texts: Do I need to use a comma before "everyone" to set off the vocative?

texts: While I was writing a status update today on social media I decided to do some grammar-learning. The status update was "Happy Labor Day everyone!" and I am now wondering if I should place a comma between "Day" and "everyone?" My grammar skills aren't great, and this may be staring me right in the face as I'm thinking about it, but researching on the web and Stack Exchange hasn't brought up the case yet. Help would be much appreciated.


texts:
I've used in the past sentences of the type

  Were hypothesis to be result, then action

Example:

  Were this question to be answered, I'd be very happy

However, I have no clue as to how to refer to this kind of structure/tense/voice. From a quick research, I think it's a subjunctive voice, and some kind of future tense? And I think the first part is in passive voice?
[Edit] @FumbleFingers has pointed out it's not a future tense, but a conditional, hypothetical one.

I can't seem to find my way through Google, so any help would be appreciated.
[Edit] the purpose of this question is to point a colleague who corrected me from "were" to "where" (both of us are native Spanish speakers) to something for them to have as reference.


texts: word that means: causing a paradigm shift, new era, revolution

texts:
I can't think of the word and it's driving me nuts.  I'm looking for a word that can be used when some technology is discovered, way of thinking, or even event happening that causes a big change in society.

Examples might be: discovery of electricity, industrial revolution, nuclear power / bomb, the internet.

Some similar terms I can think of are: dawn of a new era, a new age, or paradigm shift.

EDIT: I just want to add that I'm thinking of a lesser used word, although revolutionary fits it's not specific enough nor the word that I'm looking for.


texts:
What is a single word for "lack of accountability?"

I'm thinking unorganised, but something is telling me that I'm trying to describe something else when I use that word.


texts: What does "capacity" mean in this question?

texts:
How long have you known this referee and in what capacity

I'm filling my university application I met this question which befuddled me.

Does it mean "are you familiar with the referee"?


texts: How to add clarity to a declarative sentence?

texts:
I have the following sentence, and I am wondering how I could make it more clear, and catchy because i feel like there is something wrong with it. Does the message come across properly?

  Apprentices inject enthusiasm, hard work, and a thirst for knowledge
  into your teams.


texts:
According to the encyclopedical manner (and what COBUILD advises too), we should put an article, be it definite or indefinite, before the name of a plant.

A rose is a plant… The coconut tree is a member of… etc.…

But when it comes to common names which include Saxon genitive, the problem seems to be complicating…

I do not consider the following webpage as a reliable reference, but they keep omitting adding articles to the plant called commonly as "Lady's Thumb".

https://www.farms.com/field-guide/weed-management/ladys-thumb.aspx

Please, folks, help, as I would also opt for no article, but, all the same, I would write the burro's tale. Lady's eardrops or the lady's eardrops?

What I am aiming at is to get rather an informative register than a colloquial or common one.


texts: Is “drop the pomp for the profound” a cliché or the Time writer’s own wording?

texts:
In connection with my question on the Royal Wedding I posted today, I’m interested in the phrase, “drop the pomp for the profound” in the following line appearing in the Time article (April 29) titled “Traveling Man: Brian Williams Explains Why He Ditched the Royal Wedding”

  “NBC anchor Brian Williams chose to abandon his plan to cover Will and Kate's wedding — just hours after touching down in London — and return to the U.S. to cover the devastation caused by tornadoes, floods and storms. ---Which we can't help but admire. Let's face it, the Royal Wedding is going to be covered no matter what, but it's nice to know that one of our favorite journalists is still willing to “drop the pomp for the profound.”

I was hooked to the phrase, “drop the pomp for the profound.” because it sounds classic and cool to my ears (YMMV). Is this an established phrase, or just the author’s invention?


texts: Which one is correct? He doesn't have got a car or He doesn't have a car

texts:
I was doing a test on an English site and I found this question:

 A He don't have a car.
 B He doesn't have got a car.
 C He haven't got a car.
 D He doesn't have a car.

The correct answer was ( D ) but I want to know why the answer ( B ) is wrong
and if I'm wrong can anyone tell me or explain it to me.


texts: Besides "flood plain", is there also something similar called "flood plane"?

texts:
Having stumbled upon the term flood plane (meaning the area along a river that is flooded occasionally), I searched for it and the correct spelling seems to be flood plain. Now, some uncertainty remains with me. It is caused by one answer (source) that holds flood plane is geographically correct but in normal use its flood plain.

Is that correct?


texts:
Can I use the verb anonymize ? (related to anonym)
Is it standard English or the kind of word only non-native English would say?

regards
Julien


texts: Word or expression for "someone using fake kindness to hide something or his true nature"

texts:
It's someone who tends to be a nice person but hides something or there is something off about him. Sometimes, you meet this kind of people and you know that his/her kindness hides a darker side.
I thought about sly or shady but they seem a bit too much, however I might be wrong. Is deceitful the correct term or is there a more specific one?

Example :
"I don't like the new boss, his kindness hides something"
" I don't like the new boss, he is _____"


texts:
training for all users across..
training of all users across..

Are these interchangeable and grammatically correct?


texts:
If I said

  I silenced him during our online conversation

or

  I muted the television

what would I use to indicate the reverse event occurred? I've seen unmute used in various contexts, but it's not a real word.


texts:
Horse manure, cow dung, bear scat, chicken droppings...  Many animals have special words for their poo.  I can't remember one for pigs though, even though they're a pretty significant species for us.

Is it just 'pig manure'?


texts: Is there a more politically correct/respectful word for maniac/unhinged I can use on a university application?

texts:
I want to say something about how "Drama was an outlet for my unhinged energy" but I dont like the word unhinged because its not exactly the most respectful?
Some other words that describe the energy that i want are "unhinged, maniac, crackhead" but none of those would fit very well and are rather insensitive.
I'm trying to write a university application about about how performing arts has given me an outlet for my very high energy personality and a place where I can direct my high enthusiasm. I want to convey that I have all this pent up energy often and drama allowed me to direct it in a healthy and meaningful way.
Any help is appreciated, Thanks!


texts: Throughout my life I have thought that the correct expression is to take revenge; however, I have also heard people saying I'll revenge. Which is correct?


texts: Using dashes vs. commas in business communications

texts:
Having settled into a new job in communications, I am faced with the issue of em dashes. Since I am quite partial to commas but my boss is more partial to em dashes, I can't help but wonder whether her usage isn’t incorrect.

I’ve done a bit of research on this, and I have found it’s most commonly used in emphasizing a thought. It can also be used to offset lists or at the end of an independent clause.

However, if I receive a sentence like this:

  Dean London —a business unit of Centrell— have been supplying permeable products to Caramba Unit —a supplier of biological products — since 2009.

I would say that this usage is incorrect, and I would edit it to use commas because this is additional information  that isn’t a separate thought needing emphasizing.

Another example:

  This initiative —led by Dr. Reiv Nadar and integrated into Dean's research and design unit— intends to gather post-harvest disease control information.

Is the usage of em dashes in this instance correct, or would it be better to use commas?

Not sure whether the problem is actually just that I am confused about the correct usage of em dashes, but I figured you guys could help clarify those.


texts: Comma Placement When Using The Word "Though"

texts:
Should there be a comma before the word "though?"

Example:

I am currently working with a content writer though it would be good to find more options.


texts: what can we call someone who gives false promise to someone repeatedly but intentionally break the promise?

texts: someone promised me to help solve my problem but he did not help me. he promised me again but still intentionally make excuses. or someone borrowed money from me and gave me many dates to repay but intentionally he gave me so many excuses every time. is there any idioms or phrases to explain their intentional dodgy behaviour?


texts: A name for a place where items are waiting to be processed

texts:
I am looking for a name that describes an area or place whose purpose is to store "items" that are waiting to be processed by some external entity. Kind of like a shopping cart whose purpose is to store items that will be paid for, but without the connotation of being related to "money".

EDIT: by "processed", I mean "subjected to the same set of actions", i.e. boxes that are waiting to be painted red, parts that are waiting to be assembled, ... Also, I refer to inanimate objects, not persons or living things.


texts: Is "orientate" a word? Does it matter where you are when using it?

texts:
Is orientate a word and if so how is it different than orient? I found this definition of it says "Generally considered an error in American English." does this mean it is not wrong for British English?

I'm not sure if there's a right or wrong answer to this, but is it incorrect to use British English in North America? For example is it flat out poor English if a British man was giving a speech and referred to the "boot of the car" or is somehow more right since he is British?


texts: What does “I can just about stand learning something” mean?

texts:
I came across the phrase, “I can just about stand learning the filthy lingo it’s written in,” in the following sentence in the article titled “The Dragon’s Egg – High fantasy for young adults” appearing in The New Yorker  magazine’s December 5 issue.

  “Incoherent and often inaudible” was Kingsley Amis’s verdict on his teacher (Oxford Professor, John Ronald Reuel Tolkien). Tolkien, he reported, would write long lists of words on the blackboard, obscuring them with his body as he droned on, then would absent-mindedly erase them without turning around. “I can just about stand learning the filthy lingo it’s written in,” Philip Larkin, another Tolkien student, complained about the old man’s lectures on “Beowulf.”

I don’t understand what “I can just about stand learning the filthy lingo it’s written in,” mean.

Is “can (be able to) about stand + gerund” a popular idiom or set phrase?


texts: What are natural ways to express 'contra-positively' in writing?

texts:
I often see 'conversely' being used when the meaning is to express the 'contra-positive'.
I know that the contra-positive of a statement is logically equivalent to the statement, but they're still different formulations in natural language.
Question(s): In general, is there a more natural sounding word to use instead of 'contra-positively' in (informal but possibly academic) written English? If not technically, then what could be a good alternative?
(Just as a made up example:
If I am standing up, then I am awake. Contra-positively, If I am not awake, then I am not standing up.
'Conversely' would sound natural but feels wrong since it has such an otherwise specific meaning (in logic). Perhaps it is used more loosely in natural English, and I am being overly cautious.
None of the often proposed synonyms of different thesaurus searches feels natural to put instead, e.g. 'contrary' or 'oppositely'.)
Edits: The comments about my initial example being bad are all fair, which is why I (after several edits) instead chose to reformulate the question completely. (It was really more what got me thinking than a good example anyway.) I hope it is a bit more clear now. Also, I think the answers already provided are sufficient.


texts:
I was doing some online tests that are supposed to be useful for the  TOEFL and I was confused (although I gave a correct answer) with the following multiple-choice question:

The meteorologists say we're likely to have a _____ winter.

