What are direct and indirect objects to "provide"?

I'm always wondering when I want to write a sentence with _provide_. What is the correct way to say/write:   * to provide someone with something   * to provide someone something   * to provide something to someone Or another? Is there any difference in usage between American and UK English?


is there a word or expression which describes a mapping between the same thing?

For example, if I map 4 to 4, 4000 to 4000, is there a good word or expression which describes this kind of mapping? Perhaps _identity mapping_ or something else?


'for Verb-ing' followed by a preposition

Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary gives the definition of sink as follows: > a large open container [...] that you use for washing dishes in My question is whether the preposition 'in' is necessary. What about the following? Are the prepositions necessary? > I bought a pair of chopsticks for eating rice with.   >  I bought a pair of chopsticks to eat rice with.   >  I bought a house to live in.


Meaning & Origin of phrase "Step into [him/her]"

I've done a bit of searching for this phrase and found the following: > "step into" > > Idioms & Phrases > > Involve oneself or intervene, as in He knew he'd be able to step into a job > in his father's firm , or Jane asked Mary to step into the matter and settle > it . Also see step in. However, the place I first heard the phrase is on Law & Order: Criminal Intent, where Deakins, the supervisor of the Major Case Squad, uses it with a direct object of a suspect or a witness, which barely fits the definition. The definition implies usage towards a situation or position. Exchanges on the show usually go something like this: > Detective: "We don't have any real leverage on him to find out what he > knows!" > > Supervisor: "Step into him." Or: > Detective: "As long as his lawyer is protecting him, we'll never get him to > talk." > > Supervisor: "Step into him. Hard." > > Detective: Re-enters the interrogation room and squeezes the information > from the suspect over the lawyers increasing complaints. That seems to imply there is another, even more idiomatic usage for the phrase with a meaning closer to "investigate" or "harass". How common is this idiom? Is the screen writer mis-using a legitimate idiom? Or is there another meaning or police/detective slang that's not so documented around the web?


Word that describes devices which are combinations or two other devices?

I'm wondering if there is a term that describes any given physical device that is a "spiritual" combination of two other devices. Meaning, it mimics the form and function of both parent devices. Examples:   * Spork (combination of a spoon and a fork)    * Halberd (combination of a staff and an axe)   * Calculator Watch (combination of a calculator and a watch) To explain via analogy, " _Portmanteau_ is to words as **___ __ ___ _** is to devices"


An alternative valediction to "godspeed" wishing someone success in a venture

I am essentially searching for a well-wishing exclamation that does not imply divine intervention.


Meaning of Phenotext and Genotext

I haven't been able to find a clear and simple definition of "phenotext" and "genotext", both terms — I believe — were created by Julia Kristeva. All explanations are only pompous texts I have not had time to go through. Has anyone a definition for me?


"Sometimes...others" or "sometimes...in others"?

What's grammatically correct? > Sometimes she used metaphors, others symbols and riddles. or > Sometimes she used metaphors, in others symbols and riddles. What I'm trying here is to omit the word **_times_**.


Does "Could I have hope of getting admission of your school with that score?" sound weird?


Single word for "going along with the crowd"

What is a word to describe the behaviour where you do something because everyone is also doing this, to the point where you do it without any clear reason.


"A disliking of" vs. "a disliking for"

I was having a conversation with a friend, telling him that over time, I've started to dislike a certain genre of music: > I've grown a strong disliking for Dubstep. As though my liking for Dubstep has gradually decreased over a set period of time. Now, I'm starting to question whether the use of _for_ is correct. Have I grown a strong disliking _for_ Dubstep, or have I grown a strong disliking _of_ Dubstep? They both seem proper to me, but I'd like to be sure. Is there a difference between the two?


Why is the accusative case used for a "topic"?

If I were to write a book about myself, _Me_ would be a more natural-sounding title than _I_. Also, we say the _us-vs.-them mentality_ instead of the _we- vs.-they mentality_.


What's going on in "I have been to the store many times"?

I thought _been_ was the past participle of _to be_ , but it seems to behave like the past participle of _to go_ in this case: > I go to the store every Wednesday. > > I have been/gone to the store many times. > > *I am to the store every Wednesday. Also > I go through the tunnel. > > I've been/gone through the tunnel. > > *I am through the tunnel. What's happening?


The word "only" in this sentence makes me feel uncertain

> > The extension of the principle of the reflex to include behavior involving > more and more of the organism was made only in the face of vigorous > opposition. My understanding is this: the vigorous opposition is the reason why the principle of the reflex extend to include behavior involving more and more of the organism. But I'm not so sure about it, the word **only** in here seems to say vigorous opposition is the **only** reason, that doesn't make much sense. The source is Skinner's "Science and human behavior" and following is the whole paragraph: > > The extension of the principle of the reflex to include behavior involving > more and more of the organism was made only in the face of vigorous > opposition. The reflex nature of the spinal animal was challenged by > proponents of a "spinal will." The evidence they offered in support of a > residual inner cause consisted of behavior which apparently could not be > explained wholly in terms of stimuli. When higher parts of the nervous > system were added, and when the principle was eventually extended to the > intact organism, the same pattern of resistance was followed. But arguments > for spontaneity, and for the explanatory entities which spontaneity seems to > demand, are of such form that they must retreat before the accumulating > facts. Spontaneity is negative evidence; it points to the weakness of a > current scientific explanation, but does not in itself prove an alternative > version. By its very nature, spontaneity must yield ground as a scientific > analysis is able to advance. As more and more of the behavior of the > organism has come to be explained in terms of stimuli, the territory held by > inner explanations has been reduced. The "will" has retreated up the spinal > cord, through the lower and then the higher parts of the brain, and finally, > with the conditioned reflex, has escaped through the front of the head. At > each stage, some part of the control of the organism has passed from a > hypothetical inner entity to the external environment Is my understanding correct?


How to call the two points at each end of a path?

By "path" I mean a _route that has been walked by_. The best I could come out with is _starting point_ and _ending point_. Is there a shorter way to refer to them? (Maybe end points?)


"Went to school happily" vs. "happily went to school" vs. "went happily to school"

>   1. The boy went to school happily. >   2. The boy happily went to school. >   3. The boy went happily to school. > If the adverb “happily” is allowed to be put in the three places above, what are the different impressions you think it will give to readers?


What's the word in English for something that increases/decreases?

I'm a game programmer and currently working on a generic system that works for most type of games. I have a generic piece of code, that I use on anything that could increase/decrease called `EffectCauser` \- It has a bunch of parameters for it to work:   1. The target component (health, mana, speed, stamina, etc)   2. The effect methodology (`OneHit`, `Overtime`, `Permanent`, etc)   3. The effect type (`Positive`/`Negative`)    4. The effect amount. First let me explain how this works in a couple of simple examples so that you understand better: Let's say I wanted to create a first aid kit. I create an `EffectCauser` which will cause its effect on the `Health` component of the target object, I specify the methodology of the effect of type `OneHit` and the type of the effect to be `Positive` and an amount I choose, lets say 100 for a full heal. Another example, if I wanted to create a Mana spell that decreases mana overtime: I would create an effect causer that targets the `Mana` component of a target, select a methodology of `Overtime` (temporarily in other words) (filling the appropriate time values), an effect type of `Negative` this time, and an amount, like 50. (Imagine a spell in an RPG game where an enemy cast it at you, so you get -50 mana over a 10 sec time period) And so on and so forth. I could do this for a `Speed` component, `Agility`, `Stamina`, etc. The main thing for this to work is that all these things (Health, Mana, Speed, Stamina, etc) have to implement a common interface. I'm not being able to find the name of that interface. One common thing between all these things, is that they increase and decrease. I thought of `IChangable` but that's very generic, maybe `IIncreasableDecreasable` but that's very long, and screaming "there's a better word than me" Note that the convention of naming interfaces, is "IXXXable" (IMovable, ICombinable, ITransformable, etc) So, what can I use here? what is the word that satisfies my needs? Thanks a lot. **EDIT:** To make it easy, it need not be an interface. I could create an abstract class. Interfaces define behavior, while a class is for something that exists. I just have to change my way of thinking. Ex: an abstract `Character`, with `Player` and `Enemy` as children. `Player` and `Enemy` _are a_ `Character`. (`Character` is an abstract term for `Enemy` and `Player`) So... what _are_ `Health`, `Mana`, `Speed`, etc? For one thing, they're `Components` but what else? (I can't use `Component` here due to ambiguity as well). What about `PlayerAttribute`? well, for one thing I can attach `Health` to an enemy, not just the player. So... `CharacterAttribute` is good? nop, still ambiguous. (Attribute means a total separate thing in .NET)... I'm out of words :( If you ever played an RPG game, what would a common name be to all your player stuff? (health, mana, agility, stamina, speed, dexterity, etc)


What do I call a company that sells an item they don't make but under their name?

I was surfing for headphones on Amazon, when to my surprise, I found some fairly high-rated headphones. But initially, I thought the the first Company, A, made these headphones, I was surprised to find that while search elsewhere, another Company, B, made the exact same headphones, just under a different brand. So I searched elsewhere, and found that the real company that made the product was Company C, that actually designed and produced the product, but that Company A and B had simple just put their name on the headphones. What in this case would I call Company A & B? What would be the name for Company A & B? They didn't make the product, but they sell it under their name, despite the fact that Company C sells it. Would I call it like a "shell" company? Not sure what's the word to use here.


"Myself" as a single subject

How do we use _myself_ as the only subject of a sentence? For example I once heard some people saying _Myself am to be blamed._ Is this grammatically correct? How is it different from _I am to be blamed_?


Why is a Scot's accent so difficult for Americans to understand?

When I was in Edinburgh, Scotland, the locals could understand me just fine, but I was flummoxed by their accent, which did not remotely sound like English to me. Necessity forced me to request that the Scottish locals I encountered write out their responses to my questions. Embarrassing! How is this one-way communication misunderstanding possible, given Scotland's proximity to England and Ireland, whose accents are far easier to understand?


