Word, idiom or expression to describe feeling full (after eating)

For example: > I like how you conveniently informed us after most of us had eaten already > and we are [feeling full]. The phrase in brackets sounds unnatural to me. Would you suggest how to rephrase that better?


Difference between "unlikeable" and "dislikeable"?

Is there a difference between _unlikeable_ and _dislikeable_? It feels like there is, but I'm uncertain how to explain it.


English, Latin, or Malay pronunciation of betta fish

The genus name of the aquarium fish _Betta splendens_ derives from the Malay word "ikan betah." The common name of the fish is also "betta," which in English we'd pronounce with a soft e. I often hear the pronunciation "bay- tuh," for both common and genus name, and just as often hear fish fanciers loudly object and insist on the soft e. But would it also be correct to use a Latin pronunciation for the genus name, which I think (not sure) would be closer to "bay-tuh"?


Can there be a hyphen in "nonlinear"?

As the title says, I'm wondering if "non-linear" is an acceptable spelling of the word "nonlinear." A bit of research on this site turns up Is the use of a hyphen between "non" and an adjective strictly necessary?, in which Monica Cellio commented that some of these "non"-prefixed words have entered the language in unhyphenated form. This is the way I'm used to seeing "nonlinear." But other people I work with spell it with the hyphen, "non-linear." Is that valid, or should I point it out as a correction? (This is in a scientific paper going to publication; I wouldn't care in a less formal context) More generally, what reference(s) would I look at to answer questions like this in the future, about whether a particular compound can/should be spelled with or without a hyphen?


An expression with the meaning of "don't care" and "do not make a ceremony of"

I wanted to explain to a seller on online auction to pack the item with care because it can be damaged in transit. I looked for the right expression to say that our postal workers sometimes don't care much about packages (at least here in Russia). In my native language, which is Russian, we use expression like "ne tseremonitsya" (не церемониться). Which is "do not make a ceremony of smth". The online dictionary gave me examples like: >   1. make no bones of... >   2. handle without gloves >   3. deal shortly >   4. pull no punches >   5. didn't mince matters with ... > Could you please assist me in finding a good expression?


A word that describes giving its name to something else: iron is ... for ferromagnetism

I am writing about unusual ferromagnetic materials. For the introduction I want to use the "namegiver" for ferromagnetism, iron, as an example but I am stuck finding the right word or expression. >   * In iron the _namegiving_ element for ferromagnetism the Curie > temperature... >   * In iron, which coined the term ferromagnetism the Curie temperature ... >   * In iron, from which the term ferromagnetism is derived, the Curie > temperature ... > Is there an English word that expresses that iron, or to be more precise, its Latin counterpart "ferrum", gave its name to the phenomenon _ferromagnetism_?


"The day before yesterday"

I was wondering, what single word could I use to describe the day before yesterday? E.g. > My birthday was the day before yesterday.


"Make easy" vs. "make it easy"

I need to know which of these options is the correct one and why: >   * The Spanish cooking makes it easy to have a nice meal. >   * The Spanish cooking makes easy to have a nice meal. > I don't know if I need the pronoun _it_ or not. By the way, is "a nice meal" correct, or should I use any other adjective, such as "good"?


What is the name of this stylistic device?

There is a stylistic device where you begin and end a text with the same metaphor.I'm sorry I don't have a "real-world" example in English, but I'll try to describe what I mean. Let's say there's an article on software development. The article begins by likening the development process it to the construction of a car. Then it goes on talking about software, and in the last phrase it goes back to the car metaphor, achieving a "closure" effect. Is there a proper name for this?


"Clod" vs. "chunk" vs. "lump"

Are there usage differences between _clod, chunk,_ and _lump_? Are they interchangeable? For example, is it better to use _lump_ or _clod_ for wood?


"former" vs "last" as in "my former, only and last husband"

I was reading a book and found this expression: > [...] my former, only and last husband. Could anyone tell me what are the differences between _former_ and _last_ in this case?   Also, would **_former and only_** suffice to express this idea?


Can I say 'I feel connected' when I think a movie tells my story?

Recently I saw a movie that tells a story very similar to mine. I wanted to tell my friends about it and said 'I felt connected'. They doubted if that is the right word to use, since the word 'connected' is more often used to describe a romantic relationship. So my question is, what would be a good word for this situation?


Syllable division of VCV pattern in words such as "salad" and "lemon"

In words such as _salad_ /sæləd/, you have a VCV pattern (vowel-consonant- vowel), in which the first vowel is short. The syllable division of such words is generally done after the consonant, i.e, as VC-V. Here are a few examples:      salad /sæl-əd/   lemon /lem-ən/   never /nev-ər/   balance /bæl-əns/      This division is in agreement with the notion that generally, a short vowel do not end a syllable.      Cambridge and the American Heritage dictionaries divide these words this way. Also, phonics and spelling textbooks do the same. However, Merriam-Webster dictionaries, such as the Collegiate and the Unabridged, divide these words _before_ the consonant. So you have:      salad /sæ-ləd/   lemon /le-mən/   never /ne-vər/   balance /bæ-ləns/      I would like to ask why there is such a disagreement between the dictionaries, and which division is natural for _you_. You may want to mention whether your English is American, British or other.


Verb agreement with "that" as relative pronoun

Which one of the following sentences is grammatically correct? >   1. The idea that introduces a new relational representation is the subject > of this paper. > >   2. The idea that introduce a new relational representation is the subject > of this paper. > > Notice the form of the verb _to introduce_ in the sentences.


Is it correct English to turn interjections such as "ah", "oh", "um" "huh", "hem" into verbs?

For example: she ahhed/ohhed/ummed/huhhed/hemmed. Or is this possible only with some interjections?


What is the present participle of "stop, drop, and roll"?

In a verb phrase, such as stop, drop, and roll, how do I conjugate this in the present participle? Stopping, dropping, and rolling? Stop, drop, and rolling?


'Horeca', is it English? Alternatives?

In Dutch there's a quite commonly used word that denotes the commercial sector around selling food and beverages for immediate (or near-immediate, e.g. take- out meals) consumption: _horeca_. (This usually also includes snackbars and the like, but not supermarkets) I'm in the process of creating an English version of a website that has it as a menu item, and I'm looking for a translation of approximately similar size (i.e. not a full sentence). I found that the word horeca also exists in English, but the Wikipedia page is quite small and seems to be written by a Dutch native. The definition given is the exact definition of the word I'm looking for, but I'd rather have something that's less obscurely used in English.. > **Horeca** (or HORECA) is the sector of the food service industry that > consists of establishments which prepare and serve food and beverages. The > term is a syllabic abbreviation of the words Hotel/Restaurant/Café. I'm edging towards distrusting the fact that it's a word that English natives would understand. Does anyone have any alternatives with a simialr meaning?


A word that means how authentic or true a replica is to the original

I have been trying to recall a particular word for a week now. The word is a property of a replica indicating the degree with which it was able to be true to the original. Similar words are authentic, representative, etc. Maybe something similar to integrity. I feel like it is commonly used in this context, but in general it is not frequently used. I would love to hear suggestions!


Meaning of "I would there were..."?

What is the meaning of "I would there were", as in this quote from Shakespeare's "A Winter's Tale"? > I would there were no age between sixteen and three-and-twenty, or that > youth would sleep out the rest; From its context, I assume it means "I wish there were" but I find it difficult to conceive how the modern usage of "would" could ever have been used in this way.


Is 'many' used in positive sentences or not?

It is uncanny how many books will insist that neither 'many' nor 'much' can be used in positive sentences.   1. Have you got many pens? / Have you got much money? --> correct   2. I haven't got many pens. / I haven't got much money. --> correct   3. I have got many pens. / I have got much money. --> INCORRECT And yet, those same books will invariably have a text where - lo and behold - 'many' is used in a positive sentence! I can only guess that proper grammar rules are as dictated, but every day use has drifted considerably from the said rule. So I ask you: what is the _real_ usage of 'many'. Has it become common in any type of sentence? Or are there situations when 'many' can be used in positive sentences and situations when it can't? Because I really don't know what to say when the students point at a text and say it isn't following the rule they are supposed to follow.


Single word alternative to "overvalue"

Generally speaking, _attach too much significance to [something]_ can be replaced _overvalue_ , but that doesn't sit well with me in certain contexts. For example, suppose I reached some conclusion after considering various factors, but it turns out later that I accorded too much weight to "Factor X" (causing me to reach the _wrong_ conclusion). _"I attached/ascribed/assigned/etc. too much significance to X"_ conveys exactly what I want to say. I can't explain why _"I overvalued X"_ doesn't cut it for me - that's just the way it is. Words such as _overstate, overplay, overemphasise_ all seem to imply I focused too much on _X_ in a debate attempting to defend my (erroneous) conclusion. And _overestimate_ implies mistakenly thinking _X_ was _bigger_ than it really was (rather than just "more important than it should be"). Ideally, I'm looking for _"I xxxx'ed X"_ , but even _"I xxxx'ed the importance of X"_ would do.


Question tags — "did you" vs. "didn't you"

Typically, when we ask for confirmation/denial of a statement, we say something like the following: > We turn left here, don't we?   >  You have a cat, don't you?   >  We've met before, haven't we? pairing a positive statement with a negative question, or > We don't need that, do we?   >  You don't know anything about this, do you? pairing a negative statement with a positive question. However, sometimes positive statements are paired with a positive question > We take a left, do we?   >  You had to be a big shot, did you?   >  You've been to Prague, have you? Is this correct? Does it change the meaning in any way? Are the three forms interchangeable?


You have no idea, (...): "do you" or "don't you"?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Question tags — “did you” vs. “didn’t you” Which one is correct? option 1: > You have no idea, don't you? or, option 2: > You have no idea, do you?


