title: Which flavor of English (British vs. American) first had standard modern spellings?

text: Which flavor, British English or American English, first standardised its modern spellings? I'm mostly interested in the direction of alteration; for example, was the _u_ dropped from _colour_ or was the _u_ added to _color_? I'm interested in a general answer rather than an answer to this specific example, though. The history of dictionary releases seems to indicate that British was standardised first:   * British, 1604: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Table_Alphabeticall (perhaps _too_ Olde English?)     * British, 1755: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Dictionary_of_the_English_Language     * American, 1828: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Webster%27s_Dictionary However, I'm not certain that any of those three dictionaries represents a modern enough standard to be considered the first real standard of English for either dialect. Clearly both languages have evolved since their initial standardisation, but which set of spellings was standardised first? **Edit:** To clarify, I'm interested in the chronology rather than repute or popularity. Which dialect had its modern (by which I mean contemporary, present-day) spellings published or released in a dictionary first?


title: what the phrase/ formula of "as is" means

text: "As is". I often run into sentences which have this little formula. Can you please shed some light on the function of it? As I understand it is basically "as it is", but always have a feeling that I am missing out on some subtle meaning and/or that there is not a perfect consensus regarding what it is for - but that's just my guess.


title: Usage of the word "technically"

text: I use this word in my daily language even without knowing what it actually means. > Technically speaking, there is no big difference between […] and […]. So what does this word imply, not in the literal sense but when we combine it with a sentence? Is there a specific context to which we are supposed to limit the usage of this word? Because I hear it almost everyday. Can we substitute the above sentence with "literally speaking, there is no big difference between […] and […]"? Is the word technically supposed to bring out the meaning as in "literally" does? Are they synonymous? Can we use them interchangeably? If not, then what does the word "technically" actually refer to w.r.t daily English usage?


title: Is the structure "can have verb-ed" possible?

text: I have seen and heard sentences like these: > He _could_ have gone too far. > > John _can't_ have eaten all the cake. But I don't seem to encounter this structure: > She _can_ have done the work. I tried Googling it and found some examples, but I'm still unsure if it's acceptable. I understand that "may have _verb-ed_ " and "might have _verb-ed_ " are frequently used in English. So if, in contrast, "can have _verb-ed_ " is never used or is considered awkward, what's the reason for this?


title: Using "neither of which"

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  What is the difference between “none of …” and “neither of”? Would it be correct to say _neither of which_? For example, > The essay contains many well-known facts and some theories based on years of > research, **neither of which** would be grounds for copyright.


title: What does it mean to "look it"?

text: What does the emphasized part of the following excerpt mean? It's from an edition of _2001: A Space Odyssey_. > She had been assembled in orbit around the Earth, tested on a translunar > maiden flight, and finally checked out in orbit above the Moon. She was a > creature of pure space -- and **she looked it**.


title: Words to describe something that does not reach your expectations for it

text: Which word(s) would you use in a situation such as the one below, to make the sentence sound logical, natural and complete? > You told me we were going to a nice park. We've spent almost two hours to > get here! And what do I see here? You call these three trees and two benches > a park?! Are you kidding me? This is not a park, this is a _**___ __ ___**_ > of a park!


title: What is a "woggy dago"?

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  What is the origin of the word "wog"? I was listening to a song the other day, and it featured the words "woggy dago". Now I did manage to find out what _dago_ means, but I'm still not clear about _woggy_. It isn't in the dictionary, and while I could find it on the net, none of the apparent meanings fit the context in the song. I also googled for "woggy dago", but then nothing turns up, except for the lyrics to said song! So, what is it?


title: What does ‘the first-person epiphany’ mean?

text: I found the word, ‘ _the first-person epiphany’_ in the article written by Jeffery Klugar, under the title “Be careful what you wish for” that appeared in Time magazine pretty long ago (February 11, 2010). I knew the title is the borrowing from the title of the first album by Gabby La la from Wikipedia, The line including _‘the first-person epiphany’_ reads: “You never get over the moment you realize that you’re definitely going to die. You’re usually a small child when the insight hits, and you usually have a vague idea of what death is, but _the first-person epiphany_ – the “Wait, that‘s going to happen to me? Experience – change everything. Your sense of time and its fleeting passage can never go back to what it was before you discovered that you are on the clock." Though I understand ‘the first-person epiphany’ means ‘one’s own intuition or inspiration,’ I’m not sure, nor whether this is a colloquial expression that I can use like ‘My first person epiphany is - -’ or a rather pedantic expression better not to use in daily conversation. Can you tell me about the usage of this word?


title: "what" as a determiner

text: I am composing a sentence describing results of an experiment: > we find [results] beyond what can be expected from [theory] I am not sure this is a proper use of "what". Does my sentence needs rewording?


title: "If the robot can learn from a human, it can/could keep track of humans."

text: I have the following sentence and I don't know whether "can" or "could" would be a better choice. >   1. If the robot can learn from a human, it could keep track of humans. >   2. If the robot can learn from a human, it can keep track of humans. > Which one is correct in a proper English structure?


title: Formal/informal/slang terms for front passenger/co-driver

text: Could any native English speakers help me with some formal, informal, slang, or even some local (Scottish, Welsh, Irish, etc.) terms for "front passenger". I mean the term for a person that travels with somebody in a car (boat, aeroplane, train) next to the driver or even in the back-seat, etc.


title: An idiom meaning "failure is not the end"

text: There's a motto in my native language which literally means: > If the ball is full of air, then when it is hit against the ground, it will > go up more. Is there an idiom with the same meaning and usage in English?


title: What is the origin of the phrase "turns out"?

text: What is the origin of "turns out" as it appears in the phrases below:   * It turns out   * As it turns out   * Let me know how it turns out What is turning, what is coming out, and from where? I can't find anything on the phrase, but my guess is something either food related, e.g. meat grinding, or perhaps something to do with film projectors (although I suspect the phrase is older than film).


title: Is this correct sentence?

text: I wrote: > it would never have been possible if i didn't have interest in the least bit but a friend of mine told it is wrong and should be: > it would never have been possible if i had not had interest in the least bit I believe i have written it right. Can anyone confirm please?


title: What does "There but for the grace of God — goes God." mean?

text: It is a supposedly witty paraprosdokian said by Churchill. But I (and possibly some other people whose first language is not English) don't get it. Can someone explain what it means? Do English native speakers get this without much thinking?


title: What’s the meaning of “there are more of somebody than there are of somebody”?

text: > Their yellowish eyes were fixed upon Harry’s wand, and they looked scared. > **There might be a lot more of them than there were of him** but Harry could > tell, by the looks on their faces, that they knew no more magic than the > giant squid did. (Harry Potter 4) I couldn’t find this expression in my dictionaries, so I went to a Google search. Here are some examples. >   * What about those who wanted to use more and more energy and not worry > where it was coming from? **There are a lot more of them than there is of > him.** And it is all their fault as well. > >   * **There were a hell of a lot more of them(termites) than there was of > me** but I had chemicals on my side. > > I’d like to know especially the following points.   1. What is the meaning of the “more”? (Number of people? Chances of winning?)   2. Why do some examples say “than there **were** of him” and others say “than there **is** of him”? (I mean it plural-singular question, not tense) I'd appreciate it if you could help me.


title: Does "who does what" work in this sentence?

text: I am interested in knowing whether one can say "who does what" in the following context: > All estimation methods are not yet on hand in standard software. For an > overview of who does what, see (place reference here). **edit according to andrewdotnich's comment** The reference is the chapter of a book that describes a list of software that are able to deal with one or more of the estimation methods.


title: What is the best way to forcefully say each word in a sentence.

text: Here is the example that I have: > "Mother," I said with clenched teeth, "I said I don't want to talk about > it." Now, I'd like to express the fact that each word in the second part of the sentence is said with a hard break or pause. Example: > "I. said. I. don't. want. to. talk. about. it." I'm sure there is a better way, so any help would be appreciated. Also, what is this type of pause called?


title: Is "few couple of ..." a proper usage in English?

text: Is **"few couple of ..."** a proper usage in English?


title: 'Signal' as an adjective

text: My dictionary lists the word 'signal' as an adjective, apart from its usual usage as a noun. Could someone provide me with examples for such a usage? Also, how popular is such an adjective?


title: Is this sentence correct using the right choice of words?

text: Does the way I wrote the following sentence make sense? > The story begins with Olaf speaking about his experiences and perception of > life.


title: "Style Cream": what is it?

text: On this matter I have read other questions: “Sour cream” versus “soured cream”, “shaving cream” vs. “shave cream”. But, can someone explain what is the " _Style Cream_ " to which this potato chips are associated to, as it seems to be from reading the following phrase on the packet: > _American **/** Style Cream & Onion **/** Flavour_ I have searched for "Style Cream" in Wikipedia, but I haven't found anything. ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/CFrmK.jpg)


title: How to answer grammatically ambiguous tricky questions

text: Here are some examples : 1) The mangoes (will ripe/ripe/will ripen) over time said John. 2) The least considered in the latest Terrorist attacks (are/were/was) the innocent victims. My choice for 1) would be:   * "ripe" if it is considered as a fact, so present tense is good choice.   * "will ripe" if it is considered as an opinion of John rather than a fact; the sentence is in the past tense, so past tense is good choice. My choice for 2) would be:   * "were" if it is in newspaper article and it describes a past event.   * "are" if it is live reporting of a statement. I have checked them in this checker, and results show that all of the options are correct. **EDIT1** :And what about: This (calls/calls for/calls against) a treat. Uprooting plants (is/are/have been/was) like uprooting your life. Also please suggest most critical points to consider if possible while answering such questions and apologies for not following the standards for asking the question, i am a newbie so i am getting acquainted with it.But I have done research for these questions and did not get the answer , that's why asked here.


title: Could "Hats off!" be insulting in some situations?

text: What are true situations and structures to use "Hats off!"? Could this idiom be insulting in some situations?


title: any rules for pronouncing "V" sound?

