title: What does the "either" in this sentence mean?

text: The whole paragraph is like this: > An experiment has three possible outcomes, l, J, and K. The probabilities of > the outcomes are 0.25, 0.35, and 0.40, respectively. If the experiment is to > be performed twice and the successive outcomes are independent, what is the > probability that K will not be an outcome either time? I'm not sure about the `either` in `K will not be an outcome either time`. Which of the following is the right meaning? (1) In any of these two times, K will not be an outcome. Or (2) K will not be an outcome in both time, which means, K can be the outcome in one time at most. The right answer is 0.64, which supports (1), but I suspect it's wrong.. Does anyone have ideas about this?


What's the difference between "drivel" and "nonsense"?


What's the difference between "to herald" and "to announce"?


title: What does hog the mirror mean?

text: what does the phrase "hog the mirror" mean? I think I am just not sure what "hog" means. I heard it in a talk show.


title: What's the term for a cord that doesn't fit perfectly in the socket

text: What do you call a power cord for example that doesn't fit perfectly in the power socket and you can move it if you press it on the side. I used _fiddle_ but am not sure if that's the correct term.


title: What is the origin of the noun "craic"?

text: I always assumed the phrase "craic on" was actually "crack on", however my naivety was corrected today when I was informed that the correct spelling is, in fact, "craic". I have never seen this word before. Where did it come from and what does it actually mean?


title: Meaning of 'to wrap the ol' noodle around'

text: From http://css-tricks.com/css-font-size/ (the 1st paragraph is quoted for additional context): > Setting font-size in pixels is the most accurate (and I find the most > satisfying) method, but do take into consideration the number of visitors > still using IE 6 on your site and their accessibility needs. We are right on > the bleeding edge of not needing to care about this anymore. > > Em values are probably the most difficult values **to wrap the ol' noodle > around** , probably because the very concept of them is abstract and > arbitrary. Here's the scoop: 1em is equal to the current font-size of the > element in question. What does "to wrap the ol' noodle around" mean?


title: What are the meanings of the common verbs we use to mean change?

text: Having acknowledged that the meanings of these verbs overlap, how would describe the prototypical use of each of these verbs?   1. _Become_     * It was becoming dark.     * He became a pilot.    2. _Get_     * It was getting dark.     * You get older every day.   3. _Go_     * She went white with rage.     * The milk will go sour.   4. _Come_     * I came to realize it was the best thing to do.     * My predictions usually come true.   5. _Turn_     * Bruce Banner turned into the hulk.     * The traffic light will turn green soon.


title: What is correct phrase of ex in laws when Divorced

text: If you get divorced, are your ex spouse's siblings' children still your niece or nephew?


title: idioms out of the word "park" or "knocks"

text: What does "knocks it out of the park" means? example : "All should read this book as it knocks it out of the park"


title: What is the difference between "accumulative" and "cumulative"?

text: I'm having a hard time understanding the real distinction between accumulative and cumulative. **accumulative**   > _adjective_ > >   1. tending to accumulate or arising from accumulation; cumulative. >   2. tending to accumulate wealth; acquisitive. > **cumulative**   > adjective > >   1. increasing or growing by accumulation or successive additions: the > cumulative effect of one rejection after another. >   2. formed by or resulting from accumulation or the addition of successive > parts or elements. >   3. of or pertaining to interest or dividends that, if not paid when due, > become a prior claim for payment in the future: cumulative preferred stocks. > These definitions (and those from other dictionaries as well) say different things but I can't understand how they aren't _really_ meaning the same thing. Yet, when thinking about it, it seems there are some cases where it is distinctly more correct to use one or the other. **What's the difference, practically?**


title: What does “binder” mean? Why did it become a political buzzword?

text: I’ve been seeing a lot of “ _binders_ ” in recent newspaper and magazine articles dealing with the recent Presidential debates. For examples: Time magazines October 19 issues carries the article titled, “ _Romney’s Binders_ : The Meme Women Love to Hate - How one little phrase became a potent political symbol. There was another article in the same issue titled, “Obama and Romney dish out jokes, Not Jabs, at Annual Al Smith Dinner,” followed by the paragraph: > "At the outset, host Al Smith IV, the director of the Alfred E. Smith > Memorial Foundation -- first acknowledged women in the room and said, “It’s > good to see who’s getting out of those binders.” It was a quip that proved > the proliferation of what’s become a new meme, after Tuesday’s debate when > Mitt Romney explained that while serving as governor of Massachusetts, he > was provided with “ _whole binders full of women_ ” to help him fill his > Cabinet. In the article of New Yorker magazine October 19 issue titled “Obama on “The Daily Show”: A Gaffe is a Gaffe,” there comes again “Binder full of women”: > “When he (Romney) said, on Tuesday night, that as governor of Massachusetts > he got help from women’s groups in staffing his administration - “they > brought us whole _binders full of women_ ”-he was trying to come across as > enlightened on gender issues, but managed to give the opposite impression.” My favorite Maureen Dowd also quotes “women in binders” in her articles, “Pampered princes fling Gorilla dust” (October 20) and “Of Mad men, Mad women and Meat loaf” (October 27) on NY Times: > “Obama’s contempt for Romney gleamed through as Mitt got all O.C.D. with > Candy Crowley about the rules, and rambled on about his weird retro > worldview, where _women in binders_ have to bound home to make dinner, - - > where we just tell “our kids that before they have babies, they ought to > think about getting married to someone.” > > “Mitt hopes Americans are ready for some rules — and _binders_. He is baked > in the fuddy-duddy dad image from the era when white men ruled and the > little women toiled over a hot stove.” Oxford Dictionaries defines ‘binder’ as:   1. a cover for holding magazines or loose sheets of paper together.    2. a substance used to make other substances or materials stick or mix together.    3. a reaping machine that binds grain into sheaves.    4. a bookbinder.  However, the word, ‘ _binder_ ’ seems to be becoming a ‘new meme or symbol’ as the authors of both of the above articles say, containing different meaning. What does it mean in those contexts?


title: What is the meaning of "have a big row" in friendship?

text: In friendship, what does _have a big row_ mean? Is it a common expression? What about its style (formal or informal)? Example: > It is not long before Soosan falls out with Hooshang, and Kobra and Han have > a big row.


title: Should capitalization be preserved in loanwords?

text: > The fundamental principle of gestalt perception is the law of prägnanz > (German for pithiness). In German, all nouns are capitalized. Should the above text be written as is, or with "the law of Prägnanz"?


title: What does "country fellows" actually mean?

text: I searched on Internet for _country fellows_ , but I couldn't find definition. What is the origin and the real meaning of _country fellows_?


title: What's a better word for "cowardly", that doesn't sound like name-calling?

text: Would an average reader know what "pusillanimous" means? That would be the kind of word I'm looking for if anyone would - it sounds more distant than "cowardly". "Cowardly" sounds like you have a personal vendetta against the person/deed you're referring to. I'm trying to avoid that. The situation is this: someone is anonymously attacking someone I know, and will not reveal him/herself or back down from attacking, and I want to find a good way to describe such activity, without sounding personally irritated. Not necessarily professional or dignified, but something similar.


title: Is there a difference in pronunciation between "steal" and "steel"?

text: I'm learning English and recently I have found that there is a difference in pronunciation between such words as: _hit_ and _heat_ , _sit_ and _seat_. I want to know if there is a similar difference in pronunciation between _steal_ and _steel_ (and perhaps _still_ ), _peak_ and _peek_.


title: Origin and status of "hosed", meaning "broken"

text: Are the etymology and status of _hosed_ known, and if so, what are they? For this question, "hosed" is used as at onlineslangdictionary or at urbandictionary. (That is, with meaning _broken, messed up, worn out_ , rather than its probably-older "put hose on" or "attached hose" past-participle meanings.) My question about the status of the word is whether it indubitably is slang, vs. being a "proper dictionary word". I've always supposed it should be the latter, and imagined that dictionary compilers have left it out by mistake. Note 1: as a plus, the onlineslangdictionary site tabulates votes on frequency of use and sense of vulgarity of words, and tabulates hundreds of recent tweets containing 'hosed'; perhaps as a minus, it gives a needlessly wordy definition: "utterly and undoubtedly affixiated in a troublesome situation". Note 2: ngrams.googlelabs.com shows frequency of use of 'hosed' tripling between 1930 and 1940. Update 1: Among answers given so far, the "police brutality [by] use of water via fire hoses" and/or "being beaten with a rubber hose" explanations seem less compelling than (i) the explanation stemming from _hose_ as "transparent metaphor for the penis" (supported by specialised slang dictionary references) or (ii) the explanation based on SCTV / Mackenzie Brothers / Great White North reference and Wikipedia _hoser_ entry. If it becomes more clear in a few days I'll checkmark an answer. - jiw


title: When (if ever) to use plural form of Homo sapiens?

text: Which should I say? > These are two fine _Homo sapiens_. or > These are two fine _Homines sapientes_. (Assume I insist on using the Latin _Homo sapiens_ in my sentence, for whatever reason. Edit to elaborate: For example, for ironic effect or humor or as one suggests, to demonstrate my erudition.) There's a brief discussion of this matter here.


title: Signaling Continuation of Something

text: If you are writing something like a section/table in one page of a document and are forced to move part of it to a new place, what word do you use to signal "continuation"? For example, (Page 1:) Section 1: Bla bla bla, (Page 2:) Section 1 (cont.)(???) bla bla bla bla. The idea is to somehow signal that "Section 1" in page 2 doesn't start anew, I mean, it was already started somewhere else and we are signaling that fact. What word/abbreviation do you use?


title: Can I "shout someone out", or only "give a shout out to" someone (to recognize them)?

