texts: Why is there "Black English" but not "White English"?

texts:
African American Vernacular English is shortened to a less precise phrase "Black English". Also, Black English is used in a broader sense:

  Black English is a term used for both dialects of English and English-based pidgins and creoles, and whose meaning depends considerably upon the context, and particularly the part of the world.

  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_English

Also mentioned is AAVE is not regional anymore:

  Although no longer region-specific, African American Vernacular English, which remains prevalent among African Americans, has a close relationship to Southern varieties of AmE and has greatly influenced everyday speech of many Americans.

  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_English

I see the usage of "White English" in some technical sources but I couldn't be sure what is actually meant by that. For example, there is the this explanation from Prof. John R. Rickford from Stanford University:

  History of AAVE, exploring earlier examples of African American English, and its source in African languages, as well as the controversial question of its possible creole ancestry. Comparison with creole languages currently spoken in the Caribbean and off the S Carolina coast (Gullah) will be undertaken to shed light on this controversy. A more recent issue, which we will also explore, is whether AAVE is currently diverging from Standard English and White Vernacular English.

  Source:http://web.stanford.edu/~rickford/AAVE.html

So, why is there a prevalent usage of Black English or Black English vernaculars but not White English (vernaculars)? (Or maybe not the usage of vernacular but the phrase itself... there are of course other dialects and sociolects spoken by White people or both White and Black)

For example, there are European Americans also but European American Vernacular English is mentioned in a very few sources. Could this be considered as White vernacular English by linguists in a broader sense? Is there any source that talks about this?

Of course this is related with the history of English and American English but maybe someone can shed a light on the specific topic. Also, I would like to keep the topic in linguistic sense (though it is related with races but within linguistic usages).


texts:
To be eligible for holiday pay the employee must meet the following requirement: the employee must have worked the last scheduled day before, and the first scheduled day after a holiday except when the employee has been granted pre-approved absence. For the purpose of this article, a pre-approved absence is defined as a scheduled vacation day, personal day, compensatory day or an excused sick day.

The last sentence is what I would like help interpreting.

This sentence could have contradictory meanings .
On one hand a pre-approved absence means that all four types of absences must be scheduled.
For instance: pre-approved absence is defined as a scheduled vacation day, a scheduled personal day, a scheduled compensatory day or a scheduled excused sick day

Or on the other hand it could be interpreted as such:( meaning only the vacation day is to be scheduled)

Pre-approved absence Is defined as a scheduled vacation day, a personal day, a compensatory day  or an excused sick day

I am also puzzled by the use of "or" rather than "and"  and am wondering if they affect the sentences meaning

From the way this sentence originally reads which is correct?


texts: Which British accent is closest to the standard Australian accent?

texts:
Which British accent is closest to the general Australian accent?
Does this correlate with where the majority of British Australians originate?
Any comments on the variations of either accents by regions are welcome.


texts:
What is the meaning of a sentence like "I pissed the wall"?
Is there any difference with "I pissed my pants"?


texts: Can "emigrate" and "immigrate" be used interchangeably?

texts:
To emigrate means to leave a country, so I'm confused that people use the word where I would expect the word "immigrate", eg. "He emigrated to Italy." How do you "leave to" a place?
I checked Google to see the numbers for "emigrate to" and "emigrate from". To my surprise, the "emigrate to" usage was 3.5x more common (3.5 million results)!
I found a related construct, "He emigrated from Spain to Italy." This one makes sense to me, but I don't see how you can leave out the "from Spain" part and still have a logical sentence.
Are those 3.5 million people doing it wrong?


texts:
When speaking of a point in time, what would be the proper usage:

"Timepoint" vs. "Time point"?

This funny confusion comes from my life as a programmer: While one of our style checkers enforces "timepoint" instead of "time point", another style checker contradicts that and prefers "time point" over "timepoint"...


texts:
Is there any rule for hyphenating nationalities?
•   Irish-American, African-American, European-American
•   Irish American, African American, European American

For instance, in cases where place of origin/birth and place of living are different.


texts: “mark” in generational naming of products

texts: What is the story behind the word mark as a synonym for version in products, such as Canon 5D Mark III or Aston Martin DB Mark III?


texts: What is the opposite of "upfront payment"? Something that would signify a payment done after the service has been used.


texts: What is the word for previous boss’s recommendations in the context of a CV?

texts:
In my CV, I am trying to explain  that a written recommendation from my previous boss is available upon request.

What is that document called?


texts: In what occasion could the word “precious” be taken disapprovingly, or sarcastically?

texts:
I understand that the word “precious” in the following quote of Maureen Dowd’s article “Heart of Darkness” (NYT, March 20) literally means “2. valuable or important and not to be wasted” as defined in OALD:

  Congressman Jones read an e-mail from a former boss of General
  Allen’s, giving the congressman this unvarnished assessment:
  “Attempting to find a true military and political answer to the
  problems in Afghanistan would take decades. Would drain our nation of
  precious resources, with the most precious being our sons and daughters. Simply put, the United States cannot solve the Afghan
  problem, no matter how brave and determined our troops are.

But I didn’t know “precious” has another meaning as defined in OALD: 5. (disapproving, people and their behavior) very formal, exaggerated and not natural, and Readers English Dictionary: 2.(colloquial) terrible, almost worthless, until I was told by my respected forum mate a few days ago.

Being encouraged by his suggestion for me to “ask another question if I’m not sure of what he means by describing his input as “precious” is actually rather “precious” phrasing, I would like to ask:

What is an example of “precious” being used as “disapproving” or sarcastic way (as neither OALD nor CALD provides examples)?
Is there an easy way to discern the instance “precious” being used as “disapproving” from the case being used in the sense of genuine “great value” as used in the above quote other than judging from the context?


texts: Let's imagine I have two teams in my club. Both are equally skilled and I want both to have a name that reflects that, so no Team 1 and Team 2 because Team 2 sounds worse than Team 1. Alpha and Bravo are also not possible because Bravo is a step down from Alpha. What could be a good name for my two teams so they don't feel one is preferred or has the advantage over the other team?


texts: What's the difference between "obscene" and "scatological"?

texts:
This question was inspired by the Malvolio's answer to this question.

What is the actual difference? In English-Russian dictionary there's almost no difference if speaking about tricky phrases. And according to Malvolio's answer there's a big difference in meanings of these two words.
How to chose when to use "obscene" and when to use "scatological"?


texts:
I am wondering if "from where" is an acceptable relative phrase when we refer to a location.

For example:

You should stay at a hotel near the main station, from where/which you can travel everywhere in this country.

In this sentence, I think "where" is better but which is not wrong, as where refers to the location of the station and which refers to the station itself.

So, from where in this means "from at the station" or "from where the station is" and from which means "from the main station".

Did I distinguish between them correctly?

Any advice is welcome.

Thanks in advance.


texts: Could a non-self-contained program be called as an "app"?

texts:
Can an add-on for a browser, a plugin for a text processing (like Word) or a content unit for a software (like an Anki deck) be called an app without misunderstanding?

The definition of an app is a self-contained program or piece of software designed to fulfill a particular purpose; an application, especially as downloaded by a user to a mobile device (Oxford). So according to this definition, as long as the piece of software is designed to fulfill a particular purpose, then it is an app, right? Am I considered to be misleading if I mention them as an app? And does writing this kind of "app" make you a programmer, or developer?

I think they are big words, and I don't want to misleading people, but I need to explain to non-geeks know what I am doing.


texts:
I have several questions about the subjunctive.  Are these two sentences both correct?

The police insisted that the car  were removed.
The police  insisted that the car  should be removed.

Do those two sentences above share the same meaning?
What about these next two below?

It is important  that you (should) go.
It was important  that you (should) go.

According to my research, even if the latter has a past meaning, it's correct to use the BASIC form of the verb, the root, as this is a mandative subjunctive.   Am I correct or should I have written:

it was important that you went.

If I am correct, then the second  sentence in the first set of examples must be wrong.


texts: Why do so many newspapers use the word "Times" in their names?

texts: It seems that the word itself doesn't mean news or newspapers, but many newspapers use it in their names. Is there a historic reason?


texts: Is the sentence "There is a large number of labourers who want to migrate to Japan for work." correct?

texts:
Possible Duplicate:
  A number of questions “has been” or “have been” asked?

  There is a large number of labourers who want to migrate to Japan for work.

I type this sentence in a word processor, and it reports an error that "is" should be "are" (subject-verb agreement).

I doubt this is a valid error. Could anyone confirm this?


texts: Is the term "you only live once" accepted?

texts: Technically, you live everyday but you only die once. So in this case shouldn't it be you only die once? Is you only live once correct?


texts:
I was looking for the synonyms of the noun mirror:

  A surface capable of reflecting sufficient undiffused light to form an image of an object placed in front of it.

The majority of the synonyms are compounds containing the noun glass (looking glass, hand glass, cheval glass, etc.)

Are there some single-word, poetic, or even archaic synonyms for it?


texts:
Which option is correct to use in this sentence and why?

  I have (much, many, an) orange juice.


texts: What are the differences between College and Collegiate? Which one to use in which cases? I have also found some other similar pairs like: Meteor vs Meteorite, Human vs Humanoid etc. Did these words form in the same way or any correlation among them?


texts: I'm looking for a single word for "lazy student". In my own language there is such a word that a teacher would use for a student who doesn't engage and doesn't care. In English, the word "slacker" is the best I could think of.


texts: Question on correct way to list time in a list

texts:
If I am using time in a list, do I need to write it out? Is this correct?
We will leave at either 12:15, 1, 2:30, or 3:15.


texts:
I am writing a text in which I use the serial comma ("Oxford comma").
Example: She used to play with Ben, Alice, and Tom.
Do I still need a comma if I replace the and with as well as?
Example: She used to play with Ben, Alice, as well as Tom.


texts: A word for someone who everyone is scared of?

texts:
What would be a word to describe someone that everyone is scared/frightened of?

Example 1:

  The employees are scared to ask the boss to extend the deadline because he is ______.

