Connotation of term autodidact

I would like to know if **autodidact** has a positive, negative, or neutral connotation behind it. These questions asking about usage imply: ### A neutral connotation:   * Autodidactic as a Verb   * What would you call a person who is not a student, but takes interest in exploring academic topics?   * Self-Learner vs Self-Taught vs Autodidact _most answers_ ### A positive connotation:   * What word describes a person who never went to college, but is very successful, and well learned? ### A (slight) negative connotation:   * http://english.stackexchange.com/a/111205/20511 _Slightly negative due to context?_   * "Deliberate recluse" or "deliberately reclusive" _negative due to association with "deliberately reclusive"_   * Is "autodidact" too obscure to use in a resume? _negative due to obscurity_


Clarion call vs rallying cry

I'm studying for the GRE, and there was this one question (sentence completion) where I had to choose between selecting "clarion call" or "rallying cry" as the answer. What is the distinction between those two? Is there something I'm missing? EDIT: The context: > Scathing, lyrical and hilarious by turns, _Finding a Form_ by William H. > Gass sounds a **___ __** against the steady encroachment of the banal and > lazy into the fields of fiction.


Fragmented Quotes and Bracketed Ellipses

I had a question about the use of the bracketed ellipses with fragmented quotes. Below is an example from CMOS 16. Please refer to it. My question is at the bottom of this thread. I'm hoping you understand my question. Chicago doesn't address this usage. > Original Version: The spirit of our American radicalism is destructive and > aimless: it is not loving; it has no ulterior and divine ends; but is > destructive only out of hatred and selfishness. On the other side, the > conservative party, composed of the most moderate, able, and cultivated part > of the population, is timid, and merely defensive of property. It vindicates > no right, it aspires to no real good, it brands no crime, it proposes no > generous policy, it does not build, nor write, nor cherish the arts, nor > foster religion, nor establish schools, nor encourage science, nor > emancipate the slave, nor befriend the poor, or the Indian, or the > immigrant. From neither party, when in power, has the world any benefit to > expect in science, art, or humanity, at all commensurate with the resources > of the nation. > > Condensed Version: The spirit of our American radicalism is destructive and > aimless [. . .]. On the other side, the conservative party [. . .] is timid, > and merely defensive of property. [. . .] It does not build, nor write, nor > cherish the arts, nor foster religion, nor establish schools. My question is, if the sentence ends in a fragment, how do we employ the usage of the bracketed ellipsis in this case? I would be writing just one fragmented sentence. How would I end it with the bracketed ellipses? It would be similar to this usage of the unbracketed ellipses, which would simply end with three spaced dots. The spirit of American radicalism . . . Using the bracketed ellipses in like manner, would it be The spirit of our American radicalism [. . .]. [Full stop outside the ending bracket?] The spirit of American radicalism [. . .] (No full stop outside the ending bracket?]


Someone or something that blocks a view

Is there a single word or metonym for someone or something that "blocks a view"? I'm looking for a word that, unlike "obstacle" or "obstruction", conveys the "view" part.


Is there a word for the bad smell coming from socks?

Is there any specific English word to refer to the bad smell coming from socks, especially ones that have been unwashed for some time?


French Quality Clothes

How can I make the difference in this kind of sentence : "French Quality Clothes" Does it mean :   * Clothes of the well-known "french quality" or   * Quality clothes from France ? And How can I express the 2 without been misunderstood?


How Offensive is ''Grow a Pair?''

What does ''grow a pair'' mean exactly? Is it offensive? Does it bring a man to a level of a girl/woman? Is it more offensive when a woman says it? Thank you for the answers, especially from women. :)


What is the difference between nap, snooze and doze?

In the Macmillan's dictionary               doze (verb)     to sleep for a short time, especially during the day           nap (verb)     to sleep for a short period of time, usually during the day          snooze (verb)     to sleep for a short period of time, especially during the day      Are these three words really equivalent? I was taught in childhood, that no absolute synonyms exist. But it was not told about English... I have tried different dictionaries, but mostly one of these words is explained through another one. Or simply, as in Macmillan, the same definitions are given.


To "Macgyver" or to "macgyver"?

I recently came across this usage “we Macgyver…” and the use of the upper case caught my attention. I googled the word to see if it is mentioned in the dictionary; it gave me this result, for instance: Macgyver Verb MacGyver (third-person singular simple present MacGyvers, present participle MacGyvering, simple past and past participle MacGyvered) To assemble, or cause to be repaired or completed, an object, device, machine, or project from duct tape as the preferred repair tool, but in its absence, other items, (normally common, ordinary and mundane such as a rubber band or paper clip), not normally used for that purpose, where others would assume one needs a manufactured part, as per the design. Especially: if the items are used in ways significantly different than their intended use. Our car broke down and we didn't have any tools but Jim MacGyvered it with some toenail clippers and we were able to limp to the service station Source: Wikitionay I googled the word google as well, here is the result: google Verb google (third-person singular simple present googles, present participle googling, simple past and past participle googled) (intransitive, cricket) To deliver googlies. (intransitive, cricket) To move as a ball in a googly. Now, both words are proper nouns, but “google” is not capitalised whereas “Macgyver” is. Why?


"I can command English."

I saw a sentence: "I would like to be a scientist who can command English." What do you think about usage of "command"? Should we say " ...who has a good command of English."? Could you please explain which sentence is better? If it it wrong usage, tell me the reason. Thank you in advance.


Simple Past and Present Perfect

could you possibly enlighten me about any differences between 2 sentences below: (a) I went to Warsaw this year. (b) I have been to Warsaw this year. Thank you very much in advance!


“Permission” vs “privilege”

I'm confused about _permission_ and _privilege_. What is the difference between them? I know both mean “the rights to do something”.


What is the difference between "destruction" and "deconstruction"?

I am Hungarian, and I can completely understand the words _destruction, construction_ , and _deconstruction_ , although the corresponding Hungarian words are rarely used. I don't know if the _con-_ possesses any meaning there, please explain the situation to me.


"Called himself doing"

A friend of mine was telling me a story about one of their colleagues and they said the following sentence: "Mike called himself cleaning up the lunch table, but he left spaghetti sauce streaked all over the place." I didn't understand at the time though that this is just a way of referring to a third party doing some act that resulted in the opposite of their original intentions. The question I have is regarding the use of "called himself" and where that comes from, the etymology, etc. etc. and if there is a place I can look to learn about this type of... strange... sentence pattern?


What is a PR triumph?

In an answer of an interesting question, _Is mathematical history written by the victors?_, professor Paul Garrett wrote: > Again, "winning" is certainly not a reliable sign of absolute virtue. Could > be a PR triumph, luck, etc. In certain arenas "winning" would be a stigma... What is a PR triumph? By searching online, I'm sure it's not his own invention. But neither wiktionary nor my dictionary give me much clue on this issue. I can't see any reason that PR here could stand for public relation, proportional representation, or Puerto Rico as it usually does.


'Which', 'whose' or something else?

I would appreciate your help phrasing the following: > I am looking for elements **which/whose/... size/sizes is/are** relatively > large.


whose | which ..?

Please help on constructing this sentence.. > I have attached the report on the list of data tables which collations is > not configured Or > I have attached the report on the list of data tables whose collations is > not configured Thanks you.


Can "that" have a possessive form?

For example: It's a statue that's base is made of gold. The thing is, I'm pretty sure "that's" can only mean "that is" and I don't think I've ever seen "thats."


Other ways of saying whichs

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  'Which', 'whose' or something else? Of course there isn't a word whichs (as far as I know), but I am talking about the possessive form of which. Sometimes I use 'whose', but sometimes it just seems inappropriate and that 'who' seems a bit unnatural when being used for inanimate things. Is it only me who thinks this? Other times I use 'the X of which', but that can seem a bit convoluted sometimes. Any other suggestions?


Possessive "that's"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  'Which', 'whose' or something else? Is the use of "that's" correct in the sentence below? > Imagine a frame with two sets of strings stretched across, making a grid > that's intersections define a curve.


Use of "which" in a sample phrase

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Other ways of saying whichs Is the following grammatically correct? > Sampling was mainly random, with the exception of some services _which_ > indexes, calculated with the Triadas method, were not satisfactory The indices belong to the services.


"Healthcare" or "Health care"?

**Healthcare** or **Health care** ? Which one is correct?


Is using "as from" correct English?

Many years ago in my first job, I made the mistake of writing "as from" instead of "as opposed to" in a document. To me it seemed normal usage (I must have learnt it from somewhere) but everyone else claimed it was not correct English. Were they right?


Does the word “Loyal” have other meaning than “remaining faithful to somebody/something and supporting them or it?

I found the following definition in the answer to “What are pimps and hoes?” in Music Genres Questions in Wiki.answer.com.: > “A pimp is a _loyal_ person who pimps out girls of so called hoes meaning he > makes them go have sex with guys for money and if the hoe doesn’t listen she > will get slapped or backhanded. Practically the pimp makes the profit.” I don’t understand the meaning of “a _loyal person_ who pimp out girls,” as I recognized “loyal” only in the meaning of “being faithful to sb or sth.” OALED at hand defines “loyal” simply as “remaining faithful to sb / sth and supporting them or it” with no mention on any other meanings. Does the word, “ _loyal_ ” have other meaning than being faithful to, for instance, “professional”? If “Yes,” is it a customary usage of "loyal"?


Should the abbreviation 'i.e.' be used in speech?

I often hear people use the abbreviation 'i.e.' while speaking. It does not seem right to me. Similarly with 'e.g.' — I would always say 'for example' rather than 'e.g.'. So is it appropriate to use 'i.e.' (or more generally, abbreviations) in speech?


When and how to use the "be + they + noun" structure

Can you please explain this structure? > I can't forget the looks on faces of people who've lost hope. **Be they** > _gay_ , **be they** _seniors_ , **be they** _blacks_ looking for an almost- > impossible job, **be they** _Latins_ trying to explain their problems and > aspirations in a tongue that's foreign to them. *This is also from Harvey Milk's "The Hope Speech"


What is a correct punctuation for a sentence starting with "One more thing"?