text: I was listening to NPR's The Politics Hour when I noticed the unusual construction > They refurbished eight of our libraries, eight brand-new libraries in D.C. > Public Schools, and **I want to shout Target out.** I'm familiar with the phrase _give a shout out to_ , which is something like _hat tip to_ , a type of name-dropping expressing kudos. I thought the _shout [name/noun] out_ construction might just be a slip of the tongue, because I've never seen it with this meaning with "shout" and "out" separated, but the speaker, DCPS chancellor Kaya Henderson (originally from NYC; this could originate there?) didn't seem hesitant. Most of the instances of this kind of shout out in COCA are about giving a _shout out_ (noun) to someone, like these: > I just wanted **to give a shout out to** my doctor...   >  I gotta **give my shout out to** them...   >  I would like **to put a shout out for** a whole profession of > nutritionists... the instances where _shout out_ is a verb (that aren't about literally shouting) are rarer; I found just a few: > And **we shout out to all of you** here this morning.   >  **Our hearts shout out to** all of the bereaved families... and I found no results for _shout [noun/pronoun] out_. There are a few, when searching Google for phrases like _shout you out_ , but it seems uncommon, except for the unrelated meaning of removing stains ( _shout **it** out_). So, does it make sense to replace _to give a shout out to [name]_ or _to shout out to [name]_ with _to shout [name] out_? (If so, is this limited to American English? Particular dialects?)


title: "To" versus "with" in early English

text: I've been reading John Donne's **Song (Go And Catch A Falling Star)** and my query is on the usage of **to** in the line "to two or three." > Yet she   >  Will be False,   >  ere I come, to two or three. I understand this means _she will be false, before I come, **with** two or three others_, so is the usage of " **to** " instead of " **with** " common for the time? Are there other meanings I've not got?


title: Is there any word for a subject which we need not memorize?

text: In a conversion, i was telling my friend about the importance of mathematics subject. I said that mathematics is a such subject which we do not need to memorize. So, is there any word available to say that > mathematics is not a ......(adjective) subject, like some others which must > be learned "parrot-fashion"?


title: "As to" vs. "that"

text: Which of the following sentences is correct, or are they both correct? > I'm not so cold-hearted that I wouldn't reply.   >  I'm not so cold-hearted as to not reply.


title: Castle Caladan - why a "pile of stone"?

text: Frank Herbert's Dune book begins with a sentence that describes Castle Caladan as a pile of stone that has been home to 26 generations of Atreides Dukes. Not being a native English speaker, I am left to wonder as of what does it mean. Does the word "pile" here really mean that the castle was actually a ruin?


title: When to use "just"

text: The word _just_ is one of those overused words that carries little meaning and appears to just clutter up a sentence (oops, did it again).   * When is the use of _just_ justified?   * What are better, clearer constructions (e.g. replace _just_ with _only_ )   * When should the word be dropped altogether?


title: Is the account balance "less" or "smaller" when we compare two amounts?

text: > Your current account balance is $X **smaller/less** than is required I have read that when we are talking about amount we say **small amount**. So in my case what word would be right to use?


"Give him a box that everyone knows what it contains." Is this correct English? It sounds wrong to me.


title: See you~What does it mean?

text: What does see you means? Is it bidding goodbye or saying that I am coming soon to meet u...means I am on my way to meet u? Does it has two meanings?


title: Singular or plural noun in a sentence after using both in a related conjunction?

text: Occasionally when I am writing a sentence, I end up in a situation where I do not know whether to use the singular or plural form of a noun because I used both just prior to it in a conjunction. For example: > The worst, and one of the most common, problems is […] > > One of the most common, and generally worst, problem is […] Should _problem_ be singular or plural in those sentences? Is there a rule for situations like this? (It certainly doesn’t help that for _one of the most common problems is_ has _is_ instead of _are_ right next to a plural noun.) * * * **Update** Here is another example which (along with its non-contraction versions) does not fit the currently accepted answer. > JavaScript / Bookmarklets don’t work […] > > Bookmarklets / JavaScript doesn’t work […] In fact, the sentence before the above example with the parenthesized segment is itself confusing as to whether the next word should be _does_ or _do_.


title: Correct spelling for BOD and DO

text: What is the correct way to spell "biochemical oxygen demand" and "dissolved oxygen" in the middle of a sentence? Should the initial letters be capitalized?


title: How is the word "breve" pronounced?

text: How should the word "breve" be pronounced?


title: Taking up Picadilly

text: Good day. I've been reading 'Short works of Lord Dunsany' for this morning. Among the short stories I've read one. Fortunately I found it through internet. it follows below. *George P. Landow created this formatted version of The Book of Wonder, which was first oublished in 1915, using the Project Gutenberg text produced by Anne Reshnyk, Suzanne L. Shell, Charles Franks and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team. Going down Piccadilly one day and nearing Grosvenor Place I saw, if my memory is not at fault, some workmen with their coats off--or so they seemed. They had pickaxes in their hands and wore corduroy trousers and that little leather band below the knee that goes by the astonishing name of "York-to-London." They seemed to be working with peculiar vehemence, so that I stopped and asked one what they were doing. "We are taking up Piccadilly," he said to me. "But at this time of year?" I said. "Is it usual in June?" "We are not what we seem," said he. "Oh, I see," I said, "you are doing it for a joke." "Well, not exactly that," he answered me. "For a bet?" I said. "Not precisely," said he. And then I looked at the bit that they had already picked, and though it was broad daylight over my head it was darkness down there, all full of the southern stars. "It was noisy and bad and we grew aweary of it," said he that wore corduroy trousers. "We are not what we appear." They were taking up Piccadilly altogether.* Here is my question. I don't fully understand what 'taking up Picadilly' means. Is it idiom used in Britain? Please let me know the meaning of this.


title: How do I ask "when" without implying past or future?

text: "When did or will the event happen?" — This sounds silly to me. To make matters worse, I would like to use passive voice because the question is in reference to a statement that uses passive voice. "When were or will they be punished?" — This is especially bad because it sounds like "When were they be punished?" is an optional way of receiving the question. Any answer is appreciated, but I'd really like to do this using a single sentence.


title: "brand spanking new" - is this correct grammar & polite way to say?

text: I saw an add saying "This iphone is brand spanking new" which sound like "brand _*_ new". I am not sure if this word has correct grammar + polite (ie people use it without any bad or joke meaning)


title: "This is a song by Lady Gaga" or "this is the song by Lady Gaga"?

text: Which article is appropriate in the blank below, _a_ or _the_? > — What are you singing? I've heard the song many times.   >  — This is ___ _ song by Lady Gaga.


title: Which word to use when speaker sound is not working properly

text: I have a malfunctioned speaker, its sound does not come out normally but is like being stuck, which word(s) could I use to describe a speaker with defected sound? Thanks in advance.


title: Need one word that defines funny, clever but also blunt

text: I have a colleague who comes up with really very clever and funny things to say, but they are also very blunt. Is there a word (or two) that can describe this?


title: A word for: Taking a godlike concept and bringing it down to earth

text: There is this beautiful woman I always wanted, and who looked so beautiful and pure, like a goddess, and then we dated and she lost all this glory and she became just another girl. What do you call the process that my concept of her went through? Share your most beautiful words!


title: One word for "unworthy of consideration"

text: If you're faced with two options and one of them is more _worthy_ of consideration, as in it takes less of your time, making the other option more " _unworthy_ of consideration". It has a clear disadvantage that needs to be highlighted with a "strong" adjective. "unconsiderworthy" was the word I thought would fit but it seems it's not a word. (although atleast one other person has used it) edit: agreeing with the comments, changed the phrasing.


title: Is "titular" the appropriate word for a song that only uses the album title in its lyrics, not title?

text: Is a song on a music album considered to be the _titular_ song if it doesn't share the title of the album, but incorporates it into the lyrics? If not, is there another appropriate term for this lyrical gimmick?


title: What is packaging tape called in the US?

text: What is adhesive tape (or "Scotch" tape) that is used for packaging things is usually called in the United States? What verb do you usually use for "package something with packaging tape"? Maybe "to scotch something"? ![Scotch tape](http://i.stack.imgur.com/0VR0N.jpg)


title: Difference between "find" and "search"?

text: What is the difference between _find_ and _search_? Please suggest the proper usage.


title: Noun for adjective "reservable"?

text: In English, is it correct to use the term 'reservability' for the ability to reserve a room? Or is the term 'bookability' preferable? Or anything else? Context: I'm translating a room reservation software system, where you can set whether a room in a building is bookable in a selection field named 'bookability' with choices yes and no (and null/void).


title: Phrases about a journey in BrE and AmE

text: What is the common phrases in BrE and AmE to say someone when he/she is beginning a journey? I know that in BrE we can say (according to http://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/journey_1): 'Have a good journey!' 'Safe journey!' but what should we say in AmE? Can we ask in AmE: 'Was the journey long?' when we meet somebody at the station? **Edit** : And what about a flight? 'Have a good flight!' is common for BrE and AmE?


title: Can the statement "bunch of bees" be correct?

text: I appreciate that the correct name for a group of bees is 'swarm', which is accurate whether the bees are clustered together or not. With that in mind, how correct is it to refer to the same group of bees as a bunch, as opposed to a swarm?


title: Is there a name for 'markup'?

text: I've been trying to formulate a question for quite some time, and I haven't been able to come up with a better way to describe it. I hope it's not too confusing. There are a number of ways to use markup languages to convey information like emphasis in text files. Stack exchange uses 'Markdown' for example. In this case, adding `*` (in Markdown) or `<emph>` (in HTML) is simply called 'markup' I suppose, but is there a name for this? That is, making something stand out in the text, be it logically like "emphasis" or explicitly like "bold" or "underline", etc. The only thing that comes to mind is to emphasize, but (to me at least) that implies stressing the word, not what you're doing with the text to achieve that result. This has been bugging me for quite a while, I hope someone can help me out here.


title: Singular or Plural?

text: I know that in general people say > How are you? I find out that people used "are" for showing politeness and respect to the person. But one of my friend always say > How is you? so, can I ask "How is you?" for not showing respect and politeness to the person. Sounds bad, though it is singular question. Should it be "is" or "are"?


title: A shorter phrase for "is a poor predictor of"

text: This is a bullet point in a presentation: > Coronary angiography **is a poor predictor of** the hemodynamic relevance of > stenosis "is a poor predictor of" feels very round-about, but I can't think of a better way to phrase it. Is there one? The phrase is meant in the sense of "is not a good method to decide".


title: Relative pronouns after prepositions: is it okay to use them in speech?