(the blank would be replaced with something like 'scary')

Example 2:

  Our dictator is so _____ that nobody dares to oppose him.


texts: What the gesture of sticking out the tongue signify as a body language among native English speakers?

texts:
My question does not regard the word, but a facial expression.

Albert Einstein’s picture of sticking out his tongue is so popular and humorous, but I’ve been wondering under what situation the picture was taken, and what the picture connotes, every time I’ve seen it.

In our country, the gesture of sticking out one’s tongue means rejection (No!), denial (I told you a lie) or embarrassment (I made a mistake). This gesture is more often made by children rather than by grown-ups.

What does the gesture of sticking out one’s tongue mean as a body language among Anglo-Americans?


texts: What's a word for someone who presents their negative opinion as if it's someone's else?

texts:
Let's say a manager talking to their employee and saying "I have received multiple comments about your work, and I think you should work better", while in fact it's her own opinion, and in reality nobody made any comments.
Is there a word describing such bluff?


texts:
Which sounds better (and where do you live?) I am American, and I think "forbidden from" sounds better, although both "forbidden to" and "forbidden from" are considered standard usage.

"The banks were forbidden from making any more subprime loans."
vs.
"The banks were forbidden to make any more subprime loans."


texts: English proverb for "They danced, but didn't take a bow", as for failing good work on a final step

texts:
There is proverb in Ukrainian, "They danced and danced, but didn't take a bow" (Танцювали, танцювали, та не вклонилися).

It is used to point out that someone has put a significant amount of time and effort into performing or creating something (which is emphasized by repetition of the dance in the original), but compromised their work at the stage of representation or polishing the final result.

For example, it can be applied to these situations:

The software was released after years of development to provide great performance and stability, but its interface is user-unfriendly and designed poorly
He wrote a brilliant essay, but didn't bother to spellcheck it, ruining all the good impression of his work
Bob cooked a fancy meal for his date, but served it on disposable plates, because he was too lazy to do the dishes afterwards

What would be an English proverb or idiom to express the same context?

The expressions with a similar, but not quite satisfying connotation I've found so far:

  spoil the ship for a hap'orth of tar

being about a lack of a small amount of effort ruining something big or important, it doesn't cover "final step" part

  A drop of poison infects the whole tun of wine

and it's analogues are mainly about a little amount of detrimental thing
spoiling something good

  Good idea, bad implementation

suggests that the whole actual work was flawed, when in our case realization can be good at major stages


texts: What does the phrase "do your bit for your fellow gentlemen" mean?

texts: Does gentlemen in the phrase "do your bit for your fellow gentlemen" mean yourself, or fellows at your company, or someone else?


texts: How should I understand "resulting research effort"?

texts:
Each discipline has contributed techniques and perspectives that are characteristically of its own, and the resulting research effort exhibits an intriguing blend of these different flavors.

In this sentence, "the resulting research effort" is to emphasize "result of research effort" or "effort of resulting research"?


texts: Why do English people pronounce 'sixth' as 'sicth'?

texts: It's common practice in Ireland (and the US as far as I know) to pronounce the x in the middle of sixth: six-th [sɪksθ]. However, I've noticed from visits to England as well as watching British television, that a lot of English people pronounce it as 'sicth' [sɪkθ]. Why is this, and is it an accepted usage?


texts: "Change in scope" versus "Change of scope" versus "Change to (the) scope"

texts:
Any changes in scope will be addressed during this meeting.

or

  Any changes of scope will be addressed during this meeting.

or

  Any changes to (the) scope will be addressed during this meeting.

Proposition madness!  I believe that I can make a case for each choice, but what does the board think?

My intuition is that if one chooses the "to" preposition then I would have to include "the" before "scope," whereas "the" could be omitted from the first two options.

Thoughts?


texts:
They always complained about the school's brooms:
  some of them started to vibrate if you flew too high,
  some always flew to the left, some just didn't fly.

I think there is a problem in this sentence. there should be "and" before "some just didn't fly ".  The sentence will be :

  They always complained about the school's brooms:
  some of them started to vibrate if you flew too high,
  some always flew to the left, and some just didn't fly.

Am I correct or both are correct?


texts:
I'm looking for an idiom or expression that relates to someone who is promoted to get them out of a department because they can't be fired due to politics, possibly nepotism. The promotion is not because they were particularly good at something, but because people wanted to be rid of them, but possibly due to family ties or political alliances there is no other way to be rid of them.

Does such a phrase exist?

Thanks!


texts:
I've met a "drinks cans" compound noun on this webpage.

  See how food and drinks cans get recycled

As I know, there is a specific rule for the plural compound nouns that are made of two nouns. In this case the second noun takes an -s form and the first one acts like an adjective, so it cannot have the plural form. "Drinks cans" is not a typo, it is also pronounced this way in the video, so how can it be correct?


texts: Is the sentence *I had my skills improved considerably* correct?

texts:
Could you please explain to me if the following sentence is correct?

Does it sound good?

  Your training was very useful for me. I had my skills improved considerably.

Or I must use something like:

  Your training was very useful for me. I have considerably improved my skills of skiing.

Which of the sentences is better if the first on is correct?


texts: "Have been born" vs. "are born" vs. "were born"

texts:
We are native to this country. We have been born here to serve it.

Is the use of "have been" acceptable here? I think the simple past were is more appropriate.

Also, what about:

  We are native to this country. We are born here to serve it

Does that sound grammatical?


texts:
Is there any word in place of without asking for it in the following example?

  If you want to learn how to get a job offer without asking for it, buy this book.

The word spontaneous popped into my mind, but it doesn't seem right because, in the above example, the event isn't really spontaneous as the other party consciously chose to offer the other person a job, without the job-seeker having asked for it first.


texts:
I am curious as to if anyone else has heard of, seen, or used the term "absolutions." I purchased William F. Buckley, Jr.'s book The Lexicon a few weeks back, and this is one of the first words that caught my eye. Its supposed meaning is "the washing of one's body or part of it," with the example text given:

  Several witnesses noted the license number, and the California authorities had it within minutes, leaving it a mystery why there was no one there at his apartment to greet Edgar Smith when he drove in to perform the identical absolutions of nineteen years earlier—an effort to remove the blood from his person and clothing.

This usage has quite the semantic parallel to the singular version of the word; however, I have had no luck in finding this exact meaning anywhere else. Any thoughts or suggestions are greatly appreciated.

(Edit: This turned out to be nothing more than a typo in my book. Ablutions was, indeed, the word that should have appeared in the text. I do thank everyone for clearing it up, though.)


texts:
I have seen this question. However, I'm not sure how to leverage that lesson for this particular sentence.
The sentence I'm having trouble with is

  I did this and he and she helped me.

There are two "and"s in this sentence. My intuition tells me it should be

  I did this and he, and she, helped me.

But this still looks wrong. What am I doing wrong?


texts: What's the origin of the proverb "Third time's a charm"?

texts: We all know about the proverb "Third time's a charm", or " Third time lucky". We use it everyday in our day to day lives. I just realized that my own language has a similar proverb: "দানে দানে তিন দান"  . It doesn't say that third time's a charm or lucky, but it can be inferred from the proverb that there is something special about third time. Russian languange also has a similar thing, which basically means, "God loves trinity". So I'm just wondering, what's so special about three?


texts: Shut down the computer, or shut the computer down?

texts:
I'm not sure what they're called, but I notice that 2-word verbs can be arranged around and yet both sound okay.

  Have you tried out baseball yet?

  Have you tried baseball out yet?

or

  Do you want to take out your burger?

  Do you want to take your burger out?

or

  Remember to shut down the computer.

  Remember to shut the computer down.

Which usage is correct?


texts: What is the term describing someone who has interest in only a narrow field, and nothing else?

texts:
There are some people who have interests in only some narrow field, and are not interested in anything else:

physicians who heal only ears, and for whom the stomach doesn't matter
clerks who know all the fiscal laws by heart, but ignore anything that isn't written there
fanatics who care only what the scriptures say
housewives interested only in cooking and soap operas
geeks who care only for computer games and comics
crazy scientists that know everything about chemistry but don't know who Columbus was and have probably never heard of America

What do I call someone who has such narrow-field interests and/or knowledge?


texts:
Here's an excerpt that I read:

"This is my stop. Got to get off. I may go pop. Excuse me, excuse me"

What does "go pop" mean in this context?


texts: Why do we say "by all means" when we mean "by any means"?

texts: The common expression by all means seems to advocate the use of all means possible in order to accomplish a certain object, when in fact it expresses the use of any means to do it. I realize that all can mean any when used with a negative phrase, such as beyond all hope.  Because, of course, if one is beyond any hope, he is also beyond all hope (and vice versa).  But in a positive context, such as with by all means, it doesn't necessarily follow that when one uses any means to accomplish a task, that he uses all possible means.  Why is all used to mean any in this expression?


texts: English idiom or proverb equivalent for "if everybody is doing it, I will also do it"

texts:
Can somebody please help me by giving an English idiom or proverb equivalent for:

  If everybody is doing it, I will also do it.


texts: Can the gerund clause take a personal pronoun as its subject in “It’s no use (his?) crying over lost love”?

texts:
From a grammar book, I’ve have learned that a gerund clause can be
optionally preceded by a personal pronoun to show the logical
subject of the verb; that is, whoever is doing the gerund’s action.
I’ve also learned that a possessive personal pronoun is usually more
acceptable here than a pronoun in another grammatical case like
those used for subjects or objects of finite clauses.
With gerund clauses, there’a a certain structure that runs like this:

It’s no use doing something.

in which doing something is the gerund clause
and doing the gerund heading that clause.
My question is: Can we also add a possessive pronoun before doing
in that particular structure?  So for example like this:

It’s no use his crying over lost love.

Does it sound completely normal to use the pronoun his there to say
who’s doing that action?
If not, is there some other way of saying it that would be more common
and natural-sounding to native speakers?


texts: "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet" but with a more negative connotation

texts:
"A rose by any other name would smell as sweet" is from Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet. It means: what matters is what something is, not what it's called.

