tells a story very similar to mine. I wanted to tell my friends about it and said 'I felt connected'. They doubted if that is the right word to use, since the word 'connected' is more often used to describe a romantic relationship. So my question is, what would be a good word for this situation?


title: Syllable division of VCV pattern in words such as "salad" and "lemon"

text: In words such as _salad_ /sæləd/, you have a VCV pattern (vowel-consonant- vowel), in which the first vowel is short. The syllable division of such words is generally done after the consonant, i.e, as VC-V. Here are a few examples:      salad /sæl-əd/   lemon /lem-ən/   never /nev-ər/   balance /bæl-əns/      This division is in agreement with the notion that generally, a short vowel do not end a syllable.      Cambridge and the American Heritage dictionaries divide these words this way. Also, phonics and spelling textbooks do the same. However, Merriam-Webster dictionaries, such as the Collegiate and the Unabridged, divide these words _before_ the consonant. So you have:      salad /sæ-ləd/   lemon /le-mən/   never /ne-vər/   balance /bæ-ləns/      I would like to ask why there is such a disagreement between the dictionaries, and which division is natural for _you_. You may want to mention whether your English is American, British or other.


title: Verb agreement with "that" as relative pronoun

text: Which one of the following sentences is grammatically correct? >   1. The idea that introduces a new relational representation is the subject > of this paper. > >   2. The idea that introduce a new relational representation is the subject > of this paper. > > Notice the form of the verb _to introduce_ in the sentences.


title: Is it correct English to turn interjections such as "ah", "oh", "um" "huh", "hem" into verbs?

text: For example: she ahhed/ohhed/ummed/huhhed/hemmed. Or is this possible only with some interjections?


title: What is the present participle of "stop, drop, and roll"?

text: In a verb phrase, such as stop, drop, and roll, how do I conjugate this in the present participle? Stopping, dropping, and rolling? Stop, drop, and rolling?


title: 'Horeca', is it English? Alternatives?

text: In Dutch there's a quite commonly used word that denotes the commercial sector around selling food and beverages for immediate (or near-immediate, e.g. take- out meals) consumption: _horeca_. (This usually also includes snackbars and the like, but not supermarkets) I'm in the process of creating an English version of a website that has it as a menu item, and I'm looking for a translation of approximately similar size (i.e. not a full sentence). I found that the word horeca also exists in English, but the Wikipedia page is quite small and seems to be written by a Dutch native. The definition given is the exact definition of the word I'm looking for, but I'd rather have something that's less obscurely used in English.. > **Horeca** (or HORECA) is the sector of the food service industry that > consists of establishments which prepare and serve food and beverages. The > term is a syllabic abbreviation of the words Hotel/Restaurant/Café. I'm edging towards distrusting the fact that it's a word that English natives would understand. Does anyone have any alternatives with a simialr meaning?


title: A word that means how authentic or true a replica is to the original

text: I have been trying to recall a particular word for a week now. The word is a property of a replica indicating the degree with which it was able to be true to the original. Similar words are authentic, representative, etc. Maybe something similar to integrity. I feel like it is commonly used in this context, but in general it is not frequently used. I would love to hear suggestions!


title: Meaning of "I would there were..."?

text: What is the meaning of "I would there were", as in this quote from Shakespeare's "A Winter's Tale"? > I would there were no age between sixteen and three-and-twenty, or that > youth would sleep out the rest; From its context, I assume it means "I wish there were" but I find it difficult to conceive how the modern usage of "would" could ever have been used in this way.


title: Is 'many' used in positive sentences or not?

text: It is uncanny how many books will insist that neither 'many' nor 'much' can be used in positive sentences.   1. Have you got many pens? / Have you got much money? --> correct   2. I haven't got many pens. / I haven't got much money. --> correct   3. I have got many pens. / I have got much money. --> INCORRECT And yet, those same books will invariably have a text where - lo and behold - 'many' is used in a positive sentence! I can only guess that proper grammar rules are as dictated, but every day use has drifted considerably from the said rule. So I ask you: what is the _real_ usage of 'many'. Has it become common in any type of sentence? Or are there situations when 'many' can be used in positive sentences and situations when it can't? Because I really don't know what to say when the students point at a text and say it isn't following the rule they are supposed to follow.


title: Single word alternative to "overvalue"

text: Generally speaking, _attach too much significance to [something]_ can be replaced _overvalue_ , but that doesn't sit well with me in certain contexts. For example, suppose I reached some conclusion after considering various factors, but it turns out later that I accorded too much weight to "Factor X" (causing me to reach the _wrong_ conclusion). _"I attached/ascribed/assigned/etc. too much significance to X"_ conveys exactly what I want to say. I can't explain why _"I overvalued X"_ doesn't cut it for me - that's just the way it is. Words such as _overstate, overplay, overemphasise_ all seem to imply I focused too much on _X_ in a debate attempting to defend my (erroneous) conclusion. And _overestimate_ implies mistakenly thinking _X_ was _bigger_ than it really was (rather than just "more important than it should be"). Ideally, I'm looking for _"I xxxx'ed X"_ , but even _"I xxxx'ed the importance of X"_ would do.


