The usage of quotation marks

I'm discussing and comparing two books and I want to know if I'm using quotation marks correctly: > Both books are known for being existential and the reader is bombarded with > questions throughout the books. ‘Whose fault is this? Who did this? Why did > it happen this way? Did it even happen this way?’ I'm having **a lot** of doubts over the punctuation in this small piece of text:   * Should there be a colon after _throughout the books_?   * Should there be individual quotation marks for every question, or is this right?   * If every question must have individual quotation marks, how would you correctly separate the questions? Using dots after the right quotation mark? Using commas? EDIT: I must write the final version using a pen and paper.


Does the professor think that I'm pregnant?

Yesterday, I handed my assignment to the professor as I was reaching the deadline. For some reason it took a while for her to check my paper, which made me uneasy, but eventually she looked at me in awe, mouth agape, and said: > Wow! You really surprised me! Now I think I don't know you at all. Who are > you? Seriously! Startled by her question, I blurted out: > Just an ordinary person?! She nodded in disbelief and said: > No, you're more than one ordinary person! Now I wonder what she really meant by that. Did she mean I'm better than an ordinary person, or she was teasing me as if I'm pregnant? After all, she could use "an" instead of "one"?


What is the word to describe someone whom you are gossiping about

I was writing another question on Workplace Interview when i realised that I did not know a term / word to describe someone whom you are gossiping about What is a word / term to describe someone whom you are gossiping about ???


Origin of "a head of steam"

I'm aware of the general origin of "a head of steam" being from old steam- powered trains, but how does it break down? I'm guessing that the "head" is the surplus of motive force necessary to break free from a standstill; does some older definition better meet that meaning? The closest seems to be > a body of water kept in reserve at a height; also : the containing bank, > dam, or wall Is there a more direct fit or does it rely on analogy?


What does "trouble at pit" mean?

I saw this in an article about which British accents sound more intelligent, apparently Yorkshire was once deemed as a place with "trouble at pit". It probably has an origin related to auto racing, but I would like to know the exact meaning and how to use the phrase.


Go on/to the web page

Which is the correct way to say this? "Please go on the home page to register" or "Please go to the home page to register"?


Word for someone who goes in a specific direction

What is the word for someone who follows specific instructions or does what he is told? And is there a word for the person who makes someone like this? The maker could be a tyrant or some sort of instructor.


Do Americans say "don't" as often as the British?

this is really a question for Americans. When watching US TV or films, it's often my impression that, while using all the other contractions, Americans don't seem so keen on 'don't', but use 'do not' rather more often than we Brits. And I don't think it's only when it is stressed. Any comments?


Inquire if position is still open

I am lost on the usage of inquire. Are any of the following sentences acceptable? If so, which is the most appropriate? >   1. I'd like to inquire if you are still accepting applications? >   2. I'd like to inquire as to if you are still accepting applications or > not? >   3. I'd like to inquire whether you are currently accepting applications. > This is part of a formal letter and I am held up on how to correctly write this sentence. This question is is similar to this question.


Help me with punctuation english language

when writing a company name in a letter are you suppose to do it this way? Company., Inc., or is it Company., Inc.


Non gender oriented way to replace husband/wife

I’m creating a list of families that lists both partners’ names, ages, wedding date, and divorce date if there is one. To do this I have been using:               Husband    Age    Wife    Age    Marriage Date    Divorce Date      My cousin got married, and because he is gay _Husband_ and _Wife_ no longer apply as appropriate titles for the list of families. I’m not sure how to replace _Husband_ and _Wife_. I could use _Husband_ and _Spouse_ but that won’t work where the couple are both female. Using _Partner A_ and _Partner B_ would seem to negate the “family” aspect of the relationship, considering that you can have a partner and not be married. Also, _partner_ seems very business-like to me — as in _law partners_ , _business partners_ , etc. Is there a way to replace husband and wife in a family relationship that still carries the family connotation but is gender neutral? Spouse seems to fit one half the couple, but I’m not sure what then to title the other half.


Is it technically incorrect to speak English using speech sounds of native language(which is not English)?

Consonants "t" and "p" are not unvoiced in my native language, which is Hindi. So I pronounce "Paint" with voiced "p" and "t", is it technically correct? It is acceptable, I know. But is it correct?


What term means "the sum of a person"?

Some will say that "the sum of a person" includes:   * Actions.   * Character, virtues.   * Experiences, memories.   * Abilities. Is there a single term to mean this?


date has already passed OR date has already past?

Which is correct : date has already passed , or date has already past ? Thanks


Agreement of subject and predicate

can someone explain this rule to me, please? > A few collective nouns (public,infantry etc) occur in the singular, but are > followed as a rule by a plural verb, though a singular verb is also > possible. This is about agreement of subject and predicate


Difference between "pangalactic" and "transgalactic"?

I am building a game and trying to give some fancy names to some objectives in my game. So, I was wondering about the difference between the words _pangalactic_ and _transgalactic_? Does any of them mean something that is spawning across multiple galaxies? I am looking for a set of 3 words that go together in the following context, like : > a.  Planetary   > b.  Galactic   > c.  Inter-Galactic Can I use "pan-galactic" or "trans-galactic" in place for "inter-galactic"? [P.S: I tried searching online for the prefixes pan- and tran- but was still not really clear about the usage.]


Origin of "idiocracy"

Did the word "idiocracy" exist prior to the release of the movie of the same title, or is it a neologism coined by its screenwriters?


Does "nattering" have a negative connotation?

I hear people saying that they're "having a natter" with their friends, or 'If you want to have a natter about starting a project, give me a call!'. On different websites there are different definition: The Free Dictionary \- to talk idly and at length; chatter or gossip   Wiktionary \- To talk without purpose.   Merriam Webster \- to talk about unimportant things for a long time   Dictionary.com \- to talk incessantly; chatter.   Oxford Dictionaries \- talk casually, especially on unimportant matters; chat   Cambridge Dictionaries \- to talk continuously for a long time without any particular purpose These sounds quite negative to my ears, even rude, but whenever I hear it get used, it's rarely for negative reasons. Also, is it informal? Some clarification would be nice, examples would be awesome!


Meaning of "don't ask don't tell"

Are there other usages of the expression "don't ask don't tell" besides the one from its Wikipedia page? > Don't ask, don't tell (DADT) is the term commonly used for the policy > restricting United States military personnel from efforts to discriminate or > harass closeted homosexual or bisexual service members or applicants, while > barring those who are openly gay, lesbian, or bisexual from military > service. Or is the expression also used in contexts not related to homosexualism in the military?


What are the distinctions between "authoritarian", "totalitarian", and "dictatorial"?

I'm giving a talk about technology (specifically the Internet) in various governments where freedoms are strongly constrained. I'm a technologist, and I have little experience with words used to described the governments of places like Cuba, China, Iran, N. Korea, Libya, etc. I've learned from reading new articles that these governments are variously described as "totalitarian," "authoritarian," "autocractic," "despotic," "dictatorial," and so forth, and I've inferred that these are all essentially equivalent. Of course I'm anxious at the prospect of using them as synonyms if there are well-agreed-upon differences that I should be aware of. My web searches haven't really helped in my quest to answer this question and so I thought I'd ask you folks if you feel there are strong differences. In particular, are there any terms in my list above you feel have strong differential meanings? **Note** : A search here on English.SE shows two related questions both closed without an answer, so I'm hoping that my question is clear (and polite) enough to avoid this fate.


What would you call someone who needs to watch the news every day?

My friend claims there are people who have or are perceived to have some disorder where they must watch the news every day or they feel very agitated. Disregarding the truth of such a claim, what would you call such people? He suggested "newsivore" and I would just say "news obsessed." Is there a proper term?


"The place where we promised to meet"

This is talking about a promise to meet at a certain place. However, is it grammatically correct? Is it badly phrased? It seems that it can be misinterpreted to mean that at a certain place a promise was made to meet, rather than promising to meet at a certain place later.


"make it to there"

Consider the following two phrases which are both about going to some place: > If I can't make it there > > If I can't make it _to_ there Isn't the second phrase grammatically correct, whereas the first is not? If they are both correct and both mean the same thing, then what's the difference, if anything?


What's a phrase used to describe a "user defined" dream?

I have this strange ability to be able to control the events and environment in my dream. I know the term lucid dreaming means that you are aware of being in a dream, but this goes a step further. Is there a phrase to describe this kind of dreams?


How do I pluralize the coffee drink "shot in the dark"?

For those that do not know, there is a coffee drink that it sometimes called a shot in the dark. It consists of an espresso shot poured in a regular cup of Joe. Suppose that I would like to order two of these drinks, for myself and a friend. The problem crops up when you consider that "2 shots in the dark" may refer to either **two shots of espresso in a single cup of coffee** or **two cups of coffee each with a shot of espresso**. There are alternate names for the drink, but they don't provide any relief. For example, a "shot in the dark" may be referred to as a black eye, and a "double shot in the dark" a red eye, but I have also heard these reversed (black eye for 2 and red eye for 1). Wikipedia lists several other names as "regional variants" but I was not familiar with any others. Am I stuck doing a long manual disambiguation every time I present this order? ### Current Options   * I would like two shots in the dark. (ambiguous, requires disclaimer)   * I would like two black eyes. (possibly dangerous)   * I would like two shots in two different darks. (what I used this AM)   * ? ? ?


Who are “them” in the sentence “Awards honorees were a group of upending types who took expectations, and showed them the door.”

I’m a bit perplexed with the interpretation of the ending line of the following sentence in the December 3rd Time magazine’s article dealing with this year’s Kennedy Center Honors award winners under the title, “Kennedy Center Honors Letterman, Led Zeppelin, Dustin Hoffman” > “The Kennedy Center Honors, in their 35th year, are lifetime achievement > awards for those who have upended or embodied culture as we know it. - - > Past honorees range from Fred Astaire to Johnny Cash to Yo-Yo Ma. This > year’s pack of legends was an especially eclectic group of upending types > who took expectations and spectacularly **_showed them the door_**.” What does “an especially eclectic group of upending types who took expectations and spectacularly showed them the door” mean? Who or What does “ **them** ” here represent for? Is it “eclectic group of upending types who took expectations” or “expectations”? If it is the latter, can we show "expectation” which is an impersonal entity to door? According to en.wikitionary, “show someone the door” means either (1) To **_escort_** someone to the exit of the premises, which I take a cordial manner, or (2) To **_expel_** (kick off) someone from a room, gathering, etc., which I take a cold-hearted manner. Which of (1) and (2) is applicable to the above ending line? I’m curious of if this is good writing I should emulate or not.


