title: What is a communication breakdown caused by two cultures/societies trying to adapt one another's mores called?

text: For example, in Japan I often encounter this paradox when it comes to addressing friends. In Japan, it's generally rude to call someone by their first name unless you're really close friends. You'd generally refer to them by their last name followed by -san. Most of the young people that I meet in Japan have a good knowledge of American culture, and understand that for us calling someone Mr. (last name) means that you're not friends at all, and are interacting on a very formal level. So many people whom I've met have said "we're friends, please call me (Tetsuya, Katsuhiro, Yoshida, etc.)", even though we haven't known each other nearly long enough to be on a first name basis (by Japanese standards). On a similar note, I often want to talk Japanese to my Japanese friends (because I know that they speak Japanese and I want to practice/impress them), but they often want to speak English to me (because they want to practice/impress me). Is there a word or a term for this phenomenon? edit: To clarify, I'm specifically looking for a term that summarizes the communication breakdown caused by two cultures trying to, out of politeness or respect, accomodate each other's cultures?


title: "Bust a cap" meaning and derivation

text: I've always believed that the phrase "bust a cap in yo ass" was AAVE for: > To shoot an individual with a gun. Whilst trying to figure out what the _cap_ actually meant, I ran into this alternate definition/footnote: > This is not a new phrase as much of the Rap culture would like us to > believe. Instead it is an old phrase to shoot someone. Reference to cap is a > word for powder cap used in percussion guns popular in the old west. This > phrase is used in the 1969 movie titled "True Grit" with John Wayne, Glen > Campbell, Dennis Hopper and Robert Duvall. > > Line by Ned Pepper (played by Robert Duvall) " _I never busted a cap (bust a > cap) on a woman or nobody under sixteen. But I'll do it_." Ned Pepper's line can be confirmed via Wikiquote. Additionally percussion **caps** appear to have primarily been in use during the 1800s and were phased out in favour of primers. The events in True Grit are set in the 1870s. I'd like to know where this expression came from and how it made its transition into AAVE. Did _pop a cap ..._ also make the same journey? Is the phrase still in use today by other Americans?


title: "Without selection" vs. "without a selection"

text: >   1. W is the complex-valued transformation of the original signals x and y > without selection of the window length with respect to time t. >   2. W is the complex-valued transformation of the original signals x and y > without **a** selection of the window length with respect to time t. > Which is correct?


title: How do I pronounce "can't" with a British accent without it rhyming with "punt" or "paint"?

text: How do I pronounce " _can't_ " with a British accent without it rhyming with " _punt_ " or " _paint_ "?


title: What is the difference between a chest and a trunk?

text: Is a "trunk" more likely to have a "flat top" and a "chest" more likely to have a "rounded top"?


title: Correct verbs in sentence

text: Assume that I am advertising that a payment will be asked only if we actually execute a given job right, and I say: > "if we don't do it right, we have been working for free" > > "if we won't do it right, we have been working for free" > > "if we don't do it right, we would have been working for free" Can you tell me what is the most effective and correct way to express (advertise) the idea (especially the correct choice of verbs), and are the above sentences wrong ?


title: "Bob's your uncle" ... no he's not!

text: What is the origin of the phrase "Bob's your uncle"? Is it used internationally or is this just a term used in the UK? I have often heard an extension of this phrase: "Bob's your uncle and Fanny's your aunt", can anyone shed any light on this variant? An example of how it is used: "Put it in the oven for 20 minutes and Bob's your uncle, your dinner will be done".


title: Using the expression "the same" for a previously mentioned item

text: I frequently use "the same" as in the following sentence. > I need the details of XYZ project. Could you please send me the same as soon > as possible? Is this grammatically correct? I have not been corrected till now, but I have not seen the usage from native speakers very much either. Update: Seems like my example sentence was ambiguous. Hope the following sentence is better. > I need the documents for the meeting. Could you please send me the same as > soon as possible?


title: What's the difference between "recall" and "remember"?

text: As an example, in a legal setting: > Do you _recall_ what color the car was?   >  Do you _remember_ what color the car was? Which would be more appropriate?


title: Word for "someone who talks too much"

text: What is another word for a person who likes to talk too much. I was thinking _bigmouth_ , but _bigmouth_ could mean "somebody who likes carrying messages voluntarily".


title: What's a word meaning "related to pressure"?

text: Is there an analog to "electrically isolated" but related to pressure (or more specifically, air pressure) instead of electricity? Perhaps "pneumatically isolated"? I don't think "hermetically isolated" has the proper meaning. I also considered "manometrically isolated", but I think that seems to refer too much to manometry. I just want to express that two different rooms are not isolated from each other in terms of air pressure. Perhaps "piezo-isolated"? I can't find any precedence for this specific phrase, but it seems to express the correct meaning.


title: "Brought Forward" and "Pushed back"

text: During a conversation with a colleague about the time I had received an automated email, I noted that it had arrived 20 minutes late. I then checked the email schedule software and said: > The scheduled time has moved forward 20 minutes for some reason. To which he replied: > You mean moved back The discussion carried on with me arguing that the time had indeed "moved" forward. Time moves forward after all, and it was supposed to go out at 16:00 and went out at 16:20 instead. The time moved forward. Now I completely understand his argument, and I realise that the standard way people generally talk about time in relation to meetings etc... is to say "It's been pushed back" or "It's been brought forward". But he wouldn't concede that my choice of words was a completely valid way to express what had happened. This left me wondering if I was actually correct, and also why exactly we say "Brought Forward" and "Pushed back"?


title: What is the meaning of the business jargon "big hitter"?

text: I want the meaning of the business jargon that says "big hitter".


title: In my example, do I need parentheses?

text: (ϕ_1 ) ̂ is the first stage (the estimated effect of the MLDA on alcohol consumption). (ρ_1 ) ̂ is the reduced form (the estimated effect of the MLDA on either overall deaths, motor vehicle fatalities, or drinking fatalities). Or, can I just put a comma instead like in the following: (ϕ_1 ) ̂ is the first stage, the estimated effect of the MLDA on alcohol consumption. (ρ_1 ) ̂ is the reduced form, the estimated effect of the MLDA on either overall deaths, motor vehicle fatalities, or drinking fatalities.


title: What is another word for share in the context of a blog?

text: What is another word for **share** in the context of sharing a blog article on twitter, facebook, etc..?


title: Meaning of "When you're a guy, and a dad,.. and all the jokes about being a Kept Man are worn away, the word is 'vasectomising'"

text: > Though sure, there's no denying that the money stuff hasn't helped the > marital stuff. "When you're a guy, and a dad," I told Freddy's scarecrow, > "and you have to ask your wife to put £5,000 of her bonus into the joint > account so that the garage won't refuse your card, **and all the jokes about > being a Kept Man are worn away, the word is 'vasectomising'**..." > > Garden time swallowed me up, because the next thing I knew, Lorna was > calling me from the patio. > > -- David Mitchell, _The Massive Rat_ In the above text, what does the bolded part mean? I do know the meaning of both _vasectomising_ and _kept man_ , but I don't understand how the two sentences linked here. I don't know why the author suddenly says, "the word is 'vasectomising'".


title: Why do we use "awfully" as an intensifier?

text: First, consider this sentence: > We lost the game because we played awfully. Since "awful" means "very bad," it makes sense that "awfully" means "very badly." Now, consider these two sentences: > 1) Google is an awfully good search engine. > > 2) Bing is an awfully bad search engine. In the second example, regardless of the adjective's connotation, "awfully" just acts as an intensifier - it simply means "very." _Why do we use "awfully" this way? How did this form of the adverb come about?_ I'd be awfully grateful if someone could enlighten me.


title: Nuances/shades-of-meaning online?

text: Is there an online reference resource devoted to commentary on the finer points of usage, connotation, and word choice in English? (E.g. what nuances/shades-of-meaning/usage considerations would inform the choice between "firmament", "(the) heavens" and "(the) heaven"? or between "spry" and "lively"? etc. etc. I'm thinking of something in the spirit of the usage notes sprinkled—sparingly, unfortunately—throughout the M-W's Collegiate, but more extensive and up-to-date.)


title: What is the correct positioning of "Please" in a sentence or indeed is there one?

text: >   * **Please** can you help me with this question? >   * Can you **please** help me with this question? >   * Can you help me with this question **please**? > Is there a correct place for _please_ in this question or is it just a matter of choice?


title: Are commands complete sentences?

text: This question seems to indirectly ask the question, but the upvoted answer says "the actual sentence is...". So my question is this: Are commands considered to be grammatically sound, complete sentences in the English language? Some examples: > Go. > > Add a note. > > Do work.


title: When and how did "pretty" enter English as an intensifying adverb?

text: Today I saw an idiomatic road sign: "Pretty Muddy". I found this lack of strict English on a road sign unusual (on par with my "Dead Slow" official speed limit sign in Leeds, pic below), but as it turned out it's a charity race and the signs were merely directions. This got me thinking however, how do words like "pretty" and "dead" as intensifying adverbs end up in English? Taking "pretty" as an example, when did this first appear? ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/M7Ndk.jpg) _I wonder how fast you have to be going before they stop you. How would this hold up in court?_


title: What is "I'm gonna serve it to you" trying to convey?

text: Though there is no dispute that songs may have nonsense lyrics, the song "Seven Nation Army" by the White Stripes actually have very coherent lyrics. However, one line stands out as some type of idiom that I cannot decipher: > And if I catch it coming back my way I'm gonna serve it to you. I infer that this is some type of threat, both by the "I'm gonna ..." and also by the context of the rest of the lyrics. But what is "it", and what does "serve" mean? Perhaps "serve" is to "return the (it) back to you"? Surely Jack White didn't just throw in a single nonsense sentence to an otherwise very coherent and well-focused work.


title: What do you call an "atheist" who might believe in an afterlife?

text: Is there a term for someone who proclaims they don't believe in an afterlife but they are not sure whether the supernatural exists? I don't mean _agnostic_. Atheists don't believe in a deity, but an atheist could believe in an afterlife.


title: Is it compensation

text: For example, someone’s house is in a plan to make new highway. Then he/she will have to move another land when construction starts. In this case he/she take money from the government to buy a new house and move. What do you say this monetary help?. Is it compensation? Or is there another word especially for use as regale term?


title: Meaning of goat-footed nature gods play in the fields and woods

text: There,shepherds play their pipes and sigh with longing for flirtatious nymphs and goat-footed nature gods play in the fields and woods. How can I understand this sentence? And does "play pipes" mean play some music instruments?


title: Do things use apostrophe for indicating possessive?

