Notes

There were things his grandchildren, in turn, should know. Yet he hesitated. How do you tell your children they are progenies of the self-proclaimed inventor of Manhattan clam chowder? (The New York Times) Oxford Dictionaries say "progeny" is a noun treated as singular or plural, but on Internet I found a number of occurrences of "progenies" and, hence, a doubt arose to my mind: is it entirely wrong pluralize "progeny"? Answer I agree that your citation sounds strange; at least, it does to my ear. Reading that I almost wonder whether the author hasn’t somehow conflated progeny and prodigy , since the latter’s plural form is unremarkable. However, digging deeper, one finds that the OED entry for progeny , last updated in 2007, makes no mention one way or the other. It gives as its sense 1a 1a . Offspring, issue, children; descendants. Occas .: a child, a descendant; a family. a definition that is already in the plural, but which admits a singular sense “...

I often receive business emails starting with "Dear Daniel..." or "Hello Daniel..." although I haven't been into contact with the sender before. As an Austrian citizen (thus german speaking) this is quite unusual to me, I always write "Dear Mr. Smith..." or "Hello Mr. Smith...". When is it appropriate to address someone with Mr/Mrs instead of his given name? Answer Very good question! Since the English-speaking world has become much more informal due to the influence of pop culture, most people use first names almost exclusively. My mother insisted on being called Mrs. by everyone younger than she was, even though many of my friends would have called her by her first name. She made it clear she did not want that. I think Brett meant by honorific Dr. or other such title, not Mr/Mrs/Ms. But I may be wrong. What would I, who am a person of formal upbringing, do? First, I check how the person has signed themselves in any prior correspondence (B...

My native language is German but I’ve been watching a lot of TV in English. During a conversation about the English language, a question about the term gay came up. Is calling a homosexual person gay offensive? Meaning, using "gay" - not in a general contents (as asked in other questions) but to describe the sexual orientation when using it in a sentence like: Talking about someone: He/she is "gay" [...] Talking to someone: I didn't know that you're "gay" [...] Answer The adjective gay is the most common term, at least in the U.S., and is not offensive on its own. (It can be used offensively, of course, by using it as an insult, or even as a generic pejorative — "my English class is so gay !" — but then the offensiveness is in the implication that gayness is an insult, rather than in the choice of gay as the word for gayness. It can also be used offensively in more subtle ways, such as consistently describing someone as "my gay ...

In my English class yesterday we looked at the following example: Monica is such a beautiful woman. We learned that the above sentence could also be written as: Monica is so beautiful a woman I am wondering what the rule for this, to me unorthodox, placement of the article before "woman" is. Answer Such and so are degree quantifiers. Such goes before Noun Phrases and so goes before adjectives and adverbs; they're alternants. She is so good [that she can make anything]. She is so good at carpentry [that she can make anything]. She is so good as a carpenter [that she can make anything]. She is so good a carpenter [that she can make anything]. She is such a good carpenter [that she can make anything]. However, they usually come equipped with a that clause to show just what the standard is for the comparison. That's the normal use. It's also common in some idiolects to use emphasized so or such -- without a that clause -- as a general emotional intensifier, ...

Is the word "of" optional in this instance? Is either of these considered preferable to the other? Taste all our delicious treats. Taste all of our delicious treats. Answer Both sentences are grammatical. See the following NGRAM (all our, all of our): It would seem that the use of "all of our" is growing nowadays. Also, "all of our" ("all of our delicious") gets 18,200,000 (745) hits on Google Book, while "all our" ("all our delicious") gets 26,500,000 (4,240) hits.

I'm learning modal verbs now and get in trouble with "need" one. In my textbook it is said that: don't need to == needn't -- present simple didn't need to -- past simple needn't have done -- present perfect In some inexplicable reason I think that needn't have done sounds weird (may be because I haven't ever heard of such construction). So my question is: Is there a sentence that equal to needn't have done but without the needn't part (like the past simple one)? Or everything is just fine with it and I shouldn't keep in mind? Answer Actually, all of the examples are a little weird. Need is very rarely used as a modal any more, and it's likely that you'll be able to go your entire life without ever encountering it in speech. It is sufficient that you be able to recognize and understand sentences like the above, but don't expect to use them much. Just treat need like any other verb: Present: don't need to Present per...

