Slang words for body parts

We all know the various slang words for bottoms, boobs and genitalia. Those are well covered here already. This question relates to slang words for the other parts of the body. What common slang words do we have for body parts (aside from the "good bits" mentioned above). For example: "noggin" for your head. Alternatively, "peepers" for your eyes (though urban dictionary says this can also mean breasts).


Idioms and bodyparts: punch your lights out and lights

There is an idiom " _I'll punch your lights out_ " which means > ## punch someone's lights out > > Sl. to knock someone out with a fist There is also " _lights_ " which, when used about a body, mean > ## Lights (Offal) > > _noun_ the lungs of sheep, pigs, or bullocks, used as food, especially for > pets. I was trying to find whether or not the two were related. The only thing I can think of, which is by no means supported is that if you are to be beaten up then perhaps all the air gets knocked from your lungs?


We'll vs well used in this sentence?

Is We'll or well used here: ___ , that works. ___ , I've never done that before.


First Q here. If this has been asked before sorry (Did search) Term for a choice that you like and you dislike? And you can/would probably only take the choice you like. For example: A justice department lawyer says to you "Either testify or go to prison for 25 to life". Or "Enter witness protection or Vito is going to put you in the ground". In the above statements, we have two choices. But only one choice is viable. "To testify", or "Enter witness protection". What is such a choice called? (It can not be called a dilemma).


Origin of the phrase 'space case'

Just wondering what the origin of this phrase is. When was it first used and by whom?


what to use with "your address", at or on?

what should we use with the word "your home", at or on? for example- I have placed an order .... your address thanks in advance


What does the presence of the perfect tense reveal about us?

Other languages might say 'the floor is clean' or 'the cat is hungry'. An English speaker might say this, or we might equally choose to say 'the floor has been cleaned' or 'the cat hasn't been fed'. [Married couples seem to use a lot of present perfect simples!] I was wondering whether anyone has any insights into the philosophical implications of perfect tenses - particularly what their presence within our language system reveals about the psyche or culture of English speakers. I've been wrestling with this for some time. My initial conclusion was that this tendency to describe the world as a the result of a series of past actions suggested that we were interventionists, not fully content to just let the world 'be'. Not very Buddhist! However, I have since questioned this evaluation, and now I am wondering whether 'the floor has been cleaned' is simply an acknowledgement of change over time, something which is less explicit, though maybe implied, with 'the floor is clean'. Why do we have this need to present the past?


Correct, clear, concise way to use "potato-potato" in writing

_"You say tomato, I say tomato"_ and the song from the beginning. As an informal turn of speech, it can be used to show that two or more parties are talking about basically the same thing but not in same exact terms, or not quite agreeing on the specifics. Yet written down as _tomato-tomato_ or _potato-potato_ it looks just plain wrong and confusing (like in the video title above). Short of using the transcriptions _/təˈmeɪtəʊ/ - /təˈmɑːtəʊ/_ and _/pəˈteɪtəʊ/ - /pəˈtɑːtəʊ/_ , is there a way of writing it down that indicates the differences in pronunciation?


What's the difference between "onto" and "on to" and where should they be used, etc?


The meaning of "feel my conversation in quotation marks"?

What does the last part of the below sentence mean? It looks to me grammartically incorrect. Does it mean "The most familiar things (X,Y,Z) makes me feel at a remove, amd makes me feel that my participation is provisional and my conversation is in quotation marks." ? And further more, what does "converstaion in quotation marks" mean? Please forgive me if this question sounds a dumb one but I am not a native Englis speaker. > I never stopped feeling like an impostor, a New Yorker disguised in a > sensible English raincoat. Even the most familiar things — Trafalgar Square; > the food hall at Harvey Nichols; the best bookstore in the city, Hatchard’s > on Piccadilly — felt at a remove, my participation provisional, my > conversation in quotation marks.


Word that describes a word which isn't normally used in an everyday conversation

I remember there was a word which describes a **word which isn't normally used in an everyday conversation**. Ironically, that word isn't normally used in an everyday conversation. It's an **adjective**. In a sentence: > That word is ??????, you don't see it often. I can distinctly remember that it is used to specifically describe **words** (and not general events, knowledge etc). A **word** which is rare/exquisite and isn't seen very often. What is a word that describes that? I remember it was quite the highbrow word.


Term for advancement through medical anomalies

I'm looking for a term to describe when a medical advancement is achieved through, for example, a natural immunity to a disease. For example, the Berlin Patient, who is naturally immune to HIV may hold the cure to HIV.


Is “If I would have X” an Indian shibboleth?

As I was reading a deleted question that asks whether > If I would have sweet dreams, they would be about you. If my dreams ever > come true, it will be with you. is correct, I noticed that the incorrect use of “if I would have” in the first sentence somehow made me feel like the poster was Indian. I don't know exactly why, but it felt like something my former Indian colleagues could have said. So, is this particular error typical of (or quite likely to be made by) Indians, or is it just some weird feeling I'm getting for no reason?


What does "blow over someone's quest" mean?

What do the following sentences intend to convey to the reader? >   * One blew over the industrialist's quest. >   * One blew over the ford's quest. >


Is this redundant pronoun use "grammatical"?

Is this sentence grammatically valid or not? > People who achieve they do this with perseverance. One of the two answers to the earlier question Unnecessary pronouns: “The President he issued…” says _clearly **it's not** "correct grammatically", as it is redundant_. The other says _it **is** grammatical, [but it's] missing a comma [before the pronoun]._ The first of those two earlier answers has only a single upvote, and the second has none at all, so I don't know which to believe.


What do you call the impressive short sentences catalogs and magazine use to write product descriptions?

A couple of years ago I heard a word descriptive of short and impressive sentences that are used in catalogs and websites for product descriptions. I don't remember that specific word. Do you have any idea what it might be? I need it for use in place of the words _short description_.


When are "from" and "by" interchangeable?

Today I listened to a performance by Stephen Lynch in which he said "A public service anouncement from Stephen Lynch" which confused me, a non-native English speaker. Is the usage of "from" correct here? When can I use "from" instead of "by"?


Meaning of 'deprive them of any sense'

> Thus they are compelled to cut all connection between their statements and > experience; and precisely by this procedure they **deprive them of any > sense**


Using active voice without personal pronouns

When writing scientific research proposals I have been advised to try and stick to active voice because passive tends to sound indirect and to imply doubt. However, when writing in active voice, I find it difficult to not use personal pronouns. Does anyone have any tips for maintaining active voice without using personal pronouns?


What is the etymology of "BFE"?

BFE is an abbreviation for "Bum Fuck Egypt" or "Butt Fuck Egypt," which is used to denote "out in the middle of nowhere." I'm curious how this expression came about. UrbanDictionary.com has a user- submitted definition with the following etymology: > As I understand (and other people have corroborated), it derives its > existence from another expression “bumble fuck” (I am unsure if it's one > word or two), both of which mean "out in the middle of nowhere." I am fairly > certain that the inaccurate “butt fuck Egypt” derived from bum being the > English term for buttocks. Clearly the definition of BFE is the same > regardless of what one believes the “B” stands for, but I thought is was > worth correcting. I have no idea how accurate or reliable the above etymology is. There is no entry on EtymOnline.com.


Another way of saying "easily deceived"?

What's another way of saying _easily deceived_? I want to have a better vocabulary. _Easily deceived_ sounds a bit basic to me. Is there a better word for that phrase?


What does "write the bill with a ‘double meat ax’" mean?

What does _writing the bill with a "double meat ax"_ mean? I found the phrase _double meat ax_ in today's _Washington Post_ article, House approves dramatic cuts in federal spending in 235-189 vote, dealing with last night's House vote on drastic federal budget cuts. I know the meaning of _double ax_ as a double-bladed ax, but I don't know _double meat ax_ , and why the phrase was used with quotation marks, which suggests the writer used the phrase with special implication. Can you tell me exactly what _writing the bill with a "double meat ax"_ means? The text reads: > During the bleary-eyed final roll call at 4:35 a.m., 235 Republicans were > joined by no Democrats in support of dramatic spending reductions that they > said were needed to address a soaring annual deficit of $1.6 trillion; 189 > Democrats—as well as three Republicans—opposed it, accusing Republicans of > writing the bill with a "double meat ax."


Does the word "apparently" imply that I personally do or don't believe the statement following it?

When I say "Apparently, xyz", does that imply one of the following, and if so, which one?   1. From observation, I believe xyz to be true, but I leave open the possibility that I might be wrong.   2. I believe xyz is not true, but I am aware that it may seem so, and want to point that out. Merriam-Webster gives "open to view", "clear or manifest to the understanding" and "appearing as actual to the eye or mind", which to me seems to lean towards the first interpretation, but when discussing synonyms it also states > apparent, illusory, seeming, ostensible mean not actually being what > appearance indicates. which sounds more like the second. Can I use _apparently_ for both situations, or is there a better word for one of them?


Is "tell neither X nor Y" equivalent to "not tell both X and Y" or "not tell either X and Y"?

Given the sentence "John told neither the boss nor the secretary.", which of the following has the same meaning? >   1. John did not tell both the boss and the secretary. >   2. John did not tell either the boss and the secretary. >


What does the cause for your feeling like “downing a quart of Red Bull” mean?

Again in the _Time_ article (June 29),“Roberts Rules: What the Health Care decision means for the country” that many of my familiar ‘teachers’ criticized the style of writing as too pretentious and the analogies too outdated, there is the following sentence: > “Romney wasted little time in reacting (Chief Justice’s ruling). – Our > mission is clear,” he said. “If we want to get rid of Obamacare, we’re going > to have to replace President Obama.” ---Polls show little appetite for > repeal among independent voters, but for the Republican base, the Roberts > ruling was cause for _downing a quart of Red Bull_.” I know Red Bull is an energy drink brand, but what does the writer want to say by using this phrase? Does it mean Republican voters are angry with Roberts’ ruling? Does it mean that the Republican base need to rouse themselves to repeal Obamacare? In what particular occasions is “down a quart of Red Bull” used? Why should it be Red Bull? Can’t I replace it with other drinks such as beer, whisky, vodka, juice, or just water? Furthermore, is “downing a quart of Red Bull” a popular phrase?


Can I "make up for someone"?

