title: Word that indicates that "lower is better", such as scoring in golf

text: Is there a word that could be used in an instance where you want to indicate that a lower number is better than a positive number? For instance, `In golf, scores are _______.` to indicate that a low score is a positive thing.


title: Term for something that is supposed to increase safety, but really just increases fear?

text: Some examples:   * A news station giving daily "terrorist reports". It doesn't actually say how to protect yourself, just gives information on how horrible they are & why you should be afraid.   * A airport that forces full body searches. The odds of an attack are still about zero, but passengers will believe there is a huge problem because of the extreme security measures.   * A person never leaving the house without at least 2 firearms. Their fear of an attack is increased by buying & carrying guns, but the chances of them needing to use one is still very low.


title: Does the line" Tears of disbelief sting my eyes" make sense?

text: Can I use the words - "Tears of disbelief sting my eyes" to express the fact that I am very sad and shocked?


title: Word for when you think of anyone and they call you

text: Is there a word when you think of someone and he suddenly shows up or calls you ?


title: Origin of the idiom "butt of jokes"

text: What is the origin of the phrase "butt of (all) jokes"? I'm wondering whether 'jokes' are being personified here (as per the origin of the term) with 'butt' being used as it's not exactly the most exalted part of the body, or whether 'butt' was intended more as a 'base' for all jokes? (I'm leaning towards the latter.)


title: The choice between the gerund and the infinitive in a certain construction

text: I am pretty much sure that for native speakers the issue I am going to bring up might look as an uncalled question as they can easily figure out which form of a verbal part of speech should be used, be it a gerund, an infinitive, or a bare infinitive. However, it can be pretty much misleading for a foreigner because the same construction works differently with different words and I don’t see a logical explanation. For example:   1. The purpose of this article is to analyze the issue…   2. My hobby is reading.  One may assume, and many foreigners really come to this conclusion, that it’s OK to switch the “gerund” and “infinitive” as the meaning will stay the same, that is:   3. The purpose of this article is analyzing the issue… (same as 1 above)   4. My hobby is to read. (same as 2 above) However, as I was told, this assumption is erroneous. **Another example:**   His task was watching after them. (not good)   His task was to watch after them. Is there any principle which governs the choice of the right form in such cases?


title: What would you call someone who sells information?

text: Is there an actual term? Just wondering since in movies or books there are those whom have information that other characters want or need and thus pay 'em for such information.


title: The word "dear" in public speech

text: I am a member of a Toastmaster club in the Czech republic where people work on their public speaking skills. It is a usual to open a speech by > Dear fellow Toastmasters, dear guests,... It is a direct, word-by-word translation of a typical opening in Czech. A friend who is a native English speaker noticed that word _Dear_ should be used only in letters, in written form. It should not be used for the opening of a speech, but one should rather use: > Ladies and gentlemen,... What are the rules for an opening of a speech? Is "dear guests" in a speech English or Czenglish?


title: Rather unusual usage of the word “churn”

text: I came across this sentence in a book: > "One especially strategic family room, where all these dark socio-cultural > and political dimensions are dramatized brilliantly, is the kitchen, where > the women of the home churn dreams, fears, social and political intrigues > away." I'm not all that fond of the sentence structure, but I was really wondering about the word _churn_ in that context. From contextual analysis, I think I understand the meaning of the sentence: the women congregate in the kitchen, where they have lengthy conversations about dreams, fears, society, and politics. However, when I looked up the word _churn_ in a dictionary, I couldn't find a good definition that mapped to this usage. In addition to the process of making butter, Collins lists four additional meanings of the verb: >   * (sometimes foll by _up_ ) to move or cause to move with agitation ⇒ > _ideas churned in his head_ >   * (of a bank, broker, etc) to encourage an investor or policyholder to > change investments, endowment policies, etc, to increase commissions at the > client's expense >   * (of a government) to pay benefits to a wide category of people and claw > it back by taxation from the well off >   * to promote the turnover of existing subscribers leasing, and new > subscribers joining, a cable television system or mobile phone company > and Macmillan mentions: >   * [intransitive/transitive] to move something such as a liquid around > violently, or to move in this way ⇒ _the churning seas_ > >   * [intransitive] if your stomach churns, you have a strong nervous feeling > in it because you are worried, afraid, or upset ⇒ _My stomach was churning > before the first performance._ > > I suppose "ideas churned in his head" comes closest to the meaning in the book, but I don't get the feeling from the context that the women are particularly agitated. As a matter of fact, the use of the word _away_ almost makes it seem like the conversations are therapeutic, not something that agitates or worries. So, my questions are: 1) Is there some other definition of _churn_ that I'm not aware of? Or is the author merely using some literary license, and bending the meaning of the word? 2) Assuming I'm interpreting the passage correctly, what other words could have been used in place of _churn_ in this context?


title: "Compose" and "comprise"

text: The whole _comprises_ the parts, for example > The board comprises five members. and the parts _compose_ the whole such as > Five members compose the board. The preceding sentence can be written in passive construction as follows: > The board is composed of five members. What about the first one? Can I _ever_ have a passive construction with _comprise_ like the following? Doing so always implies the meaning of _composed of_. > The board is ~~comprised of~~ five members. [appears to be a wrong sense] Or is it only _composed of_ that is used for turning sentences into passive construction that use _comprise_ as a main verb?


title: Has a dead metaphor ceased to be a metaphor?

text: In its simplest sense, a metaphor is a figure of speech where, essentially, a simile is ellipted to what is apparently a false statement, but as the intention is to emphasise the similarity rather than deceive, this is an accepted linguistic device. > Bob is like a tiger. > > Bob is a tiger. John Lawler is an expert on pointing out in his invaluable and fascinating contributions the extended metaphors on which a lot of our language is built, such as the container metaphor(s) and up-is-achievement metaphor. In a recent post, he pointed out that 'zenith' is used metaphorically as 'high point [of eg a career]'. However, Wikipedia has this to say about dead metaphors: > There is debate among literary scholars whether so-called "dead metaphors" > are dead or are metaphors. Literary scholar R.W. Gibbs noted that for a > metaphor to be dead, it would necessarily lose the metaphorical qualities > that it comprises. These qualities, however, still remain. A person can > understand the expression "falling head-over-heels in love" even if they > have never encountered that variant of the phrase "falling in love." > > Analytic philosopher Max Black argued that the dead metaphor should not be > considered a metaphor at all, but rather classified as a separate vocabulary > item.[2] If the verb "to plough" retained the simple meaning of "to turn up > the earth with a plough," then the idea of a car "ploughing through traffic" > would clearly be a metaphor. The expression would be a comparison between > the motion of the plough cutting through the soil and a car speeding through > traffic. In order to understand it, one would need to grasp the comparison. > However, "to plough" has taken on an additional meaning of "to move in a > fast and uncontrolled manner," and so to say that a car "ploughed through > the traffic" is a literal statement. No knowledge of the original > metaphorical symbolism is necessary to understanding the statement. For 'zenith', Elliott Frith found a dictionary definition: > Zenith noun > > the strongest or most successful period of time _Should_ we revise our usage of the word 'metaphor' in such cases?


title: an exercise in ≠of?

text: Does the word "exercise" in this sentence means something different because it is followed by the preposition "in" instead of "of". I've looked the word up on merriam-webster but i could only find examples of "exercise" followed by "of" Here's a sentence: "Achieving compliance is an exercise **in** purpose, not power" Thank you!


title: "Have some reason you" or "Have some reason why you"

text: Can the "why" be removed from the phrase "have some reason why you?" Example: > Do you have some reason you **___ __ ___**? vs. > Do you have some reason why you **___ __ ___**? Are these both grammatically correct? What's the difference, if any? Googling I find a lot of both, but I'm still wondering about this.


title: How should I understand "beckon" in this sentence?

text: I learned the following sentence from _The Economist_. > Perfectly efficient electric cables, more powerful generators and motors, > magnetic levitation and a host of other technological wonders **beckoned**. I have looked it up in the dictionary: > **beckon**   >  intransitive verb   >  1 : to summon or signal typically with a wave or nod   >  2 : to appear inviting : ATTRACT But I am still not able to understand the sentence above with either explanation of "beckon". How should I understand this word and the sentence?


title: In English you have 'above', 'on', 'over' and 'on top of' but in Italian one word, 'sopra', covers all four meanings

text: In Italian if I were to say, "sopra l'albero" (albero = tree) you might rightly ask: "Yes but where, exactly?" But " **sopra**" is a great word to learn in Italian, not only is it a very flexible preposition of place, you can create a new word by simply tagging a noun, which explains perfectly its meaning. No guess work necessary. For example:   * _Soprabito_ means something you put **over** your clothes. A coat.   * _Sopracciglio_ means something **above** your eyelashes. Eyebrows.    * _Soprammobile_ something which you put **on top of** a piece of furniture. An ornament. However, an English person might justify the use of so many different prepositions with similar meanings and _top_ 1 by saying they indicate precisely where an object is positioned. In the case of "sopra l'albero" the argument is defeated as soon as anyone mentions **what** and what it is **doing** in connection to the tree. (I hope I have explained myself clearly.) A bird is "sopra l'albero"? Then it must be **on** a tree. A bird is flying "sopra l'albero"? Then it must be **over** the tree. A bird is perched "sopra l'albero"? Then it has to be at the **top** , etc. My questions are:   * What is the etymology and history behind **above, on, over** and **top**.    * Why was there a need to have these words when as shown _above_ , within a specific context, ambiguity in meaning is eliminated.    * Which English words, if any, contain the preposition, **on** , coupled with a concrete noun to form one word.


title: What's a word for "widespread," but not so wide?

text: I want to say that something is trying to attain widespread use. However, when I say _widespread use_ , I really want to say that it is trying to be used by a few people (not necessarily that widespread). Is there a word, or an expression for this?


title: How to use "if you will"

text: What is the proper way to use _if you will_? Here is an example. > It's like riding a car, if you will. Is the punctuation right?


title: How could I different the subjunctive mood from wrong tense or singular from in third personal?

text: Here is the example, which is right? It's important he know this.   It's important he knows this.   It's important he has known this.   or, those above all right, but express different meaning.