In the show 'Friends' there is an exchange between Ross and Joey that goes like this: Joey: I'm in this show called 'The Days of Our Lives'. Ross: Dude, it's just 'Days of Our Lives'. There's no 'the'. Sadly, I fail to see humor in this and it's most likely due to my poor understanding of the many meanings of the article 'the'. I also think understanding this joke could make me understand how the reception of the name "The Facebook" differs from just "Facebook" (the site used to be called thefacebook.com in the past, there's even a mention of that in the movie "The Social Network"). Could you help me understand this, please?

Is it correct to use is rather than are in this question? Where is my mother and father? Grammatically, it should be where are my mother and father? but, for some strange reason, I think I would use where is my mother and father? and I can't explain why that is. Perhaps, I used this structure before while growing up, without knowing all of the grammar "rules"; if there is an explanation for it, that would be great.

What are the difference between incident, issue, and affair ? How should one use them? Answer An incident is a single distinct event - one occurrence of something that can happen more than once. It is often unpleasant and/or unexpected. Issue has lots of meanings. Given the other words you're asking about, the meanings you might be thinking of are (1) a problem, something that needs to be discussed/fixed; or (2) a topic of interest. The first meaning that springs to mind for affair is the extra-marital kind, but it can also mean a social event (of the dress-up kind), or a plain old (read: not sex related) scandal. (I've linked each word to the definition with the most examples of usage that I could find.) After that incident with the neighbor's dog, he avoided chihuahuas like the plague. vs. After that affair with the neighbor's dog, he avoided chihuahuas like the plague. The incident probably took less time than the affair - for the former, I'd imagine the d...

I would like to split something into three parts. Is there a phrase I can use with similar overtones to "cleave in twain"? Answer As far as meaning goes, you can use "cleave in three" or "cleave in thirds". More obscure and inexact is "cleave in terciles " or tertiles . The latter two words are statistical terms referring to "three [ordered] parts, each containing a third of the population" and "any one of the three groups so divided". The rationale for "cleave in three" and "cleave in thirds" is that twain means two . In its etymology we find it " survived as a secondary form of two" in various cases, and also "in oral use where it is necessary to be clear that two and not to or too is meant." Regarding other suggestions: My understanding of the many senses of tierce is that while all of them are related to the number three, none of them would make any sense in a phrase like "*...

Once I used "pretty good" as a reply to one of my friends' question "How are you today?", I was under the impression that the "pretty good" will weigh much more than just "good", means "very good" or "awesome". But after a quick conversation with her, I got to know that "pretty good" has a flavor of sarcastic, thus it might mean "what a busy day!" or "Too busy to be good." in that specific context. Is that a good practice to reply with "pretty good" to the question "How are you?", and expecting no sarcastic meaning conveyed? If the answer is no, then can I use "pretty good" if I had got a sore throat for all day long?

In work environment, we frequently encounter the words "deployment" and "release" in technical context. I often hear them used interchangeably also. It is mainly related to "Release and Deployment Management". For example, Information Technology Infrastructure Library (ITIL) defines the aim of Release and Deployment Management as: ITIL Release and Deployment Management aims to plan, schedule and control the movement of releases to test and live environments. The primary goal of Release Management and Deployment Management is to ensure that the integrity of the live environment is protected and that the correct components are released. Source: http://wiki.en.it-processmaps.com/index.php/Release_and_Deployment_Management Additionally, I found the below technical definitions but these are not the only usages: release: 1. Making a version of software available to the public. 2. A software version which has been made available to the public. Source: http://www...

If my teacher's first name is Robert and his last name is Dowry, and I have to send him an email, then which of the following will be correct? Dear Sir Dowry, Dear Sir Robert, Dear Sir Robert Dowry, Answer If he is knighted, it would be Dear Sir Robert, Otherwise you would use any of Dear Sir, Dear Mr. Dowry, or if you know him well or are American, Dear Robert,

This is not a duplicate of earlier questions asking whether or why the comma splice is an error, because I am asking about the debate itself: unlike many another grammar rule that is widely accepted by all parties, why are so many people on opposite sides when it comes to the comma splice? I see comma splices every day in very well written members' comments on multiple Stack Exchange sites and also in so many articles on the World Wide Web. My mind keeps identifying the comma splice and suggests the semicolon as a possible alternative. With such widespread use the comma splice seems to have gained descriptive legitimacy. I sometimes use comma splice myself and only recently learned that some grammarians consider it an 'error.' Looking back over the previous questions about comma splice I came across this relatively recent question: Why is the comma splice an error? And I was surprised to see I had already posted this comment: It seems that comma splice is now considered le...

