Alternative phrase for "Service user"?

I am looking for a phrase to replace the term "Service user". There are two different contexts.   1. Someone receiving services from a mental health trust.   2. Someone who received services in the past, or who is receiving services now, or who will be using services in the near future, and who is offering their expertise to help develop services. Here are some words, and the problems that have been mentioned. For 1: "Patient" - A patient receives medical services. These people receive more than just medical services; they get vocational services and social care and etc. "Service user" - Some people (a few people with drug and alcohol problems for example) do not like the word "user". "Client" - People detained against their will under section of the Mental Health Act say they don't feel like clients. At the moment the term used is "service user". Only a small number of people dislike the word, but their dislike is very strong, so an alternative would be good. For 2: We need a word that highlights the new role; a word that avoids "pigeon holing" people. We'd really like a phrase that puts people on a more equal footing with their employed colleagues. "Service user" - these people might not be service users any more. They are moving forward with their lives, and want to define a more positive role for themselves. Also we'd like to emphasise the expertise that these people bring. "Expert by lived experience" - It's unwieldy. Many people dislike the "lived experience" bit. A few people have said that they do not feel like experts. "Service reporter" - sometimes these people are not reporting their experiences. They're just using their experience to help. For example, as part of an interview panel. "Service consultant" - consultant is problematic in the setting of a hospital. There are actual medical consultants (US equivalent: "Attending Physician"). A small number of people are uncomfortable with the word "consultant". They say it has negative connotations; they say it makes them think of someone getting paid a lot of money for providing little value. I welcome all suggestions. They don't have to be in use anywhere in the world. You can create brand new terms. I'm happy to hear what terms are used in other places too.


Parentheses surrounding footnote body

It's unbelievably hard to find relevant information online, as almost every Google search just gives pages of advice and questions regarding citations and referencing styles. If I use a footnote in place of information I would normally enclose with parentheses, should my footnote body text be enclosed with parentheses? _e.g._ , > The (entirely subject-to-change) plan is to ... If I wanted to move that piece of parenthesis into a footnote for whatever purpose, is the following footnote correct? >   1. (entirely subject-to-change) > If I shouldn't be using the parentheses, then what should that footnote look like?


Meaning of the phrase "to corner the world's pleasures"

So I was baffled when the women at college accused me and my sex of having _cornered the world's pleasures_. I know about the meaning of all of the words in this sentence, but I don't know the expression and I want to know about meaning of "having cornered" in this sentence And I want to know this sentence too: "I realize now how ancient these identities are, how deep the tug they exert on men,the undertow of a thousand generations." These sentences written by Scott Russell Sanders In patterns book lesson (Women and Men)


Popular (slang) adjectives for referring to a corrupt politician?

I'm brazillian and I'm curious to know popular expressions to call corrupt politicians. Here we have the word "ficha suja" which translated would be something like "dirty card". I don't really know if this is the expected kind of question to be made here and if I have any typo/error in this question.


Origin and use of  "in and among itself"

Where does the expression _in and among itself_ come from? Is it only used for emphasis compared to _in itself_? For example, > This would be interesting in and among itself.


"Open" vs. "open up"

Which of the following two variants is correct with reference to some email attachments? >   1. I am unable to **open** them. >   2. I am unable to **open up** them. >


What is a proper response to a joke about visiting dentist at 2:30/tooth hurty?

I advised my client that I would be unavailable on a particular day because I have an appointment with the dentist to remove a tooth. The client responded > What time is the appointment? 2:30? The second before I wrote correct time of my appointment, I realized, that this might be a joke :) How should I respond, if I want to be funny? Is there another "language joke" I can use in the reply?


Are there English equivalents to a Japanese old saying, “Be the mouth of cock rather than remaining as the tail of ox”?

Every time I hear about the success story of entrepreneurs such as IT business, not to mention Apple, Microsoft, and Soft Bank founders, an old Japanese saying, 鶏口となるとも牛後となる勿れ‐“(Choose to) be the mouth of a cock rather than ending up as the tail of an ox,” comes to my mind. I understand this maxim was imported from Chinese saying, “寧為鶏口、勿為牛後 – ning wei ji kou wu nju hou” (If I quote wrong, please correct) which has the exactly same meaning. The mouth of a cock and the tail of an ox are compared to the leader or owner of small company / organization (with a big prospect for growing up as a big company in the end) and just common office workers of big companies. Are there any equivalent English sayings that encourage someone who is ambitious enough to start up his / her own company or challenging new business by spinning out from their old organization?


Are these double negatives? "No it is not. No I don't think so."

Double Negative is generally defined as two negative words in the same CLAUSE. In these examples, "No it is not."and "No I don't think so.", is "No" considered a clause unto itself? ...or is it in the same clause as the rest of the sentence, thus constituting a double negative?


Choice of relative pronouns: 'who' and/or 'that' for people?

_Albert Einstein is a German-born theoretical physicist. He became world- famous for his general theory of relativity._ If you turn these two sentences into one, a main clause + a relative clause, you find yourself with three possible sentences:   1. _Albert Einstein, WHO became world-famous for his general theory of relativity, is a German physicist._   2. _Albert Einstein, WHO is a German-born physicist, became world-famous for his general theory of relativity._   3. _Albert Einstein is the German-born theoretical physicist WHO/THAT became world-famous for his general theory of relativity._ Why is it possible to use both WHO or THAT in sentence 3, but only WHO in sentences 1 & 2?


What preposition is the proper one to follow the noun “hatred”?

What is the proper preposition to follow the noun _hatred_?   1. Do we have a hatred **for** Buddhism?   2. Do we have a hatred **of** Buddhism?   3. Do we have a hatred **against** Buddhism? These are all just examples. It’s not my actual sentence that I wish to form.


What were nightmares called before "nightmare" was used in that sense?

Apparently the word "nightmare" has only been used in the sense of "bad dream" since c. 1829. Before then the term referred to the agent causing the dreams-- a _mare_ < _mera_ , _mære_ 'goblin, incubus'. What word or phrase was used earlier? I'm interested, in particular, in the meaning "bad dream" as opposed to "creature causing bad dreams" or "medical condition; _pavor nocturnus_ ". I'm interested in all time periods: Anglo- Saxon/Old English, Middle English, Early Modern English, and (modern) Modern English. # Progress ## Anglo-Saxon I found _swefnes wóma_ 'sleep-noise' as a possibility. OEME defines this as "dream-tumult, vision", and I can find a few uses in the corpus. Alain Pannetier suggests _wódan dreáme_ , though this seems to have the primary or exclusive sense of "fit of madness". _Dreám/dreáme_ seems to mean 'song, music' rather than 'dream'. ## Middle English The MED has: _dwelsinge_ _drēming/drēm/dream/dremme_ : Apparently not attested with the meaning "dream" but more like "vision" (in sleep); included nightmare-type visions or dreams. _night frai/night drede_ 'night fear' _incubus_ : Alain Pannetier suggests this was used from the 18th century on, though this suggests (to me) the agency rather than the condition. It seems to have been used as far back as 1561 in the sense of "night terror", not quite the sense I hoped for. _slēp_ : Typically meaning "sleep" but also meaning "dream, nightmare". _bicche doughter_ : Apparently used to refer to a nightmare by at least one source. The modern reflex is obvious, and suggests that this was never its primary meaning. _Ephialtes/ephialtes the more_ : oosterwal suggests the former and the dictionary mentions the latter. Seems to primarily refer to the cause rather than the condition. ## Modern English Rhodri suggests _ill dreams_ for mid-19th century. Of course from the early 19th century on _nightmare_ became common and soon pushed all others out of use except for poetic.


Use "to" or not?

Which sentence is correct? > I can't get my toolbox open.   >  I can't get my toolbox to open. Are they both correct?


Repeating phrases like "There are questions after questions after…"

What is the correct way of punctuating repeating phrases in a sentence? Are commas and semicolons required? Example: **"There are questions after questions after questions after questions on page after page."** BTW, let's assume the extra repetitions are necessary.


Open/switch on the air-conditioner when we are home. Which is correct? Open or Switch on?


The jean button was dropdowned, I have to go to tailor shop to replace the jean button

In the sentence: > The jean button was dropdowned, I have to go to tailor shop to replace the > jean button. Do we use _replace_ or _fix_ that jean button?


Why and how did "a sensible boy" become "intelligent and prudent"?

Italians often get confused by _sensible_ and _sensitive_. If I tell them > He's a sensible boy; he studies hard, saves his money, and plans ahead. They are quite bewildered. To them, _sensible_ is indistinguishable from the Italian _"sensibile"_ which means impressionable, easily moved to tears and sentimental.   È un ragazzo sensibile = He's a sensitive boy/young man Online Etymology Dictionary states that originally, _sensible_ meant > late 14c., " **capable of sensation or feeling** ;" also "capable of being > sensed or felt, perceptible to the senses," hence "easily understood; > logical, reasonable," from Late Latin sensibilis " **having feeling, > perceptible by the senses** ," from sensus, past participle of sentire > "perceive, feel" Then sometime in the early 15th century, the meaning of _sensible_ evolved to: > "having good sense, capable of reasoning, discerning, clever," mid-15c. Of > clothes, shoes, etc., "practical rather than fashionable" it is attested > from 1855. Meanwhile the word, _sensitive_ with its more modern interpretation (as far as I could tell) has origins in the early 19th century OED > Meaning "easily affected" (with reference to mental feelings) first recorded > 1816; meaning "having intense physical sensation" is from 1849. Why this shift, when the original Latin term, sensibilis, and consequently _sensible_ , could have continued meaning "capable of sensation and feeling" and "to perceive" i.e., _to achieve understanding of; apprehend_. What happened in the 15th century that _wise, common sense_ and _sound judgement_ replaced the original meaning of _sensible_? I am bored of telling Italian students and friends that _sensible_ is a false friend. Is there a better explanation?   Or am I to suppose that it is William Shakespeare's fault (or merit) again?!


If I didn't know any better (grammar)

For example: "If I didn't know any better, I'd say you were having a good time" This is apparent by the context that the person is having a great time, but why say **If I didn't know any better**?


What do you call a single "shot" or "explosion" in a firework?

