title: Meaning and usage of "to no end"

text: What does the phrase mean in "He annoys me to no end"? Literally, does it mean that he annoys me forever? Or does it mean that he annoys me to no result?


title: Is the "will" in "can and will" necessary?

text: Anyone who's ever seen much American film or television has heard some variation of the following sentences countless times: > You have the right to remain silent. If you choose to give up that right, > anything you say **can and will** be used against you in a court of law. And the phrase "can and will" can be seen in other contexts as well. My issue with this is not the "can" part, but the "will" part. "Can" implies that anything you say _may_ be used against you in court, but "will" asserts that it is a certainty. The person being arrested could obviously say any number of things that would not be of any use in a case against them, so it's not true to say that anything they say _will_ be used, only that it _can_ be. Does Hollywood have it wrong? I looked around to see what the official text of the Miranda warning is, and it seems there isn't any - it varies from one jurisdiction to the next, but the Hollywood version is always pretty much the same. (The Miranda _rights_ are universal, but the actual words to be spoken by the arresting officer are not mandated so long as the rights are properly delineated.) And more to the point, is this phrase just being incorrectly used in these (and other) cases? Does "can and will" maybe bear more legal weight than simply "can"? Or could the officer leave out the "and will" part and consider the Miranda warning just as properly given without it?


title: Grand (as in parents) -- singular or plural?

text: In his song "White Wine in the Sun", Tim Minchin sings > I'll be seeing ... my grand and my Mum. This apparently stands for grandparents, but what is the 'default' visualization of that word by native speakers? Do you see multiple grandparents or, for instance, one grandmother? For me as a non-native English speaker, the latter seems more natural, since, along the musical motion and harmony change, the scene's attention is somewhat focusing gradually on the Mum character, going from plural of _sisters_ to singular of _Mum_ , dragging the intermediate point to singular. It could also be undefined, so that you'd only sense just a vague odor of grandparenting. Is this the case?


title: jargon for taking leftover budget funds in one calendar year and using them the next year

text: There's a term for taking leftover budget funds in one calendar year and using them the next year, in the context of government budgeting. I am having a brain freeze and can't remember it or find it on google. I know it's a reasonably short word (my guess is in the 5-9 letter range, 2-3 syllables) and it rhymes with a common word, possibly a food item. Don't ask me why I remember that. :-)


title: Replacement for bullet-proofed

text: I was suggested to use the term `bullet-proofed` by a colleague. Someone else now pointed out that `bullet-proofed` might not even exist, because we can't build the past tense of an adjective. Part one of the question is: can `to bullet-proof` be a verb which describes "making something bullet-proof"? And in consequence `bullet-proofed` then means "having made something bullet-proof"? So far, that's just for me, learning about it. I actually have decided to replace the word by something else. The word is intended to be used like "a bullet-proofed solution", which is close to `foolproof` or `stable` or `tested`. However, I would not use `foolproof` as a term here, because it might sound offending in the business context it is used. Can you think of the correct term my colleague might have had in mind when suggesting `bullet-proofed`? Note that we're both non-native English speakers. Update: @skymninge hit the definition. The intended use is like "not subject to correction, alteration, or modification", so I am looking for a synonym of that.


title: Does "to pursue this research as a joint collaboration" sound natural?

text: I have just finished to describe a research project and I would like to mention that I have received money to conduct this research. Does the following sentence sound natural to native speakers? > I have received a three-year grant to pursue this research as a joint > collaboration between the University of City-1 and the University of City-2.


title: How do married gay couples address each other?

text: I know that non-married lovers address each other by saying " _This is my girlfriend/boyfriend._ " I know that married couples address each other by calling " _My wife/husband_ ". I also know that gay lovers who are not married (yet?) address each other by saying " _My boyfriend_ " (for **gays** ) and " _My girlfriend_ " (for **lesbians** ). But if they are married, **how do they address each other**? And **how do we describe them**? I mean if they are gays, so are they **_husband and husband_** or **_husband and wife_** (one of them "acts" like the wife)? And if they are lesbians, are they **_wife and wife_** or **_husband and wife_** (one of them "acts" as the husband)? I know they can be referred to as _a gay couple_ or _gay lovers_ from here, but I couldn't find the answer to address each of the two.


title: Did the author of the following text mean "meat?"

text: "Small initial discrepancies may not be seen as meet for a federal case, particularly when the employee, trying to succeed in a nontraditional environment, is averse to making waves." Is there a legalistic meaning for _meet_ or did the author mean to use the word _meat_ in the text quoted above?


title: What's the difference between federal republic and commonwealth?

text: I'm a non-native speaker . I noticed that there are two kinds of statement to describe polity , federal republic of Germany and commonwealth of Austrilia . So I'm confusing what's the difference between federal republic and commonwealth?


title: Die hard or die heart?

text: I just saw someone write that they were a "die heart" fan. I always thought the term was supposed to be "die hard" but I decided to google it just in case I was wrong. Google was unable to give me a definitive answer as there were folk on both sides of the fence. Anyone know the true answer?


title: Keeping the same word-order in a sentence without changing the meaning?

text: In the first Venn diagram below, the two circles represent Freedom and Love, in that order. In the second diagram, they are the same Freedom and Love, but the label “Love without Freedom” puts each title-word under the wrong circle. I need to be able to express “Love without Freedom” without changing the order of the words: “Freedom ___ Love”. Is there a word which reverses the focus of “without”? I don't want to change the order of the circles in the second diagram because that won‘t be an obvious change, and they are supposed to fit together as a whole in the ideal option. ![Love and freedom ven diagrams...](http://i.stack.imgur.com/kLK7O.png) _**Edit_** Is this clearer? ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/1hFXL.png)


title: Can I say "a folder lies in" when talking about computer folders (directories)?

text: I guess _is located in_ is nicer, but is it correct English?


title: "of" or "for" - which is correct?

text: What is correct? imaging features suggestive of appendicitis or suggestive for appendicitis. We are wondering which is correct - "of" or "for" in this sentence.


title: Common Expression for Coming Together

text: Is there a common expression to describe a situation where everything comes together perfectly? UPDATE: The phrase that kept going through my head was "perfect storm," but that holds more of a negative connotation.


title: "Cheat" or "hack" - related to computer games

text: When someone does something that is not allowed in a computer game, others tell him that he is **cheating** or **hacking**. Which word is more suitable?


title: Short antonym for 'professional'

text: I am considering a social media account for updates that are personal, chatty, opinionated, and specific to my geographic location. That is to say, not career-oriented or professional. I need a term that describes this idea. I will use it to qualify my normal account name. The term needs to be short (say 6 letters or less). I am drawn to 'hyperlocal' but it is too long. I'm happy to entertain poetic ideas (e.g. 'garden', 'backyard', etc).


title: Sentence differences

text: What is the difference between these sentences? > Have you heard of the man in the moon? > > How could a man be in the moon? and > Their house was on an island. > > Their house on an island was washed away.


title: Is this correct: "...to all avail"?

text: Many of you have probably heard the phrase "to no avail", as in "I tried to talk them out of it to no avail." (Which means I tried to talk them out of something but failed to do so). However, I was wondering if the opposite of "to no avail" existed. Something like such: > I took advantage of the ignorant _to all avail_. Thus implying I took advantage of the ignorant in all extent possible. Is this correct, or would you phrase it differently?


title: Can you negate a positive without implying the opposite?

text: I often stumble over the fact that in English, apparently, we imply the reverse when we negate a positive. For example, > That wasn't very good. [⇒ That was bad.]   >  That wasn't bad. [⇒ That was good.] Sometimes I wish to convey a more literal meaning of "That was not very good.", i.e.: "That wasn't very good, but it almost was." (I think there are a couple more contexts in which this problem has arisen, but I can't think of them at the moment.) Is there a proper way to do this? Or a more efficient way than explicitly outlining the precise measurement, as in "That was better than good, but not quite very good."?


title: Is “indifferent to negligent” just a set of word? How different is it from “indifferent and negligent”?

text: There was an article titled “The short life and lonely death of Sabrina Seelig” in July 29 New York Times reporting the death of a young woman who was a student of classics at Hunter College. She was carried to a hospital by ambulance after feeling sick, and died there. The article says: > “The family of Ms. Selig, 22, says she suffered an agonizing death because > the care she received at a struggling Brooklyn hospital (Wyckoff Heights > Medical Center) was _indifferent to negligent_.” I thought the expression, “indifferent to negligent” an idiom. I checked NGram. It doesn’t register this phrase, neither “indifferent and negligent,” or “indifference and negligence” which were obviously used in the following ways:   * Could a husband be _indifferent and negligent_ towards a wife during pregnancy...at a time when she has chosen to bear his offspring in her womb? Can he consider her a liability? －Redif com.   * President Ilves: volunteers stand like a protective wall against _indifference and negligence._ Press release from the Office of President of Republic of Estonia 7/12/2012  Is “indifferent to negligent” a simple repetition of synonyms for emphasizing the meaning? Then, how different is “indifferent _to_ negligent” from “indifferent _and_ negligent”?


title: What's the right way of expressing a desire to meet with someone in the future on the multiple basis?

text: What's the right way of expressing a desire to meet with someone in the future on the multiple basis (unspecified number of times, but definitely more than once)? >   1. **We should surely meet again and keep in contact.**   >  → This may mean that I want to meet only one more time and then just keep > in contact. >   2. **We should surely be meeting again and keep in contact**   >  → This will probably mean the same thing as 1. >   3. **We should surely meet again — and not once — and keep in contact.**   >  → This may mean that I want to meet perhaps only two or three times and > then just keep in contact. >   4. **We should surely meet again in the future on the regular basis and > keep in contact.**   >  → This may mean that I almost require a certain level of frequency of > future meetings, while I am a far cry from putting such a burden on the > person. > So, what should I say here?


title: What's a good term for games which are not software?

text: I'm writing an article on games developed by Open Source principles. The games are not software, as "Open Source" might suggest, but made from paper, wood or something else physical. My problem is that most readers who only look at the title would assume it's about software, not hardware. What would be a good term for these games? So far I have thought about "physical games" or "hardware games", but I'm sure there is something more catchy.


