title: Heraldry symbols description

text: I'm reading Game of Thrones, in English, and when some Heraldry shields are shown as the novel goes, I have some doubts about the meaning on some words. Or given the context some words don't mean what I know as the definition of them. Maybe some those are misspelled and I'm breaking my coconut trying to deduce what they actually mean. Here are some. If I find more words that leave me misplaced I'll let you know with another question. What does the highlighted words mean?   * House Ruthermont - Five black starfish on a gold pale, on **pean**   * House Bolling - **Vairy** orange and blue; upon a black canton, a golden stag beneath an orange bend **sinister**   * House Wagstaff - Five yellow **mascles** on green   * House Staedmon of Broad Arch - A black dagger piercing a red heart on white **de sang** within an undulating red border


title: I am "adjective" and I am "present continuous" in one sentence

text: Do I need to use "I am" twice in one sentence, or it is enough to use it only in the beginning? Where does this rule come from? My example: > I am fluent in three languages and I am pursuing the XXX designation. OR > I am fluent in three languages and pursuing the XXX designation.


title: What is a proper antonym of "achievement"

text: What word best describes the opposite of "achievement"? It can have more than one interpretation:   * met achievement that is not desirable    * unmet desirable achievement I'm interested in all you throw at me. Thanks. (I'm not native speaker.) (And _misachievement_ doesn't really exist.)


title: Difference between "mad" and "angry"

text: Are there any differences between _mad_ and _angry_ and when should you use one instead of the other?


title: Is there a word or phrase for a choice that ultimately leads to tragedy?

text: Examples of decisions that ultimately lead to the downfall of the deciders:   * Troy accepted the gift of the Trojan horse   * Aladdin doesn't immediately free the Genie when he is told he will become Sultan   * Juliet's ingestion of Friar Laurence's drug Is there a word or phrase that describes decision of this kind?


title: what's the lyrics in this line?

text: What are the exacts words in this line of Aaron Tippin's song "Christmas is the warmest time of the year? The time is: 1:36 - 1:39 Here's the song: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxZz1169s0Q Are they: "It's the sound of silence coming soon"?


title: What does "eau" mean?

text: I read it from a jewelry website relating to a bottle of perfume or cologne maybe? Some sort of spray? I can't seem to find a definition on google. I'm assuming French roots.


title: A single word for "a quick passing of sound"?

text: We have the word "flash" for "a quick passing of light". Do we have the equivalent for our auditory sense?


title: Is it proper to say "nor scarce" in this sentence?

text: > Oh, were you never a schoolboy,   >  And did you never train,   >  And feel that swelling of the heart   >  You never can feel again? > > Did you never meet, far down the street,   >  With plumes and banners gay,   >  While the kettle, for the kettledrum,   >  Played your march, march away? > > It seems to me but yesterday,   >  **Nor scarce** so long ago,   >  Since all our school their muskets took,   >  To charge the fearful foe. Regarding the third paragraph, Oxford Dictionary states that _hardly_ and _scarcely_ should not be used with not or other negatives, e.g. _can't hardly_. Is that proper to use **nor** before **scarce**? And is it right to use "long ago since..."? I can't make out the structure of this paragraph though the meaning seems clear to me.


title: Determining sequence

text: I have a question regarding determining the sequence of events. > "It **is** taking her a bit longer than usual to get back on the game > because she **had come** back from Germany **last night**. So I **gave** her > a friendly warning **just now** and she **promised** me that she **would** > try her best to pull herself together.   1. "It is taking her a bit longer than usual..."--happening now, so I used present tense   2. "had come back from Germany last night"--about last night, so I used past perfect   3. "I gave her a friendly warning just now"--about what happened a bit before now, so I used simple past. Is this logic correct? According to what I've learned so far, I think I must use "had come back", since I was talking about what is now ("it is taking her a bit longer than usual...") before talking about her come back from Germany, and I talked about what happened about 10 minutes ago after talking about last night. But then, I do think that I'm kind of reporting events in chronological order and "had come back" just sounds so weird to me. Can you please advise?


title: Use of comma following prepositional phrase

text: Is a comma required after the date (year only or day of week only) that is in a prepositional phrase before the subject of the sentence? For example: > In 1966 I began college.


title: Why are prepositions out of place with many phrasal verbs?

text: Please, restrict your answers to etymological info. I browsed some other questions and found some good info here: Is it correct to change the common structure in these phrasal verbs?, which is more of a disambiguation question, but it may help answerers on this question. Specifically, this idea: 'The preposition is fused to the verb to create a new, figurative meaning.' I'm wondering why some verbs have a preposition dangling after the object. I thought it was perhaps because it's expected to connect to an indirect object, but then I found myself adding additional prepositions that sometimes obviate the need for the first one (some examples in square brackets). Example: > I put some burgers on. Cooked them up. Turned the heat down [ _to low_ ]. > Called Nancy up [ _on the phone_ ]. Asked her if she could come down [ _to > my house_ ]. She freaked out. Said she was down [ _to come_ ]. I passed out. > When I came to, she was looking me over. > > She asked, "What knocked you out?" > > "You and I being on," I replied. > > "Let's chow down," she suggested – but I cautioned, "Wait up. Maybe the > burgers are burnt up." > > She said, "No. You'd turned the heat down," and pulled two plates out. We > scarfed the burgers down and funned around for two more hours before turning > in. I'm basically wondering how words like these developed.


title: Word for the smell of old books

text: Is there any special word for the smell of old books? I know about the use of _musty_ to describe them. But I thought there could be a special word too, just like _petrichor_ for the smell of fresh earth following rain.


title: Use of "frequency" in "decrease the frequency a customer makes purchases from the site"

text: This doesn't read well and I'm not sure if this is correct: > Shipping fees can reduce the number of items a customer purchases, and they > can decrease the **frequency** a customer makes purchases from the site. What is the correct way to use the word _frequency_ in this context? The reason it "feels" like it doesn't read well is it seems like there should be something linking "frequency" and "a customer". However I do not know the rules of grammar well enough to know if there is a rule about this for this type of usage or how one would define the rule. **Update:** the accepted answer introduced the concept of an "adverbial phrase" which is what I "felt" was missing but didn't know how to articulate.


title: Reference to word or phrase that has previously appeared in parentheses

text: Consider the following sentence: > There are three options (Halifax, Winnipeg and Saskatoon). Of the three, > Winnipeg is the best choice because of X, Y and Z. The sentence is pretty straightforward. My question has to do with style: is it awkward to make reference to something (Winnipeg) that has previously only been referred to in parentheses? Of course I could rewrite the sentence in any number of ways. My question has to do with whether there is a rule or convention that suggests that a word or phrase needs to be in the "real" (non-parenthetical) text if it is referred to later on in the text. I have tried to research the question but tend to turn up references to parenthetical referencing.


title: "for about one year" or "for around one year"

text: Which of the following sentences is correct or better? > I have been using this software for about one year. > > I have been using this software for around one year. Searching in Google gives 14 million hits for "for about one year" and 1.5 million hits for "for around one year". Seems that "about" is better, but my test is not very conclusive.


title: Analog of "innovative" for a well-executed engineering project

text: > The Curiosity rover was a **___ __ ___ ____** program worthy of applause > > While many of the technologies existed for decades, Steve Jobs was **___ __ > ___ ____** for making them usable for end-users I am trying to find the correct adjective here. "Innovative" programs or products are worthy of applause, but the term seems inaccurate and cliche-d. The other adjectives that came to my mind belittles and are narrow; for example calling Steve Jobs a "tinkerer" fails to describe him. What word is suitable for these cases?


title: The use of -ize and -ise in the UK?

text: I got a translation assignment where I am to use UK English but with -ize spelling. _The European Union switched from -ize to -ise some years ago in its English language publications, meaning that -ize spellings are found in older legislative acts and -ise spellings in more recent ones_. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_and_British_English_spelling_differences#-ise.2C_- ize_.28-isation.2C_-ization.29 The wikipedia link is interesting. Apparently -ize used in British English is used in Oxford publications (which refuse -ise) even though -ise seems to be preferred in Australia and New Zealand and UK itself (3:2 ratio). What are your thoughts on this. Is using UK English with -ize spelling the right or wrong way to approach it? And is -ize prevalent in US English? P.S.: I'm not a native speaker, these things are not obvious to me.


title: Starting email question

text: Please, help me understand how to build a sentence in an email to sound natural, clear, and polite. (I am not a native speaker of English.) **Description of the situation** : I send a product inquiry to a company and got a reply with some technical details and the contact information of their distributor company. They ask me to contact the distributor for purchasing information. They also have copied the distributor's email address in this reply email (in "cc" field) so the distributor will know that I might be contacting them (and explicitely wrote me about this in the email). **My question** : I assume that I shouldn't reproduce all the details they already should be aware of. (Please, correct me about this if I am wrong.) **How in my email to the distributor, before asking for purchasing details should I refer to the fact that they already know the essence of the question from the received copy of vendor's reply to me?** I mean just the help on correct wording of the phrase. Something like: > ..as you already know from the copy of the email from "X" company to me you > received yesterday..


title: What is the difference between “revenue” and “income”?

text: It seems that **_revenue_** and **_income_** have the same meaning. However, they seem to be used differently. What is the difference between them? When should we use one and not the other?


title: We haven't been able to use the fan for a fortnight

text: In a John Clarke and Brian Dawe interview, the phrase,"we haven't been able to use the fan for nearly a fortnight." What metaphoric expression was this phrase actually referring to? I've googled for ages and come up against a blank wall.


title: Single word for "mixed metaphor"

text: Mixed metaphors are usually speech mistakes by people, and are very amusing. Here are a few examples.Is there a single word for denoting mixed metaphors?


