A single word meaning "success but not without hard work"?

Looking for a very niche definition for a friend, she wants to find a single word that encapsulates the general meaning, "success, but not without hard work" for an article she is writing.


Meaning of "On" in non-physical situations

What is the meaning of "on" in non-physical situations? Of course "On" indicates a position above and being supported by something under it.For example, "A glass in on the table" and "A portrait is on the wall". These are all used to express physical situations. My interest is related to non-physical situations. 1) "It's on me today", this means "I will pay all the bill today." 2) "It depends on you", this urges someone to make a decision. 3) "I rely on you", this means you are partially responsible for my decision. 4) "I am on alert", this means I am very wary of something. 5) "I am on duty", this means I am now working. 6) "My heart will go on and on " (From the movie Titanic) , this means I can not stop my emotions. I guess there are common points in the following combinations.   * 1),2) and 3) ; related to responsibility ?   * 4) and 5) ; be in a certain condition ? Then how about 6) ? And my guesses noted above correct ? Is there another meaning in "on" ?


What is the name of this type of word: "Mr.", "Ms.", "Dr."?

What is this type of word called: _Mr._ , _Ms._ , _Dr._? In the document I am using, it is referred to as the "prefix", but I don't think that is correct.


Tag Questions "is he not"

"He is happy, isn't he?" If you did not use the contraction _isn't he_ , in the question above, would the correct sentence be:   1. "He is happy, is he not?"   2. "He is happy, is not he?" Sentence #1 seems to have to have same meaning as the above question but does _not_ become the subject complement of he? Is #2 the grammatical equivalent albeit archaic or uncommon in modern English?


Doubt about "held at" usage

Every time I see the prepositional phrase _held at_ being used, it is somehow related to a physical location. Suppose I'm in a process comprising many stages, is it possible/idiomatic to use the _held at_ in the following way ? > The validation of the data provided will be held at stage X in the > validation process. Any advice regarding my question as well as any other suitable option will be appreciated.


When is it appropriate to use 'the' instead of a possessive determiner?

I was with someone today and we were talking about a woman, and she said: > "Wow, the husband must be so proud." I was confused as to which was correct or more appropriate as opposed to: > "Wow, her husband must be so proud."


The meaning of proffer

I have encountered the word **proffer** a few times and most of these times I find the word to be completely interchangeable with **offer**. When and why is this word used? Am I misunderstanding the word? Google translate supports my interchangeability position, so I'm not native speaking. Edit: The proposition that proffer is built as (pre-)offer (as in first), is not at all appealing to me as a non-first offer would be a counter-offer.


What is the word for "making something proper"

I am thinking along the lines of **"normalize"** \-- something like **_proper- ize_**. **\-- UPDATE --** In one of my comments, I presented an example... > _a disorganized mess (for example, a cluttered desk) that I want to "make > proper" by organizing things "properly"_ Take the above example figuratively NOT literally. An answer like "tidy up" is not what I'm looking for.


Comma in "servicing carriers that are committed to participate and willing and able to adjust market share"

Troubling sentence: > Name at least two servicing carriers that are committed to participate and > willing and able to adjust market share to cover up to 100% of the risk if > necessary. Is it okay to put a comma after _participate_? Coworkers have gone back and forth over this; we can't find any documentation to support either argument in _Gregg's Reference Manual_ or _Words Into Type._


Grammar of "It is rarely that + (clause)"

The following question is motivated by this answer at ELL. Here, I'm not interested in the correctness (that's already been answered at ELL) but in the possibility of interpreting this construction as an _it-cleft_. **Clefting** is a construction by which a single sentence is broken up into two clauses so that the clause moved to the front receives more emphasis. For example, given the sentence: > Police rarely arrest people without adequate suspicion. Imagine that we want to emphasize _people without adequate suspicion_ , then we would write: > It is **people without adequate suspicion** that police rarely arrest. The question I want to ask is whether I can use an _it-cleft_ to emphasize an adverb. In the sample sentence, imagine that we want to emphasize how _rarely_ this happens, then we would write: > It is **rarely** that police arrest people without adequate suspicion.


grammar - No + singular/plural noun + singular/plural verb

Which of the following phrases is grammatically correct? * no animal is * no animal are * no animals is * no animals are Thanks.


Are “Lord” and “God” interchangeable?

Is there any difference between “The Lord is my shepherd” and “The God is my shepherd”? Are _Lord_ and _God_ interchangeable?


What is the difference between a map tile and a map section?

We are translating the great OpenStreetMap editor JOSM to Hungarian and arguing on the translation of "map tile".   Some of us state that it should be literally translated, because map tile and map section are different things, map tile being an online, scalable form of a map section. Others argue that it should be translated to the equivalent of map section, because it's the established term.   So what is the difference between a map tile and a map section? Is map tile really an online, scalable form of map section?


What does "half the point" mean?

We're doing a Dutch translation of an English play and having a disagreement about how to translate "I don't like her, but that's not half the point". Some want to translate "half the point" literally while I think "half the point" has a special meaning in English that's lost in a literal translation. Unfortunately I can't find the expression "half the point" explained online. Can anybody explain this expression, preferably with a reference?


First in are the blackest of the black - first in are - meaning, usage

Source: http://theweek.com/article/index/259581/russia-masters-the-art-of- clandestine-warfare-against-ukraine > **First in are** the blackest of the black: case officers for the > intelligence community who operate without official cover, who recruit > sources and assess the battlefield. Then, small units of special operations > forces sneak in, sometimes blending in with the populace, ready to make > trouble. Then, special forces units that specialize in "information > operations" designed to induce anxiety and outrage among local populations > follow a strategy that comes from the top of the government. The idea is to > generate genuine indigenous protest movements. Vladimir Putin has an eye to > history; if today he seeds the strands that bind ethnic Russians in Ukraine > together, it doesn't matter whether it takes five months or five years for a > revolution to foment. How do you understand **first in are**?


"Haven't you got X ?" or "Don't you have X ?"

In British English negative questions with the verb _have_ (when it's a lexical verb and not an auxiliary) can be formed in two ways. Is there any difference between them? **Type 1**   * Haven't I got your number?   * Haven't you got her number?   * Hasn't he got your number?   * Haven't we got her number?   * Haven't they got our number? **Type 2**   * Don't I have your number?   * Don't you have her number?   * Doesn't he have your number?   * Don't we have her number?   * Don't they have our number?


Is "yesterday" a noun?

Are words like "yesterday" and "tomorrow" considered nouns, adjectives, or even adverbs? I'm getting mixed signals from several references. In a case like "I have an important meeting tomorrow," it seems as if they're nouns. But what about "Yesterday afternoon?"


"Between A and B" or "from A to B"

Suppose we are talking about the numbers 1, 2, ... , 10. When we use the phrase _between 1 and 10_ , do we include the end-points 1 and 10? Is there any difference if we say _from 1 to 10_ instead?


Spent or have spent?

Which is grammatically more correct? > Thanks everybody for the great 2010 moments we spent together! vs > Thanks everybody for the great 2010 moments we've spent together!


What does "in s****" mean in the following context?

I was reading a short story when I stumbled across the following sentence. > "[H]e overheard his dad say it wasn’t worth its price in shit." I was a bit surprised with the negation. I'm used to the following use of the phrase: > "It is worth its price in shit." I understand it like: "The price you pay for it is fairly low compared to its value." But in the sentence from the story, I get a bit confused. Should it be considered like double negation? The father is not happy with the price that he wants to stick in a "swear-word" somewhere in the sentence, no matter what... Or am I missing something subtle here? I couldn't find the meaning of "in shit" via Google. The only idiom I could find is "happier than a pig in shit", which obviously has nothing to do with the use I quoted.


Can you use the word "transient" as a verb?

I want to explain how data on a server is only there for a short period of time. So I'd like to use the following sentence: > The data transients the server. Is this usage correct? EDIT #1: The actual sentence I used: "System that client data transients." I guess a better way to state this would be "System that client data transverses." This sounds awkward to me. EDIT #2: I discussed with my workmates and everyone agrees that: "the data makes a transitory pass through the server" is the best way to explain the situation.


relationship zone

I'm looking for a phrase to describe a certain relationship similar to "friend zone". The relationship is where you can't treat a person one way because you are so connected it might cause problems in another area of life. An example would be. I can't date Jane since we work together. She is in my ----- zone.


Where did the phrase "drop the hammer" come from? It's what you do when you start to go balls to the wall. I've only heard it rowing.


Is “I feel like a piece of meat” popular phrase? Isn’t it embarrassing for women to use this phrase?

I found the phrase ‘I felt like a piece of meat’ (at a meeting),’ in the article of Washington Post (September 20) titled ‘In early Obama White House, female staffers felt frozen out.’ The article quotes the following episodes contained in the newly released book written by journalist, Ron Suskin: > "Christina Romer (former chairwoman of the Council of Economic Advisers) is > quoted by Suskind saying, after being excluded by Summers at a meeting, “I > felt like a piece of meat.” > > On Friday, Romer offered a softer denial than Dunn, saying, “I can’t imagine > that I ever said this.” “I was told before I went to Washington that there > has always been a lot of testosterone in the West Wing,” Romer said Friday I understand “a piece of meat” implies here “almost nonexistent, like petty object.” But as I searched for the exact definition of “a piece of meat” in Google, I came across the different meaning of usage in AspireNow Blog; > “This is not to be confused with being treated like a piece of property, not > to be confused with being treated with ... Consistent committed positive > action is a definition of love. ... Again, that makes her feel like a sex > object or piece of meat -What do women want?” I’m curious to know how popular the phrase, “I feel like a piece of meat” is. Isn’t it liable to be misunderstood, particularly when a woman uses, or even politically incorrect to use before a woman?


Alternative to the word reprimand?

I looked into the dictionary for words similar to reprimand in this expression, > I was reprimanded by the cops for reckless driving. I checked on the web for reprimand and found lots of results, but it seems like a formal word to me(I can be wrong about this). What other words can I use for this? **Edit** Ok, I am sorry for the confusion,I dont really care about fine, what I wanted to ask was informal word along the line of scolding/rebkuing.


what is the difference between seems like /seems that/seems?

