What are the comparative and superlative forms of 'lively'?

My teacher taught me that to form the comparative and superlative degrees of a mono- or di- or tri-syllabic word, I should add 'more' and 'most', e.g.: > lively -more lively-most lively I know it is correct, but today I saw these words in these forms: > lively -livelier-liveliest Which way is correct? Or are both of them correct? Why?


Should I add "anyway" in the following sentence?

> She looked at herself in the mirror and wondered if she should wear makeup. > She decided not to. What was the point if she'd remove it in a couple of > hours, (anyway)? I'm a little confused. It sounds OK with and without the _anyway_ to me.


Usage of "would" instead of "used to"

I sometimes lurk on "AskReddit" and when people are telling stories, they often read like this: _"After I **would** cook dinner for us, we **would** sit at the large dining room table and he **would** make a point to ..._" (Source) or _"I was told a story once about a lady who [...] painted pictures that **would** reflect her depression. Her paintings **would** sell for a lot of money."_ (Source) I always wonder about the usage of "would". As I have been thought in school, would is a modal verb that indicates a subjunctive. I never heard about the usage of "would" instead of "used to" before, although for instance this site claims: " _Would can be used to talk about actions that repeated in the past. It is used in the same context as used to_ ". So my questions are:   1. Is this a regional thing or do all native speakers use this form?   2. How common is this? In which context can this substitution be used?   3. Does it sound colloquial or strange to native speakers?


Reply to "I hope you are well"?

What is the most appropriate response to "I hope you are well"? What are your reasons for choosing one reply above another? Replies I've thought of:   * I am very well, thanks. How are you?   * I am very well, thanks, and hope you are as well.   * I am very well, thanks. I hope it is the same with you too.   * (Ignore it completely.) I guess it depends on the relationship with the person, but my question is mainly focused on politeness in everyday emails with colleagues/customers.


Source of the term Munter (unattractive person)

I'm a rock climber and I live in the UK (both of these will become relevant soon). In the UK (typically southern England) it's common to call an unattractive person a Munter. > What a Munter Now in rock climbing (presumably sailing before it) there is a knot called a Munter Hitch. Are these two things/word uses related? If so how and why? It's not a particularly unattractive knot!


A simple question, so to re-iterate the title: Why is a "field" on a form called a field? A quick search for the etymology results in: > Old English feld "plain, open land" (as opposed to woodland), also "a parcel > of land marked off and used for pasture or tillage," probably related to Old > English folde "earth, land," from Proto-Germanic *felthuz "flat land" > (common West Germanic, cf. Old Saxon and Old Frisian feld "field," Old Saxon > folda "earth," Middle Dutch velt, Dutch veld Old High German felt, German > Feld "field," but not found outside it; Swedish fält, Danish felt are > borrowed from German), from PIE *pel(e)-tu-, from root *pele- (2) "flat, to > spread" (see plane (n.1)). > > Finnish pelto "field" is believed to have been adapted from Proto-Germanic. > The English spelling with -ie- probably is the work of Anglo-French scribes > (cf. brief, piece). Collective use for "all engaged in a sport" (or, in > horseracing, all but the favorite) is 1742; play the field "avoid > commitment" (1936) is from notion of gamblers betting on other horses than > the favorite. Field glasses attested by 1836. No mention of its use in forms?


TANKED - meaning is not clear

will you please help me with "translating"/explaining a couple of things? "I always had a "plan B" in case my materials were too hard, or just TANKED" - the capitalised word is the one I'm interested in.. I can't make head or tail of it


Not sure if I should use 'the' or 'a'

So I just commented (tried to, the answer turned out to have been deleted) on an answer and wrote this: "I also feel that the disclaimer was just a tincy wincy bit unnecessary". I then though to change it to this : "I also feel that the disclaimer was just a tinsy, wincy, littlest bit unnecessary". I then thought that the 'a' should/could change to 'the' as in "I also feel that the disclaimer was just 'the' tinsy, wincy, littlest bit unnecessary". However I then realized I didn't actually really know which one it should be... In my mind at least, both seemed to be correct. A slightly dumb and mundane question but still, it got my gears grinding a little bit so I thought to come here for some internet ultimate wisdom. Also in an afterthought: what's the correct use of commas within this quote?


Why "bench" for judges?

Why is the word "bench" used specifically to describe a judge or the judicial process?


Does saying 'then' after 'sorry' imply reluctance?

`A` did something wrong but didn't realize it. `B` explained to `A` why what (s)he did was wrong. Then `A` said: "Sorry then". Is `A` really sorry? Literally, "sorry then" (in my head) means in light of the new information, I am sorry. But my friend say the 'then' after the sorry means `A` said it reluctantly and (s)he is not really sorry. So which is it? Do you have any more examples of when placing 'then' after a statement makes it imply the speaker's reluctance?


Should the abbreviated forms of Latin terms be placed in italics?

When writing English, one often uses Latin terms, such as _exemplī grātiā_ , _opere citātō_ , and _id est_ , but in abbreviated forms, "e.g.", "op. cit.", and "i.e.". When writing Latin terms in English, one often places them in italics. Should the abbreviated forms of such Latin terms also be placed in italics?


comprehendible vs comprehensible

Just got into a debate at work whether _comprehendible_ is a word. It appears as I type this that _comprehensible_ is preferred in Firefox's dictionary. However, when I used Outlook's spellchecker it changed _comprehendable_ to _comprehendible_. So which is it?


Name for cognitive bias suggesting a person is special or important

I'm looking for the name of the cognitive bias that leads people to think that they are extraordinary in some aspect. This is similar to Illusory Superiority but generalized to encompass uniqueness in general, not just positive traits. It's the " _Why is it always me?_ " bias. **Added**   This is the belief that unusual things happen more often to _you_ , and is typically caused by the fact that unusual things get more of your attention when they happen to you rather than when they happen to others. **Clarification**   I'm not looking for a **disorder,** I'm looking for the name of the trait that is common in nearly everyone such that they think that things that they don't notice in other people is believed to only happen to them.


"Learn to code" vs. "Learn coding"

Is there a semantic difference between `learn to code` and `learn coding`? Can both forms be used interchangeably?


Can I say "Why not you study literature?"

May I ask you this question meaning to emphasize the importance of studying literature? What has confused me is that the question, ironically, carries the same implication of, "Why study literature?" I wont to use it exactly as is. The pronoun "you" is important: > And why not you study literature? Is this an acceptable 'native' construct?


Would you use a period after text: Thank you for helping to build the new building

My boss told me that I shouldn't have a period after the text: Thank you for helping to build the new building. She said that it is not a complete sentence.


Are there religious swear words in English the way there are in French-speaking Québec (like “Câlisse!”)?

Are there in English any cases of using religious words for swear words, most likely in predominantly Christian regions? I ask because in the Canadian province of Québec, which is primarily **francophone** , religious words get used for swearing quite a great deal when speaking French. (I suppose this might be explained by a will to express against religious abuse from time to time, or by a rejection of religious authority.) For example, French profanity like _maudit tabarnack_ , _mon enfant d’criss_ , and _hosti d’faux prètre_ could be respectively translated into English as _damn tabenacle,_ as _my son of Christ_ , and as _host of false priest_. Most use cases conjoin the word _damn_ with some religious object, but at other times they are turned into imperative verbs such as _décolisse_ or _décrisse_ (saying “de-chalice” and “de-Christ”), which could translate into _go away_ or _break_ or _tarnish_. The most common swear word one hears in Québec is _Tabarnak!_ Is there anything in the **anglophone** world comparable to this peculiarly Quebecker/ _québécois_ habit of using words related to religion for profanity?


Is it common to omit a preposition (in / on / of) before “the month (year / week /day) when they are used adjectively and adverbially?

There was the following sentence in New York Times (April 12) article titled, ‘Lone Wolf’ Theory Gains Ground in Texas Deaths” > “The Kaufman County district attorney’s office is small compared with those > in Houston or Dallas. It has about 13 prosecutors, and **Mr. Hasse’s docket > the month** he was killed provides a glimpse of the kinds of cases common in > the county: burglary, aggravated assault, forgery, theft of a firearm.” Is it common in today’s English not to use prepositions such as “in,” “of,” or "during" before nouns specifying time? I know the expressions like “It happened the day he arrived in New York” is prevalent, but does it look redundant or outdated if I put “Mr. Hasse’s docket of (in) the month he was killed ....”? Are there any handy rules with which I can judge easily when I should use and not use prepositions before nouns of time - year, month, week, day, and hour?


how do we read this sentence '50X better software quality'

I am browsing a website. There is one sentence: > 50x better software quality here _x_ should mean _times_ , but I don't know how to read it. Can someone explain it to me?


What is the meaning of the phrase "for my sins"?

I have a sentence: > No, Sir, for my sins, I am not a regular church-goer. What does "for my sins" mean in this case? The phrase is from a book but not published yet and I am translating it to Czech.


What is the correct term to describe 'primary', 'secondary', etc

What is the correct term to describe the words in the following sequence: _primary, secondary, tertiary, quaternary, quinary, senary, septenary, octonary, nonary, denary, duodenary_ , etc. I am thinking '-tier' but I don't think I am correct.


What's the meaning of "direct" here?

Consider the following quote: > When a pipe carries water, or a wire carries electricity, it contains and > **directs** the flow of the water or the electricity. Is _direct_ here sense 2 from OALD? > 2 [transitive] to control or be in charge of somebody/something


Is there a word/phrase/idiom for temporarily satisfying strong feeling of hunger?

Imagine a situation where you've been invited to dinner at a friend's place. You're extremely hungry but you learn that the dinner won't be ready for another half an hour. So you decide to eat an apple or a bite of bread or some other small thing which will not satisfy your hunger fully, but will temporarily make it more tolerable. Is there a word/phrase/idiom to describe this small snack prior to a big meal? The Russian equivalent of what I am looking for is _заморить червячка_ , which literally means _to starve/kill the little worm_. The only translation I found of this idiom was _to stay one's hunger_. However, I couldn't find any usage examples of it and the google query for define:to stay one's hunger doesn't return anything useful, so I guess this idiom, if used at all, isn't very common.