I have a question about the phrase "make up for". You can make up for the loss, the delay or someone's mistake, right? I used to think you can also "make (this/it) up for someone", meaning that you will do something nice to that person because you feel obligated for your not-so-nice conduct prior to this conversation. ex) Hey, I'm sorry I'm late. I will totally make this up for you. Since I can't seem to find a valid example for this usage, I noticed that I might have picked up this phrase mistakenly.


Is "setup" an acceptable noun in formal writing?

I'm editing a draft of a scientific paper which repeatedly uses the word "setup" to refer to the, well, experimental setup. Example: > The dimensions of the setup are 250 mm × 250 mm × 50 mm. Every time I see the word "setup" appear by itself, I cringe a little, thinking of, say, Microsoft Windows' `SETUP.EXE`. However, the phrase "experimental setup" sounds OK. Is " _setup_ " accepted as a valid word to use for an experimental apparatus, in formal scientific writing in American English?


Somebody/someone gets/get *

Which is correct: "Somebody gets punished" or "Somebody get punished?" I have the same question with respect to "Someone gets" and "Someone get." Is there a rule which applies to this kind of sentences?


"We help consumers pay less" vs. "Helping consumers paying less"

Since English is not my native language I can not decide which one of the following two sentences is better.   1. We help companies sell more and consumers pay less.   2. Helping companies sell more and consumers paying less.


Negating ‘to’-infinitive in negative clause

The sentence: `There aren't any reasons to do it.` I'd like to say other form of this phrase with opposite meaning. Something like this: There aren't any reasons to _don't_ do it. How to say this form of the phrase with double-negations of affirmative meaning correctly? And are there some rules to make a sentence of such form?


Word for "to make changeable"

What is a verb meaning _to make changeable_ or _to make variable_? For example, > Though normally his opinions were final, a recent stroke had ___ed his mind. > > When group policy changed, a ton of files were ___ed. If at all possible the word should be terse, but clear meaning is most important.


Word for very-fine, see through

Uh, I know there is a word starting with d. it sounds kinda like diophanus or something similar. It referes to very fine clothing, nearly see through clothing. I really don't know the word. Any help is greatly appreciated.


Present Perfect Simple versus Present Perfect Continuous: a tricky case

The parents come back home, see the living-room is in a terrible mess. Do they ask their little ones "What have you done?" or "What have you been doing?" What is understood in each of the questions? I call this a tricky case because the usual criterion to distinguish between Present Perfect Simple and Present Perfect Continuous, the focus on the result of the action for the simple, and on the action itself for the continuous is a bit difficult to use here, isn't it?


On Saturday afternoon or in the Saturday afternoon?

> She said she would give me her final answer **on** Saturday afternoon. Should it be _in the_ or _on_ in this case?


Is an embankment always man-made?

Is it possible for nature to create an embankment or is the word used exclusively for the result of human activity?


To use vs Make use of. when to use what

I often hear 'to make use of something'. Is there any difference from just 'to use something'?


Is "underlying" the right word?

I am describing a mathematical model, where the probability density function of a variable is made up of two contributions, two distributions. Mathematically we would say that f(x) = g1(x) + g2(x). Now: in the text I am writing something like this: > "the distribution f(x) is the sum of two underlying distributions, g1(x) and > g2(x). [...] in order to estimate the parameters of the underlying > distributions we use a parametric approach...." I am trying to use "underlying" in the sense of "lying under". What do you think? Is underlying the right word or should I address those distributions in a different way (how)?


Someone just told me that my business website structure should be "well-siloed"... what does that mean.

I know they're referencing a silo but i'm not understanding how it correlates/translates to business structure and presentation. are they talking about the function of the silo?


Difference between "classical" and "classic"

What's the difference between _classical_ and _classic_? Should we say _classic content in textbooks_ or _classical content in textbooks_?


Difference between "leverage" and "utilize"

> Sooner or later, you want to **leverage** Zend_Application better by > creating your own resource plugins. Can _leverage_ above be replaced by _utilize_?


Term for animals that live under water

What is the term for animals that live under water (not necessarily in an ocean)? Ideally this would include sharks, dolphins, crabs, seashells, salmons and pet fish. Here are some I can come up with, but none sound right:   * Aquatic Animals   * Ocean Creatures   * Ocean Animals   * Marine Lives   * Marine Animals   * Marine Creature


Literary technique from quote in Frankenstein

> How much happier that man is who believes his native town to be the world, > than he who aspires to be greater than his nature will allow The above quote is taken from Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, and I read it described as an example of 'antithesis'. I don't quite agree that categorisation and was after a second opinion. Also, if it isn't antithesis what type of literary technique would it be classified as?


Can ";" be used to replace the word "but"?

Are these two sentences both correct and equivalent? > People say stuff like "all lawyers are liars", but it's not true. > > People say stuff like "all lawyers are liars"; it's not true. Is there any difference in nuance or anything at all?


How do I use the prefix 'de-' correctly?

Is there a dictionary dedicated to word prefixes? I'd like to know more about _de-_ , but there's no uniform meaning; for example, in _demystify_ it signifies a reverse action, while in _delimit_ it's a positive meaning, like _set_.


First known occurrence of the word "technique" in English

I’m trying to track down the first printed use of the word _technique_ in English. Can anyone tell me the name, author, and date of the publication in question? It would be especially valuable, on top of that, to have an excerpted passage containing the word, in order to infer its intended meaning from its context.


Should I always insert "and" between two verbs in imperative mode?

As far as I understand, the word _and_ is usually inserted between two verbs used in imperative mood in English. For example, “Go and make me a drink.” How obligatory is this? Can I claim that it is ungrammatical (or at least less typical) to have to consecutive verbs in imperative mood? Also, what about the phrase “Go make me a drink”? Should I treat _go_ and _make_ in this phrase as two imperatives?


What's the origin of the word party pooper?

A **party pooper** is defined as: a person who refuses to join in the fun of a party; broadly : one who refuses to go along with everyone else I'm interested to know about the origin of this term and the person who first coined it. Any idea?


Word for "credit increase"

I'm designing an interface of a web-based application and want to let users increase their credit amount online in one of its sections. What is a label for this action? Is there a technical banking term for it, or should I use a simple term like _credit increase_?


What does 'mothercanuckers' mean?

First of all, sorry if it is offensive (I think it somewhat is).   I was going through http://bleacherreport.com/articles/424590-the-funniest- promos-and-moments-in-wwe-history#page/20 > The Rock owned everyone by calling the Canadians mothercanuckers I heard him saying this in the video but what does that mean?


How to quote in this situation?

> Mark said, "it would ruin our school's reputation!" If I want to quote Mark here, > Mark noted that doing so and so would "ruin ___ school's reputation." If I want to emphasize that Mark identifies himself as part of the school by using "our," can I say > Mark noted that doing so and so would "ruin our school's reputation." Is it wrong since "our" doesn't agree with "Mark"? I don't think it makes sense to change it to "his" as the school is not "his."


On a North American bus or subway, what do you call the long horizontal ads on the tops of the "walls"?

Is there an official term for the ads that you see on public transit _inside_ the vehicle or car, _above_ the windows/doors, long horizontal panels, usually about 24" x /12"?


facial expression of sympathetic pain?

How would you call a facial expression displayed at sight of someone hurting - the kind of involuntary grimace when you imagine just how much it hurt?


Factitious v. Fictitious

I came across "factitious" in this quoted sentence: > One can, however, come up with a **factitious** principle to underwrite the > latter argument. (Middle of last full paragraph on this page of this book.) It seems to me that one could equally well have used fictitious instead. So are they perfectly synonymous or are there circumstances where you would use one rather than the other?


alternatives for "guy"

I'm working in an English big company in Germany. Everybody speak English but most of us as second, or third language. One thing I noticed is that we are all "guys" in the office: "Ask the guy up there." "Call the guys of help desk." "Guys, we need to manage this now." "Who is the guy who said that?" "We need to tell this to all the other guys." Apart from some managers that says "Gentlemen" everybody else use only "guy". I'm wondering if is this normal also in natively English speaking workplaces or instead there are better and different terms that could be used in such situations.


Is there a technical term for insideout-ness?

So the technical term for right or left handedness is chirality. The technical term for evenness or oddness is parity. Is there a similar term for inside-out-ness vs right-side-out-ness? EDIT: I wish to speak of 2 objects. They have no interesting features except that each could be considered 'inside-out' relative to the other. Except there is no 'right' side. I suppose I could arbitrarily designate one side as Right and the other as In, but there are reasons to avoid doing so. "Object 1 and object 2 differ only in their **___**." I tried both chirality and parity but neither fit.


How to cite an author who spells his name inconsistently

I am writing a paper where I will cite several works by the Hungarian mathematician Gábor Szegő. Note that his surname includes the letter o with a double acute accent, NOT a letter o with umlaut ö. In his first paper (that I know of) he spells his own name this way, and biographies of him always use this spelling. However, in later works (such as a major book that he published) he usually uses an umlaut for his name instead. I am not sure whether this is because of technical limitations on what accents could be typeset at the time or because he moved out of Hungary (which did happen) and was trying to spell his name in a more appropriate way. Additionally, a theorem has been named after him (which is a great honour for a mathematician), but it is usually spelt as the Szegö limit theorem with an umlaut. Should I follow convention with the theorem name or try to correct it by using the original spelling of his surname? And how should I cite his work? To clarify, I am of course asking whether there is an accepted convention on such things, rather than looking for opinions on what people would prefer that I do. Unfortunately I plan to cite both his original paper and later book, so if I cite his name in the way it's spelt in the work then I'll have Szegő and Szegö right next to each other in my bibliography! And if I use author-year citations then I'll have them right next to each other in my text (see Szegő, 1915; Szegö, 1952)! (Thanks in advance for any help. Apologies if this is not the right place for this question. It applies equally in any language, but this seems the most appropriate StackExchange board.) Edit: I should point out that the 1915 article isn't written in English (nor Hungarian: it's in German). It seems that all of Szegö's work in English used the umlaut, so perhaps he considered it to be the correct way of writing his name in English. Just as we have Pythagoras's theorem rather than Πυθαγόρας's theorem and Sobolev inequalities rather than Со́болев inequalities, perhaps Szegö is always (and only) correct in English.