In there any difference between these expression? > It seems like they have not completed the task yet. > > It seems that they have not completed the task yet. > > It seems they haven't completed the task yet.


From French “manœuvre” to English “manoeuvre”, does “œ” exist in English?

Sadly, I don’t have much to add from the title to this question: does _œ_ exist in English, such as in the word _manœuvre_? The same question may also apply to what the French call the “e dans l’a” (e in the a), the **_æ_** , in addition to what they call the “e dans l’o” (e in the o), the **_œ_** — at least as far as the French part is concerned.


Would it be incorrect to use “could” and “might” in the same sentence? For example: > It could be that Joseph might come this afternoon. Since _could_ and _might_ are both stating a possibility, it seems kind of redundant, but is this okay grammatically?


About the usage of "with" in "There are grey goos everywhere, with many consuming the haemocoels of tardigrades"

Is the sentence below grammatical? > **There are** a lot of people, **with** many wearing tuxedos. > > **There are** some cute teenage girls in the club, **with** many of them > being PhD graduates in topological field theory. I check through my dictionary and don't see a definition of **with** that makes the above sentence legit. > with wɪð preposition preposition: with > >   1. accompanied by (another person or thing). "a nice steak with a bottle > of red wine" synonyms: accompanied by, in the company of, escorted by "she's > gone out with her boyfriend" > >   2. having or possessing (something). "a flower-sprigged blouse with a > white collar" wearing or carrying. "a small man with thick glasses" > >   3. indicating the instrument used to perform an action. "cut the fish with > a knife" indicating the material used for a purpose. "fill the bowl with > water" > >   4. in opposition to. "a row broke out with another man" >   5. indicating the manner or attitude in which a person does something. > "the people shouted with pleasure" >   6. indicating responsibility. "leave it with me" >   7. in relation to. "my father will be angry with me" affected by (a > particular fact or condition). "he's in bed with the flu" indicating the > cause of (a condition). "he was trembling with fear" because of (something) > and as it happens. "wisdom comes with age" >   8. employed by. "she's with the Inland Revenue now" using the services of. > "I bank with the TSB" >   9. in the same direction as. "marine mammals generally swim with the > current" >   10. indicating separation or removal from something. "to part with one's > dearest possessions" > > > cf. ODO So my questions are: 1] can I use "with" this way? > There are partial differential equations on this paper, **with many of them > having no real solutions**. 2] or with an adjective? > There are deuterium atoms in this jar, **with many/some of them ionized**. 3] or without "of them"? > There are grey goos everywhere, **with many/some consuming the haemocoels of > tardigrades**.


Is the phrase "Infinitely more efficient" possible?

I've been having an argument with a colleague about the use of the phrase "infinitely more efficient". I use it sometimes when describing the proper way to implement some programming solutions, but he feels it is not possible, by definition, for something to be infinitely more efficient than something else. I feel that where an infinite number of variables are present, it would indeed be possible for one process to be infinitely more efficient than another process.


the word "slant" as a way of expressing personal views

In writing, I mainly use such words as _outlook_ , _perspective_ , _standpoint_ , or _viewpoint_ to express my personal opinion or an opinion of someone else. Examples presented below: >   1. The author's **outlook/standpoint** on economy does not comply with the > mainstream view. > >   2. From my **perspective/viewpoint** the passage seems irrelevant. > > Is it possible to apply the word **slant** in similar contexts? Are there any other words which I could use?


"Aforementioned" vs. "aforesaid"

I'm writing a paper. In it, I have the following sentence. > The _**___ __ ___ ____**_ principle has two discrepancies. I am considering using either "aforementioned" or "aforesaid". How are the meaning of the two different? The definition for "aforesaid" is > Stated or mentioned before; aforementioned. The definition of "aforementioned" is > Previously mentioned, esp. in a text. Are their meanings different? When should I use which?


"That that" vs. "that"

Is "that that" or "that, that" redundant in sentences such as this: > The reason we are late is that that we had an accident. or > The reason we are late is that, that we had an accident. Is it ok if I just say: > The reason we are late is that we had an accident.


Word or phrase describing "conforming to mean or average"?

I am exploring a statistical experiment in which participants are asked for their rating of an idea (say from 1 to 10). Then they are shown the average rating of all other participants, and given an opportunity to change their own rating. I am looking for a word or phrase to describe the participants who change their own rating to a rating closer to the average. `Confirmation bias` seems similar, but it does not capture the exact idea.


Using "on" vs. "in"?

Consider the following sentence: > I am developing an application to be installed on Android. And this: > This has been a major flaw in Android... To be clear I am unsure of the usage of "in" vs. "on". When should I use "in" and when to use "on"?


Food Rhyme with No

So I've been looking into lots of different food to respond for a dance, and I was going to do something like using the food as trying to rhyme with "no" but it'll be a yes, don't get me wrong I'm not a jerk, she just had to find the yes in a pile of hay, because it's a cowboy themed dance. I've looked and looked for a food, but to no avail. I'd prefer junk food. Also the food MUST be packaged and preferably sweet, she has a sweet tooth, and doesn't like spicy things. Thanks for the help!


Injective / injectional: mode of operation of a pump

What is the best matching word for the mode of operation of a pump doing injections into a pipe system? By "injections", individual short feedings with no (temporal or other) relation to each other are meant. That mode is distinct from a "pulsed mode" where constantly are pulses generated. Could one use "The pump operates injective." or "The pump is in injectional operation mode." to describe that mode of operation in contrast to a "continuous operation mode"? Or should one better stick to the less precise term "non-continuous operation mode" in that case? Thanks in advance! * * * To clarify what that modes of operation should stand for: Setting the pump to "continuous operation mode" means to instruct the pump to produce an continuous output until it is told otherwise. While operating in that mode, the output level of the pump can be directly adjusted from 0 to 100%. Setting the pump to "injectional operation mode" means to force the pump to produce no output until an external command instructs it to do so for a limited time from that moment on. In that mode, the configured output level of the pump comes into effect only while instructed to produce an output by the external command. This question is aimed to find the suitable words that can be used to distinguish between these two modes of operation.


Is this sentence well formed?

I want a well formed sentence in english GB and US (two sentences if necessary…) from this french sentence: > Cette page n'existe pas dans cette langue. Voici son contenu original : Here is what Google Translate give to me: > This page does not exist in that language. Here is his original content: Is this sentence well formed, compared to the requirements that I have outlined? Thank you in advance for your help!


Adjectives relating to town and city names

A person who lives or was born in London may be called a Londoner; a person in Dublin, a Dubliner. In this way, which formal (non colloquial) adjectives correspond to citizens of the following cities,   * York   * Carlisle   * Edinburgh   * Kent   * Brighton   * Oxford   * Cambridge   * Bath   * Whitby


What does r/t and e/w stand for, after the flight ticket price?

What does r/t and e/w stand for when shown after the price? Something like this: > Flight from $300 r/t   >  and flight $100 e/w


Plural possessive with separate posessions

When we refer to a house that belongs to a family, we say "family's house". Pluralizing family gives us "families". Referring to the houses of several families, we say "families' houses". Forming the plural possessive in such a case is rather simple. I encountered a more complex use of this recently - referring to a single house owned by a single family in a set of houses owned by a set of families. We can say "the families' houses" to refer to all of the houses owned by all of the families. We can say "one of the families' houses" to refer to one of the houses owned by one or more of the families. In this context, "one of" applies to "the families' houses". If we were instead to apply "one of" to "the families", and want to refer to the one house owned by "one of the families", how would this be written? My first though was "one of the families's house", taking "one of the families" as a single noun and appending `'s` to it. This looks (and sounds) a bit strange, though. "One of the families' house" and "one of the family's house"/"one of the family's houses" seem wrong to me, and I can't really determine the correct way to say/write this. Is there a definitively correct way that this should be written? **EDIT:** To clarify, although I think I made it clear, in this context, there are several families, and each ones one house. The goal of the sentence is to refer to one of those houses without stating which specific house. Example: "The players and their families want to celebrate their team's victory; this will likely entail a party at one of the families's house".


"One of my friend's father" vs. "one of my friends' father"

> **Duplicate:**   >  Possessive form of "one of [a list]"?   >  Plural possessive with separate posessions What is correct: >   * One of my friend's father is serving in the Navy. >   * One of my friends' father is serving in the Navy. > Or is it grammatically wrong to have such a possessive construct and the correct form is: > The father of one of my friends is serving in the Navy.


our whole lives vs. all (of) our lives

Which one is correct or is preferable in this context:   1. We want to be free... and we wait/we've been waiting for that moment our whole life/our whole lives.    2. We want to be free... and we wait/we've been waiting for that moment all our life/all our lives.   3. We want to be free... and we wait/we've been waiting for that moment all of our life/all of our lives. Is there any difference in meaning between them, or they can be used interchangeably? Is the word "of" optional in this instance?


"I'd-a lost"? What does this contraction stand for?

The first lines of George Thorogood's version of "One bourbon, one scotch, one beer": > Wanna tell you a story   >  about the houseman blues.   >  I come home one Friday,   >  had to tell the landlady I'd-a lost my job. What does this **I'd-a** stand for? These lyrics perhaps are just misheard. If so, what does Thorogood say in place of **I'd-a**?


Issues with articles

Do I need an article in these sentences (marked in **bold** )? > And in the message, I asked for her e-mail address and suggested **the** > time and place. > A list of items required at the interview (such as **a** resume, medical > records, personal and family assets...) What is the rule for articles that follow _such as_? > A few weeks ago, I asked that girl out for hot chocolate after we had been > bantering for a few days. And in the message, I asked for her e-mail address > and suggested **the** time and place. Only today she sent **a** reply, > consisted of her e-mail, without any indication if she was willing to make > plans or even acknowledge my request. "C'mon lady – you're only boarding 7, > ah, barely. And in that range, I already have a queue of girls on OKC > waiting for their turn!" Nothing is more exciting than dealing with, as > ever, revolting flakes **of** mass proportions. I am considering to > accumulate flakes, and send out a mass e-mail; obviously CC’ing all them. In > the e-mail, I will indicate available time slots, requirements, and a list > of items required at the interview (such **as a** resume, medical records, > personal and family assets, recommendations, copy of IQ test, etc).