In the following sentence what would be the correct punctuation > One more thing don't tell anyone about our conversation. Should "One more thing" be separated by comma, dash or colon? Or perhaps nothing at all?


Why are the first syllables of “nature” and “natural” pronounced differently?

The two words **natur** _e_ and **natur** _al_ have the radical, why are they pronounced differently?


"A tool to do" vs. "a tool that does" vs. "a tool for doing"

I'm the curator of the Open Web Platform Daily Digest link. In the "Tools" section of each daily I write entries in this format:   * tool_name, tool_description For example:   * hapi, a server framework for Node.js My question is, which of these should I use:   * ClippingMagic, an online tool _to remove_ image backgrounds   * ClippingMagic, an online tool _for removing_ image backgrounds    * ClippingMagic, an online tool _that removes_ image backgrounds (That tool is located here btw.)


"Saying/doing it from your heart" vs. "Saying/doing it from heart"

What is the difference between the following two? > They didn't play the game from _their_ heart. > > They didn't play the game from heart. Or > You didn't say that from your heart > > You didn't say that from heart


What does "place oneself under the doctor" mean?

I was reading an article about a struggling postman where it quotes his solicitor explaining some trouble the postman was having: > Mr Arthur ... told the court: "He was assigned a number of different walks. > (delivery rounds). He struggled with those and he didn't complete the work. > He didn't place himself under the doctor, he just didn't manage. The phrase _place himself under the doctor_ doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Is it suggesting that he could have taken sick leave? Or a doctor could have written a letter on his behalf to explain the difficulties? Is the meaning anything to do with a medical doctor?


I have been stumbling with this phrase for a few days now. I read a book the other day called "Do More Faster". The title comes from a slogan about startups getting more work done than their competition, and getting work done faster. However, to me the sentence sounds like it is talking about making the "more" faster instead of making the "do" both more and faster. The way I would write the phase would be to add a comma after more: "Do More, Faster". Which Is Correct: "Do More Faster" or "Do More, Faster"?


"Each country's dances are different" or Each countries' dances are different"?

Each country's dances are different or Each countries' dances are different?


Meaning of a sentence

I was reading an article but I don't quite understand the part made bold: > In accordance with the ideals of Kemalism expressed above, education or > school emerged as the most efficient apparatus of the state, as Louis > Althusser would have said, **from which to gain the forthcoming desirable > nation** Could you please explain what that might mean. Actually I am stuck at "from which to gain" part.


How to use "critical" without it being mistaken for "crucial"

I would like to describe a process (not a person) as being critical. For example, for a process that undergoes criticism, correction and scrutinization such as auditing and inspection. I found the word **critical** would fit in the context, but saying **"a critical process"** may be mistaken to be **"a crucial or important process"**. How can I structure or add to the phrase to avoid that? Or is there a better word to use?


What is the preposition associated with "admiration"?

Is it "admiration for" or "admiration of"? For instance, does the sentence "He had a great admiration of Washington Irving." make sense?


"Grab me from my arm" vs "Grab my arm"

What is the difference between saying the following two: > She grabbed _my arm_ and walked me to the car. > > She grabbed _me from my arm_ and walked me to the car.


Is there any way to convey a certain pronunciation in the English language?

Take the sentence: > I want to give you the best customer experience possible. How can I change a part of the sentence so that the "the" is pronounced as "thee"?


What resources can you recommend for finding words based on knowing some of its letters?

Are there any websites that allow searching for a word based on only knowing, let us say, the second character, the third character and the total number of characters? I thought about this while solving a crossword today, but could not find such a tool on the internet.


Source for etymological study

It has always been interesting for me to know how words are made and where they are coming from. Is there any reliable source for etymological studies? any books, or dictionaries out there?


"What not", "what have you" and "so on"

Do "What not", "what have you" and "so on" mean the same? Can they always be exchangeable? For example > A, B, and/or what not / what have you / so on


The reason and meaning of repeating

In the movie "My Fair Lady", the main character will use this structure a lot; "I'm a good girl, I am." or "I washed my face and hands before I come, I did.". I like to know more about this structure and when such thing can be used. Thank you for your help.


Using "with" without an object pronoun?

Growing up I had a friend whose family would constantly say "Are you going with?" or similar. It always annoyed me. Fast forward 20 years and now I have a coworker who does the same. "I'm going to lunch, do you want to come with?" It annoys me, but is it wrong? p.s. Sorry if this is a duplicate. It was a difficult thing to search.


What is the English word closest to Japanese “Ganbatte,” the word for encouraging people who are in disaster, or challenging a severe ordeal?

In Japan, after experiencing the Great Eastern Japan Earthquake, “Ganbatte” which contains all sense of “Cheer up, Bear up, Keep your chin up, Be courageous, Do your best” became the password of everybody on the streets. With this single word, we can portray all meaning of encouragement. I think perhaps, Chinese word, “加油 - Jia you” well corresponds to “Ganbatte” in its sense and function. We watch Japanese famous personalities and athletes such as baseball, soccer, and golf players addressing Ganbatte (or Ganbare) to both victims of the great earthquake and general audience who were fortunately intact to the disaster in every ten minutes in TV commercials these days. What do you think English equivalent to the word, “Ganbatte” closest to the feeling of “Ganbatte” that can be expressed in a single word or very brief phrase?


Should you say RIP when you know someone commits suicide?

I've been told that "RIP" is not suitable in this case. Is that true or there is a better saying?


etymology of "positive economics"

Positive economics, that is, value-free theory, is contrasted with normative economics which is value-laden. What is the etymology of positive economics?


Is "Can I have a cup of coffee?" polite? What if I ask a store employee, "Can I have something?"


Swashes: What are they?

I always thought `swashes` were a way to call wet wipes/wet tissues/wet towels/moist towelettes -or- whatever you call them. Recently, though, I realized that Swashes is actually a company that makes this stuff. Do other people use `swashes` as a word for wet wipes? or am I just being crazy?


What is the difference between “whack somebody around the shins” and “whack somebody on the shins”?

> At Dudley’s fifth birthday party, Aunt Marge had whacked Harry around the > shins with her walking stick to stop him from beating Dudley at musical > statues. (Harry Potter 3, Scholastic Paperbacks p18) Can you explain what the difference between _around_ and _on_ is? I’d like to know if the _around_ adds a subtle nuance to the sentence.


How to interpret "as do" in this sentence

I'm reading a tutorial about "mutex" and "semaphore", in which the following sentence has confused me: > Mutexes can be applied only to threads in a single process and do not work > between processes as do semaphores. Does it mean mutex and semaphore fall into the same category or belong to just the opposite categories? Also, is it a bad wording problem of the author or a poor understanding of mine on the sentence?


what's the meaning of "discreet sanctuary of love" in this phrase "If one does not wish biotechnology to interfere with questions which are situated within the **discreet sanctuary of love** , one must make this decision first and above all for oneself."


meaning of "a limitation of biotechnological options as a way of broadening them" "When the Universal Declaration of Human Rights guarantees “life, liberty, and security of person” in Article 3,and many national constitutions grant special protection to the life and health of their citizens, **these guarantees are not so much a limitation of biotechnological options as a way of broadening them** "


Usage of "self" as a pronoun

I knew that "self" could be used as a noun (e.g. "she knows his true **self** "), but I had never heard of its usage as a pronoun. Here's the sentence, taken from a Garfield's comic strip: > What a tragic scenario... "Owner leaves for week... Cat locks **self** out > of house... Cat starves on front porch" _Dictionary.com_ s.v. "self" (9) says: "myself, himself, herself, etc.: _to make a check payable to self_ ". As to the Garfield's strip, the sentence "Cat locks **self** out of house" seems to echo a newspaper headline. "Self", here, suggests that the gender of the cat is unknown or unimportant. Is this usage of "self" typical of journalistic style or can it be used in speech to mean "myself," "himself" and so on?


Can "however" and "meanwhile" be used in the middle of a sentence?

Is it acceptable to have the joining words _meanwhile_ and _however_ in the middle of a sentence? I have always thought that they should open a sentence, unlike other conjunctions such as _because_ or _although_ which can used at the beginning of a sentence or in the middle.


"Reduce the amount of water" vs. "reduce the water amount"

The first "sounds" better to me but I'm trying to figure out if there is a formal rule regarding which one is more proper in American English: >   1. reduce the amount of water > >   2. reduce the water amount. > >


Why do we say County Durham?

In Ireland all the counties are expressed as 'County....' followed by the name, e.g. County Kerry, County Galway, County Clare etc. This equally applies to the six counties north of the border, County Down, County Londonderry, County Antrim etc. This style is not used anywhere else in the United Kingdom, where the counties of England, Scotland and Wales are simply known by their names, without the word 'county' appearing before, or in the American tradition after the name. We simply say Lancashire, Surrey, Norfolk etc. There is one unique exception to this. That is County Durham. We always speak of County Durham, as if it were Irish. Does anyone know why?


A term that describes high-order ordinal numbers

> primary, secondary, tertiary, quaternary, quinary, senary, septenary, > octonary, nonary, denary, duodenary, etc. are ordinal numbers as answered in this question. However, I'm looking for a word/phrase that refers to these terms in general, as in the following sentence: > Are there any secondary or `word_or_phrase` equity offering from this > company? Currently I'm considering replacing `word_or_phrase` with _higher-order_ , _higher-tier_ or _n-ary_ , with the intended meaning of "from tertiary onwards". Any help will be much appreciated.


Is "Race against the time" a well established motto?

According to "Your Time Starts Now" by Dr. Vijay Agrawal, it seems that "Race against the time" is a well established motto. > Today 'Race against the time' is the motto of success and the parameter of > ability. The expertise of a reporter is evaluated on the basis of getting > such a news item first, ' **Maharashtra's** chief minister has been asked to > submit his resignation.' In that book, however, the author also uses "run against the time", whose meaning is perfectly understandable but it doesn't appear so common in the English language, at least in written texts. So, my question is, are "Race against the time" or "Running against the time" well established mottoes? For what is worth, a quick searching on Google shows that one can run against "the clock", rather than against "the time". Nevertheless, how can the _clock_ version and the _time_ version lead to different interpretations? What are the reason why one should be preferred on the other, if any?


