Word-order of "overall"

Long story short: A player can choose from different items, and wishes to have the best one. Would the player say: > I want to have the overall best item. or > I want to have the best item overall. ?


That's the way it worked

* _Mendoza said that's the way it worked._ In this sentence why are we using _that's_?   Why not _that was_? Wouldn't _that was_ be much better?   To clarify my question, Mendoza originally said   * _"That's the way it works"._


Are brackets greedy?

I have the sentence fragment: > each in itself for achieving this pure abstraction of being-for-itself and I'd like to incorporate it into my paper so that the quotation reads as follows: > They eventually "achieve the pure abstraction of being for itself" I know that brackets go around any modified text, but I'm unclear if they "jump across" word boundaries. Do I render this as: > They eventually "achiev[e the] pure abstraction of..." or > They eventually "achiev[e] [the] pure abstraction of..." I also tend to use "verb[]" to indicate that a suffix has been dropped from a word. Would the usage be the same in that case? Say, for example, I want to make "She was reading the book" into "She read a book." Would this be: > "She read[] [a] book" or > "She read[ a] book" In both cases, the version with two sets of brackets looks awkward to me, but the version with a single set looks like it might be a typographical error. I looked at existing questions about brackets but I couldn't find any relating to brackets that cross word boundaries, I apologize if this is a dupe.


One or more of A, B, C, [and, or, and/or] D?

In the expression "one or more of A, B, C, [and, or, and/or] D," what is the correct conjunction? Examples of all three choices abound with apparently equivalent intended meaning.


The questions of sentences using linking verbs

I understand that the word "look" in "He looks happy." is a linking verb. As "look" here can be replaced by "is" My question is what is the correct question form of this sentence? Does he look happy? or Is he look happy? Thank you.


"I went to bed hungry" vs. "I went to bed hungrily"

What is the exact difference between "I went to bed hungry" and "I went to bed hungrily"?


"Kamarka part" etymology?

I know of some people in south Arkansas and north Louisiana that use this phrase. An example of its use would be when you have almost used up something, you have reached the "kamarka part." I hear it pronounced kah-MARK-ah. I have no idea of the correct spelling or where this comes from and can't seem to find anything about it and would like to know more.


What's the word for a sportsperson who always makes his team win?

For many years I have tried to describe the great cricketer Ian Botham ("Beefy" Botham) to other people in my international language school. I try to think of a word to describe someone who always makes his team win even when other people team are not very good. I want this word to describe "Beefy" or maybe Michael Jordan in basketball, or Ronaldo in football. Can you help me please?


A word for a person who is made a villain by their circumstances, not necessarily by their actions

I was watching the movie _Leon: The Professional_. The protagonist, Leon, is a hitman — not somebody we traditionally sympathize with. The antagonist is a crooked DEA agent, pretty despicable himself. Near the end, Leon is gunning down dozens of DEA agents who've been ordered by the antagonist to kill him. As the viewers, we're supposed to support Leon as he kills cops who have done nothing wrong themselves — they're just following (presumably reasonable, and since Leon is actually a hitman, perhaps _actually_ reasonable) orders. Just because the person giving the order is the villain, they end up dead, merely doing their usually noble job (and honest cops generally have the viewers' sympathy). **I'm asking specifically about the DEA agents here:** Is there a word or a phrase for this situation or literary device — where I'm made to feel that somebody is evil because of their association, where they've done nothing wrong, and they could even be considered the heroes from a different viewpoint? (Say, Leon were the villain and the cops had finally cornered him — I'd feel bad for these cops as they were gunned down). I checked the movie's entry on TVTropes.org and I don't see anything that seems to describe this situation accurately.


Idioms meaning to do something at great cost

What I'm looking for isn't quite the same as a Pyrrhic victory, as the action isn't necessarily done to obtain victory. Rather, it is any action that will ultimately result in the person taking said action to pay great (preferably terrible) cost either along the way or afterward, whether or not they realize it in advance.


quotes and brackets

I'm programming a parser for a new language, and need a word which references all kinds of quotes and brackets: `""` `''` `<>` `()` `[]` `{}` Up to now I always used "quotes and brackets", but is there another, single- term word, that can be used? (Related: Bracket vs brace) **Edit:** The language will be relatively simple. However, it's commands are completly defined by modules, and they decide how delimiters are used. Here's an example:               function "a subFunction"         set background color #FFF              //No semicolons - one command per line         put image "/path/forest.jpg" size [1080px auto] position [0 0]   //square brackets for additional information     end          set background color "black" animation [fadeIn 500ms linear]     <$variable == 42.5> call "a subFunction"   //function is only called, if  the condition is true     sleep 5.6s                                 //dots and commas have no special meaning     set background image /path/img.jpg         //Quotes are always optional


"both of" + possessive, which noun does "both of" refer to?

> Both of the boy's parents were happy with the new school. Is it proper English to say "both of the boy's parents", as in the above sentence, to mean "both parents of the boy"? Or do we have to use the latter? **Background** A similar question appeared on a private advanced-level English test. The task was to spot a mistake in a sentence similar to the above. The correct answer was apparently the place of the apostrophe: in terms of the above example, it should read "both of the boys' parents" (meaning "parents of both boys"), with the argument that, in proper English, "both" can only refer to "boys" in such circumstances. I found this argument a bit shaky though. I am not a native English speaker, but I have studied and spoken it for many years, and the above sentence looks perfectly correct to me. I also could not find any helpful references on the internet that address this scenario.


What does 'are you implying me' mean?

I was showing off for a woman and I told her that I am falling for an older woman. She replied back saying, "Are you implying me?" I am confused about its meaning. What does it mean?


Relationship Literary Term

What is it called in text when a character refers to someone as "son of_____" or "descendant of_____". Like when they refer to a person as the relation to someone else


Why is "distro", rather than "distri", short for "distribution" in Linux world?

Why is _distro_ , rather than _distri_ , short for _distribution_ in Linux world?


Does "renege" have any racial overtones, or is it otherwise offensive?

I used the word "renege" in a meeting the other day (something like, "the vendor decided to renege on their offer of shipping replacement SAN disks"), and got a few wide eyes. My supervisor sat me aside just today and told me that my word choice has racial overtones, especially in mixed company, and that I should avoid using it. I've heard that "niggardly" is somewhat taboo, but should I stop using "renege" as well? Is there a less offensive word I can use?


Does "notified by [date]" include the end date?

I have read the Rules of a competition. The text of the Rules include a sentence as follows: > As per stated in the Rules the entrants will be notified by May 30th 2010. Does the sentence above mean that May 30th is included in the term of notification or not?


Is "do something by date X" inclusive?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Does "notified by [date]" include the end date? For example, if John says: > Return it to me by March 24th. Does it mean that I need to return it to him before 23:59 p.m. March 24th, or before 23:59 p.m. March 23rd?


"Please finish this by May 15" — can I still do it today?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Does "notified by [date]" include the end date? Today is May 15. I have an email in my inbox that says > Please respond by May 15. My question is: what does 'by' mean in this context? Is it synonymous to 'no later than'? Or should I have done this on May 14 at the latest?


Do phrases such as "by tomorrow" or "by Thursday" include the day mentioned?

I wasn't sure how to research this without being able to explain what I mean. When someone says something like "I will have it done by tomorrow", does that phrase mean that they will have it done before tomorrow, or does it mean before tomorrow is over? Also, how would less-defined times be affected by this? For example, "I'll have it done by tonight"...


What does "by spring 2013" imply?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Does “notified by [date]” include the end date?   >  “I will do it by Monday”. Does it mean before the beginning or before the > end of Monday? If something has to be finished " **by spring 2013** ," how long do I have? Does this imply the beginning, or the end of spring?


Meaning of "by" when used with dates - inclusive or exclusive

If, in a contract fr example, the text reads: "X has to finish the work by MM- DD-YYYY", does the "by" include the date or exclude it? In other words, will the work delivered on the specified date violate the contract?


What does "by 30 September" mean?

In the following sentence: "It came into existence on or by 30 September." What does "by 30 September" mean?


Adjective meaning 'using creative prose/being poetic'

Here's the context, somebody has written this: > Quiet workplace... then - all of a sudden, a loud voice; complaints, > criticism, aggressiveness. Everyone's attention is drawn to an argument - > and sometimes the spotlight is on the person being publicly executed. And I want to say something like, 'That paragraph is a bit melodramtic and [uses creative writing for the sake of being entertaining to read], could you edit it to tell us what actually happened?'.


Variations in the pronunciation of “ea”

Perhaps this is more of a Linguistics question, so I apologize if this is not posted in the right place. Why is it that these words in English sound so different?   1. _earth_ = /ɜrθ/ “urth”   2. _hearth_ = /hɑrθ/ “harth”   3. _heart_ = /hɑrt/ “hart”   4. _hear_ = /hir/ “heer”   5. _ear_ = /ir/ “eer”   6. _heath_ = /hiθ/ “heeth” Looking at the first two examples, the only difference is the preceding _h_ , which makes me think that’s the reason for the change. The second and third together sound the same, despite the removal of the trailing _h_ , which supports that — for now. Then the last three examples sound still different from those already mentioned; however, the differences in spelling are not consistent. My assumption is that there is some linguistic property of both the _h_ and the _rt_ , which I will describe like this:   * A trailing _rt_ (not simply _r_ or _t_ ) will have an effect — let’s call it **“Effect A”** — on the sound of _ea_.   * A leading _h_ will have an effect — let’s call it **“Effect B”** — on the sound of _ear_ , but only if already modified by Effect A. If this is more or less correct, what are these two Effects A and B, and what are they called? And if this is not more or less correct, please tell me what is. An alternative thought is that this really has nothing to do with phonology and instead more to do with orthography, and that the difference is just because someone at some point decided to transcribe a given word in one particular way instead of in some other way, such as _through_ vs. _threw_ (or even the non-standard _thru_ ). Any evidence to support either possibility, or supporting some alternative I haven’t thought of here, would be appreciated.


Is there a difference of meaning between "edit" and "modify" in this context?

> Please, do not edit this file. versus > Please, do not modify this file. Is there a difference? Is any of them preferred over the other?