Where should the apostrophe go in "three days work"?

Which is correct? > 1 Three day's work > > 2 Three days' work > > 3 Three days work I would probably guess (2) is right, since the work belongs to the three days ("three days _of_ work"). But I'm not sure. Would it be different if it was only one day?


When does a mistake become standard usage?

We all know that word meanings and usage change over time (though not all of us are happy about it). How long does a word have to be used in a particular way for that usage to be "okay"? At what point does it become "correct usage" and what determines that? (It's hard to come up with an example that doesn't sound like peeving, so I'm making up a word.) If, for example, I started using the word "disregardless," most people would regard that as "wrong" or at least "not a real word." How many other people would have to use "disregardless" regularly for it to become an accepted word in the language? Does it matter if it's spoken or written? Does the "quality" of the speaker matter? (If the President uses the word, does that increase its "correctness" more than, say, when Bart Simpson uses it?) Is there a tipping point where a word goes from "made up" to "real" in the world at large, or is acceptance a gradual process throughout?


Could the order of words in the common question be changed?

Examples (somebody is thinking about some thoughts, said by the devil):   1. Maybe he is right... Or isn't he?   2. Maybe he is right... Or he isn't?   3. Maybe he is right... Or even to doubt in his falsehood would be a mistake?   4. Maybe he is right... Or would it be a mistake even to doubt in his falsehood? Which variants are correct, please?


Is it possible to say "to or fro", or only "to and fro" is acceptable?

Could I use the following sentence, please: According to the timeStepDirection value (+1 or -1), change the current program number **to or fro** along the time axis. If not, is it at least possible to use such combination in a totally informal sentence? Or "to and fro" is an absolutely immutable idiom? Sorry, my example was very bad. Eventually I changed "to or fro" here to "appropriately". But could such form be used in another context?


Is there an informal way to describe a woman that can not have a baby?

"Infertile"; "fruitless"? How would you describe such a woman in an informal talk to your friend?


What are usages similar to "Need I say more?"?

I recall hearing usages like > Need I say more?   >  Need I remind you that ...? instead of > Do I need to say more?   >  Do I need to remind you that ...? Indeed, they sound better, at least to me. I wonder whether there are more usages like this or not. Is this special to the verb _need_ or are there similar usages like these?


The meaning of "you dark horse"

What does "you dark horse" mean, and how is it used?


Meaning of "yesterday's papers"

What does this phrase mean? It should be an idiom and I can't find it.


"Two people got hurt and five people died in the tragedy"

Can you say so? In other words, are deaths counted among people that got hurt? Does it make a difference if you say: > Two people were injured and five people died in the tragedy. Let's imagine someone stabbed a knife into someone else. Then the victim is injured and then let's assume he dies afterwards. Does the victim need to be counted both as injured and killed? Then let's assume someone died immediately because of a heart attack or something. Does that count as injured?


"Seem", "appear", "look" — how to differentiate?

Are there any significant structural or semantic differences between _seem_ , _appear_ and _look_ in the sense of "to give the impression of being or doing something"? >   * She looks unhappy. >   * He seems angry. >   * They appear (to be) contented. >   * It looks as if it's going to rain again. >   * It looks like we're going home without a suntan. >   * It seems as if they're no longer in love. >   * It seems like she'll never agree to a divorce. >   * They appear to have run away from home. They cannot be traced. >   * I seem to have lost my way. Can you help me? >   * It seems to be some kind of jellyfish. Do not go near it. >   * They appear not to be at home. Nobody's answering. >   * They do not appear to be at home. No one's answering. >   * It seems that I may have made a mistake in believing you did this. >   * It appears that you may be quite innocent of any crime. >   * It looks as if/like you won't go to prison after all. >   * It seems a shame that we can't take Kevin on holiday with us. >   * It doesn't seem like a good idea to leave him here by himself. >   * It seems ridiculous that he has to stay here to look after the cat. >


What does it mean "It is hard to get by just upon a smile"?

I am listening to a song by Joanna Wang: "Wild World" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnlQT1I5K9s It is originally by Cat Stevens, and some lyrics are near the end of this question. I wonder what the following phrase means:               It is hard to get by just upon a smile      Does it mean it is difficult to survive in this world just because she shows a nice smile? (or that she can get by using a smile, but probably only because there are many guys who will cater to her smile and use her, and dump her when they get tired of her, so she can't survive that way?) What does the phrase mean?               Now that I've lost everything to you     You say you wanna start something new     And it's breakin' my heart you're leavin'     Baby, I'm grievin'     But if you wanna leave, take good care     I hope you have a lot of nice things to wear     But then a lot of nice things turn bad out there          Oh, baby, baby, it's a wild world     It's hard to get by just upon a smile     Oh, baby, baby, it's a wild world     I'll always remember you like a child, girl          You know I've seen a lot of what the world can do     And it's breakin' my heart in two     Because I never wanna see you a sad girl     Don't be a bad girl     But if you wanna leave, take good care     I hope you make a lot of nice friends out there     But just remember there's a lot of bad and beware      A side note is that this song was written in 1971... I listened to it for probably two hundred times over the years, but never knew or was aware what the lyrics meant, probably because I am not a native speaker of English. I told my mom several years ago that more and more I found the world to be a jungle and full of just animals -- tigers, lions, wolves, all waiting to eat the sheeps, deer, and rabbits, but my mom refuted right away "how can it be? human has civilization. it cannot be a jungle." But I found it surprising that back in 1971, the songs already said what it was "It is a wild world... I have seen a lot what the world can do... I hope you make a lot of nice friends out there. But just remember there's a lot of bad and beware."


"Elder brother" or "older brother"?

I've read both forms in newspapers and online news: _elder brother_ and _older brother_. What's the difference between them? When should I use which?


Which punctuation mark dominates?

If a question is asked in surprise, informally many people use "?!" as their ending punctuation, as in the following: > What did you do to my sausages?! According to the accepted answer in this question, this is considered incorrect by experts. In that case, which punctuation ought to be omitted and which used? > What did you do to my sausages! Seems incorrect, as the question is no longer punctuated by a question mark, but > What did you do to my sausages? loses the punch of the exclamation mark and thus requires extra words to get the point across.


What is the correct usage of "meanwhile"?

I see _meanwhile_ a lot; I use it a lot; yet I'm not sure about the formal rules when it's applicable. Can anyone help me?


What is the uncontracted form of "won't ever"?

I read in a book lately: > This is my home and it **won't ever** be the same again. I was wondering whether the proper uncontracted form would be: > This is my home and it **will not ever** be the same again. Or: > This is my home and it **will never** be the same again. Are all of the 3 above grammatical? Are there any differences between any of them? I'm asking because the second sentence seems to be quite unnatural, although I can't find any reason why it should be grammatically incorrect. The same would apply to _I would not ever ..._ , but again, I have no idea why.


Unremitting salutation

Even though I am all in favor of salutations and complimentary closes, when exchanging more than a couple of mails with the same person, I feel that starting yet another reply with `Dear Mr. Smith` gets somewhat worn and moreover stiff, even awkward if you like. Hence, I was wondering whether it would be considered ill-mannered to drop the salutation after the first (second, third?) mail and jump to addressing the actual subject matter _directly_. Correspondingly, if I drop the salutation, should/can I omit the valediction as well?


What is a "Chain of Chinese whispers"?

I had never (before today) heard this phrase. I attempted to Google it, but only found examples of its use, not much different from my first experience. (I also tried two idiom dictionaries, but _chain of Chinese whispers_ did not even present there.) What does it mean and where should I have looked to find it?


Origin of the word "shill" ("shillaber")

I was recently looking up word origins for various types of tricksters, in honor of April Fool's Day. Interestingly, I couldn't find much about the word "shill" other than that its origin was around 1916 and it came from "shillaber" or "shilliber." Wikipedia notes that "Shillaber as a surname was known in the US during the 19th Century." But then this blog says "not one of the etymological sources I’ve looked at considers the two connected" and offers that it might instead be a Yiddish word. I am intrigued. Does anyone have more information about the origin of this word?


Does the sentence of “Don’t you …”? have a connotation of accusation?

> “Don't you want to know how Ginny got hold of that diary, Mr. Malfoy?” said > Harry. > > Lucius Malfoy rounded on him. > > “How should I know how the stupid little girl got hold of it?” he said. > > “Because you gave it to her,” said Harry. “In Flourish and Blotts. You > picked up her old Transfiguration book and slipped the diary inside it, > didn't you?” > > (Harry Potter 2, p336, US edition) Some people say that negative question has a connotation of accusation, but I’m not sure. I’d be happy if you could explain the following points.   1. Is Harry accusing Lucius Malfoy?   2. What is the radical difference between “Do you want to know” and “Don’t you want to know”?


"Didn't check" vs. "Hadn't checked"

I text-messaged my friend on his cell phone last night and this morning I got a reply saying, "I had saved your number, ...but I didn't check my cell until now.." Is "didn't check until now" okay, or should it be "hadn't checked it until now" ?


The modal verb would

Longman Advanced Learners' grammar says: (p 27/7)   1. Dad **would always help** us out financially when we were at university, however difficult it was for him. Is it correct to use 'would' in this context? Or should it be: 1b. Dad **always helped** us out financially when we were at university, however difficult it was for him.


Why is a "fountain pen" so called?

I was accused of using a _fountain pen_ the other day (guilty as charged). Does anyone know why it is called so? The mess of ink I get on the page, the table, my person, etc when refilling it is certainly voluminous but can scarcely be described as a _fountain_.


"I do" in the end of a sentence

In the sentence "I love my veg I do" what is the purpose of the "I do" part? It seems to me that it gives a sprinkle of assertiveness, but a definite explanation would really help.


"Hirable" or "hireable"

What is the correct adjective form of the word _hire_? I have seen references to both _hireable_ and _hirable_. I checked using Google's Ngram viewer book search and it appears that both have been in use since the 1800s with hirable becoming a bit more popular in the past decade or so: ![Google ngram hirable vs hireable](http://i.stack.imgur.com/GkMeZ.png)


Is it OK to have an apostrophe at the end of a sentence?

