Blog

Is there a prefix or adjective that means "one and a half", as "tri-" or "triple" is for "three"? The exact usage I have is to describe "18" in terms of a dozen. Where I live they've started making 18-egg cartons, and the local grocer was wondering what name to give them in his computerised cash register, hoping for a single word. Even slang, informal or invented term would do if there isn't such a term already. Answer Sesqui- . However, it certainly isn't informal, and is also pretty obscure. About the only use of it is sesquicentennial and sesquipedalian which is at a few removes (it literally means 18inches long but it's originally figurative meaning of using long words is the only English meaning). It certainly wouldn't go with dozen ; one would just say "one and a half dozen", "dozen and a half" or "eighteen". Edit: If you really want a word meaning 18 of something, you've go...

I've always used the word branch when describing the type of industry, line of business or operation category. Please note that I'm not referring to a part of a concern structure as in "Scranton branch of Dunder Mifflin". For instance, to express that John is in finance and doesn't understand the importance of well defined code structure, which a programmer or other IT professional definitely would, I'd state the following. "Jonh doesn't know jack. He's not in our branch ." I've never got eye browse arousal on this so I lived happily ignorant that it might be an incorrect usage of the Swedish term (borrowed word from English) until my colleague had the cruelty to point that out for me. I tried to defend my position with an online dictionary but apparently there's a bug in their logic because it only confirmed the said colleague's critique of my expression. :) Seriously speaking, though, I'd like to get some light shed on the ...

In Dutch we've got the expression 'Vastbijten in'. It means you really get into a problem or some work. And you won't give up till it's resolved. I've been looking all over the web, but I've not been able to find an expression that comes close enough. Is there a way of saying this en English? The Dutch expression is a verb phrase, so that would probably come closest. Edit Thank you all very much for your answers:). Since I can only accept one final answer, I feel the need to do some clarification. Initially I added the single word request, since the expression in Dutch is just one word (not including the preposition). However, that's very specific to the Dutch language and I'm mostly looking for an expression that comes closest. Therefore I feel that: to get one's teeth into Comes closest, it's actually almost an exact translation both literally and in meaning. indefatigable Is the best candidate when a single word is required(although the ...

I have encountered wherein several times in many texts, and the general meaning of the texts was quite evident given the context. However, I do not know the exact meaning of wherein ; a dictionary search returns "How, or in what way; Where, or in which location; During which" ( Wiktionary ). But what are the contexts it can be used in, and is there any weird way it is being used sometimes? (I realised by now that English can be tricky.) Also, are there any differences concerning this word between American and British English (my preferred)? Answer 'Wherein' is generally only used in formal writing. The Oxford English Dictionary gives the following senses and quotes. I have given the most recent quote, from which you can tell that the word is no longer generally used. In what (thing, matter, respect, etc.)? 1891 - Oh, Britannicus! wherein have we offended? In which (place, material thing, writing, etc.)? 1888 - Peering keenly into the shadow wherein she stood In, ...

My favorite food is apples. Or my favorite food are apples.

Generally the verb following who agrees with the subject or object that precedes the who . This makes sense and is expected. When the subject or object that the who refers to is singular, the verb is singular; when the subject or object is plural the verb is plural Such does not seem to be the case, though, when me precedes the who . We instead treat me , in this instance, as a singular non-first-person subject: "It seems to me, who never knows anything, ...", "She kisses me, who has wanted her kiss for so long", etc. These examples are awkward but replace the italicized verbs with first person present form ( know, have ) and it gets even more awkward. To make sure this isn't just a personal grammatical tic and to not rely on my ear only, I went to Google Ngrams: I searched with the verb to be because it is the most easily distinguished by person; with other verbs it would be difficult to differentiate first person singular and first person plural me s—as i...

Changing subject and verb positions in statements and questions Why do we put the verb to be at the end of these questions? Is the expression I don't know what is an amplifier. incorrect? If so, is the correct version I don't know what an amplifier is. and why is the first variant wrong?

Vocation and Mission both translate to the same word in Slovak language. What is the difference? I can not find any suitable definition, except for this one from the definition of Ikigai .

