When writing a formal report is it bad to make up names when giving an example?

I was giving an example and was trying to immerse the reader in the experience as much as possible and made up a man's name. > Consider the following example: Joseph is testing a program built for > Windows XP. I was told not to use the name Joseph but use "the client". What difference does this make and how do I know when it's inappropriate to use people's names when giving an example?


What's the word for "doing useless things while you don't have anything to do"?

Can anybody tell me what the word for "doing useless things while you don't have anything to do" is? Let's say I am surfing on the web, reading some articles, etc. while I don't have anything to do. It is not computer related. I am looking for a broad term. I've checked the synonyms of "killing time" and these are what I've found:   * dawdle   * hang around   * idle   * kill time   * **lark** : (v) play boisterously   * mess around   * play around It seems _lark_ can work for this case.


He/She/It on Imaginary/Fantasy figures

Consider that you have a fantasy figure, when writing a comic/book. Could you refer to this figure as he/she without being grammatically incorrect? _Example:_ Daffy Duck likes **his** new boat. Because now **he** can sing "I'm on a boat".


"to be also so" oder "to be the same"? "Neither...nor"?

please, correct this sentence: "I neither drink nor smoke, but you don't have to be also so/the same". By/with this sentence I want to say, that I am both non-drinker and non-smoker, but I would accept you even if you drink and smoke. Thanks


Usage of "last evening"

I have heard my friend say _yesterday evening_ or _yesterday night_. I tell her it's _last evening_ or _last night_. While she may be correct in that it is the _night of yesterday_ , why is it then called _last night_ (or _last evening_ )?


Number of syllables in "liar", "prior"

It seems that there are two syllables in "liar" (li*ar) because it is made up of a stem "lie" plus the suffix "ar". But what about "prior" (pri*or)? Does it have something to do with the final "r" as opposed to "fire" which has only one syllable?


Should I capitalize the phrase that has its abbreviation following?

I am doing a technical and scientific writing. I have been confused by this for a long time. Basically, there are two case.   1. A well-known phrase with its abbreviation. e.g. Global Positioning System (GPS). Should I write "Global Positioning System (GPS)" or "global positioning system (GPS)"?   2. A self-coined phrase with its abbreviation. e.g. Augmented Filter Subsystem (AFS). Should I write it as "Augmented Filter Subsystem (AFS)" or "augemented filter subsystem (AFS)"? Does it really matter? I am trying to do the best that I can. Which one is more conventional?


What does 'provision' exactly mean in a legal document?

Now I'm asked to look at a legal document(here) and answer the question that which provisions apply to a certain case. However, I don't know what the word 'provision' means in a legal context. (English is my second language and I hardly read law-related material at all.) So I looked up the meaning of _provision_ and according to Tanslegal it means: > a statement in a contract or a law that a specific thing must happen or be > done That's still vague to me. First, for the document I'm reading it seems to me more like: > a statement in a contract or a law that a specific thing must **not** happen > or be done The document I'm looking at have some sections, and some of the sections are talking about formal sections. For example, section 8 of the document says > 8.(1) > > A person must not, in the course of a commercial activity, install or cause > to be in- stalled a computer program on any other per- son’s computer system > or, having so installed or caused to be installed a computer program, cause > an electronic message to be sent from that computer system, unless... This should be a provision, which I understand. However, section 9 is like this: > 9. > > It is prohibited to aid, induce, procure or cause to be procured the doing > of any act contrary to any of sections 6 to 8. Is the text under section 9 also a provision since it's about something that must not happen? Section 10 goes on to explain some terms used in section 6 to 8. So these aren't provisions, right?


Synonym - "to go above someone"

What's a synonym, preferably solely in one word? I tried circumvent and its synonyms (eg bypass, sidestep, ...), but still desire a better one. Example: > If you decide to **go above** the teacher, always tell the teacher your > intention and that you're unsatisﬁed with the outcome of the situation. > Principals will loop back to the teacher before they respond to you 99 > percent of the time so it only hurts your relationship if you go blindly > around the teacher. Use words that are professional and positive as sug- > gested later in this chapter.


How to restructure this agglomeration of adjectives so it gets readable?

A co-worker is writing an important document. There is text which explains the diagrams, but we expect that many diagonal readers will just try to understand everything from the pictures, so we need lots of condensed information in them. So he needs really descriptive labels in the diagrams. While his argumentation is solid, the whole thing ended with a bubble in a diagram bearing the label `adapted personal value dependent user interface`. To make it clear, I agree that all this information needs to be conveyed by the bubble's label. But I think that the usual rules of adjective parsing will require the reader to read it in the wrong way. The actual thing he is talking about is a user interface, which is being adapted depending on personal values. But I think that people will rather read that as (adapted (personal (value dependent (user interface)))), if they don't give up at all. Any ideas how to reconstruct the label so it is both readable and contains all this info? Maybe a rearrangement of the words so it will be clear that we are talking about personal values and not a personal user interface? I tried `Adapted personal-value-dependent user interface`, but this still seems to create the wrong precedence.


Meaning of "do over"

A colleague and I are having a disagreement over the **slang** meaning and usage of **"do over"** Does it mean (a) beat somebody up or does it have a sexual meaning of (b) screw someone i.e. hump someone


I'm worried about my overuse of commas in this news article? I'm trying to use minimal words

A 45 year old Queens Park man is in a critical condition after crashing his Holden utility through the Welshpool railway barrier and being hit by a train yesterday. The driver, Allan Braddeley, was driving on Welshpool road at 6pm when a combination of wet roads and blinding sunlight caused the utility to career through the barrier and stall on the tracks. Despite engaging the emergency brakes, a diesel locomotive transporting ten oil tankers hit the vehicle, pushing it approximately 65 metres down the track. Onlookers removed Braddeley from the wreck and he was immediately taken to Royal Perth Hospital, admitted with numerous injuries. The driver of the diesel locomotive, Harold Peterson, was treated for shock. “By the time I saw him coming it was too late to stop. I hope he’ll be okay,” Peterson said. The train remained blocking the crossing for over an hour, while police redirected traffic. “The combination of wet weather and time of day make this a dangerous stretch of road. Drivers have to take extra care in these conditions” Officer Neville Plodd said. Mr Harold Peterson recovered from the initial shock enough to continue the train to East Perth, before being released early from work.


What do you call the interconnecting bits of a puzzle piece in English?

This is hard to describe, but I'm curious about what the proper word is for these thingies in English. So I searched for a picture on Google and circled what I'm referring to with red: ![Puzzle piece with the questionable parts circled with red.](http://i.stack.imgur.com/4IIqy.jpg)


Difference between "technical criteria" and "functional criteria"

What is the difference between _technical criteria_ and _functional criteria_? > Website architecture is an approach to the design and planning of websites > which, like architecture itself, involves **technical** , aesthetic and > **functional** criteria.


Is there any difference of meaning between “take aim at” and “turn its sights”?

I noticed two different phrases were used to express the same or similar things in the article reporting Rick Perry’s recent campaign in New York Times (November 19). Under the headline, “Perry Ad Seems to _Take Aim at_ Republican Rivals,” body copy immediately follows: “Rick Perry‘s poll numbers may be lagging. But he still has millions of dollars to spend on ads and that effort now appears to be _turning its sights on_ his Republican rivals.” Is there any difference of delicate nuance between “take aim at” and “turn its sights”? I’m curious to know why the writer rephrased the words. Simply for avoiding redundancy?


How do I emphasize a word using the standard punctuation system?

I've seen people on the Internet stressing a certain word using "*": > I do not *like* it, I *love* it! I think there is no such punctuation as "*". So I'm wondering if I can use some other way to achieve the same goal in traditional English. I've tried quotation marks but then it sounds like I'm posing ironic effect. > I do not "like" it, I "love" it! That sentence leaves the impression that I'm loving it in a _unusual_ way.


Correct term or phrase for "unidirectional gaga"

I'm not sure if such a figure of speech exists in English, and "unidirectional gaga" is certainly not correct. But which wording expresses that a person becomes dumber from having exercised/performed something too frequently or in only one particular fashion.   * It's an adverb or phrase that is usually applied to a person. But can also describe activities.   * It primarily expresses "to make stupid" caused by a particular behaviour/performance.   * The persistence or repetetion of past activites is implied to turn the person more dull / less open to alternative approaches.   * Does usually but not necessarily have a derogatory meaning. Possible alternative ways to express this:   * to become stultified      * from ingrained habits     * through monotony   * somebodys behaviour became dull     * from tedious repetetion     * ever the same approach But of course I'm searching for a more catchy phrase or expression which coveres that sentiment.


Does "She is in love with Tom" imply that Tom loves her too?


What's the difference between "You have my word" and "I promise"?

What's the difference between _you have my word_ and _I promise_?


What's the difference between "I'm in love with her" and "I love her"?


"Sunshine" and "moonlight"

A thought just came in my mind: the Sun shines, but the moon? Which is better to use, _sunshine_ or _sunlight_? Can we use "Moon shines"?


attain junior secondary level(s)

If we want to assess a person's English proficiency, is it idiomatic to say?: - _His English hasn't attained junior secondary level(s)._ I'm not sure, because:   1. _attain_ might not be an idiomatic verb in this situation.   2. instinct tells me _level_ should be in the plural but sense tells me a person's English can't attain many levels logically at the same time.   3. the whole sentence might not be idiomatic Could you help me?


Is it rude to say "Thanks for asking"?

My manager recently asked me "How I was doing? Everything Ok?". I felt happy that he asked me that question, and felt that he was really concerned about me. I was doing good. So I told him that and then followed it up with "Thanks for asking .. :) ". Does the statement "Thanks for asking me." sound rude (kind of like I don't need to tell you)? Is there a better way to express the gratitude? Thanks


Is this correct: "Let me know once you finish"?

Please help me. Which of these is correct?   1. _Let me know once you finish_   2. _Let me know when you finish_   3. _Let me know when you have finished._


What exactly does this sentence mean?

> Consider the violinist Jascha Heifetz, known for his blank expression when > performing. A 1925 article remarked on his deportment: "Cold, calm, > dispassionate, he stands on the platform and performs miracles of dexterity, > displays his beauties of tone. _But do we not feel slightly chilled, anxious > perhaps for less mastery and more humanity?_ Does the last sentence mean a. we feel chilled and want humanity more than dexterity. or b. what really makes us chilled and anxious is his humanity rather than his mastery.?