Does the term 'eccentric screw pump' have weird associations?

A progressing cavity pump is sometimes referred to as an _eccentric screw pump_ , because it features a screw that turns abound an axis other than its center. 'Eccentric screw pump' yields many Google hits, while professionals seem to use the term 'PC pump'. The German term would be Exzenterschneckenpumpe, so to me and to other Germans it may come naturally to translate this verbatim and arrive at eccentric screw pump. But 'eccentric screw' might also sound like a sex act. **Does the term 'eccentric screw pump' have sexual connotaions to a native English speaker?**


"Like" or "have liked"?

Is this sentence correct? > From early ages people like travelling. Isn't it better to say: > Since early ages people have liked travelling.


What does 'Ibid' mean in this context?

Someone I know got a interview call letter part of which read as this: > .. you are requested to appear for the ibid interview .. What does _ibid_ mean in this context?


Is there a suffix for loathing?

For instance trichomania is a love of hair, and trichophobia is a fear of hair. But what suffix would denote a loathing of hair? **Edit:** Maybe I'm looking at the wrong end of the word, and I should be considering the prefix "miso-".


Terms for generic forms of 3D motion on the 3 axes

Consider up & down, left & right, and back & forth. Up & down can be stated generically as "vertical". Side-to-side is "lateral". What about back & forth?


"Whn U Ck Me, U WL Fnd Me Sez da Lord." in this picture (publicity)

Does the style (if it is) shown in the picture below have a particular name? ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/GeR6Z.png)


Hatred of Chinese

Sinophobia specifically describes fear of all things Chinese. Is there a word specifically to describe hatred (not fear) against a particular race? Right now I'm using _anti-Chinese sentiment_ , but that is really clunky. Perhaps a new word made from the combination of the prefixes "miso" (indicating hatred) and "sino"? Perhaps _missinogy_? I am writing an essay on Chinese discrimination.


"Fill out a form" or "fill in a form"

Does one _fill out a form_ or does one _fill in a form_? I've gotten different answers from the people I've asked. Google search results: >   * fill **in** a form — 14,200,000 >   * fill **out** a form — 7,000,000 >


What is this "of" here?

Does the criminal justice system need more or less **of** a governmental relationship to be effective?


Should the words "city"/"state"/"province" be capitalized (if not followed by the name of the city)?

When referring to an entity like a government body, should it be capitalized if referring to is by classification(?). E.g., if I write: > The City of New York requires us to get a building permit. Certainly "city" should be capitalized. However, if I'm communicating in a context where everyone should know what city I'm referring to (the one we are in), when I write: > The city requires us to get a building permit. Should "city" still be capitalized?


What's the meaning of "the stage-type of statesman" and "the statesmen of the old type"?

In this quotation: > The stage-type of statesman was amusing, whether as Roscoe Conkling or > Colonel Mulberry Sellers, but what was his value? The statesmen of the old > type, whether Sumners or Conklings or Hoars or Lamars, were personally as > honest as human nature could produce. What's the meaning of “the stage-type of statesman” versus “the statesmen of the old type”?


Ambiguity in "free shipping of the product"

Trying to write a mail in English I have a problem with the following sentence: > Only free shipping of the product will be asked I tried many ways to tell that using other words, other formulations … but I still can’t figure if there is some ambiguity or not about the fact that both the shipping itself _and_ the product should be free and not just the delivery.


Punctuation between clauses when the first clause is a series

I have this sentence: > Even if I seem too busy, or you made a mistake, or someone we care about > will be upset, or you feel embarrassed, if anything bothers you, I want to > know. I believe that it is correctly punctuated as is, right? I have a style question... Would the sentence be easier to parse if there was a dash between _embarrassed_ and _if_ instead of a comma? And is that an accepted punctuation choice for a sentence like this? > Even if I seem too busy, or you made a mistake, or someone we care about > will be upset, or you feel embarrassed--if anything bothers you, I want to > know. Thank you for your help!


Which pronoun should be used with "anyone"? "They" or "you"?

Sample sentence: If anyone has the files, could ( _they_ or _you_ ) please upload them to a file-hosting website? Context: I am writing an email to a group of people requesting that if anyone has the files I mentioned, to please upload those files to a file-hosting website. "Anyone" could be one person or more.


Using first names with the titles Mr. and Mrs

It is proper to use the first names with _Mr._ & _Mrs._? For example, in the invitation of an anniversary party, can one say the following: > Celebrate the anniversary   > of Mr. and Mrs.   >  James and Martha King


Can “along with” be used to mean “as a consequence of”?

I have this sentence: > Along with _something (cause)_ , _something else (effect)_ happened. From text books I know that parts that are connected by “along with” should be in the same form and in the same category. What are the possible corrections for this sentence? p.s. I need both meanings: _cause and effect_ and _happening together_.


I was reading the Mac OS X Lion upgrade page, and it said "make sure" all over the place. It struck me as odd. Where does the term "make sure" come from? What are you making to be sure? Yourself? Shouldn't the expression be, more verbose, but more accurately, "make yourself sure", or something similar?


What are these symbols called in the English language?

You see these all the time in movies, usually when some poor guy has been wrongly imprisoned and begins counting the days since his incarceration, but what are these markings called? I used to know, but I've forgotten and now it's really bugging me. ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/HlwfQ.gif)


Where "talent" here refers to a personal quality of "from birth, being able to do a specific skill well", what is the precise opposite? I.e. what word means on innate inability? Just as an example, someone who has absolute pitch can readily detect (even name) a note, so they would be talented in the skill of transcribing notes. Someone who is born tone deaf, however, has an innate inability to do this skill. In searching the dictionary, I found several suggested antonyms, however, when presented alone (without the word "talent" given), readers will not recognize the precise meaning. E.g. when readers see "weakness", they will not immediately think of some "innate inability", nor will they imagine some talents that someone might be poor at. What is the most precise antonym of "talent"?


Print vs type. What is the difference exactly?

I am filling out some employment forms and came across the following sentence that I don't fully understand: > Print your full legal name, address, date of birth and social security > number. Please don’t type this information. I am not sure what is the difference between print and type here. I assume this is related to printing using a printer vs printing by hand? Which is which?


How should I quote a book's name?

When writing, one often needs to quote the name of a book. How should I do it properly? I have met all of the following kinds of quotation. Which one is correct and what's the principle?   * _An Introduction to Manifolds_   * _AN INTRODUCTION TO MANIFOLDS_   * _an Introduction to Manifolds_   * _An introduction to manifolds_


Summarizing what makes a home a home

**Meta:** I considered asking this on WritersSE, but I am less familiar with it. I would not object to a migration. **Problem:** I want to edit the following sentence so that it is as brief and aesthetically pleasing as possible. I specifically want to change the italicized part. > My home _is a place where I (i) enjoy being, (ii) can work and rest > effectively, (iii) can escape from the world to be alone, and (iv) can spend > several days without going stir-crazy_. I have made the description long for the benefit of this question. I don't want to have a list like that. A word or short phrase to describe my home would be ideal. Feel free to alter the structure in any way. The revised sentence needn't perfectly capture all of the above qualities but should bring to mind their core concepts. **Non-solutions:** Here are some options that I have found and rejected after checking some thesauri and similar threads on this site. Words that are close but not right (in somewhat descending order): _shelter, refuge, sanctuary, retreat, sanctum, harborage, respite_. The problem with some of these is that they suggest that I am in serious danger outside of them, which is not what I want. Some are not especially enjoyable or long-term. I'd also like to avoid religious or spiritual undertones. I would consider using these words if these problems could be largely avoided. Words that are definite rejects: _lair, den, roost, manor, demesne_. These are mostly getting more specific than _home_ in an irrelevant way. The meaning of _roost_ is not terribly wrong, but I do not want to compare myself to a chicken or other animal. I also want to avoid being obscure or highly metaphorical. My best current idea is something like: > My home is truly/thoroughly/?? my shelter. > > My home can completely shelter me. These are missing the idea that I am happy and productive there. I also want to avoid the implication that I am sheltered in a negative way. > My home shelters and nourishes me. This is very close but could use improvement. Very different options are of course welcome.


"Sound engineering"

What does "sound engineering" mean in this context: "Establishment and use of sound engineering principles to obtain economically software that is reliable and works on real machines efficiently. (Fritz Bauer)"? The definition above is for software engineering. However, the word "sound" used here definitely is not engineering for audio.


What is the verb for dividing something into regions?

Imagine a piece of paper on which you can draw some "regions". How do you call this act? These words can probably better tell you what I mean, but I know they don't exist in English:   * Regionize: I regionized the paper   * Enregion: I enregioned the paper   * Region itself as a verb(?): I regioned the paper * * * In reality, I am a programmer "enregioning" a skin. I would be happier if the verb had clear relation with "region", because that is the technical term I am using for those parts of the skin. That way, the "enregioner" would both have a meaningful name and one that makes users understand it is creating "regions"


What does "just between you and me" function as?

We are trying to figure out the parts of speech in the following sentence and have been stumped by the first phrase: > Just between you and me, those boots aren't cool this year. I say interjection, but we think maybe it is some type of adverbial phrase. What do you think?


Where did the phrase "diddly-squat" come from?

It sounds like something Ned Flanders would say. I believe it just means "nothing at all". But what are the origins of the phrase? Is it common in the US as well as the UK?


Difference between "uncompress" and "decompress"

What is the difference between _decompress_ and _uncompress_? Is there any? Context: > The receiving node has to **uncompress/decompress** the data.


"perhapsy" as a slang term for "perhaps"

I've recently heard somebody answered "Yes, perhapsy." Or could it be "perhapsee"? Could this be used as a slang term for "perhaps"? It happened in NYC area a few weeks ago.


A word describes things that can be used only once

I am wondering if there is a single word that describes things that can be used only once. My focus is links that usually sent to our emails in order to activate accounts or reset passwords. However, I do not mind to find a word for all kind of items that can be used only one time (e.g. Bullets, bombs, diapers, baby wipes, pads ... etc.