title: Usage of this phrase 'it was lovely'

text: Is it correct to say to a student on the last day of school 'It was lovely to be your teacher'


title: Using pronoun "it" instead of (personal) pronouns "her" or "him"

text: Can pronoun "it" be used instead of (personal) pronouns "her" or "him" in a disparaging/derogative manner especially in the personal pronouns? I've watched a movie wherein a dead body was found and, without saying anything, they've been told just to "burn it!". I know this could have been strictly referring to "a body" — a neutral noun. However, the "burn it!" was said in a really disparaging manner. And let's suppose that the man who said it knew the man who was killed. Still, can we use "it" instead of "her" or "him" in that manner emphasising the hate and scorn towards a particular person?


title: What does "Ms." stand for?

text: In letter writing, there are four different titles to address: > Mr.   >  Mrs.   >  Miss.   >  Ms. What does **Ms.** stand for? Apparently as **Mrs.** and **Miss** already stand for female titles, **Ms.** stood for "Master", the title for a boy or a young man, similar to Miss. But the other day, my friend told me it stood for "Miscellaneous" and could be used for anyone. Is this true?


title: Pronunciation of "err"

text: I use to pronounce this word so that it rhymes with 'her', but recently I've been told to pronounce it like "air". Which pronunciation was it originally, and which pronunciation was correct?


title: Rhetorical questions with "used to"

text: The phrase _someone used to_ is used to talk about habits in past. > A year ago, I used to (not) do stuff. Now I was wondering about a particular kind of question. They are kind of rhetorical and they contain a negative: > Wasn't he British?! Here's an example: I read a book and 10 pages in I realize how much writing sucks. I actually like the author. I tell a friend and he or she says... > Really. Didn't he use to write really well?!   * Is that correct (I suppose not)?   * Would it be understood?   * What could I say instead? Also...   * would the following be understood as an attempted play with the language: > Usedn't he to write very well?!


title: Dubious Tenses in Airline Preflight Speech

text: I fly a lot of places (usually within the United States). When I take Delta, the flight attendants seem to recite (with minor differences) a prepared preflight speech detailing safety information. They seem to have a lot of minor grammatical issues, but the most annoying to me is something like the following: "Pull the mask firmly toward you to start the flow of oxygen. Even though the bag will not inflate, oxygen is flowing." (something similar appears in an official version). My main concern here is the tense. They are saying that the bag "will (not) inflate" (future) but that oxygen "is flowing" (continuing present). It's surprisingly difficult to come up with a better version, although I thought of a few variations that, if not solving the problem, would at least improve the sound (e.g. "Oxygen flows even if the bag does not inflate."). Although I can't think of a grammatical reason, I feel like once the imperative tone is dropped (e.g. "[You ]Pull the . . ."), having consistent tenses becomes more important--and not having them becomes more egregious. The whole thing is supposed to be conditional future also, although tacking the necessary _would_ onto each sentence would decrease clarity, so I agree with their choice to leave it implicit. I'm not so much asking because I don't know whether this is wrong (I'm almost certain it is), but because I'd like to know what the internet thinks of this. I have never seen anyone else notice this (and because it's so consistent and awkward, I usually visibly cringe).


title: "Will" and "Going To". What are the real differences of the colloquial usage of them?

text: I'm from Brasil and here we study the differences of using "Will" and "Going to" to talk about the future. But it is usually very confusing because we have a different kind of conjugation that uses no auxiliary verb, and the English Grammar has many explanations about the context we must use one or another. So my question is. What are the real differences and needs of the colloquial usage of "Will" and "Going to"?


title: Which one is better, "natural things" or "natural objects"?

text: > **Natural things** ought to be respected as “natural” beings , which means > that we should try our best to avoid interfering with their natural > existence and when it is necessary, to restore them into their natural > state.（self-made） Obviously, here I use "nutural things" to mean things like trees,flowers, animals,fish. But "thing" has such a broad range of meaning, that "natural things" may cover human body and human imagination, human emotion. So does anyone have any better alternative? Maybe "natural object" suits to my purpose? But it seems too technical a term?


title: Why does "sucker" mean "unexpected" in "Sucker Punch"?

text: _Sucker punch_ seems to mean "an unexpected punch" in slang. What is the origin of this term and why does _sucker_ mean _unexpected_ in _sucker punch_?


title: What do you mean by 'spark somebody up'?

text: I have searched throughout the internet to find the real meaning but was at loss.


title: American English equivalent of "revise" (as in studying)

text: Today, I discovered that the meaning of revise to do with studying is used in British, Australian and New Zealand English, rather than American English: > (UK, Australia, New Zealand) To look over again (something previously > written or learned), especially in preparation for an examination. > > _I should be **revising** for my exam in a few days._ What would be the American English equivalent? To look for equivalents, I tried looking for synonyms, and I couldn't find any synonyms of this meaning of "revise" in Merriam-Webster.com's thesaurus section, thesaurus.com, wordnet online or the Oxford American Writer's Thesaurus.


title: Is it right to combine past and present in the same sentence?

text: I am defining an instrument but am not sure if it is correct to combine past and present tense at the same time: > Ssdd is the first ever instrument, launched in 1998, which was specifically > designed to measure the gmn at Ka-band at global scale. Is the usage of **is** and **was** correct?


title: What does the suffix “‑erior” mean?

text: The suffix _‑erior_ is used in many words that seem to indicate position:   * _superior_   * _inferior_   * _anterior_   * _posterior_ However, with my Google-fu, I can’t find a real definition or etymology. What does _‑erior_ mean? From what language does it come?


title: What is the definition and usage of "tids and bits"?

text: What is the correct definition and usage of the term "tids and bits"? I tried googling but nothing turns up, not even a definition.


title: Is "How and why child is become criminal" proper English?

text: My friend is writing a paper for his Criminal Justice class and has asked me to take a look the the rough draft and point out any grammatical errors that I can spot. The first thing that jumped at me was the subject of his paper: "How and why child is become criminal". I suggested that he instead write: "How and why **_a_** child **_becomes_** _**a_** criminal". He told me that nothing was wrong with the way the subject is written. It has been submitted to and approved by his Professor, reviewed by his entire class and none pointed that out to him. He refered me to the Openheimer quote of the Bhagavad Gita and some Bible verses to support his point. Still I find it difficult to believe that this is the proper way to use the verb become in Modern English.


title: Unambiguous Way of Stating a Biconditional in Plain English

text: I am having a hard time understanding this section in Wikipedia's article on Logical biconditionals: > ## Colloquial usage > > One unambiguous way of stating a biconditional in plain English is of the > form "b if a and a if b". Another is "a if and only if b". Slightly more > formally, one could say "b implies a and a implies b". The plain English > "if'" may sometimes be used as a biconditional. One must weigh context > heavily. > > For example, "I'll buy you a new wallet if you need one" may be meant as a > biconditional, since the speaker doesn't intend a valid outcome to be buying > the wallet whether or not the wallet is needed (as in a conditional). > However, "it is cloudy if it is raining" is not meant as a biconditional, > since it can be cloudy while not raining. My question is how can the plain English "if'" sometimes be used as a biconditional? I'm OK with the word "biconditional." I don't understand how the reader is to know the "speaker doesn't intend a valid outcome to be buying the wallet whether or not the wallet is needed (as in a conditional)" especially how this amounts to "(as in a conditional)".


title: Is "kinda" a word?

text: I've used "kinda" as a word basically meaning "kind of" just run together. I wouldn't use it formally, but I noticed that Microsoft Word's spellchecker says that it isn't a word. I searched some and it seems that I'm not the only one who uses it, but it doesn't seem to be too popular. So is it an actual word? How accepted is it?


title: A more spiritual word for miss

text: I want to find a word that basically means to miss, where _miss_ is in the sense of “feel for the loss or absence of”. But I am looking for a more spiritual word. I came up with _to dream for_ or _reminisce_ but both don’t really fulfil what I am looking for. I am looking for a stronger word that is synonymous with _miss_ but is more spiritual.


title: Is vilification the process leading to vindication?

text: Vindication is at the same time both an intoxicating and an unhealthy emotion. It says, "I told you so." "I was right despite your best efforts to dissuade or punish me." An example of usage: > Having previously observed that the English Language and Usage forum abhors > these sorts of questions, she was vindicated that, despite her most creative > efforts, her question was closed as unconstructive. Given their pleasant `consonance` it seems to me that vilification (the creation of a villain) should be an appropriate contrasting term; the process immediately prior to vindication that makes it possible to be vindicated. For example: > For daring to test the authorities in this matter, she was vilified, and her > question unceremoniously closed. Shall she be vindicated? Have I correctly identified these words as contrasting terms or antonyms? Does one immediately follow the other?


title: "Put/value above" vs. "put/value over"

text: >   * The company puts profits **above/over** safety. >   * The company values profits **above/over** safety. > Is it _above_ or _over_?


title: Is 'an eye' a designator?

text: I realize this may be a super-rookie question, but I have to ask. It is in connection with my logic module. Is 'an eye' in this sentence a designator? > I was told to keep an eye on him I know "I" and "Him" are designators, but is "an eye"? I mean, it is not a specific thing it refers to, only some eye ... or is this wrong?


title: Usage of "done" vs. "done with."

text: I've always found it irksome when people form sentences such as "I'm done my homework." It is of my understanding that you are never _done_ something, but rather you are _done with_ something. Am I right to be bothered by this?


title: Comma splices and fragments in novels

text: I have noticed that many authors incorporate the use of fragments and comma splices in their novels. Given that this is acceptable practice in a novel, is it acceptable to use a comma splice or a fragment in a short story written for English class?


title: Adverbial phrase in passive construct

text: Sam built the house (active) The house was built by sam (passive) In the active voice of the sentence, "Sam" is the subject, clear and simple. In the passive construction, what is then the function of the prepositional phrase "by Sam"? I read that "by sam" in the passive construct functions as an adverbial. My understanding is that adverbs/abverbials provide information about the verb, specifically time (when), place (where), manner (how), degree (to what extent), condition, reason (why/purpose). If "by sam" is an adverbial, then what is it telling me about the verb (i.e. which adverb category (when, why, how, etc) does it fall under? It seems to be stating "who" built the house, but "who" is not a category within the definition of an adverb. If "by Sam" in this sentence is not an adverbial, what is its function in the sentence?