title: Question tags — "did you" vs. "didn't you"

text: Typically, when we ask for confirmation/denial of a statement, we say something like the following: > We turn left here, don't we?   >  You have a cat, don't you?   >  We've met before, haven't we? pairing a positive statement with a negative question, or > We don't need that, do we?   >  You don't know anything about this, do you? pairing a negative statement with a positive question. However, sometimes positive statements are paired with a positive question > We take a left, do we?   >  You had to be a big shot, did you?   >  You've been to Prague, have you? Is this correct? Does it change the meaning in any way? Are the three forms interchangeable?


title: You have no idea, (...): "do you" or "don't you"?

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Question tags — “did you” vs. “didn’t you” Which one is correct? option 1: > You have no idea, don't you? or, option 2: > You have no idea, do you?


title: Using the adverb "now" with a tag question

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Question tags — “did you” vs. “didn’t you” >   1. People can hardly motivate themselves now, **can** they? >   2. People can hardly motivate themselves now, **can't** they? > Number 1 is the correct answer. However, usage of _can't they_ in number 2 can also be correct as it takes the tag question format but due to _now_ being used in the sentence, it is wrong. My question is, I am too sure that number 1 is the correct answer, but I am not sure about the above explanation. How true this holds? And why the addition of the adverb "now" makes number 2 incorrect?


title: Using can and can't

text: > She can barely cook a decent meal, **___ ___** she? I think the answer is _can’t_. Please advise: what is the rule here? Therefore, if the question is asked: > She can’t swim, **___ ___** she? In this case, I think the answer will be _can_. What do you think?


title: differences vernacular vs. colloquial

text: What is the difference between the words vernacular and colloquial? Is vernacular closer to jargon? A quick search reveals that colloquial refers to informal spoken language while vernacular refers to some sort of native language of a place. Is that the only difference?


title: Is there a comparative form of the word "different?"

text: Does the adjective "different" have a comparative form? If so what is it?


title: What is the etymology of "giving [it] the old college try"?

text: What is the etymology of _giving [it] the old college try_? In particular, is it referencing an old ritual that might have percolated amongst alumni of the old and prestigious New England colleges/universities? I tried Googling, but I'm not really finding an authoritative source at the moment. If nothing definitive can be found, I'd at least appreciate a date of first attestation.


title: What tense is "have been are"?

text: Here are some examples: >   * Meanings **have been are** still in constant flux. (Source) >   * I'm afraid to say that in the past the police **have been are** too keen > to caution people. (Source) >   * That's because those overseas clubs **have been are** able to negotiate > those domestic rights themselves and not collectively as the Premier League > clubs do. (Source) > Are these sentences grammatically correct? Why was **have been** not used?


title: Opposite of subsequent (non-chronological/logical)

text: Just wondering, there is a related question regarding the _subsequent_ in the context of logic (which can also be used in the context of chronology), but what if we're talking about an abstract sequence. For example it is possible to say: > Subsequent files, however, can not be parsed. But how would you say the opposite: > The files which came earlier in sequence than the file in question, however, > could not be parsed. As far as I am aware > Antecedent _(or precedent)_ files, however, can not be parsed. is invalid english (though I might be mistaken).


title: Phrasal Verbs. Rules and Tricks

text: Are there any rules or tricks that might explain how phrasal verbs are formed to understand their meanings?


title: which one of these statement's grammar correct

text: 1. It will be 3 by the time I reach office   2. It will be 3 by the time I'll reach office.


title: Could "lolcat" be used to mean "something funny"?

text: > The lolcat came from a problem with the Stack Overflow API. Is this usage of _lolcat_ generally understood?


title: What do you call slapping someone at the back of their head

text: I know there is bitch-slap, that is when you you hit someone a male or a female with back of you hands (sometimes) when they act or do stupid. I want to know the word that is subtle in nature, that when we hit someone at the back of their head when they do stupid thing. Like an elder bro hit a younger one to correct him... I know a word Gibbs-slap, but that is so american and I want a global term. Thanks.


title: is there a rule that simple coordinator "and" is changed for "or" in negations?

text: For instance: Sally can play the guitar **and** the piano. Martin can't play the guitar **or** the piano.


title: How does 'worth' differ from 'value' and how are they synonyms?

text: Why do we say "he is worth a lot of money" when we neither mean to buy, or sell, nor express great regard for the wealthy man, but "his contribution is worthless" even when the person is being enormously well paid for his work -- and say "she is invaluable as a teacher"?