Using the adverb "now" with a tag question

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Question tags — “did you” vs. “didn’t you” >   1. People can hardly motivate themselves now, **can** they? >   2. People can hardly motivate themselves now, **can't** they? > Number 1 is the correct answer. However, usage of _can't they_ in number 2 can also be correct as it takes the tag question format but due to _now_ being used in the sentence, it is wrong. My question is, I am too sure that number 1 is the correct answer, but I am not sure about the above explanation. How true this holds? And why the addition of the adverb "now" makes number 2 incorrect?


Using can and can't

> She can barely cook a decent meal, **___ ___** she? I think the answer is _can’t_. Please advise: what is the rule here? Therefore, if the question is asked: > She can’t swim, **___ ___** she? In this case, I think the answer will be _can_. What do you think?


differences vernacular vs. colloquial

What is the difference between the words vernacular and colloquial? Is vernacular closer to jargon? A quick search reveals that colloquial refers to informal spoken language while vernacular refers to some sort of native language of a place. Is that the only difference?


Is there a comparative form of the word "different?"

Does the adjective "different" have a comparative form? If so what is it?


What is the etymology of "giving [it] the old college try"?

What is the etymology of _giving [it] the old college try_? In particular, is it referencing an old ritual that might have percolated amongst alumni of the old and prestigious New England colleges/universities? I tried Googling, but I'm not really finding an authoritative source at the moment. If nothing definitive can be found, I'd at least appreciate a date of first attestation.


What tense is "have been are"?

Here are some examples: >   * Meanings **have been are** still in constant flux. (Source) >   * I'm afraid to say that in the past the police **have been are** too keen > to caution people. (Source) >   * That's because those overseas clubs **have been are** able to negotiate > those domestic rights themselves and not collectively as the Premier League > clubs do. (Source) > Are these sentences grammatically correct? Why was **have been** not used?


Opposite of subsequent (non-chronological/logical)

Just wondering, there is a related question regarding the _subsequent_ in the context of logic (which can also be used in the context of chronology), but what if we're talking about an abstract sequence. For example it is possible to say: > Subsequent files, however, can not be parsed. But how would you say the opposite: > The files which came earlier in sequence than the file in question, however, > could not be parsed. As far as I am aware > Antecedent _(or precedent)_ files, however, can not be parsed. is invalid english (though I might be mistaken).


Phrasal Verbs. Rules and Tricks

Are there any rules or tricks that might explain how phrasal verbs are formed to understand their meanings?


which one of these statement's grammar correct

1. It will be 3 by the time I reach office   2. It will be 3 by the time I'll reach office.


Could "lolcat" be used to mean "something funny"?

> The lolcat came from a problem with the Stack Overflow API. Is this usage of _lolcat_ generally understood?


What do you call slapping someone at the back of their head

I know there is bitch-slap, that is when you you hit someone a male or a female with back of you hands (sometimes) when they act or do stupid. I want to know the word that is subtle in nature, that when we hit someone at the back of their head when they do stupid thing. Like an elder bro hit a younger one to correct him... I know a word Gibbs-slap, but that is so american and I want a global term. Thanks.


is there a rule that simple coordinator "and" is changed for "or" in negations?

For instance: Sally can play the guitar **and** the piano. Martin can't play the guitar **or** the piano.


How does 'worth' differ from 'value' and how are they synonyms?

Why do we say "he is worth a lot of money" when we neither mean to buy, or sell, nor express great regard for the wealthy man, but "his contribution is worthless" even when the person is being enormously well paid for his work -- and say "she is invaluable as a teacher"?


A non-offensive term to call a lunatic?

How can a mad scientist's friend address him? For example, when engaged in a conversation with other people (who don't know the scientist), he mentions having such a friend? I suppose a loony sounds too harsh. Is there a friendlier way to suggest he is a bit of a lunatic?


"object-oriented" vs "object oriented"

When should we use "object-oriented" and when "object oriented" when talking about programming? An example: > Why should I start writing object oriented code? I personally think that there should be a hyphen, because "oriented" connects to the word "object", but I am not sure.


What pronouns are used in the vocative?

A coauthor and I are drafting a letter, and we're not yet sure whom we're going to be sending it to. So I sent a draft to my coauthor, which started > Dear [whomever]: Now, that line in a letter is in the vocative case (or would be, if English really had cases). I know that _who_ is used in the nominative case and _whom_ in the accusative/dative, but what about the vocative? Should I have written > Dear [whoever]: instead? * * * * * * Obviously, my question is only about such dialects as use _who_ and _whom_. But it could be just as well asked about _he_ versus _him_ : had we been authoring a letter with a known male recipient we didn't want to bother writing out the name of, we could have used > Dear [him]: or > Dear [he]: and the same question would apply. * * * Equally obviously, because this is a draft letter and the word in question won't appear in the final copy, it really doesn't matter which word we use. I wish to know anyway.


"High Accident Intersection"

I was challenged recently to solve this problem. An accident takes place on an intersection on a high road. However, if I was to write about this as taken place in a "high accident intersection" it would seem like a lot of accidents take place at that particular location. Is there a concise and accurate way of describing an accident at an intersection on a high altitude?


Present day adjective for "cannot be taken away"

I'm looking for a word that describes that the fact that something can't be taken away or deprived of once acquired (experience) as in: > Your experiences cannot be taken away from you, man, they stay with you > forever. I was thinking something along the lines of "experiences, as a rule, are _undivestable_ so much unlike rights and dignities", but only in a more modern not-obsolete kind of way (very few people in my control group actually knew what "undivestable" meant). I need this stuff for an ad, meaning it must be easily understood by young and old, bright and dim, rich and poor i.e. all alike. Also what'd you guys think of _un-takeaway-able_? I am in need of a word that says that once you acquire (an experience) something through investing time and effort it is yours forever no matter what, it cannot be taken away from you. It is not granted to you by any one, and it is something you must "take" to have.


What does the expression "till Saturday week" mean?

I'm a native speaker of American English. But sometimes when reading a book by an English author or watching television shows broadcast on BBC I hear unusual (to my ears) expressions and am not entirely certain of the meaning. I'm going to guess that the expression "till Saturday week" means "till Saturday a week from now". A web search has brought up plenty of examples of this phrase being used, but I can't find anything that clarifies the meaning.


Usage of sound /ʒ/ in English (not /dʒ/)

I'm trying to explain to an English speaker how to pronounce the letter _j_ in French, and was looking for cases where it appears in English. It seems that _j_ is almost always pronounced /dʒ/. Examples of the /ʒ/ without /d/ in English are very rare: Asia, vision (many words ending in -sion), measure. In those words the vowel after /ʒ/ is always the same. Where else in English does this consonant appears?


Relative clause with "whose"

I just read the following sentence in a short-biography: "Peter was born in England in 1982, whose parents were from Japan and India." I think that the use of the relative pronoun "whose" is wrong here, it sounds as if the parents of the year 1982 were from Japan and India. Am I right, or is this sentence correct? Many thanks, Katerina


What is the best term to describe a "native English speaker who is an American"?

When applying for English teaching jobs, I want to describe myself as a "native speaker of English who has an American accent" since most companies in Europe want native speakers to teach English courses and they usually have a preference for one accent or another (American, British, Australian, etc.). What is the best term for this, e.g. "I am a...":   * American native speaker of English (good?)   * American English native speaker (good?)   * native speaker of American English (best?)   * native American English speaker ("native American" could be confused with being an American Indian)


Usage of the word "latest"

Raj has breakfast almost always before 7:45 AM. On rare occasions, he has after 7:45 AM, but never after 8:00 AM. So If he says "I always have my breakfast latest by 8:00 AM" to convey this fact, is Raj's usage correct?


Can you use two "and"s in a sentence?

For example, > I like chocolate, vanilla, and lemon and orange ice cream. Indicating "lemon and orange" is a combined flavor, as an item in the list needing an initial _and_.


Using "and" in a list with an element already containing "and"

I'm struggling with the following sentence in an APA format paper. I don't like the double usage of _and_ here, but 'supply and demand' is one thing in this context. Is this correct or do I need to make a change? > Riggs (2011) argues that tuition prices can be explained by the basic > principles of supply and demand and perceived quality. To clarify: My intent is for the term "basic principles" to apply to both "supply and demand" (as a single principle) **and** "perceived quality" as the other. As this sentence is paraphrasing Riggs, this must be the meaning conveyed whether or not we agree with his over-simplification of S&D.


Is this correct for an email campaign subject?

Just wondering whether the following sentence is grammatically correct — I was always taught that you shouldn't have two _and_ s within the same sentence. We are not able to come up with a better subject. The subject below is for both New and Used Motorhomes and New and Used Caravans. > Serious Savings on New and Used Motorhomes and Caravans


Multiple Ands but might still be correct?

I just wrote an interesting sentence and I'm on the fence on if it seems proper. I left it as a comment over on StackOverflow so the content may not mean much to you, but the structure interests me: > Making a regular Button do what you describe will probably be fraught with > problems and gotchas and more than likely will cause other elements of the > UI to constantly repack. Specifically the use of "and" twice. Once as a combination of "this and that" and another to join two sentences in a cause and effect sort of way. Their back to back use makes me question if the sentence is ok. Is this proper or is my Oklahoma grammar affecting my typing? If it is proper, is there a name for this kind of structure?


Using two "And"s

Is the following (part of the) sentence correct grammatically? > ... I will describe how my personal experiences **and** my professional > **and** academic background have prepared me to ...


Reverse relationship of Belong?

Consider the phrase:   " _That shovel belongs to Tim._ "   which when you reverse the subject becomes: " _Tim owns that shovel_ " However there is another use of belong, which means membership of.   " _Susan belongs to the North Hampton Soccer Club._ ".   How would I reverse that subject. " _The North Hampton Soccer Club owns Susan_ "? That isn't correct, Susan isn't property.   " _The North Hampton Soccer Club includes Susan_ "? That doesn't convay the same strength of belonging, but it is better. Consider another example:   " _Fred belongs to the Catholic Church_ "   " _The Catholic Church owns Fred_ ", " _The Catholic Church includes Fred_ ", I am ideally looking for a single word verb.