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Is using the possessive 's correct in "the car's antenna"? If someone owns something I would say: _Mom's car_. But if the owner is not a person, does it actually own it according to English rules or common usage? Which phrase is right? >   * The house windows. >   * The house's windows. >   * The windows of the house. _(Or something like that.)_ > (Feel free to modify this question so it would be clear for other people.)


title: "The dog's tail" vs. "the tail of the dog"

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Is using the possessive 's correct in “the car’s antenna”? When talking about animal body parts, which of the following is the right one (or could both be possible with some difference in meaning)? >   * The dog's tail. >   * The tail of the dog. >


title: Can we say "the problem's"?

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Is using the possessive 's correct in “the car’s antenna”? Can we add apostrophe S, **'s** , to a word for an inanimate object as in the phrase > the problem's underlying assumptions to denote possession? Would it be natural and grammatically correct?


title: Possessive form of inanimate subject

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Is using the possessive 's correct in "the car's antenna"? Is it "role of the FRG" or "the FRG's role"? I know that although the FRG is not a person, people do say, for instance, "America's role in ..." Please help.


title: Meaning of "To be"

text: What is the meaning of "to be hiered" ? Whether it means the person is hiered or he is yet to be hiered?


title: When using multiple verbs that typically use different prepositions, which do I choose?

text: This is the sentence I wrote: > It is as simple as adding or removing an item to/from the list. Now I'm wondering if I should use "to" or "from" or "to/from" in:   1. Written English,   2. Spoken English.


title: Preposition use: multiple prepositions to the same noun

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  How to combine in a sentence two verb + preposition pairs that have the > same object? Which of the following sentences is correct? >   * I listen, go, read and learn from experts. >   * I listen to, go with, read and learn from experts > I talk here about prepositions ( _to_ , _with_ , _from_ ) related to the word _experts_. What is the best use?


title: Is "expect lie from you" grammatically correct?

text: > I don't expect a lie from you Is this sentence grammatically correct? If not, how could it be corrected?


title: All of us, including "me" or "I"

text: Which is better in this case, "me" or "I"? > All of us, including me, have made mistakes. > > All of us, including I, have made mistakes. It seems that "I have made mistakes" makes more sense than "me have made mistakes." But on other hand, "including me" makes more sense than "including I." While typing this out I thought of a better way to phrase it so that it doesn't sound odd, but I would still like to know which is correct: > All of us have made mistakes, including me.


title: What is the meaning of "a trouvaille, mon cher"?

text: I was reading _A Model Millionaire_ by Oscar Wilde and came across this line. Can someone explain it to me? > "An amazing model?' shouted Jain at the top of his voice; 'I should think > so! Such beggars as he are not to be met with every day. A trouvaille, mon > cher; a living Velasquez! My stars! what an etching Rembrandt would have > made of him!'


title: How did Americans greet each other before "Hi"?

text: I had assumed that "hi" was a somehow abbreviated form of "hello," but though both of these words appear to have originated from a noise to attract attention, _hi_ actually predates _hello_. These words both appeared in the mid- to late 1800s, and seem to be primarily American usage. Does anyone know what Americans used for greetings prior to this time period? _Update on 9/10/11_ : Although I have come to feel that "how do ye" and its variant "howdy" are most likely the common greetings in the early days of America, part of the difficulty in assessing this is the lack of recorded everyday speech. I was also unaware that "howdy" was used anywhere other than the US South prior to the 1800s, but the OED begs to differ (if someone has the citation for this, please feel free to link it). There was considerable discussion in chat about the problem of researching common conversational speech, and during the course of that discussion, I realized that probably the best place to look would be plays, since they involve dialogue that might represent a "natural" conversation. After a lot of searching through early American plays, I came across "holla" used as a greeting in the early American drama _The Contrast_ by Royall Tyler. It was written and performed c. 1759, and its setting is contemporaneous New York City, therefore this greeting is probably an example of natural speech. Interestingly, I did not find any instances of any other greetings. However, finding plays that were actually set in America in the 1700s and were also written around that period proved difficult.


title: I need a word in the sense of “to category”

text: I need a word that fits this case:   I have a book; and any User may apply some tags to it, like 'dark' or 'happy' [..]   Anyway, how would I call this action, using a _short term_?


title: "Literally" and "Decimate" misuse

text: Recently I've heard American TV commentators say "[a person] was literally decimated" and "[a Senator] was literally thrown under the bus". In the first case I think the person was not actually 10% killed, but in the second, I believe they meant that 57 members of the US Senate carried #58 onto Constitution Avenue and threw him under a (hopefully moving) bus. Are usages like these normal or acceptable now? I find them grating, myself.


title: Use of the word "literally" in the definition of literally

text: Recently, the word _literally_ has come to be used for emphasis, rather than to express that something definitely happened. If you look up the definition of _literally_ on Google, the second definition is: > used for emphasis while not being literally true. It feels wrong to me that the word _literally_ is in the definition. It seems like this could be interpreted as circular logic since we don't know which definition of _literally_ the definition refers—it could refer to itself. I am not aware of any such convention where if you use the word you are attempting to define in the second definition, then you use the first definition. It seems to me that it would be perfectly valid to leave out the word _literally_ from the second definition altogether, and everything would be fine, i.e.: > used for emphasis while not being necessarily true. Is it wrong that the word _literally_ has been used in its own definition?


title: What is the part of speech of a word that refers to the word itself

text: If I say: > Some words that I like are: "desk", "lovely", and "enticingly". What parts of speech are the quoted words? Used in a typical sentence they'd be: noun, adjective, and adverb respectively. But it doesn't seem right that this distinction should also be made in the sentence above. (This wikipedia page is as far as I got in my research: Use–mention distinction


title: Why is there a difference in the adoption of "Kindergarten" in American and British English?

text: As someone living in the US, I've heard the term "Kindergarten" used quite frequently. However someone from the UK was mentioning to me that the term is really not used that much in British English. Looking at the Wikipedia article on Kindergarten it states: > In British English, nursery or playgroup is the usual term for preschool > education, and kindergarten is rarely used, except in the context of special > approaches to education, such as Steiner-Waldorf education (the educational > philosophy of which was founded by Rudolf Steiner). I'd like to know why this variation in adoption exists.


title: What is the difference between "compound" and "complex" sentences?

text: And what is the difference between coordinating and subordinating conjunctions? Is one kind of sentence (compound or complex) characterized by either a coordinating or subordinating conjunction, while the other kind is characterized by the other?


title: Is it correct to write "a 5-mm-thick layer"?

text: Do I need hyphens? Should I use the indefinite article or zero article?


title: Is there a term to denote writing numbers in words rather than as digits?

text: Often when writing we would like numbers to be written out fully e.g. thirty rather than in digits e.g. 30. Is there a name for this kind of representation?


title: Where does the word "masochism" come from, and how did it work its way into popular usage?

text: We all know that The Marquis de Sade popularized the term 'sadist' via "120 days of Sodom" and "Justine" - as well as being exemplified by his own devilish lifestyle. How/why was the word 'masochism' popularized?


title: The Use of the Modal Verb "Would" in a Certain Passage

text: Please consider the following passage from my English textbook: > ... _The commander of the troops called on his men to gather together on > deck in proper drill order...Meanwhile, the lifeboats had been lowered. When > all the women and children had filled the boats, there **would be** room for > only a very few others._ This is a passage from the reading-text _Birkenhead Drill_. The lifeboats could only carry one hundred and eighty passengers in total, and there were one hundred, and seventy women and children. Hence, there was room for ten more passengers only. I'm confused as to the sense in which _would_ has been used in the passage, I have written that in bold. I consulted my Little Oxford English Dictionary to see the use of _would_ , and it describes it thus: > **would** (modal verb) - _expressing an opinion or assumption_. Can we use 'might have been' in place of 'would be'? I have read that structures such as might/may/could + perfect infinitive are used to express something that we are not sure about in relation to the past. I have also read that we use modals would, could for a hypothesis about the future. However, the assumption "..there **would be** room for only a very few others." is related to the past. So why has 'would' been used here?