Adjectival phrase using participles

The café smelt of fried onions and tomato ketchup; the tables were green Formica with _chipped painted_ , steel legs. I am trying to use _chipped_ and _painted_ to form an adjectival phrase in this sentence. Is _chipped-paint_ , steel legs an option in this sentence? (with or without a hyphen?) Or would I have to use _chipped_ and _painted_.


Are there words for the subject and the object in a merger& acquisition?

Say company A bought company B, is there a pair of antonyms to refer A and B? E.g. merger and mergee (I know this pair is not right, only try to make a point here)


Should we say industry problems or industrial problems? Which is incorrect? or maybe each of them has specific meaning, then what is that meaning? I myself think the "industry problems" means the problems occurred in the industry , and the "industrial problems" means problems which are related to industry.


"small room" vs. "little room" / "big room" vs. "large room"

I never had problems with _small_ and _little_ before. However, I only had known about _a small room_ before I saw the word _a little room_ in a textbook (Family and Friends by Naomi Simmons). Is it the same? Also, as I always use _big_ , I'm not so sure about _large_. _Big room_ and _large room_ were the same to me. Is it right?


confusion about the suffix 'ence' and "ance"

I am confused about using the suffixes "ance" and "ence". Where would I use "ance" and where "ence"? Is there some important rule about this?


Use of the word "theory" in "string theory", "M-theory", etc

I came across this question on Yahoo! Answers: > Should M-theory read, M-hypothesis?   >  It being limited evidence for further investigation, perhaps not yet a > theory. I responded thus: (I realise the words "use" and "usage" are.. ahem.. _overused_. Please disregard this stylistic concern.) > I believe this use of the word "theory" reflects an overlap in mathematics > and theoretical physics. > > In mathematics, the word "theory" is used informally to refer to "a self- > consistent body of definitions, axioms, theorems, examples, and so on" > (reference). Examples of this usage include "field theory" and "group > theory". > > This differs from the scientific use of the word "theory" to mean "an > extensively tested hypothesis". > > I believe the use of the word "theory" here is a purposeful reference to the > fact that the inventors were interested in laying a mathematical foundation > for their model. > > Note that "string theory" has the exact same usage. In fact, the usage seems > to be quite rampant throughout theoretical physics. However, that's quite possibly just a way to rationalise what is actually carelessness on the part of scientists using the terms. It may not even fit with the facts; my knowledge of theoretical physics is admittedly slim. Can anyone give any support for or against my explanation? I found this blog entry wherein commenter James Reed chalks it up to a combination of carelessness and an alternate definition of "theory" as "a model being developed by a theorist" (which is similar to the informal mathematical definition, I think).


What is the name of the condition when I temporarily cannot speak because of shouting too much?

What is that condition called in English when I can't say anything, "lose my voice", due to shouting a lot? I think it is related to my vocal chords. The usual treatment prescribed is just to stay silent for a period of one or two weeks.


What does "Every me, every you" mean?

What does one mean when he says "Every me, every you"?


Is there a concise expression for 'as it exists today'?

Especially in the context of a situation that is anticipated to change in the near future. As in: > An analysis of the subway system capacity, both as it exists today and after > upcoming expansions. Or: > This document surveys the ethnic makeup of Manhattan, both historically and > as it exists today.


Does "Smugness" imply "Having or showing low opinions of others"?

I have a little confusion whether "smugness" implies a "low opinion of others" in contrast to a "high opinion of oneself" I have consulted ODO and wiktionary; they showed the meaning of "Smugness" is > **Smugness(noun)[ODO]:** having or showing an excessive pride in oneself or > one's achievements   >  **Smugness(noun)(wiktionary):** Irritatingly pleased with oneself; self- > satisfied. However please look at the below excerpt from the novel "2 States- The story of my marriage" from "Chetan Bhagat". > Krish is narrator. He is having chat with his college mate Ananya. > > 'So where did you stay hostel before?', She said. 'And please don't say IIT, > you are doing pretty well so far.'   >  'What's wrong with IIT?'   >  'Nothing, are you from there?,' She sipped water.   >  'Yes, from IIT Delhi. Is that problem?'   >  'No,' she smiled, 'not yet.'   >  'Excuse me?' I said. Her **smugness** had reached irritating levels. If we observe the context above, seemingly Ananya has a "low opinion" of IITians "rather than a high opinion or self pride in herself". Even though the narrator uses the word "smugness" to describe that quality. So my perticular question is, is the usage valid? Can adjectives like this be used in contrasting situations also?


Isn't a comma necessary?

> I was jumping about up to my thighs in the waters. Is a comma necessary after "about", or in another place in the sentence?


Three-word phrase stress ("little straw house" vs. "small wooden house")

I'm interested to learn why the following three-word phrases have stress on different words.   1. "little straw house" (stress is on _little_ and _house_ )   2. "small wooden house" (stress is on _wooden_ ) Here are the sentences: >   1. The first little pig built a little straw house. >   2. The second little pig built a small wooden house. > How come the stress for the second phrase is not on _small_ and _house_? Can you please help?


Themselves or them?

Today, I wanted to write: > It's really unfortunate that most people cling to something that is not > themselves just to get what they want. Then after writing this, I had this weird feeling that the right thing was > something that is not them Can someone guide or explain to me how these words are used?


Is the word "etc." including more things which are not mentioned?

I wonder the correct usage of 'etc.'. It seems to me that some people, they really pursuit thoroughness when they try to list things and they speak etc. at the end like saying "that's all". For example, > the payment statuses are accepted, expired, cancelled etc. Are these 3 statuses are all statuses existed, or, there could be more statuses? Or either case is possible?


Is it wrong to say "I hope this does not inconvenience you in any way"?

I recently had a dilemma regarding this. While the above sentence sounds okay to my ears, "I hope this does not cause any inconvenience to you" sounds more grammatically correct. Which one is correct?


Euphemism for "non-useful"

I was just about to tell someone how something "wouldn't really be much useful" if they leave it the way it is — which is like a much more polite version of _useless_ , but I just couldn't find the word. I'm guessing I just don't know it. What is an idiomatic euphemism for _non-useful_? **EDIT:** It was actually an answer to a question, and I was wondering how I would say this answer is not really useful without hurting the person.


What is a wheal?

Indulging some idle curiosity about Cornish mining I noticed that many of the mines are named _wheal_ : _Wheal Kitty_ , _Wheal Jane_ and _East Wheal Rose_ , among others. But the only dictionary definition I can dig up explains _wheal_ as:- >   1. a small, burning or itching swelling on the skin, as from a mosquito > bite or from hives. >   2. a wale or welt. > This doesn't appear to be what is meant. There is also a mention in passing here, but no clue as to the actual meaning. So, what is a _wheal_ , in the mining sense of the word?


Use of the word "lore"

Should I use the word _lore_ when speaking about knowledge that is connected to a specific domain, or would it be better to use the expression "professional knowledge"?


To "make" a draw

I often hear professional chess players use the phrase "to make a draw" where I would simply use "to draw" or replace "to make" with "to bring about" (or any of its synonyms) if we really had to use "draw" as a noun here. For example, here's (time: 0:57) Fabiano Caruana (a native English speaker, mind you) using this phrase as below: > "...I don't know if White has real winning chances, but I felt I should be > able to make a draw." Is this phrase correct?


What is the origin of the slang term "get out of here" to mean "you're kidding"?

What is the origin (first recorded use) of the slang term "get out of here" to mean "you're kidding" rather than "go away" ?


Semicolon usage

What is trying to be said in this sentence? One profile reading shall be taken for every 200 square feet for the first 1,000 square feet; for each additional 500 square feet or less, one profile reading shall be taken.


Where using "title" instead of "name" is justified?

Merriam-Webster and many other dictionaries defines **Title** as something that can be used instead of the **Name** of that thing. For example, based on what I understood, it seems logical to use these sentences interchangeably:   1. What is the **name** of the book you're reading?   2. What is the **title** of the book you're reading? My question is, how can we understand the _scope_ of things which are included in this rule? For example, can we use **title** instead of the **name** of a person, like _his title is Jack_ instead of _his name is Jack_? Is there any general rule for this?


What's the origin of "qu" in the word "masquerade"?

I've noticed that the word _masquerade_ is spelt with _qu_ instead of _c_ in _mascarade_ like in French or _mascarada_ in Spanish. According to Online Etymology Dictionary, the word is of French origin. I'd be very interested to know how it came to be spelt with _qu_ instead of _c_ or _k_ like in _mask_.


does the word "reference sentence" make any sense?

A book has a sentence 'A', which is cited from another book. In the other book, there is sentence 'A1' that 'A' is based on. Is it correct to say that 'A1' is the **reference sentence** of 'A'?


Second name or Surname in British English

I have recently been told by a Londoner that "second name" is the most common way of referring to one's surname. She explained that it arose from the fact that most people just use their first and last names, therefore "second name" and "last name" became synonyms. This has given me some food for thought and I've become curious on a couple of points:   1. Is this practice in use elsewhere?   2. Does it cause misunderstandings when a person happens to have a middle name and, therefore, second and last name aren't coincident?   3. So, in this fictitious name, what could be called what?      * Mary (first name)     * Sue (middle name / ?second name? or ?second given name?)     * Smith (surname / family name / last name / ?second name?) On a slightly different note, when non-English names that have multiple surnames are involved, how would one refer to them? For example: Ana Maria Silva dos Santos Pereira, where "Ana Maria" correspond to 2 given names and "Silva dos Santos Pereira" correspond to 3 family names (typically inherited from both mother and father's side). 4) Would everything in between "Ana" and "Pereira" be considered middle names?


What does "Booney II" mean in this context?

What does "Booney II" mean in this conext? It is in the name of a product from Columbia: Men's Silver Ridge™ Booney II


Usage of "which"

Is the following sentence correct: "They have the Supreme Court on their side which ruled in their favor." What I want to say is that they (some group of people) have the Supreme Court on their side and that the Supreme Court ruled something in their (some group of people) favor. If not, how would I need to change the sentence?