Is "as oft" a valid contraction of "as often"? If it is, then why doesn't it have an apostrophe at the end?


Why there is no "TO" in "having had nobody stand up for me"

I do not understand the following: > Having had nobody stand up for me Why it is not > Having had nobody **to** stand up for me Because: > There is somebody **to** stand up for me.


How should I say the "relationship" between the professor and student in America?

When I apply for the admission to the graduate school in America, I need to provide the "Recommendation Provider" in the online system.   * What should I write when I am asked "relationship to you"?    * Are there any specific group of words for such relationship?    * Is "teacher-student" a proper word?   * What if the professor is not only my teacher but also the thesis adviser? How should I write the relationship?


Is it technically incorrect to state something in this manner?

"I want to work at the same hospital as Tom." Tom isn't a hospital, so it might sound odd in that sense, but it's also clear that Tom isn't a hospital, and I get the feeling that this is how most people would say it in conversation.


Difference between "hypotyposis", "ekphrasis" and "iconotext"

What is the difference between _hypotyposis_ , _ekphrasis_ and _iconotext_?


What is the term for accusing a person of mischief through invented, twisting and changeable terminology?

What is the term for accusing a person of invented wrongdoing in such a way that he cannot respond or even clearly understand the accusations? For example, frequently reversing the definitions of the terminology used, or basing argumentation on hints and roundabout phrasings, metaphors, invented- on-the-fly floating definitions and rules to fit with the accusations. Update:   I think **inquisitorial** is the most proper term for context in which the result does not depend on the argumentation of one of the sides. Though, **jargonaut** was completely unheard by me and incrementally more useful.


Capitalization of names that begin lowercased, at the beginning of a sentence

> **Possible Duplicates:**   >  How Should Trademarks be Written?   >  How do you capitalize a proper noun such as "iPhone"? Many products these days have names that intentionally begin with lowercase letters. The most common examples are of the Apple "iDevice" variety, but there are some others - inSSIDer is one. When beginning a sentence with these names, should the name be capitalized?


Capitalising the t in Twitter / twitter

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  How Should Trademarks be Written?   >  How do you capitalize a proper noun such as “iPhone”? I'm writing a paper about the function of twitter as a news medium and I'm wondering about the capitalisation of the brand name. Normally one would start brand names with a capital letter, but the twitter logo made me doubt - it's such an explicitly lowercase t. Internet companies or standards often use quite _refreshing_ capitalisations in their brand names (WordPress, jQuery), and I was just wondering what your verdict was on 'twitter'. Should it be a capital T since it's a company name? The twitter website does not seem to provide much confirmation in either direction, as it seems like the differen authors (i.e. on the blog) tend to go by different rules. And what about words like _Tweet_ , _Retweet_ and _Mention_?


Upper or lowercase letter if name at the start of the sentence?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  How do you capitalize a proper noun such as “iPhone”?   >  Capitalization of names that begin lowercased, at the beginning of a > sentence I have a product that is called xYZ. If I use this name at the beginning of a sentence, should I use upper or lower case letters? An example of such a sentence would be: > xYZ can be used to ... vs. > XYZ can be used to ... I tend to use the first one, since it is a name, but I'm not sure.


Would the first letter of the middle of a name such as Christian de Duve need to be capitalized

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Can a sentence start with a small letter? ... if you're beginning your sentence with it? Would it be like, "de Duev notes that the molecular world must necessarily... ", or "De Duev notes that the molecular world must necessarily..."? I'd also like to know why is the middle-name not capitalized in such French/European names?


Capitalising a sentence whose first word is explicitly lowercase

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Capitalization of names that begin lowercased, at the beginning of a > sentence Let's say that you have a word that should be typed with leading lowercase letter. Perhaps it's a computer command. Perhaps it's an Internet nickname. I can't find any more serious examples. When you put that word at the beginning of a sentence, should you capitalise it? > `cat` allows you to display contents of a file. The convention is that commands are typed in fixed-width font, so this doesn't stand out as much. > soccer_boy_89 turned out to be my sister's account. This does, though. Of course you could paraphrase the sentence such that the problematic word is not the first one, but that's not the point here.


Should a mathematical variable at the beginning of a sentence be capitalized?

If a sentence starts with a mathematical variable which normally is lower case, should that variable be capitalized? Or is it better to just avoid starting sentences with variables? >   1. _x_ and _y_ represent the width and height of the anticuboctahedron. >   2. _X_ and _y_ represent the width and height of the anticuboctahedron. >   3. The width and height of the anticuboctahedron are represented by _x_ > and _y_. >


How do you capitalize a proper noun such as "iPhone"?

I was always taught to capitalize the first letter of the first word in a sentence, and also the first letter of proper nouns. In the last few years it's been common for certain firms to name their brands something that is always spelled with a small first letter and a capital second letter. **It is almost as if they demand the rules of usage are changed.** What do you do about this? Where is the inquisition when you need it? Should you start a sentence with "IPhone"? Should you use "iphone" in the middle of a sentence?


Should you capitalise "eBay" at the beginning of a sentence?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  How do you capitalize a proper noun such as "iPhone"? Which is correct? > On the internet you can buy stuff. **eBay** is one place where you can buy > stuff. > > On the internet you can buy stuff. **EBay** is one place where you can buy > stuff.


What is the correct capitalization of code examples when beginning a sentence?

I am writing a technical book and a lot of it is structured as explanations of code examples. For instance:               var links = data.map(function (d) {         return {source: nick_id(d.from),                      target: nick_id(d.to),                      count: matrix[nick_id(d.from)][nick_id(d.to)]};     });      Followed by: > `links` is a list of elements that tell us something. In all versions of the book "links" will have special formatting so it looks like code, the idea being that it's a direct reference into the code sample, which helps readers understand what I'm talking about. Question is, how should "links" be capitalised? It's at the beginning of a sentence so it should be "Links", but then it no longer looks exactly like the code sample and technically doesn't represent the same variable since the programming language is case sensitive. For a more extreme example, what if I want to start a sentence with `.map`, what are the grammar rules about starting a sentence with a full stop? I would like to avoid restructuring sentences like the above because `links` is the sentence subject's name. And a sentence like: > The variable `links` is a list of elements ... Is as silly as: > The person John went to the store.


Title Capitalization of Keywords in Programming Languages

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Capitalising a sentence whose first word is explicitly lowercase   >  Should I change the structure of a sentence/add filler words to make sure > that the sentence always starts with a capital letter? In programming language documentation, it is common for keywords to appear in titles. Assuming that the keyword is strictly lowercase in the language, how should that keyword be capitalized if it is used as the first word in a title? For example: **int**   `int` is used to specify an integer type. \-- or -- **Int**   `int` is used to specify an integer type.


Can a sentence start with a small letter?

> **Exact duplicate:**   >  How do you capitalize a proper noun such as “iPhone”?   >  **Also related:**   >  Capitalising a sentence whose first word is explicitly lowercase   >  Should I change the structure of a sentence/add filler words to make sure > that the sentence always starts with a capital letter?   >  Is it a good idea to begin a sentence with a number or a variable name? Is the following sentence alright? > _von Braun was a pioneer in space technology._ I am not referring to this sentence alone — most probably it's wrong (on Wikipedia, it would have been written as "Von Braun was a pioneer in space technology", in spite of the fact that his actual name was spelt as _Wernher Magnus Maximilian Freiherr von Braun_ ). My question is more general: is there any grammatically correct sentence which starts with a small letter?


Are the words "mandatory," "obligatory," and "compulsory" interchangeable?

As a non-native speaker, I wonder what the rules are for preferring one of "mandatory", "obligatory" or "compulsory" over the others. The Corpus of Contemporary American English yields examples such as these: **Mandatory: 4865 cases**   * mandatory safety nets around trampolines   * mandatory health care reform   * mandatory sentence for first-degree murder   * Unemployment sent me a letter, said this was a mandatory class.   * To stave off matting, daily brushing with a paddle brush is mandatory.   * He believes he can fill the role of rangy wing scorer that seems almost mandatory for championship teams.   * "Self-deprecation is mandatory here", he said. **Compulsory: 1060 cases**   * compulsory health insurance   * states that prohibit compulsory unionism   * compulsory celibacy for the clergy   * added to the school curriculum as a compulsory second language   * U.S. imperialism can be thought of as a system of compulsory heterosexuality   * My landlord and mother made my weekly visits to the center compulsory if I was to continue running my business rent free from her basement. **Obligatory: 808 cases**   * the obligatory happy ending   * when the obligatory compliments were out of the way   * I would hang up on my father after the obligatory five minutes   * the laptop computer has become nearly obligatory on campus "Mandatory" is presumably related to "mandate" and used when it's a matter of law or regulation. "Obligatory" is presumably related to "obligation" and used when it's a matter of moral, social or other obligation rather than law. (Like "the obligatory happy ending".) "Compulsory" seems to mean that you are forced to do something, but the forcing mechanism is unspecified? Is this approximately correct, and are there other rules of thumb for when to use which term? There seems to be some cases where the terms are interchangeable: "Mandatory health insurance" and "compulsory health insurance" would be equally acceptable, wouldn't it? Would "school curriculum compulsory second language" read the same if we substitute "mandatory" or "obligatory"?


What is the simile for dust?

What is the simile used when comparing to dust? And what does that comparison imply? Something similar to "as slick as a fox"


"All you battery needs can be found here" Is this correct?

