texts: Subjunctive vs. indicative with conditionals

texts:
I was reading this topic from March 2014 and thought Charles’s answer was great until I got to the following part:

The letter claimed exactly the same as the first, namely that if his letter wasn't published, he would be angry.

Now, by the rules I have laid out you would expect that wasn't, the indicative form, would be appropriate because we didn't know if his letter was published. Actually, it is not what we know that matters but what the writer of the second letter knew, but it nets out to the same grammatical issue. If this were a counterfactual conditional, i.e., it was known that the letter wasn't published, then weren't, the past subjunctive form, would be correct. But it isn't a counterfactual, so wasn't is OK here.

However, based on his logic in his answer, wouldn’t the subjunctive be correct only if it was known that the letter was published? I.e.,
If the letter weren’t published, he would be angry. (And the letter was published.)
*If the letter wasn’t published, he would be angry <—- this one wouldn’t work in the case that the letter was published, right?
I acknowledge it’s slightly strange to make a new post asking about someone else’s logic, but I’ve been reading it for a while and it’s bothering me! I would simply have commented on his answer, but I didn’t have the option to do so.
EDIT: I don’t need explanations on when to use which construction...this is literally a post analyzing someone else’s comment that I think has an error in it and it’s driving me crazy because it doesn’t feel like a comment that would have an error in it and yes probably super hair-splitty irrelevant but what is it we’ve all come to do here anyway


texts: Idiom for someone who works fast without paying attention to the quality?

texts: Is there any idiom or any suitable words for someone who works fast without paying attention to the quality?


texts: Is there a word for a professional who has a beautiful and neat handwriting and whose work consists of using that attribute?

texts: These days, when we use the computer for everything, it may be very difficult to find professionals who have beautiful and neat handwriting and whose work consists of using that skill.  A century ago, however, such persons were easily found in all major cities.  Their work consisted of writing on envelopes, invitation cards, certificates, diplomas, and other documents.  Their neat and beautifully drawn handwriting was highly appreciated.  What would such professionals be called?


texts: "On the tournament" vs. "in the tournament"

texts:
What preposition should I use, in or on? For example:

  67 people took part in/on the tournament.


texts: The Briton could only win the title if Rosberg finished off the podium. What is the meaning of finished off?

texts:
Here is a quick question. The meaning of:"finish OFF" and more generally the world "OFF" because i know that this is different of the world "OF"
pronunciation which change ?


texts:
I am attempting to ask a question that would be in past tense using middle English. The specific question is of the form “Person, where did you find this thing?” I was not able to find much about questions in Middle English on the internet, or else I wouldn’t be asking here. Does anyone know how to say this or where to find an answer?

forgot to say the one thing i did find was that 2nd person would be something like thou findest


texts:
I have seen these phrases using interchangeably, but I couldn't pinpoint exactly what do they mean.

what is the difference between the 2 and where/how to use them?


texts: Does English have any terms or grammatical structures which can only be used in writing and not in speech?

texts:
I am studying Japanese and a relative who is studying Italian has noticed the same thing, that there exist grammatical structures which are said to be only used in writing.

Are there any terms or is there any grammar which is not used in spoken English? I am struggling to find any examples.

Thank you!


texts: When would it be incorrect to use the past tense instead of present perfect

texts:
I am learning english, an I am wondering if I would be "correct" in using only the past tense and never using the present perfect tense. I might be over-simplifying the english grammar ...

So, are there some situations where it would be incorrect using the past tense instead of present pefect ?

(the following link gives some axample where past tense shall be used instead of present perfect, but no example where present perfect shall be used instead of past tense: Present perfect for past action with present effect)

Many thanks for your replies,
Thierry


texts: Is there a word for creating something or bringing something into existence just by thinking it? Something besides materializing.


texts: What does ‘cutting with’ mean in ‘someone is right there cutting with the rest of them’?

texts:
I read the following lead copy in today's Washington Post article titled "Back home, GOP freshmen find fiscal responsibility can be tricky business."

What does "cutting with" mean? I don’t find the meaning of "cut with" other than in the ordinary usage of cut something with a knife, scissors or any other tools in a dictionary at hand, or in Google search. Does it mean alone, separate from the rest? I'm confused with the usage of basic and short words very often that are quite plain to native speakers.

  As the government programs fell and the tens of billions in savings piled up during the budget debate in the House last week, freshman Republican Frank Guinta was right there cutting with the rest of them.


texts: What does it mean to call somebody "mom?"

texts:
I've heard many people use the word mom both in workplace and on TV. These are a few examples:

In Insanity (the home exercise program) the leader of the program calls one of the participants "mom."
Another situation is in a workplace where people call their boss mom.

I wonder if calling someone "mom" means that the person is better than other people, a way to show their respect, or something else.


texts: what is the verb tense for "is repaired" in this sentence

texts: what is the verb tense for "is repaired" in the sentence "they will be eating breakfast in the local cafe until their kitchen is repaired".


texts: A colon or a comma in alternative questions

texts:
Which punctuation mark should be used before the second part of the alternative question? Should it be a colon or a comma?
Eg:
What do you like best: pears or apples? or
What do you like best, pears or apples?
Which of these two question has the correct punctuation?
All grammar manuals I looked through say nothing about using a colon in alternative questions.


texts:
I am a French-Welsh bi-national living and working in France.
I am translating the institutional brochure of a French company whose activities are to print all types of 'identity' papers such as identity cards, passports, driving licenses etc. They also develop machines that control digital identity data, border control systems such as biometric passport control systems and sell their equipment worldwide.
Their new tagline in French is, 'Le droit d'être soi', which literally translated would be, 'The right to be oneself'.  Now, that doesn't sound very correct to me, unless of course I am mistaken. The other option that I'm still not happy with, would be, 'The right to be You'.
The meaning behind it is to say that whether you are a state or an individual you have the right to exercise all types of 'rights' pertaining to your the fact that you are a 'unique person' or state.
Any comments or suggestions would be most welcome.
Regards,
Rose-Noëlle
A quick feedback would be most welcome !


texts: How different is “he is a voice of reason awakening the public” from “he has a voice of reason awakening the public”?

texts:
In association with the question on Sarah Palin’s endorsement of Senator Rand Paul in the Time Magazine article “2013 Time 100” that I posted earlier today, I have an additional question about the expression “He is a voice of reason awakening the public” in her remark:

  “He is a voice of reason awakening the public to what must be done to
  restore our prosperity and preserve the blessings of liberty for
  future generations. His brand of libertarian-leaning conservatism
  attracts young voters, and recently he inspired the nation with his
  Capraesque filibuster demanding basic answers about our use of
  drones.”

I felt somewhat uneasy with the expression, “he is a voice,” because you as an animated being can have a voice, but you cannot be a voice which is an abstract, unanimated ‘object.’

I think there are many similar (possibly metaphoric) expressions like “he is a voice of reason / a mirror of conscience / a walking encyclopedia” that are current. But is the [animated being = unanimated object] equation grammatically right as well as logically congruent?

If so, how different is “he is a voice of reason awakening the public” from “he has a voice of reason awakening the public”?


texts: How can I say "not any time soon, but it won't take a long time either"?

texts:
I was writing an email to a client about a feature we plan to eventually release, maybe in a couple months, but they want some of the functionality now. I initially wrote:

  If there's something else I can do for you, go ahead and let me know. I don't suspect the upgrade will be any time soon.

It sounded like I was saying the upgrade will take a long time, but that's not what I want to imply. I almost wrote:

  I don't suspect the upgrade will be any time immediately soon.

...which sounds awkward, and I don't think it's correct. The search results I got for the term support my assumption.

What would be a better way to say "not soon, but fairly soon" in this context?


texts:
I'm looking for a word that describes the intro/outro pieces tacked onto old time serial radio shows.

Specifically, the intro bit that explains what happened in the previous episode, and the outro bit that explains what to tune in for next time.

I'm guessing there must be some jargon-y in-the-industry term for such things. Any ideas?


texts: Coordinating conjunctions between different pairs that are close to each other

texts:
I'd like to write a sentence with the following "logical structure":
                        I
                        '
                       can
            ,-----------'-------------,
          play                      speak
   ,-------'------,                   ,
the piano     the guitar           Russian

and I need to convey the three bits of information in this particular order (can-play-piano, can-play-guitar, can-speak-Russian).
Which of those options would be grammatical?

I can play the piano, the guitar and speak Russian
I can play the piano and the guitar and speak Russian

The first version avoids the repeated "and", but it also lacks a coordinating conjunction between the two elements under "play", that are now only separated by a comma. Conversely, the second version correctly marks each pair of equal syntactical value (piano-guitar; play-speak) with a conjunction, but it has two "and" in a row which may be perceived as heavy writing.
(I know the sentence could be rephrased, but please focus on the two options I gave: do they both sound good? or bad? or does just one?)


texts:
Which is correct?

  The set is empty and is ordered.
  The set is empty and ordered.


texts: Omitting definite articles in prepositional phrases with specific objects

texts:
Hyphenated adjectives aside, is omitting the "the" in "on scene," "in studio," "on set" etc. any more or less correct than including it?

My inquiry stems primarily from curiosity about the use of "on scene" vs. "on the scene" by some reporters reporting from a specific crime scene: "Police are now arriving 'on scene' (instead of 'on the scene')."

I've also heard radio hosts announce: "My guests are now arriving 'in studio' (instead of 'in the studio')" and "My guests are now arriving 'on set' (instead of 'on the set').

Again, I'm not asking about hyphenated adjectives: antics of the on-scene/in-studio/on-set variety, for example. I'm asking about prepositional phrases with what appear to be specific objects (the specific scene/studio/set from which the reporter/radio host is reporting/broadcasting and on/in which the police/guests are now arriving).

Thanks.


texts: A verb for making a new component work for the first time

texts:
I work with hardware components. When I get a new component I haven't worked with yet, there is a process we do to make it usable. From then on, we know how to use that component and can use it repeatedly. For lack of a better term, we call this process "utilizing the component", but it doesn't really describe it well.

