title: New Zealand pronunciation of "women" vs "woman"

text: I have read in a number of places that the NZ pronunciation of "women" must be rather peculiar. Quoting from just one such place: > For some years I've noted the tendency of Kiwis to pronounce "woman" and > "women" identically (as "woman"). To which an Australian replies: > It appears there is a vowel shift going on in New Zealand (NZ) English [...] > [T]he vowel in "women" which in Australian English is the same as the vowel > in "hit", is often, in NZ, reduced to a schwa [...]. It makes the plural > sound like our singular. I don't think the NZ pronunciation of the singular > is the same as the NZ plural A New Zealander begs to differ: > I've noticed this trend over the last few years also. To me as a kiwi it > doesn't sound anything like a mispronounced plural -- it just sounds as if > the speaker is using the one word for both singular and plural. [...] I see > it as part of a much larger tendency to confuse singular and plurals. > [Several examples follow.] Who's right? Who's wrong? Wikipedia has this: > In New Zealand English the short _i_ of KIT is a central vowel not > phonologically distinct from schwa /ə/, the vowel in unstressed "the". It > thus contrasts sharply with the [i] vowel heard in Australia. Recent > acoustic studies featuring both Australian and New Zealand voices show that > the accents were more similar before the Second World War and that the KIT > vowel has undergone rapid centralisation in New Zealand English. Because of > this difference in pronunciation, some New Zealanders claim that Australians > say "feesh and cheeps" for _fish and chips_ while some Australians counter > that New Zealanders say "fush and chups". So, there appears to be a vowel shift going on; but I'm not sure if there might be some truth to the people-just-stop-caring-about-certain-plurals argument as well. I hope we have enough New Zealanders on board to shed some light on this.   * Can you provide a guide to how to pronounce "women" _and_ "woman" in NZ English? (I've done some searching for audio files or YouTube videos, but haven't found anything yet.)    * Would you say that it's just the vowel shift, "a much larger tendency to confuse singular and plurals", or both?    * How recent is this trend? (E.g., if you are a native speaker of NZ English, is your pronunciation of "women" different from that of your parents/grandparents?)


title: Why does "trip the light fantastic" mean "to dance"?

text: This is a really cool phrase. It certainly evokes imagery of dancing about nimbly on a ray of light, or something of the sort. But how does it make sense? "to trip" I can see as being kind of like dancing. "to trip the light" - which light? And what part of speech is "fantastic" here?


title: What does wink and nod mean? In which context is it used?

text: Yesterday I read the word **"wink and nod"** in a newspaper. I didn't understand the meaning. Can anyone explain?


title: How can I describe a passive type of touching?

text: If I touch an item (like a book) intentionally, I might say > I touch the book. Now, if this had happened without my being aware of it, I would not say that _I touched it_ , but I also would not say that _the book touched me_. How should I describe this situation?


title: "Take offense" usage

text: What prepositions do I use with "take offense"? Specifically: "I take offense _at_ you _over_ your words" Are _at_ and _over_ correct?


title: "to day" or "to date"?

text: In this sentence, > My research for _Point of Origin_ was some of the most intensive and > dangerous I've done to date, and the story I tell here remains the most > painful. (Seen at the introduction part of novel, "Point of Origin", by an > American writer) Can we say "to day" instead of "to date" in the above sentence? Because "today" comes from "to day", though I'm not sure about whether we can still use "to day".


title: Is "a friend of his" a used phrase?

text: I know that _a friend of mine_ is a used phrase, but is the phrase also used with other personal possessive adjectives? > I met a friend of his.


title: Usage of "neither . . . nor" versus "not . . . or"

text: First, this is _not_ a dupe of: "Not bad either" versus "not bad neither" nor a dupe of: "Neither Michael nor Albert is correct" or "Neither Michael nor Albert are correct"? So on to my question... I'm not a native english speaker and there's something that I always find very strange when I read sentence containing the following construct: > "and try not to be shocked or overreact if..." Isn't something using _"neither/nor"_ better, like maybe the following: > "and try neither to be shocked nor overreact if..." To me the first sentence can be interpreted in two ways:   * you should either try not to be shocked _or_ you should overreact (wrong of course, this is not what the writer meant but in other case it is not that obvious that it is a wrong interpretation   * you should try not to be shocked and you should also not overreact while with the second sentence, there's no room for interpretation (once again, in this case in the first sentence it can be deduced from the sentence but I often encounter cases where it is not so). So... _not/or_ or _neither/nor_?


title: How would someone who needs to read a story from A to Z be qualified?

text: When I'm beginning to watch a movie, or read a book, I tend to want to watch or read the whole story through, even if it is a story of questionable quality or if I know the end. And I don't want to miss a thing. What would be an adjective to qualify such a person like me?


title: What is a word that describes the start or opening of a conversation?

text: What is a word that describes the start or opening of a conversation either with a friend, a stranger, in a formal situation like a business meeting or in a court? I am looking for something with a meaning along the lines of an ice-breaker, perhaps? * * *


title: "At least one" - singular or plural subject?

text: In other words, which sentence is correct? > At least one of them is not coming. > > At least one of them are not coming.


title: Is there a word for one who drives in the direction opposite the one prescribed for the given lane?

text: After having found the image below, I’m wondering whether there is a word that English speakers use to describe someone driving on the opposite side of a road. A bit of searching pulled up _geisterfahrer_, which is a German word whose translation into English is at best unclear. In fact, according to Google Translate, _geisterfahrer_ is rendered in English as _ghost rider_. However, I’m unable to find this two-word phrase in any dictionary I have consulted — and besides, I’m interested to find a single word. Thus my question is, is there a word for someone who drives in the direction opposite the one prescribed for the lane they are driving in? Note that I dislike, and will not accept, _wrong-way rider_ , both because it is too far from the single-word concept and because it seems like a made-up phrase to me. ![](http://i.imgur.com/zkVJb.jpg)


title: Is there a specific word for "causing someone to faint"

text: Is there a word describing when somebody makes someone faint without using anaesthesia or physical contact. As seen in some comedy movies where an answer usually causes somebody to lose consciousness.


title: What do models do on the catwalk?

text: What is the appropriate verb that I should use to fill in the blank below? > People march on parades, but models **__** on the catwalk.


Not a native speaker... Which one is correct? The website "gets deploys" or "get deploys" automatically everyday morning. Or does it the sentence even make senses?


title: Dull Silver Lining

text: I recently came across a statement "The silver lining on the cloud is dull." I was wondering if one can call a silver lining dull. Isn't it contradictory?


title: Is there a single word

text: What word has the same meaning as > 'Ill take it into consideration'


title: Expressions for 'unclear'

text: Basically, I'm looking for something similar to this: "His reasoning was as clear as dirt." Are there any other common expressions like that?


title: Why is the word "is" skipped?

text: I was watching something and someone said this > Interior, Outer Space. A distopian future. The year is 1000. An astronaut > floats in. His eyes are average, his face fine. "His face fine" sounds like it is skipping the word "is", like something a caveman would say. Is this good English or was this a mistake?


title: Should I modify a gerund using an adjective or an adverb?

text: I know that a gerund is a **noun** , so it should be modified by an _adjective_. However, it is also a **verb form**. Can I modify it by using an _adverb_?


title: How to pronounce English names quickly and correctly

text: How can you pronounce a name quickly and correctly? They may or may not conform to regular patterns. Currently I'm using "online website" to do the speaking each time. Are there any shortcuts that I can use?


title: Is this grammatically correct?

text: This quote comes from an article published online at USA Today, but it strikes me as odd and not correct. Am I right, or do I misunderstand the sentence? > Obama stopped short of saying how high up the Iranian government officials > who were aware of the plot or suggesting how the administration might > respond. It seems to me there should be another verb with regards to the _Iranian government officials_. Is that the issue?


title: Is there a single word that can be defined as "the ability to provide (fiscally)"

text: I thought 'providence' might work, but it doesn't seem to quite fit the bill. The sentence I'm trying to complete is: "Needs are those things that preserve life, health, home, and [word-goes- here]."


title: What is meant by "dummy sentences"?

text: > Yes, you can easily modify pages and you can (temporarily) publish dummy > sentences, and you can even (temporarily) completely destroy a page in a > wiki. In the above sentence, what does "dummy sentences" mean?


title: How did "invoice" end up with an 's'-sound?

text: The Etymonline entry for _invoice_ states (source): > apparently from M.Fr. _envois_ , pl. of _envoi_ "dispatch (of goods)," Although my French is pretty poor, my understanding is that the 's' is silent. We don't pronounce the 's' in _hors d'oeuvre_ (usually), so how did the 's' in _envois_ become vocalized? Two ideas that come to mind are that 1) people read the spelling without knowing the proper pronunciation and it caught on, or 2) a "rule-maker" decided the 's' shouldn't be silent (and turned it into a 'c'). If the latter is the case, are there some other examples of this?


title: Antonym: Latent

text: So, I was trying to think of a word that had the opposite meaning of "latent". Latent means "existing, yet unmanifested". I'm looking for a word that meant "existing and manifested, yet dissipating throughout his life". For example, angry behaviour could exist in someone from an early age but then disappear over a few years... what would the adjective for that behaviour be?


title: What's the difference between direction and orientation?

text: I frequently see these two words in 3D programming. For example: > the direction of the directional light > > the orientation of camera So, what’s the difference between them?


title: The range of attributive

text: I have a clause from DirectX SDK as below: > The position, velocity, and orientation of sound sources and listeners in 3D > space are represented by Cartesian coordinates what's the range of world position, velocity and orientation? do they decorate only sound sources? or they decorate listeners too?


title: What’s wrong with this “As a” sentence?

text: I frequently see statements in the form of this one: > As a skilled computer programmer, this new language is crap. I think that’s ungrammatical, but can’t explain why. I think it’s because the part before the comma doesn’t correctly attach to the second part. I would rewrite it, > As a skilled computer programmer, I find this new language to be crap. Because I think the first part has to attach to “I” or the verb “find”, which is done by the subject “I.” Please educate me and others.


