texts: An indefinite article before 'boys' in 'Man thinks about a little bit of baby girls and a baby boys'

texts: There's a line in James Brown's song 'It's A Man's, Man's, Man's World' puzzling me. It goes : 'Man thinks about a little bit of baby girls and a baby boys' - why is there an indefinite article before "baby boys" ? Thank you from a non-native speaker.


texts: "If the robot can learn from a human, it can/could keep track of humans."

texts:
I have the following sentence and I don't know whether "can" or "could" would be a better choice.

  If the robot can learn from a human, it could keep track of humans.
  If the robot can learn from a human, it can keep track of humans.

Which one is correct in a proper English structure?


texts: Identifying the noun for noun-verb agreement

texts:
In the following sentence, what is the correct verb to use:

  "We identified $130,000 in costs that [were/was] not eligible for reimbursement."

I'm thinking that "$130,000" (and not "costs")  is the noun, is this correct?


texts: Present Progressive or Simple Present for things that could be considered as a repeated action or as an action happening right now?

texts:
There's one thing about Simple Present versus Present Progressive which is still not quite clear to me.

The rough overview is1:
Use simple present for repeated actions, general things.
Use present progressive for actions happening right now or temporarily.

Well, sometimes I'm not quite sure if something is rather considered a general thing or just temporarily.

Here's an example:
I'm a software engineer and while coding I for sure comment my code. I just wrote the following comment:

  // [...] As some services are holding instances of the view, we need to remove the service provider to release the view.

I'm not sure if Present Progressive or Simple Present would be the right/better choice.2
On the one hand, it's a general thing or repeated action, because each time we run through that code the services hold instances.
On the other hand, right in that moment we run through that code, services are holding instances of the view.

I can't quite guess which version would feel right to a native speaker. While the Present Progressive version sounds better to my ear, I feel, however, that Simple Present would be the more appropriate tense to use.

Which tense would be your choice?

1 There are certainly more use cases for both of them, but those are not relevant to my question.
2 Same issue would still be present when I'd write "As some services would hold/would be holding" in order to refer to what would happen if I wouldn't remove the service provider instead of referring to the moment when this code is raised.


texts: How do you punctuate around parentheses?

texts:
Which of these punctuation examples is more correct?

  On December 7, 1941, ("a date which will live in infamy") Japan bombed Pearl Harbor.
  On December 7, 1941 ("a date which will live in infamy"), Japan bombed Pearl Harbor.
  On December 7, 1941, ("a date which will live in infamy"), Japan bombed Pearl Harbor.

Edit: A little background on my question may be in order. According to most, if not all, online references I could find, a comma is required after the year when writing a date in the above American style. For example, from Wikipedia: "most style manuals, including The Chicago Manual of Style and the AP Stylebook, recommend that the year be treated as a parenthetical, requiring a second comma after it." See also, Chicago Manual of Style Online, the Language Portal of the Canadian Government, and Wikipedia's own style guide.

I couldn't find a reference for how to punctuate serial parentheticals.


texts:
What a strange construction is it? Why does it sound so strange to me, Ukrainian fella? For instance, why "him" instead of "he".
And, first of all, what does it mean? I even cannot translate it correctly.


texts: When writing out a phone conversation can you use multiple capitals in a row?

texts:
When writing out a phone conversation for the purpose of transcription or translation, is it correct to write:

1) Hey, Hi, Well...
OR
2) Hey, hi, well...

I personally think 2, but others disagree... so just wanted to check.

Thank you!


texts:
I'm working in a big company with lots of employees.
We have 'Skype for business application with which we communicate and interact with each other .
I want to update my status to something like:

I'm not willing to answer non-work messages.

I want to know whether there are better alternatives.


texts:
I just read the below sentence. Is it possible to have expectations substantiated? Would it not be better to use met or realized?

There is risk of disappointment if expectations are not substantiated.


texts: What's another way to write "and on top of that"?

texts:
What is a more professional and academic way to write "and on top of that"?

  The man has excellent qualifications "and top of that" he has a position on the board.


texts: What are the rules for the use of words that have a variant ending in -al?

texts:
Possible Duplicate:
  Why is it “geometric” but “theoretical”?
  “Electric” vs. “electrical”

I think I'm clear on the difference between word pairs such as elector and electoral, where the latter pertains to the former, I'm not sure if the same rule applies to the following examples:

Numeric vs. numerical
Electric vs. electrical

Is the relationship between these the same as e.g. elector and electoral?


texts:
Background: In Finland, we have a word "uutiskynnys", and I am looking for a good translation for it. Literally it translates as "news threshold" or "news doorstep".

Uutiskynnys is used to measure if a news article is interesting enough to gain space in a newspaper (or any media). "Jimmy learned to ride a bike" is probably not interesting enough to get over the very high doorstep to the newsroom, while "deaf, blind and paraplegic Jimmy rides a bike to school every day" quite possibly is.

The essential meaning is to step over the doorstep ("kynnys") to the news ("uutis").

Google translated it as "news threshold", but google search did not convince me that it is used as such term.


texts: How Many Diphthongs Are There In English?

texts:
I was talking to a person who said that there were only two. I think she said that the "ou" in house is one of the two.

I told her that the way the letter "i" is pronounced is a diphthong, and she said it wasn't. She said it was just one vowel, "i" and that that was that.

She said she studied phonics and was writing her thesis (on child development, I think) on this kind of stuff. She said her book said there were only two diphthongs and that I was wrong.

So, how many are there? I told her I think there are probably more like ten.
I thought of six immediately, but she said they weren't diphthongs because her book didn't say they were.

"i" in time
"i" in bite
"o" in bone
"a" in bane
"oi" in boink
"ou" in house


texts: What do you call the gesture of raising both hands while shrugging your shoulders?

texts:
If somebody asks a question and you have no answer for it, then you can shrug your shoulders and move your hands up (with the palms of your hands turned to the sky).

Is there a word for what you do with your hands? It seems like an apologizing gesture people often do.


texts: I am confused whether river fish can be categorised under "seafood".


texts: Nationalities - When do we use the singular or plural form

texts:
I always have doubts whether to use a singular or a plural noun when I refer to certain peoples.  For example, we say Americans, Italians, Brazilians, Russians and Austrians.  But we say The British, The English, The Portuguese, The French, The Spanish, The Chinese, and The Irish. When it comes to those nationals I rarely hear of, I'm never sure. These would include people from countries such as Azerbaijan, Armenia or Kenya.
Is there any rule as to whether we should use singular or plural ?


texts:
...why not football mom, baseball mom, or basketball mom?

Soccer mom, as far as I can tell, is an American term made popular during the 1996 presidential elections, used to describe a key demographic - mothers who, by spending lots of time shuttling their children to and from soccer practice, demonstrate that they were concerned about their children. Other attributes often associated with this demographic are suburban, married, busy, drives a minivan/SUV and so on.

What puzzles me is the choice of sport in the term: why soccer? Globally, soccer is an extremely popular sport, but there are many sports more popular than it in USA, and I imagine this would extend to after-school activities. I see that in Canada there's the equivalent term hockey mom which makes more sense.

Was the term coined in a place and time where soccer was a more natural choice? Is soccer a more prominent sport in the after-school world? Or was there some other historical accident?


texts: Treat Hypothetical Entities as Proper Nouns?

texts:
I am working with mathematical papers and commonly encounter situations where the author designates hypothetical entities. For example:

  We assume that player 1 moves first.

Should references to hypothetical (otherwise unnamed) players such as player 1 be capitalized?


texts: "Zeitgeist" but for groups smaller than society as a whole?

texts:
Is there a word/phrase capturing the meaning of "zeitgeist" but not focused on society as a whole? Another German loan would be fine.

Some of the examples at Word like "zeitgeist" for beliefs or Is there an English variant of "Zeitgeist" other than "spirit of the times"? are pretty good but don't connote everything I'm interested in (e.g., capturing both values and beliefs, suggesting temporality/changeability, being a noun and encompassing the entirety of thinking). In particular, "consensus" sounds too authoritative/permanent.

An example sentence: The XXX of archaeology favored "pots not people" over mass migration.

The best thing I can think of is just saying "zeitgeist of the academy" or "foo is in vogue in academia."


texts: What would you call a person who looks around for useful or used stuff?

texts:
What would you call a person who searches around the block looking for useful & used stuff to buy?

Also what would you call a person who sells stuffs that are no longer being used at home?


texts:
"...what things do they provide us? For instance, a donkey looks like a horse, except only it is smaller than a horse."

As you can see, the bold part confuses me. As far as I know, except is used as conjunction with a clause, such as:

  "I would like to bail him out, except I don’t have any money."

I don't know whether the bold part in the sentence I posted above is grammatically correct. Please help me!


texts:
I've looked for the subject, but I don't find a comprehensive answer. I've checked Fowler's MEU, but I'm not happy with the answers I find because I don't find the precise point I'm looking for, so I asking for help here.

May we add "wide" to any noun? For example, if I want to refer to an organization like a bank, may I write "bankwide", "bank-wide", or "bank wide". Are there any specific rules about it?

Could "at large" be a substitute (depending on context of course)? For example, the document was distributed to the the main office, and the bank at large (or bankwide).


texts:
I've been reading John Donne's Song (Go And Catch A Falling Star) and my query is on the usage of to in the line "to two or three."

  Yet she
  Will be False,
  ere I come, to two or three.

I understand this means she will be false, before I come, with two or three others, so is the usage of "to" instead of "with" common for the time?

Are there other meanings I've not got?


texts: What's the word for the "opposite role" of "Donor"?

texts:
First post here, please forgive me if wrong community...

By "opposite role", I mean like parent/child, brother/sister.

In organ transplants, the "opposite role" of donor would be recipient. But I'm referring to crowd funding, where the "opposite role" of donor is the person who created the crowd funding campaign that the donor is donating to. They are more than just a recipient, they create and manage their fund raising campaign. gofundme uses the term "campaign organizer" but I'm looking for a single word.

And BTW, what is the correct term for "opposite role"? It's not antonym or "opposite word", because it's not really an opposite relationship.

EDIT

The best word for the reciprocal of donor in the context of crowd funding is fundraiser.