As a metaphor, imagine buying a new TV. Before using it for the first time, you need to assemble its stand, connect it to the power socket, remove the plastic wrap, etc.


texts: Use quotation marks or italics for written quotes?

texts:
In narrative writing, should I use quotation marks or italics when I quote something someone wrote?
I would go with italics to differentiate written from spoken quotes:

“I know who the killer is,” she said and hung up the phone.
I know who the killer is, she wrote, but she never managed to send her message.


texts: How do you diagram: "I will have had been known to do that."?

texts:
I'm a middle school grammar teacher, and I am absolutely stumped on how to diagram the following sentence:

I will have had been known to do that.

I know "I" is the subject.
I know "that" is the object.
I know "to do" is the infinitive so it goes up on stilts.
I don't know anything else.

I realize this is a horrible sentence; a sentence that I'd never encourage my students to use. It's purely hypothetical, but it's been driving me bananas. The context of the sentence is as follows (so you can be certain that it is grammatically correct): I'm living in the future, and I travel to the past (which is the present) and then the people who live farther in the future from where I'm from, upon reflection, are saying I'm a notable time traveler.

Thank you for your consideration and help.

Most kindly, Ali


texts:
My cousin wrote the following today:

  Never would I've believed.

The use of "I've" here, rather than "I have", sounds extremely strange to me. Is it actually incorrect? If so, is there some sort of rule I could use to explain what makes it so?


texts: What is the difference between "drop" and "dump"? When should I use each?

texts:
I do not know the difference meaning using these two verbs when you 'throw' something in the floor. For example, in the sentence: "I dumped/dropped my wallet on the street."

It may be a very silly question, but I did not find anything about it.


texts: Comma use in a list where all the items are new

texts:
Which one is appropriate:

1) He was given a new bat, ball, and glove.

2) He was given a new, bat, ball, and glove

3) He was given a new bat, a new ball, and a new glove.


texts: Is there a word for verbs where the subject is also the verb's object as an implicit relation?

texts:
For example we can have a sentences like:

The boat sank.

Your battleship sank.

No complement is required. There is no explicit object but clearly the boat or battleship is what sank in these sentences. So the subject is also the object of the verb, at least implicitly.

But is this verb  peculiar? We can change its meaning by adding an object complement but not with an adverbial complement.

The boat sank in the harbor. - no difference in meaning.

Your battleship sank my destroyer. - big difference in meaning.

What kind of verb behaves this way?


texts: Are there significant differences in how “college” and “university” are used in syntactic constructions?

texts:
To me (an American), "what to study in college" sounds acceptable.  Meanwhile, "what to study in university" sounds wrong. This suggests that these words have different grammatical attributes.

This is shown somewhat in the example sentences on m-w.com:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/university

  I applied to several public universities.
  He lives near the university.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/college

  She teaches art at a local college.
  He graduated from one of the country's best colleges.
  She attended a business college.
  He attended college for several years, but didn't graduate.
  She dropped out of college.
  I went to Mount Holyoke College.
  When I was a junior in college, I spent a semester in Spain.
  the Edinburgh College of Art
  the London College of Fashion
  She is attending fashion college.

Replacing the non-proper noun 'college' examples with 'university' doesn't sound right in many cases.

  He attended university for several years, but didn't graduate.
  She dropped out of university.
  When I was a junior in university, I spent a semester in Spain.

Placing an article in front of 'university' does make it sound better.

  He attended a university for several years, but didn't graduate.
  She dropped out of the university.

Meaning aside, what is the difference between 'college' and 'university' that suggest a different sentence structure to make it sound "better".

While, Difference between "college" and "university" looks at the difference between the meanings, the question doesn't ask nor do the answers address the perceived grammatical difference.


texts:
What words could be used as antonyms of intelligentsia?

The author of the book I am editing chose to use the word "unintelligentsia" in order to emphasise the (assumed) unintelligent or uncultured nature of the lower classes. I am seeking alternative antonyms.

The sentence in question, in reference to a popular TV show involving legal cases:

  He wisely decided that watching the {unintelligentsia} being scolded by a cranky old lady was the better choice.

The author's explanation of why he chose to use unintelligentsia:

  My use of the word unintelligentsia was meant to be playful. In the same way that Intelligentsia isn’t a pejorative, per se, but is often used as one, Unintelligentsia can be used and argued that it’s a neutral word. Although no one will believe you.

Proletariat might be suitable if you take the word literally, but when you’re using the word as a subtle insult, then you need a different antonym. Pleb is closer, but it’s definitely derogatory and doesn’t carry any sense of the group having their own culture.

So, in summary, I was looking for a word that isn’t overtly derogatory, and that describes a class of people that have (1) a shallow culture, and (2) a sense that being uneducated makes them, in some way, superior to well-educated people.

Example sentence:

  I wouldn't want to socialise with anyone from the {antonym of intelligentsia}; they're too unintelligent and uncultured for me


texts: What is a word that means both "to stop something" and "not going to start something"

texts:
I am looking for a word to use in a policy document that means both "to stop doing something" and "that I'm not going to start something" ?

For instance:

Key reasons not to run activity
Key Reasons to stop activity

I want to turn into one sentence "Key Reasons to >something < the activity"


texts:
Is there any difference between using in-built or built-in? Is one more correct than the other, or does it depend on the context, or ”house style”?

This oven comes with a built-in extractor fan.
This oven comes with an in-built extractor fan.


texts: Adding the 'the' article for proper noun and abbreviation?

texts:
As a part-time English tutorial teacher who isn't specialized in language, I would like to ask about article usage for proper nouns and abbreviations.
Do you add 'the' for the following sentences?
"I have just returned from _____ Massachusetts Institute of Technology."
"I have just returned from _____ Hong Kong."
"I have just returned from _____ MIT."
"I have just returned from _____ HK."
The reason of asking this question is because from where I live (Hong Kong), we have a public transportation named MTR (Mass Transit Railway), which we always seem to add 'the' before 'MTR'. (Example text:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MTR)
'The MTR' also appears in one of my students' text book. ("I go to school by the MTR.")
I am a bit confused by the article usage before abbreviation. My guess is:
'The' for organizations/companies;
No 'The' for location and individual's name;

But I still do not know if 'the' is needed for algorithms. For instance I am writing an academic paper about Neural Network. Should I put 'the' in front of NN? (ie: The prediction is then carried out by ______ NN.)
I would like to hear your thoughts about article usage for abbreviations. Thanks in advance!!!(Also I may have made some mess in the question, apologies to you who read this but passed by before.)
Update:
My confusion continues as I read more stuff:
Organization and Companies: (full name)
"Dragonair became a wholly owned subsidiary of Cathay Pacific after completion..."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathay_Dragon
Meanwhile: "A charter for the incorporation of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology..."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_Institute_of_Technology

But there is some new understanding that I would like to share:
When a proper noun/abbreviation is used to describe an object, the article usage will follow the object unless it's a location.
E.g.: an HMO facility, a SWAT team
http://editingandwritingservices.com/using-articles-with-abbreviations/
Exception on location:  "It started operations in July 1985 with a Boeing 737-200 service from Kai Tak International Airport..."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathay_Dragon

I will keep on updating when more questions pop up in my head. Great thanks!

Update 2: I have marked this as duplicate with this link.


texts:
Some ministerial departments of the UK government use 'of' in their name whilst others use 'for'. What decides whether to use 'of' or 'for' in the department name?
Examples of 'of':

Department of Health & Social Care
Ministry of Defence
Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government

Examples of 'for':

Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy
Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport
Department for Education
Department for Environment Food & Rural Affairs
Department for Transport

As the brief discussion under this previously asked question (examples from Canada and US) shows this questions was never really answered, so I thought I might ask again to try to get some logical answers - if such thing exists.


texts: “Each party must not” - grammatically correct?

texts:
I know that the above phrase is commonly used in legal documents, but I’ve been told that the above phrase is grammatically incorrect or clunky. What do you think? If so, how would you change it?

Thanks!


texts:
A teacher asked his colleague:

Was Mary sleeping in your class yesterday? She was sleeping in my class.
Did Mary sleep in your class yesterday? She slept in my class.

Why is the first better than the second? We are talking about the past (yesterday), and we aren't talking about an ongoing action at a specific point of time. Isn't it better to use the past simple?

Thank you very much.


texts: Is it "honor's calculus" or "honors calculus"?

texts:
I see both usage, with "honors calculus" much more common. This is in reference to courses and programs in high school and universities with a higher level of requirements than the regular counterpart.

My Microsoft Word software does not like "honors", it prefers "honor's" in above context.  What is the correct usage and why?

On Word if I type "Student's project was part of an honors calculus course" the word "honors" gets double blue underlining which implies questionable grammar.


texts: "Inter-", "multi-", "cross-", "trans-" in relation to disciplines

texts:
In academia the words inter-discipline, multi-discipline, trans-discipline, or cross-discipline are used to describe a type of combination between different disciplines or the uniqueness of a field.

Searching on OED.com for the terms inter, multi, cross and trans shows different uses.

multi has some nouns and adjectives, with one option of "multi-, comb. form"
cross has nouns, verbs, adjectives and prepositions, with "cross-, comb. form"
inter has nouns, adjectives, verbs and prepositions, with "inter-, prefix"
trans has nouns and adjectives, with "trans-, prefix"

In academia, the difference between multi or inter is not well-defined.

What is the difference between "comb.form" and "prefix"?  Why are there no results for using multi or cross as a prefix, but there are for inter and trans? How did the interchangeability of these come about, or is it improper to use them that way?


texts: What is a blanket term for a legal system based on evangelical Christian law?

texts:
I'm looking for a term that could be used in the place of Sharia (Islam), Halakha (Judaism), or Canon Law (Catholicism) that refers as specifically as possible to Biblical-literalist Evangelical Christianity.

I have seen the term Mosaic Law refer to the Ten Commandments, and Apostolic Law referring to a few books in the New Testament, but I'm looking for a blanket term that covers both of these as well as American right-wing impositions of Christian law which are less strongly based on scripture (Capitalism, Individualism).