"We choose our partners by..."

I want to say that we (as a company) choose only the best companies to join our partners program and I'm looking for a better way to say it. Something like: > We choose our partners by _____. Any other suggestions would be appreciated.


How can I teach what synonym to use according to context?

I'm a teacher of English as a foreign language, and today I was reviewing some vocabulary from a book with my students. We found "irksome" and "pestering" to refer to something that is annoying. A student asked if there was a way to know when to use "irksome" and when is better to use "pestering". So, it occurred to me that maybe there is a way to know what word is the best fit to a given context, maybe a dictionary or another type of resource.


Reason someone died (illness)

How might one ask the cause of someone's death? Not regarding the verb to die ( it could be sonething like pass away too, I know), but about the structure... Is it correct to ask "What did your mother die of?" or " How did she die" ( meaning why, ex: an accident? An illness? Murdered? Etc). What would be a natural question in American English?


where does the idiom 'driving me mad' come from?

any ideas? It's for use in an English Language class I teach.


Any term pertaining to geography, but not to toponymy?

Can you, please, come up with some term that would be directly related to geography, but would have no relation to toponymy?


Etymology: the wings of a bird

I just read about the symbol of Venice, the winged lion of Venice. As a German the German word die Schwingen for wings came to my mind. English has the word in the verb to swing.The connection between wings and to swing is obvious. By means of its wings a bird can swing up into the air. To my amazement, etymonline does not see the connection of "wing" with "to swing" and German schwingen and the noun die Schwingen. In my view etymonline gets on a wrong track by trying to make a connection with wind. I would like to hear other views.


What's the term describing someone who's obsessed with his/her own face?

I was think of narcissistic but this is a more general term describing someone's self-obsession with various aspects of himself/herself. I was wondering if there's not a more specific term, describing the fact of being self-obsessed with one's own face.


How would I say this sentence correctly?

> After six months of looking for jobs, she got a reply from a job application > she posted online from Macy's asking her to come to a interview. The sentence does not sound right to me, what would be the correct way to say this?


Idiom for saying "You are making someone go mad/angry."

First, a bit of context. Richard Stallman, father of the free software movement, has struggled all his life trying to explain that the "free" in "free software" is a "free" as in "freedom", not as "free beer". Now, let's say someone argues that the main reason for adopting free software is that it has no cost (free beer). How can I tell him that he would make Richard Stallman go mad by saying this? Is there an idiom that could communicate this effectively? (Obviously, this is a language question, not a free software debate.) **Edit** : I just realized that I am looking for a version of "to turn in one's grave" for alive people :)


Why does Hamlet not say, "ere he rots?"

> How long will a man lie i' the earth ere he rot? The quoted line is Hamlet's. I wonder why the "rot" is not "rots".


Is it grammatically sound to group nouns/verbs sharing a preposition that governs the same object using an "and" multiple times in one sentence?

For example, does the below sentence violate any grammar rules? "Global Connections" will be showcasing internship opportunities, job openings and training programs at, challenges and issues facing, and the latest information on 30 leading global businesses. I realize that there may be alternative ("better") ways of phrasing the above but I am not interested in improving this specific sentence; I just want to confirm whether the above structure is generally permissible according to the rules of English grammar. I would like to emphasize that I am not looking to have the above example sentence proofread. I would like to know, first, whether it is acceptable to group nouns sharing a preposition in the fashion that I have and, second, whether it is acceptable to do this multiple times (i.e. for other nouns affiliated with other shared prepositions) in the same sentence. My gut feeling tells me that it constitutes an over-usage of "and" in the same sentence but does not specifically violate any grammar rules. I would like to know for sure whether this is the case or perhaps there exists some grammar rule I am not familiar with.


How do you pronounce the << operator

How do you pronounce the << operator? For example it is used in here.


what does "it's time I told you" mean and why past tense here?

I'm watching Suits TV Series, and there was something that caught my attention. 2 guys meet, have a drink, chat, and then one guy says: > I mean it's time **I told you**. I made a deal with Darby to take over the > firm from Jessica. Why is "told you" in paste tense? What exactly does it mean? He is saying that news right now. If I were to say that, I would say "it's time to tell you" or "it's time I'm gonna tell you". Thanks!


What is a "numeric digit"?

I'm reading a technical documentation so every quirky detail, that a normal human being easily realizes to be a typo or just a less well chosen formulation, can, in fact, be a profound base for a concept and can fundamentally affect the future design. In the said document I can find the term " _numeric digit_ ". What is this? Also, what is it not? In my mind a digit is a character in the set of " _0123456789_ ", while something numeric is a a set of characters consisting of characters in the set of " _0123456789_ " (yes, it's the same set). Perhaps we can define the term in question by exclusion from all the other possible cases' definition. So what would be a good example of the following?   1. a non-numeric digit   2. a numeric non-digit   3. a non-numeric non-digit My guestimation is this.   1. NST, unless we switch the base (which is too mathematical).   2. NST, unless we declare a string of a digit (which is too programmatic).   3. Anything sans digits (which is a superfluous tautology).


How did the word "busybody" end up meaning so different from what it appears on its face to imply?

When I learned the word _busybody_ the first time, I was in 5th grade. It appeared in a story I had to learn for class. I figured it meant someone who was very busy, and didn't bother to look it up. When the teacher asked us if I had looked it up as I was supposed to as part of my homework, I lied and said I did. When I told her I found the meaning "in a dictionary" she asked me to bring her the dictionary. Needless to say, I was a very embarrassed 5th grader caught in a bad lie.


What to call the "things that nobody talks about"?

I am writing an article about “things that nobody talks about.” I feel sure that there should be a single word which can replace the phrase _things that nobody talks about_? It’s rather clumsy as it stands, in my opinion.


Adjectival step by step

When used as an adjective, is it _step by step_ or _step-by-step_? Example, > Thank you for this step by step guide. or > Thank you for this step-by-step guide.


Orally or Verbally

Which is correct/better to state: > He was orally informed OR > He was verbally informed. What determines when it is suitable to use either, i.e. verbally or orally.


"Recommendation of" vs. "recommendation for" – what is the difference?

Which of the following sentences is correct? >   * We are glad to provide a recommendation of a good work you did. >   * We are glad to provide a recommendation for a good work you did. >


What Are The "Living Daylights"?

In the turn of phrase "scared the living daylights out of me" what does "living daylights" refer to? Where does this particular idiom originate?


Has technology slowed or stopped the development of the core English language?

What follows is a hypothesis of mine. I'm wondering if there's historical merit for my hypothesis. It seems the English language has a much bigger change between the documents produced in the early 1800s to those produced in the early 1900s, than the early 1900s documents have until now. For example, in the late 1700s/early 1800s, the letter u was still sometimes represented as v (i.e. as in the US Constitution), but no such changes in the glyphs used to represent the language, nor "structure words" (words critical to language structure, i.e. "is" or "the" or "a"), have occurred in the last hundred years. There have been significant changes in typical vocabulary, but not in language structure. I suspect that a large reason for this is the spread of mass communication systems, such as office typewriters, Xerox machines, rail transportation, telegraph, and (most recently) computers. My guess is that the reason is that when you have mass communication at the scale these technologies span, standardized language becomes much more important. Consider if the letter u being represented as v (as I pointed to earlier) -- this would be a monumental change which would be unlikely to appear in the modern era, simply because of the number of standards (i.e. ASCII, Unicode, most all information exchange definitions, fonts, most programming language definitions, etc) which would be affected would be enormous. Couple this with the fact that English is already easy for computers to work with (no letters running together (like those which require complicated typesetting systems i.e. Uniscribe), relatively small number of glyphs, no stackable accent marks, etc.), and it seems like major changes to the language itself would be prohibitively expensive in the modern era. Does any of this make sense, and is there historical justification for it? Or is this my own subjective babble? :) EDIT: To clarify: I think the typical vocabulary of the language is still going to change (who ever heard of Googling something 15 years ago?), but that the glyphs and structure will not. EDIT: The reason for the bounty is that at this point th only posted answers have merely been opinions; I'm interested in historical precedent in either direction.


Possessive and plural of "Series"

I'm looking at the financial definition of series: _a group of stocks or options that have common characteristics_. Source How would I form the possessive and plural of this term? I'm guessing it is series' and series respectively. Sample sentences, not sure of correctness: > He purchased one series. > > He purchased multiple series. > > This one series' characteristics are worth researching. <\- This feels like > it should be series's, but it looks so wrong. > > These series' value is unmatched.


The Coordination/Conjunction Constituency Test

We've been covering constituency tests in my syntax class and whenever it comes to doing the Coordination (also know as conjunction) test, it isn't making sense to me. I'm just not sure how it proves constituency. Does anyone have a concise explanation?


Why do midwesterners say "the cancer"?

I was watching the TV show _Fargo_, which takes place in rural Minnesota. Most of the locals on the show speak with a recognizable midwestern accent, and there are some regionalisms that are common. The one that I noticed most was how when some of the characters were talking about another person they knew, they said _he has **the** cancer_. Most of the English-speaking world does not put an article before the names of most diseases — we would say _he has cancer_. I believe that many of the early settlers in this part of America were from Scandinavia, and it heavily influenced the dialect and accent. Is this phrasing quirk related to this heritage?


Are there good examples of compatible co-hyponyms?

