When did it become incorrect to use apostrophes with possessive pronouns?

I'm reading Jane Austen's _Sense and Sensibility_ , and I notice that she invariably uses an apostrophe with possessive pronouns — in a way that would be considered incorrect now. For example: (Elinor is speaking to Colonel Brandon) > _My_ gratitude will be insured immediately by any information tending to > that end, and _her's_ must be gained by it in time. Pray, pray let me hear > it. (Volume II, Chapter IX, page 153 of the Oxford World's Classics edition, > emphases in original) Assuming that Austen is a reasonably good yardstick for proper style _of her time_ , I'm wondering _when_ this practice came to be considered incorrect. (Note that there are some related questions, especially this one. But that question's answers don't get into any real detail about the _when_ part of the question.) **Edit** : @FumbleFingers points out in the comments that my example may be a bad one. In the original, the sentence would have had "HERS" (and no apostrophe). My larger point stands, and here are a few other examples without that problem: > When they stopped at the door, Mrs. Jennings recollected that there was a > lady at the other end of the street on whom she ought to call; and as she > had no business at Gray's, it was resolved, that while her young friends > transacted their's, she should pay her visit and return for them. (Chapter > 33) > > But at last she found herself with some surprise, accosted by Miss Steele, > who, though looking rather shy, expressed great satisfaction in meeting > them, and on receiving encouragement from the particular kindness of Mrs. > Jennings, left her own party for a short time, to join their's. (Chapter 38) > > That conviction must be every thing to you; and he is undoubtedly supported > by the same trust in your's. (Chapter 24) Those examples are all taken from the Gutenberg edition online. **Edit after closing** : It's funny that this should be closed so soon after the blog post about The War of the Closes. The alleged duplicate does not talk about my question, namely _when_ did good usage shift forms like _her's_ , _their's_ , etc. to _hers_ , _theirs_ , etc. Nor does the only answer to that question address the _when_ question. That other question and its answer are about whether forms like _hers_ came to exist by analogy with the possessive of nouns, such as _John's_. It's a completely different question. In addition, this question now has a reasonably good answer. There's no reason for this to be closed.


Dialog with an ok and cancel button

I'd be interested in your analysis of the following sentence (from program documentation): > ... dialog with an ok and cancel button... [correct] Would be correct. However, why not: > ... dialog with an ok and a cancel button... [correct] And why not: > ... dialog with an ok and cancel buttons... [incorrect] And why not: > ... dialog with an ok and a cancel buttons... [incorrect] And why not: > ... dialog with ok and cancel buttons... [correct]


"Repetitive" vs. "repetitious"

I have heard both _repetitive_ and _repetitious_ used in everyday speech to describe something that repeats, and I'm wondering what the real difference between the words is. Does one have a different connotation than the other? Do they describe different things?


Why do we use "executed" in referral to carrying something out?

The wording, given the standard meaning of "executed" - which is often in a negative light, as per the term - seems strange.   Has the term been adopted into it's current (stated) usage or has it always been defined to where you can use it like that?


Another definition for 'to go on a diet'

What other words or expression could be used to say _to go/ be on a diet_ , meaning to follow healthy nutrition rules mainly to lose weight.


What is the meaning of "on" in this sentence?

I saw this sentence "I go on a picnic." What is the meaning of "on" in this sentence.


Quintology or Pentalogy?

Recently I was looking at the X-Men box set and saw that currently five have been released. I had it in my head that these would be called a _quintology_ but I have seen them being called a _pentalogy_. I assume both words are interchangeable, but is one of the terms preferred over the other, or is it a matter of taste?


What is the difference between "sheer" and "utter" in the sense of enphasis if there is any whatsoever?

English is not my first language. I don’t know the difference between _sheer_ and _utter_ used for emphasis. For example, instead “That’s utter nonsense” can I say “That’s sheer nonsense” instead?


"By/before/until/through" in the past

I need to express how an event occurred before-or-at a certain time in the past (non exclusive or, which of the two alternatives is the actual one is left open). For the future I would have used "by", but what about the past? "Until" is for prolonged actions/states only, just like "through", "before" excludes the cutoff moment, and an expression like "by yesterday" seems to me intentionally wrong ( _both_ syntactically and semantically). Or can I actually say something like > Last weekend we went skiing, we had bought the equipment by then. This is still a special case, as it involves the completion of a "pending" action, not just an event. Does > The concert was held by September. make sense? What about: > Please provide a list of all his books published before 2000 included. or is it wrong: are "before" and "included" mutually exclusive? Are there any other possibilities?


Relating to multiple possessions of multiple objects

Is it correct to say `doctors specialties` when referring to the (multiple) specialties of multiple doctors?


British upper-class pronunciation of words like "what" and "when"

More from the BBC adaptation of Charles Dickens' _Bleak House_. I've noticed in these sort of movies, when some very upper-class speakers talk, like the lawyer in the series, Mr. Tulkinghorn, they have a distinct way of pronouncing "wh" in _what_ and _when_ ; the "wh-" sounds seems to be prefaced with an almost sharp whistling "h", so that it sounds like they are really saying _hwat_ and _hwhen_. I'd like to know three things: First, what is the specific name of this phoneme, as would be given by linguists? Secondly, what's the difference in articulation, in terms of tongues and throats, between this _hwh-_ and _wh_ -? And finally, the most difficult question of all: Is the _hwhat_ these upper- class speakers produce a direct-line preservation of Anglo-Saxon pronunciation, through these many centuries? [I ask because I have seen the construction "hwæt hwæt" used playfully as an example of Anglo-Saxon speech, and figured that the "hw-" sound must have prominent in that language.]


What’s the meaning of “hit him round the head”?

> Dudley was sniffling in the back seat; his father had hit him round the head > for holding them up while he tried to pack his television, VCR, and computer > in his sports bag. (Harry Potter 1, Scholastic Paperbacks p41) My guess about the meaning of this sentence was his father hit his son’s head with his palm once. However, the more I think about it, the more ideas I get from it. I’d like to know if the following guesses of mine are correct or not. **1\. hitting times** Dudley's father hit Dudley **only one time** because the writer uses the verb “hit” instead of “beat, etc.” and because “round” doesn’t add some information, like times, to the verb, since it’s not an adverb but a preposition. **2\. Why does the writer use “round” instead of other prepositions? -- because** **1).** the head is **cylindrical** (or spherical), not flat. In other words, **the shape of the target** goes well with “round.” **2).** the father hit his son’s head not with his fist, but with his **palm** which is along the head for a short moment. That is, **the easy-to-bend quality of the hitting tool** agrees with “round.” **3).** the target area for the father to aim at is **vague** , not pinpoint. So, **the hitter’s intention** requires “round.” **4).** as the father swings widely his hand (fist or palm whichever he likes), the path from the launching point to the head describes a **circle**. That means **the shape of the orbit** needs “round.” **5).** Nope. 1-4 don't matter. **British English** sometimes uses **”round” for “on”** , so there’s virtually no difference from “hit him on the head”. Take it easy. Other ideas are always welcome. I’d appreciated it if you could help me.


“aware” vs “know”

What is the difference between _aware_ and _know_?


"that things were suspicious"

Is the following sentence grammatically correct? > I began to notice that things were suspicious. If I google "that things were suspicious" it only comes up with 5 things.


Origin of the "Rule of thumb" phrase

Where does the phrase rule of thumb originate from? Why thumb of all possible body parts ;-)


A Word that means "to adapt or improve, to conform to a higher standard"?

I need to find **_or invent_** a word that suggests a system might be "adapted or improved to conform to a higher standard". A verb, noun, adjective or even adverb would be acceptable, but so far I haven't found quite what I'm looking for. **Context Examples:** "We are upgrading the current system for greater Enterprise [conformity to a higher standard]." "I believe we need to change our approach. We need to [adapt to conform to a higher standard]." "It will take some time to write an article that's more [improved to conform to a higher standard] than I've written before."


What's the word that combines inclusion/exclusion?

Like visibility combines show/hidden, what's the word that combines inclusion/exclusion? EDIT: The problem is inspired by the VIM reference manual: > A character motion is either inclusive or exclusive. When inclusive, the > start and end position of the motion are included in the operation. When > exclusive, the last character towards the end of the buffer is not included. > Linewise motions always include the start and end position. I want to know what's the right word to use for describing the inclusive/exclusive property of a character motion, which I thought is like visibility to show/hidden. As RegDwight said, I am looking for the hypernym for inclusion/exclusion for this content/condition. Sorry for my poor and misleading English.


Election or Elections?

I'm a little confused about when I should be using the singular form of **election** , and when I should be using the plural form.   * Did he win the **election** or win the **elections**?   * Did I vote in the **election** or vote in the **elections**?   * Is 1 in 4 years the frequency of the **election** or of the **elections**?   * etc. Which form should I be using, and when?


Is 'handshaking' a legitimate word?

In microprocessors, handshake signals are issued by a microprocessor in acknowledgement of a request by another device. This process has been repeatedly referred to as 'handshaking' in my lectures. Is it a commonly used term in general English?


Is "substract" (versus "subtract") a proper word?

I read an article recently where the author used "substract" instead of "subtract". I'm more familiar with the latter word but after doing a bit of googling, it seems that both words are being used, although "subtract" seems more mainstream than the other. Which of the two is more appropriate? Is "substract" even acceptable?


"Thou" or "You"? This is the problem!

In some eastern Indo-European languages like Persian specially in its northern accent Gilaki, the words "thou", "thee", "thy",... have a same meaning and pronunciation as English. But there is a difference. In these languages the usage of "thou" is much more frequent than English. They have no "you" (in singular forms) and they use "thou" everywhere. My question is about this ancient word. **Question:** What are the main differences between the words "you" and "thou" in English language in usage, grammar, etc? Is there any difference in meanings of "thou" and "you" up to special circumstances? Can one use "thou" instead of "you" everywhere?


What's "mutton sleeves" or "leg of mutton sleeves"?

I'm reading a book and came to this term... it's a bit strange to me... so I searched on internet but can't find a definition. There are some pictures on internet and wiki mentioned it in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1890s_in_fashion , I roughly guess it means the sleeve style for ladies, that has a big part on the shoulder, am I right? or is there somewhere an accurate/official definition?