Is "received with thanks" stilted English?

I just got a receipt which said "Received with thanks the sum of ..." _Thanks_ stands for gratitude, so this looks fine to me as far as grammar is concerned. But is this old-fashioned and/or stilted? Are there more formal ways of expressing this idea?


Looking for word/expression/idiom that describes "difficult to describe driving directions"

On lives in a part of town which has new roads most cab drivers don't know. In effect, one needs to direct the driver to the part of town, instead of just saying "take me to street X that intersects w/ street Y" Question: I want say that "I am stuck to hard-to-describe directions, while you're NOT." My thinking is, "while I am stuck to less amenable directions"


Is this a correct usage of the word "only"?

"Only a single DVD movie is at least 4.7 GB, So there should be a lot of data on the Internet."


How to say that a problem has occurred previously in passive voice

I want to say this in a passive voice: > People must have had this problem in the past. The sentence starts with something like "This problem must ...". How do I say it?


"Integrity" vs. "honesty"—what's the difference?

In what situations would you say that someone "has integrity" as opposed to "behaves with honesty"? For instance, if an employee is meticulous about reporting his hours, does he have integrity or is he honest? (He's probably both—but which one fits better?)


How to refer to the 'sections' of an aquarium?

When you visit an aquarium, you see different species of marine life in different 'sections.' They are usually surrounded by glass. I want to build sentences like this: > I walked to another ' **glass/section**.' In it, I could see a many sting > rays." > > The shark whale swam from one corner of the ' **glass/section** ' to the > other. > > There was a jellyfish in the middle of the **glass**. (OK, this one sounds > weird). I'm not very sure which is the best word to use here. **EDIT:** For example, this would be a 'section': ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/v64wx.jpg) Is it right to say, for instance: > The people are looking through the **glass**. or > There are many people in this **section**. (I just need a general term that people would immediately understand. I need this for a novel I'm writing.)


Must be paid before the 8th May?

Does that mean I can pay on the 8th May, or before 23:59 7th May?


"Rounded", "heaping" and other types of teaspoon(fuls)?

Can you please elaborate what's "rounded" teaspoon, what's "heaped" teaspoon and what other "types" of teaspoons exists as a measures of volume? And is there any difference between, rounded teaspoon and rounded teaspoon* _ful_ *?


What is "dismal"?

I've struggled with this word for about 2 years (no joke). Every time I see it, I look it up, kind of understand what it means in that context, and then gleefully forget. Please help me understand the origin and meaning.


“Make sure to” vs. “Be sure to”: Is the first one correct?

These two versions below are used interchangeably where I live now in the United States:   1. Make sure to do something.   2. Be sure to do something. But I always have found the first version clumsy. I come from a strong linguistic background in the UK where there was an emphasis on grammar, and I can’t imagine my English teachers from private school using the “make sure to” version. Is “make sure to” correct English in its purest form? For example, would you approve of the “make sure to” version if you were a professional book publisher or a a grammar school teacher? PS: I'm not sure what the correct tags are — compound verbs? intransitive verbs?


Is there a casual way to say "this can wait" on a positive note

Is there a short and casual way (one or two words or the like) to express that whereas something is _truly_ important, the exact timing of when it gets handled or completes does not greatly affect overall plans? Saying `not urgent` isn't useful because that implies everything else _is_ urgent which would really be a distortion and lead to a digression into strange discourse. It also implies we only do what's urgent which would be a rather grim way of describing a mode of operation unless you're in emergency mode all of the time. Maybe something like `postponable` but I'm not sure this is a very proper or accessible word, it's also tilting towards a negative connotation. In mathematical style the answer may have been something like `not time- sensitive` or something like that, but that only resonates with about 0.2 percent of literate human beings or less... The meaning I am after is something positive that also conveys `'this will be great and awaited but time is not a factor relative to other things'`. Only much more concisely if possible....


Synonym for "one flavor"

I would like to know if there is an appropriate word for "one flavor." For example:   * Monosyllabic: one syllable   * Monochromatic: one color What is the equivalent word for "one flavor," eg. "mono-gustatic" (obviously this is just a mock-up word for sake of the question)? _Note: I am asking this in reference to wine (if it helps in answering the question.) I encountered a glass which I thought was fairly "one flavored," and thus, the question arose._


Are words with negative meaning used to describe positive things by the youth?

In Germany, kids of age 10 to 15 tend to evolve a language pattern that uses a certain word that has a negative connotation to describe everything they approve of, be it an impressive slam-dunk or nice cars on the street. Every generation seems to choose their own word for this, so after some years the word changes, but the meaning stays the same. Examples that come to mind are > _übel_ (sick/disgusting) and more recently _mies_ (lousy): > > "Meine Mutter hat mir zehn Euro mitgegeben." "Miiiiies!" > > "My mother gave me ten EUR to spend." "Looooousy!" The only aquivalent i can think of in the english language would be " _sick_ ", but that's maybe connected to skater/surfer slang. Is this a common behaviour in UK/US/English speaking kids as well? Edit: After some discussions in the comments I thought to specify my question further. I'm especially interested in the described mechanism of one word replacing another over the years, allowing to place users of such word into a certain age range for example.


What does this sentence mean?

The following is from S. Fitzgerald's novel _Tender is the Night_ : > No friendship worth the name was ever destroyed in an hour without some > painful flesh being torn -- so Franz let himself believe with ever- > increasing conviction that Dick traveled intellectually and emotionally at > such a rate of speed that the vibrations jarred him -- this was a contrast > that had previously been considered a virtue in their relationship. _So, for > the shoddiness of needs, are shoes made out of last year's hide._ Yet it was > May before Franz found an opportunity to insert the first wedge. What does the italicized sentence mean?


Anticipation with a positive tone

I am looking for a word or phrase that **means** _I am happy that something will be happening_. Existing phrases along this line already exist in popular writing: > Movie Y is the _most anticipated_ since Movie X.   >  I am really _looking forward to_ Christmas this year _Look forward to_ and _anticipate_ are synonyms but nether spells out the mood in which one looks forward to something. Really, what does "most anticipated" actually mean? A load of people expect that a movie will be made? Great, but it doesn't mean they want to watch it. I respect that these phrases have built up a convention for meaning positive things,   I'd just like something more explicit. **Edit:** I did notice this question hit the wall before posting. I'd like to think I've been more objective but point out issues and I'll try to fix.


Is there a derogatory word for "mobile phone" (cellphone) similar to "idiot box" for a television?

My father called our TV "the idiot box". Implying either that it had idiots on it, was targeted at idiots, or you were an idiot if you watched it too much. Is there any similar term in use but referring to mobile phones?


When something sounds too good to be true, it is or isn't?

I'm having a hard time understanding why the phrase is > when something sounds too good to be true, it **is** and not > when something sounds too good to be true, it **isn't** Because "when something sounds too good be true," it "is **_not_** true", right?


Are "eery" and "eerie" equally acceptable spellings?

I used "eery" yesterday in a text and was corrected jokingly by my correspondent to "eerie." Looking at it after the fact, neither 'looks' right to me and both get through auto-correct with no red underline. Some cursory googling showed that both are at least technically correct, but I'm curious as to preferred or standard usage. I read a lot and I guess I've rarely seen the word in print, and even then it was probably the adverb form _eerily_. So, beyond actual correctness, are both equally acceptable? Regional differences?


Is a smiley at the end of a sentence like a period?

How do you treat an emoticon at the end of a sentence? > He probably caught his cold from the kids at school :( Should there be a period after the :(, or should I go straight into the next sentence (capitalizing the next word)?


Where does 'nom nom nom' come from?

I know that it refers to eating and as far as I'm aware, it is quite recent but does anyone know the origin of it?


Why is Q used in some words instead of K or C

For instance in words Iraq and Qashqai? Are there any historical reasons for that?


"This may get confused" or "This may get confusing"

This morning I was talking to a friend and I came out with the sentence: "This picture may get confused" with the meaning "This picture is so strange that you could get confused" then I started thinking that, maybe, I could have said "This picture may get confusing". Is There any difference between "This may get confused" and "This may get confusing"?


"I teach" vs. "I'm teaching" — which one is proper in this situation?

Following situation occurs/ed. I meet a friend for a coffee. We chat and I ask him what he's doing for work now. His answer: "I'm teaching English." This irks me. Because in that situation he's not teaching right that moment, but rather he teaches English. So shouldn't his answer rather be "I teach English."? English is not my mother tongue but I do think I'm fluent in it. I grew up bilingual.


What articles can I use with "maximum/minimum [noun]"?

There's a short piece of text whose heading is as follows: > Maximum variability and openness The _variability_ and _openness_ should refer to the features of an application. Which article should/could I use before _maximum_ — zero, definite, indefinite? I'm a little bit confused by the many examples found through googling. **Edit:** I'm sorry I didn't include more context in my original question. I thought it would be enough. What follows is the actual text of the paragraph: > Customize the [product name] yourself for it to meet all of the diverse > requirements of the users in your company. The openness of the [product > name] is based on its ability to integrate an array of individual activities > managed by special, tailored pieces of software that you use to perform > activities in your company. As for the negative connotations of _variability_ when talking about software, I must say I was a bit confused at first, but then I checked my dictionary to find out it's a false friend in my native language. Good to know! I suppose the producer wants to stress the... it's on the tip of my tongue... _versatility_ or _universality_ of their application. No, those aren't the right words. I guess it's the infinite _customizability_ that matters here most. How about _variedness_ , _diversity_ , _diverseness_ , _heterogeneity_ or _multifariousness_ then? I'm sorry if this is a bit off-topic. Should I make it another question?


How to add emphasis to a modal verb

To add emphasis to a normal verb, we use the emphatic do: >   * He does run fast. >   * Do come in. >   * Do brush your teeth. > Obviously, with modal verbs this would be a grave mistake: >   * (*) He does can run. >   * (*) You do may come in. >   * (*) I do should brush my teeth. > Of course, you can just stress the modal verb itself or introduce an adverb. In the case of "should" you can also cheat by replacing it with "have to": >   * He surely can run. >   * You _may_ come in. >   * I do have to brush my teeth. > But are there other possibilities to add emphasis to a modal verb? Which solution is the most elegant? Do any manuals of style address this?


