Blog

My mom and I say 'soup' like: "Why are you souping the snot back up your nose?" But I realise that this is not accurate. So what's the word?

According to Wikipedia , in British English, it is generally accepted that collective nouns can take either singular or plural verb forms . How does this affect their property of being singular or plural in other grammatical contexts? We use plural verb forms, but do we then also use plural personal pronouns? For example: England have won the World Cup! Now is/are England actually plural, or is/are England just used with the plural verb form without being plural in other grammatical contexts? I am sailing to England themselves or I am sailing to England itself? Which one is correct, and why? Answer I am sailing to England itself. This is the correct usage. England, in the context of the country, is not a collective noun--it is a single country. In the context of the population, England can be used as plural. The example given on the wikipedia page is "The team is/are in the dressing room". A good test for whether or not plural and singular are interchangeable: add "the

I know that the singular of data is datum. I know that data is a plural. However, common usage of the word "data" suggests it is used as a "collection of data". Here is [the collection of] data. In which case, is the word data now a singular again, or still the plural? If so, what is the correct use of the word data and datum now? Answer There are two conflicting usages. For example, a Google search for "the data suggest" returns 10,000,000 results, but a search for "the data suggests" still returns almost 2,000,000 hits. Wiktionary says : data uncountable or plural noun 1. Plural form of datum : pieces of information. 2. (uncountable, collectively) information. 3. A collection of object-units that are distinct from one another. Usage notes This word is more often used as an uncountable noun with a singular verb than as a plural noun, with singular datum. Merriam-Webster says : Definition 1: factual information (as measurements or stat

I am looking for a list of all English words that are their own antonyms. Off the top of my head, I can only think of "either", "fast", "to dust" and "to lease", but there must be dozens more. Can you provide a link to a comprehensive list, if such exists? Also, what are such words most commonly called? I like the term "Janus word" I once heard, but is that widely understood? Edited by popular demand to make it absolutely clear that this is not a community wiki poll. Answer I think you're referring to Auto-antonyms . They are not the same word but a homograph (a word of the same spelling) that is also an antonym. I guess, Janus word is also acceptable. There was a list on Wikipedia ( List of Auto-antonyms in English ), since moved to Wiktionary's Appendix of English contranyms .

Would it be appropriate to end a rhetorical question with a period, to show that it is not intended as a question that one should ponder or attempt to answer? For instance: Why do I eat so much(?)(.)(!) I don't want anyone to answer it, but it's still phrased as a question. Answer Rhetorical questions can be ended with either a question mark, an exclamation mark or a period. Using a question mark is probably the most common choice, but it is really up to the writer to use whatever punctuation matches best the intent of the rhetorical question. Yahoo's styleguide , which I would not consider as a reference, gives some examples of such usage: Can you believe it? I just bought that car, and it’s already scratched. What kind of a man are you? Boy, do I! How can you possibly think that! Would everyone please rise for the national anthem. Why don’t you stop asking me questions already. Why don’t you take a long walk off a short pier. As for my personal style, I don't use rhe

I was going through some articles about "African American Vernacular English". Article 1 . Article 2 . These articles give some examples, but they do not clearly specify hard rules to be followed in AAVE. First of all, I don't even have strong skills in Standard English, so understanding AAVE seems a lot more difficult for me. I did, however, craft a few sentences in both SE and AAVE to validate what understanding I do have. Are the following conversions correct? You don't have to validate each and every item, but rather guide me with rules that I should follow, but didn't, in the following examples. What the hell are you all doing here? — What the hell y'all doin' here? Hey you! What the hell are you doing man? Stop that nonsense now. Do you get it? — Hey you! What the hell ya doin’ man? Stop that nonsense now. D'ya get it? Come on, can't you open your mouths? — Come on, ya can't open your mouths?? Hey, who's out there? — Hey, who out ther

So there is the sentence: "The current environment is not conducive to achieving the best results" The usage of "to verb+ing" is very confusing. What is the difference between "to achieving" and "to achieve"? Thank you! Thank you Ricky! I mistakenly typed the wrong word "conductive". You are totally right. Thank you sooeithdk! You answered my question here. Now I have a clear sense of the gerund phase :) Answer The current environment is not conductive to achieving the best results. Here, this "achieving" is used as a gerund, an ing-ending noun. This gerund is not a verb, even though it has some verbal characteristics. The rest of the gerund "the best results" finishes this gerund phrase. For more information, click http://www.grammar-monster.com/glossary/gerund_phrase.htm . This use of gerund phrase is similar to using noun in this place instead. The current environment is not conductive to the survival of wild an

