What are the differences between litigator, counsel, and attorney?

I'm watching a law and court related TV show and the following terms are being used. What are the differences between them? I'm interested in the differences in connotation if there are any. Or are they more or less interchangeable?   * litigator   * counsel   * attorney I've looked the terms up in a dictionary but since I am not native English, I don't get the nuances in meaning. Definitions according to Oxford Dictionary:   * litigator     * to litigate: resort to legal action to settle a matter; be involved in a lawsuit   * counsel     * a barrister or other legal adviser conducting a case    * attorney     * a person, typically a lawyer, appointed to act for another in business or legal matters


comma or semicolon before "that is" and repeating 'that'

In the following two sentences   1. We need to show that Phrase; that is, that Phrase A'.   2. We need to show that Phrase A, that is, Phrase A'. Which one is correct or more natural? Phrase A and Phrase A' are two sentences that express the same thing. That they are the same are obvious to see and is not our concern. Add an example for sentence 1. (We are not going to show that "a+b=c is the same as a=c-b", which is trivial.) > We need to show that a+b=c; that is, that a=c-b. Thanks a lot.


expression meaning - brash talk does not always mean a pink slip

What does this expression mean? brash talk does not always mean a pink slip


Is "Just a friendly advice" grammatical?

I know that "advice" is uncountable and thus is incompatible with the article "a". However, the phrase "Just a friendly advice" seems to be rather widespread. Is it idiomatic, or incorrect? What is a more grammatical form?


When I saw this sentence first, I thought _so powerful_ to be an objective complement. [ ‘so powerful’ is the result of ‘make’] But now, it may be more reasonable to think ‘so powerful’ is modifying ‘a sleeping potion.’ Can the adjective phrase ‘so powerful’ be a postmodifier? For your information Potter, asphodel and wormwood make a sleeping potion **_so powerful_** it is known as the Draught of the Living Death.


Violation of verb tenses

I have a question about violating verb tenses. I was taught that you can't use present perfect (or continuous) and past simple within a sentence. You either have to use present perfects (or continuous) with present perfects (or continuous), and past simples with past simples. But I've found this not to be true, so I'm a bit confused. Here is an email one of my native American friends sent me. > Hey, **it's** been such a long time since we last **emailed** each other. > Thanks for sending me an email! Getting that email **was** such a pleasant > surprise, because I **was** just thinking how **I've been wanting** to send > you an email as well. What confuses me the most is the last part. How can you say that you were thinking about how you have been wanting to do something? I was taught that this is wrong: "he **has decided** to go hiking, so I **went** hiking as well." But I'm assuming that my friend's email is correct, since he IS a native speaker. So, this is what I'm thinking: I can't say **present perfect (or continuous) + past simple** , but I can say **past simple + present perfect (or continuous)**. This violates verb tenses: > "he has decided to go hiking, so I went hiking as well." But this doesn't: > "I went hiking because he has decided to go hiking." Are there instances where **present perfect (or continuous) + past simple** or vice versa is allowed and correct? **EDIT:** This is a difficult concept for me to grasp. But thank you for all your help, because I'm learning a lot. There are many sentences that don't make sense to me. I came across this sentence today: > "[I think this is inferred: During those days,] **We've watched** the movie > many times. I really **wanted** this life to continue." I'm not sure what the present perfect is doing here. I don't think it is being used for describing what a person has done before, like "I've seen that movie before". Why is it not simply "We **watched** the movie many times. [It was so good that] I really **wanted** this life to continue"?


Difference between "delight" and "delightful"

I am wondering if there is really a difference between _delight_ and _delightful_. I would like to make a title for a French cooking app and was thinking of this: > MyApp - Homemade _delightful_ French recipes Does that sound correct? Or should I use _delight_ instead? Is the order of adjectives used correct too?


'Keeping up-to-date on' or 'Keeping up-to-date with'?

I recently replied to someone who was informing me about my application for something. I replied "Thank you for keeping me up-to-date **on** my application". Afterwards I wondered if I should have written "Thank you for keeping me up-to-date **with** my application". Which is grammatically correct?


Which voice is better here, passive or active?

Between > If the moral principle of “love your neighbour” is adhered to, then the > world will be free of war. and > If we adhere to the moral principle of “love your neighbour”, then the world > will be free of war. Which fits better for formal writing? For me, the structure of the first sentence is worse, because its use of the passive voice is unnecessary.


How do you describe the feeling you get when you've almost dropped something but caught it in time?

Question says it all. I've had suggestions of using "relieved" or "elated", but none of them really sound like what I'm thinking of. Think about it this way. The other day, I nearly dropped my laptop while walking to class. My laptop is really, really, pricey, and dropping it would render it into a nice little paperweight. Luckily though, I caught it just as it was fumbling around in my hands. I don't know what to describe it as.


What is the language that is used for general social conversations and interactions called?

Comments and utterances such as "howdy" "hey" "what's up?" "awesome weather uh?" don't do much to give knowledge or anything. They are just tools for everyday conversations. What is this type of language called? Just "informal" or something else?


Can "it" refer to or represent any element showing in the foregoing sentence?

> In human soul sensory capacities are as fundamental as intellectual ones. It > attain perfect goodness through many different powers including both > intellectual ones and sensory ones. I use the first word of the second sentence “it” to refer to “human soul” which functions as a part in an adverbial modifier. Is it ok?


Definite/indefinite articles in front of trade names that are used as attributive adjectives

Every time I have to refer to some products, I am not sure what article (if any) has to be used. For example, there is a company called Contigo, which makes termo cups. In order to refer to those cups, some writer said: _Contigo cups are...._ As far as I understood, in case of other products, I would say Tupperware cups, Nivea creams, Cannon cameras, etc. But what about the singular? A Tupperware cup? A Nivea cream? However, I have noticed, that some companies add the article _the_ before the name that is used to refer to their products. Say there is the trademark Hello which stands for a computer program, and in order present it to the reader, they say _the Hello toolbar is this and that_ Why the article _the_ is used in front of the noun phrase? If I am offered to use the product of Hello, should I say _I installed Hello toolbar_ or _Installed a Hello toolbar_? I got absolutely confused and cannot understand how/when/why the definite article _the_ is used before the trade names.


Is Missouri called /mi.'zuɹ.ə/ outside of Missouri?

Here in Missouri, most people born here pronounce the state as /mi.'zuɹ. **ə** / (instead of /miz.'uɹ. **i** / or something like it). This is a lot more noticeable in the south/central, rural parts of the state. Is this pronunciation used much outside of Missouri? I'm particularly curious about the South, like Arkansas. Much of the South has a similar dialect as Missouri, but a lot heavier and more pronounced. Is this phenomenon noticeable in other areas?


I am cutting it kinda close here!

I have heard the phrase "I am cutting it kinda close!". Why say "cutting it"? When we are not cutting anything here. Why can't we just say "I am getting late" and its like?


Proper Names Functioning as Adjectives

To me, "California," "New Jersey," "Texas," "N.Y.," and "1969" are functioning as appositives in the examples below, when in fact they are not. All these words are essential information to the sentence. That said, can we drop the comma after each in the sentences below—yes or no? Joe said, "The Sacramento, California, police department is under scrutiny." Midge said, "The Elizabeth, New Jersey, warehouse was inspected." Stephen said, "The Austin, Texas, jury acquitted the defendant." Theresa said, "Brooklyn, N.Y., is where I grew up." Frank said, "February 7, 1969, is my date of birth." Thank you.


"Removals Service" or "Removal Service"?

Take for example the tag line: "reliable removals service". Is this correct grammar/usage? Or should it be just "removal", singular? To me, "removals" seems more correct because it is describing removals in general and would include jobs that remove multiple items(house contents, furniture etc). And this is the type of company I am describing(house, apartment, office removals etc, but also including single items..) Whereas "removal service" singular would suggest to me that it's more for jobs involving removal of single items, or some type of specialist service. For example "piano removal service". I'd really like to hear from you if you know which is more correct. I have seen both used for the type of service I am describing - even on the same website the plural and singular seem to often be used interchangibly.


*of* complements with psych-verbs

Consider three different uncontroversial functional categories of _of_ PP complements. **1\. Privative function** >   * ...of African slave-traders despoiled of their prey and thirsting for > blood.   > >   * The court stated that " a child injured by the negligence of another > person is not barred of his remedy by the mere fact that the negligence of > his parents contributed to produce the injury.   > >   * The boy, his ruddy cheeks blanched of color... > **2\. Stimulus function** >   * We had been to enough cotillions to be bored of the rituals.   > >   * but I froze, suddenly terrified of getting cornered in the bathroom,... > **3\. Malefactor function** >   * The young woman who had carried him in her body had soon perished of a > fever...   > >   * It received its name when Aillenn, a daughter of Lugaid, king of > Leinster and (in one version) also father of Tea, was abducted and died of > shame at her captivity. > Then there is another type of usage which is not very frequent, but still attested, where an _of_ complement accompanies a _psych_ verb denoting a stimulus. Prominent commentators on this site have said of this type of construction (with the predicate _be distressed_ ), that "...it's an error only a non-native speaker would or could ever make..." Judge for yourself the grammaticality of the following examples, from COCA: >   * and in it Maria Montes is quoted of saying, I am so beautiful...   > >   * Barnett, 1989, especially lamented of this problem, observing,...   > >   * I'm personally a little alarmed of having the Eric Massa vision of Rahm > naked in the shower without a " towel for his tush. "   > >   * He did say he wanted to go. He's obviously upset of not being able to > go. But I repeated to say that he understands the reasoning behind it and he > will continue to be in the army, having said in the past that if didn't go > he might well resign, pronto.   > > If you can find yourself accepting that any of these sentences would be uttered by a competent English speaker, would you consider the _of_ complement to be carrying out any of the 3 above-listed functions?


Can I use "expend" this way?

> Emperor You expended the whole empire in order to make his loved one smile > once. (self-made) According to my Longman dictionary, “expend” means “use up”. So it will be more naturally if its object is money or other kinds of resources. The context is that the Emperor’s attempt to make his girl laugh incurs an unexpected disaster, which seal the doom of the empire. So will “expend” be able to express what I mean?


"So I told a porcupine..."

