title: What is the difference between "harsh" and "severe"?

text: I've been just wondering what's the difference between "severe" and "harsh". So in what ways do their nuances/usages differ? For example, when you think a teacher's a little too harsh and that he might be able to soften his comments to the children, do you say he's a little too "harsh" but not "severe", and his comments are a little too "harsh", not "severe"? And are there any alternatives? Thank you in advance!


title: What is the difference between 'the English King' and 'the England's King'?

text: Is there any differece between 'the English King' and 'the England's King'? Somehow I feel they are different...


title: Put in the shoes of

text: Please guide me on whether the used phrase is right. I put myself in the shoes of the customer before preparing the requirement. Thanks & Regards, Murali.


title: What's the plural of quantum?

text: As in a number of the smallest de facto units of anything you can have in the universe? Currently in the running in my mind:   * Quanta   * Quantums


title: The verb form of "Is entered in the race"

text: [I'm not much of an expert in English usage, just an armchair boffin, so I hope I'm not out of line asking what may be a dumb question, to the regulars here...] I am trying to figure out the form of the verb _entered_ in a passage such as: > "Did John make the cut?" > > "Yes, he is entered in the race as the eighth man." Obviously, John was entered into the race in the past but it isn't past participle ("he has been entered"; "he was entered") and it certainly isn't past tense ("he entered"). In fact, in this usage, it is essentially an adjective. Is this a form that I am not familiar with or is it just bad English (albeit in somewhat common use)?


title: What are the differences between "allegories", "fables" and "parables"?

text: My concept of the three is:   * **Allegory:** A story in which ideas are symbolized as people.   * **Parable:** A short story designed to teach a moral or religious lesson.   * **Fable:** A short story in which animals or objects speaks a story, to teach a moral or religious lesson. If these concepts of mine are correct then can we say that every **fable** is a **parable** but the vice-versa may not be true? Can we relate the idea of the **allegory** likewise? Or am I wrong completely?


title: "What it is that is" versus "what is"

text: I recently heard an American presenter using the phrase "discover what it is that is important to you." What is the linguistic difference between saying "what it is that is," rather than "what is"?


title: Why "hundreds of <noun>s" instead of "hundreds of <noun>"?

text: In the expression `hundreds of <noun>(s)`, I would think that _hundreds_ is what's being modified because _of_ is usually right-branching: > hundreds`<-{of <noun>(s)}` (This is in contrast to `X hundred <noun>s`, in which _X hundred_ is clearly the modifier, and hence the plural.) If so, I can't see any reason (apart from overwhelming usage, of course!) why `<noun>` must be plural. To me, the idea expressed seems to be a multiplication of some sort: > X00 * `abstract instance of <noun>` (This would then be similar to the formal "There are two kinds of person.") Is the singular archaic, and did we somewhere along the way begin thinking more along the lines of `{hundreds of}-><noun>s` than `hundreds<-{of <noun>}`, or am I completely off? Evidence from Google Books: > ~~I have asked many **hundreds of person** of all classes respecting their > own places of residence. (1843)~~ > > ~~... there was every reason to suppose that an epidemic would be certain to > lay claim to **hundreds of victim**. (1869)~~ > > The officers of Police could point to **hundreds of person** who lived > solely by picking pockets and other selonious acts ... (1792) > > I have traveled **hundreds of mile** by rail, buggy, lumber wagon, and on > foot. (1889) > > For **hundreds of year** it was the coronation site and burial ground of > Polish monarchs, saints, and national heroes. (2010)


title: What does " Book within 2 weeks" means?

text: Can anyone answer the above question?


title: What is a term for someone who has never left their home region?

text: Specifically, someone who has never experienced other places? A college professor once used the term "parochial" in this context. "You should earn your doctorate from another graduate college, then you will not be so parochial in your studies".


title: What to call someone who always says "nothing" on most things you ask?

text: I am referring to the kind of person, when you ask him something he will say "nothing" all the time. When you ask them the question again or why they responded like this, they say "forget it" or "because it's an irrelevant question" (even though it really is not a relevant question to you.) They only respond like that on questions, not constantly on everything you say throughout the conversation, though.


title: Meaning of "direct descendant" as opposed to "indirect descendant"

text: I know what a descendant is. A’s children, grandchildren and great _n_ -grandchildren are all A’s descendants. But what does _direct descendant_ mean? It is as if some of those people are A’s **direct** descendants, but others are just his **indirect** descendants. Is _direct_ redundant and only used as a rhetorical device?


title: Meaning of liquor and leverage

text: Please tell me the meaning of "liquor and leverage" Just I read Warren Buffett Ideas there I got this sentence. "I've seen more people fail because of liquor and leverage"


title: "Non-restrictive appositive" vs. "non-defining relative clause"

text: Could you please kindly provide some explanation as to why the second option (B) is the only correct answer to the following question? And why is it not the case that both A and B could be correct depending on whether a non- restrictive appositive (B) or a non-defining relative clause (A) is used? Recently, severe management problems have afflicted Coca-Cola, **___ ___**. A. which is a large multinational corporation B. a large multinational corporation C. there is a large multinational corporation D. a large multinational corporation is it Your insights, recommendations, and corrections are much appreciated.


“Just a entrance alone will continue a lot of people entrance adult to recreate,” pronounced Manager Gary Lamb. (http://boston- massachusetts.us/conservation-plan-also-brings-development-in-maine) Gary Lamb uttered a totally incomprehensible sentence, at least for a not native of English language: it seem as the grammatical meaning, which is signaled by the structure words, is not present. Please, help me in understanding that sentence.


title: "Use of internet" or "internet usage"?

text: I am confused about the meaning of "use of internet" and "internet usage". Is there any difference between these two phrases? Does the phrase "use of internet" mean I utilize the internet or it means the benefit of using internet? And is it grammatically correct to use "usage of internet"?


title: Should I say "in my tests" or "on my tests"?

text: I want to say something like: > _Using APC is great advice. Performance increases a lot when you use it. > (100 to 1 on my tests)_ Should I say "on my tests" or "in my tests"? Are any of those wrong? Do those mean the same?


title: How did "kill" get its positive connotations?

text: For example: >   * She made a killing on the stock market. >   * The comedian killed the audience — they were slain with laughter. > Did this meaning develop slowly over time or did some person or institution invert the definition?


title: Alternatives for computer programming terms, for better understanding

text: There are several words in computer science which seem quite easy to understand, but when you just mix them with their application, they look more and more complex. I have seen many people who are new to computer programming getting confused very easily almost by every single technical term. I believe it's not their problem, however I believe these technical terms could be quite more smart and probably much easier for understanding by non- technical person. For example I have already test that people can understand the term "Box" as a "Container of Data" much easier rather than "Variable". Maybe it shouldn't be like this and the term "Variable" is more correct, but if we could explain it in another way which could be more easier for most of the people to understand it better, so I think it's reasonable to sacrifices "Variable" and start using "Box". So, here are a few words which I'm thinking of them most of the time, to finding a good replacement for them (at least for teaching purpose). I hope you help me in this way, either by completing this list or just simply suggesting alternatives for them. :)   1. Variable   2. Array   3. Object-Oriented Programming   4. Function   5. Constant   6. Class   7. Object


title: Substituting special characters or numerals for letters/word parts

text: Is there a word or phrase to describe a substituting a dingbat, special character or number for a letter or portion of a word? Examples: > The Chicago Bulls successfully achieved a **3peat**. > > "In 1999, Tom Jermoluk stepped down as CEO of **Excite@Home**." > > **Ke$ha** is the stage name of Kesha Rose Sebert. I thought of "letter substitution", but that can also refer to a substitution cipher.


title: Infinitives with "ought not"

text: Most of the references I can find about the word "ought" indicate that even when negating it, you should use an infinitive: "You ought not to go there." That sounds quite bad to my ear. Much better sounding to me is "You ought not go there." Without the "to". Comparing this to similar usage of "should" does no good, since they can't even agree _without_ negation: "should go" versus "ought to go". Now that I think about it, I am suddenly far from certain that "ought to go" actually contains an infinitive in the first place; maybe "ought to" works together as some part of speech that modifies the verb, rather than "to go" being a unit. I'm obviously no linguist. Can someone shed some light on this for me? Specifically, can you explain the function/part-of-speech of each word in a way that makes it clear whether "to go" or "go" is more correct?


title: Difference between 'lie' and 'lie down'

text: What is difference between **lie** and **lie down**? Please explain with some examples.


title: Is 'women of cover' an idiom in use in the U.S.?

text: On October 28, 2001, William Safire, wrote an interesting article on The New York Times. > Within a week of the terrorist attack, George W. Bush went to the Islamic > Center in Washington and said, ''Women who cover their heads in this country > must feel comfortable going outside their homes.'' In remarks to State > Department employees on Oct. 4, President Bush spoke warmly of ''stories of > Christian and Jewish women alike helping women of cover, Arab-American > women, go shop because they're afraid to leave their home.'' > > At a televised news conference a week later, he reprised this ecumenical > theme: ''In many cities when Christian and Jewish women learned that Muslim > women, women of cover, were afraid of going out of their homes alone . . . > they went shopping with them . . . an act that shows the world the true > nature of America.'' He repeated that phrase, women of cover, calling ''such > an outpouring of compassion . . . such a wonderful example.'' > > The cover is a veil that expresses Muslim piety. The hijab, meaning ''cover, > curtain,'' can range from a floral kerchief that leaves the face exposed, to > the niqab, abbaya or in Persian, chador, which covers the whole body except > the face, to the burka, as worn in Afghanistan, which covers everything. > ''To have good hijab'' is a general term meaning ''to be properly covered.'' > Some Muslim women believe that the cover need not be worn outside the > mosque. The linguistic question: in describing the wearers of the veil, is > it women who cover, as the president first used it, or women of cover? > > Sue Obeidi, at the Muslim Public Affairs Council, uses women who cover, > women who wear the scarf and women who wear hijab. She is unfamiliar with > women of cover, and I cannot find it on databases. > > It's possible that the president coined the phrase; if so, it was on the > analogy of women of color, a description adopted by many nonwhites. (Though > colored people is dated and almost a slur, people of color is not in the > least offensive.) The substitution of who with of in the cover category > introduces a nice parallel to the woman of color phrase; we'll see if it > takes. The article ends with the phrase 'we'll see if it takes'. Now, after more than ten years, what can a native speaker, living in the U.S., say about that expression 'women of cover'. Paraphrasing Mr Safire's words, _did it take_? Google Search shows more than 18,000 hits for "women of cover", but for those who live outiside of the U.S. that number says nothing at all but simple leads to this question.