It looks like the plural of 'prefix' is 'prefixes' - while I would expect it to be 'prefix' => 'prefices' like 'matrix' => 'matrices' or 'index' => 'indices'. Is 'prefix' an exception to the rule? If so, why? Answer General principle: Latin plural forms go with Latin singular forms The plural of the Latin word matrix is matrices , and the plural of the Latin word index is indices . We took the singular forms of these words from Latin unchanged, and the same goes for the plural forms (unchanged in the spelling, anyway; the pronunciation has been anglicized). But prefix is not technically a Latin word. It is derived from the Latin word praefix um , and the plural of that is not praefices , it's praefix a . Since there is no Latin word prefix or Latin plural form prefices , the English plural form is just prefixes, made using the singular prefix + the normal English plural suffix -(e)s. From the O...

As I understand it, comparatives compare with something. So something that is colder is more cold than another thing. However, can't a word like colder be used as an adjective without being compared to something else? For example, is it ungrammatical to say the following? People who live in colder climates should be careful about their heating bills. The adjective cold could be inserted in place of colder , but I think the meaning would be different. To me colder sounds like 'somewhat cold' as opposed to 'absolute cold.' So my questions are as follows: 1. Is this use of colder grammatical? 2. If so, is it still considered a comparative? 3. Do you agree with my understanding of colder vs. cold in the example? Answer Sure, the name comparative does not proscribe the valency. It is just the form that is used when you are comparing two things. In cases when you have one thing it can still be used. Following cases are typical: - we want to compare to some aver...

Has the traditional pronunciation of Latin fallen completely out of favor in English, or do any prescriptivists still recommend it? Is it any more common in British English than in American? A quick look through dictionaries reveals that Merriam-Webster is inconsistent, sometimes, but not always, omitting the traditional pronunciation altogether, whereas Oxford tends to list both. I'm not asking about the position of classicists on this matter, but rather the position of Englishists. Answer It depends on what you mean, but for most interpretations of your question I think "fallen completely out of favor" would be an overstatement. I don't think there is a clear systematic difference between American English and British English; in fact, when I researched the pronunciation of the word algae , I found that British speakers seemed more likely than Americans to use "non-traditional" /g/, the opposite of the trend that you suggested. I think almost nobody trea...

Is a comma needed before the word "which" and "such as" in the following examples? Ethical clearance was essential which was obtained very early in the research process. There are several reasons for this misconception such as a false belief in one's ability. Answer I agree that the second sentence needs a comma before ‘such’. The first sentence, however, requires careful consideration. To begin with, it might make for easier reading to recast it as: Ethical clearance which was obtained very early in the research process was essential. It is the convention not to place the relative clause between commas when the information contained in the relative clause is integral to the larger message. So, the sentence as shown above distinguishes the clearance which was obtained very early in the research process from the implied clearance which was obtained at some other time in the research process. However, if we punctute the sentence as: Ethical clearance, which was o...

As a non-native speaker of English and an engineer by training, I always get confused about hyphenation and almost always end up referring to Google every time I need to make that decision. Does anybody know of a concise, comprehensive style guide to hyphenation that explains this rather complex issue, once and for all? Answer Asking for something that is both concise and comprehensive is, unfortunately, contradictory. The Chicago Manual of Style, 14th Edition devotes one full page (5 numbered sections, 6.38-42) to "general principles" of hyphenating compound words, but then also goes on to list a 13-page table of common forms, when to hyphenate them, when not to, and when to make exceptions to other parts of the table. To summarize the relevant segments for you, though: 6.38: The trend in spelling compound words has been away from the use of hyphens; there seems to be a tendency to spell compounds solid [i.e. unhyphenated] as soon as acceptance warrants their being consid...

Which is more appropriate: "So" or "As"? Answer Both are equally valid because as far as and so far as have exactly the same meaning in this context. However, so far as may be considered a slightly less formal version of in so far as . as far as to the extent that: as far as I am concerned, it is no big deal (in) so far as to the extent that: it was a windless storm so far as blizzards go NOAD However, you will likely more often hear as far as I know in casual conversation. For the extremely formal, in so far as I/we know would not be out of place.