I am organizing a support event for a firework display. If someone buys a 2000円 ticket, it will pay for another "firework unit" being launched in the sky. In Japanese we say "一発", but is there an equivalent word in English?


What is the meaning of "does is"?

I have read this sentence and can not get "does is" meaning. Which type of grammar is it? > Couchsurfing is a fairly new website, and what it does is it allows > travelers from different parts of the world to meet people in the > destinations they're going to. People offer a couch in their home or perhaps > space on their floor, and in return you're expected in your own hometown to > offer the same kind of things to people who might visit you.


Terminology for the levels user programs go through to access hardware

I'm looking for the terminology to describe the stack between user level programs and the hardware. For example, in a typical non-virtualized environment, this stack is:               User program <-> Application Binary Interface <-> Operating System <-> Hardware      User level programs access the system calls through the ABI, and the OS executes the operation on the hardware on behalf of the program. In the other direction, data coming from the hardware is given to the OS, which passes it up to the program. The terminology I've been using up to this point is application stack, but this term means something different.


What is another term for left-minded people?

I want to address people who are mathematical, logical and analytic; _left- minded_ , let's say. But I find the left- vs right-minded theory trendy and biased (just the opposite of the people I'm trying to address). My phrase goes something like: "This course is focused on left-minded individuals...". Any help would be appreciated.


What is the etymology of “business” and “busyness”?

Did the word _business_ originally mean “the condition of being busy” as the word _busyness_ currently means? Why did it change? It was surely a very useful word, since the awkwardly-spelt word _busyness_ has had to be created to take its place. I think I’m right in saying the _i-ness_ construction is favoured above the _y-ness_ construction in all other similar words – e.g. _happiness_ , _friendliness_ , _haziness_ , _merriness_. What really confuses is me is this: _Busyness_ means **now** what _business_ meant **then**. Why change an existing word, then create a similar one which means what the old one did? Why not just create a new word? I suspect there’s a story there, and I wonder what it is.


"Instable" or "unstable"?

From my experience, it seems that although _unstable_ is more commonly used, _instable_ is often preferred in engineering and scientific contexts, e.g. "aircraft instability", "instable algorithm". Are there any differences in the implied meaning of the two terms? Should _unstable_ be preferred?


What is the meaning of "Dick" when it is a person's name?

Some people are named "Dick". What does "Dick" mean when it is a name?


Can we say “front of spring” or merely “beginning of spring”?

In an answer to a Writers SE question, I used the phrase “a bright morning at the front of spring”. John M. Landsberg commented: > Nice revision, but note we wouldn't say "the front" of a season. In poetry, > you _might_ make it work, but never in prose. Seasons have temporal length, > not physical substance, and they also come and go, so you can say the > beginning of spring, the onset of spring, the arrival of spring, and more, > but never the front. Is it true one can never say “the front” of a season in prose? And is there historical precedent (in the way of grammar dicta) for not applying _front_ to ethereal or ephemeral things?


New Yorker Dieresis Rule; prosaic, unionized?

There are lots of informal references to the traditional / "New Yorker" style of using diereses to disambiguate runs of vowels, however I have yet to find a definitive guide. See, for example:   * http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/culture/2012/04/the-curse-of-the-diaeresis.html   * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diaeresis_(diacritic)   * What is the standard rule for using or not using hyphen and diaeresis on the words like reelect , reexamine, and cooperate? My major question is: Is there a definitive reference that one can consult for proper traditional use of the dieresis in English? The accepted answer in last link above outlines some cases (e.g., no dieresis in "coalesce" or "react") but notably does not provide a reference to an authoritative source. My minor questions are:   * Is it appropriate to use a dieresis in "prosaïc?"   * How does one most correctly differentiate the two words spelled "unionized" ("union-ized" about the formation of a group or "un-ionized" about how many free electrons a material has)? Assume for a moment that you have to write both within the same document.


Another word for cute or adorable used as diminutive, sarcasm or condescension

I'm looking for a word that one could use by itself as one would use "cute" or "adorable" in a sarcastic, emasculating manner.


Term or phrase (bygone era) where doodles were part and parcel to writing

I read something a while back talking about this. It was a term or phrase I had to lookup; and it was available via Google-Bing, but not “predominant” - not a universal thing. Not exactly back in the times of the monks: writing flamboyant first characters that take up perhaps 5% of the page (and perhaps 80% of the artistic effort), but I don't think it precludes that. The context of what I read was more along the lines of turn of the century efforts; perhaps some kind of art nouveau fad. Flowery flourishes. Itself perhaps an echo of 18th century penmanship – calligraphy++. When a letter to someone was more than just text; and more than the craftsmanship of excellent handwriting. I think of it like putting a big squiggle under a paragraph (elongated sideways “S”) with two lines through the middle like a dollar sign. That is a minor instantiation of what I'm talking about. The term captures that and much more. Occasionally you'll see examples online, where the author will have an obscure dingbat glyph at the bottom that kind of captures the thing.


Does the use of "port" for one side of ship relate to the word "port" meaning harbour?

In this travel.se question, the words port and starboard are mentioned, and one answer says: > I would say it is convention that ships dock such that the Port is on the > left, from which the term for the side gets its name ("The side of where the > Port is"). That never occurred to me before. Is there any basis to it?


Is the sentence "we grew warmer and warmer" grammatical?

I did a Google search on the the sentence, "We grew warmer and warmer," and it only came up with a few hits, not even one page worth. So is this grammatically incorrect? Is there a better way to put this?


what is the meaning of,Are you done?

If someone is about to finish his or her lunch, and we want to know, can we ask him or her: > Are you done?


When using complete sentences in parenthetical e.g. or i.e. situations, should the first word be capitalized?

In a bulleted list of very technical sentences, where each bulleted item has one or two parenthetical examples or restatements which are complete sentences, should the first letter of each e.g. or i.e. sentence be capitalized or not? Example:   * Here is my technical sentence. (e.g., **S** hould the word of this example be capitalized like this?)   * Here is another technical sentence. (i.e., **t** his really isn't an i.e., I just want to know if the first word should or should not be capitalized and am providing an example of yes and no.)  I originally posted this on English Language & Usage http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/37153/when-using-complete- sentences-in-parenthetical-e-g-or-i-e-situations-should-th/37154#37154 and in discussion with @simchona the analogy of semicolon punctuation came up. Here are the corresponding examples:   * "As we discussed, you will bring two items; a sleeping bag and a tent are not optional." - No doubt, the "a" in "... a sleeping..." should be lowercase.    * "As we discussed, you will bring two items. A sleeping bag and a tent are not optional." - No doubt, the "A" in "A sleeping ..." should be capitalized.    * "As we discussed, you will bring two items (i.e., a sleeping bag and a tent are not optional)." - no doubt, the "a" after the "i.e.," is lower case.    * "As we discussed, you will bring two items. (i.e., A/a sleeping bag and a tent are not optional)." - Now the sentence in parenthesis is standing alone, i.e., it's not embedded in the bulleted sentence.  Should the parenthetical in this example start with "(i.e., a sleeping ...) OR "(i.e., A sleeping ...)"?


Should sentences like "I wonder..." end with a question mark?

This may be related to a general grammar rule, but which of these is correct? > I wonder if Steve Jobs will be giving the keynote speech at WWDC this year? or > I wonder if Steve Jobs will be giving the keynote speech at WWDC this year. My hunch tells me the question mark is incorrect, but I find myself instinctively wanting to add it. Is there a rule about this type of situation?


Where does "Going out on a limb" come from?

I know that the phrase, "I'm going out on a limb here" means either to take a risk or hazard a guess, but where does it come from? As in, what did it originally refer to before it became an idiom?


R is the dog’s letter

Wikipedia: > The letter R is sometimes referred to as the _littera canina_ (canine > letter). This phrase has Latin origins: the Latin R was trilled to sound > like a growling dog. A good example of a trilling R is the Spanish word for > dog, _perro_. > > In William Shakespeare’s _Romeo and Juliet_ , such a reference is made by > Juliet’s nurse in Act 2, scene 4, when she calls the letter R “the dog’s > name.” The reference is also found in Ben Jonson’s _English Grammar_. Do you know other letters in the English alphabet that have a nickname besides ICAO phonetic/spelling alphabet?


What does ‘tame’ mean in ‘tame scandal’ and ‘tame squabble’ on golf course?

In association with my question about the names of foods that have a risk of turning into an offensive remark, there was the following statement in New Yorker’s (May 25) article titled “Sergio Garcia and the lifespan of an offensive remark”: > “That decidedly **tame scandal** was fanned for a while by reporters, who > kept asking the two about each other, and writing down the barely barbed > things they said. “He’s not the nicest guy on tour, said Sergio of Woods. > “Not real surprising that he’s complaining about something,” Tiger said of > Sergio. Even for golf, this squabble seemed **tame**.” I’m not familiar with the usage of the word, ‘tame’ other than the implication of docility as defined by Cambridge English Dictionary: Adjective. (especially of animals) not wild or dangerous, either naturally or because of training or long involvement with humans: While OED gives a wider scope of definition of ‘tame’ as an adjective than Cambridge Dictionary does:   1. (of an animal) not dangerous or frightened of people, domesticated.   2. informal (of a person) willing to cooperate.   3. (derogatory) not exciting, adventurous, or controversial.   4. North American (of a plant) produced by cultivation. With that said, questions, (1) What does ‘tame’ in the quoted sentence (tame scandal / tame quibble) mean? How can it be rephrased? (2) If it means an “unexciting / uncontroversial” trivial matter as defined in 3. of OED definition, why the press made a fuss? Why had Garcia to apologize to Woods and public? (3) Is this usage of the word, ‘tame’ in the sense of “not exciting / unworthy of note / trifling” as prevailing as the meaning of ‘not wild’ and ‘docile’ only to which I’m accustomed?


Why the Simple-Present "closes" in "thousands will see the exhibit by the time it closes"?

Consider the sentence: > Thousands of people _will see_ the art exhibit by the time it _closes_. The first part of this sentence is in Future Simple, which seems correct as it is something to be completed in the future. But I wonder how to explain the "closes" at the end of sentence.