title: Origin of the phrase "Looks like Tarzan, plays like Jane"?

text: Scouts, coaches, and fans use the phrase “Looks like Tarzan, plays like Jane” to describe a player that appears physically imposing, but plays at a level not consistent with their apparent physical gifts. Tarzan and Jane obviously come from the works of Edgar Rice Burroughs, but who coined the term in relation to sports? My thought is that the NFL draft scouting process may have been the origin, as it is listed in a list of common NFL scouting lingo, so an old NFL scout may be the source, but I don't have any data to back up the claim. Any documentation that can attribute this phrase to a particular person and date of origin would be appreciated.


title: What phrase is less idiomatic than "softball question"?

text: In the US, a "softball question" is asked because it would be intentionally easy to answer. It's not an intellectual judgement, just a question formulated to be intentionally easy for that particular person to answer. I'm looking for a word or phrase that can be more widely understood (outside the US) that preserves that same meaning. Preferably, it would fit nicely into the form: _"The best political reporters no longer ask [softball] questions."_


title: How popular are the terms "software" and "hardware" outside the computer world?

text: If I’m not mistaken, the terms _software_ and _hardware_ were ordinary English words, but they have been widely popularized by popularity of computers. How much they are common (and acceptable by native speakers) to be used for other systems; for example, defining _software_ and _hardware_ in a company. It is indeed common in management literature, but I am not sure if it is plain English or a metaphor for comparing the system with well-known computer architecture. In a logical comparison, we can define a coach as software and players as hardware (just a schema not exactly). How does is sound to a native speaker? Of course, I mean in general, not this exaggerated example.


title: Etymology of the phrase "cannot see the forest for the trees"

text: How did this phrase originate grammatically? I’m especially interested in the fragment “for the trees”. See http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/see_the_forest_for_the_trees for its definition.


title: Titles of British Lords

text: In an old episode of The West Wing, a British Ambassador is referred to as "Lord John Marbury". Ignoring that once he became Ambassador he'd be Mr Ambassador, what are the possible correct addresses? My reasoning is that a friend criticised a newspaper which used the form "Lord Firstname Secondname" saying it's supposed to be "Firstname Lord Secondname". For example, with Lord Coe — or Seb Coe —, his wife is said to be "Carole, Lady Coe", but assume that's just the different names options (as there's a comma)? It's not explicitly stated that there's a correct way to use his (or her) full name, that I can find online. I tried using the West Wing episode as an example, but they pointed out that it's an American show. Indeed they get other details wrong, like saying two Commonwealth ambassadors met (when ambassadors of Commonwealth countries are referred to as High Commissioners when dealing with each other).


title: Names of tools for shaving hair

text: 1. I was wondering what differences there are between _shaver_ , _razor_ , _trimmer_ and _clipper_?   2. For head hair cut that does not make head bald, what tools are used?   3. For shaving facial hair, what tools are used?   4. For shaving a beard, moustache or whiskers, what tools are used?


title: What's the grammatical term for this phenomenon?

text: There is obviously a big essential difference between "no towel" and "there isn't a towel". I mean, the former cannot probably serve as a complete sentence, while the latter can. The former can only serve as a subject of a sentence, while the latter contains both subject and a predicate. So how is this difference named, defined or described in correct grammatical terms?


title: Why is the current unrest in the Arab world called the "Arab Spring"?

text: Does _spring_ in "Arab Spring" refer to the season - or something else?


title: "to mimic" something, what level of precision does it mean?

text: This is about technical context (i.e. not theatre or performances). The phrase - "should mimic the functionality of ..." - how it can be interpreted? From dictionaries it is not very clear - can it mean _exact_ copy, or just a "similar" thing?


title: What does "I wished I had a nickel" mean when threatened by a radical extremist?

text: I saw a clip of video titled “David Letterman came back to The Late Show this week,” on Time Magazine's website. In the CBC’s show, Letterman revealed that he was threatened by a jihadist lately. After joking he wishes the audience to be more like a human shield for him on the site, he said: > A guy, a radical extremist threatened me to cut my tongue up. I wished I had > a nickel for every time a guy has threatened to cut. I know a nickel means a small change, but small change wouldn’t save you from a great threat. What does "I wished I had a nickel for every time he was threatened to cut" exactly mean — particularly in contrast to the seriousness (or gravity) of likening the audience to the human shield of himself against jihadists even as a humor?


title: What is meant by saying "X, not to say Y"?

text: When someone says "X, not to say Y", do they mean "X, but not Y" or do they mean "X, and even Y"? Normally I would assume it's the first, but I've seen a few examples where it seems ambiguous. Or maybe it's literally the first, but used ironically to mean the second? An example (for some reason writers for The Atlantic seem to use this phrase a lot): > In somewhat different ways, Orwell and Larkin were phlegmatically > pessimistic and at times almost misanthropic, not to say misogynistic.


title: 'attention from/in/of' the (research) community?

text: I want to write the following sentence: 'Despite the growing attention of the research community, however, there exist several open issues.' I am, however, not sure about the right preposition. 'attention of' is probably not an option but is it better to say here 'attention from' or 'attention in'? Leo tells me that, in general, it should be 'attention from'. But I wonder if in the case of a community, as in the example, it should not be 'attention in'?


title: History of the phrase "for Mother Russia"

text: When I played the Battle Zone II video game in the late 1990s, which was plotted around a war between a New Soviet Union and a future analog of the USA, I noticed that Russian tanks and pilots frequently exclaimed "For Mother Russia!". This made me quite curious because not only the expression does not exist in Russian, but also would sound awkward. Under the USSR it was very uncommon to call the USSR "Russia" especially by loyal citizens, those who were outside of the emigrant and dissident circles. Thus a common expression would be "For the Motherland!"("За Родину!") or (in more official style) "For our Soviet Motherland!"(За нашу советскую Родину!). But the case is that the expression would sound awkward not only in the USSR, but in modern Russia as well (one can say "For Russia!", although this is uncommon, but "For mother Russia" sounds very much strange). The expression also could not have come from Czarist Russia as well, it was common to call "За Отечество!" (can be translated "For the Fatherland!") those times. I have seen the expression "For Mother Russia!" many times since then, but always only in English. So my question is where did this expression came from and why it is so widespread in English?


title: might find or might have found

text: Under which grammatical rule does this fall? Which is grammatically correct: (1) A teacher **might find** it difficult to explain a lecture in the past. OR (2) A teacher **might have found** it difficult to explain a lecture in the past. Thank you in advance.


title: Why “Daddy” in this sentence was written with a capital D?

text: Why is _Daddy_ in this sentence written with a capital D? > Her love letters to and from **Daddy** were in an old box, tied with ribbons > and stiff, rigid-with-age leather thongs. This sentence is from the essay named _My mother never worked_ by Bonnie Smith-Yackel.


What's a word for "a thoroughly enjoyable experience"? Something like the opposite of a "trial"?


title: Usage of 'and' between more than two items

text: > Beijing will face trade sanctions from the United States, which brought the > case, and the European Union and Japan. vs > Beijing will face trade sanctions from the United States, which brought the > case, the European Union and Japan. Which one is correct?


title: What's a synonym for the profile of a mountain?

text: I'm looking for a word to describe the the contour of a mountain. Something like profile, or cross-section. I've heard of stratigraphic column, but I think that requires showing the layers, like on the image below. I'm also interested in the name for maps that don't show the layers, just the profile. ![mountain profile](http://i.stack.imgur.com/fvuf1.jpg)


title: Collocations for "compromise"

text: Fairly simple one this time: What’s the best collocation with _compromise_ if I want to say that it has been reached and, hopefully, is going to last long? I’m looking for the most natural, the “first thing that comes to mind” kind of combination.   * stable compromise?    * firm compromise?    * steady compromise?   * strong compromise?   * ____ compromise? I did a brief Google search but obtained no satisfactory results. Seems like _stable compromise_ is fine, but I'm not sure this is it. EDIT: Having been reminded of the associations of the word _compromise_ , I have hereby modified my question. I'm actually looking for a nice way to express the situation in which two opposing parties have reached an agreement on sth, and the agreement is stable, and it's good, and everybody's happy, and it's white X-mas in Hades. I think that, instead of _compromise_ , we could work with _agreement_ , _harmony_ , _concord_ or _consensus_.


title: What is the future of English as a lingua franca?

text: English may now be the world's lingua franca, but according to a review of Nicholas Ostler's latest book in The Economist the future is uncertain: > English is expanding as a lingua-franca but not as a mother tongue. More > than 1 billion people speak English worldwide but only about 330m of them as > a first language, and this population is not spreading. The future of > English is in the hands of countries outside the core Anglophone group. Will > they always learn English? > > Mr Ostler suggests that two new factors—modern nationalism and > technology—will check the spread of English. > > ... > > English will fade as a lingua-franca, Mr Ostler argues, but not because some > other language will take its place. No pretender is pan-regional enough, and > only Africa’s linguistic situation may be sufficiently fluid to have its > future choices influenced by outsiders. Rather, English will have no > successor because none will be needed. Technology, Mr Ostler believes, will > fill the need. > > This argument relies on huge advances in computer translation and speech > recognition. Mr Ostler acknowledges that so far such software is a > disappointment even after 50 years of intense research, and an explosion in > the power of computers. But half a century, though aeons in computer time, > is an instant in the sweep of language history. What do you think? Are the days of English as a global second language numbered?


title: Is "incomplex" a legitimate word?

