"Rate, comment, and subscribe" vs. "rate, comment and subscribe"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Should I put a comma before the last item in a list? In a sentence, when listing a couple — at least three — of things, are you supposed to add a comma before the last item or not? I've see both forms "x, y, and z" and "x, y and z" used and I'm curious is one of the form or both correct?


Usage of 'and' with commas

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Comma before last item in a list I grew up learning British English rules and we were taught that while using commas to list or enumerate items, there should **never** be a comma before the _and_. For instance: > I bought bread, milk, apples and oranges. I've seen this rule less prominent these days, especially in the US. The same sentence would be: > I bought bread, milk, apples, and oranges. While this usage would have my English teachers up in arms, it seems quite normal here. Is it more of a pseudo-archaic use, is it more enforced in British English?


Punctuation before "and"

What would be the proper placement of commas before "and" in this situation? I think that A, B, C and D are useful qualities and will help her complete the assignment.


Why do we use a comma before "and"?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Comma before last item in a list Often times, I find myself writing sentences like the following: > "... to integrate four granularities of features: first, second, third, and > fourth." I am just curious to find out if there should be a comma before and. Can someone explain the reason for having (or not having) the comma?


A list of something

When I write a list of something. What are the following correct in American style. A, B, and C. A, B and C.


Should I use the so-called Oxford comma, or not?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Should I put a comma before the last item in a list? Until relatively recent times, I always concluded a series in this manner, eg.: "while walking through the park yesterday, I saw dogs, pigs, kangaroos, mountain lions, zebras and wolves. Eventually, it occurred to me that, for clarity's sake, that is to indicate that the last two items mentioned are not related as a pair, I should end such a sentence as "...mountain lions, zebras, and wolves." I read that this use of the comma is called an "Oxford" commma. I think that the former use has just an aesthetic appeal, whereas the latter use has a more practical, clarifying function. I'm inclined, these days, to use the latter style. Is this indeed the "Oxford" comma, and, if so, is it considered correct, incorrect, or just a matter of preference? Thanks, -Gavin


Using a comma before "and" in a list

I am confused as to when commas are supposed to be used before the conjunction _and_. This question answers it but I am still a bit confused. For instance the following two sentences: >   * I am going to buy apples, oranges, and bananas at the store. >   * I am going to buy apples, oranges and bananas at the store. > Which of the above sentences is the correct usage of a comma?


When do I add a comma before an "and"?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Should I put a comma before the last item in a list? Sometimes, I see an extra comma before an "and" but I don't know when I should and should not add a comma before an "and". For example: > There are apples, oranges _and_ pears in the basket. In this sentence, I don't think that there is no need for a comma before the "and pears". But sometimes, I see sentences having commas before "and". For example: > I have eaten my dinner, and I am ready go out. In this case, is the comma before the "and" necessary? In longer sentences, I often see a mixture of with and without comma before "and". In what scenario should I then add a comma before the "and" in a sentence?


Sentence with multiple 'and's: should I use an Oxford comma, and if so, where?

I have the following sentence: > I am a self-starter possessing excellent problem solving ability and > outstanding coordination and communication skills. Using the Oxford comma, what is the correct way to write it? > I am a self-starter possessing excellent problem solving ability, and > outstanding coordination and communication skills. > I am a self-starter possessing excellent problem solving ability and > outstanding coordination, and communication skills.


Terminal comma?

I've always had this question but I didn't know the name for what I wanted to ask until just recently (figured it out while reading a tutorial for the Inform Interactive Fiction system). When using commas in a list of things (see examples below) should there be a comma between the next-to-last item and the word "and"? I think it makes more sense this way (see examples below). > Example set 1: >   >   >             I like squirrels, cheese, and typographic design.   >     >         I like squirrels, cheese and typographic design. To me, the second method doesn't separate the two items, or indicate a pause (and the average reader would pause between "and" and "typographic design" regardless of whether the comma was there or not, right?). The separation makes things clearer, in my opinion: > Example set 2: >   >   >             I like squirrels, cheese, and mashed potatoes and gravy.   >     >         I like squirrels, cheese and mashed potatoes and gravy.       It gets worse when the item containing "and" isn't the last item: > Example set 3: >   >   >             I like squirrels, mashed potatoes and gravy, and cheese. >             I like squirrels, mashed potatoes and gravy and cheese. >             I like squirrels, mashed potatoes, and gravy and cheese. In the second sentence in set 2, the terminal comma (is that even the right term for it?) is removed, and in the third sentence in set 2, it is re- inserted, but in the wrong place, drastically altering the meaning of the sentence. Read aloud, the sentences probably sound about the same, but I think I like the extra clarity added by the terminal comma, but see many texts in which it is omitted. Is the terminal comma proper punctuation?


Usage of comma before "and"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Should I put a comma before the last item in a list? Which is correct? >   * Three attributes are considered in this talk: response time, > availability, and throughput. >   * Three attributes are considered in this talk: response time, > availability and throughput. >


Enumerations and conjunctions "and" and "or"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Should I put a comma before the last item in a list? How do I know if I need to add a comma or not before a conjunction preceding the last item in an enumeration? For example, which of the following sentences is correct? > I have a house, a car, a bicycle, and an airplane. > > I have a house, a car, a bicycle and an airplane. Are there any _free_ online references on this matter (with examples, if possible) for the layman?


Is it alright to use the word "and" immediately after a comma?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Should I put a comma before the last item in a list? I was taught in my school that the following is wrong: > Tom, Dick, and Harry went to school on Thursday. Instead, the correct form is: > Tom, Dick and Harry went to school on Thursday. The reasoning I was taught is that it's wrong to use "and" immediately after a comma (conversely, it's wrong to precede the word "and" with a comma). I am highly suspicious of what I was taught in my school. Can someone confirm or refute the above thesis with a strong reference?


Word for cheap manufactured art

There's a word for cheap manufactured art but I can't remember it and it's almost impossible to search for a word like that. Does anyone know what it is off the top of their head?


"Years of experience that keeps us safe." vs "Years of experience that keep us safe."

If you've ever seen Mythbusters, you know that all episodes contain at least one safety disclaimer. Having recently rewatched several episodes, I've noticed that some disclaimers have Adam saying, "Don't try this at home. We've got years of experience that keeps us safe." That sounded a little funny to me, and I'm wondering whether that's grammatically correct. Shouldn't it be "years of experience that _keep_ us safe"? Technically, it makes sense that it's the singular 'experience' that keeps the Mythbusters safe, but shouldn't the verb 'keep' be referring to the years of experience as a whole? I mean, it's the fact that they've got _years_ , and not, say, _minutes_ , that are keeping them safe. Right? Or is the sentence perfectly fine? * * * _Update:_ I think part of the issue is the word 'experience' itself, which is singular regardless of how much there is of it. Words that come in discrete units (such as, say, 'blocks') are made plural when they're modified by multiple units ('5 blocks') — experience, however, remains singular. 'Much experience', 'experience', and 'no experience' are all singular.


"Following a suggestion" vs. "taking a suggestion"

> I am going to be **following** your suggestion.   >  I am going to be **taking** your suggestion.   1. Do they mean the same thing? If not, what is the difference between them?   2. If they do mean the same thing, which one sounds more natural in English? Which one would a native speaker prefer over the other?


I'm looking for a word like "switchyard"

I would like it to evoke:   1. Queuing up of the train cars,   2. Determining where each should go,   3. Building lines of cars with similar destinations, and   4. Sending them on their merry way (once there are enough cars to make it worthwhile). I'm looking for something even shorter than "switchyard". In my case, I'm talking about chunks of data, not train cars. Specifically, I'm looking for a concise name to give to a module of C-language code I'm working on. Other functions will provide assorted data to this module, which will sort it by destination and queue it up. When a given queue reaches a size threshold, the data is wrapped into a packet and sent to another function. Thanks!


Is "the benefits of this will much more" correct?

Is this sentence correct? > The benefits of this will much more or it should be like this: > The benefits of this will **be** much more


“It will turn into water” vs “it turns into water”

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Scientific article style: present or future Which sentence is correct between these two:   1. If you heat ice, it **will turn** into water.   2. If you heat ice, it **turns** into water.


Bit or Bitten - which is correct usage?

"Spiderman was bit by a radioactive spider" versus "Spiderman was bitten by a radioactive spider" - which one is correct usage ? Not sure if "bitten" is formally recognized as English or just a colloquial extension.


Sports commentators' English

Football commentators are not renowned for their erudition, but one particular usage I am finding wearisome. I am not writing this by way of complaint as I know that is not the purpose of the site. But I would be interested to know whether other people regard this as a correct use of English. When an attacking player falls over in the penalty area one of three things may have happened: 1) He accidentally fell over. 2) He was fouled by a defender. 3 He 'dived', meaning he fell down deliberately in order to make the referee think he had been fouled and award a penalty kick (and possibly a red card to the defender). Now in the inevitable cut and thrust of argument that goes on among the pundits following such an incident, they will say variously 'I don't think it was a penalty', 'It was definitely a penalty', 'It is a difficult decision, the ref is in no position to say whether it's a penalty or not'. What they actually mean is 'I don't know if it was cause for a penalty' or 'a penalty should have been given'. In no literal sense was such an incident 'a penalty'. A penalty is potentially that which follows. Are others satisfied that the Gary Linekers, and Alan Shearers of this world get it (the English) right when they say 'It was a penalty'. The same sort of thing applies to free-kicks, corners and throw-ins.


What does "to take/catch someone off stride" mean in AE?

I guess it might originate from ball game terminology, and mean pretty much the same as "catch/take someone off balance". But, sad to say, I just can't seem to find an authoritative source online that cites this allegation as fact. And so, I thought some of you might be familiar with this expression, and be able to tell me if it has any currency at all in AE today. Consider the following sourced examples: > I hope you'll excuse me, but your question caught me off stride. source > > What caught me off stride is that he contacted me by phone. source > > I must admit your reference to a "White Replublican" took me off stride. > source > > Mr. Bush, forced onto the defensive by a controversy that seems to have > caught him off-stride. source > > I think it kinda caught him off stride a little. source > > That caught her off stride and then she crackled: "Oh, I did, I did!" source


Is it appropriate to use a colon in this situation?

