texts: Prepositions in stative verbs in passive structures

texts:
I wonder how it can be possible for a 'stative verb', that is not intransitive, to be used in a 'passive structure'.

I know there are a lot of passive sentences containing stative verbs.

The definition of 'active and passive structure' says:

  When A does something to B, there are often two ways to talk about it. If we want A (the 'doer') to be the subject, we use an active verb. And if we want B (the 'receiver' of the action) to be the subject, we use passive verb.

So, the way I see it, as long as there is a doer of the action we can have a passive structure – unless, of course, I'm missing something.

But the thing is, in sentences with stative verbs there is no action and no doer of the action.

So why should they have passive forms?

Take include, contain, involve, lack, own, require for example.

The definitions of 'include' and contain' say:

  (In the first sense of include) 'If one thing includes another, the second thing is part of the first.' (Longman Dictionary)

  (In the first sense of contain) 'If something such as a bag, box, or place contains something, that thing is inside it.' (Longman Dictionary)

However I asked this question generally, but here are some examples:

I know the following two sentences are correct.

  'The bill includes tax and service'.

And this one:

  'In passive sentences, the thing receiving the action is the subject of the sentence and the thing doing the action is optionally included.'

But if I'm not mistaken of course, this one is related to the second sense of the verb 'include' (i.e. To make someone or something part of a larger group or set), not the first one I mentioned above.

Although I know the following one cannot be correct, I am wondering why.

  *'Tax and service are included the bill.'

There is an example in Cambridge Dictionary under the entry for 'include':

  'Tax and service are included in the bill.'

If 'in' in above sentence is necessary, why there is no preposition in example 2.

And if it's related to the second sense of 'include' there should be a preposition thus:

  Tax and service are included in.

Or in example 2:

  .... and the thing doing the action is optionally included in.

As we say 'he was looked at', not *'he was looked'.

Could you explain if it is correct to say "Tax is included"?

If so, I want to know that if "include" is related to the first or second sense of the verb mentioned in Longman or  Oxford. And if it's related to the second sense, why the preposition (in/on) is omitted?

I think the preposition must be applied, because the preposition is the only thing that differentiates the usage of 'include' as the preposition 'to' does in intransitive verb 'belong' and transitive phrasal verb 'belong to'.


texts:
Sometimes I wonder if he is actually/really  as lavish as he
  pretends to be.

I know that this sentence can work without either actually or really, but if we were to use one of them to make an impact on the listener, which one should it be?


texts:
Is "huge" slightly informal?

In the following sentence,

  First, some people insist that Japan doesn’t need to adopt [an]
  austerity policy because it has a huge amount of assets at home and
  abroad.

I felt the word "huge" was inappropriate, thinking that it was too informal for this context. (Whereas if someone said "OMG, I have a bloody huge hangover", "huge" wouldn't be too informal)

However, meaning 1 of huge in wiktionary and dictionary.com don't describe it as slangy or informal.

Am I mistaken in thinking that it's informal? Perhaps I only think it's informal because it's a popular word in informal speech because you can lengthen the "u".


texts:
The people were free from the barbaric dictator. Or: The people were free of the barbaric dictator.
The mashed potatoes were free from lumps. Or: The mashed potatoes were free of lumps.
I wish I could be free from this terrible cold. Or: I wish I could be free of this terrible cold.

It seems to me that the terms "free from" and "free of" can be used interchangeably. Do the two have distinct meanings? Is one more correct than the other? Are there exceptions?


texts: What does "iages" refer to "gauges" or edges?

texts:
We're trying to determine whether "iages" was used to describe "gauges" or "edges".

The usage was found in a document from the early 1630's drafted by an alderman attempting to settle a dispute between joiners and carpenters.

Joiners were given the credit to "All worke whatsoever already invented or that hereafter shall bee invented being made by one or two iages with the use of all manner of nayles.


texts:
What is the phrase "I feel so helpless" supposed to mean?

Is it "I feel as though I am unable to offer help" or "I feel as though no one could help me?"

I saw it in a movie, and always thought it was the latter, but it was clearly used in the context of the first.


texts: Does the comma here draw special attention to an additional fact?

texts:
In the latest issue of The Economist there is the following sentence:-

"And in China, unlike India, you can shop at Walmart, most of the time."

Firstly, shouldn't it be "...unlike in India? Else it could also mean that India, or someone called India is not able/permitted to shop at Walmart. Not that we'd interpret it thus, but just clarifying the technicality.

Secondly, with or without the comma, the meaning would be pretty much the same. But it seems to me that the comma seems to additionally draw attention to the fact that Walmart shopping in China is not as widespread. The implication would be there without the comma, but I think the stress then would be only the fact that India hasn't opened up to Walmart yet; here it means that, plus the fact that China itself is no great host to it.

Agree?


texts: gone vs. due (words refering to pregnancy)

texts:
You hear sentences like "How far gone is she?" Or "When is she due?" Used to talk about pregnancy...

A few days ago one of my collegues used the sentence "How long is she due?" and insisted that it's grammatically correct and means just the same as "How far gone is she?"

But it really doesn't make sense to me. I'd like to know what native speakers of English think about its grammaticality!

And my main question is, what's the difference between "How far gone is she?" And "When is she due?" ?!

Is it that the former asks about the amount of time passed and she's been pregnant and the latter to the remaining amount of time before giving birth to a baby?

Thank you in advance


texts: What do I call a date by which document have force?

texts: I am writing technical documentation and I can guarantee, that it is in up-to-date status at the date I write it (or update it). How do I call this date in one or two words?


texts: Which one is correct "United's stadium" or "United' stadium"?

texts:
What is the correct way to put the apostrophe. the doubt is with "stadium" because it starts with 's'.
E.g:

"United's stadium" or "United' stadium"

PS: I need to know why (with grammatical explanation and reference)


texts: What is the connection between the word 'Stay' and 'Guy' in a crossword?

texts:
The clue is 'Remain; guy (4)' and the answer is apparently "Stay".
I can understand remain/stay. But I can't find anything in the dictionary that connects it to the word Guy. The closest I could think of is perhaps guy-ropes being used to keep something fixed in place, but it's tenuous at best and I wouldn't use the word 'guy' on its own in such a manner.
Is the word 'Guy' synonymous in some way with the word 'Stay'?


texts: What is a better word than "track" for a piece of music?

texts:
"Track" came from serial media like LPs, 8-Tracks or the soundtrack of a motion picture film, or a Compact Disc. But an MP3 "file" in a player doesn't exist on a revolving disc (disk) or tape. What is a more universal term for a segment of music stored in an electronic format?

Bonus points if it can apply to something besides music, like a part of an audio book. Or to things not audio in nature... Because there are lots of kinds of "tracks" that can be taken from a CD and stored in other ways.


texts: I've heard it all kinds of ways, & now I have to pick one for an audiobook I'm narrating. I'm inclined to say EE-vuh BRAWN, but I just checked youtube(the fount of all pronunciation knowledge) & they say EE-vuh BROWN. Then of course the German(I think) would be AY-vuh. Any consensus?


texts: Why is "help wanted" phrasing used in job ads?

texts:
It's quite typical to see "Help wanted" signs in cases some business has an open position. That can be some temporary position or even a permanent one.

Why is it called "help"? Why not "we're hiring" or something? I mean, "help" usually means some unpaid activity—why is this word used when referring to a job?


texts: What do you call a microphone that is held beside the face?

texts:
I don't know a term denoting a microphone usually held on speaker's side of the face. See following image that shows in white:

I googled images pertaining to the types of microphone, but that did not help. It shown me following results, that does not include the thing, of which I want the term.

After encountering such types, I had a doubt, whether the term which I want to know is just "microphone" or not.
Sample sentence can be:
I saw Sandeep Maheshwari giving a comprehensive lecture in front of a large audience via a device held on his face, called a _____ ?


texts:
Double consonants often appear in the middle or at the end of a word like:

  kitty, Eiffel, thriller, brilliant

  bass, guess, basketball

However, I wonder if there are any words (including loanwords) which begin with the double consonants. Any help is appreciated.


texts:
Teaching one student who is very good and another who is bad was a
learning experience.
Teaching a student who is very good and the other who is bad was a
learning experience.

One side of the coordinating conjunction uses "one student", the other side only uses "another." The parallelism of this usage depends on whether the term "student" carries over from first clause of "and" to the second clause that begins with "another" making it "another student."
does it need to be "another/other student?"
Cite the rule for why or why not.


texts: Does the em dash take precedence over the comma?

texts:
In a sentence like:

While I would love to do A, I cannot wait to do B.

If I add a set-off clause right before the comma, which of these is correct?

While I would love to do A—for reasons X—I cannot wait to do B.

or

While I would love to do A—for reasons X, I cannot wait to do B.

How does one include a set-off clause right before the comma? Note that I wouldn't like to rephrase the sentence to avoid this dilemma. I tried looking for a solution in British English, but couldn't find a consistent rule.


texts: Is there a single word for "this week" or "this month", like today and tonight?

texts:
If we can use today and tonight for the day and night of the same day of speech, why is there no "toweek" or "tomonth"? Are there any other words which can be used?

Is this is something that can be proposed to the language authority? EDIT: Marv's comment below clears this up.


texts: Whereof, wherein, wherefrom, whereupon, whereby, wherewith, wherefore in a contemporary article?

texts:
I am publishing an article (research) and I am wondering whether theses words, albeit far more beautiful than their equivalent using which, can still be employed even though the OED described them as archaic. I use whereof and wherein the most. The rest of the set is used as a logical derivation in general (like  consequently etc.).
I do not mind being formal.
My British reviewer did not comment on their usage.

Being in science, the field of the article does not use a complicated english (it is a branch of biology). So, besides their clarity, it may be a good opportunity to show how good they are; but if these are already too much, can they all  be replaced automatically by their counterparts with there- without changing anything to my sentences ?

Yes, this is linked to where- and there- compounds


texts: I couldn't understand a sentence while watching The Big Bang Theory

texts:
Recently I've been watching The Big Bang Theory with scripts. In one of the videos, they said:

  "I’ve got a girl who punishes her father by sleeping around and an alcoholic who’s two tequila shots away from letting you wear her like a hat."