I found this on the battery stand in a supermarket: "All your battery needs can be found here". I don't remember the exact wording, but what surprised me is that _needs_ can be found on a supermarket stand. Now, from the point of view of my native language, the correct way to say this is "All your battery needs can be satisfied here", but English is not that language, so here is my question is the above sentence correct? **Edit** This is a question about word usage. In my mind _needs_ or _requirements_ are not batteries. Needs or requirements are _to have_ batteries. And as such you can't place these on a stand. Are there any examples in literature, that could back up that one can refer to material objects as to "needs"?


To not want to believe something has happened

I usually hear people use the phrase "I don't/didn't want to believe it," and I've always been curious as to what it meant. Does it mean that the person is in denial of something? Or does it mean that the person does believe something but doesn't want to? How's it different from when people say "I don't believe it?"


What do you call someone who balances work and personal life well?

> **Work–life balance** is a concept including proper prioritizing between > "work" (career and ambition) and "lifestyle" (health, pleasure, leisure, > family and spiritual development/meditation). > > Related, though broader, terms include "lifestyle calm balance" and > "lifestyle choices". So what would you call someone who has a well-balanced work and life (personal life)? Note: **"Well-balanced"** may fit but it has a broader sense and has other connotations as well. A single-word noun would be preferable but can be an adjective too.


What’s purportedly wrong with Strunk & White’s “The Elements of Style”?

I was reading the comments on this answer where several users claimed that Strunk and White’s _The Elements of Style_ was “misinformed, hypocritical, and wrong” and “flat-out wrong or totally misleading”, so I’d love to get a delineated list of where it is wrong. **Note:** I have no position on this or axe to grind; I’ve just used it for years and would love to learn what I’ve been doing wrong thanks to it.


"Arrogant" vs. "conceited"

I'm a bit confused as to the difference between _arrogant_ and _conceited_. From my understanding, _arrogance_ is the equivalent of being confident and letting everyone know how great you are. For example, achieving the top of a leaderboard and then boasting extensively about the victory. _Conceit_ , I believe, is similar in that you may be boasting, but it's based more on unfounded measure. For example, they may make third place in the a race against the arrogant man, but they feel they would have gotten first place if only they had gotten a little more sleep. Conceit comes in their coping with not being so great, while the arrogant individual will at least admit defeat and be unable to rub their greatness in someone's face. What are the exact differences between these words?


Should I use 'no' or 'know'?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Is it "that's the same story, know?" or "that's the same story, no?" Which word should I use in this sentence, _no_ or _know_? > you also same college no? > you also same college know?


Use of ! to convey sarcasm vs. emphasis

One, two or even three exclamation marks are often added, especially in e-mail, to convey emphasis to phrases such as _Thanks!_ , or _No problem!_. My problem is that in British English, you could also use the exclamation mark to convey sarcasm such that _Thanks!_ could just as well be interpreted as _Thanks a bunch, why on earth did you have to do/say that!_. Is this just a simple regional difference? I make a point of suggesting workmates use the exclamation mark with great caution! (emphasis intended)


Referring pronoun in multiple clauses sentence

> "I have learned that when a newborn baby holds, with its little hand, his > father’s finger, it has trapped him for the rest of his life." \- Gabriel > Garcia Marquez (1927-2014) The word 'him' here at the last clause refer to the baby or father?


New sentence after semicolon

After a semicolon what follows isn't capitalized like at the beginning of a sentence. However, what if it were? Would that be incorrect?


Word for doing something only because it provokes a reaction from others

Some people act in ways that provoke surprised or shocked reactions from others, mainly because they enjoy getting those reactions and not because of any inherent desire to perform the action itself. For example, I suspect that this is a primary motivating factor behind the recent Brony phenomenon -- the My Little Pony show itself would probably not attract hords of adult male fans, were it not for the incredulous reactions which the fandom elicits. Is there a word to describe this sort of behavior? ("Provocative" seems off -- it refers to the fact that a reaction is elicited, but not that this is the motivation behind the behavior.)


Can "..." mean the same thing as a semicolon?

Can a semicolon be replaced with "..." (an ellipsis) in a sentence? Is there any difference at all?


Meaning of "game of thrones"

What exactly does _game of thrones_ mean? It is being translated into my native language (Czech) as _a game in which one might win one of the many thrones_ , but to me it sounds more like _a game in which different thrones play against each other_.


What would you (negatively) call a person who insists on repaying even a small amount of money?

Let's say you paid for a friend's bus ride, and he insists on paying you back rather than just let it be and stop worrying about it. You even find it rude on his part that he won't just forget about it. Is there an adjective or a phrase for such kind or a person, or for such kind of a behavior?


Word for 'make more frequent'

For example, how would you convert > He made cunning remarks more frequently. to > He **____** his cunning remarks.


Passivity as a passive activity?

I was reading "A fault in our stars" by John Green and he did something rather interesting. The scene is one in which the mother wants her child to attend support group. All the child wants to do is watch America's Next Top Model. The mother wants her to participate in activities to which she responds that television is an activity to which the mother exclaims that television is a "passivity". Is the mother's definition of the action of watching television linguistically correct? I tried to search for examples of where "passivity" was used this way, but I came up with nothing. Can anyone else find an example of this use? Either way I think this is a very interesting use of the word and one that describes actions that are not inherently active.


Salutation/Professional Addressing "Dy GM", what does it mean?

Found the addressing "Dy GM" in New Delhi area in the IT domain. What does it mean?


Should I capitalize "Chemical Engineering Curriculum"?

> The introduction of this course within the chemical engineering curriculum > is at this point in early stages of development. > The introduction of this course within the Chemical Engineering Curriculum > is at this point in early stages of development.


use of contractions (and some homophones)

Is it true that the current usage and spelling of words like we're/were, there/they're/their, your/you're, etc. is shifting? I heard that in the next generation the apostrophe may be disappearing in these words, the spelling changed, and the meaning made more fluid to circumvent the need for these homophones altogether.


"Out of pocket"?

I'm increasingly hearing the phrase "out of pocket" used in America as a colloquialism to mean "away from the office", "unavailable", or "incommunicado". > I apologize for not replying sooner; I have been out of pocket.   * What is the etymology of this usage?   It always sounds odd to me, since I had previously always associated the phrase with expenses, _e.g._ , "I had to pay for the service _out of pocket_ ," meaning, "I had to pay for the service using my own money."   * Should either of these usages be avoided?   * What is the extent of their acceptance?


What exactly does "President Obama will ‘fold faster than a lawn chair’" mean?

In today’s Washington Post’s “Today’s Quote,” picked up from the comment of Former Reagan Budget director David Stockman in an interview with The Daily Beast (hat tip to Political Wire), I came across the phrase “Obama will fold faster than a lawn chair.” As I could not get the idea of “fold faster a lawn chair,” or even “fold a lawn chair,” I consulted Merriam Webster, Cambridge Dictionary Online and The online Slang Dictionary in vain to find none of them carry the definition of the above phrases. Is David Stockman predicting that President Obama will withdraw his agenda easily like folding a lawn chair, (or give up lawn chair i.e. his stand) and succumb to Republicans to accept their budget reduction plan? What is the exact meaning of “fold faster a lawn chair”? Is this a well-established cliché, though I couldn’t find it in any of dictionaries available? The sentence containing this phrase is as follows: > Bring it on. I think the Republicans need to stand rigidly firm and shut the > government down for a few days. The Obama White House is weak. If the > Republicans hold the line, Obama will **fold faster than a lawn chair**. And > the Republicans will get their $60 billion in reductions.


What do you call exaggerations like "I'm starving"?

For example, when you are a little hungry and you say "I'm starving", or when you are so tired and you say "I'm dying". What do you call these type of expressions? Just exaggerations? I don't know how to explain this better.


"On the other hand" without the first hand

I have been criticized by colleagues in the past for using "on the other hand" as an alternative to "however" at the beginning of a sentence, because they said that you could only use it if a previous sentence featured "on the one hand". My question is: while their argument is logical, is it really followed by usage?


A single word noun for a "reusable object"

What is a single word noun that means "a reusable object"? I'm looking for something with as few syllables as possible, that is English vernacular. The word would also be abstract, so it encompasses any reusable object. For example humans, dogs, and cats are all _animals_. A friend (and a SO user) mentioned the word "durables" describes reusable objects, but I would like a more commonly used term.


Difference between 'sentimental' and 'emotional'?

What is the difference between the terms 'sentimental' and 'emotional'?


What is the correct term for someone who works on/with WordPress?

I'm trying to figure out what the best way to describe someone who works with/on WordPress. Some people use WordPresser but that seems a little bit clunky for me. It's easy to say WordPress developer, designer, etc but if you wanted to talk about how to talk about lots of people who work on WordPress what would be the best way for form the correct word? Example of usage: "he was the best WordPresser of them all" etc. I've been thinking it might be appropriate to formulate it like you would a person of a specific nationality - i.e. Italian, or whatever. But I'm not sure what would be right, both grammatically and to make sure it doesn't sound clunky.


How to pronounce "404 Not Found"

How do we pronounce the http status code _404 not found_ : _four hundreds and four_ , _four-zero-four_ or _four-four_? We usually use 200, 201, 302, 401, 403, 404, 412, 500. I have read How to pronounce "720p" and "1080p".


What does “the government picks winners and losers” mean?