Usage of 'appeal'

I recently came across the use of the noun **appeal** in a book chapter by Gopnick and Wellman on Theory Theory. The sentence is: > Theoretical constructs need not be definitely observable, but they must be > appeals to a set of entities removed from, and underlying, the evidential > phenomena themselves. I understand the meaning of the sentence, but I do not know, and could not find in any dictionary a definition of **appeals** which fits there. Any ideas? Reference: http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/73444/1/j.1468-0017.1992.tb00202.x.pdf


"Cheeseslicer" or "cheese slicer"?

Can somebody confirm if the correct spelling is _cheeseslicer_ or _cheese slicer_? I always thought in English words are not written together when combined, but some online dictionaries are contradictory for this word. Also, what are the rules for adding a space when combining words?


What is the word for the joy felt when a favour offered is subsequently not needed?

There is a feeling that I get when I have earned "Brownie Points" for offering to do something for someone but the offer gets turned down for some reason before I need to actually do it. All the reward for none of the effort.


"Characteristic" as an adjective to describe changes in a character

Can the word `characteristic` be used to describe changes that occur to a character (I.E. a character in a film)? For example:               ... this foreshadows the changes to come - both plot and characteristic changes.      Where `characteristic changes` is referring to changes in a character's personality or perspective. Would it be better to say `plot and character changes`?


meaning of "survived the Constitution"

waht's the meaning of "survived the Constitution" in this phrase Moreover, of this list only “the never-ending appeals to the people by competing public officials” survived the Constitution


An alternative, less casual phrase for 'been there, done that'?

> **Meaning:** > > To have experienced the topic under discussion, to the point of boredom or > complacency. > > **Origin:** > > This phrase began life in the early 1970s, in the short form 'been there', > which had the same meaning as 'been there, done that'. > > Source: The Phrase Finder We all have heard the phrase 'been there, done that' quite often on American sitcom shows. But obviously, this phrase sounds rather _informal_ and necessitates a careful application. So, it may not be appropriate to use it in certain situations. Is there an alternative phrase that sounds less _laid-back_ but hits the nail at the same time?


Period or colon?

Say, I have the following sentence: "The Gaussian Sobolev spaces are as expected defined as follows" and then you do a definition environment after. The question is: how do you end "as follows"? With a period, or a colon? I'd like to know if there is a strict English punctuation rule for this sentence.


Help with this sentence?

Is this sentence correct? > Today I have to attend a meeting with DGM sales at 12:30 PM, so I will move > from office at 10:30 AM.


Origin of oe pronounced as /i/?

/i/ is usually pronounced in English with the vowels: e, ee, ea, ei, ie, and y. What is the origin of the pronunciation of words such as `amoeba`, `phoenix` or `onomatopoeia`? I got curious about this after going through my daughter's phonics work and realizing that `oe` is never taught pronounced as /i/. Is this pronunciation of `oe` non-standard?


Is "ambiguate" a word, or is there a word with a similar meaning?

I want to say something along the lines of "obscure", such as "He obscured the details" but I want it to capture the idea that the obscurity lies in the ambiguous nature of his description.


Is "it is necessary be have" correct?

How do you use subjunctive in such situations? Have I correctly written the following? > It is necessary to have a farm of your own Is this right? If not, why? > It is necessary be have a farm of your own. Of course, I have asked this question, considering the following: > It was his order that all forests be protected. > > His order was that all forests be protected. A quick Google search for "it is necessary be have".


what's the meaning of "emotional stake"

what's the meaning of "emotional stake" e.g: to increase the emotional stakes, I had my favorites in both


"be denied" or "be denied by"

I'm reading Robert Bringhurst's book _The Elements of Typographic Style (4th edition)_ , and encounter this sentence on the top of page 10: > That freedom **is denied us** if the tradition is concealed or left for > dead. I think only phrases like   * be denied **_by_** somebody   * deny somebody are valid, but after searching I find some webpages just use "be denied somebody" for "be denied by somebody", as on the website of The New York Times, > _British Memoirist Is Denied U.S. Entry_, and on The Washington Post, > _Leading Muslim Scholar Is Denied U.S. Travel Visa_. So, is the "be denied somebody" form widely accepted? Is it a special usage?    * * * **EDIT** For better understanding of the original sentence, this is the poetic context: > Typography thrives as a shared concern -- and there are no paths at all > where there are no shared desires and directions. A typographer determined > to forge new routes must move, like other solitary travelers, through > uninhabited country and against the grain of the land, crossing common > thoroughfares in the silence before dawn. The subject of this book is not > typographic solitude, but the old, well-traveled roads at the core of the > tradition: paths that each of us is free to follow or not, and to enter and > leave when we choose -- if only we know the paths are there and have a sense > of where they lead. **That freedom is denied us if the tradition is > concealed or left for dead.** Originality is everywhere, but much > originality is blocked if the way back to earlier discoveries is cut or > overgrown.


Where does the name "Workshop" come from?

I have searched, found no answers, but why is a workshop called a workshop? In academia, workshops are being held where you learn stuff and calculate stuff. It has nothing to do with a shop (where you buy stuff) and not so much work IMO. So why workshop?


should + to be form …

At times I come across at this form of using should: > **Should** we wish to cancel these semantic actions—sometimes termed the > default actions—of the event, we simply return the value false from the > event handler. It always starts with ‘should’. I understand it as ‘If we want to…’. I couldn’t find definition in my grammar book.


Idioms or phrases for "Be it good or bad"

Can you suggest some idioms or phrases for _Be it good or bad_? For example: > **Be it good or bad** , television has become an indispensable part of our > lives.


Should it be continual or continuous?

Here is the sentence in question: • Dedicated to _continuous_ learning in the workplace. • Dedicated to _continual_ learning in the workplace. I also feel that the sentence needs to be simpler.


What's the word that means: something that allows/helps something else?

I've been on a quest to find a word that I knew, but eventually forgot. It's not a common word. I remember I liked its aesthetics. I searched synonyms for all words I could think of, and I still can't find it. These synonyms would include facilitator, conductor. Consider this example: > Someone had an idea, and I wanted to (act as/serve as/be) a * to that idea. Meaning that I want to facilitate it/allow it to happen/help it come to life. Almost as if I'm serving as an open doorway to that idea. I seem to remember associating that word with energy conductivity.


Should a name that is capitalized contain a lower case letter, for example, McDONALD or MCDONALD?

If the name is capitalized, for example, should it be McDONALD or MCDONALD?


Grammatical term for a noun phrase which consists of an alternate descriptor of the object

(EDIT: It's called a noun phrase, not a clause) I'm wondering what the correct term for this type of clause is, and what the appropriate punctuation is. For example: > "I have lost my red hat, the hat I got for Christmas." Is a comma the correct punctuation mark here, and what is the term for phraselike the one after the comma?


Why do we call an instruction book a "Manual"?

"Manual" is used for many things: "Manual Labour" - work done with the hands; "Organ Manual" - hands again; and I can see the link to the Latin "manu". But why would a book of instructions be a "Manual"? Any ideas?


Can I say, "I can answer your apprehensions."

Is it proper to say that you can answer someone's apprehensions?


Alternative word of extensive/broader experience

I usually see "I have extensive experience" or "I have broader experience" in resume. I want to know an alternative way to express that "I have much experience and great knowledge in something"


One who creates is a creator. What is one who updates?   * An updater?   * An updator? The last one seems more logical, but also wrong.


What are the limits of using the suffix "-esque"?

I'm seeing this suffix everywhere lately. Of course, there are a number of _-esques_ that are commonly used (i.e. _Kafkaesque_ ), but is there some sort of rule for determining who (or what) gets assigned which suffix? For instance, was _Orwellian_ chosen simply because someone decided it sounded better than "Orwellesque"? What about "Kafkanian"? It all seems very willy- nilly.


How to spell "the youzhe" as in the abbreviation of "the usual"

_The usual_ is a common reply to _what will you order?_ or _what are you up to?_. It is often abbreviated, in Canada, to the first syllable of _usual_ , as in _the youzhe_. How would you spell this abbreviation? Is there evidence of a standard or more common spelling?


Hardest tongue twister seen

What is the hardest tongue twister you have ever seen? Humorous ones are also welcome.


"Query" vs. "Inquiry"

What is the difference between the words "inquiry" and "query?" I tend to associate the latter with technology (e.g., search engine queries), but I'm not sure what the actual meaning is.


"Owner of" vs. "owner for"

Should I say "I am the owner _of_ ABC company" or I should say "I am the owner _for_ ABC company"?


Wording for threshold description (greater than or equal to)

I have a parameter for a program that is a threshold (T). I need to document it, and what I want its meaning to be is this:   * If N >= T then Do Action I don't want its meaning to be this:   * If N > T then Do Action For ease of discussing this, let us say that N is "number of ghosts I've seen", and Action is "freak out". So my threshold might be 3, as in "If I see 3 or more ghosts, I'm going to freak out."   * See no ghosts — fine and dandy   * See 1 ghost — still ok, maybe it's a shadow   * See 2 ghosts — ok, maybe it's a shadow and a mirror   * See 3 ghosts — _freak out_ ; leave haunted house now, call Ghost Busters   * See 4 ghosts — still freaking out, etc. But the best phrasing for a threshold description that I've seen so far is this:   * T = the number of ghosts that can be seen before a freak out occurs Which implies that for T=3 I could see 3, and a freak out would not yet occur until a fourth ghost is seen. How can I wrangle the threshold description to fix this off-by-one issue?


"Common" or "usual"?

A few years ago I had a roommate who was a French guy. He was learning English and occasionally asked me to clarify some differences. One question he asked me was the difference between "common" and "usual". I was stumped, and it has bugged me ever since. It is clear that sometimes one is correct and sometimes the other, but I don't know what the distinction is. Can anyone help?


What is the difference between variability and variance?

I could only find one result from Yahoo Answers, but the answer wasn't clear on the exact meaning of variability and how it is different from variance.


Metaphoric meaning of Hitchhiker’s?

There is a book named "Infinite Dimensional Analysis: A Hitchhiker’s Guide". I was wondering what "Hitchhiker’s" means as a metaphor in general?


What is the meaning and usage of the abbreviation "v. a."?

