When and how do words become offensive?

Disclaimer: Not strictly English language question, but still a question on language use I've just had a discussion with a member, who argued that the word "lunatic" is offensive and therefore should not be used, not even to address an actual lunatic, e.g. a mentally ill person. And if I type "lunatic" in Google, it tells me that it is a mentally ill person. Does that mean Google offends mentally ill people by telling me that's what a lunatic is? Or maybe Google has the right to use it, but not me? In that logic, if I call a person a "dog" this is obviously offensive, therefore following that logic strictly, that word should not be used, not even to address an actual dog. Does this mean black people offend each other by calling their buddies "dog"? And that is just an example, imagination is pretty much the only limit when counting the words which can be put in an offensive context. Another example, it has recently become offensive to call a retarded person retarded, the correct term is now "special needs", but how long before "special needs" becomes an insult too, which it inevitably will if it becomes the widely used term to refer to retarded people? "Special needs" can actually be offensive right out of the box, if used to address a non-retarded person and imply that person is retarded, and one can argue that in a way, using that word to insult a normal person is also insensitive and offensive to all "special needs" people in existence? And how come it doesn't even matter what kind of a context a word is being put in or whether offense is actually intended? Will this continue until half of the vocabulary is squeezed out of use and labeled implicitly offensive, even if explicitly stated to not be intended as such? Last but not least, are we doing anyone a favor by labeling more and more words as "offensive" and therefore granting previously inoffensive words the power to offend? I mean, if it is "inconsiderate assholes" who turn normal words into insults, how "smart" is it for the rest of the people to give in to that?


Attempt at formulating verb tenses when time travel is involved?

The _Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy_ has an amusing section on the problems associated with verb tenses when time travel is involved. It has several examples which appear to be constructed for their humorous sound instead of any attempt at sensible rules. > You can arrive _(mayan arrivan on-when)_ for any sitting you like without > prior _(late fore-when)_ reservation because you can book retrospectively, > as it were, when you return to your own time _(you can have on-book haventa > forewhen presooning returningwenta retrohome)_. This TVTropes page has a list of where this trouble has been dealt with in various media, but none of them (as far as I can tell) are a serious attempt at laying out the rules. Do you know of any reference where someone has laid out what various verb tenses would even be useful and/or named based on various points of view from a non-linear timeline between speaker and recipient who have experienced time differently?


May en-dashes be used in sports scores?

The accepted answer to the authoritative question When should I use an em- dash, an en-dash, and a hyphen? currently has this to say regarding the _en- dash_ : > An en-dash is use to connect values in a range or that are related. Saying > "in years 1939–1945" or **"New York beat Los Angeles 98–95"** are both > examples where an en-dash should be used (as I did explicitly in the > examples). A good rule of from here is when you're expressing a "to" > relationship. The portion that I have bolded above is not a usage I had seen before. I was under the impression that the _en-dash_ should only be used in the case of a range. In the above, two distinct scores are being described, not a range that includes the values "96" and "97". The _"rule of from"_ [sic?] presented above allows its usage in that case _("98 to 95")_ but is broader than I believe in. Taken to the absurd, this might suggest that I could rewrite _"just between us, man-to-man"_ as _"just between us, man–man"_. :p What say you: must an _en-dash_ be used only for a range of values, or may it be used more permissively?


The word entropy

Could someone define the word entropy for me in the context below. "I have journeyed through the darkness between the most distant stars. I have beheld the births of negative-suns and borne witness to the entropy of entire realities..." Source: http://starcraft.wikia.com/wiki/Zeratul


Moving the interrogative pro-adverb to the end of a question

I am not a native speaker of English. From what I learn, 'wh' questions in English should normally be like this: > Why should we believe you? > > How did she participate in the massacre? However, recently in TV shows (from US and UK) I often hear this: > We should believe you why? > > She participated in the massacre how? Of course, the latter form is still less common than the former. From the shows, I feel that it is used more often as a quick reply to some previous statement, and/or when the speaker has some attitude, and/or when the situation is urgent. In a sense, the latter form is easier: it does not need an auxiliary or modal verb, and it keeps the word order of a normal declarative sentence. I wonder:   * How often do you (who live in English-speaking countries) hear the latter question form?   * Is it a new form? (maybe a tendency for English grammar to become simpler?)    * Or have these two forms co-existed for long, just serving different functions?


Using future simple tense in a thesis

Being a non-native speaker, I have of course a bit of a problem with writing my thesis in English. In the thesis, I propose a software solution and I describe it. What I am not sure is: should I use "going to" (as it is planned) or "will"? Because it seems there are too many "going tos": > The patient is going to activate the system. The system is going to show a > stand-by screen, which is going to disappear after 5 seconds.


What is an official collection of laws/books/etc. called?

**What do you call an official collection of passages, laws, books, etc.?** I'm thinking of a very official-sounding word, like "The ___crux" "The Index" or "The Axiom" or something sounding like that... I know I learned about it in gradeschool, but I can't quite recall it.


Footnote marks at end of a sentence

I find it common in my writing to end up a sentence with a footnote reference mark. Should the footnote mark come before the stop or after it? ... this is some text1. ... this is some text.1


Single vs double quotation marks for nickname?

I am trying to conform to the British practice (specifically Oxford Style Guide) and I am a little confused which to use to mark a nickname: Andrew 'Andy' Johnson Andrew "Andy" Johnson I know following the rules I should use single inverted commas, however the first one looks a tad weird to me. I have seen the latter option a lot on newspapers and business cards but not the former. I am going to use that for email signatures and names on business cards.


Is there a word that means "every four weeks"?

Is there a fourth word in this series: _weekly, biweekly, triweekly, ..._? If not, and I had to coin a word, then would "quadweekly", "quadriweekly", or some other word be more etymologically appropriate? For example, is there a similar series from which I could borrow the prefix for "four"? **UPDATE** : "Monthly" isn't appropriate because one month is a few days more than four weeks.


What did "cinema" mean before cinema was invented?

I was attempting to find out the other day why _cinema_ is spelt with a 'c' and not a 'k', as its etymology would seem to require. While doing so I noticed that the word _cinema_ was used long before it could have had the current meaning, because _cinema_ hadn't been invented. See here:- ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/r3OWy.png) Looking for definitions in the online dictionaries turned up the current meaning, variously dated C19, 1895-1900 or 1909, and no other meaning. So what did _cinema_ mean in the earlier 19th Century, and briefly around 1705?


Plural or singular verb for collective term

Should the verb, in the following sentence, be singular or plural? > A series of samples was produced. In a related question I found a reference. However the text in that reference seems to contradict itself. > Nouns that are “collective” take a singular verb when the group as a whole > is meant. > > Commonly used collective nouns include “number,” “majority,” “series,” and > “variety.” > > Note that when collective nouns refer to a singular group as a whole they > are often preceded by the word “a”; Based on these rules, I would expect that, since I am using an indefinite article **_a** series_, the singular form of the verb is to be used. However the reference uses plural in an example > A series of western blots were performed to assay protein expression.


Fixing a series of loose sentences: Strunk & White

Rule 18 of Strunk & White talks about avoiding a succession of loose sentences. It gives the following example for a bad construction: > The third concert of the subscription series was given last evening, and a > large audience was in attendance. Mr. Edward Appleton was the soloist, and > the Boston Symphony Orchestra furnished the instrumental music. The former > showed himself to be an artist of first rank, while the latter proved itself > fully deserving of its high reputation. The interest aroused by the series > has been very gratifying to the Committee, and it is planned to give a > similar series annually hereafter. The fourth concert will be given on > Tuesday, May 10, when an equally attractive program will be presented. What will be a good way to rewrite the above by avoiding loose sentences? I tried the following: > The third concert of the subscription series was given last evening. The > concert was attended by a large audience. Mr. Edward Appleton was the > soloist, supported by Boston Symphyony Orchestra on instruments. Mr. Edward > Appleton showed himself to be an artist of first rank, at the same time, > Boston Symphony Orchestra too proved itself of deserving its high > reputation. Gratified by the interest shown, the Committee has planned to > give a similar annual series hereafter. The fourth concert will be given on > Tuesday, May 10, with an equally attractive program.


Term for measuring in fractions of 1

When you measure in fractions of 100, you call it a _percentage_. When you measure in fractions of 1000, you call it _promille_ or _per mil_. There are even words for fractions of 10000 or 100000. But what do you call it when you measure in fractions of 1?


Hence vs Therefore in casual conversation

Trying to be concise, I have been using `hence` instead of `therefore` for some time.      In the context of a casual conversation, **which should be used** (and why)?


Meaning of "we leave at eight thirty for nine"

In the expression _we leave at eight thirty for nine_ , what time is the departure going to be?


What is the word for using one part of speech where another would be more grammatical?

There's a Greek word that means using the wrong part of speech somewhere in a sentence, as in: > I don't know the who or the how or the when. Where "who", "how", and "when" are being used for nouns. What's the word for this?


What does 'What kind of mischief are you up to?' mean?

One of my US users asked the following questions when she got information about my resignation from my manager. > What is this rumor I hear? What kind of mischief are you up to? I am not sure whether she is asking what I did wrong or what others did wrong by taking the resignation decision. Can somebody explain me the meaning of this sentence in this situation.


Should an embedded question be set in quotation marks?

For example, given the following sentence, is it proper to set the enclosed question in quotation marks? > The first question to ask is, “should quotation marks be used?” Any additional comments about the structure of the example sentence above would be appreciated.


Are any of these terms correct? "Known with" or "known by"

Suppose a famous building, i.e. a stadium, a concert hall, etc., known as a landmark in a place, being sponsored by a company, such that people may happen to use the company name instead of the building name itself to refer to it. How is it correct to talk about this? > The building A is known _with_ X. or > The building A is known _by_ X. I know there are terms like _known as_ , and _known for_ , but none of them suit this situation. LDOCE and OxfordDictionaries don't mention anything with either of _by_ or _with_ , and Google NGram Viewer says: ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/ARgPL.png) Google search with double quotes has less than 1 million results for the former, but over 6 million for the latter. However not all of those results have the same meaning as this one, and I wonder how this can be expressed appropriately without sounding odd.