What will she share with another person?

**Context : Her friend gets married.** [Link] And now she is saying: "Now I will have to share her with someone else." **What will she share with the other person?**   * Memories of her friend.   * Time    * something else


“Connect to” vs. “Connect with”: Which is better?

Which is better for this situation?   * Connect **to** your target audience.   * Connect **with** your target audience.


Greeting in different ways

I'm going to go to US for a long business trip, during which I'm going to meet a lot of people. Some of them are senior managers; others are day-to-day colleagues. I want to know how to greet people in different ways: formal things to say to a manager, and casual things to say to co-workers. I don't know if it's appropriate to say these to your leaders: > wassup / How's it goin'


What is the plural of the word "it's"?

What is the plural of the word "it's"? Perhaps "it'ss" or "it'ses"? Usage: "The paragraph contained three it'ss"   Meaning: "The paragraph contained three occurrences of the word, it's"


“so long as” vs. “as long as”

I just googled the difference between _as long as_ and _so long as_. The difference has alredy been discussed here. There are, it seems, two contexts for these expressions:   1. lengths and physical comparisons (time, distance, etc.)   “This bridge is as long as that bridge.”   2. some logical implication or synonym for _provided that_ or something like this.    “You can do that so long as you keep in mind that. . . .” Somewhere else I found that you can use **both** expressions for context #2, but should avoid _so long as_ in cases of context #1. Now, mmyers commented that _so long as_ might be colloquial — or as he put it, “casual”. It seems that it’s possible to never use _so long as_ , since according to what I have been told, you can use either expression in cases of context #1. Given that I am writing academic papers, my questions are:   1. Is _so long as_ truly non-academic or non–high-style?   2. Should _so long as_ therefore be avoided altogether?


Connotations of "anoint someone" as successor

I saw this headline on the BBC today: > China anoints Xi as new leader There is one entry in the definition at Google's dictionary which exactly corresponds to the case in use: > Nominate or choose (someone) as successor to or leading candidate for a > position \- he was anointed as the organizational candidate of the party \- > his officially anointed heir Although this entry doesn't have any mention to religiousness or ceremoniousness, I wonder: Is there a connotation religious or ceremonial connotation to the use of _anoint_ in this case?


Word for person prying on my personal stuffs

which adjective can I use to describe my neighbor, who is always trying to keep eye on my personal matters like what am I bringing from market or what am I cooking etc? Regards,


Ways to say "trying hard to arrange enough time to do something"?

Suppose I am doing several things assigned by different people these days. One of the people feels that my progress on doing his assignment is slow, maybe because I am not interested in doing it. The reality is that I am interested in doing all the things, but his assignment is a little beyond my capability, and   * I need to learn new stuff in order to understand it.    * I feel a continuous period of time to focus on his assignment is what I need now, but I also have to do the other things assigned by other people, which breaks my time into pieces. How shall I explain to him to assure him I am interested in his assignment and trying to give my best to it?


Synonym for word "Administration"

Can anyone give me synonym for " _Administration_ "? I am using a software that has " _Administration_ " as a keyword, so it doesn't allow any use of this word. However, My task is to create a folder for each department of some enterprise (and it has an Administration Department). My question Here is: How can I find a synonym for " _Administration_ " without losing the real meaning of the term? > P.S.: I found synonyms like "administrative" and "directors" which don't fit > in my context.


Cowboys, cowpokes, cowpunchers, wranglers, vaqueros, and buckaroos

Depending on where you are regionally located in the US, can these terms be used just about interchangeably in the sense "a hired hand (a cowhand) who tends cattle and performs many of his duties on horseback"? In addition, can any of these terms be used interchangeably to refer to cowboys in western movies? Or to historical cowboys and gunslingers back in the old days when people had to rely on horses to carry them? By the way, how come mature cowboys in horse operas are not referred to as cowmen but still as cowboys?


How to phrase a worldwide location in English?

I have an online form where a user would usually submit a specific location in a field, e.g. Moscow, Berlin, New York, Paris. But sometimes there is no specific city location, for instance for a seminar that takes place "online" or a web screening. I want to enable the users to enter the "worldwide" case. What are typical phrases in English for that to catch? Planet, www, online, internet, worldwide, anywhere. Can you imagine up more suitable candidates? Are you aware of any existing English geo-databases with entries for the worldwide location case?


Common root of "practice," "practical," and "practicum"

When someone _practices_ something, they do it often/as a habit. When someone says something is _practical_ , they usually mean it is pragmatic/sensible/applicable, yet not necessarily practiced. And my teachers have used _practicum_ to refer to a test, which is an examination, not an instance of practice. What is the common root of these words, what does it mean, and why do these words seem to mean different things?


What do I call a word with roots from multiple languages?

As best as I can tell, a good example is _sociopath_ : > sociopath -- from _socio-_ on model of _psychopath_ > > socio- -- combining form of [Latin] _socius_ > > pathos -- from [Greek] pathos Hence, _sociopath_ is a word coined from roots found in two different languages. Is there a good term that describes this?


Is there a word for "look and feel"?

"Look and feel" is a term commonly used in UI, software and web design, yet we have job titles such as Web Designer, Visual Designer, Front-end Developer, UX Designer but no Look and Feel Designer. Visual Designer is probably the closest, but I've always thought this title doesn't capture the full range of what this designer does; i.e., they work on feel **and** visuals. Look and Feel Designer sounds a bit awkward and wordy, but it is a good term that accurately describes the domain, so I was wondering if there were a more elegant way of stating it?


What is the pronunciation of "Aussie"?

I know that Australians pronounce Aussie like _Oz-ee_. However, how should Americans pronounce it? I have, in the past, politely corrected Americans when I hear the typical "aw- see" (\ä-sē\). It seems to be pretty widely unknown that Australians say _Oz- ee_. Then, I came across a website that _specifically_ listed _Oz-ee_ in the **wrong pronunciation** column (not even in the "alternate" column). I emailed the author saying that I did not understand why this pronunciation was explicitly in the "wrong" column, and not at the very least in the alternate column. This set the author off into a rant about how tiny dialects should not be indulged with setting the correct pronunciation for the rest of the English- speaking world. However, amid all the ranting, the only objection I really received was that the _ss_ shouldn't become a _z_. So what's the answer? Should English-speakers, no matter their dialect, use the pronunciation that the subject of the word itself uses? Or was this author correct, that the generally-accepted North American usage of _aw-see_ is categorically "correct" for general usage, and _Oz-ee_ should be relegated to "tiny, insignificant, meaningless dialects"*? **In other words, which is the correct pronunciation for North American speakers?** I guess this question has three possible answers:   1. The Australian pronunciation is correct.   2. Both are OK.   3. Americans should regard the Australian pronunciation as _wrong_ for the North American accent/dialect. * * * * His words, not mine :) I repeat it here to give a sense of the tone of the rant, not because I (even remotely) concur.


"more" is to "less" as "er" is to what?

Excerpt from _Cambridge Dictionary of American English_ : > If you want to use an adjective or adverb to say that a quality is of a > **higher** degree, you can usually add **-er** ( _one-syllable adjectives_ ) > to the end of it or qualify it with **more** ( _adjectives of two ore more > syllables_ ).               e.g. your hair is longer now than it was last year.      > To say that a quality is of a **lower** degree, you can usually add **-er** > ( _one-syllable adjectives_ ) to the end of a **negative** adjective or > adverb, or qualify it with **less** ( _adjectives of two ore more syllables_ > ).               e.g. your hair is shorter now than it was last year.      My question is: How can we say that a **negative & one-syllable** adjective is of a **higher** degree? I mean, if "shorter" somehow means " **more short** ", how can I say that something is " **less short** "? And if "longer" somehow means " **more long** ", how can I say that something is " **less long** " than another thing? A friend of mine suggested that the only way of saying the opposite of "negative adj + er" is to say "positive adj + er". (i.e. shorter -> longer). My take is that whether "adj + er" means "more adj" or "less adj", entirely depends on whether the used adj. is positive or negative respectively. Is my understanding correct? Is it possible to say the opposite of "shorter" to convey the meaning of "less short" without using a different adjective? ## Rephrased question: For non-one-syllable adjectives: > If A is **more beautiful** than B, then B is **less beautiful** than A. Why is there no such ability in English to bidirectionally compare one- syllable adjectives as well? > If A is **rounder** than B, then B is ( **???** ) than A.


What do we call a picture of a picture?

Is there a word for a picture of a picture? Had a search on onelook but couldn't find anything... edit: sorry maybe I wasn't _that_ clear the first time -- I mean like a photograph of a photograph...


"Quench thirst" vs. "still thirst" when "thirst" is used figuratively

Do I say " _quenched_ my thirst" or " _stilled_ my thirst" when I speak of something that I desire and not actual thirst? E.g. a thirst for a new car or something.


"close behind" as in "time closes behind everyone and everything"

What does "close behind" mean in this sentence: _"So life comes to an end and time **closes behind** everyone and everything."_ "life comes to an end" and "time closes behind everyone and everything" are in a parallel and should mean the same? But I still cannot figure our the metaphor. Thanks! More context: _So life comes to an end and time closes behind everyone and everything. My ex-husband understood that and tried to escape by running away from it. I reminded him of time, being younger than he was, so he ran away from me too._


"Rectangle with 3 straight lines" vs "rectangle using 3 straight lines"

How do the three sentences below differ in meaning, and which can be answered with 'yes'? >   1. Can you draw a rectangle with 3 straight lines? >   2. Can you draw a rectangle by using 3 straight lines? >   3. Can you draw a rectangle using 3 straight lines? >


Is there a suitable conjunction which fits the meaning of “as a continuation of”?

I want to use it in my thesis. Like _secondarily_ , but I don't want to use that one or similar words, as these specify an order.


"We are finished" vs. "We have finished"

Is " _we are finished_ " grammatically correct? I thought it would be more correct to say " _We have finished_ ".


