Why isn’t “hermeticity” easily found in the dictionaries?

The word _hermeticity_ as (for the lack of better definition, hence the question) “the quality of being hermetic” (not to be confused with mathematical _hermiticity_, which is also absent from the general dictionaries) seems to be widely used in technical literature. Yet, I am having hard time finding a _bona fide_ definition in any decent dictionary or encyclopædia available on-line. Britannica acknowledges its existence, and via OneLook I only got one reference to the translation from German _Hermetizität_. OED, Cambridge and M-W turn up nothing. It could be the case that the use of the suffix _-ity_ to form “nouns denoting quality or condition” is sufficient, but why, for instance, have _plasticity_ if I can get the definition “the quality of being easily shaped or moulded” from the definition of _plastic_ : “(of substances or materials) easily shaped or moulded” (all quotes from OED)? Why not the same treatment of _hermeticity_? It can be presumed that such word might appear in unabridged dictionary, but then again, why this term (in all forms, such as _hermetic_ ) is not more widely used? From my experience people prefer using the terms _water-_ or _air-tight_ , but _hermetic_ works better both as a general term, and in situations when saying “air-tight liquid hydrogen container” is as semantically wrong as it is technically non-descriptive (it may be _air_ \- or _water_ -tight, but not _liquid hydrogen_ -tight). I think, the usage frequency angle is important in this question. It seems strange to me that this term (again, in all forms) is not widely understood (or used) amongst English-speakers (again, from my limited experience), while, for example, any graduate of a Russian public grade school who took a science class ( _i.e._ any) would understand this borrowed word, even though there are native equivalents for _air_ \- and _water-tight_.


What's the 'alternative forms of sexuality'?

> The Beat Generation is a group of American post-WWII writers who came to > prominence in the 1950s, as well as the cultural phenomena that they both > documented and inspired. Central elements of "Beat" culture included > experimentation with drugs and **alternative forms of sexuality**. BTW, does the Beat Generation only refer to writers?


Is it a standard usage of ‘blue’ to be used as a verb to mean ‘being deflated / become pessimistic’?

I was interested in the usage of ‘ **blue** ’ as a verb in the headline of New Yorker’s article, “Bibi Netanyahu’s election blues,” followed by the following lead copy: > “The center-left, which had seemed so deflated in spirit and imperiled in > the polls, benefitted from the biggest voter turnout in Israel in more than > a decade.” I’m not familiar with the casual usage of “blue” as a verb, but by combining the definitions of ‘blue’ in OALED as the verb, (1) make or become blue and the adjective, (2)informal (of a person or mood) melancholy, sad, or depressed, I can surmise that ‘blues’ in the quoted headline means the prospect of Netanyahu’s winning the Election is being deflated or becoming uncertain. Is ‘blue’ normally used as an intransitive verb in such a way ? Can I say “the chance of me being promoted as CEO blues” / “The prospect of Japan and China agreeing on the territory issues blues” ?


Why do people support/oppose the death penalty (with article), but oppose/support abortion (no article)

Why is the article **the** used when talking about the death penalty, but isn't used when discussing abortion?


What's the opposite of "server"/"server operating system"?

I'm looking for a word to describe a computer that's not a server. I know that in some contexts the opposite may be "client", but that implies the ability to form a network connection to a server, which is not necessary in my context. It can just be a standalone computer or any computer which does not run a server operating system. I'm also looking for the opposite to "server operating system", for example, a word to describe all Windows operating systems that do not have "Server" in their name (Windows 2000, XP, Vista, 7, but not Windows Server 2000, 2003, 2008) – not necessarily restricted to Windows, though.


Difference between 'decline' and 'decrease'

I have an advanced English student who is stuck on the word 'decline'. I told him 'decline' and 'decrease' are very similar, but are not always interchangeable. It is a business English course and we were talking about what Customer Focus means. I wanted him to say "A company needs to _decrease_ its customer base in order to increase Customer Focus". And instead he used " _decline_ its customer base", which is not correct (right?!). He then used the example of "stocks declining in the last quarter" to prove that you could use 'decline' to mean 'decrease'. Does anyone have a good rule or way of explaining when to use 'decline' vs. 'decrease'?


Why have the subjunctive and indicative converged in Modern English?

It is to me a curious fact that the subjunctive mood of verbs in English has so nearly disappeared in modern times. In fact, even the correct form and usage of the subjunctive in Modern English barely distinguishes itself from the indicative! In many regions and dialects, the subjunctive would appear to be entirely obsolete, replaced by the indicative in all cases. (Educated speakers, certainly in Britain at least, do however still make good use of it.) The present subjunctive form in Modern English is (in almost all cases) virtually identical to the third-person plural present indicative (e.g. 'He were', 'She own'). This is markedly different from Old English, where the subjunctive form a form was much more easily noticeable. Even by the advent of Early Modern English in the 16th century, the subjunctive was already converging with the indicative. Other Modern European languages, not only Romance ones such as French and Spanish, but Germanic languages related to English (e.g. Dutch/German) have a much more pronounced subjunctive form. From what I remember of my Classical Latin, word suffixes for a variety of tenses are hugely obvious in the subjunctive. My question is: why is this convergence of the subjunctive and indicative so strongly the case in Modern English? Is it a general trend in other Germanic/Romance (or more generally Indo-European) languages? Why is its disappearance so much more apparent in English than other related languages?


English Subjunctive

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Why have the subjunctive and indicative converged in Modern English? Why is it that in the English language, the past subjunctive is the same as the past indicative for all verbs _except_ to be? In other languages that I have learned there is no relation between these two tenses, even in languages similar to English.


"That ... is" or "that ... be"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Why have the subjunctive and indicative converged in Modern English? Simple question, should you say "what matters most is **that** the merger **is** successful" or: "what matters most is **that** the merger **be** successful"?


Short and well-known term for "jump from one branch to another"

In this sentence: > Bird jumps from one branch to another in a strange wood. I am interested in the part: "jumps from one branch to another". Could you tell me some well-known term of such action? So after replacing I'll get: > Bird <term> in a strange wood.


Word for Finally Reaching a Desired State

Sometimes, one undergoes a sequence of gruelling trials, struggles, etc., an **ordeal**. But eventually the ordeal is over, and one finally reaches a particular, desired state. What word adequately describes this state? The best I could come up with was _relief_ , _upside_ , _goal_ , or (reaching a) _silver lining_. However, none of these feel appropriate. Here's an example: "After enduring the intolerable advertisements, the **_** was in sight for Timmy: in moments, the movie would begin."


How many syllables does "Science" have?

The pronunciation of the word science seems to vary based on which part of the world you're in. I have heard it pronounced "sai-ens" and "saains" (think "signs"). I have check the dictionary, but every dictionary is made in a certain country and a really, really big number of those countries happen to be in the western hemisphere where people use the former. Living in Southeast Asia, I can't help but notice that people here prefer the latter pronunciation. The question is, how many syllables does the word _science_ have? I am hoping for an answer that clarifies what the pronunciation has been historically and why this difference exists in the first place.


What is the meaning of "on or after the 1st of January in the previous calendar year"?

There is one view that, if applied today, the sentence means from 1st January 2013 to 31st December 2013. There is another view that, if applied today, the sentence means any time after 1st January 2013 (ie 1st January 2013 until today (12th June 2014)). My question is, is there a definitive meaning of the phrase?


Etymology of the idiom "by and large"

The idiomatic phrase _by and large_ means > largely; generally; mostly The two earliest usages listed in Google's ngram, from 1812 and 1837, appear to use it in its current form and meaning. What is the origin of this phrase?


Usage of Status Quo

My friend want to know the current state of her hotel reservation. She wrote > Can I know the status quo Is it a correct usage ?


Proper way to pronounce and form the word for "The followers of Augusto Pinochet"

An article in this month's Monocle, discussing elections in Chile, referred to anti-Pinochetistas: > The vote was attended by a throng of cheering anti-Pinochetistas. I am wondering how the word should be pronounced and formed:   1. **Pinochetista** with a silent T, as one would pronounce Pinochet? (Pee-no-shay- _ee_ -stah)   2. **Pinochetista** with an articulated T, avoiding an awkward diphthong? (Pee-no-shay- _tee_ -stah)   3. **Pinochista** , formed like "Francista", the followers of Francisco Franco, by removing the last syllable "-et" and appending the suffix "ista": Pee-no-chee-stah


The mysterious, unenunciated "w" in the "-wich" of English place names

Doing some reading lately, I've been pondering the strange pronunciations of English place names -- namely, that of the 'w' in the "-wich" suffix, which, as I understand it, is not enunciated. For example, listening and watching many British programmes has taught me that _Norwich_ is pronounced **NORR- ich** , _Warwick_ is pronounced **WORR-ick** , and many of us know that _Greenwich_ is pronounced **GREN-ich**. My question is pretty simple, I think: Are these pronunciations the historical pronunciations, and for etymological reasons (or some other reason perhaps) a superfluous 'w' was added? That seems especially likely with ancient place names; many English cities can boast of rich histories stretching back to pre- Roman times. Or, on the other hand, is this just a common corruption, promulgated by "Standard English" to elide this "-w" -- perhaps there is some dialect in England that would properly pronounce it when speaking?


Do I use the article "the" before the name of a specific database in a sentence?

When you name a **specific** database, do you use the before it? I'm helping a friend translate from Japanese into English, and she's referring to a database such as Earthquakes database, the actual name of the database. Should a sentence say: Refer to Earthquakes database or should it say refer to the Earthquakes database? It will be read by those familiar with the particular database.


Do astute and acute have identical meaning and usage?

Do **_astute_** and **_acute_** have identical meaning ( - _quick_ or _shrewd_ ) and usage? Thanks. EDIT: From the comments below there appears to be significant disagreement about usage and a discussion seems worthwhile.


What does "I'll kill that cat" in the play Dinner for One mean?

In the play Dinner for One, James the butler says, "I'll kill that cat," at time 14:05. What does this mean? Is he referring to the tiger rug which keeps tripping him, or is it a saying or colloqualism?