Term for "utilize for commercialization"

I'm making a résumé right now and I need a term for **"utilize for commercialization"** as in: > I have learned how to _[use for commercialization]_ the concepts learned in > school. Or something like that. I came up with this wild idea of: > I have learned how to _weaponize_ the knowledge learned in Economics class. But that sounds too hostile or so. Help me get hired! :)


"Synchronous events" and "synchronized swimmers" — what is the difference?

In JavaScript, why does _synchronous_ and _asynchronous_ appear to be the opposite to their definition? _Synchronous_ (in JavaScript this refers to running in sequence): >   * occurring at the same time; coinciding in time; contemporaneous; > simultaneous. >   * going on at the same rate and exactly together; recurring together. > _Asynchronous_ (in JavaScript this refers to something like AJAX): >   * not occurring at the same time. >   * (of a computer or other electrical machine) having each operation > started only after the preceding operation is completed. >


"should like to" vs. "would like to"

> “I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less > than half of you half as well as you deserve.” > > ― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Fellowship of the Ring In the sentence above, if I change "I should like" to "I would like", will there be a noticeable difference in the meaning or nuance?


How to describe a person who loves a very cold environment (below 20°C)

Is there a word or two words that describes a person who loves to be in a very cold environment (e.g. below 20°C) and dislikes temperatures that are not very cold?


"Compared with it", is it correct?

Consider the following sentence: > We consider a simple protocol as the base configuration and compare with it > three other cases. Which one is more correct, "compare with it" or "compare it with"?


Another word for return undamaged

May I know if there is a single word that can replace the word "Return Undamaged" or "Return in Original form"? **Details** Jack borrow a item from Joe for 10 days. After the last day, Jack return the item to Joe. Joe check the item and confirm that the item is return in its original form and does not have any damages (such as scratches, tear, etc)


What's the difference between "powerless" and "helpless" (and maybe "hopeless")?

Don't they all involve not having the power to do things? I guess being hopeless is a little different, in that it does involve not having power but that it's permanent. Like hopeless that depression lifts or employment improves or weather gets better. You couldn't be hopeless if you did have the power to change it. But "helpless" and "powerless" are more difficult for me to distinguish. When people are depressed, they can experience helplessness but for some reason psychologists don't use the word "powerless." But aren't they the same? So like if somebody was abused, you say you were feeling so "helpless" in that situation but I can imagine you could as easily say you were powerless. Please help me tell them apart. Thanks!


What is the origin of the phrase "zero, zip, zilch, nada"?

In the TV show _Batman: The Animated Series_ , the character of Joker said the phrase "zero, zip, zilch, nada". Looking at Google results for that phrase, it seems to be more widely used, so I assume the show didn't coin it. So, the question is: how did this phrase came to be? I understand that each of the four words means "nothing", and I'm not interested in the etymology of each word, only them being used together like this.


"Food" vs. "foods" — spelling and meaning

I've been looking around the Internet. Some websites say that _foods_ is incorrect but others say it is correct.


Which lexical class does "wont" fall into in this sentence?

> As he is wont to do. Is "wont" an adjective, noun, verb, or something else in this context? How would you determine which lexical class wont falls into in any given sentence, since it can be used as an adjective, noun, or verb?


non-typical copular and predicative expression

> SMASH!   >  The door was hit with such force that it swung clean (1) **off its hinges** > and with a deafening crash landed (2) **flat on the floor**.   >  (Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone) (1), (2) both seem to be the resultatives of the verbs: the former predicative prepositional phrase, the latter predicative adjective. When the verbs are not typical copulars, can we call them all the predicative expressions?


An approach to do something vs. an approach to doing something

What is the preferred way to express something like this: > An approach to design a software system (here design is a verb) or > An approach to design of a software system (here design is a noun) In other words, should word `approach` as a noun be used with an infinitive?


It is an existential question

A question on another site asks, _I have a laptop ... Now I am trying to install Windows 7 and it shows a message saying "Driver not found"._ Whereupon a commenter asks, _What is the "it" that shows the message?_ I would think that was an existential **_it_** , which cannot be attributed to anything in particular. In any case, if I had structured the question myself, I would probably have intended so. **Q** : Is this a case of an existential **_it_**? * * * [Edit-1] Clarification   This question is _not_ about the subject of the example. The question relates to English language, grammar and esp., the concept of the **_existential it_**. Please see also the tags for an idea.


Female Actor or Actress

I've recently noticed the word actor used for female actresses in the Indian print media. I have a few questions :   a) Is this the correct usage of the word?   b) Is this an international phenomenon?   c) Are you aware of the origins, time and purpose of this change?


"This kind of things" vs "These kinds of thing"

I have a question about the following text: > Last week Alex Knapp at Forbes published an article criticizing my Nikola > Tesla comic. I don't normally respond to these kinds of thing, but since > it's' Forbes I figured a proper response was in order. I would rather say "this kind of things" rather than the version in the text above.


How can I ask someone if they are male or female politely?

In my daily work I communicate with a lot of people in my company that I have neither encountered in person nor heard them on phone. The conversation is usually e-mail or online chat. Some of them have ambiguous first name. I would like to know if they are male or female so I know if I should refer to them as "he" or "she" when talking to other members of my team (for example explaining conclusion of the communication with the person). Is there a preferred polite way how to ask?


An adverb challenge

I was set the challenge to provide one particular adverb that can be used as verb modifier, adjective modifier and adverb modifier, and an example of its use in each of the cases. In addition the answer should avoid the use of adjectival participles. Can you help?


Meaning of the verb "to pooch"?

I'm familiar with the word _pooch_ as a cute synonym of doggy, but here is _pooch_ used as a verb: > It was just a poorly done deal and it just so happens to be the biggest deal > ever for Nasdaq and **they pooched it** , that's the bottom line here," said > Joe Saluzzi, the co-manager of trading at Themis Trading in Chatham, New > Jersey. Is this a common usage of the word in US English? Or is it just an example of a Wall Street trader abusing our language? Full article here.


How do I pronounce Gaudí, the architect?

How do I pronounce 'Gaudi', in the name of Antoni Gaudí (the architect)?


What is the antonym of prospection in the context of seeking reward?

Currently looking into the effects of neuroscience on decision making. There is the limbic system which is in charge of the seeking of positive reward i.e. prospection. In contrast to this there is the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex which is in charge of regulating reward for long-term gain. In this context what could be an antonym of prospection? I was wanting to include the suffix of -spection to imply some form of thought. Or could one invent an appropriate word using similar etymological processes? I'm trying to capture the idea of comparing contradictory values and seeking the best long term outcome; this is as opposed to only seeking reward without consideration for how it contradicts the potential value in other alternatives. P.S. I am not looking for something strictly correct. More in the process of creating an appropriate new word for this concept.


"Decoding time" vs. "time of decoding"

What's the difference between "decoding time" and "time of decoding", "data compression" and "compression of data"? And why isn't it "decoding's time", but "decoding time"?


When should we use "and" and/or "and/or"?

What's the difference between "and" and "and/or"? How do we decide whether to use one or the other? Note: Also it would be great if someone could explain how do we actually _pronounce_ "and/or" verbally in a sentence...


Can a female proprietor be called as "proprietor"?

I know the female version of _proprietor_ can be called as _proprietress_ or _proprietrix_. But I want to know whether a female proprietor can also be called a _proprietor_? Or does _proprietor_ only indicate a male business person?


Use of comma after "accidentally"

Is a comma required after _accidentally_? > I **accidentally** sent you the wrong number.


Indicating 'ephemeral questions' section in an FAQ

Granted that entries in an FAQ are subject to change; but say I want to have a separate section for questions that are really only going to be relevant for a very short time - say, a software product version upgrade and questions pertinent to the transition. I'm looking for something like 'ephemeral questions', or to indicate in some way that this section is reserved for topics that are more fleeting or transient in time. What are my options in this case, either a single word or even a longer phrase (but commonly used in this context)? * * * For context; this is a general purpose FAQ/KB for a piece of software that addresses:   * Initial usage and reasons for adoption (why should I choose X? etc.)   * Data management & access policies   * Troubleshooting steps   * Planned features, maybe with ETA   * etc ...   * 'Ephemeral' questions which would likely mostly be a mix of troubleshooting & future plans that are relevant for the immediate present: e.g. _What are the changes in ACL requirements for next week's release?_. Basically, something with enough customer interest to have a question on it; but not needed long-term.


What does the "atta" mean in "attaboy" and "attagirl"?

What does the prefix _atta_ mean? What is it trying to abbreviate? _What a_? Wiktionary claims that it stands for _that's a_ or _that's the_ , but I do not see the resemblance to _atta_.


Should there be a period after an equation?

This isn't a pure English question, but it _is_ about writing style: Sometimes entities that aren't words end up being in sentences. I know that when mathematical expressions are inline as follows: > We used the equation _x + y = z_. This is the next sentence. they are treated as any other word, and the sentence needs to end with a period. But suppose I have text in a paper such as: > We used the equation > > _x + y = z_ > > This is the next sentence. Notice that the equation isn't inline. **Should there still be a period after the equation** (right after _z_ ) to indicate the end of the sentence?


What are some slang terms for "newspaper"?

I'm looking for some slang terms for a newspaper, whether they are archaic terms that nobody has used in the past 70 years or modern, obscure terms.


How to understand "We have not been smoking"?

Given a sentence: > We have not been smoking What is the exact meaning the speaker wants to express? One interpretation: > We smoked an hour ago, but we stopped smoking after ten minutes, then we > smoked again. Another interpretation: > We smoked an hour ago, but now we didn't smoke. Which is correct?


