Noun adjuncts and modifying phrases

Noun adjuncts are nouns acting like adjectives, such as "animal" in "Animal Farm." And some words, for example, "privileges of rank" is the same as "rank privileges." But I am confused when 'the' is attached in front of them: "the rank privileges" refers to some specific rank privileges; it is easily noticed. But when it comes to "the privileges of rank," is this phrase ambiguous because this could be interpreted as either any kind of privileges of rank or some specific privileges of rank like "the privileges of rank (that you were just talking about)"? One more question I would like to ask is this: nouns derived from verbs such as love, hatred can take modifying phrases with or without the definite article delivering same messages. "(the) love of your family," "(the) love of God," and so on although some people prefer to put the article when "your family" and "God" are the subjects. Then what about words or phrases such as interpreter, "explorer of the dream world," collector, catcher and so on and to quote examples from several famous books: "the catcher in the rye," "interpreter of maladies." Say, "the explorers of the dream world." When you say this phrase, does the speaker refer to any explorer who digs in the dream world or some specific explores of the dream world? (ex. the explorers of the dream world (mentioned in the movie)." Thanks for any comments in advance!


Are "till" and "until" perfectly interchangeable at the beginning of a sentence?

In the following sentences, would one of these conjunctions sound better than the other ? >   * _Until/Till_ my daughter got married, I had never been abroad.   * _Until/Till_ you change your mind, I won't help you.


What does "in-flight" mean in this context?

Below is the context. > Do we need to create a table to catch any in-flight data during the cut- > over? I looked the word `in-flight` up in several dictionaries and almost all of them state the meaning of it is: > Occurring, carried out, or present while in flight But from the aforementioned context I think the meaning here probably is `something happened during a process". Apparently this has nothing to do with a flight. Hope some native speakers can help to confirm.


"Relation" versus "relationship"

What is the difference between _relation_ and _relationship_? Some say that _relationship_ often refers to social connections. For instance, > She has a close relationship with her daughter. How about the following? > the relationship between poor housing and health problems (Longman > Dictionary) > > the special relationship between Britain and the US (Longman Dictionary)


Someone being mean to someone else

I'd like to know the meaning of "My dad's being mean to me."


"I am puzzled by conflicting opinion on [a] coffee."

>   * I am puzzled by conflicting opinion on a coffee. >   * I am puzzled by conflicting opinion on coffee. > These sentences are from a syllabus book. And I don't know which one is correct.


How can I express this, "When sword emitted fire"

I have to decide a title, I want to convey of the idea of a legendary sword which emits fire/ befalling curse on the enemies. I want a more impressive word for emitted. And also I need a "when" so I can't just change the title to "The Sword Which emitted Fire".


Does the word "supercalifragilisticexpialidocious" exist?

I have heard about the word countless times. However, when I looked up the dictionary, I could not find it. So I would like to ask if the word even exists at all. If so, what does the word actually mean and why was it invented? This word really piqued my curiosity I could not resist asking.


'too' vs. 'so' in the subjunctive?

A colleague of mine just asked me about the sentence: > If the book were not _so_ expensive, I would buy it. She wanted to know why too was not a worthy substitute. I explained to her about the degree of intensity in _too_ vs. _so_ but I know there's something more to it than that. Is there something in the conditionality of the book costing more than I can pay that makes _so_ the superior choice? Any input on this?


Any good phrasal dictionaries?

I think I'm supposed to have a phrasal dictionary while learning English. E-books and paper-formed are both welcome. Any advice?


present perfect for along time ago

Which one is correct? >   1. They have been working together recently. >   2. They have been working together for a long time. > And which one is correct here? >   1. They have been good friends recently. >   2. They have been good friends for a long time. >


Is there a better way to write 'do-it-yourselfer'?

I find English punctuation wholly unsatisfactory in times like these. I want to add an '-er' to the phrase 'do it yourself', to refer to someone who does things himself instead of hiring out the work to a professional builder, and the best I can come up with is > do-it-yourselfer The reason this is unsatisfactory is that, if I add parentheses to show the structure (using the parentheses the way you would in a mathematical formula) I'd come up with something like this: > ((do it yourself)er) Having hyphens between the words of 'do it yourself' seems fine, but then the '-er' attached directly to the word 'yourself' suggests this structure > (do it ((yourself)er)) which is obviously wrong. Do we have any better option than 'do-it-yourselfer'?


Does "allegedly made a drug that does X" or "made a drug that allegedly does X" sound better?

As an engineering-type fellow, I was thinking about this article about a drug that replaces sleep. It occurred to me that I could frame it in two ways:   * Scientists _allegedly created a drug_ that replaces sleep. or   * Scientists created a drug _that allegedly replaces sleep_. There are obvious arguments for both of these statements being correct - saying someone allegedly created a drug with certain properties or that they created a drug and it allegedly happens to have certain properties seems to ultimately have the bottom line of there being the possibility of replacing sleep. But which sounds better? Which ... _feels_ more right? Are the phrasings interchangeable, or could an argument be made that one or the other is in some way, tangibly or otherwise, "better"?


What does freight traffic mean?

I looked up _freight_ in a dictionary, it gave an example sentence: > The bulk of freight traffic was transported by a lorry. I do understand what _freight_ means, but I am confused by _freight traffic_. What does it mean? I can't find any definitions for this collocation.


What's an example of good style for an "if/then" statement?

I'm not sure what's common for conditional statements, with and without alternative consequent clauses, in speech—even my own—but as a computer programmer, I'm niggled whenever I have to write English instructions that follow the form of a programmatic `if (condition) doThis(); else doThat();`. I was just wondering what structure seemed clearest and least ambiguous (not necessarily restricted to the following), keeping in mind that the place- holders (`condition`,`alternative`,`consequent`) might include punctuation such as one or more commas, or even a number of sub-clauses:   * If `<condition>`, `<consequent>`.   * If `<condition>`, then `<consequent>`. With alternative:   * `<If...>`, otherwise `<alternative>`.   * `<If...>`; otherwise, `<alternative>`.   * `<If...>`. Otherwise, `<alternative>`.   * If `...` is `...`, `<consequent>`. If `...` _isn't_ `...`, `<alternative>`.   * ~~`<If...>`, or else `<alternative>`.~~     * I've determined _"or else"_ to be poor style. _"Else"_ on its own would be better but still sounds inferior to _otherwise_ or negating the condition.


The words in headlines are capitalized. I'm interested in the history of this. Where and why were capital letters first used in headlines? Where is this practice of capitalization of words in English titles derived from? Is it derived from German?


Dear Family & Friends or Dear Friends & Family?

I would like to begin the speach adressing family & friends... Should I say " Dear Family & Friends " or " Dear Friends & Family "?


prepositional phrases strong enough to bring 'the' before the nouns they modify?

I was wondering if prepositional phrases alone were strong enough to bring the relative pronoun _the_ before the nouns that they modify. Upon reading (2) do you feel the _people_ is restricted or specified with _the_ because they are already mentioned before? Or, the sentence (2) standing alone, do you feel the _people_ has _the_ because of _in Japan_? >   1. People in Japan speak Japanese. > >   2. The people in Japan speak Japanese. > > Also, do you think my paraphrases are correct (is it wrong to use _that are_ here)? >   1. People in Japan speak Japanese. = People [that are] in Japan speak > Japanese. = Probably many but not necessarily all the people [that are] in > Japan speak Japanese. > >   2. The people in Japan speak Japanese. = The people [that are] in Japan > speak Japanese. = All the people [that are] in Japan speak Japanese. > >


Sidenote, side-note, Side Note or Side note

So I've thought of a name for something, but cannot decide on how I should write it. In School, I vaguely remember someone saying "when you want to say something as one word, when it's really two words, then you hyphenate them", which leads me to believe I should be writing it like "Side-note". But How should you really write it, when it is going to be the name of something? Are Sidenote, Side-note, and Side Note all correct? Which version should I use?


singular entity as a collection of subjects

"If you are looking for a XYZ Residential Real Estate Attorney, the Law Offices of John Smith **_is_** here to help. " The firm itself is called "the Law Offices of John Smith", so is it correct that it would be referred to as a singular entity like that?


Spelling protocol (American/British/Canadian) for an International conference

If I'm a Canadian who'll be presenting in an international conference, should I use my country's spelling, which is the Canadian/British spelling like "grey" or the more used American spelling like "gray?" We also have our own unique spelling for some words, like "centre." I know Americans spell it "center" and I think the British spell it like the Americans. Things to keep in mind:   * I don't know the distribution of the audience.   * The conference will be held in Germany, which isn't an English-speaking country itself.  Is there a protocol for these sort of situations? P.S. This is a science conference, but I'm curious if a certain protocol exists.


What is prefacing paragraphs with "first," "further," and "also" called?

When I write longer posts, I tend to split my points up into paragraphs, then, for some reason, add "first," "secondly," "further," "also," "keep in mind," and so forth in front of them. I'm not sure why I do it, or where I picked it up, and I notice that not everyone demonstrates this behavior.   * What is the correct way to refer to these words when used to preface a paragraph?   * Is this a common writing style, odd, formal, or something else?   * In terms of conveying information, does this make it easier to read and comprehend the points, is it merely fluff, or (worse) distracting? Here are a few examples.


Generic terms for people on opposite sides of a transaction

I'd like to find 2 terms to represent the people involved in a transaction. The transactions vary in their semantics, so I've had trouble finding a single set of terms. Here are some sample transactions and potential terms:               Give a Reward: giver/recipient       Mete Punishment: giver/recipient       Assign a Chore: initiator/assignee       Ask a Favor: requestor/?       The 2 terms will be used as variables in software code, and not exposed to users. I'd like them to be as descriptive as possible (x and y would work, but not be very readable), but generic enough to cover all the transaction semantics. To complicate things, each person may be sending/receiving emails within the transaction, so I'm trying to stay away from "sender/recipient" to avoid confusion. The "recipient" of a request can be the sender of an email. Some other terms I've thought of:               initiator/acceptor       originator/terminator (kinda creepy)       requestor/responder (not really precise)        Any help is appreciated.


How do you say that a food and a sauce 'harmonize'?