title: "armed to the teeth", "mortgaged to the hilt", okay, but what about "mortgaged to the teeth"?

text: I just read mortgaged to the teeth, which I think sounds really weird. I'm used to _"armed to the teeth"_ and _"mortgaged to the hilt"_ , but I've no idea what the metaphorical connotations are in either of those. Is _"armed to the teeth"_ a mixed metaphor?


title: What's the word for controlling/inputting without actually touching the device?

text: I'm writing a program that allows user to emulate keyboard and mouse using an array of sensors that are put on the user's wrist, so that the user can control the computer without having to come close to it. Is these a general word for such input model?


title: Meaning of “give a pony”

text: I came across this phrase while reading an article by Paul Krugman on the New York Times website. Here's the quotation (emphasis added): > … non-GIPSI [ _the group of Eurozone nations – Greece, Italy, Portugal, > Spain, Ireland – that are grappling with the debt crisis, my note_ ] > European leaders should realize that what the GIPSIs really need is a > general European reflation. So let's hope that they get this, and also > **give each of us a pony**. Now, I understand that this is a sort of witty remark, but I cannot figure out what he's referring to. I know that there's a horse breed named “Gypsy”, but I suspect there may be another reference—an idiomatic one, perhaps—I don't know of.


title: Correct capitalisation of 'jargon' words used as acronyms

text: In a technical role at work we use many three letter acronyms to describe 'things' that we work with or processes that we follow. When writing these up, I'm unclear if capitals should be used or not. There's some discussion about whether these 'things' should be considered as proper nouns or not. For example we carry out an impact assessment. There is a specific document or artifact which is the 'Impact Assessment' document, which has a commonly understood meaning and which is often abbreviated as IA. As such, when writing a process document describing this should I refer to the impact assessment document, or the Impact Assessment document? I think the former, as it is not a proper noun, but would appreciate guidance. I'm in the UK, if that makes any difference. So far, two answers with different advice, with same upvotes. I'm tempted to go with capitalisation, as it does seem to help people draw a distinction between names of documents and the surrounding text, even though it feels incorrect to me.


title: Is the use of the word “terrible” in a positive sense at all common?

text: I recently had an argument with one gentleman where he charged that he had heard the word _terrible_ being used in a positive sense, as if something was good, or great. I had lived in the States for over 12 years where I was exposed to different strata of society from PhDs to lowly construction workers and warehouse serfs one of whom I was as well. I have heard people talk of all sorts of _bad_ , _brutal_ , _sick_ , even _ill_ , and generally _awesome_ things, but I had never encountered the word _terrible_ being used that way, even in this age of ironic hipsters. In the question about the origins of the word, few people pointed out that in French the word _terrible_ does have a positive colloquial meaning, which is confirmed by several dictionaries. Likewise, English dictionaries acknowledge different meanings for the sister word _terrific_ pointing that the meaning of _fantastic_ and the like is informal, and the meaning of _inspiring terror_ is archaic. But no respectable dictionary I had checked does mention any sort of ambiguity in regards of _terrible_. The only source known to me as yet that acknowledges the positive sense of _terrible_ is Urban Dictionary, and even there it has been consistently downvoted. Yet, it still received some votes, so at least some people think there is a legitimacy to this claim. Is there anything to this at all? Is that some sort of new phenomenon, or is it utterly misguided? If it is indeed real, are there any examples of such usage in popular culture?


title: What does "raise holy hell" mean?

text: What does "raise holy hell" mean? Is it a common phrase to use? I Googled the phrase, but couldn't find any definition. It is used in the following context: > In the end it was Stanley Stewart, from the family's third generation, who > _raised holy hell_ (including knocking over a table during a heated > argument) and finally convinced the family to move ahead with its own > branding campaign.


title: "Would" vs. "would have", "could" vs. "could have", "should" vs. "should have"

text: What is a good example to understand these words at once? I am quite confused by these and feel like I am using them incorrectly. Please guide me how and when to use them properly. E.g., "I eat rice".   * If I use _will_ , "I will eat rice", it means I am going to eat at some point in the future.   * If I use _would_ , "I would eat rice", does that mean the same thing? When can I use it?   * If I use _would have_ , "I would have eaten rice", it's about the past.  Likewise for "I could eat rice" vs. I could have eaten rice"; "I should eat rice" vs. "I should have eaten rice"; "I may eat rice" vs. "I may have eaten rice"; "I might eat rice" vs. "I might have eaten rice"; "I had eaten rice" vs. "I have eaten rice" vs. "I have had eaten rice". I went through my English books but kind of messed up which to use when.


title: Is there a word to make the distinction between a Year/Month Combination and a Month

text: Is there a word/phrase that would distinguish the combination of a year and month from a month? I'd call "January" a month I'd call "January 2011" a **___ ___**?


title: What punctuation should be used in the end of the direct speech before "but"?

text: There have already been several questions here about how to use punctuation properly in the direct speech. I've looked through most of them and didn't find an answer to my case. So here I go with my case: What punctuation will be correct in the following sentence: > He did say, "I am going to visit Jack today.", but nobody believed him. I am especially concerned here about the proper punctuation between _today_ and _but_ EDIT: To make it more clear I am replacing personal pronounces with a name: > Tom did say, "I am going to visit Jack today.", but nobody believed Tom.


title: What is the proper plural of “a series”?

text: In math, we use the term _series_ a lot, and there are many types of _series_. How should I craft my sentence when I have three different ones in mind to talk about? Should I settle down for a less mortal alternative of “list of series” or something like that? The existing question on The possessive and plural forms of “series” suggests the usage of _series’_. But is that all? If that’s the only solution, then could you please explain the usage of apostrophe symbol at the end? Is that a plural marker or a possessive marker, or both?


title: Alternative expressions to explain jargon in a sentence?

text: I have this expression (I know it seems to not make sense): > Groceries being usually presented without the corresponding "belt". Now, I want to explain what "belt" is. I'm thinking of these two forms: > ... without the corresponding "belt", that is, without an adequate price tag > that users are able to see. and > ... without the corresponding "belt". By "belt" we mean ... What alternative expressions could I use to disambiguate my use of "belt"?


title: Meaning and origin of "in so many words"

text: The literal meaning of the phrase _in so many words_ doesn't make sense to me, and its use carries ambiguous connotations. Can anyone explain its origin?


title: Preposition to use with "concordance"

text: Do you say _concordance of A and B_ , _concordance of A with B_ , _concordance between A and B_ , or something else?


title: Term for "married bridesmaid”

text: It was my understanding that, in traditional Western weddings, if the bride were to become unavailable on the day of her wedding then the groom was expected to wed the maid of honor or the next available bridesmaid, thus precluding married women from serving as bridesmaids. Times have changed and the term _matron of honor_ seems fairly commonplace but its logical counterpart, _bridesmatron_ , much less so. What, then, is the term for a _married bridesmaid_?


title: What does “have the avocados” for anchorman work mean?

text: New Yorker (November 6) carries an excerpt from legendary anchorman Ron Burgundy’s book, “Let me off at the top,” which includes the following sentence referring to his experience in Gauntlet, the anchorman training camp in Pennsylvania in his early days: > “The main goal of the Gauntlet was to test if you **had the avocados** for > anchorman work. Could you hold your liquor? Could you tell the difference > between bespoke and off-the-rack suits? Could you seduce women through a > camera lens? Test after test of skills. - - - On and on for two, sometimes > two and a half hours a day!” Any English dictionary provides definition of avocado as a fruit, but none of Cambridge, Oxford and Merriam Webster includes ‘have the avocados’ as an idiom. Then, I found the following explanation of ‘avocado’ in www.todayifoundout.com: > “The word Avocado comes from an Aztec word “ahuácatl” meaning testicle. It > is thought that the reference is either due to the avocado’s shape or the > fact that it was considered to possess aphrodisiac qualities by the Aztecs.” This led me to interpret “have the avocados” as “have guts, or characteristic qualities.” Am I right? Is “have the avocados” the common idiom that can be used in writing, and speak in public? **Addendom:** I checked Google Ngram Viewer. “Have balls” was current already in circ.1840 at the incidence level of 0.0000017063%. The use of the word had dwindled down to 0.0000004812% level in 1950, and then started to pick up to 0.0000016024% in 2008. The usage of ‘have avocados” emerged around 1920, and the usage rose to 0.00000007% level in 2008, but is still low by 2 digits as compared with “have balls.” With regard to “have **the** avocados” as used by Ron Burgundy, Ngram Viewer responded me “Ngrams not found [have the avocados]. The Ngram Viewer is case sensitive. Check your capitalization!”


title: When do we need to put a comma after "so"?

text: I noticed that most of the times when the conjunction "so" is used at the beginning of a sentence, it is followed by a comma: > So, this gets published but the fact that it is inaccurate gets moderated > out. Occasionally, I find sentences with no comma after "so": > So he went to Ishmael and married Mahalath. I am guessing that whether to put comma or not after the "so" conjunction is related to the context and emphasis rather than to the sentence structure, but I am unable to pinpoint it out. So when do we need to put comma after "so"? (← Do I need a comma after the "so" here?) P.S.: I know there is another usage of "so" as an adjective or an adverb, in which case no comma is necessary, for example: "So big is the caravan that it cannot fit into the garage." P.S.: I did skim through the list of questions with [comma] tag, and found no question on this conjunction yet.


title: "You ain't able to be sure about anything."

text: Does this sentence make any sense to you as a native speaker? The one who said this actually meant to say, "People like you can never be sure about anything" (implying the opposite side is very ignorant), but this usage of "ain't" has never appeared anywhere I have seen; does it make any sense to say so?


title: Is saying "he's too thin to carry it (some very heavy stuff)" a euphemism?