The Microsoft .NET Framework API¹ has a curiously named interface ILogicalThreadAffinative . According to their naming standard, namely concatenating capitalized meaningful English words into a single string, this represents something which is “logical thread affinative ” (and the prefix “I” is for “interface”, which is irrelevant to this question), or, how I read it, affinative to a logical thread. While the meaning of the “logical thread” is clear to the user², I am curious what could the word affinative mean, and is this not an invented word at all. To me, it looks like a two-stage suffixal defivation: affine (adj.) > ?affinate (adj.) > ?affinative (adj.), but I cannot find either of the latter two words in any dictionary, or even Google. I have been in this business for 30 years, give or take a few, and never heard them. Also, as documented, the concept is nothing more than being simply affine to a logical thread; the entity having this property simply “sticks” to the l

I just ran into this sentence in an online article: But as the App Store’s fortunes rose, so too did the iPhone’s, and later the iPad’s. If I were editing that sentence, I would remove the too on the theory that it doesn't add anything to the sentence's meaning beyond what so provides. On the other hand, the phrase "so too" (or "so, too,") is quite common in everyday speech and writing, and it may be idiomatic for some speakers and writers. Site searches for "so too" and "so, too," reveal that these terms appear a total of 25 times on EL&U pages—mostly in answers, and mostly by extremely well-informed answerers. If we think of so in the quoted example as meaning "in a like manner" and too as meaning "in addition," it seems to me that the sense of too is embedded in the sense of so , since Event B can't happen in a like manner to Event A unless it is happening in addition to Event A. But perhaps I'm ove

Here's the sentence - On further statistical analysis, these benefits were found to be both short term (0-30 days) and long term (31-360 days) and in both STEMI and UA/NSTEMI patients, irrespective of whether PCI was done or not. I was tempted to write this sentence in the following way: On further statistical analysis, these benefits were found to be both short term (0-30 days) and long term (31-360 days), and in both STEMI and UA/NSTEMI patients; irrespective of whether PCI was done or not. Any thoughts on what the right way is?

In the following phrase, from the 1971 film " The Devils " by Ken Russell, what is "most"? An adjective or an adverb? And in what form, comparative or superlative? I conjure thee, most frightful beings, by this most sacred substance. Beings refers to demons and substance refers to the blood of Christ. First, there's a very obvious mistake, in the first part of the phrase: should be "ye", not "thee", since it refers to several things instead of one. Isn't this correct? Second, the usage of "most". My initial interpretation was that "most" was used to mean "above everything else": the most frightful beings of all and the most sacred substance of all . But in the way that's written one can also interpret it as "something very important" but not the most important: very frightful beings . My intention in creating the question was to elicit different opinions, views, interpretations about how &quo

Where did the word Yankee originate? I was told it had Dutch origins. There is a lot of information on its usage today referring to northern, New England, American etc. but where did it come from and what was it's original meaning?

Consider the sentence, "Most of the apples are fresh." Is it incorrect to say that apples is the antecedent of the indefinite pronoun most ? Answer When Donatus listed the Latin Parts of Speech in his Ars Minor , he didn't mention "Quantifier". partes orationis quot sunt? octo. quae? nomen pronomen uerbum aduerbium participium coniunctio praepositio interiectio. How many parts of speech are there? Eight. What are they? Noun Pronoun Verb Adverb Participle Conjunction Preposition Interjection. He didn't mention "Adjective" either, and "Participle" slipped off the Approved List, but that's another story. Of course, this was the 4th century AD, so one shouldn't expect much. However, as it happens, this list (with "Adjective" replacing "Participle" since around the 14th century) is still what's taught in Anglophone schools as the English Parts of Speech. 4th-century science, applied to a language that didn&#

What is a word for a person who loves to share knowledge? So far I have educator in mind. Is there any other word? Answer How about "maven"? According to the Wikipedia article , A maven (also mavin) is a trusted expert in a particular field, who seeks to pass knowledge on to others. [Admittedly, many dictionaries define the word merely as something like "an expert", but the meaning is in flux, and the "person who loves to share knowledge" meaning is getting more common.]