At the time of this writing there is no explanation on wiktionary, and searching the web does not yield an answer, only more instances of its use:   * A random entry at the Etymological Dictionary of the Scottish Language: > To KELE, **v. a.** To kill.   * Random entry at latinlexicon.org: > verbero, āvi, ātum, 1 [...], **v. a.** verber, to lash, scourge, whip ...   * Examples section in Speijer's _Sanskrit Syntax_ , 1886: > Examples: Panc. 2 द्वादशभिर्वर्षौर्व्याकरणं श्रूयते  ( **v. a.** grammar > requires twelve years to be mastered), ... ![Page 57 in Speijer](http://i.stack.imgur.com/hx27E.png) My intuition is that this is an outdated Latin abbreviation similar to "e.g." and "i.e.". (Perhaps something like _verbis aliis_?) * * * **Edit:** More examples from the same book (Speijer, _Sanskrit Syntax_ , 1886), pages 2, 32, and 43: > शान्तं पापम्  (v. a. _malum absit_ )   >  उषिताः स्मो ह वसतिम्  (v. a. we have passed the night)   >  कस्तेन सह तव स्नेह  (v. a. how are you his friend?) The English gloss is more or less a translation of the Sanskrit. The only thing distinguishing these translations from others (without "v. a.") is that they are a tad less literal. I am convinced that this is _not_ a problem of Sanskrit or grammar but of academic language of the late 19th century. The text is riddled with Latin abbreviations that would have been instantly apparent to the contemporary scholar.


Word for the people whom you inspire

People who are inspired by me might say "Imray is my inspiration". But what word can I use to describe the people whom I inspire?


The "-igan" ending

Does the _-igan_ suffix serve the same function in the following words?   * shenan **igan**   * card **igan**   * hool **igan** If so, what does it mean? Where does it come from?


Meaning of "My high kicks are not done in a line!"

> My high kicks are not done in a line! The above appeared as a legend in a T-shirt I saw once. It accompanied the caricature of a soccer player warming up, but I didn't get the pun intended. When I told a friend of mine about this, he said that the joke might have to do with a certain expression from ballet ... I hope that you can shed some light on this enquiry of mine.


Is the [blank] worth the shake?

I remember someone once telling me a saying in the form: "Is the [blank] worth the shake?" The meaning was similar to the saying, "Is the end worth the means?" I can't remember what the [blank] word was though. Has anyone heard of this saying before? I think the term "shake" in this sense might mean amount of work, or hustle.


Should "head teacher" be capitalized, when it's not really anyone's occupation

Basically I want to say 'from my head teacher', but his occupation is not really that, should it still be capitalized?


Plaque wording - capitalization?

Language on a presentation plaque - is it written in sentence format or are the words capitalized like in a title? Example below: In Recognition Of Your Exceptional Leadership Of The Prevention Program Of The Oregon Sexual Assault Task Force And Your Commitment To And Support Of The Effective Prevention Of And Response To Sexual Violence In Oregon.


How well known is the word "butler"?

I'm about to launch a new web service, and currently we're still looking for a name. I thought it would be nice to call it a "digital butler" - my collaborator from Dubai, however, pointed out, that a big part of the world does not know the world "butler". How true is this?


Is "best regards" a pleonasm?

If the meaning of _regards_ is _best wishes_ , would not _best regards_ (used to express friendliness in greetings, especially at the end of letters) a pleonasm, in the context of letters? > Best regards,   >  kiamlaluno > Best best wishes,   >  kiamlaluno


Answering a question with another question when the answer is obviously 'Yes'

I heard it in the TV Series Fargo, Episode 9. Here is the transcript: > A: We still on for golf next week?   >  B: Course we are, Burty Burt.   >  A: But more importantly, are you and Louise still gonna make it on Sunday?   >  B: _Do dogs smell each other's butts?_   >  A: I think I might have observed that type of behavior on occasion. Also in Prison Break, Season 1 episode 11: > A: You still interested in getting in on PI?   >  B: Does my momma got big breastices?   >  A: I wouldn't know.   >  B: Hell, yeah, she does. And hell, yeah, I do. What is the name of this construction?


'of all the reasons' vs. 'of all reasons'

Given: > Of all `____` reasons for my decision to become a university professor, my > father's advice was `____` most important one Which of the following choice is correct?   * A: the; a    * B: /; a    * C: /; the   * D: the; the The slash ("/") here means "don't fill anything". The author says the correct answer is D, but I think C is also correct. Why is "the" required before "reasons"? What is the explanation from a grammatical point of view? Actually I am an EFL teacher and my native language is Chinese. I am quite confused about the question. I've asked the question somewhere else, but they failed to explain why "of all the reasons" is grammatically correct while "of all reasons" is not. Or do you also think they both are correct?


I "go by" this name

Often times when I go to fill forms and apply for programs at government agencies or other places, they often ask me whether I have another name that people call me. I'm Chinese and I use my native name in my legal documents, IDs, etc. and Theo is what my friends and other poeple call me. If people asks me next time, is it correct to say "I go by Theo" to mean Theo is the name my friends and other people call me?


Inversion with "many times" at the beginning of a sentence

I am having a discussion with my friend. I said, "Many times I have seen him washing his car." He says it should be, "Many times have I seen him washing his car. Much like "Often do I see him", and not "Often I see him." While I agree with him on 'often,' I am skeptical about 'many times.' I hope somebody can help.


Why is the exclamation mark called a "bang"?

Why is the exclamation mark called a _bang_? _Bang_ is used to mean the sound of something falling but these days I hear it frequently used to mean the exclamation mark, especially in IT related texts.


What is the name for this "..." punctuation?

When I am writing, and I want to leave something out, so that it gives an implied effect, I use this: _..._ What is it called?


What does “Work on your issues” mean?

I saw the word, “ _Please work on your issues_ ” in Time magazine’s article (October 3rd) titled, “Playing favorites,” which introduces several academic studies proving the fact that most parents have definite favoritism toward their children. It gives the following episode: > “A mother of two wrote a candid post on a website under the headline, “I > think I love my son just a little bit more.” The mom went on at length > describing the greater warmth she feels for her baby boy compared with her > toddler girl. She was, predictably, blowtorched, “ _Please work on your > issue lady!”_ said one typical response. “I feel absolutely horrible for > your daughter!” read another. The hard truth is most parents do.” I don’t understand what “ _Please work on your issue_ " means. It must be an expression for condemning the mother who was candid enough to admit her favoritism to one of her two children, and it should be more than “It’s your own business.” How can I interpret and rephrase this phrase?


'Supposing', 'Let us suppose': differences in hypothetical sentences

Are there differences in meaning between the sentences below? > _**Supposing** they had taken your car without asking you, what would you > have done?_ > > _**Let us suppose** they had taken your car without asking you, what would > you have done?_ In my opinion (I am non-native) the latter sentence is less hypothetical than the former on the fact that they, really, had taken the car.


Word for listening to a single song over and over

Is there an English verb that would mean listening to a single song (on repeat) over and over just because one likes it so much? In my language we have a word that would in English literally mean something like "to outwear" or "to wear down". For example, one buys a record and then, instead of listening to all the songs from the album, sticks to one single song, playing it for five days without listening to any other music.


Does 'from' in this example mean 'some'?

> I have chosen for you from the best of our personnel. Can 'from' here also mean 'some'? > I have chosen for you some of the best of our personnel.


Different pronunciation of /iks/ in "excuse" and "sixteen"

_Excuse_ is pronounced as /ɪkˈskjuːz/ while _sixteen_ is pronounced as /sɪksˈtiːn/. You see a ' in the middle of k and s in _excuse_ while ' is after both k and s in _sixteen_. Why?


Difference between an 'Abstract' and an 'Introduction' in a feature article?

I have to write a feature article for school. However, I'm confused how an abstract [a summary of my points] is different to an intro [Where you outline the points you're going to be elaborating in the body paragraphs] Original Example: Title: **Single Mothers, ‘the damaged goods’ of society?** Abstract: `They’re the unrepresented minorities in our society. Victims of social prejudice, these women are marginalised in media as a whole different class of people. They’re irresponsible sluts; ‘the damaged goods’. They’re woefully incapable of raising a baby with morals. They’re dependent; Work-shy- unambitious class of beings who only live off well-fare. Sadly, they’re the Single Mothers of our society.` Introduction: Confused! Shouldn't my 'abstract' text be my introduction paragraph?! UPDATE: Remember that I am NOT writing a research paper, rather, a persuasive article, when writing your answers please.


Is it possible to rephrase "we're going to bring back that hulking hunk of bumbling brawn"?

The context of the following quote is from the comic book Avengers. In a circus, the ringmaster introduces a brawny guy by saying: > First off today, we're going to bring back that hulking hunk of bumbling > brawn you've all been waiting for. I would like to translate this sentence to Portuguese, but I was not able. It is extremely difficult to translate _hulking hunk of bumbling brawn_. I asked it here. Is it possible to rephrase that sentence without losing the meaning of it?


Can or can’t the Three Mile Island meltdown be described as a farce in “tragedy / farce” rhetoric?

There was the following sentence in the Time Magazine article (Mar. 25, 2011) titled “The Real Cost of U.S. Nuclear Power.”: > “When Karl Marx wrote that history unfolds first as tragedy, then as farce, > he got U.S. nuclear history backward. America’s initial experiment was a > cartoonish disaster, with construction timelines doubling and costs > increasing as much as 1,000% even before the Three Mile Island meltdown. In > the 1980’s, the industry required bailout before bailouts were cool. But the > U.S. industry has matured and learned from its mistakes.” I interpreted “American initial experiment (requiring doubled timeline and 10 times as much cost even before the Three Mile meltdown)” as meaning a farce, and “the industry bailouts in ‘80s” as meaning tragedy, in the above Karl Marx allegory. My friend said, “No, no, the serious accident like Three Mile Island meltdown can never be described as a “cartoonish” disaster. “The initial experiment with construction timelines doubling and costs increasing as much as 1,000% is liken as a farce, and the Three Mile Island meltdown is a sheer tragedy. The sentence “In the 1980’s” and thereafter is the separate line from “farce / tragedy rhetoric.” Is my interpretation wrong? Is it very clear at a glance which is tragedy and which is farce in the above sentence to you, native English speakers?


What's the meaning of the expression "give that tall drink you call yer husband a break"?

