Correct usage of "Peace of mind"

Is the phrase "provide Peace of Mind" common? If not what is the correct usage of "peace of mind"? Thanks


What words or idioms are there for "beneficial constructive distraction that would establish or facilitate balance"?

What words are there for > beneficial constructive **distraction** from a task that would improve the > results or establish or facilitate balance among various tasks (all being a > "distraction" in that sense) As in work-life balance that would not manifest until some extraneous "distraction" occurs that would improve the result? I would like to avoid philosophical or psychological discussions of whether it can be the case. But there's such an assumption underlying the quoted expression---namely that giving sole attention to only one thing without another one, a few, or many, things, is detrimental to your success at that one thing. What I am looking for is either a single substantive (if existent) or an idiom, preferably, more or less commonplace, with regard to the substantive "distraction". * * * Edit: I am grateful for the answers given so far. I failed to mention that I am looking, among other, _particularly_ for words/idioms that are acceptable in rather **formal context** like corporate letters, job application letters, scientific documents. Please take a look at the comments to the answers so far for an exemplary specification of why I would like to **avoid negative connotations**. It is basically due to the **perception of the addressee** \--the message should _not communicate that the person is tired_ or "burned out", i.e., wants to _use their free time rather than working time, for an additional activity_.


"Never" vs. "never ever"

Example: >   * I **never** use this cup. >   * I **never ever** use this cup. > What is the difference between these two sentences?


Pronouncing "cumin"

Is "cumin" pronounced as > coo -- min Or is it pronounced > cyoo -- min ?


Insolvable, insoluble, and unsolvable

When speaking of a problem that has no solution, do the words _insolvable_ , _insoluble_ , and _unsolvable_ have different shades of meaning? How do you decide which to use?


What does “a good bargain is a pick-purse” mean?

> A good bargain is a pick-purse. I'm an English learner. I came across this sentence, but even though I figured out all the individual words, I didn't get the meaning of the whole thing. So can someone please do that for me?


Can there be a "random order"?

A recent article in the New York Times discussed the decision by the Metropolitan Museum of Art to eliminate the use of small metal buttons to signify that you have paid admission. ![met button](http://i.stack.imgur.com/ttqwA.png) The entrances are fairly open, and guards glance over the crowd to make sure you have the badge of a patron. All buttons on a given day are the same color. The color changes the next day so that one cannot return and enter without paying. According to the Times, > the colors are changed daily **_in random order_**. The Compact ODO defines _order_ as > the arrangement or disposition of people or things in relation to each other > according to a particular sequence, pattern, or method It defines _random_ to mean > made, done, happening, or chosen without method or conscious decision Is this a mistake, a deliberate oxymoron, or is there a straightforward logical meaning to this phrase?


Usage of “when” or “while” in this context

> He left the house ___ I was still sleeping Would this sentence be better completed with _when_ or with _while_?


How to use WHEN on the following occasion?

When I lived in there, I got to know John When I was living in there, I got to know John. While I was living in there, I got to know John. While I lived in there, I got to know John. I have been long confused by the usage of when and while, and I'm not sure whether the four sentences are totally correct. Please explain in detail, thanks!


Viewpoint vs. Point of view

A student of mine has asked me if there is any difference, both in meaning and usage, between point of view and viewpoint. Now, according to the Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English, there is indeed no difference in their meaning. Point of view   1. **a particular way of thinking about or judging a situation**   2. someone's own personal opinion or attitude about something Viewpoint   1. **a particular way of thinking about a problem or subject [= point of view]**   2. a place from which you can see something However I could not ascertain whether there was any difference in usage from the examples provided. Personally, I find "point of view" much more familiar and "viewpoint" often awkward when I try to compare their use, for example:   * It was seen from a child's point of view.    * It was seen from a child's viewpoint. But that's a highly impressionist take based on my exposure to the terms and one mustn't forget I'm not a native speaker, which means my impression could be eschewed. So, is there any usage particulars concerning the two terms?


Where does 'doofus' (or perhaps 'dufus') come from?

Both **Dufus** and **Doofus** seem to be common on the web, so I'm not sure which is the correct spelling, if either. It's kind of a cool word. Do we have any idea where/how it originated?


Distinguishing /f–t–θ/ in th-fronting and th-stopping dialects

In standard English, the digraph _th_ is a dental fricative [θ, ð]. Several dialects feature _th_ -fronting, where _th_ becomes a labiodental fricative [f, v]; others feature _th_ -stopping, where _th_ becomes a dental stop [t̪, d̪]. For example, _three_ sounds like _free_ with _th_ -fronting, _tree_ with _th_ -stopping. How well can English speakers distinguish word pairs in these dialects? Specifically:   * Can _th_ -modifying speakers distinguish /f–θ/ and /t–θ/ in their own dialects?   * Can they distinguish minimal pairs as spoken in standard English?   * Can standard English speakers distinguish the _th_ -modified variants from similar words? I expect that the answers vary between dialects and individuals, so I'm interested in reasonable generalizations. If there's a significant difference between (for example) _th_ -fronting in Cockney and African American Vernacular English, I'd be interested in that too. Likewise if there's a significant difference between the voiced and unvoiced consonants. Wikipedia notes that _th_ -stopping dialects generally distinguish between the dental stop of _thanks_ [t̪æŋks] and the alveolar stop of _tanks_ [tæŋks], but they lose the /t–θ/ opposition in some cases like _tree/three,_ and the /d–ð/ opposition is even weaker. This answers part of the question for _th_ -stopping dialects: They can sometimes (but not not always) distinguish /t–θ/ in their own dialect, and I imagine they can also hear the opposition in standard English. I'm not sure whether a typical speaker of standard English could distinguish [t̪æŋks] from [tæŋks], however. One case that particularly interests me is whether _th_ -fronting speakers can distinguish the /f–θ/ opposition in standard English. When I say the minimal pair _free–three_ /fɹi–θɹi/, can _th_ -fronting speakers hear the difference, or is [f–θ] an allophone in free variation for them? * * * Examples of standard English minimal pairs that might merge in these dialects:   * _father/fava, mother/mutter_   * _thin/fin, thin/tin_   * _three/free, three/tree_   * _with/whiff, with/wit_   * _wraith/Ralph, wraith/rate_


What's the difference between an -ing noun and a real noun

Some verbs have corresponding nouns. Also, an '-ing' can be added to create a new noun. For example:   * _Develop_ is a verb.    * _Development_ is a noun.   * _Developing_ is also a noun. So are the sentences given below both right? >   * They thought that Tom would bring a big development for this small town. >   * They thought that Tom would bring a big developing for this small town. >


Is knowledge of the meaning of the word “ubiquity” ubiquitously considered to be ubiquitous?

_Please pardon the pun._ I was in a conversation on a game’s online chat, talking about how common an item was, and used the word “ubiquitous” to describe it. But, much to my surprise, the point of contention for one user was not my assertion, but my use of the word “ubiquitous”. In the words of this user (censorship mine): > the word ubiquity in place of, say, “how common it is” is being assh**ish > and pedantic I’ve always used the word in natural speech, and it’s not one I consider to be overly “advance”, yet this user insisted that the only reason to use it would be to “seem intelligent”. **Question:** I do agree there are some words that are somewhat uncommon, or outdated. And that these words might elicit a response implying that their usage is “just for show” (not that I’d agree with one). But is “ubiquitous” one of them? **Notes:**   * The context was in a game’s chat, and the average age of a user that was present would be around 20. I’d like to know if the word is commonly known _in general_ , but noting if the fact it was a casual environment affected the validity of the user’s clam would be appreciated.   * The user’s response was arguably immature, and how vehemently they argued their point might have to do with their anger, as opposed to actually supporting their own stance, but I’d like answers to ignore this.   * This user referred to reference.com’s difficulty index on the word, which claims “Few English speakers likely know this word”. While my experience with the word might not be indicative of all people, I know most people to understand it, and use it. Additionally, I couldn’t find a source on how that index is calculated, so it might be the opinion of an editor.


What to call someone who gives as much as he demands?

What to call someone who (can) give (in return) as much as he demands? Speaking in terms of life and personality. For example, I ask my future partner to be tidy, glamorous, rich, caring, pretty etc. On the other hand I am, myself that sort of person as well and my partner can, hence, be certain to get this from me as well. So, I could ask as much from someone as the other person could ask from me as well.


Post-fixing or pre-fixing "mind you" onto an informative/descriptive statement

Example: > It was quite a sunny day, mind you. or in the middle: > It was quite a sunny day, mind you, so I packed my sunglasses. or prefixed: > Now mind you, it was quite a sunny day... What is meant to be conveyed? That I should be mindful of the fact that was stated? I can understand that much, but somehow it doesn't quite fit in with my understanding of the word "mind" when used in other contexts: "Do you mind if I borrow your car?" or as a verb: "Mind the gap." (at subway stations between the train and platform). Can someone break it down?


What are the reflective thingies called in English?

I'm looking for the proper word for these things you wear to avoid being driven over by cars at night. ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/dWp9k.png)


Usage in defining an action because of someone else

I was at the bar and got a beer because my buddy typically drank them. I stated "I ordered this beer in his image". But I feel there is an expression to say "I performed this action because it's typical of someone I know well." Any thoughts?


What's the origin of the phrase "what have you"?

I've never really understood the meaning and origin of the phrase "what have you". Examples: > You can use a pencil, a sharpie, a ballpoint, what have you. > > The display room is full of stereos, TV's, and what have you. This site says … > […] this expression uses an archaic form of putting a question (using have > you instead of do you have) as a noun clause, and what in the sense of > “anything that.” But still, this phrase does not even sound like correct English to me. Shouldn't it be "what you have" instead? Also, since when is this phrase common, and where is it used? Is it a regional thing or generally used in all English speaking countries? Also, "Your Dictionary" says it's been first recorded in 1920, but it doesn't even say _where_.


"As powerful as just, as beneficient as wise... Is there a literary device for this phrasing?