title: Origin/meaning of "burninate"

text: I've seen the word "burninate" used around the internet a bit, most recently in this MetaSO answer. The basic meaning of it seems fairly clear, but where did this come from? An online dictionary searched yielded no results, as did etymonline. A wikipedia search redirected to an article, but searching the document only found the word where it indicated the search had redirected to that page, and no other mentions of it in the article. Can someone please explain where this word came from?


title: Should I use "is" or "are" with "any of X"?

text: >   * Please log a CIP if ANY of the following is required to make the change: > >   * Please log a CIP if ANY of the following are required to make the > change: > > I believe it should be _are;_ but am I right?


title: “Recover against” vs. “recover from”

text: From page 53 of Frederick Schauer’s _Thinking Like a Lawyer_ : > If Judge Cardozo had said, “We hold that in all cases involving a > nonbusiness consumer and a manufacturer of goods, the consumer may **recover > against** the manufacturer for defects in manufacture. . . .” Could anyone please explain why it is not _recover from_ here? I’m struggling with the preposition in _recover against_. Since I’m not asking about the definition proper of **recover against** , ‘commonly-available references’ don't answer this question. In general, if X wants to recuperate from or be compensated by Y, then wouldn’t X be recovering money or property **from** Y? Doesn’t _against_ denote X’s opposition to Y, which contradicts the fact that X wants something **from** Y?


title: "A number of programs" vs. "several programs"

text: I am always confused between "a number of programs" and "several programs" for saying "many programs". Google Ngrams show that both are widely used terms. Could someone tell me which one should be used when?


title: Does the verb after 'set of' agree with 'set' or the plural noun that follows?

text: Does the verb after 'a set of + plural noun' agree with 'set' or 'noun'? For example: > 'Law is a set of rules that govern/governs society.'


title: "Life is short. Work somewhere awesome." Is it ambiguous?

text: At a company some HR person put a label on the wall with a slogan:               "Life is short      Work somewhere awesome     "      /+ Name of the company      ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/SwpQn.jpg) The question is: May this label sound conversational? Like I see at least 3 meanings:   * Working here is not awesome - but somewhere is awesome. So change your work, because life is short   * Work hard/awesome to be/stay at this company   * Working in this company is awesome (this was implied, I guess initially)


title: "Two are better than one" or "Two is better than one"?

text: I just came across the phrase "Two are better than one", but I had always heard it in my head as "Two is better than one". This is partially due to the Boys Like Girls song. Which one of these is actually correct?


title: Word to describe "compliance with unspoken resistance"

text: What I'm looking for is a word to describe "compliance with unspoken resistance" or something of the like. In other words, one complies, unwillingly. However, the unwillingness, is not stated outright, it is partially implied. Any suggestions? I was thinking "submission", but I'm not sure if it carries the full weight of what I would like to say..


title: Formal way to tell someone they accidentally sent you someone else’s email?

text: I have received an email from someone at work. He’s quite senior and probably would get quite angry to get an “accusing” message like: > I wasn’t supposed to get this email. It looks like you sent me it by > mistake. What is a more gentle but formal way of pointing out his mistake?


title: What could the word "thumbtick" mean?

text: I am trying to give a piece of software a name but for non-native English speakers it's sometimes hard to avoid awkward associations with names because you don't live with the language. Sometimes word meanings and connotations can be really diverse depending on the context. So, does the word " **thumbtick** " have any awkward, strange or bad connotations that would make it inappropriate as a software name? _I am intentionally not giving away the purpose of the software, so as to not introduce any bias._ UPDATE: The purpose of this software should be a simple easy to use time tracking webapp with mobile phone interface support. The main screen has a button named "tick" to start and stop actions quick and easy and create time- sheets which can be filled with further information later on.


title: Saying something is "for real" vs just saying something is "real"

text: I have a silly question that's been stuck in my head for a little bit. There was a movie that came out a little while ago called, "Heaven is for real" ... and something about the word "for" in that title bothered me. I've heard the expression several more times about something being "for real" vs just "real" .... what is the point of the word "for" in that context? Something about the usage of the words "for real" makes me feel like the phrase is trying to convince me (in kind of a common folksy kind of way, almost childlike way) that I should be convinced of somethings "realness". (You might disagree with this...) but some part of me feels like that using the word "for" in "X is for real" is an attempt to manipulate the listener into validating the claim. Is that unfair? I guess my questions are: What is the proper grammar concerning "X is for real" vs "X is real" ??? And my second question is what is your interpretation of the word "for" in the term "X is for real"... why use the word "for" in that context? Sorry if this is a silly weirdo question... thank you for any comments or answers.


title: Is it proper to start a sentence with the word that ended the last sentence?

text: For example: > Instead, you’ll use a higher-level model called ASP.NET AJAX. ASP.NET AJAX > gives you a set of server-side components and controls that you can use when > designing your web page. This does not seem correct to me, at least in this case.


title: Can "some" be a noun and a subject?

text: What is the noun in this sentence: > Some of our greatest innovations were launched during tough times. I know that _of our greatest innovations_ is a prepositional phrase and as such cannot contain the subject of the sentence. _Some_ just doesn't strike me as a noun—or is it? If it is, what is the easy way to recognize these type of nouns?


title: Can "succeed" be used as an imperative?

text: In a golf video game I'm working on: "Succeed a putt from 50 feet." This use of "succeed" bothers me whenever I see it, but I can't formalize why I think it's wrong.


title: My son's photo vs a photo of my son

text: I was wondering whether it is correct to say ' ** _this is my son's photo_** ' meaning _a photo of my son_? Can the phrase ' _this is my son's photo_ ' imply a photo in which one can see someone's son or can it only mean that the photo belongs to someone's son? Or are both options possible? Thank you in advance!


title: Differences between serendipity, and fate, destiny, fortune and coincidence?

text: What are the differences between serendipity, and fate, destiny, fortune and coincidence? From what I have looked up in dictionary, they seem very similar, and I would like to distinguish between them. serendipity seems similar to fate and destiny in that the occurrence is controlled by some god. serendipity seems similar to fortune and coincidence in that the occurrence is accidental, not controlled by people.


title: Meaningless s- and f-?

text: I saw some words on etymonline, started with _s-_ , which seems meaningless For example, _slack_ actually means "lax". There are also other words, if you delete the starting letter _s_ or _f_ , they are still words, but may have related or different meanings. I haven't found where this has been mentioned or summarized. So is it true that _s-_ and _f-_ can be meaningless prefixes? What have you found?


title: When to use singular or plural of nouns

text: I'm not sure which to use of these to use: The art of extracting onion from salad. The art of extracting onion from a salad. The art of extracting onions from salad. The art of extracting onions from a salad.


title: The saying "Hair of the Dog"

text: I drank a little to much last night, and one of my friends suggested "the hair of the dog" to cure my hangover. Where did this saying come from?


title: Why do we call cinema The Seventh Art?

text: Why do we call cinema The Seventh Art? Why not sixth or fifth?


title: A metaphor for "ricochet back"

text: Is there a metaphor or a single word for "When you throw a rubber ball into a wall and it bounces back and hits you." Something like boomerang, but unexpected and with negative connotation.


title: A question about "common stake"

text: What does _common stake_ in the sentence below mean?   Does it mean a common role? > Such overgeneralized beliefs will also be resistant to change, because > individuals develop a **common stake** in their perpetuation.


title: How do you call the automatic bike pedals in English

text: I mean those kind of bicycle pedals where you have special shoes and engage the sole to the pedal. In spanish it's pedales automaticos and in german: 'Klickis' or 'Klickpedale'. Thanks in advance


title: Word for "of or relating to God"

text: What is an **objective, scientifically precise** word meaning _of or relating to God_? (To be clear, I mean _scientific_ only in the context of having scientific _precision_ , a word that would describe the phenomenon from an unbiased, if not objective, point of view.) _Theistic_ , as it implies the existence of a single deity only, while _theodicy_ entails "the vindication of divine goodness and providence in view of the existence of evil," which is too partial. For example, what word would best fill the blank in the phrase "a series of `____` visits," meaning "a series of visits by God"?


title: Replacements for that

text: I've recently become aware that I use the word "that" way too much, especially in more academic writing. I've noted in particular that I use "that" almost exclusively after words like "implies" (I've found that they usually require the usage of "that"). I guess it's pretty apparent by now that I have a problem with this word. Unlike standard single-word-requests that have a particular description the word needs to satisfy, I'm just looking for a word that functions like "that" (or a combination of words that can replace "that"). Having said that, did I give anyone cancer?


title: Is the singular form of "desiderata" a disused word?

text: I was interested in the following paragraph which appeared in an article titled “A New Gauge to See What’s Beyond Happiness" by John Tierney in The New York Times (May 16, 2011). > “They wanted to win for its own sake, even if it brought no positive > emotion,” says Dr. Seligman, a professor of psychology at the University of > Pennsylvania. “They were like hedge fund managers who just want to > accumulate money and toys for their own sake. Watching them play, seeing > them cheat, it kept hitting me that accomplishment is _a human desiderata_ > in itself.” _[emphasize mine]_ Can someone clarify if the fragment "a human desiderata" is "simply" ungrammatical, as I think it is, or if the problem consist in the fact that the singular form of "desiderata", that is _desideratum_ , is a disused word? Is it possible to argue the latter hypothesis from the nGram below? ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/ldsCP.png) * * * Oxford Dictionaries \- " **desideratum** : noun (plural desiderata)"


title: What's wrong with 'caught no mice'?

text: In Kipling's story "Below the Mill Dam", this passage occurs: > "He shouted large and vague threats to my address, last night at tea, that > he wasn't going to keep cats who 'caught no mice'. Those were his words. I > remember the grammar sticking in my throat like a herring-bone." The speaker, like all cats, is fastidious to the point of pedantry, so the point of grammar can only be a trivial, or even ridiculous, one; but even so I can't see anything wrong with the expression. Can any fellow-pedant, or cat, enlighten me?


title: Is using the present perfect old fashioned?