I heard this phrase spoken on a British TV show. It was obvious from context that it meant 'a little white lie'. How did this colloquialism arise? I have my own theory about about how this may have derived from Cockney rhyming slang, but I am more interested in the correct background. @Dancrumb It was an episode of "Inspector Lewis". I can't place the exact episode, but Lewis was leaning on a newspaper reporter he had caught in a lie. The lie had been to cover up his infidelity, not relevant to the case and he stated to the Inspector...


Past progressive construction

I’m confused about how to construct a past progressive sentence. If I say these:   * I was walking in the park.   * I was singing in the bathroom. Would these sentences be considered to be in past progressive? It seems to me that they are missing some **_context_** e.g. a certain time when the events occurred. Wouldn't it be more appropriate to say:   * I was walking in the park _yesterday_.   * I was singing in the bathroom _when the phone rang_. **Edit:** I found that this site has no mention of similar examples I posted.


What does it mean that I made a doctor?

I want to know exact meaning that I made a doctor. Does it mean that I strived to be a doctor and I finally became a doctor? I want to know the exact meaning of it?


"… things like this." vs. "… things like that."

Yesterday on talk radio an interviewee speaking about Sudanese Northerner's being forced into the mountains and away from their farmlands by the Sudanese Army said the result was: > The men would leave and go foraging to gather nuts and berries, _things like > **this**_. I don't know where exactly the punctuation belongs since it was on the radio, so I did my best to put the comma in the right place before the phrase in question. Is his phrasing correct? Or would ending with the phrase: > … _things like **that**_. be correct. Are they both acceptable? Are there meaningful or grammatical differences between the two? For context, he didn't enumerate similar activities in the related line of questioning before or after the above, nor did he explicitly reference anything else he said in prior areas of discussions.


Single quotes for single characters and double quotes for double?

I’ve been under the impression that you use single quotation marks for single characters or numerals. Usage: ‘1’ or ‘a’ and not “1” or “a”. (You would double quotation marks for anything longer than one character.) Is this a correct assumption? _Note: I’m aware that there are topics that discuss the usage of both single and double quotation marks, but my question is intended to be a specific as possible as it may benefit others here._


How was the term 'payload' coined?

Wikipedia describes payload as, > Payload is the carrying capacity of an aircraft or launch vehicle, usually > measured in terms of weight. Etymonline says, > payload 1930, from pay (n. or v.) + load (n.). Originally the part of an > aircraft's load from which revenue is derived (passengers, cargo, mail); > fig. sense of "bombs, etc. carried by a plane or missile" is from 1936. > Online Etymology Dictionary, © 2010 Douglas Harper However, Google n-grams has some results from earlier, like this one from Automotive Industries, Volume 30, Chilton Company, Incorporated, supposedly 1914, page 976: > dead weight of not more than 3,500 kilograms, and the heavy trucks, whose > dead weight could be 5,500 kilograms, were both to carry a load of at least > 2,000 kilograms, and with the aid of trailers should transport, > respectively, a payload of 8 and 15 tons more. or page 1338: > HERETOFORE the Prussian army administration has wanted for military > transportation work only motor trucks capable of carrying a payload of 5 to > 6 tons or Vol. 22. page 721, > The tilt should be adjustable with relation to the direction of the > propeller shaft and the whole power plant and the payload. suggesting that the word was used earlier. One starts to wonder, whether this is a military terminology, and how did the usage later developed, whether the boom around the '55-65 as seen on n-grams is a result of (literal) rocket science or rather computers (later networking?) or something else. ![payload n-gram 1900 to 2000](http://i.stack.imgur.com/ZmlNZ.png) (source) (ngram search) Are there more information about how this word was coined and how did it develop?


Does this require a question mark, comma, or dash?

Which do you prefer? Apples or oranges? Which do you prefer, apples or oranges? Which do you prefer—apples or oranges?


How to convey the direction of a relation between two things?

There can be asymmetric relations between two entities. E.g. Parent-child. Both entities are related, but neither relates to the other as the other relates to it. I'm writing a philosophy paper that treats these kinds of relations in an abstract manner. Consequently the words I'll be using to reference related entities will not convey any information about the relation they bear to each other (e.g. parent-child). That said, I've used the parent-child relation in the following example to make it more concrete. Example: 'The wording, ' _x_ is the parent of _y_ ', references a 1:1 asymmetric relation **from** _x_ **to** _y_.' I used _from_ and _to_ to construct that sentence; however, I'm not confident that those are the best prepositions in this case. What preposition(s) do you think are best in this case? * * * Some other possibilities   * ... **that** _x_ bears **to** _y_   * ... **of** _x_ **to** _y_ (credit: Mari-Lou A)    * ... **that** _x_ **has to** _y_


what word means Sadness and concern?

I'm trying to write a story, but I cannot, for the life of me, think of the proper word to describe this. I don't want to use pity, since it seems too demeaning of a word, and I can't think of anything else. Can anyone please help?


"With use of" or "with the use of"?

Do you solve engineering problems with use of programming methods, or, Do you solve engineering problems with _the_ use of programming methods ? Which one is true? Or are both of them false? If so, how can I say this, with correct grammar? Thanks for any help !


What does 'for such actions as ...' mean?

Anyone can help to explain the meaning of **for such actions as ...** please? It's from the following context. > Even when automatic archiving is enabled, you can use manual archiving for > such actions as rearchiving an inactive group of filled redo log members to > another location. The upper text is from _Oracle documentation_. If it's too technical, please check the following example, which was found in _American Corpus_. > Last year, the company unveiled the Jawbone Icon as the first Bluetooth > headset with downloadable apps for such actions as voice dialing


Is there any difference between deputies & lawmakers?

As a non-native speaker quite often I get in trouble with slight differences between concepts. So, regarding to this doubt I think both of them are used to express the same thing but I'm not sure about it. After looking for an answer in my dictionary but having no answer, I was told by a lawyer (ESL-learner) that these two words are similar in the matter of laws. However, I wanted to make it clear. Could anyone help me out? Any help would be welcomed. Thanks in advance.


"For one thing" — meaning in context

I know what "for one thing" means. But sometimes idioms are used in such a way that gives non-native speakers a hard time to understand their meaning. I encountered the following passage: > She had never cared for the kind of tea on offer in her hometown, but in the > two weeks she had spent in Assam she had developed an unexpected affinity > for the tea on offer here. There were no spices in it for one thing, and > this was more to her taste than the tea at home. I guess the last sentence means "Her hometown's tea had no spices whereas the tea available in Assam has spices. And that is the one reason she likes Assam tea over her hometown's tea." Am I right? Please correct me if I'm wrong.


Is it "congrats" or "congrads"?

Is it appropriate to abbreviate "congratulations" as "congrats" or "congrads", or are both acceptable? I have seen the latter used very often which is why I'm asking.


Past Perfect or Simple past?

* "I don't like this," I said. She hadn't heard me. * Can the "hadn't heard" be replaced with "didn't hear"?


Is the idiom "in order" in order here?

A user at my site can offer to delete an article, she can add an explanation to her deletion proposal if she feels her proposal isn't clear enough. The message for asking for an explanation would be:   **"If you feel an explanation is (in order?), please provide one:"**   [and here comes a text-box for providing an explanation] Replacing that message with:   **"If you feel your deletion proposal isn't clear enough, please provide one:"**   sounds awkward in its context.


Word for "taking advantage of a second chance or opportunity"

Say a person doesn't act the first time around but gets a second chance and makes the right move. Is there any word that would describe such a situation or action?


Word for "to cheat fate" or "to seize/act on a moment"

I'm looking for a word that means a person seized an opportunity or acted on some sort of signal/sign in non-ideal circumstances.


Synonym for statistical meaning of "mode"

Are there any **synonyms** for the term **_mode_** as used in statistics?               the value that occurs most frequently in a given set of data.      The term seems like one that is not user friendly and would not be understood by all users. What are possible alternatives that are easier to understand?


If you call somebody or they call you, what is the name for that person?

This can also be applied to client-server interactions (which is what I need it for). For example, if you (the client) send data to the server or retrieve data from the server, what is the name of the server in that instance? Or, if the server sends data to the client or the server receives data from the client, what is the name of the client in that instance? Both of these names should be equivalent. Basically, I'm looking for a word (or words) for the _other_ person/entity when the two are connected.


How to express a risk of breaking a target/objective

I am French, and I am looking for ideally a word or a short expression to express the situation where someone is about to do something that is going to put at danger/risk a goal/target. Let's say someone is stopping smoking. What do you call the moment he fights against himself not to take a cigarette. Or someone who is making a diet and is fighting not to take that delicious pizza... I'm sure you get the idea.


"at most" vs. "at least"

I tend to use two phrases randomly with speech but I'd like know to what's exactly the difference between the two? Let's suppose for example:   * Spend at most $20 on the lunch.   * Spend at least $20 on the lunch. It seems in both the cases someone will spend $20.


Context: We are purchasing a monitor and in an email someone wrote, "Bob, let's get two of these" and posted a URL. If I were to followup, which would be more appropriate and why? "I second that motion" or "I second that notion"? Fact is, we can find plenty of books that say "second that notion" – in places like _Ski_ magazine: > Lee Aaker, 57, of Mammoth, Calif, would second that notion. (2001) or political commentary: > Ollie North calls the CIA/cocaine story "absolute garbage." I second that > notion for two reasons... but far more say "second that motion." So, is _second that notion_ a malapropism? Or just a lesser-used (but still valid) form?


Never fail to disappoint

When you say "he doesn't fail to disappoint", to me it has a negative meaning as in he always disappoints. But I've heard some people using it as a compliment and in a positive way. So, am I wrong about the meaning or it's the other way around? For example, Christina said on Voice: > My glam team doesn't fail to disappoint and they took the Monday blues and > turned it into a stunning look any girl would love.


Is this a good thesis?

For my english class I am writing an essay about social networking. My thesis: Sophisticated social network technologies such as Facebook, can negatively affect the brain development of the new generation by rewiring the brain and replacing real life(face to face) communication which is essential to develop socially. Is it good? What improvements can be made? Thanks.