text: I want to create a poster titled "An Incomplex Introduction to Complexity- based Cryptography." As you see, it contrasts the words _incomplex_ and _complexity_. (Words like _simple_ or _easy_ do not provide this.) I looked up the word _incomplex_ , and found it in a few dictionaries:   * http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Incomplex   * http://thesaurus.com/browse/incomplex However, most dictionaries do not include this word. Is it a legitimate word at all? Can I use it?


title: 'Aside from' Vs 'Besides'

text: I have come across few sentences with the phrase 'aside from' where I felt 'besides' would have been a good choice. Is there any difference in the usage of the two or can both be used interchangeably?


title: Is there a difference between "Wrong or Right" and "Right or Wrong"

text: I was writing about the difference between morals and ethics when i wrote the following line > both these terms talk about the right and wrong conduct of people   >  both these terms talk about the wrong and right conduct of people I would think both these sentence would convey the same meaning , as it is like saying _You are fat and tall_ against _You are tall and fat_. I just need a confirmation that these two sentences convey the same meaning. Am i missing anything?


title: Difference between 'gear up' and 'ready'

text: > Software programmers are **gearing up** to build applications for the newest > version of Windows Phone 7. It seems the 'gear up' in here means 'ready'. So why not use 'ready' and what's the difference with 'ready'?


title: Give Signs Of Uncertainty

text: >   1. The project gives signs of too much uncertainty. >   2. The project gives too much uncertainty. > If I am trying to use sense 5c of this dictionary, would one of the sentences above be wrong? Is _signs of_ needed?


title: "Things which are hung/mounted on wall" in a single word?

text: Is there an umbrella term for things like:   * wall clock   * wall-mounted TV   * tapestry I'm looking for a single, or at most two words for naming a concept in a programming project.


title: "Hello" or "hi" — what's best?

text: I must send a professional email but I'm not sure what is best to start it with, _hi_ or _hello_. The question may seem to be simple, but unfortunately I am not too good in English.


title: Medical or medicinal?

text: I am not an English native. I am working in the field of medicinal plants. I like to know why we don't use term "medical plants"? What is the difference between them?


title: Is “I don’t suppose you could lend me a pound?” a well-used expression when you ask someone to lend money?

text: I came across the phrase, "I don’t suppose you could lend me a pound?" in the short story titled "Chalk and Cheese," contained in "To Cut a Long Story Short" by Jeffrey Archer. The phrase appears in the following sentence that Robin, the young brother who is gifted in fine art asks his elder brother at his one-man show at a gallery to lend him money: Robin brags his brother on his talent: > "One of the things I most admire about you," said Robin, "is that you have > never envied my talent."   >  "Certainly not," said John. "I delight in it."   >  "Then let’s hope that some of my success rubs off on you, in whatever > profession you should decide to follow." "Let's hope so." said John, not > sure what else he could say. Robin leaned forward and lowered his voice.   >  "I don’t suppose you could lend me a pound? I’ll pay it back of course."   >  [Note: actually Robin has never paid back his repeated small loans from his > good-natured brother.] As I’ve never heard "I don’t suppose you could lend me a pound?" as an expression for asking somebody for lending money, I checked the usage of the phrase with Google NGram to find no result. The very beginning phrase, "I don’t suppose" sounds to me somewhat rounabout and disingenuous. Is "I don't suppose you could lend me a pound?" a well-used pattern of phrase in Both England and America in borrowing money from someone whoever intimate with you or not?


title: Better word for "massively-multidirectional"

text: The print and broadcast media (radio and television) are only capable of transmitting information in one direction, _from_ the transmitting node (the printing press, the broadcast tower) _to_ the receiving node (the newspaper, the TV). On the medium of the internet, there is no transmitter/receiver dichotomy - information can flow _to_ any node just as easily as it can flow _from_ it. If you were trying to describe **the conversation** taking place over these mediums on the macro-level, what word would you use to describe these different paradigms? For instance, I've been saying that the internet inherently capacitates a "massively-multidirectional" conversational paradigm while the print and broadcast media can only capacitate a unidirectional conversational paradigm -- but I'm looking for a better terminology - I don't think these terms fully grasp the dichotomy I'm trying to describe.


title: Ignition - Does it connect to emotions?

text: Just wanted to ask if in your opinion the word "ignition" can connect to emotions in some way (like boosting emotions), or if it's too far...


title: Instantaneous interpretation of disjoined events over a duration

text: What is the correct interpretation of a sentence with two events occurring during some time span joined by "or"? It seems that the scope of "or" doesn't change in either case. For example: > Today I will be either swimming or reading. Does this mean > At any given instant today I will be either swimming or reading. or > During the course of today I will engage in exactly one of the set of > actions {swim, read}. ? I realize that the second could be a special case of the first, but I would like to know it the conventional interpretation of the sentence is limited to that case.


title: "Medium" or "mediums" or "media"?

text: Which one of these would be correct: > (XYZ offers) significantly more visibility than other > >   * medium >   * mediums >   * media >   * mode (?) > > > of advertisements. XYZ is a new method of advertisements, similar to TV, radio, and newspapers. How would you go about comparing it to the other methods(?) of advertisements. I'm not using _media_ as in "mass communication", but rather as in "medium of instruction" or "medium of travel".


title: that adjective [of] a noun

text: > **Possible Duplicate:**   >  "How big of a problem" vs. "how big a problem" I was recently typing along on this site, when I found myself typing > . . . that big [of] a list. and I couldn't figure out if _of_ belonged in the phrase. Does it?


title: What does "OMG ponies!" mean?

text: What does this mean and what is the origin of this phrase?


title: A technical term to describe adjectives like "fast", "long", "strong", "large", "deep", "loud", etc

text: What is the technical term to describe adjectives like _fast_ , _long_ , _strong_ that are used to describe a particular property of an object in relation to another object's? Here is an example. Let's say I have a 20-centimetre ruler.   1. I can say, > This ruler is _short_. as I compare it to a 1-meter ruler.   2. Or I can give the opposite statement as I compare it to my pen: > This ruler is _long_. Both statements make sense. Whether it is _short_ or _long_ depends on what I am comparing it to. ( **Edit:** counterexamples would be _Christian, gravitational, electromagnetic, cosmic, cosmological_. These are adjectives, too. And I don't think they fit into the category.) **So what is this type of adjectives technically called?** I've come up with the phrase 'relative term', but after a check with Wikipedia, it doesn't seem to be the technical term I am looking for. > A **relative term** is a term that makes two or more distinct references to > objects (which may be the same object, for example in "The Morning Star is > the Evening Star"). A relative term is typically expressed in ordinary > language by means of a phrase with explicit or implicit blanks. Examples:   >  __ loves __   >  __ is the same object as __   >  __ is giver of __ to __. > > The word **is** is a relative term when it expresses identity. The > colloquial meaning for a relative term is that > it is different for > different people. An example: someone who is 5 feet tall might think someone > who is 6 feet tall is tall, but someone who is 5 feet 5 inches would think > that someone who is 6 feet 5 inches is tall.


title: What does "Works" of Ontario Works mean?

text: I live in the province of Ontario in Canada. The ministry of community and social services here have a type of welfare called _Ontario Works_ , and this provides financial and employment assistance to individuals in need. And I'm wondering, what does _Works_ of _Ontario Works_ mean? I've looked up the term in the dictionaries, but couldn't find anything relevant to the context.


title: Noun for "act of striving"

text: Is there a noun for the _act of striving_? Many English verbs use the same word for the infinitive (e.g. _to fall_ ) and for the _act of performing that action_ (e.g. _a fall_ ), but I haven't found whether _strive_ can be used as the _act of striving_. Is there a synonym that could work?


title: Does the order of the word 'please' matter?

text: Is there a difference between: > Can I go home, please? and > Can I, please, go home? I feel like the first is more formal, when the second shows some kind of irritation. Am I right?


title: Why do we not say "tens of"?

text: We say 'hundreds of', 'thousands of', 'millions of', even 'tens of thousands of', but not 'tens of'. The usual expression is 'dozens of'. Does anyone know why?


title: Does "establish" imply a chronological ordering?

text: The context is actually mathematics, and providing a proof for a particular fact. If one says "... which was established by Smith." does this have the connotation that Smith was the first to do it? Similarly, if we say "... whose proof establishes that..." does it mean it was the first proof to do so? My personal interpretation is that in the first sentence it implies he was the first, but not for the second sentence. What is the correct version in English? (Also, if it had already been established, wouldn't you say reestablish for the second time?)


title: Origin/reason for the "hit by a bus" phrase

text: Often at my job when someone is becoming a single source of knowledge or otherwise has a skill that no one else on the team or the department has, a common expression is: > If John was hit by a bus, there would be no one that knows enough about what > he does to take over. I don't believe that this phrase is specific to my job as this also seems to be a common phrase in articles I have read online, for example: http://37signals.com/svn/posts/3023-why-programs-become-territorial My question, what is the origin of this phrase and is there any reason that it is phrased like "hit by a bus" instead of "in a plane crash" or something else entirely?


title: What does “persona non grata” mean?

text: In Gossip Girl, there’s a line like this: > Spotted, Lonely Boy going from Teacher’s Pet to _persona non grata_ in the > pitter-patter of a heartbeat. What’s _persona non grata_?


title: Where does the "quint" in "quintessential" come from?

text: Doesn't "quint" mean "five"? What does that have to do with the meaning of "quintessential"?


title: What would the name Rod be an abbreviation or shortening of?

text: Can anyone come up with more names than Rodney, Roderick or something quite different for "Rod"? I'm trying to track a Rod Anderson down and cannot find either of those or just Rod.


title: What is this wordplay I'm thinking of involving homonyms?

text: I remember knowing there was a name for this type of sentence construction, but I can't recall it and google is failing me. The basic concept is that you use a word in two different meanings in the same sentence. A (poor) example is: "He ran a marathon and his own company", playing on the idea of running as a physical activity versus running a company. What is that called?


title: zero conditional and first conditional

text: We use the so-called zero conditional when the result of the condition is always true. What about following situation. Let's say that we have a poorly written application. :) and I complain that it simply does not work. It is always true for this version of application. Zero conditional sounds good to me. Is it wrong to use first conditional here?   * "if I press a button it crashes."   * "if I press a button it will crash." thanks!


