Should I follow English conventions, or write what sounds better?

How a sentence sounds when read aloud or in your head can often "sound" different for each individual doing so; however, I was reading details regarding the usage of _"data"_ and _"datum"_ and was intrigued by the alleged usage of it and how said usage flowed within a sentence/phrase. It is explained here that the word _data_ should not be used as, > ...the _data_ tells us... _**but rather,_** > ...the **_data tell_** us... Reading the first seems natural, I've heard it quite often; however, the second seems very hard to read or say - simply unnatural in my mouth. A similar situation is found with _Hoi Polloi_ where it is incorrect to say, > ...gone to meet with _the_ hoi polloi... _**but often corrected to,_** > ...gone to meet with hoi polloi... due to the redundancy of the term _"the"_ (where _Hoi Polloi_ meaning _"The Many"_ ). While my specific usage of these two situations may not be finely crafted, I believe the concept/question to be evident: Is it better to appease my audience by using a commonly used phrasing, or is it better to adhere to the _correct_ implementation of the words/phrases? Another consideration is my credibility. Will the readers perhaps discredit my writings due to the unfamiliar conventions utilized?


Use of 'rest in peace'

Can the expresssion _rest in peace_ be used in a humourous and friendly way to say, _stop worrying_?


Question regarding "does"/"do"

What rule of grammar does this sentence break? (I mean the "does" part of the following sentence) > What does the status indicators mean? Also, why does english.stackexchange.com have a code option for formatting... Maybe BASIC or Apple script qualifies as English.


Is it "front-end", "frontend", or "front end"?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  When to use a hyphen in writing a compound word **Which is correct?**   1. _front-end_ engineering   2. _frontend_ engineering   3. _front end_ engineering I looked over http://www.grammarbook.com/punctuation/hyphens.asp, referenced in this answer, and I'm still not sure which to use. **Rule 1** under _Hyphens Between Words_ says: > To check whether a compound noun is two words, one word, or hyphenated, you > may need to look it up in the dictionary. If you can't find the word in the > dictionary, treat the noun as separate words. "Frontend" is not found at reference.com. "Front-end" and "front end" are both found, which "front end" as two words representing the software term, so I think this must be right. However... **Rule 1** under _Hyphens With Prefixes_ says: > The current trend is to do away with unnecessary hyphens. Therefore, attach > most prefixes and suffixes onto root words without a hyphen. I think that "frontend" qualifies under this rule. Compare that with "backend" and it sounds to me that "front" and "back" are prefixes to "end". Also, the most common usage I've noticed is "frontend" as a single word when talking about software. Common usage has to count for something, right? _**What's considered the final say here?_**


Is a sentence "I knew that someone will want to take it" correct?

It sounds right to me, but is it correct? Thanks.


What are the origins of "Spelling Bee"?

I find it interesting that they decided to call a spelling competition a 'spelling bee'. How did the word 'bee' become known to also mean a competition?


The use of refer to: Active or Passive?

Are the uses of the phrase 'refer to' as follows correct?   * The methodology in this research referred to UNESCO.   * The methodology in this research was referred to UNESCO. I believe what the writer wants to say is 'the methodology used in this research is the same methodology that UNESCO uses.' Thanks so much.


What is the difference between oneday and someday

I thought that oneday is used for representing past tense and someday for future. but I saw oneday is used for representing future in the context yestreday. Can "oneday" represent future as in "Oneday, I will be a doctor."?


An idiom for "going with the most likely option"

What's an idiom for the action of going for the most likely / most appropriate option? I had been saying "placing my bets with ___ " but it turns out that doesn't exist :D Must have got it from "hedge your bets" which I don't think means the same thing - also, what does this mean?


Is there an expression that sums up "improperly conflating two ideas that are really separate issues"?

I'm intrigued by a local sign-holder who was improperly labeled "atheist" for carrying a sign that asserted that there was no after-life for a person's consciousness. The person expressed a belief in God, but not belief in the immortality of the soul. Is there a short, crisp way of saying: "You are incorrectly characterizing disparate ideas as monolithic"?


British Railway Stations - How do Brits read railway time tables?

This question is related to two others referring to "how to speak out loud 24-hour clock times". It has been asked how do English-speaking countries that officially use the 24-hour clock system refer to times greater than noon, like for instance 13:00hs (1 PM), when in fact, in the very same UK, such situations happen daily, at Post Offices and Railway Stations. So, since this situation actually happens daily in the UK, I was wondering how do Brits deal with it? Please bear in mind that there are many different possibilities, situations or cases of speech, that will not necessarily turn out in the same fashion. I will mention a few that come to my mind. **a) When telling someone that his train departs at 13:00.** I would guess: "Your train leaves at one." (it may be obvious that its one p.m.) **b) When quoting or going through a timetable for someone else (for any reason)** I would guess: "That train leaves at, let me see, fourteen, sixteen, twenty and twenty-two hours". **c) When the station speaker goes off announcing departure times.** I would guess: "The train departing at twenty-three twenty-two is delayed and will be departing at twenty-three thirty (hours?)". I think that there are two basic ways of treating the information or the time- table, as raw data, or in a processed form. When you process it, I think you are in position of adapting and telling it the way you would find best, but when you read it "raw", like in cases where you have to read out many different times, or a full timetable, I guess that there is no point in going through all the burden of "converting" every single time to a 12-hour clock time, even when in UK, which officially uses a 12-hour clock. I'm tempted to call to a UK Train Station to actually check on this, but maybe you can shed me some light into this matter? I think the same happens in US, with Railway Stations too and other public transportation systems as well?


passive afforestation

_Afforestation_ is defined as 'the conversion of open land into forest by planting trees.' What would be a synonym for _afforestation_ if there is no human intervention involved? Is there a one-word term for succession into forest?


The name of my toes

Ok.. I broke some toes in my foot and I want to tell a friend about it on Facebook. Now, here's the problem. Every foot has 5 toes. Only 3 toes have a name:   * big toe   * middle toe   * small toe What's the name of the others?


How to understand "It takes a little bit of getting used to the idea..."?

The following sentence is from a mathematical lecture note here: > It takes a little bit of getting used to the idea of a function that cannot > actually be evaluated at any specific point, but with some practice you will > find that it will not cause any significant conceptual difficulty. Is there anything wrong with this sentence? I guess it is supposed to be "It takes a little bit of **time for** getting used to the idea...". Any idea for understanding the sentence?


Pronunciation of Trapezoid?

How do you pronounce Trapezoid? Phonetic Alphabet answer preferred.


Is "regularly updated about a couple of dozen minutes" phrased correctly?

Am I saying this well? I just want to say: > regularly updated about ~2x-3x-4x 12 minutes. I have a script that updates a website between ~0-40 minutes time interval.   I just want to write it on the website at what time intervals it's regularly updated. I don't want to be exact, that's why I don't want to write ~0-40 minutes.


Combining future perfect tenses in a sentence

Which is correct to say? > On Valentines Day 2013 the iPhone will have been for sale exactly half as > long as the iPod has been for sale. or > On Valentines Day 2013 the iPhone will have been for sale exactly half as > long as the iPod will have been for sale. I initially wrote the first one as a tweet, but I reread it and thought it might imply that I'm comparing it to how long the iPod has been for sale from the present date. However, the phrasing of the first seems more natural to me. Was my change correct, incorrect, or are they interchangeable?


How did the Australian accent come about?

Can anybody tell me how the Australian accent came about? It seems strange to me that it is not more like an English accent taking into account that the first and the majority of settlers were English. Also, I am under the impression that those settlers were not really influenced linguistically by the native Aboriginal people much. Please correct me if I am wrong.


Word to describe person who popularized a sport

What is the word to describe a person who popularized a sport? The person does not need to be one of the original players nor even currently active. An example is Arnold Schwarzenegger popularizing competitive bodybuilding. There were many superstar bodybuilders before him, like Eugen Sandow, and he has been inactive for a decade. Arnold is, no doubt, the reason why many people started bodybuilding.


"Her mind was less difficult to develop" — Jane Austen

A line from Jane Austen's _Pride and Prejudice_ confuses me: > Mr. Bennet was so odd a mixture of quick parts, sarcastic humour, reserve, > and caprice, that the experience of three and twenty years had been > insufficient to make his wife understand his character. **Her mind was less > difficult to develop.** She was a woman of mean understanding, little > information, and uncertain temper. I'm aware that Mrs Bennet is less intelligent than her husband (this line is talking about her) — however surely if her mind was _less difficult_ to develop, then it would mean she was _more_ intelligent. Surely the _more_ difficult it is to develop a mind, the _stupider_ a person is? I feel as if I'm being stupid and missing something — but I really don't understand it.


Meaning of "mounting interest"

I'm not a native English speaker and I have trouble understanding this sentence from The Daily Telegraph. Does _mounting interest_ mean paying the interest and then the actual loan? > The burden of **mounting interest** and starting to repay loans can be a > daunting prospect once your degree is awarded.


"Effect of freezing on/of water"

Which preposition is correct? > This video shows the effect of freezing **on** water.   >  This video shows the effect of freezing **of** water.


Origin of "Why is a mouse when it spins?" riddle

> Question: "Why is a mouse when it spins?" > > Answer: "Because the higher the fewer." There are some great responses regarding the provenance of this seemingly- nonsensical riddle at this Guardian page (the steam engine story there seems plausible to me). Anyone knows when it was first recorded (probably in a variant different from the above) and what it was supposed to refer to? Edit: Searching a little on Google Books, the earliest reference I've found is a variant from a 1893 book: > When is a mouse if it spins? Because the higher it gets the fewer.


What is being in a state of being subdued called?

> In geology, subduction is the process that takes place at convergent > boundaries by which one tectonic plate moves under another tectonic plate... > (Wikipedia) Now I understand that quite literally, subduction is a process whereby one thing goes underneath another; and while figuratively an emotional state being subdued by another state or a more pressing need as enforced by the superego might be considered a careful use of literary license, I would like to know if there is a less grandiose word for this state. How can I describe the mind state of when one emotion is subdued, perhaps subverted, by another? In particular, this is in reference to the state where one wants to become aggressive, but ends up despondent because the vulnerability of aggression subverts its exercise.


What is the difference among ‘In you come’, ‘Come on in’, and ‘Do come in’?