Order of sentence and using 's

> ...absolutely 100% our doing, not the Restaurant's. or > ...absolutely 100% our doing, not the Restaurants. The first one feels right, but looks a little odd. I think it's the first, because you would say > ...the Restaurant's doing. even thought it might not look right. And, I think you have to show possession, right? Can someone clarify, and hopefully point me to a resource?


told vs have told in a sentence

How do you say the next sentence? 1) I told him to stay on the path while he was hiking, but he wandered off into the forest and was bitten by a snake 2) I told him to stay on the path while he was hiking, but he has wandered off into the forest and has been bitten by a snake 3) I have told him to stay on the path while he was hiking, but he wandered off into the forest and was bitten by a snake


Ambiguous transitive verb whose meaning is determined by its subject

I am looking for an example of a transitive verb with an ambiguous meaning that is determined by its subject. To explain what I mean, here is an example of a transitive verb whose meaning is modified by the object to which it is applied: to bend. You can bend a bow or you can bend the truth. Arguably, these give two different meanings of the same verb. Now, can you think of a similar effect induced by the subject that performs the action of a verb? I am looking for a similar case where the change of meaning comes from the subject. I hope this is clear. Thanks! (For those interested in why I need this, I am researching a specific model in computational linguistics and want to test it on such a verb, if it exists.)


"planning the" vs. "planning of"; "producing the" vs. "producing of"

I cannot find an explanation for the use of gerund + _of,_ such as:   * planning _of_ our future vacation;    * producing _of_ sound; etc.,  --versus the same without _of._ I prefer without _of._ Which is correct?


I wonder the differences between until now and so far

Would anyone kindly and readily explain to me the differences between the following? _Until now_ _So far_ In fact, I even can not provide any context, because I really do not understand them. Thanks in advance.


What is the most appropriate opposite of "Select All"?

Is it more appropriate to use "Deselect All" or "Select None" or some other phrase to indicate the opposite of "Select All"? Context: A toggle button in a piece of software that will select all items on screen, then change title to indicate it will clear the selected state of all items on screen


Why does "smashing" mean "very good"?

**_Smashing_** is a BrE slang which means "very good" or "impressive". Most folks might know this already, due to its use as a catch phrase by various BrE characters in media. However, from the usual meaning of the word **_smash_** (which means _breaking with violence_ ), it's not obvious how it could come to mean "very good". Did this meaning come from a specific context, perhaps military, or sports?


Meaning of "quantify" in a dating context

Someone said: " _You can always quantify things_ ", as in "* Internet and all that stuff is just that. People are people and you can always quantify things." I'm Dutch/American, but am having a really hard time understanding what this would mean.


Definition of proletariat

What is the definition of a proletariat. The dictionary tells me any working person, but in the roman empire it was a lower class citizen. Can middle class be considered proletariat?


What does "in the middle of the/a pack" mean?

Does this expression mean something like "in the middle of some score list", or "average level"?


What's a "political landscape"?

> What were some of the distinguishing features of the Congresses and > political landscapes in the 1965, 1981, 1993, and 2009 time periods? In what context is the phrase "Political landscapes" used in this sentence? I know what a landscape means but i am unable to figure out how political landscape is defined here. what i have inferred from the definition is "broad scope of political happenings throughout the country. Such things as party in power, issues being discussed by most people, election process and much more" Is this correct or i am wrong on this?


What is the name of the sign indicating positive or negative numbers

I want to describe patterns where there are numbers in pairs like these: -1 and +1, -944 and +944. Now I want to write a sentence that someone should "look for equal numbers just with opposite X". What is an appropriate word to fill in for X.


What word means "the sights, things, and activities that are special" in a place?

Typically, each city or region has its own special sights, cuisine, crafts, festivals, and activities. These need not necessarily be fully unique to a place, but might be things which local people will hope tourists will take note of. Is there a single word which can refer to these "sights, foods, activities" altogether?


Why is "Garden Leave" so called?

"Garden Leave" is a fairly common British term. According to wikipedia: > **Garden leave** describes the practice whereby an employee who is leaving a > job (having resigned or otherwise had his or her employment terminated) is > instructed to stay away from work during the notice period, while still > remaining on the payroll. The article goes on to state a brief explanation of its origin... > The term originated in the British Civil Service where employees had the > right to request special leave for exceptional purposes. and that it came into common usage in 1986 (although ngrams suggests a little earlier)... > The term came to widespread public attention in 1986 when it was used in the > BBC sitcom Yes, Prime Minister, episode "One Of Us". ... but fails to fully explain its name. What does _special_ leave have to do with _gardens_? Is it because the employee has been "kicked out of the house" and must wait in the garden like a dog? Or perhaps it is because an employee not allowed in work is expected to go home and sit in their garden?


What does "life plays tricks on him" mean?

What does this statement mean? > Life plays tricks on him. Is it similar to > He has a twisted fate.


"How does he does/do that?"

> How does he does that? > > How does he do that? Which one is correct? This type of sentence sounds a little odd because of two _do/does_ in a single statement. Is there an alternative which has the same meaning?


What does "möbius" (moebius) mean?

In Starcraft II there was a mission called The Moebius Factor. Unrelated to that, a new Futurama episode called Möbius Dick was recently released. Does anyone have any idea what does the word mean? Either generally, or in connection with any of the aforementioned phrases.


Do you know what thought did?

This question was previously presented and closed without a satisfactory answer. I'm 68 yrs old living in Australia. I've been hearing this question all my life. The answer is different every time. The query was: where did this question/ saying originate?


What is the proper usage of "not only... but also"?

I'm trying to figure out **how to use "not only... but also" properly**. Basically, my goal is to combine two clauses by using "not only". For negations, I've figured out two styles that both sound correct:   * _He knew that if he fractures his finger, not only would he not be able to compete in the water polo tournament, he would not be able to take the SAT on Monday, either._   * _He knew that if he fractures his finger, neither would he be able to compete in the water polo tournament, nor would he be able to take the SAT on Monday._ However, I don't know how to form a sentence that does not include a negation while using "not only". Here are a few possibilities that I've considered:   * _Thanks to his remarkable performance on the SAT, not only was he accepted into Harvard, but he was also given a full scholarship._   * _Thanks to his remarkable performance on the SAT, not only was he accepted into Harvard, but he was given a full scholarship._   * _Thanks to his remarkable performance on the SAT, not only was he accepted into Harvard, he was given a full scholarship._   * _Thanks to his remarkable performance on the SAT, not only was he accepted into Harvard, he was also given a full scholarship._ In those four possibilities, I'm varying **the usage of "but" and "also" in the last clause**. **What is the proper usage** of "not only"?


if or should to ask possibility?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  A special use of "should"? I have received an email which was starting wih this: > Should you have any questions, please call at this number... So could somebody explain the grammar form of "should" here and why it is preferred over "if".


The verb “should” as a conjunction

Here is the phrase from Wikipedia: > CFO Peter Klein has said that Microsoft has no alternate plan **should** its > current mobile strategy fail. Another example: > **Should** Microsoft’s tablet and phone efforts continue to inspire little > interest among the buying public, don’t expect a radical shift in strategy. What does the word should mean in this context? The same as _if_ or _in case_? Why is this verb placed before the subject? I tried to search in dictionaries, but this specific case wasn’t properly explained.


"Should" cannot replace "if?"

> **Possible Duplicates:**   >  Are "should" and "if" interchangeable at the beginning of a sentence?   >  A special use of "should"? For sentences that begin with "If", it seems that "should" can replace "If." For example: > If you ever... > > Should you ever... However after googling, it seems that "should" should not be used to replace "if." If this is true, then why do people do it? I also looked up "should" in the dictionary, and I didn't find anything that says it means the same thing as "if."


Are "should" and "if" interchangeable at the beginning of a sentence?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  A special use of “should”? If "should" comes at the beginning of a sentence, and the sentence is not a question, then can it be replaced with "if?" Is there any difference at all?


Is Apple's Old Slogan, "Think Different", grammatically incorrect?

Not too long ago, Apple Computer used the phrase "Think Different" as an ad slogan. Is this a grammatical error (that is, it should be "Think Differently"), or are they trying to say something else (and what would it be)?


Are the tense and syntax in this sentence correct?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Future tense usage: "When you see it …" > When he will arrive, he will call you. Please let me know if the tense and syntax in this sentence are correct. If not, then why not?


“What’s the buzz about something?” What does it mean?

I found a phrase, “What’s the buzz about ...?” in the following sentence in an article of Washington Post (January 20 issue) referring to the State party hosted by President Obama for welcoming Chinese president Hu Jintao, where the House Speaker, John Boehner apparently didn’t show up. What does “What’s the buzz about something?” mean? What the word,”buzz” does in this particular context represent for? Is the connotation of this phrase peripheral to “What’s up?” I also found an example of “what's the buzz about?” in a short phrase – “So what's the buzz about Michael Jackson's new baby?” in another source. Can somebody clarify for me? “The question is, and this is what Barack Obama didn't want to answer — is that human life a person under the Constitution and Barack Obama says ... Boehner's no: Just how big of a social and political faux pas was it for Speaker Boehner to say no to the state dinner? What's the buzz about Exactly why he did it? To appear 'tough'? I'd say he just appeared small and petty.


the Receipts page vs the page Receipts

Suppose there is a web application with several webpages, amongst them one with the title "Receipts". In the user's manual of this web application or a similar place, are both "the Receipts page" and "the page Receipts" correct phrases, and if so, what subtle differences are there? What are the applicable rules? My take (just to get you started): The phrase "the page Receipts" works only if "Receipts" is the established proper name of the page as much as Bill is someone's name. The phrase "the Receipts page" is more flexible, allowing the page to have anything to do with the word Receipts, such as having the title "Receipts". Here I'm making a distinction between a page having a certain name (how you call it) vs a certain title (~first line).


Is ‘(stroll with) a spring in one’s heels” a popular English idiom?