title: (I'm not sure) how to capitalize this sentence

text: When a sentence begins with a parenthetical clause (uncommon, I'm sure), how should the following portion be capitalized? My thought is it would be either > (In my opinion, at least[,]) the play was terrible. or > (In my opinion, at least[,]) The play was terrible. Since "The play was terrible" is a complete sentence, and "In my opinion, at least" is a parenthetical attachment, should "the" be capitalized? Should a sentence even start with a parenthetical clause? * * * Additionally (I will remove this part from the question if it turns out to be too separate an issue), should the comma after "at least" be present? Were the sentence written to include the parenthetical statement, it would be included, but it seems very strange to me to end a parenthetical statement that way.


title: Should we include or leave out the preposition "on"

text: Consider the following examples:   1. We are going to Japan on Wednesday.   2. We are going to Japan Wednesday.   3. We are going to Japan on tomorrow.   4. We are going to Japan tomorrow. My question is about 2 and 3. For 2 I hear it spoken all the time, but it seems a bit unusual as written words. As for 3, the "on" feels very much a redundant word in both written and spoken English. Wish that somebody could tell me if 2 and 3 are ok in terms of both spoken and written styles.


title: What does "If you're gonna get up in my face you'd better be ready to back it up!" mean?

text: I just read the following expression: I have a vague idea what it means but please could a native speaker comment: "If you're gonna get up in my face you'd better be ready to back it up!"


title: Can "his/her" be replaced by "his"?

text: Yesterday, I asked this question on Web Apps: > If a Facebook user dies, what happens to **the** account? Actually, I wanted to ask it this way: > If a Facebook user dies, what happens to **his/her** account? I chose the easy way and used **the** instead of **his/her**. Could I use just **his** in this case?: > If a Facebook user dies, what happens to **his** account? What would you recommend for similar cases? Which pronoun is more appropriate to be used?


title: Is "civillians" correct?

text: Wikipedia has a lot of occurrences for the word "civillians", such as: > At least 35 civillians were killed at the incident I began fixing them to "civilians", but then had a doubt. Is "civillians" actually correct? At least one dictionary has the term with two "l": http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Civillian but if I understand well it is listed as "Middle English". Is this an old word that should not be used in a modern encyclopedia?


title: "Maybe I have colored it too much"

text: Is that understandable in English? Or maybe there is a better way to illustrate what I want to say. What I want to say is that maybe I have exaggerated. For example, > God is always good. He kind of committed genocide with the big flood. So he's not always good but most of the time likes everybody.


title: Is "I hear you" impatient or sympathetic?

text: I have several times come across the phrase "I hear you" (spoken in response to, e.g., someone relating an experience of theirs), but I haven't been able to figure out whether it signifies a polite impatience or whether it implies understanding (or some of each). How should I use this phrase, and how can I interpret it?


title: Is there a word/term for a question where the asker knows he'll criticise any answer?

text: What do you call it when a person asks somebody a question when they know they'll criticise any answer regardless? For instance, a man asks you something like "If you were recruiting staff would you employ an ex-convict?". If you answer yes he says "Well that shows you don't care about security". But if you'd said no then the reply would have been "So you wouldn't give a person a second chance then?"


title: Proper address for married couple when husband is a Jr

text: I have been unable to find a complete answer to my question in any source I have consulted. I want to make a donation in memory of my deceased parents. I would like to use both of their first names if possible, and my father was a Jr. Should the proper format be: John and Mary Smith Jr. or Mr. John Smith Jr. and Mrs. Mary Smith? I believe the Jr. is restrictive and so I have omitted the comma.


title: What is the difference between an Emperor and a King?

text: I was at a loss when I was asked recently by my grand-daughter who is a school girl about the difference between Emperor and King. She asked me why Great Britain has King and Queen, while Germany and Russia had the Emperors, and France had both Kings and Emperors. All what I could tell her was, ‘you’d better study by yourself, don’t count on others.” Being sorry for her, I checked dictionaries at hand, but was simply confounded. For instance, OALD defines: > Emperor: the ruler of empire. > > Empire: a group of countries that are controlled by one ruler / government. > > King: the (male) ruler of an independent state / country that has a royal > family. > > Kingdom: a country ruled by a king (or queen). The difference seems to be;   1. King has a royal family.   2. Empire is a group of countries (under one ruler). But emperors have royal families as well, and Japan that has had the emperors for a millennium has been a single country (except the imperialism era of 1910–1945), and China who had emperors wasn’t a group of countries. Can you tell me what is or are the essential (functional and institutional) difference(s) between Emperor and King so that I can give a belated answer to my grand-daughter?


title: "On the first of every month" vs. "every first of the month"

text: What is the difference between the following two? >   * On the first of every month... >   * Every first of the month... >


title: Drink/eat off/from/in a cup/bowl/plate

text: Which combinations are you most likely to use? Do you drink _from_ a cup? Eat something _in_ a bowl? I got into an argument with a Welsh English speaker over this. He insisted that he drinks and eats _off_ a cup, bowl, and plate. He added that "from" would be OK, but not perfect. Me, I'm an American English speaker and I drink and eat _from_ or _in_ a cup or bowl, and I eat _off_ a plate.


title: Which one is correct "You heard it correct" or "You heard it correctly"?

text: Which one is correct? > You heard it _correct_ or > You heard it _correctly_ Does the same apply to _read_ it correct[ly]?


title: Difference between "fun" and "interesting"

text: In Japanese, there is no difference in definition between _fun_ and _interesting_ in their adjective forms. I know that fun also has a noun and verb form in English, but I am wondering is there any difference between "fun" (adjective definition) and "interesting"? In all honesty, they appear to mean the same thing. Is there a time when you can replace one word with the other to have a completely different meaning? EDIT: To explain myself a little bit more, interesting is defined as attracting your attention in Merriam Webster. When can something be fun and not attract your attention? In this sense, I feel as if fun encompasses interesting.


title: Assist or/vs Attend?

text: Is it correct to say: > it's very important to assist to the meeting? Is it similar to say > It's very important to attend the meeting? if not, in which context is the word "assist" used? I read this list of synonyms: http://www.wordreference.com/thesaurus/assist As you can see if clicked, "attend" is listed as a synonym for "assist", then, is it correct to use it insetad of "attend" in the sentences above ? or it will be correct/not formal, incorrect, correct/slang ? That's why I got confuse


title: Where to look up more general terms for a word?

text: A few minutes ago, I was in need (for coding purposes) of finding a more general term for notions such as _city_ , _village_ , _town_ , etc. Now, whereas I could just try a few options (e.g. _locality_? _municipality_?), look up their meanings in the dictionary, and go with one, it got me wondering about the problem in more general. So are there any systematic ways to look up such words? I haven't noticed anything like this in thesauri (or maybe I just haven't been paying attention). Is any such database of hierarchies of meanings even known to exist and be freely available? (as to the tags of this post: feel free to correct those; I'm not at all sure yet how tags work in this stack exchange)


title: Whether to use the singular or plural form of basis?

text: Is it: "coming to these conclusions on the basis of this study" or "coming to these conclusions on the bases of this study"? Do we use the singular "basis" because it is just one study or the plural "bases" because there are many conclusions? To correctly use the plural would we have to say something like: "Coming to these conclusions, on these bases, i decided..."?


title: Term for paying beyond the contract limit

text: I am looking for one word for situation explained as under:   1. We (My Company) have a contractor.   2. His contract amount is $ XYZ per annum.   3. As the year ended he was already paid an amount "beyond contract" limit. What should this amount be called? "Extra amount paid" or "Amount paid beyond contract limit" or what? Is there exists any single or hyphenated word for this situation?


title: the use of the word "Bastard"

text: the other day I heard one of my colleague referring to another colleague "that poor bastard is stuck there". I was surprised to hear that. But when he was saying the bastard word, the person he was referring to wasn't present because we were looking at him through the window and he was busy shovelling his car out of snow. I have to say that the former colleague swears a lot, like "fuck me" which I don't even know what it means,etc. I suppose it is some kind of common joking but just want to make sure of it. Could someone give some explanation on how this word should be used ? I am not a native English speaker and I live in eastern Canada. Thanks


title: Word/phrase origin of "StackExchange"

text: Because of the success of StackExchange.com I am having difficulty researching the term on the Internet. Where does it come from? I know the phrase comes out of computer programming, but my experience in computer languages ended in the late 70s when my BASIC program intended to calculate payroll used up all of the memory in our lab's shared TRS-80.   Don't laugh at me. I am old.


title: Are academics considered "experts", "professionals", or both in their scientific field?

text: I wrote a proposal for a survey to be conducted at a conference in the field of requirements engineering. I decided that all attendants at the conference, both the ones coming from industry and ones coming from academia, will be a good target population. I don't remember which word I used in the proposal, "RE experts" or "RE professionals" or both, because for me, both words apply to anybody who attends a conference in the field and are practically synonyms in this context. In one of the reviews, the reviewer seems to make a distinction: > For example, the RQ’s talk about the RE community and RE experts rather than > professionals (e.g., what about researchers who may be experts but not > professionals) So my questions are   1. what is the actual distinction between an expert and a professional in such a setting?    2. Why would an academic researcher not be considered a professional?  This is maybe clear to native English speakers, but not to me, and I will probably have to use the terms frequently in my thesis, so I need the clarification.


title: Alternatives to saying "cheese" while posing

text: What are the good alternatives to saying "cheese" while posing for a photo?


title: Predicative Position of Adjectives: Do We Hyphenate after the Verb?

text: Do the words in the following sentences get hyphenated?   1. She is _old-fashioned._   2. He was _ill-at-ease._   3. He is _well-informed, well-read, well-educated_ , and _well-known._   4. He _brought me up-to-date_. (Adverbial.)   5. He _is up-to-date_. (Adjectival.)   6. Joe said, "The test is _multiple-choice_ and _fill-in-the-blank."_   7. The technology is _state-of-the-art_ and the new software is _cutting-edge_.


title: The correct way to say something is hired on an hourly basis

text: Which of the following is correct? > We hire our bicycle... > >   1. by the hour. >   2. by hours. >   3. by an hour. >   4. for hours. >


title: "My friend's, Tom's, object" vs. "My friend, Tom's, object"

text: How does one combine possession and appositive comma usage in one sentence?