Earlier I wrote a sentence that happened to end with a plural possessive. Is this OK to have? For example, "I got the guys' costumes, but not the girls'." looks odd to me. It would be easy to reword or simply add costumes at the end, but is it grammatically correct?


Prices: "As low as" vs. "starting from"

Today I received an email with the following advertisement: > The SSL certicate can be renewed for as little as one year and for a price > **as low as $7.9500.** RENEW TODAY! I understood it the way that this means the price is $ 7.95 for one year. But later it came out that the prices are **starting from $ 7.95** , which is the price for a 5-year subscription. The 1-year subscription price actually is $ 9.00. The support person told me > As you have probably noticed there is a phrase "As low as" which means that > the price depends on the amount of years for which the certificate is > ordered. If it is correct to interpret the "as low as" from the offer's text this way, is there a difference between the original offer quoted above and something like that: > The SSL certicate can be renewed for as little as one year and for prices > **starting from $7.9500.** RENEW TODAY! Does it mean the same?


What does 'infinitesimally small' mean?

If infinite is the opposite of infinitesimal, and small is the opposite of large, then:   * infinitely large ---------- Means "very large"   * infinitely small --------- Means "very small"   * infinitesimally large ---- Means "very small"   * infinitesimally small --- Means "very large" ??? However my interpretation of the last situation doesn't seem to match how people use the phrase, even though there is sort of a double negative present. Can the 'negativeness' of the adverb cancel out the 'negativeness' of the adjective, or does the adverb make the adjective stronger?


What is the appropriate opposite or antonym word for sweet?

A part of my brain says, this is a flavor, how can an opposite exist? On the other hand my other part of brain says, if opposites can exist for feelings why not for flavors?


What is the military term for fighting the enemy without permission? 'Insubordinate conduct' is the term given to disobeying orders but this is too general as it can mean failing to carry out an order to do something. What I'm looking for is a term that has similar connotations as 'vigilantism' but in a military context. Similar connotations meaning trying to take affairs into one's own hands - but in this case in a military context. I thought of militancy but that word is usually used to describe people who fight against their own authority / government - not against the common enemy ......


Is it "Sales collateral" or "Sales collaterals"?

My question is whether you use the plural or singular form -- or either. Is there perhaps also a different usage in the US and the UK?


What is the plural of "How To"?

On a list of "How To" articles, should the title be "How Tos" or "How To's"? I think "How Tos" is technically correct (no apostrophe for plurals) but it reads like "How Toss" or "How Toes". "How To's", while incorrect (I think), seems more intuitively readable.


In a project, what is the relationship between dependent tasks called?

If I have two tasks, called "Design" and "Development", what are the relationships between the two called? Clearly, this is a _type_ of dependency, but I need to be more specific. That is, I need to be able to say: > In this relationship, "Design" is the **A** and "Development" is the **B** * * * My wife and I have been discussing this for quite some time now, and here are the few we have come up with, and why they don't work for me:   * **Depender/Dependee**   Feels awkward, and doesn't really disambiguate the parties involved. Also implies that the dependee provides something to the depender, whereas this is not necessarily always the case in project tasks.        * **Dependent/Surrogate**   Awkward and implies providing some sort of utility.        * **Parent/Child**   Incorrect. The "Design" task _may_ have children tasks, like "Write-up" or "Gather Requirements", but "Development" is not a child of "Design".        * **Predecessor, Precursor, etc. / Successor**   Has hierarchy implications that make it quasi-incorrect. So, the best we have right now is:   * **Prerequisite/???**   Project tasks are related in exactly the same way that some educational courses are. This does _imply_ providing some sort of utility, but not necessarily and the relationship is well understood.


Is "facebook" as a verb different from "google" or "photoshop"?

I understand that any term, grammatical or not, becomes valid if there is common usage. I'm not concerned about that. Google and Photoshop are both commonly used as verbs. Given that the terms map fairly well to verbs (web searching and image editing), I can follow the logic of their use. Does this work for Facebook, though? What verb is it replacing?


Meaning of "Write Off" in a particular context

This question is about a specific _Seinfeld_ episode "The Package". For those that are familiar with the show, Kramer breaks-up Jerry stereo package and sends it back to him with a insurance. That way he could claim that the USPS screwed it up and get the money for it. Once the package arrived, here's the dialogue: > Jerry: "What happened to my stereo? It's all smashed up." > > Kramer: "That's right. Now it looks like it was broken during shipping and I > > insured it for $400." > > Jerry: "But you were supposed to get me a refund." > > Kramer: "You can't get a refund. Your warranty expired two years ago." > > Jerry: "So were going to make the Post Office pay for my new stereo?" > > Kramer: "It's just a **write off** for them." > > Jerry: "How is it a **write off**?" > > Kramer: "They just **write it off**." > > Jerry : **Write it off** what?" > > Kramer: "Jerry all these big companies they **write off** everything." > > Jerry: "You don't even know what a **write off** is." > > Kramer: "Do you?" > > Jerry: "No. I don't." > > Kramer: "But they do and they are the ones **writing it off**." > > Jerry: "I wish I just had the last twenty seconds of my life back." Anyway. I don't watch the show with subtitles. I'm from Brazil and I get it pretty well except for this particular term "Write Off". Once I saw it with subtitles just to see what they translated it to and - basically - they translated "Write Off" as an _obligation_ , something people have the right to claim from USPS. I'm not convinced. Can you help me out on this one? Thanks so far. PS: Dialogue taken from Seinfeld Scripts


Why does one "laugh to see a pudding crawl"?

_You'd laugh to see a pudding crawl_ is a catch-phrase aimed at someone who is easily amused or is suffering a fit of uncontrollable hilarity. Does anyone know how this phrase came into being? I'm not even sure what is meant by _a pudding crawl_ ; I presume it means the act of the last part of your meal propelling itself about the table, but perhaps there is another meaning that would make the saying clearer? Searching the internet revealed that the question has been asked before (here), and the meaning explained (here and here) but the etymology has never been explained.


Present perfect continuous and "for"

Why aren't you allowed to say "I have been knowing her **for** ten years" or "It has been broadcasting **for** many years"? But you are allowed to say "I have been waiting **for** an hour".


What does the phrase “Go Tiger!” mean?

I am learning the Java struts 2 by reading a book titled "struts 2 in action" and I encountered the phrase "Go Tiger!". I can't figure out what it means; can anybody give me the answer? > If you have the pleasure of using Java 5 or higher, we highly recommend > using generics to type your collections and maps. Besides being a > recommended best practice, the Struts 2 type conversion mechanism can use > generics-based typing to learn the correct target type for the conversions. > If you do this, you don't have to use the properties file configuration. > This is a big bonus for Java 5 users. Go Tiger!


"Political magazine" or "politics magazine"

Which is more grammatically correct? > London's first **political magazine** > > London's first **politics magazine**


Difference between "Excuse me" and "Sorry"

What is the difference between "Excuse me, ..." and "Sorry, ..."? When do we use one or the other? For example, when you haven't heard the speaker, or stepped on someone's foot or accidentally spilled some sauce.


"Spontaneous", "voluntary" and "involuntary"

I was looking for a synonym of _spontaneous_ , and _voluntary_ naturally came to my mind. In an attempt to understand the difference between them, I tried to google _spontaneous vs voluntary_. To my surprise, nothing really interesting popped up from search results. Then I decided to look them up respectively. As expected, _voluntary_ is listed as a synonym of _spontaneous_ according to many online resources, and vice versa. However, to my great shock, _involuntary_ is also listed as a synonym of _spontaneous_ by major online dictionaries. Although the fact does not necessarily imply _voluntary_ and _involuntary_ are synonyms, I continued to look further into _voluntary vs involuntary_ due to confusion. I found that a _voluntary_ action is something that is done voluntarily or with meaning to do so, while an _involuntary_ action on the other hand is done _automatically_. Now I've even more confused. The word _automatically_ just reminds me of _spontaneously_ , convincing me to believe _involuntary_ is indeed a synonym of _spontaneous_ while _voluntary_ seems less so. Could someone please justify or explain the contradictions mentioned above? I'm totally lost.


What's the verb form of "polymorph"?

In software design, we can say a class is a polymorphic class. If a class is not a polymorphic class and I want to make it one, do I say I've _polymorphized_ the class?


meaning of the expression "wet flannel"

I would like to know what is the meaning of the expression "wet flannel" referred to a person or personality trait. I have seen it mentioned here: http://www.conservativehome.com/localgovernment/2012/06/labour-councillor- quits-saying-ed-miliband-is-wet-flannel.html


Is there a specific word to describe a business legend?

I would like to know if there's a word that describes a deceased business/entrepreneurial legend that revolutionized their industry. Examples of the types of people I'm talking about include Henry Ford, Thomas Edison, and Steve Jobs. `Industrialist` seems close, but means > A person involved in the ownership or management of an industrial enterprise and thus doesn't convey the right sense of importance.


Choice of words referring to being attacked/assaulted with a glass/cup

According to the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary the verb, glass, means to encase in glass. Recently, it has also come to mean being attacked or assaulted by a glass vessel/container as in this example: > Another glassing incident... A young woman faces assault charges after > allegedly glassing a man in a Brisbane bar early today. Similar incidents have been reported with a coffee cup, as in this example: > bizarre coffee cup attack between two elderly men over a woman. ...It is > understood the younger man was hit over the head with a coffee cup in a > popular town centre pub and was also scalded by a hot drink on Saturday > morning. Would this still be considered a _glassing incident_ , or would it be considered (and I am not trying to be funny here) a _mugging_ or _mugging incident_?


Why is it "your Majesty", but "my Lord"?


"Touring team" vs. "Exhibition team"

> When we are not playing competitive games, our three **touring teams** play > against three **exhibition teams**. What does the above bold terms mean?