"Paradise" vs. "heaven"

What is the difference in use between "paradise" and "heaven"? I feel that _heaven_ is more spiritual, something that probably couldn't even be imagined. When you say _paradise_ , you can denote something more real. Imagine a vacation on a tropical island; you can say, "I was in Bahamas. It was a paradise". But heaven is something even more unseizable. Is my understanding correct?


What do you call "gift CDs" that you select music for manually?

Is there a special word or phrase for a CD with a carefully picked playlist you made for a particular person, often given as a gift?


What is a word for the genre of literature of which Tolkien is the high priest and founder, in its 20th-century incarnation.?

What is a word for the form of literature that evokes images of supernatural creatures like goblins, elves, hobbits etc. in Tolkienian surroundings of misty mountains, caverns, underground lakes etc.


Am I misusing the semicolon?

Is the semicolon in the following sentence misused? > How can I miss you; we've never met? I feel that the sentence, to be grammatically correct, must be split into its individual parts.


American use of "personal", "regular"

Frequently I hear Americans (admittedly mainly in TV/movies) say "personal" and "regular" in the following contexts: > _"Don't take it personal."_ > > _"I like that he treats me regular."_ Both of these are horribly incorrect to my British ear - I have _never_ heard either here, it would be "personally" and "regularly", ignoring the fact that the second sentence is slightly awkward anyway (we would probably say "like a regular person"). * * * My question is, do Americans 'know' this is incorrect, i.e. would John hear Jane speaking in this manner and think "her English isn't great" or whatever, or would it sound perfectly normal - is this an accepted use, that all Americans would use? I could easily believe it would be the latter, since ' _momentarily_ ' for example has a totally different meaning in AE. ('in a moment for undisclosed amount of time' vs. 'for a moment at an disclosed time').


Words or digits? What is good style for numbers in mathematical writing?

What is considered good style for writing small numbers as words or digits in mathematical texts? I have three concrete examples, are there any differences between those?   1. "M is a matroid of rank six" vs. "M is a matroid of rank 6"   2. "There are six elements in the set" vs. "There are 6 elements in the set"   3. "The numbers a and b differ by one" vs. "The numbers a and b differ by 1". Are there any general rules? Edit: Not to influence your answers, but I'm asking the question because copy- editor of the London Math. Society changed all the above to use the digits while we had words in our manuscript. I'm not a native speaker, but I usually use words for small digits.


Usage of 'AD' era designation

Considering the sentence: > AD 1453, the city of Constantinople was conquered by the Ottoman empire. **Is this a complete sentence?** * * * From what I understand of the situation: The era designator 'AD' is an abbreviation for 'Anno Domini', meaning 'In the year of the Lord'. By that reasoning, 'AD 1453' is a complete dependent clause. Disregarding any current practice regarding AD vs CE, factual accuracy, or other concerns, is this actually a complete sentence? What would be the recommended arrangement for using 'AD' as an era designator in this situation? Alternate ways of writing it might include placing the era designator after the year, placing the words 'in'/'in the year'/etc. before the date, or a combination of changes. Which of those alternatives would be the most correct way to use 'AD' as an era designator?


How do I quote nonconsecutive lines from a poem?

I'm writing an analysis of a poem and want to quote nonconsecutive lines. Is there a specific way to do this, or would I just use an ellipsis and no slash?


What is the origin of surnames based on color?

I understand the background of names such as Baker, Carver and Hammer but, what are the origins of names such as Black, Blue, Brown, Green and White? Are they based on some common structure or do they each have their own twisted tale?


Is it correct to use "we too gone through..."?

Is this a correct sentence: > We too gone through such a situation. I felt that a better alternative is: > We had also gone through such a situation. Which is the correct usage?


"I had my house [be] burned down"

I have found out that using the verb _be_ in passive constructions such as: > I had my house be burned down is incorrect, therefore it should be > I had my house burned down. But is it possible instead of _be_ to use _get_? E.g. > The wire is passed through the pliers in a specific way to avoid having it > get bent.   >  The rope had its surface wear.   >  The rope had its surface get worn.   >  The rope had its surface worn. The first two sound very odd to me, but just for clarification could you please point out the errors and which ones are correct? Or is using _get_ , be it in _-ing_ or the _to_ infinitive, in any situation along with _have_ incorrect?


Idiom like "His star is shining"

There's an idiom that's on the tip of my tongue, but I don't remember what it is. I remember it as "His star is shining" but I'm not sure that's it, I may be confusing it with something else. it's supposed to mean that he's having a good period or he's reigning, and everyone is adoring him. Does that sound familiar to anyone?


“situation where” vs. “situation in which”

In my mother tongue I can use the word _where_ not only to describe something connected to a location, but also to substitute _in which_. My question is: Is it correct to use _where_ in a sentence like this? > Describe a situation **where** you had to show leadership. Or it would be better to use _in which_ instead?


Might the use of the word "where" be inapt in these three sentences?

The question found here triggered a question in my mind. Lately I've been noticing how people tend to use the word _where_ in a way which to me seems inapt. Some examples: >   * Anorexia is a condition _where_ a person, usually a young female, has > such a poor body image that she virtually starves herself to death. > >   * A phobia is _where_ you have a fear of, say, clowns, and this fear > seemingly has no rational basis. > >   * The abused dog suffered from hypothermia, a condition _where_ the body's > core temperature drops to a near-fatal level. > > Wouldn't the words _in which_ (or _when_ , in the case of the hypothermic dog) be a better fit than _where_ in the first and third examples? >   * Anorexia is a condition in which a person . . .. > >   * The abused dog suffered from hypothermia, a condition in which . . .. > Or, The abused dog suffered from hypothermia, a condition _when_ . . .. > > Wouldn't the word _when_ , or the words _a condition in which_ , be a better fit than _where_ in the second example? >   * A phobia is when . . .. Or, A phobia is a condition in which . . .. > I'm not suggesting my substitutions are necessarily the best or that they exhaust the number of possibilities, but isn't the use of the word _where_ inapt in my examples? If so, why? If not, why not?


May I use "evidence where"?

> Modern science has given clear evidence that smoking can lead to many > diseases. in this sentence，“that smoking can lead to many diseases” is an Appositive clause,but I wonder if I can say > Modern science has given clear evidence where（in which） smoking can lead to > many diseases. what is the difference between them？ please help me，thank you.


What's the difference between "the lack" and "the lacking"?

In the following sentence, my teacher says that _the lacking_ should be _the lack_ , instead. > The lacking of trees may lead to global warming. If it's wrong, would someone mind explaining why it is wrong? Thanks.


Rate & Review action?

What do we call the action of **rating** (with stars) and **reviewing** (commenting) together?


What word would be used for someone who shoots video

I used to work as a guy who used video camera to shoot events. As a non-native English speaker I have struggled to find a word to describe it. So far I have used `video recorder` but that is feels like little silly 'cause it's VCR. _edit_ to be more specific, I shot ice hockey games


What adjective (other than "last") means "most-recent previous"?

If I were to say "the previous item" or "the prior item" or "the preceding item", I _could_ be referring either to the _most-recent_ previous item, or to any other item logically coming before the current one. How can I refer to not just any prior item, but the _last_ or _most-recent_ item, without using the word "last"? I'm especially interested in a word that would be a suitable replacement for the "most-recent previous" in technical writing. * * * By way of clarification... I'm looking for alternative terminology that de-emphasizes the concept of time and emphasizes the concept of logical ordering. The word "recent" seems too attached to the concept of time. The phrase "most-recent previous" is, frankly, a mouthful --- especially if used repeatedly. The word "last" has the potential to be confused with the ultimate in an entire series, rather than merely the immediate predecessor of any specifically-referred to item the series.


How does 'give it up for ...' mean 'clap for ...'?

Well, now I understand that this is so, but the first few times I heard this, I had no idea what 'giving it up' meant. What is the derivation? How do you get from 'giving it up' to 'clapping'?


Is it OK to use "after a moment," "not long after," and "before long" interchangeably?

I write stories, and I often find myself writing "after a moment," in too many parts. > On their table was a smoked salmon, grilled meat, a plate of sushi, mussels, > some salad, a basket with bread, and two bottles of Italian wine. The group > seemed to be in some kind of celebration. > > **After a moment,** a girl approached the table, holding a huge birthday > cake with twenty candles on it. So in this case I wanted to change **after a moment** for **not long after.** Would the meaning be pretty much the same? How about **before long**?


In Edsger Dijkstra's quote, meaning of 'the plague'

"The competent programmer is fully aware of the limited size of his own skull. He therefore approaches his task with full humility, and avoids clever tricks like the plague." I am trying to understand this quote of Edsger W. Dijkstra. I understand that he emphasize to be a good programmer. However, I don't understand the meaning of 'the plague'. General meaning of 'the plague' is ill, but this context says it couldn't be.


The use of apostrophes to denoted ownership on plurals

At school we were taught to use an apostrophe at the end of plurals to denote ownership. In the snippet > "Halloween: the one day where we encourage children to accept candy from > strangers, go to **strangers' homes** , and vandalize property and terrorize > people if they don't get their own way." As in **_strangers' homes_**. Is this the correct way to use the apostrophe or is there flexibility with this? There is a fair bit of discussion in the comments of this What is to use commas and apostrophes? and rather than ask this within the comments, I figured it would be better to ask a question. There is this question "Nikki's and Alice's X" vs. "Nikki and Alice's X", but it addresses a different aspect of this.


Are "there" and "their" pronounced alike?

By comparing the phonetic of "there" with "their", it seems that they are pronounced alike, aren't they?


Can I drop the second "having" in this sentence?

Can I drop the second _having_ in this sentence? : > So, having looked through your posts and **having** read all the materials > that you referred me to, I came to the conclusion...


"Fight Academy" or "Fighting Academy?"

What's more accurate, "Fight Academy" or "Fighting Academy" or is it equally correct to use either one. I have seen both being used and when I compare it to "Fight Club," it seems that "Fight Academy" is also correct. However, "Fighting Academy" seems more intuitive, but I don't know exactly why. P.S. I'm a non-native English speaker.


Is aquamarine considered to be a compound word?

We've been debating whether or not aquamarine is a compound word or not. To me, I view "aqua" as being just a prefix rather than a standalone word, so I don't think aquamarine would be considered to be a compound word.