What do you call a scale going down?

I asked a physics question about a scale tipping over and asked _Which way does the scale tip?_ I was later corrected that I should have asked whether the scale would _tip down_ or _tip up_. So it made me wonder, what the correct way of asking such question would have been?


Is the term 'put on his parts' used everywhere, or only in some dialects?

In Norfolk, when a child misbehaves in a demanding, or sulking way, they are often said to 'put on their parts'. 'She is _putting on her parts_ again', means that she is following a pattern, typical for her, where she is being loud, difficult, insistent or awkward. It can also be used for adults and has an added force since it suggests they are behaving like a child. But I am wondering if the expression is widely understood? Presumably it derives from the following meaning of the noun 'parts'. Edit Meaning 12 of on-line OED †a. A character sustained, assumed, or feigned by a person, esp. for a special purpose. Also in extended use. Obs. earlier references deleted. a1732 J. Gay Fables (1738) II. vi. 47 The man of pure and simple heart Through life disdains a double part. 1885 Dict. National Biogr. at Thomas Blood, It is not improbable that he was at this time..acting a double part, keeping the government informed of so much as might secure his own safety. Tags


What does "toast" mean here?

> ... Since there are only about 328 wolves in a state with a historic blood > thirst for the hides of these top predators, the nonprofits are probably > right that lacking protection, Wyoming wolves are toast.


Is it OK to switch between abbreviated and non-abbreviated versions?

For example, having one paragraph where the abbreviation XYZ is used a number of times. Then, in the following paragraph, having the full version Xxxx Yyyy Zzzz several times. How about in the _same_ paragraph? Note: I prefer to _avoid_ abbreviations, and that's what I do whenever I can. However, I'm also trying to reduce the number of lines for a page limit. By abbreviating, I can sometimes remove a line.


What does "hardline phone" mean?

What is meant by _hardline_? A commenter named Ed asked, > "I am very concerned as that was definitely our garage that slid into the > Batavia. My mom has a hardline phone in the house but probally does not > realize it is a cordless requiring power. She is 70 and alone. We have not > heard from her since 9:15 this morning." -- CNN


hallo or hello: etymology dilemma

Does anybody know the etymology of the main greeting in English: hallo? Besides that I wish to know the difference between the terms _hallo_ and _hello_. I have to know!


What is the word for "Unnecessary detailed information"?

Can you tell me what the word is for `"Unnecessary detailed info on a topic which is given after the prominent parts is given"`


A particular usage of 'less seldom'

So, I've been reading _A Dance with Dragons_ by George R. R. Martin. I've come across the phrase 'less seldom' and I would be really glad if someone explained it to me: > Even so, there was something in the air that made Tyrion uneasy. West of the > Rhoyne, he knew, the wharves of Volantis teemed with sailors, slaves, and > traders, and the wineshops, inns, and brothels all catered to them. East of > the river, strangers from across the seas were seen **less seldom**. _We are > not wanted here_ , the dwarf realized. In my opinion, 'less seldom' should mean something like 'more often', but here it is used as 'more rarely'. Is my thinking wrong?


Is there a term for a question and answer pair?

Is there a single word that encapsulates the idea of a question and answer pairing or grouping? So far, google has turned up nothing helpful on the topic. Naturally, reviewing the options for both questions and answers in a thesaurus turns up nothing because the alternatives are similar to the idea of one or the other, but not both combined.


What language function does profanity serve?

I know that the use of profanity has a number of social and psychological functions like pain relief, a sense of control over helpless situations, intimacy and group bonding through release of social norms, and various physical benefits. Used incorrectly (in the wrong type of situation or to an inappropriate level of vulgarity), it can also have negative impacts (mostly social). In terms of language itself, though, is there any particular function served by profanity? Or is it just a shortcut to expressing concepts like "this is extra important to me" or "I am angry" or "I perceive this as a comfortable and informal social situation" which could otherwise be expressed without the profanity?


In my example, did I use brackets correctly?

I know the rules of this site state to only ask questions to get direct answers, but I'm hoping I could still get a little suggestion on what to do. I'm writing a research paper, so the context is formal writing. I'm revising the last section of my abstract. And please, if brackets do not seem essential in my case, let me know :) Here are the original two sentences I want to combine: > Due to the nature of this study, I used the instrumental variables (IV) > approach to estimate the effect of the MLDA on mortality in terms of per > person drinking. Through careful analysis I believe the IV assumptions are > met, which implies that the IV estimate shows the causal effect of the MLDA > on mortality in terms of per person drinking. This is how I intend to combine them by using some form of brackets: > Due to the nature of this study, I used the instrumental variables (IV) > approach — and through the IV assumptions — to estimate the causal effect of > the MLDA on mortality in terms of per person drinking.


What does "From Twitter came" mean?

Is this sentence in italics correct grammatically? Is it written in inverted order? If we rewrite this sentence, is it _Came from Twitter_? > _From Twitter came_ , "@dannyhakim Pictures of flooded Arkville, N.Y., here: > http://t.co/ldJCEFb and here:http://t.co/tp44UFd #irene #catskills" -- CNN


Can I use two colons in a sentence?

Can I use two colons in a sentence? A typical example would be something like the following: > Note: I have substantial experience with the following languages: Python, > Java, C++, and Perl. I have often wanted to write something similar but have been forcing rewrites in order to get around using two colons in the same sentence. The general pattern is: > Note: [sentence with a colon]. Is this use of two colons acceptable? * * * (This question is similar but distinct from Can I use a colon twice in one sentence? due to that question's focus on colons and lists.)


How can I join many adjectives to one word and create a grammatical phrase?

I have to describe an object that is: a pair of   * round/rounded earrings,    * made of wood/wooden,    * with bosses of brass/brass bossed? How can I put it in a single statement? I think that it could be right to say "round wooden earrings with bosses of brass" but I'm not sure, since I'm not a native speaker of English.


What's the difference between Media and Press, I think that press for newspapers and media for TV, can anyone give us details about that?


"May or May Not" Redundancy

> I may or may not contact you later. Isn't this redundant? Unless I'm missing something, the meaning can be expressed equally well with: > I may contact you later. Or even: > I might contact you later.


"Crack" as a positive noun?

Some Spanish speakers use the word **crack** as a positive noun. For example: > Lionel Messi es un crack del football! Is it the same in English? Can I say: _You're a crack_?


Can I use 'drenching' to mean 'being drenched'?

I understand 'drench' means to soak or get wet. Can I say 'I'm drenching in the rain' to mean that I'm standing in the rain and getting soaked by it? I mostly see 'drenching' being used only as a gerund. That's what had me confused.


What does ‘play the pill’ mean?

There was the following sentence in Maureen Dowd’s article titled “Taxing Times for Obama” in the New York Times May 18 issue. - http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/19/opinion/sunday/dowd-irs-investigation-means- more-taxing-times-for-obama.html?hp&_r=0 > “Asked about that on Thursday, Obama might have tried a little **J.F.K. > wit** to dismiss the ridiculous assertion. Instead, he **played the pill** , > as he too often does, huffily telling reporters, “Well, I’ll let you guys > engage in those comparisons, and you can go ahead and read the history, I > think, and draw your own conclusions.” What does “play the pill” mean? I was unable to find this expression as an idiom in any of Cambridge, Oxford and Merriam Webster Dictionary, nor the incidence in Google N Gram. At the same time, what does ‘J.F.K. wit’ mean? What is it like for example?


What great writers have used coordinating conjunctions at the start of sentences?

I had a discussion today with a friend over the validity of using (coordinating, correlative) conjunctions like _but_ or _and_ at the start of sentences. His position was that it breaks a rule of grammar. However, I remembered a post on this site saying that conjunctions at the start of sentences is fine, and that lots of great writers have done that exact thing. I mentioned this to him, and he challenged me to name an author who did this, and to provide him with examples of such. I found that to my shame I couldn’t name even one. So what famous authors actually have used conjunctions at the start of sentences, and how did they do it?


implication behind "can I ask you to ..."

Is there any difference between these two sentences ? (1) Can I ask you to ...[do something]? (2) Can you ... [do something]? Eg., if my boss were to say to me "Can I ask you to pick up the client?". Would that mean the same thing as "Can you pick up the client?" Thanks


Expressions in Tim Minchin's "Angry (Feet)"

I'm having a little trouble with matching some of the lyrics of Tim Minchin's "Angry (Feet)" to the reactions to them of the audience. This makes me suspect I'm missing some of the semantic layers. The lyrics are broken down between the more "controlled" and the more "natural" (maniacal) subpersons, I'll mark them like this and `like this` respectively.   * "My father left my mother for the love of a `pantang (?)` nother" [3:20]    * "In primary school I had trouble making `ashtrays` friends" [3:45]   * "And while he lied there bleeding I used his feet to kick him in the head" [5:40]


Does English have half-graded antonyms?

In a recent question about comparatives, a dispute arose in the comments about gradable antonyms like _useful/useless_ where English speakers strongly prefer to use comparative forms only for half of the pair. I proposed that this is simply an example of marked word pairs, a kind of asymmetry where one word of a pair is the dominant or default form for general use. Marking explains why we normally ask, “How _old_ are you?” instead of how _young._ I think it also explains why it sounds awkward to say, “This is more useless than that,” unless we add emphasis: “This is _even more_ useless than that.” Edwin Ashworth disagrees, claming: “ _Useful_ is not an absolute adjective, whereas _useless_ is. The opposite of _useless_ is possibly _essential._ ” I take this to mean that _useless_ properly has a complementary antonym like _on/off_ or _day/night,_ where the two meanings don't lie on a spectrum and don't normally permit comparatives. But _essential_ and _useless_ still form a gradable spectrum, and phrases like _more essential_ are not at all uncommon. I doubt that it's even possible to find a complementary antonym for _useless,_ as utility is inherently gradable. However, another possibility occurred to me: Is there a class of half-graded antonyms, where the two meanings lie on a spectrum, but only one of the words is gradable, while the other is absolute? This would work like a dimmer switch, where instead of _on/off,_ you have something more like _bright/off._ One such antonym might be _doubtful/doubtless_ : Wiktionary lists the adjective form of _doubtless_ as _not comparable._ My intuition is that adjectives like _useless_ and _doubtless_ are simply more marked than most, such that we permit comparative forms only in very limited contexts. However, I'm open to the possibility that some gradable antonyms really are anchored at one end by an absolute, uncomparable adjective. Does one of these theories have more merit than the other? Or are we just saying _tomayto, tomahto_? * * * Update: Thanks to ruakh for helping my organize my thoughts on this question. Essentially, I noticed that there are three kinds of adjectives that are similar in form and meaning but with different limitations in common usage. Some ( _doubtless_ ) are listed in dictionaries as having no comparative form at all. Others ( _useless_ ) have legitimate comparative forms, but they sound awkward without other modifiers ( _a hammer is more useless than a screwdriver_ ). Still others ( _thoughtless_ ) sound entirely natural in comparative form ( _Bob is more thoughtless than Alice_ ). Because all of these examples naturally fall on a spectrum and share the same suffix, I suspect that these differences are a matter of convention rather than semantics, but I'm not sure. Ideally, I'd like to see an analysis of the non-comparable and less-comparable words, specifically: How common are they, how strongly do people avoid the comparative forms in practice, and what role does convention versus semantics play in determining their limitations?


