Notes

Receipt? Receiving? I'm trying to come up with a name for "the acceptance of a delivery." I'd like to be able to say Ten deliveries were made but there are only five [fill_in_the_blank_here] on record. Any suggestions? Answer Receipt works. As in, "receipt of the items has been acknowledged." Receipt Re*ceipt" (r[-e]*s[=e]t"), n. [OE. receite, OF. recete, recepte, F. recette, fr. L. recipere, receptum, to receive. See {Receive}.] 1. The act of receiving; reception. "At the receipt of your letter." --Shak. [1913 Webster] Likely variations for your case would include "Ten deliveries were made but there are only five received items on record." "Ten deliveries were made but the records show only five items were received."

I'm aware there are different prepositions possible after disappointed : with , in , of , at . I'm particulary interested in the difference between with and in . I'm disappointed with you. I'm disappointed in you. Which one is correct? Or do they have a slightly different meaning? Answer I don't know about any official documentation on this, but it seems from usage that "disappointed with" typically precedes a demonstrative pronoun, while "disappointed in" directly precedes a subject or an article and subject: I'm disappointed in the ruling. I'm disappointed in Tom. I'm disappointed with that result. I'm disappointed with her performance. The 'that' and 'her' are demonstrative pronouns, while 'Tom' and 'the ruling' are subjects ('the' obviously being the article).

Do I need to capitalize "modernism" or "modernist"?

In two different text the first one I used to "combine" the elements in the "or" sentence in the other I only have 2 choices. Both sentences are from boardgames: "Play if at least 3 Imperial systems contain EITHER a sabotage marker or a Rebel unit" In my understanding this can be used (play) when I have 2 sabotage marker and 2 rebel units on Imperial systems. The second one: "You may EITHER exchange your cards with another player or discard any number of cards and draw en equal number of cards" In this case the rulebook clarify the ruling saying you "CHOOSE" one action. I think the key is in the "or" placement in the second one you select actions in the first one items that can be combined. If I'm wrong in my interpretation (I'm not English native) excuse me and thanks for any help in this matter if I'm correct: Is the wording in the first one ambiguous or bad wrote? Thanks again (In forums about rules of the first...

Are you his dependency , dependendee or something else? What is this type of opposite word called? I believe it is not called antonym, as that would be independent .

I understand that the word “precious” in the following quote of Maureen Dowd’s article “Heart of Darkness” (NYT, March 20) literally means “2. valuable or important and not to be wasted” as defined in OALD: Congressman Jones read an e-mail from a former boss of General Allen’s, giving the congressman this unvarnished assessment: “Attempting to find a true military and political answer to the problems in Afghanistan would take decades. Would drain our nation of precious resources, with the most precious being our sons and daughters. Simply put, the United States cannot solve the Afghan problem, no matter how brave and determined our troops are. But I didn’t know “precious” has another meaning as defined in OALD: 5. (disapproving, people and their behavior) very formal, exaggerated and not natural, and Readers English Dictionary: 2.(colloquial) terrible, almost worthless, until I was told by my respected forum mate a few days ago. Being encouraged by his suggestion for me to “ask anoth...

If someone asked you where you bought something, you could say, I got it at Walmart. but what if instead of referring to a store you were referring to a city? Would you say, I got it at Chicago. or I got it in Chicago. Somehow when referring to a city, using "in" instead of "at" seems more appropriate. Am I right? Why is that? Answer Walmart and Chicago are both places, but we use different prepositions to refer to them. From this article on them : Prepositions of Place: at, on, and in We use at for specific addresses. Grammar English lives at 55 Boretz Road in Durham. We use on to designate names of streets, avenues, etc. Her house is on Boretz Road. And we use in for the names of land-areas (towns, counties, states, countries, and continents). She lives in Durham. Durham is in Windham County. Windham County is in Connecticut. Because Walmart is a specific place or address, we say that someone shops at Walmart . However, since Chicago is a land-area, we ...

Consider the sentence: While this assumption, on its own, is relatively innocuous, if implausible, in practice, it is supplemented by assumptions... The 'if' here really means something more like 'but perhaps also'. Another sentence: He appeared very happy, if not exuberant, at her arrival. 'if not' here means something like 'and perhaps even', as if the latter statement should be a more extreme version of the former. But it also feels like an exclusive disjunction. That is, it is one or maybe the other, but not both. On the other hand, 'if' by itself feels like both statements could be true. I can conjure up many examples where both 'if' and 'if not' violate my above descriptions and many more which just seem malformed and awkward but fit them, e.g., ' He seems happy, if not a little confused' . or 'The proof appeared correct, if sloppily constructed,'.. . Adding further confusion, if I make a small change to the ...

