"Plot" in Victorian word usage

I would like to know if the word "plot" would have been used in Victorian times (ca. 1880) to describe the story of a play, novel, etc. I've tried some online dictionaries with etymologies, but they only give the etymology, not when the usage as meaning a "story" began.


How would I change the following sentence to active form?

I've been told that it's always better to turn sentences to active form (at least in fiction writing). How can I turn the following sentence to active form? > Sophia was woken up by the rattling sound of her washing machine. or > Sophia was awakened by the rattling sound of her washing machine. (I think "Sophia woke up by..." is not very idiomatic).


How should this sentence structure be interpreted?

I'm playing an online game in which I came across a message in the form of a sentence of which the structure is new to me. It read: > You do not have a hatchet which you have the level to use. The weird part for me start after the word 'which'. Specifically, how can 'the level' be put there? Without 'the level' it is a regular sentence in my opinion, but the sentence as it is now seems inscrutable for me. Could someone shed some light on this sentence structure please?


Influence of the regulatory bodies in the English language

**Where** could I find/read about **studies** about the influence **in English** of the lack of regulatory bodies of its use and lexicon?   1. It is easy to google and find long arguments on the topic. I am interested in studies that at least attempt to be systematic or rather scientific (to the extent this is possible in this case).  1.1. _Your personal opinion is not what is being asked unless it comes from an study. In that case it is prefered that you point to where can I find such study._   2. I expect to find in them comparison with languages like Spanish and French that have their language academies.    3. I honestly expect to find in them conclusions pointing to benefits, as that is my personal opinion, but I am open to what the studies could say.   4. I expect the studies to particularly look at the influence in:  -) the speed of evolution of the language.  -) the breadth of the English lexicon.


A synonym for "bastardized" without the evil slant?

With the following definition: > To lower in quality or character. Synonyms found: > corrupt, pervert, subvert, demoralize, demoralise, debauch, debase, profane, > vitiate, deprave, misdirect However all of those have a very "intentionally evil" connotation. I would say more along the lines of "messed up", but it needs to portray that it's somewhat intentional, just not with the evil slant. Intentionally done, but unintentionally wrong, is what I'm looking for. Perfect Example: My nick name on here is Aequitarum Custos, which is a "bastardized" Latin, it should have been Aequitatis Custos (the correct way to say what I wanted). I intentionally created my nick like that, but had no intention to make it wrong. Reason for desiring a synonym is due to the perceived obscenity of the word bastard by some people.


"Discover" or "invent" in mathematics context

A very theoretical question I came across with friends some time ago. I am not a native English speaker, so I may be misunderstanding some details, but as I understand: 1) Discovery relates to a concept which existed prior to ... well "discovery" but was unknown before the act. 2) Invention relates to a creation of a concept which never existed before the act Following from this, are mathematical concepts such as sinus "discovered" or "invented"? In one sense, being a fundamental property hence could only be discovered. On the other hand, the logical metaphor was created by humans, hence invented. Which one is right and which one is wrong and why?


What does "put it down on me" mean?

What does the phrase "put it down on me" mean?


the main usage of the "to" as a prepositional condition

when I was young I wasn't from the English area but I am used to learning English grammar already. Well , I am still thinking about one thing maybe because I had not even got to learn this grammar until I have realized that is such use in English . Nobody has even said to me that an -ing form can be added after the "to" in actually . What I used to learn was all about the infinitives (base verbs) only . I have seen and gone through the post in this webpage but I still cannot understand about it. So what can I actually do so that I can always be able to identify the differences about those situations hence I must able to make it clear about whether to put a gerund or a base verb after that particular "to" ? =(


To give someone the 411

"To give someone the 411" is short for information but is this phrase common in the US and/or in Britain and is it still up to date or outdated?


Hypernym for "boys only", "girls only", and "co-ed"

What word would be used on a form where one is asked to stipulate if a school accepts only boys, girls or is co-ed? We are creating the form, and the word I am looking for would be used for a drop down that has the three options "boys only", "girls only", "co-ed".


What does "run’n’gun" mean?

I found the term "run’n’gun" in an article about video games. What does it mean in that context?


Shakespeare and Maths: Metre and Completeness

Shakespearian sonnets have a particular structure where each line of the poem contains ten syllables (due to the use of iambic pentameter). This is, one might think, because ten sounds 'complete' to some extent, like 4. For example > > Love alters not with his brief hours and weeks or > > Which alters when its alteration finds Is there any explanation in number theory to why the number 10 might seem complete to human minds and ears? Or perhaps there is a mathematical explanation for why 10 is chosen for the number of syllables in the line? Are there examples in nature where sets have a magnitude of 10 elements, or where the number 10 signifies some sort of totality, whether in a cycle or other abstract setting?


“Naming names”: Descriptive or redundant?

The phrase _naming names_ arises often during the reporting of corruption investigations, political scandals or the like. The word _naming_ is defined as citing by name or giving a name to. I could not think of any similarly redundant phrase for comparison. Is this phrase merely an alliterative embellishment, or does it say more than a replacement phrase such as _naming of implicated individuals_ would imply?


What does the term 'grocer' mean in this song? (British usage)

In the song "Waiting for Margret to Go," which is about the death of Margaret Thatcher, the artist says "Grocers and Methodists lay her down low". What is the artist referring to by "grocer"? Is it really someone who works in a grocery store?


Example of too few commas(,) in an introductory phrase?

This sentence popped up as correct on a website: "Even though I enjoyed myself at the expensive dinner and most of my friends were in town to see me, I left." I'm no grammarian, so I turn to you all for help. Shouldn't there be a comma before _and_? "Even though I enjoyed myself at the expensive dinner**,** and most of my friends were in town to see me, I left." I assume that since "and most of my friends were in town to see me" is an independent clause, it should have a comma at the beginning. I'm a grammarphobe. Please answer correctly, but gently.


What does "It dopes it really really well. Dope even" mean?

Recently I came across a stackoverflow comment for a post. It goes something like this. > Dojo has an UpgradeBar that dopes this: > > Blah Blah Blah and then somebody commented the post > It dopes it really really well. Dope even I know dope is to take drug and thus may be he is meaning it as _relaxed_. Now i am a bit confused what did this guy meant. because in the end there is "Dope even". did he mean it **relaxes him** or **it sucks**? will " _something_ **even** " make a context _negative_? Full Context : http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5188667/stackoverflow- welcome-bar/5197218#5197218


Word for a person who gathers payments on behalf of other customers

I'm looking for a word that would clearly designate a person who takes individual payments from individual utility customers (e.g. his neighbours, friends or family) and goes to the utility (e.g. telecoms operator) payment office to pay in the global amount on their behalf. He or she does not do this as an occupation but rather to help his fellows villagers (e.g. in a large country where the Points of Sales are sparsely distributed) and is himself a subscriber of this utility (albeit authorised for this role). I would prefer to avoid _payment collector_ which is altogether a different role in most utility jargons. In addition, I'd also be willing to take suggestions for the individual payers (better than _contributors_ for instance).


Synonym for "proud parents"

I'm looking for a synonym for "proud parents" or "thrilled parents" (of a newborn child) but don't want to use _proud_ as it looks bit show-offy.


When All Authorities Agree

In Michael Gilleland's blog **"Laudator Temporis Acti"** \- he had a post titled "When All Authorities Agree" and he quoted Cecil Torr from _"Small Talk at Wreyland"_ : > There is no stopping a mistake after it has started. In the preface to my > Ancient Ships I gave the history of a blunder that was made by Scheffer in > 1654, and is now in four authoritative books of reference. In fact, when I > am told that all authorities agree, I feel certain that one of them has > blundered, and the rest have followed him without inquiry. Would anyone know when the phrase "all authorities agree" was first used? I Googled "when all authorities agree" and there were only 4 mentions of it. Does this phrase have a Greek/Latin or earlier original and was adopted in English?


Meaning of "The most I ever did for you, was to outlive you, / But that is much"

What did the poet mean by the following lines? > The most I ever did for you, was to outlive you,   >  But that is much.   >  — Edna St. Vincent Millay I am not able to understand the meaning completely, and the context in which this was written.


Which is the preferred usage?

Both side part right/part wrong to me; which one is preferred: A) Note, though, that Don Quixote's “olde” Spanish/English has been preserved in order to retain its intended comic effect B) Note, though, that Don Quixote's “olde” Spanish/English have been preserved in order to retain their intended comic effect


Help in language!

Which sentence is punctuated correctly? A)The brave, little boy rescued the forlorn kitten. B)We picked the ripe, juicy berries until our baskets were full. C)He recovered from his illness and went on to live a long, happy, life. D)The high school is tough, football team is counting its winning streak.


"pseudo-", "quasi-" "semi-" and

I was wondering about the meaning of "pseudo-", "quasi-" "semi-" and possibly other related prefixes, in general cases. Particularly, in engineering and science, there are quite a few terms named with these prefixes. For example, "quasi-integrable", "pseudo-Newton method", "semigroup". But I never get to understand their differences in usage.


Analog vs Digital: Describing modes of note-taking

With regard to note-taking is it correct to call handwriting on paper the "analog" counterpart to digital "typing" on a computer?


Does sympathy necessarily mean pity?

This one has bugged me for a while. I've always been under the impression that sympathy doesn't have to mean pity. But everyone else tells me I'm dead wrong. So does sympathy always mean pity?


Present perfect as continuing action (“for three years”)

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  When to use “has lived” vs. “lived” vs. “had lived” I’m having trouble understanding this sentence: > I have lived here for three years (I still live here.) I know that this sentence means that somebody still lives there, but can this also mean that that person doesn't live there anymore? I’m asking because I noticed that without “for three years”, “my whole life”, etc the action seems to be complete; for example, “I have lived there”, meaning that the person doesn't live there anymore. But with “for three years”, “my whole life”, or something similar, it is not clear whether the person is still living there or not. They may or may not be living there. Is it really so?


What is the opposite of an agent noun?

Is there a simple phrase to describe the object of an agent noun performing an action? > The adviser helped the **advisee**. > > The employer fired the **employee**. Is there a phrase similar to "agent noun" that can describe _advisee_ and _employee_?