One time I told my friend that I ate a piece of bread with honey (not jam, real honey from the bottle) and my friend asked me if the honey is good with bread. Sometimes you say to two people (usually they are a couple) "You two look good together" In a similar way, I wanted to say something like "Honey and bread are good together". The problem with this is, I think the bread is the main element and honey is like a sub-element. But here, they seem to be in the same rank/position: "Honey is pretty good on bread"   "Honey is good with bread" Is there any common expression for this?


What is a car's “interior packaging?”

What is a car's _interior packaging_? This is from Wikipedia article on Crossovers: > Using the unibody construction typical of passenger vehicles, the crossover > combines SUV design features such as tall **interior packaging** , high > H-point seating, high ground-clearance or all-wheel-drive capability — with > design features from an automobile such as a passenger vehicle's platform, > independent rear suspension, car-like handling and fuel economy.


How do you call the part of a crystal that was cut of from a larger crystal?

The semiconductor industry calls the cuts of a crystal **die** or **dice**. Is this term outside of semiconducting industries correct too? For example, a crystal has been cut into small _plates_. What are the _plates_ called then?


"Too serious" vs "too seriously"

I know the vast majority of people say "Don't take yourself too seriously", as found correct by basically every native speaker I've asked about this (often accompanied by incredulous looks). What confuses me is whether it makes sense for _serious_ to be an adverb here because that would make it, well, modify the verb. It would be an appeal for me to _less seriously_ take something instead of how I'm currently behaving, which is _seriously taking_ — what? — myself! Isn't the true appeal behind the sentence for me to reduce my grade of seriousness and (don't take) (myself serious), in a similar way one would wish me not to take sick?


What’s the meaning of “purchase” in “the purchase for changing a rule”?

On page 118 of _Thinking Like a Lawyer_ by Frederick Schauer, I found this passage: > If the **purchase** for changing a rule[,] is a perception of what the > optimal result would be in the absence of the rule, and if every case in > which the rule generates a suboptimal result is understood to be one in > which the rule should be changed so that it no longer produces these > suboptimal results, then it appears as if the rules are not operating as > rules at all and that all of the work is being done by the rule-free > determination of the optimal result. I see that purchase is being used as a noun here, yet what does it mean? None of these three Oxford Dictionaries definitions under noun seem to apply to this context. I’d guess its meaning here as “reason, rationale”, but I don’t know.


What's a good expression for "too much information"?

If someone provides too many details on something, basically making it more difficult to extract the actual information asked for, what is a good expression to describe this? Is _superfluous_ adequate or too harsh? Would it make a difference whether the too-much-information was on purpose or inadvertently?


If I was an airline pilot vs. If I had been an airline pilot 10 years ago

In a comment signed by Martha, she wrote that: > "If I was an airline pilot" and "If I were an airline pilot" have different > meanings. The latter is the subjunctive case (and presumably what _most_ > people mean, even if they say the former). The former is talking about the > past tense - "if I was an airline pilot 10 years ago..." The comment above received 8 upvotes, and this confused me. Somewhere out there, are at least 9 people who hold the same view on this usage. I can't "see" how the sentence: " **If I was a pilot 10 years ago** " is speaking about the past. The sentence begins with "if" which means the speaker is thinking and talking hypothetically, imagining a situation which is unreal. He or she being a pilot never happened. Now I would understand the number of upvotes if (ha!) "was" had been said to be informal and "were" considered to be grammatically more acceptable, (especially if one were to sit an English exam or submit a paper) but to say it expresses a past tense? My natural inclination is to write: **If I had been a pilot 10 years ago**. But in this case the speaker is still hypothesizing in the present about an unreal, and no longer possible situation. Am I wrong??


What does “so” mean in “the analogy, so the skeptics insist, did not determine the result”?

From page 97 of Frederick Schauer’s _Thinking Like a Lawyer_ : > Deciding the Skokie case involving the American Nazi Party in 1977, > therefore, was simply a matter of applying the rule set forth in earlier > cases to this situation.23 There was indeed an analogy between civil rights > demonstrators and the Nazis, the skeptics acknowledge, but the analogy, > **so** the skeptics insist, did not determine the result. I’m struggling with the necessity and meaning of so here. First, I need to figure out whether it’s serving as an adverb or conjunction, but I'm also confused about this dichotomy. Moreover, is it necessary? Does the sentence sound right without it?


So much is at stake

In this sentence: > _So much is at stake_ that courses in foreign languages are often inadequate > training grounds, in and of themselves, for the successful learning of a > second language. I have parsed the first clause 'So much is at stake' as (b) So (=adjective modifying ‘much’) (c) Much (=noun indicating a large quantity or degree of life possibilities) (d) is (=verb) (e) at stake (=idiomatic complement, meaning ‘at risk’ ‘being risked.’) Is there any special term for this kind of clause fronting a clause beginning with 'that?'


Which word can be used for the person who is challenged (in a contest)?

The words "challenge" and "challenger" are well-known, but is there such a term as "challengee" - as I read somewhere? In other words, what would be an appropriate term to describe the person challenged, for instance, to play a challenge match? Unsure whether to ask for the "antonym" of challenger.


How to reply to a status update for a job application?

I received an email today telling me that I will be notified about next steps for my job application by mid next week. I want to be polite and respond something brief, but since I'm not a native English speaker, I often have trouble with simple greetings and formalities. So far I've come up with this, but I think it sounds a bit awkward and redundant: > Thank you for keeping me up to date. I will be looking forward to hearing > about the status of my application. What do you think? Any suggestions are welcome.


You can’t BS him!

I found this statement, > "You can’t BS him!" in this blog. what does it mean?


"I don't" or "don't I" in questions

Please tell me about the difference between these two questions:   1. Why don't I see it?   2. Why I don't see it? Is the second question grammatically correct?


What is the difference between “have to”, “must”, and “should”?

Is there any difference between have to”, “must”, and “should”? If there is some difference between them, when do I have to use (nor not use) each of the constructions below?   * **have to** do something   * **must** do something   * **should** do something


When must one use "should" and when should one use "must"?

I tend to use _should_ when it's a suggestion I don't have a strong opinion on, i.e. it could be done in many other ways than the one I'm suggesting and it can still happen. > You should stop by that gas station to go to the bathroom. On the other hand, I usually use _must_ for things that **have to** happen in a certain way; any other way would make that thing not to happen. The problem is that some people find this usage harsh, as they receive it like if I'm giving them an order. > You must cross the street to get to that store. To me, it's just a depiction of reality, not an order. But I'm neither a native speaker nor a regular person. :-) So, what's the proper use for _must_ and _should_? Does this use differ among the English dialects?


Usage of 'Should'

What kind of sentence is it: > It is a pity that he should fail the examination. Kindly explain to me in what situation do we use such a structure?


Omitting commas around non-critical details

In the sentence > His ID card is missing, as well as his dog, Ian, though it's likely no-one > will notice the latter. is it appropriate to remove the commas around "his dog, Ian,"? The sentence seems a bit clunky with, but it doesn't sound quite right without either. This: > His ID card is missing. His dog, Ian, is as well. avoids the comma problem, but sounds equally awkward.


Is "unmissable" a valid word?

I noticed an advert on TV advertising "unmissable" shows coming up. MS Word marks it as a spelling mistake, but the Mac OS is OK with it. I don't particularly like it.


Does "Chinese laundry" have any non-literal meaning?

A recent ad by Bing Lee had during its ad something like > You could create a Chinese laundry with that much [washing powder]. > > Mum, you can't say that! > > Yes I can, I'm Chinese Does "Chinese laundry" have any meaning other than a laundry staffed by Chinese people? A onelook.com search only gives Wikipedia and Urban dictionary as matches for the phrase. Wikipedia redirects "Chinese laundry" to Chinese Laundries in North America, which states that > In the United States and Canada in the late 19th and early 20th century, the > occupation of laundry worker was heavily identified with Chinese Americans. However, a google ngram search has "Chinese laundry" far more common than any other immigrant population (such as Jewish, Italian or Polish) plus "laundry". Does this mean "Chinese laundry" developed a non-literal meaning? Urban dictionary has an entry about "Chinese laundry", but there's very few upvotes, and even the top voted entry has half as many downvotes.


"more people becoming increasingly xxx" or "more people increasingly becoming xxx"

I need a bit of guidance regarding the following sentence. Which of the three variants is grammatical? >   * Are more people becoming increasingly intolerant? >   * Are more people increasingly becoming intolerant? >   * Are people increasingly becoming more intolerant? >


How do you say "the test was redone"?

I'm documenting some test cases and this sentence in particular bothered me: > After the problem was fixed, the test was redone. The thesaurus wasn't helping much. Can it be reworded in a better way?


Palatalization of the initial "s" in words starting with "st-"

Sometimes I hear native speakers pronounce the _s_ at the beginning of a word as [ʃ]. For example, _straight_ as [ʃtreɪt], or _struggle_ as [ʃtrʌɡl]. It sounds like German words. Is it a certain English dialect, a specific accent, or just an idiolect?


Is there a better name for "promotional pens"?

I'm referring to free pens having a company name and/or logo. These pens are provided free of charge to potential customers or even the general public in order to promote goods or services or even a company itself which provides such goods or services. I'd like to know if there is a better name for such pens than "promotional pens".


How to describe "choose to do something by one's own willing"

For example, there is a course (say French course), for students in a college. The students can take it, but they don't have to. Someone, who is not a student in that college, thinks that this course is optional. But he saw, on a student's facebook wall, that "I have a french course." So he wants to ask this student that if this course is optional. Of course he can just ask: `Is this course elective/optional?` But the above is just an example to describe the words or the expressions that I need: An expression that says `One can choose to do a particular thing by his own willing.` There is a constrain for such expressions: If a thing breaks the law or the rules (of a society, company, school...), then we can't use this expression for such a thing. I am not sure if `... can do...by ...own willing` is a common expression for this. Furthermore, is there any other/short way to express this?


Pretentious Language Part 2

An acquaintance of mine who was born in Long Island has taken to putting the definite article "the" in front of nouns when he speaks. For example "I love the Google" or "In NYC I met the boyfriend" (referring to his own boyfriend) Even though this is common in romance languages, is it proper English or an affectation?