I feel like this phrase has a very positive connotation to it: what matter is not what this fantastic thing is called, it matters what it is. Is there another common phrase, metaphor, or idiom I can use that has a more negative connotation? I'm looking for a phrase that says that it doesn't matter what this bad thing is called, it's still the same bad thing.

An idiom like, "lipstick on a pig" or "sugarcoating" means making a bad thing seem less bad. This is not what I'm trying to convey.


texts: Use of the expression "Stop it! You are too cute"

texts:
In what context would you use "stop it!! you are too cute"?
Isn't that negative to say "stop it!! first?
Is there a degree or a connotation to it? (i.e, flirty, embarrassed, flattered, etc)

There are two contexts.

romantic — a girl saying to a guy "Stop it! This is too much" but she's not annoyed.
"stop it!! This is too cute" about a kid doing something cute.

I don't understand why you need the "stop it".


texts:
Here's a sentence I came up with when I was working on an essay:
"This kind of ignorance sowed the seeds of interests in XYZ culture among [a certain group of people] around that time.  "
What I try to say here is that there was a growing interest in a certain culture around that time when people didn't know much about it.
Does it look natural to you? Thanks!


texts: Is it accurate to say a baby is x inches taller or longer?

texts:
So today I was sending a picture of my new born to my British manager. I was saying that the baby looks a little bit different than the picture now he is 4 cm taller

She replied me saying taller or longer?

I didn't actually think about it before. I thought that taller will be the correct term as this is how we describe it as human beings ... Then I thought longer might be more accurate cause technically he cannot stand erect!

Which term is more accurate? Thanks for your insight

PS: I am not a native English speaker.


texts: "Communications In English for Engineers" — what does it exactly mean?

texts:
A lecture at my university is titled "Communications In English for Engineers".

Somebody from my year stated that 'communications' (in plural) relate to telecommunication and generally engineering/science discipline, rather than process of communicating between two or more entities (people/devices/anything else).

However, my brief Google research have not confirmed this. Most dictionaries queried about 'communications' in plural show a page for this term, but description seems more like one for 'communication'.

Could you then please explain:

What does 'communications' mean?
Is this term interchangeable with 'communication'?
Optionally: where does this difference (if there is one) come from?


texts: "Luke drove as if they were in a jeep, in high gear with hammer changes on the corners."

texts: This is a sentence from John le Carre's novel 'The Honourable Schoolboy'. Does anyone know what 'hammer changes' mean?


texts: I understand the phrase "believe you me" to be an emphatic version of "believe me" but how did it come to be?  Is it a poor translation into English?


texts:
A point is said to be equidistant from a set of objects if the distances between that point and each object in the set are equal. (Wikipedia)

Is there a word that can be used to describe two points (from one's current position) which can be reached in equal time...?  One would be 50 miles away, the other 100, but they'd both take 2 hours to reach.

(They'd be equi-temporal???)


texts: If a referenced paper has two authors X and Y, can et al. be applied in this case? For instance, is X et al. correctly used?


texts:
Real me is handsome.

VS

The real me is handsome.

Are both correct? And are they different in meaning?

If "The real me is handsome." is correct, why should put "the" into the sentence?


texts:
In my self-evaluation, I want to convey the idea of

  I am a person down to earth and more sincere than hypocrite.

But I am not sure if "more sincere than hypocrite" is awkward in pure language perspective?

Also I don't want people to think that by "more sincere than hypocrite" I imply someone among the evaluators is hypocrite, which is in fact true and I don't dare to speak out.
So I wonder if "more sincere than hypocrite" is provocative and if yes, if you have some better altervatives?

In summary, is "more sincere than hypocrite" perfectly fine?
Thanks and regards!


texts: An idiomatic expression for: “not to be seen by someone”

texts:
Sometimes I have something to share, but hope that it can't be seen by my close friends or family.

Is there a word, idiom , or a better expression that means: “not be seen by someone”

An example: (one or more words)

  I'd like to share this file but I don't want some of my friends to know, can it be  ________ ?


texts: Is "respectively" correct in this sentence? Can it be replaced by "correspondingly"?

texts:
I have seen several questions dealing with the use of "respectively" but still I am not sure how to use it.

Example:

  We saw two persons, standing on the hill and near the tree, respectively.

I need a word to clarify that not both persons are standing both on the hill and near the tree, but that one person is standing on the hill and the other one near the tree.
While this sentence is easy to rewrite (e.g. We saw one person... and another person...), this becomes more difficult in more complicated sentences and when I don't want to repeat longer words.

I was told that "respectively" can only be used in lists and I am not sure if "two persons" can be seen as a list (while "Person A and person B" would be a list). Moreover, I was told to use "correspondingly" instead.

Is "respectively" used correctly in the above sentence? If not, can I replace it with "correspondingly"?


texts: I would like to know if the expresssion can be used commonly or whether it would sound affected or out of place if not used in the appropriate context.


texts: I wish I would visit the statue of liberty

texts:
Can I use this structure in any case?
''I wish I would''  can be used when the same subject is before and after " Wish" with the word " WOULD".


texts: What's correct "let's change it (to or for) another day?"

texts:
When I am asking to change the catch-up to another day,
what's correct:

  let's change it to another day

or

  let's change it for another day

?


texts: What is the meaning of "others" in this sentence?

texts:
I came across a sentence on a Wikipedia article, where "others" seems to have been used as a noun. Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary says it can either be noun or pronoun. The sentence in question is as follows:

  Somatization disorder also causes challenge and burden on the life of the caregivers or significant others of the patient.

What does "others" refer to in the statement above? Could it be a typo or does it refer to relatives and close family members of the patient?


texts: What does “rising senior” mean and what countries use it?

texts:
I know it is something to do with universities, but as I have never come across the term before today (and have lived in England all my life including going to an English university), I am assuming it is only used by none native English speakers.

Senior common room is the common room that cannot be used by students doing their 1st degree, so I assume “rising senior” must in some way be related to students doing a 2nd degree.


texts: "The decision of the Competent Authority of the Board shall be final and binding on the candidate." what is the meaning of binding here?

texts:
"The decision of the Competent Authority of the Board shall be final and binding on the candidate."

Can anyone make me understand what is the meaning of the statement especially the bold part?

I am really having a hard time to understand this.


texts: In the song The Other Side MAX & Ty Dolla $ign pronounce the word "ten" as "teen" in the dialogue at the end of the song. Can anyone explain why?


texts:
Take a look at the following sentence

Some psychologists have characterized all infant language-learning as
problem-solving, extending to children such scientific procedures as
"learning by experiment," or "hypothesis-testing."

This sentence is just a small portion of the text that I'm supposed to solve problems with.
I'm not a native English speaker, but I lived long enough in America and I know an awkward sentence when I read one.
This sentence just sounds "wrong" to me.
The first part of the sentence, everything before the comma, sounds just fine. But after the comma, even though I understand what it's trying to say, it just seems so awkward.
I tried to change the sentence by switching the order, like

Some psychologists have characterized all infant language-learning as
problem-solving, extending such scientific procedures as "learning by
experiment," or "hypothesis-testing." to children.

But the thing is, the sentence still seems awkward to me.
I just want to know if this sentence is grammatically correct and is using the standard structure of a sentence.
It would also be helpful if someone could actually tell me what this sentence is talking about.
Any help would be greatly appreciated
Thanks!
EDIT:
I don't understand the second part of the sentence. To simplify the sentence, I wrote out the sentence like

extending to children such A as B.

I don't understand how this could be a 'correct sentence', nor do I understand what it's trying to say.


texts: What's the subtle difference between X equals Y and X is equal to Y?


texts:
there is a cartoon about one old lady who swallowed a fly.
in one moment the cat says: "And she had a frog on the sly" What does it mean?


texts: During the interview, I asked Ms. Smith what geared her towards teaching students with special needs.


texts: Why do "able" and "haste" have long a's?

texts:
(There are others, such as table, paste, and baste.)  The rule I've heard is that a vowel is made long when succeeded by a consonant and then another vowel.  Some words treat double consonants as a single consonant for this rule - hence able has a long "a".

Why is this, and is there a rule governing such words?


texts: How to interpret "as do" in this sentence

texts:
I'm reading a tutorial about "mutex" and "semaphore", in which the following sentence has confused me:

  Mutexes can be applied only to threads in a single process and do not work between processes as do semaphores.

Does it mean mutex and semaphore fall into the same category or belong to just the opposite categories? Also, is it a bad wording problem of the author or a poor understanding of mine on the sentence?


texts: Is using the plural form (in place of the original singular) of these Latin/Greek loan words acceptable?

texts:
The following Latin/Greek singular vs. plural errors make me cringe every time:

bacterium - bacteria
criterion - criteria
millennium - millennia
phenomenon - phenomena

It's extremely typical for an English speaker to always use the plural form, i.e. "the bacteria replicates by...", "the criteria for ... is ...", "a nice millennia". I would go as far as to say that the incorrect use trumps the correct use, but maybe there's a slight bias because I started looking for it. Well, it's mostly on YouTube, but the speakers do have degrees or at least represent science channels. A well known physics professor even used "these phenomenon" along with "this phenomena". Super-cringe. Yes I listened back several times, because it's sometimes hard to hear the exact endings.
So much for the rant, the real question is: Have (some of them) become so common that they are considered acceptable? I can't really tell, because it's not my first language. Maybe I care more because of that.


texts:
Say that I have a Pokémon with 2 types: Fire and Flying. One could say this Pokémon has "multiple types." That is because the designer of this Pokémon "typed" it that way.

Is it correct to say the Pokémon was "multiply typed," where "multiply" is an adverb describing how it was typed? Is there a better and succinct way of describing this typing process?


texts: How did 'sluice' evolve to have 2 distinct meanings?

texts:
What explains this word's opposing meanings? Can they be conciliated? I already understand and so ask NOT about the definition, below which I want to burrow. I heed the Etymological Fallacy.

  sluice = {noun}
  1.  A sliding gate or other device for controlling the flow of water, especially one in a lock gate:

  = {verb} [with object] Wash or rinse freely with a stream or shower of water:

I don't replicate Etymonline because it only explains the noun's etymology. My issue is that any device for restricting water flow jars with using water freely (verb)?


texts:
Which one is correct:

He's someone you just can't ignore.