Given answers are: calm, soft, mild, smooth.

The right answer was MILD but however long I searched the web and dictionaries, I couldn't find the difference between soft and mild speaking of weather. I saw both soft weather and mild weather as well as winter in particular.

Question:

Weather-wise, what is the difference between soft and mild?


texts: What is the English equivalent of 干物女 (dried fish woman)?

texts:
Literally meaning dried fish woman, the popular slang 干物女 is used to call a woman in her twenties or older who, as nicely summarized in Wikipedia, has many of the following traits:

メールの返事が極端に遅い、短い (Her text replies are very slow and short.)
簡単な食事なら台所で立って食べる (If it is something simple, she will eat it standing in her kitchen.)
忘れ物を靴を履いたまま、膝立ちで部屋に上がり取りに行く (She will go to take forgotten stuff in her flat on her knees keeping the outdoor shoes in the air rather than put them off.)
休日はノーメイクでノーブラ (She won't put on her makeup and bra on nonworking days.)
半年ほど美容室に行っていない (She won't visit a beauty salon for half a year.)
冬場は毛の処理を怠る、又はしない (In winter she won't shave or wax her body hair properly or at all.)
1人で居酒屋に入れる (She has no problem going to a pub alone.)
最近ドキドキしていない (She rarely gets so excited that she experiences an increased heartbeat.)

What is the English equivalent? In other words, how are such women commonly or idiomatically called in English?

UPDATE: Following a valuable comment below, I would like to explain the common pattern. These traits come together for a reason. There is a psychological root cause. It is a permanent psychological state of mind that manifests itself in many forms such as those described above. Psychology is not a rational thing, so it is hard to describe that state of mind in well-defined rational terms. But look at the literal meaning. It is a dried fish, not a lively fish. It is like psychologically giving up in the most global sense. A dried fish woman finds many things to be 面倒臭い  (bothersome, tiresome) and, as a result, does not do them. I think that inside her brain, a dried fish woman gets decreased positive rewards for doing good things and/or increased negative feelings from having to make efforts. Such a shift results in a dried fish woman electing not to do many things many other women do, as described above. A dried fish woman does not make efforts to find a significant other. It is not a conscious decision to never marry, but rather that she lacks a motivation to make efforts or finds relationships to be bothersome. As a dried fish is devoid of moisture, a dried fish woman is devoid of energy, motivation, feeling of love, etc. "Lazy" is a somewhat close term, but is too generic. The term "dried fish woman" is about a certain way of life described above and caused by a specific state of mind as explained above.


texts: put forward in explanation or put forward to explain

texts:
A hypothesis is a supposition put forward in explanation of observed facts.

Is this sentence wrong??and if it is then why?

In a grammar book the right form of this sentence is given by this way - "A hypothesis is a supposition put forward to explain observed facts." or "A hypothesis is a supposition put forward as an explanation of observed facts."


texts:
Can "distort" be used as a reflexive verb?

for example, can I say:
"However, due to the high interphasial length of the substrate, the shape of the phase separation has distorted"

or must I say:
"However, due to the high interphasial length of the substrate, the shape of the phase separation has become distorted"

or:
"However, due to the high interphasial length of the substrate, the shape of the phase separation has been distorted"


texts:
The farmyard was deserted. Dieter had gone down the lane with Rupert
  and Nialla to the river, and by now they had probably already made
  camp. If I was lucky, I might be just in time for a cup of tea. I felt
  as if I’d been up all night.

  What was the time, anyway?

  God blind me with a fish fork! Aunt Felicity’s train was due to arrive
  at five past ten and I’d completely forgotten about her! Father would
  have my guts for garters.

  Out of the village I went like the wind, southwestwards towards Buckshaw, until I came at last to the Mulford Gates, where
  Clarence Mundy sat waiting, perched on one of the wings of his
  taxicab, dragging thirstily at a cigarette. By the snowfall of butts
  on the road, I could tell that it was not his first.

  “Hullo, Clarence,” I said. “How’s the time?”

  “Ten hundred hours,” he said, glancing at this elaborate military
  wristwatch. “Better climb aboard.”

  (from ‘The Weed that Strings the Hangman’s Bag’)

Judging from the words, Ten hundred hours, I can guess ‘How’s the time’ may have the same meaning as ‘What is the time.’ Do the two sentences really have the same meaning?


texts: What does the exact phrase "on part with" mean?

texts:
I encountered that phrase in the following context.  The first numbered item in an unofficial translation of the "Casablanca Protocol"of 1965 says:
"(1) Whilst retaining their Palestinian nationality, Palestinians currently residing in the land of ___________ have the right of employment on part with its citizens."

Was that supposed to say "on par with"?

Although it is an unofficial translation, it appears at a United Nations website:
https://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/E373EB5C166347AE85256E36006948BA

If United Nations webpages aren't maintained by people who can figure out what is an error to be corrected, and what is correct and should stand unchanged with an explanation added in commentary, then questions like this will continue to arise.

Perhaps I am reading too carefully?  Is there a general idea that includes both "on par with" and "on part with"?

Perhaps topics involving Palestinians are thought to be light entertainment to fill up time in television news coverage, and not worth looking at carefully?


texts: Difference between "mind on your body" and "body on my mind"

texts:
What's the difference between

  Got my mind on your body

and

  Got your body on my mind

This is in the new song Cool for the Summer by Demi Lovato.


texts:
Three questions:

What is the origin of the English idiom, "spread oneself too thin?"
Is this used as frequently in the U.K. as it is in the U.S.?
What about Australia and New Zealand: Is it as common in the two beautiful countries down under as it is in the U.S.?


texts: What part of speech is "that" in this phrase?

texts: I know that "that" can function as many different parts of speech, so what part of speech is it in the phrase "the stuff that dreams are made of"?


texts: Is the sentence “The table is included for completeness” correct?

texts:
I've used the sentence “The table is included for completeness” several times in university reports and have seen it in reports of other students as well.
I am wondering if this sentence is correct though, as I can only find very little occurrences of this sentence in Google (Books).

Are there any other, more elegant alternatives to express that I include something (a table, an appendix, an image from a different angle, etc...) that clarifies the content, but the addition is not necessary ( without it the content is understandable).


texts:
Are they interchangeable? For example, in a situation like this? If not, how do they meaning differ?

  Back to the hotel, we changed into our swimming suits and sat
  in the pools with the wine coolers we found in the fridge.

  Back in the hotel, we changed into our swimming suits and sat
  in the pools with the wine coolers we found in the fridge.


texts: What is a good word to describe 'exceptional positive' research work?

texts:
In a sentence, when talking about future, for a person with huge potential.

  X has the potential for some ? research in Y field.

I was thinking

game changing
revolutionary

but both of these do not convey the right meaning.

Is there some other word that will serve the purpose here?


texts:
On John Calvin's Sermons on Deuteronomy, he says:

  "Not that god bringeth in any newe thing here: but for that he blameth the people for their foresaid lewdness, shewing that his doctrine had ben ill observed, like as when children do not profit wel at schole, but play the grosse Asses, when they have spent a whole yeare and are never the further forewarde, they must bee faine to returne againe to their Apcie."

I have found "apci" in another version, but I could not find the definition online. What does "apcie" mean?


texts:
Would you capitalize the job title in the following sentence?

  I am writing this letter in regard to Joe Brown who is applying for the director of teaching and learning position in the XYZ School District.


texts:
Does the following sentence make sense?

  Microsoft competed in programming languages by making products of which programming languages are complementary, incompatible.

The idea I am trying to convey is:

Programming languages are a complement of operating systems
Microsoft wants to create their own programming language
Microsoft made their operating systems incompatible with other programming languages

I am unsure about the ", incompatible" part of the sentence - it seems a little off.


texts:
I'm preparing an application where people can proofread other people's texts, but they can also review other's audios as well. Review could be a good word to use, but I'm already using this to... well, review, visual contents.

This kind of reviews are always cross checks, I mean, you'd never have to validate your own contents, but you do accept/reject other people's ones.

So, the question is:

Is there a direct equivalent of proofread, but focused on audios?


texts: Question about prepositions/conjunctions (from, to...)

texts:
Can you please tell which (if any) of the following is correct?

  Where are you coming from?/From where are you coming?
  Who will you give it to?/To whom will you give it?
  What for?/For what?


texts:
I am trying to find a more succinct way of saying the phrase, "easy to work with".  "Easy going" just sounds too lazy.

Added from comments:

"Team player" is cliché, however "flexible" is nice. I am in broadcasting, so it is a "hurry up and wait" kind of life. Or they may say, "I want it now, in a little while". One must stay positive when you rush to do something, and still have other things to take care of. Hence, "easy to work with" means you must keep cool and watch your mouth!


texts:
In an answer on ELL it reads:

  Here - and this is a reach - but it could technically be understood to mean that my mother thinks this girl is the prettiest I can find, though there are prettier ones out there in general.

In that context it sounds to me like this statement makes some reservation, for that reason I believe the meaning is "far-fetched" as in "The whole story sounds very far-fetched."; in other words, that it's unlikely to be understood in this way. And though, the opposite meaning might be equally likely.

However, trying to confirm one or the other by searching the Internet, especially dictionaries (Oxford Dictionaries, Merriam-Webster), I can't find anything which gives me a clue.

Reach undoubtedly means the distance over which something or someone is – well – reachable but then I actually expect a saying (with the meaning that I suspect) to be like "This is out of reach" or for the opposite "This is within reach"; but in any case I wouldn't go with "a reach".

So, what is "a reach"? Is it something I can achieve because it's still within reach, or is it something I won't achieve because it's beyond reach?


texts: Is there an adjective for someone who can withstand ridicule?

texts:
I've been searching both my mind and several thesauruses attempting to find the adjective that best describes this type of person.