title: Have you done your marketing today?

text: The first thing that comes to my mind when I hear the term _marketing_ is a word that is related to _advertising_ , _business_ and _commerce_. A colleague once said to me that she went to do some marketing. I came to realise that she meant _shopping for grocery in the supermarket_ , only after dwelling further onto the subject. But this is something that is _rarely_ used in such context based on my own personal experience. My question is: Is the usage of the term _marketing_ in the literal sense still appropriate in the English speaking community?


title: Are these plural or singular?

text: I was surprised when I heard zero is plural, and even 1.00001 is plural. Then, what about following numbers ? (1) 1.00 which means the value measured between 0.995-1.004, having possibility that it was exactly 1. (2) 0.99999..... which is mathematically equal to 1. Also, are others that are mathemattically equal to 1 than this, treated completely same as 1? (3) -1 Is this singular? Or negative numbers are generally plural? (4) i = square root of -1 I know it's weird to count things with imaginary numbers, nonetheless, if you were to count, which form, plural or singular, would you be to use? That's it.


title: A British pronunciation issue

text: Most dictionaries list the pronunciation of _issue_ as `/ˈɪʃuː/` (ĭsho͞o) in American English and `/ˈɪs.juː/` (ĭsyo͞o) possibly alongside `/ˈɪʃjuː/` (ĭshyo͞o) and `/ˈɪʃuː/` in British English. One informal poll gives equal figures for `/ˈɪʃuː/` and `/ˈɪs.juː/` in British English. Is there any manner to how these three pronunciations map out in British English? Is it a regional variation, a class variation, purely individual variations?


title: Did 'courgettes' ever have an English name?

text: Americans call them 'zucchini', which I assume is the Italian name, whilst we in Britain use the French name - courgettes. But I am wondering if the vegetable ever had an English name. The earliest quotation in the OED is from 1931. Did the Victorians not eat them? I have to admit that they were never part of our diet until the late 1960s. But they grow perfectly well in the English climate, provided you don't plant them out till after the frosts have finished.


title: Single word for 'cloying empathy'

text: Most often heard in radio and television interviews. On hearing someone stubbed their toe on a bathroom door, interviewer asks "Really, that must have been terrible, how did you cope with that?" - not sarcasm though.


title: "Whoever able"?

text: A friend of mine wrote > Whoever able to understand these few words [...] may draw my attention. First, I told him to write " _Anyone who is able_ to understand [...]", but he said he wants to keep the word "Whoever". Ok. With that assumption, for me, it would sound better if he said "Whoever _being_ able to understand these few words [...] may draw my attention." My question: Would you say that his sentence is correct without adding any word between "Whoever" and "able"?


title: How to Pronounce family name called "Penhallow"

text: How to pronounce family name Penhallow? I'm translating the "A Tangled Web" story by L.M.Montgomery to Russian.


title: B is 4, A is 10 times more, is A 44?

text: B is 4, A is 10 times more, is A 44? I am really confused by "times" and "more" or "better".


title: Couple of comma-splice questions

text: 1. He missed one episode of The O.C. and then played catch-up the rest of the season.    2. I have but one dream in life, to own a Harley-Davidson.    3. She swims twice a day, before school and right before dinner.    4. I passed up the offer although, come to think of it, I shouldn’t have.  Hi, I'm just kind of confused on some things. If the first sentence doesn't need a comma before "and" because "then played catch-up the rest of the season" cannot stand on its own then why are there commas in the second and third sentence? Why isn't there a comma between "offer" and "although"? I thought a comma was needed before a conjunction.


title: Can you explain difference between perform, execute and accomplish'?

text: Is there any difference in meaning between _perform_ , _execute_ , _accomplish_?


title: Which word has the same pronuncation as the word "may"?

text: What is the homophone of the word _may_? I can't find one real dictionary of homophones, nor is there an answer through Google.


title: "Of which I am unaware of" & "I don't know", semantic difference

text: While reading first few chapters of fascinating book "On Writing Well", this doubt struck my mind: > "There are many great English writings _of which I am unaware of_ " OR > "There are many great English writings _which I don't know_ " What is the difference in meaning? Do they convey same meaning? To me it doesn't feels the same. I would say, I am more inclined to express the first sentence as > "There are many great English writings _which I don't know as yet_ " Please help! Thanks a lot.


title: Is there an alternative, better term for "products of a culture"?

text: What is the most appropriate word or phrase to call all the books, theater plays, movies, etc. that a culture has produced and is still producing? For example, "the products of the French culture."


title: Can "erudite" be used to describe things other than humans?

text: I have heard the adjective _erudite_ in relation to humans, but I was inditing an essay and pondering whether I could implement it to describe a school. An erudite school. Is that permissible?


title: A grammar rule (Present perfect)

text: Is this rule correct? when 'for' and 'since' are used in a sentence(in present perfect tense) to show duration of an action they imply that the action is still in progress. Without the 'for', the last sentence suggests that the person doesn't live in Paris anymore and that the action is complete. I have lived in Paris for two weeks. I have lived in Paris.


title: Is this an instance of personification or is it a simile?

text: I've been sometimes a little confused on how direct personification must be. For example, consider the following phrase used to describe a river: > Like a snake it winds through the craggy mountainside. Is that simply an analogy comparing a snake to a river, or is it an instance of personification/anthropomorphism?


title: Are there metaphoric expressions to express the frustration you feel when you are not allowed to speak up before people?

text: In Japan we have a saying, “もの言わぬは腹膨るる業 - You feel like your stomach swelling, when you are not allowed to speak up (in public).” The origin of this phrase can be traced back to “Tsurezuregusa – Essays in Idleness” written in 1330 – 31 by Buddhist hermit, Kenko Yoshida who was forced out of public activity in his early life, and still being in popular currency. The phrase can be applied to the frustration people, particularly journalists, novelists, and poets in despotic countries feel as well . Are there similar metaphoric phrases to express frustration you feel when you are silenced by someone else, say your teacher, boss in your office, political authorities, (or even close votes of the forum, ha, ha)? Or there’s no such expression in the countries where everyone can enjoy freedom of speech?


title: What does "dictated not read" mean in a literary sense?

text: There have been letters ended with the phrase:               Dictated, not read,      This means that the secretary printed and distributed it without review from the author. But, when this is emphasized in literature I fail to see the author's (proper) intent. Is it telling of something? Was it the case that it is so urgent or that I couldn't care less about your response?


title: "You have hidden a request sent by ..." versus "You hid a request sent by ..."

text: I have come across a couple confusing sentences when hiding (ignoring) requests on Facebook. The first response message was: > You hid a FarmVille request sent by John Doe and the second was > You have hidden a FarmVille request sent by John Doe. Which is more correct and why? Are they both correct?


title: Cognitive capacity and (memory) capacity

text: I'm having difficulty finding the appropriate form of the word memory that would fit the above. It probably isn't memorial as that's a noun. What would you suggest?


"Heard me [infinitive]" vs. "heard me [present participle]" >   *     1. At that time, you wouldn't have heard me **talk** about it. >     2. At that time, you wouldn't have heard me **talking** about it. >   *     1. At that time, you wouldn't have heard me **condemn** it. >     2. At that time, you wouldn't have heard me **condemning** it. > Which ~~one~~ of the above sentences are incorrect and why?


title: Is it grammatical to say "I saw her dropping the ticket" as opposed to "I saw her drop the ticket"?

text: What is the difference between using the past tense and the present participle, since both sentences indicate the speaker witnessed the action of the ticket being dropped?


title: "Why ...?" vs. "Why is it that ... ?"

text: >   * Why is it that everybody wants to help me whenever I need someone's > help? >   * Why does everybody want to help me whenever I need someone's help? > Can you please explain to me the difference in meaning between these two questions? I don't see it.


title: Is "at a time" correct?

text: I would like to find a way to express the meaning of "at some time". For example: > I think everyone has his study or working rhythm **at a time**. This rhythm > varies for different person, and may be different **at a different time** > for the same person. Especially it can change over time as he becomes more > experienced. So pacing them at a pre-fixed pace may not work well. **At a time** sounds awkward to me. What do you think?


title: What does an italic "a" immediately before a year stand for?

text: Some citations in the _OED_ have an italic _a_ before the year to indicate the year is uncertain, for example: > _a_ 1556 N. Udall _Ralph Roister Doister_ (?1566) iii. iv. sig. E.iijv, By > gosse and for thy sake I defye hir in deede. What does the _a_ stand for in _a_ 1556? In this case, the book was believed to have been published in 1556, or shortly thereafter, but not known for sure. I don't think it's "about" because it's italic so possibly Latin, and italic _c_ is also used for _circa_ in other citations (" _c_ 1315").


title: Does the "defense sickle" exist in english football/soccer language?

text: In German football vocabulary, there exists a so called _Abwehrsichel_ during defensive play. The meaning can best be seen at this youtube video at the 09 second mark: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_pFKGDEgUc How I can translate this term into English. Could I translate it into "defense sickle"? It doesn't sound right to me.


title: "He denied having killed him" vs "He denied he had killed him"

text: I'm trying to understand the perfect aspect of the verbs and I am not sure whether both are correct: > He denied having killed him > > He denied he had killed him. If not, what is the problem? And one additional question, is _deny to_ correct? I have seen it often on the Internet - _He denied to ever be there_. I have read that _deny to_ is incorrect.


title: "fine at your side" vs. "fine on your side"

text: What difference(s) do the prepositions below make in the meanings of the following statements: > I hope things are fine _at_ your side. > > I hope things are fine _on_ your side. To me the first one rhymes more with the area around the person while the second one with the person itself. What do you think?


title: On your six and watch your six

text: I recently learned following phrases.   * On your six It means directly behind you. This is a military designation of location where 12:00 is directly in front of you.   * Watch your six It means to watch out for danger behind your back. Are these well-known and frequently-used phrases ? If yes, in what kind of situations do we use these ?


title: Meaning of "Unless of the 'baby', thank you!"