What is the correct word to accompany " A survey..."?

As in, do we say "A survey on xyz systems" or "A survey of xyz systems"? My initial thoughts were to use " A survey on..." because I thought "A survey of..." would refer to survey conducted by XYZ; but I ended up reminding myself that in such a case, it might be "A survey by..."


How to make Sentences using Being?

Sentence - He is being in tension. Above sentence is Present Continuos. How can we use Being in other sentences.


Use of possible/it is possible

I am editing an article by a non-native speaker who is using the expressions: > _1._ what is to be learned meaning the things that the students are expected to learn or that which is to be learned > _2._ what is possible to learn meaning those things which it is possible for a student to learn in a particular situation > _3._ what is made possible to learn in the following sense: the teacher (or circumstances) make it possible for the student to learn X so X is "what is made possible to learn" The first of these phrases seems grammatically correct to me, even though it is a bit awkward. The second two phrases sound wrong to me but I am having difficulty analysing exactly why they don't work (particularly in the case of "what is made possible to learn". The main problem seem to be that one can't say "X is possible to learn": that we need to say " **it** is possible to learn X", so "what it is possible to learn" would probably be better. But I suspect there is another problem with the third sentence - I just can't put my finger on. I would really appreciate if someone could help me to understand exactly what the problem is with these constructions and, if possible, suggest an alternative.


What does "20 weeks pregnant" mean?

First, let us agree that a woman is either pregnant or she is not I suppose a third state of uncertainty is possible, but that is more of a mental as opposed to a physical state. Is the phrasing "20 weeks pregnant" legitimate English? It is used quite frequently, but a reading without context would seem to lead one to believe that it means there are degrees of being pregnant that can be measured in weeks. I googled it and came up with many examples of this phrasing being used in mainstream media and websites. I understand the general intent of this phrasing, but is it correct English? Should it be promoted and used in publications that care about correct use of the English language? There are alternatives that are more clear, such as "she completed the 20th week of her pregnancy" or "You are in week 21 of your pregnancy." If it is accepted language (regardless of being "correct"), what does it mean? Does it mean a woman has completed her 20th week of pregnancy? Or does it mean that she is currently in her 20th week, or in other words, she is currently on a gestational day somewhere from 141–147?


Why is 'adjectival' pronounced with [ɑi] in the third syllable rather than [ɪ]?

Recently I asserted that the third syllable in 'adjectival' is different from the same syllable in 'adjective'. I was asked why that is, and all I could do was mutter something about the addition of the suffix changing it and something about strong and weak syllables, but I really have no idea why.


Is versionize a real word?

Is the word "versionize" a real word or is it a form of bastardization of English? **Additional Info:** I came across this word in a software feature tracker. The feature called for something in the software to have the ability to save versions of it. It went something like " _...Versionize feature X..._ " Interestingly, a lot of spell checkers seem to complain about the word too.


What do you call a group of people that move a lot?

I can't think of the word to describe it. Something similar to "wanderer" or "roamer". It's often used to describe people that don't stay in one place... not "migratory"...


Is there an English (British or American) expression or idiom that refers to a recluse finally socializing

In Icelandic, there is an expression "að viðra sig", using the analogy of clothes that smell of closet and the act of taking them outside to get some of that old smell out of them, that is used to describe a recluse who finally spends **some** time with other people. While I don´t expect the same analogy to be used in English, is there any other idiom/expression that refers in any way to the same act/effort? ## Updated I was not as clear as I could be with the original question... The act I am trying to pinpoint is a one-off effort to socialize, rather than a permanent change from recluse to non-recluse. Using the Icelandic expression as an example, it would be used by a parent about having forced a kid who is a World of Warldcraft addict to participate in a family dinner. Again, I am not looking for an exact corresponding expression, but hoping to get as close as possible. ## Note In the comments to this question, a few expressions were mentioned but it was pointed out that they are not intended for people: "De-mothball" - used for military equipment "given an airing" - used for papers and ideas that are brought back into discussion after neglect While difficult to use for my purposes, they might be useful in a different situation as long as you take into account the weirdness of referring to people in this way... so i thought I'd mention them here. Thanks to mplungjan and 'Colin Fine'


What's the difference between "apparel" and "clothing"?

Those two words seems referring to one thing.


Is "Thanks so much" wrong?

I have seen many many people say "Thanks so much". I believe what they really mean is "Thank you so much". Searching "Thanks so much" in this website gives 177 results. But the questions deal with "Thank you very much" or "Thank you so much". See e.g.: “Thank you very much” vs. “Thank you so much” I personally think it's wrong usage. But I've seen so many people use it that way. Is the usage really wrong?


A word to describe the act of using one's head to moving slowing to the sex partner body while having sex

I have to translate this from my language but i don't know in english. While someone having sex, he may moving his head wander around his partner's body. What is the words to describe this action.


What's a word to describe people who blindly follow their government without question?

I want to describe someone who fanatically follows one of the following:   * Governmental body   * Political party   * Country Basically, someone who will agree with their government/party/country regardless of what actions/decisions they make. I was thinking of words such as _zealot_ , _follower_ , etc.. The word most similar to what I want is slang: _sheep_. example in a sentence: > Elise constantly agrees with anything the liberal party says and does > without having any personal opinions; she is but a sheep.


Past perfect progressive followed by simple present

I've found the following sentence here: > I had been enjoying the sunshine and blue sky of the day but as soon as we > push open the door of the hangar, that pleasure ends brutally. Is simple present grammatically valid here? I guess the whole sentence designates a transition from continuing past to the point of eye-witness experience conveyed by simple present. Am I right?


"A fallacy in its own right"

Would it be correct to say or write that an "organisation is a fallacy in its own right" — by failing utterly in doing what it's supposed to do?


"Anyone has" or "anyone have" seen them?

So I thought I'm sure about this and my instincts say that: "If anyone has seen them .." would be right but then again when I said it like: "If anyone have seen them .." I started thinking which one would be the right one. Can you please guide me through which is the right one and why? P.S. English is not my first language.


Inverse for the term "refinement”

In computer science there is a term "refinement". Refinement is a hierarchical relationship between two concepts. If B refines A, then the requirements of B are a superset of the requirements of A. Thus, the set of abstractions that model B are a subset of those that model A, i.e., every B is an A. At the same time there is a term "lifting". It stands for finding a concept with least requirements to fit a particular algorithm. The question is how to describe A in terms of B if B is a refinement of "A". Similar to ancestor vs. descendant. My guess is "A is a lifting of B". But I'm not sure I can use "a lifting" in English.


How to say 'before previous' in one word?

I'm struggling to say 'before previous' in one word. Like "I visited my parents pre-previous month". Is there a suitable word?


Verb corresponding to schedule, but for a place (instead of time)

The verb "schedule" is used to denote a time (e.g."the meeting is scheduled for 8 am"). Is there a corresponding verb that denotes a place?


passive with "to get"

In spoken English (at least in America), passives are often formed with "to get" rather than "to be;" I would wager the majority of the time:   * he got hit by a car   * I get driven to work   * I've gotten called for jury duty eight times Are there specific verbs that prefer "be" to "get," or vice-versa, or semantic differences between these forms? I cannot think of any.


Why is a young surfer called a "grommet" or a "grom"? This page suggests that "a possible etymology for the word may be from the Portuguese term 'grumete', meaning the lowest ranking person on board a naval ship - this word would have been used widely in South Africa in the period when surfing was becoming popular". That sounds pretty implausible, to me.


What is a non-pejorative antonym for gourmet?

I'm looking to describe two groups of people who eat pasta sauces. One type likes things like Rao's or Mario Batali. I'm describing them as "gourmet". A second group prefers Ragu and Prego. I was thinking _utilitarian_ , but that's not quite right, and I don't want to use a term like _unsophisticated_ or _simple_ because the first is pejorative and the second isn't to do with taste in particular like _gourmet_ is. Any ideas?


Is there any rule for pronouncing words beginning with “re-”?

It’s hard for me to guess how to pronounce words beginning with _re-_ correctly. Sometimes it is /rɛ/ as in _reference_ , but sometimes it is /ri/ as in _report_. Is there any rule about this?


Is there a word for "a drop of water that comes into contact with eyes"?

I am just looking for one word, when a drop of water come into eyes.   Is there is any word for this ?


Is it correct to say "This train not taking passengers"?

I hear this announcement often at the train-station. Is this grammatically correct, without an 'is' after the word 'train'?


When do I pronounce a non-existing “r” between adjacent vowel sounds?

If I say two words consecutively, with the first ending in a vowel sound and the second starting with one, when is it correct to include a non-existing _r_ between those two words? Examples from phrases I’ve heard:   * I saw (r)a movie   * They saw (r)us   * Law (r)and order   * That's the idea, (r)anyway. I heard the last one in the movie _Edge of Tomorrow_ yesterday. Is this grammatically correct? If so, is the omission of the _r_ grammatically incorrect? Are there any rules regarding this?


not-quite-honest public service

In a noun or idiom, what are public servants who only seek public office for the sake of income called?


Difference between a gerund acting as subject and an infinitive acting as a subject?

I am wondering whether there is any difference between a gerund acting as subject and an infinitive acting as a subject.


I quoted the following from a pamphlet: > Please read the instructions carefully before **filling out** the > application form. The application will be returned to you and the > registration may be delayed, if the information is not **filled in** > completely. Does "filling out" equal to "filling in"? The words _in_ and _out_ have opposite meanings, how can they produce almost equal meaning in these phrases _filling in_ and _filling out_?


preposition 'to' after verb 'talk'

I'm confused whether it is correct to use 'to' after 'talk' or not? Some examples would really be appreciated.


Word for non-malicious heckling

What would be a word for non-malicious heckling, as when an audience member shouts something at the performer/speaker, but the statement isn't aggressive or attacking them in any way. (Brief, unsolicited audience participation.) I have seen 'heckling' used as a blanket term for this, but without context the connotations of the word are negative.


Translation for Dutch "tot en met": until and including?

