texts: What determines the addition of the suffixes "tion" and "sion"?

texts:
Why does the B in the word absorb change to P when the suffix "tion" is added?
Absorb + tion = absorption and not absorbtion.
The answer to this question is here:
Question: Why does the B in absorb change to a P in absorption?
Answer: Too long but here is the main part:

Voicing Assimilation is the technical term for what happened here.

This was an existing question and answer but my question is different from that one so it's not a duplicate.

My question is:

*Why does the B change to P in the root word but the suffix remains the same. Why didn't the suffix "sion" attach to the word absorb? It could have been absorbsion.
If we have to keep the alternating sounds the same, then B and zh (of sion) are both voiced.
In most words, the sounds in the root words remain the same and the suffix is changed.

Is there any rule that determines the addition of "tion" and "sion"? When should we use "tion" and when "sion"?


texts:
I read this phrase in a book:

  Today, you're likely to be a tiger snack.

Is that correct? I mean are not we supposed to write tiger's snack instead?


texts: Why do we "get to school" but "get home"?

texts: I've noticed that we "get to" some places, i.e. school, the gym, work, etc but we only "get home". Why do we omit the "to" for that particular usage?


texts: What word describes what to do when you have run out of credit on the phone?

texts:
Possible Duplicate:
  “I have no money on my cell phone account” or “my cellphone is out of money” or how?

What do I need to do, when I have run out of credit for my cell phone?


texts: What meaning does the word “in her turn” indicate?

texts:
I can’t understand the meaning of the words “in her turn “in this paragraph.
What meaning does it indicate?
Please explain it


texts: Is there a word for using half an idiom or saying?

texts:
Sometimes, when engaged in conversation, English-speakers will say the first half of a well-known saying or idiom, trailing off at the end or punctuating it with a shrug.  For instance, they might say "Birds of a feather..." or "When in Rome..." and leaving the "flock together" and "do as the Romans do" completely unsaid, when arguably that unspoken portion was the whole point of their statement in the first place.

Is there a name for such abbreviated usage?


texts: How to pronounce "seventeen" and "seventy"?

texts: As titled, both of these words always sound similar to me. Sometimes, the stress of these words will shift. For example, "seventeen" will say "SEVENteen". I am not sure whether it is correct or not. If so, and why?


texts:
Which of the following phrases is correct?

Why pursue a Master's?
Why to pursue a Master's?


texts:
There are some sentences that do not require object pronouns:

Go.

Being one example, where the implied object pronoun (you) is omitted.

But can we have a complete sentence where both the subject and object are omitted, as in the case of

(I) welcome (you) home


texts:
Possible Duplicate:
  When are “because”, “since”,“for” and “as” interchangeable?

A few years ago, I was told that "since" should only be used to designate a time period. For example:

  Since 2 o'clock, I've been waiting for you.

However, since creeps into the place of "because" quite often.

  Since I don't have the time, I won't be joining you.

This second example sounds slightly slangy to me now that I've been avoiding using "since" in this way for the past few years, but is "since" really a synonym of "because"?


texts:
I am writing a title and I was wondering whether I can skip the second article just like you would say a pen and pencil.  Can I say, "A cap and tie for Zed," or must it still be "A cap and a tie for Zed?"

Have been searching the net and books for some answers but have been unsuccessful.  Would appreciate a quick response from some Grammar Genius!  Need clarification here to finish up my work.

Thanks ya.


texts: Can "sufficient" be used in a negative sense?

texts:
Can the word "sufficient" be used in a negative sense, i.e. relating to something that has a negative effect when augmented? Example:

  These problems influence the results for sufficiently high speeds.

Since "sufficient" is a fundamental logical concept (as the logical opposite of "necessary"), I feel it shouldn't be "biased" in this way. On the other hand, maybe in linguistics it is different. The meaning of "sufficient" is equivalent to "as much as needed", so I can imagine that the "positive" nature of the verb "need" influences the meaning here.

So, can "sufficient/ly" be used in this way?


texts:
I use em dashes frequently to break up random or ancillary thoughts in my writing. However, I'm uncertain how to deal with punctuation after an em dash when my sentence continues. For example, which of the following is correct?

If at first you don't succeed—I seem to encounter this scenario frequently—try, try again.
If at first you don't succeed—I seem to encounter this scenario frequently—, try, try again.

Would I discard the comma in this case? It seems unnatural to keep it.
EDIT: I originally left out an obvious comma between the two "try"s, but that shouldn't affect the intent of my question.


texts: Does anyone know where “crack down” comes from?

texts: There’s crack up, crack down, and crack on (?). I am curious about the origin of the phrase crack down. Also,  what does it literally mean?


texts: Is there any authoritative source on the most popular words in English, and what percentage of written material they account for?

texts:
I ran across a couple claims that relatively only a few words make up most of the written material in English -- namely, that the most popular 100 words account from a third to a half of all content written in English -- and although it looks plausible enough on the surface, I wanted sources. However, I couldn't find a reputable source anywhere, just the same tidbits repeated all over the place.

The most trustworthy secondary source I could find was this blog post from dictionary.com, but I'd say trustworthy only because you'd assume they'd have some incentive to take associating themselves with this claim seriously.

It seems the problem stems from the relevant research available being from before the internet, or even personal computers, and so it wasn't digitized, only passed down like oral tradition. Apparently there's no recent research on the topic, at least none that I could find.

Can anyone point me to anything more substantial on the topic? Thanks.


texts: On the day of a Colleague's Birthday, I asked him "Which birthday" meaning to ask "How old have you become today". He was of the opinion that it is not a correct usage. Is the usage "Which Birthday" correct? If not what would be the right way (both I and my Colleague are not native English speakers)


texts: A word that means "a solution in search of a problem"

texts:
People tend to let capability mislead priority.  We refer to this as "a solution in search of a problem".  If your job is to point these out to people, it would be nice to do so with a single word.

Any ideas ?


texts: Is there a single word for “login/logout”?

texts:
Is there a single word that means both logging in and logging out?

I have a single file which I currently have named as Login. But it does more than logging in, it also logs out. I'm looking for a word that encompasses both login and logout.


texts: Why do we use "or" instead of "and" when we mean both things?

texts:
The following sentence came up in a recent conversation with a Polish national:

  I don't have a wife and any children.

I corrected his sentence to:

  I don't have a wife or any children.

He immediately pointed out that "or" usually means only one of the statements need be true, and that he wanted to convey that both statements were true, i.e.:

  I don't have a wife and I don't have any children.

What is the rationale for using "or" in this case?

[As a side question, should we be using "nor" in this case? I'm assuming not, though again I'm unable to explain why.]


texts: Thanks for (the?) jokes - is it definite enough for using definite article?

texts:
Context is the birthday congratulation note and it contains phrase "thanks for funny jokes and interesting lessons".

Should we put "the" before the "jokes"?

Similarly, should we say "thanks for (the) condolences" or other not exactly defined amount of something abstract? E.g. in contrast to "thank for the letter" (which I just received from you).

I'm trying to fathom this with logic - it seems that "thanks for ALL THE jokes" would be suitable because it becomes definite: I do remember them all and believe they all deserve being thanked for. But without "all" it seems "the" is optional?

Thanks for (the) hints and explanations!

P.S. I understand we can put "your" instead of "the" to be sure.


texts: What does "travelling at high speed" in "Look out for the car travelling at high speed" function as?

texts:
Is there a term used to refer to the following parts of these sentences (in bold):

Look out for the car travelling at high speed.
Catch me coming in hot.

I'm not sure if these can be considered adjectival clauses or if there's a better terminology for it.


texts: 'Knows all the knicks and knacks of...' is this correct?

texts:
So I want to write about a company that specializes in a particular field. They've been in this field since a while now, so they know everything there is to know about the field and related to it. but I am not sure if this sentence formation is correct.

  XX have been here for a while now and so they know all the knicks and knacks of...

I have been searching Google but unable to find the use of the phrase 'knicks and knacks' anywhere. Does this phrase exists and am I using it correctly?

If not, can you help me out with another phrase? It shouldn't sound boring.


texts:
The test itself lies in attempting to apply this new update to a card belonging to Judas, whom is a legitimate user of the system.

Is Judas considered the subject or the object? I'm considering Judas to be the object and hence applying whom after the comma. Is this correct?

I read about whom vs who at LINK, but I'm not sure if I'm applying it correctly to this case. I've also tried the whom+him test by asking Whom does the card belong to? with the answer It belongs to him.


texts:
I asked this question as a guest and now I have another question as a registered user because I can not comment there!

What is the difference between these two sentences' meaning?

1.She writes reasonably good children's books.

2.She writes unusually good children's books.

Edit:

Hans Christian Andersen writes ......... good children's books.

a) unusually
b) Reasonably


texts: AT the critical angle or ON the critical angle? Which preposition is the right one here?

texts:
I'm supposed to write a physics essay and I'm have to describe something that occurs when light hits an interface with a very specific angle. So the sentence goes: "(...) at the critical angle" or "(...) on the critical angle"?

There is a general rule for this or each case is a different case?

Thank you very much.


texts:
I have heard the claim that a claim must be explicit by definition, but do not see any definition that supports this.

An example of how "implicit claim" is used from this Wikipedia page on Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt.

  All three implicit claims have been disputed, and some of their
  elements disproven, by environmental groups, consumer-protection
  groups, and the industry self-regulatory Better Business Bureau

I would have thoughts claims can be implicit, either in the case of a point assumed for an argument without being stated directly  or a point being made that leads most people to the same conclusion without stating it directly.

Essentially I had thought any claim made that is not stated directly but implied would be an implicit claim. Is this incorrect?

In English can claims be implicit, or can they only be explicit?


texts: Word for a gift or debt that is so great it is not repayable

texts:
I’m looking for the word that describes a gift or debt that is so great it is not repayable (such as a parent’s gift of life. The child can never equally repay that). When I was in university, I learned there was a word for this.