Preposition IN Vs Preposition ON when writing by an electronic device

It is not clear to me, when to use IN and when to use ON in sentences such as: _"Keep it organized on your computer or in a notebook."_ What about if the gadget selected to write were a Laptop/Palm/Cell-phone/Tablet? Bye.


Questions "for chapter" or "to chapter"?

I always have a hard time in these cases: to choose **for** or **to**. Suppose I want to make a list of questions and as a headline I would like to name it something like: Questions for chapter 2. Is that correct? I think it sounds correct but the following I am less certain about. Is the following sentence correct: _"If you keep on reading, you will find the questions to chapter 2 in the book"_. I could use the longer version: _"If you keep on reading, you will find the questions related to chapter 2 in the book"_. Which I am almost certain is correct with respect to _to_ and _for_. But I would like to write as short as possible, please help me out.


Substitution of adverb by another "equivalent" word?

In the sentence: _Her voice sounds beautiful. She sang the song exactly as it was written. We heard it perfectly._ Isn't it feasible to substitute the last word by "perfect"? In Spanish both ways are valid but sounds better the second option. Even more, I feel that the second/third sentence can be deleted without grammatical ambiguity. Bye.


Question about a sentence in OWL Exercises

About the Exercise: Adjective or Adverb Exercise 1: #3 _They proved to be perfectly exact measurements_...   Isn't this an impossible fact; consequently a incorrect sentence otherwise what is supposed to be according to OWL?


Have or Hold Open House

Could you guys tell me which one is correct?   1. We are having an open house.   2. We are holding an open house?


Can I say "medium-term", as with the adjectives "short-term" and "long-term"? Do they need prepositions?

I would like to use an adjective to express something in between the two adjectives _short-term_ and _long-term_. Does _medium-term_ make sense here? What is the adjective I can use? What preposition, if any, do I use in a sentence with any one of these three adjectives? For example: > She told me the consequences are ___ long-term. (in a / in / at / ??? )


What would you call someone who is there if you need him but who is not imposing?

I am sitting in a restaurant and the waiter is available for me if I call him. He is there but not imposing. In a high end restaurant, the waiter would be serving while maintaining the quietness and comfort of the restaurant's atmosphere. What would be an appropriate adjective to describe the waiter?


Are there different noun forms of 'complex' and 'complicated?'

There are subtle differences between _complex_ and _complicated._ As far as I can tell, though, they both merge into one noun form: _complexity._ Merriam-Webster has an entry for _complicatedness,_ but that sounds outright contrived. Are there any better words for this?


How do I ask a question politely?

When I was growing up, if I ever said something similar to "Can I go to the store with Joe?", my mom would correct me with "May I go to the store with Joe?". Is "May I?" the typical way to ask a question politely or is this just specific to where I grew up or what my mom learned?


"Punctuality is the politeness of kings."

Can someone please explain the meaning of: > Punctuality is the politeness of kings.


Dialectal and historical usage of "not care" in the meaning of "not mind"

In standard Present-day English, "I don't care to be there" means the same as "I don't wish to be there." Apparently, this is not the case in some present and historical dialects. Wylene P. Dial writes in _The Dialect of The Appalachian People_ (1969): > One of the most baffling expressions our people use (baffling to > "furriners," at least) is "I don't care to. . . ." To outlanders this seems > to mean a definite "no," whereas in truth it actually means, "thank you so > much, I'd love to." One is forevermore hearing a tale of mutual bewilderment > in which a gentleman driving an out-of-state car sees a young fellow > standing alongside the road, thumbing. When the gentleman stops and asks if > he wants a lift, the boy very properly replies, "I don't keer to," using > care in the Elizabethan sense of the word. On hearing this, the man drives > off considerably puzzled leaving an equally baffled young man behind. I've been able to find some voices on the internet confirming that this usage is still present. However, I haven't found any example the Elizabethan usage. I'm wondering how widespread it was then, and whether the two opposing meanings ever co-existed on equal rights. I've found some Scottish sentences from the beginning of the 19th century in Wright's _English Dialect Dictionary_. > CARE > > With the negative: to make no objection. > > **Sc.** Even Irish Teague ayont Belfast Wadna care to spear about   >  her, SKINNER _Misc. Poems_ (1809) 159; I see you've read my hame-   >  spun lays And wadna care to soun' my praise, COCK _Strains_ (1810)   >  85; I dinna care to gang wi' you a bit. He wadna [hae] cared   >  to hae strucken me (JAM.). However, under "AT-OWER", there's this: > **Sc.** An' mair attour, I didna care to bachle my new sheen, FORBES _Jrn._ > (1742) 16 "Bachle" means _wear down_ and "sheen" are shoes, so I believe it's the standard modern meaning of "care to" employed here. My questions/requests are:   1. Could you give me some examples of this strange usage in Elizabethan English, preferably not Scottish, since I'm already pretty sure Scots used to employ it?   2. Did the two opposing meaning ever co-exist in any area?    3. How did it happen exactly that the two opposing meaning arose? It's not counter-intuitive to me, but I'm having trouble putting my intuition into words.    4. If you have something interesting to say about this matter that I didn't ask about, please do.


Is there a phrase in English that means an apology for banality?

In Russian there is a phrase that literally means "sorry for triviality (banality)". It is used when a person wants to say something very simple and common like "everyone is mortal" or "love is the cure", etc. Is there something like that in English and if it is, how often do people use it?


Use of “ever” in non-negated sentence

Is the sentence grammatically correct: > I do recall ever seeing my mother in the light of day.


Has the word “Birtherism” gotten the currency or ‘citizenship’ as the received English?

I found the article titled “Birtherism isn’t dead” in today’s Washington Post. It begins with the following sentence: “Discussion of President Obama’s place of birth died down significantly when he released his long-form birth certificate. But birtherism still lives, even if it no longer gets as much attention.” Although Wikipedia gives definition of ‘birtherism,” none of reputed dictionaries such as Oxford, Cambridge, and Merriam-Webster carries this word. Google NGram neither shows the record of incidence. As a non-native English speaker, I feel the word, “Birtherism” is somewhat awkward by its construction, just like saying “Motherism,” “Midwifeism,” “Birthplaceism.” and “Originism.” Is “Birtherism” well-received English word, particularly in America? If not, why it is shown in the newspaper without quotation marks or any sign that shows the word is recently coined or has a special meaning.


What does "as good as any out there" mean?

I don't how to interpret the following sentence: > "Her research seems about as good as any out there." What does that mean? Is 'her research' just average, better than average or the best ever seen?


What's the verb for making that "pffft" sound?

I have a dialogue like this: > "All I wanted to do was to keep a low profile" > > "Pffft. That worked well, we not only have the entire police force but also > the entire mafia chasing us" I don't want to have the "pffft" written out in dialogue, so I'm looking for a verb to replace it with. "Making a sigh of disapproval" seems to be a good description, but just doesn't have the same impact. Is there a good verb for this? **Edit:** To clarify, the intended emotion is a mixture of sarcasm, disapproval, annoyance and resignation. It doesn't have to exactly be equal to "pffft", but it needs to convey the same meaning, with the same strong impact.


What is the difference between an Emir and a Sultan? Are they both Sheik? For instance, OALD defines: > Emir: the title given to some Muslim rulers > > Emirate: an area of land that is ruled over by an emir > > Sultan: the title given to Muslim rulers in some countries > > Sultanate: an area of land that is ruled over by a sultan While OAAD defines (there is no entry for Sheik on OALD, why?): > Sheik:   >  1 an Arab prince or leader; the head of an Arab family, town, etc. / 2 a > leader in a Muslim community or organization Could we say that "Emperor":"King"="Emir":"Sultan"?


Is it redundant to say that something is "clearly evident"?

Here's a sentence: "The volume of resources invested is clearly evident." Is this redundant?


What is the “‑cide” word for killing one’s husband?

We have _uxoricide_ for killing one’s wife, but what is the equivalent term for killing one’s husband? Similarly, what is the husband-specific equivalent for the adjective _uxorial_?


dissimulate vs dissemble

I've compared these words in a few contexts; there is a difference between them, but I can't make it explicit. What do you think it is, or know it to be? ( _I know these words are very close, and in actual use it might not matter. I'm asking to satisfy my own curiosity._ ) **Dissimulation** From Wikipedia: > Dissimulation is a form of deception in which one conceals the truth. > Dissimulation differs from simulation, in which one exhibits false > information. "Dissimulation, in the negative; when a man lets fall signs and > arguments, that he is not, that he is... Simulation, in the affirmative; > when a man industriously and expressly feigns and pretends to be, that he is > not." In the animal kingdom a predator giving the impression that it is > harmless is an example of dissimulation, such as the leaf fish. An animal > that is typically prey giving the impression that it is dangerous is an > example of simulation, such as the frill-necked lizard. Definition from AHD. > To disguise (one's intentions, for example) under a feigned appearance. See > Synonyms at From Vocabulary.com > The noun dissimulation describes the act of faking your true feelings. Your > dissimulation of happiness might fool strangers but your close friends can > tell it's all an act. The word dissimulation implies that the wool is being > pulled over someone's eyes, or they're being fooled or tricked by someone's > deceit. The origin of dissimulation is the Latin dissimulationem, which > means "a disguising or concealment." Don't confuse dissimulation with > dissimilation, which describes the act of making something different or less > similar. In context: >   * In war, practice dissimulation, and you will succeed. >   * I lack the cunning and the dissimulation,” she says, “necessary for a > normal affair. >   * Uncertainty, fear, dissimulation and layerings of identity permeate the > novel. > Wordnet: says dissimulation is a type of _falsification_ and a type of _misrepresentation_ **Dissemble** From AHD > 1) To disguise or conceal behind a false appearance. > > 2) To make a false show of; feign > > 1) To disguise or conceal one's real nature, motives, or feelings behind a > false appearance. From Vocabulary.com > To dissemble is to hide under a false appearance, to deceive. "When > confronted about their human rights record, the Chinese government typically > dissembles." Dissemble is a little more complicated than a straight lie or > denial. When you dissemble, you disguise your true intentions or feelings > behind a false appearance. To dissemble is to pretend that you don't know > something, to pretend that you think one way when you act another way. "My > boyfriend was dissembling the whole time. He was a married father of two." In Context >   * Or, worse, he’s giving them the idea that it’s OK to dissemble this way > with your own kids. >   * Why is the government trying so hard to muddy and dissemble even this > modest data? >   * Senna painted himself as the wronged man, but in seeking to justify the > crash he dissembled. -He didn't dissemble; the gist was "we do because we > can". > Wordnet says dissemble is a type of _belie_ and a type of _misrepresent_.