"Green-eyed monster" before Shakespeare

I've been looking for the origins of green as the colour of envy. So far all I can get is "green-eyed monster" from Othello and vague, hand- wavey remarks about ancient Green ideas about bile. The Othello line strikes me as being a bit too specific (in "green-eyed") to be an entirely original thought. If green _skin_ had been the prevailing association until then, then why not "green-skinned monster"? To put it another way, could Shakespeare have expected his audience to connect green _eyes_ with envy? The green of eyes is far more _literal_ than the "green" of skin, which is more grey/pallid. I suspect there's something in between, perhaps a myth or fable which isn't ranked highly in Google results. Anyone know what it might be?


Where does the word "trivial" come from?

I have read many dictionary definitions and there seems to be two possible sources of the word _trivial_. Online dictionaries say it's from latin _tri_ and _via_ , "three ways" or "crossroad", basically meaning "street talk" or "corner talk", however this Q&A site states it more likely from _trivium_ , which means "first three of the seven liberal arts", and strongly influenced by the former. I am not quite sure how to interpret the etymonline.com explanation.


How do you read section 20.1234 in a regulation by a government agency? For example, the law is 38 C.F.R. section 20.1234. How do you read 20.1234? Do you read it as "twenty one two three four" or "twenty point one two three four? Thanks!


A comical/informal synonym for "big"/"large" but not inappropriate

I'm looking for a comical word that has a meaning like big, humongous, etc. but nothing inappropriate that would contain swear words. For example, I could say:               Whoa! That's a ______ spider!      Slangs are acceptable, but not necessary. I'm looking for a word that might make a reader giggle at the type of adjective used to describe it.


"Dear Sir" or "Dear John" if you are addressing the VP of a company

How to address the VP of a company or department? I have been told that addressing by name was not polite. Any clues?


Definition of "Degree Objective" in Personal Statement

I am writing my Personal Statement for my graduate school application right now. Coming to the Degree Objective section, I became a little dizzy. Does it require me to write which program degree I want to pursue? Or my goals in achieving graduate degree, like serve the community, self-fulfillment. Can anyone explain what I should write about?


What does "like being drowned in Skittles" mean?

From here: http://www.loper-os.org/?p=568 > Using Squeak is “like being drowned in Skittles.” I understand that it is a > monumentally great thing if one is able to see past that, but I suspect that > most prospective users cannot do so. I searched for an explanation, but I can't seem to find one. Does it mean that you're getting "too much" good stuff? So much that it's actually a disadvantage?


Meaning and origin of "if you catch my drift"

What does the expression _if you catch my drift_ mean? Where does it originate? I've heard it in the context to signify something like _if you know what I mean_.


What is the proper term to describe the levels of experience for a trade?

For the life of me I can't recall or even Google the proper term to describe the levels of experience for a given trade. For example let's say there are 5 levels of experience to trade x:   * Rookie   * Journeyman   * Veteran   * Craftsman   * Luminary What hypernym would describe these levels of experience?


Meaning and origin of "dressed like a slob"

What does the expression "dressed like a slob" mean? Where does it come from?


Why don't we use the indefinite article in "what hassle"? I think _hassle_ is used as noun here which means "Irritating or inconvenience". What exactly is the problem with "what a hassle" (as hassle is third-person singular)?


all days vs ever day and all persons vs everyone

Can I say "all days" instead of "every day"? And "all persons have the right to live" instead of "everyone" so as to emphasize in the first case and to refer to every single individual?


Finding a suitable English translation of "An old donkey pulls all the weight all alone"

A Hungarian colleague of mine just impressed upon me the idiom > An old donkey pulls all the weight all alone. The phrase itself isn't a common English idiom (not to my knowledge, anyway). I think in the translation from Hungarian it has become... well, not less eloquent, but perhaps less English. Though hearing it in context I felt it was an apt metaphor. To provide some context, my colleague is talking about the fact that as the senior member of the team he feels like he expected to cover for the less senior members' mistakes. In this sense, he is the old donkey pulling the weight of the others. I was trying to come up with a similar phrase in English which describes the same situation that would be more familiar to English speakers, but I am at a loss. Is there a widely recognised idiom that represents the struggle of feeling ~~all alone~~ unable to rely on the people around you, even with a team/family/group who should be helping or supporting you?


What does "ﬂy by the seat of one's pants" mean?

Reading a book, I came across an expression I really can't parse. > For some developers, the invocation of the word plan is cause for alarm. > Endless meetings with pointy-haired bosses creating reams of printed > Microsoft Project plans that nobody understands or uses are a valid cause > for alarm. So, techies often overcompensate in our rebellion against > perceived overplanning by constantly _ﬂying by the seat of our pants_. I understand what he's saying with that last sentence—that sometimes developers go too far in avoiding planning—but can't make head nor tail of how he puts it. Can anyone explain the logic (if any) behind this phrase?


"I am starting learning xyz"

Is this sentence correct? > I am starting learning xyz.


What does "cat in the hat" mean?

I have seen this idiom recently. _Cat in the hat_. What does it mean?


"At a hotel" or "in a hotel"

What is the difference between _at a hotel_ and _in a hotel_? The NYTimes seems to be using both of them. I looked up the ngram on google and it seems _in a hotel_ is used more often than _at a hotel_ , which is kind of surprising to me. ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/KE0Tz.png)


"Increasingly XXX" or "increasingly more XXX"

Which is correct: _increasingly XXX_ or _increasingly more XXX_ , where _XXX_ is an adjective? A colleague and I are disagreeing. I think the use of _more_ is redundant.


substantial vs. numerous

these two words seem very similar, 'substantial' says in the dic.that 'large in amount or number', numerous says that 'many'. Do they have differences in contexts?


Must a non-proper noun that starts a sentence be preceded with an article?

I'm doing some research in NLP, and thought you guys would be the best to ask this. When looking at an English sentence, it is sometimes hard for a computer to distinguish between proper nouns, such as _Bill_ , and common (non-proper) nouns, such as _bill_ as in _He gave me a bill_. At first I thought, 'Oh, I'll just see if it's capitalized.' I'm wary to do this though, since I'm not sure if that pattern will hold as a rule. Then, I noticed that every time a common noun begins a sentence (and almost always when it is used in a sentence), it is preceded by one of the articles _a_ , _an_ , or _the_. Is this a rule I can count on? Can anyone think of counterexamples?


Accent Marks in English

Why doesn't the English language have accent marks? I have been trying to understand the critical differences that are present between the English and Spanish language, however I just can not wrap my head around the concept that some languages have accent marks while others don't. Why can't we all be equal?


Is “Hers was a good point” grammatical?

Would it be grammatical to say: > **Hers** was also a good point to include a header specifying the contact > person. as opposed to: > It was also a good point she made to include a header specifying the contact > person.


What does a "visiting writer" mean?

From wiki page about Michael Crichton": > In 1988, Crichton was a visiting writer at the Massachusetts Institute of > Technology What does exactly the term **visiting writer** mean? Does it mean he was there on a visit once or twice? Or does it mean that he was there a permanent visitor for the whole year(1988)? Or is it the some kind of a contract with the MIT? E.g. to give lectures on writing for the whole year 1988 to the students? Thanks for the clarification.


What is the difference between “Gay” and “Homosexual"? Is it only by gender?

I was interested in the line “...most Americans use the word 'gay' now instead of 'homosexual'” in Maureen Dowd’s article titled “Happily Never After?” in today’s (April 2) New York Times: > I’m worried about how the justices can properly debate same-sex marriage > when some don’t even seem to realize that **most Americans use the word > "gay" now instead of "homosexual";** when Chief Justice John Roberts thinks > gays are merely concerned with marriage as a desirable "label," and when > Justice Samuel Alito compares gay marriage to cellphones. When you say “instead of,” it gives me an impression that they are different things, for examples, “I use margarine instead of butter,” “They use acrylic panels instead of plate glass for windows” and "The new car uses aluminum instead of steel plate for the body." However, when I checked Oxford English Dictionary, it renders “gay” as: > a.1 (of a person, especially a man) homosexual. > >   1. relating to or used by homosexuals: > > > n. a homosexual, especially a man. Also OALD defines Gay as: > a. (of people, especially men) sexually attracted to people of the same sex. > [Syn.] HOMOSEXUAL Aren’t “gay” and “homosexual” the same thing except “gay” being applied to men? What’s the difference between “gay” and “homosexual” other than gender attributes?


Etymology Moderne of ... "sick", "bad", and words we hardly consider being the opposite any more

Somewhat prosaically, it was stated that the origin (or at least the coining practice likely used) of the word "sick" to mean "awesome", or "cool", or "astounding" ... itself used the word "cool", which by itself is hardly a positive absolute connotation. In fact, "hot" would be the positive connotation. Hot chick, hot rod, hot dinner, hot venue. Which lead me to wonder, of all the various "social adjectives", how many relatively negative ones have become so mainstream, that they're now positive? Like "cool" Like "incredible" (without credibility, false, a farce) Like "amazing" (early 13c., amasian "stupefy, make crazy) Like "wicked" (late 13c., earlier wick (12c.)/wicca - wretched) Couldn't find any useful lists online. Bob


Hyphens when using "something + style" to describe something?

> _He lit the fire Cherokee style._ or: > _He lit the fire Cherokee-style._ I have seen both. Which is correct? And, if it's the second option, then what about "multiple words + style"? E.g.: > _She organized the view spiral staircase style._ versus: > _She organized the view spiral-staircase-style._ (which looks very wrong)


Closed-toe, close-toe, or closed-toed shoes?

I've always used closed-toe (as in: "the toe of the shoe is closed"), but apparently, the different variations are fairly common. I suppose I could see how "closed-toed" would make sense in terms of a type of shoe ("the shoe has closed toes; it is closed-toed"), but it doesn't sound right to me. Which is commonly accepted as "correct"? Is there any language rule that would determine which is correct?