Definite article before proper nouns I was updating my LinkedIn tagline and thinking about whether I should put the article before the name of the university. Student at the University of […]. Student at University of […]. I am leaning towards the former but I am not sure. Answer You would need it before, say, "the University of Illinois" but not before "Iowa State University" or "Harvard" or "Case Western Reserve" or "Columbia University" and so on. This is if you were using the name as a noun. If you were to write the sentence: Students at University of Illinois functions are expected to behave in a manner befitting adults. the article is not necessary, but it is in Students at the University of Illinois are expected to behave in a manner befitting adults at public functions.

I've used doolally since I was a child, but I'd rarely heard the tap version until a few years ago in the company of several Welsh people (who all agreed the two-word version was their "standard"). They said it referred to insanity caused by contaminated tap water in Deolali (lead?, cadmium?). But I've now discovered Wikipedia says... "Doolally", originally "doolally tap", meaning to 'lose one′s mind', derived from the boredom felt at the Deolali British Army transit camp. 'Tap' may be derived from the Sanskrit word 'tapa' meaning 'heat' or 'fever'. It is also just conceivable that it derives from the Welsh word 'twp', meaning 'stultified', 'unable to reason sensibly'. Can anyone either corroborate or refute any of these suggested etymologies? Answer Doolally comes from British army slang, originating when Deolali was a British army transit camp in India. Doolally tap meant ...

When we add s at the end of a word, it refers to more units of the thing. For example, a car vs cars . Why is it that when we refer to hair , it is kind of the other way around? 1) Your hair looks great (comment on all your hair) 2) You dyed some of your hairs (comment on some of your hair)

I'm looking for a word that defines that something is out of our control in a business sense. For example, we can't control the postal delivery time, so it is... (out of our control). Needs to be ONE word, please. EDIT - not uncontrollable. It is also not chaotic, like "the children are out of control". EDIT2: - to further explain, in my thesis I have a number of dependencies. Most of them our company can control as we manage them. However, a few of these dependencies we are not able to control because they are managed by someone else. So I'm looking to see if there is a word that can explain this other than saying "dependencies that are out of our control".

What did you bring that book that I don't want to be read to from out of about 'Down Under' up for? I was wondering whether this sentence is actually correct and if it is, whether someone could explain which preposition points to what in that sentence. Answer It's technically (almost) correct, but obviously a pathological case for the fun of it. Moving the prepositions into their "standard" positions and adding the appropriate pronouns gives: For what [reason] did you bring that book about 'Down Under', out of which I don't want you to read to me, up [here]? That is, from back to front: for refers to what ( what for = why ) up refers to bring ( bring that book up ) about refers to Down Under , which is just a title out of or from (but not both) refer to that book ( out of that book ) to refers to the speaker ( read to me ) The from out of bit is incorrect, as you can tell if you try to rearrange the sentence to involve both from and ou...

Since I first learned English, I have been holding this understanding that "and", as a conj. but unlike "but", can only connect two clauses, not two sentences ended with periods. But recently, I have seen so many prints, either in entertainment or in academia, where "And" is popularly used in the beginning of a sentence. It seems like the author is trying to connect the sentence just right before and the sentence following "And" in some intended meaning which I don't quite get. I was wondering if I have been wrong all the time, or if there is a new trend that I fail to understand and accept? How to understand such usage of "and" in rigorous English grammar? If I am right, why it is used differently from "but" in terms of what I mentioned at the beginning of this post? Answer Small children have a particular writing style that teachers often mark as wrong. We had a field trip. And we went to the zoo. And we saw monkeys. An...

If two people are looking at a photo, and one of them pointing out the different people says: And up here in the corner is me. ... what is the Subject of the sentence? The phrase up here in the corner feels like a Locative Complement. It is tempting to see this as a case of subject-dependent inversion like On the corner is a cafe . However, the NP me has accusative case and the verb is third person singular. The sentence isn't: *And up here in the corner am me. Also, if and only if, 'me' is not the Subject, what type of use of the verb BE is this? If me is an internal Complement of the verb, then this doesn't seem to be a specifying, ascriptive or locative use in the normal sense ( me is not a description of up in the corner , neither is it a location. And the sentence does not mean "up in the corner = me"). And if, and only if, me is the Subject, why is me acceptable instead of I ? Does me invariably take third person singular agreement of the verb?