title: By ..., one yields...?

text: In a scientific context I have a sentences of the form > By doing ..., we yield ... Now, I am trying to neutralize it to something like > By doing ..., one yields ... Unfortunately, I cannot find this formulation anywhere else. Is it a valid formulation anyway? **Example:** > By multiplying the equation with _(x+1)_ and applying standard solving > techniques for ODE, **[one yields/we yield]** the identity _sin²(x) + > cos²(x) = 1_.


title: "Even though" contradiction

text: > _Clause_   >  Run!   >  **This single-word command is also a clause, even though it does seem to > have a subject**. With a direct command, it is not necessary to include the > subject, since it is obviously the person or people you are talking to: in > other words, the clause really reads "[You] run!". You should not usually > use direct commands in your essays, except in quotations. The **bold** sentence above basically said : > This single-word command is also a clause, **_despite the fact_** that it > does seem to have a subject. Doesn't this imply that clause usually doesn't have a subject? Why does it contradict itself?


title: Ambiguous relative clause

text: In the following expression, whom does 'who' refer to? The friends of the participants or the participants themselves? "The friends of the participants who were told to order soft drinks" This was an option in a multiple choice question and I suggested that it was ambiguous, yet the professor insisted that it clearly referred to the friends of the participants.


title: "Sure to do something?" — is it correct?

text: Is the question "Sure to delete selected elements?" correct? I have seen this many times. Can I use such questions in this form on a website? Does it make a difference to place it on a website? I have found this answer but it is not exactly what I am looking for.


title: When someone says, "I do not feel that good", what does that mean?

text: I have heard it many times in movies and shows. I think it means "I do not feel very good" or "I do not feel as good as you think", but why do we use "that" here, and is it correct?


title: What is the meaning of "a correspondence of principles"?

text: Which are the uses and meanings of this expression? From my own research, it seems to have:   * In politics, a formal meaning close of _agreement_ or _treaty_ : "a correspondence of principles was sign secretly in Oslo."   * In a more informal or figurative context, I felt it sound like _guideline_ or _motto_. However, I am pretty sure this is quite incomplete.


title: Why can't they have him get caught or killed? - do I need "get" here?

text: Reading about the movie character, Dexter, a fan was wondering about how the series will end: > Why can't they have him get caught or killed? It got me thinking..it is "have sb do smth" used here? I somehow cannot understand the usage of "get" which I can (from context) see references to passive.


title: What are some alternatives for "nurturing bosom"?

text: Consider this sentence: > "Are you prepared to leave the nurturing bosom of [business-name]'s help and > support staff?" I'm looking for something that is a little more professional yet still conveys a compelling warning. Context: This is part of an advice column warning readers to think twice before they customize a product and lose technical support. Also, this advice is **not** coming from someone at the company.


title: Here is the report and login or Here are the report and login or Here is the report and the login?

text: > Here is the report and login or > Here are the report and login or > Here is the report and the login? Which one is correct and sounds better?


title: Why do we use the word “oops”, if something goes wrong?

text: Why do we use the word _oops_ in a sentence or when communicating with others, if something goes wrong? I would like to know the correct information regarding this question.


title: When the waitress at a diner calls her male customer a ''good girl'' after getting tipped, is it meant to be offensive?

text: My friend got called that and since neither of us are American, it just sounded offensive to us.


Is there an opposite of tightfisted that also contains reference to a hand? The opposite of 'tightfisted' is always 'generous'. I want a word, idiom, or phrase that means generous but with reference to hand or a form or part of it like fist etc.


title: "Preventing downtime and faults IS/ARE crucial"

text: Consider the following sentence: > Preventing downtime and faults is crucial. Is or are? Why?


title: Meaning of "the crawling of the walls"

text: What is the meaning of "the crawling of the walls"? > I can practically feel the presence of disease: **the crawling of the > walls** , the energy tension— like the nesting of a thousand insects.


title: "Cleaning area" or "cleaning surface"?

text: Question: The English term for: > the total area of a building/floor in m2/Sq Ft that needs to be cleaned Is that called the "Cleaning surface", or the "Cleaning area"?


title: What does the phrase "Does the Pope sh** in the woods?" mean?

text: I heard this phrase in the GTA San Andreas game. Sounds pretty offensive, nonetheless I don't really get what he meant to say. The context was something like:   * "Hey do you wanna make some money?"   * "Does the Pope shit in the woods?" Here's the video with CJ saying this phrase.


title: "Dare" with and without "to"

text: To my surprise, there's a missing question about this particularly interesting verb, dare. All I know about it is the fact it can be in two forms, as an auxiliary (without to: "I dare not mention their names") and main (with to: "Did anyone dare to admit it?") verb and the difference has something to do with agreeing with subject. Can somebody explain in a greater detail?


title: Usage of "along with"

text: Python, along with its related packages   * numpy   * scipy _is_ / _are_ used to make the statistical analysis. What should it be, _is_ or _are_ ? I was pretty confident it would be _is_. But someone more knowledgeable to me made the correction and changed it to _are_. Thus came the doubt. It should be similar to the usage of _with_ , I guess. Hope, this isn't a duplicate. I searched and did not find.


title: I need a noun in American English that represents the idiom 'to look on the bright side'

text: We're developing an application where we have categories users may progress towards, and one of them is 'to look on the bright side; to live without worry, etc.'. However, categories are titled with a single word, and I have failed to think of a word that perfectly suits that meaning. Can anyone assist?


title: Three years: current (2012), last (2011), but is there a term then for 2010?

text: I have three years I am putting on a chart: current year, last year, and I'm not sure what to call the year that came before the last. Does it have a name? Would it be "pre-last"?


title: "How about" vs. "What about"

text: Is there a difference between starting a question with "How about" and "What about"? Can we use both expressions interchangeably?


title: Etymology of 'kinematics'

text: What is the etymology of the word 'kinematics' - the maths of movement, not taking into account physical forces such as friction and air resistance. I was speaking with a friend about it and suggested that it comes from the two words: kinetic (essentially meaning movement) and mathematics. These 2 words seemed to go together well to make 'kinematics', and seemed a liable suggestion as kinematics is the mathematics of movement. He laughed at me and said "That's ridiculous, no words come from just putting 2 words together". So, what is the etymology of kinematics? And just so that when I next see him I can give him some words that were made from 2 being put together, it would be lovely if you could throw a few into your answer.


title: Coordinating conjunction immediately followed by parenthetical — Is a comma needed or not?

text: William Strunk's _Rules of Usage_ states: > If a dependent clause, or an introductory phrase requiring to be set off by > a comma, precedes the second independent clause, no comma is needed after > the conjunction. Strunk's example illustrates the point: > The situation is perilous, but if we are prepared to act promptly, there is > still one chance of escape. However, I would be tempted to put a comma after the "but," like this: > The situation is perilous, but, if we are prepared to act promptly, there is > still one chance of escape. So, I know you're thinking, "Well, Strunk's _Rules of Usage_ says that you're wrong. No comma." But is _Rules of Usage_ really the best source? I'd like to see this rule in a more contemporary and authoritative source, like the Chicago Manual of Style. There are many instances — such as in The New York Times — where the comma is **included** before a parenthetical comment that comes after a coordinating conjunction. Any authoritative source on the issue?


title: What did we gain in return for the loss of phonemic vowel length from Old English?

text: In Old English, vowel length was phonemic, but stress and certain kinds of consonant voicing were not. In Modern English, that situation is reversed: vowel length is no longer phonemic, but stress always, and consonant voicing in most cases now, is. ## My main question is . . . **Is there any connection between losing one phonemic property but gaining another?** Is there some sort of “conservation of phonemic axes” principle at work here that requires another axis of distinction to appear when one is lost? Did this cause other effects, such as for example stress or voicing or something else becoming phonemic? Old English represented 14 simple vowels using just 7 letters ( _a, æ, e, i, y, o, u_ ) in paired short and long variants. This reminds me of how Latin had 10 simple vowels using 5 letters, again in paired short and long phonemically distinct variants. But in the transformation of Latin into Spanish, that 10-vowel system was lost, leaving only 5 vowels remaining. And yet, Latin’s predictable stress was also replaced with a new phonemic stress in Spanish; for example, _término, termino, terminó_ are a minimal triple. Did the same thing happen to Old English as happened to Latin, as the short- vs-long vowel distinction was lost but phonemic stress was gained, or is it completely unrelated? There is one particular similarity between the transformation of Old English to Modern English and the one from Latin to Spanish: in both cases, phonemic vowel length disappeared but phonemic stress appeared. Is this pure coincidence? In Old English, stress was not phonemic because the stress was always on the first syllable except for verbs like _forsacan_ (forsake) or _behydan_ (hide) with a leading particle. But in Modern English, stress is phonemic (compare _record_ as a noun and as a verb), but vowel length is not. Was this new phonemic stress in any way compensatory for the loss of phonemic vowel length? * * * ## Other notes It was these two postings that got me thinking about the matter:   * In American English, vowel length is almost always allophonic. Generally stressed vowels before voiced consonants are held longer than those before voiceless consonants (e.g, great ~ grade pronounced [greⁱt] and [gre:ⁱd]), and that perseveres even after voicing neutralization, as in grating ~ grading, pronounced ['greⁱɾɪŋ] and ['gre:ⁱɾɪŋ]. As Neil says, real vowel length is one phenomenon which helps the listener to decode speech. But in school, everyone is taught about "long A" [eⁱ] and "short A" [æ], and this has nothing to do with Modern English speech. – John Lawler yesterday   * The IPA transcriptions are US /ænt/ and UK /ant/. One can use a macron /ā/ or colon /a:/ for the UK one, depending on transcription habits, but vowel length isn't phonemic in any dialect of English, so a simple /a/ will do. I do think that questions and answers about pronunciation in a written medium should try to use standard English phonemic symbols. Otherwise, how do we avoid confusion? – John Lawler 3 hours ago I notice that we do use vowel length a bit phonologically, even in diphthongs, at least those of us with Canadian raising, such as in the otherwise phonemically identical pairs _ice cream_ and _I scream_ , or _writing_ and _riding_ , where in each pair, the first diphthong is shorter and higher than in the second.