Usage of the word concurrence

Is it correct to ask "Are we all in concurrence?" synonymously to "Are we all in agreement?"


"Fortunately I could get into the next bus" vs. "fortunately I managed the next bus"

Which of the following sentences is more acceptable in the meaning "fortunately someone get into or was able to catch the next bus"? >   1. Fortunately I could get into the next bus. >   2. Fortunately I managed the next bus. > Are both sentences correct? If someone is asked to choose one between the two, which one should they choose?


The meaning of 'option' in 'like hell's own option'

More from Thomas Harris: > The coffee mugs had the thick rims that dribble down the sides. Starling > watched Inelle Corey walk heavily away **like hell's own option** and drank > half a cup with her napkin tucked under her chin. What does _like hell's own option_ mean? FWIW, this conversation between Clarice Starling and Inelle Corey has a religious (Christian) undercurrent to it. Also, Starling is a southern gal.


What does "through" mean here?

**Through his sleek salesman talk I could discern duplicity.**


Is there a single word that means 'adding more details' or 'enriching with information'

What is the right word (verb) for a process of adding more details to something that's already been defined? **UPDATE:** Thank you for your answers! The precise context is as follows: > I have a base entity which describes a whatever (very general) camera that > has a few parts which are whatever lens, batteries, memory cards etc. This > is what I referred to as "something that's already been defined". Now, I > need to define a very real camera which is 'D700 Nikon' that has specific > lens, batteries, etc. So I take my general definition and create a new > definition by adding more details specific to the 'D700 Nikon' camera. So the question is: what am I doing with the base definition?


Alternatives of 'a snowball's chance in hell'

I am looking for a different, common English idiom that expresses the same thing as _a snowball's chance in hell_. My teacher says I use this expression too much, and that it is not appropriate for every essay. I need a same meaning like something very cold in a hot place to have a little chance.


Is it correct to write: "She told her to phone him the morning of the next day."

Is it grammatically correct to leave out **in** and write "She told her to phone him the morning of the next day" instead of "She told her to phone him **in** the morning of the next day"? If not, why not, and does that rule have a name? My English teacher (not a native English speaker) tells me it is wrong and that **in** must be in that sentence, but I don't get why. The task was to transform > Mrs. X: "Phone me tomorrow afternoon." from direct into indirect speech. My answer was > Mrs X. told her to phone her the afternoon of the following day.


"He disagreed with something that ate him." (spoilers)

In _The Living Daylights_ (a James Bond film), there is a man named Felix Leiter who is [partially] eaten by a shark. The villain writes a paper that says: 'He disagreed with something that ate him.' Is this a common English idiom for use polite conversation, or is this informal slang?


In a combination of two vowels (such as "ae"), what rule determines if the first ("a") or second ("e") is silent?

In a combination of two vowels (such as "ae"), what English rule determines if the first ("a") or second ("e") is silent? For example, in the word "praetor", the vowel "a" is silent but in the word "maelstrom" the vowel "e" is silent.


Do I so often encounter simple past for past participle (e.g., “I have went,” “what was did to her”) because of where I am or when?

Since moving to small-town northern Minnesota (USA) two dozen years back to teach English, I have noticed a lot of instances in spoken language where the simple past is used in lieu of the past participle, as in the examples listed above. Of course this is only noticeable or an issue for such irregular verbs as have two different forms for simple past and past participle. As a SCUBA diver, I encounter the perfect formation "have dove" with particular frequency. Since I had no previous experience of living in northern Minnesota before 1990, and not much experience of living anywhere else since (except Greece), I cannot tell whether this usage is more a function of _where_ I am as an observer of spoken English, or _when,_ though I tend to suspect the former. For those who are curious, my adopted small city was recently used as a fictional location for the TV miniseries spinoff of the Coen brothers' film _Fargo,_ but as with the film, the dialect in the miniseries is rather a caricature. (The show was not filmed here, and in representing Bemidji as a town _with_ a strip club and _without_ a library it was wrong on both counts.) The local dialect does show at least one notable Germanic influence: upon sighting a pretty infant, locals will exclaim "Oh for cute!"--which _for_ I am pretty sure is more closely cognate with the German intensifying prefix _ver-_ than with the English preposition. Other historically likely other-language influences, besides the Germanic Scandinavian languages, would include Finnish (Finno-Ugric), Ojibwe (Algonquian), and French. N.B. Ngram is hard to read on this, since hits for "was did" might well be such as "What exactly it was, did not matter in the least," and similarly for other word sequences.


croak vs croaks vs croaking

I want to write: > Do you remember the pond full of frog croaking at night? Or should it be > Do you remember the pond full of frogs croaking at night? Or > Do you remember the pond of frog croaking at night? or > Do you remember the pond of frog croaks at night? Or > Do you remember the pond of frog croak at night? You get what I'm trying to say. What's the best, grammatically correct, succinct way to express this? I'm trying to convey a memory of a pond which had many frogs who croaked ferociously at night. There must be a better way (better than the alternatives) to express this idea with elegance and economy? Imagine Hemingway sitting at his typewriter with the same idea swirling in his head... The emphasis is the pond. Perhaps it's better to write: Do you remember the pond, where frogs croaked raucously at night? Is "croak" countable? So plural of "croak" would be "croaks"?


"before/after that" as a preposition

In some older English texts I have stumbled on phrases where the word "that" is used as part of a preposition. Here are some examples from the KJV Bible:   * Deuteronomy 9:4 Speak not thou in thine heart, **after that** the LORD thy God hath cast them out from before thee, saying, ...   * Acts 25:16 To whom I answered, It is not the manner of the Romans to deliver any man to die, **before that** he which is accused have the accusers face to face, and have licence to answer for himself concerning the crime laid against him.  There are numerous examples througout the text. In each case, the language would be more natural in modern English with the word "that" left out. And there doesn't seem to be any way to make common sense of the usage of "that" (such as an article or object). It seems to be an actual part of the preposition. What is specifically interesting to me is that in learning Spanish, I noticed that prepositions "before" and "after" are almost always followed by the word "de", which can have a similar meaning to the word "that". So in Spanish you would say "después de ..." or "antes de ...." followed by the phrase. So these older phrases betray a common pattern that has been lost in English. Am I correctly interpreting the word "that" as part of the preposition, or is there some other way to dissect these sentences that I'm missing? Does anyone have any insight to the origin and history of phrases "before/after that" as a singular preposition?


"When I was in college..." Do you really mean college? Or university?

When someone in the US says "When I was in college..." he can mean "college" but he can also mean "university", so I've been told. If that's true, how can we know which one he is talking about? If I say my daughter is off to college, can it really mean either one?


Does a complement phrase always follow a be verb?

## Summary question   * Is there a formal name for the entire portion of a sentence that is connected to the copula?"   * Is it "complement"? ## Background Be verb can be followed by various things: a noun (He is blue.), a be verb can be followed by a verb (Who is running?), etc. But is what follows the be verb always a "complement", even if it is more than one word (e.g., is the emboldened all part of the complement in the following sentence: "They are **happily distance running in the beautiful park**.")? Perhaps I should be asking: 'could a predicate phrase--the part of a sentence that is a predicate--also be called a complement phrase--the part of a sentence that is a complement'? I'm wondering because a "complement phrase" would seem to be more specific to be verbs? Additionally, how about this list: ## Possible followings **to be/to have been +** :   * nothing.   * gerund(s) (-ing).   * past-participle(s) (-ed).   * either of the above two + object(s).   * noun(s)/noun phrase(s).   * adjective.   * 0-valency prepositions.   * combinations of the above two.   * any of the above with adverbs (*except only adverbs) and/or prepositions. **to be/to have been (not followed by) !+** :   * simple past verb(s).   * verb root(s).   * adverb(s) (*unless preceded by commas).   * one-or-more-valency prepositions.   * conjunctions.   * interjections (*except onomatopoeia). ## Purposes Software, education.


The meaning and nuance of "such ...as"

Do you want to work for such a prestigious company as ABC? Is this "such as "structure the same as "such countries as A, B, and C?" Or, "this is such a fantastic book."


Change from to-day to today

In old books, people often use the spelling "to-day" instead of "today". When did the change happen? Also, when people wrote "to-day", did they feel, when pronouncing the word, that it contained two words, rather than a single concept?


What is the grammatical function of “a Catholic” in “She was raised a Catholic”?

I was drawn to the following line in New York Times (Feb.25) article: > “De Blasio, who has said his mother **was raised a Catholic** but did not > bring him up in the church.” http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/26/opinion/dowd-parade-marches- backward.html?hp&rref=opinion&_r=0 Is there difference of meaning among the following?   1. His mother was raised a Catholic.   2. His mother was raised as a Catholic.   3. His mother was raised to be a Catholic. (I presume most of Japanese learners of English language opt for 2. when speaking or writing in English.) Is “be raised an X (Catholic / sportsman / pianist/ naughty boy etc.) more common than “be raised as an X” and “be raised to be an X”? What is the grammatical description of “a Catholic” in 1? Is it simply a predicate?


Which version of English influenced the other? British / American

I remember hearing that modern American English is more similar to Old English than modern British English, due to rural British influences. Is modern American English a more accurate representation of Old English than modern British English?


"omni"-prefixed word for "all-hearing"

Is there an adjective that begins with the prefix _omni_ that means _all- hearing?_ I thought that an aural counterpart to _omnipresent_ , _omnipotent_ , and _omniscient_ must exist, but after a few minutes of Googling, I've failed to find any synonyms for _all-hearing._


The article "a/an" with uncountable nouns

Sometimes I read in books sentences where uncountable nouns are used with the article "a/an". For example "She fades like a dew before the sun". Is it out of the common rules? P.S.: Sorry if this question seems to be stupid. I'm just trying to figure out all the usages of the articles that I don't fully understand.


What’s the meaning of ‘get ploughed’ in sports?