Difference between 'went home' and 'went to home'

I'm a little bit confused over the difference between the following sentences. I went home. I went to home. Could someone please explain the difference.


"All I had, and all I have now, (are vs. were) clues."

In the sentence, "All I had, and all I have now, were clues", should the verb be "were" or "are", or should the sentence be rephrased so that I don't have to choose between matching the verb to the past tense indicated by the first part of the sentence or the present tense indicated by the part between the commas?


Can a mid-sentence quote have a comma outside the quotation marks?

I have a sentence such as the one below, and am unsure as to where the commas should go. > I, John Doe, the man feared as "the tyrant," guarantee it. In particular, I'm wondering about the comma after _tyrant_. That should go inside the quotations, right?


What is the real history of the word "scenario"?

In a moment of revery, I pondered from what language the word "scenario" originated. Unsurprisingly, it's Italian in origin, according to etymonline, but the etymonline etymology surprised me - the word "scenario" was used only in the context of drama and stage performaces until the year 1960, when according to etymonline, **it became used to describe nuclear outcomes during the Cold War** , after which the word began to commonly mean "a potential set of happenings" in any context. This implies that people who used the word "scenario" did so in order to indirectly call the Cold War a kind of stage play. Awesome! This would be great if it were true, so to attempt to confirm this I checked Google's Ngram viewer. Looking at the ngram viewer was enlightening but raised a few questions of its own. While the word "scenario" certainly saw a marked rise in popularity in the year 1960, perhaps due to its use to describe the Cold War, it also experienced a rise in popularity at around 1910. So, did "scenario" experience a shift in meaning in 1960? If so, did it experience another shift of meaning in 1910?


Origin of "Seek first to understand, then to be understood"

One of the Seven Habits of Highly Effective People (according to Stephen Covey) is: > Seek First to Understand, Then to be Understood What is the origin of this phrase? My guess is that it was inspired by the Prayer of Saint Francis which contains these words: > O Divine Master, Grant that I may not so much seek > > To be consoled as to console; > > **To be understood as to understand;** but according to Wikipedia even that cannot be traced back further than 1912. Did it then originate with Stephen Covey?


"Multiple" vs. "additional"

When you are adding or inserting additional people to a list, what is the correct word to use, _multiple_ or _additional_? Example: >   * Multiple escorts can be added using the Add New Escort tab. >   * Additional escorts may be added using the Add New Escort tab. >


What is the word for someone who sees music as colours?

Some people visualise specific musical keys or chords as specific colours. There is a name for this, which I think starts with _chromo-_. Am I remembering this correctly?


Does English use "Red thread" as expression for theme?

In Swedish the expression _Röd tråd_ (Red thread) is used to describe that something follows a theme. For instance, if a piece of text has a "red thread", it's written with a consistent though through out the text. The expression originates from the Greek mythology where king Theseus found his way out of Minotaur's labyrinth by following a "red thread". I could also be derived from that formerly a red thread were found twisted in some cordage belonging to the English Navy. In a figurative sense first used by Goethe in his work Wahlverwandschaften. Is this used in the same way in English or is there another expression that is more commonly used?


What's a word (noun) that means a particularly hard and difficult to solve puzzle?

Think the context would be say in a movie our heros have got into the bad guy's base, and there's this rubiks cube like puzzle object they have to solve, which is especially difficult to solve it's a ... ? The best words I've come up with are 'condundrum' and 'enigma' but neither of these seem to fit appropriately. Condundrum seems to fit more difficulty facing decision making. And enigma is a _mysterious_ problem. I was sure that there was a word for it, but perhaps there isn't.


Want a phrase/word to express the time follow and close now

I want a phrase or word to express the time follow and close now, it would have the meaning that keeps the time continuous. for me, word "later" seems be too generic, "later on" seems to have certain period time after now: "follow on" looks also not a good idea. For example: after reading this book (?) I start go to work.(after reading book I Immediately start go to work, there would have no interval between two things )


"Why not" and double negatives

This popped up during a conversation. My friend said (roughly): > Some vegetarians don't eat meat. Why not fish? To me, this felt somewhat weird. Her intent was to ask, if some vegetarians refuse to eat meat, why are they okay eating fish? The part that felt weird was the "why not". Suppose she had said instead: > Some vegetarians refuse to eat meat. Why not fish? Then this would be equivalent to: > Some vegetarians refuse to eat meat. Why don't they refuse to eat fish? But by saying: > Some vegetarians don't eat meat. Why not fish? She's _really_ saying: > Some vegetarians don't eat meat. Why don't they don't eat fish? Which is a double negative. Am I right? Or am I completely crazy here?


the placement of prepositions in phrasal verbs

In England today, "put your coat on" and "put on your coat" are in free variation. But was there an original dialectal difference in the placement of the preposition, and if so, which areas said "put... on" (and take....out and all other similar examples) and which areas said "put on X"?


When does 'gi' sound like 'ji'?

Let us take, ginger, we actually pronounce it as 'jinjer'. But take, giggling, we pronounce it as it is. There are numerous examples of this, and this confuses me a lot. So, how do I come to know which pronunciation in these kind of words is actually correct?


Movement to reduce "ing" to "in"

let's face it. More and more people are not saying the silent "g" at the end of swimming, speaking, cooking etc. When will the "ing" become just "in"? It's already used in almost every song, because "g" is hard and almost impossible to sing. Any revolutionary movement to eradicate "ing" and bring "in" into English out there?


what do you call someone performing below their potential

What do you call someone who doesn't know their worth or is under-performing their potential?


Comma before indefinite pronoun

While I would surround a noun or pronoun with commas, should I do the same for indefinite pronouns? For example: > Have a good weekend, all. > > I'm sorry, everybody, I can't do that. Thanks.


Meaning of "To be next into the breach"

What is the meaning of "to be next into the breach" in the following examples? > There's a blue flame from, I think, an oxygen tank. Carter finds Lisa on the > floor and asks her if her neck is okay; she nods. Luka **is next into the > breach** , and asks Carter whether Lisa's airway is clear[.] > > The idea that English has more than one declarative “mood” has been > dismissed as superstitious by empirically-minded grammarians of English for > centuries [. . .]. Let me **be next into the breach**. > > But let's be of good cheer: looks like Newt the execrable **is next into the > breach** as the transitory not-Mitt. I can sort of grasp the overall meaning—it seems to me that a simple _next_ would do the job in all the examples above—but I can't figure out its connotation: what does "into the breach" add to the sense? Does this idiom change its meaning according to the context?


Are the words 'innuendo' and 'insinuation' different in meaning?

According to the dictionary the two words are synonymous to each other but I think there is a subtle difference in meaning between the two words that I do not find in the dictionary. I thought of this question when I heard the word 'insinuendo' in a movie. The actor blended the words 'innuendo' and 'insinuation' and created an interesting and funny portmanteau.


What does "4-year advanced seminar" mean in this passage about the office of Vice President?

I’m reading Jeffrey Archer’s “The Prodigal Daughter” at a snail pace and came across the following sentence describing the scene where Florentyna Kate, the female candidate for Presidency answers the journalist’s question at a press interview: > “Senator Kane, is this really a bid to be Pete Perkin’s running mate?” > > “No, I am not interested in the office of Vice President. At best it’s a > period of stagnation while you wait around in the hope of doing the real > job. At worst I am reminded of Nelson Rockefeller’s word: “ **Don’t take the > number two spot unless you’re up for a four–year advanced seminar in > political science and a lot of state funerals.** ” I’m not in the mood for > either.” - Page 418. I can’t well relate the carrier of 4-year advanced seminar in political science and attendance at numeral state funerals to No. 2 position in the White House. Is Florentyna saying the experience represented by academic expertise in political science and attendance to a lot of state funerals are only good for attaining the position up to Vice President, but not worthy for the qualifications of President of U.S.A (which is what she aims to be)? Is she saying it’s not about experience, but ability when questioning caliber of President? Could you help me parse what Flonrentyna says by quoting Nelson Rockefeller’s word?


What is the semantic difference between "encipher" and "encrypt"?

What is the semantic difference between _encipher_ and _encrypt_?


"This facility has/have a new administrator"

"This facility has a new administrator" — is this correct? Or should it be "this facility have a new administrator"?


Placing the object of an infinitive before it instead of after it

> At the beginning of 1807, based on information gathered from Burr’s > correspondence allegedly showing that he had begun preparations for a large- > scale military expedition, the former vice president was arrested in > Louisiana and indicted on the charge of “wickedly devising and intending ♦ > the peace and tranquility of the same United States **to disturb** and to > stir, move, and excite insurrection, rebellion and war against the said > United States” Would someone please affirm the position of _to disturb_ in the passage cited above? Am I right in thinking that it can equally be planted at ♦, as one might in contemporary English? If correct, what’s this stylistic placement called? Also, what are its advantages or disadvantages? I find it more onerous and less lucid; I had to reread it to determine the infinitive. Source: page 54 of _America on Trial_ , by Alan Dershowitz


What does "What use is X" mean?

I've come across this construct on Stack Overflow, in the title of the question "What use is lambda in PHP?" To me this was an error, so I edited the question changing the title to "What is lambda used for in PHP?" and corrected some other stuff on the question. Later the original poster changed the title back saying it was not an error and that it changed the voice of the phrase. I'm not a native English speaker but consider myself pretty fluent in the language, and I have never seen this construct. Not that I remember, at least. What does it mean?


Is it correct to say " have been not" in English?

For example , is it correct to say that " The service has been not available since 3 days ago ". And, Is the meaning of it different from "The service has't been available since 3 days ago" Edit: changed "have" to "has"


Is 'I would rather...' without an infinitive immediately following it correct?

Consider: > I would rather the walls remain painted in a neutral tint. Is this proper use of 'I would rather..', without an infinitive immediately following it? **EDIT** This suggests that 'I would rather ...' is either followed by an infinitive or by an object (?) + past tense if you would want to include other people. But not the use I propose.