"X of 1 Points" or "X of 1 Point"?

I am trying to express credit earned toward a total number of points, and I'm considering two ways to write it in the case where full credit is only one point:   * X of 1 points   * X of 1 point My opinion is that the first one sounds more correct, but I'm not sure. I am using these standalone to display as titles over something and it is possible to get a fractional amount of points. Would it make a difference what the first number is? For example, if they get full credit would it be "1 of 1 Point" but otherwise it's (for example) ".5 of 1 Points"? I should make note that full credit isn't always worth one point and the actual number of points it is worth is important to make known (since it can be different for each question) so the total points has to be there.


Why is "bicycle" pronounced differently from other obviously related words?

The word _bicycle_ is pronounced /'baɪsɪkəl/ (bahy-si-kuhl), like _sickle_. However, the words _unicycle_ and _motorcycle_ both have the _-cycle_ pronounced as /-'saɪkəl/ (sahy-kuhl). Is there some sort of reason for this, or is this just a vagary of English pronunciation?


Should the words "internet" and "web" be capitalized?

There seems to be some inconsistency on whether people capitalize the words _internet_ and _web_ (as in _World Wide Web_ ) as proper nouns. What is the official ruling on when or if these words should be capitalized? Obviously, I am not asking about when they are the first word in a sentence or in the title of a book or other publication. Example: > "The **web** is the most commonly known feature of the **Internet**."


The centrality that does not need to be named

Suppose we are looking at Internet domain names. Every country has its own two-letter abbreviation (.fr, .uk, .ca, .za, etc.) — except for the US, as far as I know. They have .com, .org, .edu, .gov. I assume there's an historic reason for this, but what I'm wondering is: is there a term to describe the assumed centrality of the US in the domain-name world — the country being so "central" that it does not even need to be identified. Only the _other_ needs to be identified. Now suppose we are in Europe or North America. I'm asked to describe a man. "He's five foot eight, brown hair, wearing a beige suit..." I know in North America and I presume in Europe, that unless I specifically state otherwise, he is assumed by most of my listeners to be white. In other words, _whiteness_ like the US, is assumed to be so central that it does not need to be identified. I could give many more examples of the margin vs. the centre, but hopefully these two illustrate what I mean. _My Question:_ Is there a term that describes this centrality — the centrality of not needing to be labelled, if you will? I don't know how to research the question either on this site or elsewhere.


Is it common to say "late girlfriend"?

I know _late wife_ is a common term (dead wife). How about _late girlfriend_? If that's not the case, what's the most used term?


Synomym for untrue love

What is the word that can be used to describe a person who has something in heart and speaks something. Specifically showing fake love and affection.


Word for people who are not on good terms with someone

They won't be called one's 'enemies' because they are not _actively_ opposed or hostile to one. They won't be one's _adversaries_ , _opponents_ or _rivals_ either since there is no contest, conflict or dispute between. But they are people who are not on good terms with someone for any other imaginable reason. For example, religious intolerance or feelings of general dislike due to differences of social class or standard of living, language, lifestyle etc. There is a specific word in our native language to match the description that I have given above and I am interested to know if there is an English equivalent of it. P.S.: Please feel free to edit this topic if it's not clear enough.


What is the appropriate usage of "attentions"?

I recently wondered what the difference between _attention_ and _attentions_ was, as I've heard both, but couldn't think of or remember when someone would use _attentions_. One definition for _attentions_ gives "acts of courtesy, consideration, or gallantry, especially by a suitor." So now I remember that _attentions_ always seems to be used romantic contexts. I've personally never heard of it used in other ways. So would it be appropriate to use _attentions_ in a sentence such as: > His neglected daughter just wants his attentions. And would it be incorrect to say, "He wants his mom's sole attentions" to mean that he wants his mom's focus to solely be on him? I just think it's weird because sole, meaning 'one and only' is describing a plural word; just as "sole focuses" would be weird. I don't know if it's just me.


I don't know which boy?

Is it correct to say: > I don't know which boy you meet. For me _which_ here makes sense but grammatically I think there is something wrong by using _which_ to refer to the boy.


Usage of "to" and "from" in my sentence

Is my sentence grammatically correct? > I asked from the friend who took this picture, had you ever seen anything > like this before? or should it be: > I asked a friend who took this picture, had you ever seen anything like this > before?


meaning of "little low"

This is the conversation in the book "Revolution 2020" > Hey How are you? > > I am little low. she said what is the meaning of little low. it means she is unhappy ?


Origin of the term "eating your own dog food"

I'm trying to find the first usage of the term "eating your own dogfood", as a reference to companies, especially software companies, using their own products in house in order to more effectively troubleshoot. I'm fairly certain it originated with Microsoft, but I'd like to find out which year they first used it, if possible.


Question:Is this hotel selling cigarettes?

I am confused with this question: "Is this hotel selling cigarettes?" or   "Does this hotel sell cigarettes?" "Is this computer working?" or   "Does this computer work?" Which one is correct? Is there any other way of saying it?


Usage of "have a good run"

Is "the album _had a good run_ " correct to mean that it was an enjoyable listen? Or will it be confused with the idea that many copies were sold of the album?


How to use the word "petrichor" in a sentence?

What are the ways in which the word _petrichor_ which means scent of the rain, might be used? Can we use a phrase like "the pleasant petrichor"?


Term for partially abbreviating names

Is there a name for the tabloid media practice of part-initializing, part- abbreviating people's names? E.g. Jennifer Lopez -> J-Lo, Robert Pattinson -> R-Patz and so on.


Is the "hand't we" in "hadn't we better have a process?" grammatical?

Is the above question correct? I am not sure if the use of the phrase "hadn't we better" is correct or not.


"Drinking water" or "drunk water"

Why do people use _bottled drinking water_ instead of _bottled drunk water_? I am puzzled by the two sentences. > I am drinking some water. > > Some water is being drunk. I know they are the same meaning, within just one family of objects and subjects. Clearly, water can only be _drunk_ , it cannot be _drinking_.


Why is the OED's first reference to *irredentism* as late as 1886?

_Irredentism_ (from the Italian _irredento_ , 'unredeemed') has a first reference in the OED as late as 1886. Yet irredentism, the problem which had plagued European statesmen for generations was deeply at issue in the unifications of both Germany and Italy in the mid 19th century. Ethnic populations were never conveniently demarcated by lines on the map. It affected Germans living in Poland, Germans in Denmark, Austrians in the Italian states, Italians in the Balkans, Serbs in Bosnia, and was endemic to a continent of empires comprised of countless nationalities. The Austro- Hungarian Empire had a score of different ethnicities. And the problem is still with us, and has emerged spectacularly in the last few days with the shooting down of an airliner by Russians living in an ostensibly Ukrainian territory. Following the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648 Europe was destined for becoming a continent of nations, rather than one of Empires. So 'irredentism' was an issue from the start. Why does it not appear in English until 1886?


Is there a rule in British English about how to pronounce "either"?

There are two common pronunciations of "either": British /ˈaɪðər/ and American /ˈiːðər/. If Americans are more or less consistent in this regard, then the Brits seem to be freely using both. In fact, from what I can tell, "either this or that" is more often in the first form, whereas "me either" is in the second. But I may be wrong. Is there any kind of an informal rule in the modern British English with regard to this?


Pronunciations for "Either"

In general, EFL students are taught the two main ways of pronouncing the determiner "either" are the British [ˈaɪðə] and the American [ˈiːðər] varieties. However, I've repeatedly heard from specific North American individuals (face-to-face and on TV) another pronunciation: [ˈaɪðər]. My specific question here is: does that phenomenon take place because of some dialectical/idiolectical/sociolectical background? Thanks!


What does it mean to "frame an argument"?

I have asked this same question on Yahoo! Answers before, but I didn't quite understand the meaning of it. The phrase is used like so: "See how the author framed his argument?; What is he doing up there? Just framing, just framing" This is such an odd phrase, but my English teacher uses it all the time. I am more mathematical and logical, so please try to explain it as such.


"number of books" or "book count"?

>   1. The number of books is nine. > >   2. The book count is nine. > > Which is more natural? What's the SUBTLE difference between them?


How can one co-relate "does not" and "shall not" for the purpose of exclusion

Example: > Value of Investments — income from which does not or shall not form part of > income. To my understanding "does not" means investment which did not yield any income in the current year whereas "shall not" would mean investments which might give returns in future and thus not part of total income. Can one say that investments which do not yield income would not fall in the second category being investments which if yield income shall not form part of income?


simple word choice ,unabridged or unedited version

I don't know I whether I need to use _unabridged version_ or _unedited version_ for a radio podcast. Please explain the difference. Also, is "said" the right word in the clause below? "As he **said** in unabridged/unedited edition,...".


What are alternative expressions being taken place with “pull off the upset”?

I came across the phrase _“pull off the upset_ ” in the following sentence of Washington Post (January 4) article titled “Eight lessons the Iowa caucuses taught us.” > “In the early going last night, it looked like Paul might _pull off the > upset_. But as votes streamed in, it became clear his ceiling was simply > lower than his rivals. Paul wound up with 26, 219 votes - more than double > the 11,817 he received in 2008 - but it still wasn’t enough to keep pace > with Romney and Santorum." As I am unfamiliar with the phrase "pull off a (the) upset,” I searched the definition online: Cambridge Dictionary defines ‘pull off’ as a verb, meaning ‘If a vehicle pulls off, it starts moving.’ Oxford Dictionary registers "pull-off” as a noun meaning ‘an area on the side of a road where a motorist may park.” Merriam-Webster defines ‘Pull off” as a verb meaning ‘to accomplish successfully against odds,” from which I can guess what “pull off the upset” means. Although I found no dictionary carrying “pull off the upset” as an idiom, there were a lot of quotes using this phrase in the Google search. On the other hand, Google NGram shows the usages of “pull off a (the) upset” emerged in around later than 1960 and its noticeable rise around after 2000. I’m curious to know (1) how widely or dominantly this idiom is being used today, and (2) what were popular alternative expressions (e.g. snatch victory from the rival’s big jaw) to “pull off a (the) upset” that were taken place with this idiom.