text: I was talking to a Singaporean (English is her native language. I think, closer to American rather than British) friend. I learned in English class that you can use present perfect when there is a connection with present. So the discussion was something like that. I was trying to use present perfect correctly. > A: Have you been to French class today? > > B: Yes I have. I went this morning. But she told me it's an old fashion way of using present perfect. And no one uses it like that, at least not in the US and Singapore. She would use past simple there. > A: Did You go to french class today? Is it wrong to use the present perfect here or do I look stupid if I use it?


title: Which is more appropriate — "I work for" or "I work at"?

text: If you are working as an employee at an organization, when you tell about it to others which usage would be more appropriate? >   1. I work for _company_. >   2. I work at _company_. > Or are both usages correct?


title: Is "run the danger" in common usage?

text: I was interested in the following sentence which appeared in an article titled “Building a Classier Image; Las Vegas Hotels Woo Blue Chip Visitors" by Andrew Pollak in The New York Times (November 13, 1997). > Risks abound in this strategy, though. Visitors may balk at high room rates > if cheap ones are still plentiful, and giant hotels **run the danger** of > becoming impersonal. Most important, though: Can Las Vegas absorb all these > new rooms? Can someone clarify if the phrase " ** _run the danger_** " is improperly used, as I think it is? I would replace " _danger_ " with " _risk_ ", but I'm not sure on this correction because the phrase " _run the danger_ " occurs on many occasions in The New York Times, it frequently occurs in others newspapers and, more generally, it has 365,000 hits on Google Search. So I am wondering if interchanging " _danger_ " and " _risk_ " in this phrase is in common usage nowadays, especially in spoken informal English; albeit it isn't idiomatically correct.


title: Exact meaning of "You must be kidding"?

text: This is to ask for the exact meaning of the expression _You must be kidding_. More precisely, is it supposed to be: (a) friendly, (b) antagonistic, or (c) neither one? In French the answer to my question for the roughly equivalent expressions _Tu plaisantes_ or _Tu rigoles_ would definitely be (a) but, as we all know, _faux-amis_ do exist.


title: Why is "desperacy" not an English word?

text: I know one says _an act of desperation_ , but I've heard _desperacy_ much more than I've ever heard _desperation_ , it's like I've almost never heard _desperation_. Why exactly was _desperation_ preferred over _desperacy_ and **is there a pattern to noun adjectives ending with _-ate_?**


title: Is "I lost my bus" correct usage?

text: Is it correct to say, "I lost my bus," when you miss a bus? I have seen it commonly used.


title: Can I say "let me not speak about that matter"?

text: I was writing a letter and wanted to say let's not talk about something. I wanted to know if I can say "let me not to speak about that matter". Or I need to omit the "to" because of the verb let. Thank you.


title: Are "when", "where" and "of" equally valid after "to include the case..."?

text: What are the rules for the usage of this construct? For example, suppose you've written a StackExchange answer, and later you decided edit it so that your proposed solution handles an additional case. If you wanted to say "I've edited my answer to include the case..." would you follow that with _when_ , _where_ or _of_? What are the grammatical conditions? I know it must have something to do with the following part of your sentence being "situational", "descriptive", etc. but I'm not sure.


title: What is the pronunciation of "the"?

text: I read that the definite article is pronounced differently depending on the word that follows it. Which is the exact pronunciation of _the_?


title: Using "An" and "A" in a sentence

text: I'm trying to understand this simple concept. As far as I understood it, back to the days when I was a student, "an" should be used only before vowel words, that is, only before the following words: "a","i","o","u". Yesterday my sister asked me a question related to this subject and I wasn't sure if my answer was correct because there are so much controversial sources explaining this subject. The original question she asked me was which one of the following is the correct form to be used in a sentence: > An history Or > A history I told her that she should use "a history" only because 'h' isn't a vowel word. Is it correct? Thank you very much


title: Is pronouncing "The" as in "Thee" still correct in titles?

text: When saying the title of JRR Tolkien's masterpiece, which is the correct pronunciation (Yes, I know that they're spelled wrong, but I'm trying to emphasize the pronunciation):   1. Thuh Lord of thuh Rings    2. Thee Lord of thee Rings    3. Thuh Lord of thee Rings   4. Thee Lord of thuh Rings I'm partial to the first pronunciation, but another family member is adamant that the last one is the correct one. Can anybody resolve this argument?


title: Which use of the English language is correct? "A historic event" or "an historic event"

text: English is my second language, and I was taught that you use "a" before a vowel. Recently I have heard several TV Announcers use the letters "an" if it is used before a consonant. For example, it just doesn't sound right to say "an historic event". Could you please set me straight if I am wrong, or are the Announcers using improper English? Thanx, Ike


title: is article "an" before the noun "hour" acceptable?

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  When should I use “a” versus “an” in front of a word beginning with the > letter h? I have seen many authors uses "an" before "hour" like "an hour" some times. Please consider the below excerpts. > "How long is your break?", I shouted. A group of labourers sat under the > banyan tree near the main campus building. "It's two-thirty, lunch ended > **an hour** ago." and another one is below > I would take his boat for **an hour** , and buy him tea and biscuits in > return. one more > ' I won't take more than half **an hour** ' I promised. I learned from my teachers that the article "an" comes before vowels and not before consonants. Here "H" is consonant, still author uses the article "an" before "hour". My question is, is this "an" before "hour" is acceptable? If yes can you explain why?


title: A/An question: 'a humanitarian' or 'an humanitarian'?

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  When should I use "a" versus "an" in front of a word beginning with the > letter h? What's the proper wording here, neither one sounds right to me: > "Chevra, **an** humanitarian organization..." or > "Chevra, **a** humanitarian organization..." My instinct says it follows the same rule as "an hour", but the 'h' sound is more pronounced in 'humanitarian', so I'm unsure.


title: “An hilarious” vs. “a hilarious”

text: Which of these is correct? This is in the context of buying a surprise gift for someone and you think your gift is hilarious. > I bought myself a hilarious one! or > I bought myself an hilarious one! I’ve been saying both so many times that neither makes sense to me anymore.


title: Is it "a hour-long drive" or "an hour-long drive"?

text: In the following context, which usage is correct, or are both of them OK?   1. After _a_ hour-long drive, they arrived at Chinatown.   2. After _an_ hour-long drive, they arrived at Chinatown. Your help is greatly appreciated!


title: Pronunciation difference in The and A

text: When should 'the' be pronounced 'thuh' and when 'thee'? I heard that 'the' should be used as 'thee' before vowels and in some particular cases. All other cases should employ 'thuh'. What are the 'particular cases'? And when is 'a' pronounced 'eh' and when 'uh'?


title: Is it A Honorable or An Honorable

text: Which is grammatically correct? Honorable starts with an H so it should be `a honorable` but it's pronounced with an vowel so it can also be `an honorable`. I've heard the argument both ways , so which one is correct?


title: Should "an" be used before words beginning with "h"?

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  "A historic…" or "An historic…"? Should an be used before words beginning with 'h'? What about when the 'h' is silent and is followed by a vowel?


title: A/an hypothesis?

text: Is it `a` or `an` hypothesis? I am not a native speaker (and not very language talented) so I would appreciate any explanation/rules.


title: Why we say "an historical" but "a history"

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  When should I use "a" versus "an" in front of a word beginning with the > letter h? Why do we say _an historical_ but _a history_? This question was originally posed by @shanselman on Twitter.


title: Usage of "an" before nouns beginning with an "h" where that "h" is not silent

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  "A historic…" or "An historic…"? Such as   * an heinous crime   * an hideous monstrosity   * an hallucination This always looks wrong to me. I would expect it in spoken English, if the speakers accent suppresses the aspiration of the h. However some people use an even when they aspirate the h. Worse still some people write it as above. I hear this with reasonable regularity from government / official figures What is your opinion?


title: “The /ðə/ United States” or “The /ðiː/ United States”?

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  What is the pronunciation of "the"? How to correctly pronounce the _the_ in **_The** United States_? Is it the _the_ that’s pronounced `/ðə/`, or is it the _the_ that’s pronounced `/ðiː/`, and why? I often hear the second pronunciation, but I think that since the U in United States is not a vowel sound, it should be the first pronunciation.


title: Correct pronunciation of "the"

text: > **Possible Duplicates:**   >  Is pronouncing "The" as in "Thee" still correct in titles?   >  What is the pronunciation of "the?" What would be the correct way to pronounce "the"? According to my Swedish- English dictionary at home, it follows the same rule as for the articles "a" and "an". Is this really true in every situation? I've noticed that native speakers doesn't always follow this rule, and I've catched myself pronouncing (or thinking) it as [ðɜ] before words beginning with the "a" sound (like in "play" or "age"). Is that incorrect? Or does it just depend on dialect?


title: 'An historically accurate claim 'vs. 'a historically accurate claim'

text: 'An historically accurate claim ' OR 'a historically accurate claim' Which of these is grammatically correct if either one of them. They both sound incorrect to me


title: "An historian" or "a historian"

text: Which one should I use for this statement > **An historian** can change the past or > **A historian** can change the past ?


title: Using 'a' or 'an' before a word that started with 'H'

text: What should we use before a word that started with 'H'? 'A' or 'An'? and why? Sometime using 'a' seems right, sometimes using 'an' seems right, I am confused


title: "A" or "an" with words beginning with the letter H

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  "A historic…" or "An historic…"? I am wondering when it's correct to use _a/an_ with words beginning with the letter _h_. For example: _an historian_ , _a history_. I remember reading somewhere that the _h_ is sometimes silent, in which case it's _an_ , and when the _h_ is pronounced, it's _a_. But then I also remember reading that it depends on which syllable is stressed. And I also think I read somewhere that it might differ between British and American English. So how do I know when to use _a_ and when to use _an_ with a word beginning with the letter _h_?


title: When should I use "a" versus "an" in front of a word beginning with the letter h?

text: A basic grammar rule is to use _an_ instead of _a_ before a vowel sound. Given that _historic_ is not pronounced with a silent h, I use “a historic”. Is this correct? What about _heroic_? Should be “It was a heroic act” or “It was an heroic act”? I remember reading somewhere that the h is sometimes silent, in which case it’s _an_ , and when the h is pronounced, it’s _a_. But then I also remember reading that it depends on which syllable is stressed. And I also think I read somewhere that it might differ between British and American English. Personally, I pronounce the h, and believe that _a_ is correct. I find that it sounds incorrect to use _an_ and pronounce _heroic_ without the h. So how do I know when to use _a_ and when to use _an_ with a word beginning with the letter h? Are both acceptable or is there one that is correct?


title: "A heroic" or "An heroic"?