For example:               I did a quick search and found the following, but I am still confused:      List item 1     List item 2     etc.      Is it appropriate to still use the colon after adding the statement `, but I am still confused`? The colon doesn't feel as if it fits so well after the statement is added. Should `but I am still confused` be moved elsewhere (such as into parentheses)? I feel as though this reads better:               I did a quick search and found the following (but I am still confused):      List item 1     List item 2     etc.      Are they both correct? Is one preferable over the other? Or is there a better solution outside of these two options?


Which are the most common Latin words/phrases used in spoken English?

Please, specify American/British Engilsh!   I think these below are very common but I have no idea if they are commonly used in spoken English. ad hoc   per se   a priori   de facto   ergo   et cetera   vice versa Edit: Which are the Latin words/phrases understood and used by everyone?


Is this valid English: "it can help the learner generalize better"?

It sounds a bit off, but I am not sure if it valid or not. It was likely written by a native French speaker. After viewing the comments, I am including the full sentence: > It has been shown to be a good regularizer for supervised learning (Erhan et > al.,2010), meaning that it can help the learner generalize better, > especially when the number of labeled examples is small.


Word request: Generalization of “spike” and “scuttle” and “slight”

An author I know wrote this on his Facebook page: > There is a term of military art I cannot remember, that I need for a book, > and that is driving me [batty] trying to find. So what is the single word – > no, it isn’t “sabotage” – we use for the destruction of friendly military > equipment to prevent capture and use by the enemy?” There are terms for some particular _techniques_ for doing this: one might “spike” cannons, “scuttle” ships (sometimes by “scuppering” them, but there are other methods), or “slight” castles and fortifications; “scorched earth”, also called “denial”, is a _policy_ of doing this destruction to everything in an area; but— The author and others there with military backgrounds remember the existence of a single, possibly somewhat obsolete, verb for the **general idea** of _rendering materiel useless by an enemy about to capture it_. They just can’t recall the word itself.


"to spate" as a verb

As I was reading a book I came upon the following passage: > And when rain at length arrives, how beneficent is its coming! Boisterously, > richly, merrily it **spates** forth, like the large, hot tears of a man > unexpectedly relieved of care; [...] Is the verb _to spate_ still being used? I checked several dictionaries but I could only find these definitions:   1.     * freshet, flood   2.     * a large number or amount: _a spate of books on gardening_     * a sudden or strong outburst: _a spate of anger_


What does "F5" mean in this context?

> A native of Hong Kong, John Chen studied in La Salle College in Hong Kong up > to F5 before he went to US and graduated from Northfield Mount Hermon > School, an elite prep school in Northfield, Massachusetts. The paragraph is taken from this Wikipedia page. I'm wondering what F5 means in this context.


Syntactically correct, semantically incorrect sentence

How would I answer the following programming exercise? It's trying to emphasize the difference between semantics and syntax. > Write an English sentence that has correct syntax but has semantic errors.


What word describes interpreting evidence in such a way as to reach a desired conclusion?

Does anyone know what it's called when you interpret evidence to reach the conclusion you want?


Is it acceptable to use "math" in an admissions essay?

I am writing a college admissions essay and would like to get a professional opinion on whether it is acceptable to use the truncated and informal version of the word "mathematics" as "math". I ask this because my essay contains the word "mathematics" about fifteen or so times and would like to cut down on repetitiveness by using various versions of the word. I have included the word "maths" appropriately in my essay because I address my usage of it. I think it is a creative idea (I think it might be a literary technique - don't know for sure, rusty English skills) to use all of "mathematics", "maths", and "math" in my essay but just want to make sure so I don't seem foolish! Please add appropriate tags for this question. I am new to this SE site and am not familiar with the tags.


In English the imperative mood is used only for the second person (differently from Italian, where what is called imperative mood is used also for the first, and third person).   How is the jussive mood rendered in English?


Grammatically speaking what role does 'him' play in this sentence?

I like him working out.


Connotations of using "boy" by upper-class liberal Britons in beginning of 20th century

Could someone provide (ideally documented) evidence for the following details of the possible meanings/connotations of the word " **boy** " as used by a start-of-20th-century upper-class British person of liberal social persuasion. The exact person is probably irrelevant, but in case it helps to clarify the answer, its John Maynard Keynes. The specific questions I have are:   * What were the **standard** connotations of using the word boy by a British person of Keynes linguistic type (e.g. upper-class Briton, socially very liberal, at the start of 20th century).   * How likely is it that the word "boy" was used to refer to an of-age adult (say above 18 years old) in general language usage?   * Is there any possible evidence that "boy" may have been a slang for **adult** (over 18) male prostitute, in the slang of either Keynes's typical language usage, or more specifically, British upper-crust homosexual culture of the time which presumably had its own slang like any subculture does. * * * In case the question seems peculiar, it arouse out of trying to parse a quote in Keynes's letter referring to _"Tunis, “where ‘bed and boy’ were also not expensive."_. Please note that the letter was addressed to his homosexual lover, to provide context for the third question above. It was claimed that it is impossible - merely from the word "boy" - to discern whether he may have meant a of-age prostitute or underage one. I am looking for linguistic reference to support either view (e.g. if someone can show that there indeed was slang usage that didn't imply underage; or vice versa that there's no linguistic evidence that there was any chance of him speaking of adult males).


Found missing/Found to be missing?

Which one among the following is correct? > These were found missing. or > These were found to be missing. For me the former one sounds little bit odd since "found" and "missing" are next to each other.


What is the origin of the phrase "cut the mustard"?


common question structures?

I'm creating an AI app that understands the user's sentence. I'm currently working on questions, and I'm wondering what are some common question structures? I know questions commonly start with: auxiliary + subject + verb. If this is a question for english language learners, please move it.


Which is the correct spelling: "Granddad" or "Grand-dad" or "Grandad"?

_Granddad_ or _Grand-dad_ or _Grandad_? Which is the correct spelling?


"Delicacy" vs. "subtlety" vs. "fragility"

I would like to use a word meaning that something (not food) is delicate. More precisely, assume that there is one (mathematical) hypothesis R-H; it is not known if it is true or not. We know that the cardinality of a set M of numbers is infinite if and only if hypothesis R-H is true. I know it is possible to prove that some supersets of the set M is infinite, that is somehow in favor of hypothesis R-H. Now if I want to say something about that hypothesis R-H, which one of the following is better? Or is there a better alternative still? >   1. We show the delicacy of the R-H in terms of some supersets of M. >   2. We show the fragility of the R-H with respect to the terms of some > supersets of M. >   3. We show the subtlety of the R-H in terms of some supersets of M. >


"responsible for" in negative context

Can you use "responsible for" in a negative context? Like the "Kids were responsible for starting the fire". As they were guilty of burning down the house.


Put down a downpayment

Is it correct to say "to put down a downpayment"? Or should it be "to put down a payment"? But that doesn't really emphasize that it's a downpayment it could be a payment of any sort. Or maybe just say "to pay the downpayment"? I would have thought that it's the first way but it somehow seems a bit odd...


"To be starved" for "to be hungry, starving" in colloquial AE

Is "to be starved" a typical AE expression for "to be starving"? > I'm starved! What's for breakfast? source > > I'm starved. What's for dinner? source > > I'm starved. When do we eat? source


"...Enough that one can do" for "...enough to do" in AE

In AE, can the phrasal turn "...enough that one can do" be used interchangeablyn with "...enough to do" in just about every which context? > _Sam is spiritually **strong enough that he can** stand with Nephy_... > source > > _He's **smart enough that he can** do anything he sets his mind to_... > source > > _He's also **tall enough that he can** drink from the sink_... source


Proper title capitalization of parenthesis

How should Capitalizing for example "Exit Music (for a Film)"? Usually in a title the parenthetical phrase serves as subtitle, but in this case it is evidently a continuation, accordingly "for" should be capitalized or not? Thanks.


Let be: one verb or two?

My apologies if my question is not appropriate for this forum. In mathematical writing, one often needs to let certain letters denote certain mathematical objects. For example: "Let X be a number. Let Y be a set." I am confident the following examples are correct ways to combine the above two sentences into one.   * "Let X be a number; let Y be a set."   * "Let X be a number, and let Y be a set."  However, I do not know if either of the following are correct.   * "Let X be a number and Y be a set."   * "Let X be a number and Y a set." My question is this: which of the latter two are grammatically correct (or incorrect) and why?


Difference between discursive construction and discursive representation

Are there any good definitions of the concepts of "discursive representation" and "discursive construction" which highlights the difference and/or relationship between these? I'm thinking about something useful for a text on how gender inequality is being constructed and represented in a text. Thanks a lot!


Is it grammatically correct to say "I wanted to please connect with you"

I was having a debate with someone about how this phrase sounds, as it seems incorrect to me but it's been proofread many times in e-mail (yes at an american company), without anyone saying anything about it. EDIT: I don't know why it's wrong (if it is), which is why I'm asking the question. The current answer won't be accepted unless the author can elaborate. EDIT 2: I was writing to a recruiter that I know on a professional level, and was getting help on a way to eloquently request that I add them as a connection on a certain social networking site. The way I would have worded it would have been "I would like to connect with you..." or something of the sort. EDIT 3: I was trying to focus more on the placement and usage of the word "please" in this sentence, as it was the part that stuck out to me the most, and the sentence sounds more correct without it. To that point, maybe it's the tense of the verb that's odd about it? What if the sentence was, "I want to please connect with you"?


British and American slang words for immigrants?

What slang words or phrases do British/American English speakers use for (poor) immigrants?


"Little improvement" vs. "Little improvements"?

If the term _Little improvement_ refers to the stagnance of progress, and _Little improvements_ refer to a number of small additions, what is the plural of many stagnances of progress? As in, "You have very little improvement. All of you have __ __!"


Is "at all" necessary in the following sentence?

> My body was totally anesthetized at the time. It was a miracle I had managed > to get an erection **at all**. Is the _at all_ at the end neccesary?