text: Consider the following usages of relative pronouns:   1. The lecturer introduces a study _in which_ participants were asked to choose one attractive picture.   2. At the university I met famous professors, _many of whom_ were fluent English speakers. One of my grammar textbooks says that these usages are bookish. The question is whether I sound strange if I use relative pronouns in these ways in speech (I have TOEFL speaking section in mind). This may not be a relative pronoun technically, but people sometimes write _I have no pen with which to write letters_ instead of _I have no pen to write letters with_. Is the former expression too formal to be used in speech?


title: What's the deal with wherewithal?

text: Can someone give me an account of the word _wherewithal_? According to etymonline it is a combination of _where_ and _withal_. But _withal_ means "in addition." So how does _wherewithal_ come to mean "having the means?"   Additionally, what is the name of the phenomenon of two words joining into one - _where_ \+ _withal_?


title: "that" or "this"

text: I know a trivial difference of "that" and "this" uses. Such as the difference between "this chair" and "that chair". But I don't understand one case. When one person is coming into a room and another has been doing something. And the first one asks him "Why are you doing that?". I heard about the same questions with "that" in many analogous situations in different movies. And the main question is why "that", not "this". I think that "this" more fits here, because a situation is in front of an asking person.


title: Is there a word for this emotion? Resentment over someone's good fortune without wanting it - Not quite jealousy/envy

text: What is the word to describe this? I was reading up about the differences between jealousy and envy and this doesn't seem to fit either, when you don't actually want what the other person has, nor do you have it, but you're just kind of bitter and angry because you don't think they deserve anything at all. For example: Your crappy neighbor wins a new car. You have a much better car, or don't even need a car at all, but you're still mad about it since he doesn't deserve to win anything at all. Or, you break up with a real jerk, are more than happy to be rid of him and find a new wonderful partner, and then later see him out with a really attractive person. It's not like you want the guy back, or you want the person he's with, or that you're even wanting a relationship, but you just are angry that this jerk is getting anything at all. A friend suggested "begrudge", but it still sounds like you actually want what the other person has. Is there a simple word to express resentment/biterness over another person's good fortune without investment in actually wanting what they obtained?


title: Meaning of "run down your debts/assets" and "dissave"

text: What does this sentence mean? > The private sector is seeking to **run down** its **debts**. A similar construction is the following one: > The Janets must be prepared to **dissave** , to **run down** their > **assets**. Is "to run down your assets" the same as "to dissave"? Do these expressions more broadly mean "to spend", or is there any subtle difference between them? For reference, the above quotes were taken from http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/25/death-by-accounting-identity/ and http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/25/death-by-hawkery/.


title: "Hide" vs "conceal"

text: What is the difference between _hide_ and _conceal_?


title: Plurality of numbers between -1 and 1

text: If I recall correctly, the Académie française states that, for French, quantities comprised within [-1,1] are singular, and anything else is plural. This means, for instance, that we should say (in French) 0.3722 apple, instead of 0.3722 apples. I know the plurality for 1 and -1 in English, but what is the plurality of real numbers between them?


title: Anglicization of diacritical marks and non-English letters

text: In my understanding, many European cultures have compensated for the lack of certain characters on keyboards (especially old typewriters) by “anglicizing” some characters. For example, the German _ß_ becomes _ss_ , the Danish (and others) _Å_ becomes _aa_. Is there a list, official or not, of these “compensations”? (And yes, I do realize that this could very well fit in any other language SE than English, but English would be the common trait to these).


title: Where did "sorry" get its vowel sound?

text: _Sorry_ has two pronunciations in my dictionary: `ˈsärē` and `ˈsôrē`. The first is the one I am interested in because, as someone pointed out to me, the _or_ pattern in English is nearly always pronounced as "oh-r" not "ah-r". At the time, I couldn't think of any other words that pronounced _or_ as "ah-r" but overheard someone say "tomorrow" and realized there are a few others:   * tomorrow   * sorrow   * morrow   * horror (the first _o_ and only in some places) The question is this: Is there a commonality between these words that allow for a `är` (ah-r) pronunciation? Perhaps a similar history? Does the double-r make the difference?


title: "Cancel" versus "close" versus "abolish" when referring to a debit/credit card

text: What is the difference (semantical or local/cultural) between _cancel_ , _close_ vs. _abolish_ when referred to a debit/credit card?


title: What is the possessive for several names?

text: If Alice and Bob each has a house, are these "Alice and Bob's houses" or "Alice's and Bob's houses"? Does that change anything if each of the houses belongs to both of them?


title: Dissecting an English sentence using a pattern?

text: I am trying to make a script that can dissect an English sentence. Problem is, I have no idea how to dissect an English when the words are not familiar. I know what the nouns, verbs, etc are, because I reconize the words. I can give the script a large set of words so it can reconize them as well, but surely there are certain "patterns" that one can check to see what part of a sentence the noun or verb is, even though the noun or verb is not known at the moment. Are there such patterns for the English language? Can one dissect a sentence by only "recognizing" a few words? Thanks to the comments. I can specify this question a bit better. Understanding the whole language is not necesary, seeing how nobody really understands everything of a natural language. Having simple patterns and "rules" should be enough, I understand that, because English is a natural language, about every rule or pattern would have some kind of exception and mapping each one of those would probably take forever. But ignoring those exceptions (apart for the most common), I could make the script understand quite a lot. If necessary, I could theoretically then add exceptions until done (read: forever). EDIT Thanks to the feedback on this question, I've managed to find a few examples of patterns. (not sure if these are exactly what I need, but as an example they should be fine)   * Subject + Verb (S-V)   * Verb + Subject (V-S)   * Subject + Verb + Direct Object (S-V-DO)   * Subject + Verb + Complement (S-V-SC)   * Subject + Verb + Indirect Object + Direct Object (S-V-IO-DO)   * Subject + Verb + Direct Object + Object Complement (S-V-DO-OC) Reconizing in what pattern a sentence falls, is probably first thing I should aim for. Of course, this is much easier said then done, also, fo every pattern I find, questions seem to be missing for it, but that is another issue I can deal with later. From what I can tell, the best course of action is to match the verb in the sentence, then check if the words before it match as a the subject, then check the words behind it. Etc. While finding the verb should not be that big an issue, matching a subject seems quite hard, it can't come from a database since, thanks to names, there are infinite possibilities. Still.. shouldn't a subject follow a pattern just aswell? Also, if I were to go this route, wouldn't it end up being a maze of patterns? (not that thats necesarily a bad thing)


title: How should one answer a business phone?

text: I am still a bit confused how to receive an external phone call at work. Browsing the internet I find:               * Hello? (informal)     * Thank you for calling Boyz Autobody. Jody speaking. How can I help you?     * Doctor's office.      None of those work for me well. "Hello?" is certainly too informal. The second seems more for a receptionist...and the third...I don't know what's that supposed to mean. What are your standard phrases?


title: Indirect questions using “do you think”

text: When we ask an indirect, closed question we usually use _if_ : >   1. _Will he be home soon?_ >   2. Can you tell me **if** he'll be home soon? >   3. Do you know **if** he'll be home soon? > Why do we not use _if_ with _do you think_? > _Do you think he'll be home soon?_


title: Does the verb 'skid' take an object?

text: Does the verb “skid” take an object? So is it OK to say: > He skidded his car on the road.


title: Definite article and dates without ordinal indicators

text: Where ordinal indicators are not used, which of the following is correct?   1. We will go ahead _on the 7 January 2013._   2. We will go ahead _on 7 January 2013._


title: "Button up" vs. "button down"

text: As it pertains to a dress shirt, which is the correct usage or do these terms have different meanings?


title: What to call someone who doesn't like foreigners who lack manners and basic knowledge of the country and culture they are mixing themselves in?

text: For instance, a French person is coming from a different culture and hence may come across as being rude in a British person's eyes. Moreover, he is ignorant about the different culture in Britain and claims French superiority over Britain's present day culture based on events that took place in history. I am not sure if, when I dislike this French person for these treats, it could be considered racism (because that's what I am being called all the time when I say what I don't like about that type of foreign people) or if there is a more accurate term for disliking these kinds of rude, ignorant and foreign people. They visit this country with a disrespectful attitude and indifference towards adapting or awknowledging Britain's own culture.


title: Avoiding the possessive form of words ending with "s"

text: This question deals with the proper possessive for words that end with _s_. I am wondering how common it is to restructure a sentence as to avoid the awkward possessive form. For example: > I visited **Paros' lighthouse**. appears less attractive than: > I visited **the lighthouse of Paros**. I am particularly interested how this affects spoken English.


title: Term for asking a question to create context

text: Sometimes to start a conversation or to bring up a subject I ask a question. I ask it in hopes that they know the answer, I'm not seeking knowledge or an explanation, but instead I'm looking to create a context for the conversation. An example question might be something as simple as "Remember yesterday when we talked about [something we talked about yesterday]?" Obviously I don't expect them to just say "yes, I remember" and that's that. I'm bringing that conversation into mind as the context for this conversation. I imagine it's a question and not a command or a statement because 1) they may not actually remember the the conversation from yesterday and 2) courtesy. Is there a name or phrase for this kind of question?


