title: What is the suitable preposition which come after the verb "hassle"?

text: Should we say, A hassles with B or A hassles to B? What is the right expression?


title: Non-preemptive? Non-pre-emptive? Emptive?

text: We can describe something as pre-emptive, no issue there. If something isn't such, how can we write that? Word gives me red squiggles on 'Non-preemptive', but this looks silly with a double hyphenation. Which leads me to wonder why 'pre-emptive' is hyphenated anyway? 'Emptive' isn't a word, and other 'pre' prefixes aren't hyphenated (e.g. prefix, predecessor).


title: "The me of the past"

text: When talking about one's self in the past, is "the me of the past" grammatically correct? I'm trying to make a sentence like this: > The me of the past who was popular with girls, I'm jealous of him. Is there anything wrong with this sentence? Are there better ways to say this?


title: Logical meaning of the word "understand"

text: To understand something means to be aquainted with it, to know it very well, know how it "ticks". This is one of the basic words that has a direct "meaning" in mind. However, if we "dissect" it, is seems like it means to _stand under_ something. Isn't knowing something would logically be called _abovestand_ and not _understand_ , since when you are under something, you are less informed about it then when you are above it. This may seem senseless to you, but I am sure a native English speaker will get the idea of what I am trying to say. Why _under_ , not _above_?


title: What is the origin of the phrase "when life gives you lemons, make lemonade"?

text: I thought it'd be frightfully easy to find the etymology of this cliche on the Internet, but so far I haven't had any luck! It wont even tell me if its a maxim or not!


title: "Admix" vs. "shuffle"

text: What is the difference between the verbs _admix_ and _shuffle_? I'm not a native speaker, and in the case shown in the image below, I'd rather use _shuffle_. ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/khxIE.png)


title: Connotations of "quixotic"

text: Would you say _quixotic_ has more of a positive connotation or more of a negative connotation? The definition for _quixotic_ given by Merriam-Webster is: > hopeful or romantic in a way that is not practical > >   1. foolishly impractical especially in the pursuit of ideals; especially : > marked by rash lofty romantic ideas or extravagantly chivalrous action >   2. capricious, unpredictable > > > [. . .] > >   * **Synonyms** : _idealist, idealistic, quixotical, romantic, starry, > starry-eyed, utopian, visionary_ > >   * **Antonyms** : _clear-eyed, clear-sighted_ > > Given that dictionary entry, it seems like _quixotic_ can be interpreted in either of two ways:   * positively (ambitiously idealistic)    * negatively (unrealistic and not grounded in reality). Which of those two possible connotations of _quixotic_ is considered the more correct one for this word? In other words, if someone were described as quixotic, would that be considered a good thing or a bad thing?


Are there differences in the accent of NY and California English?


title: The difference between "anyway" and "any way"

text: When to use _anyway_ and when to use _any way_? >   * Anyway I can do it. >   * Any way I can do it. > Are these the same?


title: What is the second "to" in "to take this opportunity to foreground poetry"?

text: > That’s why it’s particularly appropriate for us to take this opportunity > **to** foreground poetry as an aural experience.   >  -- Source Is this "to" the same as "something to say?" P.S.: Isn't this presumptuous? It's like we have the right and legitimacy to do this!


title: What's the word for something that's too direct and plain rather than poetic?

text: When someone writes poetry that's almost like plain English sentences, what may we call that? Consider this, for example. This is an example of that plain, stated as it is, poetry (completely made up): > I did this.   >  Then I did that   >  Life is great   >  Then I wore my pants   >  But life is also a struggle and so on... It gets tiresome after a while. As against that, consider the more romantic prose. This is, as it should be, poetic. > If hopes were dupes, fears may be liars;   >  It may be, in yon smoke conceal'd,   >  Your comrades chase e'en now the fliers,   >  And, but for you, possess the field. > > For while the tired waves, vainly breaking,   >  Seem here no painful inch to gain,   >  Far back, through creeks and inlets making,   >  Comes silent, flooding in, the main. From: http://sathyaish.net/poetry/SayNotTheStruggleNaughtAvaileth.aspx


title: A song by Dr. Dre

text: Consider the following text: Bitches ain't shit but hoes and tricks. Lick on these nuts and suck the dick. Get the fuck out after you're done. _And I hope in my ride to make a quick run._ I am wondering about the meaning of the very last sentence, could somebody clarify what is meant by this?


title: How does "pussy" come to mean "coward"?

text: The word _pussy_ is often used to mean "coward". > This guy is a _pussy_. and I am wondering why. How are woman's genitals related to being a "coward"?


title: Greetings when replying to the other party's response

text: Writing formal emails, When I reply to the other party's email, how should I start my e-mail? Starting the email for the first time, I'd say _Dear XXX_. But should I say it again when I write to them for the second time in reply to what they've said or no greetings is needed in that case? Should I simply just say _hello again_ or something like that?


title: Are you "Dinky Die"? And what does Dinky Die mean?

text: Australia day is nearly upon us! And that means it's time to throw another chop on the barbie and say _real_ Aussie things like "dinky die". Stone the crows, what's that even mean, "dinky die"? I've been saying it for years in sentences like > I'm true blue, fair dinkum, ridgy didge, _dinky die_ Aussie. Does anyone know where "dinky die" came from and the correct usage?


title: "When I'm sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead"

text: In "How I met your mother" TV series, there is a character Barney Stinson, who is the author of this semi-popular quote: > When I'm sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. [sic!] Obviously, this is grammatically incorrect, because infinite form of the verb can't be used this way. However, I would like to understand why is it phrased this way. After googling a little, I found a few places where people were saying that it is slang. One of the best (in my opinion) comments also mentioned that > What he meant here was "I stop being sad and _choose to_ be awesome > instead." If he said "I become awesome" it would change the meaning. He does > not mean that he stops being sad and begins to work on growing more awesome, > but that he **is** awesome. which, based on the character, seems very plausible. Now, what I really want to know is:   * is this really some kind of slang, or is it just something the scriptwriters invented?   * how would a native speaker understand the meaning of the phrase _without_ any context?


title: When two open-front vowels meet, does one become, typically, weaker?

text: . . . at last [ət-lӕst] . . [audio source] I guess, from the two lots’ pronunciations, that when [ӕ] is accompanied by [ӕ], one which is lesser important in meaning becomes weaker and change into a schwa sound. Is this a typical pattern?


title: When a consonant and a vowel meet together, from where the sound start?

text: By IPA chart in Wikipedia,   [m] is made, up in front of the mouth, and [ɑ] down at the back. In this case, where do you say [ma] is made? I mean, is [ma] made in the middle of the both positions of [m] and [ɑ]? If yes, I wonder [ɑ] could be changed into variety of sounds dependent upon with what it combines: [m] or [l] or [h] or etc. Because it needs to be started at various places.


title: "While" followed by simple past/past continuous

text: I'm currently reading "Molly Fyde and the Parsona Rescue" by Hugh Howey. Here's a short passage with my problem zone and the subsequent question: > ...Well, I'm going to go do more Officser sstuff," Walter said haughtily. > "The sstorage lockerss in the bilge are almosst done," he added with pride. > **While she waited** for Walter to pad away, **Molly noticed** how close her > face was to Cole's. The nav screens were hard to see clearly from an angle. > ...   1. Why is the simple past used and not the past continuous as in  > **While she was waiting** for Walter to pad away, **Molly noticed** how > close...   1. I thought "while" contains the element of duration and hence requires a progressive form?  2.1 BTW, is the above question even grammatically correct? Or should it have been   * "I thought _while_ contained the element of duration and hence required a progressive form?"  I read something about verb tense consistency within a sentence and to not switch from one tense to another unless the timing of an action demanded that you did. Is this the case here?


title: "Some things will be known, but others will not", or "... will not be"?

text: Which is the correct sentence? >   * Some things will be known, but others will not. >   * Some things will be known, but others will not be. >


title: Do "soon" and "recently" have antonyms?

text: Are "a long way in the future" and "long ago" the best phrases or are there single words to describe these very common concepts? I am probably missing something obvious.


title: Word that means "Simultaneously relaxed and focused"?

text: I saw George Will on TV and he used a word (and immediately defined it) but all I was heard was the definition, not the actual word. "Emmetropic" is the closest I can come to finding a word that meets the definition "simultaneously relaxed and focused" but it seems to have such a specific, physical, meaning and the context seemed to me to indicate a mental state rather than a physical one.


title: Kafka’s Rhetoric

text: Would you please help me with the meaning of this sentence? > Kafka’s rhetoric serves not only nor chiefly to complicate descriptions of > character and event to the point that fixity vanishes. Am I right to understand it this way? > Kafka didn’t need to use too much complicated description of character and > event to achieve a strong poetic effect (fixity = coherence of the text). What exactly does the phrase “not only nor” mean?


title: Is this a signature or a sentence that requires punctuation?

text: Is a period needed at the closing of a greeting card that reads: "Happy holidays from John Smith and the Smith Realty family"?


title: Correct? "I have three new books, two bought from Amazon, and another one given by my sister"

text: "I have three new books, two bought from Amazon, and another one given by my sister". I was writing this sentence, but is not sure if it is correct grammarly. Is there a better way to say it? Thank you very much!!


title: looking for appositive that-which phrases

text: I asked sentences having an appositive that-which phrase like the following sentence in English Language Learners. > The insect propagates best near "disturbed land," that which is being > cultivated by humans. http://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/24771/do-you-use-the-phrase-that-which- for-the-apposition But, I wonder how often this syntax is used and would like to see more sentences in which the appositive that-which syntax is used. If anyone saw such sentences, would you tell the sentences?


title: Housekeeping App — does it make sense?

text: We are providing an app which manages your finances — like a housekeeping book. Our space is limited; therefore, we want to use the slogan "Housekeeping App". Would an English speaker know what is meant by that?