Usage of had in past tense

Being a non native speaker of English I am not sure about the usage of **had**. In my academics I have learned that **_had_** is only used to show that something happened prior to some event in the past according to **rule of past perfect**. Like we do say > When we reached the station, the train had left the station. But now-days I see usage of had to show some past events irrespective of any prior event. Like I have listen > What had made you so tensed? According to my teacher this sentence is wrong as there is no prior event associated with it. Could anyone clear my confusion about **over all possible correct usage of had used in past events**?


"Even that she left lying"

In a story titled "Prelude" written by "Katherine Mansfield" I came across the following sentence in this paragraph: > The fireplace was choked up with rubbish. She poked among it but found > nothing except a hair-tidy with a heart painted on it that had belonged to > the servant girl. **Even that she left lying** , and she trailed through the > narrow passage into the drawing-room. After a little bit of investigation, I realized that "Even that she left lying" means "She left even that lying", with "that" referring to the "hair- tidy", meaning: > She left everything lying in the fireplace, even the hair-tidy. The meaning of this sentence was very unclear to me at first . So my question is why the object of the verb has been moved to the beginning of sentence? What's been the purpose? to emphasize? to make the sentence more beautiful? Is this sort of stuff only found in literature? Or is it something that I may face in daily conversations as well?


Is it correct to say 'two/three parter movie'?

I have been wondering about this for sometime now. I often hear people say two-parter. Is it correct/formal? I want to describe a documentary movies consisting of three parts. Three- parter movie? How about a trilogy?


"I can't help it." Why help?

Why do we use the verb _help_ in sentences such as the following to mean something like _refrain from_?   * I try not to eat junk, but I can't help it.   * I couldn't help laughing.   * I can't help but admire her bravery.


Punctuation with unusual element in begining of the sentence

I want to bend English a bit and put weird elements into position one, mirroring the more idiomatic constructions there are. Here's the "standard"sentence > The rule is clear, but it makes no sense and people do not care. And here's what I'd like to do with it > The rule is clear, but sense it makes not and care people do not. Once again... I know that this is not proper English but I feel that it is still in the grey zone and I have little doubt that people would understand me if I was _say_ that. But I want to _write_ it.   * How would I punctuate this?   * Should I use commas or hyphens or nothing? What's the easiest for a reader to comprehend and parse?


Anything and everything

Is it correct to say, "Please feel free to change anything and everything in the draft"? I want to mean the reviewer can change as much as he wants (but want to say that more emphatically). What would be a better expression?


"That's the Mulligatawny"

In Orwell's _A Clergyman's Daughter_ , Dorothy ends up travelling with a bunch of other homeless youths, one of whom is a cockney called Nobby. He uses the word "Mulligatawny" as a slang word, but I've never heard it used this way anywhere else: After Dorothy hands over her last coin: > 'That's the mulligatawny!' he said. 'We've struck it lucky--and so've you, > kid. After she tells him her name: > 'Ellen. That's the mulligatawny. No surnames when you're on the bum.' When he's describing about going to pick hops to make some money: > ‘Pickin’ ’ops—dahn in Kent! C’n understand that, can’t yer?’ > > ‘Oh, hops! For beer?’ > > 'That's the mulligatawny! Coming on fine, she is. Well, kid, 'z I was > saying, here's us three going down hopping, and got a job promised us and > all--Blessington's farm, Lower Molesworth. Only we're just a bit in the > mulligatawny, see? Because we ain't got a brown between us, and we got to do > it on the toby--thirty-five miles it is--and got to tap for our tommy and > skipper at night as well. And that's a bit of a mulligatawny, with ladies in > the party.' From the above, he seems to be using the word in a couple of different ways — to express that he finds something agreeable (similar to "now _that's_ what I'm talking about" or "that's the ticket"), or to confirm that Dorothy is understanding him correctly ("Now you're getting it"), but finally he seems to use the word to mean 'a tricky situation' or 'in a pickle'. Does this usage have an origin outside the book?


What is the origin of the idiom "Hong Kong dog"?

Does anybody know the origin of the idiom "Hong Kong dog"? **EDIT** : I'm more interested in how the idiom came into being rather than when it first appeared in mainstream media. Something like the guess made in the following comment is most welcome except that trusted sources would be greatly appreciated.


Including "to" in a phrase/statement

I have a question. Should I say; _The place where I went_ or _The place where I went to_?


Upvote to/for/on a post?

On Stack Exchange we can upvote comments, answers, and questions. Is it correct to say that   * I put an upvote _on_ a question.   * There are four upvotes _for_ this answer.   * I ~~made~~ cast an upvote _on_ your post. Which is the correct preposition?


Usage of the expression unfold against

Can I use the expression _unfold against_ talking about some literature/movie/theatre actions. For example, _The plot of this performance unfolds against historical background_?


The feminine of "He was a leading man of letters"

"William Shakespeare was a leading man of letters". What if we are talking about Florence Margaret Smith. Miss Smith was a leading...... Would you, native speakers, say "woman" ?


What's the phrase/expression for practising martial arts?

Recently, I took up Taekwondo and ended up with a question: How can I say I practise a martial art in English? Is it just practise or is there another verb for it? In my mother tongue I say (roughly translated) "I fight Taekwondo" or "I train Taekwondo", but it sounds kind of weird in English.


Is "a ways to go" grammatically correct?

In English we often say, for example, "he still has a ways to go before he's done." Is this grammatically correct?


Why does the verb "overlook" have such a different meaning from "oversee"?

_Oversee:_ > _**-verb (used with object),_** -saw, -seen, -see·ing.   >  **1.** to direct (work or workers); supervise; manage: _He was hired to > oversee the construction crews._   >  **2.** to see or observe secretly or unintentionally: _We happened to > oversee the burglar leaving the premises. He was overseen stealing the > letters._   >  **3.** to survey or watch, as from a higher position.   >  **4.** to look over; examine; inspect. _Overlook:_ > _**–verb (used with object)_**   >  **1.** to fail to notice, perceive, or consider: _to overlook a misspelled > word._   >  **2.** to disregard or ignore indulgently, as faults or misconduct: _Only a > parent could overlook that kind of behavior._   >  **3.** to look over, as from a higher position: _a balcony that overlooks > the ballroom._   >  **4.** to afford a view over; look down or out upon: _a hill overlooking > the sea._ The third definitions of each are similar, but even there, _oversee_ is used only with persons, and _overlook_ is used only with things like balconies. Why are they so different? _Oversee_ makes sense to me, but can someone trace down the reason why _overlook_ often means _fail to notice_?


Ways to say "lose money in investment"

What are some ways to say _lose money in investment_? In particular, is the usage of _swallow_ in the following example alright? > My money has been **swallowed** by the financial market.


A formal phrasal verb for "continue to stick to their belief"

How do I rewrite the following sentence so it is more formal, using a phrasal verb in place of the part in bold? > Despite mounting evidence, they **continue to stick to their belief**.


Nouns as verbs, Brits and Yanks: ID cards

I find it interesting that not only do British and American English speakers both use the noun 'ID card' as a verb in the context of (trying to be in a position of) purchasing age-restricted items, but abbreviate it differently: British speakers: > "The bartender ID'd me" American speakers: > "The bartender carded me" Which do we prefer? Any other similar examples? Personally I think 'to ID' makes more sense, since although in 'ID card' it's an acronym for 'identity', it easily transforms into 'to ID' -> 'to identify', which makes sense. But then, I'm British! Edit: As @DavidM points out, American speakers say "I got ID'd" to mean "I was [literally] identified" - in a police line-up for instance. If a Briton says "I got ID'd", he more than likely means "I was asked to show some form of ID".


A word for a person who expects other people to be like him

What is the word for a person who expects other people to be like him, for example, a dad who wants his son to be like him?


Are "straightforward" and "roundabout" antonyms?

In describing a piece of computer code, I called it both "straightforward" and "roundabout", with the intention of communicating that although the code was more verbose than necessary, it was still easily understandable. However, my friend called me out on it, stating that these two words are obvious antonyms, because they both derive from the idea of travelling on a path: one is a straight path, and one is a path that moves around an obstacle. Are these two words antonyms, and is it appropriate to use them simultaneously to describe the same thing?


Long subjects in indirect questions

I know that to indirectly ask: > **What is** _your name_? I should say something like: > I don't know **what** _your name_ **is**. But what if the _subject_ of question is longer than " _your name_ "? Something like: > **What is** _the benefit of closing school when there's a flu outbreak_ It just doesn't sound so good to me to indirectly ask the above question when the distance between **what** and **is** gets too long: > I don't know **what** _the benefit of closing schools when there's a flu > outbreak_ **is**. So, I am wondering if it is Ok to ask the indirect question like this: > I don't know **what is** _the benefit of closing schools when there's a flu > outbreak_.


"Success" or "successes"

Which is correct? > The newspaper described the **success** of people like Bob and Joe. > > The newspaper described the **successes** of people like Bob and Joe.


Origin of "a slow day"

What is the origin of the phrase _a slow day_? The 24-hour span of a day does not naturally class as either slow or fast, nor does one 24-hour span wheel by at a rate any greater than another. The construction therefore, though in perfectly common use, is fundamentally an artful one and, as such, likely derives from a literary source or, if you will, first occasion of use by a writer of some repute. It may be that one or more Stack Exchange users has been exposed to the term in its original context. I should be pleased to know as well.


Why names such as Hastings-on-Hudson?

This question is either about etymology or language generally, as names have this feature in other languages too, but I'm just curious how the practice of naming towns in proximity to bodies of water with a built-in reference to those bodies of water came about. Obviously it's not strange to me that a town on the Hudson would be called "-on-Hudson" etc., but what "determined" or at least influenced whether a town's name ended up having a reference to a body of water as well? It's not Chicago-on-Michigan or Philadelphia-on-Delaware, so why so many "-on-Hudson" towns?