I came across the phrase, “strolled over to a place with a spring in his heels” in Jeffery Archer’s novel, Kane & Abel, which I started to read a few months ago and still in the midway. It appears in the following sentence: > “He (Abel Rosnovski, one of the two leading characters) was certain the > banker would not have found a buyer, but nonetheless he strolled over to the > Continental Trust **with a spring in his heels**. He liked the idea of being > the manager of the best hotel in Chicago.” Though I can easily surmise that ‘stroll with a spring in one’s heels’ means to stroll lightheartedly and cheerfully -We express this feeling as 小躍りして歩く‐walk cheerfully like dancing in Japanese-, I don’t find this phrase in any of OALD, online OED, CED, and Merriam-Webster. Google NGram doesn’t register “a spring in one’s heels,” but it registers “a spring in my step,” of which currency restarted around circ 1930 following a long hiatus after its short emergence during 1840 through 1980. I also found the definition of “a spring in one's step” as “(n.uc. / idiomatic) enthusiasm, energy or a positive outlook or cheerful attitude” in wikitionar, and the following example in glossfree.com/ : > “I've made the decision to March forward into March **with a spring in my > step** and a smile in my heart for many days of living life to its every > emotion and experience that lies ahead and enjoy it! Life's too short to get > bogged.” Is “(do with) a spring in one’s step” a popular English idiom, and “stroll with a spring in his heels” is just a variation coined by Jeffery Archer?


Punctuation or perhaps more

Does the punctuation in the following sentence make sense? > John is popular among clients, as well as the management who have been very > pleased with his work.


If "yet" means "and despite that", then what word means "and partially owing to that"?

> The child is only 4 years old, yet it can already talk. > > The child is only 4 years old, and, despite this, it can already talk. > > The child is only 4 years old, and, at least partially owing to its young > age, doesn't have such great balance. How do I make the last sentence more concise? As a sidenote, is it not correct to refer to the subject _"child"_ as _"it"_?


British spelling of programme and diagram

Does anyone know a reason why British English retains the _-amme_ ending for _programme_ but not for _diagram_? They both have French origins. **Programme** > ... Spelling programme, established in Britain, is from French in modern use > and began to be used early 19c., originally especially in the "playbill" > sense. Program music attested from 1877. **Diagram** > 1610s, from French diagramme ... The verb is 1840, from the noun.


What would be the best word to use for the "specificity" of data points?

I've been stuck for about 20 minutes while working on a reporting application because I can't think of what to call this property. When requesting a report, the user must specify a start date, an end date as well as the "specificity" of the data points, for example "day", "week" etcetera. I have considered calling it "specificity" or "unit size", but I feel that none of those words properly convey the meaning of the property. What word (or words) would best describe the property?


"He was so desperate that he would have given anything" vs. "that he did give anything"

> A: I heard he promised to buy her anything she wants.   >  B: Right. He was so desperate that he would have given anything to win her > over. In sentence B, instead of "would have given," is "did give" correct as well? Why is "would have given" more appropriate?


"Fall term", "autumn semester", "autumn term" or "fall semester"?

Please clarify which is UK English, American English, and where and when to use which:   * _Fall term_ (American English?)   * _Autumn semester_ (UK English?)   * _Autumn term_ (wrong?)   * _Fall semester_ (wrong?)


Is "get someone up" the same as "wake someone up"?

Is using _get up_ in this expression correct? >   * I am sorry I woke you up. >   * I am sorry I got you up. > I use _get up_ for _wake up_ all the time, but in this expression it sounds a bit odd.


"However" vs. "but" — which is more formal?

I realize there are questions on the correct usage of "but" and "however". In this case, I am concerned with correctness in a _formal_ context. I have heard it said that _however_ should be used in formal mail communications instead of _but_ because the word "but" has a negative connotation. Which should I use in, say, an email to a client? Examples: >   * We understand the issue you have pointed out, **but** we cannot consider > it as a defect in the application since the current behavior was requested > by your team. >   * We understand the issue you have pointed out. **However** , we cannot > consider it as a defect in the application since the current behavior was > requested by your team. >


A word (or short phrase) for "suggesting without prejudice"

I was having a conversation and decided that "I just though of this certain alternative option for your planning; I don't care which option you take, but know that you _have_ this option." was just too much of a mouthful. Is there a shorter way of **introducing** a suggestion, but precluding being offended if they don't take your option? It feels like a pretty frequent issue and I'd be pretty surprised if nobody's come up with a punchy way to say it. I was mainly thinking about this for social contexts.


How to refer to sexuality in a fictional universe of one sex?

Notch, the creator of the game Minecraft, has said in a blog post that there is only one sex in the game, and any animal can breed with any other animal of the same species. He uses the word "homosexual" to refer to this. "Homo" comes from the Greek - 'same'. Is there a more specific word for this? Or is it just a bit of an odd situation and thus kludging English words to fit is fine? Edit for more clarity: In this question when I talk about "sexuality" I mean "sexual preference" - what word can I use to describe the sexual preference of creatures in a fictional world where there is only one sex?


Use like something in a sentence

> I do know I can just click on that person's profile once every week/day, but > I think automated **"inbox" like** feature would be better I'm talking about Inbox feature provided by the stackexchange sites, is that correct? I felt that I should add quotes, because I'm not referring to inbox, but something that is named inbox.


Use of 'the' before human voice

Which is correct? >   * The fascinating features of human voice > > _OR_ > >   * The fascinating features of the human voice > > Is there a rule or is it another difference between American and British English? We always use 'the' for the human brain. How about in this case, 'human voice'? By the way, this example comes from an academic paper.


avoid the slash?

Should the slash be avoided? For example `every week/day` in my head is translated to `every week or day`. I think I started using slashes because I saw them used in forums and in articles. Is using slashes U.S. specific, while British English is against it? Or do I understand it wrong? _P.S. If you find any spelling errors here, please let me know._


Separating alternatives using slash/stroke where the only difference is the length

I'm wondering about the usage of slash/stroke as a way of separating alternatives (perhaps it, in this sense, could be called a abbreviation of "or"?). If the alternatives are similar, but the second one is longer, then how would I write this as short as possible, with the smallest possible risk for confusion? Let me give you an example: I have a card reader where you can insert a Memory Stick or a Memory Stick Pro. If I label the card reader with "MS/Pro", it could most certainly be interpreted as "either MS or Pro". Still, I want the label to be as short as possible.


Question mark usage/position when sentence ends with a declarative quotation?

> Who said "I am hungry?" The quotation is not a question, but do I put "my" question mark there anyway? * * * This is related to, but not the same as Position of question mark when sentence doesn't end with question


How do I punctuate a question that contains a quote that is a declarative sentence?

I'm stuck. A friend of mine stated on Facebook how much she hates the music that ice cream trucks play. So, I responded: How about they play, "Hello. It's ice cream you're looking for"? It looks wrong. I don't know if I should put a period after 'for' or not. Please help.


Look and 'feel' of a web page/site/app

Although used a lot, the phrase 'Look and feel' of a web application's assets seems a _little_ inaccurate. Is it not better to change this common phrasing to 'look and character' because we really don't _feel_ much about something displayed on the screen- but this something could have a character e.g "it's rough, it looks sexy, vibrant, irritating, annoying". You feel me?


Proper term for "four way duel"

On this Wednesday's _Survivor_ , Jeff Probst called one of the challenges as a "four way duel." Now, obviously, this is wrong because a duel is between two opponents, but is there a term referring to a fight between four opponents?


Quoting a question at the end of a sentence which is itself a question

If my sentence is a question _and_ ends with a quote of a question, where exactly do I put a question mark? >   1. Did she ask, "Is it raining"? > >   2. Did she ask, "Is it raining?"? > >   3. Did she ask, "Is it raining?" > >


Placement of question mark for a question quoting a question

Suppose I am writing to a friend, asking if he remembers a certain question I asked him. Do any of the following sentences correctly use the question mark? > Do you remember when I asked you "do you know the time"? > > Do you remember when I asked you "do you know the time?" > > Do you remember when I asked you "do you know the time?"? Less specifically, what is the general rule that can be applied to such a situation?


Where did the "juices" in "creative juices" come from? Isn't that just a little weird? I don't think _juices_ would be the first word to mind, if I hadn't heard the phrase before, and was free-associating metaphors to go with _creative_. Is it a reference to the Aristotelean humors, maybe? That seems a bit far-fetched. Or perhaps some really cool person coined the phrase and it stuck? Anyway, I'd just appreciate anyone giving me a plausible pathway on how it came to be a "stock phrase."


Is "I just spent all my money" grammatically incorrect?

Lyircs of _Free_ by Natalia Kills: > I'm free > > I just spent all my money > > but I rocked that like it don't cost a thing Shouldn't it be "I've just spent all my money"? As far as I remember, our English told us to use Present Prefect in such case because of the just.


What rules determine the apostrophe placement in "ham 'n eggs" and similar expressions?

In expressions such as "ham 'n eggs", the conjunction _'n_ appears to replace _and_ , yet there is only one apostrophe to indicate the missing _a_ and none for the missing _d_ (i.e., no "ham 'n' eggs"). Is there a punctuation rule that governs this or is it just an idiosyncratic case?


How to abbreviate "and" when used in a name

How to abbreviate "and" in titles such as "Lavender 'n Fields"?


How to answer a negative question without ambiguity?

I faced a problem to answer a negative question, for example When someone ask you: > Don't you have any money? It's a yes/no question but how should one answer the question without ambiguity? When you answer "yes", does it mean "yes, I don't have any money"? or the other way "Yes, I do have money"? the questioner may think you are agreeing to the negative, that yes, you do not have any money. I know it's better to answer with "on the contrary" but is it possible to answer yes or no?


Negative question; what's the affirmative answer here?