I thought the word irritance was a word — but it isn’t one according to Google and my dictionary. It sounds correct; what is the word I should use? By irritance I mean something that’s being irritating, like a person kicking the back of your plane seat is an irritance. After researching more, I’ve found the word I was looking for was nuisance . Answer Although irritancy certainly exists as a noun, something that is irritating is normally referred to as an irritant or an irritation — or less commonly and usually with a human agent only, an irritator . (lifted out of ephemeral comments) I haven’t found any dictionaries that yet contain irritance , although there do exist published books that happen to use it. This usually means that a word is too new or too rare to bother mentioning, since even catachrestic uses are documented by full dictionaries. So although anyone would instantly understand what you meant by the word irritance , your computerized spellchecker might not like it ...

Obviously something can be sub-optimal or poor, minimal, bad or terrible... But is there a word that means the exact opposite , the antonym, of optimal? Answer Taking the classical approach, optimal derives from optimus , the Latin superlative to bonus , meaning good . Looking at the Latin for bad , that is malus . bonus -> melior -> optimus malus -> peior -> pessimus So analogous to optimus becoming optimal , pessimus would become pessimal . All that said, I have never heard that word used . We do use plenty of the forms of Latin good and bad , as in ameliorate , pejorative , optimal , optimist and pessimist . However, pessimal never seems to have made it far in the popularity contests - it did get into the dictionaries though!

Is there a word (or a phrase at least) that means to love in a hating way (hatefully, execrably) ? There is "Love–hate relationship" but it is more like a psychological term. I'm looking for a "noun" or "verb" mainly. Answer I like "brawling love", because I like quoting Shakespeare. He was neither the first nor the last to discuss relationships combining love and hate (nor was that his only time), so there are in fact thousands of different phrases describing it. So many in fact that I'd avoid set phrases that have been used before; see if this tired old trope can be made fresh again!

I have been studying Longman's English grammar book, and something is really confusing me: We can put it and them after the verb: Give it to me. Buy them for me. Do it for me. With e.g. give and buy, we can say: Give me it . Buy me them . (But not *Do me it . ) We say: Give it to John. Buy them for John. (Not * Give John it - * Buy John them . ) Why can't I say Buy John it or Give John them ? There is another post related to it that talks about the same topic: Direct and Indirect Objects with the verbs: Give, Buy, and Bring . However, the most voted answer was, indeed, useful for me, but didn't get everything clear. What's the main rule for inverting the position and dropping the preposition? As far as I managed to understand, if the direct object is it or them and the indirect object is a pronoun, the normal construction's placement is necessary, i.e.: Subject + Verb + Direct object + To/For + Indirect object Is this right?

Initially, my question was: is "focussed" or "focused" the correct past tense of "focus", but since this applies to a lot of words, I would like to generalize and ask: is there supposed to be a rule when to double the consonant? Answer The rules are much more complicated, and I don't think it's a good idea to post them all here. Re: doubling of the final consonant in an unstressed syllable. Pam Peters (in "The Cambridge Guide to English Usage") argues that when the final syllable is identical with a monosyllabic word, the final consonant is also doubled in British English: eavesdropped, kidnapped, formatted, worshipped, zigzagged etc. Michael Swan argues that doubling in such cases is caused by a full vowel, which hasn't been reduced to a schwa. Burchfield, the editor of the most current Fowler's, also mentions such words, as benefitted , targetted etc., without any explanation. (BrE) It's interesting that Fowler's reco...

What is the difference between the following sentences: You may be prevented from crossing the border, although you are in possession of a valid visa. You may be prevented from crossing the border, even if you are in possession of a valid visa. If they have the same meaning, in which circumstances would it be better to use each one?

What is the semantic difference between apostrophe and single quote ? I see people use both of them interchangeably, but people never create two words to denote one concept. There should be a difference. Answer An easy way to differentiate: An apostrophe is only used within or at the very end of a word - it is part of the word. In English, it serves three purposes: The marking of the omission of one or more letters (as in the contraction of do not to don't ). The marking of possessive case (as in the cat's whiskers ). The marking as plural of written items that are not words established in English orthography (as in P's and Q's, the late 1950's ). (This is considered incorrect by some; see Use in forming certain plurals . The use of the apostrophe to form plurals of proper words, as in apple's , banana's , etc., is universally considered incorrect.) Single quotes are only used around words - they come in pairs, and are not part of any word. Single...

Our local newspaper had the headline today "Gadhafi forces retreat" and I read it with "retreat" as the verb instead of "forces" as the verb. I know it is a poorly written headline, but which way is the more common way to read it? (In other words, is it likely that no-one at the newspaper noticed the ambiguity?) Answer This is a type of ambiguous headline known as a crash blossom . From the Wikipedia link: Newspaper headlines are written in a telegraphic style (headlinese) which often omits the copula and therefore lends itself to syntactic ambiguity, usually of the garden path type. The name 'crash blossoms' was proposed for these ambiguous headlines by Dan Bloom and Mike O'Connell in the Testy Copy Editors discussion group in August 2009 based on a headline " Violinist linked to JAL crash blossoms ".[3] The Columbia Journalism Review regularly reprints such headlines in its "The Lower case" column, and has collected them ...