"compare" or "be compared"

Here is a sentence: _**We would like to import auto parts from your company on a regular basis, provided your prices compare favorably with those of others._** Is the sentence right? I think the word "compare" in the sentence should be replaced by "are compared", for in my view COMPARE is a PASSIVE statement. Can anyone tell me which one is right? Thanks!


Is there a word for someone born through incest?

The word 'bastard' is used liberally throughout Game of Thrones and it made me wonder about the children born through incest.


What's the meaning of 'symbolic swipe'?

I saw the following sentence in today's Washington Post: House Republicans cleared a hurdle Friday in their first attempt to scrap President Barack Obama's landmark health care overhaul, yet it was little more than a 'symbolic swipe at' the law. What's the meaning of 'symbolic swipe (at)'? Does it mean a strong strike, but not strong enough to kill (abolish) the bill, which might end up with a resistance just for the purpose of resistance, because it is headed by the phrase 'yet it was little more than'?


Is the correct phrase "Doing it healthy and safe" or Doing it healthy and safely?"

I'm working on a tshirt and want to use the phrase > "Doing it healthy and safe." Or should it be > "Doing it healthy and safely."


Grammatically correct usage

Happy Holi to You and Your Family.     Play Safe!      Is anything grammatically wrong in above sentences? In which category does the second sentence fall? Can we replace `Play Safe!` with `Play Safely!`. Are they equally true and depict same meaning? Is the usage of exclamation with both `safe` and `safely` correct?


About "Do something really quick"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Which is correct: "drive safe" or "drive safely"? Sometimes I see sentences like "I can do something really quick", rather than "I can do something really quickly". My questions are:   * Is "I can do something really quick" correct in grammar?   * Is the usage of "verb + adj" a common pattern in English? If so, what's their key difference with "verb + adv"? And can you also make some other examples of using the "verb + adj" pattern?


"Fairly quick" vs. "fairly quickly"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Which is correct: “drive safe” or “drive safely”? If I were to write a sentence like: > I completed the task fairly quickly. Is it correct, or would _fairly quick_ be more appropriate?


Does a group overlap another group?

I'm not a native speaker and I want to describe the following case: There is an Active Directory group and another one. Let's say "Managers" and "Janitors". Both of these groups have the same members. So~, do these groups `overlap` each over, or do they `intersect`? Or is there any other word? In Russian I'd say "пересекаться". As in "группы пересекаются" Edit to clarify the question: E.g. 'Sally' and 'Harry' are members of Managers group, 'Jack' and 'Sally' are members of Janitors group. So do these groups `overlap` or `intersect` or `something else`? **(note that 'Sally' is a member of both of these groups).**


What do you call a friend you don't want to name to another friend?

This may not fall under english language SE, and if not I apologize, but I always wonder when I say "a friend and I did this" to another friend, if that sounds like I'm implying they are not a friend. Is this what that sounds like? Should I say "another friend?" Or is there a better way?


"To reason most absurd" in Hamlet

Here's from Hamlet, Act 1, Scene 2 (The Arden Shakeseare edited by Harold Jenkins) > Fie, 'tis a fault to heaven,   >  A fault against the dead, a fault to nature,   >  **To reason most absurd** , whose common theme   >  Is death of fathers, and who still hath cried   >  From the first corse till he that died today,   >  'This must be so'.   >  (Emphasis added) I understand the grammar structure of this sentence _except_ "To reason most absurd". I guess it means "it is irrational", but I can't analyze it grammatically.


What does “No pressure” mean when you’re meeting someone new?

Time magazine (6 Aug 2014) carries an article titled “Our Brains Immediately Judge People” and subtitled “We make calls on trustworthiness almost instantly” that says research at Dartmouth College and New York University revealed the human brain judges trustworthiness or untrustworthiness of other people in about 30 milliseconds. The article concludes: > “This, the researchers conclude, is evidence that our brains make judgments > of people before we even process who they are or what they look like. Keep > that in mind the next time you’re meeting someone new. **No pressure**.” > http://time.com/3083667/brain-trustworthiness/ I’m not clear about what “No pressure” here exactly means. Does it mean no need of feeling pressure in trying to read and judge trustworthiness of a person you meet for the first time? Could you tell me “no pressure” from what? Can I rephrase it with a simple “No sweat”?


Words similar to "vainly"/"in vain" meaning it is pointless to even try do do something

I'm reading a poem which contains the lines "How vainly men themselves amaze / to win the palm, the oak, the bays". This got me wondering about words like "vainly" or "in vain" not meaning: "doing something to no avail" but: "there being no point in even attempting something because it couldn't possibly produce the desired outcome" Is the second one actually a different meaning or is it just a question of context? Are there any words which mean specifically the second? All I can think of right now is "pointlessly".


Should the names of seasons be capitalized?

When you are writing about the seasons, should you capitalize their names? For example, would you say: > I love the colors of the leaves in Autumn. Or should you say: > I love the colors of the leaves in autumn.


Adjective to describe a person who is easy to work with.

What singular word can be used, to describe a person who is "easy to work with?"


is " up on your mountain top" an idiom,

I wanna know whether " up on your mountain top" is an idiom? And if it is, whats its meaning? for example if some one gets on some body case and critisize him/her, if his, her answer is: " up on your mountain top" does it mean critisize yourself?


Is 'edit' a correct term for the act of editing?

Can we refer to the action of editing as to an edit? For example as in this sentence, "I paid a lot to get that edit done, it was a long text". Or "Free photo edits for the first 100 customers".


What is the pronunciation of "liceity"?

"Liceity", meaning _lawfulness_ or _legitimacy_ , is a word that seems only to be used to describe certain religious actions from the Roman Catholic point of view. The word is not present in any major dictionaries, including the OED, but this one has it for example. What is its pronunciation? If possible, please give sourced answers, but don't hesitate to speak from experience if you don't know of any sources but do know the answer.


"I will appreciate your help"

I encounter the phrase "I will appreciate your help" from time to time and it doesn't sound too honest to me. To be more specific, I don't have a problem with this phrase coming from a friend, because he will appreciate my help by "owing me one". But a stranger from the Internet, that's different, methinks. "How will you appreciate it?" pops in my mind every time I see it, because to me, appreciation equals reward and, well, you can't reward people over the internet much. It is quite possible that I am just wrong and this is a perfectly fine figure of speech.


Can "paper bag" mean any bag?

Being Swedish but living in Kenya for many years I initially reacted when at the local market I was offered a paper bag (verbally) but given a plastic bag (physically). This is always the case and was not a single incident. I thought paper bag had become a common word for all kinds of bags in Kenya but it seems like this is also common in other English speaking countries? Can anyone confirm and maybe add a bit of history to explain? For reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paper_bag http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plastic_shopping_bag Edit: A US citizen living in Kenya has made the observation as well and claims it to be British English. http://chattynicol.wordpress.com/2011/01/10/fun- facts-about-kenya/


About the word 'imperceptible'?

> Development is a process whereby insignificant and **imperceptible** > quantitative changes lead to fundamental, qualitative changes. **Question 1** : What's the meaning of 'imperceptible'? Does it mean that it's out of our capability to feel it, and we human being just cannot feel or know it? **Question 2** : Do you agree it?


Synonym for "focused"

I'm looking for a better adjective that means focused in the sense of "intense concentration" like an elite warrior in battle. I guess it doesn't even need the sense of having blinders on, more about being "in the zone". The problem with focused or concentrated (even worse) is that it can apply to too many other things. The word should apply to a person focused on an activity. It needs to be one word, an adjective, not a noun or verb. Does such a word exist or is focused the best English has to offer?


Origin of "in the drink"

I know what this means, but can't figure out why ponds, lakes, or oceans might be referred to as "the drink." From Wiktionary: > (colloquial, with the) Any body of water. > > If he doesn't pay off the mafia, he’ll wear cement shoes to the bottom of > the drink!


"put X down to" vs. "put down X to": subjects of verbs with two particles

> I expect I would have to put down many coats to do the job. ( _SOURCE_ ) One factor to distinguish phrasal verbs from prepositional verbs is particle movement. Phrasal verbs can place the particle before or after direct object, whereas the preposition in prepositional verbs must precede the noun. ( _Biber et al. 1999_ ) So, I'm confused when analyzing the fragment "put down many coats to" because I'm not able to distinguish whether "put ... " is a phrasal verb or a prepositional verb. The confusion arises when I read in the Oxford Dictionary of English, under 'put' -> 'phrasal verb', the form " **put something down to** " is correct. So, the above sentence would be rewritten as follows : > I expect I would have to put many coats down to do the job. Am I right? If not, how do I correctly distinguish phrasal verbs from prepositional verbs in the cases, like this one, where there are two particles (in this case 'down' and 'to')?


"Bring down X" vs. "bring X down"

I am unable to understand the difference between these two sentences: >   1. I want him to bring down the opponents. >   2. I want him to bring the opponents down. > Which is right and when should each be used?


Discrete data vs cumulative data

1)Can we use discrete data as antonym for cumulative data ? 2)can discrete data be cumulative data? Simple yes/no in both cases would suffice.


Is there a word for made up verbs that end in "ing"?

One thing I love about English is that verbs can be easily created just by adding the suffix "-ing" and adjectives by adding "-ly". How would you call this phenomenon? Examples: >   * Googling, Youtubing > >   * Pants-shittingly > >


Meaning of "Preparation of x, y and z and ..."

I have a question related to this example sentence: > Preparation of Isometrics, bill of material of all lines and supporting > details of all lines below 2-1/2" except lines under IBR and get subsequent > approval. From the above:   1. What are the sizes of lines for preparation of isometrics? Is it for all lines or for lines below 2-1/2"?   2. Is getting subsequent approval for (a) all isometrics, bill of materials and also for the supporting details or (b) only supporting details?


Etymology of "Buffalo, New York"

What is the place-name etymology of _Buffalo, New York_?