I may not be using the right terms for what I'm asking, but for example, "Cartesian" is an adjective derived from Descartes' name, and "Dickensian" is an adjective derived from Charles Dickens' name, both of which are used to describe things that are related to the particular person they refer to. Are there rules (even loose rules) for how such adjectives are created, or is it more of an art than a science? Is there a special name for such adjectives (like a "demonym" is a noun for people from a particular place)? Thank you in advance for any help. Please let me know if you'd like any clarification of what I'm asking! Edit And if there aren't rules for this, what are the most common suffixes used, and what are examples of such suffixes?

How do the tenses in English correspond temporally to one another? What's the difference between the following? Did the shop close? Has the shop closed? I suspect the second one to mean that the shop could still be opened but I'm not sure If I'm right. Answer With the Have P.P., the relevance of the state (whether or not the shop has indeed already closed) extends to the time of speaking. This is why in the very usual event of us hoping to still be able to purchase something, I normally use the Have P.P. - "Has it closed?" On the other hand, I'd use the Past Simple for things that are less recent or "don't affect me so much now." Perhaps if I were the owner of several shops, and some trusted people regularly just reported to me. Way past closing hour, I could ask my staff: "Did the shop close?" I learned these from a British grammar book, but there's also a difference between American and British English here.

In the Stephen King novel, so the cop says to the guy who is yet proven to be guilty: "Right now you're going to jail. And guess what? We have the needle in this state, and we use it." Could you please elaborate.

Edit - My question doesn't refer to bank loans or credit card accounts. Nor does it refer to getting things out of other people's generosity. It is specifically about money and the putative duplicate doesn't address that. If there is no specific word for someone who never pays back his debts, then the answer here should be "there is no specific word for that". I'm looking for a slang word or idiom for a person who borrows small amounts from friends or relatives (say US$ 50-200) and never pays them back. Usually this kind of person has low-income or is jobless. He is irresponsible, he knows he won't be able to pay his debts but doesn't care. (Perhaps because he knows nobody will be taking him to court because of US$20 or 50.) "I wouldn't lend him one cent. Everybody knows he's a ........." Answer You can consider welch or welcher . These terms are used for people who fail to repay a small debt. The debt is usually a betting or gambl

There's a well-known proverb in Persian, which, translated literally, goes like this: Where there's fire, wet and dry burn together. The original being ".وقتی آتش موجود باشد) تر و خشک با هم می سوزند)" In a large forest fire, both dry wood that can be ignited easily and wet wood that's hard to burn, burn. A good example of a context it's used in would be a principal punishing a whole class because of what few perpetrators did — so students that didn't deserve to be punished, (that is, the wet) burned alongside the ones that did. (that is, the dry) Is there a proverb that would express the same thing in English? More specifically, is there a proverb that would convey the innocent receiving undeserved punishment?

In a question like "Who hears a noise?", is the subject of the sentence who ? I can think of a few tests for subjects like: " the subject is the phrase that inverts with the auxiliary to form a question". But this is a question and there is no auxiliary. We could say that's because it's a subject , but that would be just to presuppose that it's a subject in the first place. I can think of tests like: " the form of the verb will agree with the number of the subject ", but on the other hand who does not seem to have fixed grammatical number, and it sometimes seems like who might actually be agreeing with noun phrases later in the sentence: Who are the most prolific writers of our age? Who is the most prolific writer of our age? There are also tests like " the subject is usually the first noun phrase in the sentence ". But of course if we have a question like: Who have you bitten? ... you , not who seems to be the subject. The first

... having reviews and articles written of me in The New York Press. or ... having reviews and articles written about me in The New York Press. Answer I recommend about . In this context of is incorrect, and cannot be used with the meaning that you indend. The word on is possible, but in this context the word on could be misinterpreted, and doesn't flow as naturally as about .