> Bagman suddenly spotted Harry, got up quickly, and bounded forward. > > “Ah, here he is! Champion number four! **In you come** , Harry, **in you > come** … nothing to worry about, it's just the wand weighing ceremony, the > rest of the judges will be here in a moment –“ (p303, Harry Potter 4, US > edition) I’d like to know the meaning of ' **in you come** ' by comparing and contrasting it with two other expressions ' **come on in** ' and ' **do come in** '. These three expressions are vaguely mixed in my mind. I know they are emphasizing 'come in', but are they equal in every way? If there's any difference, when should they be used? I’d be happy if you could help me.


Is it correct to say "one out of *a* possible four"?

I am curious if it is correct to say "one out of _a_ possible four". This is what I found in a publication: > Discrete level (one out of a possible four), corresponding to a range of > safety integrity values, where safety integrity level 4 has the highest > level of safety integrity and safety integrity level 1 has the lowest.


Intuition - "transfix' = to pierce?

I brook the etymology for 'transfix' = 'to pierce', thanks to http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=transfix&allowed_in_frame=0. Yet how does this imply or induce the figurative meaning of "make motionless or helpless, as with amazement, terror, or grief"? My guess is that if someone is pierced, then she becomes wounded and bleeds, so she is 'motionless or helpless.' Yet this doesn't explain the 'wonder, or astonishment' in this definition ?


Which one is correct? "Explain me" or "Explain to me"?

Which of the following expressions is correct? > -Explain me.   >  -Explain _to_ me. I know "Explain _it_ to me" is correct, but I want to know which one of _the above_ is valid.


"Director at", "founder of". What is the correct usage of "at" and "of"?

I have a twitter account and I see some people having in their profiles mention: > Company Director **at** ABC and others > Company Director **of** ABC Also, I come across: > Founder **of** ABC and > Founder **at** ABC As English is not my mother tongue, my question is: what is the correct usage of _at_ and _of_ in the following examples? >   * Company Director ___ _ ABC >   * Founder ___ _ ABC >


Two contrasting definitions of "fiat"

Would someone please explain and elucidate these two meanings? Why do they diverge and mismatch? A decree sounds much more prescriptive and resolute than an _arbitrary_ order. >   1. A formal authorization or proposition; a decree:   >  1.1. An arbitrary order. > I've heard of 'fiat currency' and apprehend this, but in the main, how would I determine from the context which of these diverging definitions applies?


"At hand" vs "on hand" vs "in hand"

What's the difference between _at hand_ , _on hand_ and _in hand_? _At hand_ seems to me as if you have something in reach. _On hand_ is if you have something in stock. And _in hand_ can be used as if you have more time at your disposal.


Data of similar characteristics vs. Data with similar characteristics

I have the following sentence that I don't know which preposition is the correct one. > Diversification implies a trade-off between selecting data of relevance to > user intent and diversifying data with/of similar characteristics. A quick search on Google for "data with similar characteristics" returns 417,000 results while "data of similar characteristics" returns 265,000 results. However, I think "of" is the correct one in this case since it can emphasize the "similar characteristics" part.


Is the usage of "service" as a verb a recent phenomenon?

I am finding that people use the word "serviced" in place of other verbs such as _served, repaired, helped_ , etc. Has the use of the word service always been acceptable as a verb? Or is that a more recent phenomenon?


Where does the phrase "in good nick" come from?

The term "in good nick" meaning "in a good condition" came up in conversation and I realised I had no idea where it came from. Searching online seems surprisingly fruitless- there are several roots for _nick_ as it is used in different contexts but none of them to explain why it came to mean "condition." The closest thing I can see is "in the nick of time" where _nick_ derives from the same root as "notch" or "niche", but that doesn't seem to connect directly to a mark of quality or condition unless it comes from marking notches to measure time (which the "nick of time" seems to derive from) and means "in good condition for its age" which is an interesting conjecture with, so far as I can tell, no substantiating evidence. Does anyone have any clear origin for the term?


Word being modified by whose

I came across the following sentence:   "Kiran is Kishore's uncle, whose paternal grandfather has only two children."   I am not clear which person is 'whose' referring to - Kiran or Kishore and why?


Which degree should be used?

Which degree of 'less' is correct in the following sentence -   "Seats in this room are much _less/lesser_ in comparison to the adjacent one." Also please state any general rule of English if it is being applied here. Thanks.


Phrase for (confirm it before you send email or letter)

I have a person who regularly makes mistakes in spelling or the data he writes are wrong, so I want to tell someone that (Please check and confirm the data or spellings before you send email or letter). Is there any phrase for it?


Strong verbs, weak verbs, and other categories

For verb conjugations, I know that in English we have certain verbs which ~~umlaut~~ ablaut in their principle parts: > sing-sang-sung We have verbs that add an -ed to the end: > laugh-laughed and then there are verbs which just don't change at all: > cut, put etc. So which of these verbs are strong, or weak, or have a different category altogether?


Does "supposedly" have a negative connotation?

Put another way, would using "supposedly" in the following sentence upset a neutral tone? > A variant of qi gong is external qi gong, wherein a qi gong master > _supposedly_ directs the flow of qi through other people's bodies through > his or her own energies. In the example above, I am not sure if the word is necessary. This example is a part of a larger description of indigenous alternative medical practices. I would think that people reading this description would understand that the things stated are not intended to be read as fact.


Attribute of multiple entities

Which is the correct form of an attribute related to multiple entities? For example, which is the correct form of _position_? > The position of the circle and of the square is wrong. > > The positions of the circle and of the square are wrong. I could interpret it in the following ways:   * each shape has only one position, so use the singular   * each shape has only one position, but since we have multiple shapes use the plural   * multiple shapes of a collective entity (circle + square), use the plural **edit** : assuming the shapes don't share the same position.


Proper usage of the word "trouble"

Consider the following usage of the word _trouble_ : >   1. I have trouble. > >   2. I have a trouble. > >   3. I have troubles. > >   4. I have the trouble. > >   5. I have the troubles. > > Which is grammatical? And what is the preferred usage?


How to suggest contrary solution politely?

Theoretical case: client suggests some non-optimal solution. How to offer another, better solution politely with indirect question? Is it ok to say "Don't you think doing it this way would be more efficient?" or using "Don't you think" implies that client might be incompetent in a way that he might have forgotten to consider the solution I offer? P.S. I forgot to add - it's a written dialog, via Skype or email.


A word for advantages gained by sabotaging competitors

Is there a word to describe the competitive advantage gained from sabotaging a competitor, or more generally the advantage gained from dishonesty? **An example** : Your office receives pamphlets advertising an office cleaning service. Your current office cleaning service steals and hides that pamphlet before an employee at the office can see it. What words can one use to concisely describe the advantage that your current cleaning service has gained?


What's a more powerful phrase with the same basic meaning as "no adjustment"?

What is a powerful phrase to describe the failure of a person or organization to react to a large change in the environment? Three examples:   * Mapquest continued to use static pages even after the bandwidth and browsers were available to allow interactive mapping. This failure allowed Google maps to overtake Mapquest.   * Mr. Incredible continued performing hero-work in secret even when the world demanded that he stop, almost resulting in Buddy/Syndrome killing Mr. Incredible.   * The Human Genome Project failed to adopt the shotgun sequencing approach immediately when it was demonstrated to be superior. Instead, Celera genomics, a much smaller and less well-funded effort used shotgun sequencing and produced the first human genome. "No adjustment" is has the right basic meaning, but doesn't fully capture the severity of these examples.


A word for intentionally losing a bet?

Is there a word, or phrase, to express when someone makes a bet with the intent to lose? I’m looking for one of two things (or both). Either a verb to express the action of making such a bet, or a word that is defined by this specific type of bet. An example would be in Seinfeld: Elaine makes a bet with a guy, and if the guy “loses” he must buy her dinner (with the assumption being he made a bet knowing he would lose). I realize this is basically just a swindle, but I’m hoping there is something more specific.


What does Homer mean when he says, "her words had wings"?

In both _The Iliad_ and _The Odyssey_ , Homer uses the phrase "words had wings" all over the place. Here's one quote of many: > Then the shadow of the swift-footed son of Aeacus knew who I was, and with a > cry of grief, he spoke to me — **his words had wings** : "Resourceful > Odysseus, Laertes' son and Zeus' child, what a bold man you are!" (Emphasis mine.) I assume this is a Greek idiom, but I don't really get it. What does this phrase mean, and how did it come to mean that?


Common phrase for "intermediate goal"

What is the most common phrase with the meaning of _intermediate/interim goal/target/result_? For example,   * setting up interim goal in a project/agenda   * calculating a intermediate result in a bigger mathematical task Linguee shows more possible contexts I'm looking for, the german common words are _Zwischenziel_ (-target) and _Zwischenergebnis_ (-result)


Is there a version of brunch for a meal between dinner and lunch?

Brunch has become quite a common word in the English language. Is there a similar word for a meal in place of dinner and lunch? (A phrase will also do).


the difference in meaning between present simple passive and present perfect passive

Michael Swan in his "Practical English Usage" says that present passive forms can have similar meanings to present perfect passives. > The vegetables _are_ all _cut up_ \- what shall I do? = The vegetables _have > been_ cut up   >  I got caught in the rain and my suit' _s ruined_. = ... _has been ruined_   >  I think your ankle _is broken_. = ... _has been broken_   >  My suitcase _is packed_. = ... _has been packed_. He states that it happens due to that fact that some verbs refer to _actions that produce a finished result_ (to cut, to build, to pack, to close), while others do not (to push, to live, to speak, to hit, to carry). He goes on: the past participles of finished-result verbs, and some of their passive tenses, can have two meanings. They can _refer to the action_ , or they can _describe the result_ (rather like adjectives). > The theatre was closed by the police on the orders of the mayor. (refers to > the _action of closing_ ).   >  When I got there I found that the theatre was closed. (refers to the state > of being shut - the result of the action). I'm not sure I get the difference between the two groups of words mentioned above. Could anyone, please, go into more detail and explain it to me? I need more examples _to feel_ what it really means.


Having had someone DO or Having had someone TO DO?