He's someone you can't just ignore.

I was about to say,

  'He [the first guy] may be handsome, but he [the second guy] is someone
  you [can't just or just can't] ignore.


texts: Meaning of "while he thereto was lashed" in Byron's Don Juan

texts:
From Byron's Don Juan:

  Nor yet had he arrived but for the oar,
       Which, providentially for him, was wash'd
  Just as his feeble arms could strike no more,
       And the hard wave o'erwhelm'd him as 't was dash'd
  Within his grasp; he clung to it, and sore
       The waters beat while he thereto was lash'd;
  At last, with swimming, wading, scrambling, he
  Roll'd on the beach, half-senseless, from the sea:

I don't understand this. The oar is by luck carried by the waves towards him. He takes the oar and "beats the sore waters" using this oar. But what is the meaning of thereto was lashed? Was he all of a sudden "tied to the oar"? That's unlikely.

Or does lash means "to beat, to strike" here? In this case, I cannot understand the overall meaning of the phrase. "He was beaten to.." -- to what?


texts: Is the old saying "Put a comma where you pause" a reliable way to punctuate sentences?

texts:
In grade school, it was taught that commas represent pauses in speech. The teacher often said to read sentences aloud and place commas wherever there was a short pause.

Yet there are various authorities online that say this is a terrible idea. For example, Larry Trask tells readers that "this well-meaning advice is hopelessly misleading."

But then there are also some that are for the punctuate-by-breath method. Daily Writing Tips writes:

  These rules may seem complicated. But there’s a simple test that usually works: When in doubt about whether or where to place a comma, read aloud the sentence in question, and visualize the comma as a hook that briefly makes the sentence run in place. If you hesitate or pause, insert the hook in the sentence to mark that place. If you don’t, don’t.

Is it a reliable rule of thumb? Or something that should be abandoned altogether?


texts: to infinitive as an adjective clause expressing the intention/desire of the noun's agent

texts:
'his action to observe the star'
(supposing that the phrase above is grammatically correct)
'Action' is just 'action'. It itself doesn't have any sensation of intention/desire. so we can conclude that this kind of a to-infinitive "specializes" in the meaning of 'the intention/desire of the noun's agent'. Then do Americans see this usage of to-infinitives as an adjective phrase expressing the meaning?
(Please stick to what Americans themselves would recognize them as by on their own, but not what the grammar says. Grammar comes after the recognization made by the speakers themselves. I want to make the analysis precisely and correctly.)


texts: What is the proper way to mention "current" for future events?

texts:
I am writing a software user manual so the topic is about possible situations which its users may come across.

Here is an example sentence:

  The button saves the current URL in the browser.

Usage of current above does not mention the present time actually, so what is the proper way to mention "current" for future events?


texts: How did the preposition "by" evolve its sense of "length x [by] width"?

texts:
The preposition "by" has a lot of special uses, but its etymology is not so easy as Etymonline wants us to believe.

How did "by" develop as a preposition for areas, giving the length and breadth?


texts:
In "Of human bondage", by W. Somerset Maugham, there is a sentence in the conservation between Foinet and miss Price:

  "Then it is my duty to tell you that you are wasting your time. It would not matter that you have no talent,
  talent does not run about the streets in these days, but you have not the beginning of an aptitude. How long
  have you been here? A child of five after two lessons would draw better than you do. I only say one thing to
  you, give up this hopeless attempt. You're more likely to earn your living as a bonne a tout faire than as a
  painter. Look."

I can't get the bold part, what does it mean? At first, I thought it's an idiom, but it's not.


texts: Why is a person who shares a house in the US called a roommate, not a housemate?

texts:
In the US, being roommates doesn't imply sharing the room. (Note: this question isn't about the situation where people share sleeping quarters, such as in a dormitory with separate beds but just one room - the term roommate is descriptive there. It's about the situation where the people don't share sleeping quarters but do share the rest of the house or apartment.)

  In the UK, the term "roommate" means a person living in the same bedroom, whereas in the United States and Canada, "roommate" and "housemate" are used interchangeably regardless whether a bedroom is shared, although it is common in US universities that having a roommate implies sharing a room together.
  - wikipedia

How did the term roommate come to mean someone who shares a house but not the room?

Things I've checked:

An EL&U search threw up a question on the etymology of the -mate suffix; I'm interested in the etymology of the room- part.
I also found a question about using the term roommate in an office setting; my question is about the standard domestic setting.
Etymonline's entry for roommate is rather plain, simply listing room and mate as the roots. The entry for room is somewhat more illuminating, but the noun entry seems to point to a contiguous space, whereas the US usage of roommate relates to sharing a divided space (a house).
Wikidiff, ODO and M-W don't add much beyond the basic definition of the term.

So if North American roommates don't share the room, where does the room- prefix come from? The closest justification I've come across talks about shared living spaces: living room, dining room, kitchen, etc, but that doesn't seem to go far enough, except in the generic and unidiomatic sense that everyone who happens to be in a 'room' of any description are 'roommates' - ballroom, restaurant, waiting room, etc.


texts: Upon acquiring its technical meaning, how did "stack" in "Stack Exchange" change from modality to locality?

texts:
Non-technically, stack primarily means

  1 A pile of objects, typically one that is neatly arranged.

But technically, in computer science, it means

  1.7 Computing A set of storage locations which store data in such a way that the most recently stored item is the first to be
  retrieved.

(Source: Oxford Living Dictionaries)

When stack became a technical term, by what means did its meaning change from how things can be put together to where they can be put together?


texts: Solidary? Solidaritous? Solidarious? Adjective for having "solidarity"

texts: I've been wondering this for a time, especially in moments when I would like to use this mystery word. You can say someone exhibits "solidarity", but what is the adjective for someone who does as part of their nature? I keep wanting to just use something like in the title above, namely: "solidary", "solidaritous", or "solidarious", but I know these don't exist (my spellcheck confirms it). I'm guessing there is a word with another stem that expresses the concept, and for sure I am aware of the word "loyal" being along those lines, but it doesn't quite express the same thing. So, is there a word for this? There is in Spanish, but the closest translation I see is "sympathetic", but that's definitely not the same intensity as the word "solidarity" would require.


texts: Is half of an amount stated as 50% less or 100% less?

texts:
I've struggled with this concept and have generally interpreted it one way for all of my life, which leads me to believe people are incorrect when they state the other form. And honestly I'm not really sure this is even the correct SE site but I figured there wasn't a better choice.

Here it is:

If I have a basket of 10 apples and I remove 5 apples, do I have 50% fewer apples? Or 100% fewer apples? I tend to consider the correct phrasing by performing: (original amount as a fraction / (new amount as a fraction) - 1) * 100%

So therefore 5 apples is now 0.5 of what I previously had, giving ((1 / .5) - 1) * 100%, giving 100% less.  I think this phrasing I choose is motivated by the fact that when someone says: Basket A has 10 apples and basket B has 20 apples, therefore basket B has 100% more apples. So it leads me to believe twice as much is 100% more, and then half as much would be 100% less. It would not make sense to me if twice as many apples were 100% more, yet half as many apples were 50% less.

Where this gets confusing

If my interpretation above is correct, then I commonly see people making the mistake when dealing with different amounts that don't make this obvious.  For instance about a year ago, a professor of mine said: Processor A runs at 9/10 the speed of processor B, therefore it is 10% slower. I raised my hand and explained it should be 11.1% slower since (1 / 0.9) - 1 * 100% gives 11.1%, arguing that if processor B ran at half the speed, we wouldn't claim it ran 50% slower

He agreed, but I'm still not sure I use this phrase correctly.

Additionally

Going along the same lines, I generally struggle with the differences between % of an amount vs. % more than an amount, for amounts greater than 100.

It seems logical than 50% of is plain multiplcation. Therefore Qty A is 50% of Qty B means Qty A = Qty B * 0.5. And also 50% more than would be 100% + 0.5 * amount, so Qty A is 50% more than Qty B means Qty A = 1.00 + Qty B * 0.5.

So if that is true, then of means pure multiplication, while more than means multiplication by 2nd amount and added to the original.

But this seems to be very confusing for amount larger than 100%.

For example: Qty A is 200% of Qty B So Qty A = Qty B * 2? And Qty A is 200% more than Qty B is Qty A = 1.00 + 2 * Qty B? That means the phrasing 200% more than really means 3x as much!


texts: What's the difference between the two expressions?

texts:
"Aadhar card is done here"
"Aadhar card done here"

Are the both correct?


texts: How does 'to obtain' develop to mean 'to prevail'?

texts:
What's an intuitive derivation behind definition 2 of obtain, that helps to internalise its meaning:

2. [no object] [formal] Be prevalent, customary, or established
[ODO]

How does the etymology (listed in that link and here) lead to the foregoing meaning?
I haven't pasted the Etymonline entry from above, because it refers only to the more common definition 1 [ie: to  get, acquire (something)], about which I'm NOT asking here.


texts: Transitive verb meaning "to author a strong and direct refutation of or response to"

texts:
Wiktionary defines polemic as:

  A strong verbal or written attack on someone or something.

I need a verb that means "to write a polemic of".

Anyone knows one?


texts: Is it okay to say "I can play the piano by music notes"?

texts: Is it okay to say "I can play the piano by music notes" (meaning that if you gave me a sheet of paper with some music notes on it, I would have no problem reproducing that piece of music by looking at that sheet of paper and simultaneously playing the piano) or there is a better way of expressing this thought?


texts: The use of "the" and plural concerning "case"

texts:
Q1
For the first, the question is about the use of the particle "the" in the construction "(the) nominative case". Both "... use nominative case" and "... use the nominative case" are frequently found. So does the make a difference here? or is it optional?
I have a guess here. "the nominative case" is about a declined form in a certain language, while "nominative case" is a general, abstract, translinguistical concept, as well as the difference between "I like the dark chocolate" and "I like dark chocolate". But it failed to explain the use of "the" in a sentence like "In grammar, the nominative case [...] is one of the grammatical cases which...". Apparently this sentence is not about a certain form in a certain language, but about a general, abstract, translinguistical concept, so my guess might be unreliable.
Q2
Another question is, should I decline the word "case" in singular or plural in the following sentences. Here are some examples of the singular form I found from Google:

Today I would like to give you a first impression of the nominative
and accusative case.
let's quickly review nominative and accusative case.

