title: What is a "blow-off answer"?

text: In "The Mark: A Real Sales Guy Approach to Selling Corporate Accounts" by Bryan J. Seck it is written: > I know this is a _blow-off_ answer, and now I ask this in my first meeting > so I don't have to hear it ever again as an excuse. After reading the Merriam Webster's definitions "to refuse to take notice of, honor, or deal with", "to end a relationship with", "to outperform in a contest" and "to fail to attend or show up for" I'm still confused about the correct interpretation of "blow-off" in that context--i.e., what is a "blow- off answer"? Also, if a definition of "blow-off answer" exists, I intuitively guess, even if I cannot prove it, that it must exist a definition of "blow-off question", too. So, can anybody explain how "blow-off" is used in such contexts and what is its meaning?


title: What is the meaning and origin of the suffix “-son”?

text: A friend recently asked me the meaning of the name _Madison_. Although I wasn’t sure of the meaning of _Madison_ , it prompted a discussion about the suffix _‑son_ , seen in a lot of names: Jefferson, Henderson, Johnson, Harrison, etc. I suspect it comes from English, as these names seem to be English in origin, but other than that I could find no information pertaining to the suffix. **tl;dr:** What is the origin and definition of the suffix _‑son_?


title: "To go below a minimum numeric requirement": opposite of "exceed"

text: Often for configuration settings we have minimum and maximum numeric values. An error message might report that one has _exceeded_ the maximum value. But it seems very wrong to report that one _exceeded_ the minimum value. Is there an equivalent to _exceeded_ that means _went below_? What would be an appropriate opposite of "exceed"? is related, but the answers did not seem to apply well to numeric values.


title: "She sees in the mirror" vs. "she will see in the mirror?"

text: Is this sentence correct? > She will grow up hating what she sees in the mirror. Or should it be: > She will grow up hating what she will see in the mirror. I think first one is correct, I just want to know why and the rule.


title: What is the meaning of "a hell of a lot"?

text: I read the following, but can not understand meaning of **a hell of a lot** : > _Todd:_ So when people go to your web site what can they see?   >  _Jason:_ Not a hell of a lot but I did draw everything on there myself, > every button every single piece of graphic you see on there I drew, just > photographs of me, my friends, drawings that I've done and posted up and not > really much else, but it's good if you just want to check it out. Check some > photos out. Can any one explain it?


title: What do you call a person who's not yet a customer?

text: I'm currently doing an Applied Business assignment based on Business Planning - we had to generate our own business idea, including creating aims and objectives for the business. I've decided for one of my objectives to be "To raise awareness of the business amongst..." (where the '...' is the word I'm looking for). I can't put "To raise awareness of the business amongst new customers", because they aren't actually customers yet.


title: How should I understand "He was a wise man who invented beer"?

text: I love beer, and I recently saw a magnet with this phrase on it: > He was a wise man who invented beer My knowledge in English is limited, and I'm not sure if I understand correctly this phrase. In fact I hesitate between two interpretations: > He was wise the man who invented beer or > There was a wise man who invented beer in the old time Can anyone explain which is the correct interpretation?


title: Is 'useable' preferred in certain regions, or just an alternate spelling of 'usable'?

text: I rarely use spell checkers, but today when I did use one, it suggested changing the word 'useable' to 'usable' (i.e. to drop the first 'e'). This seemed immediately intuitive and I thought I'd just made a typo, but at second glance I wasn't so sure. I haven't been able to find anything definite, even after searching this site, which surprised me a little. I've searched dictionaries and most seem to have "useable" as an alternate spelling of "usable" or simply link to it. But since my first instinct was to write "useable", I'm wondering whether "useable" is perhaps preferred in British/Australian/NZ English while "usable" is more American. This site seems to suggest the latter, but claims that both are used in British/Australian/NZ spelling. Or is "useable" perhaps simply a more archaic form that is less popular nowadays? Could anyone shed some light on this?


title: Is it allowed to mix tenses in one sentence?

text: I have always wondered whether it is allowed to mix tenses in one sentence in english(- and in my native language, danish), which can be quite embarrassing, when the need arises!? **Examples:** `Yesterday, I saw a dead cat, it is on the roof.` (somehow, I know that it is still there. Is mixing allowed?) `Yesterday, I saw a dead cat, it was on the roof.` (it has been removed. No problem) `Yesterday, I saw a dead cat, it ??? on the roof.` (I do not know, if it is still there. What to do?) `Last week, I met my uncle, his name is Zymowch` (Yes - he is still alive.)


title: What is the plural form of "the name of which"?

text: Consider we have a sentence: > I have a box named "A". rewritten as such: > I have a box, the name of which is "A". How should we rewrite the sentence if now there is more than one "item"? > I have three boxes, named "A", "B", and "C". Is the sentence below grammatical? : > I have three boxes, the names of them are "A", "B", and "C".


title: would rather VS. would rather that

text: I would rather go home. I would rather that I went home. Could you tell me the difference between these?


title: "Back it up" meaning

text: What does _back it up_ mean in this context? > He can be cocky, but he's got stuff to back it up.


title: "Can" or "could", which is grammatically correct?

text: I'm a call center agent. When I ask to transfer the call to the authorized person, which form should I use: > Can I speak to...? or > Could I speak to...?


title: omission of 'of/for'

text: I have seen people say 'I am your age' instead of saying 'I am of your age'. Similarly, a sentence like 'you have done this your whole life' instead of 'you have done this for your whole life'. My question is: why for/of is omitted? Any gramatical reason? Thanks in anticipation


title: Am I right using "as" for equality and "than" to point out differences?

text: I would like to know whether I am right when I use "as" meaning: _similar, equal or equivalent_ , and the comparative, "than", to point out a _difference_ between the nouns.


title: An alternative to quotation marks

text: Let's say that I want to communicate that a particular website is the first result when googling _cool ringtones_. Normally I would say it like this: > This website is the first Google result for "cool ringtones". But Google understands quotation marks and _"cool ringtones"_ is not the same as _cool ringtones_. People might not be sure which one I meant in the above quote. Normally I would use italics like I'm doing here, but I can't do text formatting. What are my options?


title: Should I use price, cost, or rate when referring to rent?

text: Example: > I don't know which apartment to choose. The _price/rate/cost_ in this city > is just insane. What the most appropriate option?


title: Is there a word that describes a person who constantly underestimates situations?

text: Does there exist a single word, either an adjective or a noun, that effectively describes an individual who habitually underestimates things—e.g., cost, time required, complexity?


title: When would one write "con[struction]"?

text: A quote in a book contained the word "con[struction]." It was used just as the word _construct_ would have been. Is _con_ ever used as an abbreviation of _construction_? Would there be any other reason to complete the quote like that? Unfortunately I can't quote the context; I lost the bookmark, I don't remember the page, and I lack a searchable copy. I do remember that the quote was not weird in any other way, and that there was no apparent reason to do this. The book in question is Neal Stephenson's _Cryptonomicon_. The word might have been "con[truct]".


title: Singular vs. Plural with Multiple Gerunds as Subject (IE: [Gerund] and [Gerund] are/is [something].)

text: I'm trying to find out whether I should use a singular or plural verb when there are multiple gerunds as the subject of the sentence. For example: > Running the correct course and keeping a steady pace are/is necessary in > order to win. With either one of these by itself, "is" would be correct: > Running the correct course is necessary in order to win. > > Keeping a steady pace is necessary in order to win. With both gerunds combined, I can't seem to figure out whether the verb should stay singular since each phrase is singular, or if it should become plural since there are two connected by "and". If we just treat the gerunds as regular nouns, then obviously it would become "are", but I'm not sure if gerunds have the exact same rules as regular nouns. I know that if the sentence was: > Running the correct course and keeping a steady pace are **both** necessary. That "are" would be correct, but without the "both" it sounds incorrect to me. Does anyone know the official rule here?


title: Origin of "to have a cow"

text: The phrase "to have a cow" is defined as "to be very worried, upset, or angry about something" in Free Dictionary Online. Other sources also define it to mean to react very strongly and emotionally. While it almost always is a negative response to stressful news or events, I imagine it might be used under other more positive circumstances. Many may have become recently acquainted with this expression from "The Simpsons" TV show, as "Don't have a cow" is a catchphrase of the character Bart Simpson. This source says, without reference, that the phrase is said to have originated in the 1950s, and also may related to the British phase "to have kittens" (Phrase Finder). My interest was piqued when I was acquainted with some of Gertrude Stein's writings from the movie "Paris Was a Woman". In particular, "A Book Concluding With As a Wife Has a Cow: A Love Story", published in Paris in 1926, (Google Books) caught my attention. The analyses that I heard say that there is little doubt from the context that "to have a cow" equated to having an orgasm. One summary of that analysis appears here. * * * My question comes down to whether Stein's metaphor is the origin of the phrase as it is currently used. It seems possible that the meaning of "an extreme, emotional reaction" might fall somewhere in the evolutionary path between Stein's usage and the current one. (It's also possible that she simply created a double entendre from an existing phrase.) What I've covered so far doesn't necessarily mean there is a relationship between Stein's metaphor and the more current expression, but it does look like a possibility. I don't have a good understanding how to pursue this question any further. What I have seen about the origins (as cited above) is that they don't seem to be very certain, and only agree to a possibility about its provenance. Is Stein's usage related to the current meaning? If so, how did it evolve? How did it come to be associated more with negative reactions. If it originated before Stein used it, what is the source?


title: to invest: can you invest in luxury items that you know will lose value?

text: A question about the proper usage of the word "to invest". The dictionary definitions for the verb "invest" that I have found all mention the idea of gaining a _financial_ return from the investment. For example, you can invest in real estate or invest in the stock market. Is it possible to invest in a luxury item because you think it will bring you happiness even though you know it will always depreciate in value? For example, can you "invest in an expensive coat" or "invest in a good pair of hiking boots"? I hear people say things like this but I don't believe it is a correct usage. The phrase for something you invest in which drops in value is _bad investment_. I believe it is possible to say something like "I invested in an expensive set of dining room chairs" but a very valid response to this sentence is, "Then you made a very bad investment".