Using the words "post facto"

How to use the term "post facto" in a sentence? There is an oversight to our standard procedure of seeking approval to process some invoices. I am sending a reminder to concerned about the process and telling them that > I will seek post facto approval for this instance but in future all > procedures must be followed. Am I using the words "post facto" correctly?


Finding the correct interpretation of "Every X [units of time], at maximum/minimum."

I've recently been involved in a discussion over different interpretations of the following sentence (paraphrased): > Users may update their information every two weeks, at maximum. The intended meaning is "no more frequently than once every two weeks", but some people seem to read it as exactly the opposite ("no less frequently"). A quick search on Google threw up examples of both interpretations (albeit usually sans comma), so now I'm somewhat stumped. To my mind, "every two weeks" specifies the frequency at which something may occur, while "at maximum" indicates that this is the highest frequency, not he largest interval of occurrences. Is there any one "correct" interpretation of this sentence, or is the wording simply too ambiguous? regards Luke


What is the "oldest joke in the book?"

What is the earliest recorded joke in a published work in the English language?


I have had had a question

You can say, "I have a question." You can say, "I have had a question for a long time." Right? But what about, "I have had had a question ..."? Optional side question: how do you punctuate the previous sentence? Is "have had had" grammatically correct? If so, what does it mean? Also, is it then correct to use "have had had had had had had," and does each use with a different number of hads mean something different? Do these tenses have a name? Would you only use these tenses in unique time travel scenarios? "I have had had a question," sounds weird but not necessarily wrong. "Having had had a question, I asked it," sounds okay. Or something like "Having had been a person..." EDIT So it seems that "Having" in "having had had" does not necessarily have anything to do with the tense? It still seems grammatically correct and not completely unusual to say "having had had" or even "having have had" for that matter.               Bob: I had had a question, but I never got a chance to ask it.      Bill: Having had had a question that was never asked, I understand how you feel.       I also found a few (very few) examples of "having have" by googling. I don't know if they're grammatically correct, but here's some: "24.6% reported having have been injured due to excessive consumption of alcohol." "When I got up to clear the table, only having have eaten a third of the fish—which was shockingly filling—I noticed that..." If these uses of "having have" are okay, then doesn't that mean that "having" at the beginning of such a sentence is different than "have" when used in the present perfect. But sometimes, doesn't "Having" in similar-looking sentences have something to do with tense?


Soft spot for [something]?

I always thought that "soft spot" is used for _living things_.. E.g.   1. soft spot for someone   2. soft spot for my pet dog   3. soft spot for the fishes in the pond But I was wondering can it be used for _non-living things_ as well.. for example:   1. He had a soft spot for numbers. _< \- does it make sense ?_   2. He had a soft spot for counting. _< \- what about this_   3. He had a soft spot for counting activities. _< \- better or worse?_


What's is the meaning of the phrase "Read it like you've written it"?

Does the meaning of the phrase changes on its usage? If it changes, how? I am hoping an answer based on how it changes with what people are concerned, like for an example: 1) If I have written an article, and I told you to "read it like you've written it". So I am expecting from you that you will offer constructive criticism. 2) If someone have written an article, and later on I picked up some mistakes and told the writer to review his/her article like it has written just now.


Whats the difference between mentor, tutor and professor in a University context in the UK

I'm wanting to find out whats the difference between mentor, tutor and professor in a University context in the UK? Also would mentor be a one-to-one ratio with a student or could it be one-to- many. Tutor I suppose would be a one-to-many ratio. Any help greatly appreciated.


The powers that be

How did the phrase **"the powers that be"** come about, is it an archaic verb tense of "being"?


difference between "will you be -ing?" and "are you -ing?"

Are there any differences among the following:   1. Are you using this room tomorrow?   2. Will you be using this room tomorrow?   3. Will you use this room tomorrow? 1 and 3 seem to be asking someone’s intention to use the room, while 2 has nothing to do with someone’s intention or will. It is simply asking if the room has been booked for the person being asked, isn't it?


Single word for (request, response) pair? (casual words ok)

I'm looking for a unambiguous word (or else expression) for referring to a question and a corresponding answer as a single entity. The word should express that no more and no less than 1 question and 1 answer is covered, and that they correspond each other. The terms "request, response" may be technical jargon but I'm looking for a general word (it may be technical but may be not). (In case this should be obvious, please merge this to ELL, I'm not native.)


Stock quantity of products — the most proper abbreviation

What is a commonly accepted abbreviation with regard to stock quantity of (countable) products? As in: _"200 units"_ of sth, just shorter. I've come across the form _"200 pc."_ , but as it's coming from a non-native speaker and I haven't seen it before, I can't help having some doubts. Is this form correct?


Short Sleeves or Shirt Sleeves

I've always referred to a shirt that has short sleeves as a "short sleeve" shirt. However, I've also heard it be referred to as a "shirt sleeve" shirt or "wearing shirt sleeves." This seems like a mistake and counter-intuitive: the shirt has less of a sleeve than usual so why refer to it as a "shirt sleeve" shirt when that's the very thing that's missing?!   I would appreciate your input on the popularity of one phrase over the other and the logic/origin behind the "shirt sleeves" term.


What goes after another person: we or us?

i.e. Are Mei-Ling and **______** singing together today?


Is -cund a sufix?

I saw words _fecund, jocund, rubicund_ end with _-cund_. Is _-cund_ a suffix and what does it mean?


What is an appropriate word for a third-tier item (primary, secondary, ...)?

If a first-tier item is called _primary_ , and a second-tier item is called _secondary_ , what can third, and greater, -tier items be called?


To "fling oneself on his/her face" -- expression

What does this phase "fling oneself on his/her face" mean in the following context? > Winston promptly flung himself on his face.


"Consumable" and "non-consumable" in reference to electronic items

How do you describe the difference between _consumable_ and _non-consumable_ electronic items?


Word for describing process of walking, going on foot

I’m translating an article about a wax-doll museum, and I got trapped on a phrase: > This wax doll has a mechanism, which simulates { **insert** : _process of > going on foot, walking_ — something like that}. I know this is a rather strange construction, but is there a good, maybe a little bit scientific term for describing such an activity? I was adviced with the word _gait_ , but I don't think it suits. Does it describe only a manner of a human walking (or that of a dog, horse), or it can also be used to mean walking itself?


"focus on" or "concentrate on"

I am wondering if "focus" and "concentrate" can be used interchangeably? Such as:   * [..] designed solution will **focus on** using modern hardware [..]   * [..] designed solution will **concentrate on** using modern hardware [..]


Is there a term for the convergent evolution of homonyms?

Some homonyms, like "punch", originated in different languages with different spellings. The violent act "punch" comes from the English word "pounce", while the beverage "punch" comes from the Hindi word "pañc" (citation). Is there a name for this phenomenon? It seems like the opposite of polysemy, in which a single word from a common origin takes on multiple related meanings.


If-clause with either

Which of these sentences look better? In addition, if the vertices that have outedges to this vertex are more central it will also be more central. or In addition, if the vertices that have outedges to this vertex are more central it will be more central either.


Decribing a  father's strict treatment of his children

In the movie "The Sound of Music" the father, who was also a captain, was very strict with his children. He would always give them all kinds of commands and always used a whistle. What's the best way to describe the way he was treating them?   1. He was treating them like in the army.   2. He was treating them like an officer treats his soldiers.   3. He was treating them like in the military.   4. He was treating them like soldiers.   5. `<Your option?`>


Using 'whom' for things

Is this sentence correct (especially the usage of whom)? > In addition, it might jump to a random vertex in the graph, whom the current > vertex is not necessarily connected to, with a certain probability.


How do I present a word ending in “‑f ” that may be plural or singular?

When we don’t know if a word refers to one or more, it is common to use a parenthetical _s_ :   * door/doors: door(s)   * lamp/lamps: lamp(s) What’s the best or _least awkward_ way to render this for words that change their form when pluralizing, such as words ending in _-f_ ?   * shelf/shelves: shelf(ves)?   * dwarf/dwarves: dwarf(ves)?


Unreal vs real time in that example

I have following sentences : > She looks as if she is ill. //she really looks ill   >  She looks as if she was ill //she definitely is not, I am being ironic or > whatever And when I shift these into the past, I get: > She looked as if she was ill. From my understanding, unreal time remains the same but real time changes from present to past simple..so both will look like this.Is that correct? And one more question, what is the difference in: > She looked as if she has been ill.


How to pronounce "halcyon"?

I grew up thinking this word was pronounced HALK-YON, having learned it from books and never hearing someone speak it. I recently heard somebody mention it for the first time, and they pronounced it HAL-SEE-ON. Any insights? Wiktionary says maybe it is Latin for _kingfisher_.


Future perfect progressive tense question

I don't understand the grammar in this sentence: "By this time next summer, you will have completed your studies and found a job." I understand that the first half is future perfect progressive but why is the verb "found"in the second half in past tense and "not will have found"? Thanks


Does the word 'God' with a capital G have a plural form?


What does “crocuses” mean in referring to the midterm election?

There was the following sentence in the article of Time magazine (May 7) under the title of “5 things politicians must stop saying”: > The midterm elections are coming in much the way of **crocuses** — provided > **crocuses** bought billions of dollars worth of ads to announce their > approach, spent most of that money saying mean things about other > **crocuses** and were gerrymandered into safe gardens anyway, so really > what’s the point? But never mind, they’re coming all the same. > http://time.com/90382/politicians-words-stop-saying/ According to Merriam Webster Dictionary, crocus is:   1. Any of a genus (Crocus) of herbs of the iris family developing from corms and having solitary long-tubed flowers and slender linear leaves    2. A dark red ferric oxide used for polishing metals,  and has nothing to do with politics and elections. What does the word, crocuses represent for in the context of the above article?


What's the difference between "harrowing" and "poignant"?


What does 'Tear yet’ mean on the Charlie Sheen’s rant about his qualms with CBS

I stumbled on the word _tear yet_ in the following sentence in today's Washington Post article titled "Charlie Sheen radio outburst spurs shutdown of ‘Two and a Half men.’" What does _tear (yet)_ mean here? > CBS and Warner Bros. TV have taken the extraordinary step of scrapping > production on the country's most popular comedy series, "Two and a Half > Men," for the rest of the season after star Charlie Sheen went on his most > breathtaking radio tear yet Thursday.