"Daily conversations" vs. "daily conversation"

I am currently programming my own blog system to share knowledge about the Microsoft technology ASP.NET MVC, because I am rather passionate about web software development. I thought of calling it _Daily Conversations with ASP.NET MVC_. However, since English is not my mother tongue, I am not sure whether the title is grammatically correct — should it be _Conversation_ or _Conversations_?


list characteristics in correct manner

What is the best method of listing specific characteristics when writing scientifically. My example: > The study sites range in area from 1000 m² to 1200 m², cover depths of 0.08 > to 5.7 m, range in altitude from 0 to 100 m, and span latitudes of between > −40 to 50 °N. Note that XX here is a variable name. I am not convinced that I am writing this in the best possible way. For example, am I using _cover_ , _range_ , _span_ in the correct way here? Is there a specific rule to follow in scientific writing?


Which is correct sentence? Use of verb with would

I am having little difficulty with the use of would.   Here are two examples that are making me confused about use of verb with **would**.   * What would happen if he loses the match?   * What would happen if he lost the match? Which one of these two is correct?


Adjective meaning "argumentative for argument's sake"?

Quite often, the phrase "x for x's sake" is used in English, and so one could describe someone as being "argumentative for argument's sake" to describe someone who is arguing for the sake of arguing. However, is there an adjective that means the same thing? For example, it could be used in the context: > I don't want to be [X], but [argument...] ... indicating that your argument is necessary and not intended to irritate.


Where does the phrase "get crackin'" come from?

> "There's a lot of work to be done, so we'd better get crackin'" I've often used this expression, but I have no idea what we might have been cracking, originally? Any insight?


Can the word "dehydration" imply "thirsty"?

As far as I know, _dehydration_ means the condition of a body from which the water has been removed. Can the same word imply that the body is thirsty? Simply put, is "I am thirsty" the same as "I am dehydrated"?


Can I end this sentence with "also" or "too"? Which one is right?

Please see the sentences: > I scheduled to stay after school with you today, but yesterday I was > assigned a detention for today **too**. > I scheduled to stay after school with you today, but yesterday I was > assigned a detention for today **also**. The sentence ending in `also` sounds better to me, but I am not a native speaker, and I don't know it it's correct to use `also` at the end of a sentence. Which one is the correct form?


Synonym for overdoing something/taking too wide an approach

I'm looking for an idiom or a synonym for a situation when someone has taken a heavy handed measure that achieves the desired effect, but also goes above this, affecting things that aren't a problem. For example: > If one tree is diseased, but the surrounding ones are fine, chopping down > all of the trees. I'm sure there's a phrase for this. I thought of "using a sledgehammer to crack a nut" but I'm sure there's something specific.


Is a sentence always grammatically incorrect if it has no verb?

Is the following grammatically correct? My friend says the second sentence is grammatically incorrect, but couldn't explain why. > I have always been fascinated by statistics. _The different ways in which > you could look at data and infer knowledge from it._


Is the expression ‘a legitimate rape’ logically appropriate and viable?

Missouri’s Republican candidate for the US Senate, Todd Akin, made a naïve remark on anti-abortion issue that has now become the target of thundering criticism. _Time Magazine_ (August 20th, 2012) introduced the Congressman’s disastrous remark as follows: > Asked about his stance on abortion, the Republican Senate candidate > attempted to explain his unqualified opposition to it, even in cases of > rape: “From what I understand from a doctor, that’s really rare,” Akin said > of pregnancies from rape. “If it’s **a legitimate rape** , the female body > has ways to try to shut that whole thing ‘down’.” I cannot understand the ‘legitimacy’ of the term, _legitimate rape_. OALED defines _rape_ as — note carefully — **the _crime_** of forcing someone to have sex with you, especially using violence. Merriam-Webster defines rape as (2) _unlawful sexual activity_ carried out forcibly or under threat of injury against the will, usually of a female. From both definitions, rape is a full-fledged crime. It’s illegitimate and unlawful from beginning to end. Though Akin spoke of ‘a legitimate rape’, and newspapers keep using this word nonchalantly, isn’t the expression _legitimate rape_ logically preposterous and impossible? In other word, can we say "a legitimate crime"? I understand _legitimate_ has another meaning of _real_ , and I suspect the Congressman might have used ‘legitimate rape’ to this effect. But to me, _legitimate rape_ just sounds like saying _legitimate crime_ or _lawful robbery_. So my question is, is _legitimate rape_ a proper and reasonable English term, one without risk of causing the equivocal confusion that I felt?


Is “Waste ‘much time’ and ‘many trees’” a set phrase?

I saw the phrase, “ _Much air time and many trees have been wasted_ ” in the article of New York Times (March 24) titled, “The Outsourced Party.” It begins with the following sentence: > “Who speaks for the Republican party? The answer is that everyone does — and > therefore, no one does. > > _Much air time and many trees have been wasted_ trying to explain the > division, rancor and lethargy that have beset the Republican nominating > campaign, now into its second year and threatening to run all the way to the > party’s national convention in late August. But it’s no great mystery.” I am amused with the combination of “air time “and “trees.” I can understand “waste (air) time.” I can relate 'time' to 'money', but am puzzled why “trees". “ I checked GooglNgram and found no entry of “waste much time and many trees.” Is “ _waste much time and many trees_ ” a set phrase? What does “ _trees_ ” represent for here?


"Naïve" vs "Ignorant"

What is the difference between _naïve_ and _ignorant_? I want to make sure I understand the proper meaning and connotation of each word. For example, how would you describe a person who makes inappropriate (e.g., discriminatory or offensive) comments about something due to lack of experience or knowledge? Is this person _naïve_ , _ignorant_ , or both? What connotation does each carry when used to describe the person in this case?


One word for "to take advantage of company resources (that one works for) for one's personal intents"?

This happens a lot at work, and I don't think there's a single word for it - or is there? Examples:   1. Browsing the web for content unrelated to work   2. Taking company time for personal grooming (like painting nails, shaving, etc.)   3. Using the company refrigerator to temporarily store one's groceries purchased at lunch.    4. Printing stuff not related to work (worse yet, if it's material for employment somewhere else.) Stealing is not specific enough.


What does “being skinned alive “mean exactly? Is it a well-established phrase?

There was the following sentence in the article written by Maureen Dowd titled, “Where the boys aren’t,” sketching the life of Dolores Hart in New York Times February 19 issue: > “I had no idea that it was going to mean singing seven times a day, working > in the garden, 10 people in one bathroom, the sternness.” She compared it to > _being skinned alive.”_ I thought “ _being skinned alive_ ” means “live like a stuffed bird (or a living corpse)” from the context of the above sentence, and checked Cambridge, Oxford, Merriam-Webster online dictionaries for confirmation. None of them registers the word, “(be) skinned alive.” Although the Free Dictionary and Online slang Dictionary provide with similar definitions of “skinned alive” as “to be very angry with someone; to scold someone severely. - FD” and “to reprimand severely – OSD,” I don’t think both applies to the above Dowd’s quote. What does “being skinned alive” here mean? Is “skinned alive” a well- established phrase, though I can’t find the phrase in reputed dictionaries?


What is the origin of the expression "trying to catch a falling knife"? I have just read it and I wonder how it came up to be a common expression.


"Like us" or "like we do"

Do the following two sentences have the same meaning? > They go to school **like we do**. > > They go to school **like us**. I know the first one is correct, but I am not sure if the second one is correct too.


How to correctly name a uni assignment?

Finishing my first in class assignment in an English uni, I struggle with the name (especially with "the" and "of" words). I developed a website X and the document should describe the whole process. I was thinking about:               The X site solution development report          X site development report          The development report of the X site      Which would be the best or what would you write? THanks


rule of thumb for 'however' in the middle of the sentence?

What is the rule of thumb for using 'however' in the middle of the sentence? For example: > Some people disagree with this theory, however, as it's never been proven > right.


Pronunciation of 'preface'. Why so?

As one pronounces 'pre' and 'face' as is done for these as individual words, how come when they form the word 'preface' the pronunciation is so different?


What is the radical difference between ‘this’ and ‘a’ when telling a story?

The following quotation is a line from Ron to Harry after the first stage of the Triwizard Tournament. (p359, Harry Potter 4, US edition) > “You were the best, you know, no competition. Cedric did **this** weird > thing where he Transfigured a rock on the ground … turned it into a dog … he > was trying to make the dragon go for the dog instead of him. Well, it was a > pretty cool bit of Transfiguration, and it sort of worked, because he did > get the egg, but he got burned as well – the dragon changed its mind halfway > through and decided it would rather have him than the Labrador; he only just > got away. And that Fleur girl tried **this** sort of charm, I think she was > trying to put it into a trance – well, that kind of worked too, it went all > sleepy, but then it snored, and **this** great jet of flame shot out, and > her skirt caught fire – she put it out with a bit of water out of her wand. > (The rest is omitted.) I consulted dictionaries. > ・(informal) used when you are telling a story or telling somebody about > something. > > eg) There was this strange man sitting next to me on the plane. > > eg) I’ve been getting these pains in my chest. It seems to me that I can use ‘this’ for a change whenever I’m bored with ‘a’. > ・(Informal) an emphatic form of a or the: used esp on relating a story > > eg) I saw this big brown bear I can’t understand what it emphasizes. What does ‘an emphatic form of a’ mean? I’ve seen this type of ‘this’ in some stories, but they are used only once in opening scenes, if I’m not mistaken. I tried to swallow ‘this’ by thinking it is needed for an opening scene which is very important in the story. But I can’t delude myself any more when seeing three ‘this’ in the above quotation. What kind of effect repeating ‘this’ have? Let me get it straight. I’d like to know   1. What makes you choose ‘this’ over ‘a’?   2. What kind of effect does repeating ‘this’ have as in the above citation?


"In recent years" vs "in the recent years"

Do we write _in the recent years_ or _in recent years_? For example, > **In the recent years** , the influence of blablabla on blablabla has grown > rapidly. > > **In recent years** , the influence of blablabla on blablabla has grown > rapidly. As far as I know, both are correct. But which one sounds more natural (more correct from a native speaker's point of view) or does it not matter?