Is the use of dependent clauses undesirable? (in scientific writing)

I tend to use dependent clauses frequently in scientific writing. This is especially true when discussing a problem-solving process where the result from one step leads into the next. Here's a made-up example, with the dependent clauses in **bold**. > **To overcome the issue of noise,** we performed a Fast Fourier transform on > the resultant time series. **Although the output represented only half of > the observations,** we temporally interpolated the remaining observations > based on historical trends archived previously. **Moreover,** the use of > temporal interpolation allows us to fill data gaps when the detector failed > to make observations. When I try to integrate the dependent clause into the independent clause, the paragraph loses the logical flow of problem-then-solution sentence construction and the sentences feels disjointed: > We performed a Fast Fourier transform on the resultant time series **to > overcome the issue of noise**. We temporally interpolated the remaining > observations based on historical trends archived previously **because the > output represented only half of the observations**. The use of temporal > interpolation **also** allows us to fill data gaps when the detector failed > to make observations. While I do prefer the first version, is it stylistically and technically undesirable to use dependent clauses in successive sentences? Or am I just being paranoid?


Alternatives for "I told you so."

Sometimes, "I told you so" is expected by the target. What if we want to surprise them with another famous phrase which would deliver the same message, perhaps with more intensity. Sometimes, "I told you so" doesn't quite say it, maybe because we wish it carried more weight. What are other possibilities? A single word, or phrase or idiom maybe.


Use of hyphens in acronyms

PTP-SD is a type of algorithm. PTP stands for "probabilistic tree pruning" SD stands for "sphere decoding" PTP-SD is a type of algorithm that uses PTP **with** SD. My question is about the use of the hyphen here. In the paper I am currently editing, the author has written the following: "Increasing radii algorithm (IRA) [10] and probabilistic tree pruning with sphere decoding (PTP-SD) [11] reduces the complexity by adopting the different radii in each layer instead of fixed radii used in the literature." In such examples, the spelled out form contains no hyphen. Is this okay? Should there be one? If so, where should it go? Why should only the abbreviation contain a hyphen but not the spelled out form?


Term for "soft hate"

I don't know the word for it, so I will call it _hate_ , but it might seem too extreme a word for people from the US. Example from one of the comments I got: > Maybe you're playing the wrong sort of game, if you don't like RPG > limitations. Maybe you should be playing The Sims instead (not trying to be > funny here). The person disagrees with me, but because he _softly hates_ me he says I should play The Sims. If he had nothing against me, he would not say the _The Sims_ part.


What is the term for an integer one larger than a given integer?

I'm looking for a concise term to say a number must be exactly one higher than a previous number. None of "subsequent", "incremental", or "next" seem to convey the restriction that it must be contiguous to the previous number. "Contiguous" does not convey that it must be larger rather than smaller. Is there a specific term for this or am I going to have to use a phrase like "contiguous to and larger than"?


Is "has or will read" grammatical?

I just wrote _[he] **has or will read** [some text]_ in an ELL chat room. But looking at it (or more accurately, listening to my "inner voice" trying to "read it aloud"), I find it bothers me a lot. A quick check on Google Books finds a claimed 1020 written instances of **has or will read**, and 2480 instances of **has read or will read**, which suggests a significant minority of writers don't have a problem with the fact that the two different _read_ 's don't sound the same. When I check the same construction with other verbs that _don't_ have the same written form for past participle and present tense, it seems people nearly always include _both_ (e.g. has worked or will work:1230, has or will work:8; has arrived or will arrive:357, has or will arrive:7). I'm not usually a big fan of "grammatical rules", but it seems to me there "ought" to be a rule that you shouldn't delete one instance of the verb unless it's "the same" as the one you're keeping. And it also seems to me that since language is primarily _spoken_ , "the same" ought to mean "sounds the same when spoken", not "looks the same when written". Can anyone who knows more than me about formal rules of grammar settle this one? * * * As an aside, offhand I can't think of any verb where the past participle and present tense sound the same but are written differently (maybe there aren't any), but would deletion be okay in _that_ case?


Does "oath" have an implied religious connotation?

In Singapore you don't have to swear an oath in court if you are of certain religions. Instead you affirm that you're speaking the truth: > Circumstances under which affirmation may be made 16\. Any person who —(a) > is a Hindu or Muslim or of some other religion according to which oaths are > not of binding force; or(b) has a conscientious objection to taking an > oath,and who is required to take an oath of office or judicial oath under > any written law may, instead of taking the oaths referred to in section 15 > (1) or (2), as the case may be, make an affirmation in the form of those > oaths, substituting the words “solemnly, sincerely and truly declare and > affirm” for the word “swear” and omitting the words “So help me God”. I'm curious if that means oaths in British English have an implied religious meaning? It seems to be the case that you swear to God usually, but an oath in itself is irreligious, no?


Does English have "plural" verb forms?

A friend of mine and I were having a linguistics argument (actually, this one), and she brought up as evidence the "plural versus singular conjugation" of the past-tense form of "to be", i.e. "was/were". I'm sure we all know the 6-form conjugation table:   * I [verb]   * You (s.) [verb]   * He/She/One/It [verb]   * We [verb]   * You (pl.) [verb]   * They [verb] I'm equally sure we all know that the first three are singular, and the latter three are plural. Now, interestingly, we both agreed on the answer to the original question ("Yes"), but my friend put forth as evidence that You (s.) is conjugated with the "plural conjugation", namely "were", just like We and They, whereas I and He/She/One/It are conjugated with the "singular conjugation", "was". My argument was that verbs are not conjugated in plural and singular forms, and the fact that "to be" in many tenses seems to follow that pattern is just a coincidence, an artifact of its highly irregular nature. So, which of us is "right"? Do verbs have explicitly "plural" versus "singular" conjugations, or do they simply have the 6 conjugations (per tense), and "to be" just happens to look like "plural" versus "singular" by mere coincidence?


"Some champagne for my real friends, some real pain for my sham friends."

> Some champagne for my real friend, some real pain for my sham friends." Is there a name for this kind of sentence? Note: I'm not sure the origin of this, but it is a line in Spike Lee's movie, 25th Hour


Single word for "separated for a while with the expectation to be reunited"

I'm writing a story in first person view. In that story the main character is writing about how he is now separated from a once close friend. In telling the story, I want the main character to subtly express how he really want to reunite with the friend when he say the word that is supposed to mean "separated". So what I'm looking for is a word that also carries the expectation to be reunited in addition to be separated, that can be used to replace the word "separated" in the following sentence: > This is the story of me being separated. And as a side note, I actually want to use the word as the title of the story also.


Meaning: channel vs river

What is the difference between a channel and a river? **UPDATE** I understand the difference between _canal_ and river, but why there is also channel? Is that the same as canal?


Thorough and Through

I rather like to use the word **_thorough_** , but was recently informed by a reviewer that it was "archaic". Indeed, Merriam-Webster lists it first as an archaic spelling of **_through_** , with the familiar definition only as a secondary one. Is this specific to American spellings, or is this a general trend?   What should I use instead?   Saying "painstakingly" might be all right, but it seems odd to say "He was very painstaking.".


Which preposition to use when referring to computer environments

The computer software can have versions targeting different hardware and operation systems. For example, the same game can be run on PC, Xbox and Mac. My question is - when describing the release of the version targeted the specific environment, which preposition is best to use? E.g.: `The company X has finally released their famous Zombie Undeads game on/for/to/? Xbox?` The same question for virtual stores - `We plan to release a new version for/on/in/to/? App Store and Google Play in March` \- which preposition is the most appropriate here?


What is the term for a word that alters the degree or severity of the subsequent word? In the example below, what is the term for "somewhat"? Ex: He was somewhat unhappy.


Is it considered rude language to omit interrogatives in speech?

At least, I think the proper word is _interrogatives_. But, for example, in proper sentence structure, you would see sentences such as, > Are you still here, Alouicious? > > Is there a doctor in the room? In informal speech, sometimes you can omit the actual questioning word, but still pass it off as a question, so long as it isn't confused for a completely different query. > You still here, Alouicious? > > There a doctor in the room? I know it's probably not sound in terms of grammar, but my concern is, is this considered a rude or uncouth kind of language? Or at least, is it considered far less polite than to use the full sentence? It also shows up in the case of converting, say, "What the <intensifier> are you doing?" into "The <intensifier> you doing?", but I imagine the politeness of that scenario tends to get clouded by the choice of intensifier.


What is "dook dook" called in English?

I've noticed that there are some sounds like:   * Animal sounds   * nature sounds e.g. raining sound what are these called in English?


What is the name of the phoneme produced in an upper-class Briton's pronunciation of the word "Duke"? What's different in the articulation?

When someone with a Received Pronunciation accent pronounces the word _duke_ , as in _The Duke of York_ , he doesn't pronounce it with a "hard" 'd', as one might pronounce the word _duh_ , but a softer type 'd', which I can only spell phonetically as "dj", so as to pronounce _duke_ somewhat like "djuke." My question is composed of two parts:   * What would a linguist call this phoneme?   * What is the difference in articulation between it and a "regular" /d/?


What does a "man of leisure" do exactly? What is the definition and the connotation?

I watched the BBC adaptation of Charles Dickens' _Little Dorrit_ some weeks ago, and have happily remembered a question I had forgotten from it just now. In this dialogue, Mr. Clennam, a dashing and rich gentleman, asks Frederick Dorrit -- whose brother is the principal character William Dorrit, and whose lamentable tale of being locked up in Marshalsea Prison for his debts forms the basis of the entire story -- about his fortunes. As Frederick Dorrit was once guarantor to his brother's debts, his fortunes have been laid very low, and he recalls the story of his past life (paraphrasing): > Things were not always the way they are now. I was once **a man of > leisure.** I ran a boarding school for young girls... My question is: What exactly does it mean to be a "man of leisure"? Mr. Frederick Dorrit doesn't sound to me particularly upper-class, from his job description as a proprietor, yet he applies a very gentlemanly sounding appellation to himself. I'm thinking maybe the phrase has a more nuanced meaning than merely "free from work." Can anyone help me figure that meaning, with it associated connotations, out?


What connotation exactly does the word "noddy" have in British English?