title: phrase to mean "giving the exact answer"

text: I was having a coversation and part of the conversation, the person asked me which part of the world I was from, and I answered him exactly "the western hemisphere". Then I asked him the same question and he replied that he's from north India. In contrast to mine, he gave a specific answer. I was looking for a reply to him to emphasize the way he got down to the specific answer. Is there a phrase that means "to give/get down to the exact/precise answer of something"?


title: What is the word for previous boss’s recommendations in the context of a CV?

text: In my CV, I am trying to explain that a written recommendation from my previous boss is available upon request. What is that document called?


title: A word for one who loves only one girl throughout his life

text: Just like one wife man is called : monogamous. Is there any word for one who loves just one girl throughout his life time. For him one life, one girl matters. History has seen such people. Are such people's action(of loving just one) also described in words ?


title: Is "alone" an adverb in "I was sitting alone"?

text: Is the sentence "I was sitting alone." correct? And if so, is "alone" an adverb? Are there other examples of adjectives being used as adverbs without modification?


title: What is the word for a fear of hippopotamuses?

text: The word _hippophobia_ refers to a fear of horses (apparently hippos are "water horses") and the words _zoophobia_ refers to a fear of animals in general, but I can't seem to find a word for a fear exclusively confined to hippopotamuses. To clarify, I am not talking about the healthy fear that a normal person would have of a large two ton animal being in their close vicinity, but an irrational fear of such a creature even when the situation would not warrant it, i.e. a true phobia. For instance, some children will seem to go through phases where they will have a phobia of something, becoming hysterical on sight of said thing even when they are in a safe protective setting where there is nothing to worry about.


title: What is the word for someone who hates confrontation?

text: Such a person doesn't mind losing or winning; however, they dislike having to experience resistance/confrontation. To clarify, such a person does not necessarily "fear" confrontation but thinks confrontation is **too much of a hassle**. Let's make a point that **finds confrontation too much of a hassle** is the primary meaning. — A clarifying treat for those who get it; otherwise, insightful nonetheless: "If I don't have to do it, I won't. If I have to do it, I'll make it quick."


title: When is writing eloquently considered "wordy"?

text: When I write, I prefer to do so as eloquently as possible: why should writing be only functional? Although, my English teacher considers this poor style-- her belief reflected in some of my essay grades. I understand that, nowadays, verbosity is considered a sort of "writing sin," especially in formal papers; but at what point can writing with a certain aesthetic quality be considered verbose and laborious to read?


title: Term for a snort that is almost a laugh

text: Is there a term for a snort that is almost a laugh (as would occur when looking at a meme in a public space or any situation where something is humorous but it is not acceptable to outright laugh)?


title: What nouns could symbolize a choice between 2 options?

text: I want to name a process that has exactly two possible paths. I'd like to give it a symbolic name. These concepts come to mind but I'm hoping to think of others:   * coin flip   * double-edged sword   * window   * two-way mirror   * telephone / fax   * switch track (for trains)   * fork I'd like the concept to be widely accessible / understood. Ideally it would have a positive leaning toward it, as it will be used with medical patients. What are some other objects / concepts that go two ways or have a choice of two paths?


"Although my research area in PhD includes many fields in the network security and management...." In the previous sentence, I don't know how to express the idea that during his phd studying, he did some research and that included many fields. Besides, I am not sure whether the area and fields go together or do we have to say like "area includes many fields".... Thanks


title: The wheel has become an eight

text: The title makes presumably little to no sense and is in fact a word-by-word translation of a German expression. I am talking about the wheel of a bike and a certain way it is deformed. I like the German expression since it pretty much describes how the wheel actually looks like. But how do you say it in English? An obvious option is "The wheel is bent", but this doesn't really specify how it is bent. Maybe one could say "the wheel is twisted" but this doesn't seem right either. Expressions I have found online inclue "the wheel is out of the true" and "the wheel is crispy" (due to the resemblance to a potato crisp), but for each of them there were people claiming that they had never heard of them (despite being natives). Is there a catchy way to say it in English? Edit: Maybe I should clarify what shape I exactly mean. The comment below suggest that _bent_ might actually be the right word, so don't feel put off by me saying it doesn't fit. In my opinion the word _to bend_ could also mean _to bend along some straight line_ , pretty much like _to fold_. But there is this very specific deformation which is very common with bikes. Just picture the deformation you would need to transform a circle into an eight, not by _pinching_ in the middle but by _twisting_ if you want. But instead of performing the full twist stop half way.


title: When ellipsis happens, can which of these be dropped?

text: > “I warned you,” was his friend’s answer; “I said—be on your guard when you > go near her. Besides, you **might have waited** till to-morrow, and **had** > me with you: it was mere folly to attempt the interview to-night, and > alone.” (Jane Eyre) Are there ‘might have’ omitted before ‘had’? If yes, which is grammatical omitting all the two auxiliary verbs (might, have) or just the modal verb ‘might’?


title: preposition plus as little noise as possible

text: > The side-passage door was fastened; I opened it with **as little noise as > possible**. (Jane Eyre) What do you call grammatically ‘as little noise as possible’ after ‘with’? I’m very confused because the phase is not a typical prepositional phase nor a noun phrase.


title: What is the proper way to ask two questions in one sentence?

text: Every now and again I find myself writing a sentence like this: > INPUT in LPINPUT is some data structure I can identify — what does LP mean, > array? I don't know what to call this type of sentence but the general format is that I ask a question and then list one or more possible answers. Now in the quote above I used a comma to separate the original question and my supposed answer but would it not be correct to use two question marks? Like so: > INPUT in LPINPUT is some data structure I can identify — what does LP mean? > array? Because the way I see it, I'm asking two questions.


title: Conditional: "... would not have been turned ..." (is it grammatical?)

text: I came across the following piece: > So sensible, indeed, was the President of the weakness of the excuse, that > he sought to make a diversion in favor of the Crown by demanding of M. > NICGOLEWSKI, one of the arraigned, " **if the insurrection would not have > been turned against Prussia had Russia been vanquished?** "Not," replied the > Pole, "unless the leaders of the insurrection had been recruits from a > lunatic asylum." This retort had a striking effect on the audience, and so > disconcerted the President that he at once adjourned the court. [->] Anybody know whether " _if the insurrection would not have been turned against Prussia had Russia been vanquished?_ " is grammatical? My question arises from "would not have been turned" that I would replace with "hadn't been turned". Sorry if the question is too basic for native English speakers!


title: Usage of “as well”

text: Are these usages of "as well" grammatically correct? _Going back on the deal, he said, could result in Taiwan being “regarded as an unreliable trade partner” by China as well other countries with which the island wants to negotiate free-trade pacts. (The Economist)_ _Fire TV gives viewers access to content from Amazon’s video-streaming service, as well those of Netflix and others. (The Economist)_


title: How to describe someone who doesn't listen well

text: How would you describe someone who doesn't listen well? I don't mean someone who has hearing problems. I mean someone who doesn't finish listening and starts interrupting the conversation.


title: Is it "out of question" or "out of the question"?

text: Are they used in different contexts?   Those both of them use correct grammar? Google fight shows that "out of the question" appear 10 times more often than the other.


title: Gender-independent replacement for “fiancée” and “fiancé”

text: I can use _child_ to replace _son_ or _daughter_ , _sibling_ for _sister_ or _brother_ , and _parent_ for _mother_ or _father_. What is the unisex replacement for _fiancée_ and _fiancé_? I don’t need it for speech, but for formal or semi-formal writing.


title: How would a phrase such as "Does the pope sh*t in the woods" be classified? The closest I can get is "intentional malapropism".

text: How would phrases such as "Does the pope sh*t in the woods? Does a bear wear a funny hat?" be classified? The closest I can get is "intentional malapropism". Thanks for your help.


title: "Sober as a judge" vs. "Drunk as a lord". Why judge? Why lord?

text: _Sober as a judge_ is a simile that is used for someone completely sober. _Drunk as a lord_ is a simile that is used for someone completely drunk. Why is judge equated with sobriety and lord with insobriety? What is the origin of these phrases?


title: Why is it “Merry” Christmas, but “Happy” New Year?

text: _Happy_ Christmas just sounds wrong to my American ear. (I do get that it is customary in England.) _Merry_ New Year, equally so. Of the two, Christmas is the younger holiday and yet its greeting seems to be the more archaic. So, my question is this: how did these greeting wishes get stuck with these holidays, and not the reverse?


title: Is there a name for the genre that "movies of the future" fall into?

text: Is there a name for movies/stories/whatever that intend to represent the future (i.e. the year is 2100 and blah blah, like _Star Wars_ etc., actually anything that is not real and is an imagination fantasy of the future).


title: Expression "let's cross that bridge a little further down the road"

text: I've heard the expression "let's cross that bridge a little further down the road" to convey something I understand a bit like: "let's take that difficult decision a bit later" or "let's take on that challenge a bit later". Can the expression be interpreted like that? Any other ideas?


title: Word meaning "to choose or take something as one's own"

text: I was having a conversation with an agent of an Internet service provider and the reason I called them was because I'm confused about a plan they have that is very similar to the one I currently have and I wanted to find out the difference. The conversation was coming nearer to the end and the agent asked me if there was anything else she could assist me with, and I said something along the lines of > No that's all, I actually have the Flex plan with you guys(the plan that's > very similar to the one I had confusion about), I was just confused about > the 30-day pass, but now I understand. _I'll think about it if I want to > consider the 30-day Flex plan(the one I had confusion about), thanks very > much_. The last sentence of my reply, is there a word/phrasal verb that could replace _consider_ to mean _to choose or take something as one's own_? I figured there could be a much better expression to use than _consider_. I don't want to say _choose_ or _use_ because they seem too strong because the whole intention of my call is to clear the confusion I have with this other plan that's very similar to the plan I currently have and not to decide on getting a plan and I'm pretty satisfied with my current plan though perhaps I might consider about this other plan, it's not my first intention.