I have read an older thread, presenting the following sentences: > Having advised many of your colleagues (yet **having had no one stand up** > for me when the shit hit the fan)... and > Having advised many of your colleagues (yet having **had no one to support** > me when I faced adversity)... I do not get that - why there is TO missing in the first sentence? I know there is 'have sb do'something, is this the case? But how is that different from the other one then? I assume the sentence mean "yet I had nobody who stood up for me" - which would iMHO require 'to'?


How to qualify a critic's comments which lead to improvements?

I would like to include a sentence in a response to a critical reader thanking him for his "fertile" comments, in the sense that they lead to improvements of the text he read. "Fertile" in a figurative sense would seem to me appropriate, however the dictionary entries for this word don't include a figurative meaning going that far (an investigation may be fertile, but not something that a comment or an idea it seems — and a google search seems to agree with that). What word would you use? 'Fruitful' does not sound appropriate either, because it is not the comment that actually "bears the fruit", but only the work initiated by these comments. I would like to avoid less focused qualificatives as 'intersting comments'.


To B or not 2 B

I am far from being a doctrinaire stickler opposing all neologisms; Twitter alerts one to the merit of abbreviations like "2" for "too", "4" for "for" etc. But many new usages fail to gain my assent. One of these is the abbreviation "to" for "too", as in: " _It is **to** bad she couldn't get to the party_". Can anyone trace the history of this usage? I have only noticed it quite recently. Is it a passing fad?


Can 'degenerate' be used with no derogatory meaning?

Degenerate is used to indicate a change of state ( physical or mental) which has generally worsened from its previous one. Could this term be used just to indicate a change that does not necessarily imply a negative change from the preceding one. _A degenerate tradition or custom_ are an instance of deterioration of tradition or custom or can they just be a change from a previous state?


the meaning of this 'knew'

> “Who was Miss Jennie?” > > “She was an angel straight out of Heaven,” breathed the man, fervently; “but > the old master and missus **knew** her as their oldest daughter. She was > twenty when she married and went away from here long years ago. Her babies > all died, I heard, except the last one; and that must be the one what’s > a-comin’.” It’s from the novel _Pollyanna_ by Eleanor Porter. The above ‘knew’ means the parents regarded the oldest daughter as a memory, not treadting her their real daughter because of the fact the daughter married to a poor minister? It seems a bit odd expression to use ‘knew’ in the context as above guess of mine, if I am correct. Is this a common English expression or an inventive meaning by Ms Porter?


what's the meaning when "be" is followed by an infinitive

* _"If two Weeping Angels_ **_were to look_** _at each other at the same time, they would be trapped in stone form until an outside force moves them apart."_ My questions are about the phrase _"were to look"_ :   1. What's the meaning?   2. What's the differences between it and just one word "look"   3. In which section of my grammar book I can find this kind of usage?


Antonym for "deficient"

What is an appropriate antonym for _deficient_? > The dissertation is deficient of sources. It should be a bit more decorated than the phrasing _The dissertation contains enough sources_.


Is it derogatory or offensive to call a detective a dick?

The word _dick_ is generally considered offensive and is marked so in dictionaries. But there is also a meaning of _detective_ that it carries. I usually find no derog indication for this meaning. Is it offensive to call a detective friend of mine a _dick_? **EDIT** (thanks to Kristina): I want to know if the usage of this word to refer to detectives is offensive in practice, though the dictionaries may opine otherwise. The question is general and not about how I could call my friend :)


Turning 'free of charge' into a noun phrase

I am helping a PhD student who makes constant reference to an Internet application he is studying by using a string of noun phrases, specifically > ...its ease of use, general applicability and _free of charge_ By _free of charge_ he obviously means it costs the user nothing, but it doesn't fit with the sentence grammar. My question is how do you turn _free of charge_ , which is adjectival, into a noun phrase? The _freedom of charge_ is just wrong, and though _free accessability_ works it also has another distracting meaning. Turning _free_ into a gerund doesn't help in this case either. In previous cases I've suggested to him a restucturing of the sentence grammar, but I'd be interested to hear some better suggestions.


Should a chapter title be punctuated with quotes in text?

If one is typing the name of the chapter inside a story, do they put quotes around it? If not, how is one indicated?


What's the meaning of "five past dreams" in the following lyrics: > **It's five past dreams** , I should be home asleep,   >  But I just want to keep this moment alive, it's just you and I,   >  ...   >  ...   >  **It's five past dreams** , the world is waking up, just like I should   >  Have done a long time ago, maybe I'm slow, I just didn't know,   >  That the saviour of my heart is right here


Is “repetitive pattern” a pleonasm that I should avoid?

The context: a warning to a user of a website that tells the user that patterns in an image should be avoided. One of the key characteristics of a pattern is that it _is_ repetitive. There is no such thing as a “non-repetitive pattern”. This makes it a pleonasm. Am I right about this? At the same time, I feel “repetitive pattern” sends a clearer message to the user than just “pattern”, _because_ it is a pleonasm. I was taught that I should avoid pleonasms. Is this a justified case to use a pleonasm?


Are all officially recognized Scrabble words English?

Looking at the official complete two-letter Scrabble word list, I cannot help but wonder whether they are even based on real English words. Are they? Note: I realize the answer to this question may start going into more of a Boardgames realm, so feel free to restrict your answer to a rigidly EL&U answer. I only need to know if the words are English, or if they are based on English. I am not asking here _how_ they were chosen.


How does one address a blended family in which the members have different surnames?

I am confused about how to address a family in which all the members have kept their original surname. What is the proper way to address such a family in a note to a family which consists of a single mother, her parents and children with 3 different surnames? For example, can one say, "Dear Smith family," even though that surname is not shared by the entire family? Are hyphenated names related to this or is that only the last name of children born to parents who both keep their surname? If blended families do use hyphenated names such as Smith-Martin, is it possible for a family when the collective members have more than 2 surnames, to use more hyphens (e.g., the Smith-Martin-Jones family)? I found this, which gives several options for writing an address from a blended family, but my question is about the interior of a card, not the mailing address, and the family is unknown to me except the names of the children.


"Skyscrapers are of various shapes" vs. "skyscrapers are various shapes"

>   * Skyscrapers are of various shapes. >   * Skyscrapers are various shapes. > Why do we use _of_ in the sentence above? Is there any difference in meaning between the two sentences?


Past continuous vs Past Perfect continuous

**When I was taking a Biology class in 2005, we were assigned to do an animal experiment.** So what is wrong with that sentence? I am using a free grammar checker website and it says the tense is wrong.


Question about tenses used in Seinfeld show: "what you were doing tomorrow night"

In the sentences > _"Did she even ask you what you **were** doing tomorrow night? If you > **were** busy?"_ occurring at about 0:42 - 0:43 in this clip, why was past tense used in "What you **were** doing tomorrow night", when he was speaking about the future?


Does the properness of 'Street' (in the name of a street) survive when discussing two particular streets together?

So do Smith St and Wesson St meet:   * "at the corner of Smith & Wesson Streets"; or   * "at the corner of Smith & Wesson streets"?


Is this proper use

I was watching the movie Man of Steel and in it is this passage: _"There's only one way this ends Cal; either you die, or I do."_ Now this sounds wrong to me. There's _two_ outcomes. _"There's only on way this ends Cal; one of us dies."_ This I've heard before and as the beginning of the sentence suggest, only has _one_ outcome. My question is, is it still proper to say the original passage?


Is "right hand of" means right hand of anybody else?

Idiom meaning of **"right hand of"** Example. Right hand of GOD.


"I had finished the work on friday" / "I have finished the work"

Every morning, I have to speak in English. Suppose that today is Monday. Do these two sentences convey the same meaning? > On Friday, I had finished the work. "Had" is used here because it is past perfect. > I have finished the work. I.e. the work has been finished without mentioning any timeline.


What is the name for a question which is answered implicitly by any given response?

e.g. Are you awake? (to somebody who appears to be asleep, but for which any given reply will confirm wakefulness)


Different between 'effect' and 'impact'

Someone asks me this question: 'How much work is it to fix issue? then I'm trying to determine potential **impact**.' My answer is that 'very little work should to be done to fix this issue. And there is no extra **effect** on the whole system.' Am I right to use the word 'effect' here or should I use other words to express myself more precisely?


Which is correct: "first ever loss" or "first loss ever"

Consider the following two phrases >   1. Microsoft reports first quarterly loss _ever_ >   2. Microsoft reports first _ever_ quarterly loss > Which of the them is correct?


A close synonym thesaurus

I'm looking for a thesaurus (for a programming project) that only offers close synonyms. For instance, I'm not really interested in: Phone (verb) -> Give a Jingle But I am interested in: Phone (verb) -> Call Any suggestions? Preferably I'd like something in an easily readable electronic form.


The use of "hey" in North America

Having had my formative years in New Zealand, I was born in South Africa. I vaguely recall when I was VERY young having someone tell me when I said "hey" that "hay is what horses eat". I got that then it was more when people would yell "hey" across a room to attract attention, and that was considered a bit rude for that purpose. However in my adult years in NZ and the UK, a casual nod and a "hey", or "hey, what's up?" was a perfectly acceptable greeting. Having recently moved to Canada, I greeted someone casually with that yesterday to be told again "that's what horses eat". I felt a bit rebuffed, but decided to ignore it until I could research it - ie, ask on here!. Is this just a North American thing? Or just possibly this individual's view? Same age and gender as me.


how to use "especially"? can we use "especially" after the special object we want to mention about?

Can we use _especially_ after the special object we want to mention? In the following, does _especially_ apply just to Australia? > First, the reading proves the significance of a mandatory voting system by > giving us some cases from several countries such as Greece, Luxembourg, > Thailand and Australia, especially.


'to'-infinitive without the verb

I seem to recall reading somewhere that using a _to_ -infinitive with the actual verb omitted (because it's clear from context) -- as in > He asked me to go, but I don't want to. (1) -- is fine in American but not in British English. Brits, or so the story went, append _do_ : > He asked me to go, but I don't want to do. (2) I know that the above is true about American English, my native dialect: we can use (1). My question concerns British English. Googling finds that the above (that (1) is wrong in British English) is not correct in such generality. For example, `"can't be arsed to if"` has fifteen- odd results, while `"can't be arsed to do if"` has but one, and it's not in the form of (2). So... Did I imagine the rule I stated above? Or is it restricted to particular sentences (or verbs or something)? Or is it correct as stated but outdated? Or what?