What do “socially imposed judgments” and “Keyboard, face, keyboard, face.” mean?

In the wake of successive sexual scandals of IMF Chief, Dominique Strauss-Kahn and Congressman, Anthony Weiner, I learned that there’s no shortage of euphemisms for expressing love (or sexual) affairs in modern English such as tangoing, one night stand, Okay fluke planetary alignment, etc. from recent newspapers. However, I don’t understand (1) what the word, “socially imposed judgments,” in the sentence of Carolyn Hax’s column of Washington Post’s Lifestyle section (June 6 issue), though I think I can guess it roughly. Also I have no idea about (2) what “Keyboard, face, keyboard, face,” means. Can someone clarify the meanings of these two phrases in the following sentence? > _Hi, Carolyn._ > > _Do you have any advice on how two people who really hit it off after a > mutual friend’s birthday party might see past their own hang-ups and begin > dating each other with open minds? We’ve both got some socially imposed > judgments about how easy it was for the other person to jump into bed right > away_ . > > **One-night stand to relationship?** [This is how the asker signed her > question.] Here begins Carolyn Hax's reply: > Keyboard, face, keyboard, face. > > How about: “Why don’t we go out to see if we actually like each other?” > > Unless you don’t feel as if you can do the asking? **Edited to add more context by Robusto**


What’s the word that encompasses both creating something and editing it?

I want to use a term to covers both creating and editing some entity, say a blog post or a comment in a blog. Which word should I use?


What is the correct punctuation to use in this case?

If I have a sentence like: > The royal family is extremely rich: The sled that pulls the princess is > shaped like a golden swan, the celebrations last 3 days, and the bride and > groom walk under a canopy made of purple velvet embroidered with pearls. Is a colon the proper punctuation to use after _rich_ , or would a semicolon be more suitable? Why?


Is there a general rule for the prefixation of "un-" and "de-" to words?

Given the different questions we have seen about the prefixes "de-" and "un-", I have grown curious if there is a overarching rule for terms that need undoing.   * “Unselect” or “Deselect”?   * “Unregister” vs “Deregister” For actions taken that need to be revoked or reversed, which prefix is preferred? Is there a distinction created by the underlying terms? Is it purely a usage issue where the one most used is the one to use? Do "un-" and "de-" actually have different meanings such that both could help determine which is most appropriate?


Is “Mecca” capitalized when used figuratively?

> Waleed made his pilgrimage to Mecca. This is a given. But I would write: > Bombay is India’s entertainment mecca Is this correct, or is _Mecca_ capitalized in its figurative use, as well?


Why is "ouster" the act of ousting and not one who ousts?

The question should be clear enough from the title. Also: What are we supposed to call one who ousts? [If this warrants another question, I will edit this out and open another question.]


"Alternative to" vs "Alternative for"

I'm wondering whether there is a difference between these two expressions. I never know which one to use. Google seems to return the same amount of results for both, so I suppose there might be a difference. >   1. What are the alternatives for this project? >   2. What are the alternatives to this project? >


If ‘pronunciation’ pairs with ‘sound’, which word should ‘spelling’ pair with?

If _pronunciation_ pairs with _sound_ , which word should _spelling_ pair with?


One word for (have same size)

I am looking for a word that expresses `same size` characteristic. To be specific, we can say that _"both DVD's are **identical** "_. However, `identical` might imply all characteristics resemblance. I am looking for a word that emphasizes the size resemblance only. Is there such a word?


"treat 'em and street 'em"

What does _treat 'em and street 'em_ mean?


"viruses" or "virii"?

Is the plural of virus "viruses" or "virii"?


What's the origin of the idiom "bust one's chops"?

The idiom is defined on Dictionary.com as: >   1. bust one's chops, Slang. to exert oneself. >   2. bust someone's chops, Slang. to annoy with nagging or criticism. > Looking it up on Google, I couldn't find much info on its origin. The only source I found that seems credible is this site, which mentions that the idiom's origin could possibly be the fashion for men to wear long side burns called the _mutton chop_ in the 19th century and that these people often get punched in the face, thus their "chops busted"? I could see a connection between this and definition #2 of the idiom, but what about definition #1 of the idiom? I don't see how this could have anything to do with the sense _to exert oneself_?


Envision vs Envisage

Is there a context where _envision_ is not a synonym of _envisage_ , or vice versa? Envisage's definition: > contemplate or conceive of as a possibility or a desirable future event Envision's definiton > imagine as a future possibility; visualize: _Visualise's_ definition seems to be relevant to _envision_ only in so far as it means imagine, which seems to me to be synonymous with "contemplate or conceive of".


What do you call a person who keeps on going despite setbacks? (in one word, a noun)

I'm looking for a word ( **a noun** ) to describe a person who faces the challenges of life (small and large) courageously despite the risk of failure. It would be nice if this noun does not necessarily imply that the person has experienced setbacks himself, rather that this wisdom of having courage could also have sprung out of reflection about possible risks. But that's just a bonus. I'll be using the word as the name for a character type in a game (other characters include saint and criminal), so it needs to be a single noun.


"Why wouldn't they process?"

Today I was talking to one of my friends who couldn't process her application. So she told me the following: > I just don't understand. Why **wouldn't they process** my application? I was > only 5 minutes late. I wonder if the part in bold is a well established English statement. Shouldn't it be: > **Why didn't they process my application?**


Usage of radiator as a device for engine cooling

The word _radiator_ is > a hollow metal device for heating rooms. Radiators are usually connected by > pipes through which hot water is sent But it also has the meaning of > a device for cooling the engine of a vehicle or an aircraft which is the exact opposite. Etymology says > 1836, "any thing that radiates," agent noun in Latin form from radiate. > Meaning "heater" is from 1851; sense of "cooling device in internal > combustion engine" is 1900. But I can't see why radiator is used for a cooling device, too. What is the reason? * * * Interestingly, since 1900 the use of _radiator_ is massively increased: ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/TuHsU.png)


"I have an answer for your question, but you might not like it."

What would be a single English word that could reflect the phrase (if such a word exists): > I have an answer for your question, but you might not like it. or > We corresponded, but you might not like the outcome. The word shouldn't be an exact equivalent, but must reflect the situation as closely as possible.


Signing a letter to a company you're suing

I am replying a letter to a letter a company send me I am currently going though the courts with. I used to work for this company and the director is not on my Christmas card list. What is a funny/blunt/sends a message/harsh way to sign the letter at the end? Something a little better than "Yours sincerely".


Nationality as mass noun

A question on ELL recently aroused a discussion. It's about usage of nationality as mass noun: > Like the Chinese, the Italian is a born gambler. > > "You want to know why the Italian is skinny?" The asker says, in a comment: > I was once told that we can think of other species collectively as thus we > can use either _The hippopotamus_ (singular) or _The hippopotamuses_ > (plural), but we can't do that with people. I have never heard of this rule. Sure stereotyping is a slippery slope but not forbidden as such. What's with this rule? Am I missing something? Is this usage grammatically correct but politically incorrect or something like that?


How to interpret "Top N except A,B,C"

If someone were to ask you to name the top N things/people etc. except for some (that would be in the list, otherwise) then what would you reply with? To illustrate this question properly, I will provide an example and also the exact use case in point. Example: "What are the top 3 movies on IMDb's charts except for The Shawshank Redemption?"   Possible answer 1: "The Godfather, The God Father: Part II, and The Dark Knight"   Possible answer 2: "The Godfather, and The God Father: Part II" My reasoning says that answer 1 should be correct, but some people say that The Dark Knight was not in the "top 3", so it should not be in the "top 3 except..." The actual use case in point is the following: Nmap has a top-ports option, and we are planning on adding an exclude-ports option. In this case, we are unsure of whether "--top-ports 3 --exclude-ports 80" should scan 2 or 3 ports (Note: 80 is the port scanned if we say "--top-ports 1").


Present Progressive or Simple Present for things that could be considered as a repeated action or as an action happening right now?

There's one thing about Simple Present versus Present Progressive which is still not quite clear to me. The rough overview is1:   Use simple present for repeated actions, general things.   Use present progressive for actions happening right now or temporarily. Well, sometimes I'm not quite sure if something is rather considered a general thing or just temporarily. Here's an example:   I'm a software engineer and while coding I for sure comment my code. I just wrote the following comment: > // [...] As some services **are holding** instances of the view, we need to > remove the service provider to release the view. I'm not sure if Present Progressive or Simple Present would be the right/better choice.2   On the one hand, it's a general thing or repeated action, because each time we run through that code the services _hold_ instances.   On the other hand, right in that moment we run through that code, services _are holding_ instances of the view. I can't quite guess which version would feel right to a native speaker. While the Present Progressive version sounds better to my ear, I feel, however, that Simple Present would be the more appropriate tense to use. Which tense would be your choice? * * * 1 There are certainly more use cases for both of them, but those are not relevant to my question.   2 Same issue would still be present when I'd write "As some services would hold/would be holding" in order to refer to what would happen if I wouldn't remove the service provider instead of referring to the moment when this code is raised.


"solve with" vs "solve for"

I would like to get a clarification whether I do understand and use those two phrases correctly or not. The context is solving a mathematical problem.   1. _solved with sth_ \- means a problem is tackled using _sth_ method   2. _solved for sth_ \- means that a problem is transformed in such way that can _sth_ can be obtained directly (as in "solve for x") My question is, am I missing any meanings, or confusing them? I got confused with the following sentence: "This problem is hard to solve for some methods" which I believe is incorrect, as one should not solve problems to obtain methods but by using them. I tried looking on several online dictionaries to solve + preposition compounds, but I found nothing.


What do mahjong tiles and menopause have in common?