title: "Imitation jewelry" or "costume jewelry"

text: I've looked up the translation of the word _bisutería_ in Spanish and it translated to _imitation jewelry_ or _costume jewelry_. Which of the two is mostly used in British English?


title: Difference between "fee" and "fees"

text: Which is correct: _What is the course fee?_ or _What is the course fees?_ Also, are the two words _fee_ and _fees_ interchangeable?


title: What are the names of the two sides of a coin?

text: I know one side is called 'flower'. But I don't know the other side's name. And any other common ways of calling them. Are 'head' and 'tail' right?


title: What are "good men that do nothing" called?

text: "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." -Edmund Burke Is there an idiom, phrase or preferably a single word that we can call people that **could have helped but didn't**? _Bystanders_ don't necessarily have help to give. _Cowards_ aren't particularly helpful either. * * * Addendum: For example, once EMS has arrived on scene, bystanders are encouraged not to try to help, unless they're a nurse and therefore have the necessary skills to, and sometimes even then so. If in The Service, I would not want a coward (a liability) next me holding the line. Not to take anything away from these great answers, or to insist on a non-militaristic point of view, I would like to veer into the commercial or civilian realm in which I find this quote most often alluded to, E.G., "If we all gave 5 cents we could cure cancer tomorrow." Pretend most of us did give 5 cents and we did cure cancer, but you didn't give. You are now a(n) **____**?... yes, I know what we _call_ them, but what is their proper designation?


title: Plural forms in noun + noun couple

text: At first, let's take 2 example expressions: "Books list" and "Book list". As far as I know, the first one is incorrect and I should use the second one - "Book list". And it means "List of books". But now let's replace "Book(s)" with something more complex. Let's assume that we want to have not "just" list of books, but list of books that belong to particular user. So, we are about to replace "Books" with "User's books". So now we should have "User's book list", which is ambiguous - is it list of user's book, or list of user's books? So we can change it to "User's books list", which is incorrect according to my previous paragraph... Where am I wrong?


title: What is a good synonym for "settled"?

text: The context I am thinking about is a sport competition or league, along the lines of   * GM's Tennis Competition (settled)   * Premier league will be (settled) this weekend   * The football game was (settled) last week "Settled" sounds a bit like some legal dispute that is over. Any ideas of good synonyms?


title: What is the name of the type of sentence that's formatted like "performing an action"?

text: So I am sure the title of this question makes little sense, but I don't know how to ask it (feel free to edit it to make it more direct, but not so direct that it answers the question). There is a certain sentence format that's used mainly in movie titles that's not really a complete sentence, but more along the lines of a clause of sorts. You've seen movie titles like: > Being John Malkovich   >  Forgetting Sarah Marshall   >  Driving Miss Daisy   >  Gleaming the Cube (good one, right?) It seems to me that this fragment of a sentence has a name or is at least identifiable in some way. Edit: The only tag I can think of is `grammar`, so feel free to add additional tags.


title: Take my photo, take a photo of me

text: Please tell me, is there any difference when saying take his photo and take a photo of him? To me, the first one sounds awkward.


title: Need help rewording sentence for cover letter

text: I'm looking for a word to replace "pouring" because it doesn't sound professional. Any suggestions? > Phones were constantly ringing, e-mails were **pouring** in, and since we > were located above a branch people would often come to us in person whenever > they had a problem.


title: "... that ... with ..." and "... which ... with ..."

text: >   1. The fact that I communicated to Mona is irrelevant. >   2. The fact that I communicated with Mona is irrelevant. > The only difference might seem to be the different prepositions, _with_ and _to_. Now, try replacing the _that_ in each sentence by _which_. Do you agree that you can do it with 1) but not 2)? If so, what exactly is wrong with "The fact which I communicated with Mona is irrelevant"?


title: What is the difference between "curd" and "yogurt"?

text: Most people use the words _curd_ and _yogurt_ interchangeably. Both are made by fermenting milk. Is there a difference between the two, or are they the same?


title: What's the difference between "family affair" and "family stuff"

text: I'll take one day leave for my family affair. I'll take one day leave for my family stuff. What's the different exactly? Or what situation is the best to use "affair", and "stuff" ?


title: Single term for "upload or download"?

text: I am creating a base interface for both the class `Upload` and `Download` but I can't figure out what to call it. Is there an English word that can mean _upload_ and at the same time _download_?


title: "Nervous" vs. "anxious"

text: Are these words interchangeable? When would you use one over the other? For example, is it correct to say you "feel nervous" or "feel anxious"? Is it correct to say you are an "anxious person" or a "nervous person"?


title: What does this mean “In love’s service only wounded soldiers can serve.”?

text: I just read this quote from nytimes's opinion section. "In love’s service only wounded soldiers can serve." What does this quote mean? I can faintly feel what it means, but I want to understand it more clearly. Can somebody help me? Thanks.


title: "Bald Faced Lie" vs. "Bold Faced Lie"

text: Which of these is correct? What is the origin of this expression? I've searched here on the exchange and haven't found an answer.


title: Using "disable" as a noun

text: It seems the noun derived from the verb "disable" is **disablement**. " **Disablement time**" or "disablement duration" sounds a little awkward to me though. " **Disable time**" sounds better, and also gives much more Google hits. But would you say that is correct or acceptable? How about "disabling time"? (Or is my question misworded; are you even supposed to use a noun in such context?) Background: I'm trying to decide the name of a setting that specifies the time for which a certain software functionality is disabled.


title: Word to use instead of "irony"

text: I have read exchanges such as the following being described as Irony: > A: "I'm going they're now" B: "It's "there". Your such an idiot" However I'm a bit at a loss whether it could be described as an irony or not, since it's hardly the opposite of what is intended to happen. What word could be best used in this context instead? I was thinking _hypocritical_ , but that doesn't fit very well either (since there's no real intention of making the mistake).


title: Is "thanks" appropriate to be polite in this situation?

text: Ok, it's my first question and I'm not sure if this subject can be asked in here, but here it goes: On past January I was on my vacations in London taking some photos of London Bridge when I made a joke with some foreigner photographers (Germans I think) : I was holding a very common Sony camera, and I told a something like that: "let me teach you how to take photos with my professional camera". Everyone laughed and one of them offered me to take a panoramic photo for me using my memory card on his camera. I was very pleased, said "Thanks so much!" and left. My question is: In this situation, was "thanks" appropriate to politely demonstrate that I was very pleased with what they did?


title: ravel: opposite meanings?

text: From the definition found at Merriam-Webster and elsewhere, it seems that _to ravel_ has completely opposite meanings; i.e. it means to unravel, to disentangle as well as to entangle. What's going on here?


title: How to form a noun of a verb in the English language

text: My teacher teaches me that if one puts an - ing to the end of a verb you will get the gerund of the verb which has the function as a noun. Example: > mix-mixing,   >  understand-understanding. But there is also another form noun to the relative verb. Example: > mix-mixture. Both mixture and mixing have the noun meaning. I want to know does every verb have another noun besides gerund. What is the difference between them? Can they be used instead of each other?


title: Using Conditionals 2 and 3 together

text: I'm a native English speaker (American). I was trying to explain a sentence to a non-native speaking friend, but didn't do a very good job of it. The sentence is: > Sam got to the station just in time to catch the train to the airport. If he > _had missed_ his train, he _would have missed_ his flight. I explained that the words "had missed" could be changed to just "missed", but now I'm not sure. I've researched mixed conditionals in sentences and have found answers that support my use of the language and some that do not. Perhaps being American has made me use the language a bit "less formal" or just plain wrong. If there is anyone that can help me, I'd be most appreciative. Thanks a bunch.


title: What's the opposite of dramatic irony?

text: I know that dramatic irony is when the audience knows things the characters don't, but what do you call it when the characters in a story know information that the audience does not?


title: Hi! How is doing?

text: Is it possible to greet someone asking "How is doing?" When I was in US, many times I heard a phrase "Hi! How is doing?" or maybe it was a misunderstanding and the phrase was "How are you doing?"


title: "Muse on" vs. "muse about"

text: I came across the verb _muse_ , which roughly means to be absorbed in thought about any given thing. I wondered, when specifying what someone was musing about, would it be better to say: > I muse about what happened that day. Or: > I muse on what happened that day. Which is correct, or better?


title: Is there a correct grammatical way to state computer model number in plural form?

text: For example if I said - > "I shipped ten Dell 360s this morning". where _Dell 360_ is the model number and I don't want people to get confused by the " **s** ", how should I write this? Is it more correct to mention the word laptop? For example : > "I shipped ten Dell 360 laptops today". The reason I didn't do this was because I'm not sure if they are considered laptops or notebooks etc. Could an apostrophe be used?


title: Is there a word similar to "racism" when referring to an ethnic group rather than a race?

text: I called out someone's comments as racist when someone decided to correct me and say that the term was incorrect. According to this person, the word _racism_ only seems to apply when referring to another race (e.g. Sub-Saharan African, White European, East-Asian, South-Asian, Native American, etc.) What is the similar term then for hatred towards a particular _ethnic_ group? (E.g. Italian, Serbian, Sri Lankan, etc.)


title: Meaning of "this view [is] similar to that which informs the rendering [...], and addresses the same set of concerns that motivated the former"

text: From the Wikipedia entry on Swing (Java): > Conceptually, this view of the layout management is quite similar to that > which informs the rendering of HTML content in browsers, and addresses the > same set of concerns that motivated the former. There are a few points I can't understand:   1. What does "informs" mean here?   2. I don't understand "address the same set of concerns that motivated the former."


title: Should I use "is" or "are"?

text: I am supposed to make a translation for a session to be submitted, but I'm stumbled upon this. We say "content is fed from a centralised location", right? How about "hundreds of websites' content"? Is it still "is", or is it now "are"? Thank you in advanced :) K.


title: What type of grammar construction is this

text: * _She thinks herself able to best him in this argument._   * _She thinks that she is able to best him in this argument._   * _She thinks herself to be able to best him in this argument._ Are the first and the last sentence the same in meaning?


title: Why do Americans seem to use the word “delicious” less often than I do?