title: "I reminded myself that..."

text: I'm wondering if "I reminded myself that..." is correct expression in English and if English speakers use such expression at all or if this is replaced by something else. Let's take this dialogue as an example:   * A: How many apples did you buy?   * B: Ten... no, wait, I reminded myself that I bought five more on the way home. Google Translate and other suggestions:   * "I was reminded of..." (but this sounds like someone else reminded me that)   * "I just recalled that I bought" (this sounds nice as well) Which one would be the most natural one?


title: Course catch-ups

text: How to name an event, where someone has to go for the classes once again because he/she was unavailable at the time? Alice missed her swimming pool class tonight. She has to [catch-up/repeat/work out/???] the classes tomorrow, before the next week exam. In particular I am interested in the name of this classes:   * catch-up classes   * repeat classes   * work-out classes   * any other ideas...


title: What do you call users of your software?

text: Often when I have to greet all the people using my different software collectively I'm not sure which word to use for them. For example I can't say > Overroot wishes all its users a Happy New Year!!! Because Overroot is a company which makes software and users are associated with software not the company so saying all 'its' users would be incorrect I think. Overroot wishes all its customers/clients also seems incorrect because my software is free so no-one has to pay for them and therefore no one is really a customer or a client. What do I call the people using the software that I make under the name of Overroot company? _Edit: I don't want to wish the users of a specific software but anyone who uses any software produced by Overroot._


title: How to refer to those fully-equipped houses people let to university students?

text: I have a friend who rents in an one-story house. Just your common house: there's a living room, a kitchen, and three rooms (all of them occupied by university students). It something like this from the outside: ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/Zy3bZ.jpg) How to call this kind of buildings?


title: The term 'vocal fry': where does it come from?

text: On a recent Language Log posting Vocal fry: "creeping in" or "still here"?, Mark Liberman discusses an (also) recent article about the phenomenon of 'vocal fry' and shows how it has been around for quite awhile in the US (lots of references in that blog post). I personally had never heard of this term, have never heard anybody talk about this phenomenon, have never heard anybody talk in the described manner, and frankly can't hear anything special in those utterances even where pointed out. But my sound-blindness is not the issue. What I'd like to know is where the term 'vocal fry' comes from. **Who coined it or where did people start using it?** Presumably it is metaphorical (a 'frying' sound?). The blog posting doesn't address that, and wading through the references hasn't turned up anything yet.


title: pronunciation US-UK in words like semi

text: I am trying to find a document that explains pronunciation differences en /E/ and /I/ sounds between UK and US styles. I think US pronunciation does a lot /'sɛmay/ than UK /'sɛmi/. Where can I find an explaining document for this difference?


title: Etymology of the term "curse words" and "swear words"

text: I'm having trouble finding the origin of the terms "curse words" and "swear words" when used as a synonym what many call "bad words" (although I don't agree). I've found that "curses" when used as an explicative is from the late 19th century, but not much more than that. I'm assuming they have some origin in religion/mysticism/witchcraft due to the earliest meaning I can find of the word "curse," and how "swear" is believed to come from the invocation of the the "sacred" name (Exodus). Unfortunately, these explanations don't satisfy me. I ask, does anyone have a more detailed explanation with specifics as to the origin of these terms in order to satisfy my curiosity?


title: Is "re-rendezvous" repetitive?

text: I recently used the word **re-rendezvous** in conversation with several people, meaning for two entities to come together again after having initially met and gone their separate ways. (This was a software engineering discussion, in which everything is conceptual and we frequently use metaphors.) Someone said "'Re-rendezvous' - wouldn't that be redundant?", implying that the _re_ of _rendezvous_ meant "again." I've looked at several definitions and etymologies, and all I can see is that _rendez vous_ means "present yourselves" in Middle French. I don't get any "again-ness." I'll admit it was a clunky invention, made up on the spot in a casual conversation, but I don't think it was "redundant." And it occurs to me: doesn't the _re_ prefix always occupy a syllable of its own when it means "again"? As, say, "redundant" derives from _re_ \+ _undare_ , according to Online Etymology Dictionary?


title: What's the verdict on "sooner than later"?

text: I have heard a lot of people say at work that we should do something "sooner than later." This grates against my native ear, but it seems fairly commonplace. I have always understood the expression to only make sense as "sooner rather than later." I found this Word Reference Forum thread on the subject. One poster gave a very reasonable explanation why "sooner than later" is incorrect: > I think it should be "sooner rather than later". > > There are two choices: one can do it sooner(A) or one can do it later(B). > Each one refers to the doing of "it". _>For this choice:   >  I want this done A rather than B. (correct)   > I want this done A than B. (incorrect)_ > > The fact that the adjectives are comparatives and the construction uses > "than" is what makes it tempting to remove the rather. Sooner than a > specific time might work (adding in e.g. by 7pm), but sooner than (another > comparative adjective) in my mind doesn't work. > > However, consider: _   > I want this done quickly rather than slowly. (correct)   >  I want this done quickly than slowly. (incorrect)_ I agree with him, but was also able to twist my brain around to give the phrase some kind of meaning and actually found myself suggesting ways it could be semi-correct. Here's what I wrote: > I came across this thread considering the same question myself. Below are > two caveats to the excellent response by Julian Stewart, and the caveat to > my caveats is that you will not find me saying "sooner than later." > > It definitely makes sense to say: > > _"I'd like to walk faster rather than slower."_ > > And it could make sense to say: > > _"I'd rather walk faster than (walk) slower." "I'd rather walk fast than > (walk) slow."_ > > And therefore: > > _"I'd rather finish sooner than (finish) later."_ > > Secondly, I can conceive in some convoluted way that "sooner than later" can > be used to communicate exactly what it denotes: a point (or range of points) > in time preceding the point (or range of points) described by 'later.' I > know it's screwy, but it kind of makes sense. I'd love to hear what you folks here have to say on the matter and see if anyone can make a compelling and definitive argument. I fear I might have put my brain in some alternate English reality in order to make the defense I did. Talk some sense into me please?


title: Synonym of 'Run' or 'Operate' in the context of a computer programme

text: I'm trying to find the right word for this sentence, and replace the word _run_ with something more computer orientated > A bash script was developed to _run_ the programme I've looked on thesaurus.com to no avail, and I am now turning to SE for help. What word can I use to replace _run_?


title: Singular of "folks"?

text: It has been suggested to me that "fellow" is the corresponding singular version of the word "folks" in the context of "hey folks" or "listen folks" but it doesn't have the same gender neutrality.


title: Explain the meaning of the two sentences

text: I'm a bit confused by these two sentences: > The general government consumption expenditures are used as another measure > of government size, although they do not account for the full government > size. As a component of the expenditure method'for estimating GDP, it is > widely available. Data is taken from World Development Indicators of the > World Bank. The sample consists of 81 countries over the period 1961-2005. > The panel is balanced and consists of 3645 observations. It would be great if someone could rewrite them in other words :)


title: "Principal" vs "owner"

text: What is the business perception of identifying yourself as the Principal vs the Owner? I assume they are largely synonymous (please tell me if there are subtle differences, but in a small business sense, they seem interchangeable). Using "Principal" to me has always sounded fancier :) Also, as a small issue: Is "Principal" the correct spelling? It's not "Principle" is it? My spelling skills are terrible!


title: Term for people who feel they have some disorder when they read about it

text: What is the term for people who, when they read symptoms of some psychological disorder, start feeling that they have it?


title: Difference between "artifact" and "artefact"

text: Is there any usage preference between _artifact_ and _artefact_? My understanding was that an _artifact_ was properly applied to physical, historical objects, while an _artefact_ was more correct for more abstract, intangible, error-ish concepts, for example a compression artefact. However, the couple of online sources I checked suggested that the difference was merely spelling, and that both were usable for both definitions.


title: Using "you know" when the listener can't be expected to know.

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Garbage/stuff words Can you end a sentence with "you know," when telling the listener some new information that they couldn't possibly be expected to know? For example, you could tell someone something like, "I'm actually quite good at this, you know." Now that I think about it, it wouldn't seem normal to say this if they already did know. It seems backwards. So what's up with this?


title: Beginning sentences with a needless "So". How did this scourge become so popular?

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  When did the word "so" begin to be used to start a sentence?   >  Garbage/stuff words So many folks begin some narrative with "So". I see it everywhere especially in the past few years. Ex: "So I was at the grocery store today and ran into John." The sentence has the same meaning without it. Why do people do this?


title: When did the word "so" begin to be used to start a sentence?

text: In the last few years, I've noticed a growing usage of the word "so" to begin a sentence, especially in the context of higher education. For example: Interviewer: "What is the nature of your research" Researcher: "So, what we wanted to find out is..." It seems to be a replacement the word "well", or, more informally, "ok". Has this usage of the word been around for a long time and I'm just now noticing it? Do you think that is a valid use of the word?


title: Can "let us" always be used in place of "let's"?

text: > Me: Perhaps we need to make a left turn at Albuquerque   >  Him: Let us try that Now I would have said, "Let's try that". "Let us" sounds wrong to me in this instance. Is it? Are there contractions which are improper to use in their full form? I've always thought that in formal writing contractions are avoided. Are there any contractions that should be used even in formal writing?


title: "Support of" vs. "Support for"

text: "Show your **support for** the XYZ (Organization name) this season" or "Show your **support of** XYZ (Organization name) this year"? I have seen _support of_ and _support for_ both being used. Is there a rule? "Show your **support of** our clients" or "show your **support for** our clients"? ( _Support_ to be used in the context of making a donation)


title: Another term for ' having sex with non-living things'

text: Is there a single term for who have sex with non-living things?


title: Punctuation around the word "OK" at the end of a sentence

text: If a sentence ends in "OK", and the sentence is a request, usually there is a comma before the OK and a question mark after it. The comma signifies a pause, correct? What if there was no pause, then does a comma still have to be used? What if the request is more like a demand, then can a period be used instead of a question mark?