Certain graduates of a class are donating money to place an ad in a booklet celebrating s school’s centennial. Their names will be placed in the ad. The intent of the ad (and sale of the booklet) is to raise money for the school. We have a choice between a one page ad and a two page “centerfold” ad. Some members of this group (and I) believe that the two page ad is somewhat ostentatious and belies the intent of the donation. My problem is to communicate to the rest of the group using diplomatic language that the two page ad tends to be ostentatious. Is there a better word or phrase for “somewhat ostentatious”? Dictionary.com gives several synonyms – none of which seem to fit a convincing yet diplomatic statement.


title: Does the word "simpleness" actually exist?

text: I always thought the word "simpleness" didn't exist and this was even confirmed by some American friends of mine. However, I tried to look it up on some online dictionaries and I was surprised to find out that some of them report this word while others don't. What's the story behind "simpleness"?


title: Macho for women

text: Is there a negative term to define women who are "overly" feminine, in the same way that "macho" is often applied negatively to certain male behavior?


title: Is there a word for a unique manufactured item?

text: Is there a synonym for "unique" that specifically applies to a custom-made or customized item - say, a car - of which only one copy exists? Something like "once-in-a-lifetime" but in the meaning of something like "only-one-in-the-world"?


title: Is there a word to call the second rainbow above the first?

text: As is known, a double rainbow is formed when there are two reflections inside a raindrop and a second rainbow, which tends to be fainter than the first, is distinguishable above the first. Since in 'Shakespeare's Non-Standard English: A Dictionary of His Informal Language' by Norman Blake I found that, as an instance, 'water-gall' means 'small rainbow which at sea precede a storm', I began to wonder whether there is also a word to call that second rainbow. Is there? Yes, I know that _second rainbow_ or _secondary rainbow_ or even _faint rainbow_ can be used, but I'm looking for an informal or slangy name. ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/DMDrw.png)


title: in/on with dmy dates

text: When writing dates in prose in the dmy format (29 March 2014), is the correct preposition "in" or "on". I'm seeing it with "in" here, but that construction is foreign to me. > It was released **in 29 March 2010** on Steam for Microsoft Windows, and > **in 25 March 2010** on Xbox Live Indie Games for the Xbox 360. "On" would seem to make more sense, from what I know. Verdict?


title: "I didn't spend" vs "I didn't spent"

text: Which is the correct grammar? Which is correct?


title: Single word meaning 'filter out noise'/remove background sources

text: As noted in the title, I am looking for a single word, preferably short, that relates to filtering out noise/unwanted things/background noises.


title: Is there an antonym for “capitalize” (as in letter-case)

text: A word that starts with a lower-case (lowercase?) letter can be **_capitalized_** , but what is the converse action? Google has only one page in the top results that addresses this and the closest thing to a proposed answer is _decapitalize_ , which trips spell- checkers, so _de-capitalize_.


title: Is there a word that means the opposite of "to capitalize"?

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Is there an antonym for “capitalize” (as in letter-case) Is there a word, preferably _not_ from the realm of computer programming, that means the opposite of "to capitalize"? In programming, there are scores of (silly) ways to tell someone to undo capitalization: downcase that, shush that first letter, etc.


title: Rules of thumb on using the correct tense forms and auxiliary verbs

text: For example, when using "since", you should use "present perfect": > Mr Smith _ _ _ the company since 1990. > >   1. runs >   2. **has run** >   3. is running >   4. ran > Is there any reference on similar rules, guiding principles or hints? sometimes things get mixed up for me when choosing the correct form of verb tense (past/present continuous/perfect/simple...). Also any other rules on similar cases (other than verb tenses) are also welcome : ) I tried doing some research, but haven't found much, probably I am not using the right search terms. Any hints on this are also welcome, I will do my research homework. I have an English test tomorrow, English is not my mother tongue (you probably guessed). * * * Edit: _What I am asking for can be abbreviated to this specific question:_ **Is there any reference that contains rules on when and where should one use a specific tense/aux. verb over another?**


title: Is there an adverb for "simplified"?

text: This is what I'm trying to express > [Foo] can be _simplifiedly_ characterised as [bar]. However I am unable to find references for such as word as _simplifiedly_. What I want to say is that the following characterisation as [bar] is to be understood as being simplified for the sake of explaining [Foo] in the first place. How would you phrase it? I would prefer if the structure of the sentence would remain unchanged. But if there is no such word maybe this can be restructured without being too verbose. * * * Edit: It's not a question of rhythm or aesthetics, it's a question of meaning. I'm not trying to say that the characterisation I'm making is simple to derive, I'm trying to say that I'm making a characterisation that is simplifying the matter of [Foo], which is in fact a bit more general/complicated than its representation as [bar] might suggest. For me " _simply_ " has the taste of what I'm not trying to say (according to the above paragraph). Regarding the suggested " _more simply_ ", I have no gut feeling and will have to trust you as experts.


title: Is “Jack could get to work earlier” deontic or epistemic?

text: Please consider: > Jack could get to work earlier. Is this use of _could_ in the dynamic modality about Jack’s inherent ability, or is this the _could_ of epistemic modality about the speaker’s knowledge about whether it’s possible for Jack to get to work earlier?


title: What are the principles that make certain lists sound euphonious?

text: Has this ever happened to you: You write a question, include a list or two in the discussion, and then come back to edit that list because the order doesn't sound "right"? Off the top of my head, I can remember it happening to me twice here on English L&U: I changed _God, man, and nature_ to read _man, nature, and God_ when answering one question, and the tireless **kiamlaluno** edited a question of mine from _trunk...boot_ to _boot...trunk_. Why in fact do certain constructions of lists sound more pleasant to the ear than others? Why can't it be _child, man, and woman_ rather than _man, woman, and child_? All the principles I can think of, such as ordering by "natural" progression, ordering by length of word, and ordering to preserve internal rhyme, seem to have exceptions or be violated for some sayings. Does one principle have supremacy over the other? Are there any others I'm missing? And finally, how can we be sure what sounds pleasant isn't just historical inertia carried over from a first well-recognized coinage?


title: Name for a type of idiom with two things joined (like "raining cats and dogs", "bread and butter")

text: I had heard, a number of years ago, that there is a name for an type of idiomatic expression in which two things are joined to refer to one thing. An example of this would be “raining _cats and dogs_ ”. This does not mean that _cats_ is a metaphor for one type of rain, and _dogs_ another, but rather that the combined terms form a joint expression with a single referent. Likewise, “ _bread and butter_ ” could be used similarly, e.g., “they should waste their time trying to sell frozen steaks; jewelry is QVC’s _bread and butter_ ”. Is there a name for the specific type of idiomatic expression?


title: Using three examples with "range from"

text: When using _range from_ with two examples, it could be: > I should note that our current users range from juniors to graduates. But when using three examples: > I should note that our current users range from juniors, to seniors, to > graduates. It doesn't sound correct? What are the rules?


title: She had more experience than I, she having [...] or her having [...]

text: Is it > He had more experience than I, _he_ having produced more than 10 songs > already. or > He had more experience than I, _him_ having produced more than 10 songs > already. The latter sounds more natural to me, but the former seems more grammatically consistent--alas I don't know what the parts are called to delve further. The questions Is "all that he have" correct? and "He have a point" is this correct? were all I could find and didn't seem specifically relevant, AFAICT.


title: Is there a word meaning “disposed to correct one’s own behaviour quickly”?

text: What is the English word for a person who when they fail and realize their failure, they then regret and quickly correct their own behaviour without any wavering? Edit: I accepted an answer although the exact word I am looking for has not been found. I will change the answer should one be found. The closest matches are conscientious, repentant. To express exactly what I am looking for consider the scenario: You have had an argument, then you realize that what you did to your friend is wrong and he was correct. Without any thinking at that very second you run back to your friend saying: "I am sorry I have done wrong." asking for apology. It may take you 2 minutes to correct yourself - maybe you would go over your reasoning a few times to convince a good part of yourself to take over, and you would still be considered repentant and conscientious. But what I mean is a correction without a second thought once you realize you are wrong.


title: Do we have a term for knowing-oneself?

text: In many psychological, religious, and ethical theories it's been suggested that you **know yourself** , through contemplation, cognition, etc. It's like trying to recognize **who you really are deep inside** , and **why you do what you do** , stuff like that. But do we have a name for this **knowing yourself**? Update: I'm searching for a universally recognized name, and to clarify even more, if **theology** means knowing God, I'm searching for something like **you ology** , or to know yourself.


title: What is the collective noun for a collection of collective nouns?

text: murder : crows :: **_** : collective nouns Sorry, no multiple choice this time.


title: Shred off heat?

text: I heard a phrase which I'm not sure it's this but I liked it. It was a classical radio station in Southern California. It was a hot day and radio was playing a song about ice and snow, and the commenter said something like: "Now you can **shred off** some of the heat listening to this song. Can we use _shred off_ for heat? To mean "reduce the heat," for example, or a similar meaning?


title: What causes the pronunciation "nucular"

text: What is the name of the phonetic shift behind the common mispronunciation of the word nuclear (nucular)? Or, if the answer is "none", then I would appreciate learning the origin of the pronunciation.


title: What does the word "palpable" mean in this context?

text: From an answer on another Stack Exchange website (StackOverflow): > Given how rare this will be, that ugly hack could be palpable. It sounds like the author is saying that the solution might be viable? suitable? sufficient? I can deduce what he means from the context. I am confused because having searched for the definition of the word "palpable" I cannot find an applicable definition. I like the word and if the usage is correct I might like to use it myself. Did the author use the word "palpable" correctly? If so which definition is applicable?


title: Correct place for "constitutes"

text: > Substantial progress has been made in the last years in order to answer the > question what an optimal strategy for this network constitutes. > > Substantial progress has been made in the last years in order to answer the > question, what constitutes an optimal strategy for this network. Which sentence should I use, the first or the second?


title: In which cases is a comma/period placed inside or outside of parentheses?

text: Are there cases where a period is placed inside parentheses? In which cases the period (or a comma) should be placed inside the parentheses?


title: full-stop / period before or after closing bracket?

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  In which cases is a comma/period placed inside or outside of parentheses? Is the convention (write something in brackets.) And start a new sentence. or is it (More like this). And the other confusing factor below. Is a sentence (like this?) Because the question mark belongs to what's in brackets. So (is this)? More wrong because you're de-questioning the bracketed-sentence? OK so some of those are decidedly bad english but you get the point. I hope?)?.?.


title: If parentheses close the sentence, where should period be?