It's not a duplicate question because in this context which is more specific, we get a different answer. And the best answer for the word for "opposite role" is reciprocal (noun). (e.g., What is the reciprocal of parent? Answer: child)


texts: Is there English counterpart to Japanese proverb, 一期一会 , meaning "Cherish once -in -a-lifetime encounter"?

texts:
I met a married couple of elderly American tourists to Japan who are both attorney at law in Connecticut a few days ago, and happened to have to introduce a Japanese proverb, “一期一会 - Ichigo ichie” in our conversation over the dinner.
The word is believed to have been invented by 千利休- Sennorikyu（1522－1591),
the great master of tea ceremony.

According to Wikipedia,

  “一期一会” is derived from a tea ceremony terminology meaning 亭主- Teishu
  (host) and 客-Kyaku (guests) must show as much sincerity and
  hospitability as possible in serving and relishing tea at a tea party in
  recognition of it’s being the once-in-a-lifetime encounter. It is the
  phrase to admonish you that the very moment you are meeting each other
  is the once-in-a-lifetime event. Such opportunity as happened “only here and
  only now” may never visit to you again. You should make your best to
  show your sincerity, friendship and hospitability to your guest(s) as
  well as a host. It also means that although you may be able to meet
  your friend often or someday, you must face and receive your friend
  by telling to yourself that it could be the last time, and never again, whenever you
  meet him / her.

I had a little difficulty to explain the meaning of “一期一会” to American friends, who showed great interest in the phrase.

Is there a counterpart phrase in English to “一期一会” to quote as an example, which might have helped me to explain the meaning of the proverb fully?

P.S.

I'd like to add that I recently received a mail from my friend, Carolyn W. Kone, attorneys at law who lives in New Haven, Connecticut on this matter:

"I don't think that there is an English equivalent to the Japanese proverb that you wrote about. The concept that you must treat a once in a lifetime encounter with sincerity, etc is somehow not the way most Americans think, I believe, although such encounters are often the subjects of romances in American movies."


texts:
I've searched everywhere before asking this question but I couldn't find an answer to my specific question:

"In spite of all the problems in life—lack of education, poverty, unemployment— John always thinks that his own problems are bigger.

I've just made this sentence so I know it's kinda choppy and misleading. I want to know if the use of em dash here is correct and do I have to put " and " before the last option in the list, which is "unemployment"?


texts: How do you pronounce grimace? My parents taught me a long time ago to say "gri-MACE". Then the Burger King character Gri... came along.


texts: While a definition for and usage history of "Let cooler heads prevail" can be both readily found, I have not been able to nail down the origins of the phrase. Ideas?


texts: Can "certiorari" be pronounced as three syllables in the US?

texts:
"Certiorari" has a different pronunciation in almost every dictionary I've checked.  Almost all of them are five syllables.

And according to a 2014 article in the American Bar Association Journal, in published sound recordings, not even Supreme Court justices agree on the pronunciation of this word.  Most used five syllables, one used four syllables, and two copped out and used the abbreviation ("cert").

I'm trying to choose one for myself -- to say out loud and to hear in my mind's ear when I'm reading.

The one that appealed to me the most has three syllables, from the Free Dictionary's legal dictionary.  But it is marked as British.  Is this acceptable in the US, or will people look at me funny if I use that one?


texts: "Indian-born Chinese" vs. "Chinese-born Indian"

texts:
I'm confused about these phrases.

Does "Indian-born Chinese" mean that you live in India, and were born in China?
Does "Chinese-born Indian" mean that you live in China, and were born in India?


texts: I've known you "since after" I met you. This looks so absurd!

texts:
I've encountered these structures today.

I've known you since after I met you in Paris.
or
I've worked here since right/just after I graduated.

What is it?
Having researched I just can say that some people consider it ok, but why, nobody explains.
Isn't it grammatically incorrect structure? I believe there must be only "since". Like:

I've known you since I met you in Paris.

What do you think of it?
Can we use "since after" or not?


texts: English (UK) - does "an enraged expression" make sense?

texts:
I am writing a book and one of my characters is angry but I feel like angry doesn't fit in and that enraged makes more sense and also makes the language of the book better but I'm not sure if it makes sense. The whole sentence is:
"When I finally reached him the grin he had once sported faded away to an enraged expression".


texts:
What is an appropriate term to use when describing a polarising book (or other work) which has received widespread attention, indicating both its importance
and controversial nature without "taking sides" about its merits.

influential, notable, important, significant - All seem to imply a positive evaluation or an established consensus about its merits.

widely-read - May or may not factually apply in such a case.

controversial - Does not clarify whether it's merely a work's content or its reception that are the subject of controversy, e.g. "A controversial, little-known book."

One can get by with some hedging combination of the above, but I wonder
if a more precise term doesn't exist.


texts:
What is the etymology of shithole? Did it originate from A) the orifice through which excrement is passed, or B) the hole in the ground intended for the disposal of such excrement?

(This is a serious question for professional research. You don't want to know the details.)


texts: He was to get an ice cream, is to , was to . Be to + infinitive

texts:
Can someone explain how this works ? Is this passive ?

He was to get an ice cream
or

He was to have done something

I am to do that . Is this wrong ? How can we change these sentences without losing the meaning.

Is this present tense?


texts: Using "rather" to correct a misstatement

texts:
For some reason I have it in my head that I can use the word "rather" at the end of a phrase to indicate that I am correcting a previous misstatement.

For example:

  Down the hall, you'll find the bathrooms on your left...right, rather.

Is this in typical usage anywhere, or am I just crazy?


texts:
In a recent test, we were asked to identify the grammatically incorrect sentence from this:

  They gave us the money back less the service charges of three hundred dollars.
  This country's expenditure is not less than that of Bangladesh.
  The committee initially asked for a funding of 2 million dollars, but later settled for a lesser sum.
  This country's expenditure on educational reforms is very less.

The incorrect sentence apparently is the 4th one. But I don't see why.. All 4 sentences sound correct. The only thing one might have doubts about is the use of "country's" in place of "of this country". Is the correct form of the 4th sentence - The expenditure of this country on educational reforms is very less. ?


texts:
I wrote the following sentence and my teacher told me "conducting" should be replaced with "doing"

My experience in investing comes from trading options, which I have been conducting since October 2014.

Should I replace conducting with doing? Are both correct? And why?


texts:
I wrote a paper about two opposing arguments. My conclusion was that the two arguments may be correct.

Is there an idiom or phrase that means two opposite things may be correct, independent of each other?


texts: when I say A affects B, does it imply that A has a negative effect on B?


texts:
Recently, I have been reading a book about TOEFL grammar.
I came across this multiple-choice problem:
I have _______ money left.
(A) a great number
(B) so small
(C) only a little
(D) only a few
The answer given is (C). I don't understand why (B) is not the correct answer. Does anyone know the reason? Thank you very much.


texts:
I wrote “I know all these stuff; I don’t have to go over them again” in my writing-exam paper and the teacher corrected it to read, “I know all this stuff; I don’t have to go over it again.”

The teacher is Irish so I don’t think he would make a mistake but I think even if the first one (these) was wrong, the second one (them) should have stayed the same. Am I right?


texts: what is the word close to but not stronger than 'spiky'

texts:
a) For a sequence 1,2,1,2,1,1,1,2,2 we can say it is 'uniform' since all the numbers are almost the same.

b) For a sequence 1,2,1,2,1,100,1,1 we can say it is 'spiky' since 100 is very large while others are almost the same and small.

c) For a sequence 1,10,5,9,2,12,3,4 we can say it is '_____'?

where all the numbers vary in a large range compared with (a) but not very large compared with (b).


texts: "Conduct a project" or "complete a project", or else?

texts:
In my cover letter, I was trying to highlight the fact that I did a class project few years ago: here is what I have:

In 2010, I conducted a project on ``Influence of Economic Indicators'' studying the influence of certain economic indicators on the Stock Market in the United States.

What do you think?


texts: Proper use in singular: Life is better with a pet or a dog or pets?

texts:
I always though that proper sentence would be:

Life is better with a pet.

When you are referring to having only one pet and not generally mean what kind of pet.

But all i find on google and even on translator from my language to English is:

Life is better with pets.

So i don't know which one to use. I know that pets generally mean, well pets as a word for global meaning of "pets".

But i want to suggest that as a single pet, it doesn't mean a cat or a dog, but only one animal.

So i think it should be:

Life is better with a pet?

Why than so many "pets" articles on google when they refer to only one dog?

Which one would be correct?


texts: Is there a name for words like "aftermath"?

texts: Is there a term for words like "aftermath" or "windfall" that originally had a completely different meaning to the sense in which they are used today? Windfall for example, originally referred to fruits shaken off trees by the wind but has come to mean a stroke of good fortune. Idiomatic is the closest I could come up with but I am not sure if that is accurate.


texts:
When do i use "i" and "i have"?

Example:

I rented a car.

I have rented a car.

So what's the Rule?

Greetings


texts: I don't understand this sentence in Baldur's Gate

texts:
Thus, it was a dark day when King Greneire and his horde of 150,000
  orcs appeared on the plains outside the Citadel of Many Arrows.

  King Obould announced to his followers that this horde had been sent
  to dislodge them from their home and send them out to be scavengers
  among the plains.

  He vowed that, as Gruumsh as his witness, the Citadel of Many
  Arrows would slaughter these treacherous orcs "like elves during a
  festival."

Hello, all. This is from an one of history book in Baldur's Gate.(Video Game)

And I don't understand as Grummsh as his witness part.

Gruumsh is a fictional Character and a kind of Orc's god.

The King Obould vowed that the Citadel of Many Arrows would slaughter these treacherous orcs "like elves during a festival." (I fully understood.)

But why there is no verb in [as Grummsh as his witness] part?

Does this sentence mean, King Obould vowed like Gruumsh vowed to his witness in the past?

Or King Obould vowed to Gruumsh as his witness?

I still don't get it. So would you help me to understand this sentece?


texts:
Lord Browne-Wilkinson used this phrase twice in Barclays Bank plc v O’Brien [1993] UKHL 6 (21 October 1993). 1.