I watched a BBC adaptation of Charles Dickens' _The Life and Adventures of Nicholas Nickleby_ the other day, and came across a bit of dialogue I couldn't quite decipher: > **A character named Squeers** : I hope you didn't set out the good cut of > meat. > > **His wife** : Do I look like a _noddy_? What does _noddy_ mean exactly? Is it archaic slang? I'm guessing it means something close to "fool" here, but I want to be quite sure of the connotation of the word and when one would use it.


The word "I" is singular, but it does not follow the subject-verb agreement for a singular subject

When you have a singular noun as subject, a singular verb follows. However, the pronouns "I" and "you" are singular but singular verbs do not follow after them. Does anyone know something about this reason or historical explanations? For example, you say "I live" instead of saying "I lives".


How to understand the phrase "through its successive approaches to perfection" in the given context?

I don't understand the bold sentence below. I guess it means "I should not attempt to find the origin of the human's organization by studying its evolution progress." What confuse me is that I don't know the **prefection** refer to. Could you interprete this sentence for me, especially the phrase _through its successive approaches to perfection_. > However important it may be, in order to form a proper judgment of the > natural state of man, to consider him from his origin, and to examine him, > as it were, in the first embryo of the species; **I shall not attempt to > trace his organization through its successive approaches to perfection** : I > shall not stop to examine in the animal system what he might have been in > the beginning, to become at last what he actually is; I shall not inquire > whether, as Aristotle thinks, his neglected nails were no better at first > than crooked talons; whether his whole body was not, bear-like, thick > covered with rough hair; and whether, walking upon all-fours, his eyes, > directed to the earth, and confined to a horizon of a few paces extent, did > not at once point out the nature and limits of his ideas. This sentence comes from A Discourse Upon the Origin and the Foundation of the Inequality among Mankind


Are pronouns for non-universal divines capitalized?

When following the formal English rule of Reverential Capitals, any reference to God Almighty is capitalized, as are equivalent non-Christian entities such as "Allah" or the neo-pagan "Goddess" (and various similar entities from fiction, like the Creator from Robert Jordan's _Wheel of Time_.) Does the rule extend as well to polytheistic deities of infinite character? If discussing a variation of Greek gods where each deity has infinite and omnipresent control over their particular sphere of influence, would pronouns be capitalized when they wouldn't otherwise be? > Zeus controls lightning. Do not anger **Him**. or > Zeus controls lightning. Do not anger **him**. (Assume, of course, that reverential capitals are otherwise used, as in "Jesus and His apostles.")


Expression: wanted the skinny on

Is there an expression like _wanted the skinny on_? I can hazard a guess on the meaning of the phrase but will be grateful if anyone can tell me the exact meaning. Here is the exact quote: > I'm a faculty person and just _wanted the skinny on_ how my students can > best utilize your services?


Can "to escape" also mean "to go on holiday"?

The Macmillan Dictionary s.v. "escape (verb)" says that "to escape" can also mean > to go away on holiday in informal contexts, e.g. "We're hoping to escape to the Algarve in May". I can't find this meaning in any other dictionary at my disposal. Is it actually used in this sense?


What is a "Quickfire Auction"?

I see a lot of Google results for this term, but not a single one explaining it. The phrase search "What is a quickfire auction" returns zero result (and will soon return this question). What does it mean exactly?


Why "English" but not "Anglish"?

Etymology of English from Etymonline: > Old English **Englisc** (contrasted to Denisc, Frencisce, etc.), from > **Engle** (plural) " **the Angles** ," the name of one of the Germanic > groups that overran the island 5c., supposedly so-called because **Angul** , > the land they inhabited on the Jutland coast, was shaped like a fish hook > (see angle (n.)) * * * "Old English" article from Wikipedia: > Old English ( **Ænglisc, Anglisc, Englisc** ) or **Anglo-Saxon** is an early > form of the English language that was spoken and written by the Anglo-Saxons > and their descendants in parts of what are now England and southern and > eastern Scotland between at least the mid-5th century and the mid-12th > century. * * * Also, Anglish is used as a resulting language of linguistic purism. (coined by the author and humorist Paul Jennings). It is mentioned as English minus many of the non-Germanic elements. * * * **Questions:**   * Why didn't the name of the language become **Anglish** and survive till today?   * Etymonline says that it comes from **"Englisc"** but there are three different spellings of Old English and the root is mentioned as **Angul**. So why from Englisc but not Anglisc? * * * **Note:** There is this question asked before: Where did the name "English" come from? Accepted answer mentions that English is the corruption of Anglish. But there is not much detail about it. Is it ever called Anglish then? When and how is it corrupted? Also, English is "Anglais" in French. I'm not sure if it is beyond this website if I ask why it is "Anglais" in French and if connection to other Germanic languages is related to this topic. The topic can go deeper in regards to origin of tribe names also. I may have missed some points and this can be asked in linguistics stackexchange as well.


Be careful for what you eat or Be careful what you eat

I usually hear "Be careful what you eat" and also Google is telling me that but it seems "Be careful for what you eat" to me right. Could you please explain which one is right and why please?


Is "delete" a hyponym of "edit"?

In computer science, is _delete_ considered to be included in _edit_ , or are they two separate things? Example: Editing item details and deleting items. In my case, both can be done by the same user and from the same place.


Parentheses vs. commas vs. hyphen or dash in a list of people

In a list of people published in a bulletin, which is correct? >   * We continue in prayer for: Amy B.(cancer), T. Jones(nephew of Tim), > Lillie (on the death of her brother), Sally(Nursing Home), >   * We continue in prayer for: Amy B.,cancer; T. Jones,nephew of Tim; > Lillie, on the death of her brother;Sally,Nursing Home; >   * We continue in prayer for: Amy B.-cancer, T. Jones-nephew of Tim, > Lillie- on the death of her brother,Sally-Nursing Home; >


Real word for "equippable"

_Equippable_ , while not a really a word, seems to be accepted by the gaming community as a term for _this can be equipped_. Is there a more appropriate word which is real, singular and essentially means the same? For example, > I may pick the item up and carry it. However, whether I may put it in my > hand or not would be distinguished by whether it is **equippable**.


How would you properly show deletion of unnecessary text in a quote?

I assumed you would use dots to show left-out unnecessary text in a quote, such as in > The definition of used oil is "oil ... that is xyz". The deleted portion is non-useful text that would confuse my readers, but I want to show them that the cited passage is a direct quote from regulations except for leaving out some words. Are dots the correct way to do this?


What is the word for an image hidden inside a painting?

My father-in-law has a painting by Vu Cao Dam of two girls and a man on horseback. He found a hidden fox in the painting, and today we were looking at it and found some more. What do you call it when an artist intentionally puts a hidden image within a larger work of art? My father-in-law swears there is a word, and that it is a general term which can apply to different media. It can apply to actors who make cameos or easter eggs in software. What word is this?


Can ‘nickel and dime’ be used for the object not related with money?

There was the following sentence in the pretty old article of Daily Finance titled “How to avoid getting nickel and dimed with fee: “These days, it seems as if everyone's trying to squeeze every penny out of us. From banks to colleges, American consumers are being _nickeled and dimed_ like never before. Here are some of the biggest offenders, and your best defense against them.” OALD at hand defines hyphenated ‘nickel-and-dime’ as an adjective (Ame. informal) ‘involving only a small amount of money; not important.’ Oxford Online Dictionary defines hyphenated ‘nickel-and-dime’ as an adjective meaning ‘of little importance,’ and as a verb meaning ‘harass someone by charging for many trivial items or services.’ Cambridge Online Dictionary defines ‘nickel and dime’ as an adjective meaning ‘something that is not important, usually because it does not involve much money.” Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary defines hyphenated ‘nickel-and-dime’ as an adjective meaning ‘involving or offering only a small amount of money.’ Though it seems the usage is more often associated with money, can ‘nickel- and-dime’ be used as a verb for the object that has nothing to do with money, in such a way as ‘Indulgence in alcohol nickel-and-dimed his health’ or ‘Rapidly ageing population with declining birth rate nickel and dimes the strength of the country’? Which is more common to use the word, with hyphen, or without hyphen?


"Vaccine Advisor" vs. "Vaccination Advisor"

I am making an Android application which will serve info about diseases which can be prevented by immunization. All in all it's an app targeted at travelers so it can help them protect themselves and educate them. Now my dilemma is whether I should use   * Vaccine Advisor or   * Vaccination Advisor The first option sounds like everythng is about the vaccines themselves and not about the process of immunization. What do you think — which one would be correct?


Where does English get the word “condom” from?

Although once a word that dared not speak its name, thanks to popular-culture references as well as the devastating AIDS tragedy, **_condom_** seems to be on everyone’s lips these days. But does anybody really know where the word **_condom_** (BrE `/(ˈ)kɒndɒm/`, AmE `/ˈkɑnd(ə)m/`) ultimately comes from? The OED says: > Etymology: Origin unknown; no 18th-cent. physician named Condom or Conton > has been traced though a doctor so named is often said to be the inventor of > the sheath. It is probably a coïncidence that it first appeared in the same century as _shag_ , as the device surely predates the word. It just must have been called something else back then. Even if you allow that trees can be barked, folk etymologies related to an apocopation of _condominium_ , amusing though they may sometimes be (particularly as blue punch-lines), seem to be barking up the wrong tree. So where do we anglophones (and others?) get the modern word **_condom_** from?


Is mafia an acronym?

Is _mafia_ a word of Italian origin or is it an English acronym? It seems that there are several theories, but it seems that there is no prevalent view.


suitable positive alternative to unimpaired (e.g. in neuropsychological function)

I'm translating a neuropsychological assessment report into English and I'm not sure which word/phrase to use here: The neuropsychological functions related to the performance of volitional and differentiated actions, motor production, perception, verbal memory and attention are... The idea is that these functions are unimpaired, or _functioning normally/properly_. "Unimpaired" is a negative word, with a negative prefix. I'd like to use a positive word. "functioning" sounds clumsy: "the functions are functioning".