title: what are the origins of hi, hey, hello?

text: What are the origins of _hi, hey_ and _hello?_ Are they related?


title: Is a composition of items a "composed item"?

text: Let's say I have standard items. I now group them together to create a composition of items. Is it correct to speak of "a composed item"? Some dictionaries say it does, but most seem to give composed the meaning of "calm, relaxed item" rather than "a composition of"


title: The function of "young"in these sentence

text: > He left home young > > He died young Does the word "young" act as either a predicative complement or a incidental adverbial in those sentences？And how to distinguish them?


title: "I have no ..." vs. "I don't have ..."

text: >   * I have no house. >   * I don't have a house. > What's the difference between the phrases like the ones above?


title: "Eventually" vs. "finally"

text: What is the difference between _finally_ and _eventually_? >   * He eventually escaped and made his way back to England. >   * He finally escaped and made his way back to England. >


title: Is there any slang word for somebody who doesn't show up for a date?

text: Is there any slang word that describes somebody who doesn't show up when you date him?


title: "To make terse" (an insufficiently prolix title)

text: I often find myself editing prose to remove needless verbiage. Is there a word for this process? It comes up frequently enough to be useful. I sometimes say that I _tightened_ the wording, but perhaps this can be improved upon.


title: Origin of "tail over teakettle"?

text: "Tail over teakettle" is one of several similar phrases to describe a tumble or fall. But where/how did this originate? A few web searches give me pages where people use the phrase, and one of the results included a page from Oxford Reference for _Green's Dictionary of Slang_ (but more information requires a subscription). I've been unsuccessful in discovering the etymology of the phrase, though.


title: 'Each' with plural or singular verb

text: A source says that the word "each" should always be followed by a singular noun, but however I look at it in this sentence it just doesn't seem to fit: foo comprises of multiple binary programs that each performs a single task. Should it be "performs" or "perform"?


title: "Each" followed by "have"

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  'Each' with plural or singular verb Is the use of _have_ after _each_ grammatical here? > Believe it or not, farther and further **each have** distinctly different > meanings although people tend to use them interchangeably.


title: Seller and Purchaser each represents? Or Seller and Purchaser each represent?

text: Here is the pertinent part of the sentence: "Seller and Purchaser each warrants and represents that it has not engaged the services of any agent, finder or broker in connection with the transaction which is the subject of this Agreement...." While it is true that "each" is always singular, the question is whether the word "each" can render the plural "Seller and Purchaser" singular by its inclusion in the sentence. I believe the answer is no, based on the fact that if you replace "Seller and Purchaser" with the pronoun "they," the sentence makes no sense: "They each warrants and represents...." But you can't simply remove the word "each" because then the sentence would imply that Seller and Purchaser warrant and represent on each other's behalf, which is clearly not the intent of the sentence either. So the answer, in my mind, is to break up the sentence into 2 separate sentences: "Purchaser warrants and represents....Seller warrants and represents...." Any other thoughts or suggestions?


title: "Each of them is" "Each of them are"

text: I am having difficulty understanding which is correct as each seems to be singular and them seems to be plural.


title: Words or phrases for 'credit takers'

text: Let say, A and B work in the same office. Every time A talks to B about his idea or working style, B always takes that idea to his boss and acts as if it was his own idea. What are words, phrases or idioms that I can use to call B?


title: Use of valedictions in non-personal communication

text: Would it be proper to use a valediction ("complimentary close") in a newspaper or magazine message wholly devoted to congratulating the media's readers with the New Year or some other holiday? An example message from the staff of a made-up media: > Dear readers! > > From the bottom of our hearts we... > > Yours sincerely, Russian Industrial News' editorial staff. Or are valedictions more fit for personal communication? P.S. In Russia, such congratulatory newspaper messages are ended with a no- frills bottom-positioned line like "Editorial staff of [name of media]." I became curious whether this would work in an English-language media, or should one add something to embellish the ending.


title: Is 'read' the only word that has the same conjugation with different pronunciation?

text: The past and present tenses of "read" are spelt the same but have different pronunciation. This question is related to the post Why are the past and present tenses of "read" spelt the same?.


title: What is a term for someone who is bad at communicating with other people?

text: Is there a word for someone who is incapable of getting their point across clearly or understanding other people. I can only think of longer phrases. e.g. > Don't worry about Geoff's manner. He's **not a people-person**. But I'm sure there's a more succinct term.


title: Isn’t it rare to use ‘rare’ as a verb as in “Congress is raring at the gate on tax cuts.”?

text: I found the word, ‘rare’ being used as a verb in the headline of today’s New York Times article – “An often procrastinating Congress is _raring at_ the gate on tax cuts.” It is followed by this sentence: > It is a maxim in Congress these days: If high-profile legislation affecting > millions of Americans is about to expire, deal with it at the last possible > second. Both parties in the House and the Senate are eager at the prospect > of voting for their respective versions of an extension of the cuts this > summer, well before the due date. As I’m not very familiar with the usage of ‘rare’ as a verb, I consulted with dictionaries online: Oxford Dictionary defines ‘rare’ only as an adjective meaning ‘not occurring very often.’ Cambridge Dictionary defines it only as an adjective meaning ‘not common, very unusual.” Merriam-Webster defines ‘rare’ as an adjective meaning; 1\. marked by wide separation of component particles. 2\. marked by unusual quality, merits, appeal. 3\. seldom occurring or found. OALED adds ‘meat cooked for only a short time so that the inside is still red' to the meaning of (1) ‘not happening very often, (2) existing only in small number. Only Japanese publisher, Kenkyusha’s English Japanese Dictionary registers rare as a verb and ‘rare back’ as a slang meaning “brace for action, rouse oneself for action.” Is “rare” used as a verb very often as used in “Congress is raring at the gate on tax cuts,” or “US and China are raring at the immigration of a Chinese blind lawyer”?


title: "Bash something" vs. "bash on something"

text: I was looking into my dictionary that lists many uses of the verb _bash_ but always transitive ones. According to that, I would expect to say: > He bashed him.   >  He bashed the chair. But I can see examples on the Internet saying e.g.: > I'm not gonna bash on people for speeding through. How come? Why not just "bash people"?


title: for him to run VS that he runs

text: 1. It is easy for him to run.   2. It is easy that he runs. What is the difference between the two sentences?


title: I would that & I would to God / heaven

text: > For I _would that_ all men were even as I myself. (1 Corinthians 7:7) > > I _would to_ God my name were not so terrible to the enemy as it is. (2H4 > I.ii.219-220) Do these _would_ -constructions mean the same thing?


title: What to do to control erroneous shift in verb tense?

text: According to Purdue OWL, the following paragraph is correct: > By the time Tom notices the doorbell, it has already rung three times. As > usual, he has been listening to loud music on his stereo. He turns the > stereo down and stands up to answer the door. An old man **is standing** on > the steps. The man begins to speak slowly, asking for directions. But I have the temptation to write this: > By the time Tom notices the doorbell, it has already rung three times. As > usual, he has been listening to loud music on his stereo. He turns the > stereo down and stands up to answer the door. An old man **stood** on the > steps. The man begins to speak slowly, asking for directions. Why is my version of _stood_ incorrect? Can you recommend a good tutorial or practice at improving verb tenses?


title: Does this "to" mean "will"?

text: In this sentence: > I want you _to_ do it. Does "to" here mean "will"?


title: Does “upshot” denote something positive, negative, or neutral?

text: I’m a non-native speaker of English, and I’ve always felt that “upshot” was used to denote positive results. But I’ve come across a few cases recently where negative or neutral outcomes were enumerated after the use of “upshot”. For example, “The upshot was that everyone got an incurable disease.” Is “upshot” intended for positive outcomes only? Or mostly? If yes, what word is used for negative outcomes?


title: Can a non-person have “qualms” about something?

text: Is this a correct use of the word “qualm”? > This theory has no qualms about challenging everything that physicists > believe to be true. If “qualms” cannot be used by an impersonal thing, can you please suggest an alternative word that can be used by an impersonal thing?


title: Is there a noun(phrase) for a force that upsets a given equilibrium, or creates a state of imbalance?

text: Iran's possession of a nuclear weapon 'will surely upset the equilibrium of power.' I need to replace the verb phrase with a noun/noun phrase.


title: What is a word that means "To modify the format of something so that it conforms to a standard?"

text: If I am coding and let's say I decide that for every word I print out, I want to first "change" the format of the words so that they all begin with capital letters. Or, if I want to change the format of a phrase so that there is only a single space between words. Imagine any kind of arbitrary format-changing that doesn't change the data, but does change how it is stored or displayed. What is the word that describes what I am doing to these words or phrases?


title: Origin of "to blow your own horn"

text: What's the origin of the idiom "to blow your own horn"? Is there some metaphor behind it with some animal horn or whatnot?


title: Spaces around a colon

text: In a recent test, I fixed a feature and I was given the document back because it was pointed out the following was not correct. > Name: Sandy Corporation I was asked to do this > Name : Sandy Corporation or do this > Name:Sandy Corporation To me the first one looks technically correct and is more pleasing to the eye. Which one is correct from punctuation point of view? Note the difference between all three is how much space should be left before and after the : symbol. Should it be equal on both sides or the first one is correct?


title: Indicative vs. subjunctive – was vs. were – “If a menu bar of personal commands was/were context-aware, then a “zoom-in” button would only appear if.”

text: > If a menu bar of personal commands **was/were** context-aware, then a “zoom- > in” button would only appear if the current window or application is > something that you deem worthy of requiring a “zoom-in” button, like a map > or photo application. At first, I thought it could be: > “If a menu bar of personal commands **were** context-aware”. I desire a context-sensitive menu bar in the newer Chrome OS operating system, so I thought that this was dealing with hypotheticals and wishful thinking (subjunctive mood?). I also saw examples “were” being used in alternate paths. I went back to thinking of, > “If a menu bar of personal commands **was** context-aware” because the characteristic of the menu bar has not been decided yet. I read about the example of, > “If I were rich”. “I’m not rich”. \-- > “If the bar were context-sensitive”. “The bar is not...”. Actually, the menu bar not not-context-sensitive”. The menu bar is nothing. It hasn’t been created yet. It in fact could be context-sensitive. Thanks for any help.


