Generate the answer for a given question. The question requires common knowledge of English. Make sure that the answer is in detail, long, consistent with the context, and requires general knowledge of English. To be less repetitive, please vary your language for each question. Give a proper explanation to answer, and if necessary, provide the definition of various terms. And conclude your answer if it's long. If you have used other resources (e.g., Merriam Webster's.) to answer the question, include citations in your answer. You don't need to paraphrase the context of your resources, but make sure that your answer is consistent and complete.

[Q]: I'm aware that when we say things like: It's a cheap cell phone. That's a cheapo, throw it out. It does mean something is clearly of bad quality. But how about when comparing things? for example: Those shoes are cheaper than these. That hotel is cheaper than this one. Does it give the impression of lower quality, too? How subtle is it? Should I avoid it in any case?.
[A]: Cheap has two meanings. Cheap is often used to convey low quality. It easily gets attached to any object being described, even if the price is not low at all. These cheap shoes cost half my paycheck! It can also mean a price that is lower than expected. In fact, the original meaning of cheap was 'bargain'. To make sure it has this meaning, use the adjective to modify something related to the price and not the item itself. Look at the cheap price tag on these shoes! To illustrate, note how the meaning shifts in the following sentences: I bought a cheap laptop. I bought a laptop for a cheap price. The 'low quality' connotation is minimized when 'cheap' becomes the comparative adjective, 'cheaper'. It imparts some context that it is probably the price of two items you are comparing. However, because you are not stating clearly that it is the price that is cheap, it still conveys a the possibility of low quality.


[Q]: In a few days, I have to do a class presentation project about the 1920s Harlem Renaissance. I want to say that the movement's original name was the 'New Negro Movement,' but I'm not sure if that's okay. I'm white, and I really don't want to offend anybody in my class. Is it all right to say this word in context? Or, should I ignore its original name, and only refer to it as the Harlem Renaissance?.
[A]: Is it okay to use the word 'Negro' in a historical context? Yes, absolutely. If that was term used, even in a pejorative sense, in the context of serious research you can always include things that are true and relevant. I'm white, and I really don't want to offend anybody in my class. That is impossible to answer even if the members of this forum were in your class. It is entirely possibly you could offend somebody. Whether or not your report or talk will offend someone should be the least of your concerns if what you are writing or saying is well researched and based on reliable facts. Academic study, even of sensitive social issues, isn't restricted to nationality, gender, religion, or ethnicity.


[Q]: In the book I am reading (Patrick Fairbairn, The Interpretation of Prophecy, 2nd ed., 1865), the abbreviation 'sq.' is used sometimes in referencing both Scripture and other books (as 'Typology of Scripture, vol. i. p. 100 sq.' or 'Ezek xxvi. 7, sq.'). What does 'sq.' mean in this context? (Instances of this abbreviation's usage may be found at Google Books here.).
[A]:
Sq. is short for the Latin word sequiturque, which means the following. So p. 100 sq. means page 100 and those following pages. Here's the source.