I’ve tried googling this, but all that comes up are links regarding money.
Can anyone help me out?


texts:
From Barron's 6 ACT Practice Tests:

  The books are either explicit, describe graphic violence, or use questionable language.

Is this grammatically correct? If not, is there any way to parallel "A be B" and "A do C"?

I am not a native English speaker. I take the quoted sentence as:

  The books are explicit. They describe graphic violence. They use questionable language.


texts: What made the "worst case scenario" a popular expression?

texts:
A worst-case scenario is a cliché  that refers to:

  the worse possible future outcome.

(McGraw-Hill Dictionary of American Idioms)

Though  the meaning is quite intuitive, the expression in its fixed form has become increasingly popular from the mid 70's as shown in Ngram.

The expression is very common in financial markets, where it is often used by   stock markets analysts to refer to their most negative forcasts:

  A stock-market crash of ~50% from the peak would not be a surprise. It would also not be the "worst-case scenario," by any means. The "worst-case scenario," which has actually been a common scenario over history, is that stocks would drop by, say 75% peak to trough. (uk.businessinsider.com)

But it is also commonly used depicting possible future negative developments in geopolitics or climate issues:

  Given the good performance of the rains in 2005, a worst case scenario was highly unlikely, in terms of food security. (Famine: Early Warning Systems...)

Question:

1) What made this expression a common one? Was it used by a  politician or a  well-known journalist in some famous speech or article that made it popular?

2) Was it originally a typical  financial jargon expression or was it from some other field (politics, science etc.)?

Edit:

This related question does not address my specific request.


texts: How do you differentiate "thru", "threw", "through", and "thorough"?

texts:
How do I know which word to use in the correct context?
How do I recognize these words when hearing them?
Examples:

Jimmy threw the ring at Emiko.
Elvis walked through the door.
John was through with work for the day.
Gareth was through with mosquitoes coming through the window!
Edward was very thorough when cleaning the kitchen.


texts: Is “Jack could get to work earlier” deontic or epistemic?

texts:
Please consider:

  Jack could get to work earlier.

Is this use of could in the dynamic modality about Jack’s inherent ability, or is this the could of epistemic modality about the speaker’s knowledge about whether it’s possible for Jack to get to work earlier?


texts:
I'm looking for a word that means without a source but that is a little shorter and simple than sourceless. Coulnd't find any on Thesaurus.

Any suggestions?


texts:
Trademark names that start with a lowercase letter -- do we cap the lowercase letter when it starts a sentence?

E.g.:

iTunes is a hot spot in the app store.

Not: ITunes is a hot spot ...

iPhone sales have plummeted since the inception of the Samsung S5.

Not:
IPhone sales have plummeted since the inception of the Samsung S5.


texts: Adjective describing things that can be given value

texts:
Some things are valuable, i.e. they are of great worth or appreciated for whatever reason. Some other things, however, are not valuable at all to start with, but we can assign value to them by convention or law, for example. This process is called valorization. When something is valorized, it becomes valuable.

I need an adjective to describe things that may be subject to valorization, but which are not valuable yet. Valorizable comes to mind, but it doesn't appear in OED.

I am working in the cultural heritage domain, where almost any conceivable thing may be given cultural value by someone at some point. A thing that has cultural value is valuable. What do you call a thing that has no cultural value (yet), but has the potential to become valuable?


texts:
There are tens of questions here on EL&U about the grammaticality of the try and do something construction and its merits compared with the unremarkable try to do something collocation.

However, this question is not related to those in any way. This question is about the grammatical constraints on the use of the try and do something construction.

This morning whilst on a coffee break I realised that the try and do something construction, henceforth referred to as tryand for short, is not a ready replacement for try to do something. So far these are the grammatical constraints that I have noticed:

Tryand is restricted to the present tense only:

I try and visit once a week.
*I tried and visited once a week. (ungrammatical with this meaning)
*I tried and visit once a week. (ungrammatical with this meaning)

I put the two ungrammatical versions there, because it is not clear whether the second verb in the tryand construction is usually present tense or plain form (aka an infinitive).

When occurring in the present tense, tryand cannot be used in the third person singular:

I try and visit them.
You (all) try and visit them.
*He tries and visit them. (ungrammatical)
*She tries and visits them. (ungrammatical)
They try and visit them.

Tryand is useable as the complement of other present tense verbs without the third person restriction, or any past time reference restriction:

You can try and visit them
He can try and visit them
He would try and visit them

There is also no restriction on either the third person or the use of the past simple if the auxiliary do is used:

She does try and visit every week.
She did try and visit them as often as possible though.

This does not work with the perfect auxiliary have where there seems to be a bar on past time reference:

*She has tried and visit them as often as possible (odd or ungrammatical)
*She has tried and visited them as often as possible (ungrammatical with this meaning)

So, what I have drawn from this is that perhaps tryand cannot be used in any construction where the second verb would have to be inflected.

My questions are the following:

Are there any further restrictions on the use of tryand which I have missed?
When the verb try in the tryand construction is present tense, is the second verb also present tense or is it a plain form of the verb  (an infinitive)?
Why exactly does tryand have these restrictions?

Answers to any or all of the questions above would be welcome.


texts: I have the sentence "It seems that stealing and selling pedigree pets # a lucrative and worthwhile business." and my question is, if I should put "is" or "are" as a verb?


texts: How do you usually interpret "egregious"?

texts: OED's entry about "egregious" indicates it can mean remarkable in both good and bad ways.  Vocabulary.com's entry, in contrast, emphasizes to not use it for meaning positively outstanding.  How do you usually interpret and use "egregious"?


texts: What is the meaning of..."and as many centuries"?

texts:
In the book Pinocchio in Venice by Robert Coover, there's this sentence:

  On a winter evening of the year 19—, after arduous travels across two continents and as many centuries...

What does "and as many centuries" means?


texts: Where does "dead man walking" come from?

texts:
The recent epithet used by George Osborne "dead woman walking" is a clear reference to the more common expression:

Dead man walking whose original meaning is:

  (US) a condemned man walking from his prison cell to a place of execution.

but is more commonly and  informally used to refer to:

  any person in a doomed or untenable situation, esp one about to lose his or her job.

(Collins Dictionary)

The original AmE expression appears to  have been coined in relation to death executions but it has probably an older history. Thomas Hardy wrote a poem in 1909 whose title was "The Dead Man Walking" where   he used an expression which was probably already known at that time. Ngrams shows earlier usage instances but it is not clear where the expression comes from,( the spike in usage from the mid-90s is obviously due to the popular movie of the same name).

Questions:

What's the origin of the expression 'dead man walking'? Could it have been taken from some religious writings for instance?
When did the figurative informal usage first appear? Was it an AmE or a BrE extension of the more  common expression?


texts:
I’ve been researching if it is grammatically correct to Say  is king. For instance, we say “money is king”. “Cash is king”.

The very specific phrase I would like to write is “Remote work is king”. Which I believe means remote job is the best, better than office based jobs.


texts: How do you describe this particular way of sitting?

texts:
In Japanese, there's this thing called 横座り (yokozuwari, lit. "side-sitting") that looks like this:

Basically, you sit on your knees, but then partially swing your legs out to one side. Is there a concise way of describing this in English? A short phrase or a single word; either one would work.


texts: "A feeling of content" or "A feeling of contentment"?

texts:
I'm a native English user. I am used to using "content" as a noun, adjective and verb but when I use it as a noun, I usually use content rather than contentment. I checked the dictionaries and both are correct.

But which is more common and what's the difference if both are correct? Any nuance difference? I rarely use "contentment" as I feel the word sounds a bit cheesy and I don't use a "bigger" sounding word when a simpler word is available.

I used "content" as a noun in that form (and not as contents in a box) and somebody corrected me saying it's "contentment". I'm very sure I have seen "content" used in that form in many newspapers and books over my 33 years. Who's right?


texts: When is it appropriate to use 'admixture' rather than 'mixture'?

texts:
I saw the word admixture used in a sentence recently and looked it up in the Paperback Oxford English Dictionary only to find that its definition is "a mixture".

This is the sentence:

  The 'Natura' section features a series of sixteen prose poems,
  redolent in many ways of Hill's Mercian Hymns in their admixtures of
  natural and urban landscape, dramatised autobiography and historical
  reference, fomal and colloquial styles.

Why is "admixtures" used here rather than "mixture"?


texts:
I have been trying to understand how to detect subject and predicate in a sentence. So, I stumbled on this page.

The following example was given:

  Jim will be waiting for you at the mall.

In the answers, "will be waiting" is identified as a verb.

I was surprised because to me, "will be" could have been replaced by "is" but here it's used to correct that the "is" in "is waiting" is on the progress. On a second thought, I couldn't really identify which one is the verb again, since "will be" seems to serve as an adverb.

My questions:

Can "will be waiting' considered a verb in this case?
What is the function of "will be"? and what is the function of "will" in "will be"?


texts: Personality trait in which the person's style is evident in all they do?

texts: What is the term for the personality trait in which the person's style is evident in (bleeds into) all they do? There may be, for example, a particular style of handwriting, decoration, dress, driving, fighting, and countless others, that readily identifies that person.


texts:
I own a company called Find My Bus Ltd that brands itself as Find My Bus.

Yesterday we sat down and had a discussion regarding the name and all came to the agreement that it didn't represent the company as we originally wanted it to. Seeing three separate words in a name that when thought of without any context sounds quite funky, we decided it would be better to merge the words into one name.

We aren't the first to do this, in fact it is becoming a trend to merge words into one name. For example: DigitalOcean, StatusCake.

In my opinion both of those names look fine because they consist of two words. However, when you do this with Find My Bus you see: FindMyBus.