Are there any words in English pronounced with /eː/ which aren't spelt with a following "r"?

In Australian English (non-rhotic) the word "air" is pronounced /eː/, in Canadian English (rhotic) it is pronounced /ɛɹ/ and most other dialects pronounce it as somewhere between those two. All the words I know of with that sound have an "r" as part of the spelling of the sound, e.g. h **ai _r_** , c **a _r_ e**, th **e _r_ e**, b **ea _r_** , **ae _r_** oplane. Are there any words which have the same sound where the spelling does not include an "r"?


What's another word for "house owner"?

Is there a _neutral_ term that means "owner of the house"? By _neutral_ I mean words that do not suggest superiority, e.g. "landlord", "land owner", etc. Note: "innkeeper" wouldn't work because it suggests owner of a hotel (a building primary for lease), instead of owner of a house (a building not primary for lease).


"Meet up" vs. "meet" vs. "hook up"

What's the difference between _meet up_ , _meet_ and _hook up_ as a synonym of _meet up_? The Free Dictionary has the following definitions: >   * _to meet up_ : to see and talk to someone familiar or someone you do not > know: _"Let's meet up for drinks after work."_ >   * _to hook up_ : to meet someone and spend time together: _"I was > traveling alone, but then I hooked up with another woman about my age."_ > These definitions are really similar. What is the subtle difference between these three words?


Help me to stop saying 'Man up!'?

I often utter the phrase 'Man up', or I talk about 'taking it like a man' or earning 'man points' (that last one, not so much, but I hear it still). I don't want to keep doing this, for obvious reasons; It's a bad habit, but I find myself saying it anyway. Is there a better way of getting across that I'm 'manning up' or I expect someone else to 'man up'? Could I replace 'man' in those phrases with some other word, X and say something like 'Taking it like a(n) X'? Or should I just use a different phrase?


Meaning of "run small"

What's the meaning of _run_ here? > P1: I've been thinking of getting a Levi's Filson jacket. But can't find > anywhere to try it on. > > P2: They run small. A close definition I found is "to make a service, course of study, etc. available to people" from OALD. So does _run_ here mean "to make available"? And in this case, small is the only size made available?


usage of terms "as well as " and "as well"

Can anyone describe the usage of the terms "as well as" and "as well" in sentences? Are they interchangeable?


If I attain a Master's degree, how do I refer to myself?

This is in reference to holding an MLS degree. Am I a "Master"? Would it be correct to say > When I become a Master of Library Science, I would like to... That sounds somehow kooky, but I can't think of a better way to say it.


"the like" sequence

I have a question about "the like" I found in a book. The sentence: "you who have never seen the like can scarcely imagine what delicate and wonderful flowers..." I've seen "the more you know the less you get" That sample I understand where THE stands before not-noun/adverb. There is "the .. the". Also, I can uderstand when 'the like' refers to some mentioned noun(s) before in the sentence, like this: "Girls, boys and the like didn't learn their homework" But what about "The Like" in my case? What does it refer to if does? **UPDATE:** There are whole two sentences: > The idea was received with melodious applause; and presently they were all > running to and fro for flowers, and laughingly flinging them upon me until I > was almost smothered with blossom. You who have never seen **the like** can > scarcely imagine what delicate and wonderful flowers countless years of > culture had created.


What is the meaning of ‘something blind’?

The phrase “Something ugly, slimy, and blind” is confusing me. Here are my questions.   1. What does the 'blind' part mean?   2. Is ‘something blind’ a special expression? (For I couldn’t find its example in dictionaries.) I found the expression in the following scene: > It was as though Wormtail had flipped over a stone and revealed **something > ugly, slimy, and blind** – but worse, a hundred times worse. The thing > Wormtail had been carrying had the shape of a crouched human child, except > that Harry had never seen anything less like a child. It was hairless and > scaly-looking, a dark, raw, reddish black. Its arms and legs were thin and > feeble, and its face – no child alive ever had a face like that – flat and > snakelike, with gleaming red eyes. ( _Harry Potter 4_ [US Version]: p.640) > [Bold font is mine] N.B.: The baby-like thing is a temporal seat of the spirit of a dark wizard, the main villain in the story, who is trying to regenerate with Wormtail’s help. * * * For you who are interested in my confusion. At first, I thought the thing (or the baby-like being) can’t see anything, but I found it a little difficult to accept it because we can’t tell blindness objectively like _ugliness_ and _sliminess_. (The author is likely to describe things objectively as she is narrating from the viewpoint of Harry, the main character.) Then, I thought it means something incomprehensible that the writer can’t give an exact description. However, I couldn’t find a good explanation in dictionaries.


What are "identical words" as distinct from homonyms?

The wikipedia entry on homonyms contains the following diagram: ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/JAm5h.png) In the very center of that image is a category labeled "identical words" which is separate from the rest but is at the intersection of "Same spelling" and "Same meaning". So, apparently there are words that are spelled identically and have the same meaning but are considered separate words. Am I reading the diagram wrong? If not, can someone explain what these words are and offer an example?


What does 'hopeful' mean when referring to tennis player?

I wonder what does the word _hopeful_ mean in the following context > After Agnieszka Radwanska defeated Belarusian hopeful Olga Govortsova in > straight sets during the second round of the Australian Open.' I guess that the phrase _to defeat sb in straight set_ means _to win a game without losing a single set_. Am I right?


What is the difference between "till" and "until"?

What is the difference between _till_ and _until_?   When to use _till_ or _until_? Please explain with examples.


Where does the second "l" come from in "till"?

I've always wondered this: surely an abbreviation of _until_ should abbreviate the word, without subsequently needing to double the last letter? Are there any reasons for this?


Is it OK to italicise only part of a word?

As an example: _in_ homogeneous.


What does "on point" mean in this context?

What does this mean? > To be honest, all your stuff is like 100% on point with the vibe we've had > going. I don't know if it is a compliment or the guy just cursed me :D


What does "to be in pieces" means?

Referring to famous Morrissey's "Children in pieces" b-side.


What is the name for the process which turned "iced cream" into "ice cream"?

There are several words (mostly related to food) which are shortenings of their historical forms. For example, the cold treat _ice cream_ was originally known as _iced cream_ in the 1680s. The _-ed_ ending dropped off in about 1744. A similar example is _skim milk_ , which derives from the term _skimmed milk_ which is apparently still in use in the UK. Other examples are _popcorn_ , _wax paper_ and _whip cream_. What is the name for the historical process in which the _-ed_ ending is dropped? Language Log talked about the phonology of this phenomenon, referring to it as _t/d_ -dropping, but they did not give a name to the process each word went through. I was thinking that _abbreviation_ might work, but is there a specific term available?


What the role of this word (available)

I have a sentence.   I looked up the word " **available** " . It is ADJ. So this sentence below have structure :   _be_ \+ `adj` \+ `N` \+ `adj` ( _isn't sufficient detail available_ ) > "There isn't sufficient detail available for all sectors to make a fair > comparison" I'm so confused about the word "available" position. What the role of this word.


What does "steal" in this Oscar Wilde piece mean

I was reading The Picture of Dorian Gray by Oscar Wilde. In the 2nd chapter I read the following prose: > Yes, there would be a day when his face would be wrinkled and wizen, his > eyes dim and colourless, the grace of his figure broken and deformed. The > scarlet would pass away from his lips and the **_gold steal from his > hair_**. The life that was to make his soul would mar his body. He would > become dreadful, hideous, and uncouth. From the above prose fragment it is obvious what Dorian the narcissist is thinking. But what bugs me is that "gold steal from his hair". What does it mean actually? I think that the time would steal gold from his hair (meaning that his hair would grow white). But then, the verb steal looks inappropriately handled. In all the sentences I have read steal always has a thief. Excuse my blunt way of speaking , but in this example "Somebody is about to steal my paper" the thief **_"Somebody"_** is mentioned. Why then it is not mentioned in the above line? If I wrote in this way, would it be justified?


What to call the symbol where there is a break in content or a break in a graph?

When a graph or image cannot be displayed practically in a fixed amount of space, people will generally include a "squiggle" to denote that there is some content missing from the middle. Is there an official name for this kind of thing? It's like an ellipsis, but for graphics. Here's an example of what it looks like on a graph: ![Graph Break Symbol](http://i.stack.imgur.com/gsNjY.jpg) And here's an example of what it looks like in a diagram: ![Image Break Symbol](http://i.stack.imgur.com/FmSkQ.png)


Grammar rules for parellelism in comparisons and variations according to verb placement

I'm an academic editor in the field of medicine and I often come across complex comparisons. My question is specifically regarding how the placement of the verb affects the the parallelism of the comparison. Please check the following three sentences:   1. Median serum thyroxine was significantly decreased in patients with a suppressed TSH compared to those with a normal TSH.   2. Median serum thyroxine was significantly decreased in patients with a suppressed TSH compared to that in patients with a normal TSH.   3. Median serum thyroxine in patients with a suppressed TSH was significantly decreased compared to that in patients with a normal TSH. To the best of my knowledge, sentences 1 and 3 are accurate in terms of parallelism. However, a couple of my friends agree that 1 is wrong and 2 is right. We all agree on 3 being the best form. I would like to know your opinion regarding the same. In particular, if someone can link me to any resources regarding the changes that need to be made according to the placement of the verb for maintaining parallelism in such comparisons, it would be great. Thanks!


How would you describe a set of words that are all from the same domain/idea, but tenuously applied to an unrelated domain/idea?

Imagine you created a suite of Microsoft Office-like business tools that you named "Tiger", for whatever reason. Then you named the word editor "Growl" (to vocalize, i.e. talk), and the spreadsheet program "Stripes" (because stripes are like columns). Then when you create the presentation/slideshow program you are struggling to find a Tiger-esque word to apply to the concept of the software so you use a word like "Paws" (I guess you can "pause" a slideshow...) simply to keep with the Tiger theme. I'm specifically looking for a way to describe the process or the resulting set of words when the theme has been over done and the associations have become tenuous, meaningless, contrived.


