title: Looking for a word the describes a common belief is often not the case

text: What word describes the concept of how what is generally held as to be true, is in fact false (at least most of the time). I think a fictional story illustrates an example the best: Tinkerbell lives in Never Land. Tinkerbell got lucky and secured a job as a fairy. Everyone knows being a fairy is the best job that exists in Never Land. However, after becoming a fairy, Tinkerbell learns that most fairies find the job terrible and it is actually really unenjoyable being a fairy. Another example (completely made up): Most people assume Olympic Athletes are fit, but in turns out this is untrue as a great deal of the time and to compete in the Olympics is determined more by connections than athletic ability.


title: "Man" vs. "guy" vs. "boy"

text: I am about 19 year old and go to college. Often I have to refer to myself in an introduction. What shall I call myself? 'Man' seems too old, 'boy' seems too young and 'guy' seems too informal. What shall I call myself? **Update:** as a comment suggested, and I felt too, an example is needed. This is actually quite general. I want to use it, for example, in a blog, during conversations, or maybe in an interview. I am just looking for the most appealing noun.


title: What is the origin of the word "whitewash" in the context of sports?

text: The term _whitewash_ is used in sports to describe a situation where the opponents are beaten in a series of matches failing to register a single win. Merriam-Webster defines it as :- > to hold (an opponent) scoreless in a game or contest What is the history of the word when used in sports? Is there some racist undertone to the term?


title: Primary association of "to make out"

text: I am about to write an article about the German verb "ausmachen", which looking at the parts, looks awfully close to "make out". I did some reading on Merriam Webster and Wiktionary only to find that what I thought to be a sexual term only, actually had and still has a different meaning (to discern and others). I did not know that and I doubt that many non natives are aware of that. Now I am wondering as to whether the actual connotation of "make out", that is the original non-sexual one, comes to the mind of a native speaker when he or she hears "to make out". I know that in context it will be clear. But what about the pure infinitive... do people have to think to get the non-sexual meaning or is it present immediately?


title: What's the difference between "waste time" and "pass time"?

text: In this sentence" If reading is to accomplish anything more than___time, it must be active. "Should I fill in "wasting" or "passing"? Thank you!


title: Why should sentences not start with "there is" or "there are"?

text: I had written a paper with the sentence "There is also social proof in how the man with the pizza ends up with an attractive women". I had lost marks due to the fact it is poor English to start sentences with "There is" or "There are". I want to double check this is true because the prof actually is not fluent in English herself. If it true, how can such sentences be reworded? I know many things in English (and in life) aren't necessarily wrong but should be avoided. Is it that starting a sentence with "There is" is proper grammar but does not usually appear in academic writing? I found notes with the explanation as to why she thinks this is bad: > (Almost) never begin a sentence with “It is...” or “There is/are...” These > are examples of unnecessary verbiage. The exception is when the “it” > actually refers to something, as in “This paper is an A+. It follows all the > suggestions on this page.” What is meant by when "it refers to something"? EDIT: I personally don't see the need to quote the exact sentence as it is just an example, but I see some are getting quite worked up over the entire sentence in general.


title: How to pronounce “arch” in Linuxese?

text: _Tech_ stands for _technique_ or _technology_. But how should one pronounce _tech_? Is it as /tɛk/ as in _technical_ or /tɛtʃ/ as in _tetchy_? Similarly, _arch_ stands for _architect_ or _architecture_. How do you pronounce _arch_? Is it the same way you do when you say the _Golden Arches_ , or it it as in _archangel_ with a /k/ sound?


title: How do you capitalize "spam"?

text: Is it legitimate to put "spam" (the junk email kind, not the trademarked meat) in all caps? An example I've recently read is > Please read before flagging as SPAM (a reminder from your moderators) – ends > Sep 5


title: How best to use the phrase “on the whole”?

text: Is the phrase _on the whole_ used correctly in the following sentence? > The information, on the whole, was inaccurate. If not, what other ways are there to express it?


title: Mixed conditional clause type 1-3

text: I came across the following conditional clause while studying a grammar book published by Oxford: "If you know London so well, you shouldn't have got so hopelessly lost." The writer of the book has only briefly mentioned that this is a mixed conditional clause (type 1-3) without giving any further explanation in what situation it can be used. I'm already familiar with two other types of mixed conditional clauses (type 2-3 and type 3-2) and have no problem understanding them but this one is causing me some trouble. I need your help. Thanks.


title: What do you call an item that appeals to a human urge but is unnatural?

text: I've heard this term before, let me provide a context. > Chocolate cake is **___ __ ___ __**, it is more sweet than anything that > occurs in nature and humans are drawn to it naturally because of a desire to > have their taste buds stimulated in such a fashion. It's not merely _supernatural_ which has a connotation of being non-existent, like God.


title: What does the phrase "a fine one" mean in this context?

text: In one one Daniil Kharms' short stories, Tikakeyev “insults” Koratygin by saying: > A fine one you are! This causes a fight between the two. When I first read this, I didn't see the “insult”, unless it's sheer irony, I still don't see it. Kharms, as you may know, is a bit “special”, to say the least, and it's possible that a compliment may also cause a fight in his stories. Does this phrase have a insulting meanin in this context? I need an explanation for the fight :) Full text of the story appears at shops.htm in the Kharms story directory on sevaj.dk website.


title: Are these examples of personification?

text: I have two sentences that I think use personification: > You find your voice by **feeding your mind** with your passions. and > This apathetic culture that we live in is **silencing** our voices. Am I correct about the use of personification here?


title: Can I call my close friends "Old Sport" nowadays?

text: I wonder, can I call my close friends "Old Sport" nowadays? What about my close female friends?


title: "Which stage is most desirable?" or "Which stage is the most desirable?"

text: Which sentence is correct? Should I put "the" before "most"?


title: Word that means "the front side of a person"?

text: For example, to be used in a sentence like this: > He always found it easier to recall his girlfriend's back rather than her > [...].


title: Is *-scule* in *minuscule* a suffix?

text: Is _-scule_ in _minuscule_ a suffix? What does it mean? _scale_? (I have looked it up in etymonline and didn't find the answer)


title: I want to break the habit of "here's the thing"

text: What are some alternatives to this overused phrase? Examples of use: Person A: What's going on? Why did Person B do that? Person C: Ummm... can we go somewhere more private? A & C go to the corner Person C: Here's the thing, Person B and Person D have a lot of personal history... Person A: Why can't we just hire someone to do that one task? It's such a waste of time having five people rotating on that task every week. Person B: Yeah, I hear ya. Those five workers have brought that up too. But here's the thing: management believes it's fine the way it is and it's not worth hiring a person solely for that task.


title: Is there a name for this reading habit?

text: Someone was asking for advice about reading only half of the letters in a word. Is there a name for it? Example would be...instead of reading "I won't go there with her" you read "I won go here wit he".


title: Is there a word that combines the meanings of "not practical" and "not useful"?

text: For some particular treatment, in a specialized topic, I wanted to say that it's not practical as well as not useful. Is there just one word for that?


title: Usage of "our" in sentences where we skip that/which are

text: > We check our Facebook three times on the way to work on our smartphones more > powerful than your computer. Is this sentence correct? It sounds much better if we remove the _our_ before _smartphones_ but since: > We check our Facebook three times on the way to work on big smartphones more > powerful than your computer. Is correct why should the original be wrong? If it is wrong, what is it about _our_ that makes it wrong?


title: Too many "and"s? Is it grammatically correct?

text: A friend of mine (a non-native speaker of English) has asked me to check her CV and I'm afraid / ashamed to say, I'm having trouble. Are there too many "and"s in the given sentence? It seems OK to me, but I've always heard we shouldn't use so many in one sentence. Here it is: > I help individuals, schools and organisations to provide special needs care, > care training and home audits by providing training classes, carer > evaluations and other care-based educational services. There are many sentences that look similar. Again, they all look OK to me, but this is at odds with what I learned in school. All I could find on the subject was the "Oxford comma", which doesn't seem to be the problem here. They tend to follow this pattern: I work with x, y and z to provide x, y and z.


title: Has "Kinki" become less common than "Kansai" because of the word "kinky"?

text: According to Google NGram, "Kinki" and "Kansai" (which are pretty synonymous) used to be roughly equally common, but Kansai is now more common. Is this difference statistically different? And if so, what contributed to it? Could the word "kinky" have contributed to it? Google NGram doesn't indicate a spectacular rise for the word, but that could be because it didn't use to be used in a sexual sense, whereas that meaning has become more common over time - I don't know how to measure that though. The other explanation I can think of is that Japanese people use "Kinki" less nowadays, and that the relative use of "Kinki" versus "Kansai" has spilled over into English.


title: Grammatically incorrect sentence?

text: I just appeared for GATE 2013. In its aptitude section, I was totally confused. The question was to identify the grammatically incorrect sentence. The sentences were:                1. He is of Asian origin.      2. They belonged to Africa.      3. She is an European.      4. They migrated from India to Australia.      According to me (3) and (4) are correct but I am confused whether 1st is incorrect or 2nd. Please clarify if we can use _"belonged to"_ in this regard ( _belong to a country_ ). Moreover, the first sentence is even more doubtful, as we generally say > He is Asian. It already means that his origin is Asia. So please, tell me which is the incorrect sentence and why?


title: Is it acceptable to use "especially" at the beginning of a sentence?

text: Whenever I see a sentence starting with "especially," I always get the impression that this is not grammatically correct. From example: > The high water-salt ratio will not be good for you. Especially if you are > dehydrated. I feel like the two sentences should be united with punctuation, not divided. Am I mistaken?


title: Best way to combine two sentences

text: David studied for his math exam for several hours David received the highest grade in his class. I would rephrase like this: Receiving the highest grade in his math class, David had studied for his exam for several hours. But this sounds wrong to me, somehow?? People could think the two thing happened all at once?   1. David studied for his math exam and David received the highest grade in class   2. After studying for his math exam for several hrs, David received the highest grade. Now, which one of these 3 sentences separates the two things by the right amount of time?