Is it correct to say "cold temperature"?


title: How to correct a sentence that Word thinks is a fragment I need to revise?

text: I will be specific. I am trying to frame a sentence to include in a blog post. Instinctively it feels lame and wrong. Word keeps asking me to consider revising the fragment. As I am not a native English speaker, I realize I have to ask questions when I get stuck and practice writing better sentences, step by step. That is the idea behind writing this post. Here is my sentence: > Type out the below code in your favorite code editor or simple old NotePad > and save it in a convenient location on your hard drive. What is a better way to write it, both from the point of view of grammar and user friendliness?


title: Term for the identification of the person speaking in a dialogue

text: Consider the following piece of dialogue: > **Peter:** Hello, Mary! How do you do?   >  **Mary:** Hi, Peter! Fine, and you? What is the term for the part in bold, the specification of who is to speak a particular line?


title: Origin and meaning of the American 1960s slang phrase, "bread is"

text: I am trying to answer a question from a library patron who remembers the entire phrase, "bread is" that she and her friends used in the 1960s. She accepts that "bread" was used for money or "dough," another slang word. However she remembers use of the entire phrase, "bread is."


title: "Product by company" or "product from company"

text: Suppose that there is a company named Megasoft. Megasoft has just launched their new software application to the public called Softronic. Which is correct: _Softronic by Megasoft_ or _Softronic from Megasoft_?


title: Is "It won't let me not." grammatically correct?

text: I found myself saying the following sentence the other day: > I always fasten my seat belt because my car won't let me not — it starts > beeping loudly. If I were to use _allow_ instead of _let_ , I would say: > I always fasten my seat belt because my car won't allow me not **to** — it > starts beeping loudly. The latter sentence sounds natural to me because of the additional _to_ that makes it clear what _not_ refers to. Since _let_ takes the bare infinitive, I suppose that using _to_ in the first sentence would be incorrect: > I always fasten my seat belt because my car won't let me not **to** — it > starts beeping loudly. Wouldn't it? What would you say about my first sentence? The words "won't let me not" sound strange to my ear. Is it grammatical? Is it clumsy? Is it perfectly natural? What is the general rule of using _let_ \+ negative verb with the actual verb omitted?


title: "As far as I know" and "As far as I'm concerned"

text: Can we use "As far as I'm concerned" in place of "As far as I know"? Or, are there some specific scenarios where in we do not have to use one in place of the other phrase?


title: Term for using "thingy-esque" phrases rather than a common word

text: {This question came to mind because of the recent question .. What do you call the interconnecting bits of a puzzle piece in English? } In my opinion, in English, it's reasonably common that—strangely enough—there is _no word_ for a certain reasonably common thing. And indeed, speakers prefer to use an **ad-hoc description** for the thing in question on an ongoing basis, rather than, as you'd probably expect, a specific or technical word falling into general use and coming to be "the word" for the _thing_. {Contrast milieu such as say Germany or Japan, where the culture, within 12 seconds, codifies exact, specific, universally-accepted terms for anything that comes along, whether a cultural phenomenon, technical object, or the like.} I think of this as "the _Thingy_ substitution", or the things in question as ' _thingy things_ ' because, well, they are usually referred to as > the thingy that... The perfect example is > the _thingies_ on jigsaw puzzle pieces. (Note that, 100% of English-native speakers will understand _exactly_ what I am referring to.) To repeat, native English speakers—in my opinion—prefer to stick (even over decades) with _ad-hoc thingy-esque multi-word_ descriptions rather than adopting a new word generally accepted. {On the other hand, of course, the etats-unis in particular is notorious for generating zillions of acronyms and other coinages—however, I don't think the two concepts are at odds, both are true.} Now there's possibly a term for this phenomenon among linguists e.g., "grasp words", "thingy words" or "ad-hoc non-naming conventions" etc.   * (a) Does anyone know such a term?   * (b) Indeed, does anyone agree that this is a phenomenon amongst particularly English speakers?   * (c) Indeed, is this all well-known and explored by academic linguists/etc and I'm just behind the times?


title: Be vs being in "Being in a great team" when answering "the best things in our company".

text: I am asked to list "the best things in our company". I want to say that the team I am in is great. But I think it should be a noun to be filled in the blank to answer the question. So I think "being in a great team" should be filled in, am I correct?


title: What does "this is a reach" mean?

text: In an answer on ELL it reads: > Here - **and this is a reach** \- but it could technically be understood to > mean that my mother thinks this girl is the prettiest I can find, though > there are prettier ones out there in general. In that context it sounds to me like this statement makes some reservation, for that reason I believe the meaning is "far-fetched" as in "The whole story sounds very far-fetched."; in other words, that it's unlikely to be understood in this way. And though, the opposite meaning might be equally likely. However, trying to confirm one or the other by searching the Internet, especially dictionaries (Oxford Dictionaries, Merriam-Webster), I can't find anything which gives me a clue. _Reach_ undoubtedly means the distance over which something or someone is – well – reachable but then I actually expect a saying (with the meaning that I suspect) to be like "This is out of reach" or for the opposite "This is within reach"; but in any case I wouldn't go with "a reach". So, what is "a reach"? Is it something I can achieve because it's still within reach, or is it something I won't achieve because it's beyond reach?


title: Meaning of the plural form of yarn

text: My dictionary defines the following: yarn: thread that has been spun, used for knitting, weaving, etc. I am unsure of the meaning of the plural form "yarns". To illustrate, I'll use two examples: A. "He sold yarns of many colours---red, blue, and white." B. "She found that five yarns corresponded to a width of one centimetre in the knitted fabric." After consulting with people that speak English well, I get two different answers:   1. "yarns" refers strictly to several different types of yarn, as the word is used in example A. However, "yarns" can not be used to refer to several threads of yarn as in example B. (This makes the "yarns" somewhat similar to the "peoples".)   2. "yarns" may refer to both several different types of yarn and several threads of yarn. Both example A and B show correct usage of "yarns". Which of these definitions of the plural form is correct? (Or maybe the answer is something different?) If "yarns" cannot be used to describe several threads of yarn (as in example B), then what should example B look like? Is the term "threads of yarn" ok? The text I am writing is rather formal, so I would appreciate answers that are appropriate in a formal context.


title: Describing a number that is supposed change something relative to a certain value

text: I need to describe a parameter in a program and i am struggling with grammar. The parameter is called "delta" and is supposed to be an amount that changes a certain value. So my trys are:   * The delta which to change the value by   * The delta of which to change the value by   * The delta by which to change the value I can't figure out which is correct (if one of these is correct at all). At least they sound wrong to me.


> The person who marries for money usually earns every penny of it. ...anonymous quote. What does this phrase mean? It seems to suggest that if you marry for money, you will earn all of the money you married for, which would be a lot. That doesn't make sense.


What is the difference between "splitting something" and "dividing something"? When do people say _split_ and when do they say _divide_?


title: deity / divinity / god

text: I'm translating some Buddhist texts to English and I'm wondering if there are any subtle differences in usage between the words **deity** , **divinity** , and **god** (in the lower case sense)? What is the word for their _"earthly" counterpart_ (by which I mean "natural being" or "ordinary people")? Thank you!


title: I expect John to x vs I expect John will x

text: 1. I expect John **to** reply to your email.   2. I expect John **will** reply to your email.   3. I expect him **to** reply to your email   4. I expect him **will** reply to your email (ungrammatical)   5. I expect he **to** reply to your email (ungrammatical)   6. I expect he **will** reply to your email  Why do some of these sentences take _will_ and others take _to_? * * * There is a question "Expect to" vs "Expect will". That post doesn't ask the question I've asked in this one.


title: What/who are "toy soldiers"?

text: There is a song called Toy Soldiers by _Martika_ of which a part of the lyrics goes: > Step by step   >  Heart to heart   >  Left, right, left   >  We all fall down   >  Like toy soldiers > > Bit by bit   >  Torn apart   >  We never win   >  But the battle wages on   >  For toy soldiers This song was later remade by _Eminem_ , retaining the original chorus lyrics, but being renamed to **Like Toy Soldiers**. What does this phrase mean? Who are the toy soldiers? I know the literal meaning - the toys - small soldiers - with which the children play, but I believe there is a deeper meaning to it.


title: Noun form of 'owe'?

text: If I've paid somebody $100, the $100 is my _payment_. If I owed someone $100, would the $100 be an **_owement_**? Is there a better word? I could call it _debt_ or _loan_ , but it doesn't quite suit the following example: Say two people Alice and Bob maintained a common expenses spreadsheet online to track who owed who how much. Would it be appropriate to name that sheet ' ** _Alice-Bob Owements_** '?


title: Should I use the article 'a' here? Or nothing at all?

text: Which variant is better? > We have a chance to get new experience talking to new people. or > We have a chance to get **a** new experience talking to new people.


title: Is there a word for one side in a pair?

text: Is there a word for one side in a pair? In a conversation it would the the interlocutor, but I'm looking for a generic term.


title: Should I capitalize the word 'Web' in this sentence?

text: > A dedicated web server may be required, depending on XXX, YYY, ZZZ, and the > total number of concurrent **_Web users_**


title: Can 'purview' and 'ambit' be used interchangeably?

text: Are there any specific rules for using those 2 words? Like, in some situations, purview could be better, and in some others, ambit may seem good.


title: One word for an activity a person does to get close to someone

text: Is there a single English word for an activity a person does to try and get closer to someone? This someone might be: >   * Someone they get a crush on, so they're like trying to be her/his > boyfriend/girlfriend. > >> or: >>   * Someone they want to know deeper. Like what a teacher does to her student, a mum does to her kids, a friend does to another friend. >> In Indonesian we would call it: **_pendekatan_**. In English, I can only think of: >   * _trying to get closer_ (which is not one word) >   * _approaching_ (which is merely translated to English) >   * _flirting_ or _seducing_ (which is not the kind of _approaching_ I'm > looking for) > I suppose there is a more "English" word for this. (?)


title: Implementation(s) of the algorithm on the GPU and on the CPU?

text: The implementation of the algorithm on the GPU is introduced. The implementation of the algorithm on the CPU is also introduced. If I want to combine the two sentences above into one, which of the following sentences is correct? (a) The implementation of the algorithm on the GPU and on the CPU is introduced. (b) The implementations of the algorithm on the GPU and on the CPU are introduced. (c) The implementation of the algorithm on the GPU and the CPU is introduced. Many Thanks!


title: Verb + Preposition - use of from

text: I have a cylinder and a nail. If an instruction says 'the nail is inserted from the top' what is the correct meaning? Does the verb refer to the cylinder or the nail?


title: Can 'embellishing' be used adjectivally?

text: Can one use _embellishing_ as an adjective? For example, “He gave an embellishing speech.”


title: One word substitutions for number of days?

text: Words exist to label periods of time - like **week** which represents 7 days and **fortnight** which is used for a 14-day period. Are there other such words used for certain numbers of consecutive days?


title: "In the unlikely event"

text: You hear it in most safety demonstrations. "In the unlikely event" ... of a water landing, of an emergency evacuation, of a fire etc. etc. etc. Did this phrasing come from somewhere specifically?


title: "Would agree" vs "would have agreed"

text: > Did I really believe she would agree? and > Did I really believe she would have agreed? What's the difference between the two? Is one more common/grammatically correct than the other?