"Art was theatre was sport"

I seem to have come across this sentence structure before but I can't quite remember where. Which number would be the best follow up to the phrase "To the ancient Romans"? To the ancient Romans   1. theatre was art was sport   2. theatre was art, was sport.   3. theatre was art and art was sport. I know that 3. is correct. 2. is basically the same as 1. but with an added comma. However, the message I'd like to convey is that art = theatre = sport (i.e. sport was art because it was theatre and theatre was art) rather than that sport is intrinsically art. Sport is only art because it is theatre. Sorry if the question is longwinded and confusing. Thank you so much for taking the time to read and answer this everyone.


"Were gone" vs. "had gone"

Whats the difference between: > She were gone to party.   >  She had gone to party. Are they both ok?


An "unhappy smile"

Is an unhappy smile the same as a frown? I tried to google images of an unhappy smile and that's mostly what I found. I don't think an unhappy smile is the same thing as a frown, but I could be wrong. What is an unhappy smile? A description or picture would be helpful.


Henry Adams’s use of punctuation, “:—”

I’ve never seen the construction before, except in Spanish for dialogue and Toni Morrison using the variation “;—” in _Beloved_ for denoting a strong pause (well, that’s what we decided in my English class). How does Henry Adams use “:—”? Is this grammatically correct? How can I incorporate this into my own sentences? > Among senses, smell was the strongest:—the smell of hot pine-woods and > sweet-fern in the scorching summer noon; of new-mown hay; of ploughed earth   >   > — Henry Adams, in _The Education of Henry Adams_


What is ":-" used for?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Henry Adam’s use of punctuation, “:—” I've seen a couple of times, ":-" occurring where I could expect just a colon to occur, perhaps preceding a list. When is it correct to use ":-"? What is it called? Am I simply wrong and think I remember seeing this, when in actual fact I didn't?


What is it called when an improper meaning becomes the only meaning of a word?

Someone else asked Are camp followers prostitutes? and the answer seems to be that while not every one who follows a military camp is a prostitute, if you _aren't_ referring to a prostitute, you should probably pick another label for the person. A similar effect can be seen with sexually themed words like "mistress", "madam", "ejaculate", and "escort". I assume this linguistic process has been studied and I'm curious what its name is.


XXIII, neither IIIXX nor XIIIX, represents 23. Is it correct grammar?

I want to say that we cannot represent 23 in Roman as both IIIXX and XIIIX. The correct representation for 23 in Roman is XXIII. If I write like this > XXIII, neither IIIXX nor XIIIX, represents 23 in roman. is it correct grammar?


What is the actual meaning and purpose of saying "I'm in a call" Ex: if a person pinged me when am talking with someone over phone at the same time then what would be the simple and correct way to say that "am talking with someone over phone.."


Can I omit a colon and use a comma instead in this sentence to dramatize?

original sentence -> The purpose is to disclose some information new sentence -> the purpose: to disclose some information last version(I'm asking about) -> The purpose, to disclose information


Suitable synonyms for "migrate", "migrated" based upon the supplied context

I recently asked a question on meta.stackoverflow.com ( ~~please see it for the context; I didn't copy it to this question in order to avoid unnecessary duplication~~ context quoted below*), so the damage (repetition) has been done, however I'd still please like to request your learned assistance and opinions on whether or not I could have used another word(s) that would suit the context? **Move** / **moved** was the best I could come up with after way too much internal deliberation.    **Edit** *Repetion in the partial quotes _emphasised_ : > However, the first time a question I answered got _migrated_ (to Pro > Webmasters), I registered .. > > .. their question has been _migrated_ to and I .. > > .. due to their questions being _migrated_. As it stands now, a lot of the > answers to _migrated_ questions .. > > .. new answers on a _migrated_ question until they've registered an account > on the site their question was _migrated_ to either, and the message they're > greeted with upon _migration_ itself is very perfunctory .. > > .. a link to where it was _migrated_ to, I'd like to make a feature-request > that there's a little more prodding and cajoling for the OP to register an > account on the site their question was _migrated_ to ..


Are both the "special" and the "needs" in "special needs" adjectives?

In the sentence, "she is a special needs child" (referring to someone with a disability), what parts of speech are the words "special needs"? Are both adjectives on their own, or do they only form an adjective together (and what is that called)?


Informal use of the title 'sir'

I would like to hear from the forum regarding the use of 'sir' in American literature, such as 'The Manhattan Transfer' by Dos Passos published in 1923. In the Italian translation it is given in the extremely formal 'voi' form, and I would argue that there are numerous examples of 'sir' in that period of American literature where it could be read as being an informal 'tu', simply replacing a name or title where that information is unknown.


Is it 'buy-in to', 'buy into', or 'buy in to' in the following sentence

"I don't understand why people `<insert words here>` products that have a reputation of hardware failures." What is the correct way to form this sentence?


Origin of the term 'bastard sword'

In many computer games (usually role playing games), there is an item called a _bastard sword_. Why is this name used, and does it bear any relation to the usual meaning of the term _bastard_?


"I am done" or "I have finished" or "I am finished" or "I finish"

I was trying to say the following and got bewildered with the different choices. > I have "To Kill a Mockingbird" on my list. I will write you about it when > **I am finished reading it.** > > I have "To Kill a Mockingbird" on my list. I will write you about it when > **I have finished reading it.** > > I have "To Kill a Mockingbird" on my list. I will write you about it when > **I am done reading it.** > > I have "To Kill a Mockingbird" on my list. I will write you about it when > **I finish reading it.** I am not sure which one to pick. I am confused with the exact meanings of these various choices. Could someone also shed some light on what meanings the different tenses convey in a context like this.


Food Prepared by Following a Recipe

What do we call the **food** that we made/prepared by following a **recipe**? It doesn't have to be a `single word` actually. I just want a shorter term for that.


To clarify a murky concept without explaining completely

Some concepts are just too difficult to be fully understood. Take for example the multivariate causes of the recent recession: who among us can honestly say that he or she grasps the situation completely? With respect to topics like this, although it is not possible to thoroughly grasp the concept, attempts can be made to elucidate--at least partially--the more mysterious parts. Accordingly, is there a phrase that means, "To make less mysterious, but not explain completely because the concept is too difficult"?


Quotations and Square Brackets

I have a question. If I am quoting a quote which has square brackets in it already, but I want to add square brackets because there are spelling mistakes so I want to add "[sic]". Do I just add it to the quote or do I change the square brackets in the quote?


Is the phrase "all to c**k" considered profane?

I occasionally use the colloquialism "all to cock" to mean "disastrously wrong". I've always thought it a benign phrase, but recently I've wondered whether the use of the word "cock" in this situation is vulgar. Is it? And if it isn't rude, would the 'average' person still consider it so?


Why "answer me" but not "answer me the question"?

Why are "answer me" and "answer the question" acceptable but not "answer me the question"? Is it similar to "explain me (something)"?


Hyphenation and capitalization of "Great-Uncle" when signing books to my nephew's son

When _great-uncle_ is used as a common noun, the hyphen and lack of caps make sense. However, when I sign a book to my nephew, is it _Great-Uncle Don, Great-uncle Don_ , or perhaps _Great Uncle Don_?


What's the meaning of "I put the chic in freak"?

I am a non-native speaker of English (Polish) and I teach English as a Foreign Language in Poland. A few months ago I came across this phrase / sentence printed on the student's notebook and got baffled because I didn't know how to translate it into Polish. Can anyone please provide me with enough defintion-rich explanations or other contexts and situations in which this sentence may be used. Generally I have a problem with the word " _freak_ " as I rarely use it. I simply avoid as much as I can the momorization and the internalization of it. I've done some research on the Internet, however it doesn't help me to arrive at a good Polish translation. Can you at least explain in which culture-bound situations it is used? **UPDATE:** Well, I found that this phrase is often used along with the Monster High doll franchise, web series, book series and a movie. I know that there is a cartoon series that was also aired in Polish TV channels, so I will look in there too. It may be a unique phrase, not used elsewhere but if you happen to know what it means and what it refers to, I will be grateful


Equivalent for Dutch commode?

In Holland we use _commode_ to indicate a dressing table or lowboy specifically for changing diapers and dressing a baby: ![commode](http://i.stack.imgur.com/9khq9.jpg) The commode is usually ditched after the babies have grown out the diapers. I can't imagine this piece of furniture being absent in the English speaking world but when I look on ebay, Etsy and others for commodes, lowboys, or chest of drawers I don't find anything related to changing baby diapers. What would be good translation for the Dutch word _commode_?


What's the past tense of "dive"? Of "spell"?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  UK English: Is "dived" a valid word?   >  Spelt and Spelled   >  “Dreamed” vs. “dreamt”, “leaped” vs. “leapt”, “lighted” vs. “lit”   >  Evolution of irregular verbs over the last century   >  Origin of different past tenses for verbs with the same endings? What's the difference between 'dived' and 'dove' as the past tense of 'to dive'? 'Spelled' and 'spelt' ( _to spell_ )? There are others which are similar. Is one form British usage?


standardisation of style; attributive nouns and Saxon genitives

In a recent thread, it was recommended that Academies' Trust be written as I just have done: > Academies' Trust. Normal possessive apostrophe rules apply. If I accept this traditional style, I might well end up writing something like: > Academies' Trusts include the Academies Enterprise Trust, the Leigh > Academies Trust, the Aspirations Academies Trust, and The Kemnal Academies > Trust. Should consistency of style override traditional apostrophe rules in this case?


Is it "alright" or "allright"?

In practice I find both spellings being used. From a logical point of view, "allright" (as in: "all's right — everything is fine") seems correct. However, I recall hearing that "alright" is the preferable variant. Is there consensus over which to use? Do they possibly even mean something different?


What is the difference between "alright" and "all right"?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Is it "alright" or "allright"? What is the difference between _alright_ and _all right_?