title: Wishing someone that something goes easily for them

text: I'm trying to phrase a sentence in which I'm wishing that something goes easily for someone, but can't get the wording to sound right, and not awkward. For example, someone may be studying for a test and I wish that their studying goes easy. These are the phrases I could come up with.   * I hope it goes easy for you.   * I hope the studying goes easy for you.   * I wish you the best in studying.   * I'm hoping the studying goes easily for you.   * Good luck studying. (I don't really like this one since it's a bit vague) Any other suggestions?


title: Using "I had rather" instead of "I would rather"

text: While commuting to work, I encountered a bumper sticker that said > "I had rather be on/Cape Point Fishing". I found this curious, since I always thought that the correct expression would be "I would rather be...", instead of "I had rather be". Is there a joke I'm not getting, or was this bumper sticker just incorrect?


title: Etymology of "nick" in, in the nick of time?

text: We have **_the nick_** meaning prison, as in "he served time in the nick", then we have the verb **_to nick_** , meaning to steal; but if the police catch you red-handed, then "you've been nicked". And if you led a very bad life you could end up meeting with **Old Nick** , which as we all know is the Devil's nickname or _nick_ 1 . And before I forget, Nick is also short for Nicholas. If, however, something is **_in good nick_** 2 it's usually in admirable condition, but if we spot a few **_nicks_** on a porcelain ornament we consider it damaged and we might choose not to buy it. Be careful handling it though, the edges might be sharp and **_nick_** your skin. I can see how the different meanings of _nick_ 3 are related to one another in the examples above, but what escapes me is how did _nick_ come to mean the last critical moment of time. > She was saved in the nick of time Was her death _stolen_ away? Does _the nick_ here mean a small chip, a notch or a very small but significantly sharp edge of time that allowed her to be rescued? Or maybe, historically speaking, nick was a measure of time? Is the idiomatic expression, I wonder, " _to be in time_ " related? Can anyone shed any light? Thank you.


title: Single word to describe someone who is overly sensitive

text: I'm looking for a word to describe someone who is sensitive to the point that other have to tiptoe around her. In other words, someone who can't handle routine jokes, normal criticism, or a comment that can possibly be interpreted in a negative way, even when it wasn't meant like that.


title: How to say "Castile"

text: I am from Castile, NY. As far as I can tell it is the only town in the USA with that name. We say the name like /kae-STAI-ol/, but I am aware that many people pronounce it like /kae-STEEL/. The name of the town comes from the first settlers. The wife loved Spain so they took an Anglicized Castilla for a name. I am curious to hear what you all think about how to say this name. Who out there reads this and says it like me? What is your reason for doing so? For those who say it the other way, what is your reason?


title: "Pouring from the window" vs "pouring in from the window"

text: > Mary woke to the soft light pouring from the window. > > Mary woke to the soft light pouring in from the window. What's the difference? Do they mean exactly the same?


title: What do you call devices which passed the test successfully?

text: Say we have two lists (or two buckets. whatever is easier for you to imagine)   1. List of the devices under testing.   2. List of the ones which **_passed the test successfully_** and moved from list (1) to list (2). What do you call any of these lists. Specially the second one? e.g. for the 2nd list:   * Passed Devices (but it's ambiguous what they passed).   * Devices which passed the test! (two descriptive for a title of a list)   * Passed Test Devices! (Sound wrong)...


title: Shoot and intentionally miss

text: Suppose you are a guard at a prison, watching the surrounding scene from your observation tower. You have a gun and you are instructed to shoot any escapee you witness. One day, you indeed witness a prisoner trying to escape from the prison. Though you will be punished if you do not act as instructed, you decide not to kill the prisoner. So you shoot but intentionally miss. Is there a word for intentionally missing with a gun?


title: Where can I find a list of ways to get rid of the preposition "of"?

text: I'm learning English. Unfortunately I have some obstacles in writing and speaking. In particular I often note that there are too many "of"-s in my sentences. For instance I want to get rid of them in the phrase "quality of this approach to the conundrum of enhancing my vocabulary" and I don't know if I can write "word memorization" instead of "memorization of the words". However "of" is a very common preposition and thus it's not a good keyword for googling. Do you know any hints and grammar rules I can use for reconstruction of sentences to lower the usage of "of" or any links I can make a use of for finding this information or some good keywords for searching?


title: How to use the word 'contrary'?

text: Is it right to say > **contrary** to our interest to reduce the size of the paper I want to say that we want to reduce the size of the paper but we cannot do it, due to specific reasons.


title: Why is "guinea pig" used as the colloquial term for test subjects?

text: Why do we refer to people as _guinea pigs_ when discussing the subjects of an informal experiment? Surely mice, rabbits and rats are much more common experimental subjects. Indeed, it's rare that you'll hear of real guinea pigs being used experimentally.


title: difference between or used with/without bracket

text: What is the key differences between these sentences: Namespaces defined using object literal notation may be easily extended (or merged) with other objects (or namespaces) such that the properties and functions of both namespaces can be accessible under the same namespace post- merge. Namespaces defined using object literal notation may be easily extended or merged with other objects or namespaces such that the properties and functions of both namespaces can be accessible under the same namespace post-merge.


title: "faux conjunction"

text: I am looking at a computerized sample question and solution from a university writing improvement center. > True or false. The following sentence is punctuated correctly. > > Carl Jung was born in Switzerland in 1875 and died in 1961, at first, he was > a disciple of Freud. I marked false: this really looks like a comma splice to me. However the computer said "true", explaining: "A comma is required before the faux conjunction **at first** since it connects two independent clauses." Two questions:   1. This sentence could not possibly be correctly punctuated, right?!   2. "Faux conjunction(s)" registers less than 10 google hits, all of which were useless. If this is in fact a real concept, can someone give an explanation about the meaning the question's author intended?


title: Word for "Approximately Optimize"?

text: For me, the term "approximately optimize" doesn't make sense since: > Optimize - To make as perfect or effective as possible. > > Approximately - Almost exact or correct I can't quite think of the word that means "approximately optimizing"... unless do people think it's okay? The context is as follows: > "The tool will approximately optimize the panels' positions by only > selecting faces between 120-240 degrees orientation" **Edit:** Thanks to FumbleFingers for helping clarify my understanding of the term "optimize". It seems that in computer programming it is possible for "partial" or "full" optimization. The original use of "approximately optimize" therefore is okay!


title: helping business the "online" way

text: can I use this sentences in my slogan? > helping business the "online" way or > growing business the "online" way I get the idea from this sentences "helping business the right way." or I must add a "through". helping business through the "online" way It looks strange for me. Please correct me if it is not suitable.


title: single word that means which can be constructed at home

text: What is the word that means “that which can be fixed up at home”? For example, I buy parts from a store, bring the parts home, and then can construct the thing out of those parts by myself. What is the word that means such an object, one that can be made at home in a do-it-yourself style?


title: Belief in god but not in religion

text: What do we call a person who believes in god but not in a particular religion?


title: What does "persay"/"per say" mean?

text: I heard: "It shouldn't break any of your site **persay**." I searched for it but cannot find it, not even in a dictionary. What does _persay_ or _per say_ mean?


title: A word for the heart-wrenching pain of wanting someone you can't have

text: There is a phrase in French that exactly means this: **"la douleur exquise"** It literally means "the exquisite pain" and expresses the pain of wanting the affection of someone unattainable. I think it is not used as a loan phrase in English and the translation does not make much sense. Is there an equivalent word or phrase in English? * * * **Note I:** > Sometimes, platonic love is used in this sense (though not exactly for the > pain) but it is actually an emotional relationship without sexual desires. > I'm not sure if there is a semantic shift in the meaning though. * * * **Note II:** > **“Unrequited love”** describes a relationship state, but not a state of > mind. Unrequited love encompasses the lover who isn’t reciprocating, as well > as the lover who desires. La douleur exquise gets at the emotional > heartache, specifically, of being the one whose love is unreciprocated. Source: ~


title: Avoiding "existential it" while referring to a past event?

text: I know the use of "existential it" is frowned upon, but I'm not entirely sure how to rephrase the following sentence to remove it: > It is hard to tell what would have occurred if the battle had been lost. Is something like this really all that bad? How can I rephrase this to remove that "it"?


title: What's the most pedantically correct way to reference sectioned and numbered rules aloud?

text: I am a roller derby announcer. An important part of my job is to explain the rules of roller derby to the fans. The rules of modern roller derby are promulgated by the Women's Flat Track Derby Association, and are broken into section, sub-section, and sub-sub- section (and further?) by number, just like a civil code. For instance, from section two ("Game Parameters"), subsection four ("Jams"): > 2.4.4.1.1 - If the Jammer is not on the track when the jam starting whistle > blows, the Jammer will not be permitted to join the jam in progress. No > penalty will be issued. If I wanted to _write_ this, I would write "Section 2.4.4.1.1", per my reading of this helpful StackExchange question about "section" and "subsection". However, if I wanted to _say_ this out loud, thundering it from the podium while banging my fist, what is the most pedantically correct way to do it? Is there anything _after_ subsection, like "Paragraph"? Would it be correct to say "According to section two, subsection four, paragraph four, item one point one?" -- or something similar? I have often wondered how this works in city ordnances as well -- is there a "formal" language used when drilling all the way down, much as we say "Chapter and Verse"? Or does this rabbit hole only go as deep as "subsection"? **TL;DR: How wouldTackleberry refer to numbered rules?** UPDATE: some more googling on this leads to the Wikipedia description of how the United States Code is ordered: Title > Chapter > Part > Section > Paragraph > Clause. So if roller-derby rules were ordered the same way as the US Code, I could conceivably say something like "Part two, section four, paragraph four, clause one, subclause one of the WFTDA rules clearly states." _However_ , I think this particular structure only applies to the US Code, and this is not a sort-of generic legal-document structure. ...Or is it? Is this how the drill-down usually goes when you're trying to be, you know... legalistic?


title: What is the the origin of the expression "chop chop"?

text: The phrase, as I have always heard it, is used to direct someone toward completing a task quickly, or with urgency. > "Go get that object from over there, chop chop." Have been looking for an answer to this question for years, hoping someone here has some insight.