title: An antonym for "daylight"

text: Considering that:   * The antonym of _day_ is _night_.   * The antonym of _light_ can be either _darkness_ or _obscurity_. Is there any exact antonym for _daylight_ , a word that would mean " _the darkness of the night_ ", the same way _daylight_ means " _the light of day_ "? I would use _darkness_ in a conversation, but _darkness_ is not necessarily associated with the _night_ : it could be used to describe a dark room even when it's sunny outside. However, _daylight_ cannot be used to describe a room lightened by a light bulb when it's dark outside. _Edit :_ I do not specifically look for a word recognised by a dictionary. A neologism used by a published author, and a culture reference would also be interesting. _Edit 2 :_ From tchrist's answer, it is now clear that no single-word expression exists for the concept I'm talking about (which is why I accepted the answer). However, _moonshine_ , _moonlight_ cannot match correctly since they define _light_ , when the question is about defining _night darkness_. This reminds me of something Einstein once supposedly said to a teacher : > There is no such thing as darkness. Darkness is nothing but the absence of > light. From this, while it is possible to _stand in the daylight_ , one couldn't _stand in night darkness_ , since darkness is nothing to be standing in. Similarly, while you can be _in water_ , you can't actually be _in dryness_.


title: Survey vs Surveil

text: Is `survey` just an Anglicisation of the loan-word `surveil`, or have the meanings split? http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/survey and http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/surveil suggests that `surveil` is only used in the context of observing _people_ , but considering they are pronounced the same (where I come from), I can't hear this difference in everyday usage.


title: Expression for a "smiling face tiger"

text: The Chinese expression "smiling face tiger" (笑面虎) is defined in English at one website as "an outwardly kind but inwardly cruel person". More broadly it doesn't need to refer to someone who is actually positively _cruel_. The phrase might be used to refer to a person who superficially appears nice/gracious/easygoing/etc., but actually is not at all nice/gracious/easygoing/etc. Any similar expression/word/idiom in English? **Edit to elaborate** : One suggested answer in "wolf in sheep's clothing". This is perhaps the closest English translation (especially since it involves animals) but I think this English/European idiom has an emphasis on the fact that the wolf is _deliberately_ disguising himself in sheep's clothing, in order to deceive someone and achieve some malicious end. What I am thinking of is someone less malicious than a "wolf in sheep's clothing" (but can nonetheless--though not usually--be just as harmful). Examples:   * He is always smiling, greeting you, and saying "Good morning, how do you do?" and generally being absolutely courteous.    * When he spills some coffee on your shirt he might say, "Oh my goodness! I am SO terribly sorry! I am such an absolute and horrible klutz! Please let me wash your shirt for you!" (but with no intent of actually doing so, knowing that you will probably reject the offer).    * He often offers to help you out or do you favors (again with no intent of doing so).   * When you inadvertently cause him some inconvenience, he might say "Oh that is no problem at all! Absolutely no problem at all!" and keep smiling and seem unperturbed the whole time (but in fact he is extremely peeved and if you provoke him just a little bit more, he is liable to abruptly erupt in fury).  These are just some examples. You can probably think of more. Such a person does this sort of thing on an everyday basis. Unlike a "wolf in sheep's clothing", he has no malicious intent to disguise himself or to seriously harm anyone else. Nonetheless, he has somehow acquired the art of delivering a very favorable first impression and being very nice with his words and superficial acts. But when a problem actually surfaces, it is quickly revealed that he is not very nice after all.


title: How many possible meanings does " inclusion" have?

text: I want to know how many possible meaning does " inclusion" have in this sentence, I cant get its meaning. " I am all for inclusion. but that part of the country? those are not my people."


title: How to conjugate a verb with multiple subjects

text: Say you have the following sentence: > Alice (and her family) [some present-tense inflection of the verb _be_ ]. . > . . How do you conjugate _be_ here? It refers both to Alice and "her family". Thus this probably means one writes _are_? Is this correct?


title: What do you call a person that adds things to a list?

text: Would "adder" be a valid term? The person is someone who adds an item to the list.


title: Can "yell 'word' for passcode" be considered a wordplay?

text: Consider the following sentence: > Yell "word" for passcode. Obviously it instructs one to yell "word" in order to get a passcode. To me it looks like the sentence could be read as a wordplay too, meaning that the passcode is actually `Yell "word"`. However, is this valid from a grammatical point of view? I've tried to find a replacement for _for_ when reading the sentence like that, and all I could get to was _is_. I'm not exactly sure I was on the right tracks there.


title: degrees of temperature and humidity

text: I am currently working on a game where the different areas of the map will have different climates. I wish to have 5 different levels of temperature and humidity for the different climates. I currently have the following descriptors(from lowest to highest) for the levels. for temperature: FREEZING, COLD, MILD, HOT, SCORCHING, and for humidity: ARID, VERY_DRY, DRY, HUMID, MOIST Do you feel that these names are accurate? Any suggestions for more appropriate descriptors?


title: Using “So” Followed by a Noun Phrase to Express Boredom, Disgust, Tediousness, Dullness, Banality

text: In the BBC TV series _Sherlock_ ’s episode two from series three, “The Empty Hearse", John Watson waxes maudlin over being left out of the loop for two years regarding Sherlock’s faked death. Sherlock replies: “That is so two years ago.” I interpret this to mean so much time has passed that the subject is old stuff and Watson is behaving like someone upset over past slights. I’m interested in the etymology of this construction. I suspect it goes back to Shakespeare’s days.


title: "Changing and improving are not always the same thing" or "Changing and improving is not always the same thing"

text: Are both valid? I think the first is the only option, but I have been challenged on this and I can't explain exactly why the second is wrong. It does make sense, I suppose.


title: One word for "any way around it"

text: Let us say I frame a sentence as follows: > Is there any way around this problem? I want to convey the feeling that bypass, or trick without actually using the problem, without actually dealing with it. P.S.: It may so happen that my actual sentence does not convey this feeling either. I am learning English and am new to it.


title: Redundant definite article?

text: Why do we say >   * get hold of >   * lose sight of > instead of >   * get the hold of >   * lose the sight of > The missing article has always bugged me.


title: What is modifying the "i" in Thumbelina and Carolina to alter its pronuciation?

text: While helping my daughter read (she is 5) we encountered two names in a story, Thumbelina and Carolina. The way I've come to pronounce the last four letters of "Thumbelina" is "LEE NAH" and the same part of "Carolina" as "LIE NAH". My question is what is modifying the sound "i" makes in each name? Is there a name for this rule? Am I just pronouncing "Thumbelina" or "Carolina" incorrectly?


title: Best way to phrase "{x and y} and z"?

text: I've continually struggled with this sentence arrangement. I have a list of 2 groups, but one of the groups is also a group of 2. Example: "I need help finding turtles and brown and grey foxes" The multiple "and's" makes the sentence awkward and confusing.


title: What is the opposite of "abbreviation"?

text: What is the opposite of "abbreviation"? For example, if `ELL` is an abbreviation for `English Language Learners`,   then `English Language Learners` is a(n) **___ __ ___ ___** for `ELL`. I'm looking for a word that will work for all abbreviations, not just acronyms, so another example would be: if `abbr.` is an abbreviation for `abbreviation`, then `abbreviation` is a(n) **___ __ ___ ___** for `abbr.`


title: Usage of "acknowledge"

text: Is it acceptable to write "We acknowledge Dr. AAA for his useful advice" to express gratitude or appreciation?


title: "Postfix" or "suffix"?

text: Wikipedia and The Free Dictionary were not much help — is there a **practical difference** in the semantics of _suffix_ and _postfix_ , except that the latter is more rare? File name extensions are well known. For example, `index.en.xhtml` could reasonably be assumed to be the index file of a website directory, in XHTML format, and with primarily English, human-readable contents. I’d normally call the collection of extensions (`.en.xhtml` in the example) the _suffix_ or _postfix_ , but it’s not obvious which (if any) is technically and/or semantically more accurate.


title: I end up studying english VS. I end up to study English

text: What is the difference in meaning between these: "I end up studying English" and "I end up to study English".


title: What is the proper expression for 'putting down the hood' (of a sweatshirt)?

text: Alright, super simple question I guess, but I'm no native speaker and google doesn't seem to be helpful here... What do you call it when you go from wearing your hoodie 'hood up' to 'hood down (open?)' thanks a bunch


title: Is there a word for something that would be hilarious if it weren't true?

text: I've been thinking all day but nothing is coming to mind. I feel like I'd use it a lot if one existed.


title: What's the noun-form of "not working"?

text: The phrase "not working" can be used as an adjective, for example: > My laptop is not working. What is the noun-form of the adjective "not working"? E.g. "The not-workingness of my laptop."


title: One word for experiencing a place or event through their description without being physically going to that place or event?

text: One word for experiencing a place or event through someone else's explanation without being physically going to that place or event?


title: What’s the parent of a clone called?

text: Let’s say X is cloned to make Y and Y is cloned to make Z. Is there a word that uniquely identifies X in relation to Y? How about identifying X in relation to Z?


title: generic term for "A-hed"? (quirky article at the bottom of the front page of the Wall Street Journal)

text: The Wall Street Journal usually has a quirky article on the bottom of the front page, on anything from paper clips to tugboat racing to borscht manufacturers. Their name for it is an A-hed. Is there a generic term for this? (I've seen a similar concept in other papers, on a less regular basis)


title: Minutes from a meeting

text: In this sentence: > Thanks, John; that's duly noted. what other word can you put instead of _duly noted_


title: How does an "agency" differ from a "company"?

text: When should a _company_ be called an _agency_? Typically advertising and recruitment companies call themselves agencies, is there a reason other than tradition for this?


title: Use of 'swag' as a verb

text: I came across this post on swag (the slang word): > Attempt to swag should ideally be accompanied by apt spellings. I have seen _swag_ being used only as a noun. I know _swagger_ is a verb, but is _swag_ one, too?


