Is there a word that means capable of being made brighter?

Is there a word that means "capable of being made brighter"? A word that means capable of being made stronger or more intense would work too. _Brightenable_ would be perfect if it didn't provoke as much laughter as understanding. _Intensifiable_ is about the best I can come up with.


Single word for something that is harmful, yet necessary

Can anyone please help me to substitute "something that harms us, but we which also we depend on" with an equivalent word or phrase? An example: "Every year, river water causes flooding in its vicinity, but the people living nearby are continuously dependent on the river to make their living".


What is the function of "that" in this sentence?

What is the funcition of "that" in this sentence? > The paper notes _that_ conditions in the last warm period in the Atlantic > are broadly similar to those observed now.   >  -- BBC News, October 7, 2012.


What is a 'civic institution'?

The term appears in the _International New York Times_ : "Radical Pope, Traditional Values": > As a result of its work in basic health and education — and despite its > obtuse views on birth control — in the last 50 years the church has probably > lifted more people out of poverty than any other civic institution in > history. Internet (I forgot where) suggests that a 'civic institution' by definition cannot be a government (or a market participant). However, we also have > **civic** Of, relating to, or belonging to a city, a citizen, or > citizenship; municipal or civil. and > **civil** (not comparable) Having to do with people and government office as > opposed to the military or religion. This could be construed as _excluding_ the Catholic Church (and _including_ government). So, what, if any, is a good definition of 'civic institution'? Or is the term ambiguous?


How to use 'dogly' correctly

Recently, as it is shown in previous questions, we learn how to use _asininely_ and how to use _bovinely_. Now, along this line, I would like to learn how to use _dogly_ properly. In particular, I would like to know whether phrases like > Our friends looked at us _dogly_. > > Our friends worked _dogly_. are good English. Are they? I know that there are better or more idiomatic words to replace 'dogly' there, but, thinking to the audience I have to talk to, I would prefer, if acceptable, to use 'dogly'.


Is there such an expression like cheat somebody into doing something or cheat somebody to do something? If not, is there a good replacement?


Can I use the verb "attached" for a piece of information supplied in the email body?

> Please find attached the detail for my application. Is this sentence correct if I supply the detail in the email body, not in a separately attached file?


sentence structure: S + 'was that' + independent clause

Is the structure ' _was that_ ' + independent clause correct? Example sentence: > The major difference about these two groups **was that** they were composed > entirely of young children


What does *players* mean in the context?

> Clay just nodded, seeming rather uncomfortable about something. “Yes, so > keep your hands off! She doesn’t need **players** like you chasing her > around,” he growled with a threatening tone to his voice. Does it mean something like a womanizer? Because the phrase _football player_ is senselessly in the context.


Is there a named category for nouns that are not 'agent nouns'?

Please note that this question is not about the 'opposite' of an agent noun, or the 'passive noun' corresponding to an agent noun. My question is: if we could split the set of all nouns into two sets, and one of them were that of agent nouns, what would the remaining set be called? Is there a name for such nouns? Would 'non-agent noun' be appropriate? Thanks,


What is the equivalent of sub/super sonic for the speed of light?

We have subsonic and supersonic for speeds below or above the speed of sound. What is the equivalent for the speed of light?


"Reference" vs. "credit" — which word to use when we have to mention sites we referred to?

_Reference_ or _credit_ — which word should be used in which context when we are talking about blog entries? If we have taken the information from ten different sites, and put it all together in one place, which word out of the above would be appropriate then and why?


Where can I find a list of synonyms and hyponyms for different food types?

I'm trying to find a list of synonyms between various food types for a programming project I am working on with searching English language phrases. I was originally going to ask this on Stack Overflow, but this question wasn't necessarily related to programming. In the list I'm looking for, I'd like to be able to know the synonyms and hyponyms for food types. For example:   * Synonym: sandwich — sub   * Hyponyms: Mexican — taco, burrito; fruit — orange, apple, banana Are there any lists that exist that might help bootstrap my efforts?


Is there any word alternative for "compared to"?

I'd like to find an alternative for "compared to", in order to avoid repeating the same phrase in my scientific paper. Is there any alternative for this expression?


Meaning of "would" in "the men of Gotham would have kept the Cuckoo so that she might sing all the year"

A fairy tale begins: > Once upon a time the men of Gotham **would have kept** the Cuckoo so that > she might sing all the year, and in the midst of their town they made a > hedge round in compass and they got a Cuckoo, and put her into it, and said, > 'Sing there all through the year, or thou shalt have neither meat nor > water.' The Cuckoo, as soon as she perceived herself within the hedge, flew > away. 'A vengeance on her!' said they. 'We did not make our hedge high > enough.' What does "would have kept" mean in this context? How do you paraphraise it? Is it something like "they were likely to have kept"?


Was the verb "bring" once used as a noun?

In the book of Amos (KJV, Amos 4:1), we find the verb _bring_ is capitalized in the middle of a sentence. This is in sharp contrast to the same verb written in v. 4 in lower case letters. Finding a verb thus capitalized seems to defy all known rules governing English capitalization in print. This specific phenomenon dates back to the Wycliffe Bible and seems to have been perpetuated in many if not all subsequent translations. Since _Bring_ was coupled with the place names of Bashan and Samaria in v. 1 (also capitalized), _Bring_ as a verb seems definitely out of place. Is this simply an error in printing, or was _Bring_ meant to be used as a noun within some form of steganography?


Capitalization: "Our Planet"

In the following sentence, "Science has made navigation to all parts of our planet possible," what are the capitalization rules for the words _our planet?_ > our Planet > > Our Planet


Etymology of the word "generator" when used in the context "random name generator"

I'm also curious to hear synonyms for this meaning-in-context; the idea that "this is a thing which generates other things algorithmically." Sorry for the pathetic definition that uses the word itself. :(


gourmand and gourmet

"gourmand" means someone who is excessively fond of eating and drinking, while "gourmet" someone who is a connoisseur of food and drink. Does "gour-" mean food?, "-mand" command and demand, and "-met" enjoy? Etymology says "gourmand" is not connected with "gourmet".


The efficient use of space

I'm looking for a word that means the study or practice of the efficient use of space, something ending -omics. I used to know it but I've got ergonomics stuck in my brain and that's not quite right.


How do you pronounce "cURL," the computer utility?

Are there programmers here? I'd like to know how you guys pronounce cURL. Because I don't live in a country that uses English, I haven't heard it yet.


Identify the subject, object and verb

In the sentence below I want to confirm whether I have correctly identified the subject, object and the verb (It's a sentence I made up as an example and hope it's correct, and if not please correct it too). > He wants them to be go away from the team. Subject: He   Verb: Wants   Object: Team or Them? Does "go away" also a verb in here? What kind of a work "Them" in this context?


Can ‘as’ be replaced by ‘which’?

In the following sentence, can "as" be replaced by "which"? If so, is there no difference between the two, in this case? Do we call ‘as’ in the example as relative pronoun, or just pronoun? > There was a lot more to magic, **as** Harry quickly found out, than waving > your wand and saying a few funny words. > > (Harry Potter book 1)


"Hi ladies" -- Is it rude to use this greeting for 3 people?

In addressing three people in an email isn't it more polite to use their names rather than "Hi ladies"? Also when you walk into a quad cubicle isn't it more polite to address people by their names? Grouping people together when there are only three is treating them as interchangeable, and is disrespectful isn't it?


Meaning of "Chase a Crooked Shadow"?

What is the meaning of chasing a crooked shadow? I read _Chase a crooked shadow_ in the Times of India newspaper, 10 Feb 2012, but could not understand the meaning of that title. Some context from article: > There was a man who was so disturbed by the sight of his own shadow and so > displeased with his own footsteps that he decided to get rid of both. The > method he hit upon was to run away from them, so he got up and ran, but > every time he put his foot down, there was another step, and all this while > his shadow kept up with him too without the slightest difficulty. ... This > parable is from the Chinese philosopher, Chuang Tzu. So many of our > experiences, particularly during the impressionable years of childhood, are > based on negative feedback on who we are ...


When is it acceptable to start a sentence with an "-ing" word?

Here's my example. It is a sentence that begins in the middle of a paragraph and I'm using it as a transition. "Living in Costa Rica also gave me the opportunity to interact with the local population." Or can I re-write the sentence like this: "Additionally, living in Costa Rica also gave me the opportunity to interact with the local population."


I am getting a drink from refrigerator

I am getting a drink from refrigerator. I take a drink out from refrigerator. Which is more accurates? Can I just simply say I take out the drink?


What does “Don’t squat with your spurs on” mean?

My friend e-mailed me a couple days ago a dozen of cowboys’ proverbs included in the book titled, “Don’t squat with your spurs on” by Texas Bix Bender. Though I presume this proverb (Don’t squat with your spurs on) admonishes not to do everything impetuously, I can’t figure out what’s wrong with squatting spurs on, as I’m utterly ignorant of cowboys, horse, riding boots, spurs, et cetera. The question may look naive to you, most Americans, but I don’t honestly understand the "figurative" meaning of the phrase. Does it mean projections of spurs can hurt you when you squat inadvertently with spurs on? I was unable to find out a concrete answer in Google Search, though I find the phrase in a row as a heading.


Meaning of 'fastidious'

Can this term be used to indicate a 'complainer', someone who is never satisfied with anything.


Verb question and use of am versus is

Is it correct to say: > . . . and she like I am happy that. . . . or would you say: > . . . and she like I, is happy that. . . . Microsoft Word spellchecker lets either of these be used.


What's the meaning of "root" in "you root for the favorite"?

What's the meaning of _root_ in this context? > You root for the favorite. You cry when they go away.


Tense Confusion in "If they have to/If they were to/If they had to"

Which is correct and what is the meaning of each sentence? >   1. Wickets will keep falling if they had to. >   2. Wickets will keep falling if they were to. >   3. Wickets will keep falling if they have to. > My guess is it's the second one because both "had to" and "have to" implies obligation or something necessary to be done in the past and present respectively. I don't know about the second case. Although I know I can write... > Wickets will keep falling inevitably no matter how much one tries to stop > it. But still if I want to write it in the above-mentioned ways then which one is correct?