text: I am a foreigner and now I am in America. I always use the word _delicious_ whenever I like food. For example: > This meat is so delicious! But one of my friends, who is not a native speaker, once told me that Americans rarely use _delicious_. The more frequent expressions would be “This meat is good” or “This meat is yummy.” Is _delicious_ more of a British English word than an American one?


title: Single-word term for "business name"

text: I'm looking for a word for the **name of a business**. The word " _business_ " itself is not appropriate for me as it designates the entity and not the name itself. The word " _name_ " is too generic, just like " _title_ ".


title: How does the phrase "Is something the matter?" make sense?

text: > Is something the matter? I've read or heard this usage of _matter_ many times. For instance, in _The pleasure of finding things out_ , R.P. Feynman writes: > I could tell that something was the matter. This usage doesn't seem right to me. It's hard for me to pinpoint what exactly bothers me, but I think it has to do with the use of the definite article "the" when the existence of a problem hasn't even been confirmed/acknowledged yet. I know this usage of _matter_ is accepted by many, but how does it make logical/grammatical sense? * * * Instead of: > Is something the matter? I would much prefer > Is there a problem? Instead of > I could tell that something was the matter. I would prefer > I could tell that there was a problem. Note that my issue is with the choice of article, not with that of the noun.


title: What's the best way to write nested "and" clauses?

text: Say I have the following sentence: > I went to the store to buy eggs, regular, chocolate and soy milk, apples, > and bread. There are two _and_ clauses here, one that describes the kinds of milk I was buying, and one that describes the other groceries. One option would be: > I went to the store to buy eggs, regular milk, chocolate milk, soy milk, > apples, and bread. But that seems redundant and wordy. What's best? A big problem with the first one is that it's not immediately clear whether I mean chocolate or chocolate milk, since chocolate can be either a noun or an adjective in this case.


title: Origin of British term "to bits"

text: British people sometimes use "love to bits" and "thrilled/chuffed to bits" to indicate extremes. Despite searching high and low, I could not find the origin of the phrase "to bits", other than speculation on forums. Does anyone have a source for its origin or etymology?


title: "fail to do" or "failure in doing", which is better in this case?

text: >   * I went to live in the small village to seek a simple life after my > failure in finding a decent job in the metropolis. >   * I went to live in the small village to seek a simple life after I fail > to find a decent job in the metropolis. > Which sentence is better? Or neither is better or worse semantically speaking, and the difference is a matter of personal choice?


title: How to ask a question in a modest way?

text: > I am bold to ask you another question: is there a book written on > Churchill’s life? (self-made) I wrote this sentence in an email to my foreign friend. I doubt that the use of “bold” is awkward. It does not carry the connotation of my being humble. As a Chinese saying goes, excess is not better than deficiency. To say that asking this question is bold is excessive. I desperately want to know the appropriately modest way of asking this question.


title: Can I use "wrong" "right" in this way?

text: > I think your data is wrong.   >  Your answer is right. Are the usages of “wrong” incorrect? My teacher says to me that I should always use “right” and ‘wrong” when using on people, but when it is about something objective, I should only use “correct” and “incorrect”.


title: Is "in full length" the same as "fully" here?

text: > I have no time to unfold my own view on this in full length. (self-made) Is this “in full length” the same as “fully”? So it is correct to use it here?


title: Meaning of the quote by Helena Christensen

text: I was born in high heels and I’ve worn them ever since- Helena Christensen


title: What is the difference between "conserve" and "preserve"?

text: In particular, I want to ask if we have the term "conserved food". E.g. > I have ordered some of your favorite dishes, like chicken, pork, and > [conserved/preserved] fish. This is a question in our mid-term paper. Our teacher said it should be _preserved_. Below is the explanation from Longman Contemporary Dictionary: > _conserve_ > >   1. to protect something and prevent it from changing or being damaged = > _preserve_ > > We must conserve our woodlands for future generations.   >  efforts to conserve fish stocks > >   2. to use as little water, energy etc as possible so that it is not wasted > > systems designed to conserve energy > >


title: correct usage of 'which'

text: If I say this sentence, would it be meaningful? > Similarly, trees can be described by neighborhood relations _which_ we can > see how trees exist with other objects in reality Actually what I want to say is: trees can be described using neighborhood relations that they make with other objects in their vicinity.


title: Are these two sentence make the speaker self-defeating?

text: As he sets out, China is on the brink of revolution. But I do not think so. (self-made) It seems to me to be wrong. Because the first sentence implies that the “I” have accepted “his” idea as true, hence the “I” is self-defeating when he says that he do not think so.


title: Reaction to Scratching Noise

text: I need a word or phrase to describe the sensation people experience when they hear nails scratching on a chalkboard. I don't want to describe the _noise_ , just the _sensation._


title: "Show" and "Shower"

text: I'm a programmer and found myself naming an entity, which shows things, as `Shower`. Of course, the first time I read it, I remembered the freshness of the drops of water and nothing related to what it was supposed to mean. Then I google-translated it into Russian and found no nouns stemming from the verb `Show`. So my questions are:   1. Is it correct to use `Shower` in the sense I meant?   2. If not, then what is the closest noun to the definition of a thing that shows something? I came up with `Presenter`, but it doesn't feel very close.   3. How did this word, which is evidently a derivative from a verb, evolve to mean an absolutely unrelated thing?


title: Why does the word dilemma have two pronunciations?

text: The word dilemma has caused a dilemma. According to Oxford Dictionary (http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/dilemma) Pronunciation is : /dɪˈlɛmə, dʌɪ-/ Which is di-lema or dye-lema. The website "howjsay" (http://www.howjsay.com/index.php?word=dilemma) also gives two pronunciations. I just don't understand why it has two pronunciations. Also, is one UK and the other US? I am unclear as to which pronunciation I should stick to. Does it vary according to its position in the sentence? Or should I randomly shoot the one the pops up in mind? Any assistance would be highly appreciated.


title: Why do we say and write "read" instead of "readed" for the past?

text: Why do we write **read** unchanged for present and past, while _study_ changes; we have _studied_. The present form of _read_ is _read_ , pronounced as " _reed_ ". The past form of _read_ is also _read_ but it is pronounced as " _red_ ". Is it a regular verb or an irregular verb?


title: Is "drownded" a word?

text: Is there such a word as " _drownded_ "? I would say " _drowned_ " but I am hearing " _drownded_ " so often I am beginning to wonder. For example: > He went into the deepest waters and drownded.


title: Why do we refer to car manufacturer as 'Make'?

text: When I first encountered it years ago, I was pretty sure it must be a mistake. Although I got used to it, it still _does not feel right_. What is the reason for that? Is it something specific to the automobile industry? Are there (maybe) historical reasons for it?


title: Formally saying that you are laughing without euphemisms or colloquialism without referring to yourself

text: I want to know how one can manage to assert that they are laughing without using euphemisms or colloquialism in first person, for example in a letter, without referring to yourself, that is saying "me" or "I". These examples seem impossible: >   * The chicken wanted to cross the road because it wanted to reach the > other side. Haha! >   * The chicken wanted to cross the road because it wanted to reach the > other side. LOLZ. >   * The chicken wanted to cross the road because it wanted to reach the > other side. :-P >   * The chicken wanted to cross the road because it wanted to reach the > other side. (laughing with mouth foolishly open and smells bad breath) > Side-note: Please pardon that poor humor I have taken as an example.


title: What would be the scenarios were I should use "no joke this time" or "no jokes this time"?

text: I would like to know if someone could provide me some examples of the usage of those phrases?


title: Does the verb “trounce” have dual meanings of active and passive voice in its gerund form,”trouncing”?

text: There was the following sentence in Time magazine (June 28) article titled, “Reform in Japan – The third arrow” analyzing Japan’s Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe’s so called, Abenomix policies to revitalize Japanese economy. > Nowadays, Mr. Abe faces little serious opposition outside the LDP: the > opposition Democratic Party of Japan is nowhere near reviving itself after > its **trouncing** at the polls in December 2010. I was under impression that the verb “trounce” is a transitive verb, therefore “trouncing” means “beating sb,” e.g. rival or enemy. CED defines “trounce” as transitive verb: to defeat a competitor by a large amount. OED defines “trounce” as transitive verb: (accompanied with object)   1. Defeat heavily in a contest.   2. Rebuke or punish severely. OALED defines "trounce" as verb: to defeat sb completely. Merriam- Webster defines “trounce” as transitive verb: to defeat (someone or something) easily and thoroughly In the above quote, “its trouncing” appears to refer to DPJ’s crushing defeat in December 2010 Upper House election. Can trounce which all dictionaries at hand define as a transitive verb be used in the passive sense of “being completely defeated,” or an intransitive verb like 'lose' in a noun or gerund form?


title: What is the origin of the counting prefixes: uni-, bi-/di-, tri-, quad-, etc.?

text: Many English words use the prefixes uni-, bi-/di-, tri-, quad- and so on to mean one, two, three, and four. For example: > A unicycle has one wheel, a bicycle two, and a tricycle three. I presume these prefixes are either of Greek or Latin origin, but from what little I know of these two languages, neither uses these prefixes as their numbers. That is, in Greek you wouldn't start counting by saying, _Uni, di, tri, quad, ..._


title: Each apple and each orange [has/have]?

text: For a phrase such as the following: > each apple and each orange Is it correct to use "has" or "have" when describing properties of both apples and oranges?


title: How to refer to ladies who promote a particular beer brand?

text: I’m writing a novel where one of the characters is a _酒促小姐_ (literally translated as “wine promoter miss”). They come to your table (usually in bars and restaurants) and promote particular beer brands. I’m not sure if this is something that you only find in the country I’m currently living in (Taiwan). I would like to know what’s the best way of referring to them (since it is for a novel, I just want something short). I know they are not waitresses because, well, they only promote beer. They pour beer in your glass, and talk to you sometimes, but I don’t think they are hostesses either. Any suggestions? ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/BOeGR.jpg)


title: Please use other door?

text: "Please use other door" signs are common. But would you ever say this? Or would you say "please use _the_ other door"?


title: Is there any synonym for "Ordeal" which has a positive connotation?

