TASK DEFINITION: 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.
PROBLEM: Possible Duplicate: Definite article with plural nouns I recently reviewed (as I believe, rather thoroughly) the rules of using articles in English and I do not recall any rule on absence of definitive article THE with plural nouns. Can you give me a reference on such a rule?.

SOLUTION: Plural nouns with the definite article are, well, definite. Consider Cats don't like me. versus The cats don't like me. The former implies every cat on Earth doesn't like me; the latter, that some (contextually obvious) specific group of cats don't like me. ADDED In my opinion, yes, unmemorize that reference in your other question and memorize the following: use the definite article with a plural only to denote a known or stated subset of the class ('The elephants [in this zoo] are dangerous'); omit the article for the whole class ('Elephants [all of them] are dangerous'). Use an indefinite article with a singular to denote the whole class when you want to emphasize the singular nature ('A glass of wine is healthy, but two can lead to dissolution.') Use the definite article with a singular when referring to a specific instance or when you need, for some reason, to sound like Sir David Attenborough in a BBC nature documentary ('The elephant is a regal creature, reigning over his home, the savanna ...'). Of course, an indefinite article with a plural ('An elephants are dangerous') and omitting articles with the singular of a countable noun ('Elephant is dangerous') are both just wrong, wrong, wrong. Edit Two years later and I realize another rule: 'the' is used to mark adjectives that have been promoted to nouns. When Paul Revere said, 'The British are coming', he was referring to the British 10th Regiment of Foot, not to every subject of King George, so the 'the' was de rigeur under the above rule. However, when Quentin Crisp wrote, 'The British do not expect happiness,' he did mean every single Briton. The 'the' is only necessary to make it clear that the word 'British' is being used as a noun. With an ordinary noun, it would be different. 'Plumbers [all plumbers] do not expect happiness' but 'The plumbers [in London] do not expect happiness.' Compare Jacques Brel's lyric, 'The naked and the dead should hold each others' hands' with Dean Wormer's line, 'Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life.' 'Naked' and 'dead' are nouns (or adjectives being used as nouns); 'fat', 'drunk', and 'stupid' are adjectives, which is why he uses 'is' instead of 'are': the subject of the verb is 'no way'.

PROBLEM: What's a word that means 'not knowing everything'? This would serve as a complementary antonym of omniscient, which means having infinite knowledge, or simply 'all-knowing'. Thesaurus.com shows these possible words: stupid (opposite of being clever, which = being omniscient) unknowing (opposite of being knowing, which = being omniscient) fallible (opposite of being infallible, which means 'not able to make mistakes', which = being omniscient, since I can know everything and still make mistakes) erring (which means 'capable of making mistakes', which = being omniscient, since I can know everything and still make mistakes) imperfect (opposite of being perfect, which is a superset of being omniscient... how could I be perfect if I'm both omniscient and fallible?) faulty (which means 'to have fault(s) / defect(s)', is the opposite of 'to have no fault(s) / defect(s)', which means being perfect, which = being omniscient) ignorant (which means 'having inadequate knowledge', is the opposite of 'having adequate knowledge', which = having infinite knowledge) uneducated (opposite of being educated, which = being omniscient) unaware (opposite of being aware, which = being omniscient) uninformed (opposite of being informed, which = being omniscient) Yet, none of them are true antonyms for omniscient. Is there an alternative?.

SOLUTION: According to reference.com, the Random House dictionary registers unomniscient as a legitimate word. There are a handful of hits on Google Books which include the following examples: Chaucer deepens Jean de Meun's joke about the God's ersatz divinity: immediately after the God has just issued some clearly unomniscient judgments ... If at every world, God knows at that world only the propositions whose truth-values are modally constant, then it would seem that God is necessarily unomniscient. There are actually two types of unomniscient focus, since the narrator may know the same as or even less than the characters. The impossibility of an unomniscient intelligence demonstrating the supposed contradiction, and thus transforming our universe into an untrustworthy universe, with which one can have no intercourse, is the attitude primarily assumed towards ... Also of interest is the term bounded rationality: Bounded rationality is the idea that in decision-making, rationality of individuals is limited by the information they have, the cognitive limitations of their minds, and the finite amount of time they have to make a decision.

PROBLEM: Exact Duplicate: Can anyone tell me what the suffix '-fu' stands for in the following sentence? I was reading an article on MSDN where I found a mention to google-fu. It says, 'To search for C++ delimeters and code snippets is going to take a little Google-fu on the reader's part.' what does google-fu mean?.

SOLUTION:
Google-fu is defined as 'skill in using search engines (especially Google) to quickly find useful information on the Internet.' It is a somewhat tongue-in-cheek reference to kung-fu, which is generally perceived as requiring a high degree of skill to master in the western hemisphere. In the example sentence you provided, the author is suggesting that the expected results are somewhat difficult to attain and you will need to use diligence when searching. I used a bit of Google-fu to research this answer.