It is often said that co-hyponyms are incompatible. For example, here's Alan Cruse: > Very often a superordinate has more than one immediate hyponym, and among > these there is typically a set of terms each of which is related to all the > others by the relation of incompatibility. ( _Meaning in Language_, 2004, p. 162.) So, ‘apple’, ‘peach’, and ‘plum’ are co-hyponyms of ‘fruit’, and an apple **is not** a peach, which **is not** a plum, etc. They are "incompatible": that bit of fruit can't be _both_ an apple _and_ a peach. However, it is also often said that co-hyponyms _are not necessarily_ incompatible. A little later on that same page, Cruse offers this example: > For instance, _queen_ and _mother_ are both hyponyms of _woman_ , but there > is nothing to prevent someone who is a queen from at the same time being a > mother. I'm not so sure this is a good example, though. It implies this relation: > ? _A queen is a kind of woman._ But this isn't quite so. Mary, Queen of Scots became queen (just a few miles from where I type, in fact) at the ripe old age of 6 days ... which hardly qualifies as "woman"! So it leaves me wondering whether, in fact, ‘queen’ is a proper (?) hyponym of ‘woman’. So I have been trying to come up with ANY good examples of compatible co- hyponyms, and failing in the attempt. I have done my web-searches, and while it is easy to find the theoretical position explained, as I have done above ( _viz._ , that co-hyponyms are typically but not necessarily incompatible), finding examples of the less common "compatible" sort is proving elusive. Can anyone help me? (P.s. I would have liked to tag this with "hyponyms" or "hyponymy", but these aren't yet in use, and I'm too new to create them.) **UPDATE** [2014.01.09] : (This is prompted in part by EricS's suggestion below.) There is a further problem with suggesting _queen_ and _mother_ as examples of compatible co-hyponyms, and it arises in an article by Cruse himself [D. A. Cruse, ‘Hyponymy and Its Varieties’, in _The Semantics of Relationships: An Interdisciplinary Perspective_, ed. by R. Green, C.A. Bean, and S.H. Myaeng (Dordrecht: Kluwer, 2002), pp. 3-21; the Google Books scan has some problems]. In it, Cruse points out that some apparent co-hyponyms belong to different taxonomic classes, and so are not co-hyponyms properly speaking. Cruse uses the example of ‘book’ for which ‘novel’, ‘textbook’, and ‘biography’ are hyponyms, but so too are ‘paperback’, ‘e-book’, and ‘hardback’: but ‘there is no embargo on something being simultaneously a paperback and a novel’ (Cruse, ‘Varieties’, p. 4). They are not, however, ‘co- hyponyms’ since they describe different aspects of the hyperonym. This also applies to the example I originally used above. 'Queen' participates in a taxonymy to do with status relations and involves gender (like duke/duchess, etc.), 'mother' in a taxonymy of family relationship (like 'father', 'daughter', etc.), and of course there is no problem with intersections of taxonomies, much as with 'novel' and 'hardback' both of which have a superordinate in 'book'. I am beginning to doubt, then, that Cruse was correct to assert that both " _queen_ and _mother_ are both hyponyms of _woman_ ". _Queen_ is a type of (hyponym of) _noble_ ; _mother_ is a type of (hyponym of) _kindred_ (= _family relation_ ). Or have I gone askew here? At any rate, I'm still having trouble thinking of "good" examples of compatible co-hyponyms!


Syllables and mora

I have recently discovered the linguistic term 'mora' as a subset of a syllable and am thinking through some examples. How would the word 'stretched' be analysed? Is it one syllable? And what are its mora?


Which one has red color in this phrase "the red bottle's lid"? the bottle or the lid?

Which one has red color in the following phrase? > the red bottle's lid the bottle or the lid? ## Edit Now I understand the actual sentence with which I am faced. > A more insidious attack strategy is to coerce **an unwitting third-party > visitor’s browser** to send unwanted HTTP requests on the attacker’s behalf, > abusing the identity relationship already established between your > application and that victim.


Is this sentence correct grammatically?

> Do you have any knowledge _at_ photography? Is this sentence correct? I don't think so, the _at_ doesn't sound right, but my friend says some grammar checker tells that its correct?


Would a "comment" have an implied brevity to it?

I always thought that a _comment_ would be, in comparison to other kind of response, such as an answer, something brief. However, it doesn't seems like Wiktionary says anything about it. Am I mistaken?


Use of "so as not to"

Which is correct? > The thief carried the knife carefully **so as not to** cut himself. > > The thief carried the knife carefully **not to** cut himself.


'Bramble Bush' has a figurative meaning?

Why might this introductory (denoted 0L by some law students) law book be entitled Bramble Bush http://www.amazon.com/The-Bramble-Bush-Classic- Lectures/dp/0195368452 ? I'm regardful of the definition of bramble as a verb and noun. Here, I guess that it means 'blackberry bush', but this doesn't comport with law literally. What did I miss or misconstrue?


What does it mean to be "correct" in pronunciation or grammar?

(Preamble: this post is literally about the meaning of the word “correct” in this context, but also, of course, overlaps with the philosophy of prescriptive perspectives in the process. I hope that this is not considered off-topic, as I cannot think of a better group of people to ask. ) I do not understand the meaning of the word “correct” in this context, as I cannot think of any objective or meaningful standard that correctness could be derived from. I understand the notion of clarity in pronunciation or grammar. Pronouncing a word such that it might easily be confused with a different word is unclear. Similarly impaired communication can occur as a result of using a word or grammatical structure in a way that is likely to be interpreted differently than intended. But what miscommunication could occur by saying “Feb-u-ary” vs. “Feb-RU-ary” or by responding to “May I talk to Joan, please?” with “This is her,” vs. “This is she”? There is a large set of “errors” that have no seeming impact on clarity. So, “correct,” as it is generally used, does not exclusively mean “likely to be understood.” But I don’t understand the notion of the word apart from that. Language is a naturally evolving phenomenon. It is a brilliant social tool that began to emerge millions of years, and has been evolving in the form of verbal grammar for at least fifty millennia, and likely much longer than that. At some point very recently in development, scholars decided to document their languages, basically taking a descriptive snapshot of a moving force at a moment in time. Are these documents considered the source of what is correct? Or is there some other authority? Regardless of the source, why impose a regressive authority on an inherently progressive phenomenon? In brainstorming, I conjured a few possible reasons. One reason is to intentionally prevent a natural evolution of language that might lead to a divergence of tongues. By formally encouraging adherence to a linguistic standard, localized communities are in less danger (opportunity?) of evolving a divisive dialect. However, with the prevalence of television alone, I don’t think we have much to worry about there. The second reason is to create a badge of pedigree; a way to distinguish those who have been formally educated in a set of (arbitrary?) rules from those who haven’t. Is this a worthy goal? The third reason relates to the precision and artistry that come with mastery. A deep understanding of the nuances of different word meanings and grammatical structures can allow ideas to be communicated more precisely, and can allow the words to sing rather than simply communicate. However, this is mostly a case for learning word meanings, and doesn’t apply to unambiguous word “mispronunciations” or grammatical “errors.” And so, I ask humbly, with a true desire to learn: what does it mean to be correct in pronunciation or grammar? If it is not the native speakers themselves, then who is the authority that can be appealed to?


Is it acceptable to say “It is one of my most important things.”?

My question is if I want to say > It is one of the most important things for me. In another way, can I say > It is one of my most important things. instead? And does the latter one sound strange to native speakers?


Opposites of RSVP

I've googled the subject and got hits only along the lines of DRSVP and NRPSVP, which seem like an awkward mix-up of inter-linguistic confusion (the former) and incomprehensible abbreviation demanding understanding of foreign grammatic. Furthermore, I realized that, since RSVP means that **each** invitee should reply (independently of the attendance ability), there's no unambiguous opposite. There could be, e.g. _reply-only-if-you're-coming_ or _reply-only- if-you're-not-coming_. Moreover, that acronym is used mostly for confirmation of attendance at social gatherings and, sadly, is not that widely known to begin with (at least amongst people in the companies I've worked for). At one place, we used _MRIA_ (or, at another place, _ORIA_ ) at the end of an e-mail or SMS to declare that no reply (including, but not limited to, " _OK_ ") was needed **under the condition** that no changes were to be proposed. A, sort of, opt-out, so to speak. However, I've found that _MRIA_ is as seldom recognized as _RSVP's_ negations mentioned above. And I'm tired explaining that _MRIA_ stands for " _Missing Response Implies Agreement_ " (or " _Omission of Reply Indicates Acceptance_ "). Is there a term/acronym to be used at the end of e-messages to suggest that omission of reply is equivalent with accepting the contents?


Refer to a number which comes after every 5 numbers

I want to refer to a number which comes after every 5 numbers, (eg. 5, 10, 15, 20 .. ). How can I say it it in a proper sentence? Thanks.


What do "wonk" as against performer and “Wonking out” mean?

Time magazine’s October 22nd issue carries the article titled “Paul Ryan on the campaign trail: More performer than _wonk_.” The article begins with the following lines: > “Mitt Romney's running mate was doing what he likes best: _wonking out_." > I'm kind of a powerpoint guy, so I hope you'll bear with me," Paul Ryan told > about 2,000 people at the University of Central Florida gymnasium in Orlando > in late September.” OALED defines “wonk” as noun, AmE, informal, disapproving, meaning (1) a person who works too hard and is considered boring. (2) a person who takes too much interest in the less important details of political policy. So I surmise the meaning of “wonk” in the headline as defined in (2) of the above. Please correct me if I’m wrong. However, I don’t understand what “wonking out” means in the beginning line of the body copy. OALED doesn’t show usage of “wonk” as a verb, while Readers English Japanese Dictionary at hand shows the usage of wonk” as vi. meaning ‘to study extremely hard,’ and vt. meaning ‘to give an answer from highly technical view point.’ What does “wonking out” mean? Does it mean hard-working like a wonk? Why “out” is necessary? What nuance is added to by adding “out” to “wonk”?


In a jet cockpit: "console" or "instrument panel"?

What is the correct term for the panel containing standard indicators such as the altimeter and airspeed indicator in a jet aircraft cockpit? Is it called **console** or **instrument panel** , or are both terms equivalent? From reading on the subject, it looks like _console_ refers to an individual set of instruments (one for pilot, another for co-pilot), but I don't know if this is correct. **EDIT** I'm looking for the term used by a civilian pilot of a private jet.


The pronunciation of 'Hawaii'

Apparently some parts of the US routinely pronounce the name of our island state as 'Hawaya.' At first, I thought this was just incorrect, but apparently it's a regional usage. Where do they call it Hawaya?


Why are customers referred to as "users" in software and drug industry?