In a letter from Lewis and Clark to the Oto Indians, I read > Know that this great chief, as powerful as he is just, and as beneficent as > he is wise, always entertaining a Sincere and friendly disposition towards > the red people of America, has commanded us his war cheifs to undertake this > long journey... I was wondering if there was known literary device for the structure _as x as he is y_ that is used in consecutive sentences and describes a common person or thing. From _Letters to a Nation: A Collection of Extraordinary American Letters_ by Andrew Carroll


"In second" or "in seconds" when talking about time

When talking about time as a unit, which one is correct, _in second_ or _in seconds_? For example: > How long does it take to complete the task in second? or > How long does it take to complete the task in seconds?


What does "good job" mean?

What is the meaning of "good job" in English? I have heard some people use that instead of "do not be tired".


Why is the term "isn't it?" so predominant in Indian English?

I apologize in advance if I am ignorantly and incorrectly assigning this to Indian English. When I was in medical school, I had a number of professors who were native to India. Being a school predominantly made up of American English speakers we noticed that the Indian English speakers used the term "isn't it?" with a noticeable frequency. (I hesitated to put a ? at the end because it wasn't phrased as a question _per se_.) In fact, for many of them it was practically a punctuation mark to every sentence. And, there did not seem to be any agreement of pluralization or tense. ( _e.g._ "The students went to a party. Isn't it?") Presumably, they use the phrase "isn't it?" in the same way that speaker of American English would use "you see" or "don't you agree?" My question that has nagged me for years, why would this construct come to predominate in Indian English? It doesn't strike me as a particularly British English import. Is it a direct translation of a common phrasing in Hindi or one of the many languages of the sub-continent?


is "shop " a CVC word?

Is **_shop_** a CVC word? Or, to rephrase the question, in the CVC structure, do C and V refer to a sound or to a letter? As I see it, a C or a V means a sound, and a sound could be 1 or 2 letters, so I thought a word like _sh-o-p_ or _b-a-th_ is a CVC word. Just now someone told me that in CVC, C or V refer to a letter, so shop is a CCVC word.


Word for reading without a pause

What is the word for reading something _continuously without a pause_? > He read the whole paragraph ...


A word for activities that appear difficult but aren't, and vice versa

In life, sometimes you're able to do something easily that appears very difficult or impressive. Consider a card trick. It might simultaneously be easy for you to learn to perform while impressing your audience. On the other hand, you might do with great difficulty something that others perceive to be easy. For instance, drawing a perfect circle free-hand on a piece of paper might look easy but in fact it takes much practice to achieve consistently. Are there adjectives to describe these two cases? That is, feats that are difficult but appear easy, and activities that are easy to perform but appear daunting.


> I insist that someone do something.   >  ( _used more in American English, says Michael Swan's_ Practical English > Use _, for instance_ ) versus > I insist that someone should do somehting.   >  ( _used more in British English, says the same_ ) Why did the present subjunctive survive in American English better than it did in British English (outside fixed phrases such as "God save the Queen!") when, on the other hand, forms like 'burn **t** ', 'leap **t** ', 'travel **l** ed- travel **l** ing' did not, and were made regular? Is American English more archaic or more modern than British English?


Is comma needed before "and" in two connecting clauses?

I have the fallowing sentence (I've changed the content to keep it fairly understandable, the relations between the parts are the same). > However, it states in the literature that green people love apples, which > strengthens the idea that at least some green people would buy apples > **and** that by opening a chain of apple stores great profits can be made. I'm not sure if I should leave it as is, add a comma before the emphasized "and" or make the part after the "and" into a new sentence.


Just wondering if there is a Short form or a single word for 'Lab Supervisor'? I need the short form / single word to be at most 8 to 9 letters as the short form / single word will be placed on a menu (which have limited space). Thank you.


First conditional with "would" instead of "will"

Consider the following sentence with a first conditional: > > If it rains tomorrow, I will go to the cinema. All the examples of first conditionals that I found use "will" instead of "would." Is it possible to replace "will" with "would" while retaining the same exact meaning, i.e., > > If it rains tomorrow, I would go to the cinema. Or, would I have to put the inflected verb in preterite form (as mentioned in this related posting), like this: > > If it rained tomorrow, I would go to the cinema. [Edit 1: I clarified that I want to retain the same meaning among these examples.] [Edit 2: Corrected silly mistake where the first example was the same as the second example.]


Origin of "kicker" in reference to unexpected situation or detail

How did this use of the word _kicker_ enter the English language, and is its use localized to any one region? > An unexpected situation or detail. Examples: > John wants to climb the wall, but the **kicker** is that it is thirty feet > tall.   >  Here's the **kicker** : my sweater, which cost hundreds of both dollars and > hours, doesn't fit. The sleeves are a good six inches too short... Here's > the **kicker** to the **kicker** : I don't care.


Conjugation of wonder in early modern English

What I actually mean what's the conjugation of the verb _wonder_. For example: > I wonder, thou wonderest, etc.. including past, ing form, etc.. (it will actually help me with other verbs too)


Past participle of "fly"

In a song by Coldplay, _Paradise_ , I found the sentence _Away she flied_. I'm Italian, and I was not sure that _flied_ could be a form of the verb _fly_ or some other word unknown to me. I looked it up in the online dictionaries, and I found out that it is a term used in baseball. Could somebody help me to understand the use in this song?


"On the periphery" or "in the periphery"

Are both of these valid? > **on** the periphery > > **in** the periphery What would be the appropriate usage? Would it be sufficient to use _peripheral_ as a replacement?


Can "unto" be used instead of "onto" in American English?

Is there a difference in how the preposition "onto" is used in British and American English? I always understood it to match the following dictionary definition I found online, and was not aware of any difference in American English: > to a place or position on In a side discussion on a different Stack Exchange site, another poster made the following claim: > **Onto** is English, whereas **Unto** is American English. The expression that sparked this was "climb unto a pedestal". I suggested that the proper expression was "climb onto a pedestal". While it was a pointless discussion in the context, I still want to know which one is correct in American English.


"The way in which": a grammar mistake or not?

I'm studying English pronouns and my book says that the sentence "the way in which" is incorrect and I have to use, instead, only "the way". Is it true? And if so, why? Here are some sentences: > 1) That's the way in which the world goes round. > > 2) That's the way in which I like it. > > 3) Now we'll consider the two ways in which aircraft can fly.


How can I use the verb "sad" in the past continuous? E.g.: > I was crying.   >  I was missing. What should be the sentences for _sad_ or _upset_ in past continuous? Why do some words like the two above not follow standards? Are these exceptions?


What is the difference between "promotion tool" and "promotional tool"?

I checked the grammar: "promotional" is the description of tool, thus "promotional" tool is right while the first is wrong. Is it true? Why are there so many cases that those two are exchangeable?


Usage of "compensate" as a recompense for gain instead of loss

To keep this PG, I've changed the popular saying we've all heard: > _"He has a huge truck to compensate for his small **ego** "_ But I've recently been using a sort of counter to the joke, in one form or another (which will need some translation to be funny, or funnier I guess): > _"I have a small truck to compensate for my large **ego** "_ My question is, is this a correct usage of the word **compensate**? Can you compensate for something large with something smaller?


"Mastery Guidance" meaning

What does **Mastery Guidance** mean in this context? > "Replace a vague idea of 'purpose' with a manageable and measurable > objective that is made ahead of practice and gives **mastery guidance** " – > Practice Perfect (book) I think it means that it's going to give you a pathway to follow to achieve mastery. Am I right? Or is it more like "giving you guidance that comes from a master"?


When listing features of something, do I need to use "it" before "has"?

For example: The smartphone is blue, small, lightweight, (it) has three buttons, two cameras... Is the "it" relevant? Can I omit it?


Let us or Let's when demanding.

What to use when you are not exhorting a group and yourself to go, but demanding a third person to let you go? Can “Let's go! " also be used"or only “Let us go!"?


What does "to be of service" means?

I recently saw the following sentence: > One is glad to be of service Could anyone please describe what does that means?


Is -wala a recognized suffix in Indian English?

Why do we use terms like _taxiwala_ , _tongawala_ and _policewala_ in Indian English? Is **_-wala_** a recognized suffix in Indian English?


When to use "fate" and when to use "destiny"? Are they interchangeable?

In Wordnet Dictionary, if you search for `fate` you will see that it has 3 meanings and all these meanings have synonym `destiny`. > 1- destiny, fate - an event (or a course of events) that will inevitably > happen in the future > > 2- Destiny, Fate - the ultimate agency that predetermines the course of > events (often personified as a woman); "we are helpless in the face of > Destiny" > > 3- fortune, destiny, fate, luck, lot, circumstances, portion - your overall > circumstances or condition in life (including everything that happens to > you); "whatever my fortune may be"; "deserved a better fate"; "has a happy > lot"; "the luck of the Irish"; "a victim of circumstances"; "success that > was her portion" Source: http://www.wordnet-online.com/fate.shtml However, I think `fate` carries quite a negative meaning like " _He died in a car accident, it's his fate_ ", no one says " _it's his destiny_ ". Whereas, `destiny` carries a quite positive meaning like " _our destiny is to build a great company_ ", no one says " _our fate is to build a great company_ " as it sounds very bizarre.


Word for bias against or fear of foreign languages

This came up as I was writing a comment for a discussion on another site on the network*. The discussion was about non-english creative works, and I warned against "xenophobia," but that's not quite right since the bias in question applies much more strongly to works in foreign languages than to works in English created in foreign English-speaking countries (e.g. England, Australia, Canada). I'm looking for a word with connotations similar to "xenophobia" but that applies to foreign languages (as specifically as possible) instead of foreign countries or cultures. At this point I probably won't be using it in this particular discussion, but now I'm curious as to whether such a word exists. I've just thought of "anglocentric," but that's more England than English, and I'd prefer a somewhat stronger and more general term. *: I'd prefer not to link to the particular comment chain; it's not a pretty discussion and I'd like to limit its exposure (besides, it's likely to get wiped by myself or another mod at some point). I think the meaning I'm looking for is quite clear without it.


Capitalization: “ondes Martenot” is, while “theremin” isn't — why?

As evidenced by their Wikipedia pages; and pretty much everywhere. Léon Theremin developed his instrument in 1918 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theremin Maurice Martenot invented his in 1928 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ondes_Martenot _ondes_ is “waves” in French. Orchestra examples:   * The ondes Martenot - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PjyCpRKDrk   * The theremin - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxJIl73tJps


Is "quintessential example" correct usage?

