Synonyms for "extra-"

I'm looking for prefixes similar to _extra-_ in the sense of 'outside of'. I'm attaching it to "mathematical" and in its context "extra-mathematical" or "extramathematical" can be misread as "very mathematical". I'm specifically trying to avoid "nonmathematical" because I want to stress the connections with, rather than differences from, that field. The term would be used to refer to fields of study aside from math, e.g. chemistry or engineering. * * * _I'm tempted to add a [single-affix-requests] tag for this question... that would be wrong in so many ways._


Why do we say "I might add" when we are definitely adding something?

Often when a piece of rhetoric is being added for emphasis, we put "I might add" before or after or sometimes inside of it. > Martin Brice - my old and good friend who promised me we would not get in > trouble and who, I might add, did not. All of the definitions of "might" that I can find include an element of "possibility." Why, when Cosmo is _definitely_ , not possibly, adding "[Martin Brice did not get in trouble]," does he still use the phrase "I might add?"


How to associate a participle with an exact word in a sentence like 'List of items'?

I have a problem with a sentence "A list of items grouped by category". There are two possible ways to understand this sentence:   1. (A list of items) that is grouped by category   2. A list of (items that are grouped by category) How to write it correctly?


How to say something like "A is x times as much likely ..."?

How to accurately, unambiguously and concisely say something in the following cases: case 1. "The predictor is significant, with 1.5615 times as much likely to get higher scores when it is true." case 2. Subjects with A are 1.5615 times as much likely to get higher scores as those without A. Maybe I can use "chance" instead of "likely" to form the sentence better?


What is "however" in this sentence referring to?

> No definite mass is identified. However, for further evaluation of this > patient given his symptoms, an MRI is recommended. In the above sentence, does the "however" refer back to looking for a mass or forward to further evaluation of the patient's symptoms?


What does "RP" mean in the context?

Can you help me understand what my client meant about **_RP_** in this context: > I canceled my application since the payment scheme wasn't validated in RP.


What do you call the phenomenon where a rectangle Ϳ is shown because a font lacks a glyph?

Is there a name to describe the situation where a particular character is shown on a computer screen in a particular font, but this font does not have a glyph for this particular character? Usually, the result looks like this: Ϳ   A kind of empty rectangle. Sometimes it shows the code for that character within the rectangle. ![tofubake](http://i.stack.imgur.com/LdjiI.png) What do yo call this phenomenon?   If there is no name, is there a common term referring to this "rectangle"? Some Japanese people call this "tofubake" because rectangles look like tofu. _(It is notmojibake. Mojibake happens when character encoding meta-information is lost. It is not the problem here. Using a better font solves this phenomenon, but does not solve mojibake. Selecting a character encoding solves mojibake, but does not solve this phenomenon.)_


Word meaning something is technically accurate but overly simplistic

I am trying to think of a word used to describe someone who is intentionally oversimplifying an argument by making a statement that is technically true, but ignores a lot of issues. Its an adjective similar to describing the person as being intentionally obtuse or too clever for their own good.


"...must have taken ‘after’ his daddy."

I read this phrase: > My son cracks me up. He's had me laughing all day long. Must have taken > **_after_** his daddy. I want to know what _after_ means in this construction, and if there is some formal construction equivalent to this one.


What does the sentence mean?

I have a physics book and am having trouble understanding this sentence: > When we say we are a pile of atoms, we do not mean we are merely a pile of > atoms, because a pile of atoms which is not repeated from one to the other > might well have the possibilities which you see before you in the mirror. > > -- Richard Feynman, _Six Easy Pieces: Essentials of Physics by its most > brilliant teacher_ There is no comma between words which makes the sentence very complicated. Could you explain what he really wants to say?


What's the adjective of "conspectus"?

> This is a well-written **conspectus** for a project.   >  Since it's very well written, it makes the project ? **conspectible**. Apparently, _conspectible_ is not recognized by the dictionaries I've checked. What is a correct choice of word in this context? Please note that I'm not looking for a synonym in this case, although it'd be nice to get some.


Is there a term for a flaw in logic?

I write code for a living and I'm trying to find the right word for a flaw in logic. "Error" seems too vague, I'm looking specifically for a word that describes a flaw in logic. Addendum 1: This would be an unintended flaw in logic. Addendum 2: Preferably 1 word, please.


When should you use a semicolon *with* a conjunction?

I know the basics of a semicolon—at least I think I do. Aside from delimiting verbose lists, it separates independent clauses of a sentence. So, if you have two independent clauses in a sentence, you can either separate them with a semicolon, or a comma along with a conjunction—like "but". However, I've noticed a few authors actually using a semicolon with a conjunction, like: `<independent clause 1>`; but `<independent clause 2>` Can anyone shed some light on when this is preferable to just a comma? Is this simply a matter of personal preference?


What is the word for talking to someone as if they don't know anything

This is noticeable in conversation when person A keeps trying to educate the person B. Person A automatically assumes a position of higher knowledge. What is person A doing to person B? It's not patronizing is it, because he isn't necessarily trying to talk to the other person in a condescending manner.


Is "adorable" used to describe an adult?

I've heard _adorable_ sometimes used for kids. Is it ever used to describe an adult?


What is another way to describe an action based on a previous action?

In a turn-based game, each player's turn is based upon the turn their opponent took before them. You could say that each action taken in the game is an action based upon the previous action taken in the context of this game. Is there a word or phrase that describes each individual action in this chain- of-events more succinctly?


Correct Use of "Resort to"

Are "resort to" or "resorted to" (phrasal verbs followed by a preposition) always negative? For example, is it always incorrect to write any of the following sentences, or are there circumstances under which they would be acceptable?   * It began to rain, so we resorted to moving the event to the lodge.   * The chairman then resorted to a helpful, detailed account of the incident.   * If the proposal is well received, we will be able to resort to disclosing the dollar figures.   * The neck brace worked wonders, so the doctor was glad he resorted to it.


What does "drawn" mean in "Hung, drawn and quartered"?

I've always assumed the "drawn" in "Hung, drawn and quartered" meant eviscerated _(remove the entrails of; disembowel)_. A friend insists it refers to being _drawn/dragged to the gallows_ , which doesn't make sense to me since it comes _after_ "hung" in the stock phrase. I started trying to Google it, but my friend (who isn't good at Internet searching) has cried foul in case I'm selective about the evidence I produce! What's the bottom line on this one?


Incredulous proper use

Is it valid to say 'I'm incredulous." all by itself as a standalone sentence? The intent is to convey that I am in disbelief. Thanks.


Word meaning "un-decorate"?

I'm looking for a verb that means to remove decoration from a room, in the sense of taking paintings off walls or removing furniture. I would prefer a word that has negative connotations. I though of "redecorate", but redecorating involves adding new decoration and sounds too positive.


Word for light after it has passed through a window / glass

The most evocative image I can think of for this is when the headlights of a car pass through your bedroom. I need this word because I have a computer graphics application that requires me to name a class which has the projection of another object, and I don't want it to be either ProjectedVisualObject or ShadowVisualObject because the first one is just not the word I'm looking for, and the second one isn't really accurate because it still has all the color of the original object.


what is the difference between the words "tall" and "high"?

Are there any differences between the words **"tall"** and **"high"** ? For instance, `tall building` and `high building`   I'm not sure what are the differences between them.


Is "short fall" an acceptable synonym for "shortfall"? > We noticed an important short fall here that no-one else had planned for. Found on an English-language Korean news website. I search in my dictionary but it did not have a "short fall" entry. Maybe that is an acceptable word nonetheless?


To be "glad of" or "glad about"?

I was wondering about the correct usage of the term "glad". It seems to me it can be used (at least) in two different ways: "to be glad of something" or "to be glad about something", indeed I found both of them in some online dictionaries. But I cannot really understand what is the difference (if there is any), or if one of the two is more correct than the other. Thank you very much for your help!


How to say in English that I am going to test a given Unit from a student's book?

What is the best way to say that a given test is on a given subject? Can I say 'The test is on Unit 4 from your student book? How should I rephrase it to make it sound more natural or even correct?


Word for something difficult or nearly impossible to achieve

What is a word which means _something difficult or close to impossible to achieve_? For example, > A ten-percent growth rate is a **__** : it is certainly possible on paper, > but very difficult to accomplish. I can think of _a castle in the air_ or _an ideal prospect_ , but I would love to have a simple one-word substitute.


How should one properly construct compound nationalities?

Chinese American or American Chinese? Indian Briton or British Indian? In practice, I've come across both forms and I would love to know whether this is a matter of personal preference or whether there are, in fact, clear-cut rules to be followed. I personally feel the ethnicity should precede the nationality, i.e. Chinese American and not American Chinese when referring to an American citizen of Chinese origin. In other words, when I say "Chinese American" I am referring to an American citizen who is ethnically Chinese. When I say "American Chinese" I mean a Chinese citizen who is ethnically American (a rarity, I grant you). However, as mentioned, I have come across texts where the construct "American Chinese" refers to ethnic Chinese who are American citizens. Such a construct just strikes me as wrong but I have never been able to find any real evidence to back up my opinion on this matter. Is my interpretation correct or does the matter just come down to preference?


The math problem is too difficult for `X` to work out

There are four options: everybody, somebody, anybody and nobody. Which one should be used in `X` place ?


When your 10-year old boy says “It’s meta,” what does it mean? In what situation and of what sort of object they use this phrase?

I asked about the meaning and usage of meta a few days ago, quoting Maureen Dowd’s review of the movie, “J. Edgar” in New York Times. I received six answers. But I still don’t get a clear idea of what “It’s meta” means because I don't understand (or have a total inability to comprehend) the concept of “self-referential.” An answerer answered: “Meta in this fairly recent, casual context is supposed to mean self-referential, or recursive in some way. This is the sense in which my teenagers would use this term.” So let me resubmit the question on “meta” in simpler format. When your teenager boy says “It’s (or this is) meta,” what does it mean? In what situation and of what sort of object they use this phrase? I’m sorry for many users who lent me kind answers to my previous question. But I would like to get it fully on the meaning and usage of “it’s meta,” as a colloquial expression, not the meaning of meta as a prefix.


