What is this phrase, "I hope we catch up," called when "catch" may be confused with what's done with a  baseball?

I asked someone “I hope we catch up soon” and he imagined himself being lightly or violently tossed in the air hoping someone will catch him. Obviously a non-native English speaker. Is there a term for this phrase or type of misunderstanding? Are there other examples of this?


What is the meaning and origin of "set-piece battle"?

The definition I've found that makes the most sense is Wikipedia's: > In warfare, a set piece battle may involve large formations moving according > to a plan and responding to the opposing force also by plan. So I assume the point is that the course of the battle is decided in advance, as opposed something ad-hoc or improvised. But what's the origin of the term? And what are its opposites?


Why isn't the letter 'W' used to describe co-ordinates?

From my understanding, UV is used to describe the co-ordinates for 2 dimension and XYZ is used to describe the co-ordinates for 3 dimension. why was the letter 'W' skipped which is between these 2? Is there any reasons pertaining to the English language or there is no real reason for the choice?


Meaning of "I have got..."

I don't clearly understand the meaning of "I have got ___ _" in sentences like the following one: > I have got to get. Is it a sentence using the past tense, or the present? What does it mean?


Positive alternative to "ominous"

The word `ominous` has a negative connotation attached to it, but is there a word with the same kind of meaning that is positive?


em-dash and comma, which comes first

I am confused about the preferred way to combine an em-dash insertion with a comma occurring in the outer sentence. Until now, I had preferred to write: > The erosion responsible for residuals is less related to the material > process of creation—e.g., rewriting in the sense of Mondrian or blurring the > edges in the sense of Rothko—, but to the double nature of time. Consulting another question on the web, I had convinced myself that em-dash and comma are complementary and there is nothing wrong in combining them. However the example on that linked page indicates that perhaps the comma should precede the insertion, like so: > The erosion responsible for residuals is less related to the material > process of creation,—e.g., rewriting in the sense of Mondrian or blurring > the edges in the sense of Rothko—but to the double nature of time. Is there any advise on which variant would be preferred in academic British English?


"Absence makes the heart grow fonder" vs. "Out of sight, out of mind"

So which is it? Do we feel more sentimental when we are apart from our loved ones, or do we tend to forget friends and lovers easily once they are out of our sight? Which idiom came first, and was the second in reply to the first? In other words, I would like to know the history of these proverbs and if they are linked. _**History notes_** Well the history of the first proverb is proving quite interesting. In 1650, the polyglot and Anglo-Welsh writer, James Howell’s, in his literary work, _Epistolae Ho-Elianae_ or _Familiar Letters_ observed that > “Distance sometimes endears friendship, and absence sweeteneth it.” When I read this letter of friendship and love I was enamoured and slightly perplexed, it appears to be a declaration of deep affection and love. And from what I could gather it was addressed to a man, a certain _Dan. Caldwell, Esq.; from Amsterdam_ in 1610 ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/GGSEH.jpg) ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/TGJ5g.jpg) * * * However, some claim that the sentiment, _absence makes the heart grow fonder_ , first appeared in Shakespeare _Merchant of Venice_ 1596-1598 > ... but I dote on his very absence,... I'm not terribly convinced though, isn't this the same as saying, "I miss him terribly"? One theory I read says that an anonymous poem which appeared in Francis Davison’s “Poetical Rhapsody” in 1602 is the originator of this proverb. I checked online and this was the closest example I could find. ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/xWxnd.jpg) ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/MyBsU.jpg) Is it possible to discover when "Out of sight, out of mind" was first written, did it precede the 16th century? I wonder.


metaphor(ic) Vs idiom(atic)

I would like to understand what differences and relations are between metaphor and idiom, and between metaphoric and idiomatic. Following are quotes from me asking two people on this site: zpletan said after this answer: > I would say that something smelling fishy is a metaphor that has become > idiomatic. But maybe I'm wrong. :) Metaphor is "a figure of speech in which > a word or phrase is applied to an object or action to which it is not > literally applicable," while idiom is "a group of words established by usage > as having a meaning not deducible from those of the individual words." (New > Oxford English Dictionary) Nico said in one comment following his reply: > idiomatic means: Peculiar to or characteristic of a particular language > (OED). So you could have an idiomatic English metaphor/simile/allegory etc. > as opposed to a French or Spanish one. However idiomatic is not restricted > to figures of speech, you can say that putting the verb at the end of the > sentence is idiomatic of German. It looks like different people have different opinions. So are there consensus opinion on this question?


"Thank you for your coming" and "Thank you for your understanding"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  "Thank you for coming" and "Thank you for your coming" The first one seems ungrammatical, as pointed by some of native speakers. But the latter one seems relatively recognized as grammatical sentence. Considering both "coming" and "understanding" nouns, both sentence seems grammatical to me. Or "coming" never be a noun? Could you show me other example with different verbs?


"Asked my height" or "asked of my height"?

"Asked my height" sounds strange, while "asked of my height" sounds like an overkill. "Asked what my height was" sounds terrible.


Which is more appropriate: Watch out/Be careful you are going to fall OR you will fall?

The thing is that the answer key to Round Up 3 says: Watch out! You are going to fall! BUT Be careful or you will burn your hand. I wonder whether it is possible to interchange 'to be going to do smth' for future simple in the above sentences as the rule goes like this: We use "will" for prediction, warning, offer, promise, threat, polite request, on-the-spot decision, opinion, hope, fear (especially with the words: think, expect, suppose, hope, believe, know, probably, sure etc). e.g.: Be quiet or the teacher will get angry. (warning) I'll write to you every day. (promise) While we should bear in mind that one of the uses of 'to be going to do smth' is when there's evidence that smth is about to happen: There's going to be rain because the sky is overcast. So, i can't quite tell one from the other - whether it is a warning or evidence of what is going to happen and could they be applied simultaneously to one case? Meaning, one can use both depending on what they imply.


Etymology of 'just' as an adverb and its French connection

Just (adj.): > late 14c., "righteous in the eyes of God; upright, equitable, impartial; > justifiable, reasonable," **from O.Fr. juste "just, righteous; sincere" > (12c.)** , from L. iustus "upright, equitable," Just (adv.): > "merely, barely," 1660s, from M.E. sense of "exactly, precisely, punctually" > (c.1400), from just (adj.), and **paralleling the adverbial use of Fr. > juste**. What does _paralleling the adverbial use of Fr. juste_ mean? Were the different senses of just concocted in French and then carried over to English every now and then (after its use as an adjective had already been integrated into the latter)? I am also interested in how the adverb evolved from meaning _exactly_ to _merely_ , two words which seem slightly at odds with each other.


When to use 'divisible' vs 'dividable'

I realised today that I use the terms _divisible_ and _dividable_ interchangeably, even though there may be a difference between them. If they are in fact different, I'm interested in any general rule that might apply to a large case of similarly related terms as well.


How/when does one use "a most"?

I've recently come across a novel called A most wanted man, after which being curious I found a TV episode called A most unusual camera. Could someone shed some light on how to use "a most" and whether it has anything to do with "the most"?


"UET is engineering a stronger Pakistan", is it correct to say so?

For a local festival, my university - UET - has written a sentence on the entering gate, that reads as "UET is engineering a stronger Pakistan" According to my knowledge, engine is a verb, and engineer is a noun as `an engineer is a person who engines.` So, can `engineer` be regarded as a verb and `engineering` is the present participle of it? And if so is the case, is it formal or informal?


What is the source of the expression "nothing at all"?

I'm looking for the source of the distinction between "nothing" and the nearly equivalent phrase "nothing at all." In common usage the two are synonymous, but the preposition "at all" seems to suggest a more nuanced logic: "Nothing," but a nothing coinciding in the place of "all." The latter speaks less to the negation of the presence something and more to the condition of a gap in a totality. I've seen definitions of the Latin nil being equally "nothing" or "nothing at all;" if this is the case, I wonder when and where the equivocation comes from.


Origin of "Under the weather"?

I understand that "Under the weather" means feeling sick. I heard a rumor that this idiom may have nautical origins, but I don't know for sure. Does anyone know more about the origin of this phrase, and when it entered common usage?


Is there a term for expressions usually rendered as names but are meant to be humorous?

The expressions about which I am asking are used often on "Prairie Home Companion" when the narrator delivers a list of "fake" credits at the end of the show or at the end of a comic bit. For example, I.P. Freely, Iona Ford, Ilene Down, Max A Million, etc. Is there a technical term for this type of expression. I guess these could be a type of pun.


are astronomy and astrology apt names for their concepts?

Or be switching them be correct, since the original assignment was a historical convention? Or do neither suffix convey enough meaning; we can create 'bionomy' if 'biology' was already taken?


Starts with N ends in O.... means Yes

Just wondering if there is a word (or pair of words) that starts with N and ends with O and actually means Yes (or roughly yes... some sort of synonym). I thought this might have some humorous applications on occasion. Thanks.


Why is "eye" pronounced so strangely?

This is either a spelling or a pronunciation anomaly; I'm not sure which. Why is "eye" pronounced as the letter "I"?


Is there a word for "dissecting a sentence and naming its parts"? (example below)

Such as: > The great people of that great nation had been producing the greatest per > capita carbon footprint for decades when they realized that the science was > right and their practices were unsustainable. I've gone thus far and have some questions. > 1-SUBJECT A..The B..great C..people D..of E..that F..great G..nation > > 2-VERB A..had B..been C..producing > > 3-PREDICATE A..the B..greatest C..per D..capita E..carbon F..footprint > > 4-PREDICATE (Q1-still predicate?) A..since B..their C..industrialization > > 5-CONJUNCTION A..when > > 6-SUBJECT A..they > > 7-VERB A..realized > > 8-CONJUNCTION A..that > > 9-SUBJECT A..the B..science > > 10-VERB A..was > > 11-PREDICATE A..right > > 12-CONJUNCTION A..and > > 13-SUBJECT A..their B..practices > > 14-VERB A..were > > 15-PREDICATE A..unsustainable. Q2-Is this a run on sentence? Q3-If this is a valid sentence, could someone help me go further by labeling each word of each part of the sentence? Q4-Could it be made better? Much obliged.


Meaning of "that friendship will not continue to the end which is begun for an end"

Can someone explain the meaning of this quotation? > That friendship will not continue to the end which is begun for an end.