Pronunciation of vowel in vague as [æ] instead of [eɪ]

I have a friend who pronounces the vowel in _plague_ , _vague_ , and _bagel_ as `[æ]` instead of the standard `[eɪ]` (so _plague_ rhymes with _flag_ , for instance). Interestingly, he apparently can't tell the difference between the vowel sounds (i.e. even when I say `[veɪɡ]` and `[væg]` back-to-back, he can't tell me which pronunciation is the one he uses and which is the one I use). I had at first assumed it was a regional pronunciation, but his wife is from the same relatively small (35k) town in western Michigan, and she uses the standard pronunciation. Is this shift common in his region (or any other region, for that matter)? Is it otherwise explainable? Any insight would be appreciated.


What do you call 'a person of encyclopedic culture'?

Would 'polymath' a correct word to substitute 'a person of "encyclopedic" culture' in > He is described as an atheist, a materialist, and a person of "encyclopedic" > culture. quoted from 'Creating the Hybrid Intellectual' by Anne Lambright. Or, as an instance, 'polyhedric' is more suitable? I'm unsure because Merriam-Webster defines 'polymath' as 'a person of encyclopedic learning', not as 'a person of encyclopedic culture'.


What is the meaning of "as the appreciation" here?

> As the appreciation of justice and the desire to act to further it, > conscience is based on a rational appreciation of the well-orderedness of a > benign God's plan for the world. _Thomas Acquina on the Passion_ by Robert > Miner Conscience can appreciate or generate the appreciation of justice, and can generate the desire to promote it, but it is different from them both. So to use the conjunction word “as”, for me, is to reduce conscience to things it generates. Therefore I think the sentence is written loosely. Do you have a better explanation which will do more justice to the author than my version?


Meaning of the "forthcoming" in this sentence

> I'm going to be as forthcoming as I can be, Mr. Anderson. from The Matrix.


Where did the phrase "Give it some wellie" originate?

I've heard this a few times, and I would presume that it comes from Wellingtons, with the meaning of put some boot to it. Is there an origin for this phrase?


Laughing somebody out of town/court/the room

I heard of this expression:               We were laughed out of the room      After googling for it, it seems there are 2 more variations to it:               laughing somebody out of town     laughing somebody out of court      I would like to know which one was the original.


What are the differences between "amalgam" and "hodgepodge"/"hedgepodge"?

What are the differences between _amalgam_ and _hodgepodge/hedgepodge_? I see people using them in their sentences, which seems to mean mixture of many things. Are they subtly different?


What does "In some ways" exactly mean?

What does the expression "in some ways" exactly mean, as in > The English language is limited in some ways, and perhaps most limited in > its ability to express love. Is it generic (like _in many ways_ ) or specific (like _in a few ways_ )? Can you give an example of an equivalent expression?


In "Winnie the Pooh", Why isn't the Hundred Acre Wood  plural?

When I read some of these Winnie the Pooh stories to my kids at night, the place where the story takes place is the Hundred Acre Wood, not Hundred Acre Woods. Why is that?


What does the phrase "They would clash with my drapes" mean?

I have come across this phrase in the sitcom, Hot in Cleveland wherein a gay man is asked if he had kids to which he responds with this phrase :"They would clash with my drapes." I tried looking it up on the internet but I have had no luck finding the meaning. I would be glad if someone could kindly tell me as to what it means. Here's a link to the episode and you could hear the phrase at 6:30 Video


Are there acknowledged studies about the relationship of vocabulary and comprehension of English language?

Though I’m not sure whether this question is suitable to EL&U site or not, I’m glad if I can get any input on the relationship of the vocabulary and comprehension of English language, or if you can suggest me other suitable site that I can post this question. I recently read the book, titled “Read a Million Words (to master English language),” written by Japanese English language scholar at Tokyo Tele- communication University, Kunihide Sakai. Mr.Sakai cites the following numbers: >   * Vocabulary of 1,000 words allows 80% comprehension of English statement > >   * 2,000-word vocabulary allows 86.6 % comprehension of English statement > >   * 3,000-word vocabulary allows 90.6 % comprehension of English statement > >   * 4,000-word vocabularies allows 92.8 % comprehension of English statement > > Though it’s not clear what "English statement" means (maybe I’d do better to ask him directly as well as about the source of number), it’s hardly believable that 3,000 vocabulary level allows 90% comprehension of general statement in English language from my experience of reading English language literatures everyday to look for the subject for posting EL&U. I know British psychologist and linguist, Charles K. Ogden asserted that we can express everything we want to say with 1,500 words (850 basic English words and their combinations, plus 350 international (foreign) words and 300 from scientific terminology), and promoted Basic English movement during 1930s. Winston Churchill supported Ogden’s theory and recommended diffusion of Basic English as the international language in his discourse at Harvard University in 1944. However, Ogden's theory is applied only to writing and speaking, not reading and hearing. Is there any trustworthy study that illuminates the relationship between vocabulary level and ability to comprehend English language statements expressed in day-to-day conversation, literature (not too academic) and daily journals? What is its finding with regards to the relationship between vocabulary and comprehension?


Usage of "shall we?"

What does it mean and where would I use it?


Does the following sentence make any sense?

Is the following sentence grammatically correct and does it make any sense? > "Humans made god to live in pieces and not peace." It was posted by some atheist in response to this quote: > "God made us to live in peace and not pieces."


Connotations of "have you ever thought about..."

I recently had an argument with a friend around the question "have you ever thought about _something_?" The question was asked in the context of exploring some life possibilities, such as buying a sports car or moving to a different country. The disagreement was around whether an affirmative answer to the question bears the hidden meaning that the _something_ being considered is something that the person answering actively wants. To give an example: when asked "have you ever thought about moving to Sweden?", if a person answers in the affirmative, which of the following two meanings best describes their answer?   * They consider moving to Sweden a practical possibility, and they actually want to do so in the future.   * The thought has crossed their mind, but nothing can be inferred about whether they want or plan to move to Sweden in the future. Assume the subject is not currently living in Sweden :) **Question update:** Some of you answered that the meaning depends on other factors, such as tone of voice, body language, context, etc. As I said in a comment, to the purposes of this question, ignore such secondary conversational artifacts. They can _always_ extend the range of meaning of _any_ sentence or word, from the "proper" sense, to the complete opposite, such as when being sarcastic (e.g. "Would you like to go to Sweden?" "Yeah, right...") Consequently, the disclaimer "it depends on the tone of voice" can probably be applied to most answers on this site. To put it another way: assume you _read_ the text, with minimal context. What's the meaning then?


When is the use of "north" more appropriate than "northern" and vice versa?

North, South, East, West, can be used as adjectives, but so can Northern, Southern, Eastern, Western. What rules, if any, govern which is appropriate when?


South vs Southern - difference?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  When is the use of "north" more appropriate than "northern" and vice versa? Are there any differences in meanings of South vs Southern, North vs Northern, and so on, when used in to modify a location? If yes, what is it? One example I can think of is that South America normally means the area where Brazil, Argentina, etc. are, and Southern America normally means the southern part of the US. Is this only a special case or is this an instance of a more generalized rule?


Etymology and meaning of the word "pizzled"

I heard of a term today called "pizzled" and am confused about it as there is a plethora of different definitions for the word. I first heard it in a speech by David Shing TNW Europe Conference. He said that it was a combination of "pissed" and "puzzled." I immediately thought it was made up and that it is new slang. But then after further investigation I found traces to a short story where it was used in a strange way in 1955, see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autofac. In addition, Wikipedia said "pizzle" is an old english word for penis, see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pizzle. In addition Wiktionary had the following: "Having the penis in a different tincture than the rest of the body." What is the etymology and meaning of this strange word?


Is "now" grammatical in "Have you now spoken to him?"?

> Have you now spoken to him? I really heard that from someone.


Could the word "artist" be used to refer to a writer?

According to the dictionary, artist could be a painter, singer, dancer, or actor. But I think maybe writers could be considered artists as well. What's your opinion? I'm writing a composition about art and artists, and I'm not sure if a writer is appropriate as an example.


the usage of 'which'

I'm doing review for a journal. There are many sentences which really confuse me. For example: > We employ similarity learning using Ranking-SVM to learn parameters Is it better to change it like so? > We employ similarity learning **which** uses Ranking-SVM to learn parameters Another sentence > The similarity measure incorporates special emphasis on spatial > localization, **by which** the similarity between x and y decreases with the > increase of their in-between distance. The above sentence is kind of weird to me. Is ' _by which_ ' used correctly?


use of article before the word onset?

It happened due to 'an' early onset of the monsoon or it happened due to early onset of the monsoon. Are both correct? Is one wrong? and if anyone know what's the rule. I did a google search, and I got plenty of hits for both the variations.


What is the origin of the term "woo"?

On the Skeptics StackExchange you quite often read users referring to certain things and practices as _"woo"_. What is the origin of this word? How did it come to be synonymous with skeptics?


Note: sorry for cross-posting from Writers.SE, but I can't seem to get a definite answer. * * * How do I designate the footnotes that are mine inside a quote? I tried "our note", "note ours" and "remark is ours". Which one is the correct one and most commonly used? Or is there some other way? For example: > He provides an argument for it:   >  "Before the Greeks, the ancient Egyptians used it[1] in the construction of > their great pyramids." > > * * * > > [1] The Golden Section — note ours. ← this is _my_ note, not the original > author's So you can see there is my note inside a quote. Or if I have something without a footnote. > He provides an argument for it:   >  "Before the Greeks, the ancient Egyptians used it (Golden Section — note > ours) in the construction of their great pyramids." Note where I use "note ours", to clarify that "it" is a "Golden Section".