I could understand the meaning, but couldn't understand the structure of this sentence. Is there anybody who can help me with figuring it out??


texts: What does “The man that once did sell the lion’s skin While the beast liv’d was killed with hunting him” mean?

texts:
I came across the following sentence in the context of four professional men discussing a plot to retrieve their lost $1 million, swindled from them by a nouveau riche American banker in Jeffery Archer’s novel, “Not a Penny More, Not a Penny Less”:

  The man that once did sell the lion’s skin
  While the beast liv’d was killed with hunting him.

The line reminded me of a Japanese proverb, “ミイラ取りがミイラになる - A mummy searcher always ends up as a mummy,” which I think is close to an English saying, “Go for wool and come home shorn.”

What is the exact meaning of the above two lines? Is this a popular English metaphor?

Why is there no period at the end of the first line while the second line starts with the capital?

Is it wrong to rearrange the sentence as follows?

  The man that once did sell the lion’s skin was killed with hunting a lion while the beast liv’d.

.


texts: GRE question - not convinced with the answer

texts:
Should we really care for the greatest actors of the past could we have them before us? Should we find them too different from our accent of thought, of feeling, of speech, in a thousand minute particulars which are of the essence of all three? Dr. Doran's long and interesting records of the triumphs of Garrick, and other less familiar, but in their day hardly less astonishing, players, do not relieve one of the doubt. Garrick himself, as sometimes happens with people who have been the subject of much anecdote and other conversation, here as elsewhere, bears no very distinct figure. One hardly sees the wood for the trees.

Q) The doubt referred to in line 7 concerns whether

A. the stage personalities of the past would appeal on a personal level to people like the author

B. their contemporaries would have understood famous actors

C. the acting of famous stage personalities would appeal to us today

D. Garrick was as great as he is portrayed

E. historical records can reveal personality

Correct Answer: A

I think the correct answer can also be D because it is mentioned in the passage that

  Garrick himself, as sometimes happens with people who have been the subject of much anecdote and other conversation, here as elsewhere, bears no very distinct figure. One hardly sees the wood for the trees.

which implies that he is an ordinary person. People hardly see the details of his personality as they are too involved with his triumphs.


texts: Is "that" optional in these sentences? If not, does each mean the same?

texts:
My experience working in the justice system and first year of law school have convinced me that my legal future lies in criminal litigation.

OR

My experience working in the justice system and first year of law school have convinced me my legal future lies in criminal litigation.

Are both grammatically correct?


texts:
There was an article titled “Forget Leaning In, Let's Talk about Leaning Out” in Forbes magazine (April 2. 2014) in which the author, Caroline Mayer says:

  “I don’t know about you, but I’ve heard way too much about Sheryl Sandberg and her new book, Lean In, encouraging women to be more assertive, especially in the workplace. At this stage in my life, I simply want to Lean Out.”

I was in understanding both “lean in” and “lean out” simply refer to bodily actions as defined by Oxford English Dictionary: to move the top part of your body in a particular direction. Example: Don’t lean out of the window,” until I read Sheryl Sandberg’s Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead.

I understand now the word, “lean in" is used to mean to get aggressively involved in business and ambitious career development, and “lean out” as its opposite word.

As far as I checked Google Ngram, both “lean in” and “lean out” have been used since well before 1840 with predominant incidences of “lean in” over “lean out.” However, usage of “lean in” made a remarkable increase coming into 2000 (from 0.0000085329% in 1980 to 0.0000118571% in 2000), possibly for its extended meaning.

I’m curious to know (1) from around what time the word “lean in” started to be used in Sheryl Sandberg’s “Lean In” context other than proper “body actions,” and (2) whether the word, “Lean out” is now commonly understood as a pair word of Sandberg’s “Lean in.”


texts: Rule for suffix to describe where someone is from

texts:
Is there a rule or pattern to describe where someone comes from?
Some examples of places, with the word to describe people from that place:

New York / New Yorker
London / Londoner
Toronto / Torontonian
Paris / Parisian
Boston / Bostonian
Brazil / Brazilian
Mexico / Mexican
Vancouver / Vancouverite

There are -er suffixes, -ian suffixes, -an suffixes, and -ite suffixes. Possibly others that I could remember.
Is there a general rule for determining which suffix to use when you see the name of a place for the first time?


texts: What kind of name is "Underground Railroad"?

texts: The "Underground Railroad" wasn't a real railroad but it was given that name. Is there a word for what kind of name "Underground Railroad" is? It's a made up name for a phenomenon that's also sort of a metaphor (as in if it were not a recognized proper name, someone might still write "they traveled along the underground railroad" as a metaphor). Is there such thing as a proper name metaphor?


texts: One word for "stealing something on its way to the recipient"

texts:
I am looking for a word which means stealing something on its way to the recipient.
For example, suppose you sent a gift to your friend. And suppose someone steals it before it reaches your friend. Is there one word (other than simply stealing) to explain this action?


texts: Does English contain any "abbreviated" words as a core part of its corpus?

texts:
In other words, are any of the core words in English from the pre-digital era a derivation of other words, abbreviated?

Online I find myself using "wrt" a lot, short for "with respect to". But "wrt" seems short and useful enough to perhaps find itself in use as a conjunction in and of itself (even though phonetically it would sound a bit ugly).

"Lol" has already seen this fate, but that fails to be a pre-digital word. Many pre-digital abbreviations are probably better described as shortenings, rather than concatenations of some other collection of words.


texts: The past participle of "split": "split" or "splitted"?

texts:
I have just written a question in the PPCG site, and now that I read it again I have just noticed that I have just written "split" and "splitted" randomly as the past participle of "to split":

  Can the number be split into powers of 2?
  [The number] can be splitted into...
  [The string] can be somehow split into numbers...

Since nobody seems to edit the question to fix any possible spelling mistakes, now I wonder: Are both forms valid? Or is one of them preferred or even invalid?

A simple Google search of "be split" and "be splitted" seems to return many more result for the "split" form (nearly a hundred times more). Maybe the "splitted" form is only used in specific contexts or countries?


texts:
“It was papa made me leave. I am a boy and I must obey him.”

“I know,” the old man said. “It is quite normal.”

“He hasn’t much faith.”

“No,” the old man said. “But we have. Haven’t we?”

Hemingway, Ernest. The Old Man and the Sea (p. 2). Green Light. Kindle Edition.

Does "No," mean "I agree with you"?


texts: A semicolon or a comma in this sentence?

texts:
I am stuck between the use of a comma or semicolon here. I think a comma is a better choice to place after "respectively", simply because the next sentence is not a full sentence and sounds more like a clause than a sentence.

  Model thickness and tamper area were considered as 5 m and 4 m2, respectively, the same as those which have been previously used in verification process by experimental data of Oshima and Takada.


texts: Can I say "Please give your children big cheers at the playing field?  Or should I say "Please give your children a big cheer?"  Do these mean different things?


texts: Is it correct to ask "what's your father?" when you actually mean to ask about his job?

texts:
What's your father?

Some said this question even exist in the visa-applying of USA, but I just couldn't understand it. Is it asking about somebody's father's job, his personality, or just what he is? If you take this question literally, the only answer can be "He's a pig, or blah, blah". So is it correct to ask this way?


texts: 'Doing for someone' -- correct expression for cleaning or housekeeping?

texts: Looking for a likely expression a maid in 1930s England would use to say she's cleaning or keeping house for someone. Is 'I'm used to doing for an older gentleman' or 'He's clearly used to doing for himself' the right expression?


texts: What is the word for the space between the hours marker in a clock face

texts: For example, there is a space between the number 4 and the number 5 in a clock. What is the name for this other than "space"


texts: How is "totalitarian" properly used in a non-political sense?

texts:
The adjective totalitarian meaning:

  Of or pertaining to a system of government which tolerates only one
  political party, to which all other institutions are subordinated, and
  which usu. demands the complete subservience of the individual to the
  State. (OED)

derives from the Italian totalitario coined in the 1920s as a description of fascism.

However in the list of OED examples below, several of them use totalitarian in a non-political sense. E.g. from 1936 a reference to the corporate and totalitarian character of the Christian response to God. And from 1937 totalitarian scholarship.

This morning, on the BBC's programme The Big Issue, an Islamic member of the contributing group talked about the human conscience being totalitarian. I believe that what he meant by that was that conscience had control over every aspect of life. But the remark did raise eyebrows.

My question is whether the term totalitarian can be used to describe such things as religion, art, culture, etc. And if so, what meaning does it have? And does it simply mean "having the nature of totality"? Would it not be appropriate for the OED to recognise a separate non-political sense of the term?

  1926   B. B. Carter tr. L. Sturzo Italy & Fascismo ix. 220
  Anti-Fascism..has, however, a positive sense if it is taken to
  represent an element antagonistic to the ‘totalitarian’ and absolute
  position of Fascism.

  1929   Times 2 Nov. 7/5   A reaction against parliamentarism..in
  favour of a ‘totalitarian’ or unitary state, whether Fascist or
  Communist.

  1936   E. Underhill Worship xii. 251   This cultus is, in origin, an
  acknowledgement of the corporate and totalitarian character of the
  Christian response to God.

  1937   E. Pound in Germany & You 25 Apr. 95 (heading)    Totalitarian
  scholarship and the new paideuma.

  1937   E. Pound in Germany & You 25 Apr. 96/2   In 1937 we are
  concerned with the reintegration of the arts in totalitarian
  synthesis.

  1940   Hutchinson's Pict. Hist. War 2 Oct.–26 Nov. 183   We have all
  heard lately about total or totalitarian war. It has been defined as
  conflict between nations taking the place of armed forces. Every
  citizen is in a sense a combatant and also the object of attack.

  1951   H. Arendt Burden of our Time iii. x. 303   Totalitarian
  movements aim at and succeed in organizing masses—not classes.

  1964   H. Marcuse One Dimensional Man i. 3   ‘Totalitarian’ is not
  only a terroristic political coordination of society, but also a
  non-terroristic economic-technical coordination which operates through
  the manipulation of needs by vested interests.