Can one feel claustrophobic?

I often hear people say they "feel claustrophobic" (e.g. in a lift). This sounds wrong. To me, one _is_ claustrophobic, or one feels _claustrophobia_. Am I correct in assuming the expression "to feel claustrophobic" is technically incorrect, and should instead be "to feel claustrophobia"?


What does “Cultures are circular” mean?

There was the following sentence in the commentary of Joshua Rothman, the New Yorker’s archive editor on Amy Chua’s memoir, “Tiger Mom” under the title, “The Battle hymn of the Tiger Family” in the online New Yorker February 4 issue: > "Why didn’t all sorts of families, and not just Asian ones, send their kids > to cram schools to study for Stuyvesant entrance exam? They regard the usual > explanation, that Asian-Americans have an ‘education culture,’ **as > circular**. The challenge is to delve deeper and discover the cultural roots > of this behavior – to identify the fundamental cultural force that underlie > it. - - > > The thing is, though, that often, **cultures really are circular**. All the > time, communities judge their members by standards that are, on some level, > arbitrary." http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/books/2014/02/the-battle- > hymn-of-the-tiger-family.html I’m not clear with the meaning of the word, “circular” used here. Cambridge English Dictionary defines ‘circular’ only as an adjective, meaning;   1. Shaped like a circle:    2. Describes an argument that keeps returning to the same points and is not effective. OALD adds to;   1. Moving around in a circle as adjective, and   2. A letter sent to a large number of people as noun. There is no mention of “circular” as a verb in both CED and OALD. However, none of the above definitions seems to sit well with “culture(s)” in the above context to me. Does “culture as circular” mean culture is inherited generation to generation? What does “have an education culture as circular” and “cultures really are circular” mean?


Why is this sentence incorrect?

In my understanding, determiners are categorized into three subgroups: predeterminers, central determiners and postdeterminers. Articles (a, an, the) and possessive determiners are identified as central determiners. ~~In my book~~ , Is the following sentence ~~is identified as~~ correct? I believe it is. > This is the Tim's book. However, this sentence does not sound right even though the two sentences used same determiner from the same group. > This is the my book.


Meaning of pull-out in education?

What is the meaning of "pull-out" in this sentence? I can't figure out the exact meaning even though I looked up the dictionary. > Schools that have adopted **pull-out**, team teaching, or block scheduling > practices will only inaccurately be able to isolate individual teacher > “effects” for evaluation, pay, or disciplinary purposes.


Lack of it / Lack thereof

I am aware of the usage of "lack thereof", but I was wondering whether it is valid to use "lack of it".   During a conversation with someone I used "lack of it" in a sentence, and she claimed that it is an error and that "lack thereof" should be used instead.   **Example sentence:** > Do you think that accent (or lack of it) is a critical factor in obtaining a > job?


Exclamation point inside a sentence

While reading the free Kindle edition of _She_ by H. Rider Haggard (originally published in 1887), I noticed sentences like this one: > But now, to my intense horror, I _knew_ that I could never put away the > vision of those glorious eyes; and alas! the very _diablerie_ of the woman, > whilst it horrified and repelled, attracted in even a greater degree. Notice the “alas!” in the middle of a sentence. I have never seen exclamation point in the middle of a sentence used like this before. Was this a common practice at the time this book was published? What is the history of this practice?


Can snow be dry?

Disclaimer: There are a lot of questions packed in but their answers are interdependent.      Different textures of snow can be described as "wet" and "dry". Considering that water is the quintessence of wetness and snow is water, is it accurate to describe snow as being dry? Is there a fallacy in the above syllogism because water in its frozen form is not water but ice and therefore even though snow is _made of_ water it is not the case that it _is_ water? If so, is wetness a property that can only exist in non-freezing conditions? Are all of the above questions predicated on the false assumption that the adjective "dry", when applied to snow is intended to be literal when in fact it is figurative?


What does the expression 'Do the fish' mean?

I just recently heard this expression and couldn't quite figure out its meaning from the context, unless it means something like "take the bait." Is this a common expression? Is it perhaps an abbreviation of another expression? Most importantly, if it _is_ a common phrase, what does it mean? **Edit:** The basic context in which I heard this expression used was this: one person asked a technical question of a group, to which a member of the group responded, beginning with "I'll do the fish" and then proceeding to the technical explanation.


What is the subject of a cynic called?

According to the dictionary, a **cynic** is: > a person who believes that only selfishness motivates human actions and who > disbelieves in or minimizes selfless acts or disinterested points of view. Alice is a cynic. She uses Bob as an example to illustrate her point of view. What's the best term (preferably a single word) she can use to describe Bob? You could say that Bob is **___ __ ___ __ ___ __ ___ _**. For example, given the definition above, you could say that Bob is selfish. However, I believe that this doesn't sum up all of the things Alice believes about him...


"Yes, I thought it was very good." Why "thought"?

Here is a sentence from "Essential Grammar in Use" book by Raymond Murphy: > Did you enjoy the film ? Yes, I **thought** it was very good. The correct answer in key section is "thought", but why not to use "think" instead: > Did you enjoy the film ? Yes, I **think** it was very good. It looks like you thought in the past and have another thought now.


More colloquial term for "confidant"

Is there a more colloquial term for a " **confidant** ", or someone who has been entrusted with sensitive information to be disclosed only under certain conditions? This is related to my previous question on trusted proxies.


Expression for "pulling out something from the past"

I am looking for an expression (proverb / idiom) meaning "pulling out something from the past" in disapproval. An example of this would be: somebody mentioning a thing of the past, which is not relevant anymore. Do we have a proverb / idiom with this meaning?


Can 'must have -ed participle' have the present meaning?

In an Oxford dictionary, ‘must have –ed participle’ is used for supposing a past event. > He must have known (= surely he knew) what she wanted.   >  I'm sorry, she's not here. She must have left already (= that must be the > explanation)   >  (Advanced Learner’s) However, a case below seems to have some different meaning. Although, yet, I do not have found the explanation, from a grammar textbook for Korean language, I guess the case seems to express an awareness of realization, perfection, or the continuity of the perfection at present with a past form. Can my guessing be right, or am I to learn about some other explanation? > “Jane,” he recommenced, as we entered the laurel walk, and slowly strayed > down in the direction of the sunk fence and the horse-chestnut, “Thornfield > is a pleasant place in summer, is it not?”   >  “Yes, sir.”   >  “You **must have become** in some degree attached to the house,—you, who > have an eye for natural beauties, and a good deal of the organ of > Adhesiveness?”   > (Jane Eyre)


Different dictionary in New South Wales, Australia?

My writing textbook on page 446 says this: > _Use local conventions regarding punctuation, spelling, and mechanics._ Be > aware that these conventions differ from place to place, even in the English > speaking world. For instance, the Australian state of New South Wales uses a > different dictionary for spelling than all the other Australian states. I can't seem to find anything backing up the statement about the dictionary. The author does not appear to cite his source for this information. In short, does New South Wales really use their own dictionary? The textbook is Markel, Mike. _Technical Communication_. 10th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 2012. Print.


Why is the pronoun required in the sentence "I know it is..."?

I am volunteering for an ESL program and one of my students wrote: > I know is very rare. As a native English speaker, I know that "it" is required. But I'm struggling to come up with an explanation of why. Is the subject/verb/object "I know it" or "it is rare?" The two nouns & two verbs is confusing me.


Antonym for "resurrect"

I am looking for an antonym for the word _resurrect_.


How common is the misuse of "literally" to mean "figuratively"?

This question > "Literally" and "Decimate" misuse addresses the misuse of the word "literally" to mean its opposite. I am curious as to how prevalent is such misuse. My hunch is that we are all so attuned to spotting incorrect usages that we over-estimate the frequency of misuse and overstate the threat of the word literally losing its meaning. How I might go about calculating the ratio of correct usage to incorrect usage?


How to clarify the meaning of "don't forget my son"?

There are two meanings of "Don't forget my son"   1. A directive addressed to your own son.   2. A directive addressed to someone else about your son. You want to use meaning #2. You can emphasize meaning #1 using a comma but there is no way to emphasize #2. How is the ambiguity resolved? Would any native speaker who don't see a comma assume #2? It's easy in many languages (Slavic, Turkic etc) changing subject's relation to the verb using suffixes. I wonder if it's possible in English.


What does “Don’t leave your brains at the door,” mean? Is this an idiom, or just frequently used phrase?

I found the phrase, “ _Don’t leave your brains at the door_ ,” in the statement of Republican congressman, Morgan Griffith quoted in ‘Today’s Quote’ of Time magazine (November 18). Under the caption, “ _I hope you didn't leave your brains at the door_ ,” it reads: “A Republican congressman from Virginia, to Secretary of Energy Steven Chu. Chu has been assailed in congressional hearings for claiming to have had no real-time knowledge of key events in the collapse of solar energy company Solyndra.” “Don’t leave your brains at the door,” reminded me of the famous catch phrase of Amex Card’s, “Don’t leave home without it” that prevailed in 1980s. But I don’t understand exact meaning of “Don’t leave your brains at the door.” Does it mean “Don’t be silly (or oblivious)”? I could find a few examples of the use of this phrase on Google, e.g. -"Have I ever walked out on a movie? Not yet. This is the closest I've come. Just the first in a line of soon to come Robin Williams crap. Maybe not technically a "* _leave your brain at the door_ " film" -.Amazon.com -If you live in a confessional world, do _you need to leave your brain at the door_? There’s been a lot of talk lately about whether Roman Catholics have less intellectual freedom than other Christians because of the strongly confessional nature of the Catholic tradition.- Scientia et Sapientia. As far as I checked, none of Oxford, Cambridge, Merrimu-Webster registers “leave (check) one’s brains at the door” as an idiom. Nor Google Ngram viewer registers usage of this phrase. Is this phrase has a currency as an idiomatic phrase nowadays?