What does "frost your pickle" mean and where did it come from?

I hear my mom say this all time: > Well doesn't that just frost your pickle? I usually laugh because it sounds funny, but honestly I have no idea what it's really supposed to mean, in the sense that I don't really understand why "frost your pickle" makes sense as a phrase. She uses it to express a feeling of annoyance (I guess). Can anyone identify the history/origin of this phrase? Why is the phrase used in this way?


Does “I have studied Russian language” continued by “I have learnt…” use a correct tense?

Does “I have studied Russian language” continued by “I have learnt …” use a correct tense? With the meaning that I studied Russian language in the past, for 3 years, but I’m not studying it anymore and continuing the complex sentence with the same tense. What tense should I use?


Is "a future musician" grammatical?

I want to become a musician in the future. Is it correct to say > I am a future musician. I want to put it in my bio for Twitter. Are there any other better phrases?


Is this a portmanteau, contraction, or perhaps both?

**I have chosen to edit this post because it apparently has offended some of the more sensitive among us.** While, personally, I feel this should prompt discourse rather than down votes, I do not wish to offend people who unwittingly stumble upon this question. I was contemplating a word that is a contraction of two words. Click here if you wish to know the word in question - but be warned it is mildly offensive to some.. (Try as I might, I cannot think of a non-vulgar example that blurs the line so effectively. See further for details.) This word does not use an apostrophe to denote its contraction. Rather it has borrowed the morphology of half of each word to make a new whole. The new whole, however, has a bit of synergy that the words themselves convey but perhaps not to the same degree. (Thanks to Bradd Szonye for helping me phrase that properly.) Is this strictly a portmanteau as is suggested in the linked definition above? My question is: Would a word like this be considered a portmanteau or a contraction? Or perhaps both? Does the synergy of meaning make it a portmanteau, or does the ability of both words standing alone to convey similar meaning make it a mere contraction?


Emails with Attachments

I'm wondering what is the best way to express that an email contains more than one attachment. Would saying "Please find the attached (name of document). Our (name of document) is also attached." be proper?


Word for "growing in intelligence"

I'm looking for a word whose definition is something along the lines of "growing in intelligence". I'm trying to use it in a sentence like "the people are getting smarter and smarter throughout the years".


Abbreviation of words only in 3 letters!

Is there a Document or Dictionary to shows words in short form? (in 3 letters) for example Abbreviation of Ireland is: IRL I have to write some words (like computer/internet/technology/...) just in three letters.. Is there a rule to do this?


'Monthly' and 'annual' as descriptors

When I am describing a service that is billed for once a month I write, "This is a monthly service." When describing a service that is billed for once a year I use, "This is an annual service." Why would using "This is an annually service." sound incorrect? It's as if 'monthly service' is used as shorthand for 'monthly billed service', and 'annual service' is used as shorthand for 'annually billed service'. Is my problem that 'monthly' is used incorrectly in the first case?


What's the most appropriate preposition to use with the word "status"?

Say I have application that tracks TODO items; each TODO item has a status, e.g. "Not Started", "In Progress", "Completed", etc. Which phrasing is the most appropriate to display in the application?   1. You have 5 items _in_ status "Not Started"   2. You have 5 items _with_ status "Not Started"   3. You have 5 items _of_ status "Not Started" I prefer #1. My rationale is that, I consider "status" to be synonymous with "state," and things reside _in_ a state rather than possess a state. But I am open to persuasion otherwise.


Looking for a word the describes a common belief is often not the case

What word describes the concept of how what is generally held as to be true, is in fact false (at least most of the time). I think a fictional story illustrates an example the best: Tinkerbell lives in Never Land. Tinkerbell got lucky and secured a job as a fairy. Everyone knows being a fairy is the best job that exists in Never Land. However, after becoming a fairy, Tinkerbell learns that most fairies find the job terrible and it is actually really unenjoyable being a fairy. Another example (completely made up): Most people assume Olympic Athletes are fit, but in turns out this is untrue as a great deal of the time and to compete in the Olympics is determined more by connections than athletic ability.


"Man" vs. "guy" vs. "boy"

I am about 19 year old and go to college. Often I have to refer to myself in an introduction. What shall I call myself? 'Man' seems too old, 'boy' seems too young and 'guy' seems too informal. What shall I call myself? **Update:** as a comment suggested, and I felt too, an example is needed. This is actually quite general. I want to use it, for example, in a blog, during conversations, or maybe in an interview. I am just looking for the most appealing noun.


What is the origin of the word "whitewash" in the context of sports?

The term _whitewash_ is used in sports to describe a situation where the opponents are beaten in a series of matches failing to register a single win. Merriam-Webster defines it as :- > to hold (an opponent) scoreless in a game or contest What is the history of the word when used in sports? Is there some racist undertone to the term?


Primary association of "to make out"

I am about to write an article about the German verb "ausmachen", which looking at the parts, looks awfully close to "make out". I did some reading on Merriam Webster and Wiktionary only to find that what I thought to be a sexual term only, actually had and still has a different meaning (to discern and others). I did not know that and I doubt that many non natives are aware of that. Now I am wondering as to whether the actual connotation of "make out", that is the original non-sexual one, comes to the mind of a native speaker when he or she hears "to make out". I know that in context it will be clear. But what about the pure infinitive... do people have to think to get the non-sexual meaning or is it present immediately?


What's the difference between "waste time" and "pass time"?

In this sentence" If reading is to accomplish anything more than___time, it must be active. "Should I fill in "wasting" or "passing"? Thank you!


Why should sentences not start with "there is" or "there are"?

I had written a paper with the sentence "There is also social proof in how the man with the pizza ends up with an attractive women". I had lost marks due to the fact it is poor English to start sentences with "There is" or "There are". I want to double check this is true because the prof actually is not fluent in English herself. If it true, how can such sentences be reworded? I know many things in English (and in life) aren't necessarily wrong but should be avoided. Is it that starting a sentence with "There is" is proper grammar but does not usually appear in academic writing? I found notes with the explanation as to why she thinks this is bad: > (Almost) never begin a sentence with “It is...” or “There is/are...” These > are examples of unnecessary verbiage. The exception is when the “it” > actually refers to something, as in “This paper is an A+. It follows all the > suggestions on this page.” What is meant by when "it refers to something"? EDIT: I personally don't see the need to quote the exact sentence as it is just an example, but I see some are getting quite worked up over the entire sentence in general.


How to pronounce “arch” in Linuxese?

_Tech_ stands for _technique_ or _technology_. But how should one pronounce _tech_? Is it as /tɛk/ as in _technical_ or /tɛtʃ/ as in _tetchy_? Similarly, _arch_ stands for _architect_ or _architecture_. How do you pronounce _arch_? Is it the same way you do when you say the _Golden Arches_ , or it it as in _archangel_ with a /k/ sound?


How do you capitalize "spam"?

Is it legitimate to put "spam" (the junk email kind, not the trademarked meat) in all caps? An example I've recently read is > Please read before flagging as SPAM (a reminder from your moderators) – ends > Sep 5


How best to use the phrase “on the whole”?

Is the phrase _on the whole_ used correctly in the following sentence? > The information, on the whole, was inaccurate. If not, what other ways are there to express it?


Mixed conditional clause type 1-3

I came across the following conditional clause while studying a grammar book published by Oxford: "If you know London so well, you shouldn't have got so hopelessly lost." The writer of the book has only briefly mentioned that this is a mixed conditional clause (type 1-3) without giving any further explanation in what situation it can be used. I'm already familiar with two other types of mixed conditional clauses (type 2-3 and type 3-2) and have no problem understanding them but this one is causing me some trouble. I need your help. Thanks.


What do you call an item that appeals to a human urge but is unnatural?

I've heard this term before, let me provide a context. > Chocolate cake is **___ __ ___ __**, it is more sweet than anything that > occurs in nature and humans are drawn to it naturally because of a desire to > have their taste buds stimulated in such a fashion. It's not merely _supernatural_ which has a connotation of being non-existent, like God.


What does the phrase "a fine one" mean in this context?

In one one Daniil Kharms' short stories, Tikakeyev “insults” Koratygin by saying: > A fine one you are! This causes a fight between the two. When I first read this, I didn't see the “insult”, unless it's sheer irony, I still don't see it. Kharms, as you may know, is a bit “special”, to say the least, and it's possible that a compliment may also cause a fight in his stories. Does this phrase have a insulting meanin in this context? I need an explanation for the fight :) Full text of the story appears at shops.htm in the Kharms story directory on sevaj.dk website.


Are these examples of personification?

I have two sentences that I think use personification: > You find your voice by **feeding your mind** with your passions. and > This apathetic culture that we live in is **silencing** our voices. Am I correct about the use of personification here?


Can I call my close friends "Old Sport" nowadays?

I wonder, can I call my close friends "Old Sport" nowadays? What about my close female friends?


"Which stage is most desirable?" or "Which stage is the most desirable?"

Which sentence is correct? Should I put "the" before "most"?


Word that means "the front side of a person"?

For example, to be used in a sentence like this: > He always found it easier to recall his girlfriend's back rather than her > [...].


Is *-scule* in *minuscule* a suffix?

Is _-scule_ in _minuscule_ a suffix? What does it mean? _scale_? (I have looked it up in etymonline and didn't find the answer)


I want to break the habit of "here's the thing"

What are some alternatives to this overused phrase? Examples of use: Person A: What's going on? Why did Person B do that? Person C: Ummm... can we go somewhere more private? A & C go to the corner Person C: Here's the thing, Person B and Person D have a lot of personal history... Person A: Why can't we just hire someone to do that one task? It's such a waste of time having five people rotating on that task every week. Person B: Yeah, I hear ya. Those five workers have brought that up too. But here's the thing: management believes it's fine the way it is and it's not worth hiring a person solely for that task.