Is there a term for a word that is the same upside-down?

I know _palindrome_ is the term for a word that works backwards and forwards, but is there a similar term for a word that can be flipped/reversed and remain the same? For example, the word _SWIMS_ or the number _6009_.


What does "make it last" mean?

There is a song but I am not sure about the meaning of "make it last" in that song. Please let me know what it means and which situation I should use this? **Make it last - Tim Mc Morris** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_cCVzyH8cY


What does 'A small medium at large' phrase means?

Just received this joke: * * * Q: What do you call a midget fortuneteller on the run from the law? A: A small medium at large. * * * the 'Q' I understood. It's a runaway psychic gnome. But what does `A` means? Is it geometric term or something?


Word for someone who receives commission

Is there a word that describes someone who receives commission for something? I am not only referring to a salesman but also to for example VISA that charges 3% commission on credit card sales.


How do we know how words were pronounced hundreds of years ago?

Recently, I've spent some time reading "The Canturbury Tales", by Geoffrey Chaucer. There are a number of resources out there to help make sense of the old language he uses, but I've noticed that several sources make matter-of- fact statements describing how the language was pronounced in Chaucer's time. For example, the WIKIpedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Canterbury_Tales) says that Chaucer's generation was among the last that pronounced the "e" at the end of words such as "care". How can anyone claim to know how words were pronounced hundreds of years ago? The only thing I can guess it is that linguists would make inferences about how some words were pronounced based on how rhyming poems were written.


Parsing possibility

What is the correct way to parse the following sentence: It is possible that one can be happy only if one can be free. Does the sentence say: It is possible that [one can be happy only if one can be free]. or does it say: [It is possible that one can be happy] only if [one can be free]. What's the clearest way to express the former so it does not get confused with the latter?


what does "But enough about me" mean?

I want to know whether or not "but enough about me" is an idiom ? if yes, what does it mean? and when and how we can use it?


What is the difference between "pliable" and "pliant"?

I am confused between _pliable_ and _pliant_. What's the difference? The explanation in the Oxford Dictionary seems vague:               pliable             1. easily bent; flexible                 [quality leather is pliable and will not crack]             2. easily influenced                 [pliable teenage minds]          pliant             1. easily bent                 [pliant willow stems]             2. easily influenced or directed; yielding                 [a more pliant prime minister]


Plural of "iPod Touch"

What is the plural of _iPod Touch_? Should it be _iPods Touch_ or _iPod Touches_?


How to Say Something was 'Not an Improvement'

There is a mother, Ann, who has a stereotypical 'good' personality: she is religious, a teacher, and a very generous lady. Her daughter, Emily, isn't the nicest lady: she whines a lot, insults people, and is ignorant to her family history. My professor asked to mention in my essay that Emily's personality was an 'un- improvement', as compared to her mother's. I can't find a way to say this without sounding awkward. What I have so far is: "Emily's personality shows a degraded structure as the generations of her family trickle down." I already know that I do not want to use that sentence: it sounds awful and confusing, in my opinion (I can bet that you had to read it twice before understanding what I was trying to say). Can anyone else think of a way I could say this?


How do you format a sentence to avoid or use "to to" correctly?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Rules about prepositions and duplicating 'to' > Where did you travel to to get that? Using to, to has always looked/seemed awkward to me. What is the proper way to express this?


Way to do something

I was wondering if "way to do something" means it is right or wrong to do something? I thought it means it is right to do something until I read this: > Just a few doors down, Lynette's sister shows up just in time to help her > through her split with Tom. Unfortunately the once messy sibling shows up > looking fabulous and on the arm of a sexy new boyfriend. **Way to make > Lynette feel good about herself!!!** Don't you hate when that happens? When > a friend or loved one shows up to try to help you through a troubling time > and all they do is flaunt all of the fabulous things that are going on in > their life.


which is better, dead or deceased or passed away?

I was not able to serve the letter to Mario because he is dead. I was not able to serve the letter to Mario because he is deceased. I was not able to serve the letter to Mario because he passed away.


Etymologies of noun and verb _wimple_

Wiktionary and etymonline show a different etymology for the noun _wimple_ (which has senses including “A cloth which usually covers the head...” and “A ripple, as on the surface of water”) than Wiktionary shows for the verb _wimple_ (which has senses including “To cover with a wimple” and “To cause ... to ripple or undulate [eg] _The wind wimples the surface of water_ ”). From Wiktionary: > Etymology 1 [noun]   >  From Middle English _wimpel_ , from Old English _wimpel_ (“veil, an article > of women's dress; a covering for the neck, a cloak, a hood”), from Proto- > Germanic _wimpilaz_ (“wimple, scarf, veil”). ... > > Etymology 2 [verb]   >  From Middle English _wimplen_ (“to cover, conceal; to fold, drape”) Because Middle English _wimpel_ and _wimplen_ are so much alike, I assume they have a common ancestor, perhaps _wimpilaz_ , perhaps something older. What is that ancestor, if any? Is there a better and more complete etymology for the verb _wimple_?


Is "With the Wish of Wellness" grammatical?

Recently one of my friends who is not a native English speaker sent me a mail. In the last phrase he used a harmonic but strange structure instead of the usual phrases like "Best Regards", "Best Wishes", "Sincerely", etc. That phrase was: "With the Wish of Wellness". Question: Is this a legitimate English phrase? If not, which grammatical rules does it violate?


"Whether or not" vs. "whether"

>   1.     * This will depend on whether he's suitable for the job. >     * This will depend on whether he's suitable for the job **or not.** >     * This will depend on whether **or not** he's suitable for the job. >   2.     * It is still not defined whether we're following that approach. >     * It is still not defined whether we're following that approach **or > not**. >     * It is still not defined whether **or not** we're following that > approach. > "Or not" doesn't really seem to be needed to complement "whether". Why do people use it then? Is it redundancy and nothing more? Or is it for emphasis? Or are there cases when "or not" is required for the sentence to be grammatical?


Is the "or not" in "whether or not" optional?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  “Whether or not” vs. “whether” I am not sure about the usage of _whether_. My confusion over it is whether _or not_ is optional. Suppose I have the following sentence: > The results of the pathological test will definitely show whether the frail > patient has an infection **or not**. Is _or not_ compulsory to make this sentence more appropriate, or is it optional?


Does "it is entirely possible that" require the subjunctive form of the verb following "that"?

For instance, take the following sentence (from a real email exchange):               it is entirely possible that one WebEx is not enough      Is it correct? Should it be               it is entirely possible that one WebEx be not enough      ? My reasoning is as follows:               (1) it is necessary that you be here -->     (2) it is necessary that one WebEx be here -->      (3) it is necessary that one WebEx be enough -->      (4) it is necessary that one WebEx be not enough -->      (5) it is entirely possible that one WebEx be not enough -->       Is it true that the grammatical context is preserved throughout the entire transformation, starting with a sentence known to require the subjunctive (1) and ending with my example (5) ? I have performed a few simple Google searches and the results are quite confusing:   * **"it is necessary that he be"** yields 170,000 results   * **"it is necessary that he is"** yields 342,000 results   * **"it is possible that he be"** yields 985,000 results   * **"it is possible that he is"** yields 4,040,000 results Of course, no conclusions can be drawn from these results ...


Is the "to" required in "the person (to) whom I granted freedom"?

I had this phrase _"the person whom I granted freedom"_ in something I wrote; a friend maintains that it must be _"the person_ **to** _whom I granted freedom."_


Correct use of the word "damage" in this sentence?

Correct the bold section of the sentence: Federal Legislation establishing a fund for the cleanup of the sites damaged by toxic chemicals permits **compensating state governments for the damage to** their natural resources, but does not allow claims for injury to people. > A. compensating state government for damage to   >  B. compensating state government for the damage of   >  C. giving state governments compensation for damaging   >  D. giving compensation to the state government for the damage of   >  E. the giving of compensation to state governments for damaging


Incorrect gerund to simple past conversion?

I'm a non-native speaker of English, so this might or might not be something very basic. Nonetheless, it's baffling me and I'd love some help. A friend of mine wrote this sentence in a story for which I'm a pre-reader: > They crossed a highway along the river shore and then a bridge, leading them > to a dirt road winding down a thin peninsula that jutted into the river. In my mind, based on how my native Portuguese phrases things, I felt that "leading" gerund there could be replaced by the determiner plus simple past "what led", and the phrase would "sound" better: > They crossed a highway along the river shore and then a bridge, what led > them to a dirt road winding down a thin peninsula that jutted into the > river. The "what" in there is supposedly a determiner referring to and meaning the whole of "They crossed a highway along the river shore and then a bridge". However he told me, and I quote him, "your suggestion in this case would cause the sentence to make absolutely no grammatical sense whatsoever." I'd like to understand why that's the case, what the exact rules are, and whether there's a correct way to do a gerund to simple past conversion in this and similar cases. Thank you very much!


English Article

I have come across a sentence where 'Niagara Falls' is used without an article. I seem to remember that there is a basic rule of the English language that there should be an article before any specific countable noun. Niagara Falls is a set of three spectacular waterfalls located on the US-Canadian border which makes it plural specific noun. Then why not 'The Niagara Falls'?


Flattering vs. flatter

Of two sentences >   * You are flattering me. >   * You flatter me. > Which is correct? Are both correct, or is one better than the other?


Other words or phrases for "Little Black Book"

I'm trying to find if there are any other words or phrases that have a similar meaning to Little Black Book. More looking along the lines of a word or phrase to mean a list or book where you keep important information, but usually about other people. Little Black Book: n. a book containing the names and addresses of acquaintances who are potential dates, usually put together by men. : Am I in your little black book, or can you already tell that I wouldn't go out with you?


As/so sth as: subjective or objective pronoun?

Which of the following is the correct grammar usage? >   1. We scored as many runs as they. >   2. We scored as many runs as them? > Wren and Martin says nothing about this case. Please explain the rule involved.