In Dutch language we use the expression " _tot en met_ " to signify a quantity between two measures **including** the last measure. So, for instance, the following: _woensdag 22 juni **tot en met** vrijdag 24 juni_ ... would mean: Wednesday the 22nd of June until and including Friday the 24th of June, whereas: _woensdag 22 juni **tot** vrijdag 24 juni_ ... would mean: Wednesday the 22nd of June until but not including Friday the 24th of June I'm unsure of what the correct expression would be in English language to imply the former. Is either _until_ or maybe _through_ enough perhaps? Or is there some other term which expresses this more correctly?


"Exchanged with" vs. "exchanged for"

Is "exchanged with" grammatically correct and does it mean the same thing as "exchanged for?" "For" and "with" don't normally seem interchangeable, so these two phrases should be different, yet they seem similar.


Does "exact" determine the precision or the accuracy of something?

When I say "the speed of light is exactly 300000000m/s", is that an incorrect or a correct statement? That is, does "exactly" refer to the precision of an estimate (then my statement would be correct, I think, because I wouldn't have asserted that my statement doesn't deviate from the correct speed) or does it refer to the accuracy? (then my statement is incorrect, because the speed of light is slightly less than that).


Non-gender uncle/aunt relation name

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Is there a single term for "nieces and nephews"?   >  Is there a gender-neutral word for [aunts and uncles], parents' siblings? The non-gender name for 'mother' is 'parent', for 'son' it is 'child'. But is there a non-gender word for 'uncle' or 'aunt'? Or is there no better definition than 'parent-sibling'? If there is a word I would like to know the inverse as well, i.e. for 'nephew/niece'.


Is there a single term for "nieces and nephews"?

I find it handy when talking about my sons and daughters I can just say my children. It's nice to say nieces instead of sibling's daughters. I wonder if there is a similar term for nieces and nephews together? I imagine I could say sibling's kids but I was hoping for a single word.


Etymology of a word

I'm curious how one describes the etymology of a word. Does the etymology of a word entail more than its origin? Does etymology also contain a words usages and history?


What's the name of a person doing assurance

This has come to my mind, person doing test is a tester, person doing development is a developer, person doing consultation is a consultant, etc. My question, as written on the title, is, what's a person doing an assurance? If you need it more specific, what's a person doing a software quality assurance.


Word of "let's split ourselves into teams"

> "Let's X to play football" can I replace X with a verb (or phrase)? I was thinking of _teamup_ (or is it _team-up_?) but I think it is used when we are already split and we want to be one team.


Could "are he" be correct?

I was just trying to formulate a sentence in an email, and wanted to reference a third person, inquiring as to which of something that person was referring in the forwarded mail message. Is it: "About which things is he talking?" or "About which things are he talking?" Just FYI I originally had the "about" at the end. Not grammatically correct but no one talks like that anyway. There seem to be conflicting rules here, but I don't know which one applies. Normally, with sentences like "What is he doing?" the "is" is part of "is talking," and similarly the second person "are talking." This would indicate that the first version is correct. But you could also argue that the helper verb applies to "things", and so should be "are" because "things" is plural. I started to think that "is he" is correct, because if you turn the sentence around to answer it, you get "He is talking about those things" and not "he are talking". But still, there are other sentences like "Which gifts is he bringing to the party?" Now that just feels wrong, saying "gifts is" like that. But is it correct?


"Customer usage" or "customer use"?

I'm working for a truck manufacturer and I have to analyse what our customers do with their vehicles (for example, how many kilometres do they usually drive per day, or how much fuel do they use?). I'm not a native English-speaker and I'm not sure if I should say I'm studying "customer usage" or "customer use". I've read many pages explaining the difference between both words, and I think "usage" is the right word, but I would like to be sure. Thank you.


using "Usage" or "Use"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  "Use" vs "usage" As a non-native speaker, I have trouble deciding whether to use 'use' or 'usage'. > The aim of this paper is to demonstrate a working prototype of a wireless > sensor network [...] for industrial (use|usage). Are both versions equivalent, or is one preferred over the other?


Synonym for "raise the bar"

Is there another way to express "raise the bar"? The context I'm looking for would fit this sentence: > A firewall **raises the bar** for would-be attackers.


Can e.g. be used in the end of a sentence in place of "for example"?

It is said that **e.g.** (informally also written as eg.) is a abbreviated Latin phrase used in place of " _for example_ ". Reference: here, here & here Example: > **Asia is a large continent containing many large nations (For example, > China, India and Russia).** > > can also be written as the following by replacing " **For example** " by " > **e.g** " > > **Asia is a large continent containing many large nations (e.g., China, > India and Russia).** Is this "replacement" also valid when used in a case like this: > ... and that is why Democratic countries often end up with higher rate of > corruption. Take US & India for example. Can the last sentence of above example be rewritten as: > Take US & India e.g. **P.S.** I know that somehow it is incorrect but I am not aware of the reason.


Can I use an "if" clause without "then"?

I have the following sentence: > If T had still been alive, there is the great possibility that either T or C > ... My teacher says that the word "then" must appear after the comma, but I think that it's implied and unnecessary. Who is right?


Word for "knowing the feeling from X situation"?

Yes, I know the same thing has been asked before, but there were no answers that fit the word I'm trying to find. Anyway, what is a word for "knowing the feeling from X situation"? That would be something like "know that feel" in slang. I am not thinking of _sympathy_ or _empathy_. It is more like: let's say someone describes a situation like "and then I feel sad because of what is said", and I know myself from it or I know the feeling very well. Sorry if I'm not very good at explaining. Hope someone knows what I am talking about. If it is of any help, I would say "å føle seg truffen" in Norwegian. ### I think I'll stick with something like "I ~~recognize~~ know that feeling" or "I can relate".


Would you use the term cucumber-time and why?

During International Law studies I talked to English natives about politics, using a literal translation of the Dutch "komkommertijd", _cucumber time_ , meaning to refer to the news-silent period of high summer. I thought they understood me. Later it occurred to me that they might simply have nodded out of courtesy and may have missed the actual meaning. Looking it up, I found that _cucumber time_ seems a dated term, out of use since more than a century. Would you consider _cucumber time_ and _silly season_ to be equivalent? Would you use either phrase or prefer one over the other? Update: this German text implies the English term is still in use, while this Dutch text explicitly states the term is out of fashion and largely forgotten.


Is "more poorly" an appropriate phrase?

Today I described someone as being trained to react "more poorly" to a given situation. Her current reaction is poor. It is becoming more poor. So she reacts more poorly. Is this correct? It sounds awkward.


What does "at south of $100 million" mean?

From this article: > Judge Alsup did take the unusual step of appointing his own damages expert. > That independent expert valued the patent case **at south of** $5 million, > and valued the copyright case **at south of** $100 million. It sounds like it means either: > the minimum value is $100 million or: > the maximum value is $100 million


alternatives for "leveraging"

Some people frown upon the use of "leveraging" in formal writing. What would be a good alternative to the expression: > We will be able to investigate X **leveraging** from the knowledge of Y. None of the entries in thesaurus seem to neatly apply to the case. Any ideas?


Which is better: "how important something is" or "the importance of something" as the subject position?

Phrases can sometimes be paraphrased into clauses. For example, _the importance of something_ can be paraphrased as _how important something is_. It seems that the clause version is used mainly as the object position. Can it be used as the subject position? For example, in (1) which sentence is better? Is either ok? Which is more appropriate in (2)? >   1. a. The degree of dependence on nuclear energy varies from country to > country.   >  b. How dependent on nuclear energy varies from country to country. > >   2. a. How to read books varies from person to person.   >  b. The way of reading books varies from person to person. > >


Is there a common term for source and destination?

**Background:** I'm trying to come up with a name for a database column. This would store the source or destination of funds in a multi-part financial transaction.


Is it correct to say "It was not happened"? I have heard people saying "It was not happening" or "It didn't happen" but "It was not happened" is new to me.


Phrase for focusing on unimportant details

I'm looking for an idiom or saying that I could use when people are focusing too much on small details and not seeing the big picture. A couple that come to mind are "being penny-wise and pound foolish" and "rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic". However, the former doesn't fit what I'm thinking of because the present activity might not be wise. The latter implies too much about impending doom. For example, let's say some company is spending all their time refining a small detail in their product, while ignoring a major opportunity shift in the industry. What phrase could I use there?


Idiom: People caring about minor stuff while something terrible is happening

Imagine a situation in which the whole place is on fire, a bomb is about to explode, everyone is running for their lives and someone is checking his looks on the mirror... pretty inappropriate for the situation, don't you think? I'm looking for an idiom or colloquial/slang/informal expression to describe such an indifferent stance.


Idiom about tackling smaller problems instead of tackling the root

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Phrase for focusing on unimportant details I'm trying to find an idiom about tackling smaller problems instead of tackling their root cause. For example,   * Instead of plugging the holes in the dam, let's try to divert the river (or build a new dam).   * Instead of hosing down forest fires let's try to stop the kid playing with the matches.


Term for Perfectionist with poor priorities

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Idiom: People caring about minor stuff while something terrible is > happening Someone who is obsessing over details of a project, trying to get them perfect, while fundamental basic components or steps are left undone and by the wayside. Is there an adjective or a name for this kind of behaviour?


What to call it when someone takes something the most negative possible way

Is there a word for the situation when someone takes something said in the most negative possible way, basically stretching what is said to fit the negative meaning that they desire it to mean. Example: "Maybe we shouldn't hang out." to mean: "I never want to talk to you again, you are cut from my life."


Why "pay top dollar" and not "pay top dollars"

Why do we use _pay top dollar_ and not _pay top dollars_? _Dollar_ is countable, so _dollars_ look more correct.


Meaning of "Blunt instrument"

I am having difficulties trying to understand this sentence: > In some respects, Courses of Action are the more basic of the two. In and of > themselves, however, Courses of Action tend to be rather **blunt > instruments**. In Merrian Webster, blunt is: _slow, deficient in feeling; obtuse in understanding; abrupt in manner;_... and when searching for images in Google, it seems a blunt instrument can be _a bat, a hammer_ , and any other object used to hit something or someone. What is the meaning of tend to be "blunt instrument"? It will determine if a course of action will be successful or not like a judge's hammer?


An article before the word "Equation"

In many scientific papers, the article before the word "Equation" is omitted. Is there any grammar statement behind this? For instance: > "Equation (8) contains various approximations, and we have to check their > consistency."