title: Opposite of change?

text: What is the opposite of change ( _change_ as in "change for currency")? If I say, "Give me change for $10" what is the opposite of 'change' in that sentence?


title: How to put "saved my time" in sentence?

text: If I want to say that I have to scan my computer for virus filtering but some information tell me that there is no virus issue in my system and saved my time because I don't need to do virus filtering then is this the correct sentence to say               It save my time of virus filtering?      or is there any other way to say that more accurately and neatly?


title: How would you call someone that connects two people together?

text: Is there an English term to describe someone that acts as a "mediator" between two people, i.e someone that connects two people together?


title: Is "instead of served by it" grammatically correct?

text: Hillary Clinton said as follows: > If the Voting Rights Act is not fixed, Clinton warned, "Citizens will be > disenfranchised, victimized by the law _instead of served by it_ , and that > progress — that historical progress toward a more perfect union — will go > backward instead of forward." Is " _instead of served by it_ " grammatically correct? Shouldn't it be " _instead of being served by it?_ "


title: The correct usage of 'Not only' in the beginning of a negative sentence

text: Friends, would you please tell me if I use "Not only,but also" correctly?   1- Not only have these conditions been not prepared in developed countries, but developing countries also have not accepted them.   2- Not only have not these conditions been prepared in developed countries, but also have developing countries not accepted them.   3- Not only have these conditions not been prepared in developed countries, but (also) in developing countries.   Could you tell me which sentence is correct, where is the right location of 'not' in the above examples and can we ignore the verb after 'but also' like example 3?   In the end, do you have any better idea to write the mentioned example in a more formal form? Thanks a lot.


title: Difference between "reflection" and "reflexion"

text: When is one used instead of the other? Is there a reason to use one or the other? Or is just two words that can be used without problems?


title: What is the term which encompasses accents, umlauts, etc?

text: Is there a term that covers grave and acute accents, umlauts, cedillas, tildes and all other characters that can be added to normal letters. I have come across the word _diacritics_. But this seems to include things like commas and apostrophes.


title: Origin of an ethnic slur

text: The American Heritage Dictionary states that the origins of "sheeny," a pejorative slang word for a Jew, are unknown. As a Jew, I am interested in finding out where and when this word developed. Any clues?


title: social media platform vs. social media venue

text: What would be the correct or most appropriate word for each social media form (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, Blog, etc.) Social media platform? Social media venue? Social media account? "Among multiple social media platforms, Facebook is most effective in ....."


title: Is "will never have been" valid English?

text: I was reading this phrase "will never have been" and I was wondering what grammatical structure does it belong to / is it grammatical? I'm not sure why but it sounds weird. What is the difference between "will never have been" and "was never"? > **1 Kings 3:12 (NIV)** > > I will do what you have asked. I will give you a wise and discerning heart, > so that there will never have been anyone like you, nor will there ever be. PS: This question is about English usage, and no, this question has nothing to do with exegesis.


title: What is a word processor and a type setter? (and a "powerpoint" type program)

text: What would you call:   * latex (a type setter)   * MS Word (a word processor)   * iWork Pages (a word processor) What about:   * latex   * MS Word   * iWork Pages   * Powerpoint   * Excel Is there a term for these programs?


title: Send, sent; end, *ent?

text: The past tense of a number of verbs changes from _-end_ to _-ent_ :   * _bend_ → _bent_   * _lend_ → _lent_   * _rend_ → _rent_   * _send_ → _sent_   * _spend_ → _spent_   * _wend_ → _went_ However, most do not, notably _end_. Granted, I say “I ent up” (facetiously?), but how did this sound change come to happen to some verbs but not others? Of the examples above, all but _spend_ come to us from non-Latin origins; but _end_ and _blend_ and _trend_ and many others are all non-Latin as well, and _don’t_ exhibit this change. I gather that this happened some time in the transition from Old English, because (if I’m up on my Old English conjugation, which is questionable) these verbs all used to have regular past forms:   * _bend_ : _bendan_ → _(ge)bended_   * _lend_ : _lænan_ → _(ge)læned_ (?)   * _rend_ : _rendon_ → _(ge)rended_   * _send_ : _sendan_ → _(ge)sended_   * _-spend_ : _forspendan_ → _(ge)forspended_ (?)   * _wend_ : _wendan_ → _(ge)wended_ Can anyone offer some insight? Is this related to _learned/learnt_ , _dreamed/dreamt_ , &c.?


title: Phrase for asking the obvious

text: In my language when a question is asking something really obvious we are using a phrase that if translated means: > What is making a "meow meow" sound on the roof/rooftop? Is there an equivalent phrase to that in English? Kind of slang but with nothing that can be considered rude in the sense of "Do bears shit in the woods?"


title: How is appropriate to say "one of the biggest/best" etc?

text: The superlative forms imply that they are the ONLY ones. For instance, if we say, that John is the _best_ football player. We mean, he's _the_ best. So, how is it appropriate to say, "one of the best", when that phrase implies plurality.


title: On English Phrases with Essential Changes in Meaning

text: In any living language the change in meanings of the words and phrases is a natural phenomenon. But sometimes this change is very essential and a certain word or phrase loses its original meaning during the time and accepts a new meaning in the opposite direction. My question is about such idioms in English languages. **Question:** Is there any word/phrase/idiom/sentence in English language which was offensive (respectful) in the past and is respectful (offensive) nowadays? Please introduce some references for the offensive/respectful usage of each word/phrase/idiom/sentence in the texts.


title: singular verb or plural verb for working hours

text: It makes sense to say, "My working hours are from 9 am to 6 pm." But is it right to say, "My working hours is from 9 am to 6 pm." My argument is that from 9 am to 6 pm can be treated as a singular subject, as is "butter and bread".


title: A word similar to pride (without it's troublesome patronizing connotations)

text: I frequently want to express a feeling of pleasure to be associated with someone who is doing something exceptional. The phrase that comes to mind is, "I'm proud of you," but I am troubled by a certain sense of the word that suggests that I am responsible for the success of that person. It has a bit of a patronizing, parental feel to it. So for years, I've been hunting for something that expresses some of the same sentiments, without the troublesome patronizing connotations. Any suggestions?


title: Can I say "stuffs" as a plural noun?

text: I know that "stuff" is a collective noun, but other collective nouns like "family" can be pluralized, but "stuffs" doesn't sound quite right to me. However, the spell check on my browser says that "stuffs" is a word. If "stuffs" is correct, why does it sound wrong to me? If it isn't, then why is it different from other collective nouns?


title: Can collective nouns technically refer to only one noun?

text: For those who don't know, collective nouns are words like "family" that refer to a group of things. As I understand it, "stuff" is also a collective noun; that is confirmed by this question. Essentially, my question is: "Can I say 'my stuff' when referring to a single item that I posses?" If I can, does this technicality apply to other collective nouns, or just "stuff"?


title: Meaning of "duck"

text: This is an extract from the subtitles of a television series (Bones) in which Brennan have a talk with Booth: > Booth: The director will create a special unit. If I line my ducks up, I can > head it up. > > Brennan: I think I could be a duck. > > Booth: No, we stick to the book. Cops in the street, squints in the lab. > > Brennan: In this case, the Jeffersonian will issue a press release. > > Booth: You do that, I'm a dead duck I understand the meaning of the whole dialogue in principle, but the multiple use of the word _duck_ in different ways makes me confused. Because Brennan said " _I could be a duck_ " I thought that " _line my ducks up_ " means _to line up a team_. But this makes no sense to me at all. In the TV series, there are always the same people involved in investigations. According to these idioms " _get your ducks in a row_ " means " _to organize things well_ ". This makes sense. But now Brennan's answer is nonsensical. Which meaning has _duck_ in the first sentence by Brennan? Note: I understand the latter _duck_ (dead duck); it is explained as " _someone or something that is certain to die or fail_ " and, likely, just used to complete this wordplay.


title: Position between the origin and the destination

text: In a form we have today:   * from   * via   * to I think it'd be better if we used other terminology. So I went with this.   * from --> origin   * via --> ???   * to --> destination What'd be a good noun corresponding to the adverb " _via_ "?


title: How to say we provide a synopsis here for details refer to other work in formal academic writing

text: > We provide here a synopsis of the measurement process, for an in-depth > description, please refer to XYZ. I'm not a native speaker. How do I write that as the first sentence of a chapter in an academic, technical paper? Also, do I use the word "please" or omit it in formal, technical writing? As in "for an in-depth discussion, please refer to XYZ".


title: What does “Soviet time tactics - No give bucks and muddy the water” (If I heard it right) mean?

text: In our English language listening circle, we unanimously heard AP Radio News (aired on March 31) refering to Russia’s action on Crimea anexation by force as follows: > Former ambassador, Michael McFaul tells the NBC’s ‘Meet the Press’ that > Russian President Vladimir Putin seems to be using a tactic from Soviet > times - **No give bucks and muddy the water**. "They’re changing the > subject. They’re saying O.K. Crimea’s done. We’ve taken that. Now let’s > start negotiating about the Ukrainian constitution.” I’m not certain whether we heard out the line, “No give bucks and muddy the water” rightly, or not. Does our hearing make sense? If no, what should Mr. McFaul have said?. If yes, what does it mean? Is it an idiomatic expression?


title: Incorrectly transliterated foreign words that have been improved

text: Seeking a list of several foreign words (usually names, but any noun) that have been borrowed from other languages, but originally transliterated/pronounced incorrectly and are now being improved into a closer approximation of the original. I used to be able to rattle off four or five such examples, but have forgotten most. Examples:   * Peking (now corrected to Beijing)   * Mao Tse-tung (now corrected to Mao Zedung)   * Bombay (now corrected to Mumbai) Note:   Modified the question to replace "~correction" with "~improvement", as suggested in comments.


title: Is "remains" in "Xenophobia remains in our society" a linking or intransitive verb?

text: Yet another grammar question. I know that 'remains' can be a linking verb in many contexts, but I'm undecided on whether it is linking in the sentence "Xenophobia remains in our society". I feel that "in our society" doesn't restate or rename xenophobia, and I feel it answers the question "Where does xenophobia remain?", making "in our society" an adverb of place. But certainly you can describe some societies as xenophobic. So what characterization is appropriate in this case?