Is there a name for this reading habit?

Someone was asking for advice about reading only half of the letters in a word. Is there a name for it? Example would be...instead of reading "I won't go there with her" you read "I won go here wit he".


Is there a word that combines the meanings of "not practical" and "not useful"?

For some particular treatment, in a specialized topic, I wanted to say that it's not practical as well as not useful. Is there just one word for that?


Usage of "our" in sentences where we skip that/which are

> We check our Facebook three times on the way to work on our smartphones more > powerful than your computer. Is this sentence correct? It sounds much better if we remove the _our_ before _smartphones_ but since: > We check our Facebook three times on the way to work on big smartphones more > powerful than your computer. Is correct why should the original be wrong? If it is wrong, what is it about _our_ that makes it wrong?


Too many "and"s? Is it grammatically correct?

A friend of mine (a non-native speaker of English) has asked me to check her CV and I'm afraid / ashamed to say, I'm having trouble. Are there too many "and"s in the given sentence? It seems OK to me, but I've always heard we shouldn't use so many in one sentence. Here it is: > I help individuals, schools and organisations to provide special needs care, > care training and home audits by providing training classes, carer > evaluations and other care-based educational services. There are many sentences that look similar. Again, they all look OK to me, but this is at odds with what I learned in school. All I could find on the subject was the "Oxford comma", which doesn't seem to be the problem here. They tend to follow this pattern: I work with x, y and z to provide x, y and z.


Has "Kinki" become less common than "Kansai" because of the word "kinky"?

According to Google NGram, "Kinki" and "Kansai" (which are pretty synonymous) used to be roughly equally common, but Kansai is now more common. Is this difference statistically different? And if so, what contributed to it? Could the word "kinky" have contributed to it? Google NGram doesn't indicate a spectacular rise for the word, but that could be because it didn't use to be used in a sexual sense, whereas that meaning has become more common over time - I don't know how to measure that though. The other explanation I can think of is that Japanese people use "Kinki" less nowadays, and that the relative use of "Kinki" versus "Kansai" has spilled over into English.


Grammatically incorrect sentence?

I just appeared for GATE 2013. In its aptitude section, I was totally confused. The question was to identify the grammatically incorrect sentence. The sentences were:                1. He is of Asian origin.      2. They belonged to Africa.      3. She is an European.      4. They migrated from India to Australia.      According to me (3) and (4) are correct but I am confused whether 1st is incorrect or 2nd. Please clarify if we can use _"belonged to"_ in this regard ( _belong to a country_ ). Moreover, the first sentence is even more doubtful, as we generally say > He is Asian. It already means that his origin is Asia. So please, tell me which is the incorrect sentence and why?


Is it acceptable to use "especially" at the beginning of a sentence?

Whenever I see a sentence starting with "especially," I always get the impression that this is not grammatically correct. From example: > The high water-salt ratio will not be good for you. Especially if you are > dehydrated. I feel like the two sentences should be united with punctuation, not divided. Am I mistaken?


Best way to combine two sentences

David studied for his math exam for several hours David received the highest grade in his class. I would rephrase like this: Receiving the highest grade in his math class, David had studied for his exam for several hours. But this sounds wrong to me, somehow?? People could think the two thing happened all at once?   1. David studied for his math exam and David received the highest grade in class   2. After studying for his math exam for several hrs, David received the highest grade. Now, which one of these 3 sentences separates the two things by the right amount of time?


An antonym for "daylight"

Considering that:   * The antonym of _day_ is _night_.   * The antonym of _light_ can be either _darkness_ or _obscurity_. Is there any exact antonym for _daylight_ , a word that would mean " _the darkness of the night_ ", the same way _daylight_ means " _the light of day_ "? I would use _darkness_ in a conversation, but _darkness_ is not necessarily associated with the _night_ : it could be used to describe a dark room even when it's sunny outside. However, _daylight_ cannot be used to describe a room lightened by a light bulb when it's dark outside. _Edit :_ I do not specifically look for a word recognised by a dictionary. A neologism used by a published author, and a culture reference would also be interesting. _Edit 2 :_ From tchrist's answer, it is now clear that no single-word expression exists for the concept I'm talking about (which is why I accepted the answer). However, _moonshine_ , _moonlight_ cannot match correctly since they define _light_ , when the question is about defining _night darkness_. This reminds me of something Einstein once supposedly said to a teacher : > There is no such thing as darkness. Darkness is nothing but the absence of > light. From this, while it is possible to _stand in the daylight_ , one couldn't _stand in night darkness_ , since darkness is nothing to be standing in. Similarly, while you can be _in water_ , you can't actually be _in dryness_.


Survey vs Surveil

Is `survey` just an Anglicisation of the loan-word `surveil`, or have the meanings split? http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/survey and http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/surveil suggests that `surveil` is only used in the context of observing _people_ , but considering they are pronounced the same (where I come from), I can't hear this difference in everyday usage.


Expression for a "smiling face tiger"

The Chinese expression "smiling face tiger" (笑面虎) is defined in English at one website as "an outwardly kind but inwardly cruel person". More broadly it doesn't need to refer to someone who is actually positively _cruel_. The phrase might be used to refer to a person who superficially appears nice/gracious/easygoing/etc., but actually is not at all nice/gracious/easygoing/etc. Any similar expression/word/idiom in English? **Edit to elaborate** : One suggested answer in "wolf in sheep's clothing". This is perhaps the closest English translation (especially since it involves animals) but I think this English/European idiom has an emphasis on the fact that the wolf is _deliberately_ disguising himself in sheep's clothing, in order to deceive someone and achieve some malicious end. What I am thinking of is someone less malicious than a "wolf in sheep's clothing" (but can nonetheless--though not usually--be just as harmful). Examples:   * He is always smiling, greeting you, and saying "Good morning, how do you do?" and generally being absolutely courteous.    * When he spills some coffee on your shirt he might say, "Oh my goodness! I am SO terribly sorry! I am such an absolute and horrible klutz! Please let me wash your shirt for you!" (but with no intent of actually doing so, knowing that you will probably reject the offer).    * He often offers to help you out or do you favors (again with no intent of doing so).   * When you inadvertently cause him some inconvenience, he might say "Oh that is no problem at all! Absolutely no problem at all!" and keep smiling and seem unperturbed the whole time (but in fact he is extremely peeved and if you provoke him just a little bit more, he is liable to abruptly erupt in fury).  These are just some examples. You can probably think of more. Such a person does this sort of thing on an everyday basis. Unlike a "wolf in sheep's clothing", he has no malicious intent to disguise himself or to seriously harm anyone else. Nonetheless, he has somehow acquired the art of delivering a very favorable first impression and being very nice with his words and superficial acts. But when a problem actually surfaces, it is quickly revealed that he is not very nice after all.


How many possible meanings does " inclusion" have?

I want to know how many possible meaning does " inclusion" have in this sentence, I cant get its meaning. " I am all for inclusion. but that part of the country? those are not my people."


How to conjugate a verb with multiple subjects

Say you have the following sentence: > Alice (and her family) [some present-tense inflection of the verb _be_ ]. . > . . How do you conjugate _be_ here? It refers both to Alice and "her family". Thus this probably means one writes _are_? Is this correct?


What do you call a person that adds things to a list?

Would "adder" be a valid term? The person is someone who adds an item to the list.


Can "yell 'word' for passcode" be considered a wordplay?

Consider the following sentence: > Yell "word" for passcode. Obviously it instructs one to yell "word" in order to get a passcode. To me it looks like the sentence could be read as a wordplay too, meaning that the passcode is actually `Yell "word"`. However, is this valid from a grammatical point of view? I've tried to find a replacement for _for_ when reading the sentence like that, and all I could get to was _is_. I'm not exactly sure I was on the right tracks there.


degrees of temperature and humidity

I am currently working on a game where the different areas of the map will have different climates. I wish to have 5 different levels of temperature and humidity for the different climates. I currently have the following descriptors(from lowest to highest) for the levels. for temperature: FREEZING, COLD, MILD, HOT, SCORCHING, and for humidity: ARID, VERY_DRY, DRY, HUMID, MOIST Do you feel that these names are accurate? Any suggestions for more appropriate descriptors?


Using “So” Followed by a Noun Phrase to Express Boredom, Disgust, Tediousness, Dullness, Banality

In the BBC TV series _Sherlock_ ’s episode two from series three, “The Empty Hearse", John Watson waxes maudlin over being left out of the loop for two years regarding Sherlock’s faked death. Sherlock replies: “That is so two years ago.” I interpret this to mean so much time has passed that the subject is old stuff and Watson is behaving like someone upset over past slights. I’m interested in the etymology of this construction. I suspect it goes back to Shakespeare’s days.


"Changing and improving are not always the same thing" or "Changing and improving is not always the same thing"

Are both valid? I think the first is the only option, but I have been challenged on this and I can't explain exactly why the second is wrong. It does make sense, I suppose.


One word for "any way around it"

Let us say I frame a sentence as follows: > Is there any way around this problem? I want to convey the feeling that bypass, or trick without actually using the problem, without actually dealing with it. P.S.: It may so happen that my actual sentence does not convey this feeling either. I am learning English and am new to it.


Redundant definite article?

Why do we say >   * get hold of >   * lose sight of > instead of >   * get the hold of >   * lose the sight of > The missing article has always bugged me.


What is modifying the "i" in Thumbelina and Carolina to alter its pronuciation?

While helping my daughter read (she is 5) we encountered two names in a story, Thumbelina and Carolina. The way I've come to pronounce the last four letters of "Thumbelina" is "LEE NAH" and the same part of "Carolina" as "LIE NAH". My question is what is modifying the sound "i" makes in each name? Is there a name for this rule? Am I just pronouncing "Thumbelina" or "Carolina" incorrectly?


Best way to phrase "{x and y} and z"?

I've continually struggled with this sentence arrangement. I have a list of 2 groups, but one of the groups is also a group of 2. Example: "I need help finding turtles and brown and grey foxes" The multiple "and's" makes the sentence awkward and confusing.