"Commitment" vs. "work ethic"

I am writing a paper for a squad leader audition for marching band. We have to describe our strengths and weaknesses for each subject. The different subjects   * Leadership   * Commitment   * Attitude   * Punctuality   * Work Ethic   * Performance   * Lesson Attendance   * Marching Band When I got to the paragraph about commitment, I was trying to think of how it was different from work ethic, but I couldn't think of how it was. What are the differences between these two words?


Is "sustain the tuition fee" correct English?

Searching for it in google yields just 9 miserable results. So, I am puzzled - is it bad English, or is the opposite true - too good to be widely used? **EDIT** The complete sentence is: > However, having our children attend a good school is also very important to > us, so I have been using the School Report Cards by Fraser Institute as a > guiding tool in my search for a good public school (unfortunately, we are > unable to sustain the tuition fee for a private school). English is not my native language, so Google is my primary guide to what is widely used and what is not.


What's meaning of "get to the meat of"?

For example, "let's get to the meat of the problem"? When could I use this phrase? Does this mean "let's get to the most important part of the problem"?


"Lowercase", "lower-case", or "lower case"

Is it _lowercase_ , _lower-case_ , or _lower case_?


Which one is more British: "car hire" or "rent a car"?

I am wondering which one is more commonly used in the United Kingdom: _car hire_ or _rent a car_?


Is "many fewer combinations" correct?

Is the expression "many fewer combinations" correct? It only gets about 600 hits on Google, against 1,200 for "a lot fewer combinations". What would be a correct way of expressing the idea contained in "many fewer combinations"? would it be best rephrased using something like "a large reduction in the number of combinations", or something similar?


Single word for "product or service"

Is there a single word that can represent the phrase "product or service" as in this sentence: Companies won't succeed unless they can provide a wanted **product or service** at a fair price.


What's the term for siblings born 1+ years apart on the same day?

What is the term for two siblings born on the same calendar day, one or more years apart? I know there's a term, and I'd know it if I saw it, but I can't for the life of me remember it.


Synonym for force-feed?

I can't find one anywhere and can't think of one either, but this is a clever group and maybe someone has a synonym for force-feed, in the sense not of forcible indoctrination, but physically forcing someone to eat something.


Is a predicative adjunct part of a noun, or is it part of the sentence?

I just recently learned about predicative adjunct which is present in the following sentence by the "ready to race" adjectival phrase. I wonder whether the phrase that functions as a predicative adjunct is actually part of the predicand, or the sentence? > John, ready to race, started the car. I'm asking whether "ready to race" should be considered part of the subject "John" or whether it's a phrase that interrupts the flow of the sentence. I'm comparing this with the following sentence, which has a relative clause: > John, who was ready to race, started the car. which, as far as I know, considers the relative clause "who was ready to race" as part of the noun "John". More technically, if we're discussing in Penn Treebank parse tree format, would it be parsed as the following first option or the second?               (S       (NP (NNP John)         (, ,)         (ADJP (JJ ready)           (S             (VP (TO to)               (VB race))))         (, ,))       (VP (VBD started)         (NP (DT the) (NN car)))       (. .))                    (S       (NP (NNP John))       (, ,)       (ADJP (JJ ready)         (S           (VP (TO to)             (VB race))))       (, ,)       (VP (VBD started)         (NP (DT the) (NN car)))       (. .))


Any website to look up words with similar pronunciation or spelling?

Is there any website(s) to look up words with similar pronunciation or spelling? For example: _stack_ , _steak_ , _stake_ , _stick_. (It can help me as a non-native English speaker to learn confusing words.)


What does "The Quality of Mercy is not Strained" mean?

I think I know what Shakespeare meant for Portia to be saying when he wrote this dialog between Shylock and Portia, and I found a decent discussion on the web here. What I want to know is, what do people mean, when they quote this figure-of- speech by itself. It seems to have acquired a meaning of its own, a proverb that in the end, embodies some meaning which maybe is supposed to be clear to everybody, but which is not clear to me. Is it used by those who quote it, for example, meant as a rejoinder or insult against someone who seems stubborn, recalcitrant, and uninterested in the mores of the larger society? Has anyone seen a cataloging of other places in literature where this quote is used, or is the quote largely used in conversation only?


What does "Way out of a paper bag" mean?

What do they mean when they say "He can't find himself way out of paper bag?" Or "Couldn't manage himself out of paper bag?" Also what is the history of this statement? What is the origin?


Are there any better (perhaps business-oriented) alternatives to "pitting against" for this situation?

Recently a colleague demonstrated a shared Microsoft OneNote notebook in which he and other members of his team posted their weekly accomplishments in sort of bulleted lists. The idea was that they could monitor one another's bandwidth so they could assist one another. I saw it differently however: to me it seemed that it sort of pitted them against one another to see who could have more bullets on their list of accomplishments. Is there any better term than "pitted against" to describe this method of trying to motivate someone by guilt or by always trying not to seem the team's weakest link? It isn't quite the stick, but it definitely isn't the carrot.


What would be the proper term for the head of an Academy?

I'm reading a book, and I'm constantly seeing the name 'Chairman' appear to describe the head of an Academy that students of all grades can attend. An "Elevator School" if you will. The problem I face, is that to me, in English, a Chairman is someone who deals with businesses, not Academics. I can potentially see alternate uses such as 'Director,' or even 'Principal,' but I'm not certain which one would be more correct? I tried to do some research through Google, but I couldn't find any one place that solidified the titles of Academic places, as it seemed more to be a "What sounds more important? Let's use that." sort of deal. In the UK I've heard that Charter Schools call them 'Chairman,' but in the United States I've heard 'Dean' or 'Headmaster.' What is the difference? **EDIT** : This is a Semi-Private School, basically, for students from Primary through to Graduation, but not including University/College. It does include Student Dormitories as well. Thanks!


Is this a paradox, oxymoron, or irony?

The sentence is > Laughter was his way of expressing his alarm and despair. I know this is the definition of an oxymoron: > a figure of speech in which apparently contradictory terms appear in > conjunction And that seems like a reasonable fit; however, is it better to say that this is a paradox? Or should I just stick with irony?


"Multimedia" or "media" for menu name

I'm developing a website on which photos and videos will be shared. But I couldn't decide on the main menu name to use under which there will be two subcategories _Photo Gallery_ and _Videos_. Which one do you think makes more sense to visitors: _multimedia_ or _media_? Once they see it, they should immediately realize this menu is all about photos, videos and things related to graphics.


"Any English I have learned" vs. "All the English I have learned"

Is it correct to say: **_Any English** I have learned has been from movies and the Internet_ or is it better: **_All the English** I have learned has been from movies and the internet?_


Word for someone unaware they are different or disabled

There is a word that describes someone who is unaware that they are different or disabled.For example, someone who can't smell but is unaware of what smelling is so they think they are the same as everyone else. What is this word?


"What do you want to be when you grow up?"

The usual question and answer seem to be of the form > What do you want to be when you **grow up**? > > I want to be a singer when I **grow up**. Should it not be > What do you want to be when you **have grown up**? > > I want to be a singer when I **have grown up**. Here we have interpreted _grow up_ as the process at whose end one becomes a singer. Should the first pair be considered correct simply because of its accepted usage, or is there an alternative explanation for this?


Does the phrase "The hills have eyes" predate the movie?

I'm under the impression that the phrase "the hills have eyes" predates the movie (including the 1977 one), but I can't find any use of it on Google. How can I find out if the phrase existed first?


Meaning of "one of the most XXX"

One frequently hears something being described as _one of the most important XXX_ or _one of the best XXX_. Isn't _most important_ or _best_ (any superlative really) unique by definition? How can something be one of a set of most important things?


Is "blah blah blah" the most common spelling?

What is the most common or correct spelling of "blah blah blah"?   * blah blah blah    * blah blah   * bla bla bla    * bla bla My question stems from when I first wrote it as "bla bla bla" in an English text, but a friend told me it should have been written as "blah blah" so I decided to ask here. Before that I had checked it out on some online English dictionary and Google search but I wasn't able to clear it out.


Is "I'm dead serious" formal?

In a movie I heard an actor saying "I'm dead serious". I looked up the dictionary and found that "dead" in this context means "really". Is it formal? Can we use it in business meetings?


"to comment out" before the era of programming

I think many people here are programmers since stack sites started out as stackoverflow originally, which is about programming. My question here is about the phrasal verb "to comment out". It makes a lot of sense to those who know that in programming you can easily turn some part of the code (usually a line) into simply a comment that would have no bearing on the code's execution. For example,               print: Hello world       can be easily turned into a comment in this way:               ; print: Hello world        Programmers would say in this case, "I have commented out the line." It is absolutely logical and makes sense to me. However, I wonder if this phrasal verb ever was used before the programming came about. Did it exist in those times? If yes, in what situation it was normally used then?


Plural indefinite pronouns?

Can some indefinite pronouns be plural? One commenter on Mr K's Grammar World says they cannot. He also says the following examples contain quantifiers, and not indefinite pronouns. >   * _Many have_ expressed their views. >   * John likes coffee but not tea. I think both are good. >   * I'm glad to say that _fewer are_ smoking these days. >   * I'm sure that _others have_ tried before us. >   * _They say_ that vegetables are good for you. >   * _All is_ forgiven. - _All have_ arrived. >   * There _is more_ over there. - _More are_ coming. >   * _Here is_ some. - _Some have_ arrived. >


Past perfect or past simple in combination with present perfect?

Suppose I received a document from my colleague, studied it and then gave him feedback in a letter. How should I construct the following sentense? > I have examined the document you _gave_ me and... or it should be > I have examined the document you _had given_ me and... and just in case (though I hardly believe it is correct) > I have examined the document you _have given_ me and... From one point of view both he and I know when he gave me the document so one should use past simple. On the other hand past perfect might be used here to indicate that the moment he gave it to me occurred before I read it.


What is the correct capitalisation of the word "sonar"?

What is the correct capitalisation of the word "sonar" (and why)?