Examples that actually mean the opposite of their original meanings

I have learned that in English, some words have been used to mean the opposite of their original meanings, for the purpose of often negative intensions such as sarcasm, irony, ... For example I would think most use of 'way to' these days is used in this ironic way. In English, single-word replies often denote sarcasm. A common example you might often see in movies and TV is: if someone says a lame joke and someone else replies in an unenthusiastic tone of voice, "Hilarious," it implies that the person thinks that the joke was not funny at all. In order not to be easily fooled, I wonder if we can provide more examples that are often used by native speakers to actually mean the opposite?


Origin of "no such thing" idiomatic phrase

The risk of asking this question could be like asking the question > What is the origin of the phrase "I love you", or "I need a shower", etc which grew out of spontaneous language use. Anyway, I am willing to take that risk because I have a strong feeling that its origins could be traced to a few or a singular event. Examples of usage:   * There is no such thing as a free lunch.   * There is no such thing as Truth.   * There is no such thing as real democracy.   * There is no such thing as blah .. blah ...


Interpreting "not bad"

In conversations people often use "not bad". How to interpret this? Are they feeling good or just not bad or somewhere in the middle?   Does it depend on the context? E.g.: > X: How are you doing today?   >  Y: Not bad. You? Does "not bad" mean "good"? E.g.: > X: How was the food in that new restaurant?   >  Y: Not bad. Are there examples showing "not bad" doesn't mean "good" either?


What does “pace and poise” mean?

The phrase “pace and poise” seems to be a sort of idiom, albeit I can’t find any reference of it being one in the dictionaries I can avail myself of. I have come upon the phrase in the following passage taken from the New Yorker (emphasis added): > But something happens to the **pace and the poise** of “Django Unchained” as > the hunters head South and the screen fills with the word “Mississippi.” While I perfectly know the meaning of each word this phrase is constituted of, I think that there is something more to the mere addition of each meaning which I cannot grasp at the moment. Is this an idiom?


People referring to themselves with verbs with "-s"

Sometimes I see people on the internet saying something like "Me has a box" "Me does the job", or "I has a box" (or even "I haz a box"). And I'm sure they do it intentionally. Why do people refer to themselves using verbs in 3rd person while using "I" or "me" in front of them? And is there any difference between that and using it in a "correct" way (like "I have a box")?


"Come of a royal family" vs. "comes from a royal family"

Is it correct to say "She comes of a royal family"? Or should it be "She comes from a royal family"? Both sound correct to me. Could someone explain?


How do you say "I made books fall off the shelf"

One way is to say "I spilled the books off the shelf". I am looking for a more suitable usage of words.


Are there any terms equivalent to 'Americana' for other cultures?

Given the available definition of Americana as pertaining to "artifacts, or a collection of artifacts, related to the history, geography, folklore and cultural heritage of the United States", are there any equivalent terms which pertain to folklore and cultural heritage of locales or cultures other than those of the United States?


Remaining particles after making coffee or tea

When we make coffee or tea, there are particles that remain at the bottom of the jar. Is it right to call them 'rudiments' or is there another term for this?


When did the word "bad" become a noun?

When did the word "bad" become a noun? I assume it was when the cliche "my bad" was invented. When/where did this originate? Are there any other uses of "bad" as a noun? I'm specifically interested in the use of "bad" as in "my bad", which seems to mean a specific culpable action on the part of the speaker/writer. This seems distinct from the more abstract uses of "bad" given in the first answer below.


Is this Americanism grammatical?

I would like a generative BNF-style complete description for English grammar. Some of the more subtle stuff leads to awkward questions of grammaticality. The interior rules for forming STATEMENTS must include adjectives formed from gerunds, to make sense of clearly grammatical stuff, like: "The sweating man walked south" But then, extending the gerund to a gerund-phrase in the BNF, you get a lot of variations on this peculiar americanism, a favorite of Foghorn Leghorn's:   * "Just wait one cotton picking minute!" ### EDIT: response to ignorant comments, answers, and downvotes I got told that "cotton picking minute" is a cussing idiom, and that this grammatical rule does not exist in English: "french fry frying frier", "leopard skinning machine", "folding chair", "first responding officer", "rain seeding airplane", "snow blowing machine", "county election stealing candidate", "emergency training wheels" "ocean swimming gear" "gullt presuming judge", "load bearing truss", "direction finding equipment", "spoken voice recording technology", For a demonstration that this is an actual recursive rule, not a way of forming noun expressions from gerunds:   * "The habitually repulsively loudly obnoxiously snoring captain awakened me from my sleep."   * "I bought a DNA, RNA and protein sequencing machine."   * "I found the constant running gag repeating in that movie grating."   * "Those sweater vest, suit and tie sporting Chomsky quoting businessmen are getting on my nerves!" I could go on all "mother-fucking" day. So please stop pretending that this is not English. I just want to know how far you can go before it stops being comprehensible ### END OF EDIT The cotton-picking minute is a minute picking cotton, where the picking cotton has been made into an adjective by gerundizing. This construction makes an adjective out of a gerund phrase. I put this in the BNF, and it generates some weird sentences. I was wondering which ones were considered grammatical. I will write them all in Foghorn-Leghorn character voice, because that's what they sound like to me.   * That's an apple table putting plumber there, son! (that plumber puts apples on tables")   * That's a paragraph short story including writer there, boy! (That writer puts paragraphs in short stories) The second example has two-word object of the word "include", is this still ok?   * That's a long, eye-poppingly detailed, paragraph short story putting writer there, son! Is this still ok?   * I say! Boy. that's one horse bridle neck putting jockey riding there.   * That's a falling off the tree apple, wooden table wobbling on its legs, putting plumber there, boy!   * I say. I say. That her boy to school in a car driving mom went on the plane.   * The fish in his mouth with gusto chewing masseusse was done chewing the fish in his mouth with gusto. The last two have optional arguments in the construction, and each of these have pretty much independent issues. For example, the second to last construction has a "her" with a binding to "mom", which goes a different direction than usual. The previous has embedding within the arguments. The first two sentences lack the proper forms on the arguments of the gerund, they might be correctly rendered as:   * That's an apple on the table putting plumber there, son.   * That's a paragraph in a short story including writer there, son. You can also recurse this construction:   * That's an apple on the vase supporting table putting plumber there, son. or, with single-words   * That's a ripening apple eating plumber there, son. It is dead easy to exclude these constructions--- simply require that the arguments of the verb must be one word long. But looking at them for a while, they start to sound ok to me as is. Do others agree? Are these grammatically ok? These phrases are automatically generated by an English BNF, if you treat these gerund phrases consistently. They can be excluded by modifying the BNF to disallow multiple word arguments on gerund phrases in this position. I want to know the intuition consensus before making a decision.


"Let's go to a mountain" vs "let's go to the mountain."

You can say: > Let's go to the beach. But I've never heard anyone say: > Let's go to the mountain. So I wonder if it should be: > Let's go to a mountain. Is that acceptable? Is it acceptable to say the following? > "Yes, we can go on a trip. Too bad I can't think of any place right now." > > "How about the mountain?" Perhaps this is more _natural_? > "Yes, we can go on a trip. Too bad I can't think of any place right now." > > "How about a mountain?"


Can I say "What opinion are you of?"

We can say "I'm of the opinion that ~" instead of "I reckon that ~" in a formal way. Then, can I say "What opinion are you of?" in place of "What do you reckon?"


Difference between "simplify" and "facilitate"

Are _simplify_ and _facilitate_ interchangeable? The Oxford dictionary defines them as: > **simplify** : make (something) simpler or easier to do or understand > > **facilitate** : make (an action or process) easy or easier


The use of "not" in idiomatic English

The Daily Mirror recently used the phrase "Pentagon experts on Friday said it was impossible to imagine that the missile could not have been fired without Russian help". This exact phrase has appeared in other news stories as well, likely spread from the original Pentagon press release via newswire. Is the "not" a mistake or idiomatic English? Without the "not" the phrase makes sense to me and the meaning is consistent with the context. With the "not" I don't even know what it means.


Proper usage of "status quo"

I was attending my college re-union and a speaker just said that "Having an ebook reader is status quo". Apparently, it means that it is in vogue or in fashion. I do not think it is the correct usage. But I am a bit confused. Can someone clarify?


Origin of "walking on eggshells"?

Where does the phrase "walking on eggshells" originally come from?


What's the most elegant way to say "surmountable objection"?

"Surmountable" sounds so much weirder there than "insurmountable".. As in: > Was that a rejection? At the time it seemed like maybe he just had a few > surmountable objections...


Singular to plural noun

Many nouns that end in _‑f_ are made plural by changing the _‑f_ to _‑v‑_ and adding _‑es_.               +----------+-----------+     | Singular |   Plural  |     +----------+-----------+     |  half    |  halves   |     |  leaf    |  leaves   |     |  shelf   |  shelves  |     +----------+-----------+      ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/t7AJs.png) But some nouns that end in _‑f_ are made plural simply by adding _‑s_.               +----------+-----------+     | Singular |   Plural  |     +----------+-----------+     |  chief   |  chiefs   |     |  roof    |  roofs    |     |  cliff   |  cliffs   |     +----------+-----------+      Some nouns that end in _‑f_ can be made plural in two ways, either by adding _‑s_ or _‑ves_ :               +----------+--------------------+     | Singular |      Plural        |     +----------+--------------------+     |  scarf   |  scarfs or scarves |     |  hoof    |  hoofs or hooves   |     |  dwarf   |  dwarfs or dwarves |     |  wharf   |  wharfs or wharves |     +----------+--------------------+      Now my question is how to determine whether to use only _‑s_ or to change the _‑f_ to _‑v‑_ and add _‑es_?


"Thence" to allude to the past

I see that **"hence"** means roughly "from _this_ fact/time/place/source", while **"thence"** means roughly "from _that_ fact/time/place/source". Usage such as "half an hour hence" is typically (although perhaps not universally) used to refer to times in the future, being taken as "from this time" or "[forward] from now". Would it thus be correct to say, e.g., "[today] is three years _thence_ " — in the sense of "from _that_ time" or "[forward] from _then_ " — in order to allude to the day three years ago?


Linking two sentences with a comma?

I'm wondering if the following sentence is correct? > Please let me know your thoughts on these issues, I welcome your feedback.