text: For example, "Is there any cars available?" When the speed of speech is getting faster, it isn't really going easy to make sure of making a lip formation about V where the bottom lip must be behind of the top. In my case, when I do that, the lip formation has been going similar to B sound. F sound is the same as well. Here is my point, is that natural or should make exact formation as them selves?


title: Meaning of snobbishly

text: I'm reading _The Great Gatsby_ and on the second page it says: > As my father snobbishly suggested, and I snobbishly repeat a sense of the > fundamental decencies is parcelled out unequally at birth. I know a _snob_ is a person who a person who wishes to be seen as a member of the upper classes, but I do not know what _snobbishly_ means.


title: Question tags: "Hardly seems... Doesn't it?" vs "hardly seems...does it?"

text: * * * Is it correct to use a negative question tag in this sentence: "It hardly seems fair, doesn't it?" Bit confusing, because if I wrote "it doesn't seem fair, ..." The correct tag would be a positive "does it?" But "it hardly" is essentially "it does hardly..." It appears that the negative tag is grammatically correct, but I think it still sounds wrong to the ear.


title: Need to clarify use of "its" and "their"

text: I am having a debate at work regarding the correct choice: > No investor has ever lost its capital. or > No investor has ever lost their capital. It seems to sound awkward to say "its capital" as opposed to "their capital". We are referring to a single investor (in a context where _all_ investors are institutional entities).


title: Past perfect vs. simple past

text: What verb tense must I use in the following sentences? I'm describing my work experience in casual speech. >   1. I had been working at Apple for five years. [I imply that I worked > there in the past] >   2. I've worked at Google for four years. [I imply that I've worked there > till now] >   3. Now I'm unemployed and looking for a job at McDonald's. > Are these three sentences correct? Maybe in the first one I must use the past simple tense?


title: Regular vs. irregular verbs

text: I recall an English teacher explaining that verbs that change vowels during tense changes were called 'regular' and those that added '-ed' in the past tense were 'irregular'. This seemed counter-intuitive, but the explanation was that early English verb conjugation regularly inflected a vowel rather than not. Is this correct?


title: Pronunciation and usage of "bona fide"

text: As I am reading books and articles, I come across this _bona fide_. How do you pronounce this? How do you use it properly? I know the definition is _in good faith_ , like if you are welcomed to someone's house, the guests are in good faith welcome around the house and not expected to steal anything, or when you test drive a car, it's in good faith you won't run off with it.


title: Difference between "retro" and "vintage"

text: What's the difference between _retro_ and _vintage_? (or _antique_ for that matter)


title: What punctuation symbols mean "not in the full sense of the referenced phrase?"

text: This strip of Dinosaur Comics made me wonder whether it is appropriate to use quotation marks (in the terms of the comic) "as a not in the full sense of the word" lingual marker. Searching Google, I found a Daily Writing Tips blog entry that indicates quotation marks can express irony. The Wikipedia article on "Irony Punctuation", however, indicates that no standard way to denote irony or sarcasm in English. It mentions "scare quotes," which seem to be closest to meaning that the word or phrase was not intended to have its full meaning, but scare quotes carry the risk of ambiguity - how do you distinguish between a properly quoted phrase and a phrase that means something differently? **Is there an established, unambiguous punctuation that suggests that the enclosed or referenced phrase does not have its full meaning?**


title: What does "bread and butter" mean in this situation?

text: Boy gives girl a kiss on the cheek. They approach a lamp post. For a moment, it looks as if they will pass it on opposite sides, but boy grabs girl's hand and pulls her around to his side of the post, to avoid getting 'bad luck.' Boy says, "Bread and butter!" What does 'bread and butter' mean in this situation?


title: Should I omit the verb in this clause?

text: "As I returned to my seat, my heart (was) still racing, other kids started to talk to me." Is the "was" necessary at all? As an ESL student, I was rather confused as to why my teacher had marked me wrong for omitting the 'was", since I have seen the same sentence pattern in some English books. Thanks in advance! Sorry for any silly grammatical mistake, I'm still learning...


title: What constructions enable a writer to preserve strict logical coherence and reduce redundancy when conjuncting two noun-phrases?

text: What constructions allow a writer to preserve strict logical coherence and reduce redundancy when conjuncting two noun-phrases? Example > Many cultures have used gold or silver bullion as a currency. That sentence could imply that many cultures have used gold - _in any form_ \- or silver - _only when cast as_ \- bullion, but I intended it to mean that many cultures have used gold bullion or silver bullion as a currency. Moreover, a reader could interpret the sentence to mean that many cultures have used gold - _in any form, for any purpose_ \- or silver - _only when cast as_ \- bullion - _and only_ \- as a currency. How can I construct that sentence to ensure it imparts only the meaning I intend it to impart?


title: Term that means adaptation to a suboptimal situation

text: If you are not only accepting a situation that is not what you wanted, but are taking steps to adapt to that situation, is there a word/phrase that describes this? Neither "resignation" or "capitulation" seems to imply the adaptation step.


title: Meaning of "foregrounding"

text: > The EU should stop talking about **foregrounding** conditionality. What does _foregrounding_ mean here? Is it a gerund or an adjective?


title: Whimsical: "Lost the rag". Origins and just what is "the rag" anyway?

text: Just a whimsical question... When one says that they have "lost the rag" - it usually means they've gotten impatient or lost their temper. But what does the 'rag' refer to and how did the phrase originate?


title: wait vs wait up, fall vs. fall down

text: Can you explain differences:               1a) Hadn't we better wait up for the slower ones?                           vs.     1b) Hadn't we better wait for the slower ones?               2a) The apple fell from the tree.                          vs.     2a) The apple fell down from the tree.


title: Can "either" be used in this way?

text: A picture was shown to the student. In the picture a girl was missing her shoes, another girl was missing her mittens, and a boy was missing his hat. This is the student's description of the picture: > The children either forgot their shoes, mittens, or hats. Is _either_ correctly placed, and is it properly used with more than two alternatives?


title: Are there sounds where the tongue is not symmetrical?

text: Are there sounds in English languages and accents where the tongue does not move symmetrically in the mouth, i.e. the right side of the tongue is not moving like the left side?


title: What should you call a preface for a small document?

text: I think the word _preface_ refers to books. I have a small document that is in the form of a hierarchical outline. Before my document, I want to put a small paragraph with instructions how to consume the material. What should I title that small paragraph?


title: Is there a term for the other 2 months in a quarter?

text: The organization I work for has monthly volunteer opportunities, and quarterly volunteer opportunities. The trouble comes when someone serves quarterly (say, the 1st Monday of each quarter) and we need to fill the other 2 first Mondays of the months in that quarter. Is there a term for that time frame?


title: Where does the verb go on this question? Is it even a reported question?

text: I understand that when I report a question, I put the subject back in front of the verb, as in: "He asked if she was going to be late." But I always get puzzled when it comes to reporting a question with a question. (In fact I'm not even sure this is reported speech, but I think it is, because I'm reporting my own doubts.) My starting point is the question: > What is the task for the afternoon class? But now I want to ask if anyone in a group knows what the task is. Which of the following alternatives would be grammatical? > (a) Does anyone know what is the task for the afternoon class?   >  (b) Does anyone know what the task is for the afternoon class?   >  (c) Does anyone know what the task for the afternoon class is? Intuitively, I would pick (c), but I don't know if that is the correct choice, and I certainly don't know why. Can anyone tell me which of the options is correct and why?


title: Which one to state — "We would like to thank You" or "We thank You"

text: I am writing an official statement for plaques, in appreciation of an employee's contribution to the company. I am not sure which one to use: > We would like to thank you for your unstinting support... or > We thank you for your unstinting support... Could you please help me out?


title: Is there a word or term other than ‘exemplar’ for the educational cards used to teach English?

text: Is there a word or term other than ‘exemplar’ for the educational cards used in primary classrooms to teach English? These are the: > 'A' is for 'Apple' Or for the cards which show how to write a letterform which tends to line the walls of some classrooms. > 'A' 'a', 'B' 'b', etcetera I am looking for a general use term or phrase which elementary teachers would refer to these and not for product names used to purchase them.


title: "Upload to" vs. "upload on"

text: Which preposition should follow the verb _to upload_ — _to_ , _on_ , or something else?


title: Is there a more formal option for 'just in case'?

text: It was addressed before, but the question was too specific, thus doesn't resolve my issue. I'm expecting a general answer, though provide an example as well. For instance, I'm writing a letter and attaching some extra files along with important ones. I would write: > I have also attached the original document [just in case/ in case you need > it/ ...]. What other options can you think of?


title: Term for a person who doesn't know who he really is

text: what do you call a person who doesn't know who he really is, who doesn't understand himself much.


title: What is a "street address"?

text: What does the term "street address" mean, as opposed to just "address"?


title: Can “inverted” be used to indicate that something is "inside-out"?

text: If something is inside out, can it be said that the object is **_inverted_**? My understanding of the word **_inverted_** is simply "the opposite state," but I would like to get a bit of clarification just to be sure.


title: 'Satire' is to 'Satirically' as 'Parody is to ...?

text: As stated in the title; I'm having a difficult time thinking of the equivalent conjugation. The word "Satire" is to "Satirically" as "Parody" is to ...?


title: What is the male form of fashionista?

text: I run a fashion website and am a guy. I'm not a fashionista, but something else, right? What would I be?


title: When do "direct" and "indirect" questions become the same?