Since quintessential means "representing the perfect example of a class" is it correct to use "the quintessential example" as in this sentence: > "Electrons are the quintessential example of (apparently)-elementary > particles." or is it better to write: > "Electrons are quintessential (apparently)-elementary particles."


Is it customary or grammatical to drop ‘to’ in “I’m not going to go look for it”?

There was a scene a thirty-something wife refuses to go looking for the wedding ring her husband lost in a courtyard when she was asked by her husband over the phone, in the fiction titled “The Lost Order” appearing in New Yorker magazine (January 7). > “I think I lost it when I was in the courtyard with Monkey [their pet dog]. > I’m sorry to put this on you, but would you mind taking a look around for > it?” - - - > > “ **I’m not going to go look for it** ,” > > I find myself saying into the phone. It’s not really a decision, it’s more > like discovery.” I noticed that there is no ‘to’ or ‘and’ used in “I’m not going to go look for it.” Is it customary or grammatical not to bring ‘to+inf’ or 'and' after ‘go.’ Is it customary to say “go play baseball,” “go see movie” “go buy pumpkin” “go swim to the pool” or "go help someone."?


what is the meaning of 'if form holds'?

_**If form holds_** , the 250,000 women each year who undergo the same genetic testing Jolie had will be joined by the thousands more; but the mutation that was detected in her, in what's known as BRCA1 gene, is ~~.


Is "... et al. data." proper grammar?

Would it be proper grammar to use the Latin phrase in the following way? > The items inserted came from departments, employees et al. data.


Is there a word for the single letter contractions commonly used in store names? (see examples)

Is there a term for the single letter contractions as used in the following examples? **Toys 'r' us**   **Stop 'n' go** Note: Trademarks above corrected for proper grammar.


How to hyphenate "Churchill"?

How should "Churchill" be hyphenated when it breaks across two lines?   * Chu-rchill,    * Chur-chill,    * Churc-hill, or    * Church-ill?


What is a word that means "to railroad the conversation"?

For example: Person A says "Stop -------ing" because Person B person was intentionally trying to railroad the conversation. The key here is "intentional". If it helps, I think the word I'm looking for starts with a D and ends with "ing".


Is "including but not limited to" a redundant phrase?

Doesn't "including" imply the "not limited to"?


Is "there's no sin on you" standard?

In some translations of the Holy Quran, the following translation comes up: > And if you decide on a foster suckling-mother for your children, _there is > no sin on you_ , provided you pay (the mother) what you agreed (to give her) > on reasonable basis.   * _Emphasis is mine._ I wonder if this usage of _sin_ is common in contemporary English.


what is the meaning for window of time

_We have observed during the window of time, . . . ._ What is the meaning for the above sentence?


When an adjective modifies a noun, can either "look" or "look like" be used?

As far as I know, we use "look" with adjectives and "look like" with nouns, but I came across this sentence in Oxford Dictionaries: > That looks an interesting book. Well, I was told that when we want to modify a noun with an adjective, use must use "look like", but this doesn't happen here. I don't know why. Maybe both "look" and "look like" can be used when an adjective modifies a noun.


What is a bromide?

I just finished reading Ayn Rand's wonderful _Fountainhead_ , but one point that escaped me was Rand's near-constant use of the word **bromide** to refer to something disappointing, or a "bummer" in the vernacular.   When I searched online, I only found chemistry references....does anyone know what it means? Can anyone identify the etymology of this word?


Meaning of "whip into a lather"

> In New York, basketball phenom Jeremy Lin continues to **whip** fans of the > Knicks **into a lather**. What does _whip [somebody] into a lather_ really mean?


A word for that which is created from a template?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  What is the word for an applied template? I am looking for a word to describe that which is created from a template. I am writing software which is used for testing. I created an object which can be used as a template for actual tests. These 'implementations' (as I have called them) just pass a few parameters to the template and the template is executed. It is important to recognise an implementation as such and to be able to refer back to the template as this is where the actual actions are performed. I am not happy with the word 'implementation' as I find it too general. Is there a better word I could use? Bear in mind that the end user has to create (implement?) the template itself before template-implementations can be created. It gets a bit confusing. I had thought of 'wrapper' but this doesn't fit well with 'template' - perhaps 'template' is the wrong term ;-) **CLARIFICATION** I need a term which the end-users will understand (i.e. non- IT people). P.S. I am aware of this question What is the word for an applied template?. The fact that I'm asking virtually the same question shows that the question should not have been closed!


What do you call the 'intro document' that new employees get on their first day?

I'm referring to the "master plan document" of how they'll learn all they need to learn in order to start working at company X. Often this is a mega tome of links and sub-links, or lists of lists, sometimes kept in a wiki. The Hebrew term is תוכנית חפיפות - but the translation of this to English is too horrible to repeat here.


"Put over" for "put off" in AE

In AE, can "put over" interchange with "put off" in the sense "postpone" in all contexts, or only in some specific ones? I'm all the more anxious to know the answer as I didn't get any hits searching Google for "put over my (and your) appointment". _By 6:00 P.M., the arbitrator **put over** the meeting..._ http://www.yonkerstribune.com/2013/01/arbitration-case-in-city-of-yonkers-vs- firefighters-local-628-postponed-to-february-1-2013-by-hezi-a.html


Is there a word that encompasses both collaboration and individual help/assistance

I'm making a web widget that will include social media functionality (Twitter, Facebook, etc..) and also a personal chat with sales. I'm looking for a word (idea, concept, jargon) or some kind of universal image/icon that unambiguously communicates this succinctly. Sorry, if this seems lame.


Adverbial form for a common swear word

Is _shittly_ a word (and if so, how many _t_ ’s does it have?) or do I have to use _shittily_?


What do you call a medical procedure that requires the patient to recover walking

For some medical operations its required to revalidate the patient because the procedure was so heavy he/ she had to lie down for 1 to 3 weeks with a completely paralysed lowerbody. After the patient is health they need physiotherapy to relearn walking. What is this phenomenon called.


literary or rhetorical definition

Looking for single word definition for a question or riddle that seemingly has no answer. Designed to confuse. Not paradox or conundrum. I.e "What is the sounds of on hand clapping?"


Conditional Type II and Type III

I have been kind of confusing regarding these sentences. Would you please give me any hint or guide about them? 1- _If I had eaten breakfast this morning, I would not be hungry now._   * Is this sentence correct? I suppose that since the main clause is “would not be” and has a present time marker (now), then the if clause should be simple past (conditional type 2). Am I wrong? 2- _If my brother would have been there, he would have known what to do._   * Is this sentence correct? Which type of conditional is that? 3- _If it wasn’t X, it would have been something else_   * Is this sentence correct? Which type of conditional is that?


What does "occasions" mean in this sentence?

> The justiciarship originated in the king’s need for a responsible > subordinate who could take a wide view of the affairs of the kingdom, act as > regent when the king was abroad, and on other **occasions** take charge of > those matters with which the king had no time to deal.   >  -- Encyclopedia Britannica Does the word _occasions_ in the above sentence mean "circumstances, occurrences, or states of affairs that provide ground or reason for something" or "special events or ceremonies"?


Capitalization of certain terms in English Literature

In English literature, improper capitalization of some phrases is common. A friend of mine calls them 'Milnesian Capitals'. These tend to be used in late 19th early 20th century British writings. A.A. Milne wrote that > '[Winnie-the-Pooh] was a bear of Very Little Brain.' Terry Pratchett uses Milnesian Capitals frequently, particularly in dialogue. Are there any rules or conventions governing their use? Is it an older style that has been discarded?


What's a "Xerox word"?

While reading this (interesting) article about how to improve english and reduce accent, I met a concept I've never heard about before: Xerox words. > So I visited toastmasters.org and found a club close to me. [...] The club I > go to uses a dog training clicker to call people’s attention to their use of > filler words like “mm,” “ah,” or **“Xerox” words** like “I, I ...”, “We, we > ...” But I couldn't find any example online: what is it exactly ?


Is there a specific name for this kind of water dispenser?

I see these water jars in many food service areas (hotels, company cafeteria, etc). I'm wondering if there is a specific name for them. "Water dispenser" seems too _unspecific_. I wonder if they original from a certain style or region, which _does_ have a name? ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/Wm81Y.jpg) ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/c7GQK.jpg) ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/gGgvu.jpg)


What's the correct word to use in order to prompt the user to enter the data in a computer app: "Enter" or "Insert"?

When I write an application with a programming language and I want some inputs from the user, should I use the word "Enter" or "Insert"?


Semantics to give correct meaning

What is the correct semantics?               We can't tolerate no more.      Or,               We can tolerate no more.      Or,               We can't tolerate any more.      Or, Is there any better way to express such meaning?


Correct way of saying a decision has been made

What is the correct way of saying "decision has been made on a paper"? I review papers submitted by officials. Is it OK to say it like this? > This paper has already been decision by Sam Rick. I am looking for a formal way to convey this message.


Use of not without an Auxillary

Is the below sentence grammatically correct? > Know not what you know.


Is "subordinated" a good translation of the Italian legal term "subordinato"?

I've found this translation http://www.wordreference.com/iten/subordinato but I am not sure if English legals use subordinate to define a party that is subordinated to another. Any suggestion? EDIT: An approximation of "subordinato" can be "working for someone that employs you".


“Blue-green algae is/are present in the lake”?

I was once walking round one our local lakes with my family and there was a sign that read: > Blue-green algae _is_ present in the lake [ _emphasis added_ ] I maintained that it should be _are_ , however we have never been sure and I have seen it referenced as both on the web and in biological journals.   * http://lmgtfy.com/?q=%22algae+are+present%22   * http://lmgtfy.com/?q=%22algae+is+present%22 Which one is correct?


The position of 'last' in sentences

My post on another site has prompted me to ask this question. What is the rule of using 'last' in a sentence? For instance: > When did you revise this rule **last**? > > When did you **last** revise this rule? > > I **last** revised this rule three days ago. > > I revised this rule **last** three days ago. > > I revised this rule three days ago **last**. > > I revised **last** this rule three days ago. (I think here it is at a wrong > position) Are there any other possible versions?