Reed Richards says: "Amazing! Psycho-Man's ship is so massive that its gravity has trapped an atmosphere shell around the hull!" His wife asks him "What now, Reed?", but is the Thing who answer to her "Ah, give that tall drink you call yer husband a break, Suzy! He can't be thinking all the time!" I know what _tall drink_ is, but I did not understand what the Thing mean by saying "Ah, give that tall drink you call yer husband a break, Suzy!"


Would you elaborate between have been v-ing and have p.p.?

> I have flown to Toronto a great deal this month. > > I have been flying to Toronto a great deal this month. Would you possibly explain the different between them?


Is there a single word that means "self flagellation" or "self punishment"?

In the back of my mind, I'm almost certain there are at least several individual English word that means to punish one's self. It doesn't have to be physical, necessarily, but it must be some kind of self-punishment. Are there such words? Clinical words are also accepted (i.e. psychological terminology).


Are "money" and "mind" cognates?

Wiktionary gives me these pieces of information: [ ** _money_** ] [1] From Middle English moneie, moneye, from Old French moneie (“money”), from Latin **monēta** , from the name of the temple of Juno Moneta in Rome, where a mint was. Displaced native Middle English schat (“money, treasure”) (from Old English sceatt (“money, treasure, coin”)), Middle English feoh (“money, property”) (from Old English feoh (“money, property, cattle”)). [ ** _mint-2_** ] [3] From Middle English mynt, münet (“money, coin”), from Old English mynet (“coin, money”), from Proto-Germanic *munitan, *munitō (“coin”), from Latin **monēta** (“place for making coins, coined money”), from the temple of Juno Moneta (named for Monēta mother of the Muses), where coins were made; akin to Dutch munt (“currency, coin, mint”), German Münze (“coin, coinage, mint”), Danish mønt (“coin”), and to Russian монета (“coin”). * * * [ ** _mint-1_** ] [2] From Middle English minten, from Old English myntan (“to mean, intend, purpose, determine, resolve”), from Proto-Germanic *muntanan, *muntijanan (“to think, consider”), from Proto-Indo-European ***men-, *mnā-** (“to think”). Cognate with Eastern Frisian mintsje, muntsje (“to aim, target”), Dutch munten (“to aim at, target”), Dutch monter (“cheerful, gladsome, spry”), Gothic (muns, “thought, opinion”), Old English munan (“to be mindful of, consider, intend”). **_More at mind_**. [ ** _mind_** ] [4] From Middle English minde, from Old English ġemynd (“memory, remembrance, memorial, thought”), from Proto-Germanic *gamundiz, *mundiz (“memory, remembrance”), from Proto-Indo-European ***men-** (“to think”). Cognate with Gothic (munds, “memory, mind”), Old English myntan (“to mean, intend, purpose, determine, resolve”), Latin mens,mentis (“mind, reason”), Albanian mënd (“mind, reason”). **_More at mint_**. ## \------------------------------------------------------------------ There are two etymologies, _mint_ -2 and _mint_ -1 provided for _mint_ , referring respectively to two meanings: "a coin/place making coins" and "intent to do". (Q1)So are _mint_ -1 (intent to do) and _mint_ -2 (a coin) cognates or not? If they are not cognates, given that _money_ is cognate with _mint_ -2 (a coin) while _mind_ is cognate with _mint_ -1, (Q2)can we draw the conclusion that _money_ and _mind_ are not cognates?


Can the superlative be paraphrased by the determiner 'any'?

If > "John can't solve the simplest puzzle" **=** "John can't solve _any_ puzzle" is true, why is > "John can solve the simplest puzzle" **=** "John can solve _any_ puzzle" false, but > "I'm surprised that John can solve the simplest puzzle" **=** "I'm surprised > that John can solve _any_ puzzle" true is? In other words, are there coherent and standard correlations between the superlative and the determiner _any_?


Contemporary native English words with diacritics

As I understand, _ö_ in _coöperation_ is considered archaic (or is it?) and words like _résumé_ , _cliché_ and _naïve_ are copied directly from foreign languages. Are there any contemporary native (non-borrowed) English words left that contain characters with diacritics? _Update:_ Note that a word from any contemporary dialect of English would work for this question. Also, of course, as is noted in answers below, besides borrowed foreign language words, there are English words with diacritics, that were created from non-English given names — like _ångström_ for example. Such words, arguably, also can be considered borrowed. And, at least with _ångström_ , Wikipedia claims that version with diacritics is archaic as well. _Update 2:_ To clarify:   1. Contemporary = was a norm in XX century at least (preferably after twenties as well). When I said "archaic" in comments, I meant "non-contemporary".   2. Diacritics, which appeared in anglicization of a borrowed word (i.e. foreign original does not have diacritics), is acceptable. (So, _Brontë_ surname would be good if survived into XX century.) (Anyway, is there a source where I can read about the rules which guide when diacritics should appear during "contemporary" anglicization?)   3. I'm not sure if proper nouns are in the spirit of the question — but if you know one that fits and is not synthetic (i.e. employs "metal umlauts" or imitates some foreign language), please share.


Which word to define the characteristic sounds in a location?

I'm struggling to find a word that fits into the following: > The settlement's peaceful surroundings are ????? by the crashing of the > pounding waves against the cliffs below and the swirling winds that come in > from the Livian Sea. I initially wrote "backed", but the more I looked at it the more it felt wrong. Characterised/Illustrated also (briefly) came to mind. What is the right word to define the normal sound effects to a location?


Difference between "stir up" and "provoke"

Just I want to know the difference between the "stir up" and "provoke", where it should be placed exactly.


What do you call a name which has an adjective / describing word as part of it?

E.g. Charles the Great, Charles the Rash, Edward the Confessor, etc. I'm reasonably sure there was a word for this .... * _scratches head_ *


Word for someone you have passed by?

I am looking for a single noun to describe someone that you have come within 5 feet of or so, or have seen, or have crossed paths with. The closest terms I can think of are _passer-by_ or _stranger_. You may or may not know them, so _stranger_ is not a good fit. Is there a better word than _passer-by_? Why the question? I am building an app that detects other mobile devices using Bluetooth, and I need a name for the collection of these people. Initially, I was considering _nearbyUsers_ or _nearbyPeople_ , but once they go out of range they are no longer nearby. What are they?


What's the matter?

> A (1). What’s wrong?     A (2). What’s the matter?   >  B. The internet doesn’t work. In A (1), ‘ _what_ ’ is beyond doubt a subject. But in A (2), Which is the subject: ‘ _what_ ’ or ‘ _the matter_ ’? Can it be clearly designated? Or ambivalent?


How to work something

Could you tell me if this sounds right? > Do you know how to work the projector?


Where and what is the well those cheap drinks come from?

* In the U.S. when someone orders a 'well drink' they are typically intending to order a drink (i.e. "vodka tonic, well") with the cheapest of the liquor the bar has available Where did the "well" come from? It is distinct from what is called a "call drink", which is when the customer specifies the brand (i.e. Stoli tonic). Since well liquor is also distinguished in contrast to middle- and top-shelf liquors, is "well" perhaps being used as a reference of altitude (e.g., a well is a subterranean water hole)? Is it coincidence or is it etymologically pertinent that the Hebrew word "be'er" means "well" in the sense of shaft/recepticle? To emphasize, this question is asking for information on the origin of the word "well" in its sense and usage behind a bar. Where does this usage of "well" derive from and how was it adopted for bar usage?


Differences between "just might" and "might just?"

Can someone help me understand more precisely the connotative differences between "just might" and "might just I came upon this dilemma while working on a short comic strip. In the first panel, a person is attempting an unorthodox approach to a problem, saying: > It might just work. The second panel, moments later: > It didn't work. I'm unsure if the effect would be significantly altered if the words were swapped.


A person who shares or likes or retweets everything they come across?

I have come across a few folks who share, like or retweet everything they see. Is there a word to indicate their behavior/attitude/nature?


Does "having" something imply the possession of it?

I'm seriously pained when I hear the word "have" being used in the present continuous to imply possession. Take for example, the following quotation from Wordsmith.org. > Read the Etymology of the word "fulsome", which has been described as > "...-some ( **having** a particular quality). Grammar books have always suggested that this construction implies "eating, consuming, or experiencing"; **never** possession. So, if I said that I'm "having a friend", that would imply that I'm eating the friend, or having sex with her/him. What do you folks think?


Validity in the brevity of this prose?

What I intended to write full out was: > We have moved away from obsoleted technologies and technologies being > deprecated. What I actually wrote feels slightly awkward but I justified leaving it as such because it is concise, sits on my ear in an interesting way and is almost a bit poetic in its simplicity. However what I'm wondering is the validity of the statement: > We have moved away from obsoleted and technologies being deprecated.


The use of the genitive in: We had a good time despite "its" raining

"We had a good time despite its raining." Why does the genitive pronoun not work here, yet in the majority of examples we have a choice between accusative and genitive pronouns:- > We had a good time despite him being ill. OK > > We had a good time despite his being ill. OK > > We had a good time despite them arguing. OK > > We had a good time despite their arguing. OK > > We had a good time despite it raining. OK > > We had a good time despite its raining. NOT OK. And what exactly is "it"? Also am I correct in thinking that _their arguing_ is a noun phrase, whereas _them arguing_ is a non-finite subordinate clause? And if that is true then with a sentence like "We had a good time despite arguing" what is _despite arguing_? Is it an NP or a non-finite clause? Or is it a Schroedinger's cat?


To be is to be perceived

Can someone explain me this phrase attributed to Berkely Wikipedia > In Principles #3, he wrote, using a combination of Latin and English, esse > is percipi, ( **to be is to be perceived** ), most often if slightly > inaccurately attributed to Berkeley as the pure Latin phrase esse est > percipi. The phrase appears associated with him in authoritative > philosophical sources, e.g. "Berkeley holds that there are no such mind- > independent things, that, in the famous phrase, esse est percipi (aut > percipere) – **to be is to be perceived** (or to perceive)." I have read explanations online, but I'm wondering if someone could give me an example of the phrase?


What does "it’s all on you" mean?

I just wonder whether this sentence: > It is **on** you. can ever mean this one: > It is **because of** you. This was spoken Tony Stark in the 2012 film, _The Avengers_. Is “It’s all on you” a common and natural saying in English-speaking countries?