An interesting observation that has always fascinated me: it is only in software industry and drugs industry where we refer to customers as "Users". I don't know of any other. For instance, we talk of "User Acceptance Testing" as opposed to "Customer Acceptance Testing" when referring to final software acceptance testing. What are the origins of this?


in lunchtime or at lunchtime

How say correctly? I want buy a micro usb type b connector **in lunchtime**. I want buy a micro usb type b connector **at lunchtime**.


What does “good enough to lose” in “Red Sox were either good enough to lose, or just plain bad” in the World Series in the past”?

New York Times (October 31st) reported Red Sox’s victory in the World Series under the title, “Red Sox Rout Cardinals to Win World Series” It begins with the following sentence: > For much of the 20th century, the Boston Red Sox were a symbol of > frustration and pain for an entire region. As popular as they were in their > corner of the nation, either **they were good enough to lose** in agonizing > fashion on baseball’s grandest stage, or they were just plain bad. > http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/31/sports/baseball/boston-red-sox-rout-st- > louis-cardinals-to-win-world-series.html?hp I’m comfortable with the expression, “they are good enough to win,” but feel somewhat uneasy with “they are good enough to lose,” no matter whether it’s in agonizing fashion or in happy fashion. If you are good enough (at game"), logically, you shouldn't lose (the game). Is “good enough to lose” a common expression? What does it mean? Can I say "My son was “good enough to fail" the college entrance exam," / "He was good enough to be fired because of frequent boobs," by the same token?


"My pigs are killing me!"

How has the word "pigs" come to be used as slang for feet? As in the phrase: > My pigs are killing me! It seems to me that "pigs" and "feet" have very little in common. I'm not sure how common this usage is. I've certainly heard it on several occasions.


Where did “Cleanliness is next to Godliness” originate?

I've often heard the phrase " _Cleanliness is next to godliness_ " used but as far as I know, while there's nothing intrinsically wrong with the notion, in spite of mentioning God the phrase doesn't have a Biblical basis. Where did the phrase come from and does it have its roots in Christianity or somewhere else?


One comma or two? I have since been

Which of the following is correct? _Context:_ I left AMD in early 2008. > I have, since, been the CTO of a large software firm near Oregon. or is it > I have since, been the CTO of a large software firm near Oregon.


Ordinal numbers usage

When you are delineating a set of statements which come one after another, could you use ordinal numbers but omit some of them in between ? For example, consider I want to describe the limitations in my study: > However, these results should be interpreted considering certain limitations > existing in the study. First, the small sample size ... ... . In addition, > our sample consisted of young people residing ... ... . The third limitation > is that ... . Is this style correct ?


What is the difference between "proven" and "proved"?

My question concerns when to use what of the above.


What's the appropriate response to the "door knock" when you are in a fitting room?

I'm an international student and I have had this question for a long time: When I'm trying on clothes in a store fitting room, the store employee sometimes knocks on the door to see if the fitting room is occupied. How should I response to that? Also, is there another way to refer to the people who works in the store other than" _store employee_ "?


> Your patience on this matter _behooves_. Is it okay to use the word "behooves" in this way?


Why is it "masterpiece" and not "a piece of art"?

Why do you say _masterpiece_ , and not _piece of art_?


What is the origin of "xox"?

What is the origin of _xox_ used to mean _kisses and hugs_?


Difference between "second cousin" and "first cousin once removed"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Is there an accepted rule for naming all of our various distant relatives > (Kinship Terms)? What is the difference between _second cousin_ and _first cousin once removed_? Is "[ordinal] cousin once removed" generally used in English?


Term for relationship to cousin's child

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Is there an accepted rule for naming all of our various distant relatives > (Kinship Terms)? My relationship to my cousin's dad is nephew-uncle. My relationship to my cousin is cousin-cousin. What is my relationship to my cousin's child? Is it still cousin-cousin?


In Nothing - June 12th 1799 Letter by John Marshall

> He was in our late army a lieut. Colo. & he performd the duties of that > office with reputation. It is probable that he may feel wounded at being > offerd the same grade under others whom he then commanded & who are perhaps > **in nothing** his superiors. It is presumd that officers in the actual army > will command those of the same grade in the eventual army. If we are correct > in this then Colonels Bentley & Parker who were both subalterns when Colo. > Cropper was a field officer, & who are not supposd to have manifested any > superiority over him, will now take rank of him. (Source) Could someone please explicate and demystify **in nothing**? My guess would be that Colonel Cropper's superiors admittedly possesses nothing that would make them veritably superior?


If someone says, "Shoot, it was a great day to be alive." , what does he/she mean?

A example sentence from Oxford dictionary: > Shoot - exclamation   >  North American informal   >  used as a euphemism for ‘shit’: > > **shoot, it was a great day to be alive** What is the tone of this sentence? How to paraphrase it?


Other way of saying "with his/her back facing me."

Is there another common way of saying: _with his/her back facing me?_ For example: > The person was standing in the middle of the clearing, **[...back...]** me. I don't want to use **his/her** because I don't want to reveal the sex of the person. Any suggestions?


Mix and Mixture

What is considered the correct usage of _mix_ versus _mixture_? As an example, is either of these two sentences considered to be more correct grammatically than the other? 1) _The trip was a mix of hiking and climbing_ 2) _The trip was a mixture of hiking and climbing_ To my ear either is acceptable, but I presume one is better than the other?


What does 'authorizing against' mean?

I'm sorry if that question seems quite obvious for some of you, but I'm not native from english country and have some trouble with some expressions. Today, I found this sentence : > In the end, all software systems that need any type of authorization will be > authorizing against activities In this context, I can't manage to understand the meaning of against, it is supposed to show some kind of opposition, but where do you find an opposition in this sentence?


"Smiled at me" vs. "smiled to me"

I searched for the following two expressions and came across both being used in various places. > She **smiled at me** at the grocery store. > > She **smiled to me** at the grocery store. What is the difference between the two?


Is this sentence a dependent clause?

Not to mention the amazing embellishments that are sure to spark the interest of our well-healed clients: flowers, butterflies, crystals, and feathers.


What does "v." stand for?

In in the following sentence, what does the "v." stand for? > The new system was partially indebted to Stanley v. Georgia Does it mean "Stanley and Georgia" or "Stanley against Georgia"?


Against and Towards can be same?

_After I found this website, I have a chance to ask questions I used to hesitate to use in a sentence as I am not a native English speaker even though I am really interested in learning English._ Anyways, Can these sentences be legit and give the same meaning?   1. I feel something towards her.   2. I feel something against her. Do they have same meaning and also where can we not use `against` and `towards` interchangeably if we can use them interchangeably sometimes. **Edit:** Okay, it seems while feelings are coming to play they cause different meaning but where can I not use them interchangeably when there is no feelings involved?


West Country Pronunciation 17th to 18th century

I read somewhere that the West Country pronunciation of oi for words like fight and like would become foight and loik. Was this really more common in the 17th and 18th Century?


Meaning of "all-new" in advertising-speak

Sometimes hyphenated, sometimes not. Most commonly heard in car commercials, eg "Introducing the all-new 2010 Cadillac SRX Crossover". I've only heard it since moving to the US so perhaps it is a North American thing. Does the "all" actually convey any specific meaning? Am I losing anything by interpreting "the all-new 2010 model" as "the 2010 model"?


Word for feeling in the mood to experiment

I am looking for a word for being in a mood to experiment or try something you would not normally do for a situation. A person might say: "I am feeling .... today, and will go another way". I knew this word but for some reason I am totally blanking on it at the moment. I think the word starts with the letter t.


What does "something 101" mean?

Many times I saw the phrase _something 101_ , such as _Microsoft Excel 101_. What exactly does it mean?


Where does "pull it off" come from?

"to pull it off" was at one time used meaning "to win." And in sentences such as, > I don't think you can pull it off. , it often implies the idea of "success." But how did this expression originate?


Mike brought cake VS mike brought cake with him

What's the difference between these two expressions:   1. Mike brought his guitar.   2. Mike brought his guitar with him. How does "with him" change the meaning of the sentence?


What does "a-building" modify?

"The city was a thousand years a-building." What does "a-building" (in building) modify in that sentence?


"Jesus is a coming" - what's the exact grammatical role of the "a" before the gerund?

I've noticed that in the common use of English, namely in songs, there is also an extra redundant(?) " _a_ " before a _gerund_ , such as in a gospel song I heard > Jesus is _a_ coming (this particular phrase looks like quoted here). What's the _exact grammatical role_ of this extra inserted _a_? Is it the _indefinite article_? Why is it there? Is there any specific reason for it, or is it just bad language, slang or what? Has it developed from a pause in the speech when the speaker needed an extra time to find the word? Something like this: > Jesus is a... what the hell is he.. well, coming! ADDED: Based on a comment I am supposed to spell it as > Jesus is _a_ -coming so maybe you may comment on this, too.


Etymology of circumfix present continuous (a-fly-ing)

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  What is the story behind "a-" prefix / suffix? I'm writing an introductory lecture on morphology and as a familiar example of circumfixes I found (on Wikipedia, but it's since been removed it seems) the _a-fly-ing_ form of the present continuous from older English, which is nice and familiar. But I got to thinking: Where does that _a_ come from? My other familiar example, the German perfect participle ( _ge-spiel-t_ ), I know (a derivational prefix in common Germanic). But the _a-_ in the present continuous, I have no clue. Does anyone know where this comes from?


Why is there an "al" in algebra?

Words like "algebra", "alchemy" and "alcohol" were introduced to English via Arabic. The "al-" prefix is the Arabic definite article. Why was the definite article retained when the words were incorporated into English? BTW: I am aware that Arabic was not the origin of some of these words but it did add the "al-" prefix.


Short, Politically Correct word for Native Americans

No more than four syllables, more PC than Indians. **EDIT:** I arbitrarily chose four syllables because any more seemed like a mouthful. I like to be PC and not have to stumble over 6+ syllables.


What did "google" mean in the 1900s?

I know that Google got its name from the word googol (10100), and that Google/google referring the search engine/using the search engine are recent additions to the dictionary. Their definitions are easily found for such meaning (example). However, just for kicks, I did a Google Ngram search for the word "google" and "Google" and got some interesting results: ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/3Wsqt.png) There is a drastic spike in the use of the word "google" around 1900, well before the website, or even the internet, existed. There is then some use throughout the next hundred years, where it starts to climb (because we now have Google). Clearly this word had some meaning in the past - does anyone know what it was?