What is the opposite of procrastination in one word?

I thought of **precrastination** at first but that appears to be the act of planning to procrastinate.


What is the equivalent of a "Good Watch" for an audiobook or record?

We say that a movie is a "good watch" and a book is a "good read". Somehow, to say that an audiobook or an album is a "good listen" doesn't sound right to my ears, but perhaps that's only because I've never heard it.


What is the difference between "better yet" and " better still"?

Is there a difference? This Ngram shows an interesting trend.


What is a "canary-trainer"?

In Arthur Conan Doyle's _The adventure of Black Peter_ , Watson casually refers to a previous exploit of Holmes:- > In the memorable year '95 a curious and incongruous succession of cases had > engaged his attention, ranging from this famous investigation of the sudden > death of Cardinal Tosca...down to his arrest of Wilson, the notorious > _canary trainer_ , which removed a plague-spot from the East End of London. According to Green's _Dictionary of Slang_ a canary might be   * a mistress   * a prostitute   * a thief's female accomplice   * a female singer among other less-likely definitions. So it seems possible that a _canary trainer_ was a brothel-keeper. Online I turned up _The Canary Trainer_ , a Sherlock Holmes pastiche, revolving around Opera singers, which doesn't seem to fit in with the previous definitions. I realise that _actress_ and _harlot_ were pretty nearly synonymous in Victorian times, but don't think the same stigma attached to opera singers, in which case training of singers can hardly be said to be "a plague-spot". So, does anyone know what a _canary trainer_ did?


Word Meaning: Stopping Someone from Doing Something (such as in the case of punishment)

I've just lost a word I use frequently whenever talking about the reasons for punishments. The word should (I think) fill the blank: Punishments, such as jail time, **__** people from doing crime. The word is related to stopping, hindrance, incentive, restrict, etc. In this usage, it should also imply that it stops people from committing crime because they don't want to go to jail. Jail also stops people from committing crimes because they can't leave jail. It should fit both of these simultaneously. I hope this isn't too far of a stretch.


Between 5 and 10 means: “5 and 10” or “6 and 9”?

> Please enter between 5 and 10 characters.


Use of "facetious"

I received an e-mail including the following sentence: > I am not asking for a facetious grade change, just one that would allow me > to pass. What the writer means is that the request isn't frivolous or petty. This use sounds wrong to me, but the literal dictionary definition doesn't contradict it (the dictionary definition includes, for instance "flippant"). My question is whether this is a use typical in some situation or dialect I'm not familiar with, or if it's actually completely nonstandard.


Origin of Doobie (joint, marijuana cigarette)

OED says: > **doobie** : _a marijuana cigarette_   >  Origin unknown. A relationship with _dobby_ has been suggested.   >  **dobby/dobbie** : _A silly old man, a dotard, a booby. Dialectal._ > > First citations:   >  1967 J. B. Williams Narcotics & Hallucinogenics. _Dubbe_ , Negro slang for > a marijuana roach.   >  1982 A. Maupin Further Tales of City 95, _I smoke a **doobie** at lunch._ But I just chanced upon What does the "dooby" in "scooby dooby doo" mean? in Yahoo Answers (don't laugh! :) where someone posted: > _"It's obvious that Shaggy's astoner, I'm sure he's been feeding Scoob a bit > of his hash and whatnot."_   >  _Scoob =Scooby Doo_, cartoon "pet" dog of constantly-hungry hippie/village > idiot _Shaggy_ (from 1969) I'm not entirely convinced that 1967 _dubbe_ was necessarily a significant factor in the appearance of a doobie = a joint since around 1970 (the hippie era, some might say). So I'd like to know whether it's credible to claim the usage arose (primarily?) through association with the TV show (specifically, the two characters therein closely associated with marijuana).


What does someone “pushes back and crack some eggs” mean? Is it a popular turn of phrase?

In Maureen Dowd’s article titled “Who’s that candidate in the teal toenail Polish?” in New York Times (August 3), http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/04/opinion/sunday/dowd-whos-that-candidate-in- the-teal-toenail-polish.html?hp she quotes the following comment of New York City mayoral candidate, Christine Callaghan Quinn: > “Quinn is still smarting over a Times story that described her volatile > “hair-trigger eruptions. “Am I pushy?” she asked. “Yep. Do I like taking no > for an answer when no means New Yorkers aren’t going to get something they > need? No. **Do I push back and crack some eggs?** Absolutely.” > > She also defended herself for calling the police and fire commissioners in > July when an ambulance did not arrive in a timely way, after a City Council > intern fainted in the heat.” Though I understand this is a metaphoric expression, I’m not clear with the meaning of “Do I push back and crack some eggs? Absolutely.” It sounds like she is saying that she is adamant to say ‘No,’ whenever she doesn’t think the proposed policy and measures benefit New Yorkers, without worrying about conflict or confrontation, but I’m not sure. What does it exactly mean? Is “push back and crack some eggs” a popular turn of phrase, or Christine Quinn’s (not Dowd’s, as is usual) own turn of phrase?


The meanings of a couple of expressions

* **You sound like a broken record**   * **You're like a broken record skipping** They mean someone repeats something over and over and it's annoying? Are they both common?   * **She's is poor as a church mouse** Is it still in use?


Omitting "what it was" in a sentence

Example: > There's was something wrong in the room, but I couldn't quite tell what it > was. I felt as if I had entered a house with the gas stove left on; there > was something dense and strange in the atmosphere though invisible to my > eyes. > > **Seconds ~~after~~ later I realized:** Anna was no longer in the room. So instead of writing "seconds after I realized what it was" I just left it as "seconds after I realized (because I already wrote what it was in one of the sentences above). Is it acceptable to omit **what it was** in a situation like this?


sham + adjective / noun

I've come across **he shams sick** Can I say **he shams an idiot** or **he shams pain in his back** ? Do I have to use a person or a thing after sham? I know it's a rare word but nevertheless


What does it mean to "pay X on the dollar"?

When I hear money laundry lingo in TV crime-series, people sometimes fence stuff for so and so much "on the dollar". What does it actually mean? And where does the expression originate from?


In Vs On Vs At (when talking about streets)

I have found many sentences with street names and some of them have these three prepositions. I Don't know, but I believe that Americans use (on + name of the street) and British use (in + name of the street). So if I am correct about this, are these sentences correct? > He lives in Oxford St. > > He lives on Oxford St. I also came across that "in" is not used when we want to talk about exact location, you'd use "at" instead. So, are these sentences correct? > He lives at 4732 Marshall Drive. > > Alice's office is at 26515 Main Street. These last two sentences I've come across them using the prepositon "on", but if "at" is used to exact location, I think that "on" would be incorrect. I don't know if there is any difference between British and American English in this case.


Is the word 'consort' still considered an insult in the modern usage?

In Romeo and Juliet, Tybalt says to Mercutio: 'Mercutio, thou consort'st with Romeo.' Mercutio replies 'consort! What, dost thou make us minstrels?... Zounds consorts!' Bloodshed followed shortly. It's very clear that the word _consort_ here is very emotionally loaded so as to lead to murder. What I'm interested to know is whether the word _consort_ still carries this highly negative connotation today. If not, can it be used interchangeably with _partner, associate_ or even _friend_?


What part of speech is "atom" in "hydrogen atom"?

What is the type (adjective, noun, etc.) of the word _atom_ in _hydrogen atom_? I think that _atom_ here does not qualify _hydrogen_ in any way and we can use it or not, and the meaning of the word _hydrogen_ will not change. So, _hydrogen atom_ and _hydrogen_ are equivalent.


Is "paraphrased" the correct way to express an attributed quote with known origins?

This question and answer indicate that when the source of a quote comes from an unverified source, we may say it's "attributed", or that it's "apocryphal". Both of these terms imply that there is some error or uncertainty in who is credited with having said the quote being referenced. However, I have a situation where the source of a quote is known, but the original version is an idea expressed over a few paragraphs. Over time, with many retellings, the idea has been trimmed down to an efficient and snappy phrase. So, I want to give credit to the person who had the idea, but use the snappy version that people are familiar with. Note that no one person is known to have come up with the snappier version. Each retelling always attributed whatever version to the original source. Most people assume the original person said the snappy version the first time round. Using a generic example, I was thinking that I would add the word _(paraphrased)_ , something like this: > "A snappy quote is a short quote." > > ~ Joe McFamousguy (paraphrased) But I wondered if maybe there was a standard for this kind of thing. What's the best way to express that this is a variant or version of a quote, but that there is no uncertainty that the source is the correct one?


Optimisation fence

Could anyone explain what "optimisation fence" mean? I have found it in several papers but don't get the meaning at all.


How is vehicle fuel efficiency expressed outside the United States?

I've been wondering this for a long time and Google doesn't seem to want to give me the answer. In the United States, the term "miles per gallon" is most commonly used to express the fuel efficiency of an automobile. Given that "mile" and "gallon" are artifacts of the U.S. customary system of measurement, how would someone in a country that uses the Metric system go about expressing this rate? "Kilometers per liter"? "Meters per U.K. gallon"? "Furlongs per hogshead"?


When using 'of' when is it really necessary to pluralize something or singularize it?

What would be right. Would you say a thousand points of battle damage are inflicted to you or would you say a thousand points of damage is inflicted to you?


Sun 'goes down' or 'comes down'?

A couple months ago I read a book with the statement **When the sun goes down** and today in a movie I saw the man said **Let's wait for the sun to come down**. I believe both are refering to the sunset. But which of them is better to be used or are there any formal differences between the two sentences?


Good word for something physical that's inexplicable

I'm looking for a word to describe something physical, something that you can tangibly and empirically feel, but cannot see, nor sense in any other way than touch, nor explain its imperceptibility. Does anyone have any ideas? **EDIT** : If anyone can think of a single word for such a definition, that would be fantastic! :)


"It was turning out the dining-room done it."

> “It was turning out the dining-room done it, if you ask me,” said Mrs. > Sutton. “Now, don’t you overdo yourself, ma’am,” I says to her; but you know > how she is, sir. She gets that restless, she can’t bear to be doing > nothing." Is the first sentence "It was turning out the dining-room done it," correct? It's in the novel _Suspicion_ by Dorothy Sayers. Something seems to be missing in this sentence and I don't understand the meaning of this sentence at all.