How does “found-in-a-cabbage-patch look” look?

There was the phrase “ _found-in-a-cabbage-patch look_ ” in the article of Time magazine (October 3, 2011) titled “Playing Favorites,” that dealt with the results of recent researches on the prevalence of parents’ favoritism toward particular one of their children. The author, Jeffery Kluger writes; > “I was the second of four in an all-boy brood, and by almost any measure, > the third in line, Garry, should have been the favorite, simply because he > was gorgeous, born with extravagantly long eyelashes, absurdly perfect > features and platinum blond hair that completed his ‘ _found-in a-cabbage- > patch look_.’” I can vaguely imagine how a cherub-like boy with ‘found-in a-cabbage-patch look’ looks with the association of “Cabbage-Patch Kids” dolls. But I don’t think the author is referring to “Cabbage-Patch Kids” character here. What do ‘the baby found in a cabbage patch’ and ‘found-in-a-cabbage-patch look’ mean? What is the origin of the word, “found in a cabbage patch”?


Meaning of "She'll get you in Dutch"?

In the lyrics of the Coasters' 1959 song "Poison Ivy" there are the lines > She comes on like a rose but everybody knows   >  She'll get you in Dutch   >  Now you can look but you better not touch The song is apparently about a woman who transmits a venereal disease and my question is: > What does "she'll get you in Dutch" mean?


"Lifting a ban" — why does "lifting" mean "removing"?

In all other cases "moving something up" means creating or increasing something, like in "rising concern" or "erecting obstacles". At the same time "lifting a ban" means effectively removing the ban. What is a historical explanation of appearance of such expression? I can only suggest that this came from the lifting a castle's gates which allows passage. Is this true?


Alternative to priority value

Given two states in the diagram, each of them has a ? value, if state 1 ? value > state 2 ? value, we choose state 1, otherwise, we choose state 2. We can replace ? by "priority", is there any other words that can fit into this sentence? Basically ? value is assigned randomly to both states (each state has different number) with the reason of choosing of state. Is "dominant" good here?


Opposite of "infinitesimal"

What is the opposite of "infinitesimal"? Infinitesimal means a value smaller than the minimum possible measurement. For example, if we have a ruler with 1 centimeter intervals, then any length measured shorter than 1 cm is infinitesimal for that measuring instrument - smaller than the smallest possible measurement, but still greater than zero. The opposite of infinitesimal means a value larger than the maximum possible measurement. Analogously, if we have a 100 centimeter ruler, then any length measured longer than 100 cm is that opposite term. "Infinite" is **not** the opposite of infinitesimal, although that term is commonly (mis)used. Infinity is an abstract concept for something that never ends, not merely a value above measuring capability. For example, the question "how long is this road?" may have the answer "the opposite of infinitesimal" if we lack the capacity to travel along a straight road in its entirety and measure its length. On the other hand, if the road is short enough to see in its entirety but loops in on itself, we could say that its length is "infinite". A term I came up with for this is "supermaximum"; above the maximum possible measured value. I would like to know if an official term exists.


What does the following sentence mean [ From The Invisible Man , Ch 1 ]

I'm a little confused by the following sentence. I know all the nouns here, but I don't understand the phrase "a turn them bandages" > What a turn them bandages did give me, to be sure!


Why can't I put 'a' or 'the' before 'different clubs'?

Is there a specific rule saying that 'a/an' and 'the' should not followed by the word 'different'? "I go out to different clubs with my boyfriend". I know there are some fixed expression for using articles (eg at 'the' weekend ; or in 'the' afternoon ; or take 'a' bath) , but how about putting article in front of the word 'different' in the sentence quoted above?


Any difference between "protest" and "protest against"?

I've looked up in my _Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary_ and _New Oxford American Dictionary_ , it turns out that the difference (if any) between **"protest sth"** and **"protest against sth"** looks very hard to tell. Examples are as follows:   1. Students took to the streets to **_protest against** the decision_.   2. They fully intend to **_protest** the decision_.   3. Doctors and patients **_protested against** plans_ to cut services at the hospital.   4. The workers were **_protesting** economic measures_ enacted a week earlier. In addition, I'm wondering if the object following them really matters to the choice, but examples 1 & 2 seem to prove me wrong. Any more explanation on this?


Wash Hands to Serve Safe Food?

The other day I saw a sign in a restroom saying: > Wash your hands thoroughly to kill bacteria and serve safe food It struck me as wrong somehow, since it gave me the immediate humorous mental picture of the _very act of washing_ somehow actually serving food _at that moment_ , just like the bacteria killing. I also think the point is not to "serve safe food" but rather " _safely_ serve food." Am I correct that this is wrong, or at least awkward? What would be a better way to say it?


Ellipsis that results in one word serving as both subject and object

Quoting from Jeff Atwood's blog: > [I expanded the team] by adding Kevin, who I didn't know, but had built > amazing stuff for us without even being asked to, from Texas. And again by > adding Robert, in Florida, who I also didn't know, but spent so much time on > every single part of our sites that I felt he had been running alongside our > team the whole way [...]. These two sentences struck me as odd. In each of them, the _who_ is "overloaded", for lack of a better word. It serves as an object ("who[m] I didn't know"), but also as a subject ("who had build"/"who spent"). Obviously, this is a deliberate ellipsis1; the author didn't want to use "who" twice, as in: > I expanded the team by adding Kevin, who(m) I didn't know, but who had built > amazing stuff for us. I constantly run into this type of ellipsis1 on the Web. I've also noticed the pronoun "that" being overloaded in the same manner on countless occasions. My question is threefold:   1. What is the term for this kind of ellipsis1?        2. Is this a "valid" thing to do in formal writing? Do any manuals of style address this, or can you perhaps even quote, say, Twain pulling off this stunt (other than in jest)?        3. How recent is this phenomenon? I would guess that it probably wasn't anywhere as widespread back when English was still wearing a tight corset of grammatical cases. * * * 1 Edit: nohat makes a strong case for this not being an ellipsis, but I am leaving my original wording as a courtesy to future visitors who might have a similar question without knowing the correct term.


Is this a valid sentence? "Money makes us grow and happy"

"Money makes us grow" and "Money makes us happy" are both legitimate sentences, but together like that it makes it sound like "we" are busy "happying," which is obviously invalid. Obviously there are ways to make it sound better, but I'm wondering if there's technically anything mechanically wrong with this sentence. Consider also that "Money makes us happy and grow," does not sound incorrect at all. EDIT: Ellipsis that results in one word serving as both subject and object This question is answered here. Syllepsis.


Is the phrase, "a bloody altercation" an accurate way to describe the Officer’s killing at the MIT campus?

I was caught up with the word, “the bloody altercation” in the following statement of New York Times (April 25) article titled “Officer’s killing spurred pursuit in Boston attack.” http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/25/us/officers-killing-spurred-pursuit-in- boston-attack.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20130425&_r=0 > -It was just a little after that routine interaction, the police said, that > a pair of men approached Officer Collier’s squad car from behind and shot > him to death, in what some law enforcement officials said appeared to have > been a failed attempt to steal his gun. > > -The killing of Officer Collier, who was mourned Wednesday at a campus > memorial at which Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. spoke, was the first > **bloody altercation** in a nearly 24-hour chain of violent events that left > one of the brothers suspected in the Boston Marathon bombings dead and ended > with the capture of the other. Was there an enough time to allow an “altercation” when the culprits approached the squad car from behind and shot the officer to death? Was the (noisy) argument "in public"? As I'm unfamiliar with the word, altercation, I consulted with dictionaries. OED defines “altercation” as “a noisy argument or disagreement, especially in public.” To me the showdown of the campus officer and Boston Marathon bombers was more than an “altercation” though it being preceded by the adjective, “bloody.” CED defines it as “a loud argument or disagreement” as well. So my simple question: Is the word, “bloody altercation” really pertinent to describe the critical scene where the culpits shot the officer no sooner than they approached the squad car from behind? In other word, is it 'phisically' possible for both the officer and culpits to get engaged in "an altercation" in such an instant? By the way, the New York Daily News of the same day uses the word “Confrontation” for describing the killing scene: > Two people embrace in front of a memorial to MIT Police Officer Sean > Collier, who was killed during a **confrontation** with the suspects in the > bombings of Boston Marathon.


Meaning of "Crises involving a tick."

Here is the place where I saw this: http://feltron.com/ar11_04.html (in the right-bottom corner of the first page).


One word for the act of being born?

Is there any one word for _the act of being born_? The closest things I could think of are:   * I was born   * I come to life   * She is giving birth to me I'm interested in knowing if there is one word to describe this; something similar to "I die." (In Norwegian, we can use the word _fødes_ ). **Context:** I am creating a computer program, where I have several "mortal entities." These entities, amongst other methods, have a method named `Die()`, which defines everything that they do as they die. I would also like to create another method for what they do as they "bore."


Why is "not as ... as" preferred to "not cheaper than"?

In the rephrasing exercise > A is more expensive than B. > A is not **___ __ ___ __ ___ __** B. The only correct answer is supposed to be "A is _not as cheap as_ B". However, a student suggested "A is _not cheaper than_ B". In Portuguese, that's a perfectly possible construction, but, to me, it sounds awkward in English. However, I cannot explain why (except for the fact I'm sure I have never heard or read such a sentence - but, again, I'm not a native English speaker). I've checked all my grammars, but I couldn't find anything that could help me explain to the student why _not as ... as_ is preferred to _not more/-er than_. What can't be overlooked is that I have found no exercises or examples that allow for the _not more/-er than_ structure. As it is, I'm not even sure if the sentence is possible (even if it is awkward) or if it is absolutely wrong. Whatever the answer, the main problem remains: why? Is it because of the negative to be? Does it require the _as ... as_ structure?


"Its color is brown" vs "It is brown in color" describing nouns

I was wondering what the difference between these two similar ways of describing a noun is. > Its color is brown. or > It is brown in color. If they are both proper usage please explain to me which one is use more often. Thank you.