  If the creditor bank has notice, actual or constructive, of the undue
  influence exercised by the husband (and consequentially of the wife's
  equity to set aside the transaction) the creditor will take subject to
  that equity and the wife can set aside the transaction against the
  creditor (albeit a purchaser for value) as well as against the
  husband.

2.

  Where a wife has agreed to stand surety for her husband's debts as a
  result of undue influence or misrepresentation, the creditor will take
  subject to the wife's equity to set aside the transaction if the
  circumstances are such as to put the creditor on inquiry as to the
  circumstances in which she agreed to stand surety.


texts:
That is, the person who is querying.

The person who sends can be a sender, the person who receives can be a receiver.  Similarly the person who responds (to a query) can be a responder.

But can the person who queries be a queryer?

I've thought about using initiator, but I'd prefer something more specific.

Thanks in advance.


texts: Grammar: 'dangerous to' or 'dangerous for'

texts:
Looking at the health warning on our beers, I'm sure the grammar is incorrect.

  "Alcohol abuse is dangerous to your health."

Shouldn't that be:

  "Alcohol abuse is dangerous for your health."

Used as a verb, we'd say: "This is a danger to you."

Used as an adjective shouldn't we say: "This is dangerous for you"?


texts: Coining new words from existing ones: Duplicate last letter?

texts:
I am trying to invent a word by taking an existing word and turning it into a noun a person can be called who is interacting with an object.
The trouble I ran into was the initial word's ending.

Since 'message' ends in an 'e', does the new word become messager, messageer, messagor, messageor or something completely different?
What would be most consistant with how similar words have originated?
I know the word messenger exist, but it does not quite fit what I am looking for. This came up in the context of coining appropriate names for objects invented using a programming language. The new word is supposed to convey that a person can interact with a message (send it, receive one....)


texts: Mentally challenged as differently abled

texts: Can we politely refer to somebody who is mentally challenged but leading an almost normal life upon professional support as differently abled?


texts:
What is a one word substitute for something which is "easily understood"? I can think of clear but I guess there are other better words.

Edit 1.
Will the answer be different for easily understandable? (As opposed to  easily understood)

Edit 2. Here's an example to more narrowly indicate the sort of usage desired:

  The manual should be precise and easily understandable.


texts: Articles in captions (tables, pictures, etc.)

texts:
I have some awful problems with editing picture and table captions in a paper I'm working on. Maybe some native speaker could give me a hand. One of the captions is for example:

Figure 14. The dynamics of crime in X. A causal chain.

It's under a diagram with which I want to explain the dynamics of crime in X - the diagram presents a causal chain.

Should it be "A causal chain" or just "Causal chain"?


texts: Phrase meaning "North, but not directly North, from here"

texts:
I have 40 characters to give hints to users about the location of a "prize" (Broken up into two lines of 20 characters.) There is some ambiguity when I send the following hint:

The prize is somewhere
   North from here.

I mean to imply that any location further North than this spot can have the prize. This includes any location directly North, to the Northeast, or Northwest.  But, from this spot, the prize is neither on this latitude nor any Southern location.

The problem is, the majority of users interpret this clue to mean the prize is directly North from here, and feel cheated when they search all locations due North and come back empty handed.

How would you convey, in 40 characters or less, that the prize is North from here, but not necessarily due North?


texts: This rule admits/allows no exceptions. Which do you use

texts:
This rule allows no exceptions.

This sounds natural to me, but I am told "The rule admits no exceptions" can be an alternative way to express this. However, some say using admits is not correct or natural.

I would like to ask how you feel it.


texts:
What would be a good word to describe something (like sex) which gives a lot of release.

The sense is "rewarding, emotionally fulfilling and physically ...releaseful?"


texts: Why did final -ie become so popular during early Modern English?

texts: A hallmark of Early Modern English is that it exhibits a lot of variance between the use of final -y and -ie.  In the 16th century -ie is even found in Old English words, eg stonie.  And Mulcaster in his Elementarie of 1582 effectively recommends the dominant use of -ie when he relegates final -y only to "sharp and loud" final vowels (eg, deny but prettie).  Why did -ie become so widely used in the 16th century?  Are there phonological reasons to select -ie over -y?  Is it due to contemporary French practices?  I assume it's a complex mix of causes - if so, is there a study into the "rise and fall" of -ie?


texts: Can e.g. be used in the end of a sentence in place of "for example"?

texts:
It is said that e.g. (informally also written as eg.) is a abbreviated Latin phrase used in place of "for example".
Reference: here, here & here
Example:

Asia is a large continent containing many large nations (For example, China, India and Russia).
can also be written as the following by replacing "For example" by "e.g"
Asia is a large continent containing many large nations (e.g., China, India and Russia).

Is this "replacement" also valid when used in a case like this:

... and that is why Democratic countries often end up with higher rate of corruption. Take US & India for example.

Can the last sentence of above example be rewritten as:

Take US & India e.g.

P.S.
I know that somehow it is incorrect but I am not aware of the reason.


texts: What does “straight out of [person]” mean?

texts:
I know the meaning of the straight out. But what does it mean with of?
For example:

  It’s straight out of Alice Miller.


texts:
I'm having difficulty figuring out the subject and object in the following sentence:

  Give me that pencil.

The confusion is since someone is requesting the pencil, should they be the subject? In which case the pencil is the object? Or is the pencil the subject, and the person who is implied in the giving the object. How is it determined? Thanks.


texts:
Should "coal supply contracts" be hyphenated since "coal supply" modifies  "contracts"?

Example sentence:

Please provide a copy of the coal supply contract.


texts:
I'm currently reading some boring programming book and have found this phrase:

  If you are used to C and printf(), you might think cout looks odd.

If I wrote this phrase (supposing I understand it correctly) I would say:

  If you used to use C and ...

without are and with additional use.

So the question is: why was it written in that way? Is it a short way of writing “used to use” or am I missing something?


texts:
I understand passive sentence, e.g: The boy was bitten by a dog. But this sentence I think the verb "convinced" is a passive, but I don't understand how it works

  I’m leaving this university convinced that it’s on a promising track
   and very much hope that it remains as fascinating and inspiring as I got to know it.

How is it ("convinced") called in English? I think naively it should be written in passive way like this

  I'm leaving this university and I was convinced ....


texts: Why is it wrong to say this sentence 'I'm afraid I forgot my homework at home

texts: Why is it wrong to say this sentence and what grammar rules are broken


texts: Word for calling out to a deity in frustration?

texts:
Like when Zuko yells at lightning to strike him (but ideally more in the sense of insulting a deity). Imagine standing on top of a cliff during a thunderstorm, clenching your fists and and screaming at the top of your lungs "ARE YOU WITH ME!? WHERE ARE YOU, GOD!?" toward the sky. Kind of like "invocation," "appeal", or "curse", but definitely none of those.

Example sentences:
"The cultists recited a ritual _____ in unison"
"Desperate, the beggar collapsed to his knees and ____'d at his luck"
"It was suddenly very clear now--he had been tricked! He _____'d at Loki for his cruel deception."

I'm looking for an action more emotionally charged than "curse"

I'm open to the possibility of a compound word or phrase being what I'm looking for, but should be decently idiomatic.


texts: Do /ɪə/, /eə/, /ʊə/ diphthongs actually exist in General American as phonemes?

texts:
The Handbook of English Pronunciation. (Marnie Reed, John Levis referring to J.C. Wells)

  Аs the pronunciation of most speakers is rhotic, there are no centring
  diphthongs, because the vowels /ɪə, eə, ʊə/ in words such as peer,
  pair, and poor are a sequence of a monophthong followed by /r/ so the
  rhyme of these words is /ɪr/, /er/, and /ʊr/ respectively.

Acoustics of American English Speech: A Dynamic Approach (Joseph P. Olive, Alice Greenwood, John Coleman)

  There are five diphtongs in American English, /eʲ/ as in bait, /aʲ/ as
  in bite, /ɔʲ/ as in boy, /aʷ/ as in cow and /oʷ/ as in boat.

Oxford Dictionary marks /ɪə/, /eə/, /ʊə/ as strictly British.

Wikipedia quoting Wells in "General American English" article.

  When prosodically salient, the lax vowels /ɪ, ʊ, ɛ, ʌ, æ/ tend to be
  realized as centering diphthongs [ɪə, ʊə, ɛə, ʌə, æə] instead of the
  more usual long monophthongs [ɪˑ, ʊˑ, ɛˑ, ʌˑ, æˑ] when they precede a
  word-final voiced consonant, so that the word good in the sentence
  that's very good! tends to be pronounced [ɡʊəd] instead of [ɡʊˑd].

That is why fear [fɪr] may become [fɪər] or poor [pʊr] may become [pʊər] when emphasized just as well. In my humble non-native speaker opinion.

Why, despite all that, do I keep seeing guides like this that insist on existence of these diphthongs in AmE? Is it a sort of alternative theory I'm not aware of, or do these authors interpret diaphonemic notation literally?


texts: What is the difference between " I look him" and " I look at him"?

texts:
I read some of the book my son was reading at home yesterday.
It read "I look him." Afterwards, I felt curious about the difference between "I look him" and "I look at him" What is the difference between the two?


texts: How to refer to the collection of horizontal line characters?

texts: Hyphens, dashes, n-dashes, m-dashes, and minus signs all look the same (give or take a pixel).  Is there a term for this set of characters?


texts:
I wonder if "some other" means exactly the same as "another" in the following sentences. Is there any difference between them?

  There must be another explanation.
  There must be some other explanation.

  In this case we will go to some other city.
  In this case we will go to another city.

  After that they saw some other house.
  After that they saw another house.


texts: What does 'PPT' stand for, in the context of a shop?

texts: "PPT" is the technical name for the price labels put in front of products in shops, often with a discounted price on them. What does PPT actually stand for?


texts: Another way to say "He brings trust-worthy feeling"

texts: The context is for a comment of an employment to the employee. "He brings trust-worthy feeling". It's not just "He's trust-worthy" but here, the man has gone through many difficult tasks and he always managed to succeed every time. It's like a person you can trust and rely on. So is there another way of expression ?


texts:
Is there a rule regarding the pronunciation (or lack of) of the apostrophe?
I have seen this on tv:

  "Enchantress' wrath" pronounced as "Echantresses wrath"

  "Gus' schedule" pronounced as "Guses schedule"

According to that the following examples should be pronounced the same:

  Jones's car as "Joneses car"

  Jones' car as "Joneses car"

Just to make it clear, this is not a question regarding the use of the apostrophe, it's one regarding the apostrophe's pronunciation.


texts: Where does the expression 'Kick the Bucket' come from?

texts:
The expression to "kick the bucket", meaning to die, doesn't quite make sense when you stop and try to apply it literally to what it means.