text: I heard this dialogue in a drama: > Tom: Let me introduce my baby brother, Jack.   >  Jack: Unless of the 'baby', thank you! I wonder what does _'unless of'_ mean there? Or it is actually _'unless off'_? I've checked a dictionary and haven't found such an expression.


title: Any opened supermarket near?

text: I want to know if this sentence is correct: > Are there any opened supermarket near? If I want to place "Do you know" _before_ the question, which is preferred? >   * Do you know if are there any opened supermarket near? >   * Do you know if there are any opened supermarket near? >


title: "Should you pull a ‘Burger King’ to cut your tax bill?" - What figurative device is it?

text: Burger King plans to buy the Canadian Tim Hortons in an effort to cut taxes as in the following link: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/should-you-pull-a-burger-king-to-cut-tax- bill-2014-08-26 What kind of figurative device is "Burger King" in the title?


title: Can I use "anymore" with "nothing"?

text: Normally, _anymore_ (or _any more_ in UK) meaning _any longer_ used as an adverb not a as determiner, can be found in negative, conditional, or interrogative sentences. Americans may use _anymore_ in positive sentences, but I'd like to skip this subject if possible :) **My question** : is the use of _nothing_ makes the sentence negative despite it's grammatically a positive sentence and so allows the use of _anymore_ ? Can I say and write : > Shara has always hated this town but she stayed there for her mother. Her > mother has just died. From now on, nothing prevents her from moving on > anymore And what about _nothing else ... anymore_ or _almost nothing ... anymore_ ? They still both express the negation but not the COMPLETENESS. Is it a trouble? > John has a very weak will. And Sofia thinks if he tries cocaine just one > time, then for him, nothing else will matter anymore Another **less important question** : I find _From now on_ and _anymore_ a bit redundant. Is it the case or it's OK? Thank you for all your remarks.


title: "Fast" vs "Quickly" vs "Speedy" vs "Rapidly"

text: A similar question has been asked. However, is it possible to give (general) differences in usage of _fast_ , _quickly_ , _speedy_ and _rapidly_? And with respect to the top answer: Are _quick_ and _fast_ absolutely interchangeable?


title: "And been" when "has" has been said in the sentence already?

text: I have the sentence "The role has gotten easier and easier to play, and been forced upon me more frequently than not." I was wondering if "and been" is correct to use in this case, or if "has" must be used again i.e. "and been" or "and has been?" Thanks!


title: "If I didn't have" vs. "if I hadn't had"

text: Can someone please tell me if these sentences are correct? I prefer number one. Here I am trying to talk about a past condition that didn't actually happen because the person _had_ the example sentences and they _did_ understand. >   1. If I didn't have the example sentences, I wouldn't have understood the > text. >   2. If I hadn't had the example sentences, I wouldn't have understood the > text. >


title: When did the term 'leverage' gain its verb/debt-related meaning?

text: I was discussing the much-abused business term _leverage_ with a colleague and thought it would be interesting to know when the term as a verb entered popular use as opposed to the physics-related noun. I can look at ngrams and do basic searches, but since the forms exist as homonyms I don't know of any tools that can distinguish between the two. When did the word _leverage_ become a commonplace way to describe borrowing to make money, and how much newer is it than the physics term?


title: Word to describe "fleeting, wandering and prone to drifting off" of thought

text: I was wondering if someone could help me find a word based off of my description. I would like a word that means something along the lines of "fleeting, wandering and prone to drifting off" or something like this. I'm trying to describe thought in a "Men fear thought" analysis. Trying to breakdown the line "Men fear though more than ruin" I was trying to assert that thought is **___** as it is "fleeting, wandering and prone to drifting off". If anyone has some insight into a particularly helpful word, or one that seems to fit well, please let me know! **UPDATE:** I would also like for the word to possibly carry a little bit of a negative connotation, so it can be tied into the analysis of "more than ruin". Also, I think the word should have its emphasis on "prone to drifting off" and also "leading to other kinds of malicious thoughts/things" if you know what I mean.


title: Sentences ending with something that already contains a period/full-stop

text: What's the rule about sentences that end in something that already has a period in it? Like a sentence that ends in: Washington D.C. -or- etc. Personally, and I realise this is wrong, I would love to have two periods - the first being, of course, the mark for the abbreviation and the second being the period/full-stop of the sentence. I'm guessing that it is just treated as a stone that kills two birds, but I've never heard a definite answer as to how to deal with these.


title: Non-standard "because" usage - is it valid?

text: I've currently reading Neal Stephenson's book "The System of the World", and there have been multiple instances of him using a sentence structure with "because" that seems strange. As an example, one sentence of the form in question is: > Jack was silent for a while, because alert. I would normally expect to see this written something like: > Jack was silent for a while, because he was alert. That is, he seems to omit repeating the subject. Is this structure valid? I read quite a bit, but can't recall ever seeing anyone else do this. _Editing to add another example of this structure, which I believe is now the third or fourth time I've seen it in this book:_ > Upon entering the Chapel, every denizen of Newgate stops in his tracks for a > few moments because staggered by a blast of light, a sort of optical > fanfare.


title: Tending to misuse comma

text: I tend to misuse commas in large way. Whenever I draft a professional mail, I get engrossed in the points, and somewhere along the way I get the feeling that this sentence is too long. I then start putting in commas to separate out thoughts. This often leads me to situations where I start using "He has done well, but a lot remains" etc.   How do I stop this usage and start using the English language properly? **P.S.** English is not my native language.


title: Design tool or designing tool

text: Which is the correct form?   * Collaborative Unified Modelling Language **design** tool for software development teams    * Collaborative Unified Modelling Language **designing** tool for software development teams


title: What is a good way to refer to stories that are meant for adults?

text: There are stories for children and for adults. But when I say "adult stories" people tend to think they are erotica/porn stories. What is a good way to refer to adult stories? Example of adult stories: Lovecraft's, Poe's, Kafka's, etc.


title: What does this quote/excerpt mean?

text: I read the following lines somewhere on the Web: > If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained, you will > suffer defeat. > > If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a > hundred battles. After reading those lines five times, I still don't understand what the writer is exactly trying to say here. Could someone please explain the meaning of these lines in simple words?


title: "Massager" vs "masseuse"

text: A friend of mine recently used the word **masseuse** to describe a person that gives massages. I have never heard of this terminology before so I'm wondering what the difference is between _massager_ and _masseuse_? To me, the _-er_ ending makes it very obvious that it denotes "[a] person or thing that does an action indicated by the root verb; a person whose occupation is (the noun)." For instance:   * player: a person who plays   * driver: a person who drives   * songwriter: a person who writes songs I realize sometimes there is a distinction between male and female actors (e.g. actor/actress). Other words that have different endings to indicate the person:   * assistant: a person who assists   * scientist: a person who practices science Now with the last example, the _-ist_ suffix denotes profession or religion, so in my case, _massage therapist_ would also work. But what's with the word _masseuse_?


title: How would you say someone was "disrespecting you" correctly?

text: Is there a grammatically correct synonym for the word "disrespect" in the form of a verb? As in: "Please stop disrespecting me, Bill."


title: Syntax tree of a sentence

text: How would you draw the syntax tree of the sentence below? > She arrived at quarter past two My doubts are especially about _at quarter past two_.


title: Where does the "I brake for" idiom come from?

text: I am familiar with how _I brake for_ is being used nowadays, but am puzzled as to where this idiom comes from. I can imagine a possible origin, say a particularly popular campaign where stickers with a specific "I brake for…" message were given, but haven't been able to find anything about this.


title: "Enthused" vs. "enthusiastic"

text: Is it grammatically correct to say "I was enthused" rather than "I was enthusiastic"? If so, what is the difference between the two?


title: Does "dining" refer only to "dinner"?

text: Does _dining_ refer only to _dinner_? What should I say when I am not joining a team/group for lunch? Is the following grammatical? > Sorry I'm not dining with you for the lunch. Is "for the lunch" necessary to mention? Or can I omit the word _dining_ and use _joining_ instead? > Sorry I'm not joining with you for the lunch.


title: Meaning of  "alien"

text: What is the scope of the word _alien_? If NASA sends a pregnant woman into space and she gives birth to a baby there, is the baby an alien?


title: Phraseme "THROW THE BOOK AT".

text: I'm looking for info on how this idioms origin was documented to the USA? Can I grammatically eliminate any tie to the german book listed below. Could a latin spanish or Russian form translate well enough to our non literal meaning ? Malleus Maleficarum, (Latin for "Hammer of The Witches) was an infamous witch-hunting manual written in 1486 by two German monks, Heinrich Kramer and Jacob Sprenger. It was used by both Catholics and Protestants[17] for several hundred years, outlining how to identify a witch, what makes a woman more likely than a man to be a witch, how to put a witch on trial, and how to punish a witch. The book defines a witch as evil and typically female. This book was not given the official Imprimatur of the Catholic Church, which would have made it approved by church authorities, but was used by the Inquisition nevertheless.


In what situation would you use 'so' instead of very? For example, I'm very sorry. I'm so sorry. (When you apologize to someone) Does 'so' sound natural in the context? Is he an old man? Yes, he is so old. How old is he? He is seventy years old.


title: On what juristic basis are students corrected when making mistakes in an English class?

text: I've learned that there is no authoritative dictionary for English. I wonder on what juristic basis students are corrected when making mistakes in an English class. How can someone say that whatever the student did wrong is not considered correct English by other people. In German schools, students may only be "punished" (by getting a bad mark) when they had the chance to know better. For example when they have violated a rule in the official German dictionary. That is impossible when there is no official dictionary. How do schools in Britain or the US handle that issue? Note: There is no official reference of the German language either. However, authorities in Germany are advised to use the German language as specified in a dictionary called "Duden". Pupils in Germany are graded using the "Duden" dictionary. Other German-speaking countries may use other dictionary.


title: Pronunciation of the words 'height' and 'weight'

text: Why is "height" an "weight" pronounced differently, when the spellings are so similar? Is there any logical explanation or it evolved that way?


title: Difference between "presidentship" and "presidency"

text: What's the difference between _presidentship_ and _presidency_? Please give examples to show the difference.


title: Question about the future “tense”

text: My daughter, who is in the 4th grade, was asked to answer questions about the following sentence: > What time can you meet us at the school on Tuesday? She was asked questions about the usage of _can_ and _meet_ in the sentence. Specifically, she was asked whether the words were **action** , **linking** or **helping** verbs, and then she was asked whether those words were **past** , **present** or **future** tense. Apparently, they are teaching a future “tense”. My questions:   1. Are _can_ and _meet_ past, present, or future tense in this sentence?   2. Should this sentence begin with the preposition _at_ or is it correct as written?


title: Someone who enjoys statistics

text: Is there a single word for someone who likes or loves to examine statistics?