  1977   M. Walker National Front i. 15   The totalitarian society is a
  single-minded structure. It mobilizes all its resources under one
  authority to achieve one goal.


texts: What's the connection between Slobovian and the elbow?

texts:
Here is a sentence from Making Sense of Japanese by Jay Rubin:

  They are just part of the world's most clunky writing system, and a writing system cannot cause a language to be processed in a different part of the brain any more than it can force it to some other part of the body (excepting, of course, Lower Slobovian, which is processed in the left elbow).

It seems that there is a joke or word play involved, the very point of which I cannot get at. I tried to search Slobovian + elbow but failed to find any information on their connection. Is it just the author's original invention?


texts: Is it correct/idiomatic to omit "once" in some cases?

texts:
Example:

  Once again, I traveled three hours just to sit alone.

  Again, I traveled three hours just to sit alone.

  We decided to go to the balcony. Once there, we leaned on the railing,
  side by side.

  We decided to go to the balcony. There, we leaned on the railing, side
  by side.

Do they differ a lot? Is this something a native English speaker would do in informal speech?


texts: Is "To whom could we direct our questions to?" grammatical?

texts:
Which of these sentences are proper? :

If we have further questions with regards to x&y, to whom could we direct our questions?
If we have further questions with regards to x&y, to whom could we direct our questions to?

Or is it true that both are grammatical and either one could do?


texts: The difference between 'transfer' and 'transit' in the context of airports and train stations

texts:
There appears to be a fine shade of meaning between the words 'transfer' and 'transit' in the domain of airports and train stations, possibly sea ports as well.

Consider this typical usage fragment...

  I'm flying from Colombia to Munich with transfer in Atlanta. The
  transit time is 3h and 58m. The flight is on Sunday and Atlanta,
  indeed, is the airport with the heaviest passenger transit in the
  world...

Also, sometimes you also see text referring to 'transfer fees', but never 'transit fees'.  But alternatively, countries issue 'transit visas', but never 'transfer visas'.

Question: what are the differences between 'transit' and 'transfer' in the overall domain of travel.

Note: The question here is prompted by an effort in Travel to introduce precision into these words as site tags.  In addition to authoritative English usage answers, pedantic and/or didactic answers that clarify these terms are also welcomed.


texts: "to find something/someone [adjective]" - When is this construction proper English?

texts:
Under which circumstances is it proper English to say, e.g.

  I find this book [adjective].

A common example seems to be

  I find this book difficult to read.

From my native language I am inclined to generalize the above construction,
and use "to find" in the sense of "to regard"/"to consider"

  I find this book difficult, entertaining, and too sophisticated.

It is not evident to me whether the above sentence represents proper English. For example, the phrase "I find this entertaining" returns too many hits as too debunk it as wrong immediately.

Can somebody clarify the usage of "to find" with adjectives?


texts: A phrase to describe the external spreading phase of some infection?

texts:
I believe that some types of fungal/viral/other infections have a life cycle in which they kill a host entity (possibly plant or animal), and then around that time they also "bloom" or "erupt" from that entity, spreading widely (so as to infect others). I'm looking for a phrase to describe this and use it as a metaphor or simile; preferably describing a case that would be visible (and unpleasant) to the naked eye. For example:

  Before the company went bankrupt, it filed many lawsuits, sabotaged
  the oversight commission, and started daily spam-advertising to all
  its customers. It was like _________.

Edit: Thanks to @cobaltduck in the comments for linking to the specific biological process of which I was thinking but couldn't name: Ophiocordyceps unilateralis (or "zombie fungus").


texts: negative interrogative forms in present simple and continuous

texts:
my question is about forming negative questions in present simple and continuous, I have got some confusion here:

as you know, there is a special case when it comes to tag questions with subject I

for instance we ask with the form: aren't I?

does this apply to present simple questions?
do we say: aren't I a teacher? for instance..

and in present continuous:

am I not going to the party?

or, should it be like:

aren't I going to the party?

thanks


texts: A friend and I were having a conversation where I said "box of gums" and then I was corrected to say "box of gum". Why is it called a box of gum, when it's not a solid body of gum, but each gum is a separate object wrapped in a paper? And there are a few of them inside the box.


texts:
I doubt about the correct preposition here.

Which sentence should I use if it is the engineers themselves who are clamouring for the equipment?

  This instrument is highly demanded for engineers

  This instrument is highly demanded by engineers

or are both correct?

and how about this?

  It is highly demanded instrument for engineers

  It is highly demanded instrument by engineers


texts: Adverb position: 'has been constantly increasing'

texts:
I have the following sentence:

"The share of solar energy has been constantly increasing in Europe"

Grammarly tells me that this is a mistake and suggest writing:
'has constantly been increasing'

Is my version a grammatical mistake?


texts: Word for something which is “on the side” or which manifests “at the edge”?

texts:
I will use a smile as an example (though the word should work in general for something which is “at the edge”).
So what I want is an adjective for a half-smile which would fit in, say, the following sentence.

… a smile; subtle and ______ .

Here are some possibilities I looked at but didn't satisfy my description:

extreme: Literally means something at the extremity or end, but it is not usually used in the physical sense so it would convey a different meaning.
quasi: Doesn’t describe the location of the smile, also cannot stand alone as an adjective.
crooked: Fits the sentence I provided but doesn’t mean “at the edge”.
lopsided: Like crooked.
uneven: Same problem.

I already checked out A word that refers to a "half-smile"?, but the answers either provide a noun, or an adjective which doesn’t have the meaning of “at the edge”.


texts:
Ex-wife, ex-boyfriend.

Does ex have a full form?

Google dictionary has this information about the origin of ex:

But what is the origin of the usage as a prefix in the words like ex-wife, ex-boyfriend?


texts:
Here is an excerpt from Steve Job's speech:

  On the back cover of their final issue was a  photograph of an early morning country road, the kind __ you might find yourself walking along if you wanted to see the world.

I'm just wondering what words could be possibly omitted between "the kind" and "you might find..."
Is that a relative adverb, "where"? or a relative pronoun "which/that"?
- the kind of road where you might find yourself walking along? OR
- the kind of road that/which you might find yourself walking along?

I know that the omitted words are not necessary to understand the sentence, but it's just out of curiosity...


texts: Is there a word that means 'Skeptic Hatred'?

texts:
Is there a word for the phenomenon where people have extreme emotional distress towards others who ask for evidence or question the validity of a popularly accepted claim, where the distress commonly accompanies condemnation and/or threats of exile to the individual questioning the claim?

For example, assume most people in the world believe a teapot orbits the Sun between the Earth and Mars. A guy comes along and says, I don’t believe that, could you show me the evidence of that? The crowd gets angry and condemns the man. They ask him to back up his claim or he will be exiled forever. Of course he cannot back up his claim, it's much like proving Santa Claus doesn’t exist. So, he is destined to be hated, since they cannot prove their original claim.


texts: Which is more natural "a wife" or "the wife"

texts:
It is a part of a short bio, and it goes more or less as follows:
"He lives in London with his wife, his son, and three cats"
If I wanted to use articles instead of "his", which would sound more natural:
1. "He lives in London with a wife, a son, and three cats"
or
2. "He lives in London with the wife, the son, and three cats"?
As I've said - it is a short bio with the guy's education and recent jobs. His wife/child is mentioned only once at the end. So I thought: "a". Buy wouldn't it sound like he lives with somebody else's wife? Or the wife is treated like a piece furniture? I know that "his" is the best solution here, but what if...?


texts: What is an adjective for a group of people who have already been convinced of something?

texts:
I'm looking for a word that could be used to describe a group of people who believe the same thing.

  The members of the blog site worked hard to win others over to their political views, unaware that their follower base was _______.

In this case, their followers already share their views, which, unbeknownst to them, makes their arguments moot.

"Like-minded" is close, but not quite right (perhaps because it lacks the connotation of ignorance), and I would prefer a single concise word.


texts: Is there any phrasal verb to mean "teeth are falling out because one is getting older"?

texts:
The sentence would be:

  He is Xing now.

Where X means "losing teeth" or "teeth are falling out" because he is getting older. I am assuming such phrasal verbs or words exist because it would be awful/dumb to speak as:

  He is losing his teeth now because he is getting older.

I might be wrong though. Please suggest how it should be expressed.


texts: Has "may" become a formal version of "can"?

texts:
When I went to school I was taught that when asking for something you use "may I (have/do something)". "Can" was used only when asking if you are "physically capable" of something.

These days I have a feeling that you can also use "can" where we would formerly use "may".

I know the rules on "can/may" hasn't changed formally, but has there been a change in usage of the two?

Do schools still teach pupils to ask for things with "may"?


texts:
As a data analyst, I am trying to define the time periods in my analysis. I simply compare the weeks with each other.

Let's assume that

Today is 11.06.2020
Last week was 01.06.2020 - 07.06.2020

Now, I am looking for a word for the period of 25.05.2020-31.05.2020

Is there a synonym of "week before last week"?


texts:
I’m looking for a generic word that means “debit or credit”.

Say I have a transaction, and I don’t know whether it’s a debit on the account or a credit on the account, and I want to ask about it, is there a word I can use?

For example, if I were asking whether a book were green or blue, I would ask, “What’s its color?”  If I ask whether a transaction was a debit or a credit, can I fill in the blank, “What’s its _?”

(Background: I’m looking to name a variable while programming, and the best I can come up with is type, which is not very descriptive).


texts: Why does 'The virus went out of control' sound wrong, when it is grammatically correct?

texts:
My first instinct was to change 'the virus went out of control' to 'the virus was out of control.' My supposition was confirmed by other people who are native English speakers. Yet we can't figure out why this is so. Similarly, 'the computer went out of control' sounds less acceptable than 'was'. Yet 'the fire went out of control' seems less unacceptable than the rest...

We were wondering if it was an issue of agency, as a virus has no consciousness. Whereas fire and computer would be instruments???

Two of the meanings of the word ‘go’, are, from Oxford:

A) To pass into or be in a specified state, especially an undesirable one: the food is going bad
B) To proceed or turn out in a specified way: At first all went well.

So the use of 'went' should be acceptable.

The issue seems to be an instinctive rejection of a change of state, from under control to out of control, and a preference for a statement to the effect of an unchangeable status as implied by the word 'was'.