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  "A historic…" or "An historic…"? I have heard and read this combination both ways:               It was a heroic act.          It was an heroic act.      Personally, I pronounce the "h", and believe that "a" is correct. I find that it sounds incorrect to use "an" and pronounce "heroic" without the "h." Are both acceptable or is there one that is correct? (Inspired by this question.)


title: When do we pronounce "the" as "the" and when as "thi"

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  What is the pronunciation of "the?" I am not from the UK or the US, English is not my mother tongue. I pronounce "the" as "the" (with e sounding like the letter sound) in the following example sentences: >   * Where is the apple? >   * That is the most extraordinary thing ever happened to my life. > My past English teacher has been correcting me saying that that pronunciation is incorrect before certain words. So when should I pronounce "the" as "the" and when as "thi"?


title: One word for 'Person being evaluated'

text: I am developing a software application for a Medical Committee which will analyse [medical] examination results and issue certificates based on them. The Committee never sees the person and the exam results may be years old, so 'patient' is not a good term. What can I call the person who is being evaluated? In Spanish they use _Evaluado_ which may be 'Evaluated' or 'Evaluee' but I don't know which to use or if they are correct. It would be great to use a single word, not a phrase like 'Person being evaluated'.


title: Abbreviation “n.d.” in citation?

text: I’ve just come across “n.d.” used as an abbreviation, as a bibliographic reference in an academic essay, along the lines of: > Smith (n.d.) discusses the subaquaeous pliability of rattan fibres… Is anyone familiar with this? Unfortunately it seems rather difficult to Google for (since it’s an abbreviation for many other things as well) and checking a couple of scholarly style guides, I haven’t found it mentioned…


title: Describe a project that delivers content on multiple vehicles with a word or short phrase

text: Say a company makes a project that delivers content on multiple vehicles: a mobile game (for android, ios, windows phone, blackberry, whatever), a tv series, a feature film, youtube shorts, novels, comics, music records, web pages, web apps, social media, `<insert other platform here>`. How would we call such a project? Multimedia would be one possible candidate, but a single videogame or an interactive webpage will be multimedia, and "Multimedia Project" does not convey the full breadth. Multiplatform is already taken, and refer to a computer software that can run on several platforms (pure Java, for example). Besides the two rejected candidates above, what could we call such a project?   \-- Single word or short phrase.


title: Usage of "to be across"

text: I have only recently encountered "to be across", meaning "to understand fully". I have long been familiar with "to get across", of course. It seems to be the recipient that corresponds to the giver of understanding (and it seems odd now that I think of it that "get" is the giver). Is there a geographical or cultural context for the former that might explain why I have never heard it until now and why it has sounds odd to me?


title: Difference between "opacity" and "opaqueness"

text: What is the difference in the meaning und usage of the words _opacity_ and _opaqueness_?


title: "Left" and "right" are to "side" as "front" and "rear" are to what?

text: Is there an equivalent word to "side" when speaking of the front or rear of something (e.g. a car)? So, a mechanic might say: > You damaged your wing-mirror? Ok, which **side**? ... or... > You damaged your bumper? Ok, which [insert word here]?


title: Idiom for or more colorful phrasing of "without having their lack of trivia exposed"

text: I am writing a children's book (8–12) and am looking for an idiom or more colorful language to be used in place of the highlighted section. > Now that she’d stumped me, Ms. Sanders, my favorite of the Uniformed > Division of the Secret Service and grand master of White House Trivia, would > stop. And it’s a good thing too, since quite a line of employees have > gathered behind me. They don’t mind waiting while she quizzes me on White > House trivia since it means that they will get through **without having > their lack of trivia exposed.**


title: Should anti- and counterclockwise be hyphenated?

text: I've got a document in which I'm defining counterclockwise and mentioning that it is sometimes also called anti-clockwise. The document is in American English, and generally in line with the Chicago Manual of Style. CMoS seems to suggest counterclockwise (no hyphen), but anti-clockwise seems to me to be a predominantly British-English term, and the OED seems to indicate that the hyphen should be present there. Should I hyphenate either or both of counterclockwise and anti-clockwise? Why?


title: Can you use "Goldilocks" as an adjective?

text: Space professionals have popularized the terms _Goldilocks planet_ & _Goldilocks zone_ to describe planets and regions of space around a star that, like earth, are "just right" to conceivably harbor life. Are there other popular instances of using "Goldilocks" as an adjective? Can I just attach the word to any noun?


title: Use of the "the" article

text: Can anyone explain why we use the definite article _the_ for the following: > The upper classes often go fox hunting. but > People in High society often go fox hunting.


title: What is the context of Mark Twain's "If you don't like the weather…" quote?

text: It seems well-accepted that the quotation > If you don't like the weather in New England now, just wait a few minutes. was said or written by Samuel Clemens, a.k.a. Mark Twain. (At least two fairly credible sources would seem to say that Samuel seeded said saying.) Anyway, what the sources I've been able to find don't say is whether he said it or wrote it, and what was the context when he did?   1. http://www.snopes.com/quotes/twain.asp   2. http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/401087-if-you-don-t-like-the-weather-in-new-england-now Meta aside: The FAQ says not to post questions purely discussing English literature, but that is not my intent. The above phrase (often bastardized) has apparently become a sort-of idiom for "wait a moment" in modern English (for example, the second comment to this question). I'm trying better to understand the full meaning of its original context.


title: Looking for two terms from law vocabulary

text: I'm looking for two technical words used in law:   1. Someone who accepts the law, they will try to do the best things in any situation.   2. The opposite of number one, they reject any law and at every chance will run away from it. for example in the law vocab, "ALIBI" means : A defence where an accused alleges that at the time when the offence was committed, he was elsewhere. I'm looking for words like that! like "objection" or ...


title: A correct preposition - account closed due/by/at 12th of May

text: I asked my bank to close my account on 12th of May. Also > I expect the account to be closed [?] 12th of May . What preposition should be there? I think about by or due. Also if I want to ask someone a question: What date was your account closed [missing preposition?]


title: 'Per' vs 'by' - as in 'interactions by/per post'

text: I'm attempting to get a title for a list of interactions made on posts by users. "Interactions by/per post". Are by and per interchangeable? Is one more formal than the other? I feel that _by_ might be easily misunderstood as interactions made by the posts itself instead of interactions with the posts by users. Is that a correct assumption?


title: Verb to refer to putting debris aside with machinery

text: > The screen was showing a close up of some buildings in ruins. Excavators and > bulldozers **[...]** debris aside, while the survivors watched the work with > anguish and despair on their faces. OK, I guess I could use **put**. But I think it sounds too soft for such heavy work. I also thought of **push** but I guess excavators don't actually push things? (unless **push** can also be used for 'grabbing things and putting them aside'). So I can't think of the proper verb. Any suggestions?


title: Difference between "taxi" and "cab"

text: * Definition of taxi: > To ride or travel in a taxicab   * Definition of cab: > A taxicab. Since the definitions don't show many differences, is it okay to assume that there is no difference between _taxi_ and _cab_?


title: 'Act Naturally', is it an oxymoron?

text: To act is to put up a facade, yet when put together with natural, it contradicts each other. Yet this phrase is used frequently. "Now, Tom, remember to act natural in front of the examiner and do not be nervous!"


title: Usage of the phrase “couldn't help without”

text: I am getting confused at the usage of the phrase "couldn't help without." For example, > "I couldn't help without answering the call" Is this correct & what does this sentence mean?


title: What is the difference between "Computer science" and "Informatics"?

text: I could not find any difference... or at least no good source that definitely distinguishes both. I tried:   * Wikipedia (Informatics has a redirect to Computer Science), so I guess the only difference is the context in which both are used   * Google:      * University of California:        * Computer Science: internal features, structure and behavior of computer systems       * Informatics: relationship between what is inside the computer and what is outside (What does this mean? I study ... well, I thought it would be called "Computer Science", but I'm not sure now. )     * forum.wordreference.com:        * Computer Science: software engineering, algorithms       * Informatics: installing new software, upgrades,networks LAN WANS, firewalls   * dict.leo.org: Both are translated with "Informatik" in German.   * English.StackExchange.com: No result


title: The prefix *sub*

text: The prefix **sub** appears in many words, such as _subway_ and _substantial_. For **subway** , I take it as the **way** that is completely different from the **way** that I get used to. Moreover it is not the main way. Other words with _sub_ , like subcategories and subscript, they all seem that **sub** makes the concept inferior. But **substantial** makes the upside down. It completely means the opposite. So, could someone shed some light on this for me please?


title: Which preposition is used with tolerance in this sentence?

text: I want to use the word tolerance in the context of infectious diseases. This sentence: > The immune response will mediate either clearance or tolerance `preposition` > infections. In other words, the immune system will either get rid of infections from the body or on the contrary will tolerate them. Is it `of`, `to`, `from`, `toward` or what? which preposition is more correct?