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  In which cases is a comma/period placed inside or outside of parentheses? Consider the following sentence: > Now, it is highly attributable that professionally I never had to write any > Swing code (or, for that matter, had a chance to look at Swing code others > have written) In this sentence, where should the period be? After the closing `)` or before opening `(`?


title: "Any ideas are appreciated" or "Any ideas would be appreciated"?

text: Lets say I'm asking a question on a popular question and answer website, and I want to close by saying that I will appreciate any submitted ideas. The first seems awkward because at the moment of writing there aren't any ideas yet. The second makes it sound like I would appreciate any ideas, if I wasn't a misanthropic sociopath that doesn't appreciate anyone. Edit: I suppose I could also use the verb "will", but what if it's a really unhelpful idea? Seems like the job for a verb that implies more committal than "would", but less than "will"... I'm probably over-thinking, but it bugs me!


title: More formal way to say "follow up"

text: I am writing a formal letter and want to say "I am following up with you regarding..." but I need to say it more formally.


title: "I'm free at around 7PM"

text: > I'm free at around 7PM. Is it correct?


title: When does thousand turn into thousands?

text: My boyfriend and I are arguing whether _thousands of miles_ means 1000+ or 2000+ miles. The first argument is that 1000+ is over 1000 and therefore 'thousands of miles' by rounding up. The other argument is that thousands are a unit, and if you only have one unit plus a fraction of that unit it is not 'thousands of miles', it is a thousand miles plus the fraction: therefore only 2000+ is really 'thousands of miles'.


title: What is the meaning of “Body Electric”?

text: Actually it's title of a song written by Lana Del Rey. **So what does Body Electric really mean when Lana says "I sing the body electric"?** And here is a link the the lyrics.


title: What does 'it is love' mean?

text: I have heard many times from many people saying 'it is love' or 'French is love' or 'Baltimore is love'. What does it exactly mean? Shouldn't they use lovely instead.?


title: "Are you hurt" vs. "Did you get hurt"

text: What should we use when someone is injured? > Are you hurt? Or it should be > Did you get hurt? I felt using the second one as improper. Please correct me.


title: Response when your boss thanks you

text: What should be your response when your boss thanks you for using his own resource allotted to you and you respect your boss and cannot respond him like _It's ok_ or _you're welcome_.


title: Difference between would and will

text: Thank you for your time reading this. I am from China and have learned British English for years from my middle school to undergraduate time. I normally take 'would' as the past form of 'will', though I know 'would' may also work as an auxiliary verb which could be used in subjunctive mood. Now I come to the United States and have got confused about 'would' and 'will' very much. In the past, whenever it came to something related to the future, I would use 'will'. Now in the USA, people use 'would' a lot. For example, if we are talking about MIT, some guy may say 'I would go to MIT someday'. For me, I prefer to say 'I will go to MIT someday and I will surely make it!' There are many similar examples. I know grammatically both sentences must be correct but I just can't understand the usage of 'would' here. I have looked up some information online. They helped a lot. For example, people say'would' can be used to express your desire or hope. However, from my memory of middle school, it is 'will' that could be used to express your willingness to do something. According to Merriam-Webster dictionary, both words can be used to express a desire or wish. Then why people prefer 'would' to 'will'? I am totally lost! People keep using 'would' under those circumstances which I will use 'will' and this really annoys me a lot. Help!


title: "Denoted by" or just "denoted"?

text: In a mathematical context (explaining a formula just written) the following seems unobjectionable: "The set of unitary polynomials has been denoted by P". My question is whether it sounds right to skip the preposition "by", so that the sentence would read: "The set of unitary polynomials has been denoted P".


title: "Loviest-doviest" or "lovey-doviest"?

text: I know that this term in its comparative form would 'lovier-dovier', but somehow I can't decide whether it is "loviest-doviest" or "lovey-doviest" Which is the correct form?


title: What is the meaning and usage of the word "dense"?

text: I often come across people saying to each other: > I don't want to be too dense here, but… What does the term _dense_ imply in such contexts?


title: Why is "head over heels" used as if it were exceptional rather than commonplace?

text: Most people spend part of each day standing, and if they have normal anatomy their heads are over their heels in this position. Even sitting or lying down, the head is higher than the heels (if not over the heels). Yet the phrase "head over heels" is used in ways implying it is an unusual situation. How did such usage come to be, and why does it persist? Why is the more obvious "heels over head" not used?


title: "Technology" is to "technical" as "memory" is to what?

text: I'm writing a sentence about the job of the memory and am characterizing absorption with memory. How do I say "memorical absorption" correctly? _Memorial_ sounds like a noun...


title: Alternatives to "inside view"?

text: I want to describe in details how something works. It is good to say: > "I want to describe it from inside view" ? If not, what are the alternatives?


title: How do you pronounce "read receipt"?

text: Is it past tense (/rɛd/) or present tense (/rid/)? I can imagine rationale for either choice. Past tense because it's an acknowledgment that the message has been read, or present tense because it's an acknowledgement that the message has been _opened_ and the recipient is thus reading it.


title: To "strum strings" and "hit keys"

text: Is it correct to use a verb right next to its corresponding noun in this specific context? **I strum strings and hit keys for a living.** Thanks for your help.


title: Using "Thank you" and "Cheers"

text: Is it sensible to use both "Thank you" and "Cheers" in ending an email?   For example if I sign off. > Thank you, I am looking forward to receiving your response. > > Cheers,   >  (insert name here) would it's **simultaneous** use be **obvious** to most people as being redundant? (I can get rid of the "thank you" all together and leave the "cheers" to serve the purpose of a thanks and goodbye, but lets say I want to keep both - like " **over yonder** ")


title: Thieves' words for their victims

text: What words might a thief (of any variety) use to describe the victims of his theft? Con artists in film often use "mark", for example. Is there other jargon specific to the con branch* of crime? How about burglars? Muggers? Bank robbers? Politicians? Oh, sorry... Highwaymen? Pickpockets? * * * *We might call these words "con-specific". `:p`


title: How to interpret the negation in this sentence?

text: I have a question. What does the following sentence mean? Negation is so complicated here. > We are characters who do not exist in a story composed by no one from > nothing.


title: "To increase competitiveness in" or "to increase competitiveness on"?

text: Which phrase is the correct one? > to increase competitiveness _in_ the EU labor market   >  to increase competitiveness _on_ the EU labor market


title: Articles with general concepts

text: I have the following sentence in the beginning of a chapter: > This chapter lays down the fundamentals of distributed processing. It > provides the basics for data processing... I would like to ask why I need to have "the" before "fundamentals" and "basics".


title: Number agreement when using “(s)” for optional plural

text: I have a question about the following construction and which instance is correct. >   * Selecting an appropriate study topic(s). >   * Selecting appropriate study topic(s). > When it is both singular and plural due to the parenthesized optional part, should I use the _an_ because of thinking of what follows as being the singular (that is, _study topic_ )? Or should I omit the _an_ because of thinking of what of what follows as being in the plural (that is, _study topic **s**_ )?


title: What do you call a past participle+noun construction clause such as “No offense meant” “Your point taken,” “With that said,” and “Given that”?

text: In reference to my question about the usage of “No offense meant/taken,” I noticed that there are a lot of shortened forms like “No offense meant/taken,” “Your point taken,” “That said,” and “Given that” used in place of statements like “I don’t mean to offend you / I don’t take it for your offense,” “I’d take your point (correctly),” “As I said that,” “Under the given situation (condition, statement, fact, story, and so on).” .” When did these shortened forms come into currency or vogue? Did they surge because the tide of modern time requires speed and shortened form of expression? Is there specific grammatical terminology to describe such a “noun+past participle (or passive verb form)," or vice versa contracted construction clause?


title: Why is "xxxx doth not a yyyy make" considered valid English?

text: > Reading doth not a writer make. This sounds all wrong so why it is acceptable to use?   The word order looks to be all out sequence (Object-Subject-Verb).   It should be "reading does not make you a writer" (Object-Verb-Subject). And if this is Shakespearian, when and how did the word order in English change?


title: Proper usage/origin of the generic phrase "[action phrase] does not a [noun] make"

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Why is "xxxx doth not a yyyy make" considered valid English? I occasionally come across a sentence formulated in a manner similar to the following: > Reading a book does not an expert make. I realize the grammar is quite irregular (I'm no grammar expert, so I'll just call it Yoda-speak), but I've heard this structure used a number of times in the colloquial. My questions are:   1. Is anyone else familiar with this sentence structure?   2. What's the origin?   3. How should I use it properly?


title: Unusual word order in a sentence

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Why is “xxxx doth not a yyyy make” considered valid English?   >  Proper usage/origin of the generic phrase “[action phrase] does not a > [noun] make”   >  “Two films don't a revolution make”: is this sentence grammatically > correct?   >  “Dazzling images do not a shining nation make”   >  Is employing hyperbaton correct in English? The following sentence is from the book "Practical Common Lisp": > A single record, however, does not a database make. It sounds somewhat strange because of the word order: Subject-aux.verb-object- verb. Instead of this order I would expect the following: > A single record, however, does not make a database. Is this a common practice? Does the first order alter meaning in any way? Maybe it mimics some other text or a way of talking?


title: "Two films don't a revolution make": is this sentence grammatically correct?

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Why is "xxxx doth not a yyyy make" considered valid English?   >  Proper usage/origin of the generic phrase “[action phrase] does not a > [noun] make”   >  “Dazzling images do not a shining nation make” I came across an article in _TOI Crest Edition_ about black-and-white films. It had the following sentence, which looked dubious to me: > Two films don't a revolution make, and it would be even more simplistic to > suggest that these two films are a reaction to the increasing use of CGI, > motion capture and 3D in films today. It is about the two recent black-and-white movies 'The Artist' and 'Good Night Good Morning'. Is this sentence grammatically correct? Why?


title: How much of the English language comes from each of its influences?

text: I was watching a video linked in this answer and it made the following claim: > [...] like most words in English is derived from German. That got me thinking. While I know that Germanic languages have greatly influenced English, so have the Latin and Celtic ones (and various others to a greater or lesser degree). Is it true that more than 50% of the English vocabulary is derived from Germanic roots? More generally, can someone point me to data on this? I imagine attempts have been made to quantify the contribution of different languages to English, what were the results? What percentage of the language comes from each source? Ideally I would like to see this expressed in terms of % of words but I am aware that, at least to some linguists, attempting to quantify vocabulary is anathema (to give a simple reason, _all_ languages that allow number construction have an infinite vocabulary by definition), so alternative approaches to quantifying this are also welcome.