My wife and I communicate in English. She's Japanese, I'm Norwegian and we're both language enthusiasts; this makes for a lot of interesting language discussions. This is something that surfaced today: > _**"Is this not so good anymore?"_** , says my wife, holding up an old > container of barbecue sauce which she thinks has gone bad. **_"Yes"_** , I > answer, meaning that the sauce has gone bad. Disregarding that **_a)_** the question could probably have been formulated in a different way to make it less ambiguous and **_b)_** I could have been more verbose in my answer; would answering _"Yes"_ or _"No"_ to this question, in English, indicate that the sauce has, indeed, expired? Both of our native languages handle these kinds of "negative questions" a bit differently and we can't seem to figure it out in English.


How to answer this question? Yes or No

Sorry, if this question is naive. If someone asks me, > "You didn't go to school today, right?" If I did not, should I answer, _Yes_ or _No_? Similarly, > "You do not like eating fish, do you?" If I do not like eating fish, should I say _Yes_ or _No_?


Reply to a question with "Yes, it is" or "No, it is"

What is the correct response to the following question:   **Ten divided by five is not two?** 1) Yes, it is.   2) No, it is. Intuitively I would say "Yes, it is", but then I thought about it in the following way: If one asks "Ten divided by five is two?" I would say "Yes, it is", but if the   person asks "Ten divided by five is **not** two?" then I would say "No, it is". So I think my intuitive answer is wrong, but I am not sure.


How prevalent is this reversal of "yes" and "no"?

Example: > Aren't you going to the store? Where I am from, the correct answer indicating I am going to the store is yes. The contraction "not" is ignored. Is this sort of confusion prevalent elsewhere? * * * I don't understand what is so complicated about my question here: **Is this sort of confusion prevalent elsewhere?** I am not asking for any of the answers provided here. They are all grand answers, but they have nothing to do with my question, which is is bold this time. I am not asking how to answer this sort of question. I am not asking what this sort of statement means. I am furthermore not asking for an opinion. If you don't understand how ignoring the adverb "not" is confusing, please don't answer. I am asking a very simple question; one desiring a very simple answer. To reiterate, the confusion arises from the fact that the proper response of "yes" and "no" is reversed.


How can I answer back?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  How to answer a negative question without ambiguity? If someone ask you this question   "Don't you have exam? "   how can I answer back using only (Yes and No).   that's funny - I used to answer "Yes" then he/she ask me again "when is your exam?"   that's confuse me because I answered "Yes" that mean I don't have Exam but she get it in wrong way. If I answer "No" then it will mean I have exam, but I don't have exam. So which is right answer "Yes" or "No" ? Hope my question will make sense! Thanks


Ask: "You don't think this is right", Answer:"No, I don't". What does that mean?

English sentences can be very fascinating... or downright confusing, depends on how you look at it. For example, if A asks B:"You don't think the Josh is right on this, do you", and B answers:"No, I don't" and then FULL STOP. No further clarification will come from B. So, how should we interpret B's answer? Is B thinking that Josh is right, or is B thinking that Josh is wrong? Is B agreeing with A, or disagreeing?


Answering a negatively-expressed question

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  How to answer a negative question without ambiguity? > 2). Didn't we park on the C level?   >  (A) Yes, I sure thought we did.   >  (B) No, we'll park on the D level.   >  (C) Yes, we didn't park on level C. Which is the best answer to a negative-polarity question, please?


Why do positive and negative variants of the same question elicit the same answer?

In common American English usage, these two questions elicit the same response:   1. **Do** you have a ticket?   2. **Don't** you have a ticket? These are the usual answers (I was going to say "possible answers" but I can think of a whole host of situations where one could get other answers, e.g. wake up someone in the middle of the night and ask it, the answer might easily be "I don't know" or "maybe" or "hey, just let me sleep!"... but that's neither here nor there... :-)   * Positive: "Yes" or "Yes, I do".   * Negative "No" or "No, I do not". But consider this: the questions are logically equivalent to:   1. You **have** a ticket, right?   2. You **do not have** a ticket, right? Here I am not so sure that a "Yes, that's right" response means the same thing to each question. (One could still, however, use "Yes, I do" as @F'x answer in How to answer a negative question without ambiguity? illustrates, to remain valid and unambiguous.) (As a side note, it is interesting to compare the same question in Chinese, where one literally asks "Do you have/not have a ticket?" and the common answers are:   * "[I] have"   * "[I] not have" ...which also removes the ambiguity... while at the same time straying from my original question:-) So why can I rewrite the questions so that they are essentially equivalent yet expect different answers?


"You have nothing to do" - "Yes I do" / "Yes I don't"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  When a negative question is asked, what is the grammatically correct way to > answer?   >  How to answer a negative question without ambiguity? If someone says "You have nothing to do", what is the proper answer to say "what you just said is true": >   * You have nothing to do. >   * Yes, I do. > Or >   * You have nothing to do. >   * Yes, I don't >


> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  How to answer a negative question without ambiguity?   >  Response to “Would you not do it?” When a negative question is asked, what is the grammatically correct way to answer? If someone asks you _Didn't you come by car today?_ , what is the correct answer?


What is the practical difference between ignorant and naive?

Defined in online dictionaries, `Ignorant` means a lack of education, while `Naive` means a lack of worldly experience. What is the practical difference between these two? When would I use one and not the other? We could consider education to be the acquisition of knowledge, and experience to be knowledge acquired first-hand. In that case, these two words would have no practical difference, yet I have had people strongly disagree with me in some discussions. One person tried to explain that `ignorant` is when a person doesn't know about something, whereas `naive` is when a person does or should know about something but fails to act on the knowledge or fails to acquire the knowledge before acting. Could someone please clarify?


Are words like 'dog whistle', horse box', etc compound nouns?

Why do we say 'dog whistle' but 'dog's lead'; 'horse box' but 'horse's bridle'?


Can the eldest sibling of three males call his younger brother "my older brother"

Had this conversation with a 26 year old male. He has finished a degree at Uni and told me I was wrong when I said you cannot call your younger brother your older brother. He is only older son to your mother who would refer to her three sons as "my youngest son, my older/elder son and my oldest/eldest son. He was so passionate about this (my three sons also told me I was wrong) I had to stop but at 47 I am wondering what is correct.


What does 'turn things over his fingers' mean?

Below is the first paragraph of Salinger's "The Ocean Full of Bowling Balls". I wonder what **to turn things over his fingers** means in this context? I imagine the little boy juggling things, but I don't have a clear scene in my mind (why would one need to roll forward to juggle?). > His shoes turned up. My mother used to tell my father that he was buying > Kenneth’s shoes too large for him, or to please ask somebody if his feet > were deformed. But I think his shoes turned up because he was always > stopping on the grass, rolling his seventy-five or eighty pounds forward to > look at things, to turn things over his fingers. Even his moccasins turned > up.


Why "Game Over" not "Game Is Over"

According to basic grammar, there should be a _be_ verb in front of the _Over_. So why do all games display _Game Over_ instead of _Game Is Over_?


cried and begged

Below are two options in my grammar questions : > 1.The newly released 3D Disney movie was supposed to be the best of all time > and Joe’s little sister **cried and begged him to take.**   >  2\. The newly released 3D Disney movie was supposed to be the best of all > time and Joe’s little sister **persistently begged him to take.** It says second choice is more correct. So, What is wrong in first one ?


in spite of him/his

> Jane told Marcos that in spite of (him/his) being small, he would definitely > be a great asset to the team because of his athletic abilities. In the above sentence, which of him/his is correct and why ?


Using adjectives & nouns placed before nouns

I'm really confused when using adjectives and nouns. Nouns often have their adjective forms. When I want to modify a noun, I have to chose one form to use. Is there any rule? It's said that adjectives are used to express implied meaning while noun forms are used to provide real, easily understandable meanings. Is this correct?


"Were you seen by him" vs. "were you be seen by him"

I am confused about which of the two is grammatically correct: >   1. Were you seen by him, he would have been surprised. >   2. Were you **be** seen by him, he would have been surprised. >


"Listen to music" or  "listen for music"

Which of the following sentences is grammatically correct?   1. The music for which we heard last night at the concert was exceptionally good.    2. The music to which we listened at the concert last night was exceptionally good.    3. The music which we listened last night at the concert was exceptionally good.


Life cycle, life-cycle or lifecycle?

I notice great variability in how this concept is expressed. Does the term vary depending on the context? Should one use one variation when discussing biology, for example, and another when talking about product phases? Wikipedia uses different forms in way that seems random. So, too, does the New York Times, based on basic search. An earlier discussion of the variations in connection with technology notes that "A compound generally starts open (life cycle), migrates to hyphenated (life-cycle), and ends up closed (lifecycle)." Are we at the closed stage for the term in a general sense?


"personal issue", "private issue", "personal affair", or "personal business"?

I need to send my boss mail explaining that because of a personal issue I need to handle, I can’t attend the conference. Which of these phrases would best express that I have my own business to deal with:   * personal issue   * private issue   * personal affair   * personal business What are the differences between those expressions?


Ambiguous plurality ("One or more items was/were skipped")

Given a sentence in this format, which would be correct? > One or more items was skipped. > > One or more items were skipped. I'm leaning towards the latter, but maybe it doesn't matter? (Hey, that rhymes!)


What is the correct definition and usage of the acronym "ETA"?

Does "ETA" stand for "Estimated Time _to_ Arrival" or "Estimated Time _of_ Arrival"? I most commonly hear phrases like "ETA 20 minutes", but I've also heard "ETA 4:30 PM". Is one usage correct and the other wrong, or are both okay?


When will you be in through? What is the meaning of this question?

I could not figure out the meaning of this question. Could someone explain me briefly? This statement was in "answering audience questions" which is a presentation guide line.


Is “Who is he?” ok when we don’t know the sex?

Suppose I see someone coming whose gender is unknown; how should I ask who the approaching person is? Should I say “Who is he?”


"At the flicks" - where did this term come from?

How did the term "flicks" come to relate to "movies" or "cinema"? Where did "flicks" come from?