All Right vs Alright when starting to speak

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Is it "alright" or "allright"? When giving a speech or presentation it's common to hear the speaker (including myself when I present) start out by saying "All right". "All right, let's get started.". My questions are   * In this scenario, which is correct, "All right" or "Alright"? I suppose when listening to a speaker you wouldn't notice the difference.   * Follow up: Do they have different meanings based on context or is Alright a conjunction?   * Why do we use this phrase to actually get started? Is it to break the silence or is it a nice way to get the attention of the audience?   * Is it appropriate to use when writing? This would be more in the context of blogs, educational articles, tutorials, etc.


God Bless(es??) America

I think grammatically the phrase "God bless America" is wrong; it should be "God blesses America", don't you think so?


How do I describe higher language verb types?

For example, present tense is "God blesses you" but there is another form which is "God bless you" in which "bless" is a different verb tense. What is that higher verb tense that we use in more formal or higher forms English.


What is the correct way to write "God bless America"?

I've seen people write "God bless America", and it drives me nuts. Shouldn't it be "God, bless America"?


What's the difference between "hoover" and "hover"?

I sometimes use "hoover" and sometimes "hover". What's the difference?


More advanced way to describe a country has many resources

My question is: Instead of "this country has many resources", what can I say? This country is abundant in many resources?


When does a comma change the meaning of a sentence?

Match the two sentences with their meaning: > 1) I had a discussion with a friend and a programmer. > > 2) I had a discussion with a friend, and a programmer. Meanings: > a) I talked to a friend who _is_ a programmer. > > b) I talked to _two_ people, a friend, and a programmer. Intuitively, I know that 1 => b, and 2 => a. Is there a rule? Does this grammatical construct have a formal name or definition?


Why is the letter "w" the only letter in (basic) English alphabet that is not read as one syllable?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Why is a w a "Double u", but an m is not a "Double n"? Is there any reason/history as to why "w" is the only letter in English alphabet that is not pronounced as one syllable?


"Stand up comedy", "standup comedy", or "stand-up comedy"?

I've seen all three versions for describing a person on stage performing comedy: "stand up", "standup", and "stand-up". My guess is that the term started as two words, but as the performance form itself became more established in the culture, the set of the two words together became perceived as a single unit. Reflecting that, in writing, some people even started merging the words or joining them with a hyphen. Based on that assumption, I'm extrapolating that it's a term in the midst of evolving, and so maybe there might not be an absolute answer on this. Still, I'd like to be consistent myself and settle on one. Is there any particular reason I should choose one over the others?


verb + infinitive vs -ing form: change in meaning?

What is the difference? > To try doing something   >  Try to do something I found that _try + infinitive_ means: make an effort to achieve something while _try + -ing_ means: do something as an experiment to solve a problem. > Why don't you _try holding_ your breath for a minute or two?   >  Why don't you _try to hold_ your breath for a minute or two? The answer key indicates that the meanings of these two sentences are different. How are they different?


try + ing vs. try to + infinitive

Which sentence is correct: > Why don't you **try to give up** candy if you want to lose some weight? > > Why don't you **try giving up** candy if you want to lose some weight?


What is the difference between the infinitive and present participle?

I already know the difference between "stop doing something" and "stop to do something". I really don't know what is the difference between "like doing something" and "like to do something". And is it "gerund" or "present participle"? * * * This is not a duplicate question. That answer doesn't fit (in my opinion) to this question. Actually, I want to know the difference between saying, for example: _"I like to drink soda"_ and _"I like drinking soda"_ , and which is the correct if there is a correct construction.


Difference between using 'to go' versus 'going' in this sentence

What is the difference between **_I haven't tried to go there_** and **_I haven't tried going there_**?


Reasons to choose / for choosing

> There are many reasons to choose X or > There are many reasons for choosing X Are these sentences equivalent/interchangeable?


“To hear” or “hearing”

> Nothing is so happy as to hear from your family. > > Nothing is so happy as hearing from your family. Which is more natural for native speakers?


"These findings are critical [to inform/for informing] future research"

In this sentence, would you use "to inform" or "for informing"? > These findings are critical ______ future research Likewise, would you use "to understand" or "for understanding" in the following? > These results provide a powerful framework _____ existing patterns. This is a question that comes up a lot in science writing: when do you use the "to" vs. the "for" version of a verb? Is there a word for these two different uses? And is there a rule for deciding which one is correct? They often get used interchangeably, but I can't find any hard rules for deciding between the two. People often use the "to" version because it sounds less passive, but I find it more ambiguous and a bit clunky, but I can't find any actual sources to say which is correct.


"To see" vs "seeing"

Which of the following is grammatical? >   * To see my stuff at your grocery is a great source of pride! >   * Seeing my stuff at your grocery is a great source of pride! > The verb "to see" is the subject, so I suppose that using "to see" is the right way... but it sounds so strange to me.


"Developed to [infinitive]" vs. "developed for [gerund]"

I am confused about when to use "to verb" and when to use "for verb+ing" constructs. For example what would be the proper construct for the following sentences extracted from scientific journals: > A chemically reactive Raman probe with femtomolar sensitivity was developed > for monitoring/to monitor ROS generated in living cells. Another example: > As the metabolism products,ROS are very important in cell signaling and > homeostasis to regulate/for regulating a whole wide range of biological > functions. Which construct should be used and when?


How to remember the difference between: "Can you try to open this jar?" and "Can you try opening this jar?"

I am well aware that a similar question has been asked in the past, namely “Try to save” or “try saving”. However, I am not totally satisfied by the posted answers. My problem is that, every time I think I have understood when to use try + infinitive and try + verb + ing (gerund), I forget and mix them up. I would like **a mnemonic** , or an **infallible reminder** which is which when I need to write, speak or teach this construction to private students. In my grammar books the "rule" stated is: > Try + infinitive = make an effort to do something > > Try + gerund = experiment to see if something works So if I ask: " _Can you try opening this jar?_." and " _Can you try to open this jar?_." Am I in effect saying the same thing? It appears to me the difference in meaning is slight. If I change the verb _try_ into the past: > "I tried to open the jar." and > "I tried opening the jar." Don't they both mean I failed to open the jar? In any case the next time I meet this construction I would like to not have to double check in my grammar books. So any tips?


infinitive and gerund

Are the following sentences equivalent in meaning? >   * To play the flute takes a lot of effort. >   * Playing the flute takes a lot of effort. > I know that we say "It takes a lot of effort to play the flute", thus "To play the flute takes a lot of effort" seems to be a better option. But what about the gerund?


How does one know when to use a gerund or an infinitive?

As a native speaker of English, the gerund version of this sentence sounds better: infinitive: > When used together in chains, extension methods are an unprecedented tool > **to produce** extremely concise code. gerund: > When used together in chains, extension methods are an unprecedented tool > **for producing** extremely concise code. But how can I explain to someone learning English how to decide in situations like these whether to use the infinitive or the gerund?


"How easy is it to *verb*..." vs. "How easy is *verb*..."

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  How does one know when to use a gerund or a infinitive? What is the difference in connotation between > How easy is it to "some _verb_ here" and > How easy is "some _verb_ here" What is the significance of using "it" in the first example?


"To know X is all I need" vs. "knowing X is all I need"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  How does one know when to use a gerund or a infinitive? Which of the following is the correct form? >   * To know you're interested in my book is all I need to go on with my > work! >   * Knowing you're interested in my book is all I need to go on with my > work! >


Single word for "less mass per unit volume" (the complement of "dense")

I've been looking for the antonym of _dense_. I'm looking for an exact opposite: a single word the means, precisely, "having _less mass per unit volume_ than another object". That is, I'm seeking a scientific word which could be put into this sentence, and have it make sense: > Wood is more `_____` than metal To mean precisely the opposite of: > Metal is _denser_ than wood And precisely the same as: > Wood is _less dense_ than metal Only using a single word (as an atomic comparative), as opposed to the two words " _less dense_ ". As analogies, we have the pairs " _heavy_ "/" _light_ " and " _thin_ "/" _thick_ ", and thus needn't to resort to circumlocutions like " _more massive_ " or " _less wide_ ". For similar reasons, I find " _light_ " (the opposite of " _heavy_ ") and " _spread out_ " (the opposite of " _congested_ ", i.e. "smaller _population_ per unit volume") unsatisfying. I would like a single, atomic word that enjoys some currency in scientific prose, which means precisely " _less mass per unit volume_ ".


Name of a word where you can continually remove one letter from the beginning or end

_This is possibly off-topic here - please redirect me if necessary_ I am looking for the name of a type of word where you can continually remove one letter from the start or end of the word, until there is just one letter left, and every intermediate word is a valid word in the English language. For example, `brandy` is such a word, because after each letter is removed below, we get another word:               brandy     brand     bran      ran       an       a      What is the name for words with this property? _I'm new on ELU.SE; I can probably do with some help with tagging this question correctly._


Word for someone that always has to be right

Is there a word for someone that always has to be right? The person gets angry if they are not.


Résumé formality: "Struck a deal that resulted in savings of XXX"?

I am not sure if the paragraph below is a bit too casual for a résumé: >   * Responsible for negotiating the purchase of XXX. Struck a business deal > that resulted in savings of 12,000 EUR/month > Is there a more formal way of saying "Struck a business deal?" in a CV? I am concerned it may sound too colloquial.


Word for sharing an old experience with someone new

_Jamais vu_ is when an experience that is old to you suddenly seems new. But I'm looking for something even more specific. Is there a word for that feeling you get when an old experience is refreshed by sharing it with someone new? For example, watching a favorite movie with someone who's never seen it, and enjoying it vicariously through their reactions.


Can a colon be preceded by a conjunction or: Is the title of Dr. Strangelove okay?

The full name of the movie often called "Dr. Strangelove" is **Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb**. I find it odd that there is a colon after a conjunction like "or." Is that correct usage in a ordinary sentence (i.e., not a title)? If so, are there other examples? I understand that this is a movie title and titles aren't subject to the same rules as ordinary sentences. I'm just wondering if this usage is fine in a sentence.


Word for encoder-decoder

_Modem_ is a common word for modulator/demodulator. Is there a word that in a similar fashion (or in general) would describe the encoder and decoder functionality presented in one piece?