I heard that ' petrichor ', which is defined as a pleasant smell that frequently accompanies the first rain after a long period of warm, dry weather , is the only noun in English that means a specific scent. Is this true? Answer There are definitely at least two, because the word " nidor " refers specifically to the smell of burning fat. The word "musk" may or may not qualify. I've been looking for more examples of this myself. If I knew any, I would add them to this Wiktionary category .

What does a dry sense of humor mean? This article explains how to develop it, but not what it is. How to Develop a Dry Sense of Humor Developing a dry sense of humor can be challenging and fun. Learn how to develop one. If you really want to (and you know you do) then read the article. Answer Here is a relevant definition that says it all: dry adjective (of a joke or sense of humor) subtle, expressed in a matter-of-fact way, and having the appearance of being unconscious or unintentional: he delighted his friends with a dry, covert sense of humor NOAD

When we want to change a statement from active to passive, in the present continuous, we have to change the verb that is continuous from the active verb to the continuous for of be and the past participle of the active verb. E.g. if we start with is painting then we have to change it to is being painted by . However I'm not sure how to change the subject and the object. If we start with: John is painting his room. Is the passive construction: His room is being painted by John. Something seems wrong when comparing the two sentences, but I'm not sure what. Does his in the passive construction refer to the same person as in the active?

The following examples are clearly wrong: × I am very much tired × She is very much clever But the following sounds fine (at least according to OALD ): I am very much afraid that ... I am very much aware of ... Worse, the following sounds awkward to me: × I am very aware of ... I wonder some sound ok while the others do not. Does it have to do with the type of adjectives being used? Or is there a subtle nuance between "very" and "very much"? Is "very much" the same as "extremely" (I would guess not, at least in the "afraid" example)? When should/can one use "very much", as opposed to "very"? Are there differences between spoken and written uses? Answer I'd say "very much" isn't used with adjectives of characteristics/qualities that tend to be inherent or permanent (She's very intelligent.) And we tend to use very much with other adjectives, especially if they go with a preposition. (I'm ver...

In English, generic reference takes three possible forms: A. Cats are cute. B. A cat is cute. C. The cat is cute. But the names of nationalities seem to me to make an exception to this rule. As far as I know, when referring to all the members of a nation, you can only use the C version: The Italians are musical , or The French are posh , or The British are cold . Why is it that in this case only C is considered grammatically correct? If all the Italians, or all the French, or all the British are musical, posh, or cold, why can't we also say: A. *Italians are... // *French are... // *British are... or B. *An Italian is... // *A French is... /// *A British is... ? Answer I don’t agree with the premise. We can, with generic reference, say all of the following: The Italians are musical , but the British excel in poetry. Italians may be musical , but you can’t beat Germans for a good brass band. The Italian is musical , where the Frenchman is artistic. An Italian is musical , but a ...

“A number of students” vs. “the number of students” I want to know whether the following construct is correct: Number of Attempts per Question is unlimited. I want to know if it should be are in place of is in the above sentence. I have read somewhere that the article before number (whether the or a) governs the form of the verb. However, here there is no article before Number .

For those who don't play video games, there's a growing trend in the industry called "Microtransactions" - a small fee the player can pay for certain things in game. Usually something small, such as a cosmetic item to change the color of their equipment, or a fancy Mount to ride on. Usually, these convey no actual benefit to the player aside from looking cool and unique. But there are games that abuse this (especially on mobile devices) where you can pay for convenience; get experience faster, objectively better items or other advantages, pay now for extra Lives or whatever. Having defined that term, I had a discussion recently about the trend of Microtransactions and how so long as a game doesn't implement them in a manner that gives paying players an objective advantage over other players I think they're perfectly fine. I cited a game as an example of one that I was told implements these microtransactions unfairly, and I was apparently misinformed. The other...

I came across this exchange between Fanny Price and Miss Crawford in "Mansfield Park" near the end of Chapter 29. The phrase does seem to be a saying. Has anyone conjectured that it could be a source for the idiom, "I could care less" ? "I know nothing of the Miss Owens," said Fanny calmly. "You know nothing and you care less, as people say. Never did tone express indifference plainer." "I could care less" could be an abridgement of "I know nothing and care less," a simplification that avoids witticism and heightens the sense of indifference. We can be sure that Fanny was not speaking sarcastically, so that Miss Crawford must have been mistaken about the tone that expresses indifference most plainly. It would have been delicious if Fanny had turned to her and replied: "I could care less, dear heart." Answer Edit: The answer is, "Yes, Henry Churchyard," for those who TL;DR. The idiom of knowing nothing and ...

