"It is they who lied" or "it is them who lied?"

Which is the correct usage of the third person, plural pronoun? > It is they who lied.   >  It is them who lied.


I can run faster than _____. (1) him (2) he?

Consider the sentence "I can run faster than 15 miles per hour." Its meaning is clear and to my eyes obviously grammatically correct. Now let me present some variations that have given me trouble for a long time.   * I am faster than 15 miles per hour. – To me this is clearly incorrect. Directly comparing _me_ to a speed doesn't seem right. We need to compare _my speed_ to a speed, or me to _another person_.   * I can run faster than him. – Compared to the base sentence, there is a distinct shift in meaning of the comparison. While before I named a speed faster than which I can run, now I am naming a person. It doesn't seem quite right. I realize the parts of speech can change, but my initial objection is that "him" is not a speed.   * I can run faster than he. – This seems most correct to me, but still somehow feels objectionable. Is this in fact the correct way to say it? And if so, is it proper as is or need I say "... faster than he is" or even "... faster than he can run?"   * I am faster than him. – With "am" instead of "can run" it now seems slightly more correct. But is it?   * I am faster than he. – I'm in doubt here. It doesn't seem wrong to me to say, "I am faster than he is" or even "I am faster than he is fast." (Though I suppose that is a given since I could hardly properly compare to some other category as in "I am faster than he is smart.")   * My speed is faster than his. – Hmm. This seems more proper as "my speed is greater than his." So which of these constructions is correct and which is incorrect? Is there a general rule that I can follow? **UPDATE** The scholarly article Syntactic isomorphism and non-isomorphism under ellipsis may be of great interest to some readers! > Once we accept that the elided constituent and its antecedent can differ in > form, it becomes reasonable to ask how large this difference can be. The > answer in Rooth (1992), Fiengo and May (1994), Chung et al. (1995) and > subsequent work is that the wiggle room is actually quite small: the elided > constituent and its antecedent are allowed to differ only in the realization > of inﬂectional morphology. Other than that, both constituents have to be > syntactically and lexically isomorphic.


Usage of Personal pronoun "I"

Books like word power suggest "Ramu and I are going to theatre today" may be wrong. Does "Ramu and me are going to ..." a right structure.


Is “It must be him with whom you enjoy doing your assignments, not me” correct?

I’d like all of you to please consider the following sentence: > It must be **him with whom** you enjoy doing your assignments, not **me**. I have known that after 'to be' verb pronouns words take the subjective form. For example: > It is **he who** was absent yesterday. So, can I say that the first sentence is erroneous? Would it be correct to write > It must be **he with whom** you enjoy doing your assignments, not **I**.


"It is me whom she loves" or "It is I whom she loves" which one is grammatically correct?

> **It is me** whom she loves   >  or   >  **It is I** whom she loves Because I know that "It is I" is grammatically correct.


Which is correct, "you and I" or "you and me"?

When the phrase is used as an object, why so many native speakers are saying "you and I" instead of "you and me"? I'm not a native speaker but I thought "you and me" is correct. Not sure if this falls into the same category, but "Just between you and me" sounds more natural than "Just between you and I".


Should personal pronouns always be placed at the end of a list?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  “My friends and I” vs. “My friends and me” vs. “Me and my friends”   >  Is naming the first person last proper grammar or just proper manners?   >  “Julio and I” vs “I and Julio” Today I made a post on facebook in which I copied conversation from somewhere else. To preface my post, I wrote: > A conversation between me and John: There were a number of comments on my use of pronouns, but the one I am most interested in was on the word order. One commentator said that the personal pronoun must always come last. I admit that I was raised to always use the personal pronoun last and simply did not type what I felt was correct, but I honestly don't know whether what I was raised with was correct. So, Should you always place the personal pronoun last in a list? If so, why?


"My friends and I" vs. "My friends and me" vs. "Me and my friends"

I've always been taught to put myself last when referring to myself in the same sentence as others but the usage of "me and..." seems to be everywhere these days. The misuse of the word "me" instead of "I" aside, is there some new rule I haven't heard of? Shouldn't we put ourselves last regardless of the "me"/"I" usage? Examples of "correct" usage: > My friends and I went for some ice cream. Did you see my friends and me at > the ice cream stand? Examples of "incorrect" usage: > Me and my friends went for some ice cream. Did you see me and my friends at > the ice cream stand? Note: I was also taught that the only person who could put themselves first was the queen.


Is it correct to say "My partner and I"?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  “My friends and I” vs. “My friends and me” vs. “Me and my friends” I'm not sure since sometimes people also say 'My partner and me'


You And I Grammar Rule Question

My Friend recently said in a picture caption, "Officer Smith & I"...but wouldn't it be "Officer Smith & Me", because if Officer Smith would be out of the picture wouldn't you point yourself out in a picture by saying "Me", not "I"?


"He and I", "Him and me"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  “My friends and I” vs. “My friends and me” vs. “Me and my friends” Somebody taught me a rule of thumb how to discern if I should use "I" or "Me" when adding self to the end of a list of people in a sentence: Ignore the list, strip the rest and treat it only as if it was the singular "me", choose one that matches. Still, often I see things like _John and me went to the park_. Is this just a common error or are there some specific rules where _I_ will be replaced by _me_ if appearing on a list?


Older than me (or I)?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  I can run faster than **_**. (1) him (2) he? Is it correct to say, "She's older than me" or "She's older than I?" I almost always hear people say the former (me). If I remember correctly my grade school grammar, though, the test to apply is to say the sentence out in full: "She's older than I (am old)." In that case, the subject form I seems to be correct. I've often wondered and would appreciate a definitive answer.


"Than I" or "Than Myself"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  I can run faster than **_**. (1) him (2) he? Which is grammatically correct? > My friends seem to be having more fun than _I, Me, Myself, and Them_ Also, > Good people are always ready to help those who are not as fortunate as > _Theirs, Them, They, Us_


"You and I" versus "you and me"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Which is correct, "you and I" or "you and me"? I was surprised to hear "you and I," when I expected "you and me." Are the two expressions synonyms to each other?


John, Valencia, and I (or me)?

> **Possible Duplicates:**   >  Should I Put Myself Last ("me and you" vs "you and me")?   >  When do I use "I" instead of "me?"   >  Who wants ice-cream? When identifying people in a photo—for instance, > John, Valencia, and (I or me). should I use ”I” or “me”? Which one is grammatically correct?


"That was me" vs. "That was I"

When telling a story about myself from the past, I have found myself in an internal debate over whether the correct way to segue into the present is: > That was me twelve years ago. Or: > That was I twelve years ago. My instincts tell me the first is correct (object pronoun after a verb and it sounds better to my ears). But, I'm not sure if pronouns after linking verbs should be object pronouns. Which is correct?


Would you say 'yes, neither do I' / 'yes, me neither'?

My question does not have to do with the correctness/incorrectness of 'neither do I'/'me neither', but with the presence of the 'yes' (or 'yeah', which is how it most often 'comes out' for me) at the beginning. If someone were to say: > I love chocolate. I'd naturally answer (orally) one of the two: > Yeah, so do I. / Yeah, me too. But if someone were to say: > I don't like driving. Would it be normal to answer: > Yeah, neither do I. / Yeah, me neither.


"It's me" or "It's I"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Which one is correct to say: "It's me" or "It's I"? Which of these is correct? " _It's me_ " or " _It's I_ ". I hear these both colloquially but need the grammatically correct statement if one is preferable over the other.


Is 'my wife and I' correct English?

Is it proper grammar to write: > Please join my wife and I for coffee... Or is it > me and my wife Or > my wife and me


"X and I" versus "Me and X"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  When do I use "I" instead of "me?" Apparently I use 'Me and xxx' in conversation often enough that a foreign English speaker I work with has started using it as well. When he said it I automatically corrected him. ;) Clearly I've picked this up from somewhere. Does anyone know if it's a regional variation? I do recall a teacher having a go at someone over saying it when I was at school, but he Wasn't From Round Here...


"You and ME" Versus "YOU and I"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Which is correct, "you and I" or "you and me"?   >  "Me and my wife" or "my wife and me" Is this sentence correct "All I need is you and I " ?? since "All I need is I" seems not proper here whereas "All I need is you" does.


Pronoun after verb "to be"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Who wants ice-cream?   >  Which is correct to say: “It's me” or “It's I”?   >  “This is her” or “This is she” I'm reading a book and I found a sentence which made me have some doubts. The sentence is: > That was **him** on the phone. I wonder whether the sentence would be as grammatically correct as 'That was **he** on the phone'. The reason I wonder is because when you answer the phone, for example, you say "yes, this is he" (meaning something like 'Speaking'). So are both grammatically correct? How can I know whether I should use _he/him_ after verb _to be_?


"____ and me" versus "____ and I"

> **Possible Duplicates:**   >  When do I use "I" instead of "me?"   >  Which is correct, "you and I" or "you and me"? While reading an article from a certain newspaper this morning on grammar pet peeves, I noticed one that I had never heard of before, concerning the usage of "me" vs. "I." The examples were something like: "The pool amazed my friend and me"; and "My friend and I were amazed by the fireworks." I have never, ever heard of using " **__ and me," but the writer of this article believes that when using the passive, it should be "__** and me." Is this correct?


Using nominative "I" instead of objective "me" in plural phrases

I hear people saying, "He said it to my wife and I" when they would never say, "He said it to I." Why are people so inconsistent?


"I and someone", "me and someone" or "I and someone we"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  When do I use "I" instead of "me?" A friend of mine asked me for advice about an e-mail he was writing. There was a sentence like this: > I and my partners we are interested in investing in your product. I figured it was wrong, so I suggested: > I and my partners are interested in investing in your product. This looks grammatical to me but sounds strange. Also, I have seen a lot of people writing this: > Me and my partners we are interested in investing in your product. which I believe is not grammatical. So, which one of the options above is correct? Also, what would be a better choice of words?


Use of Me and I

why does this analysis say it is correct to say "me and Bill worked late" and say it is incorrect to say "Bill and I worked late"?


Me and X or X and me?

When should I say, for instance, "Mary and me," and when should I say "Me and Mary?" Example: Which option should I use in the following sentence? > After drinking our tea and saying goodbye to Hank, [...] made out way back > to the hotel.