From which language has English borrowed the most words?


title: What is a word for someone who will only take credit for something if it benefits them?

text: For example, someone who will not say they suggested the restaurant if someone in the group said they didn't like it. Synynoms could include: noncommittal, unaccountable, fickle. Someone who frequently makes disclamers. Not able to take the blame or own up to bad decisions.


title: Word for "Ray of Hope"

text: Which word or phrase to use instead of "Ray of Hope" ? EDIT : In a general context. Suppose there is one line - There is a Ray Of Hope in darkness always.


title: "Arab" or "Arabic" or "Arabian"?

text: Are these adjectives interchangeable? I always hear: 'An Arab man.' but never 'An Arabic man.' and I always hear 'Arabic coffee' but never hear 'Arab coffee.'


title: "Unselect" or "Deselect"?

text: If I want the user to revert their operation of selecting an item, should I say: "Unselect the option" or "Deselect the option"?


What's the difference between 'collision' and 'conflict'? In SQL language, should I say 'PK collision' or 'PK conflict'?


title: PhD = Piled Higher and Deeper

text: For most folks, PhD means "Doctor of Philosophy". But, for Jorge Cham, it means "Piled Higher and Deeper". Can you explain to me the title of that comic book? ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/1M2Nv.jpg)


title: What is the proper phrase for being in one's official limits, probably when quoting something?

text: While quoting something, the consideration of the fact that it does not offend the sentiments of a community or culture one belongs to. How do we ask that in one sentence e.g Did I remain in my limits/Did I not overdo my limits?


title: A word that means 'most important'?

text: I tried to find a single word that means "most important", but I couldn't. I want it to be able to express what's missing below: > If you get hurt, the ___ thing to do is to stay calm. It would need to describe something as being the absolute, single most important thing as opposed to just very important. I did find the word "quintessential", but I think that word also has another meaning which is used more frequently. I thought about making up my own, but I couldn't find a _prefix_ that means "most". * * * I feel kind of silly, but I think I have been looking for a word based on a concept that doesn't exist in English. I was looking for a word that could never be used to describe two things as both being the most important. I think some of these words, like 'imperative,' express necessity as opposed to importance, but I may be wrong. The word 'key' expresses importance, but it, like 'important,' could be used to refer to multiple things. The two most important players are Sam and Ashley. The two key players are Sam and Ashley. I was thinking of a word that would describe importance as 'best' describes 'goodness,' but I'm realizing that that doesn't really make sense because even the word 'best,' though I think it tends to often describe only one thing, is often used to describe two things. The two best players are Sam and Ashley. I guess, with the superlative, if you take any adjective and put the noun it's modifying in a singular form, it implies that that noun is the single strongest possessor of that adjective. I could just say "The important thing to do is to stay calm," and I think that would imply that that is the single most important thing to do because the word 'thing' is singular. I think the fact that the same word can be used to describe the single strongest possessor of a trait (the tallest person) and multiple strongest possessors of a trait (one of the tallest people) kind of rubs me wrong. If anyone's curious, I was thinking of inventing the word 'monobest' or 'unibest' to mean single best. This way, you couldn't say "one of the monobest" because 'mono' means one, and something can't be both both multiple and one. Similarly, 'monotant' or 'unitant' could mean single most important (I've shortened the word 'important'). Thank you all, and sorry if this question was misleading.


title: Pattern: It is X that Y

text: I might be confused about the "it is X that Y " pattern: > 1a That he is not the best player is a surprise.   >  1b It is a surprise that he is not the best player. > > 2a That he is not the best player is a possibility.   >  2b It is a possibility that he is not the best player. Sentence 1b is a good rewrite of 1a. Could the same be said of 2a and 2b?


title: Why are 'preterite presents' called so?

text: While reading about 'defective verbs' on Wikipedia, I came across this term – _preterite present verbs_. > The most commonly recognized defective verbs in English are auxiliary verbs > — the class of `preterite-present verbs` — can/could, may/might, > shall/should, must, ought to, and will/would (which was not historically in > Old English a preterite-present but has joined the class in modern English) > [Source] > > The so-called `preterite-present verbs` are a small group of anomalous verbs > in the Germanic languages in which the present tense shows the form of the > strong preterite, and the preterite is weak. [Source] I understand why modal auxiliaries are referred to as 'defective verbs' as far as their incomplete conjugation (lacking an infinitive, future tense, participle, imperative, and gerund) is concerned. But I do not understand why they are also referred to as _'preterite present verbs'_. _'Preterite'_ expresses a past action or state, but how is that sense applicable to all modal auxiliaries? I don't see how _can_ , _will_ , _may_ and _shall_ express a past action or state.


title: Is "cookie" a recent addition to Australian English?

text: Wiktionary's entry for cookie says a "cookie" is > (England and Wales) A specifically American-style biscuit. and Wikipedia's entry for biscuit says > Although in Commonwealth Nations, the term "cookie" may be synonymous with > "biscuit", a cookie is generally a softer baked product. I don't really recall "cookie" being used this way 10 or 20 years ago in Australia. Am I imagining it, or has usage of the word increased over time?


title: Comma with explanatory insertions?

text: I wonder if there should be commas in this sentence:   1. Method A translates votes into seats such that, for each constituency, fixed seat-contingents are met.   2. Method A translates votes into seats such that for each constituency fixed seat-contingents are met. The expression "for each constituency" is not exactly parenthetical, but without the commas it seems harder to grasp the sentence.


title: How to capitalize and italicize proper nouns with the same ending

text: Let's say there's an _English Language Questionnaire_ and an _English Usage Questionnaire_ (I want them to be italicized), and I want to refer to them together, by name. What should I use: The _English Language_ and _English Usage_ questionnaires are... The _English Language_ and _English Usage Questionnaires_ are... The _English Language Questionnaire_ and the _English Usage Questionnaire_ are... Or something else? If it makes a difference, note that by this point in my paper I have already described each of them separately, so the reader has seen both of these names before. PS: Feel free to edit the title, as I had no idea how to ask this in one line.


title: Programming vs. Coding

text: As a programmer, I often hear "writing a program" and "writing code" used interchangeably. The way I understand it, a _program_ is a file which contains _code_ written to perform a task or a series of tasks. Those who write computer programs (like myself) are typically referred to as programmers. However, the slogan of the popular website CodeProject is "For those who code," not "For those who program." Is there any difference in meaning between "I code for a living" and "I program for a living"?


title: Past tense of "must" when meaning logical probability

text: I'm wondering how to say this sentence in the past tense: > He must be very clever I have seen that the past tense of "must" is "have to" but it doesn't sound good to me to say something like "he had to be very clever" because it may mean that it was compulsory to be clever for him but I mean that he was probably clever. Maybe the sentence "He should be very clever" may be more appropriate, but I'm not sure if this has a meaning of past.


title: "At this time" vs "At that time"

text: Is it acceptable to use "at this time" when referring to a specific point in time in the past? While in the process of telling a story, for example, that happens completely in the past? To me it just does not sound right, and I used to correct a non-native speaker (even though I am one also, only more advanced). Since then, however, I have heard it a couple of times (I'm in the USA). **EDIT** After receiving couple of answers confirming my view, I would like to give a specific example I just found of that "incorrect" (I think) usage in this Wikipedia article on the Holy Roman Empire. (Please do a search in the text there for "at this time.")


title: What is the origin of the word "Blackmail"?

text: How did the word _blackmail_ originate? The words "black" and "mail" (if you split them out) have no relation to the meaning of the combined word. How was the word choice made? Also, how has the term's meaning evolved from its original sense, and when did those changes occur?


title: Initial capitalization of foreign surnames when starting a sentence

text: In the book, "The Crystal Shard," by R.A. Salvatore, a character is surnamed "de Bernezan." Which of the following complete sentences uses the correct English-language capitalization:   * de Bernezan entered the room.   * De Bernezan entered the room. The Wikipedia page on "de Vries" capitalized "De Vries" as a standalone, but writes "Marc de Vries" when using the full name. Edits in response to comments:   * The book starts sentences as "de Bernezan," which seems incorrect. Hence my question.   * The Wikipedia page is neither authoritative nor clear. It seems to refers to "De Vries" as the correct capitalization of the surname, except when actually used as a surname. Since I am not Dutch, I do not know how their names work, especially when used in an English-language context. Again, hence my question.


title: Is there a term for a word that defeats its own purpose?

text: There are a few words that can possess an oxymoronic or paradoxical meaning that tend to defeat the entire purpose of the word. The most obvious example: > This sentence is indescribable. Specifically, words such as "indescribable." The paradox is that the description of something as "indescribable" means it now the opposite of "indescribable" but I am not interested in the paradox itself. I want to know what to call the _word_ "indescribable" in the sense that word defeats its own purpose. By using the word it becomes inaccurate. Other examples seem hard to find, but this is close: > (spoken) How quiet! In this case, "quiet" also makes itself suddenly inaccurate. The paradoxical nature is again obvious but what I am trying to find would be more akin to "self-referential meaninglessness" or "a word that makes itself inaccurate."


title: “Analogous” vs. “analogical”

text: What is the difference in meaning between _analogous_ and _analogical_?


title: "They are there." and "They're there." versus "There they are." and "There they're."

text: Are any of the phrases in the title incorrect in any way? Do the meanings differ in any way? Is one preferred over the other and if so then why? I find this particularly interesting for many reasons including because a listener can not distinguish whether a speaker said "There they're." or "They're there." Also, are there other more complex and/or more interesting examples of this kind?


title: Why is the spelling of "pronounce" and "pronunciation" different?

text: Why is the spelling of _pronounce_ and _pronunciation_ different? If one originally did not know the spelling of _pronunciation_ , one would when hearing it verbally deduce its spelling to be _pronounciation_ , which is the incorrect spelling. Why is the difference in spelling so? Also, are the two words pronounced differently? (I think I am using the American pronunciation for _pronunciation_ ( _pro-noun-ciation_ ), but according to howjsay.com, it's pronounced as _pro-nun-ciation_. Is this just for British English or universally?)


title: "Something to the rescue!" vs "Something for the rescue" — which one is correct?