Intuitively the singular form sounds more correct for me, but according to grammar it is wrong, since the nominative case is one case and the accusative case is another case, so they are two cases together.
The plural form is frequently found on Google as well:

For example, the nominative and accusative cases often distinguish
subject and object of the verb...
Understanding how the nominative and accusative cases work in
German...

But they sound unfamiliar to me. So, which is correct?


texts:
I am reading "Insider secrets to hydraulic" book and there are two sentences:

As with any repair, the economics of proceeding with a repair on a cylinder are ultimately depend on the cost and availability of a new one.
If you do carry out repairs to hydraulic components yourself, always follow the component manufacturer's repair instruction.

In both sentences "repair" is used.
Can you explain to me why in sentence 1) there is construction with "repair on" and in 2) there is "repair to"?


texts: What's the normal way to say you're present during a headcount?

texts: I always thought just plain "present" was proper, but apparently my Filipino teacher prefers "I'm here" which sounds really odd. What's the normal way to say you're present during a headcount, especially in a class?


texts:
Problems with correct sentences

  I would like to study related algebraic problems in the complexity framework,one of the challenge in this would be to find suitable parameter for these problems.

                                    OR

  I would like to study related algebraic problems in the complexity framework. One of the challenge in this would be to find suitable parameter for these problems.

Question : Which one is more correct?


texts:
In fact it is the soul of mathematics to carry out such a dialogue with one's own proof.

&

  We're talking about a perfectly innocent and delightful activity of the human mind-a dialogue with one's own mentality.

What does the author mean by "with one's own proof" and "with one's own mentality" in the above sentences?


texts: What does "that" mean at the beginning of a sentence?

texts:
"That which is certain is of no interest."

Above sentence starts with a "that", which I am curious about the meaning it adds. Would anybody please explain it?


texts: Connotations of "Is there any" vs "Are there any"

texts:
For countable nouns, both "Is there any  x?" and "Are there any x?" are grammatical and correct.

But what nuance / connotation differences are there between them?

For example, if we're searching for a Chrome plugin to do something, what's the connotation difference between:

  Is there any Chrome plugin to do this?

vs:

  Are there any Chrome plugins to do this?

Related threads (which only increases the confusion):

https://www.englishforums.com/English/IsThereAnyVsAreThereAny/vdpvg/post.htm#353324
https://english.stackexchange.com/a/113005/8278


texts:
Background
Reading this post, I realized that I had a tendency to use "typical for" rather than "typical of".
After a quick research, reading through several sources on the web, I found that the more I read, the more I got confused. I felt like there is no established rules to state which one is more appropriate, in which occasion.
I even found the two usages in the same BBC's article,

"The painting is a little a-typical for Van Gogh because of the many people appearing on it but also very typical because of the prominent role for the mill."
"But he added that other elements of the the work, with its bright colours lathered roughly on the canvas, was typical of Van Gogh's style at the time he was living in Paris."

The searches for "typical of" and "typical for" here (EL&U) both returned substantial results, though "typical of" appears to be in favor.
Confusion
Trying to make sense of it, I was about to conclude that I should use "of" when the typicality is something intrinsic (a property or a character of what was talked about), and use "for" when such typicality should be viewed extrinsically. As these two examples from Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary,

This meal is typical of local cookery. (intrinsic)
A typical working day for me begins at 7.30. (extrinsic)

But soon I felt abash when I found someone mentioned question 7 in this English Grammar Test, Elementary Level # 71,

Such bad behavior is typical .......... the spoiled child.
a) for
b) with
c) about
d) of

The question was listed under "british vs. american english", implying that each dialect prefers one usage over another. But I have a feeling that it might turn out to be untrue.
Is there any good rule of thumb for the usage of typical for vs. typical of?


texts: I've heard of these four a lot but never really knew the differences. Can anybody tell me?


texts: Is Eckersley's *Essential English* still in use?

texts:
When I taught myself English a long time ago I used (alongside Assimil's L'anglais sans peine and the BBC's Calling all beginners) a series of four books,  Essential English authored by C.E. Eckersley and published by Longmans.
It was an impressively good set of boooks, with plenty of grammatical  and cultural explanations, presented in a very British witty and amusing style and accompanied by funny but quite relevant cartoons and schematic drawings.

My question is whether English is still taught from these textbooks.
I confess that I was emboldened to ask this question by the mischievous thought that for once you native English speakers would be at a disadvantage to answer it (unless you teach English) as compared to us foreigners ...


texts: JFK (Mis)quote Chinese: "不怕神一样的对手 就怕猪一样的队友"

texts:
I've been looking for an English equivalent of the Chinese, "不怕神一样的对手 就怕猪一样的队友," which has been, rather directly, translated as:

  We fear not God-like rivals, but pig-like team members

and rather funnily enough attributed to JFK.

Did JFK ever say anything even remotely close to this?
Are there other idiomatic phrases in English that resemble "We fear not God-like rivals, but pig-like team members"? (i.e: who needs enemies, with friends like you?)


texts: Is the "went" in the following sentence redundant?

texts:
As Eri closed the laptop, her stomach started to growl. That's right.
  She hadn't eaten breakfast yet. She'd been so absorbed in the video
  that she had completely forgotten about it. Eri stood slowly from the
  sofa and then, giving the laptop a final glance, went to prepare herself to
  go out.

I was wondering whether the went in the last sentence is redundant. I think the word prepare already implies that the person stood up and moved from its current position?


texts: Is there a name for an idiom that intentionally reverses key words for dramatic effect?

texts:
I have in mind a particular kind of expression which employs a repeated sentence structure, but with key words reversed for dramatic or emphatic effect. Here are two examples:

"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog"
JFK's famous "ask not what your country can do for you — ask what you can do for your country"

In both cases, the words in bold have been reversed to reveal a deeper or more profound truth. Does this particular kind of idiom or expression have a formal name?


texts: Let's get -- Is this a grammatical sentence?

texts: Is this a grammatical sentence?  Is it idiomatic for "Let's go?"


texts: 3 adjectives (in different classes) describing a noun & commas

texts:
In the case of three adjectives, can there be a combination of classes and therefore commas? A bit confused.

Eg.

In the early 1900s, many poor, uneducated German immigrants settled in the town.

"poor" and "uneducated" seem to be interchangeable and need commas, but then "German" seems to be another class.

If there were only two adjectives ("uneducated" and "German"), I would not put a comma. But if it were only "poor" and "educated" I would. I think that would be correct. But in the case above, with 3 adjectives, should there be a comma after "uneducated"? In general with 3 adjectives, should there be commas after the first two or does it depend also on classes?


texts: Is it okay to flap "didn't" (and "wouldn't", "couldn't", "ridden")

texts:
I've tried to research this topic a lot and since I'm not a native English speaker, I can't tell whether it sounds "right" or not when you flap these words. I've found some examples on youtube of seemingly native people who flap it. Correct me if I'm wrong but I think Avril Lavigne flaps "didn't" in her song "Tomorrow You Didn't".

Somebody singing it in a song though, may not mean it is "okay" to flap didn't (or wouldn't, couldn't, etc). Is it common?

Also, I think some people differentiate "written" and "ridden" by flapping the latter. On the other hand, some people don't. Which is more common?

Thinking about this has given me multiple headaches over the last few days so if you have any input I'd be very thankful. To a native speaker, does flapping these words make them sound strange or not?

For reference: Wikipedia - Flapping


texts: How would you capitalize sister-in-law as a form of address?

texts: I'm editing a chapter of a novel translated from Chinese, where kinship terms are often used as a form of address replacing a name. In this case, the speaker is referring to another woman as "sister-in-law". I was wondering if that would be capitalized as "Sister-in-Law", "Sister-In-Law", or "Sister-in-law"?


texts:
I'm having a hard time figuring out whether or not to use a comma in the type of situation shown in the examples below:

  Jane was concerned that running by herself she might get mugged.
  Jane was concerned that running by herself, she might get mugged.
  Jane was concerned that, running by herself, she might get mugged.

.

  We knew unless we changed our attitude we were bound to fail.
  We knew unless we changed our attitude, we were bound to fail.
  We knew, unless we changed our attitude, we were bound to fail.

In the above examples, is 1, 2, or 3 right?

Normally, if "running by herself" and "unless we changed our attitude" started a sentence, they would be separated from the main clause for being a participle and a subordinate clause, respectively.  However, I'm having a hard time finding an answer regarding comma usage when these come later in the sentence.  Logically, I think the answer should be 3, but very often and in normally very grammatical sources, I see it written like either 1 or 2.  Also, I can especially see how 2 might be accurate because the the comma separation looks as if it divides the verb in the main clause from its subject, and particularly in the latter, the information provided isn't parenthetical but necessary to the operation of the sentence.

Sorry for the long spiel, but I felt I needed to describe the situation sufficiently because I don't have a name for it.  If I had a name for it, maybe I could have found the answer.

Anyway, if you could possibly either give a rationale or a source that backs up your answer, that would be greatly appreciated.  Thanks!


texts: Appropriate word for non-regular procedure

texts:
One can think of a routine or common procedure to be applied (here it is in case of technical sequence of operations) on any system.

When some exception occurs - the common/ normal routine is NOT followed by another one is followed. I want to use an appropriate word for this.

Few words i have thought of myself that doesn't quite fit.

alternate procedure sounds like a replacement so doesn't indicate that it should be used only for exception.
exceptional procedure is not appropriate because exceptional is quite often connotative to "great"
non-standard non-regular or irregular is not appropriate because this secondary method is also standardized for the given situation.