text: The word "Ordeal" as defined by google is "a very unpleasant and prolonged experience". I need a word that does not have this negative connotation attached to it.


title: Which nouns should include an article after "go to [noun]" in AmE and BE?

text: When referring to a non-specific instance of a place ( _hospital_ , _theatre_ ), there seems to be a strange inconsistency as to when you use _the_. Is there any sort of pattern, or is there any reference site that lists these out somewhat comprehensively? American English:   * _go to the hospital_   * _go to school_   * _go to church_   * _go to the mall_   * _go to the theater_   * _go to the police station_   * _go to the train station_   * _go to the airport_   * _go to the supermarket_   * _go to the post office_   * _go to the market_ (is _go to market_ okay in American English?)   * _go to town_   * _go to college_   * _go to jail_   * _go to the bank_ British English:   * _go to hospital_   * _go to school_   * _go to church_   * _go to the theatre_   * _go to the cinema_   * ??? This question is inspired by the conversation here: Is there a reason the British omit the article when they "go to hospital"?


title: pronunciation rule for grapheme "a" in words like "nefarious," "variation" and "temporary"

text: English pronunciation / spelling guides appear to state that the letter/grapheme "a" is pronounced either as the "short a" with IPA symbol /æ/, as in "mat" or the "long a" with IPA symbol /eɪ/, as in "baby." However, apparently there exist multiple words where all references I checked provide the spelling of "short e" with IPA symbol /e/ or /ɛ/ which I take as a variation in the IPA transcription not in the underlying pronunciation. What I'm unable to come up with or find a reference for is when will the grapheme "a" be pronounced as /e/ (or /ɛ/) instead of the short "a" /æ/ that the typical rules would predict? Examples of words that have "a" transcribed as /e/: \- temporary \- nefarious \- compare \- share \- dare \- subsidiary (many more have two alternative pronunciations listed, one with /æ/ and one with /e/) I recognize that all these examples include the sequence "ar" but I do not know if this is only because I was searching for this sequence in a corpus (based on the original example of "nefarious") or because there exist no other cases. Actually, I find that my most trusted reference "The ABC's and all their tricks" by Margaret M. Bishop is including some of these words in the group of "-arr-" as in "carry", which my dictionaries transcribe as /ˈkæri/. This mixes two different pronunciations under the same rule. Is there no "rule" to help predicting the /æ/ or /e/ realization?


title: Proper Usage of gerund form of the verb

text: So, I want to title a talk. Which of these is the right usage and why? "Web Development Paradigms and Djangoic approach to solve them" OR "Web Development Paradigms and Djangoic approach to solving them"


title: Phrase for action "testing and correcting"

text: What is a phrase to indicate the action _testing and correcting_? For example, imagine a situation in which you don't know what you should do exactly and step by step you change things and see the results.


title: Is using "both of you" along with "each other" redundant?

text: > OK, things are going well, both of you are enjoying each other's company, > and both of you are attracted to each other. Is the usage of "both of you" correct? Sounds a bit off to me. BTW what part of the language "both of you"?


title: Another way to say "fulfill your dream"

text: What's another phrase or metaphor that means "to fulfill your dream" or "make your dreams a reality?"


title: Is there a term for it when you use an obviously false statement to highlight the falsity or absurdity of another?

text: For example, person A states something. Person B says "And pigs fly" to imply person A was wrong. If there's no term for it, what could you call that that sounds smart?


title: Voltage vs. Voltages

text: Is 'voltages' the plural for voltage? When requesting for someone to check voltage more than once, would you state that you're documenting 'voltages'?


title: What is the word that describes a person trying to sell stuff persistently?

text: I am trying to remember the word to describe a person trying to sell stuff persistently. I can't seem to figure it out. - It can be a verb, noun or adjective. Anything around "Selling stuff persistently".


title: What is the name of part of onion we peel?

text: We call the state you can’t stop tearing “玉ねぎの皮をむくように―tamanegino kawa wo muku youni – like peeling the ‘skins’ of onion" in Japanese. In actuality, we don’t shed (or drop) tears when we peel off the _outer_ skin of onion. We shed (or drop) tears when we peel the _inner layers_ of onion. This might look a very primitive question to Anglophones. But none of Japanese English dictionary at hand carries English counterpart to ‘the inner layer’ of onion. It can't be flesh, pulp, capsule, or leaf. No English text books available in this country makes a specific mention to the inner part (layers) of onion. What is the exact word for the thing (part) of onion we peel off in colloquial English, and if possible with botanical nomencclature?


title: What is a good substitute word for the X-cum-Y construction?

text: I wanted to use the word "cum" to avoid repeating "and" in the following phrase: > example.com is a teacher-cum-student search and listing site... But on second thoughts, the word "cum" is also a vulgar slang, which certainly would raise a few eyebrows when readers come across it. Is there a good substitute for this word?


title: When addressing my 'Sensei', should I omit the possessive "my"?

text: In English, when (if ever) is it appropriate to use the possessive with a formal title when addressing someone? Kind of like I would say, "As you wish, my greatest of loves." For example, > Thank you, my Sensei. Or should it simply be, > Thank you, Sensei. Or, would the 'my' be used always and only along with the subject of learning? As in > Thank you, my Sensei of Swordsmanship. but not > Thank you, Sensei of Sauciness. I believe there is a component of cultural understanding and lingual comprehension of Japan and the Japanese language that _may_ be necessary to answer fully with regards to "Sensei" in particular, but in general, how are possessives and titles combined?


title: Including a comma to exclude all other people

text: > I am Investigator Ace Sleuth, from the Fuji Apple Sheriff's Department. > > I am Investigator Ace Sleuth from the Fuji Apple Sheriff's Department. The comma in the first sentence implies that he's not Investigator Ace Sleuth from the Granny Smith Police Department, unlikely, I know, nor Ace Sleuth from any other agency. The second sentence implies there are Ace Sleuths all over the place. As a court reporter, I often have this sentence pattern. Which is better?


title: Is there a term for polishing something too early?

text: I imagine there must be a term/idiom/phrase for polishing something too early... For example:   * Painting the walls of a room before completing other work which may accidentally damage them.   * Adding detail to a section of a drawing that you may likely need to radically change later (and lose the detail work)   * Optimizing a software function which might be deemed unnecessary before it's even used Though I can't seem to think of what this is called (no luck with searching either). Originally I posted this in the 'workplace' stack exchange but was recommended to try here.


title: Should I continue to extract valuable English grammar rules from an English grammar book published in 1820?

text: Forever, since I can recall, I've used a book for reference to English grammar, written by Peter Bullions, whenever I've felt ambiguous about whatever it be―from punctuation to syntax. And hitherto, I have been very assured by the laid-down rules provided by this seemingly extraordinary and concise book; although judging by the rules proposed by users on this website, it certainly seems as if the rules whereby I have been composing "grammatical" English texts all this time, and sharing my knowledge with others here, are no longer in use! So, I surely seem to be in a tricky predicament, where I find myself uneasy to impart conceivably-outdated information! Do you suggest I abandon all which I've been taught by this book, or I alter the rules I reckon to be then-right but now-wrong, through meticulous comparisons for confirmation of validity?! Please note that in this book, the 2nd person singular pronoun is thou, and the 2nd person plural ye. However, I have easily learned to ignore these evidently-outdated pronouns, and instead simply use "you" for both cases (which is ridiculously unclear, due to the confusion of whether a crowd or an individual is the audience). Thanks for your recommendations.


title: Question about subject-verb agreement

text: Is this a run-on? > By 1990, it was even easier to make bottles and paper products quickly; as a > result, competition among companies grew and stores featured products with > increasingly interesting and colorful labels. Independent clauses: (1) competition among companies grew (2) stores featured products with increasingly interesting and colorful labels So, is the sentence correct, or should there be a comma before the 'and'? Also, > Pancakes, perhaps the standard American breakfast, **are** losing a rapidly > increasing number of calorie-conscious adherents. Shouldn't the 'are' be 'is' because 'Pancakes' is singular because one eats pancakes and not a pancake? I don't know. These questions were from the Princeton Review 11 Practice Tests for the SATs book. Thanks so much.


title: Expression for some special SQL queries

text: While I'm not native English speaker, I often need to express myself in English. For a week, I have been searching for a term which represents a kind of SQL query:               SELECT something FROM somewhere WHERE somethingElse IN (SELECT foo FROM bar)      It's a query within another (those in brackets). What term should I use to describe it?   * A nested query   * An embedded query   * An included query   * A sub-query   * Another term? Thanks,


title: Opposite of the suffix -less

text: I'm looking for a suffix that has the opposite meaning of the suffix _-less_ as in _stainless_. That is, a suffix that means “not free of ...”. In German, for example, there is the adverb “ _behaftet_ ” and one can say “ _fehlerbehaftet_ ” (meaning “not free of defects”). In particular, I'm looking for opposites of _unitless_ and _dimensionless_ (w.r.t. physical quantities).


title: What is the correct way to form a demonym from an acronym?

text: For instance, what is the equivalent of _New Yorker_ when using the acronym ( _NY_ or _N.Y._ instead of _New York_ )?


title: What does refering to someone as a "garden shed" mean?

text: http://youtu.be/a9GgU3hzGGw?t=1m54s   In the following video, a talk host watches an acting performance, and refers to the actor as a "garden shed". I've never heard that expression before. I am also not British. I imagine it means someone who can do anything, though I can't find a source for it anywhere on the Internet. Am I correct in this assumption? Is this a commonly used expression in the United Kingdom?


title: What's that word that means "typical of / a small version of / illustrative of"?

text: I want so say that the battle between video rental store franchise companies like Hollywood Entertainment Corporation and internet video streaming companies like Netflix is _something_ of the shift that the .com era brought to the prevailing business management philosophy and practice in America. "Microcosmic" isn't quite it.. what's that word?


title: Is "the way how" wrong?

text: I was correcting an ESL learner who said "It is the way how we write." I realize "It is the way we write" is correct and "It is how we write" is correct, but "It is the way how we write" _looks_ wrong to me, despite that when I say it out loud it sounds perfectly normal if I'm speaking fast. What I mean is, if an ESL learner said it, it would sound wrong. But when I say it as a native speaker, it seems okay though not felicitous. So I can't tell. Is it grammatically wrong?