What should be filled in "Honoring", "Given by" and "R.S.V.P"

In the invitation letters, what should I fill in to the fields "Honoring", "Given by" and "R.S.V.P"? ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/EPsmv.jpg)


How to use particles like 'back', 'on', 'off', 'around', 'up', 'down' or 'out' are used sometimes with phrasal verbs? Use of English

How to use particles like 'back', 'on', 'off', 'around', 'up', 'down' or 'out' are used sometimes with phrasal verbs? **back** \- return **on** \- continue **off** \- travel to another place **around** \- do a pointless activity **up** \- complete something/have no more to do **down** \- (1) put something onto paper, (2) reduce (speed, number, etc.) **out** \- (1) distribute something amongst people, (2) lose ability to function For example: > Drink it up (but is there more meanings than finish it) > > Speak out


Which one is better: "wipe out" or "wipe away"?

> If justice is wiped out, then society will fall apart in no time. I vacillate between "wipe out" and "wipe away". I do not know which one is better in this sentence.


Why is "hysterical" applied to women but rarely to men?

> _hysterical_ :  affected by or deriving from wildly uncontrolled emotion, > _Janet became hysterical and began screaming_. Why is the adjective _hysterical_ usually applied to women and rarely to men? For what it's worth, Google Books shows 42,700 hits for _hysterical woman_ and 2,820 hits for _hysterical man_ , but the fact is I rarely hear _hysterical_ used in reference to men.


What does I.p. mean in this context?

The following is from a reader's response to a book review. What does `I.p.` mean? > The reviewer is pretty much right on target and helpful in his review; he > nicely qualifies the benefits of the large book. I.p., his observation of > knots repetition is correct--he is not citing "variations". I find no listing in OED.


Subtask vs sub-task vs sub task

We provide tests for candidates. Each test consists of several tasks. Each task may consist of several subtasks / sub-tasks / sub tasks? So far we've used all these terms both internally and in communication with customers. At least we should be consistent and choose one over the other. But which one?


"take the initiative" vs "make the initiative"

What is the difference between "taking the initiative" and "making the initiative"? Context : I recently sent an email asking advice on whether I should " **take** the initiative to contact professor X". The person answered "Yes, you should **make** the initiative".


Should a serial comma be used when mimicking Victorian-era British text?

I am editing a manuscript that mimics the style of late 19th-century British writing. To what extent were serial commas used during this time period?


Can "may" be an infinitive

I was reading this article http://www.organics.org/8-beers-that-you-should-stop-drinking-immediately/ when I saw > Propylene Glycol is controversial, and is said **to may** be potentially > harmful to your health As far as I know, "may" cannot work as an infinitive like this, but I decided to try to Google for it, and found other cases, e.g. http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2007/11/11/21341/experts-danger-of-nuclear- armed.html > Now it is Iran that is said **to may** be bent on acquiring nuclear arms, > and President Bush who has declared that "unacceptable." I'm beginning to think that these are not mere typos. But what's going on? I tend to believe that the authors are native English speakers, at least I didn't find any other signs of non-native-ness in the articles. Is it dialectal? Please note: I am not looking for answers along the line of "This is wrong".


Is "revelationary" a word in the English language?. If it isn't a word in proper English, then which word, if any, can be used for something that leads to a revelation?


Unsure if an apostrophe is needed before an 's' in a sentence

In the following sentence should there be an apostrophe before the s in "transfer"? I don't think so because it's not possesive but on the other hand the transfer should be singular so I'm not sure. > Used for sending out e-mails each time an owner transfers an asset.


English idiom related to time

I wonder what is the English idiom with the following meaning. "There are two opinions and only time could decide what is true". It should be something like "survive time's exam" or something like that.


Is "it makes following five-fold contributions" a good expression?

I saw some papers using expressions like "five-fold contributions". What's the difference between this and "five contributions"? Which one is better? What are the appropriate scenarios for the word "fold"?


Usage of "symmetrical" and "symmetric"

What is the appropriate usage of "symmetrical" and "symmetric" (using the geometrical adjectival definition of both terms)? Are they synonymous?


Can a hyphen be used without anything on the right side?

From this page: > [...] in early parts of this century when it was the most user- and > hardware-friendly Linux operating system available [...] Is the **user-** fragment valid (outside this technical/informal context)? The usage in this context is clear, as it's just avoiding the repetition of **-friendly** , but is it correct? Would it be more correct to omit the hyphen?


"I didn't think of it [at first/before]" — which one is acceptable?

> I like the idea of contract signing with my customers. I didn't think of it > before. Should I say _at first_ instead of _before_ , or is the sentence acceptable as it is?


Under what circumstances should I use 'requisite' and 'required'?

The context of this is in the writing a technical document. The statement I am writing is something of the ilk: > The package then updates the [requisite/required] number of tables. I was wondering which is more appropriate here, and more broadly, which circumstances each should be used.


Can object complements make any difference to sentences?

I'm reading a grammar book, and I have some questions. ## A. >   * We ate the fish raw. >   * I want Sue drunk. >   * I prefer the music soft. >   * I like coffee black. >   * We drank the beer cold. > This type of sentence (Verb + Object + Object Complement) is in frequent use. Then the meanings are the same as the following? >   * We ate the fish which was raw. >   * We ate the fish while it was raw. >   * We ate the raw fish. >   * I prefer the soft music. >   * I like black coffee. >   * We drank the cold beer. >   * We drank the beer while it was cold. >   * We drank the beer which was cold. > I suspect there will be differences, but I can't catch them. ## B. Another type of sentence is as follows.   * >     * I know that London is the capital of the U.K. (o) >     * I know London to be the capital of the U.K. (?) The book says the latter is not natural, but no reason for it.   * >     * I believe that the rain is falling. (o) >     * I believe the rain to be falling. (?) Same here. The second is said not to be natural.   * >     * I know Mary to be a Christian. >     * I believe John to be a man of interity. But these two are said to be acceptable. Why?   * >     * I remember him to be tall and lank. >     * I remember him tall and lank. Could be there any difference, if any?   * >     * I find that this chair is comfortable. >     * I find this chair to be comfortable. >     * I find this chair comfortable. It says each has a slightly difference nuance, but the contexts are not given. And I don't understand the explanation, perhaps because it was translated word for word into my mother tongue.   * >     * If you look in the files, you'll find —  >       * that she is Mexican. (o) >       * her to be Mexican. (?) >       * her Mexian. (?) This is very strange to me. Are all the sentences not acceptable? ## C. I'll type up some more sentences below. >   * NBC announced Henry to be the winner.   >  vs. "… Henry the winner." >   * They report the sea level to be down considerably.   >  vs. "… the sea level down considerably." >   * He hates gin to be diluted.   >  vs. "… gin diluted." >   * The police want Bill to be alive.   >  vs. "… Bill alive." >   * Quick, get in here! Tommy needs his leg [set (o)/to be set (?)]. >   * Tommy needs his leg [to be set (o)/set (?)] eventually, but let's not > rush things. >


"My latest five novels" or "my five latest novels"?

Is it okay to say "my latest _five_ novels" when I want to express "five of my _latest_ novels"? As far as I know, "five" is a postdeterminer, so it precedes an adjective (except for "last/following/top", to name a few) as a rule.


Is there any difference if Peeves said “Not doing anything” instead of “Not doing nothing?

Peeves the Poltergeist is a practical joker in _Harry Potter_ books. Why is he saying ‘nothing’ for ‘anything’ in the following citation? Does this express his character? Is it possibly a dialect or anything? > ”Peeves, get down here NOW!” barked Professor McGonagall, straightening her > pointed hat and glaring upward through her square-rimmed spectacles. > > ”Not doing nothing!” cackled Peeves, lobbing a water bomb at several fifth- > year girls, who screamed and dived into the Great Hall. **N.B.:** Peeves is floating in the air and throwing water bombs.


Difference in usage and connotation between "attenuate" and "extenuate"

What is the difference between _attenuate_ and _extenuate_ in terms of their usage and connotation?


Preposition to choose when referring to something from a book

Which would be better to say? >   * He reminds me of Dill **from** _To Kill a Mockingbird_. >   * He reminds me of Dill **in** _To Kill a Mockingbird_. >   * He reminds me of Dill **of** _To Kill a Mockingbird_. > Also, which is more appropriate in a formal context?


Has "mother" become politically incorrect?

Has _mother_ become politically incorrect? The word _mom_ now seems to have replaced _mother_ throughout popular news articles. Is there some reason besides political correctness, which until now has always seemed to have been connected to racism, no matter how tenuous the connection, or have I missed something?


Usage of the word 'from' and 'between' in the sentence

Which of the following sentences is correct? > The children are **from** the ages of five and fifteen. > The children are **between** the ages of five and fifteen.


How to interpose cross references to sections in the presentation of an outline

In academic papers the introduction usually contains a description of the outline of the paper, i.e. a description of the structure of the paper, such as a description of what goes in what section. In writing such a description one might want to interpose the cross references to sections instead of having them in the main flow of sentences, e.g. to write "I will start out with an introduction (section 1)" instead of "I'll start out with an introduction in section 1". What are the proper/best ways to do this? Here's two examples. If parentheses are used to interpose the cross references to sections, then the parentheses might be distracting (especially if they occur frequently): > I will start out with an introduction (section 1). After that I'll present > some additional background (section 2). Then I'll present my position > (section 3), argue for it (section 4) and present some of its applications > (section 5). Finally, I'll sum up the main points (section 6). If commas are used, then the disposition might get confusing (e.g. by confusing the list and the interpositions in the second sentence): > I will start out with an introduction, section 1. After that I'll present > some additional background, section 2. Then I'll present my position, > section 3, argue for it, section 4, and present some of its applications, > section 5. Finally, I'll sum up the main points, section 6. There might be other possible constructions, e.g. by use of semicolons or dashes.


