texts: How can one choose between "tunable" and "tuneable"?

texts:
Both "tunable" and "tuneable" seem to be in common usage.

Is there a source which can be used to justify a preference for one or the other for general usage, possibly as a function of whether one is considering a particular nationality or dialect of English?


texts:
In 1958, Evans joined Miles Davis's sextet, where he was to have a profound influence.

What is the meaning of "was to have" here?


texts: What limits are there to the word 'stepmother'?

texts:
The OED defines stepmother as:

A woman who has married one's father after one's mother's death or divorce.

In the case of a child such as Ruairi (Rory) Aldridge (character in the BBC radio soap -The Archers) he was the product of an affair that his father, Brian Aldridge, had with a fancy-woman,Siobhan, who later died. The affair was conducted whilst Brian was married to his wife Jennifer, who subsequently 'adopted' Ruairi and is bringing him up as her own child.

So what is the relationship between Ruairi and Jennifer? Can she be regarded as stepmother?


texts: How do I write about "fun" without using that word?

texts:
I'm a fortunate writer in that I get to write about toys. I get to describe games, puzzles and many more fun things for kids and adults. But I'm feeling like a broken record that's relying on the word "fun" too much. What are other ways to call something "fun" without using that word?

I'm trying to go beyond the thesaurus. I'm writing about an emotional response so I'm looking for similar words people like and respond to. Thanks for your help.


texts: How to interpret the two lines in the poem?

texts: 'today is night without the darkness' and "the fish and chip lady sings 'love me tender' over the splutter of fat', what do the two lines mean? Really can't understand it. Thank you for your help.


texts:
Would it be better to say:  “If I was in your circumstance,
I hope, I truly hope, I’d do the right thing.” OR “If I were faced with your circumstance, I hope, I truly hope, I’d do the right thing.”


texts: Meaning and tone of "Offhand I do not know..."

texts:
Two days ago I sent a mail to a university I am interested in, asking for the ratio of Early-Decision–accepted students to Regular-Decision–accepted ones. I received this answer part of larger mail.

  Offhand I do not know the ratio of Early Decision applicants to Regular Decision applicants.

What does offhand mean? I used a few English–French dictionaries but it still remains unclear. Moreover, what is the tone of this sentence? I feel a lot of annoyance — am I right?


texts:
which one is correct?
I am intimidated by the future.
I am intimidated from the future.


texts:
Nowdays farmers are _____________ mushrooms.

Options:

rising
grow
has raised
raising

My approach: I am confused between these two as I am not able to differentiate  after looking at their meaning.

rising: going up, increasing, or sloping upward.
raising: increase the amount, level, or strength of.

Edit:
Also I found the difference here. Is it correct?
Source:
http://www.grammar-monster.com/easily_confused/raise_rise_raze.htm


texts: Why is writing "alot" such a common mistake?

texts:
Why is it such a common mistake (particularly among school-children) to connect certain pairs of separate words? The most obvious example probably being:

  e.g. "a lot"->"alot"

Is it because- in this particular case at least- there is already a valid word "allot" that exists?

Maybe also, it helps that "a" is a valid prefix to a word (e.g. "a-plenty").


texts: Is there a synonym for "chance" with positive connotation?

texts: In my native language Swedish the word chans is almost like the English word chance but it has a positive connotation. Therefor as a swede it sounds a bit strange when you read something like "the chance of getting cancer." What's the English word for chance but with a positive connotation?


texts: Do I use a plural or singular verb after "half"?

texts:
When we describe a pie chart that gives information about percentage of common reasons for travel to a country, which of these two is correct?

As it is mentioned above, half of visitors has a trip for vacation
As it is mentioned above, half of visitors have a trip for vacation


texts: Plumbing terminology. A name for a pipe.

texts: So I have this pretty large-size (water) pipe that runs to my house. A couple of years ago I had some guys run a smaller pipe from that "large-size" pipe to my barn. Well, my question is this: what do you call the smaller pipe that splits off the larger pipe and runs to the barn? I know that the first (larger) pipe is called the "main" (if I am not mistaken), but I have totally forgotten what the second (smaller) pipe is called, but I do know that there is a name for it.


texts: What does a dialogue consist of?  I mean, what are these constituents called?

texts:
Tina: I had a strange dream last night.
  Jack: Well, dreams are always strange. I've never had an absolutely "normal" dream. So what did you dream about?
  Tina: I dreamed about a skyscraper devouring a small "Starbucks"

What do you call a single part of a dialogue that is spoken by one person? (There are three such parts written here: The first and the last one are spoken by Tina, and the middle one is by Jack.)


texts: Is the above sentence correct .about a sports championship


texts: How to use the phrase "come doing" properly?

texts:
How do you use the phrase 'come doing' properly?

On the one hand, 'come doing' means that someone comes for doing something. For example, "Why not come dancing tonight?". This sentence never means "someone comes as he/she is dancing". Lol.

On the other hand, 'come doing' can also mean that someone comes while doing something. For example, "She came crying and screaming". This sentence never means "she came for crying and screaming".

How do you use properly the different meanings of 'coming doing' form?

meta: I'm a non-native speaker of English.


texts: Can I express future action without the exclusion of former activity?

texts:
Consider the following scenario.  Someone is hired for a job and is new to the career field.  For instance, a new accountant.

After being an accountant for a very short period of time, and doing an excellent job as a novice, someone encourages the worker by stating "You will be an excellent accountant."

My question is in regards to the statement "You will be an excellent accountant."  Does the statement suggest that if the individual will be a good accountant, which would imply that they are not currently doing a good job?  Or, does it mean that the individual will be a good accountant, regardless of any good or bad work they have already accomplished?

I ask this question because there have been times where I have actually wanted to encourage people who are novices but show great potential for success because of the good work they have done.  One person I know personally is quite keen to respond with "Oh, so I haven't been doing a good job?" which would seem to imply that such as statement denotes that previous work does not fall within the category of "excellence".

I know this question bridges the gaps of English, logic and etiquitte.  If there is no simple answer, I am certainly interested on the community's thoughts and suggestions on how to make such a comment without being excessively verbose or awkward.


texts: Mckee believed WAS the Mary Rose Vs Mackee believed TO BE the Mary Rose

texts:
In 1967 , Edgerton's side-scan sonar systems revealed a large , unusually shaped object , which Mckee believed WAS the Mary Rose.

Shouldn't this be "Mackee believed TO BE the Mary Rose"?

Can somebody please explain the grammar?


texts: Grammatical construction of "to have happen"

texts:
In a sentence like the following:

  What a wonderful thing to have happen on your birthday!

what is the grammatical form of to have happen? I know the sentence is grammatical, but I can't identify how. It isn't a perfect infinitive, as in the following:

  What a wonderful place to have visited on your birthday!

because to have happened would be incorrect in the original sentence. I thought it might just be the infinitive of a phrasal verb have happen, as one can in fact say something like:

  I have happened to visit her in Atlanta quite recently.

But on reflection, the latter construction just appears to be the present perfect of happen.  So I discarded that idea.

I searched online, but 'have happen' grammar and 'have happen' definition didn't yield anything useful.


texts: Could you lend me any/a little/../money?

texts:
I would like to know how to say that correctly and whether some/any could stand as a subject in the sentence:

Could you lend me ... money? Sure, If I find some/any.


texts: How to describe a parent with a lenient approach to parenting?

texts:
I'm trying to describe my character as a parent who has a fairly 'hands-off' approach to raising his children. He is a single man who inherited a young boy and girl after the death of a family friend, and whose job prevents him from being too heavily involved in their day-to-day activities. But, he loves them, is always there for them when they need him, and cares very deeply for their moral upbringing. He just doesn't really know what he's doing.

So... What is the word for my character's 'hands-off', make-it-up-as-you-go-along style of parenting?

P.S. This character, if this helps, is very similar in moral code and behavior to Atticus Finch.


texts: "Bash her up" – offensive or just an idiom?

texts:
My girlfriend and I were having an argument over something that her female friend had said about me, which I found rude and displeasing. My girlfriend responded to my complaint by saying "What do you want to do, bash her up?" She thinks this phrase is normal, but for me, there's something inherently wrong about it, especially given that the implied meaning is a guy (me) beating up a girl, and even if it was meant to be an ironic statement. Am I getting too sensitive over what is perhaps just a harmless idiom, or should I stick to my gut feeling?

I picked up my English in North America, whereas my girlfriend did in Malaysia/Singapore, and so there's a good chance that it might just be a cultural difference, but for me that doesn't change my feeling that it's offensive.


texts: What is the difference between "coming" or "going" and "heading" somewhere?

texts: What does "We could head that way" mean, exactly? Why should I use "head" instead of "come" or "go"?


texts:
What is the piece of grass that comes off when a golf ball is hit called?

I kind of vaguely remember seeing it in the Tom and Jerry Cartoon once; and it was called a pivot, but I just searched for it and they say pivot is a motion in golf.


texts: Improper expressions of the future progressive

texts:
A thread on ELL makes me reconsider how I might naturally misuse other tenses when the future progressive is intended.

For example, I might pass out work assignments in the following ways:

"John, you will be running the tests tomorrow." (future progressive)
"John, you will run the tests tomorrow." (simple future)
"John, you are going to run the tests tomorrow." (simple future)
"John, you run the tests tomorrow." (improper expression)
"John, you are running the tests tomorrow." (improper expression)

With the ELL example, the intent might be similarly stated by:

"We will be discussing X at the meeting tomorrow." (future progressive)
"We will discuss X at the meeting tomorrow." (simple future)
"We are going to discuss X at the meeting tomorrow." (simple future)
"We discuss X at the meeting tomorrow." (improper expression)
"We are discussing X at the meeting tomorrow." (improper expression)

I think the fourth and fifth cases in both examples are probably improper, but I believe they would sound natural among the business leaders I associate with.

Are they improper? If so, are these forms of expressing future progressive common or at least acceptable in casual conversation (in either AE or BE)? If not improper, is there a formal description for these forms?


texts: Difference in the implied meaning when different words for “Shining” used?

texts:
Please consider the sentences below:

  The grass was glittering with dew.
  The grass was glistening with dew.
  The grass was glinting with dew.
  The grass was gleaming with dew.