Is “balanced literacy” a generic term, or elementary education specific?

“The Room for Debate Section” of New York Times (July 3rd) deals with “the Right Approach to Reading Instruction,” and throws the question; > “The student-led approach to reading and writing known as " **Balanced > literacy** " is making a comeback in New York City schools. But critics say > students need closer instruction from teachers and more work on " **Core > Knowledge** " focusing on systematic phonics and facts. What is the right > approach to improving student literacy?" > http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/07/02/the-right-approach-to- > reading-instruction?ref=opinion According to E. D. Hirsch, Jr. professor emeritus of education and humanities at the University of Virginia, “balanced literacy” in primary school includes some phonetics, children’s literature writing, and is the opposite concept to “core knowledge” approach focusing on systematic phonics and coherent content I understand that “balanced literacy” simply means balanced (unbiased) knowledge, sophistication, education, or culture of individual (more likely of grown-ups) as a generic term. Is it education specific, particularly of elementary education?


Which are the Best sites to Learn Spoken English"?

What are some sites which have great material to learn idioms , phrases and new words. I want to improve my spoken English skills!


What is the difference between Anglia and England? When it's used. * * * Some examples of modern usages:   * probably coincident, but Anglia in Polish language is England,   * there are regions called East Anglia, Mid Anglia and West Anglia,   * there are schools such as Anglia Ruskin University in Cambridge, The College of West Anglia, Anglia Ruskin Students' Union,   * Anglian Water in the UK, Anglian Bus,   * Greater Anglia trains and Anglia Railways,   * and similar


"Can you suggest some exercises to speak Vowels perfectly"........?

Some exercises to practice speaking Vowels? I have noticed that i stutter when i speak vowels. How to improve my speech?


So I saw a post on a funny pictures site... "In the word "Scent", is the S or the C silent?" ![](http://i.stack.imgur.com/rhH75.jpg) And I thought I could ask about it here. In particular, how does the pronunciation of "scent" differ from "cent" and "sent"? Small audio references would help me in particular.


A philosophy where technology is forsaken and nature embraced

There is a particular philosophy that I am trying to find the proper word to describe. An exemple of this philosophy is from a short story I once read (From Jack London's short story "To Build a Fire") is where a man tries to build a fire in the winter, and in his confidence takes his boots off to warm them. Whereupon snow falls from above, extinguishing the fire, soaking his foot, and we are left to presume dooming him to death. Another example (that I cannot source sadly) is the story of a particular man who abandoned society and built himself a log cabin in the middle of the woods, and lived his entire life there. The core concepts invovled are thus:   * A reverence for nature   * A desire to be self-sufficient   * A belief that this state is the purest form of mankind   * Not a fear of technology, but a desire to avoid it


Can I use the word "flesh" when referring to plants/crops?

If not, what would be a more appropriate word? > Those potatoes had been potatoes eaten by worms. Now, they were nothing more > than lumps of flesh with nothing inside.


Spaghetti and gravy

In Nero Wolfe "Before I die", the gangster's sidekick asks for spaghetti and gravy. After Wolfe's chef Fritz prepares him spaghetti with the type of gravy used for roast beef, it turns out that the gangster meant tomato sauce when he said gravy. Looking on the internet there is a lot of confirmation that some Italian-Americans use "spaghetti and gravy" to mean spaghetti with a tomato- based sauce, for example discussions like this: http://southjersey.momslikeme.com/members/JournalActions.aspx?g=437439&m=3625596 At the bottom there is an answer like so: > I think the Italian Immigrants in New Jersey put their own spin on a lot of > things.... [Gravy] is an Italian American invention. I never heard red sauce > called gravy until I roomed in college with my Italian roomate from Hoboken. I also find at http://www.seriouseats.com/talk/2008/01/sunday-gravy-anyone- have-a-great-recipe-for-i.html > Gravy is one of those words where Italian immigrants picked the closest word > to their native word. My father was born in Naples (Italy, not Florida) and > called it gravy. That's good enough for me. Can anyone confirm or deny this? What is the origin of using gravy to mean spaghetti sauce? _(Apologies for yet another spaghetti question.)_


Can "have a feeling that" be used to state a fact?

> I have a feeling that you are angry with me.   >  I have a feeling that George Washington was commander in chief of the > Continental Army. Can _I have a feeling that_ be used to introduce a fact?   If it can be used, what is the difference between the the following sentences, and the previous ones? > I think that George Washington was commander in chief of the Continental > Army.   >  George Washington was commander in chief of the Continental Army.   >  I know George Washington was commander in chief of the Continental Army.


Done and dusted

I came across the idiom 'Done and dusted'. I would like to know what is the origin and meaning of this idiom.


Which is correct: "with regards to," "in regards with," "regarding"?

I have been using the following phrases but I am still not confident that they are grammatically correct and sound right:   * "in regards with something"   * "with regards to something"   * "regarding something" I have also heard/read people using an arbitrary combination of the above (e.g. "in regards to"). Are those correct? If yes - are they equivalent or the usage depends on context?


Why do they address me "Dear (surname)"?

I have a little international business contact, and sometimes, some people write me a mail and address me as "Dear (my surname)", no "Mr", no nothing. Where is this common and how so? I never knew this. I only know "Dear (first name)" (American) and of course "Dear Mr (surname)", as well as "Dear (first name) (last name)". But this new variation, I can't quite grasp yet. Your input would be appreciated.


What is the adverbial form of “communicational”?

I tried _communicationally_, but the Free Dictionary doesn’t find it to be a word. What I am trying to express is that someone is _communicationally challenged_ , basically meaning they can’t communicate very well.


"Particular" vs. "specific"

The Free Dictionary lists _particular_ and _specific_ as synonyms, but there still seems to be a subtle distinction between the two. What is that distinction? In a phrase along the lines of: > the [particular/specific] card selected from the deck is there any meaningful difference, or should I just use whichever sounds best?


"Do so" vs "do it"

Example: > I don’t know why I didn’t go back to my hometown. I didn’t have any reason > not to—maybe I didn’t have a reason to do [ **so/it** ], either. Should I use _do so_ or _do it_ in the example above?


A word or phrase to describe a plan that helps people achieve their goals?

I've created an online web form. The web form has a step-by-step guide which asks the user to provide a detailed answer for each question. Once the user has finished the form their feedback will be arranged in a final overview document which they can use as a plan to share with others and help them reach their goal. What is this called? Did I just answer my own question? Thanks for humoring me.


What is the meaning of "dumbly eloquent"?

Please go through this excerpt from "The Story of My Life" by Helen Keller: > The hands of those I meet are dumbly eloquent to me. The touch of some hands > is an impertinence. I have met people so empty of joy, that when I clasped > their frosty fingertips, it seemed as if I were shaking hands with a north > east storm. I understand the literal meaning of _dumbly eloquent_ here. The word _eloquent_ means fluent or persuasive in speaking or writing. So _dumbly eloquent_ means the speech or literature are so persuasive and fluent that addresses all your questions and make you speechless. _Eloquent_ relates to speech and writing. However, Helen Keller was unable to see and hear, and could only perceive by her touch. How can someone who cannot see and listen feel the some attribute which can be perceived by seeing or hearing only? How does _eloquent_ fit in this context? What is the exact meaning of the phrase _dumbly eloquent_ in this context?


Is there a difference between the words "divestment" and "divestiture"?

Is there a difference between these two terms, either in terms of definition or connotation? Context is in a business selling an asset or business line. Most of the time I hear divestment, but once in a while someone refers to a divestiture. EDIT: When you look it up, (e.g., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divestment), it just says they're the same word. I'm looking for more than a simple Google search would provide. EDIT 2: Investopedia says the same thing, that they're the same: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/divestment.asp Perhaps this means that they are the exact same, but I feel a slightly different connotation between the two that I can't put my finger on.


Pronunciation of street/road/avenue/etc. names

About three decades ago I read a book on English usage that was already quite old at the time—I think it was a 1940s book—which pointed out a pronunciational habit that I hadn't noticed before. The word "street" in any location name would have the stress on the other word—BOND Street, OXFORD Street, DEAN Street—while with any other kind of generic topographical descriptor it would be the other way round: Hyde PARK, Leicester SQUARE, Angel LANE, Dollis HILL, Edgware ROAD, Portland PLACE, Crouch END. The book limited itself to UK referents, but it seemed to me the same was true elsewhere. In the US people would say, FOURTH Street, TENTH Street, etc, but Madison AVENUE, Times SQUARE, Central PARK, Dealey PLAZA. And I think all other English-speaking countries followed the same rule. It was even true of fictional names with a figurative purpose: GRUB Street, EASY Street, but Fat CITY, Lonesome ROAD, Tin Pan ALLEY... But I wondered whether it was still true today, or completely true. Because I do notice one strange pronunciational development, which I think of as the "leftward-drifting stress". This is more noticeable in the US than elsewhere. I've seen pre-war American films where people can be clearly heard talking of cigarETTES and magaZINES, in contrast to modern renderings, CIGarettes and MAGazines. More recently, we've had olive OIL and soy SAUCE becoming OLIVE oil and SOY sauce. One of the clear-up crew after the Twin Towers attack spoke of "powdered CEment" (and he wasn't even from the south, where you might expect it). And only last week I heard a news report mentioning PAKistan and BANGladesh. There seems to be this trend of shifting stresses leftwards of where they are supposed to be, and I wondered if this might start infecting the pronunciation of the kind of place names I listed above. Is anyone tempted to say, "I visited TIMES Square"?


How do I list within a sentence?

I want to list 3 things within a sentence in an article, and I don't want to use multiple lines. Is the following OK? "I need to get 3 things from the supermarket: a) eggs, b) milk and c) coffee" Thanks


checking parts of speech pattern of this sentence

I wonder if the following sentence is grammatically correct. > _Foobar_ is a novel, set in a scenic landscape of farmland and ancient > woodland on the banks of the River Foo. I suppose the word "set" is a verb without a subject noun, is it ? The usage of comma in the above clauses is not correct , is it ?


Word order for "What is... that ... called?"