Using "I" first

I have a friend that says "I and John went to the store" instead of "John and I went to the store". Is this still correct?


Usage of I or me

The use of me and I what it the secret to this struggle. When is it appropriate to use me and when to use I?


Which is correct: "This is her" or "This is she"?

Upon answering the telephone, the person calling asks if Joan is available. If Joan is the person who answered the phone, should she say "This is her" or "This is she"?


What to use - 'I' or 'Me'?

> **Possible Duplicates:**   >  Which is correct, "you and I" or "you and me"?   >  When do I use "I" instead of "me?" Which one of the below sentences is correct? > John and me are working on it. or > John and I are working on it.


What's the correct usage?

Would it be "people like us", or "people like we?" For instance, When we arrived at the party we immediately noticed that there were many people like we/us!


"Me" versus "I"

_He was almost as bad at English as me._ _He was almost as bad at English as I._ The first one sounds better as-is, but not when you change the second one to _He was almost as bad at English as I was._ Which is correct?


Why is it "This is he" rather than "This is him"?

> **Possible Duplicates:**   >  Should I use a nominative or accusative pronoun when making comparisons > (e.g. "I run faster than ___ ")?   >  "Me" versus "I" I've been told that "This is he" or "This is she" is correct, while "This is him" or "This is her" is not. For example: > **Caller:** Hello, may I speak to Bobby Tables? > > **Bobby:** This is he. Likewise, "We are we" is correct, but "We are us" is not. On the other hand, you would say "I told him" or "I hate him" rather than "I told he" or "I hate he". Why are linking(?) verbs and action verbs different in this regard?


English language proper sentence

Which is correct of the following two sentences, one of which contains 'I', the other 'me'. That is the point of the question. In all other respects the sentences are the same. Someone bigger than I will make that decison Someone bigger than me will make that decsion


"...and me" or "me and..."

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  "Me and my wife" or "my wife and me" I keep seeing that it's just courtesy to put yourself last in a list of nouns. eg. "They went to the game with Sally and me" instead of "They went to the game with me and Sally". Is there an official rule somewhere that says this? All i'm finding is people just saying that's the case


"You know more about this than me/I"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  I can run faster than **_**. (1) him (2) he? Which is correct? > You know more about this than **me**. > > You know more about this than **I**. The second sounds unnatural, but I think it is correct because a trailing _know_ is implied.


Is naming the first person last proper grammar or just proper manners?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  “My friends and I” vs. “My friends and me” vs. “Me and my friends” I cringe when someone does not follow the _rule_ of naming the first person last: > Who went to the party?   >  \- Me, Bobby, Sally, and Joe. This is surprisingly common in informal spoken American English. I admit have a strong cultural bias against this practice. My native language is Spanish and listeners in informal situations often reply with _el burro por delante_ ( _the donkey in front_ ) to correct the speaker. Another post (Which of these sentences use the correct grammar?) partially covers this topic but the answers do not conclude whether it is proper grammar or just proper manners.


"like I" or "like me"?

In high school we learned to say "than I" and "as I" because you could potentially add an "am" to the end of the sentence. Examples: "She is smarter than I." (Think: "...than I **am**.")   "He is as tall as I." (Think "...as I **am**.") So analogously, shouldn't it be "like I" as well: "He is sincere, just like I." (Think: "... like I **am**.") But universally, it seems that we use "like me". Where does this reasoning break down? Is there history here?


"I didn't realize it was him."

Overheard on an elevator today, > I didn't realize it was him. Corrected by the know-it-all, > He. "I didn't realize it was he." The know-it-all then went on a rant about how everybody is a dolt for not knowing that. I swear I have never heard this before in my life. Is the know-it-all correct? If so, why is "I didn't realize it was he," grammatically correct? What rule makes "him" incorrect here?


Pronoun Dilemma - "The winners of the contest were Morgan and me / Morgan and I

In the sentence _'The winners of the contest were Morgan and I',_ is 'I' or 'me' correct? I think it should be 'I', because _'Morgan and I were the winners of the contest.'_


Between you and ("me" or "I")?

Is it correct to say "between you and **me** " or "between you and **I** "? I am not a native English speaker, so please bear with me.


"You and I" versus "you and me"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Which is correct, "you and I" or "you and me"? When I was in primary school, I was advised by my English teacher to use "you and I" instead of "you and me." I know some people out there still use "You and me." Can anyone explain why we should use "you and I" and what is wrong with "you and me"?


"Me and my wife" or "my wife and me"

Which is correct: _me and my wife_ or _my wife and me_? The sentence in which this is used is > Ms. Smith informed **me and my wife** that she was afraid of being accosted.


"He is I" vs "He is me"

A while ago I heard a preacher say during a speech the following personal anecdote: > When I arrived at the Atlanta airport, I saw a man with my name written on a > card approach me and say 'are you reverend G…?' And I said 'He is I'… _He is I?_ Is that correct? I guess if we apply the rule “when the pronoun is the subject of a verb” it might be technically correct, but even Shakespeare wrote “Oh, woe is me.…” not “woe is I.” I wonder if the preacher knocked at doors saying “it is I.”


"The new guys are dressed a lot nicer than we/us"

Does anyone know the correct word choice between "we" and "us", and explain the reason why? Thanks!


"I and others" or "me and others"

> **Possible Duplicates:**   >  Which is correct, "you and I" or "you and me"?   >  When do I use "I" instead of "me?" Could you please explain more in an answer, so that **I and other developers** would use benefit. Could you please explain more in an answer, so that **me and other developers** would use benefit. Which one is correct? Why?


Is it "me" or "I" and why?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  When do I use "I" instead of "me?"   >  John, Valencia, and I (or me)? I found a photo of Sarah, Thomas, James and I? OR I found a photo of Sarah, Thomas, James and me? "I" subject pronoun, photo "object", "me" object pronoun - or not as the case may be? I believe it is "me" not "I" but can you provide why this is so in terms of sentence structure. Thank you


When do I use "me" and when "I"?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Should I put myself last? I get this mixed up so often. Should I say: > Me and Rob are going swimming. or > I and Rob are going swimming. I know the latter sounds REALLY awkward and I'd probably never say it that way but > Rob and I are going swimming. sound perfectly fine (confusing because _Rob_ and _I_ aren't grammatically different here). In the original sentence both _I_ and _Rob_ are the subject, so why use the accusative _me_? Also why do we say: > She and Rob are going swimming. but not: > I and Rob are going swimming. ?


Is English changing to make “Jack told Jill and *I* to walk faster” acceptable?

Consider: > Jack told Jill and **I** to walk faster. instead of > Jack told Jill and **me** to walk faster. This “mistake” seems to be becoming more and more common, even among TV newscasters or commentators. Seems as if this is going to be a permanent change in English grammar, adding a complexity: > Jack saw me there. > > Jack saw Jill and I there. Is it?


Use of "me" vs. "I" in comparisons

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  I can run faster than _____. (1) him (2) he? I was using this sentence with an ease until my teacher scolded that this is wrong. He said to use _I_ in place of _me_ as comparison is being done between two subjects. So _me_ is wrong according to him: > He is wiser than **me**. He said to use: > He is wiser than **I**. Which sounds more appropriate?


Why "most of them" and not "most of they"?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  “It is they who lied” or “it is them who lied?” Why does "most of..." take an object pronoun, such as _them_ , and not _they_? Do all prepositional constructs do this?


"I" or "me" in one word question

Which of the two is more correct, when one wants to make sure whether he/she is a subject of the statement (ex. the sentence is addressed at two people, and one of those two people wants to make sure, whether the sentence is addressed at him/her). > You have beautiful eyes. > > Me? or > You have beautiful eyes. > > I?


"Who wants ice-cream?" — Should I say "(not) I" or "(not) me"?

With the enthusiastic question of "Who wants ice-cream?", what is the more correct response? >   1. (Not) I. >   2. (Not) me. > Neither response is a sentence. The first response of "(not) I" sounds stuffy, like it should be followed with an indignant sniff. The second sounds like American idiom and acceptable for casual speech. What do you say?


It is us? It is we?

Which would it be--it is us, or it is we? "Who is the real culprit? It is us, the ignorant, apathetic people of America." Or, "Who is the real culprit? It is we, the ignorant, apathetic people of America." Or plural? "Who are the real culprits? They are us, the ignorant, apathetic people of America." (Sounds more like the name of a retail store--They R Us.)


"I", "me" and "myself"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  "My friends and I" vs. "My friends and me" vs. "Me and my friends"   >  Can “myself” stand for both “me” and “I” in “my mother and I/me”? What is correct? We are a family of four: my father, my mother, my brother and me. or We are a family of four: my father, my mother, my brother and I. or We are a family of four: my father, my mother, my brother and myself.


"Smarter than me" or "smarter than I"?

> **Possible Duplicates:**   >  I can run faster than **_**. (1) him (2) he?   >  “like I” or “like me”? Which of these is correct and why? I always assumed it followed the rule of "which would be correct if you inserted the verb", eg. Smarter than I am vs. Smarter than me am, in which case the former would obviously be correct. But thinking more about it, I'm not sure...


Confusion regarding "I" and "me"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  I can run faster than **_**. (1) him (2) he? Which one is correct? > He is taller than I. He is taller than me.


‘With me being one of them’—grammatically correct?

Would the phrase 'With me being one of them' be grammatically correct? Sounds a bit odd in my head and I triple-checked mentally but couldn't tell if it was correct or not. 'With I being one of them' doesn't sound correct either. Has to be 'me' or 'I'. Those two are the only first person pronouns... if I recall correctly.


What is the answer to the question "Who came yesterday?" — "I" or "Me"?

> **Duplicate of:**   >  Who wants ice-cream? What is the answer to the question: > Who came yesterday? Is it "I" or "Me"?


Usage of Me or I

This is kind of a basic question, but I would appreciate your input. If you're describing a photo of you and a friend, do you write:               "My friend and I"       or               "My friend and me"      I understand the usage of "I" as a subject and "me" as an object, but what about the above case where there's no verb?