title: I need an expression or a different group of words for "long list of reasons I am unworthy/ a failure

text: I'm looking for another way to say: I couldn't help but ponder the long list of reasons I am unworthy/ a failure.


title: Is it better to start a sentence with “If ” or “Where”?

text: Which of the following sentences is better to use? >   1. Where it is concluded that the report is incorrect it will be returned. >   2. If the report is incorrect then it will be returned. > Or do they mean the same thing? These sentences will be used for a description of activities.


title: Is this that-clause a complement?

text: > In that discomfort, breathing quicklime and tar, no one could see very well > how from the bowels of the earth there was rising not only the largest house > in the town, but the most hospitable and cool house **that** had ever > existed in the region of the swamp.   > (One Hundred Years of Solitude, tr. by Gregory Rabassa) The that-clause is a complement providing the criterion for ‘the largest’ and ‘the most’, isn’t it? (It seems like the ‘indirect complement’ that is said in ‘The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language.')


title: Does “walk back” have a meaning of ‘deny’ or 'keep distance from sb. / stg.' as an idiom?

text: I came across the phrase “a State Department spokesperson had walked back his (John Kerry’s) comments in the Time magazine’s (August 2) article titled, “Oops: John Kerry gaffes, Washington backpedals.” http://swampland.time.com/2013/08/02/oops-john-kerry-gaffes-washington- backpedals/#ixzz2aqtJvoJJ The article deals with Secretary of States’ remarks about the drone campaign in Pakistan on a press interview: > “I think the program will end as we have eliminated most of the threat and > continue to eliminate it,” Kerry said. “I think the President has a very > real timeline, and we hope it’s going to be very, very soon.” Was Kerry > announcing a dramatic policy shift? Nope. Within hours a State Department > **spokesperson had walked back his comments** , saying: “This was in no way > indicating a change in policy…. I have no exact timeline to provide.” As I wasn’t quite familiar with the case of using ‘walk back’ in such a context as denying or distancing one’s comments, I checked Cambridge, Oxford, and Merriam-Webster online English Dictionary. None of them shows “walk back” as an idiom, though they show “call back, look back, talk back, walkout, walk through, walk up,” and so on. I’m puzzled about the expression, “walk back his comment,” because I understand ‘walk’ is an intransitive verb that doesn’t take objective noun (here, his comments). Is this grammatically right expression? Though the word, 'backpedal' in the headline gave me a hint, what does ‘a spokesperson had walked back his comments’ exactly mean? Is “walk back” an idiom in this case, and used very often in such a way as “walk back” one’s comment / idea / policy / promise / stand / connection, or person?


title: What are some examples of “zombie nouns and verbs”?

text: This is one of the _New York Times_ writing rules.I don't know exactly what “zombie nouns” and verbs mean here. Can someone give some examples? > Rule 6: Write With Non-Zombie Nouns and Verbs > > Delve into Strunk and White’s fourth style reminder “Write with nouns and > verbs” by reading about what Helen Sword calls “Zombie Nouns”: > > Nouns formed from other parts of speech are called nominalizations. > Academics love them; so do lawyers, bureaucrats and business writers. I call > them “zombie nouns” because they cannibalize active verbs, suck the > lifeblood from adjectives and substitute abstract entities for human beings. > > Fight those nasty zombie nouns with vivacious verbs.


title: Is there a name for the situation where someone disproves an unimportant subset of a story, and claims that this disproves the whole story?

text: It is quite common in comments about major news stories, especially if it's about a crime. Someone disproves a very tiny detail, possibly a mistake of the news-writer, and claims that thus the whole story is disproven. Usually it follows with a rant about how we are all misled by the powers above, and they falsely accused this innocent person, etc., but in reality the event really did happen, and the false detail was quite unimportant.


title: "Looking to + infinitive" vs "Looking to + gerund"

text: Which is the correct expression, _looking to build_ or _looking to building_? > Whether you are looking to build. . . . or > Whether you are looking to build **ing**. . . .


title: Register vs Apply

text: I'm trying to wrap my mind around the semantic differences between the words "Register" and "Apply". For example, are there any real differences between these two sentences:   * "I will _apply_ for this event."   * "I will _register_ for this event." **What is the best way to think about the meanings between the two words?**


title: Word for desire to be recognized as super productive by others?

text: Is there a word or phrase for the desire to be recognized as very productive on everything one is responsible for? Perhaps sometimes it could be a motivation for an overachiever. Or other times it could be a cause of depressive symptoms for not being able to do so.


title: What do you call a person who starts learning something before you do?

text: For example, someone who started learning and playing badminton five years before you do, under the same instructor. Another example, like a senior person in the same school. Thanks.


title: Period in or outside the Parenthesis?

text: I have seen a few tips regarding the placement of periods before or after the closing parenthesis, but none of them solves my issue. A general rule of thumb-if the words inside the parentheses form a complete sentence, then period before closing it, otherwise period after closing it. However I am writing a sentence in the introduction part of a paper and the following options seem to be there   * <,> denote the generalised inner product (see Section IV).   * <,> denote the generalised inner product (see Section IV.)   * <,> denote the generalised inner product (see Section IV.). Which one among them is correct? A double period seems superfluous while placing it either inside or outside seem not to do justice to the whole sentence. Are there different conventions for British, American or Australian systems?


title: What does "breathing of the lighter elements" mean?

text: I'm reading _Yelizaveta Bam_ of Daniil Kharms (tr. Neil Cornwell) and stumbled upon the following dialogue: > **Ivan I.:** But who then lights the lamp?   >  **Pyotr N.** : No one, it burns by itself.   >  **Ivan I.** :But that surely cannot be!   >  **Pyotr N.** : Empty, stupid words!   >  There is an infinite movement,   >  the breathing of the lighter elements,   >  planetary motion, the earth's rotation,   >  the crazed alternation of day and night,   >  the combination of remote nature,   >  the anger and strength of remote nature,   >  anger and strength of untamed beasts   >  and the laws of light and wave. (I emulated the formatting used in the book) What does "the breathing of the lighter elements" mean here (or in general)? Since it is supposed to be an "infinite movement" I cannot relate it to the breathing of a living thing.


title: Word meaning the outcome is different to that intended

text: A friend has said that there is a word meaning the outcome is something very different from that originally envisaged. For example: > The Australian government introduced a "First time home owner" bonus. Where > if you were buying your first house you would get a lump sum cash. Of course > everyone selling a house in that price backet put the price up by the same > amount as the lump sum and first time buyers didn't benefit at all. Does anyone know if there is a word meaning this and what it is?


title: Comma after introductory discourse marker

text: When beginning a sentence with "well", do you put a comma after it? >   * Well, you know I was wrong. >   * Well you know I was wrong. >


title: Nationality modifier vs. Language modifier

text: "Chinese writer Mo Yan wins Nobel literature prize" (USA Today)   "Chinese author Mo Yan wins Nobel Prize for Literature" (BBC) Q. Are we to understand   1. that Mo Yan wrote in Chinese,   2. that he was a Chinese national,   3. necessarily both, or   4. possibly both?  Q. How would we rephrase to avoid ambiguity, if so required?


title: I'm on doing something

text: This is something I've heard in some TV show. I don't remember which one. I just wrote it down when I heard it. Here it is. > **-I'm on protecting the public.   >  -Are you still on saving your girlfriend?** What I'm especially interested is the meaning of **on** in these sentences. What does it mean or imply?


title: Avoiding Adverbs

text: I have been told to avoid adverbs at all costs. What is another way of rewriting:               This feature is not easily extensible.


title: Term for "still deciding on/looking for a religion"

text: Someone said that it was "agnostic," but as an agnostic I know that's not it. But I was wondering if there was a word for someone who hasn't yet found a religion. Thanks!


title: What is the name of a "role" in a family tree?

text: I have two questions concerning family trees:   1. What is the name of the initial person in a family tree? For example, if you want to know the family tree of a certain person, you have that person in the center and then draw lines from that person referring to all of that person's relatives, ancenstors, descendants, partner and siblings. Is it called individual?   2. What is the name of the role a certain person has in a family tree? For example a sister, mother, father, aunt, etc?


title: Is it grammatically incorrect to say that someone desires ambiguous brevity?

text: Brevity is a noun, is it not? So, ambiguous, being an adjective, should be able to modify it, correct? That was the first thought I had regarding the subject, but for some reason it just doesn't sound quite right. In the past, that's normally been a good indicator to me that something in my writing isn't quite right. Is there actually something wrong or am I just slightly paranoid?


title: Schedule in the next week

text: Which one is correct? > I'd like to schedule a meeting with you [in/for/no preposition] the next > week.


title: A question about the usage of Past Perfect Tense

text: I read a paragraph in a book: > Three months passed and then one morning, he found his wallet outside his > front gate. It had been wrapped up in newspaper and contained half the money > he had lost. My question is whether 'had been wrapped up' in the sentence can be replaced with 'was wrapped up'. Please explain in detail; thanks!   According to my personal view, Past Perfect Tense focuses more on an action which had been conducted by _someone_ prior to the moment the wallet was found, so it gives the impression that _someone_ had done it intentionally. On the other hand, if we replaced it with Simple Past Tense, the meaning would be totally different. It would focus more on the state of the wallet when it was found, and that is, there was newspaper around the wallet when it was discovered. Am I right?


title: Use of "lacerate"

text: I read this newspaper article which quotes someone saying: > I must do the penance that lacerates me. What does this mean? 'Lacerate' means to tear, so I don't see the connection. Did the speaker mean 'liberate'?


title: Shouldn't be, should it?

text: Hello I was concerned about this. Is this a correct proper formal English? There shouldn't be any issue, should it?