Do I take a small nap or a light nap?

I heard a friends say that he's going to take a _small_ nap. Is this correct usage? I thought we only take _light_ naps.


May numero sign (No.) be used to indicate amount?

I found that numero sign (No.) may be used as abbreviation of word "number" in meaning "ordinal number". May it be used as abbreviation of word "number" in meaning "amount"?


A single word which can be used in the place of floccinaucinihilipilification whithout losing the nuances of its meaning

> Humans are quick to partake in the _floccinaucinihilipilification_ process, > it has happened before and it will happen repeatedly until evolution > explicates perfect men. Is there a single word that conveys the meaning of flocc...ion and that therefore can be used in the sentence above without losing in nuances?


Ordering of question mark, closing quotation mark, and citation

Let's say I am quoting the verse "Do you like cheese?" from the Book Of Cheese. Is it: As it is written, "Do you like cheese?" (Book Of Cheese, 43:21) or As it is written, "Do you like cheese" (Book Of Cheese, 43:21)? or As it is written, "Do you like cheese? (Book of Cheese, 43:21)" or something else entirely?


What is the etymology of 'oojiboo'?

Oojiboo: > a thing whose name one forgets, does not know, or prefers not to mention Since I don't have access to the OED, can someone tell me its etymology and whether it's commonly used nowadays?


Where do accents and dialects come from?

Why do people in different areas speak differently? Where do accents come from, how do they change and/or survive over time and why do we have them? Reading recommendations on this topic would be welcome.


Pronunciation of "comparable"

I was talking to my boyfriend about this but I wanted to get some more opinions. "Comparable" can be pronounced as:   1. COMP-er-uh-bul (which is how I usually pronounce it)   2. Com-PAIR-ah-bul (which usually makes me blink and tilt my head) Is there a specific case where one pronunciation is used over another? I tend to think that version 1 deals more with similarity than version 2. Version 2, to me, feels like it's more about the fact that two elements _can_ be compared. Also: can both words/pronunciations be used interchangeably (granted that my guesses toward the meanings are correct)?


"Someone else took them helm"

I recently read a sentence containing _took them helm_ , and I cannot understand the meaning of that sentence. > Looks like [username] did not remove you from the commit list, so I cannot > answer that. Otherwise, given you complained about this almost 4 years after > the fact, the only thing I could tell is you did not care inbetween, or at > least it was not important for you to raise a concern. Given that, it sounds > rational that someone else took them helm, doesn't it? _Commit list_ is the list of the users who can commit code using CVS. What does the last sentence mean? To what is it referring?


Which of these is the correct usage of the words "listen", "hear"?

Which of these sentences is correct? Why? > You must hear to this song.   >  You must listen to this song.   >  Have you heard to this song?   >  Have you listened to this song?


Is 'that' required? Does it make a difference?

* I want **that** he become a doctor.   * I want he become a doctor. Is there any difference between these?


Single word for someone who likes to party

What is one word that can be used to describe someone who likes to party and go to clubs?


What is the correct way to pronounce "Figure 8-1"?

I know that the symbol "-" can be read as hyphen or dash. While I am reading aloud "Figure 8-1" or "Section 8-1", what is the correct name for "-"? Sometimes, I heard people read it as >   * figure eight dash one >   * figure eight point one > but those both sound strange to me.


It really should be ROY GBP?

I've read the Color Survey Results. There is a sentence: Indigo was totally just added to the rainbow so it would have 7 colors and make that “ROY G. BIV” acronym work, just like you always suspected. It should really be ROY GBP, with maybe a C or T thrown in there between G and B depending on how the spectrum was converted to RGB. What does it mean? I understood this acronym but why C or T? I translate this article into Russian, but do not understand the meaning letters C and T here. And why between G and B? It really should be ROY GBP?


Idiom for someone who works fast without paying attention to the quality?

Is there any idiom or any suitable words for someone who works fast without paying attention to the quality?


"Made in..." vs. "Product of..."

What is the difference between "Made in..." and "Product of..."? Both are often seen on product labeling; my understanding is that "Made in" is not used for agricultural goods while "Product of" is?


What's the difference between "hundreds of thousands of" and "hundreds and thousands of"? Are they both correct?


"feed an animal some food?"

Which sentence is correct? (or both) _Feed the dog twice a day this meat._ _Feed the dog twice a day with this meat._


The single word for "Volume per second"

Will anybody be able to mention the English word for "Volume per second (or preferably Volume per Time unit) or "Amount of task per a second"? Thank you.


Can a sentence have two verbs of same type - for example "is"?

I found the following sentence in a book. > A good way of figuring out what a function **is** doing **is** to type it > without the parentheses. Is this correct way of writing? Thanks.


"Known not to ..." or "Known to not ..."

Which one of the following word orders is correct: > This program is known not to work correctly.   > or   > This program is known to not work correctly.


What does : ca. 1828 mean? ca. before a date?

Could you tell me What " ca. 1828" mean? ca. before a date ? Thanks for your answers


Which noun does an Adjective associate with of

I read the Adjective Association question but I'm wondering how it applies to the following sentence: > Here is a really old picture of me. It appears that _really old_ , and _picture_ are associated to _me_ , but it could also be assumed that _really old_ associated to _picture_. Seems ambiguous. Slightly changing the sentence: > Here is a blurry old picture of me. Seems to indicate the picture, whereas I cannot come up with an adjective that would associate to _me_ (might exist).


Fitting word for "subject to physics" or possibly "subject to laws"

Is there a fitting word that means "subject to physics" or possibly "subject to laws"? It seems to me that I must have read such a word somewhere but I simply can't dredge one up. Ex: Any passengers on a star ship could be killed instantly, mashed to a a pulp, by inertial forces because the ship itself is [an] [thing which is subject to physical laws]


Can the adjective "squalid" be used to describe a person?

As the title states: Can **squalid** be used to describe a person that has really fallen on hard times (ragged clothing, worn-out, haggard etc.)? And if it can be used as such, how does it compare to **shabby** , i.e. which has a stronger connotation of _run-down-ness_? All descriptions of **squalid** in dictionaries or example texts I found always use the word for buildings, areas, streets, but none I found uses it to describe a human directly.


Is the word "women's" a typo?

My browser's spellcheck says it is, but I can't figure out why. Is Firefox sexist?


Does 'some' necessarily imply 'not all'?

If some X's are Y's, does that imply that some X's are not Y's?


Tassel vs. Tassle? Which is correctly spelled, or both?

I think I found an error in someone's work, where they spelled "tassel" as "tassle". Before I mention it to them I want to be 100% sure that this is really a problem and there is no alternate spelling.


What do you call the linguistic ambiguity in an assertion "Blah is the Best X?

I don't know the correct name of the following characteristic or phenomena to search for it on Google for further study and exploration: > Someone says they live in the "Best Democracy" and they says that they can > back this up with historical and contemporary evidence. They could be > asserting either: > >   1. Their country is the best implementation of democratic principles and > this is what they have evidence for; **or** >   2. They live in country considered sufficiently democratic _and_ that > country is the proven best in some other way > (affluence/power/stability/happiness index/BMI/trombone players/etc). > In more generalised terms: > An assertion `Best X` could mean: > >   1. Best at X; **or** >   2. A member of X which is Best at Y > **What is this form of linguistic ambiguity called?**


Do "operative" and "valid" have the same meaning in legal terms?

I found this question when reading a machine manual. In the part about Guarantee, it said "The guarantee will not be _operative_ if any of the following apply:" My question here is that can _operative_ be used in here or is _valid_ a more appropriate choice for this situation. P.S. The manual is a translated version. Thanks


Infinitive or gerund complement clause

Which is more grammatically correct: "I like to speak Japanese." or "I like speaking Japanese." Also, do they mean the same thing? Why is one better than the other, if they differ?


How many syllables are in the word 'hour'?

Does the word 'hour' have 1 or 2 syllables?


"is only mentioned" or "is mentioned only"?

> The list was mentioned only at the meeting. or > The list was only mentioned at the meeting.


FCE exam's troubling transformation sentence

Today my students were given the following transformation sentence as part of their FCE exams: > I am reading a book which is irrelevant to school work. Do: The book I am reading **is** ..................... school work. Can you please tell me how to do it? The obvious would be: > The book I am reading **has** nothing to do with school work. But the exercise asks us to use _is_ , not _has_.


How to separate two phrases in a grammatically correct way?

In all stackexchange sites, there is an edit summary field provided when you try to edit a question or an answer. I find myself frequently writing there the following: "edited title, added a tag" or "edited title, added two tags and edited body for clarity" Here are my concerns:   1. Are the above two statements grammatically correct?   2. Should I replace the comma with a semicolon?   3. Are there any fullstops required in any of the two statements?


Can the shortening of proper nouns, such as "The Nuge", be considered a type of elision?

The earliest example that comes to mind is the shortening of the name Ted Nugent as The Nuge. To be clear, I'm less interested in the dropping of syllables at the end of his name, and more interested in the replacing of an initial word with "the". A more recent example is Mountain Dew's slogan, "Do the Dew" (their re- branding as Mtn Dew is also interesting, but not what I'm getting at). I've heard this formula applied colloquially, such as referring to Taco Bell as The Bell. Would this be considered elision? If not, is there a name for this?


Is the describer needed in 'not...but..." type constructions?

Consider these two sentences: "His actions reveal him to be a husband who is not jealous but is zealous." "Those words demonstrate not his jealousness but his zealousness." Are the words "is"/"his" needed before zealous / zealousness? They wouldn't be needed if the sequence were reversed: "His actions reveal him to be a husband who is zealous, not jealous." But what about when the negation comes before the assertion? Also are commas needed? Where?


Can you say "accurate to"?

For example: > The building is accurate to its schematics Is this invalid use of the word "accurate"?


Is this sentence a valid example of a double negative

Me and my friend were talking about grades and I said > Grades don't mean shit. and we had some more debate and now we are arguing whether that sentence is a example of a sentence with double negatives in it !


Position of prepositions in questions and clauses

I would like to know if there is any rule to know where prepositions should be placed in questions or clauses. For example, I have heard many sentences and some of them put the preposition in the start and others in the end, but I don't know if there's any rule for this or any recommendation. > Where are you **from**? > > Who are you talking **to**? > > **To** whom are you talking? > > He's the person I was speaking **to**. > > He's the person **to** whom I was speaking. > > This is the place **from** where you should start.