title: Past vs Past Perfect

text: While writing a paper for my English class, I couldn't decided whether past or past perfect tense was needed. It's basically about how a guy whose house is destroyed because the government wants to build a freeway over it: > Walking towards where my house was built, I see that only my mailbox **had > survived** the wreckage, while I try to salvage all I **could**. Looking > through my mail, I see a letter from the government telling me kindly that > they are going to build a freeway where my house **had once stood**. > Attached is a sum of money reimbursing my devastating loss, but it **could** > not account for the number of generations who **had once lived** there. Basically, I can't decide if there following are correct. It's supposed to be in present tense. (The guy is currently standing at the wreckage.) 1) "had survived" 2) try to salvage all I "could" 3) where my house "had once stood" 4) but it "could" not account 5) number of generations who "had once lived" there Please provide some sort of explanation. Thanks!


title: Consumer goods question

text: What is a better definition, the consumer business industry or the consumer goods industry?? And also, is there an acronym?? I am in between those two, would really appreciate your help


title: "Skipping rope" vs. "jump rope"

text: Well it is summer time and I have to lose some weight so I have chosen the cardiovascular activity to do that jumping rope. While digging on some information I have asked myself a few questions: Why do they call the jump rope skipping rope in England? Do they call it skipping rope or jump rope in the States as there are World Rope Skipping Federation (WRSF) and The United States Amateur Jump Rope Federation (USAJRF)? What is the etymology of "skipping rope" as you are jumping not skipping? What is most common to use nowadays as I have heard both? See this NGram.


title: Is it 'bye from now' or 'bye for now'?

text: I often hear it in the end of the radio programs. Are they saying 'bye from now' or 'bye for now'? Some times they say 'bye from/for me' if there are more than one person. What do they mean?


title: Alternatives to "He is of the opinion"?

text: Are there alternatives to "is of the opinion ..." in the following sentence? > **He is of the opinion** that there is a something upon which we depend. Because I am not an English native speaker, the expressions like "is of + noun" are ambiguous a little bit.


title: Word wrapping rules

text: Are there any rules or recommendations on word wrapping in English text? For example, consider the following sentence wrapped on two lines: > The tragedy of the commons is an   >  economics theory by Garrett Hardin. I believe that the article _an_ cannot be left on the first line. So the following wrapping seems better: > The tragedy of the commons is   >  an economics theory by Garrett Hardin. What about the short word _is_? Should I leave it or is it better to move it to the second line as well? (Note, that I am not talking about the line lengths here!) I believe this is more typographical question rather than linguistic one. Nevertheless, are there any recommendations/rules on this topic?


title: Word meaning coincidence of reference to the unusual

text: Most of us have had the experience of stumbling over a new fact or bit of knowledge and then finding several more references to it in the near future. For example, you see a strange word which you're forced to look-up and then the next day the same word appears in the headline of your local paper. There's a term for this phenomenon but I've been unable to track it down. Can anyone help?


title: Phenomenon of learning a new word that you've never seen before, and then seeing it being used

text: On Wednesday my wife came across the word **atavism** in Out of Africa that she did not know the meaning of. I did not recognise the word and did not know what it meant. So we looked it up and found out. Then on Thursday I was reading an article on the Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/23/worship-children-brings- misery-suzanne-moore) and saw the word **atavistic**. I cannot for the life of me recall seeing this word ever before, and here it pops up shortly after finding out what it meant. I am sure this phenomenon has happened before - where I learn something new (usually the meaning of a word that I have never seen before, or name of a place or person) and then the very shortly afterwards see it being used. (This also happened to me this year with quinoa.) Is there a name for this phenomenon? Or is it just me that this happens to?


title: Use or omit "the" before profession?

text: > This image-stabilising system for a hand-held camera, developed by cameraman > Garrett Brown in 1973, offers (...) Wouldn't it be more correct to write "the cameraman Garrett Brown"? Is omitting the "the" generally acceptable (outside newspaper headlines)?


title: Term for when someone gets overly pepped up and thinks he/she can do anything

text: What is it called when someone gets encouraged by people around him/her or gets pepped up by the atmosphere around to the extent that he or she gets a wrong impression about his/her powers and capabilities (physical or mental), and probably gets out of control and starts doing crazy things in an effort to do the job right. For example, I'm looking for something similar to filling in the following sentence: > Don't get/be **_** , you can't drink all that in one go" If there are various related words or expressions to be used in different situations, I would like to have all of them with appropriate examples. Thanks.


title: What should be done for making this sentence more clear?

text: "About the scenario, there are insert transactions on every 3 seconds. In a busy day, about 3000 rows for big table, another 100 for medium table and around 30 for small table." There is a question for this sentence "1 row every 3 seconds? Or many rows (3000) every 3 seconds? Very unclear" So what can be done prevent vagueness here ? And what did you understand from that ? Edit: Extra info for those who didn't familiar with computer databases. Topic is related to an internet server database. About the transactions, they don't related with marketing. Simple explanation from wikipedia "A transaction comprises a unit of work performed within a database management system against a database, and treated in a coherent and reliable way independent of other transactions." Inserts are also about entering data to database. An insert can contain only 1 row or it can contain multiple rows: http://www.w3schools.com/php/php_mysql_insert.asp


title: Analogue of "most recent" for events in the future

text: In the context of a listing of events that are time-based, it is common to use "Most Recent" to describe a listing of events ordered by date, in descending order, with the upper limit being today's date (or perhaps yesterday's date, since an event happening today would be a "current event"). Is there a similar, compact, title ("heading") that is appropriate for future events, ordered by date, where the event whose date is closes (in the future) to today's date would be ordered first, and events farther in the future would be ordered next? "Upcoming Events" is often used, but doesn't convey the specificity of the ordering in the same way that "Most Recent" does.


title: How should I correctly repeat possessives?

text: >   1. planning of mine, the student and the company >   2. planning of mine, the student's, and the company's > Which is correct/better, and why? I would assume 2 is correct, but is 1 incorrect?


title: What's the correct way to cite the name "King James I" in an MLA works cited page?

text: I'm writing a paper on _Daemonologie in Forme of a Dialogue_ , and I was wondering how I should cite King James I in my works cited page. This is King James I of England who was also King James VI of Scotland, and at the time he wrote this book, he was king of Scotland, but not yet king of England. Since he is now more well-known as James I, I was leaning more towards citing him this way: King James I. _Daemonologie in Forme of a Dialogue_. Edinburgh, 1597. Should I specify that he is King James I of England, since there was another King James I who was king of Scotland prior to this James's kingship? Should I cite him as James I? I've searched my MLA handbook, which states that titles of nobility should be omitted in works cited lists, but doesn't state whether or not the same should be done for royal titles.


title: Use of "groin" as a verb

text: I came across this line when reading Owen's _Strange Meeting_ : > It seemed that out of the battle I escaped > > Down some profound dull tunnel, long since scooped > > Through granites which Titanic wars had **groined**. What does the last line really mean? Going by the dictionary, _groin_ as a verb stands for 'to form the line of intersection of two vaults', but with this I am unable to bring **Titanic wars** into the picture.


title: Is this sentence of "mixed construction"?

text: In English class, we've discussed the following sentence and considered if it is of mixed construction: > The increase in the number of times his name appeared on such lists after > the poem was published was enough to make him famous. Is this sentence ok, or is it mixed construction?


title: Using "and" twice in a list

text: About using _and_ , I've learned it is usually used in lists, between the last two items. For example: > I like movies, traveling _and_ going out with friends. Please tell me if the use of _and_ twice in this next example is correct. The first _and_ is used between the last two items of the list, and the second is used to combine two things in the second part. > I am a software developer who has permanent residence, Bachelor degree > **and** 4 years experience in .net for developing new software **and** doing > enhancements in existing once.


title: "began" vs "begun"

text: What is the difference, and when should I use which?


title: Term for the time set aside by company for self-directed projects

text: Some companies set aside a few hours or maybe a day for employees to work on projects apart from their assigned team workload. This is atleast known in technology & IT sector, a description of some of these arrangements are in this LifeHacker article. Is there any standard word or phrase to describe this? I was thinking of flex week, but I believe that is something else entirely, implying allowing telecommuting etc. but not necessarily self-directed projects.


title: What does "ever" mean in this sentence?

text: I read this sentence: > Did that ever hit home! None of these definitions hits home. It's neither a question (in which it would perfectly match) nor a negative sentence. And it does not mean "at any time", and it's not constantly, because it refers to a single event in the past when something shocked him.


title: "Don't worry, ..."

text: > "Don't worry, it won't hurt much." Is the comma the correct punctuation mark to use after "Don't worry"? This seems to be the norm, but I feel like there almost two sentences there and that something more than a comma could be required. Though a full stop or a semicolon seems a bit much.


title: Crib: to Complain

text: People in India use _crib_ as a word for _complain_ as in 'Don't crib about it'. I always thought this was wrong usage, but I recently checked in OED online and found that sense 9b says > **b.** To complain, to grumble. _colloq._ Cf. _crib-biter n._ at **crib** > _n._ Compounds 2. > >> 1925 in E. Fraser & J. Gibbons _Soldier & Sailor Words_   >  1957 L. P. Hartley _Hireling_ xi. 90 She calls on the neighbours, she's out > half the time and doesn't answer the telephone, and when I start cribbing > she just laughs. Is this correct?


title: Word to call a person that works in a store

text: I seem to always have a trouble with this one; what do you call a person that works in a store? A clerk? A sales person? Neither of these sound right. Saying "person that works in the store" doesn't work that well either. Is there a general single word that I can use that represents "a person that works in a store".