text: _Thin_ has a meaning of "not well fleshed," but does it also carry a meaning of "being weak or feeble"? In the Merriam-Webster, it does carry a meaning of "lacking substance of strength," but it uses "thin plot/broth" to make the example.   Is it okay to say someone is to thin to do anything which needs a lot of strength? I just find it misleading to say, because _thin_ doesn't always means _weak_. If you google, there is a title such as "Michael Jackson is too thin to play live." Is it OK to say so? Somebody argued that it's a euphemism to say so.


title: What is the difference between "exhausted" and "enervated"?

text: What is the difference between _exhausted_ and _enervated_ when used to refer to human beings?


title: Is it correct to ask "what's your father?" when you actually mean to ask about his job?

text: > What's your father? Some said this question even exist in the visa-applying of USA, but I just couldn't understand it. Is it asking about somebody's father's job, his personality, or just what he is? If you take this question literally, the only answer can be "He's a pig, or blah, blah". So is it correct to ask this way?


title: Can you say "raise an animal"?

text: It was said as a way to comfort someone who had just broken up with her boyfriend, and someone said something like "go raise a dog". I know it's okay to say _raise_ an animal; I just feel so weird about it. Don't we normally say _raise_ a child? I mean, in my opinion, isn't _raise_ only used for human beings? For animals, like pets, which verb is more appropriate to use? Do we just use _raise_ all the time, no matter if referring to people or animals?


title: Can I say "in one respect..in other respect"?

text: > It is clear that there is only one legal system, which in one respect should > be designed rationally and discreetly, not conflicting with each other, in > other respect should be good in the sense that good laws create good > citizens, so that it is not subject to the danger of being violated.(self- > made) I tried "on the one hand...on the other hand", but I soon realized that in my sentence there is no such strong sense of contrast. So I chose "in one respect", and "in other respect". Does that usage make sense to you?


title: Single word for "inhale using your mouth with force or power"

text: I want to express the following: "Inhale using your mouth with force or power". It does not sound good to me. Is there any single word or a good phrase to express this?


title: What type of word is "abnomaly"?

text: I've got a coworker that frequently uses the word, "abnomaly", not "abnormal" and not "anomaly", but "abnomaly". While the types of these words differ (i.e. adjective versus noun), the meanings are clearly related. Is there a term to describe this type of linguistic compound?


title: Can Onwards be used as a sentence?

text: Is "Onwards!" a correct single word sentence meaning "continue" or "carry on"? Do you know any quotes with it?


title: It is time for "a next step" or "the next step"?

text: Which form is proper: it is time for "a next step" or "the next step"?


title: Why is 'hell' considered a curse word?

text: Given the Wikipedia's list of profanities, you will see that it's somehow detached from the rest of curse words. The most commonly recognized profanities usually describe a body part, person or an (usually inappropriate) act. However, 'hell' is the only one that actually bears the negative connotation as a result of its origin - which is strictly of religious background. Why is it then, that while still being considered inappropriate to use, you can hear it on the radio, tv and in other media without being censored or blacked-out? Is there any source in form of a dictionary that could point out the severity of the word's usage, or some kind of category that would help in categorizing, and perhaps distinguishing it from the other, way more vulgar, curse words?


title: Is there a verb for 'to make heroic'? Something like 'heroicised'?

text: As per the title, is there a verb for 'to make heroic'? Something like 'heroicised'? EDIT: For example, talking about how an author elevated a character to heroic status.


title: Comma after a long introductory phrase

text: Please help me with commas in the following sentence: > As an example of the successful use of such a model **[,]** one can mention > SymPy computer algebra system **[,]** which uses Python as a main user > interface. Is it necessary to write the comma after _model_? I am not sure whether we can consider "As an example of the successful use of such a model" as an introductory phrase. Also, I am not sure about the second comma.


title: Trouble with mixed tenses

text: > How many phones have you lost in total? > > I've lost 2 in 2 months, at this rate I could be catching you up!" In particular I've used the past simple in the first sentence. The second sentence uses the past continuous ( _I have lost_ ) although I'm unsure about the last part ( _I could be catching_ ). Any suggestions on how these 2 sentences could be rephrased?


title: "Make it so!" - where does it come from, how does it "feel" for native speakers?

text: The catchphrase from Star Trek captain Jean-Luc Picard "Make it so!" was first used in "Encounter At Farpoint" (28 September 1987) and thereafter in many episodes and films, instructing a crew member to execute an order. **My question**   Where does this phrase come from? Was it "invented" for Star Trek? What are the associations for native speakers, when they hear it (apart from Star Trek ;-) Does it feel strange or like Old English?


title: Comma or semicolon when omitting a conjunction

text: Perhaps someone could clarify the accepted punctuation for a sentence where a conjunction has been omitted. I'm quite clear about when a coordinating conjunction has been omitted but not as clear for other conjunctions such as _because._ Check out the following: _I think I should (,) (;) (.) It's important for all of us._ This is a statement in dialogue and answers the question " _Are you going to go?_ ", so its full meaning " _I think I should go because it's important for all of us_ " is understood by the listener and then would this only require a comma? But what about the alternative ways of writing this sentence: I think I should go, for it's important for all of us. (Yes, I know we wouldn't say that, but my first statement is also an abridged version of this grammatically correct structure, that uses the coordinating conjunction _for_ rather than _because_ and would then need to be punctuated with a semicolon.) Or how about if I consider the spoken version is an abridged version of: _It's important for all of us, so I think I should go._ I don't think this has much relevance to my question, but again it's another way of looking at it using a coordinating conjunction within an unabridged sentence, albeit transposed.


title: What kind of infinitive is it in “to come home to be killed”?

text: In this example: > Agamemnon comes home to be killed by his wife and her lover. We are quite sure that he didn't plan on dying, so _comes home to be killed_ is not the “infinitive of purpose”. What is it then? Is there a grammatical term for that? * * * Edited, another example: > She came home to pick her car. Here, _to pick_ is the “infinitive of purpose”. In contrast: > She came home to find the house has burned to the ground. Here, though, _to find_ is **_not_** the “infinitive of purpose”, so what kind of infinitive is it?


title: English notation for hour, minutes and seconds

text: I often see English notation about time using the `"` and `'` symbols. I have always mistaken about the two, and even their meaning. I'm more used to "01:05:56", for example. Which is for the hour, which is for minutes, which is for seconds? Is it _the_ common way to write duration of time elapsed? Do they have a special pronunciation?


title: "How much water do you take a bath with?" — Is this sentence correct?

text: I corrected the student, saying that he should write "How much water do you use to take a bath?" because his sentence seemed unnatural to me. Do you consider it correct? Would you use it?


title: Word for not knowing about something

text: I would like to know some word choices (can be a noun, adjective,...) for not knowing about something,   * with a positive connotation   * with a negative connotation   * in a neutral way For example, I guess _ignorant/ignorance_ is a negative word, is it? Can I use it to describe myself before asking others (especially experts) a question, to show that I am humble?


title: Minimum and maximum age of "guy"

text: _Guy_ has pretty much the same meaning as the German counterpart _Kerl_. There is the progression of age in the sequence _child, teenager, adolescent, (young) fellow, guy, old man/guy (?), senior_. But Germans do not call a very old person a _guy_. You can call an anonymous group of people independently of their age and sex _guys_. However, calling someone a _Kerl_ often implies he is male with a minimum and maximum age I am not sure about (18-50). Does this match the English meaning and usage of _guy_?


title: Is "for true" valid English?

text: I have an English-language version of my Finnish birth certificate. It is called an "extract from the population system". The last paragraph, showing the name of the issuing autority, the place, date and stamp, is headlined by > For true extract from the Population Information System in Finland This is the complete headline. I assume what it means is that it's an official document - it has a seal and all. But is "for true" really valid English? I have never heard it used this way. Or is it a mistake?


title: "Documents" or "document"

text: I know that _document_ is an uncountable noun. But I see some people write > A lot of **documents** were found. Which is correct?


English is not my language and I need help with this... I need create a name for an mobile app that will help pregnant womens for 9 months giving tips about everything about she and her babe. So ... I need a English equivalent or Expression for "Who take care of a Pregnant Mother". Would be "Mommy's Carer" ? Thank you all that can help me!


title: Is there a word for a picture of a face that is made from the letters of a name?

text: Does anybody know if there is a name for a picture of a face made from the actual letters of a name? This picture from the band T'Pau's album cover is a good example what I'm looking for - Heart and Soul album cover I saw a set of them at an art gallery years ago that used different people's first names, but I haven't been able to find anything since and no look with google.


title: What is the English equivalent of the phrase “ménage à trois”?

text: Merriam-Webster defines _ménage à trois_ as: > an arrangement in which three persons (as a married pair and the lover of > one of the pair) share sexual relations especially while living together I would like to know whether an equivalent term exists in English that does not use French loanwords, something that “sounds” English.


title: Is it grammatical to say of some potential meaning that it is "able to be said" or "trying to be said"?

text: A recent commenter on a recent word-search question nominated a term as "an even better word for what is trying to be said." This seems to me to attribute intention to something--a meaning--that is incapable of intention. I have also encountered this same fallacy, as it seems to me, with words such as _able_ and _ability_ followed by passive infinitive, in such a way as seemingly and absurdly to locate the ability in question in the patient rather than the agent. For some reason, passive constructions like _" capacity_ to be [past participle]," and _" capability_ of being [past participle]," which respectively locate the capacity and the capability in the patient, do not likewise bother me in the least: > The 235U nucleus has the unique capacity to be split by a neutron into 89Kr, > 144Ba, and three neutrons that can in turn split further 235U nuclei. But I would never say or write that the nucleus _is able_ or _has the ability_ to be split. To say that something "can be said" is unquestionably grammatical, and some instances of "able to be said" result from trying to put that into the future tense or conditional mood, as "will/would/could/should be able to be said." To say that something is _sayable_ is also unexceptionable: adjectives in _-able_ or _-ible_ normally tend to modify or be predicated of the patient. A Google Books ngram of "able to be said," "trying to be said," and "try to be said" shows very low but non-zero frequencies for the former two. A plain- vanilla Google search for "able to be said" turns up (besides a few instances where a comma and right-hand quotation mark separate _be_ from _said)_ a surprisingly high proportion of results from Google books, and a surprisingly high proportion of results that are products of translation from other languages. (Also and less unexpectedly I found among the top results one that resulted from a transformation of "can be said" as discussed above.) Searching for "passive infinitive" in combination with "able" or "try" led me to some on-line grammatical resources, but the only one to discuss this particular problem was a page I had written for my students a few months back.