Which word you would choose as a superlative of "wrong"?


title: Correct usage of 'was not having' or 'did not have'?

text: Is the sentence 'The man was not having any change' grammatically correct? Or does I have to be 'did not have'?


title: Rag and Razz--slang for teasing/ridiculing--which came first and what's the etymology of the words?

text: Hopefully everyone understands to razz and to rag as meaning to tease/ridicule on account of I don't have anything specific to reference. I'm curious to know which word came first and why both words--rag and razz--were chosen for teasing and ridiculing. I'm having difficulty uncovering their etymologies in regards to these meanings.


title: Expressions in Tim Minchin's "Storm"

text: Can you help me with these expressions from Tim Minchin's _Storm_? There will be some obscenities—sorry for those; I am just interested in their meaning.   * "I confess a pigeonhole starts to form" [1:10]   * "diplomacy dike" [2:55]   * "What are we - fucking two" [4:55]   * "Horton heard a who" [4:55]   * "Blow your hippy noodle" [7:12]


title: YUMMY acronym used in recent press article

text: What does YUMMY stand for in this recent article? We tend to think of the classic "luxury consumer" as a wealthy woman—the buyers of Louis Vuitton bags, Tiffany necklaces and Prada dresses. But a new report suggests that future growth for luxury will come from a new consumer. They're called YUMMY's. They're the new, more mainstream version of the "metro-sexual." And YUMMY's could reshape the $1 trillion luxury landscape.


title: Colloquial alternatives to questions regarding the ordinals

text: I'm very well aware that this question is asked a myriad of times before but I want to know how one would phrase a question in every-day language to get the answer _"n-th"_.   * What ordinal number reflects the position of you in the set of candidates?   * Where do you fall in order among all candidates?   * In the sequence of candidates, what is the position of yours? These were suggested in the previous questions but they all sound very formal. Could one say _"What place did you take in the exam?"_ Are there any other alternatives? How does _"how manyth"_ sound to a native speaker?


title: What is the name of the study of animal mind and behavior?

text: Is there a term for the knowledge domain that deals with _animal mind and behavior_? Initially, I'd thought that it is "Zoology", but it doesn't look like a fit. Basically I was wondering if the study of human mind and behavior is called "Psychology", what is the name for the study of animal mind and behavior?


title: 'Run' or 'Operate' for a business related sentence

text: I am trying to decide between two sentences but not sure which one fits the most. I am going to use this sentence inside the 'About Us' section of the company. Option 1 > Company A also runs two hotels. Option 2 > Company A also operates two hotels.


title: Should "romaji" be capitalized?

text: Should, "romaji", a loanword from Japanese, be capitalized because it is ultimately related to "Rome", which is a proper noun? I came across Should capitalization be preserved in loanwords? , but "romaji" is usually not written in romaji in Japanese. For example, it's written ローマ字 in the Japanese edition of Wikipedia. How heterological!


title: What does “what’s in store” mean?

text: I saw this sentence today as the motto to a meeting of English teachers: > What’s in store for us teachers? Although I think I can grasp the meaning of this sentence — something like “what is being kept for us?” — I can’t understand what it means when used in the song “I get along without you very well”, as made famous by Chet Baker: > What a guy! What a fool am I?   >  To think my breaking heart could kid the moon. > > What's in store? Should I ’phone once more?   >  No, it’s best that I stick to my tune. So — does it just mean “what is being kept for me?” or does it have a more idiomatic, nonobvious meaning? As a bonus, if anybody knows what is “stick to one’s tune”, please let me know.


title: Who coined the term 'affluent society'?

text: Prime Minister Harold Macmillan, in 1957 used the term 'affluent society' to describe the rising prosperity in Britain in those years. Does anyone know of any earlier reference to the term?


title: Any connection between -dom (kingdom) and dharma?

text: Appreciated the article on the derivation of -dom as in kingdom; any relationship between that and dharma? I see that -dom goes back to Old English for doom, judgment, law statute, and dharma goes back to Proto-Indo-Iranian root *dhar- ("to fasten, to support, to hold") (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dharma), but was wondering if OE traces back to that as well.


title: Meaning of the idiom "keeping my head out of the oven"

text: What does the idiom "to keep one's head out of the oven" mean? I heard the phrase in this context: > "Hey John, how's it goin'?" > > "Oh, you know... keeping my head out of the oven."


title: Word or expression for someone who intentionally says false statements to bring someone else down?

text: Someone who intentionally says false statements and/or facts about someone else (directly related to and/or about them) with whom that person is in a conversation (with or without other people around), in order to embarress that person, bring them down or prevent/break the peace.


title: Is it appropriate for me to pronounce words ending in "ths" (e.g. "paths") with a "z" sound at the end?

text: It feels natural for me to pronounce words like "paths" with a slight "z" sound at the end. Others close to me do not. What sort of accent am I mimicking? Or, am I making up my own accent?


title: How do I know when a verb should be followed by a gerund or an infinitive?

text: A few weeks ago I posted a question about the usage of a verbal in a particular sentence. But now, I have another question on the same topic, _gerund_. Sometimes I don't know for sure if I need to use the _gerund_ or the _infinitive_ form, so I searched on web to find the answers for my questions; I found this. In this article I found a list of common verbs followed by _gerunds_ and another list of common verbs followed by _infinitives_. So, I was wondering if the words that compound one list has some characteristic in common that determine if the following word will be a _gerund_ or an _infinitive_. * * * From the referenced PDF file: ### 1\. Following a verb (gerund or infinitive) Both gerunds and infinitives can replace a noun as the object of a verb. Whether you use a gerund or an infinitive depends on the main verb in the sentence. Consult the lists below to find out which form to use following which verbs. > I expect **to have** the report done by Friday. [INFINITIVE] > > I anticipate **having** the report done by Friday. [GERUND] ### Some common verbs followed by a gerund (note that phrasal verbs, marked here with *, always fall into this category):   * acknowledge — She acknowledged **receiving** assistance.   * *accuse of — He was accused of **smuggling** contraband goods.   * admit — They admitted **falsifying** the data.   * advise — The author advises **undertaking** further study.   * anticipate — He anticipates **having** trouble with his supervisor.    * … ### Some common verbs followed by an infinitive:   * afford — We cannot afford **to hesitate**.   * agree — The professors agreed **to disagree**.   * appear — The results appear **to support** your theory.   * arrange — They had arranged **to meet** at noon.   * beg — I beg **to differ** with you.   * …


title: Does one "douse" or "dowse" a spotlight or projector?

text: A recent SMS conversation has prompted me to question my use of "dowse", "dowsing", and so on in relation to lighting instruments and projection equipment. I do not remember from where I got this habit, but I do know that I've had it a while. I looked up "dowse" in Wiktionary, though, and there is no mention whatsoever of anything related to extinguishing or putting out. Merriam-Webster says it's a variant of "douse", though, and Google says that "douse" is a synonym—but Thesaurus.com doesn't even know the word "dowse", and other sites I've looked at make no mention of it in their synonym lists for "douse". I guess I've confused myself through research at this point. It seems like the more unusual word "dowse" would fit in a theatrical or film production context, where jargon is extremely common (I should know), but I do want to make sure I'm using the word correctly.


title: introducing a good and comprehensive source in structure?

text: I need a good and all-around book in the field of structure of English language. Needless to say, I have read books such as ESS or English sentence structure, and some other books. Can anyone provided me a good source in terms of sentence structures? Of course if it is available online, it would be very good...


title: In the Dickensian era, was a capital letter preserved through apostrophe contractions?

text: Assume that a certain word **is** capitalised, for example "Microsoft." Say (for whatever reason, perhaps slang) you were going to shorten that certain word, using an apostrophe. Today, I'd say we would write: 'soft (So for example: "I've worked at 'soft for years...") We would not (I'd say) keep the capitalisation through the contraction. (So, I'd say, we would **not** write "I've worked at 'Soft for years...") Question: what happened in 1850? (Of course, the overall study of changes in capitalisation is a big topic; hopefully there's an expert here.) * * * PS. Please _do not_ edit italics in to this question, as italics makes it a little hard to follow apostrophes perfectly, thanks. * * * Still very little information on this, other than one (great) example found by Stoney. Anyone??


title: Comma before “or” when it introduces synonym or explanation

text: This Grammar Tip of the Day: > **The rule:** Place a comma before "or" when what follows it means the same > as what precedes it. confirms what I understand about using a comma before the word _or_ — when it explains the preceding word further or gives its synonym. However, Oxford Dictionaries’ definition 2 uses a comma before _or_ in the first example: > yoga is a series of postures, or asanas But it doesn’t use a comma in the next couple examples: >   1. Joshua was born weighing just 18 ounces – half a kilo or just over a > pound. >   2. By early Tuesday he was dead – a victim of the most deadly of the > world’s culinary delicacies, the blowfish or fugu. > Am I missing something?


title: Can you give me any examples of children's pronunciation of words?

text: Firstly, I'm sorry, but I am not a language expert, so please don't be too judgemental of this quetion. Secondly, I understand that my question is not probably not very clear but basically, I am interested in the way that children develop language. I work in a nursery setting, catering to 2-4 year old children. It always interests me when I listen to the children talking, especially regarding how they compensate not being able to pronounce certain parts of words, for sounds that they are able to make. A good example being today, when I heard a child say "Fway doh" instead of "Play doh", another child pronounces "Skip" as "Gip". This will probably be a stupid question but can you think of any other sounds that children compensate real word sounds with? And also, why is it that children are unable to pronounce certain sounds, but they later develop the ability to do so?