What is the difference between reference and deference? Is it true that it could be that reference is giving respect or showing respect, which means that reference could mean deference? Deference's meaning is what I don't get.


title: "Contribute for" or "Contribute to" or "Contribute on" or "Contribute in"

text: We said : > I do want to thank Mr. Foulen and Mr. Felten who **contribute for** server > hosting . or > I do want to thank Mr. Foulen and Mr. Felten who **contribute to** server > hosting . or > I do want to thank Mr. Foulen and Mr. Felten who **contribute on** server > hosting . or > I do want to thank Mr. Foulen and Mr. Felten who **contribute in** server > hosting .


title: Meaning of 'I don't swing at soft balls'

text: In an episode of Cougar Town, I noticed one of the characters told her friend 'I don't swing at soft balls'. First I thought it was an idiom, but I couldn't find it anywhere when I started looking it up. Here's the dialogue: > Girl 1 - Luckily, I can control my gag reflex.   >  Girl 2 - _(ignoring)_   >  Girl 1 - What, nothing?!   >  Girl 2 - I don't swing at soft balls. I would like to know whether this is normally used in English or it is just a phrase coined for the occasion.


title: "Could have avoided" vs "could avoid"

text: This is a line from a fiction in which a killer says to the good guy > For what it's worth I had hoped we **could have** avoided this day". I mean why not say "For what it's worth I had hoped we **could** avoid this day"? Please note that I know the general grammar rules about _could_ and _could have_ but this one seems to be strange.


title: initialism for names starting with a digraph

text: What is the rule of initialism for names starting with digraph that is usually considered as a single letter? For instance, some non-Latin single letter transcribes to a digraph (e.g., Russian: Yu in Юрий->Yuri, Chinese: Zh in Zhang, etc.). Should I use the first letter or the whole string corresponding the single letter?


title: What's the semantic difference between "How did I <verb> <subject>" and "How I <verb in past tense> <subject>"?

text: Is there any difference between these two forms? Examples:   * "How did I take that picture" vs. "How I took that picture"   * "How did I make the cake" vs. "How I made the cake"   * "How did I meet my wife" vs. "How I met my wife"


title: what does "line ministries" mean?

text: Could someone explain it for me. I googled it but couldn't find any useful information. I would appreciate it if you could tell me what it means. Example usage... > _The antimonopoly committee has oversight responsibilities for antimonopoly > issues, but the **line ministries** are responsible for implementing the > antimonopoly laws._


title: "Were happily recovering" vs. "were, happily, recovering"

text: >   * The hospital informed us that both victims were happily recovering. >   * The hospital informed us that both victims were, happily, recovering. > What is the difference in meaning between the two? Aren't they the same?


title: Noun+ infinitive + verb structure

text: In my grammar book I've got a sentence **The woman to talk to is over there** and this is the only example. That makes me believe I can say things like:   * -The packages to deal with will arrive tomorrow   * -The foreign student to help to practice his Norwegian isn't here anymore   * -Sorry! The guy to fix such things doesn't work today   * -My time to talk has come   * -The wish to call her waned after some time I'm getting the hang of it or I'm really off? )


title: by + the + noun

text: 1. He's well off. He can spend £ 1000 by (to?) the minute   2. You can buy cheese by (to?) the kilogramme. Do these sound correct? Meaning every minute / kilogramme.


title: What's the correct adverb for predict?

text: I'm trying to figure out whether it is valid to say > the size of ... is predictively determined some sources on the web include predictively as a valid adverb, some don't. And what about _predictably_? Thank you!


title: Jumps vs. Leaps

text: Does a curve in science or finance have sudden jumps or sudden leaps? We talk about a discontinuous curve. My position is that jumps is more appropriate but I might be wrong.


What's the difference between 'china' and 'porcelain'?


Which one is the most general: "ox", "bull", "bison" or "buffalo"? I've looked it up in Wikipedia, but it seems that the authors of articles in Wikipedia are trying to avoid using general terms and would rather use special scientific terms derived from Latin, which makes definitions very accurate and that's, of course, the way how any article in encyclopedia should be. But here I am more concerned about general terms and their usage, not precise definitions. So, which one of those four words seems more inclusive to you? (I know "cattle" would probably "swallow" them all :) )


title: Sentence structure of second amendment

text: Wikipedia mentions two versions. As passed by the Congress and preserved in the National Archives: > A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, > the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. As ratified by the States and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson, then- Secretary of State: > A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, > the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. The first version seems grammatically awkward to me. Isn't there something wrong in the sentence?


title: Term for talking about a subject or idea you did not want to talk about?

text: Specifically, is there a term for the situation where both parties agree not to discuss a certain subject and in so doing end up engaging in a discussion about the very topic they said they wouldn't? An example: > Person A: "What do you want to talk about?" > > Person B: "Anything but the weather." > > Person A: "Agreed, I find it boring to discuss the weather." > > Person B: "Me too. Oh, that reminds me -- did you hear it was supposed to > snow tomorrow?" > > Person A: "Wow, really? I didn't know that. So long as it doesn't rain!" > > Person B: "You do realize we now actually _are_ talking about the weather, > right?"


title: Hyphenation of the suffix "like"

text: I am having trouble understanding the following: "the achievable rate of the optimal AF scheme performs close to the **cut-set like bound** obtained in this paper" I think that the word "like" (above) is intended to be used as a suffix to express the fact that the bound is "cut-set"-like. My question is what to do in such a case to show the connection between the words. Is it (a) "cut set-like" (b) "cut-set-like" (c) "cut set(en dash)like" (d) something else Please help me.


title: "I want to come there" or "I want to go there"

text: When someone is away from you and wants to be where you are, do they tell you _I want to come there_ or _I want to go there_?


title: What does ‘Near-career’ mean?

text: I found a word, _near-career_ filling in the following article of today’s New York Times titled _Unusual Work, Even in World of the Theater_. > Tom Santopietro has made a near-career filling in for other people on > Broadway, not as an understudy, but as a substitute for house managers and > company managers. I also found a line using _near-career_ in a site (City-Data Forum) that follows: > I also had my own military near-career so I moved even more. After living in > seven other states, some of them more than once, and three other countries, > I landed back in California 32 years ago and have stayed. Judging from the context of those sentences, _near-career_ job seems to me akin to _probationary_ , or _not full-fledged_ job. What does _near-career_ exactly mean?


title: I would if you will

text: Is this the correct form ? > I would love to do this as soon as you will do that. Or is it > I would love to do this as soon as you have done that Or is there a better way to form this sentence ?


title: Please check if the sentence is correct

text: I would have passed the exam if there was a computer and internet in my house in 70s.


title: "over the period of" or "over the period"?

text: Which one is correct? > I visited four countries over the period of 2010 to 2014. or > I visited four countries over the period 2010 to 2014.


title: "Ski in / Ski out" – Which action is which?

text: Hotels on ski fields directly connected to the lift system are often referred to as "ski in / ski out" hotels. In this context, does "ski out" refer to the action of skiing out _to_ the mountain, or skiing out of the mountain _back to_ the hotel (with "ski in" being the opposite)?


title: Term for providing a rationale for why a concept applies

text: I am using a concept that was developed for one subject area and applying it to a different area. However, there is a one-to-one correspondence between the objects in the original concept and the objects in the area I would like to apply it to. Specifically, I am drawing an analogy between voters in a shareholder meeting (where not everyone has the same voting power) and chemicals at a Superfund site, in that both carry a certain weight (votes/health risk) towards a measure (bill/remedial action decision). I would like to introduce this discussion with a section header that quickly describes that I will be providing a rationale for applicability of the specific concept. Right now, I am using the provisional title _Rationale for Applicability_ , but perhaps there is something "preposition-free" or more descriptive?


title: Is "Roach Motel" now an established English term for some kinds of buisiness behaviour?

text: I found the origin of the word and the statistics about its usage. I found these two links about facebook and Oracle’s Public Cloud using the term figuratively. **Is this usage common today**?


title: Is Anyone/ Who is used together?

text: > The course is for anyone who is interested in learning about computers. Is there an error in the above sentence formation? Or can we just say: > The course is for anyone interested in learning about computers.


title: "In" or "at" a performance?

text: Which is the correct usage? Example: > I was surprised that she participated at the performance held at LA. > > I was surprised that she participated in the performance held at LA.


title: "Do this" or "Will this" in questions

text: I have a question sentence: "Will this set of vectors form an orthogonal basis for the system?". Is it ok to start with "Will this" or "Do this" is more appropriate?


title: Word detectives needed: "Ananyzapata"

text: I'm trying to decode the mysterious word _Ananyzapata_. Unfortunately I don't have the original source, just its appearance on a slide from a presentation. From the context (words on good luck charms/amulets in Medieval England) it may be a word like _Abracadabra_ , or the name of a god, or angel, or even demon? It might even be a phrase mistakenly rendered as one word. Any ideas?


title: Hypernym for "coalition" and "opposition"

text: I'm looking for a word (or expression) that is a hypernym of _coalition_ and _opposition_. I want to be able to ask a party whether its "type", for lack of a better word, is coalition or the opposition without using that word: > — What is your [ _type_ ]? — Coalition.


title: Meaning of "which we have"

text: What does _which we have_ mean here? > In the end, will you be looking over your shoulder for the rest of your life > wondering if your time is up? The short answer is yes. The long answer is > definitely yes. The truth is, there’s a bull’s-eye on your back, and > committing to this new life is your best shot at staying alive. And while > you may never be able to remove that bull’s-eye, you can certainly cover it > up with a Buzz Lightyear spacesuit and jetpack. **Which we totally have.**


title: Meaning of the phrase "hacked by someone" — but not in context of computers

text: What does it mean when a girl says that she "hasn't been hacked [by a boy]"? Dictionaries give us only computer-related meanings of "hack"; does it have any other meaning?


title: "I am a degree holder now" or "I am now a degree holder"

text: Which one is correct? >   * I am a degree holder now. >   * I am now a degree holder. >


title: Is an ellipsis a distinct punctuation mark?

text: The ellipsis looks like three consecutive periods, but many type faces have a distinct glyph for an ellipsis. Is this an aesthetic distinction, or is the ellipsis actually a different punctuation mark? The reason I ask is I wonder if it's grammatically incorrect to use three periods (...) instead of an ellipsis (…) when typing.