I want one appropriate word (as an adjective to the process) that indicates that it is not a "normal" procedure but to be used under some exception.


texts: Is there any other word meaning "prick" with initial onsets "pr-" except prick?

texts:
This is my edited question:

I look up in the etymological dictionay about prick, and find that prick is not a word derived from Proto-indo-european etymon.

Meanwhile, I find a lot of words meaning "prick, stick, pierce, spear, rod, etc.",

words starting with "br-"

  such as brad, bristle, brittle

words starting with "st-"

  such as stick, stake, stipe

and find pierce, which contains p and r, but etymologically it is composed with *per1 "forward, through" + *(s)teu-1 "To push, stick, knock, beat".

So, I start to wonder whether there is or no words derived from PIE, which starts with "pr-" and has the similar meaning to prick, such as "prick, stick, pierce, spear, rod,etc.".


texts: two nouns for "do it now" and "delay it to the future"

texts: I am writing a research paper whose title is about "doing things now or delaying them to the future." To be more formal, I hope to use two nouns to represent the same meaning. It is not hard to find a noun for "delaying things," which is "postponement." However, I really had a hard time finding a noun for "doing things now". One word I found is "preproperation," but this word means expediting things or rushing to do things. It is not exactly "doing things now". Can anyone help with this? Thanks a lot.


texts: Term used to describe a person who predicts future outcomes

texts: There are people out there who try to predict future outcomes for certain areas like crops, events, etc... It's all logic-based and determined by their perception of previous years data.  No clairvoyance or prophesied type thing at all... I'm trying to come up with the term that they used to describe that type of person, but for the life of me I cannot remember what it is.... if I'm not sailing mistaken, I think I have seen it centered mostly around stock markets.


texts: What's the best name/adjective to refer a safe and free to use resource?

texts:
I'm looking for a name/adjective to refer a software resource that is both free to access and safe to use from a security point of view.

The term is going to name the group of such resources in an operating system.

As an example think of *nix files like /dev/null and /dev/zero

So far the best I've found are

commons
public

With "commons" I link these resources to the common lands, as they are owned collectively by a number of persons; indeed Merriam-Webster dictionary defines "common" as "belonging to or shared by two or more individuals or things or by all members of a group".

I'm not a native English speaker, so I'm not sure "commons" is appropriate, but "public" is usually opposed to "private" and in this scenario this is not what I want to express.

Is there another term I should use? Or is "commons" just right?


texts: What word can I use for "level someone wants to achieve"

texts:
If I want to say:

  Level 10 is Larry's _________ (aspired) level?

Does "Aspired" work?

In Merriam-Webster, aspired is a verb not an adjective; that's why I was wondering. If not, then what word can I use for "level someone wants to achieve"?


texts: Appropriate word for a young person who behaves like a cynical old person?

texts:
What is an appropriate term for a young person (child or teenager) whose words and actions mimic that of a much older person from a previous generation? Such a youngster would demonstrate strong nostalgia for the past, despite never having lived during that time period.

An example I can think of is a 12 year old boy who observes that, "children nowadays spend all their time with their faces glued to smartphones", or who prefers to write letters rather than emails, "like it was done in the good old days". This child would never have a Facebook or Twitter account, because they are, "silly fads of the 21st century".1

A possible phrase would be mature beyond his years, although that doesn't quite capture the characteristic in question—in particular the underlying contradiction, cynicism, and nostalgia.

I can think a perfectly fitting term from another language, but not English...

1The motivation behind this question is  an interesting youngster I know who makes these statements!


texts:
If somebody asks me to describe the below photo, I would definitely say, "It is a picture of shirtless Putin on a horseback".

The adjective topless is defined by Oxford Online Dictionary:

  (Of a woman) having the breasts uncovered: a topless dancer.

And according to Online Etymology Dictionary, topless means:

  of women, "bare-breasted," 1966, from top (n.1) + -less.

And I looked up the bold top (n.1) above in the same dictionary and it states:

  Few Indo-European languages have a word so generic, which can be used
  of the upper part or surface of just about anything.

And nothing else to clarify the meaning. However, the headline of The Independent reads:

  Chelsea Handler uses topless Vladimir Putin photo to highlight
  Instagram nudity inequalities

Questions:

Can the adjective topless describe a male? What is the difference between shirtless and topless, then?
What does the noun top mean in topless? What is its etymology? (I can't figure out from Online Etymology Dictionary.)
Are there more apt/suitable words to describe the below picture besides shirtless (or possibly topless)?


texts: What is a word for "about to burst out laughing"?

texts:
Is there a word that can describe this facial expression?

("about to burst out laughing")


texts:
I've found it in a book and assume it's got to be correct, but I cannot understand why the Past Perfect of I had been offered. Would was offered not have been clearer?

I explained that when I was in high school I had been offered a job teaching tennis at a local country club because I had been one of the best junior tennis players in the area


texts: Word request: make code comment / make comment code in programming

texts:
I am looking for the correct verb for turning code into comment and comment into code in programming.

I have ______ the code, so it is a comment now. No need to delete it!

I have ______ the comment, so it is now code again. I am glad you didn't delete it!

I believe the first one is "comment out" but I am not sure. I don't know whether the second actually has got a word.
(Technically I am asking for two words here.)


texts: A better verb for "cement" in "cement one's interest"

texts:
Is there a better word for cemented in the following sentence?

  All the experiences I went through have cemented my interest in this field.

I was told "cemented" doesn't quite fit in and I was asked to find a replacement. Any synonyms, anyone?

I know this question sounds vague, please comment if you need additional details.


texts: Is it better to say someone lived "at" or "on" a particular street?

texts: When I was a lowly copyboy for a newspaper in the 1970s, I wrote obituaries.  My desk editor came to me with a criticism.  I had written that the deceased lived "on Nevada Blvd."  She threw my copy down and stood on it.  "This is 'on'," she said.  Standing to the side of the paper she said, "this is 'at'."  OK, I can take a hint, from then on I said people lived "at" a certain address.  But is that really the rule, or was that just my editor's pet peeve?


texts: What's the correct use of apostrophe here?

texts:
There are two men named Bill Bass. I want to write the following two sentences. I want the two sentences below to refer to both of them, as plural, not possessive. Is this correct?

  I think this should be the Bill Bass' Memorial Picnic. That way it can be a memorial to both Bill Bass'


texts: A word which means "someone who owns and or operates a space"?

texts:
For my thesis I am investigating a way to analyse how crowds' engage with a space. A space could be a room, part of a room or outdoors. For example, a classroom, a library, a lecture theatre, a section of a museum.

I am looking for a word which would encapsulate people who own or operate these spaces.

"operator" and "land owner" are what come to my head but neither seem quite appropriate.

For example, "This will provide a means for X to optimise their spaces"


texts: Word for "A society/group/system that does not value aesthetics"?

texts:
Is there a single word that means  "a society/group/system that does not value aesthetics"?

I can't think of anything. Any suggestions?


texts: Is there a word that describes the phrase "hope for the best,expect the worst"?

texts: The meaning of that word doesn't have to have the exact same meaning but something close enough.


texts: "A bit" vs. "a little bit" vs. "a little"

texts:
Is there a difference between a bit, a little bit and a little in the following context?

  He is a little bit angry.
  He is a little angry.
  He is a bit angry.

Or do these sentences mean the same thing?


texts: The real tense of "I'm going to be talking about"

texts: I just listened to a video in which the speaker said "I'm going to be talking about....". Can we change that to "I'm going to talk about..."?


texts:
Possible Duplicate:
  What does “I know, right?” mean?

Is the expression "I know right" grammatically correct? I hear it a lot and I think I understand what it means, but it just sounds wrong to me.


texts:
If I do all this, I would have such a story to tell.

Is this sentence wrong? I've searched it up and it's wrong according to grammar guides -- but I've seen it so often. The would is supposed to show how the event is:

Possible
Ambitious but somewhat probably and not unlikely


texts: Is there such a word as 'tractless' and what does it mean?

texts:
I recall hearing the phrase 'tractless wilderness' but no dictionaries has 'tractless'. Up until now, I believed the meaning to be 'expansive'.

There is a possibility that I'm confusing it with 'trackless', but I don't see how this would convey the same meaning as 'trackless' simply means without tracks.


texts: Is someone "casted" or "cast" in a film role?

texts:
Can the word 'casted' be used in this headline?

  Michael Fassbender Casted In Upcoming "Kung Fury" movie


texts: I recently discovered that cowardly, which looks like an adverb, is actually also an adjective. So far so good. Then what is the difference between cowardly and coward, and is there any preferential usage of either?


texts:
I'm a huge fan of the computer game HoMaM4 and I watch videos on YouTube by other players, walking through the campaigns. The goal for me is to have fun, learn new strategies, gain new moves practices, etc. While the gamer is fighting the battles, he's commenting on some of his tactics/moves and explains why he does these moves and what's their benefit. One of the comments was:

This battle can be fairly easily won, but we use more cheesy tactics to
avoid any losses.

The gamer was using a tactic that includes only one creature in the battle (and letting the other creatures stay in the back) because this creature has a special ability which prevents the attacked opponent from returning the attack. Using this tactic, the battle took longer, but the result was that other creatures were not hurt and it was a flawless victory – no losses or damage taken from the opponent. The other way of winning this battle and make it shorter (duration) would be to use all creatures to attack the opponent, but there would be losses, although small.
I do understand approximate meaning of this expression, but I'm wondering about three things:

What is the exact meaning of this expression?
Where does this expression come from?
Is this expression used only in war/battle/games language (Google associated this expression with games) or can it be used also in different situation?


texts: What is the correct usage of 'formerly' as time adverb?

texts:
PLEASE NOTE: JDK6 [is|was] formerly known as Project Mustang

In the previous sentence what is correct 'is' or 'was'? and why?

While reading a bug report I found this sentence with 'is' and now I'm wondering what is correct.

BUG 6399361


texts:
This question was inspired by the this thread over at physics.se.

What are the correct uses of "why" and "how" as interrogatives?