A word or phrase describing "cheap talk" or "cheap issues"

Cheap talk like a kind of talking back of actors'/actresses' lives or an interview about their secret lives in some popular magazines or cheesy show off like reality shows you can find in TV channels. Making a drama or love story of any simple or ordinary happening in its fake version only to take attention or advertise for someone or something. We have an interesting equal in Persian/Farsi language which is "Yellow Matters". Do you have something like this for it?


'Therefore' in an illogical logic sense

I have a co-worker that is always saying "Therefore, A B C" when the "A B C" isn't a conclusion from any sort of deductive reasoning. For example, > Me: ... thus, that's how it works.   >  Her: I think you are wrong about that. Therefore, I know I'm right. I was wondering if this use of _therefore_ is appropriate. Should _therefore_ only be used (much as in the symbolic logic sense) when what's being concluded is beyond a reasonable doubt?


Can you decide grammaticality from the sentence alone?

I would like a generative BNF-style complete description for English grammar. Some of the more subtle stuff leads to awkward questions of grammaticality (a complete answer to this question, and all related questions, is a publication with a complete description of a comprehensible and comprehensive formal grammar which generates exactly the set of grammatical English sentences): Here is question 1: is grammaticality of verbs ever dependent on external context from other sentences? If so, then those constructions obviously require some semantics. The two sentences below are the context   1. John smiled at Lisa at Kinko's.   2. John asked Lisa for advice at Kinko's. After either 1 or 2, you say:   * I did what John did at Kinkos at James   * I did what John did at Kinkos of my friend I believe the second form is certainly not grammatical in case 1. How about case 2? I am not sure if the first sentence is grammatical even in case 1. Should they be   * I did what John did to Lisa at Kinkos to James? In other words, do the arguments have to match "do" or the verb that is implied by context by the "do"? More generally, are there any cases where the grammaticality of a sentence requires looking at other sentences for context?


Response time or response times

Which is grammatical? >   1. response time of multiple services >   2. response times of multiple services >


Should the statement after "then" be followed with modals?

Consider the following: > If you were to buy this, then ask me. Or should it be: > If you were to buy this, then you would need to ask me. Is the use of _would_ necessary here? If we go with the first one, doesn't it break the rules of conditional statements? Or how would you construct the hypothetical structure of the following: > If you want to buy this, let me know.


What is the meaning of "provably good"?

What does _provably good_ mean ? Does it mean not good for practical scenario and only good theoretically ? > None of the hash functions that we would be discussing in today's lecture > are provably good hash functions . I see it here at 39:06 time line.


How to determine the English structural validity of a domain name

I'm in the process of creating a parser which, using a few dictionaries (English language words, places and acronyms), splits the domain name into a set of potential phrases and attempts to decide which phrase is the most likely to be correct according to the intentions of the person who registered the domain. My current rules are:   * The place name must be at least 4 characters long.   * A maximum of 2 place names can occur in a phrase and must be adjacent   * Acronyms must be at least 3 characters in length   * Priority (in order) is:      1. least number of words     2. highest average character length     3. highest maximum word length For example, _refundslondon_ extracts to _refunds london_ , _refunds lon don_ and _refunds lond on_. It doesn't seem to work too badly at the moment, but from an English-language perspective, it would be nice to know if there was a way to determine (a) the validity of the sentence structure and (b) if certain words appear out of place, particular with respect to words that technically can't really go on the end of a sentence. Examples:   * _my_ probably shouldn't go at the end of a sentence   * _and_ probably shouldn't go at the start or end of a sentence ...and so forth. Any assistance would be appreciated!


Exsanguination or Desanguination?

My wife was working on her lines for a play ( _Dracula_ ) set in the early 1900s and one line caught my eye. It referred to the **_desanguination_** of the vampire’s victims. I’d always heard the term as **_exsanguination_** and never heard of _desangination_. A few quick Google searches seem to indicate that _desanguination_ is perhaps more archaic. The questions are these:   1. Is _desanguination_ considered archaic? For how long? Which word would have most likely been used by a doctor (the character in the play) circa 1900?   2. Are there any subtle differences in meaning between the two? If so, which seems more relevant to the results of a vampire attack? How’s that for a topical question on Halloween week?


"I was going to" expression. How to use it correctly?

> I was going to pick you tomorrow from the airport (not a big deal to me, > really), but remembered that tomorrow I'll be teaching the class, which ends > at 8. in above example, I am trying to say that earlier I planned to pick you up (tomorrow), but now I remember that I have prior commitments tomorrow, and hence can longer do it. What's the best way to say something like this and use _I was going_ expression. thnkas


What does "had had" mean? How does this differ from "had"?

For example, what is the difference between the following two sentences: > I had a bad day > > I had had a bad day


Using had twice

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  What does "had had" mean? How does this differ from "had"? Is this correct usage? I had had enough food?


using had had in a sentence

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  What does "had had" mean? How does this differ from "had"? I had had so many interruptions this morning that I scarcely had done any work   or   I had had so many interruptions this morning that I scarcely have done any work   or   I had had so many interruptions this morning that I scarcely did any work Am confused whether to use, did/ had done/ have done after the adverb scarcely. I already referred a post on had had usage which is entirely different.


They might keep knowledge of its potential to effect social change from being widely disseminated

The title is an excerpt from a GRE question: > Those who fear the influence of television deliberately ---- its persuasive > power, hoping that **they might keep knowledge of its potential to effect > social change from being widely disseminated**. > >   * promote >   * underplay >   * excuse >   * laud >   * suspect > I don't quite understand the structure and meaning of the **bold** part of the sentence, could you explain it for me?


"Purge" vs. "expunge"

Whats the difference between _purge_ and _expunge_ , if any? For example: > All the duplicate pages were expunged from the book. > > All the duplicate pages were purged from the book. Do these sentences have the same meaning as if they were deleted from the book?


Is there a name for the verb "to have"?

If "to be" is the copula, is there any special name for "to have"?


give / lose ground - meaning

> **Most stock markets _lost ground_ after their recent gains.   >  They're not prepared to _give ground_ on tax cuts.** These are all the examples I could dig up in my dictionaries. I don't quite understand the meaning because every dictionary says something different. Does give/lose ground mean fail completely or lose an advantage or both?


Is comma needed in this sentence?

Below is a sentence from my book review. "China" is the name of the author. Is it correct or incorrect to have a comma after the word _pay_? > China finds a way to dissect both a woman's desire to find love and her > penchant to make a man pay, if he plays around with that love.


Etymology of addict

From Wiktionary _addict_ means: > A person who is addicted, especially to a harmful drug   >  An adherent or fan (of something) Its etymology is: > ad- (“to, towards, at”) + dīcō (“say; declare”) How does its meaning come from its etymology?


Why is god, a common noun, capitalized?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  When should the word "God" be capitalized? I thought god is a common noun, but many people capitalize it when it is not the first letter of a sentence or a title.


Why is the Christian god being spelled with a lowercase letter?

It's been going on for some time, but the phenomenon which was once seen as almost an act of _rebellion_ is now becoming more commonplace. God, capitalized, is increasingly seen only at the start of a sentence. Leaving aside whether one believes in a god, or in the Christian God Himself, why is this convention not being criticized? God is after all a proper noun, the name of a deity which for over 2,000 years we have all heard of, and know by that very name. It matters not that _god_ or _God_ may or may not exist. It is a name. And like any other name that belongs to a real person or a fictional character in a book, it ought to be spelled with a capital letter. I always feel uncomfortable writing about God with a capital letter, I always feel there is a hoard of die-hard atheists ready to accuse me of being a creationist, god forbid. (Should that have been: "..., God forbid"?) Is the spelling of the Christian "God" politically incorrect? Is God with a capital letter, grammatically speaking, an archaic tradition? And if so, why? **EDIT** : From the answers so far posted, no one has yet mentioned the political and social consequences this deceptively innocent, lowercase spelling may have had on us, on today's society. And this has lead me wondering, whether in the history of the English language there has been anything similar; any linguistic _subversion_ , spoken or written which was in reality a show of defiance toward an established authority such as a government or political leader.


How to name the supreme power in the universe, in front of various people who believe there is one?

Even in writing this question, I have been deeply embarrassed : should I capitalize some words ? Although not a believer myself, I wish to perturb nobody, whatever his / her faith could be : my position is "as long as they are happy with their creed, and don't try to convert anyone by force, should they have gained enough power for it, it's all the best for everyone, why should I bother ?". The problem arises when I have to address several persons of different or unknown creeds : some have specific names, some others resent as a blasphemy to even mention a name. And I heard that there are 700 different Christian denominations in the USA alone, and how many rules apply, with all the non- Christian others ? And lately, that the word used by Muslims should not be used by any non-Muslim ... In the USA, "in _God_ we trust" is written even on more or less dirty banknotes ; in the UK, you utter the word only in church or for taking an oath. In French "Dieu sait où il est !" means "Nobody knows where he is is", it's absolutely innocent, an atheist could say that, just a way of speaking. Try to translate this word by word ! Some eyebrows would raise. **Have you a global, general solution ?** Thank you.


How long has "looney" been in use?

How long has _looney_ been used as an abbreviation of _lunatic_? Is it a recent addition or something substantially older?


Meaning of "No dark sarcasm in the classroom"

The phrase is, of course, from one of the good Pink Floyd songs: Another Brick In The Wall. I always wonder what could it possibly refer to in the context of the song and in general context. I mean, what kind of exchanges would you term 'Dark sarcasm in the classroom'?


Is there a word meaning "append", but at the beginning, not the end?

In computer programming, when you append a "string" to another, you add it to the end of the former string. E.g.               String string1 = "abcd";     String string2 = "efgh";      Appending the two strings would give               "abcdefgh"      But what if I wanted to add string2 before string1 to have the result:               "efghabcd"      What would be a good _name_ for that that reverse operation? What is the opposite of "append"?


Using “nor” without “neither” — special case

I wonder if this sentence is OK: > This person looks nothing like you, nor anyone. I know there are a lot of questions about _nor_ , but I could not find a sentence similar to this one.