I work with software engineering and in norwegian (I'm from Norway) we have a word, "fagsystem", which refers to a software system/application that is specialized to handle a certain kind of business or professional context. Examples are my best bet to clarify, I guess: A banking back-end system that keeps track of a customers transactions and bank engagement An insurance back-end system that keeps track of a customers insurance premiums An airline booking system ... I've tried using translate.google.com but the translations seem a bit funny: "professional system", "task system", "specialized system". I would be very thankful for any suggestions on how to express this in English.

I'm talking about the Latin cum , which I've seen used conjunctively, as in A-cum-B . What does it mean, and how do you use it? Answer Cum is the Latin word for with and is usually used to join two nouns, showing that something serves two purposes. She is a waitress-cum-singer in the restaurant. This is my bedroom-cum-study.

Given two options, we can use 'either and 'neither' to show no preference. Do you want to watch A or B Neither, I don't like either. The only option I can see for more than two options is: 'any' and 'none' Do you want to watch A, B, C ... ? None, I don't like any. Actual Question : Is there, or has there ever been a word to show no preference for 3 options? More Information Sometimes we have an extra, sometimes uncommon, option for a 3-type question. This question is searching for a similar option for "either" How many times have you eaten sushi? Thrice What is your phone number? Oh, seven, double five, treble zero 9 is triple 3 Answer Any (vs. either ), none (vs. neither ) are your options AFAIK. The last option in a multiple-choice list is None of the above , not Neither of the above , (even when the options are just two.)

I often encounter a problem when writing sentences in mathematical contexts, where one "does something" in order to "obtain something." These sentences typically have the form "using X , one can do Y ," where generally X is a mathematical rule or function, and Y is its result. I never know if I should put "by" before the present participle. I have this problem mainly with the verb "using," but this is not the only verb that gives me trouble. Here are some examples: (by) using Theorem 2, one can prove that... We obtain the result (by) expanding the function ... (by) differentiating w.r.t. the 2nd variable, we obtain ... (by) taking the integer part of F, one can compute...

Some examples of what I mean: "What the eggs are for, is to prepare the cake." "What my husband is, is a nice guy." "What a bird is, is a kind of animal." "Where the station is, is close to the Centre" I am not sure if this is something I am just misusing from the Spanish. Answer These are examples of a kind of sentence called a Wh -Cleft (aka Pseudocleft) construction. They are constructed from a simpler sentence and mean the same thing. E.g, I want him to trim the hedge . = Wh -Cleft=> What I want him to do is (to) trim the hedge. He told me (that) it was raining. = Wh -Cleft=> What he told me was (that) it was raining. Bill's wearing the/a white sweater. = Wh -Cleft=> What Bill's wearing is the/a white sweater. Wh -Clefts are very complicated and have many arbitrary restrictions. For instance, cleft sentences insert a form of be as a fulcrum between the two cloven pieces, and therefore they are reversible around that f...

I am reading a book that contains the following text. A square matrix P is said to be a permutation matrix if each row and each column of P contains a single element 1, and the remaining elements are zero . My questions are: why is "contains" used? why not "contain"? Since there is a "and" before "contains". why not "zeros" for the last word in the sentence? Answer This is a particular case of compound subject , one or more nouns joined with a conjunction. When compound subjects are preceded by "each", "every", and certain other words, they are rendered singular, in an exception to the general rules. This explains the singular verb agreement in your example. So: " the cup and bowl contain milk ", but " each cup and each bowl contains milk ". Your Dictionary University of West Florida Cuny School of Law Southeastern Louisiana University Here, "zero" is used as an adjective, rather th...

While editing and improving a question on the Cognitive Sciences site , I came across the following sentence: Infants can detect an upside human face right after they are born This sounded awkward to me and I struggled to improve it. I believe the author's intention was to say: Infants can detect a human face right after they are born, as long as the face is not rotated or: Infants can detect a human face (in proper orientation) right after they are born. But I really feel like there must be a word for "in proper orientation" in a context such as this. What would be appropriate? Answer upright Apparently, the author meant upright not upside . I do not think there's more to it than that. The preceding sentences in that post too have spelling and grammatical errors, as the author does not seem to be a native English speaker. No need to be overly concerned about these minor things.

What do you call a brightly lit spot, especially as a result of reflecting the light source (e.g. sun) off a glassy surface?