What is the opposite of "abbreviation"?

What is the opposite of "abbreviation"? For example, if `ELL` is an abbreviation for `English Language Learners`,   then `English Language Learners` is a(n) **___ __ ___ ___** for `ELL`. I'm looking for a word that will work for all abbreviations, not just acronyms, so another example would be: if `abbr.` is an abbreviation for `abbreviation`, then `abbreviation` is a(n) **___ __ ___ ___** for `abbr.`


Usage of "acknowledge"

Is it acceptable to write "We acknowledge Dr. AAA for his useful advice" to express gratitude or appreciation?


"Postfix" or "suffix"?

Wikipedia and The Free Dictionary were not much help — is there a **practical difference** in the semantics of _suffix_ and _postfix_ , except that the latter is more rare? File name extensions are well known. For example, `index.en.xhtml` could reasonably be assumed to be the index file of a website directory, in XHTML format, and with primarily English, human-readable contents. I’d normally call the collection of extensions (`.en.xhtml` in the example) the _suffix_ or _postfix_ , but it’s not obvious which (if any) is technically and/or semantically more accurate.


I end up studying english VS. I end up to study English

What is the difference in meaning between these: "I end up studying English" and "I end up to study English".


What is the proper expression for 'putting down the hood' (of a sweatshirt)?

Alright, super simple question I guess, but I'm no native speaker and google doesn't seem to be helpful here... What do you call it when you go from wearing your hoodie 'hood up' to 'hood down (open?)' thanks a bunch


Is there a word for something that would be hilarious if it weren't true?

I've been thinking all day but nothing is coming to mind. I feel like I'd use it a lot if one existed.


What's the noun-form of "not working"?

The phrase "not working" can be used as an adjective, for example: > My laptop is not working. What is the noun-form of the adjective "not working"? E.g. "The not-workingness of my laptop."


One word for experiencing a place or event through their description without being physically going to that place or event?

One word for experiencing a place or event through someone else's explanation without being physically going to that place or event?


What’s the parent of a clone called?

Let’s say X is cloned to make Y and Y is cloned to make Z. Is there a word that uniquely identifies X in relation to Y? How about identifying X in relation to Z?


generic term for "A-hed"? (quirky article at the bottom of the front page of the Wall Street Journal)

The Wall Street Journal usually has a quirky article on the bottom of the front page, on anything from paper clips to tugboat racing to borscht manufacturers. Their name for it is an A-hed. Is there a generic term for this? (I've seen a similar concept in other papers, on a less regular basis)


Minutes from a meeting

In this sentence: > Thanks, John; that's duly noted. what other word can you put instead of _duly noted_


How does an "agency" differ from a "company"?

When should a _company_ be called an _agency_? Typically advertising and recruitment companies call themselves agencies, is there a reason other than tradition for this?


Use of 'swag' as a verb

I came across this post on swag (the slang word): > Attempt to swag should ideally be accompanied by apt spellings. I have seen _swag_ being used only as a noun. I know _swagger_ is a verb, but is _swag_ one, too?


What is the difference between reference and deference? Is it true that it could be that reference is giving respect or showing respect, which means that reference could mean deference? Deference's meaning is what I don't get.


"Contribute for" or "Contribute to" or "Contribute on" or "Contribute in"

We said : > I do want to thank Mr. Foulen and Mr. Felten who **contribute for** server > hosting . or > I do want to thank Mr. Foulen and Mr. Felten who **contribute to** server > hosting . or > I do want to thank Mr. Foulen and Mr. Felten who **contribute on** server > hosting . or > I do want to thank Mr. Foulen and Mr. Felten who **contribute in** server > hosting .


Meaning of 'I don't swing at soft balls'

In an episode of Cougar Town, I noticed one of the characters told her friend 'I don't swing at soft balls'. First I thought it was an idiom, but I couldn't find it anywhere when I started looking it up. Here's the dialogue: > Girl 1 - Luckily, I can control my gag reflex.   >  Girl 2 - _(ignoring)_   >  Girl 1 - What, nothing?!   >  Girl 2 - I don't swing at soft balls. I would like to know whether this is normally used in English or it is just a phrase coined for the occasion.


"Could have avoided" vs "could avoid"

This is a line from a fiction in which a killer says to the good guy > For what it's worth I had hoped we **could have** avoided this day". I mean why not say "For what it's worth I had hoped we **could** avoid this day"? Please note that I know the general grammar rules about _could_ and _could have_ but this one seems to be strange.


initialism for names starting with a digraph

What is the rule of initialism for names starting with digraph that is usually considered as a single letter? For instance, some non-Latin single letter transcribes to a digraph (e.g., Russian: Yu in Юрий->Yuri, Chinese: Zh in Zhang, etc.). Should I use the first letter or the whole string corresponding the single letter?


What's the semantic difference between "How did I <verb> <subject>" and "How I <verb in past tense> <subject>"?

Is there any difference between these two forms? Examples:   * "How did I take that picture" vs. "How I took that picture"   * "How did I make the cake" vs. "How I made the cake"   * "How did I meet my wife" vs. "How I met my wife"


what does "line ministries" mean?

Could someone explain it for me. I googled it but couldn't find any useful information. I would appreciate it if you could tell me what it means. Example usage... > _The antimonopoly committee has oversight responsibilities for antimonopoly > issues, but the **line ministries** are responsible for implementing the > antimonopoly laws._


"Were happily recovering" vs. "were, happily, recovering"

>   * The hospital informed us that both victims were happily recovering. >   * The hospital informed us that both victims were, happily, recovering. > What is the difference in meaning between the two? Aren't they the same?


Noun+ infinitive + verb structure

In my grammar book I've got a sentence **The woman to talk to is over there** and this is the only example. That makes me believe I can say things like:   * -The packages to deal with will arrive tomorrow   * -The foreign student to help to practice his Norwegian isn't here anymore   * -Sorry! The guy to fix such things doesn't work today   * -My time to talk has come   * -The wish to call her waned after some time I'm getting the hang of it or I'm really off? )


by + the + noun

1. He's well off. He can spend £ 1000 by (to?) the minute   2. You can buy cheese by (to?) the kilogramme. Do these sound correct? Meaning every minute / kilogramme.


What's the correct adverb for predict?

I'm trying to figure out whether it is valid to say > the size of ... is predictively determined some sources on the web include predictively as a valid adverb, some don't. And what about _predictably_? Thank you!


Jumps vs. Leaps

Does a curve in science or finance have sudden jumps or sudden leaps? We talk about a discontinuous curve. My position is that jumps is more appropriate but I might be wrong.


What's the difference between 'china' and 'porcelain'?


Which one is the most general: "ox", "bull", "bison" or "buffalo"? I've looked it up in Wikipedia, but it seems that the authors of articles in Wikipedia are trying to avoid using general terms and would rather use special scientific terms derived from Latin, which makes definitions very accurate and that's, of course, the way how any article in encyclopedia should be. But here I am more concerned about general terms and their usage, not precise definitions. So, which one of those four words seems more inclusive to you? (I know "cattle" would probably "swallow" them all :) )


Sentence structure of second amendment

Wikipedia mentions two versions. As passed by the Congress and preserved in the National Archives: > A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, > the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. As ratified by the States and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson, then- Secretary of State: > A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, > the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. The first version seems grammatically awkward to me. Isn't there something wrong in the sentence?


Term for talking about a subject or idea you did not want to talk about?

Specifically, is there a term for the situation where both parties agree not to discuss a certain subject and in so doing end up engaging in a discussion about the very topic they said they wouldn't? An example: > Person A: "What do you want to talk about?" > > Person B: "Anything but the weather." > > Person A: "Agreed, I find it boring to discuss the weather." > > Person B: "Me too. Oh, that reminds me -- did you hear it was supposed to > snow tomorrow?" > > Person A: "Wow, really? I didn't know that. So long as it doesn't rain!" > > Person B: "You do realize we now actually _are_ talking about the weather, > right?"


Hyphenation of the suffix "like"

I am having trouble understanding the following: "the achievable rate of the optimal AF scheme performs close to the **cut-set like bound** obtained in this paper" I think that the word "like" (above) is intended to be used as a suffix to express the fact that the bound is "cut-set"-like. My question is what to do in such a case to show the connection between the words. Is it (a) "cut set-like" (b) "cut-set-like" (c) "cut set(en dash)like" (d) something else Please help me.


"I want to come there" or "I want to go there"

When someone is away from you and wants to be where you are, do they tell you _I want to come there_ or _I want to go there_?


What does ‘Near-career’ mean?

I found a word, _near-career_ filling in the following article of today’s New York Times titled _Unusual Work, Even in World of the Theater_. > Tom Santopietro has made a near-career filling in for other people on > Broadway, not as an understudy, but as a substitute for house managers and > company managers. I also found a line using _near-career_ in a site (City-Data Forum) that follows: > I also had my own military near-career so I moved even more. After living in > seven other states, some of them more than once, and three other countries, > I landed back in California 32 years ago and have stayed. Judging from the context of those sentences, _near-career_ job seems to me akin to _probationary_ , or _not full-fledged_ job. What does _near-career_ exactly mean?


I would if you will

Is this the correct form ? > I would love to do this as soon as you will do that. Or is it > I would love to do this as soon as you have done that Or is there a better way to form this sentence ?


Please check if the sentence is correct

I would have passed the exam if there was a computer and internet in my house in 70s.


"over the period of" or "over the period"?

Which one is correct? > I visited four countries over the period of 2010 to 2014. or > I visited four countries over the period 2010 to 2014.


"Ski in / Ski out" – Which action is which?

Hotels on ski fields directly connected to the lift system are often referred to as "ski in / ski out" hotels. In this context, does "ski out" refer to the action of skiing out _to_ the mountain, or skiing out of the mountain _back to_ the hotel (with "ski in" being the opposite)?