Anyone have any ideas why?


texts: What is the "explicit"'s equivalent of "imply"?

texts:
Note: The original title of this question was "Why is 'exply' not a word?

While considering the words implicit, implicate, and imply, it struck me that I can't think of an equivalent to imply for the word explicit (specifically one with the same Latin root).

Is explain the equivalent? It has *seems to have** the same Latin root, but doesn't have the full connotation of intentionally making something explicit.

* (Edit: Thanks, Jason and e.James, for the clarification on this)


texts:
After considering https://www.lexico.com/definition/as_well_as and https://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/as-well-as, I would say that 'as well as' is most of the time a preposition, very rarely a conjunction (e.g. second to last example in the Oxford dictionary).

Often 'as well as' is used after a noun (the noun which is accompanied by further items stated after 'as well as'). I was wondering if the following four sentences are equally correct and carry the same meaning:

My work is taken into account by the company as well as James' and his girlfriend's work.
My work is taken into account as well as James' and his girlfriend's work by the company.
My work as well as James' and his girlfriend's work is taken into account by the company.
My work, as well as James' and his girlfriend's work, is taken into account by the company

I am pretty sure that 3-4 are correct. In 4, 'as well as' is just additional information that could be put in parentheses. I am not that sure about 1-2. As regards 1, I think the reader understands that 'as well as' does not produce further items for 'company' since 'work' cannot accompany 'company'. I would also be keen to know if your opinion would change if I leave 'by the company' out and 1-2 would become:

My work is taken into account as well as James and his girlfriend's work.


texts: relative clause with compound antecedent

texts:
I wonder what is the general way to create a relative clause modifying a compound antecedent? For example:

  This data is from many proof of concept environments and production
  environments that run XXX benchmark software.

Here the that is intent to refer to both "proof of concept environments and production environments". Will this expression cause ambiguity that that only refers to "production environments"?

Is the following sentence better than the preceding one?

  This data is from many proof of concept environments and production
  environments, which run XXX benchmark software.


texts:
Is "walking by the street" grammatical? Or do I need to write "in/on the street"?
Do they convey a different meaning?


texts:
When i'm reading specification of gif-89a in here

...
To determine that actual size of the color table, raise 2 to [the
value of the field + 1].
...

Don't mind what was of article above.
I stupidly thought the word raise means plus, and i learned a lesson.
Then i checking that phrase "raise to" on google, i'm getting more confused. there are more than one usage:

raise number to number

number raised to number

e.g:
raise 2 to 3
2 raised to 3
Can somebody help me figure out?


texts: Is It correct to say: "I had been his wife before he got married with her."?


texts: For as long as dark corners still "lurk" in our heart?

texts:
I found this sentence in a translation:

For as long as dark corners still lurk in our heart, we cannot claim to direct others to the light.

Now can "lurk" be applied to a non-animate subject? My instinct says no, but as I am not a native speaker, I cannot trust myself 100%. If "lurk" does not apply, which word would be appropriate?
Edit: After all the enlightening comments I received I decided to add this. It dawned on me that I always associated lurk with movement and if you look at its synonyms here you will see why. Corners do not move and cannot find a place to hide or loiter. In a literature context you can certainly make anything move, and probably in metaphors you can do that also, but still..,


texts: What is the meaning and etymology of "ruthless?"

texts:
A "standard" definition is something like "cruel," or "remorseless."

But what does this have to do with "ruth" (or lack thereof)? Is this a reference to a kind person named Ruth?

Perhaps a clue may be found from the German Rücksicht, which translates literally into "back sight," or "looking back." Could it then be that a "ruthless" person is actually one who plows ahead, without "looking back" at what the consequences may be?

And how would this evolve into the "standard" definition?


texts:
I am trying to create a scale of descriptive words. I have new content being described as "fresh" thinking of describing old content just as "old" unless you have any other suggestions.

My issue is what to describe content that is neither new or old. Looking for one word.


texts: How do you concisely qualify the direction of viewership?

texts:
I'm making a user content driven website where users watch a stream of said content.  I'm looking for a way to concisely qualify the direction of viewership in the database.  Something more concise than:

"Time spent viewing the stream" and "Time other users have spent viewing my content"

Is there a specific word that qualifies the direction of viewership?  Something like "viewing time" is too vague and doesn't specify if it's the time the user has spent viewing others' content vs. time other users have spent viewing this specific user's content.


texts: Relation between blood type and personality

texts: I am looking for a word that would name the belief that your personality is related to your blood type.


texts: How to say ''Plug-and-Play" for a furniture item?

texts:
I would like to express in English that my shelve doesn't require any assembly. Basically open the box, open the frame, put the racks and everything is ready to use.

I can't find any short term to express this idea, the closest I could found is plug-and-play but I am not sure it is suitable for furtniture.

PS: Because it is a promotional document, I am looking for a short word to express this idea.


texts: How do you say rolling's one's eyes or describe an eye roll in this situation?

texts:
How would you describe this situation:

  Rolling one's eyes due to orgasm.

I checked most English dictionaries but most definitions are negative, e.g. due to frustration.


texts: What's the linguistic term for when you use an object in place of a person who uses or is associated with that object?

texts: For example, a common one is calling someone who helps out a hired-hand. Another example is gumshoe for a detective, or a private eye. Sometimes the association might be metaphorical, like whips in politics. Is there a general term for this phenomenon of using objects to stand in for people who use the objects?


texts: What do you call the person responsible for a meeting?

texts:
What do you call the person that is responsible for conducting a meeting, i.e. inviting participants, preparing the agenda and (mostly) also moderating the meeting, as well as define and document the intended result of a meeting?

I've heard the word "meeting owner" before.
Would that be the correct term, or are there others, maybe depending on context or culture?


texts: What's wrong with 'In the beginning the characters are shortly introduced'?

texts: Another example sentence for my upcoming exam. There's a mistake somewhere in this sentence. First I thought the mistake was 'shortly', which can't be used with 'introduce'. But then someone pointed out it should be 'AT the beginning'. So which of these is the real mistake? Thanks.


texts: Origin of the phrase ''Respect,man/bro. ''?

texts: Respect bro!! , you never hear anything like ''Fear, man'' or ''honesty, man.'' used in the same sense, its interesting.


texts:
Hearing 'engine' pronounced with a long 'i', as the final 'e' seems to suggest, sounds odd:

'fin'/'fine' but 'gin'/'engine'.

Looking here for an explanation, I just found another example: 'opposite'

Wiktionary has 'engine' coming from the old French 'engin', and an entry for 'engin' as "an obsolete form of 'engine'".


texts: In "Winnie the Pooh", Why isn't the Hundred Acre Wood  plural?

texts:
When I read some of these Winnie the Pooh stories to my kids at night, the place where the story takes place is the Hundred Acre Wood, not Hundred Acre Woods.

Why is that?


texts: How did "tot" come to mean a measure or ration?

texts:
How did tot,

  A measure of spirits, especially rum.

get that meaning?

It seems to have come to mean a specific ration, as in the daily tot of rum given to a sailor in the Royal Navy (well, no longer daily; see Black Tot Day).

This is in almost complete opposition to the idea of a total, though I can see how perhaps you could tot up the tots to make a whole. Other possibilities might be an association with the small child meaning of tot (something tiny) or totter (stumbling).

(I'm also curious about teetotal, but it looks as though it came later, so it's unlikely to be a source for this meaning.)


texts:
"Wise" is defined as having, experiencing or showing "knowledge and good judgement", whereas "shrewd" is defined by as "having or showing sharp powers of judgement; astute".
Does this mean that "shrewd" is simply a synonym and therefore the two adjectives can be used interchangeably, or does it have a subtle difference, i.e. shrewdness is the application of knowledge to a greater extent [than wisdom]? How would this affect their application in everyday language?
Thanks!


texts: How to describe a comparison between three objects?

texts:
I am comparing three things, but how could I describe the relative order in a single sentence?
For example, is "A is greater than B greater than C" valid?  Or is there a formal way to describe this?


texts: Do reverse clauses with 'be/have/do' require 'that'?

texts:
I am looking at these sentences:

*The fool he is said this.*
*The job he has is hard.*
*The job he does is hard.*
*The suit he wears is black.*

The reverse clause #1 seems completely wrong to me. #2 and #3 look somewhat questionable, and #4 looks completely correct to me. However, adding that (The fool that he is said this.) seems to make it more correct in each case.

It seems like I would always prefer to use that for all be/have/do-based reverse clauses to make them right.

My questions are: Is there a rule that makes #1, #2, #3 wrong? Or, perhaps, they are all correct?

On a side note, I have never come across a book that would comprehensively describe and explain English grammar on a formal level. Books tend to go by example, and kind-of coach people to do it right only on an intuitive level.


texts: Is there a word for something happening after you wish for it?

texts:
For example, saying "I wish I could pet a dog right now", then a person walking their dog comes around to corner.

Is there a word for this outside the realm of faith aside from calling it a wish coming true?


texts: Middle English or Elizabethan English as a second language?

texts: Are there books, web sites, or language courses designed for English speakers who want to learn Middle English or Elizabethan English in the same way that they would learn a foreign language? It would be fun to be able to understand Shakespeare fluently rather than straining to follow what was being said. Chaucer just seems hopeless without such a course, unless you're a college English major taking your upper-division course on Chaucer.


texts:
The following sentences -

  I was humiliated by him, and now he was standing next to me.

and

  And now, I was looking at him, preparing for his entrance.

Are these grammatically correct? I mean, I'm saying "now" but using the past tense.
If not, how can I correct it?


texts: What is the correct way to use commas in this sentence?

texts:
I have a hard time correctly placing commas in sentences such as the one presented below. What is the correct usage of commas here and are there any simple rules I can memorize for this?

The sentence without any commas:

Each X is created by first choosing some number of Y and then distributing the Zs using N different approaches.

My attempt at correctly placing commas:

Each X is created by, first, choosing some number of Y and, then, distributing the Zs, using N different approaches.


texts: Why is "Pokémon" written with an accent?

texts:
Is there a language-related reason why the word has an accent on the "é"?

The Japanese for Pokémon is "ポケモン" (pokemon), so it's not to represent a long vowel.


texts: What do you call someone who always speaks in gobbledygooks?

texts: What word would you use to describe a person using gobbledygooks even during casual conversations?


texts:
What is a word for comparing two things but suggesting one is better than the other?