title: Where did "God helps those who help themselves" originate?

text: I've always heard it said that " _God helps those who help themselves._ " From a Biblical perspective this doesn't make much sense to me (since I've also heard that we should rely on God for everything). However, it's a pretty popular phrase. Where did the phrase originate? Is it a Biblical reference or is there no relation to Christianity?


title: Is there a difference between "treble" and "triple"?

text: I've been reading _The Economist_ lately and noticed that the magazine uses both **trebled** and **tripled**. According to my dictionary, "treble" means "threefold; triple". Is there a subtle difference, not captured by the dictionary entry? Some examples, "trebled": >   * _The Economist’s_ index of non-oil commodity prices has trebled in the > past decade. >   * The number of companies from Brazil, India, China or Russia on the > Financial Times 500 list trebled in 2006-08 from 20 to 62. >   * That number has more than trebled since 1999. > "Tripled": >   * In the ten years to 2010, internet users in the developed economies just > about tripled. >   * Intercepts of Chinese planes almost tripled last year, to 96 (see > chart). >   * Many of the 20 leading economic performers in the OECD doubled or > tripled their education spending in real terms between 1970 and 1994, yet > outcomes in many countries stagnated—or went backwards. >


title: Think in the shoes of someone

text: I want my readers to imagine being at a place. Is this a reasonable way of saying it? > Think in the shoes of a visitor of a mass public event, like the Norwegian > Constitution Day. As an alternative, I came up with > Imagine yourself being a visitor of a mass public event, like the Norwegian > Constitution Day.


title: Run me ragged/run me exhausted

text: Is it understandable if we say "run me ragged" or "run me exhausted" (in both of these expression "run" doesn't mean literal "running")?


title: What does "delineate" mean in this context?

text: I was reading a Scientific American story, “Controversial Spewed Iron Experiment Succeeds as Carbon Sink” by David Biello, when I came across this sentence: > The problem for scientists is that oceanic waters tend to mix, which makes > monitoring and delineating an experiment in the ocean challenging. I'm wondering what _delineate_ means in this context. Does it mean “describe” or “trace the outline of”? Could someone kindly enlighten me on this?


title: Is the phrase "Only to later realize" correct in usage?

text: I have the below sentence: > Attended ABC college where I topped the English subject in 10th grade (only > to later realize that my love for the language couldn’t end there). Now after 15 years I realize the truth of the parenthesized statement so how exactly should I state this? "Only to later realize" OR "Only later did I realize". I want to push emphasis on that period of time and hence I prefer retaining the first usage of the phrase. Please correct me if I am grammatically incorrect.


title: "publish in" vs. "publish on"

text: I've been looking thoroughly about each constructions, but I haven't been successful about when to use them. Some rules of thumb I've found: >   * This forum post and this one suggest _publish in_ should be used when > the place of publishing is a three-dimensional place and _publish on_ should > be used when it's a surface. This makes a bit of sense to me, but does not > seem a very academical explanation; whereas there are some cases in which it > would be hard to distinguish which kind of place it is. >   * When the place is virtual, _on_ is used. Example: Publish on Google Play > My particular cases are the following: >   * To publish an application __ [in/on] Google Play >   * To publish an application __ [in/on] a virtual market > Is there a way to identify where to use _publish in_ or _publish on_? Are they mutually exchangeable?


title: Where does "Look yourself in the mirror" come from?

text: Where does "unable to look myself in the mirror" come from? related example: > ...I asked her what she does if after six months or so it becomes obvious > that a salesperson is not bringing in business. Would she fire the person? > Without hesitation, she blurted out, _“I have to look myself in the > mirror!”_ — as if firing someone who isn’t doing the job would make her a > bad person.


title: Differences of "supposed to be" and "supposed to be having"

text: What does this sentence mean: > "I am supposed to be having my physics class in the science building." Also, what is the difference between this sentence and > "I am supposed to have my physics class...."? What should be inferred from the use of a _progressive_ tense?


title: Is there a definitive spelling for the shortened version of “as per usual”?

text: A shortened version of the phrase “as per usual” is now used as slang when referring to something that is typical or expected, often in an exaggerated or hyperbolic manner. For example: > Bill: Mike is late, _again!_   >  Sara: As per usual.   > But instead of saying “as per usual”, the slang version shortens _usual_ to pronounce the first syllable only, which I lazily make an attempt to spell as “ujj”. (IPA /juːʒ/ ―tchrist) ## And the question is. . . . Is there a definitive spelling for the shortened version of “as per usual” — or, more specifically, for the shortened version of _usual_?


title: considers a probability vector v containing the probabilities of jumping to each vertex

text: Should I use " _probabilities_ " or " _probability_ " in the following sentence? > Consider a probability vector _v_ containing the probabilities of jumping to > each vertex.


title: Definition clarification for "effervesce"

text: I was wondering about one of the meanings of _effervesce_ , "give off bubbles". I wonder if you could use _effervesce_ for a solid, and how it's used in a sentence.


title: How to know what part of speech is "there" in some cases?

text: I've been doing some ELA homework and I noticed that ' _there_ ' is not always the same POS. It seems to be an adverb, a noun, a pronoun, and several other POS in various contexts. How would one know what part of speech the word ' _there_ ' is in a given case?


title: How should this sentence be interpreted?

text: So I am reading the essay "On Some Verses of Virgil" by Michel de Montaigne (translation by Donald M. Frame) and I came across this particular sentence. > Is there any ugliness in doing wrong that can dispense us from the duty of > confessing it? The choice of vocabulary here is, honestly, quite confusing to me. Here is the sentence again with the preceding paragraph for context: > The diseases of the body become clearer as they increase. We find that what > we were calling a cold or a sprain is the gout. The diseases of the soul > grow more obscure as they grow stronger; the sickest man is least sensible > of them. That is why they must be handled often in the light of day, with a > pitiless hand, be opened up and torn from the hollow of our breast. As in > the matter of good deeds, so in the matter of evil deeds, mere confession is > sometimes reparation. _Is there any ugliness in doing wrong that can > dispense us from the duty of confessing it?_ It's been a long time sense I've had this much difficulty understanding the exact conclusion a sentence was trying to reach. My first instinct is to assume that the sentence is somewhat synonymous with: > Is there any ugliness in doing wrong that can [spare] us from the [ordeal] > of confessing it? But then a friend of mine offered an interpretation more to the effect of: > Is there any [wrongdoing so exceptional] that [it will] [render our > confession truly unprecedented in the context of humanity]? Meanwhile, another translation (found on Project Gutenberg) renders the sentence thus: > Is there any deformity in doing amiss, that can excuse us from confessing > ourselves? I don't have much confidence in either his or my interpretation, and this other translation isn't clearing things up for me much at all. What is Michel de Montaigne saying?


title: Do you say "the lyrics of the song" or "the lyrics to the song"? And why?

text: Well, the title says it all: Do you say "the lyrics of the song" or "the lyrics to the song"? Is any of these wrong? And why?


title: What terms describe who pays for a meal?

text: I have heard the terms _go dutch_ and _AA_ used to mean that, when two or more people eat at a restaurant, each will pay only the price of their own dish. Also _treat_ is used to describe the act of one person paying for the meal of themselves and another.   * Has anyone conducted a study on the terms used and their geographic distribution?   * In which regions of the world are these terms used?   * Are there other terms which might be more popular in North America, the UK, Australia, and New Zealand?


title: What's the figurative meaning of "the end of the line"?

text: Leaving aside the strong sexual connotations of the lyrics of Pulp's song "This Is Hardcore", I was wondering what is the figurative meaning of the expression the author used: > "This is the end of the line" I thought it could be "this is it" or also could mean "I am putting an end to this", but I am not sure. I was curious about the possible uses of the phrase, not only this particular case (ie, this lyrics). Also, I would like to know about the literal meaning. Is it refering to a drawn line? A spoken line?


title: Is "on the side of" right here?

text: > China’ government faces a lot of challenges in global politics and domestic > politics. On the side of global politics, it is criticized for its lack of > moral courage to take side in conflicts. On the side of domestic politics, > the people are not contended with only living as a happy pig, they start to > struggle for political freedom. (self-made) I only know the use of “on the side of” in expressions like “to err on the side of…”, not sure whether “on the side of “ is good here. Is there any another alternative? For example, “in the respect of”.


title: is this grammar right?

text: We are looking to use this text, as a headline on our sustainability page, on our website. As coworker asked if "sustainably" was grammatically correct. I am unsure. > TCS believes that thinking sustainably will make our future stronger, to > think globally and act locally through a variety of green initiatives Is the word `sustainable` used correctly, is it even a word?


title: Can "prodigious" be used in this context?

text: > With his prodigious English skills, he can get a decent job in a foreign > company in Shanghai. (form the homework written by my student) I found the first part of the sentence problematic, there may be two reason. First, _prodigious_ is about something really unusual or great, speaking and Writing good or perfect English does not count as being truly great. Secondly, the structure of the sentence makes it sounds a neutral narration. It will be more acceptable to say: his English skills are prodigious, this helps him get a wonderful job in a foreign company. Hope you will correct my faulty ideas.


title: Origin and correctness of “ain’t no”?

text: In contemporary American English usage, I come across sentences like: >   * I ain’t got no money. > >   * Ain’t no man like him. > > Saying _ain’t no_ sounds incorrect to me because it is a double negative. What is the origin of this particular construction? I wasn’t able to find anything online related to the origins of this incorrect usage.


title: Lady Chatterlay's Lover: "last crow"

text: I don't want to be vulgar here. But what does "crow" mean in their conversation: > Connie: Then why are you so bitter? > > Mellors: I'm not! If my cock gives its last crow, I don't mind! When they talk about the extermination of mankind?


title: why is it said that "messages are sent to methods"

text: In object oriented programming, it is said that messages are sent to methods. In this context, why is the word "method" used instead of "procedure" or "function". In other words, why was the word "method" introduced to programming?


title: "Would have us view" -- is it correct?