Indirect "be" question; word order

_Caveat: There are a great number of similar questions I have found, but none has explained this specific thing. If the answer does exist and I have overlooked it, please let me know._ So, I was under the assumption that the general rule for indirect question formation was to:   1. convert the question to a statement,    2. convert the unknown part to the appropriate question word, and    3. pull that question word to the beginning. Thus: **Unknown object:** > What does wasabi taste like? > >   1. **Wasabi tastes like [something].** _(converted to statement)_ >   2. **wasabi tastes like [what?]** _(replaced unknown part with appropriate > interrogative)_ >   3. **[what] wasabi tastes like** _(moved interrogative to beginning)_ > > > Tell me **what wasabi tastes like**. **Unknown subject:** > Who likes koalas? > >   1. **[someone] likes koalas.** _(converted to statement)_ >   2. **[who] likes koalas** _(replaced unknown part with appropriate > interrogative)_ >   3. **[who] likes koalas** _(moved interrogative to beginning)_ > > > Tell me **who likes koalas**. If the subject is what we want to know, as in the koala example, we still do the same thing - pull out the unknown, convert it to a question word, and move it to the front - except it is already in the front, so the last step is superfluous. The formula remains the same, however. * * * This works for pretty much any situation as long as the main verb is not **_be_**. That's where I get confused. **Unknown... subject?** > What is his name? > >   1. **His name is [Bob?]**. >   2. **His name is [what?]** >   3. **[what] his name is** > > > Tell me **what his name is**. This, to me, is the correct indirect question. Thing is, because of the fact that **_be_** is all copulationary-wise an' all, we can often reverse the subject and complement: > What is his name? > >   1. **[Bob?] is his name.** >   2. **[what?] is his name** >   3. **[what] is his name** > > > Tell me **what is his name**. Now I know in speech this is probably quite common, but it sounds incorrect to me, and I would never write it. I believe (admittedly perhaps erroneously) that it is wrong. At least I think it is wrong*er* than the first example. So, my question: **Is this 3-part rule I have been using wrong for _be_ sentences? If so, what can I use in its place, and how can I explain it logically to my students?** * * * Incidentally, the original question that sparked this was: > I don't know + Who is going to be our new boss? Using the method above, this becomes: > I don't know who is going to be our new boss. Whereas I think the more correct version would be > I don't know who our new boss is going to be. but cannot explain why the former is incorrect. * * * I've looked around, and there are a few questions who come tantalizingly close but do not fully explain what I need to know:   * Where does the verb go on this question? Is it even a reported question?   * "I'm not sure what the right way is"   * And especially: "What's" in indirect questions


What's the difference between "ledger" and "accounts"?

I want to know the difference between the words _ledger_ and _accounts_. I don't work in an accounts department and know nothing of it. Can anybody explain it to me please? The following definition is an excerpt from the _Longman dictionary of contemporary English_. > _ledger_ > > a book in which a business, bank etc records how much money it receives and > spends and > _accounts_ > > a)[plural] an exact record of the money that a company has received and the > money it has spent


Document names and proper nouns/definite articles

I'm a translator and not a native speaker of English and have some troubles understanding definite articles. Any feedback for my problem would be of great help for me. What is the rule for document names and proper nouns? I need to translate the following sentence into English: "Documents that increase **Inventory and stock list amount** are as follows..." Now, 'Inventory and stock list' is a proper noun in this case, it is a caption in our software, but in this context I refer to **amount** , why I don't need the definite article there? What will modify that noun? Would it be incorrect to say: "Documents that increase **the** Inventory and stock list amount are as follows..." I need a grammatical explanation for this. 'It sounds good but I don't know why' rule is driving me crazy.


"Either A or B": what exactly is the subject?

My brother had this pair of questions on a Year 7 English exam. > Consider this sentence: > >> "Either Michael or Susan will have to do night shift tonight." > >   1. Which is the subject? > > (a) Michael and Susan   >  (b) Michael or Susan, not both > >   2. Is the subject plural or singular? > > He answered _(a)_ and _plural_ and was marked as wrong on both counts. The class has not yet had the reason explained to them. ~~Which~~ _What_ are the correct answers, and why?


Is a comma still required before the name of the addressee when there's a tag question?

For a sentences like "You're a good person, Tom." and "You're a good person, aren't you?" There's no doubt the commas are required. But what about: "You're a good person, aren't you, Tom?" Are both of these commas required?


Is this correct usage of "dated"?

> Star Wars is a film that has dated well. The intent being that Star Wars has not shown its age as much as other movies. I would think "hasn't dated" or "has aged well" would be more correct but I'm not sure.


"If we were to agree" vs "If we are to agree"

In an undecided situation that needs to be discussed, which one of the following seems more accurate? Are they interchangeable? >   * If we were to agree on this deal, do you think we can start working on > it next month? > >   * If we are to agree on this deal, do you think we can start working on it > next month? > >


What is the spelt-out form of Mike Huckabee’s message, “(He) would not have received [permission] had they."

Time magazine’s (Jan 27) article titled, “Huck: “I didn’t approve that message,” begins with the following sentence: “On Fox News' "Your World" Friday, ex-AR Guv says Gingrich's campaign did not ask to use his sound bite and " _would not have received [permission] had they_." Adds he would "love" for the Georgian's team to take down the ad.” To a non-native English speaker who learned English mostly from “bookish” English readers, it is difficult to understand the phrase " _would not have received [permission] had they_ ," particularly the meaning of ‘had they.’ Is this grammatically perfect expression? If not, what word is omitted before ‘had they’? How can the phrase be spelt out in easier-to understand format?


Speeded vs. Sped

I think " _speeded_ " may have been the appropriate past-tense form for "to speed" in the past, but I wonder if it is still considered the correct form. In spoken English, one usually hears " _sped_ " to communicate the same past action. This might also be the case with " _dived_ " and " _dove_ ," as one rarely hears the former.


What is the class of things that includes “new” and “existing”?

I'm trying to name a database attribute that might take the value "new" or "existing". What is an appropriate name? Something like "newity"? What is the relevant concept?


"I'm debating" instead of "I'm in a dilemma"

I have noticed many people say "I'm debating" when they mean they are in a dilemma between two choices. I always thought that to debate means discussing different view points between two individuals, not within the head of a single person, therefore debating here seems like an incorrect usage of the term but I am not sure. Can somebody please clarify?


In the context of family, what is the opposite of "immediate"?

In the context of family, the term "immediate" refers to member of the family connected by birth, adoption, marriage, civil partnership, or cohabitation. Is t here a term that refers to the rest of the family?


Groups of Books

I have been scouring the internet for a few days and have not been able to find what I am looking for, so I decided to come here and ask you fine people if you have an answer to my line of inquiry. I have been looking for what a group of books is called and why it is named so, id est, the type of series that it is and why it is called that. For example, chronicles are multiple pieces of literature that take place in the same place or involve the same character(s). Words like chronicle and saga are examples of what I am looking for.


"Particulate" vs. "particle"

What’s the difference between _particulate_ and _particle_? Should it be _diesel particulates_ or _diesel particles_ , and why? Could you provide three or more examples where it should use _particulate_ rather than _particle_?


"Can we get this over with?"

I am confused about this sentence because it ends in a preposition, something that I thought was not really grammatically correct: > Can we get this over with? In addition, I haven't found a restatement that would solve this issue. Things like the following don't seem to make sense: > This can we get over   >  Over with get this   >  With get this over So my questions are:   1\. Is there a problem with the sentence?   2\. What part of speech is "with"?


Does "grim" share an etymology with the surname "Grimm"?

People have often punned about Grimm's fairy tales being very grim. For example, TV Tropes has the trope Grimmification about tales being made more grim. (The Brothers Grimm didn't engage in Grimmification - they didn't need to. In fact, they Disneyfied.) Are the two words "grim" and "Grimm" etymologically related? The English edition of Wiktionary does not have an entry for "Grimm", nor does the Online Etymology Dictionary. Wiktionary states that grim came from Old English, which came from Germanic. And Grimm is used as a surname in Germany. Grimm has an entry in the German Wiktionary, but even with Google translate I can't tell if it's talking about a name, a noun, or both. One person I talked to about this said that "Grimm" meant "hooded", which would explain "The Grim Reaper" (apart from it only have one "m"). Is that true?


Is there a word for "part of a route"?

I'm building a software application where I calculate which way to take between two different places. I call the complete path for a Route (correct?). But what do I call each part of the route? The user wants to go from A to D, but to reach D the user must take the path A -> B -> C -> D. What is part A->B called?


What's that word meaning 'thus more strongly for X'?

What's that word meaning 'thus more strongly'? As in X applies to Y, and thus even more strongly to Z. E.g.: > The body's immune system needs warmth, so adequate heating is good for you > (and [this conclusion follows with even more force] for sick people) I seem to remember that there is such a word, and it's Latin, though I could be wrong.


Is there a name for "near the opposite side of the earth"?

I am looking for a word which specifies "nearly at the ellipsoid opposite side of the earth", by which I mean, given a beam that is perpendicular to earth surface at a given first location, and the second location that this beam crosses earth on the other end, what is a word that specifies a place that is near the second location?


How to write "calf's liver"  on menu

_Calf's liver_ as an item on a restaurant menu is certainly correct, but one also sees _calves liver_ written down. What certainly is wrong is _calves' liver_ , except if one assumes that many calves were part of the contribution to what is being cooked and served (hardly the case, and even if correct, not worth mentioning). What is the correct way of writing this?


Can you ever drop the first ‘as’ in “as . . . as” constructions?

I have wondered if dropping the first _as_ is permissible and grammatical while using comparison: > Ian Bell was organised and elegant as ever, prospering with several > uppercuts over the slips. I believe **_as_ organized and elegant as ever** is correct, but is the above formulation also acceptable?


What is the sound of nails scratching a chalkboard called?

Does the high-pitched sound of nails scratching a chalkboard have a name? I thought of "squeaking" or "screeching" but I don't think either of them correctly describes it.


What do you call the question type in a quiz game where you have to order the answers?

What is the proper name for these type of questions? These are the questions like the 'Fastest Fingers First' questions in Who Wants to Be a Millionaire. Can you call them _'ordering' questions_ or _'order the answers' questions_ or is there a proper name? I found the following names for other types:   * **Simple answer** : when you have no choices, you have to type or tell.   * **Multiple Choice** : when you have to choose one.   * **True/False** : when you have to decide if the information given is right or wrong.


How did "everloving" become a completely generic intensifier?