"Nobody will help you but me" vs. "Nobody will help you but I"

As has been shown in another question, in comparisons with _than_ both the accusative and the nominative are possible and grammatical: >   * He loves you more than _I_. >   * He loves you more than _me_. > However, when we use _but_ only the accusative seems possible: > Nobody will help you but _me_. [Not _I_ ] What I think is that the nominative case could be justified as well. > Nobody will help you but _I_ [will]. Why I am wrong? Any other examples and references will be appreciated.


present perfect

https://www.metoperafamily.org/metopera/season/synopsis/aida Aida has hidden in the vault to share Radamès’s fate. This is a sentence from the last paragraph. This usage of present perfect is strange. "It's started to rain." "The president has announced." "He's done his homework already." These all reply what just happened. However, in the question sentence, it implies something already done. Like, when something happened, something else had already been dealt with. What do you think? Is it possible?


Capitalization of the word "the" in "the Lord" / "The Lord"

Should I capitalize the word "the" when speaking of God as "the/The Lord"? > I praise the Lord. or... > I praise The Lord.


Should there be a gerund or a noun in front of the preposition?

> (a) The rise of price of goods burdens the people. > > (b) The rising of price of goods burdens the people. > > (c) The ban of plastic bags is a good way to reduce environmental problems. > > (d) The banning of plastic bags is a good way to reduce environmental > problems. Which form should I use for the words 'rise' and 'ban' before the preposition? Gerund or noun?


What is the difference between a proverb, an adage and an aphorism?

Dictionary definitions of all three are very similar, typically something like: > a pithy observation which contains a general truth But the wikipedia entries for each are quite different. Are these words largely interchangeable synonyms? In the wikipedia entry for adage, for example, a _proverb_ is defined as an adage produced from folk wisdom, whereas an _aphorism_ has "not necessarily gained credit through long use, but is distinguished by particular depth or good style".


What is the "adjunct of space" in this sentence?

Can the adjunct of time be introduced in a sentence by the word to. like in the case _The case, which opens in the High Court on Thursday, has led **to the discovery of 300 boxes of documents filling 110ft of shelving._** Can the function of the last sentence element be adjunct of space (time because it has led WHERE? -> space reference,) even though it is not an actual physical space?


what is the difference between employ and employment

I can not understand the difference when _employ_ is a noun. So somebody help me to show the difference between _employ_ and _employment_.


How can I use “fête” as a verb in active voice?

Oxford Dictionaries cites a verb as an entry for _fête_ and gives a passive example. How can I use _fête_ in the active voice? For example, can one _fête_ an occasion with pomp and circumstance?


A word to describe setting-up (or preparing) the basic attributes of something

Let's say we are making something, say, a picture, and we want to set up (prepare) the basic things such as the size, the material, the shape and the color of the canvas. Or if we are making a wooden figurine, we want to prepare a piece of wood of an appropriate size and color. Is there a single word to describe the process of setting up those? I thought about "styling", but it occurs to me that "styling" has a slightly different meaning, more like "developing the design concept" or something. If it is impossible to say it in one word, what would be the shortest phrase to describe that?


Expression for "getting 'aha' moment after long time of failing explanations"

I'd like to recall that there's an expression along the lines of " _coin dropping down_ " used to described the moment when an explainee finally reaches the verge of grasping a concept after the explainer tediously has gone through the pains of presenting a multitude of examples, approaches and pedagogical tricks. Googling it gave me no hits and searching on SO for " _coin_ " resulted in way too many. None of that was of relevance, though. Can I use the following phrase in correct English to describe that I'm trying to explain a bit more because I see that the subject is about to get the " _aha moment_ "?               I was about to give up but I felt that the coin was about to drop down.


Limp and Hobble

I have a problem with the word "limp" and "hobble". I do not know which word is appropriately used when it comes to context because I do not know how the words differ from each other. Can we use them interchangeably? Do they have the same meaning? How do we differentiate the word "limp" from "hobble"?


The Act of Committing

What is the word for the act of committing? For example, `The _ murder is a crime.`. Sometimes we programmers say "commit" as in committing code to a version-control database, but that sounds for normal usage somewhat geeky (or wrong).


About 'wh' questions with prepositions

Here is an example making sort of curious things for me "who are customers with questions advised to speak with" In the above sentence, what does "with" function at the end of it? Simply, next to verb 'speak', dose this just work that say something with someone as a verb phrase? or assisting 'who' to make sure to represent a meaning who customers should ask their questions to? and, if it is correct in the second case, is it able to be replaced by other sentences like "with whom are customers with questions advised to speak" or "who are customers with questions advised to speak to" ?


Should the clauses in these two senses be joined?

In reading the contents of a card, I have come across the following doubt regarding joining the two clauses with a semi colon or keeping them as two separate sentences. The phrase is the following: > Thank you for all of your help these past days; without which, my study > would not have been as successful. The doubt is with the semicolon. As you can see, the first clause stands alone as a grammatically sound sentence: "Thank you for all of your help these past days". However, my doubt is about the second part: "without which, my study would not have been as successful" can not necessarily stand alone in the same sense. My question is: Does the fact that the second part of this phrase begins with the preposition _without_ permit the use of the semicolon? Or, is it more grammatically sound to split the sentence into two separate sentences in which the _without which_ refers to the _time_ in the first? Any insight?


Can anything be "bated" but one's breath?

We are all no doubt familiar with the phrase "with bated breath," but is it ever used in other contexts?


Order of "not" with infinitive

This is one thing that keeps bugging me, and maybe there's a direct answer. Grammatically, which one is more correct of these two? Does it make a difference? > I tried not to do that. > > I tried to not do that.


"Plan not to retire" or "Plan to not retire"?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Order of "not" with infinitive Someone edited my post on another StackExchange.com site to change the former to the latter. Which is better? I wrote the phrase the first way so that the infinitive wasn't split, but would appreciate other interpretations.


"Try not to" vs "try to not"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Order of "not" with infinitive When negating verbs that are commonly followed by the infinitive, is there a difference in meaning between placing the "not" before and after the "to"? e.g. > I try not to care or > I try to not care


"I've decided not to leave A.I. Town" versus "I've decided to not leave A.I. Town"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Order of "not" with infinitive Last month I decided to change my residence and shift to another town. After some days, due to some reasons, I cancelled my program and decided to stay at my current place. At that time I sent a message to my friends, "I've **decided not to** leave A.I. Town". After sending the message, a question flashed in my mind that have I used "to" at the correct place. Shouldn't it be "I've **decided to not** leave A.I. Town"? I am actually confused that should I separate the preposition "to" and the verb "decided" in the prepositional phrase "decided to" by using "not" in between them?


"Enables you to quickly and easily identify" vs. "enables you to identify quickly and easily"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Are split infinitives grammatically incorrect, or are they valid > constructs? I'm currently having a bit of a dispute and would appreciate your help please. Which one is more grammatically correct? >   * enables you to quickly and easily identify >   * enables you to identify quickly and easily > And why do you think the one that you've chosen?


Grammaticality of Star Trek's slogan

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Are split infinitives grammatically incorrect, or are they valid > constructs? Star Trek's slogan: > To boldly go where no man has gone before. "To boldy go" sounds right, but I was told by my friend that this is actually grammatically wrong because it is a split infinitive. I don't agree, because it seems to sound right. Is this a split infinitive, or something else?


Are split infinitives grammatically incorrect, or are they valid constructs?

> Mark's generosity in this crisis seems to more than make up for his earlier > stinginess. Should those sentences always be avoided, or are there cases where they are valid?


'To swiftly go' or 'to go swiftly'?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Are split infinitives grammatically incorrect, or are they valid > constructs? One of my friends once told me 'to go' is considered a whole word and no word should be put in between. Are either grammatically incorrect and is one preferred?


"Pretend to not" vs. "Pretend not to"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Order of "not" with infinitive The following are both accepted as grammatically correct, right? > You pretend to not notice. > > You pretend not to notice. However, if I think about it, it seems like the first one is correct but not the second. Why would that be? It's almost as if the second one is saying "You don't pretend to notice," which means something different from the first.


'decide not to' or 'decide to not' ?

I came up with this question when I received an email from a committee with a sentence 'We have decided not to publish it', which seems really strange to me because the grammar I learned in English classes is 'decide not to do something' and 'decide to not do' was told incorrect. I searched for answers to this problem online, but did not find a clear as well as persuasive answer. In terms of grammar, is 'decide not to do' correct ? If it is incorrect, is there a reason why people say 'decide not to do' even in official letters ?


"To not" vs. "not to"

A little bit of context, I read the sentence below after the system - a computer application - has been subject to a certain kind of update: > The system will be able **to not** create a record of that movement anymore. I think they are trying to stress the new behavior of the system compared to the previous one, hence that sentence construction. Firstly, would it sound better if we changed the sentence for something like this where we get rid of the split infinite: > The system will be able **not to** create a record of that movement anymore. At least for me that sentence construction seems a little bit odd and something an English native speaker would not say, do you agree with me or is it perfectly acceptable?


Is using split infinitive allowed in formal English?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Are split infinitives grammatically incorrect, or are they valid > constructs? Is it allowed to use _split infinitives_ in formal English? I look into Wikipedia but it is too objective and it doesn't directly say that I can use it formally. Is split infinitives grammatical? * * * from Wikipedia: > A split infinitive is an English-language grammatical construction in which > a word or phrase, usually an adverb or adverbial phrase, comes between the > marker to and the bare infinitive (uninflected) form of a verb. > > In some cases, moving the adverbial creates an ungrammatical sentence or > changes the meaning. R.L. Trask uses this example: > >   * She decided **to gradually get** rid of the teddy bears she had > collected.   > "Gradually" splits the infinitive "to get". However, if the adverb were > moved, where could it go? > >   * She decided **gradually to get** rid of the teddy bears she had > collected.   > This might imply that the decision was gradual. > >   * She decided **to get** rid of the teddy bears she had collected > **gradually**.   > This implies that the collecting process was gradual. > >   * She decided **to get gradually** rid of the teddy bears she had > collected.   > This sounds awkward, as it splits the phrase "get rid of". > >   * She decided **to get** rid **gradually** of the teddy bears she had > collected.   > This is almost as unwieldy as its immediate predecessor. > >


Which is correct? "not to" or "to not"

I was writing a blog post just now and I couldn't help but hesitate at the following snippet: "...causing this to not work as expected" And I couldn't decide if that's correct or if I should use "...not to work..." ot if "...to not work..." is okay. Can anyone shed any light on this?   * "...causing this to not work as expected"   * "...causing this not to work as expected"


"to successfully complete" or "to complete successfully"?