Below are the definitions given by my dictionary.

  Glisten = (of something wet or greasy) shine with a sparkling light.
  Glitter = shine with a bright, shimmering reflected light.
  Glint = give out or reflect small flashes of light.
  Gleam = shine brightly, especially with reflected light.

I know that even if two words are synonyms, they can imply different meanings, even when the dictionary definitions look almost identical (as they do here). Are there any such differences between the implied meanings of the example sentences above?


texts: accent used by the character Christopher Foyle

texts:
The accent used by the actor Michael Kitchen, who plays Christopher Foyle in the U.K. series Foyle's War, is not one of the standard "stage English" accents we often hear in the U.S.

Is this a recognized accent associated with a particular region or social class in the U.K.?


texts: A verb for when some rights are not violated?

texts:
Their civil rights are violated. That is not true, their civil rights
  are fairly _____ .

  They said that, contrary to what your media tells people, in this
  country human rights are not violated but ______ .

The verbs I have in mind are to satisfy and to secure. Is any of them idiomatic ? Or any other suggestion? I am looking for a verb to mean not violated when we talk about rights such as human rights, employee's rights, etc.

But don't think of 'rights' only in a strictly legal sense. It can more broadly be taken in the sense of 'entitlement'. For example, consider the following sentence:

  It is true that the audience has right to be told the truth by the
  news channel. But I am quite sure that this media has _______ (=not
  violated) such right on the audience part.


texts:
I've seen all three used and there doesn't seem to be a definitive one that I can find. I'm hedging towards Co-Founder as it's a title, but any clarity would be appreciated.

Edit

If it makes it any clearer, the intended use would be for business cards; so something like:

  Name Surname
  Co-Founder Some Company


texts: Word for a story that keeps the reader's attention

texts:
The word for a story or article that is keeping the reader's attention.

Example sentence:

  I would like to rewrite this story to make it more ...


texts: What is the derivation of “skinny malink”?

texts:
But despite my wife’s insistence, everyone knows it is more properly skinny merrink. I don’t care what Oxford English says!

Oxford Dictionaries Online offers the following for skinnymalinky (and nothing for merrink)

  (plural skinnymalinkies)

  Scottish A very thin person: that young skinnymalinks above the shop

It goes on to note

  Origin: Late 19th century: origin uncertain; a Scottish children's song related the adventures of a thin man known as ‘Skinamalinky Long Leg’.

A version of the lyrics is found at the Online Dictionary of Playground Slang

  Skinny Malinky lang legs, umbrella feet

  Went to the pictures (cinema) and couldnae find a seat

  When the picture (film) started

  Skinny Malinky farted

  When the picture ended

  Skinny Malinky fented (fainted)

However there is no indication of the derivation of the term malinky or malink.

Numerous references are found at wordwizard.com dating back to 1892, but again, no indication of the origin of the term malink.

There are a variety of spellings, including melink, balink and most importantly, marink or merink (with single or double rs) the form from my childhood.

Can anyone help with the source of malink (or even better, merrink)?


texts: Can "as well" follow the verb it modifies?

texts: I came across a sentence that begins with "I suggest adding a legal reference to include as well a citation to..." To my ears, "include as well" is incorrect and should be changed to "also include." Or can "as well" or "also" follow the verb it modifies?


texts: Due by, due on, due for - what's the difference?

texts:
When someone says "I need x by Friday", I usually take it to mean they want x in their hands when Friday begins. However, when that same person says "I need x on Friday", I understand them to mean they want x no later than the end of the day Friday.

What about "I need x for Friday"? Is "for" in this context synonymous with "by" or "on"?

Do other people understand "due by" and "due on" in the same way I do? Is there a common consensus?


texts: " much to someone's amazement " vs " (to) much of the amazement of someone "

texts:
I'd like to ask if the following sentences are have the same meaning and all of them are grammatically correct?

  Much to my surprise, they offered me a £4,000 scholarship.
  To much of the surprise of my, they offered me a £4,000 scholarship.
  Much of the surprise of my, they offered me a £4,000 scholarship.
  Much of the surprise of mine, they offered me a £4,000 scholarship.

I found some example sentences that were created using by " to much of the amazement" and I would like to ask which one is more correct when we refer to 3rd person or other people without using  personal pronouns as follows.

  Much of the amazement of the historians, a recently unearthed
  fortnightly in the extinct Arabic-Malayalam language reveals that the
  Muslim community in Malabar was very much concerned about the
  developments in different sectors of the Ottoman Empire.(original sentence)

  To much of  the amazement of the historians, a recently unearthed
  fortnightly in the extinct Arabic-Malayalam language reveals that the
  Muslim community in Malabar was very much concerned about the
  developments in different sectors of the Ottoman Empire.

  Much to the amazement of the historians, a recently unearthed
  fortnightly in the extinct Arabic-Malayalam language reveals that the
  Muslim community in Malabar was very much concerned about the
  developments in different sectors of the Ottoman Empire.

  Much to the historians' amazement, a recently unearthed
  fortnightly in the extinct Arabic-Malayalam language reveals that the
  Muslim community in Malabar was very much concerned about the
  developments in different sectors of the Ottoman Empire.

Another example I found on the Internet is as follows:

  ...Adorya Baly, who brought the late national hero Noel Lloyd back to
  life in her performance, much of the amazement of the audience.

  ...Adorya Baly, who brought the late national hero Noel Lloyd back to
  life in her performance, (to) much to  the amazement of the audience.

  ...Adorya Baly, who brought the late national hero Noel Lloyd back to
  life in her performance, much to  the audience's amazement.


texts:
This is an example sentence demonstrating the usage of past perfect:

  I checked with the supplier and they still hadn't received the contract.

In this case the timeline rule works out as it should. Now, if I modify the sentence a little bit.

  I had just checked with the supplier and they still haven't received the contract.

Is the second sentence grammatically correct? If so, which one of these would one say as verbally pleasant?


texts:
I read this article about 5 times and looked up every word I don't understand and I still am completely clueless as to what exactly is the article talking about(the topic). It really irritates me and I tried so many times to understand what is written there, but it just doesn't make sense! This is the article:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/08/german-tabloid-bild-identifies-sunlounger-hoggers-british

  Wake-up call for Brits as Germans refuse to take towel jibes lying down.

What does this mean?! What are Germans refusing to do? I looked at every definition of the word "jibe" and this still doesn't make sense.

  German daily tabloid Bild says it has sunlounger hoggers in Europe's holiday resorts bang to rights: the English

What does "sunlounger hogger" mean? The only related definition of the word "hog" that I found is "to appropriate selfishly", but I just don't get it. What does a "sunlounger hogger" do?

What is this article exactly about? What problem related to towels is it discussing?


texts:
The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language (Page 1266-67) has this section:

10 Verbless clauses
We confine our attention here to verbless clauses in dependent or supplement functions comparable to those realised by non-finite clauses, as described in the main part of the chapter.
(a) Complement to with and without
[1] i They were standing against the wall [with their hands above their heads].
ii They were wandering around [without any clothes on].
...
The [boldfaced] clauses have subject + predicate structure, but with no verb in the predicate. With and without do not license finite complements, but non-finites are found in addition to the verbless forms (see §8.3 above).
...
With is semantically similar to have, and without to not have: [i–ii], for example, entail They had their hands above their heads, They didn’t have any clothes on.

CGEL is saying the boldfaced portions after with/without are verbless clauses. In [i], their hands is the subject, and above their hands the predicate. In [ii], any clothes is the subject, and on the predicate.
As suggested by CGEL, with/without can be replaced with having/not having as follows:

(1) They were standing against the wall [having their hands above their heads].
(2) They were wandering around [not having any clothes on].

Here, can you say that having and not having take verbless clauses as complements?
Are their hands above their heads and any clothes on verbless clauses?
If not, why do you consider the same construction as verbless clauses when they're complements to with/without?


texts:
I’ve been looking over what has been posted regarding the use of ’s.

I used to be a Technical Writer (years ago). The title of one of our training documents was Users’ Guide.  Once, a coworker said every time he saw that title he expected users to start coming.

Never made any sense to me, but I have to admit that the majority of us didn't understand the use of s’ in place of ’s.  What is the difference?


texts: Africans’ traditions or Africans traditions?

texts:
“She spent a lot of time criticizing them for trying to change the native Africans’ traditions.”
Is this the grammatically-correct sentence?
My try
“Native Africans traditions” in this case Africans should be adjective
“Native Africans‘ traditions” Africans is a noun, so Africans’s means that the traditions of native Africans
Complete text
“Mary Kingsley didn't travel during the first 30 years of her life. However, when her father died, leaving her an inheritance, she decided to set off for West Africa, which was still largely unmapped in the 1890s. Kingsley traveled alone, which was almost unheard of for a female at the time. During her travels, she lived with local people and learned their skills and customs.
Kingsley became quite well known after returning to England. She spent a lot of time criticizing missionaries for trying to change the native (Africans’?) traditions.”
(I had to put the correct word from the variants)
A)Africans’s
B)African’s
C)Africans
D)Africans’


texts: I recently saw someone intentionally use "eachother" instead of "each other".  In what circumstances would this be correct?


texts:
First, I'm not sure if sous vide is a trademark or just a cooking method like boil or fry.

How should I use sous vide in a sentence when writing a recipe?


texts: Why does it make sense to surround [words] in square brackets in this case?

texts:
I know that putting words in square brackets when quoting is used to clarify or emphasize something, but I've seen some cases where it really doesn't make sense to me.

For example this sentence:

  If you drink a liter of water, [urination] will increase

from this context:

  He added that any increase in fluid input will lead to an increase in urine output. "If you drink a liter of water, [urination] will increase," Armstrong said. "Doesn't mean you shouldn't drink water."

So, the word in brackets is added by the writer of the article, but hasn't been said by the quoted person, right? What boggles me is why would the writer put urination in brackets, when the sentence would obviously not make sense, if we omit that specific word in this specific case...?