title: Slogan for a drapes manufacturer, which is correct? "Dressing the perfection" or "Dressing Perfection"?

text: I work at a factory that manufactures drapes and window treatments, and we hired a marketing team to revamp our corporate identity. The slogan they came up with is: "Dressing the Perfection" To me that sounds wrong, I believe it should be "Dressing Perfection". They claim it's to give emphasis to the word "Perfection" (As in _**the** perfection_). Thoughts?


title: Why some questions are written in this funny way?

text: There, I did it myself. Instead of asking "Why are some questions written in this funny way?", I produced what strikes me as bad English ever so often: Questions that are formed by starting out with "Why" (or other interrogative words), followed by what seems to be a normal subject-verb-object sentence. A few examples are quickly drawn from some other SE sites (missing question marks included), but this seems to be quite common all across the board:   * “Why we need SELinux?”   * “Why ATM and MPLS are at level 2.5”   * “Why Turn Collate Off”   * “Why BitTorrent uploads simultaneously?”   * “Why the letters in keyboards are arranged like this?” I do have the impression that the actual article beneath such a question is often written in quite good English, so the writer is not necessarily a beginner of the language. Therefore my question, mainly aimed at the native speakers of English: Is this considered to be good style? Or do you find it sloppy? What's your impression when you read such a construct?


title: Is the colloquial Australian term 'festy' actually a word?

text: Usage: "I would not like to eat that pie as it looks all **festy** since you dropped it on the ground." Is the colloquial Australian term ' **festy** ' actually a word?   Also, is it used elsewhere in the world?


title: Informal term alternative to attendee

text: I'm looking for a word to describe people who are attending an event, or who have attended, and would like a less formal term than attendee. I would strongly prefer a single word to a phase, but can be flexible. Any suggestions?


title: Usage of "being" in sentence

text: Why is **being** used in the sentence below, and what does it mean? > Lisa is upset about not **being** invited to the party Are they trying to use the passive voice?   If yes, how would the sentence look if we use the active voice to frame the same sentence?


title: A single word meaning deep love of reading

text: Not bibliophile, or really anything "biblio-" because that means a love of books, which might mean a collector or someone who loves the books themselves, but not necessarily their content. Also, not words like bookworm, because they refer to the person who loves reading, whereas I'd like a word that describes the act or state of loving to read.


title: "indulger of" vs. "indulger in"

text: A person can **indulge in _something_**. Is he therefore an **indulger of _something_** or an **indulger in _something_**? Are both okay? If both are okay, is there any difference between these two phrases or are their meanings exactly the same?


title: Upside down vs downside up

text: Typically when something is reversed or inverted we say it is "upside down", could we also say that it is also "downside up"? For example... > "The picture is upside down" could we also say it like this... > The picture is downside up Are there any sort of rules for the latter? I know it doesn't get used much (if it all) but is it still valid?


title: The + Possessive

text: I'm quite sure that I can say _the Onegin's score_ meaning the opera “Eugene Onegin”. However, i feel that it's wrong to say _the Onegin's leg_ meaning the character Eugene Onegin and that the correct form is _Onegin's leg_. Do I understand correct? Does that mean, that we can use _the + possessive_ only if we talk about inanimated concepts?


title: Term for when inventory is discovered to be missing

text: I previously worked in a bookstore and at around this time of the year, we did an inventory of the bookstore, counting our stock and shipping back old stock to corporate. There was a term we used to describe what happened when there was a difference between our computer stock read as and what we actually had on-hand in the store. This term essentially meant "unanticipated loss of stock due either to theft, misplacement, or other reasons." What was this word?


title: And I didn't know kiwis had hair

text: What can this phrase possible mean? > And I didn't know kiwis had hair I have parsed this as well as I can and cannot come up with anything that makes sense. Reference for context: comment under this StackOverflow Question Is it a phrase or structure commonly used in some corner of the world?


title: Professors and Students

text: When I was learning English back in school (in the nineties), there were _pupils_ and _teachers_. Now there seem to be _students_ and _professors_ , where a "professor" can be anyone who happens to teach people in a school environment. Maybe this strikes me as odd because of the fact that both "Student" and "Professor" are used in German, too. However, "Student" refers to someone at studying at a university, and "Professor" strictly is reserved for someone who has earned a habilitation or has been appointed to a professorship (possibly _honoris causa_ ).   * Has that strict use ever been the prevalent case with English?    * Is it the difference between AE and BE usage?   * Or is it just to euphemism-creep?


title: What is the difference of “a troubling cut to Social Security” from “a troubling cut of Social Security”?

text: The Home page of today's (April 11) New York Times carries an article titled ‘In the President’s Budget’ written by their Editorial Board, which is followed by the lead copy - > “The plan for 2014 includes a troubling cut **_to_** Social Security and > other better ideas that put Republicans on the spot.” Though this might be a primitive question, as usual, from a non native English speaker, if I replace the preposition ‘to’ in “a troubling cut to Social Security” with ‘of,’ what difference of meaning would come out from the original line?


title: "My job is not to worry about those people" — what does "not" refer to?

text: In the famous leaked video, Mitt Romney says > My job is not to worry about those people An equivalent sentence probably is > It is not my job to worry about those people Some media in my home country have translated it to something roughly like > My job is: not to worry about those people The difference is that the _not_ can be assigned to "my job is" or either to "to worry about those people. I actually do not know how this difference can be demonstrated by two proper English sentences, so I hope you get the idea. Question: Can these different shades of meanings be rendered in English just by word order or grammatical particles? Is there any ambiguity in Mitt Romney's statement?


title: Comparative adverbs

text: "Officially" (or so I believe) English doesn't have comparative adverbs (a single word rather than "more" + an adverb), but _faster_ is in common usage as one, for example: > Do it faster When strictly speaking one should say: > Do it more quickly Is the former an error in grammar? Or has English (d)evolved to such an extent that _faster_ may be used as a comparative adverb?


title: What's the difference between "yet another" and "another"?

text: What's the difference between _yet another_ and _another_?


title: Difference between "climate" and "weather" please

text: As a native speaker of Spanish I am confused because we don't have two different words for these terms


title: How to say *heathenous?

text: I want to decry an act or object as having heathen-like qualities. I would call it *heathenous, except apparently this word is neither in the dictionaries nor oft-seen by google.


title: Origin of "for the birds" (Trivial; worthless; only of interest to gullible people.)

text: I really have looked, but the best I can come up with is this > To say that something is "for the birds" is to call it horse manure. Dating > from the days of horse-drawn traffic, the expression is the answer to a > child's question: "Mommy, what's all that stuff in the street?" Perhaps I need to get out more (not that there's much of it around where I live), but I find it hard to believe that of all the things it might be known for, _bird food_ should be considered an archetypal use for _horseshit_. Is that really the origin?


title: word/phrase for "treating the problem rather than the symptom"?

text: Is there a word that mean's the equivalent (or close to) the expression "treat the problem rather than the symptom" ? If not, is there a concise way to say this? For example, in discussing healthcare costs i might advocate that we treat the problem (lack of exercise) rather than treating the symptoms of the problem (obesity). I need to explain this clearly and concisely in a bullet point.... Thanks in advance, any tips appreciated. -Joe


What does "these things are in the ether" mean? The context of the sentence is > My own daughters' names are Freya, a more popular name across the pond than > in the US, and Calla, which last trended as a baby name in 1880. Although > the week Freya was born we learned of two other baby Freyas in our Brooklyn > neighborhood. And a former colleague also had a little girl named Calla. > **So these things are in the ether somehow.** Thank you.


title: What is the proper name for the corkscrew at the top of a soda bottle?

text: At the top of a bottle of pop, there is a corkscrew pattern into which the plastic cap is twisted, tightened and sealed. What is the name of this feature of the bottle?


title: "Shot dead" v/s unfortunate or sudden demise

text: Is it possible to use the word "shot dead" for unfortunate or sudden demise of a person not due to a gun shot?


title: Is there a word for replacing foreign words with English substitutes?

text: On tonight's broadcast of NPR's _All Things Considered_ , host Robert Siegel interviewed Ralph Keyes, who "writes about words for _American Scholar_ magazine." The topic was a contest run by the magazine to find suitable English replacement words (neologisms, in this case) for four words which have been borrowed into English but have entered common parlance to varying degrees: mensch, frisson, schadenfreude, and sympatico/sympathique. While the proposed neologisms were on the whole underwhelming, I did come to wonder: is there a word for the conscious replacement of foreign words with English substitutes, either as an editorial action in a specific work or as a broader, sociolinguistics endeavor? 'Anglicization' came to mind, but I think of that more with respect to spelling or pronunciation ( _i.e._ , not wholesale word replacement). Is there a term for this process? (Incidentally, isn't it the French who have a semi-governmental process to guard against foreign word borrowings, at least as far as the official language,mwhatever that means, is concerned? If so,mother obviously 'anglicization' can't be right, assuming this French body performs a similar effort to replace foreign words with French alternatives, officially or un....)


title: "Rome was not built in a day"

text: I always heard this phrase from school, but never understood the actual meaning of it or how this phrase originated. What does this actually mean, and why was it Rome and not any other city? What is so special about Rome in this phrase?


title: Where did the word "umpteenth" come from?

text: Where did the word "umpteenth" come from, and why is it a "teen", if it is supposed to represent a very large number?


title: I knew it already 20 yrs ago vs I knew it as early as 20 yrs ago

text: I know that "already" is mainly used with present perfect. I want to emphasise that something was known 20 years ago. Are the following the same? > I knew it already 20 yrs ago   >  I knew it as early as 20 yrs ago. And is this structure correct? > This has been known already since 1993 (I guess I cannot say "ago" in pres.perfect).


title: Who first coined the term photobomb?

text: Do anyone have an idea about the exact etymology of this word? Also, would it be correct to use the same word when referring to a live broadcasting on television? Or would the term videobomb be more appropriate?


title: Usage of the phrase "Eat your tea"

text: This is another bit of unusual English (to an American) that I picked up from Terry Pratchett's writings. Characters in the books have told others to "Eat their tea", in the literal sense. Is this a common British usage of the term? Does "tea" in this context refer to both the drink and the food that one would eat at teatime? Would "Take your tea" be more a common phrase?