I have been having a trouble with the idea of the definite article meaning generic concepts. Recently, I came upon a question asking which one is correct between " The Chines invented the paper" and "The Chinese invented paper. All of the commentators said the second one is correct because you are indicating paper in general, which I totally agree with. But, the definite article "the" also has a function to indicate the generic concept of something as in "The lion is big". So I assumed using "the" in the sentence would be okay, implying the generic idea of paper not a specific kind of paper. But it apparently seems not right from English natives' perspectives. So, I concluded that general things expressed by nouns with zero article and general things expressed by nouns with definite articles are different. How are they different? Answer There are two different issues here. The first is to do with the way that we talk about and think abo

I would like to start planning for next year. In the above sentence, there is no definite article before the words next year . Should it be present, as in the following sentence which sounds far less natural to me? I would like to start planning for the next year. Or, is it more proper to leave it out as in the first sentence? What is the reasoning behind the correct usage in this context? Answer Next in this usage is better regarded as a determiner rather than as an adjective. ( http://simple.wiktionary.org/wiki/next ) (compare last year , this year ). The use of another definite determiner (the) is thus superfluous. However, this does not apply with following , present , and previous , where the definite article is needed to pre-modify: I wanted to start planning for the following year. I'd guess that following etc are behaving more like adjectives, so there needs to be a definite determiner (the definite article) added. Next grades into adjectivalness, so the definite arti

“I try to give ‘em a reason, you see. It helps folks if they can latch onto a reason .” (Harper Lee, To Kill A Mockingbird) When we say ‘prepositional verb’ and ‘adverbial complement,’ are they two points of view for one occasion: the former sees ‘latch onto a reason’ as [prepositional verb: latch onto]+[a reason], and the other [latch]+[adverbial complement: onto a reason].’ Or does the example show only the prepositional verb? Answer A prepositional phrase is a grammatical structure consisting of a preposition followed by a noun phrase. An adverbial complement is a grammatical function. Adverbial complements may be realized through prepositional phrases or other adverbials. Consider: I put the book down . I put the book on the table . I put the book down on the table . There are verbs requiring complements without which the sentence they are part of would be malformed. In your example, the verb latch is such a verb. The addition of the adverbial particle onto in conjuction with th

Would anyone happen to know where the terms for the units of time came from, and why? I know "minute," which also means something extremely small, comes from the latin meaning "small," but then why is it not the smallest unit of time? Also, is there any relation between the time unit "second" and the ordinal number "second"?

English has a lot of pangrams, which are short sentences that use every letter of the alphabet at least once. This website has several examples. But is there a similar thing that is designed to use (almost) every phoneme of the English language? I know it would be nearly impossible to come up with something that uses all of them (and it is mostly likely going to be a paragraph, and not a sentence, given the amount of phonemes), but still, my question remains: is there such a thing? (And what is it called?) Answer The following three mnemonics (the first devised by my father in the 1940s and the second and third devised by me in the 1970s) almost do the trick requested. "We will aim them at some high, far bow--joy long told--full soon. (Cue.)" Puff thought "Sash--choke! Hey!!" Woman lawyer(ing). The first contains all of the vowel phonemes (including the diphthongs) of the dialect of English my father spoke, while the second contains all of the voiceless consonant

There are many topics here related to multiple hyphen use, which seems to depend on various factors. human-voice controlled system human-voice-controlled system human voice-controlled system Which is correct? Typically, human voice when used without the word controlled, need not be hyphenated. software and finite-state-machine -based approach software- and finite-state-machine -based approach software and finite state machine-based approach software- and finite-state-machine-based approach software and finite-state-machine-based approach Which of the above are correct and incorrect, and why? Answer The use of hyphens is to reduce ambiguity, and, in the case of multiple modifiers, to show which ones modify each other. In the first case I would go with human-voice controlled system . In this case, however, it is pretty easy to guess that human must modify voice, even without hyphens. In the second case, on the other hand, you need the hyphens because it's far from clear from the sen

The opposite of "equal" is "unequal", yet there is no word "unequality". Why do we use "inequality" instead? Answer The prefixes in- and un- both have the effect of negating the meaning of the word. The prefix in- comes from Latin and almost exclusively applies to words borrowed from Latin, which in many cases were borrowed from Latin with the in- prefix already attached. The prefix un- , on the other hand, is a native English prefix, and so, in general, can apply to any English adjective. The Online Etymology Dictionary tells us that inequality was borrowed from Latin (via French) with the prefix in- already attached, so we get the word with the prefix in- : 1484, "difference of rank or dignity," from O.Fr. inequalité (14c.), from M.L. inæqualitas, from inæqualis "unequal," from in- "not" + æqualis "equal" The word unequal , on the other hand, does have the same Latin root of æqualis , but the pref

If I were to write a book about myself, Me would be a more natural-sounding title than I . Also, we say the us-vs.-them mentality instead of the we-vs.-they mentality .