For example: John verbally compares a and b but hints that a is superior.

With what word would I replace compares so I can get rid of the second clause?


texts:
Can we say that: " I am living under the same roof with my dog" ?

As far as I understand the expression refers to a relationship and its challenges like for example marriage but can we use the same expression for relationships between humans and animals as well ?


texts: What's the word for an initial outpouring of creativity?

texts: If someone picks up an instrument, paintbrush, starts writing, or other creative activity for the first time and they experience a 'gush' of initial production or output. There's a word for it, but totally forgot it?


texts:
I just noticed something in a rather innocuous text that I was sending a friend. The word "Left", for instance, could mean, "Hey, have you left already?" or "Is anyone left here?". Both these meanings are completely different from each other even if they are using the same word(in this case, "left").

My question is, "Does anyone know more of such words? And if so, is there a specific term for them?"


texts: How to say that two things don't mix well?

texts:
For example, I like both ketchup and pancakes but not together.

How can I say something like that idiomatically?

I want to say that two things are good but they just don't mix well together.


texts: In Danish there is an idiom that litterally translates peace with that (fred med det), that indicates that the speaker wishes to end a discussion. Let’s leave it at that has the same meaning but a different tone. Is there something closer?


texts: Are there cases where the definite article is used with a plural noun, or is it a rule that the definite article is never used with the plural of a word?


texts: Origin of the military term "technical" referring to weaponized pickup trucks

texts: When did the term "technical" come to denote a converted pickup truck with an added weapon mount in military jargon?


texts: How is "but of course" different to just "of course"?

texts: I've seen in writing and on screen the phrase "but of course" used as a stand alone sentence. If one were to substitute just "of course" would the meaning change?


texts:
The sentence is:

What would the people eat?

Can it mean "What are the people going to eat?" in future Or, "What were the people going to eat?" talking about future from past Or, both?


texts: Pronoun question: referring to inanimate objects as 'he' or 'she'

texts:
I read the following claim concerning pronouns referring to inanimate objects:

  Anything that is meant to contain you, protect you or provide you with something beneficial is [often referred to as] a she; anything that is a perceived threat is a he. That's why cars, boats and some countries are she.

Is this really the case, or is it just a subjective claim? (According to the Chicago Manual of Style using he/she for inanimate objects is not recommended and it should be used instead.)
Is there a 'rule' for determining whether to use he, she or it based on the impression one would like to express? (I only know the 'rule' for animals: In the case where you know their gender and they are important to you, you refer to them using he/she. E.g. A dog attacked me in the street. It bit me. versus This is my dog Roger. He is 7 years old.)
Have these practices changed over time?

Note 1: There is already a similar question (Referring to objects as "she"), but that considers only the feminine case and none of the answers offers an objective discussion of the matter.

Note 2: My native language is Czech, where the gender of the pronoun is based only on the grammatical gender of the noun. E.g. a cat (kočka) is always she, a dog (pes) is always he, a boat (loď) is always she and a car (auto) is always it.


texts: possessive connecting word for inanimate object

texts:
Duplicate of:
  Is the word 'whose' referring to an inanimate object correct in this sentence?
  Usage of “whose” not referring to a person.
  Referring to some attribute of an inanimate object — use “who's”?
  What is the possessive form of “what”?
  Other ways of saying “whichs”
  Possessive “that's”
  'Which', 'whose' or something else?

Today I wanted to say something like

  A camera whose wires go through the wall.

but it sounded funny. Whose to my ear only applies to people, and perhaps animals.

Is there a single word I can use in its place? I can say something like "A camera that has wires..." but I just wondered why another word didn't come readily to mind — or perhaps more accurately, I wondered why I wanted to use whose with the camera!

Bonus: what is the grammatical name for the word whose in this sentence? What part of speech is it?


texts: Difference between "at" and "in" when specifying location

texts: I am used to saying "I am in India.". But somewhere I saw it said "I am at Puri (Oriisa)". I would like to know  the differences between "in" and "at" in the above two sentences.


texts: Which is the more accepted spelling between “doughnut” or “donut” in formal academic prose?

texts:
From what I understand, the term donut arose as a shortening for the word doughnut. The former has become much more common, though.

Which word is more accepted in academia: the more formal but somewhat less common (doughnut), or more common (at least casually) but less formal (donut)?


texts: What is the difference between Backronym and Acronym?

texts: Are Backronym and Acronym same? I don't understand the difference between these two terms.


texts:
Consider these sentences, please:

Person A: Does the word "have" mean "to possess" in the context given?
Person B: I understand it to mean "to eat" in the context. I do not see it describing possession.
[see=understand]

I just can’t see them winning the game. [see=imagine;https://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/see_1 definition 6]

Question 1: Since "see" means "to understand" and "to imagine" in sentences 1) and 2) respectively, can I replace it with them? For example:
a) I do not understand it describing possession.
b) I just can’t imagine them winning the game.
Question 2: Do the participles "describing" and "winning" in 1) and 2) function in the same way as the participle "playing" in the following example?

From the window we could see the children playing in the yard. [see=notice;https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/see definition 1]


texts:
I've read a great article about the usage of apostrophes. But there are still some points that are unclear.

Why do we say...

school project but not school's project?
car service but not car's service or even cars' service (plural form)?
apostrophe usage but not apostrophe's usage or apostrophes' usage?


texts: Meaning of Jo's dialog in Chapter 16 of Bleak House

texts:
A portion of chapter 16 of Dickens' Bleak House is shown below.

  Jo attends closely while the words are being spoken; [...] and nods his ragged head.

  "I'm fly," says Jo. "But fen larks, you know. Stow hooking it!"

  "What does the horrible creature mean?" exclaims the servant, recoiling from him.

  "Stow cutting away, you know!" says Jo.

I don't understand either the gist or the details of what Jo says in the above.  I've assumed I'm fly means he understands or is agreeable or something; that fen is a noun or verb and larks is vice versa; that stow means stop or quit; that hooking it and cutting away mean getting away.  However, I don't understand what he is trying to communicate.  Any ideas on Jo's meaning?  (I presume it's all explained in annotated versions of the book, but I don't have an annotated copy; and the numerous occurrences of this passage on the web that I've looked at are given as examples of difficult-to-understand parts of Dickens, without explanation of the meaning.)


texts: One to two words that describe a person who guides people on a mass scale through transformation (esp. in education)

texts:
Been racking my brain for days on this and can't seem to come up with the right word (or two words) to fully encapsulates describe this type of person...

Someone who leads people en masse to transform their lives by educating them, guiding and mentoring them, but through the lens of "on a mass scale" and likely in an automated way. "Thought leader" and "Influencer" are close but don't necessarily imply that they educate and work to transform peoples lives. "Coach", "Guide", "Mentor", "Teacher" are also close but don't imply the mass scale and global or national impact.

The words I'm looking for would describe someone who has laid out a journey for people to walk down in order to better their lives but can deliver that to people in mass via an educational model. A "cult leader" for good without a religious context. Tony Robbins is an example as is someone like

I'm also good with a single etymologically appropriate word that isn't necessarily in common use but makes sense.

It should fit in this sentence... Tom is an entrepreneur and powerful __________ whose books, training, leadership and non-profit work has created a movement.

Thanks in advance for your help!

EDIT: I'm looking for how someone would view themselves vs how others would view them.


texts: What would be a suitable name for the game panel in tetris?

texts:
I am trying to develop a Tetris clone. However, I am unsure what to name the panel where the user places the pieces.

Game panel seems too generic since the entire frame is in fact the panel of the game. Are there any other options?


texts: John ate vs John is too stubborn to talk to

texts:
I was intrigued by an observation made by Noam Chomsky in this video, namely that if we take the sentence John ate an apple and drop an apple to get John ate

John ate an apple.
John ate.

we understand it to mean that John ate something else. On the other hand, if we take John is too stubborn to talk to Bill and drop Bill

John is too stubborn to talk to Bill.
John is too stubborn to talk to.

it means John is too stubborn for someone else to talk to him. It could've meant that John is too stubborn to talk to someone else, but it doesn't mean that. So my question is why aren't the semantic interpretations uniform in this sense?


texts:
Instead of writing

  We performed a systematic review of articles

some academic authors write

  We systematically reviewed articles

to saves 3 words -- for the purpose of word count limit.

Now, what is the verb from scoping review?

I found this very bizarre:

  We [scopingly] reviewed articles


texts:
Please clarify the usage of right preposition on or at.

For example: That paper is on your desk.

or That paper is at your desk.


texts: Is Invasion of the Body Snatchers a misnomer?

texts:
In the phrase "invasion of Vietnam", Vietnam is being invaded. It seems whenever I see "invasion of (SOME COUNTRY NAME)" in any English text, the country in question is being invaded and is not the invader.

That is why I am confused by the movie title. Is that a misnomer or is it that "invasion of X" can have two meanings?


texts: Conjugation when not substituting pronouns for proper nouns

texts:
Pronouns take the place of proper nouns when context allows.  However, it seems proper nouns are only ever conjugated in the third person, singular or plural.  Is this a rule?

For example, if I'm talking directly to someone named Susan, I could ask her "Do you agree?"  However, if I feel I need to specify who I'm specifically talking to, I could choose to by asking "Does Susan agree?".  Is it grammatically incorrect to ask "Do Susan agree?"


texts: "He must have overslept, mustn't he?" versus "… , hasn't he?" or "… , didn't he?" Which is correct?

texts:
Which question tag should follow He must have overslept ?

  He must have overslept, mustn't he ?

or

  He must have overslept, hasn't he ?

or even

  He must have overslept, didn't he ?

What motivates my question is that adding not to modal must usually changes its meaning from the logical deduction that something is/was the case to prohibition, doesn't it?


texts:
There is a strange usage of a strange word steeldust.
It is used in the following extract from a Warhammer novel:

  ...shown in white marble numerals on their battleplates and the
  steeldust rims of their pauldrons...