Correct English words for trade 'source item' and 'destination item'

First of all, I hope I'm on the correct site asking a question, usually I'm around on Stack Overflow itself. So here's the story: I am designing a database table involving trading and I'd like to use the correct words, the table involves at least:   * A user that wants to trade his item.   * The item he wants to trade, codenamed `sourceItem` for now.   * The item he wants to trade his item to, codenamed `destinationItem` for now. What are the correct English words for `sourceItem` and `destinationItem`? I sadly don't even know it for Dutch (my language), so cannot translate it either. **Edit** to clarify: I am looking for the genuine English naming of the words I've asked, I am _not_ looking for a variable name or something of that kind.   I'm sorry if this question looked too much like a "How should I name this variable?"


Is "a person without desire" correct?

Can I use desire in its singular form without an article before it? That is, if I write "...so also a person without desire", will that be correct? or I'll have to use "..so also a person without any desire" or "..without desires"?


How many sentence types are there in English?

As the header says - how many distinct sentence types are there in the English language?


does "sluggish" have a negative connotation?

Context: The Processing Speed for situations requiring immediate attention is **sluggish** I'd like to know if this sounds acceptable in a neuropsychological report, or if there's a more suitable word. Thank you!


Distinguish contraction of "ain't"

I know the contraction of _am not_ , _is not_ , _are not_ , _has not_ , _have not_ , _do not_ , _does not_ , and _did not_ can be represented as _ain't_. How can I understand correctly which contraction the speaker meant?


Is there a word that has the following meaning: to distribute a portion of funds

I am interested in a single word, if such a word exists.


"Connection to/with the server was/has been lost"

Which one is correct? > Connection to the server **was** lost. > > Connection to the server **has been** lost. Also, should _to_ or _with_ be used with _server_?


"integer multiple" vs. "integral multiple"

>   1. Nine is an integer multiple of three. > >   2. Nine is an integral multiple of three. > > Which is more common? If both are accepted, what's the subtle difference between them?


"Justification of" or "justification for"?

Do "justification of" or "justification for" mean different things? Is one more appropriate than the other?


Term for things like "naughty step" where the step is not what is naughty

Can anyone remind me of the grammatical term for the apparent misapplication of an attributive adjective, as in the phrase "the naughty step" (where it is **not** the step itself that is naughty but the person consigned to it)?


What does it mean when someone has 'issues' with something?

This seems another of those fashionable expressions (like awesome) which may not stand the test of generations. But when someone tells you that Suzannah has 'issues with self confidence', what does that mean? Is it a euphemism for saying 'she lacks self confidence'? What are the limits to this expression? Could I say:'In a moment I will have an 'issue' with the clock, as I have to go to a meeting', or perhaps: 'In the car yesterday I had an issue with another driver, and my passenger is now in hospital', or 'the doctor thinks there is an issue with Fred's heart', (it has stopped beating). How far could we go with this?


What is the name of the moment when the detective solves the mystery or realizes who the murderer is?

In many Whodunit mystery stories, there's a scene when the detective (e.g., Hercule Poirot) discovers (or overhears) the final clue (or a phrase another characters says) that makes this detective realize who did the crime. This is of course before the "Reveal". Does this event have a name?


Why do programmers always use 'we' when really they mean 'me' or 'you'?

Something I've noticed a lot from reading articles on stack overflow is that programmers tend to use the term 'we' a heck of a lot. I'm a programmer myself and I must admit, of all the times I've given people a few programming lessons or a bit of programming help, I've never felt compelled to use the term 'we' when talking about something you can do in the language. For example (picking from some stackoverflow suggestions): "When do we really need to use hibernate for our Java code?" and "Why do we use process when we do have threads? [closed]" Really what these people mean is: "When do you really need to use hibernate for your Java code?" (in which case 'you' acts as an informal equivalent of 'one') and "Why is process used when threads can be used instead?" Has anyone else noticed this? Is there a reason programmers tend to use 'we' when discussing programming when really they mean 'you' or 'me' or the question could be asked without the terms. Does anyone know where this trend/habit started or why so many people do it? Frankly it's starting to bother me because it results in an awkward use of English that doesn't feel natural and isn't particularly easy to take in.


Who is ‘Brad’ who doesn’t want you to succeed in public speaking?

In association with my yesterday’s question about the meaning of ‘metaphysical impossibility’ of the chance of making speech at Oscar Award wining for most of us, I found the following sentence in the New York Times’ (February 23) article titled “Tips for Public Speaking”: > “Nearly everyone gets some anxiety about public speaking — even Oscar- > winning actors. Here are some tips to help you through a big speech: -- > > Remember, the audience really wants you to succeed. Except that one guy in > the back, **Brad**.” Who is Brad who sits in the back of the hall? If it is Bradley, why should he be Bradley, not Dick, Charles, John, or anyone else? Why those who don’t want you to succeed is only one person while there could be several of your rivals who don't like your success at anytime.


It is just like him to be late

What a strange construction is it? Why does it sound so strange to me, Ukrainian fella? For instance, why "him" instead of "he". And, first of all, what does it mean? I even cannot translate it correctly.


Could you replace these words with simple words? "rent strike" and " mount".

The leader of the rent strike mounted the platform to deliver an effective philippic against the management. NB I should say I looked them up in dictionaries but still I have my doubts if the word "mount" refers to plan something. I also have my doubts if " rent strike" means protest against raising cost of renting houses, does it?


What's the origin of "flipping the bird"?

What is the origin/meaning of the phrase "flipping the bird"?


What's the meaning of "bitching"?

What's the meaning of "bitching" in the following sentence taken from references in 'tfd.com'? > December: I quit bitching with grateful thanks for all the good times, > things and friends God has provided me with this year.


What does "P.U." (in reference to stinkiness) stand for?

"What does {holding nose} P.U. mean?" my son asked me tonight. I told him I didn't know, and he laughed and said "It means _stinky_ , Mommy!" Very funny and well said, but it left me wondering. A search of Wikipedia and Etymology Online came up wanting and my etymological dictionaries are packed in boxes. What does this abbreviation stand for and why does it mean _stinky_?


Is there a better / correct term for the de facto usage of ‘ironic’?

The word ‘ironic’ is known to be quite frequently misused, to the point that some dictionaries have actually started accepting the de facto usage as another definition, usually calling it _situational irony_. Is there a better, more appropriate term for this construct?


Word for "obsession with reliving past mistakes"

I am looking for a word that is close in meaning to _nostalgia_ , but not so passive. Something that is compulsive. It should also be unambiguously negative. A bonus would be a connotation of anxiety. **Edit:** I am looking for a noun, like _nostalgia_ , that describes the state or emotion.


What does "Someone was wearing heavy black coats" mean?

* I came across a sentence "They were wearing heavy black coats" . I want to know what 'heavy' means here. Does it mean the coat was heavy ( maybe the materials used to make the coat are of high density to make it thick enough to keep warm) ? Or does it mean the color of the coat was very dark? And what about light grey jacet? Is it talking about the color or the weight ? THanks . * * *


What’s the opposite of “wider”?

What is the opposite of _wide_ and _wider_? For instance, is the corresponding opposite to sentence one below really sentence two?   1. The Ipad2 is **wider** than the iPad Air.   2. The iPad Air is **narrower** than the iPad2.  I ask because _narrower_ does not sound right to me.


Implicit "which is "

> A new study has shown that millions of pieces of junk **floating in space** > could be a big hazard for satellites orbiting Earth. Is there an implicit " _which is_ " in front of floating in space? Why is " _which is_ " not written?


What does "I can get behind that :)" mean when you suggest someone to compromise on an alternative option?

"How about we compromise and ... ? ;)" Answer: "I can get behind that :)"


What's it called when you're paid while the business is temporarily closed

I'm trying to find a word to describe `an individual whom is paid while the business they work in is temporarily closed.` Example: While a library is renovated, the staff are paid for the hours they would have worked. I've thought about "paid leave" and "paid time off" but it doesn't seem correct as leave would suggest the workers voluntarily took the time off, and the latter would suggest a vacation. The closest I've come to would be a "paid furlough". Any ideas?


"Café" vs. "coffee shop" in American English

When is _café_ used and when is _coffee shop_ used? Are there any differences? Which is more widespread?


Is it wrong to use "The Albatross is now on the sky"?

Is it wrong to use "The Albatross is now **on** the sky"? Is it like we should always say "The Albatross is now **in** the sky"? I would like to get an explanation for this. Thanks.


Names of ancient people and spirits that are used for desribing people's mood and characteristics

I saw some words, which are names of ancient people and spirits (such as those exist in Greek and Roman tales). They are used for describing people's mood and characteristics. For example,   * some names of the planets in the solar system are used for describing people's mood, e.g. saturnine is used to describe lacking in cheer.   * _philistine_ is used to described a person who is guided by materialism. I wonder if you can help to list and categorize those words, (and/or the reason of the ward carrying the meaning), so that it is easier to compare and remember them? Thanks!


why do we say "too bad"?

At first glance you'd think the correct use of the expression "too bad" would be in a conversation like this: > Sure stealing candy would be bad but stealing candy from a baby is just too > bad. But instead we more often use the expression either sarcastically in cases like this: > Yeah, I got it first! Too bad. You lose. or as a synonym for "unfortunate" such as in: > It's too bad that you can't come to the party. But why did we come to use "too bad" in this way that seems to be little related to the literal meaning of the words?


Usage of the word "through"

what is the meaning of "The malware affects IE9 through IE11(Internet Explorer)"? why can't we use "from IE9 to IE11" instead


'Eventually' — in the past or by some point in the future

Consider the following exchange: > Alice: Did Charlotte send you that email?   >  Bob: No, but I'm sure she'll send it eventually. In this case, there's no upper bound on the period of time in which Charlotte can send the email to Bob for his expectation to be met. Suppose I want it to be limited by some point in the past or in the future: > Alice: Did Charlotte send you that email last month?   >  Bob: No, but I'm sure she sent it eventually. Can Bob say that? What about: > Alice: Did Charlotte send you that email last month?   >  Bob: No, but I'm sure she sent it eventually-by-one-week-ago. And what about: > Alice: Did Charlotte send you that email last month?   >  Bob: No, but I'm sure she has sent/did send/will send it eventually-by-one- > month-from-now. How can Bob express his certainty that the email was sent, or will be sent, at some point in time between the day Alice mentioned and the limit time Bob is referring to?