Verb Tense: Talking about Events in fictional work

I was referred to this sub-forum from English Language Learners Stack Exchange. My question is why do some people on the comic message boards that I frequent use present + past tense to discuss about the current storyline or the actions leading up to it instead of the present tense + present prefect. Summaries of the events: Chapter 4, released last week: > Sara shaves her head after she breaks up with her boyfriend. Chapter 5, released this week: > Sara grows her hair back. I used the present tense (following Purdue grammar guide) to summarize the events in chapter 4 and 5 so you guys would have an idea of the storyline. Purdue OWL recommends using "present tense to describe action in a literary work, movie, or other fictional narrative." The 3 examples below are what they would post after knowing what happened in chapter 4 and 5 which I summarized above. They use present + past tense, or just past tense to talk about the events : > Sara is growing her hair back, after she foolishly shaved her head when her > boyfriend broke up with her. > > She grew her hair back. > > I was not surprised that she grew her hair back. Thank you for informing me that my question didn't make sense. Please let me know if there are further problems with my question =)


Article - "a" or "the" or plural for countable nouns?

I think a countable noun are usually of the following 3 forms:   * `the` \+ `countable noun (single form)`   * `a` \+ `countable noun (single form)`   * `countable noun (plural form)` I am confused about which to pick for the following sentence. Should it be > The map is usually a crucial prerequisite for location services. OR > A map is usually a crucial prerequisite for location services. OR > Maps are usually a crucial prerequisite for location services.


what does a three-up mean in below contents?

Print proofing **with a three-up** : The two sides show the lightest and darkest prints that are within tolerance. The one in the middle is juust right. I can guess what it means by reading the whole content, but I don't know why it can be expressed in this way, is it a kind of fixed usage?


What's the term to describe this kind of sentence?

What is the term to describe this kind of sentence: > I don't know why people like to study things that they don't like to study. There's some kind of logic error with this statement, and it's meant as a joke. What's an appropriate term to describe this sentence? (I was thinking of things like _irony_ , etc.)


"Antecedent" vs. "predecessor"

When do I use the word _antecedent_ and when should I prefer _predecessor_?


How to say "I'm calling to touch base" without using the idiom?

Is there a common phrase or a word to convey the same meaning?


Where is the root morpheme in Modern English evacuate and vacuum?

They both are cognates (it can be easily proved by many etymological sources). The question is : Is it possible to consider VAC as a common root for evacuate and vacuum (we may go further - vacation, vacancy, vacuous etc.).


Is there a word to describe female between 'girl' and 'woman'?

I've been trying to find a word that describes someone that's older than a 'girl' but not yet a 'woman'. It seems the connotation of girl is an immature female that's still growing up. Whereas a woman connotes a female that's starting to settle down in life. Other words such as lady connote delicateness. There are few other words and most of them are derogatory. My curiosity is around the maturation of a female i.e. someone just out of college figuring life out but out of the 'girl' stage.


What is the word or phrase of the relationship between an account and a bank?

I am looking to describe the relationship between a bank account (such as a checking account, a loan, etc.) to a bank or other financial institution. Right now, I am using _is conducted by_ , as in > Account 123 _is conducted by_ My Credit Union. I have also considered _is held at_ (or _is being held at_ ), and _is managed by_. But all of these seem awkward. Are there other phrases or words for this relationship that are accurate and more elegant?


About 'used to'

> You used to have muscles. > > You can use it to me. Sometimes, "used to" means "often", sometimes use+to just means "use". How to diff those two situations?


Capitalization of "RF" versus "dc"

In English-language papers, I often see "dc" (as in direct current) in lowercase, but "RF" (as in radio frequency) in uppercase. For example, this paper includes both usages at the bottom of page 618: > This means that the ac (RF) waveform applied to [...] Some more papers using "dc".   * http://instructor.physics.lsa.umich.edu/adv-labs/Mass_Spectrometer/MassSpecQMS.pdf   * http://www.vacuumcursus.nl/casussen/jcequad.pdf   * http://ir.gig.ac.cn:8080/bitstream/344008/13774/1/08018.pdf Oddly, this one uses lowercase "dc" _and_ "rf":   * http://www.stanford.edu/group/Zarelab/publinks/798.pdf Where does this convention stem from?


Meaning and synonyms of 'toll' in 'death toll'

As a foreign locutor..., the word _toll_ seems weird in the following sentence in The New York Times: > Death **Toll** Rises From Wind and Flooding Automatic translations do not help very much : without, costs, number, call, toll ? Could you give me other examples of sentences with the word _toll_ , or provide synonyms for it?


Term for the type of audible reaction typically written as "heh" or "hmph"

Is there a term for a person's audible reaction, the quoted written form of which we typically find spelled as **_heh_** or **_hmph_**?


Who first used the term "bit rot"?

Wikipedia says: > **Bit rot** , also known as **bit decay** , **data rot** , or **data decay** > , is a colloquial computing term used to describe either a gradual decay of > storage media or the degradation of a software program over time. The latter > use of the term implies that software can wear out or rust like a physical > tool. More commonly, bit rot refers to the decay of physical storage media. The Jargon File adds: > There actually are physical processes that produce such effects (alpha > particles generated by trace radionuclides in ceramic chip packages, for > example, can change the contents of a computer memory unpredictably, and > various kinds of subtle media failures can corrupt files in mass storage), > but they are quite rare (and computers are built with error-detecting > circuitry to compensate for them). When was the term _bit rot_ (or _bit-rot_ or _bitrot_ ) coined and by whom? Edit: And do synonyms such as _bit decay, data rot, data decay_ or _software rot_ predate it?


The correct syntax for "I/We remain" at the end of the letter

I want to sign off a letter with the following: > Letter text. > > We remain, > > Sincerely yours, > > Mr Person   >  Head of Accounting Is this correct usage? Isn’t this like having 2 salutations? Is it ok to have 2 salutations?


What does it mean that Republicans in Congress “need to get off their hands and stop rooting for failure”?

In June 3rd AP radio news, I heard Stephanie Cutter, Deputy Manager of the Obama re-election campaign, say: > Republicans in Congress have refused to approve measures that will improve > job creation because they want the President to fail. _They need to get off > their hands and stop rooting for failure._ I’m not clear about what the last line, “They need to get off their hands and stop rooting for failure,” means. From (or to) what Republicans need to get off their hands? What does "get off one’s hand" mean? What does "root for failure" mean? Would you explain the last line in plain English?


Assuming answer to be true

This is more of a mathematical context (as opposed to literary context). We assume the statement we have to prove to be true (assumption) and on the basis of that we draw deductions from the statement and draw some conditions for the statement to be true and in the end, come to the conclusion that since these conditions (given in question) are imperative for satisfying the answer so the statement is true. E.g.: > Example 18 Show that if f : A → B and g : B → C are one-one, then gof : A → > C is also one-one.   >  Solution:   >  **Suppose** gof(x1) = gof(x2).   >  g(f(x1)) =g(f(x2)).   >  f(x1) = f(x2), as g is one-one.   >  x1 =x2, as f is one-one.   >  **Hence** gof (x1)= gof (x2). What is this "method" called?


Example of sentence using "sang-froid"

In which context should _sang-froid_ be used?   Can you provide an example?


In what situation "you will have shown" can't be substituted with "you will show"?

My point is whether there is such a context, in which "you will show" would really change the meaning if it is substituted for "you will have shown".


Video, picture, or image?

How do I clearly distinguish between:   * Moving images **only**   * Moving images and audio Using as few words as possible, without it sounding 'awkward' of course. > **Black Hat Guy:**   "I was watching and listening to this moving image with > audio data stream on my LCD screen and speakers respectively about..." > > **Mrs. Roberts:**      "You were _what?_ " > > **Black Hat Guy:**   "I was watching a video on my computer about..." For both technical and non-technical usage?


Is "I'll when" proper form?

A friend of mine keeps using a contraction like this and I keep correcting him by asking "I'll what?". He doesn't get it though, and no matter how much I try to explain it doesn't seem to sink in. For example, I tried explaining that in most cases you can't use a contraction (more specifically ones that refer to a person(s) like I'll, they'll, he'll and so on) right before who/what/where/when/how/why, that he should use "I will" instead of "I'll" unless he's asking a question; "I'll when?" makes sense, "I'll when it's finished" doesn't. So, just to clarify, does "I'll when" work when it's not a question? How can I better explain it to him? I'm having a hard time and I seem to be making a mess of it rather than helping.


Etymology of "Scantily clad"

I'm aware of the meaning of "scantily clad", the internet gives some good clues on that (Side question: Does it have erotic implications in itself?). However, what do the actual words mean ("clad" from "clothed"?), from which period is it, and why has it become a fixed expression?


The word for "?!" or "!?"

Is there a word for the punctuation "?!" or "!?"? A friend of mine steeped in such idiosyncrasies of eccentric English lore said there was but could not recall the name. I guess for reasons known only to the search-gods it seems rather ineffective to Google.


Is "gaijin" considered offensive?

Is _gaijin_ a term that's only acceptable when it's a non-Japanese person using it self-referentially (similar to n-word privileges in TV Tropes), or is it considered ok to use in normal conversation between non-Japanese and Japanese? For example, could one say, "Can you rewrite that address in romaji so us gaijin can understand it?", or would it be better to use a more bland term?


"In respect of" / "With respect to"

Is there a difference in meaning between, "in respect of" and "with respect to"? Is it grammatically correct to use, "in respect to...."? The full context I am concerned with currently reads: "My recommendations in respect to the features available are summarised below."


If Christopher is a "carrier of Christ" then what is Jennifer carrying?

I was told in a Latin class that the name Christopher has Greek roots that mean "one who carries Christ". I assume that the Latin connection here is _fero_ , which is the verb _to carry_. With that in mind, does the name Jennifer have a similar derivation? If so what would she be carrying?