I heard the phrase, “ _pick winners and losers_ ” in AP Radio News (aired on March 19), relating GOP presidential candidate, Mitt Romney’s attack on President Obama’s economic policy: > -Republican Presidential candidate, Mitt Romney says President Obama is > wrong to _pick winners and losers_ to try to boost the economy:   >  “Because he has not worked in the economy, he doesn’t understand when the > government _picks winners_ , they think, _and losers_ that the rest of the > free economy shatters.”- There are many “pick winners and losers” quotes in Google search, for instance; > “Aside from this disparity and the empirical evidence that suggests the > ineffectiveness of such efforts, it turns out there is one more problem with > _picking winners and losers_ : sometimes the winners you pick turn out to be > losers.” - www.ctnewsjunkie.com. But I find the definition of this phrase nowhere. I remember that Chinese government took 'winners first' policy once to try to make the rich richer first, then making the poor rich subsequently as if trickling its effect when they started to steer their economic policy toward the open-market. Does “the government picks winners and losers” mean to try to protect or benefit everybody, i.e. the rich and the poor equally?   What does it exactly mean?


the use of both to show emphasis and experimentalist and theoretician communities

In your opinion is _both_ superfluous in the following sentence? > Efforts from both experimentalist and theoretician communities, started to > increase over the last decades in order to turn the hydrogen energy from a > possible solution to a reality. I used _both_ , even if it seems superfluous, to show emphasis that, although at the beginning of hydrogen energy research, most of researches were experimentalists, it turns out in the last decades that theoreticians are interested in such fields as well. A second doubt I have is if the expression "experimentalist and theoretician communities" is correct in the way I'm using it. I've read many times expressions like: "Each session, devoted to a kind of spectroscopy, will include invited contributions from both experimentalists and theoreticians" or "time-scale motions remains a challenge to experimentalists and theoreticians alike". But in my sentence I'd like to make clear that theoreticians and experimentalist working in different fields, as for example catalysis, electrochemistry and computational chemistry, are now given attention to hydrogen energy. That's why I used _communities_. In you opinion, does it make sense?


North, South, East, West as Adjective or Noun in Street Signs?

I frequently see street signs such as “West America Street” or “North Carolina Avenue”. Grammatically, is there any way to say with certainty what is meant by “West America Street”? Is it a street named on honor of the western area on the US? Alternately, is it the west end of a street named in honor of the US for which there is also an east end?


The meaning of: "Why don't you just beat it?"

I would like to know what does this phrase means: > "Why don't you just beat it?" My dictionary says only that: beat it: get lost   Can you beat it? : Do you get it?


Tourism nomenclature help

I'm working in a software company working on an information system for travel agencies. Because we've grown big, we've decided to rename our internal project nomenclatore from Czech to English. I think I've translated all names well, with one exception. I will now try to explain its meaning before proposing my translations. In our system, there are "business cases" which are basically information containers containing a relation between a client and a travel agency. The simplest business case contains a hotel and a room that was reserved, names and ages of people that are going to spend their holidays there, generated contract and invoice documents to be printed etc. It could not be possible to make a reservation for any hotel if the travel agency did not know the "availability" of the hotel. That means, it's essential for a travel agency to know **how many** people can be accommodated in a hotel and **when**. Our information system just provides them with means to easily keep track of the hotels' availability. If a reservation is made, there are many complex interconnections, invisible to the employees of the travel agency. But a programmer working with the system has to know all of these connections. As I said, a business case contains people that are going to spend their holiday somewhere. Now imagine, that for the system to work, there must be some connection between these people and the hotel availability. This connection essentialy says "1 man takes 1 availability unit from the hotel". Now imagine that this connection is actually a single item with many implications. With this model, we can create much more complex situations and in agendas outside hotels, e.g. flight reservations or theatre/cinema reservations. Examples of complex models: "1 and only one children takes 0 availability if the children is aged from 0 to 2" "1 dog takes 0 availability in a flight" "1 man takes 2 availability if the room he reserved can be ordered for himself regardless the total capacity of the room" The question is, how would you call this connection? Something that is abstract and succinct enough. Word/phrase that basically says that **there is an X of "something/someone" that is taking and holding Y places somewhere under some conditions and for a specific time.**   * Using word-by-word translation from Czech, the result is "bound capacity" but that just doesn't sound well for me. Does it for you?   * Another suggestions I could think of are capacity holder, availability holder, space block, space binder ...    * It's also possible that there is a right word for this from the tourism industry which I don't know. (since I'm a programmer (IT industry), not a travel agency salesman) I'm not a native english speaker. Could you suggest what would you think is the best? :) (the question is probably a bit too complicated so if you're not sure you don't understand, please try to read the following explanations, they might help :) **THE WORD RESERVATION:** Someone proposed a "reservation" and for a second, I felt like a total idiot but then I realized that we already use this word - reservation is actually a state of the business case. And business case is in reservation when it has valid _connections_. When there are no connections at all, the business case might be cancelled (because it wasn't paid or for a client request etc.) or many other reasons (the hotel is not be available during storm seasons/state holidays etc. etc. etc.) **RESPONSE TO FIRST LYNN'S ANSWER**               Hotel California has 4 "availability spots".          Family Jones has 4 people plus a dog ... this takes 3 "availability spots"      -- 0 for the dog, 0 for the infant, 1 for the older child, and 2 for the adults          What would you call "availability spots" in English?      I'm not asking this :) I'm asking what would you call the thing that takes the availability spot. It can be a dog, an infant, a child, in some cases even a luggage! **EXPLANATION OF THE BOUND CAPACITY** The idea is that the occupant is _binding_ the single _capacity_ spot of the hotel to himself only. He's doing that by creating a "bound capacity" - a virtual unit that says how many places is he taking. Vast majority of these bound capacities are the simplest case: 1 man = 1 place. But there are also vast possibilities of how this bound capacity could be modified and how could it work anywhere else in the system.


Pronunciation of the word “reduct” as a noun

How should I pronounce the word _reduct_ as a noun?


What does this joke mean?

> You wanna know what line doesn't work on a harp player? > > “Hey baby, wanna pluck?” It's a joke from a sitcom. I think I understood its general meaning but I don't understand what a "line on a harp player" is. And pluck? Thanks for helping me.


Appropriate title case: 'em or 'Em or 'EM

It's a common practice to capitalize headings/titles of articles. But is there a correct or conventional way to capitalize words in titles that are ~~apocopated~~ apheresed at the beginning? E.g. > Disable Feeds (Make 'em Inaccessible) On Your Site Yes, I do understand that using _Them_ instead of _'em_ would be more proper, but I really wanted to know about this anyway.


Is there some rule against ending a sentence with the contraction "it's"?

I heard this lyric in a song the other day and it just sounded so wrong that I assumed it must be incorrect grammar, but I can't find any specific prohibition that applies. > That's what it's. That rolls off your tongue with the grace of a moose in a tutu, but I can't figure out why. There is clearly no problem with ending other sentences with a contraction. These sound fine. > I thought I could, but I can't.   >  Stop touching that, it will fall off if you don't.   >  You say that the sky is green, but it isn't. Also, it sounds just fine if you remove the contraction: > That's what it is. So what's up with this construction? Should it be avoided?


When can one use a contraction at the end of a sentence?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Is there some rule against ending a sentence with the contraction "it's"? Sometimes it's fine to use a contraction at the end of a sentence: "If you're thinking about starting a land war in Asia, just don't!" **(Sounds fine!)** Other times it sounds wrong: "Mr Vizzini is smarter than I'm." **(You must say, "... than I am.")** I am unaware of any rule that prescribes when it is okay to use a contraction at the end, and when it is not (or maybe I'm ascribing too much importance to the position of the contraction over some more significant attribute?). In any case, if there is a rule, I have no idea what it's.


Can you end a sentence with a clitic like "they're"?

I saw someone write the sentence "Of course they're". As a native English speaker, this instantly seemed wrong but I couldn't come up with a good reason as to why. I did a bit of research and there seems to be a rule called "stranding" where if there's an object before the clitic then it can't end like that but I don't entirely understand it.


Is the sentence "Do you know who I'm?" grammatically correct?

If so, why does it sound so awkward?


Using "it's" vs. using "it is" at the end of a sentence

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Is there some rule against ending a sentence with the contraction "it's"? Why is it that the following sounds incorrect: > "Would she know where it's?" But this sounds fine: > "Would she know where it is?"


Why does the contraction of "I will" sound strange in certain sentence constructions?

Recently, while chatting with a friend via text, my friend asked me, "Can you ask them tomorrow?" I responded with: > I will when I go. It occurred to me when writing this response that it would be really _weird sounding_ to say: > I'll when I go. However, it would have been normal sounding if I had said: > I'll ask when I go. Is there any formal reason why the version without "ask" following "I'll" is incorrect? Or maybe it is correct, but merely awkward? I suppose there may not be any explanation deeper than, "it just sounds weird," but any informative insights into why, ideally with examples of similar cases, would stand as an answer.


Is there a rule for when contractions are not possible?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Is there some rule against ending a sentence with the contraction "it's"? In conversing with non-native English speakers online, I saw someone type: > Do you know who *** _I’m_** ? This is obviously wrong to a native English speaker, but I don’t know why. Is there a rule that tells when contractions are not allowed? Here are some more similar examples where the contraction doesn’t work (with the expansion of the contraction in parentheses following each):   * Can you tell who * _I’m_ by my voice alone? (I am)   * Please, tell me who * _he’s/she’s/they’re_. (he is/she is/they are)   * If you want to go to the movie, * _we’ll._ (we will)    * Will you have some? Yes, * _I’ll._ (I will)    * I won’t have any, but tell me if * _you’ll_. (you will)   * I didn’t have the same thing for supper as * _you’d._ (you had)   * Would you like to go? Sure * _I’d._ (I would)


Why people don't use "Where it's?" question?

Why > "Where it's?" is incorrect while > "Where is it?" is considered correct? Was it like this all the time in English? Because the word oreder is wrong here too:               Why it's there? = Why it is there?      it is incorrect too. So, why `Where it's?` is wrong and `Why it's there?` is OK?


Is it okay to say "Yes you're." instead of "Yes you are."?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Is there some rule against ending a sentence with the contraction "it's"? I was having an SMS conversation with a friend and somehow "Yes you're" came into play in retaliation to a comment. Example: > Person 1: "You are bad at English". > > Person 2: "No I are not.". > > Person 1: "Yes you're". Is that acceptable? I would assume that it is. Think of "don't". You can say: > "No, don't." or > "I don't." and it is a contraction like "you're". So, is it okay?