Tri-Parts Phrasal Verbs and Categories

There seem to be three categories for tri-part phrasal verbs:   1. genuine non-separable (come up with);   2. flexible in that the final particle can be omitted (brush up (on);   3. mandatory separable (talk (.) out of). Are there any that have been missed here?


What is the word for an adult who is not mature?

What term can be used for an adult, especially a man, who is in his forties and still behaves like a teenager, shunning responsibilities typical of mature people, preferring to enjoy himself?


When can verbs precede subjects?

I saw a sentence in which "is" precedes the subject though the sentence is not interrogative. Here comes the sentence:     * _In fig. 4_ **_is_** _shown [the approach to equilibrium absorbance for a glass illuminated at three different intensities]._ In general, when can we precede a subject by a verb? Personally, I used such a structure a little earlier ( _Here comes the sentence_ ) which I think is correct as it looks so. What is the underlying principle behind when to bring the subject first or the verb?


What's the difference between "someone" and "somebody"?

What is the difference between "someone is waiting for me" and "somebody is waiting for me?" Please make it clear for me.


Do you make a difference between “anybody” and “anyone”

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Is there a subtle difference between "somebody" and "someone", "anybody" > and "anyone"? Not being an English native, I’m totally unable to distinguish between the two words. Is there any difference? Could you use one instead of the other at any time?


Someone vs Somebody

Can anyone please explain the difference between "someone" and "somebody"? Or they are same?


No one or nobody? Someone or somebody?

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  Is there a subtle difference between "somebody" and "someone", "anybody" > and "anyone"?   1. Can "no one" and "nobody" be used interchangeably? If not, when is the correct time to use either one?   2. The same but for "someone" and "somebody".


Finding out the proper word out of book-learned vocabulary

I've been learning English for many years already, using many ways available for me. It is mostly reading, as I have very few opportunities to use English in real communication. Due to this fact my vocabulary is rather one-sided: I can read fast and without problems but to find out the proper word in real conversation is really hard for me. My live expressions are full of book- learned words and phrases. I guess I often use formal and archaic words instead of simple spoken ones. I simply don't feel the difference between them as a native speaker does. Are there any online resources that could help find out the most appropriate words for the contemporary usage, helping to sound less artificial, formal and archaic? Or, maybe, other advices for the learners like me?


What are the possible words for a task?

I am looking for similar words to _task_ for a document on scheduling tasks in the context of a project. My goal would be to find words that would denote meanings for three things.   * A word for a small atomic task of short duration that is to be done. This would be the fundamental unit. I'm thinking to: _job_ , _assignment_.   * A word to denote that this _small task_ has been done. I'm thinking to: _work_.   * A word for a larger task that is made of several _small tasks_ , or even several _tasks_. I'm thinking to: _task_ , _labor_. As a non native English speaker, I am having troubles finding the exact meaning of all these words, and if my hierarchy, from small to large, is correct. Do native speaker have suggestions for other words?


What does "ain't" mean?

What does the contraction _ain't_ mean? Is it appropriate to use it in formal settings?


"You're not" vs. "you ain't"

> **Possible Duplicate:**   >  What does "ain't" mean? What's the difference between "you're not" and "you ain't" ("...coming home")? I do realize that _ain't_ is a contraction of _are not_ — but still. Which of the two forms should be used and when? Which is the most formal/informal?


Was “ain’t” at one time acceptable in “proper” English?

I contend the word _ain’t_ is a useful contraction of _am not_. **_Ain’t_** I correct in thinking that in the early 1800s, Bostonians thought of _ain’t_ as an acceptable word without stigmatization?


What is the full form of ain't

## Ai'nt > I know, Ain't is the same as aren't But i want to know full form of **ain't** , Anyone know this?


Why is "ain't" not listed in dictionaries?

Google finds 52,000,000 matches for _ain't_ but non-natives simply can't look up this word. Wiktionary isn't helpful. Is it some kind of 'wildcard' for "am/is/are not"?


Can you say “which goes in a downward direction” in English?

> The inventory check conducted by a private contractor (name-of-the contract) > has revealed a 20 percent discrepancy **which goes in a downward > direction**. The warehouse ledger shows the total inventory (crude oil) > worth to be at 1 million US dollars, however the inventory check report > provided by a private contractor shows the total inventory worth to be at > around 800 thousand US dollars. The internal investigation of embezzlement > has been initiated as of the 4th of may. The phase _which goes in a downward direction_ is where the rubber meets the road and where the shoe pinches, for it is a Russian idiom written in English words. I personally think that with the context at hand one can easily infer what it means. PS: If it is incomprehensible to native speakers, I’d like to know how it should be phrased to be comprehensible.


Need a computer tool to find words with certain patterns of letters

I am trying to decipher some illegible writing by a nurse. For instance, I have a word where I am fairly certain the word starts with an _E_ , ends with an _L_ and contains a _T_ somewhere in the middle. It could be _emotional_ for instance, but I'm not sure. Does anyone know of a computer tool out there where I can get lists of words that satisfy criteria such those in the example?


Special words in soccer

I would like to know a couple of words so special about soccer even Google can't help me.   1. How is the "gate" called (if you make the score, you kick the ball into the "gate". We call it "gate" (maybe door or front door) in Hungarian language. Maybe "net" or "goal" in English? Which is the right word?   2. How you say if somebody makes a score? (We say "He made a goal", "kicked in the goal", "kicked the ball into the gate", etc., but we rarely say "he made a score", because scores are for the final standing of the match, so teams make scores (0, 1 or 3) not players.   3. We have the word _labdabiztosság_ which is a special word in soccer to show the player's ability to be able to secure the ball and not lose it against the enemy easily. If somebody is _labdabiztos_ it means he is not easy to dodge and have the ball taken away from him, so the ball is "secured" for his team. The literal translation is "ball security" (e.g. "This player is ball-secure".), but I don't think that's the phrase I'm looking for.   4. Another word is _gólveszélyes_ which means "how dangerous this player is for making a score, what the chance is that this player makes the score if he is in the right position (in front of the 'net')". Word-for-word my best shot is "goal-dangerous" or "score-dangerous". How do you say these soccer skills and phrases in English?


How is “so” used in this sentence?

I found this text in one of my reading. I wonder what the role of **so** in the text because I find it hard to translate into my language. > Since I am a teacher of and consultant in engineering and management, the > majority of my contacts are with people who are analytical. quantitative, > verbal, logical. These are certainly exellent traits for any problem-solver. > However, **so** is the ability to conceptualize freely, an activity that > requires a somewhat broader thinking vocabulary. I am deeply concerned with > attempting to better define this cocabulary and with helping people expand > in this direction.    Is **so** still the conjunction or is it carried any other meaning?      Where is the subject of the text (is it eliminated for speficif reason)?      is using **so** here familiar with academic writing?      are there any other words carried the same funcion as this **so**? Thanks.


In what context do we use "subject to"?

I came across a situation where a customer had agreed to pay a certain amount but in the contract it was mentioned "Rates are subject to particular charges." So when we say "rates are subject to particular charges," does it mean rates are calculated excluding those particular charges?


Is there a word for "underneath a tree"?

Is there an adjective to describe an object ( _edit:_ e.g. a dog house or a headstone; the object is not necessarily a living thing) on the ground and underneath a tree? I thought of _"treeside"_ , but its meaning is obviously a bit different.


Etymology of the word 'sin'

In the Oxford English Dictionary of 1989, Vol. VII. under the verb 'sin' it lists the earliest recorded use of the word as from circa 825 AD. The word 'sin' was written then as 'syngian'. If the Latin suffix 'ian' means: of or belonging to, how does the verb sin derive from syng or sing which could be interpreted as a substantive or a separate entity?


Capitalization of "Theorem 1" in mathematics papers

In many mathematics papers I read sentences like "...with an appeal to Theorem 4.5 we get...". Is the capitalization of _theorem_ in this case correct? If it is correct why do we capitalize the word?


Why "meth-", "eth-", "prop-", when there is "uni-","di-","tri-"?

In chemistry, the homologous series for hydrocarbons uses the following prefixes: >   * Meth- >   * Eth- >   * Prop- >   * But- >   * Pent- >   * Hex- >   * Hept- >   * Oct- > Why are these prefixes used, instead of just using "uni-", "di-", "tri-"? I looked up the prefixes, but there is no dictionary record of them. Still, I think "uni-", "di-", "tri-", were invented first. Is there a specific reason why, instead of using the normal counting prefixes, new prefixes were used or made up, assuming they were made up for this specific purpose?


Is using "an idea" instead of "a good idea" good English?

In colloquial German, you can say something to the effect of > Would it be an idea to move the bike shed a bit to the left? and it is immediately understood that "an idea" is supposed to mean "a good idea". I tend to use this "an idea" in my English conversations as well, but I am unsure about its validity. Sure, it's never a problem to _understand_ what is meant, but is it commonly used and good style? Googling seems to suggest that it indeed is valid and relatively broadly used. Is this true? Is it, like in German, a more colloquial thing? **Edit:** Note that I am specifically asking about the use of "an idea" instead of "a good idea".


Are there any plans to extend the English alphabet

Certain sounds possibly deserve their own letter in the alphabet, are there any indication that some more letter may be added to the English alphabet?


Word for a person being used

I'm looking for a word to describe someone who is being used. This person would be the subject (a noun) not a verb or or adjective. Maybe like a pushover.


Formal way to describe sexual acts

I'm writing a statement of events that happened between me and my ex. It needs to be written formally but I don't how to write the following words in that way: "blowjob" and "eating her out." Thanks for any help you can offer!


What does "someone figures someone" mean?

What does "he figures you" mean? I mean in this sentence: "He figures you get more overtime that way, being at a cheaper rate or whatnot."


Is hierarchial a word?

I've found one reference that says hierarchial is an alternative form of hierarchical, but it's an unreferenced resource. Some wiseacre wrote a bug fix for my software saying hierarchical was the only spelling of the word and I'd like to prove said wiseacre wrong. So, can someone crack open the Oxford English Dictionary with the tiny print and help me out?


Word for when something turns out to be the opposite of what you believed?