What is the word for "history of the study of the subject"?

Suppose the subject is nutrition. Is there a word for _the history of the study of nutrition_? Or _the history of the study of a science_ for that matter? I thought it was one of those _epi_ -ology words like epistemology but I was way off. You know how if you go to a Wikipedia page on any of the natural or social sciences, they'll have a "History" section. Is there a better word for that?


Future perfect progressive

When is the future perfect progressive used? I am trying to understand in which cases it should be used, but I cannot find any practice examples of sentences using that tense. > I will have been loving.


Is every sentence in a tense?

I know that "tense" indicates time. If that is true, then not every sentence can be indicated of its tense. Please review these sentences: "If I could go to the market , I must have taken breakfast (by now)."   "If this great mountain was given my secret, it would have broken."   "If she were tall like you, she would never have asked you to pick those clothes for her." Here all these sentences have main clauses in past, but I don't know whether past indefinite or not. Still, these are imaginary conditions, supported by “if”; so can we say that these sentences have no tense? Some people told me that their roots are in the present as we are indicating the absence of the mentioned conditions implies that the sentence indicates the present continuous, or some other sort of present. But that sounds strange, as the sentence itself does not narrate the absence of that condition but only the supposition of “if” that were true... so what is the tense. Thnx for all responses. Now i can safely say that this sentence is making use of auxiliary modals in subjunctive mood. Still according to my perspective, it indicates towards a timeless phenomenon( Though no one knows about the future) still its pointing towards a timeless phenomenon, still if someone wants to refer it to a tense, i think its is present indefinite because it indicates that i am not a bird. "If I were" suggests that I am not.Otherwise the sentence itself does not refer to time. And as i have understood English language does not make use of tense only to indicate time, the total sentence structure depends on many thing sand also the mood of sentence changes the total outlook of any sentence. So tense and/ or mood can be understood if they indicate real things rather imaginary ones. I failed to understand any better through these answers.


What is the question tag for "I used to swim in the Tilak tank"?

What is the question tag that can be added to the following sentence? > I used to swim in the Tilak tank. This is question from an MCQ test whose options were   1. did I?   2. would I?


Do you capitalize both parts of a hyphenated word in a title? "My Ex-Wife Hates Me" or "My Ex-wife Hates Me"


What is proper usage of hyphen in title

Which is correct, Co-Sponsor Proposal or Co-sponsor Proposal? This will be a heading on a proposal. Thank you


Title case: "Stand-alone" or "Stand-Alone"?

I need to write a "stand-alone" adjective as a part of a title. Which capitalisation is correct: > _Stand-alone_ or > _Stand-Alone_?


What should be the correct tense and structure of the sentence?

Sorry if my question sounds dumb here. I am not a English speaker and now I am trying to learn and improve my English. Suppose following scenario occurs: **Person A has done something wrong in past and Person B is suffering in present due to the fault of A. Now person B wants to tell that what A did was wrong and instead of doing wrong, if he did something else, he should have done right.** So is it correct to use the following structure if B is telling to A (actually I have tried this)? **You _had_ done wrong; instead of doing this,if you _would have done_ that, this _might would have been_ right.** I am confused with the italicized parts. Is this structure correct grammatically? I suspect it is not, then what should be the right format?


'Sit on your left' or 'sit to your left' or 'sit on to your left' etc

Which one of the following is correct. There are pairs of chairs in a classroom and one wish to say that students should sit in the left-hand side chair, leaving the right-hand side chair empty.   * 'Sit on your left'   * 'Sit to your left'    * 'sit on to your left'   * 'sit at your left'    * any other phrase At some logical plane, one can never sit on one's left hand side because as soon as he sits on his LHS, his LHS changes.


Origin of “Put up your dukes”

This link claims that one cannot be sure of origin of this phrase. Three explanations are given here, but they are not very convincing (I am not a native speaker). In one of our newspapers, someone gives an explanation. Apparently, > Duke of Wellington, the man who defeated Napoleon Bonaparte in the Battle of > Waterloo in 1815, though quite the ladies man, wasn’t really much to look > at. The most prominent feature of his not-so-handsome face was his rather > long nose. The officers and the men who served beneath him began to > affectionately refer to any nose which was unusually long as ‘duke’. With > the passage of time, this word began to be used to refer to any nose; of > whatever size. Since human fists are notorious to be employed in fights to > put a ‘duke’ out of joints, fists began to be called ‘duke buster’. Soon, > the word ‘buster’ was dropped, and everyone started referring to fists as > ‘dukes’. This sounds like a great story, but he did not cite any references. Since this explanation is so very different from many others available on-line, I wonder if there is some reliable reference in support of his claim.


Meaning of "experience pertaining to computer science and diversity"

I'm applying for a grant and there is a question in the application form as follows: > As a grad student in computer science, what has your experience been > pertaining to computer science and diversity? Is it asking about what I have done for the computer science world? How about the meaning of _diversity_ here? Does it mean the different things related to computer science?


Pronunciation of onomatopoeia, pharmacopoeia, etc

Words such as onomatopoeia and pharmacopoeia incorporate the Greek suffix _-poeia_ , meaning _to make_ or _to prepare_. Wiktionary's provided etymology for onomatopoeia reads: > From Ancient Greek ὀνοματοποιία ( **onomatopoiia** ) I'm curious to know how the Greek _onomatopoiia_ is/was pronounced and if the _-poeia_ suffix in the English equivalent has always been pronounced `/piːə/`. Also, are there any words in English that have simplified _-poeia_ to _-pia_ or similar?


Less than or below when comparing to a limit

When I am comparing a numeric value to a numeric limit, as in a maximum value, should I say the value is "below the limit" or "less than the limit"? Specifically, I am saying, "the maximum concentration limit (MCL) is 5 mg/L," and then "the measured concentration was (below/less than) the MCL," but I am not sure which is correct (below or less than).


How do you stop using "you" in every question?

I post questions on stackexchange sites and I'd like them to sound more professional. However, they usually start like this: > How do you.... How can I make my questions sound more professional? Is there a better way to think of the question or is there just something mechanical I need to do differently?


In English, do people say "the Jack" or "the Donald" to specify someone special?

I heard Donald Trump had the nickname _the Donald_. So I'm curious, can I say > Did you see the John? or > Did you see the Michael? Do people say it? What if there are five Michaels at a workplace? Would it be normal to use "the _name_ "?


Category hierarchies or tiers?

Considering the following lists, what would be a good generic word or phrase describing the **_individual_** bullet point items? It seems "category hierarchy item" is too wordy/difficult, is there a better/simpler term that I'm missing? **Edit:** These words came to mind just after posting this: _segment, scope, dimension_. But still, I'm not sure if there is word that would be a better fit. **Edit 2:** I'm writing some end user documentation for an advanced search feature some software has. So I need a simple way to refer to these bullets in a generic way like "search segment" or "search specificity". I'm just trying to get the most straightforward wording to identify these. List 1:   * Artist    * Artist, Album    * Artist, Album, Song List 2:   * Author   * Author, Book List 3:   * Continent   * Continent, Country   * Continent, Country, Region


Software to change American punctuation to British

My apologies if this is off topic. American and British writing have different punctuation styles. Is there any software that can change American style punctuation to British? I am referring to punctuation, not spelling. A simple example would be changing the American styled > "Hello," he said. to what (I think is) the British styled > 'Hello', he said. I am not entirely certain about the particulars which is why I need this tool in the first place.


What kind of rhetoric is (this particular) "No one ever [...]"

> The President also knows that we have to stop blaming victims for these > crimes. No one ever asks the person who got robbed at gunpoint in the street > -- why were you there, what were you doing, what were you wearing? What did > you say? Did you offend someone? We encourage people to come forward. We > don't have to explain why someone took our money. _Source_ I think the "No one ever [...]" claim is literally false, and actually obviously so. So, I understand it to mean: > > The President also knows that we have to stop blaming victims for these > crimes. No one **in their right mind** ever asks the person who got robbed > at gunpoint in the street -- why were you there, what were you doing, what > were you wearing? What did you say? Did you offend someone? We encourage > people to come forward. We don't have to explain why someone took our money. Supposing that I am right, what is this kind of rhetoric called?


Is "evidence" countable?

As a native English speaker, I am often asked by friends and colleagues to correct their manuscripts. One of the most common mistakes I find is the use of the noun _evidences_. Now, the dictionary definitions I have read state that _evidence_ is a mass noun, that it is not countable. For example, this one: > noun [mass noun]   > > > the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or > proposition is true or valid:the study finds little evidence of overt > discrimination   > > >   * Law information drawn from personal testimony, a document, or a material > object, used to establish facts in a legal investigation or admissible as > testimony in a law court:without evidence, they can’t bring a charge   > >   * signs or indications of something:there was no obvious evidence of a > break-in > However, I came across (don't ask me how) this article: 101 evidences for a young age of the earth and the universe I had firstly assumed that this was either an outright error or at best a usage that is specific to christian literature, but upon further analysis things get more complicated. On the one hand, most google hits for _evidences_ seem to be from the christian fundamentalist and/or creationist literature, on the other hand this article has collected multiple examples of its use citing such luminaries of the English language as William Shakespeare, Ralph Waldo Emerson and Henry David Thoreau. Indeed, this google NGram shows that _evidences_ used to be quite common (note that I am searching for " _many_ evidences" which should filter out most uses of _evidence_ as a transitive verb): ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/tWw7R.png) Finally, I also found a definition which includes the following line: > (technical) The cave contained evidences of prehistoric settlement. While I have encountered this use in technical literature (my field is Biology), it was always used by non-native authors in whose language, as is very often the case, _evidence_ is probably countable (e.g. ES: _evidencias_ , FR: _évidences_ ). So, my question is, is _evidence_ countable? The two quoted definitions contradict themselves. _Evidences_ as a plural noun sounds horrible to my native's ear. Apparently, it is indeed a valid archaic usage but is it grammatical today? I don't have access to an unabridged OED or any other dictionary of similar status and quality, what do they suggest?