What is the "superlative" way of expressing "thank you"

On rare occasions, you are in a situation where a simple _Thank You_ seems like you're undermining the other person's help. You know, instances where you are too grateful to express your feelings of gratitude. When this happens face to face (or even over the phone) your body language/voice carry that feeling and the other person understands the full gravity of your expression. However, many a time, all you have is online/email interface for expression. And words are all you can use. So my question(s) is(are):   1. Is there a _superlative_ form of _Thank You_ which one can make use of in such cases?   2. Will you advice using the same during face-to-face(or voice)?   3. Which is the highest degree of gratitude you have seen/expressed?   4. Is there any chance that the other person might think you are exaggerating? (If you are wondering about the last question : see my comment (3rd one) below this SO answer. Its not that there are no good books/authoritative articles/sources on theory of Object Oriented Programming. I have read few, if not many, of them. And I _do_ feel strongly about the answer the user has given. But at the same time, I don't want to _overdo_ it)


Is "school" a collective noun?

> **Identify the collective noun in the sentence:** _"Students have to take > their entire school books home on the last day of school."_ I couldn't find any credible sources stating that "school" is a collective noun or otherwise (although The Free Dictionary seems to say so). So, in the given sentence, is "school" a collective noun? If not, what is? **EDIT:** The sentence is from my grammar book, and not something I invented. Bad book I guess.


What's the meaning of “Take me for my ride”?

> "It's all right with me," she announced, "so long as Goodbody's is hanging > the rap on me -- somebody I can sue for a million when it flops. I've got > nothing to say. **Take me for my ride**." It's a part of Dashiell Hammett's novel _The Assistant Murderer_. For the above case, the ride means to be in the car of police (to be arrested)? I'm not a native speaker of English, so this easy word is pretty difficult for me to translate. Please give me advice!


"cannot" vs. "must not"

It's pretty common, especially in video games' mission objectives, to state: > A person X must not die. Would this be rapidly different if constructed like this? > A person X cannot die.


Is it appropriate to add a postscript to an email?

Wikipedia says: > A postscript may be a sentence, a paragraph, or occasionally many paragraphs > added to, often hastily and incidentally, after the signature of a letter or > (sometimes) the main body of an essay or book. When all letters were handwritten, and adding a new thought to the letter would have likely involved rewriting the entire letter, a postscript had obvious practicality. Now, however, one can just as easily add the thought to the main text.


"Are" vs. "is" for proper nouns which sound plural (such as band names)

I was trying to explain to a friend that someone is no longer available on Spotify earlier today so I said the sentence: > The Avalanches are no longer available on Spotify. Immediately after saying that I realized it might be incorrect (English isn't my first language so this is a common occurrence) because if you take the name of the band out of the equation the sentence becomes of the form: > [Band name] are no longer available on Spotify. which shouldn't be using are but instead be using is. I asked around and some people responded saying it should always be _is_ which confused me even further. Is there any rule for referring to a proper noun as a plural or not in the case where the entity _sounds_ plural?


Correctness of omitting a definite article or a preposition

I am writing an essay about my university experiences and a suggested correction from an English Ph.D. sounds wrong to me. The suggestion is > In our meeting to discuss ~~the~~ spring semester of my junior year, my > adviser set forth a challenge. She made a similar correction later, > One graduate course had been sufficient to consume my time ~~in the~~ fall > semester. As a native English speaker, both of these corrections sound like grammatical errors to me, but I do not have the linguistic knowledge to articulate exactly what, if anything, makes them incorrect. (I spend much more time on math.se than english.se!) Are her suggestions correct?


phrases: "marry a guy and he'll provide"

Trying to find a similar phrase to this Chinese phrase:               嫁汉嫁汉，穿衣吃饭      which basically means if a woman marries a guy, then the guy will provide food and clothing. I can't think of anything off the top of my head, something like               marry a guy and he'll provide     marry for provision      are there any set phrases/idioms in English?


"that of which you" vs "that which you"

What is the differentiator between these two phrases?


Does one stand by or at the bar?

When you are in the pub, ordering a drink from a bartender, which of the following is the correct way to say it? >   1. When both of you're stand by the bar ordering a drink, and a bartender > asks to pay now or open a tab. >   2. When both of you're stand at the bar ordering a drink, and a bartender > asks to pay now or open a tab. >


What is the most eloquent way to transition into pointing out a major flaw in someone's thinking?

There is phrase that I really liked and was quite articulate, but I can't think of it. This is in response to a debate when analyzing one's position or paradigm. Other ways:   * crucial fallacy   * serious mistake   * flagrant error   * pivotal blunder   * grave misunderstanding   * critical misconception


Difference between 'crow's feet' and 'worry lines'

I came across the phrases 'crow's feet' and 'worry lines' several times. Please enlighten me about the origin of these two phrases and the difference between them.


BrEng: "pull your finger out", "cock up" and "stuff it" What do they mean?

In the British sitcom, The Thin Blue Line, Detective Grim makes three intelligently crafted sentences, which are given below. What do they mean? > It's my arse on the line, so you better pull your finger out > > It's my arse on the line, and I don't want a cock up > > It's my arse on the line, and if you stuff it, I will be red in the face


"In toto" versus "in total"

Are the phrases "in total" and "in toto" interchangeable, or is "in total" a corruption of "in toto"?


Difference between "had [verb] not to" and "hadn't [verb] to"

When we talk about things that we intended to do, but didn't or will not do in the future, we can use past perfect. I did a question in a reference book: >   1. I hadn't intended to become a doctor, I always wanted to become a > teacher. >   2. I had intended not to become a doctor, I always wanted to become a > teacher. > (1) is correct but it doesn't state whether (2) is correct, too. So I want to ask if there is any difference between these two sentences. And what will happen if I change the verb to _decide_?


What is a non-secular and possibly offensive version of "for heaven's sake"?

In Is there a secular, non vulgar alternative to "for heaven's sake"? Terdon asks for something that is polite, secular, and non-offensive. I am asking for what is a non-secular phrase that you can think of that also has known use. For instance my aunt says, "Jesus, Mary, and Joseph!!" Any religion goes as long as the phrase is discernible in English. You can mix in offensive words but really looking for the religious aspect. Bonus if the phrase could be used at work. To clarify vulgarity is OK but the religious aspect is key. (For the "closers" - this question would be the OPPOSITE of Terdon's)


Should I use "narrations" or "narratives"?

At work I keep seeing the term _narrations_ as opposed to _narratives_ and I'm trying to understand if this is common across the English speaking world or if this is just a term in the US.


Is "pal" too informal when the other person is much older than me?

I have an online friend (here on StackExchange) and I happen to know that he is significantly "more experienced", he's a professor while I'm a student, and his contribution here is larger than mine. Still, we surely consider each other friends, we treat each other equally, make jokes on each other etc. Is it ok to call such a person "pal" in the chat, like: > Thanks a lot, pal! Or is this word too impolite in this case? And would there be a good substitute for this situation?


Should I use the subjunctive mood in these sentence?

Last night, I was asked by a non-native speaker if this sentence is correct:   " _Would you mind if I sent you messages while you were away?_ " I replied "no". This is what I would say:   " _Do you mind if I send you messages while you are away?_ " She got discouraged and told me that she was practicing making sentences in the past subjunctive mood. To which I said (1) there are much more fundamental points of grammar you need to study, (2) I'll try to get to the bottom of this "past subjunctive" issue. As of now, this is how I would put the sentence in the **normal** subjunctive:   " _Would you mind if I were to send you messages while you are away?_ " But, I am not sure about this **normal** subjunctive. And, I've never even heard of **past** subjunctive. Are all of these sentences correct:   (1) _Would you mind if I sent you messages while you were away?_   (2) _Do you mind if I send you messages while you are away?_   (3) _Would you mind if I were to send you messages while you are away?_


Etymology of "duck"

Etymonline and wiktionary don't seem to agree on that one. Many European languages have cognates ( _Ente, anatra, eend_ ), but _duck_ seems isolated. Where does English take _duck_ from? **Edit**   As Henry has pointed out, the etymologies of etymonline and wiktionary are actually consistent. See comments.


“Next to” is to horizontal as what is to vertical?

The thing I like about _next to_ is that it does not specify whether it is to the left or to the right. However, for the vertical _next to_ , it appears one needs to specify whether it is “above” or “below”. I find quite interesting why this would be the case (cf. various other vertical versus horizontal biases: reading direction, attentional acuity, etc), but I also find it quite annoying. I would like to find a word that is the equivalent of _next to_ but which applies to the vertical case. That is, it indicates that a position is **either** above **or** below, without specifying which of those two applies. Sample Sentences, assuming the preposition is _abaqine_ : > "The sparrow abaqine that falcon is casting a shadow on that sand dune." > > "Look at those macaques, they're all climbing abaqine one another." > > "In my fridge all the good food is abaqine each other, so I can't get it > without toppling it all over."


Who coined the term "Holocaust" to refer to the Nazi "final solution" for the Jewish people?

Before World War II the word "holocaust" referred most often to a huge inferno. Who first used the term to describe the Nazi murder of 6 million Jews? When and where?


Referring to people from different parts of United Kingdom

I see four people in front of me. One is from Wales, one is from Scotland, one is from England and one is from Northern Ireland. I can say about each one "He is Scottish/Welsh/English". But, how do I say it about all of them? As far as I heard, Great Britain is the island, so I cannot say "They are British" because that would exclude the man from Northern Ireland. "They are United Kingdomers"... I doubt that it is correct. So, is there a word that could be used in such phrase and mean "They are from United Kingdom"? Additional question: is there a word that refers to someone from Northern Ireland? Northern Irish?


word for burrowing, but by a plant rather than an animal

I would like to describe how deeply a tree's roots go underground. Burrowing is a term used for animals. Is it appropriate to use it in describing the extent to which a certain tree can dig its roots into the ground? What would be the correct term?


Word for ability to understand, analyse and judge things

Is there one specific word in English to describe one's ability to understand, analyse and judge things? I'm trying to find an equivalence for 悟性 in English. Thanks.


Is "the way" synonym of "how"?