A dictionary says plough means to form furrows with a plow, so I thought those who got ploughed in sports had deep cuts. However, my understanding might be a little strange in the following context ( _Harry Potter 4_ [US Version]: p.108) , because he _hit_ the ground. What kind and degree of injury did he get when he got ploughed? Would you use ‘get ploughed’ in common sports, I mean, non-magical sports? (The sport’s players are flying on their brooms. Two of them are diving for a small ball.) > at the very last second, Viktor Krum pulled out of the dive and spiraled > off. Lynch, however, hit the ground with a dull thud that could be heard > throughout the stadium. A huge groan rose from the Irish seats. (Then a spectator, Charlie, says) > ”He’ll be okay, he only **got ploughed**!” Charlie said reassuringly to > Ginny, who was hanging over the side of the box, looking horror-struck. > [bold font is mine] Side Note: I think ‘only’ means that it’s easy to recover by magic. So I guess ‘get ploughed’ causes serious injury in our world.


Which one can be named or acknowledged as the elder brother (sister) between twins who was born earlier and later in UK and America?

There is the following sentence in Jeffery Archer’s detective story _False Impression_ : > Arabella was so wise and sensible. If only her beloved twin had been born a > few minutes earlier rather than a few minutes later, then she (Arabella) > would have inherited the estate (of Earl of Wentworth titled in 1815) and > undoubtedly handled the problem with considerably more panache. From the above sentence, I speculate that the twin who was born later than the other is acknowledged as the elder sibling and the first heir of the parental estate in order in U.K. If my guess is right, what is the reason, base or provenance for giving priority to the “late comer to the world,” not the “first comer’ in the family order? In Japan, we had the same custom of acknowledging “the born-later” as the elder sibling before the Meiji era (up to late 19 century), but today’s Family Register Law provides the “earlier-born” to be the elder of the twins. **Update with more context** I have added the previous paragraph which _makes this sentence Victoria's point of view about Arabella_. > Victoria looked steadfastly ahead as she climbed the wide marble staircase > to her bedroom on the first floor. She felt unable to look into the eyes of > her ancestors, brought to life by Romney, Lawrence, Reynolds, Lely and > Kneller, conscious of having let them all down. Victoria accepted that > before she retired to bed she must finally write to her sister and let her > know the decision she had come to. > > Arabella was so wise and sensible. If only her beloved twin had been born a > few minutes earlier rather than a few minutes later, then she would have > inherited the estate, and undoubtedly handled the problem with considerably > more panache. And worse, when Arabella learned the news, she would neither > complain nor remonstrate, just continue to display the family's stiff upper > lip.


Are "skill set" and "skill sets" both acceptable?

Are the phrases _skill set_ and _skill sets_ both correct? As I see it, _set_ implies a single set of related skills whereas _sets_ can be taken to mean multiple sets of skills around different concentrations. Thoughts?


A word for a person concerned with spelling

What do we call a person who is concerned with words' spelling? This person likes words without spelling mistakes. If this person's name is typed incorrectly or if the person sees incorrect spelling, then he or she is disturbed by it.


Technical terms for user-website interaction

I am making a context diagram of a website and I noticed that the words I used for a user and the website's interaction are not consistent or cohesive. I have been using the pairs of words below to indicate that a user requests to "see" a webpage: ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/fMsXo.png) > a user "visits" a website and the webpage "views" (as a response to the > user) I can't find a more acceptable alternative for these two but I am sure there are better ones out there that I just don't know. One more, what should I use if the page that a user wants to see is a popup or specifically a modal element (which means a user is not directed away from their current page)?


"restart" is to "restarted", "shutdown" is to what?

If _"restart"_ is to _"restarted"_ , _"shutdown"_ is to what? I don't think _shutdowned_ is the word. What is the past-tense of the word _shutdown_?


What is a common word that describes men who don't attract women

How do you refer to men who are unable to get women for courtship? Context of the question: A man might want a woman for sex, _just for sex_ , for marriage, for a relationship that might not _necessarily_ lead to a marriage, etc. But whatever might be the reason, the man needs to be able to talk to/impress/approach the lady. If a person is unable to do so and thus has a very hard time _getting_ women, what would you call him? Also, please do not consider _paying a woman_ in the same way as I am trying to express _getting a woman_. Both are totally different things. Whatever the a man might want from a woman, he needs to go through a _test of sorts_. That could be _having a soft heart_ for some women, simply wealth for others, with some it is social status, etc. What do you call a person who does not pass this _test_ (or hardly ever passes it) with any woman. Also, I am _not_ looking for slang terms.


Difference between "valuable" and "invaluable"

_Invaluable_ intuitively seems to imply a higher degree of importance. Please explain the difference between _valuable_ and _invaluable_ and in what context you'd use one or the other.


Use of a semicolon before and comma after "however"

Several years ago, a previous boss told me to use a semicolon and comma with the word "however". I've always questioned this and would like to know if the following random sentences are using the correct method. >   1. Our plane was delayed overnight; however, the airlines reimbursed us > for lodging. >   2. It looks as though he's upset; however, she told me he always has that > look on his face. >   3. I want to find him a nice gift; however, I am a broke until payday. > Normally I would use a less "wordy" sentence in casual writing, but hopefully the example will suffice. For example, on number 3 I would usually type: > I want to get him a nice gift, but I'm broke until payday.


Phrasal Usage of called on

Consider the sentence: "America's respected Institute of Medicine called _for/on_ nurses to play a greater role in primary care." Which is more appropriate _on_ or _for_?


Should I use "somewhere" in this sentence?

**"I've lost myself [somewhere] among the dreams that never come true"**


Capitalization of "sister" and "brother"

I have seen the question on when to capitalize _mom_ and _dad_, but I am confused why the rule would not apply equally to _Brother_ vs. _brother_ and _Sister_ vs. _sister_. I.e., if the rule is to use capitals when speaking of a specific mom, as in "my Mom", then should the rule compel me to refer to siblings as "my Sister" and "my Brother"? It looks perfectly acceptable to capitalize parents, but capitalizing siblings looks extremely odd.


Be talking something?

First of all, I'm not native. I've heard this expression in some movies, I believe, and I'm wondering whether it's correct (or maybe I just thought I heard this and I'm mistaken). Can you say "be talking something", without "about"? Example: > guy 1: We're planning a bachelor party for Mike. > > guy 2: Great, what are we talking? Strippers, booze, private party or should > we go all the way and take a trip to Las Vegas? The example is made up but this is the context of usage I have in my mind.


Does anybody use the elative degree in modern speech?

I read that English has the following degree of comparison: positive, comparative, superlative (with definite article) and elative (with indefinite article). I'm wondering, whether sentences like "it is a most brave action" can be used in modern speech or it will be said "it is the most brave action"?


Please help explain this long sentence

> It **bore** an engraved escutcheon, a herald's wording of which may serve > for a motto and brief description of our now concluded legend; _so sombre is > it, and relieved only by one ever-glowing point of light gloomier than the > shadow:_ "ON A FIELD, SABLE, THE LETTER A, **GULES** " I looked them up (the words in bold) in online dictionary websites but I could not pick up the most correct meaning they have to fit into the above sentence. Could you explain the meaning in the sentence in italic ? Thank you.


"length in bytes" vs "length by the byte" and "paid in hours" vs "paid by the hour"

>   1. "The variable len indicates the buffer length in bytes." > >   2. "The variable len indicates the buffer length by the byte." > > I'm a computer programmer, so I know **1** is far more common than **2**. However, please consider the following two sentences: >   1. "He is paid by the hour" > >   2. "He is paid in hours" > > I also know **3** is far more common than **4**. Which of these phrases should be used in what scenarios?


Em dash vs semicolon: which is more appropriate in the following examples?

I am very confused by these, and even when I understand other people's usage of them I find it difficult to know when to employ them myself. For this reason, I am trying to make my own examples and see if I get them correct. Please understand, English is not my first language, but I have never learned grammar in my native language either. I hope that what I'm saying is comprehensible to you. In the following examples, I'll be using a period in place of the em dash or semicolon, because I am utterly confused as to which one should be used. >   1. English is not my first language, and I'm having trouble with the > grammar. Specifically semicolons and dashes. > >   2. Don't ask Jim to fix your car. That sort of thing would be better > handled by Steve. > >   3. The question isn't what you can take away from this, but what you can > learn in the process. / The question isn't what you can take away from this. > It is what you can learn in the process. > > Normally I would use a semicolon in all of these instances, but recently I have come to learn that this is incorrect usage. Any help is greatly appreciated.


What do you call people who are constantly moving [i.e., "in motion"]?

_Moving_ here does not mean moving to a new city or something like that. I am talking about the people that just can't stay at one place. It is impossible for them to sit put at one place and relax.


How to use "have resonance with"?

If I want to say "have the same feeling with ..." or "agree with ...", can I use "have resonance with ..."? For example, I knew a friend who doesn't own a cellphone and I found an article saying how great it is not having a cellphone. When I send this article to that friend, can I say "you may have resonance with this article"? I found some people use this expression, but I'm not sure it is commonly used.


Are there any differences between "update" and "upgrade"?


What are the different nuances of "passing with distinction" in a CV?

I am in the middle of translating my (German) CV to English. In the German/Austrian school system, there is the notion of passing ...   * ... _"mit gutem Erfolg"_ (which is better than average, yet not the best you can achieve, roughly translating to "good success")   * ... _"mit ausgezeichnetem Erfolg"_ (which is the best you can achieve, similar to "with distinction") What would be a good English word/expression for the former expression in my CV? Is there a grading of "passing with distinction" in British/American English or their respective school systems? * * * _Update:_ I was referring to the general way of referring to "passing with distinction". Our universities give Latin grades ( _"cum laude_ ", etc.), whereas schools don't.


Examples where English is "more Germanic" than German

English is a so called a Germanic language, as are German, Yidish, Dutch, etc. In a way it seems natural to believe that German is "more Germanic" than English. But here it is not clear what "more" is supposed to mean since "Germanic" is just a linguistic description of the inner working engine and the roots of a language. In this context I am looking for examples that are "the other way around", i.e. where the original Germanic form is used in English and another (e.g. Roman) form in German. The most prominent examples are the following ones: > English: **window** from Germanic **Windloch** (wind hole)   >  German: **Fenster** from Latin **fenestra** What would be a good source to help easily find (such described words)?