Term for providing a rationale for why a concept applies

I am using a concept that was developed for one subject area and applying it to a different area. However, there is a one-to-one correspondence between the objects in the original concept and the objects in the area I would like to apply it to. Specifically, I am drawing an analogy between voters in a shareholder meeting (where not everyone has the same voting power) and chemicals at a Superfund site, in that both carry a certain weight (votes/health risk) towards a measure (bill/remedial action decision). I would like to introduce this discussion with a section header that quickly describes that I will be providing a rationale for applicability of the specific concept. Right now, I am using the provisional title _Rationale for Applicability_ , but perhaps there is something "preposition-free" or more descriptive?


Is "Roach Motel" now an established English term for some kinds of buisiness behaviour?

I found the origin of the word and the statistics about its usage. I found these two links about facebook and Oracle’s Public Cloud using the term figuratively. **Is this usage common today**?


Is Anyone/ Who is used together?

> The course is for anyone who is interested in learning about computers. Is there an error in the above sentence formation? Or can we just say: > The course is for anyone interested in learning about computers.


"In" or "at" a performance?

Which is the correct usage? Example: > I was surprised that she participated at the performance held at LA. > > I was surprised that she participated in the performance held at LA.


"Do this" or "Will this" in questions

I have a question sentence: "Will this set of vectors form an orthogonal basis for the system?". Is it ok to start with "Will this" or "Do this" is more appropriate?


Word detectives needed: "Ananyzapata"

I'm trying to decode the mysterious word _Ananyzapata_. Unfortunately I don't have the original source, just its appearance on a slide from a presentation. From the context (words on good luck charms/amulets in Medieval England) it may be a word like _Abracadabra_ , or the name of a god, or angel, or even demon? It might even be a phrase mistakenly rendered as one word. Any ideas?


Hypernym for "coalition" and "opposition"

I'm looking for a word (or expression) that is a hypernym of _coalition_ and _opposition_. I want to be able to ask a party whether its "type", for lack of a better word, is coalition or the opposition without using that word: > — What is your [ _type_ ]? — Coalition.


Meaning of "which we have"

What does _which we have_ mean here? > In the end, will you be looking over your shoulder for the rest of your life > wondering if your time is up? The short answer is yes. The long answer is > definitely yes. The truth is, there’s a bull’s-eye on your back, and > committing to this new life is your best shot at staying alive. And while > you may never be able to remove that bull’s-eye, you can certainly cover it > up with a Buzz Lightyear spacesuit and jetpack. **Which we totally have.**


Meaning of the phrase "hacked by someone" — but not in context of computers

What does it mean when a girl says that she "hasn't been hacked [by a boy]"? Dictionaries give us only computer-related meanings of "hack"; does it have any other meaning?


"I am a degree holder now" or "I am now a degree holder"

Which one is correct? >   * I am a degree holder now. >   * I am now a degree holder. >


Is an ellipsis a distinct punctuation mark?

The ellipsis looks like three consecutive periods, but many type faces have a distinct glyph for an ellipsis. Is this an aesthetic distinction, or is the ellipsis actually a different punctuation mark? The reason I ask is I wonder if it's grammatically incorrect to use three periods (...) instead of an ellipsis (…) when typing.


Where did "God helps those who help themselves" originate?

I've always heard it said that " _God helps those who help themselves._ " From a Biblical perspective this doesn't make much sense to me (since I've also heard that we should rely on God for everything). However, it's a pretty popular phrase. Where did the phrase originate? Is it a Biblical reference or is there no relation to Christianity?


Is there a difference between "treble" and "triple"?

I've been reading _The Economist_ lately and noticed that the magazine uses both **trebled** and **tripled**. According to my dictionary, "treble" means "threefold; triple". Is there a subtle difference, not captured by the dictionary entry? Some examples, "trebled": >   * _The Economist’s_ index of non-oil commodity prices has trebled in the > past decade. >   * The number of companies from Brazil, India, China or Russia on the > Financial Times 500 list trebled in 2006-08 from 20 to 62. >   * That number has more than trebled since 1999. > "Tripled": >   * In the ten years to 2010, internet users in the developed economies just > about tripled. >   * Intercepts of Chinese planes almost tripled last year, to 96 (see > chart). >   * Many of the 20 leading economic performers in the OECD doubled or > tripled their education spending in real terms between 1970 and 1994, yet > outcomes in many countries stagnated—or went backwards. >


Think in the shoes of someone

I want my readers to imagine being at a place. Is this a reasonable way of saying it? > Think in the shoes of a visitor of a mass public event, like the Norwegian > Constitution Day. As an alternative, I came up with > Imagine yourself being a visitor of a mass public event, like the Norwegian > Constitution Day.


Run me ragged/run me exhausted

Is it understandable if we say "run me ragged" or "run me exhausted" (in both of these expression "run" doesn't mean literal "running")?


What does "delineate" mean in this context?

I was reading a Scientific American story, “Controversial Spewed Iron Experiment Succeeds as Carbon Sink” by David Biello, when I came across this sentence: > The problem for scientists is that oceanic waters tend to mix, which makes > monitoring and delineating an experiment in the ocean challenging. I'm wondering what _delineate_ means in this context. Does it mean “describe” or “trace the outline of”? Could someone kindly enlighten me on this?


Is the phrase "Only to later realize" correct in usage?

I have the below sentence: > Attended ABC college where I topped the English subject in 10th grade (only > to later realize that my love for the language couldn’t end there). Now after 15 years I realize the truth of the parenthesized statement so how exactly should I state this? "Only to later realize" OR "Only later did I realize". I want to push emphasis on that period of time and hence I prefer retaining the first usage of the phrase. Please correct me if I am grammatically incorrect.


"publish in" vs. "publish on"

I've been looking thoroughly about each constructions, but I haven't been successful about when to use them. Some rules of thumb I've found: >   * This forum post and this one suggest _publish in_ should be used when > the place of publishing is a three-dimensional place and _publish on_ should > be used when it's a surface. This makes a bit of sense to me, but does not > seem a very academical explanation; whereas there are some cases in which it > would be hard to distinguish which kind of place it is. >   * When the place is virtual, _on_ is used. Example: Publish on Google Play > My particular cases are the following: >   * To publish an application __ [in/on] Google Play >   * To publish an application __ [in/on] a virtual market > Is there a way to identify where to use _publish in_ or _publish on_? Are they mutually exchangeable?


Where does "Look yourself in the mirror" come from?

Where does "unable to look myself in the mirror" come from? related example: > ...I asked her what she does if after six months or so it becomes obvious > that a salesperson is not bringing in business. Would she fire the person? > Without hesitation, she blurted out, _“I have to look myself in the > mirror!”_ — as if firing someone who isn’t doing the job would make her a > bad person.


Differences of "supposed to be" and "supposed to be having"

What does this sentence mean: > "I am supposed to be having my physics class in the science building." Also, what is the difference between this sentence and > "I am supposed to have my physics class...."? What should be inferred from the use of a _progressive_ tense?


Is there a definitive spelling for the shortened version of “as per usual”?

A shortened version of the phrase “as per usual” is now used as slang when referring to something that is typical or expected, often in an exaggerated or hyperbolic manner. For example: > Bill: Mike is late, _again!_   >  Sara: As per usual.   > But instead of saying “as per usual”, the slang version shortens _usual_ to pronounce the first syllable only, which I lazily make an attempt to spell as “ujj”. (IPA /juːʒ/ ―tchrist) ## And the question is. . . . Is there a definitive spelling for the shortened version of “as per usual” — or, more specifically, for the shortened version of _usual_?


considers a probability vector v containing the probabilities of jumping to each vertex

Should I use " _probabilities_ " or " _probability_ " in the following sentence? > Consider a probability vector _v_ containing the probabilities of jumping to > each vertex.


Definition clarification for "effervesce"

I was wondering about one of the meanings of _effervesce_ , "give off bubbles". I wonder if you could use _effervesce_ for a solid, and how it's used in a sentence.


How to know what part of speech is "there" in some cases?

I've been doing some ELA homework and I noticed that ' _there_ ' is not always the same POS. It seems to be an adverb, a noun, a pronoun, and several other POS in various contexts. How would one know what part of speech the word ' _there_ ' is in a given case?


How should this sentence be interpreted?

So I am reading the essay "On Some Verses of Virgil" by Michel de Montaigne (translation by Donald M. Frame) and I came across this particular sentence. > Is there any ugliness in doing wrong that can dispense us from the duty of > confessing it? The choice of vocabulary here is, honestly, quite confusing to me. Here is the sentence again with the preceding paragraph for context: > The diseases of the body become clearer as they increase. We find that what > we were calling a cold or a sprain is the gout. The diseases of the soul > grow more obscure as they grow stronger; the sickest man is least sensible > of them. That is why they must be handled often in the light of day, with a > pitiless hand, be opened up and torn from the hollow of our breast. As in > the matter of good deeds, so in the matter of evil deeds, mere confession is > sometimes reparation. _Is there any ugliness in doing wrong that can > dispense us from the duty of confessing it?_ It's been a long time sense I've had this much difficulty understanding the exact conclusion a sentence was trying to reach. My first instinct is to assume that the sentence is somewhat synonymous with: > Is there any ugliness in doing wrong that can [spare] us from the [ordeal] > of confessing it? But then a friend of mine offered an interpretation more to the effect of: > Is there any [wrongdoing so exceptional] that [it will] [render our > confession truly unprecedented in the context of humanity]? Meanwhile, another translation (found on Project Gutenberg) renders the sentence thus: > Is there any deformity in doing amiss, that can excuse us from confessing > ourselves? I don't have much confidence in either his or my interpretation, and this other translation isn't clearing things up for me much at all. What is Michel de Montaigne saying?


Do you say "the lyrics of the song" or "the lyrics to the song"? And why?

Well, the title says it all: Do you say "the lyrics of the song" or "the lyrics to the song"? Is any of these wrong? And why?


What terms describe who pays for a meal?

I have heard the terms _go dutch_ and _AA_ used to mean that, when two or more people eat at a restaurant, each will pay only the price of their own dish. Also _treat_ is used to describe the act of one person paying for the meal of themselves and another.   * Has anyone conducted a study on the terms used and their geographic distribution?   * In which regions of the world are these terms used?   * Are there other terms which might be more popular in North America, the UK, Australia, and New Zealand?


What's the figurative meaning of "the end of the line"?