title: Using “scare quotes” inside a quotation

text: I understand that scare quotes can be used when a word is being used in a specialized, unconventional, or disputable sense: > The census bureau encountered problems when trying to define a “normal” > family. I also understand that, when quoting a quote within a quote, the convention is to switch from double to single quotes1: > The teller reported, “The bank robber whispered, ‘Give me all your cash,’ > just before brandishing his gun.” My concern is: **Does the switch to single quotes still apply when the inner quote marks are not quoted material, but scare quotes?** As an example, suppose I read a newspaper article that says: > The most equitable way to solve this problem is to enact a “vice” tax. I want to include this quote in a report I am writing. **My gut tells me that the correct way to do this is** : > In an editorial published on June 4, a _New York Times_ columnist wrote, > “The most equitable way to solve this problem is to enact a ‘vice’ tax.” **However, when I looked for confirmation, I couldn’t find any**. I found many sources that mentioned the quote-within-a-quote rule (switch to single quotes for the inner quote), but all the examples I ran across used cases where the inner quote was either a quote or title, not a scare quote. None of the grammar blogs or punctuation guides addressed the embedded scare quote problem. For example: > Use single quotation marks for quotations within quotations. > >> **Example:** _He said, “Dan cried, ‘Do not treat me that way.’ ”_   >  source or: > The convention in American usage is to use double quotation marks (except > for internal quotes) and to keep commas and periods inside final quote > marks. The _Chicago Manual_ gives this example of the normal usage: > >> _“Admit it,” she said. “You haven’t read ‘The Simple Art of Murder.’ ”_   >  source and from the Purdue OWL: > **Quotations within a Quotation** > > Use single quotation marks to enclose quotes within another quotation. > >> The reporter told me, "When I interviewed the quarterback, he said they simply 'played a better game.'" > > **Quotation Marks Beyond Quoting** > > Quotation marks may additionally be used to indicate words used ironically > or with some reservation. > >> The great march of "progress" has left millions impoverished and hungry. Incidentally, I'm asking because a colleague asked me to review a report. I pointed out that the scare quotes inside her quotation should be single, not double, as she wrote them: > In an editorial published on June 4, a _New York Times_ columnist wrote, > “The most equitable way to solve this problem is to enact a “vice” tax.” When she published her final report, the quotes were still doubled. I tried to find just one example in an online grammar column that would back me up directly, but the closest I could find was the split guidance I've shared here. Bottom line questions: 1) Am I right in assuming that the scare quotes should be converted to single quotes when embedded in a quotation, much like other quote marks are? 2) Can anyone provide an “authoritative” example where this specific issue is addressed explicitly? * * * 1Unless following Fowler’s advice in BrE


title: question about where the comma goes

text: where does the comma go in a sentence that says: in the past 10 years I have mostly worked at schools and churches which has helped me.


title: Equivalent word for "womaniser"?

text: The word "womaniser" typically refers to a man who charms a lot of women - what would be an equivalent word for a female who charms a lot of men?


title: Feminine equivalent for Casanova

text: Is there a feminine equivalent for "Casanova" without negative connotations?


title: What's this? What is it? Pronunciation constraints

text: Can anyone give a cogent, simply described explanation of why the verb _BE_ in:   * What is it? ... doesn't seem to be able to be contracted with the subject:   * What's it? * Compare the sentences above with:   * What's this?   * What's that? These are perfectly fine. In fact, the contractions here should be expected in almost all examples of spoken English.


title: Can 'for' replace 'because'?

text: Can _for_ be used as a replacement to _because_ as in the examples below? If so, how formal does it sound? If not, what exactly does _for_ mean in the cases below? > Give us each day our daily bread, and forgive us our sins **for** we > ourselves forgive everyone who is indebted to us. > > Tell me where is Gandalf **for** I much desire to speak to him


title: correct usage of see both of you vs see you both

text: please clarify which is correct: see you both OR see both of you. i'm responding to a "grammar dictator," that has rsvp'd, and i want to convey that i'm looking forward to both he and his wife attending. i don't know which way is correct.


title: How can this sentence be reworded?

text: I just got back a paper my teacher had corrected, and she labeled the word 'be' in the following sentence as a 'dangling modifier': > How one learns from these experiences will ultimately determine how > fulfilled his or her life will be. Not only am I confused as to whether this classifies as a dangling modifier, I am not sure I see any errors in the grammar at all. So my questions are:   * What error or awkwardness is present in the above sentence?    * Regardless of whether any errors exist, how could the sentence be rearranged or reworded _to keep the same meaning?_


title: What's the English equivalent of "Drilling one's head"?

text: In Arabic (Specifically, north-western Levantine), there's a saying that goes like > He **drilled my head** about/with that lunch meeting ( **بخشلي راسي** > باجتماع الغدا) Which means something along the lines of > He kept insisting on/talking about/remind me of/bringing up that lunch > meeting It can be used in situations where your girlfriend wants you to take her out somewhere and she keeps reminding you about it everyday, when your kid keeps asking for a new bike everyday, or when your boss keeps bringing up that report you have due next Monday. The saying doesn't carry the connotation of negligence reluctance on behalf of the person on the receiving end. The person might or might not be working on fulfilling his promise or adhering to the other party's wishes. Many times I find myself in such situations and I really need something to use. I often use the direct translation as written in the first example. **Is there an equivalent for that in English?** The closest thing I was able to think of was "nagging", but it doesn't convey how strongly I feel about the situation.


title: "Birthday" vs. "anniversary"

text: Are there general guidelines for using "anniversary" vs. "birthday"? E.g., birthdays are generally for... well, birthdays. It's also used for some notable historical dates regarding countries ("Our nation's birthday") and cities. Is there a meaningful, generally-accepted differentiation?


title: What is the difference between "sardonic" and "sarcastic"?

text: Basically, _sardonic_ and _sarcastic_ both stand for mocking gestures, but what is the difference in their contextual use? Are there any other words that represent a similar gesture?


title: Anyone for pudding?

text: I saw a reference to blancmange in an answer to another question and it got me thinking about pudding. It is very common in British English for the word _pudding_ to be used as the general term for _dessert_ , but in American English the word _pudding_ seems to be reserved for a particular type of dessert somewhat akin to blancmange. Any idea why?


title: which is correct "a ear" or "an ear", conversely "a year" or "an year"

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Which is correct- "A Year" or "An Year"?   >  Use of “a” versus “an” _A(n) ear_ vs. _a(n) year_ in speaking is very confusing, please clarify.


The definitions for both terms are as follows   * Effective (adj.): Adequate to accomplish a purpose; producing the intended or **expected result**.   * Efficient (adj.) Performing or functioning in the best possible manner with the **least waste of time** and effort. Something can be effective but not efficient. My question is the opposite: Can something be efficient but not effective? The meaning would be in this sentence: "He was **fast** and efficient, but not effective" -> He worked in the best possible manner and as fast as possible but didn't reach the goal/ **expected result**. Anyways if the answer to my question would be NO, that sentence was wrong (the explanation of course is possible anyway).


title: Meaning of "a glimpse of insight"

text: I understand the words _glimpse_ and _insight_ , but what is the meaning of the whole idiom _a glimpse of insight_?


title: What does the term 'spoon' refer to?

text: **Note:** This question is not about the assertion from the Matrix that _There is no spoon_. There are _tablespoons_ and _teaspoons_ which are two different things. However is there a plain _spoon_ or does this just refer to any sized _spoon_?


title: "Which" vs. "what" — what's the difference and when should you use one or the other?

text: Most of the time one or the other feels better, but every so often, "which" vs. "what" trips me up. So, what's the exact difference and when should you use one or the other?


title: Should I use "what" or "which"?

text: _What_ and _which_ are somewhat similar, and as I understand it, we always use _which_ when a noun follows the _wh_ -word. For example: > Which color is your favourite? but > What is your favourite color? Still I may sometimes hear those words used interchangeably, as in: > What language are you studying? seems more natural to me, than > Which language do you study? My question is: **What/which** version of the above should I use, and in **what/which** cases?


title: "what" as a form of "which"

text: Is it standard to use "what" as a form of "which," such as in the sentence: > The tour guide let us know what items were permitted to be taken along on > the trip. In this instance I prefer "what" because it refers to categories of items as opposed to specific items.


title: "Which" or "what" for accepting multiple choices from a list

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  "Which" vs. "what" — what's the difference and when should you use one or > the other? I know that, in the context of radio buttons (the options are limited and they choose one), I should use _which_. For example, _Which is your favorite color?_ ( ) blue ( ) green ( ) red I also suspect that for an unlimited text box, the correct option is _what_. For example, _What is your favorite color?_ **___ __ ___ ____** My instinct tells me that the same is true for checkboxes. For example, _What colors do you prefer?_ [ ] blue [ ] green [ ] red When they can select multiple answers, I should use _What colors do you prefer?_ , not _Which colors do you prefer?_ , right?


title: "Which/what is your bike?"

text: > -- **Which/what** is your bike?   >  -- The blue bike. Is it possible to choose _what_ instead of _which_ , in your opinion?


title: "What/Which word best describes XXX ?"

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  "Which" vs "what" \- what's the difference and when should you use one or > the other? Which of the following two phrases is the more correct or are they both acceptable? > **What** word best describes XXX ? > > **Which** word best describes XXX ?


title: Usage of "Which" and "What"

text: >   1. Which is your most favourite subject in school ? >   2. What is your most favourite subject in school ? > Which one is acceptable? If both are acceptable, do they have any difference in meaning?


title: "for which" vs. "for what"?

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  "Which" vs "what" \- what's the difference and when should you use one or > the other? Q: What's the rule-of-thumb on "for which" vs. "for what" usage? I recently wrote the sentence: "For which data is it appropriate to use method A instead of method B" This seems right. But I can't articulate why "for what" seems wrong.


title: Why do we say "I envy you your <something>"?

text: That construction has always bothered me. People will say it's because _you envy a person not a thing_ , and that on the surface is okay, but then why isn't it _I envy you_ **_for_** _your thing_ , or **_because of_** _your thing?_ Why is it okay, in this particular construction, to drop the preposition? It reminds me of the french "Once upon a time" construction: _Il était une fois une vache qui rit._ which also seems like it's missing something. On the other hand there are also examples on the internet that _do_ include a preposition. For example: > I envy you for your lovely car. and this makes it more confusing because now it seems like it's more of a personal choice and I wonder even more why they are both allowed and which came first?


title: The meaning of "I would as soon that remain a mystery"

text: So in this Garfield strip I found a sentence that's giving me a hard time fully understanding it. Although the meaning seems to be quite clear from the context, I'm not getting the phrases / expressions used. In a response to a question whether he'd like to know where eggs come from, Garfield replies " _I would as soon that remain a mystery_ ". I'm especially not getting the " _as soon_ " part: I can imagine the response being e.g. " _I would prefer that remain a mystery_ " (or ' _remained_ ' ?). What am I missing here?


title: "Focussed" or "focused"? The double consonant

text: Initially, my question was: is "focussed" or "focused" the correct past tense of "focus", but since this applies to a lot of words, I would like to generalize and ask: is there supposed to be a rule when to double the consonant?


> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Is there any rhyme or reason to when one should double the last consonant > when adding -ed or -ing?   >  Focussed or focused? The double consonant Why isn't "training" spelled "trainning"? Why no double 'n'?


title: Why is "writing" spelled with only one T?

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Is there any rhyme or reason to when one should double the last consonant > when adding -ed or -ing? It has always been a word that intuitively I wish to spell with two Ts. So does anyone know why it's not _writting_? Could it just be that the T is harder when said in a continuous tense while the T is harder, for example, in the word _bite_ than in its continuous form?


title: Is there any rhyme or reason to when one should double the last consonant when adding -ed or -ing?

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  focussed or focused? The double consonant Sometimes, final consonants are doubled when adding _-ed_ or _-ing_ to the end of a verb whose penultimate letter is a vowel.   * stop → stopping   * grab → grabbing   * mar → marring   * run → running But sometimes, the consonant is not doubled.   * label → labeling   * madden → maddening   * book → booking Is there any way to tell whether it will be necessary to double the letter in a generic way, or is this another case of English's general rule of "you must memorize all cases separately"? I think this also relates to pluralizing nouns in some cases, although an example escapes me at the moment.


title: What is the rule for duplicating the last letter when adding "-ed"?

text: I wonder if there is any rule for doubling the _p_ at the end of a stem. For example: > _stop — stopped_ but > _help — helped_


title: Possessive noun form of "country"

text: In a recent test, we were asked to identify the grammatically incorrect sentence from the below: >   1. They gave us the money back less the service charges of three hundred > dollars. >   2. This country's expenditure is not less than that of Bangladesh. >   3. The committee initially asked for a funding of 2 million dollars, but > later settled for a lesser sum. >   4. This country's expenditure on educational reforms is very less. > The incorrect sentence _apparently_ is the 4th one. But I don't see why.. All 4 sentences sound correct. The only thing one might have doubts about is the use of "country's" in place of "of this country". Is the correct form of the 4th sentence - The expenditure of this country on educational reforms is very less. ?


title: Plural of "Popeye"

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Family Name Pluralization Okay, so this is kind of a strange question... but a group on my fraternity calls itself "Popeye" and they refer to themself als "Popeyers". But I got the feeling that that isn't really spelled right. But what would the correct English plural for "Popeye" be? edit: oh and in case this should be trivial, English is not my mother tongue so to me it isn't


title: Pluralization of proper nouns: regular or irregular?

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Family name pluralization If a proper noun is a homograph of a common noun, is the proper noun subject to the same usage and form rules as the common noun, especially if the rules are not standard? I’m specifically interested in pluralization. For instance, if there are several people whose first names are _Company_ , would I refer to them collectively as _Companies_ or _Companys_? Or, if I have several unique things named _Equipment_ , would they be collectively referred to as _Equipment_ or _Equipments_?


title: What is the plural of "Santa Claus"?

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Family Name Pluralization What is the plural of _Santa Claus_? It would be _Santa Clauses_ , right? I started with _Santa Claus'_ but that's obviously not correct.


title: "Your company name" or "Your company's name"?

text: Which way is correct here? Some explanation would be appreciated.


title: Height and weight written out

text: In formal writing I like to do this (in British style): >   * The infant weighed 10lb 5oz;   >  a 10lb 5oz infant > >   * He was 6ft 3in tall;   >  a 6ft 3in man > > My question is about the plural usage: do we have to change > The infant weighed 10lb 5oz. to > The infant weighed 10lbs 5ozs. Or not? I say no, but I’m really just reaching out for confirmation here. Also, would you use my examples — with abbreviations for _pounds_ , _ounces_ , _feet_ , and _inches_  — in formal writing? If not, how would you write it?


title: “Slept off”: correct or incorrect?

text: I have been using _slept off_ to mean that I fell asleep. For example, > I slept off early yesterday. Is that used correctly?


title: Asks a question; never responds to answers/comments

text: What do we call someone who asks a question and never responds to answers/comments? Think of it more as "a pattern of behavior" (somebody who has asked many questions and never responded).   I had _unresponsive_ in mind, but that doesn't say that they _asked_ in the first place.


title: "Taiwan visa" or "Taiwanese visa"?

text: Which way is correct? Is there any rule for such cases?


title: Is "constringence" a word?

text: I would like to express, in one word, the tendency to concentrate excessively rather than disperse. This is applied in a sentence where I describe a set of data, which has too much focus on one aspect and miss out on other aspects. For this I use the word "constringences". > The results collected and presented earlier are limited by ambiguities, > paradoxes and constringences. However, it seems some dictionaries do not know _constringence_ , while others do. So is it a word or isn't it?


title: Nationalities - When do we use the singular or plural form

text: I always have doubts whether to use a singular or a plural noun when I refer to certain peoples. For example, we say Americans, Italians, Brazilians, Russians and Austrians. But we say The British, The English, The Portuguese, The French, The Spanish and The Irish. When it comes to those nationals I rarely hear of, I'm never sure. These would include people from countries such as Azerbaijan, Armenia or Kenya.   Is there any rule as to whether we should use singular or plural ?


title: One word for taking something without feeling

text: I am looking for a word that explains the state of mind where one is neither happy nor sad about something, i.e., being unbiased in one's feeling towards something or even-minded about something. Something like 'indifferent' or 'impassive' but sans the negative connotation. I was considering equanimous, but I guess that word mostly means stable minded in face of adversities, and it's a character trait rather than a one-time response to something. Eg:   I am neither sad nor happy about his departure. Update: Based on the comment below I wish to add to the question a little. The meaning I wish to convey is the subject in question bears little significance to me and hence I am of an even temperament towards it.


title: Alternative word for "arguably better"

text: I am trying to find a word for it different than "arguably better" because I am trying to avoid arguing or pointing out the reasons why it is arguably. May you suggest me an alternative word?


title: Usage of apostrophe in “baker’s dozen”

text: In the phrase “baker’s dozen”, why does the apostrophe indicate possession of _a_ (single) baker? Shouldn't it indicate possession of _all_ bakers in general? Shouldn’t it be “bakers’ dozen”?


title: Are there any special English words describing indexed items which are displayed first word last?

text: The indexes in the back of some books contain items which are listed with the first word at the end, e.g.:   * An entry for "The Golden Goose" would be listed as "Golden Goose, The".   * An entry for "baseball teams" might be listed as "baseball teams", but also as "teams, baseball". Are there any English words to describe such a reversal, or to call index items which are displayed in reverse, or to call an index which contains such items?


title: What is a group of dragonflies?

text: As per title, what is the name of a group of dragonflies? Some friends say it is a mob, some say it is a hover. Anyone?


title: Is this sentence in the Future Continuous?

text: Would be obliged if someone could clarify whether the following is in the Future Continuous tense. > The Earth will be three degrees hotter by the year 2050. It seems so but I need to be absolutely certain. If it is the case, what rule would I use to describe the tense? So for Future Perfect I could say "The Future Perfect links a time in the future with a time before that". I'm looking for something along those lines if possible.


title: "It would not do to confuse the nurses with the patients"

text: From http://www.debate.org/debates/School-uniforms-ought-to-be-worn-in- primary-and-secondary-schools./1/: > For many of these, the reason for wearing a uniform is clear: so that they > are easily recognizable. In a hospital, for example, **it would not do** to > confuse the nurses with the patients. What did the author mean by "it would not do"? Can anyone parse this sentence please? Or is it a typo?


title: That vs. who for "police"

text: "After hearing that Ramin’s father was in the shah’s secret police who were responsible for killing millions..." I thought the word would be "who" because police are people, but MS Word corrects is as "that". I was wondering why "that" is the correct modifier?


title: Need a word that describes Training and Teambuilding

text: I need a word or conjured word that describes _Training and Team Building_. I am searching for a name of a new company doing this business.


title: How suffixes like -ness and -ship are chosen when forming abstract nouns?

text: In some programming situations I came across making up abstract nouns to give name to an information that indicates some quality. Eg. if the quality is `orange` one may be tempted to form the word `orangeness`. I found several possible postfixes for this in a paper by Dr. Suneetha Yedla:               ii) Forming abstract nouns     -asy, -acy “state or quality” accuracy     -age “condition, state, rank, office of” coinage, postage, barrage     -ance, -ence “state, act, fact of” emergence     -ade “general noun” salad, parade, lemonade     -al “act of” chemical, mechanical, physical, structural, operational     -ation “state of being X-ed” information, aviation, configuration, validation     -ia “condition of” inertia     -ial “differential, industrial     -icity “abstract noun from – ic” felicity, electricity     -ism “doctrical system of principles” constructivism, professionalism     -ity “state, quality, condition of” unity, complexity, solidity, fragility     -ment “condition of being X” equipment, experiment, requirement     -ness “state, quality, condition of” innateness, thickness     -ship “state, condition of” guide ship, airship, (large) cruise ship      The descriptions in the list are not exactly distinct. Suppose one cannot say which one 'feels right', I am not native; how do one choose the right suffix?


title: Is this sentence's grammar wrong?

text: > The maps, or the sequences, are just the start of many lines of research, > polyphiloprogenitive, multiply multiple genome projects. (source, _Nature_ > magazine) The part "polyphiloprogenitive, multiply multiple genome projects" does not seem to follow the first part of the sentence. Is this wrong grammar?


title: which phrase is more suitable in an official text :"ordinary people" or "normal people

text: I am confused which phrase is more suitable to put in an official text that is comparing two phrases : 1) successful person 2) Ordinary or normal person.


title: "I won't stay longer than I can help" or "longer than I can't help"?

text: I'm a non-native speaker of English and the following sentence makes me wonder: > "I won't stay longer than I can help." I've heard similar uses of "can help" in other contexts and they all sounded strange to me. Shouldn't we say : > "I won't stay longer than I can't help." In the same manner, doesn't it sound strange to say: > "I'm not driving at night, unless I can help it" Shouldn't one say "unless I can't help it"?