Is it right to ask "Where is the world's most fresh water?" without using the word found or located?

Is it right to ask this question: > Where is the world's most fresh water? Can I ask this question without using the word "found" > Where is the world's most fresh water found?


If the sun rises at morning, what to say about the moon?

If the sun is said to rise at **morning** , should I say 'the moon rises at night'? Or is there another expression?


"Ask me anything" and "Ask anything to me"

There are some sentences I hear regularly: >   1. **Ask me** anything >   2. Ask anything **to** me. >   3. If you **ask me whether** he was right, I would tell you "No". >   4. If you **ask me about whether** he was right, .... >   5. If you **ask to me whether** he was right, I would tell you "No". >   6. If you **ask to me about** whether he was right, ... > So I hear the construction between ask + me + something but I like to know which sentences are correct above? And also could you please explain the grammatical rule of these sentences? And more quick thing, I told my native english speaker friend this "Do you know whether Eric asked me today". And his reply was "I don't know what Eric asked you about." However I meant to ask whether Eric ever looked for me or not. Was my question wrong?


Could the term "elephant" have derived from "olfactory?"

The online etymology dictionary gives " _Oliphant_ " as the predecessor of " _elephant_." Dictionary.com defines " _olfactory_ " as "pertaining to the sense of smell." Given the similarity of " _oliphant_ " and " _olfactory_ ," could the first word be derived from the second? I'll close the loop by noting that an elephant is noted for its "nose" (trunk).


Are these sentences grammatically correct?? How to correct?

"Control of magnetic multidomain states is a central challenge in developing multilevel spintronic devices. Due to the random domain nucleation process, it is hard to be achieved in a normal ferromagnet.", "We demonstrate that both traditional spin transfer torque and spin-orbit torque play the essential roles in the controllable domain nucleation.", and this one "Compared with previous reports that the magnetization can only be switched between two uniformly magnetized states, we show that the current induced magnetization switching can be achieved between any two multidomain sates.". The referee says that these sentences are grammatically incorrect, but i cannot find. Thanks a lot.


English word similar to Unagi

I am looking for a word (or two words) that means something similar to "unagi" as it is used in the TV show _Friends_ (i.e., the concept they were trying to go for, not the fish!) - a total sense of awareness of yourself and your surroundings.


Is it proper to use ordinal suffixes on fractions?

I know in more formal writing, spelling out fractions is preferred (e.g. two- thirds), and in math no suffix is used, but I frequently see ordinal suffixes being used on fractions (e.g. 2/3rds), even from reputable news sources. _2/3_ is already pronounced _two-thirds_ and, to me, the addition of _rds_ just looks weird and is certainly unnecessary. Google turns up millions of examples: > https://www.google.com/search?q=2%2F3rds Even legit news sources: > http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57369226-503544/florida-primary-exit- > polls-2-3rds-say-debates-mattered/ Wikipedia has nothing to say about it: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraction_(mathematics)#Pronunciation_and_spelling Is this proper English or just an undefined grey area?


Do plaza and square have a different meaning?

Do _plaza_ and _square_ have a different meaning, when referring to a place?   From my English studies, I recall that I was taught that plaza and square were two different kinds of "square". Is it true? Are the words used as synonymous?


What to call the lump on skin from mosquito bite?

What word can I use to describe the small lump on the skin seen after a mosquito bite?


Would a restaurant name of "Punjab House" be offensive?

We are looking for a good name for an Indian restaurant that specializes in Punjabi food. We have heard that naming the restaurant "Punjab House" would be offensive. What specifically makes it inappropriate or offensive? I was told it is a derogatory reference, but I don't see examples of that anywhere. I'm specifically asking for any ways that it may be taken offensively, or any explanations why it would be regarded as an offense.


Can a participle contain a comparison to other object?

Can a participle contain a comparison to another object in the same sentence? For example, is the following sentence grammatically correct? "I can't see any vehicle moving at higher speed that travels on the left lane compared to the vehicles on the right lane". If it is not correct, please suggest another form for comparing two (or more) objects when it is needed to mention at least two actions that first object is performing. I would like to avoid using twice (or more) the same relative pronoun such as: "that". Thank you in advance.


Is "thank's" an alternative correct spelling?

My colleague who is American spells "thank's" (with an apostrophe) and when I ask him why he said because it's "more formal" and "he uses American English". Is this true? Can you really spell "thank's" in American English and is it really considered more formal? EDIT: Well, I _do_ know it's not true. I just wanted to have someone _native_ explain it so it is more persuasive. And I have seen this incorrect spelling so many time that judging _just by usage_ \- it is correct :) Just Google search gives about 2,500,000 occurrences... You may even be easily mislead by a dictionary title and it doesn't say it's wrong!


Considering - meaning in this sentence

What is the meaning of considering in this sentence? We're just fine, **considering**.


Do both of these introductions mean the same thing and make sense?

I work with someone whom I have not yet introduced myself to; someone usually introduces a new person around the office but I wasn’t in on this person’s first day, so I missed that. Anyway, on introducing myself, I was wondering if the following would make sense? > I don’t know that we have been introduced. Does it mean the same thing as: > I don’t think we’ve been introduced.


Awkward sentence

I am trying to improve this sentence. It sounds awkward to me, How can I rephrase it so it seems better and is more lucid? Which variation is the best?   1. The biggest thing that I have improved in since I started this job is my ability to get the kids who do this program to follow my directions and do what I ask of them    2. My biggest improvement has been in my ability to get the kids to follow my directions and do what I ask of them    3. My biggest improvement has been in my ability to get the kids who do this program to follow my directions and do what I ask of them?


"Let's see how can we do this"?

I'm reading the C++ boost library and the following sentence drew my attention: > Once the two steps have been successfully completed, the process can start > writing to and reading from the address space to send to and receive data > from other processes. Now, **let's see how can we do this** using > Boost.Interprocess. Here's the source page. I assume the sentence in bold should be written as **let's see how we can do this**. Has the original sentence been mistakenly written by a person(e.g., a non-native speaker) or was this reversed order intended to emphasize something?


is there any difference between "you'd" and "you would" in the meaning?

As in the title, is there any difference between the following sentences. `You'd` better put your results to another place.   `You would` better put your results to another place. And, When I use any of them ?


What kind of rain is "sprinkles"?

It appears that MSN Weather has chosen an amusing adjective (from my British point of view) for the weather today: ![Sprinkles](http://i.stack.imgur.com/5crcZ.png) I'm assuming the precipitation (sadly) won't contain any hundreds-and- thousands. To a British person, what is this equivalent to: drizzle, mizzle or deluge?


Word combination with “eternally”

I am currently thinking of engraving text for our wedding rings. Idea is to engrave some nice combination of two words (one word per ring) in order to get phrase close to “forever together”. I do like word _eternity_ , so one combination that I could think of is _eternally together_. Is that word combination "sound" and correct in terms of usage? Maybe there is another option close in meaning?


Where to use a "noun + noun"?

Sometimes I cannot understand how to use it. For, example > a model car This expression makes sense and means "the best car". Another example. I have an exercise and a guide for the exercise. A native speaker told me that "an exercise guide" makes no sense and that I should use "a guide of an exercise" instead. Could anybody give a clear explanation about two nouns in a row?


Rephrasing "A are what is B" to "A are what are B"?

I see sentences like > They are what is remembered. > > More troops are what is going to be needed. And got me wonderin': Can I rephrase them this way? > They are what are remembered. > > More troops are what are going to be needed. Which way is better?


The "Nobody claps, one person claps, everyone claps" Phenomenon

What is the word to describe the phenomenon where at first nobody has the intension to clap (after a performance, lecture, etc). But suddenly one person starts clapping loudly, breaking the silence, and there goes the applause! Everyone starts clapping!


What does it mean to "hazard a guess"?

I know it's an idiomatic synonym for "make a guess" or "take a guess," but what is the underlying basis for the phrase? Is "hazarding a guess" more dangerous than "taking a guess?"


Is the sentence "We are invested" correct? I found it in a blog and was wondering whether it is correct. I do not want to discuss the usage, but just if the combination of "are" + "invested" is grammatically correct and has the correct sentence structure.


Is "be wearing" improper English?

If I were to say, > Can't I just be wearing my swim suit already? Would "be wearing" be improper English?


Why are pronouns always given in the same order? I, you, he, etc?

**Not just English** Why are pronouns when conjugating verbs always given in the same order.   * I   * You   * He   * She   * We   * You Plural   * They (or he's and she's depending on the language) Does anyone know?


"Only" vs "but only"

Do they mean the same when used in a sentence? Example: > A scream would occasionally escape from her, **only** to be absorbed by the > dark metallic walls. > > A scream would occasionally escape from her, **but only** to be absorbed by > the dark metallic walls. Do both sentences mean the same? If not, what would be the difference?


What do you think?

> I think of this place as my home. (OALD) Consulting the sentence above, can I make an interrogative as these?:   [a] As what do you think of this place?   [b] What do you think of this place as? Or is this alone, _what do you think of this place_ , possible? Or none?


Can "that" have a meaning of "although"?

Can _that_ have a meaning of _although_? For example, > He was too sleepy even to be surprised **that** the people in the portraits > along the corridors whispered and pointed as they passed.


Why "go to the movies" and not "go to a movie"

Why do we use _Do you ever go to the movies?_ and not _Do you ever go to a movie?_ Is the latter also correct?


Term to describe the mass changeover in land ownership

I am looking for a word to describe the above. The context is where, after the Irish famine in the 1840's, entire villages were abandoned and the land was re-distributed to new tenants. This happened on a mass scale, and I was wondering if there was a term for such a replacement of population with the suitable conotations.


What's the original meaning of "Abraxis"?

Today I realized that I'd been running into the name 'Abraxis' in quite a few different places, and I didn't know what it meant. If it appeared once or twice as the name of a fictional character or a music group, I wouldn't think much of it. None of the occurrences are very prominent. But put together, they suggest a common referent. What are they named after? A web search on 'Abraxis' turns up a variety of businesses and other organizations that don't have any obvious common thread. None of the web sites I visited offer a clue as to why the name Abraxis was chosen. I'm beginning to think that most of the founders don't know what it means either; it just sounds cool. Most likely it refers to someone or someplace in history, but I've been unable to find anything online that looked old enough to be original -- a main referent after which other recent instances of Abraxis were named. I'm pretty sure the DC Comic character is not it.