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  "I'm not sure what the right way is" Direct and indirect questions are not usually the same: > **What is** your name?   >  I don't know **what** your name **is**. But sometimes, they become the same: > **What is** wrong with you?   >  I don't know **what is** wrong with you. > > **What is** available?   >  I like to know **what is** available. So my question is, what the grammatical rule is when they become the same.


title: Are actors taught to roll their "r"'s?

text: A particularly prominent example of a rolled _r_ user is the actor Jeremy Brett, who played "Sherlock Holmes" in the 1980s Granada adaptations. I've noticed that several other actors, especially from the older generation, also use the rolled _r_. Is this something that actors are or were taught to do at drama school? If so, why?


title: What proposals have been made to give the apostrophe some relief?

text: The apostrophe has a lot of jobs.   * It makes things possessive,   * it indicates the omissions of letters in contractions and numbers in dates,    * it is used to indicate strange accents in dialog, and    * it indicates plurals of words and letters. To complicate matters, it looks almost or exactly the same as the single-quote in many fonts and in hand-writing. I have read of proposals to use a distinct mark of punctuation for each task. What are some of these proposals?


title: Meaning of "ever so" phrase

text: I recently listend to an audio book and this sentence stuck in my head > he put her on the cot gently and ever so gently mainly because I heard it a few more times (not the exact sentence, but the "ever so" phrase) until the end of the book. What does it exactly mean? I can guess that it emphasizes _slowly_ in this case, like he did it really slow?


title: Upset the apple cart meaning

text: I'm 32 and today was the first time I've heard the expression 'upset the apple cart' used. It was on reddit and the context was: "Once again, my colleague Stephen Hawking has upset the apple cart. The event horizon surrounding a black hole was once though to be an imaginary sphere. But recent theories indicate that it may actually be physical, maybe even a sphere of fire. But I don't trust any of these calculations until we have a full-blown string theory calculation, since Einstein's theory by itself is incomplete." Looking it up I found that it means to 'cause trouble, by spoiling ones plans' or 'to disorganize something, especially established plans.' So, my question is: is there an implied meaning behind this idiom? Does it mean that Stephen Hawking is basically talking a bunch of smack that goes against the established theory of whatever they're talking about and causing trouble because it gets a lot of press, thus, upsetting the apple cart? Or rather, that there is some established theory, but Stephen Hawkings brilliant ass self came up with something that is making them reconsider whatever it is they'[re talking about, thus, upsetting the apple cart. Or third, is it just impossible to tell without further context.


title: Is "senility" pejorative?

text: Could you please give your opinion on whether or not "senility" is a pejorative term? My sentence is: > Although there wasn't any real upper age limit, elders who seemed to be > affected by senility were omitted from the survey.


title: What preposition should I use here: "written of me" or "written about me"?

text: > ... having reviews and articles **written of me** in The New York Press.   > or   > ... having reviews and articles **written about me** in The New York Press.   >


title: Membership vs ticket

text: Tickets are sold for concerts, presentations and other gatherings. Yet conventions tend to sell memberships. Why does one purchase a membership (rather than a ticket) to a convention?


title: What's the most preferred spelling of auto fill, auto-fill, and autofill?

text: When you are trying to say that something is automatically filled in, you use the word _autofill_ , or if you were using past tense, _autofilled_. I see 3 main ways that people use it:   1. _auto fill_ / _auto filled_   2. _auto-fill_ / _auto-filled_   3. _autofill_ / _autofilled_ Note: this also applies to _pre fill_ , _pre-fill_ , and _prefill_ as well. **Which way is the most preferred spelling?**


title: "Compound nouns list" or "compound noun list"?

text: I couldn't help but wonder every time I saw such a noun phrase. I've seen both forms used equally often, so I guess both of them can be used interchangeably. But do I guess right? Some examples: > Here is a frequently used _compound nouns list_. > > Here is a frequently used _compound noun list_. I usually rephrase them into something like this. > Here is a reference _list_ of _compound nouns_.


title: "Article on" vs "article about"

text: Which one is correct: _an excellent article on ant behaviour_ or _an excellent article about ant behaviour_? If both are correct, is there a difference in their meaning and usage?


title: How do you distinguish "have got" from "got" as the past tense of "get" in "I got my car back"?

text: When someone says "I got my car back" in an informal setting, does it mean (1) or (2)?   1. I have got my car back. (Where "have" can be dropped in spoken English.)   2. I got my car back. (As the past tense of "I get my car back".) I do understand that they mean virtually the same thing, but (1) is in the present tense, whereas (2) the past tense. When you make it a question, the syntactic difference is clear:   1. Have I got my car back?   2. Did I get my car back?


title: What is a book about cooking called?

text: What would be the right sentence to use to say that I am reading a book about cooking?   * I am reading a cooking book   * I am reading a cook book  Please explain the reason for the choice.


title: How to formally state that parents have not raised their children well

text: I'm writing an article about the family and how it can change a person's life in the future. I need a word that tells the readers about a family in which the parents have not been good enough to teach their kids social skills and generally those things they will need in the future to be able to live well.   * _The word must be formal (and polite)._ I searched the dictionary for some words, but I'm not sure if they are the right words to be used with family. I found the following: > Inefficiency, incompetence, inadequacy, ineptitude, inefficacy None of the dictionaries I checked (Longman and Oxford) mention whether or not this is the right word to be used with family. Ineptitude of family?


title: Why the indefinite article in "have a good time"?

text: Why do we use the indefinite article in the expression "have a good time"? _Time_ is an uncountable noun, and we never say "what a beautiful weather!", but "what beautiful weather it is!" Could anyone explain it to me?


title: "Reset" or "re-set"?

text: As far as I know there are two different meanings of the word "reset":   * to restore an object/value to a previous/initial state - that's the most widely use of the word;    * to set the value/state a second time. But, is it common to use "reset" with the second meaning? For me it makes more sense to distinguish the two meanings by using "re-set" on the second one. But, does "re-set" even exist? For example, what would be most acceptable in the following examples? > The thermostat is now set to 20 ºC. You can make it colder or warmer by > _resetting/re-setting_ it [to a different value]. > > "Production stop" works simply by _resetting/re-setting_ the end time [to a > different value but not to the default one].


title: Can you say "Why Tom let Katie win"

text: Some one pointed to me that in this Star magazine from cover, the editor used the sentence "Why Tom let Katie win" instead of "Why **did** Tom let Katie win". Is it a correct form or is the grammatical quality of the magazine the same as its content quality? The same goes for the question in the upper left corner in the blue circle "How much $$ she gets". If the use of "$$" instead of the word money is acceptable, is the sentence "How much money she gets" grammatically correct? ![picture](http://mscwne.wcdn.co.il/w/f-466/1312943-5.jpg)


title: "If he saw that he should act" or "If he sees that he should act"

text: > If he **saw** that he should act immediately or > If he **sees** that he should act immediately Any differences betweeen these?


title: Why do we use the term "and how"?

text: What is the literal and/or figurative meaning behind the term "and how"? Example: Boy 1: "The sun is boiling today." Boy 2: "And how!" I get HOW it's used, but can't seem to find any info on WHY the particular phrase would be used. A silly question, perhaps, that has nonetheless intrigued me at 1:30 am. Please and thank you.


title: It is correct and formal to include "of" when writing dates?

text: A friend of mine, native EN speaker, told me that the following is correct written like this: > We met on the 1st of June. Is that really true? I cannot see any reference that these are used in written text.


title: "Want to relieve from" vs. "want relief from"

text: >   * Want to relieve from academic pressure. >   * Want relief from academic pressure. > I think the former one is more proper but my teacher said the latter one is correct.


title: Is "having have been" / "having have eaten" grammatically correct? Is it a verb tense?

text: Some examples of a weird _thing_ I found. I want to call it a verb tense, but I'm not sure that's accurate: "24.6% reported having have been injured due to excessive consumption of alcohol." "When I got up to clear the table, only having have eaten a third of the fish—which was shockingly filling—I noticed that..." Is this grammatically correct? If so, what is it called? Present participle of the past perfect? Normally after "having," you would have to use the past participle, but in these cases "have" is used instead of "had."


title: Idiom that describes a person who doesn't have an acceptable witness

text: We Persians have a proverb that says: > They asked the fox, "Who's your witness?" The fox said, "My tail!" What do Americans say when a person only has their ally as a witness? Is there any idiom for this?


title: Shortened "cannot be disabled"

text: How can "cannot be disabled" be written in short form, similar to the way "can be removed" can be written as "removable"? I didn't find the answer in Google Translate.


title: appearance phrase question

text: My student wrote in his essay > it gives her face a peculiar charm? I tried all the dictionaries at hand (hard-copy and electronic ones) but did not find a definite answer whether this phrase sounds English. Could you please help me?


title: A phrase for critically important

text: Can you please help me to find an idiom/phrase that would describe something as being of high importance. e.g. These files are ... (critically important).


title: What are specific cartoon-type interjections like "cough" and "sigh" called in English?

text: In comics, for example those by Walt Disney, interjections that describe or emphasize in words what the characters in the image are doing are quite commonly used ( _cough_ , _sigh_ , _tweet_ ). According to the _German Wikipedia_ , a grammatical term for this type of word has been introduced only recently, in 1998. It’s called _Inflektiv_. I could not find an English translation, neither on these pages nor in any search engine. Is there a term for this?


title: Using "basically" in an interview

text: Can I use word _basically_ in an interview? For example > I _basically_ belong to X but I am working at Y from last 10 years. Or can I use > I belong to X and I am working at Y from last 10 years.


title: Can I use "let ... alone" to mean "even though/if"?

text: I am composing a poem and have something like this > Even if/though it is thousand miles far, we can still share the one. in mind, which I want to express it more poetically as > Let thousand miles alone,   >  Can we still share the one. It kinda makes sense to me. But I am not sure whether it also makes the same sense to others. Is this use of the phrase _let alone_ correct? Note that I am aware of two questions regarding the phrase _let alone_ here, but neither of them addresses my issue.


title: When and why did the N-word and "negro" go apart?

text: Both the terms _nigger_ and _negro_ come from the Spanish and Portuguese _Negro_ which denotes "black". But today they have widely different connotations, the former is considered a horrible racial slur, while the latter was the prefered way to refer to a person of black ancestry or appearance until the 1960s–70s, was used by MLK in his "I have a dream" speech and is still used in the full name of the UNCF. When did the terms go apart, and why does one of them have a strong racist connotation while the other doesn't?