In the 11th episode of the 3rd season of House called Words and Deeds, the main character, Dr. Gregory House says the following: > Male menopause: high estrogen, low testosterone, explains temperature > swings, disorientation, endocrinologically similar to female menopause but > without the vaginas and mahjong tiles. What do the mahjong tiles refer to in the above statement? I can't wrap my head around it.


He is a giant [(of a) man]

* He is a giant of a man.   * He is a giant.   * He is a giant man. What's the difference in meaning between the three sentences written above?


Calculation by, by means of, through, from

Which of the following sentences regarding the calculation of something should be preferred?   1. The calculation of the result **by** this equation...   2. The calculation of the result **by means of** this equation...   3. The calculation of the result **through** this equation...   4. The calculation of the result **from** this equation... Moreover, is any of them particularly incorrect?


"Principal" or "principle"

What is the difference between _principal_ and _principle_? I frequently come across these words and get confused.


Synonym for Boolean

**Question** I am trying to find a word, other than `Boolean`, that represents a true or false value. Is there such a word? **Context** I am designing a programming language that is meant to be as easy as possible to understand for those who know nothing of programming. I am trying to name the fundamental types in a way that portrays their purpose to the target audience well. For example, instead of `float` or event `floating-point number`, the data type is called `decimal`. After much thought and use of a popular search engine, I cannot think of an alternative to `Boolean` for true or false values. The reason I do not wish to use `Boolean` is that people who have not been exposed to programming or similar logical thinking simply do not know what it is, which is exactly what I am trying to avoid.


Alternative phrase/term for 'middle men'

I head up a support team. In some situations I refer to some issues where support act as 'middle men' between the clients and the developers. This seems sexist (females in the team), but I cannot find a better term.   Any ideas?


Grammaticality of "by the bus" when the bus is the only choice

Can the expression "by the bus" be used to specify how I go home when it is the only method to be used?


compare and contrast, comparison and?

Just like the title says, when I say compare and contrast, what is the equivalent of the word contrast if I say comparison.


What do you call a person who admits that she has a bad side and a good side too?

What do you call a person who considers himself both bad and good? Bob, for example, burns his enemy's house as revenge, after which he says, "Good Bob wants to apologize, but bad Bob wanted revenge." What would you call Bob?


Does "cottage industry" have a negative connotation?

If I say that somebody's idea started a cottage industry of such-and-such, does it necessarily imply that I am criticizing them? Is the phrase itself demeaning?


"Require that every lightbulb have/has"

I have a sentence which reads > Many people require that every lightbulb within a house have/has a switch. Is it appropriate to use "have" here so as to utilize the subjunctive mode of the verb "require"? Or is it more appropriate to use "has" in order to get the (lack of) pluralization in "every lightbulb has..." correct?


What does one do with a recipe?

I'm looking for a verb that means following the instructions written in a recipe.


"A good knowledge in English"/"a good knowledge of English"

Any comments on the usage of "a good knowledge _in_ English"?


How would you abbreviate Amount per Hour?

If I need the abbreviation of "Amount per Hour" to be used as a label/title, should it be: "Amt/ ** _Hr_** " or "Amt/ ** _hr_** " or something else?


what do you call a person who does not like to share information?

Is there any word for a person who does not like to share information?


What do you call someone who has extensive knowledge but won't share it?

What do you call a person that has a lot knowledge/information but decides to not share it? Is it really the classic know-it-all or enlightened?


Looking for a phrase for looking

See the photo: http://static.guim.co.uk/sys- images/Film/Pix/pictures/2011/3/30/1301471878380/The-Three-Musketeers-007.jpg What's the most elegant way of describing the way they face the three different directions? I'd like to begin with: **_They're standing there...._** facing each of the three directions? looking at the three directions? **____________________________**?


Confused with the interpretation of the restrictive relative clause

The sentence: > My sister who is from Chicago visited me last weekend. The interpretation from YouTube: I have more than one sisters and I am specifically talking about my sister who is from Chicago. Question: If I say, > "The car that I bought last week is red" Will people think that I have more than one cars? (Ooops, do I have to add s at the end of car in this sentence? I am a nonnative speaker who enjoy learning English. Please help me with this interpretation.


Origin of the term 'country mile'?

A 'country mile' is a term used casually in some areas of the English-speaking world to refer to a very great distance, but what's the origin of the term? Obviously 'mile' refers to what could be seen (from a human perspective) as a long distance, but why does the adjective 'country' combine to make it mean a very great distance?


"will + past participle" is it correct?

I have seen these structures being used several times in York, UK (by native speakers).   * a. "He will lived at address Y."   * b. "He be staying at address Y." I am wondering if it is:   1. grammatically correct?    2. poor English, but colloquial.    3. totally wrong and strange, representing speakers lack of English literacy.  Thanks you guys


Using prepositions and conjunctions in a sentence

Which one of the following example sentences are correct/more appropriate?   1. _It is better to laugh than cry._   2. _It is better to laugh than to cry._ Some general tips would be helpful.


Where did the word 'Wheelbarrow' come from?

I'm fairly confident that it's not a mangled 'Wheeled Barrel'. I've heard of barrows in reference to deep graves, or underground storage chambers.


Comma before as shown in Figure

If "as shown in Figure" appears at the end of the sentence, is it always necessary to put a comma before "as", or there are conditions in which we do not use commas? Example: These constraints give rise to a graph with three edges, as shown in Figure 1.


Is there such a thing as an unvoiced vowel?

I can't think of any and google has not been helpful.


Difference between "should not" and "should avoid"

Is there a difference between `should not` and `should avoid` or more generally between `not` and `avoid` e.g               You should not be drinking.     You should avoid drinking.


"In extensive grounds" vs. "on extensive grounds"

If there is a large house, can I say either of the following? >   * The house stands **in** extensive grounds. >   * The house stands **on** extensive grounds. > Which one makes sense?


I set a campfire on fire?

How would I describe lighting a campfire **before it becomes a campfire?** Saying "I set a campfire on fire" just sounds very odd, and I've been trying to reword that to make sense. I've tried "I set a camp on fire" but that sounds off (obviously), and "I set a bunch of sticks on fire" which provides no context to what the bundle of sticks were used for. In any case, how can I best describe lighting a fire for a campfire that hasn't become a campfire yet? EDIT: As Illmari Karonen points out: > Basically, you seem to be looking for a word that means "unlit campfire" or > "pile of wood that will become a campfire once you light it". Alas, I don't > think English really has a natural word or phrase for such a concept


What do you call collective intelligence?

Collective intelligence is a form of wisdom of crowds. What together an aggregation knows is often pretty comparable with expert opinions. What is one word (or at most two) that describes this kind of community knowledge?


Which of these two sentences is (more) correct?

"The average number and total number of dogs and cats are presented in the following table." "The average number, and total number, of dogs and cats are presented in the following table." The table has four entries: average number of dogs, average number of cats, total number of dogs, total number of cats.


What a weather vs. what weather

Which of the following is correct: `What a Weather!` or `What weather!` This grammar app I have (for SATs) says that the right answer is the first one, but I've never heard it used in regular speech. It also feels extremely awkward to say.


Punctuation in "or in other words"

In a Math.SE question, I used the sentence: > “some two of these propositions are true and the third one is false”, or in > other words, “exactly 2 of 3 propositions are true” Here I used “or in other words” to rephrase a statement for better comprehension, but I didn’t use a comma after “or”. On the Net, I see people both using and omitting the comma in that phrase. What is the correct punctuation in the phrase “or in other words” and why?


Can "forcibly" be used in an action that a person performs to himself/herself?

For example, can I say: > She doesn't cry very loud. When she cries it sounds like a string of almost > inaudible sobs she **forcibly** wants hold inside. Can forcibly be used in a case like the one presented above? If not, what's a better verb to use?


Alternate, archaic meanings of "such as"

I'm familiar with the first meaning, but notwithstanding my other question, I still find the second and third meanings strange. Would someone please connect or relate them to meaning #1? What are the intuitions or origins of 2 and 3? > `2. Of a kind that; like > > `3. (archaic) Those who


Which article to choose in this situation?

On our company's website there's a list of projects. One of them can be chosen by clicking on the button _Choose the project_. In my opinion there should be _a_ instead of _the_ , because we are not pointing on a specific project. Am I right or wrong? And why? Unfortunately, rules can't clarify this question for me.(


"No less than" when referring to non-quantities

I came across this answer to the question "Which of the following best summarizes the main points of the argument?" In an LSAT practice test: > Balanced reporting requires impartially revealing injustices where they > occur no less than fairly presenting the views of each party in a conflict. I am having moderate difficulty parsing this sentence. Before the "no less than" the sentence is a pretty clear declaration. After the "no less than" the sentence is a readable sentence fragment. But it isn't really a quantity, so I am having trouble understanding the meaning of the entire sentence. If it instead said: > Balanced reporting requires impartially revealing injustices where they > occur no less than 5 times in a given week. Even though this thought, guideline, or rubric might be questionable, the sentence itself makes sense. So what is the meaning of the sentence in question?


Using 'certainly' at the end of a sentence — what is the correct punctuation and what is the construction called?

Consider this construction: > Certainly, I will see you tomorrow. The word 'certainly' constitutes an introductory phrase, and the appropriate punctuation to use is a comma. (AFAIK). Now, consider this one: > I will see you tomorrow, certainly. Is this acceptable? If so, what is the name of the construction? Is a comma correct?


Question with adjective

I hope someone could help me with my dilemma. The word 'some' refers to an unspecified number or amount of an object. Are 'some difficulty' and 'some difficulties' both grammatical? Please help. Thanks


What can replace “consists of”?

For reasons I cannot explain, I hate the phrase _consists of_. Does anyone have an alternative? An example is: > Testing **consists of** continual operation, alternating between random > writes and random reads. To me, that phrase just sounds pompous. As a technical writer for international audiences, I try to keep my words as simple as possible.


Turn "in to" or "into" a lonely lane?