I am having difficulty with finding the natural word order in the following passive construction: > What are people called who do a lot of unnecessary work? > > What are called people who do a lot of unnecessary work? > > What are people who do a lot of unnecessary work called? If I change passive to active, the sentence becomes natural: > What do you call people who do a lot of unnecessary work? > > What does one call people who do a lot of unnecessary work? But what is the preferred/natural word order, if any, in such sentences, provided I want to stick with the passive? I was unable to invent a more generic and to-the-point title. Please fell free to edit if you do.


What does "in the east" mean here?

I just read this sentence "when the wind was in the east a smell came across the harbour" from the Ernest Hemingway's novel _The Old Man And The Sea_ : Two questions:   1. What does "in" the wind mean? Does it mean the wind was "from" the east or the wind was "towards" the east?   2. Should there be a comma after the relative clause, before "a smell"?


What does the most common usage of 'Korea' mean in modern-day English-speaking world?

On Meta.Travel.SE, we have a debate whether our 'Korea' tag should be mapped to 'South Korea'. One of the answers - from the moderator who made the synonym mapping - is that common usage of the word 'Korea' often refers to South Korea the country rather than Korea the region, and when people refer to the political entity of North Korea, they specifically use the 'North' qualifier. ![Frequency of usage of 'Korea' vs 'South Korea' vs 'North Korea'](http://i.stack.imgur.com/MkGjA.png) I ran a search on Google's Ngram Viewer on their corpus for period 1940-2008 which shows the frequency of usage of 'Korea' vs 'South Korea' vs 'North Korea'. As you can see, 'South Korea' and 'North Korea' as terms are pretty close, with 'Korea' being the more widely used word. My question is this: **in modern-day usage - _not_ historical - what is the word 'Korea' most commonly understood to mean - the region _as a whole_ or just _South Korea_?** EDIT: To clarify, I'm not asking what synonym mapping to use on Travel.SE. What I'm more interested in knowing is that in English-language usage, what sense is 'Korea' most commonly used to mean.


In the movie Law Abiding Citizen, there is this dialog when Clyde is having meal in the cell at about 48 minutes: > Clyde: Oh, excuse me, waiter? > > [The waiter looks at Cyde] > > Clyde: _You might want to put 30% down for yourself_ , my man. > > [The waiter kind of nods and leaves] What does "You might want to put 30% down for yourself" mean?


Not a synonym, but what?

I am looking for a word that describes the relationship between two words that are not the same, are not used in lieu of the other, but are related in what they refer to. Example, _storm/monsoon_. While _monsoon_ may be substituted for _storm_ occasionally, in a rather understated way, _storm_ would not normally be substituted for _monsoon_. Any help would be greatly appreciated, whether it’s suggestions or the information that no such word exists.


Does this sentence require a comma (+ is the meaning there...)?

> Modifying the causal account so that instead of deriving explanandum E from > law L and true premises P, we derive P from E and L, produces strongly > counterintuitive conclusions. I'm hoping you can tell me if this flows and whether the comma after "...law L and true premises P" is needed.


Manipulativeness of the progressive aspect in "to be wondering if"

I am around a group of people who, for whatever reason, have developed the habit of talking odd tenses. I'm no English or grammar expert but here is what I mean. Instead of saying "Can I borrow your car?", they might say " I was wondering if I could borrow your car." Or, instead of "Is the mechanic's name Robert?", they might say "I am wondering if the mechanic's name is Robert." These aren't great examples but the bottom line is, when I talk to these people, I often feel manipulated or that they are generally manipulative in the language use. Does any of this make sense? Is it perhaps recognized as a topic of study I could research? Say, "How people use the continuous aspect in manipulative conversation" or something like that. If this makes absolutely no sense to anyone, feel free to heckle... _**_** _*_** *Many thanks to all who gave an answer to this. My examples weren't the best but I think what you have shown me is that the people around me choose to speak in a very passive voice. I think they "hedge" a lot more than people in other peer groups. However, the feeling of manipulation comes from the expectation that I will measure up to certain norms of "nicety" or "niceness" (sorry, I don't know the right word) because they were so nice and passive they way they asked. This may not make any more sense than my first post but thanks! I appreciate your love for language.


Is it common to use the word "commute" instead of "go" in conversation?

I talked to a Canadian person yesterday. She used the word "commute" instead of "go" or "get." For example, she said "I commute to work by car." and asked me "How do you commute to work?" It was a bit odd to me to see a person use "commute" instead of "go" or "get." So, I want to know whether is it common to use "commute" instead of "go" or "get"?


Is an article acceptable in those sentences?

Can I say : We are not in a kindergarden. Should I say : We are not in kindergarden. Does usage of 'a' refer to a bulding?


How can I write a given date in an abbreviated form?

Are these acceptable?   * Nov. 2nd, 2011   * Nov 2nd, 2011   * Nov 2, 2011


What is the meaning of the phrase 'set the bar for '?

> In .NET Framework 3.5 we released several LINQ providers, including LINQ to > SQL which **set the bar for** a great programming model with LINQ over > relational databases.


Is there an idiom beginning “when a dog is cornered”?

Is there any saying in a complete sentence including “a dog which is cornered”? I have tried to find a complete one, but there seems to be no one. Actually, what I want to know is how to explain the situation in North Korea. Since I think North Korea has been going through hard times and now they have nothing to lose, they keep threatening with their nuclear weapons as their last resort. So, I want to use a saying. Is there one like “When a dog is cornered, it bites or attacks or something else?” I want to get a fixed sentence, which is cliché. If there is another saying that can show the situations above, please give that, too.


Hypernym for "pros" and "cons"

Is there a single word to denote _pros and cons_? For example, > Here you can view the [pros and cons] of this product. _update:_ When reading the word, one should immediately understand that it's about the _pros and cons_ and not features/specifications in general. Think about a block or section, with 2 lists, a _pros_ list and _cons_ list. It's that block or section I want to refer to.


Is "has died for several years" correct?

I know it is correct to say > He has been dead for three years. I've learned the present perfect tense, and it's said that non-continuous verbs are allowed. Is this sentence correct as well? > He has died for three years.


Expect +to VS expect + ing

I know that expect is used this way:               I expect you to do that.      But I have also seen examples like with verb in its "ing" form:               > What to expect working at...          > I will expect you doing //sounds not right to me      I would be grateful for explanation.


What is the correct expression of "melancholic/blue man"?

Just to mean someone is in melancholic/blue state. Not sure about how to express it properly in English


Origin of "I wouldn't ... for all the tea in China"

What is the origin of the expression "I wouldn't ... for all the tea in China"? I've heard it from a British speaker, and I am guessing it may be of British origin, but I couldn't find a reference for it.


Is there a term that means "oft-used misquotation"?

There are some quotations that people always seem to get wrong: > Alas, poor Yorick, I knew him well. [Real quote from _Hamlet_ : "Alas, poor > Yorick! I knew him, Horatio."] > > I have nothing to offer but blood, sweat and tears. [Real quote from > Churchill: "I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat."] > > Reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated.* [Real quote from Mark > Twain: "The report of my death is an exaggeration."] I keep thinking there is a term for this, the way _malapropism_ is a term for a misused word. I have the feeling I read the word somewhere, but all the Googling I've done doesn't give it up. [*] _This one is particularly galling to me, since Twain was such a master of understatement. Oh well ..._


Do I use a comma before "that" or "which" here?

Let's say I'm describing what some person is currently doing, and I say: > He is reading articles which he is summarizing in his blog. Is this sentence (and specifically, this usage of "which") correct?   Do I need a comma before it? Or do I need "that" instead? (I know I can reword it into something else entirely, like changing the order into _"He is summarizing the articles that he is reading in his blog"_ or something else, but that's not what I'm asking about here.) **Addendum from OP's comment:** I have used the progressive tense because what I want to say that he is reading several articles and summarizing them at the same time as he is reading them. Also, I am not describing a habit, nor something in the future, but what is happening _currently_.


Can more than one coordinating conjunction be used in a sentence?

Can more than one coordinating conjunction (and, but, or, etc.) be used in a sentence? **For example:** "It was never my intention to become wealthy, but opportunities seemed to just happen, and I was not about to refuse them."


What does “raising the debt ceiling is not groovy” mean? Is the word “groovy" obsolete among the youth of America”?

In Japan, the word _groovy_ has been used to mean "fashionable and trendy" as an imported English word, which I think, doesn’t go far from the definition, "fashionable, attractive and interesting" in OALD. However, use of _groovy_ in the recent New York Times article _Four Dudes and a Table_ seems to me to have a different nuance from “fashionable and attractive”: > Ron Paul ... has a new TV ad, directed at the youth of America, which begins > with a picture of Rick Santorum. “Is this dude serious?” the announcer > demands. “Fiscal conservative? Really?” > > The ad then goes on to say that Santorum’s votes to raise the debt ceiling > were “not groovy.” I am not an absolute expert on the speech patterns of > young people, but I am feeling pretty confident that they do not use the > word “groovy.” ... > > Take your pick, Republican primary voters. If neither [Romney nor Santorum] > works for you, there’s always Newt. Or Ron Paul. Some choice, dudes. Not > groovy. What does _groovy_ in "Santorum’s votes to raise the debt ceiling were “not groovy”" exactly mean? Are the meanings of _groovy_ in "Santorum’s votes to raise the debt ceiling were “not groovy”" and in "Some choice, dudes. Not groovy," the same? Is the word _groovy_ really obsolete among the youth of America today as the author claims? If so, why is Ron Paul using a word that no longer gets across (even if in the negative sense) with the younger segment of voters in his commercial directed to them?


Evolution of "push somebody's buttons" and "know what buttons to push"

Colloquially speaking, "to push somebody's buttons" means to irritate or annoy the person. And, "know what buttons to push" means to know _what to do_ to get people to act the way you want. I can't understand how come " _buttons_ " are associated with people and their behavior. How did these idioms come to be? **Edit:** I feel I am not being clear with the question. What I intend to understand is the relation of a person's pysch and buttons. As it is unusual to talk of hurting a machine's _feeling_ , likewise it should be unusual to speak of somebody's button as well. This being my point, how did the metaphorical idiom originate(and considered meaningful)?


Can any adjective be used as comparative?

I was talking with my friends the other day about what is heathy to eat, I brought up the fact that something can be healthy if you compare it to something that is not healthy. You could say a doughnut is healthy if you compare it to bacon but you can say a doughnut is very unhealthy if you compare it to a salad. Likewise, I could say that I'm tall, but in comparison to my house I'm not very tall at all. Are all adjectives comparative?