title: "Product" vs "production"

text: When developing software, we have servers for development and servers for real customers. For the real servers environment, should I call it _product environment_ or _production environment_?


title: Difference between "without" and "with no"

text: What is the difference between the usage of _without_ and _with no_? For example, _without sound_ and _with no sound_.


title: "I am gonna have to" vs. "I have to"

text: What is the difference between " **I am gonna have to** " and " **I have to** "? When would you use the first one? update: I am specifically asking about situations like the one described here.


title: Interdependence vs. interdependency: grammatical number

text: Are the two words interchangeable? If so, why is one more common in singular (interdependence) and the other in plural (interdependencies)? Look at the Google search hit numbers below: interdependence: 2,560,000   interdependences: 98,600 interdependency: 1,190,000   interdependencies: 617,000


title: Are white and black ever capitalized when referring to people

text: What is the accepted custom regarding capitalization when it comes to "White" and "Black" when referring to race, whether they are being used as nouns or adjectives?


title: "Forgot" vs "Forget"

text: Is the following correct, or is there more to it? "I forgot his name" — I knew his name, but I forgot it. "I forget his name" — I keep forgetting his name. Where using "forget" basically means that you tried to remember this information before as well, but you couldn't then either.


title: Languages understandable to English-speakers without learning

text: There are groups of languages that are mutually intelligible. For example, as a Russian, I can partially understand what is said to me in Ukrainian, Belorussian, Bulgarian, Czech, and some other languages, though I have never learned any of those languages. I heard that Swedish people can understand Norwegian and Danish without specifically learning them. The question is: How is it with the English language? Are there any languages that can be, at least partially (the overall meaning of the phrase spoken), understood by a person whose native language is English, provided that the person in question never learned any of these languages beforehand?


title: What would you call a person that nags a lot?

text: If say one party has agreed to paint a shed and is now getting nagged by the nagger to do it. Is there a term better than "nagger"?


title: Ban vs Suspend (e.g. I banned a user from my site)

text: Is it correct to say > We will suspend you from our website Or > We will ban you from our website Both seem acceptable, but which is the best?


title: What is the meaning of the phrase "this side of x"? And how do I use it?

text: Since I don't understand it in the first place, I better just give you an example: Cracked.com example, says _otherwise known as "the pettiest hobo crime this side of aggressive panhandling."_ ( **WARNING** : site graphics could be **NSFW** , YMMV) It's not the only time I have seen it but it's the only one I can find via Google Search The usage that I've seen seems to indicate some sort of comparison. The example above seems to say that "where we live, panhandling is aggressive", but I can't figure out the exact meaning Note: So far I think I've only seen this phrase in cracked.com itself. Perhaps it's some kind of inside joke, but I certainly don't get it and its usage seems pretty legitimate EDIT: Mathias Foster gives 2 other examples: _this side of the black stump_ and _this side of the equator_.


title: Expression choice for the error of being too exact?

text: For example, stating a street address with millimetric precision would be too exact and is therefore not applicable and not done. So you can be too exact. Is there an expression for this error or a phrase (like "cutting stones with a surgeon's knife" or likewise if someone uses a tool or an instrument with too much precision for a job)?


title: "Simple is best" vs "Simple is the best"

text: As a foreigner, using articles is one of the most difficult part. What is the difference between "Simple is best" and "Simple is the best"? When I googled it, both appeared with many results, so it seems both are right. Are they same or have some differences?


title: "so does/so did"

text: In a middle of a conversation, I came across the following situation. My friend said, "The weather forecast says it's going to be rainy this weekend." I wanted to say, "It also said that for the last week, but it didn't rain." This is a long sentence and I wonder whether there is a shorter way to express it. Maybe > So did for the last week but didn't rain. Is this correct? I want to emphasize the _weather forecast_. The sentence should look like as if it started with "The weather forecast...". What are the related grammar for these kind of scenarios?


title: Word for a combination of video / visuals / perhaps other media

text: I believe it was about one year ago that I listened to a song (title is “Hún Jörð” by the band Sigur Rós) on YouTube accompanied by video. I believe the video was taken from a film about Jesus and Christianity. The author used a term for this kind of combination of audio and visual, but I can’t remember it. Could anybody help me out? **Edit** : When I looked up the word back then, I believe one of the definitions was something along the lines of “two things moving together” or “two things playing in harmony”.


title: Is this a correct sentence?

text: > Either a dryer hook-up kit or power cord and separate vent kit are required. Basically means either   * a) dryer hook-up kit   * b) power cord and separate vent kit are required. The sentence sounds wrong but I'm not sure how.


title: What is the term for a child that's in between toddler and adolescent?

text: I'm trying to come up with terms to describe the various age ranges for children up through teenager and I'm stuck trying to describe someone who's in the age range of about 6 through 10. In other words, I'm trying to fill in the gap: newborn -> infant -> toddler -> ??? -> pre-teen -> teenager I considered that "pre-teen" technically fits that age range, but to me, that term strongly implies a child in the 10-12 range (just before they hit 13 and become a teenager). I also considered but rejected "pre-pubescent", which also technically fits, but is more focused on a child's level of sexual maturity, which is irrelevant to the situation I'm trying to describe. Most references I found simply refer to children of that age as a "child", but doesn't that term apply equally to anyone under the age of majority, or at the very least, anyone pre-adolescence?


title: Where did the term "garage band" originate from?

text: Apart from the video game, the term has been in use amongst musicians for years - where did it come from, documented listings?


title: Are there English affixes for left/right?

text: Is there an affix that means left (right)? E.g. Imagine it was the prefix lef-. We'd be able to generate the following words.   * lefcars (cars in which the steering wheel is on the left-hand side)   * leffoils (foils with the grip set-up for a left-hander)   * lefpoliticians (politicians associated with the political left) etc.


title: "Issue #16 is being downloaded" vs "Downloading issue #16"

text: When downloading something on an application, I preferred the present continuous active voice form of the message, say something like "Downloading issue #16" However I have been asked to change it into passive voice form "Issue #16 is being downloaded" While I can't really point what is worse or better with the latter, my sensibilities strongly favor the former. Can you point out which one is better, what would you prefer and why?


title: Use of "minute or two" to mean "moment" in the early 20th century?

text: In what seems like at least half her novels, Agatha Christie writes that one character waits for a "minute or two." At first I thought that these characters were actually sitting there and pondering, mid-conversation for a full 120 seconds while the other character was staring at them expectantly. However, this phrase has also been used in situations of high urgency, so I'm starting to think that "minute" is actually just being used to represent a pregnant pause. > Tommy became restive. The conversation he had overheard had stimulated his > curiosity. He felt that, by hook or by crook, he must hear more. > > There was no sound from below, and it did not seem likely that the > doorkeeper would come upstairs. After listening intently for a minute or > two, he put his head round the curtain. In this passage, Tommy is considering moving closer to eavesdrop. Waiting for a full minute would sort of defeat the purpose! My questions are: Am I right about this meaning "a moment" rather than "60-120 seconds"? Was this something actually used by many writers or speakers at time, or is it peculiar to Christie? (who, in my opinion, writes some of the most incredible plots and characters, but her prose feels a bit amateurish, which might explain a "mistake" like this.) When and why did this usage fall out of use? Edit: I don't agree that "He waited for a minute or two" is the same case as "Give me a minute." For example, if someone expected to take another 10 seconds to finish something, they might tell you "Give me a minute", but more likely, "give me a second." However, they would most certainly not say "Give me a minute or two" because that strongly suggests from close to a minute to a few minutes. In addition, I am asking much more about the specific phrase "minute or two", which she uses exclusively. Characters never wait for "a minute" or "about a minute."


title: Single word meaning "freshness duration"

text: I'm looking for a word that encapsulates the phrases "freshness duration" or "duration until something is stale".


title: Does "absent friends" have definite association with deceased family/friends?

text: Having gotten married this year and acting as best man for my brother, one of the responsibilities for speeches was a toast "to absent friends". With some of our family no longer being alive, for us this evoked memories of them. Is the implication of lost loved ones strong enough that this is a widely understood euphemism for dead family and friends?


title: An alternative for "revisionism"

text: I believe that _revisionism_ is in itself essentially a historical exercise. I'm looking for something that can succinctly describe the following scenarios where the "revisionism" is more immediate and possibly necessary. I'm open to both terminology and colourful idiomatic expressions. > John Doe is the leader of the revolutionary army. He is, however, hit in a > drive-by shooting and dies instantly. Later on, his second-in-command > informs the army that their leader didn't die instantly and actually > survived for a few minutes. He states that John Doe's last words were, > "Don't lose heart and keep on going without me. I'll be watching over you > from the heavens.". Quoting from here: > The miracle of the herring is an usual miracle ascribed to St. Thomas > Aquinas, mainly out of desperation on the part of the Catholic Church > because, although he was a great writer, he did little in the way of > sainthood. Therefore, they created this miracle. The story goes that St. > Thomas Aquinas was on his deathbed and wanted some herring, but there was no > herring where he lived (the Mediterranean) so they gave him pilchards > instead. When Thomas ate them, he said they were the best herring he ever > tasted. The church claimed that the pilchards turned into herrings in his > mouth. (I'm not sure how much time passed between Aquinas' death and his canonisation. For the purpose of this question, let's assume that this interval was relatively brief.) **Edit:** I'm concerned more with the **act** of revisionism to **_advance a cause_** than its end result or the subjects involved.


title: Sayings similar to "a picture is worth a thousand words"

text: I' m looking for a common saying or catchphrase that has the same meaning as "a picture is worth a thousand words". I need this as a title for an article that illustrates that point in a specific context, but the original is obviously worn out. EDIT To clarify: I'm trying to illustrate the point that it's easier to convince someone of a fact if you show them it, than if you just describe it.


title: I don't understand the word "however" in this context

text: > In the years since transgression I have sought no absolution, only bare > forgiveness. In good faith I have removed myself from all temptation, > sacrificed to prove my commitment however I can imagine. I cannot understand the last part " _sacrificed to prove my commitment however I can imagine_ ", so could you explain this sentence to me?