title: Is the word "Americana" capitalized?

text: ...in the sentence "Here's a list of great Americana books." It looks SO weird lowercase: "Here's a list of great americana books."


title: How is the ending -le or -el determined?

text: I'm busy working on a _ladle model_ at the moment, and as I am idle and inattentive this phrase sometimes comes out as _ladel model_ , sometimes _ladle modle_ , and sometimes _ladel modle_ in addition to the occasional correct spelling. Is there any particular reason for the two differently-spelt but identically sounded endings? Perusing the dictionary suggests that _model_ is from French and _ladle_ from Old English. Is that why the words are spelt differently?


title: Is there a word that describes this feeling?

text: The rising star shows no remorse for the figment of existence to which man shows no resolve.   There is no depression, for there is no sadness.   There is no boredom, for there is no annoyance.   The world does not know, nor would the world give it consideration if it did know.   If mankind could hear the thoughts of thy brethren, it would not care to listen.   If mankind listened, there would be no thoughts to hear, for your indignation is not.   He who feels would rather study the cracks of time in the monuments of creation than enjoy thyself.   Ones mind is as clear as the sky which does not show. I just wrote whichever words that came to mind about how I feel.   I'm not suicidal.


title: What term is used for the closing of a letter?

text: **Salutation** is the term used to describe the beginning of a letter or other correspondence. What is the term used for the closing of a letter? Here are some examples: _Yours truly_ , _Sincerely_ , _Best wishes_ , _Love_? Searching for 'antonym of salutation' **1** was not helpful. EDIT: This need not be expressed as a single word. (Whatever is correct is fine, whether one word or a phrase!) `1.` Citation (IEEE Style): **Thesaurus.com, "salutation,"** in Roget's 21st Century Thesaurus, Third Edition. Source location: Philip Lief Group 2009.


title: What do you call the adjectives between transitive verbs and objects?

text: > I carefully pried open her mouth. (The Weed that Strings the Hangman’s Bag) When intransitive verbs are followed by adjectives, they seem to call these adjectives as subjective complements or adjuncts. But the example has transitive verb [pried] before an adjective [open]. In this case, does this adjective be called an adjunct?


title: Word for 'internal uniformity of an object'

text: I'm looking to convey the internal uniformity and indivisibility of an object. I like that _monolithic_ means both 'uniform' and 'indivisible,' but I don't want to imply 'large size.' _Homogeneity_ implies that the object is composed of other smaller objects. I don't want to do that either.


title: Meaning of "I feel so helpless"

text: What is the phrase "I feel so helpless" supposed to mean? Is it "I feel as though I am unable to offer help" or "I feel as though no one could help me?" I saw it in a movie, and always thought it was the latter, but it was clearly used in the context of the first.


title: Synonym for "utilize" that means "to use without waste"

text: I'm looking for a synonym for _utilize_ that sounds less dry and emphasizes that nothing is being wasted. "The program utilized all the supercomputer's resources." Ideally, this word would make the word "all" redundant.


title: "Woman is the 'n-word' of the world"?

text: The other day I was watching a video, in which one white teacher was being accused of using the word "nigger" in reference to one of his students who was black. The newscasters, before showing the video report, didn't dare to say the whole word "nigger" and instead just said "a teacher used the n-word in class...". So, I guess, this word is really bad since the newscasters can't say it in the full length. But this reminded me of the song by John Lennon "Woman is the nigger of the world". I am kind of puzzled here: As far as I know Lennon had already moved to the USA by the time he released this song. I know that some radio stations refused to put it on air because of the n-word in it, but that was 40 years ago. Have things not changed since that time? If newscasters don't dare to say "nigger" even today, how would they refer to that song today if they needed to? EDIT: Just found this video on YouTube where Lennon himself explains the situation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5lMxWWK218


title: "Exchange emails with whomever you want to put me in contact [with]"

text: I realize the "never end a sentence with a preposition" rule is controversial these days, but let's assume for the sake of argument that it should be followed. What is the proper construction of a sentence that has a prepositional phrase inside a prepositional phrase, such as in the title of this post? Is there a way to make this strictly correct, but not so cumbersome? > I can make time for a phone call, or just exchange emails with whomever you > want with whom to put me in contact. Is this simply a case where there is no way to avoid ending the sentence with a preposition (short of clobbering it with the ugly stick)?


title: Tenses and Verbs

text: What kind of verbs are -- is, are, were ? How do these words effect the tense of a sentence? What tense is the sentence " They are engaged in something...." ? 1) They engage in doing something. 2) They are engaged in doing something. With respect to above two sentences, \-- when is one used over the other. \-- what tense is sentence 1, what tense is sentence 2?


title: App or app? When I refer to it in a formal paper

text: In Android contexts, should the 'a' in 'app' be uppercase always or lowercase?


title: Difference between "would have" and "would" in the following

text: When we talk about past habitual or behavioral events, what is the difference between the following two sentences? > Every once in a while I would go to this friend's house and we would get > into a discussion. By the time I would realize, it would **have taken** 4 > hours. > > Every once in a while I would go to this friend's house and we would get > into a discussion. By the time I would realize, it **would take** 4 hours.


title: Trouble with second conditionals (with “could”)

text: > I would do B if you could do A. This is a statement which has been bothering me for quite a while. I come across such statements often and, to me, they make no sense. _Could_ is the subjunctive of can — it is often used to express possibility (or anything else along those lines). Sometimes, _could_ is also used as the "past form of can". Now, the second conditional is used to express unreal(istic) situations in the present, we construct it using the simple past form of the verb at hand and instigate a _would_ in the "response sentence". Now, does this _could_ then indeed relate to the capability and not to possibility of someone doing A? And, furthermore, isn't the condition fulfilled only by the fact there exists this capability (or possibility)? That's the part that makes no sense for me. You don't actually have to "do A", you just must have the possibility/capability to "do A", for the if clause to return true and make the speaker "do B". > I would do B if you did A. does the proper job of the original idea that the speaker intended. And since the second conditional indeed is used for unreal situations in the present, why do we so often use it to express conditions to other people? Wouldn't it be more prudent to actually state a requirement in the present, which deals with "real situations": > I will do B if you do A. What's the difference?


title: which Allowed to or which allowed doing?

text: I haven't found any threads on this topic so I decided to create a new one. Please have a look at the usage of the verb **allow** in this sentence: "This report was presented to the external stakeholders during an event, **which allowed to establish** important communication channels with specific segments of the community". Is "which allowed to + verb" correct? I have checked some forums but haven't yet come to a conclusion whether "which allowed + verb" or "+ gerund" (which sounded quite awkward to me) is the best option (IF there is one...) thanks!


title: "Allow to [infinitive]" vs. "allow [gerund]"

text: Which of the following is grammatical? If both are, which is preferred when and why? >   * Has developed a new label that allows to mark... >   * Has developed a new label that allows marking... >


title: What is the word for dating documents by the mistakes in them?

text: There is a technique for dating hand-copied documents, or placing them in the correct chronological order at any rate, by analysing the mistakes in them that are inevitably made when a new copy is made. Does anyone know what that is called? (Putting a search involving "dating" into Google generates a lot of hits but not much that is relevant.)


title: What's the difference between an "aphorism" and a "maxim"?

text: Quotes, sayings, aphorisms, maxims. What's the difference between all these, especially aphorism vs. maxim?


title: Is "is when" acceptable while linking two objects or ideas?

text: In a grammar class I'm enrolled in, one of the diagnostic tests contained the following question: > "Blocking" is when a television network schedules a less popular program > between two popular ones   > According to the test, a good revision would be: > "'Blocking' is a television network's practice of scheduling a less popular > program between two popular ones." Why is it grammatically incorrect to connect two subjects with "is when" or "is how", as in the above example? My teacher called it an 'illogical expression.' Are there any other "is ___ _" phrases that I should avoid?


title: Is there a word or phrase for ethical value based on economic value?

text: I'm not even certain that such an ethics system exists, but I can think of at least a few people who consider economic levity to be a sign of moral absolutism, and that those who are economically destitute are immoral individuals. Is there a word or phrase for this belief? The belief that one's economic standing indicates one's value on an ethical scale? In other words, an ethical system in which the good are rich (or rewarded by becoming rich) and the bad are poor (or punished by becoming poor) would be called...


title: How to say "I was among the top ten percent of students" in my résumé?

text: Could you please tell me how I should mention this in my résumé (my personal website indeed) that I have graduated from the university, _while I was ranked among the top ten percent of students_? For instance, is it OK to say: > I was graduated from this university while I was among the top ten percent > of the students"


title: Architectural term for inward-facing corners

text: A **T** has eight corners. Six of these point outwards and two (the armpit) corners face inwards. In reference to a building, what is the term to describe the inward corners? The closest I've come up with is the _Axilla corners_ or _Oxter corner_ but I can find no reference to those two terms ever being used outside of medicine.


title: Use of comparative degree when no comparison is being done

text: I have studied in my academics that we can use comparative degree when comparison is being done. But today I came across use of comparative degree without any comparison. Is it correct to use comparative degree when there is no comparison? Also, if possible can anyone give the instances where it can be used without comparison? The sentence I came across was > Its revolutionary features, futuristic design and host of exciting > applications will turn you everyday into a _smarter_ celebration. (Here it refers to any brand name.)


title: Idiom to describe something that has little to no effect?

text: I'm looking for an idiom to describe something that has a negligible effect. The only similar question I found here was: An idiom meaning someone's doing something useless and has no result at the end, but I'm looking for something else. I remember it being something to do with water or fire. Something along the lines of throwing a very small amount of water on a large fire? Does anyone know what I'm thinking of?


title: Humorous synonyms for "lie"

text: What are some funny synonyms for _to tell a lie_? E.g. _fib_ , _pull a Bill Clinton_ , etc.


title: Alternative to the incorrect "I'm doing great"?

text: Since 'great' is an adjective, "I'm doing great" seems to be incorrect. It should be: "I'm doing (adverb)." You could say "I'm doing well." Could you also say "I'm doing greatly."?