He has more money than [her/she/she does]?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  I can run faster than **_**. (1) him (2) he? What's the right was to say here? > He has more money than **she**. or > He has more money than **her**. or > He has more money than **she does**.


Is it impolite to say "me" first?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Should I put myself last?   >  "Me and my wife" or "my wife and me" Having been raised with German as my first language, my parents took very much care that I would not mention myself fist: If I told them that I did something with my friends - "me, Bob and Andrew" - I was always corrected to say "Bob, Andrew and me" instead. Is there a similar rule or is it perceived to be similarily impolite to mention oneself first in the English language?


can the pronoun I be use alone to answer a question who?

If I am asked, who is going to the wedding? can I just say "I"?


How exactly does one determine when to use I or Me?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Should I say "not I" or "not me"? I got into a good argument with myself when a Lecturer asked: > "Who said that?" and I replied > "I." Actually, I didn't just want to stop there, but I felt there was no need to continue and that it was correct. However some argued that "Me" was the correct reply. Since the reply was not a sentence, it was difficult for me to conclude whether I should refer to an objective _Me_ or a subjective _I_. _So in short_ , I want to know whether there is any other clear parameters that defines when to use which and how?


Choosing between 'I' and 'me'

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Which is correct, "you and I" or "you and me"?   >  Which one is correct to say: "It's me" or "It's I"?   >  "It is they who lied" or "it is them who lied?" Which one is grammatically correct: **It was me who called you.** , or **It was I who called you.**? Similarly, which one is correct among these two: **He and me were going to the forest** , or **He and I were going to the forest**?


Is there a word/expression that would correspond to something like "self-distance"?

In Swedish there is a term called _självdistans_ , which would be directly translated to "self-distance", which means possessing a certain objectivity towards yourself, to be ego-less or not taking yourself too seriously. In other words, it's a quality in a person that would be modest and not too egoistic. Important thing to stress here is that an apparent lack of "self- distance" is a negative thing while too much self-distance can also be seen as a negative trait as it would been that you are actively trying to avoid giving yourself credit for something you have done, or dismiss any praise you might get from others. I am not sure if what I am trying to get at is clear enough or if I should try to explain it better. At any rate, I am trying to find a word or expression to express the same quality but I can't seem to find "self-distance" in any English dictionary. Is there a good, semi-formal word that fits in this context?


Should it be unlike or dislike button in Facebook?

I see an increasing demand for an unlike button in Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Unlike-Button/72641866357 http://www.allfacebook.com/facebook-adds-unlike-2010-05 http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/facebook_unlike_button_comes_to_the_news_feed.php I have always used and understood unlike in the sense of dissimilar. Is it ever used in the sense of do not like?


"Lept" vs. "leapt" vs. "leaped"

After reading this discussion, I'd like to know what example sentences distinguish the meaning of the words _lept_ , _leapt_ , and _leaped_ from each other?


What is the difference between "sheer" and "pure" will(power)?

In English, we use the phrase "sheer force" much more often than "pure force" (Google Ngram). And willpower. _What is the difference, in meaning and usage, between the two (and is there a reason for such a discrepancy in usage)?_ For instance:   * Both "sheer force" and "pure force" are grammatical in the following:     * He overcame his addiction through pure force of will     * He overcame his addiction through sheer force of will   * Both "sheer willpower" and "pure willpower" are grammatical in the following:     * He overcame his addiction through sheer willpower     * He overcame his addiction through pure willpower   * You could also use either in:     * He overcame his addiction through sheer force of habit     * He overcame his addiction through pure force of habit


As fast as Or As fast

> He is as clever if not cleverer than his brother. > > Ranjeet is as fast as or perhaps faster than Rohit. Are both these sentences correct? As per _Wren And Martin High School English Grammar And Composition_ (BY N.D.V. PRASADA RAO S. CHAND), the first sentence is better like this: > He is as clever as his brother, if not cleverer. Or like this: > He is as clever as, if not cleverer than, his brother. (Chapter No-22 Conjunction.Page 255, example: This is as good as that, if not better.) Now in second sentence conjunction OR has been used so can I use the punctuation comma here too? If I can, then how can the 2nd sentence be right?


Priscilla--a girl who prefers to stay home? Who could this term be resultant of?

_From Flappers to Rappers_ , a book of American youth slang, records "Priscilla" as a 1920s slang word for a girl who prefers to stay home. I'm curious to know why they've chosen that name. Is there any historical figure of whom they would have used to regard a Priscilla as one who bides at the house?


Periodical vs Issue?

I found _issues_ were used on some websites like "$1 an issue". (Some magazines.) But I found another word _periodical_ was used on my vocabulary book as follows: > The _periodical_ is published every month. Can I replace the _periodical_ with _issue_ here? Appreciate your comments and replies.


When should I use "hey there" or "hi there"?

I know it's a way of greeting someone, but I am not so sure when should I be using it, and how they differ from "hey" or "hi".


Is "Missus" used as a word in American English?

In the book "Geisha", Liza Dalby writes the following about schools for wearing kimonos (for Japanese people): > The text of one school calls for an elderly lady to wear her kimono "with > dignity"; a middle aged woman, or "missus," to wear it "composedly"; and a > young girl to wear hers "neatly and sprucely". Presumably, the quotations are not verbatim, but English translations that try to capture the flavour of the original Japanese. In the book, Dalby apparently writes in American English (based on her use of "center" and "theater"), albeit in a slightly archaic style. For example, she uses "common whore", and "complaisant". In Australian English, the word "Missus" is used as a slang word in its own right, as opposed to it being just a pronunciation of "Mrs.". For example: > Harry said he couldn't stop and chat because his missus wanted to go > shopping. (By contrast, you can't say "the mister wanted to go to the hardware store" in Australian English) Is "Missus" used as a word in its own right in American English? Google NGrams says that the frequency of "Missus" is reasonably similar in American and British English, which would suggest it is not particular to Australia and New Zealand, whereas the second most upvoted entry on Urban Dictionary says that it is Australian and New Zealand English.


Is the "really" in "I don't really know" necessary?

I know that one can have a greater or lesser amount of surety (i.e. "I'm not really sure"), but don't you either know or not know something? Are there degrees of knowledge? I hear this phrase often from reporters and news correspondents: "We don't really know..." I think that this is a way to avoid saying "We don't know", which sounds more blunt, but is more precise.


does "fey-lit" make sense?

I want to say a strangely-lit grove, eerily-lit in an out-of-this-world manner. Does "fey-lit" convey that meaning?


single word for 'Hospital' and 'Clinic'

I am developing a software that requires users to enter hospital or clinic name. The software treats clinics and hospitals the same way. I wanted to know a _single_ word that can be used for any medical institution. Example use cases: In forms: > Hospital/clinic name: **___ __ ___ __ ___ ____** In URL: > http://website.com/hospital/search While I can use something like "Medical Facility" as blanket term for clinic, hospital, trauma center, nursing home, etc... I do not like it because:   1. it's big.   2. it has two words so URLs wouldn't look great `http://website.com/medical_facility/search`. Thanks. By the way, 'no' is perfectly OK answer.


General Party Secretary of the CCP, Xi Jinping, called for the revival of the Chinese spirit

> General Party Secretary of the CCP, Xi Jinping, called for the revival of > the Chinese spirit. I think it's ungrammatical, and _the_ is required before _general_ , or the commas must be omitted. Do experts here agree?


Some people are not determined to win

Does it mean   1. He doesn't have a strong will to win   2. Gods do not decide that he should win Bonus: How those 2 meaning of determined related? One means strong will, another means predestination.


What are the most well-understood vocal animal languages?

Just as the Bee dance, for a "language", I mean that there are vocal pattens. In the nature, there are many intelligent animals like human beings. Bird songs, whale songs, dogs? In fact, bird vocalization includes both bird calls and bird songs. There are Parrots, hummingbirds and songbirds,... I wish to know the most well-understood vocal animal languages. Which species?


"Suspect" versus "Suspicious" as Adjectives

A recent question on this site ("to suspect" vs "to be suspicious of") asks about the difference between "to suspect" and "to be suspicious of." An even more complicated situation involves when to use _suspect_ as an adjective (as in "suspect reasoning" or "a suspect classification") and when to use _suspicious_ (as in "suspicious thoughts" or "a suspicious detective"). Is there a general rule about when to use one adjective or the other? Are they always interchangeable? A somewhat similar question comes up in an older query titled "that things were suspicious". In this connection I note Wilson Follett's comment (under **transitive/intransitive** ) in _Modern American Usage_ (1966): "Thus, _suspicious_ should designate the persons harboring a suspicion and _suspect_ the person who is the object of it. From this it follows that one cannot be _seen carrying a suitcase in a suspicious manner_." Presumably, Follett wants the author to use "in a suspect manner" here. Follett's analysis is clearly prescriptive and just as clearly ignores centuries of frequent contrary usage; but is there any validity to his prescription as a way for writers to avoid possible ambiguity, as in the case of "suspicious behavior" versus "suspect behavior"?


"By when you want it completed" vs. "when you want it completed by"

Which of the following is grammatical? >   1. Can you please let me know by when you want it completed. >   2. Can you please let me know when you want it completed by. > I am preferring the latter, but will really appreciate your professional advice.


Does this sentence have two different possible meanings?

I'm not a native English speaker and when I read the following sentence (which is taken from a roleplaying manual) I find it to be very confusing because of two possible meanings. > Any "shaken" opponent hit by you is "flat-footed" to your attacks. This is not exactly the original text: I've removed complicated concepts specific to the game like when the attack should be done or how long the flat- footed condition lasts and I've replaced a list of possible conditions with shaken - I want to ask about the structure of the sentence, not the game (I already have asked about it at RPG.SE and I discovered mt problem is not in the rules but in the language).   It's also very important to understand that _shaken_ and _flat-footed_ are different conditions in the game. So, I initially read that as   "Any opponent that is shaken and I have hit is now flat-footed"   (While the opponent I have hit is shaken, it's also flat-footed) The vast majority of people reads that as   "Any opponent you hit while it was shaken"   (If I have hit the hopponent while it was shaken, now it's flat-footed)   ...and I see that their option is valid too. I think it's a sentence parsing problem with the two options being equivalent to:   1. Any shaken **opponent** hit by you is flat-footed to your attacks.   2. Any **shaken opponent** hit by you is flat-footed to your attacks. Where the subject of the sentence is bolded Someone also tells me my interpretation is _not a viable choice_ or _not how it works_ , and I'd like to know if they are right. Is my vision plain wrong because of some English sentence structure rule I'm not aware of?