title: What does "What the monarchies have going for them are royal families that allow them to stand above the fray,’ mean?

text: I saw the sentence in the following quote of Kenneth M. Pollack, director of the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution, about Middle East upheaval in New York Times’ ‘Quotation of Today.’ I understand the meaning of _stand above the fray._ But as I was unsure of the meaning of _have going for someone / something_ , I checked a dictionary. It carries _have a lot going for_ and its definition as _Having many positive personal attributes and achievement_. Having seen this, I’m not still very clear about the exact meaning of the line, _What the monarchies have going for them are royal families that allow them to stand above the fray._ Though I can 'guess' the meaning of the whole by context, can somebody rephrase or restructure this line so it is easier for a foreign English learner to understand? The quote in question reads; > What the monarchies have going for them are royal families that allow them > to stand above the fray, to a certain extent. It allows them to sack the > government without sacking themselves. > > \--- Kenneth M. Pollack, director of the Saban Center for Middle East Policy > at the Brookings Institution, on why monarchs are weathering political > upheaval in the Middle East.


title: Is "holiday" derived from "holy day"?

text: I'm just curious if the word "holiday" is derived from "holy day".


title: People eighty years and up

text: Is there a word for people in the 80+ age group? I know octogenarian means 80-to-89-year-olds. Is there a word for people in their 80s, 90s, 100s, etc., inclusive? Supraoctogenarian?


title: "At the time" versus "at that time"

text: If I want to say that during the accident there were no passengers, how do I phrase it? > There were no passengers at the time.   >  There were no passengers at that time.


title: "jury-rigged", or "jerry-rigged"

text: As far back as I can remember, the usage went something like _"Their **jury** was **rigged** , and that's how he got away."_ Or, _"They **Jerry-rigged** the controller at the last moment and it worked!"_ I used to cringe every time I saw something being _jury-rigged_ , until I found it in the NY Times today. Which one is it? Is the other one wrong?


title: Opposite of "distributed"

text: What is the opposite of _distributed_ ? Is it _single_ or _combined_ ? What is a more appropriate word?


title: Water comprises/composes/combines/consists two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  When do you use what word to express that something consists of something > else?   >  Does a whole “compose” its parts?   >  Correct use of “consist” > Water _comprises/composes/combines/consists_ two hydrogen atoms and one > oxygen atom. Can anyone let me know the correct usage in this sentence?


title: What’s wrong with saying “Your book inside”?

text: Let’s say you have a box, and you have a book inside it. You can attach a paper on it saying “Book” or “Book inside”. Now, if you’re sending it to someone and you write a note on it, you would say, “Your book is inside.” Why would saying _your book inside_ be wrong? Either way you’re labelling the object. If on your note you wrote “your book: inside” or “your book – inside”. Those seem fine because they have a sign. Why is that? Is it because it just sounds better?


title: Question about the phrase "items borrowed"

text: In the sentence > For example, the proportion of children's **book borrowed** doubled to > comprise 40% of total I mean that "book borrowed" = book which is borrowed. And the full sentence is : > For example, the proportion of children's **book which is borrowed** doubled > to comprise 40% of total Please confirm for me. The way I mean correct or incorrect?


title: Which sentences is better?

text: I have a question. Which sentence is better?   1. I have sent electronic copies of all my documents to your University.    2. I am sending electronic copies of all my documents to your University.        3. Could you please review my documents and determine whether I qualify to be admitted to postgraduate studies.   4. Would you please review my documents and determine whether these qualify me for admission to postgraduate studies. Thank you in advance for your help.


title: Single word for "this is why"

text: Consider: Where = here When = now What = this How = thus Why = (this is why)?? With the above, you could answer a question with the word on the left with just the single word on the right as an answer without additional information when the context is implicit, or can be provided with non-verbal cues such as pointing or demonstrating. Is there a single word answer to the question "why?" to describe **this reason** or **this is why** when the context is implicit? Both **therefore** and **because** are inadequate as they require additional information. If not, does anyone know if other languages perhaps do have a single word for this?


title: What do you call a brightly lit spot?

text: What do you call a brightly lit spot, especially as a result of reflecting the light source (e.g. sun) off a glassy surface?


title: What is the word for nouns with gender-specific forms?

text: Thought I would try a question with visual aid.* The image below shows Claire Danes, "Actor", in a kiosk poster for the Met. The variation in usage between actor and actress for female thespians is ably handled here: Female Actor or Actress ![Claire Danes, female Actor](http://i.stack.imgur.com/bXzT6.jpg) My question is: more generally, what is the term for nouns that have gender- specific forms (master / mistress, emperor / empress, bachelor / bachelorette, hero / heroine) and those that don't (swimmer, dancer, announcer, etc.)? [Separately, it would be interesting to see any cross-language / cross-region statistics on prevalence or frequency of gender-variant noun forms.] * Victor Mair on Language Log has been illustrating contemporary Chinese usage brilliantly with photos from real life ( http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?author=13 ), so I thought I would try it out here on English Usage. If you like experiments, let me know how you like this one...


title: Why do people say "break a leg" to actors?

text: Frequently, before going on stage, someone will say "break a leg" to an actor, which is a peculiar acting saying meaning "good luck!" How did this expression come about?


title: Is "Them’s fighting words" a right and received English expression?

text: I came across the phrase ‘ _Them’s fighting words_ ,’ in the beginning part of a Time magazine (July 12) article in its Swampland section under the title “Don’t mess with the stimulus! It had all your creamed spinach and more.” The author, Michael Grunwald, seems to be defending Obama’s stimulus plan of infrastructure. The sentence in question reads as follows: > You know, the poor thing has no one to defend it but me. And me again. And > yet again. So, its infrastructure spending was too “rushed,” and sent cash > to the "least difficult and imaginative projects," huh? _Them’s fighting > words_! I interpret "Them's fighting words" to simply mean "They're fighting words." Can _them_ be used as a subject being followed by the singular of "to be" and a transitive verb (fight) that takes the objective noun ( _words_ )? I’m puzzled if this is an established American usage of _them_ or just a fashionable saying.


title: Wondering if this mixed conditional is correct or not ( taken from Euronews )

text: > Earlier on his arrival in Warsaw the president had met US and Polish air > personnel from a detachment of F-16 fighter jets. Obama also stressed that > more sanctions **were being** prepared against Russia if the West > **decided** it ( Russia) engaged in activities which were destabilising to > Ukraine. Source: http://euronews.com/2014/06/03/us-to-step-up-military-presence-in- european-reassurance-initiative/ I really have my doubts whether the mixed conditional here is correct format. Based on my perception the writer should have used **second conditional** , somethimg like: > Obama also stressed that more sanctions **would be** prepared against Russia > if the West **decided** it ( Russia) engaged or had engaged in activities > which were destabilising to Ukraine. If I want to make a mixed conditional out of the sentence, it would be something like: > If new sanctions **were going to be imposed** on Russia in future, it > **would be** because of further possible destablising activities in Ukraine. Is my sentence correct, as opposed to what the Euronews reporter wrote? Many thanks in advance.


title: Common interjections / exclamations in English

text: What are the interjections / exclamations commonly used in English (e.g. _aha_ , _wow_ , _eh_ , etc.)? I'd appreciate if you can provide me with a full list with the meaning of each term.


title: thrice, twice, once, *zeroce?

text: In similarity to this question: once, twice, thrice, *frice? What are some words that indicate 'zero times' ? **EDIT:** I'm looking for a word that clearly states a zero-time occurrence. Not a simple negation.


title: Do serious grammarians endorse the "Can I"/"May I" distinction?

text: Just now, I wanted to ask a question that was something like, "Can I get a thorough list of all the parts of speech that a sentence can be broken down into?" But then a nagging voice appeared in my head and said, "Of course you can! You certainly have the capability -- but that's not what you want, is it." "You're asking for help, so use _may_." My question is: Should I invariably trust that voice, instilled in students by grammar school teachers everywhere? What do serious linguists and language enthusiasts think about the "Can I"/"May I" distinction? Would they agree, or is it fair to say that using "can" there has become proper idiomatic English? I ask because I couldn't really think of a quick way to rephrase that sentence using "may", and began to wonder whether it was just another one of those kludgy myths megalomaniac teachers enforce on their students...


title: Usage of "nonetheless" and "nevertheless"

text: Person A: "Is it just because you think I am sad, that you want to talk with me?" Person B: "No, I want to talk with you **___ __ ___ ___**." In the blank, which word is correct: "nonetheless" or "nevertheless"? Also, can you give an example of the usage?


title: Can "the Scotch minister" mean the Presbyterian Church of Scotland?

text: In Mark Twain's "A Dog's Tale" there is a sentence which I feels a little tricky,“...a curly-haired Irish setter by the name of Robin Adair, who was a Presbyterian like me, and **belonged to the Scotch minister**.” According to dictionaries, "minister" only refers to priests or other high rank religious officials; in other words, it refers to **people**. Yet this was the first time "Scotch minister" appeared in the work, and therefore the word "the" sounds a little strange, and an "a" might sound more natural. I wonder if the expression is an allusion to the Presbyterian Church of Scotland, which is the national church there. Is it possible that "the Scotch Minister" could refer to the Scotch Church instead of a mere person, or it is just that the narrator of the story took for granted the priest was known to the intended audience in the context?


title: "That's okay" to mean "no" or "don't bother"?