Informal Suffix Usage: -ity/ety

Sometimes in very informal or comic book language one will see phrases such as "bonkity bonk", "flippity-flop", and "knockity knock". Other examples include "crunchity", "swirlity", etc, etc. I have heard people add the suffix "-ity" to a number of verbs and it always seems to imply a progressive action. For example, "knockity knock" can be used to refer to the action of knocking on a door while it is still happening. This suffix is different than "-ing" which also shows present progression. It wouldn't sound right to say "knocking knock" or "bonking bonk". But what IS the difference? And what is the correct term for this suffix?


How to refer to a previous number by "that much"?

Sentence: > Using cross-validation, it was shown that modeling at a penalty value of > 1.25 did achieve the highest performance. This indicates that a penalty > value _that much_ could mitigate the negative effect of collinearity on > model performance. or > ... _as that much_... or > ... _this much_... Which one is more correct? Is there a better expression to give the same meaning?


What type of phrase is 'not quite'?

I'd like to to know what type of phrase 'not quite' is. My English Language teacher says it is a mitigated adverbial phrase, but I have no idea. I'm pretty sure it is not mitigated, but partly adverbial due to the use of 'quite'. Please help!


The meaning of "pro"

I have a question about the word _pro_. Some software apps are called _pro versions_. What does it really mean? When I google the meaning of _pro_ , it shows me the result _professional_ and _prostitute_. Then why are they using the name _pro_ for software apps?


"Dichotomy" but for three

What's the best way to express the idea of a _dichotomy_ over 3 entities? Is _trichotomy_ sufficiently clear, meaningful and correct?


What is the plural form of trademarked product names, specifically of the term "WordPress"?

On the stackexchange site WordPress Answers, we recently discussed the plural form, or whether one exists at all, of the system we all use. > WordPress is a free and open source blogging tool and a content management > system (CMS). In more colloquial terms it is a software application or > "program". Initially, I suggested that analogously to "press" and its two-word-companions such as "bench press" the plural ought to be "WordPresses". Another user argued, that it was a singular without a plural, since it is a trademarked name of the WordPress Foundation and hence any alteration of it would be a fork (programming terminology).   The latter is obviously for one correct and for another in the realm of our expertise and not to be discussed here. Still, initially I contested the earlier, since I thought I could for instance order "Two Pepsis" or "Two Cokes" (synonymical to "Two bottles/cans of [...]") in a restaurant and inline with that "WordPresses" would not have to mean "the system and a smiliar one (i.e. a fork)" but could refer to "several installations of WordPress".   A third user added that that might be misused in spoken language frequently, but that it would be correct to order "Two Pepsi" only and that that term didn't have a plural either. That still _felt_ wrong to me, but thinking about it further, I concluded that you'd never order "Two Guinnesses", but "Two Guinness" instead and that hence that must hold true for Coke and Pepsi as well - and because of that ultimately for the initial term (WordPress) also. They _almost_ have me convinced, but whatever the correct way, this has sparked my (and likely our) interest and I'd like to get a definitive answer on this one. Hence I am asking you guys and girls here. Shed some light for the IT nerds, please: **Do product names have plurals or not? Or, if this can't be answered categorically with yes or no, in which cases do plurals exist and in which do they not?**


Meaning and origin of "Get someone's shirt out"

I was wondering to myself about the word "shirty". It seemed so curious a word. After all, what did its meaning have to do with _shirts_. "Were the two words even related?", I wondered. So I looked up "shirty" in the dictionary... > **shirty** (ˈʃɜːtɪ) — _adj_ , shirtier , shirtiest slang chiefly ( Brit ) > bad-tempered or annoyed [C19: perhaps based on such phrases as **_to get > someone's shirt out_** to annoy someone] This led me to another question. I have never heard the phrase " ** _get someone's shirt out_** ". So I looked up this, to find out a bit more about the phrase. And what I found was that the only places it seems to be used were in dictionary definitions of the word "shirty"! It seems that the phrase means "to annoy someone". But where did this phrase come from and why does it mean that?


What is a less offensive synonym for "hypocrite"?

Is there a word that describe a person who doesn't "practice what they preach"? Basically, is there a synonym for "hypocrite" that carries less pejorative connotations? For example, let's say a friend of mine says he is a Christian. Yet he engages in behaviors considered sins by the Bible, making him a hypocrite. And I would like to tell him I think he is a hypocrite. What would be a good word to use here, so my criticism seems constructive rather than offensive? * * *   * I tried using a thesaurus, but the synonyms that came up were even worse (ie: they are _more_ offensive than "hypocrite").   * _Related (but different) question:Alternatives to "Hypocrite"_, which asks what to call someone who knows they **are** in the group of people they criticize.


Word for resembling the truth

How do we refer to the act of _resembling_ the truth, regardless if it is _indeed_ the truth? Some context: suppose you are watching a film and the story bears a striking resemblance to "real life". Perhaps you remember similar events from your own background or the story has a strong internal coherence. So you feel that the story _could_ be true, even though you know it is fictional. Or, as the legend has it, when Michelangelo finished his "Pietà" and the sculpture seemed so "real" and "natural" to him, that he was amazed that the sculpture couldn't talk. One last example: you hear the promises of a politician in election campaign and he seems to be telling the truth, but of course you have no way to figure out, beforehand, if he is being honest or not. The word "likelihood" comes to mind, but this word suggests some kind of numerical (even statistical) evaluation, which is akin to "probability". The word I am looking for describes the feeling you get, which leads to a subjective "binary" judgement (either it resembles the truth or not). In Portuguese, such word is "verossimilhança" (from Latin `verum`, _truth_ \+ `similis`, _similar_ ).


Can "grammatical" mean "grammatically correct"?

I have been seeing phrases like, "That sentence isn't grammatical" etc. recently, and at first I wrote them off thinking, "Oh, well that technically isn't right, but I get what he's saying so I'm not going to make a fuss..." The thing is, I've been seeing it more and more, by different people, and I can't tell if it's just that the speakers (well, this I've been seeing this on the internet, so I guess it "the posters") aren't native English speakers, or I've missed some sort of shift in the usage of the word "grammatical". Can anyone shed some light on this?


What does the end of sentence "eh" tag mean in Canadian English?

What does the end of sentence _eh_ tag mean in Canadian English? It seems like it should mean something. In other languages, final tags can indicate questions or other things.


What is the meaning of the phrase "slaved out"

As i was reading a character's biography : > Jack, a small orphan child on transport ship that crashed on the Pitch Black > planet. During the movie it is discovered that the child dresses like a boy, > but is actually female. > > In the second instalment of the series, we discover that she attempts to > replicate Riddick's eyes and fate by joining a bountyhunter crew. **She was > slaved out** , and when attempting to escape murdered her captives, and sent > to a prison. > > At the end of Chronicals, she is killed during the fight with the Lord > Marshall. I was wondering what "slaved out" exactly means, i tried to ask my friends, whose English is way better than me, but they could not provide an answer. Dialogue between Riddick and Jack:               Jack: How the hell can I get eyes like that?     Riddick: First, you've gotta kill a few people.     Jack: Okay. I can do that.     Riddick: And then you get sent to a prison where they tell you you'll never see daylight again. So you dig up a doctor, pay him twenty menthol Kools to do a surgical shine job on your eyes …     Jack: So you can see who's sneaking up on you in the dark!     Riddick: Exactly.


single nouns follow "their"

I've seen sentences like: "A lot of people use their computer to ..." is it just a typo of "their computers", or it's correct usage? Thanks


Why is my English "worlds better" than yours but never "the best by worlds"?

In speech when making comparisons we can say:   * It is **_far_** _better than_   * It's **_way_** _better than_   * It's **_miles_** _better than_   * It's **_worlds_** _better than_ For instance, > British restaurant food is far/way/miles/worlds better than it used to be 20 > years ago. In the case of _miles_ and _far_ we can invert the order and say > _It is better_ **_by far_**   >  _It is better_ **_by miles_** But the phrase: "It is better by way/worlds" sounds off key. > _British restaurant food is better by far/miles than it used to be 20 years > ago_. YES   >  _British restaurant food is better by way/worlds than it used to be 20 > years ago_. NO In the superlative form, the dissonance no longer occurs with _way_. > _Of all the ice-creams we've tasted, Italian_ **_is by far the best_**   >  _Of all the ice-creams we've tasted, Italian_ **_is the best by far_**   >  _Of all the ice-creams we've tasted, Italian_ **_is the best by miles_** > tfd   >  _Of all the ice-creams we've tasted, Italian_ **_is by way the best_** But the dissonance continues with "worlds" > _Of all the ice-creams we've tasted, Italian_ **_is by worlds the best_** ?? The expression "by way the best" is idiomatic, but the phrase by worlds the best sounds off, and Google agrees, displaying only seven results. Is it ungrammatical? Is it nonsensical? Can you not measure something in _worlds_? Well... yes you can, because a person can do something _worlds better_ than another person. How many worlds? Two, three, an infinite number? It doesn't matter, the term _worlds_ is used as a form of measurement as proven when it is used in the comparative sense. If neither "by way better" nor "by worlds better" is idiomatic, what happens with _way_ when we use the superlative form in "by way the best"? I did a little Google research and came up with these figures:   * **by far the best**   215 results   * **the best by far**   323 results   * **by way the best**   143 results   * **by miles the best**   330 results   * **the best by miles**   275 results   * **the best by worlds** (?)   8 results   * **by worlds the best** (?)   7 results 1) Is _by worlds better_ and _the best by worlds_ ungrammatical? (I know they're not idiomatic) 2) Does this type of construction and/or flexibility have a name in linguistics? I.e., _It is miles better_ / _it is better by miles_ 3) Why is "it is better by way/worlds" incorrect but not "it is better by far/miles"? 4) Why is the superlative form acceptable in " _it's by way the best_ " when it sounds so wrong in the comparative form? * * * **EDIT**   Many thanks to @Mitch who pointed out that Google's declared results and the actual instances for "by way the best" were way off by miles— _groan_. Consequently, I've clicked on the last page for each search and noted down the results. You'll see that on every last page Google kindly reminds its users: _In order to show you the most relevant results, we have omitted some entries very similar to the XXX already displayed.   If you like, you can repeat the search with the omitted results included._ (I don't think I'll ever understand how Google calculates its results...)