title: how much vegetables or how many vegetables?

text: I know that vegetable is a count noun, but Which one of the quantifiers do we use with vegetables. How much vegetables do our bodies need? How many vegetables do our bodies need?


title: Is there a word for "a person who hardly understands things"?

text: I have one friend who has a hard time understanding things other people say. While everyone except him understands what someone tried to say, this guy still understands nothing. We always have to explain more and more until he can get it. What can we call him? It's the same as the student who hardly understands what a teacher says while other students can understand it. (Does not mean he is stupid. He can do the exam well. But the teacher has to speak more than usual.)


title: What is the word for thinking a joke is both funny and bad (groan-worthy) at the same time?

text: Is there a word in English that describes the feeling or thinking that a joke is funny, but really bad (i.e. groan-worthy) at the same time? For example, most puns cause many people to groan, but they might also make the same people laugh momentarily ("It's not that the man did not know how to juggle; he just didn't have the balls to do it."). If not that, is there a word that describes such a joke?


title: Why do we use the phrase 'Across the pond'?

text: Why do we use the phrase Across the pond to refer to the opposite side of the Atlantic Ocean? Considering the size of the Atlantic Ocean is vast, is it suggesting the ocean is only a small hindrance? Considering that in the modern world it has become easier to communicate and travel?


title: Word to describe "concealing" positive emotions, in fear of being perceived as irrational

text: This will be a bit hard to explain, but I'll give it a shot. I am looking for a good word to describe: _A person hiding his intense positive enthusiasm and excitement for something, as to not seem overly excited and hence being perceived as emotional or irrational. This person is afraid that his excitement might generate some sort of mistrust with the cautious person who will decide if he will be able to experience what he is exited about or not._ Example sentence: > _"He is a true pragmatist; one who takes on new challenges with great, yet > [word here] enthusiasm."_ I have been thinking about using _concealed_ , _reserved_ , _humbled_ , _restrained_ and _modest_ , but I feel like those words come with a sort of negative undertone, as if the person is harbouring some kind of hidden agenda, which is not what I want to say. Any suggestions?


title: What are the words for the different parts of a ticket?

text: Admission tickets such as those for the cinema are often composed of a part which will remain to the customer, and a part which will remain to the attendant.   * What are the two parts called?   * What is the action of separating the two parts called?   * What is the word for the dotted line, usually with small holes in it to facilitate the process?


title: Why the "meat" in "sweetmeat"?

text: This has always confused me. Dictionary.com doesn't help at all. Candy and meat just don't go together that well.


title: Difference between "Let us go" and "Let we go"?

text: Just wanted to know the correct usage of 'us' and 'we' . Are there any contexts in which they can be used interchangeably? I know "Let we go" seems wrong..but couldn't explain it.


title: What is the word for thinking about what someone is thinking?

text: In chess you are constantly thinking about what your opponent might be thinking. Is there a specific word in English for this? _Meta-cognition_ comes close but not exactly what I am looking for. _Guessing, predicting_ , and _psychoanalysis_ are obviously not what I am looking for. * * * **Edit** : I am looking for a single word (not a phrase) that is closest to this.


title: "endure" vs "perdure" vs "persist"

text: _perdure_ and _endure_ both mean "to remain in existence", and _persist_ means "continue to exist". So are there any differences among the three verbs?


title: "Both of" vs. just "both" with mathematical symbols

text: In mathematical writing we use letters to denote the mathematical objects we are writing about. I wonder how to use "both of" in the following phrase: > Both of I and I' are irreducible ideals. vs. > Both I and I' are irreducible ideals. I am writing in American English. More abstractly, should I treat mathematical symbols as nouns?


title: Does a gerund always end with -ing? If so, why?

text: After asking what the difference is between a gerund and a participle, I began to wonder if _all_ gerunds end with -ing, since I couldn't think of any that didn't. If they do, why?


title: be fresh / not be tired

text: Is it correct to tell a person who worked hard after a long day, ' be fresh' or ' no tired' or something like that? In general, do English people use these expressions or others in the mentioned situations (especially after a long and hard working)?


title: "To be assigned to" usage question

text: Many years ago I translated a document and wrote "he was assigned to an operation" (context: hospital operation, the assignee is _undergoing_ one). An English professor who volunteered to copyedit my translation said that this was incorrect. I checked real-world usage and found that indeed, such a phrase was not used. The question is, why is this incorrect? For example, "he was assigned to a class" is widely-used and (I assume) correct. Is it because one can only be assigned to a group? Or is there another reason?


title: Difference between "day after tomorrow" and "day after next"

text: According to the internet's wisdom, the term " _day after next_ " means a day that might never come - basically **some** day in the future, if any at all. However, in _Covert Affairs_ (S04E14) they seem to use that term to denote the day after tomorrow. Can the former be used as the latter as well? Is that a cultural thing?


title: Throw away/in/out for rubbish?

text: Is it best to use "throw away" or "throw in" for an expression when you ask someone not to throw something, like "Don't throw them away/in/out (the rubbish bin)." Specifically, if one doesn't know where it's going to be thrown, they could be given to charity or someone else instead.


title: Rule for present perfect continuous

text: Consider the following sentence:   * Have you been watering the plants? Is the above sentence grammatically correct? Or should it be something like:   * Have you been watering the plants for 5 minutes? i.e. when you see the use of 'have been' with present participle form you also use the time of start.


title: Use of 'at large'

text: > Marketing is the activity, set of institutions, and processes for creating, > communicating, delivering, and exchanging offerings that have value for > customers, clients, partners, and society **at large** What difference does it make if I cut _at large_ in the sentence above?


title: What does “Emergency blame game” on Iraq mean?

text: New Yorker magazine (June 14) reports as follows under the headline, “Senator, John McCain calls for **emergency blame game** on Iraq.”: > “Citing the deteriorating situation in the war-torn nation, Senator John > McCain (R-Arizona) on Saturday called for Congress to convene an **emergency > blame game** on Iraq.   > [..]   >  McCain said that he hoped Congress would act swiftly to assign blame to a > long list of culprits he identified, including President Obama, the Joint > Chiefs, the media, and everyone who did not vote for him in the 2008 > election.” > http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport/2014/06/mccain-calls- > for-emergency-blame-game-on-iraq.html What is “Emergency Blame Game”? Does it have any legal effects, I mean, binding power of the law? What does the word “game” here represent for? Why is it “game,” not act, initiative, resolution, or campaign?


title: Tricky middle school pronoun case question

text: My younger sister is reviewing for an upcoming exam using quia, which her teacher suggested. She ran across the following question: > Help me carry **_______** boxes into the house. The options are 'those' and 'them.' The service indicates that the correct answer is 'them,' which is utterly baffling to me. I am not particularly great with grammar, but I don't think this can be right -- it is nearly painful to my ears. **What is the correct answer? If it is 'them,' then what is the explanation.**


title: "Is it in slang?" versus "is it slang?"

text: What is more correct and why? I heard few British people speaking "in slang" and some of them said that unofficial language is named "slang." Additionally, is "slang" official/polite word?


title: Is "knocking on" an idea an idiom for dismissing the idea?

text: For years, I thought I'd heard others say, "I don't mean to knock on your idea, but..."--and it was definitely _on_ , not _down_ , although I've heard _knock down_ as well--but now that I'm looking it up, I can't seem to find the idiom anywhere. The closest thing I've found is _knock_ in the Urban Dictionary as meaning "to disregard, turn down; to ignore,"--but without the preposition _on_. Have I misheard others all these years?--or have you heard the phrase used this way, too? If _knock on_ isn't a real idiom, then is _knock down_ the only alternative, or are there similar variations?


title: What is the origin of 'cash'?

text: What is the etymology of 'cash'? According to the OED when it is used in 'cash-box' it descends from the French 'casse', and presumably Italian 'cassa'. However the word meaning 'loose change' is from the Tamil word 'kasu'. The question arises as to whether English used 'cash' before they began to have dealings with southern India?


title: what does somebody's "release date" mean?

text: I am reading a book "Pro git", in the preface, the author says: > I would like to dedicate this, my first print book, to my little girl, > Josephine, whose release date was nearly the same as this book’s. So what does "Josephine's release date" mean? birthday? wedding day? or other meaning?