A Google search yields 41,200,000 results for the former but only 3,150,000 for the latter. Are split infinitives really to boldly be avoided in English grammar, or are millions of people just unaware of / uncaring for their existence?


"how to not give up" or "how not to give up"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Are split infinitives grammatically incorrect, or are they valid > constructs?   >  Order of "not" with infinitive Suppose I want to tell someone that I want to learn how to stop myself from giving up. I could say: > I want to know _how to not_ give up. or > I want to know _how not to_ give up. Which one is the right expression?


Meaning of "at the way" in "she looked away from his face at the way his shoulders sloped"

Please share with me how would you understand meaning of "at the way" in the context below. > He smiled at her now and she looked away from his face **at the way** his > shoulders sloped in the loose tunic he wore with the four big cartridges > held in loops where the left breast pocket should have been, at his big > brown hands, his old slacks, his very dirty boots and back to his red face > again.


Why is the progressive form used here?

> In February 1825 he married Julianne Thiemer, daughter of a property owner > and well-established glove-maker in Seesen. Heinrich, a cabinet maker > without property, a Beiwohner(boarder), was marrying up. Together, he and > his wife raised ten children in Seesen, a small city of about three thousand > people six miles down the mountain from Wolfshagen. ( _Steinway & Sons_ by > Richard K. Lieberman) How does _marrying up_ work in this paragraph? Is there any difference if you use past tense here?


What preposition should I use with "flying"?

I want to say that I loved flying, but I also want to add the name of the airline company in my sentence. So, what should I say? > I loved flying with American Airlines or > I loved flying on American Airlines. I've found on my Googling both "with" and "on", and now I'm even more confused than I was before...


Gender specific language for one in a series of occurrences: does it imply something about the other occurrences?

A recent radio headline was > Another member of the Canadian Armed Forces has taken his own life. This is > the fourth suicide this week. The presence of the word _another_ somehow left me with the impression that the sentence meant all the suicides, or even all the Armed Forces members, are male. I happen to know that neither of those constraints is true. I also suspect the radio headline writer didn't intend to suggest that. Had the headline been: > A member of the Canadian Armed Forces has taken his own life. This is the > fourth suicide this week. ... then I would not have drawn the same conclusions. I know how to write this sentence without implying anything about the gender of the latest soldier (use they/their, change verbs to eliminate any need for a possessive pronoun, etc) but I am curious about why saying _another_ , and thus referring to a series of events, has (for me) the effect of blurring that possessive pronoun back so that it somehow applies to the whole series. Am I the only person who is influenced by _another_ like this? How do these sound? > Another student has missed his deadline for applying > > Another farmer has put her farm up for sale If _another_ has this effect, does it have a name? I would probably avoid the effect by omitting _another_ where there was a second sentence (as in the radio headline) to carry that information, and keeping it but rewording the rest to avoid possessive pronouns when there wasn't. But am I just being overly careful?


Word for "someone who doesn't want you to succeed"

I'm looking for a word for _someone who doesn't want you to succeed_ or _threatened by your success_. Particular for fear that your success will overshadow their own. Not so much for malicious reasons, but more from insecurity.


"Leave" vs. "Go"

From this question, I was just wondering, what is the difference between "leave" and "go" in terms of the same definition of "departing", and when do we use one, but not the other.   For example, which verb should I use in the following sentence? > Tell me when you [go/leave]. If it is _leave_ , why is it so, and what determines which to use at what time? I googled this, but there were no discussions or articles on the difference of usage between _leave_ and _go_.


Why is there no consistency in the plural forms of words ending on an "f" (e.g. safe, roof, dwarf, etc.)?

The plural form of _leaf_ is _leaves_ , although according to Merriam-Webster _leafs_ is also correct. _Dwarf_ can be pluralized as either _dwarfs_ or _dwarves_. Conversely, the words _roof_ and _safe_ are pluralized as _roofs_ and _safes_. Is there any logic underpinning these variations? Is there a historical trend where words that were previously pluralized as _-ves_ are now being increasingly pluralized as _-fs_?


Word usage 'when you go'

Is there any thing wrong in the following sentence: > Could you please inform me **when you go**. Can I use 'when you go' like this?


When to spell out non-alphanumeric characters?

If a term contains non-alphanumeric characters, when (if ever) should these characters be spelled out? For example: > C++   written as    **C Plus Plus** > > C#      written as    **C-Sharp** If they are spelled out, what are the conventions regarding capitalization and hyphens (e.g. **C Plus Plus** or **C-plus-plus** )?


Are software titles italicized?

The titles of freestanding works (books, movies, plays, albums, etc.) are italicized; smaller parts within these works (chapters in a book, articles in a magazine, songs within an album) are not (they are put in quotes, instead). How are software titles treated? My understanding is that if a particular program resembles a book or a dramatic work (like a video game), its title is italicized -- otherwise, it is treated as a proper noun, just like any other product. > I played _Grand Theft Auto_ , instead of reading "Democracy in Ancient > Greece" in _Microsoft Encarta_ and preparing my presentation in PowerPoint. Is this approach correct?


"If I am getting late"

Is it correct to say "If I am getting late, I will let you know"? The Conditional rules don't say anything about continuous tense. In addition, what would be a better way of conveying the same message?


What do you call a person that only do the minimum to get through day-to-day basis?

I'm trying to find a word or a short phrase that target such person. Like someone who has no passion, no drive and only does whatever needed to survive.


Synonym for "counter-trend"

> In each of the years 1995, 1996, 1998, and 1999, variable X grew by 20% > year-on-year. But in 1997, X fell by 50%. What might explain this _counter- > trend_ fall in 1997? What might be a better word in place of "counter-trend" here? Googling "counter-trend", it seems like this is somewhat commonly used in investment, but I have not come across it anywhere else. Yet I cannot think of a better word to use in the above context.


Hyphenation of non-combat-related injury

As I understand it, we are to hyphenate phrases which consist of several adjectives strung together to form a single thought. I would, therefore, assume "non-combat-related injury" is the proper hyphenation of the phrase. "Non-combat" should be hyphenated, without question, but should the hyphen exist between "combat" and "related"? Normally I would assume so, but attempting to Google it, I find that most of the top hits suggest "non-combat related injury" is standard. It sounds like it is a related injury (!?) of the non-combat variety (umm...), but apparently, it's standard. I was just going to run with it until I realized I also had to use the phrase "combat-related injury" wherein the hyphen does, commonly, come between combat and related - as expected. Should I stick to the standard hyphenation ("non-combat related injury") or try to smooth things over grammatically by saying "non-combat-related injury"? Or am I overthinking it? Or am I missing something obvious?


Why is it “knife” in the idiom, “Before you can say knife” though there are many shorter words than knife?

I saw the phrase, ‘ _before you can say Dow-Jones Index’_ in the following sentence of JefferyArcher’s novel, “Not a penny more, Not a penny less.” Scotland Yard’s Fraud Squad Detective Inspector, Clifford Smith tells young Oxford's visiting Mathematics professor, Stephen Bradley who fell a victim to a large scale investment fraud, being coaxed by his Harvard school mate: “I’m sorry to say that we can hardly ever recover the money, even if we produce enough evidence to nail the villains. They have it all stashed away all over the world _before you can say Dow-Jones Index._ I guess “Dow-Jones Index” here is Archer’s version of “before you can say knife (or Jack Robinson),” but I’m curious to know; 1) Can we coin and use as many variation of “before you can say X” in our conversation as Archer did? 2) Is there a standard or best received pattern of “before you can say X”? Is it “before you can say knife”? 3) What is the origin of “before you can say knife”? Why it should be the “knife,” not gun, sword, Tom, Jon, any other words that represent for brevity?


What can we call those ladies?

I am looking for a word or expression to describe those ladies, usually high society ladies, whose main aim in life is to find a good match for marriage and whose main activity is organising lunches or dinners for relatives and friends often to raise money for some non-profit organisation?


Fluents and Fluxions

When calculus was first being developed, the terms "fluent" and "fluxion" appeared quite often in the Newtonian works. I am wanting to know the etymology behind these words. I assume that "fluents" are related to the concept of "fluid" or "flowing", but (as far as I am aware) the word has gone out of usage in mathematics. "Fluxions" are not used in modern-day texts, but I assume that "flux" (a term with which every physics student will be familiar) derives from "fluxion". If context helps, one would usually talk of a "fluent" as a moving point, generating a curve, and a "fluxion" as its velocity (direction + speed). I am interested in knowing why these terms were used, and what they referred to. * * * EDIT: On a related note, Newton writes "Fluxions of quantities are in the first ratio of their nascent parts or, what is exactly the same, in the last ratio of those parts as they vanish by **defluxion**." What would "defluxion" refer to?


Extending a hug

Is the expression, I am extending a hug to you, only used when expressing sympathy or can it be used as an expression of love too?


What is the correct pronunciation of the word "route"?

I have always used both "root" as in route 66 and "rooter" as in the networking device. The latter has gotten me funny looks often, however I could not bring myself to accept the inconsistency. Today I heard "rowt" used for a path of movement by a radio presenter. Which is correct?


Word for object in programming that connects to relay

What is a word for an object that connects with something? _Connector_ is used to describe a specific part in electronics but I need a word describing that the abstract object connects with something. This is an object in programming that allows the programmer to connect to a local proxy relay. I would like to call it a _relay-connector_ but am unsure if it is correct to use _connector_ in this context.