What is the difference between a "stanza" and a "verse", as applied to English literature?

What is the difference between 'stanza' and 'verse' in English Literature (Poetry)? I've read one of my classmate's essays and the word 'verse' cropped up - I thought that the word 'verse' was usually used for song/lyrics and was quite confused when it was used in that context (Poem analysis).


Large amounts of English text needed

I must admit that I'm unsure whether or not this is the right forum for this question. It may belong to statistics and AI also. If there exists a more suitable forum, then tell me. The thing is, I want to analyse a lot of English text for an AI project (Confabulation theory). Is there an online collection of freely available English texts? Books, news would be preferred — scientific texts will properly not do, due to large amounts of math etc.


It's fine by me

"Fine by me" seems like an unusual use of the word 'by'. Is it unique, or are there other cases like this? Is there a special term for this specific pattern?


I'd tick you in all safe at night

Want the meaning of the above sentence in US english langauge


How should I understand "a hundred years on" in this sentence?

I learned the following sentence from _The Economist_. > **A hundred years on** , superconductors have found widespread use in just > one technology, magnetic resonace imaging, which lets doctors peer inside > patients' bodies. How should I understand the phrase "a hundred years on"? There are so many meanings of the preposition "on" in the dictionary. What kind of dictionary should I refer to when I have similar problems?


Is "catch up" used in formal language as in "We will catch up sometime"?

I wrote "we will catch up sometime" to one of my new friends. When I searched the Internet I found that people used it in informal situations. Is it okay to use this in formal writing as I did since the friendship is very new? What else could I have used? I tend to think that the answer depends on culture. My purpose in context: I want to put the decision of when and where to meet, to the other person.


Word that means "healing" or "spiritually healing"?

I know there is a word that means 'healing' as in. "The therapy session was very **__** ", blank meaning it was healing (possibly of emotional wounds from the past)


One word for the ta-daa! pose?

I can hardly describe this, which is why I need the one word. When you shout "Ta-daa!" and throw your arms out at your sides, does anyone have a one-word description for what you're doing? Argh.


What the #$@&%*! is that called?

Is there a name for the use of symbols in place of curse words, for example `#$@&%*!`?


How do I cite a Stack Exchange answer in MLA?

I'd like to cite an answer to a Stack Exchange question in an MLA-format paper. What's the correct way to do this? Should I cite the specific answer I'm using, or the question page as a whole, and if the latter who counts as the author? Everyone whose contributed? Word has done it as such:               GordonM. Why is Global State so Evil? 10 May 2012. Web Page. 21 April 2014.         <http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/148108/why-is-global-state-so-evil>.


Word to describe "when someone describes something in too much detail"

There's a word I thought I knew at some point, but can no longer remember what it was. I tried looking up various thesaurus websites to no avail. Similar words to what I'm looking for, but not quite:   * Elaborate: too neutral -- I'm looking for a more negative connotation.   * Elucidate: too positive a connotation.   * Ruminate: The direction is correct, but it is about "thinking about something in too much detail" vs actually describing it so.   * Describe ad nauseum: 3 words, and awkward sounding. Example sentence: "He began to **___ _** the topic" To clarify, I'm looking for a verb.


A verb meaning to have something pointed "inserted" on one's leg?

Example: > The bird [...] its beak on my arm. I thought about _stab_ but I think it sounds weird applied to a bird's beak. What other verb can I use?


Capitalisation of "chess"

When talking about the game of _chess_ do I capitalise or not? If not why not? Example excerpt: > I have picked **chess** as it is a popular, well understood game. Even if > the programming unit doesn’t know the concepts behind chess there is a > wealth of easily-researchable information available for the developer to > find answers promptly. Chess, as well as being ubiquitous, has some well- > defined behaviour which drew me towards using it as the problem domain for > my experiment.


What does “Turn a lemon(s) into lemonade” exactly mean?

In association with my question about possibility of using Etch-a-Sketch as a verb, I found the expression “turn a lemon into lemonade” in the related article of Five Star. It says: > Etch-a-Sketch had a dilemma as it faced one of three choices: > >   1. Say and do nothing, and wait for the story to go away. >   2. Object to the use of the Etch-a-Sketch brand in such contexts, and > publicly reinforce its core brand values. >   3. Seize an opportunity to _turn a potential lemon into lemonade_. > > > Happily, the folks at Etch-a-Sketch chose the last option. As I was interested in the expression “turn a lemon into lemonade,” I googled, and found the following example of usage: “How to _turn lemons into lemonade_. Bob Chambers. Most of us are so busy building our business that we often forget some of the simple principles that will turn our business into a powerhouse.” We have Japanese sayings 災いを転じて福となす or 奇貨とするmeaning “turn disaster into fortunateness.“ But “turn lemons into lemonade” seems to imply to make an ordinary thing into a special or superior thing. Am I right? Is this a popular English phrase?


Attacking by "Taking the high road"

Situation: There are two political opponents running for the same position. In politician #1's commercial, he attacks #2 by pointing out flaws in his campaign or history. #2's attack is more clever. He "takes the high road" by saying that he'd never stoop so low as to attack his opponent, while this itself is an attack as it implies his opponent is beneath him, since he has gone so low as to directly attack him. What's this type of attack called?


Hip Hip Hooray!

I am looking for the etymology and history of the cheer “Hip Hip Hooray”. I’m curious due to its interesting entry in Wikipedia, which reads thusly: > The call was recorded in England in the beginning of the 19th century in > connection with making a toast. It has been suggested that the word “hip” > stems from a medieval Latin acronym, “ _Hierosolyma Est Perdita_ ”, meaning > “Jerusalem is lost”, a term that gained notoriety in the German Hep hep > riots. Another claim is that the Europeans picked up the _Mongol_ > exclamation “hooray” as an enthusiastic cry of bravado and mutual > encouragement, according to Jack Weatherford’s book Genghis Khan and the > Making of the Modern World. It’s all rather intriguing! It is all the more so since the _Hep-Hep_ anti- Semitic riots took place in _1819_. Unfortunately, none of the sources cited on the Wikipedia page appear to be all that etymologically useful. There are a couple of loosely related questions on this site; one for hip and the other for hooray. The latter carries no mention of the exotic Mongol touch. So, in many ways, this question requests the etymology of the three different pieces of the puzzle: _hip_ , _hooray_ and _hip hip hooray_ itself. **Update (for the bounty):** If the anti-Semitic (and Latin) connection is/isn’t a load of horse manure, then I’d appreciate (dis)confirmation as well as information (if possible) on the source of said manure. Some sites cite _Gabay’s Copywriter’s Compendium (2006)_ as the point of origin of the Hep-Hep connection. A similar request applies for _hooray_ ’s Mongolian connection—Jack Weatherford’s book, _Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World_.


Are there any expressions that describe going from a bad to a worse situation?

Are there idioms or expressions in English that describe going from one bad situation to one that's even worse? I heard "between a rock and hard place" but this describes a dilemma not really a transition. I am looking for an expression that describes someone trying to get out of a bad situation but after much effort, the situation only got worse.


The word "lad" in the south of the U.S

Is there any possibility that a farmer from the southern part of the U.S. will use the word "lad", or is it completely 'Brit'? the context is naming a pet (a mule) "lad".


How can I tell when an abbreviation is an acronym?

I know an acronym is an abbreviation that can be pronounced as one word, but when is an abbreviation pronounced as one word? Making myself clearer, how do we know whether or not it is pronounced as one word or not? Is there any definite rule to go by? For example, today, we were discussing " **AYAD** ", whether or not this was an abbreviation or acronym. We didn't know, and we didn't know how to tell whether or not it was an acronym. So,:   1. Is there a rule to go by to determine an acronym from an abbreviation?    2. If there is, what is it? Can someone please provide some details on this? Cheers!


It's a nice vista!

I overheard someone use the term " **vista** " while describing a view. Being a non-native speaker, I would have chosen the simpler form: " **It's a nice view.** " Could some generous soul explain when it's a _vista_ and when it's a _view_? Are these interchangeable in most circumstances?


What does "in his life or in his present errand" mean?

In the novel _The Crystal Man_, in Chapter I, there is this sentence: > He was not entirely at peace with society: there was something in his life > or in his present errand which he desired to conceal. Please can anyone explain what "present errand" means? And how can I rewrite this sentence using other words, but with the same meaning?


"Out of" vs "outside" of city

I would like to know what would be the correct sentence here. I just want to say that I left the city on the weekend. > I went out of the city on Saturday.   >  I went outside the city on Saturday.


Which of the following sentences are correct?

Can someone please tell me which of the following sentences are correct and which are the differences between them? >   1. Prove me wrong. >   2. Prove I'm wrong. >   3. Prove me I'm wrong. >   4. Prove me that I'm wrong. >   5. Prove to me I'm wrong. >   6. Prove to me that I'm wrong. >


Has the suffix "-trix" acquired a pejorative meaning in recent years?

A couple days ago I needed the correct word for a female aviator, which I figured was _aviatress_. A dictionary.com search provided _aviatress_ , _aviatrice_ and _aviatrix_ as acceptable choices. Coincidentally, I had just read this EL&U post about the origin of the -trix suffix, and so I explored other Latin-based agent nouns. I found that _legislatress_ exists along side _legislatrix_ as does _benefactress_ with _benefactrix_ and _orator_ with _oratress_. Not so with _dominatrix_ , though. It seems to have maintained only the -trix suffix. Dictionary.com has this to say about the -trix suffix in modern use: > Most nouns in -trix have dropped from general use, so that terms like > aviatrix, benefactrix, legislatrix, oratrix, and proprietrix occur rarely or > not at all in present-day English. Dominatrix has maintained, and most people would only ever use it in the realms of sado-masochism and sexual role play. My question is, why has the -trix suffix fallen off and been replaced by the more sibilant "-tress"? And, have we avoided the -trix suffix to avoid any unintended association with the sado-masochistic sense of dominatrix?