"Soldier sleeps - the service continues" (Russian idiom/saying)

What are English equivalents for following Russian idiom: "soldier sleeps - the service continues"? In Russian it means that "you have a rest, but your work is still being done". UPD from comments:   * For example, you have a rest on the sea, and you still come royalty for previously written a book.    * you relax, and the money will still come to your account   * Your text can be paraphrased - do / not do - you have the same result. That is, anything from you does not. That is correct. But I would say that you're doing something, and there comes a time when you have to depend on nothing.   * Example: you are the boss and taught their employees to do their job without your help. Ride the sea. Relax. Now nothing to depend from you. But you know that your staff will do everything as it should.   * For example, Joanne Rowling wrote "Harry Potter" books, and may the relax a long time - the money for the books will be coming for a long time, ie hard work you at first, and then you can use the result of a very long


For as a coordinate connector

![](http://i.stack.imgur.com/jTzvs.png) In this sentence "for" is used as coordinate connector, so therefore, both before and after "for" should be a complete clause right? "Despite its small size and slow gait, the wolverine is an effective predator" is normal. "What it lacks in speed and size it makes up in strength and endurance." I'm confused with this one. It seems to have 2 subjects. Or when we use the connector "for" we should add another noun as an object for it? Quite confusing..


What is accidental metaplasm & metathesis across words? Such as... > grammar teacher --> trammar greacher Does this have a name?


English term for switching phonemes between words?

Is there the English term for switching phonemes between words, creating something like Freudian mistakes? For example, changing 'lumberjack' to 'jumper's luck'. As fair as I can remember, one of Gummi Bears from TV child series was permanently using such constructions.


How widely-accepted is "What do you got?" to Americans?

Watching A Stranger Among Us, I noticed that Melanie Griffith _twice_ asked "What do you got?" I recognise this as an American construction which sounds strange to me — Brits invariably say either _"What **have** you got?"_ or _"What do you **have**?"_. But I'd be interested to know if it's considered "normal" by most/all Americans, or if it's regionally or otherwise restricted.


Is "Do you got Insurance?" technically correct?

I've been hearing a lot of complaints about this in relation to the Thanks Obamacare campaign in Colorado, but trying to look for information on "Do you got xxx" I don't find too much to actually show that it's right or wrong, no matter how it looks.


Can we start a sentence with "Like this,"?

Is the following sentence well constructed? Like this, doing things that you do not like help you learn important skills. It looks wrong to me, but I have yet to find a rule or guide that could give a reason for this. Thank you for any and all help!


How to say succinctly: "An opinion which is *shareable* and agreed upon by many"?

How would you express the notion: _overall many would share that opinion_ , more succinctly? For example: > It is **generally agreed upon** that "Breakfast is the most important meal > of the day".   >  Breakfast is the most important meal of the day is something which **many > agree** ( _including myself_ ) **with** or > **Many would agree** (myself included) **with** X's assertion   >  X's opinion is **generally agreed upon**   >  The decision to X is **agreed and shared by most** I ask because recently I had to stop myself from saying: > "I didn't take that action, although _condivisible_ ". I stopped short in my tracks and realized I was anglicizing the Italian expression _**condivisibile**_ which means _shareable_ or any of the expressions which I placed in bold font. If I had to rephrase that last sentence to reflect accurately the meaning of _condivisibile_ I would have to say: > I didn't personally take that action, although **it is one which I [and > many] would agree with**. **_Agreeable_** would have been perfect but it doesn't fit because it's principle meaning is _enjoyable and pleasurable; pleasant_. It is especially inappropriate if the action or decision taken by another is a form of punishment. For example, someone being fined heavily for parking on a pavement/sidewalk despite there being no more parking spaces available (this happens all the time in the area where I live... _ahem_ ). Perhaps the best example is this last one: > He got fined heavily for parking on the sidewalk, although **_______** (I > agree with the decision to fine him), perhaps the council ought to think > about providing more parking spaces. So, is there a single-word, an adjective or shorter phrase to express this concept?


Word meaning "to tell the truth to someone"?

Example: > I wanted to [...] him—to let everything out. What's a common word to use in this cases? I'm looking for something similar to `spit` as in `to spit something out`. Like, when you say something harmful to someone because of anger.


Meaning of "bust"

Context (New York Times), > Alpha Centauri or **bust**. The government agency that helped invent the > Internet now wants to do the same for travel to the stars. ... Does _bust_ here mean > Dictionary.com: 8. failure Is the author saying that either the government agency is going to pull this off (sending humans to Alpha Centauri, to the stars) or this is just totally a failure?


Usage of the noun suffix "-ment"

What is a good rule for the usage of the noun suffix _-ment_? Is _desirement_ as acceptable as _achievement_?


Need a word to represent the opposite of busy

Today I came across the Japanese word which conveys the meaning of having a lot of free time, and is the opposite of _busy_. The closest word which I can think of is _idle_ , but that word seems to mean more of a laziness rather than actually lacking something to do. Are there any other words that would convey this kind of meaning?


the and thee (I prefer to pronounce it as thuh all the time)

My question is can I always pronounce THE with **thuh instead of thee**? Because unlike "a" "an" rule, pronouncing "thee" seems cumbersome for some people (including me) Note that I know the "emphasis" and "vowel, consonant" rule about THE but I still prefer to pronounce it as thuh everytime. So can I??


A word for someone who occupies a position

Is there a lexicalization for someone who holds a position, for example, in a company, in the army, in an organization, etc.? > All of the relevant **___________** should be promptly contacted and > updated. _Position-holder_ seems so awkward.


By the close, meaning

> The Russian ruble strengthened the most since September 2012, adding 1.6 > percent to 35.2230 per dollar by 6 p.m. in Moscow and trimming its quarterly > decline to 6.8 percent. The Micex Index (INDEXCF) added 1.9 percent to > 1,369.29 **by the close** , the highest since Feb. 28. That cut its three- > month drop to 9 percent. What does **by the close** mean in this excerpt?


Subjunctive mood with complex sentences

Which sentence is correct?   * If I could, I would find a hint which helps me.   * If I could, I would find a hint which would help me.


How is "Can anyone tell me how can I solve this" wrong?

I posted a question somewhere that said...               Can anyone tell me how I can solve this?      ...but someone edited it to...               Can anyone tell me how can I solve this?       ...and it was accepted. That's wrong isn't it? Can someone explain how that's wrong?


Additionally ... also

[disclosure: I'm not a native speaker of English] I work as a university professor. When writing up lecture notes as well as research papers, I have a tendency to write things like the following. > A Monte Carlo simulation shows that Factor A is a significant one. > Additionally, it also shows that the outliers can be grouped together as a > special case. The question is whether the _Additionally...also_ sequence is a stylistically acceptable one, given that both _additionally_ and _also_ convey additivity. I keep on using it because using just one of the two sounds weird, in a way that I really can't put my finger on (but then, this might be because I don't speak English natively). If _Additionally...also_ is deprecated, I would welcome suggestions of alternative ways of expressing the same meaning.


Should "tablet" be capitalized in a school essay?

Should "tablet" be capitalized? Such as: "The last ten years has brought us smartphones, tablets, 3-D visual entertainment..." etc.


I often get confused by the usage of "located " and "situated"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Situated vs Located? Can I have a few examples to comprehend?


What preposition should I use before "Christmas"?

Example: > The whole family got together **__** Christmas. Meaning: Christmas is the _reason_ for the family getting together


What does "don’t pave the cow path" mean in this context?

I came across a new phrase while reading description section of a webinar topic on **Operational Best Practices in the Cloud** here. **Excerpt:** > _Don’t pave the cow path_. Cloud infrastructure is very different from > traditional infrastructure and requires different approaches to really > harness cloud value. From dev/test/prod lifecycle management to deployment > automation, patch management, monitoring and automation for autoscaling and > disaster recovery... What does _don't pave the cow path_ mean, in general and in this context? I couldn't even find the meaning or an idiom entry in The Free Dictionary.


"Whiz" and "wiz" in Wizard of Oz

In this famous song from The Wizard of Oz I do not completely understand the words _whiz_ and _wiz_. I think it's probably a play on words. What is the meaning of each use of _wiz_ or _whiz_? > We're off to see the Wizard > > The Wonderful Wizard of Oz > > We hear he is a **whiz** of a **wiz** > > If ever a **wiz** there was > > If ever, oh ever, a **wiz** there was > > The Wizard of Oz is one because > > Because, because, because, because, because > > Because of the wonderful things he does > > We're off to see the wizard > > The Wonderful Wizard of Oz!


Difference between "to fear" and "to be afraid of"

> I **fear/am afraid** I changed my gender. > > The very thing I **fear/am afraid of** is the thing that I can't realize > that I actually changed not the thing that I consciously know that I > changed. That in fact I hide and **fear being/am afraid to be** open > instead! What is the difference between using _to fear_ and _to be afraid of_ in these examples?


How do we interpret these lines from 'Ulysses'?

What do these lines from _Ulysses_ mean exactly? What is a _sinking_ star? How does the simile work in the first line? This summary calls the phrase _ambiguous_. > To follow knowledge like a sinking star, > > Beyond the utmost bound of human thought.


Meaning and usage of the slang "gold"

I often hear the word _gold_ as a slang to describe something great such as "last night's party was gold" or "that movie was gold" etc. What exactly does _gold_ mean and how do you use the slang?


What is a “big-ender pair”?

In the sci.math newsgroup ca. 23 Mar 2013, in thread _Subject: Re: math formulae?_ , I saw the following: > > >"Is the tournment liken to a bridge tournment? The problem is vague.   >  > > As there are 100 diffenent bigender pairs, 10 rounds would be   >  > > inadequate. > > > I can’t compare euchre to bridge, as I don’t know how the latter is   >  > played. In this particular euchre tournament, there are to be 5 tables,   >  > each seating 2 bigender pairs per round ... Anyway, does anyone know what a _big-ender pair_ is? Also, it seems to me to be incorrect to leave out the hyphen as those newsgroup posters did. For example, the wikipedia article on _Endianness_ consistently hyphenates big- endian, little-endian, etc.


Why are there so few words in English that are derived from Welsh? Wikipedia mentions only 11.


1 or 2 words for 'completed on our own accord, without said individual's request/expectation'

This sentence > This x is a proprietary idea from John Doe. is used, as you might expect, to indicate that descriptions of x should not be shared without just cause. However, I want to change the sentence to indicate that it is our idea to keep the idea close, and that Mr. Doe isn't even expecting us to take this measure. Can you suggest any short modification to this sentence that would not be confusing, and not be long. A word that says 'effected without request', 'on our own occord'. I hope I am not too far off topic. I ask this because I have a hunch that there is a really cool way to say it that I hadn't thought of. Edit: My current solution: Thanks, I couldn't think up that word for some reason. > We are voluntarily keeping this x proprietary for Mr. Doe. I expect the audience will understand it unambiguously. **The only thing remaining** is that it doesn't clarify that Mr. Doe is unaware we are doing this for him. This is a minor imperfection, but I welcome suggestions.