"Is someone covering/going to cover this event?"

Which one of the following is better or more correct? > Is someone **covering** this event? > Is someone **going to cover** this event?


What, exactly, is the point of beginning a sentence with "Well..."?

Sample conversation: > Person 1: What did you think of the movie?   >  Person 2: Well, the acting was great, but the plot was terrible. What does "well" actually add to the body of the sentence? I have never heard any sentence spoken or written whose meaning was absolutely dependent on beginning with "well". It seems akin to an "um" or "uh", serving as a vocal void filler while the speaker collects their thoughts and puts their words together before actually speaking them. If that's the case, why do people actually type it? People clearly have time to think about what they're going to say before posting a comment on a blog or replying to an email. Has it become a sort of accepted language anomaly much in the same way Midwesterners like to say things like "Where did you put it at?"


What does ‘shines’ mean in “Bears defense shines in 24-17 loss to Panthers”?

There was the headline “Bears defense shines in 24-17 loss to Panthers" in today's New York Times Sport section. Cambridge English Dictionary defines “shine” as;   1. to send out or reflect light.   2. to point a light in a particular direction.   3. to make something bright by rubbing it. Oxford English Dictionary defines it as;   1. give out a bright light.   2. make (an object made of leather, metal, or wood) bright by rubbing it.    3. be very talented or perform very well. Oxford Advanced Learners’ Dictionary defines it as;   1. produce or reflect or point the light of lamp in a particular direction.   2. polish stg.   3. to be very good at stg. Though it seems to me that only the definition 3. of both OED and OALD is relevant to the ‘shine’ in the quoted headline, I cannot make out why Bears defense is described as “shines (performed very well)” in a lost game, not winning game. What does “shines” here mean? Is it a prevailing usage of ‘shine’ as a verb? Is the word ‘shine’ used very often in this way?


Words with a leading silent w

My eldest is a beginning reader. Yesterday we read one of my favorite books, _The Wreck of the Zephyr_. He pointed at _wreck_ and asked me why that one looked like it said "wuh-reck." I explained that spelling is funny like that sometimes. This didn't satisfy my curiosity though. Silent w is not uncommon—we see it in the question word 'who' for instance—but it often appears in the combination wr-, and this is what I am curious about. Was the w ever pronounced in these words (and if so, how)? Do these kind of words all share a common lineage that has some unique sound represented by this combination? (I am thinking of, for instance, that someone told me once that most words with _ph_ come from Greek.)


"Out of the" versus "off"

Is it correct to use _out of the_ or _off_ , in the following sentences? > The spacecraft flies out of the planet. > There is a bear out of the house.


What does "sit in the back of the bus" mean?

What does "sit in the back of the bus" in the following sentence mean? It has been taken from Harvey Milk's "The Hope Speech." > The first gay people we elect must be strong. They must not be content to > **sit in the back of the bus**. They must not be content to accept pablum.


"Suffer from a headache" vs. "suffer from the headache"

I am not sure which article to use in the following context: >   * She has been suffering from **a** headache. >   * She has been suffering from **the** headache. > Please clear up my doubt.


Does one top up or top off rechargeable batteries?

While writing a forum post on proper lithium-ion battery care, I started wondering whether the proper term for recharging them while still fairly full is called _topping up_ or _topping off_.   Perhaps both are accepted?


Skill-set is not common in or on

I've written the following sentence but after reading it, it sounds to me like it's wrong. > The skill-set for iOS and Android development is not common in the current > team. Is it correct to say "common **in** the current team"? Or should I use "common **on** "?


Word that describes a response to an approach

Here's a situation: We have a list of companies that we want to talk to. So we approached them. And some of these companies have gotten back to us. This act of getting back to us:   1. Are they approaching us? (would this be correct?)   2. Are they getting back to us? (Obviously)   3. Are they [fancy word] to us? This [fancy word] is what I am looking for. And not something like respond. Any suggestions?


To give a talk?

What is the most appropriate verb to use with "talk" in the sense of "an informal address or lecture":   * "To **give** a talk"?   * "To **present** a talk"?   * "To **deliver** a talk"?   * Another completely different verb or phrase?


Perfect Continuous tense with the verb "be"

"I have been working on a project recently" is clearly a perfectly grammatical sentence using the Perfect Continuous tense. It is not clear whether "I have been being sick recently" is grammatically correct though. Of course, most English speakers would simply say "I have been sick lately", but does this necessarily have the same connotations as the other sentence? Perhaps "been" entails the continuous aspect, but I'm not certain. Similarly, can I say "Starting tomorrow, I will have been being sick for two months now"? By the way, these sentences read less awkward if you put the emphasis on the word "being", since this implicitly groups "being sick" together. Edit: In lieu of Ham and Bacon's answer, one can replace every instance of "sick" with "confused" or some other adjective and the question remains the same.


Something is "yay" big

I have heard expressions like "It was _yay_ big" or "It was _yay_ by _yay_." a couple of times now, always accompanied by a gesture indicating the size of something. Does anybody know where this word comes from? Can it be used in other situations? Is it older or newer than the word _that_? If it's of any help it is frequent in the UK. **Edit:** I obviously tried searching for it myself but my results seem to be dominated by the word _yay_ as an expression of joy. I assume the two are completely unrelated.


Are there cases when the word "best" as an adjective could be used without "the"?

That is an advertisement of one company, a banner. They write the name of the company and the second line goes like this "best ad designs". Is this line correct? or should there be a "the"? Is there a general rule to put "the" before the adjective "best" or are there cases when "the" is not needed?


Which sentence is most acceptable when describing the current time period?

I would like to know which of these two sentences have the most acceptable form when describing the current time period.               Why do so many people **today** have no values          Why do so many people have no values **these days**      Thanks in advance for any help in sharing knowledge.


Is this sentence correct? Present Perfect for finished past

Is this sentence correct? **"Post-Soviet Russia has long hesitated before definitively recognizing the frontiers with its new neighbors"** The recognition comes after the hesitation; therefore, the time period for the latter is finished. Plus Russia has NOT been hesitating for some time now. Isn't it better to say: **"Post-Soviet Russia had long hesitated before definitively recognizing the frontiers with its new neighbors"**? OR **"Post-Soviet Russia hesitated for a long time before definitively recognizing the frontiers with its new neighbors"**


Aeronautical equivalents of the nautical terms "port" and "starboard"

Are there any aeronautical terms for _left_ and _right_ sides of a plane, essentially equivalent to their nautical counterpart terms of **_port_** and **_starboard_** for the respective _left_ and _right_ sides of a seaworthy vessel?


'market survey' OR 'marketing survey'

_Market survey_ or _marketing survey?_ When you ask somebody to answer your questions, which term is correct?


Help + Noun + Gerund or Infinitive

1. Help my sister peel oranges.   2. Help my sister to peel oranges.   3. Help my sister peeling oranges.    4. Help my sister with peeling oranges. Which of the above is/are correct, and why are the others incorrect?


Using a question mark mid-sentence

May I use a question mark in the middle of a sentence? Examples: > Would you like the drapes to be white? or perhaps something off-white? > > Would you like the logo to be centered? at the bottom? left off entirely?


Difference between "remainder of the text" and "remaining text"

While reading one of the technical books I encountered "the remainder of the text will explore how the .NET framework...". From the context I understood it means "the remaining text of the book will explore ...". Is there any difference between them or why is one used over the other?


Difference between "constitution" and " structure"

The main kind of problem which I always face in English language is my inability to find out the difference between two similar words . Now I can't really understand the difference between "constitution" and "structure". I'd be more than happy if someone guides me to get the difference.


Differences between e.g., viz. and i.e.

What are the differences between viz. and eg. and in which situations each is used? Please also compare the usage with i.e. if appropriate. **Edit** : In response to a comment below: I'm asking this as I was framing a sentence   1. "Mobile device manufacturers e.g. Nokia, Samsung, ...."   2. "Mobile device manufacturers viz. Nokia, Samsung, ...."  Which of the above is better usage?


How to pronounce "thon"?

Charles Crozat Converse proposed "thon" as a gender-neutral pronoun for English in the 19th century, and it's often been cited since. But…how do I pronounce it? Rhyming it with "on" and "done" doesn't come naturally, but they seem the best candidates. **Edit to add** "won" as an alternative that makes sense considering that the "etymology" is "that one". Also, my perspective is from the Los Angeles dialect—some of these sound better if I imagine them in other accents. **Note** : Comments on the uselessness of "thon" or gender-neutral pronouns in general are boring.


Is integratable a word?

I hear the word integratable a lot, but do not know if it actually it is a word or how to spell it correctly. So,is integratable a word and how to spell it?


What does sharp means when it comes to being physical?

Someone told me "you are very sharp, though I will leave it to you, if I mean mentally or physically" What does sharpness mean in the context of being physical? Thanks.


Is there an umbrella word for cancer treatment?

I know that there is a noun for cancer as an area of medicine; oncology. But is there a word for the umbrella art/science of cancer treatment? I was thinking of something other than "cancer therapy." Something like "oncologics" although that's not actually a word.


Pluralizing the noun support

Is it ever okay to pluralize the noun "support"? When talking about several support systems, for example, is it okay to say that people "need supports"? If not, why not? Thank you!


Is 'artwork' a mass noun?

I have seen artwork used as a mass noun, as in: > Look at all of the artwork, it's beautiful! As well as: > Look at all of the artworks, they're beautiful! Per my understanding, there's no need to pluralize a mass noun, so I'm unclear as to which sentence is correct.


Is it "end quote" or "unquote"?

When reading something that has a quote in the middle of it, is it proper to say "end quote" or "unquote" to signal the end of the quote? I've heard both ways.


Can I put the question word "where" at the end of a question?

I got this sentence from a Primary 5 student's worksheet. > According to this passage, this creature can be found where? Some of the parents think that the sentence should be "..., where can this creature be found?" One of the teachers said that "where" can be put at the end of the sentence, too. All of us, the parents and the teacher, are non-native English speakers. Please enlighten us.