'last but foremost' - mixture of 'last but not least' and 'first and foremost'

I found '...last but foremost...' with google in some texts, which seems to be some combination of 'last but not least' and 'first and foremost'. Seems to suggest that while something is mentioned last, it is yet the most important thing. Can it be used like this? does it sound right for a native speaker?


Word to describe a picture within a picture within another and so on

I know there is a word for when there is a picture inside a picture, that inside another and so on, recursively. Does anyone know this word?


"(it) is necessary"?

Which one is correct: > To perform a task is necessary to do some things. or > To perform a task it is necessary to do some things.


About the use of metaphorical language

I understand that when being metaphorical you're saying that something IS something, for example: "The moon is a ball of cheese". Because I'm saying that the moon IS a ball of cheese it is of course metaphorical. Would this count as metaphorical language?: > "He fell down the bottomless pit to his death". (Of course, a pit can't be bottomless, that's impossible). So, although this isn't necessarily saying that the pit is bottomless as opposed to appearing bottomless, could it still be classed as metaphorical explanation of the pit? Could this bottomless pit be classed as metaphorical? Could one interpret the sentence into saying that the pit is bottomless?


Meaning of "knocked him down in the kennel" (London 1818)?

> I having hold of him all the while; he then began striking me as hard as he > could in my face, with both hands, and I was obliged to let go to defend > myself; **I knocked him down in the kennel** , and as he endeavoured to get > up, I made a grasp to lay hold of him again; he got from under my arm, and > ran down Holborn; I pursued ... source; Old Baily records online.


What is the term for calling off a war when you are winning?

If you're losing a war, you can _surrender_ to end the war. In an _armistice_ , neither side surrenders, but both agree to end the war. Is there a term for a side that is winning that has a change of heart and ends the war unilaterally? A _ceasefire_ or _truce_ both appear to be cessations of hostility that are somehow less than an _armistice_. Neither appear to be unilateral. I understand that it probably doesn't happen much, so there may not be a word for it. As to why such a thing might occur, besides just thinking better of it or having an election that leads to a new direction from leadership, I could also see enough Pyrrhic victories leading the aggressor to give up on the war, but certainly not surrender or even enter into an agreement of any kind.


Difference between “?!” and “!?”?

Is there any difference between “?!” and “!?”? The Wikipedia page on Interrobang describes: > In informal English, the same inflection is usually notated by ending a > sentence with first a question mark and then an exclamation mark, or vice > versa. Many people are unfamiliar with the interrobang, and would be puzzled > when first seeing it, although its intention is usually self-evident. The > interrobang can be hand-written with a single stroke plus the dot. One > common application is in cartoons, as a stand-alone symbol of surprise. Is there a difference, or are they identical?


Meaning of "nip"

_Nip_ is defined differently in two different dictionaries. From OALD, _nip_ is defined as “to give somebody or something a quick painful bite or pinch”, whereas in MWLD, it is defined as “to bite or pinch (someone or something) lightly.” Which is correct, or can they both be applied?


Using 'own' in passive voice and causative sentences

Is it correct to use _own_ in causative and passive voice sentences? For example, > _I had my own house built by a local builder._ > > _I didn't have my own eyes tested._ > > _His own hair was dyed by a friend._


"Having to" usage

I am confused in the usage of "having to" in a sentence, mentioned below. Which one is correct/appropriate? > The trouble is having to backup … or > The trouble is in having to backup … I would appreciate some suggestions.


By taking the public relations offensive - meaning

> **By taking the public relations offensive** , the Russians have time and > again been two steps ahead. U.S. and Western officials, not to mention the > Kiev government, are left scrambling to debunk the rumors and fear- > mongering. As a result they are frequently playing catchup for hearts and > minds in the east. How do you understand the phrase in a bold-type font? Does it mean that they take them (the public relations) as an offensive thing, they perceive the public relations as an offense to them?


discreetness, secrecy

Is paraphrasing: > I expect you to keep this subject secret from people it does not concern. as > I'm expecting discreetness concerning this subject. a correct use of that word? How else would you formally, elegantly, subtly describe the requirement of restricting the reach of certain information (especially in noun form)? I'd prefer to avoid strict, technical language related to "classified", or "closed circulation" etc. Keep it on subtle, polite side please.


Like I versus Like me

My friend and I got into an argument about English grammar, so I was hoping maybe you could help us out. Okay so we want to know if the following part of the sentence is correct, "People who are satisfied and feel self-fulfilled like I" rather than "People who are satisfied and feel self-fulfilled like me". I have already provided many sources to my friend showing that the first way is a formal and a grammatically correct way, however he wants an answer with this specific part of the sentence. Please help us out Thank you


Is the phrase "I kid of course" grammatically correct?

Just recently, I heard someone on TV use the phrase "I kid of course". (I think it was The Big Bang Theory but I'm not very sure). Any way, is this phrase grammatically correct?


What does "ad-hoc" mean?

I read some articles that used _ad-hoc_ like an adjective. Questions:   * What exactly does it mean in this paragraph: > Needless to say, all of that is pretty painful and error prone. Sure, once > you’re familiar with a library, you’d probably just copy it from another > project instead of getting it from the web, which makes things a bit easier. > But it’s still an overall very **ad-hoc** process. — Source.   * Are there any other meanings?


What is the phenomenon called when we use an incorrect sensory perception to describe something?

My primary and most common example is to read something and say (or write) that it "sounds familiar". Text has no sound. I'm sure there is a technical term for this practice or phenomenon. What is it?


Is the word 'stroke' understood, in meaning one of these / \?

All the meanings of the word 'slash', other than an oblique forward or backward stroke are either violent or obscene. They include cuts made with swords, lashing with a whip, cutting maliciously car tyres with a knife, and in Britain the act of male urination (I have never heard it applied to a female). Hence I find the word when used in its now everyday sense of a small inoffensive printed stroke (which is American in origin) unpleasantly resonant. I tend therefore to use the time-honoured British nomenclature of _stroke_ , _forward stroke_ , and _backward stroke_. Does everyone understand that?


Perception of subjects with indeterminate gender

Being German, I am used to getting information about the gender of a sentence's subject in the same sentence: > Meine Freundin mag Bücher. Here it is immediately clear that it's a _female_ friend of mine who likes books. In English, however, many nouns do not imply a certain gender (which makes a lot of things so much easier): > My friend likes books. How is such a sentence perceived by a native English speaker? I'm particularly interested in the case where such a sentence is part of a story, where the reader is likely to visualize the sentence's action mentally. Personally, I tend to imagine the subject as being male (this might be due to male profession titles and pronouns being the de-facto standard in German texts, even if the texts are not gender specific). This leads to surprises in situations like this one: > My friend likes books. She owns many of them. Do native English speakers experience a similar surprise? (Note that this works for both genders, i.e. a female reader might be surprised if "He" owns many of them) If not, what happens instead? **Edit:** Several answers point out that the same issue exists with other attributes (age, race, ...). However, in my experience, these attributes are either not fixed at all during a story (so we're fine to imagine them anyway we want) or comply with the stereo-types we have for the story's cultural environment (so the chance is high that we imagine the "right" thing). Gender, on the other hand, is almost always fixed for a story's characters, and very hard to guess in a more modern and western setting.


Where to put the adverb in passive sentences?

While writing another question on this site, I was uncertain about placement of adverbs in passive sentences. > It shouldn't **frequently be used** in the context of immaterial things. > > It shouldn't **be frequently used** in the context of immaterial things. I have two verbs, _be_ and _used_. Should I place the adverb _frequently_ to the left, or in between?


You right/you are right

I often encounter people saying "you right" instead of "you are right". Is it correct? UPDATE. I meant I often encounter things like "yes, you right" in written form.


What does "famously absent" mean?

What does the term "famously absent" mean? I was reading the wiki article about Ward Lamon and saw it in there: > Ward Hill Lamon (January 6, 1828 - May 7, 1893) was a personal friend and > self-appointed bodyguard of the American President Abraham Lincoln. Lamon > was **famously absent** the night Lincoln was assassinated, having been sent > by Lincoln to Richmond, Virginia.


Yes, no, adverbs, and interjections

There appears to be some disagreement over what function _yes_ and _no_ perform in the following sentences:   1. _Yes_ , you are right.   2. _No_ , you are mistaken. According to ODO (yes, no), they are being used as _exclamations_ which are presumably the same as _interjections_. Webster (yes, no) and Macmillan (yes, no), on the other hand, reckon that they are _adverbs_. Wiktionary (yes, no) chucks another spanner by stating that _yes_ is being used as an _adverb_ while _no_ is being used as an _interjection_. Wiktionary also links to a Wikipedia article on "yes and no" which seemingly disagrees with both options. > The words _yes_ and _no_ are not easily classified into any of the eight > conventional parts of speech. **Although sometimes classified as > interjections, they do not qualify as such, and they are not adverbs.** They > are sometimes **classified as a part of speech in their own right** , > sentence words, word sentences, or pro-sentences, although that category > contains more than yes and no and not all linguists include them in their > lists of sentence words. Sentences consisting solely of one of these two > words are classified as minor sentences. So, which, if anything, is it and why is opinion so divided?


Abbreviating names that start with a vowel

What are the rules about abbreviating names that start with a vowel? Would abbreviating "Alanis Morissette" to "A. Morissette" be correct or should it be "Al. Morissette"?


Are "should've", "could've", etc. valid short forms of "should have", "could have"?

This is interesting - if I write " **should've** " (for " **should have** "), my spell checker underlines the word. Same happens if I do " **could've** " (for " **could have** "). I use these forms but I'm starting to question if there even is such form and if I'm using English correctly? I also noticed that " **I've** " (for " **I have** ") doesn't get underlines by the spell checker, but " **things've** " (for " **things have** ") does. Can anyone explain this?


Is "nowadays" the same as "today"?