What is the origin of the slang 'kicks' meaning sneakers

Street culture uses the term 'kicks' to describe sneakers/athletic shoes. I've been using this term for as long as I can remember so I'm comfortable with it's meaning however, as I'm sure I could make an educated guess in terms of the origins of the slang 'kicks', I'm quite curious to learn the authentic origin. I've tried researching online and while I've found the definition countless times, it seems that the back story is scarce. This site is my last stop so fingers crossed, one or more of you have the information I'm looking for. Thanx in advance :)


What's the correct apostrophe usage in this case?

I just wrote a response on a meta Stack Exchange site to a question about tag usage and purpose. In that response, I found myself writing the following: > I hesitate to argue for the tag's (and the questions' that go with it) > complete removal. "Tag" is intentionally singular and "questions" is intentionally plural. Is that the correct way to use the apostrophe on "questions"?


What is the origin of the saying, "faint heart never won fair lady"?

Having heard the phrase, "faint heart never won fair lady" for the third time in very short span, I'm determined to find out its origin. Unfortunately, when I Google, I'm getting a bunch of low-quality sites -- unlike our StackExchange -- that only mention that it's a proverb, and give no clue as to its origin or date of first occurrence. That's what I'm wondering -- is it a literary quote, passed down from some famous author into a proverb? When is the date of its first attestation? How familiar would an ordinary Briton be with this saying? (It's a chiefly British saying, right? I don't believe it's popular in the United States.)


Prepositions used with "command line" and "shell"

I found the following variations on the use of "command line" and "shell" in computing and wonder which are correct and how to use them appropriately.   * _Command line_ : is it "at the command line" or "on the command line"?   * _Shell_ : is it "in a shell", inside a shell", "at a shell" or "on a shell"? My English teacher once jokingly said that with prepositions it's not only knowledge but sometimes also a good portion of luck for those who aren't native speakers.


Term for 'baby-talk'

So many newly-weds have this practice of calling one another ridiculous but affectionate names i.e. honey-bunch, or 'bunny-boo' etc. Is there a single-word term for this practice?


Can "to be able to" be used without preposition

Can the phrase "to be able to" be used without the preposition "to". For example, can you say "I will call you back as soon as I am able?"


"Have you got a chance to" vs "Did you get a chance to"

What is the difference between following two statements? >   1. Have you got a chance to look into this? >   2. Did you get a chance to look into this? >


Having said that, consequently vs conversely

Should "having said that" always be used in place of "conversely" or can it also be used in place of "consequently"? Meaning, in the structure: > X. Having said that, Y. Does Y have to somehow "negate", "go against" or "differ" from X, or can it be used with emphasis like "having said _that_ , Y (which follows from X)"?


In Search Of: a noun (or phrase) like "irrefutableness"

Ideally I'm looking for a word, though it could be a phrase. It should be a noun, like "veracity". Its somewhat close in meaning to veracity. It should mean low likelihood of being refuted. Sort of like being "authoritative" on a subject, but not as certain as that. I intend to use include it in a sentence like: These improvements give our information product a greater X. I can elaborate if that would be helpful. Thank you! **ADDED** I don't think veracity ("truthfulness") is the right word. It's not a matter of our telling the truth. It's a matter of the likelihood of whether the information presented is sufficient to prove something. **ADDED** Our information product speaks about having observed certain data and presenting an accurately preserved, complete and untampered with record, which is why "authoritative" didn't work. (In theory, there could be relevant unrecorded data.) Also, because of this, "authenticity" isn't the issue since there's no reason to doubt the authenticity of our data. (And I certainly wish the context allowed me to be cheeky enough to say "truthiness"!)


What does this "but" mean here?

Oh but I were in poverty! What does this mean? I can't find this in my dictionary. I would appreciate it if you could quote some authoriatative source.


What is the correct way to style academic degrees after a name in British English?

What is the correct way to style academic degrees in British English? I've got a name: > Jane Doe RN Dip HV BSc My question is: How should I style the degrees? > Jane Doe, RN Dip., HV, BSc. or: > Jane Doe RN Dip., HV, BSc. or totally in another way?


Head word for Synonyms and Word Families?

Is there a word/term/phrase that means the designated word to represent a collection of related words? Dictionaries use a "head" or "root" word for variants (House: >Houses, >Housing, >Housed) - is there such a thing for Synonyms and Word Families? I've Googled and I've searched here (and Yahoo Answers etc.). I'm not sure if there is such a term. If there is, can someone please tell me the name? If there is, can someone point to a source (such as a thesaurus that uses it)? If there is no such term/reference - what would you suggest as a way to implement it?   Should I simply go for the shortest word in the group (with the same/similar part of speech/morphological attributes (mood/gender etc.)? Is there a better way? Thank you.


What football position does this phrase refer to: "He plays back for Dartmouth"?

What football position does someone refer to when saying "He plays back for Dartmouth"? (I read it in a novel, which takes place in 1931) Edit (more context) A conversation during the game between his friends, one of whom arrived late: "How’s he doing?" "He’s all right, I guess,” says one of the boys. “Decent run in the last series. Eleven yards.”


Why aren't double quotes always closed?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  How should I use quotation marks in sections of multi-line dialogue? Sometimes when reading, I will see a **"** at the beginning of a paragraph [When someone is speaking]. It is not closed anywhere, and at the end of the paragraph, there is no ending **"**. How come?


Is it proper grammar to omit an ending quote at the end of a paragraph?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  How should I use quotation marks in sections of multi-line dialogue?   >  Why aren't double quotes always closed? In some books I've read, the ending quote will be omitted if the paragraph ends with the character's line. Is this correct? If it is correct, in what cases is it correct?


'Clean' vs 'Clear'

What is their difference? Please provide an example (or two if the use as verb or adjective differentiates their meanings).


How should I understand this "that" clause?

The following sentence is from an article of Harry Frankfurt who is a professor from Princeton University: > It must be part of the point of saying that humbug is "short of lying," > **that** while it has some of the distinguishing characteristics of lies, > there are others that it lacks. How should I understand the second "that" (in bold) here? Does it refer to "it" in the sentence or is it an object of the word "saying"? How should I understand this sentence?


Is "crooner" old-fashioned and humorous?

My dictionary tells me "crooner" is old-fashioned and humorous. I was wondering why "crooner" is humorous? I would like to hear from native speakers how you view/use this word. Here's an example of use: > Movie star Debbie Reynolds and crooner Eddie Fisher are Fisher's parents. In > the 1950s, they were America's sweethearts. But, Eddie left Debbie for > bombshell Elizabeth Taylor when Carrie was just a toddler. – CBS-Sunday > Morning


Is the idiom 'burn the midnight oil' not used as much lately?

When I said 'We burnt the midnight oil.', an American guy seemed to have a tough time trying not to laugh. Is this expression so old? How about 'We did/pulled all-nighters'?


Is there a list of syllables contained in US English?

I'm trying to find a list of all syllables (ideally just syllables that appear at the start of words in english). Any suggestions?


Why do British people pronounce “Ibiza” as “Ibitha”?

My brief overseas experience in Great Britain has taught me that British people tend to pronounce _Ibiza_ as _Ibitha_. My questions are as follows:   1. Why is this the case?   2. How did this develop?    3. What are the circumstances that determine if a _z_ is pronounced like a _z_ or a _th_?


When is it correct to capitalise 'earth'?

At the beginning of a sentence is obvious. I'm referring to the following examples: >   1. A handful of earth. >   2. The earth under this house. >   3. The earth beneath my feet. >   4. What on earth? >   5. The heavens above and the earth below. >   6. The earth moved. >   7. We returned quickly to earth. > Lower: 1,2,3,4 Upper: 7 Not sure: 5,6


Can I say "reduces the proximity to zero" to describe 2 objects being very close?

When I say " _reduces the proximity to zero_ ", does it mean that the distance between two objects are extremely close? My intention is to describe that the distance between two objects gets very close together. I checked the dictionary and it says proximity is the nearness. I am worry that when I say "reduce to zero", I flipped the meaning opposite to become "reduce nearness to zero", which may feel like it meant "very far apart".


Can the word "orbital" mean expensive/high?

I have heard someone say "As a consultant, Dave can charge orbital fees, so we would rather have you do it." I tried to look up "orbital" but did not find what I was expecting.


How to hyphenate a negated compound noun?

We have a term for a process, "defect source assessment". We want to describe a set of processes that are not related to that process. Which of the following (if any) would be correct? >   * non defect source assessment processes >   * non-defect source assessment processes >   * non-defect-source-assessment processes >   * non-defect-source-assessment-processes >


What term is a hypernym for "story" and "article"?

I need a single word that can be used to mean _article_ (e.g. something printed in a magazine to inform readers or to argue something) and also _story_ (i.e. some fictional short story printed in a literature publication). Sometimes _story_ is used to refer to a newspaper article, but readers will be confused if I simply use _story_ as they might think I am excluding other types of non-fiction articles. What term can I use to describe both kinds of writing?


How did "yours truly" become a euphemism for "I" or "me"?

Rarely but occasionally I've seen _yours truly_ appear in text when the author wishes to refer to him- or herself. An example from The Cambridge Dictionary: > Some folks, such as _yours truly_ , can't resist a clever pun or play on > words. How did a valediction gain such a form and then maintain its usage despite its—at least, in my subjective view of colloquial language—awkwardness?


Is "platonic" generally appropriate?

Specifically, I'm wondering about the definition about relationships: > of, relating to, or having a close relationship in which there is no romance > or sex. Is "platonic" generally appropriate? It seems useful to describe non-romantic relationships, but most definitions emphasize the nonsexual part of the definition. Would it be appropriate to use in places where nonsexual would not be?


What does "deepest summer" mean?

I am new to this English stack exchange, I asked this question on the movie stack exchange Though it was a question from a movie it's also related to English Language. I will be simply pleased and delighted if anyone could help me to understand. Thank you


Is “(somebody) own the sunshine” an established phrase or just a set of word?