“Unregister” vs “Deregister” I'm just wondering what the consensus would be on the antonym of register. The intended use of the word is for a website. Users can register for the site, and should they desire, they can also "unregister". Can you list a set of words that would fit the problem domain? Answer There are several words including "cancel", "eradicate", "rescind", but I think the most relevant word is: Deregister Taken from here

You know, the kind of person who you tell stuff like "I really want to go to this thing" and they point out everything wrong with it.

How dissimilar are "they're not" and "they aren't"? Is it dependent on context or are these exactly the same? They are supposed to be going, but they are not. They are not going. Answer These are pretty much equivalent. If you desire to place more emphasis on the negative, use "They're not."

A UK guy told me that Mozart was a musical composer . A US guy told me that Mozart was a music composer . Is it a regional difference?

Which one of the following is correct if the writer intends to say a week after next week ? My friend and I decided to go to the beach in the next two weeks. My friend and I decided to go to the beach next two weeks. My friend and I decided to go to the beach in the coming next two weeks.

I want to describe a situation when to get a south bound route you need to drive north. I'm looking for a noun. A couple possible suggestions I've seen: "It is quite a bit of a diversion" and "It is quite a bit of a detour" One could call it an "indirect route", but I'm looking for a noun, not an adjective.

What is the difference between following two sentences? When should we use did and have ? Am not sure that the following sentences are right. I did not answered I have not answered.

I was reading the poem "To His Coy Mistress" by Andrew Marvell when something struck me as odd. Let me quote two passages: Thou by the Indian Ganges' side Shouldst rubies find: I by the tide Of Humber would complain. I would Love you ten years before the Flood, [...] But at my back I always hear Time's wingèd chariot hurrying near; And yonder all before us lie Deserts of vast eternity. Thy beauty shall no more be found, Nor, in thy marble vault, shall sound My echoing song: then worms shall try That long preserved virginity, Now, am I supposed to read flood as [fluːd], eternity as [ɪˌtɜː.nəˈtaɪ̯], and virginity as [vɜː(r)ˌdʒɪ.nəˈtaɪ̯]? Was one supposed to do so back in the 17th century? Or is this, and has always been, some sort of purely "visual" rhyme? The rest of the poem rhymes perfectly in contemporary English. I guess I could sum it up in one question: What is the term for this type of rhyme? Answer I think would and flood are or were rhyming pa...

Possible Duplicates: Are “should” and “if” interchangeable at the beginning of a sentence? A special use of “should”? For sentences that begin with "If", it seems that "should" can replace "If." For example: If you ever... Should you ever... However after googling, it seems that "should" should not be used to replace "if." If this is true, then why do people do it? I also looked up "should" in the dictionary, and I didn't find anything that says it means the same thing as "if."

I'm looking for a word to describe that a particular situation where two people (a man and a woman) are probably the best of friends but have no romantic inclinations towards each other. They may invade each others thoughts periodically but aren't really in a relationship per se. What would be a good word to describe this? I'm aware of "platonic" but am wondering if there is another word? Answer I would say they are dear friends or close friends .

I had always supposed that the expression make do(with) was the short for the idiomatic expression make do and mend . The case appears to be quite the opposite; Ngram shows usages of "make do (with)" from the beginning of the 20th century, while the latter expression clearly originated later, during WWII. The following usage example is from Homes and Gardens (1930) : Make do with inexpensive furniture and renew it piece by piece later, if necessary. But start with a good carpet if you would have your room thoroughly lovable and liveable . The Grammarist suggests that "make do" is actually the short for another, probably once commom, expression, but it does not provide futher evidence: make [something] do well enough , where do carries the rare sense to serve a specified purpose. So this do is similar to the one used in sentences such as, “I could use a cup of coffee, but tea will do.” Then we have also the nominal expression make-do which refers to the same con...

In the latest issue of The Economist there is the following sentence:- "And in China, unlike India, you can shop at Walmart, most of the time." Firstly, shouldn't it be "...unlike in India? Else it could also mean that India, or someone called India is not able/permitted to shop at Walmart. Not that we'd interpret it thus, but just clarifying the technicality. Secondly, with or without the comma, the meaning would be pretty much the same. But it seems to me that the comma seems to additionally draw attention to the fact that Walmart shopping in China is not as widespread. The implication would be there without the comma, but I think the stress then would be only the fact that India hasn't opened up to Walmart yet; here it means that, plus the fact that China itself is no great host to it. Agree?