Do I need to use past tense here?

I'm writing a personal statement in which I describe a course I have learned in my college. Should I use "the course IS really difficult" or "the course WAS really difficult" ? Since I still think that course is difficult for me, I don't know which tense to use.


Is an implied "I know" considered correct English in this type of phrasing

I often read or hear statements like "Joe robbed the bank because I saw him running away with the money." Clearly, the literal interpretation is not the intended meaning and there is an understood "I know/state/believe this" before the "because." Today I came across similar wording in a new ad campaign: "If you have seen AT&T's recent advertising campaign, someone is obviously worried." My first thought is, "well what if I haven't seen it?" Here, "then you (should) know" is apparently implied. I don't recall this topic coming up in school, but then I wasn't the best English student. Is this implied phrasing (in formal terms) correct? Is there a specific word to describe it?


meaning of 'put down'

I looked up 'ley' in my Concise Oxford Dictionary and found the following definition. a piece of land temporarily put down to grass, clover, etc., in contrast to permanent pasture. Can anyone tell me what 'put down' means? I cannot find its meaning in the dictionary.


Pluralisation: is this correct?

I have the following sentence I've just seen, but I am pretty sure there should be no apostrophe on cahunas. > developers with cahuna's only need apply. Any ideas, I think it should be: > developers with cahunas only need apply.


A word for "someone looking to try new things"

I am looking for another word for someone who is looking to try new things. I mean this to have a positive connotation.


Is there a saying in English that basically means "adapting to your target audience"?

There is a saying commonly used in Turkish, which goes something like: "serving the syrup according to the arteries" (quite literally translated). The meaning behind it is to adapt what you are saying/doing so that it fits the audience and does not irritate or annoy them. Are there any counterparts in English that convey the same or a similar meaning? I seem to recall that there was one such saying I learned at some point, something with "sail" and "wind". PS: If the meaning of the original saying does not make immediate sense, think along the lines of syrup being very sweet and heavy, or somewhat lighter and watered-down. And if you have someone that's not well trained and have clogged arteries a heavy-syrup might not go down very well, so you adapt what you serve. (That's how I make sense of the saying, at least)


What does "from Point A to Point B" mean in this sentence?

I've read a text on http://www.nytimes.com and a sentence from it confused me a lot. > I didn’t understand then that I had used him, too, to learn how to get from > Point A to Point B again, and, let’s be honest, to simply eat at times. What does "from Point A to Point B" mean in the above sentence? Now that it's a text about love and the lovers fell into love and finally parted with each other, I thinks the Point A here should refer to "the process they fell into love", while Point B means "the result that they parted". Am I right in this? Considering that you might lack the context, here is the text: Getting to that safe place


What does "foo" mean?

I saw that "foo" has been used to name a lot of computer-related things. I wonder   1. if foo has some meaning itself beyond computer science?   2. what it means in computer science?   3. how it should be used?


"The more chickens in a farm the more crap and the fewer eggs"

Consider: > The more chickens in a farm the more crap and the fewer eggs. This is a proverb I hear often in Spanish (Cuba). I think it is pretty much self-explained: it is related to productivity and the negative effect of a workplace/task with too many people. Is there a similar phrase in English? I googled this one and got nothing.


"Cannot help but think" vs. "cannot but think" vs. "cannot help thinking"

Which of the following are grammatical? >   1. I cannot help but think. >   2. I cannot but think. >   3. I cannot help thinking. > I was taught (1) is not correct. Is it true? Or are they all correct? Is there any other way(s) to express what the speaker is trying to say using the words "help" and "think" apart from the three ways I mentioned?


Word for "having intension to do something, but do not know where to start"

Sometimes I feel like doing something (let's say writing an article about the lovely weather today) but I do not know what to write. How to describe this phenomenon? You have the intension to do something, but you do not know where to start.


Word for the fear in spooky environment

Sometimes when I am in spooky environment (like on a deserted street at midnight with little light), I would have this fear that I would start having hallucinations (like seeing things that don't exist and getting freaked out). I'd heard that a number of people experience this cognitive delusion and claimed to have seen things like robots with flying heads and that is how they start to believe in supernatural things. How should I describe the fear I have in those spooky environment? * * * p.s: I forget to mention I have this increasing anxiety when I am at those spooky environments and so I would always avoid these environments as much as possible (I think this has to do with a part of my childhood..) So I accepted Mohit's answer because agoraphobia describes best how I feel. At first I wanted to look for the term for the **fear of having hallucination** but it most likely doesn't exist. (It would still be great if someone finds it and posts it here) Thank you guys for giving me all the awesome answers!! Greatly appreciate!!!!


What does the expression "With a twist" means?

I would like to know the meaning of the expression "With a twist" and the context in which it can be used - examples are welcome. I have an understanding of it in the lines of "Traveling with a twist" that I perceive as traveling with something special or somewhat different in a good way.


Word that refers to both input and output devices

I usually refer to the term **_throughput_** when referring to both the inputs and outputs of a system. But right now I need a term/word/phrase that summarizes both an electric system's _sensors_ (input devices) as well as its **_actuators_** (output devices). I _could_ cop out and use **_throughput devices_** but was hoping something more scientific/formal/semantic was available. Ideas?


The title pretty much says it all. Is there a more eloquent word for a zigzag? **Edit:** Allow me to clarify, I'm referring to the shape of a zigzag, a picture is attached below. ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/BljMp.jpg)


In older variations of English in history, how much evidence of written language samples are needed to define the grammar and usage of that period?

In older variations of English in history, how much evidence of written language samples are needed to accurately define the grammar and usage of that period? For example, if we want to define how English was in the year 500 CE, how much evidence in the form of parchments and samples must we have and analyze? Is there an official figure or standard?


On/in its semantics?

Please help me in choosing the right preposition in the below sentence: > The returned values seem a bit confusing on/in its semantics, Here I'm talking about returned values of a computer programming function, after reading its expected behaviour. Which one should I use and what is the difference about use in or on?


To "have someone's number"

Where does the saying > I've got your number come from?


Usage of drove off in the following sentence

> "I'll drive you to the MRT, then," her father said. > > After saying goodbye to her mother and promising to come back soon, Naomi > got into her father's car, and **drove off** to the main road with him. What I want to say is: "She got into the car and then her father **drove off** to the main road." I'm not very sure but I think the _with him_ implies that her father was the one driving. Or it reads as if Naomi is the one driving the car? (Or **drove off** actually means _left to the place and started heading to X_ so it isn't actually a problem?)


Understanding "that" as in this statement

If I only say something as below without further more explanation, will a native speaker understand me? > He may be sexually dysfunctional, lately he can't do **that** his best. > That's why I am here to help. If I said it out loud and stressed "that", would you then ask me what is "that" ?


What can't you describe without a picture?

What do you call objects, or kinds of objects, that cannot be described without visual aids?


Do you read the 'c' in 'kc'?

For example:   * clickcub   * clickcube   * clickcrab   * clickcrate   * clickcone In which of those cases do you read the 'c' and not?


"Communicate over" vs. "communicate through"

> Also schemas can communicate _over_ database links to schemas in other > remote databases. Could one replace the preposition _over_ with _through_?   Will it change the meaning, and if so, when should we use _over_ instead of _through_?


Apartment number before or after house number and street

When writing an address, I wonder which comes first, the apartment number, or the house number and street name? Thanks! For example: > 1234 Charles ST APT A > > Hollywood, CA 54321 or > APT A, 1234 Charles ST > > Hollywood, CA 54321


Is this transitive or intransitive?

Let's consider this situation. A mother asks her child, "Who ate this apple?" Then her son replies, "I didn't eat." In this situation, is "eat" an intransitive verb when "the apple" is omitted? I think "eat" is transitive verb originally. What do you think?


“In the outskirts” versus “on the outskirts”

Which of the following sentences is correct, and why? > I bought a house _in_ the outskirts of the city.   >  I bought a house _on_ the outskirts of the city.


"Aeroplane" or "Airplane" - Which are people more familiar with?

I'm considering creating an application which has the word "Aeroplane" in the title. However, I have noticed in Google the following trend: Aeroplane: 16,700,000 results Airplane: 119,000,000 results I'm British and would never think to use the term "Airplane", it seems juvenile to me. However, the search results speak for themselves, so I'm wondering if this is an Americanism and if people on the other side of the Atlantic would be equally unfamiliar with the world "aeroplane". Natually, I want my app to be available to a global market, I also want to make sure it is easily accessibly via searches. Would it therefore be most prudent to go with "airplane" rather than "aeroplane"?


Idiomatic expression related to "cat-putting"

I lived in a scholarship house for all of one year when I was in college (in the US). At the end of every year, they held an event that they called "The Cat-Putting" in which a few residents would take turns telling a story. In the story they passed an imaginary cat to each other, but the primary focus of the story was to gently razz or roast all of the residents. I remember that it was explained at the beginning of this event that it was dubbed "The Cat-Putting" because of an **idiomatic expression that had something to do with cats** , but I can't figure out what that expression might be. Does anyone know what saying this might refer to, and how it might relate to this event? And has anyone else ever heard of a "cat-putting" or is this an event that is restricted to this one particular house?


"Some same thing/person"

I wonder if it is correct to say "some same thing/person", in order to mean some thing/person same as the one just mentioned earlier? If not, what is the correct way to express the meaning? My concern is that: is "same" always preceded with "the"?


Synonyms of "such that"

I found myself writing _such that_ many times already. Which synonyms would be adequate? Here is a typical example: > For theory 1 Eq. (1.1.1) can be written as ... , while for theory 2 _A_ must > be replaced by _B_ , **such that** ...


Justice as a title ... where does it come from?

In the US supreme court judges, among others, are called "justice [name]". Where is this _use_ rooted? Obviously the term comes from Latin "justitia" originally, but that means justice as in the the _principle_ or _system_ of justice. Where does the use as an honorary (?) title originate?


What is the origin of being in "hot water"?

When a person is suspected of doing something that is wrong, they are said to be in "hot water". Why? Did law breakers long ago have hot water thrown on them for their punishment? Were they dunked in hot water?