Can you buy things "for cheap"?

The first line of this news story says: > Call it space grave robbery for a cause: imagine scavenging defunct > communication satellites for their valuable parts and recycling them to > build brand new ones **for cheap**. I've heard people use that "for cheap" construction before, but thought it was dialectal (mid-to-northern English). I was surprised to see it in an NZ publication. Why does that almost pass grammatical muster, whereas "for expensive" (for example) really stinks?


Is it accurate to say a baby is x inches taller or longer?

So today I was sending a picture of my new born to my British manager. I was saying that the baby looks a little bit different than the picture now he is 4 cm **taller** She replied me saying _taller_ or _longer_? I didn't actually think about it before. I thought that taller will be the correct term as this is how we describe it as human beings ... Then I thought longer might be more accurate cause technically he cannot stand erect! Which term is more accurate? Thanks for your insight PS: I am not a native English speaker.


is this sentence using "but instead" correctly?

Someone who is beating around the bush is a person who avoids the main point of what they are saying, but instead talk around it. I am doubting this sentence because it just sounds weird to have "avoids the main point" and then the use of "but instead" and "talk around it" Would it be correct if you substitute "doesn't get to the gist" instead of "avoids the main point"?


Pronunciation of "lib"

I've been a computer programmer for many years, and recently my father has been learning computer programming. Programmers often times will use a folder called "lib." Not a native English speaker, my father pronounced "lib" like *lib*eria - short for "library." When I corrected him and told him it's pronounced "lib" like *li*t, he asked why if "lib" is supposed to be short for "library." I couldn't think of an answer why. I thought of other words such as   * "pup", short for "puppy" is pronounced like the first part of puppy   * "mic", short for "microphone" is pronounced like the first part of microphone Why is "lib" not pronounced like the first part of library?


Looking for a certain word

What do you call a person who advocates the use, against an enemy, of methods borrowed from that enemy, or applies the same moral standards as the enemy does or otherwise copies the enemy's behavior or techniques?


Is "walk on foot" acceptable?

I understand that we can say "walk on a hurt foot", but can we simply say "walk on foot" to mean go somewhere on foot? For example, is this sentence correct: "I walked on foot for a long time"?


What's the difference between "judicial" and "juridical"?

I have found the definitions below from Merriam-Webster (my bold) and, aside from the fact that judicial has a wider use (and definition) than juridical (most of which I cut from this excerpt). When using each word as per my highlighted definition, is there a technical difference in what is being referred to or are they synonyms? > ju·rid·i·cal adj \ju̇-ˈri-di-kəl\ > > Definition of JURIDICAL > > 1: **of or relating to the administration of justice** or the office of a > judge > > 2: of or relating to law or jurisprudence : legal > ju·di·cial adj \jü-ˈdi-shəl\ > > Definition of JUDICIAL > > 1a : **of or relating to** a judgment, the function of judging, **the > administration of justice** , or the judiciary (judicial processes)


What’s the difference between “Take yes for an answer” and “Say yes for an answer”?

Today’s (December 7) Washington Post carries the following quote from the Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s remark on the back-and-forth debates of raising the debt ceiling in the congress as the Quote of the Day. > “What we have here is a case of Republicans here in the Senate once again > not **_taking yes for an answer_**. Now the Republican leader objects to his > own idea. So I guess we have a filibuster of his own bill." I don’t think I’ve heard the phrase “Take yes,” though I say and hear “Say yes / no” pretty often. I found “Take yes” by “googling” in the title of the book, “Why Great Leaders **_Don't Take Yes for an Answer_** : Managing for Conflict and Consensus” written by Michael A. Roberto, professor of Management at Bryant University and visiting associate professor of New York University. From the context of Mr. Reid’s quote and the above title of a book, I guess “Take yes for an answer” means to make a resolute decision, or vote for Yes to go forward, but am not sure. How does “Take yes” differ from the colloquial “Say yes”? Is it a popular word like “say yes / no,” or a political or management terminology?


What is the "Ocean Sea"?

I've come across the term "Ocean Sea" and wonder what it means, especially compared to simpler terms like "ocean" or "sea"? Is this a recognized term in English, either current or historical?


...wound sky down to desert

"Well out of the city, out where the first of a crop of white windmills, lazily turning, **wound sky down to desert** , Driver sailed without warning onto an exit ramp and into a one-eighty." [ _Drive_ , James Sallis] In the sentence above, is the bolded phrase talking about the turning direction of the windmills, or about something different?


Is there any difference in meaning between "cannot afford to + verb" and "cannot + verb"?

Is there any difference in meaning between the 2 patterns: "cannot afford to + verb" and "cannot + verb"? For example:   1. _I cannot afford to wait forever_ versus _I cannot wait forever_.   2. _I cannot afford to go_ versus _I cannot go_.


Why is there no comma before "and" before this independent clause?

> This was at a moment when the magistrate, overcome with tiredness, had gone > down into the garden of his house **and** , dark, bent beneath some > implacable thought, like Tarquin cutting the heads off the tallest poppies > with his cane, **_M. de Villefort_** was knocking down the long, dying stems > of the hollyhocks that rose on either side of the path like ghosts of those > flowers that had been so brilliant in the seasons that had passed away. Why is there no comma before the bolded _and_? My understanding is that there is an independent clause on each side of the bolded _and_. By the way, the subject of the two independent clauses is the same.


Asking a "Do you have..." question without do-support

Is the following sentence correct English? > Have you the address? The address in question is obvious to the person being asked. It's normal to ask such a question as "Do you have the address?" or even "Have you got the address?" But is it acceptable to use **just** the verb _have_ without _do_ or _got_?


Can 'filtered' be ambiguous?

I'm working with algorithms that filter their input (that is, remove part of it), and I'm not sure this phrase is unambiguous: > This function returns the filtered elements. Is it obvious that _filtered_ here means _the elements that have passed the filter_? Or could it mean _the elements that have been filtered out_? If both are present, I believe it's easier to eliminate the ambiguity: >   1. This function returns a pair of lists _(filtered_out,filtered_in)_ . >   2. This function returns a pair of lists _(filtered_out,filtrate)_. > Buf if I see just a variable named _filtered_ , without the __out_ and __in_ suffixes, I'm not sure which one should be inferred.


"In almost" vs "Almost in"

Which of the following is correct? >   1. In almost all cases, ... >   2. Almost in all cases, ... >


What is the meaning of "He was a myth made man"?

I can't understand the meaning. Is it "He was a mythical person" or "He was a myth that became a man"?


More general term than "slashdotting"

"Slashdotting", or the slashdot effect is where a high profile website has a link to a low profile, low traffic website, and the increased web traffic on the latter causes it to slow down or crash. Are there any hypernyms for this term, not limited to web sites being degraded? Of something being recommended by someone or something high profile, causing more people to visit or use it, resulting in it becoming overcrowded or otherwise degraded? An example of that can be seen here, where a commenter has claimed that restaurants with the highest number of positive reviews on sites such as TripAdvisor or Yelp often will be crowded and have prices inflated, presumably as a result of its positive rating on those sites - increased real-life visitors from a high profile website causing a degraded experience.


"A lot of nature " ....can I say it this way?

How can I use the word nature when I want to describe different places with different nature?.Can I say > I like living in a place with A LOT OF NATURE.


Idiom for opportunistically exploiting a situation to one's advantage

I was wondering what various figures of speech could be used to describe a situation where somebody exploits a situation in order to push their own agenda. For example in Persian we have 'Catching a fish from muddy water'. Are there any English equivalents? **EDIT** Per request, let me clarify further what I have in mind: I'm looking for a figure of speech used to describe a situation: say something happens, and the previously dogmatic opinion of somebody about the something, could then be somewhat justified after an accident, and that person would gloat and say 'I told you so', much like politicians would do from a given incident and use the turn of events to justify their own agenda. What idiom could you then use to reply to that person? Like 'You're really [idiom about opportunistically exploiting] now'. A real example here: Politician A and B are engaged in a debate. Politician A has been running the country for the past 4 years and has been lenient toward gun control, whereas politician B and his party have been critical of this leniency from the outset. During these 4 years under Politican A's reign, society has been very safe and healthy, with no gun crime whatsoever, and the population have actually been happy with Politcian A's gun policies. A month before elections, a psychotic army conscript starts shooting at people in the street and kills 2 people. Politician B will then launch a scathing attack on Politcian A for being reckless in his decision making and not heeding the advice of others, intentionally failing to point to the fact that the person committing the crime is an army personnel and has had his guns for a long time, and would have had his weapons with or without a stringent nationwide gun policy. What would be a good figure of speech to describe Politician B's exploit of the incident to his own advantage?


"I wish I would wake up early"

Is this sentence correct? Some grammar rules say that 'would' shouldn't be used when its subject is the same as 'wish' subject. It 'would be illogical', the rule says. I came a cross this sentence and it seems to break the rule? What is the reason?


Is there a term for the direct opposite?

Suppose I have two words, let's take "true" and "false". "False", is the direct opposite of "truth", and is an antonym of "truth". However, the word I am looking for is not "antonym". If I was to ask what was the "direct opposite" of "black", the answer would have been "white". What word could have replaced "direct opposite" in this case? Other examples include "dark" and "light", or "big" to "small". It is true these are antonyms, but these are special antonyms, they are the only ones that are the "equivalent opposites". "big" has other antonyms like "tiny", but "tiny" is the equivalent of "huge". "big"'s equivalent in opposite is "small". EDIT, The word I am looking for has the meaning of "opposite _match_ "


"be enacted' = to take place

Why is the passive, and not the active (= "to enact"), the equivalent of "to take place"? What's the intuition?


How should "makeup" be written in BrEng?

By "makeup", I mean cosmetics, as in lipstick, foundation, eyeliner, etc. My assumption is that it should be written as "makeup", but others have suggested "make up" or "make-up". In case there are any regional differences, I'm primarily interested in the most idiomatic written form in Britain/Ireland.