Most of the uses of the word _everloving_ I can think of involve either vulgar or violent contexts, so you must excuse the following example: > He'd finally crossed my last nerve, so yesterday, me and my buddies caught > him out and beat the **everloving** snot out of him. When I look up the definition of _everloving_ at Wiktionary, it gives me the following three definitions: >   1. Which loves unceasingly or unconditionally >   2. Of or related to one who is everloving (1), or to everlasting love >   3. Which is loved unceasingly > And the fourth states, "generic intensifier." So I have to two questions: First, is the premise of my question wrong? Is there a phrase where _everloving_ is used as an intensifier, and still manages to add a meaning more than making the phrase stronger? Secondly, how did _everloving_ assume this role? How is the fourth definition of _everloving_ connected to its first three definitions? Can anyone find or draw a plausible path?


"Each" — pronoun or adverb

I am looking at these two sentences: >   1. M and W are letters that each have 4 strokes. >   2. M and W are letters and each has 4 strokes. > It seems that _each_ is an adverb in (1) but a pronoun in (2). Can anyone explain why _each_ is not a pronoun in (1)?


starting a sentence with 'when reading ...'

Is it possible and good English to start a sentence with 'When reading...'? Exactly it's about the following one: When reading your offer it seemed to me as if this position is made for me. bg, Johannes P.S.: If you have any other things to say about this sentence, I'm always open for corrections and tips.


What is "angular art"?

I've stumbled upon "angular art" in following sentence: > Everywhere there is something to delight the eye — not tchotchkes, but art. > Eccentric art, angular art, modern art, all a signifier of personal style.   >  — From an article in Palm Beach Post, January 12, 2013 Though I can understand that "angular art" is an art style and get an idea what sort of art it is by googling "angular art", I was not able to find more or less clear definition of this art style and when it and its name entered the language. Probably this question is more about art than about English but anyway maybe somebody can clarify this for me.


When to use conclusion and conclusions in a scientific article or report?

I am writing a scientific report in English. For the final part, should I use `conclusion` or `conclusions`? I am a bit confused because in my memory it's an uncountable noun. But I saw many journal papers using either `conclusion` or the plural form `conclusions`. Does that mean when using `conclusions`, there are more than one finding in the article?


How to correctly name these percentages?

I've been researching some stuff about a certain game's probability systems and there are many cases when.... I can't really put it into words, so here's an example: > **15% + 60% = 75%** **15%** is the _base percentage_ , and it is often called so in the description text. The **60%** in its own context is also called a _percentage_ (but never with the _base_ word). And the formula for the total chance is: > Resulting Percentage = (Base + **X** ) * Multiplier Without **X** being explicitly called anything comprehensible. What should the **X** thing be called?


"Despite the fact" implies knowledge of said facts

I had an argument about the phrase "despite the fact". The argument was around the headline: > US Immigration officials deport 14 year old runaway to Colombia, despite the > fact that she's American and speaks no Spanish. When US Immigration officials deported her they did not realize she was American and that she speaks no Spanish. One of us took the side that this title was misleading because it implies that Immigration officials knew she was American when they deported, which they did not. The other took the side that this is a perfectly acceptable usage of "despite the fact" and that the title uses a common and acceptable usage of the phrase and is therefore it is not misleading. Is this title misleading or not?


When and how has the word 'nigger' lost its neutral meaning?

The word 'nigger' comes from Latin 'nigrum' (black). It's quite a neutral description of the external characteristic of a person. There's no reason to be offended by it, just like (normally) nobody is offended by calling them 'white'. However, nowadays it's considered an offensive word. When and how has the character of that word changed? When it has became common to use it to offense people instead of describing them?


Use of "mental" and "spiritual" as adjectives

If I say something encouraging for someone, then I am **mentally or spiritually supporting** him. > I mean to input into his head as well as resurect ideas of possibility that > has been far out of reach. Is **mental or spiritual support** the correct term here?


Alternative for "pedantic"

I would like an alternative for the word "pedantic". "Pedantic" has the meaning of : > highly concerned with minute details or formalisms, especially in learning > or teaching. The problem is, "pedantic" is used in a negative way, that is, it is used for some one who is "ostentatious, and overly concerned". I would like to have a word that has the same meaning as this word(concerned with minute details), _minus_ the negative connotations. Some come to mind:   * _meticulous_ , but "meticulous" can also be used for habits, such as meticulous habits in tidiness etc.   * _scholarly_ , but "scholarly" although used for study, does not necessarily have the connotation of highly meticulous study. It can just be study of a subject, without going in-depth. Ideas please?


Why do "able" and "haste" have long a's?

(There are others, such as _table_ , _paste_ , and _baste_.) The rule I've heard is that a vowel is made long when succeeded by a consonant and then another vowel. Some words treat double consonants as a single consonant for this rule - hence _able_ has a long "a". Why is this, and is there a rule governing such words?


Why is "gauge" spelled with a 'u'?

I was rather old before I realized "gauge" is pronounced (and sometimes spelt) "gage". The etymology doesn't reveal too much: > mid-15c., from Anglo-Fr. gauge (mid-14c.), from O.N.Fr. gauger, from gauge > "gauging rod," perhaps from Frank. galgo "rod, pole for measuring" (cf. O.N. > gelgja "pole, perch," O.H.G. galgo, English gallows) ... The figurative use > is from 1580s. As a noun, "fixed standard of measure," early 15c. (surname > Gageman is early 14c.), from O.N.Fr. gauge "gauging rod." Meaning > "instrument for measuring" is from 1680s. Is it just a quirk, or is there a deeper reason?


Correct sentence structure and grammar?

I'm helping my stepdaughter write a cover letter and we are at odds as to whether this sentence is structurally and grammatically correct. > My experience in customer service qualifies me for this position and have > attached my resume for your review. I've run it through a number of grammar checkers online, but I'd love some "human" input.


"For example" vs. "just to name a few"

How would you explain the differences between using "for example" and "just to name a few" in the following multiple choice: > Your smartphone might give you a wake up call, send you emails, help you to > order a high-speed rail ticket and to book a hotel room for the weekend > conference, **_**.*   >  (A) just to name a few   >  (B) for example I'd certainly choose (A), but I don't think I can adequately explain to my students their difference, except perhaps that _for example_ seems to rarely follow such a long list of items containing phrases.


Is ‘Bash-a-thon’ a received English phrase or just a combination of words?

I saw the word ‘Bash-a-thon’ in the headline of the Time magazine article (August 3) - ‘Palin Joins in Romney Bash-a-thon’ followed by the lead coy: “In an interview with Hannity, Palin takes Romney to task on debt. Says Bachmann performed better but "I'm not prejudging the field at this point." I searched several dictionaries including Cambridge Dictionaries online and Free Merriam Webster for the meaning of 'Bash-a-thon,' without finding any entry. There was an example of usage of this word – “I’m ready for a _bash athon_ today. Bring it on.” in forums.silvertails. net. Although I understand that ‘bash-a-thon’ is ‘bash’ plus the affix, ‘athon’ meaning a long race, I wonder whether ‘bash-a-thon’ is an established English that worth for stowing in my English vocabulary, or just a casual combination of words like ‘McKinley moment,’ Reno era’ or ‘Snake metaphor’ as I posted question yesterday.


The relation between "temporal" and "time"

The word "temporal" is the XXX form of the word "time". What is XXX? I can't find the answer anywhere, I don't even know where to look.


Other expression for "Off the top of my head"

What are some other expressions for: > "Off the top of my head" I seem to say this very often, it would be nice to be able to spice things up.


Adverb to describe one's career?

I am writing a document where I need to describe a decision I'm making that is beneficial both to my finances and to furthering my career. I'm more partial to using two `-ly` adverbs to match the rhythm of the rest of the document. The first is obvious: _financially_. I am struggling with the second: an adverb to describe my career. _Professionally_ came to mind, but that sounds a bit too stiff, and I would like to place the emphasis on the learning opportunity. Is there a more apt word? Or should I drop the `-ly` words altogether and try others?


The use of nearly-similar words

I have heard people using two words that are nearly similar or with a subtle difference. The examples include **'each and every'** & **'until and unless'**. Is it correct to use these words in English? What if I use only one word of those two in the same sentence? Does the meaning change? Explanation with examples will be better.


A line in Reflections on the Revolution in France

In Edmund Burke's Reflections on the Revolution in France he says: > "I flatter myself that I love a manly, moral, regulated liberty as well as > any gentleman of that society, be he who he will ; and perhaps I have given > as good proofs of my attachment to that cause, in the whole course of my > public conduct. **I think I envy liberty as little as they do, to any other > nation.** I'm not sure what Burke means by the line, "I think I envy liberty as little as they do, to any other nation." Could someone help explain what exactly he means by this line?


What does “fresh-off-the-vine technologies” mean?

Time magazine (February 11) carries an article reviewing the fast evolution of drone technology and problems and opportunities involved with President Obama’s “drone campaign”, under the title _Drone Home_. It says: > Five years ago the Parrot (drone) couldn’t have existed; it’s an anthology > of **fresh-off-the-vine technologies**. Five years ago there weren’t cameras > as tiny and sharp or chips as tiny and fast. As I did not find the phrase “fresh-off-the-vine” in any English dictionaries at hand, I checked the phrase online to find only irrelevant lines such as: > Ask the guys from Fresh Off the Vine what kind of music they play, and the > first word that comes to mind is “mystical.” - www.dailyinterlake.com Though I surmise that “fresh-off-the vine technologies” means just newly born technologies (please correct me, if I’m wrong), is the phrase, “fresh-off-the- vine” widely and frequently used to imply "fledgling" or "brand new"? Can I say 'fresh-off style / fashion / idea etc' in the same way?


Simplify “Status Update Frequency”

I need to measure if someone sends status updates about their current activity. The best I came up with was “Status Update Frequency”. Does this describe that measurement? Is there a simpler term? (I'm not a native English speaker.)


Is the term "indignant with rage" acceptable?

A google search provided a plethora of instances in which the term was used, but isn't it kind of repetitious? Can you be indignant with something besides rage?


What's a more formal equivalent to "seriously out of line"?

What is a more formal equivalent to "seriously out of line"? In the particular case I'm looking for, I've been advised that what I'm referring to is seriously out of line _legally_ , but the question is general.


Which is correct: “I’m done” or “I have finished”?