Which is correct, "be embodied in" or "be embodied within"? > There is hope for the future of the great river, and it is **embodied > within** the reverence with which she is still held. (from a documentary > film, _Ganges_ , by Darren Flaxstone) Reverence is in people's heart, in this sense. It is a feeling, which has no extension. Therefore, is it not more natural to say that hope is embodied **in** the reverence?


title: "By some at least of the merchants" — what does this syntax mean?

text: > The thirteenth century also witnessed the adoption of armorial devices by > **_some at least of the merchants_**. -- (Goodall, John A.., Heraldry in > Italy During the Middle Ages and Renaissance, Coat of Arms, No. 37, January > 1959.) What does "some at least of the merchants" mean? Does it mean "at least some merchants had adopted coats of arms"? Or does it mean something else?


title: Is the comma before "with" necessary?

text: > The Oscars may not take place until February 24, but awards season is > already in full swing, with the Golden Globes among Hollywood's many red- > carpet events. (British Vogue, Feb 2013) I've been trying to educate myself on the comma and got a little confused when I read this sentence. Is the comma between "swing" and "with" supposed to be there?


title: What is the "ponytail" in a knight's helmet called?

text: Does the ponytail thing in a knight's helmet have its own name? Or are they just called ponytails? ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/KrVqr.png)


title: What do you call hypothetical inhabitants living on the Moon?

text: I'm writing a fiction where inhabitants live on the Moon, so I want a name for them. I know that 'venusian' means 'of or relating to the planet Venus', 'martian' means 'of or relating to the planet Mars or its hypothetical inhabitants' and so on. But, after having observed that 'moonian' is not a word, I wonder as to whether there is a term meaning 'of or relating to the _Moon_ or its hypothetical inhabitants'.


title: “It were” versus “were I”: the proper subjunctive for this statement

text: > I wouldn't have been surprised to learn _it were_ already named Lingua > Mathematica, and I submit that as the best reason to give it that name (and > not some other). Based on my understanding, I think this is correct, but it sounds worse than common uses of the subjunctive I'm already familiar with (e.g. “if I were an Oscar Meyer weiner…”). Is it correct? **Note** : I'm interested in prescriptivist English grammar here, not meaningless practicalities like being understood by people. There's no need to remind me that I'll be well understood only by saying “to learn it was.” I am more confident of “I would not have been surprised if _I were_ to learn it is already named Lingua Mathematica…” and not quite as much more confident in “I would not have been surprised _were I_ to learn it is already named Lingua Mathematica…” which sounds extra hoity-toity.


title: Do we need hyphen in this: graded-reading books?

text: Is it necessary to have a hyphen in the following phrase? **graded-reading books** Please my friends you are only hope for me at a last chance salon because my teacher he is not knowing answer.


title: In/on for "into/onto" in colloquial and not so formal AmE

text: If the context is crystal clear and, as such, allows no risk of misunderstanding or ambiguity whatsoever, unlike "Paul jumps into the lake (= Paul jumps into the lake from a certain point)" vs. "Paul jumps in the lake (= Paul is in the lake and jumps out)", is it grammatically acceptable in AmE to substitute "in" and "on" for "into" and "onto" to indicate movement or the idea of movement, for all but the most formal prose? E.g. Should we go in the pool first, or should we shower first? source Let's get on the bus before the good seats are taken. source Let me translate this in the language of non-BS... source


title: Synonyms for exclamations of joy or excitement

text: I am looking for words that convey similar meaning to the following: 'whoopee', 'yeah', 'yahoo', when such words are used as exclamations of joy or excitement, as in : > 'Whoopee! Hammertime!' > > 'Yeah! Holidays!' > > 'Yahoo! School's out!' Perhaps in this type of usage 'synonym' is not the correct term, and I hope what I am asking is in any case clear. In addition, very localised or period-specific words are very much okay (as long as you can reference it). For example, perhaps in 18th century Bordeaux people shouted "Mercante!" to mean the same thing.


title: "Today in history"

text: I'm currently writing an application which displays historic events happening on this actual day. (So say, today is October 1st, the application displays events from the past which also happened on October 1st). How do you call such a thing? I Germany we call it a "Kalenderblatt" (Calendar sheet), because such information was printed on the back of (daily-) calendar sheets. Is there such a word in English? What would be the best title for such an Application? I selected **"Today in History"** , is this appropriate? I thought of **"Historic events"** , but this doesn't imply the relevance for today. **"On This Day"** also came to my mind. If so, how would you write **"Today in History"** in the application-title? Capitalized **"Today In History"**? Another question on the same application: Does the sentence **"150 years ago today: Something happened"** sound better than **"Today, 150 years ago: Something happened"**. So, where to put the "today"? Does this sentence make sense (in the context explained above?)


title: What are the effects of the passive voice other than changing emphasis?

text: As this excellent answer points out, the passive voice can change the emphasis of a sentence from the subject to an object. That seems to be its primary function: this other answer provides an example of how the passive voice is used in academia to draw emphasis away from the author of a paper and towards the paper's findings. However, are there any effects of using the passive voice other than changing the focus of the sentence? If so, what are they?


title: How to simplify this: "can include, but not limited to"

text: I am writing a list of props and found myself writing > ...including, but not limited to... (and here in context): >   * Options for Scary Creatures (can include, but not limited to); >     * Mummy >     * Vampire >     * Frankenstein's Creature >     * Goblin >     * C'thulu > My question is this: Is there a nicer way to write this phrase. I want to say, "here is a list of scary creatures that you can include, but if you want to use something else, then go for it", but in a nicer way.


title: is there a term for "largest possible minority?"

text: A hand of bridge has 13 tricks, and one can win between 0 and 13 tricks in a hand. Between 0 and 6 tricks would constitute a minority of tricks, with 6 being the largest possible (discrete) minority. Seven tricks would be a majority. So bidding systems are built on a base of six tricks. That is a bid of "one heart" really means "seven tricks, with hearts as trumps." Is there a term, such as "superminority," that would refer to this base of six tricks as the "largest possible minority."


title: What is the correct plural form of the word "forum"?

text: "Fora vs Forums" I understand that the word "forums" is more acceptable than "fora" because anyone can understand its meaning today and that English is a living language so it's adapting, but except for what opinion each of us have for it, the real question is: **What is the correct form to use?** Two points to consider about it:   1. Why the plural form of this Latin word should be excluded? I.e. why "data" instead of "datums", "bacteria" instead of "bacteriums", "alumni" instead of "alumnuses", "media" instead of "mediums" and so on?   2. Why people use the plural form when they usually mean their singular one? The word "fora" refers to several places for discussion but usually the people name their web board as "forums", even if they mean just one.


title: Word for people who clean out supermarkets during crisis scares

text: What do you call the people who clean out the grocery stores when they hear the word _snow_?


title: When can "have" be used without "got"?

text: I read this article and now I'm confused when _got_ can be omitted when using _have_. Could this be explained in plain English without technical terms? Is there a different usage in past tense?


title: What kind of phrase is this? [manically across the stage]

text: In the sentence: At the beginning of the play, the entire cast dances maniacally across the stage. What kind of phrase is [manically across the stage]? Is it an adverb phrase, prepositional phrase or (as some of my schoolmates think) a noun phrase? Thank you very much for any help.


title: What effect does the article 'a' have on this fragment?

text: What do you think is the difference between: > Achieve better work/life balance and > Achieve a better work/life balance The discussion may be academic, but I know what my preference is, and I need to be able to defend it.


title: "At/In the Summer Olympics"

text: ## ! I found this to be strange: in Wikipedia, > Russia **at** the 2008 Summer Olympics   >  Russia competed **at** the 2008 Summer Olympics How different is the meaning if _at_ is changed to _in_?


title: "Functionalities" vs "features" - what's the difference?

text: How are those two words different? Are they considered synonyms, especially when describing computer software?


title: Origin of idiom "wearing the < role > hat?"

text: What is the origin of the idiom "wearing the < role > hat"? Here is an example from the post Getting things done when you wear multiple hats in _PookieMD's Blog_ : > I wear many hats, and I suppose you do as well. I wear my small business > owner hat when I run/manage my company, ExtraMD, my doctor hat when I play > doctor, and my consultant hat when I head off to multiple meetings that seem > to define the EHR consultant world I live in. Of course, I wear my mother > hat, wife hat, Girl Scout leader hat, and the hat that seems to get worn the > least–the self hat. and another example from Jean Scheid's The Many Hats of a Project Manager: > As the owner of a small auto dealership, many of my managers wear more than > one hat. My service director is also my parts director and my finance > manager is also my sales manager. In the business office, my controller has > an added responsibility of obtaining registrations for the vehicles we sell.


title: Is “There is no sewer one isn’t willing to swim in for one’s master” a popular expression?

text: I found the phrase, “ _There is no sewer he wasn’t willing to swim in for his master_ ” in the following sentence in Jeffrey Archer’s novel, “False Impression.” “Fenston looked down at a man who had proved, time and time again, that _there was no sewer he wasn’t willing to swim in for his master_. But then Fenston was the only person who had been willing to offer Leapman a job after he’d been released from jail.” As we have the similar cliché, “水火も辞せず- be willing to jump in fire and water (for his master / mission)” in Japanese, I was interested in this expression. So I searched the phrase on Google to confirm its exact usage. All I could find were a stack of the same clips from “False Impression” and no English dictionaries at hand carry this expression as an idiom. Is “There is no sewer one isn’t willing to swim in for one’s master” an established English idiom, or just a phrase coined by Jeffrey Archer?


title: Is "weightage" an English word?

text: Is _weightage_ an English word? We use it a lot in India, but I couldn't find it in my Oxford Dictionary.


title: When using the preposition "for" should it be followed with the subjective or objective case?

text: > The activity we engaged in was good for she and I. or > The activity we engaged in was good for us both. or > The activity we engaged in was good for her and me.


title: Bull and Bear Arguments

text: What do list titles such as "bull arguments" and "bear arguments" mean? My guess is that they are arguments in favor / against a proposal that's being discussed.


title: "in a similar way as" or "in a similar way to"?

text: Consider the two statements:               A is constructed in a similar way as B      and               A is constructed in a similar way to B      Which one is correct, or can they both be? By the way, I originally thought of the sentence is a weakened form the following:               A is constructed in the same way as B      This might subconsciously lead me to prefer the former construction, although if I would expand the sentences above into imagined longer versions, I might have to choose between               A is constructed in a similar way as the way in which B is constructed      and               A is constructed in a way that is similar to the way in which B is constructed      where I guess the latter sounds better.


title: Is it "biased towards" or "biased against"?

text: I've come accross both phrases for quite some time and I can't seem to distinguish the difference between both of them. Suzy is _biased towards_ Thomas. Suzy is _biased against_ Thomas. In both cases, it is clear that Suzy holds something against Thomas but what is the difference between "biased towards" or "biased against"? Is it the degree of biaseness or is it that both are acceptable?


title: Difference between "hop the rocks quickly" and "quickly hop the rocks"

text: I'm trying to decide which sentence is correct, or if they both are. which would you recommend as easier to read/understand for the average reader? >   1. Hop the rocks quickly and get the star. >   2. Quickly hop the rocks and get the star. > I'm using this in a promo for a game I made. Assuming both are valid, would it be better to use the first sentence since it begins with a shorter word?