Can the words 'basic' and 'basically' be pronounced with [z] instead of [s]?

In dictionaries, I have only found the version with [s] but I heard Ryan Stiles on _Whose Line Is It Anyway?_ pronounce "basically" with a [z].


What does "F" mean in "Mushrooms 3.94 F" of my grocery receipt? I guess it means I paid 3.94 US dollars for mushrooms, but I don't understand why.


What is the exact meaning of “It’s better to be lucky than good”? How popular is this adage?

Today’s (October 29) New York Times carries the article written by Jim Collins and Morten Hansen under the title “What’s luck go to do with it,” It deals with a nine-year research study of some of the most extreme business successes of modern times that they call "10Xers," that they recently completed. The article begins with the following line. > “ _Better to be lucky than good_ , the adage goes. And maybe that’s true — > if you just want to be merely good, not much better than average. But what > if you want to build or do something great? And what if you want to do so in > today’s unstable and unpredictable world?” I guess “ _Better to be lucky than good_ “means “to be gifted with good fortune is better than being simply good (at what remains as a question though),” but I’m not sure of its exact meaning. Although the authors say it’s an adage that I understand should be well- established, popular form of expression, I don’t find this phrase in neither Cambridge nor Merriam-Webster Dictionary. Google Ngram either doesn’t register this phrase. As a plausible origin of this expression, flightjournal.com says: > “By: Thomas McKelvey Cleaver. "It's better to be lucky than good," says > Lamar Gillett, the only P-35 pilot in. World War II to shoot down a Japanese > Zero fighter. "I was lucky I was behind the Zero instead of in front of him. > I was lucky when I landed back ...” What is the exact meaning of " _It's better to be lucky than good_ ,"? What does "good" mean here? Is it really qualified as an adage as the authors claim it?


Problem with choosing between singular and plural nouns

I would like to find out how to use singular and plural nouns correctly. I have tried grammar books, but I can't find anything on agreements of nouns in the object position. Please kindly explain to me whether the sentences below are correct and whether there are any differences between their use. Also this type of grammar problems if filed under what names in grammar books. Thanks!!! > A) > >> I can't offer any simple solution   >  I can't offer any simple solutions > > B) > >> I want to get better school results   >  I want to get a better school result > > C) > >> They can't obtain a sense of accomplishment   >  They can't obtain senses of accomplishment > > D) > >> Students should do more sports to help them build a healthy body   >  Students should do more sports to help them build healthy bodies


Where does "for good" come from?

As a foreign English speaker, I always wondered if **_"for good"_** is an old style English phrase, or it is relatively new. For me, it seems like an old style phrase, but I don't know anything about etymology. Can you shed some light on it?


"See you Monday" vs "See you on Monday"

I have seen native speakers use both variations. > See you Monday. and > See you on Monday. I would like to know which usage is correct or if there are any specific instances in which each is used.


Should I use a comma or semicolon to separate these ideas?

>   * I can no longer remember her face, too much time has passed. > >   * I can no longer remember her face; too much time has passed. > >


Use of "submitting" or "submit" in sentence

Why is submitting used instead of submit in the sentence below from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codebase? > They are often used by multi-developer projects to handle various versions > and developers **submitting** various patches of code in an organized > fashion.


"With what [...]?" or "What [...] with?"

Making a comparison with Who/Whom I now have a doubt about the use of what with prepositions in questions. I'll explain by example: These two sentences are correct, one is more formal than the other: **Who/Whom**   * Formal: **With whom** are you doing that?   * Informal: **Who** are you doing that **with**? But if I substitute Who/Whom with What, the "formal" one sounds a bit awkward and I'm not sure if it's correct or not: **What**   * **With what** are you doing that?   * **What** are you doing that **with**? So, are those last two questions grammatically correct?   Is one more formal than the other?


Is incharge/encharge a word?

I always thought the word incharge/encharge existed but I noticed my spell check kept marking it as wrong. Examples:   "Who is encharge around here!?"   The secretary is encharge of taking notes. I find this confusing because "in charge" is two words which as a phrase does not literally mean what it describes. Is it considered an idiom?


Is "you and I" the subject in this sentence?

I know that "you and I" should be used when it's the subject of a sentence, and "you and me" when it's a complement. But I'm not sure about the following phrase: > We are very good pals, you and I. It would seem to me that "you and I" is a subject here (so I should use "I" instead of "me"). Is that correct?


One-word synonym for "dataset"

I need a one-word synonym for the word "dataset". I need it for a software written in .NET, that is a programming framework that already has a concept of "DataSet".


Can I use the word "reincarnated" for a body part?

Basically, can I said something like this? > But what really turned heads were her hands. They looked incredibly delicate > and soft, so much that some started believing they were the **reincarnated > hands** of a Goddess. (the passage above is describing the hands of a teenager). For some reason, it sounds strange to me. Is it OK to use the word like the example above? Is there's a better one? **reincarnated** according to Merriam-Webster Dictionary: > **1 a** : the action of reincarnating : the state of being reincarnated > **b** : rebirth in new bodies or forms of life; _especially_ : a rebirth of > a soul in a new human body > > **2** : a fresh embodiment


Difference between 'kindness' and 'politeness'

Can one use _kindness_ as a synonym for _politeness_? What's the difference? Where do you draw the line between them?


The spiritual usage of the word "revelation"

I translate some spiritual texts and this word _revelation_ is very tricky to translate to another language that really does not have a similar word. For example: "God has sent a new _revelation_ to the world." What could be good synonyms for it in a general (non-Christian) spiritual context, where I am coming from. The original text is in American English. Possible translations:   1. New message   2. New information   3. Insight What else? Dictionaries mainly refer to Bible and book of Revelations, but that is just confusing, because this text is not about Bible and should not be confused with it.


Specific vocabulary for making someone laugh by rubbing their underarm with finger

To make someone laugh, we sometime rub his underarm with our fingers in a way that makes him feel restless and then he starts laughing. My question is: What is the specific vocabulary in the English language for the aforesaid rubbing?


Better word for "specialized"

_**General_ relativity** is a general concept that apples to that applies to the universe at large. **_Special_ relativity** is a _"subset"_ of general relativity that applies to the subset of the universe that shares a certain characteristic. "Subset" is not the right word here - what's a word that addresses the conceptual relationship between a "general concept" and a _"special(ized)"_ application of that concept to a more strictly-defined context?


Is it ok to say that I burned my hand if it was injured via hot water?

I feel like it should be alright, but thought I'd get your feelings on whether it's appropriate to employ the term "got burned" if no fire was involved, specifically as it pertains to injury to a living thing, or if I am precluded from having been burned by hot water, and have to employ scalded or cooked or some other non flame related term?


Participle as verbal adjective

I came across the following: >   1. As he had been deceived by his friends he lost all hope.   > >   2. He was deceived by his friends and so he lost all hope.   > >   3. Deceived by his friends, he lost all hope.   > >   4. He lost all hope because he was deceived by his friends.   > > It was said that only sentence 3 has a participle in it. But all 4 has the word deceived, Why is "Deceived by his friends, he lost all hope' is said to have participle?


"He eyeballed me pensively"; using bodyparts as verbs

What are these words called, and why are they used in place of traditional verbs? For example: >   * She handed me a pencil. [ _handed_ instead of _gave_ ] >   * He eyeballed me pensively. [ _eyeballed_ instead of _leered_ or _looked > at_ ] >   * She eyed the carrots. [ _eyed_ instead of _looked at_ ] >   * He mouthed some words to me. [ _mouthed_ instead of _spoke/said_ ] > There's so many more, so these are just a few examples. This is colloquial speech, but it kind of irks me when I hear people say body parts in place of verbs (excl. _handed_ because it's so common). Is there a particular name for this usage? Is this done in other languages?


Is "get" (in the sense of "become/make") appropriate for formal writing?

Is the use of "get + adjective/participle" appropriate for formal writing (for example, scientific papers)? I am thinking of usages analogous to   * get fat    * get inflated   * get sick where the meaning is "become". What about cases where the meaning is "make (sg)", such as   * get (it) done   * get (her) dressed Not being a native speaker, I cannot easily judge the level of formality of these constructs.


What’s the meaning of “if that” at the end of a sentence?

I find it often after a number. What does it mean and what is _that_? It’d be nice if you could help me. (from Google search) > Some books that are more than 100 years old still won't sell for more than a > dollar, if that. ( _Harry Potter 2_ [US Version]: p.123) > Nearly Headless Nick, the ghost of Gryffindor Tower, was staring morosely > out of a window, muttering under his breath, “… don’t fulfill their > requirements … half an inch, if that …”


What is indeed the "first known use"?

Why, after a quick lookup at the Google online library, allowing the browsing of the content of available books, can I inevitably find instances prior to the first known use in the dictionary of certain words?


The meaning of Descending Priority when some possibly contradicting ordering is also are specified

At work, we use a priority classification with the following values:   * Priority 0 (most urgent)   * Priority 1 (less urgent than previous p0)   * Priority 2 (less urgent than previous p1)   * Priority 3 (least urgent) I've listed them in this order as I see them in order of descending or lesser importance, as you go down the list. My boss recently sent me an email with of prioritised tasks. She stated that "These are in in descending priority", and they were listed as   * P3 ---- butter task   * P3 ---- cake task   * P3 ---- apple task    * etc.   * P2 ---- chocolate task   * P1 ---- cookie task However she expects that above defined importance is applied to the list I wonder if either of our understandings of _descending_ when applied to _priority_ is flawed with respect to a common sense understanding. FYI : We're English speaking New Zealanders to give you a cultural context.


Origin of "c**p"

I've heard some far-fetched stories of the origin of the word _crap_. What is its real origin?


How to express college student in each grade?

It really bothers me: > Should I say _I'm a college senior student_ , or should I say _I'm a senior > college student_ (or _I'm a college senior student_ )? > > Should I say _I'm a sophomore_ , or should I say _I'm a sophomore college > student_ (or _I'm a college sophomore student_ )? Ooh, English is tough!