So where does the expression come from? The historical context of an expression often explains how the expression links to what it means.


texts: Is the expression "a first for my kind" idiomatic in this usage?

texts:
I ended up being dragged in a very heated debate with a (self-proclaimed) native speaker after a friend posted the following comment on the internet:

"... At last, I've been approved for something. That's a first for my kind." (last part referring to his homosexuality)

Now, his first claim was that "a first for my kind" was not proper English, and that there was no such expression. We've been accused of many different things, including making random sentences and calling it English. This is seriously getting on my nerves as I don't like being made to feel like an impostor so I'm asking for help.

  Sentence: Being approved for something was a first for my kind.

  Is this grammatically "proper" English?
  Does it sound natural?
  In a similar situation, would a native speaker (be it from US, GB or any other place) formulate their thoughts using such a sentence?


texts: Can "literally" correctly describe something presented as not being literal?

texts:
Not that I expect to find English used correctly in spam email but I recently received a message with the following subject line:

This Literally “Scrubs” The Air In Your Home

I'm willing to accept the use of the quotation marks as scare quotes to indicate that the product doesn't actually scrub the air. But is Literally actually being used correctly since, assuming that the product works as implied, it would literally "scrub" the air even if it doesn't literally scrub it? If so, would the following subject line have the same meaning as the original and also be "correct?"

This "Literally" Scrubs The Air In Your Home

I admit that it might be best to avoid both of these lines but I like them more than the way "literally" is so often incorrectly used.


texts: Why does "There was little pretense of objectivity." mean "there is almost no objectivity"?

texts:
Today, I am reading the book Freedom for the Thought That We Hate. In Chapter 1, the author talks about the press industry in the 18th century:

  The newspapers of eighteenth-century America were raggle-taggle affairs, nothing like the highly capitalized metropolitan press known to us. ... The papers were highly partisan, the editors often political party men. ... There was little pretense of objectivity.

When I saw pretense means "a way of behaving that is intended to deceive people," I had the following reasoning of the sentence's meaning in my mind:

Alrighty. Since "pretense" means the above, so I thought "pretense of objectivity" means "a way of behaving to deceive people so that people would believe there was objectivity".
I usually interpret "little" as "almost no".
Therefore, I thought the whole sentence was trying to state that "there was almost no such deceiving behavior." In other words, that means, back to the 18th century, the newspapers didn't have to deceive people to make them believe they had objectivity in the news.
Then why did the newspapers at that time didn't deceive their readers? There can be two cases, in my opinion:

There was almost no objectivity in the news but the newspapers didn't care about the readers' feelings, so they never bother to make an effort to deceive the readers.
There was objectivity in the news so it made no sense for the newspapers to "deceive the readers to make them believe so" because the reality was already that way.

But when I looked at the Chinese version of this book, the translation means the case #1: there was almost no objectivity. When we look back at the context of this sentence ("The papers were highly partisan"), it also makes a lot of sense that "There was little pretense of objectivity" means "there was almost no objectivity".

So why should this sentence be understood as the first meaning, whereas I think the second meaning is also possible? Which part was I wrong about?

I totally understand that learning a language is not like learning math or logic. But sometimes I have to learn the individual words first, then put them together and try to figure out the meaning using logic. Obviously, it didn't work quite well in this sentence.


texts:
Is there a word for a collection of shapes?

For example: one triangle, two squares and three circles.


texts: There are stories where children find a doll on the road. They take it home, and then all sorts of problems start in their families. What is one word for such witchy dolls  ?


texts: Why are the first syllables of “nature” and “natural” pronounced differently?

texts: The two words nature and natural have the same root, so why are they pronounced differently?


texts:
This one never ceases to confuse me. When to use 'such as' and when to use 'like' while giving examples? Is there any clear rule?

  Metros like Mumbai, Delhi and Karachi are unsafe after dark.
  Metros such as Mumbai, Delhi and Karachi are unsafe after dark.

(Before anyone points out, Delhi and Karachi are unsafe round-the-clock, but it's just an example.)


texts: What caused the spike in usage of Shone just before 1600?

texts:
I was looking at the usage of shine vs shone (related: Is "shined" correct? If so, is "he shined X on the tree" also correct?) and noticed that between about 1590-1600 shone has spiked in literary appearance.

What is the cause for this? I can speculate that some famous (at the time) literary work used it and it gained popularity, perhaps one of Shakespeare's.


texts: I'd rather not [do something] vs I'd prefer not to [do something]

texts:
In this question the issue came up as to whether there's any difference in the level of politeness/correctness involved in I'd rather not say as opposed to I'd prefer not to say.

My own gut feeling is the prefer form is a bit more "formal" (and thus arguably more correct/polite). This NGram shows that I'd rather occurs far more often than I'd prefer. Partly that's just because the rather form is more common, but the difference is far less marked with the more formal I would rather/prefer. I take this to mean rather is more suited to casual use/conversation when used with this meaning.

It could be lots of verbs besides say, and I don't think the not is necessarily relevant here either. But usages vary for certain alternatives - for example, go blind only seems to work with rather.

That's just my opinion. Does anyone have arguments/evidence/sources to either back up or refute the proposition that I'd prefer not to say is more formal than I'd rather not say?


texts: What do you call someone who has passed deadline?

texts: What do you call someone who has passed deadline or someone who should return book to the library, but has passed due date?


texts: Phrase for describing that someone is the wrong person for the job

texts:
I'm looking for a phrase for the situation where the person responsible for seeing a task is done is the person least likely to do the task themselves.  For example you wouldn't make Bob responsible for ensuring everyone washes their cup because Bob is the worst culprit for forgetting to wash his own cup.

I feel like "Choosing the fox to guard the henhouse" is not quite right as there is malice and/or cunning implied in what the fox would do in the henhouse.

Is there a phrase or idiom for choosing a person who is inept or ill suited for the work in this way?  The subject of the discussion isn't stupid, just the opposite of the person you want for this task.


texts:
I have three questions about "which" and indirect speech.

Is it not possible to have indirect speech using "which"?
I have explored a lot of grammar sites but none of them give an explanation (or at least an example) of indirect speech using "which". And it makes me think that (probably) "which" can't be used in indirect speech. But I fully doubt my opinion.
If "which" can be used in indirect speech, can you help me change this sentence into indirect speech?

  Which one is your book?

What's the indirect of this sentence?

  What's the best?

Could it be "What the best is"?
But again, I doubt it.


texts: What is the difference between "lightning rod" and "scapegoat"?

texts:
I was watching an interview with someone in politics who said he had become the lightning rod, and I was not sure what that meant but looking up the meaning, I wonder how is that different from being a scapegoat?

EDIT: I'm asked to say why the following suggested link is not the answer.  That one is not about the difference between these two terms.  But I do see an answer that references both terms:

"A lightning rod is someone who attracts a lot of criticism, in particular in order to shield other people (like a literal lightning rod diverts lightning harmlessly into the ground). It is thus related in meaning with scapegoat, i.e. someone who is blamed for the mistakes of others."

So is this the difference then that lighting rod (purposefully) attracts the criticism to shield others, almost heroically, but scapegoat is person who is blamed/criticized by OTHERS?


texts: "There is the man." Is *there* an adverb or pronoun?

texts:
According to Dictionary.com

  there

  adverb

  in or at that place (opposed to here ):

  She is there now.

  pronoun

  (used to introduce a sentence or clause in which the verb comes before its subject or has no complement):

  There is no hope.

Then, what element is there in:

  There is the man.

I'm confused because "There is the man" is an adverb inversion, in which there is an adverb and "the man is" is inverted. But according to the definition above, there suddenly becomes a pronoun.


texts:
He stood naked.
He stood nakedly.

A native English speaker says
1. sounds more natural,
but the dictionary says "naked" is an adjective.
Why is 1. better?
Please explain.

Katrina


texts: What is the word for a woman dominating in social family situations?

texts:
What word describes a woman who takes lead over her husband and/or children in social family situations? Talks lively, entertains people around and at the same time does not allow her husband to speak by answering first and overwhelming him with her vigour.

Edit: As some users rightfully noticed in comments I did not ask for a person who irritates everyone around with her attitude. To this, other users raised concern the question is ambiguous and unclear because of that. I see no contradiction between being a vigorous, entertaining, and pleasant woman to everyone around, and at the same shutting off her spouse and other members of the family.I don't even see why should I and how can I clarify that point other than what I already wrote.
Nevertheless all answers provide valuable insight even if they are slightly off the original question.


texts: What does the bolded part of the sentence mean?

texts: Giving medicine to relieve suffering, even if it risks or causes death, is not assisted suicide or euthanasia; nor is withdrawing treatments that only prolong a painful dying process. Like the general public, many in the medical profession are not clear about these distinctions. Terms like assisted death or death with dignity blur these distinctions, implying that a special law is necessary to make such practices legal-in most countries they already are.


texts: Why is there an 'A' in phrase 'Times are a changing'?

texts: I am not sure if the phrase Times are a changing is used exclusively within or related to the Bob Dylan song but the A is bugging the hell out of me every time I see it.  Why is there an indefinite article in front of an adjective which is not followed by a noun?


texts: When people refer to me on stackexchange websites they call me @H2ONaCl.  Where did this convention arise from?  If it were taken from my email address, the @ symbol would be at the other end of my name so that does not appear to be the source of this convention.


texts:
President Trumps wrote he is a "stable genius". According to my dictionary research, "stable" could mean:

resistant to change
not showing erratic emotions.

So does Trump mean that he is "a genius, who will always remain a genius" or "a mentally stable person who happens to be a genius"?


texts:
For example, when writing an email to an associate saying

  Good afternoon, Joel.