Is this sentence correct, are there any better ways to phrase this sentence?

I'm trying to say that many people are doing the same thing -- when I did it, I was viewed differently. But the sentence sounds a bit dull, I'd like other ways to phrase this or suggestions. > While I told my speech, I had come to the realization that I was being > observed differently than others who were doing the same thing I was.


Which word (adjective or noun) best describes the idea of doing something anywhere, anytime and with anyone?

The ideal word, which can be either an adjective or a noun, should describe (or at least allude to) the idea that doing something _anywhere_ and _anytime_ with _anyone_ , or that something is done anywhere, anytime, by anyone. If no such word exists to satisfy all three above, then a word to satisfy the former two ( _anywhere_ and _anytime_ ) is OK too. **Update:** I agree that some context should be given to better narrow down the choices. I mainly want to describe something (e.g. a service or goods) that would enable people to complete a task or to accomplish some goal anytime and anywhere.


Can "progeny" take the plural form?

> There were things his grandchildren, in turn, should know. Yet he hesitated. > How do you tell your children they are _progenies_ of the self-proclaimed > inventor of Manhattan clam chowder? (The New York Times) Oxford Dictionaries say "progeny" is a noun treated as singular or plural, but on Internet I found a number of occurrences of "progenies" and, hence, a doubt arose to my mind: is it entirely wrong pluralize "progeny"?


What do you call a fraction that cannot be written as a finite decimal?

For example, the fraction ⅓ cannot be written, because it repeats infinitely (0.33333333... etc). Is there a particular word for numbers that cannot be written directly, but must be expressed as fractions?


Difference between "size" and "dimension"

What is the difference between nouns "size" and "dimension". When I want to set dimensions/sizes of an object which noun should I use?


Why are movies so hard to understand (and what can you do about it)?

I have been learning English for many, many years now and think I have acquired quite some mastery. Yesterday I saw just another English (American) flick and thought it was a different language, but definitly not English. I had to turn the (English) subtitles on... :-( Why is it so very hard to understand movies - and do you have a panacea to it?


Punctuation for a compound question

What is the proper punctuation for the following? Have you heard, I like chocolate ice cream (?) (.) Should it be two separate sentences? Have you heard? I like chocolate ice cream. Is there a way to create a compound sentence?


Postpositions in English and "ago"

I was informed earlier today that the word _ago_ is actually a _postposition_ and the only one of its kind in English. Is this correct? If so, why do dictionaries not use this classification and prefer to label it an adverb instead?


"Anyone knows that" vs. "everyone knows that"

The context is as follows. I say that X is true. The (dismissive) response I receive is "Anyone knows that". Is that a complete sentence? Yes, it is grammatical. Yes,it has some semblance of meaning. Firstly: most people wouldn't see a problem — they would interpret _anyone_ as _everyone_ without thinking about it. But, as other discussions in this forum note, _anyone_ and _everyone_ are not precise synonyms. Secondly: by inferring an implied set of people, the sentence "Anyone knows that" makes sense, e.g., "Anyone (you could possibly ask) knows that." I agree that most listeners/readers would make this inference without thinking about it. But note that this interpretation of "Anyone knows that", is only an example. There are other possibilities for implied sets of people. Therefore, it seems to me that if the meaning of _anyone_ is intended to mean all, the sentence is incomplete. What do you think?


A single verb that means two entities mutually supplement one another

I'm about to take a degree in Linguistics and Japanese. I want to explain my thought that linguistics supplements Japanese, and Japanese supplements linguistics. Is there a single verb that implies two entities support each other in this way? "Symbiotic" is a useful adjective, but it's not quite appropriate, because it suggests that the two entities depend on one another for survival. I'm merely trying to express that the two entities enhance or add to one another in some way. I was thinking that a verb like "cosupplement" and "cosupport" would work, but they don't appear to exist as words. > Linguistics and Japanese [mutually add to/supplement] one another. A noun that refers to two entities adding to one another would also work nicely, as in: > Linguistics and Japanese are [mutually supplementary].


Appropriate word for smile

I'm looking for an appropriate word for a certain kind of a smile. > Are you in love with that girl' asked she with a grin on her face. I have used the word _grin_ but I guess _grin_ is a broad smile. The situation here is the girl who is asking the question is in love with the guy. But she hasn't told him yet. She heard from someone that he likes someone else. So the degree of smile is actually a small smile which doesn't reveal much.


"ignorance" can also mean a "willful disregard of something"?

I try to use the 2nd or 3rd definition of words (to slow down speed readers). However, I am not sure if "ignorance" has a 2nd definition. (common meaning) is "a lack of knowledge". With this meaning, no syllable is stressed.   * _My ignorance of hardware means I cannot build my own pc._ (2nd meaning?) If pronounced differently, I think that "ignorance" can also mean "a willful and careless disregard of something". The "nor" syllable in "ig-NOR-ance" must be stressed.   * _The French were aware of the strategic weakness of the Maginot Line, and their ignorance of it enabled the German blitz through the Low Countries_.    * _My ignorance of my girlfriend's hourly text messages quickly caused our break-up._ In a dictionary, "ignorance" is only defined as "lack of knowledge". But, I am not talking about that "ignorance". I am talking about the "ignorance" that is derived from "to ignore" and thus pronounced just like "to ignore", and thus has the meaning of "to ignore". There is precedence for this: "to accept" --- derive ---> "acceptance"   "to ignore" --- derive ---> "ignorance"   .... Anyone agree with me?


What does “rising senior” mean and what countries use it?

I know it is something to do with universities, but as I have never come across the term before today (and have lived in England all my life including going to an English university), I am assuming it is only used by none native English speakers. Senior common room is the common room that cannot be used by students doing their 1st degree, so I assume “rising senior” must in some way be related to students doing a 2nd degree.


How does negation affect the use and understanding of "or" and "and"

I'm trying to make more sense of how negation effects how a sentence is parsed and understood if _and_ 's and _or_ 's are used within them. Pop quiz: You are trapped on a bus with a bomb going 50 MPH. You have a radio... (okay enough Keanu Reeves references) :-) Let's say the bomb expert says "Don't cut the red or green wires." I think that means "Do not cut the wires colored red. Do not cut the wires colored green." Now, let's say the bomb expert said on the radio "Do not cut the red and green wires", instead. Do I take that to mean: > "Do not cut the wires colored red. Do not cut the wires colored green." OR > "Do not cut the wires whose insulation has red and green stripes." ? OR > "It's okay to cut the wires colored red or the wires colored green, as long > I don't cut one of each color." Which meaning should I take if the radio breaks and I can't ask follow up questions?


Please provide me correct interpretation of this sentence

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  How does negation affect the use and understanding of "or" and "and" A's girlfriend doesn't like movies or Roses. What would be the correct interpretation ? Does A's girlfriend not like both, or only one?


To dine somebody?

Here is a line from Sir Walter Scott's journal: > We expect a raid of folks to visit us this morning, whom we must have dined > before our misfortunes. Save time, wine, and money, these misfortunes—and so > far are convenient things. I'm not sure of the whole meaning of the first sentence. Didn't he mean "have dined _with_ " instead of just "have dined"? Surely canibalism is out of the question? I guess Sir Walter Scott is expressing a certain impatience with these folks, and wishing that he was ill so as to avoiding dining with them. And in that case would "whom we will have to dine with before our misfortunes" be more clear?


What is the difference between "risk" and "uncertainty"? In what situation should I use each word?


Please help me by explaining a sentence I don't understand

Please help me to understand an important email which contains this confusing sentence: > It is recommended that you must delete the videos after use, especially > after your sponsorship expires. I have weak knowledge of grammar, so I don't understand whether it is a suggestion or a requirement that I delete the videos after my sponsorship expires, or if it was suggested that I do so because I had asked for permission to keep the video after my sponsorship expires. Thank you.


Is there a proper term to describe 1/3 of a year (4 months)

I am looking for a proper single work term to describe one third of a calendar year. Trimester does not seem correct as it seems to refer to a period of three months (one third of a pregnancy or one third of an academic year).


Is this a positive or negative sentence?

I heard a sentence like this: > _How will Bill ever know that?_ Can someone tell me if this is a positive or negative sentence and what are the guidelines to decide which it is?


Usage of "you is"

So I'm reading a book set in the American South in the beginning of the 1900 and I stumble upon the use of the verb _is_ with _you_ ("you is", "is you?") in conversations: eg. "is you Samson Fuller?". I've heard this in rap songs before, but this usage made me wonder how it came about. Could someone give any insight into this? History, usage today? (The writer also adds an _s_ to some verbs, eg. "I doubts that", "I sees", etc. What's with that?)


What is a good word for filling in the following blank: "Insecurity has a million ways of ______ itself"

I am looking for a better word than "presenting". I cannot remember this word exactly. The word I am trying to remember is frequently used when talking about apparitions or supernatural beings. Like > Amongst the densest of rain clouds a fire breathing dragon _______ itself. The same word could be used here also. This is something I cannot google my way out of.


Is there a name for laughter that happens when you're infuriated?

I listened to the Comcast representative call on soundcloud recently, and although it was infuriating, I couldn't help but start laughing out of sheer disbelief. Other things that seriously aggravate me may lead to me laughing in exasperation, but I don't think of "exasperation" as necessarily including laughter. Is there a word for this kind of laughter, or for anger that is so intense that it causes laughter?


Until + tense / "since" or "for"

Is any of these sentences correct? >   1. Until I played again 2 months ago, I had not played to this game for 5 > years. >   2. Until I played again 2 months ago, I had not played to this game since > 5 years. >   3. Until I played again 2 months ago, I had not played this game for 5 > years. >   4. Until I played again 2 months ago, I had not played this game since 5 > years. > And can I just say, "until 2 months ago" instead of "until I played again 2 months ago"?