In constructions like the following ones, could _the way_ be replaced with _how_? Is there any difference between them? > I like the way she eats peaches. The way he looked at her... Can anybody provide examples of any phrase where replacing _the way_ with _how_ (or vice versa) changes the meaning of the sentence? To me, _the way_ sounds better, but when I use soulless Google to translate it to my native language, it tells me there is no difference.


"Let's play with each other" vs. "Let's play together"

Do > Let's play with each other and > Let's play together mean the same thing? Do they have different connotations? What's the difference?


Usage of "must have" in past tenses

So, I've checked Is "must" ever grammatical as a past tense verb? and Past tense of "must" when meaning logical probability and I'm also almost confident that I cannot say "must had to." How can I say that? For example, in these situations (I'm copying the examples from the wordreference forums, where they are still not answered): > But translating a story, which is already in the past tense, I came across > the following problem: What if a text is already in the past, and you > basically have to go one tense further back grammatically to express a > surmise/conjecture about events even further back in the past than the past > of the story. In other words, is there a past perfect form of "must have"? > > Here's the context to make it more clear: > >> […] He was walking down the street, mulling things in his head. Maria? Was it really possible that they would meet again here, in London? **It must had been** 10 years since they had last talked to each other […] The trouble I'm having is that this doesn't sound quite right to me, but neither does it sound good (to me) if I substitute "must have" for "must had." In the context, it doesn't seem "past-tensey" enough, if you catch my drift. So, would the above sentence be grammatical or not? A similar example is the following one: > […] The truth was, Frank was not that much taller than Maria; she must > somehow had made herself appear shorter […] Should it be "must somehow have made herself appear shorter"? Again, would that be "past-tensey" enough?


Why does ‘you’re on’ mean ‘I agree’?

One dictionary says ‘you’re on’ is used tell someone that you accept a bet or an invitation to compete against them. Then why does it use ‘you’ instead of ‘I’? What’s the ‘on’? In terms of the meaning, ‘I’m on’ is more understandable and easier to memorize, at least for me. Just for your information, I found the phrase in the following scene. > ”Yeah,” said Harry. “Yeah … we’ve helped each other out, haven’t we? We both > got here. Let’s just take it together.” > > For a moment, Cedric looked as though he couldn’t believe his ears; then his > face split in a grin. > > **”You’re on,”** he said. “Come here.” ( _Harry Potter 4_ [US Version]: > p.634) [Bold font is mine] **N.B.:** Harry and Cedric are competing for the cup a few feet away from them, but they are friends now because they were helping each other during the tournament. I have two questions on this phrase. **1\. Why does the phrase use ‘you’, not ‘I’?** **2\. What’s the meaning of ‘on’?**


What's the difference betwen perhaps and maybe?

I would like to know how to use them are theres alike? or just two differents words that can be used in the same way?


Use of "massively" in this specific sentence

Instead of using _massively_ in the following sentence, what else can I use? > I am **massively** running out of time now! I have tried "terribly", "horribly", "incredibly", "unbelievably", and "almost". The first words seem strange to me because this is the first time I have heard of them. The two later are fine since I heard native people use them before. But still, I would like to know your opinions over how they are correctly used both in writing and speaking cases.


Difference between ɒ and ɔ: in terms of sound?

Are they same, like, allophones? To me, they sound like same?


Term for people who cause accidents just to look like a hero

What's the term for people who cause accidents so that they can step in, save the day and look like a hero?


Vernacular vs Lingua Franca

I'm curious about the concept of vernacular vs lingua franca. Historically there is a negative connotation to the word 'vernacular,' where it was used to refer to an inferior language (of the slaves) and hence subservient to a higher, more common language. Whether this connotation remains today, I don't know. But could you illustrate with examples from other countries? Can German, which is the mother tongue in Germany, be a vernacular in other nations? And for a tongue to be a lingua franca, must it necessarily be an outside language that's gained currency? Lots of points, but I'd appreciate any inputs/debate on this.


"Elaborate" as a transitive verb?

It is common to speak of "elaborating on (or upon) a topic." However, I have been told that this is appropriate only when some explanation has already been given; if no information is yet known, then the proper usage would be "elaborating the topic." Is it true or false? For example, if the president issued a statement, and I wanted to explain why he did so, I might say, "I would like to elaborate the motive behind the president's statement." It wouldn't be correct to say "elaborate _on_ the motive," since nothing is yet known about the motive.


Why are "batsmen" becoming "batters"?

Flapping my ears near other people's conversations, as I am wont to do, I have noticed that the people we used to call _batsmen_ have (it would seem) turned into _batters_. Does anyone know why this should be?


Which is the correct construct?

Which one of the following is correct/better? As usual, I am more interested in **the really good construct** than just a comparison.   1. The power of a programming language lies in abilities of the programmer using it **in** how effectively he is able to break down the program and glue the solutions together.   2. The power of a programming language lies in abilities of the programmer using it, how effectively he is able to break down the program and glue the solutions together.


How do you use "timbre of the times" and what does it mean? I read: **Given the timbre of the times, I wouldn't have done it.** Thanks.


Chicks - Girls, Cats - Boys?

The 1950's song Fever (covered, among others, by Elvis Presley) contains the following lines: > Now you've listened to my story   >  Here's the point that I have made   >  **Cats were born to give chicks fever**   >  Be it Fahrenheit or Centigrade   >  They give you fever when you kiss them   >  Fever if you live and learn   >  Fever till you sizzle   >  What a lovely way to burn How normal is it nowadays to refer to guys as _cats_ , and where does it come from?


Origin and meaning of "along the lines of"

Where does the phrase _along the lines of_ come from, and what are you really saying? For instance, if you were commissioning a sculpture you might sit down with the artist and a pen and paper and say > I want something along the lines of this and then draw a sketch. Or if you were describing a book you wanted you might say > The plot was something along the lines of a murder and a police man.


Is there a word that means "a way of thought"? For example, whether someone is interested or not, it is simply how he thinks. Whether someone is confident or not, it is simply how he thinks. So "interest" and "confidence" are simply "ways of thinking". I was thinking of the word "mental", however "mental" means "relating to the mind" which is too broad. For example, "tiredness" would be "relating to the mind", but it isn't a "way of thought". What's another word to mean "a way of thought"?


1. Is it right to ask "how are you all doing?"?   2. Should I reply to a "How do you do?" with an "Am good" or should I say "How do you do" myself in return?


Unusual meaning of "head over heels"

I was reading Florence Lamborn's translation, from Swedish, of Astrid Lindgren's _Pippi Longstocking_ (the translation appears to date from 1950). I read the following sentence: > ... Just at that moment the gate of one of the cottages nearby opened and a > boy came rushing out. He looked scared, and that was no wonder, because > **head over heels** after him came five other boys. ... (emphasis mine) I had never seen the phrase "head over heels" to mean, as it seems to from this context, "immediately after." I looked it up and found, in my Shorter Oxford, and on dictionary.com, only the meanings I already knew (topsy-turvy and intensely infatuated). On Wiktionary I did find this second definition, which does seem to fit the sentence: > At top speed; frantically This question and this question both discuss "head over heels" but not with this meaning. Is it commonly recognized, today? And is it more British English? (I do not know, but assume that the translator of this edition was British, based on other expressions in the book).


How can I politely tell a customer that we only provide e-mail support?

I'm running an online e-commerce site but use only e-mails for customer service to cut the expense. When a customer asks me by e-mail if he/she can call me for some questions, how can I politely tell her/him to use only e-mail for enquiries? Is it O.K. to say " _Sorry we accept only e-mail support and don't have phone number_ " or something?


What exactly is meant by "This is not to say it's not a bad system"?

Someone on a forum wrote > This is not to say it's not a bad system. With some context, > This is not a component system. This is not to say it's not a bad system, > but in this case you should be able to cast the pointer to any of the > interfaces (or just cast it to a Gun object and it should contain the > interfaces) and then use it as appropriate. If the statement is read literally, the two _not_ s negate each other forming > This is to say it's a bad system. What I'm wondering however is: did this person actually mean > This is not to say that it's a bad system or does it look like it should be interpreted literally?


Can "Sure thing" mean "You're welcome"?

I'm looking for different ways to say "you're welcome." Is "sure thing" one of those ways? If it is, then how? I looked up its meaning and it doesn't seem to make sense as a replacement for "you're welcome."


Face up or head up?

My 7 years old daughter is doing her English homework. She wrote the following sentence: "My parents are face up looking at the cool sky" I reckon it does not sound right. I would have said "My parents are turning their heads up and looking at the cool sky" But not being a native English speaker myself, I am not confident of my suggestion. Is there any better alternative?


What is the meaning of “If you can't sleep, don't count sheep. Talk to the shepherd.”?

http://hubpages.com/hub/How-many-Days-can-a-Man-stand-without-Sleep: > “If you can't sleep, don't count sheep. Talk to the shepherd.”


a person with a fossilized mind

How to describe a person who have a fossilized mind? whatever he hears he will not (get it into one's head)


How much mmmm should be in hmmmmmmm

This is my first question here. I am not a fluent English speaker. I just know the basics. My question is how many _m_ 's should be there in "hmm" as when I try typing it anywhere, it suggests "hmmm," even on SO sites, including this one. Is there is any reason for this ?


What does "OP" stand for?

I see the abbreviation everywhere at stackoverflow.com to represent the user who asked the question. I'd like to know the complete form of `OP`.


The ( changed ) meaning or classification of words in programming

I am facing a bit of a dilemma / problem. I am an amateur programmer ( profile ) , and in programming languages some terms are accepted, known to everyone and frequently used everywhere. My confusion is that when I am passing my code in a spell checker, some terms are marked as wrong and / or need corrections. Some examples: `accepted term` = the suggested / correct (alternative)   * `plugin` = plug-in ( plug in )    * `uploader` = up-loader ( up loader )    * `textarea` = text-area ( text area )    * `checkbox` = check-box ( check box )    * `submenu` = sub-menu ( sub menu )    * `metatag` = meta-tag ( meta tag )    * `screenshot` = screen-shot ( screen shot ) Now for those of you that have ever experienced basic programming, those terms would be very familiar, but how should I treat those terms when releasing my software ? (Even while writing here, My firefox browser marks all those terms as spell errors. Better yet, the name "`firefox`" itself is marked as an error :-) ) I must stress that I am not a native speaker and English is not my mother tongue (it is a mere 1 out of 8), But I would still like to know what is the correct way to handle those situations. I do suspect that some of these terms (like `checkbox` or `plugin`) have become an adjective by themselves and are no longer exclusively used as a noun or as descriptive term for an action.