When helping an Italian speaker with her written homework, a cover letter, I told her to change the expression _nowadays_ to that of _today_. Her original sentence was the following: > I would be delighted to work for your company, as it is one of the most > important software companies nowadays. She asked why it was better to change that expression. I said it didn't sound "right". She looked at me quizzically, so I mumbled something about it being a question of register and collocation but frankly, I'm not sure. I had better add that she wants to sit the Cambridge English exam Advanced, CAE, so I was wondering whether an examiner would look unfavourably on the expression. Moreover, I would like to know if _nowadays_ is considered a compound word? Until today, I thought it was made up of three words; _now, a_ and _days_. But etymonline tells me that it was originally two words: **_now_** and **_adayes_**. _Adayes_ used to mean "during the day", which I think is lovely and I wish it would make a comeback. In any case, did the hyphenated form, _now-adayes_ ever existed? I know there is a similar question on ELU to this one, "Nowadays" vs "today" but it hasn't really answered any of my questions.


Come on, don’t be such a nimrod!

According to the OED, the word English **_Nimrod_** is derived from the Hebrew, where in Genesis 10:8–9 he is described as ‘a mighty one in the earth’ and ‘a mighty hunter before the Lord’. It is apparently still a popular name in Israel. This would match the OED’s definitions: >   1. A tyrannical ruler; a tyrant. _Obs_. >   2. A great hunter; one who is fond of, or given to, hunting. > But you never hear it used that way any longer. Now it’s become some sort of slang that means something more like dunce or idiot or jerk. While I doubt that PETA was involved, I still would like to know what the exact history is that lies behind this new anti-hunter motif?


Meaning of "reductio ad Hitlerum"

Can anyone explain what _reductio ad Hitlerum_ means in simple English with examples? I tried reading the Wikipedia article but it didn't help.


Analysis stage vs analysis phase

I need to report the progress of my work, when I am analysing a problem, which is the correct expressions to synthesize my current status ? >   1. At analysis stage >   2. At analysis phase >   3. Other ? >


Short expression for "If you are not 100% convinced yet, this last thing will seal the deal"

I'm writing a LinkedIn recommendation for a colleague of mine. I praised his abilities far and wide; now I would like to throw in one last (ironic and informal) punch line to top it all off. Here is what I have so far: > _You know how they say that if you want something done, you should ask the > busiest person in the office to do it? This is the reason why Andrea is my > favorite go-to guy for all of my data digging and reporting needs. Always > working long hours, he still takes the time to patiently listen to me and > assist me with whatever problem I have and, what’s more, he always does it > with a smile. Quick, reliable and helpful, Andrea is also – and by far – the > most polite and good-natured guy around. I am always at ease working with > him._ Now I want to add something like: > _What seals the deal? He keeps a huge stash of candies in the first drawer > of his desk, for everyone to take._ Does that make any sense, or is the use of the expression "to seal the deal" inappropriate? What other choices do I have? Please feel free to add any comment (also regarding the first part of the letter) if you wish.


Meaning of "reach out to somebody"

The dictionary explains this as: > To show somebody that you are interested in them and/or want to help them The explanation indicates the subject of the sentence is the one that offers help, but I think this one is also correct: > I'll try it first, and if I can't handle it, I'll reach out to you for help. I am confused about who offers help because I saw my native speaker colleague write this in an email: > Thanks for reaching out to me. Is this a "thanks" for helping or being asked to help?


How can I practice pronouncing "Coke" so it is not mistaken for another word?

I always fear my conversation sounds like this: > — What would you like to drink, sir?   >  — I will take some cock, thanks.   >  — _ROFL_. Any tips on how to pronounce _Coke_ so it is not mistaken for anything? :)


Is it necessary to use “the” before using verb

'The' is usually used before a noun. But in sentences that refer to specific action, is 'the' necessary? Example: > The release of the bending moment results in opening and closing of the > pipe.


Trying to figure out proper form of "that" in sentence

I currently have the sentence "Seahorses are the only fish that practice steadfast monogamy." to tree diagram for class, and cannot freakin' figure out what the word "that" would be used as in this sentence. Please help! Thanks. If you could also throw out a diagram of the sentence that'd be great.


Difference between 'As compared to' and 'When compared to'

Is there any rule governing when the phrase "As compared to..." should be used, and when "When compared to..." should be used? Or, do they mean the same, in all contexts?


"Met" vs. "met up"

Do these two terms mean two different things? as in: > I met up with Julie when I went to town/I met Julie when I went to town.


Why do we not include a possessive in "thank you for coming", and include one in "thank you for *your* kindness"?

Why is it more correct to say "thank you for coming" than "thank you for your coming," but it's okay to say "thank you for your kindness," rather than "thank you for kindness"?


Why do people use "..." in emails after people's names? For example, "Mike... "

What does this "..." mean in emails? For example, > "Mike...You are always welcome to come to our social event."


What are the words that can't exist without their prefix or suffix?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  What do you call words that look like a negation but are not? I found these poor orphaned words that only exist through the life-giving quality of their affix: ## feck _less_ , ruth _less_ , _un_ ruly, _in_ ept, _dis_ hevelled, _dis_ mayed, _dis_ gruntled I'm sure there are more. They have the familiar appearance of antonyms... Antonyms to something that doesn't exist. It's as if they've lost their positive attitude. Do these words have a common name? How did they get this way? They all have standard english affixes with known meaning, so it seems like they should be able to stand on their own. Were the original words lost? Is there a list of these recognized words somewhere?


How did the definite / indefinite articles develop?

Russian, I believe, has no definite or indefinite article. How did it develop in Latin languages, particularly English? Would English be much poorer without it?


Phrase for habitual scoffing at someone & then asking for his help

In our cultural language we say that `he always spit & then lick the same spot`... at least something like this. However, can I get some convenient phrase for such a person habit.


'they are' or 'these are'

Which sentence sounds more natural? These are first and foremost ethical, not medical questions. or They are first and foremost ethical, not medical questions.


The pronunciation of "ate"

I was talking to some friends and I said "I ate (/et/) chocolate yesterday...". Then my friend corrected me: "you ate (/eit/) chocolate...". I repeated my sentence with the /eit/ pronunciation and we moved on. But later at home I checked some dictionaries and online debates on the subject, and now I'd like to know if it's possible or not to pronounce _ate_ as /et/ rather than /eit/.


Beautiful novels

Putting aside the wonderful realm of Middle-Earth and many other values, The Lord of the Rings and Tolkien's other works are written in a very beautiful English. What are other novels/stories that you find exciting because of its language?


What's the difference between these terms: old-fashioned, out of fashion,unfashionable and outdated?

What’s the difference between _old-fashioned_ , _out of fashion_ , _unfashionable_ and _outdated?_   * She wears old-fashioned clothes.   * She wears unfashionable clothes.   * She wears outdated clothes.   * The clothes she wears are out of fashion.


Some prepositions - confusion

Please can you tell me which of the two prepositions in the examples below are correct? Is it possible to use both of them? Thanks! :) > Translate text **into** German / Translate text **to** German > > It started to snow **at** Christmas / It started to snow **during** > Christmas > > To ring Kitty **up** / To ring Kitty > > It starts **about** eight / It starts **around** eight > > To travel **around** Europe / To travel **through** Europe > > He looked **about** himself / He looked **around** himself > > To give a speech **about** / To give a speech **on**


Pronunciation of letter y: asylum vs syrup

I want someone to clarify if there is a rule about how to pronounce the letter Y I've read in another stackexchange post that when it is in a Greek-origin word it is pronounced as uh e.g. _analysis_ , _paralysis_. However in another Greek-origin word, _asylum_ , it is pronounced as i while the in the latin word _syrup_ it is pronounced as /i/.


How to properly build the "article is <some words> deletable/creatable?" question?

I have a minimum limit number, `1`, a maximum limit number, `10`, an "entity", `article`, and a question whose **answer** should state (one between _true_ or _false_ ) if the number of current `articles` exceeded the minimum limit or the maximum limit of allowed `articles`, `...`. _Technically_ speaking, I'm trying to write questions like `article is <some words> "deletable"?` and `article is <some words> "creatable"?` (note: one of my requisites is that the way I'd like to "build" questions is that _each question should refer to a **single** `article` with the verb **to be_** ). In the above case, for both questions, the `<some words>` value I came up with might be "the last", but I think it doesn't properly ask for **answer** I am looking for. So, what `<some words>` can I use?


Suggest some word

Can someone suggest a list of words used for a single thing (robot, machine, website, human, etc.) that can do multiple operations? I am searching for a word that I can use for something that do many thing alone. I want it for website name.


List of plural names of currencies?

Is anyone aware of a list of plural names of currencies? I don't really care what conventions are used; I just want to avoid using an obviously wrong plural form.


English Syntax Rules Based on Word Choice

I was reading the Wikipedia article on Animacy and came across something I found to be very interesting: > The higher animacy a referent has, the less preferable it is to use the > preposition of for possession, as follows (this can also be interpreted in > terms of alienable versus inalienable possession): > > _My face is correct_ , while _the face of me_ is not. > > _The man's face_ and _the face of the man_ are both correct, and the former > is preferred. > > _The clock's face_ and _the face of the clock_ are both correct, and the > latter is preferred. It is really interesting to me that there are two different ways of writing the same thing, and the ideal way is based almost entirely on animacy. Are there any other similar types of characteristics in the English language (where there are multiple ways of writing the same thing, and one becomes more "correct" based on a property of one of the words in the phrase)? Also, is there a name for this field of study, or available resources for someone interested in learning more about this? I'm interested in this to help teach ESL students different things like this which native speakers innately know (having to do with the structure of a sentence), but don't realize they know.


Which English accent works satisfactorily for speech recognition?

According to “Google iPhone voice-recognition tool baffled by British accents”, mobile phones have trouble recognizing speech. Which accent (probably US) works satisfactorily? Are there any resources like videos that demonstrate an accent that works well?


slip rate dependent friction - hyphen needed?

Should I put a hyphen for friction that depends on slip rate? Possibilities: > slip rate-dependent friction or > slip-rate dependent friction or > slip rate dependent friction The last one seems to be most widely used, however, I have also seen the first and the second in a few papers.


What does ‘Reverse fig leaf” mean?