title: Necessity of "that" as a conjunction

text: A simple Google search reveals that the word `that` can be used in many ways: as a pronoun, determiner, adverb and conjunction. I'm wondering about its usage _specifically_ as a conjunction. Take the following two examples: > I think that I know who sings this song and > I think I know who sings this song From a colloquial standpoint, I would use the shorter version (the latter). However, what is the _grammatically-correct_ form? Is the word `that`, when used as a **conjunction** , necessary from a grammatical standpoint? It seems superfluous to me.


title: What is the difference between “prophecy” and “fortune telling”?

text: > Maybe a week, maybe a month; you will meet a tall dark stranger; the next > few weeks are going to be hard on your energy levels.... What are the real/inferred differences between “prophecy” and “fortune telling”?


title: How are artificial constructions such as l33t classified with regards to English?

text: L33t or its various other titles* is a derivation of English but I have no idea what term should be used to describe it. Other examples of these things would include lolspeak and the massive alterations involved in commonplace texting. Wikipedia suggests that l33t is an alternative "alphabet" but that only covers the letter/number conversions. "Alphabet" doesn't address the lingo and structure ( _*cough*_ ) that l33t employs. Perhaps this question is too far outside of the scope of this site. L33t itself _suggests_ a culture of its own but no one over there can agree on anything and any popular lingo today will be forgotten or replaced by tomorrow. Its worthiness is totally debatable but I still want to know what to call it. * Included here for future searches: leet, leetspeak, l33tspeak, l33tsp34k, 1337, 13375p34k


title: Where did "I'm Jonesing" get its meaning from?

text: I'm Jonesing for a little Ganja, mon... I'm jonesing for a little soul food, brother... Where did "I'm jonesing" come from?


title: What does "to phrase it another way" mean?

text: What does " _to phrase it another way_ " mean?


title: Should it be "concerned person" or "person concerned"?

text: An office colleague wrote the following in an email: > Kindly log a ticket for the same and assign it to the _concerned team_. I wrote back the following: > I believe it should be   >  "Kindly log a ticket for the same and assign it to the _team concerned_." Which one is correct, and why?


title: Combining "i.e." with "in this example"

text: I wonder whether it is ok to combine _i.e._ or _that is_ with _in this example_. Consider that an example meeting situation has been described already and John has been introduced. The document also describes other examples so I tend to use _in this example_. The following sounds good for me: > The task of writing meeting minutes is up to the person who last joins the > meeting, **in this example that is** John. While this one doesn't: > The task of writing meeting minutes is up to the person who last joins the > meeting, **in this example i.e.** John. Putting _i.e._ in front might solve it: > The task of writing meeting minutes is up to the person who last joins the > meeting, **i.e. in this example** John. **Which alternatives are ok? Or would you generally recommend to not use _i.e._ and _in example_ together, because _i.e._ is thought for explanations which has no exceptions? If it is preferred to not use them together, what is a better replacement to make clear that the conclusion is related to the example in this chapter?**


title: Word to describe things that run after each other

text: Is there a word to describe tasks that need to "run one after the other"? My current choice is _sequentially_ , but feel there is a better word.


title: Is "Dave's 40" correct?

text: It's Dave's 40th Birthday on Saturday and there have been emails and texts sent with the headline - "Dave's 40". Not sure if this is correct, can anyone help? Thanks. Pete


title: Colloquial expression for something working very fast?

text: I am looking for an expression as an alternative to **fast** in the following expression: > Ever since they have constructed flyover/overbridge, traffic has been very > fast. > > My laptop has been super fast, ever since I have had the ram changed.


title: Does anyone write "noöne" with a diaeresis?

text: Related: "Whereas" as an alternative spelling of "whereas" Does anyone write "no-one" as "noöne", with the diaeresis (double-dot) serving to separate the syllables? (Chrome's spellcheck doesn't recognize it.)


title: "Show someone through" for "show someone around" in AE

text: Just wondering, can "show through" be used interchangeably with "show around" in AE? "Trained docents will be delighted to show you through the house." http://www.hewhs.com/museum/


title: Positive word for Premonition

text: I wanted to use the word "Premonition" in a sentence , but when I checked the meaning , I got "A feeling of evil to come", which was far from what I wanted to convey. So I checked synonyms like "boding" , "foreboding" , "forewarning" , "Presentiment" , and so on. All had ominous connotations or a negativity or a sense of evil attached to the meaning. So here I am , asking if there is a Positive word for Premonition , without negative implications. UPDATE: "Hunch" is the word I select as matching my requirements , from all the answers I got.


title: Is a semicolon appropriate in this sentence?

text: Is 1 or 2 correct? Or neither? >   1. I'm not saying I'm Batman, but answer me this; have you ever seen me > and Batman in the same room? >   2. I'm not saying I'm Batman, but answer me this. Have you ever seen me > and Batman in the same room? >


title: Meaning of "sex on the legs"

text: I'm currently listening to _Casual Vacancy_ and heard an idiom/expression _sex on the legs_ in this book. Is it some widely used expression or is context required to understand its meaning?


title: What does "quality stand-down" mean?

text: What exactly does "quality stand-down" mean? For example, > We will have quality stand-down on the following work. I came across this expression in the context of software quality assurance.


title: "Liquid refuse" or "Liquid waste"?

text: Is there any conceptual difference between "Liquid refuse" and "Liquid waste"? What are the differences, if any? Is any of them used more than the other? It feels to me that "liquid waste" is more used in common language. If there is no conceptual difference, I'll go with the most commonly used. If there are conceptual differences, though, I'm chosing the one which most closely refers to waste in liquid state as it is discarded in industrial/residential pipes. If my word choices are not the best ones and there is a third even-better one, please enlighten me. * * * **[EDIT: adding contextualization]** Maybe I should provide some contextualization. I'm describing the following scene: it's raining and one person is disgusted because the water that is spilling on his face are not just raindrops, but it is mixed with water/greywater/waste water/liquid waste/whatever disposed from the buildings above him. He does not acknowledge them being industries or residential buildings, but he knows he's not being under pure raindrops. In this context, what better describes this generic dirty water? Greywater? Waste Water? Liquid Waste?


title: How do you call a thing that raises something (e.g. an event)?

text: Let's say I want to describe event model in some software. Conceptually there are two sides: the one which raises an event and another which receives it. While I do know the difference between _to raise_ and _to rise_ , I'm not sure whether I should say " _rising_ side" or " _raising_ side".


title: Interpretation of 'have' as stative or dynamic

text: Please bear with me. It's been a long time since I looked up grammatical concepts. The sentence is: I can quite clearly see the bewildered looks you will be having on your faces on reading this. An entirely natural reaction. (Implying I can imagine the reader's look of bewilderment on reading what I have written previously.) A commentator has mentioned that the reason this sentence is odd because 'have' is stative and can't take a 'progressive' (ing) form. I found the following information on where 'progressives' can be used: http://goo.gl/arxla) > Progressive forms include a form of “To be” plus a present participle (an > -ing ending). Frodesen and Eyring** categorize progressive verbs according > to the following functions: > >   * to describe **actions already in progress at the moment "in focus" > within the sentence** , as in > > > “I was doing my homework when my brother broke into my room, crying.” or “I > will be graduating from college about the same time that you enter high > school.” > >   * to describe **actions at the moment of focus in contrast to habitual > actions** , as in > > > “We usually buy the most inexpensive car we can find, but this time we're > buying a luxury sedan.” > >   * to express repeated actions, as in > > > “My grandfather is forever retelling the same story about his adventures in > Rangoon.” > >   * to describe **temporary situations in contrast to permanent states** , > as in > > > “Jeffrey goes to the University of Connecticut, but this summer he is taking > courses at the community college.” > >   * to express uncompleted actions, as in > > > “Harvey and Mark are working on their deck.” > > *Kolln suggests that we think of the difference between stative and dynamic > in terms of "willed" and "nonwilled" qualities. Consider the difference > between a so-called dynamic adjective (or subject complement) and a stative > adjective (or subject complement): "I am silly" OR "I am being silly" versus > "I am tall." I have chosen to be silly; I have no choice about being tall. > Thus "tall" is said to be a stative (or an "inert") quality, and we cannot > say "I am being tall"; "silly," on the other hand, is dynamic so we can use > progressive verb forms in conjunction with that quality. > > The same applies to verbs. Two plus two equals four. Equals is inert, > stative, and cannot take the progressive; there is no choice, no volition in > the matter. (We would not say, "Two plus two is equalling four.") In the > same way, nouns and pronouns can be said to exhibit willed and unwilled > characteristics. Thus, "She is being a good worker" (because she chooses to > be so), but we would say "She is (not is being) an Olympic athlete" (because > once she becomes an athlete she no longer "wills it"). First, cannot 'the look you will have' be interpreted as a 'choice' or a 'willed' quality, similar to what is mentioned in the last part of the text I've quoted? [Also, 'owning a bike' and 'loving it' @ http://goo.gl/XBzpU ] Secondly, does not 'have' in the example I have given above, fit at least one of the three situations marked in bold?


title: Meaning of “bejesus” in the idiomatic expression “… the bejesus out of …”

text: According to multiple online dictionaries, _bejesus_ is a quite common mild expletive used to express surprise and/or dismay and is derived from _by Jesus_. But what does it mean? The phrase “you scared the _by Jesus_ out of me” doesn’t seem to make much more sense than the derivative expression.


title: "would rather" + subject + past subjunctive

text: What is the difference between:   1. _The company would rather each employee_ **_be_** _provided with ID card._   2. _The company would rather each employee_ **_were_** _provided with ID card._


title: Pronunciation of "jsfiddle"

text: English isn't my native language. I don't trust my pronunciation too much. I don't know how to pronounce the domain name _jsfiddle.net_. There isn't any video about _jsfiddle_ , so I can't learn the pronunciation.


title: What is the origin of the name "grammar nazi"?