title: Word for "ability to hide complexity"

text: Is there a single word for _ability to hide complexity_ or _ability to hide details_?


title: Why are names abbreviated in translations?

text: Often when reading English translations I will encounter names of places or people that have been abbreviated. An example is in Catherine Hutter's translation of Goethe's "The Sorrows of Young Werther": > A few days ago I met a man called V., an ingenuous fellow with a very > pleasant face. Is this because there is no English translation of the name? Why not just use the foreign name?


title: Why is service pronounced the way it is?

text: Why is service pronounced the way it is and not like device even though the last 4 letters of the words are identical? I would think that if they end the same way, the same pronunciation rules should apply as well. I also checked Wiktionary.org and it says both words evolved from Old French where 'service' originated from 'servis' and 'device' originated from 'devis'. Again identical end of the word spelling.


title: What is the logical difference between "to seek" and "to look for"?

text: I have seen a non-native English speaker write "Still seeking for a job". That got me thinking, what is the difference between _to seek_ and _look for_?


title: "Hence" and "hence why"

text: My question is, is the use of the word "hence", used in it's most common sense as an alternative to "therefore", strictly acceptable in English usage in the following example: > I like bananas, hence why I eat them. I see a lot of people using the word "why" after the word "hence", and I have always considered it, at the very least, inefficient use of English. Happy to find out other views. Many thanks for all comments.


title: Is the change from "m" to "n" within the descent from O.E."æmette" to E."ant" a regular one?

text: According to Etymonline,I can't help wondering whether there is any other example like this? Because E." _emmet_ ",which preserves the "m" intactly,is the cognate of E." _ant_ ",which "changed" the "m" to "n" and is "contracted"? ant (n.) c.1500, from Middle English **ampte** (late 14c.), from O.E. **æmette** "ant," from W.Gmc. *amaitjo (cf. O.H.G. ameiza, Ger. Ameise) from a compound of bases *ai- "off, away" + *mai- "cut," from PIE *mai- "to cut" (cf. maim). Thus the insect's name is, etymologically, "the biter off." As þycke as ameten crepeþ in an amete hulle [chronicle of Robert of Gloucester, 1297] Emmet survived into 20c. as an alternative form. White ant "termite" is from 1729. To have ants in one's pants "be nervous and fidgety" is from 1934, made current by a popular song; antsy embodies the same notion. emmet "ant," from O.E. **æmete** (see ant), surviving as a dialect word in parts of England; also, in Cornwall, a colloquial name for holiday tourists.


title: Why is this a fragment?

text: What's wrong with this sentence (other than that it is incomprehensible out of context): > Because I don’t know what you don’t know. MS Word is telling me that this is a sentence fragment (I disagree). MS Word said the same thing about an earlier version of it: > Because I don’t know what it is that you don’t know. I'm trying to write a FAQ for my syllabus (don't worry, I'm teaching math, not English). One of the Q&As goes like this: > _How come your lectures are so terrible_? Because I don’t know what you > don’t know. If you ask more math questions – even stupid ones – I will get a > better feel for your confusion. I think this is a perfectly reasonable sentence. It means: I don't know what piece of information you don't have in your naive, little student brain, which makes you incapable of understanding my perfectly clear explanation of integrating using the shell method to calculate the volume of a solid generated by revolving a region outlined by a few functions around another line (I mean, really?). The subject is "I". What am I doing? I'm not "knowing", the verb. And then the rest of the plain English sentence. Or maybe is MS Word even stupider than a calculus 2 student?


title: Imperative + and, or Imperative + then

text: Imperative + and, or Imperative + then. Which one is more correct? Does anyone know? please answer me. Study hard, and you will become a great teacher. Study hard, then you will become a great teacher.


title: "Try and" vs "try to"

text: So many people say "try and" instead of "try to", yet the former seems totally incorrect. I'm amazed that a search on this site doesn't show any entries about this. "I'm going to try and get some food" implies you're going to do 2 things, you're going to try, and at the same time, get some food. Not sure what you're going to try. "Try" is transitive to an infinitive verb, it is not something to combine with another action with a conjunction. Any official rules anywhere on this? Doesn't appear to be in Wariner's.


title: A single word which means to start a company or business

text: What is the single word which means to start a company or business?


title: Urge Her Against Him

text: For this: > google book   >  "With one hand on the small of her back, and another just a bit lower, > **_he urged her against him_** again. The woman was melting his resolve and > calling into question his honorable intentions." What is "urge her against him"? Dictionaries don't say anything about "urge against".


title: Two people, same last name, both have master's degrees

text: I am finishing my Master of Healthcare Administration and my husband is a Master Plumber. I would like to refer to us correctly in an email as "The Masters Ourlastname" but I'm not sure if it is Masters or Masters' or just Master's. Can someone please tell me what is correct? Thank you!


title: English word for a contest where participants collect items

text: Well, I'm hoping that the title is self-explanatory. I'm looking for a word (or a Wikipedia article) that describes the type of competition where participants are encouraged to buy more products, and accidentally collect tokens. These tokens are understood to be worth something in tandem.


title: Is there a word for a person with only one head?

text: Reading this article by the fantastic Douglas Adams I came across this interesting quote: > ‘[I]nteractivity’ is one of those neologisms that Mr Humphrys likes to > dangle between a pair of verbal tweezers, but the reason we suddenly need > such a word is that during this century we have for the first time been > dominated by non-interactive forms of entertainment: cinema, radio, recorded > music and television... We didn’t need a special word for interactivity in > the same way that we don’t (yet) need a special word for people with only > one head. This got me thinking — not just about what that word might be (unikef? monocap?), but also how new words are constructed. My two first thoughts above were that the word would be constructed from either Greek or Latin roots (mono and uni, respectively), and I assume that most newly constructed words would follow a similar structure. That is - they would take previously prescribed pieces of a language (classical or otherwise) and shape those pieces to fit the needs of the new word. But which language would be more likely? Greek? Or Latin? Or, since the concept of having to describe someone with only one head antedates both of these languages by so much, would it be inappropriate for a new word to have a classical root? I would appreciate it if any readers who do have multiple heads could let us know authoritatively how you refer to us one-headed folks.


title: When not to use past perfect?

text: In a recent question: Past perfect or past simple in combination with present perfect? the asker presented three options. >   1. I have examined the document you gave me and... >   2. I have examined the document you had given me and... >   3. I have examined the document you have given me and... > All the answers suggested the asker to pick #1, with optionally choosing #3, which are fair enough, but what at least three people including me are interested in is: "Why not #2?" The document was given before the examination took place and both took place in the past, so the formal requirements for past perfect seem to be satisfied. So what other reasons either make it undesired here, or make the two others more desired? If I have choices similar to the above, when should I choose past perfect and when other tenses are more preferable? _(just as a comment, in my native language (Polish), our counterpart of Past Perfect went extinct sometime around the past century and only leads a zombie life through rare idiomatic expressions, so I find it a fascinating subject for study.)_


title: Meaning of the counting rhyme "Eenie Meenie Miney Moe"

text: Counting rhymes are as we know, used for determining who is it.So last week, we were playing chili-chili-water, and my friend told me that the counting rhynme "Eenie Meenie Miney Moe" actually had a meaning. I asked him but he wouldn't tell me. Could someone quietly explain what the rhyme meant?


title: Is there a word or phrase to describe ambiguous sarcasm?

text: To be specific, this statement refers to a phrase in which the writer/speaker's intention of being sarcastic is not disclosed to the reader/listener (deliberately or accidentally). The effect strongly depends on the vocal inflection placed on the statement. Is there a better word or phrase than "ambiguous sarcasm"? EDIT: This includes the case in which the speaker is unsure about his or her intentions, leaving the implication of the statement for interpretation.


title: "Promised to be exciting, but ended being boring"

text: > Although it promised to be exciting, _it ended being boring/dull/useless_. Any idiom for the above phrase?


title: Word or phrase for 'a much hyped discovery which later turns out to be insignificant or of no value'

text: In the company where I worked before, the team of specialists which handled customer dissatisfaction issues often came up with seemingly brilliant solutions which would initially appear to be _key breakthroughs_ but would later turn out to be no more brilliant than those which had been tried and abandoned before. Along those lines, let's suppose, someone is working on a big scientific discovery or breakthrough, it's got big hype and everything, but once it is made known to public and its applications are discussed, people notice nothing useful about it and dismiss it as nonconstructive or nonfunctional. I am interested in knowing if there is a word or phrase to describe the idea. ( _Edits made to rephrase some sentences_ )


title: Do any words have three or more correct spellings?

text: I can call to mind several words with another correct spelling (colour, analogue, disc, barbeque) but I can't think of any with multiple correct spellings, i.e. three or more equally acceptable, semantically identical variants of the same word. Do any exist?


title: "Pandora's Box" metaphors

text: The majority of definitions give the same meaning - "Pandora's box" is a synonym for _"a source of extensive but unforeseen troubles or problems."_ Are there any other metaphors with the same meaning?


title: "Would have had to have been" vs "would have had to be" for past event conditions

text: I instinctively said > I would have had to have been over 180 lbs for that to have happened. I thought that seemed overly wordy. Too many "have"s and "had"s. So I tried: > I would have had to be over 180 lbs for that to happen. That didn't feel right, though. My brother and I were talking of a past event. He suggested something that could have happened. (Something like, _You could have hung from the chandelier to get it out_ ). I tried the first of the above statements. I want to speak about something that would need to occur for something else to occur in that past situation. What would be the proper way of saying what I was trying to say up there‽


title: "To my right" vs. "on my right"

text: Which one is correct and why? >   * _To_ my right is Alex. >   * _On_ my right is Alex. > What is the difference between _on_ and _to_ here?


title: Adjective of proper noun containing "and"

text: A person from The Turks and Caicus Islands is known as what? Likewise with Trinidad and Tobago, St Kitts and Nevis, São Tomé and Principé, and Bosnia and Herzegovina. http://www.un.org/en/members/ I've heard of "Trinidadian", but isn't that specific to one island? Then again I've heard of Bosnians but not Herzegovinians. In some cases, it isn't even clear what someone from specifically one group of islands is called. Turk? Caicasian?


title: 'Next Monday' or 'on next Monday'?

text: Is there any preposition before "next week"? Is it "I would send you the proposal next Monday", or "...on next Monday"?


title: How common is "What happened?" when asking people to repeat what they said? How long has this been in common usage?

text: For several years, I have heard most young people and some adults use the phrase _What happened?_ when they do not hear what is spoken. It appears to be used where previously several other phrases were used, the most formal being _I beg your pardon._ (See How do you decide which phrase to use when asking people to repeat what they said?) My answer to _What happened?_ is usually _Were you expecting something to happen?_ or _Was something supposed to happen?_ I am met with a look of puzzlement or annoyance. I wonder what the origin of this usage might be. Perhaps it is considered too humiliating to beg someone's pardon? Similar queries may be taken as an admission of fault (not paying attention). Can someone provide some insight?