An English equivalent of 'intelligentsia'?

Webster says: > Definition of INTELLIGENTSIA:   >  intellectuals who form an artistic, social, or political vanguard or elite > > Origin of INTELLIGENTSIA   >  Russian intelligentsiya, from Latin intelligentia intelligence   >  First Known Use: 1907 What other word or (a group of words) would describe in English the same thing?


Difference between "dumb" and "stupid"

A friend and I had a disagreement about something, in which he called one of my statements "dumb". As we were talking through the disagreement, it got a little heated and I tried repeating what he had said, and instead of using "dumb", I used "stupid". Per Google (seaching 'define: dumb' and 'define: stupid') > dumb: stupid > > stupid: lacking intelligence or common sense Without even knowing I was doing so, I used these words as though they're interchangeable... but are they? Do these words have any difference at all? My friend's argument is now that "stupid usually implies a lack of knowledge"... but I'm not sure how "dumb" doesn't.


Are there idioms specific to one English dialect?

Let's get into a little conversation about the differences between American English, British English and regional dialects. Some words are specific to certain dialects ( _lass_ is Scottish, _the lads_ is British, etc.). Some words take different meaning ( _theatre_ vs. _cinema_ to mean “movie theatre”). Pronunciation is obviously different, and spelling can be ( _neighbour_ / _or_ , _gray_ / _grey_ , etc.). What I wonder is this: are there some specifically British (or American, or whatever) **idioms**. I don't see why there shouldn't be, but I can't think of a single one right now. So, can you come forward with such idioms with the following constraints:   * the individual words do not markedly belong to one dialect   * it does not refer to a specific cultural element: geographic place, local dish, … It would be fun to have some from a wide variety of English dialects, to broaden the perspective. * * * _Edit:_ to clarify, an idiom in this question has the meaning of “a group of words established by usage as having a meaning not deducible from those of the individual words”


Difference between "encampment" and "camp"

I recently came across the term _encampment_. Although I could understand that the word must be very close related to _camp_ , it bugs me that I don't understand why such a long word for the same thing exists. Is _encampment_ a more sophisticated word than _camp_? The translation for both words refer to the same words in my mother tongue (german).


"Inconsequent" and "inconsequential"

What is the difference between "inconsequent" and "inconsequential"?


What does "as you are able" mean?

I feel like it could mean either "what you are capable of doing," or "what you are willing to do." Do one of the above better represent the meaning of this phrase or are they both right?


What's a good opposite of "keep track"?

How can I say the opposite of "keep track"? I was trying to keep track of something but something happened and I lost the track. I'd like to say "lose track". Is it possible to say it this way or is it just my funny attempt to speak English? :-)


Is "mate" in the word "roommate" a root or a suffix?

I'm doing my term paper about wordbuilding. And I'm interested what is "mate" in the word "roommate"? Is it a second root so the word "roommate" is a compound, or is it a suffix?


Would the phrase “No worries!” be understood outside Australia?

In Australia, _No worries!_ is a very common way of saying _You’re welcome_. I wonder whether it is used this way in other English-speaking countries. The phrase’s meaning can be understood easily enough in context, so it should therefore be safe to use, but I’m still curious whether it would sound natural to non-Australians.


"'Hello', says he. 'Hello', says I" — is this correct?

I'm reading a novel in which once in a while a character says something like "I are", "He do", and similar stuff. I understand the author is just reproducing the way people talk on the streets. However I've found a piece of text of which I'm not sure if it's proper English. One of the characters, who almost always speaks proper English, is reproducing a conversation that happened many years ago using the present tense in the following manner: > I was with this guy and "Hi", says he, "how are you", says I... and so on. My question is if the "says I" is proper English (a special case in which "I" is treated as a third person because we are relating in present tense something that happened in the past) or it's just kind of slang. I was also a bit surprised by how the usual order is switched ("says he" instead of "he says") but to me it's secondary to the "says I" issue.


“A similar hat to Jane” vs “A hat similar to Jane’s”

Of late I have noticed British people using the following sort of construct: > John and Jane make such a cute couple because John always wears a similar > hat to Jane. To my ear, that is ungrammatical, or at least nonsensical, because **John seems to have mistaken his wife for a hat!** John’s hat cannot be similar to Jane; it can only be similar to Jane’s hat. For me, that sentence must therefore be recast as this: > John and Jane make such a cute couple because John always wears a hat > similar to Jane’s. That way the hat is no longer similar to her, merely to hers. Is the former formulation actually grammatical, or is it a common mistake or simple carelessness? Doesn’t it confuse people? Is it fit for formal writing? How long has this been going on? To the American ear, it sounds really messed up, like it is making a wrong comparison. It’s like they have forgotten about the possessive case, which is the only one that makes sense here. * * * ## Edit Here are actual “similar X to Y” instances by British authors, where one would expect to find “Y’s” or “that/those of Y” instead:   * In consultation, our members observed that other people with **a similar disability to Mr Malcolm** — perhaps with varying degrees of severity — would have been able to understand the sub-letting regulations. Great Britain. Parliament House of Commons. Work and Pensions Committee – 2009   * Dave had **a similar accent to dumper truck man** , so that’s who I thought it was. _Explaining Colours to a Blind Man_ , David Hooper   * Believe it or not she was also Afrikaans with **a similar accent to Anna** , and, like Anna, she was not exactly a beauty. _Paget's Progress: A Tale of High Adventure and Low Salaries_ , Dick Paget   * Auroville’s two or three thousand inhabitants, most of whom **live in similar style to André** , come from all over the world, as a brief glance at its telephone book made clear . . . _In Spite of the Gods: The Rise of Modern India_ , by Edward Luce But I still don’t understand it, nor do I know its history. When did the possessive go away, and why? Shouldn’t those all have a possessive there?


Pronunciation of the word 'infantry'

I didn't have any doubts about this word, because as I could see it is pronounced in both British and American variants as [ˈinfəntrē] - as it written - and I heard it in modern military usage sounding like that, until I heard an American WWII song _The Ballad of Rodger Young_ in performance of West Point Cadet Glee Club - and it occurred to me, that they definitely pronounce it like 'enfantry' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1MEJM0cboDg#t=7 Then I searched some other variants of the song - and in the most of them the same pronunciation was used, although in some not. Then I have searched the Internet and have looked up in dictionaries, but nowhere this question was discussed. I think that maybe this is the variable pronunciation like insure/ensure, inquire/enquire, or dated, or dialectal, or specifically U.S. military, but still cannot find any arguments in favor of anything. Or is it just a personal accent of the singer and nothing interesting?


What is XLNC an example of?

_XS_ sounds like _excess_ , _B4_ sounds like _before_ , _XLNC_ sounds like _excellency_ , etc. What are these wordplays called?


What is a suitable word for a desired/ideal level of education?

I need to say that, for doing a specific task (such as "calling a customer on the phone") there is a minimum level of education. Currently I say "minimum education" or an "ideal" level. However, "ideal" is _not_ the word i am looking for, because you might think that "ideal" means the _highest_ possible education. e.g. > Boss speaking to employee): "Yes, you have the minimum education level but > i'd say that for this task the XXXXXX education level is a high school > education.


When to use "compatible", when "incompatible"

Reworded as requested. I am confused about when one uses the term “incompatible” and when “compatible”. Is it sometimes believed that compatibility is about “working” and incompatibility about “not working”. However, consider the following two statements:   * Printer X is incompatible with the latest version of windows –does not work   * Grenade X is incompatible with normal handling – works (detonates) Apparently incompatible can mean both not to work and to work”. Perhaps it is about something being “suitable”?   * Vending machine X is incompatible with the new currency – does not work, not suitable   * Vending machine X is incompatible with foreign coins – does not work, suitable It seems that incompatibility can mean to be not suitable and suitable! So, is there an easy way of explaining when to use the word compatible and when incompatible?


What's the etymology of "Oscar"?

_**Wiktionary_** gives this: > Irish Osgar, from **os (“deer”) + cara (“friend”)** ; resuscitated by James > Mcpherson in The Works of Ossian (1765). Napoleon, an admirer of the > Ossianic poems, chose it for his godson Oscar Bernadotte, who became a king > of Sweden. > > **It can also be explained by Old English ōs (“god”) and gār (“spear”) (see > Oswald, Osborn, Oswid, Osric, Oslak).** While **_Wikipedia_** states that: > The name is derived from two elements in Irish: the first, **os, means > "deer"** ; the second element, **cara, means "friend"**. The name is borne > by a character in Irish mythology—Oscar, grandson of Fionn Mac Cumhail. The > name was popularised in the 18th century by James Macpherson, creator of > "Ossianic poetry". Today the name is associated with Scandinavia because > Napoleon was an admirer of Macpherson's work and gave the name to his > godson, Oscar Bernadotte, who later became Oscar I, King of Sweden.1 > > **The given name Oscar is not to be confused with the Old English Ōsgār, > which is of an entirely different origin (from two Old English elements > meaning "god" and "spear").2** So the question is: What is the real origin of "Oscar", Irish or OE?


How to pronounce “derivative” in the phrase “f ′ is a derivative of f ”?

How should I pronounce _derivative_ in the phrase “ _f ′_ is a derivative of _f_ ”? Should I read it as `[dɪˈrɪv.ə.tɪv]` or `[dɪˈrɪv.ɪ.tɪv]`? I have heard it as `[dɪˈrɪv.ə.tɪv]` in this context, but _Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary_ says that this word should be pronounced as `[dɪˈrɪv.ɪ.tɪv]` when used as a noun, and that the pronunciation `[dɪˈrɪv.ə.tɪv]` is only for the adjective _derivative_. However, it doesn’t refer to a mathematical meaning of this word, just for general one.


What is the first stanza in a poem called?

Is there a specific term for **the first stanza** in a poem?


Why use the prep "to", why not others like "of" in the following sentence?

> There are three fundamental parts **to** the <locale> header.


Why Should One Capitalize Titles When Publishing?