I saw the phrase, “ _Obama owns the sunshine_ ” as the headline of Time magazine’s (January 29) article reporting the result of the latest NBC News/Marist poll of registered Florida voters, which shows President Obama’s statistical edge over all four Republican Presidential candidates. I can easily imagine the implication of the phrase, “ _own the sunshine_ ,” and I thought it is an idiom. But as I checked Oxford, Cambridge, Merriam- Webster online dictionaries, there was no entry of “own the sunshine” as an idiom in any of them. GoogleNgram registers “Your own sunshine,” of which usage started circ 1860, peaking in 1910-20, tailed off until it started to pick up around 2000, but not “own sunshine.” Is “ _own sunshine_ ” a Time’s coinage, or just a set of word?


why do we say scorching hot while scorching already means very hot?

Scorching means extremely hot. So why do we say scorching hot? Isn't it redundant to bring hot after scorching?


Is it wrong to say "cook a cake"?

Is it wrong to say "to cook a cake"?


"Precondition" vs. "prerequisite"

> In conclusion, security is the precondition of political freedom and > political freedom is the prerequisite for economic freedom. Do _precondition_ and _prerequisite_ mean the same in the above? Is there a difference?


Curriculum vitae: Proper qualifiers for skills

I am updating my curriculum vitae, and there is a section where I list my experience with several technologies and programming languages. I would like to group my experience in two categories; namely, technologies with which I have long experience, and those with which I have relatively basic (yet, not elementary) experience. Currently I am listing my experience as follows:   1. 20+ years of experience with X and Y   2. Some experience with W and Z However, _some experience_ sounds ambiguous and I think gives the impression that my experience with W and Z is quite elementary. I do have some experience with W and Z but not enough to call it "broad". What would be a good or proper qualifier for such skills?


Precise meaning of "Last N days, weeks, months or years"

Would phrases like these generally be considered inclusive of the current period? I think it's pretty clear that _last week_ does not include the current week. But does _last 2 weeks_ include the current week? Does it make a difference where you currently are in the period? For instance does _last 2 weeks_ on Sunday mean the exact same time period as _last 2 weeks_ on the following Monday (assuming you start a new week on Monday). On the following Thursday, does it then become an 11 day period rather than 14 days?


What does 'corporeal form' mean?

> These series, however, are only one particularly obvious example; throughout > practically the whole of chemistry, even in the various nitrogen oxides and > oxygen acids of phosphorus or sulfur, one can see how "quantity changes into > quality", and **this** allegedly confused, hazy Hegelian notion appears in > **so** to speak **corporeal form** in things and process.   * What does 'corporeal form' mean?    * What do these pronouns substitute?   * Does "quantity changes into quality" only apply to physic objects?


"Prerequisite for" vs. "prerequisite to"

When is it appropriate to use "prerequisite for" instead of "prerequisite to"? Does it depend on context, or is it a matter of style? I googled the two phrases and found 4.5 million hits for "prerequisite for" and 3 million for "prerequisite to".


Difference in usage of "rock" and "rocks"

Recently, I came across this situation where I was asked which one was correct: > Fossils are found in sedimentary rock. > > Fossils are found in sedimentary rocks. Is there is distinction between these statements?


What is the difference between " I look him" and " I look at him"?

I read some of the book my son was reading at home yesterday. It read "I look him." Afterwards, I felt curious about the difference between "I look him" and "I look at him" What is the difference between the two?


Middle English or Elizabethan English as a second language?

Are there books, web sites, or language courses designed for English speakers who want to learn Middle English or Elizabethan English in the same way that they would learn a foreign language? It would be fun to be able to understand Shakespeare fluently rather than straining to follow what was being said. Chaucer just seems hopeless without such a course, unless you're a college English major taking your upper-division course on Chaucer.


Uniquate = Eliminate or replace duplicates, make unique?

I am not a native English speaker and I need a word means **modifying a list/set to make it a unique-values list/set eliminating or replacing non- unique values with unique ones**. I am also aware of _deduplication_ suggestion, but I can't settle for it. Because, it sounds me that it means **eliminating** (deleting) duplicate values, but not **replacing**. So, the word **uniquate** meets this meaning or it is completely different thing? And any other suggestion? **Edit:** I need a word reflects especially **_replacement_** , but it is OK if it **also** reflects _eliminating_. I don't search for an answer focusing to only eliminating.


Is healthful considered an acceptable synonym of healthy?

To my ear, _healthful_ does not sound right. This could well be geographical bias on my part. Is it now a valid alternative to _healthy_? Does it have another meaning?


What does "feeling a little precious" mean?

I ran across this phrase in a video made by an Australian walking the Camino de Santiago. He describes a horrible sleep-deprived night and suffering from food poisoning, and states that he's **feeling a little precious**. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dqOI87nSU0 at 1:09:25. I assumed from the context it meant **wasted** or **shaky**. In this blog entry there's a similar use, I believe also from an Australian: > It was a good night as everyone celebrates throughout the city just as we do > at home. Woke up the next day **feeling a little precious** and was having a > coffee and looked at a stamp I had on my hand from a bar we went to. But then, in this blog, which is also an Australian, it's used a bit differently: > Matt is **feeling a little precious** about a couple of scams he's fallen in > to over the last couple of days. The first one was when he asked me the time > one morning and I mistakenly read my watch as 6.30am - off he went running > at 5.30am. He was a tad confused to get back at 6.20am. The second I will > let him explain but when you read it bear in mind how many years he spent > dealing with reps and suppliers getting the best possible price for shop > stock. Right Matt here. Absolutely gutted yesterday got conned by a gypsy > woman about 4 foot 6 and with only one tooth. In that case, it seems to mean **disappointed** or **embarrassed**. So, what's up with this?


"Inside of" vs. "inside"

I guess this is an American usage. When to use "inside of" versus "inside"? Any example sentences would be greatly appreciated.


"Had they have"?

> Had they have gone to the same place, they would have talked to one another. Is the sentence above acceptable? If not, then what is a proper way of saying this?


When did “green field’ and ‘brown field’ come into use as an economic, or investment term, and who rearranged so?

I’ve noticed economists often use the word, “green field” and “brown field” these days in TV talk shows when arguing the efficiency of governmental or corporate investment. I also saw the comment of representative of Global Infrastructure Partners (GIP), saying “Our interest is brown field. We don’t invest in green field” in an infra investment journal. He meant it’s better for GIP to invest in the field where they can capitalize on their managerial expertise and investment technology than in the field they are unfamiliar and can’t be sure of return of investment. Neither Cambridge nor Oxford English Dictionary carries ‘green field / brown field” as a word. Readers Plus English Japanese Dictionary (published by Kenkyusha) defines 'greenfield' as 'of underdeveloped area," with no mention of 'brownfield.' GoogleNgram’shows incidence of ‘green field’ at high 0.000012% level, and ‘brown field’ low at 0.0000012% level in 2007. But I think the usages of both words are irrelevant to the above case. When did “green field’ and ‘brown field’ as a pair come into use as an economic, or investment term, and who did arrange so?


Rationale behind pronunciation of "subtle"

I've read pronunciation, yet I'm still irresolute about the exposition/logic behind the pronunciation of **subtle**. Why is the **b** not pronounced? subtle = subtil(e) in French, in which the b is pronounced. That website avers: > "By the 18th century, however, they smartly dropped the silent **b** in > dette, and doute, and decided to begin pronouncing it in subtil. The deletion of **b** in these French nouns may explain the silent **b** in debt and doubt in English.   Yet why does this not extend to "su* _b_ *tle"? In French, dette and doute have no **b** (and thus b sound). Would this explain the silent **b** in "debt" and "doubt"? In French, the b in subtil(e) is pronounced. Yet the **b** in "subtle" isn't? Why does this differ?


What does ‘play a blinder’ mean? Is it a popular phrase?

I came across the phrase ‘ _played a blinder’_ in the following paragraph of the New York Times’ December 12 article, titled “British Euro Farce,” dealing with British Prime Minister David Cameron’s veto of EU treaty reform in December. > Marx observed that history repeats itself, first as tragedy, then as farce. > Having a British prime minister say he’ll only go along with Germany saving > the euro if City of London banks get an exemption from a financial > transactions tax, while a Tory M.P. parties with Nazi lookalikes, and > another Tory boasts of Cameron having _“played a blinder,”_ is about as > farcical as it gets. As I am unfamiliar with the phrase, ‘played a blinder,’ I checked its meaning on Google, and found that only the Free Dictionary comes up with a definition: > to perform with a lot of skill, especially when you are playing sport, as an > example: _He's played a blinder in every game so far this season._ Apparently it indicates performing the play skillfully and successfully. Can I apply this definition to the above sentence as it is? Does it mean many Tories believe that Cameron vetoed the EU treaty reform successfully 'with a lot of skill’? Why is “played a blinder” in quotes? Is ‘play a blinder’ a popular idiom, not only in sports but in all other domains, in both UK and US?


Am I using “such” right?

Are these right?   1. such amounts of money   2. such a lot of money   3. such an amount of money   4. such lots   5. such lots of people


"Was the extent" vs "was about the extent"

> That was the extent of what I recalled. > > That was about the extent of what I recalled. Do the mean the same? If not, what's the difference?


What's wrong with "We hope you will find our Qualifications to be well-organized, concise, and most of all, to exceed your expectations."

Why is the following sentence grammatically incorrect? > We hope you will find our Qualifications to be well-organized, concise, and > most of all, to exceed your expectations. I've asked three grammar whiz friends and they have all told me "it just isn't right." I need reasons and rules! I wrote this sentence as a closing to a cover letter....


What is the past participle of the verb open?

I'm French and I'd like to be precise on the conjugation of the verb "open".   On this picture, I'd write "opened" instead of "open". Could you tell me more about why they have written "open"? ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/Wk4zm.jpg)


Are commas properly used in "He who can, does. He who cannot, teaches."?

George Bernard Shaw said, "He who can, does. He who cannot, teaches." Are commas properly used in these sentences? In my mind, the comma in each sentence improperly separates the noun ("he") from the verbs ("does" and "teaches"). The other phrases ("who can" and "who cannot") are dependent clauses that could theoretically be removed.


Is the word "granular" a synonym for the word "specific"?

I often hear the words "granular" or "granularity" being used around colleagues at my office to specify level of detail. For example: >   * Does the running category have to be more granular? >   * We need to see these reports with more granularity. > Is this an appropriate use of the word "granular"? Most dictionary references online indicate the word being used for scientific contexts to grain size.


Is "We embraced." a complete sentence?

Can someone write "we embraced" to mean "we embraced each other?"