I've been wondering for a while, if there is a word for when something turns out to be the complete opposite of what you believed. So, something that would fit in a sentence like below would be great: > It was so **____** , he was at the complete opposite end of town.


Wish + tense agreement + subordinate clause

* I wish I knew what he did/does for a living   * I wish I knew what he had/has bought her   * I wish I knew what he would/will do in this case * * *   * I wish I'd known what he had done for a living   * I wish I'd known what he did for a living   * I wish I'd known what he would do in this case Are they correct and what the situations are like when hear them?


Next week, in particular, is my wife(')(,) Liana's(,) show

I was writing an email to my department, and was informing them about an art show my wife was having. So I wrote: > Next week, in particular, is my wife Liana's show. But then I realized that I usually would write "my wife, liana, ...", but the apostrophe made it look strange. Then it occurred to me that maybe I should be putting the apostrophe on "wife" instead. After thinking about this for more than a few minutes, I decided to drop all commas and send the email, since I was wasting time. But I wanted to know what the correct punctuation would be in this case. Also, I apologize if this seems trivial or is a duplicate. I could not find a decent answer to this elsewhere.


Problem with sentences structures?

I have problem with sentences structures. I have a sentence: > When reviewing [Name of Bank] reports, the conclusion can be reached that > over the next few years demand for new solutions will be maintained which > will be adapted to working ... It seems to me that this sentence have mistake. I was trying corrected sentence. >   1. When reviewing [Name of Bank] reports, the conclusion can be reached > that over the next few years demand for new solutions will be maintained, > and ones will be adapted to working ... >   2. When reviewing [Name of Bank] reports, the conclusion can be reached > that over the next few years demand for new solutions will be maintained. A > new solutions will be adapted to working ... > I am not sure, which sentence is correct and better?    Thank you in advance for your help.


Once you've introduce an acronym / initialism should you always use it?

When writing a large document with technical terminology (in this example I'll use 'Content Management System') I would use the full term itself and alongside introduce the acronym / initialism: > ...When using your Content Management System (CMS) you should first.... However, once I've done this should I _always_ refer to it by the initialism throughout the document, or is it advised to refer to the term by its full name at periods throughout the text? I don't want people getting confused by the term if they repeatedly come across it and not understanding what it means, so would be tempted to occasionally reuse the full 'Content Management System' wording in order to associate that with the initalism again, but then equally I don't want people thinking " _they've already told us what CMS means, why are they using the full words again?_ " Should I just stick with the initialism throughout?


"Par for the course"

From your personal experience, is "par for the course" widely understood, or would you recommend using a less technical term? I am particularly interested in differences between American, British, and Australian English.


Actual word for "Broadity"?

I'm looking for a single word that explains how broad or widespread something can be. Since "broadity" or "widespreadity" aren't real words, are there any viable alternatives?


Difference between "repress" and "quell"

What is the difference in meaning between _repress_ and _quell_? Are they interchangeable?


Is “No offense meant (taken)” well-accepted English expression?

I’ve seen the phrase “No offense taken” in the answers to the comments in EL&U site. None of online Cambridge, Oxford and Merriam-Webster dictionary registers this usage, nor does Google Ngram. However, I was able to find the definitions of both “No offense taken / meant” as “I am not offended [by what you said] / I did not mean to offend you,” in idioms.thefreedictionary.com and www.urbandictionary.com Since what time around did these expressions come into currency? Are they a polite way of excusing? Can I use “No offense meant (taken)” in both colloquial conversation and formal meeting, for instance with the client advertiser in opposing their idea?


Plaque Wording and Capitalization

When writing a message on a plaque using multiple lines to communicate the message, is it appropriate to capitalize the first word of each line, even if the line is a continuation of a sentence shown on the prior line? Example: > To Management and Staff of ABC Company,   >  For your valued partnership and   >  Creativity in development of new   >  Technology that will improve the   >  Lives of transplant patients all   >  Around the world, we express our   >  Deepest gratitude and appreciation,   >  On the occasion of ABC's 20th Anniversary.   >  Presented June 5, 2013, in Los Angeles California Additional question: Would "Anniversary" be capitalized since it is an event being recognized? And, would there not be a comma between Los Angeles and California? This is similar to wording I received from management to use on an appreciation plaque—I'd like to get it right, whether I'm right or they're right.


"On/at/for/over the weekend" in American English

Some sources say that "at the weekend" is wrong, while other ones say it's correct. Which form is acceptable in American English? >   * On Saturdays her sister Ann usually comes to stay with Mary > on/at/for/over the weekend/s. >   * What are you going to do at/on/for/over the weekend/s? >   * We are going to Paris on/at/for/over the weekend/s. >   * Are you going to stay here for/at/on/over the weekend/s? > Which preposition do American English speakers use — _at_ , _on_ , _for_ , _over_?


"Love me tender": adverb or adjective?

Is the last word in each of these phrases an adverb or an adjective? How can we know? > love me _tender_   >  treat me _nice_   >  hold me _tight_


Ten years (of) experience

> IT professional with 10+ years **of** experience. Do I need to put "of" between "years" and "experience"? I would have put it without any doubt if I hadn't read a few examples without "of" in the book ACE the IT Resume: Resumes and Cover Letters to Get You Hired


Can we use two pronouns side by side?

While writing an essay, I felt the need to write two "her"s simultaneously: > Jane had taken the book from Ann five months ago, and hence felt the need to > return _her her_ book as soon as possible. Yes, the second _her_ is indeed a possessive adjective, but still, does this sentence sound grammatically correct?


Possible Grammar Error

I asked a friend of mine to read something (on skype), and he declined the offer. Then he asked me to play a game, to which I replied, "I have better things to do." Then he wrote back, "Exactly! Why I didn't read." Then we got into a debate about whether it was grammatically correct. I believe that if he had said "Exactly why I didn't read your text", it would have been correct or even something like "Exactly why I didn't read", but he says he is correct. Can you tell me whether he is mistaken or I am?


Where does "my ass" come from?

The usage of _my ass_ to mean _me_ is now relatively common. My impression is that it originated from AAVE and has since been included in various other dialects. The NGram below implies it became popular in the 70s: ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/fwuVE.png) However, that is only for the specific usage of _save my ass_ and might not be representative of the general trend. So, where does this come from? Does it in fact originate from AAVE or was it just popularized through it? How old is this usage and is there any etymological information on it? Specifically how/why did it enter the general vernacular? * * * Clarification: This is not about the phrase _My ass!_ to express incredulity in the way expressed by _My eye!_ but about _my ass_ to mean _me_. As in _She saved my ass_ , or _You got my ass into trouble_ etc.


Is it grammatical to say: Your understanding is correct?

Is it grammatically correct to say: Your understanding is correct to re-assure a concept?


Do vocal pitch and timbre differ by accent?

Guys from the UK and India seem to have higher-pitched voices than Americans. Similarly, I have heard comments from Japanese-American women that they make an effort to lower their voices when speaking English in the US in order to be taken more seriously. Are there some accents within English for which the typical vocal pitch and timbre is high or low, or is this a personal, idiosyncratic dynamic of language?


How do we correct the sentence, "The party was held on the hotel’s roof."

INCORRECT : The party was held on the hotel’s roof. CORRECT : The party was held in the roof of the hotel.


Does issue as "Offspring, progeny; a child or children" have modern usage?

When looking at the word "issue" in the thesaurus I noticed that children was given as one of the definitions. Having not seen issue used in this context before, I decided to do some investigation. Sure enough the Oxford English Dictionary (Online Edition) lists one of the definitions of issue as: > Offspring, progeny; a child or children; a descendant or descendants. Now > chiefly in legal use or with reference to legal succession. †Formerly > sometimes with pl. issues. (Rarely used of the young of beasts.) However, I see example usage such as: > 1850 H. Martineau Introd. Hist. Peace II. v. ix. 344 No issue from this > marriage survived. which seems to stop at around 1871. Is this just an older usage of the word, or does it also hold in modern day usage as well? I'm having trouble finding examples.


Why are they called Hudson Bay and Bay of Biscay? Why Mediterranean Sea and Sea of Japan?

I was looking up a French town on Google Maps, when it struck me. There are bays shown as "Bay of ..." on the map, as well others listed as "... Bay". Their naming seems to be consistent with the naming in other maps I checked. Likewise we have most seas listed as "... Sea" (e.g. Caribbean Sea), but some oddballs like the Sea of Okhotsk. This also can be noticed in the naming of gulfs. I simply can't figure out the rule. Here is a link to the list of seas on Wikipedia. (On a random note, this is probably coincidental, but the names of bays I can think of off the top of my head that end in "Bay" are all in America.)


"Studying PhD at the university" or "studying PhD in the university"?

Which of these two sentences is correct: >   1. I am studying PhD _at_ the university. >   2. I am studying PhD _in_ the university. > Should I use "at" or "in"? Or is there no difference?


Does English have frequently used ordinary words that distinguish between equality and equivalence? For example: > It was the same man on the photo. Equality. The two persons are identical. > She ordered the same dish as her cousin. Equivalence. The two dishes are the same kind of food, but they are two objects.


Whatever happened to thou and thee? Thy words have become more dreary

Why did thee, thou and thy come to disappear from English? I am looking for solid explanations, rather than observations that these are still used in dialects in the north. Please explain cause for their obsolescence, if possible. It will greatly help my students if a legitimate and credible answer is provided! (Added): it would be really interesting if anyone can identify _when_ this occurred. My research: I have only found that the forms disappeared by 1800, but no illumination of why they fell away and were commonly replaced by 'you' as standard. I don't mean to sound apathetic, but I prefer to generate some debate or choose amongst responses from the people in the know who use this space than simply reference Wikipedia.


What do we call the person who is doing small business?

If a person is earning 5000 rupees monthly in a business, then can we call him a businessman? What are the words we use for different earners earning from hundreds to millions of rupees in a business.If a person is running a shop (selling snacks and homemade items), then what do we call that person? Is it a kind of a business or not? and If a person is selling the same items on the road, can we call him a businessman?