Situation: I am composing this phrase for a real forum discussion in person: There are a large number of proverbs/idioms in English (and doubtless additional ones in American). Some are entirely regional and if you don't live in that region you are unlikely to hear them. It is not easy either sometimes when you associate the situation that includes a cultural background [when you translate/interpret the Indo cultural things for Westerner you will find it]. Thank you. Question: Any recommended advise whether I should use: "There is a large number" OR "There are a large number"?

The phrase "it was his time" means that the subject is deceased. In other contexts that require the same meaning for "time" as this, would it be best to capitalize "time" to personify it as an omnipotent thing (or whatever) in the same way "God" is capitalized? For example: "...to escape his inevitable time." Yes or no? Answer Unless time is at the beginning of a sentence or part of a title or name of some sort, it should not be capitalized, because it is a common noun. God is a person, and as such he gets a capital letter, whereas a god is not capitalized. Unless the noun in question is used as a name or title, as it clearly is not in his time, but is as in Father Time, it should not receive a capital letter.

I've been having a small argument with a family member. She insists "It's no skin off my teeth" is the correct saying, though I've only heard "It's no skin off my nose" before. Which saying is more "correct" than the other? By this, I mean which came first, which is more commonly used, and which is more acceptable to use. Answer Writing in Google I got these results: "It's no skin off my teeth" -> About 36,300 results "It's no skin off my nose" -> About 449,000 results But on the dictionary I found both and they seem to have different meanings, even if the first one uses by the skin of and not no skin off : by the skin of one's teeth by a very narrow margin ; barely : I only got away by the skin of my teeth. [ORIGIN: from a misquotation of Job 19:20: “I am escaped with the skin of my teeth” (i.e., and nothing else). Current use reflects a different sense.] it's no skin off my nose (or off my ba

Are units in English singular or plural? I want to say: Those sixty dollars are gone That sixty dollars is gone The reason I ask is because I was originally typing: Those $60 are gone But that looks funny to me. Which is more correct?

Since the version of the word " that " might matter to the correct answer, I'll provide the actual title in question: Title : Existing Solutions that Didn't Work If someone could explain the why of the answer, I would be appreciative. EDIT: It has been suggested that this is a duplicate, and that may be, in a sense. However, the after reading the suggested prior question, I'm no closer to my answer. I think it may have to do with my use of the word " that ." Perhaps it is incorrect? Using these definitions of the word " that :" I'm having trouble figuring out which definition of that matches my title. Am I even using it correctly? Perhaps I should use which instead: Possible Title : Existing Solutions which Didn't Work If my original usage is incorrect, and I should use which , then the answer is simple since which is always a pronoun or adjective, and those are both capitalized in a title. However, I'm having difficulty unde

What is a word/idiom for ‘unable to decide’? Is there a word to describe indecisiveness, specifically between two things? I tried online dictionaries, but did not find anything.

I know pillion is a seat behind the rider of a horse or motorbike etc. I would like to know the word for the person sitting on pillion. Answer Pillion is the right word for the person too. Source Wikipedia A passenger in this seat is said to "ride pillion" or may themselves be referred to as a "pillion". Or you can say 'pillion rider' as in these news articles .