text: I was wondering which one of the following constructions below is grammatically correct? Or both are acceptable? >   * Something to the rescue! >   * Something for the rescue! >


title: "Cover off" meaning "cover"

text: I've noticed that some business people (generally management types) have started to use the expression "cover off" to mean "cover". E.g. > Can you cover off agenda item 3 for me? or > Not only will Scott cover off some of the new stuff... See: https://sites.google.com/a/codecampsa.com/home/speakers/scott-barnes Where has this come from?


title: "We care for our Nature" or "We care for Nature"?

text: Was drafting an email and my senior wanted to type "Planting saplings is our way of saying we care for our Nature".   I felt that's wrong English. Shouldn't it be "we care for Nature"? (it makes it a bit impersonal to remove the 'our', but if 'our nature' isn't right, can the cuteness factor of mentioning 'our nature' be preserved?. Which is correct?)


title: What word/expression describes allowing another to save face rather than to be disgraced publicly?

text: The word that comes to mind is 'diplomacy' but I don't believe that is quite it. It is a practice that's seems more nuanced in Asian cultures than Western. For instance, if a person is fired, rather of publicly stating the individual was fired, the person is allowed to say they wish to pursue other interests or something less harsh. It's a bit of an unwritten and unstated custom that allows the a person in a more superior social role to allow the other individual to basically save face.


title: What does "to trap in amber" mean and where does it come from?

text: > I guess that’s one of the reasons I do write here, **to trap in amber** > these states of emotion and experience in some way so I can look back and > ultimately think that I was writing a lot more in [insert year here] even > though I probably at that time felt I did a lot more writing in some other > era of my life


title: Difference between lexicon and dictionary

text: What is the difference between a _lexicon_ and a _dictionary_? Is a lexicon just an über-big dictionary?


title: treated him as a child

text: 1-His wife treats him like a child. 2-His wife treats him as a child. Is there a difference between the meanings of 1 and 2? 3-His wife talks to him like a child. 4-His wife talks to him as a child. Is there a difference between the meanings of 3 and 4? 5-They treated him like a star. 6-They treated him as a star. Is there a difference between the meanings of 5 and 6? Thank you.


title: "She always sees..." or "She is always seeing..."

text: >   * She always sees things that don't exist. >   * She is always seeing things that don't exist. > In the first sentence we use verb "to see" in the present simple tense. In the second sentence, verb "to see" in the present progressive, unusual for verbs that express forms of sense perception. Are both sentences correct and interchangeable? Any subtle difference in meaning between them?


title: "Cut into halves" vs. "cut in half"

text: >   1. It’s easy to cut a rectangle **into halves**. >   2. This will cut both rectangles **in half**. > What is the difference between _halves_ and _half_? There are two answers, and it’s best to get both. "It’s easy to cut a rectangle into halves." All you have to do is make sure that the cut passes through the precise center of the rectangle. The cut can be at any angle. Here we have two rectangles, a positive one (the cake) and a negative one (the missing piece). Decide where the centers of the two rectangles are. These two points make a line. Make a cut along that line, and the cake will be split evenly. "This will cut both rectangles in half", so each piece will equal half of the cake plus half of the missing piece. In other words, both of the resulting pieces have the same area.


title: Amnesty — meaning

text: Which of the following is the most accurate meaning for the word _amnesty_?   1. a general pardon to prisoners of war   2. a general pardon of political offenders I am aware that maybe neither is accurate, but if I have these two to choose between, which one is nearest to the correct meaning and why?


title: English subways have 'Cars', but English Surface Trains have 'Carriages'. Why the Difference?

text: I heard both terms used in an episode of 'Sherlock'. It seems like one term or the other should do for both surface and underground trains.


title: Parenthetical double negation?

text: Is this a double negation? Is it still grammatically correct? If not, what is a better form? > He cannot go outside (legally, not physically), because he is under house > arrest. The meaning is that he is limited from going outside in a legal sense, but not in a physical sense.


title: What's the difference between "ex-" and "former"

text: Is there any real difference in usage between _ex-_ and _former_?


title: What is the difference between “metaphorical”, “allegorical”, and “figurative”?

text: What is the difference between _metaphorical_ , _allegorical_ , and _figurative_?


title: Why is "biblical" the only proper adjective to not use upper case?

text: Generally, when an adjective is derived from a proper noun, the adjective also has a capital initial, hence _Googleable_ , _Mancunian_ , _British_ , and _Shavian_. (In contrast, verbs are not given capitals, hence _to google_ and _to hoover_.) For some reason, though, _biblical_ is an exception. The word _Bible_ itself can be used as a normal noun ( _the fisherman’s bible_ , or _a bible for cooks_ ), but _biblical_ clearly refers to the proper-noun usage of _Bible_ , and yet it is not given a capital initial. Why is this? (Actually, a minority of dictionaries do give a capital initial, but that usage is rare in my experience.)


title: What phoneme symbols does Google show in its search results?

text: I'm familiar with the IPA characters, but google shows other symbols in its search results. What I want to find is an equivalence table or something to get the IPA characters of any particular word than I'm interested in. Or a tool that brings words as quicky as typing "define book" in my browser's address bar, which is how one can get the Google's result for any world.


title: Can the verb "wish + that clause" express open possibility?

text: We often use "wish + that clause" to express a past/present counterfactual statement or a future unlikely event (i.e. remote possibility): > I wish I hadn't quit my job. (But I quit my job.) > > I wish I had two million dollars. (But I don't.) > > I wish I wouldn't have to work tomorrow. (But I have to. I will be working > tomorrow.) My question is, is it possible to use **wish + that clause** to express open possibilities for the future? Note: **Open possibility/condition** means the fulfillment of the event is not determined but there is a chance of it happening, as opposed to **remote possibility/condition** , where the speaker knows that the chance of occurrence is remote/unlikely. For example: > (?) I wish the weather would be nice this weekend. [future time reference] > > _(Intended gloss: I really don't know what the weather will be like this > weekend, and I haven't checked the weather forecast, but I hope it will be > nice.)_ I tried to find the answer from the web and in a few grammar books. The only answers I got so far are negative. But the sentence above, about the weather, seems rather natural to me. I even found this example sentence from a grammar book, but the book doesn't say whether it carries the connotation of unlikelihood: > I wish the weather would get better. I am tired of being inside all the > time. To me, that sentence simply expresses the hope that the weather will clear up, i.e. an open possibility.


title: T-V distinction

text: In many languages, there is such thing as T-V distinction. Basically, it's when you use different pronouns in "formal" (or "polite") speech, and in informal speech. Now, I do realize there is no such thing in English directly. However, there are phrases that indicate the change between the formal and informal pronoun. For example, in Russian, a phrase `"перейти на 'ты'"` means literally `"to start using 'ты'"`, where `'ты'` is the informal pronoun. Variations of this also exist in other languages. So my question is, what is the best way to translate such a phrase into English? In Poul Andersen's book "Tau Zero", I've found a phrase > “That’s the main reason I called you. Remember, during training I urged you > to come here for part of your furlough.” **By now they were using the > intimate pronoun.** While this seems a little awkward, it does the job well. Are there any other ways of saying it?


title: Ages — Semicolons, commas or parentheses?

text: Which is preferred below--1, 2 or 3? Are all versions technically correct? Which is your pick? _1\. Mike, 25, Jimmy, 44, and Joshua, 49, were arrested on a charge of petit larceny._ _2\. Mike, 25; Jimmy, 44; and Joshua, 49, were arrested on a charge of petit larceny._ _3\. Mike (25), Jimmy (44), and Joshua (49) were arrested on a charge of petit larceny._


title: The word for realizing that other people are people too, with stories and depth

text: I remember coming across an article that said there was a word for the realization that other people are the same as you, with stories, pain, heartache, joy, etc. I believe the word starts with an 's', but I can't figure out what it is.


title: could and might to talk about future possibility

text: I have problem with using could in the future possibilities for example: They have the technology, but unless the government makes stricter laws, car companies ____ do it. With which one should I fill the blank of..... Might not or Couldn't and why ? Thank you :)


title: "Build out" versus "build up"

text: How are these two different? > Build [something] out vs. > Build [something] up


title: 'Someone who hops from idea to idea'

text: Is there a word or a term used for someone who hops from idea to idea? More specifically, for someone who jumps from idea to idea without ever really completing any of them.


title: Wondering if the use of "either ...nor " is correct

text: Taken from BBC Interim President Oleksandr Turchynov described the referendum as a "great farce" which "will never be recognised either by Ukraine or by the civilised world". My try is Interim President Oleksandr Turchynov described the referendum as a "great farce" which "will never be recognised neither by Ukraine nor by the civilised world".


title: He was to get an ice cream, is to , was to . Be to + infinitive

text: Can someone explain how this works ? Is this passive ? He was to get an ice cream or He was to have done something I am to do that . Is this wrong ? How can we change these sentences without losing the meaning. Is this present tense?


title: Is there a difference between "subsidy" and "subvention"?

text: Is there a difference between _subsidy_ and _subvention_? If yes, what is it? When should I use either?


title: Not earlier than 15 minutes

text: Please arrive at the venue not earlier than 15 minutes before the commencement of the interview.


title: What does “It’s sorta meta,” mean?

text: Maureen Dowd wrote a review on the recently released movie, “J.Edgar” directed by Clint Eastwood in New York Times November 12 issue under the title, “Dirty Harry meets dirtier Edgar.” Apart from the interest in weird relationship of the FBI’s ‘fearful enforcer’ Edgar Hoover and his protégé, Clyde Tolson, I was caught up with the short phrase, “ _It’s sorta meta_ ,” in the following sentence: > Some F.B.I. agents who worked with Hoover have been grousing that portraying > the feared first director of the F.B.I. as homosexual would “turn Dirty > Harry into Dirty Harriet,” as William Branon, chairman of the J. Edgar > Hoover Foundation, put it. > > _It’s sorta meta_ : the star who played a fictional law enforcement officer > breaking rules for what he sees as the good of society makes a movie about a > real law enforcement officer breaking rules for what he sees as the good of > society. Dowd’s articles are always ordeal to me because of inclusion of a lot of unfamiliar words to me and her own style of elocution. I guess “sorta” means simply “a sort of,” but I don’t understand what “It’s sorta meta” means here. It’s a short phrase, but “meta” is an evasive word for me. I’m not even clear with what “meta user” shown on my page of EL&U page means. Would you explain me?