Why Yell "Geronimo" When Jumping From A Plane?

Can anyone explain the origin of the practice of yelling "Geronimo" when parachuting from a plane?


Can I say "out of accidence"?

> I am a white only out of accidence. (self-made) Since we use “out of necessity” to mean something necessarily happens, by the same token, can we equate “out of accidence” with “accidentally”? It seems we use “by accident” in place of “out of accidence”?


Is this sentence "Sign up for class" correct?

Someone told me that the verb `sign up` isn't used to mean class registration. Instead, I should use `to enroll`.


Is it appropriate to say directly "x belongs to y (a category)"?

You belong to the cleverest human being. (self-made) Is this clear enough, or should I say: You belong to the category of the cleverest human being.


Do Australians say "down north"?

I noticed some maps from the southern hemisphere are "reversed" with the south pole on top. Which makes me wonder, are there places in the southern hemisphere where the concept of "down" is presumed to mean north instead of south? For example, would someone say: "Yea I went down north for a bit to Ireland" Just curious.


"Had a seafood dinner" or "had seafood dinner"?

Which sentence is correct? >   * I had a seafood dinner last night. >   * I had seafood dinner last night. >


Another phrase for "wear and tear inspection" of tools and equipment report

I am looking for a word that could substitute "wear and tear" in a resumé. The original was: > "Wear and tear inspection reports for the preliminary maintenance of tools > and equipment." I had found: > depletion, depreciation, erosion, ablation, attrition, consumption, > decrement, dissipation, hard wear, overuse, ravages of time, wearing away, > and weathering. (None of them quite fit since I was talking about offshore drilling tools and equipment. In this case "upkeep" deals with the concept in a better way.)


"Cheese and rice"?

A new girl started at the office, and she's quite a peculiar character. She moved here from Alabama and is definitely the excitable type. Every office has one I guess. One thing she says every now and then is **cheese and rice**. Like, I'll ask her a question about something, and she'll reply, "Oh, cheese and rice, I don't know!" A quick Google search turned up nothing but casserole recipes. Does "cheese and rice" mean anything? Is this something I just attribute to her strange perkiness, or is this just a Southern thing?


Usage of the gerund preceded by the possessive pronoun

I read this thread on the usage of the gerund preceded by the possessive pronoun with much interest. I have another question about the usage of the gerund preceded by the possessive pronoun. In a test from a textbook I am using, one must choose the correct form of the bracketed word in the following sentence (I have simplified it somewhat): > Company X experimented with its (expand) ___ _ into a new business area. The given answer is "expansion." To me, this intuitively feels more comfortable than the gerund "expanding." My question, however, is the following: Is the gerund also grammatically correct in this sentence? In the example sentences throughout this thread so far, there are no cases in which the subject of the sentence and the subject of the gerund clause are the same, not to mention cases in which the verb of the gerund clause is intransitive and followed by a preposition. For example: > The monkey seemed to be preoccupied with its prying off the lid of the jar. Again, this sounds very awkward to me, but I'm not sure if it's incorrect. I also wondered if there might not be a rule that if a verb has a standard nominalized form (expand -> expansion), it needs to take precedence over the gerund when it is preceded by the genitive case. Are such matters entirely irrelevant to my question?


What is the difference between "particularly" and "in particular"?

Is there any difference between _particularly_ and _in particular_? When should I use each one of them?


What is an appropriate response to "what's up" greeting?

Sorry if it's a trivial question, but when someone uses _what's up_ as a greeting I have no idea what they want to hear. What are the possible answers and what does this question mean exactly?


What should a reply to "What's up?" be?

How should you reply to "what's up?"


How to reply to the question, "What's up?"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  What is an appropriate response to "what's up" greeting? If someone asks me "What's up, man?," how should I reply? What does it mean?


Response to "What's up?" in various conversations

> **Exact Duplicate:**   >  What is an appropriate response to "what's up" greeting? What should be the response to "what's up"? I don't get satisfied and often confused with my answer saying "fine/working/chatting". There are various situations and time of conversations such as   * chat with a friend   * chat with a business partner   * chat with your boss   * etc. So, what should be the response that would satisfy the questioner?


"Ignored for deletion"

Is the phrase "item is ignored for deletion" grammatical and idiomatic? The context is a software program. I have a list of items to be deleted from a database, and if an item from the list is not in the database, I want to display a message saying that the item is ignored. Since this message can appear among other unrelated messages, I want it to be as informative as possible but laconic.


usage of "lead to"

If I want to use _lead to_ , does it always need to use _being_ as shown below. > less number of points _lead to_ missing edges _being_ occurred, are > recognized using proximity analysis.


Does apologizing entail recognizing being at fault?

Consider this example: > I'm sorry if you got the impression that I meant to insult you. That was not > my intention. Would it be correct to say that the above person apologized? All the dictionaries I have checked defined "to apologize" as admitting one's fault. However, in the above example, the person is not conceding he is making a mistake; he is merely clarifying his intent and, well, _apologizing_ if he hurt the other person's feelings. Yet, based on my understanding of the verb, it would be adequate to say that the person apologized. So, does apologizing really require being at fault?


very specific tense aspect configuration

I recently tried to translate a German sentence to English and I failed. I won't give you the German version but rather the background configuration of it. Two people talk about an event that has happened in the past. They do not know how exactly it happened though, let's say there are 2 options how it could have gone down. They have no information but they do know that under a certain condition one outcome was almost certain. Here is an example that I think does work in English (if not then please correct me): > If you haven't seen the movie, then you have definitely missed out on > something. Another example without a negative: > If Marie studied then she passed the exam. Now here comes the version that didn't work. > If Thomas knew, that Marie needed the book he would have brought it with him > to class. or another try: > In case that Thomas was aware that Marie needed the book, then he has > probably brought it with him to class. I don't know if that is correct or not. Anyway... I was wondering why the same configuration can be expressed in the movie example quite easily while I have to find all kinds of workaround for the book-example. My idea was, that the verb to know (with a few exceptions) does not make sense in perfect aspect and that using the simple past doesn't work because the **if** makes it look conditional. Is that possible? And also, what is the grammatical name for that configuration? How can I express the idea for the book-example in proper English?


Comma placement in "developing cutting edge websites and previously video games"

This is the opening line of my CV so I would like it to be correct. Would this be the correct place to put the comma? I've always been taught not to put a comma before _and_. > I’m a talented and versatile programming and UI professional with 5 years of > commercial experience in developing cutting-edge websites, and previously > video games.


What does "she was as generous in sharing her death as she was in sharing her life" mean?

I just started reading this book called "A Dirty Job" by Christopher Moore. The author has dedicated his work to Patricia Moss by this sentence: > This book is dedicated to Patricia Moss, who was as generous in sharing her > death as she was in sharing her life". I don't exactly get the meaning of it. Is there any kind of irony in this sentence? Does the writer want to say "She not only shared her life with others when she was alive, but also, when she died, she was still generous and shared her death with others and killed them"? or the writer only wants to praise Patricia Moss?


Way to differentiate between at this precise moment, and at the time being?

I came across this problem last Sunday when talking to my brother and mother. We were in the car, my brother in the back seat, and me and Mother in the front... > Bro. : "So, Mom, what are you reading at the moment?"   >  Me : Um... She's driving?   >  Mom(didn't hear me) : "I'm reading Agatha Christie. The Murder of Roger > Ackroyd." In this conversation, my Mom understood my brother to mean the book she is reading, but hasn't finished, while I understood it as "right now." Is there another way of phrasing it concisely without having to resort to something like: > "So, Mom, what are you reading at present, not at this exact moment, but the > book that you haven't finish yet?" Ideas please?


Do adverbs only describe verbs?

> Egypt and Tunisia have both taken steps to form a new government after the > overthrow of Mubarak and Ben Ali respectively. In this context, does _respectively_ describe the steps that have been taken, or the overthrow of Mubarak and Ben Ali?


Meaning of "down on me" in the Janis Joplin song

What does ' _Down on Me_ ' mean in this Janis Joplin song? > **Down on Me**   >  Well, down on me, Lord, down on me.   >  I said it looks like everybody in this whole round world,   >  Yeah hey yeah all right, is down on me yeah.   >  Yeah yeah yeah yeah.   >  [...] I'm sceptical about the 'oral sex' meaning here.


Is there a term to describe the tendency to do what's minimum?

I will try my best to describe. Some times, I have found that people tend to do the minimum procedures to finish what they do, and find improving unnecessary. I understand different people have different definition of what's perfect, and have justification for not making it better. Maybe it is due to rules in where they live, or policies in where they work, or just because we are not paid enough to polish the result. Is there a word or phrase to describe this phenomenon? Thanks in advance.


"On the equivalence of A and B" or "between A and B"

I am writing an academic paper with a choice of titles: >   1. On the equivalence of A and B > >   2. On the equivalence between A and B > > or >   1. On the equivalence of A, B and C > >   2. On the equivalence between A, B and C > >   3. On the equivalence among A, B and C > > where A,B,C are some scientific or math notions. Should I use **of** or **between** or **among**? Which case is more correct or suitable?


What are entries of the same year called

I want to know a word for a group of students who enroll in a university at the same department at the same time. I tried looking it up in google but didn't get any real results.


Who is watching the watchdog?

I am looking for an expression that conveys the meaning _Who is watching the watchdog_?


"Would have not" vs. "would not have"

>   * That would not have happened if John had completed his work. > >   * That would have not happened if John had completed his work. > > The former seems correct. The latter doesn't seem incorrect. Are there any cases where one ought to use the latter instead of the former?


The air bracing, leaves just starting to turn

I found this sentence - > It was autumn in New England, the air bracing, leaves just starting to turn. What does "leaves started to turn" mean? Does it mean that "the leaves started to bend due to dryness"?


Wish someone 'good luck' for an operation

What is a good way of wishing someone 'good luck' for an operation? The words 'good luck' don't sound right, especially because it is a very difficult operation with lots of severe risks.