Word cluster for jobs where people perform the functions of

What are the words for jobs where people perform the following functions : Classifying things, cataloguing things, annotating things, organizing things. I thought of things like : natural historian, taxonomist, but I am sure there are a whole lot more. To be more specific, the context is there is a galactic warehouse full of books and documents and journal articles, and other media resources, and these are going to be searched and annotated, so that the annotated parts can be used in reports. It's not really analysis, and it's not "research" since it has no specific topic in mind -- it's more cataloguing what the parts of interest are of these documents, (where "interest" is defined by what the document is in itself), putting them into categories, and recording a reference to these annotations in a big card system. The entries in that card system can then be used say in making other resources in future. With proper attribution back to the source. Kind of like a massive citation project -- so the people who go through and make all these citations / annotations, what would they be called? A cluster of terms is more useful than one because I am not just seeking "an answer" I am trying to think more deeply about what that role is exactly.


Volitional sentence vs. imperative sentence

What's the difference? Is a volitional sentence simply a weaker form of an imperative sentence?


"Thousands of thousands" vs. "Thousands upon thousands"

Is "thousands of thousands" grammatically correct? Why does it seem that "thousands upon thousands" sounds better, even though the former is closer to the logical truth? Is there any difference at all?


Is "Both I and you fight for ourselves" correct?

Suppose two persons from different countries are talking with each other. How can I combine the following two sentences > "I fight for myself. You fight for yourself." ... and make a single sentence without changing the meaning?   * (?) Both I and you fight for ourselves.   * (?) Both I and you fight for themselves.   * (?) Both I and you fight for oneself. Logically the first sentence seems to work, but on second thought I feel it looks like "you" are betraying his/her country and fighting for "my" country... Is this the case? Modifying a little bit using "each", "respectively" or something like that will help? If I give up using this structure, what is the best way to simply describe this idea?


Contemplate vs consider

After reading an article recently, I wondered when one should use _contemplate_ over _consider_. I searched for the issue on Google and found that: > In that context, they're essentially the same. > > Contemplating is more reflective, thinking about problems that aren't > solved, puzzling >over mysteries. > > Considering is more like analyzing known choices. > > You'd contemplate the mysteries of the universe, you'd consider what kind of > car to buy. (wordreference.com) Yet, the article I mentioned above, contains the following sentence: > As Iraq erupts in civil war and America again contemplates intervention, > that unfinished business should give new urgency to the question of how the > United States military controlled the media coverage of its long involvement > there and in Afghanistan. I would say that the possible intervention that is contemplated here **is** a known choice more than a mystery. **When should I use contemplate over consider?**


Expression for 'One who cares about one's social rank'

What is a word or expression for someone who cares about what social rank they're in. Someone who wants to have money, something similar to _ambitious_? _Vain_ is not the word I'm looking for.


Difference between "when" and "if" in a sentence

I was doing a grammar activity and filling in sentences when I came across the instruction: "fill in when or if.". I was wondering, since these two can be used in a lot of same sentences, what is the difference between sentences like this? > Chris might call while I'm out this evening. [If/When] he does, can you take > a message?


What does ‘Lower oneself for farewell swim’ mean? Is this a sport related jargon?

I saw the phrase “(Donnie) Welsh refrained from lowering himself for a farewell swim,” in New York Time’s sport article (June 3rd) titled “Ungainly Knicks Lose a Man of Elegance.” The article starts with the following line: > After avoiding the muddy pool of his boss, James L. Dolan, for the duration > of his time as the Knicks’ president, Walsh refrained from lowering himself > for a farewell swim. He took the same high road out of Madison Square Garden > that he rode in on. Though I guess the phrase “lower oneself for farewell swim” contrasts to the subsequent phrase, “take the high road,” I’m not sure of the exact meaning of this phrase. Does this (lowering himself for a farewell swim) mean putting oneself for humiliating position? Is this a popular idiom?


Is 'there' an adverb or a preposition? (Or something else entirely!?)

Most dictionaries seem to describe 'there' as an adverb. Oxford online dictionary definition Is this true? "Last year we went to Paris. We stayed there for three nights." In sentences like this 'there' is taking the place of a preposition and a noun - in this case 'in Paris'. So why is it referred to as an adverb? Is there a case for describing it as a preposition? It is a substitute for a prepositional phrase ('on the table'. 'in the room', 'to Paris', 'in Paris' etc), and like a preposition, and unlike an adverb, it may be modified by 'right' or 'straight'. "We flew straight there." "The book is right there - in front of you." Prepositional phrases So, is 'there' (and I suppose we could extend this to its interrogative: 'where') an adverb, a preposition or some other category of word?


How do you denote date and time in written English?

I always wonder how to denote date and time when I have to make an appointment. To make sure that I don't make typos, I always mention the weekday. What is the correct way to do so? ## Appointment at 2014-05-28, 14:00   1. Could we meet on Wednesday, the 28th of May at 2 o'clock p.m.?   2. Could we meet on 28th of May at 9 o'clock (it's a Wednesday)?   3. Could we meet at 2 o'clock p.m. on Wednesday the 28th of May?     * As far as I know it is very unusual to write 14:00. I think it's only used in military in English speaking countries. Is that correct?     * What is the best way to make an appointment? Are the four variants I've suggested correct?     * Do you write "a.m." or "a. m." (with a space)? According to wikipedia: > Some stylebooks suggest the use of a space between the number and the a.m. > or p.m. abbreviation.[citation needed] But the wikipedia article does not use spaces... I've looked it up in the "Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English". It's not written with spaces there. According to this dictionary you can also write `am` (without dots) in British English. ## Appointment on 2014-05-28, 09:45 I don't know how to write this without the `hh:mm a.m. / p.m.` or `h:mm a.m. / p.m.` style. Do you really write "quater before 10"? ## See also   * 12-hour clock


How did the word "copacetic" come into use?

I once heard the late John Ciardi (NPR's "A Word in Your Ear") try to explain that the 1920s idiom, "copacetic" (meaning completely satisfactory), entered into the African-American vocabulary in Harlem from the days when Jews and African Americans lived there together. He argued that _copacetic_ has the same meaning as the Israeli idiom "kol b'seder" which literally means "all is in order." The problem with that, said my Harlem-raised father-in-law, is that the Jews in Harlem spoke Yiddish and _kol b'seder_ was not used in Yiddish. The dictionary I've got is not helpful. Can someone come up with a better explanation?


"Slit one's wrists" vs. "cut one's wrists"

Which one is used more often? You can cut your leg, hand etc. but do you _slit_ or _cut_ your wrists? Is the correct word related to the method of action that causes wrists to bleed?


Is it better to say someone lived "at" or "on" a particular street?

When I was a lowly copyboy for a newspaper in the 1970s, I wrote obituaries. My desk editor came to me with a criticism. I had written that the deceased lived "on Nevada Blvd." She threw my copy down and stood on it. "This is 'on'," she said. Standing to the side of the paper she said, "this is 'at'." OK, I can take a hint, from then on I said people lived "at" a certain address. But is that really the rule, or was that just my editor's pet peeve?


Is introvert a derogatory term, or just neutral?

Is _introvert_ a derogatory term? Does it have the potential to offend someone, or is it okay to call someone who enjoys solitude an introvert?


infinitive/comma/sentence fragment question

> Cabs can drive people anywhere, but cannot be hailed at, or below Jon Street > and Frank Street. My question is should there be a comma after _anywhere_? Is _but_ a conjunction in this case? I am not sure, because "[cabs] cannot be hailed at, or below Jon Street and Frank Street," is giving me trouble. Is _be hailed_ a infinitive in which case the phrase two lines up is not a sentence because there is no verb?


How to express 'unneed' of something?

For example, method 1 of doing something (say A) requires something else (say B). And I invented method 2 to do A but without the prerequisite of B. I can say: > The disadvantage of method 1 is its requirement/need of B. Now I want to introduce my method by saying > the advantage of my method 2 is its (the phrase). What should I put in there to represent the meaning of "no requirement/need of B"? I don't choose to say "the advantage of my method 2 is that it doesn't require B" because I want to also introduce other advantages, like "the advantage of my method 2 is its speed, efficiency, and … ". What should I put here?


Is there a countable form for "literature"?

_Literature_ is an uncountable noun, so we can't say _one literature_ or _two literatures_. But is there a countable form, as there is for _information_? _One piece of information_ , for instance.


Meaning of "That's gonna leave one helluva scar"

What does > That's gonna leave one **helluva** scar mean? Does _helluva_ stand for _a hell off a_?


Is the usage of “night and day” as “completely different” very common?

There was the following line in December 2nd AP News, > “Chief White House trouble shooter for healthcare gov.web site says the web > site is **night and day** from where it was October 1st. Jeff Zients say > they carried out hundreds of software and hardware fixes. I first took “night and day” for “continually,” but later realized it meant the status of web site is compretely different (mproved) from October 1st stage after searching for the definition of “night and day” other than “all the time,” and found it in Online slang dictionary and urbandictionary: While all major dictionaries only provide ‘all the time” implication, both Slang Dictionary and Urbandictionary provide “completely different” implication as shown below: **Cambridge Dictionaries Online:** night and day (also day and night) all the time: [ex.] They've worked night and day to publicize their campaign. **Oxford Dictionary** : all the time; constantly: [ex.]She studied night and day **Merriam-Webster Dictionary** all the time: continually **Dictionary com.:** unceasingly; continually: [ex.] She worked night and day until the job was done. **The Online Slang Dictionary** : completely different. * ** _www._ *urbandictionary** A phrase used to describe a stark difference between two things. Similar to day and night, except it implies an improvement of the situation rather than a deterioration. So my question: Is the usage of ‘night and day” in the meaning of “completely different” popular, or still on the sideline? Because I don’t find it in any of Cambridge / Oxford / Merriam –Webster English Dictinoary.


"Lose not an hour" origin

The earliest use of the phrase I can find is Horatio Nelson, urging his commander, Sir Hyde Parker, to attack the combined fleets of Russia, Sweden, and Denmark, moored off Zealand. When Parker dithered over the two choices of approach, Nelson burst out "Let it be by the Sound, by the Belt, or any other way, but lose not an hour." His exclamation is famous, in its way, but was it original? The strange phrasing (even for 1800) suggest it was not.


Is "to collaborating" correct?