title: Problem to understand "to manage" in a sentence

text: Usually I don't have problems to understand technical English texts, but in that case I don't know what it means: > Notice that during a license check, your application does not manage any > network connections or use any licensing related APIs in the Android > platform. What does "does not manage" mean? Does it mean that I need any network connection or not or does it mean that it cannot handle network connections while license check or maybe something else? I don't understand the meaning of this sentence.


title: Term for convincing yourself words are spelled incorrectly?

text: Sometimes I'll look at a word for too long and I become convinced that it's spelled or pronounced incorrectly. This happens most frequently with "spider" (I think that should be pronounced "spih-dur" [like "spitter"], not "speye- dur") and happened just now with "finger" ("fin-gur", not "feen-gur"). There's a similar variant to this (discussed here), but that's related to a word losing it's meaning. To me, the word just looks incorrectly spelled, or I convince myself that everyone's pronouncing it incorrectly. Is there a difference between what I'm describing and Semantic Satiation? If there is a difference, does this one have a name?


title: How bad is the use of "n***er" today?

text: If I call a black people of "nigger", how bad is this today? If a black call another black with this word, it is wrong?


title: Zero article in a concessive adverbial clause

text: Which of the following two expressions is better? >   * A doctor by training as he is, he has proved himself to be a successful > writer. >   * Doctor by training as he is, he has proved himself to be a successful > writer. >


title: "He had snaggle teeth" — how to say correctly?

text: Is it okay to say "He had snaggle teeth"? Or there is a better way of describing that problem with teeth?


title: Difference between "to flounce", "to caper", and "to gambol"

text: In a sentence describing some children having some fun in a playroom: > They would flounce, caper, and gambol all the time. What are the differences between those three actions?


title: Difference between "to reel", "to swivel", "to whirl", and "to spin"

text: In a sentence describing two people dancing in a room: > And they reeled, and swiveled, and whirled, and spun ... What are the differences between those four actions?


title: Using 'show' with 'treatment'

text: Is it proper to say 'show special treatment' for example in "He showed him special treatment."? I know it sounds more natural to say, "He took a special interest in him because of his background." but is it weird to say "He showed him special interest and treatment because of his background."


title: Litotes: Always for Emphasis? Used for Non-committal Hedging? Any Authoritative Source?

text: My question is about litotes. I’m wondering if it is always for emphasis, or whether it can be a type of non-committal statement or hedging. And, is there an authoritative source that can be cited that explains how these are differentiated? The Wikipedia entry (which, unfortunately, I cannot use as a source in my work) says “Litotes is a form of understatement, always deliberate and with the intention of emphasis”. However, what if I describe some food as “not inedible” when it is pretty awful and just barely palatable. Seems that would be just a step above inedible, not saying that is wonderful food. For example, in the following sentence, is the “none . . . have not” for emphasis, or something else? > None of the flowers appeared not to have bloomed at that time.


title: How to Pronounce "Deictic"

text: I'm going to be talking about demonstrative pronouns, and I need to say "deictic" aloud. Looking at several dictionaries, I have three options for pronouncing the word: (1) 'dīk-tik (IPA: [ˈdaɪktɪk]), (2) 'dāk-tik (IPA: [ˈdeɪktɪk]), and (3) 'dik-tik (IPA: [ˈdɪktɪk]). I'm pretty sure the third is a British usage (I'm looking for the best choice for a standard American usage). The first appears to be the most common, but it sounds odd to me. Random fact: the first represents a modern Greek pronunciation. The second follows the Erasmian pronunciation. I use the Erasmian pronunciation when I teach classical Greek, and this might explain my favoring the second pronunciation. Is there any source that recommends the second pronunciation as its preferred option? How have you heard this word pronounced in academic settings? Should I just go with the first option?


title: Alternative to "Patient Discharge"

text: I visited someone in the hospital today and was struck by some unpleasant associations from seeing "Patient Discharge" on a sign. Surely there is a better word for this...what do they call it in UK countries?


title: Synonym for "factor"

text: I'm looking for a synonym of "factor". "Factor" as a cause of something. Example: > X happened due to technical and social factors.


title: "Sites to see" or "Sights to see"?

text: A google search turns up results for either. The two are seemingly interchangeable. Which is it? Does one see sights or see sites?


title: What does the word "as-yet-unknown" mean?

text: What does the word `as-yet-unknown` mean in the following sentence?               Andrews, 31, plans to sue the as-yet-unknown person who shot the     footage -- and anyone publishing the material.


title: Correct use of "wake up"

text: English isn't my native language (Spanish is), so this question may be very basic, but it is worse not to ask. Which of these two phrases is the correct one? >   1. I'm trying to _wake_ and get up from my bed >   2. I'm trying to _wake up_ and get up from my bed >


title: Not overengineered or underengineered

text: I'm looking for a word to describe a solution that is simple, fast to develop and fulfills its intended purpose. The word "adequate" is not quite what I'm after. The shade of meaning I want to impart is that the solution is good quality, and not over- or underengineered. I suppose I could say "well engineered". Can anyone suggest an alternative? I thought of "optimal" but this implies a kind of exactness that I don't want to portray. I want to suggest there's a range of possible solutions that could work and not be considered over- or underengineering. For example, to meet some need we could put together a spreadsheet or a little database and both of these would be acceptable solutions, neither is "optimal". Whereas a custom built application might be overengineering and a manual system might be underengineering. I'm not sure that "well engineered" really captures what I want to say.


title: "I myself Naresh" as an introduction

text: I have heard so many times that before starting presentation people introduce themselves like this: >   1. **I myself Naresh** and the topic I am going to present is.... >   2. **Myself Naresh** and the topic I am going to present is.... >   3. **This is Naresh** and the topic I am going to present is.... > In the above examples, which one is correct? Can I use the word _myself_ , when I am introducing myself to someone?


title: How do I punctuate a question within a statement?

text: What is the proper way to punctuate a question that is posed within a statement like in the following example? > Associated with my interest in the patterns that structure aquatic > ecosystems is the question of what factors control the distribution and > cycling of resources in aquatic systems. The second part of the sentence (after the what) is a question, but the sentence as a whole is a statement. Is the way I have it punctuated correct and what rules govern this sort of thing?


title: Frequent ping-ponging of priorities?

text: I came through the following sentence in a technical research paper. Is it correct to use `ping-ponging` word? Please let me know. > With TS policy, priorities of threads change very frequently for balancing > load and providing fairness in scheduling. Due to this frequent ping-ponging > of priorities, ...


title: What color does ‘pale thing’ have?

text: I'd like to focus in on the meaning of 'pale' which is used in color description. My dictionary, OALD, says 'pale' in such case means "light in colour; containing a lot of white". It shows me some examples; **pale** blue eyes: I understand; a **paler** shade of green: ditto. Then I have two questions.   1. a **pale** sky (from OALD) … Does it mean its basic color depend on time and weather, or pale blue? Or is there another tacit agreement on its basic color?   2. **pale** eyes (Ollivander's eyes, from p.308, Harry Potter 4) … Does it mean a specific basic color, or a color depending on readers' imagination? I’d be happy if you could help me.


title: Word or phrase for a scam-like enterprise based on ignorance

text: I've noticed a spate of schemes to raise money on Kickstarter, Indiegogo and through more traditional avenues that involve claims that are essentially physically impossible. A rudimentary due diligence investigation by an expert in the field would debunk the project very quickly. Examples include solar cells a few inches in diameter with a mains receptacle, a device for charging your cell phone based on coffee or beer mug temperature difference, and a keychain scanner that purports to be able to detect nutritional content and trace compounds in foods. In some cases the principals may actually be scammers, but in others they are marketers who can claim ignorance of engineering or science (yet are marketing a tech product that does not have anything close to a working prototype). They could even be experts in some facet of the required technology, but ignore other essential parts. Is there a pithy term for such operators? **Scammer** or **rip-off artist** do not not quite seem appropriate because they imply an intent rather than ignorance (or willful ignorance). If no such term exists, a coined term would be most useful.


title: What is the word for poignant, but with a positive connotation?

text: _Poignant_ denotes touching and significant, but typically with a negative connotation.   Is there a word that means the same, but has a positive connotation?


title: How do I address an envelope where one person has a professional title but their spouse does not?

text: When addressing an envelope to Dr John Smith and his wife, Jane Smith, what would be the proper form to utilize? I have been using "Dr. and Mrs. John and Jane Smith", but I was told by my co-worker that it should really be "Dr. and Mrs John Smith". Which, if either, is the correct format?


title: What is the name of a pick-up-sticks or jackstraws pile?

text: Is there a specific name (a single word or phrase) for the pile, heap, nest, clump, cluster, configuration, stack or arrangement of sticks or shapes used in pick-up-sticks or jackstraws, when piled up for play? If so, what is the word or phrase? Note, in pick-up-sticks straight sticks of various colors are used; in jackstraws, many of the objects of the game are molded or carved shapes. Also note, the game is sometimes called _spillikins_ , and a _spillikin_ is “One of the straws used in the game of jackstraws (spillikins)”.


title: Word for logical fallacy of including a debatable proposition in a list of truisms

text: Is there a word for the logical fallacy of including a debatable proposition in a list of truisms? Sometimes a salesman or a politician or whatever will toss out a string of statements that he knows the audience will agree with, so they're all nodding their heads and saying yes, of course. Then he tosses in a highly questionable statement. To make a deliberately oversimplified and silly example: > And as we all know, it's a good thing to love your mother. And I'm sure you > all agree that chocolate tastes good. And we all know that all Ruritanians > are stupid. And of course no one wants to get cancer ... The idea is that you get the audience agreeing with you, they think you're "one of them" because you're obviously right or on their side on so many questions, and then you slip something in and you hope they'll just keep nodding yes, or if they question it, they'll think, "Oh, does that go with everything else he just said? I guess so." It's not necessarily a "non-sequitur". I'm not looking for cases where the speaker presents a logical sequence of steps and one of the steps isn't valid. Rather, I'm thinking of cases where he just throws a bunch of ideas together, with no connection other than an implied, "These ideas all go together" or "These are all things that we all agree on" or "These are all things that are obviously true."