text: Growing up, I became accustomed to using the phrase "that's okay" to mean "no" or "don't bother." For example: > **Waitress** : Yous guys want any dessert?   >  **Patron** [shaking head to mean no]: That's okay.   >  **Waitress** : Here's the check then, hun. In other words, the patron is really trying to say, "That's okay, _but I am already full_." Later on in life, when traveling to areas with other dialects of English, I was often met with confusion when trying to use that phrase to mean "no". When I got to thinking about it, the phrase itself is quite ambiguous, because it is unclear to what "that" refers. In fact, "that's okay" could very well be taken to mean "yes" in the above scenario, if interpreted literally. I have since taught myself to avoid this usage. Having first learned English in the Philadelphia dialect, I attributed this weird usage as a regional fluke, like our use of "anymore", _et al_. However, I have since heard other people in other dialects using this phrase to mean "no". **Questions** : Is this usage of "that's okay" a regionalism? Is its etymology as simple as just dropping the end of the phrase, _e.g._ , "That's okay ~~, _but I am already full_~~ ," or is its etymology more complex? **Edit:** This is completely anecdotal, but I seemed to meet the most resistance to this construction on the West coast of the US, and particularly in the Pacific Northwest, _e.g._ , > **Waitress** : Would you like any dessert?   >  **Me** [shaking head to mean no]: That's okay.   >  **Waitress** : Does that mean "yes" or "no"‽


title: Meaning of the phrase "Educational pearl"

text: I've found that phrase "Educational pearl" on this page and have no idea what it means. Can someone explain it for me please?


title: What is a "high-level conversation"?

text: Recently I was told by a potential interviewer for a job that we would be having a "high-level conversation" soon. I assumed at the time that she just meant a conversation with a higher-up, e.g., her boss, but suddenly am not so sure. So I'm curious. Have you heard that term before, and what does it mean?


title: How/From where did the term "paradigm shift" originate?

text: Paradigm Shift + Thinking outside of the box = Death of a Salesman


title: Pronouncing acronyms

text: I've noticed that some people in my office spell out "data import tool" as **D**. **I**. **T**., whereas others will say " **dit** " (like "ditty"). Is trying to pronounce an acronym as a word, as opposed to spelling it out, ever correct?


title: Is this structure, Adj. as it seems, correct?

text: I wish to express > Although it may sound good, its assumption is questionable and risky. I remember vaguely that I have read it as such from somewhere I cannot remember: > Good as it may sound, its assumption is questionable and risky. Is it correct? Or it should be: > Good as it may sound, **but** its assumption is questionable and risky.


title: When did the term "scientist" overtake usage of the term "natural philosopher"?

text: The word _scientist_ comes from the Latin _scientia_, but when did its usage become more prevalent than the term _natural philosopher_?


title: "Toys out of the pram" expression

text: Can the expression "toys out of the pram" be applicable for describing that someone is having a bad day?


title: How to use it's vs is?

text: I've seen that people use "how easy is it to […]?" and "how easy is to […]?" Another example could be: > I couldn’t ignore the barrage of research showing how easy **it is** to > screw up your kids. Could it be written as follows? > I couldn’t ignore the barrage of research showing how easy **is** to screw > up your kids. Admittedly, it sounds much better the first form, however, is there any rule regarding the use of _it's_ versus _is_.


title: Does "typically" always imply a habitual occurrence?

text: Example: > When she lost her wallet, typically, she panicked. That looks awkward and incorrect. A present tense version of the sentence looks correct: > When she loses her wallet, typically she panics. (or "she typically panics") I am trying to explain to someone why why "typically" is wrong in the past- tense sentence. Is it because "typically" always implies a reoccurring event?


title: Cleanness vs Cleanliness

text: I only heard "cleanness" for the first time yesterday - I did not know this word existed. So what's the difference between cleanness and cleanliness? I've read this http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=973672 but am not clear when I would use "cleanness"


title: Origin of the personal pronouns

text: What is the origin of the personal pronouns _I_ , _you_ , _he_ , _she_ , _it_ , _we_ , and _they_?


title: Easy interrogative garden path prevention

text: How do writers of American English inform the reader that the current sentence is a question (with all the assumptions and prosody that go with it) without sacrificing the content, format, impact, etc. of the sentence? (In Spanish the problem is alleviated by use of the inverted question mark.) Examples: > Running into a lot of trouble handling finances and balancing your budget? > > The fastest way to find the north pole is to run there?


title: Modern replacement for checking frequency tables?

text: What is the most up-to-date, robust, and reliable way to check verb (or other POS) frequencies in current usage? Is there any hope of an algorithm involving counting Google hits and dividing by some benchmark number (say 1,000,000,000,000) or is that so error-prone as to be out of the question? (Any help with tags would be appreciated.)


What is the origin of the phrase "and nothing of value was lost"? Is this from a movie, book, or show, or did it get its start on Slashdot or some other online forum?


title: Origin of “Homeward ho!”

text: In the English translation of an essay by Leon Trotsky that came out in _Foreign Affairs_ , I read [emphasis added]: > Now it turns out that the world exchange is the source of all misfortunes > and all dangers. **Homeward ho!** Back to the national hearth! While its meaning is perfectly clear to me (“let’s go home!”), I cannot determine its origin. Has it something to do with a command to a horse?


title: Why do people use “mayday” and not “help”?

text: I’m not native English speaker, so I wonder why forces like policemen and firemen and such use _Mayday_ instead of the simpler _Help_. What is origin of this habit?


title: What is meant by 'intestinal fortitude'? 'ovariological fortitude'?

text: Is a good example of 'intestinal fortitude' when someone faces his/her fair share of adversity and bounces back from it? Or when a boxer is repeatedly pummeled and knocked down in a fight, and he keeps returning to his feet to continue notwithstanding the beating endured (he's showing a lot of heart, internal strength and 'guts')? Can you say 'He had the intestinal fortitude ('guts') to call me a buffoon'? Is 'ovariological fortitude' the female equivalent of this term?


title: Meaning of "plumb" as verb

text: I found in the free dictionary the various meanings of _plumb_ as a verb and mainly it seems to have the meaning of _explore/study/delve into_. However, within the title of an article of the International Herald Tribune (Aug. 11, 2011), namely _Spanish case plumbs trans-Atlantic divide on Web privacy_ , it seems to have the meaning _trigger_. Is that right?


title: What's the proper interpretation of: "I was kissed by a girl twice"?

text: The other day I experienced two distinct but similar events. I wanted to convey this to a friend and this is what came to mind: "I was kissed by a girl twice." My question is, does this sentence say, "I was kissed by the _same_ girl twice," or "I was kissed by two different girls on two separate occasions?" Similarly, what's the proper interpretation of this sentence: "He got hit by a bicycle twice yesterday." (Was he hit by the same bike twice?)


title: last summer or the last summer?

text: I've read `Essential Grammar in Use` Raymond Murphy's book. some page of the book was told me: > Do not use "the" with: > > television > > breakfast/lunch/dinner > > next/last + week/month/year/summer/Monday/etc. e.g. > Did you have a holiday last summer? My question is can i speak: > Did you have a holiday in the last summer? Is it really that i can not use `a` or `the` with all of them above? for example: > a television, the television, the last month, ... I'm a little bit confusing. Is that rule depend on its context or it is always true? Note that this question might be duplicated but i expect the answer that emphasise on the additional explanation according to the context above that i referred from the book to make it more clear.


title: What is the implication of Herman Cain “tried to parse the meaning of “settlement” versus “agreement”?

text: In Maureen Dowd’s article titled “Cain not Able” appearing in the _New York Times_ November 1st issue, there was the following line: > “He [Herman Cain] has contradicted himself even more risibly on his memory > of the harassment charges than he has on his abortion position. > > At first, he said he wasn’t aware of the five-figure settlement to one > woman; then, suddenly, he was aware. Instead of the meaning of “is,” _Cain > tried to parse the meaning of “settlement” versus “agreement_.” He still > claims he doesn’t remember the other five-figure settlement to another > woman.” I don’t get meaning of “Cain tried to parse the meaning of “settlement” versus “agreement.” Of course I understand “settlement” is different from “agreement,” because they’re different words. But what does this line mean exactly in this particular context. What is the technical difference and difference of implications between “(five-figure) settlement on payment” and “agreement on payment” to a woman for his alleged sexual harassment charge (or liability)? Why did Dowd say Cain tried to “parse” the meaning of his own words, not saying “he mixed-up” or “intentionally obscured them" or even evaded the question on his charge? Additional question: What does "instead of the meanig of 'is'? mean? What does 'is' have a particular meaning here?


title: Good websites to help improve usage of prepositions

text: Please anyone suggest some good websites which give tips on the usage of prepositions on a daily or weekly basis. I have doubts regarding usage of prepositions in many contexts. So wanted to know a general website which would help. I am a software programmer and i get many doubts regarding the usage of prepsitions many times while discussing on forums. For example: I am not sure of a sentence like "Is this conference only for android developers or anyone without a prior knowledge of/in android coding can attend? "


title: Is the following sentence punctuated correctly?

text: I feel like something is wrong with the _", notably" part_ , but I can't explain why! Is the following sentence grammatically correct? > Employees give relatively low scores across a variety of characteristics, > notably the quality of the Marketing department's decisions, compensation, > and having sufficient people resources. (My problem with grammar is that it's completely intuitive, and I often can't explain the rules behind why something is wrong.)


title: What does "boy" mean here?

text: Recently, in a magazine, I read the following line: > It's been an eventful year and boy, has it flown past! My question is, what does the word "boy" mean here? Is it an idiom? What is its usage?


title: What is the difference between 'make decision' and 'take decision'?

text: What is the difference between _make decision_ and _take decision_? When to use the one and when the other?


title: Why is anyone in a porn movie considered a porn star?

text: Recently, the media made a big deal about Charlie Sheen dating a porn star. It seems that anyone who is in a porn movie is referred to as a porn star. The same is not true of anyone in a normal movie. Everyone in a normal movie isn't a movie star. Everyone in a rock band is certainly not a rock star. Why is it that porn actors are afforded such lofty descriptions?


title: How to quote a list from a paper?