I am interested in this sentence: "I am used to collaborating with other people". I am not sure if this form is correct, maybe "I am used to collaborate with other people" is more correct?


How to understand this sentence

I found this sentence in a reading material from a GRE (Graduate Record Examination) test. And I found it incredibly difficult for my to understand. > A desire to throw over reality a light that never was might give way > abruptly to the desire on the part of what we might consider a novelist- > scientist to record exactly and concretely the structure and texture of a > flower. Any help is appreciated. It would be better if you could disassemble the sentence into parts. (e.g. main structure: A desire ... to the desire) Edit: It is from the paragraph below: (Don't blame me. It is one paragraph as it is.) > In Hardy‘s novels, various impulses were sacrificed to each other inevitably > and often. Inevitably, because Hardy did not care in the way that novelists > such as Line Flaubert or James cared, and therefore took paths of least > resistance. Thus, one impulse often surrendered to a fresher one and, > unfortunately, instead of exacting a compromise, simply disappeared. A > desire to throw over reality a light that never was might give way abruptly > to the desire on the part of what we might consider a novelist-scientist to > record exactly and concretely the structure and texture of a flower. In this > instance, the new impulse was at least an energetic one, and thus its > indulgence did not result in a relaxed style. But on other occasions Hardy > abandoned a perilous, risky, and highly energizing impulse in favor of what > was for him the fatally relaxing impulse to classify and schematize > abstractly. When a relaxing impulse was indulged, the style—that sure index > of an author‘s literary worth—was certain to become verbose.


"Relevant to" vs. "relevant for"

Is there a rule to decide which is better: _relevant to_ or _relevant for_? One is accusative and one dative but that doesn't really help me.


Real quick question

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Can “real” be used as an adverb to describe an adjective? Let me just ask you something real quick. Is my previous sentence wrong? Must the real part be "really"? Some context: I am asking, because "real quick" sounds cool as hell and I see more and more people using it.


Can "real" be used as an adverb to describe an adjective?

Is this correct? > That is a real cool answer. I learned that that was incorrect, since "real" is an **adjective which can describe a noun** , e.g. "real answer" but it is not an adverb which can describe an adjective, "real cool". Instead you would have to say: > That is a really cool answer. Since "really" is an adverb.


How to word two items together compared to a separate item?

Consider the following example: "there is a relationship between cats and dogs and bears". How can this be punctuated/worded so that it is clear that the comparison is between [cats and dogs] and [bears]?


Can two adjectives ending in -al be in a row?

I feel like : Technological Educational Institute is wrong, and that it should be Technological Education Institute. Please explain if I'm right/wrong, and why?


What is the difference between Coaching and Mentoring?

I know coaching is all about the client potential and not being directive or giving solutions, but how does it different than mentoring?


The meaning of "What's she gonna look like with a chimney on her"

Title - Feel It Artist - The Tamperer ft. Maya > You got it on the side   >  A little one night thing   >  I thought it over and this time I will forgive you   >  Well I'm not letting go   >  But don't forget I know   >  You made your bed and she was in it, no no no > > What's she gonna look like with a chimney on her?   >  What's she gonna look like with a chimney on her?   >  What's she gonna look like with a chimney on her?   >  What's she gonna look like with a chimney on her? > > Well I'm not blaming you   >  But she's still hanging around   >  And she's so crazy, tell ya now I just don't trust her   >  She thinks she's right on time   >  But I think she crossed the line   >  And I'm ready for the ride, I'm ready, yep, just biding time > > What she's gonna look like with a chimney on her?   >  What's she gonna look like with a chimney on her?   >  What's she gonna look like with a chimney on her?   > What is the meaning of _What's she gonna look like with a chimney on her_?


Which form of a verb should I normally use after "what you have done is"? Should it be present participle (option A), past participle (option B) or a base form (option C) : A. I wanted you to clean the whole bathroom, but what you have done is simply **washing** the sink. B. I wanted you to clean the whole bathroom, but what you have done is simply **washed** the sink. C. I wanted you to clean the whole bathroom, but what you have done is simply **wash** the sink.


"Does it make sense?" or "Do you understand me?"?

Suppose I tell something to my companion and I want to make sure he understands me. I thought I may simply ask "Do you understand me?". But recently I heard that in such cases I should ask "Does it make sense?" instead. Is this true? Which option is appropriate to use in business communication?


Word for people easily influenced by propaganda

What is the word that describes people who are easily influenced by propaganda or always do what all other people are seen to be doing without much thinking?


Name for title used before a name for phonetic or rhythmic reasons

Often, when people are announced or mentioned in the news, their name is prefixed by a title that gives rhythm and balance to the sound of their name. For example, we sometimes hear "Libyan strongman Muammar Gaddafi". I'm pretty sure his title is not "strongman", but this prefix gives rhythm and balance to his name. I have a vague recollection long ago of knowing the origin of this practice (Chaucer, I think) and a name for it. I've tried every way of searching for it, but I can't find it. Am I remembering wrong, or is there a word or phrase for this?


How should I pronounce 't' followed by 'the'?

This combination is really hard to me. This is an example: > Knowing what to check is **just the** start to process. Can anyone help?


What would be a word for describing a tendency to take the literal meaning of words above the accepted meaning?

For example someone accused of homophobia would answer that isn't correct as he is not afraid of homosexuals. The accepted meaning of homophobia is, of course, a much wider range of negative attitudes, least of them being actual fear. What would be the term for such a person?


A phrase for ignoring the disparity at a low level, while seeking commonality at a high level

I'm having a hard time describing the phrase I'm looking for, so I think the best way to ask the question is to simply present the problem. At work I've been tasked with merging the guidelines (the topic is technical, so for the sake of this question let's assume the topic is on "HR ethics") used by three major branches of an organization into a single guideline. Sounds like a great idea, right? The problem is that each office (one branch has several offices) has their own set of rules pertaining to HR ethics. So I'm now trying to make a "master" guideline in a system where everyone has their own rules anyway. Is there a phrase that would summarize this paradox? I think the phrase I'm thinking of would be (I think) the opposite of the one discussed here: Phrase for focusing on unimportant details


Aeroplane and airplane

How has it come to be that we British have the pleasure of saying aeroplane, whereas the US Americans (and possibly others) are only left with airplane?


"buy... clever" & "buy... miserable"

You can’t buy your kids clever. What’s more, if they’re merely above average, by sending them to some hideous Holland Park hothouse, you’re probably buying them miserable. As far as I know, _clever_ and _miserable_ are both adjectives, not nouns. So why were they used with _to buy_? Is this an idiomatic way of saying _You can't buy your kids intelligence_ and _you're probably buying them (moral) misery_? If so, what is the idiom used here? I'm not familiar with it.


Past Perfect Continuous/Past Perfect or?

Which tense should I use in the following example? Is it OK to use the Past Perfect Continuous if I want to explain to someone that _I had been working in some company for 10 years_ , without mentioning - _before I finally quit_ , or maybe I should use the Past Perfect - _I had worked in that company for 10 years_ … but also without mentioning - _before I moved to_ … ??? Thanks!


"Groom" in Marriage?

Groom for me as I know it means a man who tends to the horses, or and in the verb form, it is to take care of one's appearance. Then, why is it used to refer to the man of the marriage? Is there any etymological reasons?


What's the usual meaning of "monkey business"?

"Monkey business" seems to be a widely used idiom. I looked it up on Wiktionary and I found two main possible meanings, one stressing the silliness of an activity: > (US, slang) Wasting time, or effort, on some foolish project. / An activity > that is considered silly, or stupid, or time-wasting. the other one questioning its morality: > (idiomatic) An activity that may be considered illegal, questionable, or a > vice, but not felonious. The Free Dictionary seems to favor the latter meaning. Without any context that could help clarify the exact meaning, which of the two characterizations is usually understood?


What is the origin of "bite me"?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Meaning and usage of "bite me" Here’s the dilemma: What body part does the oft-used expression, “Bite me!” refer to? All the males (man on the street) I’ve surveyed, say the bum, the tushie, indeed, the derriere. Most women don't know and profess to never use this expression. I've had a few varied answers, but I’d say 85% so far agree that’s it’s the human posterior. Is there any relation or association with the Bard’s “I bite my thumb at you, Sir”?


Origin of "sleep like a baby"

I believe that many, or in fact, most of you have heard the phrase "sleep like a baby". But actually, where does the phrase originate from? Personally, I don't think using baby is a good reference as babies usually wake up crying at night or wake up and scream every 3 hours asking for milk. I would like to ask why is the reference for babies used instead of other, possibly better references like 'sleep like a patriarch', for instance?


American English without an accent

I have heard that in the Midwest region of the United States (Nebraska, etc.), people do not have an accent when speaking compared to people from the south or either coast. Is this true? Why? Please add sources to back up what you say.


Is the use of the dative of possession (from Latin) in English phrases proper?

I am an avid Latin III student studying in high school, and I often think about the effect that Latin has had on English, not just through etymology and morphology, but in semantics and pragmatics. In church today, I noticed again that the pastor says "The Word Of the Lord" and that the congregation replies "Thanks be to God" to this. "Thanks be to God" at first sounds very awkward until I actually thought about what the phrase might be trying to convey. I began to think about the Dative of Possession in Latin where "Nomen mihi est..." literally means "The name to/for me is..." and is used to show possession of the subject of the sentence by the dative. The way the phrase in question sounds is similar (with the dative and the copula); if it is styled so, it is "The Thanks is to/for God".   1. Is this what the phrase is trying to get across to the congregation, or is it some remnant from an older, more complicated English?    2. If so, is it really proper to use the Latin Dative of Possession like that?


Why do they say "love fifteen," in tennis?

Why do they say " **love** fifteen," in tennis?


Monosyllabic and polysyllabic

what exactly would monosyllabic words and polysyllabic words be? Google definition isn't helping to understand...


"I am going to have to", "I have to", and "I will have to"

What is the difference between these two:   * I am going to have to see you sometime.   * I have to see you sometime. When would you use the first one? On that note, how is . . .   * I will have to see you sometime. . . . any different from the two sentences previously mentioned?