title: "Hot Diggity ..."

text: Ok, perhaps the last one was too easy :) Here's one that a friend of mine uses, and I'd love to know if it's something he coined, or is it a more common expression than I think: > Hot diggity-dag-dong-ding ... sh*t fire and save matches. Given the southern twang that he uses when he says it, I would imagine this is a southern U.S. saying. Any takers on this one?


title: Proper preposition for "absolve"

text: Are you absolved _from_ your sins or absolved _of_ your sins?


title: Why is money called "rhino"?

text: I was going to the hole-in-the-wall to get some _rhino_ the other day, when I started to wonder why cash is so-called. I hit the books. Farmer & Henley gives no etymology. Partridge says > Origin problematic; there is probably some allusion to the size of a > rhinoceros or the price which almost any part of its corpse will fetch as an > aphrodisiac. This is supported by the related terms _rhino-fat_ , _rhinoceral_ and _rhinocerical_ , all meaning 'rich'. Green thinks > ety. unk.; one suggestion, that it refers to the rhinoceros, then a fabulous > creature 'worth its weight in gold', implies a certain lexicographical > desperation I had no luck with online sources either (here). So, does anyone know why money is called _rhino_?


title: "Inputs are invalid" vs. "Inputs were invalid"

text: > Applications send a warning message if the received inputs from the user are > invalid. Is " _are invalid_ " correct or should it be " _were invalid_ "?


title: fused relatives versus interrogatives

text: > Would you differentiate which are relatives and which are interrogatives?   >  (And I want to know the sub-category (sub-name) of each below, if they > are.) > > (1) “You can keep it,” said Harry, laughing at **_how_** pleased Ron was.   >  (Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone) > > (2) Disgusted that the Slytherins had lost, he had tried to get everyone > laughing at **_how_** a wide-mouthed tree frog would be replacing Harry as > Seeker next.   >  (Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone) > > (3) His questions showed me **_how_** complex and mysterious were certain > institutions of the Church which I had always regarded as the simplest acts.   >  (James Joyce, Dubliners) > > (4) "I don't give a damn **_how_** you lost it as long as you keep it > hidden."   >  (Ralph Ellison, Invisible Man) > > (5) We revenged ourselves on Leo Dillon by saying what a funk he was and > guessing **_how_** many he would get at three o'clock from Mr. Ryan.   >  (James Joyce, Dubliners) > > (6) The duties of the priest towards the Eucharist and towards the secrecy > of the con-fessional seemed so grave to me that I wondered **_how_** anybody > had ever found in himself the courage to undertake them.   >  (James Joyce, Dubliners) > > (7) I noticed **_how_** clumsily her skirt was hooked at the back and (8) > **_how_** the heels of her cloth boots were trodden down all to one side.   >  (James Joyce, Dubliners) As Dr. McCawley says: It is often difficult to distinguish free relatives from interrogative complements, and indeed many examples are ambiguous between the two interpretations.   (James D. McCawley, 1988. p.431) It’s very difficult to distinguish which is relative and which is interrogative. A Korean blogger says, _how_ in “ ** _How_** I spend my free time is a private matter.” is a nominal relative [free relative or fused relative], but in “I want to say **_how_** pleased I am to receive this award.” it's an interrogative. This differentiation is somewhat easy: for the first how functions as CGEL says: “combines the function of head of the NP and precuclear element in a modifying relative clause.” And the latter how functions as not referring to something known, something concrete, which can be specified (source).


What is the shortened version of "Did you forget something ?" is it "Forget something ?" or "Forgot something ?"


title: Omitting the full stops after middle initials in BrE

text: In BrE style, can the full stops be omitted in: _C. J. Harris_ (Charles James Harris) Can it be written like this? _C J Harris_ And if we abbreviated just the middle initial, is the following acceptable? _Charles J Harris_


title: Word for a shop which sells materials used in making clothing

text: What generic word/phrase can I use for materials like zipper, buttons, threads and needles, etc which are used in making clothes? I want to use this word to describe a shop which sells these things.


title: The definite article 'The' is necessary for the following bold lines?

text: Maehara et al, 2011 conducted a research on isolated endophytic fungi/sp from **the quinine bark.** What is the specific reason if I have to omit 'the' in this context?


title: Rhymes like "feed the man meat" or "butter is better"?

text: Are "feed the man meat" and "butter is better" both assonance or both consonance, or are they different in this respect?


title: Can "since" and "wouldn't" be used in the same sentence?

text: For example: > Since it's raining, wouldn't it be a good idea to bring an umbrella? That sounds OK, but I'm not sure if it is. What about these alternatives? > Since it's raining, isn't it a good idea to bring an umbrella? I thought that this might be grammatically correct because "is" is on both sides of the sentence. It doesn't sound right though. Why? > Since it's raining, won't it be a good idea to bring an umbrella? For some reason this doesn't sound right either, but I don't know why. It sounds better than the second example, but not as good as the first example.


title: What's a word for someone who has completed an exercise?

text: I want to refer to people who have completed a short written exercise. "Graduate" would be one way, but that seems a little over the top. "Completer" would be another, but that's ambiguous as a completer could be something that helps you to complete. Any ideas?


title: Why does the *dirty* in *dirty mind* refer to sex instead of any type of immoral thought?

text: Why does the _dirty_ in _dirty mind_ refer to sexual-related thoughts instead of any type of immoral thought (including ill will or malice against another)?


title: Answering or calling in response to a job posting?

text: Which of this is correct when calling concerning a job opening: Hello Mrs Goodman. My name is ..... and I'm **answering** the advertisement for a ..... that was in ..... paper." Or Hello Mrs Goodman. My name is ..... and I'm **calling concerning** the advertisement for a ..... that was in ..... paper." I saw the first example (the one with answering) on a website but it didn't sound right to me so i decided to create this thread to get the opinion of other members on WR. I would really appreciate your response. Thanks


title: Apostrophe or not

text: We are finishing our mission statement and our staff is split on if we use an apostrophe or not. Wild Quail is committed to providing our members and their guests' (guests) with exceptional customer service. is it guests', guests or guest's


title: Opposite of benefit of the doubt?

text: "Benefit of the doubt" is a standard phrase in English and is a very useful one in formal discussions. Is there an equivalent expression to denote the opposite of it, formal or informal? For example: > Sara: What do you think of our new neighbour?   >  Sam: I do not know them, but I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. [they > must be good people] How about an opposite case (I will try to convey it below): > Sara: Will you marry me?   >  Sam: I do not know you, so I have to **__** (I wont risk it, you could be > terrible...) One thing I can think of is _possible risk_. Is that how the English speaking world go about this?


title: Can "in case" and "if" be used together?

text: Is this sentence grammatically correct? > **In case if** you see him, please tell him I am looking for him.


title: Why do we call our lovers "baby"?

text: It is common in American English and culture to refer to one's lover or significant other as "baby" or "babe", for example: > Come on baby, light my fire! 1 or > I got you, I won't let go. I got you to love me so. I got you babe! 2 Where does this usage come from? What's the history behind referring to one's significant other as "babe" or "baby"? * * * 1 Credit to The Doors 2 Credit to Sonny & Cher


title: Word for a person who knows two or three languages

text: A _polyglot_ is a person who is fluent in many languages, but what do we call a person who is fluent in only two or three languages? Is _bi-glot_ a proper term for this? I don't think the words _bilingual_ / _trilingual_ fit the bill, because I am looking for a _-glot_ word.


title: I went vs I had gone

text: > I went home on the twenty seventh of last month or > I had gone home on the twenty seventh of last month? the time of uttering the sentence is two weeks after the action was completed.


title: What is the etymology and literal meaning of 'Cock a snoot/snook'?

text: I've been using this expression all my adult life but have no idea what it means or where it originates. Google searches lead me to the description of it being to do with putting your thumb on nose and wiggling four fingers. This is not an entirely satisfying conclusion to my quest. Can anyone elaborate?


title: Metonym Confusion Redux

text: It seems that I am once again confused about the finer points of metonyms. The example I give my students is the phrase _Today, Ottawa announced..._ , where _Ottawa_ is a metonym for _the Canadian government_ (because the two are closely-associated concepts). But what about _They went to the bedroom and had a good time_? Is _to have a good time_ a metonym for _to have sex_ (aside from also being a euphemism)? Speaking of which—are euphemisms metonymic by definition (or at least a subset of metonymy)? Also, I bought some sort of medicinal drink at Safeway yesterday and it's called "Hot Lemon Relief"—can _relief_ be a metonym for _(medicinal) drink_?


Which is correct? He takes lessons "on Thursdays" or "at Thursdays".


title: "More drunk" or "drunker"?

text: I am at a party. I drink wine till I'm drunk. Then I drink some more. So am I more drunk now, or drunker?


title: What in the world is "neckbeard vomit"?

text: A user of U&L posted the following comment in response to somebody's answer: > That's some neckbeard vomit right there. Nice. I investigated and discovered that _neckbeard_ , unsurprisingly, means > Facial hair that does not exist on the face, but instead on the neck. Almost > never well groomed. OK, but what is neckbeard _vomit_? Google only returns four hits for the phrase and one of them is the comment in question. To make matters worse, the poster of the comment seems to consider it a compliment, while to me it seems very much the opposite. So, what is _neckbeard vomit_? Is this a geek slang term I have not come across or was it coined by the comment's author?


title: Is "spaghetti salad" a phrase?

text: I am (almost) certain that "spaghetti salad" is a phrase. But, I cannot find _any_ references to this phrase in the oracle of Google. Can someone please confirm that they have at least heard this phrase?   And, please state the meaning and etymology?   If someone can find this via Google, please show me the regular expression to use. **my understanding**   def = "a collection of data that has no organization"   ety = "statistics. As datapoint (one strand of spaghetti) moves across the x-axis, it bounces randomly up/down on the y-axis. A "salad" would be a collection of such randomly moving strands of spaghetti." Am I am losing my mind? Google is AWOL on this, right? They can't index everything.


title: Interpretation, which is desired to open two story lines

text: Is there a word, which describes a point in a story, that opens two different story lines, which are both conclusive and intended. If there isn't any word, how would you write this issue?