"If you don't do it, I'll". Why does that sentence feel so awkward?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Is there some rule against ending a sentence with the contraction “it’s”? Earlier today while writing a very informal email, I expressed: > If you don't do it, I will. Upon looking at it, I realized that "I will" could be contracted to "I'll", however, this is completely unheard of and feels quite awkward. I am now quite curious, is there a reason why ending a sentence with "I'll" feels (or is) so inappropriate? I understand that the use of contractions is generally an informal use of language so rules of usage can be a bit loose. Therefore, this is a case that to me doesn't make logical sense and I'm a bit confused. Why does it feel wrong when an "I'll" is placed at at that end of a sentence, even though such an expression is informal and not, technically, an incorrect usage of the contraction "I'll?"


How to pronounce "aa" vowel pair?

The word in question is "thraal", a species from the Dr. Who universe (http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/Thraal) and coincidentally also a species from the Transformers universe (http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Thraal). The only similar word I know of is "Baal" and I've heard "bal", "bail" and "bawl" for that as well... so that doesn't help. Any guidance?


Indefinite Plural VS Indefinite Singular for stating general facts, properties, etc

Is there any nuance in the two sentences below if I want to state a general fact about **cars** ? A) **Cars** have 4 wheels. B) **A car** has 4 wheels. The question above is also a question to itself. So can I say "...if I want to state a general fact about **a car** " instead of "..... **cars** "?


be expected from vs. be expected by

Would you let me know the difference between the following sentences? >   1. The company’s third loan payment is expected from ABC Bank on Friday. >   2. The company’s third loan payment is expected by ABC Bank on Friday. >   3. The third loan payment is expected from the company on Friday. > I think #2 and #3 have almost the same meaning, but I can't understand #1. I don't know why 'from' is used in #1. #2 and #3 is much more clear than #1. (Sorry, there is no context, so please make up some contexts for the above sentences.)


What is the origin of "settle your hash?"

I understand the phrase "settle your hash" means to subdue someone through the use of threats or violence. For example, a heated argument between two individuals where insults were being lobbed to and fro might lead one to exclaim: > If you keep disparaging my mother like that I am going to settle your hash. What is the origin of this idiom?


What do you call a person who conducts seminar workshops?

If a _resource speaker_ or _guest speaker_ is someone who makes usually formal public speeches; a _trainer_ is someone who trains; how about someone who conducts seminar workshops?


What is the word for a surrounding sequence?

A pattern that begins a word is generally denoted as "prefix", one that ends a word is generally denoted as "suffix". Is there a word that indicates a pattern that surrounds a word. For instance (hello), is there a word that indicates the parentheses? So if I have several patterns i.e.: "hello" (hello) {hello} [hello] etc. What word do I use for the surrounding pattern?


Is it IQ or IQ score?

What's the correct way to use the term **_intelligence quotient_** in a sentence? > Jim's IQ is 130.   >  _–or–_   >  Jim's IQ score is 130.


What do you call a manager that can't hire or fire personnel?

Jon Taffer calls him a Stupidvisor. But I'd like to think that's what you call a phony supervisor. But is there a more direct word to refer to a phony manager? I mean my work has phony supervisors and phony managers. I say that because only the owner can fire/hire so we don't listen to them. We like to call the supervisors; Stupidvisor. But I would like to call the managers a different name, to distinguish them.


Is this expression correct?

Is it right in English to say: > It is nice a day. instead of > It is a nice day. Is any sentence of this form correct?


What is the origin of the use of "hate" with the preposition "on"?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Origin of "hating on" Recently I've noticed an increasing use of the phrase **to hate _on_** [someone]. From what I can tell, the addition of **_on_** implies a jealousy or dislike for another person's talent or status. It doesn't appear that **_to hate_** and **_to hate on_** are directly interchangeable; one wouldn't say _"I really hate on the taste of fish"_ for example. The verb _to hate_ was previously sufficient as far as I was aware, so where has the addition of the preposition **_on_** come from? My guess is America, but does anyone know where and when this originated?


Can I use "better" as a verb?

As my title, can I use "better" as a verb? I have read and known that the word "better" can be used as a verb. For example, to better your business productivity, you should use ABC technology. I've also searched in Google and found out some examples regarding the word "better" can be used as a verb. Can someone explain this to me?


Which one is more correct: "works at a university" or "works in a university"?

> My relative is a fairly big academic and works **at** a university. Is this correct? or should I have used **in** instead?


What is the difference between teaches "at" and "in" xxx university

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Which one is more correct: "works at a university" or "works in a > university"?   >  "In college" versus "at college" versus "at university" He teaches at xxx University. He teaches in xxx University. What's the difference between at and in here?


"In college" versus "at college" versus "at university"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Which one is more correct: "works at a university" or "works in a > university"? It seems that only in the U.S. one says that they are or were "in college", even though the person attended a university, such as the University of Iowa. You are either in college, or majored in such and such while in college. You hear the phrase "at college" less often, but never "at university" in the U.S.   Elsewhere, even next door in Canada, the equivalent phrase seems to be "at university": "I majored in English while at university." I don't think I have ever heard or read the phrase "in university" used.   Likewise, in the U.S., one says, for example, "I will be going to college next year" whereas elsewhere one seems to say "I will be going to university next year." Is there anywhere else in the world besides the U.S. where the phrase "in college" is used instead of "at university"? How did the American English usage come about?


Difference between "pain" and "ache"

What's the difference between _pain_ and _ache_? I often see the two words used (almost) interchangeably. At the same time the phrase "aches and pains" is pretty common, and seems to suggest that the two words aren't exact synonyms. The dictionary definitions I've seen ("ache is a continuous dull pain") don't really help in understanding many of the usages I've come across, such as this one from the NHS: > Back pain [...] usually feels like an ache and also this title: > Stomach ache and abdominal pain It would be particularly interesting to see examples where one of the two words is appropriate when describing physical suffering, and the other isn't.


Proper translation/explanation for business sector, business field

I am German. I am currently developing a system which acts like a data provider for company infos. A company needs to be assigned to one or more "business sectors". I currently deal with companies doing the following:   * Repairing vehicles   * Towing services   * Handicraft businesses   * Motor vehicle experts The above types I called "business sectors". Below these can be "business fields", like: Handicraft businesses   * mason   * carpenter, etc So my question is, how would a native speaker call these two levels? So far I've seen industrial sectors, branches, etc... I am confused ;)


How can we check if a noun is concrete or abstract?

To put it simple, a concrete noun is a noun with mass (for all concrete nouns), and a non-concrete noun is a noun without mass (for all non-concrete nouns). Is this true, or false? Is _sunlight_ a concrete, or abstract noun?


Alternate word for impersonate in terms of Items or things

Well actually I'm searching for the right word for a particular scenario or maybe behavior. Suppose I go to a shop and ask for an item but they don't have it. Now the sales person's priority is to make a sale and he **_impersonates_** (I know it's not the right word) another item and tells me it's what I'm looking for. What word do I use in place of impersonation?


'much better' spoken rather than written English?

Is it grammatically correct to use in a publication, that something is (a) 'much better' way of doing something?


Is there a difference between "anatomic" and "anatomical"?

I want to say "anatomical context". Google tells me that _anatomical_ in that context is preferred. An online dictionary claimed that American English does not have _anatomic_ but only knows _anatomical_.


call vs invoke - informatics context

Particularly in computer science and informatics, when should one use them? Is call the preferred form? For instance,               call function          invoke method      Googling for "call operation" returns +300 000 returns, whereas, "invoke operation" about +100 000. **EDIT:** For further context, the doubt came to my mind when working with Cucumber's Gherkin language "a Business Readable, Domain Specific Language that lets you describe software’s behaviour without detailing how that behaviour is implemented." Eg:               Given some precondition     And some other precondition     When some action by the actor     And some other action     And yet another action     Then some testable outcome is achieved


Why is the term "touched" no longer commonly used?

I’ve heard the term _touched_ used to refer to someone who is “not quite right”. I’m curious as to where this term came from, what it really means, and why it doesn’t tend to be used often anymore. Is it seen as offensive now, or does it just seem dated because it might be seen as religious or something (as in “ _touched_ by an angel” or “ _touched_ by God”)? I’ve also heard someone say that “ _on the spectrum_ is the new _touched_ ”, indicating that both terms are intended to be “delicate” ways of saying the same thing (with the further implication that “touched” was often used to refer to a person with autism, before many people knew what autism was). Is there any truth to this? What got me thinking on this is the new Kiefer Sutherland show _Touch_ which is about a kid who is diagnosed as autistic, although clearly there is something else (supernatural, presumably) going on. I was curious if the name was partially in reference to the term.


"having", "with" or "who have" - which is preferred for an attribute conferring group membership?

I need to provide a label in my software's user interface that describes about the list of members having private access to a document. So which one will suit best from the following?   1. Members having private access   2. Members with private access   3. Members who have private access Note: The label will be suffixed with a colon.


Joining homogeneous parts of the sentence

How can I join homogeneous parts of a sentence that determine each other? Can I use commas or should I also use some linking words such as _that is_? > **Example:** > > _By “circumstances” I mean not just the world around, but the society, (that > is) the mob able to make anyone behave in any way, the mob that influences > on our decisions, actions and individuality._


Which is correct, "dataset" or "data set"?

I keep writing _dataset_. Is that correct, or should I write _data set_?


Is the tense shift here problematic?

> See a raccoon and pungent isn't what you think. But **if you** put the > animal close to your nose, **you'll** find . . . Just a reworded example. Is there a tense shift here? One that shouldn't exist? Does the tense shift get removed if you write: > See a raccoon and pungent isn't what you think. But put the animal close to > your nose and you find


Meaning of "would that I might forget him"

> "Would that I might forget him," Ned said bluntly.   >  -- _A Song of Ice and Fire_ Does the sentence in quotes mean, "I would forget him if I could"?