A poetic word or expression for networking/lobbying/making professional connections

I’m looking for a poetic word or expression that means making professional connections, lobbying, networking, socializing professionally. _League, circuit, club, society_ , and so on and so forth.


What's wrong with this sentence: "Who am I doing this task with?"?

Imagine that you are in a class full of students and the teacher is forming couples to perform some task. Let's say, for some reason, you didn't hear the name of the person you are going to do the task with. I would ask the teacher "Who am I doing this task with?" but Google shows me that there is no such a sentence out there. How would you express yourself in this situation? Thanks a lot!


contrite, detritus, diatribe

The words _contrite, detritus, diatribe_ share the same root "trit" which means rub. Why does contrite mean remorse, detritus mean debris, and diatribe mean criticism? From etymonline, I found that con means "together", de means "away", and dia means "away".


Do desultory, result, consult share the same root?

In _desultory, result, consult_ , do _sult_ all mean jump and leap? I searched etymonline, which gives different interpretation, especially in consult, sult seems to mean gather together. But I hope the three words have the same root with the same meaning.


A term for this type of language

For example, you're in a room with three people. You're talking to one person and the other is getting kind of stupid or is doing something that you find dumb. To insult them without them catching on to what you actually mean, you come up with a statement that you say to the person that you're talking to, and it sounds like you're talking about something else, like your dog, but you're really insulting the person.


How did "strike" get its baseball meaning?

**Strike** as an English word (meaning to hit) is certainly older than **strike** as a baseball term (meaning **not** to hit), so what puzzles me is that the word adopted for the action is the exact opposite of the action. Etymonline indicates that the first use is in the mid-19th century, but gives no indication of how it came to be used. Can anyone shed any light on why such an ill-suited word was chosen for the action of not striking the ball? If it is is actually an appropriate word for this, why is it? (Additionally, to be _stricken_ by something, usually an illness I believe, means to be afflicted by it, and seems to be a metaphor for being hit by an disease.) **Edit** : Interesting things to consider   In the context of the American court systemref (and probably elsewhere), strike is used to mean "remove". Similarly, ~~this is strike text~~.


What are the differences between, and the connotations of, "flag", "banner", and "standard"?

See also: Difference between "banner" and "flag". I would like to know about _standard_ , too. What would you say are the differences between the three words?


Use of "I for one"

When we say “for one” in a sentence, what does it mean? I heard a sentence in a TV program where Robin Hood said: > Who will bear this injustice? I, for one, will not. As I understand it, “I for one” means for a single person. Does “for one” have the same figurative meaning in all the sentences in which it is used?


Is it ever correct to use “end” after the name of a month?

I’ve heard some people say things like _September end_ or _June end_ when I’m used to hearing the _end of September_ or the _end of June_. Is the former usage (meaning, the “something end” collocation) correct or standard somewhere?


What do you think of the tenses here?

“If I had to explain to a foreigner why Yamamoto’s action was a problem,” Miyadai said, “I don’t think I could do it.”Source the "was" of "why Yamatomo's action was a problem." Is it fair to say that this has two possible interpretations, that is, it is purely past and that it is because of the sequence of tenses due to the hypothetical mood of the clause?


What term refers to "one's personal definition of what is polite or rude"?

People tend to have their own feelings about what behavior or conversation subjects are polite or rude. Is there a specific term to refer to a person's personal definitions of this? The terms "ethics", "morals", and "virtues" don't seem specific enough in dealing just with this sense.


"Prospects of" or "Prospects for" a new project?

The title more or less says it all. In particular, I'm considering the title of a presentation or short article. I'll say that it's a discussion of new discoveries that might come from pursuing a "Project X". The title is currently (not by my doing) "Prospects of Project X", but my gut feeling is that it should rather be "Prospects for Project X". Glancing at a few examples it looks like there isn't a clear distinction, although a Google Fight gave "Prospects for" as the winner. So, which should it be? "Prospects of Project X" or "Prospects for Project X"?


Whence “emphasis mine”?

Writers often highlight part of a quotation to emphasize the point they're making. They use a variety of phrases to indicate that the emphasis did not appear in the original text. In order of current usage:   * emphasis added   * italics added   * emphasis mine   * italics mine It appears that “italics mine” is the earliest phrasing and the most common for at least 60 years, after which it was matched by “italics added” (c.1960) and then overwhelmingly surpassed by “emphasis added” (c.1970). It strikes me that “italics mine” and its later kin, “emphasis mine,” is an odd and archaic-looking construction, especially considering that it didn't become common until the early 20th Century. Can anyone shed light on its origin? Was there a particular reason why “emphasis added” so strongly overtook it in the 1960s?


Both or only the first, but never just the second

OK, so the title sounds more like a cryptic crossword clue rather than something that explains my question, so please feel free to make it into something more sensible if you can (and remove this sentence)... Let's say we have two items, the items do not matter but for this example let's say the first is "fish" and the second is "chips". If I were serving these items I might ask one of the following questions: > "Would you like fish **or** chips?" - implying that they could only choose > one or the other. > > "Would you like fish **and** chips?" - implying that they could only have > both items together. **Now the question** : Is there a word (or two) that could replace and/or in the above sentences that would imply that they can choose to have fish only, both fish and chips, or neither of them, but **not** chips only? * * * To try and clarify my requirements, here is the original example that inspired me to seek out an answer... Originally I read the following sentence on StackOverflow (a different SE site for those that don't know): > You should probably use javascript or jQuery to accomplish this The problem I find with this sentence is that "jQuery" is a javascript library and cannot exist without "javascript", therefore the "or" is technically inaccurate. However, to replace the "or" with "and" would also be inaccurate because you could choose only "javascript" as "jQuery" is optional (it would just make it easier). And, of course, neither can be chosen.


“Has reported” as present perfect vs. “has” as present + “reported” as a noun

In the following sentence below, I **want** to use the word _reported_ as a noun, but it looks like I’m using the present perfect form _has reported_. How can one be clear when constructions like this arise? > That both covers the whole 3-week period and has reported duty-cycles under > it. (Note: That sentence was written in the context of technical writing, so don't pay too much attention to its actual meaning.)


Is "sectio caesare" an appropriate English alternative to "caesarian section"?

On Parenting.se we recently received this question, which refers to sectio caesare birth. I was not familiar with the term, but found that wikipedia redirects the term to the caesarian section page. After some discussion, it was suggested that this might be a common European variant for the procedure. However, it is not clear to me if this is the term from non-English European languages, or if it was used commonly by European English-speakers. Are both versions valid in English? Is one more common than the other (I don't want to fall into the American bias here)?


Should I use period pronunciation when reading poetry aloud?

I find that when I read older poetry, the rhyme scheme is sometimes broken and I assume that the problem comes from changes in pronunciation over time. For example, Poe keeps up a pretty impressive rhyme scheme throughout the Raven but it breaks on the lines: > "Prophet!" said I, "thing of evil! > > prophet still, if bird or devil! unless "evil" and "devil" rhyme. When reading that line aloud, should I try to adjust the pronunciation so that they rhyme? Or is it more important to pronounce words in a way that modern listeners will readily understand?


Word for: "dislike of people that has same gender as speaker"

Is there a word for "disliking people of same gender"? I.e. man that dislikes men in general (but not women), or woman that dislikes women in general (but not men)? There's "misanthropy", but it means "dislike of humans in general", and "misogyny"/"misandry" do not satisfy "same gender" requirement. Is there a specific word for that?


Why do some people prefix people's names with "the"?

Lately I've been seeing a trend that I find disturbing for some reason, mostly in Indian publications but also in some American ones - prefixing people's names with "the". For example: _The_ Mr. Gandhi said that taking _the_ Narendra Modi's name was tantamount to committing a crime in the party. Is this proper usage? It surely doesn't sound right.


Origin of New Jersey idiom "down the shore"

As a native Midwesterner, I was very puzzled to hear my wife (who is from northern New Jersey) use that idiom. I understand what it means, and as far as I can remember I understood what it meant from the beginning; but I thought that my wife's rapid speech was eliding the "to". My usual sources for etymology (Merriam-Webster.com and Etymonline.com) are designed for word etymology, not phrase etymology, and I don't see (after some search) a question here, so I'll now put the question: _What is the origin and history of the New Jersey idiom "down the shore", used to mean "in the area along the southeastern coast of New Jersey?"_ **Note** The related question, here, correctly identifies the expression as being a local idiom, but doesn't address the question of where the expression came from (For example, was there a local dialect which used "down the" to mean "in the direction of"? If so, by whom was it spoken? Where? Does it survive in any other expressions? Is it at all related to the northern New Jersey accent?) I'm specifically looking for _historical_ origins, which are not addressed in the previous question.


Description that sets the scene in a play

In plays, there is often a description at the beginning of the scene that sets the scene before the characters start speaking. e.g., see the paragraph in italics here. What is the formal term for it?


Already vs. before in the present perfect

What's the difference?   Example: > I've already seen Terminator. vs. > I've seen Terminator before.


Is there any countable noun which is a synonym of 'rating'?

What noun can be used to describe how many times something has been rated? For voting, you can say "one vote" or "two votes". For liking (Facebook), you can say "one like" or "two likes". For rating, I don't think someone would say "one rate" or "two rates". What's the right word in this case?


Which is correct: "it's not a big deal to me" or "it's not a big deal for me"?

What is the correct way to say it? >   * It's not a big deal to me. >   * It's not a big deal for me. > Also, should I use "it's _not_ " or "it's _no_ "?


Using "a" vs "an" with 'very'

I've just read from a comment somewhere that 'a very emotional' is grammatically wrong, and it should be 'an very emotional'. Why is 'very' ignored in this case? If it should be ignored, are there any other words that should also be ignored?


Is "bad loser" a valid expression?

Is the expression "(someone is a) **bad loser** " valid?   If it is valid, is it equal to " **sore loser** ", or does it have a different meaning and/or use?


In my mother tongue, we have an expression that I have translated to > I read the dictionary as if it were a novel. I think the meaning is easy to grasp by I wonder if there a more suitable translation. Thank you.