Should words be capitalized because they're loanwords?

In the English language Wikipedia article on noh theatre, "Noh" is frequently capitalized even when it's in the middle of a sentence. The only reason I could see someone doing that deliberately is because it's a loanword from Japanese. (The other possibility is that some of the authors are writing in English as a second language, but I doubt that's the explanation) Assuming that italics are available, should words be capitalized because they're loanwords?


Is there any other word meaning "prick" with initial onsets "pr-" except prick?

This is my edited question: I look up in the etymological dictionay about **prick** , and find that prick is not a word derived from **Proto-indo-european etymon**. Meanwhile, I find a lot of words meaning " **prick, stick, pierce, spear, rod, etc.** ", words starting with " ** _br-_** " > such as **_brad, bristle, brittle_** words starting with " ** _st-_** " > such as **_stick, stake, stipe_** and find **_pierce_** , which contains p and r, but etymologically it is composed with *** _per1_** "forward, through" + *** _(s)teu-1_** "To push, stick, knock, beat". So, I start to wonder whether there is or no words derived from PIE, which starts with "pr-" and has the similar meaning to prick, such as " **prick, stick, pierce, spear, rod,etc.** ".


What does the word "Hakim" sound and feel like?

I really enjoy the connotations of words, particularly now because I'm looking for a name for something. I'd like to know what this word ( **hakim** ) sounds like to native English speakers. **Obs:** If there's a foreigner and in your country this word is used and makes sense in a different context or it's pejorative, please let me know the points below.   * Is it good?    * Is it an easy to recognize word?   * Is it commonly used?   * In which context is this word used?   * What do you first remember when see **_hakim_** in a text, phrase, etc?


Why is he saying ”This is us” when it means “This is ours”?

I found two examples of this kind in _Harry Potter_ so far and in both cases, the speaker is Mr. Weasley and the listener is Harry. Does it add some nuance? Is it his habit of saying?   1. (In a lift of the Ministry of Magic building. They reach their story.) > ” **This is us** , Harry,” said Mr. Weasley, and they followed the witch out > of the lift into a corridor lined with doors. “My office is on the other > side of the floor.” ( _Harry Potter 5_ [US Version]: p.130-131) [Bold font > is mine]   2. (They are looking for the camp site they booked in advance.) > ”Always the same,” said Mr. Weasley, smiling. “We can’t resist showing off > when we get together. Ah, here we are, look, **this is us.** ” They had > reached the very edge of the wood at the top of the field, ( _Harry Potter > 4_ [US Version]: p.79) [Bold font is mine]


Proper use of the word "lousy"?

Is the sentence below correct? > The place is lousy with hippies I looked it up on merriam-webster.com but they said that lousy was: > infested with lice Close, but not quite there...


Meaning of Goethe quote

While watching the latest episode of 'Poirot' series, I came across this Goethe quote in the beginning of the episode. > Beginnings are always delightful; the threshold is the place to pause. What is its meaning?


Why are animal names used as vulgar slang for body parts?

Asking this question in strict propriety out of genuine curiosity, why is that in (American) English animal-related names are used for vulgar names for the private body parts? In fact, all of the examples I can think of, at least one vulgar term for each body seems to come from an animal. I am sure there are exceptions but even then, why are they so common? What is this fascination with having animal names as "dirty" words, i.e.   1. Cock - A rooster   2. Pussy - A cat   3. Tits - A small bird   4. Ass - A donkey - okay I see this so this can be taken out. Is this only in America or does it happen in other parts of the English- speaking world as well?


Verb for 'retrieval of wealth'

I remember finding this word in P. Spufford's _Power and Profit_ , and now can't read it without once again fruitlessly checking reverse dictionaries. It was used to describe a mass revival of investment after a downturn, and was either in the context of, or specifically referred to, removal of money stored in chests. I doubt it was divest or another common word; it could well have been a compound of re-, dis- or de-.


What is the difference between 'sometime' and 'sometimes'?

I wrote an erroneous sentence recently. My teacher corrected it. Here is the sentence. Thus, the driver experiences a poor vision while driving, or sometime a faulty vision due to reflection of water droplets.


What is a "commodity" when referred to as an adjective to describe a particular object?

When people describe any object (such as a career, or for instance, a computer cluster, etc) and they describe it as "commodity", what is it supposed to mean? According to Wikipedia, a commodity is basically something that fills in a need or a want, but if that's true, then isn't _everything_ a commodity? Basically, what kind of connotation does the word have in everyday usage?


Is British English considered a foreign language to American English?

Is British English considered a foreign language for someone whose native language is American English? I need to know this for technical purposes.


What adjective would best describe adjectives that are related to feelings?

Joyful, happy, angry, hilarious, lovable, annoying, poignant, melancholic, depressing, cheerful, hateful, etc. All these ones are adjectives. Some of them can be applied to those objects who experience those feelings that these adjectives imply. Some of them can be applied to those objects that only cause those feelings in others. However, they are all related to feelings whether those are physical feelings (those that one's body can feel, like pain) or "soulish" feelings (those that are felt in one's soul, like liking or sympathy). So, the question is how to name all these adjectives? Is there any term for such ones? (A term consisting of only one adjective is preferable).


Is "princessship" a word? any other words where same letter comes 3 times consecutively?

One of my friends argues that _princessship_ is the only word which has 3 identical letter together ("s") ,but I think there is no word such as _princessship_. Can anyone tell me whether this is a real word, and if there are any English words which have 3 letters that are the same consecutively?


Is there an English idiom equivalent to "coup de main"

I am looking for a translation of the French **military** term _coup de main_. (Not the common French civilian usage which translates as _helping hand_.) The term occurs frequently in the correspondence between Napoleon and his subordinate commanders, as something one should always look out for both on offense and defense. (See **Saski** : _Campagne de 1809 en Allemagne et en Autriche_ , for examples.) In context it refers to a quick victory or acquisition, inevitably by surprise, often bloodless or nearly so, and commonly _on the run_ (meaning by simply not stopping or holding when expected to do so). It seems to capture imagery from all of the English terms, but I am looking for a better single English term that comes closer than any of these:   * _Flick of the wrist_ (emphasising the quickness and adroitness);   * _Stealing a march_ (emphasizing the unexpectedness and surprise); and   * _snatch and run_ or _grab and run_ (misses on the _and run_ part). Any thoughts?


Euphemisms or synonyms for plagiarism

Any funny euphemisms or synonyms for plagiarism?


Meaning of "Butter is Gold in the Morning, Silver at Noon, and Lead at Night."

In his book _A Complete Collection of Scottish Proverbs: Explain'd and Made Intelligible to the English_ (1721), James Kelly offers this interesting saying (page 74, #138): "Butter is Gold in the Morning, Silver at Noon, and Lead at Night." Kelly then comments: "A common Saying, of whose Truth or Reason I know nothing." What is the literal sense of this adage? Does it refer to color changes in different light, to phase changes at different temperatures, to effects on the body at different stages of digestion, to monetary value at different times, or to something else? And what is its most likely figurative meaning? Thanks!


Origin of the word Waddy and how it came to mean "unappealing, unattractive."

From the first decade of the 20th century and up till the 1940s, the word _waddy_ was a popular word meaning unappealing and unattractive. Can anyone help me better understand this word and it's origin? The only reference I could find for _waddy_ on the internet I've copied below: http://hubpages.com/hub/College-Slang-From-the-1900s-That-Still-Sounds-Fresh


Is this sentence correct both grammatically and meaningwise? - "He has started feeling the heat of the chill"

> He has started feeling the heat of the chill. Is the above sentence correct grammatically and does it make some sense? We know that the word "heat" can be used in the following ways - "..... in the heat of the moment" or "... feeling the heat". So is such a sentence, trying to emphasize the cold weather, correct?


Names for different age group

What are the age group names for each increment of a decade,starting from 0 and up? i.e. Octogenarian or teenager ?? Thanks


'Marked by' vs 'having' in dictionary definitions

I've read definitions that differ from each other only by the words _marked by_ and _having_. E.g. 'Marked by a calm demeanor' and 'having a calm demeanor'. I see this often enough that I suspect lexicographers distinguish between the two phrases. For dictionary definitions, how do the denotations of _marked by_ and _having_ differ from each other?


Is "kip" Chinese in origin?

While looking up the history of kip for a previous question of mine, I realized that the information about its origins is rather scant. The noun and verb _to kip_ in BrEng is often said when a person wishes to take a _short sleep_ or a **_quick nap_** , it's a colloquial expression and sounds very post-war Britain to my ears. Surprisingly, Etymonline completely ignores the word, listing only _kipper_. Wiktionary on the other hand comes to the rescue: > **1760–70** , probably related to Danish _kippe_ (“dive, hovel, cheap inn”) > and Middle Low German _kiffe_ (“hovel”). From the same distant Germanic root > as _cove_. > > Noun **kip** (plural kips)   >  (informal, chiefly UK) _A place to sleep; a rooming house; a bed_.   >  (informal, chiefly UK) _Sleep, snooze, nap, forty winks, doze_. "I’m just > going for my afternoon kip." (informal, chiefly UK) _A very untidy house or > room_. (informal, chiefly UK, dated) _A brothel_. But thanks to a comment made by a respected user it seems the connection between _kippe_ and _kip_ is quite strained. (If he gives me his permission, I will link and post his pertinent observation.) EDIT Janus Bahs Jacquet has! > ... but kippe (as a noun) is beyond vanishingly rare in Danish. It’s a > marginally common verb, meaning ‘tilt’ or ‘lop’ (or ‘dip’ as in ‘dipping the > flag’), but according to the dictionary, the noun and the verb are > unrelated. The noun is allegedly the same as kipe ‘basket for carrying > grain’. Supposedly, the shift from ‘basket’ to ‘hovel’ was helped along by > Middle Low German kiffe ‘hut’, whence it was used in compounds to refer > specifically to a real dive or a brothel, which is when English presumably > borrowed (?) it. Quite a shaky etymology overall, I’d say So on my trek to find the truth, I came across the _Chinese-English Dictionary of the vernacular or spoken language of Amoy_ by Carstairs Douglas, printed in 1873, London. The language Amoy or otherwise known as Xiamenese, Xiamen or Hokkien dialect, I believe gives some insight as to how _kip_ was loaned to the British English language to mean a short sleep or nap. It says > **Kip** [R. hasty; urgent; in extremity].   >  **tioh-kip** , in very great haste; not willing to wait a moment, as in > some very urgent matter.   >  **kip-kip** , very swift, like the demon of thunder [...] said also > figuratively of anything to be done in great haste.   >  **kip-sio** , a small thin flat-bottomed earthen kettle for warming things > quickly. Could it be that Dutch sailors adopted this expression? I am blissfully unaware of Danish maritime history but I seem to remember reading somewhere that the Dutch traded with the Chinese, was it the 13th century or later? This in turn reminds me of the Italian explorer Marco Polo and his tales in China in _The Travels of Marco Polo_ or, in Italian _Il Milione_ ("The Million"). But in Italian the letter _K_ is a foreign letter and I can think of no Italian words beginning with ch = /k/ which are remotely related to the meaning of haste, urgency or velocity. Could **_kip_** therefore be a _Chinese_ loanword in the Danish or English language?