"Keys to car" or "keys of car"

I saw in a grammar book a sentence that looks weird to me. > Kyle gave Loren the **keys to** his new car. I would have hoped to see _of_ instead of _to_ but it must be correct since it was the sample sentence. > Kyle gave Loren the **keys of** his new car. What grammar rule is this?


A GRE verbal question -- I think the given answer is wrong

According to my understanding the choices to this question is only **A**. But the answer sheet says the correct choices are **A** and **C**. The question asks the conceptualization about _gender_ in western culture. In choice **C** it says: > The idea of male/female binary gender is **not** generally considered the > **norm** of contemporary Western civilization. I don't know if I understand the word "norm" here correctly. If I understand it correctly, and the choice **C** is correct, I think it means _in general western consider a third gender in their culture_. And the explanation to choice **C** even confuse me. It feels to me that the explanation contradict with choice. I think this passage is quite simple, and maybe I misunderstand some key words. So please help me. ![Question](http://i.stack.imgur.com/HiJ89.jpg) ![Answer](http://i.stack.imgur.com/ArC2W.jpg)


Is it possible to write an infinite sentence that is grammatically correct?

I was wondering if this was technically possible in English. I did not know if there are specific grammar rules that would make an infinite sentence impossible.


Can “take fruit in” something mean you enjoy it?

Consider > to **take fruit in** something For example: > I **take fruit in** my life. I feel like I have heard this term used before, but because I couldn't find an example with Google, I wanted to check whether this makes sense to other people or whether I’m just conjuring this out of my own brain. The intended meaning here would be “to enjoy”; is this acceptable and correct?


Quite often I see derision about ideas by people who label them as 'too academic'. Often this appears to result from laziness or an unwillingness to stretch their thinking. What's the logical fallacy where people dismiss what you say as irrelevant to the real-world?


What’s the male equivalent of “menopause”?

If women go through **_men** -o-pause_, do men go through **_women** -o-pause_? Is there an etymological equivalent? What is the antonymic Greek word to _meno-_ (or rather, to _μηνο-_ )? There might be a medical equivalent — such as _andropause_ — but which would actually be the male equivalent of _estropause_.


Song: when to use remix, cover and tribute to

If there is original song and same song performed by another artist, when to use term 'remix', 'cover', 'tribute to'?   1. Is 'remix' more suitable for electronic version of song?    2. What is the difference between 'cover' and 'tribute to'?   3. Which word to use when someone performs a song (but not sing) that was originally by another author? Example: Sungha Jung playing Take On Me (originally by A-HA).


What are the differences between "want to pass", "want pass" and "want passing"?

Would you kindly tell me what is the difference between the followings? >   1. I want you **to pass** your exams so that you can come as soon as > possible to be with me. > >   2. I want you **pass** your exams so that you can come as soon as possible > to be with me. > >   3. I want you **passing** your exams so that you can come as soon as > possible to be with me. > >


Best source for origins of expressions and idioms?

I'm often interested in the origins of English phrases, and I know that I can find answers by googling, and I can find _good_ answers by asking here. How can I find good answers myself? Are there any well-known, respected, and fairly comprehensive sources for origins of English expressions and idioms?


Why do I give my pets "food" but my livestock "feed"?

When I feed my cat or my dog, the package tends to say "Dog Food" or "Cat Food." In contrast, I give my chickens "chicken feed" or "poultry feed." Likewise, a cow's silage is her "feed." Why does this distinction exist? Is there an historical or grammatical explanation, or is it merely idiom?


I am stuck on a word choice problem. I have a large amount of response related data, which were previously stored such that each datum lay within one of the following realms:   1. law enforcement    2. health and safety   3. hazardous materials, or   4. other In order to reduce a significant amount of double entry I have decided to switch the coding so that realm is simply an attribute of each datum. I am also doing this for jurisdiction (e.g., state, local, federal) and some other like attributes that were stored as realms. My question is, "Is there one word that clearly describes the difference in kind for these four types?" Any hints well appreciated, as the word choice here will influence the structure of a large number of models based on these data. The closest I've come so far is vocation, but this seems overly general. **edit 1** : each datum denotes a a response action taken such as hospitalization, arrest, or called out (i.e., visited the scene). **edit 2** : An example datum might be represented like so:               > {???}: Law Enforcement        - jurisdiction: Local             + agency: Police                 * measure: Arrest      While it's clearly tempting to place these into a hierarchy, but I must avoid duplicate entries, so I am trying to encode the agency and allow many different agencies to use the same action. **edit 3** : In order to clarify I'll phrase as a simile: `Apples and oranges are to fruits what law enforcement and health/safety are to ...`


How to stress any word properly?

Personally I think stress is one of the hardest things. There are thousands of words around, so most likely I cannot remember all stress-marks of every word then pronounce them exactly. Is it so important? And how to deal with this problem efficiently?


How do hyphens modify the meaning of "n-month-old"?

I see three different ways of hyphenating the phrase "six month old". Six-month old: > A **six-month old** poses with a machine gun owned by supporters of the Free > Syrian Army. Six-month-old: > Fraud alert closes account of **six-month-old** baby girl Six month old: > Rebecca Judd, a model, TV personality and a new mother to Oscar (her **six > month old** son with AFL star Chris Judd) is a self-confessed happy snapper. Is there a significance to these differences?


How to say that a city is in the side of another city? Is it neighborhood city?

I live in Guarulhos city, which is right next to the city of São Paulo. Can I say that Guarulhos is the neighbor of São Paulo?


"sufferings" is plural though it is uncountable,but how?

We know that there is no plural form of the "uncountable noun," but, for example, we write: > His sufferings force us to retain pity for him. Is it possible to make an uncountable noun plural? If so, please explain it.


Does "Can I have lunch with you?" imply I have something to talk about with that person?

Last week, I asked one of my coworkers to have lunch with me. I messaged him "Can I have lunch with you?" and he reply "No, I have a meeting until 2pm" Then around 4 pm, he walked to my desk and asked me if I have something to talk, which prompts me to ask: Does “Can I have lunch with you?” imply I have something to talk about with that person?


Is there a more formal word for 'ratting'?

I'm looking for a more formal term used to describe **_ratting_** : > A verb intransitive identified as slang meaning to betray one's comrade by > giving information on a friend to the authorities. Specifically, I want to know what word would appear in a court document? Should " _ratting_ " be included in criminal proceedings? **Is there any formal word I can use for 'ratting'?**


Opposite of "In response to"?

I'm looking for the "outward" name for a relationship between two items. One is a request item, the other is the item created in response. Other examples of are: Name - Outward Name - Inward Name   Depend - "is required for" - "depends on"   Duplicate - "is duplicated by" - "duplicates"   Subtask - "parent for" - "subtask of" The one I'm looking for would be:   Response - "????" - "response to" Looking for something a little better than "Request" or "Inquiry".


"Opulence is the end": has this a double meaning?

This quote in its context means "death caused by the opulence (wealthy life)". Opulence is the end because it can make people do things they wouldn't do otherwise. My question is: can this quote also reference to an achievement I want to goal? Like "the opulence is my objective! (the end)"?


What is the origin of "hot" as "good-looking" or "attractive"?

I'm not sure if "hot" as "warm" or "heated" existed before "hot" came to mean "good-looking" or "attractive", but if so, how did this new meaning come to be?


"same as" vs just "same"

Here are two variations of the same sentence: >   * He's not the same as he was yesterday. >   * He's not the same he was yesterday. > Both can be encountered in colloquial speech, but I would like to know if there are any noteworthy differences in usage between the US, the UK, and Australia. Does either one sound more natural or correct, for lack of a better word, in any particular dialect?


Is there a word to name being unable to think of "proper terminology" for something?

In regards to only being able to say something like "hand ankle" when meaning "wrist", but the person is absolutely unable to remember the word "wrist". (Or "unsweet doughnut", when someone can't remember the word "bagel".) Is there a word to describe this phenomenon of cobbled together phrases meant to bridge a temporary gap in commonly-known vocabulary?


Using I hope in professional environment

I need to state that my goal is to answer some answers. Starting my e-mail with the "I hope..." does not sound professional. Any alternatives you can provide me with?


Demonstrated through?

Is this sentence correct? "Excellent communication, organizational, and leadership skills demonstrated through various awards and volunteer activities."


Set your journey to the wellness.. "set" used as "begin" , goes right here?

Using 'set' as 'begin' or closely similar way. The sentence "Set your journey to the wellness.." is ok? Set goes right here? From definition, I want to use "set" for this purpose.. cause (someone or something) to start doing something. "the incident set me thinking"


Spaces and em-dash

In using the em-dash, where do you put the spaces? Which of the following is correct? > School is based on the three R’s —reading, writing, and ’rithemtic. or > School is based on the three R’s— reading, writing, and ’rithemtic. or > School is based on the three R’s — reading, writing, and ’rithemtic.


to depart from the project?

Would it be OK to say: "The Subcontractor `departs` from the certified project" (meaning, that he does not comply with the established work order, stated in the project" and takes his own direction)? Is the word "depart" suitable here?


A conditional sentence with present perfect

Is it correct to say: > If you have finished it by then, I'll come and take it. thus using the present perfect in the "if" clause to mean the future instead of the present?


Are these called synonyms? What grammatical elements are constraining the meaning?

Consider the following sentence: > Due to my low reputation on SE, I was tentative (okay, "fearful" is more > _____) in posting to meta.SE. The context of the statement might the top of a post, as a kind of "apology introduction" before moving on to the main topic. I consider this to be in the realm of informal conversational English. I find it interesting that a lot of words can fill in the blank. For example: >   * okay, "fearful" is more apropos >   * okay, "fearful" is more realistic >   * okay, "fearful" is more like it >   * okay, "fearful" is more timely [an "almost but not good enough" fit] >   * okay, "fearful" is more right >   * okay, "fearful" is more descriptive >   * okay, "fearful" is more honest >   * okay, "fearful" is more true >   * okay, "fearful" is more exact >   * okay, "fearful" is more indicative of the situation > These all say "pretty much the same thing". It seems like they are synonymous but not necessarily synonyms. Could it be the idiomatic phrase/style/humor is guiding the meaning: > [Main clause stating some condition with an understated tone] (well, perhaps > [emphatic tone word] is [what goes here is allowed more variation than > normal]) So this is my question: Would these just be called synonyms? Distant synonyms? Synonymous? And also, is the idiomatic construction allowing a wider semantic distance for the blank?