  If you drink a liter of water, will increase

doesn't really sound right to me.


texts: How did "lady" and "ladies" come to differ in conveying degree of respect?

texts:
I was struck today by the difference between the sentences:

  Ladies, are you ready to order?

and

  Lady, are you ready to order?

The first (at least in my idiolect) is clearly respectful, while the singular borders on disrespectful, yet the only surface difference is that one is singular, and the other plural. How did this come about, and are there other, similar words?


texts: How to name the thing that has components?

texts:
What is the best name for the abstract thing which contains components?

Context: I am writing an abstraction in a computer program. My domain consists of abstract entities. I don't know what concrete entities will exist later on. But I know, some entities are components of other entities.

An example concretization of the abstraction would be the entities house, window and door. Here window and door are components of a house. So the house is the ??? of windows and doors?

The word will be used in source code and also on the user interface. In questions or in error messages:

Is a house a ??? of a window?
What is a house the ??? of?
What is the ??? of a window?
Error: A door is not a ??? of a window.

Note that the word must work in unknown domains. Instead of house, window and door. It could be body, arm and finger. Or continent, country and city.

The user will be building a tree of entities of his own choice. The software needs to name them as entities, components and ???.

An entity could be a component and a ??? at the same time.

A compound word would be ok, but the shorter, the better.

What I have ruled out:

collection - because usualy a collection has items of the same type. and collection is already used in the core of my programming language and this would create a name collision.

What I am considering:

container
composition


texts: Preferred American English term for the [enter/return] key in the keyboard

texts:
Problem
A colleague is designing an application and wants to decide what to write in the return/enter key.
Research
In the Macbook keyboard both terms are present (return and enter).

Question
My question is: which term is the most used US English word for such operation?


texts: Saying about many related events in the future

texts:
My question relates to these questions :

Conditionals in the future
Future tense in conditional clauses
“If I go..” vs. “If I will go..” referring to the future
About two mutually related, future actions

What is the common way in English (and American English) to say about many related events that can happen due to some condition:

  I suppose if this gadget [will be] packed in cardboard box there [will be] less chances that the package [will be] stopped at customs for any additional inspection of its contents.

or even:

  I suppose if this gadget [will be] packed in cardboard box there [will be] less chances that the package [will be] stopped at customs for any additional inspection so there [will be] no delay in delivery.

Note: I used "[will be]" to depict that action will occur in a future - I understand that it is incorrect.


texts: The subject more or less says it all. I would like to know how rh (as in rhythm) was originally pronounced. It is listed as being something which was originally present in Latin, but, in Latin, "h" is used to harden a vowel. I can't think of a soft pronunciation for "r" in Latin or any potential intermediate steps.


texts: Idiom/proverb applicable when a driver forces his car into roundabout without stopping just because he thinks he has signaled ahead of time

texts:
What is the idiom/proverb applicable to this situation?

  When a driver forces his car into roundabout without stopping (as the traffic rule would recommend) just because he thinks he has signaled ahead of time.

The idea is one should stop before entering into a roundabout rather than forcing one's car into it just because one comes signalling from far away. So here the driver is wrong in the first place and over the top he then throw tantrums post event.

A resembling idiom in hindi is

  Ek  toh (First of) chori (caught stealing) upar se (over the top) seena zori (chest-thumping)


texts: are these structure "It's adj for somebody to do something" / "It's adj of somebody to do something" generic ones?

texts:
I am non-native English speaker and my English teachers often teach these structures to me

"It's adj for somebody to do something". Ex: It is necessary for you to get up early

"It's adj of somebody to do something". Ex: It was really kind of you to help me.

My question is that:

Can we apply these structures for all adjectives?

If "yes", then are It is good for you to get up early & It is good of you to get up early  interchanged?

If "no", then when is to use the 1st & when is to use the last?

Seem not many websites mention this!!


texts: What does "it" in "If it wasn't for Amber..." refer to?

texts:
If it wasn't for Amber he wouldn't be able to marry Claire.

Please, what does "it" in this sentence refer to?


texts: Analyzing 'genitive/accusative + V-ing phrase (gerund-participle phrase)' as different constructions

texts:
(1) I regretted [his leaving the firm].
(2) I regretted [him leaving the firm].
(3) I regretted [leaving the firm].
(4) He didn’t bother [giving me a copy].

Regarding the above sentences The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language (Page 1190) has this to say:

If (1) and (2) are analysed as quite different constructions, with only (2) a clause, then which of the constructions would (3) belong to?
This problem would be particularly difficult to resolve with those gerund-participials where it is not possible to include an NP before the verb, as in (4). We avoid these problems by treating the optionality of the initial NP as simply a matter of the optionality of subjects in non-finite clauses.

Here, CGEL is basically arguing that the bracketed construction in (1) is no less a non-finite clause (with his as its subject) than that in (2) is (with him as its subject).
So, CGEL is basing this argument on the presumption that the bracketed portion in (2) is a non-finite clause. But I wonder why that has to be the case.
PROBLEM of CGEL's APPROACH
CGEL's approach cannot explain the potential semantic difference between (1) and (2), as explained in Merriam-Webster Dictionary of English Usage (as quoted in this Language Log):

The accusative pronoun is used when it is meant to be emphasized.

Because CGEL's approach analyzes (1) and (2) as the same construction only with some difference in register (formal vs. informal), I think it fails to accommodate the semantic difference shown above.
SUGGESTED APPROACH
What if we considered the verb 'regret' as taking two complements in (2), one being him and the other being leaving the firm, where the former is construed as the semantic--but not syntactic--subject of the latter?
In this approach, him in (2) would be a raised object of the verb 'regret', whereas the verb 'regret' in (1) would be analyzed as taking only one complement, a non-finite clause shown in the bracketed portion.
Then, (1) and (2) would be "analysed as quite different constructions".
This way, there would be no "problem" analyzing (3) or (4).
More importantly, the suggested analysis treats (1) and (2) as different constructions, thereby possibly accommodating the semantic difference quoted in the Language Log (shown above).
QUESTION
I'd like to know what others think of this suggested approach vis-à-vis CGEL's, and if any existing grammar employs something like the suggested approach.


texts:
In the attached youtube video, at 13:12, the lecturer gives a footnote on the difference between Such that and Subject to when expanding the initials mathematical abbreviation S.T. in certain mathematics problems.

He claims that some people read this as Such that and some as Subject to where the former is a common mistake. In his words: "subjugate to followed by restriction is not the same as such that, restrictions" .

Can anyone elaborate why such that, restrictions, as the lecturer states it, is wrong? In general, which is the correct form and where lies the difference between the two?


texts: What is 'understanding' involving learning?

texts:
It appears the word "understanding" is nebulous when used in an educational setting. What's the most rigorous definition you've found for "understanding" when used for learning?

Background:

Every now and then I hear people going into great depth about knowledge vs understanding. They say one might want to strive for deeper understanding and not just knowledge.

Intuitively I see the difference between rote learning (e.g. "the capital of Canada is Ottawa") and deep understanding (e.g. creating new interesting music).

That said, I think there's a large grey area in-between. Say, getting knowledge vs understanding out of reading a book or listening to music.

So what is "understanding" and what is "knowledge"? From a pure linguist perspective, does it have a clear definition?

Am I making sense? Apologize if the question is too vague. :)


texts: Bells and whistles refers to non-essential features, visual or functional, that are an enhancement to the object. What is the opposite of bells and whistles?


texts: Why isn't a definite article used before "a labyrinth"?

texts:
The following is from NY Times.

  "The decline is the result of the rise of untraditional business structure, the effects of a more globalized economy, and a labyrinth of subsidies and tax credits."

In the sentence above, the indefinite article "a" is used before "labyrinth". I understand that a definite article is used before a noun when the noun is restricted by an of-phrase, so becomes identifiable. But my question is, what does it exactly mean to restrict a noun? I can see that "effects" from the sentence is clearly restricted by "a more globalized economy". Then, is the reason "a" is used before "labyrinth" instead of "the" is that because "subsidies and tax credits" do not restrict the word labyrinth like "a more globalized economy" does "effects" and they just show some characteristics that "labyrinth" has?


texts:
What is correct?

He was logging on to the Bitrack database.
He was logging in to the Bitrack database.
Please note a password is required to log on/in to the database.


texts: What is the difference between "aged" and "age"?

texts:
I've seen a few ways of discussing the age of a person.

For example:

  aged 11

  age 11

As well as:

  college aged students

  college age students

When should I use "age" and when should I use "aged"? What is the difference between the two?


texts:
Consider the following situation. I am waiting for someone who is getting through a list of my purchases and slowly wanders around a storage and gets my stuff to the counter piece by piece. I am asking that person about the progress:

What are you looking for for me right now?

Meaning to find out the item number that person is processing at the moment.
I do get that such a sentence is a little made up. What I ask is if it is ok to combine the same preposition from time to time? Should I avoid it altogether?
Other examples:

There is nobody you could speak to to my mind.
Would you check this out out of curiosity?


texts: Number agreement when using “(s)” for optional plural

texts:
I have a question about the following construction and which instance is correct.

  Selecting an appropriate study topic(s).
  Selecting appropriate study topic(s).

When it is both singular and plural due to the parenthesized optional part, should I use the an because of thinking of what follows as being the singular (that is, study topic)?

Or should I omit the an because of thinking of what of what follows as being in the plural (that is, study topics)?


texts: What is the term for inserting that *may* lead to subsequent removal?

texts:
In terms of any sort of collection of things, where the collection is limited in the amount of members it may have.  I suppose 'replacement' would be enough to describe insertion of one thing then subsequent removal of something else.

I am looking for, though, a term that describes insertion that may result in subsequent removal, but not necessarily.


texts: Is 'as' used as a conjunction here? Indeed, is the sentence grammatical?

texts:
I don't think the word 'as' is necessary in the sentence below.

As far as I know, 'as' is a conjunction, which means there must be two clauses if it can be used. However, there's no main clause in the sentence.