How popular is the word “cromulent”? If I use this word in conversation with native speakers, doesn’t it look out of place?

In today’s post, “What’s the antonym for recommend?” an answerer answered "I discourage the blue sweater" sounds perfectly cromulent.” As I am utterly unfamiliar with the word, “cromulent,” I looked for its meaning in Oxford, Cambridge and Merriam-Webster online dictionaries to find none of them registers this word. And Window Word 7 spelling checker keeps suggesting me to correct “cromulent” into “corpulent” or “crapulent” at this right moment I’m writing this question. However, Wikitionary registers “cromulent,” and provides the definition as:   * Fine, acceptable or normal; excellent, realistic, legitimate or authentic.  (Origin) 1996 February 18, Matt Groening et al., “Lisa the Iconoclast”, The Simpsons, Season 7, Episode 16. I wonder how popular this word is among English speaking world. If a non- native speaker like me whose stock of vocabulary is very limited and are totally unsure of the good command of English uses this word in conversation with you - native speakers, does it sound out of place or overreaching?


What’s the right term for "expensive things that have no real use"

The rich people buy many luxury things like expensive cell phones, gadgets with brilliants, bags made of snake skin and other such things. They buy it in order to separate themselves from the “crowd” and to show others their social status and wealth. There are other people that want to look rich (or VIP) so they spend their lifetime scraping and saving in order to buy these expensive things. However, these things have no real use, these things are just expensive “trifles”. But many people are still sure that these things will make them happy! The question is:   What’s the right American English term for “things that have no use which people buy, spending their lifetime, to show others their importance”. Maybe _trifles_ or _trinkets_ are the right words?


“Bazaar” vs. “bazar”

Which of _bazaar_ or _bazar_ is better to use for the domain name of specialised marketplace? Both are available according to the dictionaries. Any advice which of these two is better to use in the URL?


"So much", "too much", "a lot" and "very much"

Are the following sentences correct? Do they all mean the same thing? > She talks **so much**. > > She talks **too much**. > > She talks **a lot**. > > She talks **very much**.


What do "Tea-Paw" and "Tea-Paw Tax double header" mean?

I found the word, ‘ _Tea-Paw’_ in headlines of articles of both Time magazine (March 31) and StarTribune (March 1st). Time's headline says "The _Tea-Paw_ tax double header," followed by the lead copy, "Minnesotan heads to Boston on Friday ahead of Des Moines on Saturday." StarTribune’s headline says " _Tea-Paw_ : Birth of a candidate?" followed by the lead copy, "Minne‘Former Minnesota Governor, Tim Pawlenty released a new video Tuesday highlighting his speech at a weekend tea party convention in Phoenix. What is Tea-Paw? Is it a combination of ‘Tea party’ and “(Tim) Pawlenty”? If it is (or not), what is “Tea-Paw tax double header”? Does the word 'Tea-Paw" pass itself as the common currency?


'phenomena' as singular: usage

We know _phenomena_ is a plural whose singular form is _phenomenon_. However, I have seen frequent of use of _phenomena_ itself as singular, as in 'this is a phenomena ...', 'this phenomena is ...', etc. This Google Ngram shows such use may also have been present in literature, 'this phenomena' being more frequent. ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/kARWd.png) How do we explain this discrepancy and suggest that the usage is wrong? * * * [Edit 1]: Will usage eventually redefine grammar in such cases as 'phenomena' and 'criteria' then? (inspired by @Barrie England 's comment.)


Can “sui generis” be placed before the noun?

I came across _sui generis_ in the following paragraph of today’s New York Times (April 27) Restaurant Review section headlined "Chef’s table at Brooklyn Fair." > César Ramirez's restaurant in downtown Brooklyn is a kind of **sui generis** > exercise in personal expression, and one of the more extraordinary > restaurants in New York City. As I was unfamiliar with the expression, "sui generic," I consulted two English Japanese dictionaries (Japanese publications) at hand; both of which gave the meaning of “unique, of its own kind,” by defining the word as an adjective to be placed after the noun as postposition. However, Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary defines it simply as an adjective. Which is right? Is it right to place "sui generis" in the way of "sui generis exercise"?


Which sentence is wrong?

Take a look at this part of a conversation:               A: I got very wet walking home in the rain last night.                               |1. You could have taken a taxi.     B: Why did you walk? |2. You could take a taxi.                          |3. You ~~was~~ **were** able to take a taxi.      Which one of the numbered sentences is wrong? (WHY?)   Using 'could' confuses me! What's the difference between them?      Thanks in advance.


What does "The black spot is under the plate" mean?

Simon Jenkins, in The Guardian online newspaper, writes: > How can the British Tommy, the jolly tar or the air ace confront the dreaded > foreigner, when a defence secretary cannot say boo to George Osborne? Be a > man, Fox, they cry. **The black spot is under the plate.** The pistol is in > the gents. I googled for the exact phrase, and the only hit is this article. Googling for "black spot under plate" just gets me a lot of stuff about toenails. What on earth could he mean?


Starting sentence with "indeed" to complete previous statement

Is it correct to add a sentence that starts with _indeed_ in order to complete a previous statement? For example, > The political crisis has a negative influence on the economy. **Indeed** , > foreign investments have never been as low. Is it recommended to start a sentence with _indeed_ in a research paper?


What does "instagram" mean?

I'm talking about the name of the popular internet photograph service. I guess the first part of the word (insta) means _instant_ , but I couldn't figure out what it means when it's colligated with _gram_.


What do you call the final sip of water in a bottle (with all the saliva)?

When I was on a trip a while ago a friend had a word for the final bit of water in a bottle. The point of the word was to emphasize the (purported) high percentage of saliva in the final sip in a bottle. The word was used in situations where multiple people had drunk from the same bottle before the final sip. I have forgotten the exact noun, but it sounded like **/ɣɝʃlɛ/** to me. I'm fairly sure it wasn't a word in original English - it may have been borrowed from Hebrew or Arabic. I found a reddit page with a similar question for German, where one user mentions "Spuckschluck", but it's not the word I remember.


Pronunciation of names that end in "h"

In Britain (or perhaps just Scotland) the names "Sara" and "Sarah" are pronounced different. >   * Sara: Sah-rah ("a" as in "bat")   > >   * Sarah: Se-rah ("a" as in "air") > In the US and Canada, Sarah and Sara are both pronounced like "Sarah". In addition, there are other examples which are pronounced the same in North America (NA). >   * Marry is pronounced like Mary and Merry ("a" as in "air") >   * Harry like Hairy >   * Barry like Berry >   * Carry like Jim Carrey > Question: Is there truly no distinction between the two pronunciations of Sarah/Sara in NA? How did English lose its open "a" sound when tied with an "r"?


"Sign up" vs. "signup"

When we have a button on a website for creating an account, should it say "sign up" or "signup"? I see "sign up" in most places, but which is the correct one?


The use of "trespasses"

According to a dictionary search for "trespasses":   * v. Enter the owner's land or property without permission   * n. A voluntary wrongful act against the person or property of another, esp. unlawful entry to a person's land or property without their permission Yet this article uses the headline: > Criminal **Trespasses** Police Officers and goes on to say: > The entire police force has in effect been **trespassed** from a Wellington > property. Is this actually a legitimate use of the word "trespass" or "trespassed"?


Is it gramatically a good start to say "It is definitely not unheard that people say"?

I was reading an answer to a question in this site which started with this phrase: > It is definitely not unheard that people say ... I feel it is incorrect or at least not a very nice phrase. Since I'm not a native English speaker, I was wondering what is wrong with this phrase (if there is any)? Can we say it uses a double negative and also a strong affirmative word "definitely" in one sentence?


"Italy-based company" or "Italian-based company"

When referring to a company that is based in Italy, I am never sure which of the above is correct. Logically speaking, "Italy-based" seems the most appropriate (since the company is based in Italy, not Italian), but I so often see "Italian-based..." written in publications that I begin to doubt myself. Is there a "correct" way, or is it simply a style issue?


How did "When" become the customary answer to "say when"?

When a waiter at a restaurant comes by with pepper or Parmesan cheese, he says, "say when" and starts putting it on your food. Many people will say "OK" or "that's enough," but it seems that the customary answer is "when". How did this become the customary answer? Did everyone decide to make the exact same joke, until it became commonplace. I thought it was funny when I was a kid, but even now as an adult, I still say it. For evidence that this is indeed commonplace, see http://www.gocomics.com/broomhilda/2012/06/20. The answer "when" is used and is external to the joke of the strip. But even so, I'm curious as to just how commonplace this really is. I see it a lot in the US. Is it used elsewhere in the world? (by the way, I'm new to asking questions on this site, and I have no idea what tags to put on this question)


double punctuation marks: one inside parenthesis and one outside

I don't seem to be able to find the answer I'm after so here is my question. Can I make a sentence and at the end of the sentence make a a startling comment in parenthesis ending with an exclamation mark, close the parenthesis and then use a full stop to start the next sentence? I mean is this sort of usage correct? > We were travelling along the road and saw many animals (but we did not > realise something even greater was in store for us behind the next curve!). > We stopped in a shaded area to have our lunch as it was already early > afternoon...


Using abbreviations incorrectly?

In English it's considered correct to ask > I do it like this, don't I? or > Why can't I go? whereas "don't" is an abbreviation of "do not" and "can't" is an abbreviation of "cannot". However, keeping the structure and no longer abbreviating the words, you get > I do it like this, do not I? Which really doesn't make sense. Why is this?


Meaning of "I am buying a third-hand book."

"I am buying a third-hand book." Does this mean I am the third or fourth owner of this book after I buy it?


Difference between "to wit", "that is", "namely", and "i.e."?

What is the difference between "to wit", "that is", "namely", and "i.e."? Are there any other similar wordings?


Using 'nascent' in a negative context

Is it an inappropriate choice of word to use 'nascent' in a negative context? For example, "Auditory hallucinations were one of the more notable symptoms of his nascent schizophrenia." Or should the word be reserved for something which is only in a positive context, i.e. nascent talent, nascent technology etc? If not, then can anybody suggest a more appropriate word to indicate the early developing stages of an illness or disorder? Many thanks, I'm sure I'm being more than a little dim and missing out on the obvious answer.