For the title alone

Someone has voted for one of my questions with this comment: > +1 for the title alone. Which of these two possible meanings is the most correct:   * The title itself is so nice that I would have voted for the question whatever it was   * I vote for your title, but your question doesn't deserve it


Antithesis of "international"

If "international" is the generic word for anything that is global, what is its generic antithesis? As in: > This is an international affair/This is an **___ _** affair. And please, don't give me national, because I know that's what I'm not looking for.


A study of awake and awaken

It has been drawn to my attention that I may not be using the verb 'awake'correctly in the active and passive. Please could someone confirm that I have now got this right. In their simple present tenses they are: Active, 'I awake each morning at 6.00am'; and passive, 'I am awaken each morning by an alarm clock'. Past tenses therefore are: Active, 'I awoke this morning at 5.00am'; and Passive, 'I was awaken by the sound of thunder'. Perfect: Active, 'I have awoken early all my life'; and passive, 'I have often been awakened by a passing train' Pluperfect: Active,'I had awoken by the time the phone rang'; and passive, ' I had been awakened by noises downstairs'. Which other verbs behave in this way?


"Permanent resident in/of America"

When conveying this on foreign soil, which of these is correct usage: >   * Permanent Resident of America >   * Permanent Resident in America >


Explanation of "in favor of"

I have just read an article comparing two services, let's call them Maria and George. The article concludes "I choose Maria in favor of George". I do not understand this structure?! "I choose Maria over George" would be clear to me, but here I am not sure if it means Maria or George was chosen?


Why Côte d’Ivoire ⇒ Ivory Coast but Costa Rica ⇏ Rich Coast?

Why is it that we Anglicize some foreign proper nouns, but not others?


Emphasis of this double negative?

> Without which, we would be able to act at all. I’m hearing this in my own head as, “Without which, we would **not** be able to act at all.” So I'm wondering, is the former just a cleaner and less hectoring version of the second, with both meaning the same thing?


Use of plural with "respectively" when referring to a property

If you are referring to one property but are giving the respective values for two different things do you use the singular or plural form? Can the property be treated as a mass noun so that it takes on a cumulative reference?   1. The yields of 1 and 2 were 76 and 89%, respectively. The yield of 1 and 2 was 76 and 89%, respectively.   2. In control and treated cells, the mean values were 8.6 and 7.5, respectively. In control and treated cells, the mean value was 8.6 and 7.5, respectively. It's clear that the plural is used for cases in which two properties are listed (i.e., the yield and recovery rate of A were...) but it's not clear when only one propery is listed.


Cell phone? Cell? Mobile phone? What's the "correct" term?

What's that type of phone called that you don't need a cable for and you can use everywhere in the world (provided there's coverage ;-))? And what differences are there between the regions? USA/UK/AUS etc... and even within, say, the US (or even UK). I've even read rumors that in parts of the east of the US, people use the term "handy" (which is a really crazy German "Americanism"). EDIT: Clarification: The colloquial usage is more interesting (to me) than the "correct" official terminology (though that's of interest, too).


Is there a word for being so polite as to appear insincere?

I'm looking for a term in English to describe being so polite that one appears to be insincere.


Are there any studies on changes in British English to become more like American English?

With the spread of American popular culture (movies, books, franchises, etc.) and technical jargon (manuals, Web syntaxes, default spell-check settings, etc.), I'm wondering if there have been any studies on a resulting general change in the use of traditional British English conventions, particularly in places such as Britain and Ireland, in the direction of American conventions. In particular, I'm looking for the results of systematic studies on the topic, or strong evidence for change or lack of change of British English usage. (For example, the change of a few key conventions over the past 5, 10 or 20 years.) I refer equally to spoken conventions (e.g., "come and see" vs. "come see") as well as spelling (e.g., "centred" vs. "centered").


Is 'she-woman' an acceptable counterpart of 'he-man'?

If this is, as it is, a real English example, > I wanted to know what role his women played in persuading him that he was > this incredible _he-man_. can this > I wanted to know what role her men played in persuading hers that she was > this incredible _she-woman_. be proper, too? If _she-woman_ is not proper, can anyone suggest a word that, in that phrase, would be more suitable?


Can I start a sentence with "Established in"?

So, I am proofreading a text which starts as follows: > This is a bank established since 1900 with majority shareholding held by... and I feel like it can be improved. Can I change it to: > Established in 1900, this bank's majority of shares is held by ... As in, would it make sense grammatically? Is there any other way I can turn it around to make it sound better?


What is my co-worker asking?

My American co-worker sent this to our group chat: > Can an undatable man be transformed into a datable man? > > I am not asking if you think such a thing can be done in real life. > > I am asking if a real undatable man can be transformed into a datable man. English is my second language, and I'm having trouble making sense of the last two lines.


Do I need to add an article before the weekend?

When I’m going to have a weekend, do I have to say “ **It’s weekend**.” Or do I need to add ‘a’ or ‘the’ in front of the weekend?


What is the exact use of "X aside, Y."?

In today's _Yahoo! News_ , there is a report on small houses around the world, which contains the sentence, "Patriotism aside, there's much to love about Europe's devotion to small-space living." Isn't a sentence that begins with "Patriotism aside" supposed to go on to promote the domestic version? That is how I've always understood this "aside" construction. Or is it an expression with two opposite meanings, like the word "sanction"?


Can "the least I could do" be negative?

A common answer to being thanked for doing something is "It's the least I could do," which by my understanding is basically synonymous with "It was nothing". Recently I received a gift as thanks for being generally helpful, and - included in the message accompanying the gift - the giver uses this expression. Taking the words literally leaves me with the impression of "I've been helpful over a long time, and in return you do 'the least you can' as thanks..." It seems kind of negative. Is this just something that shoud not be taken literally, or is the expression being misused here?


What’s the meaning of “surrender” here?

What's the meaning of _surrender_ as used in the Aerosmith song, “I Don’t Want to Miss a Thing”: > _I could stay awake just to hear you breathing   >  Watch you smile while you are sleeping   >  While you’re far away and dreaming   >  I could spend my life in this sweet **surrender**   >  I could stay lost in this moment forever_ Is _surrender_ here the act of surrending in this sense from AHDE? > to give over or resign (oneself) to something, as to an emotion


At X's expense and of X's timber

The following string appears in Jenks, E. "The prerogative writs in English law" _Yale Law Journal_ 32:6 (1923): > ...the accused in the meanwhile [was] to be kept in one of the new gaols > ordered...to be built...in every county, in some borough or royal castle, at > the King's expense, and if possible of the King's timber. What does it mean for a prisoner to be lodged "at the King's timber"? Does it mean that the King pays for firewood?


"Decide/Intend on [gerund]" vs. "decide/intend to [infinitive]"

In analogy with "plan on [gerund]", do the gerund constructions above have any currency in AE, or are these chiefly dialectal and might sound folksy to most ears? E.g. > We decided on taking our next vacation to France. > > We decided to take our next vacation to France. . > We're intending on visiting Italy on our next vacation. > > We're intending to visit Italy on our next vacation.


Why use "the" for oceans/seas/rivers etc. but not lakes?

Possibly two questions in here: Are these sentence constructions logical, and if they are, why are they different? > I swam across the Ocmulgee River.   >  I swam across the Pacific Ocean.   >  I swam across the Red Sea.   >  I swam across Lake Winnipeg. I can't think of a way of phrasing the lake example while using an article with a proper noun. I thought at first it was because Lake Winnipeg is different; it's generic portion (the "Lake") comes first and the name of that body comes second, but _I swam across Falls Lake_ is the same. Yet the sentence _I swam across the lake_ sounds right to me. ...Why?


Khreshchatyk and Kostyolna streets, no definite article

Source: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26868119 > The interior minister also showed a number of slides and photos illustrating > where he said police snipers were firing from. He named two buildings on > Khreshchatyk and Kostyolna streets, saying other spots were still being > investigated. I would like to know why is there not a definite article such as **the** in front of **Khreshchatyk and Kostyolna streets**? Or, do you think, it's totally alright as far as grammar goes? If so, could you please explain the rules governing this particular usage? An example where street names are used along with articles. Source: http://rt.com/news/157884-shooting-mariupol-eastern-ukraine/ > The outlet also reported that “on **the Lenin avenue** , two people were > seriously wounded – one in the head and another in the stomach. A huge pool > of blood is next to the “Arbat” café. It’s not known whether the wounded > people have survived. Witnesses say they were driven away in a passenger > car. The fighting is on next to the main police department, gunfire is > heard. Two armored vehicles blocked **the Artyom street**.”


The Mt.Fuji vs Mt.Fuji. When do I use "the"?

Why do we say **The** Amazon river and not **The** Mt.Fuji? For example, I climbed Mt.Fuji. I swam in **the** Amazon river. I hiked along **the** Silk road.


Use of definite article before phrases like Heathrow Airport, Hyde Park, Waterloo Station, Edgware Road and Parliament Square

In this related question (Definite article with proper nouns, titles followed by a common noun), the OP asks if it is grammatical to use the definite article before phrases like _Advanced programming in Java whitepaper_ and _Microsoft Office 2010 product_. The accepted answer by @Kosmonaut was: > Yes, it is. This is because the "Advanced programming in Java" whitepaper > phrase forms a syntactic unit, with whitepaper as the head of the unit. The > definite article for a phrase always corresponds to the head of the phrase, > so using the definite (or indefinite) article for these phrases makes > perfect sense and is correct English. My question is whether the same answer applies to phrases like Heathrow Airport, Hyde Park, Waterloo Station, Edgware Road and Parliament Square. I ask becase it seems to me that airport, park and station, etc. sound like they are part of the proper noun itself, and not simply a common noun. Moreover, I think the _head of the unit_ in these cases would be the place name (first noun) and not the place type (second noun). If that's true, then I assume that no definite article should precede these phrases. Is that correct?


"Duplicate data" or "duplicated data"?