A single word would be amazing, but I realize that is unlikely, and a short phrase would do in a pinch.


texts:
I call (and I'm not alone in this idea) a mechanism that protects a system from entry by malicious users a preventive mechanism. On the other side, what should I call a mechanism that deals with intruders already within the system by analyzing their behaviors - and based on the findings, identifies them for further decisions/actions?

I think it could be called as confrontive mechanism. Is this term appropriate? Any idea for better terms?


texts: When moving one's head to answer a question does "nod" mean yes and "shake" mean no?

texts: I was reading the Green Mile by Stephen King and when John Coffey shook his head in answer to questions it was implied that the word "nod" referred to the lowering and raising of his head in affirmation and the moving of his head side to side is negatory. Is this correct in usual speech? I thought to shake ones head was ambiguous and could mean "yes" or "no"?


texts:
How do the bolded sections of the sentences below function grammatically? (taken from David McCullough's John Adams)

Philadelphia, the provincial capital of Pennsylvania on the western bank of the Delaware River, was a true eighteenth-century metropolis, the largest, wealthiest city in British America, and the most beautiful.

It seems to me that "most beautiful" could be tacked onto the the string of adjectives ( the "largest, wealthiest") that precede it. Is there a name for this sort of construction, wherein the last item in a string of modifiers is pulled out and moved to the end?

Distilleries and breweries were thriving. Adams found the local beer so much to his liking that he temporarily abandoned his usual hard cider.

I'm not sure what's modifying what here. I see the main clause, "Adams found the local beer," and the subordinate clause, "that he temporarily abandoned his usual hard cider," but what's going on the middle?


texts: Does the word "facility" have a negative connotation?

texts: When I hear about "facility" I immediately associate that with a building (like a company's headquarter, store, etc). However, some people say that it can be used to mean a "WC." Is this true? Does this word really have a negative connotation?


texts: Can I use "Just" at the beginning of a sentence when I want to mean "very recently"?

texts: For example can I say "Just a terrorist attack happened in Barcelona" instead of "A terrorist attack just happened in Barcelona" or "Just a guy came and asked about you" instead of "A guy just came and asked about you"? I can use "recently" at the beginning of a sentence in any situation as far as I know. Can't I do the same with "Just"?


texts: Is this a direct object or prepositional phrase?

texts:
Sorry if my question is not suitable for this forum. Although a native speaker, I am unfamiliar with grammatical rules in English (which consequently leads to a lack of comprehension in foreign languages...) I have done research on the differences between direct objects and prepositional phrases but still can't seem to determine the grammatical role of "with my gardening" in the following sentence:

  I have been busy with my gardening.

Is it the direct object? A prepositional phrase?

  I enjoy learning about grammar.

-- "about grammar" is the direct object...?

To me, a direct object is something received/given that the verb does in the sentence; whereas, a prep phrase constitutes a location, time, etc usually with a preposition (but this is still unclear to me).


texts: What should we use instead of "it" when to emphasize more?

texts: We use it when emphasizing that we refer to one particular thing. For instance, "It is Lawrence you should be talking to". Or, "It was malaria that killed him." What pronoun should we apply when we want to emphasize plural things? it does not look all right in such scenario. Should we use "they"? For instance, "It is we that will win this match." Here I doubt I can still use "it", but I do not find another pronoun. If "it" can be used here, that means sometimes "it" refers to plural things.


texts:
What’s the meaning of "otherwise " in the following  sentences ?  Could you explain the meaning of every "otherwise " sentence with the contexts I have given ?

In an interview, he said the idea shouldn’t be that shocking. As long as exchanges are carefully regulated, no one would be forced into it. It would solve an otherwise intractable problem.

Excessive wealth is providing fuel for an otherwise  impoverished industry. Like fossils fuels, it’s bound to pete out at some point. In the meantime, let them eat coach.

As far as anybody knows, the Albanians have always been there. The Albanians speak an otherwise extinct Indo- European  language. There is absolutely no native culture - no literature, no art, no music.


texts:
Should I use on or upon in the following sentence?

  I remembered the story years later when I investigated the incident it was based on.


texts: Has there ever been an antonym for "benefit" that includes the latin affix "neg-"?

texts:
I understand bene to roughly mean well, good, or rightly so from Latin, while neg- coming from Latin negare to roughly mean deny, negate, or against.

The words benefit, beneficial, and benefactor all represent a person or characteristic that yields a positive result or influence.  Do any of these words have an antonym that includes the neg- affix?  Are there any positive bene-based words that have a neg-based word as its antonym?

Mono- and poly- seem to be frequently paired in an antonymic relationship — does this occur with bene- and neg-?

*Background:  I started titling a pro and con list with benefit, and found myself searching for negefit.


texts: "A depends on B and C" or "A depends on B and on C?

texts:
I know that, in some cases, it can change the meaning. For instance,

  "The delay depends on how the cpu handles the processes and the network load."

is ambiguous and could mean that the cpu handles the network load, while

  "The delay depends on how the cpu handles the processes and on the network load."

is more clear.

But, what about:

  "The travel time depends on how fast you walk and the distance to your destination."

There is no ambiguity here, but would it be better to put an "on" preposition before "the distance to your destination"?


texts: Use of "whenever" or "when" instead of "if" in logical sentences

texts:
The conjunction "if" is used a lot in scientific writing. I wonder if it is correct to replace it with "when" and/or "whenever".
For example, instead of writing:

(1) a · b = 0 if a, b are orthogonal.

writing

(2) a · b = 0 whenever a, b are orthogonal.

or

(3) a · b = 0 when a, b are orthogonal.

I read sentences like (2) and (3) in many scientific articles, but they were not written by English speakers, so I am not sure if they are correct.


texts: Is the account balance "less" or "smaller" when we compare two amounts?

texts:
Your current account balance is $X smaller/less than is required

I have read that when we are talking about amount we say small amount. So in my case what word would be right to use?


texts:
If you see him, would you say hello?

Would you get us some coffee if they have any?

Are these questions, in which the “polite” would is used, conditionals of the first or “mixed” type? Are they, in fact, conditionals?


texts: Usage of the definite articles with personal names

texts:
Could you tell me if the following sentence is correct or not? It seems to me that it is not correct because as I know, definite articles are never used with personal names. The only thing that I worry about is that I found this sentence on a website for learning English.

  That evening, jack saw the Maria and Angela. They looked hungry so he offered them a hot meal.

Source pdf: http://www.cmlab.csie.ntu.edu.tw/~cathyp/eBooks/LearningEnglish/EnglishTown/Unit%20overview%20-%20Level%207%20Unit%204.pdf


texts: Why does the *dirty* in *dirty mind* refer to sex instead of any type of immoral thought?

texts: Why does the dirty in dirty mind refer to sexual-related thoughts instead of any type of immoral thought (including ill will or malice against another)?


texts: Similar idioms to "When the cat's away, the mice will play"

texts: I wonder if there is any similar idioms to "When the cat's away, the mice will play." I searched on a few websites (the free dictionary, dictionary.com, and cambridge.) but there was no suggestions idioms.


texts:
I am writing a paragraph describing qualities of a successful manager.
I want to use a word (noun) for the "ability of not being stuck in the past/letting things go/moving ahead with no baggage from the past".

Do you know of a word that could be used in this scenario? Thanks!


texts: Is it technically incorrect to state something in this manner?

texts:
"I want to work at the same hospital as Tom."

Tom isn't a hospital, so it might sound odd in that sense, but it's also clear that Tom isn't a hospital, and I get the feeling that this is how most people would say it in conversation.


texts: A word that describes something that evokes something?

texts:
For example, the sun may evoke an existential angst.

How could I phrase it like "The ___ sun", where ___ is a word that could succinctly communicate my sentiment.


texts: What is the root word of "unforgivable"?

texts: I'm learning about morphology and got confused by the word "unforgivable" when identifying its root. Is it "forgive" or "give"? Thanks for your help!


texts: Is "default" used for "a value used when nothing has been explicitly set" outside of IT world?

texts:
In a discussion at another question, rajah9 mentioned that default is used to mean to fail to repay a loan, but that in the computer world we now use it to mean a value used when no value has been explicitly set.

Somewhat closer to the IT meaning, default can also mean to lose a game or a lawsuit by failing to show up, as in lose the baseball game by default. At least, I can see a similarity between this is what you get if you don't say what you want and this is what you get if you don't show up.

Is there any context outside of IT field where default is used to mean what you get if you didn't say what you want?

Particularly, is there such a usage before IT people started using the word in this sense?


texts:
I appreciate this is somewhat arbitrary, but humour me! I am trying to come up with a term that describes the following...

I am working with "groups" of people. This is the informal definition, rather than, say, the mathematical definition of a "group". (Technically, I'm talking about POSIX groups of users, but in my mind, the analogy holds.)
Entities can be associated with a group. (e.g., This play was performed by group A, that play was performed by group B, etc. The "performed by" association in this example is arbitrary and I realise "troupe" would be better here than "group", but you get the idea! In my specific case, I'm talking about the association of ownership -- "X is owned by group Y" -- but I don't think that matters.)

Thus I'm looking for an adjective that means "of or to do with groups", preferably with Greek roots.

My ultimate reason is that I'm referring to multiple entities that are associated with the same group. Sticking with English, I've come up with homogroupic, but it's not very satisfying (hence my question).

For example:

  This theatre's homogroupic performances were critically acclaimed.

...would mean something like:

  All performances which were performed by the same group, at this theatre, were critically acclaimed.

That single adjective being both more precise and terser.

(In the mathematical sense of a "group", both homogroupal and homogroupic appear in the literature, with the former slightly more popular. I personally prefer the sound of the -ic suffix, hence going for that.)


texts: Is the comma necessary in this sentence?

texts:
Is the comma used in the following sentence necessary?

  Ellie said she couldn't wait for the vocabulary final, because
  studying words is her favorite thing to do.

Thanks


texts: "Every garment" or "every piece of garment"

texts:
The dictionary definition of garment is

  an item of clothing

Should I write every garment or every piece of garment?  The second one sounds more correct to me, but it's wordier.  Is the first one grammatically correct also?

An example sentence:

  In the suitcase, every garment seems brand-new.

Essentially, is garment countable or not countable?