Define "He's like"

Is he's like different from he said? Does "like" mean the same thing as saying that someone said something or is there more implied maybe like a subtle difference in attitude?


Need a quick translation

What is the meaning of this sentence: > What is the Need you are going after? >   >   >     **Edit** here is the context >   > > 1) PowerPoint presentation > > Intro (4 – 5 slides) > > a) What is the Need you are going after? > > b) What is the problem we are trying to solve? > > c) Your Solution to problem


Is the correct usage of “Diagnose (verb)” losing its ground?

In spite of many references on the correct usage of _”Diagnose”_ , usage of passive construction followed by a with-phrase – e.g. “ _The patient was diagnosed with cancer_ ” — and usage of patient as object of this verb –e.g. “ _She helped with his story to raise awareness about Chiari, especially so doctor could diagnoses its victims earlier”_ are what I find in today’s media. So, I am start to wonder : Is the correct usage of _”Diagnose”_ losing its ground ? **Correct usage (as being sescribed )** From Bryan A. Garner's **Garner's Modern American Usage 2nd Ed.** > _to identify, esp. a disease or problem. Strictly speaking, it is the > disease or problem that is diagnosed, e.g.: "Eichelman went to the doctor, > who didn't diagnose the broken bone and told the swimmer he would be back in > the pool in a few days." Jason L. Young, "Senior Is Eager to Make Up for > Lost Season," Indianapolis Star, 7 Dec. 2002, at S4._ From R.W Burchfield's **The New Fowler's Modern English Usage 3rd Ed.** > _Properly used to mean 'to make a diagnosis of (a disease, a mechanical > fault, etc.)' (he was able to diagnose the fault at once), but now often > used with a person as object (a baby who was incorrectly diagnosed as having > died before birth, only to be delivered alive, but paralysed, 17 hours > later-T. Stuttaford, 1990)._ **Defination from dictionaries :** Oxford English Dictionary 2nd Ed.   > _To make a diagnosis of (a disease), to distinguish and determine its nature > from its symptoms; to recognize and identify by careful observation._ Shorter Oxford English Dictionary 6th Ed. > _1.Make a diagnosis of, infer the presence of (a particular disease etc.) > from symptoms. 2.Ascertain the condition of (a person etc.) by diagnosis. > E20._ Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary 3rd Ed.   > to recognize and name the exact character of a disease or a problem, by > examining it_ Concise Oxford English Dictionary 11th Ed.   > make a diagnosis of (an illness or other problem). identify the medical > condition of (someone)_


What are alternative terms/words for "cognitive dissonance?"

I grasp the meaning completely, I'm just looking for alternatives ways to express it.


is pollution singular or plural?

is the word **pollution** singular or plural ? The confusion delivered when making these statement `"pollution makes money, disease makes opportunity"`


A little brain fart

What is a nicer, less _immature_ saying? I love using 'A Freudian slip', but that is only applicable in certain situations.


What does "Subject to" + verb mean?

I know it looks so naive but I don't really quite understand "subject to" + verb pattern. Such as : > These computers are subject to change. What exactly does it mean?


What is the English word for a 'spaghetti harvest'?

Spaghetti, traditionally, an Italian crop is now being widely grown in Britain. Can anyone say what the harvest should be called, perhaps based on the Italian.


Word for "people with write-access"

Say you have a forum only a select group of people have access to contribute to - what would you call those people? Or, more accurately to my domain, say you have a file on a shared computer drive that any user can read but only certain users can write to - what would you call those certain users?


What's the origin and popularity of the word "boss" in the context of refering to the person you're talking with?

In a video game called "Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines", a character called "Gorgeous Gary Golden", always refers to the player as "boss". Here are some examples from that first dialog: > "We're having a wrap up party for The Misfits about forty years late. Cast > and crew only, boss." > > "How do you know I'm even here, boss?" > > "I'm over here, boss! Wait, maybe I'm over here! Or maybe I'm behind you, > with a hatchet in my hand..." > > "I don't know, boss. You tell me. After all, I didn't crash your party." > > "You don't say. Wake up, boss! Who do you think you're dealing with?" > > "Because I like the sound of my own voice... It's not everyday we get > visitors, boss!" Not living in a country where English is the native language, this sounded odd to me. The player is just meeting him for the first time, and he doesn't have any relationship with Gary that would justify him being treated as a boss. It's also not a compliment either, since Gary doesn't really care for him. I'm guessing it's just his way of talking with people. Maybe this expression is popular somewhere, or maybe it's a throwback to an expression that was popular before. I also checked some online dictionaries, but they don't mention anything about this usage of the word boss. My question is this: Is this an expression related with a certain place and/or time, or do you think this is a only a random quirk of this character that isn't a reflection of anything historical?


Is "cry" an intransitive verb, or can it be transitive? - as in "Cry me a river"

When I look up the word, it should be an intransitive verb (no object). However, I'm still curious about the title "Cry me a river". Can I say that "I cried a bucket"?


What do you call the child who doesn’t resemble his / her parents in English?

There are sons and daughters who don’t look like their parents at all. We call them “Onikko 鬼っ子” in Japanese, which literally means the child born or brought by an ogre, not by his / her biological parents. Onikko doesn't necessarily mean derogatory. For instance, when we have a brilliant child brought up by mediocre parents, we describe the child 鳶が鷹を産んだ子 - tobi ga taka wo unda ko - a hawk born by a kite. The hawk (child) can be a kind of Onikko. What is the expression in English for the son or daughter who doesn't resemble his / her parent in face, figure and temper though they are their parents' real child?


What is the correct way to interpret the sentence "You can't have too many"?

> It's like chef's in a kitchen for that part of a game's engine. You can't > have too many.   >  \- Quoted from a conversation with a friend. When said in this context, my friend interpreted as "You can always have more chefs." When I said it, I meant "You can't realistically have many more chefs." Given only this context, what is the correct way to interpret the sentence as written? We're both arguing semantics over this now, and it would be nice for a third party to just settle this so we can move on. This is my first time on this StackExchange, so I have no idea which tags to use or if this is even the proper question etiquette here. My apologies.


"As per" and "in the case being"?

Take the following text into account: > These airstrikes would not only be punishment for Assad's use of chemical > weapons against civilians amid the three-year-long Syrian Uprising ( > **according to** the Obama administration), but would also serve another > purpose - to protect U.S. personnel **in the case being** where the ISIS, > otherwise known as the Islamic State, were to be involved. I was wondering, does the phrase "in the case being" make sense here in the context it is being used in? If not, what would be a better alternative? Also, is the phrase "as per" more professional than simply using "according to"? If that's the case, would I use: (as per the Obama administration)... or (per the Obama administration)... **EDIT:** I think instead of "in the case being," "in the case" would be good enough. However, I would still appreciate some feedback on this. Also, would "in the case being" make sense?


Why do eleven and twelve get unique words and not end in "-teen"?

In short, why is it not _oneteen_ and _twoteen_ , and we start at _thirteen_ in English? In another thread, I supposed that despite that fact that people have ten fingers, amounts of items leading up to and including twelve were more common because twelve is more easily divisible evenly by two, three, four, and six. Both English and German (which are related) switch to a _-teen_ ( _-zehn_ auf Deutsch) ending after twelve. Based on that thread, so does Norwegian. Could this be the explanation? Looking at other languages (Arabic, Japanese, even a related romance language of French), this doesn't seem to apply, and you'd think that if something so fundamental as divisibility were the explanation, we'd see a more universal distribution across them.


How compound words "eighteen" and "roommate" are built

Why does eighteen not have two tees like roommate has two ems?


Why eleven is not called onety one

I want to know why _eleven_ is not called "onety one"? Since eleven comes after ten, why is not "onety one"? and why ten is not called onety ?


Onety-one or Elebenty-Leben

Why is 11 (eleven) not pronounced onety-one or elebenty-leben, and why is it considered the ghetto way of saying eleven?


Oneteen, Twoteen, Threeteen, Fiveteen

I was wondering why we say eleven, twelve, thirteen and fifteen instead of oneteen, twoteen, threeteen and fiveteen? And where does "teen" come from? I would assume it derives from ten making me think they were originally said three-ten four-ten and so on. The same applies with numbers such as thirty and fifty why not threety and fivety?


Single word for 'and thus', 'as such' or 'in other words'

I'm writing a list to describe a subject, like: > He's handsome, articulate, immensely intelligent, physically fit, but spends > most of his time tinkering in his garage … **_in other words_** , Tony > Stark! What single word can I substitute for the expression _in other words,_ or _to summarize,_ in sentences such as the above?


"I've been waiting" Vs "I waited"

Let's say for example this sentence : Finally, you're here! Where were you ? What took you so long ? **_______**!   1- I've been waiting here for hours.   2- I waited here for hours. which one is correct to say ?


Should I fix typos/grammatical errors in quotation?

When writing papers, I meet typos/grammatical errors in references now and then. Should I correct them, or leave them as they are?


Is it correct to use "punctuation outside of the quotations", or "inside?"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  How should I punctuate around quotes?   >  When should end punctuation go inside quotes? Or is it region specific? I was always taught that when ending a quotation, that punctuation remains inside of the quote. > I think he said, "we should go to the store." Are you sure he said, "we > should go to the store?" As opposed to: > I think he said, "we should go to the store". Are you sure he said, "we > should go to the store"? This is just an arbitrary example off of the top of my head, and it's hard for me to come up with an example for the second usage because it looks completely wrong to me. I actually got into a small argument with my girlfriend earlier this year because she uses something similar to the second example, and said that's how she was taught (which is why I ask if it's region-specific.) Anyway, is there a correct usage for ending a quotation with punctuation?


Exclamation mark at the end of a quote and end of a sentence

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  When should end punctuation go inside quotes? Is the grammar at the end of the following sentence correct? If not, what should it be? > I was told in no uncertain terms "this is our decision to make!".


Why is the period placed inside the double quote, at the end of a sentence?