Is it correct? Are there any words omitted? I believe that if there are no quotation marks the sentence is acceptable.

  As Albert Einstein once said, “Anyone who has never made a mistake has
  never tried anything new.”


texts: Best etymological calque of the word Schadenfreude

texts:
This question is purely theoretical (i.e. I don't foresee actually trying to use the word), but using arguments based on etymology, as well as euphony and (least importantly) comprehensibility, what is the most etymologically faithful English equivalent for the German Schadenfreude?

Other Germanic languages use etymologically translated calques: skadefryd (Danish & Norwegian), schadevreugde (Dutch). English has a cognate word for German Schaden, Dutch schade, Danish & Norwegian skade, Swedish skada (all of which mean damage/injury) in the form of scathe (which also means damage/injury) – all descended from Proto-Germanic *skaþô (damage/injury) – so it is reasonable to propose that the first part of the theoretical English word should be scath-, scathe- or skaith-.

The difficulty lies with the second part – English does have a word frith (peace/sanctuary) that is a distant cousin of German Freude, Dutch vreugde, Danish & Norwegian fryd (all of which mean joy); but it is a closer relation to German Frieden, Dutch vrede, Danish & Norwegian fred (all of which mean peace), these words and frith all being descended from Proto-Germanic *friþuz (peace). One could opt for -frith : scathefrith is viable.

Or one could take the Swedish option (skadeglädje) and replace the last part with a different word for joy (glädje = gladness) : scathgladness or skaithgladness are options.

The question(s) are which of these three options (scathefrith, scathgladness or skaithgladness) is the best, and is there a better option? Can someone pull a (perhaps obscure, perhaps archaic or even Old) English word out the bag that is a closer relation to Freude/vreugde/fryd? Or perhaps a word with a slightly different etymology that is better for other reasons?

P.S.
Apologies if such questions are not appropriate on English SE, but it is a technical question looking for a technical answer, however theoretical it may be.


texts: Is there a generic word for "all of x type of thing"?

texts:
I am looking for a generic collective noun that can be acceptably used to refer to all existing things of some particular kind.

It would apply to "all existing trees", "all existing vehicles", "all existing stars", and so forth. My attempts at figuring this out has resulting in terms like "the totality of trees" but I'm unsure if there is a better or designated word for this concept.

A simple "all trees" ("I looked over all of the trees and could not find a match") would always do; I would just like to know if there is a word I could use to phrase it differently:

  I looked over the ____ of trees and could not find a match.

Does such a word exist?


texts: What is a good synonym for “appointment”? Is “date” one of them?

texts:
TL;DR:

If I use “date” for “appointment”, is it unmistakably understood?
If not, is there a shorter word for “appointment”?

In German, there’s Termin, from Latin terminus (“boundary, limit”), for which there is no obvious English cognate. This German substantive can mean anything of the following:

“appointment”, as in doctor’s appointment
“meeting”, as in statutory conference
“date”, as in future arrangement or dutiful point in time
“deadline”, as in closing date

In these cases, Termin is well understood and of handy length. However, Termin doesn’t mean “(calendar) date” in general, and neither does “appointment”. On the other hand, “calendar date” translates to Datum, which in turn is cognate to “date”, thus my uncertainty.

I’m afraid that “making/having a date with so.” sounds rather private (i.e. non-platonic) than professional, even if it refers to a “scheduled date”.

I’m looking for a shorter synonym for “appointment”, with generic emphasis on “future due date”, but less specific than “deadline”. Is “date” generally understood as-such? Is there any alternative more concise than “assignment”?

Some examples of potential use:

I need to have those appointments conducted.
You have to make an appointment at the doctor’s.
We’ll meet at the business appointment.
When would you like to have an appointment?

I don’t think those struck through parts can be properly replaced with “date” while retaining their original meaning. There might simply be no (short) alternative to “appointment”. Is there?


texts: "Either A or B": what exactly is the subject?

texts:
My brother had this pair of questions on a Year 7 English exam.

  Consider this sentence:

    "Either Michael or Susan will have to do night shift tonight."

  Which is the subject?

  (a) Michael and Susan
  (b) Michael or Susan, not both
  Is the subject plural or singular?

He answered (a) and plural and was marked as wrong on both counts. The class has not yet had the reason explained to them.

Which What are the correct answers, and why?


texts: Is advanced notification the right term to use?

texts:
If someone visit you or your company without notification prior to the visit, what is the right term to use?

e.g. someone visit the office without advanced notification?

Please help me think of the adjective to use - preferred one word only.

Much appreciated.


texts:
We are designing an automated ordering system which concerns itself mainly with two entities:

Requests, which express the need of a customer to place an order in the near future
Orders, which are sent to third-party suppliers

What noun embraces both Requests and Orders, i.e. a substitute for X in the following sentences?

A request is an X
An order is an X

Ideally, X is a term that is 'natural' within the commodity domain. If possible, the fact that an item is being shipped as a consequence of X being processed should be evident.


texts:
What's the best way to say seriously considering or positively reviewing?
For instance, if someone made you an offer, and you're considering the offer very positively.


texts: Nouns that can be both count and noncount nouns

texts:
I would like to ask how people who are familiar with English interpret these sentences regarding the nouns that can be both count and noncount nouns.

(1) I have to make more cake/cakes to offer a wide variety of bakery products for my own business.

(2) France is famously known for having more cheese/cheeses than there are days in the year.

My foreign teachers went for plural noun in (1), but they chose the bare form for (2). I have them chose only one form for each item. For me (I'm Thai), I just want some explanations because both items represent "a variety of sth", so why these two are treated differently.


texts:
Please help which one will fit in the blank and why?

The belief in life after death is prevalent in both primitive societies _________ advanced
cultures.

A. and

B. and in

C. and also

D. also

E. also in


texts: Is there a phrase or slang word for a man who is always chatting women up?

texts:
He can be rich or poor, educated or not, vulgar or polite, handsome or not, but what characterizes this guy is his way with words and his garrulousness. More importante, he is notorious for making a pass at almost any woman.  Whether or not he succeeds is irrelevant.

I'm not looking for lists. Just the best slang word or phrase for this type of person.

I'm not looking for medical terms.

I'm not looking for old-usage such as "a Don Juan."

  chat up (verb) -to talk flirtatiously to (a person), esp with the intention of seducing him or her.  http://www.thefreedictionary.com/chat+up

EDIT - (context where I would use it)

Jim has been dancing with my sister all evening.  Do you think he is a nice guy?
Er... perhaps I shouldn't tell you this but when we were in College he was notorious for making  passes at almost any girl. As a matter of fact he was a .................


texts:
Née is a word borrowed from French that means "born as" and is used to denote someone's former name, such as the maiden name of a married woman. It is usually seen as a parenthetical aside: "Jane Smith (née Doe)." I'm looking for something equivalent that would work when speaking in a formal matter, like for a news report or a speech. I don't think née works in this context, because it sounds more like a negation.

The only thing I can think of is formerly or formerly known as, but those almost sound like something you would say about a criminal to me. I'm wondering what are some good alternatives.


texts:
When you are asked, "Where are you from?" does that mean your birthplace or does it mean your current residency, or something else?

People are more mobile than they used to be, and it's becoming common to live in more than one place for several years. I've always assumed that "from" means where I was born. Is it possible to be "from" more than one place?

ETA:I'm trying to figure out whether it really is subjective. As for context, let's say Wikipedia has categories at the bottom of an entry. Take a look. A musician who has lived in several places is categorized under "People from Chicago" and "People from Kansas City" and "People from New Orleans" because he has lived in all those places. But is that true? It seems to me he can only be "from" one of those places, because "from" means starting point, and your starting point is where you were born. You wouldn't say "I'm from Chicago and now I'm from Kansas City." You are not two people.


texts:
I know that a flat adverb is an adverb that has the same form as its related adjective, but does that mean any adverb without the -ly suffix is grammatically correct? For instance, if I said I am “extreme angry,” is that the same as saying I am “extremely angry”? Or is saying that it is “dangerous hot outside” the same as saying it is “dangerously hot outside”? I realize that flat adverbs are less common than they used to be, but that doesn’t change the question: Are flat adverbs always formed from words, namely adjectives, missing the -ly suffix?

Thank you

PS: This is what prompted my question:

  “Flat adverbs used to be much more common than they are today. For example, in Robinson Crusoe, Daniel Defoe writes of weather that is "violent hot." Samuel Pepys wrote in his famous diary of being "horrid angry." But most of these adverbs have long since been abandoned.”

Bolded words are my emphasis.


texts: What is the right way of asking questions?

texts:
This is a follow-up question to this question that I asked yesterday.

There are a couple of similar expressions that I need help with:

  How  [am I supposed to/do I] get to the stadium from here?
  Where [am I supposed to/do I] get the cab from?

Are these expressions okay? Does using "supposed to" in place of "do" affect the meaning of the sentence here?


texts: What word contains the most unique letters?

texts:
I'm assuming there isn't a word that contains every letter in the alphabet, so which word contains the most?

Examples:

antidisestablishmentarianism - 12 [antidseblhmr]
psychotherapy - 12 [psychotherap]
handcraftsmanship - 13 [handcrftsmhip]


texts: Term for anticipating counterarguments and rebutting them

texts:
There's this term for the rhetorical device of anticipating counterarguments and rebutting them, but I simply can't remember it.

Now I know what you're thinking - did you try googling it? Well I did, and was not able to find it. I'm pretty sure its a greek word that starts with either 'a' or 'p'. I also tried looking through Glossary of rhetorical terms but was unable to see it.


texts: To say that since you're working in different location which is far away you won't be able to handle this activity.


texts: The teacher as well as the students are busy

texts:
As far as I know, the last noun determines whether "is" or "are" is to be used. I recently came to know that "are" is incorrectly used here. Could someone please explain why?

Also, what's wrong in the following sentence and why?

Horse is a faithful animal.


texts: Can I provide insight to another person? Ex: I provided my client insight to his problem.


texts:
Real eyes realize real lies.