Are there any more poetic synonyms for "snow-white" and "niveous"? I was searching but I've only found "nival".

It might be a strange question, but I, as a non-native speaker (Pakistani), have listened to English pronunciations by my native people who have over time developed their own pronunciations. So, I heard the word "THUG" with the pronunciation "T" + "HUG" (T, as in tyre, tank, tip, etc). But I later found out that the "TH" in thug is pronounced like the th in thought, thin, etc. Since then, I am trying to think whether the pronunciations of TH as T+H are acceptable anywhere else or not? Is there such a word? Answer In general, the "t" and "h" in "th" are only pronounced on their own when they appear in English words that originated as compound words (such as rat-hole becoming "rathole", foot-hill becoming "foothill", and light-house becoming "lighthouse"). In each of these cases "th" is not a single sound, but rather two sounds, "t" and "h". Instead, ...

When is it possible to use an indefinite article before uncountable nouns? Only when they are defined in some way? music, art, love, happiness advice, information, news (It was a good advice/information/news) furniture, luggage (an old furniture, a heavy luggage) rice, sugar, butter, water (a/one rice on my plate) electricity, gas, power (a dangerous gas) money, currency Answer It depends on the noun. Some mass nouns are also count nouns. Take art , beauty and gas , for instance. You can say The art of the native peoples was interesting. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Gas permeated the room. or He made lying into an art. That cameo brooch was a real beauty. The noble gases include helium, neon, argon, and xenon. These differences rely on different senses of the word. Some nouns use counters to turn them into count nouns. three grains of rice (not "three rices") a piece of toast Some require units of measurement instead of counters. 200 kilowatts of electricity a gla...

I'm trying to keep this descriptive essay in the past tense. I bolded the words of my concern (and italicized the ones I believe are in the right tense) in the following passage: As a result of the floor containing thousands of small holes, looking down through them yielded the sight of the rushing waters of the Merrimac River. Passing by this intense stream invoked a fear of falling into the violent, rushing waters. What my question comes down to is: Are those verbs that end in -ing considered past tense, as well as those ending in -ed ? If not, how should I re-write this passage? Answer Containing can be replaced with which contained (past tense) without any change in meaning, so that is compatible with the past tense. Looking and Passing are gerunds , that is, they are nouns formed from verbs. Since all nouns are compatible with the past tense, so are the gerunds you used. Also, as a result of the floor containing lots of small holes sounds unnatural. I would instead...

Excuse me if this topic has been brought up before though I couldn't find it. It seems that there are many similar topics related to both defining and non-defining clauses but there is still one question that bothers me. I want to know about the difference between wh- pronouns (who, which, what...) vs. that in restrictive relative clause . For example: The man that I saw at the mall looked puzzled. The man who I saw at the mall looked puzzled. I omitted commas intentionally, as I'm willing to talk about defining clauses only. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language gives quite vague description on that and I cannot think about actual examples: "Relative clauses are so called because they are related by their form to an antecedent. They contain within their structure an anaphoric element whose interpretation is determined by the antecedent. This anaphoric element may be overt or covert. In the overt case the relative clause is marked by the presence of one of the rela...

I know that some adjectives (such as easy & short) can be used as adverbs in some situations, but when can this happen and what adjectives does this apply to? This definitely works: "He stopped short" But does this?: "He fell pretty hard" Answer I don't think there's much more to it: some adjectives can simply be used as adverbs too. Some can only be so used in certain idiomatic expressions ( your estimate fell short ), others in a broader context ( she drove by fast ). There are also other adverbs that simply don't end in -ly, like soon and yonder . The now productive suffix -ly for adverbs is relatively recent; Dutch and German don't have it—that is, the suffix exists, but it is used differently. In Proto-Germanic/Gothic, the suffix -lîko- could be used to form adjectives from nouns and other adjectives. (Cf. manly, soldierly, womanly, masterly .) The normal suffix for adverbs was -e in Old English, which still exists in German. When the -...

I am attempting to find an adjective to describe someone who has rebounded from failure and come back even stronger. The ___ man came back, worked harder, then succeeded after missing the game winning shot. Answer "Resilient" seems to be a perfect fit. able to become strong, healthy, or successful again after something bad happens able to return to an original shape after being pulled, stretched, pressed, bent, etc. merriam-webster.com: resilient

Mr. A told me two months ago that he did not do something. Mr. A told Mr. B today that he did do it, and I was in the room. I saw in Mr. A’s eyes the moment he realized that he had, in effect, just admitted that he had lied to me. It was a moment of realization lasting only a split second. What do you call the act of seeing a moment of realization in someone's eyes?