"What questions are there?" vs. "What are the questions there?"

Imagine this scene: "a non-native student asking another student about the questions in a paper on the table of the teacher". Which is the correct way for asking this between the two questions below: >   1. "Hey man, what questions are there?" >   2. "Hey man, what are the questions there?" > What are the differences between the questions 1 and 2, I mean about **meaning** and **grammar**. Are both grammatically correct? If yes, are the meanings the same?


Does anybody know the origin of the phrase ‘clued up’?

Does anybody know the origin of the phrase 'clued up'?


Can the word ‘genius’ be used as an adjective?

Can the word 'genius' be used as an adjective? For example: 'A genius plan' or 'This is a genius piece of work'?


Why, in old books, are dates often given with the years redacted?

silly question, and I'm not sure this is even necessarily the right forum, but it's the most appropriate on StackExchange, so here we are. Why is it, in older books, that years are sometimes redacted and replaced with a dash when writing the date in letters and so forth? Here is an example, from Mary Shelley's Frankenstein: > Letter 1 > > St. Petersburgh, Dec. 11th, **17--** > > TO Mrs. Saville, England > > You will rejoice to hear that no disaster has accompanied... I've seen this in many (mostly older) books, and my only hypothesis is that it is/was a fashionable attempt to try not to make the book seem outdated quite so quickly; or as a sort of faux attempt to feign respect for privacy, within the world of the novel itself. In a similar vein, in Frankenstein, several curse words ( _D--n_ ) are also redacted. I assume this is a sort of Victorian modesty in not printing profanity, but if I'm wrong, I'd love to be corrected on that, as well. * * * **EDIT** : I just received this back from the reference librarian (libraries are so great!): > It seems that there is no definitive explanation, but several explanations > seem to come up over and over again. I am including the best of what I found > online, rather than some of the random information that is posted (though, I > will include one online discussion that might be interesting for you all the > same). > >   * From author John Barth: http://www.colby.edu/~isadoff/ss/barth.doc > "Initials, blanks, or both were often substituted for proper names in > nineteenth century fiction to enhance the illusion of reality. It is as if > the author felt it necessary to delete the names for reasons of tact or > legal liability. Interestingly, as with other aspects of realism, it is an > illusion that is being enhanced, by purely artificial means." > >   * Electronic Labyrinth: Postmodernism and the Postmodern Novel > http://elab.eserver.org/hfl0256.html "... a literary convention of the time > when many books and pamphlets were written criticising the government of the > day, or important figures, by using false names... Some rather scurrilous > stories were also printed which were thinly veiled parodies or criticisms of > important figures. So when Jane Austen wrote the **___ _** _shire regiment, > or the Earl of_ ** ___ _**, she was a)avoiding the pitfall of being accused > of inaccuracy and b) avoiding the pitfall of being accused of criticism of > some important political figures." > >   * Here is that discussion I mentioned: Republic of Pemberley Archive: More > or less: http://www.pemberley.com/bin/archives/regarc1.pl?read=9221 > >   * Here is one more online discussion with a very nice and referenced > answer, though the source page is no longer available. It discusses the use > of this convention in epistolary novels (novels written in the form of > letters): http://answerpool.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/436601891/m/6931055141 > > Since I think a couple of these links came up in the answers below, I'm just going to upvote them all and mark as answered the closest one (not that it was a quiz; but there were many good suggestions, and I can only mark one as the answer...).


An equivalent term for "decaffeinated"

Is there an equivalent term to the word "decaffeinated" to refer to tea instead of coffee? I think it's quite odd to say I drink decaffeinated tea. Detheinated perhaps?


"Enter information about your education history from secondary level onwards": Is the word "onwards" inclusive or exclusive?

I was filling an application and I came across this sentence: > Enter information about your education history from secondary level onwards. I am a bit confused. Do I have to include the secondary level info or not? What does the word "onwards" do here? Does it have an inclusive role, or an exclusive role?


Usage of "to" in the statement

Is there any difference between the two statements below? If yes, please let us know the difference. > I sent him a note yesterday > > I sent a note to him yesterday If both the statements are grammatically correct, what is the difference and when to use them? Does the word order above really change the meaning of the sentence?


"Win the lottery", "win a lottery", "win lottery"

Should it be _win the lottery_ or _win a lottery_ or just _win lottery?_ The sentences below sound the same to me. Are they? > I lost $5000 to lottery. > > I lost $5000 for lottery.


Is there a word for "applying modern standards / morals to a past era"? Something like "anachronism" but not quite. An example of this would be to criticize a public figure from centuries ago for owning slaves.


Is there a better way to say "Lesser of"?

I'm wondering if there is a better way to write this: > Lesser of actual physical damage or $1,500 per occurrence.


Does the word "God" in English imply that there is only one?

I know the word _Allah_ in Arabic implies that there is only one. That's because _Allah_ is either a name or a short form of _Al Illah_ , literally meaning "the God". That depends on which muslim you ask, actually. What about the English word _God_ or _god_? We got Zeus, a god, Hermes, a god, and then we got this Judeo-Christian God. Does the word _god_ in English imply that there is only one such being? This post on the Biblical Hermeneutics sister site claims that it does.


L.A. vs NYC (punctuation)

After researching the internet for a while now, I am still not sure whether it is true that one abbreviates Los Angeles by L.A. but New York City by NYC. Is that true, if so, why the different punctuation?


What’s the difference between “come recommended” and “be recommended”?

> … But their main business is in parts and refurbishing, and the old man, > Deforges, doesn’t like to sell a used piano to someone who hasn’t come > recommended. He says it’s more trouble than it’s worth and he’s got plenty > of customers for the pianos that come his way. ( _The Piano Shop on the Left > Bank_ by Thad Carhart) I think the rough meanings would be the same if the sentence used “who hasn’t been recommended” instead of “who hasn’t come recommended,” but what’s the difference between them?


Student:Classmate::Teacher:____________?

A student is a classmate, schoolmate, etc. to another student. But what is a teacher to another teacher? Couldn't it be colleague? Surely not, because a colleague could be any employee working with another.


Attention, focus, and respect as distributable resources

I'm curious about why we say things like, "If I could have your attention please", "Please give me your focus", and "Please give me the same respect you want for yourself". When did these become distributable resources? Does anyone have insight into how this came about and **why we use these as we do**?   We don't use other intangible nouns like this, so why do we use a select few in this special way? ("Could I have your kindness?" sounds weird, as do things like, _good humor_ , and _excitement_ ".)


Is the phrase "... or I'm mistaken" correct?

I want to write phrase "Capital of A is B, or I'm mistaken?", but I'm not sure that the second part of thus phrase is correct. Should I write "... or I've made a mistake?", or "... or I'm wrong?"? What is the best?


Synonym for "engrooved"

_Engrooved_ isn't a word, so I'm looking for something that carries its meaning. _Engraved, accustomed_ , and other synonyms don't express the same meaning. I'm looking for a word that carries the meaning "fitted to something". E.g., > The keys were engrooved to the fingers. Edit: so "adapted over time" is the best fit so far (thanks to FumbleFingers). If anyone has a better way to express this, I'd love to hear it.


Vocabularies about order of the things

I want to know if what certain orders or positions in the orders are in English. The following are my questions, assume that we have ten apples, I put my questions on these apples: What is the name of the order when all apples are red? We say the apples are all red? What is the name of the order when one apple (the first) is red, the next one is yellow, and then the third one is red and the forth one is yellow again and this continues to the last apple. What is the name of the order when one is red, and the next two are yellow and the forth one is red and again the next two are yellow and .... You see, I'm seeking for word/phrase to describe this orders. My second concern is the position of the items in an order. We say the first apple is red. We say the last apple is red. But, how do we say one apple to the end is red? I mean an apple before the last one? Thanks


Name for music that imitates speech

I have searched and asked others for the answer to this but have come up dry: what is the name or technique in music where musical notes approximate/imitate speech? Note that I am not talking about vocoders where speech is modulated by tones or notes, but rather the technique of arranging notes so they sound similar in pitch/length to spoken syllables. An example is the intro to "Hot Blooded" by Foreigner. Onomatopoeia is really the reverse of the term or idea I'm after. I asked in the music.stackexchange.com site and while there was no consensus one of the users suggested that I ask the question here. "Rhetoric in music" and "lyrical melody" were suggested as starting points, but I find them vague and not accurate enough to the topic at hand.


Word-type in this sentence

I'm trying to decode what word-type each word is in the following sentence, please correct me if I'm wrong. > The things you own end up owning you. I have it decoded as follows: The (det) things (noun) you (prep) own (verb) end (noun) up (adverb) owning (verb) you (prep).


A word for moving from one website to another

Here's the situation: I browse Tumblr, and then I go to, let's say, Youtube. What is the word for the action? The noun? It's not conversion, or click- through, I just move from one website to another. I don't think it is browsing. Browsing is when you surf the web, and I need a noun for the single action of shifting from one website to another. Mind you, a NOUN is needed. There are many verbs for this action.


Best word for portfolio / projects / references?

what would be the best word to describe finished projects / websites / applications? It should be for company web page and it should be clear that after click person will see list of projects / websites / applications done in past.


«Said I» vs «I said»

Are «said I» and «I said» interchangeable? «Said I» is pretty uncommon, or so I thought. The sentence in question looks like so: «"It's not going to be your way," — **said I**.» Or it could be «"It's not going to be your way," — **I said**.» Which one sounds better? (same question for "exclaimed I" vs. "I exclaimed", etc.)


Why FYI is called slang word?

> FYI is "For Your Information" But it is considered as a slang word: http://www.internetslang.com/FYI- meaning-definition.asp why?


What are words similar in spelling but differing in meaning called?

I frequently encounter " **vs** " words like:   * prodigal vs prodigious   * ingenuous vs ingenious   * affluent vs effluent These words are very **similar** but not identical in spelling, and have **different meanings**. (Since the words are not identical there are not heteronyms) Is there any term that describes such pairs of words?