The header of psyco.sourceforge.net states: High-level languages need not be slower than low-level ones. Why use need not instead of do not need ? What does it mean? Also, why no to before be ? Answer There are two verbs need , which mean the same thing but use different constructions: 1. He need not be concerned. Need I be concerned? This need is sometimes called a modal verb (although others find this term inconsistent): it always requires an infinitive without to ; it doesn't have do-support in questions and negative sentences; and the third person singular (he/she/it) doesn't have -s . This is the need in your example. It is of the same type as must, will, shall, can, may, help , and probably a few uncommon cases. Modal need is slightly old fashioned. Except in negative sentences and questions, it is less common in modern writing, except perhaps in certain fixed expressions (though the need in if need be is a noun). 2. He doesn't need to call her. Do I ne

In British English I think these two words have different shades of meaning, but I couldn't articulate them. In American English I see inquire used where I would use "enquire". Are there shades of meaning in British English? Do they exist in American English? Answer The Oxford Learner's Dictionary has an "Help box" regarding Enquire vs Inquire, I'll paste it here: In British English people sometimes distinguish between enquire and inquire , using enquire for the general meaning of ‘ask for information’ and inquire for the more particular meaning of ‘officially investigate’. " I called to enquire about train times. " " A committee will inquire into the allegations. " However, you can use either spelling in either meaning. In American English inquire is usually used in both meanings. The NOAD distinguishes them as inquire and inquiry being the usual U.S. spellings, while enquire and enquiry are classified as " the standa

I'm preparing for an upcoming presentation for a class on Richard Nixon and Watergate. Nixon was given the name " Tricky Dick ." The name "Dick" as a nickname for someone named Richard was very common. I happened to mention this to a younger teacher in my office and they thought I was joking. The word "dick" nowadays refers to male genitalia in a negative way. The use of the word "dick" in "Private dick" (a detective) does not seem related...at least I couldn't see any connection. When and why did the word "dick" change from a common nickname to an almost exclusive reference to male genitalia? Please note, I am not interested in the etymology of the word. I want to know why the word has almost completely shifted meaning. Was there a popular event or phrase that shifted the meaning? The only other word that comes to mind in this way is "gay," which the dictionary still defines as "happy" and used to

This word was on my mind earlier, been trying to remember it but can't. It is used when someone is uncomfortable of meeting someone else; they fear something and overthink. So they try to avoid meeting or seeing people. It would be used in a sentence like: I can understand you are [the word here], but...

I'm not sure about the sentence structure below: All kinds of problems arise that smaller animals or plants do not have to cope with. It looks like that works as a relative pronoun for all kinds of problems , but I couldn't find such usage in my dictionary or online. This sentence could be divided into There are all kinds of problems. Smaller animals or plants do not have to cope with all kinds of problems. But, I can't figure out where 'arise' fits. If you have any thoughts, please share them.

How can I know the exact meaning of the word cousin in a sentence? How do English speakers distinguish between different kinds of cousins? (Arabic distinguishes both the sex of the cousin and the side of the family —Cindi/Google)

Some homonyms, like "punch", originated in different languages with different spellings. The violent act "punch" comes from the English word "pounce", while the beverage "punch" comes from the Hindi word "pañc" ( citation ). Is there a name for this phenomenon? It seems like the opposite of polysemy , in which a single word from a common origin takes on multiple related meanings.

I have trouble understanding if I should use "monthly average" or "average per month" when asking someone to calculate monthly average of a variable, e.g. heating expenses. Is there any difference, if this payment happens every month or quarterly, and I want to know average per month? Answer Average per month" or ("average monthly") and "monthly average" (or "monthly mean") have different meanings. Rather than speak about the "Average per month" it would be clearer to use "average cost per month". It can be used and calculated as follows: For payments that are made every month - add up all the money spent on electricity during 12 months then divide by 12 to get the average per month ( http://www.ehow.com/how_6391683_calculate-average-monthly-return.html ) For payments that are made at intervals greater than monthly divide by the number of months in the interval (eg. for electricity bills that come every quarter

What is the difference between spirit and soul ? Is the word soul used for only human beings? For instance, He [Descartes] thought the brain worked as a center for the spirits of the soul . Answer While you'll likely find no definitive answer, under general usage: Spirit refers to a non-physical part of a sentient being that is the source of their emotions. Soul is generally spoken about with greater religious implications, and can be considered an immortal, metaphysical aspect of a sentient being which is able to transcend the body and mind.