Googling shows that close meaning of it is an American horse breed. I am stuck on it about an hour for now!


texts: What is the correct possessive for nouns ending in "‑s"?

texts:
What is the possessive of a noun ending in ‑s?  Are these both right, or is the second one wrong?

the boys' books
the boss' car


texts: Why does the suffix of "iodine" sound different in American and British English?

texts: As an American, I noticed Fluorine and Iodine, though clearly sharing the same ending (and this was corroborated by etymonline.com; both contain the same chemical suffix) sounded different. Fluorine has an ending that sounds like "een", and Iodine has an ending that sounds like "ine" should sound if you say it aloud. Bromine, Chlorine, and Astatine also have an "een" ending, so clearly Iodine is an outlier. I then went on en.wiktionary.org to check it out, and it turns out the British pronounce it correctly, whereas the Americans do not. I searched all my usual sources and some more, but nothing could explain this difference. Any help?


texts:
Yesterday i was texting my grandma, and one of the things I said was:

Nothing much going on down here. Were (supposed to) getting lobster rolls from Masons since its National Lobster Day.

Now, my question is would I say get or getting in the sentence. Saying "Were getting lobster" is right, and saying were supposed to get lobster" is also right, but since there are parenthesis, does that change it? Thanks!


texts: Is this use of 'whom' appropriate or should I reword the sentence?

texts:
May I ask if the following sentence sounds right or if I would be better off rewriting it?

Stockpiles of weapons were found in the building of the staff members who worked there - one of whom was later caught attempting to smuggle some of the guns out in the boot of his car.

The part I'm particularly concerned about is the 'one of whom was later caught'. It doesn't seem to sit right with me for some reason; is there a better way to word it? I'm basically just trying to say that one member of a group got busted. Thank you.


texts: Is the adjective "big" in Disney's new film The BFG redundant?

texts: "The BFG" stands for "The Big Friendly Giant". But I'm curious, is the "big" part of the title considered redundant because "giant" already means big? Otherwise, I suppose there are small giants and big giants to begin with. I'd like to ask native English speakers specifically.


texts: 'too dangerous to let live' or 'too dangerous to be let live'?

texts:
I was writing something down that came to me in a passing while I was watching TV, and I found myself discombobulated with the way one should phrase the notion of letting someone do something in the manner illustrated by the example in the question I posed. I know of a book with the title 'too dangerous to let live', but the sentence I was writing down feel so much intuitive with the second form, that is, having 'be' before the phrase 'let + verb'.

The sentence is,

'Besmirching what I thought to be too pure to be let exist, deflowering what I reckoned to be too beautiful to be let waste'.

Is this sentence grammatically right? Or is this one a better alternative?

'Besmirching what I thought to be too pure to be let to exist, deflowering what I reckoned to be too beautiful to be let to waste'.

The problem here is, I was reminded by that book I mentioned with the title 'Too Dangerous To Let Live' which would then suggest that my sentence is better if phrased this way,

'Besmirching what I thought to be too pure to let exist, deflowering what I reckoned to be too beautiful to let waste'

I also have thought of another alternative which further baffles me,

'Besmirching what I thought to be too pure to be let existed, deflowering what I reckoned to be too beautiful to be let wasted'

So do you have any ideas or insights on which one should be correct? Any answer is very much appreciated!


texts:
Which of the following is grammatically correct?

I am having OR I have.
We/they/you are having OR we/they/you have.

For eg.

I have/ We have a problem that I/we can't seem get rid of.

OR

I am having/ We are having a problem that I/we can't seem get rid of.


texts: I need to know the difference between these two sentences 1)He stopped to playing football 2)He stopped playing football


texts: A word for someone who is overly cautious?

texts:
I am thinking along the lines of a hypochondriac, only not necessarily limited to health.

"Overly anxious" comes to mind but I don't think it fits exactly...

In context:

  'I don't want to come across as being a XXXX but I am concerned that it will get damaged'

I need it to sound more formal than just slang.


texts: Do we need the definite article before designation plus organization?

texts: If I write Mr. ABC, President of the XYZ Corporation, . . . do I need to use the before President? I know it is must when we are mentioning organizations, but what about designation (more specifically, designation with organization, if it matters at all)?


texts: A word for a person who expects other people to be like him

texts: What is the word for a person who expects other people to be like him, for example, a dad who wants his son to be like him?


texts: When should I use "to do" and "to doing"

texts:
folks
Here are two sentences that I find difficult to understand the grammar during my reading.

Last year, two of her ministers suggested that convicted tycoons be pardoned if they could contribute to boosting economic growth.
He also argued that the heavy-handed approach taken by the government to promoting innovation is in fact retarding it.

As a foreign English speaker, I would have said "contribute to boost" and "approach taken to promote" .
Why in these phrases the article uses v. + ing. Does the -ing form suggest a clause?

Thank you very much for your help.


texts:
As seen in The Church Porch by George Herbert, this is the phrase's context:

A sad wise valour is the brave complexion,
That leads the van, and swallows up the cities.
The gigler is a milk-maid, whom infection
Or a fir'd beacon frighteth from his ditties.
Then he's the sport: the mirth then in him rests,
And the sad man is cock of all his jests.

If I had to guess, I would say it means "butt of all his jokes", but I'd like to make sure.


texts: Is it correct to write 40+ in a sentence?

texts:
If the amount of something, let's say locations, has a minimum of 40 but fluctuates to up randomly, can 40+ be used? Would "around 40," "about 40" or something similar be more appropriate for a formal paper.

Ex. Their company has 40+ locations.


texts: What is the meaning of "from the inside out"?

texts:
I guess the meaning of "from the inside out" is thoroughly. Is it right?

Here is an example sentence.

That will change you from the inside out


texts: Does "shall no longer be" imply "forever not?"

texts: Can "no longer" refer to a finite, forseeable time period, or does it indicate a long-term finality?  For example, if someone says, in anticipation of a large meal, "I shall no longer be hungry," does that imply that they will never be hungry again?


texts:
We’re afraid of coming to grapple with words...

Is this sentence grammatical? I can somehow infer that it's related to a progressive action, like being afraid to become to grapple with words, in this case, but it sounds pretty artificial and undue.


texts: Was analysis spelt as anlysis in the past?

texts:
I found a lot of uses of the term anlysis, mostly in older texts and archived articles (from the 1970s). Was the word spelt as anlysis before the current use of analysis?

Update: It seems like people think these are mostly spelling errors, so here are a couple of queries that yield results that use anlysis instead of analysis - some of the 120000 google results are obviously misspellings, some are intended abbreviation in the context, but some seem like the word was used intentionally. The 33 archive.org results also seem to be a mixed bag, but some of the results are from fairly recent works.

google search for anlysis not analysis

books and papers on archive.org that have anlysis in them

Update 2: Based on all the errors, seems most likely that the ones that are not misspellings are early OCR errors. Thanks, all!


texts: I've tried to offer you an answer about the use of "closet" and "wardrobe" in the United States, but cannot find a way to do that.  In Colonial times, in the United States, homes and buildings were taxed by the number of rooms they had.  Closets were counted as rooms.  So, widespread use of wardrobes ensued.  As tax laws changed, the use of wardrobes finally phased out.


texts: "Should either be" or "should be either"?

texts:
Which is more correct:

  This rule specifies that an object should be either visible or invisible, but not partially visible.

Or

  This rule specifies that an object should either be visible or invisible, but not partially visible.

Is there any rule for that?

Also, should the be be repeated after the or in the second statement?


texts:
I'm going through some code with classes named like:

clean_Cache
purge_Stage
do_Keywords

The particular file do_Keywords is a complete mess and maybe if I knew what it was supposed to do then I could make sense of it. The dev who wrote it and used the verb "do" is absent, probably from someone beating him for his practices.

What is the term in English for verbs that don't provide any information, such as "do"? I'm looking to fill in the following sentence:

  When naming classes, do not use ________ verbs. Use descriptive verbs.

If the term applies to all words, and not just to verbs, all the better. Thanks.


texts: English possessive case, when 2 s are near

texts: James's car is white, or Dickens's books are popular. can we put 2 s together and if so how do you pronounce it naturally and nicely?


texts: Merry Christmas and Happy New Year are proper nouns. But, why are they used with an indefinite article as in "I wish you a Happy New Year/Merry Christmas.


texts: When did English-speakers start and stop using foreign language honorifics?

texts:
Around the middle of the twentieth century, it was usual for English speakers to refer to people from certain non-English speaking countries with honorifics in their native language, rather than English honorifics.

The most easily found example is that contemporary reports of Adolf Hitler almost always call him "Herr Hitler", and rarely "Mr Hitler" or "Mister Hitler". A more recent example - François Mitterand - shows a much more even mix between "Mr" and "Monsieur".

When did this practice originate?

I believe it's no longer a common practice in English, is that correct? If so, when did it stop?

It was definitely used in the German and French languages. What other languages was it common for? What languages was it rarely or never used for?

Does anyone have any explanation for this practice, which certainly seems odd?

Is there any research into this practice?


texts: Confectionery or confectionary when referring to a group of sweets

texts:
A recent discussion arose on how to spell the term "confectionery", as used to refer to a collection/group of sweets. Most people believed it was actually spelled "confectionary". Spellcheck programs suggest only the former spelling is correct. But a quick google to resolve it suggests that these words have two distinct meanings:

Confectionery is the act of making chocolates. To confect something.
Confectionary refers to a place that sells confections

Which is confusing, but kind of feels right. However, neither word means a group of sweets which is probably the most common way in which this term is actually used. Looking at the above definitions suggests that the proper word for this is simply a plural: confections.

So, when referring to a group of sweets, is it correct to use the term "confectionery"? If so which is the correct spelling, or are both correct? And what's the grammar, etymology at play here?


texts: Is there a word for "one who is spoken to"?

texts: Is there an English word for "a person who is spoken to"? I guess you could say speakee or talkee or something but I'm looking for a word that's already well established.


texts: Has the use of the idiom "last week" surpassed the use of the correct "yester-week"?

texts:
In his book Write It Right, which was published in 1909 -– a hundred years ago -- Ambrose Bierce disagreed with the usage of the words “Last” and “Past” with “week”. He explained :

  Last and Past.  “Last week.” “The past
  week.” Neither is accurate: a week
  cannot be the last if another is
  already begun; and all weeks except
  this one are past. Here two wrongs
  seem to make a right: we can say the
  week last past. But will we? I trow
  not.