I have a sentence I'm writing where I describe making a turn, as I run, into an empty alleyway. Here is how I would like to say it: > I turn _into_ a lonely lane... The problem I find is that it may mean that I am changing my direction to run into a lane, or it may suggest that I am becoming a lane -- however unlikely that may be, realistically. Is there a better way to write the sentence without disrupting the flow of my writing? (I understand that I can say, "I _make a turn into_ a lonely lane..." but am afraid that that might cause some incontinuity.) For example, could I say this? > I turn _in to_ a lonely lane...


When did saying "I'm offended" or "I find that offensive" become a common phrase in English?

When did saying _I’m offended_ or _I find that offensive_ become a common phrase in English?


would not vs will not vs can not

I understand about the conditional, and imaginary, tense but if someone implies something will or won't work, which is the stronger or more definite use? >   1. Even if he tries, it cannot work >   2. Even if he tried, it would not work >   3. Even if he tried, it will not work > Thank you. Sorry I wasn't more clear. I was curious about the level of intention expressed in language, for a hypothetical situation - ie, whether will, would or could denotes that a person is more likely to do something, in this case try. Saying it would/wouldn't, seems to remove it that bit further from it taking place. I think Barrie has answered what I was trying to find out, ie intention as expressed in language. eg 1\. It could not work (something will prevent it being successful) 2\. It will not work (I might try, but probably unsuccessfully) 3\. It would not work (I'm unlikely to try and even if I did, it will probably be unsuccessful) Just curious about this subtle difference in the use of language on a psychological level.


What words can I use to indicate how hungry I am?

Besides "I'm hungry" and "I'm starving", where starving is more than hungry, are there other phrases to indicate how hungry you are (including slangs, if any)?


What we've gelost — why doesn't English use the prefix "ge-"?

The Germanic languages that I'm familiar with all use a prefix similar to _ge-_ on past participles: > **German** : Ich habe mir den Fuß _gebrochen_. > > **Dutch** : Ik heb mijn voet _gebroken_. But English doesn't do this at all: > **English** : I've _broken_ my foot. Where did this prefix come from? Did English ever have the _ge-_ past participle prefix? If so, why was it lost?


What do you call someone who shoots fireworks professionally?

What is the name of the occupation for someone whose job it is to set up a fireworks display, fire it off for an event such as July 4th, and then tear it down? I have informally heard them called "pyros" but this seems to be more jargon than an actual name of an occupation.


Does 'twink' imply a specific sexuality?

I know that _twink_ is a slang term for hot young homosexual guys who do not have facial hair. This word is very common in the gay community (and their adult industry) and recently I've heard a debate about using the word _twink_ for heterosexual guys who otherwise meet the criteria. Can we use the word _twink_ for heterosexual guys or does it always imply that the person is homosexual?


Is usage of “Yours sincerely” still appropriate?

I am currently in the process of writing a cover letter for an application for a PhD position. Upon proofreading it, my girlfriend, who has had training as a European secretary, told me that her English teacher instructed them not to use “Yours sincerely” as a valediction in such correspondence (such as a cover letter) anymore and use something like “Best regards” instead, stating that “Yours sincerely” it is too formal and old-fashioned. How accurate is this information?


How far down the ancestry line do you call a person your "cousin"?

Should individuals on your family tree, 8 or 9 generations, still be called cousins? After aunts & uncles, should you call all individuals on a family tree "cousins"?


Meaning of "Scarce"

I'm reading Time Machine by H. G. Wells. And there is a sentence: "At first I scarce thought of stopping, scarce thought of anything but these new sensations". What does "scarce" mean in this context? Usually "scarce" means "not very much of something", but in this case .. it is like "to be scared of". Is that mistake or.. maybe it is "scarce usage of this word"?


"Mistaken as" vs. "mistaken for"

I heard someone use the words _mistaken as_ rather than _mistaken for_. Is this correct? If it is correct then what is the difference between the two? Is it ever wrong to use _mistaken as_ , and if so, why? I ask because I was recently advised about something: > It shouldn't in any way be mistaken as an academic judgement. In dictionary definitions and usage guides, the preposition used is given as _for_ , not _as_. However, there are other examples with _as_ , such as ones in comments below, as well as in books on the internet.


Are "like" and "such as" completely synonymous?

"Like" and "such as" seem to fit the exact same sentences: > I want a cookie like that > > I want a cookie such as that There are plenty of variations where they differ: > I like cookies > > I, like, eat cookies > > I use cookies as such: Eat them; bake them; store them. But the usage I am interested in is when they compare one thing to another. When is it best to use one or the other? Are there different connotations? Other examples: > A friend like you is a treasure / A friend such as you is a treasure > > I hate tests like these / I hate tests such as these > > No one cares like you / No one cares such as you The last "such as" seems iffy to me.


Program is written in C++ or Program is written on C++

Which is right: This program is written in C++. or This program is written on C++.


What is the term for an item that facilitates the tying of things together?

Is there some piece of equipment or item that allows you to tie two or more   1. strands of rope   2. threads of fabric together? I imagine that (1) and (2) will be different items. If such things do exist, what are they called?


In reply to "Do they have...", which is correct — "yes, they do" or "yes, they have"?

My daughter is in an 5th grade English class in Germany with a teacher who teaches British English. The teacher asked what is the correct response to > Do they have some? My daughter, who has learned mostly from hearing American English spoken, responded: > Yes, they do. The teacher said that she should instead say: > Yes, they have. What is going on here? Is this a difference between American/British English or is one of these more correct than the other?


Is "I like!" a recent idiom? What is its origin?

Does it seem to anyone else that in the past few years people have been saying "I like!" in a new, playful, ungrammatical way? I am not plugged in to popular culture so I wonder if some of you could comment on this, and, if you have noticed the same, shed some light on the origins of this idiom. Here is the context I'm thinking of: A friend walks into a room that you just finished repainting. They exclaim: "I like...!" Or maybe they are pointing at a bracelet you are wearing. It seems to me that ten years ago, people would have said "I like that", or some other construction, but not just "I like". Or is it just my ears? To my ears it almost sounds like someone mocking an Asian accent, or someone speaking pidgin English. You like? Yes, I like. You go movies with me? No, I no go. Thanks in advance for your insights!


How should I address a professor in the US?

I am always puzzled about how students address a professor in America. Perhaps "Professor + Last name" is the most formal way to do. Here are my questions:   * What if the last name of a professor is very long?   * Is it common that students use the nickname or the first name of a professor?   * What if the teacher is a lecturer instead of a professor? How should the student call him/her?   * Is it formal to write "Prof." instead of "Professor"?


One for the money, two for the show

What does the expression > [x] for the money mean? I remember hearing the topic title in a rap song (can’t remember which, might be Eminem), and there seem to be movies named after this pattern: _Two For the Money_ with Al Pacino and _One For the Money_ , an upcoming comedy. _Urban Dictionary_ does not seem to know this expression, neither does _dict.cc_ give a proper translation. What does it mean and where does it come from?


Is it very necessary to use past perfect tense here?

Context:   1. Yesterday, I met my first girl friend.    2. She was beautiful when I first saw her ten years ago.   3. Yesterday, I thought she was beautiful as ever. Questions:   1. If I try to use only one sentence to express 2 and 3, do you think past perfect tense need to be used? Or do you think I can make it clear just by using simple past tense?   2. Which sentence is correct and which one is the used more frequently? Yesterday, I met my first girl friend. She was as beautiful as she was ten years ago. Yesterday, I met my first girl friend. She was as beautiful as she had been ten years before.


Is it less than $100 or under $100? Is it more than $100 or is it over $100?

I am building a web site and need to clarify something for a non-U.S. customer. It's whether to use "less than/more than" or "under/over".   * items less than $100.00    * items from $100.00 to $500.00   * items more than $500.00 Or should it be   * items under $100.00   * items from $100.00 to $500.00   * items over $500.00 Is there one that is blatantly wrong?


To repair bicycle is his job. Vs. Repairing bicycle is his job

My question is what the differences are between the two sentences. In what situation do you use infinitive as a subject? And when do you use gerund as a subjective? Thanks a lot!


Use of "mugging up" for hobby

I have heard of the expression _mugging up_ to mean _study intensively as before an exam_ , but would like to know if it can also be used to investigate a hobby. For example, could I use something like: > I spent my summer **mugging up** butterflies. > > I spent my summer **mugging up** on the topic of butterflies.


Is it a good idea to begin a sentence with a number or a variable name?

Is it acceptable to have the following sentences in formal writing? > 2.5 years have already been completed. or > _n_ shows the number of something.


"Congratulate for" vs. "congratulate on"

Which is correct? > I congratulated him **for** coming first in the race. > > I congratulated him **on** coming first in the race.


Films/Series that are extremely good to understand (and that are not...)

Some time ago I asked "Why are movies so hard to understand (and what can you do about it)?" To my surprise even many native speakers answered that they had difficulties understanding some movies and series. **My question:** Which films/series do you think are extremely good to understand (I don't mean learning videos or the like but "normal" films/series) I for myself often find many of the Star Trek episodes (e.g. Voyager) very good to understand. Counterexamples, which are even for native speakers incomprehensible, are also welcome.


Singular of "vertices"

I often hear the word _vertice_ (pronounced VER-tee-cee) used as the singular of _vertices_ instead of _vertex_.   * Is _vertice_ an acceptable singular for _vertices_? If so, how is it pronounced?   * On the other hand, is _vertexes_ an acceptable plural for _vertex_?


"A tax is a tax is a tax." What does this sentence mean?

I am not a native English speaker and this question has been bothering me for a long time. I saw this sentence on my text book. However, I don't know what's the meaning of it. And I don't even know whether it's a correct sentence (in terms of syntax). Could somebody help me?


The meaning of "modulo"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Meaning of “modulo the fact” I just saw a construction quoted below. > Every answer that wasn't this particular user's had been downvoted (modulo > one that was a one-liner summary of his answer). To my understanding, "modulo" is a mathematical operator, roughly put for computing the rest term in a division. What does it do in this sentence?