The term "thick-skinned" is the closest to what I am trying to convey, but that carries the connotation that he/she is callous and does not care about others.

Is there a word that describes someone who is not easily offended -- able to withstand criticism, ridicule, or jokes made at his/her expense -- without also implying that the person is emotionally callous?


texts: Ricky Gervais used an odd word like benign but about being complacent in a group discussion

texts: I can't exactly remember where it was from, it was during an interview or perhaps an episode of the Ricky Gervais Show, where he was talking about how not speaking what's on your mind or being complacent all the time in a group discussion leads to your original point or idea becoming blunted or watered down by the averaging of the group.. does anyone know what's that word I'm trying to recall? thanks


texts:
This is something that confuses me from time to time:

They didn't have any real money so they acted as though they had.
They didn't have any real money so they pretended like they had.

Do these two sentences mean the same thing?


texts: Freebie means free things. Why is there a post-fix -bie? Does it have meaning itself?


texts:
I have studied English extensively, yet I haven't seen various forms of the subjunctive ever, for example the third person singular and the negative form. They sound so wrong in my ears. Are they (the two forms of the subjunctive mentioned above) even used that often, or is it just me? Examples are:

It is necessary that he see a doctor (contrasted with the indicative he sees).
I recommend that they not enter the competition

The only ones that make sense to me are these three forms:

I suggest that he be removed
If he were rich....
If I were rich...

For anyone who is wondering, here is a description of the subjunctive-mood, given in Wikipedia:

"The subjunctive in English is used to form sentences that do not describe known objective facts. These include statements about one's state of mind, such as opinion, belief, purpose, intention, or desire"

[Though it must be added for balance that different grammarians use the term 'subjunctive' (as metalanguage in English) in conflicting ways, some grammarians rejecting the term as inapplicable when analysing English.]


texts: One word to denote "A noun that conveys wrong meaning" or misleads

texts:
Suppose I'm building a website and I want to have a page to help the user know about the website: the apt title would be Help,  but I've named it About.
(Normally About pages tell us about the author / company /reason for the existence of that website, but I've used the term Contact here.)

What is the term for this? (I once came across the word, googled, and found the meaning. But I have now forgotten the word.)


texts: I was writing a poem in which I used 'sinned have I' in a declarative sentence. Do I have to use 'sinned I have' instead?


texts: Why are so many terms nautical in origin?

texts:
I have joked that whenever I don't know the etymology of a word, I reply "of indeterminate nautical origin" (that's right - it's party 24/7 at my crib).

What is it about the nautical tradition in the 18th century that seems to have spawned a wildly out-sized portion of our vocabulary? It's not as if there weren't other highly specialized professions with their own jargon.


texts: How to use noun + verb + (adj. denoting "other") + adj. + pl. noun?

texts:
Is it possible to say Noun + verb + (adj. denoting "other") + adj. + pl. noun without applying the adjective to the first noun? e.g.

The Tyrannosaurus rex ate the other nice dinosaurs.

This implies that the T. rex is also nice. Is there a way to do this without suggesting that? My guess would be something like:

The Tyrannosaurus rex ate the other, nice dinosaurs.

Inserting a comma. Is this correct, and if not, is there a way to do this?


texts: Is there an adjective for 'speechless-making'?

texts: I wanted to write about intense fear, something like abject terror, but implying that it strikes you dumb with fear. Am I missing something obvious, or should I just settle for changing the wording to avoid the problem?


texts: What's the difference between: people in England, people of England and English people?

texts:
People in England clean glass with newspaper.
People of England clean glass with newspaper.
English people clean glass with newspaper.

I would like to know which one sounds most natural. I would also like to know the usage of "people of England."


texts: Can we use "Person's name, When he verb to ..."

texts:
Can we say for example "Oussama, when he wants to do something he does it" rather than "When Oussama wants to do something he does it"?

What is the correct sentence grammatically, because someone said that the first sentence is bad expression to use because we mentioned the person's name alone without any verb?


texts:
I'm new to this but I have a question, when someone only tells you part of the truth for example a conversation:

  Me: hey I bought a new car

Saying I bought a new car, but hiding the fact that its second hand. I remember someone telling me this and that the media does it. Is this shadowing or something?


texts:
I can't distinguish the usage of these two words: pervasive and prevalent. Almost all dictionaries define these words' meaning as spreading throughout [a medium].

One forum I have come across states: (https://www.englishforums.com/English/PrevalentVsPervasive/bdnxdv/post.htm)

  Prevalent has to do with expanse of effect and pervasive has to do with depth of effect.

Another forum claims: (http://ask.fm/The_YUNiversity/answer/120917623170)

  Prevalent carries the additional meaning of being superior to something else (as shown by the associated verb prevail).

  Pervasive generally has a negative connotation and is often used to describe unwelcome things.

These two explanations do not concur at all, though that need not make either wrong. But could someone please indicate the true facts of the matter?


texts: Designed in an insidious, manipulative way

texts:
What is an adjective that is like "bespoke" in that it means purposefully designed (custom-made), but has more negative connotations; it is something cleverly designed to be tricksy, manipulative, controlling etc.

The adjective would likely describe obtuse contracts really well

  Mr Salamander used _______ contracts to bind his unwitting tenants to unfortunate fates

Or maybe to describe a dystopian political body censoring works

  The party's _______ guidelines pretty much eliminated all freedom of expression

I am thinking of words like "insidious", but that doesn't fit because it doesn't have any "intentionally-designed towards a purpose" meaning.


texts: "Kebabs, fruit machines, and brasses" -- what do these slang words mean?

texts:
More from the British movie The Football Factory.  In the following dialogue, the main character, a Cockney English speaker played by actor Danny Dyer, waxes philosophical about why he enjoys being a football hooligan and would rather do nothing else on a weekend:

  What else are you gonna do on a Saturday? Sit in your fuckin' armchair wankin' off to Pop Idols? Then try and avoid your wife's gaze as you struggle to come to terms with your sexless marriage? Then go and spunk your wages on kebabs, fruit machines and brasses? Fuck that for a laugh! I know what I'd rather do.  Tottenham away — love it!

I'm guessing this is slang of some sort, and I'd love to understand what he means by each word.


texts:
Following from this question: Which is correct, Credential or Credentials?

the PO was asking if he can use credential in the singular form, answers indicated that the common way to address it is credentials (even though it's for one person)

How can I address the credentials in the sense of multiple users' credentials?


texts: Comparing different (but related) qualities in English

texts:
I was recently trying to express a sentiment like the following.

New York is bluer than South Carolina is red.

(For those not familiar with U.S. political jargon, blue = Democratic and red = Republican.)
Although the above phrase is grammatical, it struck me as at least slightly awkward. I can think of numerous variations of this kind of sentence:

Joe is more courageous than Harry is foolish.
Janet caught more fish than I did crabs.

While these phrases can easily be reworked into a longer or different form, e.g. "Janet's fish outnumbered my crabs", I would like to know if there is a more fluent way of expressing this kind of comparison that preserves (more or less) the same structure.


texts: Is an indefinite article necessary in this context: "A group of [...] (a) group which [...]"?

texts:
Exact context is:
"... a number of people had been demanding [...], (a) group which became more vocal as [...]"
Alternatively:
"... a group of people had been demanding [...], (a) group which became more vocal as [...]"
Personally I believe omitting the indefinite article makes the sentence flow better, but a friend has suggested it is incorrect. Are there any rules on the inclusion of articles in this context?
Thank you.


texts:
I encountered an article on Dictionary.com that says that pennies are not used to refer to a sum of money but rather the coins themselves. It went on to say that the term pence was used to refer to a sum of money. I was rather dubious about this statement, partially because I never heard anybody say pence in my stay in the US.

Can anybody back up this fact? I  tried to google this, and the only source of information I got (other then UK currencies) that supported this was Wikipedia.


texts: Does the phrase "out of one's mind" mean beyond one's average level in this sentence?

texts:
A sentence I read this morning,

  The reason the running back got his new monster contract in the first place is that he was performing out of his mind – and was bound, therefore, to fall back to earth a bit. So the team made the same mistake that a lot of stock-market investors make: they bought high.

If so, how frequently do people use this phrase for such a meaning?
Thanks.


texts:
It will be almost a month since you wrote to me and you have possibly
forgotten your state of mind (I doubt it though). You seem the same as
always, and being you, hate every minute of it. Don’t! Learn to say
“Fuck You” to the world once in a while. You have every right to. Just
stop thinking, worrying, looking over your shoulder, wondering,
doubting, fearing, hurting, hoping for some easy way out, struggling,
grasping, confusing, itching, scratching, mumbling, bumbling,
grumbling, humbling, stumbling, numbling, rambling, gambling,
tumbling, scumbling, scrambling, hitching, hatching, bitching,
moaning, groaning, honing, boning, horse-shitting, hair-splitting,
nit-picking, piss-trickling, nose sticking, ass-gouging,
eyeball-poking, finger-pointing, alleyway-sneaking, long waiting,
small stepping, evil-eyeing, back-scratching, searching, perching,
besmirching, grinding, grinding, grinding away at yourself. Stop it
and just

This is from the first part of Sol LeWitt's letter to Eva Hesse.
I couldn't find the meaning of numbling in any dictionaries. Is it a kind of wordplay? If so, what does it mean?


texts: When making a decision, how many "choices" are there?

texts:
Suppose I put a coin on a table.  I can do this in two ways: heads up or heads down.

  Question: How many choices do I make?

It looks like I have one choice in the sense of having one decision.  But, at the same time, I have two options (which is a synonym for "choice"; ref. Wiktionary, Thesaurus.com), so we could also say that I have two choices too.

This grammatical situation arises frequently in combinatorial mathematics; some random examples are

  When you have n things to choose from ... you have n choices each time! -- MathsIsFun.com

and

  You can count the number of permutations of a set of n elements in the following way: there are n choices for the first item, then (n-1) choices for the second item, and after choosing those two, (n-2) choices for the third item, and so on.  -- Albyn Jones

In both of these cases, there is a single decision to be made at each step, but there are (in general) multiple options.


texts:
I have to classify users, like Expired users and users who are not expired.