title: "The first step in making" vs. "the first step on making" vs. "the first step at making"

text: I have this sentence: > I strongly believe that the first step **in** making the most efficient > solution for any problem is analyzing it well. Would it be better to use either of the following? >   * I strongly believe that the first step **on** making the most efficient > solution for any problem is analyzing it well. >   * I strongly believe that the first step **at** making the most efficient > solution for any problem is analyzing it well. > The context is as follows: > First of all, I concentrate on understanding the big picture of any problem. > I always try to recognize all the factors that have caused the problem. > Then, I start planning the solution at a very high level in order to create > long-term benefits. I strongly believe that the first step in making the > most efficient solution to any problem is analyzing it well. In my opinion, > "What to do" is much more important than "How to do".


title: Desk name plate for a PhD holder

text: I have read the full article in wikipedia and this question, but I am still unclear about this, as I am not a native speaker. A quick Google search did not help either. My brother recently received a PhD diploma in Chemistry. I would like to give him a desk name plate as a gift with a small insignia and his name and title. Should it be: > Alexander Doe, PhD or > Doe Alexander, PhD or something else? Is it appropriate to use Alex instead of Alexander? In all likelihood, he is going to work in the U.K.


title: Term for a polygamist's wife

text: Is there a term for a wife of a polygamist if she has _only_ one spouse?


title: How did 'arching' come into use as a verb meaning 'to thwart'?

text: I have seen the word 'arch' used as a verb in the context of a villain causing trouble for a hero, or a hero thwarting a villain. It is also used when a villain is actively trying to become a hero's primary nemesis. I've only seen it in comedic or informal settings, or when talking about a hero/villain relationship. It probably sprang from 'arch-enemy', but I'm trying to find where and when this phrasing was first used. Can this be sourced to a particular work? How long has this usage been around?


title: In what book was "the oldest joke in the book"?

text: I'd like to understand the derivation of the phrase "oldest X in the book." Was this referring to a particular book, or was it an idiom that developed without a particular object in mind? If it is just an idiom, how old is the idiom, and how did it develop?


title: Word for "not consciously aware of"

text: What's the word to convey the meaning "not consciously aware of"?


title: What is the origin of "Indian Summer" and is it offensive?

text: I am discussing San Francisco's "Indian Summer" and happen to be surrounded by people from India (the country). As I was speaking I got terribly uncomfortable thinking I was offending someone, (there also is a person of Cherokee heritage behind me). Is there any chance that me calling the weather an "Indian Summer" would offend anyone?


title: Closest (plural) descendants

text: I am working on a programming interface that has functions to give you the closest descendants (in a tree). But there are two categories of function: one gives you exactly one result and the other multiple results. As a non-native speaker I was hoping for the existence of the word _closests_ , so I would not spend so many characters in the function name. What can I use instead?


title: Is it ok to use the word "killer" as an adjective in a semi-formal text?

text: Is it ok to use the word "killer" (as an adjective) in a semi-formal or even formal text like an ebook? For example, "this is the killer part," which essentially means that it is the most significant part. If it isn't ok, can it be used within double-quotes to signify the usage of an informal term? Thank you!


title: is "Younger Generation" plural or singular

text: Is this sentence correct? I recently read it in an article: "How does younger generation spend their money." I want to know whether the usage of "their" in the above is correct


title: Meaning of "What gave it away"

text: I came across a phrase in Seinfeld, it wrotes: > (Claire passes the table; George stops her and writes something on his > notepad.) > > GEORGE: Claire, Claire, you’re a woman, right? > > CLAIRE: What gave it away, George? What does "What gave it away" means?


title: Best Word for "Loyalty to an Alma Mater"

text: What word or phrase best describes a sense of loyalty to and/or support of an educational institution from which one graduated? **Used in a sentence:** > Alice received her PhD from Foo State University (FSU). She actively > promotes her alma mater, attends alumni events, and makes large > contributions. She has a strong sense of **__**.


title: Is there any reason for saying "he is good-looking", instead of "he is well-looking"?

text: A person who has............is said to be.............. >   * "good manners".........."well-mannered" >   * "good behaviour"........"well-behaved" >   * "good intentions"........"well-intentioned" >   * "a good reputation"....."well-thought-of" >   * "a good upbringing"...."well-bred" >   * "a good education"......"well-educated" >   * "a good proportion"....."well-proportioned" >   * "a good taste"..............."well-tasted" > But someone who has "good looks" is said to be "good-looking". Would it be wrong to say "well-looking"?


title: Writing the most important part of a sentence (at the end, between parentheses)

text: I've seen this writing style several times, where the most important part of a sentence - or a twist - is put at the end between parentheses. This is typically used in titles and gives the sentence an ironic or cynical tone. Examples: > The new ways to lose weight (that don't work) > > The car of your dreams exists (but you'll never have it) > > A simple recipe for happiness (that nobody follows) Does this writing style have a name? Which prominent author used it first, if any?


What is a word called that consists of a repetition of one word? I came across the word polypoly in one of the other question asked on the site, and it got me thinking whether there are other English words that are made up of a word or part of a word repeated in the same way that polypoly is made up of poly + poly. Can you please provide examples also?


title: What does regression mean here?

text: Quoted from here: > green gfx bugs while playing avi file encoded with ultimotion codec > > most likely libavfilter-caused regression Can someone here explain in more detail?


title: What does it mean to speak with "mock deference"?

text: I can find many instances of this expression, especially in descriptions of characters' lines in written dialog, but I can't find any mention to the expression itself. I understand that deference means polite submission and respect, so I take mock deference to mean that it's mocking someone by speaking with deference; like an employer calling an employee by boss. Not being a native English speaker, I'm looking for a grounded meaning of this expression so I can be confident that I'm using it right.


title: "Oh, dear!" vs. "Oh dear!"

text: Which is correct, "Oh, dear!" or "Oh dear!"? My understanding is that the word _oh_ is an interjection, and should thus be followed by a comma. However, is the second usage the correct one because the two words form a phrase and the word dear is not a vocative here?


title: Would you possibly elaborate your explanations?

text: Mary doesn’t play the piano well and nor does Alex. Mary doesn’t play the piano well. Nor does Alex. Are they the same? and which one do you use? ......................................... Now, considering the mentions above, would you please tell me whether these are right or not? Corpus delicti – other Latin legal term using corpus, here meaning the fact of a crime having been committed, not the body of the person being detained nor (as sometimes inaccurately used) to the body of the victim. Corpus delicti – other Latin legal term using corpus, here meaning the fact of a crime having been committed, not the body of the person being detained and nor (as sometimes inaccurately used) to the body of the victim. Corpus delicti – other Latin legal term using corpus, here meaning the fact of a crime having been committed, not the body of the person being detained .nor (as sometimes inaccurately used) to the body of the victim. ........... In addition, could you possibly explain the following and verb's tense? having been committed Thanks in advance


title: What does "[expletive] it up" mean?

text: When I was in San Diego, I asked to a girl "how can I get to the freeway?" She answered me, "Go straight on, you can't **fuck it up**." What does it mean? Is this a usable phrase or it is too vulgar? Is this american slang?


title: Difference between "invoice" and "bill"?

text: I am talking about something you should pay. "Invoice" here doesn't mean the proof of payment. Sometimes I am told to pay my "bill", and sometimes they may refer to the similar paper (physical or virtual) as "invoice". The only difference I can think of is that "invoice" seems to be something you pay before you use while "bill" is the opposite. But this distinction is not clear since my university also calls the tuition fee as invoice now (I am already studying when I pay the "invoice"). Could someone tell me the difference?


title: Single word to use instead of "can't" or "won't"

text: I'm looking for a single word to use instead of _can't_ or _won't_. (Single also meaning no hyphenation or conjunctions/contractions. The differences between the words in regard to _being unable to_ vs. _being unwilling to_ can be ignored) **Edit:** Some background into this question, when writing Unit Tests in C# I have found it very easy to misread method names that differ solely based on Can vs Cannot. Since many times a unit test will exist with both the pro and contra side. Contractions aren't acceptable for the fact ' is not an allowed character in a method name.


title: Preposition to follow "Further acknowledgment"?

text: I have a statement. And after that statement I have: > This is further acknowledged by the consolidation of the material. But I want to remove the "This". What preposition can I use here: > Further acknowledgement **arrives** from the consolidation of the material. . I'm not sure if "arrives" should is correct or formal enough. This is for a PhD thesis.


title: When can a noun be used attributively?

text: Nouns can modify nouns: _cat food_ , _coffee cup_ , _gold ring_ , _laser surgery_ , _flood insurance_. It seems to me there are even cases where a noun sounds better than the corresponding adjective: _sociology papers_ sounds a bit better than _sociological papers_. Some noun-noun combinations don't work. You wouldn't say _America gangsters_ or _measurement spoons_ or _greed crimes_. If you spilled water on your keyboard you probably wouldn't call it a _keyboard spill_ or even a _water spill_. Are there rules that tell which combinations are acceptable?


title: Does “drape oneself in something” have the meaning of “be armored in”?

text: Gabe Rottman , a legislative counsel and policy adviser at the Washington legislative office of the American Civil Liberties Union contributed an answer to the question, “Is it wrong for credit card companies to process donations to extremist organizations?” in the Room for Debate section of New York Times (August 8) \- http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2013/08/08/the-ethics-of- doing-business-with-hate-groups/cutting-off-financing-to-hate-groups-is- unwise-censorship Rottman says; > " Credit card companies are private businesses. They generally have the > right, including possibly the First Amendment right, to refuse to deal with > anyone. While superficially appealing, that answer is wrong. Pulling credit > card services helps the haters and hurts free expression. > > First, there’s the “martyr” problem. Back in 2010, PayPal threatened to cut > off Pamela Geller, the anti-Muslim blogger, for violating its “acceptable > use” policy. Geller immediately **draped herself in the First Amendment** — > and put out a call for donations. PayPal eventually relented, but it’s clear > that the denial of services to a “hate speaker” transformed her modest > soapbox into a wider broadcast." As I was unfamiliar with the expression, 'Geller immediately “draped herself in” the First Amendment,' I consulted Cambridge, Oxford, Merriam-Webster online dictionary, none of which carries “drape oneself in stg” as an idiom. Google Ngram shows incidence of usage, ‘drape oneself’ though at low 0.000000032% level during 1930 to 1950, then tailoring down further to 0.00000001% level at present. What does “Geller draped herself in the First Amendment” mean? Does it mean she armored herself with the First Amendment (or any cause / law / back-up theory), or resorted to the First Amendment? How popular is ‘drape oneself in stg.” as an idiom?