Is “Songify” a well-received word as an English neology?

I came across the word “ _songify_ ” for the first time in the article of October 23 NY Times titled ‘Yes We Chant’ with the sub-head, “The Gregory Brothers songify the debate, with Gregorian chanting.” The article is accompanied with a video, in which CBC’s Bob Schieffer as the moderator of this Monday’s Presidential debate, President Obama and Gov. Mitt Romney all “songify” clips of their statements. The text reads: > “Our only remaining option was to _songify_ the whole thing ourselves, to > imagine the parallel universe where Gregorian chanting monks shepherded the > candidates through the debate as Bob Schieffer dropped verse after verse. We > hope that whoever wins this blasted election will be kind enough to sing his > acceptance speech.” Although www.definition of net. defines “Songify” as “1. to make stuff into a song. 2. to make a song out of stuff that wasn't originally intended to be a song, none of credible English dictionaries including Oxford, Cambridge, and Merriam-Webster registers “songify.” As there is no instance of this word in GoogleNgram viewer either, we cannot tell since when and how the word “ _Songify_ ” came into currency. Is “ _Songify_ ” a well-received word in modern or American English? Or is it just a wild and ephemeral journalism neology? Is it possible to say, or coin “Musicify,” "Medlefy,” “Lyricify” and “Poemify” likewise?


Will (for certainty) and Going to (for evidence)

According to my grammar, when we talk about predictions, "will" can be used when we are certain something is going to happen and "going to" for evidences. I think that when we are talking about evidences, we are certain something is going to happen. Am I not right? When the forecasters forecast the weather, I believe they use "will". Well, they are almost 100 sure and they say this because they have some evidence about this because of the satellites and stuff. So why not "going to"? When I am 100 % sure about predictions, I use "going to" and when about true facts I use will. > Look at the sky. It looks as if it's going to rain. > > His birthday will fall on August 12th.


"You are going to want to" vs "You will want to"

So I was going to say something the other day like "After eating this, you are going to want to go there." I wanted to express that after eating that, the person would end up with a wish about going to some place. It's taken out of context, it could be a restaurant or so here.   1. Is this a correct/good way of saying this? What gave me some doubts is that it was kind of a messy sentence to say. It has two "go" in it and everything.   2. Is perhaps the formulation "After eating this, you will want to go to there" better? As I understood from the thread below though, "you will want to" is more intended for instructions. So how would this fit here? What does "you will want to" mean?     1. Is this thing expressed differently in different regions? The other day was one of the first day of my life that I spent in an English speaking country, so I realized that I've got to step up my game a few notches :)


Without, free from, lacking, etc.: Unambiguous total negation with "OR"?

In the following, “does not cause” seems to be clear negation, and total negation requires “or”, therefore: > The widget does not cause deformities or cracks However, it is unclear to me whether the following types of words and phrases are strong enough in negation to enable an “or” to clearly express total negation. For example: > The widget leaves a product: > > _without_ X or Y   >  _free from_ X or Y   >  _lacking_ X or Y Questions:   1. Would, for example, “. . . without X or Y” above unambiguously mean “having no X and having no Y”?   2. What is the term for this class of words and phrases and are there other common members of the group?


commas in "They are sweet, not sour, grapes"

In the sentence "They are sweet, not sour, grapes.", is the second comma correct, incorrect, or optional?


How are these two sentences connected?

I have a doubt about this sentence: > They stood in the streetlight through the kitchen window there’d never been > much point putting curtains over The sentence is taken from a book, so it should be correct as it is. It sounds strange to me, because it seems that something is missing between "window" and "there'd", like "where" or something. Is it normal or is something actually omitted on purpose?


Single word or short phrase for giving a passing mark?

> I thanked my teacher for **giving me a pass mark** in the exam. Is there a single word or short phrase for the emphasised phrase?


backquote vs backtick

What is the difference between **backquote** and **backtick** . Really, i search on this issue . And it seems that are the same . # ` If so , Is it a synonyms ?


Common expression for request and order

We are designing an automated ordering system which concerns itself mainly with two entities:   * Requests, which express the need of a customer to place an order in the near future   * Orders, which are sent to third-party suppliers What noun embraces both Requests and Orders, i.e. a substitute for X in the following sentences?   * A request is an X   * An order is an X Ideally, X is a term that is 'natural' within the commodity domain. If possible, the fact that an item is being shipped as a consequence of X being processed should be evident.


Which person do I have to use when I use parenthesis

> You (or someone else responsible) have/has to be there tomorrow. Which person should I use? 2nd or 3rd? My opinion is that both should be correct, but I'd like this to be clarified. How about if there is no parenthesis? > Either my team or you have/has to be there tomorrow.   >  Either you or my team have/has to be there tomorrow.


What is the difference?

Hello I was wondering what the difference was between these: >   * I was having the man leave. >   * I was having the man leaving. >   * I had the man leaving. >   * I had the man leave. > are some of these even correct? and what about these ones: >   * The book had me getting bored. >   * The book had me get bored. >   * The book had me bored. > _Getting_ here is intended to be used instead of _becoming_ as in entering the state of, but I'm not sure if this usage makes any sense given the numerous purposes of the verb have. Thank you in advance.


Sounds of the letter a

How can I know, precisely, when to differentiate the sounds of the letter a, like in: _apple_ and _vault_?


is "keeps wanting to X" correct?

My wife, who teaches English to Spanish language students, but is not a native speaker insists that this sentence is wrong: My phone keeps wanting to switch to Spanish. She states the verb form of want here (with ing) must be intransitive and thus can't take an object. I can't help but think on this one she has the unusual distinction of being wrong, but she is alas usually right. So I turn to you fine folks for arbitrators: who is right and why? ;)


What's a word that can be used when something, such as a document, is purposely bland?

The word may also be used when referring to really dull signage for a government organization.


Using -ed vs. -ing in the "needs washed" construction

I'm from Central Pennsylvania, and apparently, we have a strange language construct in this area. I was recently talking about how "my car needs washed" to a friend from NJ, and she told me that my sentence was grammatically incorrect. I realize she's right, and I realize my options are "my car needs _to be_ washed" or "my car needs wash _ing_ ". But I'm not clear on the precise rule being invoked.


"Needs to be repaired" vs. "needs repairing"

Is there any difference in meaning between the following two sentences? >   1. My car needs to be repaired. >   2. My car needs reparing. >


Are "revisited" and "revisiting" temporally different?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Using -ed vs. -ing in the "needs washed" construction I used "revisited" in a sentence not unlike this: > In the past we decided policy X should be applied to certain types of users. > > I wonder if this needs **revisited**? The word **revisited** was corrected to **revisiting** : > I wonder if this needs **revisiting**? I then did a search to find out what the difference in usage between the two words are and found these examples: ### Revisited   * _Revisited_ at a future meeting.   * _Revisited_ regularly through out the school year.   * _Revisited_ in the future. ### Revisiting   * _Revisiting_ the dream.   * _Revisiting_ the treaty at such length, but will instead give a useful overview of its contents.   * Tired of constantly _revisiting_ sites to check for new articles? Is **revisited** used when it's something you do in the future, but **revisiting** is something you are doing at a current or past point of time? I felt the original usage was fine because I didn't expect the "revisit" to happen immediately? For clarity, I am a British English _user_ (Scottish to be more precise).


Central Pennsylvanian English speakers: what are the limitations on the "needs washed" construction?

In the Central Pennsylvania dialect of English (and possibly elsewhere), the following construction is possible: >   * This car needs washed. (=needs to be washed) >   * The room needs cleaned. (=needs to be cleaned) > It appears that, if a verb like _needs_ is followed by a passive construction in the infinitive, the "to be" portion is left out. This construction sounds so unnatural to my ear that I have no intuition as to the extent to which it can be extended to other words and contexts. If anyone here is a native speaker of this dialect of English, perhaps they can help to explain the limits on its use. My basic question is: how productive is this particular construction among those who use it? To be more specific, can this construction be used with any verb (if that verb can be immediately followed by a passive construction, of course)? That is, would (any of) the following be acceptable, for example? >   * At this restaurant, we always wait seated. (=wait to be seated) >   * My kid hates picked last in sports. (=hates to be picked) >   * We all want loved. (=want to be loved) > If this construction is restricted, then which verbs can be used, aside from _need_? **Edit** : What I am really hoping for here is that there is someone who happens across this question that can say, "I actively use this construction, and here's what I can and can't say."


How can I explain what is wrong with the sentence "She is having difficulty to shop"?

It should be, I believe "She is having difficulty shopping." But I am not sure how I can explain to someone who is a non-native English speaker why the form "She is having difficulty to shop" is not correct but "She is having difficulty shopping" is okay.


When should a verb be followed by a gerund instead of an infinitive?

Some verbs are followed by _ing_ , e.g. _I enjoy swimming_. We can't say _I enjoy to swim_. Likewise, some verbs are followed by _to_ , e.g. _I decided to make a plan_. Which particular verbs are followed by _ing_ and _to_? Can you please provide a list for that? Moreover, which verbs can be followed by both without having the meaning changed?


Unusual sentence construction

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Using -ed vs. -ing in the "needs washed" construction "The car needs washed." I can understand what the speaker means to say, but this is strange to me. My question: If this sentence claims there is no ellipsis, and that it is perfectly acceptable, how to understand the grammar? Or is it some kind of usage?


Is "Needs fixed' valid usage?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Central Pennsylvanian English speakers: what are the limitations on the > "needs washed" construction?   >  Using -ed vs. -ing in the "needs washed" construction I've noticed in forums and advertisements a surge in the use of this mixed tense phrase. I would never say this- I would write "needs to be fixed" or "needs fixing". Is this a local usage that has gone worldwide recently? I'm not one to be very strict about colloquial English, but this one is grating to me. Edit: For many, many examples, try this Google Search: http://www.google.com/search?q=forum+"needs+fixed"


The barn needs painted

I was raised in California, the son of an English teacher, but when I moved to Indiana, I discovered an idiom that I haven't heard elsewhere. The idiom is to use the past participle form of a verb as a direct object to the word "needs" when referring to something that should happen to another thing. Examples:   * The barn needs painted.   * The car needs washed.   * The child needs spanked. I am assuming this usage came about either by eliding the "to be" of the infinite phrase, or by somehow confusing the present participle which is often used as a gerund with the past participle which never is. My question is two-fold:   * Have any of you ever run across this syntax?   * Is there something I'm missing that could make this syntax grammatically correct?