Shall I use the term Non-Expired to indicate that a user is still valid and has a long enough validity period?

  Is there a term like non-expired?

Any suggestion would be helpful!


texts:
The dictionary describes "one-off" as:

  done, made, or happening only once and not repeated.

I am using this word in the the following context:

  Two types of solutions are gathered to improve the website:

  One-off improvements that can be implemented while developing a new version of the website.
  Content guidelines that help users to write higher quality content. These guidelines make it possible to raise the quality standard in the long term.

I am not a native speaker, but "one-off" looks a bit.. off to me in this context. Am I wrong and is this correct, or should I replace it with a different word?


texts: In the comments section of this question the subject derailed slightly: is the word upskirting dependent on today's technology or is it older?


texts:
I recently got into discussion with someone about the definition of these words:

Nationalist
Nationalism

From the onset I used the Oxford Dictionary as my go-to for saying 'I am a Nationalist, in that I advocate political independence for a country'.
However the other person seemed to have a different idea of what a Nationalist was. This got us looking at Nationalism's definition and so on.
So now I have a range of questions ...
Oxford Dictionary shows the definition for Nationalist like so:

  A person who advocates political independence for a country.

  1.1 A person with strong patriotic feelings, especially one who believes in the superiority of their country over others.

The problem here is that by the definition on the first line (Is this the "Primary" definition? Is there such a thing as a "Primary", "Secondary" etc .. definition?), I would call myself a Nationalist, but by the definition at 1.1 I would not. Reason being that while I might think of myself as being patriotic I would not use a term like 'strongly' as I find it too subjective, and then the 'superiority of their country over others' part is not clear to me - is this saying 'superiority of their country over all others' or 'over any others' (I assumed the latter)?

And then if I look at the definition of Nationalism it gets me confused again.

  Patriotic feeling, principles, or efforts.

  1.1 An extreme form of patriotism marked by a feeling of superiority over other countries.
  1.2 Advocacy of political independence for a particular country.

Here the "primary" definition of Nationalist has been placed at position 1.2 for Nationalism, while the 1.1 definition of Nationalist has retained it's place in the definition of Nationalism.

So can I call myself a Nationalist if
a) I 'advocate political independence for a country', but
b) my sense of patriotism is not 'marked by a feeling of superiority over other countries'?


texts: Why does "there's" work as a contraction for plural items?

texts:
While writing recently, I came across a situation where a character said:

  There's a lot of chandeliers in here.

When editing, I realized that I wanted to have the sentence sound more formal, and chose to remove the contraction to do so, which is when I realized that it would become:

  There are a lot of chandeliers here.

This puzzled me, and puzzles me still. There's is presumably a contraction of "there" and "is", which is, of course, grammatically incorrect when describing a plural. But why is this okay in the contraction?


texts: The nature of an action that leaves something as it was before

texts:
E.g. entering the kitchen, preparing food, and leaving a mess; or entering the kitchen, preparing food, and leaving everything as it was before.

How do you call this concept? "I take some actions, but after I am done, everything is the same". This also applies that you can repeat the exact same action.

EDIT:
I feel this concept in my current living situation. For the week I live in an Airbnb apartment in a different city, and when I come home on the weekend, I could get a dismissal any day and I would not have to "clean up after myself", as opposed when I had a rented flat in the city.


texts:
Is uppercase a valid verb?
Could I say for example "you should use your password uppercased"?


texts: word meaning doing things arbitrarily without control at all

texts:
I am writing about rebuilding my sleep schedule and looking for a word meaning doing things arbitrarily with no control whatsoever.

  I started __________, putting off sleep and waking up whenever I felt
  like, except for mornings that I had work.

Is indulging or overindulging appropriate? What word would you use?


texts: Why do robots use the word "affirmative" to agree?

texts:
In the Terminator 2 movie, the human character asks the terminator not to use the word affirmative.

  John Connor: No, no, no, no. You gotta listen to the way people talk. You don't say "affirmative" or some shit like that.

Again, the robot in the movie Chappie (2015) also uses this word.

Why do so many robots use the word "affirmative" to agree with a statement?


texts: What is the English term for those who cannot part with their smartphones anywhere or at any time?

texts:
Until a decade ago, people were chatting, reading books or napping in commuter trains and public buses. Today, almost everybody sitting beside you and in the opposite row of seats is holding a smartphone at nose level and absorbed in games, surfing websites, and tweeting in the train and bus. They are looking at their smartphones on the platform while waiting for their train to arrive. I occasionally bump into a pedestrian who is looking at their smartphone while walking on the street. This didn't happen with mobile phones. I don’t know whether it’s a social phenomenon unique to Japan or common to anywhere in the world. But to me, as someone who is in his eighties, it seems weird.

A Japanese TV programme described the ubiquitous phenomenon of those who cannot part with their smartphones anywhere or at any time “Internet dependence”.

What is the common English word to describe those who are heavily (or morbidly) dependent on their smartphones? Are they “Internet dependent,” as the TV calls them, “smartphone addicts,” or simply today’s normal smartphone users?

PS: There was an interesting article in connection with this question in the latest (November 26) New Yorker magazine under the title, “Is Internet Addiction a Real Thing? http://www.newyorker.com/science/maria-konnikova/internet-addiction-real-thing

I think “smartphone addict” is an archetype of "Internet addiction.”


texts:
If Bob Smith says, "Kevin is . . .", and I only hear "Kevin is", did I ignore the ". . ."? According to the dictionary, my not hearing this part is not ignoring it, if a loud noise prevented me from hearing it. According to the dictionary, it would only consider my having ignored it if I actively rejected the words in the ellipses. Personally, I would use the word in every case, but maybe that is just me.

I would define ignore as every single word I did not hear, and it would not matter why I did not hear it. If I treat ignore this way, will I confuse the listener?


texts: Does "Smugness" imply "Having or showing low opinions of others"?

texts:
I have a little confusion whether "smugness" implies a "low opinion of others" in contrast to a "high opinion of oneself"
I have consulted ODO and wiktionary; they showed the meaning of "Smugness" is

Smugness(noun)[ODO]:  having or showing an excessive pride in oneself or one's achievements
Smugness(noun)(wiktionary): Irritatingly pleased with oneself; self-satisfied.

However please look at the following excerpt from the novel "2 States- The story of my marriage" from "Chetan Bhagat".

Krish is narrator. He is having chat with his college mate Ananya.
'So where did you stay hostel before?', She said. 'And please don't say IIT, you are doing pretty well so far.'
'What's wrong with IIT?'
'Nothing, are you from there?,' She sipped water.
'Yes, from IIT Delhi. Is that problem?'
'No,' she smiled, 'not yet.'
'Excuse me?' I said. Her smugness had reached irritating levels.

If we observe the context above, seemingly Ananya has a "low opinion" of IITians "rather than a high opinion or self pride in herself". Even though the narrator uses the word "smugness" to describe that quality. So my perticular question is, is the usage valid? Can adjectives like this be used in contrasting situations also?


texts: How not to avoid using reference numbers as nouns in an academic article

texts:
I wrote a scientific article for a conference, and a reviewer criticized it as he said that in my manuscript “references are used as nouns”. I assume he was refering to instances of the following type, although he did not say so explicitly:

  According to [20]
  …is described in [17]
  …as highlighted in [7]

(The conference proceedings specifies this in-text numerical reference style.)

Is it really wrong to use reference numbers in this way? In any case, how can I satisfy him by rewriting these examples to avoid doing this?


texts: Word for the sound of a voice when the speaker is suppressing grief?

texts:
When someone is suppressing grief, we sometimes describe the subjective sensation as "a lump in the throat." Apparently this is may be due to conflicting urges to expand or contract the muscles of the glottis.

If a person is doing this, and they try to speak, there may be some audible modulation to the sound of their voice associated with this.

Imagine you're listening to their voice on the radio only. You could call it a "shake", "quiver", or "tension" in the voice.

Is there a better, more specific word for this sound?


texts: using past tense for the future - is it correct?

texts:
In the show Westworld, Anthony Hopkins uses this structure, as:

  As soon as Dr.Ford left the room, he would put an end to this nightmare.

now the question is, shouldn't the sentence be like:

  As soon as Dr.Ford leaves the room, he would put an end to this nightmare. or:

  As soon as Dr.Ford has left the room, he would put an end to this nightmare. (in order to emphasize the fact that the action is to be completed)?


texts: I will (have the package sent) vs (have sent the package) by next week

texts:
I'm aware that:

  I will have the package sent by next week

is correct. But what about:

  I will have sent the package by next week

Is it completely wrong to say it or is there some correctness in it?

I'm asking this question because I was writng an email and I first wrote:

  By next week I will have discussed the projcet with the professor and would be able to answer your questions then.

Then I changed it to:

  By next week I will have the project discussed with the professor and would be able to answer your question then.

Is the first one (I will have discussed the project) absolutely wrong? And is there a way to rewrite it so that discussed still appears before the project when using have (to emphasize the discussing action)?


texts:
A while back I was talking about it with friends.

Another question indicates a few meanings of the "meta-" prefix. Considering that "meta" means, in simple words, "about itself" (like how metadata is data about data), what would be the appropriate prefix to mean the opposite relationship?

It seemed to us that "meta" raised a concept to a new level, and we were wondering what prefix would, conversely, lower a concept to another level. Is there another prefix I could use to cancel out the "meta" in "metadata" to get back to "data"?


texts:
I don't fully understand the relationship between the following conversations. Suppose, two men are fighting, and there are three commentators. At this point man 2 intends to attack man 1.

Commentator 1: someone strikes, "Wait! Man 1"
Commentator 2: "He may have suckered him there."
Commentator 2: "blocked it." someone strikes again
Commentator 2:
Commentator 3: "woaw!"
Commantary3: "That's it! That's it!"

Then man 2 proceeds to destroy man 1
Suppose we are tracking the actions of the fighters through commentary alone. My questions are:

On commentator 2's statement "He may have suckered him there.", who is he? Who is him?
On commentary1's statement "blocked it.", Who did the blocking? Man1 or man2?


texts:
In a (software) business negotiation to provide a joint service with a partner, the potential partner would like to provide "back to back support" for the joint service.