title: racism VS the racism

text: > There are other reasons for _the racism_ : the legacy of fascism and the > continuing adulation of Benito Mussolini; the tangible insecurity, even > sense of inferiority, of many Italians; widespread economic misery for at > least the last decade; and a political class that is absurdly ignorant. But > perhaps the most interesting explanation for _racism_ comes from an Italian > mate of mine who's an armchair anthropologist. I know that notions like _racism_ do not take a definite article unless that notion is well referred to in a context. Then why is the first occurrence of racism in this fragment preceded by _the_ , and the second one is not? If, on the one hand, the first occurrence of racism is about the racism in Italy, the second one seems to me to be about the racism in Italy, as well. On the other hand, if racism was used notionally, then both occurrences of the word should have been preceded by no _the_. Either way, racism in this fragment, whether it is about racism in general or the racism in Italy, should have been used uniformly. So my question is: why wasn't it?


title: Synonyms for "section"

text: 1. How I can replace the word "section" as the meaning of a part of a website? For example: "Friends section", "Event section", "Messages section" etc.    2. Can I name a small part of a webpage "a block"?  For example: **This "block" of friends on my facebook page.** http://ipic.su/img/img7/fs/kiss_174kb.1390237697.png


title: Is there a U.S. equivalent or version of the Plain English Campaign?

text: I recently found out about the Plain English Campaign, a UK-based movement for simplification of document language. They advocate the use of plain English in corporate-to-consumer and state-to-citizen communications. There was a TED talk about it but I was not able to find any similar association in the U.S. - Can anybody help out?


Is it okay to use Past Simple with Past Progressive for two consecutive actions? For example, "She **added** some water to the flour and **was mixing** it until she got a lump of dough" or should it be "She **added** some water to the flour and **mixed** it until she got a lump of dough" ?


title: Use of unencumbered in describing personality

text: I am looking for a word to use to describe a person who is, in a nutshell free from many of life's burdens most other people are subject to. Someone not carrying a proverbial load, weight, baggage. Someone _unencumbered_? Unencumbered with financial worries, bills, emotional baggage, the Jones effect, opinion of others etc. Is _unencumbered_ a good word or is there a better one?


title: What style manual does Noam Chomsky use?

text: I wonder where this info would be available. Maybe it would have to be reverse engineered. More generally, are there any style guides that are more prevalent among leftists?


title: Is the idiom 'keeping well' recognized only in British English?

text: I've seen the idiom 'keeping well' being used to mean 'in good health' in some contexts where British English is expected. But Americans seem surprised by it. Is that idiom uncommon in American English?


title: What do you call someone who hides files?

text: I'm writing a novel about a woman who hides files because she fears that other people may access information she wants to keep secret. Mary Lou doesn't follow a precise method for hiding files in hard-disks, but she does so with excessive zeal. So, as ever, I would like to know whether there is an adjective to describe Mary Lou. After a bit of searching I found that bibliotaph means 'one that hides away or hoards books', but, alas, it seems that one can properly uses this word only in reference to books, not files. So, I wonder, what do you call someone who hides away files?


title: Does 'Belvedere' mean the same as 'viewpoint'?

text: A student of mine used google translator to translate the Portuguese "miradouro" into English. Instead of an expected viewpoint, scenic overlook or similar, the translator suggested "belvedere". She has asked me the meaning of belvedere and I have been unable to find it in my two dictionaries (Longman and Oxford). So, what is 'belvedere' in English?


title: What’s the word to describe a person in this role?

text: I was watching a prank, and I wonder what they call, or how you describe, the person in the prank who is not a bystander but pretends to be one. Is there a noun for this? He is with the prank-makers and is assigned to purposely act as a bystander to fool other people.


title: Is there a word for phrases such as those that are used to calm a baby down?

text: Speakers of Purik-Tibetan may say "kangchu Tululululuuuuu" in order to comfort a baby they're cradling in their arms. To someone else, they might also say that they are "doing the Tululu". What's a good (and perhaps very general) word to refer to such a "phrase"? Unlike a lullaby, it's not sung (even though the repeated lu-syllables sound somewhat chanted), and it doesn't make any sense (at least not from a synchronic perspective).


title: "It was then that..." vs "That was when..."

text: I'm not very sure if both mean exactly the same but I've noticed that the former is more widely use in Japanese novels translated into English. Whereas the latter is more often used in English novels (not from England but originally written in English). Examples: > It was then that the thought occurred to him. > > That was when he spotted the man. Is one more commonly used than the other? Which one you would usually in literary work?


title: Why king and queen rather than king and kingess?

text: Dukes have duchesses, counts countesses, princes princesses, mayors mayoresses, and even emperors empresses. Yet _kings_ have _queens_ rather than say, _kingesses_. Why is this so? If this was due to some historical quirk of fate, was there ever a word similar to _kingess_ which was superseded by _queen_? How about _lords_ , _ladies_ , and ... _lordesses_?


title: What is the difference between "nudge" and "push"

text: > I am trying to nudge them towards a practical solution. What does _nudge_ imply here? Can't we just use something like _push_? Is the word outdated or still in use? I'm not trying to avoid using _nudge_ as such, just don't know if it is a suitable word to use in an academic context.


title: A phrase whose meaning is different from a combination of its constituents?

text: The are phrases whose meaning is not what you would get from combining its constituent words (i.e., they violate the Principle of compositionality).   1. Some are entity names, e.g.,      * "weird science" is (usually) a _movie_ , not a kind of _science_ ,     * "grand theft auto" is a specific kind of _felony_ or a _computer game_ , not stealing a big car   2. Others are idioms, e.g.,      * "kick a bucket" or     * "pull a leg" or     * "break a leg"   3. something else which escapes my mind at the moment... What is the general term for this? "Non-compositional phrase"? The only other thing which comes to mind is mass-defective phrase :-)


title: Infinitive of “may” and “might”?

text: What’s the infinitive of the verb I use when I say “I might go” or “May I come with you”? I think in German it’s _dürfen_. Is there one in English? If not, why not?


title: Number agreement of verb with plural algorithm name as subject

text: Should I say: > Geodesic Active Contours (GAC) are a method for shape approximation that > have demonstrated excellent performance for abdominal wall segmentation. Or: > Geodesic Active Contours (GAC) is a method for shape approximation that has > demonstrated excellent performance for abdominal wall segmentation. Thank you!


title: When saying supplier of a building material should the material be singular or plural?

text: Which of the following is correct: Supplier of tile, stone, tools and equipment or Supplier of tiles, stones, tools and equipment If you could provide an English rule to know that would also be very much appreciated. Thanks!


title: Words or expressions for Scribbles and Erasure

text: I've been curious about a word to express those 'marks' that we have, mostly, on pen written texts, usually when you write and make a mistake and you can't erase you have to cross out the word, then you have that "dirty mark". In my native language we have a specific word for that. I looked for the translation of the words we have and found _scribbles_ and _erasure_. So here is my question: Are the words from the title correct to refer to that? Can I get some examples? Is there any other word or expression to express this? To see what I mean see the below image: ![picture of scribbling out words on a page](http://i.stack.imgur.com/Ovzyj.gif)


title: How to phrase "my time and Bob's time" more succinctly?

text: I can say "Bob and I are going" instead of "I'm going and Bob is going." I want to say something like "This is a waste of my time and Bob's time," but only saying "time" once. I can't say "our" because I'm introducing the other person's name in this sentence. The best I can think of is "This is a waste of me and Bob's time," but that seems incorrect.


title: Is this a valid sentence using accretion?

text: I am having difficulty understanding and using the word "accretion". From what I understand , it means to **gradually** save a definite amount from a source. So is the following sentence valid? > James bought this car using the accretion amount that he saved


title: Meaning of incentive

text: In the table published at this U.S. Postal Service Website, USPS compares different service classes in different aspects. One aspect is called "incentive". I wonder what it means? From Google, I guess it may mean "A payment or concession to stimulate greater output or investment", but this meaning doesn't explain the aspect in the USPS table well to me.


title: Art Photobook in English

text: I am looking for books that contains photos of paintings and/or statues, historical buildings. These books are typically used as a sort of art gallery on high-quality paper, but I don't know the specific name in the English language.


title: What is the difference between "scent" and "odor"?

text: Proper usage guidelines and examples are appreciated.


title: A question on co-ordinating conjunctions in a compound sentence

text: A compound sentence is characterized by one or more than one main-clauses joined by a co-ordinating conjuction, as opposed to a complex sentence, which has a main clause together with a dependent or a subordinate clause separated by a subordinating conjunction. A subordinate/dependent clause is defined as a clause which follows/augments a main clause, and is _dependent_ on the main clause to make complete sense.   With this definition, shouldn't clauses joined with the main clause by **illative** (eg. _therefore, so, consequently_ etc) and **Alternative/Disjunctive** (eg. _or, either....or_ etc.) conjunctions be classified into subordinate clauses (assuming that commonly they are classified to be co-ordinating conjunctions)?   For example, :- " _because_ " is classified as a subordinating conjunction, the reason being that the clause following " _because_ ", is dependent on the preceding clause to make complete sense and cannot stand on its own, and hence is a subordinating clause. > He passed _because_ he was intelligent. But then, the following sentence should also be a complex sentence:- > He was intelligent _therefore/so/consequently_ he passed. Because the clause after the conjunction _depends_ on the preceding clause, as in the _action_ being described in the second clause ( _passing_ ) is a consequence of the _action_ described in the preceding clause ( _being intelligent_ ), the same as was in the sentence with clauses joined by " _because_ " ("being intelligent" is linked to "passing" as a reason, or that "passing" is the consequence of "being intelligent".) What difference in the meaning or the linking of the two clauses which makes the former sentence a complex one and the latter a compound sentence. The same is true in case of _disjunctive_ conjunctions, where _or_ links the action of the ensuing cause to be the consequence of the failure of the action described in the preceding clause, i.e. the action in the second clause is not independently true without the action of the preceding clause not occuring. for example:- > _If_ you do not read, you will fail.(complex) > > You must read _or_ you will fail.(compound) Are not the clauses in both the sentences "linked" in the same way, as far as meaning is concerned?