What is unfreeze your hearts?

Stephen Colbert was taking about the CIA Interrogation Report when he said, "unfreeze your heart!" @6:12 in the video. What does that mean? How can I use that term? Does it mean, 'forget about it"?


Can a dash work after a question mark?

Can a dash work after a question mark? Meaning is this sentence correct and if not how would you rewrite it? > I am wondering if you know any publications, blogs or websites who are > seeking new writers right now? -- particularly those interested in tech or > the cloud, big data, mobile applications, info graphics, etc.?


Why is "lawyer" widely pronounced "loyer"?

This pronunciation phenomenon appears to be more widespread than I'd thought. I've always pronounced _lawyer_ as it's spelled ( **law** -yer), but I've often heard people say **_loy** -er_ instead. It's not dialectical as far as I can tell, since so many different people say it that way (plus, it's in the dictionary). Why is _lawyer_ so often pronounced _loyer_?


looking for a certain quote/saying about winning, luck and practicing

I'm not sure if this the correct forum, but I can't seem to be able to google it so you guys are my only hope. I know there is a saying that means something like " **you have to be lucky to win, but it's usually the people who train a lot that win** " or " **the winner got lucky, but unless you practice a lot you won't get lucky** ", but I don't really recall the exact wording or who said it.


Letter closing other than "Love"

I am writing an email to a family member (in-law or brother/sister). While in the past I used "love" and signed off with my first name for closing, I usually wondered if there are better words I could use instead of "Love". For one thing, it sounds uncreative and a little trite. For another, it seems phony as I do not feel a close relation to some family members. What are the alternatives?


to give options to "if you do not mind <much?>"

Can I tell "if you do not mind ?much?"?   Or how can I leave me with some freedom in taking and changing a decision?


What is the closest alternative to "rubbish" in American English?

What is the replacement for "rubbish" in American English? I would think "crappy" but it seems a bit stronger than needed.


When to use 'had been' + past participle of the verb

I read the sentence below in a news article: > "The couple had been engaged since the summer," her spokeswoman said in a > statement. Why was "had been engaged" used in this sentence. Is it wrong to say "The couple _have_ been engaged since the summer"? Is this sentence in passive voice so "had been + past participle" used? PS: I read other questions on stackexchange about tenses, but I couldn't understand why was had been + past participle used in the sentence.


What is the future tense of "would have been"?

The following sentence is grammatically correct: > Today would have been Freddie Mercury's 68th birthday. If Freddie Mercury were still alive, this sentence would be correct too: > September 5, 2015, will be Freddie Mercury's 69th birthday. But Freddie Mercury is now dead, and thus, to correctly describe his 69th birthday, it would be necessary to use a "would have been" formation. However, in this case, the formation would be applied to an event in the future. How would one get the future tense of a naturally past-tense modal verb?


"Movies" vs. "Cinema" vs. "Theater" -- what's the difference?

What are the differences between going to "the movies", "the cinema", and "the theater/theatre" (ignoring the fact that theaters are also for plays and not just movies)? Personally, "movies" sounds more American to me, and "cinema" sounds more British, but I really have no idea, it's just a guess, I have no idea.


What is the meaning of "We went back and forth, but there was nothing we could do."

Kindly let me know the meaning of this sentence (taken from this article): > We went back and forth, but there was nothing we could do.


Can 'must' be used in a negative question?

Is it proper to write negative questions this way?   * _You mustn't watch too much TV, must you?_


Why is the state of being resident "residence", but the state of being president "presiden-cy"?

_Resident_ : _Residence_ seems like the normal pairing to me. _Residency_ isn't exactly unknown (see here), but it's far less common. But with _President_ the derivatives are reversed and then some. _Presidency_ is virtually universal. I'm not sure _Presidence_ even qualifies as a word, outside of misspellings for _precedence_. Why is this?


Exploration "on" or "of"

As already written in the title, I need help on how to write the following: > A exploration on Levy alpha-stable distributions or > A exploration of Levy alpha-stable distributions In an other context: > A exploration on the Poisson distribution or > A exploration of the Poisson distribution Can anyone tell me what the right choice is?


Help me parse this sentence so I can understand what joke my ancestors played on the King

I'm reading an old history book about my ancestors entitled "Rulewater And Its People: An Account Of The Valley Of The Rule And Its Inhabitants" published in 1907 by George Tancred. In it, I'm having problems understanding a sentence, italicized below: > The King issued a peremptory order for all Turnbulls in the district to > submit themselves to the King's authority. _The principal men of the clan > immediately made their submission, coming before him in linen sheets, with > withies about their necks, and put themselves 'in the king's will,' as it > was termed._ It is said that the King ordered every tenth man to suffer > death. Looking up withies gives me (from here) > n. pl. with·ies 1\. A rope or band made of withes. 2\. a. A long flexible > twig, as that of an osier. b. A tree or shrub having such twigs. My initial thought was that "in the king's will" was a pun on "will". As in somehow my ancestors got themselves written into the king's last will and testament. Now that I see the definition, I wonder if "will" could mean a plant owned by the king? As in how game was owned by the king in the past? I'd really like to know what my ancestors did, why it was presumably funny to them, and why it irritated the King so much. If it helps, this took place during the reign of King James IV around 1510. Also interestingly, the word "king" in 'in the king's will' is NOT capitalized, I just double checked. So its not The King its just king. Not sure if this is a typo or an important clue.


How can I say I regret something in the past tense?

How to say you should do something in the past but you did not. Is this a correct usage? > I had to finish my homework. Are there any soft versions?


What does ‘Pose challenges as myriad as Mubarak’s departure was singular’ mean?

In today's New York Times article titled _Uncharted Ground After Stunning End of Egypt’s Regime_ reporting now 'former' President of Egypt, Hosni Sayyid Mubarak’s departure from office, I found the phrase _pose challenges as myriad as Mubarak’s departure was singular_. The meaning of _as .... as_ used here does not seem to be same as the pattern I’m accustomed to, e.g., _as many as_ , and _as much as_.   I think the writer chose _myriad_ to make contrast to _singular_. Can I interpret _as_ preceding to _Mr. Mubarak’s departure_ as _when_ , _while_ , or _although_? If not, how can I paraphrase this line? The text reads as follows: > But in the gray light of dawn, Egypt will face the meaning of its > revolution, as will an Arab world that shares its demographic of a younger > generation taking the stage, posing challenges as myriad as Mr. Mubarak’s > departure was singular.


Does the suffix in "lipolysis" and "ketosis" have the same meaning in both the words?

_Lipolysis_ and _ketosis_ both end in _‑sis_. Does that suffix have the same meaning in both the words?


"From - Till" vs "From - To"

I read an experience letter which said > "So and so" person has worked **from** "date1" **till** "date2". Is it okay? Or should it be like this? > "So and so" person has worked **from** "date1" **to** "date2".


Why is it that score is used in singular when referring to several groups of 20?

If I'm not mistaken, score can mean "a group or set twenty". What I don't understand is why you say for example "Four score and seven years ago...", instead of saying "four scores" (since there are four groups of twenty years).


Simple Past or Past Perfect

If I went to a place last night where I needed to show an id, but I forgot to have it on me. So if in the morning I was speaking to a friend(reporting on what happened), which one of the following would be correct: _I had heard that you needed an ID, but I didn't know if it was absolutely necessary_ _I had heard that you **need** an ID, but I didn't know if it was absolutely necessary._ _I heard that you need an ID, but I didn't know if it was absolutely necessary._ The first one seems correct to me, but I might be wrong. Ideas? And which one of the following should I say in the context above: **Reporting on what had happened** **Reporting on what has happened** **Reporting on what happened**


Can I use "when" + future tense in this case? > I'm not sure when it will be released.


Commas to separate a dependent clause or not?

I'm writing about a player playing a game and probabilities. I tried to cut down the sentence, so don't concentrate too much on the sense rather than the commas. Would you write my sentence like this > The player should accept if the probability that this is indeed the best > item is bigger than some other probability. or with commas like this > The player should accept if the probability **,** that this is indeed the > best item **,** is bigger than some other probability.


Is there an American English dialect that sounds as "distingushed" as British English?

Obviously there are a lot of subjective words in the question. There are dialects of British English that don't sound distinguished at all (Cockney). Also, what sounds distinguished is somewhat (though not entirely) subjective. However, I don't know how else to ask this. Sometimes I have heard an American speak and thought, "wow, he sounds just as distinguished as a British speaker". But I don't know where that dialect would come from. More often than not, though, I hear an American speak and think, "wow, why don't we sound as distinguished as our British counterparts?" For what it's worth, I think what makes a dialect sound distinguished is that it sounds "educated, upper class, articulate". At least that's my guess. Ignoring the subjectivity of the words composing the question, where would you find American dialects that sounded distinguished?


Task definition and its instances

I have a system which allows to set tasks for users. Each task has to be completed everyday and has a recurring due time. To keep the history of completions/failures, there is another entity: a task assignment for some specific date. To give an example, you have the "brush your teeth" task set to 10:00 every day. An "instance" of this task template is set every day. Which good, short, self-explanatory terms can be used to name these two types? "Task" and "Assignment"? "Task definition" and "Task"? I can't think of a good matching name for that :)


What is the difference in meaning between "proposal" and "proposition"?

These two words have similar meanings, however in certain contexts only one of the two can be used or is used most frequently (fits better idiomatically). Can you give examples of such contexts and if possible explain the difference?


What is the difference between "brain" and "mind"?

Could someone please explain the contextual difference of this two words? If I for instance say: > I am using my **brain** to decide in what direction to move. or > I am using my **mind** to decide in what direction to move. what would be the difference between this two phrases?


Meaning: "Any more" in context

I am not sure about the meaning of the "any more" in the following phrase and how can I spot it: **Would the things I've said and done matter any more?** 1) Would it matter any longer?   2) Would it matter more than before? Are there any rules to find it out?


Is rhyming of two words a transitive property?

Let's suppose A rhymes with B and B rhymes with C. Does A always rhyme with C?


Is 'smth' a correct abbreviation in American English?

How common is the usage of 'smth' in American English as an abbreviation of 'something'?