If it is countable, you can say:

three garments

if not, you have to say:

three pieces of garment

or

three articles of garment

(if piece or article isn't correct, what noun should I use instead?)


texts: Appropriate way to say "see you tomorrow" when meeting online

texts:
I'm talking with my clients on a daily basis, mostly via conference calls (only voice calls, without video).

Is it OK to take leave of them by saying "see you tomorrow" at the end of the meeting, although we never see each other? Is there maybe a more appropriate greeting for this situation, like "talk to you tomorrow"?


texts: What is a term for a genre that is not sci-fi or fantasy?

texts: I need a term to distinguish movies such as Die Hard or Taken from the likes of The Lord of the Rings or Minority Report. Broadly speaking, they are all action movies. But what do I say when I want to exclude genres like sci-fi, fantasy and superhero? What would I call a movie set in the real world with human characters, one which doesn’t include mythical or superhuman characters or settings?


texts: difference between might and would in the past

texts:
However drunk he might come home she would always please him / however drunk he would come home she would always please him.
Could a native speaker please tell the nuance I can't hear between might and would in the context. Both denote a habitual action in the past . But what's the difference. Thanks .


texts: Word that means "healing" or "spiritually healing"?

texts: I know there is a word that means 'healing' as in "The therapy session was very ______", blank meaning it was healing (possibly of emotional wounds from the past).


texts: Word for a parent whose children have all died

texts:
I know there have been other questions asked that are similar, but I want to know about the specific case where a person has had a child or children, but all have passed on.

Is there an accepted word or term for a person in this situation?


texts: Does etymology have a word like cladistics?

texts: A recent question on EL&U about a current hip-hop expression led my research into a meme that is evolving faster than drosophila. This expression and its variants have gone viral on internet videos, and are morphing quickly. Urban Dictionary lists several dozen closely related variations. Of particular interest is how this meme is attaching itself to other "loaded" expressions to spawn combination phrases. In trying to wrap my brain around the complexity of this cultural phenomenon, I imagined trying to draw a sphere-of-influence graph of this meme. Which leads me to my question. Biology has cladistics. Does etymology have something similar? Is there a standard means of diagramming the evolution of a word or phrase, and, if so, what is it called?


texts: What's the form and type of the three verbs highlighted in the sentence below?

texts: A helicopter carrying elite paramilitary mountaineers took off Wednesday for a "very high-risk" operation to retrieve five dead climbers and three others believed killed scaling a treacherous Himalayan peak.


texts: Word for tight, vertical city development

texts:
I'm looking for a word capturing the city planning philosophy of building upwards and not outwards, in order to avoid urban sprawl.

A great example is the Emerald City from the Wizard of Oz, with it's vertical development, tight footprint, and abrupt border marked with a surrounding wall. The city is surrounded by nature, with no human affairs spilling outside the wall, except the yellow brick road.

The only real world example I can think of was the segregated ghettos enforced on the Jews by various European powers.


texts: What is the object called that does the activity of collapsing — "collapser" or "collapsor"?

texts:
Possible Duplicate:
  What's the rule for adding -er vs. -or when nouning a verb?

I would say collapser or collapsor but neither of these two words can be found on web dictionaries. Is there some other word that I'm not aware?

I'm listing all action elements of a particular web page of which some are buttons, links etc. and some provide section collapsing.

Example

Suppose you have a page with two sections:
1. a master list of elements
2. details section below/beside it

The first one is always displayed but details are initially collapsed. There is this details collapser element that when clicked expands details section and asynchronously (Ajax) loads details of the selected item in the master list.

The idea is to name the element (likely has some icon or arrow that provides visual clue related to collapsing/expansion) that performs details section collapsing/expansion. I'm currently calling it details collapser.


texts:
I can't seem to find an adjective that describes something that can be disabled. I made up the word "disableable", but it surely sounds funny, and it's not even a real word.

It's for use in a software development context, where I want to be able to say something like:

  "I want to create a disableable control and then I can toggle its disableability."


texts: Is it acceptable to use 'that' followed by a direct quote?

texts:
New York Times:

  Even before President Obama declared this month that “I have Israel’s
  back” in its escalating confrontation with Iran, pro-Israel figures
  like the evangelical Christian leader Gary L. Bauer and the
  conservative commentator William Kristol were pushing for more.

Is this sentence, in particular the part in bold, grammatical? I imagine that it would be impossible for such constructs not to occasionally slip in spoken conversations, but are they formal/suitable for papers?

To be redundantly specific, I'm asking whether or not the following would be more natural:

  ... President Obama declared this month that “He had Israel’s back”...

Or is the original sentence perfectly normal and formal?


texts: What does the word "palpable" mean in this context?

texts:
From an answer on another Stack Exchange website (StackOverflow):

  Given how rare this will be, that ugly hack could be palpable.

It sounds like the author is saying that the solution might be viable? suitable? sufficient? I can deduce what he means from the context.

I am confused because having searched for the definition of the word "palpable" I cannot find an applicable definition. I like the word and  if the usage is correct I might like to use it myself.

Did the author use the word "palpable" correctly? If so which definition is applicable?


texts: Scientific writing: comma after "where" while explaining variables?

texts:
I am writing a scientific report. Lets say there is an equation,

c = a+b

where,
a is variable1
b is variable2

Is it needed to put comma after "where" here? Also at the end of the equation, is a comma required?


texts: Punctuation and word choice in one particular sentence

texts:
I'm wondering, what is the correct punctuation in this sentence:

  In OOP, each object contains data and a set of methods, which operate
  on the data.

I read the rules about restrictive and non-restrictive clauses, but I'm not sure which one is the case here. In my opinion it's supplementary information.
Another question is whether comma is needed after "In OOP".


texts: Which is better, "provided object" or "object that is provided"?

texts:
Here is my original sentence that I was told needs correction.

  For instance, the provided metadata and types are sufficient for the automatic construction of the application user interface.

The intent is to say that the "metadata and types", which are provided by someone, are sufficient to achieve a certain goal, automatic construction of the application user interface.

A native-English-speaking person (my native language is Ukrainian) who helped me proofread my article suggested changing this sentence to

  For instance, the metadata and types that are provided are sufficient for the automatic construction of the application user interface.

and explained as follows.

  "Provided" in this instance seems to mean "on the condition that", especially when the word "provided" precedes the object.  "For instance, provided metadata and type are sufficient for the automatic construction of the user interface, then ... something can happen", but the ending of the sentence is missing, so the reader must start again and mentally rearrange the words.  This is a fairly consistent (but incorrect) approach to this type of syntactic expression, and possibly results from an equivalent syntactic construct in Ukrainian.
  Yes, the suggestions tend to be slightly more verbose, but upon re-reading they are more clear and less ambiguous than the originals.

A resource at diclib.com suggests that such meaning of the word provide is only the fourth possible meaning. Constructs like attached documents instead of documents that are attached, or implemented program instead of programs that are implemented are common in English.

Is provide (as in provided program, provided document) really so different from attach and implement? Is the suggestion to always say object that is provided instead of provided object correct?


texts: How should I place an apostrophe to represent the possession on a word already emphasized by rounded apostrophe?

texts:
For example:

/*!
 * Get the index of specified 'pick_value_item'.
 * @param a0 The path of the 'pick_value_item'.
 * @return The index.
 * @remark The 'path' syntax will be '<page>/<pick_value_item>/<value_item_name>'.
*/
virtual int get_index(std::string)=0;

If I don't want to use the {sth} of '{other}' pattern, how should I place an apostrophe to represent the possession on a word already emphasized by rounded apostrophes:

  "@param a0 'pick_value_item's path?"

Like that? I guess no one can understand it.


texts: Is there a word for a person who takes well care of his/her belongings?

texts:
There are people who keep their things in a prim and proper manner. They take good care of their stuff and use it with care.

Is there a single word to describe them?


texts:
I want a word that means "Selected from the pool/set" - randomness is implied but not necessary.  What is a good word for this?

It would be used in a sentence like:

  The parameter is selected from the set and used in the experiment.

I want one phrase for selected from the set so that it can be used to form a terminology.


texts:
This may be an odd question for this site, but tonight I've been enjoying myself by creating a small script that produces (is supposed to produce) sample sentences that resemble English, while being total gibberish.

The idea came from reading a question on StackOverflow.com which involved word wrapping of a text. Some people would use the Lorem Ipsum quote to generate a sample text for demonstration purposes. I thought, why this would be a nice use of a random text generator.

The very intriguing Wug test was also at the back of my mind, and the fact that it is relatively easy to read a sentence with scrambled words, as long as beginning and end letters remain the same. For example:

  Ocne uopn a mndihgit derary, whlie I peonredd waek and warey oevr mnay
  a quinat and ciruous vumole of fgtorteon lero,

I have done some research on (concerning English):

Word length distribution (Using an approximation of Zipf's Law I
found online)
Letter distribution and first letter distribution

Adding some random punctuation and capitalization, it is looking pretty, but I need some simple algorithms to make the words more realistic looking. Here's a sample text:

  Ynssdto lcianche ttlkise aaricod oawsepje. Hast tvnvcfaiesont eteoy
  prae wwecofuothenroo nmtnhglw lmhwefc etlugloe. Ywio odhw, chlt dhpei
  tiaqirter, sorrdstg aontli kayhut, tnust, berv dosp wrhhys  sblfm.
  Nkttrbfoeret thpit atea aoecwb ctwrhfae oneeot selm teihug
  ttolgktrwwmc, wwrleil sga, isdeedeo adnrsi, aydhd asroino dhddonn,
  lrctp gckort ikhcvo. Tvte hzmdosnd wsad a cwfndoac drnsrtsaths

Obviously, words should contain at least one vowel. It might in fact be idea to make vowel insertion a distinct part of the process. Some consonants should not follow each other (e.g. tvnvcf), and should not be too many in a row.

I was looking for a distribution of the last letters in English words, but that may not be applicable, since word endings can be fairly similar (ing, ane, tion, able, etc), and that might add some familiarity to the sentences.

I'm looking for ideas. Links to resources. Rules of thumb. What can I do to make my script spout more legible gibberish?