title: What are the possible part of speech combinations for compound nouns?

text: I am currently working through allowable part of speech combinations for the first two words of an English sentence. It seems troubling to me to allow the first two words of a sentence to both be nouns, but that may well be valid. One such circumstance is with compound nouns where it is rendered as two separate words (I am neglecting hyphenated and one-word versions here). If I were to have the following sentence: > Tea time is at 3:00 every afternoon. I would naturally think of _time_ as a noun of course, but I might describe _tea_ as an adjective in this case. So which combinations of parts of speech can a compound noun take and how would one distinguish which is the correct labeling for the compound noun?


title: Equivalent of "former" and "latter" for more than 2 items

text: _Former_ and _latter_ are valid only when there are two choices. If I have a list of more than two items, is there an elegant way to say _the first one_ or _the last one_?


title: What is the earliest mention of an "American accent"?

text: Do we have any idea how quickly the American colonists (specifically those British colonists living in what would later become the United States, but I'd be curious about French and Spanish colonists in their respective areas as well) developed an accent that was distinctly non-European? What is the earliest mention of someone "sounding American," or speaking in a way that they clearly came from the colonies?


title: Is "moral implication appropriate here?

text: Now I am going to trace back this historical process in order to further illuminate on the moral implications of “bonds” and“constants”. The context is Chinese ethics. "bonds" and "constants" have their own meaning , but when used in the domain of morality, they have many special meanings.Through a research into the history, these meanings will become clearer. So which word shall I use?


title: Name for a company that resells products

text: I'm looking for a single word to call a company that does not manufacture products, but instead buys them and sells them again at a different price. I came up with "reseller company"; is this a good description? Is there a better one?


title: Word for a "deep narrow line"

text: What's the word for a _deep narrow line_? I'm trying to describe the lines you see on a person's body, particularly the abdomen. When someone has very muscular defined six-pack abs, you can clearly see deep narrow lines in between their abs. How do you describe/call these lines?


title: **in** an equilibrium or **at** an equilibrium

text: I often search for valid collocations using google with a specific query phrase. In case of the phrase in question, i.e. in/at an equilibrium I have a problem since both seem to be used almost equally often. So I am wondering whether there is any difference in meaning in phrases like:   1. The molecular system is in an equilibrium.   2. The molecular system is at an equilibrium.   3. The molecular system is in equilibrium.   4. The molecular system is at equilibrium. Are the above phrases all correct?


title: Shorter way to say: "regardless of whether it would..."

text: Is there a shorter way to say that phrase. As in a sentence like: > Regardless of whether it would happen or not, all she wanted now was to go > back to her apartment.


title: "The book I've read that feels closest to this book is..."

text: Let's say I'm talking about a book, and I need to refer to some other book I've read, which I consider to be, of all the books I know, the one that is closest to the book that's under consideration. I would say: > The book I've read that feels closest to this one is... But this just feels wrong. I can't find any way of phrasing this that seems right. The issue I keep running up against is that I have to do three things:   1. Refer to all of the books that I've read.   2. In that set, single out _one_ specific book.   3. But also somehow apply the superlative "closest" to it. If you drop the last requirement, this isn't hard. "The only sad book I've read" is easy, because the criteria that singles out your book isn't a superlative. The problem seems to be that I have to single out one book, but once I've done that I can't meaningfully apply a superlative anymore. Why does the above sound wrong, and what would be the best way of phrasing it?


title: A person who criticizes his own homeland/city/country?

text: He was born and brought up in this village, but after staying and studying abroad his childhood friends seem backwards to him; he ___ this place now. Or He had lived in this city all his life but whenever he gets a chance he starts counting the flaws. He thanklessly ___ his homeland. It might even apply to a situation like say you party every weekend but if somebody else does the same you criticize them. Note: Read title: act of crticizing one's own homeland/city/country I can use words like criticize, betray or badmouth in my sentences, but I am looking for more like an idiom or phrase or even a proverb, that may or may not fit into my sentences but explains the intent. The intent here is being a hypocrite to an extent, yes but there's an addition of viewing one's own homeland or people as backwards(where I don't think that person has changed, they are just trying to show off). In hindi there's a saying "jis thali me khaya usme ched kiya" which means destroying the plate in which you are served. I'm kinda looking for an english analog for this proverb. I thought "don't shit where you eat" would be the close but it was hilarious to find out it's meaning and of course that it's nowhere close.


title: Quotation ascribed to Benjamin Franklin, "We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid."

text: There is a cottage industry in the United States of manufacturing quotations and ascribing them to the American Founding Fathers. A recent one, "We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid," ascribed to Benjamin Franklin. The language and structure just don't sound like Franklin. The parsing of the difference between _stupid_ and _ignorant_ seems to have arisen after Franklin's death based on an N-gram comparison. Unfortunately, I don't have OED access to make that comparison in a more authoritative manner. The question is, does the quotation (as edited) sound as if it might have come out of the 18th century?


title: Recommendations for non-native English speaking bloggers

text: What if someone who is not a native English speaker wants to write for a blog in English, but is not sure about the correctness of his writings? How could one ensure that the article won't annoy readers with its wrong language? What would you recommend in this case? What should one pay attention to in the first place? What resources are there online for ensuring that an article is written well enough to be published?


title: Apostrophe usage in "your order's been dispatched"

text: > Your order's been dispatched. Is this contraction (not to indicate plural, but as a contraction of "order has") correct? Or would it be better to just simply write: > Your order has been dispatched. I've looked through quite a few examples, but couldn't quite decide so thought I'd ask the community.


title: How did “classic” and “classical” come to mean “historic”?

text: I assume the words _classic_ and _classical_ have a basis in the word _class_ — which is to say, of a category. Why do we use those words to mean old or historically important?


title: "Fall", "fell", "felled"

text: How is the causative form of _fall_ used in English? In the present tense, often enough, > A tree _falls_ in the woods, but a logger _falls_ trees as well. but in the past tense, > A _tree_ fell in the woods, but the logger _felled_ a tree. However, if it's not a tree, or if it's not a person's normal course of work to fall trees, then _fell_ is used to mean "cause [some structure, regime, etc.] to fall." > Someone will _fell_ that evil dynasty one day. As far as I know "falled" is not a word, and "fell" is not a past-tense form in the causative sense.


title: Starting a sentence with "apparently"

text: Can one start a sentence with the word _apparently_? For example: > Apparently he did not pay him back. I know that one should not start a sentence with _because_ , but what are some words that one shouldn't start sentences with?


title: What's the evolution of the phrase "milk it for all its worth"?

text: The phrase "milking it" seems to have originated in the context of finance. According to the OED, "milking" can refer to > The manipulation of funds for (esp. unscrupulous or illicit) financial gain; > (more generally) exploitation of resources. Similarly, given what the physical act of milking some animal is like, it makes sense to think about "milking it" as "getting as much as possible out of a resource." All of this makes sense. I'm wondering, however, when this idiom started to be used in different contexts. When did it become common to hear "You're really milking that for all its worth" in reference to an injury, for example, or for an emotional slight? Similarly, which is preferable: "milking it for all _its_ worth" or "milking it for all _it's_ worth"? Should there be a standard, or does it depend on the meaning one wants to convey? I'm inclined to prefer _its_ , as a thing does possess a finite worth (theoretically).


title: The meaning and origin of "hedge your bets"

text: What exactly does it mean? And what is the origin of the phrase "hedge your bets"?


title: Expression choice: 'conclusion', 'taken as a whole', or 'regarding'

text: I am wondering if it would be more effective to use another construction: > **Taken as a whole** or > **Regarding** instead of > **In the general framework** of the leaf photosynthesis limitations > associated with drought stress, we may conclude that leaf assimilation could > have been reduced by increase in stomata and mesophyll resistance, elevation > of the leaf temperature and negative feedback of carbohydrates. Are these expressions all equivalent? Are there different levels of formality involved?


title: What does steel beams mean here?

text: From _Legend_ by Marie Lu: > It’s early evening, but it’s already pitch-black outside, and the > JumboTrons’ reflections are visible in the street’s puddles. I sit on a > crumbling window ledge three stories up, hidden from view behind rusted > steel beams. This used to be an apartment complex, but it’s fallen into > disrepair. Broken lanterns and glass shards litter the floor of this room, > and paint is peeling from every wall. In one corner, an old portrait of the > Elector Primo lies faceup on the ground. I wonder who used to live here—no > one’s cracked enough to let their portrait of the Elector sit discarded on > the floor like that. What are the rusted steel beams here ? I can't imagine what the the author is saying here.


title: "Seal the Deal" literally?

text: I am familiar with "seal the deal" only as an expression.   1. I assume it has a history in literal use. If so, was "seal" the process of stamping/imprinting, or the process of securing a containing envelope, or something else altogether?   2. Does the expression still see literal use today?


title: "What they are is x" — is singular "is" correct, and why?

text: Is the following sentence correct? > Such splendid isolation is the privilege of the giants of a discipline, and > giants in the world of scholarship is definitely what the authors of this > volume are. I found it disconcerting, but I do not feel confident evaluating its correctness. The question is particularly interesting because it appears in the description of a book related to linguistics! http://www.amazon.com/Atlas- North-American-English-Phonetics/dp/3110167468/ * * * There seem to be a number of issues here. The clause "what the authors of this volume are" rather than a simpler noun phrase, the atypical arrangement of the sentence for emphasis (as in "The winner is you." instead of "You are the winner."), etc. The above issues make it far trickier than "The authors of this volume are definitely giants in their discipline." PS - In addition to the question itself, please feel free to correct/edit any of the terms I describe clumsily (the title, the parenthetical statement in the first paragraph, etc).