Capitalizing a Figure

In a report I'm working on, I have lots of drawings. In the caption of each drawing I write "Figure 1." (or whatever the number may be). It appears that it is indeed correct to capitalize it in the caption. However, what about when writing in the actual text "as shown in figure 1". Do I capitalize the word figure there?


What do you call someone who isn't doing their calling in life?

You have a person who has an incredible talent, whether it be cooking, writing, sports, whatever. This person briefly showed this talent but then is living their life without fulfilling their calling in life. I would like a noun and I would hope it would not only convey that the rest of the population is missing out on that person's talent too. Note: The Will Hunting comment is a good one. 1 out of 5 movies seem to be about this type of person.


What does “Wonk gap” mean in brief?

I came across the word, “The wonk gap” used as the headline of the article written by Paul Krugman in New York Times’ September 8 issue. The word reappears in the following sentence: > Senator Rand Paul --insisted, “the size of growth of government is enormous > under President Obama” - which was completely untrue but was presumably what > his sources had told him, knowing that it was what he wanted to hear. For > that, surely, is what **the wonk gap** is all about. > http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/09/opinion/krugman-the-wonk-gap.html?hp None of CED, OED, and Merriam-Webster carries “wonk gap,” nor does GoogleNgram. However, there are dozens of descriptions incorporating “wonk gap” on Google Serach. For an example, the article written by Steve Benen in MSnbc Maddow blog ( June 3, 2013) comes under the headline, “Avik Roy and **the wonk gap** ,” and goes on: > “Jon Krugman, and others have detailed reports explaining why Avik Roy's > analysis simply doesn't make sense, and I hope folks will follow the links > to understand the underlying policy dispute. It's not just of a gray area; > Roy is simply wrong. But it's the point about "why we can't have an honest > debate" that resonates with me. Indeed, it reinforces the **"wonk gap" > thesis** I've been kicking around for a while. > http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/06/03/18727925-avik-roy-and-the-wonk- > gap?lite OED defines ‘wonk’ as; (North American informal/derogatory)   1. a studious or hard-working person: any kid with an interest in science was a wonk   2. a person who takes an excessive interest in minor details of political policy:he is a policy wonk in tune with a younger generation of voters.  But it doesn’t give me a clear idea of ‘wonk gap’. What does “wonk gap” mean in essence, in a couple of words? Do most Americans understand and use this phrase, or it’s just a politics, or press jargon, of which currency is limited to a select group of people?


English pronunciation by Spanish speakers

A typical pronunciation problem for Spanish speakers is that of words that begin with 'S + consonant'. For example, `Spain` may be pronounced `eh-spain`. What are other standard (eh-standar) pronunciation issues for Spanish speakers? (Note: This is a query for specific examples; thus, we do not have here an exact duplicate of this question, which was a little more vague.)


Are derived class and deriving class interchangeable terms?

Consider the following statement that I quoted from Inheritance and Derived Classes (C# vs Java) > You can extend the functionality of an existing class by creating a new > class that derives from the existing class. The derived class inherits the > properties of the base class, and you can add or override methods and > properties as required. Now, let's compare with the following that I quoted from a book. > Abstract classes are similar to interfaces in many ways. They can both > define member signatures that deriving classes must implement, and neither > one of them can be instantiated. Shortly speaking, are derived class and deriving class interchangeable terms?


What are you having?

When we are at the restaurant is more correct for the waitress to ask '' what are you having madam?'' or ''what will you have?''


Word usage: feeble

Is it correct to say > Feeble people are more at risk of flu-related complications. to convey the idea that there are different levels of risk in the population at risk? I could have said _old people_ instead of _feeble people_ , but I would like to stay vague at this point. Is _weak_ a better alternative for _feeble_?


The use of negative with indefinite pronouns

Is it correct to say: Everything doesn't go easy in life. Or should one say : Not everything goes easy in life.


What is a verb for "illusion"?

What is a verb for _illusion_? I want to use it in a sentence like the following: > The optical effect [illudes] my perception of its real shape. ~~But **illude** does not exist.~~ But I cannot find _illude_ in my Dictionary (OS X Dictionary.app). I want to find a verb that is somewhere between _deceive_ and _confuse_.


How should "Northern Europe" be capitalized?

**Europe** should obviously be capitalized, since it is a proper noun. Should the **northern** part of the example sentence _"I was traveling through **northern Europe**."_ be capitalized? In country names such as **North Holland** , **north** is actually part of the name and not an adjective, and should therefore be capitalized. However, in this case, there is no part of Europe officially named "Northern Europe", but is instead just used as a general (and varied, depending on you count them) list of countries roughly situated towards the north. What are the rules for capitalization in such a case?


Non positively connoted synonym for "highlights"

I'm producing a monthly report that put forward a selection of ten particular cases out of 70 individual entries. I filter for the 5 best and 5 worst cases according to various indicators. The idea is to bring forward whatever is out of ordinary, bad or good. So far, the report is called "highlights", but in all dictionnaries I've consulted the word has a positive connotation. > Webster: something (such as an event or a detail) that is very interesting, > exciting, or important : the best part of something > > Collins: the most exciting or memorable part of an event or period of time > > Oxford: An outstanding part of an event or period of time It does not seem right to use it with "five worst sellers" of the month, for example, although it's fine with "five more profitable". Ideally, I'm looking for a synonym of _highlights_ but that could be also used for negative stuff. A synonym devoid of connotation –if it can be still called a synonym ? For native speakers, in the following list of synonyms I found (from Collins+Oxford), what would be the word that sound to you the less connotated in a positive or negative manner, what sounds the most neutral ? > emphasize, stress, accent, feature, set off, show up, underline, spotlight, > play up, accentuate, flag, foreground, focus attention on, call attention > to, give prominence to, bring to the fore,high point, peak, climax, feature, > focus,high point, high spot, best part, climax, culmination, peak, pinnacle, > height, top, acme, zenith, apex, summit, apogee, apotheosis, crowning > moment, high water mark, most memorable part, most outstanding feature; > Latin ne plus ultra Or , would you have another proposition ?


What is a word for the length of sky between directly overhead and horizon?

What is a word that is closely defined to "the vertical length of sky between directly overhead and the horizon"? **Example for definition:** "The sun shown through the fog in the |between- zenith-horizon|" It may also be defined as "the range of directions between directly overhead and the horizon." **Example for definition:** "The sun shown through the fog in the |between- overhead-horizon| sky" I would prefer one word.


word meaning 'the day before'

I am looking for a word meaning 'the day before' that fits within the following sentence: 'day before the day the conference started' Alternatively a neater way of saying the same thing would be great....


Sixty-nine callback

In the movie 'Fight Club' I heard the phrase 'Sixty-nined you' for calling back. Is that common in American English or special for New York where you can press the 6 and 9 to call the last incoming number?


down the hall to the left

Why do people say like "down the hall, road, alley, etc" when it is not down in any way. Why can't we say like "it's straight this corridor, road, etc"?. Why do say "it's straight **down** this corridor, road, etc"? Please elaborate it.


Non-finite clause complementation of complex transitive verbs

This question has been bothering me for a while. It came up when I was reading Chapter 16 of "A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language." How to explain the grammatical structure of the following four sentences? "We knew him **to be a spy**."   "I saw her **leave the room**."   "I heard someone **shouting**."   "I got the watch **repaired**." What category do the four non-finite clauses in boldface fall into? They do not seem to fall into any of relative, nominal, comparative and adverbial clauses.


How to describe different levels of maturity?

The dictionary describes _mature_ as _fully developed, completed, or perfected_. I assume by this meaning that it is already absolute. My question is, is there such thing as degrees of maturity? If yes, what are those adverbs to describe the degrees of maturity?


What's the meaning of the phrase "where appropriate"?

Could you explain how to understand the phrase "where appropriate"? I know each word 'where' and 'appropriate,' but I cannot understand the meaning of the phrase combined with two word in this context. "Evaluation by competent supervisors and peers, employing such approaches, should form the foundation of teacher evaluation systems, with a supplemental role played by multiple measures of student learning gains that, **where appropriate** , could include test scores."


Can I bother someone "for" something?

If I want someone (in this case, a Professor) to do something for me that they don't _need_ to do (in this case, a second opinion on another Professor's paper), can I ask whether I can "bother them **for** a second opinion"? The "for" would emphasize that I _want_ the second opinion from the other person, more than "about". But is it proper English? Google gives a number of results for "bother for", but as always in these kinds of questions, that's not proof of anything except that 94,000 other people may be doing it wrong.


What is the meaning of “in that parents’ basement sort of way”?

What is the meaning of _parents’ basement_? > In that parents’ basement sort of way > > He’s kind of cute, in that parents’ basement sort of way


what does "falling into the pit of success" mean?

I can see its literal meaning, but I don't know its extended meaning. I saw this in the introduction of stackoverflow: > We believe finding the right answer to your programming questions should be > as easy as falling into the pit of success. Could anyone help me understand?


Is there a better way to say "able to be calculated"?

I was doing some proofreading and ran across the word " _calculate-able_." I'm tempted to write this out as the question suggests ("able to be calculated") but was wondering if there was a more terse alternative.


Polish your mug idiom

Recently I've heard couple of interesting idioms one of which was "Make yourself scarce or I'll polish your mug". So, I was wondering is it really used like that? I've heard of "Make yourself scarce" before, but "I'll polish your mug" is the first time I heard it. Does it sounds natural? Can I actually use it? Or will it be just funny if I say it?


"Teaching assistant" referring to a student

Can I use "teaching assistants" to refer to students teaching peers in lower grade levels as their extra activities? What is the best word in this case?


What is the most professional name for "squiggly bracket"?

I am creating a software training video and need to refer to these brackets: > { } I usually call them "squiggly brackets" or "curly brackets". Is there a more professional name?


What does the phrase "Begging the question" mean?

What does the phrase "begging the question" _really_ mean? And does it even matter if I use it correctly? Almost everyone just uses it as a synonym for "posing the question" these days.