Leaving aside the strong sexual connotations of the lyrics of Pulp's song "This Is Hardcore", I was wondering what is the figurative meaning of the expression the author used: > "This is the end of the line" I thought it could be "this is it" or also could mean "I am putting an end to this", but I am not sure. I was curious about the possible uses of the phrase, not only this particular case (ie, this lyrics). Also, I would like to know about the literal meaning. Is it refering to a drawn line? A spoken line?


Is "on the side of" right here?

> China’ government faces a lot of challenges in global politics and domestic > politics. On the side of global politics, it is criticized for its lack of > moral courage to take side in conflicts. On the side of domestic politics, > the people are not contended with only living as a happy pig, they start to > struggle for political freedom. (self-made) I only know the use of “on the side of” in expressions like “to err on the side of…”, not sure whether “on the side of “ is good here. Is there any another alternative? For example, “in the respect of”.


is this grammar right?

We are looking to use this text, as a headline on our sustainability page, on our website. As coworker asked if "sustainably" was grammatically correct. I am unsure. > TCS believes that thinking sustainably will make our future stronger, to > think globally and act locally through a variety of green initiatives Is the word `sustainable` used correctly, is it even a word?


Can "prodigious" be used in this context?

> With his prodigious English skills, he can get a decent job in a foreign > company in Shanghai. (form the homework written by my student) I found the first part of the sentence problematic, there may be two reason. First, _prodigious_ is about something really unusual or great, speaking and Writing good or perfect English does not count as being truly great. Secondly, the structure of the sentence makes it sounds a neutral narration. It will be more acceptable to say: his English skills are prodigious, this helps him get a wonderful job in a foreign company. Hope you will correct my faulty ideas.


Origin and correctness of “ain’t no”?

In contemporary American English usage, I come across sentences like: >   * I ain’t got no money. > >   * Ain’t no man like him. > > Saying _ain’t no_ sounds incorrect to me because it is a double negative. What is the origin of this particular construction? I wasn’t able to find anything online related to the origins of this incorrect usage.


Lady Chatterlay's Lover: "last crow"

I don't want to be vulgar here. But what does "crow" mean in their conversation: > Connie: Then why are you so bitter? > > Mellors: I'm not! If my cock gives its last crow, I don't mind! When they talk about the extermination of mankind?


why is it said that "messages are sent to methods"

In object oriented programming, it is said that messages are sent to methods. In this context, why is the word "method" used instead of "procedure" or "function". In other words, why was the word "method" introduced to programming?


"Would have us view" -- is it correct?

It probably is correct since the article is from Bloomberg.com website. However, I am not sure what it really means and why it's correct > Mark Twain once quipped that “everyone complains about the weather but > nobody does anything about it.” Many **analysts would have us view the > dramatic increase** in inequality with a similar spirit -- as a natural > condition that we should accept without complaint. We should be skeptical of > this view -- and not just because it’s obsolete even with regard to the > weather.


"currently not" or "not currently"

What's the correct order: > Lessons are not currently being offered. or > Lessons are currently not being offered.


Expressing contentment about receiving a letter

Someone wrote to me. I'm writing him back. I want to say, in formal speech, that I'm glad that he wrote to me. How do I do that? I guess I can just say "I'm glad to hear from you" but maybe you could suggest a more elegant expression.


How to use "in" or "on" with nouns?

I'm always confused by this and can't find it anywhere. Here's an example of what I mean: (literature here in context of academic literature, such as journals, proceedings, etc.) > In the literature ... or > On the literature ... Another one: > ... an overview on the advances of ... or > ... an overview in the advances of ... Someone care to say which ones are correct and why?


Not only ... but also

Is it fine to split correlative conjunctions as in the case below? Author’s study of the friendship relations of international doctoral students thus not only fills a glaring research gap. It is also a much needed sociological account of a field otherwise rife with psychological accounts.


Is "give me a five" the same as "give me five" or incorrect?

I mean the physical gesture of slapping hands together. Any difference between them? Thanks.


Is there a usage of "the" that indicates one out of a group of many?

Considering the sentence `Nearly anything can be a weapon in a martial artist’s hands.`, the indefinite article `a` indiciates that this can be any martial artist out of all in the world. Next, consider `The wise warrior stops a ranged attack before it nears him.` Here, the definite article `the` is used, but still, I am quite certain that the sentence talks about any "wise warrior", or that one would even qualify as a "wise warrior" by performing the named action (among others, probably). Is this a correct usage of `the`, indicating one out of a group of many? What is this usage called properly? Finally, consider `Through judicious placement of wounds, the marksman ensures that his enemy cannot escape him.`   I am wondering whether this could be the same kind of use for the definite article as in the second example, or whether to a native speaker this sentence indicates a specific individiual (that is a "marksman") that would be clear from context.


collocations such as "bird of prey" and generalization

I got a question about the usage of generalization of collocations. There is a word such as "bird of prey" to refer to birds eating animal flesh. And one way to generalize reference of a noun is to put "the" in front of the word, especially for animals, plants, recent inventions; the lion is the king of the animal world of Africa / the smartphone is nowadays a required item. Then my question is whether this kind of expression below is also okay to show generalization; **The bird of prey is a bird that eats animal flesh.** For other nouns, such as "man of steel," when someone says "the man of steel," a native English speaker would think some particular or specific man of steel since there are several possible possibilities; Stalin, or the Superman in the recent movie, etc.


Combine these two sentence with relative pronoun

Can I combine these two sentences:   1. I'll never forget the time.    2. We were a happy couple then.  To > I'll never forget the time that we were a happy couple. And more, without "that" > I'll never forget the time we were a happy couple. I remember we can use a sentence to describe the objective.


When to use a definite article in the name of a ship

To use examples from Star Trek, the original series and The Next Generation called their ships "The Enterprise", Enterprise varied between "Enterprise" and "The Enterprise", Deep Space Nine always had "The Defiant", and Voyager always called the ship "Voyager" rather than "The Voyager". "The Voyager" certainly does sound wrong to my ears, but I can't identify a reason for that. Is there a rule (or combination of rules) for this?


The boy who lived... come to die? (Harry Potter)

I hope I'm not giving away any Harry Potter plot points. I just watched the last movie of the series, and I'm pretty sure that they made an error in the German translation of a line from Voldemort taken right from the book: As you can see in the trailer, Voldemort says > Harry Potter, the boy who lived...come to die. Note that the sentence ends in a period, not an exclamation point. Now I had always understood this to mean: > (Look at) Harry Potter, the boy who lived (who has now) come to die. In the German dub, they translated it as: > Harry Potter, der Junge der überlebte. Komm her und stirb! > > (Harry Potter, the boy who lived. Come here and die!) Surely that's not correct. Or is it? Is this ambiguous at all?


Multiple stone throws

"A stone's throw" is often used to describe a short distance. Is there a widely recognized English word or expression that similarly describes an intermediate distance, but which does not actually involve any direct measurement of that distance? For example, consider that what might be a stone's throw to a farmer talking about a neighbor, probably wouldn't count as one to someone visiting from the city, even though they would both be talking about the same specific distance.


"Absorbed in" vs. "absorbed with"

> That young man was absorbed **in** his big camera. He was shooting a short > movie of people and passers by who were singing and reading the poems under > the trees. If I use _with_ instead of _in_ , does it change the meaning?


Alternative for brave/stoical

What word could I use to describe somebody who is getting on with a difficult life changing situation and making the best of it. Brave is not quite right but nearly there. Stoical is not right either.


Does one differentiate A "from" B, or differentiate A "and" B?

> A fecal test cannot differentiate intestinal blood from blood from red meat. -or- > A fecal test cannot differentiate intestinal blood and blood from red meat.


The article "the" before messages

> He shouldn't have posted the PM's that were meant to be private. [PM = > Private message] Is the above sentence correct if we are talking about specific messages? Suppose that, on a forum that I am on, one poster sent 2-4 messages to another person in private, who then posted the screenshots of those messages. So wasn't I supposed to say he has "posted THE messages" (I have those 2-4 messages in my mind when I was talking about them there) instead of "posted messages"? Is "the screenshots of those messages" or simply "screenshots of those messages" correct?


meaning and usage of "in order the more"

I have just come across a phrase I have never seen before: > I do not so in order to undermine the status of xy but, on the contrary, _in > order the more_ securely to identify certain aspects. A quick internet research has shown me that the phrase apparently really exists and me and from the respectice contexts I guess it must be equivalent to _in order to [identify] more [securely]_. Is this right? Is this phrase commonly used or rather strange?


"Opposite the mall" vs. "opposite to the mall"

> The new showroom that he has put up **is opposite the** central mall. I have doubts about the grammaticality of this sentence. According to my understanding, it should be: > The new showroom that he has put up **is opposite to the** central mall. Are both variations acceptable?


"The more..., the less.." type of sentence corrections

> The more you think about it, the less likely you will take action. I feel that sentence sounds a bit awkward, especially _the less_ part. I am not so sure if the sentence is correct, grammatically. So what's the right way to put it? Or how can I rephrase it?


Should I use verb or verb + ing in the following case?

> Marla glanced at her watch. Half past four. She'd been in the subway since > morning, doing nothing in particular— **just watching trains come and go, > people getting on and off.** A typical commuting scene. My first impulse was just to write _getting_ instead of _get_. But after reading the sentence again I said: wait I wrote _come_ and _go_ shouldn't I write _get_ instead? But after replacing it with _get_ something seemed off. So I'm a bit confused, should I use _get_ or _getting_?


Origin of the saying "X wears the pants"

I just heard this saying recently in this conversation: > No.1 : Why aren't you telling him to shut up?   >  No. 2 : Mr. Palm is going to do that.   >  No. 1 : Oh! So Mr. Palm wears the pants!" What does "wear the pants" mean? And what is its origin?


Best internet sites for British English learners?

What are some great resources for advanced British English learners?


Origin of "Everybody is smarter than anybody"?

Who said this: > Everybody is smarter than anybody. I have been trying to find the origin of this phrase with no success. I think I first heard it from a speaker on an IT subject (but I am not sure if its origin is from a person with a technology background). I would like to use this quote but won't use it if I can't give a proper attribution.