My mother tongue is Chinese, and as I read English articles, I find a convention in written English that I can't explain. If a quoted word appears at end of a sentence, the period is written _inside_ the quote instead of being written _outside_ , which is quite counter- intuitive to me. For example, a paragraph from Samsung SSD White Paper. ![period inside quotes, sample sentence](http://i.stack.imgur.com/Zg9Kl.png) Notice it is written as: > ... called a "strobe." instead of > ... called a "strobe". Can someone help explain this?


Why is the comma inside quotation marks when people are quoted?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  When should end punctuation go inside quotes? From a AMS blog post: > Some organizations have temporarily suspended their polling, and with the > news media tabbing Sandy as the new “it girl,” the presidential candidates > were sent to the fourth estate’s back burner, at least for a few days, as > notedby media reporter Howard Kurtz Why is the comma inside the quotation marks in _“it girl,”_? This occurs not only in this example, but is a general rule, not even limited to English. But I find it strange: the comma clearly not part of the name; nor is it part of the quotation in e.g. _“wait a second,” said my friend_ as opposed to _“wait a second”, said my friend_. What is the grammatical word for the comma being placed inside the quotation marks, and why is it like this?


Punctuation outside of quotes

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  How should I punctuate around quotes?   >  When should end punctuation go inside quotes? Here is what I have written: Is it too late to say, "Don't go. I'm sorry"? Here is my question: If I add a period after sorry, within the quotes, is it absolutely incorrect. I don't know why, but the above looks wrong.


Where should I put the comma? Inside or outside the quotation marks?

I need to put a quote in my research paper. My friends give me different answers so I'm confused now... Would it be > According to "Title", "blah blah blah." or > According to "Title," "blah blah blah."


Quotation Marks

I'm an American living in the USA. Is it permissible to punctuate thusly, i.e., insert the commas and periods outside the quote marks? • When Joe called me a "schlep", I was offended. • The terms "prevaricate", "tergiversate", and "masticate" rhyme. • Make sure to enter the log-in password "geeksquad 4". • Nancy said, "I heard Lou say, 'Be careful what you wish for'." (Is the '." ending correct here?) • Joe said, "Respect your elders". (Thinking it should be: Joe said, "Respect your elders.") Thanks.


How much punctuation is appropriate when ending a sentence with a full-sentence quotation?

When you end a sentence with a quotation that is itself a full sentence, do you use the quotation's punctuation? The containing sentence's? Both? Something else? I think this might be best illustrated with an example. Which of the following is correct? > John asked her "Do you have the time?" She said yes. or > John asked her "Do you have the time." She said yes. or > John asked her "Do you have the time?." She said yes. Related, but not a dupe: http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/23/is-it- ever-acceptable-for-a-period-to-come-after-a-quote-at-the-end-of-a-sentence


Punctuation immediately after a question mark in a quote?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  How should I punctuate around quotes?   >  Comma placement when using quotes that end with a question mark Say you're quoting someone with a requirement for a punctuation, how do you follow with your own punctuation? e.g.,               "Are you crazy?," she asked incredulously.     "Wow!," said the cat.      Both of these example seem awkward. Do I just leave out the comma?


Punctuating Quoted Questions in a Parenthetical Clause

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  How should I punctuate around quotes?   >  What do you do when you end the first part of a compound sentence with a > quote?   >  Comma placement when using quotes that end with a question mark Someone asked What is the difference between saying: > Are you still working there? > > Do you still work there? I started my answer with: > For your specific example, "Are you still working there?" versus "Do you > still work there?", when referring to having a job at a company both are > commonly used. That punctuation feels wrong, but I don't know what would be preferable in American English. I am referring in particular about ending the parenthetical phrase with `"Do you still work there?",`. (Wow, how about the punctuation of _that_ sentence.) I need the question mark because of the question, I need the quotes to end the quotation, I need the comma to end the parenthetical, but the rules for punctuation around quotation marks are so odd to my way of thinking that I feel like I must be doing something wrong. What do you think? Is this the best way (without rewriting the sentence) to punctuate it? If not, what would be better? EDIT: So far we have :   * The Chicago Manual of Style not specifically addressing this case but generally saying _**"Do you still work there?"**_   * The Gregg Reference Manual saying _**"Do you still work there?"**_ **BUT** "if the omission of a comma at this point could lead to confusion, reword the sentence to avoid the problem."   * and most everyone else agreeing with me on _**"Do you still work there?",**_ So yeah, go ahead and close it, as we are not going to settle the question here?


Where do I put a comma when I have quotes around a short story, and the sentence structure needs a comma? I know that, generally, commas go inside of quotes, but what if the quotes are marking a short story. Here is the part of the sentence I'm having trouble with: > Gertrude Stein’s _The Gentle Lena_ is vastly different from Edith Wharton’s > “The Other Two,” yet the two female leads ... Should it look like that, or should it look like this: > Gertrude Stein’s _The Gentle Lena_ is vastly different from Edith Wharton’s > “The Other Two”, yet the two female leads ...


Where does the period go?

Which of these is correct? > Our company has a philosophy that "People Matter". > > Our company has a philosophy that "People Matter." Does the period go inside the quotes here or outside?


In text Citation

If your quote is at the end of a sentence and is the end of its own sentence as well does the period go inside the parentheses or outside of it? Also what would you do with the in text citation (page number)?


where to put the comma between two distinct quote?

Where should I put the comma and the quotes in such a sentence? > The comments were significantly focused on my being “engaging, patient and > extremely helpful,” “very coherent and easy-to-understand,” or "clear and > straight to the point". My question is whether I can do something like this "bla," "bla" - meaning, a simple space between two quotes and the comma before the first one. Thanks!


Is it ever acceptable for a period to come after a quote at the end of a sentence?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Is it correct to use “punctuation outside of the quotations”, or “inside?” I've heard that you should always place ending punctuation inside of quotes, no matter what. Are there any cases where it is appropriate for a sentence to end with `".`?


How to correctly use double quotation marks at the end of a sentence?

Group A: >   1. This is so-called "Moon Cake." // The period is inside the double > quatation marks > >   2. This is so-called "Moon Cake". // The period is outside the double > quatation marks > > I know the former is more standard-conforming in most publications; however, I think the latter is more intuitive and meaningful. Because the period is used to stop the whole sentence, rather than stop the phrase itself. I think the former is counter-intuitive, although the usage is standard-conforming. Please consider another two sentences: Group B: >   1. She said: "I don't know." > >   2. She said: "I don't know". > > It is obvious that the former is more meaningful than the latter, because the period is used to stop the whole sentence, and the double quatation marks are used as a quatation. This time, it is standard-conforming and intuitive. What's your opinion?


Where do the commas and full stops go?

Do you agree with the punctuation in these examples? I'm using BrE style here.   1. I like his sentence 'Be good to yourself and respect your elders.' (I say that the full stop goes inside the quote mark.)   2. The email stated 'The meeting scheduled for June 12 has been cancelled.' (I say that the full stop goes inside the quote mark.)   3. I love the adage 'A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.' (I say that the full stop goes inside the quote mark.)   4. Lou said, 'I heard Jonas say "Martha and Frank are getting a divorce." ' (I think the ending punctuation ." ' is good.)   5. Ernie said, 'I didn't like it when Nancy called me a "schlepp".' (I think the ending punctuation ".' is good.)   6. When Nancy screamed 'Shut the hell up and get out of my house!' she scared her children. (I think no commas are needed in this sentence.)   7. When Bob said 'Be careful what you ask for', Nicholas began to weep. (I think only one comma here, yes or no?)   8. When Rufus asked 'Where are the liquid refreshments?' his wife pointed to the fridge. (I think no commas are needed in this sentence.)   9. The sign said 'Shoplifters will be prosecuted.' (I say that the full stop goes inside the quote mark.)   10. The sentences 'Be careful what you ask for', 'Life is way too short', 'Always respect your elders', and 'No good deed goes unpunished' provided sound guidance to Nicholas. (I say commas go outside the quote marks.)   11. Mike said, 'Don't be disrespectful to your parents.' (Full stop inside, I say.)   12. 'I will,' Joe said, 'provide an explanation when the time is right.' (I say the comma and period go inside the quote marks.)   13. 'I will provide an explanation when the time is right,' Joe said. (Again, comma inside.) Thank you.


Including unrelated punctuation in the quotes

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  How should I punctuate around quotes? I have seen in many places, in many articles on the web as well as in print, the practice of including punctuation inside the quotes, when the punctuation is not related to the quoted content, as follows: > "We have begun development," the spokesperson told the media. > > Although his response was, "We have begun development," he could not share > any further details at this time. The comma at the end quote is not related to the quoted content but it is included in the quotes. Why is that? Shouldn't the following be correct, with the comma outside the end quote? > "We have begun development", the spokesperson told the media. > > Although his response was, "We have begun development", he could not share > any further details at this time. The next example is about the full stop at the end. This is included inside the quotes. > "We have begun development, " the spokesperson said, "but I cannot give you > any further details at this time." Here there are two functions to accomplish, marking the end of the quoted content as well as the end of the sentence, but only one full stop is used. Does the full stop, in this case, mark the end of the quoted content, the end of the sentence or both of them? Is the following correct, marking both with different full stops? > "We have begun development, " the spokesperson said, "but I cannot give you > any further details at this time.".


Comma placement when using quotes that end with a question mark

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  How should I punctuate around quotes? I've been writing a letter to an editor, and one line of my response reads: > In your article "What Makes Free Will Free?" you mention... My question is: where should I place a comma to transition from the quoted article title to words _you mention..._ after it? Should I place the comma in the quotes, or outside the quotes? Traditionally, I would place it in the quotes, but I wasn't too sure if I could place a comma right after a question mark like that.


Handling quotes ending in exclamation or question marks

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Is it correct to use "punctuation outside of the quotations", or "inside?" I've always had trouble dealing with quotes ending in question marks. Any solution has been awkward. What's the best way to use it? Examples (which are probably wrong):   * Did you know how he asked me "how do you do?"?   * After he said "Do I know you?", we hit him with some bricks.   * "Fool!" he exclaimed.