Is it possible to form adjective "morally" by deriving it from the noun "moral" (as in "of the story")?

Recently I used the word _morally_ as an adjective formed from the noun moral. The concept I wanted to describe was that some statement is _morally_ correct if you are able to agree with it intuitively but you don't necessarily have evidence or proof for it. So the statement would be a _moral_ of some precise story (meaning evidence or proof). Then it was pointed out to me that this might not be correct because _morally_ is usually understood as referring to _morality_. So I looked it up in the dictionary and, indeed, I weren't able to find the meaning I wanted. So my questions are: >   1. Is it correct to use word _morally_ in the meaning I referred to above? >   2. More generally, how do I know that words I form (e.g. by deriving > adjectives from nouns) are correct? Is it enough to look in the dictionary > and by not finding the word there, could I conclude that the word (or some > special meaning of the word) indeed does not exist? >


What is the difference between "harsh" and "severe"?

I've been just wondering what's the difference between "severe" and "harsh". So in what ways do their nuances/usages differ? For example, when you think a teacher's a little too harsh and that he might be able to soften his comments to the children, do you say he's a little too "harsh" but not "severe", and his comments are a little too "harsh", not "severe"? And are there any alternatives? Thank you in advance!


What is the difference between 'the English King' and 'the England's King'?

Is there any differece between 'the English King' and 'the England's King'? Somehow I feel they are different...


Put in the shoes of

Please guide me on whether the used phrase is right. I put myself in the shoes of the customer before preparing the requirement. Thanks & Regards, Murali.


What's the plural of quantum?

As in a number of the smallest de facto units of anything you can have in the universe? Currently in the running in my mind:   * Quanta   * Quantums


The verb form of "Is entered in the race"

[I'm not much of an expert in English usage, just an armchair boffin, so I hope I'm not out of line asking what may be a dumb question, to the regulars here...] I am trying to figure out the form of the verb _entered_ in a passage such as: > "Did John make the cut?" > > "Yes, he is entered in the race as the eighth man." Obviously, John was entered into the race in the past but it isn't past participle ("he has been entered"; "he was entered") and it certainly isn't past tense ("he entered"). In fact, in this usage, it is essentially an adjective. Is this a form that I am not familiar with or is it just bad English (albeit in somewhat common use)?


What are the differences between "allegories", "fables" and "parables"?

My concept of the three is:   * **Allegory:** A story in which ideas are symbolized as people.   * **Parable:** A short story designed to teach a moral or religious lesson.   * **Fable:** A short story in which animals or objects speaks a story, to teach a moral or religious lesson. If these concepts of mine are correct then can we say that every **fable** is a **parable** but the vice-versa may not be true? Can we relate the idea of the **allegory** likewise? Or am I wrong completely?


"What it is that is" versus "what is"

I recently heard an American presenter using the phrase "discover what it is that is important to you." What is the linguistic difference between saying "what it is that is," rather than "what is"?


Why "hundreds of <noun>s" instead of "hundreds of <noun>"?

In the expression `hundreds of <noun>(s)`, I would think that _hundreds_ is what's being modified because _of_ is usually right-branching: > hundreds`<-{of <noun>(s)}` (This is in contrast to `X hundred <noun>s`, in which _X hundred_ is clearly the modifier, and hence the plural.) If so, I can't see any reason (apart from overwhelming usage, of course!) why `<noun>` must be plural. To me, the idea expressed seems to be a multiplication of some sort: > X00 * `abstract instance of <noun>` (This would then be similar to the formal "There are two kinds of person.") Is the singular archaic, and did we somewhere along the way begin thinking more along the lines of `{hundreds of}-><noun>s` than `hundreds<-{of <noun>}`, or am I completely off? Evidence from Google Books: > ~~I have asked many **hundreds of person** of all classes respecting their > own places of residence. (1843)~~ > > ~~... there was every reason to suppose that an epidemic would be certain to > lay claim to **hundreds of victim**. (1869)~~ > > The officers of Police could point to **hundreds of person** who lived > solely by picking pockets and other selonious acts ... (1792) > > I have traveled **hundreds of mile** by rail, buggy, lumber wagon, and on > foot. (1889) > > For **hundreds of year** it was the coronation site and burial ground of > Polish monarchs, saints, and national heroes. (2010)


What does " Book within 2 weeks" means?

Can anyone answer the above question?


What is a term for someone who has never left their home region?

Specifically, someone who has never experienced other places? A college professor once used the term "parochial" in this context. "You should earn your doctorate from another graduate college, then you will not be so parochial in your studies".


What to call someone who always says "nothing" on most things you ask?

I am referring to the kind of person, when you ask him something he will say "nothing" all the time. When you ask them the question again or why they responded like this, they say "forget it" or "because it's an irrelevant question" (even though it really is not a relevant question to you.) They only respond like that on questions, not constantly on everything you say throughout the conversation, though.


Meaning of "direct descendant" as opposed to "indirect descendant"

I know what a descendant is. A’s children, grandchildren and great _n_ -grandchildren are all A’s descendants. But what does _direct descendant_ mean? It is as if some of those people are A’s **direct** descendants, but others are just his **indirect** descendants. Is _direct_ redundant and only used as a rhetorical device?


Meaning of liquor and leverage

Please tell me the meaning of "liquor and leverage" Just I read Warren Buffett Ideas there I got this sentence. "I've seen more people fail because of liquor and leverage"


"Non-restrictive appositive" vs. "non-defining relative clause"

Could you please kindly provide some explanation as to why the second option (B) is the only correct answer to the following question? And why is it not the case that both A and B could be correct depending on whether a non- restrictive appositive (B) or a non-defining relative clause (A) is used? Recently, severe management problems have afflicted Coca-Cola, **___ ___**. A. which is a large multinational corporation B. a large multinational corporation C. there is a large multinational corporation D. a large multinational corporation is it Your insights, recommendations, and corrections are much appreciated.


“Just a entrance alone will continue a lot of people entrance adult to recreate,” pronounced Manager Gary Lamb. (http://boston- massachusetts.us/conservation-plan-also-brings-development-in-maine) Gary Lamb uttered a totally incomprehensible sentence, at least for a not native of English language: it seem as the grammatical meaning, which is signaled by the structure words, is not present. Please, help me in understanding that sentence.


"Use of internet" or "internet usage"?

I am confused about the meaning of "use of internet" and "internet usage". Is there any difference between these two phrases? Does the phrase "use of internet" mean I utilize the internet or it means the benefit of using internet? And is it grammatically correct to use "usage of internet"?


Should I say "in my tests" or "on my tests"?

I want to say something like: > _Using APC is great advice. Performance increases a lot when you use it. > (100 to 1 on my tests)_ Should I say "on my tests" or "in my tests"? Are any of those wrong? Do those mean the same?


How did "kill" get its positive connotations?

For example: >   * She made a killing on the stock market. >   * The comedian killed the audience — they were slain with laughter. > Did this meaning develop slowly over time or did some person or institution invert the definition?


Alternatives for computer programming terms, for better understanding

There are several words in computer science which seem quite easy to understand, but when you just mix them with their application, they look more and more complex. I have seen many people who are new to computer programming getting confused very easily almost by every single technical term. I believe it's not their problem, however I believe these technical terms could be quite more smart and probably much easier for understanding by non- technical person. For example I have already test that people can understand the term "Box" as a "Container of Data" much easier rather than "Variable". Maybe it shouldn't be like this and the term "Variable" is more correct, but if we could explain it in another way which could be more easier for most of the people to understand it better, so I think it's reasonable to sacrifices "Variable" and start using "Box". So, here are a few words which I'm thinking of them most of the time, to finding a good replacement for them (at least for teaching purpose). I hope you help me in this way, either by completing this list or just simply suggesting alternatives for them. :)   1. Variable   2. Array   3. Object-Oriented Programming   4. Function   5. Constant   6. Class   7. Object


Substituting special characters or numerals for letters/word parts

Is there a word or phrase to describe a substituting a dingbat, special character or number for a letter or portion of a word? Examples: > The Chicago Bulls successfully achieved a **3peat**. > > "In 1999, Tom Jermoluk stepped down as CEO of **Excite@Home**." > > **Ke$ha** is the stage name of Kesha Rose Sebert. I thought of "letter substitution", but that can also refer to a substitution cipher.


Infinitives with "ought not"

Most of the references I can find about the word "ought" indicate that even when negating it, you should use an infinitive: "You ought not to go there." That sounds quite bad to my ear. Much better sounding to me is "You ought not go there." Without the "to". Comparing this to similar usage of "should" does no good, since they can't even agree _without_ negation: "should go" versus "ought to go". Now that I think about it, I am suddenly far from certain that "ought to go" actually contains an infinitive in the first place; maybe "ought to" works together as some part of speech that modifies the verb, rather than "to go" being a unit. I'm obviously no linguist. Can someone shed some light on this for me? Specifically, can you explain the function/part-of-speech of each word in a way that makes it clear whether "to go" or "go" is more correct?


Difference between 'lie' and 'lie down'

What is difference between **lie** and **lie down**? Please explain with some examples.


Is 'women of cover' an idiom in use in the U.S.?