Capitalization of job title

Would you capitalize the job title in the following sentence? > I am writing this letter in regard to Joe Brown who is applying for the > director of teaching and learning position in the XYZ School District.


Why is "k" added to "panic" when suffixes added (as in "panicky")?

When adding any suffix to the word "panic," a "k" is added after the "c". Examples: panicked, panicking, panicky. Why is this the case? Are there any other English words that do the same? I'm also curious about any other words that add extra or unexpected letters when part of speech or tense changes. The etymology of "panic" includes a Greek origin--"panikon"--which is spelled with a "k" but no "c". Does this origin have anything to do with adding the "k" in variations of "panic"? But still, why keep both the "c" and the "k" in these variations? I know many other English words use "c" and "k" together (stick, lock, back, truck), but these others consistently use "ck" in all forms ("stick," "sticky," "stuck"). Why is "panic" different?


"May not have" or "may have not"

Which of the following is correct: _may not have_ or _may have not_? For example, which sentence should one write? > They may not have apples. > > They may have not apples.


It's 2013, where's my flying car?

>   * It's the 21st century, why don't we have world peace? > >   * It's 2013, where's my flying car? > > Is there a name for this kind of bad argument?


Is 'acronymise/ze' a word? Is it used only colloquially, if at all?

I just sent a text to a friend, who didn't understand an acronym I used for a game: > "Ah, I said it in a previous text so thought it was ok to **abbreviate** > it." Though, since it was an acronym I had created, could I have used the word 'acronymise/ze' to be more specific? I'm pretty sure it isn't a (formally used) word, but I wondered, as you often refer to acronyms specifically as acronyms, rather than abbreviations. Can you be more specific with a verb, too? It sounds too odd to me, so I'm guessing generally no. But I wondered—so perhaps I'm wrong. Or half wrong.


Is “what’s” a correct short form of “what does”?

E.g. “What’s he think?” Usually ’s is short for “is” so I don’t know.


Entire sentence in parentheses

I am formatting a new book for my company and ran into a problem. There is a sentence that reads: > Before beginning, watch Part I in the DVD series, _God & the History of > Art_. (If available as part of your program.) That the author wants me to change to: > (Before beginning, watch Part I in the DVD series, _God & the History of > Art_. If available as part of your program.) This sentence is one line, not part of a paragraph. Is it right to surround an entire standalone sentence with parentheses?


Difference between 'decided on' and 'decided to'?

_**Examples:_** _I have decided on a blue carpet for the bedroom.   I have decided to emigrate to Australia._ What exactly is the difference between "decided on" and "decided to"? Is the usage simply based on construction of the sentence, or do they differ in meaning as well?


Word for using quotation as part of sentence

Is there a word to describe the co-opting of a well-known phrase in the course of regular conversation or writing? For example, a sentence regarding death might refer to "shaking off the mortal coil" without mentioning that the phrase is taken from Shakespeare (perhaps assuming that the audience will be familiar with the reference). If it's not an exact quote, this could be called a "paraphrase" of Shakespeare. But what could it be called if it _is_ an exact quote? **Example:** What adverb could be employed to complete this sentence: _The phrase "shuffled off the mortal coil" was made famous by Shakespeare, and is used by this author_ **___ __ ___ __** _y._


Comma or full stop after ''come on''?

I’ve always wondered whether you should put a full stop or a comma after _come on_. >   1. Come on, it’s just over there! >   2. Come on. It’s just over there! > Which one is right?


Word for a pane showing fictional characters in columns

In the manga/anime world you sometimes come across panes that show some of the characters of a certain manga or anime series arranged into columns. Here are some examples: Bleach Gotei 13 Bleach Main Characters Steins;Gate Characters Is there a technical term for such panes? The closest word I can think of is "character roster", but those usually arrange the characters in a grid, rather than in columns.


Is the expression "for all time" correct?

I'd like to know what's the correct usage of the expression "for all time". In particular in this sentence: "she cried for all time" (it's about a girl who took a plane and cried during the whole flight). Thanks a lot for your attention!


An adjective for "able to see the big picture"

Is there a formal word to describe someone who sees not just the particulars, but also the bigger picture?


To see them play and to see them playing

Excuse my limited acquaintance on English usage; which sentence is grammatically correct, and if any, which meaning do they convey to ?   * I saw them **play** chess.   * I saw then **playing** chess. Many Thanks.


Should Philip have P. or Ph. as an initial?

In the context of scientific articles and technical white papers, references to other publications typically include the author’s surname with, depending on the format of the specific publication, either their full first name or (most commonly) their initials. In such cases, I sometimes see “Ph.” used instead of “P.” as initial for people named “Philip”. This does not seem linked to specific journal policies, but rather uncorrelated to the format of the references themselves. My questions are:   * How common is it? Is it considered standard practice?   * Are there other such examples in addition to _“Ph.”_?


Can we use future continuous in the following sentence?

"I have instructed that the cheque latest have to be issued by 15th every month, is there any problems? Please voiced out earlier if there's any issues in future. This will be the last time I'll be reminding on this." I would be wonder, whether the last sentence is correct or no!? "I'll be reminding on this" i think it must be "I am reminding on this" or "I reminded on this". Thank


prefix for "possible", "supposed", "potential" etc.?

I am looking for a prefix to express the meaning of something _possibly_ belonging to a class / category, or being a candidate for the concept in question. For instance, a "[...]-solution" would be some statement or proposition that _could be_ a solution for a given question, albeit its status of being so or not has still to be established. A "[...]-pathogen" would be a germ whose pathogenic character is still unclear; a "[...]-perpetrator" an alleged perpetrator and so forth. (Actually, I am mostly interested in a more abstract use of the prefix-root-combination). The prefix should function in the same way as "pseudo-", "quasi-" etc. It would be nice to find something of Greek or Latin origin, but other proposals are fine as well.


Are these the same or different?

What's the difference between these two sentences? >   * This movie is hardly as interesting as that one. >   * That movie is almost more interesting than this one. > I would like a native speaker's opinion on this.


Does "a value between two values" imply the two values are included within the range?

For example, if a there is a validation message that specifies that a number "must be a value between 1 and 100" does that imply that 1 and 100 are part of the allowed set of values? I would suggest that 1 and 100 are not part of the allowed range as it states the value must be between 1 and 100. Therefore meaning more than 1 and less than 100. Am I right?


The difference between a clause and a phrase?

This question What is the difference between a phrase and a clause? has an answer, with no embedded examples. The link it provides is not longer active, giving a `404 page not found error`. _Please don't close this as a duplicate until it, at least, has some answers._ The answer to the duplicate explains the differences between clauses and phrases, but fails to answer my question, as this is the explanation given: > The short answer: clauses contain a subject and its verb, while phrases do > not. Note that phrases may contain nouns and verbals, but won't have the > noun as the verb's actor.   * I do not understand what is meant by _verbals_ and the _noun as the verb's actor_ may as well be written in Swedish (of which I know not one word!). So I am posting this question again, as my question has not been answered. Clauses and phrases were the only thing I failed when studying English at school and forever it has been difficult for me to grasp (I don't think it was explained well, as I had a similar problem with positive and negative numbers the same year, and went on the excel at high level maths). I am looking to understand the very basics of what a clause is, what a phrase is, and by understanding these definitions it, hopefully, will be clear what the differences are. Can anyone, please, explain this and provide embedded answers?


Which past tense of "to light" should I use here?

I know that there are two ways to form the past tense of _to light_ (i.e. lit/lighted). Which one is appropriate for the sentence below? > His thoughts _lighted_ our way. or > His thoughts _lit_ our way.


Is there a single word for a document containing an individual's contact information?

I'm looking for a single noun to indicate a document (or web page) that contains a person's contact information (phone, email, etc.). The context is a navigation element on a personal website, for example: > Home | Bio | Contact Page I want to substitute the text "Contact Page" with the word I'm seeking. Archaic, formal or loaned words are perfectly acceptable, even desired. The tone of the website is humorous. A word that has a metaphorically connected meaning (similar to the way "Home" is understood to mean "The Home Page"), though less desirable, is still acceptable.


what's the meaning of "country- years"

What's the meaning of "country- years"? > Democratic legislatures approved only 76 percent of bills proposed by the > executive branch during 783 country- years Democracy and the Limits of Self-Government By Adam Przeworski ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/EezWJ.png)


Can I use a gapping comma in this sentence?

Could you please help me correct this sentence? Thank you very much. "The first thing I do in the morning after getting up is brush my teeth and wash my face, but the first thing he does is go on to sleep." Is this sentence logical?If I want to emphasize the different habits of two people (I vs. he), what can I do to make the sentence clearer? Also, can I replace the second verb with a comma? "The first thing I do in the morning after getting up is brush my teeth and wash my face; the first thing he does, go to sleep."


Is 'friendly reminder' a positive word? What is an alternative with a friendly undertone?

I send reminders to my customers all the time. And, I hesitate to use the word 'friendly reminder'. I interpret it as a soft reminders before aggressive reminders. It brings up an image of a thug asking me to payup before his next visit, This might be because of the movies I watch. So, what would be a substitute for 'friendly reminder' with a polite undertone.


18th to 20th Century Prose by Educated Professionals

I'm interested in emulating quality prose written in American or British English from around 1700 to 1900 by educated professionals who attended university. These years are only for reference and aren't strict bounds. Are there any contemporary books, websites, published collectanea/compendia which feature them? I'm questing after short works, such as editorials, letters, or opinions, like this letter from Oliver Ellsworth (third Chief Justice of the US) to George Washington and this letter from the American merchant William Jarvis (though ostensibly, he didn't attend university). I had to unearth these wearily and by chance, so where could I find such works effiaciously? **Addendum thanks to Andrew Leach:** I am regardful of the Shopping Recommendation page. To obviate this issue, I'm not requiring any specific titles but just starting points. **EDIT:** By luck, I discovered the US government's National Archives's Founder Online: Letters by John Jay: http://founders.archives.gov/index.xqy?q=Author%3A%22Jay%2C+John%22&s=1111211113&r=1 Letters by John Marshall: http://founders.archives.gov/?q=%20Author%3A%22Marshall%2C%20John%22&s=1111211121&sa=&r=11&sr= Letters by James Madison: http://founders.archives.gov/index.xqy?q=Author%3A%22Madison%2C+James%22&s=1111211113&r=1


Adjective or Noun for Describing a Written Entity Devoid of Meaning

I wrote a blog post that was about pretty much nothing, but couldn’t come up with a good word to describe its lack of meaning. I was hoping for a more interesting word than just _meaningless_.