Is it correct to say "one such family are..." as opposed to "one such family is..." in some circumstances? Say, for instance, as used in this article on gene families: [...] One such family are the genes for human haemoglobin subunits; [...] The problem occurs when the family is a collection of things. It sounds weird if you say "One such family is the genes for human haemoglobin subunits" and saying "One such family is the family of genes for human haemoglobin subunits" is too wordy. Does the problem make sense?

What does an exclamation mark inside parentheses "(!)" mean? I saw this in a book review I was reading and I didn't understand what the use of it was. Can someone help me? Answer This usage is simply a passing note of astonishment at the preceding word (or perhaps phrase). Typically there will be no further comment on this astonishment, and it is just an aside. This may express real or feigned (sarcastic) astonishment by the writer, or be used to call attention to a surprising aspect of the use of the preceding word.

When something is unnecessarily complex, it is _____. Example: The statement "That solution is no longer unnecessary" is ______, couldn't we simply say "That solution is now necessary"? Answer Your particular example is not only overly complicated, but especially confusing as a result. I would therefore use convoluted : 1 (Especially of an argument, story, or sentence) extremely complex and difficult to follow — Oxford Dictionaries Edited to add: Note that the word's original meaning is literally "twisted" or "coiled", but it is now commonly used (at least in the US) metaphorically to mean confusingly complicated, as attested in the Oxford definition. I think the connotation of twisting back on itself is quite useful here. Not only does the double negative cause a "reversal" in meaning, but it is likely to make the reader go back and re-read the end of the sentence so that the reader's eyes trace a Z-shaped path across t...

Furthermore, Gilbert’s vibrant description of Naples’s pizza makes it sound unique and delicious. Does the "it" in the sentence above refer to the description or the pizza? Would it be better to rewrite the sentence as the one below? Furthermore, Gilbert’s vibrant description of Naples’s pizza makes the pizza sound unique and delicious. If I remember correctly, pronouns refer to previous noun mentioned. However, the word "pizza" is in a prepositional phrase. Therefore, doesn't the "it" refer to the word "description"? (My goal is to say that the pizza sounds unique and delicious. This is pretty self-evident, but I just want to be as clear as possible.) Answer First, forget the supposed rule that pronouns refer to the most recent noun mentioned. It's not really how they work. As a reader, you should try to figure out the antecedent by looking at what would make the most sense. As a writer, you should only worry if there is a possibility...

I'm surprised this has not been asked and answered on this Site--perhaps it has, but my search found nothing. The closest question to this one i could find sought the difference between grammar and syntax, which received one answer before it was closed as off-topic. In any event, I did not find the answer probative of the question i ask here. What's more, Internet search engines were no help, likely because there's no distinctive keyword in the query. Answer I too have searched for a definitive answer to this question and not found one. My own way of differentiating grammar from usage errors for my English language learners is as follows: If the mistake contravenes a generalizable rule for all members of that word class, then it is a grammar mistake. Otherwise it is a usage mistake. For example: He live in Frankfurt contravenes the rule that verbs in the 3rd person singular present simple tense require an -s (with the exception of modals), and is hence a grammar mistake. ...

Typically, when we ask for confirmation/denial of a statement, we say something like the following: We turn left here, don't we? You have a cat, don't you? We've met before, haven't we? pairing a positive statement with a negative question, or We don't need that, do we? You don't know anything about this, do you? pairing a negative statement with a positive question. However, sometimes positive statements are paired with a positive question We take a left, do we? You had to be a big shot, did you? You've been to Prague, have you? Is this correct? Does it change the meaning in any way? Are the three forms interchangeable? Answer No, they aren't interchangeable. A tag question is a device used to turn a statement into a question. It nearly always consists of a pronoun, a helping verb, and sometimes the word not. Although it begins as a statement, the tag question prevails when it comes to the end-mark: use a question mark. Notice that when the statement i...

What is the accepted custom regarding capitalization when it comes to "White" and "Black" when referring to race, whether they are being used as nouns or adjectives?

Is it "Bob and I" or "Bob and me" when describing a picture? I've read the other links but they all use an example with a longer sentence. like "Bob and I went to the store", or "Me and Bob had lunch today." But what if it's a picture and the sentence below is just "Bob and I"? Is that correct? Answer The rule here is very simple: the correct word is the one you'd use if there were no "Bob" involved -- so "I went to the store" becomes "Bob and I went to the store," and "She kissed me" becomes "She kissed Bob and me." So what would you label a picture of just yourself? "This is me" or "This is I"? It's the first one, of course, so the proper caption is "(This is) Bob and me."