As well as + verb-ing

I am a bit unsure about putting a verb in the "ing" form when it follows "as well as". Can somebody please explain which one (A or B) is grammatically correct and which one sounds more natural? > A. He documented a number of processes and workflows as well as **liaising** > between the development team and its internal clients. > > B. He documented a number of processes and workflows as well as **liaised** > between the development team and its internal clients.


Difference between "field of inquiry" and "field of endeavor"

These two kinds of phrase frequently pop out in the topics of GRE analytical writing. Is there any substantial difference in meaning? EDIT: I know the difference between the word "endeavor" and "inquiry", but can the "field of endeavor" and "field of inquiry" be used interchangably to some extent? For example, can the former include scientific research?


Which of the following works best on a business card?

I am Minh Tran Nhat Nguyen. I later picked "Michael" as my English name when I first came to the U.S. Not everyone knows my English name (especially Americans) so I'm thinking about putting one of the following on my business card:   1. Minh Tran Nhat "Michael" Nguyen ->it seems like the standard form, as used on Wikipedia, but this looks too long.   2. Minh T. "Michael" Nguyen -> is this acceptable?   3. Minh T. Nguyen (Michael) -> how about this? Normally, people put nicknames in quotation marks (like "Mike", "Andy", "Dragon Slayer" etc.), so in my case, is Michael (a full name) in quotation marks acceptable?


Is "he plays the piano" stative or dynamic?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stative_verbs: > The same verb may act as stative or dynamic. An English phrase like "he > plays the piano" may be either stative or dynamic, according to context. Could someone elaborate, exactly according to what context can "he plays the piano" be stative, and according to what context can "he plays the piano" be dynamic ?


What would you call a person who farts a lot?

I came across one word that is "gas-bag." Are there any other specific (not slang) words?


What does "Essential Travels" mean?

I live in Israel, and at the 12th of August I need to travel to some place in Russia. My travel goes through Turkey, as the place I am traveling to costs more and takes longer if I travel through Moscow. Now Israel is at war, and Turkey goes against Israel and the news says: > Please avoid non-essential traveling to Turkey What does that mean? Real message translation: > Warning: Avoid non-essential travel to Turkey > > The face of violent protests in Turkey against Israeli Foreign Ministry > called avoid unnecessary visits and take precautions. Diplomats were > evacuated close


Meaning of "poured it on and poured it out"

In this part of the song "2 Out Of 3 Ain't Bad " by Jim Steinman, I cannot understand the phrase "poured it on and poured it out": > ...   >  And maybe you can cry all night   >  But that'll never change the way that I feel   >  The snow is really piling up outside   >  I wish you wouldn't make me leave here > > _**I poured it on and I poured it out_**   >  I tried to show you just how much I care   >  I'm tired of words and I'm too hoarse to shout   >  But you've been cold to me so long   >  I'm crying icicles instead of tears   >  And all I can do is keep on telling you   >  ...


A term for a "clean" win

I'm looking for a sports-related term in English, that means that one side had won without the other side having scored a single point, e.g. 1:0 or 5:0. Is it "a clean win", or does a clean win mean anything with a large gap between the winner and the loser?


Meaning of "two out of three ain't bad"

In this song's lyrics, I cannot understand the phrase "two out of three ain't bad" : > ...   >  I want you, I need you   >  But there ain't no way I'm ever gonna love you   >  Now don't be sad   >  'Cause **_two out of three ain't bad_**.   >  ...


Should a pan of brownies really be called "brownies" if uncut and in one piece?

I have never heard anyone call a pan of brownies anything other than a "pan of brownies". Thinking about this, I realized that there is nothing plural about a pan of brownies. Is it just that everyone assumes it will be cut and refers to it as such?


Difference between "commit suicide" and "suicide"

One of the examples in my English composition book (for learning to write my language's sentences in English) was "Why he committed suicide under such a good circumstance is an unsolved question.", but what I would have written would have been "Why he suicided...". What's the difference between "commit suicide" and "suicide"? (I think I saw 'commit suicide' more than just 'suicide', and the spell checker of Google Chrome says that 'suicided' is not a word, even though I think it isn't wrong.)


Rephrasing a sentence

I am trying to rephrase a sentence : > I believe that life is like a “signed, blank check” and therefore, the > beneficiary should make the decisions that revolve around his/her self- > satisfaction and happiness otherwise; it would lead to a “bounced check”. What I mean from the above statement is one should work in the area that keeps him happy and satisfied. I am not having a good feeling about the above statement but I kind of like the idea. Do you think it is too vague or am I trying to forcefully put across an idea?


When to use override and overwrite

My intention is to use on the following sentence: The administrator has the right to **___ ___** the user time slot for the venue A inside the online system. So, which word would be suitable: override or overwrite or are there more suitable words?


Why a dash in this example?

I am reading an article by Bill Keller ( _The Times_ ). He wrote: > Through the years, The New York Times’s coverage of the Roman Catholic > Church and the Vatican has received sharp criticism from practicing > Catholics — including the past eight years that Bill Keller has been the > paper’s executive editor. Why has he used a hyphen (-)?


What is the verb for removing spaces from a sentence? Is it _de-space_?


What is the best word that defines the space shown in this picture?

American Heritage Dictionary defines: > plaza: a public square or similar open area in a town or city. > > gallery: a roofed promenade, especially one extending along the wall of a > building and supported by arches or columns on the outer side. Which is the better word defining the space shown in the picture below: "plaza" or "gallery"? Or is there a more appropriate word? ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/w8Zlm.png)


Coordinating conjunction and subordinating conjunction

The joining-comma rule mentions that two complete clauses may be joined with a comma if the clauses are short or the comma is followed by a coordinating conjunction. So, I suppose that I should write > When I arrived home I fell asleep, for I was exhausted. > > When I arrived home I fell asleep because I was exhausted. However, what puzzles me is that "for" does have a causal (subordinate) role. Here, the logic of the language escapes me. Please, can someone clarify this point?


"Irrelevant for" vs. "irrelevant to"

Reading some of the comments on StackExhange, I came across > this is irrelevant for this question Shouldn't it be "irrelevant _to_ this question"? Searching on Google I found both are used in various academic texts.


Is there a word for people who emit positive vibes and negative vibes?

It's happened to me tons of times. See some people on Tv, live in office or anywhere, meet them and without their saying much you feel some positive energy oozing out of them. Although sometimes it is negative too. When it is -ve you don't like seeing them again. I was wondering if there is a word for such people ? Thank you.


"Should either be" or "should be either"?

Which is more correct: > This rule specifies that an object should **be either** visible or > invisible, but not partially visible. Or > This rule specifies that an object should **either be** visible or > invisible, but not partially visible. Is there any rule for that? Also, should the _be_ be repeated after the or in the second statement?


"I would like that he was normal"; is this sentence correct?

> I would like that he was normal. This sounds a little awkward but plausible. Is it valid English? How about another example: > I would like that he bathed before going to sleep. It sounds a little better with that additional clause. Both sentences sound normal with _it if_ replacing _that_ : > I would like it if he was normal. > > I would like it if he bathed before going to sleep. Is it just a matter of preference? Are both valid and _it if_ instead _that_ just sounds more natural?


Is 'long time no see' grammatically correct?

I have researched and found out long time no see is a direct translate from the Chinese phrase, 好久不见. As much as we use it almost everyday in our lives, is it actually grammatically correct? Since it is a direct translate, is it grammatically approved?


ostentatious vs pretentious

Looking at the definition of these words it appears they are pretty similar: Pretentious: Having or showing the unpleasant quality of people who want to be regarded as more impressive, successful, or important than they really are [Merriam-Webster] Ostentatious: Displaying wealth, knowledge, etc., in a way that is meant to attract attention, admiration, or envy [Merriam-Webster] The way I usually see pretentious being used infers a kind of naivete (an under-educated/lower class person trying to sound intelligent/aristocratic) were as an ostentatious person _is_ upper class, but is flaunting it in an arrogant/gaudy way. Am I way off base here?


Appropriate word for very fast

Can some one tell me the appropriate word instead of 'very fast' in sentence: > Don't loose hope _very fast_.


What does "let it bleed" mean in this context?

What does 'let it bleed' mean in the following sentence? > Though the actors give their all, notably Stellan Skarsgård as the brother > of the missing Harriet and Joely Richardson as an estranged relative, the > film hangs back when you want it to come out swinging. **Only Mara lets it > bleed**. Her defensive, bruised-animal performance inexorably draws you in. Is it common enough in daily conversation or English texts? I have seen it before, but it also in a film review (and The Rolling Stones album). Could you give me another example of its use in a sentence? If possible, the origin of the phrase would be nice too.


Expression similar to 'freak out'

For usage like this: > I _freaked out_ when I saw that file was not there. > > Every time I talk to him, he _freaks me out_ by his strange stories. What similar expressions can I use instead of ' _freak out_ '?


"Autumn" vs. "fall" — geographical distribution of usage?

I know that generally _autumn_ is the British term and _fall_ is the American one, but what is the geographical distribution of the two terms outside these countries? I'm fairly sure that no British person would use _fall_. Do Americans sometimes use _autumn_?