"I draw myself" vs. "I draw me"

"How can I draw myself using a mirror?" — I came across this question and couldn't help but wonder if it should be "draw me". _Draw_ here is to mean "make a picture". What do you think?


What does "make [someone] into shoes" mean?

In BBC's Sherlock series (Series 2 Episode 1, "A Scandal in Belgravia"), > Jim Moriarty says to Irene Adler: _"If you have what you say you have, I'll > make you rich. If you don't, I'll **make you into shoes**."_ What does he mean? Googling led me to a link that that is probably enlightening, but unfortunately, not for me. So if this is a play on words, then what are the possible meanings?


Does anybody pronounce the word "pillow" as "pellow"?

My girlfriend giggles whenever I say it, and I never realized that I said it differently then anyone else. But now that I am listening...NOBODY says pellow? They all say pillow. I've listened to my family, mother & father, and grandparents...and I can't figure out where I got this from? Any insights?


What is the meaning of "get as far as doing something"?

What is the meaning of the expression or phrase "get as far as doing something"? For example, what does it mean in this sentence? > They had got as far as painting the kitchen.


Comma with 'who' in this specific sentence

Can you shed light into this? The coach came to the defence of the player who has been sacked from the team following his differences with the captain. OR The coach came to the defence of the player, who has been sacked from the team following his differences with the captain. Isn't the subordinate clause that begins with 'who', non-restrictive?


"Branch of/off the main tree"

Which should be used: _of_ or _off_? > It is a branch **of/off** the main tree. The actual context is program code branches and in that context the plural _branches_ is not suitable.


Why is something fried on a griddle called grilled?

To my understanding, to grill is cooking with a heat source located beneath an open slatted grate (or ribbed closed pan). (For example, using a barbecue grill on one's patio.) The word grill is derived from the French for gridiron _gril_ which is derived from the Latin _craticula_ (gridiron, or small griddle). So, how did this definition expand to the sense of frying on a griddle to be called grilling? For example, a grilled cheese sandwich. Does this actually date back to the Latin definition? Is there a chain from Latin to English for this definition? Why wouldn't we just call this griddled?


Is "to have to do something with" ambiguous?

I am struggling with understanding of this structure. So here is something I would need to explain: > It has to do something with the car. [It is related to the car somehow.] But what if I want to say that (hypothetically) "it" (e.g. a monster) must perform an action with/on the car, wouldn't it look the same? > It has to do something with the car. [It must perform an action with the > car.] Or: > He has to do something with the fraud. [He is involved in the fraud.] > > He has to do something with his friend. [I want to express that he must do > something together with his friend.]


"sounds fun" or "sounds like fun"

If you say, "it is fun playing golf", I think "fun" is a noun.   When I hear people say, "it sounds fun," is it a noun or an adjective?   I understand the verb "sound" is followed either by a noun or an adjective, and I think they should say, "it sounds like fun" if they use it as a noun. Or can the word "fun" be used as an adjective on its own?   Please clear this up once and for all.


Do "normal people" know the terms URL and GUI?

Would an English-speaking but non-technical audience be familiar with the terms _URL_ (in the sense of _link_ , _web address_ ) and _GUI_ (Graphical User Interface), for example in a manual aimed at end users? If not, are there alternatives to GUI for referring to "the part of the program you can see and interact with, including content, menus, buttons etc."? Or is it perhaps better to just refer to a GUI as "the program", since there is no visible distinction between the program and the GUI for the person using it?


Is "errored" correct usage?

If "errored" is not a valid word, then how should I say: > The program errored at line 44 I guess I could say: > The program threw an error at line 44 But why is "errored" wrong? Is there a better alternative?


Do I need a comma after "when" in this example?

> I do not know if anything is getting created when the contract gets > uploaded. Does this sentence warrant a comma after "when"?


What does this mean: "How much experience do you have gathering data for web analysis?"

I am trying to understand the following question:               "How much experience do you have gathering data for web analysis?"      I understand the concept of "web data analysis", and I understand "gathering data from the web for analysis", but the above question is not clear. Perhaps I am being too literal or picky, but the question sounds like I would first gather data, then put it on the web, and then analyze it, which is not logical. If you have any ideas, could you please provide a **specific** example of what kind of work would satisfy the question. For example, maybe the question means I would download Apache Server logs from a website, import into Excel, and perform analysis?


"Artificial" vs. "faux" vs. "fake"

Do these words have a different meaning? Should we say _artificial sugar_ or _sweetener_? Should we say _artificial fur_ or _faux fur_? Is there a rule that defines the border for _artificial/faux/fake_?


Which is correct: "is it worth it?" or "does it worth it?"

Which one should I prefer? > Is it worth it? or > Does it worth it? Additionally, is the following form (without _it_ ) correct? > Is it worth?


Is there a term for an "obvious" but not "accepted" compound?

This question is inspired by the question of whether there is a single term for the sports surfing, skateboarding, and snowboarding. I think many native speakers would read this question and think the answer is "board sports", similar to how the question "What is a term for all the windows of a house?" would elicit the term "house windows". When I searched Google, there was an overwhelming number of results for "board sports" that came from retailers of the said item type, but no dictionary entries (please correct me if I'm wrong). The term "board sports" seems "obvious" in the same way that the compound "front door" is, but this **is** a dictionary term. Is there a term for an "obvious" but not (dictionary-)"accepted" compound/term such as "board sports"? I think it might be something like "lexical gap", but 865,000 results on Google when searching "board sports" with quotation marks suggests that the gap might be considered filled.


Are there any English idioms to describe “futile benevolence?”

We have a word, “宋襄の仁” meaning “futile benevolence.” The word comes from a historic episode from ancient China. In Spring and Autumn era (BC 8C) in China, when Song Country fought Chu Country, Muyi, Prince of Song besought his father, King Xiang to attack the enemy before the enemy completes deployment of their army, King Xiang rejected his son’s advice because it’s unfair to attack people when they are in trouble. King Xian lost the war and Song was conquered by Chu. Hence the word, “宋襄の仁 – Sojo-no-jin - King Song Xiang's benevolence” passes as the futile benevolence or stupid generosity in our country, and possibly in China. Are there any English phrases or idioms that are derived from similar episodes in which excessive or inconsiderate benevolence / generosity turns out to be a great disaster?


What is the correct use of the word "abuses"? While the phrase: "Human rights abuses" doesn't seem incorrect, "verbal and physical abuses" does. I am tired, so if I'm being dense please don't be too harsh. I can't seem to find anything that will explain this satisfactorily.


"Moon's Land " or "Land of Moon"?

What is the difference between _Moon's Land_ and _Land of Moon_? Do both expressions have the same meaning or how do they differ? When do we use each one of these, if they do have different meanings?


What makes a question rhetorical?

> according to Wikipedia: > > A rhetorical question is a figure of speech in the form of a question posed > for its persuasive effect without the expectation of a reply. > > Example: "How much longer must our people endure this injustice?" So would any question for which an answer is not expected be considered rhetorical? On SE, users are presented the following question. > Have you considered accepting an answer or starting a bounty for this > question? There is no mechanism for responding to the question but it is more reminding than persuasive. Is it a rhetorical question? > according to reference.com > > rhetorical - used for, belonging to, or concerned with mere style or effect. By this definition, a question that was crafted (expected) to receive a certain response (such as a loaded question) might also be rhetorical if used merely for it's style or effect. In my experience, people often say a question is rhetorical if they do not expect (or usually want) an answer but it has little to do with the question being persuasive or not. Is there an exact set of criteria that can be used to evaluate the context of a question in order to determine if it is in fact rhetorical?


What does the phrase "that's as may be" mean?

I encountered this phrase in a novel I'm reading, and I think I've heard it before. What does it mean?


What's the noun for "synchronous"?

If the noun for "synchronized" is "synchronicity", what's the noun for "synchronous"? Is there even such a noun?


Hypernym for "conjunction" and "disjunction"

Is there a hypernym for _conjunction_ and _disjunction_ , in their logical senses? Just using "junction" doesn't seem right to me.


"A few" vs. "few"

>   1. I have few friends. >   2. I have a few friends. > I thought "few" means just one, two or even none. "A few" typically means more than two. However it seems to me some people say "few" when they really mean "a few", am I right?


What is the actual difference in the following statements

>   * Sentence 1: Many Hindus study Sanskrit,but only _a_ few Parsees study > Avesta. > >   * Sentence 2: Many Hindus study Sanskrit,but only few Parsees study > Avesta. > > I fail to understand the difference between both the sentences,if any? Which sentence is grammatically correct and should be used.


How long can you say "the late so and so"?

When you refer to the deceased, you say "the late so and so." How long can you say that? Is JFK referred to as the late John F. Kennedy? How about Abraham Lincoln?


"in front of" or "opposite"

Imagine my house is on the left side of the road, and if there is a bus halt on the left side of the road and a vegetable stall on the right side of the road, when I talk about the bus halt, should I use "in front of" or "opposite?" What I feel is that I should use in front of since opposite can be definitely used for the vegetable stall since the vegetable stall is facing my house.


To whoever it may concern

I received a letter of confirmation for funding from an English native speaker. She started the letter with: > To whoever it may concern, I am not a native speaker, but that sounds quite odd to me and I would change that to _To whom it may concern_. Can anyone confirm whether her starting phrase is at least grammatically okay or is it just wrong?


Missing had/have?

In an American-English fiction book there is a sentence which reads: > Without makers to show them new ways, show them new forms of magic, the > gifted were left with doing only that which been done before. Is this sentence grammatically accurate or should it end as either > ...that which **had** been done before. or > ...that which **have** been done before.


What would be the one word substitution of the phrase "one who receives a donation"?

I have searched a lot and could not come to a conclusion about what should be the exact word :) My guess is that the closest possible word for this should be "beneficiary", but there are other words as well. Can somebody explain, what exactly should be the word and why?


"at the time" and "at that time" usage and differences

Are the expressions "at the time" and "at that time" interchangeable? What are the differences between the two? How do use them?


What does "don't do yourself wrong" means?

I heard this sentence in a song, here's the part: > People hold on > > Don't do yourself wrong > > People hold on > > We've got to be strong I'm not sure about the meaning of the sentence "don't do yourself wrong". Can I rephrase it "don't do anything that can make you the bad guy"?