I'm making a presentation and I need to know if I should use "duplicated data" or "duplicate data". Is there any difference? I'm talking about removing observations of a database that are duplicates.


Disambiguating fictitiousness

I think that confronted with the statement: > The claim is fictitious. or even > The claim is made up. most people would interpret it to mean, _"The claim was actually made, but its content is made up,"_ but I think it could also be taken to mean, _"The claim was never made; its **existence** was made up."_ Is there some usage or variant of "fictitious" that unambiguously means the latter? Of course you can get around it by using a completely different sentence, like the one I just did ("The claim has never been made"), but I'm wondering whether there's an accepted alternative that keeps the nefarious connotations of "fictitious":   * The former ("fictitious content") could be a lie, invented to lend credibility to a weak argument. _"I wasn't in the area on the night of the crime."_   * The latter ("fictitious existence") could be a claim maliciously invented in order to attribute it to someone. The claim itself was never made by anyone, and (even if true) is fictitious in the "existence" sense (although attributing it to someone else is of course fictitious in the "content" sense). I wondered at first whether that might be why we have both _fictional_ and _fictitious_ , but it seems that _fictional_ is intended to be reserved for works of fiction.


"[...] up with which I will not put."

Okay, I'm probably being a bit slow here, but I don't quite understand this story: > Supposedly an editor had clumsily rearranged one of Churchill’s sentences to > avoid ending it in a preposition, and the Prime Minister, very proud of his > style, scribbled this note in reply: “This is the sort of English up with > which I will not put.” I mean, it made me laugh, but that was mostly because of how stupid it sounded, not because I actually understand what's going on here. Anyone care to explain it? In particular, which are the prepositions?


another term for " 'international' hotel"

I have an article which informs the readers that our company [a local provider] helped a "foreign hotel". This "foreign hotel" is not an international hotel. My original article title: **A Local Provider Has Extended Help To An International Hotel** The article title is a bit misleading because the hotel is not "international", what is the appropriate title for this replacing the 'International Hotel'?


English idiom equivalent to “Like a deaf man at a wedding procession”

I have been trying laboriously to find an equivalent idiom or a catchy phrase to the one we have in Arabic مثل الأطرش بالزقة which simply means, “He is like a deaf man at a wedding procession”. It is used when two or more people are talking about a specific topic and one person in that group (or someone who happens to join in) is completely ignorant about the topic and cannot follow the conversation. That person might then say, “I’m like a deaf man at a wedding procession”, or the others may say it about him. I was just curious if there was any similar idiom in English; or if not, is there anything in vicinity of it, or some catchy phrase which people usually say or any casual sayings?


Identifying accents of British actors

As an American, a large part of my impoverished experience of British accents comes from ancient BBC comedy imports on PBS. I'd very much like to identify the regional accents the following actors are using:   * the farmer Maurice Moulterd in Are you being Served? Again! (aka Grace and Favour) (the second series where they're running a country inn).    * Alice Tinker and Owen Newitt in The Vicar of Dibley   * Onslow from Keeping Up Appearances All four have distinct ways of speaking (not necessarily the same, but then that's the problem, I can't tell). Which accent does each of these four use?


Pedantic: Is the "triangle" instrument badly named?

Yes, this is a very pedantic question! Is the musical instrument called the triangle badly named? The instrument in question has three sides, but only two angles. Might the name tricosta or triparte be more appropriate? In some languages the name of the geometric shape for which the instrument is named does in fact mean "three sides" as opposed to "three angles", such as Hebrew (משולש). Therefore the name is in fact appropriate in these languages. This question only refers to the English name of the instrument, without consideration for translations, etymology, or use in other languages.


"Printfing" or "printingf"?

>   * At this point the program starts printfing the pot value. >   * At this point the program starts printingf the pot value. > Both sound wrong, and yet... one of them must be used.


'to the contrary' - is this definition of 'but' correct?

Merriam-Webster lists 'to the contrary' as one of the senses of 'but.' > 3 : to the contrary < who knows but that she may succeed> Being worded like this, I'm having a bit of hard time understanding 'but' in this context. Is this just bad wording on M-W's part or am I not understanding something correctly, in which case I would greatly appreciate some spelling- out. For the record, I'm not a native speaker.


What's the difference between "along with" and "together with"?

I keep hearing this phrase in the end of news release on the radio: > Thanks for listening. I am Mike Widword along with Lizz Cai meaning that two anchors were involved in casting this news. I wonder why not say "together with Lizz Cai"?


Can these sentences have the same meaning?

>   1. This blouse is a bit of a fiddle to do up. > >   2. It's kind of complicated to do up this blouse. > > I've just came across the meaning of "fiddle" as "something difficult to do" and I tried to rephrase the sentence in order to get kind of a synonym.


Gesture is to physical motion as [blank] is to speech

I am looking for an equivalent word for gesture in reference to speech. 'Overture' came up in offline discussion but it isn't quite right.


What's the right preposition to use with the verb "enroll"?

The dictionary says that one enrolls in a university, but today I heard a person saying > "The student enrolled at the school." Is it right? Can I use both the prepositions "in" and "at"?


"1 in 10 are" or "1 in 10 is"?

Take the examples:   1. "One in ten children are dyslexic."    2. "One in ten children is dyslexic."   3. "One in ten children has dyslexia."   4. "One in ten children have dyslexia." The "one" is singular so 2 and 3 should be correct. But the "one in ten" is a fraction" so 1 and 4 should be correct. And yet I _think_ I usually say 1 and 3. Which is/are correct?!


1 in 7 appleS becomeS green? or, 1 in 7 apple becomeS green? or, 1 in 7 appleS become green?

Which of the following is proper grammar usage? > 1 in 7 apple **s** become **s** green   >  1 in 7 apple become **s** green   >  1 in 7 apple **s** become green


Which is correct: "one or more is" or "one or more are"?

Should the phrase be "one or more _is_...", or "one or more _are_..."?


Should I use plural or singular fore 'more than one' and why?

I was writing the sentence and understood I do not know whether to use plural or singular: _If more than one attribute **was / were** found ..._


Grammatical? "One in 12 babies is/are immunized."

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Which is correct: “one or more is” or “one or more are”?   >  “1 in 10 are” or “1 in 10 is”? Which is grammatical and why? > About one in 12 Australian babies **is** not fully immunised. or > About one in 12 Australian babies **are** not fully immunised.


Should one ever use the word "please" in an order or demand?

A police officer who pulls over a driver might ask to see his “license and registration, please.” Similarly, a border official might ask for a “passport, please.” However, in these situations, the asked party doesn’t have the option to refuse. Does the word “please” imply that the addressee has the option not to obey the request?


Is the last comma in "A, B, and C, do X" correct?

Does the following sentence require a comma after the word "meal?" > Quizzing the waiter, complaining about the menu, and criticizing the meal, > detract from your advocacy.


Is the phrase "keeping the flat tidy and in good nick" grammatical?

> Our cleaning staff is keeping the flat tidy and in good nick. For your > convenience. Does that read correctly?


Aspirated letters vs. Silent letters

How are aspirated letters different from silent letters when pronouncing a word?


"Let's get it over (with)" — do I need the "with"?

I'm trying to understand why there is this "with". I can say "Let's get this done". So, why "Let's get this over with?" I would really appreciate if someone could explain that a bit.


What's the (unobvious) meaning of "I saw you coming"?

Watching an episode of Ruddy Hell, the phrase "I saw you coming" was printed on a shop and the shop owner used it when talking to the rich lady. The context was that he sold stuff second hand and even openly admitted that it was only worth "a fiver" when he bought it. He then exclaims: "But I saw you coming ..." which apparently is the excuse for a much higher price when selling. Now, I get the approximate meaning from the context, obviously. However, how would native speakers explain the exact meaning of the phrase?


England vs English

Why are country sports teams, for example, from England, referred to as 'the England Football Team' as opposed to 'the English Football Team'?


What tense should be used when looking at an old photo?

Commenting on a photo which was taken a few years back: Question: > Is this you? Should I reply: > Yes, this **is** a few years back. or: > Yes, this **was** a few years back. Which of the above is correct: _is_ or _was_?


Word that means "private word used by a group"

Here's an example: a group of my friends has a term we invented. It's a verb that means "to pronounce over-correctly", used of a word borrowed from another language when that word has a common anglicized pronunciation, but the speaker of the word chooses instead to pronounce in the source language. There may be a standard English word that has this same meaning, but our private word is derived from the name of a person we know who does this often, and so it's sort of an inside joke: "Oh, stop Trauthing, you pompous fool." The word I'm looking for describes such a private word. Sort of like a single word in an _idioglossia_ but with no surrounding language; the private word stands on its own. Taking a cue from _neologism_ I might coin the word _idiologism_ but that word apparently already exists (or so says google) and has a slightly different meaning since it's only used by one person. Is there a word for a coined, private word, which has a specific meaning only to a certain small group of people?


If a sentence ends with a place name that ends with an exclamation mark, what punctuation should follow?

There are a few place names in the world that end with exclamation marks; for example, Westward Ho! and Saint-Louis-du-Ha! Ha!. I suppose there are multiple cases here:   * If an ordinary statement ends with such a place name, should it be followed by a full stop/period? "He went to Westward Ho!" or "He went to Westward Ho!." The latter, though ugly, seems strictly correct to me and at least makes it clear that the sentence is not an exclamation, even if the reader has never heard of the place name.   * In an exclamation, should an extra exclamation mark be added? e.g. "He went to Westward Ho!!" Is this, in fact, a restricted situation where multiple exclamation marks could legitimately occur together?   * In a question, I do not see any alternative to simply following the original exclamation mark with a question mark, although it looks like an interrobang: "Did he go to Westward Ho!?"    * Finally, just for completeness and to consider the most unpleasant case, suppose one wanted to express incredulity using an interrobang. Would one then write "He went to Westward Ho!!?"  (Naturally, I suspect that in some of these cases, unless one were quoting, the best advice would be "Recast the sentence".)