title: Italics and punctuation

text: This might be a tad off-topic, but I am looking for an English-specific answer. When I’m using italic text to denote emphasis or a quotation, should the italicisation extend to the punctuation surrounding the italicised words? If the punctuation marks are _not_ italicised, in most digital fonts the italic letters will crash horribly—or at least intrude awkwardly—into the Roman punctuation. It’s especially problematic with parentheses, and lowercase Fs. Since I don’t have the luxury of typesetting all of my documents in lead, I’ve taken to either italicising the punctuation, or inserting a thin space (for lowercase F) or a hair space (for other letters) before the closing punctuation. Examples:   * What is _that_? ⇒ What is _that?_ ⇒ What is _that_ ?   * Solid (or _fluff_ ). ⇒ Solid (or _fluff)._ ⇒ Solid (or _fluff_ ).   * ( _Good times_!) ⇒ _(Good times!)_ ⇒ ( _Good times_ !) I know this is a nitpicky thing (hell, even I think so, and I’m the one asking), but is there a standard way to address it? Just because this is the internet, it doesn’t mean we need to totally disregard the typesetting facilities that _are_ available.


title: "Give me one half of that" Vs. "give me half of that"

text: I can't remember when and where I had this discussion, but I remember being corrected when I was speaking by a stranger saying that it is never correct to say _give me half of this_ ; instead, the grammatically correct phrase would be _give me one half of this_. I've never been a pro at where numbers fit in with the English language, so maybe someone here could shed some light on this.


title: "At all" in w-questions

text: I don't know how to say it but "at all" used in yes or no questions has a specific function. I would maybe call it "asking for a basic reality" but I don'T know if that makes sense to anyone. > Do you drink milk at all? I feel like "at all" does not work with w-questions. > Where is the bar at all?   * Are there examples where it does work?


title: What is the reason or proper usage of "price" and "pricing"?

text: Here are my examples: > We need to change the price of this item. > > We need to change the pricing of this item. To me the second option feels right but why?


title: What was "bathroom" called in 1900's?

text: What would have been said around 1900 for a woman saying she needed to go to the bathroom in the state of Virginia?


title: "Respect, where has it gone?" vs "Respect. Where has it gone?"

text: We are using the following topic for a speech contest and there is a question as to punctuation > Respect, where has it gone? or > Respect. Where has it gone?


title: Origin of "ballpark estimate" to mean a very rough estimate?

text: I'm wondering where the term "ballpark estimate" comes from? Sometimes "ballpark" is said stand-alone to mean a rough estimate, as in "these numbers are a ballpark". I understand it must come from baseball or some other sport. Does it refer to the idea that a batter might point in the direction he'll hit the ball? Or is it something that relates to a rough guess at the attendance that day? What part of the ballpark or sports does one use a rough estimate?


title: What's the difference between "cardinal" and "ordinal" as adjectives?

text: What's the difference between describing a number or place as _cardinal_ versus _ordinal_? They both seem to have to do with the order of things. For example, when saying "He is the first in his class", is _first_ ordinal or cardinal? What are the usage differences here?


title: What is the meaning of "draw the line" in this sentence?

text: Example: > Some say 19 is too young to have a baby, but where do you **draw the line**?


title: "As I said" vs. "Like I said"

text: I was told that saying _**Like I said**_ isn't grammatically correct although it is used a lot. That we should use _**As I said**_ instead. Is it true?


title: A word for a list of definitions

text: I am preparing a technical document for a new version of a web application I have created, and towards the beginning of the document I am going to list a few of the terms I will be using in the document, along with a short definition or explanation of how I am using the term. This is just to make sure that the words are understood the way I intend. There is a word for just such a list. I know there is. I just can't come up with it. Aarrgghh!


title: Term to a verse that starts with the last word of the previous verse

text: The music "Glad you came" by The Wanted has the following verses > Turn the lights out now, now I'll take you by the hand > > Hand you another drink, drink it if you can > > Can you spend a little time, time is slipping away > > Away from us so stay, stay with me I can make > > Make you glad you came Is there a term for it?


title: Should I factor-out "to" in a series of infinitives?

text: Which of the following two forms of the sentence is better?   1. "Managers can use these findings to bound estimates, to assess the realism of road maps, to recognise unsustainable growth, to judge the health of a software development project, and to predict a system's hardware footprint."   2. "Managers can use these findings to bound estimates, assess the realism of road maps, recognise unsustainable growth, judge the health of a software development project, and predict a system's hardware footprint."


title: Origin of "to be into [someone] for [a sum of money]"

text: _"He's into me for fifty quid"_ means _"He owes me fifty pounds"_. It's common enough in the UK, but I'm fairly sure I've heard it in American movies too ( _bucks_ or _grand_ there, not _quid_ , obviously), so I don't think it's particularly a UK expression. But since I just had reason to say it, I got to wondering "Why 'into'?", and realised it's a bit odd. Is it just short for _"in debt to"_? When I say it, I feel like _"into"_ is one word, and a quick Google shows that's how people write it, but if you just miss out the word _"debt"_ you'd still have two words left. Anyone know the origin/first use?


title: "In case of cancel"... lation?

text: I see this phrase written very often, and in legal documents, which are at least in theory more often correct than the "average" text: > in case of cancel, ... It sounds incorrect, and I suppose it is, but is there a context where this phrase is grammatically correct, or more appropriate than _in case of cancellation_? The only use for _cancel_ as noun that I know of is "a mark made on a postage stamp to show that it has been used", which is not the case here (the phrase is being used in a contract clause about cancellation of purchase). **Edit:** By carefully looking at the examples, they all seem a bit crappy in terms of English quality. Also, some of them seem to alternate between _cancellation_ and _cancel_ indiscriminately. http://www.pragueresidences.com/terms.php http://www.astanapengembak.com/bali-free-and-easy-package.html http://www.chambre-avec-vue.eu/rentagreement.pdf http://billetavion.opodo.fr/opodo/flights/fareNotes?pnr=24X57E&opodoConfNum=0014179106&locale=fr_FR_109 http://www.villa-pavlina.cz/EN/cenik.htm http://www.larrakoetxea.com/precios_en.html http://www.hostels.com/es/albergues/rio-de-janeiro/best-rio-hostel/35087 http://www.lazycow.com/nav/terms **Edit 2:** I agree, my question is not very useful. If it should be kept in the hope that Google will help some of those poor translators to avoid the same mistake, or if it should be erased, I'm not sure. Either way is fine for me, but I do not know how to actually improve the question. I'll delete it if recommended to.


title: Banking meaning of "held"

text: While filling in a UK form I just encountered the following question: > How many credit cards held? This was followed by a free-form text field. So they are either asking   1. ‘how many credit cards have you ever held in your hands in total,’   2. ‘how many credit cards have you held in your hands at most at any one time,’ or   3. ‘how many credit cards have you currently got registered in your own name.’ Judging by the context it's obviously the third. Next question: > Current account held? [ ] Yes [ ] No What? My first thought was that there was a plural "s" missing, and they're really asking _how many_ accounts I have like in the last question, or else the account number of my current account, but they want a _binary_ answer. So are they asking   1. ‘do you have an account at all,’   2. ‘is your account in some nebulous "held" state,’   3. ‘is the account you're currently using registered in somebody else's name (applicable to minors or dependants),’ or   4. something completely different?


title: Which word is more appropriate in this headline: “captivate” or “engross”?

text: Consider this headline: > Horrific Accident On Live TV Captivates The Internet Dictionary.com gives the following definitions for _captivate_ : >   1. to attract and hold the attention or interest of, as by beauty or > excellence; enchant. >   2. Obsolete . to capture; subjugate. > and the following for _engross_ : >   1. to occupy completely, as the mind or attention; absorb. >   2. to write or copy in a clear, attractive, large script or in a formal > manner, as a public document or record. >   3. to acquire the whole of (a commodity), in order to control the market; > monopolize. > It seems to me “engross” is more appropriate. Are there other verbs that better suit this context?


title: Hypernym for "increase" and "decrease"

text: Is there a word in English which would encompass both the action of increasing or decreasing [the value of] something? I am looking at a word similar to _modify_ , _change_ or _alter_. But the first two do not denote the fact that the current value would be slightly changed and I feel the the last one is a bit general.


title: "in ages" vs "for ages"

text: I've always thought I should use "for ages" when, for example, I meet a person who I haven't seen for a long time, but recently I came across another expression, "in ages," as in "I haven't seen you in ages." Is it correct to say this?


title: What does the use of the word "deserts" mean in this passage?

text: > A man of great deserts, it would seem is most liable to be small minded, for > what would he do if his deserts were not as great as they are? - Nicomachean > Ethics: Aristotle. I'm not looking for the philosophic meaning but rather how the word desert is being used here. Is it to imply vacuousness?


title: verb meaning "to suggest that something is false"

text: I cannot find an antonym for _to suggest_ with the force of _to suggest that p is false_ if _to suggest_ is used with the force of _to suggest that p is true_. The context is a sentence that looks approximately like: > The proposition that proper names have senses is suggested by _P_. The > proposition that proper names are definitionally equivalent to definite > descriptions is [...] by _Q_. Where _P_ and _Q_ are lists of reasons that aren't important here. The meaning of the passage should be equivalent to the following: > The truth of the proposition that proper names have senses is suggests by > _P_. The falsity of the proposition that proper names are definitionally > equivalent to definite descriptions is suggested by _Q_. I recall having attempted to find a suitable word to replace [...] in the first set of sentences before. However, I was unsuccessful and rephrased the passage. Even if the passage would work best rephrased, such a word would be useful For reference, the context is an introduction to a discussion of the problems raised by _P_ and _Q_.


title: Is there a connection between shy (adj.) and shy (v.) meaning throw?

text: Most British people probably best recognise the colloquial meaning of shy from the traditional fairground throwing game called the coconut shy but it is also occasionally used in everyday English. According to the Online Etymological Dictionary the _throw_ meaning is the more recent (1787) and a connection between the two is uncertain. If there is no connection, how did this meaning of shy originate?