Troubled by a sentence in a Reuters article

I am troubled by the following sentence > According to Khanh, Vietnam has 0.7 passenger aircraft for every 1 million > people in its population, compared with 7 in Malaysia and 15 in Australia. which appears in the following Reuters article http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/27/us-vietnam-dreamliners- idUSBRE98Q12H20130927 I don't think it's my fault however. In this case, it's fairly obvious that Malaysia and Australia have 7 and 15 aircrafts for every 1 million people respectively. But assume the statistic is slightly different so that the statement becomes > According to Khanh, Vietnam has 1 passenger aircraft for every 1 million > people in its population, compared with 7 in Malaysia and 15 in Australia. And assume we have no idea about the economy of the 3 countries, then the trouble becomes Is it > Malaysia and Australia have 1 aircraft for every 7 and 15 millions people > respectively. Or > Malaysia and Australia have 7 and 15 aircrafts for every 1 million people > respectively. Do I have a valid point here?


What is the correct romanization of the Russian name "Андрей" — "Andrey" or "Andrei"?

What is the most preferable: "Andrey" or "Andrei" for the Russian name "Андрей"? Wikipedia gives both variants.


Logic behind "at most"

Does the term 'at most' mean there is at least one?


Does "All" imply one or more?

Does _all_ imply that there is one or more of something?   * Does the statement "all of the books are red" imply there is at least one red book?    * Could there be zero books and the statement still be factually correct?   * Is it inherently ambiguous? Not sure if this is an English question or more of a math or logic question.


Where do East End / Gangster slang terms for numbers relating to money originate?

Words like 'monkey', 'pony', 'ton' and so on are used by East End villains and Cockneys to denote numbers - ton is one hundred for example. Examples abound in popular culture (The Krays, Only Fools and Horses, Guy Ritchie movies). Where do these terms come from? And how could the words possibly connect to the amounts?


Is there any rule of order for time, date, place, building, and etc?

I sent an email to confirm my meeting with a person which specified time, date, place, and building on the email like below: > I would like to meet you at 5pm this Sunday in KFC on the first floor in USA > Shopping center. There are two things about this sentence. (It's just my opinion.)   1. It's overly complicated for me.   2. The order of time, date, place, and etc doesn't look right. I wonder if there is a rule of order when writing about time, date, place, and etc.


Word to describe "when sensitive information is given to a trusted proxy in case of untimely death"

What's a good word to describe the situation when sensitive information is given to a trusted proxy (such as a lawyer), to be released only when a certain event occurs, such as a person's untimely death?


Is there a term for "*cough*<something>*cough*"?

What I mean is the act of "coughing" something that you don't actually want to (or rather dare) say outright. So instead of writing, say, "Miss Parker", you'd write "*cough*Ms Parker*cough*" or fake a cough that sounds very much like "Miss Parker". Written and spoken differ in that of course, when written is absolutely clear what that "coughed" term is, while when spoken it's "hidden" in the cough (which the written form tries to express). Never heard it in conversation, only heard it in movies or read it in books, though my contact to actual English native-speakers is (sadly) limited. Is there a linguistic/rhetorical term for that?


What do we call this kind of recursive expression?

> A metaphor is like a simile. Is there a name for the kind of statement that suggests an infinite recursion? It is in a way similar to a paradox such as the one with a statement written on each side of a piece of paper. Side one says "The statement on the other side of this page is true"; Side two says "The statement on the other side of this page is false." But the quotation above is not a paradox, an endless contradiction, but an endless reinforcement. What do we call that? I'm finding it hard even to come up with adequate tags for this question. And remember: All generalizations are false.


Nouns constructed out of an adjective and a suffix?

I experienced a bit of interesting language-building this past weekend. A post about "subtle -isms" (i.e. subtle sexism, subtle racism, etc.) had various commenters who used the phrase "subtle-ism" (no space), and even one person who used "subtleism" as a noun on twitter: "... 'subtleism' = lowlevel *-ism that hurts in aggregate" Obviously "subtleism" is a long way from being a "real word", but I do think it has a very interesting and unintuitive construction: subtle (adj.) + -ism (suffix) -> subtleism (noun). I'm wondering if there are any other words constructed similarly (through rebracketing, de-hyphenation, etc) in the English Language. Edit: I don't think "subtleism" is a particularly well-constructed or intuitive word, but someone did use it and I'm interested in seeing if there are any similar words. Thanks!


Properly refer to the turn of the year

During a meeting I was explaining a problem that only occurs once year: when one year ends and new one begins. Specifically during the first few days of the new year. Unfortunately, I was lost for words to describe the phenomenon, and, in the midst of stuttering, uttered, "Well the problem only happens during year turning, umm, well when 2010 became 2011..umm.." I got my point across, with mild sense of embarrassment, considering that a fairly large audience was attentively listening to my poorly formed narrative (I'd better stop now with this extraneous information). **What is the best way to describe what I was trying to telegraph --that is, the issue only occurring during the turn of the year?**


Can you place "so" after an adjective for emphasis?

Normally you write, for example,               Life is so fleeting.     She's so beautiful.      "so" is used for emphasis. Can you invert it with an adjective to have more emphasis?               Life is fleeting so.     She's beautiful so.      I think I have seen this kind of use before. Note this question is for written, literary English, not spoken English. Thank you.


Prepositions to use when indicating locations

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  When should I use "in" or "on"? I am always confused with the prepositions to use when indicating an event happening at a place. Should I use "at" or "in" or "on"? For example: > We had our dinner at the McDonalds _at/in_ the shopping centre _at/on_ Sixth > Avenue. The McDonalds restaurant is in the shopping centre. The shopping centre is located at Sixth Avenue. So am I right to say "the McDonalds _in_ the shopping centre _at_ Sixth Avenue"? Now, what if it was a street instead of an avenue? Say for example: > We had our dinner at the McDonalds _at/in_ the shopping centre _at/on_ Coral > Street. Here, somehow, I find it natural to say "the McDonalds _at_ the shopping centre _on_ Coral Street". How do I determine the right prepositions to use? And how would the different prepositions give different meanings to the sentence?


'On a swing' vs 'in a swing'

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  When should I use "in" or "on"? Would you say: > A child is sitting in a swing. or > A child is sitting on a swing. Is it the same case as: _in a chair_ vs _on a chair_?


how to use "in" and "on" different things

There is a really big confusion in me when it comes to using "in" and "on". If I am describing a position of an object I know how the two words differ, but when it comes to other things it really confuses. e.g > in photo or on photo   >  in website or on website   >  in phone or on phone   >  in the movie or on the movie   >  in his account or on his account How do we figure out which is the word to use in such occasions? What are the rules to get them right?


When should I use "in" or "on"?

As it is common with people from my country, I have an immense difficulty with prepositions in English, especially with the use of _in_ and _on_. When the preposition indicates the position of the object it is a bit easier to decide which one to use, but as it requires thinking from me, I still say things like "I put the bill _in_ the fridge", "my pencil is _on_ my bag", etc, even though if I think about it, I would know how to say it correctly. Of course, even in those cases where the preposition indicates position the decision is not always clear, as is the case for example with "on the bus" (you are not on top of the bus, you are inside the bus) or "he is _in_ bed" (you are not inside the bed, you are on top of your bed). Other cases are even less clear, and I believe there is no real rule to decide what should be said; the person should just know it. Two examples are " _in_ a bad mood", "you are _on_ my mind". So my first question is whether there is really no rule to help me. The second question refers to two of the cases where I still don't know whether to use _in_ or _on_ :   * good luck on/in your exam   * in/on the list The last one is especially important to me, as I have asked a number of native speakers, and each time I get a different answer. The only consensus seems to be the case where you say "on top of the list". Apart from that, some people will say that I should say "his name is in the list" whereas others think I should say "his name is on the list". And yeah, a couple of people did tell me that I can use either. Can someone help me?


"Inspect" vs. "control"

Which of _inspect_ or _control_ is more appropriate when referring to action checking the operational state of something? Context: Workers are checking the operational state of a billboard with regards to its cleanliness, lighting, etc. Their sole job is to report their findings, they are not required to act on their findings. Is the difference just cosmetic for my context, or is there some subtle difference in meaning between using _inspect_ and _control_?


Describing features that are included in a service

When writing about more than one feature. Would you write "The service _includes_ features such as A, B and C" or "The service _include_ features such as A, B and C"


Is the expression, "having a good time" too personal?

Me and a colleague were jointly writing an email to an English speaking business partner when a discussion arose on how to formulate a sentence. The business partner is currently on vacation, so I thought that the sentence "We hope you're having a good time on your vacation" was a good and appropriate way to address this in the beginning of the email. My colleague on the other hand said that the phrase "having a good time" is more personal and something you say to people you know more personally and something along the line of "We hope you're enjoying your vacation" would be more appropriate. What would you say the correct semantic of this phrase is?


"Moving house" vs "moving houses"

Which is more natural between the two of these sentences? > I plan to move house next month.   >  I plan to move houses next month. Are there any places where _move houses_ should be used over _move house_ or vice versa?


Is there are term for when you believe that because something hasn't happened, it won't or can't happen?

I was having a conversation with someone about whether or not robotics and AI will cause problems by eliminating jobs. They said: "People worried about joblessness when we started to mechanize farms, their worries never panned out, therefore your worries now are misplaced." Or to use another example: "The last big asteroid that came close to earth didn't crash into us, therefore we'll never be hit by one ever." Without any justification as to why the two situations are similar this line of thinking seems like it is a fallacy. If so, what is the name for it? If not is there any other word or term that describes the line of thinking?


Meaning of "Put an egg in your shoe and beat it"

> Go on! Put an egg in your shoe and beat it. What does "Put an egg in your shoe and beat it" mean?


"Undertake" and "overtake"

_Under_ \- and _over_ \- seem to be prefixes with contrary meanings. But with the example of _undertake_ and _overtake_ , I don't see contrary meanings between them. Am I missing something?


Is this sentence correct English?

I am not a native English speaker. But I would like to know if the following sentence is correct? "Choose a password at least 6 characters long." Or should it be something like "Choose a password that is at least 6 characters long."?


Meaning of "binge"?

What does it really mean? And what do _binge-watching_ ; _binge-reading_ ; _binge-eating_ mean?