Suasion vs Persuasion

I referenced http://english.stackexchange.com/a/22445/50720 but it doesn't apply for these nouns? > suasion = [mass noun] _formal_   >  Persuasion as opposed to force or compulsion: I also tried http://thecommonparlance.blogspot.com/2007/10/suasion-v- persuasion.html and http://sprachgefuhl.blogspot.com/2011/06/suasion- persuasion.html but these look tentative.


"Being open minded" vs. "the quality of being open minded"

>   * One of the most essential characteristics that all good leaders share is > being open minded. >   * One of the most essential characteristics that all good leaders share is > the quality of being open minded. > Both variations of this sentence sound awkward, I am not sure why. Can someone tell me if they are both awkward, pick which one is better or suggest an improvement?


Use "of" or "for" with Institute, Department, Office...?

When should which be used and what's the difference? Department **of** XYZ or Department **for** XYZ Institute **of** ABC or Institute **for** ABC Federal Office **of**... or Federal Office **for**... Is there any sort of rule for this? The "problem" is that it's an ongoing debate in the Department (non-English- speaking country) on how to properly translate it into English.


"Unstar as interesting"

If I starred something as interesting, would I unstar it as _interesting_ or as _uninteresting_?


Formal way to say "pay off"?

I am trying to write an Abstract and need to change the sentence > I believe that the work load for the physicians will pay off by increasing > patient safety. I was wondering if there is a more formal way to say that something _pays off_?


Word meaning "being tossed up and down?"

I'm looking for a word to replace the phrase "being tossed up and down." To be used in something like: > The tree trunk [...] between the waves. Any suggestions?


"Why it is" vs "Why is it"

What is the difference between these two sentences: 1 ) Please tell me why **is it** like that.(should i put question mark at the end) 2 ) Please tell me why **it is** like that.(should i put question mark at the end)


Sophisticated positive or negative

When I searched for the meaning of the word sophisticated ,it does mean well advanced ,highly complicated etc. When I say my project is sophisticated what impression it can possibly make. The project is good that it is advanced or the project is really complicated to understand . Can I use that word in such situations


What does "over" mean here?

"All assets could be pledged except for pledges over a going concern (gages sur fonds de commerce), Luxembourg law doesn't provide for an all assets security." Could someone explain this sentence？ What does “over” mean here? Thank you.


Custom v/s Customized v/s Personal

We have a small start up and need a tag line for it. We deal in custom products that we make according to their requirements. We have come up with 'Customized Technology Solutions'. But, now we have a doubt, is 'Custom Technology Solutions' the correct usage or is it customized itself. Also, is it wrong to use 'Personalized Technology Solutions'? Does customized make it seem that we modify products not actually make new ones?


Grammatical Voice Problem

"Can security be granted by an entity which is neither a borrower nor a guarantor? Yes, The third party may be granted if . . ..“ I don't understand what this sentence means. Who grants whom? To my understanding, the third party should be someone who grants, and is not granted.


Is "went missing" correct?

I have always thought the word _went_ indicated, more or less, something purposely done; yet, it is now used when there is no idea how something disappeared.


Ways to ruin a hobby

## Variations   * _The best way to ruin a hobby is to make it a career._   * _The fastest way to ruin a hobby is to try to make money with it._   * _The quickest way to ruin a hobby is to make it a job._ What's the history behind this saying? Is it attributable to a particular person? (I imagine the complementary maxim would be _Do what you love._ )


"What happens when" or "what happen when"?

Should I write "what happens when" or "what happen when"? Does it depend on if I know if the "what" that happens is plural or singular, or is it always the same? Provided "what happens" is correct in all situations, how about this: > "What happens when [something]? Two things: [one thing that happens] and > [another thing that happens]."


Shalln't vs. Shan't in British English

I am a British English speaker and often use "shall" and "shall not". When I contract "shall not", I pronounce it [ʃɑlnt] -- that is, the "l" sound remains. My question, therefore, is how do I spell it? I would naturally spell it as "shaln't". I see on Wiktionary that "shalln't" (with two "l"s) is listed as an archaic spelling and shouldn't be used. All other resources I've found indicate that it should be "shan't" -- with no "l" -- but this is the American English pronunciation, to me.


Is there a single word for the faith a user of magic has in the efficacy of a magical object or act?

I'm writing about art's function of rescuing, redeeming or validating the artist's experience and suffering. Some of my sources have compared this to the functions of magical talismans and power objects, and I'd like to use magical language now and then throughout my paper as a nod to this similarity. The problem is that I have no idea of magical jargon. When I refer to the artist's confidence that their act of creation can and will perform this redemptive role, I want to spiritualize that word choice a bit--I guess "faith" is better than "confidence," but that's definitely more religious than magical. So I was wondering--is there a particular word, used in some form of magical practice, that expresses one's degree of confidence in a magical object or action? If there was a "Magick" stackexchange, I'd have posted this there. Sorry to ask a rather bizarre question.


Why does "don't have a cow" mean "chill out" or "calm down" in American English?

I am just unable to understand why "don't have a cow" can mean "don't panic". What is the origin of this expression? What's more, If someone is getting flurried, can I say "he is having a cow"?


How to avoid ambiguity in "I am renting an apartment in New York"?

Does the sentence: > I am renting an apartment in New York. imply that I am the **landlord** or the **tenant**? How can I unequivocally communicate that I am the tenant (or the landlord)?


The use of "about" on "discuss" and "think"

Why is it grammatically incorrect to say > We would like to _discuss about_ the matters at hands first. But it is alright to say > I will _think about_ what you have said this morning. What I've heard that the word _discuss_ is treated like _consider_ and _investigate_. It makes sense that _about_ cannot be placed with _consider_ , e.g. it sounds weird to say "I'll consider about this relationship." So what are the words that will have the same effects with _discuss_ , _consider_ and _investigate_? What makes _look_ and _think_ so special that _about_ is grammatically correct to be used together with them?


What is the difference between "order" and "command"?

What is the difference between those two words `order` and `command`, and where to use each of them? Please give some examples. Thank you!


Can the coordinating conjunction 'yet' follow a subordinating conjunction?

Is it grammatically permissible by the rules of Standard English for the coordinating conjunction ‘yet’ to follow a subordinating conjunction? For example, take the sentence: > Although it is early, yet still I must rise. This seems to make sense and be correct to me, but if I substitute another coordinating conjunction, say ‘but’, it no longer seems so: > Although it is early, but still I must rise. It seems that the semantics of ‘but’ are what create a problem here, though instead of the grammar, but I can't seem to form any valid subordinating + coordinating sentence except if I use ‘yet’, so I'm not sure.


What word is the opposite of Luddite?

Single word, please, preferably one derived from someone's name.


Salutation for two doctors (not married)

Does use of the salutation > Dear Drs. Apple and Banana, imply that Dr. Apple is married to Dr. Banana? That is, would it be better form to use: > Dear Dr. Apple and Dr. Banana, when Dr. Apple and Dr. Banana are unrelated, but happen to both be addressed in the same letter?


What is the name of the "agency" fallacy?

I'm looking for the name of the logical fallacy where intent or agency is assumed when in fact there is none. It's a common fallacy in my experience, but I can't seem to find it described specifically on any site that discusses logical fallacies. It seems to be a special case of apophenia, but Wikipedia and Google turn up nothing specific to an "apophenia of intent" or any related phrase. The best I've been able to find is this rather obscure blog post that names it the "agency fallacy," but I haven't been able to find any other sites that use that phrase. Does this fallacy even have a name? Here are a few examples:   * A child, playing with magnets, finds that they repel when held one way and attract when held another way. Seeing this, the child thinks "oh, those ends want to be together, but the other ends want to be apart." They have (unconsciously) read intent into a deterministic physical process.   * A picnicker gets rained on and thinks "Darn it, rain! You just couldn't resist ruining a nice day, could you?" Again, they have (unconsciously) attributed agency to a mindless natural process.   * Two people pass each other in a crowded hall. One trips and stumbles into the other. The other thinks "What a jerk! Why'd they do that to me?" They have mistakenly attributed intent (specifically, malice) to an action that was accidental. This is the case of the fallacy that Hanlon's Razor warns against.   * A socialist on a soapbox shouts "Capitalism is the source of all the world's evil! It's stealing our jobs and lining the pockets of bureaucrats!" Although the use of metaphor is more deliberate here than with the child or the picnicker, it is still misleading: capitalism can't do anything on its own, only the people who participate in it can.


two uncountable nouns with and

If we had two uncountable nouns with and , would we use a singular or plural form? How much flour and butter is/are needed to make a pizza ?


Is there a term which covers ATM cards, credit cards, and debit cards?

I work in accommodation for international travelers, and people can pay with various kinds of cards:   * In some countries such as USA, credit cards are very common, but debit cards are not so common.   * In other regions such as Europe, most people have debit cards, but credit cards are quite a bit less common.   * These days in Australia both kinds of cards are very common. Often customers are confused when I ask if they want to pay (or make a reservation) with credit card because they know they have a debit card and not a credit card. And there are other kinds of cards like ATM cards and EFTPOS cards. These can be used for payment but not for making reservations because they cannot be charged without access to the physical cards. **I've taken to using the circumlocution "Mastercard or Visa card", but I wonder if there's a better term?** For instance Maestro cards are related to Mastercards and usually work here too. All the cards have the same form factor and either/both a magnetic strip and/or smartcard chip. They are all processed with the same machine. A few weeks ago I stumbled across the term "payment card" on Wikipedia, that I couldn't recall hearing before. I thought this would be the right term, but it seems not to include ATM cards so I guess I should rule it out ... (My second reason for looking for this term is to decide on which tag or tags to use for such cards over on travel.SE, where we currently only have a `credit-cards` tag, but more and more questions about the other kinds of cards too.)


use of commas with conjunction reduction

I wimped out in answering this question, dropping the commas and going to parentheses in this sentence, because I was not sure of the placement/correctness of commas in this construction. Now I'd like to get clear on how to use commas in this sentence (without reformulating it...no moving "poems", for example), and why. I'm not even sure that conjunction reduction is what causes the awkwardness here... Wimp version: > I like Lord Byron's (and also enjoy a number of Percy Shelley's) poems. Now I'm asking, if you use the comma, do you use both commas? It looks mighty strange with "poems" out there by itself: > I like Lord Byron's, and also enjoy a number of Percy Shelley's, poems. ...Or is the comma even required? I don't like this, but is it correct? > I like Lord Byron's and also enjoy a number of Percy Shelley's poems.