Confusion about meaning of sentences in Economist

I am confused about the parts in bold while reading Economist. > And the **feeble** recovery is **petering out**. > > Their prescription for a weak economy is **a** large **slug** of austerity. Why do we use the article _a_ instead of _the_ since it's talking about a specific slug? What does _slug_ here mean anyway?


Can any transitive verb be accompanied by a preposition?

> Galileo was forced to **recant** his assertion that the earth orbited the > sun (Oxford Dictionary) > > Can one **recant on** an absence of belief? (The Secret Intensity of > Everyday Life) The first “recant” is a transitive verb. And Wikipedia says the second “recant on” is a transitive particle verb. Can any transitive verb be accompanied by a preposition to add the preposition’s meaning?


Is "curious if" improper to use compared to alternatives such as "curious as to" or "curious whether"?

Consider the following line, which I've heard this particular construction frequently: > "I’m curious if other people feel like I do." The construct specifically is that of using "I'm curious if" to preface something that the speaker is curious about. I was recently told by someone that this is improper English, as it implies a conditional - that is, "If other people feel like I do, then I am curious". The proper way suggested was "I'm curious _as to whether_ other people feel like I do." I can see where it's coming from, at least that the former can be read in that fashion and that the latter is unambiguous. However, is it actually _improper_ or _logically incorrect_? Prior to asking this question, I did a quick check on this site - there were at the time 48 instances where users used the phrase "I am curious if (some situation is true)", while there were 46 instances where users used the phrase "I am curious as to (whether something is true, where the rule works in this fashion, etc.)". So they both look equally used, and the users using them ranged from new users to reaching the 20k reputation level, so it struck me as not something about being improper English. Rather, it struck that if anything it might be considered maybe a colloquialism or otherwise casual lingo.


Are contractions shortening "to be" verbs along with other words, such as "It's," "To be" verbs themselves?

Title says it all. Let me know if I need additional information.


Word meaning the reverse of 'Xenophobia'

_Xenophobia_ refers to the irrational fear or hatred of foreigners. But recently I've seen people displaying (in newspaper articles and other places) an irrational fear or hatred of their own countrymen. Is there a word for that?


Can you not: Complete Sentence or Elliptical Formation?

I recently heard a sentence: "Wow, can you not?" A friend stated that it was missing a verb. I said that Can worked as the verb in that sentence, and then he responded that Can could be used as a Main Verb but in this usage it was an Auxiliary. So, is "Can you not" an elliptical construction or a complete sentence?


Volunteer or Voluntary Organisation

I belong to an organisation which consists of volunteers. We do voluntary work. Would one describe this as a **volunteer organisation** or a **voluntary organisation**? I have seen both expressions used widely, but am uncomfortable with the latter.


What's the difference between inform and notify?

What's the difference between those when somebody said:   1. I'll inform you.   2. I'll notify you.


Use of “conscience” as verb

I’ve heard _conscience_ used as a verb, in the phrase _can’t conscience_. For example, > I can’t _conscience_ taking credit for what I didn’t do. Is this use of _conscience_ correct? From a Google search it appears this phrase is actively used, but I can’t find it in the OED or other dictionaries.


Usage of "it" pronoun for animals

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Use of “it” and “its” for people and animals I’m an Italian working in an English-speaking company. In school here they usually teach us to refer to animals using the _it_ pronoun. Something like (i.e. talking about a dog): > It’s really nice. I see many people using _he_ or _she_ also for animals. What’s the correct way to use _it_? Should I use it only for inanimate things?


Where does the phrase "fit to be tied" come from? Has its meaning become diluted?

While looking into an answer for "Sick and tied" and "sick and tired", I stumbled across the idiom _fit to be tied_ which according to thefreedictionary means angry and agitated. (As if needing to be restrained.) A second search turned up that this refers to the practice of bounding uncontrollable, dangerous people into strait-jackets. How did we make the leap from crazy and uncontrollable to the general usage today of _ticked off_? Or is my understanding of general usage today incorrect? Is it common for these phrases to become so watered-down over time?


What is a word to describe a statement that seems meaningless

Is there a phrase or word in the English language that describes a statement or a discourse that seems meaningless or so broad it lacks value? For example > Society grows best when those who plant trees don't expect to sit in shade. While the sentence is cohesive, I personally find it meaningless. Is there a word to describe this? Saying this statement is trivial wouldn't be correct, as the implications are not obvious. Basically I'm asking what's a politically correct synonym for saying something is "bullshit". Another example is this quote > We are prisoners in the present, locked in eternal transition between our > past and our future. Perhaps in context it's meaningful but to arbitrarily say we are prisoners of the present, I personally find is idiotic.


Term for student who was thrown out of university?

Is there a term or even a noun for a student who was thrown out of college/universite etc.? I want to emphasize that he was willing to continue, but was dismissed permanently (e.g. due to severely breaking rules). He may never return.   * "Failed student" or the like implies that the student failed some tests, which is not the case here.   * "Dropout" seems to imply that he simply dropped out voluntarily, e.g. due to lack of interest.


Present perfect continuous in negative with period of time

Could you answer my question? > 1) I haven't smoked for years.   >  2) I haven't been smoking for years. In Raymond Murphy's book _English Grammar in Use with Answers. A Self-Study Reference and Practice Book for Intermediate Learners of English_ (ex:11.1(9) The answer is No. 1 Why is   _I haven't been smoking for years_ , not possible? Could you please explain? Can I use the present perfect continuous negative with period of time: _for 2 weeks_ , _for years_ etc? And not with the verb _to smoke_ but also with other verbs.


Trust him about as far as I can throw him?

Here is a quote from The Avengers, 2012 film. > Coulson : But first, we need you to talk to the big guy.   >  Natasha : Coulson, you know that Stark trusts me _about_ as far as he can > throw me.   >  Coulson : I've got Stark. You get the big guy. I know what "Stark trusts me as far as he can throw me" means: he doesn't trust me. But I'm not sure why the sentence includes _about_. What does _about_ mean here? Plus, What does _I've got Stark_ mean in the exchange? Maybe Coulson meant _I will take on Stark_?


"In no way" vs "By no means"

How do I decide whether I should use "in no way" or "by no means"? Are they different in any way? Should either of these terms be used at all? For example: > In no way am I suggesting that... > > By no means am I suggesting that... or should I stick to something like: > I am not suggesting that... Thanks ahead of time!


Taking advantage of a group

This is going to sound so stupid, but what word am I thinking of? My mind is telling me that is sounds something like _platonize_ and it means to take advantage of a certain group (racial minority, lower income families, etc.) and exploiting them in some way for personal gain.


"Anxious to" versus "eager to"

A copy editor friend of mine once told me that instead of saying for example "I'm anxious to see the new movie," I should say "I'm eager to see the new movie." This seemed logical to me—after all, there's no anxiety involved in my desire to see the new movie. But I've noticed that almost no one, including speakers whose language skills I admire, talks this way. Most people (in my experience) say "anxious to" even in situations when they are clearly feeling eager and not anxious. I'm interested to hear other people's opinions on this. Is it a British/American difference? * * * ADDED: Nohat's response below answers my question: The non-anxious sense of "anxious to" is common enough to have made it into at least some dictionaries. I note that the New Oxford American Dictionary (bundled with Mac OS X) _doesn't_ include this sense of "anxious to". In fact they have a usage note that reads > Anxious and eager both mean 'looking forward to something,' but they have > different connotations. Eager suggests enthusiasm about something, a > positive outlook: : I'm eager to get started on my vacation. Anxious implies > worry about something: : I'm anxious to get started before it rains. So apparently there is not consensus amongst dictionary editors.


Pronunciation of "undoable"

As this question points out, there are two different meanings of _undoable_. I can't find any phonetics how they are pronounced. I guess that the difference is barely audible. Or do you stress the word so that it is capable of being differentiated? I found phonetics for undo and doable(copied from OALD)   * undo: `ʌnˈduː`   * doable: `ˈduːəbl` It would be logical that both _undo-able_ and _un-doable_ are pronounced equal.   * `ʌnˈduː` has a trailed `əbl`   * `ˈduːəbl` has a precedent `ʌn`. Both leads to: `ʌnˈduːəbl`. But I conjecture this pronunciation to differentiate them:   * un-doable: `ʌnˈduːəbl`   * undo-able: `ˈʌnduːəbl` Is there any audible difference in pronunciation? Perhaps are there also any difference between British and American English?


How to compare quantities and values?

Which is the correct way to compare two values or quantities? Apart from 'greater than', or 'lower than', could you say something like **'1 is close to 2, but far from 9'**?


How should one punctuate the phrase "simply to understand devote yourself"?

I found an acronym for the word STUDY online. However, the punctuation looks amiss. It reads > Simply — to understand, devote yourself! But I think the dash makes no sense here. Am I right? Shouldn't it be > Simply: to understand, devote yourself! or even > Simply... to understand - devote yourself!


Is it ever effective to use modern and archaic grammar together?

A manuscript I'm currently editing has brought up a new (to me) problem - There's a character who speaks in archaic forms ("thee" and "thou", essentially). I've noted to the writer that this is coming across oddly. After some thought, I realized that the problem is that the character's speech is a mix of modern and archaic English. Can anyone point out any references to using this kind of grammar effectively? The only fairly complete one I've found is at a site on fantasy art, so I'm not sure this is a good source for language advice. Fantasy Art Resource Project: 'Thou' in Archaic Grammar


Does an analytic dictionary of English exist?

I read about this type of definition in a linguistics glossary. > Analytic definition: a description of the range of reference of a lexical > unit. This description is made up of ageneric term identifying the broad > category to which it belongs, and modifying word or phrase which specifies > its obligatory components of meaning, thus.   >  For example > >   * **doctor** —"a person licensed to practice medicine" >   * **eat** —"to take into the body, through the mouth, something which may > be thought of as food" > > > In contrast with > >   * **doctor** —"physician; surgeon" >   * **eat** —"consume; devour" > > > ... Defining a lexical unit using a synonym or generic term alone is not > sufficient to distinguish it from similar words. I searched online, but only found an etymological dictionary. Do you know if a dictionary like the one I described above exists?