"needs closed" and "needing closed"

"Needs closed", "needs resolved", "needs done"... I have never seen this before and it sounds totally incorrect, grammatically speaking. However, I have been hearing this so often, at work and even in written work documentation, that I am starting to doubt that I am right about this not being correct. Could anyone please help with that? Thank you.


"... need XXX-ing" vs. "... need to be XXX-ed"

What is the difference between these two expressions? >   1. Your hair needs brushing. >   2. Your hair needs to be brushed. >


"In accepting" vs. "to accept"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  When should a verb be followed by a gerund instead of an infinitive? > Part of the reluctance **in accepting/to accept** social arguments about > human nature lies in the fear that many scientist have, of falling into the > Cartesian pit. I'm not able to differentiate between these two choices. Both sound Okay according to my understanding. Is latter one more apt in usage?


"Prefer to do something" vs. "prefer doing something"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  When should a verb be followed by a gerund instead of an infinitive? What's the difference between the two: >   * What materials do they prefer working with? >   * What materials do they prefer to work with? >


"Recommend to have" vs. "recommend having"

I am writing my bachelor dissertation and several times Microsoft Word has corrected me from "to have" to "having". One of the sentences, for instance, goes like this: > The author recommends **to have** ‘(...)'. Bugeja further recommends > **having** a student blog where prospective... Can anyone enlighten me?


Is it wrong to say "I enjoy to see the butterflies around the flowers."?

Do I have to say always "I enjoy seeing"?


Which one is right: "allows to acquire" or "allows acquiring"?

Which version of the following sentence is correct/better? > "In particular, it **allows to acquire** a signal using a sample rate > significantly lower than the one dictated by the Nyquist criterion" or > "In particular, it **allows acquiring** a signal using a sample rate > significantly lower than the one dictated by the Nyquist criterion" I searched Google Scholar for "allows to acquire" and "allows acquiring", and it seems people use both more or less with the same frequency.


Omitting "to be"

> **Possible Duplicates:**   >  Central Pennsylvanian English speakers: what are the limitations on the > "needs washed" construction?   >  Using -ed vs. -ing in the "needs washed" construction   >  Should I say “Needs cleaned…” or “Needs to be cleaned…” I have a friend who instead of saying something like > The dishes need to be done will say > The dishes need done He seems to use this form for every sentence that I would say as "[subject] need to be [verb]" (i.e., "the car needs washed", "the dog needs fed", etc.). Is one of these forms "more correct" than the other?


"Needs repairing" vs. "needs to be repaired"

Do the following two sentences mean the same thing? If so, which is more commonly used? >   1. My car needs repairing. >   2. My car needs to be repaired. >


To use "to" or not to?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Gerund or infinitive: When to use which? > You like to read books. > > You like reading books. The second second sentence seems to be better than the first. Why is that? Now consider the following two sentences. > He likes to read books. > > He likes reading books. Here they seem to be equivalent and nothing seems wrong with either of them. Neither seems better than the other? Why does the use of "to" in the first set seem less natural?


"Last straw on camel's back" but positive?

Is there an idiom that is similar in meaning to the last straw that broke the camel's back, except with positive connotations? For eg., how do I idiomatically express that "the My Little Pwny mount was the final factor that helped me decide to install HotS"?


Does "flattered" have a negative meaning in this context?

When I finished my business trip, my customer unexpectedly invited me to his home for dinner. Can I say "I am flattered" to show my unexpectation of their kindness? And what else can I say in this kind of situation?


About the word "perception"

1. Are there any differences in the three words in bold below? > cannot perceive it, out of **perception**. > > cannot feel it, have no **feeling**. > > have no **sense**.   1. the **perception** > With microphones, cameras, accelerometers, compasses, temperature gauges, > and brightness detectors, smartphones have become extra-sensory devices, > able to augment your own **perceptions**. We all know human beings' sensors have limitation. If **perception** means knowing something by the human being's physical sensors, then how can we augment it? It seems impossible. If **perception** means not only by sensors but also by mind (see wikipedia), then could you give me an example ?


"Floating in an asteroid," vs "floating on an asteroid."

> The dog was in space, floating around in/on an asteroid. Is the sentence above ambiguous? I'm not sure but I think it could mean that _the dog was floating on the surface of the asteroid_ and also that _the dog was floating around in space together with the asteroid_ Which one makes the less ambiguous _in_ or _on_? (I'm also open to other suggestions).


Build a house, plant a tree, father a son

What is the origin of the phrase (and the principle) "build a house/home, plant a tree, father/raise a son/child" and its derivation (perhaps) "write a book, plant..."?


Hypernym for the products from trees

I want to know a hypernym I can use to call products from trees. For example, mangoes, coconuts, oranges, bananas. I want to use this word in a context like below sentences. >   1. Mangoes are .... of mango trees. >   2. Bananas are .... of banana trees. >


Which is preferable: "We are all" or "we all are"

1. "We are all mad."   2. "We all are mad." I think each of these conveys the same idea. Besides this, we can use "we are all" alone. I hear the first one more frequently. Does the second one sound worse to a native speaker? I wonder about this. _Note: I'm not a native speaker. Please tell me if you think this question shouldn't be here. If appropriate, I can delete this right away. Thanks._


Why doesn't the prefix "in" in "invaluable" mean "un-" as in other adjectives?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Where did prefix exceptions originate?   * efficient   * accessible   * consistent   * articulate   * considerate   * conceivable   * convenient   * inefficient   * inaccessible   * inconsistent   * inarticulate   * inconsiderate   * inconceivable   * inconvenient However _valuable_ to _invaluable_ sits alone, like a trap, not merely an inconvenient irregularity but seemingly almost inconceivable that it's not a deliberate inconsistency, causing an inconsiderate degree of inaccessibility for the inarticulate. So English is even more inefficient and inaccessible than it would otherwise be. Or is there a logical reason why _invaluable_ doesn't mean _unvaluable_?


Official/legal address

In Russia and the former Soviet Union there is such thing as propiska/registration - an official address of a person where he is entitled to live. It may be a place owned by that person or the place where he/she is included in a rental contract. I wonder to you in English-speaking countries have a legal address (for example for the purposes of tax collection) and how is it called? If you rent a flat from the government (does it happen in your country?) how do you call the right to use this flat?


In a written work, is it better to reference people by their first or last name?

In a work, when you introduce someone by their full name and later refer to them in a context which is not appropriate for a pronoun, do you use their first or last name? Example: "Eli Whitney is credited with inventing the concept of interchangeable parts. [...] Out of this contract, **(Eli or Whitney)** developed a sample of guns which he then presented to the United States Congress"


“In” or “of” for a location?

Would I say “Human Services _in_ New York” or “Human Services _of_ New York” if the Human Services serves and is located in New York but is not actually owned or governed by New York?


What do you say when you wish someone to do well the next time they run?

A friend of mine was leaving to start running as an exercise and I said "Have a good run!". Then I found out it is an idiom with a different meaning. What is the right thing to say in that case?


Idiomatic saying for "just over" and "just under"

Is there an idiomatic saying to say that a distance is _about_ x kilometer, including the connotation of " _a little bit more than_ " or " _a little bit less than_ " as " _just over_ " and " _just under_ " respectively denotes. > The village is located __ 30 km to the south of London. * * * Clarification: I'm not looking for one word that is saying both (like around, approximately, etc.), but for two different (opposite) words with the connotation of either "just over" or "just under".


Should taxonomy terms such as Crustacea be capitalized? I think yes, but am unsure.


Can you say "see you then/there" when arranging a meeting?

I am sending an e-mail to a colleague to arrange a meeting. In my e-mail I inform her where and when we can meet, and I would like to end the e-mail by saying something like "See you there" or "See you then". But is this correct or am I translating too literally? If it's incorrect, what alternative phrase could I use?


What is the difference between "utter" and "speak"?

E.g. >   * speak vehemently >   * utter vehemently > When should one use _speak_ and when _utter_?


Job Description on CV

I want to write a title (e.g. "Math Teacher") and one short sentence (e.g. "High School teacher at Kellog's school of Wizards") on my CV that describes the job I had during a summer. The company I worked for had the following business idea:   1. Get people to signup with their names and addresses   2. Take these names to a public bid between companies that provides energy & electricity.   3. The companies fight on who gets the customers - the one with the lowest prize wins. My job was to _call_ the people who had signed up for the email newsletter, and convince them to _signup for an auction_. I thought my title should be "Telemarketer" or "Energy Telemarketer". The sentence: I don't know.


When should I use "see" vs. "refer"?

I have this question on using _see_ and _refer_ in technical documentation especially for cross-references information. I use _see_ when mentioning another section in the same document, for example, _for more information on xyz, see section abc on page nn-mm_. I use _refer_ when asking the reader to see an external document or any appendices, for example, _for more information on xyz, refer to the ABC Guide_ or _for more information, refer to Appendix A_. My colleagues and I have a disagreement with this logic. They seem to prefer _see_ for everything. As a cross-reference is more like a footnote and also acts like a footnote. Is my logic correct?


Is there a collective term to describe "coffee" and "tea"?

Any term to describe both of them — coffee and tea collectively? I wanted to call it _beverages_ but that also includes drinks outside coffee and tea. Also, I could call it _hot drinks_ but that would also include any hot beverages. Any ideas to call both of them collectively?


Beg to differ - Why is there a need to beg for differ

Wouldn't 'Wish to differ' be better than 'Beg to differ'? A friend of mine asked me why I like to 'beg to differ', instead of 'wish to differ' or 'want to differ'. Any insight on the history of 'Beg to differ'? I know that 'Beg to differ' looks more polite but another friend told me that it is over-polite, so would 'Wish to differ' be a better choice?


"Second lady" vs "vice first lady"

The president's wife is often referred to as " _the first lady_ ". What would be the wife of the **vice** president be called (if one had to follow the systematics here)?   1. the first vice lady   2. the second lady   3. the vice first lady Or maybe something totally different?