title: Which one is correct, "favourite song of all time" or "... of all times"?

text: Which one of these sentences is correct? >   1. That is one of my favourite songs of all time. >   2. That is one of my favourite songs of all times. > I am not a native English speaker.


title: Which term is correct — "Afghan" or "Afghani"?

text: I was talking with a friend who told me that _Afghani_ is an offensive term for someone from Afghanistan, and I should use _Afghan_ instead. Is this term offensive?


title: Is there a word or phrase for conceding a debate just to end it?

text: When an argument or debate degrades to nitpicking insignificant points, such that it becomes too tiresome and unproductive to continue, one party may concede the debate simply to end it. Perhaps the points being debated are so mundane or tangential to the central topic that they are irrelevant. One person outwardly admits defeat, but the internal motivation is exhaustion, boredom or a desire to keep the peace, rather than sincere conviction. Is there a single word or phrase to describe this act?


title: Use of "them" as an article, not a pronoun

text: I've seen a lot of times the pronoun _them_ used like an article. For example, in the title of the Delta Rhythm Boys _Them bones_ , or in the first sentence of "Money for nothing": > Now look at them yo-yo's, that's the way you do it. I know that it's not "proper English" (i.e., not something you'll use in a serious writing), but I'd like to know when it's commonly used, and why. Is there any difference between using it and using _the_?


title: What did Obama mean by " ... something like this might have happened again"?

text: After a deadly random shooting at Fort Hood the other day, President Obama was quoted as saying as follows: > In Chicago, President Obama said that White House and Pentagon officials > were following the events closely. “We are going to get to the bottom of > exactly what happened,” the president said. “We’re heartbroken something > like this might have happened again.” What does he exactly mean by saying "we're heartbroken something like this might have happened again" instead of "We're heartbroken something like this happened again?"


title: Sentence patterns: There are 16 ways to "leave" your book

text: Playing around in my head the different positions that a subject; verb; direct object; and indirect object can be positioned in one sentence, I ended up with 16 sentences using _only_ the simple past tense. The sentences which are preceded by a question mark indicate my uncertainty about their grammaticality.   1. I gave Peter a book   2. Peter I gave a book.   3. I gave to Peter a book.   4. I gave a book to Peter.   5. To Peter I gave a book   6. ? To Peter I gave a book to.   7. Peter I gave a book to.   8. To Peter a book I gave.   9. A book to Peter I gave       **_Passive voice_**   10. To Peter a book was given (by me).   11. ? To Peter a book was given to.   12. A book was given (by me) to Peter.   13. To Peter was given a book.   14. ? Peter was given a book to   15. Peter was given a book (by me).   16. A book to Peter was given (by me)*      *suggested by @Merk * * *   * Are there 16 different sentence patterns? Or is the passive voice a separate entity not to be included? In which case are there 9 sentence patterns in the English language?   * Which sentences or sequence of words are ungrammatical and why?   * Do these patterns have names?   * And any grammar facts which I may have overlooked in my question.


title: What does "bodded ill" mean?

text: Quoted from here: "Not to make an impression but anyone that **bodded ill** with the Duchess, did not sit with with Ealora" I was wondering what the expression "bodded ill" means. Thank you. P.S. As you can see here, Google suggest that "bodded" written form is far more popular than "boded".


title: What is the word to describe "the gaining of full control over an ability or power you already have"?

text: For example, a Jedi is born with powers, but must learn how to control them in order to use them. What's the one best word for this? > I have _ _ _ my power. The word is in the back of my head but I can't pull it out. It also means to have a full understanding of something. > I _ _ _ the way the world works.


title: Starting a sentence with 'About your question, ...'

text: I have noticed myself often starting a sentence like this: > About your drawing question, I don't think there is an easy way to draw > these shapes. Is it formal to start a sentence that way (formal in the sense of writing it in emails sent by students to a faculty member or adviser)? And do you end it with a comma or a semi-colon? How does it compare to: > Regarding your drawing question, I don't think...


title: A different use of BOTH

text: I'm really confused with this since my students have asked me if this sentence is correct or not. Is it correct to say: > Please sign BOTH first and second PAGE. (Or is it PAGES?) Under what circumstances, if any, Page would be correct? (I've been told to use PAGES) Do I need any articles before First or second?


title: Does using "Their watch is ended" over "Their watch has ended" change the meaning of the sentence?

text: I've been watching this little HBO show by the name of Game of Thones. Perhaps you have heard of it. In the most recent episode the following line is used (and also happens to be the title of the episode): > Now their watch is ended This sounds foreign to my ear. I would be inclined to say "Their watch _has_ ended". Is there a subtlety in the English language that alters the meaning of the sentence by changing "is" to "has" and vice versa in the context of a simple sentence such as the above?


title: How come "wise man" and "wise guy" have opposite connotations?

text: > **wise man** : > >   * a sage >   * a wise and trusted guide and advisor > > > * * * > > **wise guy:** > >   * a smart aleck >   * a person who is given to making conceited, sardonic, or insolent > comments > > > [thefreedictionary] Etymonline says: > _Wise man_ was in Old English. _Wise guy_ is attested from 1896, American > English...   * How do these two phrases happen to have different connotations (one positive, other negative)?    * Is it possible to find an explanation regarding to their origins?


title: Why doesn't blood sound like \ˈblüd\?

text: The pronunciation of _blood_ is \'bləd\ while words such as _moon_ and _spoon_ (with double 'o') are pronounced as \ˈmün\ and \ˈspün. Why isn't _blood_ pronounced like \ˈblüd\ ?


title: What's a paronym?

text: I really want to know what a paronym is because we're supposed use them in class.


title: meaning of "to have got to be a catch"

text: during a conversation I heard "there's got to be a catch" related to a flat. is it an idiomatic expression? what does it mean?


title: Is prius plural for prius?

text: Similar to sheep. Look at that sheep. Look at those sheep. Look at that prius. Look at those prius. Sounds right.


title: Should I use "made of" or "made from"?

text: > "The toy train is made of plastic." Or > "The toy train is made from plastic." Which one is correct? Why?


title: Beer is made ___ yeast, water, hops, and malted barley

text: Which is the correct answer to fill in the gap in "Beer is made ____ yeast, water, hops and malted barley"?   1. of   2. from   3. with   4. out of I am leaning toward '2'. "Made from" can be used to describe a manufacturing process. I originally liked '3', but I don't like it now. I would use '3' if I mentioned secondary ingredients, as in "This beer is made with raw apple cider."


title: Etymology of "vagina"?

text: Not to be immature or anything (interpret the question as you will...), but I was just thinking about how "V" is essentially a feminine symbol. The masculine symbol is usually the reverse, probably playing off the whole yin/yang thing. The structural similarities between the letters and sexual organs of both or undeniably similar, while somewhat simplistic (though its distant origin would suggest simplicity). Where did the word come from and did the fact that it starts with the letter 'v' influence its creation or propagation as a word? Then again, thinking on it....unless it came from English, then the word probably didn't start with a 'v'. Nevertheless, it would still be interesting to know how the word came to be.


title: Is the phrase, “Let ‘em up easy” Abraham Lincoln’s one-off phrase or an obsolete idiom?

text: I came across the phrase, “Let’em up easy,” in the following sentence in the section of “1864 Reelection” of “Abraham Lincoln” in Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia: > "Reconstruction began during the war, as Lincoln and his associates > anticipated questions of how to reintegrate the conquered southern states, > and how to determine the fates of Confederate leaders and freed slaves. > Shortly after Lee's surrender, a general had asked Lincoln how the defeated > Confederates should be treated, and Lincoln replied, " **Let 'em up easy** , > General.”---Determined to find a course that would reunite the nation and > not alienate the South, Lincoln urged that speedy elections under generous > terms be held throughout the war." As I was unable to get an idea of "Let 'em up easy,” I consulted English dictionaries at hand. None of them registers “let sb / stg up easy,” nor did Google Ngram show the incidence of the phrase since 1840, more than a quarter century earlier than the President used it. Is this famous line, “Let’em up easy,” inscribed in the history, a just one- off phrase used by President Lincoln, or then-current-but-now-an-obsolete phrase?


title: Idioms and Formal Usage

text: Certain websites devoted to idioms claim that they--idioms-- are not used in formal conversations or writing; that is, they claim that these creatures are always used in only informal situations. As the site is a British website, is this a common belief among the British, or is this a mere hiccup in the website? For "according to" and "at first glance" are far from "informal".


title: Words for sounds made during intimacy

text: What are some words that describe sounds made during intimacy?


title: What does ‘peer around something’ mean?

text: Broadly speaking, _peer_ seems to have two meanings, looking intently and being partially visible. > a). She peered into the darkness. > > b). The moon peered from behind dark clouds. However, I have difficulty understanding ‘peer’ with ‘around something’ as follows. Would you help me? (‘Around’ often annoys me!) **1.** > _Go_ , Harry pleaded with him silently, _go with Snape_ … _go_ … **Mrs. > Norris was peering around Filch’s legs** …. Harry had the distinct > impression that she could smell him. ( _Harry Potter 4_ [US Version]: > p.470)[Bold font is mine] > > **N.B.:** Mrs. Norris is a cat. Harry is in an Invisibility Cloak. **2.** > All of them were looking at something Harry couldn’t see and sniggering > heartily. **Pansy’s pug-like face peered excitedly around Goyle’s broad > back** as Harry, Ron, and Hermione approached.( _Harry Potter 4_ [US > Version]: p.511)[Bold font is mine] **PS:** * _No.1:_ * I thought at first the cat is just walking between somebody’s legs like forming a figure 8, but I couldn’t find a good example on the Net or YouTube. Or is the cat looking at a specific thing, for example, Harry as a smelling point or Filch’s legs? Or, is it similar to ‘looking around something’: to visit somewhere, walking around it to see what is there? (Unlikely… well, the sentence pattern seems similar, though…) **No.2:** I wish I could find any dictionary says ‘around’ means ‘from behind’.


title: Meaning of "get the swing of it."

text: In the film "Falling Down": Foster: Good! Good, freedom of religion. **Now you get the swing of it**. Feels good to exercise your rights, doesn't it? (opens fire). What is D-fens try to say?