What is the correct pronunciation of the word “processes”?

What is the correct pronunciation of the word _processes_ because in my company some say it as "process-eez" and some say it "process-ess"? I am confused, because my mother tongue is not English.


Meaning Of "Wrapped Around My Finger" and "See Ya When I See Ya"

Will you help me to understand the meaning of these phrases? > Wrapped around my finger and > See ya when I see ya


Can you help me to formally define the phrase "to edit <something>"?

I am in a situation on Meta Stack Overflow in which I dispute the validity of the system notification text "Code in your answer has been edited", because there was no code in the answer before the edit; merely, code was added to the answer _after_ the edit. Another user claims that this is simply a "more vague" meaning of "edit": > Saying it was edited is not wrong, it's just more vague. [..] I'm asserting > that your definition of "edited" is incorrectly narrow. I'm fairly confident, though, that in the phrase "to edit _X_ " the " _X_ " is what was present _before_ the edit, not as a result of it. That is, _you cannot edit something that is not there_ by adding the thing. However I'm struggling to find a way to prove it. **How may I prove the following in a semi-formal manner?**               "Hi there."  => "Hi you."         # "I edited the second word".  <-- OK     "Hi there."  => "Hi there you."   # "I edited the third word".   <-- NOT OK


"as far as" vs. "to"

Is "as far as" the same as "to" in these sentences? > I read as far as the third chapter. > > I read to the third chapter. and > I'm going by train as far as London. > > I'm going by train to London.


'Sort out' or 'sought out', which one is correct?

I was reading an apology letter of Shirley Hornestein and found it very interesting: > For as long as I can remember, I have been lying. From the simple white > lies, to the “if-I-say-this-I’ll-get-what-I-want” lies, and the this-could- > have-serious-consequences lies, I’ve told them (probably even to you). . . . > For the first time in my life I sought out professional counseling and have > spent the last five months learning to work through my insecurities, > processing my past and am trying to understand why I have such an addictive > relationship with lying. But there are few points on my mind. Please help me to understand:   * Is it _sort out_ or _sought out_?    * Regarding _this-could-have-serious-consequences lies_ , is this the right structure for a sentence?


Is this sentence right correct "What I want to do is read this book."?

> "What I want to do is **read** this book." Is it correct? Or, can I say: "What I want to do is **to read** this book."   "What I want to do is **reading** this book." Are all of the three sentences correct?


'Remit' an antonym of itself?

Perhaps I don't fully understand the word, but it always confuses me. When talking about money: > The money was remitted. Which means that the money was transmitted/transferred successfully. But it also means:   * Cancel or refrain from exacting or inflicting (a debt or punishment).   * Pardon (a sin). What are the reasons that when referring to money as remitted, it is a positive, otherwise negative?


"as far as" vs. "so far as" vs. "in so far as"

Are these sentences the same? > As far as I know, he's going to Chicago. > > So far as I know, he's going to Chicago. > > In so far as I know, he's going to Chicago. I think that they are the same, but the 1st one is formal, the 2nd one is informal and the 3rd one is very formal.


What is the difference between “each to one’s own,” and “a law unto-oneself”? Are they totally different idioms?

I came across two different idioms, “a law untothemselves” and “each to his own” in the scene then British Army Captain, later a global media tycoon, Dick Armstrong, plotting to rob Julius Hahn, a desperate German press owner of the ownership of his newspaper, Der Berliner in Jeffery Archer’s fiction, “Fourth Estate.” : > Hahn asked, “Do you think there is anything you can do?” “I’d like to, > Julius. But as you understand better than most, the American and Russian > sector are **a law unto themselves**.” - P.316 > > Armstrong placed the dozen bottles of claret on Captain Hallet’s desk before > the captain had a chance to say anything. “I don’t know how you do it.” said > Hallet. “ **Each to his own** ,” said Armstrong, trying out a cliché he had > heard Colonel Oakshott use the previous day. – P.318 Wikianswer.com defines “to each his own” as ‘everyone has their own thing and a right to one's personal preferences.’ usingenglish. com. defines ‘a law unto themselves’ as ‘If somebody is a law unto themselves, they do things their own way and follow their own ideas about how to live instead of following what others do.’ “Each to his own” and “a law untothemselves” are very different on their looks in terms of the components of word, but according to the above definitions, they look pretty similar in that everybody has their own rights and preferences, though the former places focus on preference, and the latter on deed. What are the exact definitions of, and basic difference between “each to his own” and “a law unto themselves”?


Using verb continuous for living abroad for a period of time

Suppose that a friend of mine is Thai and he usually lives in Thailand. Now he is in Australia and he is going to live in Australia for only a few years. Should I say “A friend of mine is living in Australia” rather than “A friend of mine lives in Australia”? Is that right?


past perfect tense with the conjunction "and"

> Among those on his right was Bob, the guy that **had** days earlier > **started** the lease and so **began** the first... OR > Among those on his right was Bob, the guy that **had** days earlier > **started** the lease and so **begun** the first... OR > Among those on his right was Bob, the guy that **had** days earlier > **started** the lease and so **had begun** the first... The question really is, when the conjunction _and_ lists two things that happened in the "perfect past", do I need a second _had_? In this situation, the past is: Bob was on the right; while the "perfect past" or further past is: Bob was the guy that started the lease and (in so doing) began the first... (fill in the blank). Which is right, or best? What is the rule?


What are the differences between "crack", "slit", "crevice", "split", and "cleft"?

I was wondering what differences are between crack, slit, crevice, split, cleft and possibly other similar words, and when to use which? For example, I just bought a bowl and there is a small such kind of flaw in the bottom.


"-ing" or "which" for description?

I think this sentence is standard English: > 1A. **_John_** swung his arm wildly, **_hitting_** Jane in the head. And it approximately means: > 1B **_John_** swung his arm wildly and **_he hit_** Jane in the head. * * * Then, I saw this sentence here: > 2A. A neighbor’s **_daughter_** had been abducted, **_bringing_** an > epidemic of kidnappings within reach of her own family.* I attempted to reapply my analysis method of the first sentence here, and came up with this approximate interpretation: > 2B. A neighbor’s **_daughter_** had been abducted, and **_she_** [the > neighbor's daughter] **_brought_** an epidemic of kidnappings within reach > of her own family. It sounds weird though. Could my analysis be defective? Or is the sentence poorly written—so would it be better like this? > 2C. A neighbor’s **_daughter_** had been abducted, **_which_ brought** an > epidemic of kidnappings within reach of her own family.


Can I say something like "a such-written essay"?

I am expressing that one writing method is not good. If we follow that method, **the essay written with that method** is likely to be of a poor quality. Can I say " **A such-written essay** is likely to be of a poor quality."? If not, could any one please provide a condensed and formal way of doing so? BTW, I am writing a formal technical paper.


How to punctuate math fractions?

I was doing the Writing and interpreting decimals exercise on Khan Academy and was asked the following question: > What is nine and three hundred two thousandths in numerical form? I read it as "What is nine and three hundred... two thousandths", i.e. 9 and 300/2000 instead of "What is nine and three hundred two... thousandths", i.e. 9 and 302/1000. Should there be a punctuation difference between the two?


Is the word "radial" in proper usage if I want to describe a star-like structure?

I want to describe a star-like structure as shown in the following figure. In the figure, the center object is surrounded by a number of other objects, and there are rays pointing from the center point to the surrounding objects. ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/oWO35.png) Figure 1 The idea is that the center object can be represented by the set of the surrounding objects due to similar appearance. I want to name this structure as "Radial Representation" of the center object. Is word "radial" in appropriate usage? (I am writing a technical paper, and I want give this structure a proper name.)


I saw a quote by Golda Meir > Don't be so humble; you're not that great. Can a non-great person self-claim humble? I now wonder if I have misused "humble" in the past. I knew I wasn't great (but not too bad either), but I said I am humble and sincere in a self- evaluation.


Spelling and etymology of "whatchamacallit"

> ...then he picked up this watchamacallit and... I've heard the word _whatchamacallit_ more than once, but never found it in a dictionary. What is the right spelling, if it does exist? Is it acceptable in writing? Is it derived from "what you _may_ call it", or "What you _might_ call it?"


How to make sense to "make sense"

ALL, I had met the phrase “make sense” many times, But I still can't understand its meaning and usage even if I had review it in some online dictionary many times, And I still be confused about it every time when I came across it in some read. Here is a example, Please review it . > In fact, the order of selectors in your CSS does play a role and the > "further down" one does in fact win when the specificity values are exactly > the same. For example: >   >   >     .favorite { >        color: red; >     } >     .favorite { >        color: black; >     } >   > > The color will be black... but I digress. > > **The point here is you want to be as specific as it makes sense to be every > chance you get**. Even with the simple example presented above, it will > become obvious to you eventually that simply using a class name to target > that "favorite drink" isn't going to cut it, or won't be very safe even if > it did work. It would have been smart to use this: Could you help me? Anyway, I don't know if the title is right way to use it , please correct me if it is wrong.thanks.


What is the meaning of the suffix “‑don”?

What are the meaning and origin of the suffix _‑don_ , as in the words _pteranodon_ and _megalodon_?


. . . **a** libis . . . **a** ppetite . . . r **a** ther . . . M **a** rk . . . [audio source] The first two a’s are different in their phonetic symbols in the dictionaries from the other two, but I can’t differentiate. What’s the difference between /ӕ/ and /ɑ/?


Past simple vs present perfect in this example

Could you explain to me please what is the difference between these. It is meant to express that I will let him know AFTER I picked/have picked a car. > I'll let you know which one I picked > > I'll let you know which one I've picked The present perfect, its because its shifted from future present?


What does "blow a story" mean?

Ben Horowitz tweets, "These annotations have completely convinced me that Newsweek blew the story." Does this mean that Newsweek was correct, and was the first to the scoop? Or does this mean that Newsweek blew it, got the story wrong?


Do "Shipping Tracking Code", "Consignment Number", "Shipping Code", "Shipping Number" share the same meaning?

do "Shipping Tracking Code", "Consignment Number", "Shipping Code", "Shipping Number" share the same meaning? I want to use a very short term to express "Shipping Tracking Code" (is kind of unique code that locates the shipping item" Can i use "Shipping Number" or "Shipping Code"?