What are the abbreviations most commonly used on the Internet?

Every so often I see various abbreviations used on forums and blogs and whatnot, such as FYI (For Your Information) and AFAIK (As Far As I Know). What other common abbreviations are there, and what are their meanings?


If Atheism is the rejection of all deities equally what is the polar opposite?

If an 'atheist' is someone that does not believe in all deities with equal disbelief, what would you call someone that believed in 'all deities' equally?


English idiom for the Italian "Buon lavoro"

In Italian we can say "Buon lavoro" to someone who is working and it basically means that we wish him/her the best while working (It can be literally translated with "Good work" but it sounds just wrong). It's like when you say "Good morning" to someone and it can be roughly translated with: "Have a good day at work". Note: I'm aware of the fact that in English you can say "Good job" but that's usually said after a job is done. Is there such an idiom in English?


Title in a letter to an unknown person

Many times when writing a letter asking to a department of my university, I'm hesitating for the appropriate title. Say I want to email "Student Insurance Office" to ask about insurance coverage. Here are some example I can come up with,   1. "To whom it may concern". Not appropriate, because to me it shows the writer's indifference about the person reading it.   2. "Dear Student Insurance Officer/Manager". Can I start with "dear" to an stranger?(I could replace it by "Hello" or "Hi" though) and can I generally call people officer? Usually it means police officer.    3. "Dear Student Insurance Office". It seems that I'm writing a letter to the whole office.    4. "Dear Sir/Madam". But actually I don't know the name of that person. I would know of course if he/she responds my email. Do you guys have any suggestions to the generally acceptable title for an unknown person/department/organization?


The usage of "but" in non-shift sentence

I have found a sentence: > He returned several times to India briefly, but only returned permanently > early in 1915. I believe this sentence does not contain any shift. We can say that _He returned several times to India briefly, and only returned permanently early in 1915._ I do not which know one is correct and why.


Is "teen-ager" correct? Still used? Etymology?

I was reading an article in The New York Times published in 1990 and came across the spelling of teenager as 'teen-ager'; is this American spelling? Archaic? > The young man, who often said he only wanted to be treated like an ordinary > teen-ager, had a date for the senior prom, and friends said he was looking > forward to the dance.


How popular is the phrase “What’s eating you?” Is it an interjection?

I saw an American English teacher introducing the phrase, “What’s eating you? in a TV English conversation class this morning by warning audience not to confuse it with the question asking what food you are eating. As I was unfamiliar with this expression, I consulted with OALD. It registers this as an idiom used to ask what sb is annoyed or worried about. Wikidictionary defines it an _interjection_ meaning “what is annoying you?” However, Googlebooks Ngram Viewer doesn’t register “What’s eating you?” Is “What’s eating you?” a popular phrase both in Britain and United States? Is it an idiom or interjection as defined by Wikidictionary in the same sense of “Oh my God,” “Look out,” and “Watch it”? To me it looks a plain interrogative sentence. What is the origin of “What’s eating you?”


Confusion about characters in a dialogue: I can't fathom who spoke what from the punctuation

I am reading The Complete Stories of Flannery O'Conner (The Noonday Press). In the second story, there's a conversation going on between Rayber and the barber. The barber starts saying something about politicians at the end of the first page and goes on till the beginning of the first page. Then the quotation marks close, and the next paragraph starts in quotation marks, which is > "You hear that, George?" he shouted to the colored boy wiping the floor > around the basins. Here is a google books link pointing to what I am talking about. Which also seems to be said by the barber. My understanding of English language's punctuation was that when a dialogue between two characters is written, the paragraph is only changed when the turn of the first character finishes, and the turn of the second character begins. In cases where there is paragraphing within the quote of the first character, the double quotes do not close at the end of the first paragraph, but do start at the beginning of the next one, signifying that the text is still in the quotation of the first character. Am I missing something? Can somebody point me to a punctuation guide in this regard?


Expression regarding a periodic task

So, if I have to do a certain task during a whole week but with a 3-week gap. For instance, in a 3-week period I will have to do that task for 1 week, in a 6-week period for 2 weeks, not in a row, of course, and so on. >   1. One work week for each 3-weeks. >   2. Once in every 3-weeks. >   3. ... > Which is the best way to express this work schedule rotation?


Why is the preposition "in" used twice in this sentence: In 1934, in February...?

This sentence is in the book pattern complete sentence is: > In 1934, in February, when the dust was still so thick in the Minnesota air > that my parents couldn't always see from the house to the barn, their fifth > child – a fourth daughter – was born. ― _MY MOTHER NEVER WORKED_ , by Bonnie > Smith-Yackel, page 2


Does this sentence make sense? Correct use of the word constitute?

I was pretty sure this made sense but then I looked up the dictionary meaning of the word `constitute` and I wasn't so sure?               By continuing to use the website and/or the Services you constitute that you agree to      these new terms of use.


"Being incognito, I naturally add up"

I was interested in the following piece which appeared in an article titled "Let's Be Philosophical" by Russel Baker in The New York Times (January 25, 1987). > It was that incident, in fact, that renewed my determination to get busy > with reading philosophy. It is humiliating to be caught accidentally > confusing Descartes with Hume. > > And accident it was, of course, for I am thoroughly familiar with the > thought of Descartes. It is famously stated in his ''Puto ergo sum,'' a > Latin expression meaning, ''I am putative, therefore I do sums.'' This is > sometimes written, ''Cogito ergo sum,'' meaning, ''Being **incognito** , I > naturally add up.'' > > David Hume, on the other hand, was incapable of thinking such thoughts since > he was never either putative or **incognito** and, being Scottish, detested > the very idea of thinking in Latin. This he considered a disgusting > affectation that the English used to show off Oxford educations. Oxford Dictionary of English defines "incognito" as " _(of a person) having one's true identity concealed_ ". Can someone clarify if the journalist correctly uses the word "incognito", as I'm not sure on this circumstance, even after reading the Latin origin this word ("incognitus", from **in** \- 'not' + **cognitus** (past participle of _cognoscere_ 'know')?


Single word for 'to become known or famous'

I want to describe an event that through the years has become known or popular, like the celebration of, say, Holloween for instance. We could say that Holloween became popular or (...) a long time ago.


What is a single word describing this type of statement?

Scenario: A gang from the west of the USA wants to kill gang members from the east of the USA. The gang from the west meet a gang member from the east and ask: 'Where are you from?' The gang member from the east replies: 'From the west.' But he intends to mean 'the western world' so he said something intending a different meaning than that of the meaning in the minds of those he was addressing, thus fooling them, and saving himself. Is there a term for this type of linguistic/semantic strategy? _Note: no offense to people from the USA_


Scenario: 'Are you stressed by his threat?' Answer: 'I'm not that concerned.' What is the grammatical function of 'that' in this sentence?


Asking somebody to select between two or more options

Assume we want to ask somebody to choose between two options. Each option is a phrase like "stay home" or "come with me". What is the correct form of asking such questions? >   1. Do you want to stay home or come with me? >   2. Do you want to stay home or do you want to come with me? >   3. Do you want to stay home or you want to come with me? > Any better form? What if there are more than two options?


What is the phrase ending in "game" that means a fool's errand?

I am trying to remember the phrase that describes a particular kind of folly - trying to "beat the house", or willingness to play a rigged game. As I recall it has the form of "a fool's errand" - that is, the game is referred to as belonging to the person who is silly enough to play it. I'd appreciate knowing the origin of the phrase, too.


What would be an appropriate opposite of "exceed"?

_Exceed_ is commonly used, but when I found myself wanting to use the opposite I couldn't really find a single word that would do it. _fall short of_ and _inadequate_ are a little off.   How about _deceed_?


Is there a word similar to vocabulary, but meaning the body of phrases known to a person?

I could say I have a wide vocabulary if I know the meaning of many words. What would I say if I know many phrases? Or, if I learn a new phrase, then I have added it to my **___ ___**. I am not looking for words that can be used for groups of things in general (e.g. arsenal).


Where "summat" came from

In Scottish English, I know that the word _summat_ is used in place of standard _something_. But what's the etymology of this pronoun? It seems unlikely to me that _summat_ could be merely a variant pronunciation of _something_. It also seems likely that the _sum-_ part is from _some_ , as with _something_ , though I haven't a clue what the rest of it could be.


Is there a word for refusing to call things by their name out of fear?

Some examples:   * "He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named" or "You-Know-Who" for Voldemort of Harry Potter fame   * Him in the Powerpuff Girls   * Any of the various monikers for Yahweh   * possibly "She Who Must Be Obeyed" for Hilda Rumpole


What is the literary term used to describe long vowel sounds? For example in Ted Hughes's "Your Paris" in his Birthday Letters anthology "Eerie Familiar Feeling", what term would be used to describe this literary long vowel sound technique?


this is the first year + clause

In a sentence such as > This is the first year I’ve lived in a house with a yard. Is it all right to have a clause other than present perfect? That is, can you say, for instance, sentences like the following: > This is the first year I'm living in a house with a yard > > That was the first year I lived in a house with a yard.


"knowledge on" or "knowledge of"? Which one is correct?

I want to mention on my CV that I also know a little bit about Java and C#. What is a better way to mention that? I think one of the following may be correct: > 1) Also have some knowledge on Java and C#. > > 2) Also have some knowledge of Java and C#. Which one is correct? How can I mention it on my CV?


What does "noon hour" mean?

I came across the following sentence in a book. I wonder how should I interpret "noon hour": > "And how shall you rise beyond your days and nights unless you break the > chains which you at the dawn of your understanding have fastened around your > noon hour?" (The first part of the sentence is closely related to the sentence before.) Those who are interested can see the whole text at 'On Freedom'.


Replacement for "God forbid"

I wanted to use the phrase "God forbid" the other day, but really wanted to avoid the religious connotations that may come along with it. I was stumped while thinking of a replacement or variation. I like the way the phrase "flows" or "feels" when interjected like this: > You could do X if, God forbid, Y doesn't happen. I know "heaven forbid" is common, but that's the type of thing I'm trying to avoid. Are there any similar phrases that could be used in such a way, or even a good replacement word for "God/heaven" which would work here and still sound natural?