What are the rules for preposition use in Canada, England, US, Australia, etc?

I am looking for 'rules' for all (most?) prepositions: which one to use when/where and why. I assume there will be different rules for different parts of the English speaking world. I was born and raised in western Canada. I 'know' what 'sounds' correct to me but I haven't been able to find formal rules. I listen to several BBC podcasts & I noticed they often use prepositions in ways that sound strange to me. Also I am helping a Quebec French speaker learn English. I am finding it almost impossible to explain which preposition to use when and why.


When a car stops working, is it "crashed" or "broken"?

When I use _crashed_ for computers, that means my computer stops working suddenly. To imply similar meaning for cars, should I choose _broken_ or _crashed_? What I understand from _crashed_ is _having an accident_ instead of _spontaneous problem._


Difference between "take off", "take from" and "take out"

What's the difference between these three sentences? >   1. Let's take this part out of the picture. >   2. Let's take this part off the picture. >   3. Let's take this part from the picture. >


Using a comma this way

I am reading "The Reader Over Your Shoulder" by Robert Graves (author of I, Claudius), which is a clarity\grace guide for written English. He has a section about punctuation, which gives examples of mistakes found in the wild. This is one of them: "The fire of Prometheus is as a rush-light compared to the volcano of steam..." The examination noting the punctuation error (one of many errors in this single sentence): "Without a comma at 'rush-light' it is the rush-light, not the fire of Prometheus, which is being compared to the volcano." It's an interesting point, but I cannot find a further break down of this example (and how to use it) in my other grammar resources. It is similar to how he pointed out the difference between these two sentences: "I did not go to the party, because I was not wanted" and "I did not go to the party because I was not wanted." The first one meaning what you think and the second meaning "I went to the party but the reason I went wasn't merely for the reason that I was not wanted (ie, I didn't go out of spite)." I had never heard of that usage either, though explanations of it were easier to find online than the rush-light example.


Word for people who believe in a higher power that is not God

There are people who believe that there is someone or something in the universe that controls everything but it is not a god or gods. What is the term for these people? I know it's not atheism. So, what is it?


What does "if flawed" mean in "interesting, if flawed, concept"?

I'm not a native English speaker. I was reading some article and it said: > "interesting, if flawed, concept". What does "if flawed" mean in this sentence? Does it mean the concept is interesting and flawed (wrong?)? I can't quite understand.


Term for administration of a university

Is there a collective term for the senior administration of a university (dean and upwards)? I am looking for something specific to the U.S., though not specific to a particular system (such as _regents_ for the University of California).


Enamored of/with/by

It seems that "enamored" can be used with any of the prepositions "of", "with", and "by". What is the proper usage for each? This is the sentence I'm writing: > The team, _enamored with_ this new metaphor, spent much of the remaining > time brainstorming ways to apply those principles to the project. "By" sounds the most natural to me in that context, and "of" sounds stilted. "With" is somewhere in between.


Origin of distinction between "one" and "a/an"?

So I was told that the English articles "a" and "an" have Germanic origins. In German, there is not a distinction between "one" and "a/an". Is there any explanation for the existence of these two different words in English? Is there a situation in which "one" and "a/an" cannot be interchanged? I suspect that "a/an" is just easier to say....but maybe I am just biased to think so, as I am a native English speaker.


"Watched them get married" vs "watched them getting married"

I read the following: > The next day as I watched them get married... How does it differ from the following? Is one more eloquent and accurate than other? > The next day as I watched them _getting_ married...


What's the opposite of "retaliate"?

What would be a single word to mean: "to do something positive to someone because they have done or said something positive to you", when you want to return the favour with something equal or better. I Googled it and I found some odd results like "forgive" and "sympathize".


Using "RSVP" as a noun

_RSVP_ literally means "Please respond", however it seems to have turned itself into a noun in common usage: > "What's your RSVP for the party?" > > "I'm attending" Is it acceptable to refer to a person's attendance status as _their RSVP_ ?


Is there a term for words that are spelled the same in a foreign language?

Is there a term for words that are spelled identically in a foreign language and have the same meaning (regardless of whether they sound the same)?


How to ask a knowledge question without causing offence?

By "knowledge question", I mean any sort of question intended to check whether the listener already knows the answer or not. For example:   * Are you familiar with how an operating system works?   * Do you know how to vote? Unfortunately, in certain contexts, these sorts of questions can cause offence because those being asked either **A:** Don't know the subject but feel it is common knowledge and so they _should_ know about it **B:** Do know the subject and feel they are being patronized This creates a problem because it is often difficult to tell which way a person is going to go in taking offence, especially if you don't know them very well. Therefore, I can't simply modify the question to "Of course you are familiar with how an operating system works, right?" as this will comfort B but offend A. Similarly, skipping the question entirely will comfort A but offend B. I work in technical support and usually deal with this situation beginning any conversation with a short script explaining that I try not to assume any knowledge on the part of those I am talking to and that they should ask me to skip stuff if I am going too slowly. I think this is quite clumsy, however, and not always appropriate in less formal situations so I am wondering if there is a way to ask this kind of question more neutrally.


Is this grammatically correct? "You see a dirt block, above which a stone block"

Is this grammatically correct? > You see in front of you a dirt block, above which a stone block. If not how should it be fixed?


Origin of phrasal verb "love on"

Lately I've been hearing friends talk about _loving on people_. Here's an example of the sort of thing they'll say: > We should be working in the streets and _loving on_ the homeless. > > Forge relationships and _love on_ your friends! You can find specific examples of this usage by typing `"loving on" people` into your favourite search engine. I have done a bit of research on phrasal verbs and have read these two posts here on EL&U. While they are certainly interesting, they don't quite answer my questions:   1. What is the origin of _loving on_ or _to love on_? Could it have been popularized by people who thought that _loving_ or _love_ weren't active enough for the context? ( _Loving on_ seems most frequently used in a religious context, especially when referring to good works.)   2. Of what use is the preposition _on_? It doesn't seem to change the meaning much—you can't physically _love on_ somebody in the sense they're describing—and I've only seen or heard it used in contexts where _love_ by itself would suffice. I ran a Google ngram with input `love_VERB on`, although I can't say for sure whether that's helpful.


Tricky pronoun and antecedent agreement

I'm currently taking a grammar class and the professor gave us this phrase to ponder upon. She said that there was a problem with it. I can't seem to find the problem nor the solution. > Manolette met Julette when he was leaving the airport. (consider both Manolette and Julette MALE) > Ashley told Lama that she has the smallest room in the dorm. Both sentences have the same problem... but have a different solution. I think the pronoun "he" and "she" is unable to identify both their antecedents in both sentences?


What is the oldest trick in the book?

Is there one trick that is the oldest? I understand the Oxford definition of the idiom but when was it first used and what did it refer to?


Adjective for the adverb "soon"

I am looking for an adjective that corresponds to the adverb _soon_ , to fit a sentence such as: > That feature will be added in an _[adjective]_ update. Is there an adjective with the same meaning as _soon_?


Is "use" a negative word in the following sentence?

I heard somebody say: > I used my mother to find my socks. The moment I heard it, my first impression was that it meant something bad — a rather negative word choice. Then I looked up _use_ in the Oxford English dictionary and chose the following two entries which may suit here. >   1. employ sth for a purpose; bring sth into service >   2. exploit sb/sth selfishly > Which is correct here? Likewise, in > We have to use the police. Is _use_ here negative?


What's "jewishness" supposed to mean?

There is an image at http://www.pinterest.com/pin/160511174191029351/ which goes like this: ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/yuisE.jpg) I don't quite get the joke... what's "Jewishness" supposed to mean in this context?


What does "rachet" mean and when was it first used?

The word **_ratchet_** is all over Twitter. Some real examples from just now: >   * "All these ghetto ass ratchet ass girls at mchi are wearing these Santa > hats, and they all claim to be Santa..." > >   * "I was lookin ratchet in my workout pic but for you to make it a > priority to talk about somebody's habit that u be sneakin & geekin to do" > >   * "Yaassss finally getting ratchet tonight after being a good girl for a > month " > > The @lovihatibot Twitterbot routinely finds it in searches for "I love the word [X]" and "I hate the word [X]", in fact it's the 14th most loved word and 15th most hated word (presumably use in one category feeding the other). Similarly it's the fifth most common in @favibot's searches for "[X] is my new favorite word". What does _ratchet_ mean? Where does it come from and when was it first used? Was there a single person or event which popularised it, and when was it? Is it a "good"/positive word, or "bad"/negative, and has this changed in any way?


What do you mean when you ask "How are you?"

I have been asked one simple question many times by Americans: "How are you?". I know this does not mean that the person I am talking to wants to know how I feel, but sometimes I see that they repeat the question to me, so I answer that "I am fine", and I do not know what I should answer other than "fine" to people who I do know. I know, for example, that in Hebrew "How are you?" in most cases means "Hello". In Russian if you ask "How are you?" you definitely want to know it. What do you mean when you ask this question? What answer do you want to hear?


What is the term for lowercase i as word in sentence

If **i** have this sentence. **i** also have this sentence. Then correct it to: If **I** have this sentence. **I** also have this sentence. If we know the error is not a typo. What would such a correction be called?


Which is the correct preposition to use with the verb "match"?

Which of the following is correct? > Match the value in the request field **with** the value in the delivery > field. or > Match the value in the request field **to** the value in the delivery field.


"On the air" OR "On air"

Do you remember Northern Exposure? I hope so. Chris had a light-sign in his office: http://nevergoodbye.com/go/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/totalchris.gif And when you search google images for "on the air" some of the signs shown has sentence "on air" without "the". **So which one is gramatically valid?** Personally I'd prefer "on the air" as it looks better.


What is the etymology of "Tough titty"

This is a phrase I've heard used on several occasions by different people. I'm interested about what it's origins are, and whether it should be considered rude. Essentially it means "That's tough luck!", but with an unapologetic undertone. e.g. > Person A: Strawberry ice-cream? But I wanted chocolate. > > Person B: Tough titty. That's all they had.