Which of these alternatives is grammatically correct? > I’m done. or > I have finished Like _I’m done_ sounds very American, but is it grammatically correct?


What is the word for the set of words "million", "billion", "trillion"?

I am writing a program and I like to name things well. I have to say if a value is in the thousands, millions, billions, or trillions. My question is what do we call the set of number names that are ",000" from each other? I know I am looking for something like "order of magnitude" but that is powers of ten. Edit: I know about the "long scale" vs. "short scale" issue. I am looking to see if there is a word that describes the set in English which as I understand it is always short scale.


Hypernym for "interpolation" and "extrapolation"

_Interpolation_ typically means modeling the values of some curve inside the given data, and _extrapolation_  — outside the given data. For example, if I know the temperature on Monday and Wednesday, and ask for what it was on Tuesday — this is interpolation. If I ask for what it was on Sunday before or Thursday after, it is extrapolation. I am looking for a word that would encompass both. I thought of _modeling_ , but is there perhaps something better?


Is “might could” a correct construct?

I have a friend from the southern U.S. who uses the phrase “might could” quite often. He’ll say, for example: > I might could do that this weekend. When I first heard him say this, it made me do a double-take. I wasn’t sure whether it’s incorrect, or correct but just not idiomatic outside the southern U.S.


would you help me out with examining this sentence? "That might even could happen" be considered incorrect? Thank you.


Where did "might could" come from

I am from NC. While living out of state people made fun of me for saying "used to could" or "might could". The second is essentially another way of saying maybe, but I wonder how it started.


Usage of 'into' after 'penetrate'

Somehow I have difficulties telling which one is more correct _They penetrate **into** the building_ OR _They penetrate the building_ I've heard it being used both ways and I'd like to hear some thoughts on that. Thanks.


Difference in usage between "ostensive" and "ostensible"

I know that _ostensive_ and _ostensible_ are both adjectives, but can someone give me proper usage of each in their adjective forms? In their adverb forms, they almost sound identical.


Is it common to use an adjective as a noun without ‘the’ or the following word in the press headlines?

Washington Post November 29 issue reports Pope Francis has been encouraging Vatican’s charity activity under the headline: Pope ramps up charity office **to be near poor, sick**. It begins with the following sentence: > “Pope Francis has ramped up the Vatican’s charity work, sending his chief > alms-giver and a contingent of Swiss guards onto the streets of Rome at > night to do what he usually can’t do: comfort the poor and the homeless.” > > http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-faith/pope-ramps-up-charity- > office-to-be-near-poor- > sick/2013/11/29/ac9cd9a6-58d0-11e3-bdbf-097ab2a3dc2b_story.html?tid=pm_pop&wpisrc=nl_most Is it common to spare “the” or “people” in front, or after “poor” and “sick” like this in journalism English? To me you can not save much space by sparing 'the,' and ‘to be near poor, sick” sounds like “feel like being poor and sick.


past/present tense when telling a story in spoken English

I've noticed that, in daily conversations, when people are telling stories in the past, they often shift the tense back and forth between the past and the present - even they're native speakers. For example, people might say: > _It was almost 5 a.m. He hadn't come home yet, and his phone was off. I'd > been so worried that couldn't sleep at all. Then I heard the door knocked > fiercely. Of course it's him. **He's got** a bottle of whisky in his hand > and _smelt_ like a tramp. He **stumbles** in, ignoring me at all. I **was** > like, stopping him, asking where _he's_ been. He suddenly **turns** around, > shouts at me, pushing me crazily out of my flat and locks me out. I **am** > totally petrified. _I've_ never seen him like that. That's why I **asked** > you if I could come here._ I made up this scenario because I couldn't come up with an exact example I've heard, but it happens all the time. The tenses shift. On one hand, I don't have any problems understanding the story. I wouldn't misinterpret the timeframe just because I heard the tense jump to the present. But on the other hand, I would feel a bit uncomfortable and think, "isn't it wrong?." Furthermore, when it comes to me telling stories, I've been struggling with this usage. I can't judge if this usage is proper, educated, and "correct." Also, if this is proper, are there any rules I should keep in mind so that I won't confuse the listeners? Should I insert something like "I was like" from time to time to remind the listeners that I'm still talking about the story in the past? Or should I shift to the present tense only when I tend to bring the scene more lively to the listeners? Is it a good idea to tell the whole story in present tense once the time has been set, in this case, after the first sentence? Finally, since I feel the present tense is generally easier to be spoken more fluently, would it be recommended to use the present tense throughout the whole story, given I'm sure the timeframe has registered with the listeners? Any suggestions will be greatly appreciated.


Word for the mutual transfer of belongings to their appropriate domains

I'm looking for a word that describes the following situations:   * A man and a woman are breaking up. Over the course of their relationship, their possessions have become intermingled: a box of his LPs at her place, a bottle of her shampoo at his. They agree to _a series of events through which he takes back what's his and she hers_.   * A company has two branches, one for accounts payable and one for accounts receivable. The company receives a large flow of correspondence pertaining to both. To sort this, they hire an uninitiated temp to determine which mail goes to which department. While in some cases the temp gets it right, in many cases each department receives mail which would better fall under the other's jurisdiction. Every week, they engage in _a transfer where a courier from each department trades the other for the misdirected mail._


What was the original sound of rh?

The subject more or less says it all. I would like to know how `rh` (as in rhythm) was originally pronounced. It is listed as being something which was originally present in Latin, but, in Latin, "h" is used to harden a vowel. I can't think of a soft pronunciation for "r" in Latin or any potential intermediate steps.


Pluralization of Phrases

I was corresponding with someone about the misuse of a Latin phrase, _puto qui_ , during which I said, > Instead of peppering his sentences with incorrect _puto qui_ s, he should > have used the infinitive verb form in the subordinate clauses. How are phrases or groups of words like this normally pluralized? I italicized the _puto qui_ and not the _s_ , but I am not sure if there is a conventional way to do this.


Informal Vocabulary - 'Mank you'

I understand the character is being sarcastic but I don't understand why exactly he says 'mank you'. I looked up the word 'mank' and it doesn't make sense in the context so I suppose 'mank you' is sort of a pun. I'd love to understand what the wordplay is. Source: Movie 'Date Night' (excerpt about minute 13) Dialogue between customers and maitre d' (who's being sarcastic): Phil: The things is my wife and I are on a date and we were hoping tonight would be sort of special. So, just asking you if maybe you have any tables available? Maitre D’: Okay, well, I’m gonna have to ask you to wait at the bar, and if anything opens up, we’ll come get you, okay? Claire: Thank you. Maitre D’: _Mank you._


What does "to come undone" actually mean?

I've heard this phrase several times but was given several contradictory interpretations. Please provide an exact meaning of the phase.


Is “people with a bit of grit under their fingernail” an idiom, or just one-off phrase?

I was interested in the phrase, “people with a “little bit of grit under their fingernails” appearing in the New Yorker magazine’s (March 14) article titled, “American Ads, American Values.” It reads; > “In an interview with Michael McCarthy, of Ad Age, Cadillac’s advertising > director, Craig Bierley, said that “Poolside” was pitched at consumers who > earn around two hundred thousand dollars a year, **people with a “little bit > of grit under their fingernails** ” who “pop in and out of luxury.” He also > said, “These are people who haven’t been given anything. Every part of > success they’ve achieved has been earned through hard work and hustle.” > http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/currency/2014/03/american-ads- > american-values.html I surmise ‘have grit” means “have courage / guts.” Though it sounds “catchy “as an ad director’s parlance, I wonder if “have a little bit of grit under one’s fingernails” is common phrase or not. Is “under one’s fingernails” acknowledged suffix to “a bit of grit,” or just an optional use?


If we can say 'Where are you going to?', why don't we say 'Where do you live in?'?

In most cases 'where' seems to be substituting for a prepositional phrase. As in: - **Where** do you live? / I live **in Brighton**. **Where** does the train stop? / It stops **at Reading and Bristol**. So why is it seemingly okay to say 'Where are you going _to_?' as well as 'Where are you going?'. Is the former actually correct? And if it is correct, is it something to do with asserting the preposition 'to' because the listener may otherwise assume 'in' or 'at' as default? And now I come to think of it why do we say 'Where do you come from?' as opposed to 'Where do you come?'? In this case 'where' is substituting for a noun with no preposition which kind of messes up my theory and my mind at the same time! Please help - I don't know **where** my head is **at**!!!!


What do I call a date by which document have force?

I am writing technical documentation and I can guarantee, that it is in up-to- date status at the date I write it (or update it). How do I call this date in one or two words?


When using "Used To" in a sentence with two clauses, do you change the verb tense in the second clause?

I was helping a friend proofread one of her essays on the short story The Lottery. She had written this sentence: > I think the lottery used to have a specific reason and represent something > in the society. I changed the sentence to > I think the lottery used to have a specific reason and **represented** > something in the society. I thought that, because 'used to' was not directly preceding 'represent', it should be changed to past tense. But after thinking on it for a while, I am just not sure. I can't seem to find a definitive answer and the question left all of my friends conflicted.


What does it mean that sea turtles get a smaller ''salary premium''?

For starters a bit of background about sea turtles to give some context to the question: > The terms "sea turtle" (a pun on "hai gui") and "seaweed" (a pun on "hai > dai") are homonyms for "return from abroad" and "return and wait for work" > in Chinese respectively. * * * My question does not refer to the sea turtles, but to the expression **salary premium** in the following sentence: > Several studies show that sea turtles on average must now wait longer to > find a less senior post at a smaller _salary premium_ over local hires.


Conditional sentences not starting with "if"

> Were I rich, I would live on Long Island.   >  If I were rich, I would live on Long Island. Is the first sentence still used, or is used in particular contexts (in example, to give emphasis to the sentence)?


> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Conditional sentences not starting with “if” What is the meaning of this sentence - "Were it not for the bodies there on the ground, it would have appeared to be a normal day at the oasis."? Does it mean something like this - If the bodies were not there on the ground, it would have appeared to be a normal day at the oasis. Can anyone also explain the structure of this sentence and example of some similar sentences?