Or should there be a comma instead of the period?


texts: Why is "You’ve brought a knife to a gun fight" considered to be a mixed metaphor?

texts:
In my reading today, I came across this phrase:

  Pardon the mixed metaphor, but you’ve brought a knife to a gun fight. [Link]

The (longtime) columnist was saying the person was outmatched. I understand that "gunfight" for a conflict is a metaphor, but I don't understand why the entirety is a mixed metaphor.

A mixed metaphor is mixing parts of two metaphors to make a, well, not a known metaphor or one that's ridiculous, e.g. to talk a very long time without significant results can be expressed by saying,

  talk until you're blue in the face/until your face turns blue

and,

  until the cows come home

Both are common metaphors. Mixing them would produce, say,

  Talk until the cows turn blue.

I tried Googling variants of the supposedly mixed metaphor to see if there was a more established version. I could not find one.

There were references to the origin of the above idiom, my favorite (supported here as well) being from the movie, The Untouchables, wherein Sean Connery utters with contempt, "Isn't that just like a [racist for Italian]... brings a knife to a gun fight." (There were others but none earlier.)

The following, first appearing in print in 2008, might be considered a mixed metaphor:

  Those who live by the sword get shot by those that don't.

But I can't understand the idiom in question as a mixed metaphor. Can someone tell me what I am missing?

Edited to add an example, and in case I was unclear: if it is a mixed metaphor, which are the two metaphors it's mixing?


texts: Did British chef Jamie Oliver redefine “pukka” in 1999?

texts:
Recently I've been watching cooking programmes: MasterChef Italia (addictive),  MasterChef USA (awful), followed swiftly by Ramsey's Kitchen Nightmares, and then onto Jamie Oliver's acclaimed The Naked Chef. I have never seen any of Oliver's TV shows before but I love the language he uses: lovely jubbly, chuck that in, lugs of olive oil, whack 'em in there, hack that up, bash it all in, mush it all up, and... tastes pucker..., it's really really pucker,...  ends up being dead tasty and looking dead pucker (6.50).  The word is regularly scattered in the series, and it succeeded in baffling me totally.

Then in season 3, episode 5, Curry Feast (YouTube link), what sounded like an arcane cooking term was finally explained. ‘Pucker’ is in fact pukka, a Hindi word meaning “real”, which Oliver specified as: “real authentic, the real McCoy”. Later, I discovered that pucker and pukka were completely unrelated to one another despite being pronounced practically the same. Merriam-Webster has /ˈpə-kər/ and /ˈpə-kə/ respectively while Cambridge Dictionaries has /ˈpʌk.ə/ and Oxford /ˈpʌkə/ for both terms.

Merriam-Webster also shared this interesting footnote

  Pukka tends to evoke the height of 18th- and 19th-century British imperialism in India, and, indeed, it was first used in English at the 1775 trial of Maha Rajah Nundocomar, who was accused of forgery and tried by a British court in Bengal. The word is borrowed from Hindi and Urdu "pakkā," which means "solid." The English speakers who borrowed it applied the "sound and reliable" sense of "solid" and thus the word came to mean "genuine." [...] These days, "pukka" is also used as a British slang word meaning "excellent" or "cool."

According to Collins English Dictionary the primary meaning of pukka is

  properly or perfectly done, constructed, etc: ⇒ a pukka road
  genuine   ⇒ pukka sahib

Oxford Dictionaries says

  Genuine
  1.1 Of or appropriate to high or respectable society
  British Excellent:

Cambridge Dictionaries provides three definitions

  [old-fashioned] real
  [slang] of excellent quality
  extremely formal and educated

But nowhere do they mention when its current slang meaning (excellent, cool),  first appeared. Don't bother checking with Etymonline, it doesn't have any entry, which doesn't seem pukka to me.

When did its slang sense, i.e. excellent, first-rate, first appear?
Was pukka a dated term which came back in fashion in the 1990s?
Is pukka known only in the UK? How common is it?
Googling online it seems that pukka is mostly in connection with food, or is it a false impression? Can anything be really really pukka?


texts: A word to describe the quality of a system or process continuing to work well as complexity increases?

texts:
Some systems can be described as highly scalable, meaning that they will continue to perform well as the volume of data or number of users increases.
I'm looking for a similar word that would describe a system that continues to work well as the complexity of the subject matter it is applied to increases.
i.e
Size is to scalable as complexity is to ?
I thought of something like "complexifiable", but that doesn't seem to be a valid English word. I'd like to use this in a context where I'm comparing models or tools, and their varying ability to handle increasing complexity.


texts: The meaning of the sentence about relative clause and the word usage

texts:
A manuscript that lay unnoticed by scientists for decades has revealed that Albert Einstein once dabbled with an alternative to the Big Bang theory, proposing instead that the Universe expanded steadily and eternally.

What is the subject for "proposing"? Is that "A manuscript" or "the Big Bang theory"? Is there a rule to distinguish?
What does the word "instead" in this sentence mean? If I omit it, will I change the main idea of the sentence?

Thanks!


texts: should there be space between a sentence and question mark or not?

texts:
while asking questions in the sentence do we need to give space between question mark (?) and the sentence.

what is your name?

what is your name ?

which one is correct?


texts: what is the personality trait for someone that can't think fast, slow learner etc

texts: what is the personality trait for someone that can't think fast, slow learner. Writing down a character is slow sounds ok but is there any other way i could describe my story character


texts: How should I describe a semester-long leave?

texts: We call it annual leave when it comes to taking time off from work or school for a year. I want to use something like "Semester leave" as the title of a letter to my university to denote that I will be taking a semester off. Are there any better alternatives to "Semester leave"? Note that I'm looking for a title, so please don't suggest long phrases or complete sentences.


texts:
This is a bit of a strange question because I know that there should never ever be a comma after 'and.' But what if there's a parenthetical statement/clause-thing right after it? Let me demonstrate.

  She spread her arms, tilted her head back, and, closing her eyes, let the sun warm her face.

Should it be:

  She spread her arms, tilted her head back, and closing her eyes, let the sun warm her face.

I feel like the ,and, looks really bulky, but I also feel it's necessary to separate the statement between the commas. Help?


texts: How to pronounce “derivative” in the phrase “f ′ is a derivative of f ”?

texts:
How should I pronounce  derivative in the phrase “f ′ is a derivative of f ”?

Should I read it as [dɪˈrɪv.ə.tɪv] or [dɪˈrɪv.ɪ.tɪv]?

I have heard it as [dɪˈrɪv.ə.tɪv] in this context, but Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary says that this word should be pronounced as [dɪˈrɪv.ɪ.tɪv] when used as a noun, and that the pronunciation [dɪˈrɪv.ə.tɪv] is only for the adjective derivative.

However, it doesn’t refer to a mathematical meaning of this word, just for general one.


texts:
A question on the usage of the definite article "THE"

The sentence below comes from Word Smart II: How to Build a More Educated Vocabulary.

  Federal law requires manufacturers to demonstrate both the safety and
  the efficacy of new drugs. The manufacturers must prove that the new
  drugs are efficacious.

The 1st sentence presents both 'manufacturers' and 'new drugs' without articles. But in the 2nd sentence both are presented with definite articles.

Is there any specific reason for this or no good reason so the 2nd sentence is no problem without articles?


texts:
A good friend wrote me an email and at the end she added Take care sweets.

I guess it's something good, but not sure what is the exact meaning.
I searched a little bit what does that mean and didn't find anything.

So, what is the meaning of this expression and what would be alternative to that?


texts:
Please help. My kid's homework makes me cry)))
The task is to choose a completely INCORRECT sentence:

The book is on the table (sure it's 100% correct)
The book is in the table (I think it's correct if the book is on an inner shelf of the table or is locked in a drawer of the table)
The book is on top of the table (sure it's better to say just ON, but I think ON TOP OF is also possible to be used here)
The book is under the table (100% correct)
Am I right and are all the four sentences correct? If I am wrong, please let me know which one is incorrect.


texts: what does "a female attendant to a lady of rank" mean?

texts:
I checked a dictionary that said this about the "to":

  To can be used as a way of introducing the person or organization you are employed by, when you perform some service for them.

but what is the meaning of "a lady of rank"?


texts: What is the meaning of "in the realm of"?

texts:
There is an expression "in the realm of ...".

What does it mean exactly, and in what cases it is used?


texts: What is the difference between "by habit" and "out of habit"?

texts:
As far as I understand both phrases "by habit" and "out of habit" are valid. What is the difference, if any, between the two?
For example:

She was doing it by habit.

vs

She was doing it out of habit.


texts: How do I say that something must happen or another thing, not both, in one simple sentence?

texts:
I'd guess as opposed to but I'm not sure.

  This property must be set as opposed to X (one or another, not both)

How can this can be better?


texts: English pronunciation by Spanish speakers

texts:
A typical pronunciation problem for Spanish speakers is that of words that begin with 'S + consonant'. For example, Spain may be pronounced eh-spain. What are other standard (eh-standar) pronunciation issues for Spanish speakers?

(Note: This is a query for specific examples; thus, we do not have here an exact duplicate of this question, which was a little more vague.)


texts: Has "dilemma" ever been restricted to two options?

texts:
I was surprised to discover my dictionary had this entry for dilemma:

  a situation in which a difficult choice has to be made between two or more alternatives, esp. equally undesirable ones

The notion of dilemma meaning two or more flies against what I was taught about the word. The very idea of a false dilemma is specifically based on the number two.

Has my dictionary merely updated its definition to encapsulate the many people who use dilemma for more than two equal choices? Or was someone in my youth being unnecessarily pedantic?


texts: "Have to be" or "are to be": difference in meaning?

texts:
The piano and the pipe organ have/are to be tuned for the show.
Here both seems fine to me but the choice question wants me to choose one. Is there any prominence for one answer. Please help.


texts: Civil War/antebellum terms in Chicago style

texts:
In Chicago style, should the term "union" be capitalized when referring to the pre-Civil War nation? What about the terms "northern" and "southern" as adjectives?

I can find clear-cut references for the 14th edition online, but not for the 16th. I'm copyediting for a journal, so reframing the passage should be avoided.


texts: Colon or semicolon before a follow-up question?

texts:
I've seen countless people do this, but I am unsure if it's correct usage or not.

  This show is talked about, but that brings up the important question; will it be great?