Is there a UK/US difference in the usage of in/to + verb (for example, "this tool helps in dealing with this/to deal with this")?

I have done a translation and the Dutchman (who speaks American English) who wrote the book is going through the text often changing "in + verb" constructions to "to + verb". For example, > this tool helps in dealing with this vs > this tool helps to deal with this Is he just simplifying the text to his preference, or is the latter formulation more common in American English?


Meaning of "What's shaking?"

I can guess it probably means "what's happening", or "what's up". Am I right? I am curious where this phrase comes from and how to use it properly.


Grammar correctness of "could" sentence

I would like to know whether the following is correct:   Someone is knocking on your door. > Who could it be? As far as I know, modal verbs do not change its form in reported speech: > He asked who it could be. After the knocking on the door has finished, you ask yourself: > Who could it have been? Do I get it correctly?


Entertaining multiple goals (makes / make) a person’s life stressful?

As per the following grammar rule, the singular "make" should be used but it shows "makes" in the answer. This is a little bit confusing. **Rule:** When acting as subjects of a sentence, gerunds and infinitives are always singular and require singular verbs. **Sentences:**   Entertaining multiple goals (makes / make) a person’s life stressful. To plan road trips to three different cities (involves / involve) the handling of many details. **Answer:**   Entertaining multiple goals "makes" a person’s life stressful. “Entertaining multiple goals” is a gerund phrase which acts as the subject of the sentence ("singular"). To plan road trips to three different cities "involves" the handling of many details. “To plan roads trips” is an infinitive phrase which acts as the subject of the sentence ("singular").


Meaning of "first-level", "second-level" in general

What do these expressions mean in general: _first-level_ , _second-level_ , ... ? For example, > Response rates provide a **first-level** indicator of advertisement > effectiveness. Conversion rates offer a **second-level** indicator of > advertisement effectiveness.


What does “Mercy within mercy within mercy" mean?

I saw a lot of articles in these couple of days about Pope Francis’ reflection of his style, influences and priorities as pope in the recent interview with La Civilta Cattolica, the Jesuit journal in Rome. In this interview, the words of Thomas Merton – “Mercy within mercy within mercy," was quoted, which appears in his book, “The Sign of Jonas” as follows: > "I have always overshadowed Jonas with My mercy, and cruelty I know not at > all. Have you had sight of Me, Jonas My child? **Mercy within mercy within > mercy**." I understand it’s hard for non-Christian like me fully understand the meaning (Actually one of writers wrapped up his article by confessing he neither understand exact meaning of this phrase). But I would like to know at least basic implications of this phrase. What does ‘within’ before ‘mercy’ represent for? If ‘within’ is replaced with ‘and’ with an aim at emphasizing, does it totally miss the point?


Embarrassment for the person talked to

Sometimes I'm embarrassed for the person I'm talking to. Is there a better way to describe how I'm feeling? English is not my first language. _Embarrassment_ might not be the right term. The feeling I'm trying to invoke is the kind you feel when a student claims to understand philosophy, then calls David Hume "light reading" or "pop philosophy," despite demonstrating clear unfamiliarity with the subject. ("Hume is a bit simple and silly. He doesn't resolve important issues of existence, like why we exist," etc.) (Just an example, of course. A similar one would be a student claiming to be a physicist after reading Michio Kaku, and then proceeding to "demolish" the Standard Model.) I think you know the kind of person. I want to say that I feel embarrassed for this person, but that doesn't sound right. When I'm embarrassed, it's a deeply personal thing; when I feel "embarrassed" for the kind of person I outlined above, it's sort of a disconnected experience, one with the realization of "oh dear". I want to say that I feel something like condescension, but that doesn't sound right. _Condescension_ is usually mixed with anger; or the definitive grouping of the target of your condescension in the category "inferior". But, again, this isn't right because the feeling is distinctly disconnected. The word I'm looking for has a very mild "presence", if it exists.


Is this use of "rollback" mis-leading or out-and-out incorrect?

Suppose you are working with a system that keeps track of edits to a file and can show you a list of the versions. In this system, available actions are shown following each version, e.g.:               3 Edited  date/time by  whoever  [Edit/Delete]     2 Edited  date/time by  whoever  [Edit/Delete/Rollback]     1 Created date/time by  whoever  [Edit/Delete/Rollback]      One of the functions the system supports is reverting to an earlier version, this is done by clicking on the "rollback" action listed after earlier versions. So if a file is reverted, the list would look like this:               4 Reverted to version #2  date/time by  whoever  [Edit/Delete]     3 Edited  date/time by  whoever  [Edit/Delete/Rollback]     2 Edited  date/time by  whoever  [Edit/Delete/Rollback]     1 Created date/time by  whoever  [Edit/Delete/Rollback]      Is this use of "rollback" confusing or incorrect? It seems to me it would be more accurate if the action were labelled "rollback to this version." "Rollback" by itself sounds like it's an action that should be performed on the current version to roll it back to an earlier one. In fact, the system that prompted this question is the Revisions page that exists for any post that's been edited on a StackExchange site. It seems slightly confusing to use "rollback" as shorthand for "roll back to this earlier version."


"Identifying" or "the identification of"

Which one could be used more correctly in the context: > This study allowed an analysis of financial results and _the identification > of_ possible causes of negative results from the company that was studied > and, as is known in the national media, the situation is widespread. . > This study allowed an analysis of financial results and _identifying_ > possible causes of negative results from the company that was studied and, > as is known in the national media, the situation is widespread. Perhaps the following sentence is more accurate? > The survey allowed an analysis of the company’s financial results and > _identifying_ possible causes of its negative results and, as is known in > the national media, the situation is widespread


the use of would in the sentence

what is the difference between this two sentences " would you like to be a farmer ?" and "Do you like to be a farmer?" I know would is about specific time but there is no time in the sentence


A Word To Represent The 5 Senses

Working on a game and I need a _single_ word that represents the 5 senses: _smell_ , _touch_ , _taste_ , _sound_ , and _sight_. At the moment I'm using "perception" which I don't think is adequate.


A Word To Represent Physical & Mental Attributes

I'm working on a game, and at the moment I'm using the word "Attributes" to represent things like: intelligence, strength, dexterity, wisdom, aura, etc. I wouldn't necessarily call them traits, because there will be a statistic applied to each one of them. Is there a not a _proper_ word to represent these?


What do people mean or think they mean by "not to scale?"

I have in front of me a map of an area in the Angeles National Forest that says at the bottom, "map not to scale." What, if anything, does "not to scale" properly mean on a map or diagram, and if people use it in incorrect ways, do they mean anything specific by it? I.e., is there a common misconception as to what it means? I can think of two possible meanings for this phrase:   1. The diagram does not show proper proportions. For example, we could have an anatomical diagram of a human body with the head the same size as the torso, or the famous New Yorker cover painting, "View of the World from 9th Avenue."   2. The diagram is not full size. It's scaled down. Interpretation 2 is obviously pretty silly in most of the cases where I've seen the phrase used. For example, I don't need a special warning label to tell me that the piece of paper on which the map is printed is smaller than the Angeles National Forest's real size. My guess would be that the correct meaning of the phrase is #1, but many people ignorantly use it to mean #2 or use it without any clear idea of _what_ they think they're saying. In the particular example of the map I have in front of me, comparison with other maps seems to rule out interpretation #1 -- there don't seem to be any features on the map that are drawn out of proportion to other feautures.


Synonyms for 'the use of'?

I need synonyms for the word 'the use of' in my sentence. > Also, the use of commonly available solutions contributed to cost reduction. Thank you in advance for your help.


"Give your best" vs. "give of your best"

Does one say, _give your best_ or _give of your best_ when it comes to effort?


What other word can we use in place of "helpless"

I am looking for an English word I can use sometimes in place of _helpless_. I have the word in my language, but I am not able to find it in English. The word which we say sometimes if we feel that we can't do anything as we don't have control over it, or if you have to do something as you have no choice left, or you have to do it because if you don't someone will kill you. Something like: > I am sorry my friend I didn't want to do it, but I was _**___ __ ___ _**_.


"She is gone" versus "she has gone"

When should I say "She is gone", and when should I say "She has gone" (and why)? I think that when I mean "She went away and she's still there", it should be "She has gone". Are there exceptions where it should be "She is gone" ?


What is a word meaning "a non-instantaneous event"?

That is, an event which has some positive (possibly infinite) duration.


What are reading comprehesion tools that can generate or suggest plainer language?

I'm looking for ways to simplify a document for better comprehension after I have already gone through an editing process myself. It could include suggestions easier synonyms, grammar optimization (adding commas or rearranging sentences), or plain language in general. I've only found a few resources: Okapi This highlights difficult words according word whitelist from Spache (Grade 1-3) and Dale-Chall (Grade 4 & up). It can only handle 200 words at a time. Microsoft Word can provide Flesch-Kincaid Reading Ease score (0-100) and Reading Level (about school grade) after doing a SpellCheck if you have enabled this option in preferences. I know that software, algorithms, and automation will never quite accomplish everything, like finding for example:   * How complex the ideas are   * Whether or not the content is in a logical order   * Whether the vocabulary is appropriate for the audience   * Whether there is a gender, class or cultural bias   * Whether the design is attractive and helps or hinders the reader   * Whether the material appears in a form and type style that is easy or hard to read [ from http://plainlanguage.com/newreadability.html ] But are there tools other than those in Microsoft Word, a thesaurus, or the OKAPI tool that would help improve a text document?


What do you call the word used in prose to describe the surroundings to make prose richer?

There is a word in English which is used to describe the technique used by authors where they describe the surroundings (like sight, sounds, smells, etc.) to make the scene more rich. Like "there was fresh sand between the driveway paving stones and a diminutive sapling on the lawn" to describe that the house is new. What is that word?