What is another word for 'all round' capabilities?

I am looking for a positive, passionate word to describe the all-around capabilities of a person. Any words better than 'all-arounder'?


What are "pushing horns"?

This is from a song by Garth Brooks called The Cowboy Song: > Pushing horns weren't easy like the movie said it was   >  And I don't recall no dance hall girls   >  Or hotel rooms with rugs   >  You worked hot and tired and nasty   >  Rode your pony's head too low   >  There were all the nights you couldn't sleep   >  'Cause it was too damn cold   >  And you'd sing "Strawberry Roan" and "Little Joe" Can anybody tell me what "pushing horns" refers to, and possibly the name of the movie in question as well?


Why is it "grand theft auto"?

I'm not a native speaker so it might just be me finding this strange, but why is the _auto_ in _grand theft auto_ at the end? Shouldn't it be _grand auto theft_ or something like this? I thought the expression described the crime of stealing cars?


Better name for a square prism

What is the proper name for a cube which is stretched in one direction. So that it is really four rectangles of the same size with two squares at the ends. Elongated/stretched cube? Rectangular/square prism?


Is it appropriate to use two consecutive "-ing" clause?

> The Cheng-guang (law-enforcement staff) are semi-barbaric, stirring up a > universal hatred for the government, thus endangering the stability of the > whole political system. In this sentence I've devised, I have used two "-ing" structures as clauses describing activities / consequences. Is it appropriate to use two consecutive -ing clauses? Maybe I should create another sentence in which I replace the second -ing clause?


Usage of "Who" and "whom" in the given sentence

In the given sentence,"There’s Mr. Som, who they say is the best singer in the country" is "who" is the correct word to be used or "whom"


An adjective to describe "being at sea"

I'm looking for an adjective that describes the fact that a ship is sailing at sea. Much as "afoot" describes a person being in the state of walking. I was hoping "asail" would be a word, but can't find it from Google. The word would replace the square brackets in the following example: > In Plato's ship of state metaphor, a ship is [sailing at sea], helmed by a > captain ...


Others or the others in this example

> The goal of ABC is to enable the doctors all around the world to share and > benefit from the knowledge of (the) others. (meaning of other doctors all > around the world) I know that THE OTHERS is used when there is a limited count. But there is always a limited, finite count (people on the world..). Should there be others or THE others?


Another phrase for "until this time"

I have a student (C1 level English) who has asked me for another way to say "Until this time" in an email. She wants to reference a meeting that she is having next month with an executive in another company in her complimentary close. As I don't believe my initial reaction - "um, we don't say things like that in emails in America...?" was sufficient, is there a resource that I can point her to that would provide a fairly exhaustive explanation of the rules of business email etiquette? She said the equivalent in her L1 - Czech - is "awhile," which did not do much to help answer her question. Stock phrases generally don't reference a specific time, obviously; which, she is aware, but wants to do something different...be original and inventive, I suppose. So what should I explain to her, and how - ?


If I say First Monday or Second Monday of the Month what is the name for the First or Second Part?

Situation: Someone says i want to meet the first monday of each month. And i want to tell them that the first wouldn't work. But i want to say it like: Please choose a different xxxxx. IE: if i wanted to change the day i'd say. "Please choose a different day" I'm thinking something close to frequency or ordinal..but i'm sure there's a term for it.


Usage of the word "truancy" in a workplace context

I recently made this personal discovery of the word _truancy_. It means: > the action of staying away from school without good reason I am wondering if there's a parallel to this word for workplace or professional settings. All I can think of is _absenteeism_ , but it doesn't capture the essence of _truancy_.


“Greater Good”: Why the comparative?

I’ve often heard the expression _Greater Good_ and have always come across the very same question about it: why the comparative form instead of the superlative form?


Suitable idiom for using instead of immunize

We have water that is not drinkable, we boil it for killing the microbes, is this sentence correct “I immunize the water ” or there is an idiom for this action?


Is this social media post really grammatically correct as it claims?

A friend of mine shared an image macro that contained this block of text, claiming it is grammatically correct. > This exceeding trifling witling, considering ranting criticizing concerning > adopting fitting wording being exhibiting transcending learning, was > displaying, notwithstanding ridiculing, surpassing boasting swelling > reasoning, respecting correcting erring writing, and touching detecting > deceiving arguing during debating. Is this really the case? If so, does it really mean anything, or is it just a bunch of meaningless words sewn together to conform to English language rules?


"Piece of mind"

I was interested in the following sentence which appeared in an article titled “Personal Health: Diagnosing PMS” in The New York Times, Women's Health, (August 28, 1996). > Experts insist that no woman should now have to risk her job, her personal > relationships or her **piece of mind** because of premenstrual disturbances. I'm not particularly convinced in order to this "piece of mind" usage. Am I wrong? Or, perhaps, in the above sentence "piece of mind" assumes an idiomatic meaning that I am not able to understand. Can someone clarify this question?


Choice of pronoun to refer to 'one of us' when 'us' is male + female: they, he, she?

Imagine yourself – a man – sitting next to someone you want to talk to – a woman – on a bus, train, plane, etc. After a while you say: 'One of us has to start talking / break the ice, don't they? / doesn't he? / doesn't she?'


Statements beginning with subject+wonder

I'm wondering about the sentence structure when you use _wonder_. Take for instance: > I wonder when will my money be refunded. > > I wonder when my money will be refunded. > > I wonder when is my money going to be refunded. > > I wonder when my money is going to be refunded. Are all these sentences correct or only some of them? By "correct" I mean "grammatically correct". Could you provide examples of sentences starting with [subject]+ _wonder_ , and without it while conveying the same idea?


A word for the answer that is "the" answer

Sometimes when I ask a question on StackOverflow or SeasonedAdvice, I get an answer that is the perfect succinct answer to my question. Almost provably the best answer. In Swedish there is a word derived from the quick lookup you would do when you were doing an arithmetic problem in school, and you checked the _Answers_ section in the back of the book. The Swedish word is "facit". (I'm pretty sure it is related to the typewriter brand name "Facit" that was huge in Scandinavia during the early 70's.) **Is there an equally distinctive term in English?** A complete example for any Suedoisuisses   * -Han tejpade först sina trasiga skor med silvertejp. Sen lite härdande silikon. De var som nya. 212 kr från Clas Olson.    * -Du, jag tror facit vore en resa till myrorna.  I'd be pleased to learn the heritage of the word "facit" too of course, the letters alone implies a latin root. My explored options that I am unhappy about are   * A perfect answer. _This is just a compliment_   * The answer I was looking for. _It just serves my purpose_   * The definitive answer.  I can't complement an answer on SO with "This is the definitive answer". It would be odd to me.


Less colloquial term for "zoom in"

I have a graph that shows some statistic for the period 1930-2010. I then have another graph (for the exact same statistic) which I introduce by saying: "Let us _zoom in_ to the period 1960-90." I have been told that "zoom in" is too colloquial. What is a better word or phrase?


How specific does a noun have to be to have "the"

Consider these two sentences:   1. _Houses are expensive in that neighbourhood._    ― **All** houses are expensive in that neighbourhood.   2. **_The** Houses are expensive in that neighbourhood._    ― Not _all_ houses are expensive in that city, only the ones in that **particular** neighbourhood. Under appropriate contexts, aren’t both sentences correct?


"Baby is creeping" vs. "baby is crawling" in AmE

Years and years ago, I remember reading in a book on AmE usage that the phrasal turn a baby creeps before it walks was to some extent more common to AmE than to BrE, which preferred exclusively the "crawl" version. And so, I just recently checked on the accuracy of that information on NGram Viewer, and it actually was fact...more than a century ago! What I would like you to tell is if it would sound sort of weird to hear someone say today in the US that a child "creeps" before walking and running (see **_Synonyms_**) rather than it crawls. Also, what's the story to those terms? How did "to crawl" come to prevail and supersede "to creep" to describe the way a baby moves around? _As with a plant, so with a child. His mind grows by natural stages. **A child creeps before he walks** , sits before he stands, cries before he laughs, babbles before he talks, draws a circle before he draws a square, lies before he tells the truth, and is selfish before he is altruistic. Such sequences are part of the order of Nature... Every child, therefore, has a unique pattern of growth, but that pattern is a variant of a basic ground plan. (Bigge & Hunt, 1962, p. 166)_ My impression is that "to creep" instead of "to crawl" for how a baby moves around might have made a lot of sense in the old days if you consider the way babies were dressed back then. Think also of Swee'Pea's outfit in Popeye the Sailorman cartoons. Besides, here is a article I just found on Parent.com, which asserts a difference between saying "to creep" and "to crawl."


Period placement in a sentence containing both parantheses and quotes

Which of the following is correct: >   1. (This is a "test"). >   2. (This is a "test.") >   3. (This is a "test".) >


What is the term for a structure, unconnected to the main building, on an estate?

For a large property, or estate, what is the term for buildings other than the main residence that are separate and unconnected?


Avoiding confusion with multiple use of ibids, how would one do it?