title: Active vs passive voice with inanimate object as the subject

text: I have asked the same question in ELL Stackexchange forum. There all the answers and comments I received was really helpful, but still I was looking for something more. So I have decided to ask this same question here also. I have seen some sentences like this - >   1. The film was announced to be released on this coming Friday. >   2. The film was announced to release on this coming Friday. > Both the sentences are used, and I know they are interchangeable and does bear the same meaning. But I have some doubt about the second sentence - why is it "to release", when the film cant release itself. Some other sentences of similar structure that arises my confusion - >   1. The product sells well. >   2. The book reads well. >   3. The glass broke. > The sentences are understandable, but in each of the sentences the subjects can't perform any job, as they all are inanimate object. The verbs are active, but they acts like they are used as passive. Now my question is how to decide which verb to use this way and which not?


title: Is "a disclaiming" a gerund?

text: **EDIT** see end of question for updates: * * * The question came up if this is proper English: > Sorry, I felt the need for a disclaiming for some reason. And I think it is but some others say it isn't. I gave a further example to back up my case that that is acceptable with: > "A disclaiming was made by the mayor" And thus was born the question that you see here. I'm not saying it should be used _all_ the time, but as an occasional usage, is this proper? Yes yes, the appropriate word to use there would've been "disclaimer" not "disclaiming" but disregarding that? * * * My proof that this is acceptable is the countless number of books I've read where I've forgotten more than I remember that I've read, but I'm certain I've seen a literary device such as this used before and not heard a great deal of complaining on it. * * * So since I posted it was pointed out to me that this is most likely a gerund. If it is _indeed_ a gerund, then is this a proper use of _this particular gerund_ in this instance?


title: "It is having time to think that makes me depressed" — grammatical function of "that"?

text: > It is having time to think that makes me depressed. In this sentence, what is the grammatical function of the word _that?_


title: Should valedictions be capitalized?

text: Recently I was proof reading an email that a coworker was going to send to a superior and I pointed out that the valediction wasn't capitalized. He said it didn't need to be because it was the start of a phrase or clause and not a sentence, and that people only do it because other people do it. But in the back recesses of my mind I'm thinking that there is a rule that says that it should be capitalized. Is my coworker right and capitalization is unnecessary in this case? If I'm correct, what rule or guide can I point to, to prove my stance? (T/t)hanks, Jeremy


title: How can I say in one word "number written in words"?

text: If there should be numbers written in words, like "one hundred and ten" instead of "110", how can I say it in one word?


title: Content Performance

text: What is a right word to describe **Content/Performance**? It is about best and effective content that form a complete artefact. The example text as below: > **5.4.1 Content/Performance** This is about a better user experience, the > effectiveness of the artefact and the context of the contents. It is part of > the critical component for target users to experience, and the aesthetic is > explained in the post-question survey.


title: What are some phrases used to notify the speaker that you're still listening?

text: My employer often contacts me on chat and explains me what the next project is about. He does most of the talking, I just sometimes ask questions and throw in the occasional "okay" and "sure". These words get awkwardly repetitive in longer conversations and I'm looking for some other terms of acknowledgement.


title: "error" or "wrong"?

text: For example: >   * What's error in this sentence? >   * What's wrong in this sentence? >


title: Is it wrong to say "The sun's rays are primarily responsible for skin damage."

text: > The sun's rays are primarily responsible for skin damage. To me this sounds like it means that the primary activity of the sun's rays is damaging skin. However the intention is obviously that the primary cause of skin damage is the sun's rays. Is this sentence actually wrong, or just ambiguous?


title: Usage of "When doing something"

text: How to understand the usage of "when/while doing something" in grammar? For example, > I am watching TV, when sitting in my sofa. I think "when" and "while" can never be used as prep.. They are conj. instead. I remember seeing some explanation from a English grammar book, written for people speaking another language, which basicaly said "when/while doing something" is just a shorthand of "when/while somebody is doing something", where "somebody is" must appear in the main clause, otherwise this shorthand usage is not valid. For example, it is wrong to say > I watch TV, when sitting in my sofa. because in the main clause there is no "be". I would like to see if someone can concur or refute this explanation from rigorous English grammar point of view.


title: Is it possible to use the verb "torture" in a figurative sense?

text: Is it possible to use the verb "torture" in a tropical sense? I mean not in a physical sense. For example: > Linda: "So what? Did you see Jack?" > > Tom: "Yes" > > Linda: "So did you talk to him about Betty?" > > Tom: "Well, he even met with Betty tonight himself" > > Linda: "He saw Betty tonight! So, did they arrive at any conclusion?" > > Tom: "Well, yes. They even called the office and received some additional > information" > > Linda: "What kind of additional information?" > > Tom: "Well, I would say super important information. Not only so, but I > myself on my way here found out something even more important" > > Linda: "Tell me everything" > > Tom: " Well, can I have a cup of tea first?" > > Linda: "Oh Tom, don't **torture** me like this" Addition: I used the word "tropical" here because the other day I was reading a book written by one Christian expositor (he died only in 1957) who was interpreting some versus from the New Testament in that book. He said there that some words in the scripture must be taken in their literal meaning, and some - only in their tropical meaning. Since he died only in 1957, I thought that using the word "tropical" in this way would still be okay in the modern English. Also, while I was asking this question I had no idea that "torture" could imply only psychological sufferings. I thought it referred only to physical pain inflicted on someone by someone else in order to get some desired results (like getting some information from the one who is being tortured, some confession, etc.)


title: Ways to say methods of doing things

text: I saw a lot of usage of machinery, mechanism, to be used with similar meaning as techniques, ways, methods,.... For example, my math teacher said the machinery in the proof of some theorem is not heavy. Mechanism is also used to describe how something works. I have actually been confused if they can mostly be exchangeable. Also are there similar terms that can be used in this kind of scenario? PS: I have asked similar questions before here, but the post got closed. cerberus encouraged me to ask again.


title: Can someone please explain this pun?

text: There's a sentence that I keep reading over and over, and I can't quite grasp what's so funny about it. Perhaps, it isn't funny. Or perhaps, there's a meaning of a word in the sentence that I don't understand. The pun is: > She’s afraid that if she leaves, she’ll become the _life_ of the party.   >  ~Groucho Marx I'm not quite sure what the punchline is here. Perhaps it's a concept I don't get or don't know. Can someone please enlighten me?


title: "Treatment" vs. "therapy"

text: We are going to establish a company in order to commercialize a stuttering treatment/therapy program. The treatment/therapy is really effective and backed by a lot of scientific research. In our recent discussions, some disagreement has come up whether to market it as the "XYZ stuttering treatment" or the "XYZ stuttering therapy". On one hand, calling our product the "XYZ stuttering treatment" might be advantageous, because in all the research literature it is referred to as such. On the other hand, calling it the "XYZ stuttering therapy" could be better, because all the competition markets/offers their programs as "therapies", and having the term "therapy" appears to be more serious and seems to imply effectiveness. Also, the word "therapy" appears to be more international, which could help if we offer the program abroad. I'm not a native speaker though, so I wanted to hear your opinion and feedback. What's really the difference between "treatment" and "therapy"? Would you rather recommend calling it the "XYZ stuttering treatment" or the "XYZ stuttering therapy"? Why?


title: "Didn't want to do X until Y happened" vs. "hadn't wanted to do X until Y happened"

text: Which answer is correct? > Tony _______to have children until his little daughter was born. After she > won his heart, he decided he wanted a big family. > > A. didn't want.   >  B. hadn't wanted. This is a multiple choice question from the Understanding and Using English Grammar Workbook 3rd edition by Betty Azar. To me, both answers are correct as I cannot see the diffrence. Please show me the wrong option to delete.


title: Usage of colon in English writing

text: It seems colons are used more restrictively in English than in my native language (German), so I'm having a bit of trouble with it. Do you think the use of the colon in the following sentences is good style in English, or should I better replace the colons (by semicolons)?   * This leads us to the main goal of this work: to define a statistical model for object recognition.   * I am following my father's advice: first I look left, then right, then I cross the street. I'm really using the colon here for ", which is": "This leads us to the main goal of this work, which is to define a statistical model for object recognition" to make it more concise. Is that wrong? Are there any other good ways to make it as concise as possible and get rid of superfluous words like "which is?"


title: "zh" vs. "j". Are these pronounced in the same way?

text: I've seen some Chinese words like "YUEZHONG". Also in some other languages like Persian and Arabic I've seen words written with "zh". Are these two sounds pronounced in the same way? Is there any word in English using the same combination of letters? Is it right to use "zh" to imply the letter "j"?


title: What does 'culture' mean in this sentence?

text: > ...which is often used when the physician does not (or cannot) perform a > **culture** to determine the actual bacterium.