“I have made an X to make an X”

I have found in a novel the sentence “I have made a call: to make a call.” The context is: the female main character is on the run and distressed, and to try and fix her problems she calls a former fiancé, in a hope to manipulate him. Is “I have made an X[:] to make an X” a standard phrase? Is it a hidden quotation? Or could it be a play on the different meanings of “call” (phone call, call for help etc.)?


what phrase to use to convey the idea of "my first attempt"

I had tried photography as serious hobby for the first time and I have made an album. I want to expresses the idea to the world that this is my first attempt. Few things come to my mind like "my first try at photography" or "my first hand at photography". I do not know if these statements are correct, so can someone suggest something or at-least verify these.


What is the meaning of the sentence (about mathematics and philosophy)?

I have a question. I translate a text from English to Russian. And I can not understand the meaning of the sentence. It's very difficult for me. Could you explain its meaning for me using simpler words? My sentence: > "A chief point of interest that has emerged from modern attempts to > characterize philosophy is the importance of distinguishing dialectical or > analytical inquiries about meaning from empirical inquiries about facts"


Why do people say "you could have done"?

An email from my American colleague says: > If there is a transaction _you could have saved_ data. I don't quite understand his specific tone by the "could have saved". Why not just say "you can save data"?


Today Was vs Today Is

If someone asks, "What day is it today?" and it is 10 pm, is it correct to respond with > "Today **was** Tuesday." since the day is over and it's night? Is that response incorrect? Should the correct response be > "Today **is** Tuesday."?


What is the etymology of "blackguard"? Does this British-sounding word have subtleties in its use?

The following is from _My Fair Lady_ , where Eliza Doolittle's father, a man of working-class origins, is about to make his appearance. Prof. Higgins and Col. Pickering, our primary interlocutors in this dialogue, sense that Alfred Doolittle is after money for their use of Eliza to settle their little sociolinguistic experiment. > HIGGINS [ _promptly_ ] Send the blackguard up.   >  MRS. PEARCE. Oh, very well, sir. [She goes out].   >  PICKERING. He may not be a blackguard, Higgins.   >  HIGGINS. Nonsense. Of course he's a blackguard.   >  PICKERING. Whether he is or not, I'm afraid we shall have some trouble with > him. What is the etymology of this word? Wikitionary, usually extremely handy, informs me that it comes from "black + guard", which is just too thin gruel for my taste. I mean, duh! The question is why are those terms combined to apply to "scoundrels" and "unprincipled persons", as Wikitionary defines it. Can some make the history more detailed for me? Also, would one find this word current in British English, and does it always have a "chummy" or "lighthearted" quality as used in the quotation above?


What is the word for "understandable by specific group"?

Please suggest the word which means "understandable by specific group". I just forgot that.


Using the correct tense in writing

Should I use past tense to describe something of a permanent nature/situation? > "The Taipei 101 stands at ... (height) is the most famous financial centre > in Taiwan and it has 101 floor of storeys". Since I'm writing an essay entitled "My holiday", should I write "The Taipei 101 **_stood_** at... **was** the most famous financial centre in Taiwan and it **_had_** 101 floor of storeys?" > "The card access system is a fully automated system that **_links_** with... > and then the data captured **_is_**..." As I'm writing my CV, I just wonder I should use past tense to describe the system/program that I had designed, but in fact they are still existing and running at present though I had left the previous company. Would it be more consistent with the text of other tasked performed if I write > "The card access system **_was_** a fully automated system that **_linked_** > with... and then the data captured **_was_** ..." so that my whole text would be in past tense?


What does this intricate sentence mean?

What does this bold part mean? It doesn't make any sense. What did he want to say here? http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2013/08/syrian-electronic-army- hackers-new-york-times-tactics.html Regardless, it’s clear that the individuals who make up the S.E.A. are not simply technically savvy in a rote way. They are fully native products and producers of Internet culture. They use English, both on social media and in their phishing attacks, in the manner of young people who’ve spent their entire lives online; they deploy well-known memes when they hijack accounts; they crack jokes about Justin Bieber; and, of course, they relentlessly broadcast all of their doings on social media. (Their current Twitter account, @Official_SEA16, is, as the number implies, their sixteenth consecutive account, as previous ones were suspended. A Twitter spokesperson explained in an e-mail that the account remains active because “Our Trust and Safety team takes action only after someone reports a violation of our Rules and the report is investigated.”) **Most profoundly, the S.E.A.’s campaign reflects the vigilantism of young aggressors steeped in the Web: it’s conducted not simply on widely viewed media sites or on social media itself but for them;** the SEA knows how to capture a precise kind of attention from a particular kind of audience. This is in part, one suspects, because they are that kind of audience, one who lives on Facebook and Twitter. That’s what ultimately makes this group so remarkable: it has shifted the battleground from a single place to an infinite number of them, because it’s battling for attention, not power—even if it can be hard to tell the difference.


Does "to err on the side of ... " indicate wrongdoing?

Does the phrase "to err on the side of ...," specifically "err on the side of caution," indicate that it is wrong to be "on the side of," the object? "Err" makes me think of "error," and is such the word in question in the phrase. Additionally, is this phrase considered an idiom?


What would you call the object of an activity one does for fun?

For instance, the object related to cooking is a "dish", when playing it is "sport" or "game", when singing it's a "song". Which single term would describe the object for the general act of doing something for leisure? The closest I've got to is a "fun thing". So that I could say "I did a fun thing last weekend" as opposed to "I did work last weekend". Would anyone like to volunteer a neologism if a term does not exist? Something catchy, please.


What is the difference in usages between "send" and "dispatch"?

I found that both words have similar meaning as in when they are verbs, they can mean similar action. But I'm confused with their usages when this similar usage takes place, which is "sending". May I ask what is the difference in usages between "send" and "dispatch"?


I'm an American who lives in Germany and hear many kinds of English spoken by many nationalities. Just as "one can either write `organization` or `organisation` but the main point is to be consistent" I have also generally applied this rule to my speech. Especially when I was teaching English I would make it a point to not say phrases such as: > Spot on! even though I thought it was cool. And instead of saying: > Shall we go? I would say: > Do you want to go? I can imagine if you are teaching English or if you are representing a company from London or New York or Sydney you have a certain obligation to speak as if you come from that place. **In what contexts is it important to maintain your accent or dialect?**


Can "recall" be used in an imperative sense?

Can " **recall** " be used in an imperative sense, interchangeably with " **remember** ", such as in " **Recall** that..." as if I was saying " **Remember** that..." i.e. "John, recall I told you to go shopping"


Is the line blurring between "accent" and "dialect"?

The definition that I have had in my head for most of my life is: > **dialect** : _a variation of the original language (usually regional), > sometimes even using different vocabulary and grammar_ > > **accent** : _a discernible influence of another language (usually because > the speaker is not talking in his native tongue)_ Yet, I keep hearing about Southern, Scottish or New York accents...shouldn't these be more accurately called "dialects"? I could see that the answer might not be as clear cut in the US as in the UK because there are probably far more "native" American speakers whose ancestors' native language was not English... _Disclaimer: I'm German myself and I'm more or less assuming that "accent" and "dialect" directly correspond to their German "lookalikes": "Akzent" and "Dialekt". Maybe the semantics of those two words are simply different in English? If so, feel free to close this question._


How to use the words ending with "-ly"?

First question: in the grammar world, where do the _-ly_ ended words belong?   Second question: how to use them correctly? Rarely (oops!), if ever, I get myself using -ly ended words in my writing. I'm not a native speaker and I'm always at loss when choosing between a -ly ended and a non -ly ended word to use in my writing.


What is the meaning of the phrase "a man of the world"?

The name of one of the **Ernest Hemingway** 's short stories is **"A man of the world"**. It seems to me that I understand the meaning of this phrase out from the context of the short story. But all the same it seems a little vague to me due to the fact that this seems to be an idiom with its own specific meaning. All the meanings of this idiom which I managed to google don't seem to fit in full for the name of the short story. Could you help me to grasp the meaning of the idiom in this short story? **Edited (added):** "A Man of the World" Summary (from http://www.bookrags.com/studyguide-ernest- hemingway/chapanal059.html ) > Blindy is a blind man that wanders among the local bars playing slot > machines. He smells very bad and has a difficult time finding someone to > give him a ride between bars. His favorite bar is the Pilot, where he gets > along well with the bartender. The bartender explains how Blindy became > blind. During a fight, his eyes were gouged out and then bitten off by his > opponent, Willis Sawyer. Blindy, who refuses to be called by his previous > nickname, Blacky, is content with his life and pities Willis Sawyer.....


How should a (North American) Native English Speaker prounounce the word 'Afrikaans'?

I've always had trouble with the word 'Afrikaans'. I could say it the way South Africans say it, but then I'm not sure if I'd just be saying the word with a South African accent. After all, I don't pronounce 'Spanish' as 'ESS- PAN-YOLLL'. So how do people pronounce it?


Reasons for using the same word for people and language of a country?

Ever since my first days of learning English I have been puzzled by this simple phenomenon: Why the word "English" can both mean the English language, and the English people? Is there any historical reason for this? By "historical", I mean, is the usage already like this a long time ago? I am asking this because "people" and "language" are two related but very different concepts. Why use the same word for two different things? (Well, of course a single word can have two or more completely different and unrelated meanings, but that's not what I am asking here.) I am a Chinese. In Chinese the words for people of a country and the language of that country are different. For example, for English people, we would just say "English people", and for the language, we would say "English language". I don't know what is the case in other languages.


Is “Go against type” a stand-alone popular idiom?