What is the motivation behind capitalizing the first letter of each word except prepositions in news, articles and blog post titles?


Is "Stick no bills" correct English?

![alt text](http://i.stack.imgur.com/qWoPU.jpg) 'Stick no bills' sounds awkward. Shouldn't it be something like 'Do not stick any bills'?


Where does the idiom "Queen Anne is dead!" come from?

Looking through the dictionary, I chanced upon an idiom which attracted my attention: "Queen Anne is dead!" The dictionary says that it means something about "The thing you've just said is well-known, you won't interest anyone with it". I can't stop wondering, where does that phrase come from?


How can I rephrase compound sentences to make them simpler?

Following Martha's advise I am splitting up a question Compound sentences, the punctuation and mooore. Consider the following sentence: > One of the items that needed a further development was a research on child > nodes of a story representing its sub categories being updated the moment > the list of sub categories is changed through edit page for stories. While I indeed wanted to practice compound sentences (see a question Constructing compound sentences), another reason why this sentence is so complex is that I don't know how to split it into smaller parts. Could you help me with it? If you need the context please read a post from the second link.


Using your voice as an instrument

What are some words that describe using one's voice as an instrument, i.e. doing certain things with the voice, not necessarily just hitting particularly challenging higher/lower registers? Things like yodeling; a yodeler is a _[word]_ , someone who is _[word]_ , someone who can _[word]_.


How to describe relations between objects unambiguously?

Following Martha's advise I am splitting up a question Compound sentences, the punctuation and mooore. Consider the following fragment: > child nodes of a story representing its sub categories I intended this fragment for anyone to understand that a story has sub categories, and these sub categories are displayed as child nodes.   1. Is the relation between child nodes, sub categories and a story clear and unambiguous?   2. How else could I construct the fragment so that it could be used as a subject of a sentence? The story and the sub category are just terms, which may not make any sense to you but they do for those whom it's designated to.


Is this the correct usage of the word "Poultry"?

Poultry has given him great profit. Is this sentence grammatically correct? What do you think is the correct use if this isn't correct.


Prepositions in a compound sentence

Following Martha's advise I am splitting up a question Compound sentences, the punctuation and mooore. Consider the following sentence: > One of the items that needed a further development was a research on child > nodes of a story representing its sub categories being updated the moment > the list of sub categories is changed through edit page for stories. Did I miss any prepositions obligatory for sentences that complex? If you feel like it's not the right way to use English anyway, please see questions Constructing compound sentences and How to rephrase a sentence?.


What's the difference between "he's going to start walking" and "he's going to walk"? Are there any shades of meaning here?


When did "text" come to be defined as something other than words?

I think the answer to this question may be in the OED, but I don't have access to the service. I am discussing "texts" using definitions (from dictionary.com) like this: > text: any theme or topic; subject. and this > text: anything considered to be a subject for analysis by or as if by > methods of literary criticism. Within the context of cultural anthropology I'm having a discussion with my students about how the definition of a _text_ has expanded over the years to include not just texts comprising words but also visuals (e.g., images in advertisements). I've come across the latter usage of _text_ in certain educational books: > "Like written texts, visual texts have been carefully constructed by their > composers to shape meaning, and to affect and influence the viewer." Or > "This resource covers how to write a rhetorical analysis essay of primarily > visual texts with a focus on demonstrating the author’s understanding of the > rhetorical situation and design principles." An ngram search for "visual texts" doesn't have many results before the 1960s, and some of the results refer to visual texts in single or double quotes to highlight the non-standard usage. > "visual texts" or > visual "texts" My question is: >   * Since dictionaries are formally acknowledging that a text need not be > comprised of words only, when did the concept of a 'visual text' become a > subject of analysis in its own right?" (e.g., the MacIntosh logo of an > apple; see > http://creativebits.org/interview/interview_rob_janoff_designer_apple_logo) >


> “Thought is a thread, and the raconteur is a spinner of yarns" What does this metaphor mean and what is the origin? I know it is an ancient one, but couldn't find anything else! Is it obsolete now?


What does the expression “official mom” mean, that forced J&J to apologize and cancel their ad?

Related with my question about the currency of “sheconomy,” ”there was the following sentence in the Time magazine’s article – “Woman power: The rise of the sheconomy”: > “Johnson & Johnson found out the painful way, with a 2008 Motrin campaign > that followed the inner monologue of a mom toting her infant around in a > baby carrier. It 'totally makes me look like **an official mom** ,' she > notes in a Web video before agonizing over the backaches it gives her. Some > mothers felt belittled. Overnight they formed a group and gave J&J a Twitter > headache as emotions escalated. The company apologized and canceled the ad.” > http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2030913-3,00.html What does “official mom” mean? Does it mean legally wedded mother of child? Why did the word infuriate a group of mothers? Is there ‘unofficial mom’ as the legitimate word? Is this expression current, apart from the issues of women’s rights or political correctness?


What does c/o stand for in a postal address?

Sometimes when for some reason you have to give friends an address to receive mails, you write something like: > Joe Black c/o John Doe   >  xxx ZZZ street   >  town... etc What does _c/o_ mean in this address?


Using "you" and "your" as a representation for yourself and everyone in general

Example sentence: "I love when your dog just lets you sit there to pet them. You don’t necessarily know if they are enjoying it, but they love you enough to just sit there with you for a bit." Is this correct? We assume that the person who wrote this sentence is also talking about him or herself when using "you/your" but also representing everyone in the process. I have always been curious about this.


A record of recorded, tabulated, numerical records of observed phenomena

I am looking for a good word to use to describe a record of recorded, tabulated, numerical records of observed phenomena. I am studying an video game using a system which generates a large amount of numerical data. I want to present the resulting record of data to the public for use and study. I considered the word almanac, but this infers that the records are yearly. My records will be ongoing and continually growing. Is there a better word for this? Here is a visualization for my data: http://www.clearuse.us/starcraft/ Additional Explanation: The research involves the game Starcraft and recorded the outcomes of battles between groups of 41 different unit types. The goal was to graph (or otherwise visualize) the outcomes of these fights to determine the battle efficiency of each unit based on the unit cost. The first data set of data includes numeric data from around 40,000 different battles. A basic visualization of the results can be seen at the link above. I want to make the data set publicly available as an api o that anyone can create their own visualization and also to build support for the test. I need a name for the data/api. The Starcarft Almanac was my first choice. I know that there is a better word than almanac, so I asked the question.


Joining two sentences with semicolon

here is my sentence This makes the best use of balding resistant hair, most of us have at the sides and back of our head. The sentence after the comma does not make sense ALONE. However, grammatically speaking, it is a complete sentence. My QUESTION is whether I should regard is a subordinate clause and use a comma, or regard it as a complete sentence and use a colon to join the two sentences? Thanks


Can you "do a goal" or do you have to "meet a goal?"

If I am asking a client what they will be doing to meet a fitness goal, i.e. riding a bike to be more active (the goal is to be more active). Can I say, "how will you do your goal?" in a goal setting worksheet?


Synonyms of "hand in"

I'm looking for synonyms of "hand in" which means "give something", often used in this kind of context: > I will hand in my paper tomorrow. Any suggestions?


Pronunciation of "catch"

I was curious about the different pronunciations of the word _catch_ ; more specifically, the difference between /kætʃ/ and /kɛtʃ/. The Oxford dictionary lists both pronunciations as correct; is this difference regional? How did it come about?


Capitalization of the words Fourth Quarter

In the sentence > Our profits are down for Fourth Quarter 2011. is Fourth Quarter capitalized?


Punctuation to separate clauses: "What is X _ now that Y?"

In sentences like: > What is your name _ now that you have changed it? > > Where do they live _ now that the coal industry has collapsed? > > Why are we still here _ now that the election is over? is any punctuation needed in between the clauses? The only options I can think of: > 1) What is X now that Y? > > 2) What is X, now that Y? > > 3) What is X; now that Y?


"What a shame!" versus "Such a shame!"

I would like to know the difference between " **What a shame!** " and " **Such a shame!"** ". When do I use one or the other? I am Brazilian, so I don't know exactly how to use them.


Have definition; searching for matching word

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Other expressions for "to be the devil's advocate"? Given the definition: "the adoption of an ostensibly defensible position, less because one actually believes in it than for the sake of ruffling feathers," what word springs handily to mind?


Usage of "just", "only" and word-order [intended meaning]

I've got these sentences, which meanings are correct (my interpretations are in brackets): Use of only: > (1) **Only** in 1996, Ford sold a rebadged Mazda 626 GV over here as its > rebranded Japanese mid-size stationwagon. (1996 was the only year) > > (2) In 1996, **only** Ford sold a rebadged Mazda 626 GV over here as its > rebranded Japanese mid-size stationwagon. (Ford was the only manufacturer) > > (3) In 1996, Ford sold **only** a rebadged Mazda 626 GV over here as its > rebranded Japanese mid-size stationwagon (i.e. it was the only rebranded > Japanese stationwagon from Ford) > > (4) In 1996, Ford sold a rebadged Mazda 626 GV over here as its **only** > rebranded Japanese mid-size stationwagon (there were no others, I assume?) > > (5) In 1996, Ford sold a rebadged Mazda 626 GV over here as its rebranded > Japanese mid-size stationwagon **only** (but not as a hatchback or saloon) Use of just: > (1) **Just** 3 weeks ago, there was a sudden snowfall (3 weeks ago > recently?) > > (2) 3 weeks ago, there was **just** a sudden snowfall (no other natural > disaster?) > > (3) 3 weeks ago, **just** there was a sudden snowfall (no other location) > > (4) 3 weeks ago, there was a **just** sudden snowfall (?) Are these grammatically correct, and are the meanings correct for these words?


Strive for excellence VS Striving for excellence

"an environment that promotes strive for excellence / striving for excellence" I would like to know which one is correct ? Because I dont quite catch how to use the phrase " ** _strive_** for excellence".