Alternative to “façade”

In software development, I’m using the so-called “Façade Pattern” to hide the complexity of a workflow via abstraction and encapsulation. I’m naming my classes using a _“_Façade”_ suffix, so like _Customer_Façade_ , _Filesystem_Façade_ , and such. I’d like a better word to use in my naming convention. What is an alternative to _façade_? I've seen the question Word for "ability to hide complexity", but it does not provide an acceptable answer. **After thought** : I’m actually wondering whether I should even try to find a generalized word from the English language, or whether I should instead try to find a word from the specific domain (software development), considering that these will have different meanings depending on context — for example, _Profile_.


Formal way of saying "when you are in need"

How can I write following in a formal way?   * It will help you when you are in need.   * It will help you when it is required.   * It will help you when needed.   * It will help you when you required to be helped.   * It will help you when you are required to do such task. **Edit** A person is denying to perform a task/job on computer and insisting that he only needs to do it for few days and then the job/task will be no more required so i do the job for him. While I am going to request him to do it himself because he may require to do the same due to any reason in future and doing so will make him know how to do that job. Now i need a formal statement to communicate my concerns to him.


"Curious X": X is the subject or an object

When _'curious'_ is used as an adjective (e.g., in the construction _"A is a curious B"_ ), there is ambiguity as to whether the noun it modifies is:-   * **The subject:** _A_ feels curious (e.g., _"Humans are a curious species"_ meaning humans want to know about everything)   * **An object:** _A_ is an object of curiosity (e.g., _"Dung beetles are a curious species"_ meaning dung beetles are interesting to us)  How can we resolve this ambiguity? Is there an official way to do it? Both are correct 'de facto' as both versions of usage are common.


What does this "after deadly shooting" mean?

> The showdown came after the fatal shooting of a campus police officer at the > Massachusetts Institute of Technology. So is the police officer dead or did he shoot someone else dead?


"cool" used to describe a person

I was reading the _about me_ page on an author of a poker strategy website and on one of the passages he describes himself as a pretty _cool_ guy: > This is the page where you get to read a little more about me and > subsequently find out that the guy behind such a sophisticated Texas Hold em > website is actually really cool. I looked up the meaning of _cool_ and it seems like when it's used to describe a person, its meaning is negative. From OALD _cool_ used with persons means: >   1. not friendly, interested or enthusiastic >   2. calm and confident in a way that lacks respect for other people, but > makes people admire you as well as disapprove > So what does he mean when he describes himself as "cool"?


Formal phrase for "in hopes that"

I'm using in hopes that in the following sentence. However, it does not seems to be formal and appropriate for a scientific paper. Is there any similar phrase that has the same meaning but more formal ? Thanks. > To overcome this crucial issue, a popular solution has been used where a > task is assigned to many workers and the results for this task are > aggregated _in hopes that_ the aggregated result is actually the correct > one.


When to use the abverbial form of maximal: maximally?

Could the following sentence considered to be a correct use case of the adverbial form of the word _maximal_ in English? > Use underflow to set the maximally possible value of used datatype. When should one use _maximal_ , and when should one use _maximally_?


What tense do we use with "since"?

Consider these two sentences: > The money has been delivered since 1st January 2000. > > The money was delivered since 1st January 2000. Are both of them grammatical? What may be the difference between them?


What preposition should be used with "cache"?

Which is most grammatical? >   * It's still cached _to_ your phone. >   * It's still cached _in_ your phone. >   * It's still cached _on_ your phone. > I find myself gravitating towards "to" but I'm not sure - I feel like "cached" implies some kind of attachment.


"Infective" or "Infectious"

I checked the dictionary only to find these two words clubbed into a single entry. Have these words evolved into one, having started differently? > His enthusiasm was infectious. Does "infective" fit there? Personally my answer is a no. On the other hand, when talking about diseases, both the words seem to fit. Is there any rule or pattern to the usage?


"No difference" or "no different"

> A: What do you want to eat for dinner? > > B : No **difference** /No **different**. Which is correct and why?


Is there a specific word to describe the duration before due date?

I'm trying to find such a word to describe the time peroid before a workflow/process should be completed.


How to distinguish the meaning of "repair" and " fix"

Are both the same? When do we use "fix" and when do we use "repair"


Word/phrase for when an incorrect approach leads to an unexpectedly great result

> Related question on Chinese.SE There is a phrase ("歪打正着" in Chinese and "怪我の功名" in Japanese) which roughly means "do the wrong thing but achieve the right result anyway". Is there a similar phrase or idiom in English? **Examples** :   * (From the related question): The subject brings a gift to a friend but the friend wasn't present. When the subject tried again on another day, the friend was present, but - unknown to the subject - it was also the friend's birthday, so the gift became a birthday gift too.   * When you lose your job/lover but this leads you to find a much better one Some translations available online are "score a lucky hit" or "hit by a fluke" but I feel these do not capture the incongruity between approach and outcome. Compare this with situational irony, which is often used when the aim or intent is good but the outcome is incongruously bad.


Is the word "mid-shelf" applicable to any merchandize being sold at retail shops more than liquor?

There was the following sentence in Time magazine (September 16) titled “The world according to Vladimir Putin.” > The nation that put the first man into space has given the world no > distinctly Russian export under Putin except for **mid-shelf vodka** and > Kalashnikov assault rifles. As I’ve been unfamiliar with the word “mid-shelf” (though it’s easy to relate it to store shelf) I checked online English dictionaries. None of Cambridge, Oxford and Merriam Webster Dictionary carries this word. Google NgramViewer shows the emergence of the word in / around 1970, and its currency is on notable decline (to 0.00000011 in 2008) after peaking in 1990s (0.00000024). I think the following answer to the question “What in the heck is mid-shelf liquor?" in yahoo Answers is relevant to “the mid-shelf vodka” in the above quote, and I conceived ‘mid-shelf “is most often used for liquor. > “In every category of spirit, you will have at least 3 tiers. - Top shelf > liquor is the expensive stuff and bottom shelf liquor is the cheap stuff. > Mid-shelf liquor is the good yet affordable stuff.” But, I was confused when I came across the definition of “mid-shelf” in Urban Dictionary: > mid-shelf: A magazine that isn't pornographic enough to be top-shelf, but is > still sold more or less with the purpose of providing (something else). > Often contain women who believe themselves to be famous for something other > than their breasts. Is the word, “mid-shelf” applicable not only to liquor but _any other_ merchandize found on the shelves of retail shops? Is it better for nonnative speakers like me to say “middle class” or “ordinary liquor” than affectedly calling them “mid-shelf” when speaking with native speakers?


"Practice/practise" and "licence/license"

In British English, _practice_ and _licence_ are nouns while _practise_ and _license_ are verbs. This seems a very logical state of affairs. In American English, _practice_ is both the noun and verb and the same is true of _license_. Even more bewildering is the fact that the former ends with _c_ while the latter ends with _s_. How did the words come to be used this way in American English?


Can I use "and" many times in one sentence?

I was always under the impression I should not use _and_ more than once. I have this text: > I appreciate that all my previous work experience is within office based > industries however I am a quick learner, keen and enthusiastic and am > looking to change to ensure longevity of career and that the remainder of my > working life is spent doing something that I enjoy and that I can feel > passionate about. Are there too many _ands_ in that sentence?


Another idiom that has the same meaning as "mere ink on paper" or "words without actions"

Is there an English idiom that has the same meaning as "words without actions" or "mere ink on paper"? Especially in the field of economics.


"has" or "have"? As in "X requires that Y have ..." versus "X requires that Y has ..."

To me, it seems that the following subtly differ in meaning:   * X requires that Y **have** (occurred prior to blah-blah-blah)   * X requires that Y **has** (occurred prior to blah-blah-blah) Problem is, I can't figure out how they differ (however, my sense is that _has_ sounds slightly slightly awkward / less acceptable than _have_ ). Are there any contexts in which one would be preferred over the other? Here is the full sentence:   * A felicitous interpretation of example (9) requires that the observation _have/has_ occurred prior to the time of utterance.  Any help would be greatly appreciated.


What does "crowding out" mean?

> The risk is at some point, the bond market vigilantes are going to wake up > in the U.S., like they did in Europe, pushing interest rates higher and > **crowding out** the recovery. What does "crowding out" mean, in the above sentence?


A word/phrase meaning the "house where I was born"?

For instance, to refer to the place you were born you say "my hometown." How about when referring to the house where you were born? I thought of "my parents' house", but I think it'll sound strange if one of the parents no longer lives there?


*Joking* used in continuous form

" _I'm only joking_ " and " _She wasn't joking_ ". Why is the verb _to joke_ used in the present continuous, instead of the present simple tense? Is it because it's a dynamic verb?


Another " would" usage to maintain the same tense in the sentence

> Touché on modify the joke to serve your best interest, **although it'd > probably lose its luster as you'd be disregarding traditionally Jewish > stereotypes.** Is this sentence grammatically correct? Please elaborate.


How does the "be-" prefix change the words to which it is applied? How did it come about?

What does the _be-_ prefix change when applied to adjectives and verbs? There are many such words that seemed to be coined of this process, for example: > _behold_ , _beget_ , _befallen_ , _beridden_ , _bedazzled_ , _bedevil_ , > _between_ , _befluxed_ That's just off the top of my head; I am positive that I've missed _plenty_ more. How does (or did) _be-_ change the "root" of each word? (Scare quotes, because many of these "roots" don't seem to be actual words in modern English). And also, I'm aware that words typically often gain different meanings, sometimes vastly away from their original sense, in the process of word evolution; in addition to asking what _be-_ prefixation means in the present day, I'm also wondering about what the first coiners of these words, many from Old English, would have been thinking as they coined them, and if the _be-_ prefix evolved from a "natural" preposition.


Does the expression "Java bag" exist in American English?

Here is a question and an answer from a list of questions on Cuba: > Q. What is a "java" bag? > > A. "Java" is the Cuban word for bag. Because of the shortage and high cost > of personal hygiene articles, the State provides all employees in the public > service sector with a free bag of toiletries every month. This bag usually > contains deodorant, toothpaste, shampoo, razors, etc. My questions here are the following: Does this expression exist in American English (perhaps as an idiom)? If yes, how and when is it used?