title: What word would you use to describe the most interesting man in the world from the dos equis commercials?

text: I'm trying to think of a word that describes a person who's skillful, intelligent, capable, interesting, etc. Think of the character in the most interesting man in the world commercials. What's one word that would describe him? Some that I've thought of don't have quite the right tone: > Champion, Badass, Baller Is there one word that fits the bill?


title: synonym for "having seen"

text: I am writing a small essay as a homework and I found that I used the expression "having seen" or in general "having done". I wonder if there are any synonyms which I could use to better my text. example: `Having learnt about Dante, my interest grew further.`


title: Which word should I use to describe the noise made by an electronic device?

text: The noises made by electronic devices (lamps, electronic chargers, etc.) sound to me like a high-pitched，barely audible "zzzzzz". In my mind is the word "buzz". Beyond that I don't really know. What word should I use to describe them?


title: How to parse a sentence with verb 'bring'

text: > “He brought the umbrella swishing down through the air to point at Dudley.”   >  (Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone) I guess the sentence could be parsed as below:   [He] [brought] [A: the umbrella swishing down through the air] [B: to point at Dudley.]   (A: direct object of brought, B: result or aim of the previous saying.)   But, I cannot have confidence with the parsing. Could you show me how to see the construction?


title: When you have a sentence containing a list separated by commas, do you need to repeat the verb before a preposition?

text: I.E. Which of these is correct? A. You are cool, funny, and among the most popular of students at this school. B. You are cool, funny, and are among the most popular of students at this school. If neither is correct, how would I say what I am trying to say?


title: Grammar of 'dare' in this example

text: What is the grammar of the verb 'dare' in the following example? > The pizza was nice but, _dare_ I say it, the salad was awful. Is it some type of imperative?


title: I need another way of saying 'does the talking'

text: I'm coming up with a tagline for my business – 'Where flavour does the talking'. I'm basically trying to get across the idea that flavour is the main focus. Any ideas?


title: Is there a word for "to consider [something] a virtue"?

text: For example, many religious traditions consider austerity and renunciation from material pleasures a virtue. Randian libertarianism characterizes selfishness as a virtue. To consider as divine is to _deify_ , to declare as innocent is to _exonerate_ , to hold as a virtue is to —?


title: What is a 'non productive' syntactic structure?

text: I am going through some of my old school notes about English idioms and the text describes idioms as having a _non productive syntactic structure_. I don't understand and couldn't find anything more about the 'non productive' part of the phrase.


title: Last I checked, we put commas after appositive phrases

text: The _Official SAT Study Guide, Second Edition_ 's second practice test's writing section contains the following question, with the objective to choose the answer that is most correct. > Through his novels Thomas Wolfe reveals to us both the pain and the beauty > of his boyhood in the American South. > > (A) [no change] > > (B) By means of Thomas Wolfe's novels, which reveal to us both the pain and > the beauty of his boyhood in the American South. > > (C) Not only the pain is revealed to us in Thomas Wolfe's novels but he also > describes the beauty of his boyhood in the American South. > > (D) Thomas Wolfe, through the medium of his novels, reveals to us both the > pain with the beauty of his boyhood in the American South. > > (E) As a novelist, Thomas Wolfe thus revealing to us the pain and the beauty > of his boyhood in the American South. B through E are all blatantly incorrect, so the only remaining option is A, which is listed as the correct answer. However, everyone I've asked agrees that that sentence requires a comma after the word _novels_ , because _Through his novels_ is functioning as an appositive phrase. Is there something I'm missing here, or are all of these sentences incorrect?


title: "Said objects" or "The said objects"

text: I've always said things like "If you ate the said candy." and "If you count the said rocks." I've also heard many people say "If you ate said candy." and "If you count said rocks." This always sounds to me similar to "If you grab chair." It makes sense sometimes, like in instruction manuals, but you don't hear people say that in real life. Which one is correct?


title: "when" + conditional sentence + tense

text: > 1: She said she would do it when she came home.   >  2: She said she would do it when she comes home. Which is correct, and why?


title: "Publicly well known X" vs "public well known X"

text: How do you say it correctly? > The publicly well-known project or > The public well-known project


title: "Injure" vs. "damage"

text: * I have _injured_ my ankle.   * I have _damaged_ my ankle. Could you tell me the difference? How can I use injured/damaged correctly?


title: What is the origin of "rings a bell"?

text: Where does the expression "rings a bell" come from? e.g. > Bob: Have we met before? > > Geoff: Well, your face _rings a bell_.


title: Great (?) personality/character(?)

text: I'm looking for the appropriate English term for what I'd call a "große Persönlichkeit" in German.   * This is _not_ about someone who is famous,    * neither about someone who tries to appear superior than others by making them small   * but means someone who is wise, reflected, (possibly brave), emotionally stable and independent (in the positive sense), superior (in a way that doesn't oppress but rather the opposite) and has a good influence on other people, also by being a good example   * This rough translation of a more or less idiomatic rule of thumb may also help to explain: A "große Persönlichket" will help other people to grow, while a "kleine Persönlichkeit" (small? personality?) will keep people down/small(?)/oppress people in order to seem larger (?) Actually the last point is the context I want to explain in English. I'm really unsure which of the "groß" (great/large/big/?) terms is appropriate and whether to use personality or character or something else.


title: Can someone please fix the grammar and punctuation in this sentence?

text: Is this grammatically correct? > After multiple scientific experimentations, I can safely conclude my > hypothesis: ice cream DOES taste better after 1am.


title: "Come Hell or high water" vs "Lord willing and the creek don't rise"

text: Recently I've wondered about two idioms which have a strange relationship. > Come Hell or high water and > Lord willing and the creek don't rise   1. Grammatical accuracy, alternative formulations, and questionable folk etymologies, and literal meanings aside, why do these two phrases (often used interchangably) have such different implications?  My thoughts so far have centered around the former being an expression of an internal locus of control (i.e. I will _make_ this happen) and the latter of an external locus of control (i.e. I _hope_ this won't not happen).   1. Why does the more apparently positive formulation reference Hell while the less (certainly) positive one mentions the 'Lord?'


title: Meaning of 'patchy at best'?

text: > Its social web services initiatives have been **patchy at best** , so Google > hasn't managed to muscle in on Facebook or Twitter like it has with > Microsoft and Yahoo.


title: Is "let go your hand" grammatically correct?

text: Wherever "let go of your hand" is used, can "let go your hand" be used in its place? Is there any difference at all?


title: "desert island" versus "deserted island"

text: What is the difference between "a desert island" and "a deserted island"? Are they synonyms?


title: The future as reported in the past

text: Is (1) correct, or must it be written as (2)? >   1. John told me yesterday that this contract will not be renewed when it > ends next month. >   2. John told me yesterday that this contract would not be renewed. It > would be ending next month. >


title: "His work(s) in research and teaching [have/has] been"

text: >   1. His work in research and teaching have been ... >   2. His works in research and teaching have been... >   3. His work in research and teaching has been ... > If I want to express many pieces of his work, not just one piece of work, which one of the above is correct or better?


title: What does 'dance a control run' mean in selection of figure skaters for the Winter Olympics Games?

text: There was the following sentence in the Time magazine article titled, “Plushenko’s retirement is proof he should have quit before Sochi.” It says Evgeni Plushenko should have given way to a younger generation before the Sochi Olympics began: > “The Russian figure skating association allowed him to dance a “ **control > run** ” for a committee of skating experts less than three weeks before the > Games. Although that performance was never shown to the public or the press, > the committee ruled that it was enough to give Plushenko a ticket to Sochi.” > > http://world.time.com/2014/02/13/plushenko-retirement-sochi- > olympics/#ixzz2tFitu1MT What does “control run” mean? Why is it in quotes? What is the shortest possible paraphrasing of “control run”?


title: Why might 'undelivered' be preferred to 'undeliverable' regarding mail?

text: In the UK, I have noticed that on envelopes, the text preceding the return address has changed from "If **undeliverable** , please return to:" to "If **undelivered** , please return to:". To me, the term "undeliverable" seems more logical. Something is always "undelivered" until it has been delivered, so the "undelivered" form almost suggests that no attempt need be made at delivering it before returning it. Therefore, I'm interesting in knowing the perceived advantages and disadvantages of each phrasing, and any suggestions as to why "undelivered" seems to be the norm these days.


title: How many syllables does "cry" have?

text: I started out to make a program which finds out the number of syllables in a word, which is when I realized that I couldn't decide how many syllables **cry** consists of. According to Wikipedia, > A unit of pronunciation having one vowel sound, with or without surrounding > consonants, forming the whole or a part of a word; e.g., there are two > syllables in water and three in inferno According to the above definition, _cry_ does have 2 vowel sounds, so the number of syllables _should_ be 2. Technically, it should be 1, since there is a 'y' and no vowel. I want to know what the community thinks about it.


title: Present tense and past participle, How do they co-exist?

text: 'Macbeth is written by Shakespeare', is a valid, grammatically correct sentence. But curiously it contains the verb 'to be' in the present tense, with a past participle. We can recognise that the sentence is in the passive voice, but what is the tense of the verb(s). Is 'written' working as a verb, or as another part of speech? Now we can also use 'is' and 'written' in the same sentence, but in separate clauses, such as in: 'Written by Shakespeare, Macbeth is a masterpiece'. How has the role of the verbs changed?


title: "only if we ignored X, might Y happen"?

text: In spite of the general guidance on conditionals found on this site, I am struggling with which tenses to use in the following sentence to properly convey what I mean: > Only if we ignored these success cases might this seem impossible. To be clear about my intended meaning, I believe that   * "ignoring these success cases" is a foolhardy thing to do   * "this" is very much possible [therefore, the construction should make "this seem[ing] impossible" adequately remote] Given this, is there a better combination of verb tenses for me to consider?


title: Account registration phrases

text: An applications asks user to provide a phone number. When the number is wrong, the application displays a message. There can be two cases: 1) the phone is correct, but another user already used it for registration; 2) the phone is incorrect (has wrong format). Is it correct to say: 1) "This phone number is used by another user. Please provide a different one". 2) "Invalid phone number. Please check and try again.". Or may be there is a better way to write these messages?