title: The meaning of "hemorrhoidal sensations"

text: > The Swede, like the Frenchman, prefers in Poetry the light, the clear and > the transparent. The profound, indeed, he demands and values also; but it > must be a depth that is pellucid. He wishes that he may see the gold sands > at the bottom of the wave. Whatever is dark and muddy, so that it cannot > give him any distinct image — let it be as far fetched as it may — he cannot > suffer. He believes that > >> Th’ obscurely utter’d is th’ obscurely thought, > > and clearness is a necessary condition for whatever shall produce any effect > upon him. In this he differs widely from the German, who in consequence of > his contemplative nature, not only suffers, but even prefers, the mystical > and the nebulous, in which he loves to foresee something deeply thought. He > has more ‘Gemüth’ and gloomy seriousness than the Swede, who is more > superficial and more frivolous. This is the source of those mystical > feelings and **hemorrhoidal sensations (hemmorrhoidal-känningarne)** in the > German Poetry, for which we have no taste. > > Esaias Tegnér, quoted in _Fritiof's Saga: a Legend of the North_, by F M > Franzén, 1839 (my emphasis) What's the meaning of "hemorrhoidal sensations"? Does that mean that reading German poetry will produce bad feelings just like having piles?


title: Is there an adjectival form for "good etiquette"?

text: For example, when we say someone has **_good courtesy_** , we can say they are **_courteous_**. Is there an analogous word for having **_good etiquette_**?


title: Can "status quo" be used in regards to micro topics?

text: I was having a discussion with my fiancee about whether or not she was going to take my name when we get married. As of right now, the plan is that she will keep her current last name. When asked if this will change before our wedding, I said "we will most likely stick with the status quo, and she'll keep her name." A. Is it incorrect to use the term "status quo" to describe the current state of a micro-topic? B. Does using it in that sentence conversely imply that that "status quo" is what is normal in society (which is for the female to take the last name), and thus the "status quo" is actually her taking my last name? Thanks!


title: What is the antonym of 'quoin' -- a single word to describe an interior angle

text: I'm looking for single words to describe interior (as in 'corner of a room') and exterior angles (as in 'corner of a building'). For the exterior angle I found _quoin_ which is (according to Merriam-Webster) ' _a solid exterior angle (as of a building)_ ' and ' _(architecture) solid exterior angle of a building; especially one formed by a cornerstone_ ' according to the Free Dictionary, so it's spot on. Now, how could I describe an interior angle? If there's no single word for this, perhaps a phrase sounding better than ' _concave corner_ ' or ' _interior angle corner_ '?


title: correct antonym for individualistic

text: I'm looking for an antonym for individualistic that ideologically corresponds to valuing the common good above the individual. For example when Spock says " _the needs of the many outweighs the needs of the few_ ", what ideological stance could this view be ascribed to?


title: "All previous work is" or "All previous work are"

text: Which of the following two sentences is the correct one? (1) All previous work is in the file. (2) All previous work are in the file. Google search turned up documents using both forms, but the "is" form was most prevalent. Thanks.


title: What is the name of the area of skin between the nose and the upper lip / mouth?

text: What is the name of the area that is between the nose and the upper lip, circled in figure 1 below? ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/ZEu5W.png) source of face image I have found that the area circled in figure 2, the small indentation under the nose, is called the "philtrum," which is what the many searches I have tried have yielded, but I cannot figure out what the entire area is called.


title: Why is "to win over" also called "to one up on"?

text: Peter Lynch has a book that's called _One Up On Wall Street_ , which probably means "Win Over Wall Street." But why this phrase? Why is it "One Up"? Is there a story behind it? Where does it come from?


title: Do I have a couple of questions or a few?

text: I know what the dictionary definitions are for few and couple. Not looking for reciting the definition or etymology. I would like someone to tell me in common usage is it appropriate to call 3 of something a couple or to call 2 of something a few? This comes from my workplace. I work in a very global setting. In emails and on conference calls often people will say "a few" when they are talking about two things. Or "a couple" when they are talking about three things and sometimes more. Are there any regional/social/demographic based differences? For instance my grandma often uses the terms interchangeably and might go back and forth with the two words about the exact same topic. What is the cutoff point for couple and a few?


title: How Many is "A Few"?

text: I'm preparing some marketing materials for my boss, and one section contains the phrase "Here are a few examples:". The list that follows contains two items, which strikes me as being incorrect, though I can't find much evidence of this. Is it semantically correct to refer to two items as "a few"? Is there a solid rule for this, or is it just personal preference? **Edit -** As Armen correctly pointed out, this question is about semantics rather than grammar. I changed my phrasing to reflect this.


title: Approximate values of amount modifiers

text: This is an area of English that I consistently have trouble with. Consider the following sentences.   1. I have a couple of books on my desk.   2. I have a bunch of books on my desk.   3. I have a number of books on my desk.   4. I have a few books on my desk.   5. I have several books on my desk.   6. I have many books on my desk. How many books, give or take, do I have on my desk in each case? [digression: one example of how I tend to get these wrong is the following: not long ago, my wife (native speaker of American English) and me were out with a few friends from out of town. At one point I said "[famous landmark] is only two hundred meters from here", to which my wife replied "no, it's more like a a couple hundred meters".]


title: Is "administrate" a valid English verb? What's the difference between it and "administer"?

text: We had an interesting discussion yesterday about the use of _administer_ and _administrate_. I feel that there is a case for both usages -- sometimes you might administer something, and other times you might administrate something -- but I couldn't convince my fellow co-worker who thought that _administrate_ was some kind of neo-abomination. This was mainly because I couldn't cite a convincing example. So then, is _administrate_ an acceptable verb, and what usages exist that differentiate it from _administer_?


title: Why do we say "bless you"?

text: I don't mean when someone sneezes or when someone's been kind to you, but in other situations. Like, when someone is enjoying a lot of luck, fortune or doing staggeringly well in something. Or when someone is wonderful at a task and you admire them at lot. So, you want to get to know them better through talking to them, either directly or via online messaging. However, they are often quite busy and you're hoping they have time for you, but they turn out not to have any. You can say: "(It's a pity, but) bless them." Besides, is it the same meaning as "wish you good luck"?


title: Сonstruction "Do you mind"

text: Your room mate asks: “Do you mind if I smoke?”. But, you HATE smoking. What would you say? “Yes” or “No” ? I think correct answer is "Yes". My answered correctly?


title: Difference between "the very first" and "first"

text: I have the sentence: > Who wrote the very first dictionary ever? Is it any different from > Who wrote the first dictionary ever? I don't get how something could be more first.


title: Which expression is older: "London Royal Parks" or "London's Royal Parks" ? And why is it Hyde Park and not Hyde's Park?

text: > **London Royal Parks** and > **London's Royal Parks** Both phrases are used, and I understand that "London" in the first example is acting as an adjective. Whereas in the second, "London", is used as a proper noun and therefore has an apostrophe. However, which form is the older? I suspect that it is the second and if that is the case, why do only two Royal Parks: St. James's and The Regent's Park, have an apostrophe while four Royal Parks do not? In other words: Why not Hyde's Park, Richmond's Park, Greenwich's Park and Kensington's Gardens? Please, no answers with: > "The Royal Parks **in** London" or > "The Royal Parks **of** London." _**and_** claiming the above are "correct" because inanimate nouns and geographic names do not take the apostrophe. That's false. On dates I found this on Wikipedia: > Place names in the United States do not use the possessive apostrophe on > federal maps and signs. The United States Board on Geographic Names, which > has responsibility for formal naming of municipalities and geographic > features, has deprecated the use of possessive apostrophes **since 1890** so > as not to show ownership of the place. Only five names of natural features > in the U.S. are officially spelled with a genitive apostrophe (one example > being **Martha's Vineyard** ). I'd also be interested to know which form is considered "preferable" by linguists, grammarians etc... `London Royal Parks` or `London's Royal Parks` and which is more common in everyday speech.


title: Is " Let me know your opinion" correct?

text: What are the possible structures that follow the phrase: let somebody know. For example, is "Let me know your opinion" correct?


title: how do we use 'ride' and 'drive when it comes to a motorcycle?

text: suppose Iam offering someone a ride home can i use the word 'ride' as in " come I'll ride you home " i know " I'll give you a ride home " would be the correct sentence but could you still answer my question


title: "Somewhere" - is it really a pronoun?

text: Is it? If it is then why is not listed in the major dictionaries? LDOCE, Dictionary.com, Merriam-Webster: No


title: What is the "bin" in "loony bin"?

text: A question on ELU gives some background on the use of _looney_. Etymonline's entry for _bin_ has "receptacle", "all from L.L. _benna_ 'cart,' M.L. _benna_ 'basket.'" _Loony bin_ seems to be analogous to _police box_ or _paddy wagon_. I'm not sure if the "insane" were literally kept in boxes or carted up as the definition implies. If not, why was _bin_ chosen? **Was _bin_ used in similar phrases or contexts, or was it just a unique construction that caught on?**


title: Is there a word for capitalizing in the middle of a word, as in "eBay"?

text: Usually this sort of word is a trademarked name, such as _eBay_ or _BlackBerry_. Is there a word that describes capitalization mid-word?


title: It's not "probability" but...?

text: I have values between 0 and 1, like [0.9, 0.8,...], indicating that a value closer to 1 is more probable than one close to 0, but without all the values adding up to 1. I guess I can't call it _probability_ , but what else can I call those values?


title: "Replacing variables with their equivalence classes" vs. "... with their equivalence class"

text: In my thesis I have the following sentence: > One can construct a new query by replacing all the variables in Q with their > equivalence classes. I doubt that this sentence is grammatically correct, for the following reason. Every variable is replaced by just one equivalence class, since there is only one equivalence class for every variable in Q. At the same time, there are multiple variables in Q. So should it be "equivalence class" or "equivalence classes"?


title: What's the difference between "attendee" and "participant"?

text: Attendee: Someone who is at an event such as a meeting or a course. Participant: Someone who is taking part in an activity or event. Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English


title: Collective Noun for Fire

text: What is the collective noun for _fire_? > A **___ __ ___** of fires. To clarify: This is actually a school curriculum text question and I have never heard of such a collective noun. This is an example I can think of: Suppose that several fires raged yesterday in the city and the newspapers wanted to say "Yesterday the fire department fought a whole bunch of fires". What word can replace "a whole bunch" in the previous statement?


title: Word for feeling conflicting emotions simultaneously

text: I've been trying to think of an adjective that expresses having two (or perhaps more) conflicting emotions or opinions simultaneously. Can anyone think of one?


title: Origin and pronunciation of "Thawte"

text: Working in the IT industry I often have to use the word _Thawte_ \- the name of a company and its certificates. What is the origin of this word and its correct pronunciation? Does it have its own meaning or is it just a name? A web search result seems to contain IT security stuff only.


title: What does " hand-me-downs of talk" mean ?

text: for you to know the context, I am submitting a sentence.. " the collection of more modern hand-me-downs of talk can be found in.... " what is the meaning of "hand-me-downs of talk" ?


title: What is meant by "if only..."?

text: Does it mean something like I wish? > If only I had time to do this.   >  If only I could do this.


title: How often do people call friends "chum" so that you know they are not actually calling you "chump"?

text: I am not a native English speaker. If my schoolmate yells at me "Hey chum!", I wonder if they are actually calling me _chum_ or _chump_. How often is _chum_ being used to refer to friends instead of "Hey bro/buddy"? Please gives answer for US, UK and AU.


title: "The lyrics to the song" vs. "the lyrics of the song"

text: >   * Do you remember the lyrics **to** the song? >   * Do you remember the lyrics **of** the song? > I'm more familiar with the second sentence using the "of". But what I don't know is, how would you interpret both of these sentences in the grammatical sense? Do both of these sentences express a relation between lyrics and songs?


title: Is "statistics" singular or plural?

text: >   * Statistics **shows** that people are having fewer children these days! >   * Statistics **show** that people are having fewer children these days! > Which one is grammatical?