He is not vigilant like you. Does it mean that you are vigilant. Or you are not vigilant like him. I am really confused by the sentence whether it's a compliment or complaint? Answer It could actually go either way, but I think it mostly likely means you ARE vigilant, he is not. If it was phrased: Like you, he is not vigilant. That means neither person is vigilant. If it was: He is not vigilant, like you. Then again, neither person is vigilant. But because it is phrased: He is not vigilant like you. Then I'd treat "vigilant like you" as a single phrase, meaning you are vigilant and he is not like you. Therefore he is not vigilant. The other phrasings all specifically break "you" from "vigilant" with a comma.

What is the equivalent word for a person who doesn't want to communicate to share any of his/her secrets , life's stories or personal information ? Need some words related to the above described description... Answer This person would be called private . "Private" is used to describe not only information, but also people who don't share personal information freely. There are a variety of expressions to describe someone who does not wish to disclose other types of information, such as "secretive," "tight-lipped," and "discreet." However, "private" seems the best for the situation you've described. Two other possible candidates are unforthcoming and guarded . From Oxford Dictionaries online: private 1.3 (Of a person) choosing not to reveal their thoughts and feelings to others: he was a very private man unforthcoming 1 (Of a person) not willing to divulge information: the sergeant seemed unforthcoming, so he enquired at

I have these two sentences: We can get ammonia by treating ammonium salts with caustic soda or sodium hydroxide. We can get ammonia by treating ammonium salts with lime water or calcium hydroxide. Caustic soda is the common name of sodium hydroxide, while lime water and calcium hydroxide are two different substances. Both the sentences are grammatically and scientifically correct, but they obviously mean quite different things. In this particular case, I happen to know how to parse either sentence, but what if I get a situation where I cannot recognise whether the first term is a synonym for the second, or a different term entirely? I did not come up with this question myself, the first sentence is actually given in the standard NCERT textbook of INDIA. Nearly 1.5 million students are studying using this book. Is there a mistake in our book? Answer You don't disclose what the book is asking , but there is no mistake in the sentence as such. As you yourself say, both sentences are

When I reference to the next sentence or sentences using the term following , is the preferred way to use a colon or a full stop? An example: Consider the sentence 'I wash the clothes'. Replacing the letter h with the letter o in the previous sentence results in the following sentence. I waso toe clotoes. Answer Colon. Using a period misses the opportunity to connect the two sentences. Of course, avoid overusing colons in your writing.

Neither the OED and Etymonline has any answer to the etymology of the word. The latter does suggest it may have an origin in the Caribbean, but offers nothing better. The first citation is from 1936 only. Here are the last two citations: 1975 High Times Dec. 137/1 — Like Marley, he’s a spliff-toking Rastafarian. 1977 Transatlantic Rev. lx. 192 — Coon rolled a massive splif and blew clouds of ganja gremlins through the hatch. What’s the origin of the word spliff ? Might there be precursor that makes sense only if you know the various creoles of the West Indies, or even just the Rastafarian culture? Answer This unsubstantiated source suggests that spliff is a portmanteau word derived from combining the word split with the word spiff : (From split + spiff ) A quality cigarette rolled with both tobacco and marajuana, initially popular on Europe's Iberian Peninsula. Additionally, the term has been adopted to mean any high quality or well-rolled marijuana joint. You can find oth

If I read the sentence Find ten apples and oranges. Do I need to find ten or twenty pieces of fruit?

What is the difference between that's odd , that's weird , and that's strange ? Answer While they may be used interchangeably in casual conversation, they actually have different meanings. From an etymological dictionary: Odd (a jut of land): something not usual or expected. Has no special positive or negative connotation. Winning a lottery would be odd but neither weird nor strange. Weird (fated): Something supernatural or beyond human understanding. A fortune-teller predicting your future would be weird, but probably neither odd nor strange. Strange (foreign): Something unfamiliar. A type of material (rock, cloth, or such) you've never seen before would be strange but not weird, and odd only if it were otherwise unusual or rare.