Why are there two pronunciations for "either"?

A few weeks ago, I had a conversation with an individual who told me that pronouncing the word "either" is wrong when pronounced like \ˈī-thər\ instead of \ˈē-thər\ , but I didn't argue the point because I'd done no research on it myself. So I looked the word up on Merriam Webster Online and wasn't at all surprised to find that both pronunciations are in fact legitimate. Which brings me to my question: what is the history of this word? How was it pronounced in old English? Were both pronunciations common hundreds of years ago? I was unable to glean much from Merriam Webster Online apart from some small fact that the word is somehow related to _whether_. EDIT: I dug up some additional information about the origins or either, and I'm hoping that someone can shed some light upon what it means. > O.E. ægðer, contraction of æghwæðer "each of two, both," from a "always" + > ge- collective prefix + hwæðer "which of two, whether."   >  Modern sense of "one or the other of two" is early 14c. I took this directly from Dictionary.com, but I have no idea what language those words come from.


"Suppose we have a collection of blog posts where each document was/is a post"

I found this in a book: > Suppose **we have** a collection of blog posts where each document **was** a > post. Shouldn't it be: > Suppose **we have** a collection of blog posts where each document **is** a > post. Or is it correct as it is?


Best link to forward to juniors re: correct use of apostrophes, possessives and contractions

I'm tired of my junior employees abusing, misusing and otherwise being cavalier about possessives and the use of apostrophes. I could wag my finger at them, point them to some Guide of Style or to any of a myriad of pedantic websites that come up in a simple Google Search. What I'm looking for specifically is a good writeup, whose intended target audience is this younger generation who seem to neither know, nor care, much about grammar (nor spelling for that matter, but I digress). If the article is humorous, or even sarcastic, so much the better. The goal is to make sure a young blase audience reads it through to the end, and retains the salient points. Throw up your links, fellow pedants! Tom


Is it rude to say "how did you end up here"?

Is it rude to say, "how did you end up here?" to a teacher? I said it to my English teacher, and then thought, "damn, I don't know if I'm supposed to phrase it that way or not." So, is it?


Where does the phrase "get a bye" come from?

This question inspired me to look at the etymology of "get a bye". The earliest mentions in a sporting context that I found while searching Google Books were in the _Coursing Calendar_ , the 1872 edition of which contained this baffling sentence: > Bismarck, who was a favourite for the event, had the misfortune to get a bye > of terrific length, and this doubtless lost him the stake, as, hard run as > he had been, he led his opponent in the concluding course. and this one > Duffer ran a bye, which brought the day's sport to a conclusion at half past > three. On the other hand, we also have from the 1867 _Coursing Calendar,_ > Black Topsy had the good luck to get a bye owing to Blue Bock having injured > himself yesterday, so much so that his trainer wisely drew him, with an eye > to the future. The first two instances seem to be using "get a bye" in a completely different sense than the modern one, in which it means to sit out a round in a tournament. The third instance, only five years earlier than the other two, seems to be used in the modern sense. What do "get a bye" and "run a bye" mean here, and is this where the modern phrase, "get a bye," comes from?


Difference Between "Sell" and "Sale"?

I'm a copy editor at a law firm and need to give a quick-and-dirty explanation of the difference between "sell" and "sale" to a native English speaker (a legal secretary) who is very self-conscious about her grammar knowledge. I've already given her info about how they are different parts of speech, and some example sentences. She's still not comfortable with her understanding but doesn't know or isn't able to articulate the area(s) of difficulty. Any suggestions?


Is it acceptable to start a sentence with “however”?

I have heard that starting a sentence with _however_ is wrong. What are the grounds for this view and is it still held by a majority of pedants? They would suggest changing > However, some people are beginning to doubt this. to > Some people, however, are … or > Some people are, however, beginning …


Word for "letter or letter-like character"?

Is there a word for a "letter or letter-like character" in a writing system? With that I mean a grapheme that is not a number, punctuation, special symbol or space, but a letter (alphabet), consonant-vowel-unit (abugida), syllabogram (syllabrary) or a logogram (logographic writing system). Or in other words: A unit of text that is formed by a character of the Unicode category "L", maybe followed by combining marks "M". edit:   I need the word for a user interface; it should be understood by the average user. edit2:   To clarify the purpose: I have a system that learns word structures from user input. In the documentation I explain an algorithm that does some stuff with the input. This is the sentence: > By default all letters and letter-like characters (such as the syllable > symbols of a syllabary like Japanese Katakana) are included, everything else > (such as numbers and punctuation) is excluded [from the alphabet].


Word for houshold activities

Is there any generic word describing household activities such as doing dishes and mopping floors? I feel the word _chore_ implies a burden and am looking for something more natural.


What might be an appropriate term for a long-term, very serious, girlfriend?

In the USA, where I live, it is becoming increasingly common that men and women are making committed relationship decisions, but choosing to remain unmarried. However, they live together, raise children together, and otherwise appear married. They are simply not legally married and they are okay with it and so are most other Americans. It is obvious that they are highly involved with each other and the depth of their relationship is akin to a long standing marriage. I am having trouble determining what to call men and women in this kind of relationship, relative to the other. I might say "my friend's girlfriend," however, I would also use this same term for whatever the relationship of two 14-year-olds is. It seems to me that my friend and his relationship with his girlfriend deserves higher recognition. Lately, I have resorted to calling these women ladies. I might ask my friend "How is your lady doing," or say about a party "Bring your ladies." I like this because the definition of lady implies a high 'social' status and removes any negative connotation that the women are morally devoid because they are not married, yet live with a man. Oddly, someone told me recently that it sounded sexist when I referred to a few friends and "their ladies." I don't even really know how to approach that. It wasn't until just now that I have no ideas at all for men. Just "lady" for women.


Pronunciation of "McLeod"

How do we pronounce the Gaelic name _McLeod_? Does any Gaelic name have a specific pronunciation? For the continental European it is a real nightmare.


Origin and meaning of "Hello the fire!"

My father just used an interesting phrase: _hello the fire_. He said it was a way to let me know he was coming without startling me. I've never heard this phrase, and I can't find anything about it online. He said he remembers it having to do with the Old West, but that was all he could recall. What is the origin and meaning of this phrase?


A word for the opposite of favorite (or opposite to the most favorite)

I have a collection of five objects as a series. Clearly, I can order these objects by my preferences. I distinctly prefer two of the objects over the others. I say the first two objects of my preference are my favorites, but the first is my most favorite object. How should I name the rest of the objects with one word, and how do I present my lesser preferred object the same way (one word)? I do not dislike my lesser preferred object, but what if I did? How would that change the relevant describing word?


Is it 'seeing as' or 'seems'?

A friend of mine just posted this status on Facebook: > Decisions, decisions - schoolwork...watch olympics....schoolwork...watch > olympics......?? Olympics is so going to win this dilemma haha especially > SEEMS the gymnastics is on later! I said surely she meant _seeing as,_ not _seems,_ (she's used this word in a similar way before). She replied: > 'seems' is also grammatically correct - it is a synonym for 'because.' And > 'seeing as' is actually an idiom and is no longer the preferred phraseology Is she right?


"I been" or "I’ve been"?

In the famous song Every Breath You Take by The Police, Sting sings: > Since you've gone I been lost without a trace… I admit that I am not some expert in English Grammar, but this "I been" sounds a little bit strange to me. Shouldn’t it be "I’ve been"? And consequently, the beginning of the sentence changed into "Since you’d gone…"?


Using the gerund two times in a row

When you have this construct: > . . . is a key factor in the **making** and **controlling** of the water. Should you leave only the last verb in the gerund: > . . . is a key factor in the **make** and **controlling** of the water.


"for good" expression in an unfortunate event?

I just heard an expression while watching a TV series yesterday. Someone just died and they said: > He is gone _for good_ I googled it and found that "for good" means "forever" in this context. But it still sounds odd to me to describe something unfortunate this way. Is there a deeper reason behind this expression?


Is "huge" slightly informal?

Is "huge" slightly informal? In the following sentence, > First, some people insist that Japan doesn’t need to adopt [an] austerity > policy because it has a huge amount of assets at home and abroad. I felt the word "huge" was inappropriate, thinking that it was too informal for this context. (Whereas if someone said "OMG, I have a bloody huge hangover", "huge" wouldn't be too informal) However, meaning 1 of huge in wiktionary and dictionary.com don't describe it as slangy or informal. Am I mistaken in thinking that it's informal? Perhaps I only think it's informal because it's a popular word in informal speech because you can lengthen the "u".


Where did the expression "every last one" come from?

There is, after all, only one last one. Why did it become common to say "every last one"? Dictionary.com has a definition for last as follows: > **8**. individual; single: _The lecture won't start until every last person > is seated._ It seems plain that the definition was created because of the idiom, and not vice versa. How was the idiom started?


Are these sentences OK?

Are these sentences OK? > Other notation and terminology which we don't define will be used as in the > John's book. > > In other notation and terminology we will follow John's book.


When to nominalize?

When is it correct to use nominalizations? (Isn't nominalization a nominalization?) It seems the main problem is that they tend to mislead the reader. It is appealing to think that "being" and "understanding" are "things." I see how this sort of misuse of words can be misleading. But when does concise become too compact? The English language seems to nominalize words frequently--and often effectively (I'm thinking of George Eliot).


Verb types or mode of expression to convey lack of causality

In Biblical Hebrew there are two simple verb types (Qal grammatically active and Niphal passive) which covey no causation. They may be reflexive, permissive or tolerative or some combination. Would adding the phrase "permit/permitted" to English translation help preserve the lack of causality?   Is there a more accurate word than permit which would preserve the lack of causality? > Gen 1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. vs > Gen 1:3 And God [permitted himself to] say, [Let there] be light: and there > [permitted] light. More on Qal More on Niphal


Can we use "is" with second form of verb is sentences?

Can we use the second form of the verb with _is_. For example > The book is hidden In daily life, I used to listen to some sentences in which the second form of the verb is used with _is_. Is it right? If yes, then what are the situations where we can use that?