title: Name for when an adjective modifying a noun leaves the class of objects the noun describes

text: When adjectives modify nouns, usually they restrict the class of objects that the noun refers to. For example: > Red car A red car is, in particular, an instance of a car. However, in specialty fields, we often encounter objects named by an adjective+noun combination, which are not (necessarily) actually instances of the object described by the noun itself. An example from mathematics: > Weak topology A "topology" is a type of mathematical object satisfying certain axioms, whereas a "weak topology" may satisfy only a subset of those axioms. A "weak topology" need not be an instance of a topology. In mathematics, there are even sometimes adjective+noun combinations which refer to objects that are necessarily _not_ instances of the class the noun describes. * * * Outside of mathematics, I can find only a few examples that are only arguably examples. Usually if I encounter something that looks like this phenomenon, it can be explained away by an archaic meaning of the noun that would turn the adjective+noun combination of the first kind described above, for example: > Christian science * * * I have two questions:   1. Does anyone know a name for this linguistic phenomenon?    2. Are there examples of this phenomenon which are non-technical and can't be turned into the first type described above simply by appealing to an archaic or unusual meaning of the noun?


title: Is it correct to say " Is mr.John in travel"?

text: Is this correct? > Is mr.John in Travel?


title: Studied, having studied or has studied?

text: This is a translation of my high school graduation certificate: > This is to certify that XXX, male, ethnic group of Han, born in March 1988, > native of A County, B City, C Province, **studied** in our school from > September 2003 to June 2006, has completed all the courses stipulated... Should I use _studied_ , _having studied_ or _has studied_ in the first sentence? Also, any advice would be appreciated.


title: Origin of doolally [tap]

text: I've used **_doolally_** since I was a child, but I'd rarely heard the **_tap_** version until a few years ago in the company of several Welsh people (who _all_ agreed the two-word version was their "standard"). They said it referred to insanity caused by contaminated tap water in Deolali (lead?, cadmium?). But I've now discovered Wikipedia says... > "Doolally", originally "doolally tap", meaning to 'lose one′s mind', derived > from the boredom felt at the Deolali British Army transit camp. 'Tap' may be > derived from the Sanskrit word 'tapa' meaning 'heat' or 'fever'. It is also > just conceivable that it derives from the Welsh word 'twp', meaning > 'stultified', 'unable to reason sensibly'. Can anyone either corroborate or refute any of these suggested etymologies?


title: Is the "How to ... ?" question phrase acceptable?

text: Is the following sentence acceptable in semi-formal or formal written speech? > How to adopt a lifestyle that consumes less? Or ought it be rephrased? For example, to the following? > How do I adopt a lifestyle that consumes less? Context.


title: What is the proper title abbreviation for addressing multiple people?

text: I'm writing a letter to several recipients in the same document and want to address them correctly at the start. Is the following correct (I suspect not) and if not, what should it be: > Dear Mr's Jones, Smith, Bloggs and Flintstone


title: Meaning of "Almost every kinky kind was being had and enjoyed."

text: I saw this sentence in NYT OP: > "Almost every kinky kind **was being had** and enjoyed." What does the part in bold mean? What grammar rules pertain to it?


title: Can't read a word from a 187-year-old document

text: I have a land deed from the year 1824 for some land in the province of Upper Canada (back when that was a province). Some photos of the deed can be seen in this imgur album. I am attempting to read which day March 1824 the document was signed. The hand writing is simply indistinguishable from our modern form, so any help would be appreciated. Logically, it would make sense if it was a number of the month. Here is the specific section towards the end of the document: ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/uoQHe.png) Here is the word with some editing to make the shape stand out. ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/jI3Js.png) My guess is: "Hveutitath", obviously not a word.


title: Comma before "as well as"

text: Here is the sample sentence: > We have carried out works for private individuals and property developers > **as well as** our own building projects." Should there be a comma before _as well as_ in this case?


title: Is "remaining sum" the same as "remaining balance"

text: What's the term to express "left money in my account" ? I found BALANCE, REMAINING SUM and REMAINING BALANCE. Are they identical? Thanks!


title: Comma position with citation

text: This question regards Vancouver referencing, though I suppose the issue could really arise regardless of what is contained in the in-text citation. Consider the sentence: > As dogs are mammals they give birth to live young. Clearly this is better separated: > As dogs are mammals, they give birth to live young. But what if we feel the need to justify the statement that dogs are mammals? > As dogs are mammals [1], they give birth to live young. Or: > As dogs are mammals, [1] they give birth to live young. The former makes more sense to me - I intuitively would like the citation to be contained on the same side of the comma as the clause to which it relates. But I have a feeling the latter is perhaps 'correct', and the comma should not surround the citation, just as it should not surround a parenthetical? (Which I do unashamedly anyway)


title: is "You Worry Not" a correct phrase?

text: I am trying to rephrase the "Don't worry" in such a way that it will sound more like a promise than as advice. I wonder if this is a wrong way to phrase that. I actually copy that from love me not, which is "don't love me" rephrased


title: Why does "for" sound more appropriate than "during" in "I couldn't do anything for the rest of the day"?

text: > I couldn't do anything **for/during** the rest of the day. I know that _for_ sounds correct, perhaps because "the rest of the day" is a finite chunk of time like "one hour" or "one week". However, I am struggling to explain to my colleague (who speaks English as a second language) why _during_ can't be used instead.


title: What is the origin of the phrase "forty winks," meaning a short nap?

text: Inspired by the question _How long is a 'wink'?_ , I did some work on the origin of the phrase _forty winks_. Though the OP at the _wink_ question mentions the phrase, it does not ask about its origin. So I thought I'd ask the question here and post what I've found. I was able to find an antedating not mentioned by any of the usual phrase-dictionary suspects. The most accurate information I found elsewhere was from a post by Ken G in a discussion of the phrase at Wordwizard. Any other insights welcome.


title: A word for milk that has not "gone off"

text: I'm looking for a word to describe milk that has not "gone off". Does "on" or "viable" work?


title: What’s wrong with “After roasting the deer, the hunter extinguished the fire and then searched for a tree to hang it from”?

text: A question from my GMAT class, which I was told is wrong and it was left for me to figure it out. > After roasting the deer, the hunter extinguished the fire and then searched > for a tree to hang it from. It sounds good when everyday conversation is considered, but what is wrong with it anyway? I tried to search but was bemused as to how to look for it.


title: Does a principal act upon a target, or does an agent act upon a patient?

text: In a software application, I have an access model that contains a set of data structures, each describing how a given entity may or may not act upon another given entity. An "entity" is a person, a thing, or a group of people and/or things.   * **Alice** _may_ read mail sent to **Bob**.   * **Carol** _may not_ send messages to **residents of Danville**.   * **Everyone** _may_ connect to **the public server**. (These are contrived examples only. I am not writing a mail server.) In each sentence above, we have:   * an actor (Alice, Carol, everyone),   * a permission (may, may not),   * an action (read mail, send messages, connect), and   * an object, either direct or indirect (Bob, residents of Danville, the public server). A hallmark of quality, maintainable software code is clarity—that is, it should not only be easy to understand, but the intentions should be clear. An important facet of this goal is that the names of things should make their functions obvious. They should also be concise, because long, overly descriptive names are not only more effort to type, but also more effort to read. What's more, the parlance must cater to the particular language quirks that are the jargon of the industry. For example, the word "object" would be a poor choice here, because that word has an industry-specific meaning that would render it rather ambiguous in this context. I'm therefore struggling with succinct names for the person or other entity who performs an action and for the person or other entity who/which is the recipient of said action. The original terms I came up with were **principal** , as in "a chief actor or performer", and **target** , as in "one to be influenced or changed by an action or event." It occurs to me, however, that the linguistic terms that most closely represent the concepts are **agent** and **patient**. Going back to the subject of clarity, though, I'm not sure that these uses for "agent" and "patient" would be immediately understood by software developers, or indeed by most people without a background in linguistics. I wonder, then, if the original words are clearer, and if perhaps there exists another pair of terms that would be an even better choices.


title: Does "Each product is defined into final detail" have a meaning?

text: I was asked to proof-read an english text. The sentence "Each product is defined into final detail" caught my eyes, as I do not know if it is valid. I believe the client wants to say "Each product is defined down to the last detail." Now I am not sure. Is the first version in any way correct or is it just plain wrong?


title: Using the prefix "be-"?

text: I read somewhere that the prefix _be-_ can be used as a causative and this got me thinking. Does this mean that _because_ means _to cause to cause_ or _to make cause_?


title: What is the origin of the phrase "caught red-handed"?

text: I'm just wondering: why "red"?


title: Should a parenthetical verb agree with the main subject?

text: The question is how to write the following sentence in a parenthetical form: > Loops -- A loop is an arc that pairs a vertex to itself. -- are not allowed > here. Are the following sentences correct, or should they be plural? > Loops, an arc that pairs a vertex to itself, are not allowed here. > > Loops (an arc that pairs a vertex to itself) are not allowed here.


title: Are "to it" and "about it" optional in these kind of sentences?

text: Examples: >   1. His story has a ring of truth **about** / **to it**. > >   2. His voice had a familiar ring **about** / **to it**. > >   3. Their protestation of innocence had a hollow / false ring **about** / > **to it**. > >


title: Is "i.e." in this situation incorrect?

text: _I.e._ is used when we would like to use a situation as a kind of clarification. Suppose I was to write something like this: > Nano-boxes are used in medical science i.e. cancer treatment, where the > nano-boxes are used to inject drugs into cells. The problem, however, is that I would like to refer to an example regarding the cells. How would I write it? Like this? > Nano-boxes are used in medical science i.e. cancer treatment, where the > nano-boxes are used to inject drugs into cells i.e. cancer cells. However, I've been told that you cannot have an _i.e._ within an _i.e._ Are there suggestions on how to write it?


title: 'Postpone' or 'postphone'?