On October 28, 2001, William Safire, wrote an interesting article on The New York Times. > Within a week of the terrorist attack, George W. Bush went to the Islamic > Center in Washington and said, ''Women who cover their heads in this country > must feel comfortable going outside their homes.'' In remarks to State > Department employees on Oct. 4, President Bush spoke warmly of ''stories of > Christian and Jewish women alike helping women of cover, Arab-American > women, go shop because they're afraid to leave their home.'' > > At a televised news conference a week later, he reprised this ecumenical > theme: ''In many cities when Christian and Jewish women learned that Muslim > women, women of cover, were afraid of going out of their homes alone . . . > they went shopping with them . . . an act that shows the world the true > nature of America.'' He repeated that phrase, women of cover, calling ''such > an outpouring of compassion . . . such a wonderful example.'' > > The cover is a veil that expresses Muslim piety. The hijab, meaning ''cover, > curtain,'' can range from a floral kerchief that leaves the face exposed, to > the niqab, abbaya or in Persian, chador, which covers the whole body except > the face, to the burka, as worn in Afghanistan, which covers everything. > ''To have good hijab'' is a general term meaning ''to be properly covered.'' > Some Muslim women believe that the cover need not be worn outside the > mosque. The linguistic question: in describing the wearers of the veil, is > it women who cover, as the president first used it, or women of cover? > > Sue Obeidi, at the Muslim Public Affairs Council, uses women who cover, > women who wear the scarf and women who wear hijab. She is unfamiliar with > women of cover, and I cannot find it on databases. > > It's possible that the president coined the phrase; if so, it was on the > analogy of women of color, a description adopted by many nonwhites. (Though > colored people is dated and almost a slur, people of color is not in the > least offensive.) The substitution of who with of in the cover category > introduces a nice parallel to the woman of color phrase; we'll see if it > takes. The article ends with the phrase 'we'll see if it takes'. Now, after more than ten years, what can a native speaker, living in the U.S., say about that expression 'women of cover'. Paraphrasing Mr Safire's words, _did it take_? Google Search shows more than 18,000 hits for "women of cover", but for those who live outiside of the U.S. that number says nothing at all but simple leads to this question.


Origin of the phrase "Looks like Tarzan, plays like Jane"?

Scouts, coaches, and fans use the phrase “Looks like Tarzan, plays like Jane” to describe a player that appears physically imposing, but plays at a level not consistent with their apparent physical gifts. Tarzan and Jane obviously come from the works of Edgar Rice Burroughs, but who coined the term in relation to sports? My thought is that the NFL draft scouting process may have been the origin, as it is listed in a list of common NFL scouting lingo, so an old NFL scout may be the source, but I don't have any data to back up the claim. Any documentation that can attribute this phrase to a particular person and date of origin would be appreciated.


What phrase is less idiomatic than "softball question"?

In the US, a "softball question" is asked because it would be intentionally easy to answer. It's not an intellectual judgement, just a question formulated to be intentionally easy for that particular person to answer. I'm looking for a word or phrase that can be more widely understood (outside the US) that preserves that same meaning. Preferably, it would fit nicely into the form: _"The best political reporters no longer ask [softball] questions."_


How popular are the terms "software" and "hardware" outside the computer world?

If I’m not mistaken, the terms _software_ and _hardware_ were ordinary English words, but they have been widely popularized by popularity of computers. How much they are common (and acceptable by native speakers) to be used for other systems; for example, defining _software_ and _hardware_ in a company. It is indeed common in management literature, but I am not sure if it is plain English or a metaphor for comparing the system with well-known computer architecture. In a logical comparison, we can define a coach as software and players as hardware (just a schema not exactly). How does is sound to a native speaker? Of course, I mean in general, not this exaggerated example.


Etymology of the phrase "cannot see the forest for the trees"

How did this phrase originate grammatically? I’m especially interested in the fragment “for the trees”. See http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/see_the_forest_for_the_trees for its definition.


Titles of British Lords

In an old episode of The West Wing, a British Ambassador is referred to as "Lord John Marbury". Ignoring that once he became Ambassador he'd be Mr Ambassador, what are the possible correct addresses? My reasoning is that a friend criticised a newspaper which used the form "Lord Firstname Secondname" saying it's supposed to be "Firstname Lord Secondname". For example, with Lord Coe — or Seb Coe —, his wife is said to be "Carole, Lady Coe", but assume that's just the different names options (as there's a comma)? It's not explicitly stated that there's a correct way to use his (or her) full name, that I can find online. I tried using the West Wing episode as an example, but they pointed out that it's an American show. Indeed they get other details wrong, like saying two Commonwealth ambassadors met (when ambassadors of Commonwealth countries are referred to as High Commissioners when dealing with each other).


Names of tools for shaving hair

1. I was wondering what differences there are between _shaver_ , _razor_ , _trimmer_ and _clipper_?   2. For head hair cut that does not make head bald, what tools are used?   3. For shaving facial hair, what tools are used?   4. For shaving a beard, moustache or whiskers, what tools are used?


What's the grammatical term for this phenomenon?

There is obviously a big essential difference between "no towel" and "there isn't a towel". I mean, the former cannot probably serve as a complete sentence, while the latter can. The former can only serve as a subject of a sentence, while the latter contains both subject and a predicate. So how is this difference named, defined or described in correct grammatical terms?


Why is the current unrest in the Arab world called the "Arab Spring"?

Does _spring_ in "Arab Spring" refer to the season - or something else?


"to mimic" something, what level of precision does it mean?

This is about technical context (i.e. not theatre or performances). The phrase - "should mimic the functionality of ..." - how it can be interpreted? From dictionaries it is not very clear - can it mean _exact_ copy, or just a "similar" thing?


What does "I wished I had a nickel" mean when threatened by a radical extremist?

I saw a clip of video titled “David Letterman came back to The Late Show this week,” on Time Magazine's website. In the CBC’s show, Letterman revealed that he was threatened by a jihadist lately. After joking he wishes the audience to be more like a human shield for him on the site, he said: > A guy, a radical extremist threatened me to cut my tongue up. I wished I had > a nickel for every time a guy has threatened to cut. I know a nickel means a small change, but small change wouldn’t save you from a great threat. What does "I wished I had a nickel for every time he was threatened to cut" exactly mean — particularly in contrast to the seriousness (or gravity) of likening the audience to the human shield of himself against jihadists even as a humor?


What is meant by saying "X, not to say Y"?

When someone says "X, not to say Y", do they mean "X, but not Y" or do they mean "X, and even Y"? Normally I would assume it's the first, but I've seen a few examples where it seems ambiguous. Or maybe it's literally the first, but used ironically to mean the second? An example (for some reason writers for The Atlantic seem to use this phrase a lot): > In somewhat different ways, Orwell and Larkin were phlegmatically > pessimistic and at times almost misanthropic, not to say misogynistic.


'attention from/in/of' the (research) community?

I want to write the following sentence: 'Despite the growing attention of the research community, however, there exist several open issues.' I am, however, not sure about the right preposition. 'attention of' is probably not an option but is it better to say here 'attention from' or 'attention in'? Leo tells me that, in general, it should be 'attention from'. But I wonder if in the case of a community, as in the example, it should not be 'attention in'?


History of the phrase "for Mother Russia"

When I played the Battle Zone II video game in the late 1990s, which was plotted around a war between a New Soviet Union and a future analog of the USA, I noticed that Russian tanks and pilots frequently exclaimed "For Mother Russia!". This made me quite curious because not only the expression does not exist in Russian, but also would sound awkward. Under the USSR it was very uncommon to call the USSR "Russia" especially by loyal citizens, those who were outside of the emigrant and dissident circles. Thus a common expression would be "For the Motherland!"("За Родину!") or (in more official style) "For our Soviet Motherland!"(За нашу советскую Родину!). But the case is that the expression would sound awkward not only in the USSR, but in modern Russia as well (one can say "For Russia!", although this is uncommon, but "For mother Russia" sounds very much strange). The expression also could not have come from Czarist Russia as well, it was common to call "За Отечество!" (can be translated "For the Fatherland!") those times. I have seen the expression "For Mother Russia!" many times since then, but always only in English. So my question is where did this expression came from and why it is so widespread in English?


might find or might have found

Under which grammatical rule does this fall? Which is grammatically correct: (1) A teacher **might find** it difficult to explain a lecture in the past. OR (2) A teacher **might have found** it difficult to explain a lecture in the past. Thank you in advance.


Why “Daddy” in this sentence was written with a capital D?

Why is _Daddy_ in this sentence written with a capital D? > Her love letters to and from **Daddy** were in an old box, tied with ribbons > and stiff, rigid-with-age leather thongs. This sentence is from the essay named _My mother never worked_ by Bonnie Smith-Yackel.


What's a word for "a thoroughly enjoyable experience"? Something like the opposite of a "trial"?


Usage of 'and' between more than two items

> Beijing will face trade sanctions from the United States, which brought the > case, and the European Union and Japan. vs > Beijing will face trade sanctions from the United States, which brought the > case, the European Union and Japan. Which one is correct?


What's a synonym for the profile of a mountain?

I'm looking for a word to describe the the contour of a mountain. Something like profile, or cross-section. I've heard of stratigraphic column, but I think that requires showing the layers, like on the image below. I'm also interested in the name for maps that don't show the layers, just the profile. ![mountain profile](http://i.stack.imgur.com/fvuf1.jpg)


Collocations for "compromise"

Fairly simple one this time: What’s the best collocation with _compromise_ if I want to say that it has been reached and, hopefully, is going to last long? I’m looking for the most natural, the “first thing that comes to mind” kind of combination.   * stable compromise?    * firm compromise?    * steady compromise?   * strong compromise?   * ____ compromise? I did a brief Google search but obtained no satisfactory results. Seems like _stable compromise_ is fine, but I'm not sure this is it. EDIT: Having been reminded of the associations of the word _compromise_ , I have hereby modified my question. I'm actually looking for a nice way to express the situation in which two opposing parties have reached an agreement on sth, and the agreement is stable, and it's good, and everybody's happy, and it's white X-mas in Hades. I think that, instead of _compromise_ , we could work with _agreement_ , _harmony_ , _concord_ or _consensus_.


What is the future of English as a lingua franca?

English may now be the world's lingua franca, but according to a review of Nicholas Ostler's latest book in The Economist the future is uncertain: > English is expanding as a lingua-franca but not as a mother tongue. More > than 1 billion people speak English worldwide but only about 330m of them as > a first language, and this population is not spreading. The future of > English is in the hands of countries outside the core Anglophone group. Will > they always learn English? > > Mr Ostler suggests that two new factors—modern nationalism and > technology—will check the spread of English. > > ... > > English will fade as a lingua-franca, Mr Ostler argues, but not because some > other language will take its place. No pretender is pan-regional enough, and > only Africa’s linguistic situation may be sufficiently fluid to have its > future choices influenced by outsiders. Rather, English will have no > successor because none will be needed. Technology, Mr Ostler believes, will > fill the need. > > This argument relies on huge advances in computer translation and speech > recognition. Mr Ostler acknowledges that so far such software is a > disappointment even after 50 years of intense research, and an explosion in > the power of computers. But half a century, though aeons in computer time, > is an instant in the sweep of language history. What do you think? Are the days of English as a global second language numbered?