Today’s New York Times carries an article with the headline, “James Gorman of Morgan Stanley, **Going Against Type** ,” followed by the lead copy: > Forgoing Wall Street flash, Morgan Stanley’s chief executive is finding > safer ways for the firm to make money. I first guessed “Go against type” as “go against typical pattern or traditional way of thinking, which usually means ‘aggressive, abrasive and revolutionary,” but the succeeding copy goes against my preconception: “In the process, James Gorman and Morgan Stanley are becoming the face of what may be Wall Street’s future: highly profitable, to be sure, but with fewer of the grand ambitions or larger-than-life personalities that have always characterized the place. “I’m pretty invisible, and that’s just fine,” he acknowledged." It seems “go against type” implies James Gorman is taking a steadier and life- sized approach of management as against aggressive and speculative business approaches of Morgan Stanley in the past. However, I don’t find the phrase, “Go against type” neither in CED or OED, though I find “Go against sb./ sth (flow, the grain)” in CED. Is “Go against type” a stand-alone idiom, or just one of variations of “Go against sth,”? Can “go against type” be often used in such a way of simply meaning “different from the old way,” as used in the above article, without projecting any revolutionary, ambitious, and abrasive tones and a sort of bulldozing approach that come first from the word, “go against X”?


Is "we all pull on one single string" an idiom or is it just wrong?

> We all pull on one single string. Is this correct English? When I look up the intended meaning of this phrase, I get the following results from several online dictionaries:   * > to pull together >   * > to act in concern > > But there is no dictionary that says, "to pull on one (single) string". Hence my question: Is it an idiom or is it wrong? Addition: This phrase is definately meant to be an idiom. There are no physical strings to be pulled. It means to say that everyone holds together to face a common dread, to make a difference and to fight for a better world. Thats the context.


Does one say "to ring stupid" or what are appropriate alternatives?

If you want to express that something is true even if it is actually dumb, in German we can say something along > So blöd es auch klingt, aber es ist wahr. Literally it's _As stupid it also rings, but it is true._ I guess that _to ring stupid_ isn't a proper term in English, especially not as shown in the literally translation, but I'm looking for a term that is quite similar to the German one. The phrase _So blöd es auch klingt_ is used when you tell:   * really strange and unbelievable happenings,   * unusual feelings, occasions, etc. in which you e.g. do or want have the opposite of what is considered as being normal, or   * actions that are self-evident and actually not need to be said Consider the following examples in which I replaced the German saying by _I know it sounds weird_ (which actually is in German _Ich weiß, dass es sich ungewöhnlich anhört_ ), although it sounds indeed weird in the last sentence. > I know it sounds weird but I've really seen a ghost that night. > > I know it sounds weird but I'm scared of being happy. > > I know it sounds weird but you should always warm-up before sports. I am looking for one ore more phrases having the same connotation[*] and using a sentence structure that is as close as possible to the German one. * * * [*]Regarding connotations: Although in all three sentences the connotations are a bit differently from each others, I guess that the appropriate connotations are obviously. If I'm wrong please comment and I will add an explanation what is denoted by the phrasing.


An idiom meaning "sticking fingers in your ears does not change the fact"

I am looking for an idiom which means sticking fingers in your ears does not change the fact; the fact remains so, even if you don't listen to the one who is mentioning it.


Is "but" really a conjunction here?

_But_ can be used to introduce an exclamation of surprise. Here's an example from Game of Thrones (not verbatim) > But you're a pretty girl! The sentence was supposed to mean roughly > My god/Wow, you're a pretty.... The Oxford Dictionary does mention this _but_ but they call it a conjunction. And that I find weird.   * What is this _but_ conjoining?   * Isn't it a modal particle rather than a conjunction?


Would be vs. would have been

Which of the following examples is grammatically correct? >   1. There was someone at the door. It WOULD BE the milkman. > >   2. There was someone at the door. It WOULD HAVE BEEN the milkman. > > If both are possible, do they mean the same thing? Thank you very much for your kind help. Paolo


What word contains the most unique letters?

I'm assuming there isn't a word that contains every letter in the alphabet, so which word contains the most? Examples: antidisestablishmentarianism - 12 `[antidseblhmr]`   psychotherapy - 12 `[psychotherap]`   handcraftsmanship - 13 `[handcrftsmhip]`


What does "trollpoking" mean?

The edit summary here says: > cleaned up a bit, removed the trollpoking. I'm certain removing _trollpoking_ is referring to the removal of: > This answer is going to be deleted as off-topic, isn't it? ^_^ and I know what troll(ing) is. But what does _trollpoking_ mean?


Wrong usage of “myself ”, or just putting emphasis on “me”?

I was writing the following sentence, and I realized it somehow sounds odd: > I am constantly trying to remind myself to think carefully before speaking, > but those moments I forget to do so end up hurting others and **myself**. Does it sound somewhat awkward, and if so, how would I have to change it? > I am constantly trying to remind myself to think carefully before speaking. > However, there are few moments where I forget to do so, and end up hurting > others and myself. Could above be an alternative? but is there a way to write it in one sentence, putting emphasis on _me_ , and still not making it sound odd?


two times or twice

1. In the 1980’s the rate of increase of the minority population of the United States was nearly **twice as fast as it was in** the 1970’s.   2. In the 1980’s the rate of increase of the minority population of the United States was nearly **twice what it was in** the 1970’s.   3. In the 1980’s the rate of increase of the minority population of the United States was nearly **two times faster than that of** the 1970’s.   4. In the 1980’s the rate of increase of the minority population of the United States was nearly **two times greater than** the 1970’s. Can anyone explain correct grammatical sentence between these ?


Opposite of "summary"

What is the opposite of _summary_ as in a _Summary Report_ or _A Summary_? Common suggestions are _Exposition_ but that doesn't seem right at all, and other suggestions I find in a search are just antonyms of _short_ like _long_ and _lengthy_. _Summary_ stands on its own as a noun, but none of the others do except _Exposition_ which seems very different in meaning. In my specific case I have two reports; one is titled _End of Month Summary Report_ and one is _End of Month Report - Long Version_ which is painfully awkward. I'd like to keep the titles short and _End of Month Summary_ sounds perfect. I need a concise, understandable phrase for the latter.


Proper use of "vernacular"

Is this proper use of the word _vernacular_? > Wow! _Curmudgeons_ is a cool word! I'm going to add it to my **vernacular**.


What's the difference in saying "the average family" vs. "the family average"?

Consider these two sentences: > A Scranton family has an average of 2.1 children.   >  The average Scranton family has 2.1 children. I've seen both used. The first one seems reasonable, but the second one seems wrong because you're applying average to _family_ , not to numbers. To me, saying "the Jones are an average family" seems legitimate, but if the Jones have 2.1 children, they're anything but average. Is the second sentence grammatically correct? Is it understood to mean the same as the first sentence? Inspired by the question, Meaning of the expression "2.1 kids".


Yet another question about the pronunciation of the letter i

First, let's not talk about the long i (as in the name of the letter) or the short i (as in 'incorrect') pronunciations. This question is about the third and usually not talked about pronunciation - the ee sound (as in "pronunciation"). I have looked at many web sites about the letter i and none talk about the ee sound of the letter i. Why? Would you call it the 'soft' letter i? As in the long A, short A and soft A? Do we also have long I, short I and soft I? If one is teaching letter pronunciation to a non-english speaker all 3 sounds of the letter I have to be included. I don't see how it can be lumped into the letter e or letter y conversation. After all, it's an "i", not an "e" or "y". thanks for any insight you can provide. Chip


Is this usage of "reign" correct?

Lately I've noticed increasing usage of the phrase "free reign". Is this a legitimate usage of the word "reign", or is this a corruption of the phrase "free rein"? I've been dismissing usages of "free reign" as grammatical errors, but I'm beginning to see this phrase used even in print, so I'm questioning my initial dismissal of this phrase.


Sentence analysis (copula)

I am quite confused with this. Sentence is: His dog is his best friend. I would say that this is copula sentence, without object, and that HIS DOG is a subject. My friend is trying to persuade me that it is quite different i.e. his dog=object, his best friend=subject. Pls help&thank you


"Cheap mother" idiom

In this passage: > Got a feature request? Found a bug? Think our mother is cheap? We'd love to > hear from you! (source) What do they mean by "Think our mother is cheap?" there?


The vocative case and comma splices

I've been trying to find an answer to this question for some time, and have finally decided to... well, buck up some courage and ask. In sentences like these two > "Hello, Mary, how are you?"   >  "Don't touch that, John, it'll explode!" is the comma after the name (Mary, John) a comma splice or not? I can understand that for instances like the following > "I can't believe, Howard, that you've put the duck in there." the name is technically parenthetical, but it feels to me like the first two are clearly not. In the first two cases, I'd be much happier if the latter was replaced by a period or had a suitable conjunction added in. It feels to me, here, like the vocative is being used to justify attaching two independent clauses together in a similar manner to a comma splice, and is thus an error. Any thoughts/information on this? I'll appreciate any answers anyone could give me on this, even if they are just 'Duh, that's obvious'. It's been bugging me for a while.


Why do we say "Hurricane prepares to hit east coast?" People prepare for a hurricane, but the hurricane isn't doing anything but moving. When else do we say that an inanimate object prepares to do something?


Recognizing right relative pronouns for clauses

I have read some grammar points about adjective clauses, but I still have problems recognizing the right choice in questions requiring them. > A Jekyll and Hyde is a person who has two personalities, one of ---- is bad > and the other good. (I guess it should be _whom_ but the answer is _which_.) And I wonder if using relative pronouns in this paragraph is correct: > He invents a drug _that (which?)_ can separate them. When he takes the drug, > he becomes an evil version of himself, _whom (that?)_ he calls Mr.Hyde. Can someone please provide information, or resources to get better answers?


What does "reputation-bibbing" mean?

I read this sentence: "In all his writing (and, apparently, conversation) [Roy] Jenkins loved reputation-bibbing, loved all kinds of ranking, especially of politicians." What does "reputation-bibbing" mean?


Is using a plural word after a word describing something that is plural correct

'Different work based on their functions’ should the word 'functions' in this sentence be function because the word 'Different' describes here that the word 'function' is plural.


How much can we trust text-to-speech pronunciation of names?

Text-to-speech software are applications which try to generate a sound based on a textual input by following linguistic rules of a language (mainly phonetics and phonology). They make a sound for anything you enter, whether it's valid or not. Because pronunciation of the names of people are really hard to be found over the Internet, I thought suddenly to use these software as a close hit. But I'm not sure if I can trust them or not. Do pronunciations of names follow linguistic rules by a good and acceptable percentage? Could this approach be useful?