What does back to back support in this context mean?


texts: What is a hypernym for the ascending and descending legs of a flight?

texts:
If an airline flight is everything that happens in between your starting and ending gates. What is the generic term for each time the plane ascends or descends during an air route? In layman terms, what terminology would define the four '_____?' equally as four separate things.

If the image below indicates the proper terminology for a flight. What is the hypernym for phase 3/4 and phase 6/7 of the air route?


texts: Is there a counterpart of "sufficient"/"enough" meaning "not more than the needed maximum"?

texts:
I understand the meaning of the word sufficient like defined in Merriam-Webster:

  sufficient = enough to meet the needs of a situation or a proposed end

So mathematically said:

  not less than the needed minimum

Is there an "upside-down counterpart"?

  not more than the needed maximum

It should be of the same style as sufficient or enough, expressing the same concept (being within limits and not being under the maximum).

Let's have an example of a chemical reaction. In order the reaction can start, you need at least 5% concentration of a given substance. So if the concentration is 6%, we say that the concentration is sufficient. (Also suggesting that no more concentration increasing is needed.)

However, what if the requirement is that in order the reaction can start, the concentration of the given substance should be at most 95%. So if we have 94%, the concentration is ...? Sufficient here sounds funny...

Analogically, it should also bear the notion of no more concentration decreasing is needed.

I am searching for a single word in the same common style as enough of sufficient, not for a mathematical expression.

N.B.: I do not mean the same as in the related question Can "sufficient" be used in a negative sense?


texts:
I am having a problem in understanding this sentence:
I can understand being deceived into thinking it's a joke.
Does it mean that the speaker is being deceived into thinking like that or he (the speaker) thinks that someone is being deceived into thinking like that. I mean does it mean:
◆ I can understand I am being deceived into thinking it's a joke.
Or
◆ I can understand someone is being deceived into thinking it's a joke.
Actually, I have read that the continuous(present,past,future) passive voice structure is like this: sub+helping verb+being+ past participle+preposition+object, but here, the (sub and helping verb) part is missing and I want to know the reason. Please explain it to me.
TIA


texts: What does "no love lost" mean and where does it come from?

texts:
I have trouble with the idiom "no love lost". I understand that it is used when people are at odds or don't get along, but I don't understand why. Interpreted literally it sounds like there should be plenty of love, but it seems to mean the opposite.

Where does this expression come from? And is there a different interpretation that better explains its meaning?


texts: Does the expression "Java bag" exist in American English?

texts:
Here is a question and an answer from a list of questions on Cuba:

  Q. What is a "java" bag?

  A. "Java" is the Cuban word for bag. Because of the shortage and high
  cost of personal hygiene articles, the State provides all employees in
  the public service sector with a free bag of toiletries every month.
  This bag usually contains deodorant, toothpaste, shampoo, razors, etc.

My questions here are the following: Does this expression exist in American English (perhaps as an idiom)? If yes, how and when is it used?


texts:
In proper English usage it's widely recognized to use 'an' in front of any noun which begins with a vowel. Ex. An apple instead of 'a' apple. The converse is true in regard to nouns beginning with a consonant. Ex. A banana versus 'an' banana.

However, my question revolves around nouns whose first letter 'sounds' like a vowel; but isn't. Ex. 'an' hour sounds considerably better than 'a' hour.

Thus, is there an established rule of English utilization saying a person must/should use an article such as 'a' in front of nouns which begin with consonants sounding like vowels?


texts: What's the difference between using "should" and "must" when making guesses?

texts:
I will clarify my question first by giving you some examples of the usage I am specifically asking about:

  The dish should be ready by now.
  You must be exhausted, come in.

Most online teaching materials distinguish the usage between should and must by level of certainty. Using must implies greater certainty. However, it seems to me other factors also come into play. For example, the following sentence is a bit unnatural to me (please let me know if you think otherwise).

  Tom isn't home yet. He should have been stuck in traffic.

It seems that when we use should, we are making guesses about a reasonable (often desirable) outcome if things've gone according to plan. Hence, I think it's okay to say:

  Tom isn't home yet, but he should have been back 2 hours ago.

My conclusion is we don't use should when we are making guesses that an undesirable event has happened. In other cases, both can be used and imply different levels of certainty.

  Ask Tom. He must know.
  Ask Tom. He should know.

Could you tell me what you think? Thank you very much.


texts: When do you close? vs Until what time are you open?

texts:
I have just came across this situation.
At I can't get rid of this question what should I say

when do you close
or
until what time are you open?

it might sound really silly question,
but when you asking in your way,
which one would you prefer and what makes it more comfortable to say?
and it might be more silly to ask, but I am kind of wondering "when do you close" sounds a bit direct.
of course asking about the closing time is not a matter of polite or not, but it seems sounds just quick and might give the rude sense?
thank you in advance!


texts: How to use the verb "overload" in a passive sentence

texts:
My sentence is "Do not overload the equipment" and I want to change it into "The equipment shouldn't be ..." form. How should the verb "overload" be used in this situation?

Is it "overloaded" or "loaded over"?


texts:
Open/switch on the air-conditioner when we are home.

Which is correct? Open or Switch on?


texts: Is there an idiom, proverb or a saying about someone who receives all benefits and good things while complaining about it?

texts:
For example: Someone who has a tree that gives him fruits, he doesn't take care of it or have to take care of that tree.
He eats all the fruits of that tree, and yet he dares to find or come up with something to complain about with regards to that tree (sort of blaming the tree).


texts: "Were someone someone, ... would ..." structure

texts:
I have been practicing my English reading skill for a while. I try to read news article from various sources. Lately, I found this article (link: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/10/stop-forcing-journalists-to-conceal-their-views-from-the-public/247571/) and I could not understand a specific sentence. That sentence is

  Were I an opportunist, I'd be salivating at the recent news from NPR, which is now on record with the precedent that it is unacceptable for the host of an opera show to participate in Occupy Wall Street.

I haven't seen this kind of structure before. It will be helpful if someone can explain me this sentence to give me better understanding.

Thank you very much!


texts: What does this Much Ado quote mean, "I can see a church by day light'?

texts:
I was reading through Act 2 Scene 1 of Much Ado About Nothing and I found this rather difficult to interpret because I am stuck between two meanings.

LEONATO: Cousin, you apprehend passing shrewdly.
BEATRICE: I have a good eye, uncle; I can see a church by daylight.

I assumed that Leonato was being sarcastic and complimenting Beatrice for the way she talked about death, etc and in response, Beatrice was agreeing with him by saying she was has a good eye (she can view things well). However, Leonato could instead be calling her remarks as blasphemy and Beatrice responds by saying she is only joking and that she can see a church as well as anyone.
So I'm just wondering which one is more accurate or is there another way to interpret this text?


texts: What's a word for "makes you feel like you're floating in the air"

texts:
I want to describe an orchestra performance that made me feel like I lifted up from the ground and floated in the air because it was so good. What's a good word for that?

I looked up float in a dictionary and found the following synonyms: drift, glide, hang, hover, poise, ride, sail, swim, waft, but none of them seem to really express what I felt.


texts: Can tag lines or headings for technical documents be a juxtaposition of words?

texts:
I thought of a small wiki heading Software Pricing and Pricing software with details covered in the body section.

Software Pricing means how to price software while Pricing Software means software used for pricing products (actually that's what I want it to mean).

Does both grammatically mean the same?
Does the mere juxtaposition of words is enough to make it implicitly understandable or I got to make it more clear?
What does this technique (just rearranging the words to convey different meaning) called?

I have similar questions about deer hunting and hunting deer, and many others.


texts: Is the use of "feel" followed by "would" incorrect in this sentence?

texts: I am talking about a feeling that could possibly arise in a hypothetical future situation, and if the feeling did arise, the person would express it. I phrased the sentence like this: "If you feel that way in the future, you would express/say it." Is my use of the word "would" after "feel" incorrect?


texts:
Totally confused on the need for an article in front of "oversight". Google gives examples of all the different variations. Would appreciate help choosing the right one from the following.

  A. Operated at a senior level to provide oversight of key aspects of
  project and programme delivery.

  B. Operated at a senior level to provide the oversight of key aspects
  of project and programme delivery.

  C. Operated at a senior level to provide an oversight of key aspects
  of project and programme delivery.


texts:
I cannot grasp the structure of this sentence.

  Natural selection will tend to maximize r for the environment in which the species lives, for any mutation or gene combination which increases the chance of genotypes possessing them contributing more individuals to the next generation (that is, of increasing r) will be selected over genotypes contributing fewer of their kind to successive generations. (Birch 1960, p. 10).

  (r is rate of increase.)

Is "for" after comma is in parallel with former "for" after "maximize r" or just a conjunction like "because" ?
What is the meaning of  "possessing them" here?
Why could "possessing" and "contributing" be appeared in succession ?
What (is the subject of) "will be selected over"?


texts: In AE, is it okay to drop "with" in grammatical constructions with "to supply", "to furnish", "to present", "to issue", and "to endow"?

texts:
In analogy with "to provide" and "to feed", which can be both constructed with and without "with" (at least in AE) -- [This application will provide you (with) all the information you need] and [The young mother feeds her baby (with) milk] -- is it also acceptable to do so -- as far as AE goes -- with such verbs as "supply", "furnish", "present", "issue", and "endow", just to mention the few ones that just came to mind?

You might want to consider the following sourced examples for this.

  And most important to supply them the means to do it.
  source>/

  Russia is supplying them the weapons of mass destruction.
  source>/

  We presented them a good case.
  source>/

  I presented them a pretty attractive investment profile. source>/

  They are plenty of Copperheads, who furnish them all the information they want.
  source>/

  I am, consequently, unable to furnish you the information desired.
  source>/

  Many an establishment to furnish you the necessary goods.
  source>/

  His acting career in 1984 which endowed him a tremendously rich experience of 29 years. source>/

  His life experiences have endowed him am incredibly work ethic. source>/

  Mr. Nasiatka said he told them he could issue them an infraction.
  source>/

  We calculate what the lodging would have cost and issue them a cash bonus.
  source>/


texts: She or her in a relative clause where she is both subject and possessor

texts:
If I have a relative clause where 'she' is the subject of the relative clause, but a possessor in the main clause, should I use 'of she' or 'of her'?