Do questions that begin with "why" necessarily pursue answers which lie beyond the realm of empirical data or natural fact? If not, is it possible to rephrase those "why" questions which can be addressed by the experimental sciences as "how" questions without changing their meanings?


texts: An idiom or phrase for when you're about to be ill

texts:
It's that time of year, you're surrounded by sick people.

Parents tell you their child hasn't been able to shake off that nasty flu for over a week. A colleague comes to work looking worse for wear, she doesn't take off her scarf or her gloves all day, and you can tell she is shivering.

And this morning, you feel odd. You have a dry chesty cough. You almost feel you have a cold or a fever but not quite.

Is there an idiom or phrase that means you are getting sick? I don't want to say I am ill, or I have the flu over the phone because you can't tell by my voice, but I'm definitely feeling "off".

  I'm sorry I can't come for dinner tonight because ________


texts: Isn't "chuckle" the frequentative of "chuck"?

texts:
Wikipedia indicates that the frequentative word "chuckle" has no original form, but Dictionary.com lists chuckle originating from the third form of chuck, meaning "to pat or tap lightly, as under the chin".

That seems like a perfectly legitimate original form of chuckle, to me.  So am I missing something, or is Wikipedia missing the mark?

Edit
I misread the "chuck3" link.  I thought it meant the third sense of first form, marked as "chuck1 3.".  But there is actually a "chuck3" with a first sense meaning "to cluck".  That's more reasonable!


texts:
This is an excerpt from a newspaper.

It was this reference to the ICC that India said it could not support.

Why author uses that and not which?


texts: about "[to be] so unlikely to become common as to be innocuous"

texts:
The following sentence is from Bertrand Russell. I would like to know if in the emboldened part the equative structure not so ... as is used or it's another structure with a different meaning.

  ... they will conclude that a new belief is probably either an advance, or so unlikely to become common as to be innocuous.


texts:
The Oscars may not take place until February 24, but awards season is already in full swing, with the Golden Globes among Hollywood's many red-carpet events. (British Vogue, Feb 2013)

I've been trying to educate myself on the comma and got a little confused when I read this sentence. Is the comma between "swing" and "with" supposed to be there?


texts: People of different ages who share the same birthday

texts:
I'd like to find a word to encompass multiple people who share the same birthday (but were not necessarily born in the same year):

  Best wishes to my <birthday-sharing friends> for a wonderful day.


texts:
If I have a split verb, such as "pick up" and I am a addressing a third person, I can say either:

  I will pick Fred up at 11am.

Or:

  I will pick up Fred at 11am.

For the second person, we have:

  I will pick you up at 11am.

But it sounds wrong if I say:

  I will pick up you at 11am.

What is my missing understanding here?

UPDATE:

My understanding from reading the possible duplicate question and the given answers, is that there is no strict rule about this at all, only a matter of style.

Thinking about it, I realised there is nothing wrong with the fourth example above, for example, if you wanted to give emphasis. Imagine saying the sentence and pointing your finger at the intended person:

  I will pick up you at 11am.

It is no longer an awkward sentence, but becomes a highly emphatic one.


texts:
I am bringing up a rather pedantic point here, but, one that has me completely stumped.  This is going to require some serious grammar knowledge.

I was in a line at a shop today and the teenager at the counter actually said "May I please help whomever is next."  As a matter of conversational English, I dare say, this construction borders on pretentious.  But, on deeper thought, it might be fine in formal English since the subject of the dependent clause should typically agree with the main clause.

But, then I found the following post by Edwin Ashworth on this site regarding the issue:

  If one wants to be pedantic, the correct version uses whoever rather
  than whomever in this construction as, though the accusative is
  required to agree with the main clause (Can I help John? Can I help
  him? Can I help him who is next? NOT *Can I help he who is next? - see
  Fowler), the compound lexeme whoever fulfils a dual accusative
  (relating to the main clause)/nominative (relating to the relative
  clause) role. Whomever fulfils a double accusative role (Treat
  whomever the acid came into contact with).

I followed Mr. Ashworth's explnation until he started making distinctions between dual and double accusatives (which I didn't think existed in English).  If anyone could offer a clearer explanation, I would be apprecative.  Thanks.


texts: preposition 'for' in the sentences with structures like 'compared to'

texts:
Recently, I've watched one film and (have?) met there one interesting, at least for me, phrase.

...that is nothing compared to what I could be, and perhaps should, be asking for.

My question is, what if I wanted to replace 'for' closer to the beginning? How should I do this?

...that is nothing compared to that for what I could, and perhaps should, be asking.
...that is nothing compared to what for I could, and perhaps should, be asking.

As for me, I don't really think the second one has even a bit of sense, yet I'm not sure.
Thank you in advance, and if you don't mind could you explain the '(have?)', I mean that I'm wondering whether I should write it or not (I think I should not).


texts:
Should fall be capitalised in the following? If yes, is it because Fall 2011 is a proper noun?

  Where should an app be released in Fall 2011?

Context.

In a Wikipedia article, Avatar (2009 film), a particular summer is capitalised (my emphasis):

  Work on the language for the film's extraterrestrial beings began in Summer 2005, and Cameron began developing the screenplay and fictional universe in early 2006.

(The related question Should the names of seasons be capitalized? is about the seasons themselves (as in I love the colors of the leaves in autumn.), not a particular season, like Fall 2011.)


texts: "Prefer to do something" vs. "prefer doing something"

texts:
Possible Duplicate:
  When should a verb be followed by a gerund instead of an infinitive?

What's the difference between the two:

  What materials do they prefer working with?
  What materials do they prefer to work with?


texts:
When I am succumbing to something, what am I doing?

There are many close synonyms, such as submission or surrender; however, does succumb has its own noun form?


texts: Need a word for "Unravel in the worst possible way"

texts:
I am writing something in a blog and I want to write this sentence

  Its a very hard thing to follow a path you believe in and are
  passionate about when everything around you starts to _________ and
  every tom dick and harry you know takes the other lucrative path

I want to fill up the blank with something that means "unravel in the worst possible way", i.e. things starting to crumble around you, but you are alone and strongwilled on that path. Any such words/phrases in English? I don't want to just use the word crumble - it's too negative and it stands out too much. Unravel in a bad way softens the blow a little bit, but just unravel on its own is too subtle.


texts: Looking for a common word meaning hands and feet as well

texts:
I am looking for a word that describes/means the appendices at the ends of limbs (namely hands and feet), meaning a singular one of them.

Bonus: a word that describes/means all of them


texts: where should I place conjunction in the sentence?

texts:
I have a problem with the placement of conjunctions in a sentence. (Especially when I am writing an academic article.)

In many articles, writers place the conjunctions in the middle of sentence.

For exp.; It cannot, however, be inferred from the fact that.. or

However, it cannot be inferred from the fact that...

When should I place them in the beginning of sentence/in the middle of sentence?

I am confused about it.  It is also applicable for therefore, furthermore, otherwise etc.


texts: What are all the different ways in which we can refer to time in English?

texts:
I am trying to wrap my head around the ways in which we can refer to time in English. The following list is what I have been able to come up with:

1- Tense

2- Auxiliary constructions

3- Temporal adverbs

Am I missing anything? If not, is there fault in the above classification?


texts: Is the following usage of "matter-of-factly" correct?

texts:
Most of the usage of "matter-of-factly" that I've seen is to describe a manner of speaking - "He said, matter of factly,...", etc.

A friend brought up the following usage, which seems wrong, but I can't pinpoint exactly what is wrong. "Matter of factly, I don't know. I know from my dad's experience."

What's the view on this?

Couple of points:

The adjective form "As a matter of fact, I don't know. ..." seems correct.
Similar usage of literally works: "I literally don't know." or "Literally, I don't know"


texts:
I've just read an article about GM food. I can't get the following sentence:

  Should those against this bill lose the label war, they might be able to turn to Clear Labs technology to get a better idea of what is in that package of ramen or can of corn on the shelf at their local grocery store.
  source

Does that mean that if the opponents of the bill lose this war, they still should have the right to turn to Clear Labs to know the product contents?


texts: The term for when fruit is first starting to appear on a plant

texts: Was looking through a vineyard and noticed that the grapes were beginning to show up on the vines. They were small and unrecognizable from when they would be picked but they were the first sign of fruit on the vines. What is this called? Basically, what is the term for when fruit first starts to appear on a plant?


texts: What's the difference between federal republic and commonwealth?

texts:
I'm a non-native speaker . I noticed that there are two kinds of statement  to describe polity , federal republic of Germany and commonwealth of Austrilia .
So I'm confusing what's the difference between federal republic and commonwealth?


texts: What is a term for a server that is functioning 24/7?

texts:
If we have some critical servers that have to be running 7 days a week, 24 hours a day and they can't be down even for one second, what is this particular type of server called in English?

Example sentence:

  Our servers must be flawless; they must be _____.

Does the term productive suit?


texts: When did 'Robot' start implying a machine?

texts:
The word 'Robot' originated from a Czech author, Karel Čapek.  He first uses the word in a play where robots are manufactured biological entities said to lack independent thought.

However, after the word was introduced to English to mean some sort of manufactured biological slave labour, the word's meaning changed to exclusively mean a human-like machine.

When did the word robot change from meaning a biological entity to meaning a mechanical entity?


texts: "Changes to calendar" vs. "Changes in calendar"

texts:
There's this section on a concert hall website where they inform people if their shows have been cancelled or rescheduled.

Is it correct to call this section

  Changes to calendar

or should it be called

  Changes in calendar


texts: Can the word 'quote' mean only one word?

texts:
According to Google quote is '

  repeat or copy out (a group of words from a text or speech), typically
  with an indication that one is not the original author or speaker'

can a single word qualify as a quote?

EDIT:
Besides: One word sentences like "yes","no","okay".