I was interested in the word, “Reverse fig leaf” in an article titled, “Should Germans read ‘Mein Kampf” appearing in New York Times (July 7), which deals with the planned publication of Adolf Hitler’s ‘Mein Kamp” in Germany due to expiration of the copy right held by the state of Bavaria in 2015. It reads: > “(Facing an outcry among academic and in Bavarian Legislature) in an awkward > dance, Mr. Seehofer’s government was forced to reconsider its > reconsideration. It agreed to leave the money in place while withholding its > government seal of approval (for release). This **reverse fig leaf** may or > may not mollify opponent, who thought they had stopped the book. > http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/08/opinion/should-germans-read-mein- > kampf.html?_r=0 I know "fig leaf" has biblical origin and means a hasty / inadequate cover-up for something shameful, but I never heard of the word, “reverse fig leaf.” Google Ngram shows growing currency of ‘fig leaf’ at 0.00000912% in 2008, but no track of “reverse fig leaf.” If we reverse a fig leaf, we’re gonna disclose or publish a hidden object, secret, or shame. How can I define “reverse fig leaf” precisely? Is it just an incidental combination of adjective, “reverse” and a figurative “fig leaf,” or a set of word to be applicable to many other instances, for instance, "Japanese Prime Minister, Abe’s latest decision to authrize the nation’s Collective Defense Right is a **reverse fig leaf** of the existence and nature of Japanese Defense Force under the pacifist Constitution prohibiting its engagement in any kind of wars."?


What is the exact meaning of manifestation?

I am unsure why my professor is using the word **manifestations** for example here > Biochemical manifestations of apoptosis. Activation of caspase family, DNA > and protein breakdown, and Membrane alteration facilitating the recognition > by macrophages. I think the manifestations these _manifestations_ are only processes in the apoptosis. **What is the definition of manifestation?** **What is a better word for a manifestation?** I think just a process.


What does "Merlin's beard!" mean?

I know that **Merlin's beard!** is an exclamation from Harry Potter which is similar to "Oh Lord!". and it is a common wizarding expression used to show surprise. Can we use it this expression in the muggle world? I just wanted to know whether it is a proper exclamation which has its own origin and what is the literal meaning of this? Are there any other exclamations like this?


Irregular plurals. Leathermans or Leathermen?

Which plural do you use for a word that should have a regular plural but ends with a word that has its own irregular one? The example that made me ask was "leatherman" (the multitool) but there are plenty of others.


What is a common expression in English that a person might say when one suddenly got shocked by sound?

What is a common expression in English that a person might say, when one suddenly got shocked by sound? For example, while a woman was walking on the sidewalk in a dark place, she suddenly heard someone yelled at her "DON'T MOVE!". what is likely going to be the first word or phrase that comes out her mouth? And what would you say to the person who yelled at you, if you recognized immediately that the person is your brother or sister.


What is the name for the male version of a nymphomaniac?

A nymphomaniac is the word which signifies a woman with uncontrolled sexual desires. What is the best word to describe a man who demonstrates similar characteristics?


What does "...considered to be, well, school" mean here? Does "..., well, ..." change it's meaning?

In Time magazine (March 5) article titled, “The New SAT: America treats its language like garbage,” John McWhorter, an associate professor of English and comparative literature at Columbia University rebuts former University of California president Richard Atkinson’s speech to support exclusion of big words from SAT as follows: > “(In his 2001 speech) He described seeing schoolchildren studying verbal > analogies such as “untruthful is to mendaciousness is as circumspect is to > caution” in preparation for the SAT. Atkinson’s implication was that this > was as depressing a sight as the kids being taught alchemy. But there was a > time when what Atkinson saw was considered to be, well, **school**.” > > http://time.com/14135/sat-vocabulary-big-words-english-language/ I am unfamiliar with the usage of “school” used in this manner. For instance, OED carries 5 different ways of definitions of ‘school’ as a noun including   1. An institution for educating children:   2. The buildings used by a school:   3. The pupils and staff of a school:   4. A style, approach, or method of a specified character:   5. A group of people, particularly writers, artists, or philosophers, sharing similar ideas or methods: But none of the above definitions seems to be applicable to the line, "there was a time when what Atkinson saw was considered to be school.” I doubt if the writer was confident of the use of ‘school’ in this context as he injected “well” before ‘school.” What does ‘school” mean in the above quote? Does the word, ‘school’ have the meaning of “main school / stream"?


What does “draw something within something” mean?

From page 228 of _Thinking Like a Lawyer_ by Frederick Schauer: > The law is presumed unconstitutional, but the state may rebut that > presumption by satisfying a heavy burden of justification. Conversely, when > a statute **draws** a classification **within** this category of “suspect” > classifications, it is presumed to be constitutionally permissible and will > be invalidated only if the challenger meets its burden of proving that the > classification is irrational. This doesn't appear in the legal dictionary or at http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/draw?q=draw or Google.


What does “which” refer to in “in respect to which”?

From footnote 34 on page 216 of _Thinking Like a Lawyer_ by Frederick Schauer: > . . . it is accepted that individuals have due-process rights to notice and > hearing [//]   >  with respect to adjudicative facts that will produce adverse consequences > to them, [//]   >  but not to legislative facts that will produce adverse consequences to them > [//]   >  only in respect to **which** they are members of a class adversely affected > by the legislative rule. What’s the antecedent of _which_ here? That flummoxes me. I’ve purposely separated clauses with [//] to help make sense of the sentence.


How to parse these two long (subordinate) clauses connected with 'that'?

From footnote 8 on page 205 of _Thinking Like a Lawyer_ by Frederick Schauer: > Supplemented context: There are, of course, controversies about and > challenges to these venerable distinctions as well, some but not all of > which come from perspectives loosely labeled as “postmodern.” And it is true > that many purported descriptions have a normative element to them, with > values being smuggled in under the cover of purported neutral description. > > Nevertheless, it is sufficiently implausible to insist that there is no > difference between “John fired a gun whose bullet entered Mary’s heart and > caused her death” and “John ought to go to prison for murdering Mary” `that` > allegedly sophisticated challenges to any of the distinctions in the text > need not detain us any further here. Would someone please explain or unravel? I understand the last (subordinate) clause as comprising these parts:   * subject: _allegedly sophisticated challenges to any of the distinctions in the text_   * verb phrase: _need not detain_   * predicate _us any further here._ Yet how does the greyed _that_ connect all this to the first subordinate clause “Nevertheless, it . . . for murdering Mary”? I can endure the meaning of the two clauses, but am confused by the meaning of this entire sentence.


A single word for someone who is not pleased no matter how hard you try

I'm looking for a word that means > someone (especially a boss) who is not pleased (with your work, attitude > etc.) no matter how hard you try.


"That" between "thought" and "could"

Is > It was me that Mr. Jones thought could do it. correct? Is _that_ required between _thought_ and _could_?


Use of "Sure" in reply to help offering  and to appreciation

In American English, "sure" is often heard in reply to offering help or expressing appreciation. I was wondering if it may not be a good choice? For example,   1. > \- Would you like a cup of water? - Sure. Is it correct that "sure" here does not have any meaning similar to thanks in advance? I would say "Yes, please". Even sometimes "Yes, please. Thanks!" Using "sure" makes me feel that others might think I take their help for granted.   2. > \- Thank you so much! - Sure. Is "sure" here used to emphasize that appreciation is required or highly expected? I would think "You are welcome" or "My pleasure" are less demanding. In general, how shall one use "sure" in an acceptable way? What kinds of occasions can it be used, and when better not?


Understanding appositives and the use of the m-dash ( — )

My understanding of a dash is that it sets off a lengthy appositive, but can also be used to introduce a summary. Consider the following passage from Stephan Jay Gould: > If evolution worked explicitly for species, then we could soften the blow of > Darwin's radicalism. The transition from God's overt beneficence _toward_ > species to evolution's direct operation _on_ species permits a soft landing > in transferring allegiance from creationism to evolution—for the central > focus on "higher" good as raison d'etre remains unchanged From what little I know about grammar, an appositive has to be either a noun, or a noun phrase. Am I correct, then, that "for the central...unchanged" is **not** an appositive, and that Gould is using the dash to set off a summary to the preceding independent clause? (I'm not trying to over-analyse any writer's grammar, just learn the rules for myself :))


Can the word 'aggregation' be used to mean a collection of people?

I'm wondering if one can use the word "aggregation" to mean a _team_ or a _collaboration_ of sorts, or even a certain collection of individuals in general, not just objects. Any thoughts?


Does "generosity"/"generous" - as character quality - imply connotations "giving of your OWN resources, not someone else's"?

The question is about the context attached (or rather not attached) to the term "generosity"/"generous" (defined in Merriam-Webster as "liberal in giving"). The question is, is there a widely/universally understood context of "giving of **your own resources** " ( **and NOT someone else's** ) when using the term? Please note that I am asking for an answer that can be supported by an official/scholarly reference, not merely an opinion. E.g. a dictionary definition precise enough to include/exclude such contexts; or a scholarly article discussing the topic. * * * Due to the fact that there are a lot of different meanings to the word "generous", I will clarify specifically the ones I mean/don't mean:   * This Q **IS** about the use of the term "generous"/"generosity" pertaining to a personal quality of an individual's character; **specifically used as an opposite of "being greedy"**   * This Q is **NOT** about the archaic "nobility"/"class-status" meaning of the word.   * This Q is **NOT** about the use of "generous" as indication of size (as in "generous slice of the cake"/"generous amount of help").    * This Q is specifically about the use specifically of the word " **generous** ", not some other positive quality. E.g. we are NOT discussing whether you are good/nice/well-meaning when wishing to give other people from resources that are not yours. Only whether or not you can be called a generous person based on such.  * * * **Here is a very specific example to illustrate the question precisely:** **Situation 1** : You go to a restaurant; you pay for dinner and add **extra** $50 tip to the waiter on top of the customary 15% tip, despite the fact that the service/dinner was quite ordinary, not deserving of extra tip on merits. In this case, you can obviously be said to be **generous** to the waiter; or committing an act of **generosity** (in your attitude, NOT the large amount). **Situation 2** : You go to a restaurant for a dinner event **paid for by the company you work for** (therefore, ultimately, paid for by the company owners - who are NOT you and are not present). It is now the time to decide how much of a tip to give to the waiter. **QUESTION** : Would advocating for an extra $50 tip (on top of the customary 15%, despite the fact that the service/dinner was quite ordinary, not deserving of extra tip on merits) still be considered an act of **_generosity_** (as opposed to general good will), even though that extra $50 would be paid for by people **other than you** and will have no measurable financial impact to yourself?   1. I'm not asking for moral dimension of this - merely of whether in this specific second scenario the word **generosity** is a valid term to use to describe your personal attitude about extra $50.   2. I am not asking about whether the extra $50 tip can be called generous - I am asking about whether your behavior in giving such a tip can be called generosity.