Can you explain the pun "erpigarms"

Here is an extract from a short story: > When Pushkin broke his legs, he started to go about on wheels. His friends > used to enjoy teasing Pushkin and grabbing him by his wheels. Pushkin took > this very badly and wrote abusive verses about his friends. He called these > verses 'erpigarms'. I guess the word "erpigarm" here is a pun, but I cannot really figure out the meaning. It clearly has something to do with "epigram". But what else? **Note 1:** The word appears to be "эпиграммами" in the original Russian script. **Note 2:** It's from _Incidences_ of Daniil Kharms (translation by Neil Cornwell). The pun is translated into English as "erpigrams" in another translation by Matvei Yankelevich ( _Today I Wrote Nothing_ ).


To work under the advisory of?

I want to describe my current research-assistant position saying that "I work under the advisory of John Green". Is this the correct way of saying that my advisor is John Green? If not, what is the better way to state the whole sentence?


What does "he’s sneaking in a cheeseburger" mean? Context: Now I have a very unhappy stepdad, but at least he’s sneaking in a cheeseburger so that should keep him amused while I write you a letter.


What is the adjective form of "turmoil"? Might it be "turbulent"? I have a feeling that that isn't it, though.


"This is Figure 7 on page 777" or "This is Figure 7 on the page 777"? Why not "the"?

I cannot understand what is wrong with _"on the page 8"_? My instructor claims that it is _"on page 8"_. It is a specific page to which I referring to on a particular book. What is wrong with _"the"_ in front of _"page 777"_?


Which tense should be used in troubleshooting cases, simple present or simple past? I've seen examples where simple present is used. But what if a specific date is provided in the case. For example: On Setptember 9, 2013, the system encouters/encountered an exception.


Why must you capitalize the first word of a sentence?

My suspicion is it provides more visual indication that a new sentence is starting, but it bothers me because I think a period / exclamation / question mark seems sufficient to me. Plus, if a proper noun begins the sentence, then it's not as obvious it's a proper noun. Are there any problems if the convention of capitalizing the first letter of each sentence were eliminated?


Meaning of "suboptimal"

I find myself using the word _suboptimal_ quite a lot. In my understanding it is an understatement in itself, as _suboptimal_ is not optimal at all and the subject needs drastic improvements.   1. Is this assumption correct?   2. Is this term feasible for a semi-academic paper?    3. Can it also be applied to other adjectives like _sub-logical_?   4. Is _sub-optimal_ also correct?


"Rank" and "ranking"

What is the difference in meaning between _rank_ and _ranking_ , as in "an officer with high rankings" and "a high-rank officer"? I know perhaps there might be a difference in usage, but my question is about any difference in the meaning.


Doing something an amount of times 'up to' so many

Does it include doing it zero times? For example: "By signing here, you have agreed to catch the bus to work up to 10 ten times." I was sure it did but I'm just reading something worded similarly (action changed) in a legal document so it's put a touch of doubt into my mind. **Update:** As a few replies have indicated the context could make a difference, I thought it best to include the exact wording. It's an employment contract for a sales job that says: "The employee agrees to call up to 20 new prospects per week and provide a log of these when requested."


Meaning of "a while since"?

I read the following sentence in a newspaper, but I don't understand what it means. > It's been a while since Germany had so many good players. Could someone explain what it means?


What is the distinction between terms 'where', 'while', 'whereas' and 'whenever'?

It seems all of these four words can denote 'at the same time' or 'if and only if', but do the meanings of them identical? Update: e.g.   1. Day comes where the sun rises.   2. Day comes whereas the sun rises.   3. Day comes while the sun rises.   4. Day comes whenever the sun rises. Update: e.g.   1. An integer is even where it is divisible by 2.   2. An integer is even whereas it is divisible by 2.   3. An integer is even while it is divisible by 2.   4. An integer is even whenever it is divisible by 2.


What the phrase is expressing is, "Choose what's truly your favourite flavour". Can I say, "Choose your true, new flavour"?


Pairs in common idioms/phrases

There are phrases which pair things up. For example, "checks and balances", "bells and whistles", What is the rational behind this construct? Any more examples?


What can I replace the word “I” with in my cover letter?

When proofing my résumé’s cover letter, I found that I am writing _I_ way too much. I have read that this is a potential turn-off for employers. Does anyone have suggestions on how to replace _I_ with something else? This seems to happen more frequently at the beginning of my sentences.


Where did the expression "have at it" come from?

Couldn't find its etymology... anyone knows?   What does its meaning break down to?   Also, when should it be used best? Thanks.


Confusion with possessives

We have a choir in the town of Ako called **Ako International Students Choir**. The choir is directed in English and is indeed international, but by no means limited to **International Students**. I am confused to where the possessive should lay in the name. Should it be: > Ako's International Students Choir Or > Ako International Students' Choir I want the emphasis to be **Ako International** Students Choir, more than Ako **International Students** Choir or even Ako International **Students Choir**.


What's another way to say "problem area"?

Looking for some powerful, formal words with a slight negative connotation for a resume/performance assessment. The general context pertains to computer software development. These aren't _my_ problem areas, they are areas that were problems in someone else's work that I have identified (thus saving the day). Here's the actual context: > Regularly conducted memory audits to identify problem areas


How to describe a previously crumpled but now 'flat' sheet of paper that has been crumpled before?

How do you describe the state of a now-flat sheet of paper that has previously been crumpled? Should I just use _crumpled_ as in, "The paper is crumpled" (even though it's not in a crumpled ball shape: it's flat with lines on it that have formed from it's being crumpled previously)?


How to capitalize "get out of" in a title according to CMOS?

I need to know how to correctly capitalize this title. I usually go with the Chicago Manual of Style for rules, but wasn't able to find anything regarding something like this: >   * This Is How He Finally Got the Hell Out Of Mexico! >   * This Is How He Finally Got the Hell Out of Mexico! >   * This Is How He Finally Got the Hell out of Mexico! > I know that prepositions should not be capitalized as long as they are shorter than five letters. So is "out of" a single preposition consisting of two words, or does "out" act as a part of the phrasal verb "get out"?


Ending a quotation in a comma?

Is it correct to have a comma before the closing quotation marks in a case like the following? > “The combination of wet weather and time of day make this a dangerous > stretch of road. Drivers have to take extra care in these conditions,” > Officer Neville Plodd said.


What is the etymology of "Augenphilologie"?

_Augenphilologie_ was used in the Scripps National Spelling Bee last night, and it seems like a fantastic word to use in writing. But I’m not sure how to use it in a sentence, or what its definition is really getting at. The definition given by Webster’s Third is: > linguistics that misrepresents the realities of speech because of > overemphasis on writing. Is it saying something like “writing tends to be much more florid than regular speech, thus misrepresenting it”? What are some other examples? Or does it mean something different?


Abbreviation for Estimated

What is the correct abbreviation for the word estimated? (not "estimated time of arrival", just the single word)


"Unarm" vs. "disarm"

Is there a semantic difference? I thought _unarm_ was more popular, but Google Ngram shows otherwise.


How to correctly say you liked some food?

Yesterday a colleague gave me a piece of cake. We are both not native English speakers, but communicate in English. She wanted to ask me if I liked it and wrote: > 'Did the cake taste you?' (1) She asked me if it's correct English. I told her that I don't know and that probably I would use 'Did you like the cake?' (2) or 'Was the cake tasty?' (3) Are all 3 correct?


What's the difference between curious and marvel?

I want to express that I'm curious to new things and I have looked up in an online Chinese-English dictionary. There is a sentence: > I marvel at all things new to me. _**My question:_**   1. What's the difference between _curious_ and _marvel_?    2. Does "I marvel at all things new to me" have the same meaning to "I'm curious to the new things"?


Is Jutland so-called because the region it describes 'juts out' into the ocean?

I know that 'Jutland', a part of Denmark, comes from the Danish 'Jylland', which describes the same region. But was that name just invented at random, or does it come from the verb 'jut', as the land juts out into the ocean?


What's the meaning of boilerplate in programming?

I am not very clear about the word _boilerplate_ when it comes to programming. How is it different to other similar terms such as _template_ and _prototype_? I would appreciate some examples that clearly explain the difference.


Meaning and acceptability of "One fifty" when speaking of dollars

I was watching Errol Morris' ‘11 Excellent Reasons Not to Vote?’. At some point, the dialog goes this way: > ― If I could sell my vote, I probably would. > > ― How much? > > ― How much? Psssh... Aaah... Like, one fifty? One fifty? > > ― Hundred fifty dollars? Have I listened right? Did she said "One fifty" meaning "One hundred fifty"? In my native language, if one says "one fifty" referring to money this would unequivocally mean "one dollar and fifty cents" so I am not sure I got it right. If I listened correctly, how common and acceptable is this idiom?


Does this ‘twice’ mean two times, or double in quantity?

> She caught sight of Mr. Diggory’s feet, and slowly, tremulously, raised her > eyes to stare up into his face; then, more slowly still, she looked up into > the sky. Harry could see the floating skull reflected **twice** in her > enormous, glassy eyes. (p134, Harry Potter 4, US edition) NB – **The floating skull** is an ill omen, which a gangster launched into the sky by using magic, to show that his group is going to do bad things. The sign is illuminating the entire wood like some grisly neon sign. ‘ **She** ’ is an innocent passerby with big eyes. **Mr. Diggory** is a kind of policeman who thinks she is the gangster. I’d like to know what the ‘twice’ means. When I ran into the sentence, I thought she blinked and the sign reflected two times in her eyes, though there’s no ‘blink’ like expression around the sentence. Then, another idea occurred to me that the sign reflected in her two eyes, one by one. Would you give me the right meaning of the ‘twice’?


How do you respond back to "Hi, How is it going?"

I have observed that people from America, greet by asking, "Hi, how is it going?". I usually say, "It is going good" and return a smile. Sometimes, I have observed people saying "Thank you" and returning the question. What is the proper etiquette here?


Where did the phrase "shut up" as an expression of disbelief or amazement originate?

I recently heard _shut up_ used according to this definition in Urban dictionary. > shut·up (shuht-up) \--interjection 1\. An expression of disbelief. 2\. > Amazement; astonishment. I've only heard it used in a few movies ( _The Princess Diaries_ and in an episode of _Dr. Who_ for example). What is the etymology of this idiomatic phrase? I'm particularly curious as to when and in what country this use originated and in what circles is it used. Also, is there a proper or expected response to the phrase in conversation?