Is "incomplex" a legitimate word?

I want to create a poster titled "An Incomplex Introduction to Complexity- based Cryptography." As you see, it contrasts the words _incomplex_ and _complexity_. (Words like _simple_ or _easy_ do not provide this.) I looked up the word _incomplex_ , and found it in a few dictionaries:   * http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Incomplex   * http://thesaurus.com/browse/incomplex However, most dictionaries do not include this word. Is it a legitimate word at all? Can I use it?


'Aside from' Vs 'Besides'

I have come across few sentences with the phrase 'aside from' where I felt 'besides' would have been a good choice. Is there any difference in the usage of the two or can both be used interchangeably?


Is there a difference between "Wrong or Right" and "Right or Wrong"

I was writing about the difference between morals and ethics when i wrote the following line > both these terms talk about the right and wrong conduct of people   >  both these terms talk about the wrong and right conduct of people I would think both these sentence would convey the same meaning , as it is like saying _You are fat and tall_ against _You are tall and fat_. I just need a confirmation that these two sentences convey the same meaning. Am i missing anything?


Difference between 'gear up' and 'ready'

> Software programmers are **gearing up** to build applications for the newest > version of Windows Phone 7. It seems the 'gear up' in here means 'ready'. So why not use 'ready' and what's the difference with 'ready'?


Give Signs Of Uncertainty

>   1. The project gives signs of too much uncertainty. >   2. The project gives too much uncertainty. > If I am trying to use sense 5c of this dictionary, would one of the sentences above be wrong? Is _signs of_ needed?


"Things which are hung/mounted on wall" in a single word?

Is there an umbrella term for things like:   * wall clock   * wall-mounted TV   * tapestry I'm looking for a single, or at most two words for naming a concept in a programming project.


"Hello" or "hi" — what's best?

I must send a professional email but I'm not sure what is best to start it with, _hi_ or _hello_. The question may seem to be simple, but unfortunately I am not too good in English.


Medical or medicinal?

I am not an English native. I am working in the field of medicinal plants. I like to know why we don't use term "medical plants"? What is the difference between them?


Is “I don’t suppose you could lend me a pound?” a well-used expression when you ask someone to lend money?

I came across the phrase, "I don’t suppose you could lend me a pound?" in the short story titled "Chalk and Cheese," contained in "To Cut a Long Story Short" by Jeffrey Archer. The phrase appears in the following sentence that Robin, the young brother who is gifted in fine art asks his elder brother at his one-man show at a gallery to lend him money: Robin brags his brother on his talent: > "One of the things I most admire about you," said Robin, "is that you have > never envied my talent."   >  "Certainly not," said John. "I delight in it."   >  "Then let’s hope that some of my success rubs off on you, in whatever > profession you should decide to follow." "Let's hope so." said John, not > sure what else he could say. Robin leaned forward and lowered his voice.   >  "I don’t suppose you could lend me a pound? I’ll pay it back of course."   >  [Note: actually Robin has never paid back his repeated small loans from his > good-natured brother.] As I’ve never heard "I don’t suppose you could lend me a pound?" as an expression for asking somebody for lending money, I checked the usage of the phrase with Google NGram to find no result. The very beginning phrase, "I don’t suppose" sounds to me somewhat rounabout and disingenuous. Is "I don't suppose you could lend me a pound?" a well-used pattern of phrase in Both England and America in borrowing money from someone whoever intimate with you or not?


Better word for "massively-multidirectional"

The print and broadcast media (radio and television) are only capable of transmitting information in one direction, _from_ the transmitting node (the printing press, the broadcast tower) _to_ the receiving node (the newspaper, the TV). On the medium of the internet, there is no transmitter/receiver dichotomy - information can flow _to_ any node just as easily as it can flow _from_ it. If you were trying to describe **the conversation** taking place over these mediums on the macro-level, what word would you use to describe these different paradigms? For instance, I've been saying that the internet inherently capacitates a "massively-multidirectional" conversational paradigm while the print and broadcast media can only capacitate a unidirectional conversational paradigm -- but I'm looking for a better terminology - I don't think these terms fully grasp the dichotomy I'm trying to describe.


Ignition - Does it connect to emotions?

Just wanted to ask if in your opinion the word "ignition" can connect to emotions in some way (like boosting emotions), or if it's too far...


Instantaneous interpretation of disjoined events over a duration

What is the correct interpretation of a sentence with two events occurring during some time span joined by "or"? It seems that the scope of "or" doesn't change in either case. For example: > Today I will be either swimming or reading. Does this mean > At any given instant today I will be either swimming or reading. or > During the course of today I will engage in exactly one of the set of > actions {swim, read}. ? I realize that the second could be a special case of the first, but I would like to know it the conventional interpretation of the sentence is limited to that case.


"Medium" or "mediums" or "media"?

Which one of these would be correct: > (XYZ offers) significantly more visibility than other > >   * medium >   * mediums >   * media >   * mode (?) > > > of advertisements. XYZ is a new method of advertisements, similar to TV, radio, and newspapers. How would you go about comparing it to the other methods(?) of advertisements. I'm not using _media_ as in "mass communication", but rather as in "medium of instruction" or "medium of travel".


that adjective [of] a noun

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  "How big of a problem" vs. "how big a problem" I was recently typing along on this site, when I found myself typing > . . . that big [of] a list. and I couldn't figure out if _of_ belonged in the phrase. Does it?


What does "OMG ponies!" mean?

What does this mean and what is the origin of this phrase?


A technical term to describe adjectives like "fast", "long", "strong", "large", "deep", "loud", etc

What is the technical term to describe adjectives like _fast_ , _long_ , _strong_ that are used to describe a particular property of an object in relation to another object's? Here is an example. Let's say I have a 20-centimetre ruler.   1. I can say, > This ruler is _short_. as I compare it to a 1-meter ruler.   2. Or I can give the opposite statement as I compare it to my pen: > This ruler is _long_. Both statements make sense. Whether it is _short_ or _long_ depends on what I am comparing it to. ( **Edit:** counterexamples would be _Christian, gravitational, electromagnetic, cosmic, cosmological_. These are adjectives, too. And I don't think they fit into the category.) **So what is this type of adjectives technically called?** I've come up with the phrase 'relative term', but after a check with Wikipedia, it doesn't seem to be the technical term I am looking for. > A **relative term** is a term that makes two or more distinct references to > objects (which may be the same object, for example in "The Morning Star is > the Evening Star"). A relative term is typically expressed in ordinary > language by means of a phrase with explicit or implicit blanks. Examples:   >  __ loves __   >  __ is the same object as __   >  __ is giver of __ to __. > > The word **is** is a relative term when it expresses identity. The > colloquial meaning for a relative term is that > it is different for > different people. An example: someone who is 5 feet tall might think someone > who is 6 feet tall is tall, but someone who is 5 feet 5 inches would think > that someone who is 6 feet 5 inches is tall.


What does "Works" of Ontario Works mean?

I live in the province of Ontario in Canada. The ministry of community and social services here have a type of welfare called _Ontario Works_ , and this provides financial and employment assistance to individuals in need. And I'm wondering, what does _Works_ of _Ontario Works_ mean? I've looked up the term in the dictionaries, but couldn't find anything relevant to the context.


Noun for "act of striving"

Is there a noun for the _act of striving_? Many English verbs use the same word for the infinitive (e.g. _to fall_ ) and for the _act of performing that action_ (e.g. _a fall_ ), but I haven't found whether _strive_ can be used as the _act of striving_. Is there a synonym that could work?


Does the order of the word 'please' matter?

Is there a difference between: > Can I go home, please? and > Can I, please, go home? I feel like the first is more formal, when the second shows some kind of irritation. Am I right?


Why do we not say "tens of"?

We say 'hundreds of', 'thousands of', 'millions of', even 'tens of thousands of', but not 'tens of'. The usual expression is 'dozens of'. Does anyone know why?


Does "establish" imply a chronological ordering?

The context is actually mathematics, and providing a proof for a particular fact. If one says "... which was established by Smith." does this have the connotation that Smith was the first to do it? Similarly, if we say "... whose proof establishes that..." does it mean it was the first proof to do so? My personal interpretation is that in the first sentence it implies he was the first, but not for the second sentence. What is the correct version in English? (Also, if it had already been established, wouldn't you say reestablish for the second time?)


Origin/reason for the "hit by a bus" phrase

Often at my job when someone is becoming a single source of knowledge or otherwise has a skill that no one else on the team or the department has, a common expression is: > If John was hit by a bus, there would be no one that knows enough about what > he does to take over. I don't believe that this phrase is specific to my job as this also seems to be a common phrase in articles I have read online, for example: http://37signals.com/svn/posts/3023-why-programs-become-territorial My question, what is the origin of this phrase and is there any reason that it is phrased like "hit by a bus" instead of "in a plane crash" or something else entirely?


What does “persona non grata” mean?

In Gossip Girl, there’s a line like this: > Spotted, Lonely Boy going from Teacher’s Pet to _persona non grata_ in the > pitter-patter of a heartbeat. What’s _persona non grata_?


Where does the "quint" in "quintessential" come from?

Doesn't "quint" mean "five"? What does that have to do with the meaning of "quintessential"?


What would the name Rod be an abbreviation or shortening of?

Can anyone come up with more names than Rodney, Roderick or something quite different for "Rod"? I'm trying to track a Rod Anderson down and cannot find either of those or just Rod.


What is this wordplay I'm thinking of involving homonyms?