Is it correct to say "I am heading off" when I am about to leave? Is it informal? If so, what's the formal equivalent?


title: Where do we put the question mark in a long question/statement?

text: Without the question mark, it is simple... > Can we make it in one hour -- as I want to eat my dinner now. (I like the dash as a clear separator for the question and statement parts of the sentence) Adding a question mark, it looks wrong to me in all permutations. What should I be doing with this? > Can we make it in one hour as I want to eat my dinner now?   >  Can we make it in one hour? as I want to eat my dinner now.   >  Can we make it in one hour -- as I want to eat my dinner now?   >  Can we make it in one hour? -- as I want to eat my dinner now.


title: Is there a word for animals that have two arms?

text: I know there's bipedal for animals that have 2 legs, but what of animals with 2 arms?


title: What does "cup" mean in "cup of cheese"?

text: I was reading a recipe of macaroni-and-cheese. In Brazil (Portuguese) cheese is sold only by weight. I understand the concept of cups to measure volume or weight of liquids and powders, but as far as cheese goes, I have no idea what a cup could mean.   * Is a cup a unit?   * Can a conceptual cup as unit of measurement be used to measure the volume or weight of a big solid object that would never fit in a cup?   * What else could cup mean in that sentence?


title: Positive of word "Abyss"

text: Could somebody tell me, what is the positive of the word " **Abyss** " ? As I know, abyss means an infinite depth or abode of evils, Hell. So isn't there any word which will mean the same as infinite depth or void but without pointing towards the negativity of Hell ?


title: Almost half a dozen

text: I understand, _dozen_ may be more comfortable than _twelve_ in speech. I can understand using _over a dozen_ or _almost a dozen_ These imply rough measurement of the count, maybe ten, maybe eleven, or maybe thirteen, maybe fifteen. But why do people choose to say/write _Almost half a dozen_ or _Nearly half a dozen_ when it invariably means "five"? "Four" is definitely not "nearly half a dozen", and I completely don't see the point why would anyone use this expression, but still I find it quite frequently. Does it have some historical basis or implies something beyond "five"?


title: Is 'but rather' considered grammatically correct?

text: Is this comment that I made here grammatically correct? > In Latin, when a group of males and females is combined, the neutral plural > form is not used, but rather the masculine is.


title: What word can I use for unclear music?

text: I am listening to the radio, but due to some signal error there are lots of disturbances in the music. What word can I use for this unclear and noisy music?


title: Correct use of will & would?

text: What would be the correct use of will & would in these sentences? 1) What will happen if **I say** to my boss that I will not come tomorrow? 2) What will happen if **I would say** to my boss that I will not come tomorrow? 3) What will happen if **I will say** to my boss that I will not come tomorrow? 4) What would happen if **I would say** to my boss that I will not come tomorrow? There are four sentences which one should I use and in which situation?


title: term for demonstrating favorable aspects of a skill, while leaving out cautionary notes

text: OK, so there's the term "whitewashing" which means to omit or downplay mention of negative aspects of something, in order to mislead someone else to overlook those negative aspects. Is there a similar term (not necessarily invoking malicious intent, but rather something that leans more towards neglect) in the context of teaching or demonstration? An example is Mickey in the Sorcerer's Apprentice scene of Fantasia; he learns from the wizard how to animate the brooms, but not how to stop them. Or teaching someone how to fly a plane without showing them how to land.


title: Idiom for: a not-challenging environment spoils a good worker gradually

text: I want an idiom for the situation where a non-challenging environment gradually spoils a good worker. If a brilliant programmer worked with a group of mediocre programmers for quite a long time, he or she would eventually become a bad programmer (with or without knowing it). I have found the following in google results:   **One bad apple spoils the whole bunch** But I need something like **One good apple is spoiled by many bad apples**   or **good apples should not be mixed with bad apples**


title: Difference between Do you want to and Can you

text: What is the difference between the question phrased as "Do you want to (some verb e.g. go)" vs. "Can you (some verb e.g. go)? What these questions indicate? Which one has request notaion? Which one has the notion of your willingness? Thanks, A


title: "Bite off" and "bite of"

text: "I take a bite off my pizza." Or "I take a bite of my pizza." Or neither or both? I am not sure how to use bite off/of correctly.


title: Why do people sometimes use the past perfect form of a verb when the past would suffice? (e.g. "you had mentioned")

text: I noticed that my American friends tend to use the past perfect form when they use the verb _mention_ in its past form, almost despite of the context of the sentence. I hear them say "you had mentioned" a lot more often even in situations where the use of simple past would have been perfectly fine. Have you noticed it too and is it one of those unwritten rules, or is there a more formal explanation to it? It seems like there was more verbs like that, but I am having a hard time remembering it now. If I do, I will edit the post and likely change the title to accommodate other verbs.


title: Past Perfect VS Past Simple: suffer

text: Is there any difference at all between these two sentences? Why would a native speaker choose one over the other? a) She had suffered from asthma when she was very young. b) She suffered from asthma when she was very young. Thank you. Nawee


title: Use of *this* to refer to both sides of a telephone conversation?

text: By convention, complementary words like _here/there_ and _this/that_ are relative in their usage, i.e., their meaning depends on which side of the conversation they fall into. However,   * To introduce oneself on a telephone, it is common to say " _This_ is John."    * On the other hand, to ask someone on the other end of the line about their identity, the usage is still "Who's _this_?" or something like "Is _this_ John?" when in doubt.    * Combine the above two into a single statement, and hell breaks loose! "Hi! _This_ is John. Who's **_this_**?" is just so ridiculous a statement! See also: how-to-answer-is-this-john … How did the word _this_ come to be used to refer to the both sides of a telephonic conversation?


title: What word (e.g. eventually vs potentially) does express better the following scenario?

text: The scenario: > a) **John believes that Peter Parker has a PhD degree.**   >  b) **Peter Parker is the spider man, but John does not know about this.** Which sentence does express the scenario in the best way? > 1) John **eventually** believes that the spider man has a PhD degree.   >  2) John **potentially** believes that the spider man has a PhD degree.   >  ?) or something that is offered by you I am interested in more everyday-used words (a layman's words) not in technical one (like, "extensionally"). Does the position of adverbs matters in this case?


title: the origin of the word "hag"

text: It comes across as offensive. I just recently saw _Shadow People_ for the second time and what they didn’t go into enough is the origin of the word _hag_. There is some particular woman they speak of being Norse in her earlier years. and Germanic in her latter years. This also ties in with the origin of the word nightmare. Is there someone who is able to shed some light on this for me?


title: What's the meaning of "a class act"?

text: What does the term "class act" mean? For example, The club is lucky to have such a class act and he is lucky to have the club. What does "class" and "act" mean respectively in this set phrase or word combination of "class act"? Does "class" here as the adjective modify the noun "act"?


title: "like many others" indicates/points to which part of the sentence?

text: In the following sentence- > As I love to read, like many others, a desire for writing grew inside me. the part **"like many others"** indicates/points to which part of the sentence? **i.e.** to **"As I love to read"** or to **"a desire for writing grew inside me"** ? So, does it mean > As I love to read like many others or > like many others a desire for writing grew inside me One more question: Is **"like many others"** a phrase? If not, what's the appropriate term for such group of words?


title: What is the meaning of "just as well" in this context?

text: > The family cemetery sat at the bottom of the hill from the mansion. Dan > thought it was kind of stupid they'd hired a hearse to carry Grace a hundred > yards down the driveway. They could've put wheels on the coffin like they > have on suitcases and that would've worked **just as well**. Does this "just as well" have the same meaning of "just as well" in "It's just as well we'd prepared everything beforehand."


title: Art and Culture are to "Philistine" as Feeling and Compassion are to what?

text: I'm looking for a noun to embody the adjectives "unfeeling" and "heartless" the same way Philistine embodies "uncivilized" and "crude". I'm looking for something a bit more tactful than say, "a cold-hearted bastard", which is all I've been able to come up with so far. Does such a word exist?


title: Does "within the same day" make sense?

text: Does the expression "within the same day" make sense? I want to say something like "if I go today, I can't come back within the same day," or "I if I get banned from a forum, I can't log in within the same day." Or, like, "I can't post the same thing twice within the day."


title: What's a word that describes this facial expression?

text: Is there such a word? Find this one hard to describe: ![](http://i.imgur.com/UD6izBs.jpg) ![](http://i.imgur.com/qw5ihmg.png) ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/yasWX.png) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=77ZtOG6o6to&feature=youtu.be&t=6s Edit: Hey guys I hope it's less unclear now with an added video. Please consider reopening.


title: Why don't we use the definite article before these examples?

text: 'We need to look closely at **_business growth_** , **_technological advancement_** , **_economic trends_** , and **_product development_**.' I would never say 'the business growth' or 'the technological advancement' etc.