text: It probably is correct since the article is from Bloomberg.com website. However, I am not sure what it really means and why it's correct > Mark Twain once quipped that “everyone complains about the weather but > nobody does anything about it.” Many **analysts would have us view the > dramatic increase** in inequality with a similar spirit -- as a natural > condition that we should accept without complaint. We should be skeptical of > this view -- and not just because it’s obsolete even with regard to the > weather.


title: "currently not" or "not currently"

text: What's the correct order: > Lessons are not currently being offered. or > Lessons are currently not being offered.


title: Expressing contentment about receiving a letter

text: Someone wrote to me. I'm writing him back. I want to say, in formal speech, that I'm glad that he wrote to me. How do I do that? I guess I can just say "I'm glad to hear from you" but maybe you could suggest a more elegant expression.


title: How to use "in" or "on" with nouns?

text: I'm always confused by this and can't find it anywhere. Here's an example of what I mean: (literature here in context of academic literature, such as journals, proceedings, etc.) > In the literature ... or > On the literature ... Another one: > ... an overview on the advances of ... or > ... an overview in the advances of ... Someone care to say which ones are correct and why?


title: Not only ... but also

text: Is it fine to split correlative conjunctions as in the case below? Author’s study of the friendship relations of international doctoral students thus not only fills a glaring research gap. It is also a much needed sociological account of a field otherwise rife with psychological accounts.


title: Is "give me a five" the same as "give me five" or incorrect?

text: I mean the physical gesture of slapping hands together. Any difference between them? Thanks.


title: Is there a usage of "the" that indicates one out of a group of many?

text: Considering the sentence `Nearly anything can be a weapon in a martial artist’s hands.`, the indefinite article `a` indiciates that this can be any martial artist out of all in the world. Next, consider `The wise warrior stops a ranged attack before it nears him.` Here, the definite article `the` is used, but still, I am quite certain that the sentence talks about any "wise warrior", or that one would even qualify as a "wise warrior" by performing the named action (among others, probably). Is this a correct usage of `the`, indicating one out of a group of many? What is this usage called properly? Finally, consider `Through judicious placement of wounds, the marksman ensures that his enemy cannot escape him.`   I am wondering whether this could be the same kind of use for the definite article as in the second example, or whether to a native speaker this sentence indicates a specific individiual (that is a "marksman") that would be clear from context.


title: collocations such as "bird of prey" and generalization

text: I got a question about the usage of generalization of collocations. There is a word such as "bird of prey" to refer to birds eating animal flesh. And one way to generalize reference of a noun is to put "the" in front of the word, especially for animals, plants, recent inventions; the lion is the king of the animal world of Africa / the smartphone is nowadays a required item. Then my question is whether this kind of expression below is also okay to show generalization; **The bird of prey is a bird that eats animal flesh.** For other nouns, such as "man of steel," when someone says "the man of steel," a native English speaker would think some particular or specific man of steel since there are several possible possibilities; Stalin, or the Superman in the recent movie, etc.


title: Combine these two sentence with relative pronoun

text: Can I combine these two sentences:   1. I'll never forget the time.    2. We were a happy couple then.  To > I'll never forget the time that we were a happy couple. And more, without "that" > I'll never forget the time we were a happy couple. I remember we can use a sentence to describe the objective.


title: When to use a definite article in the name of a ship

text: To use examples from Star Trek, the original series and The Next Generation called their ships "The Enterprise", Enterprise varied between "Enterprise" and "The Enterprise", Deep Space Nine always had "The Defiant", and Voyager always called the ship "Voyager" rather than "The Voyager". "The Voyager" certainly does sound wrong to my ears, but I can't identify a reason for that. Is there a rule (or combination of rules) for this?


title: The boy who lived... come to die? (Harry Potter)

text: I hope I'm not giving away any Harry Potter plot points. I just watched the last movie of the series, and I'm pretty sure that they made an error in the German translation of a line from Voldemort taken right from the book: As you can see in the trailer, Voldemort says > Harry Potter, the boy who lived...come to die. Note that the sentence ends in a period, not an exclamation point. Now I had always understood this to mean: > (Look at) Harry Potter, the boy who lived (who has now) come to die. In the German dub, they translated it as: > Harry Potter, der Junge der überlebte. Komm her und stirb! > > (Harry Potter, the boy who lived. Come here and die!) Surely that's not correct. Or is it? Is this ambiguous at all?


title: Multiple stone throws

text: "A stone's throw" is often used to describe a short distance. Is there a widely recognized English word or expression that similarly describes an intermediate distance, but which does not actually involve any direct measurement of that distance? For example, consider that what might be a stone's throw to a farmer talking about a neighbor, probably wouldn't count as one to someone visiting from the city, even though they would both be talking about the same specific distance.


title: "Absorbed in" vs. "absorbed with"

text: > That young man was absorbed **in** his big camera. He was shooting a short > movie of people and passers by who were singing and reading the poems under > the trees. If I use _with_ instead of _in_ , does it change the meaning?


title: Alternative for brave/stoical

text: What word could I use to describe somebody who is getting on with a difficult life changing situation and making the best of it. Brave is not quite right but nearly there. Stoical is not right either.


title: Does one differentiate A "from" B, or differentiate A "and" B?

text: > A fecal test cannot differentiate intestinal blood from blood from red meat. -or- > A fecal test cannot differentiate intestinal blood and blood from red meat.


title: The article "the" before messages

text: > He shouldn't have posted the PM's that were meant to be private. [PM = > Private message] Is the above sentence correct if we are talking about specific messages? Suppose that, on a forum that I am on, one poster sent 2-4 messages to another person in private, who then posted the screenshots of those messages. So wasn't I supposed to say he has "posted THE messages" (I have those 2-4 messages in my mind when I was talking about them there) instead of "posted messages"? Is "the screenshots of those messages" or simply "screenshots of those messages" correct?


title: meaning and usage of "in order the more"

text: I have just come across a phrase I have never seen before: > I do not so in order to undermine the status of xy but, on the contrary, _in > order the more_ securely to identify certain aspects. A quick internet research has shown me that the phrase apparently really exists and me and from the respectice contexts I guess it must be equivalent to _in order to [identify] more [securely]_. Is this right? Is this phrase commonly used or rather strange?


title: "Opposite the mall" vs. "opposite to the mall"

text: > The new showroom that he has put up **is opposite the** central mall. I have doubts about the grammaticality of this sentence. According to my understanding, it should be: > The new showroom that he has put up **is opposite to the** central mall. Are both variations acceptable?


title: "The more..., the less.." type of sentence corrections

text: > The more you think about it, the less likely you will take action. I feel that sentence sounds a bit awkward, especially _the less_ part. I am not so sure if the sentence is correct, grammatically. So what's the right way to put it? Or how can I rephrase it?


title: Should I use verb or verb + ing in the following case?

text: > Marla glanced at her watch. Half past four. She'd been in the subway since > morning, doing nothing in particular— **just watching trains come and go, > people getting on and off.** A typical commuting scene. My first impulse was just to write _getting_ instead of _get_. But after reading the sentence again I said: wait I wrote _come_ and _go_ shouldn't I write _get_ instead? But after replacing it with _get_ something seemed off. So I'm a bit confused, should I use _get_ or _getting_?


title: Origin of the saying "X wears the pants"

text: I just heard this saying recently in this conversation: > No.1 : Why aren't you telling him to shut up?   >  No. 2 : Mr. Palm is going to do that.   >  No. 1 : Oh! So Mr. Palm wears the pants!" What does "wear the pants" mean? And what is its origin?


title: Best internet sites for British English learners?

text: What are some great resources for advanced British English learners?


title: Origin of "Everybody is smarter than anybody"?

text: Who said this: > Everybody is smarter than anybody. I have been trying to find the origin of this phrase with no success. I think I first heard it from a speaker on an IT subject (but I am not sure if its origin is from a person with a technology background). I would like to use this quote but won't use it if I can't give a proper attribution.


> "But I was patient. I wrote back. I was sympathetic, I was kind. Ginny > simply _loved_ me. _No one’s ever understood me like you, Tom …. I’m so glad > I’ve got this diary to confide in …. It’s like having a friend I can carry > around in my pocket …._ " (p309, Harry Potter 2, US edition) NB -- The speaker, Tom Riddle, is a villain in this story. He is boasting how well he could win Ginny’s heart by becoming a kind of pen pal with her. The author describes his character as an **impatient, unsympathetic, and unkind** one. Therefore, I would think his saying expresses temporal action, not permanent character. He **treated her kindly at that time** and his attitudes got Ginny to **fall in love**. But I feel something strange when ‘I was kind’ and ‘She loved me’ express action, for I’ve run into much more ‘be kind’ and ‘love’ which describe someone’s character or continuing state since I started studying English. So, here is my question. Is there any nuance in ‘I was kind’ when it means ‘I treated her kindly”? In other words, why does the speaker use such expressions, instead of other expressions like ‘treat kindly’?


title: Word for sensors that collect the same data in two different ways

text: I need a word that describes two sensors that collect the same features, but in different ways. The raw data may be of different types, but the features would be the same. This word would imply that dodging one sensor does not help dodge the other sensor. An example of two sensors that fit this criteria are visual cameras and infrared cameras. They both measure light with the purpose of seeing what is there, but an attempt to avoid one of them (ex: camouflage) will not help avoid detection by the other one. I've considered both the words "orthogonal" and "complementary", but neither seems to fit. Orthognal implies that the sensors never detect the same thing and complementary seems to imply that one sensor always detects what the other doesn't. Update: I should have mentioned that my target audience is mathematically minded people. When I use the words orthogonal or complementary, they will, in all probability, think of the mathematical definition.


title: Usage of "ain't" in formal conversation

text: Is it okay to use _ain't_ in formal conversation? I know _ain't_ can be used for _am not, is not, are not, have not, has not._ So if I can use it in day-to-day life, it will be easier for me I guess.


title: Has been run vs has been running

text: If I want to question someone about for how many hours a computer is turned on and running - and by the time of the question it is still running - which of the constructions below is more appropriate? >   1. For how long has your computer been running? > >   2. For how long has your computer been run? > > First of all, I'm not sure if construction number 1 is grammatically correct,   and secondly, in construction number 2 it seems the computer is not running anymore;   am I right?