Is there a difference between “arse” and “ass”?

From a comment here, in frequent usage, _arse_ and _ass_ are often interchangeable when used to refer to buttocks or to a person of dubious charms. However, although “to arse about” has a vague connection to “make an ass of oneself”, many of the threads of meaning derived from arse are not present in ass. Likewise, ass has a donkey-referring component that arse does not. Despite common perception, are these words more deviant than common usage indicates? **Edit** : It appears they have (someone look this up with an authoritative dictionary please) different origins, _asinus_ (Latin) for ass, and _ærs_ (Old English) or _orros_ (Greek) for arse.


the noun form of 'we are under the department of XXX'

The meaning I want to deliver is: `We need to tell the school that we are from the department of education when we approach them.` But since I want to present it in a proper way, I plan to write something like below: `Staff members are reminded to clearly state their affiliation with the department of education while having phone conversation.` I think `affiliation with the department of education` is not the right phrase, any better suggestion?


What name would you give to data about a person's illnesses, ailments, diseases and medical condition?

What term would you ascribe to the record of a person's illnesses, diseases and medical condition? **Clarification** The thing I am trying to describe is simply the record of, or data that reflects on the present medical condition of a patient with respect to diseases and aberrations from good health. I want to clarify that I am not looking for a term to represent _all kinds of medical data about a person_. **What I am looking for** 1) I am not necessarily looking for just a single word, but definitely a single descriptor or title between one and four words. 2) I am searching for one of the either two things: a) _Precision_ Terms like _medical history_ , _medical profile_ (all encompassing, includes diagnostic reports, health indicators such as BP, sugar level, etc.), _medical records_ (suggests only reports about the medical tests a person had), _medical report_ (again, suggests a medical test report) -- all have different meanings. I am searching for precision; or b) _Custom_ Where there isn't a precise term, or even if there is, and there is also a term that is widely known and accepted to be what my question is asking, and even if it is colloquial and doesn't literally mean what I am asking, but is widely accepted, then I am in favor of using it.


They call me "Tater Salad." What is the part of speech of "Tater Salad"?

What is the part of speech of "Tater Salad" in the sentence 'They call me "Tater Salad."'? What about "crazy" in "They call me crazy."? For that matter, is "me" the object of the verb "call" in both of those sentences?


Meaning of “flip the script”

I’ve heard the phrase “flip your script” or “flip the script” in various hip- hop songs. What does it mean?


"One another" or "one and other"

I thought this might have already been asked, but apparently not. Is using the phrase "one another" considered equivalent to the phrase "one and other"? Is one of the two considered right and the other wrong? To give an example: >   * The two computers were situated relatively close to one and other. >   * The two computers were situated relatively close to one another. >


What does "it" refer to in "it's raining"?

I wanted to leave the question title as is so as not to take away from my amusement `:)`. Anyway, > It's raining. What is raining? Is it the sky? The clouds? The weather? The rain? What is "it"? Any historical insights on the statement?


Whence the "it" in "I like it here"?

What is the origin of the use of the object (it) in the following sentences, and what is its purpose? > I like it here! and > Did you like it there? In essence, the things we are saying we like are really _here_ (this place) and _there_ (that place) themselves - whence the insertion of the antecedent- free pronoun? Note: I can think of plenty of antecedents you could replace the "it" with, so that's not the answer I'm looking for.


Usage of 'it' in the sentence

What does _it_ refer to in the sentence: _It is dark outside_?


What does 'it' refer to in this example?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  It's raining. What is? 'It is raining.' What does 'it' refer to? I know some people might say 'the weather' but you wouldn't say: 'The weather is raining.' But you would say: How's the weather? It's raining.' Bit confusing.


"Leave open the possibility of a stretch-mark fetishist"

Can anybody explain to me the meaning of this sentence?


"Did you" vs "Do you" for questions about the past

Which of these is more correct for American English in a professional context: **Did** you have any other prior marriage that lasted at least 10 years, or any other prior marriage that ended due to your spouse's death? **Do** you have any other prior marriage that lasted at least 10 years, or any other prior marriage that ended due to your spouse's death? (I might also be tempted to change some other other grammar in this sentence if I had my druthers, but for the scope of this question, please focus on the first word.)


Was I correct in my use of "whatever" over "something"?

Background: I have an undefined, informal and ongoing relationship with someone where we often meet in the late evening at his place. Occasionally, we might go to a bar first but we don't really hang out socially at all beyond that. Currently, we are both making an effort to expand on the relationship to include other activities. Texting:               me:   do you want to do whatever tonight...?     him:  define whatever. lol.      me:   google says... whatever -> pronoun & determiner: used to emphasize a lack of           restriction in referring to any thing or amount, no matter what.     me:   I guess I could have chosen "something" instead, which would have also implied            that I do not prefer the nothing possibility included in the scope of            whatever      him:  so... just to clarify... candyflipping at a rave is out?     me:   ummmmmmm... technically, based on what i said at least, it is still in.  but no,            we should not do that.        And then we debated my word choice. (yes, I'm lots of fun...) So, here's my argument for using `whatever` over `something`... The idea of `something` essentially means "not nothing" or "more than nothing". However, `whatever` does include both "nothing" and "anything"... and in that, `nothing` can be expanded towards "nothing together" and "nothing apart". By saying `something`, the `nothing` is entirely removed (except, of course, if he says no to the question as a whole and turns me down tonight). I chose `whatever` because I feel like the question in itself removes the absolute `nothing` from `whatever`. Also, I did not want to exclude our normal "nothing out in the world but alone in your room together" activity and using `something` might appear like I am asking for something other/more than that tonight. What I wanted to say: I am good with anything together. I do not specifically have something else to suggest for tonight but if he has something he wants to do with me, I am willing to go with him. I am happy with what we normally do together. I also understand if he is busy but I would prefer to meet up. I think `whatever` was the better choice. What he said: the words are the same and using `whatever` makes me sound like I am 12 years old.


"Solution for" or "solution to" a problem?

> I need to find a solution to/for this problem. Can _to_ and _for_ be used interchangeably here? Is one of them just plain wrong?


How to pronounce R²

How do I pronounce R² as seen in chemistry formulas or maths? I can pronounce it as "R-square" but what other word is there for "square"?


A sentence using negative construction expresses bad news or the writer’s dissatisfaction or unhappiness. True or false?

'A sentence using a negative construction always expresses bad news or the writer’s dissatisfaction or unhappiness.' Is this strictly true?


In Grapes of Wrath, What does "I learned to write [...] Birds an' stuff like that" mean?

In _The Grapes of Wrath_ : > I learned to write nice as hell. **Birds** an' stuff like that, too; not > just word writin'. My ol' man'll be sore when he sees me whip out a **bird** > in one stroke. (Tom Joad) What is this ' _bird_ ' he is talking about?


Can the verb "intake" be used intransitively?

Can a combustion engine be said to _intake_ oxygen?


Is there a word for when someone tells you to do what you're already doing?

Is there a word that describes when someone tells you to do the thing that you are already doing? It seems there should be a word for that. Or at least there should be a word for it so that you can tell people to stop doing it to you.


"serbicwitnessour disposition"?

Sorry in advance for the spelling of this expression. Do you know of "serbicwitnessour disposition"? I've heard it somewhere and can't find the spelling or any other information. Please help, it is driving me crazy. Thank you.


Phrasing of "this=that" sentence?

What is the best way to phrase and punctuate this type of "this = that" sentence? No noise was detected, indicating that the room was empty. No noise was detected, which indicated that the room was empty. Thanks, EM


Is "grooving me" grammatical?

The context of the word _groove_ here is musical groove. In youth slang of electronic music fans it means aesthetic pleasure while listening to music. Can I use _groove_ as a transitive verb? As in, "X is grooving me", or even on itself?


Is "martini" plural or singular?

Although frequently used incorrectly incorrectly in English, the borrowed Italian word _paparazzi_ should be used for **a group** , while _paparazzo_ is **one** intrusive celebrity photographer. The dictionary defines the plural of _martini_ as _martinis_. But similar to paparazzo, shouldn't _martino_ mean **one** such olive-adorned drink, while _martini_ mean **several**?


What does this old mark mean?

> Now banish the **pathetic。** from public discourses, and you reduce the > speakers merely to modern eloquence; that is, to good sense, delivered in > proper expression.   >  Hume, _On Eloquence_ There are lots of this sort of old marks in this article by David Hume. I am totally at a loss what function this special mark has.


Difference between 'part' and 'a part'?

This question may seem to be very simple, but something I get confused whenever I want to speak. I read a book entitled "re-start your English", and saw a sentence. > this is a leg. it is part of your leg. > > this is a neck. it is 'a' part of your body. Why didn't they use 'a' in the first sentence? And why did they use one in the second one? I'm not a native, so I hope you will please understand, even if there's something awkward about my question.


Is "exposure" used correctly here?

I was talking to a teenager and he told me that his eyes change colors a lot. And I asked him how's that? Why's it change? I questioned him saying "it's an illusion probably? from light exposure?" Did I use the word _exposure_ correctly? What I wanted to say is that, could the color change be an illusion from being in different lit areas, such as the sun.


How can dictionaries be tyrants?

Sometimes you might hear the phrase, _tyranny of the dictionary_ Is there a way to express succinctly just what that means?


Whether to use a verbal or a deverbal noun as a modifier?

Which is more grammatically correct: `an XXX-inhibiting drug`, or `an XXX inhibitor drug`? It would seem to me that the use of the verbal noun ("inhibiting") as a modifier is more grammatically acceptable than the deverbal form ("inhibitor"). I say this based on the observation that verbal nouns are generally more grammatically flexible since they retain verbal characteristics. However, I most often see cases of "inhibitor drug" in the literature than instances of "inhibiting drug".


Is there a word to describe the unintelligent/streety way some people talk?