Why are detectives/investigators referred to as "gumshoe"s?

Why are detectives/inspectors colloquially referred to as Gumshoes? Is it anything other that they would travel a lot in investigations and, presumably, wore hard-wearing shoes?


Any non-profane alternative to "bullshit"?

By bullshit, I include but **not limit** it to: > Stuff that is made up for the purpose of placating someone, or passing an > exam, or getting elected to office. Most often false or ridiculous. or > False or exaggerated statements made to impress the listener rather than > deceive. * * * In this StackExchange question, "marketing bullshit" was corrected to "marketing-speak" by a moderator who took exception to the profanity. I believe (lets not blame others here!) that the word fills a purpose by being universally understood term and I cant come up with an alternative readily. What is a non-profane alternative that is as **internationally understood** and means the same thing as the original?


Why is it "as happy as a clam"?

Many go about saying I'm as happy as a clam, or Tom is as happy as a clam, but what are the origins to this phrase and what makes a clam happy?


"He knows his counterparts in each branch"

Can I use the word _counterpart_ this way: > He knows his counterparts in each branch. The context is that he works as the marketing manager in one of the company branches. And the counterparts refer to those who work as the marketing manager in other branches. Or should add something in front of the "counterpart"?


"Can take no other" vs. "can't take other"

As an ESL I'm not sure if I can use the following sentences: > You can take no other directions. I'm using it on giving indications to a foreigner. Should I use instead: > You can't take other directions. Which one do you think it is the most natural/idiomatic?


"Interchange" and "exchange"

I was wondering if interchange and exchange are equivalent and can be used interchangeably or exchangeably (okay this is an example already)?   What are the differences between their prefixes, _inter-_ and _ex-_? > It is common for XML to be used in interchanging data over the Internet.


Antonym of "dispenser"

I've been searching a lot of dictionary websites for the antonym of _dispenser_. I was wondering if anybody could think of one.


Term for phrases that almost rhyme but are orally rhythmic

When thinking of short slogans or sayings there is great value in having something that is fun to say and has good shape, but not necessarily directly rhyming. If the rhyme is too literal, it tends to have a sing-songy tone. The phrase “Keep calm and carry on” felt as though it had the property I’m looking for. Is there a term to describe this kind of “almost-rhyme”?


“Non-rhotic” is to R-droppers as “non-?????” is to L-droppers

Certain speakers of English have a tendency to “drop” L’s that occur after a vowel but before another consonant, as in **balm, calm, golf, gulf, palm, wolf** , and many more. Often these aren’t completely dropped, but instead change the preceding vowel a little bit. So instead of _wolf_ , they have _woof_ ; instead of _palm_ they have _pom_ or _pawm_ ; instead of _golf_ , they have _gawf_. People who drop their R’s in a similar position are said to have a **_non- rhotic_** pronunciation there, or to speak a non-rhotic dialect. What then is the corresponding term for someone who routinely drops their L’s, so **“a non- _?????_ speaker”**? _Lambdacism_ and _lallation_ seem like dead ends. This isn’t a new thing either, considering the historical L’s no longer heard in words like _could_ and _stalk_. Whether it’s growing, I’m not sure, but perhaps so.


Should I insert is/was/were after an 'if'?

I have the following sentence: > if the foo is/was/were a bar and the baz truck a qux, how does the working > of a baz relate to coaching? Should it be is/was/were? Searching the internet just give me a lot of conflicting answers, so I'm here to hear (hmm that rhymes!) from the experts! Thanks!


Capital 'I' and lowercase 'L'

I was wondering why these two letters (capital 'I' and lowercase 'L') look the same in some fonts? Is there any historical reason?


Is it "2-8 days" or "two to eight days"?

When I am writing a book and referring to something that lasts 2-8 days, do I say " _2-8 days_ " or " _two to eight days_ "? Also, when referring to how much of something I would use, would I say " _2-4 tablespoons_ " or " _two to four tablespoons_ "?


Dress up like a tailback

This comes from The Newsroom S01E06, about 51:48. Will comments on a large black bodyguard's advancements on McKenzie: Will: Dress up like a tailback and he won't be able to lay a hand on you.   Bodyguard: Shrimp boat, if I wasn't being paid to keep you alive… It's obviously received as a witty and offensive joke, but what is its meaning? What does tailback mean in this context?


"Do I believe the sky above" vs. "I do believe the sky above"

I’m Brazilian and I have a question. Why does Enya say the following in her song “Caribbean Blue”? > So the world goes round and round   >  With all you ever knew   >  They say the sky high above   >  Is Caribbean blue > > If every man says all he can,   >  If every man is true,   >  **Do I believe the sky above   >  Is Caribbean blue** Is it right? “Do I” is for questions, isn’t it?


The meaning of the sentence

"Over three occasions, each of 3 nights, a total of 21,830 moths were collected, representing more than 1250 morphospecies." Especially ,the meaning of "each of 3 nights".


"Required to do" vs. "required doing"

>   * Your employer is **required to deduct** a certain amount from your > salary as a withstanding tax payable to the federal government. >   * 'Hamlet' is **required reading** [= must be read] for this course. > Would you kindly tell me the reason why in the first sentence, there is an infinitive after _required_ , and in the second one a gerund?


What's the noun for "off-key" or "out of tune"?

The answer isn't _off-keyness_ , although I wish it were. I am interested in the secondary meaning of something being _off-key_ , in the sense that it is irregular or incongruous, for example: "An off-key remark" and "His remark was off-key" Oxford Dictionaries provides this example: > You try to console her, but it feels **a bit off-key** : after all you’ve > heard only 70% of what she’s said. In Italian, the adjective _off-key_ is translated by stonato, which means something is out of tune (tone = _tono_ ) and intonato. > He sang on-key/in tune = _Lui era intonato_   >  He sang off-key/out of tune = _Lui era stonato_ I need a noun that fits the sentence below: > A) The phrase "I transported my friend to the airport" sounds off-key, if we > swap the verb, transport with _"took"_ the **_____** no longer occurs. The Italian noun form is _stonatura_ , below is an example of how it is used and my translation: > _Quel gilet viola è una stonatura intollerabile_   >  B) That purple waistcoat (AmEng _vest_ ) is an unbearable **____**   * What _noun_ can fill both gaps, i.e. A and B? * * * **EDIT** _Dissonance_ fits perfectly in example A, but much less so in B. The problem is a visual **_____** , because the speaker is complaining about the colour. Perhaps the purple is jarring per se or it clashes with the shirt. What noun describes this visual _disharmony_? Is there a better noun than _dissonance_ and _discordance_ as suggested by @Mitch and @Third News to complete sentence B?


"Were that you who did that" vs. "was that you who did that"

Which of the following is correct? >   * Were that you who did that? >   * Was that you who did that? > Obviously one has to use _were_ with _you_ , but which one goes here in this case?


What is the metaphoric antonym to “paycheck to paycheck living?”

Is there any metaphoric antonym to “pay check to paycheck living”? In Japanese we have the word, ‘Kirigirisu zoku’ – people who live like a grasshopper who squanders money and not prepare for winter as against ‘Ari zoku’ – people who live like an ant who works hard and saves money to brace for hardship. This came from Ant and Grasshopper episode of Aesop Fables. But I don’t think “Kirigiris-like” living analogy applies to “paycheck to paycheck” living, because it merely refers to unwise spendthrift life.


What does the following phrase mean: "pursuing invariably the same Object"

Given the following sentence in the American Declaration of Independence: > But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, **pursuing invariably the > same Object** evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it > is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to > provide new Guards for their future security. I understand the sentence as a substantiation for the making of a new US government, however what does the particular highlighted phrase mean?


What are proper collocations of 'revision'?

Can I say: I will do/make revision of the material that we have covered so far. Should I say : I will revise the material that we have covered so far.


'The Constitution Is Not A Suicide Pact'

Would someone please explain why this means: > that civil liberties only go so far, and at extremes, security must take > precedence  ? I tried to reference a suicide pact and more context here, but I still don't see how to determine it. I'm not politicking or legalising this; I ask only about meaning.


Are American vowels drifting backwards?

I have 2 young daughters who like many their age are currently obsessed by "Frozen". I watched it for the first time last night and actually ended up googling to work out whether Elsa's sister is name Anna, or Arne. It seems the former is correct but there is no way I could pronounce it that way. Is this a general trend in N.Am English or does it only apply in certain cases?


Using 'would' to talk about past with examples

The following are sentences,   1. I would take the dogs out on a walk.   2. I would have took the dogs out on a walk.   3. I would took the dogs out on a walk. I understood them as follows:   1. Possible action to be taken in future.   2. You imagine something happening in past but it didn't.   3. An action that was happened in past especially more often. Is my understanding correct?


what does this mean “Without hard work, nothing grows but weeds. Gordon B. Hinkley”

“Without hard work, nothing grows but weeds." – Gordon B. Hinkley


Do I use "ID" or "Id"

I'm not an expert on English, but I'm fairly picky. I'm also a programmer, and I regularly use the word "Id" as an abbreviation for Identifier. So I was wondering whether it's more correct to use "Id" or "ID". Maybe it's a meaningless question because as far as I know it's a unique usage of abbreviations as it's pronounced "eye-dee", but it does get on my OCD not knowing. Edit: This question is about which is correct in the English language- the fact that it's for use in programming is incidental.


Frequency of word use vs number of words

Let's consider a partition of the words in the english language according to respective use frequency. Looking at the frequency graph it should be easy to find classes of words with approximately the same frequency. Now I'm interested in the size of these classes. I know that the size depends on the relative cut-off points, but I'm more interested in a general classification, i.e. are there more common words, or more uncommon words?