"Would you have a suggestion?" Vs. "Do you have a suggestion?"

If you were asking for suggestions, say at stackexchange, what would be the most polite grammatically accurate version: Statement of the problem followed by: 1\. Do you have a suggestion? 2\. Would you have a suggestion? 3\. Would you happen to have a suggestion? I didn't think of this till I used (2) today morning. When I re-read the question after a couple hours, the construction sounded odd to me. Is (2) grammatically correct? Is it more polite than (1)? Is it old-fashioned? Why does it sound a bit odd? Would you have any thoughts? Do you have any thoughts? Would you happen to have any thoughts?


Where to place 'only' relative to prepositions?

I know that questions about the placement of 'only', are often asked here; accordingly, I searched for an answer to my question before posting it. **Question** Where are focusing adverbs placed relative to prepositions? For example,   1. For his presentation, he needed to talk _only_ about tomatoes.   2. For his presentation, he needed to talk about _only_ tomatoes. **My Attempt to Answer the Question** In both examples, it seems to me that 'only' is placed close enough to what it is intended to modify (the topic of the subject's discourse: tomatoes) that I cannot see any justifiable misinterpretations. One of the examples sounds better to me, but at this point in my studies, I am more interested in what the traditional rules of grammar require, than in how the wordings sound.


Adverb order: 'has largely been' or 'has been largely'

Does the placement of an adverb affect its meaning or application? Does each paired sentence here mean the same as the other? > 1.1 Mobile technology progress has largely been consumer-driven rather than > enterprise-driven.   >  1.2 Mobile technology progress has been largely consumer-driven rather than > enterprise-driven. > > 2.1 Mobile technology progress has largely been shaped by consumers.   >  2.2 Mobile technology progress has been largely shaped by consumers.


"Registrator", "registrar", or "registry" when describing the responsibility of managing registration-related activities

When naming a class in an object-oriented programming language I came a across a case where there were a few proposed names for describing a component that is responsible for abstracting registration related actions. Candidate names: >   * ApplicationRegistrator >   * ApplicationRegistrar >   * ApplicationRegistry > Which of these phrases more properly describes the scenario?


Correct use of subject/object in sentence?

In the sentence: It is fun to be him/he, would you use him or he? A teacher told me that you use the object form after the infinitive of to be. Is this true?


What's the grammatical object of "at" in "at 2-0 down"?

> At 2-0 down with ten minutes left, you have to go for broke. This is a structure at odds with what most learners know. Prepositions take nominals as objects, but here, what's the supposed object of the preposition? I'm raising this question because I find this 'at' cannot fit with the rest of the sentence in a grammatical analysis. "Down" is like an adjective or adverb, and "2-4" is a measure of how 'down' a sports team is, like 'two years' in "He is two years old". But then 'at' does not fit! I've seen such sentences as "Barcelona is 2-0 down with 10 men on the field" without "at", so I was wondering if "at" is necessary at all. If you think "at" is necessary in the original, would you also say it is necessary in "the bird is flying at 200 feet high"? This phrase parallels the first in that both involve a subject complement (high and down respectively) and a measure term of that attribute (200 feet and 2-0 respectively). Here is another example: > He is 6 feet tall. No preposition is needed here, so why is 'at' needed in the original?


Is there a specific word for "sheet music portfolio"?

Is there a specific name for a portfolio (a type of briefcase) that is used exclusively for holding sheet music?


Which word is used more in the UK: 'gaol' or 'jail'?

I know both words share the same meaning and pronunciation, but I wonder about their comparative usage in modern English.


What are some non-Greek/Latin hybrid words?

Most etymological hybrids in English are a mixture of Greek and Latin. I'm interested in hybrids from other languages, French and German, say. Can you think of any good examples? I'd be especially interested in modifications which cross languages. For example, if "knifelette" was a word it would be a German root with a French inflection. The older/more established the better.


Is there any word for a person who ruins magician's trick?

Is there any word for a person who ruins a magician's trick? I remember that I heard that word, but it's now lost somewhere in my brain. Can someone please help me to remember that word? Before asking here I asked in chat, where I got the response that there is no specific word for it. But I still think there must be.


Does the word "newbie" have a negative connotation?

Imagine that I'm running a friendly and informal online business. I would like to introduce my service to the new customers by a blog post that entitles, 'Are you a newbie to XYZ.com?'. Will that title make my customers feel intimidated? My brother and I had a long argument about that word. I said that the word doesn't make such a bad meaning and it can be used anywhere in a friendly manner; but he said that it sounds derogatory and should be avoided. He also asked me to completely avoid that word. He believes it will make people angry. Who is right and who is wrong here?


Connotation of "complacence"

What is the connotation of _complacence_? Is it a negative trait? The dictionary makes it seem like a positive attribute.


"Split in half" vs. "split in two" — which one is correct?

Does the "in" imply multiplication, in which case _split in half_ is correct, or is it division? It sounds like the latter to me, but I've heard it used both ways.


What will be appropriate in the following sentence?

What did the king do when he become/became angry? I am not a native speaker so am confused that since did is used in the begining, what will be correct, become or became? Also, what rule governs it?


Meaning of "through all right"

What does the phrase _through all right_ mean? > He'll see me _through all right_


What is the term for the part of a jingle that states the company name?

I have a vague recollection that there's a specific term for the way a company name is set to music in an advertising jingle. The only examples I can find right now are at the end of this Youtube video or this one. Wikipedia mentions "sound logo," but that's not quite right, that refers to the distinctive music, or tune, e.g. the 5-note McDonald's "I'm loving it!" sound.


Meaning of "public affairs" and "public interest"

The definition of _political_ from OALD is: > connected with the state, government or public affairs Is the definition of _public_ of public affairs definition 1 or 2 or neither? >   1. of, relating to, or affecting all or most of the people of a country, > state, etc. >   2. connected with the government and the services it provides > From dictionary.com, _affairs_ is defined as: > matters of commercial or public interest or concern Which of the following is the definition of _interest_ of public interest? >   1. the quality that something has when it attracts somebody's attention or > makes them want to know more about it >   2. a good result or an advantage for somebody/something >


Why does "want" take a preposition but "insist" does not?

Why can't you say: > "I insist you to do that!" After all, you can say: > "I want you to do that!" What's the difference between these two verbs, that they need to be used in sentences with different structures?


Best way to represent comparative information in paragraph form?

Let's say normally I have a table, and the left hand column has a requirement in it, and the right hand column has how the requirement is fulfilled. But because of a lack of support for tables, I need to represent this in the briefest manner possible for many, many items, without committing the literary sin of the text becoming boring, because I am repetitious in everything but the nouns. How do I do this?


What does “ ’er” mean in this phrase?

What does _’er_ mean in the following phrase? > Ear-bending disapproval from ’er indoors.


Are these sentences in the "Christian Science Monitor" acceptable English these days?

This is from a _Christian Science Monitor_ story on Nancy Pelosi's decision to stay on as House Minority Leader. The first report I saw in the _Washington Post_ had only one questionable sentence, but this second report has two: > “Being actively involved in politics at this level is really insatiable,” > Representative Pelosi said at a Wednesday press conference, flanked by her > female Democratic colleagues. “There aren’t enough hours in the day for me. > There’s so much more I want to do.” Are these sentences acceptable English to most native speakers, or are they clearly errors (one misusage of an adjective and one dangling modifier)?


What is this emphasis "did"?

> And he would fain have filled his belly with the husks that the swine > **did** eat: and no man gave unto him. Is this archaic? I see many instances of this usage where simple verbs would be enough in Shakespeare.


Above the title. What's the difference between "known as" and "known for"?


Say I wrote down 25 instead of 52 by accident. What is the right verb I can use here to specify what I did to these two digits?

I'm looking for a verb/some verbs here so I can say: I (verb) those two digits and that's why you read 25 here (instead of 52). I don't want to use "mix up" because I'd like to specify this "action" between two digits 2 and 5. I hope I made myself clear. Thank you!


How do native speakers guess the pronunciation of a word that they've never seen before?

How do native speakers guess the pronunciation of a word that they've never seen before ? Is there a general rule for that ? For example, someone said :               Words that end in -ic or -tion will be stressed on the second to last syllable. It doesn't matter how many syllables long a word is, we will count backward.     Here are some examples with -ic and -tion.     -ic: `classic, fan`tas-tic, e-co-`nom-ic, en-thu-si-`as-tic     -tion: `nation, con`di-tion, in-tu-`i-tion, spec-i-fi-`ca-tion       I would like to know more other rules like the above one, not only how to stress the word properly but also the way to pronounce one word correctly (or nearly correct) without knowing the phonetic. p/s : In short, my question is : "Is there a way to guess the pronunciation of a word correctly (or nearly correct) when we don't know it's phonetic code ?"


Is my interpretaion of Hobbes correct?

> Forasmuch as whosoever speaketh to another, intendeth thereby to make him > understand what he saith; if he speak unto him, either in a language which > he that heareth understandeth not, or use any word in other sense than **he > believeth is the sense of him that heareth** ; he intendeth also to make him > not understand what he saith; **which is a contradiction of himself**. It is > therefore always to be supposed, that **he which intendeth not to deceive, > alloweth the private interpretation of his speech to him to whom it is > addressed**. I don't understand the bold parts. "or use any word in other sense than this listener's understanding of the word." **he** believeth is the sense of **him** that heareth. This he is the speaker and him is the listener? "which means this speaker is contradicting himself, because he wants the listener to understand him but at the same time he doesn't want the listener to understand him" "people who don't want to deceive people allow what they say to be understood by the listener" Is this correct?