The likeliest problem vs. the most likely problem : are they both correct? do they mean the same thing? is one preferable over another?

In the following example, is it appropriate to use a or an as the indefinite article, and why? He ate __ green apple. I know that in the case of just "apple", it would be "an apple," but I've heard conflicting answers for "green apple," where the noun is separated from the article by an adjective. Also, which is more appropriate in this case: He ate __ enormous Pop-Tart. Answer The question of "a" vs "an" is always decided by the pronunciation of the word that follows the article. Thus, various geographical regions that have different pronunciation rules may use a different article for the same word. Words that begin with a vowel sound, such as "apple", "egg", or "hour" are preceded by "an". All other words, such as "cake", "pie", and "user" (which begins with a y sound), are preceded by "a". Except (as lifted from @Nohat's comment below ) - The...

Is there a name for this manner of purposely speaking in double negatives, e.g. I wouldn't say no to a cup of tea! I've noticed it as a habit of some people, perhaps often going along with a particular type of sense of humour and British understatement. Answer This is litotes , a figure of speech using understatement - in particular, double negation - for rhetorical effect. It's not a recent habit, or even solely a British one, but rather a figure of speech used in many cultures and languages. A prototypical English example is " not bad! "

Some compound words are written without hyphens ( nonaggression , nonbeliever ), some with hyphens ( well-intentioned ), and others with spaces ( post office ). Is there a rule or good guide as to which option should be used? Answer In English, there are three types of compound words : the closed form , in which the words are melded together, such as firefly, secondhand, softball, childlike, crosstown, redhead, keyboard, makeup, notebook; the hyphenated form , such as daughter-in-law, master-at-arms, over-the-counter, six-pack, six-year-old, mass-produced; and the open form , such as post office, real estate, middle class, full moon, half sister, attorney general. For the most part, compound words that are created by adding a prefix are not hyphenated. For example, there are the words anteroom , extraordinary and coordinate . Some exceptions to this rule are (from the link above): compounds in which the second element is capitalized or a number: anti-Semitic, pre-1998, post-Freudian ...

Brits say "dar-bee" for both the town and the race, but Americans pronounce it as it's spelled. Did Brits used to say "der-bee" too and that's why it's spelled that way but they changed over time? Was it always pronounced like in the UK but American pronunciation followed the spelling for some odd reason? Is it borrowed from some other language so there's a disconnect between the spelling and the UK pronunciation?

I have been using the following phrases but I am still not confident that they are grammatically correct and sound right: "in regards with something" "with regards to something" "regarding something" I have also heard/read people using an arbitrary combination of the above (e.g. "in regards to"). Are those correct? If yes - are they equivalent or the usage depends on context? Answer I have been using the following phrases but I am still not confident that they are grammatically correct and sound right: "in regards with something" "in regard to" is the right way here. "with regards to something" This is OK. Somehow I have the feeling that "with regard to" is more normal though. Paul Brians seems to back this up . "regarding something" This is OK, e.g. film title "Regarding Henry", etc. I have also heard/read people using an arbitrary combination of the above (e.g. "in regards to...

Consider the following exchange: [1] Q: Is your name Jane?      Aa: * Yes, it's right.      Ab: Yes, that's right. Note that [1Aa] is simply not acceptable. It's not just that that is preferred to it ; it's rather that, in Standard English, it simply cannot be used here. Why not? Yes, in the replies [1A], the reference is clearly (supposed to be) deictic rather than anaphoric (see below); and the characteristic usage of 3rd person personal pronouns he/she/it/they is anaphoric. But they certainly can function deictically at least sometimes; CGEL gives the following example (p. 1469): Isn't she lovely! (uttered while looking at someone's baby). So why is [1Aa] completely unacceptable, rather than just being less favored than [1Ab]? I am well aware that Yes, it is would be completely acceptable... and I do understand why it would be. But [1Aa] is not, and my question is specifically about why it is not. Some background on deixis [1Ab] is a clear example of d...