title: How old is the word "prolly"?

text: _Prolly_ is given this definition at Wiktionary: > Clipped pronunciation of probably. I was reading an interesting article today that claimed _prolly_ dates from 1947 and that surprised me. Unfortunately, I wasn't able to find a listed source for the claim. So how old is _prolly_?


title: Does "eschew" have negative connotations?

text: For example, in the sentence: > He eschewed his father's profession. does this have the implication that he found it somewhat repugnant, or does it just mean he decided it wasn't for him?


title: Can adverbs also modify/specify the speaker's state of mind, emotion, character, etc. in English?

text: I don't think there are such adverbs in English that officially indicate the speaker's emotional/mental state, personality, etc. "Could you _please_ let me join your group?" doesn't convey the intensity of desperation in writing. We would have to hear people request, beg, etc. to know exactly what they mean by _please_ in such a request. I heard that some foreign languages have adverbs that specifically nitpick a desperately pleading speaker. (Judgmental warning) With many women, I notice the frequent use of the word _completely_ , especially for adjectives not subject to completion, or for verbs that already denote completion.   * I was _completely_ pissed that he was 2 minutes late.   * That movie was _completely_ stupid.   * I'm avoiding that class because I hear it's _completely_ difficult.   * That pig _completely_ finished all the leftover food. From experience and as I've been told, this over-usage of "completely" denotes someone who has very high, unrealistic, and unfair expectations. I believe the usage is acceptable, though not the best choice of adverb in many cases; but the choice and frequency just ought to say something about the speaker. I think English adverbs modify only verbs, adjectives, and other adverbs, but not the speaker. I just have that yearning for adverbs to also be able to depict the speaker's psyche.


title: Which thesaurus best describes the differences between several similar words?

text: Which thesaurus (online or paper) best describes the differences between several similar words? As a non-native English speaker, it is often difficult for me to distinguish the slightly different concepts in similar words. I'm looking for a good online dictionary or thesaurus that compares those synonyms word by word.


title: A word for someone who never had a mate because he/she has a high standard

text: Is there any better word than _picky_?


What's the origin of the word "saccharine"? Has it transformed from a different word or is it taken from a different language? Have any words originated from this word?


title: Difference between "in" and "to" in this context

text: My friend is taking an English conversation class. In it, she said > I have been teaching math in high schools for more than 10 years. Before > that I taught math **in** junior high schools. However, her teacher corrected her, telling her she should change **in** junior high to **to** junior high schools. Is there any reasons that we should use **to**? Isn't **in** correct?


title: Exclamation mark before closing parenthesis

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Where does the question mark go — inside or outside the parentheses? Consider this: > Even a fool gets to be young once (but not twice!). Do you understand? The parentheses and the text within them are supposed to be a part of the first sentence. Note also that this is just a silly made-up example. These are not the actual words I'm dealing with in reality. **Question:** Should there be a dot after the closing parenthesis?


title: proper placement of question mark in regards to parentheses

text: here is the sentence (you didn't really think I was going to suggest you just drink eggnog and eat latkes all month, did you)?


title: What do you call someone who believes in ghosts?

text: What do you call someone who believes in ghosts and ghost stories?


title: Is it acceptable to use 'that' followed by a direct quote?

text: New York Times: > Even before **President Obama declared this month that “I have Israel’s > back”** in its escalating confrontation with Iran, pro-Israel figures like > the evangelical Christian leader Gary L. Bauer and the conservative > commentator William Kristol were pushing for more. Is this sentence, in particular the part in **bold** , grammatical? I imagine that it would be impossible for such constructs not to occasionally slip in spoken conversations, but are they formal/suitable for papers? To be redundantly specific, I'm asking whether or not the following would be more natural: > ... President Obama declared this month that “He had Israel’s back”... Or is the original sentence perfectly normal and formal?


Should I say "data sets of race times of various cars" or something better? I am concerned that the "of" don't sound quite right.


title: When "especially" is at the end of a list, does it apply to the whole list or only the last item

text: English is my second language, so be gentle if this seems silly ... This sentence puzzles me: > China's prolonged silence about its destruction of the Feng Yun 1-C > satellite, which it launched in 1999, has been almost as unnerving to its > potential enemies ( _America, Japan and Taiwan **especially_** ) as the > experiment itself. In the parentheses does _especially_ apply to only Taiwan or all three countries? And how about in this sentence? > China's aim is to signal to America and its protégés in Asia—Taiwan and > Japan _especially_...


title: Is this grammatically correct? "For one, I had mainly be"

text: Is the following grammatically correct? > The introduction of this assignment had made me rethink many previous ideas > that I had held on to in previous assigned projects. _For one, I had mainly_ > be using Illustrator to...


title: "Retrieves and let you print" or "Retrieves and lets you print"?

text: Speaking of some program, which of these sentences is correct? >   1. Retrieves and let you print... >   2. Retrieves and lets you print... >


title: Is there a simpler sentence than this?

text: "Each of the first ten whole numbers is written on a card." The sentence will be used to support the following question: _Find the probability that a card taken at random has a label of an even number._


title: Settle you in vs Get you settled in

text: As GET has so many meanings, it is hard for me to distinct between them and understand the nuances. Are these sentences all correct? Would you understand the same thing by them? > I will settle you in.   >  I will get you settled in.   >  Let's get you settled in! Is the first one acceptable?


title: Using respectively when two subjects receive the same treatment

text: When describing the fact that A, B and C received treatments 1, 2 and 3, we can write:               Subjects A, B and C were tested; and treatments 1, 2 and 3 respectively, were applied.      If subjects A, B and C are applied treatments 1, 1 and 2, should we apply the same sentence?


title: How to pronounce '-ing' followed by a vowel

text: I'm getting into English recently and I'm a little confused by the way people pronounce a word that starts in a vowel right after a word ending in _-ing_. For example: > You have to **bring it** up now? I don't know if I should pronounce it as:   1. bring /ŋit/   2. brin' /nit/   3. bring /git/ Another example would be "I'm **coming out** ". Likewise, what about the ending _-ang_? For example: > We can just **hang out** and have a good time. And to round it all up, what about a combination of the two? For example, > He got sick of **hanging around** waiting for you and went home. I've been asking myself these questions for weeks.


title: Administrating vs Admining

text: I get the sense that the word "Admining", like the word "Admin" from which it derives, is used to refer to computer administration, while "Administrating", like "Administrator", is used more when it is finance or buisness being admin'd. I would like to know what other people think, though, if that is indeed so, or if my perception is wrong. Also, as a side note, what about "admined" vs "admin'd".


title: "to the right" vs. "at the right"

text: I'm confused about the use of " **at** " or " **to** " in the following sentence: > This function puts the number at/to right of the equal into a new set I see a lot of people using "at" but I am pretty sure that it's wrong! Which is correct?


title: Is "He is too weak that he cannot walk" a correct sentence?

text: Consider the following: >   1. He is too weak that he cannot walk. > >   2. He is so weak that he cannot walk. > >   3. He is too weak to walk. > > I feel all the above sentences are correct. But my grammar book suggests, that the first one is wrong and the rest is correct. Why is it so? Any explanation?


title: "check out" vs. "look at"

text: Consider the following: > **Check (out)** the portfolio and let me know if you are interested via > e-mail. or > **Look at** the portfolio and let me know if you are interested via e-mail. Can I use _check_ , _check out_ or _look at_? I need it to be as simple as possible, so _take a look_ is not an option for me right now. My guess is that _look at_ is the most formal one, so should I use it when talking to a client or is _check_ OK, too?


title: What are "city sevens"?

text: In the novel "The Clock That Went Backward", in chapter II, there is this sentence: > Aunt Gertrude's will left me her bank and gas stocks, real estate, railroad > bonds, and city sevens, and gave Harry the clock. Please can anyone explain what "city sevens" means?


title: How to say "the project that we are working on" in a short phrase?

text: I want a short phrase for "the project that we are working on". Could it be "our working-on project"?


title: How do you call it when A cannot alter B above A?

text: There's only one true example I can give without going off the idea and this example is quite "techy", so I'm sorry for those who possibly won't understand the principle. I'm certainly not being ignorant, I just cannot think of any other as good example as this one. There's a virtualization program called Virtual Box, which creates a virtual, emulated environment in which you can run another operating system inside your main operating system. The whole environment is completely emulated, therefore the system inside it (called the guest system) has no access to your main system and cannot alter it. Thus, this guest system cannot operate any faster than the main system, cannot outperform it in any way. How is this called? When a sub-category item (child) cannot "understand/outperform" its group parent?


title: Etymology for "cacamayme"

text: I love using "cacamayme" in conversations when I really want to emphasize the "crazy" I am talking about. I also love the Urban Dictionary's slang definition: > 100% grade A Bologna. Does anyone know where this word comes from, or how many different ways it can be spelled? Edit - It looks as though the spelling I am using is Yiddish -- here is a link.


title: for one price or one flat price?

text: I'm kind of confused about grammar here, and I wonder which one of the following sentences I should use for my website! build unlimited websites for one price! build unlimited websites for one flat fee! build unlimited websites for one low price! Thanks everyone for taking the time to help!


title: Dependent clause, phrases, and fragments

text: Is a dependent clause considered a fragment? Are all fragments considered to be a dependent clause? Or is fragment like an umbrella where dependent clauses and phrases can be found? Thanks for any and all help.


title: "There is no doubt this is arguably wrong"

text: This is from a review of something: > There is no doubt that the _(product name)_ is arguably the best consumer > _(product category name)_ currently on the market. I stopped for a while after reading that sentence. If there is no doubt it is the best in class product, then why is the word _arguably_ in there? Is this just plain wrong grammar or is there some justification for this? I think there's a conflict in logic of this sentence. Edit: Maybe I should provide more context. The rest of the review supports the notion that it is the best in class product and there is no irony or sarcasm in the sentence.