Should I use the example above? What about this version?

  This show is talked about, but that brings up the important question: will it be great?

Is one wrong and the other right, or can both be right? I usually see people throw these nasty semicolons in right before questions that follow up in the same sentence and same clause.


texts: Suppose for example a team of people are using a single email address to share files among one another (each person has the username and password of that email address). There is another service that allow each person to have their own credentials and be able to access the documents by granting permissions to each user. This service would better suit their needs. We would say that this service is more _____ than email.


texts: Is there a word that means the results of a test can only be positive or inconclusive?

texts: Is there a word for this? For instance, a medical test where a positive result would be conclusive but any other result would not be.


texts: An interjection/expression for expressing nostalgia

texts:
What is an interjection/expression to use to express nostalgia?

I was listening to a song which reminded me of my adolescent days, feeling nostalgic for those times. Are there kinds of nostalgia? What interjection/expression can be used for expressing nostalgia in different contexts?


texts: Is there any difference if Peeves said “Not doing anything” instead of “Not doing nothing?

texts:
Peeves the Poltergeist is a practical joker in Harry Potter books. Why is he saying ‘nothing’ for ‘anything’ in the following citation? Does this express his character? Is it possibly a dialect or anything?

”Peeves, get down here NOW!” barked Professor McGonagall, straightening her pointed hat and glaring upward through her square-rimmed spectacles.
”Not doing nothing!” cackled Peeves, lobbing a water bomb at several fifth-year girls, who screamed and dived into the Great Hall.

N.B.: Peeves is floating in the air and throwing water bombs.


texts: Some fish such as blue fish have a kind of strong smell. What words (noun, adjective, etc) can describe specifically this kind of fish smell? Stench seems to mean any smell that is unpleasant.


texts: What do you call “I'll not feed you by my own hand” in English

texts:
I don’t know how to describe this properly. I just translated what description to English that I use in my native language (Bangla/বাংলা)
The situation is like this: Some people always need others’ help to do things. They seek help for every little step. If you aggregate the help, you'll find that they didn't do anything by themselves. They got someone to help them to do every small task.
For example, Robert asks Andrew how to post question on https://english.stackexchange.com/. Then he asks where to type the title even though the Title input label is seen very clearly. After that Robert will ask “Hey Andrew, Could you tell me some good title sentences that I can put here?” It goes on.
Robert is not actually asking questions. He is asking for so many details that it makes Andrew do the whole task.
My question is how to tell Andrew, “I can not feed you every time by my own hand”?
Is there any single word? Any idiom?


texts: Is 'sum' an okay replacement for 'problem'?

texts:
I've seen some people using the word sum as a substitute for the word problem, in a mathematical context even though the problem does not explicitly involve the addition operation.

For example, We discussed Huygen's Principle in the last class. I believe all of you checked out the sums related to that.

Is this usage okay?


texts: "great for the chase" vs "expert in the chase"

texts:
"Great for the chase" vs "Expert in the chase"
I found these two clauses on the same page of The Iliad:

Then Menelaus son of Atreus caught the brilliant hunter Scamandrius with his sharp spear. Scamandrius was a great man for the chase, who had been taught by the goddess Artemis...

Then in a note below I read:

Scamandrius, expert in the chase, is killed by Menelaus.

What's exactly the difference between the two?


texts: I recall an English teacher explaining that verbs that change vowels during tense changes were called 'regular' and those that added '-ed' in the past tense were 'irregular'. This seemed counter-intuitive, but the explanation was that early English verb conjugation regularly inflected a vowel rather than not.  Is this correct?


texts:
I'm trying to write a caption for my work Instagram account. I work for a ski holiday company and it's a photo of one of our guest's children.

  Wonderful photos from Chalet Augustine guests, Mike and Anne. Their children look great in their ski suits!

The problem with what I've written is the fact the first sentence makes it sound like the photos are of them (Mike and Anne) when they are actually taken by them but the photos are of their children.


texts:
When A believes that the proposition p is true, we may say

  A subscribes to the proposition that ...

Which verbs may replace the italicized expression without altering the
meaning of the sentence?

Answers should be either suitable to academic prose or archaic.


texts: "I am going to attend" vs "I am attending"

texts:
Which of these two statements seems to be more appropriate?

  I am attending a meeting tomorrow.
  I am going to attend a meeting tomorrow.

I am quite not sure which one to use.


texts:
A phrase that kind of illustrates what I'm looking for is something like "Activity Type".

Activity Type: indoor

Activity Type: outdoor

Is there a single word that can better represent the concept of either indoors or outdoors?

Some words I've thought of are "venue", "location" and  "place", but these are all a bit too general.


texts: Word to describe that something changes at the same rate or pace?

texts: Is there a word in English language that describes that something (two or more values or things) is changing (i.e., grows) at the same or similar rate or pace?


texts:
We would like to start an info-service for programmers and we came up with a name:

  Code Pile

How does it sound for native-speakers? Is it ok?


texts: Different adjectives following a list in a sentence

texts:
Example:
I hope to help with the vision of and research at Booze Drinkers Ltd.
The question is that vision is followed with a different article than 'research'. In separate sentences it's vision of booze drinkers, and research at booze drinkers right? Or if this isn't the best example, I am thinking of situations where what I'm asking about does apply.
I don't know if you say

I hope to help with the _____, ____, ____ and, ___ at Your Mom Gay Enterprises.

Or

I hope to help with the ____ at, _____ of, ____ in, and _____ with Your Mom Gay Ltd.


texts: Choice of ‘hypothesize’ or ‘guess’ to indicate the outcome of evidence in a technical document

texts:
Which of these verbs would you choose to insert?

The survey on the wall stretches present in the burg, along with the subsequent comparison with the masonry of the medieval tower, have contributed to hypothesize/guess the evolution of the wall belt and therefore the possible expansion of the burg.


texts: Are "there is none like Him" and "there is none like unto Him" exactly synonymous, or is there a nuance between the two ? (the second construct is often used to translate certain Muslim idioms).


texts: Is a relative clause always a permission for "the" article to be used before its antecedent?

texts:
I have noticed that most often a relative pronoun such as who, which, etc. is used to further inform the reader about its preceding noun or noun phrase, e.g.

  1-Do you know the girl who is talking to Tom?[1]
  2. I told you about the woman who lives next door.[2]
  3. The man who did this is the brother of our neighbour, Mr. Smith. [3]

In both statements above, the precedes the noun, i.e.   girl and woman, respectively. But, my question is:
Are relative clauses always a justification for using the definite article "the" before their antecedent?
For instance, in the following statement, individuals is not specifically known of in the context, and thus the only introduction for that comes in its relative clause who had not taken part.... Has the been used correctly here? Or should it be omitted?

  ... and providing questionnaires to the individuals who had not taken part in the coordination meeting of Khuzestan soccer referees

References:
-1 and 2, http://www.ego4u.com/en/cram-up/grammar/relative-clauses
-3, Tipping, L., Matriculation English Grammar, 1967


texts:
Consider the sentences:

Take my picture [handing over a frame]
Take my picture [handing over a camera]

(Photo vs. picture being insignificant - a more contrived example could avoid it; as is the verb 'take', we could even have no verb, but I think it helps to illustrate.)

What is grammatically different between the first, in which the speaker owns the picture, and the second, in which the speaker is to be depicted?

I've considered:

Actually I thought of this example reading about oblique (aka objective) case, after encountering it in another language; is (2) oblique ('as the object of preposition' per Wikipedia examples) I wondered, or is it significant that all of Wikipedia's examples use me; not my?
Certainly (1) is genitive/possessive - is (2) also, but with the sense of belonging somehow reversed, the speaker belonging to the picture, and if so is there a term for this?
So God created man in his owne Image [Genesis 1:27] is another well known example, which I thought might help me find some discussion; unfortunately it didn't. (It's surely not the same construction as if he created man in the image of his {possession-goes-here}?!)
(1) really holds place for picture of mine; (2) for picture of me (and in the Genesis example, him and his respectively) - i.e. independent possessive and object personal pronoun, respectively, and shortened to dependent possessive

So (2) is posessesive? Was shortening it from picture of me 'valid' in the first place, or is the issue that it's a (widely used) informal form?


texts: Is the sentence "What do you think is going on?" grammatically correct?

texts:
A lot of my ESL students have asked me if the following sentence is grammatically correct.
They see it as an error because the word think is followed by is.

"What do you think is going on?"


texts: Should we include or leave out the preposition "on"

texts:
Consider the following examples:

We are going to Japan on Wednesday.
We are going to Japan Wednesday.
We are going to Japan on tomorrow.
We are going to Japan tomorrow.

My question is about 2 and 3. For 2 I hear it spoken all the time, but it seems a bit unusual as written words. As for 3, the "on" feels very much a redundant word in both written and spoken English.

Wish that somebody could tell me if 2 and 3 are ok in terms of both spoken and written styles.


texts:
It seems that terroir is always used in English as the original in French. Wikipedia proposes a somewhat vague translation:

  Terroir can be very loosely translated as "a sense of place"

But is there another word/expression that is also used in place of terroir itself?


texts: Do I still omit the closing quotation mark before a paragraph break in speech?

texts:
Traditionally, paragraphs in speech are rendered like this:

The professor harumphed. "It's not as easy as that.

"English grammar is surprisingly complicated. Why, only yesterday..."

That is, only having a closing quotation mark at the end of the block and omitting the ones in paragraphs inside the spoken text.

Is this still a thing these days? Text rendering does change over time --- why, I remember the days when you pluralised numbers with apostrophes ('Personally, I quite like 4's and 5's.') and was quite glad when that went away.

It does look kind of weird, and as a whole I tend to rearrange my prose not to need it (e.g. adding a 'he said' to the first paragraph), but I dislike changing my writing style just because of a text rendering issue. If it's not a thing, what's the current approach?

(Note to mods: I've tagged this with 'grammar' because I can't think of anything more appropriate --- feel free to retag.)


texts: Is there any difference between "I am having interest" and "I am interesting"?

texts: If I say I am having interest to play cricket OR I am interesting to play cricket , Is there any difference in meaning of both?


texts: What is a term for a form that has been filled out?

texts:
Assuming the definition of 'form' as follows (see definition #6 here):

"a printed document with blank spaces for information to be inserted."