In short, what are the general rules for building an English-looking word?


texts:
Etymonline doesn't expound the etymology and states no more than:

  rarebit (n.)
  1785, perversion of (Welsh) rabbit, as if from rare
  (adj.) + bit (n.).

Does anyone have more insight into the etymology of "Welsh rarebit"?


texts: the exercises suggested/the suggested exercises

texts:
I´d like to know whether I could say these two sentences:

1) However, I have calculated that in order to complete the exercises suggested, it would take closer to....

2) However, I have calculated that in order to complete the suggested exercises, it would take closer to....

To my ears both sound pretty good.

Thank you very much.


texts: What possible word that begins with D and ends with Y is used in racial context?

texts:
I recently came across an article about the history of chicken thieves, and in two instances, it made a reference to d---y. I'm curious to know what this means.

The first one is where they are talking about a hungry d---y, and the other is where a lady is talking about keeping a d--y away from her chicken coop and melon patch.

I am having a hard time searching for this term on Google, so any help with this would be greatly appreciated.


texts:
Is this sentence from a translation Ivan Turgenev's Fathers and Sons grammatically correct?

  What a magnificent body, how I should like to see it on the dissecting table.

The how I should like part sounds a bit non-English to me.


texts: Ambiguous line from Browning's My Last Duchess

texts:
A heart – how shall I say? – too soon made glad,
Too easily impressed: she liked whate’er
She looked on, and her looks went everywhere.
Sir, ‘twas all one! My favor at her breast,
The dropping of the daylight in the West,
The bough of cherries some officious fool
Broke in the orchard for her, the white mule
She rode with round the terrace – all and each
Would draw from her alike the approving speech.

What does the phrase My favor at her breast mean in the context of this poem?
I am not sure about how it should be interpreted.


texts: Meaning of "no-analog" in the following context?

texts:
Would you please tell me what the meaning of "no-analog" in the following context is?

  One conclusion that can be drawn from a no-analog future is that
  further manipulations, whether genetic, ecological, or climatic, are
  not only necessary but justified. Source

Wikipedia defines no-analog in ecology as:

  No-analog (variants may omit the hyphen and/or use the British English analogue), or alternately novel, climatic conditions ("no-analog climates") or biological communities ("no-analog communities") in paleoecology and ecological forecasting are those without current equivalents. Source

But I do not clearly understands that definition either. Does that mean "a totally new condition"? If so, then how may the conclusion mentioned in the text be drawn from a novel future?


texts:
I want to know if the following sentence is grammatically correct:
"John's largest tomato and largest pumpkin outweighed Bill's by 2 and 17 pounds, respectively."

I am trying to say "John's largest tomato outweighs Bill's largest tomato by 2 pounds and his largest pumpkin outweighs Bill's by 17 pounds."

Thanks


texts: How common is the use of 'although' as a preposition rather than a conjunction?

texts:
Conceding a point can be expressed by means of

– an adverb (however, nevertheless, etc);
– a preposition + the point in noun form (despite this, in spite of this, despite the fact that, etc);
– a conjunction + the point in the form of a clause (although this is the case, while this is the case, etc).

In Cambridge's First Certificate Trainer, Six Practice Tests, I found the following (p. 87, key p. 208) in a multiple choice exercise about a text entitled 'Fingernails growing faster':

[…] the human fingernail now grows about 3.5 mm a month, compared with just 3 mm seven decades ago. Toenail growth, [gap: A although; B despite; C however; D nevertheless] only about 2 mm per month, was also up on the figure obtained in a similar survey done 70 years ago.

And the answer the key gives is 'A although'. So here, 'although' is used as a kind of preposition! How common is that?


texts: Meaning of "It’s when you can’t even feel pain anymore that you're in real trouble"

texts:
Still, being able to feel pain was good, she thought. It’s when you can’t even feel pain anymore that you're in real trouble.

What does this saying mean?


texts: Is there an idiom or proverb about being unfair about dividing things, property, money, etc?

texts: I`m looking for an idiom, proverb or just expression in English, which would describe a person who becomes unfair and unjust when it comes to dividing money, or property with others,thus trying to grab more for himself/herself ?


texts: Does the word “skyfall” (or “sky falls”) exist in English?

texts:
I found the word, “skyfall” being used in the article of April 18 Nikkei.com. under the title, “What the collapse of the gold bubble tells” with the following lead copy

  “International commodity market represented by gold collapsed on April
  15th. The collapse was triggered by the dropdown of the economic
  growth rates of China which turned out far below the economists’
  expectation. The “Skyfall” broke out in the gold market may foretell
  the economic boom of new developing countries is coming to a turning
  point.

The word “skyfall” is used in English in Japanese text as if it is a stock market jargon.
There is a Japanese word “杞憂-kiyu” – worring about the fall of the sky,” which we borrowed from Chinese proverb, “杞人憂天-Qi ren you tian” that derived from the ancient story of the people of the Qi country very much worried about if the sky should fall on their heads suddenly.

I checked if the “skyfall” is English word or not with CED, OED, Merriam-Webster English Dictionary to find none of them carries this word, nor does Google Ngram register it.

Is “skyfall” used as an English word other than James Bond “007 Skyfall” and its theme music? If it is, can the word, “the sky falls” be associated with anything like a panic or catastrophe as used in the Nikkei article among Anglophones?


texts: What is the difference between "complicated" and "complex"?

texts:
I can't understand: what's the difference between complicated and complex?

They seem to be used interchangeably. Are they actually different at all?


texts: What do you call a person that helps buy things?

texts: Let's say there's a school club. There's a person in charge of ordering/buying things for the club. What would you call this person's role?


texts: Can a sentence only contain a noun and a relative clause?

texts:
I've read an article in the New York Times:
"The year where Black communities were ravaged by the twin pandemics: state violence and Covid-19. A year in which Black people and our allies rallied around the globe to reckon with 400 years of racial terror."
It looks like both of the two sentences contain only a noun + relative clause, no main verb. So can a sentence have that structure?
And also why does the first sentence use the year, but the second use a year not the year?


texts: How do you hyphenate the word 'branches'? I'm intrigued between branch·es and bran·ches.


texts: What is the classification of the words such as "group of", "bundle of", "number of" and also the right form of verb after using this words?

texts:
First example:

A bundle of roses is the most beautiful thing one can have in the morning.

A bundle of roses are the most beautiful thing ...

Second example:

The number of books are four.

The number of books is four.

Which of the above sentences are correct?


texts: The wording suggest the opposite.  Something that is one of a kind is but one of a category of many, if you look at each word non-idiomatically.  Why, then, does "one of a kind" mean "unique?"


texts:
In articles I often read the author refer to a baby as "baby", without an article. Example:

She insists there is no modern proof that it is safe for baby

Our midwife does the same, always referring to "baby".

When baby does this

I'm not a native speaker English speaker and that's contrary to my intuition which is to say "the baby" so I'd appreciate an explanation.


texts: Why “buy things secondhand,“ not “buy secondhand things”?

texts:
I saw the word ‘secondhand’ come after ‘things’ in the lead copy of July 17 Time magazine’s article, titled “10 Things You Should Be Buying Used”, as follows.

  Buying things secondhand can save a few bucks and help keep junk out of our landfills.

Though I think ‘secondhand’ is used adverbially, and modifies ‘buying’ here, “Buying things secondhand can save a few bucks’ was confusing to me at the first because I took ‘secondhand’ for a post-position to ‘things.’

Although it’s essentially a matter of taste, isn’t it more straightforward and plain to say ‘Buy secondhand things,’ ‘I bought a secondhand book’, ‘I bought a second hand car at a used-car shop,’ ‘I got firsthand (secondhand) news from my colleague,’ rather than saying ‘Buy things secondhand,’ ‘I bought a book secondhand,’ ‘I bought a car secondhand at a used-car shop,’ and ‘I got the news firsthand (secondhand) from my colleague.’?


texts: “I would like to express a big congratulations...” Why ‘a’ before the plural form?

texts:
At school I was taught that before the plural form we don't use the articles a and an. So why do people use a before big congratulations?

Examples:

A Big Congratulations to Dr. Wei Cheng on His Latest Publication! link
A big congratulations to the Devs!
They have put in an incredible amount of work this week to get this online up and running for all of us. They have handled communication with the community perfectly keeping us up to date ... link
A big congratulations!
We would like to say a massive congratulations to ‘Stumble’ and ‘Tripp’ for successfully completing a five day residential to become qualified regional Makaton trainers! link
A Big Congratulations!
Further to our article last month, we wanted to congratulate Jane Mason and Tom Wicks on their effort in Nottingham Life Cycle 5. Jane and her team completed her 50 miles, while Tom finished his 75 miles in the aid of raising money for dementia research. link
A big congratulations to Hozier from Artists Den and Chase Sapphire Preferred for being nominated for "Favorite Artist- Alternative Rock" by the American Music Awards. link

plus many more found on the Internet.