title: How to name the hierarchy of my employees

text: If the employees working directly for him are called his direct reports, how should one call the complete hierarchy of employees who work for him?


title: Term, blend-word, or metaphor for being social but with boundaries

text: I'm looking for a term, word or metaphor for being social but within rules or boundaries. I don't like the word _privacy_ as it has a negative connotation. I think the word _social_ is overused or misunderstood, especially in the online realm. I assume real social interactions operate on trust and that certain behavioral rules must be followed. But doing things together bonds people, and they learn more about each other. _Etiquette_ is too stodgy and doesn't encompass all that I am trying to say. Any thoughts on how to combine all of these ideas into one word, a blend-word, or a metaphor, please?


title: What does "Easy peasy japanesey" mean?

text: What does this sentence mean? > Easy peasy japanesey! Especially "japanesey", why Japan? It was in the 1994 movie _The Shawshank Redemption_.


title: "What's the problem with you?" vs. "What's the matter with you?"

text: Is there a difference between saying _What's the problem with you?_ and _What's the matter with you?_


title: Is there an antonym for the word "Behold"?

text: What is the opposite word (or antonym) for the word "Behold" as in the phrase "Behold the mighty ..."?


title: What are the possible differences between "inchoative" and "inchoate"?

text: According to dictionaries, "inchoative" and "inchoate" are both adjectives and both denote "initial". I couldn't find slightest difference between them. So I was wondering can they be used interchangeably or are they different in some ways?


title: What is a good word to describe unchanging?

text: I want to say something like. This department is getting [Insert Adjective to describe old and unchanging]. I thought of decrepit but not sure if this will really communicate my point


title: Grammatical rules of prepositions

text: I read a document regarding to prepositions in English grammar and at the very beginning of this document, it mentions, only way to know the verb "dispose" is followed by the preposition "of" is through experience. It almost sounded like there are no grammatical rules for the topic prepositions and I must experience every single one of them in order to master this subject. Are there recommended path ways to learn deeply about prepositions?


title: Which sentence is correct and why?

text: > Each of these CDFIs are finding solutions for communities that lack access > to traditional financial products and services, and the NEXT Awards will > accelerate their success. OR > Each of these CDFIs is finding solutions for communities that lack access to > traditional financial products and services, and the NEXT Awards will > accelerate their success. The difference is, the first one uses "CDFIs are" and the 2nd sentence uses "CDFIs is" Which one is correct? Any why?


title: Parsing  a complex sentence

text: The following sentence is from here. It’s too long, and I don’t fully understand it. Can anyone help me parse it? > Simple examples are likely to have far more overhead than the work done > making the performance of the concurrent example far worse than just writing > it single threaded and also the code more confusing.


title: Is there a single word for "login/register"?

text: I'm a programmer and often create login/register forms. I'd really like a single word to use to describe a form that lets the user login/register. Sort of like "authentication", but that's really more specific to the login part. The next best I can come up with is "onboarding", but that really applies more to the register part. Does such a word exist? Edit: I'm really looking for this from a coding perspective, not to display on the page (i.e. it doesn't need to be user-friendly). I just want it to be concise so that I can avoid variables like "login_register".


title: Can you come up with such verb?

text: > He wounded himself. > > He pinched himself. > > He stabbed himself. > > He looked at himself. In all these cases the action proceeds from the agent (which is also a subject) and is directed at this very agent. Let's call this phenomenon an "short-circuit action" (I am sure there should be a correct grammatical term for this). In all these cases the short-circuit actions are expressed by using '-self'. I wonder if there are such verbs in English that would also express short- circuit action, but '-self' would not be needed then? I know there are such cases in other languages. Can you come up with such verb?


title: What does “touch off a scramble” mean? Is it an idiom or simple combination of “touch off” and “a scramble”?

text: I saw the phrase “ _touched off a scramble_ ” in the article titled “Redefining headphone, with more bass” in the New York Times (November 20) followed by the following copy: > “The rap impresario Dr. Dre is behind Beats, a successful line of expensive > headphones that have become a fashion accessory and touched off a scramble > in the industry.” There were other instances of using this phrase, for example:   * The authorization for establishing three of the satellite offices _touched off a scramble_ among members of Congress who want one in their states or districts. - www.statesman com   * The prospect of nearly $1 trillion in cuts unnerves military leaders, troubles lawmakers protective of the Pentagon and has _touched off a scramble_ in the defense industry as contractors look to spare their multibillion-dollar weapons programs. – www.thinkownusa.com There is no entry of “touch off a scramble” in any of Oxford, Cambridge and Merriam-Webster online dictionaries, while Google Ngram Viewer shows the usage of “touched off a scramble” that (suddenly) started in circa 1940, peaked around 1980, and since then is dropping down sharply. I understand “touch off a scramble” means “cause a commotion or sensation.” Am I right? Is it an idiom, or the simple combination of “touch off” and “scramble”? Is this expression actually losing vigor as the Google Ngram curve indicates?


title: What are differences of meaning among device, gadget, gimmick and gizmo?

text: Further to today's my question about the words, 'off-the-shelf' used in Time Magazine's feature story titled 'The Best 50 Invention of The Year' (Nov. 11th 2010 Issue), I found the following sentence in the same article: 'One analyst says the iPad is the fastest selling non-phone _gizmo_ in consumer electronics history.' I understand there is difference of meaning between device and gizmo / gadget and gimmick as a group. Are there great difference of meaning and usage among the words, gizmo, gadget and gimmick?


title: How to specify the letter O, not a zero

text: Imagine a technical specification that reads: > In the text box, enter "O1" (O the letter, not the number zero) Is there a convention which achieves this explanation more succinctly, or is more immediately clear?


title: Does the apostrophe in names of diseases drop when the disease name is part of a foundation name?

text: Many diseases are named after the doctor who identified the diseases and therefore have names like Hodgkin's Disease or Parkinson's Disease. But when a fund or foundation is created to raise money for research on the disease, should the apostrophe remain? In other words, should it be Parkinson's Foundation or Parkinsons Foundation? If the apostrophe is dropped, is it dropped out of necessity?


title: Mentor and Mentoring

text: Would someone who is not a professional but knows a subject (such as automotive repair) in depth and offers advice and hands-on assistance with repair procedures be considered a mentor? Is the act of giving advice in this context mentoring?


title: What does "What price X?" mean?

text: I've come across phrases like "What price freedom?" a lot. I speak British English and it doesn't read nicely to me. It seems some words are missing. Does it mean "What is the price of X?"? Where did this phrase originate from and why is it used in this way?


title: More emphatic term for "Expert"?

text: I've hit a wording problem in the controls for a game that I'm writing. I need two nouns with increasing emphasis for someone highly skilled in a given area.   "Expert" is an obvious choice, so I need a second noun which is:   * More emphatic than "Expert" - it must imply being extremely capable.   * Not gendered. (This is why I've rejected the most obvious choice, "Master".)   * Obvious in its meaning, once read.   * Not too long - screen space is limited.   * Carrying connotations of _skill_ but not necessarily _experience_.   * Applicable to many different areas of skill - professional skills (science, accounting) and personal (leadership, martial arts) It is acceptable to use two words, so there could be a modifying adjective, but in that case space demands that they both be quite short. ("Very skilled" would just work, but "World-famous expert" is out.) (Edited to make criteria clearer) If it matters, the setting is 60s to 80s Bond-movie-villain's lair. Some characters are clones grown by a mad scientist and programmed for their tasks, so terms like "veteran" which imply experience as well as skill won't work. Alternatively, I could use "Expert" in the top slot, to mean extreme skill... in which case I need a replacement word which is _less_ emphatic than Expert, but carries the same connotations and matches the conditions above. It will still need to mean "more than average skill" - the default is "professional competence", and the two terms I use need to describe two increasing levels above this.


title: Short for "time period in life" like teenage

text: I am looking for a word to describe a **time period in life** , like _teenage_ , but that would work for any time period, like 11 – 22. I want to say _it is xxxxxx_ in everyone's life.


title: Why abbreviation for "Definition" as "Def^n" (math context)

text: I've seen in math and physics lectures delivered in English, that people use to abreviate the commonly very used word " _Definition_ " by " _Def_ _n_ "( _Def_ superscript n). What's the meaning of this _n_? That is, which sequence of letters of phonemes does this _n_ stand for? And, which other words can be abbreviated in the same way? (I've seen more, I just forgot which)


title: "Operating system" is to "runlevel" as "human being" is to what?

text: I am looking for a hypernym for the set of different "mental states" or "sedation levels", but I don't know which one (if any) would apply here. I have values like the following in mind:   * is dead   * is sleeping   * is awake but inactively, unresponsively laying around   * can talk but not move   * is fully operational


title: "Less for more" or "More for less"?

text: I don't know if this belongs more to User Experience. Pardon me if it does. * * * Which is more suitable for kind of a slogan:   `Less for more` \- The word `less` refers to the prices and money, `more` refers to the quality and amount of the product. Can be understud as that `less` refers to quality and amount of the product and `more` refers to prices and money. `More for less` \- Same as above, just inverted. * * * Which would be the clearer one, that more likely wouldn't be misunderstud?


title: Noun form of verb "decline"

text: Is there a noun form of the verb "to decline"? That is, is there a word that follows this pattern:               to accept  -> acceptance     to decline -> ?      I am aware of the word declination which is the closest I've found, but that seems to reflect the meaning of "decline" as related to "incline" and "recline" rather than the synonym of refuse. If not, are there synonyms of "decline" that follow this pattern?