title: Would a comma be necessary here

text: Supposedly, when combining an independent clause with a participial clause, you separate them with a comma. But what about a sentence like: We built this facility, using the latest technology. To me, that comma seems odd there. So if no comma is needed here, what's the difference between a sentence like this, and a sentence like: He jumped down, creating a cloud of smoke.


title: Why "in" and "of" are deleted in this paragraph?

text: > A number of armorials of other countries have sections devoted to Spanish > arms, especially those French armorials arranged by marches; Aragonese arms > are prominent, not surprisingly in view of the cultural and political links > that existed between Aragón and southern France. (Collins, W. T., Spanish > Armorials, Coat of Arms, No. 161, Spring 1993.) I am understanding the paragraph in this way: > A number of armorials of other countries have sections devoted to Spanish > arms, especially **[in]** those **[of]** French armorials arranged by > marches **[,]** Aragonese arms are prominent **[;]** not surprisingly in > view of the cultural and political links that existed between Aragón and > southern France. Is my percept from the context correct ever? If it is correct, why "in" and "of" are deleted?


title: What word describes the form of address in which someone is called "Dad" or "Mum"?

text: I'm writing about what people might call God when praying, things like "Lord" or "Father" etc. With respect to using "Dad" or "Mum", would you call them names? (not exactly - not like "Brian" for instance). Not really a title either, is it? How about an APPELLATION, perhaps?


title: Which sentence is more correct: "They are playing by the river" or "They are playing at the river"?

text: I know that both sentences can be used to express proximity, to be near something but "by" sounds much better to me than "at" in this case. In which situation is "at" preferable?


title: Is “Compete to get scraps from a shrinking pot” a set phrase, or President Obama’s ad hoc turn of phrase?

text: In the New York Times’ interview to President Obama in Galesburg, Ill. on July 28 (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/28/us/politics/obama-says-income-gap-is- fraying-us-social-fabric.html?hp), Mr. Obama said; > “Racial tensions won’t get better; they may get worse, because people will > feel as if they’ve got to **compete** with some other group **to get scraps > from a shrinking pot** ,” Mr. Obama said. “If the economy is growing, > everybody feels invested. Everybody feels as if we’re rolling in the same > direction.” Is “Compete to get scraps from a shrinking pot” a set phrase, or just President Obama’s ad hoc turn of phrase? We have Japanese expression- 蟻がたかるように- to compete to get scraps like the swarm of ants for everybody swarming about marginal merits. Is there any alternative English idiom or phrasal expression corresponding to “Compete to get scraps from a shrinking pot”?


title: Does "allows to + verb" imply that the corresponding event occured?

text: Example: > Yahoo vulnerability allows hacker to delete 1.5 million records from > database. Does this imply that the hacker _did_ delete those records or just that he was _in the position to_ delete the records but not necessarily performed the action?


title: Usage of commas with "albeit"

text: Is it correct to place two commas in this sentence? > New York City plays a significant, albeit previously neglected, role in the > urban narratives of [...].


title: When asking a question, when should you use "may"?

text: When asking a question like "May you print a copy of that for me?", when should you use "may" or "could"?


title: Use of the subjunctive mood, "be"

text: > Along with the commercial database servers, there has been quite a bit of > activity in the open source community in the past five years with the goal > of creating a viable alternative to the commercial database servers. Two of > the most commonly used open source database servers are PostgreSQL and > MySQL. The MySQL website currently claims over 10 million installations, its > server is available for free, and I have found its server to be extremely > simple to download and install. For these reasons, I have decided that **all > examples for this book be run** against a MySQL (version 6.0) database, and > that **the mysql command-line tool be used** to format query results. Even > if you are already using another server and never plan to use MySQL, I urge > you to install the latest MySQL server, load the sample schema and data, and > experiment with the data and examples in this book. To me it sounds like the author could as easily have used **should** instead of the subjunctive form of the verb **to be**. Would there have been any difference in meaning if he had?


title: Is the "for" in "for too long" necessary?

text: Is it correct to say: > The night she passed away, I sat in front of the TV too long. Or must I say > The night she passed away, I sat in front of the TV for too long.


title: Question on Reported Speech

text: We have learned the rules concerning sequence of tenses in Reported Speech. I have one question. Is the one and only possibility according English Grammar to say or to write: She told me that he loved me. Even if I am just now reproducing the sentence which was told before one hour and I want to express the fact that she loves me constantly. Is the sentence She told me that he loves me? in every occasion wrong?


title: "to help other people to choose" vs. "to help other people choose" - is the former correct?

text: I have some doubts about verb patterns. I know "to help other people choose" is correct. What about "to help other people _to_ choose"? It's usually easy for me to ascertain the correct use of some verb patterns when talking, but I struggle to understand the rules.


title: Use of 'what?' to end an assertion

text: I'm interested in the colonial English habit of ending an assertive statement with the question "What?", as if asking for agreement from the listener. For example: > Pleasant weather. What? What is the history of this phenomenon? It sounds rather comical to modern ears.


title: What's the usage of "starry"?

text: What's the usage of the adjective "starry" for a speaker that has English as a mother-tongue? How frequently it is used? > A **starry** night sky. or > A night sky **full of stars**. or > _A night sky **starring... stars**?._ Could it be used as some kind of "cosmic metaphor," as in the Lovecraftian > Church of the **Starry Wisdom**. Considering the latter, one could not say: > Church of the **Wisdom Full of Stars**. Because if one could say such a thing, why not say > **A star starring starry stars, each one full of stars**. then?


title: What's the proper way to punctuate inches when recording the dimensions of something?

text: When punctuating the dimensions of something, if both dimensions share the same units, does the punctuation occur after each measurement or just after the last one. For example, if I'm looking at a sheet of paper, which is correct: {8 1/2 x 11"} or is {8 1/2" x 11"}?


title: How do I correctly use the possessive apostrophe with a parenthetical citation?

text: Is the apostrophe in the right place in the following sentence? > Pendleton, et al. (2002) **’s** research implies that extension of treatment > allows for greater weight loss.


title: Usage of "filed away"

text: > He still had the moment filed away in his memory. Is the meaning of the sentence I wrote widely understood?   Should that sentence be used in a particular context (e.g., when writing a book)?


title: Saying dates in English

text: Are these dates correctly pronounced? Should it be 'dash' or 'hyphen'? Roman one, or '/aɪ/'? 27/I-1980, twenty-seven, slash, Roman one, dash/hypen, nineteen eighty 4/II-1936 Four slash Roman two dash nineteen thirty-six 11/III-1908 eleven slash Roman three dash nineteen-eight 1/IV-1981 one slash Roman four dash nineteen eighty-one 29/V-1949 twenty-nine slash Roman five dash nineteen forty-nine 13/VI-1946 thirteen slash Roman six dash nineteen forty-six 14/VII-1959 fourteen slash Roman seven dash nineteen fifty-nine 12/VIII-1967 twelve slash Roman eight dash nineteen sixty-seven 4/IX-1966 four slash Roman nine dash nineteen sixty-six 28/X-1965 twenty-eight slash Roman ten dash nineteen sixty-five 5/XI-1964 five slash Roman eleven dash nineteen sixty-four 3/XII-1927 three slash Roman twelve dash nineteen twenty-seven.


title: Which is proper: "to debate X" or "to debate about X"?

text: Which version of this sentence is correct? >   * Doctoral students about to graduate, like me, often **debate about** > what qualities make a successful scientist. >   * Doctoral students about to graduate, like me, often **debate** what > qualities make a successful scientist. >


title: Word for someone who always corrects misspellings

text: Is there a specific word for the type of person who always corrects misspellings? Something exact, not something like perfectionist, grammar nazi or anal. Something that describes the person, like the word ultracrepidarian does for a person who gives advice outside their knowledge.


title: Past simple vs present perfect

text: I have read many online articles. I've read questions and answers on this site. I still can't get my head wrapped around the difference between `past simple` and `present perfect` I know the difference is between finished time (use `past simple`) and unfinished time (use `present perfect`). But as a non-native English speaker, this still makes no sense to me. I am **not implying any kind of time period.** > I have posted on SE   >  I posted on SE I just want to convey that the action completed in the past. I don't want to provide any connotation whether the action just completed, or completed at certain period in past. Maybe with **"I"** , I know the time period, but what if I am talking about someone else. > He has posted on SE   >  He posted on SE I don't know the time frame that **"he"** did the action. I don't know what **"he"** was planning (continuous action, or at specific time). I just know the action took place in the past. I don't know if it just finished. I don't know if there is a consequence to the action or not. It seems to me that I am **forced** to imply a time frame. So my question is: if I don't want to imply any time frame, or at least to imply as little as possible, what should I use?


title: Term for dedicating a book

text: Let's say:   1. John Doe writes a book -- _Me and My Dog Spot_. On the page after the title, he writes: _For Nancy_.   2. My aunt gives this book to me for my birthday, and on the title page, she adds in her penmanship: _Dear Jen, this reminds me of you and Fluffy. Love, Aunt Marge_ I'd refer to #1 and #2 as a _dedication_ , but are there more appropriate terms?


title: Why are the past and present tenses of "read" spelt the same?

text: and only have different pronunciations?


title: Isn't behind your back in front of you?

text: We've all heard the phrase that usually goes along the lines of "blah blah did something behind my back". I've always thought that from your back's point of view, anything behind you is in front of it therefore behind your back is in front of you. Is this just another unnecessary redundancy and should we all just say "behind me" or am I reading too much into this?


title: Potential future events

text: Does the following correctly express potential consequences of meeting someone? > A chance encounter is a great idea. However, in this case, chances would be > very slim to meet her this way. Even worse, if I went out of my way to meet > her socially and randomly, chances that her two roommates would accompany > her are pretty significant. This question arose from my latest post on seddit: http://www.reddit.com/r/seduction/comments/ed4at/trying_to_get_with_a_9_but_she_is_hesitant_to/ as I was contriving the comment to one of the responders. Feel free to suggest modifications to my actual post.