text: I was taught that the word **postpone** was spelled as I just spelled it, but recently I have seen a rise in the spelling **postphone** (or **post phone** ). At first, I thought it was just a spelling error, but I have begun to see it more and more in official contexts. Historically, the first spelling is definitely more accurate as you can see in the Online Etymology Dictionary and in Google Ngram. But also notice in the Google Ngram results that recently there has been a slight decline in the use of **postpone**. If you remove **postpone** from the Ngram query, you will see that the decline is accompanied by a rise in the use of **postphone** and **post phone**. Are these new spellings becoming an acceptible alternative? Or is this simply a case of the rise in a misspelling accompanying more people having access to publication? * * *   * An example of 'postphone'   * An example of 'post phone' * * * **BONUS:** The best answer will explain _why_ this variant spelling is so common, if possible.


title: What's the difference between "although" and "even-if"

text: What is the difference between the following sentences:   1. You may be prevented from crossing the border, _although_ you are in possession of a valid visa.   2. You may be prevented from crossing the border, _even if_ you are in possession of a valid visa. If they have the same meaning, in which circumstances would it be better to use each one?


title: A positive way to describe a know it all

text: What is a good word to describe someone who is confident, will correct you if you are mistaken about something and they are correct. They display a degree of self-assurance that could be construed as arrogance or a touch narcissistic, but they are not mean nor do they try to humiliate others if making a correction; it's just their nature to stop the dissemination of false information. They are happy to acknowledge their strengths and high intelligence. As opposed to a more, socially acceptable, slight self-deprecation, that can be mistaken for humility. (I think humility warrants a discussion elsewhere). To an uneducated observer they might be regarded as being arrogant or grandiose. If an extremely skilled and capable individual, doesn't actually flaunt their capabilities, but makes no attempt to hide them and will argue logically and without malice, and happily acknowledges this capacity. If they are not actually self absorbed, but can also give credit where credit is due.. What word would describe someone like this? The instincts of many, may be to use a pejorative term; however I am looking for a word that doesn't have negative insinuations. It's like a know-it-all, but someone who really does and whenever you argue the toss with them, they are, invariably right.


title: "Remember those times that" or "remember those times when"

text: I have seen that in certain places the phrase "remember those times that" is used, when I actually find it more natural to say "remember those times when". Since I am not a native English speaker I was wondering which is more appropriate. For instance:   * "Remember those times that I met Bob" vs "Remember those times when I met Bob".    * "I remember those times that I pretended that I was looking around but I was actually [...]"    * "I remember those times that I would think about [...]" I found a case in which it sounded more natural to use that: "remember those times that won't come back again", but this is not the same type of sentence. What do you think? Are these two forms interchangeable?


title: What’s the meaning of the line “The conclusions of the Second Vatican Council of 1962 -65 were given too liberal a reading by many Catholics?”

text: Though it must be a plain statement for native English speakers, the captioned line in the Time magazine’s (February 25 – though a pretty belated subject) article titled “The Second Act” - http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2136322,00.html \- puzzled me: > “Cardinal Marc Ouellet of Canada, has worked in South America and is now > ensconced in Rome as head of the extremely influential Congregation of > Bishops, --. The Pope (Benedict) also made him president of the Pontifical > Commission for Latin America. Like Benedict, Ouellet believes that **the > conclusions of the Second Vatican Council of 1962--65 were given too liberal > a reading by many Catholics.** However, he keeps a very low profile and is > not particularly magnetic. What does “The conclusions of the Second Vatican Council were given too liberal a reading by many Catholics” mean? Is this a clear-cut sentence to all Anglophones? Is it mandatory to place the article (a) immediate before the noun / gerund (reading) as “too liberal a reading (by many Catholics)? If I take this line as “The conclusions of the Second Vatican Council were interpreted in a too liberal way by many Catholics,” am I making an egregious mistake?


title: "dis" and "un" prefixes for the word interest

text: For the word _interest_ we can say: > I am disinterested* in that topic. And it is correct. To be correct again we must use the prefix "un" if we choose to structure the sentence this way: > That topic is uninteresting. Why is it like this? Is there perhaps an Old English rule that determines the negative prefixes that the common English speaker has since forgotten? Are there other examples? The Merriam dictionary linked to below says there is an argument over this particular word, so maybe this situation is unique to this word. Maybe the answer is in the exact purpose of "dis" and "un". * It seems that _un_ interested is also a word but I never hear anyone use it. There is apparently an old argument over this too.


title: Which is the opposite of pick pocket

text: Without you became awarness a pick pocket pull some object from your pocket or your bag.   How can we name somebody who do the opposite action pushing something in your bag or your pocket? _Edit after comments_ 1 - I asked this question to know if, in English literature or usual expressions, there were an expression which corresponded to this completely unusual behavior; it is the stage that corresponds in a scenario current from limning. 2 - _Putpockect_ put in a text where it is a matter of pickpocket, seems clear, and for no English-language


title: "Can I do X" vs. "Can't I do X"

text: Consider this scenarios: > **A:** Can I do _X_?   >  **A:** Can't I do _X_? In both the cases, the **B** replies with "Yes" to indicate **A** can do _X_ and with "No" to indicate he cannot. The 1st one seems to ask for permission while the 2nd one seems to imply a tone of indignation. * * * Consider another scenario: > **A:** Can I not do _X_?   >  **A:** Can't I not do _X_? Here, **B** replies with "Yes" to indicate **A** doesn't have to do _X_ and with "No" to indicate **A** has to. Here also, the difference is subtle: **A** seems to just ask for clarification or permission in the 1st and seems frustrated or even resigned in the 2nd. * * * My question is, what are the differences between the 2 then?


title: Is it correct to combine multiple clauses into one sentence?

text: Is it correct to combine multiple clauses (sub sentences) into one? For example, let us consider this sentence: > _On managerial side, I am experienced in accounting software, have been > working throughout the life cycle of product, and have considerable > experience for enhancing and improving existing products._ Here I am combining 3 clauses to make they one sentence, so I am wondering if it is grammatical?


title: Parenthetical sentences

text: I have a colleague who, in his technical documentation, sometimes likes to put entire sentences, or sometimes entire paragraphs, in parentheses. This looks wrong to my eye, but I'm having difficulty articulating precisely why. Should I be more tolerant of this style, or is there a reason why comments in parentheses should generally be restricted to phrases within a sentence and not form larger units of text? In case this isn't clear, here's an example, adapted from some text I'm reviewing:               By default, the template to be rendered will be $root/template. (Variable      $root has a default value.)          (Previous versions of this program loaded templates from webapp/WEB-INF,      but in this release these files have been moved out of the web application.)      I think the goal here is to de-emphasise the subsidiary information, but I think it would be clearer without the parentheses.


title: Which adjective to use for a hour that has already started?

text: I am having a hard time with wording of a simple agreement (just as an exercise, not a real thing, of course). I am trying to express that for each hour the person spends on some task, he will get $10. To be specific, if a person spends 1 hour and 1 minute on the task, he will get $20 in total. Is there a single adjective I can use to write something like "For each _my- adjective-here_ hour spent on the task, you will get $10"?


title: Is it a correct sentence?

text: I've got a sentence: > Cleaned the lake from the ice. Question: Does it really mean "the lake with no ice on it" or does it mean that "the ice now is clear."?


title: What report is given to a boss at a higher rank by bypassing the immediate boss?

text: Is there a single word that can be put before "report" meaning a report given to a boss at a higher rank by bypassing the immediate boss?


title: Is there difference between in the way of human, in a humanitarian way, in a humane way?

text: > There is also a social norm implied by “Humanity”: to treat other humans in > the Way(Dao) of human. (My own translation) This is a translation from Ancient Chinese. I am afraid that "in the Way of human" is not a very good phrase, because we usually say "in a humanitarian way". But "humanitarian way" is a fixed term, not appropriate for translating an ancient text. Actually "the way of human" may mean more than what "humanitarian" means. Right? In China, we too often connected humanitarian with the Red Cross, and the wares it send out(Red Cross is the largest charity organization in China, but it is totally an offical agency). Later, in TV NEWS and Newspapers you will heard too many times: We have send the humanitarian alms...here it extends to mean any goods for those in urgent need. I mean I first learnt the Chinese word for "humanitarian", and afterwards, when I learn the English version, my understanding of it is very much influenced by the Chinese word. Also, the famous doctrine of Heidegger and satre about the humanity is translated into "humanism", not humanitarianism. So I sort of treat "humanitarian" like the word "utilitarian", with its meaning being limited to charity and kindness, compassion.


title: “Straight ahead” vs. “straight as you go”

text: Is _straight as you go_ used often? What is the main difference to _straight ahead_? I have heard _straight ahead_ in conversations quite a bit, but _straight as you go_ doesn’t ring a bell. Perhaps it occurs only in selective states in U.S.A.?


title: Double negation and litotes

text: A friend of mine who's a native English speaker corrected me the other day. I said something like "it's not something no-one has done before". He told me about the rule that states that double negatives cancel out, thus making the sentence affirmative. He told me I should rather say "no-one **hasn't** done before". I can see at least two ways of saying the same thing:   * "It's **not** something **no-one** has ever done"   * "It's **not** something someone **hasn't** done before" According to the rule, these sentences will convey an affirmative meaning as well. What I want to say is basically: > Someone has done this before. Which is an affirmation. What's wrong with double negation then?


title: Can I use "I just got 22 years old"?

text: In my mother language, I can say "I got 18 years old today". I want to use the same concept in English, but I googled the sentence structure, and did not get a lot of hits. So I was wondering, is it okay to use it this way, or is there a real correct way for it?


title: What is a baby ling called?

text: ![Ling](http://i.stack.imgur.com/2NoEZ.jpg) Here is a ling. I was wondering what a baby ling would be called, as a a baby cod is called a cod-ling.


title: The proper usage of "putative"?

text: I'm trying to write the sentence, > Lower-grade soldiers made up two-thirds of the putative high quality army. My original sentence was: > Lower-grade soldiers made up two-thirds of _what was supposed to be_ a high > quality army. To make the sentence more efficient and more suitable for a formal paper, I tried looking up one word that would fit in there and came up with _putative_. Am I using the word properly? I was also considering _reputed_ , but the definition of putative (" _commonly regarded as being: the putative father_ ") seemed to fit better for what I'm trying to get at.