What is the origin & meaning of "It used to drive me spare"?

While watching the eponymous documentary on Stephen Hawking, his wife described her husband's behaviour when he was deep in thought. She said he could be surrounded by children and not even notice what was going on. She then said, " _It used to drive me spare_." I got the gist that she meant it drove her perhaps crazy or to despair. Is this a British idiom? If so, how did it originate? Was there an omission in the phrase? How does one get to **spare** from **annoyed/upset**? I think that while the previous post is somewhat plausible, it is rather tenuous. To go spare (becoming unemployed) and being driven spare (getting angry) seems quite a leap to me. To me, even extreme anger and being distraught are two entirely different emotions. The link to loss of employment appears speculative in my mind.


"Holding her finger" vs "holding on her finger" vs "holding onto her finger."

> Mary peered down at the beach, and **holding her** index finger, she sank > back to her seat with a sigh. > > Mary peered down at the beach, and **holding on her** index finger, she sank > back to her seat with a sigh. > > Mary peered down at the beach, and **holding onto her** index finger, she > sank back to her seat with a sigh. (Mary is travelling to have a surgery on her finger. So, as she becomes aware that she is reaching the airport, she starts unconsciously holding her finger.) Do the sentences above mean the same? If not, how do they differ?


Why `night` with gh?

I am not native speaker. And me very interesting why **night** writting with **gh**? Thanks


To talk angrily and provoked in a low voice

I'm looking for a word that can describe a person continuously talking angrily as if fighting with someone, for example over a phone, but in a low and whispering manner.


to name a business model which behave like chicken pecks

I am describing a business model of doing a lot of buying and selling in very small quantity. Retailing is not the right word. In my case the small buying and purchasing is not due to demand being small, like retail, but that demand is unknown. It's like if you supply a hungry man who cannot speak (or an animal), you can only supply bit by bit, until he refuses to eat more. It is not retailing, it is the only way to satisfy unkown demand without oversupplying, especially if the over-supplied part is expensive to return to storage, and repeated supply is, seeming onerous, actually cheap to achieve -- seemingly impossible but it works in the Internet era when the supplier is a software program. How can I name this market behaviour or business model? A phrase less than 4 words should be idea. The concept is only debated a dozen times in the project, so it doesn't have to be squeezed down to a single word. I thought of "food-pecking", like a chicken pecks food little by little. Any more ideas?


Is "I, too, did it" correct

I've heard sentences such as "I, too, did something," in which I would have used "I also did it," or "I did it as well," or "I did it, too." In school I've been taught I have to put 'as well' and 'too' at the end of a sentence and 'also' after the subject. Was I taught correctly or do those rules apply only on a case-by-case basis? (I don't mean 'me too,' which isn't wrong, but informal).


Is /e/ a new trend for /æ/ in America?

> paranoid /ˈperəˌnoɪd/ Is there a trend that /æ/ makes a transition to /e/ in America? When I first came across the pronunciation in Merriam-Webster’s Advanced Learner’s (2008 version), I thought there might be a typo. But merriam- webster.com has /e/ sound followed by /a/-- \ˈper-ə-ˌnoid, ˌpa-rə-\ Webster’s Third New International Dictionary (1986 version) has /a/ followed by /e/. So I guess /e/ is a new trend. Is it really a new trend? On what cases does the sound be used? - none has /ket/ for cat.


Question regarding usage of "but"

I have a question regarding the usage of "but". Suppose a person plays cricket. He does not play football. Which of the following is correct? >   * He plays cricket but football. >   * He plays cricket but not football. > I think the first one to be true. But it seems weird. Most of the time, I've seen the second statement to be used.


Is this a correct English sentence: "I'm not quite well enough ready yet."

I was talking to someone recently and blurted out as I had to move on to another task " _I am not quite well enough ready yet_ " which sparked a discussion about if that was correct English. Although I'll grant it is fairly uncommon, I believe it is correct, but am having trouble proving my position. As I see it, the meaning intended was "I'm not comfortable with how unprepared I am" and that is conveyed. Taking the sentence apart, the subject (I) verb (am) with its adverb modifier (yet) and subject compliment adjective (ready) with it's adverb modifier (not) are obvious to me; the remaining phrase (quite well enough) seems to be an adverbial phrase (modifying ready) but I'm not as confident. Bonus: I learned grammar by sentence diagramming and if you could help me with the correct sentence diagram, it would be greatly appreciated! Thank you!


What is the usage of "in it fat" in this sentence?

I found this sentence: > It has in it fat, which gives energy. I can't figure out the usage of the part " _in it fat_ ". Can anyone kindly explain it or maybe give some examples please?


What's the meaning of the word "brand" in the expression "brand new"?

What meanings might be conveyed by something being called _brand new_ , as opposed to it simply being called _new_? What's behind the word _brand_ here?


Language proficiency

Sometimes, a native speaker of a given language receives their higher education through another language; say, a native English speaker whose higher education takes place in France, through French. This will often mean that that person has somewhat limited vocabulary in their native language within certain more technical fields. Is there **a word** in English that describes this kind of proficiency with ‘technical gaps’ in the vocabulary?


Addressing Professors: Between Dr. and a hard place

Early in my (academic) life, I was told that it is appropriate to address a faculty as Professor only when he/she possesses the full Professorial rank and I would be better off addressing Assistant and Associate Professors as Dr.X, especially in written communication. However, recently I have been corrected that it is appropriate to address as Professor, faculty of all three ranks irrespective of them possessing a doctorate. So, my first question is, whether it is okay to address an assistant (or associate) Professor as Prof.X with regard to American universities. Second, I have been told that these professorial ranks are often a source of ego and resentment. In previous letters, I have unfortunately written something along the lines of "I am interested in the research work of Prof. X and Dr.Y". I wish to know whether addressing them as such, with the obvious distinction would lead to ego issues, or any problems in general. Perhaps the second question does not belong on this forum. Still, I would appreciate if someone from academia or otherwise could clear them for me.


What do you call people who use their iphones excessively to the point of distraction?

I'm thinking of the type of person who would text while walking and end up smacking into a telephone pole. What would you call them?


What is the difference between fog, mist and haze?

So, as the question says by itself: what's the context when I should use the word _mist_ and the right context for _fog_? And _haze_?


Is there a connection between *miser* and *misery*?

From OALD: > **miser:** a person who loves money and hates spending it   >  **misery:** . [U] great suffering of the mind or body Synonym: DISTRESS   >  _Fame brought her nothing but misery_. > > . [U] very poor living conditions Synonym: POVERTY   >  _The vast majority of the country live in utter misery._ > > . [C] something that causes great suffering of mind or body: _the miseries > of unemployment_ > > . [C] (BrE, informal) a person who is always unhappy and complaining: _Don't > be such an old misery! ◆ Old misery guts here doesn't want to go out._ Is there a philological relation between these two? They are very similar(like noun and adj) but I can't form a relation berween them...


Is there any other way to say 'Sent Successfully'?

The actual message is 'Message was sent successfully'. But, we are not sure that the message was delivered to the person or the person has read the message. Is the use of 'sent successfully' correct?


"x and y are what drive them" vs "x and y are what driveS them"

Which of the following is correct? > It seems evident that self-confidence and a desire for power are what > **drive** them to enter this competition. > > It seems evident that self-confidence and a desire for power are what > **drives** them to enter this competition.


Tense to use when describing a written work

I'm writing a book report and I'm mot sure which tense should I use to describe the story in it. The story in the book is set in the past time. So I wonder whether I might use the simple past tense or just the simple present tense?


Does "the motor speed" mean the speed of the motor?

I'm an engineer and I often hear others say "the motor speed" when they are talking about the speed of the motor. For example, one might ask "What was the motor speed?" when he or she wants to know what the speed of the motor was. I've seen similar phrases in scientific journals too. Why is it OK to say "the motor speed" when you are talking about the speed of the motor?


"These are my children who want me to..." or "It's my children who want me to..."? And why?

Which of the following two lines is correct?   * These are my children who want me to learn cooking.   * It's my children who want me to learn cooking. I am not very familiar with the codified rules of grammar, but based on my reading experience, I am pretty sure the second line is correct. But then, I don't know why it is so. Isn't "children" plural?


Improper expressions of the future progressive

A thread on ELL makes me reconsider how I might naturally misuse other tenses when the future progressive is intended. For example, I might pass out work assignments in the following ways:   1. "John, you will be running the tests tomorrow." _(future progressive)_   2. "John, you will run the tests tomorrow." _(simple future)_   3. "John, you are going to run the tests tomorrow." _(simple future)_   4. "John, you run the tests tomorrow." _(improper expression)_   5. "John, you are running the tests tomorrow." _(improper expression)_ With the ELL example, the intent might be similarly stated by:   1. "We will be discussing X at the meeting tomorrow." _(future progressive)_   2. "We will discuss X at the meeting tomorrow." _(simple future)_   3. "We are going to discuss X at the meeting tomorrow." _(simple future)_   4. "We discuss X at the meeting tomorrow." _(improper expression)_   5. "We are discussing X at the meeting tomorrow." _(improper expression)_ I think the fourth and fifth cases in both examples are probably improper, but I believe they would sound natural among the business leaders I associate with. Are they improper? If so, are these forms of expressing future progressive common or at least acceptable in casual conversation (in either AE or BE)? If not improper, is there a formal description for these forms?


Short name for rearranging verb and adjective places in a sentence

The usual "Working Hard?" greeting can be rearranged to "Hardly Working!" reply. Is there a name for this process?   In the above statement instead of using "rearranging" can one use "permuting" instead?


How to cite an author who does not capltalize her name if you are beginning a sentence with her name

If you are writing a paper and citing works by an author/researcher who does not capitalize her name, how do you begin a sentence using the author's name?


SAT Writing ambiguous pronoun error?

Can anyone please explain why this sentence is incorrect? > When Russell Wallace and Darwin _independently_ proposed similar theories, > Darwin _had_ already accumulated extensive evidence _with which_ to support > _his_ ideas. I thought the error was at _with which_ because it seems wordy; to me, **evidence to support an idea** sounds better and less wordy than **evidence with which to support an idea**. But the error occurs at _his_ , and it's an ambiguous pronoun error. Thank you!