And H. W. Fowler agreed with those sentiments in his Fowler's Modern English Usage 1st Ed.

  4. Last) (latest. In this now favourite antithesis (Dr Marshall's
  latest, but we hope not his last,
  contribution) we are reminded that
  latest means last up to now only,
  whereas last does not exclude the
  future. The distinction is a
  convenient one, & the use of latest
  for last is described by the OED as '
  now archaic & poetical'. But no
  corresponding agreement has yet been
  reached for abstaining from last when
  latest would be the more precise word,
  & many idioms militate against it
  (last Tuesday; last year ; for the
  last fortnight; on the last occasion ;
  as I said in my last).

And his successor, R. W. Burchfield, also agreed, in New Folwer's Modern English Usage 3rd Ed.

  4. Last/Latest. In such a
  context as “In his latest book, Dr.
  A…”, it is clear that Dr. A has
  written earlier books and that he is
  still alive and may well write others.
  If the statement runs “In his last
  book, Dr A…” the meaning could be the
  same, or it could also imply that this
  was the final book written by Dr A
  before he died. It is obvious,
  therefore, that if there is any danger
  of contextual ambiguity some word
  other than last should be used. In
  many idiomatic phrases last is still
  the only possible adj. of the two: =
  most recent; next before a specified
  time ( last Christmas; last week); =
  preceding; previous in a series ( got
  on at the last station); = only
  remaining ( the last biscuit; our last
  chance); ( preceded by the) = the
  least likely or suitable ( the last
  person I’d want to see; the last thing
  I’d have expected; = the lowest in
  order ( the last name on the list).

Nevertheless, the Oxford English Dictionary 2nd Ed described yester as:

  yester-

  in comb. or as prefix = immediately
  preceding the present, last, in
  yestereve, etc., after yesterday,
  yesternight; e.g. yester-afternoon,
  yester-age, yester-noon,
  yester-tempest, yester-week. See also
  yester-year.

Of course, I admit I've always thought that last week was the week before this.

So my question is: Do you think that use of the idiom last week has overpowered the correct usage "yester-week"?


texts: Trust me I'm a doctor - Origin of the phrase

texts:
Searching for the origin of the phrase, "Trust me I'm a doctor", which I take as a humorous way of simply saying, "Trust me!", it seems mostly to be attributed to the title of a British TV show of that name from 1996.

The original series of the show ran for four series between 1996 and
1999.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trust_Me,_I%27m_a_Doctor_(TV_series)

However I have a strong feeling that the name of the TV show came from the expression rather than vice-versa.
Does anyone here have any proof (or anecdotal evidence) that predates 1996?


texts: Is 'edit' a correct term for the act of editing?

texts: Can we refer to the action of editing as to an edit? For example as in this sentence, "I paid a lot to get that edit done, it was a long text". Or "Free photo edits for the first 100 customers".


texts: What do you call the "inverse" of a question?

texts:
Suppose I asked: "Does every X have property Y?"

Then I want to rephrase the question for the reader, in order to make use of some special terminology...

In other words, "Can an X exist without property Y?"

But, of course, even though I am essentially asking the same thing, these two questions are not the same and have different answers (yes for the first question and no for the second)

How can I introduce the second version? What is the relationship called?


texts: A word or phrase for something that seems modern but comes surprisingly from the past?

texts:
A few examples of this "future in the past" phenomenon:

  SR-71 Blackbird aircraft (1964).
  Douglas C. Engelbart's "Mother of All Demos" (1968).
  World's Fair: Columbian Exposition (1893).
  Huge telescopes over a century old with crystal clear optics, Nikola Tesla's inventions, WW II technologies, Bathyscaphe Trieste's deepest dive record of 35,800 feet (1953), this "time traveler"—the list goes on…

If there is no such word or phrase, how can this be described?


texts: HP Lovecraft's "A Reminiscence of Dr. Samuel Johnson" - Seemingly random capitalization in a sentence

texts:
Mr. Lovecraft writes, "indeed, 'tis frequently by means of such Recollections that the obscure occurrences of History, and the lesser Anecdotes of the Greats, are transmitted to Posterity."

Why would he capitalize "Recollections," "History," "Anecdotes," "Greats," and "Posterity"?

Reading through the story, I have observed that he capitalizes words that otherwise should not be capitalized--at least to my amateur-level knowledge.

Thank you in advance for your responses.


texts: What dictionary should be used when citing the dictionary in an American PhD-level dissertation?

texts:
In an Australian PhD dissertation, the Oxford English Dictionary would be the obvious choice when needing to make reference to a dictionary definition.

However, I am writing for an audience of (mostly) American computer scientists and would like to follow US conventions.

Which dictionary would be widely regarded as the source of the most authoritative, prestigious and "academic" definitions within the US?

(There is a related question at US Equivalent to the Oxford English Dictionary but the question and answers are based on a reader's point of view, rather than as an authoritative source)


texts: Is this possessive optional? How would it affect the meaning of the sentence?

texts:
I'm writing an English piece as part of an assignment for our class, but I was unsure whether to add an apostrophe here:

I went to see the Arctic Monkeys concert last week.

or

I went to see the Arctic Monkeys' concert last week.

To me, the first version seems correct, but they both make sense. Is it more of a stylistic choice? Or is one grammatically incorrect?


texts: His objection only takes (SOMETHING) with one aspect of the theory

texts:
I am talking about how an author notes the problem in only one aspect of a theory. I know there exists a construction on the lines of "takes notice", but is more apt here.

What is that construction?


texts: What's the term describing regarding things/animals as humans?

texts:
I believe there's a special word for it but I can't recall it. What would be a proper name for the phenomenon of regarding inanimate objects (or animals) as humans in terms of properties?

E.g. talking about a door that's been hurt or a chair that is sad. Alternatively speaking of dogs smiling or cows taking a coffee break with friends.


texts: Are there nouns that are always plural — have no plural counterpart?

texts: Are there words that have no plural counterpart, because they are, in fact plural? Words like rice or scissors come to mind.


texts: Are commas and dashes truly interchangeable?

texts:
My English teacher told me that "dashes and commas are interchangeable".

For instance, "My friend, Alex, ran to the store." and, "My friend–Alex–ran to the store." are both grammatically correct sentences and have the same meaning.

However, is, "My friend–Alex, ran to the store." a correct sentence? Or can the sentence only have one or the other when a dependent clause is inserted into an independent clause like that?


texts: Strict semicolon syntactic semi-lateral symmetry

texts:
Is this ok?

  I’m in need of a punching bag; anyone want to volunteer?

Do both sides of the semicolon have to be the same syntax — that is, both questions or both statements?

And considering the latter half does not stand on its own as a statement, can I use it in a semicolon like this?


texts:
I was never really sure about the difference between these four, so I went to dictionary.com to check them (http://www.dictionary.com/browse/quarrel?s=t, http://www.dictionary.com/browse/discussion?s=t, http://www.dictionary.com/browse/argument?s=t and http://www.dictionary.com/browse/brawl?s=t).

I'd like to share my impressions to start with. It came to me that there are two pairs of words with closer meanings.

Argument and Discussion

Argument and discussion seem rather civilized, and though they can infer somehow aggressive situations, they tend to be primarily rational and pacific.
However among these, only discussion can be used when a debate is welcome.

They had a very interesting discussion about the pros and cons of the legalization of marijuana.

Seems to be a case where discussion and argument aren't interchangeable.

Brawl and Quarrel

These are rather aggressive, highly emotional and can easily get physical. I don't see any case we could say a brawl/quarrel was pacific.
The entry for Brawl also gives me the impression Brawl is more of a noisy kind of event than quarrel.

I also looked on Ngram how often they are used in American and British English to check if there was any country preference (https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Brawl%2CArgument%2Cdiscussion%2Cquarrel&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=18&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CBrawl%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CArgument%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cdiscussion%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cquarrel%3B%2Cc0 and https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Brawl%2CArgument%2Cdiscussion%2Cquarrel&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=17&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CBrawl%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CArgument%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cdiscussion%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cquarrel%3B%2Cc0), but it seems that in either case discussion is by far the favorite one.

My quations are:

Does the notion above (of dividing them into those groups) make sense?
If so, then what's the difference between each word in each pair? If not, how would you explain the differences among them?
Is discussion really more common than the other three both in AE and in BE?


texts: Is "he plays the piano" stative or dynamic?

texts:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stative_verbs:

  The same verb may act as stative or dynamic. An English phrase like
  "he plays the piano" may be either stative or dynamic, according to
  context.

Could someone elaborate, exactly according to what context can "he plays the piano" be stative, and according to what context can "he plays the piano" be dynamic ?


texts: What is the error called when numbers are confused with letters?

texts:
In serial numbers etc., there are many cases where you can't tell if the intended character is a number or a letter. For example, the number 0 and the letter O, the number 1 and the letters l or I, and so on.

Is there a name for this concept/problem?

Background: I'm writing a spell corrector for my search engine that handles this situation. I'd like to know what this concept is called so I can document it properly.


texts: How do I rephrase "As a newbie, let me give you some advice" where "newbie" applies to the listener?

texts:
I've come across phrases like the following.

As a veteran, let me give you some advice. (I am a veteran, so I can offer some advice.)

Usually, "veteran" refers to the speaker.
Sometimes, I hastily construct a similar phrase, with "newbie" instead of "veteran", but with the person spoken to being the newbie.

As a newbie, let me give you some advice. (You are the newbie, so I can offer some advice.)

This version strikes me as weird, and I usually rephrase. Could it ever be used in the second fashion, or is it strictly the first case (the noun referring to the speaker)?
I tried to rephrase to remove ambiguity:

Seeing that you are a newbie, let me give you some advice.
In light of you being a newbie, let me give you some advice.
It seems like you are a newbie, so let me give you some advice.

However, I feel these can be improved. The first two seem a bit condescending, and the third just makes an assumption where the original phrase states a fact.


texts: Comma use: "from the ground up" or "from the ground, up"?

texts:
Is it appropriate to use a comma in the expression: ..."from the ground, up" or should there be no comma?