Is it just me, or does it look wrong having three words merged and capitalized? Would it be better to use Findmybus or perhaps FindmyBus?

Apologies if this seems like I'm running a poll, I'm not, I just simply would like to ask users with experience in the English language which looks the most appropriate for a company name.


texts: Can I use distinctive as a synonym for sharp?

texts:
There was a sharp rise in prices-There was a distinctive rise in prices
Is it correct?


texts: When you have no money, doesn't that mean you're already bankrupt? Can you use "in general" for a case like that?

texts:
Is the sentence below correct? What would be the best way to write it?

"In general, when you have no money, tap water is better than bankruptcy."

It says "in general" and assumes a condition "when you have no money" immediately after that. And again at the end it says "than bankruptcy" while "having no money" already implies that, are all the words in this sentence in proper order?

Context:

"One day, I even found myself asking my girlfriend for a few cents because I had no money to buy bottled water"
"In general, when you have no money, tap water is better than bankruptcy."
Source: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11336678


texts:
How do you write the following sentence:

Marcelo, together with Angela and I, are going to...
Marcelo, together with Angela and myself, are going to...


texts:
While watching American TV series, I sometimes see a sentence, "I’ve gotta go," but sometimes an actor says “I gotta go” instead.

Is there any difference between those things?


texts:
I read the following sentence from the NYT and am having trouble understanding parallelism applied here:

  Mr. Zuckerberg is for free trade, more open immigration and for a certain controversial brand of education reform.

Why does only "more open immigration" go without "for" and how does it work grammatically?

Please help. Thank you in advance!


texts: The phrase - "I remain sceptical" vs "I continue to remain sceptical"

texts:
During a parent meeting , I heard a teacher say :

  I remain sceptical (on the progress of the child).

  and the parent questioning him-

  Why do you continue to remain sceptical?

Isn't "I am sceptical" a better phrasing  instead of "I remain
sceptical" or is it informal?
continue to remain sceptical- makes sense to me, because the
sceptism is based on the past performance which was poor and no improvement is apparent. Does my logic meets the grammar?


texts: Why is a zero score in tennis or squash called love?

texts:
Possible Duplicate:
  Why do they say “love fifteen,” in tennis?

What is the origin of 'love' score in tennis/squash? To be honest, I didn't not quite understand why commentators kept mentioning stuff like 15 love, 30 love, until the other player scored a point and they said 30 15.

So what is the origin of 'love'?


texts: How should literary/fictional words, derived from the anglicization of other languages, be pronounced?

texts:
We often see peculiar names being given to titles and fictional characters, such as Wolfenstein (which protagonist does also have a weird name: Blazkowicz).

I would spend long times trying to figure out how I should pronounce these, but when I see a video of someone pronouncing it "correctly" (in the original language), I find out I were saying it very differently! However, these names are anglicized, as in used in English language fiction, such that the pronounce might not be the original one either.

Is there any consensus as to whether we should pronounce these names as if they were from their original language, or any standard to pronounce their anglicized forms?


texts: How can I say the demonym of "Chaco"? In Spanish it is "chaqueño", but I don't know what the correct word is in English.


texts:
Hey guys I'm looking for a nice-sounding, obscure word to synonymize the words: revival, rebirth, re-surgence.

Thanks


texts:
Is this sentence grammatically correct?

It must have been hard for you to deal with the pain her loss would have caused you.

I could have said ' ... her loss caused you' but that wouldn't allow for the fact that I am not sure how much pain was actually felt.


texts: Term for phrases that almost rhyme but are orally rhythmic

texts:
When thinking of short slogans or sayings there is great value in having something that is fun to say and has good shape, but not necessarily directly rhyming. If the rhyme is too literal, it tends to have a sing-songy tone.

The phrase “Keep calm and carry on” felt as though it had the property I’m looking for.

Is there a term to describe this kind of “almost-rhyme”?


texts:
I know that we should know basics of Grammar to be a good writer, but which part of English Grammar is most important .And how to memorize Adjectives and phrases.
Kindly explain


texts: Adjective to describe s̶t̶r̶i̶k̶e̶t̶h̶r̶o̶u̶g̶h̶ text?

texts:
Sometimes you get strikethrough text that has been crossed out.

How can I describe this attribute of text in one word?

i.e.

  The text "the illuminati exists" is ______

Bold, italicised, underlined etc. all fit above; what is the appropriate adjective for striked-through text?


texts: Non-standard British use of possessive "me"

texts:
Native North American speaker here.   It's fairly common in certain British dialects to substitute "me" for "my" (Shiver me timbers) in informal speech.
My impression is that some speakers mix the two.
What are the descriptive rules for selecting between the two variants?
Specifically, I'm asking about usage of

A non-standard variant of my (particularly in British dialects) is me. (This may have its origins in the fact that in Middle English my before a consonant was pronounced [mi:], like modern English me, (while me was [me:], similar to modern may) and this was shortened to [mi] or [mɪ], as the pronouns he and we are nowadays; [hi wɒz] he was; versus [ɪt wɒz hi:] it was he. As this vowel was short, it was not subject to the Great Vowel Shift, and so emerged in modern English unchanged.)

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_personal_pronouns#Archaic_and_non-standard)
As an example, here is an excerpt from the character Daisy in Downton Abbey:

DAISYSomeone walked over me grave.

(https://scriptline.livejournal.com/43860.html)
Someone please supply a video clip of this speech pattern.   I'm sure it can be found, but I can't.


texts: 'Between' with 'to' or 'and' for specifying ranges

texts:
I know that normally 'between' is used with 'and'. Howvever, I am not sure if this is still correct, if I want to specify a ranges. Here is an example:

"Method B leads to improvements of between 0.8% to 13.3% regarding the costs."

Is the 'to' correct here? When I use 'and' I somehow have the impression that the reader might think that this is not a range but two discrete numbers (so either 0.8% or 13.3%). I'd appreciate every comment.


texts: The fine line between stilted and sloppy

texts:
I received a comment to one of my questions that I would like to elaborate on.

Because the inversion of word order in the original makes it sound a little stilted

The original question yielded two possible ways of expressing the same thing and Robusto regarded the former one as the more stilted.

Neither I am, nor was I ever, nor will I ever be
I am not, have never been, and never will be

I understand that point of view, but as I am trying to improve my understanding of English literature as a non-native speaker, I would like to know how other people think about this issue.
I would have thought that the former statement is more literary whilst the latter would be used in a casual dialogue.
Is this true? How can I decide which one to choose, and when would a variant be considered inappropriate?


texts: Word for inability to think in certain ways

texts:
Am looking for a word that loosely means inability to think in certain ways.

For example, for lyricists (or writers) lyrics come so naturally, but for non-lyricists it's very difficult to think how lyricists write lyrics— it's a mindset or thinking pattern difference. The same can be for screenplay writers or artists. The same can be for lock-pickers and non lock-pickers. It's loosely the ability or inability to think along particular lines.

Is there a word that correctly captures what I am trying to say?


texts: Single word to describe a person who is difficult to work with

texts: Is there a single word to describe someone who is difficult to work with in a work environment.  They turn down offers to help but then blame you if things aren't done, try to actively go against what you say in group settings, and do not take your advice or listen (even if you know more about the subject or have been working on a project longer).


texts: Does the 'i' in 'iPhone' stand for anything?

texts:
Does the i in 'iPhone' stand for anything?

For example, when the word 'email' is used, it's just a shorter way to say 'electronic mail'.  When someone says 'eSports', it means 'electronic Sports'. So I'm curious if the i in iPhone or iPad or iTouch stands for anything? Like the iMac.  Did Apple just whimsically pick a letter prefix for their products? Or is there a word that it stands for.


texts: Can "who" be plural when it is the subject of a sentence?

texts:
A title I saw reads Who are doing Jehovah's Will, which doesn’t sound correct to me. To me, Who is doing Jehovah's Will sounds more correct.

Am I wrong, or can both be used in the beginning of a sentence or title?


texts: Is the second part of this sentence grammatically correct?

texts:
It is a well known fact that social media platforms can make it easier to communicate with others and how fast and convenient this communication is.

I find

It is a well known fact that social media platforms can make it easier to communicate with others in a fast and convenient way.

a safe alternative, but I'm curious about the first sentence. Does including the bolded section make the sentence ungrammatical?


texts: A better way to say "enrolled in a program" to signify the difficulty of attaining admission in the face of stiff competition?

texts:
I'm trying to write a personal statement in which I've to account for my past educational experiences. One of my courses is from a prestigious institute in my country, where its difficult to attain admission for that particular program.

How do I say so, without mentioning that in explicitly (As space is a requirement, and also I don't want to look too smug - after all, the institutes I'm applying to are leaders in their fields, and might view it as arrogant of me) ? If I say "enrolled in the program", it may mean I simply paid the tuition fees, which is incorrect (all the students receive full scholarship by default if they pass the multiple rounds of exams, making it a much difficult feat to secure entry)....


texts: Word Meaning: Stopping Someone from Doing Something (such as in the case of punishment)

texts:
I've just lost a word I use frequently whenever talking about the reasons for punishments.

The word should (I think) fill the blank:
Punishments, such as jail time, __ people from doing crime.

The word is related to stopping, hindrance, incentive, restrict, etc.

In this usage, it should also imply that it stops people from committing crime because they don't want to go to jail. Jail also stops people from committing crimes because they can't leave jail. It should fit both of these simultaneously.

I hope this isn't too far of a stretch.


texts: What is the difference between "gift" and "present"?

texts: What is the difference between gift and present?


texts: The Order of Modification in English Nouns, Preceding or Succeeding?

texts:
As I don't know the exact linguistic terms, what I mean my "preceding" and "succeeding" in modifying nouns is as follows.