title: which is correct "to be as flexible as possible" or just "as flexible as possible"

text: On our website's homepage we have the following sentence: > We make our software to be as flexible as possible so you can maintain and > visualize the data that is important to YOU. One of my friends insists it should be: > We make our software as flexible as possible so you can maintain and > visualize the data that is important to YOU. Which one of these is grammatically correct and why? Are both wrong? In case anyone's interested, our beta homepage is http://intellectpersonified.com/


title: Is "caught you unawares" correct?

text: I read a book and came across "caught you unawares". I kept thinking it's supposed to be "caught you unaware". Is this an acceptable form or was that a typo or something?


title: Is there any exception in the usage of since and for especially with reference to the inclusion of word last?

text: > I have been working here for 5 years. or > I have been working here since last 5 years. Does the word "last" have any effect on period of time, thereby changing the context to the point of using "since" instead of "for" just because of adding last to the sentence? I have much difficulty dealing with the educationists related to English discipline. All this happens because I live in a country where English is used as a second language.


title: Usage of the term 'non-reproducibility'

text: > Studies on genetic factors of schizophrenia are characterized by high > heterogeneity and non-reproducibility. Is the usage of term 'non-reproducibility' appropriate in the above sentence? Is there any other way to write this?


title: Why do "catsup" and "ketchup" coexist?

text: I do not often come across the word _catsup_ , but I do see it every once in a while, and I know it means _ketchup_. What I don't know is why they both came to be words for the same thing (though _ketchup_ is much more popular). Dictionary.com says _catsup_ was invented later as an anglicization, but even that raises questions. Why and when did someone try to anglicize _ketchup_ , and why didn't it ketch on?


title: What does "get milked" mean

text: There's a site http://getmilked.com/ with satirical comics. I already googled for the definition of get milked. What I got from googling is the following definitions: `To draw out or extract something from...`, `To obtain money or benefits from...` so based on the satirical context, the site has, these definitions doesn't really make sense. So what's the real meaning of `get milked`?


title: What's the meaning of "to hold it up against" here?

text: Here I got this comment : > I've really grown to like how the NLT can help in understanding the original > meaning behind a verse. I still like to hold it up against literal > translations (as you did) and interlinear bibles, though. As far as I can understand, the person there says that he really likes NLT version of the Bible, but I am a bit not clear about the latter part of his comment - "I still like to hold it up against literal translations". Does he like literal translations more than NLT or he still prefers NLT more than literal translations?


title: Word for "that which shows the reality behind a phenomenon"?

text: Is there a word for a tool, or concept, that allows you to see the reality behind a certain physical phenomenon, or a tool that exposes the behind-the- scenes details? For example, _backstage_ would be one of such words. A totally made up word is perfectly fine!


title: Has the incorporation of foreign phrases in English stopped?

text: I know English contains many words taken directly from another language - _chauffeur_ , for example - but I am interested in foreign _phrases_. These are phrases you'd see in writing or spoken aloud, such as:   * C'est la vie   * Caveat emptor   * Hasta la vista Have there been any recent foreign language additions to the lexicon in recent history, say the past 50 years or so?


title: When writing a formal report is it bad to make up names when giving an example?

text: I was giving an example and was trying to immerse the reader in the experience as much as possible and made up a man's name. > Consider the following example: Joseph is testing a program built for > Windows XP. I was told not to use the name Joseph but use "the client". What difference does this make and how do I know when it's inappropriate to use people's names when giving an example?


title: What's the word for "doing useless things while you don't have anything to do"?

text: Can anybody tell me what the word for "doing useless things while you don't have anything to do" is? Let's say I am surfing on the web, reading some articles, etc. while I don't have anything to do. It is not computer related. I am looking for a broad term. I've checked the synonyms of "killing time" and these are what I've found:   * dawdle   * hang around   * idle   * kill time   * **lark** : (v) play boisterously   * mess around   * play around It seems _lark_ can work for this case.


title: He/She/It on Imaginary/Fantasy figures

text: Consider that you have a fantasy figure, when writing a comic/book. Could you refer to this figure as he/she without being grammatically incorrect? _Example:_ Daffy Duck likes **his** new boat. Because now **he** can sing "I'm on a boat".


title: "to be also so" oder "to be the same"? "Neither...nor"?

text: please, correct this sentence: "I neither drink nor smoke, but you don't have to be also so/the same". By/with this sentence I want to say, that I am both non-drinker and non-smoker, but I would accept you even if you drink and smoke. Thanks


title: Usage of "last evening"

text: I have heard my friend say _yesterday evening_ or _yesterday night_. I tell her it's _last evening_ or _last night_. While she may be correct in that it is the _night of yesterday_ , why is it then called _last night_ (or _last evening_ )?


title: Number of syllables in "liar", "prior"

text: It seems that there are two syllables in "liar" (li*ar) because it is made up of a stem "lie" plus the suffix "ar". But what about "prior" (pri*or)? Does it have something to do with the final "r" as opposed to "fire" which has only one syllable?


title: Should I capitalize the phrase that has its abbreviation following?

text: I am doing a technical and scientific writing. I have been confused by this for a long time. Basically, there are two case.   1. A well-known phrase with its abbreviation. e.g. Global Positioning System (GPS). Should I write "Global Positioning System (GPS)" or "global positioning system (GPS)"?   2. A self-coined phrase with its abbreviation. e.g. Augmented Filter Subsystem (AFS). Should I write it as "Augmented Filter Subsystem (AFS)" or "augemented filter subsystem (AFS)"? Does it really matter? I am trying to do the best that I can. Which one is more conventional?


title: What does 'provision' exactly mean in a legal document?

text: Now I'm asked to look at a legal document(here) and answer the question that which provisions apply to a certain case. However, I don't know what the word 'provision' means in a legal context. (English is my second language and I hardly read law-related material at all.) So I looked up the meaning of _provision_ and according to Tanslegal it means: > a statement in a contract or a law that a specific thing must happen or be > done That's still vague to me. First, for the document I'm reading it seems to me more like: > a statement in a contract or a law that a specific thing must **not** happen > or be done The document I'm looking at have some sections, and some of the sections are talking about formal sections. For example, section 8 of the document says > 8.(1) > > A person must not, in the course of a commercial activity, install or cause > to be in- stalled a computer program on any other per- son’s computer system > or, having so installed or caused to be installed a computer program, cause > an electronic message to be sent from that computer system, unless... This should be a provision, which I understand. However, section 9 is like this: > 9. > > It is prohibited to aid, induce, procure or cause to be procured the doing > of any act contrary to any of sections 6 to 8. Is the text under section 9 also a provision since it's about something that must not happen? Section 10 goes on to explain some terms used in section 6 to 8. So these aren't provisions, right?


title: Synonym - "to go above someone"

text: What's a synonym, preferably solely in one word? I tried circumvent and its synonyms (eg bypass, sidestep, ...), but still desire a better one. Example: > If you decide to **go above** the teacher, always tell the teacher your > intention and that you're unsatisﬁed with the outcome of the situation. > Principals will loop back to the teacher before they respond to you 99 > percent of the time so it only hurts your relationship if you go blindly > around the teacher. Use words that are professional and positive as sug- > gested later in this chapter.


title: How to restructure this agglomeration of adjectives so it gets readable?

text: A co-worker is writing an important document. There is text which explains the diagrams, but we expect that many diagonal readers will just try to understand everything from the pictures, so we need lots of condensed information in them. So he needs really descriptive labels in the diagrams. While his argumentation is solid, the whole thing ended with a bubble in a diagram bearing the label `adapted personal value dependent user interface`. To make it clear, I agree that all this information needs to be conveyed by the bubble's label. But I think that the usual rules of adjective parsing will require the reader to read it in the wrong way. The actual thing he is talking about is a user interface, which is being adapted depending on personal values. But I think that people will rather read that as (adapted (personal (value dependent (user interface)))), if they don't give up at all. Any ideas how to reconstruct the label so it is both readable and contains all this info? Maybe a rearrangement of the words so it will be clear that we are talking about personal values and not a personal user interface? I tried `Adapted personal-value-dependent user interface`, but this still seems to create the wrong precedence.


title: Meaning of "do over"

text: A colleague and I are having a disagreement over the **slang** meaning and usage of **"do over"** Does it mean (a) beat somebody up or does it have a sexual meaning of (b) screw someone i.e. hump someone


title: I'm worried about my overuse of commas in this news article? I'm trying to use minimal words

text: A 45 year old Queens Park man is in a critical condition after crashing his Holden utility through the Welshpool railway barrier and being hit by a train yesterday. The driver, Allan Braddeley, was driving on Welshpool road at 6pm when a combination of wet roads and blinding sunlight caused the utility to career through the barrier and stall on the tracks. Despite engaging the emergency brakes, a diesel locomotive transporting ten oil tankers hit the vehicle, pushing it approximately 65 metres down the track. Onlookers removed Braddeley from the wreck and he was immediately taken to Royal Perth Hospital, admitted with numerous injuries. The driver of the diesel locomotive, Harold Peterson, was treated for shock. “By the time I saw him coming it was too late to stop. I hope he’ll be okay,” Peterson said. The train remained blocking the crossing for over an hour, while police redirected traffic. “The combination of wet weather and time of day make this a dangerous stretch of road. Drivers have to take extra care in these conditions” Officer Neville Plodd said. Mr Harold Peterson recovered from the initial shock enough to continue the train to East Perth, before being released early from work.


title: What do you call the interconnecting bits of a puzzle piece in English?

text: This is hard to describe, but I'm curious about what the proper word is for these thingies in English. So I searched for a picture on Google and circled what I'm referring to with red: ![Puzzle piece with the questionable parts circled with red.](http://i.stack.imgur.com/4IIqy.jpg)


title: Difference between "technical criteria" and "functional criteria"

text: What is the difference between _technical criteria_ and _functional criteria_? > Website architecture is an approach to the design and planning of websites > which, like architecture itself, involves **technical** , aesthetic and > **functional** criteria.