Grammar: 'dangerous to' or 'dangerous for'

Looking at the health warning on our beers, I'm sure the grammar is incorrect. > "Alcohol abuse is dangerous **to** your health." Shouldn't that be: > "Alcohol abuse is dangerous **for** your health." Used as a verb, we'd say: "This is **a danger to** you." Used as an adjective shouldn't we say: "This is **dangerous for** you"?


Image in article

What would you call an image in a newspaper article that appears in the flow of the article with text wrapped around it? For example an article with two columns — on the right column there's an image with wrapping around it. What would you call it? In-line image? Article in-line image? Paragraph image?


Do we compile the source or the binaries?

When programming, we usually write text files in some programming language. These source files are fed into a compiler that compiles them into binary files. My question is whether to say:   * we compile the source files, or   * we compile the binary files? Is one of the two more correct than the other?


Synonym for "heavy use"

Like this sentence: > A heavy use in X taught me how to X. What are the other sayings of "heavy use"?


What is meant by "pun intended"?

I am not a native speaker of English. I came across many articles which used the phrase "pun intended". In many cases I am not able to grasp the meaning of the sentence as what this phrase mean in the context. For example, > Behavioural experts say it is not just the wiring that causes the > ‘differences’ (pun intended). I am totally clueless about what the meaning of the phrase inside the braces is. What does it mean?


What word should I use when I want to say someone said?

* A said that "if you want to get this job, you must know about computer hardware."   * B state that "you must finished this task within this week, otherwise we will have problems" I know and use only 2 words, "said" and "state" and I don't like when I write a long email and use same word over and over again. I want to know an alternative words to express someone say something.


What does "at best" signify in "this slowly becomes annoying at best"?

What does this mean: > This slowly becomes annoying at best I cannot understand what the last two words of this phrase signify.


Why is there a comma in "Man discusses his, wife's experience"

Why is there a comma after "his" in the headline? Does this mean his AND his wife's experience? Is it correct english, or slang? "Man discusses his, wife's experience being injured during the Boston marathon bombings." Source: http://abcnews.go.com/US/video/boston-marathon-explosion-video-attack- victim-hard-mad-18969745


Word for "translating" English to English

Is there a specific word for "translating" a work from period Modern English into contemporary English? For example, if Locke's philosophies were rewritten point by point in contemporary English, would you say they had been translated? Rendered? Adapted? Something else?


Can I write "cupcake sprinkle"? -- Google searches are bringing up "sprinkle cupcakes"

I'm writing a text where the object of the text is the sprinkle on top of the cupcake, "cupcake sprinkle". But I've searched it and it all turns up "sprinkle cupcakes".


Meaning of "I'm a disaster"

What does _disaster_ mean in the following sentence? > I'm a disaster.


Where to put the "+" in "200-word" to mean "200 or more words"?

I wrote this: > Write a 200-word essay. However, I need to indicate that it should be at least 200-words. For brevity, I'd like to place "+". I've tried these:   * 200+-word   * +200-word   * 200-word+ Which way is correct in formal or technical writing?


Would you use the term "looker" to describe a man?

Both Merriam Webster and Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary define _looker_ as a word used to describe an attractive person, usually a woman. http://oald8.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/dictionary/looker http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/looker The operative word is "usually". Urban Dictionary, however, tends to be a bit more liberal, and the term's used to describe both men and women (but, then again, it's Urban Dictionary). So I'd like to know the opinion of native English speakers coming from different parts of the English-speaking world: How unusual would it be to call a handsome man a "looker"? E.g., "Joseph Stalin was quite a looker in his youth". ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/J2kyz.jpg)


I am glad to have met you

If I met a person yesterday, could I say, now, `"I am glad to have met you"` ? Or is it better to say: `It's been a pleasure to meet you`?


Should there be a hyphen in 're-rate'?

If you have already rated something and then you want to rate it again, what is the correct term? > _Rerate_ or _Re-rate_?


"Security was a privilege of expensive locks"

Can I say "security was a privilege of expensive locks"? I am rechecking a translation, and the use of _privilege_ in this context seems too weird to me. Isn't "privilege" used only with people?


"Indexes" or "indices"?

A table can have one index, or it has two or more ind...? Is it _indexes_ or _indices_? I'm just asking since I've noticed that they're both used quite often. Even Wikipedia seems to support both variants, although it prefers to use _indexes_. Simply put: Which plural is the preferred one?


When should cooking, cuisine, and cookery be used?

I have never really understood when the words _cooking_ , _cuisine_ and _cookery_ should be used, and to what level they are synonymous. For example, in each example below, which could you use and why (or why not)? >   * Sicilian cuisine is based on seafood >   * the local cuisine is just fine, but their wine is terrible >   * my wife is much better than me at cooking pasta >   * Greg is more skilled than me in cookery >   * I am taking cooking classes after work >


Should I use 'to'?

I have two verbs in a sentence. I know I have to use 'to' before each verb. But in this case it sounds a little bit strange to me. Should I use _to_ there? > Test that this method returns right data and to works correctly.


A word to express the idea of "human traits"

Is there a single word that can succinctly express the idea of "human traits" or "human behaviours" or "human habits"? Words that I have thought like race, species are not good because the sound too general and have too little link to the idea of "human traits"


"to throw someone something" vs "to throw something at someone"

In the following sentence, the need for the at preposition is clear: "He threw something at him" However, if I started the sentence the other way round, it would feel (at least to me) as if the preposition was no longer needed: "He threw him something" The question is: Is it correct to omit the preposition when the person (indirect object?) is mentioned first? UPDATE: This would seem at a first glance as a normal Dative Alteration, as many of the responses told, but a Dative Alteration also implies the use of "to" or "for" prepositions, because the indirect object should respond to "to whom" and "for whom" questions. So, since in this case the preposition at use is "at", what happens to the alteration? Is it still a valid Dative Alteration? UPDATE: After the overwhelming responses that stated that what follows the preposition "at" is not an indirect object, then the case of the Dative Alteration does not apply, apparently turning the alteration from "He threw something at him" into "He threw him something" invalid. Nonetheless, I've googled a lot on this matter looking for appearances of "threw him a" (expecting a following noun) and found no contradicting results. In all cases what followed was a noun that always meant some kind of help or utility but no harm (a slice of bread, a coin, a handkerchief, a smile, a kiss). The only exception I've found was in the case of baseball, where pitchers "threw batters a slow or fast ball", in an attempt to make the batter miss the ball, instead of actually catching it. All things considered, I'm closing the question, and finally accepting John's answer (and comments) as correct. Thank you.


"Participate at" vs "Participate in"

Can we use both "participate at" and "participate in" interchangeably? Is there a difference between the two if any?


Relative clauses: integrated, restrictive, non-restrictive, supplementary

H. W. Fowler established a terminology (I do not know if it originates with him), where clauses that are related to another clause through a pronoun are called _relative clauses_ ; he further drew a distinction between _restrictive_ and _non-restrictive_ relative clauses to explain his famous rule about when to apply that vs. which. The _Cambridge Grammar of the English Language_ rejects this terminology in favour of another terminology:   * Instead of restrictive relative clause, the _CGEL_ prefers _integrated relative clause_ ;   * Instead of non-restrictive relative clause, the _CGEL_ (always?, usually?) prefers _supplementary relative clause_. Why does the CGEL, reflecting the preference in Anglistics, follow this alternative terminology?


"Blind" is to "sighted" as "Deaf" is to..?

What is the opposite of the adjective deaf? e.g. > The seats close to the interpreter are reserved for the hearing impaired. It > is imperative that all [not deaf] people sit in the remaining seats.


Name for words created from mispronunciations?

Is there a name for the process by which words are created out of mispronunciations of other words, or for the words themselves? Examples that come to mind include _ain't_ for _isn't_ and _prolly_ for _probably_. I suppose these words would be called _slang_ words, but they're a particular kind of slang that comes from the original words being more difficult (or just taking longer) to say. Also, is this the same phenomenon that gives us more casual, abbreviated versions of longer words, like _comfy_ for _comfortable_ or even _ˈkazh_ for _casual_?


What is meant by "treading water" in this context?

In an article, I came across the following expression: > I don’t have to pick up a textbook. I don’t have to talk to my friend. I > don’t have to eat. When I wake it feels like I’ve been **treading water** > for an eternity, I ache and my eyes are heavy. Wikipedia describes _treading water_ as a method of swimming, but how is it being used or supposed to be understood in this writer's context? Is it common expression, or just used as a simile here?


Meaning of "boosting cat food from someone"

In the 'The Panic in Needle Park' movie, one of the actors tell someone the following on the phone: > No, man. I didn't boost any cat food from you. What does it mean? It doesn't seem to be a very common expression either.


Device used to count number of customers that enter a store

What is the name of the device used to count the number of _anything_ (e.g. the number of people that enter a store)? I'm thinking of a.. thing.. that fits in the palm of your hand and it has just one button, so that when you click it the number on the screen increments by 1.


Trapezium/trapezoid — why are the US/UK definitions swapped around?

These are the US definitions... Trapezoid _— a 4-sided flat shape with straight sides that has a pair of opposite sides parallel._ Trapezium _— a 4-sided flat shape with straight sides and NO parallel sides._ The meanings of the two words are exactly reversed between the US and British interpretations. I don't know how relevant this is, but in general the -oid suffix _(humanoid, android, asteroid)_ means _"similar to (but not **actually** )"_, whereas -ium _(consortium, auditorium, emporium)_ is a "noun-forming" suffix, sometimes having the sense of bigger or more complicated. The British definitions therefore seem more "logical" to me - our _trapezoid_ is superficially "like" a _trapezium_ (it has four sides), but it's not actually the same (no sides are parallel). It's also tempting to think Brits were using the words first. Is there any explanation for how this US/UK difference came about?


Phrase concerning "concealing a weapon"

I am having trouble finding the right way to describe the following: _a man not having a revolver "tucked away in the pants."_ I would like this to include the idea that _"if he had one, you wouldn't see it anyway, but he doesn't,"_ I also need to include the _"in the pants"_ or _"in the belt"_ (?), as this is for a translation. Is there any phrase describing this situation?