What could you call a printed document with the blank spaces filled in, if you were trying to use a word that differentiated those printed documents from the ones that haven't been filled in?

UPDATE

To help clarify the situation a little more, let me explain the two concepts that we are working with.  We have several online 'forms' that people fill out in order to provide us with background information about them.  We also keep hard-copies of the information they have provided, but these 'forms' do not correlate directly with the online 'forms.'  For example, online we have "Personal Information", "Biographical", and "Financial" forms.  The printed 'forms' contain information from several of these 'online' forms.

For example, the financial form pulls name, address, etc., from the personal information form.  So you see, the printed forms are not really submissions because they are created after the 'submissions' have been gathered.  They are also not really the 'completed' or 'filled' forms.  Also, 'printed' won't work either because, although I mentioned we keep hard copies, they are also used electronically as well.  We are looking for very unambiguous terms because of the confusion that has resulted in the past (you would be surprised).


texts: A word like ethereal that also means quickly vanishing

texts:
This is a question for English wordsmiths. Is there a word that "feels" like the word "ethereal" that means something ethereal that quickly disappears.  Or is "ethereal" the correct word choice for this? Ethereal was the first word that popped into my head for this.

From the various definitions that I've looked at for ethereal, it says delicate, beautiful, heavenly, etc. but not necessarily quickly vanishing, except for the secondary definitions related to ether that suggests it evaporates. I'm just wondering if there is a better word than this.

I'm using the term "ethereal skill" to describe a certain type of pilot skill (instrument flying) that requires tremendous practice to achieve proficiency, and once proficiency is achieved it is a beautiful thing, but if you don't practice it regularly, that skill vanishes after a few weeks.

USAGE:
Instrument proficiency is an ethereal skill that once obtained must be maintained through constant and regular practice.


texts:
While trying to locate the etymology of the Tamil slang, OB, I ran across the following claim:

  This entirely Tamilian term, strangely enough, has its origins in the term "off-beat" used in the British Army to refer to retired officers or soldiers.

I'd like to know if there's any truth to the claim that "off-beat" was a British Army term for retired officers.


texts: Can "x-percent in savings" mean "an x-percent savings rate"?

texts:
A PolitiFact article rating a statement by Newt Gingrich has the headline:

  In Chile "they have 72 percent of the GDP in savings."

That is immediately followed by the subhead:

  Newt Gingrich says Chile has 72 percent national savings rate.

This pertains to a statement from one of the recent Republican debates. A transcript of the event gives the full sentence as:

  The result is in Chile , for example, 72 percent — they have 72 percent of the GDP in savings.

PolitiFact originally rated Gingrich's statement false because Chile's savings rate was nowhere near 72%. They later revised their rating to half-true after a reader pointed out that PolitiFact itself reported in 2009 that the Chilean savings plans assets were 65% of GDP. But in their conclusion, they put the onus on Gingrich:

  Gingrich said that in Chile "they have 72 percent of the GDP in savings." The number is basically right, but Gingrich erred in how he described the statistic. On balance, we rate his statement Half True.

However, when I read the statement, I cannot see how a rate of savings is implied. Using have along with in savings would seem to indicate the current state rather than an ongoing action. But PolitiFact employs professional journalists. One would assume they are very familiar with the English language.

What is the proper interpretation of Gingrich's statement? Or is it ambiguous?


texts: what is the word/phrase when you are in a new place and cannot sleep?

texts: There is a word/phrase which explains why we don't get sleep when we are in a new place. AFAIK it is/was due to the fact that our hunterer-gatherer ancestors were prey and at times when they moved they didn't know that the new place is secure or  not. Does anybody know a word/phrase which describes it rather than going through the whole wordy description ?


texts: Is it grammatically correct sentence - "I did able to do that"?

texts: Is it grammatically correct to say - "I did able to do that" ? to stress the fact that I was able to do something in the past but some reason I am not able to do this right now.


texts: Is using "since" and "ago" with the present perfect correct?

texts:
I just found this in a Cambridge Grammar Book and I am so confused. When I learnt English in school, the teacher said I cannot put Since and Ago together in present perfect sentence. However, in this book there are so many examples of combining together. What I know is since express period but ago is one point in the past, so that ago cannot be in present perfect sentence. Could you explain this?

From Advanced Grammar in Use by Martin Hewings. Unit 3 3.3 (page 7)

  Find the following: (i) three sentences that are incorrect; (i) three sentences with the present perfect which could also have the past simple (consider the difference in meaning); (iii) three sentences where only the present perfect is correct. (A-G)

[A-G refers to the author's examples and explanations of the Present perfect (I have done) and past simple (I did) and their usages]

  Jane has agreed to lend us her car. (I)
  Do you know how many people have walked on the moon?
  Phone for an ambulance. I think Keith's broken his arm.
  In his twenties, Lawrence has spent many years travelling around Spain.
  The Vikings have established a settlement at what is now York, in the north of England.
  The house looks so much bigger now that we've painted the walls in brighter colours.
  My brother has gone into town to buy some new shoes.
  The Earth has been formed about 4,500 million years ago.
  I've worked in Malaysia for three years.

Unit 8 (page 16)

  Since the operation two months ago, Joe has been learning to walk again.

Jinny


texts: what is the difference between "imagine" and "envision"?

texts: I kind like a word "envision" so, Can I use it exactly in same way as a word "imagine"?


texts: Should ‘Ground Zero’ (site of old World Trade Center) be capped in all references?

texts: Should Ground Zero (site of old World Trade Center) be capitalised in all references?


texts: Word/Phrase for an unnecessarily rude response

texts:
Assume P1 is a customer and P2 is an organization representative.
P1 is trying to minimize his/her hassle by staying loyal and trying to stick with the services offered by P2's organization, but P2 is responding in an unnecessarily rude and passive-aggressive manner.
A typical conversation could be like:

P1 (dejected and decided about leaving): "I would have really preferred to stay with you guys."
P2 (faking sincerity, donning a concerned looking expression, and, speaking in a concerned sounding tone): "Yeah... me too."

P2's response could be because of cultural conditioning or even due to a personal disposition, from his/her past, to respond to someone indicating that they are upset with their attitude and are done with them.
In either case, the response is neither professional, nor genuine, nor is it deserved.
Is there a word that describes P2's response?


texts: Word or expression for guys who slept with the same woman(prostitute)?

texts:
Embarrassingly, in Korean, there is a slang word for this kind of relationship between guys.

Might be translated as, "the husband of my wife's sister but only by the hole" ?

I don't know how can I call the husband of my wife's sister in English. Korean word is "Dong-suh 동서(同壻)". That is, Korean people don't say "Hank is the husband of Mr. White's wife's sister" but "Hank is the Mr. White's dong-suh".

With this kinship terminology, if some Korean guys found out that they have slept with the same woman (in many cases a prostitute or a professional), they might jokingly call each other "구멍(hole)동서(the husband of my wife's sister)". It has f-word level vulgarism.

Is there similar slang word/expression in English?

UPDATED

I forgot "brother-in-law". Original words is something like "brother-in-hole". In here, 'Hole' symbolizes the vagina. So I mentioned vulgarism.


texts:
Possible Duplicate:
  Singular or plural following a list

Which of the following would be correct:

  What are the primary cause and the primary consequence of the...
  What is the primary cause and the primary consequence of the...
  What is the primary cause and what is the primary consequence of the...

Is there a pithy, clearly correct alternative?

The answers to the question "Singular or plural following a list" describe what to do when a verb comes after a list, but in this example the verb "be" comes before the list.
Do we still have subject-verb agreement in this situation? How do I know whether the subject of the verb is the list, or the word "what"; and if it's the word "what", how can I figure out if it is singular or plural?


texts: Does "How do you know?" have the inchoative aspect?

texts:
In English, a verb that expresses a state can also express the entrance into a state. This is called inchoative aspect.

Would a sentence like "How do you know me?" have the inchoative aspect? I think "how" in this instance means "method, way" but it bothers me that the sentence is present tense if it does have the inchoative aspect where "know" means "to enter the state of knowing." If it is the inchoative aspect, why isn't it past tense if something like "how did you find out who I am?" is the proper way to put it? Given the definition of "how" here, I don't think it works without the inchoative aspect, but I can't explain why it's present instead of past tense.


texts: Should I use "me and her" or "her and me" in the following sentence?

texts:
I was surprised Paola agreed to come on the trip, just her and me.
I was surprised Paola agreed to come on the trip, just me and her.

Both versions sound OK to me. Or is it there a more appropriate one?


texts: Feel confused about to-infinitive in a sentence

texts:
In order to understand the English grammar, I have to read the Grammar Section in OALD. I don't understand the grammar constituents of to-infinitives in these sentences. How can I understand them?

OALD said

  Eat and to eat are both the infinitive form of the verb. Eat is called a BARE INFINITIVE and to eat is called a TO-INFINITIVE. Most verbs that take an infinitive are used with the to-infinitive.

the goldfish need to be fed.
she never learned to read.

  Some verbs can be used with both a noun phrase and a to-infinitive. The noun can be the object of the main verb.

Can you persuade Sheila to chair the meeting?

  or the noun phrase and infinitive phrase together can be the object.

I expected her to pass the driving test first time.
We'd love you to come and visit us.

My question is that in 1, can I think of the to-infinitive (to be fed and to read) is the object of need and learn, respectively？ And in 2, why can her to pass or you to come be bound together to be the object of expect or love? At the same time, why I can't think of Sheila to chair in this way?

I love our language, but can't understand its grammar :-(

Edit: What role is the to-infinitive playing in these sentences?


texts:
I have recently read an article about school and the word "attentiveness" was used multiple times in it. I had never heard it and in particular I always used "paying attention" before.

I have searched a bit on the web and so far, beside the usage that is different (I don't think one can use attention without the verb pay before), the only semantic nuance I found is that attentiveness usually involves politeness, while attention does not.

Is there really a difference in the meaning of attentiveness and attention? Or is attentiveness only for a specific context, like education?