title: Is there any difference of meaning between “take aim at” and “turn its sights”?

text: I noticed two different phrases were used to express the same or similar things in the article reporting Rick Perry’s recent campaign in New York Times (November 19). Under the headline, “Perry Ad Seems to _Take Aim at_ Republican Rivals,” body copy immediately follows: “Rick Perry‘s poll numbers may be lagging. But he still has millions of dollars to spend on ads and that effort now appears to be _turning its sights on_ his Republican rivals.” Is there any difference of delicate nuance between “take aim at” and “turn its sights”? I’m curious to know why the writer rephrased the words. Simply for avoiding redundancy?


title: How do I emphasize a word using the standard punctuation system?

text: I've seen people on the Internet stressing a certain word using "*": > I do not *like* it, I *love* it! I think there is no such punctuation as "*". So I'm wondering if I can use some other way to achieve the same goal in traditional English. I've tried quotation marks but then it sounds like I'm posing ironic effect. > I do not "like" it, I "love" it! That sentence leaves the impression that I'm loving it in a _unusual_ way.


title: Correct term or phrase for "unidirectional gaga"

text: I'm not sure if such a figure of speech exists in English, and "unidirectional gaga" is certainly not correct. But which wording expresses that a person becomes dumber from having exercised/performed something too frequently or in only one particular fashion.   * It's an adverb or phrase that is usually applied to a person. But can also describe activities.   * It primarily expresses "to make stupid" caused by a particular behaviour/performance.   * The persistence or repetetion of past activites is implied to turn the person more dull / less open to alternative approaches.   * Does usually but not necessarily have a derogatory meaning. Possible alternative ways to express this:   * to become stultified      * from ingrained habits     * through monotony   * somebodys behaviour became dull     * from tedious repetetion     * ever the same approach But of course I'm searching for a more catchy phrase or expression which coveres that sentiment.


Does "She is in love with Tom" imply that Tom loves her too?


title: What's the difference between "You have my word" and "I promise"?

text: What's the difference between _you have my word_ and _I promise_?


What's the difference between "I'm in love with her" and "I love her"?


title: "Sunshine" and "moonlight"

text: A thought just came in my mind: the Sun shines, but the moon? Which is better to use, _sunshine_ or _sunlight_? Can we use "Moon shines"?


title: attain junior secondary level(s)

text: If we want to assess a person's English proficiency, is it idiomatic to say?: - _His English hasn't attained junior secondary level(s)._ I'm not sure, because:   1. _attain_ might not be an idiomatic verb in this situation.   2. instinct tells me _level_ should be in the plural but sense tells me a person's English can't attain many levels logically at the same time.   3. the whole sentence might not be idiomatic Could you help me?


title: Is it rude to say "Thanks for asking"?

text: My manager recently asked me "How I was doing? Everything Ok?". I felt happy that he asked me that question, and felt that he was really concerned about me. I was doing good. So I told him that and then followed it up with "Thanks for asking .. :) ". Does the statement "Thanks for asking me." sound rude (kind of like I don't need to tell you)? Is there a better way to express the gratitude? Thanks


title: Is this correct: "Let me know once you finish"?

text: Please help me. Which of these is correct?   1. _Let me know once you finish_   2. _Let me know when you finish_   3. _Let me know when you have finished._


title: What exactly does this sentence mean?

text: > Consider the violinist Jascha Heifetz, known for his blank expression when > performing. A 1925 article remarked on his deportment: "Cold, calm, > dispassionate, he stands on the platform and performs miracles of dexterity, > displays his beauties of tone. _But do we not feel slightly chilled, anxious > perhaps for less mastery and more humanity?_ Does the last sentence mean a. we feel chilled and want humanity more than dexterity. or b. what really makes us chilled and anxious is his humanity rather than his mastery.?


title: Adjectival phrase using participles

text: The café smelt of fried onions and tomato ketchup; the tables were green Formica with _chipped painted_ , steel legs. I am trying to use _chipped_ and _painted_ to form an adjectival phrase in this sentence. Is _chipped-paint_ , steel legs an option in this sentence? (with or without a hyphen?) Or would I have to use _chipped_ and _painted_.


title: Are there words for the subject and the object in a merger& acquisition?

text: Say company A bought company B, is there a pair of antonyms to refer A and B? E.g. merger and mergee (I know this pair is not right, only try to make a point here)


Should we say industry problems or industrial problems? Which is incorrect? or maybe each of them has specific meaning, then what is that meaning? I myself think the "industry problems" means the problems occurred in the industry , and the "industrial problems" means problems which are related to industry.


title: "small room" vs. "little room" / "big room" vs. "large room"

text: I never had problems with _small_ and _little_ before. However, I only had known about _a small room_ before I saw the word _a little room_ in a textbook (Family and Friends by Naomi Simmons). Is it the same? Also, as I always use _big_ , I'm not so sure about _large_. _Big room_ and _large room_ were the same to me. Is it right?


title: confusion about the suffix 'ence' and "ance"

text: I am confused about using the suffixes "ance" and "ence". Where would I use "ance" and where "ence"? Is there some important rule about this?


title: Use of the word "theory" in "string theory", "M-theory", etc

text: I came across this question on Yahoo! Answers: > Should M-theory read, M-hypothesis?   >  It being limited evidence for further investigation, perhaps not yet a > theory. I responded thus: (I realise the words "use" and "usage" are.. ahem.. _overused_. Please disregard this stylistic concern.) > I believe this use of the word "theory" reflects an overlap in mathematics > and theoretical physics. > > In mathematics, the word "theory" is used informally to refer to "a self- > consistent body of definitions, axioms, theorems, examples, and so on" > (reference). Examples of this usage include "field theory" and "group > theory". > > This differs from the scientific use of the word "theory" to mean "an > extensively tested hypothesis". > > I believe the use of the word "theory" here is a purposeful reference to the > fact that the inventors were interested in laying a mathematical foundation > for their model. > > Note that "string theory" has the exact same usage. In fact, the usage seems > to be quite rampant throughout theoretical physics. However, that's quite possibly just a way to rationalise what is actually carelessness on the part of scientists using the terms. It may not even fit with the facts; my knowledge of theoretical physics is admittedly slim. Can anyone give any support for or against my explanation? I found this blog entry wherein commenter James Reed chalks it up to a combination of carelessness and an alternate definition of "theory" as "a model being developed by a theorist" (which is similar to the informal mathematical definition, I think).


title: What is the name of the condition when I temporarily cannot speak because of shouting too much?

text: What is that condition called in English when I can't say anything, "lose my voice", due to shouting a lot? I think it is related to my vocal chords. The usual treatment prescribed is just to stay silent for a period of one or two weeks.


title: What does "Every me, every you" mean?

text: What does one mean when he says "Every me, every you"?


title: Is there a concise expression for 'as it exists today'?

text: Especially in the context of a situation that is anticipated to change in the near future. As in: > An analysis of the subway system capacity, both as it exists today and after > upcoming expansions. Or: > This document surveys the ethnic makeup of Manhattan, both historically and > as it exists today.


title: Does "Smugness" imply "Having or showing low opinions of others"?

text: I have a little confusion whether "smugness" implies a "low opinion of others" in contrast to a "high opinion of oneself" I have consulted ODO and wiktionary; they showed the meaning of "Smugness" is > **Smugness(noun)[ODO]:** having or showing an excessive pride in oneself or > one's achievements   >  **Smugness(noun)(wiktionary):** Irritatingly pleased with oneself; self- > satisfied. However please look at the below excerpt from the novel "2 States- The story of my marriage" from "Chetan Bhagat". > Krish is narrator. He is having chat with his college mate Ananya. > > 'So where did you stay hostel before?', She said. 'And please don't say IIT, > you are doing pretty well so far.'   >  'What's wrong with IIT?'   >  'Nothing, are you from there?,' She sipped water.   >  'Yes, from IIT Delhi. Is that problem?'   >  'No,' she smiled, 'not yet.'   >  'Excuse me?' I said. Her **smugness** had reached irritating levels. If we observe the context above, seemingly Ananya has a "low opinion" of IITians "rather than a high opinion or self pride in herself". Even though the narrator uses the word "smugness" to describe that quality. So my perticular question is, is the usage valid? Can adjectives like this be used in contrasting situations also?


title: Isn't a comma necessary?

text: > I was jumping about up to my thighs in the waters. Is a comma necessary after "about", or in another place in the sentence?


title: Three-word phrase stress ("little straw house" vs. "small wooden house")

text: I'm interested to learn why the following three-word phrases have stress on different words.   1. "little straw house" (stress is on _little_ and _house_ )   2. "small wooden house" (stress is on _wooden_ ) Here are the sentences: >   1. The first little pig built a little straw house. >   2. The second little pig built a small wooden house. > How come the stress for the second phrase is not on _small_ and _house_? Can you please help?


title: Themselves or them?

text: Today, I wanted to write: > It's really unfortunate that most people cling to something that is not > themselves just to get what they want. Then after writing this, I had this weird feeling that the right thing was > something that is not them Can someone guide or explain to me how these words are used?


title: Is the word "etc." including more things which are not mentioned?

text: I wonder the correct usage of 'etc.'. It seems to me that some people, they really pursuit thoroughness when they try to list things and they speak etc. at the end like saying "that's all". For example, > the payment statuses are accepted, expired, cancelled etc. Are these 3 statuses are all statuses existed, or, there could be more statuses? Or either case is possible?


title: Is it wrong to say "I hope this does not inconvenience you in any way"?

text: I recently had a dilemma regarding this. While the above sentence sounds okay to my ears, "I hope this does not cause any inconvenience to you" sounds more grammatically correct. Which one is correct?


title: Euphemism for "non-useful"

text: I was just about to tell someone how something "wouldn't really be much useful" if they leave it the way it is — which is like a much more polite version of _useless_ , but I just couldn't find the word. I'm guessing I just don't know it. What is an idiomatic euphemism for _non-useful_? **EDIT:** It was actually an answer to a question, and I was wondering how I would say this answer is not really useful without hurting the person.