How do you say it when you are extremely relying on someone or something?

I want to say " _I'm at the whim of X_ " but it just doesn't sound right. There is another word for this but for some reason I just can't think of it.


What does the phrase "red rovering" mean? Here is the context: > Over a decade ago, Billy Bob’s career began in the corporate world before > **red-rovering** to agency life.


Reason vs. purpose

Just now I wanted to explain why I was doing something, then I wrote "the purpose of doing something is blablabla". Immediately I wondered why I didn't write "the reason of doing something is blablabla" instead. It seems to me that the words purpose and reason are perfectly interchangeable in this context. On the other hand, however, the word purpose impresses me as "where is it going" while the word reason carries the connotation of "where is it coming from". In this sense, they seem to contradict each other. Any one can explain this phenomenon to me? Maybe it is only me that is confused due to misconception of the two words.


On the interpretation of "walked to the station at 9 o'clock"

I want to confirm what a book says. It says:   1. I went to the station at 9 o'clock.   2. I walked to the station at 9 o'clock.  Sentence (1) has the following two meaning: a. I left for the station at 9 o'clock. b. I got to the station at 9 o'clock. Sentence (2), on the other hand, has only one meaning: I left for the station at 9 o'clock. Do you agree with this description? If so, how do you express this situation in one sentence: I walked to the station, and I got to the station at 9 o'clock. "I got to the station walking at 9 o'clock"?


"It is only me that is" or "It is only I that am"

> It is only me that is confused. or > It is only I that am confused. The first one sounds more natural to me while the second one appears to me as grammatically correct. Which one is correct?


Is “tidbits” Bowdlerized or original?

Our American English local paper insisted on changing a title from _ti **t** bits_ to _ti **d** bits_ for a column on minor local events and stories. I, a British English speaker, have always pronounced and spelled this as _ti **t** bits_. Are they accurate, or do they just want to avoid shocking their readership with any connection to bouncy lady-parts, in the same way that CNN insists on _IED_ rather than _booby-trap_?


Why are news headlines in present tense if they refer to past events?

In news papers we see headings like this > "India signs a pact with Russia" > > "Sachin hits another century" > > "Obama wins presidential election" These are completed events, aren't they? Then, why are these sentences not mentioned in past tense?


The property of something to return to its original state when not being acted upon

Consider a pot of soup. Its contents are static. Once you start stirring it the state of the contents changes rapidly. Once you stop stirring the state of the pot returns to something approximating the original state. What is this property called? Most things don't have this property. When you stop smashing your computer with a baseball bat it will not return to its original state. **Edit** with a better example: On a farm, there is a certain number of cows. The number depends on the amount of grass on the farm. Once the population of cows is at that number it cannot increase beyond it because there isn't enough food. If the farmer were to kill a lot of cows one year for beef then the remaining cows will have more calves and the population would return to that number. I guess I could say the system is self-correcting but then that would imply that one state of the system was more correct than the other. I don't want to do this.


What does "campy" mean?

I was reading this answer to another question and came across the word _campy_ (towards the end of the answer). I’ve definitely seen it used before to describe science fiction movies and shows but have never had a good definition of it. What does it mean and where does it come from?


Which is correct: "as good as possible" or "as best as possible"?

Which one is the correct expression: >   1. as good as possible >   2. as best as possible > Both were suggested to be used in the following sentence: > The activity has been performed as good/best as possible. Spontaneously, I would have immediately said the first, but my friend that studies English is convinced of the second.


Difference between "less" and "lesser"?

These two seem very similar. What are the major differences between the two? For example, in the following sentence, > Substitute the lesser punishment for the greater one. Can one use "less" instead of "lesser" here?


Must a colon be appended to "that is"?

In certain sentences, I use _that is_ to rephrase something, be more specific or elaborate. Example: > This coffee is so black, it must have been prepared by someone who works a > lot, that is: an insomniac. But in certain circumstances, this colon is unpractical because there's another colon around. Or it makes the sentence insist too much on this particular point. And I think that I already saw _that is_ without a colon. Is this punctuation sign required?


Do we put a comma before "then" when it's the last word in a sentence? If she goes, I'm not going, then.


Rephrase the question about history?

Here is what i want to ask - > if you are given a chance to meet and talk to a person from history, who > that would be? This above phrase doesn't sound good when asked as a question. Please rephrase it.


Formal alternative to phrasal verb "turn down"

I wish to state on my curriculum vitae something along the following line:               Scholarship turned down to pursue a career in industry.      I find phrasal verbs (like _turn down_ ) rather informal. Is there a more formal way to make such a statement?


What causes the euphemisation of medical terms?

George Carlin has a famous sketch where he laments the dehumanising of ailments by “euphemisation”, illustrated by the use of “shell shock” during World War I, followed by “battle fatigue”, then “operational exhaustion”, and finally “post-traumatic stress disorder” (“PTSD”) today. Google Ngram Viewer does indicate that “operational exhaustion” never gained traction, and that “battle fatigue” never overtook “shell shock” completely, but “post-traumatic stress disorder” has left “shell shock” far behind: ![Ngrams](http://i.stack.imgur.com/IzQSZ.png) Other modern medical euphemisms which sprang to mind:   * “Idiot”, “imbecile”, “moron” -> various mental disabilities   * “Mongoloid” -> “Down syndrome”   * “Cot death” -> “Sudden infant death syndrome” As a counterexample, “influenza” is a very old term term which doesn't seem to have acquired a common scientific name. Are the forces behind the creation of such medical euphemisms known? Are they usually caused by political pressure, a wish to dissociate the professional from slang, some actual scientific reasoning, or some other force?


Where to put an adjective to avoid ambiguity?

The essence of this question is not about style. It is foremost about avoiding ambiguity. The sentence is "She called me." If I want to use the word "sniffling" to describe the caller, where should I put it? I don't want to use the adverb "snifflingly". If a noun is used instead of the pronoun 'She', it's very clear to say "a sniffling child called me".


What does "Knock on wood" mean?

From the dictionary, it looks like it's some kind of ritual one does for luck, but I still cannot figure out when one would really knock on wood.


What does “Clearasil-scented grammatical sloth” in casual American speech mean?

John McWhorter, associate professor of English and comparative literature at Columbia University comments on the growing sophistication (or devolution) of English language among Americans in the article of the New York Times (April 5, 2014) under the title of “Like, Degrading the language? No way.” He picks up prolific uses of the words, “like,” “totally,” “because X” in daily discourse and “lol” in texting as the noteworthy trends of the shift of language. He says: > “Linguistically, underneath the distraction of incivility, America is taking > a page from Dale Carnegie’s classic “How to win friends and influence > people.” There’s, overall, an awareness of the states of minds of others in > much of what is typically regarded as **Clearasil-scented grammatical > sloth**.” As I understand Clearasil is a pimple treatment medicine primarily directed to high-teen users, does “Clearasil-scented grammatical sloth” mean immature usage of language? What does it mean? We say “It smells like Mentholatum” in Japanese in referring to the person / thing emitting an alien (not necessarily unpleasant) smell. Is “Clearasil-scented” a popular phrase, or the author’s particular trope? Can we apply “Clearasil-scented” to other words, like “look, fashion, view, remarks, and infatuation”?


use of the verb "make"

The following is part of a blog post in _The Huffington Post:_ > In the perfect world we would all be morning people. We would wake up calm, > refreshed and ready to tackle the day. But this isn’t a perfect world, and > many of us have hectic morning routines that are considered a success only > if we're able to make it to work on time and with no coffee stains on our > shirts. I don’t understand the last sentence where it reads “only if we’re able to make it to work on time”. Doesn't the verb _make_ have to be followed by another verb without _to_? Or, is this sentence used in a different way?


How do I say a calculated decimal has too many decimal places?

I'm trying to craft an appropriately worded error message for an application I'm working on. It boils down to when a calculated value results in having too many decimal places it can't be correctly calculated by the application. My initial thought for an error message would be something like               Decimal too large to be calculated accurately.      I'm trying to convey the `too large` to mean a fraction with to many decimal places. But obviously `to large` means something else. **What would the correct term be?** For a more literal example; when `0.0017985611510791366` is used in the program it throws an error. When `0.002` is used it doesn't.


How Do You Pronounce "Tuesday"?

My friends have a variety of ways of pronouncing "Tuesday":   * Tooos-day   * Tyu-sday   * Choose-day Which one is considered correct?


"Extremely appreciate": grammatically correct?

I've seen the word **Extremely** used to modify adjectives. Would it also be correct to use it to modify verbs? For example, "extremely appreciate", or "extremely enjoy". Thank you.


Is it grammatical to introduce a result clause using “then”?

Is it grammatical to introduce a result clause by using _then_ as in these examples:   * Don’t be lazy – _then_ you will fail.   * Don’t kill him – _then_ you will regret it. If so, then is the _then_ in these examples a conjunction? I’ve not found any resources that mention this – they usually say that result clauses are usually introduced by conjunctions such as _so_ or _so that_ which in the above examples would read:   * Don’t be lazy _so that_ you _then_ fail.   * Don’t kill him _so_ you regret it.


Is "implicit" a suitable adjective for both "implied" and "inferred" properties?

I'm working on some software programming documents where certain types can be _inferred_ from the code*. I have this tendency to then called these _inferred_ types the _implicit_ type. This makes sense because it's a contrast to an _explicit_ type. What bothers me is that the word _implicit_ appears to have _imply_ as its root. Knowing these types are _inferred_ and not _implied_ makes it odd to use the word _implicit_. It might however just be the history of the word and thus no longer relevant. Is it okay to call these _inferred_ types an _implicit_ type? * _In non-programming terms: I have a document which describes an object. Some of the properties of the object are not actually written down, but can be inferred from the other listed properties._


"Informative" is the adjective form of "information". What's the adjective form of "data"/"datum"?


sentence diagramming

How does one diagram this sentence: > Who made him jump into the pit?


Can "found" be used, as it is in this sentence, in the future tense?

For example, > After several years, Rubin left to _found_ Danger, Inc. Is this grammatically correct?