Let me give an example, would I have:

  The crown of she who is upstanding is gold.

Or:

  The crown of her who is upstanding is gold.

(Admittedly I wouldn't ordinarily write English like this, I would rephrase the sentence, but I'm trying to produce a literal translation.)


texts: I don't understand what is the use of "should" in this sentence:- "Strange that now in its old age this dark business should have cast its shadow upon the venerable walls!"


texts: Is there a synonym for "schadenfreude" that sounds more colloquial?

texts:
Is there a more colloquial synonym for "schadenfreude"? I'm specifically looking for a noun that denotes a pleasure derived from other people's misfortunes or sufferings. Sadly, I couldn't find any nouns derived from 'to gloat'.

What I have in mind is a plain English word derived from Middle English, Anglo-Norman, Old English, Dutch or Old French. It must be none of the following:

Informal contemporary term (e.g. "lulz")
Loan-word that sounds ostensibly alien (e.g. "schadenfreude", "epicaricacy")
An item of the professional jargon (e.g. some psychological condition)

I'm looking for something plain and simple like 'eviljoy'* (a word that I've just made up).

This word must fit the variable in the sentence "It is common for Jane to feel/experience x ". A word is deemed to fit x on the basis of 'common-sense' linguistic intuition in addition to being a singular noun + the above-stated conditions.

To elaborate on the intuition bit, 'sadism', for instance, is not applicable, neither is gloating. For, if we input the former, then we have "It is common for Jane to feel sadism'. This obviously doesn't sound right, and 'sadistic' would be appropriate, were I not looking for a noun. If the latter is used, then "It is common for Jane to feel gloating" also sounds pretty awkward.


texts: What does "there" refer to in the sentence?

texts:
I've read a sentence in a Burmese story.

  "The medico went to the nearest village and there in the bazaar he found various kinds of meat and fish"

I wanted to know whether "there" refers to "the nearest village" or "in the bazaar"


texts:
I am reading the grammar book "Practical English Usage" by Michael Swan. In the book it stated when we are not talking about 'unreal' situations, we use the same tenses with if as with other conjunctions.

  If you didn't study physics at school, you won't understand this book.

To the best of my knowledge, only type 3 can be used to talk about unreal situations. And in the quote above, it is probably type 1, which the tenses should be present tense and will + infinitive.

My question is: Why shouldn't I use would instead of will, given that would is the past form of will? I used to learn that the "result" part is in future tense. Is it that will a fixed formula which I have to use will regardless of the time I am referring to?

Thanks.


texts:
I'm looking for a name for my website which has the purpose of attracting people. I stumble across the word 'lure'. But I was wondering if the verb 'lure' has a negative connotation. Can any native speaker tell me this? And can you say 'lure at you'?

Many thanks!


texts: What is the origin of the phrase "forty winks," meaning a short nap?

texts: Inspired by the question How long is a 'wink'?, I did some work on the origin of the phrase forty winks. Though the OP at the wink question mentions the phrase, it does not ask about its origin. So I thought I'd ask the question here and post what I've found. I was able to find an antedating not mentioned by any of the usual phrase-dictionary suspects. The most accurate information I found elsewhere was from a post by Ken G in a discussion of the phrase at Wordwizard. Any other insights welcome.


texts: Is there a word for children under 10 years old?

texts: I am looking for the counterpart of the term "teenager" for those who are younger than 10 years old. A single word that means something like "elementary school student" is helpful as well.


texts: Word describing "State goes back to original state after state-modifying actions A followed by ~A"

texts:
This word is slipping my mind and it is driving me crazy.  Not sure if it is a math term or computer science term, but I use it a lot in development (when I can remember it!)

Basically, you have the system in some state S.  You perform action A on the state putting it in S'.  Now you apply the opposite action, ~A.  The system is now back to state S because this set of actions acting on this system are _____.


texts: When the adjective 'suited' is followed by a verb, should this verb be in the infinitive or in the -ing form?

texts:
Here are some example sentences from different dictionaries.

With her qualifications and experience, she would seem to be ideally suited to/for the job. (Cambridge online dictionary)
This was a job to which he seemed well suited. / He is not really suited for a teaching career. (Oxford Learners' Dictionary online)
Satellites are uniquely suited to provide this information. (Collins online dictionary)

Why not to providing?

He is not suited to teaching. (Le Robert et Collins, dictionnaire français-anglais, paper version)

Why not to teach?
When followed by a noun, noun phrase, or pronoun, the adjective suited must be followed by the preposition to or for, that much is clear.
But when it is followed by a verb?
Is it to be suited to do something (full infinitive, preposition to or for dropped, Collins's example sentence) or to be suited to/for doing something (gerund, preposition maintained, Le Robert et Collins's example sentence)?
Does the type of subject – person (he) or thing (satellites) – have an influence on the structure one should use, or not?
It is not obvious that the adjective/verb-followed-by-noun and the adjective/verb-followed-by-verb structures should match, as is NOT the case in

to be scared of something / to remind someone of something

versus

to be scared to do something / to remind someone to do something

but not

to remind someone of doing something *!

However, note that

to be scared of doing something

is possible, but with a change of meaning from intentional to accidental – I suppose – as in to be afraid to do something (to choose not to do something which is in your willpower, to avoid doing it – intentional, voluntary) versus to be afraid of doing something (to try to avoid something unpleasant happening to you – if it did happen, that would be accidental, involuntary).
These things are much more complicated than either the dictionaries or the grammar books make them out to be!
Unfortunately, many monolingual dictionaries not aimed at foreign learners do not give example sentences of adjectives/verbs followed by verbs because they do not even realize that choosing the form the verb should be in IS a difficulty!


texts:
Came across this sentence today"

  "I've never been derogatory towards taxi drivers," he said.

from the BBC's, Uber boss Travis Kalanick: I'm no bully.

Can one really be derogatory towards something?!

Sounds wrong to me.


texts: How do you say resolution value 1920px*1080px?

texts:
"The resolution of this screen is 1920px*1080px"

How do you say it?

For example:

"The resolution of this screen is nineteen hundred twenty pixels multiplied by one thousand eighty pixels."


texts: Why isn't "citizen" spelled as "citisen" in British English?

texts:
In British English vocabulary, most words with "z" are spelled with "s". For example, "capitalization" is "capitalisation", "industrialization" is "industrialisation".

But for some words, like "citizen", for example, it has a "z" instead of a "s". Why is this like this?


texts: What does it mean and makes different with "a" + number?

texts:
There is a film called "plasticized"(http://www.plasticizedthemovie.com/about-the-film/).
They got a sample(plastic) by trawling.

One guy asks a researcher
"It's the sea-state coming down, huh?"
And she answers
"Yeah, it was about a... it was pretty calm, it was about a two or a three today."
The guy reacts
"There's a nurdle."

What does it mean "a two or a three"?
and why with "a"?


texts:
I have a award, customers chose me as a best IT specialist.

Is it okay to call it in this way "Customer's best IT Specialist" or it would be better to name it as "Best IT Specialist chosen by customers" or something like that?

Thanks in advance.


texts:
Every time I read a new and unknown word containing the letter 'i' I wonder how I should pronounce it. What's very frustrating for me is that, when I look up the words, I find out that my gut feeling was wrong for most of them.

A Google search only gave a few links talking about the pronunciation of this letter, but most times they are at a very low level.

From what I found and read, finally I daresay that:

i is pronounce as /aɪ/ when i +  consonant + e as in: time, site, fire, to entire, ...
i is pronounce as /aɪ/ when i is followed by gh as in: sigh, sight, thigh, ...
i is pronounce as /aɪ/ when i is preceded by a as in: aisle, ...
i is pronounce as /aɪ/ when i is written as y: to try, to fly, to cry, ...
else i is pronounce as /ɪ/: to hit, ship, sick

But there are many exceptions, too many in my opinion:

to give, to notice, clandestine (/ɪ/ instead of /aɪ/)
to fail, to contain (/eɪ/ instead of /aɪ/)
gravity, paucity, hierarchy (/i/ instead of /aɪ/)
pie, title, vital, giant, modifier (/aɪ/ instead of /ɪ/)

The following words are very interesting, because the pronunciation is swapped to what I expected:

indecisive
library

My vocabulary is very rudimentary, but yet I know a lot of exceptions.

So, I know that it is hard to make pronunciation rules for English words. But how can I improve my gut feeling in pronouncing new words correctly?


texts: Word request: "proprietary currency" or "artificial money"

texts:
I'll give two examples of this.

First example:
I was just at a local festival and I was hungry. To get myself a burger, I couldn't buy it with cash. I had to first purchase tickets with my cash, and then exchange the tickets for the food. It was weird, since the exchange rate was $1.50 for a ticket, and a hot dog cost three tickets. The important thing to note here is that these tickets aren't real money and so they wouldn't be recognized as currency anywhere else but the festival.

Is there a technical term for these tickets? Fake money? Artificial currency?

Second example:
In the episode of Always Sunny in Philadelphia "The Gang Sells Out", Dennis has the brilliant idea of stimulating economic activity in Paddy's Pub by printing fake money called Paddy's dollars. The idea was to distribute Paddy's dollars out on the street to get people to come in and drink, and hopefully these people would "get hooked" and want to buy more Paddy's dollars to keep drinking at the pub.

Again, Paddy's dollars are specific to Paddy's Pub, and are not recognized anywhere else. What a technical term I can use to refer to this kind of currency?


texts:
Iota is typically used to refer to a tiny amount of something. Is there a letter antonym? Do you know of a case where iota and its antonym have been used in a quote to create a contrast.