Without a comma, the expression seems strange to me.  I've been criticized by a non-native English speaker for writing the expression in this way.  Since he's put a lot more effort into learning the "rules" of English, I have a shadow of self-doubt.  However, I have a feeling that this is one of the many (many) cases where English proves that rules were meant to be broken - or at the very least, that there are more rules than one can easily learn.


texts: What is the word to describe an advanced vocabulary?

texts:
Instead of using a common word like "sad", one can use "morose" to make a more vivid image. Or in professional fields words like "pedagogy" are used instead of a more common word like "education". We usually see this kind of vocabulary in  academic writing or literature, which require ideas to be expressed more precisely than normally.

Is there a name for this? I have thought about:

advanced vocabulary, but it doesn't express the idea of giving the speakers or the writers "liberty of thinking"
GRE vocabulary. In fact I had the idea of this kind of vocabulary when I studied for GRE, but I don't think taking the name of a test is a good use here.
academic vocabulary. Well, a large portion of it is academic vocabulary, but "morose" is not an academic vocabulary, is it?

Example usage: by learning the ______ vocabulary, my writing is sharper and mightier.

I would like the word to convey the sense of "making the message more precise"


texts: What is the word for when someone gives you something for free instead of charging you for it?

texts:
What is the word for when someone gives you something for free instead of you paying for it?

For example: Some shopkeeper is about to close his shop, and you catch him just in the nick of time, you get something(anything), nonetheless he's so hurried that he lets you take it for free.

I know it's kind of a bizarre example and also a rarity, but it's the only thing I could come up with.

Much obliged.


texts: An adjective to describe the nature of information used to blackmail someone

texts:
In yesterday's Washington Examiner article, the word "kompromat" was used to describe a piece of "compromising information" Russia might have on Trump.

What I'm looking for is a less vague synonym to "compromising", a word you'd use to describe an information which would make a person look bad in other people's eyes. Not necessarily in a criminal way, so "incriminating" would be too strong and off-topic - more like in a general way, but still less formal and flat than "compromising".

Any ideas?

PS: I'm asking since I strongly believe I had seen an exact word I'm now looking for before - but now I just cannot recall it.


texts:
Initally from this question : https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/58702/how-do-you-call-this-work-disorder?noredirect=1#comment153389_58702

I have observed a frequent work disorder (or at least work habit) but I can't find a name for it.

"Always doing the bare minimum, following instructions to the letter. Forcing others to micro micro manage them."

Naming it would help me pin down the problem and try to solve it constructively.


texts: Stating the further reference of an individual

texts:
If I addressed a professor in text as "George Lee Peterson" but didn't want to call him that every single time he is referenced, can I not just state at the first mention of his name like this?:

  George Lee Peterson (Peterson) was born in North eastern Canada in Trenton, Ontario on a small farm. He worked on said farm until he had enough money to go to school. Peterson then continued to major in physiology.

(Horrible grammar I know, but I just need the answer for the question. )


texts:
What is the Middle English letter combination?

In Mk.9:4 Studylight says it is "pp", but in Mt.21:26 it is not "pp".

Wycliffe's Bible (page 76)

Mk.9:4

Studylight:

"...and Helie with Moises apperide to hem, and thei spaken with Jhesu."

King James Bible:

"And there appeared unto them Elias with Moses: and they were talking with Jesus."

Wycliffe's Bible (page 44)

Mt.21:26

Studylight:

"...not to hym? If we seien of men, we dreden the puple, for alle hadden Joon as a prophete."

King James Bible:

"But if we shall say, Of men; we fear the people; for all hold John as a prophet."


texts: What is the difference between "easy" and "simple"?

texts:
I'm not sure if those two words are completely synonymous in all context and which connotation they have.

Here are some example sentences where I would use them synchronously, but I'm not sure if this is correct:

Answering this question is [easy / simple].
His live is [easy / simple].

I think there is a difference in

I can simply / easily do it: The first sounds a bit more like somebody is resignating, e.g. somebody else did not do the job he was supposed to do. The second emphasizes that the task is not difficult.

And here is the Google ngram:


texts: Word meaning a saying or phrase spoken as a ritual

texts:
I'm looking for a word which converts the meaning of something such as a word, phrase or prayer which is said by rote as a form of dogma or ritual.

For example, a prayer or political phrase, which might be routinely spoken before a meeting or presentation.

Ideally, the word would convey on or more of the concepts that:

The content of the phrase, while dogmatic, is considered politically incorrect or taboo to challenge within the culture in which it is used.
Most people who repeat the phrase don't think about what it really means. They just do it because everyone else does it, or because they think it's "nice" or "the done thing."


texts: What do you call a building where you can view a historical attraction?

texts:
I'm designing a small building for my university where you can come and relax and take pictures and most importantly, view the neighboring building through a lens "(which is a historical site).

So, can you guys tell me what would be the right name to call it by?


texts: Is there a verb specifically meaning 'to mock something one does not understand?'

texts: In the film Idiocracy, Joe Bowers is often mocked or ridiculed as being the unintelligent one simply because the others around him lack the wherewithal to properly understand him. I am familiar with words like jeer, deride, scoff, etc. but is there any verb (or any other word form) that specifically pertains, or is limited to, ridicule stemming from one's own lack of knowledge or understanding?


texts: Why is the phrase "We assume the reader to have [...]" not ungrammatical

texts:
In scientific articles I often read the phrase:

  We assume the reader to have [some basic knowledge in] ...

A simple google search of it reveals tons of examples. But, strictly, it sound a little bit odd, or ungrammatical? Should it not rather be

  We assume the reader has some basic knowledge

or

  We assume that the reader has some [...]?

Or why is the original form perfectly fine?


texts: What's the word for a segment/part of a spectrum chart?

texts:
Let's say there's a spectrum chart (or any chart) like this:

and I want to point out that 300-400 MHz segment is exceeding the red line.
Then what is the correct word I should use for those segment/range/part?

For example, I want to write some sentences like "The test failed due to 300-400 [word].", "300-400 [word] exceeded the criteria." or "300-400 [word] is exceedingly high". Also, I'd like to know the word when it's not a range but a specific point, for example, to point out 300 [word] being the highest.


texts: What is the difference between agree and concur? Which is the more common to use? For instance, someone said something to me and I want to say that he is right. Should I say I agree with you or I concur with you?


texts: What does ‘be one’s “buddy”’ mean aside 'be one’s “friend”'?

texts:
What does ‘be one’s “buddy”’ mean aside be one’s “friend”?

I was drawn to the phrase, “My short game’s always been my buddy” appearing  in
the following quote of Tiger Woods in the Time magazine’s (December 4) article, titled “Turning 40, the golfer talks about his highs and lows on and off the course”:

  “I had never seen myself going through a spell that bad. I’ve never
  lost my short game my entire life. I’ve lost other parts of my game,
  but I’ve never lost my short game. My short game’s always been my
  buddy. I’ve always been able to chip and putt.
  http://time.com/tiger/?xid=homepage&pcd=hp-magmod

From the context, I surmise “my buddy” here means one’s forte or strength, but Cambridge online dictionary defines “buddy” as noun;

a friend:
buddies for years.
(US) (as a form of address) used when talking to a man, sometimes in a friendly way.
Someone who provides friendly help to someone with illness or problem.

Oxford Dictionary defines 'buddy' likewise:

a close friend:
a working companion with whom close cooperation is required.
a person who befriends and helps another with an incapacitating disease, typically AIDS:
Used as a form of address to a man whose name is not known:

To me, it requires a bit of stretch of imagination to link all of the above definitions associated with ‘friend’ to ‘strength / forte,’ though it might not be impossible. At the same time, I feel difficulty to compare impersonal thing (short game) to the living (buddy), albeit it's a metaphor.

Is the expression such as “short game (approach, putting, math, karaoke, quibble, whatever) is my buddy” a very common usage of “buddy”?


texts: What is a more specific word for a 'thing'?

texts:
By thing I mean as in "how is that still a thing?" or "people are doing that, is that a thing now?". Things can also happen, as in "stop trying to make fetch happen."

I suppose things are common behaviours in a group performed and accepted by a substantial number of people. The best specific word I can come up to describe a 'thing' is the term 'phenomenon', but is there something more appropriate?


texts: "empirically ubiquitous": what does "empirically" mean here?

texts:
I am translating an American article about a theatre production, and there's a phrase I can't understand. It uses the word "empirically" but if I'm not mistaken has nothing to do with philosophy/science, the two spheres that are usually mentioned in the definitions of this word. Here it is (Bunin is the name of the author of the original text):

  Bunin’s text isn’t diminished amid the theatricality. Indeed Bunin’s words are empirically ubiquitous (the piece is entirely in Russian and French): the dialogue is echoed both by a cappella vocalizations and the English translations washing across the playing field, the entire stage becoming a projection screen.

The only idea that comes to my mind is that "empirically" here is a synonym for "practically", that is: "Indeed Bunin's words are practically/almost everywhere". What do you think?

I would appreciate your help and your ideas :) Many thanks in advance!


texts:
How did "aye yah" get its start in our language? For example, "Waste not, want not — aye yah."
Did it originate in the northeast or southern California? I've googled but cannot find a definitive answer regarding "aye yah."
Or when one says, "Christmas presents, aye yah." What does that mean? I heard it was a common utterance of forest rangers.
Your thoughts?


texts: what does "vertiginous game of chicken" mean and its origin

texts: Taking us behind the scenes, Paulson shows, day by day, how the U.S. government and Federal Reserve got sucked into a vertiginous game of chicken with Wall Street bankers (link)


texts: How did the phrase "much of a muchness" come to be?

texts: This is a great way of saying that two things are so similar that there is no significant difference between them.  I'm sure there are many more and thought this might make a great community wiki.  How did the phrase/idiom come about and is it more prevalent in one english-speaking region than another?


texts:
“Just a entrance alone will continue a lot of people entrance adult to recreate,” pronounced Manager Gary Lamb. (http://boston-massachusetts.us/conservation-plan-also-brings-development-in-maine)

Gary Lamb uttered a totally incomprehensible sentence, at least for  a not native of English language: it seem as the grammatical meaning, which is signaled by the structure words, is not present.

Please, help me in understanding that sentence.