Preceding : delicious food, long way, kind person, et cetera
Succeeding : faculty of science, land of despair, a book that changed my mind, et cetera

English seems to accept both ways of modification.

Sometimes, either way will not make a difference.
department of science == science department
a burning book == a book burning

At other times, changing the order will still make sense but be somewhat awkward or bizarre.
Kentucky Fried Chicken ?= Chicken Fried in Kentucky
free as in free speech ?= as-in-free-speech free

When writing English, I tend to use more the preceding modification style because my native language Korean is quite strictly precedingly modifying.
"빠른 판단을 바탕으로 한 재치있는 응수" directly translates to "a quick-decision-based clever response" rather than "a clever response based on a quick decision"

French as well as other Latin-originated languages seems to be succeedingly modifying.
Académie Française, Poulet Frit du Kentucky

while German and Dutch more often use preceding modification.

Well, this mixture in English allows rich style with various ways of expression, but it does often make a non-native English speaker be a little confused. Is there any subtle but general difference between these 2 ways? Or is it just simply case-by-case. Any guidance will help.


texts: Listing three items where the latter two are in a group. Put two "and"?

texts:
I am trying to write a sentence similar to the following. This one looks dumb as there are many jargon in my original sentence. This is an example with simple wordings:

Our candidates include Tom, who is a boy and Betty and Mary, who are girls.

Clearly, Betty and Mary are in one group. However, the sentence is hard to read as there are two "and". What is the correct way to write it? Thanks in advance.


texts: Word whose form is contrary to its meaning?

texts:
Is there a word for a word whose form is contrary to its meaning?

For example, "quotidian" is anything but quotidian.


texts: What is the general scale for rarity adjectives? On a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being 'abundant' and 10 being 'extremely scarce', what adjectives could be used to describe the areas in between? For example, what would a two be?


texts: Can I say "Intake energy into the grid"?

texts:
My UK translator always talk about sold energy to the "electric grid" but I need to describe the energy that is put in the grid from a generator (paid or not)

Now I'm also using "InakenEnergy" as a variable name inside my programming code. Is it correct?


texts: Is there a word for someone who does no work of their own, but criticizes the work of others?

texts:
I have a coworker who is notoriously lazy, hands off all her assignments, then when others do her work for her she is ridiculously critical of it.

Is there a word for someone like this? My colleagues and I couldn’t think of one.


texts: What is the difference between "count" and "matter" in this quote?

texts:
I came across a quote today, it is,

  As a person it's what's on the inside that counts. It's what's on the outside that matters.

Please explain the quote for me. Are count and matter opposites?


texts: Is "Are" always used with plural verbs/nouns?

texts:
Examples:

There's six seasons, dude.

Wouldn't it be:

There're six seasons, dude.

We are talking about multiple items; six seasons. If we refer to multiple items, we should use "Are" in most cases, no?

There's cats everywhere!
There's vans chasing us!

People often use the contraction "There is", plural or not. Wrong?


texts: What “I couldn't place it“ about an accent means?

texts:
Stephen Clarke wrote in A Year In the Merde, 2004 :

  "Not really, I'm 27. If I was a rock star I'd be dead." The bloke made apologetic gestures. "No, no. Ah'm not criti-sashing. Ah'm just... admirative." He had a weird accent. Not quite French. I couldn't place it[...].

What does I couldn't place it means in this context ? For an English learner like me, it's easy to think that he can't place something, but it has no sense in this context.
Is it, that he couldn't figure out where his accent comes from ? If so, why "place" ?


texts:
I am looking for a word/expression that refers to the related area of someone's job.

I've thinking in industry, job field or work field but I am not sure which one is more correct or if there is another different word that fits better.

Imagine the following sentence:

  They both share the same _____

How would you fill the empty slot?

There are other sentences where industry sounds good to me. For instance:

  I don't like that family, they all work on the computer industry.

Cars industry also sounds good, but what about laws industry? That sounds weird.

So, is there a more general word? Can someone tell me a solution for each of these cases?


texts: As the title states, if I have a list with a description after it like, "New coffee makers, new washing machines, dishwashers, or even toasters, are already..." should I put a comma after the last item in the list? (Toasters in the example)


texts: Welcome someone who returned to their home country

texts: I wanted to say "Welcome back to your home country!" but I'm not sure if this is correct. Should I say "in" instead of "to" or is there a better way of saying this?


texts: Origin and usage of "wild" in "my wildest dreams"?

texts:
Collins Dictionary defines wildest dreams as:

  If you say that you could not imagine a particular thing in your wildest dreams, you are emphasizing that you think it is extremely strange or unlikely.

The idiomatic expression appears to be quite old as suggested by Etymonline

  Wildest dreams attested from 1717.

and before that,  "wild" seemed to be used figuratively mainly about different forms of excitements:

  Meaning "sexually dissolute, loose" is attested from mid-13c. Meaning "distracted with excitement or emotion, crazy" is from 1590s.

So, where does "wildest dreams" come from? What connotation of the term does the expression rely on to suggest something extremely unlikely? Was it originally an AmE idiomatic expression?


texts:
Banana, alfalfa, entente: these are words containing an overlap, that is, the pattern XYXYX where X and Y are replaced by letters or sequences of letters. The idea is that the two occurrences of XYX overlap.

Is there any 5-letter English word like that?
Any other examples besides the ones I mentioned?


texts:
Is it correct to say:

Both Jack and Jill have apples.

when they each only have one?
Thank you.


texts: Can the word 'have' be omitted without changing the meaning here?

texts:
Sorry if I'm bad at explaining, I'm not a native speaker.

I had an interesting exchange with someone regarding a very particular sentence. Here goes:

For context; they are talking about an existing restaurant and are writing a short history paragraph about it.

The sentence:
"The recipes have been passed down and become the recommended dishes".

I argued that in this particular context, it's not correct to use "and become" because you're talking about a certain event that has already passed; that is, when the recipes made it into the menu. So I argued that it had to be "and have become the recommended dishes" OR "and became the recommended dishes".

Their argument is that they can omit the second use of "have" before "become" because the entire sentence uses the same tense (present perfect).

I feel like their proposed sentence has an illogical meaning the way it is constructed, and changing it to "has become" or "became" are correct in this particular context.

Am I right or wrong here?

Thank you in advance.


texts: The use of present perfect on someone who has passed away

texts:
The late Dr. Francis was a compassionate doctor who __________ his life to
helping the poor.

This is a question in an exam paper and the correct answer is: has dedicated.

Can anybody explain why 'has dedicated' is the answer instead of 'had dedicated'? Technically speaking, Dr Francis's dedication is a thing of the past which means it does not affect the current situation. In this case, shouldn't 'had' be used instead of 'has'?


texts:
Possible Duplicate:
  Why shouldn't we say “an user”?

I've personally seen the indefinite article an coming before consonants in many places whereas I think that should be a mistake.
I'm wondering if that's the case or using an before consonants is grammatically a mistake?
For example consider this:

  Insert an user into the database.

Taken from Worepress Trac (line 1028).


texts:
Possible Duplicates:
  “All but” idiom has two meanings?
  “to be all but X”

  He all but ran out of the building

If I understand it correctly (English is not my native language), this sentence means "he ran out of the building", and the "all but" is here to stress the fact that he didn't do anything else (besides running).

That being said, the first time I came across this construction, I understood it the other way round. Eventually, I inferred from context the above meaning, but even today, I still have a feeling that it's somewhat illogical.

Where does this construction come from (and what does it really mean)?


texts:
While reading the 'Guide to the use of the dictionary' of the Compact Oxford English Dictionary (yes, I read dictionary introductions, shame on me), I stumbled upon a section about hyphenation with regards to noun compounds, specifically upon the following sentence:

  [...] hyphens are also used to show a word's grammatical function. [...] so that you would write for example I used my credit card but credit-card debt.

What is not clear to me is the sentence 'hyphens are used to show a word's grammatical function'. If I understand the concept of 'grammatical function' correctly, then this sentences doesn't make much sense to me, because then one would have to add hyphens to every grammatical object, because every grammatical object has a function in a sentence.

Am I correct in saying that I can take this sentence to mean something like 'hyphens are also used when the grammatical function of noun compounds is to be an adjective of the following noun'? Or is there maybe some sense of the term 'grammatical function' that I am missing?


texts: Meaning of "in dash" in a story headline

texts:
This is the headline: US President Biden discovers limits to his power in dash to erase Trump's legacy
What is the meaning of "in dash" here?
Something that is readily available, like in a dashboard?
Just short for "in a dash" i.e. "quickly"?
Something else?
The story: https://english.alarabiya.net/News/world/2021/01/31/US-President-Biden-discovers-limits-to-his-power-in-dash-to-erase-Trump-s-legacy


texts:
what is the meaning of so patent a manner in the following sentence

Seeing him like this, dressed just for her in so patent a manner, she could not hold back the fiery blush that rose to her face.


texts: “Tizzarget Acquizzired”; What's the deal with the Z's when imitating divers?

texts:
When imitating scuba divers, especially "old-timey" ones, extra Z's or "izz"es get added to the middle of words. What is the origin of this?

I have heard this in a few older shows, including the original Scooby Doo series, and now most recently in How I Met Your Mother, where Barney Stinson modifies "Target Acquired" to become "Tizzarget Aquizzired", while wearing a diving suit.


texts: Is the sentence structure "because... and so" grammatically correct?

texts:
According to the grammar I know, I only use either "because" or "so", but I do not use them in one sentence at the same time. I found that a translator always renders in this way. Sometimes the translator uses "because... and so," "not because...so," or "some say because... and so." My editing team are confused about that and don't know if it is a grammar error.  Is "because... and so" proper in written English?

Examples:

  "Throughout history there has been no mention of extra terrestrial
  beings living on the planet. Because they do not appear to us, and so
  many feel they do not exist."