(The first letter in  Hebrew alphabet is aleph, and aleph-naught is used to refer to the first order of infinity in mathematics. But I have not heard of iota being used next to aleph.)


texts: Sometimes I see go XXX (go home) and sometimes go to XXX (go to school, go to work). Is there any specific rule about this?


texts: Can "equivalent" and "counterpart" be interchangeable in the context below?

texts:
"Between 30 and 40 per cent of children attending school A had problems in the areas of spelling, listening, articulation and concentration in classes, while the equivalent/counterpart figures for school B stood at between 5 and 15 per cent."

I wonder if the two words "equivalent" and "counterpart" are interchangeable to each other here in the context as I checked up on the dictionary that the two words both means having same purpose or value as something else does.


texts: Does "relatable" (without "to s.t.") say anything that "understandable" does not say as well or better?

texts:
A colleague recently complained to me of the usage of relatable in student writing. It appears to derive from intransitive relate, OED sense 9, attested only from 1947:

  intr. With to. To understand or have empathy for; to identify or feel a connection with. Also without construction.

Most adjectives formed from verbs with suffix -able or -ible are formed from transitive verbs so as to modify what would be their direct objects, as readable modifies what one might read; but this is no invariable rule, since laughable modifies what one might laugh at. So the intransitivity of this sense of relate is not a valid objection.

The Google Books Ngram utility suggests that relatable peaked in the seventies (though it cannot well distinguish usages with a "to s.t." from those without, the latter only being in question here). And indeed these usages of both relate and relatable strike me as redolent of that era's youth culture or counterculture; they seem to function primarily as a kind of slang, i.e., to identify the user as a member of that culture, hipper than those who might use understand and understandable for the same purposes. If that is all that is going on, such usages are generally ill-suited to formal academic writing. But is there more to it than that in this case?


texts: Does one “take” a photocopy or “make” a photocopy?

texts:
If the verb for "photograph" is take, I presume that the verb for a "photographic copy" should also be take.

The word photocopy is often abbreviated to copy. I have noticed the verb make is used for copy.

Considering the above, which is used more: to make a copy or take a copy?


texts: What does the phrase 'much the most" mean?

texts:
Is it really a phrase?
I found it in Tom Sawyer - "...and the most hospitable and much the most lavish in the matter of festivities that St Petersburg could boast..."


texts: Proverb meaning "to give something to somebody who does not recognize its value"

texts: Can you please tell me an English proverb which means "to give something to somebody who does not recognize the value of that thing"?


texts: Word for whether a product is genuine or sham

texts:
What word should be used to fill in the blank?

  We don't know whether a product is genuine or sham

means

  The product's  __ is unverified.


texts: Is this sentence correct? — "The combat of Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order is more like that of Sekiro than that of Dark Souls."


texts: Why English pronunciation differs so much from written language, compared to German?

texts:
Given that English is derived mostly from German, when Anglo-Saxons (German tribes) migrated to Britain, how do you explain that

although German has a strict correspondence between written language and spoken language (the sounds largely follow 1-1 what is written)...
English has sooo intricate pronunciation rules, sometimes directly at odds with what is written? (Too bored to give examples, but it should be obvious).

My pet, tongue-in-cheek theory is that those tribes weren't too literate, didn't have a sound knowledge of the written form of words, so it was easy the pronunciation to follow its own independent path.

Anyone with a more informed explanation?


texts:
One
Couple
Few
Some
Several
(Any word that fits in here?)
Many
...

Example sentence:
A cycle time of ___ seconds is achievable.
(___ here means a quantity around, say, 10 to 30.)


texts: Why do we use plural when we say "blow someone's brains out"?

texts: My simplistic thinking is that each person has one brain, so why do we say "blow someone's brains out"?


texts: A word/idiom to describe someone who is impressive by speech but lack of experience in real world applications? (without negative connotation)

texts:
Someone who is articulate and able to sound impressive by theories or speech but do not have sufficient experience in real world applications. The word/idiom that I am looking for is without negative connotation. Phrases like "is all talk" and "look good on paper" have a sarcastic tone which I want to avoid.
The scenario I have in mind is someone who has graduated from a course that is relatively new to the market. There isn't a great demand in the market for such expertise yet. The person can only accumulate knowledge by research. They are able to convey impressively by theory. However, they do not have enough experience in real world applications yet.
Much thanks!


texts: What means share the feelings of another?

texts: I understand it like having the same feelings (experience the same feelings of another), that's right?


texts:
I'm currently writing my PhD thesis in computer science and often need to refer to  algorithms, which are depicted in figures as shown below.

So far, I used phrases such as Algorithm X shows / depicts / presents Euclid's algorithm. However, I do not want to use these three phrases over and over again and I'm running out of ideas.

My question, therefore, is: What is an elegant way to refer to a figure displaying an algorithm?


texts:
In this sentence:

  We are asking you to invite your congregation that have a passion for mission to consider volunteering three hours one day a week.

Should it read "who" or "that" after "congregation"? I always used "who" but was told that "who" only goes with proper nouns.


texts: Both time work for me , or Both time works for me, or Both times work for me?

texts:
which one is grammatically  correct ?

Both time work for me  , or Both time works for me, or Both times work for me ?

I think  the answer is : Both time work for me

Although time is always singular word, here the Both makes it plural ! Am I correct?

Thank you.


texts:
I want to know, can I use hero in this sentence to refer to someone who is female?  Does it make sense?

  Mom you are my hero.

Or is it better to say

  Mom you are my heroine.


texts: Alternate wording for 'verification and validation'

texts:
In technical contexts the idea of 'verification and validation' is often used. However novices to the terminology (or so I claim) on more occasions display a hard time grabbing and remembering which concept is which, or even what are they.

An example expression of this confusion can be seen in
Difference between "validation" and "verification"

It would be unfortunate if people talking about the things meant by either verification or validation would have unclear ideas of what they are talking about. This is a field where communication should be clear. Eg. you don't want to lose time verifying your communication about verification...

I think the problem with the two term may include that they both start with v, end with ion, are generally somehow unfamiliar in precise meaning, denote somehow abstract things, not to speak of the fact that they can include or apply to each other (eg. 'verification is validation by empirical means'). So all in all, introducing them together is risky and inherently prone to errors.

I'm looking for alternate wording for either or both of these words, assuming they each have a single intended meaning. If suitable terms could be found that better express their difference, the learning curve to their usage hopefully could be shortened.


texts: Irregular past tense confusion with compound noun/verb. More examples?

texts:
Students of martial arts may be familiar with a breakfall, which can (depending on the situation) be treated as a noun or a verb.

I am often amused when speakers, even native English speakers (myself included!), stumble over the past tense because of the double-irregularity. I've heard breakfalled, breakfell, brokefall, and brokefell - most try one combination or another and then switch to did a breakfall.

I was wondering if people had other examples of this phenomenon, and whether there is a canonically correct past tense form?

EDIT: Prompted by the discussion, for those interested, a breakfall may be defined as any of several ways of 'receiving' a technique, but in Western parlance most often refers to a method of slapping the ground (mat) just at the moment of impact, when you are thrown. This provides a reactive force and lessens the whole body impact if you are unable to roll out. (See uke/ukemi for the Japanese perspective).


texts:
Recently, I was auto-corrected by a word processor when I typed in "now days" to "nowadays." Why did it do this to me? "Nowadays" looks and sounds silly, incorrect, and made-up to me.

Which version is appropriate? Which is most appropriate? Where did the word "nowadays" even come from?


texts:
HAL¹ used this sentence in the 1968 classic film '2001: A Space Odyssey' when interviewed from Earth by Amor. HAL had ~seven minutes to compose a response.

  HAL: Let me put it this way, Mr. Amor. The nine-thousand series is the most reliable computer ever made. No nine-thousand computer has ever made a mistake or distorted information. We are all, by any practical definition of the words, foolproof and incapable of error. source: Transcript of the Film 2001 A Space Odyssey

Should it be grammatically correct to use nor in place of or here or was HAL correct all along?

  No nine-thousand computer has ever made a mistake nor distorted information ...

¹ The HAL 9000 was a Heuristically Programmed ALgorithmic Computer. There are many speculations that the name HAL originated from a one letter shift off IBM.


texts: Indefinite article before an adjective in form [number]-[something]

texts:
Which one of these is correct?

We use two-stage compilation process.
We use a two-stage compilation process.

The second looks more formally correct, but feels strange.

Perhaps this is better?

We use two-stage compilation.


texts: Which tenses can grammatically be combined in a single sentence or paragraph that refers to various time periods?

texts:
I am aware that there are many different tenses in the English language, but which tenses can be used in the same sentence without detracting from its coherence? For example, in a situation like this:

  Over and over again, I see their bodies, the way the monster and her father had left them after their horrifying last moments that the monster couldn't care enough to spare them from.

What tenses can be combined when speaking in the present about events that have not happened yet, may have happened, might happen, etc. in the same sentence or paragraph while still maintaining syntactical correctness?


texts:
Fanning (hot) air off the soul is an approximate translation to the Arabic idiom الترويح عن النفس. It means to do something recreational to relax and change your mood.

Are there any similar idioms in English? In Arabic it is used as a verb when you alter the noun to a verb. It's very formal, punny and articulate in Arabic.

An example of its use as a verb: If there is straitness welling up in your chest and you feel so lonesome, why don't you go on hunting to fan some of that hot air off your soul, to change your prevailing mood and ease out, etc.

In slang Arabic, people say 'How is the weather?' as in 'How is your weather?' or 'How are you?' If you're feeling gloomy or unwell, they might say, 'Let's do something to change the/your weather.' I thought this might help in understanding that some idioms and sayings are so peculiar and hilarious when translated.

I'm trying to approximate this idiom's meaning in English. I think translation from one language to another always causes discombobulation and difficulties both to the translator and then to the audience who'll have to try and comprehend what they have said. Try although transiently to think as those people might and to see things from the perspective of their customs and culture.


texts: "Engineering runs in my family" as my mother, father and brother are all engineers. But this phrase "runs in the family" seems too bold and flashy to start my resume. Please suggest an alternate that I can use.


texts: How to hypenate this compound adjective?

texts:
I have this as a sentence:

These still commonly used phrases have retained their meaning over time.