text: I'm writing a paper and I need to quote the following list:   1. Step1: Compute the center of each triangle and the correspondences between the center and three vertexes of the triangle;   2. Step2: Set up the Kd-tree according the centers of triangles;   3. Step3: Search the Kd-tree and check up the topological connectivity of the corresponding edges, and find the boundary edges;   4. Step4: Distinguish the different boundary loops according to the topological connectivity of vertexes; Do I quote like the following? "   1. Step1: Compute the center of each triangle and the correspondences between the center and three vertexes of the triangle;   2. Step2: Set up the Kd-tree according the centers of triangles;   3. Step3: Search the Kd-tree and check up the topological connectivity of the corresponding edges, and find the boundary edges;   4. Step4: Distinguish the different boundary loops according to the topological connectivity of vertexes; "(place citation number here)


title: Proper adjective for an addictive TV series

text: Can I use _Crazy addictive_ for a TV series which I'm being hooked up? Like: This TV show is not as _crazy addictive_ as that TV show.


title: The objects in an analogy

text: Consider this sentence: > This situation is analogous to the classic problem of cracking a hashed and > salted password: We **see** the X as a password and Y as a salt. What are the other ways to refer to the different "objects" here, instead of just using **see**? As the rest of my text is rather formal, _see_ feels like a bad fit. Edit: To be crystal clear, my goal is to argue the use of the analogy by comparing the X and Y to the password and salt.


title: Difference between 'than others' and 'than the others'

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Incriminating others vs. Incriminating the others: Is this sentence > correct? When should one of these be preferred over another for sentences of the form "A is different than (others | the others)"? For ex. what is the difference between - > All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others. and > All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than the others.


title: When to use words quite, rather, pretty, fairly etc

text: Is there any logic to this or just decision? I would use the following combinations:   * quite amazing   * rather large   * pretty good I would not use the following combinations:   * pretty amazing   * quite large   * rather good There're also the words pretty and fairly and of course we say "pretty good" instead of quite good/rather good. Is there any grammar rule that states which word to select to give strength to an adjective without depending on the adjective for no appearant reason?


title: Single word for a person of few words

text: What is the single word for a person who expresses every emotion with a few or single word.


title: Preposition with phrase passed away

text: Is "My grandmother passed away from cancer last night" grammatically correct and acceptable?


title: Why do we say someone who has read many books is "widely read"?

text: Why do we say someone who has read many books is "widely read," or "well- read"? (Though the latter has a hyphen, and it could be called a separate word. Still, it has its etymology.) Why didn't we just stick to saying "he _has_ read widely"; why did we go from saying "he _has_ read" to "he _is_ read"?


title: Which tense should a verb take when parentheses could alter the tense?

text: In the following sentence I'd like to convey that "I don't know what space an item currently takes up or what space it will take up at some undefined future time". I contracted the sentence using parentheses* to read: > I don't know what space it (will) take up. My memory of primary school tells me that a sentence should still make sense if the bracketed section was removed, meaning I would have to conjugate "take" as if it were present tense. When I read this, however, it sounds wrong. > I don't know what space it (will) takes up. Should I always favour the way the complete sentence reads, in this case, conjugating for the future tense? * * * *brackets [BrE] but my programmer mind is often tuned to AmE alternatives.


Which English words place the tip of the tongue between teeth?   For example: _other_ and _that_


title: What is the question form of "used to do"?

text: What is the correct way to convert "used to do" into a question? Since I want to emphasize that the action is not on-going any more, so simple past tense is not a good idea here. Could I say "do xxx use to do" or "did xxx use to do"? Both sound weird to me. If there is no way to do it. Do you suggest any other alternatives?


title: Asking a Question in the Imperfect

text: I can say in Spanish, > Yo jugaba al tenis cuando tenía 8 años, which means > I used to play tennis when I was 8 years old. I could also ask, > ¿Jugabas tú al tenis cuando tenías 8 años? whose English counterpart is > Did you play tennis when you were 8 years old? Sometimes I get stuck, though, since it's hard to ask > Did you _use to_ play tennis ... Is there a real way to ask a question in the imperfect using the "used to" form of the imperfect?


title: Is the word multimedia redundant?

text: So, the correct plural form of medium is media. Of course, there are exceptions, and the words have taken on new usages (such as adding a definitive article "the" to media, making it singular), but isn't the word multimedia redundant? What you are really trying to say is multiple mediums -- or just media. I imagine it started in the 50s or 60s. Did it start as a "buzzword" or some sort of industry jargon? Perhaps it is a byproduct of the aforementioned exceptions, in that "the media" became singular, and thus a new pluralized form had to be developed?


title: What is the "Wire Service Era"?

text: In a CBS sports article, I read this sentence: > Alabama wrapped up its 10th national championship of the _wire service era_ > , winning its third national championship in four years with a 42-14 > thrashing of No. 1 Notre Dame in the BCS title game. There are a few definitions of "wire service" out there. For example, > wire service (noun): A news-gathering organization that distributes > syndicated copy electronically, as by teletype or the Internet, usually to > subscribers. My estimation is that the _wire service era_ coincides with the advent of some wire-based transfer of news, but I'm not sure which. The article references Alabama's 10th National Championship of the WSE, the first of which happened in 1961. Is anyone familiar with this term, and, if so, could you shed some light on the timespan of the "wire service era"?


title: Hypernyms for "historic/archeological places", "churches/temples/mosques"

text: We are building a travel app that will have categories of places like   1. Wild Life   2. Rivers   3. Beaches    4. Hill Stations I also want to have categories describing the following:   1. Historic Places / Archeological Places   2. Churches/Temples/Mosques  What are the suitable single-word substitutions for these?


title: Difference between the use of "resilience" and "resiliency"

text: I constantly hear people use the word "resiliency" (especially sports broadcasters and the like). I've always used "resilience" instead. Is there a preferred word to use in any given situation? As far as I can gather they are exact synonyms.


title: A XHTML document or An XHTML document

text: When writing this sentence: > So it's possible to do an XHTML quine, but not a HTML quine I noticed that I used `an` for XHTML but not for HTML. In the discussion on this thread, I've picked up on a few points: > Use an when the following sound is a vowel-sound. The letter X is pronounced > eks ... so an eks-em-el code. And, > XML code, by the way, is not singular. "An XML code" sounds as odd as "a C > code" or "a Visual Basic code". You could say "an XML tag" but "XML code" > refers to any quantity of code written in XML. As well as, >   1. XML stands for "Extensible Markup Language." (not "extended") > Therefore it seemed more natural to type `an` for something that's singular (document) and begins with an x. It seems like the "ex" in "extensible" is similar to the "ex" in "extra", since you pronounce the consonants in the `XML` acronym. Is it incorrect to use `an` in this case?


title: Is it proper to use capital letters in (e.g.) document names

text: If I am referring to a definite document, the name of which I have previously stated, is it proper to use a capital letter, and omit the document name? For example, I mention some international standard called "ISO 1923801: The Proper Use of Capital Letters". If later in the text I am referring to it it omitting the full name, should I say "in the standard...", or "in the Standard", since the reader will know for sure which one I am talking about?


title: The difference between "the way" and "like"

text: What's the difference between these two sentences: "He treated his children **like** an officer treats his soldiers" "He treated his children **the way** an officer treats his soldiers"


title: Verb after preposition

text: Is it correct to write this: "... rely on emulating techniques"? I must write the emulate verb in gerund because it is preceded by an preposition, right? The whole sentence is: > These systems usually rely on emulation techniques, such as interpretation > and dynamic binary translation, to execute guest application code. Isn't it true that always that a verb appear after a preposition the verb must change to gerund form?


title: Punctuation in presentation slides

text: I am creating a presentation of slides to be used with a projector. Most of the slides contain lists of incomplete sentences so as to not clutter them up with too much text and overwhelm the audience. I have written the phrases without ending periods. _Should_ they have ending periods?


title: Help on an ACT English Question

text: While taking a practice ACT test, I came across a confusing grammar problem. The sentences given in the passage are as follows: "Many people believe that language is the domain of human beings. However, cats have **developed an intricate language** not for each other, but for the human beings who have adopted them as pets." The bolded text would best be replaced by:   1. NO CHANGE   2. developed, an intricate language   3. developed an intricate language,   4. developed; an intricate language The answer is very obviously not 2 or 4. The supposedly correct answer is 1. NO CHANGE, but I do not understand why answer 3 is not correct. A pair of commas is used to set aside information that adds to the sentence, but is not necessary for the sentence to be understood. The book where I came across this problem states that there is no need for a pause, thus making answer choice 1 the correct answer. Why, then, do I feel like the sentence flows better with a comma before "not"?


title: Better way to say "repeat sequentially"

text: I'm trying to say "it counts the number of times a given value repeats sequentially" in a list, meaning it finds the maximum number of times a value occurs _in a row_ in a list. I know there's a word for it, but I can't remember it.


title: Adverbs for Dirty (Dirtily?)

text: It is common to simply use 'dirty' as the adverb here, ex: He talks dirty. Other resources say that the adverb is dirtily! I do not believe I've _ever_ heard this used... is it correct?


title: That which was promised

text: My brain immediately suggested the non-word "promisand", but I doubt I would be understood if I said that. What's a good word (or failing that, phrase) for the action or thing that was promised? This reminds me of Latin expressions like _Carthaginem esse delendam_ (Carthage must be destroyed, lit., 'Carthage is a thing-which-is-to-be-destroyed') or perhaps that once-common mathematical expression QED _quod erat demonstrandum_ ('that was a thing-which-is-to-be- proven'). Circumlocution or other forms are often possible: "He gave me the promised widget" or "He did what he promised he would". But sometimes it's useful to have a word that stands on its own. More generally, is there a good way to express the construction 'thing-which- is-to-be-X'? In Latin this is a gerundive, though it seems in my brief searches that the term means different things in English and other languages.


title: Origin of "washing up"

text: Where does the phrase "to wash up" (equally "to clean up") originate from? Particularly the word "up", how did that enter the phrase?


title: What does "roll your eyes" mean?