  "And because she was young, and so damn clever and amusing and
  wonderful, wherever she made her home, there would be some man who
  would fall in love with her." (Crown of Midnight)

  "Finitude is implicit in being limited, therefore, because being
  limited, and so coming to a stop, is itself part of a thing's ownmost
  being." (The Opening of Hegei's Logic: From Being to Infinity)

A quick google search shows 339,000 instances and of which 279,000 in the 21st century (supposedly). I want to make sure is "Because...and so..." proper grammar?


texts: What are words called when they can be made from the sounds of letter names?

texts:
For example:

Icy → IC
Excel → XL
Easy →  EZ*

* This spelling is based upon the U.S.A's. more recent pronunciation of the letter Z, which is /ziː/, rather than the British style /zed/. Compare with the pronunciation of easy, which is /iːzi/ in both regions. See: O.A.L.D.


texts:
Does anyone know of a proper word/phrase to describe an action whereby you break a file path (e.g. /a/b/c/d) into several pieces such as:
/a
/a/b
/a/b/c
/a/b/c/d


texts:
I'm hearing the current measures taken during the current coronavirus pandemic referred to in the media as "curfews". To me the word "curfew" implies that people are required to behave a certain way during certain hours of the day. The definitions I've seen given tend to agree with my instinct. In other words, requiring people to be off the streets and in their homes after 6 pm or before 8 am sounds like a curfew to me, but a constant lockdown or what some are calling "shelter in place" doesn't.

  n.
  1. A regulation or rule requiring certain or all people to leave the streets or be at home at a prescribed hour.
  2.
  a. The time at which such a restriction begins or is in effect: a 10 pm curfew for all residents.
  b. The signal, such as a bell, announcing the beginning of this restriction.
  American Heritage Dictionary

  n.
  1. an order establishing a time in the evening after which certain regulations apply, esp. that no unauthorized persons may be outdoors or that places of public assembly must be closed.
  2. a regulation requiring a person to be home at a stated time, as one imposed by a parent on a child.
  3. the time at which a daily curfew starts.
  Random House Kernerman Webster's Dicitonary

  2a : a regulation enjoining the withdrawal of usually specified persons (such as juveniles or military personnel) from the streets or the closing of business establishments or places of assembly at a stated hour The city ordered a curfew to prevent further rioting.
  b : a requirement that someone (typically a child) be home by a particular time Instead, [parents] should make a point of enforcing curfews and standards of behavior that reflect their family's values …— Pam Carroll
  Merriam-Webster Dictionary

  1A regulation requiring people to remain indoors between specified hours, typically at night.
  ‘a dusk-to-dawn curfew’
  Oxford dictionaries (at lexico.com

  A curfew is an order specifying a time during which certain regulations apply.1 Typically it refers to the time when individuals are required to return to and stay in their homes.
  Curfew (Wikipedia)

However it's possible that the Collins Dictionary definitions describes the current public health measures, as it doesn't seem to require a time component:

  n
  1. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) an official regulation setting restrictions on movement, esp after a specific time at night
  2. the time set as a deadline by such a regulation
  Collins Dictionary

Edit: India has recently ordered people to stay off the streets between 7 am and 9 pm. Some people consider a curfew to specifically restrict movement after dark, but to me this sounds like a curfew. I guess you could describe it as a reverse curfew as people are only allowed out at night.


texts: Should I use a comma before the conjunction in this sentence?

texts:
The sentence

The movie was loud and the chatter was louder.

Should I need to add a comma before the and that joins the first sentence The movie was loud and the independent clause the chatter was louder?
Which one is correct?

The movie was loud and the chatter was louder.

The movie was loud, and the chatter was louder.

I am not a native English speaker. Please explain your answer too.


texts: When and why did "the Dutch act" emerge as a slang term for suicide?

texts:
J.E. Lighter, Random House Historical Dictionary of American Slang (1994) provides this entry for "Dutch act":

Dutch act n. Und[erworld] suicide.—constr[ued] with the. [Earliest cited occurrences:] 1902 Hapgood Autobiog. of Thief 112 {ref. to ca 1890} A week later Del was found dead in his cell, and I believe he did the Dutch act (suicide). 1911 A.H. Lewis Apaches of N[ew] Y[ork] 31: Spanish...did not croak Dribben and Blum and do the Dutch Act for himself. 1922 In the Clutch of Circumstance 235: He was a "lifer," and not being able to endure the system longer he did the "Dutch act" in order to shorten his sentence.

The Hapgood reference is to Hutchins Hapgood, The Autobiography of a Thief (1903):

A week later [after his arrest] Del was found dead in his cell, and I believe he did the Dutch act (suicide), for I remember one day, months before that fatal night, Dal and I were sitting in a politician's saloon, when he said to me:
"Jim, do you believe in heaven?"
"No," said I.
"Do you believe in hell?" he asked.
"No," said I.
"I've got a mind to find out," he said quickly, and pointed a big revolver at his teeth. One of the guns in the saloon said: "Let him try it," but I knocked the pistol away, for something in his manner made me think seriously he would shoot.

The part of Autobiography of a Thief containing this vignette appears in the September 1902 issue of Frank Leslie's Popular Monthly, justifying the 1902 date in given Lighter. This instance certainly suggests criminal underworld use of the slang term. But why the connection between suicide and anything "Dutch"? Is this simply an anti-Dutch or anti-German ethnic slur? How far back in the print record does "the Dutch act" go, and in what context did it first appear? And finally, what antecedents, if any, did the expression have?


texts:
I have a table which has the following entry which is in brackets:

"(conventional control as benchmark)"

Can I write it like this or would you rather use 'for benchmark'? Unfortunately the space is limmited in the table and I do not want to have another linebreak. This is why I can't write 'serves as bechmark'.

I'd appreciate every comment.


texts: use of the pronoun 'it' in extraposition

texts:
I really don't know about this it in the sentence:

[…] I didn't know why I resented it so intensely to have them think of me as something newly minted, but it was – I am certain – echoes of that idea that had been sounding […]

1) To me the first and the second it refer to: have them think of me as something newly minted

2) However, when I replace it with this or that it doesn't seem to refer to anything.

Kindly, is there another manipulation to make sure of it?


texts: When was "Chronic" first used as its own antonym?

texts:
The word "Chronic" means "long lasting", or "occurring over an extended period of time".  A chronic illness one that you will have for a long time (if not for your entire life), or take a long time to recover from.  A short-lived, sharp/intense/severe illness would instead be referred to (in formal language) as "Acute"

However, in informal usage, "Chronic" is frequently used to mean "severe" - such as a sudden painful migraine being referred to as a "chronic headache" even when relatively short-lived.

  The word is also used in informal British English to mean 'bad, intense, severe, objectionable'
  "Fowler's Dictionary of Modern English Usage" (1926) Henry Watson Fowler. Edited by Jeremy Butterfield in 2015

Certainly in Medical circles, you would never expect to see "Chronic" used in this way, even though it is a "new definition" for the word.  However, someone recently asserted thusly to me (regarding the definition of a different word):

  "There has to be some period of time after which the new lexical definition of a word can be accepted"

There are several questions this raises (I'm sure that Law.SE could find examples of when this would "invalidate" various Legal documents or rulings!), but the main one I was wondering is this:

What is the first record we have of "Chronic" being used in place of "Acute", its antonym?

There are other word-pairs in a similar situation, such as "Literally"/"Metaphorically", but this seemed an example with significant impact if the colloquial usage were to replace the official one


texts: what does "Google to pay Apple $12B to remain Safari's default search." mean?

texts:
I could not understand this part of the sentence : "Google to pay".
I googled it by typing "Subject + to + verb" but could not find anything. Thanks in advance for your answers.


texts:
Possible Duplicate:
  Is it OK to drop the periods in abbreviations?

Okay, so in School I was always tought that when we want to abbreviate, we must use a full stop "." inbetween each letter, and if it's at the end of a sentence, a full stop at the end also (duh).

But, everywhere I go now, I am faced with having to put up with bad grammar, incorrectly-spelled words, and just total rubish. And I believe marketing is to blame! Think about it... When was the last time you saw a major company with a nice looking logo like AVC use dots inbetween each letter?

It's become so widely accepted that everybody does it now - all the time. Now I'm getting confused because all I've seen for a long time is just total rubbish, and now I don't remember which way is correct or not.

Say for example the following letters stand for "Another" "Silly" "Word", which version of abbreviation is correct?

  A.S.W
  A.S.W.
  ASW

Or are they all correct?


texts:
Consider the following sentence as an example:

  The present analysis suggests that the central Indian (CI) region is loaded with higher aerosol concentration and that rainfall is significantly negatively correlated with aerosol optical depth (significant at 1 % significance level) over CI.

where the first instance of the abbreviation "CI" is presented as short of "central Indian" and the second instance technically "central India."

Is this an acceptable presentation? Or should I change the second instance to "...over the CI region...."?


texts: Why is there in in -in-law instead of by or something similar? Simon Jester, in his answer to this question, quotes the Oxford English Dictionary which says that it originally applied to step-relatives rather than those now considered in-laws, but I still don't know why we use son-in-law instead of son-by-law.


texts: I am unsure about the relationship between overhearing and eavesdropping. Am I right to think that overhearing is always unintentional, and eavesdropping is always intentional? Or is eavesdropping a special case of overhearing, i.e. overhearing can refer to both intentional and unintentional circumstances?


texts: A word for when an arguer states their case again but simultaneously claims the argument should cease?

texts:
Is there a term for when an arguer simultaneously (1) states their case again and (2) claims the argument should stop?

Example:

Thread #4522, Post #51:  I will just say one last time that there
                         is no way Frank would have done that, and
                         it is clear at this point that the manager
                         was 100% correct in her assessment.  But
                         really, let's stop arguing about this.