Is this sentence illustrating the usage of alliteration? If not, which poetic device has been employed here?


texts:
Is it correct to say

  The software deployment has concluded

For some reason it feels incorrect. I would have used concluded in the context of a meeting, some kind of debate, involved with people.


texts: Can I use subjunctive when something is possible?

texts:
To my understanding when expressing something is not fact I should use subjunctive, e.g.

  Without your instruction, we would be working now.

I'm wondering if I can use subjunctive to express something that is possible for being a polite way.

In my case, I'd like to reply to the recruiting manager like this:

  If I was fortunate to get this job, ...

Is it ok to say like this?


texts: Is "is" an auxiliary verb in the sentence "My mum's bag is blue"?

texts:
My mum's bag is blue.

Is is an auxiliary verb in that sentence? If not, what is it?

Is “is” an auxiliary verb in the sentence “John is working now”?
 was suggested as a possible duplicate, but that post doesn't answer this question because it is about a different kind of sentence ("John is working now" is a progressive/continuous construction, but "My Mum's bag is blue" is not).


texts: How can I correctly ask a question like "What are our numbers?" meaning what are the number of people in the audience in comparison with number of people in some other audience.


texts: Isn't "But my pay was not even quite enough for one person much less several." missing a comma?

texts:
But my pay was not even quite enough for one person much less several.

Isn't a comma missing here? Should it not be:

But my pay was not even quite enough for one person, much less several.

?
I've often seen native English/American speakers/writers, and often quite intelligent ones, make this "mistake", and thus I'm beginning to think that it is not a mistake at all. But it seems very wrong to me. It doesn't look right to omit a comma, and it suggests to me that the author is prone to making "comma splices" in other contexts, sort of "shifting the meaning" of the comma.


texts:
What are the differences between the following and when do we use them?

There is still work to be done.
The work has to be done.
The work is to be done.


texts: What word is there for a man and a woman who have children together but are not in a romantic relationship and were never married?

texts:
I am trying to find a word in any language that would indicate the relationship of two people specifically because they have mated/bred/procreated together.

The closest I can find is co-parent but this isn't a one-word solution and seems to imply that both parties are currently actively parenting.

Looking to replace "my son's father" or "my son's mother."


texts: What is the term for a photo used to advertise a business such as a firm?

texts: I'm looking for the word that describes the portrait style photos used to advertise yourself to the world.  You often see these in the context of a law firm or theater artist profile.  Would profile be an adequate term?


texts:
A few years ago I was told not to use that word because, in addition to its negative meaning, it comes from Latin denigratus, past participle of denigrare, which means to blacken. Therefore, "to denigrate someone" would be "to blacken that person". Considering its current definition (see below) and the wish to be politically correct, I wonder whether the word has come to acquire any racist overtone.

The reason why I'm asking is because I was reading "Language Myths" a book by Laurie Bauer recently, and came across this passage which contained that word  "...certain educational institutions denigrate the way certain ethnic minorities and lower-working-class children talk."  Then I remembered I was once told not to use "denigrate" as it might be misinterpreted by some people.

  denigrate - from Merriam-Webster
  1. to say very critical and often unfair things about (someone)
  2. to attack the reputation of, to deny the importance or validity of, belittle

EDIT (on Dec 17th, 2017) - This article, Dark Words Of Disapproval which Mari-Lou A mentions in one of the comments, shows very clearly the writer's feelings about this word, with very good arguments to bear him out.

Then again, there are those who think otherwise. For one, Melvin B. Tolson, the character played by Denzel Washington in the 2007 feature film "The Great Debaters", says the word has racist undertones. -  Edit (on May 6th, 2020)


texts:
I just realized that throughout my life I have interchanged "I recommend that you do X" and "I would recommend that you do X".

Is there a difference in their meanings in modern-day usage, or are they functionally the same?


texts: What is the origin of skinflint and the image it is derived from

texts:
I would like to know what's the origin of the word skinflint.

When you lookup skinflint in a dictionary you will find a definition like the following:

A penurious person; a miser; a person who is stingy with money; a penny-pincher.

I can easily imagine what a penny-pincher literally describes but what's the image or action a skinflint is derived from?

I found on etymonline.com the following description:

  slang; literally "kind of person who would skin a flint to save or
  gain something"

But it's still unclear to me.

Has it to do with the knapping off flint flakes or the scraping of animal skins with a flint?


texts: I don't understand the following paragraph.What does it mean by "empathizing with someone"?

texts:
Source: SAT Practice Test 2 Reading Test for Assistive Technology - The College Board

  There are different views on where ethics should apply when someone makes an economic decision. Consider Adam Smith, widely regarded as the founder of modern economics. He was a moral philosopher who believed sympathy for others was the basis for ethics (we would call it empathy nowadays). But one of his key insights in The Wealth of Nations was that acting on this empathy could be counter-productive—he observed people becoming better off when they put their own empathy aside, and interacted in a self-interested way. Smith justifies selfish behavior by the outcome. Whenever planners use cost-benefit analysis to justify a new railway line, or someone retrains to boost his or her earning power, or a shopper buys one to get one free, they are using the same approach: empathizing with someone, and seeking an outcome that makes that person as well off as possible—although the person they are empathizing with may be themselves in the future.


texts: Case of website names in written communication

texts:
What is the appropriate way to write the names of websites in written communication?

If I treat them as the proper nouns that they are, I should write something like, "On the website Wordpress.com and CNN.com...".
On the other hand, what about names of stylised websites like tumblr? Should I write, "On my  tumblr.com site..."?
What are the rules for shortening the name of a site and dropping the .com? What happens if I then confuse my readers about whether I am referring to tumblr the company as opposed to the portal tumblr.com [sic?]?

Is there a style guide available that addresses questions like this?


texts: What's the difference between legal (illegal) and lawful (unlawful)?

texts: For example, why signage in national parks says "it's unlawful to feed wildlife" instead of illegal?


texts: Origin of the phrase "social justice warrior"

texts:
What is the origin of the phrase "social justice warrior"?

RationalWiki says that the phrase "social justice" (without warrior) originated in the 1840s.

Searching twitter for top tweets about "social justice warrior" got hits as early as August 2009. One tweet lead me to the ACLU blog post In Memory of a Social Justice Warrior: LGBT Rights Champion Carolyn Wagner from January 2011.

When and how did it become a popular phrase, possibly with capital letters ("Social Justice Warrior")? Also, was it coined and/or popularized by people who support social justice, their opponents, or a third party?


texts: I'm looking for a hypernym to replace "movies and plays" in "Some movies and plays ...". I think that there's a word that describes both but I just can't remember it.


texts: "Equalize" as a substitute for "counterbalance"

texts:
When I say "This is equalized by that" is this the correct way to express that the weight of "that" is equal to the weight of "this"? And I want to stress here that "that" is used to cancel out the effects of "this" metaphorically.
I've made some research into the usage of "equalize", but couldn't find a example of its usage where you use another object to convey the comparison of weight of the two.
"This is counterbalanced by that" should be correct word here, but I don't like it stylistically. Using "balance" instead of "counterbalance" seems like an option, but stylistically it seems too neutral and inexpressive.
I've also seen "outweigh" as a synonym for "counterbalance" but if anything, it creates an impression that one thing has greater in weight than the other on the first read, and I don't want that.
More specific example: "The achievements of people equalized/counterbalanced/outweighed by government's corruption."


texts:
With a sentence like, "He sat on the couch," is sat still being used as an intransitive verb since, in general, prepositional phrases cannot act as direct objects? To me, the prepositional phase "on the couch" seems to be behaving like a direct object. If it is not behaving like a direct object, then I should not be able to construct a passive voice version of the sentence (i.e., "The couch was sat on by him"). To be sure, no one would actually use this passive voice construction, but it was nonetheless possible to create.
What am I misunderstanding here?


texts: What is the structure in "as best you can"?

texts:
I instinctively translate it "as best as you can", however this makes no sense.  What is the real structure behind this phrase?

I'll include an Ngram to illustrate the historical presence of this phrase:

http://ngrams.googlelabs.com/ngrams/chart?content=as+best+you+can%2Cas+well+as+you+can&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=0&smoothing=3

Whatever the structure is, I'm guessing that it has something to do with 19th century grammar.


texts: Word describing 'not content with small achievement, but working hard to achieve higher level'

texts: I am looking for a single English word which describes the mental quality of being not content with small achievement, but working hard to achieve higher level. For example, an artist who is not satisfied with winning a prize or fame, but focusing on his art of work and trying to discover a new way of impression and inspiration in his work.


texts: How can I use "perspective" to express "in my opinion"?

texts:
Should I use "from my perspective", or "in my perspective" or "on my perspective?"
Can "standpoint" and "view" be used in the same way?


texts: Single-word or idiom request to mean "overshoot the runway" and its etymology

texts:
In yesterday's Outfront anchored by Erin Burnett, she and one of the panelists exchanged the below conversation:

  Burnett: So, Van, Clinton was wrong technically in terms of there's
  been no evidence of video. Okay? Wrong on that. Does she owe Donald
  Trump an apology?

  Van Jones, Former Special Adviser to President Obama: Well,
  I don't think so. First of all, she overshot the runway trying
  to make an accurate point. Lots and lots of terrorism experts have
  said over and over again, when you have the kind of bombastic rhetoric
  that Donald Trump has and increasingly other Republicans have, where
  it seems like they're smearing all Muslims...

The topic was whether Clinton should apologize for her unsubstantiated remarks in the debate:

  The country needed to make sure the really discriminatory messages
  that Trump is sending around the world don’t fall on receptive ears.
  He is becoming ISIS’s best recruiter. They are going out people
  showing videos of Donald Trump insulting Islam and Muslims in order to
  recruit more radical jihadists.

The noun runway means:

  A strip of hard ground along which aircraft take off and land.