Edit: here is an example of the usage:
"... to explore the relationship between recess timing and attentiveness in the classroom."
From an article of the Atlantic


texts: Is it appropriate to call a British person a "Brit"?

texts:
Specifically, is it appropriate for a non-British person to call a British person a "Brit"? Whenever I see it from an American source it always feels too familiar or too informal, or both. But I can't tell if that's something real or just my own peculiar hang-up.

How formal is the word "Brit," and how do people from Great Britain feel about others using the word? What about "Brit" as an adjective (e.g., this reference to a "Brit singer")?


texts: Are collective nouns taught at school (and one has to learn them) or are they just a fun thing?

texts: I speak English as a foreign language and find it unique in several aspects.  One of them is the large number of collective nouns, especially for groups of birds.  Such high degree of specificity reaches the point where you have several nouns for a single species, just depending on whether the group is on land, flying together, or just flying at random.   We say there is a parliament of owls, a murder of crows, a company of parrots, a plump or moorhens, a clutch of chickens, a kettle of hawks, a watch of nightingales, a covey of partridges, a pod of pelicans, a sedge of cranes, a flock of geese on land, a plump of geese flying close, a skein of geese in flight, and so on.  The list is indeed very long.  My question is – Are these nouns standard in every English Speaking Country ?   Are they treated seriously so  native speakers have to learn them at school ?  Or is it just a fun thing ?  Can these collective nouns take both a singular and a plural verb - depending on context ?


texts: What does it mean that the word is not idiomatic to describe something?

texts:
What does the word "idiomatic" mean in a phrase like this one:

  The word "upsurge" is not idiomatic to describe a student's vast
  improvement.

Here I am confused by the meanings of the word "idiomatic"

Webster gives two definitions:

  1:  of, relating to, or conforming to idiom

  2:  peculiar to a particular group, individual, or style

The first meaning is something that I am more familiar with - it is about some "inner meaning behind the first meanings of words". Like, for example, "That's where the rubber hits the road" is not about the actual rubber and actual road, but rather about the real reason of the problem. So, if I follow the first meaning, than the meaning in the sample sentence would probably mean that the word "upsurge" doesn't have any other possible hidden meanings and, therefore, it's okay to be used in this case (in case of describing a student's improvement).

However, if I follow the second meaning, that would mean that the word "upsurge" is not good for this particular style or situation. And that would be a direct opposite of the first interpretation.

So, which one of these two interpretations is correct?

........................................

Edit: This is an 'Is A or B right?' question, where the answer is C.

RHK Webster's gives the appropriate sense:

  3:  [1b] conforming to the usual manner of expression in a language [ie sounding natural to and often used by proficient native speakers]


texts: What is a person called who is writing exams in the name of another person?

texts: Is there a word for a person who is writing exams in place of/in the name of other persons?


texts: What do you call someone whose rights have been taken away from them?

texts:
For example, if someone took my right/freedom of speech, by forcing punishments or such.

What do I become? Is there one word to describe this situation (where rights are taken away)?


texts: Is there a term for repeated phrases (not a catch-phrase)?

texts:
There is a children's television program called "Ben & Holly" in which there are a few repeated phrases/themes. I'm trying to find the correct terminology to describe them.

Example 1: In almost every episode there is a variation of a phrase - usually "and I'm an elf" or "and we're elves", followed by the elf/elves blowing a horn.

Example 2: About once every 5 episodes a location is flooded with jelly and all the characters all shout "Jelly flood!"


texts: Participle phrase or participle clause? For my students please

texts:
I've looked at other answers, but am still confused - so please don't shoot me down (as tends to happen here) - but rather help if you can for the sake of my little learners. I have to teach a class on this in two days and I suspect that the text provided for me is wrong:

  Walking to school, I spotted a car driving erratically toward me.

I would say that "Walking to school" is a participle phrase as it has no subject, but my text says that it is a participle clause. How can it be a clause when there is no subject at that beginning end of the sentence? I've read of implied subjects - i.e. the person walking and the person spotting are one and the same here. Does that count?

Again, sorry if this is an obvious question to some, but you folks here know heaps and I want to give my little guys accurate info, which is truly hard when it comes to clauses!


texts: Another word for "tens" other than "dozens"

texts:
I'm seeking another word for "tens" when describing multiples of something fewer than one-hundred.

For example:

  The landlord received tens of applications for the rental home.

I don't like the word "dozens" as a substitute simply because it breaks the convention of using base ten figures elsewhere:

  The landlord received hundreds of phone calls about the rental home.
  The landlord noticed thousands of online views of the rental home listing.
  To the landlord, it feels like he has contacted tens of thousands of people.

But using "dozens" carries a hefty weight with it, that "tens" seems to lack.

Is there a way to use "tens" in this context while still conveying the idea of "several" as opposed to "only a few"?


texts: "pros and cons", "black and white", "ups and downs". Always in a fixed sequence, is there a word or phrase for these?

texts:
Is there a word or phrase for two nouns or adjectives joined by a conjunction (usually "and") in a fixed sequence?

  alive and well
  fast and furious
  hat and gloves
  pen and pencil
  law and order
  wit and wisdom
  salt and pepper
  bacon and eggs
  horse and carriage
  Adam and Eve
  ladies and gentlemen
  loud and clear
  heads or tails
  yes or no
  dead or alive


texts: Repeating the object in a list of transitive verbs

texts:
You have received this proposal. Please decide whether you would like
  to accept it or reject it.

Is it correct to repeat the object it in this  sentence or should I skip it until the last verb? For example:

  Please decide whether you would like to accept or reject it.


texts: "Will discuss the matter" vs. "will discuss on this matter"

texts:
I received an email with the following sentence:

  The meetings will be discussing on this early next week.

I have two questions:

Should we use will discuss rather than will be discussing? I don't know the purpose of the future continuous here, or the general purpose of the future continuous tense.
Should we use will discuss the matter or will have discussion on this matter (I guess that was a mistake to use will discuss on here)?


texts: meaning of "A group of graduate students planned to picket a movie theater that would not show a sexually explicit foreign film"

texts:
meaning of: "A group of graduate students planned to picket a movie theater that would not show a sexually explicit foreign film"

does it mean that students protested for showing a sexually film? or did they agree with showing this kind of film?


texts: Should I write "pre-paid debit card" or "prepaid debit card"? I found a discussion about the same topic on wordreference.com


texts: Looking for a word to express that a company has been around for a while

texts: We have thought of Heritage, Traditional, Enduring... but these words aren't "it." Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated!!


texts: What does it mean when we say "something is easier on the nerves"? Does it mean "it is easier to withstand"?


texts: When you agree with a person's point but you find their way of making that point obnoxious

texts:
Let's say you're listening in on/reading a conversation about some topic, and someone in that conversation decides to make their own point. In terms of the point they're making you can agree with them, but the way they handle expressing that point is incredibly obnoxious and off-putting. What would be a word or phrase to describe that kind of mixed reaction one would have to that?

I know that for a while there was a fake German word floating around that essentially meant what I'm getting at (i.e. Waltersobchakeit), but I'm hoping there's something already existing in language to articulate the same idea.


texts:
I live in Bangkok and on the intercom in the subway they constantly say Smoking, drinking and eating are not allowed. To me it sounds weird. I’d say Smoking, drinking and eating is not allowed.

Because you would normally say It’s not allowed to smoke, drink or eat.

Can someone explain what is the grammatically “correct” way to say this? And maybe explain why I find it so awkward.


texts: What English construction matches the Boolean condition of nand?

texts:
English language usage has some logical word pairs including:

Or | Nor
Either | Neither
With | Without

But there doesn't seem to be an opposition to the word "and". In computer engineering and Boolean logic, this is referred to as a "nand" operation.

For example, if I were to say "I eat pancakes when they have bananas nand strawberries in them," then what I want to communicate is that:

I will eat a pancake with bananas
I will eat a pancake with strawberries
I will eat a pancake with neither bananas nor strawberries
I won't eat a pancake with specifically both bananas and strawberries

Is there an equivalent of the boolean operand nand in the English language (or a short phrase and not just a rearranging of the sentence)? Essentially, not how to say the phrase with the same meaning, but if there's a short phrase or word that conveys the same meaning. This question intends "to be less about the missing 'nand' word and more about how to express the condition it represents" (Chris Subagio).


texts: Is 'to' necessary at the end of sentence?

texts:
I'm not a native speaker, and can't understand why is 'to' needed at the end of this sentence:

  To keep safe the one they had all sworn their undying loyalty to.

Can't we just say:

  To keep safe the one they had all sworn their undying loyalty.

Thank you in advance.


texts:
I need to convert some noun compounds into regular sentences, and I am having trouble with four of them:

1) greatly reduced atmospheric ozone depletion.

2) an airport air traffic controller.

3) air pollutant particle size.

4)  population growth rate

Those are my answers:

1)Greatly reduced depletion in the atmospheric ozone.

2) A controller which controls the traffic in the air at the airport.

4) The rate of growth of a population

And number 3) I don't know how to convert at all.

Are my answers correct?


texts:
I can't understand the meaning of the word 'enclosure' in the context: "This client reads one or more RSS feeds, queues up the enclosures for download, and processes several downloads in parallel using threads.". Can you explain me please the meaning of it.

I read it in the python docs - https://pymotw.com/2/Queue/#using-queues-with-threads


texts:
According to Collins Dictionary to burn something to the ground means to completely destroy it by fire. I have two questions regarding this phrase:

1- What is the exact connotation of it: Does it mean something is burnt completely from top to the ground? Or it implies collapsing and falling to the ground?

2- Are there other phrases having a similar pattern, i.e. v + to + something-as-an-end implying the verb is done completely? Is there a name for such a pattern?


texts: What's the syntactic explanation in "Mistakes are likely to happen":

texts:
I'm confused about this sentence construction:

Mistakes are likely to happen.

I’ve thought of three possible explanations; are any of them
correct?

Where likely is an adjective acting as a subject complement,
then to happen acts as some type of adverb modifying likely?
(But I don't know what that type would be if so.)

To happen acts as a subject complement, and likely as
an adverb of the finite verb (are) or the non-finite verb (to
happen).

There is an ellipsis of outcomes between them: mistakes
are likely (outcomes) to happen where likely and to happen
both are adjectives modifying ellipsis (outcomes), and
to happen is a reduced relative clause of that might/could
happen.