> The furniture of the den, a cement-floored room that ran the length of the > house, consisted almost entirely of his carpentry (shelves, tables, stools, > a ping-pong table) and Nacy's needlework (chintz slip covers that > rejunvenated a decrepit couch, curtains, pillows bearing the legends: > "Happy?" and "You don't have to be crazy to live here, but it helps"). I found this is the book "In Cold Blood" by Truman Capote What does "You don't have to be crazy to live here, but it helps." mean?


title: Word for Someone Who Watches Mountain Weather

text: I've been working on a paper regarding the Himalays. As part of that, I've been learning about sherpas. I feel like I see these kinds of people watching or monitoring mountains. Either for weather or signs of trouble. I'm trying to figure out if these people that watch these mountains have a title or a name? I'd like to use it in my paper. Does anyone know what these people are called? Thanks


I'm trying to make sure my writing is correct for the following sentence: > The list of functionality has/have to be implemented But I'm confused about **has** or **have** there.


title: Can you *donate* to a non-charitable cause?

text: I just had someone insist that a _donation_ can only be to a charitable cause or organization; otherwise, the word _contribution_ should be used. When I objected to "contribution" on the grounds that it sounds like what you send to your favorite politician, he suggested _offering_. But that's not any better - I've only really seen it used in church. Is he right that _donation_ implies _charity_? If yes, what's a good alternative?


title: Preposition cluster "all up in"

text: What exactly does the string of words functioning as a preposition "all up in" (many many Google hits) mean in modern American slang usage?


title: “Cannabis” vs. “marijuana” vs. “weed”

text: I know all these words have the same meaning and refer to a kind of drug. Also, as far as I know, _weed_ is slang for _marijuana_ or _cannabis_. (Correct me if I’m wrong). What I do not understand is the difference between these words. Is _cannabis_ a formal word, and _marijuana_ and _weed_ both informal? Does one or two of these words come from South America — for example, has a Spanish root — and the others come from elsewhere?


title: US English - need for determiners (a/an) in each item of a list (already parallel)

text: I have been all over every grammar site I can find (including this one) and cannot find a definitive answer. I am looking for a rule that says in a list of singular nouns, each noun must have its own determiner - even if they would all be the same one. My employer has invoked parallelism as an explanation, but I do not think that applies here - as they are already of parallel form. Everything I can find on parallelism speaks to verbs and tenses, not nouns. I contend that it's a stylistic choice, as the meaning is clear either way - but I can't prove it. Specific example: "The sensor includes a right-angle infrared LED and right-angle phototransistor..." "The sensor includes a right-angle infrared LED and a right-angle phototransistor..." Are both right? If not, and the determiner MUST be used, where/what is the rule? If it is a stylistic thing, I just need confirmation.


title: All up in my grill?

text: Is the phrase > [all] up in $POSSESSIVE_PRONOUN grill which is synonymous with the figure of speech > in one's face an automotive metaphor? If so, would it be more correct to spell the last word "grille"? If not, what does the phrase mean?


title: Which one to use — "support" or "sports"?

text: I have read about many times like as given below: > Nokia N8 Mobile **Support** A 12-Megapixel Camera. and > Nokia N8 Mobile **Sports** A 12-Megapixel Camera. So my questions are:   1. Is there any difference in the meaning of those two words here?   2. If yes, then when should one use _support_ and when _sports_?


title: hybrid adjectives and how to diagram

text: This query is a follow-up from another question I asked a few days ago. I am still pondering how to best interpret the following phrase grammatically: "my brother's weapon" Could I categorize it as follows: my = Possessive pronoun adjective modifying brother's brother's = possessive noun also functioning as an adjective modifying weapon my brother's = adjective phrase collectively modifying weapon If I diagrammed this, would "weapon" be on the main line with "brother's" descending on a slanted line below it like an adjective? Would "my" be on another adjective line coming off of "brother's"? I'm thinking the flow would be similar to the way one might diagram "the bright red truck"? In this phrase, would you consider "bright" an adjective modifying "red" with the both of them working together as an adjective phrase modifying truck? Thank you in advance for your polite feedback. I'm working hard to clarify my understanding of how these parts of speech function together in context.


title: Ending a sentence with "because [noun]."

text: I've noticed an interesting usage where "because [noun]." is used at the end of a sentence to mean "because [...everything that word implies. Nothing more needs to be said]". It often has a wry or sarcastic tone that implies the subject considers the word to be a blanket explanation for something. An example might be "She couldn't drag herself away from the computer because internet.", the implication being that the Internet is seductive. Another example is here where "because sex" is used to imply that a group of people have a simplistic attitude to how sex affects people's lives. The odd grammar causes a clang in my head when I read it, but of course that is the point; the author is showing how this word will stop the conversation dead in its tracks, so it is quite effective. Is this a new or emerging usage, or have I just started noticing it?


title: What is the origin of the phrase ‘By the by...’?

text: What is the origin of the phrase 'By the by...'?


title: What's the origin of using "toboggan" to mean a knit cap?

text: I'd always know the word "toboggan" to mean a sled. In the last couple years I've met people who insisted on calling their winter knit caps "toboggans." All of these people happened to be from either Kentucky or Tennessee. Wikipedia mentions that > In the United States south and midwest, especially Appalachia, it is often > called a "toboggan". but there's no info about origin. When and where did this usage come from?


title: Use of "deadpool" as a verb

text: I recently came across this term while examining a set of properties in a JSON feed relating to a startup company:                ...      "deadpooled_year": null,      "deadpooled_month": null,      "deadpooled_day": null,      "deadpooled_url": null,      ...      I searched for the word, and find several non-authoritative sources (e.g., _The Urban Dictionary_ ), but nothing definitive. I gather it means something like "defunct" or "obsoleted" — handed over to the pool of dead companies which have been surpassed and made irrelevant by other, more successful companies. I also infer that it is a fairly well known term used in the startup lexicon. Yet this is the first time I've encountered it. Can anyone shed some light on the term "deadpool" or "deadpooled"? A citation from a serious publication that uses the term in a way that makes the meaning obvious and unmistakeable? Please, no speculation. I have already speculated enough about this.


title: "Good to hear from you"?

text: Is it correct to write "Good to hear from you" ? I have seen it many times but I feel it should be "It feels good to hear from you" or equivalent.


title: Does "I had done" make sense grammatically?

text: I was writing my CV but wasn't sure if this makes sense: > At my old place of work I adapted to the new work very quickly (I had never > done pub work before). Does the "I had never done pub work before" make grammatical sense? If not then why?


title: Usage of 'much more'

text: Is saying _much more_ grammatically correct? For instance, some purists argue that this is wrong: > I'm much more comfortable with A than B and that it should be: > I'm more comfortable with A than B or, to emphasize: > I'm a lot more comfortable with A than B _Much more_ does sound colloquial but I've seen it used in newspapers and articles so I was curious.


title: Is the term "blind spot" something that only native English speakers would understand?

text: Is the term "blind spot" peculiar to the English language, or is it likely to be well understood worldwide, even by people who don't have English as their first language? **Some background**   I'm currently searching for a term I can use in some software I'm developing. The feature in question allows the user to draw rectangles over an image to denote areas they'd like to ignore in a later analysis of the image. I need the user to be able to create and delete as many of these areas as they like. Currently, the areas are called "exclusion areas", but that causes problems when you've got a button labelled "Remove exclusion area". We've seen people being tripped up by the double negative. One thought was to rename the "exclusion areas" to "blind spots". However, do you think this will cause more problems for non-native English speakers?


title: "One-to-one" vs. "one-on-one"

text: I said: "Tomorrow will be our **one-to-one** meeting with Mr.XYZ." My friend: "OK, **one-on-one.** " Which is correct? > One-to-one Or > One-on-one


title: A women's accessory...what's the word?

text: What is the accessory that is like a net that is worn by women on the head and that comes all the way till the eyes... it is worn on formal occasions and its is quite old fashioned (IMHO). It is not used to hold the hair on anything I think. Sometimes I have seen that it comes attached to the bonnet... Update 1: I remember finding the word in the dictionary once.


title: Using the word "foible", and its interpretation

text: There are situations when I get in doubt about the usage of a word, even after having used it for long and on a regular basis. One of those words is "foible". I thought it to be related to character or idiosyncrasy or attitude untill I saw it's real definition today in Oxford dictionary. I casually used to say "hey, I don't appreciate such foible" or "I approve of such foible". Now I know that it might have conveyed the meaning to others and seemed appropriate to me but I have been wrong all that time. I need to know if this word matters that much in everyday usage if, the audience were fastidious about proper language and if they were not. Another question that exhumes out is that whether I should use it as a synonym for weakness or character. Also, in what way will writing or saying, " I appreciate such foible" be understood? Will the reader or listener think that I like the weakness or flaw in his character or I'm just being sarcastic about it or any other thoughts?


title: Question about the Possessive with Multiple Parties

text: Suppose I want to refer to the widget owned by me and Susan. Then do I say "you are welcome to use Susan's and my widget"? (Sounds awkward.) Or "you are welcome to use the widget owned by Susan and I"? (Too long, clunky.) How do I say this correctly? I would prefer not to rearrange the phrase altogether to avoid the problem. How do I correctly format the possessive with the multiple parties?


title: A phone call you ask your friend to make to you in middle of a date

text: Is there a dedicated expression for a pre-arranged phone call you receive to give you an opportunity to politely get out of a situation (e.g. a dinner date)?