text: I came across the following sentence in a technical documentation that explains about integration with HTTP protocol. What does "rolled your eyes" mean here? Excerpt: > If you’re a developer you’re likely fairly familiar with this protocol — you > may have even **_rolled your eyes_** at the sight of it — but it’s worth > mentioning to emphasize our integration’s dependency on proper, well-formed > HTTP requests.


title: “These stuff” vs. “this stuff”

text: I wrote “I know all _these_ stuff; I don’t have to go over _them_ again” in my writing-exam paper and the teacher corrected it to read, “I know all _this_ stuff; I don’t have to go over _it_ again.” The teacher is Irish so I don’t think he would make a mistake but I think even if the first one ( _these_ ) was wrong, the second one ( _them_ ) should have stayed the same. Am I right?


title: Genetic Relatives

text: In the vein of historical linguistics, what languages (modern or dead) are considered genetically related to English? Also what differences mark a language as a genetic relative vs a language that had a developmental impact on English in its past? To what degree are they related? Presumably most all mutual intelligibility has been lost, but when and how? What artifacts can be found in modern English from this relationship?


title: Double 'not' in questions - how is it correct?

text: Suppose the following sentence: "Aren't the headers not covered by copyright?" Is this sentence correct?


title: Using "to fix" as synonym of "to correct"

text: I often encounter the usage of "to fix" verb in the meaning "to correct". Was this a widespread use before the computer age? How would you conduct the other meaning of "to fix", i.e. to make something to stay in place strongly without moving or vibration in such a way so to avoid the confusion and ambiguity?


title: imperative and intransitive

text: I'm translating two poems into English and I have two questions -- hopefully someone will be able to help me with them... First, I needed to know whether I can simply use "See!" as a sentence (imperative). I tried to do my own research, but it's hard to google this because google does not read punctuation. I know I can say "Look!" or "See??", but could I say "See!" in English? (In Portuguese we can say that even though the correspondent verb is transitive). Second, I needed to know if I could use the verb 'defeat' as intransitive even though it is transitive. I need to say something along the lines of "the light that kills" (a luz que mata) but it hardly sounds poetic like that and I managed to work around the rest of the poem so as it would rhyme with "defeats" (light that defeats). Does that sound alien to native ears? I usually have a good ear for matters related to the English language, but, when it comes to poetry, it is hard for me to draw the line because so much of what I read in poetry sounds weird to me anyway (in Engl or Port)... Can anyone help me with that?


title: What is a verb to describe the act of making a grammatical error?

text: Making a spelling mistake is called "misspelling". It obviously can't be "misgrammaring"... Here's the full context: > “codes”. This might be considered a “minor grammatical error”, only it > isn't. This book deals with code... our profession is creating code. Being a > web developer makes you interact with thousands of people online over time, > everyone saying “code”, the right way. Why consistently misspell or make a > grammatical error with this? I'd like to condense _make a grammatical error with_ into a single word, a verb that describes the act of "misgrammaring".


title: Why is "my giddy aunt" an exclamation of surprise

text: The mental picture that forms in my mind is of fancy English ballrooms, a fainting lady and smelling salts. So someone shouting "My giddy aunt" would rather **be an expression of concern**. Does anyone have an explanation for this phrase? Google Books and the Phrase Finder are not proving helpful and just term it "An exclamation of surprise." Can one of the English scholars out there provide the colourful backstory to this archaic phrase?


title: Meaning of "strike dread"

text: What is the meaning of the phrase _strike dread_? I've encountered it many times.


title: A question of nuance: 'amiable' and amicable'

text: How would an English-speaking person explain the difference between _amiable_ and _amicable_? Which is the more friendly?


title: Have I transformed this reported speech correctly?

text: > She asked the teacher what should she do. Should it read as - > She asked the teacher, What has to be done? Please explain why the sentence might be incorrect.


title: "will likely have cut" usage correct?

text: from the news report _xx will likely have cut yy jobs by end of fiscal 2012, the company has said._ why use **_will have cut_** here? I think "will cut" will be ok.


title: A single added word that changes the meaning of a question

text: At work today, I took an FSA test that asked the question: "You can only give advice to a customer if they ask for it" True OR False? Now, considering our organisation cannot offer advice under ANY circumstances, I could not see a correct answer to this. It turned into a big debate between me and the rest of my group. My argument was that for there to be a correct answer (False), the word "only" needs to be removed as it becomes the main focus of the question otherwise. If it is True, it means we can only offer advice to those who ask for it. If it is False it means we can offer advice whether they ask for it or not. I got very stressed as my entire group was trying to explain to me why I was wrong, when I was certain I was right. At the very least I was insisting that the question is unclear and needs changing. Please, am I right or wrong?


title: “adapt the discussion to suit your own needs” <- correct?

text: Consider this: > The theory above was put forward in the most general way possible. You > should adapt the discussion to suit your own needs. Is the phrase “you should adapt the discussion to suit your own needs” correct? I don’t find it on Google, which is usually a sign of trouble. If it’s wrong, why is it wrong, and what are some alternatives?


title: Meaning of "ant-industry"

text: In the English translation of Oswald Spengler's _Decline of the West_ that I'm reading, they use the word _ant-industry_. I tried to google it and also used online dictionaries but found no answer to the meaning of this word. I'm guessing it is some kind of composite but something like _anti industry_ doesn't really make sense to me in the context. The full sentence is > All genuine historical work is philosophy, unless it is mere **ant- > industry**. More context can be found on google books.


title: Idiom/Phrase/Proverb to describe a scenario where a person who saved me from a bad habit has now fallen into the the same habit

text: I am facing a dilemma. Someone I know once (long time back) helped me get into a good habit, and abandon the accompanying bad habit, and now they have fallen into the same trap as me. I want to let them know of this, but I can't find the proper way to do this. I am looking for a proverb, idiom, phrase, or a historical reference which I could use to subtly remind that person of that fact. Being direct might get me a quicker response, but I am afraid beginning from that might make the person less receptive to my advice. I am looking for something that I can use to get the other person thinking before I finally approach this topic. Something suggestive, yet powerful. Any help would be greatly appreciated.


title: Idioms which denote detraction

text: I'm looking for an idiom which describes a situation whereby superfluous things detract from other more important/prominent things. The way I want to use it is like this: > In practical terms, such details are superfluous to the overall schema and > vision of the narrative because they distract our attention away from the > most important ones.


title: A word that describes a process that can be both good and bad

text: I am searching for a word that can describe an object or process as having both bad and good elements. I realize this is a repeat of this previous question, but I do not believe the suggestions answer my question;   * _**Egregious_** , the proposed answer by the OP, is not a common enough word (anyone I have asked has had to look it up), nor does it mean precisely what I'm after,   * _**Sick_** is a word that can be used in both good and bad contexts. It does not actually mean "both good and bad". The context I am working is biological, specifically cognitive impairment (such as dementia). In a publication I am working on currently, I would like to describe the role of inflammation as having both good and bad roles (depending on the situation). I can think of possible sayings that might apply, for example "swings and roundabouts" or "bitter-sweet", but again these do not seem formal enough. Is there a word that fits the context? "Inflammation is a double-edged sword..." but more scientifically!


title: Do "want to" and "have to" mean the same thing?

text: Which one of the following is correct? > To shine like a sun, you **_want to_** burn like a sun. > > To shine like a sun, you **_have to_** burn like a sun.


title: What literary device is being used here?

text: > The beginning of prehistoric wars is a disputed issue between > anthropologists and historians. Source: http://ask.yahoo.com/20070404.html I was reading that article and I noticed that sentence and it made me laugh for a moment. Is that a specific literary device being used there? Or is it just coincidence that it sounds weird and cool at the same time? It's like the sentence has meaning on two levels; the reals wars fought and the ones the historians are having over the real wars. I hope you guys understand what I'm saying.


title: Is there a word for "one who salvages"?

text: I am looking specifically in the context of used, discarded or lost material (perhaps ships, trucks, weaponry and the like). I have considered _forager_ , _scavenger_ and _pirate_ ; however the first seems to me to attach more of a connotation of food, the second adds the sense of animals to food, and the last intimates more of theft and violence. Perhaps this sentence may give some insight. > The salvage ship plied its trade through uncharted backwaters, searching for > the abandoned detritus of yesterday's business. How would you call who worked on that ship?


title: Difference between "banner" and "flag"

text: What's the difference between the meaning of "banner" and the meaning of "flag"?


title: Why is "door" pronounced with an "o" sound and not a "u"?

text: Why is _door_ pronounced as in 'o' not as in 'u' ?


title: Prepositional phrases on the internet

text: Is there any online dictionary or database of prepositional phrases? What I would like is to enter e. g. "justification" and it would give me: "justification to somebody", "justification of something", and other possibilities (optionally with description of the meaning of each phrase). I found this website http://www.englishpage.com/prepositions/verb_preposition.html. This is almost what I want, but it contains only few examples. I am looking for more complete list. Maybe some online dictionary might provide me with what I want, but dictionary.reference.com, which I use, does not list prepositional phrases with words (right?).


title: What's a more formal name for a "third" party?

text: Two parties are trying to resolve some dispute that involves interest of both. Sometimes it's hard for them to reach an agreement on a fair basis. This is typically when another party who has no interest involved and no bias towards either party comes into play in order to settle the dispute between the two conflicting parties. The term "third party" seems being used quite often. I would also call it a "middle-standing" party or we could say this party is neutral. These terms seem NOT formal enough to me though. I'd like to see if anybody can come up with a better one.


title: Punctuation of a question that ends with a statement

text: How would you punctuate this question, which ends as a statement: > Where is Mom I need to talk to her


title: Why are so many common Asian names English genitalia euphemisms?

text: I noticed a lot of fairly common Asian names — Poon, Dong, Wang — are also slang for genitalia in American English. Why is this? (See also: people’s names as names for genitalia, for English names like Peter, Johnson, Dick.)


title: Why is it 'speaking'/'speech' instead of 'speeking'/'speech' or 'speaking'/'speach'?

text: Why is it _speaking/speech_ instead of _speeking/speech_ or _speaking/speach_?