Punctuation placement in speech

> **Possible Duplicates:**   >  Is it ever acceptable for a period to come after a quote at the end of a > sentence?   >  How much punctuation is appropriate when ending a sentence with a full- > sentence quotation? If I have a sentence where I double quote what someone says, i.e. > The man said "How are you?" If that was the end of the sentence, does it need a full stop at the end as follows? > The man said "How are you?" **.**


How should I punctuate around quotes?

The American convention in quotations is (typically) to place punctuation inside quoted text. But I always run into situations where the punctuation of the quote interferes with the punctuation of the sentence. How would you punctuate this (American, non technical)? > When my friends ask, "What do you want for your birthday?", I never know how > to respond. It seems odd to place the last comma _outside_ the quote simply because of the question mark. Is _that_ the preferred (i.e. most often accepted) standard?


Quotes and Punctuation

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Is it ever acceptable for a period to come after a quote at the end of a > sentence?   >  How should I punctuate around quotes? I graduated with an English Major from Radford University back in 1991, but over the years I've done a lot of technical writing as a web developer, and it does not make sense to me to put punctuation inside quoted terms. For instance... > When you find the item marked 'Lever A', please move it near 'Lever B'. ...rather than... > When you find the item marked 'Lever A,' please move it near 'Lever B.' The reason is because I'm not quoting what someone said. Of course, when we use double quotes or single quotes for these terms, that's just a problem with typography where we might not have italics available to us. The best way to compose this, then, would be: > When you find the item marked _Lever A_ , please move it near _Lever B_. However, sometimes when composing an email or other form of communication where italics may not necessarily be available to us, it appears that double quotes or single quotes are used and therefore we get stuck in this problem. Is it appropriate to put common sentence structure punctuation outside quoted terms in cases where italics is not available?


Proper punctuation of “John’s last words were ‘———’ ”

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  How should I punctuate around quotes? When attributing a quote to someone, you put a comma before the quote: > John said, "———" But is the comma still used in the following sentence? > John's last words were, "———." Or should there be something else instead? A colon maybe?


What is the correct way to punctuate this?

> There were forty-nine messages, the first of which was “Is it true that you > moved to Florida?” sent to my cell phone. It seems like there should be another comma after _Florida_ , but you've already got the question mark and quotation mark there. Is it okay like this?


Quotation in sentence

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  How should I punctuate around quotes? How does one punctuate a sentence that contains a quotation in the middle? For example, is it: > 1) Those who say, "My system is foolproof," are underestimating the > ingenuity of fools. or > 2) Those who say, "My system is foolproof" are underestimating the ingenuity > of fools. or > 3) Those who say "My system is foolproof" are underestimating the ingenuity > of fools. ?


In the book "Charlotte's Web," or In the book "Charlotte's Web",?

When stating a book title, is the comma before or after the quotations?


"What happens to the comma after an inquiring/exclaiming quotation?", he wondered, as he posted to StackExchange

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  How should I punctuate around quotes? Forgive me for the creative title, because I'm not sure how else to ask this. If you have a sentence like this... "What's wrong?", he asked sympathetically, hoping for an honest answer. or like this... "Hey! Give me my keys!", he shouted, as he shook his fist. Is the comma to the right of the quotation mark correct? It seems odd to me, as the !/? already counts as 'punctuation'.


What do you do when you end the first part of a compound sentence with a quote?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  How should I punctuate around quotes? For example, if I want to show someone's response in the same sentence, what would I do? Would the comma from the end of the quote be enough? > He said, "Get me a drink," but I didn't want to. Because this looks weird: > He said, "Get me a drink,", but I didn't want to. What if the quote end with a question? > He said, "Will you get me a drink?" but I didn't want to. I think that I would need a comma somewhere. > He said, "Will you get me a drink?," but I didn't want to. > > He said, "Will you get me a drink?", but I didn't want to. The `?,"` looks better to me, but I don't know. How do you do it?


Periods in quotes and how to end the sentence the quote lies in

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  How should I punctuate around quotes? If I am quoting someone in my writing, and I end their quote with a period, and the end of the quote is also the end of my sentence. How do I properly end the sentence? An example of this is in my last question: > For example, "The file is not updat(e)able.". Here is another example: > The boss said, "If you don't get your work in by tomorrow, you're fired.". Is that how you properly end the sentence, or should I leave one of the periods out? If the latter, could you explain why?


How to punctuate an embedded quoted question within a declarative sentence?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  How should I punctuate around quotes? I'm having a devil of a time trying to determine how to punctuate an embedded quoted question within a declarative sentence. A comma is used to introduce the quote, but things get hairy at the end of the quote. > When Ms. Peremptory asked, "Are you ever going to be ready?" I was unable to > respond. Is this situation best handled with no closing comma? Placement in any of the possible spaces between the closing "y" in "ready" and the subject of the sentence produces visually confounding -- though possibly grammatically correct -- results.


Should the article that comes after ‘There is” always be “a” or “an”?

I found the following sentence in a reference book of English grammar, titled “These are the weak points of Japanese on English grammar - 日本人は英文法のここを間違える” edited by Japan IR and published by DHC Publishing in 2006: > “Example: There is _a_ first time for everything. > > Though you may be tempted to use “the” for “first time,” here you must use > “a,” because it is a grand rule to use “a” after “There is.” The > composition, “There is” always demands “a,” and “first time” just follows > its demand.- P.52 I didn’t know such a grand rule – A noun after “There is” should be accompanied with an infinite article exhists. Is it true? I used to write “There was the following article in the New York Times.” Was I wrong?


How did “equivocal” come to mean what it means?

The word _unanimous_ is reasonably easy to trace: it comes from Latin _unum_ (one) + _anima_ (mind). If several people are of the same unanimous opinion, they could be said to be speaking “of one mind”. The word _equivocal_ looks very similar. It comes from _aequi_ (same) + _vocal_ (from _vox_ , voice). It would seem that it should mean “speaking with the same voice” and thus have a meaning similar to _unanimous_. Yet, it means the opposite, and it is _unequivocal_ that is a synonym of _unanimous_. **How did _equivocal_ manage to reverse its meaning?**


What does "head the bill" mean?

What does this phrase in the song Wow - Kate Bush mean? > We're all alone on the stage tonight.   >  We've been told we're not afraid of you.   >  We know all our lines so well, uh-huh.   >  We've said them so many times:   >  Time and time again,   >  Line and line again. > > Ooh, yeah, you're amazing!   >  We think you're incredible.   >  You say we're fantastic,   >  **But still we don't** **_head the bill._** > > Wow! Wow! Wow! Wow! Wow! Wow! Unbelievable!


Single word meaning "pregnant woman"

Does such a word exist? It has occurred to me that the "woman" part is redundant, since only women can be pregnant (except for Arnold Schwarzanegger in Junior)


"Begs the question" or "Raises the question"?

From Super User: > I just installed Win7 on my non-PC (ahem) and was struck by how many times > the Windows installer reboots during installation. It even tells you on the > screen during installation that the computer will reboot multiple times. > > I know MS must have a good reason for this, but I'm completely baffled why > this is necessary? Installation simply writes to the disk, and because the > system has booted off the DVD, it already has full write access to the > target hard drive partition. Is Windows in fact installing a preliminary > disk image and then booting off of that instead of the DVD in order to speed > up installation? ( **Though that then begs the question, why 2 reboots?** ) > > Edit: Changed "3+ reboots" to "2 reboots". It probably seemed like more than > that because I had to do an extra reboot initially (back to my host OS) to > fix the format of my partition, and then there were the subsequent reboots > for windows updates. ( _Emphasis added by me_ ) It seems to me like "raises the question" would fit better than "begs the question" in this case. What is correct?


"In a frail voice" versus "with a frail voice"

Which of these are correct? > In a frail voice, he said goodbye.   >  With a frail voice, he said goodbye.


Does this logical fallacy have a name?

A phrase being used by the "news" media regarding the recent arrest of people in Columbus, NM is "firearms favored by the Mexican cartels", referring to their purchase of AK47s and other semiautomatics; weapons that are in fact favored by many people who want a good weapon for a reasonable price. I'm trying to name the fallacy, and "guilt by association" and "red herring" come to mind but aren't really a good fit. I've read this thread, but can't really match it to the situation. I've also looked through many of the fallacies at the Nizkor Project and logicalfallacies.info and can't see a good match. Any ideas? * * * It could be rewritten for clarity: Person P bought weapons A and B.   A and B are favored by the Mexican drug cartels.   Therefore, P bought the weapons with intent to distribute them to the Mexican drug cartels.


When did "fag" become an offensive word?

I'm from Pennsylvania. With the recent threat by the Westboro Baptist Church to protest the funeral of seven children who perished in a fire, I've been thinking a lot about their infamous catchphrase: "God Hates Fags." Religious debates aside, when did "fag" become an offensive word?


Past simple with today

For example, I want to say that I found a ball today. But "today" means action in present, am I right? I've already searched the Internet and it seems the right way is this: > I found a ball today But it seems wrong when I say "today" and "found" (I'm not using words like "earlier"). Maybe it's right to say: > I have found a ball today And why can't I say > I find a ball today Which way is right and why?


Should "Ms." be used in a document meant to be translated?

The honorific 'Ms.' is very useful in US English, but I can't find any authority on what the equivalent might be in other cultures and languages. Has this reached (say) Indian English? If I use it in something that will be translated to other languages, am I just frustrating the translator because it doesn't cross?


Word for pulling and releasing in kite flying

When flying a kite, there are moments when you need to quickly pull on the string and let it go so that the kite can catch the wind and go up. Is there a word for this action?


Does the long form of an abbreviation go in quotes?

I am trying to use and introduce an abbreviation in a sentence. Example: > I worked with technologies such as Syntactically Awesome Stylesheets (Sass) > while working on my project. Does the "Syntactically Awesome Stylesheets" part need to be in quotes? It seems a bit out-of-place to me while using an acronym with such a peculiar long form. Thanks


What does "tearing your résumé apart in a way" mean?

I asked a résumé checker to check my résumé and she gave me the following answer: > When you look at the below list of issues, you'll probably think I'm tearing > your resume apart. I guess I am, in a way. But, I swear, your resume is > pretty good. What does she mean by _tearing my résumé apart_?