[Oxford Online Dictionary]

I understand its meaning in the context, but what does it exactly mean? I tried to Google the idiom, but I found only one hit in Urban Dictionary whose definition doesn't seem to fit in the context (I don't want to put it here).
I wonder if there are any other (better) single words or idioms that can express the same meaning in the above quote. Any suggestion?
I can't find the origin of the idiom. I would like to know when and how the idiom started to mean what it means now. I can just speculate it could have started as a military term.


texts: Correct usage for "bad" v. "poor" adjectives

texts:
The way I was taught many years ago was that something like quality can be poor, but not bad.
The reasoning was that "bad" is a value/moral whereas poor applies to non-value qualities. In this case, evil people can be bad, but not poor (unless they have no money).
Is this still the case? I find more often that people use "bad" to describe most things that "poor" would traditionally be used for.

Poor

This burger was really ____ quality.
Wow, that chair is of ____ craftsmanship.
Johnson handled the account ____ly, so we lost it.
He drives so ____ly, it is a wonder how he ever passed his test in the first place.

Bad

That barking dog is ____.
The ____ boy broke my window.
No one can dispute that Hitler was a ____ man.

So what about where things are less clear-cut? What's the rule of thumb?

Wow, that's a really ____ computer you have.
My S.O. always treats me ____ly when I forget to take out the trash.
I hate that garage! The mechanic always does a ____ job!


texts:
From an interview (doesn't matter with whom):

  ...unfortunately, we have a nuclear world now. And you have,
  Pakistan has them. You have, probably, North Korea has them

What is the meaning of the phrase "you have"? Is it like "look, here you are"?


texts: This question has divided the office into two camps.  Camp 1 believes the correct way to indicate the relationship in this sentence is to use the client's name as a possessive, as in "When UltraGalactic's employees call the Customer Service line..."  Camp 2 believes the apostrophe can be dropped because "UltraGalactic" is modifying "employees," and therefore the possessive is assumed. Frankly, I don't understand the uproar over typing two additional characters, but I'd appreciate your feedback.


texts:
Should I use "Be", "Become", "Get" in this sentence?

"Due to it being one of a/the few restaurants in this area, Saturday evenings can become/get/be busy so it is advised to pre-book by calling 0789343894."


texts: Is the “Beltway Stop" a popular metaphor meaning a concurrence of events or things?

texts:
I'm interested in the phrase, “Beltway Stop in the Oscar Race” which is the title of an article appearing in December 21 New York Times.
It comments on the concurrence of movies focused on the country’s politics in Oscar prize race as follows:

  “In the last few weeks Washington and its corridors of power have
  become an unusual second front in the annual battle for Hollywood’s
  best picture Oscar. No fewer than three leading contenders —
  Lincoln, Zero Dark Thirty and Argo — have found their prize
  campaigns entwined with the nation’s politics.”

OALED defines Belt-way as 'an AmE - a Ring road, especially the one around Washington DC.' But I surmise that “Beltway stop” here implies a succession of events or things, represented by the concurrence of three politics-focused films as contenders in the Oscar race.
I wonder if this expression is used very often in writing and conversation, or just a nonce-word invented for this specific article.

Additionally, why is the ‘stop’ in singular form when there are three political-theme contenders (instances) of “Lincoln,” “Zero Dark Thirty” and “Argo” in the Oscar race?


texts: How to say ‘review and see what’s wrong’?

texts: I would like ask how to describe ’review the questions I did wrong and find out why’ correctly? Is there any vocabularies or phrases can simplify that? Thank you:)


texts: How to deal with quoting a grammatical error?

texts:
What should you do if you’re quoting someone, and that quote has a grammatical error?

Say for example that I’m quoting this line from the American Pregnancy Association:

  The term used for a pregnancy that ends on it’s own, within the first 20 weeks of gestation.

The proper way to write this is without the apostrophe. I know that, and you know that, but  the Association’s proofreader apparently missed it.

The question is what I should do now: how can I quote this without sounding like I’m the one committing a grammatical error?


texts:
A single person speaking to another person or a group is called a

monologue

Multiple people speaking to each other is called a

dialogue

How is it called when multiple people speak to another person/group without speaking with each other, like for example a presentation?

Is this still a dialogue? Or is it rather a

multilogue

?


texts:
Question 1

The way our parents treated us in childhood reflects on our subconscious and understanding of love. - What about sequence tenses in this sentence?

Context: What we understand as “love” was put into our mind in childhood when we didn’t understand that term. The way our parents treated us in childhood reflects on our subconscious and understanding of love.

Question 2

There is a description of how we go mental, then recognize craziness and then suffer more and more until this circle is finished. - Do we need a comma before then?

I bet the first one, but why? - do we need a comma before but in this case?

Context: There is a description of how we go mental, then recognize craziness and then suffer more and more until this circle is finished. There are 2 pictures that you might like. (I bet you like the first one, but why?)


texts:
In the movie Allied, Marianne says to Max, who just arrived home, "You were ages."

What does this mean?

The Cambridge Dictionary says that ages means a very long time, like in
It’s been ages since I’ve seen you.

but is "you were ages" grammatical? Is it a common idiomatic expression?


texts: What does "So you are going to be famous ?!" express?

texts:
My teacher gave us a dialogue the other day and the boy said he was playing in a band so his friend said : Oh, that must be exciting! So you are going to be famous ?
Then she gave us a question : What does "So you are going to be famous ?" express? She said it expressed inquiring for information but I don't agree with her. An information is something concrete isn't it? But this boy doesn't know yet if he is going to be famous or not and she was saying that in an excited voice. So please what does it express?


texts: What's the correct usage: embattled customers whose flats are in limbo despite them or their having made the payment? What's the logic?


texts: How long has "looney" (meaning "lunatic") been in use?

texts: How long has looney been used as an abbreviation of lunatic? Is it a recent addition or something substantially older?


texts: What's the meaning behind the idiom "Answers on a postcard"? Answers on a postcard, please

texts:
I don't hear this phrase used often anymore; of course it was common many years ago when people still actually sent postcards instead of Instagram posts. Since it's not used often now, trying to find the origin and meaning behind it has resulted in conflicting or vague descriptions.
So what does it mean, and does it have more than one meaning? For example, it might be genuine request for answers to a proposed question, but they're expected to be brief. However, I've heard it being used in a sarcastic tone, like "Will Covid-19 cause a recession? Answers on a postcard, please."


texts:
Please take a look at the following two images:

In India, it's customary to refer to the thing in the first image as a "gas stove" and the second as a"cooking range" or "hob." Is it the same in American homes?


texts: Drove my chevy to the levy and the levy was dry

texts:
Years ago I had this English teacher (from UK) who asked us to translate American Pie to Swedish. A quite difficult task of course :). Anyhow, he told us that "Drove my Chevy to the levy but the levy was dry" meant I drove my Chevrolet to the movie theatre but the film was dull.
Anyone else who has heard this?


texts:
Example from page 75 of Frederick Schauer’s Thinking Like a Lawyer:

  But what of mandatory authorities? Are they as “binding” as the traditional
  terminology suggests? The answer depends on what is meant by
  “binding,” and it turns out that speaking of “binding” authority can be
  just as misleading as speaking of “persuasive” authority.

What are the similarities and differences between what about and what of? I see that the definitions below are worded differently, but I don’t see any intrinsic differences — which I still suspect must exist.

  what about
  1a. does that include (someone) : how about (someone)
  1b. how does that affect (someone or something) :
  2. used to make a suggestion about what could be done
  3. used to ask someone to tell you something in response to the thing that you have just said

  what of
  1. formal how does that affect (someone or something)
  2. why does (something) matter


texts: Word for people who have the same affliction

texts:
Suppose two people meet and learn that they both suffer from similar or analogous afflictions – e.g., they both:

Spilled their meal on the floor.
Have been walking through the same desert, both looking for something lost
Are suffering from diseases with similar characteristics

Is there a single word that could allude to this relationship or the fact that they share a similar or analogous affliction or misfortune?

This is a more general case of Synonym for "Fellow Sufferers"?  Neither that nor "partners in misfortune" works because the people in question are not (necessarily) partners or fellows.  I don't want to assert more than that "they're in the same boat" (to incorporate the first answer).

E.g., none of the following attempts work: "We are affliction twins."  "She is my relationship sympathizer."  "You are my co-sufferer."


texts: One word for "insulting someone by mimicking them"?

texts:
Suppose John has a foreign accent and Mark does not.
The two get into an argument with each other. At some point, Mark has no good reply, so he simply mimics John in his accent to insult him. Is there a word for such behavior?


texts:
I would like some help in choosing the correct sentence between:

A. I received comments from Person A
B. I received comments by Person

Does it matter if the sentences alter to

A. This paper benefits from comments and clarifications received by
Person/Persons name/s
B. This paper benefits from comments and clarifications received from
Person/Persons name/s


texts: Word for a person who doesn’t let anyone get in their way?

texts: I have to write about Miss Trunchbull in English, and Dahl states ‘she ploughed on like a tank, with small people bouncing off her to left and right.’ So I thought she doesn’t let anyone get in her way? But when I searched it, it came up with strong minded, and I don’t want her to sound like a good person.


texts: Do we just need "this morning" or have to use "in this morning"? Ex: "He fed his dog (in) this morning?"

texts:
Ok, let see these sentences:

"He fed his dog in the morning"

"He fed his dog this morning"

"He fed his dog in this morning"

So, which sentence is correct?

It seems that the 2nd one is used more commonly


texts:
I came to "English Language & Usage" in hopes of clarifying a common "Me" or "I" question, and found significant consensus as long as convention is followed: "Me and my wife went to the movies" is incorrect grammar. However, the consensus also seems to be that "I and my wife went to the movies" is incorrect usage because the convention is to "put yourself last because it is polite". So "I and my wife went to the movies" is correct, but don't ever use it!

Which prompted my question: Do rules of grammar apply to unconventional language usage? I understand that it is a simple question for a nuanced subject, but it seems in this example you're left with "Yes, the rules of grammar apply as long as you follow this other thing which is not a rule"!


texts: Equivalent of eponym for short story/compendium?

texts:
Is there a specific word for the short story whose title is also the title of a compendium of short stories containing that one? The closest I can come up with is eponym but that doesn't feel quite right.