Could you please explain to me what this statement means? And why is it funny? > Syzygy, inexorable, pancreatic, phantasmagoria — anyone who can use those > four words in one sentence will never have to do manual labor.   >  — W.P. Kinsella


title: Two imperative clauses joined by coordinating conjunction taken as a conditional

text: I would be inclined to parse the sentence "Nobody move and nobody get hurt" as two commands:   1. Nobody move.   2. Nobody get hurt. In other words, this is equivalent to "Nobody move or get hurt" (for nitpickers: assume conjunctive/inclusive _or_ ). As long as I'm only reading and not in a bank with armed gunmen, in which case I would probably ignore any possible grammatical issues. This answer suggests that this is equivalent to "Nobody move and nobody gets hurt", which in turn is equivalent to "If nobody moves, nobody will get hurt". Other sentences with a similar construction that come to mind are "Nobody move and nobody say a word" or "Nobody move and nobody shoot anyone" (vs. "Nobody move and nobody shoots anyone"). Admittedly all these sentences have a very strong contextual inference. In the last example, "Nobody move and nobody shoots anyone" clearly means "if nobody moves, nobody will shoot anyone", while "Nobody move and nobody shoot anyone" should be directed to the ones holding the guns: "Don't move and don't shoot anyone". "Nobody move and nobody shoot anyone" directed at people not able to shoot anyone and having guns pointed at, clearly doesn't mean the latter, however, is it a grammatically correct replacement of "Nobody move and nobody shoots anyone"? In summary, my question is: can "Nobody move and nobody get hurt" be grammatically taken to mean "If nobody moves then nobody gets hurt" instead of "Nobody move or get hurt". Why or why not?


title: What does "programming in a vacuum" mean?

text: I'm not sure what that exactly means. Why do people use the term _vacuum_ like this? Please advise.


title: Who is "the superficial man"?

text: > She possesses many other qualities prized by **the superficial man**. My understanding is--whoever says it, doesn't refer to himself by _the superficial man_. The superficial man is some hypothetical person that represents all superficial men in the society. In the same fashion you say "The activities associated with **the common man**." There are three ways to say this: > She possesses many other qualities prized by **the** superficial **man**. > > She possesses many other qualities prized by **a** superficial **man**. > > She possesses many other qualities prized by superficial **men**. Are any of these sentences incorrect? Why is the first one preferable?


title: Why is the word 'number' abbreviated to 'No.' in UK English and '#' in American English?

text: Why the disparity? And why use 'No.'? Is it from the French? And the _hash_ or _pound sign_ seems a weird choice too, is there a history or any reason involved?


title: Antonym for "challenge" (noun form)

text: I was writing a market research report the other day and listed the **challenges** my company faced in the market in question, then I created a new section header for the... uhh... **easy bits**? That's when I realized I could think of no reasonable antonym for challenge in the noun form. I can certainly describe it -- _characteristics of the market that will be of benefit to our entry_ "Advantages" is close to the mark but doesn't quite capture the idea because I feel that is in reference to our company, rather than in reference to the market itself. To give an example:               Challenges       > customer purchasing power is low       > public perception of our manufacturing location is negative          (Easy Bits / Cakewalks / Happy Things / etc.)       > no competitive product on the market       > strong transportation network with low logistical costs      "Incentives" also seems close, but not quite there. Any ideas?


title: Are there are more vowels in the American English than in British?

text: > car, father, jarring ■ man, lad, mast A British guy would pronounce the vowel "a" equally in all these words. But an American would give one sound for the first three words, and the other for the rest. It is interesting to me, that the American English has changed the Brithsh sound "a" in most of the words, but retained it intact in a handful of words. This leads to a conclusion so there are probably more vowel sounds in the American English.


title: What is an English term for grouping bills and credit notes?

text: I'm wondering if there is a generic term to talk about bills and credit notes, in other terms, the money I'll receive and the money I owe.


title: What is the origin of the term "toots" to refer to a woman?

text: When speaking to my female friends (who know me well enough to not take offense), I frequently use the term _toots_ to refer to them. These are friends who know that I'm using it ironically as part of my enjoyment of using antiquated terminology (especially to sound like a 1930s gangster). In other words, I don't wish to engage in a debate on whether or not I'm a misogynist. (Let me be clear, I'm a misanthrope, not a misogynist. ;P) A few dictionary searches have shown that it is likely a shortening of the word _tootsie_ , but a search on that does not shed any light on the origins. It merely suggests that the origin is obscure (and perhaps related to an obscure usage meaning a worthless person). The usage for the word meaning the sound a horn makes has a clear origins in 16th century Germanic usages. Can anyone point out a credible source of the origins of the usage above?


title: A synonym for "go online"

text: What synonyms are there for telling someone to " _go online_ and search for it"? Is there something like _go live_ or similar?


title: use of distainer office, distrainment proceedings, etc

text: Is "distainer office, distrainment proceedings, distrain order, ..." correct? Even this spell checker highlights these words as incorrect. Some translations use execution office, executor's office, etc., which I don't find correct. I would also appreciate some examples.


title: Mounted on or in the ceiling?

text: Which preposition is to be used in a phrase like: > An object is mounted [in/on/?] the ceiling in the car. and > An object is mounted between the front windows [in/on/?] the ceiling.


title: What does the phrase "good for you" mean?

text: What does this phrase mean? And in what cases is it appropriate to use it?


title: Emend and Amend- What's the difference? They both have the same definition

text: What's the difference between the words emend and amend? They both have the same definition.


title: What part of the sentence is "you" in "telling you who that is"?

text: The object is "who that is", right? And the verb is "telling", but what is "you"? Further sentences:   * Did they give 'him' a reward?   * Will you be able to find 'them' a home?   * I have given 'her' a lot of money, and she has shown 'me' nothing in return.   * I want to buy ink from 'them'. Not from ' **them** '.   * My girlfriend gave 'me' a delicious bag of curry crackers, and I gave 'her' a delicious, curry-flavored kiss.   * His chariot sent 'him' airborne, and the tumble against the ground gave 'him' a cracked rib.


title: Is "low physique" idiomatic?

text: Is "low physique" idiomatic? If not, what is the adjective to be used with _physique_?


title: "Oblivion" as a state of forgetfulness?

text: I usually think of "oblivion" as referring to a state of being forgotten, as in the expression "consign to oblivion". Wiktionary includes this definition, but also gives "The state of forgetfulness or distraction" as another definition. Is this actually true? Can someone give an example where "oblivion" is used to mean forgetfulness rather than forgotten-ness?


title: Single word for writing from left to right or the reverse

text: I am searching for a single word which represents "written from left to right" or "written from right to left". Please make sure that the word should be meaning not only the direction but also meaning direction in case of writing. I want to use it like "This language is X", where "X" is the asked for word.


title: Trans vs Transgender vs Transsexual

text: As I understand it, trans means "an individual whose gender identity is different than what they were designated at birth". However, I also hear the terms transgender and transsexual used for similar meanings. I know that personally I only refer to myself as trans or rarely transgender, and never transsexual, and the latter sounds very odd to me. I'm interested in why there are several words for roughly the same meaning, and if they do have different meanings or simply based on geography and time period.


title: What is the proper emphasis for the word "indent"?

text: Does _indent_ carry an accent on the first or the second vowel? I've seen both in IPA. My non-native ear would tend to favor the first.


title: Is there a medieval term for a highwayman?

text: What would you call somebody waylaying in the middle ages? I found the term "highwayman" but that doesn't seem to be any older than 1600 something, so way too new for what I'm looking for. An outlaw seems to be something different again (being an outlaw as a sentence). What term would you use? Are there any references in old English literature I could refer to?


title: To "Please" or "not to Please"

text: I'm writing the text for the order form of the website. The users are suppose to select their preferences with regard to ads and banners which they want to publish on the website. My question is about the word "Please" when guiding the user through the order process. I checked other websites and everyone is using it differently. Should I or shouldn't I use for each step "Please" within the text? Example:   1. Step 1. "Please" select one of the [...]   2. Step 2. "Please" select the menu language [...] or would it be enough to go for :   1. Step 1. Select one of the [...]   2. Step 2. Select menu language I don't want that it sounds like an order to the users but can't "feel" how it sounds for native English speaking users.


title: Should I write documentation on first person plural or on third person singular?

text: I'm a Spanish computer programmer and I usually write code and documentation in my native language, but lately I'm trying to migrate them to English. The point is this kind of **writing is quite formal (maybe scientific)** and **oriented third person** to read it (and understand it). I don't know **what should be the best point of view** when I comment the code. I have doubts especially between **first person plural, third person singular** and **if I can skip the subject in these or another cases**. In practice, I'm trying to describe a piece of code that do something (it will be only read by programmers). These are the options (if you think another better I'd appreciate it):   * 1 . // **It removes the files** => This sounds good to me, but I'm repeating "It" constantly   * 2 . // **Removes the files** => Sometimes used by another people, is this correct? (skip the subject)   * 3 . // **I/We remove the files** => I think this is quite objective (but very common in Spanish, sometimes without the subject)   * 4 . // **Remove the files** => Widely used by English, but I'm not sure if this is grammatically correct (because it's referring to the code (third person singular)). If this is fine, it's supposed to be a second person singular (because of the lack of -s)? An special rule? Maybe an imperative? In that case it would be too much direct and we're explaining the code, not you   * 5 . // **Removing the files** => I think this is wrong. In fact I'm going to do it, but I'm not doing it now **So, what's the best way to write documentation in an appropriate style (formal and objective)?**


title: Word or phrase for premeditated act of self defense

text: Consider a scenario where a person is forced to act and attack a person who they consider to be a threat even though there has been no display of such threat. I am talking about sensing danger and acting upon it. This doesn't sound like _self-defence_. As usually, self defence is the use of physical force to counter an **immediate** threat of violence. OxfordDictionaries.com defines it as: > the defence of one’s person or interests, especially through the use of > physical force, which is permitted in certain cases as an answer to a charge > of violent crime. _I am looking for a word or phrase that would describe an act of premeditated self-defence, in **anticipation** of a threat._


title: What is the expected response to someone saying “Happy Vacations” to you?

text: Someone has messaged me: _Happy vacations_. Are the following replies correct?   * Now it would be good.   * Same to you too! Or should it be   * Same to you too!   * Now it would be good. I want it to sound that my vacation will be all the better for his having mentioned it. What should the proper reply be?


title: Noun for "send"?

text: There is a noun for "receive": reception. What about "send"? Is there a noun for this verb? It's about sending SMS messages, so I wish to underline the outgoing nature of the message.


title: Charles Dickens: "It was the best of times…"

text: > It was the best of times… How to understanding this usage without using "the" (i.e. instead of "the best of the times")? How can we apply the same usage in everyday conversation? E.g. should we say "it is the best of mankind" or "it is the best of the mankind"?


title: Condolence message: "I was sorry" vs. "I am sorry"

text: What is the difference in nuance between the following statements? Which would be more appropriate for a letter of condolence? >   1. I **was** sorry to hear that your mother has passed away. >   2. I **am** sorry to hear that your mother has passed away. >