We are creating a product which is online hosted CMS solution (something like WordPress), and we want to call it **Site Pack**. However, there are places where we need to join these words together (like the logo for example). How we should case the joined word? There are many options available:   1. SitePack   2. Sitepack   3. sitepack Which casing is correct? Who decides the casing of newly coined words? Do we have autonomy in determining the casing of the name of our product, or should we consult somewhere for that?


title: What's the meaning of "one too many times"?

text: > They're just a better bank. I keep a local bank as well (got burned one too > many times by WF — started charging me for things I had for free for 6 > years).


title: Present perfect and present perfect continuous for actions in progress

text: My grammar book says that both present perfect and present perfect continuous, when used with "for, since, etc", express a situation that began in the past and continues to the present. When used without 'since' or 'for', present perfect expresses the action that has happened before now and the progressive without any specific mention of time expresses a general activity in progress recently. So neither of them implies that an action is still in progress when time is not mentioned, but I noticed that sometimes even when specific time is mentioned both can refer to an activity that is not in progress anymore and that has finished. Eg., **_I have been wearing this dress/I have worn this dress the whole summer_**. (The summer is over, the action is over too) What do you think about it? I can give another example; **_I have been living in France_** (Maybe the person has just relocated and says that he has been living in France recently) and **_I have been living in France my whole life/for five years/for ages_** (Again the person has relocated to another location and says where he/she used to live recently. **_I have lived in France my whole life/for five years/for ages_**. Similar statements as the two above: he/she doesn't live there anymore, but was recently living there. Sometimes native speakers tell me that nothing is impossible :). What do you think about these statements? **_I have been driving my car_**. The specific time is not mentioned, however the progressive form implies that the action is still in progress. I have been confused by this sentence too as well as by the sentences below. **_I have been driving my car for ages/for five years_**. I know that this normally means I am still driving it, but I have been told (not by experts) that it can also imply that the action has finished recently or even if not recently it is not in progress anymore. The following sentence has the same meaning as the previous one; **_I have driven my car for ages/for five years_**. And **_They have been married for twenty years/for ages_** , maybe they are still married, maybe have recently divorced. Are these comments right? Thanks


title: Does “code of conduct” mean the same as “code of ethics”?

text: I have tried with many dictionaries to search for a synonym of the phrase “code of conduct”. I wonder if it has the same meaning as “code of ethics”. Your help is much appreciated.


title: Instrumented? What is a good explanation/definition of the word. (English: Tech Jargon)

text: What is a good explanation/definition of the word Instrumented? as in "Good code needs to be instrumented..." I did a brief web search, but the few places it pops up seem to also be full of jargon, so I'm still confused. Is it a real word, is another word better, is it really related to Java programming, or other programming languages?


title: Meaning in context of 'founding population'

text: > Bryan Sykes, an Oxford scientist, wrote a book called "The Seven Daughters > of Eve" in which, using studies of mitochondrial DNA, he had claimed to be > able to trace nearly all living Europeans back to a founding population of > just seven women—the 'daughters of Eve' of the title—who lived during the > Palaeolithic. To each of these women Sykes given a name—Ursula, Xenia, > Jasmine and so on—and even a detailed personal history. Can the paragraph above have the implication that the 'daughters of Eve' lived in the same generation? If so, why? Is the use of 'founding population' that create this implication? Would it be sufficient to remove 'founding' to avoid this implication?


title: Equality among multiple items?

text: When I have two items and they are the same, we can say that they possess "equality". Let's say I have three or four items and they are all the same. What do we call the quality that they possess? Can we say the three items possess "equality" too? What are the other words for this quality? For example, I have four athletes and they are all equal in strength. What do we call the equality among their strengths? Thank you!


title: Formal term for upper level health workers

text: What is the **formal** term for upper level healthcare workers? By "upper level" I mean Medical Doctors and pharmacists; basically the ones that must have a university degree to perform the duties. I'm aware of possible legal differences between various countries, fortunately I don't need a perfectly unambiguous term. The context allows for not being 100% accurate, journalistic accuracy would be enough, so to speak.


title: What do you call it when some group is feeling self-satisfaction by praising themselves?

text: What do you call it when some group of people is feeling self-satisfaction in praising themselves, even though others don't think them praise-worthy?


title: Difference between ‘"folder" and "directory"

text: What is the difference between _folder_ and _directory_ in the context of computer science?


title: Can you use "many, many" in this way?

text: Suppose I want to use the phrase "many, many" to compound the "maniness" of the thing I'm describing. > There are **many, many** people. > > The people (of which there are **many, many** ) The first one is standard, but the second one is contended. _Can_ it be used in that way? An example of one that wouldn't be so awkward is: > There are **lots and lots** of people. > > The people (of which there are **lots and lots** ) Each one can be properly used in its singular form, but once repeated, one of them falls apart. Why?


title: What does a person “with about two dollars to one’s name” mean?

text: I found the phrase, “a homeless man in New York _with about two dollars to his name_ ” in the New Yorker magazine’s article (November 29, 2011) titled “Politics of Dissolution.” It begins with the following sentence “You can’t get much further apart on the socio-economic ladder that Peter Thiel and Ray Kachel. The former is a silicon Valley billionaire entrepreneur, venture capitalist with sharply conservative –libertarian views, the latter is, currently, a homeless man in New York City, with left-wing politics and _about two dollars to his name_.” As I didn’t get the idea of a homeless man ‘with about two dollars to his name,’ I looked for its meaning on Google. Wikipedia provides the definition of ‘two dollar’ simply as “the United States two-dollar bill is a current denomination of US currency. President Thomas Jefferson is featured on the obverse of the note.” As a derivative phrase from ‘two dollars, only Urban Dictionary registers "two dollar scratchie" as; When you have a bitter break up or disagreement with your partner and their name becomes a non-speakable word, substitute it for "two dollar scratchie". If anyone says their actual name instead of the substituted "two dollar scratchie" - they gotta buy you one! Neither of both definitions seems to be applicable to the above homeless man description. What does “ _someone with two dollars with his (her) name_ ” mean? Is it a popular phrase to mean a nameless person with no value attached to his or her name / being? Can I apply ‘two dollars’ to any other insignificant articles or things than a person in the same way as ‘no worth for a dime’?


title: Where is the word "cutlery" in common usage

text: During a trip to the US I realised that many Americans have never heard the word cutlery before ... however some have. Where in the English speaking world (and in particular where in the US) is this is a common term for knives, forks and spoons?


title: Meaning of sentence with double negation

text: I'm a learner of English, and I got this sentence from a dating book which I find difficult to understand: > We know a man who was horribly disfigured by fire who has a constant stream > of women in his life, who would never dream of thinking of himself as > sexually inadequate. The word _never_ is a negative word and _inadequate_ also has a negative meaning. There are two ways I can understand this sentence: (1) Negative plus negative gives positive (my Chinese grammar), so the sentence means the same as > He would dream of thinking of himself as sexually adequate. (2) Double negative strengthens the negation, so the sentence means the same as > He would dream of thinking of himself as sexually inadequate or > He would never dream of thinking of himself as sexually adequate.


title: Is this an imperative sentence?

text: Is this sentence an imperative sentence, or does it have conditional meaning? > You hang around with riffraff like the Weasleys and that Hagrid, and it’ll > rub off on you.


title: Expression for a frustrated, annoyed double-take

text: Let us take a specific situation. > You are facing a person you find extremely annoying. The person is finding > faults in your ways and pointing them out in a rather blunt manner. They are > making high demands, being obnoxious and really getting under your skin. > Worst of all, they are right on all accounts and your argument with that > person is quickly turning into a losing battle. > > And on top of that, the person is using a really annoying dialect, something > you can't hold against them but it really brushes you the wrong way. > > Yet another point in your argument is raised, stated in that annoying > dialect, and as you utter your angry, frustrated (and wrong) rebuttal, you > find yourself replying using the same terrible dialect. You stop and correct > yourself immediately, but during the second before correcting yourself, > you... _scoff_? The dictionary definition suggests scoffing is more similar to annoyed, dismissive laugh. This is more about grinding your teeth in frustration. How would you describe such an expression?


Why is "to get" sometimes used where "to be" could be used? Examples:   1. "The video got uploaded to the web site." vs. "The video was uploaded to the web site."   2. "He got thrown in the pool." vs. "He was thrown in the pool."   3. "We got caught!" vs. "We were caught!" Is that usage correct?


title: Use 'got' instead of 'was'?