It is odd because if the person really wants the back-and-forth to stop, then obviously they shouldn't lob another volley.  It seems to be an attempt to end the argument while letting themself have the last word.

This is a very common (and rarely successful) tactic in arguments in online forums.  I think the people doing it often don't realize the hypocrisy of what they are doing: they themselves are continuing the argument, while they are asking the other person to stop.

This isn't exactly a fallacious argument, so it is unlikely to appear in a list of fallacies, nor is it the sort of behavioral pattern that would appear in a list of unconstructive behaviors.  And yet it is so common to see that I would expect there to be a term for it.

Here are the most related terms I can find, but none of them comes close to pinpointing this common tactic.

"Argumentum ad baculum" with the implicit threat being that the argument will continue if the opponent does not capitulate. But this is not a physical threat.
"Thought-terminating cliché", although there is not really a set phrase that is used, and the request to stop arguing is also not on-topic, so this is not a great fit either.
"Argumentum ad nauseam" is often being used simultaneously, and this (saying the argument should stop) seems to be an appeal for the other person to let this tactic succeed already without the speaker needing to continue any longer.

I would expect the term to be a word or phrase usable in a sentence such as "The post quoted above in grey is a good example of ________."  But even if the usage would differ from that, it would be useful to have any word or phrase that clearly indicates this tactic.


texts: What is a far cry, and what is its origin?


texts: British usage: add verb forms of "do" after a conditional

texts: Is it standard British usage to add forms of the verb "Do" after a conditional like "Would"? e.g., If I could, I would do"?


texts: Plural or singular in "between the negotiated and fixed rate(s)"

texts:
From http://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/swapspread.asp

  Swap spread  is the difference between the negotiated and fixed
  rate of a swap.

Should "rate" be plural "rates"?


texts:
I want to know the difference between already and yet in this example:

  I was surprised that they had __ to decide what to do.

My answer on this question was already and my
teacher marked it as a wrong answer in the test.
What's the difference between already and yet in that sentence?


texts: "Para" and "Paras" vs "Paragraph" and "Paragraphs"

texts:
I find people using "para" for "paragraph" and "paras" for "paragraphs", even in formal English.

See the example sentence:

  In para 2 of the plaint, the plaintiff has stated that he is entitled to "x".

Have "para" and "paras" come of age and gained recognition in formal English. Can I write "para" and "paras" in a formal writing?


texts: Meaning of the phrase "hacked by someone" — but not in context of computers

texts: What does it mean when a girl says that she "hasn't been hacked [by a boy]"? Dictionaries give us only computer-related meanings of "hack"; does it have any other meaning?


texts: Meaning of the phrase "embedding theoretical knowledge into practice"?

texts: So, I have been writing my application for a job, and I want to mention that I consider the job as an opportunity where I convert the theory I have learned in my study into practice (real work). In this context, would it be correct to state "embedding theoretical knowledge into practice"? I read it somewhere online, but I am not quite sure about the correctness of it.


texts: How to spell "Spalding" so that it is pronounced with /ɑː/ and not /ɔː/?

texts: English being my second language aside, I want to call my dog Spalding and I want it to be pronounced with [ɑː] not [ɔː]. How do I write down Spalding to be pronounced that way?  I would like to know the pronunciation for both British English and speaker of American English so that it's [ˈspɑːldɪŋ].


texts: Grammatical explanation of statement "He will not be questioned."

texts:
Seems to me that it is equivalent to "He is not to be questioned." There's an element of declaration or assertion I can't pin down!

Context is Stephen Miller speaking about Trump's travel ban, asserting that his power to block immigrants is absolute. I wondered how the tense and grammar was able to suggest this.


texts: Perfect Participle - "Having gained truth, keep truth"

texts:
"Having gained truth, grab the truth"

This is an example of the Exercise in Grammar 51 in Wren and Martin, which actually asks for the noun being qualified by the partciple beside its type.

Now, two things are clear:
1: "Having gained" is an active perfect participle,
2: And, the first instance.of "truth" is the object of the participle, as it is telling the some thing has gained the truth.

So, "truth" can't be the noun qualified by the participle as the qualified noun is a sort of subject, weather in active mood or passive mood. So, the first thing crossed my mind when I read the example that it qualifies "you" implied in "grab", an imperative.

But, surprisingly, the key of Wren and Martin mentions "truth" as the noun being qualified by the participle.

So, if someone kindly elaborate where lies the problem: in my understanding or in the key!


texts: Is this sentence grammatical: "all there is, are idiolects?"

texts:
Someone please explain why singular to plural to singular is correct. In my opinion, this makes no sense.

Edit for clarification of what I'm asking: My point is that double linking verbs are not OK as they lack an object in between (and cannot share a subject or object in such cases). One of my sources for this is here: http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/when-are-double-words-ok?page=1

And here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_copula, which is partially relevant. Except that we're taking it to a whole new level by changing plurality of a word!

Also: https://www.quora.com/When-did-the-double-is-usage-as-in-the-thing-is-is-become-common-or-at-least-unremarkable

Same idea goes for sentences like "All there is is a cat" (which, again, I find ungrammatical) or "A cat is is all there" (flipped around version, or the predicate adjective form of the predicate nominative using the same singular form instead of going from plural to singular or singular to plural which is an even more extreme case of incorrectness I believe).

BUT, people still say things like this: "all there is are socks." So why not say, "all there are is a sock?" Same idea in terms of grammar? Or is that wrong? Why can a predicate nominative not be flipped to a predicate adjective form? Quite confused here.


texts:
Background

Imagine you are a presidential candidate. You have a potential winning policy idea. Now is time to finesse the details. Your fundamental goal is persuade as many people as possible about your policy idea.

Now, you know that some people will be turned off by it, but you believe your messaging can help outnumber those that are turned off. Maybe you could say that this is all intentional at this point. You know what kinds of people you will never receive their support from, and you know what people could join you. This seems all intentional so far.

Question

My question deals with the unintentional losses. Maybe you chose an incorrect word or phrase. Turns out you lost people. Maybe gaffes would fall under a similar idea, but they aren't my main focus (just to help explain the idea).

Your goal was to persuade people, but you did the opposite, unintentionally.

What is a word that means that? This can be a word or phrase.

What I did

I thought a good word was dissuade, and I used that. But the more I think about it, it appears that dissuade is an intentional act. You are intentionally persuading someone to not do something. That is what dissuade appears to mean. However, that is intentional, and I am looking for unintentional.

In particular, I wrote something like this, "...add just one word and you can dissuade many, but you also persuade many others." Just to reiterate, I was going for intentionally to unintentionally as concise as possible.


texts: Is there a specific term for the use of adjectives?

texts:
Is there a specific term or designation for the act of adding an adjective to something?

"The act of adding an adjective" could generally be called an "edit".  However, the question is whether a term exists specifically for this use of an adjective.


texts: What semantic meaning does the copula 'be' have in its specifying use?

texts:
The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language (Page 252) says:

It may be that the be of [Kim is fond of animals] should be regarded as semantically empty, serving the purely syntactic function of carrying the tense inflection, which has to be associated with a verb: note in this connection that translation equivalents in a good number of languages contain no verb. However, there are undoubtedly constructions where be does express a semantic predicate (e.g. in The chief culprit was Kim: see §5.5), and we will simplify by assuming that it does in all cases.

The copula be (is) of Kim is fond of animals is in the ascriptive use in that it ascribes to Kim the property of being fond of animals. By contrast, in The chief culprit was Kim, the copula be (was) is in the specifying use in that it specifies who the chief culprit was.
In the above excerpt, CGEL seems to be saying that the copula be in the ascriptive use has no meaning ("semantically empty") whereas that in the specifying use does have some meaning ("does express a semantic predicate").
Assuming this is what CGEL is saying, what semantic meaning does the copula be have in its specifying use (that the ascriptive be doesn't have)?


texts: Is there a word describing someone who is ignorant in the ways of Science?

texts:
I am not sure if dogmatic or doctrinaire covers it, but I am looking for a word to describe someone (like a politician) who is willfully unknowing of how the scientific method works and what science can and cannot accomplish.

I am looking for a descriptive word, and not a derogatory term like "ignoramus". And somehow it has to convey the idea that their ignorance applies to scientific domain only.


texts:
I read an article, here is the original words:

  Lennon even created his own comic strip, which he called "The Daily Howl". This contained drawings, frequently of crippled people, and satirical writings, often with a play on words. For example, in one page, Lennon wrote a weather report saying that "Tomorrow will be Muggy, followed by Tuggy, Wuggy and Thuggy".

Could someone tell me about the meaning of ""Tomorrow will be Muggy, followed by Tuggy, Wuggy and Thuggy"? This is hard to understand for me since English is not my mother language.


texts: Why are open source and closed source usually not hyphenated? Should they be?

texts:
Typically, English writers do not hyphenate open source or closed source when referring to computer software.

Why is this?

Should they be hyphenated or is it best to not use hyphens for these terms?


texts:
My first post here, hello everyone. :)
Feel free to suggest changes to this question.

I was just wondering why is the word remote unlike the other words starting with “re” like replay, reply, relocate, remove where the “re” is the prefix meaning again. Is there any historical reason behind this?

Are there other words like this? :)

Edit: Actually, I'm referring to my TV remote here, I do know remote also = far..


texts: Does a woman who has never been married have a maiden name?

texts:
I watched a movie recently in which one of the characters states that his mother doesn't have a maiden name. It really struck me as something odd (I am not a native English speaker), I would have thought the answer would be that his mother's maiden name is the one she's bearing.
However my Irish boyfriend claims one only "obtains" a maiden name once she gets married.
In other words, is maiden name an equivalent of birth name for women?