What is the word for obtaining a rhyme by mispronouncing a word using a regional dialect?

Take the lyrics: > ... Now he lives in the islands   >  Fishing the pilin's (instead of pilings) ... Is there a word that means to alter the pronunciation to achieve a rhyme (in song)?


Is it possible to use' cover off' instead of 'cover up'? cover up sense of unworthiness


What does "metadiscursive framework" mean?

In their article "The language of text-messaging" (which appeared in 2009, in S.C. Herring, D. Stein & T. Virtanen (eds), _Handbook of the Pragmatics of CMC_. Berlin and New York: Mouton do Gruyter.), Crispin Thurlow and Michele Poff use the phrase, > Given this modest but growing body of research, it is surprising that public > and policy-level discourse about text-messaging continues to fixate on its > deleterious impact on literacy and standard language use \-- especially of > young people (see Thurlow 2006, 2007). No review of the literature on > texting would, however, be complete without briefly considering this broader > metadiscursive framework. I googled this term "metadiscursive framework" and only got 8 hits, so I think it is relatively uncommon. The term "metadiscursive" is referring to "metadiscourse" which is discussion about a discussion (or maybe, about discussion). So I have a hand waving idea of what this means, but I will need to introduce it to the reader in plain language (using the magic of apposition). Any ideas how I could define this term in plain language? **UPDATE** Here are some more examples of the term's usage: From "Middle English medical recipes: a metadiscursive approach", here. > The first person singular pronoun is associated with authorial identity > while its plural counterpart is connected to the concept of community. This > is essential in the metadiscursive framework as it points at the idea of > communication as always accounted for in terms of social contexts. From "The Moral Resonance of Arab Media", here. > As I suggest, genre provides a way to discuss the organization of talk and > poetry -- a "metadiscursive" framework -- as poets and signers build > consensus over the kind of community that is best able to address the needs > at hand.


Psychopath vs. Sociopath

Given the recent news, I've heard the words "psychopath" and "sociopath" thrown around with little to no differentiation between the two. With no regards to medical practice, what's the difference between "psychopathy" and "sociopathy"? What makes a "psychopath" and what makes a "sociopath"?


"Especially" and commas

I'm curious about the correct usage of commas in the following sentence: "Secondary electron emission from metallic and especially dielectric surfaces is a fundamental process of great technological significance." I heard that one should put a comma before but not after especially. However, in my opinion the sentence looks kind of weird with a comma in front of especially. Can anyone assist me on this?


Reported speech: unnecessary past tense?

The following is an excerpt from a textbook in Korea. I'm wondering if this is an unnecessary past tense for the reported speech--or possibly wrong. > When I moved to Korea, one of the first things my coworker taught me was how > to say my address. I didn't understand why it was so important. **They > explained that I'd often give it over the phone when I ordered things to be > delivered**. Is the past tense necessary at all? Ordering food over the phone is not a one- time event and there is all likelihood that the writer will order more food in the future--not to mention that I'd never explain it like that. (I'd just say "You'll need it when you order food.) What do you guys think?


What is a "wreckless careerism"?

I have come across the following sentence: > The quickness of her ascent, and the fact that she revamped each orchestra’s > administration before suddenly moving on, has led some in music business > circles to charge her with _wreckless careerism_.   >  _Source_ After having considered that _The New York Times_ , as far as I know, does not use slang words in its written texts, I wonder what _wreckless careerism_ means. My problem is that _wreckless_ gets no support from any dictionary I have consulted, but this Ngram shows that this word exists, so it seems difficult to rule out the case as a mere typo. ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/yQv3z.png)


Archaic gradation words/constructs synonymous to "more" and "less"?

Are there any adverbs/pronouns (or sentence constructs) that fulfilled the gradation role of _more_ and _less_ in Early Modern English, that currently fell out of use or exist only in marginal, archaic or domain-specific speech? _example: how could one rephrase these sentences into Early Modern English, so that they don't use the the words 'more' or 'less'?_ > _You did more for me than you imagine._ > > _Less gawking, more helping!_ > > _I should study that some more._ > > _I meant that more... figuratively._ > > _Pour me some more coffee, please._ (note, if there are no such words, an answer that states so is perfectly acceptable)


Using "who" for things (nonliving beings)

On an online typing tutor site I came across the following phrase: > We're now going to move on to words who's first letter originates on the top > row. Can "who" normally be used in this way (to refer not only to people)?


Is there a comparative form of "well"?

Is there a word that means "more well", in the same way that "better" means "more good"? In common parlance most people just use "better" for this purpose, but this seems incorrect and is a nagging irritation for me, since "better" is an adjective while "well" is an adverb, and so strictly speaking can't be used in the same sense. I realize there isn't a commonly used word for this but it'd be interesting to know if there's one that's become archaic and has fallen into disuse.


Why is Santa Claus a man but Santa Maria a woman?

When it comes to cities and boats named after saints, it seems that "Santa" is always female and "San" is always male. > _e.g._ > > **Male Saints** : San Diego, San Francisco, San Antonio > > **Female Saints** : Santa Barbara, Santa Maria So why isn't "Santa Claus" a woman like all the other "Santa"s?


Is spelling part of Language?

In response to another question I asked, I was told spelling is not a part of language because it is a part of writing. This statement confuses me. Writing is a form of communication and is therefore, a part of written languages. Writing is directly related to spoken forms of the same language and though written langugaes can exist without a spoken form, and spoken languages exist without written versions, I don't understand how that would mean writing isn't an aspect of langage. Specifically in regard to spelling in English, we have standardized spelling. There are British Standards as well as US standards and the two are distinct despite more commonality than difference. What spelling is "correct" is dictated by where the writer is communicating. For example, realized vs. realised which are both phonetically correct, but which "standard" is chosen for use is largely dependent on where you learn your spelling, do your reading, get published etc. If this is not a part of "language" than what is it? Can someone please explain this distinction or separation to me? The comment had up-votes which would indicate to me that others reading the comment were not also confused by it and even agreed. I would just like to understand this perspective that is brand new to me?


Pronunciation: is there a reason why 'gn' in 'reigning' is pronounced [n] while in 'regnant' it is pronounced [gn]?

Both 'reigning' and 'regnant' are related to the same Latin noun 'regnum'. Why is 'gn' is pronounced [n] in the first word but [gn] in the second?


Adding a word accidentally to another, changing its meaning

A colleague accidentally keeps adding the word _case_ after referring to a project called _basket_ , thus referring to it as "basket case". Embarassing. But what is this linguistic phenomenon called, i.e. accidentally adding a word which changes the meaning so that the connotation becomes negative?


Another phrase like "Having a grand old time"?

Trying to find other phrases like "Having a grand old time" for an ending to our wedding invitation. Thanks so much for your help! -Jordan


OED Appeals: Origin of "bimble"

The OED has made a public appeal for help in tracing the history of some English words, including: > ## bimble > > verb _earlier than 1983_ > > The word _bimble_ , meaning ‘to move at a leisurely pace’, is sometimes said > to have originated amongst British soldiers serving in the Falklands, and > much of our early evidence supports this. However, one of our > correspondents, who grew up in the north-east of England in the mid-20th > century, says he remembers the word _bimble_ from his childhood there. We’re > looking for earlier evidence of the word to uncover the real story: is > _bimble_ a military coinage of recent vintage, or a north-eastern English > dialect term with a longer history? > > Here is the earliest example currently in OED for the verb bimble: > >> **1983 R. McGowan & J. Hands _Don’t cry for Me, Sergeant Major_ iv. 81 When the Marines moved at a slower pace they were ‘bimbling’.** > > Can you help us trace the origins of this word?


OED Appeals: Antedatings of football "header"

The OED has made a public appeal for help in tracing the history of some English words, including: > ## header > > noun _earlier than 1891_ > > _OED_ researchers have traced the history of _header_ in the football > (soccer) sense of ‘a shot, pass, or clearance made by heading the ball’ back > to 1891. It appears in the caption to an illustration of a player heading > the ball in an annual publication of the Scottish Football League: > >> **1891 ‘Gush’ _Heads & Tales_ 32 (caption), Header.** > > However, we know from our research that the verbal use of head to describe > the action (‘heading the ball’) goes back to at least 1871; with your help, > we would like to see if an example of _header_ in the football sense from > before 1891 can be found. If you find anything earlier, please also consider posting on the OED site.


What is the difference between obsolete and deprecate in computer science?

Given the two terms "obsolete" and "deprecate" in computer science, what is the difference between them? What I understand, Deprecated means still available for use but will no longer be developed or supported and may be discontinued in the next release or so. Obsolete means a better alternative is available so this is now deemed redundant and will **probably** be discontinued in the next release or so. It's what I believe and may be **incorrect** and if so then what is the actual difference?


Female equivalent for "wet dreams"?

As I understand, the term _wet dreams_ applies only to masculine gender? Then, unless it's unisex in nature, is there a specific term applicable to feminine gender?


Which is correct placing of 'just' and 'by'

Which of the following sentences are right:- A) One doesn't become cool just by playing football. OR B) One doesn't become cool by just playing football. sense of the sentence:- the sentence should give the following meaning Playing football does not make someone a cool person.


"Keith does not a hint take" or "A hint does Keith not take"

While wasting time on the internet (as I am wont to do), I came across a video in which somebody was criticizing a blog-post and corrected the statement   * * _Keith does not a hint take._ supplying his corrected version   * ** _A hint does Keith not take._ with the added explanation that the first sentence implies that there is a hint not taking Keith, unlike his phrasing. In either case, the intended connotation is supposed to be that of the statement   * _Keith does not take a hint._ Do either of the above statements carry this meaning? To my ears, the first statement seems perfectly comprehensible and does not appear to flip subject and object, while the second seems convoluted. Maybe something like _"A hint Keith does not take"_ is something more along the lines the critic was going for? At any rate, I would appreciate an explanation as to which of the above statements are grammatical and/or carry their intended meaning.


What do you call the people who like themselves?

How do you describe a person who appreciate himself ( kinda love himself) or really talk about himself in a way of selfishness ?


What is the origin of "go suck an egg"?