The X in the hat

English is not my native language so I have gone through the pain of learning the difference between _in_ , _on_ , and _at_. However, it is common in the U.S. to refer to someone wearing a hat as _X in the hat_. A notable example is the children's book _The Cat in the Hat_ by _Dr. Seuss_. Using the latter example, we know that the cat is not _inside_ the hat but instead the hat is _on top_ of the cat. Why is it acceptable to say _The Cat in the Hat_? Why is the expression _X in the Hat_ acceptable?


Personal Introductions: "This is" or "These are"

The Canadian children's network, _Treehouse_ is in the process of replacing the show "This is Emily Yeung" with "This is Scarlett and Isaiah". That doesn't actually _sound_ wrong, but would it be more correct to say "These are Scarlett and Isaiah"? That would definitely be the case if you were to elaborate "These are my siblings Scarlett and Isaiah". What rule applies here?


A synonym for "moral hypocrite"

I'm looking for a precise word to describe someone who is hypocritical on moral issues, for example:   * a cult guru who claims to be holy while doing something evil.   * or a company which partakes in some kind of sordid business practice while pretending to be holier-than-thou.


Is there a name for spelling differences in words like _grey/gray_, _color/colour_, etc.?

Is there a categorical name for differences in the spelling of a word when the word keeps the same meaning and the same sound?


Is there an expression to describe a poor woman who marries a rich man for money?

Wikipedia reads that in Spanish _Dar el braguetazo_ 'se dice de un hombre que ha encontrado un buen partido para casarse, que le saca de toda penuria y preocupación,' -- e.g., to marry for money, where the man is poor and the woman is rich. I don't know why, but after some searches I found no Spanish expression to describe, contrary to "Dar el braguetazo", a marriage of a poor woman to a rich man, which is, as far as I know, a more common case. Thus, my question is, at least in English, is there an expression to describe a poor woman who marries for money a rich man?


Better phrase for "not throwing good money after bad"

I have a friend who is shrewd in his business decisions: he often takes a painful step if it is overall cheaper than something that might feel morally satisfying but comes at higher cost. I want to compliment him on this attribute. _Joe, you are the king of.._   1. _not throwing good money after bad._   2. _intelligent tradeoffs._   3. _shrewd decisions._   4. _cutting your losses._ I can't find any words that are artful and pleasing; any suggestions?


"I thought I did this, but it turns out I only thought about doing it and then forgot to do it?"

Is there a word for > "I thought I did this thing, but it turns out I only thought about doing it > and then forgot to do it?" It's like the feeling you get when someone messages you, and then you forget to message them back because you had composed a message in your mind, thought you sent it, and then forgot to do so. Is there a word for this feeling or the action that leads to it (in English or any language)?


Words at beginning of sentences with first letter displayed within brackets?

I've been reading _The Deer Slayer_ , and I can't help but notice that some words at the beginning of sentences display their first letter within square brackets. Here are some examples: > [W]hen five or six had discharged their bullets into the trees, he could not > refrain from expressing his contempt at their want of hand and eye. > [T]hen he turned and showed the astonished Hurons the noble brow, fine > person, and eagle eye of a young warrior, in the paint and panoply of a > Delaware. > [T]hat pale-face is my friend. My heart was heavy when I missed him . . . (The brackets and their contents are included in the book). I considered that maybe this was the use of dialect, but it doesn't seem likely or sound natural. What is the reason for this?


Potato or Potatoes

When considering a recipe which contains potatoes, which would be correct for the UK:   1. 350g of potato   2. 350g of potatoes


Adjective for not first but either second, third, fourth, etc

What is an adjective for something that is not first but either second, third, fourth, etc? We don't need to know what position it is at; the only thing that matters is that it's not the first one. EDIT: After reading the comments/answers, I realized I didn't provide much context. Let's say I have a few words preceded by a prefix. The first prefix however is different than the others, so we say there are different prefixes for the **first** word and the **XXX** (later) words. What can we use for XXX?


What is a positive word for "deadline" that's < ~10 characters?

What is a more positive word for "deadline" that has also comparable length as "deadline" (~8 characters) so it's easy to type (hence more likely to catch on)? I'm a fan of positive reinforcement if I can be, and I think using the word "deadline" negatively reinforces the "due date" (though "due date" doesn't inspire any sense of hurry). * * * Personal Choice: "finish line" as in "When do we have to reach the finish line?". It sounds like a place that if I work real hard and fast get to it, there will be rewards there (and maybe snacks). If that remains a top choice, I'll write that up as the answer, but I'd like to see other ideas.


"Intense stress" vs. "high stress"

>   * Capable of performing under **intense stress** without compromising > quality of service. >   * Capable of performing under **high stress** without compromising quality > of service. > Which is best suited for the statement above? Then again, would it be best to replace _stress_ with _pressure_?


What is a word for "available time"?

I writing a sentence as follow: > The time made available and financial resources imposed their limits on the > scope of this research. I feel that "the time made available" is a bit odd. Is there a word for "available time" or "time made available"?


Is it "Seeking a bigger challenge" or "Seeking for a bigger challenge"?

Sometimes in a job application form, it asks you for the reason of leaving the previous company, and if the reason is to look for a bigger challenge, would it be   * Seeking a bigger challenge   * Seeking for a bigger challenge   * Searching for a bigger challenge The phrase "Seeking for a bigger challenge" sounds more right and more comfortable to the ears, but maybe seek shouldn't usually be used with a preposition? Google search showed about 11,000 results for `"Seeking a bigger challenge"` (with the quotes), vs 3,600 results for `"Seeking for a bigger challenge"` so the first one seems to be more correct according to collective intelligence. Is it more correct to use "Seeking a bigger challenge"?


Is there an equivalent for French "CQFD"

In French, when concluding a demonstration, we say "CQFD", which stands for "Ce Qu'il Fallait Démontrer". Do English has an equivalent for this ?


Achilles' heel or achilles heel? - Is it proper to lowercase the usage

I was reading an article that uses the phrase "Achilles' heel" to refer to Facebook's acquisition of Instagram, but it was written thus: > achilles heel My main question is - was this a bad mistake or is making this kind of description in this way a common thing? If so, could you provide examples where others have taken common phrases and lowercased them. A little more context in case it helps: > Because Facebook is essentially about photos, and Instagram had found and > attacked Facebook’s achilles heel — mobile photo sharing.


Passive voice of "Stay"

What would be the passive voice of "passengers stay in a hotel". The whole sentence would be "passengers can be forwarded to their destination in a new flight, or (be kept) in a hotel". "Kept" is not a word I want to use for humans :)


Literary term for an obvious understatement to emphasize excess

I was wondering what the term was for a intentional understatement of an obvious excess to emphasize that excess. For example saying Bill Gates is “doing well for himself”. Anyone familiar with Bill Gates instantly thinks of how “doing well for himself” doesn’t do his excess wealth justice.


"Request sample documents for which to follow" vs. "from which to follow"

I am editing a document that has the following sentence: > If there are no brand standards published regarding logo use and colors, the > team will request sample documents for which to follow. The "for which to follow" seems so awkward to me. Should it be "from which to follow" or should I just rewrite the whole sentence?


What's the origin of the phrase "fresh off the back"?

I often come across this phrase "fresh off the back of something" and although I could never find it in a dictionary, I figured out it means "right after something" but what does it really mean "off the back"? Why is the word "back" used in this phrase?


How to use "learn you"

While I was reading "The Adventures of Tom sawyer",I came across this phrase. **Huck said ,"I will learn you."** Is it right to say like that?Or we should say "I will learn from you"?


Is there a word for human litter-mates?

If my brother and I shared a womb during gestation (as humans) we're twins. If there was another sibling in there we're triplets.. and so on, but is there a general term to describe us irrespective of how many of us there were? I know we're siblings, but I'm curious if there's a word analogous to siblings that refers specifically to members of a single human litter. For that matter is there an alternate word for a human litter? Or is it correct to refer to triplets as a litter?


Using "subject to" with a verb other than "to be"

Is it possible to use _subject to_ with a verb other than _to be_? for example: > The self-image is subject to changes. (Obviously OK) > > Being bound to our self-image we react subject to behavior patterns. (Is it > OK??) Are there any good alternatives to this construction?


Word that covers Games, TV, Movies and Music

Is there a word that covers Games, TV, Movies and Music? Entertainment seems to be fitting but it's a bit too long for my needs and I'm looking for alternatives. I searched and found 'Media' and 'Fiction' but I'm unsure if these two terms covers it too.


Difference between "harvesting" and "scavenging"

What is the difference between _energy harvesting_ and _energy scavenging_? Which is more appropriate when referring to an electronic device getting energy from the environment?


What does term "Security Holding" mean?

I have recently been informed by a government office of the United Kingdom that an account balance is X pounds on cash and Y pounds "in a security holding". What does/might the term "security holding" mean to a UK government office?


Plurals of "infimum" and "supremum"

The words _infimum_ and _supremum_ are technical terms in mathematics. Should their plurals be _infima_ and _suprema_ or _infimums_ and _supremums_?


The case of "y'all"

What cases can "y'all" work in? A prior question asks about the 'proper' usage of "y'all", but it and its answers only address nominative case (all examples are nominative). I think that there are some cases where "y'all" doesn't work as is. For example,   * nominative: "Y'all come back now, ya hear?"   * accusative: "I'll ring y'all up tomorrow after the fish fry."   * possessive: "Bring y'all's swimsuits. The pool will be open." (or "y'allses". yes, I find this is questionable usage)   * vocative: "Hey y'all! Where's the keg?"   * but instrumental/dative/indirect object?: nothing sounds right. > ? I'll bring the BBQ over to y'all. > > ? This party is all for y'all. These don't sound right to me. The alternatives that sound right to me would be: > I'll bring the BBQ over to you all. > > This party is all for you all. Can anyone confirm my usage? Has there been a study/paper on this? I ask because most pronouns in English have forms for different cases, so it is not given that "y'all", though a synonym for "you" which only has a different form in possessive case, would or would not have a different form.