As a Southerner, I completely understand the meaning of fixing to . It means I'm getting ready to do something. But what I don't understand is where this rather unusual usage of fix comes from. Nothing actually gets fixed! Do you know where this phrase originates? Answer fix (v.) late 14c., "set (one's eyes or mind) on something," probably from O.Fr. *fixer, from fixe "fixed," from L. fixus "fixed, fast, immovable, established, settled," pp. of figere "to fix, fasten," from PIE base *dhigw- "to stick, to fix." Sense of "fasten, attach" is c.1400; that of "settle, assign" is pre-1500 and evolved into "adjust, arrange" (1660s), then "repair" (1737). Sense of "tamper with" (a fight, a jury, etc.) is 1790. As euphemism for "castrate a pet" it dates from 1930. Related: Fixed; fixedly (1590s); fixing. From EtymOnline I'd speculate it came from arranging oneself...

The you is Harry Potter. I’m really curious about the grammatical construction and the reason why JKR chose it. ”Mrs. Weasley, why – ?” ”Ron and Hermione will explain everything, dear, I’ve really got to dash,” Mrs. Weasley whispered distractedly. “There” – they had reached the second landing – “ you’re the door on the right. I’ll call you when it’s over.” ( Harry Potter 5 [US Version]: p.62) N.B.: Mrs. Weasley has just led Harry to his room. She is in a rush because she has to attend a meeting downstairs. I think it means "your room is at the door on the right," but Mrs. Weasley might be making a mistake because she’s in hurry. I don’t know for sure, though. What’s the true meaning of “you’re the door on the right”? If it’s grammatically acceptable, is there any omission in the sentence? If it’s grammatically acceptable, what situation do you use it in? And what’s the difference in listeners’ impressions between this kind ( a-person-is-an-object type) of sentence and th...

Sometimes I wonder if he is actually/really as lavish as he pretends to be. I know that this sentence can work without either actually or really , but if we were to use one of them to make an impact on the listener, which one should it be?

Is there a verb to the word science ? Could you say sciencing (i.e. "in the Process of making/generating science")? Of course there is the word research, which is both a verb and a noun. But in the noun form, "research" and "science" seem to differ a bit if you ask me.

Is there a difference between using "it seems" and "it seems that" For example: "It seems that automatic restart is not happening now" "It seems automatic restart is not happening now" Which one is correct? Or are they both?

Why is interesting sometimes pronounced as intra-sting ? The same goes for interest sometimes being pronounced without the first e . Answer For the same reason "surprise" is frequently pronounced as "sah-prise": people sometimes take shortcuts if the meaning is still clear even with the mispronunciation. For more examples, see here , including this detailed explanation of the specific pronunciations of "interesting": Interesting IN-tris-ting or IN-tur-uh-sting or IN-tur-ES-ting . All three pronunciations are acceptable, though not so long ago only the second was considered cultivated while the first was considered British and the third was frowned upon by some authorities. One reason there are so many accepted pronunciations is that most educated speakers do not say interesting in exactly the same way every time. Slight, unconscious variation is natural in rapid and informal speech, and when a certain variation recurs often enough in educated speech,...

"All of them, that is, but Storm." Is the above line a sentence fragment, and if so, why? Thanks.

Here's a quote from Lolita : "Dolly Haze," she said, "is a lovely child, but the onset of sexual maturing seems to give her trouble." I bowed slightly. What else could I do? " She is still shuttling ," said Miss Pratt, showing how with her liver-spotted hands, " between the anal and genital zones of development . Basically she is a lovely..." "I beg your pardon," I said, "what zones?" "That's the old-fashioned European in you!" cried Pratt delivering a slight tap on my wrist watch and suddenly disclosing her dentures. "All I mean is that biologic drives--do you smoke?--are not fused in Dolly, do not fall so to speak into a--into a rounded pattern." Her hands held for a moment an invisible melon. What the hell does it mean? Is it some kind of late 1940's psychobabble, or a disdainful parody of same, or what?

I'm wondering if there is a word for a software feature which is not wanted and negatively impacts the software/business using it? In my mind is not a bug as a bug is where something doesn't work as intended. In this case the "feature" functions as intended, it is just that its intent is misguided and in practice it is problematic for the business and we'd rather that users don't use it. We would have the "feature" removed from the software, but would it still be considered a feature until it is removed? In my mind for software, a feature is inherently a positive thing. Or am I mistaken? Example sentence: Can you please remove the ability to do XYZ, it is a [word-for-negatively-impacting-feature]? Answer It is a design bug - a bug by design . It is sometimes also called a misfeature . That is, it is intentional, part of the design. (Something that was overlooked at design time can also be called a design bug, however, and this includes a feature om...