"Go suck an egg" is a saying typically used similarly to "take a hike" or "piss off": > Hey, you going to help me with this or what? > > Go suck an egg. An few Ngram searches shows that "suck an egg" is only really used with the words "go" and "an" but I was not able to find any reference to the origin of the phrase. An existing question on ELU asks about the origin of "teaching grandma to suck eggs"  but none of the answers directly discuss this usage of "suck eggs". When did this phrase become a common statement meaning "go away"? Why was _this_ random activity associated with the idiom?


What is the word for a man who keeps returning for other people to abuse him?

I'm looking for a word describing a man who keeps returning to a place although people there always abuse him and say bad things to him. He keeps going back because maybe he likes to experience this like a Howling Mad Murdock of the A TEAM.


Diagramming and use of please as interjection

When diagramming the sentence, "Simon, would you please sing now?", should I diagram Simon or you as the subject? Would you be diagrammed as pronoun and please as an interjection? I am trying to help my son diagram real-life sentences and am getting stuck myself.


Ambiguous? "someone lives between place A and place B"

Is this sentence: “someone lives between place A and place B” ambiguous? Depending on the cities, I wonder whether it means:   * "someone lives in a place C between A and B"  Or,   * "someone keeps traveling regularly from A to B and B to A for whatever reason. But stays in A and B."


Omission of "the" in "elected him president" and "made captain"

Why is there no _the_ before _president_ and _captain_? > They elected him president. > > She was made captain of the team.


"To be elected chairman" vs. "to be elected the chairman"

I have a question regarding the correct use of the definite article "the": One of my books says: > Definite article _the_ is used before nouns denoting a position that can be > held by one person at one time Example: He has been elected **the** chairman of the committee. But another book says, > No article is used before predicative nouns denoting a position that is > normally held at one time by one person only. This means that "He has been elected chairman of the committee" is correct. So my question is this: which one is (more) grammatically correct?


Why no article in the following?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Omission of "the" in "elected him president" and "made captain" I was reading a piece on Time and found the following paragraph where they don't use 'a' or 'the' with President. Why no article and what difference does it make if we add one? > Celebration in Dakar, the capital, weren't so much for the triumph of Sall, > who still has to prove himself _as President_.


Should I add a "the" before "headmaster" here?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  "To be elected chairman" vs. "to be elected the chairman"   >  Omission of "the" in "elected him president" and "made captain" > Dr. Peter Spence, **__** headmaster of the school, told us, “a fifth of > pupils here go on to study at Oxford and Cambridge.” Does it matter whether I add a "the" before "headmaster" here?


Term to describe fictional texts written in a non-fiction style

The term "creative non-fiction" is the opposite: a non-fiction work expressed in a fiction style, such as a historical novel. It may be a little less common, but is there a general term for the opposite? In film it might be called a "mockumentary" (e.g. _This is Spinal Tap_ ), or "pseudo-documentary" (e.g. _War of the Worlds_ ), but the use of "documentary" concerns a particular non-fiction medium. One wouldn't use it for _Scarfolk Council_ (a fictional history blog), for example, or _Welcome to Nightvale_ (a fictional news radio show). So is there a more general term I'm missing?


Contracted dates

I'm comfortable with the _'80s_ as a contraction of the _eighties_ , as in the years from 1980-89. How do I correctly use this when it is in a position where it looks like it is either an adjective or needs a possessive apostrophe? An example sentence with the options I've identified this far:   * _'80s' music_ (music of the '80s), or    * _'80s music_ ('80s being an adjective describing the music). What do you think?


Does the word "exgest" exist?

A colleague of mine found reference to the word _**"Exgest"**_ in a contract. In context, this appeared to mean the opposite of the word _**"Ingest"**_ which was used earlier in the contract. These words were intended to convey the consumption and processing of data in a system. Does this word, _**"Exgest"**_ , actually exist, and what does it mean? **Edit:**   List of prior research:   google: exgest   google: word definition exgest   google: site:dictionary.com exgest   reverse lookup: opposite of ingest   merriam webster search: exgest   dictionary.com exgest   english.stackexchange.com search


More concise words for “Ask for help and learn from others”

I’m looking to summarize an idea into as few words as possible — to make it as concise as possible. The idea is to ask others for help (putting ego aside), value others’ input, listen to others, learn from others. What I have so far is “Ask for help and learn from others”, but I’m not that satisfied with it. I’m trying to make a list of rules, such as “be virtuous” or “seek adventure” or “be kind”, and this particular phrase doesn’t really fit in well. Any other suggestions? And please ask me to clarify if necessary. I’ve been running this through my head for a while, so it might not be clear as I think it is.


Twelfth Night: Why does Olivia call Sir Toby “cousin”?

I’m reading _Twelfth Night_ , where in Act 1, Scene 5, Olivia says to Sir Toby Belch: > **Olivia** : Cousin, cousin, how have you come so early by this lethargy? How come she’s calling her uncle “cousin”?


Is “want” a causative verb?

I've always held on to the definition that Causative Verbs express how the Noun before the Verb influences the execution of an action. Similarly, the Longman Student Grammar of Spoken and Written English defines them as: > "Causative Verbs... indicate that some person or thing helps to bring about > a new state of affairs." I know that the verbs _have, get, make,_ and _let_ are the four prototypical Causatives. But then I got to thinking that _let_ doesn't really “make” anything happen. And I just bunch _let_ up with the other three (also _allow_ ) because of their similar structures and because it's more convenient to teach them as a group. When learners and teachers expand the definition beyond the four most common Causatives, in both active and passive-like structures, the lines can get blurry. There are many long lists on the Net (one listed as many as 90 and called them “mostly Causatives”). I guess the problem is the definition of what's Causative to begin with. There are also those people who would identify Causatives by certain patterns that the words follow. In any case, for this particular question, I’d settle for one verb that I’ve seen making the rounds on Causative lists: Is _want_ a causative verb or not? And for me to make a sharper delineation of what's causative, I’d have to ask why.


Word for "player" without the negative connotations

I wanted to describe someone as a player in the positive sense but the word seems to have too many negative connotations to use without explanation. The word or phrase I'm looking for describes someone as "in the game", an active participant, making a difference, and meriting respect. Edit: Though this question has been closed as not likely having a factual answer, I am still hopeful someone will know one. As pointed out I could have done a much better job of explaining the concept I was going for. In particular, the word describes one who is an active participant in all parts of life (or at least whatever part is in context), enjoys participating, is successful and is focused on the playing rather than the winning. I was hoping for a word that stands along without context. I'm told "player" alone suggests one who manipulates others.


What language technique is "I am gone though I am here"

I am writing an essay about Shakespeare's 'Much Ado About Nothing' and I was wondering what language technique is used in "I am gone though I am here". Is it a juxtaposition, oxymoron or what?


"Mobile" vs. "cellphone" in AE

I already heard Americans use the term "mobile" for "cellphone" -- which I thought was chiefly BE -- and so I wish you could tell if such usage of "mobile" has any currency in GAE? Unless it might be called a "mobile" by Americans outside of the US or frequently traveling to Europe.


What does "not quite a Haiku" mean? Is it a popular English idiom?

I found the article written by Mark Halperin under the title _not quite a Haiku_ in July 13 Time magazine followed by the lines: > From a White House pool report about the President’s stop in Virginia Beach: > He worked the rope line. Lots of teenagers. There was more screaming. As I was quite unfamiliar with the phrase, I tried to find out its meaning on Google. I wasn’t able to find any definition as I used to find in Google Search, but found a couple of examples of the text headed with the caption, _not quite a Haiku_ : >   * _Not quite a haiku_ : They would never suspect they always have it > coming And I'm famous but someone has to do it Clean this world of the rot. > ‒ amcon. net > >   * Not quite Friday anymore, and _not quite a haiku_. A little while ago, I > was looking for sentences for my RTK2 deck, and while attempting to find > something for the character I stumbled across something that is, I suppose, > near ... ‒ andorien.wordpress.com > > From these examples, and in association with _Haiku_ , which is the shortest form of poem in the world as I understand and easy for everyone to try and work up, I assume _not quite a Haiku_ means "It’s not a so easy work (as you work up a Haiku)" or "It’s not a so easy-going day (as you're indulging in Haiku)" but I’m not sure. What does _not quite a haiku_ mean? Is it popular English phrase? Since when did it come into use? We have鼻歌 (hanauta) in Japanese literally meaning “sing a song with nose,” which means doing one’s work humming a tune (nonchalantly). Does ' _not quite a haiku_ ' imply the same thing?


Semi-vowels in English

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  When is "Y" a vowel? Why are 'w' and 'y' called semi-vowels in English?


Are W and Y vowels?

> **Possible Duplicates:**   >  When is "Y" a vowel?   >  Is the 'w' in 'cow' a vowel or a consonant? Are **W** and **Y** vowels? I learned it depends on the conditions. But I don't know what conditions.


Is the 'w' in 'cow' a vowel or a consonant?

Is the _w_ in _cow_ a vowel or a consonant?   Assuming it is considered a vowel, would it likewise be so in _how_? I learned that the vowels are " _a_ , _e_ , _i_ , _o_ , _u_ , and sometimes _y_." If _w_ can be a vowel, what other letters can be vowels?   What is the definition of a vowel? By the way, I know _w_ can be a vowel, for example in the word _cwm_ , described in the OED as: > A valley; in Physical Geogr., a bowl-shaped hollow partly enclosed by steep > walls lying at the head of a valley or on a mountain slope and formed > originally by a glacier; a cirque.


“Dish of the day“ vs “today's special”

Many restaurants offer a menu which doesn't change from day to day, and in addition offer one choice which varies from day to day, perhaps depending on which ingredients are available. This choice can be called _dish of the day_ (perhaps “soup of the day”, etc.) or _special_ (“today's special”) or perhaps other expressions (what else is there?). How prevalent are the various ways of formulating this concept? Does it vary between dialects? Is there a nuance in meaning? (I guess really fancy restaurants would use _du jour_ …)


parent vs parents, which is the correct word to use?

i would like to know which of these is exactly correct or is both allowed ? i see people use **parent** and also as **parents** in day to day communication.