I remember knowing there was a name for this type of sentence construction, but I can't recall it and google is failing me. The basic concept is that you use a word in two different meanings in the same sentence. A (poor) example is: "He ran a marathon and his own company", playing on the idea of running as a physical activity versus running a company. What is that called?


zero conditional and first conditional

We use the so-called zero conditional when the result of the condition is always true. What about following situation. Let's say that we have a poorly written application. :) and I complain that it simply does not work. It is always true for this version of application. Zero conditional sounds good to me. Is it wrong to use first conditional here?   * "if I press a button it crashes."   * "if I press a button it will crash." thanks!


By ..., one yields...?

In a scientific context I have a sentences of the form > By doing ..., we yield ... Now, I am trying to neutralize it to something like > By doing ..., one yields ... Unfortunately, I cannot find this formulation anywhere else. Is it a valid formulation anyway? **Example:** > By multiplying the equation with _(x+1)_ and applying standard solving > techniques for ODE, **[one yields/we yield]** the identity _sin²(x) + > cos²(x) = 1_.


"Even though" contradiction

> _Clause_   >  Run!   >  **This single-word command is also a clause, even though it does seem to > have a subject**. With a direct command, it is not necessary to include the > subject, since it is obviously the person or people you are talking to: in > other words, the clause really reads "[You] run!". You should not usually > use direct commands in your essays, except in quotations. The **bold** sentence above basically said : > This single-word command is also a clause, **_despite the fact_** that it > does seem to have a subject. Doesn't this imply that clause usually doesn't have a subject? Why does it contradict itself?


Ambiguous relative clause

In the following expression, whom does 'who' refer to? The friends of the participants or the participants themselves? "The friends of the participants who were told to order soft drinks" This was an option in a multiple choice question and I suggested that it was ambiguous, yet the professor insisted that it clearly referred to the friends of the participants.


"Sure to do something?" — is it correct?

Is the question "Sure to delete selected elements?" correct? I have seen this many times. Can I use such questions in this form on a website? Does it make a difference to place it on a website? I have found this answer but it is not exactly what I am looking for.


When someone says, "I do not feel that good", what does that mean?

I have heard it many times in movies and shows. I think it means "I do not feel very good" or "I do not feel as good as you think", but why do we use "that" here, and is it correct?


What is the meaning of "a correspondence of principles"?

Which are the uses and meanings of this expression? From my own research, it seems to have:   * In politics, a formal meaning close of _agreement_ or _treaty_ : "a correspondence of principles was sign secretly in Oslo."   * In a more informal or figurative context, I felt it sound like _guideline_ or _motto_. However, I am pretty sure this is quite incomplete.


Why can't they have him get caught or killed? - do I need "get" here?

Reading about the movie character, Dexter, a fan was wondering about how the series will end: > Why can't they have him get caught or killed? It got me thinking..it is "have sb do smth" used here? I somehow cannot understand the usage of "get" which I can (from context) see references to passive.


What are some alternatives for "nurturing bosom"?

Consider this sentence: > "Are you prepared to leave the nurturing bosom of [business-name]'s help and > support staff?" I'm looking for something that is a little more professional yet still conveys a compelling warning. Context: This is part of an advice column warning readers to think twice before they customize a product and lose technical support. Also, this advice is **not** coming from someone at the company.


Here is the report and login or Here are the report and login or Here is the report and the login?

> Here is the report and login or > Here are the report and login or > Here is the report and the login? Which one is correct and sounds better?


Why do we use the word “oops”, if something goes wrong?

Why do we use the word _oops_ in a sentence or when communicating with others, if something goes wrong? I would like to know the correct information regarding this question.


When the waitress at a diner calls her male customer a ''good girl'' after getting tipped, is it meant to be offensive?

My friend got called that and since neither of us are American, it just sounded offensive to us.


Is there an opposite of tightfisted that also contains reference to a hand? The opposite of 'tightfisted' is always 'generous'. I want a word, idiom, or phrase that means generous but with reference to hand or a form or part of it like fist etc.


"Preventing downtime and faults IS/ARE crucial"

Consider the following sentence: > Preventing downtime and faults is crucial. Is or are? Why?


Meaning of "the crawling of the walls"

What is the meaning of "the crawling of the walls"? > I can practically feel the presence of disease: **the crawling of the > walls** , the energy tension— like the nesting of a thousand insects.


"Cleaning area" or "cleaning surface"?

Question: The English term for: > the total area of a building/floor in m2/Sq Ft that needs to be cleaned Is that called the "Cleaning surface", or the "Cleaning area"?


What does the phrase "Does the Pope sh** in the woods?" mean?

I heard this phrase in the GTA San Andreas game. Sounds pretty offensive, nonetheless I don't really get what he meant to say. The context was something like:   * "Hey do you wanna make some money?"   * "Does the Pope shit in the woods?" Here's the video with CJ saying this phrase.


"Dare" with and without "to"

To my surprise, there's a missing question about this particularly interesting verb, dare. All I know about it is the fact it can be in two forms, as an auxiliary (without to: "I dare not mention their names") and main (with to: "Did anyone dare to admit it?") verb and the difference has something to do with agreeing with subject. Can somebody explain in a greater detail?


Usage of "along with"

Python, along with its related packages   * numpy   * scipy _is_ / _are_ used to make the statistical analysis. What should it be, _is_ or _are_ ? I was pretty confident it would be _is_. But someone more knowledgeable to me made the correction and changed it to _are_. Thus came the doubt. It should be similar to the usage of _with_ , I guess. Hope, this isn't a duplicate. I searched and did not find.


I need a noun in American English that represents the idiom 'to look on the bright side'

We're developing an application where we have categories users may progress towards, and one of them is 'to look on the bright side; to live without worry, etc.'. However, categories are titled with a single word, and I have failed to think of a word that perfectly suits that meaning. Can anyone assist?


Three years: current (2012), last (2011), but is there a term then for 2010?

I have three years I am putting on a chart: current year, last year, and I'm not sure what to call the year that came before the last. Does it have a name? Would it be "pre-last"?


"How about" vs. "What about"

Is there a difference between starting a question with "How about" and "What about"? Can we use both expressions interchangeably?


Etymology of 'kinematics'

What is the etymology of the word 'kinematics' - the maths of movement, not taking into account physical forces such as friction and air resistance. I was speaking with a friend about it and suggested that it comes from the two words: kinetic (essentially meaning movement) and mathematics. These 2 words seemed to go together well to make 'kinematics', and seemed a liable suggestion as kinematics is the mathematics of movement. He laughed at me and said "That's ridiculous, no words come from just putting 2 words together". So, what is the etymology of kinematics? And just so that when I next see him I can give him some words that were made from 2 being put together, it would be lovely if you could throw a few into your answer.


Coordinating conjunction immediately followed by parenthetical — Is a comma needed or not?

William Strunk's _Rules of Usage_ states: > If a dependent clause, or an introductory phrase requiring to be set off by > a comma, precedes the second independent clause, no comma is needed after > the conjunction. Strunk's example illustrates the point: > The situation is perilous, but if we are prepared to act promptly, there is > still one chance of escape. However, I would be tempted to put a comma after the "but," like this: > The situation is perilous, but, if we are prepared to act promptly, there is > still one chance of escape. So, I know you're thinking, "Well, Strunk's _Rules of Usage_ says that you're wrong. No comma." But is _Rules of Usage_ really the best source? I'd like to see this rule in a more contemporary and authoritative source, like the Chicago Manual of Style. There are many instances — such as in The New York Times — where the comma is **included** before a parenthetical comment that comes after a coordinating conjunction. Any authoritative source on the issue?


What did we gain in return for the loss of phonemic vowel length from Old English?

In Old English, vowel length was phonemic, but stress and certain kinds of consonant voicing were not. In Modern English, that situation is reversed: vowel length is no longer phonemic, but stress always, and consonant voicing in most cases now, is. ## My main question is . . . **Is there any connection between losing one phonemic property but gaining another?** Is there some sort of “conservation of phonemic axes” principle at work here that requires another axis of distinction to appear when one is lost? Did this cause other effects, such as for example stress or voicing or something else becoming phonemic? Old English represented 14 simple vowels using just 7 letters ( _a, æ, e, i, y, o, u_ ) in paired short and long variants. This reminds me of how Latin had 10 simple vowels using 5 letters, again in paired short and long phonemically distinct variants. But in the transformation of Latin into Spanish, that 10-vowel system was lost, leaving only 5 vowels remaining. And yet, Latin’s predictable stress was also replaced with a new phonemic stress in Spanish; for example, _término, termino, terminó_ are a minimal triple. Did the same thing happen to Old English as happened to Latin, as the short- vs-long vowel distinction was lost but phonemic stress was gained, or is it completely unrelated? There is one particular similarity between the transformation of Old English to Modern English and the one from Latin to Spanish: in both cases, phonemic vowel length disappeared but phonemic stress appeared. Is this pure coincidence? In Old English, stress was not phonemic because the stress was always on the first syllable except for verbs like _forsacan_ (forsake) or _behydan_ (hide) with a leading particle. But in Modern English, stress is phonemic (compare _record_ as a noun and as a verb), but vowel length is not. Was this new phonemic stress in any way compensatory for the loss of phonemic vowel length? * * * ## Other notes It was these two postings that got me thinking about the matter:   * In American English, vowel length is almost always allophonic. Generally stressed vowels before voiced consonants are held longer than those before voiceless consonants (e.g, great ~ grade pronounced [greⁱt] and [gre:ⁱd]), and that perseveres even after voicing neutralization, as in grating ~ grading, pronounced ['greⁱɾɪŋ] and ['gre:ⁱɾɪŋ]. As Neil says, real vowel length is one phenomenon which helps the listener to decode speech. But in school, everyone is taught about "long A" [eⁱ] and "short A" [æ], and this has nothing to do with Modern English speech. – John Lawler yesterday   * The IPA transcriptions are US /ænt/ and UK /ant/. One can use a macron /ā/ or colon /a:/ for the UK one, depending on transcription habits, but vowel length isn't phonemic in any dialect of English, so a simple /a/ will do. I do think that questions and answers about pronunciation in a written medium should try to use standard English phonemic symbols. Otherwise, how do we avoid confusion? – John Lawler 3 hours ago I notice that we do use vowel length a bit phonologically, even in diphthongs, at least those of us with Canadian raising, such as in the otherwise phonemically identical pairs _ice cream_ and _I scream_ , or _writing_ and _riding_ , where in each pair, the first diphthong is shorter and higher than in the second.