texts: Looking for 2 words or phrases to describe this situation

texts:
I am looking for 2 words or phrases, if such exists, for either side of the following situation:
A pastor was conducting (christian) bible study and was teaching the story of how Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit and thus caused the devastation of mankind from then on. The students asked, if God made everything, knows everything, and knows the fruit is harmful, why give Adam and Eve the opportunity to even access the fruit, if God wanted it as an ornament and knew A+E were going to eat it and cause devastation, he could have at least put it out of reach. The pastor replied that it was to test the children (ie, A+E)'s obedience, and the students replied, but you are a parent yourself, would you not make sure your poisonous and hazardous cleaning products and knives etc are out of reach of your own children, lest they hurt themselves, and the pastor said no, they need to learn to be obedient (ie not touch things I tell the not to touch). The students all said nothing but were not convinced.
I am looking for 2 words or phrases, one for the pastor or his action, and one to describe the way the students must have felt upon hearing this.
Note: This has nothing to do with religion itself and I am not here to start an argument about religion.
For the pastor, I thought of "lied through his teeth" but I don't think this works, because 'lying' is saying something false: this would imply he does indeed hides his dangerous things from his kids at home, but simply says he doesn't. What I want to portray is, the ridiculousness of a claim, to stand up to or support a ridiculous claim/something that is just obviously wrong, in order to be "correct" all the time, and not contradict yourself. Again, not meaning to stir up political controversies, another similar, but not the same, example would be when Trump supporters lied through their teeth with no evidence.
Can I say the pastor "changed his goal post and said "No, I wouldn't..."", ie, changing his answer to fit the question?
I would also like a word to describe the students and what they must feel or react to hearing something like this. I thought of "disappointed" or "conned" but neither is remotely close. "Amused (at the pastor's answer)" isn't so great either but better than the former two, the problem is, it is a bit vague and can have a positive connotation. You can be amused by good things too, but I think a word with a more negative connotation here would be better. "Angry" or "irritated" are also not the right word (I think), because the 'deception' doesn't harm them (it's not like the pastor said he prepared lunch for them but didn't so all the students went hungry). "Bemused" is closer, but the Merriam-Webster defines it as "marked by confusion or bewilderment", and the synonyms absent, distracted... The students were not confused, baffled nor perplexed, which would imply they accepted the pastor's answer as fact, but just could not understand it, rather, they all secretly rejected his answer as nonsense.
What I'd like to write is, "The students then looked to each other with ___ understanding" like, "they understood how ___ each other were feeling".
The students then looked to each other with mutual "angry" understanding but didn't say anything?
The students then looked to each other with mutual "baffled" understanding but didn't say anything?
The students then looked to each other with mutual "exasperation"/exasperated understanding but didn't say anything?
The students then looked to each other with mutual "bemused" understanding but didn't say anything?
etc etc. (these sentences aren't necessarily grammatically correct)
Again, a political example would be when anti-Trump people hear Trump supporters lie, and they know it is a lie.


texts:
Consider the sentence

  Why did the Egyptians not develop sculpture in which the body
  turned and twisted through space like classical Greek statuary?

Could someone please explain the use of "in which" here, and paraphrase this sentence. Thanks.


texts: Is the response "I am fine, thank you. And you?" outdated?

texts:
This is what I learned from the middle school English class 10 years ago as the correct way to respond to "How are you?". The textbook was co-published by Longman, I suppose it was British English. When I go abroad I find few people say this.

Is this saying old fashioned or outdated?


texts: what's the difference between "apparent", "evident" and "obvious"?

texts:
I believe they are all the same, but is there any case in which not all of them are correct?

Here are the examples, from an English textbook:

  1. It is (quite) __ that he took the wrong path.

  A.apparent B.evident C.stupid D.absurd

  2. It is __ that two and two make four.

  A.apparent B.evident C.obvious D.visible

  3. It is __ (that) you have been cheated.

  A.clear B.apparent C.regretful D.ignorant

The answers are B, C, and A.

I think A is also a correct answer to Q1, A and B are also correct answers to Q2, and B is also a correct answer to Q3.

It is not that easy when it comes to answering questions in an exam, because there is only one answer I can choose, and if I'm wrong, I lose points. So, is it really wrong to use the other words in these cases? Why?


texts: Is it right to say "mutually exclusive with"?

texts:
Is it semantically correct to say Event A is mutually exclusive with Event B meaning the two cannot occur together? If not, which other preposition would fit in the phrase to convey the required meaning?

mutually exculsive to / with / from ?


texts: Device that emits pleasant odor automatically

texts:
In a hospital I once saw an electrically-powered device, which had a little tank filled with some fluid. That tank seemed to be heated, and the vapors of the fluid filled the room with an agreeable smell. It ran all the time and improved the smell of the air inside the room continously (i. e. it wasn't an aerosol, which you spray manually).

Example sentence (X is the word I'm looking for):

  There was X on the table next to the bed and filled the room with a smell of rose petals.

What do you call such a device?


texts: Usage of 'represent' to mean 'present again'

texts:
Can the word 'represent' be used to mean 'present again'? Is the usage in the following sentence correct?

"You cannot represent a bounced cheque.'


texts: Word-order and meaning - which is correct for this notice?

texts:
I'm creating some signs for the office car park, and one of these signs is to control access. What I'm trying to get it to indicate is that cars aren't permitted between 10 am and 4pm except for access.

Which of the following means what I want to say above?

Except for access 10 am - 4 pm
10 am - 4 pm except for access

Am I correct in thinking that the first one means "Cars allowed for access between 10 am and 4 pm only " and the second one is "No cars between 10 am and 4 pm except for access".

I realize the ambiguity of the sign, and want to make sure what I'm saying is correct.


texts: "I hope you'll do X" vs. "I hope you do X"

texts:
Both "I hope you'll read lots of good books this year" and "I hope you read lots of good books this year" are correct, right?

Is one of them more common than the other? Is there any difference between UK/US English?


texts:
In Nalo Hopkinson's short story "Ours is the Prettiest" (published in the collection Falling in Love with Hominids, 2015), I found the following sentence (emphasis mine):

  I swung aside the skeletal bustle that was the skirt of my gown just in time to get it out from underfoot of a staggerline of Trubies, everyone of them dressed to pussfoot in gleaming white canvas bell-bottoms, sailor shirts and beanies.

Earlier in the story, the narrator had said that the eyes of her companion Gladstone were "silver, from the Trubie side of her family", so "Trubie" is clearly a family name. However, I couldn't find "staggerline" in Wiktionary, the online Collins dictionary, the online Oxford Dictionaries (I have no access to the OED), the online Cambridge Dictionary or with a more general web search.

So what does "staggerline" mean?


texts: Preposition: evaluated on/at/as the borderline between?

texts:
The sentence goes: This resulted in my project being evaluated merely as "Sufficient", instead of (on/at/as) the borderline between "Great" and "Superb".

So let's say that 80-90% would be "Great" and 90-100% Superb, and I would want to emphasize that the I would have received exactly 90% (therefore, on the borderline) if evaluated correctly. Which proposition is correct (if any)?

Thanks!


texts:
I’ve always understood the difference between disinterested and uninterested as follows:

uninterested: not interested, not up to it
disinterested: impartial

Consider the situation of someone unwilling to help another in need. Is that person uninterested or disinterested?

I’d always thought it has to be uninterested, but I’ve read disinterested used in contexts like the one just given.


texts:
What do you call a question that needs a selection? For example:

  Is an argument true until proven false or vice-versa?


texts:
The first sentence is good English:

"The students showed disrespect toward the teacher."
"The students showed poor behavior toward the teacher."

Is the second sentence also good?


texts: Look forward to meeting you both vs. Look forward to meeting you

texts:
I'm confused about the need to add the word both when  using you as a plural that refers to more than one individual.

T/e first you sentence also refers to two people:

  We look forward to meeting you this evening as well as getting to know you both over the coming year.


texts: Why isn't the present tense of "try" appropriate in the following sentence?

texts:
"Its network and the patience of its customers strained to the breaking point, the on-line service company announced a series of new initiatives that try to relieve congestion."

Apparently, it is more correct to say "...new initiatives to try to relieve congestion".

Why can I use the present tense of try when I use the word "to", but can't use it if I use the word "that"? Also what else is wrong with using the word "that" here?


texts:
I was reading the "Oxford Word Skills" book when I got a question:

Since "roast" itself can act as an adjective (and of course as a verb), is it correct to say either "roasted chicken" or "roast chicken"? Or, the first option is not correct? The book has offered the second phrase, so which one is a more proper word to use? As a general question, if a word has a verb and an adjective form (like what we see here), and since P.P of verbs can also act as an adjective, is there any rule to use one over the other? Or is it optional? Thanks in advance...


texts: What is the grammatical name and function of this sentence

texts:
...which eventually develop into cacoons..

The full sentence is:

  According to researchers, the silkworm (which eventually develop into cacoons) from which raw silk is produced do well in warm climatic conditions


texts:
Google uses the phrase "Whale fail" on this picture (from their error page):

What does it mean?


texts: Possible positions for the word currently

texts:
I was discussing the question of correct word placement in english with a coworker but since we both aren't native speakers we did not come to a conclusion.

Here is an example: Given the sentence

  We have no open positions available.

which of the following placements of the word currently are valid?

Is there a simple rule which explains this?

Currently we have no open positions available.
We currently have no open positions available.
We have currently no open positions available.
We have no open positions currently available.
We have no open positions available, currently.


texts:
I am translating something from German to English (my mother-in-law's war stories), and she wrote of having lived in various labor camps while she was in the custody of the Soviets after WW 2.  She writes of having lived "in einer Baracke", and the singular form for it in English is "barrack", but do we really ever use the singular form?  Despite my 8 years in the US Army where this word was used frequently, I never heard the singular form used.  My German-English dictionary says "hut, barrack", and the Free Online Dictionary says "A building or group of buildings used to house military personnel. Often used in the plural."  Well, always is not often, clearly.

The reason I am asking is because I am considering using the singular form (making her story into a book, you see) in order to keep somewhat of the flavor of the original account.  But is that a good idea, do you think?  It will be English speakers who will read this book, and I don't want them to think I spelled the word wrong.


texts: "Also" and "as well" in the same sentence

texts:
Make sure that the keyboard shortcuts are accessible using US keyboard layout (since it guarantees that they will be also accessible using almost any other keyboard layout—e.g., German one—as well).

Is it correct to use "also" and "as well" in such a way? Is it better to remove one of them?


texts: Go "from zero to hero", usage and origin

texts:
The expression  from zero to hero is an informal saying that means:

  To change an outcome, one's situation, or oneself from being particularly unsuccessful, negative, unfortunate, or unpopular to being especially successful, positive, fortunate, or popular.

  After his parents won the lottery, John went from zero to hero in his high school overnight. With computer programming becoming an increasingly in-demand skill, many who might have been picked on in high school are now going from zeros to heroes. (TFD)

The expression is a quite common one and it is used in different contexts like music and tv programs for instance.

Ngram shows that "from zero to hero" became a popular expression especially from the early '90s.

Curiously the ODO has an entry for its opposite from hero to zero , which is  used to refer to a sudden, rapid decline in popularity or success.