Should 'still commonly used' be hyphenated or not? As in:

These still-commonly-used phrases have retained their meaning over time.

Obviously, if it wasn't used as an adjective, I would write:

Over time, these phrases are still commonly used.


texts: Can I write June 15 instead of June 15th?

texts: In writing, I have always believed I can use day numbers without the "th" at the end. I know they are pronounced, but have been taught I can write them either with or without this "th" at the end. Is this correct? And if so, is one of them considered to be better?


texts: A 'country mile' is a term used casually in some areas of the English-speaking world to refer to a very great distance, but what's the origin of the term?  Obviously 'mile' refers to what could be seen (from a human perspective) as a long distance, but why does the adjective 'country' combine to make it mean a very great distance?


texts: Who can help me with Metonymy and Synecdoche

texts:
To gain a further understanding of the difference between them, I have searched a lot of information about them, but I found that what some regard as metonymy are considered synecdoche by others.
E.g.
England won the tournament. (Metonymy?)
England votes for John. (synecdoche?)
law for police officers (synecdoche?)
Little old Japan for traditional Japanese houses. (Metonymy or Synecdoche?)

What I'm certain about is that hand, head, and some parts of your body for a whole is synecdoche. But what about container and contents? Are they considered metonymy or synecdoche? And questions of these kinds came to me.


texts: What's the grammatical name of this part of the sentence?

texts:
I'm reading a book and I came upon this sentence like this:

"We looked at the city, and found that beneath every surface, a whole world of adventure was waiting for us."

I'm curious about three things:

What's the grammatical name for "beneath every surface" in this sentence?
What are the comma rules associated with it?
On another note, am I correct that the first comma is misplaced because it separates "we" and "found"?

Thanks for reading.


texts: What is the difference between 'The Germany National team' and 'the German national team'?

texts:
I can't say I get it. I think the difference is:

'The Germany National team' is team which represents Germany as a country. And it is its formal title.
'the German national team' is team which represents Germany as a country. But in this case it is emphasised that this one is German, i.e. "This is the German national team and that one is the French"

Am I right?


texts: Can you "destroy" a non-physical object?

texts:
While browsing Wikipedia, I came across and interesting edit: replace "destroy any interest" with "obviate any interest" because "interest" can't be destroyed, like a physical object. This struck me as strange; I have often heard people talk of "destroying" non-physical objects, such as creativity, hope, and, of course, interest. No offense to the editor, who is a very active contributor to Wikipedia, but is this really true? I agree that perhaps "obviate" is a better choice of word in the context of the sentence, but I disagree with the notion that "destroy" is grammatically incorrect here.
I apologize if this question has already been asked or if it belongs on a different Stack Exchange website.


texts: Difference between an adjective clause and a noun clause in apposition to a noun or a pronoun?

texts:
What is the difference between an adjective clause and a noun clause in apposition to a noun or a pronoun?
I am confused because the examples I found are quite similar.

Noun clause in apposition to a noun or pronoun:

  Your statement that you didn't take the money can’t be believed.

Adjective clause:

  Fruit that is grown organically is expensive.

I would also appreciate it if you could provide more examples of these clauses with their main clause and subordinate clause marked (main clause in bold please).

How can I differentiate between and identify them?


texts: What is the plural of the words “animus” and “anima”? In any context (literary, Jung psychology, apothecary etc.). Is there English v. Latin differences? Interwebs are no help: versions differ from “animuses”, to “animi”, to uncountable. “Animuses” is correct as native English plural, if I understand correctly (then “animas” for feminine?). If we take Latin route, would it be “animi” for masculine, and “animae” for feminine?


texts: Using dashes for showing a dichotomy spelling

texts:
I have trouble with deciding how to use dashes in the following case:

  Before moving on, it is worth noting that the complex -- (non-complex)
  simple dichotomy is not the same as the complicated --
  (not-complicated) simple dichotomy.

In the text elsewhere I use en-dash (--) to signal an interjection, so technically, here it would seem that "(non-complex) simple dichotomy is not the same as the complicated" is an interjection, while it is really not.

If I did not have to make distinctions between non-complex and non-complicated simple, I would just put "complex--simple dichotomy", without the spaces, but adding the parts in parenthesis would make it look silly, and I am not sure how to go about it. Any suggestions?


texts:
I am filling a form for staying on-campus on my university.
I am trying to figure out what the word representative means in this context.

Referring to item 4.
http://www.rta.qld.gov.au/zone_files/rooming_accommodation/r18.pdf

Dictionary:
"Representative - a person or thing that represents another or others."

What can I actually fill in here? I actually wrote myself, because no one is representing me.

Did I get the wrong idea?


texts: One word for "the state of being unloved"

texts:
See sentence below:

  I hope that if you ever feel the desolation of ____, the knowledge
  of my admiration may be of small consolation.

Good rephrasing is also acceptable.

Edit  By "unloved" I mean the feeling that one is not appreciated or unwanted


texts: What is the meaning of 'the food chain'?

texts:
The OED confirms my long-held suspicion that the original use of the term 'food chain' is becoming supplanted by an altogether different meaning.

The term 'food chain' was used extensively in the 1950s when scientists first became aware of the dangers associated with the pesticide DDT. The poison built up in the food chain until it reached humans at the top.

The OED says: under Ia. A series of organisms, each of which is dependent on the next for food, esp. by direct consumption or predation.
1920   Sci. Monthly Oct. 295   Each such fish has its ‘food-chain’..leading back from the food of man to invertebrates upon which it preys and then to the food of these.
1980   R. Mabey Common Ground i. 32   The accumulation in the birds of toxic agricultural pesticides, passed down the food chain from dressed grain to seed-eater to bird-of-prey.
2005   New Scientist 12 Nov. 44/1   Food chains here [sc. at deep ocean vents] are based not on photosynthesis, but on a process called chemosynthesis.

Nowadays the term 'food chain' seems most frequently to be used to describe the various events  necessary to bring food to the table, from agriculture, to distribution, to packaging, to preparation and sale.

OED 2.

The system or sequence of events by which food comes to be consumed by human beings.
1951   Ecology 32 351   The base of the human food chain is the production of plant organic matter.
1993   Independent 23 Oct. (Weekend section) 35/1   An elongated food chain involving numerous intermediate links—processors, packers, hauliers.
2003   Observer 5 Jan. i. 8/1   Defences against a bioterrorist attack involving animal diseases such as foot and mouth are to be stepped up to prevent rogue groups targeting Britain's food chain.

We have thus arrived at a confusing situation. How, in the view of subscribers to this site, should 'food chain' be used. If both are to continue how do we make it clear to readers and listeners which one we are talking about?


texts: Word for a person who freely shares others' secrets

texts: Is there a word that describes a person who spreads others' secrets without their permission?


texts: Commas to separate two phrases separated by conjunctions

texts:
So I was studying for the grammar (English) section of the ACT, and I discovered what seems to be a serious gap in my knowledge. In one particular section, there were 4 questions that I got wrong - all for essentially the same reason.

Examples speak louder than explanation, so:

  Q: For centuries, scientists believed in the existence of planets beyond the solar system, but had no way of knowing how common they were or how similar they might be to better-known planets.

The objective of this question was to modify the statement to correct the grammar.

  Choices:

  No change
  system. But
  system but
  system but they

Now, for me, this question was unambiguously 'No change;' however, apparently not - the answer key says that the correct response is 'system but.'

This was not an isolated occurrence, I realized whilst checking my responses.

  Q: The group was originally a four-person ensemble but has expanded to five-part harmonies, a sixth member acts as a sign-language interpreter.

  My Ans: ensemble, but has expanded to five-part harmonies...

  Correct Ans: ensemble but has expanded to five-part harmonies...

and

  Q: The rings spread over hundreds of thousands of miles, they consist of billions of individual particles that create waves, turbulence and other effects.

  My Ans: miles, and consist

  Correct Ans: miles, and they consist

This question is slightly different, yes, but my original question still applies. Also note how the author leaves out the Oxford comma - something I would not do.

Lastly:

  Q: I would live with a local family, and attend classes at a nearby high school.

  My ans: No change

  Correct ans: family and attend

Thoughts?


texts:
I just noticed that "gimble" and "brilig" show up well before, and always more than "jabberwocky"  in ngram

I thought that these words originated in the Jabberwocky poem ... but apparently not?

What is the deal with that?


texts:
Jeff Atwood ♦ has just posted something that I'm confused about

  Stack Overflow, due to its size, has some unique problems. One of those is flags

I'd say that those and flags are both in plural, however shouldn't is be plural too? It means, shouldn't it be

  Stack Overflow, due to its size, has some unique problems. One of those are flags

I think it's right, because he's a native English speaker, but I'm just not sure why. Or is it just a mistake?


texts: My grandpa used to ask "Do you live around here or ride a bicycle?" fairly often, finding it hilarious (him and only him).  While it is quite an awkward, malformed piece of logic, what is its source?  It seems to exist as a phrase more often than chance, occasionally in humor/"wit" books.


texts: Why is it "geometric" but "theoretical"?

texts:
I just came across a course name: Geometric and Theoretical Optics. The mismatched endings bug me. Why do we have both -ical and -ic endings?

Is there any difference in meaning between, say, theoretic and theoretical? I know that acoustic and acoustical mean slightly different things, but is this difference inherent in the words, or is it just usage — we happen to use the former for sound, and the latter for ceilings?


texts:
"You might as well get a taxi from the station. It'll be quicker than me coming in to get you."
I know may, might, and might as well are quite different. But would it be incorrect (meaningless) if I used "may" or "might" instead of "might as well" in the sentence above?


texts: Similar meaning to 'abstract' and 'concrete'?

texts:
I'm looking for some terminology.  This terminology is mostly only paired with a specific part of speech (I believe verbs).  Essentially, some verbs can easily be seen and some verbs cannot easily be seen.  For example:

Group a: run, jump, swim, tumble.

Group b: understand, survive, upgrade, regret.

There may have been more than only two groups, but I can remember these groups clearly.  I also clearly remember that 'abstract' and 'concrete' were not the terms.  Also, it would be very useful to have a wiki link or a hyponym for these terms.