What, in this context, is wrong with using the progressive tense?

> In just a couple of years, low-carbohydrate diets have accomplished what the > government has failed to do in decades of trying: convince the public that > refined grains are bad and whole grains are good. Why is the imperative word "convince" used instead of the progressive tense word "convincing?" I ask this because it was an SAT question, and one of its options was to use a progressive tense form of "to convince." Hence, I have no idea why my answer was wrong.


What are proper nouns of people's names called?

Proper nouns include any named entities, often appearing in title case. These include places and other entities such as organisations and groups. What is the concept of a person's name called?


What is the origin of the "towards a new" used in the titles of some research articles?

Examples:   * "Towards a new agenda for transforming war economies"   * "Towards a new agenda for Japanese telecommunications"   * "Towards a new age in the treatment of multiple myeloma" As I mentioned in the comments, "It would be nice to know the initial use because it would give me some insight into the language and trends that either birthed the phrase or required its invention." I ask out of curiosity. As a sub-question, are there any papers or books that cover the history and evolution of academic terminology and writing?


What are verbs specific to living subjects called?

The set of verbs applicable to living organisms can also apply to other inanimate subjects like rain forests (e.g. `resembled`, `looked`) but I'd like to identify those verbs which are **strictly** applicable to living organisms. Perhaps this is a better representation: ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/nHjLX.png) While it's possible for a forest to speak figuratively, I only want to focus on the literal use of these verbs. I want to identify the organism verbs, including human verbs. Oh, and deceased subjects that were once living should also be considered as organisms.


Meaning of "thespian pin"

What does it mean that a boy gave his girlfriend even his _thespian pin_? > And they are so in love! He even gave her his **thespian pin** or something.


What is the more serious version of 'pet peeve'?

A "pet peeve" is something minor that annoys you. What is the term for a **major** annoyance?


"Sender" is to "receiver" as "distributor" is to what?

I'm looking for a word that means the party being distributed to by a distributor. I'm in the film industry. There are wholesalers _and_ distributors. Even though both roles could be called wholesaling, functionally, they are never talked about that way within the industry. The recipients of a distributed film are only referred to by category. For example, 'cinemas', 'retailers', 'churches'. I am looking for a hypernym to all those categories. Any suggestions would be great!


Why did the past tense ending -t change to -ed?

My posts are often questions for further knowledge about reasons for language change. In this extract from 1750, there are three variations on the past tense form. Once again, I am grateful if anyone can assist with explaining why or when contemporary use became standard practice. > It appeared that the Priſoner went to the Proſecutors Shop and cheapen’d > ſome Handkerchiefs, that he carry’d one to the Door to ſhew to a Woman who > was there, and asked her if ſhe liked it; and as ſoon as he was gone they > miſt the Handkerchiefs off the Compter.


Singular or plural verb after a series connected by "or"

The following sentence refers to an apocalyptic story where money no longer has any value: > A can of sardines, radio batteries, or a bicycle **is/are** more precious > than money. Should I use _is_ or _are_ after the series?


Is the word "annotation" suitable to describe "underline, highlight, strikethrough" made by reader/user? (labels in computer application)

I am not a native speaker so I would like to know what terms are suitable to describe   1. notes   2. highlight   3. underline   4. strike-through to the user, in computer applications where user can annotate text like PDF readers ( _notes_ appear as yellow boxes near words and show text when clicked, while 2,3,4 appear as text decorations). I feel that underlining, highlighting and striking are sort of acts of annotation too. I may be wrong. I see that most applications that enable the user to annotate text, like PDF readers, collectively name notes (like sticky yellow "adhesive" notes) and decorations (like underlining) as "annotations". Many tutorials or wiki entries about annotating a book use _annotations_ for both types of items. Maybe it is because many programmers are not native English speakers. Or maybe it is correct to call notes and decorations together _annotations_. I do not know, I am asking here. In other languages, in fact, words like _annotate_ encompass also underlining or drawing arrows, circles, writing marginalia and so on, in addition to _create and attach or link to notes_ , as a whole process that goes along study. Are 2,3,4 _annotations_? If yes, are they _annotations_ also when 1 is explicitly called _notes_? (important) If an app is able to manage 1,2,3,4, how would I describe 1 and 2,3,4 as two separate categories to the user (like _notes_ vs _annotations_ )? I feel it is also ugly to call 2,3,4 _text-decorations_.


"To predicate" + of or + as or + some other preposition

I'm interested in Definition 1.1 at Oxford Dictionaries which exemplifies "predicated of." Yet, would "predicate as" be equally correct? Google Ngram depicts a difference, but not Google Books (ostensibly):   * predicated of   * predicated as Or does "to predicate" admit some other preposition that can follow it?


To buttonhole someone

Can you help me find a synonym to this expression meaning to approach someone as if by grasping the person's garment to have his attention. Could it be used informally to describe boys' attitude to get girls' attention?


Is the word "queer" an accepted and polite word for lesbian?

I was reading an article on the promulgation of the dental dam as a means of preventing sexually transmitted disease. Article here. The author of the article Arielle Duhaime-Ross consistently refers to lesbian women as "queer women". Up until now, it had been my understanding that this term was a pejorative and insulting to homosexuals. That it implies their choice of lifestyle to be strange and aberrant. So, I was rather surprised to see this term being bandied about in a reasonably respectable online tech and lifestyle reporting website. Shows like "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy" notwithstanding, it just didn't strike me as proper in the format. Ms. Duhaime-Ross does not have a biography that I could find on her website. I couldn't discern if she, herself, is a lesbian and is using a preferred nomenclature. Or, if it is a term only used amongst "members of the club" similar to African American usage of the n-word. I decided to post it here, hoping to better understand the protocol about the term. My motivation is to be able to address people as they _wish_ to be addressed.


Which is the proper usage: a city name or its demonym?

Which is the correct usage? > Oh c'mon New York ... how difficult is it to stay in your traffic lane? or > Oh c'mon New Yorkers ... how difficult is it to stay in your traffic lane?


"If not for you" meaning

Today I have encountered a phrase: > If not for you, I would be poor. I would think it is like "if there were not you", is it like that? On the other hand, how would I say the following as the meaning would be different: > If not for you, whom do I cook the cake for?


"All roads lead to Rome"

We Italians sometime say "Tutte le strade portano a Roma", which is an idiomatic expression to say that there are many different ways to reach the same goal. In English, the expression can be translated "All roads lead to Rome". Among Anglophones, is that expression understandable and currently in use? Or, is it preferable to say New York or London, rather than Rome, to make that expression work ("All roads lead to New York", "All roads lead to London")?


Is there a word to describe an irrational demand?

For the longest time, I have been searching for a word to describe irrational demands. Any ideas?


A friend of Jane and Tom or A friend of Jane and Tom's?

We can say: She's a friend of mine. She's a friend of Tom's. She's a friend of my parents'. But today I saw this: She's a friend of Jane and Tom. Is it correct? Or should it be: She's a friend of Jane and Tom's?


Can Apple spell correctly?

There's an ad appearing in the paper lately (in Aus) for Apple's iphone and its siri-thing. The headline of the add says: "What's my day look like?" To me that doesn't look like proper english. I would say "What does my day look like" or "What is my day looking like" but not this hybrid between of the two. Am I correct or can Apple actually spell correctly?


Is the expression, “Romney will not to let Obama change the subject” grammatically right?

The article titled, ‘U.S. factors may spare Obama EU allies’ fate’ on Japan Time May 9 issue wraps up with quotes from Mitt Romney and his campaign spokeswoman, Amanda Henneberg; “'The real question is not just about how we'are doing today. It's about how we'll be doing tomorrow,' he (Romney) said. 'When we look back four years from now, or 10, 20 years from now, won’t we be better off if we have the courage to keep moving forward?' But _Romney will not to let Obama change the subject_. “President Obama would like for voters to believe he hasn’t been president for the last three years, “ said campaign spokesman Amanda Henneberg." I have a few qestions on the above ending lines:   1. Is ‘to’ necesasary in “Romney will not to let Obama change the subject”? In other word, is [will + to + do] combination grammatically right?? If it is a typo. I see typos too often in reputable publications these day as in the case of “He went on explain (Clucify metaphor)” in New Yorker magazine I posted a week ago. Is it still a ‘local’ problem?   2. Can spokesman be used for a female? I understand Romney’s campaign spokesperson, Amanda Henneberg is a female.   3. The last line, “President Obama would like for voters to believe he hasn’t been president for the last three years,” looks winding to me. Is Henneberg saying President Obama was only good for the first year in his term?


Is there a popular / informal way of expressing a need to use a toilet?

In (Canadian?) French, we have an expression, "j'ai envie" (litteraly: I want), which, when used without any subject, means that the speaker needs to use a toilet, either to urinate or defecate. It is somewhat informal; you would prefer saying "I need to use the washrooms" rather than that in a very formal context, but it would still be accepted. Is there any such expression in English? What is the most popular way to express one's need to use a toilet? I am specifically looking to translate the following: > Quand je mange des produits laitiers, ça me donne envie ( _When I eat dairy products, [I need to use the washroom])_


Phrase or word for animal freezing in response to danger

I'm looking for a technical (medical or biological) term for when an animal freezes in response to a perceived danger. This is a pretty well known phenomenon (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fight-or-flight_response), i.e. a deer freezing in the headlights of a car, but I'm having trouble determining if there's a more precise word/phrase.


What is the common root between "contumacious" and "contumelious"?

I'm interested in understanding the meanings of the 2 words : > contumacious - Wilfully obstinate; stubbornly disobedient and > contumelious - Arrogantly insolent in the context of their word roots. It seems that they have at least 1 root in common, so it would be nice to know the other 2 different roots, and their other usages in English words (if any).


When should I use the verb "work" over "working"?

What is the difference between: > I am working today and > I work today What is the right form?


why is it "one European institution", but "European Institutions" (with capital i) if talking about several authorities?

I found this spelling differentiation on the website of the EU commission and you can see it on wikipedia, too: "There are a range of European Institutions in Strasbourg (France), the oldest of which dates back to 1815." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_institutions_in_Strasbourg If someone could point out the grammatical base of this differentiation, I would appreciate that! Many thanks, Alexandra


Difference between "read", "scan", and "skim"

What is the exact difference between _read, scan,_ and _skim_? Is the difference related to the concentration on the text, or is there anything else? The answer is really important for me, since I often see these words in the texts I read.