This type of communication frequently leaves the 'g' off the end of words. "Talking" becomes "talkin'". Also, it combines certain small phrases into one. "What's that?" becomes "Wuzzat?" The best example I can think of would be the comic book characters Nick Fury and Howard the Duck who speak like this in the comics.


What is a word for partaking in art?

I'm looking for a word to describe the complement of "to create art". I'm trying to describe the act of being affected by it, or by "receiving" it. Specifically, I want to fill in the blank for the following sentence: > I want to create art that I also enjoy **___ __**. So far, the best I have is "consuming". However, I do not like that, as it implies the destruction of the art in the process, which often does not apply. Similarly, I rejected "receiving" as it implies an exchange. I want to stay away from visually-biased words like "seeing", "viewing", or "observing", as much art is not visual. (Think music, food, etc.) I struggled with "partaking" for the title; I think it's not at all what I want. It also implies activity; what I want is a bit more passive than that.   "Appreciating" is often used in this context, but I find that very awkward, especially when partnered with it's near-synonym "enjoy". I don't find that it conveys my intent well.   Simply leaving it as "[…] that I also enjoy" isn't ideal either; I want to emphasize the dichotomy with the creation, which is also enjoyable. Does anyone have any ideas?


What is the flat part of an iron called?

What's the word for this part of an iron? ![This is the part of an iron that I want to know the word for](http://i.stack.imgur.com/L1vSI.jpg)


Meaning and origin of "the grind of my day"

Somebody told me today in chat: > before i get into **the grind of my day**... is there anything you are > waiting on from us or need asap? What does the expression _the grind of my day_ mean? Where does it come from?


how to say "etc" in a subject

I am translating some legal certificate and I need to indicate that a construction method and related factors are in accordance with a law. I am not sure what is the appropriate way to describe “related factors” in the sentence that is in. I tried “the like” as below, but not sure if this can be part of the subject. “Method A and the likes are in accordance with the lawB” It will be most appreciated if you could help me with this. Thank you in advance. NOTE: contents of the “related factors” are not provided to me neither, so I need to be vague on that.


Can I use "linkography" instead of "bibliography" when referring to web links?

I’m writing a piece of documentation and I want to add the links I'm referring to at the bottom of my document. Since they are links and not books, I think the section title should not use the word _bibliography_. The most appropriate term that comes to mind is _linkography_. However, I don't know if this word even exists. I did not find it in the dictionary. I think the word is ugly, and my computer’s spell-checker does not know it. Is _linkography_ the best term to use when referring to web links? Does this word really exist?


Being mighty a master, being a father and fond: what "fond" is?

I'm not sure of the meaning of the last word in the last line of G.M. Hopkin's "In the valley of the Elwy":                God, lover of souls, swaying considerate scales,      Complete thy creature dear O where it fails      Being mighty a master, being a father and fond.      Is that an adjective, i.e. _fond_ = affectionate? Or is that a noun, since _father_ is a noun too? If that's a noun, what's the meaning? Foundation?


A word for "hard and diligent work under sleepy-eyed conditions"?

How would you describe _one who works hard with full interest and consciousness, including spending sleepless nights_. In such a scenario, sleep is deprived deliberately by the person. What is such hard work called where sleep is not given priority, and days and nights are devoted to work. Words like _workaholics_ don't implicitly speak of sleepless nights. Many programmers, writers and solution providers do it. I am looking for one word for such efforts.


What is the meaning of these two sentences in David Copperfield?

There are two sentences in _David Copperfield_ that I don't quite understand, with regards to their (possible) figurative meaning. **Chapter XIII:** > [...] a muslin curtain partly undrawn in the middle, a large round green > screen or fan fastened on to the window-sill, a small table, and a great > chair, suggested to me that my aunt might be at that moment seated in awful > state. What does "to be seated in awful state" mean? **Chapter XXXVII:** > [...] I would sit sometimes of a night, opposite my aunt, thinking how I had > frightened Dora that time, and how I could best make my way with a guitar- > case through the forest of difficulty, until I used to fancy that my head > was turning quite grey. What does David mean when he says that he imagines his head "turning quite gray"?


Why is 'spatial' written with a t instead of a c?

The word 'spatial' is obviously derived from the word 'space'. So why is it usually written with a 't' instead of a 'c'?   Is there a historical reason or is it because of some grammar rule I do not know about?


If you are talking "on behalf of" you and someone else, what is the correct usage?

If you are talking on behalf of you and someone else what is the correct usage? > On behalf of my wife and me > > On behalf of my wife and I > > On behalf of me and my wife > > On behalf of myself and my wife > > On behalf of my wife and myself > > ... My understanding is that after that phrase you would carry on talking in first person.


Please, don't - I'm not

> “Please, don't mock me.”   >  “Oh, no, ~~I don't!~~ **I’m not!** I'm completely serious about that.” This is a correction I received from a proofreader of my story. How does that work? What happens here so that "I don't mock you" should be replaced with "I'm not mocking you"?


I am needing to rewrite a question

The question I need to rewrite has to be open ended, versus a yes or no. The question is, "Would you suggest more visuals in any of the rooms?" Visuals refer to pictures and other motivational displays.


Joel Spolsky: > We started with Stack Overflow, a Q&A site for programmers about programming > questions. StackExchange is an attempt to bring that same technology to > other fields besides programming. Cooking, photography, etc. Each of these > sites is a StackExchange. Collectively they are the StackExchange Network. > **So when we say "StackExchange" we mean all these sites, of which there is > one big honking granddaddy called Stack Overflow.** The entries in Webster suggest that _honking_ refers to an object making a loud noise, but that meaning seems off in this context. What does "honking" mean in this context?


Is there a word for "not pronouncing any r's"?

Some find it difficult to form an "r" sound, and some are able to, but just don't. I'm looking for a word which means "not pronouncing r's", without implying inability to pronounce them, though that may be the case. Specifically, I'd like a word which mean "not pronouncing _any_ r's", but if there's a word which means "not pronouncing _some_ r's" (as in many dialects), that would be interesting to know too.


How to express "accommodatable"?

Is there some word or phrase which gets the idea of "able to be accommodated" across without using the (apparently nonexistent) word "accommodatable"? I am going for the idea of "able to be made to happen."


When should I use "finish" instead of "complete," and vice versa?

I am confused about when to use _finish_ instead of _complete_ and vice versa. May you help me in understanding when to use those words?


Adjectives that do not have predicative position

I've read somewhere that some adjectives cannot be used in the predicative position; for example "this is a major problem" is acceptable, but "the problem is major" is not acceptable. I'm wondering what other adjectives cannot be used in predicative position other than _major_. Is it the only one we have in English?


What is the difference between “Change we can believe in” and “Change we can believe in tomorrow’”?

The article of today’s (August 27) Washington Post titled, “Obama offers 2012 election supporters change they can believe in — next term” begins with the following sentence: > Three years after storming the White House with the “fierce urgency of now,” > President Obama has a new message for his reelection campaign: Be patient, > democracy is big and tough and messy. “When I said, _Change we can believe > in_ ,’ I didn’t say, ‘ _Change we can believe in tomorrow_ ,’ ” Obama told a > crowd of 2,400 during a birthday celebration in Chicago this month. For a foreign English student, it’s difficult to comprehend and discern the difference between “Change we can believe in” and “Change we can believe in tomorrow.’” What was wrong with President Obama for Americans to make change they can believe in tomorrow,”? I think most people want to believe in tomorrow, not only living today. Can somebody elaborate the difference of meaning of “believe in,” and “believe in tomorrow”?


"Would have" in the following

Reading a J.K Rowling book, I came across the following: > It's only dying a bit later than I _would have_ , because I am never going > to the dark side! Is the _would have_ part compete here or does it have an implied unspoken verb after it? For example: would have _died_. And is it a future or a past conditional in this context? If it's a past one then how could it be used in a future context?


The more complete 'Poor you'

In sentences like "Go home," the 'You' is implied, as in 'You go home.' What would be the implied words/full form of the sentence "Poor you"? It certainly isn't "You are poor." ** I am editing this question to clarify what I'm looking for - I know what the meaning of this sentence is (both meanings and the difference). I'm merely curious as to how to write it out with the verb so as to make it a grammatically complete sentence. Just like 'Go' would be 'You go.' **


What is the origin and meaning of "racing to a red light"?

During the third episode of the HBO show "True Detective" the following dialogue is exchanged: > Cop 1: "Certain linguist anthropologists think that religion is a language > virus that rewrites pathways in the brain; dulls critical thinking." > > Cop 2: "Well, I don't use ten dollar words as much as you, but for a guy who > sees no point in existence you sure fret about it an awful lot. And you > still sound panicked." > > Cop 1: "At least I'm not racing to a red light." I had not heard this phrase before, and am curious of its origin and meaning? EDIT: Before transcribing the dialogue, I had written the phrase as "racing to a stoplight."


When should "into" be used rather than "in to," and vice versa?

"Into" (one word) and "in to" (two words) are frequently confused. In what situations should the former be used? The latter?


Difference between "in" and "into"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  When should "into" be used rather than "in to," and vice versa? I often get confused about which one to use: _in_ or _into_? Kindly tell me what the difference is between the two.


"Put it into the refrigerator" or "Put it in the refrigerator"?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  When should "into" be used rather than "in to," and vice versa? I am sorry if the question is silly, but I think I heard both options spoken by native speaker. So, which one is correct?


Check source "into" or "in to" SVN?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  "Checked into the database" versus "checked in to the database" I understand the difference between "into" and "in to". The first involves the movement towards the inside of a place. The latter, is a combination of an adverb and preposition. This is explained here. But, does "into" require that the place be a physical location? If so, I would guess using "in to" would be correct since SVN (or Git, or...) is not a physical location. Is it more correct to check code into svn or check code in to svn?


Difference between "in to" and "into"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  When should "into" be used rather than "in to," and vice versa?   >  Difference between "in" and "into" I had to write a business plan the other day, and one of my coworkers found that I was using _in to_ incorrectly in the sentence > Data will be imported **in to** the database. What is the difference between _in to_ and _into_?