Questions:

When and by whom was the expression 'from zero to hero" first used?
Who or what made it popular during the '90s? a song or a sports program for instance?


texts: Can there be two consecutive dots at the end of the sentence?

texts:
What to do, when the sentence ends with an abbreviation. For example:

  The following results are by Deb et al.

or

  The following results are by Deb et al..

Are two consecutive dots ok?


texts:
Possible Duplicate:
  What is the difference between “speaking” and “talking”?

I'm often befuddled when I am reading an article and the author uses talked with when referring to a conversation he/she had. I've always used spoke with in such a case and sounds odd to me when used otherwise.

When is it proper to use talked with or spoke with?


texts: How should µeV be written out? Is it microelectronvolts? or microelectron-volts?


texts: Which would be correct? Owen and I or Owen and me

texts: Caption over picture of Owen and his dad..."Owen and I"   is this correct grammatically ?


texts:
I'm editing a manuscript which takes place in 1854 Britain. I've run across two uses of "on another hand" used in place of "on the other hand."

Is this proper vernacular for the era or should I edit it?

In both instances, coincidentally, the person is actually holding something in their other hand, but I do not believe that's the reason for the wording.


texts: Who used "Byzantine" as a derogatory/negative term for the first time?

texts:
By this I mean: in English or other European language from which it may have entered English with the meaning — in Mirriam-Webster:

often not capitalized
a : of, relating to, or characterized by a
devious and usually surreptitious manner of operation a Byzantine
power struggle
b : intricately involved : labyrinthine rules of
Byzantine complexity

The same in Cambridge Dictionary.

What I mean is not one or other bad opinion about "the Byzantine", but the use of the term itself as a negative attribute. I think these are three separate things:

a bad opinion about "the Byzantines"

the use of the term "byzantine" as derogatory, instead of a neutral (descriptive) use

the initial adoption of the term "Byzantine" (instead of "Roman", "Late Roman" or "Roman Oriental") with a negative/deprecatory intention (consciously or not).

Like "baroque" or "Gothic", it is not derogatory per se, but in some circumstances it can become a "bad name". I can imagine that like "baroque", it means "excessively complex, heavy, convoluted, hard to understand" by contrast to clarity, rationality, purity. The "baroque" was mostly typical of the Catholic Counter-reformation art (mainly in Habsburg-dominated Italy, Spain and Austria). The "byzantine" is typical of the Eastern Christian Orthodoxy. I imagine "baroque" could have gained a negative connotation from a Protestant (anti-Catholic), a French (anti-Habsburg) perspective, or from a general rationalistic perspective. I think I know the perspective from which "byzantine" could have gained such a connotation: I have even posted an answer to the question Why did the term “Byzantine Empire” enter common usage instead of “Eastern Roman Empire” or “Roman Empire” where I try to identify why the term was adopted in the first place and why it sometime had negative connotation.

Michelet uses it in 1846 as adjective meaning "of excessive subtlety" - « qui est d'une subtilité excessive ».

I see a Reddit question "When and how did "Byzantine" become a derogatory term meaning overly complicated" and under there an answer saying "the earliest OED verified mention for the derogative meaning is as late as 1937, from Koestler’s A Spanish Test: "In the old days people often smiled at the Byzantine structure of the Spanish Army." I found no older English uses of this sense on Google, either. Before the 30s it was in widespread use to describe the art, architecture and styles of Byzantium; the derogative meaning may be a semantic shift from the artistic one (compare the adjective "baroque")."
Is that true?

The Greek Byzantologist Helene Ahrweiler at the France Culture radio  — in French, Les inconnus de l'Histoire - A Byzance, quand l'Empereur était une femme 1/4, accessible on the France culture website and on Youtube — more precisely HERE — stated that, when “the Byzantine” culture entered the field of interest of the 16th and 17th century humanists, it had to be placed on an intellectual map defined by the exalted ideal of the ancient Greece and the ancient Rome. That created the problem of differentiating “the Byzantine” from “the Greek” (meaning classical Greece) and from “the Romans”. This logical necessity for differentiation was doubled by an axiologic necessity imposed by the negative judgment that Renaissance humanists (and their classicist and rationalist successors) made on the Medieval era: “the Byzantine” inherited thus a "Medieval" connotation in the same way the term “Gothic” did.

I would like to know exactly exactly who, when and where used "Byzantine" as a negative term for the first time or in the most influential manner.


texts: What was the role of "compound" verbs in Middle English?

texts:
I was just reading a book where it is said that when perfect started to acquire modern meanings, "compound" verbs appeared. Here are some examples (I`m assuming with "compound" verbs on the right):

ceorfan (cut)  - āceorfan (cut off)
swapan (sweep) - for-swapan (sweep away)

What was their role? Were they the alternative to pefect in some areas?


texts:
I read some source code and came across this sentence:

  Hopefully it works, and we don't need no steenking BIOS anyway [...]

You see the word "steenking" in there. I traced its origin down to the phrase "We don't need no stinking badges" but still don't know why anyone would write "stinking" as "steenking."

Could anyone explain this weird spelling?


texts:
Some time ago, there was a famous advetising line in Italy: "Two is meglio che One". By mixing three English words that everybody knows (one, two, is) with an Italian phrase ( "meglio che" = "better than" ) they got the public attention.

How would you translate, or better, render the same effect for English native speakers? I doubt that leaving it unchanged would work. Inverting the language, such as in "Due è better than Uno", might be better. Or not?


texts: When did the word cutlery first include spoons and forks?

texts:
In the comments in Where is the word "cutlery" in common usage this question came up with no obvious resolution. In British English today the word cutlery just refers to implements used for eating, such as knives, forks and spoons. However this is not the definition given in the OED (where the current entry still dates from 1893), nor is it the usage one can see using Google Books from the 19th century. What is the first usage of cutlery in its modern meaning?

If one needs more proof of the modern meaning, the Wikipedia article says "The major items of cutlery in the Western world are the knife, fork and spoon." and a web search will show no end of shops in the UK selling knives, forks and spoons as cutlery.

To try to hone in on a date, in 1939 cutlery apparently included spoons and forks even in the US. See this Google Books results. There is also a linguistic distinction between kitchen cutlery and table cutlery.


texts: Why did the letter “o” disappear in the word “pronunciation”?

texts:
The verb pronounce has the letter o in its second syllable, but in the noun pronunciation, that same letter disappears from the corresponding position.

Why is that?


texts: Is there another idiom for using too strong a tool for the job: not "bring a gun to a knife fight" or "use a sledgehammer to crack a nut"? Or turn it around - one about using a simpler, more direct tool? It may be "kill a fly with..." But nothing I end it with sounds like what I a, looking for. Bazooka, maybe.


texts:
I gather that the expression mother of all predates Saddam's famous mother of all battles pronouncement, especially in Arabic. It seems that most pre-Saddam examples refer to an original thing from which other things stem - mother as in parent. In modern English usage, mother of all normally denotes the biggest, baddest, most impressive, most awesome etc, perhaps with a nod to mother as a profane abbreviation.

What I was wondering was this: surely Saddam was using the mother of all expression in the traditional Arabic way? I think he meant to say something like this:

  I do not seriously expect to defeat the forces ranged against me on
  this occasion.  But be warned - it won't end here.  This war will sow
  such division and resentment that the world will never be the same.
  This is the mother of all battles, the one that kicks off all
  subsequent battles - you ain't seen nothing yet.

He was right of course, but I think the modern English usage is based on a misunderstanding of Saddam.  Perhaps that misunderstanding in part arises from the fact that Americans use mother as a profane abbreviation as noted above?


texts: Can the word "anxiety" take the preposition "at" and still sound proper?

texts:
I wrote this sentence recently, where I used the preposition at after the word anxiety.

  I suppose they1 are valuable in that they reveal our anxiety at being human.

I'm not sure if the preposition at can properly follow anxiety in this way. I may have done it for the sake of euphony, i.e. at rhymes with that.

A quick search on ngrams shows that the phrase "anxiety at" is indeed used, more than "anxiety concerning" and a little less than "anxiety on". The phrase "anxiety over" has a substantial edge and "anxiety about" is most common by far.

But this research is by no means conclusive. It just shows that "anxiety about" is the most common. Which preposition would you choose to complete the sentence? Do you think that using at this way is a good choice, or would most people flag it as suspicious?

1 The pronoun here refers to the theories of free will and determinism. To give more context, I was debating whether these theories are useful or just fun to think about.


texts: "You'll be hoping for a bit more from the new player, I suppose." Why the future continuous?

texts:
“You'll be hoping for a bit more from the new player, I suppose.”

Why the future continuous?
Wouldn't one rather use the future simple instead? If not: why not?


texts: What's the best English word which describes a relationship that is antagonistic on surface but friendly or comrade-like in essence?

texts: I am looking for a word or phrase which describes the opposite of frenemy


texts: What does large in too large for worry mean?

texts:
What does large mean in this quote which is extracted from this poem Promise yourself?

  Promise to be too large for worry, too noble for anger, too strong for fear, and too happy to permit trouble to press on you.


texts: What is the origin of the phrase "you've got another thing/think coming"?

texts: What is the origin of the phrase "you've got another thing coming"? And — perhaps more importantly — is it more correct than the alternative "you've got another think coming"?


texts: Is there any pragmatic implication in ‘Beaky has enjoyed London’ here?

texts:
It says on a grammar book that in some cases, the present perfect form has pragmatic meanings.

Joan has broken the teapot. (I have to get a new one.)
I’ve had a bath. (I’m now clean.)

Is there such implication in the following “Beaky has enjoyed London.”? Or is Hagrid merely reporting the fact?
(A letter from Hagrid (in London) to Hermione (at Hogwarts) just after losing a case)

Dear Hermione,
We lost. I’m allowed to bring him back to Hogwarts.
Execution date to be fixed.
Beaky has enjoyed London.
I won’t forget all the help you gave us.
Hagrid. (Harry Potter 3 [US Version]: p.291)

N.B.: Beaky is Hagrid’s pet, a treasure to Hagrid, which was judged dangerous and received a death sentence. In the book, there’re several teardrops smudging the letter.


texts:
I want to express the following: You are blaming me for your lack of concern and I like that (in a sarcastic way).

Which one of the following sentences would be correct?