"Facility for speaking" vs. "facility to speak"

Which one would you use: >   * I lost my facility to speak. >   * I lost my facility for speaking. > Or does either work?


Is it right to use "both" in negative sentences?

I've just come across a film review by an American author where he says: "I can assure you that both are not typical in any part of this state". In negative sentences like that, my inclination would be to use "neither one of them is..." instead (or, depending, none of them is/are...). Is it right to say "both are not..." ?


"Bar none (the most/the best...)" for "without exceptions or by far (the most/the best...)"

I once came across the idiom "bar none" for "by far/with no exceptions" as in "He's bar none the best player on the team", after what (for some reason unbeknownst to my forty three year old self) it was forgotten and fell into oblivion...until just recently, as I came to rediscover it sometime earlier today searching the Net for some other expression I previously posted about. And so, I wish someone would tell me whether this idiom is acceptable for all English registers, or definitely belongs to informal, colloquial usage and, as such, should be best avoided in formal style. e.g. _Bill is **bar none** the most talented photographer_... http://www.ratemyprofessors.com/ShowRatings.jsp?tid=703015


Pronunciation of the prefix "tri"

I know that English pronunciation is rather arbitrary. There are still some "rules" that even with many exceptions are useful for non-natives like me. I'm puzzled about the pronunciation of the very common prefix "tri", meaning "three". "Tri" is often pronounced /traɪ/. For example: triangle, trilateral, tripartite, trioxide, triode, triad, trilobites, triglyceride, triennium, tridimensional, trigeminal, tricycle, tricuspid, triceps, triathlon. But sometimes "tri" is pronounced /trɪ/. For example: trigamous, triplicate, trio, trinity, trilogy, trillion, trigonometry, triplet, triple, triphthong, triploid, triptych. Finally, it seems that a few words can be pronounced both ways. For example: trimester, tricolor. I can find no pattern at all. Is there any "rule"? Or can you help me in any way to guess the right pronunciation of a new word with the prefix "tri"?


Single-word replacement for "To be replaced"

I'm looking for a word to describe an old item that is soon to be replaced. Temporary was the first thing that came to mind, but it didn't seem to fit in context as the old object has been there for a long time already so is hardly an interim substitute.


Looking forward to " see" or "seeing"?

Which of the 2 sentences is correct? Sam is looking forward to see the Rocky mountains. Sam is looking forward to seeing the Rocky mountains.


What did Steve Jobs mean by “Technology married with Liberal Arts” in his last speech?

The Asahi, Japan’s leading newspaper quoted the following famous closing words of Steve Jobs’ in his last speech at the iPad 2 event in March 2011 in its popular editorial column, “Vox populi, vox Dei” on its April 22 issue. It deplored in the column that today’s Japanese management lacks great vision and big dream as Jobs had: > "It's in Apple's DNA that technology alone is not enough. That it's > _technology married with liberal arts_ , married with the humanities, that > yields us the result that makes our hearts sing." In the column, the Asahi translated the phrase, “ _technology married with liberal arts_ ” as “technology married with kyoyo (教養:culture, refinement, education)” in Japanese. I’m not sure whether the Asahi’s choice of word, kyoyo- meaning culture and education exactly fits the notion Steve Job meant by “liberal arts” in his speech. Oxford Dictionary Online defines “liberal arts” as: >   1. chiefly North American arts subjects such as literature and history, as > distinct from science and technology. >   2. (historical ) the medieval trivium and quadrivium. > Cambridge Dictionary Online defines it as: > mainly U.S. College or university subjects such as history, languages and > literature. What does “liberal arts” mean in general? And what did Steve Jobs mean by “liberal arts” married with technology in his speech? Are there difference between general perception of the word, “liberal arts” among public and specific usage of “liberal arts” by Steve Jobs in his speech?


Is it correct to say "No users have configured this setting"?

Is it acceptable to say "No users have configured this setting"? It is an error message. It sounds odd to me. "None of the users have configured this setting" seems OK. Please provide your advice.


What does "no worse than ..." mean?

What does the writer mean by saying "no worse than stealing?" > It is thought the scam, which stores say is _no worse than stealing_ , is a > product of our ‘fast-fashion culture’, where trends are popular for a short > time then become outdated and therefore worthless. (Mail Online, 2014.11.4.)


Sentence for an advertisement

I am designing an advertisement and I've this question now. Can we say, > We are now here in New Zealand? or > IBM is here in New Zealand? Which is grammatically correct?


Why “daily” and not “dayly”?

Checking how adjectives related to time are created, I see:   * year → year **ly**   * month → month **ly**   * week → week **ly**   * day → da **ily** Why has “day” derivated into “daily” with an ‘i’ instead of “dayly” with a ‘y’? In the Online Etymology Dictionary I don't see information related to this ‘loss’ of the ‘y’ in favour of the ‘i’: > **daily (adj.)** > > Old English _dæglic_ (see _**day_** ). This form is known from compounds: > _twadæglic_ “happening once in two days,” _þreodæglic_ “happening once in > three days;” the more usual Old English word was _dæghwamlic,_ also > _dægehwelc._ Cognate with German _täglich._


Synonym for "do you mean" without negative connotations

Whenever I use the phrase "do you mean to say", I notice that the word "mean" has a variety of negative connotations (cruelty, harshness, etc.) Is there any alternative for this phrase that doesn't have such unpleasant connotations? ("Do you mean to say this" sounds very similar to "what you said was mean", despite having a completely different meaning - that's why I'm concerned about the connotation.)


What modal verbs do natives use nowadays?

We are being taught English by a native speaker from Alaska. He states that many of modal verbs we were taught are outdated and have been replaced. E.g.: >   * We must ➙ We have to >   * May I come in? ➙ Do you mind if I come in? >   * We don't have to leave yet. ➙ We don't gotta go yet. > Totally outdated: "ought to" and "shall". Is it true, and if so, to what extent? Which modal verbs do you regularly use in your spoken English and which in written language?


"To take in" and "to catch" in the sense "to attend and visit (or see) [the sights of (a city, etc.)] in AmE

Do these terms share the same degree of informality in the sense "to attend and visit (or see)" as of someone taking in/catching the sights of a place, or taking in/catching a show or a movie? E.g. > When was the last time you caught [or **_take in_** ] a movie at the drive > in? > > How's that, you spent three weeks in Paris and you didn't even catch [or > **_take in_** ] the night sights of that glittering city? You surely must > have been off your head! Also, can "to take in" in the sense [to attend and visit (or see)] encompass other things than sights [=anything **worth** seeing (the sights of London)] and shows (movies, plays, etc.)?


Do Thomas and his friends do anything besides start the rusted wheel of things?

The melody of the theme song of the cartoon series “Thomas and his friends” matches the scansion of poem X (“March”) of A.E. Housman’s “A Shropshire Lad”. There are five verses to Housman’s poem, but the second one seems especially apt semantically/satirically: > So braver notes the storm-cock sings > > To start the rusted wheel of things, > > And brutes in field and brutes in pen > > Leap that the world goes round again. Are there any other poems whose scansion matches this one?


Are "gossip" and "rumour" perfect synonyms?

Are the words _gossip_ and _rumour_ perfect synonyms or is there a fine distinction between them? The only difference I'm aware of is that the second one is spelled differently in British and American English.


What is the meaning of the pejorative form of “gay”?

Dictionaries don’t define the pejorative use of _gay_ , but the term is used in common parlance. For example: > That’s so gay. or > You’re gay. Is there a way of establishing what _gay_ means when used pejoratively?


How to shorten If SVO+prep. A, then SVO+prep. B.?

How to shorten the following sentence? > If the teacher brings a gift for Adam, then the teacher brings a gift for > Barbara. This sentence does not make much sense. My question is if there is a formula (like ·so does it·) to shorten "If SVO+prep. A, then SVO+prep. B."


Are there any words in English meaning "goodbye forever"?

I'm not a native speaker. I want to know if there is any word that you use to express that yourself and the listener will not have a chance to see each other again, or that it is incredibly unlikely you ever will. Such as when they are going abroad or dying.


Meaning of "bearing"

> Knowledge having a **bearing** on human life was placed highest > > Knowledge **about** human life was placed highest


"The" before person name and context indication

I'm a native French speaker and the following is translated from French: > A production still in which the beauty of the natural elements and colours > evoke **the Renoir of** _A Day in the Country_ (1936) and _Picnic on the > Grass_ (1959). This is indeed something you can say in French: a person's name is preceded by the definite article and followed by an indication of "context" (here: two films directed by Jean Renoir), meaning Renoir's style as can be appreciated in those works, or the way Renoir would do things at the time. The English translation (not mine) is literal and doesn't sound correct to me. Could you give me your opinion (and ideas to improve it)?


'Complete a confusion' -- expression or confusion?

Is _complete someone's confusion_ a popular expression that makes sense? This expression pops up so often I wonder I am missing something here. Does **complete** here mean to ' **resolve** '/ ' **clarify** '? Blaise Pascal, et al., _The provincial letters of Pascal_ , p314 > And is it necessary, in order to complete your confusion, to bring forward > the words of M. de St. Cyran, in the same letter, in which he speaks of the > sacrifice of the Mass as the most excellent of all, … Sergey Fomin, _Symmetric Functions 2001:_ , p.30 > To complete your confusion, we define another morphism a: #n_i,n ->F (15) > sending (/n_i, /n) to (/n, P)- Brown University: _Man's contracting world in an expanding universe:_ , p165 > Then I shall make a summary statement to complete your confusion. Although, I was imagining the expression should, if at all, mean **further confounding** , as in: Jane Aiken Hodge, _Runaway bride_ , p191 > "… And now, to complete your confusion, she too, is run off. It is not an > edifying story, Mr. Gurning."


Etymology of "half-assed"

The term "half-assed" is used to refer to something being sloppy or partially completed. For example, "You really did a half-assed job on those TPS reports, Bob." What is the etymology of this phrase? If half-assed means partial or incomplete, can something be "full assed" or "fully assed"?