title: Situation when a sentence can't be appealed

text: After a specific period, or if the appeal is found invalid for any reason, or was issued at the final instance court, a sentence becomes valid and is to be executed. I found the translation of the term to describe this situation from my language to point to "prejudice", but as I read about it, it appears to apply only to a limited range of situation — dismissal of a proceeding with or without prejudice, or overturning it on appeal. I don't see "prejudice" for example getting applied when the sentence becomes final through normal procedure without appeal (defendant pleads guilty and accepts the sentence). So, is there a term that describes a sentence that is final — can't be appealed, overturned or otherwise changed?


title: Past tense of 'to output': output or outputted?

text: According to Wikipedia, the past tense (and past participle) of the verb _to output_ is either _output_ or _outputted_. Are these two forms entirely interchangeable? Or do they have certain nuance in meaning or context (e.g. in programming one of the forms is preferred)? > Instead of correct results, my program output/outputted garbage. Which one should I choose? My logical sense tells me _output_ is better because it derives from _put_ , but intuitively I tend to use _outputted_ when I speak and don't have time to think.


title: Stative verbs in the continuous form?

text: As a nonnative speaker of English I was always taught in school that there are verbs that cannot be used in the continuous form, i.e. the stative verbs. However, I've seen some stative verbs used in the continuous form in American English, especially the verbs _wish_ , _feel_ , _hope_ , _guess_ , _love_ and _like_. Is using these stative verbs in the continuous form wrong? If it's not, what's the difference between using them in the simple and continuous forms?


title: Minimal size of vocabulary

text: What is the minimal size of vocabulary that could enable two persons to communicate more or less sensibly about matters of everyday life in English? Would 3000 words (8000 words, if different grammatical forms are taken into account) be a reasonable estimate?


title: Is there any difference between “a ... sense of purpose” and “a sense of ... purpose”?

text: There’s an English-Japanese dictionary giving identical Japanese words for “a common sense of purpose” and “a sense of common purpose.” I’m wondering if both of the expressions are the same in meaning. Just out of curiosity, I used google search and found “a spiritual sense of purpose” (37,000 hits) and “a sense of spiritual purpose” (15,000 hits). I’d like to know if both kinds of expressions are the same in meaning.


title: What does ‘bookend’ mean in President Obama’s remark, “My address on Tuesday will be a bookend to what I said in Kansas”?

text: The Time magazine’s (January 21) article titled ‘Osawatomie Reprised,’ reported that President Obama said his address will "be a bookend" to his Kansas speech last month, in video previewing Tuesday's State of the Union, with the quote: > “In a lot of ways, _my address on Tuesday will be a bookend to what I said > in Kansas_ last month about the central mission we have as a country, and my > central focus as President. And that’s rebuilding an economy where hard work > pays off and responsibility.” From the context of the above statement, I guess the bookend here means “a pair” or “duplication, repetition”. But as I checked Cambridge online dictionary to make it certain, it simply defines ‘bookend’ as a noun meaning ‘an object used, especially in pairs, to keep a row of books standing vertically.’ Oxford online dictionary, in addition to the similar definition with the above, provides the usage as a verb meaning “be positioned at the end or on either side of (something): the narrative is bookended by a pair of incisive essays.” There was another definition of ‘bookend’ in www.businessdictionary.com; > “In marketing, set of two matching or related commercials; one played at the > beginning of a commercial break period, the other at its end. This technique > aims to aid the listener's or viewer's recall of the advertised item.” None of the above definitions seems to suitably fit to the case of President Obama’s ‘bookend.’ Is it a popular usage of “bookend” in the sense of “another pair, duplication , repetition, reproduction, or the like” as used in President Obama’s statement?.


title: Are all these prepositional phrases equally correct?

text: I'm trying to understand when to use classic compound prepositions. Is there any particular reason to prefer/avoid any of these patterns? > In what field could we put it where it wouldn't interfere with the existing > code? > > What field could we put it in where it wouldn't interfere with the existing > code? > > What field could we put it wherein it wouldn't interfere with the existing > code?


title: What does 'Gangnam Style' mean?

text: Does PSY attribute his fashion to his district Gangnam? I've been hearing people nowadays going 'I have the Gangnam Style'. Are they meaning they have adopted the cultures of Korea, Gangnam?


title: Using prepositions with time

text: Which is the correct preposition? " _at_ evening", " _on_ evening", or " _in_ the evening". Is this correct-"He mailed me ( _on_ evening / _in_ the evening / _at_ evening)"? How are prepositions used with time?


title: “There lie targets” vs. “there lies targets”

text: I have a sentence: > However, until then it is obvious that there lie intermediate “targets” — > foo, bar and baz. Is the use of _lie_ in this way correct? The targets still exist, so I don’t want the past tense. I don’t think that _lies_ sounds correct, because there ~~’s~~ are multiple targets and I'd say _the dogs lie_ rather than _the dogs lies_.


title: Do you want choice A or B? Yes!-- Is it wrong to answer with a yes when given two options?

text: If someone asks > Would you prefer to go shopping or go out to eat? and receives the response > Yes the response is ambiguous. You cannot deduce which choice the responder has chosen because they haven't responded with one of the options. Is there a rule that dictates which choice to assume the responder has made?


title: Connotation of terms regarding one's profession

text: I'm wondering if there are more-commonly-than-not held connotations for terms regarding occupation that would differentiate between one's own personal experience in a field versus the description of the field as a whole. E.g. I am an engineer at company A, this is my _job_ , but engineer is my _profession_. The example is arbitrary. To me I associate _job_ , _occupation_ , and _career_ with a more personalized representation of employment while _profession_ or _vocation_ are less so. **NB:** I am trying to model certain relationships in code and want to choose the best names for some objects in the hierarchy so that it is at least somewhat evident by their names what the relationships are. I understand that there may not be any one "right" answer to this question.


title: Usage of "many" vs "many a"?

text: Can someone please elucidate the difference between "many" and "many a"? In what context of usage should we add an extra "a" beside the word "many"? For example: >   * Many times, I had seen that... >   * Many a times, I had seen that... > I do not know if the example is accurate enough to support my question but I would just like to know the difference between how they are used.


title: 'typeface' or 'font'? Which term is better known to a layman?

text: I'm designing a simple CMS in which users (non-experts) can, among other things, choose from a select group of typeface-combinations. Although not entirely correct ( I believe?) I could also use 'font combination' to explain the feature. What would be the best way to describe the feature to English speaking that are not into typography / design jargon?


title: 'but' for contrast and 'but' for opposition

text: 'But' does not mean the same thing in "I like pop music but my parents like classical music." and in "My parents have played a lot of classical music to me but I still don't like it." What is it called in each case? How come the first 'but' can be replaced by 'whereas', but the second cannot? Or, the other way round, the second 'but' can be replaced by 'despite which/in spite of which' but not the first?


title: When to write the word “parenthetically”

text: I understand that if you're speaking a phrase in which you would write parentheses, you can say the word _parenthetically_. But when should you _write_ the word _parenthetically_? I came across this sentence, starting off a paragraph in a scientific article: > Parenthetically, we note that subjects in all experimental conditions were > unbiased … This struck me as odd. If they're speaking parenthetically, shouldn't it be in parentheses? On the one hand, from a descriptive point of view, the usage of the word was not ambiguous – I know exactly what the author is trying to connote by using it. But from a prescriptive point of view, would this be considered proper grammar?


title: Do "in a black study" and "in a brown study" mean the same?

text: I encountered relatively often the expression "to be in a brown study" but I can find nothing about the "black" version of the same expression. I found it in William Hope Hodgson's The Island of the Crossbones. I believe the meaning should be the same -at least he's talking about someone who's quite pensive- but I'd like to be sure.


title: Is 's/he' grammatically correct?

text: When it is needed to refer both male and female with pronoun,we usually use masculine pronoun 'HE'.But nowadays many people claim that it is a form of gender discrimination.So if in this type of case ,I use 's/he'.But can it be called grammatically correct?


title: Something was being touched but no longer is

text: I'm looking for an (English) word meaning something that was being touched but no longer is - similar to disappear (for the visual sense). I'm thinking at the moment about using _DISTACTED_ or _DISTACTUALED_ (which are apparently not words) for the past tense. The former sounds better, but the latter is (probably) more correct. Anybody have any ideas?


title: Not quite "strawman" -- a word for stating a non-believed proposition?

text: [Begin video clip]"The Earth is flat. You can walk from here to there and you never start tilting." [End video clip] "So it might have appeared to people at one time..." [Discard rest of hour-long lecture on how we know the Earth is round.] It is an increasingly common political tactic to find statements that, when removed from context, say the very opposite of what the speaker clearly intends to communicate. But "out of context" is not forceful enough to describe the situation, since the need for more context generally arises from some need for nuance or equivocation. "Strawman" is not the word, since a strawman argument is weak or off-point. The "in context, the opposite of what is ultimately argued" statement may be perfectly valid. The best I've come up with is "counter-propositional" but at that point, you might as well say "In context, [s]he said the opposite..."


title: What is the oldest common English word?

text: I'm trying to formalize What is the oldest still-in-use English word? which was closed as vague. Consider the "age" of a word to be the length of time since it was first used with the (more-or-less) the current meaning and pronunciation. Obviously, there are lots of words date from Classical Antiquity: _Coitus_ , _agenda_ , and _terminus_ are among thousands of words that would mean the same to Julius Caesar as they do to us.   [Assignment for the under-worked: write a logical, grammatical English sentence consisting entirely of such words; extra credit if it also makes sense _in Latin_.] There are even words preserved untouched from ancient Greece ( _echo_ , _academe_ , _halcyon_ , _stasis_ ). Are there any word that pre-dates those, such as some word that a Mycenaean potter or a Hittite horseman would say that, I don't know, Matt Lauer would understand perfectly? My guess is _ma_ , meaning mother, but I have no proof.


title: Word to describe "everyday things"

text: Is there any one word which can describe _everyday things_? By this, I mean things we commonly regard as things most people do every day, like taking a shower, brushing your teeth, getting dressed, going to work or school, and eating dinner.