*EDIT: I think what I'd really like to know is how you answer the question from the movie - what is her maiden name, knowing she's not married?


texts: What is a word or phrase that means "both achievable and challenging?"

texts:
The adjective "achievable" places an upper-bound on difficulty, whereas "challenging" is a lower-bound. I would love a word or phrase that binds difficulty in the sweet spot between these two.

In other words, I am looking for a word or phrase that means "challenging, but achievable."

Thank you!

Context

The context of this question is that I am looking to come up for a replacement mnemonic for SMART criteria, in which the 'A' typically stands for 'achievable.'

I don't like that particular criterion because it doesn't capture the whole story of difficulty-appropriateness. Both bounds are important to me.

Example sentence

  None of Frankenstein's goals were [?]; he aspired only to drink his coffee without spilling, and to engender world peace."


texts: Can a phrasal adjective be placed AFTER a noun?

texts: If phrasal adjectives can be placed after nouns, what are some examples?


texts: Is there an established term to describe quarterly repeating transactions?

texts:
I'm the developer of a personal finance app for iOS called My Finances. The app supports repeating (daily, weekly, monthly and yearly) transactions and presents a summary of the repeating settings to the user e.g. Every week on Sunday.

I want to add quarterly and half-yearly repeating transactions and I'm not sure how to summarise them correctly. Would it be correct to summarise a quarterly repeating transactions starting on April 3rd like this: Every quarter on 3rd day in 1st month?

Same goes for half-yearly transactions.

Update: Rephrased question.


texts: How can I express the fact that the reason why I wore pants has been the same?

texts:
Since the start of the latest lockdowns, I haven't been wearing pants often. The only times when I wear it have been when I meet with a particular friend of mine. Now, I want to express the fact that this particular friend of mine has been the only reason why I wore pants. However, I'm having a bit of trouble:
If I say

S/he has been the only reason I have been wearing since the start of the latest lockdown.

The reader might understand as if I have been wearing pants for several months now. Even though the act of wearing pants has been done several times for short time periods, the reason why such an act has been the same. So, when I say "since ...", the time phrase should modify the noun reason and not wear.
How can I express what I want to say, just like in the above example, in a single sentence without causing possible confusion?


texts:
The following sentence comes from Charles Fennyhough's The Voices Within: The History and Science of How we Talk to Ourselves:

  Take the time Adam was talking to a member of his mental health team and saying, ‘I would be terrified to be a schizophrenic’.

I don't understand what starting a sentence with "take the time" means. Could you help me please?


texts: Is there a word for someone who you've not physically met but know well?

texts: I have met many people online, but not physically. Like a boy who's like my brother. They're no less than my real-life buddies. So I have to create a group of contacts devoted to those people only. What can I name that group? Virtual people would be geeky, I need something that's also respectable.


texts:
How would you punctuate this sentence?

I watched the conversion of goods into packages into services then into profits.


texts: Relation between "trivial", "more than trivial", and "less than trivial"

texts:
I am a non-native speaker who thought understood the meaning of 'less than trivial' to mean more complicated than trivial. My intuition came from assuming that given an adjective then 'less than' would mean going less in the direction of the meaning of the adjective, the opposite direction. For example, 'less than happy', or 'less than pleased' to mean not so happy or somewhat displeased. See these links, although I don't know if they are considered reliable.

Then I saw someone using 'more than trivial' to mean (deduced from the context) more complicated than trivial.

I tried searching in Google, but couldn't find which one is the meaning of each.
A native speaker told me that to them 'less than trivial' sounded odd, but 'more than trivial' sounded more common (to them), and carrying the meaning above.

I just wanted to confirm these claims, or if not find the right meaning.

If they are not correct, is it true the generalization that I was making? Namely, that 'less than <adjective>' has a meaning that goes somewhat in the direction of the antonym of the <adjective>?

Not sure if degree-of-comparison is a tag that applies here. It didn't have a description.

Examples that I have found so far:

Here 'more than trivial' is being used to mean more complicated than trivial (material). This is an example contradicting my guess. By the way, maybe there is also a difference between 'more-than-trivial' and 'more than trivial', together with context.
This one seems to be using 'less than trivial' to mean more complicated than trivial. This is agreeing with my guess.


texts: Is there any exception where 'am I' is used but not for question? Thank you


texts: Is "once you stop to think about it" ambiguous?

texts:
I tripped over a phrase in a book similar to "Once you stop to think about it, the existence of rainbows is pretty amazing."

Now, in context, it is pretty clear that I am supposed to stop my usual thoughtless existence to take some time thinking about rainbows, but literally, the phrase could mean that I should stop all this useless thinking to have time to appreciate rainbows more.

Is the phrase "stop to think about it" actually ambiguous or is it always used in the sense of thinking?


texts: which phrase is more suitable in an official text :"ordinary people" or "normal people

texts: I am confused which phrase is more suitable to put in an official text that is comparing two phrases : 1) successful person 2) Ordinary or normal person.


texts: Using "you" and "your" as a representation for yourself and everyone in general

texts:
Example sentence:

  I love when your dog just lets you sit there to pet them. You don’t necessarily know if they are enjoying it, but they love you enough to just sit there with you for a bit.

Is this correct? We assume the words "you" and "your" refer to the speaker of the sentence, and not to the listener, as second-person usually does. But it also refers to dog owners in general. I have always been curious about this.


texts: Baldur's Gate: EE What does this sentence mean?

texts:
I'm playing a PC game 'Baldur's Gate:EE' and I can't understand this sentence.

It is from a character in the game.

"I bet those rank-ridin' bandits are hired by the Amnian. It'd be like those moneygrubbers to pull something so low. Got to the point where an honest man can't travel the roads."

In particular, second sentence, I don't get it at all.

It would be like those moneygrubbers to pull something so low.

What does pull something so low mean?
In the sentence, to infinitive(to pull something so low) is used as an adjective to describe those moneygrubbers?

Please help me and thanks in advance for any help.


texts: Should I use a hyphen in "patient tailored" vs "patient-tailored"?

texts:
Being a non-native English speaker, I was wondering which is most correct?

(1) Patient-tailored staging of xx carcinoma, or
(2) Patient tailored staging of xx carcinoma?

It is for a scientific paper.

Thank you in advance.


texts: When remembering events from last year, would you say "looking back on 2017" or "looking back at 2017"?


texts: How do you pronounce the word "married"? Why do most people pronounce it like "mɛrid" or "mɛərid" even though IPA for it is "mærid"?


texts: Looking for a word that captures knowledge, and falsely assuming that everyone else has it, thereby selling oneself short

texts:
Ok so I realize the title seems confusing, so let me elaborate:

Often times someone with a high level of knowledge in a some subject, may be inadvertently over-charitable to others, in assuming that they too have the same high level of knowledge, and insights that he/she may, whilst more often than not, that is not the case. In doing so, (especially in competitive environments), they may then assume, (and get discouraged further), in initiating a new project/venture with their insights, because they think that "everyone" already knows what they know, and so their idea isn't unique, and may be "already thought-of / done".

Is there a word/phrase that may capture such a thing? It's sort of a cross between selling yourself short because of knowledge/insight, since you falsely believe everyone else already knows what you know.

Thanks


texts: Is the adjective "graphic" acquiring a new meaning?

texts:
In almost any reference I look, the adjective graphic refers to:

  producing very clear and detailed mental images:

as in...

  She described her operation in the most graphic detail.

However, on almost any given news program in the US, it is common to hear the anchor warning...

  "...and we warn you, the following images are very graphic"

and what follows is usually disturbing: broken, bleeding bodies being pulled from bombed out buildings, mothers weeping in anguish, blood, gore and general mayhem.

Is the adjective being mis-used, or is it acquiring a new usage?


texts: What does the phrase "denizen of the swamp" mean?

texts: I read this in an article in NYT.  I tried searching Google, and also looked through a number of dictionaries, but no help. Any one can help?


texts: How to say that the usage of something is questionable due to already exisiting solutions?

texts:
For example, I have developed a software algorithm which does the needed behaviour, but already existiing solutions are better or already implemented. How can I describe my algorithm with a professional adjective, that says something like "useless but working", e.g in the following sentence:

  "It was shown that the algorithm does the needed thing. However, the
  usage of it may be GOOD-ADJECTIVE due to already exisitng
  alternatives implemented."


texts: How should I understand "She cracked open a door"?

texts:
I learned the following sentence from 100 Greatest Science Discoveries of All Time by Kendall Haven:

  Marie Curie's studies rank as one of the great turning points of science. Physics after Curie was completely different than before and focused on the undiscovered subatomic world. She cracked open a door that penetrated inside the atom and has led to most of the greatest advances of twentieth-century physics.

I don't understand the sentence in bold. Why can two verbs, "cracked" and "open", be put together in this sentence? Or do I misunderstand the part of the speech here?


texts: Opposite of "arrogant"/"having attitude"

texts:
Are self-abased and humble both opposite to arrogant or having attitude? What are their differences?
What are words for the opposite to arrogant, respectively in a positive, negative, and neutral way?


texts: "Well paint me green and call me a cucumber! I just […]"

texts:
Well, [perform some action against me (through which I will be complacent)], and call me a [something humorous which I would then resemble].  [Sincere or feigned exclamation of a recently apparent truth]

I've heard variations of this template phrase through the years, but I've never understood how the parts are supposed to work together.

I believe the structure was often used in the dialog of the television show "Perfect Strangers" by Cousin Balki, but I was very young and couldn't understand it at the time.  Regrettably, the show is no longer on the air.

It seems that the first and second sentences should be related somehow.  I don't have any examples of a funny complete phrase.

Where did this structure originate?
Does it have a name?
Do you know any good examples?
In which humorous situations would it be appropriate to use such a phrase?


texts: Is it hour or hours when used in a phrase?

texts:
I recently joined a company as a trainee and we have to skype our priorities or task that we are going to do on that day.