Is there an exception to the prohibition against ending a sentence with “ ’s ” at work here?

The _’s_ can be used as a contraction representing a weak, unstressed word that is not pronounced. It allegedly cannot occur in sentence final position. >   * She is not ready, but he is. >   * She’s not ready, but he is. >   * She’s not ready, but ***he’s**. > The last one is not grammatical there. Similarly, here the last one is not grammatical: >   * He has not started yet, but she has. >   * He’s not started yet, but she has. >   * He’s not started yet, but ***she’s**. > This answer claims this is because you cannot end a sentence with a weak form. It backs up its point with reasonably scholarly documentation. However, this does not seem to be invariably true. >   * Shall we go to the movies? Yes, let us go. >   * Shall we go to the movies? Yes, let’s go. >   * Shall we go to the movies? Yes, **let’s**. > Unlike the third example in the first two sets, here in this case the third example is indeed grammatical, despite ending with a weak form. Is this an exception to the rule, or is there another rule at work here?


Asking about the date on which something happens using "effective"

How is the word " **effective** " or " **effect** " used to indicate from which date a new rule / change will be applied? I am not sure which of the following is correct: > These changes will **take effect from** March 1, 2012.   >  These changes will **take effect on** March 1, 2012.   >  These changes will be **effective on** March 1, 2012.   >  These changes will be **effective from** March 1, 2012.   >  These changes will be **effective** March 1, 2012.   > **Update:** I just came across a new phrase: March 1, 2012 is when the new changes will **come into effect**.


Tenses in zero conditional

I'm wondering about contradictions in zero-conditional explanation in different sources. Some of them state that **only** Present simple + present simple is correct. Some of them state that present and past simple are correct till both sides have the same tense. And some of them state that all simple tenses (present + past + futute) are correcnt till both sides have the same tense. Which source is right (for American English)? And if I can use past and/or future - what the difference between all of them?


Is the following company name in correct word order?

Is the following company name correct? > Irrigation and traffic works construction investment joint stock company The company aims to invest in the construction of irrigation and traffic works and it is a joint stock company. However, when registering we need an English name for the company but I don't know how to write Da Nang irrigation and traffic works construction. I am completely confused.


Is it appropriate to express a sentence without verb?

Many native speakers expressing sentences **without verbs** while speaking,   For instance,   * What you doing now?    * How you doing? Is it appropriate?


Name a person who loves to do things manually

What will you call a person who loves to do things manually rather than using any technology tools.


"Of a trilogy" vs. "in a trilogy"

I've Googled for a while now, and can't seem to find any good answers to this. Which of the following is correct? >   1. X is the second installment in a trilogy. >   2. X is the second installment of a trilogy. >


What is the origin of "like a bat out of hell"?

As far as I know, this expression means to appear suddenly and in a scary way. But what is its origin? I heard that it comes from Meat Loaf's song but I'd like to confirm it with reliable sources, if possible.


Pronunciation of "Porsche" over time

Is there an official pronunciation for Porsche? I grew up pronouncing it with a silent final e ("Porsh"). However, I've increasingly heard it was pronunced with a neutral e sound at the end ("Por-shuh"). Is this simply an anomaly in some people's idiolects, is it regional, or is it becoming a general thing in American English? And has the pronunciation with the final e become more common over time?


Word meaning "absorbs everything around him"

I'm looking for a word to describe my son. Basically, he sucks in virtually everything around him - music, books, adult conversations, etc - and adds that to his mental image(s) of how the world works. It's something like absorptive, but that does not feel active enough. Thoughts?


In correspondence, what is the correct way to refer to two people with the same first name but different last names?

I have received an email containing the following statement, "tell John Ford and Smith that their proposal is due". As both individuals share the same first name, what should the correct directive state ?


Could somebody explain the difference between these ways to make food directly using fire or heat?

When you use fire or head directly to cook or make something, there are so many different ways, like grill, roast, toast, bake and broil, maybe there are more else. What is difference between them?


Shorter word for 'Settings'

I am creating an application which has a button which opens the settings pane, but there is just not quite enough space on the screen for the whole word (in a readable font size). Is there a shorter word that means the same? Something like "properties" except, well, shorter. Thanks!


Meaning of the phrasal verb "to dart at"

> There was the poor bear, spluttering away in the water, and trying his > hardest to swim whilst the goldfish darted at him in fury. What does _to dart at_ mean in this context? Does it mean "attack"?


Collective term for all those involved in producing a film?

Is there a single word that covers both the cast and crew of a film? I'm certain there is but can't think of it and, given the topic, Googling just results in lists of films. Can someone please tell me what it is?


"Short of" meaning in "means of finding an audience short of landing a job as a critic."

what does the bolded part means? > An established New York critic admitted to me a certain amount of bitter > envy, for when he was coming up in the ranks, there were no outlets in which > to express his opinion, nor means of **finding an audience short of landing > a job as a critic**. Does it mean **_finding someone who thinks of being a critic as a job_** or **_finding an audience who pays for the criticism of a critic_** or something else?


What word means “the important events in one's life”?

I am looking for a single word which refers to the important events of a person's life. This might include birth, marriage, changing jobs, or anything else that the person feels is significant, but preferably when observed by looking at one's entire life.


What word means “the people in one's life”?

I am looking for the closest single word which refers only to those people who are directly connected to a person's life. Most specifically, this the meaning of the word should include co-workers, classmates, friend, and family members, but should not include strangers.


"the son of a barkeep is speaker of the House"

The Wasington Post quotes Obama as saying: _"Here in America, our success should not depend on an accident of birth, but the strength of our work ethic and the scope of our dreams. That's what drew our forebears here ... [that's] how the son of a barkeep is speaker of the House."_ Would it be also possible to say in this context:   1. _"and **a** scope of our dreams"_   2. _" **a** son of a barkeep is **the** speaker of the House"_?


Comma after the noun of the Oxford comma?

In a sentence like: > Next to apple, pears, and bananas, a lot of other fruit exists. Is the comma after bananas needed, allowed, or forbidden? And why? Is the same true for descriptions with verbs: > Next to fruit that smells of sewerage, looks like dung, or tastes > disgusting, a lot of nice fruit in between these extremes exists. Or is there a neater way of saying this?


How to introduce yourself?

I am using British English. While addressing a gathering or talking to a new person, how do you introduce yourself? Is it "I am Phani" or "This is Phani"?


Which word to use, "again" or "anymore"?

I'd like to describe an action which I'm used to do but I won't do it in the future. Which word is correct, for example:               Just a little more work, I'll never need that tool again.      Or:               Just a little more work, I'll never need that tool anymore.      If there is any better way to describe it, please help me to correct my sentence, too.


Does this sentence "iPhone 2G has Photo Geotagging capacity of No" make any sense?

Ok, this is the original sentence: > iPhone 2G does not have Photo Geotagging capacity. I want to rewrite it as _iPhone 2G has Photo Geotagging capacity of No_. So my question is does the sentence > iPhone 2G has Photo Geotagging capacity of No. make any sense (that is correct grammar & can be accepted by the reader)?


Word for long chain of causes

What may be the conceptual, phenomenal word for > a long chain of complex causes and reasons, that doesn't believe in > coincidences, accidentalities, karma etc.?


"To go so far as to" — suitable for academic writing?

Is using the phrase "to go so far as to" in an academic context (e.g. in an article in humanities journal) acceptable? New Example: > I do not know why Mister X went so far as to assert that Mister Y's argument > is blatantly invalid (-- after all, it seems to be quite convincing). This phrase sounds rather colloquial to me, but I think I have read it quite often in journals -- maybe due to a lack of alternatives... Are there any reasonable alternatives? * * * I realized that my intended-to-be entertaining example distracted from the actual question. So I edited the question and added a new, updated example. Sorry for the confusion. To keep the answer by Bill Franke reasonable, I keep the original example: > I do not know why Mister X goes so far as to assert that Mister Y is a > scumbag.


What's the difference between "eldest" and "oldest"?

When should I use "eldest" and when should I use "oldest"? Are the differences semantic or regional? (Or both?) (What got me wondering is the `removeEldestEntry()` method in Java's `LinkedHashMap` class.)


Correct use of 'with' or 'at' when talking about percentages?

I'm writing the following sentence: > Women lead uptake at XX%. But a friend is saying that it should be written: > Women lead uptake with XX%. Which one is correct?


Is it "bear the shame" or "bare the shame"?

Google returns results for both variations of this common phrase.   * bear the shame   * bare the shame What is the meaning of this phrase, and which one is correct? Is the speaker _carrying_ their shame or are they _exposing_ it? Or is this just a case of two separate meanings?


The history and use of the term "moth hour"

I had never heard or read the term _moth hour_ before, but am reading the American author Jan Karon's book "In the Company of Others" and she uses it several times. The book is set in Ireland, and there are entries from an old diary scattered throughout the story. Here is one excerpt: > I remember how she slit the throat of a Hedgehog which she commanded me to > capture & bring to her in a sack--the creature was rolling in fat for the > spring & summer had been especially wet & lush and I had often seen him > outside his Burrow at the **moth hour** surveying the land. I searched and found that William Butler Yeats (1865-1939) used the phrase in his poem The Ballad of Father Gilligan Here are the first two stanzas: > > The old priest, Peter Gilligan, >> >> Was weary night and day; >> >> For half his flock were in their beds, >> >> Or under green sods lay. > > Once, while he nodded on a chair, > > At the **moth-hour** of eve, > > Another poor man sent for him, > > And he began to grieve. ... I can see from this NGram that the height of the use of the term may have coincided with the publication of Yeats' poem. But would he have coined it, or was it in general use and he borrowed it? ![enter image description here](http://i.stack.imgur.com/3qRaP.png) I also noticed that there is a Moth Radio Hour, sometimes known as the Moth Hour, which is all about the art and craft of story-telling . See "Why The Moth?" But it's not really related to the term I'm interested in. So, after all this, I presume that _moth hour_ is an Irish and maybe British expression. Did Yeats coin it? Is it well known and is it still used? (Do any of you Americans use it?) I also presume it means the hours around dusk, when the moths come out. Is that so?