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 Answer Yes, they're usually called Irreversible Binomials - Binomials for short - or Binominals . (Unfortunately, Binomials is also a mathematical term). I've read about them under the term freezes as used by John Lawler in the comments, but the majority of the literature and also grammar references that talk about this, that I'm aware of, use the term Binomials . Binomials have two main characteristics. The first, as noted by the Original Poster, is that the order is usually perceived as fixed. The second is that the two terms are normally the same part of speech, though not always Nouns. Three of the examples in the Ori...

Suppose that a team of people is laid off but is asked to temporarily stay to train their replacements. Is there any idiom that would describe people in such a conflicting situation? "Digging their own grave" comes to mind, but I typically associate that with cases where people work against their own interests by their own accord, not because they're forced to. "Faustian bargain" also isn't quite right but feels like the type of phrase I'm looking for. Answer rub salt in the wound to make a difficult situation even worse for someone In speech I have often heard/used the shortened form 'rub(s) it in'. As if being laid off wasn't bad enough, to rub it in [rub salt into the wound] management required us to train our replacements.

I am trying to find out why sheep has the plural sheep . I have found different explanations, such as, "it is because they were seen as uncountable, as in 'a herd of sheep'", "because it comes from German, which does not have the plural 's'" and that it is because it is a neutral Old English noun which does not change in the plural. Does anyone have the right explanation?

I find that in persuasive conversation, whether written or oral, it is sometimes useful to draw attention to the "I" in the sentence, giving the connotation that you are confessing or conceding to some degree. There are two common ways to do this, that I can think of: I myself have done this once in a while... or Even I have done this once in a while... The first just feels like bad grammar. The second seems far too pretentious; often giving the connotation that the speaker is normally "above" such behavior. Is there another way to communicate this meaning without such negatives? Answer I, too, have done this... calls attention to it, while merely including yourself humbly in the long list of people who have done it.

I can't find the reason why : riceful and antful are ungrammatical. Can someone help me? Thanks

The most common definition I have of numb is: "Deprived of the power of sensation." "Deprived of feeling or responsiveness." These definitions show up in nearly the same form in multiple dictionaries, yet I see comparative and superlative forms "number" and "numbest" listed as well. I understand numb to mean complete deprivation of feeling, and so here's my question. I had a student write the sentence: His fingers got number the longer he stayed outside. She asked if it was correct (because the spelling looked funny to her; it looked like number, as in "the number seven"), and I told her that numb didn't need a comparative form because it implied complete lack of sensation. I told her she could phrase a sentence His fingers slowly became numb... to signify that he was getting colder, but that she should not use numb in a comparative or superlative sense. Can somebody explain to me the reasoning for the comparative and superla...

Are these dates correctly pronounced? Should it be 'dash' or 'hyphen'? Roman one, or '/aɪ/'? 27/I-1980, twenty-seven, slash, Roman one, dash/hypen, nineteen eighty 4/II-1936 Four slash Roman two dash nineteen thirty-six 11/III-1908 eleven slash Roman three dash nineteen-eight 1/IV-1981 one slash Roman four dash nineteen eighty-one 29/V-1949 twenty-nine slash Roman five dash nineteen forty-nine 13/VI-1946 thirteen slash Roman six dash nineteen forty-six 14/VII-1959 fourteen slash Roman seven dash nineteen fifty-nine 12/VIII-1967 twelve slash Roman eight dash nineteen sixty-seven 4/IX-1966 four slash Roman nine dash nineteen sixty-six 28/X-1965 twenty-eight slash Roman ten dash nineteen sixty-five 5/XI-1964 five slash Roman eleven dash nineteen sixty-four 3/XII-1927 three slash Roman twelve dash nineteen twenty-seven. Answer I would say no, those aren't the correct pronunciations. The problem with dates is that they have written representations, and they are ...

This question relates to my previous question: More formal word for "know-it-all" I would like to describe the general attitude of a particular witness, in my closing argument. This will help me comment on her reliability as a witness. She was very negative about everything, and came across as being in a snit about everything. I need a word for this idea of being in a snit. She was opposed to everything. She got herself tied into contradictory knots because she was opposed to so many things. The word could be an adjective describing her constant oppositional state. Or it could be a word to mean the oppositional state itself. It should show that it comes from a desire to show that everything the parent speaks, acts, dreams, or breathes is wrong . That was her guiding principle. But it was an emotional (visceral) thing for her. She's too stupid to be analytical. Oppositional doesn't work because two-year-olds are oppositional. They say "no" to everything . Th...