text: What does Nazi have anything in common with those obsessively correcting other people's grammar? What is the origin of this expression?


title: V number out of Tampa

text: I don't get the exact meaning of "V number out of Tampa" in the following context from Hemingway's To Have and Have Not. > Freddy Wallace's boat, the Queen Conch, 34 feet long, with a V number out of > Tampa, was painted white. "V number out of Tampa" means that the boat is called V number out of Tampa? Tampa is a region? It is too difficult to understand...


title: What word describes putting oneself in reach of the law

text: The title isn’t great and I couldn’t think of something more appropriate. I'm looking for a work that can be used to indicate that the next phrase may put the writer at risk of being within the reach of the law. The context might be something like: > At the risk of {something} myself, I have to confess, I always steal the > table sauce at restaurants The word that came to mind was ~~“inditing”~~ “indicting” but searching for the meaning of the word, it seems to mean something different than I imagined.


title: Synonym for discovery?

text: I'm working on a backend product and the term "eDiscovery" is overused in my industry. What's another appropriate word that has enough resonance to be marketable? _Discovery_ in this context does not seem to be appropriate.


title: Explanation of the proverb "Beauty is only skin deep...."

text: Can someone help me understand the following proverb? > beauty is only skin deep but ugliness cuts clean through to the bone I know it means something like true beauty is on the inside, but I want to understand it more "deeply"


title: Need a word that has the opposite meaning of "nominal"?

text: I'm looking for a word that has the opposite meaning of the word _nominal_ in the sense of _in name only_. Here's an example (fill in the blank). > Brian was in charge of scheduling in his [    ] role as Project Manager.   >  He was often expected to carry out Project Management duties, even though > his business card identified him as a programmer. _De facto_ sort of works, but I feel like the connotation of (in my example) having the role by tradition or default doesn't fit what I am trying to say. I am essentially looking for a term that means _we don't call it that, but in practice it really is_.


title: "Through" or "throughout"

text: In the conclusion of an essay, which fits better? > **Through** this experience, ... > > **Throughout** this experience, ... It sounds better to me with _throughout_ , but I really do not know why. Any explicit example will be greatly appreciated.


title: I'd rather not [do something] vs I'd prefer not to [do something]

text: In this question the issue came up as to whether there's any difference in the level of politeness/correctness involved in _I'd rather not say_ as opposed to _I'd prefer not to say_. My own gut feeling is the _prefer_ form is a bit more "formal" (and thus arguably more correct/polite). This NGram shows that _I'd rather_ occurs far more often than _I'd prefer_. Partly that's just because the _rather_ form is more common, but the difference is far less marked with the more formal I would rather/prefer. I take this to mean _rather_ is more suited to casual use/conversation when used with this meaning. It could be lots of verbs besides _say_ , and I don't think the _not_ is necessarily relevant here either. But usages vary for certain alternatives - for example, _go blind_ only seems to work with _rather_. That's just my opinion. Does anyone have arguments/evidence/sources to either back up or refute the proposition that _I'd prefer not to say_ is more formal than _I'd rather not say_?


title: What can I call other students if I am also a student?

text: I wonder what I can call other students, if I am also a student? For example, if I am talking to a professor, and want to mention other students just like me. I know I can use "classmates" if we are in the same class, but how about if we are not in the same class? Can I say "fellow students", or is there anything better?


title: Meaning and usage of "Gentlebeing"

text: I wonder what _gentlebeing_ means and how it is used, especially when compared to similar phrases like _Ladies and gentlemen!_ I saw _Gentlebeings!_ being used at the beginning of an email. Is it a formal or informal word, and does it have any sarcastic or humorous connotation to it?


title: "What an idiot!" in plural form

text: There is a phrase "What an idiot!". How should it be used for a group of people? Looks like "What idiots" doesn't have same emotional meaning.


title: Human Face Divine

text: I recently read that there is a grammatical construct known as a _Miltonic Structure_ , after John Milton. It said that the structure consists of an _adjective + noun + adjective_ , like "human face divine" from Paradise Lost, book III: > "Or flocks, or herds, or human face divine;" I searched but found no singular construct such as this called Miltonic Structure. Are you familiar with this structure? Is it called this? Does it have another name?


title: Using the FANBOYS "for" in a series

text: I have a sentence that is constructed the same as this one: > She bought food **for** a black cat, a white horse, a red dog, and a green > frog. However, I feel the comma does not give enough pause for what I want to convey. Instead of a series for which the comma is used, I would like more separation between each item when the list is read aloud. That is, each item is more important on its own than in the series. So I wrote this instead: > She bought food **for** a black cat, **for** a white horse, **for** a red > dog, **and for** a green frog. I use _for_ (from the conjunction mnemonic FANBOYS) in addition to the comma to create the pause I want. Is this so incorrect? Should I just stick with the commas, or is there a better way to represent a longer pause?


title: "Snag (a chance, an opportunity, etc.) for "seize/snatch" in AE

text: Does "snag" have any currency in modern day AE to say "snatch (or seize) (a chance, an occasion, etc.), and can it be used just about interchangeably with the latter? Or, is there a subtle difference to it? Consider these sourced examples: > We snagged the chance to ask him a few questions. source > > Talking about the program, she happily acknowledges that she snagged the > chance of a lifetime. source > > Photographer David Goldman thought he had snagged the opportunity of a > lifetime. source > > I had snagged the opportunity to design costumes for an Off-Broadway show. > source


title: What's the function of this "as"?

text: In http://lareviewofbooks.org/review/what-exactly-is-piracy/ > Spoo avoids rehashing the labyrinthine history of the work’s publication > **except as** it bears upon his larger point. What is the function of "as" in _except as_?


title: Who does the verb "argues" and preposition "to" refer to in the following sentence?

text: > At least **to argues** E.Pessen in his iconoclastic study of the very rich > in the US between 1825 and 1850. I don't quiet understand both _to_ and _argues_. Does _argues_ refers to _E.Pessen_? Can anyone please turn this sentence into the normal form, such as "E.Pessen argues XXX"?


title: "Just another random thoughts/thought"

text: Which one is correct? > Just another random thoughts. or > Just another random thought. I'm writing a blog post about recent musings.


title: Is the sentence correct?

text: > I called on your mobile just now, but could not reach you. Is the construction of the sentence correct?


title: How is SQL pronounced?

text: When I was learning SQL, I remember reading that it should be pronounced just like the word _sequel_ ; however, I worked with a bunch of techs who seemed to prefer S-Q-L. Is there a proper convention for this?


title: Difference between 'turn up' and 'turn out'

text: This occurred to me when I was drafting an email. I wanted to mention in the email that something that I had estimated earlier to take 5 days was not as complex, and I could finish it in 1 day. Which of the following is correct?   1. It turned out (to be?) much simpler that I had thought.   2. It turned up (to be?) much simpler than I had thought.


title: Does the use of present perfect continuous with a time reference in the past imply an intention to finish, and if yes, how to avoid it?

text: I guess the question sounds a bit intimidating, but the real-life example I am referring to should be easy for a native speaker. I am proofreading, or rather copy editing, a research paper intended for an international conference. Neither me nor my co worker who wrote it is a native English speaker. I managed to set lots of grammar straight, but there is a sentence I find extremely tricky. She writes "The framework is developed since about eight years". As far as I can tell, the grammatically correct form of this sentence is "The framework has been in development for about eight years". To me, this sounds as if we want the framework to be finished at some point, and it has taken so terribly long to develop and is not yet finished. We don't want to make such an impression, as this is an ongoing project which already has finalized, usable versions, but it is also still being developed because we are continuously improving it and expanding it. Is my interpretation correct, or am I just confused by some similar structure in some other language? And if it is correct, how can I change the wording (without making it significantly longer) so it reads just as the mentioning of the starting point of a process expected to continue for an indeterminable length of time in the future?


title: Meaning of "Would you value the ethics of consequence over means?"

text: I've been reading a book for a while and I've stumbled on the following sentence, which I didn't quite understand: > Would you value the ethics of consequence over means? The context is the following: Person A steals a valuable book and doesn't tell his superiors (In the book, this is punishable by death, since he's hiding information and this act caused a war earlier), person B is As friend and doesn't do anything about the book (person B is religious). The mentioned superiors find out about the book and thus, person A is sent to court, where person B is a witness. Person A asks B to lie, but him being religious, isn't able to do so. Since B didn't lie in court, but did nothing before the act of hiding the information was found out (aka "I'm all good with it until there isn't something for me to lose), is called a hypocrite by person A, so he goes through a psychological drama, before talking to person C (person C being a priest and a good friend of person B). During the discussion, person B lets C in on his drama and gives the aforementioned question as answer to his person Bs psychological drama.


title: study comedy "at" or "in" the XYZ theater

text: > I will study comedy at XYZ theater Sounds more intuitive. Which one is grammatically correct and why?


title: A word for obligatory but not relevant activities

text: Suppose that your job is an academic, then you may need to: 1\. perform the research, 2\. apply for a research grant. The tasks of the first kind contribute directly to your becoming a better researcher. The tasks of the second kind have to be performed otherwise you will not have funding to conduct the research, however, applying for a grant does not make you a better researcher, hence acts more like a distraction than as a relevant part of your research. What are the names for the first and second kinds of activities? I thought of words: 1. main, 2. support. However, these two words are only a bare extraction of the meaning to be expressed, moreover their meaning may be even misleading in the context I descri


title: Meaning of "If gold rust what shall the iron do"

text: My teacher ask me to write an essay on this topic, but I have no clear understanding of this phrase. Can someone explain in more simple words? > If gold rust what shall the iron do.


title: In an Australian context, should "Aborigine" be capitalised?

text: When referring to an Australian context, as opposed to Aboriginal Canadians, or indigenous people worlwide, should "Aborigine" (and "Aboriginal") be capitalised? I tried googling, but the hits I found were usually from government or advocacy websites about aborigines, and may reflect political biases rather than expert English knowledge, rather than websites about the English language.