On the one hand, the compendium is named after the short story, so that sounds like it fits the definition of eponym:

of, relating to, or being the person or thing for whom or which something is named

But this question seems unanswered/debatable as to whether or not eponymous can apply to something other than a person.

Is there a word other than eponymous that better fills the blank below?

In the ____ short story of Wallace's "Oblivion", we meet Randall, who...


texts: Is it possible that using “whom” these days can slow down and confuse readers and listeners?

texts: In casual conversation, even in written discourse, has English evolved to where using “whom” can slow down readers and confuse listeners ?


texts: The King Rides. Is there a name for this?

texts:
There's a line in Mark Twain's "Yankee" that goes like this:

  "And so it might be, if he were sleeping," I said, "but the king is
  not sleeping, the king rides."

The simple present here doesn't raise any flags, even though logically it should. But it doesn't. Why not? Is this a special tense of some sort, and if so, does it have a name?


texts:
I've come across the following statement while reading an article.

  In the strawman scenario shown in Figure 4(a), we use Iperf to
  measure the bandwidth between STA3 and H4 during 60s.

Figure 4(a) depicts a diagram utilized as an example to help to explain the text.
However, what does strawman scenario actually mean?


texts: On the velar nasal /ŋ/ sound followed by /k/

texts:
I'm a non-native speaker and I have always pronounced all words with syllables ending in 'n' followed by a /k/ sound with the velar nasal /ŋ/. For example:

  think / increase (v+n) / income / incomplete.

This was just acquired naturally without any intentional training.
(I understand that words ending with 'nk' like 'think' do get the velar /ŋ/ sound, and that's something that gets explained to ESL learners).

I was surprised when I recently found out that many of these words are transcribed as /nk/ rather than /ŋk/ in the dictionaries (Oxford, Cambridge, Merriam-Webster for example), and I have a few questions about it:

Do all of you native speakers follow these dictionary patterns, or are there some among you who follow a pattern similar to mine?
What's the difference or the rule that makes a word like 'inkling' get an /ŋ/ while a word like 'include' get an /n/? And generally is there rules for which words with 'nk'/'nc' sequences get an /n/ sound and which get an /ŋ/ sound?
I played the word 'conclude' repeatedly on different dictionaries, and they all sound as having an /ŋ/ to my ear. Are these dictionary transcriptions universally accurate!? Do you hear it as an /n/ when you listen to it? Can native speakers normally distinguish the two sounds in all contexts?
When I say a word like 'conclude' I find it much easier to pronounce it with an /ŋ/, because with an /n/sound it's switching from a velar to an alveolar and back to velar, while with an /ŋ/ sound it's all velar. Do you native speakers pronounce it with an /n/ sound?!
For people with ESL teaching experience among you, do you bring up this topic with your students?

(And thanks for your patience!)


texts: What situation do you use ‘if I need persuading’ in?

texts:
I can understand need persuading virtually means need to be persuaded, but once it’s implanted in a sentence as the form of “if I need persuading”, I can’t figure out what the speaker is saying.
In the following citation, it seems that Harry doesn’t conclude his sentence after if I need persuading. Because of this, I can understand even less. So I tried searching for other examples on the Net, but I could find few examples and it’s difficult for me to understand their meanings clearly. I’d be happy if you could help me.
(Harry and Myrtle are hearing a chorus of a magical egg and trying to solve the mystery of the lyrics. Harry has to be under water when he hears the song.)
(the egg’s song)

"Come seek us where our voices sound,
We cannot sing above the ground,
And while you're searching, ponder this:
We've taken what you'll sorely miss,
An hour long you'll have to look,
And recover what we took,
But past an hour - the prospect's black
Too late, it's gone, it won't come back."
”Hear it?” said Myrtle.
”Yeah… ‘Come seek us where our voices sound …’ and if I need persuading … hang on, I need to listen again….”  (He sank back again in the water.)(Harry Potter 4 [US Version]: p.463)

I have no idea. What is he trying to say?
(From Google search)

Q: How can I persuade my mum to get me a dog?
A: If your mom needs persuading she does not want a dog. I am a mom of 4 children and 2 dogs and if I need persuading over anything the answer is ‘I don't want it’.

I feel it roughly means 'absolutely'. The same goes for 'if your mom needs persuading', I suppose. 'Need' might mean 'strongly want' and the mother has a strong desire to get her son a dog (she wants to be persuaded by her son) but the situation prevents it completely.
EDIT: adding the egg’s song to the citation.


texts: "Subterranean", but for planets/surfaces other than Earth

texts:
Subterranean : existing, situated, or operating below the surface of the earth; underground.

Informally, we can use subterranean to describe that which lies below the surface; technically, terranean refers to terra, the Latin name for Earth.

What word could we use to mean that which lies below a surface, in general. I.e., what would we say about caves under the surface of Mars, "submartian"?


texts: Term for phenomenon of going to another room and forgetting the task

texts:
This phenomenon can be summarized as thus:

You are in one area of your house.  You are in the midst of a task
Something is required from another area of the house.  You leave to get it
When you arrive there, you see a non-related task.  It is a quick task.  You do this quick task, and remember you were in the first room doing the primary task.  You return there
Upon returning you immediately remember that you couldn't continue until you obtained the item from the second room, where you did the quick, unrelated task

What is the term or phrase that describes this phenomenon?


texts: First usage of "honey pot" or "honey trap" in the context of espionage

texts:
I have seen both "honey pot" and "honey trap" used by le Carre and Forsyth in their novels, and as both are ex-spooks, I am assuming this was the terminology.

It describes a person who is used as a sex object to attract an asset.

Also a source of many a man's downfall
.

On the other hand, it has also been suggested that it derives from the Russian expression that describes a particular strategty.

kompromat

  One aspect of kompromat that stands the test of time is that the compromising information is often sexual in nature.

-Wikipedia

Does the term honey trap/pot come from a foreign source, or was it used in spy game before World War II?

From what I recall...possibly it was from Peter Wright, Spycacther...and his memoirs are mostly pre-WWII


texts: Is there a word for "outsourcing work to an internal employee/person"?

texts: A company wouldn't say they, "outsourced their advertising to Jim", who is an employee of the company because that just doesn't sound right. What is a word similar to "outsource" in a situation like so?


texts: Is there a better word than "moot" for "not worth talking about"?

texts:
Of course a lot of people misunderstand the primary meaning of the adjective "moot" -- "open to question" or "argued about but not possible to prove" -- using the word only in the expression "moot point", which rightly or wrongly is often taken to mean "not worth debating".  As a result the word is apt to cause confusion, even when properly used.

So is there a better word to use for the minor meaning of "moot" -- "not worth talking about" or "no longer important or worth discussing"?  A term which might be used in the sentence "The question of what color to paint the ceiling is _____ since we won't be adding on after all"?

(One advantage of "moot" in this sense is that it's short and abrupt, which serves to enhance the meaning.  Except that the wrong meaning may still be "heard".)


texts: What is the meaning of "ail" in this dictionary website example?

texts:
What can substitute the word ail in the sentence

  Another fact you ail to demonstrate is how the wealthy somehow get rich on the back of the poor

without changing the meaning?

[Quote from dictionary.com]


texts: Is there a single word for "becoming lucid"

texts:
Often when I want to say that something became clear, I may instead say that the thing "became lucid" or that the thing is "becoming lucid"

is there a single word that I can substitute for this?


texts: Synonym for "worse" with no negative connotation

texts:
Say there are two records in a band's discography and neither of them is bad. What's a better term than "worse" to refer to one record not being as great as the other record? Since both records are good, using the word "worse" might mean to some people that the record is bad.

What other terms or phrases could be used so that something won't be painted in a negative light in comparison to something else?


texts: Comma usage within essential subordinate clauses

texts:
I have a sentence with a rather complex 'so that' subordinate clause that contains two clauses, each of which could stand alone as a complete sentence. I know the comma before 'so that' would be wrong, but should I use a comma between the two clauses within the 'so that' phrase? For example:

"For the experiment, the restriction enzymes were digested so that the inserts became larger and it was easier to see the final product."

or

"For the experiment, the restriction enzymes were digested so that the inserts became larger, and it was easier to see the final product."

The original sentence was far more complex than this; each clause had additional elements and/or parenthetical information, stretching the entire thing out over four lines of text. Arguably a comma would make the clauses easier to digest, kinda like the restriction enzymes, but I'm not so sure how strict the rule on omitting commas before essential subordinate clauses is and whether it stretches to additional clauses within.


texts: Phrasal variations for "advance warning" and their origins

texts:
I just used the phrase "just giving you a heads-up" for the first time in years, and it got me thinking about the origins of the expression and variations of it.

Heads-up (nominal) is essentially the equivalent of advance warning and heads up (phrasal verb in the imperative) is basically pay attention. Some examples:

  The boss is going to come by later, so I just wanted to give you a heads-up!

and

  Heads up, the boss is going to come by later!

There's more discussion in this Q/A, but the origin of heads up is not my question. I want to know about variations of the phrase (in the sense of advance warning), and their origins.

I know of a few variations off the top of my head:

look/watch out: Watch out, the boss is coming by later and he's not happy.
look alive: Look alive, the boss is coming by later for an inspection.

but I don't know where these expressions came from. What are some variations of heads up in the sense of advance warning and the origins of those variations?


texts:
Today in my city, it's raining very slowly. What is this called in English?.

I am from India. In Hindi we say 'Rimjhim'. What is it called in English?


texts: Correct or incorrect use of the word “Criminalistic”?

texts:
I was wondering whether “criminalistic” is the correct word to use in this sentence:

“Even though many believe he was a villain for being an apparent corrupt criminalistic politician, Augustus, formally known as Octavian ...”

I have done multiple searches but I don't  really understand what they are saying. Here is the website I was looking at https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/criminalistic .If it’s not the right word can you please suggest some alternatives?

What I'm basically trying to say is that people have said he was a “corrupt politician” and “rose to power by criminal methods”, but when I type criminalistic into word it tries to change it to “criminalistics” and obviously that’s not the right word to use.


texts:
Possible Duplicate:
  Difference between “each” and “every”

I'm not sure if I should use for each or for every in the quoted sentence.
On one hand it sounds better to use for each, on the other hand, I think when talking about how often something happens we must use for every.