What does 'abstract ideas' mean?

In the sentence for example: > This book would also interest intelligent students with a taste for abstract > ideas and theoretical arguments. What does the phrase "abstract ideas" mean? I looked up the word in dictionary and it seems to have meanings such as something which not a material object and which exists as an idea. What does it generally mean?


Can “this time around” and “all the time” be compatible?

I was a bit puzzled to read the following sentence in the article titled “Obama showering Ohio with attention and money” in September 26 Washington Post: “It goes without saying that, every four years, presidential candidates shower battleground states with attention. _This time around_ , it’s Obama in Ohio, doling out the perks of office — _all the time_.” “This time around” should refer to a specific point of time in contrast to the folowing “all the time,” which is separated by em dash. Don’t “this time around” and “all the time” in the same sentence contradict each other? Though I think “ _all the time_ ” means every four-year routines of every presidential candidate, is this a perfect English sentence? It may sound nitpicking, but aren’t some words missing, or redundant in the last line of the above sentence?


Slightly different meanings of "National" and usage

I'm a programmer and I have to name some columns in a database. It's about sports competitions. I have to classify the leagues and competitions in two properties. One of them is if they are national games, such as World Cup, but not Champions League. The other one is, if they're national leagues such as Barclay's Premier League, not Europa League. Both "national" and "international" sounds to describe both. I don't want to use the word "local" for a league like "Barclay's Premier League", as "local" describes a league which is played in a city or town. I may use "domestic" but still, "national" would sound like a domestic league either. My question is, what are the two words that I can use, which would not be confusing and make you would understand what it describes even though you don't know the other one, and which has opposites.


Is  “He picked up a quarrel” correct?

Is this sentence grammatically correct? > He picked up a quarrel.


What does “single spread” mean?

Recently I read an article about the Windows Phone design. The author kept mentioning the term _spread_ , as in "single spread" and "long spread of content". I thought they would be explained later on in the article, so I read on, but tough luck. He just kept using it. So I stopped reading, confused. Here's a part of the article demonstrating the use of the term in context: > Even though Panoramas are made out of panels or sections, we should design > them as single long spreads of content. Think of one of those two, three or > even four page spreads in magazines. The ones that unfold, sometimes being > the cover itself, and others being pages within the magazine for an > advertisement or poster. By designing the Panorama as a single spread and > not in chunks you will be able to sell the immersive experience that > Panoramas offer in a much more compelling manner to users. What does _spread_ mean here? What is "a single spread", what are "four page spreads"?


Should broader types be capitalized?

I'm seeing that I get a red squiggle under the words _asian_ and _european_. When I right-click either, it wants to capitalize the word. I wouldn't think a general type of thing gets capitalized, such as "evergreen tree", a type of tree, versus "Blue Spruce", a specific type. I would think I need to capitalize "Chinese" or "German" or "American", but not the broader types of "Asian" or "European".


What is "thrown in for salt"

His voice drifted up, liquid and full of tears, mostly _Oh dear_ with the occasional _Oh God_ or _Now it's snow_ "thrown in for salt". What does "thrown in for salt" mean hear?


Inventory or repository?

I have a program for managing products and intermediate artifacts stored in a human concrete building somewhere. The program is not only manage the artifacts existed, but also the resource planning for non-existed artifacts. So, what should I call this program, an _inventory manager_ , or a _repository manager_ , or _warehouse manager_ , or something else? Personally, I feel that _inventory_ is not intuitive, it's prefixed with _invent-_ , however, there are also purchased artifacts which are not invented by ourselves in the repository. Though, most people/documents call this piece of program as _inventory manager_.


What is the early recorded use of "white trash" and has its meaning changed over time?

I am reading _The Personal Memoirs of Ulysses S. Grant_, written in 1885, and came across a passage describing poor white Southerners who had no property or slaves but who were nevertheless coerced or cajoled into supporting the rebellion as _white trash_. > The great bulk of the legal voters of the South were men who owned no > slaves; their homes were generally in the hills and poor country; their > facilities for educating their children, even up to the point of reading and > writing, were very limited; their interest in the contest was very > meagre—what there was, if they had been capable of seeing it, was with the > North; they too needed emancipation. Under the old régime they were looked > down upon by those who controlled all the affairs in the interest of slave- > owners, **as poor white trash who were allowed the ballot so long as they > cast it according to direction**. I had assumed the term _white trash_ was a more modern idiom. I am curious, when did the term originate and has the meaning changed over time?


"Status" vs. "state"

Can anyone explain what the difference between _status_ and _state_ is when I talk about the condition or situation of an object? Here's what I got from Longman English Dictionary. > _status_ : a situation at a particular time, especially in an argument, > discussion etc. > > _state_ : the physical or mental condition that someone or something is in For example, how do you interpret these two sentences: >   1. What is the current status of this project? > >   2. What is the current state of this project? > >


Having question about what a sentence mean, and to figure out what the references referring to

In context: > Where is the simple fact? Scientists have been seeking it in the two > extremes, in the infinitely great and in the infinitely small. Biologists, > for example, have been instinctively led to regard the cell as more > interesting than the whole animal; and, since Poincaré's time, the protein > molecule as more interesting than the cell. The outcome has shown the wisdom > of this, since cells and molecules belonging to different organisms have > been found to be more alike than the organisms themselves. > > How then choose the interesting fact, the one that begins again and again? > Method is precisely this choice of facts; **it is needful then to be > occupied first with creating a method; and many have been imagined, since > none imposes itself.** It's proper to begin with the regular facts, but > after a rule is established beyond all doubt, the facts in conformity with > it become dull because they no longer teach us anything new. Then it's the > exception that becomes important. We seek not resemblances but differences, > choose the most accentuated differences because they're the most striking > and also the most instructive.   1. _What does the sentence in bold means?_ And now that I had a vague idea what the sentence mean, what about the references:   1. _What is needful then to be occupied first with creating a method?_   2. _What have been imagined?_   3. _And none of what imposes itself?_ Edit: Add a previous paragraph into the context, add 3 questions to elaborate more about the question. Edit2: I had ponder on for several hours, and it occur to me that I might have misused 'reference'. I don't mean the reference of books, the 'reference' I am talking about here comes from Cohesion in English written by Halliday. And I had translate into three questions above. The second and the third may be ellipse, but for convenience I just call it reference because they all point to something in the text or in the register. I don't read the book thoroughly, and there may be error that I do not detect, but that's main idea of my question. Apology for my mistake. **Edit3:** Well, what I am trying to said is **I am new, and am trying my best as I can** to ask a good question. **Please leave a comment** before you **downvote** me, so I can understand where the problem is, and I will try my best to **improve the question.** I don't know whether this question is a good question in your definition. But the question, especially the last three which underlie the first one, is **important and valuable to me** , and **I'll try my best to get an answer.** Thank you.


Plural of "an end in itself"

In singular English say: > The thing is an end in itself. How does plural look like then? > The things are the ends in themselves. Am I right?


Is it possible to describe an event tensed ambiguously?

If an event will occur in the future I might say:               There will be an event and it will have a number of features.      If it occurs in the past I might say:               There was an event and it had a number of features.      If it is occurring now I might say:               There is an event and it has a number of features.      What if I dont yet know the time of the event relative to "now"? Alternatively, what if I do not want to reveal if the event has occurred yet, but I do want want to describe it? If I want to remain ambiguous about gender I can use the neuter form. Is there something equivilent in tense, or is there a selection of tense neutral words I can use instead?


How to use a person's given name, followed by what they're also known as, in the same sentence

How do we use a person's given name, followed by what they're also known as, in the same sentence? For example, > There's just no denying that Barry Allan a.k.a. The Flash is one extremely > fast guy. Not sure if any commas, quotes, parentheses, etc. are needed, or where to put them. I'm kind of new to all this stuff, so forgive me for the stupid question.


A verb for transforming something into currency

I need a verb that expresses the concept of transforming a raw material into currency, as in this sentence "The bitcoin manufacturing process _currenciates_ digital information." New coinages are fine if they make sense and are less clumsy than the one I used above, but an existing term would be preferred. I've considered the word _mint_ but that seems to relate more to the final product than the raw material -- in other words, you mint coins (the finished product), you don't mint gold (the raw material).


Difference between "assent" and "consent"

What is the difference between _assent_ and _consent_?


What does “showered” mean?

What does _showered_ mean in this sentence? > Netflix was **showered** with Emmy nominations for _Orange_ and _House of > Cards_.


Statement of fact: future simple

Why is the simple future used in the following sentence instead of the simple present? > A client software will not transfer files.


Meaning of: "hollered a shrill, wannabe voice-of-the-people"

> "Is anyone up there sober?!" hollered a shrill, wannabe voice-of-the-people, > audibly virginal and entitled. What does this sentence mean? I am uncertain of meaning, or implied meaning of **1.** "hollered a shrill, wannabe voice-of-the-people" and **2**. "audibly virginal and entitled."


Which is the correct statement "tolerate against" or "tolerate with"?

I can't get this right, but I'm not sure which is the correct statement: > We do not tolerate against pornography images. or is it > We do not tolerate with pornography images. Which is the correct way of not agreeing with pornography images?


How do you say x in x language? What's the English/Spanish word for x?

Is it correct to ask "how do you say 'tower' in Spanish?" or should we actually ask "what's the Spanish word for 'tower'?" Some people say that if I ask "how do you say..." the answer would be _softly, loudly_ etc., as if _how_ was functioning as an adverb of manner and that was its only function. So, the correct question would be "what's the Spanish word for..." What do you think? is there any grammar rule that could help me understand the difference between these two questions?