I've found answers on the web but also got conflicting answers from financial professionals (coworkers). In metric, you'd use M (mega) for million, G (giga) for billion and T (tera) for trillion. The only financial specific similar abbreviation I can find is MM for million (financial notation, according to wikipedia). What's the AP style (or equivalent) abbreviation for billion and trillion in a financial context? Bonus: where would I find this information? Answer I have seen million, billion, and trillion abbreviated as M, B, and T respectively. However, I would not bet that that is a standard abbreviation. $3.1M settlement in Daniel McCormack priest sex abuse case for Chicago Archdiocese Lawyers: $9M settlement for boy's cerebral palsy - Washington Times JPMorgan reaches record $13B settlement with DOJ Big win for BofA: Judge OKs $ 8.5B settlement with mortgage bondholders China Now Owns a Record $1.317T of U.S. Government Debt

We have two words for events occurring in periods of years - biannual meaning twice a year, and biennial meaning once every two years. However, my colleagues talk about having meetings biweekly . This causes a lot of confusion, since it can mean either once every two weeks or twice a week. We can use fortnightly to indicate once every two weeks and help disambiguate that way. Are there any other words we could use which could help, particularly words which mean "twice a week"? I'm looking particularly because some of my colleagues speak English only as a second language, and find fortnightly difficult to remember. Answer Avoid biweekly altogether. Use fortnightly for "once every two weeks", and twice a week for, well, "twice a week". Not everything has to be a single word, so don't be afraid to use more than one word when you want to use clear, understandable, unambiguous language. If they have problems with fortnightly , use every other we

I know this is kinda stupid but what is the word for "helping someone climb by allowing him to stand on your hands" (to allow him/her see above some wall or climb something)? Answer Per Wiktionary, the word you are searching for is to give so. a leg up . Leg up: the act of assisting another's progress over a wall or other obstacle by forming a step for one of their feet with one's hands

I saw a sentence like this: Wilkinson is contesting the release, and threatened to sue should it be released. I could understand it but do you know what do they call this kind of use of "should" in grammar? Answer This use of "should" appears to be called expressing the conditional mood . The New Oxford American Dictionary describes it in the following way: (formal) expressing the conditional mood (in the first person) indicating the consequence of an imagined event: if I were to obey my first impulse, I should spend my days writing letters referring to a possible event or situation : if you should change your mind, I'll be at the hotel should anyone arrive late, admission is likely to be refused (I added emphasis to the part most relevant to your question.) Often, at least to my ear, this use of "should" carries a connotation of improbability. Example: In the [unlikely] event that you should need to complain, please email the management team directly

When do you use at the office ? And when do you use in the office ? What's the difference between the phrases? Answer 'At the office' refers generally to the state of someone who works in an office of some kind being at work, e.g. "Where's Bob?", said Jim. "At the office.", replied John It can also refer to an object being at said place of work: "Where's your briefcase?", said Jim. "I left it at the office.", said John. 'In the office' refers to someone or something physically being in a specific office, e.g. "Where's Bob?", said Jim. "In his office.", said John. This would usually be used when the office in question was in close proximity to the speakers, for example if Jim and John were in another office in the same building as Bob. "Where's the telephone?", said Jim. "It's in the office", said John. However, in and at are often interchangeable. Take the briefcase

Let's look at this sentence. China has as much claim to North Korea as they have over Tibet. That is, if they do decide to invade and occupy North Korea. Question You do agree this passage is grammatically problematic, don't you? If using they as pronoun for China is somehow an imperative in this passage, how would you resolve this grammatical conflict? Answer The problem is with your chosen pronouns. Observe how smoothly it flows once a few corrections have been made: China has as much claim to North Korea as it does over Tibet. That is, if it does decide to invade and occupy North Korea. Why did I choose the pronoun it? Quite simply because you said China has . You should maintain consistency among your pronouns, so if you use the singular "has", you are treating the noun (China) as a single, collective unit. That is, you're talking about China as the country in general as a single entity. If you'd prefer to use the plural pronoun they , then the c

He's a friend of mine . That's a car of his . Why do we use the possessive when the meaning would be the same while not using it (e.g. a friend of me and a car of him )? I thought maybe it is short for That's a car of his [cars] , but I have no way of making sure; it sounds a little odd that way to me. Answer They're examples of the double genitive/possessive , which is perfectly valid and has been around in English for centuries. The of already denotes "possession", but we do this again when we use mine/his instead of me/him . The fact that we don't say John is a friend of me/him is really just idiomatic for those particular forms. But that "idiomatic principle" isn't universally observed - people often say, for example, He's a friend of John . Though they also say a friend of John's - both forms are valid there. Here's an NGram showing how friend of her has gradually given way to friend of hers over the past couple of c