  I like it that your lack of concern is my fault.
  I like that your lack of concern is my fault.


texts: use of distainer office, distrainment proceedings, etc

texts:
Is "distainer office, distrainment proceedings, distrain order, ..." correct? Even this spell checker highlights these words as incorrect.
Some translations use execution office, executor's office, etc., which I don't find correct.
I would also appreciate some examples.


texts: Is the origin of the term "blackleg" racist?

texts:
A blackleg is defined as:

  a person who continues working when fellow workers are on strike

When did this term originate? Does it's origin have racist connotations?


texts: Is it grammatically correct to use "baby" as a proper noun

texts:
A lot of baby books and products use the word baby as you would a proper noun.

For example "when lying baby down in the cot" instead of "when lying your baby down in the cot". Another example from a shampoo bottle "proven to help baby sleep better". Books about child raising don't say "when teaching child good manners".

Where did this practice arise and is it valid?


texts: What is the word for the row at the top of this Excel file?

texts:
I am looking for the word for the row at the top of this Excel file that shows what category each cell in the column is in.

I've been using "header", but I wanted to check if there was a better word for it.

Example:

  Does your Excel file have a __ ?


texts:
As we know, the English language doesn't have the /x/ phoneme anymore (at least in an everyday kind of context*) and the sound seems to have been dropped in many words, such as in light or eight.

However, consider the following words: laugh, tough, rough and cough. It strikes me as very odd that what was once a /x/ would turn into /f/; it seems much more likely to me that it would have shifted to /h/, /ʃ/ or even /g/ — but definitely not to a fricative at the front.

My question is: Has it been attested that /x/ shifted to /f/ in certain situations ? Is there an explanation for this phenomenon?

laugh is lachen in both German and Dutch with a /x/-like sound; rough is ruig in Dutch and ruuch in Swiss German (both with /x/). So there is some relation between /x/ and /f/, but it perplexes me.

(On an irrelevant note, I also notice that shaft is Schacht in German, but the whole ft vs. cht at the end of words seems to be more complicated and possibly independent from the /f/ in the words I mentioned in the second paragraph. There are some Dutch-German pairs where they systematically differ: {kracht, Kraft}, {lucht, Luft}, {stichting, Stiftung}. This is odd, too, but not in the scope of this question — or of this site for that matter.)

* disregarding all annoyed teenagers who use "ugh" excessively ;)


texts:
I received an e-mail at work where someone said something along the lines of:

  "...the report was not configurated."

Since I've never really heard of the word they used, wouldn't it be more proper to say configured?

Is one preferred over the other in this scenario?


texts: A word/phrase which refers to the smell of nature?

texts:
Similar to the word 'petrichor' in its purpose. I'm looking for a word/phrase that can be used to describe the smell of grass/pollen/trees/wood/earth essentially the outdoors.
Similar to the smell of a garden or wooded area in the summer or perhaps freshly mowed grass?


texts: Is it grammatically correct to seperate a complete sentence and an incomplete sentence with a semi-colon?

texts:
A common pattern in English is to separate two complete sentences with a semi-colon.

For example,

  John was hurt; he knew she only said it to upset him.

"John was hurt" is a complete sentence, and so is, "he knew she only said it to upset him."

The pattern is:

  [sentence] [semi-colon] [sentence]

As you know, we usually use a semi-colon, instead of a period, when it is important to take the two sentences together to form the whole idea.

However, in what cases (if any) is the following pattern valid?

  [complete sentence] [semi-colon] [incomplete sentence]

Examples:

  They’re not very expensive; maybe $10.
  Both are unconscious; no clear prognosis.


texts:
What is the origin of the idiomatic expression rub someone the wrong way?

Is it correct to use the idiom in reverse, i.e. rub someone the right way, possibly meaning to calm or to please?


texts: Is there a more positive alternative to the word "inevitability"?

texts:
Inevitability just sounds so depressing to me. The "inevitability of death" is a glaring example.

There has to be a word that means "unavoidable but in a good way" right?

Edit:
The sentence I'm trying to make right now is about "the [inevitability] of technological progress in our society". Technological progress at least in what I'm arguing for is good so I'm looking for a word that would be a positive replacement for [inevitability].


texts:
Has "which were" been omitted before " noted" in this text?

But there is no other evidence that the Persians of this period were the slaves of any such superstition as that noted by Ammianus.

The text comes from the book The History of Sassanian "New Persian" Empire,
by George Rawlinson.


texts: Is there a name for words like Terror in "The Tomb of Terror"?

texts: I know that Terror is a noun, but is there a name for a noun that's used to describe another noun like this?


texts: How do you say "can't choose" in a good way?

texts:
I need to provide a quote for a large project with price breakups, but I don't want the client to choose only a few things from it, either they go ahead with the project or don't.

I can't find a suitable work for it.  "Mutually exclusive" maybe, not sure.


texts: Correct way to write "save them 20 days of labor per month"?

texts:
I am stuck in trying to figure out how to say that automation saved a company X days of labor every month.

Is writing save them 20 days of labor per month the correct way? Is there a better way to express the same meaning?


texts:
If you want to summarize "I am good in engaging (with) others", meaning "getting them interested and involved", can you say then "I'm an engager"? Or how would you call it, "I am an...". Does the word "engager" exist in English?

Thank you!


texts:
Being an Indian, I don't like the way we Indians use the English. Of course I also make mistakes, but I will try to learn from time to time.
I see and hear some phrases like, Please do the needful, Years back etc which are absolute blunders, I was wondering if Single Sitting is also Indian made ;)?
(Actually I am pretty sure it is Indian made :D ) Generally we hear this phrase as in http://goo.gl/y3gl06.

By Single Sitting we Indians mean the job attached to this phrase can be done in single visit.


texts: Does it make sense to say "to be cross over something" with cross meaing annoyed?

texts: We can say someone is mad/angry/annoyed over something. Can we use the same structure for the adjective "cross"?


texts: Meaning of "There is no better time to be happy than now."

texts:
Does it mean that the timing to be happy is rare, so that we should seize the day and be happy?

Could anyone help clarify, please?


texts:
The following sentence is very common in employment and reply letters:

I look forward to hearing from you soon.

I wonder why "to hear" must not/cannot be used instead.

What's the rule behind the use of the gerund (is that really the gerund?) in sentences like the above?

Thanks!


texts: One word for "one who surrenders to his fate"

texts:
What would be the word for a person who ultimately  "surrenders to his fate" whatever be the circumstances?

Example (the latest one I came across): In the Tempest, act 1 scene 1, in the end the mariners had no choice but to say: 'All lost to prayers, all lost' or Gonzalo saying that 'let the wills above be done'. They were in such an adverse situation that it was next to impossible to save the ship from the wreck and hence they had to cling their hopes to fortune.


texts:
Say you have some condition that requires x, y, and z to be set for the condition to be true. These would be the 'required' senses
Is there a word for the inverse situation where a success condition requires all of x, y, and z must be unset? The 'inverted' requirements.
Preferrably something more intuitive than 'invert(ed)'
e.g. (X & Y & Z) vs !(X | Y | Z)


texts: What does the phrase "woman who does" mean?

texts:
I've first heard the phrase on QI (season 3 episode 6) where Stephen Fry uses it as rhyming slang for "buzz"

Bill: "Woman"?
Stephen: "Woman who does": buzz.
Bill: Buzz.
Phill: "Woman-who-does"?!
Stephen [laughing]: It's all I could think of!
Phill: Oh, oh. So we're doing middle-class Cockney rhyming slang!

I couldn't find it anywhere and wrote it off. But then I heard it again used in the White's Blues by Fascinating Aida. Sadly I couldn't find the lyrics but it seems to refer to a nurse that takes care of the singers infant. The song can be found here.
Am I right in assuming the phrase refers to some sort of housekeeper duties? Also does anyone have any idea where the phrase originates or where it is used? I've never heard it before but it seems to (according to Phill's comment) be tied to (presumably British) middle class society.


texts: Past perfect simple vs past perfect continuous

texts:
I am struggling with an example sentence (Fill the gap  type of exercise):

When I arrived, everybody was sitting round the table and talking. Their mouths were empty, but their stomachs were full. >>They had been eating/They had eaten. <<

I would pick past perfect simple (They had eaten), however the correct solution is past perfect continuous.

Can you explain why?


texts: What is the meaning of boldfaced lines in the paragraph?

texts:
I am reading a speech delivered by Sara T. Smith at the Second Anti-Slavery Convention of American Women.

I am confused what exactly the boldfaced lines in the paragraph below means. The context here is that Smith is encouraging women to participate in the abolitionist movement.

  By the Constitution of the United States, the whole physical power of the North is pledged for the suppression of domestic insurrections, and should the slaves, maddened by oppression, endeavor to shake off the yoke of the taskmaster, the men of the North are bound to make common cause with the tyrant, and put down, at the point of the bayonet, every effort on the part of the slave, for the attainment of his freedom.

What does it mean for the men of the North to make common cause with the tyrant? Teaming up with a tyrant to put down every effort on the part of the slave sounds quite evil.

I believe I am missing the point here.


texts: When not used as a polite closing, are "Thanks" and "Thank you" sentences ending with a period? "Thanks. I appreciate your effort." "Thank you, Kevin. I will be in touch soon."


texts:
Whatever one believes about the merits of completing the remaining intercity portion of the system, it is clear that 1) it gives the country an intercity transportation network that would be sorely missed had 2) it not been built. Even those who argue against 3) it 4) do so on the ground that if it had not been built, some better (nonauto) system would have been divised.

Does 1) “it” indicate completing the remaining intercity portion of the system?

Does 2) “it” indicate "the remaining intercity portion"?

Does 3) “it” indicate the same as 1)?

Why does 4) “do so” appear in the present tense and not in the past tense?

And what does “do so” indicate here?


texts: Difference between "magnitude" and "extent"

texts:
Is there a difference between the two when used as in the following sentences?

The extent of the disaster was initially underestimated.

vs.

The magnitude of the disaster was initially underestimated.

Both seem very similar, but I haven't found either as a synonym for the other in a Thesaurus (only as related words).