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Why is “to get” sometimes used where “to be” could be used? Sometimes I hear people say things like this: > I just got robbed. (Personally I would rather say 'I was robbed' or something.) It seems correct to me, but is this a _good style_? And if so, in which cases is it possible to replace a word with _get_ or _got_?


title: Is "Didn't you have a meeting to attend to?" grammatical?

text: Is the sentence "Didn't you have a meeting to attend to" grammatically correct?


title: Is "Men Socks" correct?

text: Just would like to know if saying "Men Socks" is correct? It needs to mean "socks for men". By searching on google I could see that men's socks is more used. If you speak portuguese, I was translating "meias masculinas" to English when I got this doubt.


title: Lets not sweat it

text: What is the meaning of "lets not sweat it" in this post? Is it something like "let's not take it too seriously?" or "hey man, take it easy?".


title: What "All of is" means?

text: Question: Who wrote this music? Answer: All of is. I don't get it. Can someone help me here? Thanks.


title: What does “This story just won’t write” mean? Is this still an acceptable English phrase today?

text: The New Yorker (March 20) carries an interesting story about the writing style of Time magazine posted by Calvin Trillin who worked for Time magazine as a ‘floater’ and editor in 60s under the title, “Time Edit.” There is the following statement: > Writers at Time paid a sort of homage to those leftover tics by using > phrases like “short-fingered vulgarian Donald Trump.” It was largely because > of the constant pressure to compress that Time prose struck me as more > difficult to write than to parody. A common complaint then among Time > writers who found themselves stuck on a story was “ **this story just won’t > write** ”—as if the story had a will of its own and was using it to resist > being shaped into a coherent narrative. I may have used the phrase from time > to time myself. The problem was mostly space. I don’t understand what “This story just won’t write “mean. I feel like agreeing with 'This story tells ....," but can the story write a story by itself? What does it mean? The author explains that Time writers used this expression ‘from time to time’ because of space constraint, by admitting by himself "it looks like as if the story has a will of its own," and "the problem was space (constraint)." However, is the expression,“This story just won’t write” grammatically right? Does it make sense to most native English speakers, or is considered good Time-style English? If this is just a usual expression both grammatically and rhetorically, why the author should have picked up this particular episode in explaining Time’s writing style and its obsession to space, which seems to be rather wasting space to me?


title: Is there a single-word noun for an overwhelming feeling that uses “overwhelm” as its root?

text: Is there a single-word noun for an overwhelming feeling that uses _overwhelm_ as its root? My first thought was to make a gerund, that is, _overwhelming_. Although _overwhelming_ is normally used as an adjective, this strategy applies to verbs like "cook", since _cooking_ can be both a noun and an adjective. That being said, I don't think I have ever heard _overwhelming_ use as a noun, such as for example: > The overwhelming was terrible. Pardon the technical jargon, but that just doesn't sound right. Searching around here and elsewhere online doesn't yield more than people suggesting _overwhelming feeling_ or _overwhelmption_ (although girldetective.net may not be an authoritative source on the English language). Is there a single word that fits this use case? If not, why does such a word not exist? Is the verb _overwhelm_ part of a certain class of verbs that don't lend themselves to this?


title: Prepositional phrases

text: > It was drawing to an end now; but the evening was even warm, and I sat at > work in the schoolroom (1) with **the window open**. (Jane Eyre) > > Presently the chambers gave up their fair tenants one after another: each > came out gaily and airily, (2) with **dress that gleamed lustrous through > the dusk**. (Jane Eyre) The two prepositional phrases each have (1) a small clause (Bar Aart’s term), (2) a noun and the relative. How do you call these in grammatical terms?


title: What's the atonym for related information?

text: I can't remember this word, it's been on the tip of my tongue for days. I am sure that this word exists but there's no synonym results I could find on Google. It means something like the inverse of correlation/evidence, "freak occurrence" possibly. It's a word used to say something to the effect of, "you're referring to something as though it's connected". But that word describes the claim in a single word: "X information". A great example is something like;- person A sees person B in a car with a dog and then goes on to conclude that many people might drive with dogs in the car. The observation is "unrelated" to the reality or something similar, yet person A took it to have a connection and for there to be some underlying explanation. This event itself (not the observation) is an X. Talking about the event is using X information and is not very scientific. edit: I found it. (anecdotal/anecdote, "anecdotal information") http://www.macmillandictionary.com/thesaurus-category/british/Not-definite-or- based-on-fact anecdotal adjective based on someone’s personal experience or information rather than on facts that can be checked


title: Does "the N-word" have implications other than a word used for racial discrimination?

text: The New York Times (February 21) carried an article introducing the travelling exhibition of “The Cyrus Cylinder and Ancient Persia” to the U.S. at the Smithsonian, Metropolitan Museum, Asian Art Museum, Getty Villa and Houston’s Museum of Fine Arts. The Cyrus Cylinder was made soon after Cyrus of Persia captured Babylon in 539 B.C., and was called the first bill of human rights in history. The author and op-ed columnist Roger Cohen concludes the article with the phrase: > My theory, by the way, was this: It may just be possible to write a column > about Iran without using the **“N” word**. My understanding of “the N” word is associated with racial discrimination. However, thinking of recent turmoil concerned with nuclear development and possible armament of Iran, N can be associated with Nuclear. What does “N” stand for in the above statement? Can "N" word mean something other than racial discrimination? For your reference, the ending line is preceded with the following sentence, but it doesn’t seem to give any hint to my question: > “National conventions include the ceremonial form of intention-veiling > flattery known as “taarof,” and the sacrifice of truth to higher religious > imperative known as “tagieh” (The Shiites, like the Jews, have been lonely > in the Middle East; lying was often a means to survive.) The third “T” of > the Iranian psyche is “tazieh,” effectively a synonym for dramatic lament > and epic resistance.”


title: Word that means 'an unknown phenomenon or concept'

text: Is there a word that means 'an unknown phenomenon or concept'? Is it really referred whit the one letter word 'X'?


title: Can "in between" refer to a single continuous action?

text: Can we say _in between_ if we are in the middle of an action? For example: > The doctor told me not to eat anything after midnight. In the morning I > accidentally ate a seed and recalled as I was in between [eating].


title: Implication of the sentence "... can ... if ..."?

text: When saying "Someone can A if B", does it imply "If someone does not B, someone cannot A"? So if I want to say "B is an option for A, but B is not necessary to achieve A", is "Someone may A if B" closer to this? Or is "Someone can A if B" good enough for this meaning?


title: What tense is "You were unable to do it."?

text: > "You were unable to do it." Can you describe the tense of this sentence? Is it Past Progressive?


title: "as and when" Usage

text: Why would one say > " you can do that as and when needed" instead of > " you can do that when needed" Is there any difference between them?


title: Proper antonym for "expand"

text: I am creating an application that has a small panel that has an "expand" button. When the user expands it, he will be able to shrink it again. What would be the best antonym of "expand" to use here?I don't think "shrink" is the most formal one. I have found "diminish", "compress", "lessen", "narrow" and "shrink" but I'm not 100% which one of these would fit best on my case. _Edit:_ This has nothing to do with programming. I just mentioned where I'll be using the word, so as to help me find the correct antonym.


title: Looking for a good word that means "an open statement"

text: I'm trying to think of a word that means something along these lines: An open statement. Not a number. Not something absolute. Not something calculable. A free statement. A literary premise. E.g. "cheese may be good for you" as opposed to "17.6" EDIT: The word needs to represent a collection of non-mathematical, non-technical sources. E.g. "non-mathematical" or "literary" (except those don't cut it.) Used in a sentence: I calculated agreement between _ sources.


title: Is there a reason to use "mono" over "uni"?

text: I'm just interested in knowing if there is any non-arbitrary basis for using prefixes "mono" or "uni" when words are initially being coined. As far as I can tell, they mean the same thing as a prefix. For example, why use "monochrome" instead of "unichrome"? In a similar vein, what about other words, with prefixes like "bi", "di" or "duo"? To be more specific, I suppose I wondered if there was any inherit connection between the prefix and its root word; like maybe if the root word is from Latin, the Latin prefix should be used, or something.


title: "I will rob you of it" vs. "I will rob it of you"

text: Which of these is grammatically correct, and why? >   * I will rob you of it >   * I will rob it of you >


title: What part of speech is "down" in "down went the Titanic"?

text: > **Down** went the Titanic. What part of speech is _down_ in this context? I have to choose between a) Preposition, b) Noun, c) Verb, and d) Adjective. But I think the correct answer should be "adverb", which is absent from the list. What do you think about it?


title: Adjective & Adverbial forms of "Conspiracy"

text: I tried looking up its synonyms (plot, scheme) and then their adjectives, but they didn't quite cut it. Any word that can be used as its adjective and adverb? The place that I would like to use it is this: > Keep your _conspiracy-theory-like_ ideology to yourself, and don't spread > what you can't prove.


title: the pronunciation of "get"

text: Both /gɛt/ and /gɪt/ show up in the Wiktionary. The etymology strongly suggests that the pronunciation /gɛt/ is older. What is the source of the pronunciation /gɪt/? Is it confined to certain regions? It does not seem to be coming from a regular sound change, as nobody says /pɪt/ for /pet/. On the other hand, it does affect "forget" (at least for me).


title: "Reaction to" or "reaction at"?

text: Here's the context: > So has gone the **reaction** of many **to** the news that Facebook is buying > the mobile photo-sharing service Instagram[.] Could "at" be used as well? I was taught that, when it comes to reactions, you should use "at": e.g. "I was surprised at the news", "I was shocked at his behavior", etc.


title: What is the origin of face 'turning around'?

text: I'm watching a documentary movie on the history of Roman Empire. There's a part where the narrator says "In 113 BC, the Roman General Carbo parleyed for peace with the barbarians. Then he turns around and murders their ambassadors." Meanwhile in the enactment the actor playing Carbo actually 'turns around', faces to the opposite side towards his soldiers and signs them to ambush and kill the opposite party when they are gone. Has this phrase 'turning around' got some significance more than the literal meaning?