From “War Pigs” by Black Sabbath: Generals gathered in their masses Just like witches at black masses In English poetry, a perfect rhyme has identical vowels but different onsets, like come and sum. An identical rhyme has identical vowel and onset, like come and become. Pairs of homonyms and homophones are identical rhymes but not perfect rhymes, and most people consider them inferior. Holorime , where entire lines rhyme, is likewise stigmatized in English poetry: For I scream For ice cream Most consider this a trifle at best, doggerel at worst. This judgment makes some sense for the mere repetition of a word as “rhyme,” which may indicate a lack of creativity . However, that makes less sense to me for examples like the wordplay in holorime and in the Black Sabbath song. Furthermore, some other languages value identical rhyme, like rime riche in French poetry. Did identical rhyme fall out of favor at some point, or was it never well-accepted to begin with? Was there any period ...

The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language (Page 335) says: A count noun denotes a class of individuated entities of the same kind. Boy , for example, denotes the class of boys. For example, in (1) the count noun boy denotes the class of boys but is combined with A to denote an individuated entity. And the same is true with the count noun human . (1) A boy is a young male human. But when used alone (without any determiner such as a ), as in (2), the count nouns boy and human cannot seem to denote the class: (2) * Boy is young male human. Why is that? (Although this is a why question, I hope this is detailed enough to be answerable.)

Although I searched fairly extensively, I couldn't find any references as to the origins of pre-plan . According to Online Etymology Dictionary , pre-arranged and prearranged have existed since 1792 but it fails to mention the history of pre-plan . Dictionary.com which is a reliable source for dates and examples of usages, doesn't even list the verb. Instead it re-directs the reader to plan Oxford Dictionaries (which rarely provides the origins of words) says pre-plan [WITH OBJECT] (usually as adjective pre-planned) Plan in advance: Safety and security of supply demand that they operate to stringent standards and create a mindset that is preconditioned towards conformity and pre-planned behaviour Collins Dictionary notes the one word solution: preplan But then he added, `We'll let the company treat us, and I'll tell you all about how to preplan and prefinance your mother's funeral . Exactly how old is this "corporate speak" expression? Is it really der...

Somewhere in the back of my mind I seem to remember that cedere meant “to go or yield” in Latin. Presumably this gives us the words concede and accede . (?) But what about the words supersede and proceed ? Are they derived from the same source? If so, why the different spelling? Answer The different spelling of 'supersede' is appropriate because it is not derived from the same source as the others. Supersede is derived from super (over) + sedere (to sit). Proceed is derived from pro (forward) + cedere (to go). Here is a comment from the Oxford dictionary on the spelling confusion of supersede : The standard spelling is supersede rather than supercede. The word is derived from the Latin verb supersedere but has been influenced by the presence of other words in English spelled with a c, such as intercede and accede. The c spelling is recorded as early as the 16th century; although still generally regarded as incorrect, it is now entered without comment in some modern dictiona...

What do people really mean when they say "what's not to love"? Is there any context in particular to use this? Answer It's a variation on the older phrase, "what's not to like". The question is rhetorical, it's a different way of saying that you can't think of a reason why anybody would not love/like X; there is nothing not to love/like about it. At least that's what the literal meaning is. Nowadays, the phrase is such a cliché that it's often used ironically, to mean the exact opposite thing. The Phrase Finder provides some background : The earliest example of 'what's not to like?' that I've found in print is in Dorothy Kilgallen's review of the film Charade in the 'Voice of Broadway' column in the New York newspaper The Dunkirk Evening Observer, September 1963: "It has Audrey Hepburn, Cary Grant, Paris in living color, and a beautiful score by Henry Mancini. So what's not to like?" [...] The ...

What word can I use to describe the small lump on the skin seen after a mosquito bite? Answer Technical terms aside, the most common phrase used to describe this is just mosquito bite . I got a mosquito bite yesterday. It really itches.

I am currently working through "The Blue Book of Grammar and Punctuation" by Jane Straus. In the section on subject-verb agreement the author describes a rule for sentences that begin with "there" or "here" which claims that the true subject in these sentences will follow the verb. In the exercises, there are two sentences where I am supposed to identify the subjects and verbs as well as correct any issues. There is one sentence in particular that is confusing me. The sentence "There's lots of food left" has the subject "lots" and according to the rules given should have the verb "are" but the book states that this is incorrect. The correct verb according to the book is "is". Why is this the case when there is a plural subject?

I'm referring to someone who travels a lot, completely consumed with his job.

Sheba walked to the door and she opened it. Sheba walked to the door and opened it. I would use a compound sentence only if the subject in the second clause is someone other than Sheba: Sheba walked to the door and (John) opened it , for I can't see any good reason for the extra one word. But sometimes subjects in both independent clauses are the same person. I prefer the more concise Sheba walked to the door and opened it , of course, but why should I have to have options?