  1 . Employee A has a shift planned for each of the 5 days in a row.
   2 . Employee A has a shift planned for every of the 5 days in a row

Which one do you think is the right one here or is there any other way for stating that ?


texts: Word for an idea that is often touted as true but in fact the opposite is true?

texts:
I'm looking for a word that describes an idea that is often held out as true or used as a rationale though in fact the opposite is true. Something like "common misconception" or "antipattern" come close, but I feel as though there's a better word I'm missing.

Examples:

"Refusing to use popular security algorithms because everyone knows how they work is a [word], since it is because everyone knows how they work that they are so safe."

Not necessarily saying I 100% agree with the following, but someone who advocates for Keto might say this:

"Trying to lose weight by cutting out fat is a [word], because replacing carbohydrates and proteins with fat allows the body to enter ketosis, which is one of the best states for losing weight."

Thanks in advance.


texts: Capitalisation of "co-chair" and "co-host"?

texts:
We have the title "Chair" in our organization for functions.  Our Education Chair wants a person of equal help in the form of a co-chair.

1) When listing these two people in a sentence:

  Your new Education co-Chairs are Sue Y and Robert  X....

Do I capitalize co-Chair, Co-Chair, or co-chair?

2) What about a list of officers?

  Sue Y, Education Co-Chair, Robert X, Co-Chair

These aren't in the beginning of a sentence.  Do I capitalize co-Chair, Co-Chair, or co-chair?

Is it the same rule for co-Host, Co-host, Co-Host of an event?


texts: how to determine whether I should go with singular or plural in the following sentence?

texts:
I was just wondering what to choose between singular and plural in the following usage:
"Both functional and individual distributions/distribution of national income are/is addressed in the literature."
Thanks.


texts: When are reciprocal pronouns preceded by "to"?

texts:
I Have Been reading respect reciprocal pronouns and their rules/uses, but I haven't Found the reason why sometimes they are preceded by "to" .For example:

"Brenda and Lana speak TO each other every day"
"Peter and David hate each other"

Both are valids? Or Am i losing a grammar fact respect to this?
Can I say "Brenda and Lana speak each other every day" / "Peter and David hate TO each other?

Thanks in advance!


texts:
We have missed executing this activity for the two consecutive weeks.
'For the two consecutive weeks'. Is the usage of article 'THE' mandatory here?


texts: Difference between word-final iː, i and ɪ

texts:
As we know, English usually contrasts the two high front vowels /i:/ and /ɪ/, and many different minimal pairs exist for this (e.g. /sli:p/ vs /slɪp/). However, at the end of a word, we usually have neither /ɪ/ nor /i:/, but /i/ (e.g. /sɪti/).

For a long time, I believed that this was, effectively, a merger of /i:/ and /ɪ/ in word-final positions. However, I recently stumbled upon some minimal pairs that seemingly have an /i:/-/i/ distinction in word-final positions, e.g. guarantee vs guaranty or trustee vs trusty.

So, I was wondering:

1) Are these really different sounds, or is this more an case of spelling-pronunciation?
2) Is it because the stressing changes?
3) And if they are different, can /ɪ/ occur at the end of a word as well?
4) Are there /i/-/ɪ/ minimal pairs, or maybe even /i:/-/i/-/ɪ/ minimal triples?

5) Effectively, is /i/ an independent phoneme or a word-final allophone of /i:/ and/or /ɪ/, and when do the different variants occur (word-finally)?


texts: Is there a word to designate people enforcing that nobody is poaching at sea

texts:
Coastguards are an organization created for maritime security.

What I am looking for is a more precise word to designate the organization whose role is to enforce that fishing boats don't fish forbidden resources and respect fishing quotas.

Does this word exist? Is coastguards a good replacement?


texts:
I would like to know what would be the correct sentence here. I just want to say that I left the city on the weekend.

  I went out of the city on Saturday.
    I went outside the city on
  Saturday.


texts: Synonyms for "speak of the devil [and he doth/shall appear]"

texts:
Specifically, I'm looking for something that would fit in the same situation, but I need a less negative connotation. Saying that when my Dad, for instance, walks into the room while I'm talking about him, well, that sort of seems to imply I think he's the devil.

Naturally, any help or criticism of my question is welcome. I can't improve if I don't know something's wrong.


texts: Meaning of the sentence, "she is the kind of lawyer most skilled at finding reasons not to do things"

texts:
I have read a passage from wikileak:

  AIT/T has had regular contact with Tsai Ing-wen on
  economic, political and cross-Strait issues (ref B).  She
  is a savvy insider on formulating and implementing policy
  for the ruling party.  She was the DPP campaign manager for
  the December 3 elections in Taipei County.  As Vice
  Premier, we expect her to be consistently well informed on
  issues and very clear about the policy positions that the
  Chen Administration will stake out.  She is the kind of
  lawyer most skilled at finding reasons not to do things.
  As the person who started Taiwan's push for a Free Trade
  Agreement with the U.S., we can expect that she will
  continue this effort and push even harder in light of the
  July 2007 expiration of trade negotiating authority.

(source: https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/06TAIPEI221_a.html )

And I don't quite understand the meaning of that sentence: She is the kind of
lawyer most skilled at finding reasons not to do things.

Below are some possibilities:

(A) She is lazy and has a lot of excuses running away from things that she should do.

(B) She is good at distinguishing things she should or shouldn't do.

(C) When there's something she thinks is unnecesary, she is very good at telling others reasons not to do that.

(D) It probably is a typo. Maybe the author is trying to say She is the kind of
lawyer most skilled at finding reasons to do things.


texts: I think I can use tech-illiterate. However, this word seems to have a negative aura. Is there any word choice with a more positive feel?


texts:
As many of you know, there is a famous song by the Beatles entitled Love Me Do. Nevertheless, I have some doubts about the correctness of such a title.

Does "love me do" mean the same as "love me" or is the verb do acting as some type of intensifier in the sentence in question?

Thanks in advance for your replies!


texts:
I am reading B. Traven's adventure The Treasure of the Sierra Madre, which is about three men who secretly go prospecting for gold. On their way home with their new-found loot they cover their tracks by tearing down their mining camp. Howard (the most experienced of the party) verbally beams with pride over a job well done. Dobbs, another member, takes offense at Howard's response. The quoted section can be found here:

  The mine was leveled to the satisfaction of Howard. Anybody now coming upon the mine by chance would never think that a mine had been worked here, or if at all, not during the last hundred years.

  "Doesn't it give you guys a real joy to look at the place now?" Howard asked with pride in his voice.

  "All right," Dobbs said, "you have it your way and you feel happy, so please, for the love of Mike's booze, leave us in peace with your feelings. Sometimes I think you must have been a preacher, only the hell of it is I can't figure out what church it was you wanted to catch birds for."

When I found a definition of bird (Definition 5.a) that is slang for fellow, I took Dobbs' words to catch birds for to be reminiscent of the Christian saying fisher of men, meaning the minister is actively looking for people to convert. In past conversations, Dobbs has been known to use slang like mug to refer to people. But being more familiar with the usages meaning a young woman or a person, especially one who is odd or remarkable, I thought this usage unlikely and continued to look for another.

So I wondered if Dobbs was making an allusion to bird dogs, who retrieve birds for their masters. (One might say a minister retrieves the lost for a higher power, a superior in the church or for God.) This could be an insult to Howard, the slight being that Howard would be a subordinate instead of the senior/equal he was when mining with Dobbs. This insult makes sense in this context, because Dobbs has a history of viewing Howard as a taskmaster, as shown by Dobbs's outburst when he cuts his own hand at the beginning of the chapter. But this analogy of bird dogs seems tenuous and elaborate.

I've searched Google for "catching birds," but the most relevant results are the proverb "A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush." I wondered if Dobbs was speaking of some duty, tradition, or superstition associated with ministers, but I have found nothing.

What does "to catch birds for" mean?


texts:
I have listened to the pronunciation of the word skull  in both Oxford and Longman Dictionaries AE and BE.

I do not feel that u in skull is pronounced like the u in cup ,it is more similar to the oo in book.

Is there a reason for that ?


texts: Why do some speakers pronounce the aɪ sound as ɔɪ?

texts:
Essentially, I'm referring to how some British English speakers pronounce words like "time", "right". That first vowel changes and ends up sounding like "toyme" or "royght". Americans seem to have picked up on it, often laughing at us pronouncing "license" as "loicense", so it's definitely a real phenomenon.

It's something I've noticed among a lot of people, but it seems to be found somewhat randomly geographically - everywhere from the Black Country to Essex, and also in people from parts of the North. Is it a feature of some regional accents, or is it a class/age thing?


texts: How to create a questions from past modal verb sentences

texts:
I have no idea why my question was closed as it was pretty clear (at least for a person of average intelligence) so I am trying again:
There is a sentence, e.g:

  He could have seen that.

Will the question be:

  Could he have seen that?

And with how, will it be like this?

  How could he have seen that?


texts: The Relationship Between an Ex and the Current Partner?

texts:
My wife's ex-husband is my __?

It sort of felt a bit awkward to see the woman, her current husband, her ex-husband, and her and her ex-husband's children in one room together. They all seem to be at ease and are bonding very well. Anyway, what is the relationship called between the two men?


texts:
So, Cambridge Dictionary proposes "/su:/"
and seems most of the examples on youtube for instance have this form.
However many dictionaries offer an alternative form as "/sju:/", and it is articulated here for example: Macmillan dictionary
I wonder which one is correct and which dialect each of them belongs to?


texts: I'm looking for ways to say "I'm having a bad hunch", or more like a bad feeling about something upcoming. The gut-wrenching feeling that something bad will happen.


texts: Is there a word for an inferior substitute?

texts: I was wondering if there is a word in English to describe a person fulfilling another's role, albeit not as proficient.


texts: The sun and fun pictures never do adequately express the feelings of being there.