title: subject + verb + infinitive

text: I am having difficulty with subject + verb + infinitive set-ups, as I discovered with who/whom sentences. I understand who and whom as the subject and object forms. For sentences that I find a little more difficult I find it challenging to identify the form. For example: "This is the man who/whom Sara asked to wait for her." I figured this would be whom. Since the man is the object of asked; as a variation: "Sara asked him to wait for her." (Subject + verb + object + infinitive + prepositional phrase.) "This is the man who/whom the authorities refused to permit entry to the building." I think whom is correct; as a variation: "The authorities refused to permit him entry to the building." (Subject + object + infinitive + object + adverbial phrase?). I ask because of the following I found online: "[This is the] man who the authorities refused to admit existed." I applied the variation: "The authorities refused to admit he existed." Existed applies to the man and so he is the subject of the verb exist. I'm confused because “he existed” seems to me to be the object in the sentence. Take for example: “They refused to permit him entry”. The objective pronoun is being used. Both 'to permit' and 'to admit' are transitive here (I think); therefore, isn't “he existed” the object? I am confused by the use of the infinitive and what qualifies as the object in the subject + verb + infinitive set-up. Any assistance with how to understand this subject + verb + infinitive set-up and the object would be much appreciated.


title: "Needs cleaned" or "needs to be cleaned"

text: I'm from Western Pennsylvania. Until I moved away, I never realized that when I omitted the _to be_ from phrases like _needs to be cleaned_ , my usage was different than what most English speakers are accustomed to. Is it wrong?


title: Scottish English: past participle instead of gerund or infinitive?

text: A few years ago I moved to North-eastern Scotland. I've noticed that people from all backgrounds and levels of education frequently use the past participle instead of the gerund or infinitive forms, both in written work and in conversation. For example, the group secretary at my place of work has just sent out an e-mail saying: > I will be out of the office on Monday. If you have anything that **needs > booked** before then, please let me know. This just seems wrong to me: **needs booking** or **needs to be booked** would be correct. However, I hear it so regularly up here - and from people that are clearly well educated - that I'm beginning to think there must be more to it. Does anyone know of any historical precedent for this kind of usage in Scotland, or elsewhere? Perhaps it's actually fine and I'm just showing my ignorance? Thanks!


title: "Order something done" for "Order something to be done"

text: As far as your variety of English goes, can the verbal turn "order something done" be used interchangeably with "order something to be done"? > "We ordered this item sent to our local store." > > "I ordered this item sent to my son in Utah." > > "I ordered this item delivered to my girlfriend's workplace." > > "Yemen ordered him caught dead or alive."


title: "Conventional" vs. "traditional"

text: What is the difference between _conventional_ and _traditional_? E.g.: > My grandfather used to live a conventional/traditional life.


title: Word for a part of a wooden railroad track

text: I'm looking for a word for the thingy that's in the blue circle - ideally something not too complicated for a 3-year-old buddy. :) ![Train](http://i.stack.imgur.com/EhjkS.jpg)


title: Meaning of "to be" in the example

text: I cannot get the meaning of the following: > The failure to include these actions, which could be easily performed, might > by their absence betray an otherwise convincing claim to be feeling fear or > distress. Could anyone please explain what "to be" here means? And use synonym or explain that? It does not make any sense to me. EDIT: Does it mean "betray an otherwise convincing claim that he is feeling fear or distress"?


title: Transitive form of "to be"

text: Is there a single word in English that means something like "is-ify" or "to confer the property of existence"? I am not looking for "create."


title: "file content" vs. "file contents"

text: I am aware of the difference between _content_ and _contents_ and usually the distinction is clear to me. However I am wondering whether _file content_ or _file contents_ is more correct. On the one hand, the content of a file is a finite sequence of bytes, hence _contents_ would be appropriate. On the other hand, those bytes represent some entity (an image, for example), to which I would refer as the file's _content_. Is this distinction correct, or am I complicating things too much?


title: "Dignity" vs. "respect"

text: Today, I read an article, and one sentence talked about > treating other people with dignity and respect I had thought I understood the difference between the words _dignity_ and _respect_. But then I realized that I didn't understand — at least in the above context. I checked out the definitions on dictionary.com, m-w.com, etc. and I still didn't get it. What is difference between the two words _dignity_ and _respect_ in this context?


title: Can "duration" mean "remainder"?

text: On multiple commercial domestic flights, I've heard a flight attendant make an announcement just before final descent back to the ground that "the seat belt sign will remain illuminated for the _duration_ of the flight." This strikes me as an obvious mistake, where clearly "remainder" is intended. Is there an argument for using "duration" in this instance, despite much of the flight having already been spent with the seat belt sign dark?


title: When should "such forth" be used?

text: I was just having a conversation with a friend and I said "see how far from the access point each device is, so that I can do some relocation and such forth". She said that using _such forth_ at that part of the sentence is incorrect. Why?


title: Term for a firm used as a public front to hide an illegal operation

text: What do you call a firm used as a public front to hide an illegal operation? This would be a term for, for e.g.,   * A law firm used to hide a money laundering operation;    * A DVD corner shop where pirated films can be traded;    * A chemical plant concealing a large meth lab;    * A museum where secret slave auctions are held;    * A motorcycle shop where illegal guns are sold; and    * A legal casino where illegal gambling is secretly held in a back room club.


title: What does 'excluding the systematics' mean?

text: A business user asked me if I can run the report for her 'excluding the systematics'. Does that mean without going through the formality and procedure and etc?


title: Does "ran to" have a specific ending point in time?

text: Consider the following sentence: > Sam ran to the university pool. Does the running action have an ending point in the past?


What would you call 'A person who is ready for support all the time'? I wanted to write an email and convey to some clients that I will always be there for support, and was stuck when I got to this.


title: "The first time" vs. "at the first time" vs. "for the first time"

text: I have to arrange as a sequence some details about operations an ATM user will do to take cash. Which of the following is or are grammatical? >   1. The first time the user pushes the button, if the number he entered is > not valid, then... >   2. At the first time the user... (as the above) >   3. For the first time...(as the above) > I would be inclined to choose the first... Am I right?


title: "Small Latin and Less Greek"

text: About a third of the way through his poem "To the Memory of My Beloved the Author, Mr. William Shakespeare and What He Hath Left Us," Ben Jonson writes: > And though thou hadst small Latin and less Greek, > > From thence, to honour thee, I would not seek > > For names; but call forth thund’ring Aeschylus, > > Euripides, and Sophocles to us, > > Paccuvius, Accius, him of Cordova dead > > To life again, to hear thy buskin tread > > And shake a stage; or when thy socks were on, > > Leave thee alone, for the comparison > > Of all that insolent Greece or haughty Rome > > Sent forth; or since did from their ashes come. I have always supposed that the first line quoted above meant, as it would today, "And although you had little command of Latin and less of Greek"; but a footnote in George Greenwood, _Ben Jonson and Shakespeare_ (1921) offers the following gloss: > "And though thou hadst small Latin and less Greek" wrote Jonson. "Here," > says the learned Dr. [Clement Mansfield] Ingleby, " _hadst_ is the > subjunctive. The passage may be thus paraphrased: 'Even if thou hadst little > scholarship, I would not seek to honour thee by calling thee as others have > done, Ovid, Plautus, Terence, etc., _i.e._ , by the names of the classical > poets, but would rather invite them to witness how far thou dost outshine > them.' Ben does not assert that Shakespeare had 'little Latin and less > Greek,' as several understand him." ( _Centurie of Prayse_ , 2nd Edit. > [1879], p. 151). This may be correct, but others contend that Ben's words > are to be taken not in the subjunctive but in the indicative mood. It may be > so, since Ben was writing on the hypothesis that the player would be > generally taken as the poet, and, naturally, had to adapt his language to > that hypothesis. Either interpretation will equally well suit the sceptical > case. I have two questions: **1.** Does "And though thou hadst" here mean "And even if you had" or "And although you had"—or is it impossible to tell? **2.** If it is impossible to tell, were listeners and readers in Shakespearean/Jonsonian times accustomed to having to draw their own conclusions about whether the subjunctive mood or the indicative mood was intended in such cases?


title: What's a generic name for an attack animal?

text: I'm looking for the name of an animal trained to attack, whether for defense or sport. I feel like it's on the 'tip of my tongue' but can't quite get it. “Blood sport” is a bit too broad (and, in a sense, too narrow as well), and refers of course to the act and not the creature.


title: A word to mention a set of products sold together with a bundle price?

text: Is there a word to refer to a set of products sold together, with a specific price? For example:   * Product A is sold 10 dollars   * Product B is sold 10 dollars Product A and B are sold together for 18 dollars. How can we call the result of this product grouping?


title: Meaning of "about to [do something]" when it refers to somebody's action

text: > I am about to launch a start-up company. Would the sentence be understood as _I am intending to launch a start-up company_ , or _I am close to launch a start-up company_? In a sentence like _the ceremony was about to begin_ , I would understand that the ceremony was close to begin; is that the most common meaning assigned to sentences like _I am about to launch a start-up company_?


Where did the term "doggone it" come from?


title: An adjective that would substitute "underfunded" here?

text: > Tom remains underfunded to start up a business. The context is that this man has an excellent business plan and entrepreneurial spirit. But the bank wouldn't lend him money in absence of collateral. In my view, the word "underfunded" properly stresses the fact that Tom lacks capital. However, according to Collins Dictionary, this word in most cases modify an organization or services. Are there any words that would fit in better? To clarify, Tom LACKS enough funding. Still, he may turn to other institutions other than banks, a solution not very practical because the former ones charge exorbitantly high interest rate.


title: A polite substitution for "lamer"

text: Is there a polite word that can be used to designate someone who didn't really understand what he or she was doing? Or, in general, someone who is intentionally ignorant of how things work. A "lamer" doesn't fit for being impolite, and seemingly harming some people's ears too much. **Edit:** Another good definition is > It distinguishes between people who are ignorant by chance from those who > are ignorant by choice. And it makes me think that there is no polite substitution just because the meaning itself being impolite and abusive. Right?