I've been taught that in "Reported Speech", the subordinator "that" is a signature of "indirect speech". For example: He said, "I will be late." (Direct Speech) He said that he would be late. (Indirect Speech) But, it is wrong to say or write that: He said that , "I will be late." (Wrong!) However, I occasionally see counterexamples such as this Wikipedia Article: In 2000, Robert Scheer created the website New Age Journal, which states that "We are not affiliated with any magazines printed on paper." ( link ) Is this a correct usage of the conjunction "that" in Direct Speech? Does it depend on the reporting verb and with some verbs, such as "to state", we can use the conjunction "that"? Answer One can write a sentence with a partial quotation: Direct speech: We live in a madhouse! We have to move. She says they "live in a madhouse" most of the time. This is unobtrusive: the quotat...

Can anybody please tell me the subject, verb, and object of this sentence: Thank you all for conducting a landmark experiment. I would also like to please know what part of speech thank you belongs to when it’s used the way it is in the sentence given above.

I always get confused when using hyphenated words in my research papers. Is there any specific rule for using hyphenated words? For example, which one of the following is the correct usage of co scheduling ? One has smallcase s , while the other one has uppercase s . Is it just simply a taste of the writer? Google shows both the words along with coscheduling . Co-scheduling or Co-Scheduling Moreover, wikipedia tells that: Certain prefixes (co-, pre-, mid-, de-, non-, anti-, etc.) may or may not be hyphenated. Could someone clarify this? Answer The problem here is that there is not one true answer. Google will display the various styles used, but there is not one correct one. To determine the style that you should should use, do the following. Look up the word in the standard dictionary you are supposed to use. (If there isn't a standard dictionary for your project, choose one). If the word is in the dictionary, use that spelling. If not, look up the hyphenation rules in the s...

Every language has its stock of onomatopoeic expressions, but they vary across nationalities and cultures. For example, the American “bow wow” (a rapper’s name) has its Japanese equivalent in “wan-wan.” And the Korean equivalent is probably “mong mong.” The American “pitter-patter” has “para-para” in Japanese. American “chugalug,” Japanese “goku-goku.” And many others. Of course the Japanese expressions above are written in Romaji or Western script, but there’s no denying that the whole reception of sounds is different. My question is: Is there any technical term (or subfield) that can be used to refer to or that can best summarize this phenomenon? Of how almost exactly the same events would lead to completely different onomatopoeia across languages? Answer Mitch is right. But onomatopoiea per se is a very insignificant phenomenon, since it can only refer to words about sounds, and how often do we talk about sounds? Onomatopoeia is, however, part of a larger, more general, and sporad...

Given the following sentences that use will in the if clause (which is seldom with if-clauses and therefore, I'm not sure they all are even grammatical or not). If you will/would kindly lend me your book, I will be thankful to you. If you will not/would not mind lending me your book, I will be thankful to you. If you will/would wait for a while, I will check it for you. If you will use it, you can have it If you will not arrive before six o'clock, I cannot meet you. What if the last sentence is modified as follows? If you will not be arriving before six o'clock, I cannot meet you. Once upon a time, it was found in a grammar book. If the play will not be finished until ten o'clock, I will have to spend the night at your place. Can the following version of this sentence have a different meaning (or no meaning at all — a wrong sense)? If the play is not going to be finished until ten o'clock, I will have to spend the night at your place. After all, the question ...

From the very second paragraph of "Foundation" by Isaac Asimov: There were nearly twenty-five million inhabited planets in the Galaxy then, and not one but owed allegiance to the Empire whose seat was on Trantor. I presume he means that they all owed allegiance to the Empire, but that phrasing sounds like he's saying the opposite. I want to read it as if 'but' is the subject of the sentence meaning 'exception'. Answer Your presumption is correct. I don't often hear "not one but" used this way in spoken English, but it's not terribly uncommon in written English. (Unfortunately, Google Ngram Viewer is no help here because it offers no way to distinguish between not one but verbed [as in your quote] and not one but number [not one, but two hippos in my swimming pool].) Anyway, you can think of not one but with a past tense verb as equivalent to not one that didn't with a present tense verb: There were nearly twenty-five million inha...

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.)

I am trying to find a word that expresses the pretentiousness of an obvious design, or maybe the feelings of disgust/disdain associated with such pretentiousness. Something like the feeling you might get from an affected art piece or performance. I feel like "pretentious" is probably the closest word, but I think it's vague/general enough term that further explanation is required to describe the sensation. An example usage: "While Osamu's novel about the waning cultural influence of aristocratic families in in postwar Japan was generally well received by critics, the book's title The Setting Sun was often criticized for its [pretentiousness of intentional/efforted design]" Where "The Setting Sun" is an obvious, even gross metaphor for the book's theme. Answer You could use pompous as an adjective, or pompousness as a noun. characterized by an ostentatious display of dignity or importance http://www.dictionary.com/browse/pompous?s=t In ...