title: "View data" is to "observance" as "control data" is to what?

text: To view data is practising observance, to control data is practising...? I'm not looking for the antonym of _observance_ , I just don't know the "looking:observance::doing:?" word.


title: Why is so much idiotic jargon used in U.S. business communication?

text: I heard part of a similar complaint on BBC World Service this morning. The broadcasted example was a thirty-nine word jargon-ridden answer provided by the Starbucks coffee company's CEO to the question: "Will you buy any more companies this year?" The real answer was: "No." In my business dealings, the catch-phrases abound. I am reminded of the joke told by Naval aviators: "An airplane crash is "officially" defined as a semi- controlled descent into local indigenous terrain."


title: What's the appropriate term for a non-annual commemoration of an event?

text: The word "anniversary" literally means a day that commemorates and/or celebrates a past event that occurred on the same day of the year as the initial event. The "ann" in "anniversary" comes from the Latin word "annum," meaning "year." As such, it kind of bugs me when people refer to the "six- month anniversary" of an event. Is there a more appropriate word that means something like an anniversary, except for not a year?


title: Why don't writers make more use of the word "abracadabra"?

text: If you want to import a sense of the miraculous into your text, why not use _abracadabra_ which has been available in English since the late 17th century, and originated in Gnostic writings in the 2nd century? My instinct tells me these would have been Greek, but the OED claims they were Latin. Is this correct?


title: Concise phrase for "former employees' tasks"

text: I'm looking for a short, snappy alternative word/phrase meaning "person who has left the company". I have very limited space available (20 characters) for a label that conveys (in prose): > List of tasks that are open but assigned to somebody who has left the > company I've tried Thesaurus.com but can't find anything graceful with this precise meaning. "Ex-staff" for example, is adequately short, but equally unpleasant. Given our wonderful language's habit of a word for every occasion I'm surprised I'm finding nothing suitable!


title: Proper Use of "Disponibility"

text: I recently ran into a word that I hadn't encountered before in my life in this context: > "Well, thanks a lot [BlackVegetable] both for your quick reply and > disponibility." (It's in a comment on Stack Overflow.) Intrigued, I performed a quick Google search on the word "Disponibility" which led me to the Wiktionary entry stating: > Noun: availability What on earth? I thought I would have encountered this in a thesaurus or some other context for such a common word by now. When is this word (supposed to be) used, and is it an exact synonym?


title: which type of conditional should I choose?

text: In a crowded market, I'm pushing someone in front of me aside in order to get my way through. The guy turns around, arguing why I'm pushing him. I reply: (1) If I don't push you, how can I get through? (2) If I didn't push you, how could I get through? (3) If I hadn't pushed you, how could I have got through? (4) If I weren't pushing you, how could I be getting through? My main problem is: The decision of the push has happened. It can't be changed. It seems that I should use Sentence 3. However, the action of the push is happening and the action of passing through hasn't finished. It seems that using sentence 4 is logical, but it sounds weird, doesn't it? Also, if my intention to reply him is to put this situation in a objective situation, like when we discuss a decision a protagonist makes in a story, does Sentence 1 make sense to show my intention? Is Sentence 2 better to show the same intention? Any advice will be greatly appreciated.


title: agreement in plural possessives

text: I'll try this one more time and if I'm blocked by the system, I will give up. Which is correct: "everyone's life" or "everyone's lives"?


title: What's the opposite of new comer ? Is veteran ok?

text: Someone who has just come to a new workplace may be called a new comer. What about someone who has been at a workplace for a while or a long time? I have looked up the dictionary. Does veteran(veteran to refer to someone who has been involved in a particular activity for a long time.) mean this? But I do not quite think so. Any other words for this? What about old people, old man, old comer ? Are they OK?


title: "Cups of gold and wine"

text: In the quote in the title, "of" refers both to the material that makes up the cup and to the stuff that the cup holds. I remember reading that there is a literary device that describes this, but I can't remember what it's called. The device, if I remember correctly, refers to the parallel structure of a phrase whereby a thing is described in two aspects or, as in this case, an aspect and a function. Shakespeare commonly used it, though I can't think of a quote. Syliva Plath uses it in the line: > I am silver and exact to refer to a mirror--what it's made from and how it does its job. Could someone tell me what this structure is called.


title: "Only when..." vs "it was only when..."

text: In the following example: > Eri stared at date on the screen, but all she saw were white pixels. Only > when she recovered from her shock that she became aware of its meaning. Do it have to add " _it was_ " before "...only when..."? Or it's not necessary? When to use **only when** and when to use **it was only when**?


title: What is the etymology of “yellow”, and why is it so different in other European languages?

text: It seems like most of our names for colors come from our German roots ( _blue/blau, green/grün, red/rot_ , etc.). But _yellow_ is _gelb_ in German, _amarillo_ in Spanish, _jaune_ in French, and _giallo_ in Italian. I suppose the Italian seems closest, but perhaps they all have something in common?


title: "Take a degree" or "do a degree"

text: In university I learned that we say _to do a degree in X_ but I saw many other sources where it says _to take a degree in X_. Which is correct? Is there a regional difference?


title: "Is missing" vs. "is missed"

text: I was wondering why we say "something is missing" instead of "something is missed"? If _missed_ is an adjective then why we use it that way? E.g.: "The sword is missing".


title: What are a coolie and a draw, as in "feed in the coolies & water in the draw"?

text: In a cowboy song the narrator, who is riding an old paint (spotted horse), says the dogies (motherless calves) "feed in the coolies & water in the draw." Where do they feed, and where do they water?


title: Usage of 'will' twice in a sentence

text: Is the sentence 'The student who will score the maximum marks will win a prize' correct?


title: Embedding a sentence in another sentence

text: In my native language Slovene, we often put a sentence in the middle of another sentence to further clarify the context. An example would be, > A few years ago - being young and stupid - I was stealing neighbour's > cherries. Does this construct exist in English language and if yes, what is it called?


title: What is the meaning of the sentence "you have to be possessed which you can't will"?

text: There is this video on John Baldessari and he says there's three things a young artist should know. I couldn't get the second one because I could not figure out the sentence. Take a look at it: > You have to be possessed which you can't will If one wants to see the tip in context, it appears at 4:58 in this 5:54 video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eU7V4GyEuXA Many thanks!


title: How to use "social disparity"

text: How should the phrase _social disparity_ be used in a sentence? > There was great **social disparity** between A and B. > > The **social disparity** was great between A and B.


title: What does "Humility disarms" mean?

text: I am reading Alice Schroeder's "The Snowball" where she uses the phrase "humility disarms" in following sentence: > Among the many lessons, some of the best come simply from observing him. > Here is the first: Humility disarms I couldn't quite get the meaning as to what it exactly meant. The book is a biography of Warren Buffett.


title: Does "In the event of ..." take the genitive case?

text: Is insisting on a genitive pronoun after "In the event of ..." pedantry or correct? For example: "In the event of ..."   * his/him winning the election   * my/me dying   * our/us leaving For those who advocate the genitive, would you also write "In the event of Peter's leaving"?


title: "He remembered seeing a pocket compass [...] and marveling/marveled"

text: > Albert Einstein talked about what influenced his life as a scientist. He > remembered seeing a pocket compass when he was five years old and ( > **marveling/marveled** ) that the needle always pointed north. This is from my exam question which asked to select the correct choice between _marveling_ and _marveled_. The answer says _marveling_ is the correct answer but it seems like _marveled_ is the right answer for me. Can someone verify the answer and explain why _marveling_ is correct?


title: How would you describe an operator which has no fixity?

text: Traditionally mathematical operators are either prefix, postfix or infix. All the three forms of notation are equivalent and can be converted from one to another. Formal systems such as programming languages usually enforce a certain fixity. Most languages are infix, LISP and its derivatives are prefix and concatenative languages are usually postfix. If a formal system allows an operator to be used as either prefix, postfix or infix depending upon its position relative to its operands how would you describe its fixity? I was thinking along the lines of "unfix" or "nofix", but I'm not sure which one would be appropriate. I believe "nofix" is more accurate. Unfortunately there's no such word. On the other hand "unfix" means "to unfasten" or "loosen". Clearly not very accurate.


Are there any differences between "supernatural" and "paranormal"?


title: "Just" vs "already": which one is sooner?

text: Which one is sooner or closer to now? >   1. I've just called him. >   2. I've already called him. >


title: What's the meaning of "on somebody's account"?

text: I looked up "on somebody's account" in the Longman dictionary. The following is an excerpt from it: > **on somebody’s account**   >  if you do something on someone’s account, you do it because you think they > want you to   >  _Please don’t change your plans on my account._ I'm still confused about it. Does the example sentence mean "please don't change your plans for me" or "it's none of my business that you change your plan"?


title: What's the difference between "I look forward to" and "I'm looking forward to"?

text: I just don't get the reasoning behind which one is correct in which situation. Typically I use the wrong one, or I use them when I'm not supposed to.


title: Word for the extent of truth of an article

text: I'm looking for a noun to be used in the following sentence to express my **uncertainty** about the amount of absolute truth an article contains. In other words, I doubt if the information the article contains are based on facts. What is the word for the 'degree of truth'? > I am not certain about the ___ of this article. (Sorry I really do not know how I should describe the noun I am looking for.. Using 'degree of truth' to express the idea is a bit strange but I can't think of any other phrase.)


title: In an international software, should I use First name / Last name instead of Full name?

text: I'm building a software meant to be used internationally. At first I don't have localization features so I intend to use an "international English". I must say the US market is big and I may do something more familiar to US people because of that, but I'd like something international if possible. Should I use `First name` and `Last name` instead of `Full name`? If the answer is yes... What about the middle name? Wouldn't it be registered? And how would I display it? Would it be `Hopkins, Anthony`? or `Anthony Hopkins`? I live in Brazil and here we use always full names. Thank you so much.