Is 'so I did', and other like expressions, at the end of a sentence good English?

In Northern Ireland people will say 'He went to Bohemia on holiday, so he did', or 'I need to do some shopping, so I do'. Is this correct English?


What's a good replacement to "cookbook" as referring to general-purpose manual-like computer books?

O'Reilly published a series of "cookbooks" which are general-purpose manual- like computer books that usually have wide but shallow coverage of a topic. What's a good word that's less rhetorical than "cookbook" but has a similar connotation?


Can we call a person who loses things a "loser"?

> Think > Thinker   >  Draw > Drawer Can we call a person who loses thing a _loser_? Of course, I do not mean that they are not successful or failed but what should I call them?


"The" usage on a subjectively modified known location

In the following sentence, > It was great meeting you at X-Event in [the] beautiful Monterey Bay. is [the] required by grammar, or is it optional? It sounds more fluid and poetic without it but since Monterey Bay is a known location does it require the? On the other hand the refers to 'beautiful Monterey Bay' which is not directly the location but it is subjectively modified by beautiful.


Opposite of "client"?

Is there an antonym of _client_ for the following context? > The [?] performs services for his clients. Usually one would just specify the profession or job title: > The contractor does home improvement for his clients. But is there a term that is as generic as _client_? I thought of _professional_ , but that obviously implies they are practicing a profession, which they might not be.


Why "lemon" for a faulty or defective item?

Related questions:   * What does "lemon on" mean in this context?   * What is the origin of the phrase "when life gives you lemons, make lemonade"? In the above questions, "lemon" is used to mean a faulty or defective item. A typical use might be to describe a second hand car that, once bought, turns out to have serious faults, as a "lemon". Why is the delicious fruit associated with faulty goods? Etymonline says:   * perhaps via criminal slang sense of "a person who is a loser, a simpleton," which is perhaps from the notion of someone a sharper can "suck the juice out of."    * A pool hall hustle was called a lemon game (1908);    * while to hand someone a lemon was British slang (1906) for "to pass off a sub-standard article as a good one."    * Or it simply may be a metaphor for something which "leaves a bad taste in one's mouth." But none of these rings true for me, and words like "may be" and "perhaps" show a lack of confidence. Can anyone shed more light?


"Thus" vs. "so" in formal English

> Currently there are about 4000 international students from 110 different > nations across the world, **thus/so** the university offers perfect > conditions for socializing and making new friends. Is this sentence correct formal English? I don't know if I can use "thus" here, or if I should use "so" instead. Or is it better to rephrase as follows? > With about 4000 international students from 110 different nations across the > world, the uni offers perfect conditions for socializing and making new > friends. In German we would write the latter, but is it possible to use "with" this way in English?


Is there a noun-form of the word 'intrinsic'? If so, what is it? Intrinsicity? I suppose I could say 'the intrinsic nature of...', but it makes grammar awkward when there are multiple subjects to your sentence, eg: "In regards to your belief in the intrinsic nature of the insult which lies in calling someone a **___ __ ___** , I'd argue that..."


Is there a difference between "assistant manager" and "manager assistant"?

Would a switch of the word 'assistant' and 'manager' cause differences in a universal corporate context? In my opinion, _assistant manager_ is just a rank below a _manager_. This seems to apply to _manager assistant_.


'is' or 'are' in lists of counted nouns

Which of the following is correct?   Does the is/are depend on the total number of things in the list, or only on the thing immediately following the is/are? > There is 1 apple and 1 orange available.   >  There are 1 apple and 1 orange available. Also, would it make a difference if one would put the is/are near the end, like so? > 1 apple and 1 orange is available.   >  1 apple and 1 orange are available.


There is vs There are

I'm aware of (multitudinous) related, similar questions concerning this, but I still feel tentative for the following example. I also referenced http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/oddness-when-you-start-a- sentence-with-there-is?page=1. Predicated on these, I'd guess that > "there are happiness and joy" is correct,   >  and "there is happiness and joy" is wrong. Here, there is (I know why it's NOT there are here) a compound subject containing two nouns, thus the verb must be conjugated for a plural subject.   Yet Google Ngram contradicts this significantly? Why? I fear that I misconstrued something?


would I use is or are in the following sentence

As of this report, there are/is confirmed cases in the county and city 1, but not city 2.


uncountable noun + and + uncountable noun

Which sounds better?   * _There_ **_is_** _water and butter in my fridge._   * _There_ **_are_** _water and butter in my fridge._ I think it should be: **_is_**. But what if we said:   * _How much flour and butter_ **_is_** _needed to make a pizza?_   * _How much flour and butter_ **_are_** _needed to make a pizza?_ In that case, I think the plural verb: **_are_** , is the correct choice, which means (I think) there is a contradiction between both sentences.


Singular or plural in these sentences . .

I've often written sentences like these:   1. The structure and linearity here **is** [are?]what is [are?] stifling creativity.   2. Compare: The pencil and pen **are** in the room. [Where is seems wrong]   3. The project is based on chapter information and book category, which **is** [are?] useless when guiding you toward the actual objectives.   4. There **is** [are?] a table and chair in the room.   5. Compare: A table and chair _are_ in the room Is the **is** appropriate in these sentences? Especially the first one; I don't quite get the rules at play here, so am only going by what sounds right.


Singular or plural following a list of singular items

Here's the sentence: > I know what if, him, his, and will means/mean.


Use of the singular or plural "is" or "are" in ambiguous situations

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  [Singular] Is/Are [Plural]? In this sentence: > The only exception are questions that are narrow enough that they can be > reasonably answered definitively with one or two possible solutions. Should it be "The only exception is" because "exception" is singular, or "The only exception are" because "questions" is plural?


"Are" vs. "is" with compound subjects

>   1. How are the wife and kid? >   2. How is the wife and kid? > Which is more correct?


[Singular] Is/Are [Plural]?

1. My fish's native habitat is rice fields.   2. My fish's native habitat are rice fields. I'm pretty sure the first is correct, since 'is' modifies 'habitat,' but it still sounds weird...


Is "Are" always used with plural verbs/nouns?

Examples: > **There's** six seasons, dude. Wouldn't it be: > There're six seasons, dude. We are talking about multiple items; six seasons. If we refer to multiple items, **we should use "Are" in most cases, no?** > There's cats everywhere! > > There's vans chasing us! People often use the contraction "There is", plural or not. Wrong?


"Another category are/is appearance-based methods"

> Another category of vision-based methods for fall detection **are** > appearance-based methods, which can be applied even with a single camera, > but can also benefit from multiple cameras so that they cover larger areas. In the above sentence, is it wrong to use _are_?


Singular or plural following a list

Can anyone tell me if I should use _inspire_ or _inspires_ in this phrase? > An extraordinary leader whose vision, values, integrity and boundless > curiosity inspires all who follow in his footsteps.


Something and something <are> or <is>

For E.g - The Swedish government’s recent efforts and investments in elevating education standards are/is nothing short of commendable. "Are" sounds a bit awkward to me, but it seems to be the correct choice?


"There is" or "there are"?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  "There are so many" vs. "There is so many" I know this is correct: > There's no problem. But what if it was plural, i.e. `problems`? Would this be correct, too: > There **are** no problems. Or should it be: > There **is** no problems. I always wondered about the usage of `there is`.


Is "there're" (similar to "there's") a correct contraction?

> Q: "Do you have any juice?"   >  A: "Yes, **there's** some in the fridge." Sounds perfectly fine to me, but: > Q: "Do you have any towels?"   >  A: "Yes, **there's** some in the closet." Does not. I asked for towels - plural - so wouldn't "Yes, **there're** some in the closet," in which **there are** is turned into a contraction be the correct way to say it? Spellcheck, however, doesn't like "there're", and I think I'm the only person I've ever heard use the word "there're". Even folks who I know say "there are" shorten it to "there's" when possible. Am I saying it wrong, or are both forms acceptable?


Correct use of "is" or "are"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Singular or plural following a list Would I use _is_ or _are_ in the following sentence? > The Pohutakawa Coast, Hauraki Gulf, and Waiheke Island **is/are** the > backdrop for our day. If I rewrote it so the subject (backdrop) starts the sentence, then it seems to me that as it is singular, the verb should be the singular _is_. But as it is written above, _are_ seems less clumsy.


"There is" vs. "there are" when contracted

Unless I am mistaken, when referring to a single thing or entity, one can say `there is` or `there's` (the contraction of the same). When referring to more than one of something, the correct wording is `there are`, however, I am not aware of an actual contraction of the latter, or `there're`. As a native speaker, it seems perfectly fine to hear (and to use) `there's` in place of `there are` (at least for some examples, but I can't think of any that _really_ don't work), but is this a valid grammatical usage? e.g. > There are many ways this can be stated. > > There's many ways this can be stated. Am I wrong in accepting this? Should I try to break myself of this?


"Why are there more of them" vs. "why is there more of them"

I was writing this sentence: > Why are there more of them on some nights than on others? Is _is_ or _are_ correct here? I was told that _is_ is correct, but to me, _are_ sounds better.


A singular verb instead of the plural one

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Is "there're" (similar to "there's") a correct contraction? Why it is that in some cases native speakers use a singular verb instead of the plural? Eg., There's times like.... Here's your shoes...


Using "do" or "does" for two things connected by "and"?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Singular or plural following a list >   1.     * Does your mother and father know about this? >     * Do your mother and father know about this? >   2.     * What does "this" and "that" mean? >     * What do "this" and "that" mean? > Which option is correct? I thought the second one of each example is correct because we are talking about plural things.


Plural contraction in a very specific case: Which is correct?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  "There are so many" vs. "There is so many" I was talking with a friend recently, and to entice him to come to an event with cookies. Which way is correct? "There's cookies" versus "There are cookies"? The former is the equivalent of saying "There is cookies", which is not correct, but I am under the impression the way I said it is still grammatically valid. Is it okay to say "There's cookies"?


"One blue ball and one red ball is" or "are"?