Sound something makes while travelling through a liquid

What word best describes the sound made by an object passing through water for a prolonged period of time? "Whoosh" and "Splash" both come to mind, but neither really describes what I'm thinking of of. "Whoosh" sounds too airy and "Splash" connotes a sudden, loud, impact with a liquid as opposed to a gradual passage through it.


Why is the word 'bologna' pronounced like 'baloney'?

Why is the word 'bologna' (as in a bologna sandwich) pronounced so differently from the way it's spelled? The word 'lasagna' isn't pronounced 'lasagney'... The American sausage is derived from a similar Italian sausage that originated in the city of Bologna, yet the name of the city is pronounced more like the word 'lasagna', which leaves me wondering where the pronunciation came from...


Noun phrase converted to verb, is a hyphen needed?

When "air kiss" is treated as a verb, as in "they air kissed", should it be hyphenated to "air-kissed"?


What is the origin of gully and googly in cricket?

The OED supplies no clue to the origin of either gully or googly. It does not in fact mention etymology of the cricket sense of gully, which has led me to infer that it is from the ordinary meaning of gully, i.e. a channel between point and slip. However one responder to an earlier question suggests it is of Indian origin. As regards googly, the OED says 'origin unknown'. It is interesting because of the derived verb 'to google', which nowadays has acquired an entirely different meaning. > a. A ball which breaks from the off, though bowled with apparent leg-break > action. > > 1903 C. B. Fry in P. F. Warner _How We recovered Ashes (1904)_ ii. 29 You > must persuade that Bosanquet of yours to practise..those funny ‘googlies’ of > his.   >  1904 P. F. Warner _How we recovered Ashes_ 106 Bosanquet..can bowl as badly > as anyone in the world, but, when he gets a length, those slow ‘googlies’, > as the Australian papers call them, are apt to paralyse the greatest > players.   >  1909 P. A. Vaile in _Westm. Gaz._ 17 Sept. 14/2 The ‘googly’ is merely the > American service at lawn-tennis introduced into cricket.   >  1920 E. R. Wilson in P. F. Warner _Cricket_ ii. 74 The ‘googly’ or ‘Bosie > ball’ as it was afterwards christened in Australia.   >  1924 N. Cardus _Days in Sun_ 48 Hirst cultivated the swerve and Bosanquet > the ‘googly’. 1930 C. V. Grimmett Getting Wickets i. 22 It was at this time > that I learned to bowl the ‘bosie’ or ‘googly’—an off-break with a leg-break > action.   >  1954 J. H. Fingleton _Ashes crown Year_ 46 Australians call it bosie after > Bosanquet..Englishmen call it the google, or googly.   >  1955 K. R. Miller & R. S. Whitington _Cricket Typhoon_ i. ii. 32 > In..Yorkshire, the ‘Chinaman’ is regarded as the lefthand bowler's off- > break... In Australia..the ‘Chinaman’ is..the left-hander's googly. Can anyone supply any further clue to the origin of either word, please?


When a Brit is refering to 'the war' which war does she mean -WWI or WWII?

As the title says, when a Brit in modern times writes 'since the war' which war is being refereed to -WWI or WW2?


What is the difference between remember and remind

Could someone explain the difference between these two words? Here is an example of using each.   * Your hair and eyes **remind** me of your mother.    * I can **remember** people's faces, but not their names.


Punctuation issues with relative pronouns

Is it allowed to replace the highlighted words in the following sentence with a comma?   1. This is the book **which was** stolen by Taro.   2. This is the book, stolen by Taro.


Acoustic perfume

What is the exact meaning of "acoustic perfume" in the sentence: Let's get out of here - this acoustic perfume is too much for my ears.


Incorrect? “I only have one distinct memory from the movie, a scene where …”

Should I say “I only have one distinct memory from the movie, _that of_ a scene where …”, or would it work without the _that of_? If it wouldn’t work without the _that of_ , what if I replace the comma with a colon? Would it be ok then?


What do you call someone who is shy, withdrawn, and fearful of being approached?

What do you call someone who is shy, withdrawn, fearful of being approached, and with little interest for or even fear of social events? _Sociopath_ would be too harsh of a term (but close) and _shy_ too mild.


How to punctuate "A and B and C" properly if "B and C" form a set

Given that "A" is one set and "B" and "C" are another set, how should the following phrase be punctuated correctly? > A and B and C


spread of the quotative "be like" outside North America

I thought that the quotative "be like" was limited to American English, but was surprised to hear a 60-something New Zealand woman using it repeatedly recently. What is the status in world English? (I am referring to "be like" to introduce a quotation or internal monologue, as is discussed in e.g. this paper: http://www.jstor.org/stable/455910 )


Is "plantingly" an adverb?

Is _plantingly_ an adverb form of _plant_? Can you give me a example sentence? Edit: This use of _plantingly_ came from the following quote: > Firstly I [would like] to thank you for taking the time from your [busy] > schedule to help we **plantingly challenged**.


Is there a word for a plot detail that becomes important retroactively?

I know that foreshadowing is when you drop hints about the future, but is there a name for it when a statement which is innocuous at the time suddenly becomes very important in the light of new events?


The choice between 'will' and 'would'

"I will not accept the truth that I will be jealous if you have a boyfriend unless you accept the truth that you will be jealous if I have a girlfriend," said Phil. Is this sentence correct or should I use 'would' in the places where I have used 'will'? Or should I use 'would' only when there is 'had' in the places of 'have'? _confused_


Is it okay to use "Sure thing" as a reply to my boss?

I was wondering whether _sure thing_ — when I mean _certainly_ — is too casual in a business environment, or whether it could be used under certain circumstances. (I’m not a native speaker of English.)


Comma before "and so"

I encountered the following two examples: >   1. Moreover, the proposed scheme is designed in an ID-based setting **and > so** the necessity for certificates and some related problems are > eliminated. > >   2. Our scheme also achieves setup-freeness **and so** a user can enjoy the > fairness provided by the fair exchange scheme without interacting with the > arbitrator for registration. > > Is this type of construction ( _and so_ ) correct? Should there be some commas somewhere? Are they not just two independent clauses joined by _and so_?


Etymology of English "Achoo" relative to other sneezing onomatopoeiae

So I was recently curious about the sound that people sneeze with in other languages and was surprised to notice the difference between the English onomatopoetic word "Achoo" and that of other languages in the same family. For example: German - _hatschi_ Dutch - _hatsjie_ However some of our sibling languages are closer: Icelandic - _atsjú_ Norwegian - _aatsjoo_ Interestingly, most of the world seems to pronounce their sneeze more like modern Germans than modern Americans (basically all of Eastern Europe, Russia and Asia will end their sneezes with a short i instead of a long o). Does anyone have any ideas why the pronunciation differs between ending in a short i in many closely related languages and a long o in English? Presumably people talked and wrote about sneezing relatively early on before these languages broke up so there should be some sort of proto-english pronounciation that either split during a period when most of these branches hadn't extended far, or English changed its common representation of the sneeze at some point in history. Does anyone know of a time in English's history when our sneezes ended in 'i' or a time in German/Dutch history when the 'oo' was favored? Note that the OED traces the word back to the early 19th century, always spelled ending in the 'oo' sound and not a short 'i': > Forms: α. 18–19 aitchoo, 18– achew, 18– achoo, 18– ahchew, 19 ahschoo, 19 > ahshoo, 19– ahchoo, 19– atchoo, 20– aitshoo. > > β. 19 achoos.


Choice of an agent to give an active voice - me or the computer program

**Background** I am writing a scientific article that describes a computer program. Although it is common in the field to use a passive voice, it is also acceptable, and my preference, to diversify the text with an active voice. That said, the focus of my paper is a computer program, and I am describing what it does. I am having a difficult time determining when it is appropriate to say that the program does something versus when I (or we) did something. **Example** Call the program 'FOO' (all caps since it is an acronym, though presumably, since I am introducing FOO in this paper, I could change this to only have a capital first letter) > FOO uses addition to determine Y, versus > we use addition to determine Y, or > Y is determined by addition I think that giving agency to Foo makes it easier to write, but then my text becomes 'FOO does this ... FOO does that'; making the name 'FOO', which is really incidental, dominate the page when looked at as a whole. In addition, it can feel awkward to writing about a computer program as a protagonist (however, this is my first attempt to describe such a program). **Question: What is the best way to write about software in an active voice?** In my field, the passive voice is dominant so I am having difficulty finding good examples of the use of an active voice.


The meaning of "by so" in the sentence

Here is the sentence: > A person who agrees to serve as mediator between two warring factions at the > request of both abandons by so agreeing the right to take sides later. To > take sides at a later point would be to suggest that the earlier presumptive > impartiality was a sham. I don't understand the meaning of "by so" in this sentences. Does the sentence mean "by abandoning agreeing the right to take sides later, a person can become a mediator", or "by serving as mediator, a person must abandon taking sides later"? What does the "so" refer to? And is "by so" a "adverbial modifier" of "abandon agreeing"?


Why is the word “so” in the line, “To a ill-informed person I would have so answer yes,” shown in Italic to stress the word?

I am interested in the word, “so” in the following sentence in Jeffery Archer’s novel, “The Prodigal Daughter.” Florentina Kane who is the chairman of an international hotel empire she succeeded from her father, and stood as a candidate for the Congresswoman for Illinoi State in late 1960s is asked question by a journalist at the press conference: > “Do you consider it a disadvantage to be a woman when seeking public > office?” > > ( She answered:) > > “Perhaps to a limited or ill-informed person **I would have _so_ answer > yes**, but not with any intelligent voter who puts the issues before > outdated predudices. Which of you if involved in a traffic accident on the > way home today would think twice if the first doctor on the scene turned out > to be a woman?- The Prodigal Daughter(Published by St. Martin's Press) > P.293. _Naturally_ I read the bold line as “I would have **to** answer yes,” as most of you do, but then noticed that it is _clearly and distinctly_ written as “ ** _so_** ” **in italic** to emphasize this specific word. What does “so” mean in the above sentence? How does “ _so_ ” here function grammatically? Logically and empirically, it's hard to believe such a reputed author as Lord Jeffery Archer deiberately put " _so_ " in Italic to _show off_ his error.