title: A non-offensive term to call a lunatic?

text: How can a mad scientist's friend address him? For example, when engaged in a conversation with other people (who don't know the scientist), he mentions having such a friend? I suppose a loony sounds too harsh. Is there a friendlier way to suggest he is a bit of a lunatic?


title: "object-oriented" vs "object oriented"

text: When should we use "object-oriented" and when "object oriented" when talking about programming? An example: > Why should I start writing object oriented code? I personally think that there should be a hyphen, because "oriented" connects to the word "object", but I am not sure.


title: What pronouns are used in the vocative?

text: A coauthor and I are drafting a letter, and we're not yet sure whom we're going to be sending it to. So I sent a draft to my coauthor, which started > Dear [whomever]: Now, that line in a letter is in the vocative case (or would be, if English really had cases). I know that _who_ is used in the nominative case and _whom_ in the accusative/dative, but what about the vocative? Should I have written > Dear [whoever]: instead? * * * * * * Obviously, my question is only about such dialects as use _who_ and _whom_. But it could be just as well asked about _he_ versus _him_ : had we been authoring a letter with a known male recipient we didn't want to bother writing out the name of, we could have used > Dear [him]: or > Dear [he]: and the same question would apply. * * * Equally obviously, because this is a draft letter and the word in question won't appear in the final copy, it really doesn't matter which word we use. I wish to know anyway.


title: "High Accident Intersection"

text: I was challenged recently to solve this problem. An accident takes place on an intersection on a high road. However, if I was to write about this as taken place in a "high accident intersection" it would seem like a lot of accidents take place at that particular location. Is there a concise and accurate way of describing an accident at an intersection on a high altitude?


title: Present day adjective for "cannot be taken away"

text: I'm looking for a word that describes that the fact that something can't be taken away or deprived of once acquired (experience) as in: > Your experiences cannot be taken away from you, man, they stay with you > forever. I was thinking something along the lines of "experiences, as a rule, are _undivestable_ so much unlike rights and dignities", but only in a more modern not-obsolete kind of way (very few people in my control group actually knew what "undivestable" meant). I need this stuff for an ad, meaning it must be easily understood by young and old, bright and dim, rich and poor i.e. all alike. Also what'd you guys think of _un-takeaway-able_? I am in need of a word that says that once you acquire (an experience) something through investing time and effort it is yours forever no matter what, it cannot be taken away from you. It is not granted to you by any one, and it is something you must "take" to have.


title: What does the expression "till Saturday week" mean?

text: I'm a native speaker of American English. But sometimes when reading a book by an English author or watching television shows broadcast on BBC I hear unusual (to my ears) expressions and am not entirely certain of the meaning. I'm going to guess that the expression "till Saturday week" means "till Saturday a week from now". A web search has brought up plenty of examples of this phrase being used, but I can't find anything that clarifies the meaning.


title: Usage of sound /ʒ/ in English (not /dʒ/)

text: I'm trying to explain to an English speaker how to pronounce the letter _j_ in French, and was looking for cases where it appears in English. It seems that _j_ is almost always pronounced /dʒ/. Examples of the /ʒ/ without /d/ in English are very rare: Asia, vision (many words ending in -sion), measure. In those words the vowel after /ʒ/ is always the same. Where else in English does this consonant appears?


title: Relative clause with "whose"

text: I just read the following sentence in a short-biography: "Peter was born in England in 1982, whose parents were from Japan and India." I think that the use of the relative pronoun "whose" is wrong here, it sounds as if the parents of the year 1982 were from Japan and India. Am I right, or is this sentence correct? Many thanks, Katerina


title: What is the best term to describe a "native English speaker who is an American"?

text: When applying for English teaching jobs, I want to describe myself as a "native speaker of English who has an American accent" since most companies in Europe want native speakers to teach English courses and they usually have a preference for one accent or another (American, British, Australian, etc.). What is the best term for this, e.g. "I am a...":   * American native speaker of English (good?)   * American English native speaker (good?)   * native speaker of American English (best?)   * native American English speaker ("native American" could be confused with being an American Indian)


title: Usage of the word "latest"

text: Raj has breakfast almost always before 7:45 AM. On rare occasions, he has after 7:45 AM, but never after 8:00 AM. So If he says "I always have my breakfast latest by 8:00 AM" to convey this fact, is Raj's usage correct?


title: Can you use two "and"s in a sentence?

text: For example, > I like chocolate, vanilla, and lemon and orange ice cream. Indicating "lemon and orange" is a combined flavor, as an item in the list needing an initial _and_.


title: Using "and" in a list with an element already containing "and"

text: I'm struggling with the following sentence in an APA format paper. I don't like the double usage of _and_ here, but 'supply and demand' is one thing in this context. Is this correct or do I need to make a change? > Riggs (2011) argues that tuition prices can be explained by the basic > principles of supply and demand and perceived quality. To clarify: My intent is for the term "basic principles" to apply to both "supply and demand" (as a single principle) **and** "perceived quality" as the other. As this sentence is paraphrasing Riggs, this must be the meaning conveyed whether or not we agree with his over-simplification of S&D.