For example, people write priorities like this:

1. HTML/CSS training - [0.5 hours].

2. PHP training - [9 hours].

Now I do know about quasi possessive but this doesn't sound like a quasi possessive. I want to know whether it should be 9 hour or 9 hours? Maybe it might be 9 hours because it's more than 1 but writing 0.5 hours seems a bit confusing. Please let me know what's the correct usage. Thank you.


texts: What is a word that means 'things that have been seen'?

texts:
I need a word that means 'things that have been seen'.  I'd be happy with a made-up or foreign word, if the meaning is relatively clear to English speakers.

For example, using the word 'floop' for now, I would want to be able to say things like: "In the context of movies, my floops include Die Hard, but not Die Hard 4".  Or "My floops yesterday included a bald cat".


texts:
Feminism is defined as

  Feminism is a collection of movements aimed at defining, establishing, and defending equal political, economic, and social rights for women.

in Wikipedia and

  A social theory or political movement supporting the equality of both sexes in all aspects of public and private life; specifically, a theory or movement that argues that legal and social restrictions on females must be removed in order to bring about such equality.

in Wiktionary.
Masculism is defined as the exact same but with equality for men's rights, which actually means the same.

I think that this is in fact a wrong use of the word feminism which puts emphasis on the word women (~ Latin femina) instead of equality between sexes.

I'm looking for a word that represents a movement which can be assumed and extremist feminism and that supports more or better rights for women above men. Or just supporting more women's rights regardless of those of men. This is what I would think of when hearing feminism, until I discovered this wasn't true.


texts: How can I say in one word "number written in words"?

texts: If there should be numbers written in words, like "one hundred and ten" instead of "110", how can I say it in one word?


texts:
I am of the belief that Hell should be capitalized because real or not, it is the name of a place, and thus a proper noun. It should be capitalized correct?
I have seen it written without capitalization plenty of times, but I suspect that most of those were just due to laziness or illiteracy (it tends to be written with a lower-case ‘h’ mostly on the Internet–sigh).
Other uses, including expletives seem to use it as a place name as well:

What [in] the Hell‽

Go to Hell!

Google gives mixed results and checking the WikiPedia entry for Hell to get a proper definition does indicate that it is a location, but even on that same page, there are plenty of instances with a lower-case ‘h’.
Is there a situation in which it would not be capitalized? What about uses as an adjective:

that job was Hell?


texts: "From around the world" vs "Around the world"

texts:
What is the difference between "from around" and just "around" in the following context or in general?

I participated in an event where I met some people from around the world.
I participated in an event where I met some people around the world.


texts: "we spent together" or "we have spent together"?

texts:
Seeing as 2010 has just recently ended, which is grammatically more correct?

  Thanks everybody for the great 2010 moments we spent together!

vs

  Thanks everybody for the great 2010 moments we've spent together!


texts:
Searching on Google yields nothing about this word's meaning but does yield some quotes in which it is used. I came across it in the following quote:

  Why a man would want a wife is a big mystery to some people. Why a man would want two wives is a bigamystery.

No dictionary I own has this word. Every text editor I type this in paints it red.


texts:
Is the colon used in this sentence correct?

“The Dark Wood” is the vivid representation of a cloudy, misty forethought: in Dante’s Divine Comedy the ominous wood is a place for lost souls, who lose their way in life.


texts: Is "you've coming from" a colloquialism?

texts: In the Take That song, Never Forget, the lyrics run "Never forget where you've coming from". Was that a mistake, or is it a colloquialism (or something else) to say "you've" instead of "you're" in this context?


texts:
In Michael Bishop's SF book Transfigurations (1979), the author (in the course of the narration by the main character) refers in several instances to one or another "debussy", by which he evidently means a bathroom (i.e. a loo/WC/toilet/washroom, depending on your local usage).

I've never encountered this elsewhere and searching has turned up nothing. Is this an invented usage of the author's, or is there some precedent somewhere?


texts:
There's a Polaroid photo in the album, and I want to ask the owner about the person in it.
Can I ask him: "Who's that man in the snapshot (shot)?, or I should ask "Who's that man in the picture (photo)?"
Thanks in advance, Victor.


texts: Is the word gothic wrong/arbitrary in "Raygun Gothic"

texts:
According to wikipedia, Raygun Gothic is a catchall phrase for mid-20th Century futurist design. I don't use this term because it doesn't seem accurate in the context of art movements. Personally, I would not use the word "raygun" at all, instead I would use "rocket" as that is the actual influence at the dawn of the space age, specifically: aerodynamic shapes and rocket fins.

But my real quibble is "gothic" since that is a very specific historic style which doesn't resemble mid-century retro-futurism in the least. Nevertheless, I see this term used often in sci-fi discussion groups and the general (non-art history) public seems to recognize it.

I'm not claiming everyone should stop saying it – if the general public knows what it means then it's doing its job as the name of a style, but is "gothic" just an arbitrary word being used to make it sound more like an "official" art movement?

I'm confused because of the painting "American Gothic", which is maybe using "gothic" in the same way as a "catchall" phrase (or maybe there is something in the painting that is actually gothic in style, I have never been sure). I'm asking here because my problem is not about defining the style or discussing art, it is the use of the word "gothic" in this context.


texts: Are "Among …, include(s) ….” constructs illogical?

texts:
This website implies that "Among …, include(s) ….” constructs are untenable. It says that the sentence:

  “Among the skills tested on the standardized tests given to military pilots includes orthographic imagination”

is illogical, because it uses both "Among" and "includes" when only one of these may be used at a time. The website also says it is acceptable to say “Among the skills is X,” or to say “The skills include X,” but not “Among the skills include X. ”

I don’t understand this, because in other websites I could see “Among ….. , include(s)  …." For example, from here:

  The University of Louisville’s online program consists of 36 credit hours, with 6 credits transferrable. Among the core courses include Philosophy of Higher Education, The American College and University, and Educational Resource Management in Postsecondary Education.

Incidentally, if "Among …, include(s) ….” constructs are acceptable, what is the subject of the verb include?


texts: Why is the word "mimic" divided into syllables as mim-ic and not mi-mic

texts: I would like to know why, when dividing the word mimic into its syllables, is it divided as "mim" and "ic" and not "mi" and "mic". Is there any rule to this?


texts: What happens to articles in phrases "a bit  "?

texts:
Consider the phrase "I'm doing this for a bit different reason."

The grouping here is "((a bit) different) reason" and not "a ((bit different) reason)", so the noun "reason" lacks an article.

Does "a bit different" itself act as a determiner here? Or is the article implicit and simply omitted to avoid repetition?


texts: term for a nickname composed of an auto-antonym

texts: What is the term for a contradictory nickname such as "Tiny" for a very large person?


texts: Million people OR million of people OR million & Singular or Plural

texts:
So far, I've learned:

  1) A number of internet users were in Paris.

  2) The number of internet users was in Paris.

1) and 2) are grammatically correct, and have a little different meanings.

But I'm not sure about:

  <Number> + of + plural noun/nouns . . .
  <Unit> + of + plural noun/nouns . . .
  <Number> + plural noun/nouns . . .
  <Unit> + plural noun/nouns . . .

1. Should we treat "<Number> + of + plural noun/nouns" and <Unit> + of + plural noun/nouns" as "A number of"?

a) 7.8 million of internet users was/were in Paris. < Was || Were >

b) Millions of internet users was/were in Paris. < Was || Were >

c) 7.8 million internet users was/were in Paris. < Was || Were >

d) Millions internet users was/were in Paris. < Was || Were >

2. I know that we can usually say "Millions of internet users" and "7.8 million internet users".

How about saying "Millions internet users" and "7.8 million of internet users", are they usual?

3. Is it usual to use article "the" to specify the mentioned quantities in the sentences?

And should we treat "The <number> + of + plural noun/nouns" and The <unit> + of + plural noun/nouns" as "The number of"?

e) The 7.8 million of internet users was/were in Paris. < Was || Were >

f) The millions of internet users was/were in Paris. < Was || Were >

g) The 7.8 million internet users was/were in Paris. < Was || Were >

h) The millions internet users was/were in Paris. < Was || Were >

4. In 2005, Paris had the largest number of internet users at 7.8 ___________.

Which should be filled in the blank?

a) million people

b) million of people

c) million


texts:
What does

  I got you

mean?

Does it mean

  Ok, I understood what you said

or

  Hey, I know that you did that?

If they are both correct, when should we use which?


texts: What does "anticipation" mean in this sentence?

texts:
He sees Empedocles' work as a primitive anticipation of Plato, a significant union of spiritual other-worldiness with the philosophical and scientific traditions of the Presocratics.
  (Empedocles' Cosmic Cycle, by D. O'Brien).

An activity anticipates another activity, a product anticipates another product. So either Empedocle's writing anticipates Plato's writing his dialogues, or Eempedocles' work is the forerunner of Plato's books.

Here the speaker says that a work of one thinker(an object) is an anticipation of another thinker. I donot know why, because it is beyond my understanding of "antipication" as set forth above.


texts:
I wondered which term for the below paragraph is correct grammar and whether I should use "this" or "that".

  Peter kept wondering about everything he had overheard. For the time being, he wanted to appear as busy as possible until he knew all the facts. That/This way, his aunt and uncle would leave him alone – giving him time to think up a plan.


texts: What is the meaning of the idiom 'to charm water out of sand'? I heard it in a conversation and cannot find any such idiom online.


texts: What type of phrase is "A few days ago, ..." or "Last Monday, ..."?

texts:
What do you call a phrase like "A few days ago, ..." or "Last Monday, ..."?

For example, "A few days ago, I went shopping" or "Last Monday, I finished reading my book"

I was thinking that it was an appositive, but I'm not sure.


texts:
What is correct?

Australia constantly improves its roads.

Australia constantly improve their roads.

Australia constantly improves their roads.

Thank you!