I was thinking and researching about the use of Ibid in footnotes/endnotes etc. and found the following example in Wikipedia: > [1] E. Vijh, _Latin for Dummies_ (New York: Academic, 1997), p. 23   >  [2] _Ibid._   >  [3] _Ibid._ , p. 29.   >  [4] Al Azif, _The Necronomicon_ (Petrus de Dacia, 1994).   >  [5] _Ibid._ 1, at 34 What would one do if there were multiple books of the same title (and no author is mentioned)? For example, > [1] Interesting Book, p. 4   >  [2] Interesting Book, p. 4   >  [3] _Ibid._ , at 5 What would happen if this occurred over multiple chapters? (Given that footnote numbers reset at the beginning of each chapter.) What would differentiate the chapters? For example, > Ch. 1 > > [1] Interesting Book, p. 3 > > Ch. 2 > > [1] Interesting Book, p. 3 _Note: This is a different book_   >  [2] Even More Interesting Book   >  [3] _Ibid._ 1, at 4 Even worse, I was wondering what would occur if there were multiple books titled “Ibid” (where there was no author)? For example, > [1] _Ibid_ , p. 3   >  [2] _Ibid._ , p. 4   >  [3] _Ibid_ , p. 5 How would one potentially clarify this? Just given the above example, it would be impossible to know which one would be a new one.


"This wine is drinking nicely" : does anything else drink nicely?

People tell me this phrase is only used in the context of wine. Even though my lack of knowledge of other phrases that are built similarly suggests these people must be right, my curiosity gets the better of me. After all, I can't claim to know of all the phrases out there. Are there, though? Something along the lines of:   * this pizza is eating nicely   * this gum is chewing nicely or even with another beverage:   * this juice/whiskey is drinking nicely


What is it called when you “refill” a debit card?

How it is called (in the US) when you go to the bank or an ATM to add cash to your VISA/MasterCard debit card? That is, when you add cash to the bank account which is tied to that card. Is it either of these two, or is it something else?   * to refill my debit card   * to add funds to my debit card


String slicing nomenclature

Maybe I'm just not very good with Google, but I'm looking for good terms to use when describing manipulation of strings of characters, specifically words to describe:   * Removing a prefix   * Removing a suffix   * Removing an infix, i.e. taking out some middle part and concatenating the remaining parts A more or less comprehensive list of string manipulation terminology would be nice, but just providing the above definitions would suffice.


What would be the difference between past and present tense here?

* 1.) I assumed you were the type who **kept** your promises. vs.   * 2.) I assumed you were the type who **keeps** your promises.


Pronoun “you” can be omitted as subject in imperative form, what other pronouns can be omitted, when and why?

The pronoun _you_ can be omited as a general rule, but sometimes I’ve seen sentences that should have used _I_ or _it_ as the subject but it was omitted.


how to pronounce "twenty" correctly?

Well, I usually say "twenny" instead of "twenty" (not "twendy" even). I recently noticed that I never heard the same from any native english speakers during any talks I ever had with them. Recently I had a brief search on the 'net and it seems that it is somehow okay to say "twenny", but it might look the least correct pronunciation for most of the people, or they might think you have strange accent, etc. So, my question is, is there any good reference which clearly proves saying "twenny" instead of "twenty" is totally correct or wrong? P.S. You're most welcome to write your very personal opinion if you don't know any good references. **Update** I've already looked at the major dictionaries and didn't find any of them lists "twenny" in their pronunciation's section, however I'm sure that I didn't made that up, but I heard that while ago. Maybe in a movie, maybe from someone, and that's why I'm looking for the answer.


How should I refer to a "screen comp"?

I always get a word spelling error when I type my emails regarding screen comps. Screen comps, if you don't know, are a visual representation of a web design or the like. Does anybody know how to spell this. It feels like it isn't a word, but I hear and see it quite a bit, so it feels like it is a word now. Edit I assumed it was in reference to Screen Composition, but I haven't ever seen it referenced. When I do a Google search on it, nothing comes up that refers to what I know as a comp. Edit 2 When people refer to screen comp, are they referring to a composition? If yes, how do you know?


Does the term "Methodical" have a negative connotation associated with it?

It seems to me that the only times I hear the term Methodical in journalism/press are to describe negative people such as killers or psychopaths. I don't believe methodical inherently has a negative connotation but it seems society over time through its use in the media has given it one. Does Methodical in fact have a negative connotation? Is it viewed negatively in literature or is this only in news outlets?


What is the meaning of the expression?

What does "Get all you can, can all you get, sit on the can." mean? It seems that Google can't help me with this one. Could you also explain its origin and how it is related to the meaning?


Adding a new line to this statement

In the following statement: > After confronting Nick about it he said “I have helped you out in the past > you owe me for that!”. Should the quoted text be put on a new line and rephrased? This is the only direct speech in the paragraph I am writing.


Like ambidextrous, but for a thing

We know that "ambidextrous" describes (roughly) the ability to use both hands. Are there words in English the capture the idea of something that is "suitable for use by either hand"? Similarly, is there a word that captures the idea of something that is "suitable for use on either foot"? _Examples_ :   * For shoes, we distinguish between left and right feet. For skis, as far as I can remember from the last time I went skiing, each individual ski can fit on either boot.    * Scissors come in left-handed and right-handed varieties, whereas tongs generally can be operated by either hand. (As a side remark: I've seen scissors marketed as "ambidextrous". Is this use of the word correct?)


A phrase for "several" multiples of ten

Like how $x000 can be referred to as "several thousand dollars", and $x00 can be referred to as "several hundred dollars", and $x "several dollars", what about $x0? I've looked at this similar question: https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/16356/how-to-use-tens-of-and- hundreds-of but it's not exactly the same, because it doesn't involve "several". The suggestion from that question, "several dozen dollars", does sound a little bit better than "several ten dollars". Is that the preferred approach? However, what about bigger numbers? I can say "several hundred thousand dollars", but both "several ten thousand dollars" and "several dozen thousand dollars" sound weird.


"Skills that are useful" or "skills those are useful"?

I am used to using the phrase _that is_ a lot, for example: "I have a skill that is useful in this situation". What if I use a plural form? What is the correct sentence of the following two? >   * I have some skills that are useful in this situation. >   * I have some skills those are useful in this situation. >


what would be synonym of 'utility' in the sense of 'marginal-gain'

I wanted to ask, what would be synonym of _utility_ , when it is used in the sense of _marginal-gain_. For example, we say: > Among two competing persons, I prefer giving this object to Person-A, since > Person-A has a higher utility of using this object than Person-B".


Sub-classification or subclassification?

We’re debating this at work. Merriam-Webster says it’s “subclassification”. Dictionary.Reference.com allows “sub-classification” and “subclassification” Is there a ‘more correct’ word to use? (If it helps, we're after Australian English)


In my example, comma or no comma before the word respectively?

In the graph for all arrests, and DUI arrests, the effect of the MLDA is about 125 and 50 increase in arrests rate respectively. I personally think no comma should be put before the word - "respectively". And what about the comma before the phrase - "and DUI arrests" ? Should I remove it? I want to say there is one graph for each and make that clear. So maybe I should change the first part of the sentence to something like... In both graphs for all arrests and DUI arrests, the effect of the MLDA is about a 125 and 50 increase in arrests rate respectively.


Looking for a suffix that is opposite of "-prone", but softer than "-proof"

Say I'm talking about a car that has less of a tendency to crash than other cars. It is the opposite of a "crash-prone" car. But it isn't "crash-proof" either, in that you can crash it if you try hard enough.


What does "macabre laugh line" means with regard to the government’s alteration of color-coded alert system?

American daily newspapers such as Washington Post and New York Times provide a treasure trove of interesting words and idioms to foreign learners of English language like me. For example, an article of January 29 the New York Times titled _We Never Got Down to Blue_ begins with the following copy. It provides me with a set of interesting phrases in only the following few lines, such as _Erode into a macabre laugh line_ , _stand beltless in one’s socks_ and _survival biscuits_. Among these phrases new to me, I’m particularly interested in the expression _erode into a macabre laugh line_. Why can _macabre_ , which I understand meaning _chilling, dreadful_ , can marry with the word _laugh line_ that does not seem to necessarily fit gruesome connotation of _macabre_? So, What does _erode into a macabre laugh line_. mean? Can anybody tell me? > Well before the end, the government’s color-coded alert system was eroding > into a macabre laugh line for the modern age of terrorism. Were people > standing beltless in their socks actually hearing the airport announcements > when the risk estimate mostly shuttled between yellow (Elevated) and orange > (High)? The five-color code is going the way of cold war survival biscuits. > Homeland Security officials decided that it ultimately lacked credibility > and clarity to the point of sapping rather than bolstering public > confidence.


What is the term used to describe when two items (maybe numbers) have been mixed up?

What is the term used to describe when two items have been mixed up (i.e.the month and day of a date of birth)?


Meaning of the adverb 'differently' and its position

> Perceptual constancy refers to our ability to see things differently without > having to reinterpret the object's properties. Is _differently_ referring to _we see_ or _things_?


"It can be safely deleted" vs. "It can safely be deleted"

Is there a subtle difference between the following two sentences? >   1. It can be safely deleted. >   2. It can safely be deleted. > If they mean the same thing, is one preferred for other reasons?


When should I use "a discussion of" vs. "a discussion on" vs. "a discussion about"?

“A discussion of”, “a discussion on”, and “a discussion about”: When is each phrase used in preference to the other?   If context is important, I want to use it as a subheading on a piece of non- fiction.


Use of  'pagan' in an essay:  is it acceptable or not?

I'm writing an essay right now and I'm deliberating whether or not I should use _Pagan gods_ instead of _Greek gods_ (to provide variation in the essay). I've looked up the word _pagan_ in the dictionary and it mentioned it was a derogatory term. Would it be acceptable to use it though in an essay or would it be inconsiderate for me to use that term?


What is non-derogatory way of saying "people here are obsessed with sports"?

Saying obsessed or being crazy about something seems a little negative and derogatory. How am I supposed to say it in a positive way.


What's different between the two sentences?

Hey, I'm watching a TV show, and there's a sentence: > I knew giving you that book was gonna come back and bite me in the ass. Can I change it to: > I know gave you that book was gonna come back and bite me in the ass.