Which is correct? >   * One blue ball and one red ball is preferred. >   * One blue ball and one red ball are preferred. >


Usage of "is" with "and"

I am confused in using this sentence. > "Code in SVN and Test case document **is** updated accordingly." I am thinking of using **are** instead because "Code" here is a set of Source Code files and "Test case document" is a single document file. But **are** would contradict with " _document_ " which is singular. So which form should I use? Any help would be appreciated.


Verb agreement in "Where is the Messiah and his Kingdom?"

> Where is the Messiah and his Kingdom? I think it should be "Where are the Messiah and his kingdom"; it just sounds better! But my friends and even a teacher claim that "is" would be correct.


"There are so many" vs. "There is so many"

> There are so many questions on this website. > > There is so many questions on this website. The former "sounds right," but the contracted form of the latter does as well: > There's so many questions on this website. Which is correct?


There is (are) + countable plural nouns

I keep hearing from native speakers the phrases like these:               There is a lot of cars (books, hotels)     There is a couple of cars (books, hotels)     There is five (ten, etc.) of cars (books, hotels)     There is a few of cars (books, hotels)      Nevertheless, somebody told me that the phrases like above are incorrect for sure and there should be `there are` instead of `there is`. Whom could I believe?


Plural or singular verb with this subject

Funding and financial management sometimes (remains or remain) difficult. Can you please tell me wich one is correct and why?


Having a singular subject and a plural object - which form to choose for the verb?

> **Possible Duplicates:**   >  In special cases, can you use "one such family are" vs. "one such family > is"?   >  [Singular] Is/Are [Plural]? I often encounter sentences like > The best solution _is / are_ implicit parameters. Which form is correct in this case?


In special cases, can you use "one such family are" vs. "one such family is"?

Is it correct to say "one such family are..." as opposed to "one such family is..." in some circumstances? Say, for instance, as used in this article on gene families: > [...] One such family are the genes for human haemoglobin subunits; [...] The problem occurs when the family is a collection of things. It sounds weird if you say "One such family is the genes for human haemoglobin subunits" and saying "One such family is the family of genes for human haemoglobin subunits" is too wordy. Does the problem make sense?


Singular or plural verb with two subjects

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Using “do” or “does” for two things connected by “and”? I'm writing an interrogative sentence questioning someone else's writing: "Is grammar and spelling correct?" Can I use the singular verb "is" or must it be the plural verb "are"? (The sentence is one of a list of interrogative questions about the quality of writing, e.g. "Are words in the right order?" "Does the copy flow?")


Plural vs singular noun

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  [Singular] Is/Are [Plural]? Is the following sentence correct? > This report’s intended audience is the students of the University of Canada. Can I use the verb "is" with a plural noun as the subject complement?


"was" or "were" when there is number mismatch between subject and predicative complement

I have a question about this sentence: > The only thing he feared more than the wolves **were** the swirling > buzzards. I believe it to be correct, but someone suggested that the "were" should be changed to "was". Which one is correct?


Correct use of is/are in a list of pronouns

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Using “are/is” after a list with “and/or” My company's website recently received an E-mail stating there was a grammatical error in our greeting message. The sentence in question is as follows: "If you, a family member, or a friend is physically or mentally disabled, unable to work, and needs help navigating through the Social Security disability system, we are here to help you!" If you were only paying attention to the last item in the list then "is" would be okay, but since it's mixed in with "you" it gets a bit confusing.


Is it: My apples and orange are/is wrong?

Simple question: > My apples and orange **are** wrong or > My apples and orange **is** wrong I am not a native English speaker, and I am having some trouble choosing between plural _are_ or singular _is_ for that kind of example.


Proper usage of "is" and "are" when specifying multiple nouns

This is one thing I never really bothered looking into, but have always been unsure of. > punching, kicking, slapping or slashing [is/are] strictly prohibited That's what I'm trying to determine. Let's say multiple of these specified actions can occur simultaneously. Is it proper to use "is" or "are"? This is going to be used in a short legal notice.


"There is a lot of food and fruit" vs. "there are a lot of food and fruit"

Which of the following sentences is correct: >   1. There is a lot of food and fruit in the supermarket. >   2. There are a lot of food and fruit in the supermarket. >


Does addition of clause change tense

For example, which of the following sentences is correct: Jack, and his partner Jill, **offer** a new perspective on child-rearing. Jack, and his partner Jill, **offers** a new perspective on child-rearing. Does the addition of the clause "and his partner Jill" change the tense of the verb "to offer"? Should I just leave out the commas for clarity?


Here's -- Plurality Question

A phrase I came across tonight was "Here's the good news and the bad news." Trouble is, "Here's" means "Here is", and "is" is meant for one thing, not two things. I'm describing two things. However, "Here are the good news and the bad news" sounds bizarre. What to do?


"The breast, along with the muscles [is/are]"?

> The breast, along with the muscles [is/are] of normal size and shape. Should the verb be _is_ or should the verb be _are_?


The first and most well-known example is/are the reserves in the United States

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  [Singular] Is/Are [Plural]? Should the verb be is or are? I would say 'are', but a colleague says 'is'.


There is/are for multiple subjects

Which one is correct? > There is an apple and an orange.. or > There are an apple and an orange?"


Opening sentence in cover letter?

I am currently writing my cover letter for an application. In the opening sentence I want to put emphasis on the most important fact about my profile: That I am a statistician and that this is my passion. I am applying in the area of financial statistics. I thought about using the classical "I am writing to apply", but instead somehow a punchline, something like:               Statistics and solving quantitatitve problems is my passion. I studied .....      I am not sure about this sentence, first is this a good idea? Second is the "is" correct? Or is an "are" necessary?


When to use 'is' or 'are'?

Which statement is correct? Alcohol, drug abuse and work equipment is a lethal mix. or Alcohol, drug abuse and work equipment are a lethal mix.


there is a lot or there are a lot? over here or at here?

I am an English learner. While I was watching a documentary video, this caption really confused me a lot. Is it correct to say _there is a lot_? I thought it is supposed to be _there are a lot_. Also, what is the difference between _over here_ and _at here_? ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/MnYDs.jpg)


"This date and time is" vs. "this date and time are"

The following sentence appears in a letter I am editing: > If this date and time are not convenient please contact me at ... Structurally, this seems okay, but it feels very awkward. Shouldn't it read: > If this date and time **is** not convenient please contact me at ...


"There were only 4" versus "There was only 4"?

I used the sentence "there **was** only 4 channels on tele" (reminiscing about the good old days before digital TV!), but I wasn't sure if I was right, so tried _were_ instead of _was_. It still doesn't feel right, even though I found an article that stated that, as the subject was plural and came after the verb, it should be _were_ \- but it still doesn't feel right! I've got it in my head that if I had just said _channels_ it would be _were_ , but as I said "only 4 channels" it should be _was_. Should I use _were_ or _was_?


"has" vs "have" usage after enumerating two subjects, the first one in plural

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Singular or plural following a list I'm inclined towards the 2nd sentence, because 1) the first subject is plural and 2) there are two subjects. Sub-question: but what if the first subject would have been singular? > Specifications and game design has already been completed for it. or > Specifications and game design have already been completed for it.


Subject-Verb Agreement - was/were

A bag of carrots and half a tomato "was/were" sitting on the kitchen counter. A bag of carrots and half a tomato **was** sitting on the kitchen counter. Is this correct? I was informed that the main subject is "bag," so I should be using the singular verb. Also, is "of carrots and half a tomato" the prepositional phrase? or is it just "of carrots"? Is this correct as well? Please advise.


When to use is or are in a sentence listing items

search in records where fixtures; oil; gas or minerals; or timber **are** located. or search in records where fixtures; oil; gas or minerals; or timber **is** located.


Is "Here's some tips" correct?

If I say "here's some tips", is that correct? Doesn't sound right to me. I would have thought it should be "here are some tips".


What should be taken into account? The verb or the list?

> Watching Nat Geo, religious rituals on Youtube, and the full series of Saw > back to back _has_ exponentially increased my resilience. Is this sentence correct? I am confused as to whether I should be using has/have here.


Nouns in a series with singular or plural verb?

Which is correct? > Cultivation, possession, and distribution of corn is ... Or > Cultivation, possession, and distribution of corn are ...


Should I say "there is a handful of..." or "there are a handful of...."?

I want to write that I have handful of somethings. Which of these is the correct form?   1. There is a handful of somethings.   2. There are a handful of somethings. Are both correct?


Mixing plural and singular list items with a single verb

A friend wants to write, > There is no hardware to purchase, no additional software to install and no > key fobs to worry about. This is awkward because the verb "is" doesn't match up with the third item, which is plural and demands "There are" as the subject. However, > There is no hardware to purchase, no additional software to install and > there are no key fobs to worry about. sounds awkward as well. Is there a good workaround for this problem where some list items are singular and some are plural, so they don't share a common verb?


I am not sure whether to use **is** or **are** in the following sentence: Climate change and the accompanying sustainability concerns is/are the defining theme(s) of the 21st century.


Subject–verb agreement: "are" versus "is"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Singular or plural following a list   >  My apples and orange are wrong What is correct? >   * Her ripples, her current, her momentum is the fountainhead of science. >   * Her ripples, her current, her momentum are the fountainhead of science. >


Using "are/is" after a list with "and/or"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Singular or plural following a list > James and Mark are going to help you. Here, I use 'are' because the subject is plural. > James or Mark are going to help you. > > James or Mark is going to help you. Here, I’m not sure whether to use 'are' or 'is' because the subject isn't plural(?) It’s one or the other – so does that mean the subject is still plural, and I should use 'are', or is 'is' correct here?


Can a singular or plural verb ("is" or "are") be used when the subject is a coordination?

In the sentence: > _The dimensions and shape **is/are** a little different than the rest._ Should I be using 'is' or 'are', or can either be used?


Which of several or’d-together subjects should the verb agree with?

There are instances when I have difficulties with the agreement between the subject and the predicate. Which of these should I say:   * Neither you nor I **am** to blame    * Neither you nor I **are** to blame.


What are or What is

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Singular or plural following a list Which of the following are correct: >   * What are the primary cause and the primary consequence of the... >   * What is the primary cause and the primary consequence of the... >   * What is the primary cause and what is the primary consequence of the... > Is there a pithy clearly correct alternative?