Is it Web site or website?

Future Perfect's "Is it Web site or website?" states: > Since the World Wide Web is a proper noun, we use initial upper-case > letters, as we would with your surname, for example. > > As for writing ‘Web site’ as one word, it is true that this is seen a great > deal, but then, so is the spelling ‘recieve’ which is just plain wrong! I disagree. Languages change over time, and I think 'website' has now become the accepted spelling. A Google search for 'website' returns almost 3 billion results, including the official website of the British Monarchy. If 'website' is good enough for Her Majesty, it's good enough for me :-) What do you think?


When to use "essay" vs "assay" (as a verb)?

By the dictionary definition as a verb, I can see that _essay_ and _assay_ have the same meaning, i.e. "make an effort or attempt". I'm wondering if they are totally interchangeable, or is there a difference in degree associated with each?


sewer pipeline or sewerage pipeline

Would one say: The sewer pipelines are old and need to be replaced. or ... The sewerage pipelines are old need o be replaced additionally: The sewer infrastructure ... The sewerage infrastructure any help?


Difference between 'later' and 'later on'

Is there any difference between the usage of 'later' and 'later on'?   * I'll see you later.   * I'll finish it later on.


"A colleague from work" vs. "a colleague at work"

Which is correct? >   * The tag showed the familiar name of a colleague **from** work. >   * The tag showed the familiar name of a colleague **at** work. > The colleague is not necessarily working at the moment the tag is shown, much rather it's just a colleague from the workplace.


What is the best word to describe an "object of importance" without inquiring about its past? (i.e. not memento)

I'm looking for a word to describe a gift. The way I am using this word is to describe the item in way that a person who receives this gift would almost worship it because it means so much. The words that I do NOT think work in describing this object include: memento, souvenir, keepsake, memorial (things that make you think about the past) **I'm looking for a word that is SIMILAR to: treasure, idol, pearl (a word that gives significance to the object more it's meaning or origin)**


Is "has made it his business to" polite or impolite?

In this sentence: > He **has made it his business to** reintroduce the theory to a new > generation of activists.   1. Is " **has made it his business to** " an impolite expression?   2. Is it a radical expression?   3. Has it any implicit meaning that he reintroduces the theory, but he shouldn't do it? EDIT: These answers confused me, First sentence of Source article may help better understanding this expression in the context.


"Having influence" in perfect tense

I chatted on IRC and stumbled upon such a nice sentence: > On the opposite, Tom has been a good influence on my life since I met him. For me it means that _Tom_ is an _influence_ , instead of _Tom having influence_. So I'd rephrase that as: > On the opposite, Tom has had a good influence on my life since I met him. However then a native speaker said that the first sentence is more natural to him. Which one is correct here?


"New diagnosed" vs. "newly diagnosed"

Which one of the following is correct to use? >   * _New_ diagnosed cases. > >   * _Newly_ diagnosed cases. > >


Ukraine on Thursday disbanded an army unit that lost six armoured vehicles - an vs. the

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/ukraine-disbands-army-unit-fiasco-push- east-144943083.html > Ukraine on Thursday disbanded **an** army unit that lost six armoured > vehicles to pro-Russian militants, as Kiev's military reeled from a > disastrous attempt to oust separatists in its eastern regions. Why is it **an** instead of **the**? They are obviously talking about the unit that was captured by the protesters in Slavyansk a day or so ago. Of course, I understand that the authors know this but they still can speak about what happened in general terms - the unit which was captured was a unit that lost six mechanized vehicles. Okay, they are just getting rid of a unit that was ineffective. Again, what makes you use **an** instead of **the**? To me If it was **the** , it would pretty much convey more or less the same meaning.


What is a word for somebody who lies to themselves

I feel like the fact that people lie to themselves about things can tell you a lot about that person but I just can't put my finger on a single word that I'd use to describe them. In fact, not just describe them, but truly convey that they lie to themselves. > **Example of a person who lies to themself:** _"I will do all my work > tomorrow, I swear."_


The meaning of "...Identity between"

There is this sentence which I can't work out the meaning. "They have a unique identity between language and thought that means they cannot conceptualize a lie. This also means that deception, fiction and metaphors are completely alien to them." I can't understand the 1st sentence "They have... that". What is the meaning of Identity here and what is the effect of between prep and it's complement on the meaning of identity? Can somebody kindly explain to me what is the meaning of first sentence? Thanks. Alex.


What calls are you making?

Sorry, if this is a trivial question. But I feel really confused when I ask people, their answers are different to my answer. So I want to ascertain what exactly is answered to this question. For example: We have some kind of call (bank customer's call, mobile customer's call, Data base calls) which we have to make. When I ask a question to one guy > What calls you are making? Should the answer be _in number of call_ or _which call_?


Can we use the abbreviation "etc" without a period/full stop?

Throughout _Practical English Usage 3rd Edition_ (Swan, 2005), the author writes _etc_ in a manner I can't help but wonder if it's a typo. >   * Much/far/a lot **etc** more money >   * Many/far/a lot **etc** more opportunities > Throughout the book, he does not put a period (full stop) after "etc" and he never uses commas in combination with "etc". I'm taking notes by writing the book verbatim on to notebooks, and I've been finding other grammatical mistakes. It's a little disconcerting when trying to use the book as a reference source. I'm hoping you guys can help me figure out if this is just another. What punctuation should be used with this abbreviation?


usage of affirmative

what is the correct usage of word affirmative? What does it mean if someone says 'that is affirmative' when listening to a person explaining about a modification in a project.


Why is "pineapple" in English but "ananas" in all other languages? ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/0wtlv.jpg)


Conventions for parenthetical inclusion of articles

Somewhat related: "A/An" preceding a parenthetical statement When writing mathematics, one sometimes wants to write things like > x is not contained in (the closure of) the space Y. The typical interpretation of this is that the statement holds whether or not the parenthetical statement is read. In this case, x would be contained neither in the space Y nor in the closure of the space Y. One could also shift the parentheses: > x is not contained in the (closure of the) space Y. Is there any convention as to which is better writing? I suspect that the first is preferred. It has the advantage that reading the parenthetical phrase does not change the referencing of articles to nouns. Of course, this implies that if the articles were different the second construction would not be an option. The second construction seems quite a bit stranger, but I have seen both in writing and occasionally the second one really did seem better in context. Is there any strict convention on which should be used, or is it acceptable to choose based on stylistic concerns? Admittedly I don't know of any context outside of mathematics where one would write a phrase like the ones I have quoted. It may be that this is entirely inappropriate use of parentheses in standard English; if this is the case feel free to close the question.


About using said in dialogue

I want to know if there are any rules regarding using said before or after a name. For example, > "I am going to the bank," said John. or > "I am going to the bank," John said. Which is correct?


Eww! Has it crossed the pond yet?

I hear _eww_ (sometimes spelt as _ew_ ) fairly regularly on American sitcoms, usually uttered by a scatterbrained beautiful blonde girl when she sees or hears something disgusting. I don't recall it ever being said when I was a child living in London, in the 70s it was common to utter _yuck_ or _ugh_ , the word _gross_ was virtually unknown. Moreover, on my frequent visits to the UK I don't seem to hear _eww_ ever being used but I tend to mix with people closer to my age. The dictionary, Online Etymology offers no guidance, and Oxford Dictionaries limits itself by saying > ##  ew > > /ˈɪəuː/, /ˈiːuː/ > > **EXCLAMATION** > > INFORMAL   >  Used to express disgust or distaste: _ew, I’d hate to think what has been > trampled into that carpet_   >  _eww, how can you eat that?_ > > * * * > > **Origin** > > 1970s: imitative. Has _ew/eww_ crossed the Atlantic and become common parlance in old Blighty i.e. the UK? If it has, when did it more or less occur? And are the expressions _ugh_ and _yuck_ still popular with the young in both the US and the UK? If not, which exclamation of disgust is gaining territory? If anyone is still confused about which sound I'm referring to, click on the youtube link to hear a perfect example. The young _American_ child (who coincidently happens to be blonde) is called Georgie and she is tasting a variety of foods while blindfolded, the resulting _"eww!"_ is spontaneous and unaffected and happens at 56 seconds. EWW! THAT'S GROSS!


Had been vs was

Now this is confusing.. I wanna know the difference between the following sentences: -If you were there, I would see you. -If you had been there, I would have seen you. What's the difference between 'Was' and 'Had been'? And could we use 'Was' instead of 'Had been' in the 2nd sentence? Thanks in advance!


"driving across the state" or "driving across state"?

Is it "driving across state" like "driving across town", or "driving across THE state", like "driving across the country"?


If I believe that AAVE is a legitimate dialect of English, am I a linguistic prescriptivist or a descriptivist?

Or maybe there is a third categorization I should use, such as "linguistic inclusivist"? I believe that hypercorrections like "This is a secret between you and I" and "Whom is he?" are incorrect insofar as the speaker considers himself to be speaking in a formal, non-slang context. However, I do believe that African American Vernacular English is a culturally legitimate form of English, so I disagree with extreme prescriptivists who want to quash out the dialect. Does this make me a moderate prescriptivist? Or a hard descriptivist? Or something else?


What do we call the “rd” in “3ʳᵈ” and the “th” in “9ᵗʰ”?

Our numbers have a specific two-letter ~~onomatopoeia~~ combination that tells us how the number sounds. For example   * 9th   * 3rd   * 301st What do we call these special sounds? **\--EDIT--** As mentioned in the comments, _onomatopoeia_ is not the correct word to use here.


Is acquiesce used correctly in the following exchange?

> Joy wants some candy.   >  That can be acquiesced. I have two main questions here: 1) Am I correct in thinking that "That" represents a noun such as "the request", making the second sentence equivalent to "Joy's request can be acquiesced"? 2) Assuming the answer to 1) is yes, and the sentence is essentially "Joy's request can be acquiesced", is the sentence correct? I wouldn't think so, as the person is the one acquiescing, not the request.


Difference between "per" and "a"

What is the difference between the following two sentences? > She goes to the forest three times **per** week. > > She goes to the forest three times **a** week.