What is the difference between "synergistic" and "synergetic"? I believe they both speak of the cooperation of multiple things to produce an output, but how do they differ?


title: What does "putting someone on" mean?

text: Like in this example: > He was worried that X was **putting him on**.


title: Is "how to do it" grammatically correct?

text: If it is, then what is the verb?


title: What does ‘Need a turn on the butcher’s block’ mean in cutting down the U.S. Government spending?

text: I came across a phrase _a turn on the butcher’s block_ in the following sentence appearing in an article of Time Magazine (Dec. 19, 2010 issue) titled _Can Washington Tackle Its Deficit Cows_.   I know how butcher’s block looks like with pictures, and I understand Washington must touch on big chunk of deficit sources. But what does this figurative expression _need a turn on the butcher’s block_ really mean?   Can somebody teach me? > The list of reasons for our looming economic disaster is long: a tax-cutting > and spending spree when economic times were good; the financial crisis, with > its blow to tax revenues and massive spending in response; two long wars in > Iraq and Afghanistan. There are also plenty of ways we can get out of hock. > The Bowles-Simpson plan has spotlighted some of our government's long- > standing sacred cows — ones that may finally need a turn on the butcher's > block. Here are three of the most expensive ...   >  — _Spending on Military Machine, Social Security, and The American Dream > Subsidy_


title: "defined by" or "defined as"?

text: MY main interest is in the mathematical context, where one defines objects by a formula. I can imagine 2 cases :   1. Direct case, "direct definition": _The function f is defined by/as f=a+b+c_   2. Implicit definition: _The number x is defined by/as a = g(x)_ I would tend to use as for the case 1 and by for the second one.


title: Gay (homosexual) and gay (happy)

text: When did the main meaning of the word 'gay' shift from happy to homosexual? How did the meaning evolve, if there is a relation between the two?


title: Why "Speak of the devil"?

text: Why is the expression " _Speak of the devil_ " and not " _Speaking of the devil_ "? For me, the -ing would make more sense because you're currently talking about someone, when he/she appears. For example, if you're talking about something, and that subject made you remember something else, you would say something like: > **Speaking** of groceries, I have to go to the supermarket in an hour. but you wouldn't say: > **Speak** of groceries, I have to go to the supermarket in an hour.


title: Terminology for the sub-structures of laws & legislations

text: I am working on a paper for Russian history class that deals with emancipation reform of 1861. Basically reform was accomplished through legislature, made of 17 acts, and each act was made of multiple "laws". What would be the correct term for "laws"?


title: South Park grammar perplexity 2

text: This is another strange example from South Park I am posting : "How about you come up with the reason why we don’t break your arms?". Why is the present used in the second part of the sentence? How is it called in grammar? Shouldn't it be "we shouldn’t/wouldn't break your arms". Thank you


title: How different is “Nothingness” from “Nothing,” “Emptiness,” “Void,” “Vanity,” "Vacuum," and “Zero”?”

text: Pursuant to my previous question on “Fear Factors” in the article of Financial Times (November 23, 2007) -“The ten things everyone should know about science,” there was the following sentence: > “And what does the future (of the universe) hold? One possibility is that > everything will come together again in a Big Crunch, after countless billion > of years. But at the moment cosmologist believe it more likely that our > universe will expand for ever into a cold, desolate _nothingness_.” I was interested in the word, “nothingness” as I don’t think I’ve heard it very often. Is “nothingness” a day-to-day use English word or an academic or technical word to describe such things as an effect of the Big Crunch as being used here? Or can I use it for everything that doesn’t exist? How does it differ from other words implying the state of nothing exists, for instances, “Emptiness,” “Void,” “Vanity,” "vacuum,"and “Zero”?


title: Using "that" to describe everything.. Is this incorrect, or poor grammar?

text: I'm not very English literate, but I am annoyed by the use of "that" during the CrossFit games. Announcers, coaches, and athletes all said "that" more times than I can count.   * Move _that_ bar.    * Use _that_ hip.    * Pick up _that_ weight.    * Tell me about _that_ workout...  "That" is consistently used in place of what I feel should be "the". I do not think I know enough to even ask a good question here... What role does "that" play when describing an object?


title: Complex sentence whose subject is a clause

text: In Thomas Harvey's _Elementary Grammar and Compsition_ he says: > A complex sentence whose subject or predicate only is a clause, need not be > separated into principal and subordinate clauses in analysis. Later in the section he gives the example, "That he is very sick, is evident," parses the sentence, then gives a sentence diagram. ![sentence](http://i.imgur.com/dgLQJDU.png?1) I'm curious how one _would_ break this sentence into its principal and subordinate clause.


title: Diplomatic Status of a territory?

text: What would you call the status of a territory? The territory can be a country, a region, a state, what is the expression that qualifies its status, is it a `diplomatic status` ?


title: Word similar to "indecisive" but more conflicted

text: I was trying to describe the facial expression in this GIF and couldn't come up with a single word. ![The GIF in question](http://i.stack.imgur.com/duDRT.gif) On the surface, it looks like the feeling expressed by this character is indecisiveness, but it seems more conflicted. I actually found this GIF when it was a top response on a question on Reddit that was something like "How would you feel if the Westboro Baptist Church was attacked by terrorists?" It summed up the feeling of the entire thread perfectly (e.g. any sort of violence and terrorism is inexcuseable, but... it's one extreme group hit by another). Is there a single word for this specific feeling?


title: The meaning of the word assumed

text: What does 'assumed' mean in this sentence? > Practitioners may perceive constraints and challenges to providing high > levels of confidentiality to young people, in the form of _assumed duties_ > to report child abuse, under-age sexual activity, and the need to obtain > prior parental consent for counselling. Is it the verb assume where it means to 'take on a duty' or does it mean 'false, pretended and accepted as true without proof'? Thank you.


title: How to use "theme"?

text: When you want to ask for the theme to someone who is dressing up as something, which is the correct English? "what's the theme?","what's the theme of?" or anything else more natural expressions??


title: What's the meaning of "unplugged"?

text: English is my second language and I'm wondering what's the exactly meaning of "somebody unplugged"? Such as "Joe Biden unplugged"?


title: Using source as a verb to mean "to provide a citation"

text: Recently on the meta for English.se, I used the following sentence: > Personally, I think we should **source** answers if possible, but this is > also sensitive to the level of the asker. My question relates to whether this usage of **source** as a verb is as one person responded "a rather lazy and hence unclear phrase?" The other person suggested that it could admit two interpretations: > we should provide sources in answers OR > we should seek answers * * * google defines source as a verb as follows: > obtain from a particular source. I learned to use source in the way I describe in the midst of university teaching. Specifically, we often say regarding claims that are not original to a student or that state data without a citation -- "you need to source this." Is something in my usage odd, incorrect, or lazy?


title: 'Throne' for a Lavatory

text: I have come across the usage of 'throne' for a lavatory. Is there any special etymology to this? Is it simply because a throne is a seat? Or does the equivalence have any royal * _under_ *pinnings to it? ;)


title: Is it correct to use 'Forgot password' or 'Forgotten password'

text: Many websites use the phrase 'Forgot password?' when prompting users to renew their login passwords. Is this correct usage or should it be 'Forgotten password?'.


title: "Kebabs, fruit machines, and brasses" -- what do these slang words mean?

text: More from the British movie _The Football Factory_. In the following dialogue, the main character, a Cockney English speaker played by actor Danny Dyer, waxes philosophical about why he enjoys being a football hooligan and would rather do nothing else on a weekend: > What else are you gonna do on a Saturday? Sit in your fuckin' armchair > wankin' off to Pop Idols? Then try and avoid your wife's gaze as you > struggle to come to terms with your sexless marriage? Then go and **spunk > your wages on kebabs, fruit machines and brasses**? Fuck that for a laugh! I > know what I'd rather do. Tottenham away -- love it! I'm guessing this is slang of some sort, and I'd love to understand what he means by each word.


title: Intimate and Intimate

text: I was thinking about the "intimate" word used here: > How can I intimate this to my most intimate friend? How can I differentiate both words? **Edit:** in response to comments, I don't quite understand the meaning of the sentence. What is the difference between the first "intimate" and the second?


title: What are "a" and "certain" adding in meaning to the phrase "a certain Mr. Ripley"?

text: Consider the following sentences: > I had my identity stolen by Mr. Ripley. and > I had my identity stolen by a Mr. Ripley. and > I had my identity stolen by a certain Mr. Ripley. In what sense do these 3 sentences differ from one another? How do _a_ and _certain_ modify the middle and last sentences?


title: Newton Law vs Newton’s Law

text: Do I need an apostrophe- _s_ in reference to major concepts? For example, I see both versions as in:   * _Planck **’s** constant_   * _Planck constant_ Are both forms considered correct?


title: Syntax analysis of the sentence

text: I'm trying to analyse the following sentence. > To understand the importance of this event you should know all the facts. It seems to me that this sentence is complex, and «To understand importance of this event» is dependent adverbial clause. But then, as my grammar book says, it would require a comma before «you», since the dependent adverbial clause comes before the independent clause. So, please help to do the syntax analysis of this sentence and to understand whether the comma is needed.


title: What's up with the hyphen in "orang-utan"?

text: For most of my life 'till about a couple of years ago, I had only seen the spelling _orangutan_ written to describe those delightful red-headed apes from the tropical forests of Borneo. Lately, though, I've increasingly been seeing a strange spelling in certain scientific publications I read: _orang-utan_ , with a hyphen. Is there a particular reason why this hyphen was added? It's strange, because usually in English, words evolve to have their hyphens and diacriticals omitted, not added.


title: What does 'In and out of time' mean?

text: I've encountered the phrase `I can feel your heart beat in and out of time` in the song `Call To Arms, Angels And Airwaves` and can't figure out what it means. Does it mean that the heart beat is timeless? Or that it is constant (throughout eternity)?


title: When and why did the em-dash and the hyphen supplant the semicolon?

text: It seems to me that semicolons are rarely used today in ordinary English writing - even in newspapers and books. They appear to have been replaced, in many cases, by em-dashes and hyphens (the hyphen being used on the Internet and/or in informal communications). In some cases, semicolons have been replaced by periods (i.e. something which might have previously been one sentence would now be written as more than one sentence). Over what period of time did this change take place, and why?


title: "Menu of services include" or "...includes"?

text: I'm not sure about the pluralization here: > menu of services includes or > menu of services include Which is correct?


I am currently in the process of collaboratively editing a research paper, and participated in a meeting about it today. During the discussion, the head of the group made a blanket statement about commas, to the effect that it is not fashionable to use too many commas anymore, and that the goal should be to eliminate as many of them as possible. Is this a valid argument? I thought that the rules for using commas were relatively clear and unambiguous. Is the phrase, "Use commas sparingly" a valid piece of advice? Do I need to quote the "Little Brown" handbook every time I insert a comma into this document? Or has the use of commas become more an issue of "common practice" than one of rigid rules? Here is an ambiguous sample from the paper, to which I have added a comma for clarity: > This process makes use of commercially available software to read the data > files, and custom software to convert the files to a different data format. ...and here is a sample that I consider unambiguous (the comma is required to separate two independent clauses): > The organization does not regulate the data products it receives, and the > software application cannot always read the data due to errors resulting > from different vendor implementations.


title: Term for bowling alley machines that fix pins

text: What do we call the bowling alley machines that fix the pins after the ball rolls and hopefully strikes them out?