Is there a term for named chapters in a work of fiction?

Does anyone know if there's a term that describes the device of titling chapters in a work of fiction? That is, chapters not simply called "Chapter 1", "Chapter 2", etc., but chapters with unique names that describe their contents, such as the chapter called "The Potions Master" in the first Harry Potter book.


Is it correct to say "aging X years or more"?

> Hundred participants ( **aging 18 years or more** ) were selected from each > of the cities. Is the phrase within the parentheses correct? Any suggestion to better express the idea will also be appreciated.


What is the difference between "ok" and "alright"?

What is the difference between "ok" and "alright". Do the two words have the exact same meaning? If not, what is the difference? Is the difference reflected only according to different usages in different circumstances?


"In England we call them rolls of arms: in Spain they are known as armoriales — armorials — or libros de armeria — books of arms, and books seem to outnumber rolls as such. Of nearly 30 Spanish armorials recorded, at least eleven are books, and only one is definitely a roll. Nine are original productions, and six are known only from copies. At least eight foreign armorials contain compilations of Spanish arms." (Collins, W. T., Spanish Armorials, Coat of Arms, No. 161, Spring 1993.) What does "...and books seem to outnumber rolls as such." mean?


"Say for someone to do something" in colloquial AE

In colloquial prose, is the idiomatic "say for" an appropriate substitute for "tell" in "tell someone to do something" whatever the context? E.g. > Have I ever said for you to pretend to be someone you are not. source > > We concluded the conversation with my saying for him to contact me in six > months.source > > Now I am saying for you to sit down...source > > May I say for you to call... source > > We parted with her saying for me to be safe. source > > Didn't you say for him to call his probation officer and tell him he was > terminated? source > > I think he might be saying for us to reach out to Muslims... source > > I never said for him to rot in hell, that is God's decision after death. > source It sounds like what is meant in the last example is something like "I never wished for him to rot in hell" or "I never said he should rot in hell" rather than "I never told him to." Does this sort of more obscure meaning of "say for" have any currency in colloquial speech and writing?


Last names that are English words with an extra 'e'

I noticed that there are a lot of last names that have an 'e' at the end. The pronunciation usually isn't changed from that of the base word.   * _Poole_   * _Steele_   * _Browne_   * _Clarke_ Why do English words not have the _e_? Maybe the answer to this question depends on which came first, _pool_ or _poole_.


How to write numbers one after the other in different context

Sorry if the title is poor. I am having a hard time thinking of a good title. If I wanted to say something like: "We will have 5 two-hour sessions". Is there a proper way of listing this?   * "Five 2-hour sessions"?   * "5 2-hour sessions"?   * "5 two-hour sessions"?   * "Five two-hour sessions"?


Use of 'not' in questions

When is it okay to use 'not' when posing a question? I believe that the person asking would include the 'not 'when he believes the implied to be true. For example: "Are you going to the store? "Are you not going to the store?" Then the question of how to properly answer it. "Yes, I am going to the store" "No, I am going to the store." and if they arent going... "No, I am not." "Yes, I am not." I wonder if this is a French rule and therefore confusing to English speakers; where 'Si' is used instead of 'Oui'. Anyways, your thoughts?


Who's who or Who's whom?

I'm wondering if the phrase "Who's who" as in "a who's who of the community" should be "Who's whom" on the basis that if you rephrase to a question and remove the apostrophe you get "Who is who?" which is poor English, so should be "Who is whom?" (since you would respond to it phrased as a question with, for example "He is him(self)". Which is technically correct, **"Who's who" or "Who's whom"**. I'm pretty sure it should not be "Whose who" because that would be possessive. Ignore that who and whom are generally interchangeable in modern common usage, I want to be technically correct about it if possible, though I fear it may just be one of those statements which makes no sense but we use anyway.


What are wrong with this phrase?

Is the phrase > what are wrong with XY and ZZ correct English? I stumbled upon it in a question on movies.SE: What are wrong with the bleach and the fish in the Machinist?, and instantly thought "That has to be an error!" Not being a native speaker, I thought before correcting it, it'd be better to Google it first (you never know) and it actually returned over 13 million results. I'm stumped, is this actually correct? Or just a common mistake?


Is a comma still required between "said" and a quote if no one actually says anything?

For example He gave me a look that said "Don't you dare." Should a comma still be placed after said?


Is there a computing term for form elements that have “relevant” values?

Is there a word for form elements that have “relevant” values? If there is, what is it? By “relevant” values, I mean values that we want to process or which are needed for processing. These values are not necessarily user inputs because they can be hidden fields or static fields. Elements like the submit button, form headings, and labels are examples of form elements that have irrelevant values. I guess I’m looking for a programming term because in programming, those are considered form elements and they have “values” in a programming sense.


What's a word for "teenager-ish"?

I am looking for a word that encapsulates "teenager-ish" - that sort of petulant, contrarian, immature behavior. Any ideas?


Is 'Brave' the symmetrical of 'Yankee'?

Note: This question is only apparently a dupe of preceding: "Is Yankee derogatory?". I have heard of the term "Brave" often referring to people in the Southern U.S. by Northeners. Is it true? If so, is this term considered derogatory or offensive and should it be avoided in formal settings? ADDENDUM: as choster say in his/her comment, probably I am confusing the terms with the names of two major league baseball teams which were rivals in the 1990s: the New York Yankees and the Atlanta Braves (cities which are associated with the North and the South). Probabily this rivalry might be reverberated in Europe to the point of distorting the really meaning of the terms.


What is the opposite of 'cozy'?

I'm trying to find a word to describe a restaurant space that is the opposite of _cozy_. The only word I can think of is _cavernous_ , however I don't wish to give the sense that the space is particularly large. It's simply that it is not cozy.


Does changing the position of an adjective, change the meaning of the sentence?

What are the differences in meaning between these sentences? >   1. _The weather is hot on the island._ >   2. _The weather on the island is hot._ >   3. _On the island, the weather is hot._ > Do they mean the weather is usually hot on the island or the weather is hot on the island right now?


Is it OK to use perfect infinitive in such cases...?

I wanted to express my disdain for certaing people and say something along the lines of **_"If they by any chance were to die tomorrow, I wouldn't care"_** (I know it's a wrong thing to say, and I'm sorry.) What I actually said was: **_They could have been killed tomorrow; I couldn't care less._** Shouldn't I have said: **_They could be killed..._**? I used the perfect infinitive to emphasize the improbability of them being killed any time soon. Now I feel I overdid it.


Question about likely vulgar expressions

The terms " **screw up** " and " **crap** " are frequently used on American TV that I'm not sure whether they're euphemisms, my first assumption, or just vulgar. I don't want to make mistakes, especially when speaking to children, but after doing some research, I found no definitive answer. Are these terms euphemisms or just vulgar? I found this explanations: "screw up" is offensive in the UK, but just slang in the US. The translation in my language is vulgar or euphemistic, depending on whether they're being translated from UK or US English. "crap" is considered mildly offensive, but the translations are both euphemistic and very vulgar. Can I use these terms when speaking with children or with, for example, my father-in-law?


Are these interrogatives subjects or complements for verbs?

> [a] **Which** is the best choice for the blank?   >  [b] **What** 's the best choice you have made? (TED) Which are the subjects in above respectively? It seems like _which_ in [a] and _what_ in [b] are subjects.   And I also get the idea that _which_ and _what_ might be complements of the verbs respectively. For I can make these echo questions, in those _which_ and _what_ are complements. The best choice is **which** for the blank?   The best choice you have made is **what**?


Adjective that describes a person who shows a lot of enthusiasm in the beginning but gets bored gradually?

Can anyone provide a word which describes a person who shows a lot of enthusiasm in the beginning but gets bored gradually and eventually leaves the task uncompleted? I looked at **jaded** , but it doesn't fulfill the criteria. Jaded seems to describe more of an overworked fellow, whereas the word I'm looking for would describe the nature of person. The word I'm looking for would describe a person who always exhibits this behavior.


"Martyr To" vs "Martyr For"

This book specifies the difference as: > **martyr for something** : smb. who is made to suffer severely for a cause > > **martyr to something** : smb. who is acutely inflicted by something Oxford dictionary also tells us this: > (martyr to) a constant sufferer from (an ailment): Other online dictionaries don't seem to explicitly specify a difference, though all example sentences for "martyr to" contain an ailment. Yet, I've seen the usage "He/She is a martyr to his/her cause/country" a lot. In fact, google gives more hits to the "to" use than the "for" use. > **martyr to his cause** : 315,000 uses vs. **martyr for his cause** : > 285,000 uses > > **martyr to his country** : 371,000 vs. **martyr for his country** : 266,000 > uses So is there still a difference between the two in modern/current use? Is this a case of colloquial use being inconsistent with grammatically correct use? Is this a US vs UK issue? Help, please? Surprisingly google is not yielding even a single article discussing this usage. ETA: Ngram comparisons that have now only increased my confusion. It seems "martyr to cause" is significantly more common is usage than "martyr for cause". Diagrams for Cause and Country


Difference between "The car is" and "The car is blue" in the word "is"

I, being a native English speaker, and having snoozed through some of my grammar lessons in elementary school, sometimes cannot express differences that I feel exist in certain grammatical constructs. Here is such a case: > The car is. and > The car is blue. What is the name for the word "is" when used in the first sentence, and in the second? I feel that these two sentences have different semantic meanings for it, the former being "exists" and the latter not being "exists". While the second sentence could be rephrased as "The property of blueness exists in the car" I think that that is a completely different way of stating the thought, not an equivalent. I think the latter is called a "copula" perhaps? No idea for the former.


Is there an adjective to describe someone who has access to all the facts, news or insider information?

Looking for an adjective to fill in the blank below: I was talking to my stock broker. I wanted to say: I am not as **_** as you who has access to all the facts, news and insider information (about the stock).