Motorcycles, bikes, motorbikes, mopeds, motorcyclists, bikers, and motorbikers in AE

As far as I know, "motorcycle" is the formal term -- and "bike" the informal one -- for a powered two (and occasionally three) wheeled vehicle resembling a bike but larger, heavier, and a heap more powerful, chiefly for one rider but sometimes having two saddles and a sidecar for passengers. Besides, motorcycle riders are referred to fornally as "motorcyclists", and informally as "bikers". Now, "motorbike" is the generic term for a lightweight, less powerful motorcycle with a smaller frame. The thing is " motorbike" can both designate a lightweight motorbike (which I roughly equate with a dirt or pit bike stylewise), and also a pedal bicycle propelled by an attached motor (which, I guess, looks more or less like a moped). Hence my question: how does what you Americans call a motorbike differ from a dirt (or pit) bike style vehicle, and from a moped? Also, if "motorcyclist" and "biker" are both specific terms to refer to a motorcycle rider, what do you call someone that rides a motorbike? A motorbiker, or something else? > http://www.thefreedictionary.com/motorcycle > > http://www.thefreedictionary.com/motorbike > > http://www.thefreedictionary.com/minibike > > http://www.thefreedictionary.com/moped


What does ‘Brace yourself’ really mean?

I saw an article titled ‘The Rise of Chinese Cheneys’, written by Nicholas Kristof, with a lead copy > China today resembles the Bush era in America: Hard-liners are ascendant. > Brace yourself in today's New York Times. I know the meaning of 'Brace for.' But as I was uncertain about the meaning of 'Brace Yourself,' I consulted with Urban dictionary, which defines it as ‘Prepare yourself mentally or emotionally for hearing something unpleasant, out of place or inappropriate.’ However, in this particular case, what does ‘Brace yourself’ mean? Is the author casting this word to Chinese, or Americans? By the way, I found really amusing phrases ‘panda-huggers’ and ‘panda-muggers’ in relation with 'yin' and 'yang' concept in this article, which might not be any new to you, but new to me. > Chinese-American relations are deeply strained and likely to get worse. > American opinion tends to be divided between panda-huggers (‘China is > fabulous!’) and panda-muggers (‘China is evil!’), but the truth lies between > this yin and yang.


Water : Aquatic :: Sand : xxx?

Just as _aquatic_ is to _water_ and _aerial_ is to _air_ , what is an equivalent word for _sand_ (or _earth_ , I suppose)? For context, I’m trying to describe the locomotion of worms _within_ desert sand (as opposed to its _surface_ ). Ergo, _terrestrial_ isn’t particularly suitable and neither is _earthy_.


Modifier clause question?

In the following sentence, what parts are incorrect or ungrammatical? (GMAT related) > The new “e-waste” salvage company collects electronic waste items, such as > old cellular telephones and broken personal music players, discarding them > as trash, to transport them to state facilities for recycling. What does "discarding items as trash" refer back to, the salvage company or music players? Are there rules that apply here?


Should I Use “these” or “those” When I Refer to Something in the First Sentence?

> I’ve posted 5 photos on my timeline. Have you seen **these/those** photos? > You’ll love **these/those** photos! **These/Those** photos were taken in > France. Should I use “these” or “those” when I refer to something in the first sentence? Are there any simple rules that I should follow? NOTES: I know that I should use “this(singular)” and “these(plural)” for things that are near me. I know that I should use “that(singular)” and “those(plural)” for things that are far from me. In my example there is no “distance”. What should I do? Changing the sentence is not an option.


Rephrasing a Run-on Sentence

I am having trouble phrasing some of my thoughts into a decent sounding sentence. I particularly do not like the use of _and_ twice: I believe this may make the sentence a run-on. Also in previous English classes I have been advised against using _and_ twice in one sentence. Can anyone suggest how to express the same thought in one sentence without creating a run-on? > Growth of the Hispanic population within the US will increase their presence > within the workforce, creating new opportunities and challenges for > Hispanics and their employers.


Is 'GRAND TOTAL AMOUNT' verbose?

After the subtotals and net totals, finally it comes to the _grand total_. Should I say "the _grand total amount_ is $100", or only "the _total amount_ is $100", or "* grand total amount* is $100"?


Why is "yeah" considered unprofessional?

I have read in many places on the Internet that "yeah" is considered unprofessional. And that using "yes" is preferred and considered more formal. What is the reason behind it?


"Reconnoiter" and "reconnaissance"

Are _reconnoiter_ and _reconnaissance_ two forms of the same word or are they two words with a common etymology? According to the Wiktionary pages, they are both derived from French, but it is unclear as to the relationship between the words.


The way in which or by which?

I am trying to say something very weird, but I'm not sure if any of these sentences makes sense: 'Recursion is the way in which a function is specified in terms of itself' or 'Recursion is a way by which a function is specified in terms of itself'


Is capitalization of special words acceptable without another rule to justify it?

I've found that it's a rather contentious issue in the Pokémon fandom whether names like "Pikachu" should be capitalized when referring to the general species (and similarly for certain other words). Such as: > If your team consists of six **P** ikachu, you're going to have a hard time > against **G** round-types. Many people who I've seen talk about the subject believe that those bolded letters should not be capital, because there are no rules to make it such. However, I've also noticed this "special capitalization" of words in other, actually literary series as well — for example, the Dementors, Boggarts, or Hippogriffs from Harry Potter, or the Yeerks and Andalites of Animorphs fame. Any arguments I've seen on the subject have invariably degraded into bickering about different sides of the debate. Are there any more authoritative opinions on such a phenomenon, and if so, where can I find them? (What's special about the Pokémon case is that the species as a whole is usually only referred to by a "characteristic instance" of it — while you wouldn't say "I like dog better than cat because it's more loyal", you could definitely say "I like Squirtle more than Charmander, because it's cuter".)


How can I say the Italian term "dislivello" in English?

I'm working on a brochure describing many hiking trails in my region (that is northern Lake Garda, Italy). I'm trying to find a good translation for the Italian word "dislivello", meaning the difference in height between a lower and an upper point of a route. As possible solutions I've found "difference in height", "elevation difference", "altitude gap", "difference in level" and many others, so that now I don't really know which is the most suitable in my case. Could you help me? Thank you so much!


"The flowers that bloom in September trala"

I wonder what this sentence means: > The flowers that bloom in September trala ... quoted from http://www.swimmingworldmagazine.com/lane9/news/World/28104.asp What's trala? Instead I heard people said "Ta la" as some kind of meaning-free words.


A word for "modify/delete/change a newspaper article"

a word for " a person/politician asking to review/modify a newspaper article before it is published"


Common expressions of surprise in American and British English

I'm trying to learn English and I would like to know what are the expressions of surprise with positive meaning (slang or not, but not vulgar) currently used in spoken English for USA and Britain. Is "whoa" correct? Or is "wow"?


"that" + "would" = "that'd"?

Is "that'd" an appropriate contraction of "that" and "would"? I _say_ it, but I'm not sure if it's a legitimate contraction in written form.


Can a helicopter “ditch”?

If the verb _ditch_ means "to make a forced landing of (an airplane) on water”, as Merriam-Webster reads, what verb can be used to mean “to make a forced landing of **(a _helicopter_ )** on water”? Or, if _ditch_ , contrary to what Merriam-Webster reads and according to Andrew Leach’s definition below, is simply to make a forced landing ( _ditch in a field_ ), what verb, possibly a single word, can be used to mean “to make a forced landing of (an airplane) **on water** ”?


How do you spell time specifications given in (military) "Zulu time"?

For an example, let's consider the time specification "1539Z". How do the people in the military spell that? "Fifteen thirty-nine Zulu"? "Fifteen thirty-nine zee"? "One fife tree niner zulu"? Are there differences between US, Canadian, British, Australian (and other English-speaking NATO members) spelling of this time specification - and if so, what are they? The scenario here is how to put the time in writing as direct speech/quotation of someone. This is important in the following cases:   * It's a direct quotation, and I want to write down what would be spoken _exactly_ as it would be spoken (but don't have access to audio logs).   * It's direct speech in a work of fiction, where _how_ someone spells the time specification gives a hint to their background.


How to describe someone who speaks a language "as if it is his mother tongue" in a CV?

Let's say English is not my mother tongue, but I claim in my CV that my English level is "as if" it was my mother tongue? Is _natively_ the word for that? As in: > Languages: > >   * Hebrew: mother-tongue >   * English: natively > P.S. It's quite paradoxical and funny, asking how to say in English "my level of English is like a native speaker"; if my level was really like a native English speaker, I wouldn't have needed to ask.


Is there a name for this method of writing that includes pictograms?

I've seen people write (usually in a humorous way) a 'code-like' message where parts of words are replaced with a pictogram that sounds like that word-part. E.G.: > (eyeball) (tin can)(rope knot) get the (hole in ground) (earth) in my head, > yet. becomes > I cannot get the whole world in my head, yet. I once saw this used in a fictional book, and wonder if it has an actual name. **Edit:** the answer also helped by re-find this wonderfully imagined race that communicates via rebuses.


Any help with my question will be appreciated. Does a hummingbird just hover, or can it be described as, “Hovering stationary?” Excerpt from my new manuscript."Hooter Hornbuckle and Barnabus Belmont. The Best of friends. " _Then, with a buzz of her wings, and in the blink of an eye she had moved, hovering stationary once more in front of another grimy window pane."_ James A Bresco


Difference between "fluency" and "fluidity"

_Fluent_ seems to most commonly refer to language mastery, but in that context isn't it just saying that its delivery is _fluid_? If so, am I communicating something different when using one over another or are they essentially interchangeable?


Would anyone use "ramp down" as the opposite to "ramp up"

In the context, for example, of factory production I often read the phrase "ramp up production" or "a ramp-up in production". To me "ramp down" sounds a strange phrase to use as the opposite - does anyone have a more apt antonym?


Difference between "peddler," "beggar" and "hawker"

I am studying Middle Eastern migration to Latin America at the end of the nineteenth century. One of the popular practices among these people was peddling, and there is much research on those who sell their goods on the streets. Yet, _peddler_ is not the only word used for them. _Hawker_ and _beggar_ are also used by scholars. What is the difference between these words?


When would I use "might as well" instead of "may as well"?

If I understood the NY Times correctly, the words **might** and **may** are interchangeable except **might** is used to convey a greater level of uncertainty. Examples: > _I'll probably need gas for tomorrow's trip, so I **might as well** fill up > now._ (There's a sense of uncertainty: I don't know if I have enough gas.) > _I **may as well** get a car wash while at the gas station._ (There is no uncertainty here. I am indeed at the gas station.) On the other hand, this answer suggests to me that if I were "medium- confident" I had enough gas, I would use **may as well** in the first example above. Is that right?