To put the question in perspective: The question came up when my co-worker and I were trying to use this website and we were arguing if it is necessary to provide more than one word.


texts: Is it considered normal to say "many millions"?

texts:
For a poem I'm writing for my English class, in order to fit in some consonance, I plan on saying

  Many millions of miles

But I am wondering if this is correct grammar, as millions already implies that it is more than one, and many would become redundant. Can anybody point me in the right direction?


texts: Should I say "One-Click RemovER" or "One-Click RemovAL"?

texts:
I'm building a software and am wondering if I should say "remover" or "removal" for its name.

What is the correct way to describe the process? "One Click Color Removal" or "One Click Color Remover"?


texts:
I’m looking for a word that is synonymous with diplomatic, but in an environment that is more casual.

You will use this word to describe a person who returns phatic responses in inane conversations, so as to avoid being subjected to direct questions, but otherwise have no interest in participating in it.

I’m not looking for the word “polite” but do let me know if I’m wrong. (I’m not looking for the word “rude” either.)


texts:
I have a sentence:

  You must drive to headington roundabout where you go straight over and make your way to Newbury.

Does it mean where you go straight through(something)? (because one meaning of over is through)


texts: Can a which-clause be used with another which in this sentence?

texts:
Apologies for the unclear title, but I wasn't sure how to phrase it.

Situation
Assume a table, on which lies an object, occupying half of the table. A hat is placed on the table.

Question

Which of the following sentences is correct?

The hat was placed on the table, half of which was occupied by an object
The hat was placed on the table, which half of which was occupied by an object

The second sentence feels so unnatural to me, but isn't the first one not quite right either? Though not ungrammatical, it has a ring of offering a rather parenthetical, separate clause rather than a clause describing the previous one (that is, reading the first sentence, I get an impression of "and by the way, half of the table was occupied by an object". Indeed, I feel a semi-colon rather than a comma would be preferable in that case).

Also consider the sentences

The hat was placed on the table, which was occupied by an object
The hat was placed on the table, which was partly occupied by an object

Any input on the matter would be appreciated.


texts: What is the origins of the phrase “on the lam”?

texts:
After puzzling over this phrase for quite some time I came across the possible answers offered in this site.  The one that seemed to show the most promising solution was the longest entry, which included the possibility of there being a verb “to lam” meaning “to run.” I found just such a verb in the English Dialect Dictionary, a somewhat now forgotten, yet very useful, text.  I here provide the germane entry, from Vol. III, pp. 509-10:

“LAM...4. to run quickly. w. Yks 5 Whear’s tuh lamming tul! Ther wur a
peeler after him - by Gow didn’t he lam!”

The above quotation - which seems to fit exactly the meaning of “lam” - as “running from the police” (i.e. a “peeler”) - comes from C.C Robinson’s  The Dialect of Leeds and its Neighbourhood, of 1861.


texts: "Fork(s) of the road" to "fork in the road". Why the switch?

texts:
I was reading a recent New Yorker article: "How the Promise of Normalcy Won the 1920 Election" (Sept. 14, 2020)
Where the Democratic nominee for President of the US, James M. Cox of Ohio, was quoted as saying

“We stand at the forks of the road and must choose which to follow.”

I had never heard "forks of the road", and have always heard "fork in the road", so I looked up the historical usage from Google's N-Grams, and indeed, "forks of the road" was more commonly used until around 1920. (Maybe if Cox had used the up-and-coming "fork in the road", he would have done better in the election. /s)

ngram link

Can anyone shed light on the migration of this metaphor?
Some famous usage of the metaphor are listed here.


texts: "There is to be no drinking beer today" What is the status of "no" and "beer" here?

texts:
There's no doubting her sincerity.
There's no telling what she's done.
There's no guessing which way they'll bolt.
There's to be no drinking beer today.
There's no telling her.

The word no is usually thought of as a determinative. We expect to see it in Determiner position in noun phrases. Of course, we often see determinatives in Determiner function with deverbal nouns:

The reading of books is prohibited.
This constituted a breaking of his silence on this topic.

Notice that because the -ing forms above are nouns and not verbs, they cannot take direct objects and the phrases after them are preposition phrases. If we omit the word of the sentences are ungrammatical:

*The reading  books is prohibited. (ungrammatical)
*This constituted a breaking  his silence on this topic. (ungrammatical)

My questions  therefore are:

What part of speech is the word no in examples 1-4?
How should we regard the syntactic function/grammatical relations of the word no in relation to the phrases it occurs in?
What is the syntactic function of the strings after the -ing forms. (direct object /complement?)
What part of speech are these -ing forms?


texts: Without a home to return to or without a home to return?

texts:
We say :

" I'm going home "

but not

" I'm going to home "

So which is correct between :

" Someone without a home to return to "

or

" Someone without a home to return "

I know I can just say homeless, but I'm practicing for the IELTS, if I can cram more words to say absolutely nothing, I should do it ( my professor recommends it )


texts: I was reading a book and it said:"The coastline length of the United States proper is 22,860 km. What does "United States proper" mean here? Another phrase would be:"Her family lived outside the city proper". Is the word "proper" a noun here? What is its definition in this context?


texts: Word for a person you consider personal and don't want to share with anyone

texts: What term is used for a person whom you consider yours and don't want to share him with anyone?


texts: I note the discussion of the lack of female equivalent for uxorious.  Is there any equivalent for avuncular?


texts: What is the meaning of this sentence ..please explain this

texts: You’re right to be cautious---what is the meaning of this


texts:
I'm using an in-text citation in my paper which is as follows:

  Our case studies demonstrate that NGET have already provided a wide
  range of environmental, security, health and safety, and economic
  benefits

Unfortunately the reader will not understand what an NGET is unless I can explain it. What would be the proper way to showcase what this abbreviation stands for in an mla-style paper?


texts: What's an eponymous adjective that is an antonym of Machiavellian?

texts:
REVISED QUESTION

Is there an eponymous adjective with equivalent cultural weight and recognition that could be considered an antonym of Machiavellian? I am after the basic idea of an adjective that describes a person who leads or influences others in ways that elicit cooperation and admiration with a Machiavellian person who may use fear as a motivator for desirable outcomes.  So, the dichotomy I'm interested in here is **loved leader who elicits cooperation vs. feared leader who wields power in a more ruthless way.  The idea is that both people are effective leaders.

In a way, I am interested in the fact that Machiavelli and his eponymous adjective are so poorly understood, but bear such cultural significance and
negative connotation.  I wanted to know what the antonym of Machiavellian was from the point of view of people who answer my questions, but also whether the positive eponymous adjectives have similar cultural heft.

Original Question and Addenda

  Is there an eponymous adjective, i.e.based on a person's or
  literary character's name, that is the opposite of Machiavellian
  that refers to a person who behaves unselfishly with good
  intention and collaboration in clear, open ways?

Machiavellian is an eponymous adjective used to describe a person or behavior that is underhanded, manipulative, unscrupulous and interested in one's own benefit, despite appearances to the contrary.  Merriam Webster has similar definition, provides example sentences and explains the origin of the adjective from Niccolo Machiavelli's name.

I am interested in a word that is not confined to politics, but might be more general.  I have consulted lists of eponymous adjectives including this one. I have also searched on EL&U past questions and could not find any that ask or answer my question. I would prefer an adjective with gravitas that conveys a sense of efficacy through open, collaborative, generous behavior.  Think of different style of bosses in a small institution or business settings.

  Example sentences:

  Jesse employs Machiavellian tactics and  really fools the team into believing that they have made a group decision for the benefit of all. The team has good success, it's true, but only people with a certain kind of mentality seem to stay.

  Alex, on the other hand, displays __________ intention,
  honesty and candor in leadership of the team.  Most people prefer to work on Alex's team and can point to examples of both team and individual success.

Addendum:

NB: As pointed out in comments, I am using Machiavellian in its contemporary usage.  I understand that scholars and many educated people think this is a misrepresentation of Machiavelli.

Addendum 2

While I figure out whether to edit the question to ask for an eponymous adjective that describes behavior that is unselfish, collaborative, open and effective, you have a few choices:

Give eponymous adjectives that make sense to you and are interesting to you.  Please post them as answers.  All the comments have been good ones.
Continue to educate me on the flaws in my question.  Consider me on the way to fuller awareness of my ignorance in relation to the word, Machiavellian, and perhaps a remedy to that.
My emerging understanding is that the main contrast I am after is competitive behavior that is manipulative and hidden vs. collaborative behavior that is more transparently aimed at goals reached by concensus.


texts: Title for a list of disclaimers, prerequisites, FYIs

texts:
I'm about to start a workshop and I'd like to have a "before we start" slide in which I'll communicate:

several prerequisites for attendees to better understand the content,
set several boundaries in regards to content presented and its format,
and perhaps some general notes as well.

Roughly, something like:

1. This workshop assumes you understand concept x;
2. Bringing a laptop is not mandatory;
3. Please interrupt me at anytime if something is not clear;
4. I'll answer any question - I hope we don't deviate too much from the main topic :)
5. I won't give any homework, although I strongly recommend practicing at home
etc.

Is there a word/simple phrase that would accurately describe such a list?


texts: Why put a period after your name in the closing of a communication/E-mail?

texts:
I have several co-workers in Europe and all of them tend to put a period after their names in the closing of E-mails, e.g.:

  Thanks,
  Matt.

I've never seen this, so I am curious if it is proper form to put a period after your name in a communication.


texts: What is the difference between "Look who has decided to show up" and "Look who decided to show up"?

texts: I always get confused between deciding whether to use present perfect or past simple with expressions like these. So how can I use them correctly?


texts:
What is the correct idiom?

1) His contributions to the field of medicine?

2) His contributions in the field of medicine?

Please elaborate


texts: A word for an Irish-phile, a person who is fond of Irish or Celtic culture

texts:
For example, francophilia describes fondness for French culture, language, etc. and an anglophile is a person who is similarly fond of British culture.

Is there an analogous word to describe a person who is fond of Irish or Celtic culture or languages?


texts: Use of "pull" in lieu of the phrasal verb "pull off"

texts:
Example: "pull a miracle" instead of "pull off a miracle".
A quick google search shows the former being used in sports contexts, though I have heard of it in informal conversation as well.
Is this usage grammatical? To contexts of what degree of formality may it be accepted?