title: Is this correct for an email campaign subject?

text: Just wondering whether the following sentence is grammatically correct — I was always taught that you shouldn't have two _and_ s within the same sentence. We are not able to come up with a better subject. The subject below is for both New and Used Motorhomes and New and Used Caravans. > Serious Savings on New and Used Motorhomes and Caravans


title: Multiple Ands but might still be correct?

text: I just wrote an interesting sentence and I'm on the fence on if it seems proper. I left it as a comment over on StackOverflow so the content may not mean much to you, but the structure interests me: > Making a regular Button do what you describe will probably be fraught with > problems and gotchas and more than likely will cause other elements of the > UI to constantly repack. Specifically the use of "and" twice. Once as a combination of "this and that" and another to join two sentences in a cause and effect sort of way. Their back to back use makes me question if the sentence is ok. Is this proper or is my Oklahoma grammar affecting my typing? If it is proper, is there a name for this kind of structure?


title: Using two "And"s

text: Is the following (part of the) sentence correct grammatically? > ... I will describe how my personal experiences **and** my professional > **and** academic background have prepared me to ...


title: Reverse relationship of Belong?

text: Consider the phrase:   " _That shovel belongs to Tim._ "   which when you reverse the subject becomes: " _Tim owns that shovel_ " However there is another use of belong, which means membership of.   " _Susan belongs to the North Hampton Soccer Club._ ".   How would I reverse that subject. " _The North Hampton Soccer Club owns Susan_ "? That isn't correct, Susan isn't property.   " _The North Hampton Soccer Club includes Susan_ "? That doesn't convay the same strength of belonging, but it is better. Consider another example:   " _Fred belongs to the Catholic Church_ "   " _The Catholic Church owns Fred_ ", " _The Catholic Church includes Fred_ ", I am ideally looking for a single word verb.


title: Order of sentence and using 's

text: > ...absolutely 100% our doing, not the Restaurant's. or > ...absolutely 100% our doing, not the Restaurants. The first one feels right, but looks a little odd. I think it's the first, because you would say > ...the Restaurant's doing. even thought it might not look right. And, I think you have to show possession, right? Can someone clarify, and hopefully point me to a resource?


title: told vs have told in a sentence

text: How do you say the next sentence? 1) I told him to stay on the path while he was hiking, but he wandered off into the forest and was bitten by a snake 2) I told him to stay on the path while he was hiking, but he has wandered off into the forest and has been bitten by a snake 3) I have told him to stay on the path while he was hiking, but he wandered off into the forest and was bitten by a snake


title: Ambiguous transitive verb whose meaning is determined by its subject

text: I am looking for an example of a transitive verb with an ambiguous meaning that is determined by its subject. To explain what I mean, here is an example of a transitive verb whose meaning is modified by the object to which it is applied: to bend. You can bend a bow or you can bend the truth. Arguably, these give two different meanings of the same verb. Now, can you think of a similar effect induced by the subject that performs the action of a verb? I am looking for a similar case where the change of meaning comes from the subject. I hope this is clear. Thanks! (For those interested in why I need this, I am researching a specific model in computational linguistics and want to test it on such a verb, if it exists.)


title: "planning the" vs. "planning of"; "producing the" vs. "producing of"

text: I cannot find an explanation for the use of gerund + _of,_ such as:   * planning _of_ our future vacation;    * producing _of_ sound; etc.,  --versus the same without _of._ I prefer without _of._ Which is correct?


title: I wonder the differences between until now and so far

text: Would anyone kindly and readily explain to me the differences between the following? _Until now_ _So far_ In fact, I even can not provide any context, because I really do not understand them. Thanks in advance.


title: What is the most appropriate opposite of "Select All"?

text: Is it more appropriate to use "Deselect All" or "Select None" or some other phrase to indicate the opposite of "Select All"? Context: A toggle button in a piece of software that will select all items on screen, then change title to indicate it will clear the selected state of all items on screen


title: Why does "smashing" mean "very good"?

text: **_Smashing_** is a BrE slang which means "very good" or "impressive". Most folks might know this already, due to its use as a catch phrase by various BrE characters in media. However, from the usual meaning of the word **_smash_** (which means _breaking with violence_ ), it's not obvious how it could come to mean "very good". Did this meaning come from a specific context, perhaps military, or sports?


title: Meaning of "quantify" in a dating context

text: Someone said: " _You can always quantify things_ ", as in "* Internet and all that stuff is just that. People are people and you can always quantify things." I'm Dutch/American, but am having a really hard time understanding what this would mean.