What is the correct way to use infinitive after the verb "help": with or without "to"? For example: Please, help me to understand this. or: Please, help me understand this. Answer The particle "to" is not wrong in this sentence, but it is unnecessary. I would recommend against using it. The phrase "to understand" can be interpreted as a special case of the infinitive; a kind of future infinitive or impersonal future tense . In that context, the first sentence means, essentially, "please help me develop an understanding of this (in the future)". While that may be technically correct, it adds nothing to the meaning of the sentence. To add some weight to my argument, the COCA lists 142 entries for "help me understand" versus only 18 for "help me to understand". The results are similar for other constructions involving "help me ..." versus "help me to ...". I think that the confusion stems from th...

I have read answers to questions like When is it correct to use "yourself" and "myself" (versus "you" and "me")? but I couldn't find a general rule for using "you" or "yourself", "him" or "himself" that could explain things I see in some examples. For example, I think that one normally say (according to examples I see in LDOCE dictionary ): You bring something with you. You have something in you. You have something on you. You pressed her to you. But on the other hand one would say: You draw attention to yourself. He killed himself. You can try it out for yourself. As a general rule, it seems that the reflexive pronoun is used when the object is the same as the subject of the verb. But for prepositional phrases, it seems more complicated. Do some prepositions (like "with", "in", "on") always come with the accusative form of the pronoun, and some other (like "for"...

Wikipedia mentions several English words that have been reborrowed from Japanese : Anime comes from animation and has been reborrowed into English to mean Japanese-style animation. Puroresu comes from professional wrestling and is a term for Japanese-style professional wrestling. Kosupure comes from cosplay (an abbreviation of costume play ) and refers to the practice of dressing in costumes of anime and video game characters. Do you know other examples of word reborrowings from Japanese or other languages back into English, or vice versa? Answer From the French paquebot , comes from the English packet-boat in 1641 , use to mean mailboat , but now is used to describe a ship, liner , was reborrowed with the meaning mailboat in 1894 . redingote , comes from the English riding-coat in 1725 , reborrowed in English and means "A long coat or greatcoat, originally for men but now often for women". ( Source )

Is there an adjective meaning that an idea or object has longevity, or will still be relevant in the future? (I believe I've heard such a word, but I can't think of it at the moment.) Usage example: While this textbook is interesting, it does not seem particularly [?] ; five years from now, it will be useless. Answer There are a number of possible synonyms: eternal, lasting, permanent, enduring, abiding, immortal, everlasting, ceaseless, immutable, indestructible, undying, ageless, imperishable, changeless. The word required in your example, however, might be definitive , which carries the sense of being authoritative.

Over on Stackoverflow, I keep seeing questions wherein posters say: *I have an item named SoAndSo (a table, a file, etc.). Shouldn't it be: *I have an item called SoAndSo . Is "named" an acceptable word in this context? Are those words specific to a particular English speakers, e.g. UK vs. USA vs. Australia, etc.? Answer If the name of the item is indeed SoAndSo , then it is reasonable and correct to refer to it as an “item named SoAndSo ”. If in addition to being named SoAndSo it usually is called SoAndSo , it still is ok to refer to it as an item named SoAndSo (and also would be ok to refer to it as an item called SoAndSo ). But if, although usually called SoAndSo , it actually has some name other than that, then it would be incorrect to refer to it as an “item named SoAndSo ”. Some further examples appear in answers to “Don’t know what the name is” vs. “Don’t know what it’s called” .

Is there a word or concise English expression for the kind of discussion that is heated, perhaps a bit contentious or pretentious, but ultimately off-topic, vague, or too abstract to be useful? A word-picture that comes to mind are a bunch of stuffy politicians or inexperienced young professionals arguing for argument's sake, to display their knowledge or make their voice heard yet without contributing any value to the discussion at large, or worse, derailing it entirely. Answer I think the usual way of portraying this is with the phrase ' hot air '; they're not so much talking about anything important as they are just breathing at each other. Example: The politicans could talk for hours, but all that ever came out was a lot of hot air . Equal meaning can be derived from the terms idle talk , gas or wind , tall talk or inanity . Of course those are nouns for describing the actual tone of the dialogue - if you want verbs describing their behaviour you could use babbli...

I'm having a discussion with my wife on English conditionals . She says we cannot have "would" in a hypothetical if statement: If I would want to change my address, should I let you know? She says that "would" can only occur in the second part (as in Type 2). If this is the case, is there then no way to describe "a hypothetical situation in which I would want to change my address" as conditional? I feel like this sentence is different from: If I want to change my address, should I let you know? Then again, maybe it is just that I'm confused with how we would say it in Dutch. And what about if it is the change, not the wanting to change, that is hypothetical? In other words: If I would change my address, should I let you know? Answer is there then no way to describe "a hypothetical situation in which I would want to change my address" as conditional? Yes, there is a way. To express a hypothetical present time situation, use the past ten...