What's the proper past tense of "to freeze": "freezed" or "frozen?

Which form should be used for the past tense "freezed" or "frozen" or are both acceptable?


Is the use of semicolon applicable anywhere in this sentence?

Here's the sentence - > On further statistical analysis, these benefits were found to be both short > term (0-30 days) and long term (31-360 days) and in both STEMI and UA/NSTEMI > patients, irrespective of whether PCI was done or not. I was tempted to write this sentence in the following way: > On further statistical analysis, these benefits were found to be both short > term (0-30 days) and long term (31-360 days), and in both STEMI and > UA/NSTEMI patients; irrespective of whether PCI was done or not. Any thoughts on what the right way is?


How to indicate that a word / acronym X will refer to Y in academic writing

How would I indicate, for example, that I am going to use "toms" to mean "tomatoes". Something like: > Tomatoes (toms) are red. This is false as some toms are green. I like toms.


What's the difference between "any way" and "any which way"?

Why should I use "any which way" (like in "any which way you can") instead of simply "any way"? I've been studying English as a foreign language for some time, and never came across this particular construct before.


Plural followed by singular - "have" or "has"?

I'm wondering which of the following is correct: > Guns are an invention that **have** had an enormous impact on African > history. or > Guns are an invention that **has** had an enormous impact on African > history. These sentences aren't actually being used in my report, but I decided to create them to save you from the grammatical horror of my actual run-on sentences. Anyway, I know "have" is used for plural subjects and "has" is used for singular subjects (wrong term, I'm sure), but I'm unsure as to whether the subject is the plural "guns" or the singular "invention." Microsoft Word is suggesting the latter sentence. Is that correct?


Ands and Commas

I'm trying to construct a relative clause that's deliberately crammed with a lot of info. This is to illustrate to someone the flexibility of relative clauses (versus adjectives). Here's my independent clause: _I met a girl..._ Now, I need to make a relative clause that starts with "who" and contains every one of the following details:   1. beautiful    2. smart    3. tall   4. has big, brown eyes    5. has long, black hair  Now my question is: how many _ands_ do I use? Also, at which points do I place the commas? This is what I came up with on my own: > I met a girl who is beautiful, smart and tall, and has big, brown eyes and > long, black hair. Should there be an " _and_ " before " _has_ "? In fact, are all my " _ands_ " and commas placed correctly? I would like to avoid making two separate sentences. * * * P.S. I hope this particular example doesn't sound sexist to anybody.


Can "alas" be used all by itself?

Often, you see something like > Alas, I couldn't afford it. But isn't it possible to use it all by itself? > I couldn't afford it. Alas! What about in combination with "however", as in > However, alas, I couldn't afford it. If these last two situations don't work, are there any alternatives to "alas" that would work instead?


What do you call a quote collector?

EDIT: As Chris Taylor made note of, there are multiple types of quotes. I mean quotes as in phrases written/spoken by someone (not insurance quotes, etc.). Is there a single word that describes someone who collects quotes? I've seen both _quotologist_ and _quotographer_ used, but I'm not sure if either of those is "acceptable" in any serious circle. Thoughts?


Origin of "how we/I roll"?

The phrase "that's how we roll" (along with variants) seems to have become increasingly popular in recent years. It appears to draw attention to one's behavior or policies, asserting -- sometimes ironically -- the correctness or importance of them, as in "that's how we do things around here." How old is this usage and where does it come from?


What is the equivalent word for "screening" when referring to recorded sound only?

In other words:                  theater : performance ::             film : screening ::       audio tape : ??      It doesn't happen very often, but in exceptional circumstances there exist audio recordings that are rare and important enough to present on their own. Is "presentation" the most appropriate word to use in this case, or is there one more specific to audio tape?


StackExchange's tag "synonyms" aren't. What should they be called?

StackExchange sites use tags to help users sort, search, group and filter the large volume of questions and answers. Sometimes there are cases where a tag has a common misspelling, or a meaning similar to another more common tag, or describes a (non-useful) subset of the things described by another tag. Because SE wants tags to be as useful as possible, and used as uniformly as possible, it provides a mechanism to automatically turn the less useful of a pair of tags into the more useful of that pair. StackExchange calls these tag pairs _tag synonyms_ and provides a user interface where high-rep users can propose new synonyms for a tag. Here's an example of the current user interface (from the Computer Science StackExchange). > ![StackExchange synonym suggestion UI](http://i.stack.imgur.com/HEqqF.png) Personally, I can't tell whether it has been proposed that _notation_ be used instead of _terminology_ or that _terminology_ be used instead of _notation_. And apparently no-one else can figure it out either, because this user interface is used wrong-way-around about as often as it is used as intended. Part of the problem is with the use of the term _synonym_. A _synonym_ is > a word or phrase that means exactly or nearly the same as another word or > phrase in the same language [Google]. That is, synonymity is an equivalence relation. In particular synonymity is symmetric. Given a pair of tags a and b, "a is a synonym for b" implies "b is a synonym for a." But that's not how StackExchange tag "synonyms" work. The system is supposed to either automatically convert b into a (always) or automatically convert b into a (always). That is, it's a hierarchy. What term(s) should StackExchange be using here? (Just for the record there is apparently another place, in the StackExchange moderator tools, where they use non-symmetric terminology, but it is still not clear which way the replacement is intended. See http://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/142891/fixing-the-sucktastic-merge-ui- for-tags.)


Is this sentence flawed?

I keep trying to make this sentence sound better but I can't figure it out. It's part of an essay I wrote. "We are threatening ourselves by destroying the plants and animals that we have only recently become cognizant of and the great potential that they may hold in curing the illnesses that have threatened us for centuries."


"Has" or "Have" after "Who" in a sentence?

I'm confused about using "has" or "have" after "who". For example:   1. I am a doctor who **have** confusion in using has or Have.   2. I am a engineer who **has** 4 year experience, degree in engineering and is available. Will it vary depending on I or Who?


Should there be a comma after "if X"?

Consider the sentences: >   1. If you agree with that, could you suggest us some references? > >   2. If you agree with that could you suggest us some references? > > Which one is written correctly? Notice the use of "," in (1).


Am I using 'thus' correctly in this paragraph?

I'd like to confirm if the use of 'thus' is correct in the following passage. If it's not, please explain why, and what an alternative would be. > I believe the most important mission of a healthcare provider is to deliver > the most effective and safe medical services to patients. **Thus** it would > be the basic principle that all the strategies and activities of a > healthcare provider should be patient centered.


What is the etymology of "business end"?

What is the origin of the phrase "business end"?


A short noun equivalent to "non-applicability"

I'm looking for a shorter version of the noun "non-applicability" to complete the following triplet. **Truth** is to true as **Falsity** is to false as **X** is to na. What should **X** be? Non-applicability has the correct meaning, but I want to find a shorter but equivalent word. For background, I'm writing a programming library and I have subprograms with names corresponding to the names of the above triplet. However, programmers hate long names so I need to find a shorter version of the last subprogram name. Any suggestions would be appreciated.


What does "USA intellectualism: a mile wide, an inch deep" mean?

I read "USA intellectualism: a mile wide, an inch deep", what's the meaning?


Changing verb tense in a quote after ellipsis

I am using a block quote in my manuscript. The sentence starts off something like this: > Our approach provides a general procedure to deal with this problem by > using... The block quote is a bit long and I'd rather cut it down to: > Our approach [...] uses... but now I've changed the tense of _using_ to _uses_. Is this appropriate? Do I need to make this clear, as in _us[es]_? That looks really bad. What is the preferred way to deal with a change in verb tense created by the use of ellipsis?


Feminine version of "gentleman and a scholar"

Although I've often heard use of the phrase: > You are a gentleman and a scholar I have never heard a version appropriate for the fairer sex. I guess you could say a lady and a scholar?


"Have" vs. "Is" + Verb

The phrases _have expired_ and _is expired_ are in practice more or less identical. Formally, of course, they are different in that the former uses _expired_ as a verb with _have_ as its auxiliary, whereas the latter uses _expired_ as an adjective. Can anyone think of why one might be preferable to another in a written context such as an announcement that _The offer has/is expired_? Ngrams for _is expired,has expired_ seems to indicate "is expired" is more archaic, but is there another reason other than trendiness to prefer one to the other?


What is "petrololine"?

I received an email today, which seems to well and truly have done the rounds. It begins with the following: " _I don't know what you guys are paying for Petrololine_ ", and goes on to mention both Petrol and Petroline (both in title case), in a seemingly interchangeable manner. I have never heard of the word _petrololine_ , and cannot, for the life of me, find anything remotely close to a definition for it online. For the most part, Google just returns links to sites all over the place, in which the monologue (for want of a better word,) has been duplicated. In the course of my browsing, I have seen sites in which _petrololine_ and _petrol_ are listed in the same sentence, in such a way as to indicate that they are entirely separate substances. On the other hand, some sites seem to use _petrololine_ directly in place of _petrol_ , (such as in describing _petrololine_ engines as opposed to diesel ones). Does anyone know what petrololine is, if it bears any difference from run-of- the-mill petrol, and whether or not the word is in fact a trademarked term that _should_ be capitalised in writing?


"Can't" vs. "won't be able to"

Which of the following is grammatically correct? > Even if **___ __ ___** , I probably won't be able to **___ __ ___**. Could it be rephrased this way and still remain grammatically correct? > Even if **___ __ ___** , I probably can't **___ ____**. Is there a difference? How about this? > Even if I find the keys, I probably can't start the car.


Is there a single word which means "a person, and all of his ancestors", or "a person, and all of his descendants"?

There are a lot of words describing ancestral relationships between people, such as:               parent     grandparent     great-grandparent     any of the above can be described as an "ancestor".          child     grandchild     great-grandchild     any of the above can be described as a "descendant".      I am wondering if there are single words (nouns) which describe any of the following concepts:               A person and all of his/her ancestors     A person or any of his/her ancestors     A person and all of his/her descendants     A person or any of his/her descendants      Any ideas?


What is the origin of the expression "close, but no cigar"?

It's a bizarre expression that I've always taken to describe a situation in which one has very nearly achieved their objective. Where do the roots of this expression lie?