Is the word "Americana" capitalized?

...in the sentence "Here's a list of great Americana books." It looks SO weird lowercase: "Here's a list of great americana books."


How is the ending -le or -el determined?

I'm busy working on a _ladle model_ at the moment, and as I am idle and inattentive this phrase sometimes comes out as _ladel model_ , sometimes _ladle modle_ , and sometimes _ladel modle_ in addition to the occasional correct spelling. Is there any particular reason for the two differently-spelt but identically sounded endings? Perusing the dictionary suggests that _model_ is from French and _ladle_ from Old English. Is that why the words are spelt differently?


Is there a word that describes this feeling?

The rising star shows no remorse for the figment of existence to which man shows no resolve.   There is no depression, for there is no sadness.   There is no boredom, for there is no annoyance.   The world does not know, nor would the world give it consideration if it did know.   If mankind could hear the thoughts of thy brethren, it would not care to listen.   If mankind listened, there would be no thoughts to hear, for your indignation is not.   He who feels would rather study the cracks of time in the monuments of creation than enjoy thyself.   Ones mind is as clear as the sky which does not show. I just wrote whichever words that came to mind about how I feel.   I'm not suicidal.


What term is used for the closing of a letter?

**Salutation** is the term used to describe the beginning of a letter or other correspondence. What is the term used for the closing of a letter? Here are some examples: _Yours truly_ , _Sincerely_ , _Best wishes_ , _Love_? Searching for 'antonym of salutation' **1** was not helpful. EDIT: This need not be expressed as a single word. (Whatever is correct is fine, whether one word or a phrase!) `1.` Citation (IEEE Style): **Thesaurus.com, "salutation,"** in Roget's 21st Century Thesaurus, Third Edition. Source location: Philip Lief Group 2009.


What do you call the adjectives between transitive verbs and objects?

> I carefully pried open her mouth. (The Weed that Strings the Hangman’s Bag) When intransitive verbs are followed by adjectives, they seem to call these adjectives as subjective complements or adjuncts. But the example has transitive verb [pried] before an adjective [open]. In this case, does this adjective be called an adjunct?


Word for 'internal uniformity of an object'

I'm looking to convey the internal uniformity and indivisibility of an object. I like that _monolithic_ means both 'uniform' and 'indivisible,' but I don't want to imply 'large size.' _Homogeneity_ implies that the object is composed of other smaller objects. I don't want to do that either.


Meaning of "I feel so helpless"

What is the phrase "I feel so helpless" supposed to mean? Is it "I feel as though I am unable to offer help" or "I feel as though no one could help me?" I saw it in a movie, and always thought it was the latter, but it was clearly used in the context of the first.


Synonym for "utilize" that means "to use without waste"

I'm looking for a synonym for _utilize_ that sounds less dry and emphasizes that nothing is being wasted. "The program utilized all the supercomputer's resources." Ideally, this word would make the word "all" redundant.


"Woman is the 'n-word' of the world"?

The other day I was watching a video, in which one white teacher was being accused of using the word "nigger" in reference to one of his students who was black. The newscasters, before showing the video report, didn't dare to say the whole word "nigger" and instead just said "a teacher used the n-word in class...". So, I guess, this word is really bad since the newscasters can't say it in the full length. But this reminded me of the song by John Lennon "Woman is the nigger of the world". I am kind of puzzled here: As far as I know Lennon had already moved to the USA by the time he released this song. I know that some radio stations refused to put it on air because of the n-word in it, but that was 40 years ago. Have things not changed since that time? If newscasters don't dare to say "nigger" even today, how would they refer to that song today if they needed to? EDIT: Just found this video on YouTube where Lennon himself explains the situation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5lMxWWK218


"Exchange emails with whomever you want to put me in contact [with]"

I realize the "never end a sentence with a preposition" rule is controversial these days, but let's assume for the sake of argument that it should be followed. What is the proper construction of a sentence that has a prepositional phrase inside a prepositional phrase, such as in the title of this post? Is there a way to make this strictly correct, but not so cumbersome? > I can make time for a phone call, or just exchange emails with whomever you > want with whom to put me in contact. Is this simply a case where there is no way to avoid ending the sentence with a preposition (short of clobbering it with the ugly stick)?


Tenses and Verbs

What kind of verbs are -- is, are, were ? How do these words effect the tense of a sentence? What tense is the sentence " They are engaged in something...." ? 1) They engage in doing something. 2) They are engaged in doing something. With respect to above two sentences, \-- when is one used over the other. \-- what tense is sentence 1, what tense is sentence 2?


App or app? When I refer to it in a formal paper

In Android contexts, should the 'a' in 'app' be uppercase always or lowercase?


Difference between "would have" and "would" in the following

When we talk about past habitual or behavioral events, what is the difference between the following two sentences? > Every once in a while I would go to this friend's house and we would get > into a discussion. By the time I would realize, it would **have taken** 4 > hours. > > Every once in a while I would go to this friend's house and we would get > into a discussion. By the time I would realize, it **would take** 4 hours.


Trouble with second conditionals (with “could”)

> I would do B if you could do A. This is a statement which has been bothering me for quite a while. I come across such statements often and, to me, they make no sense. _Could_ is the subjunctive of can — it is often used to express possibility (or anything else along those lines). Sometimes, _could_ is also used as the "past form of can". Now, the second conditional is used to express unreal(istic) situations in the present, we construct it using the simple past form of the verb at hand and instigate a _would_ in the "response sentence". Now, does this _could_ then indeed relate to the capability and not to possibility of someone doing A? And, furthermore, isn't the condition fulfilled only by the fact there exists this capability (or possibility)? That's the part that makes no sense for me. You don't actually have to "do A", you just must have the possibility/capability to "do A", for the if clause to return true and make the speaker "do B". > I would do B if you did A. does the proper job of the original idea that the speaker intended. And since the second conditional indeed is used for unreal situations in the present, why do we so often use it to express conditions to other people? Wouldn't it be more prudent to actually state a requirement in the present, which deals with "real situations": > I will do B if you do A. What's the difference?


which Allowed to or which allowed doing?

I haven't found any threads on this topic so I decided to create a new one. Please have a look at the usage of the verb **allow** in this sentence: "This report was presented to the external stakeholders during an event, **which allowed to establish** important communication channels with specific segments of the community". Is "which allowed to + verb" correct? I have checked some forums but haven't yet come to a conclusion whether "which allowed + verb" or "+ gerund" (which sounded quite awkward to me) is the best option (IF there is one...) thanks!


"Allow to [infinitive]" vs. "allow [gerund]"

Which of the following is grammatical? If both are, which is preferred when and why? >   * Has developed a new label that allows to mark... >   * Has developed a new label that allows marking... >


What is the word for dating documents by the mistakes in them?

There is a technique for dating hand-copied documents, or placing them in the correct chronological order at any rate, by analysing the mistakes in them that are inevitably made when a new copy is made. Does anyone know what that is called? (Putting a search involving "dating" into Google generates a lot of hits but not much that is relevant.)


What's the difference between an "aphorism" and a "maxim"?

Quotes, sayings, aphorisms, maxims. What's the difference between all these, especially aphorism vs. maxim?


Is "is when" acceptable while linking two objects or ideas?

In a grammar class I'm enrolled in, one of the diagnostic tests contained the following question: > "Blocking" is when a television network schedules a less popular program > between two popular ones   > According to the test, a good revision would be: > "'Blocking' is a television network's practice of scheduling a less popular > program between two popular ones." Why is it grammatically incorrect to connect two subjects with "is when" or "is how", as in the above example? My teacher called it an 'illogical expression.' Are there any other "is ___ _" phrases that I should avoid?


Is there a word or phrase for ethical value based on economic value?

I'm not even certain that such an ethics system exists, but I can think of at least a few people who consider economic levity to be a sign of moral absolutism, and that those who are economically destitute are immoral individuals. Is there a word or phrase for this belief? The belief that one's economic standing indicates one's value on an ethical scale? In other words, an ethical system in which the good are rich (or rewarded by becoming rich) and the bad are poor (or punished by becoming poor) would be called...


How to say "I was among the top ten percent of students" in my résumé?

Could you please tell me how I should mention this in my résumé (my personal website indeed) that I have graduated from the university, _while I was ranked among the top ten percent of students_? For instance, is it OK to say: > I was graduated from this university while I was among the top ten percent > of the students"


Architectural term for inward-facing corners

A **T** has eight corners. Six of these point outwards and two (the armpit) corners face inwards. In reference to a building, what is the term to describe the inward corners? The closest I've come up with is the _Axilla corners_ or _Oxter corner_ but I can find no reference to those two terms ever being used outside of medicine.


Use of comparative degree when no comparison is being done

I have studied in my academics that we can use comparative degree when comparison is being done. But today I came across use of comparative degree without any comparison. Is it correct to use comparative degree when there is no comparison? Also, if possible can anyone give the instances where it can be used without comparison? The sentence I came across was > Its revolutionary features, futuristic design and host of exciting > applications will turn you everyday into a _smarter_ celebration. (Here it refers to any brand name.)


Idiom to describe something that has little to no effect?

I'm looking for an idiom to describe something that has a negligible effect. The only similar question I found here was: An idiom meaning someone's doing something useless and has no result at the end, but I'm looking for something else. I remember it being something to do with water or fire. Something along the lines of throwing a very small amount of water on a large fire? Does anyone know what I'm thinking of?


Humorous synonyms for "lie"

What are some funny synonyms for _to tell a lie_? E.g. _fib_ , _pull a Bill Clinton_ , etc.


Alternative to the incorrect "I'm doing great"?

Since 'great' is an adjective, "I'm doing great" seems to be incorrect. It should be: "I'm doing (adverb)." You could say "I'm doing well." Could you also say "I'm doing greatly."?