This person first thought to any question is to react that the other person wants something from them. An example. If you ask them if they want to go to the store that person would say I'm not paying for anything. Or if if you want them to hang out they say do I look like an ATM you are always trying to get me to spend money! Or they would answer you just don't want to spend your money on gas. They don't give you a chance to finish your thoughts or intentions they just group you in a category.

Which of these is correct please, if any? my parents' friendship with Sally's parents my parent's friendship with Sally's parents my parents friendship with Sally's parents What is the correct use of possessive apostrophe in this case? Answer "My parents' friendship with Sally's parents" is correct. When you're confused about apostrophe usage, try substituting the word "of" into the sentence to see if it makes sense. "The friendship of my parents with the parents of Sally" is grammatically clear (if stilted and certainly not recommended, in speech or in writing). Semantically, the friendship of my parents = my parents' friendship and the parents of Sally = Sally's parents Thus, in the actual sentence, you would need an apostrophe after both "my parents" and "Sally".

Which is more grammatically correct: "I like to speak Japanese." or "I like speaking Japanese." Also, do they mean the same thing? Why is one better than the other, if they differ?

A friend of mine, George, called the other day. The poem "The Road Not Taken" is one of Robert Frost's most famous works. How come sentence 1 requires commas and sentence 2 does not? Both phrases ("George" and "The Road Not Taken") both specify the subject. Answer "Rule: When an appositive is essential to the meaning of the noun it belongs to, don’t use commas. When the noun preceding the appositive provides sufficient identification on its own, use commas around the appositive. " Example : Jorge Torres, our senator, was born in California. Explanation : Our senator is an appositive of the proper noun Jorge Torres. Our senator is surrounded by commas because Jorge Torres is a precise identifier" (from here ). Other examples: My brother Ken is a minister in the PCA denomination. My trainer, Jim Shipshape, is also a bodybuilder. Raconteur Ed Schlemiel will be speaking at the Jewish Community Center tonight. Mezzo-soprano Hilda Gutenberg ...

The following always puzzles me as a non-native speaker. When somebody asks the question "Do you mind if...", there seem to be two possible responses. "Sure" and "No, not at all", which both mean that the person doesn't mind. "Actually, I do mind", which means that the person does mind. Why is this so confusing? Especially, how come people reply "Sure" to this question, if that could be understood to mean that they for sure do mind ? Answer "Do you mind..." is a polite way of asking "Can you...." For this reason, it's usually acceptable to respond to the semantic intent of the question by answering "Yes (I can do that)", rather than responding to the grammatical form with "No (I don't mind)". Native speakers sometimes get confused by this, too.

In the original Muppet Movie ( lyrics , video ), Jim Henson asserted there is not, but that was 1979. Now it's a few decades later, and the English language has evolved, including a lot around changing speed and depth of new relationships. It seems possible that there might be a word that describes a first meeting of two people that is accompanied by a resonating familiarity, déjà vu , and sense of overlap in perspectives and values, leading to a feeling of a strong relationship despite the absence of actual length. Also in the past few decades, we've gained the EL&U Stack Exchange, where such a question can be asked. So, give it your best shot! The target word could be a noun describing a person (with grammatical usage similar to other relational terms like friend, enemy, acquaintance, companion, etc.) or the feeling (with usage similar to déjà vu but focused specifically on a person and indicating a feeling of strong connection but not necessarily a confusion over havi...

Possible Duplicates: What is the correct possessive for nouns ending in s? Pronouncing possessive words that already end in s How do I pronounce possessives that end with the awkward "s's" and "'s"? Examples: I found the mistress's attitude ridiculous These are the eggs' shells. Which coat is Amos'?

I heard people saying "Of-fen" as well as "Of-ton". Till now I have been using the first one but few days ago I had an interviewer who pronounced often "Of-Ton" while interviewing. Answer The 't' used to be pronounced, but then was lost, but the pronunciation with a 't' is slowly coming back (because of the spelling). Dictionaries will provide the 't' pronunciation as a variant. Note that 'soften' is always pronounced without the 't' currently.

How should I use "passive-aggressive" as an adverb? My hunch is that this is correct: Jack passive-aggressively said nothing. What I consider incorrect: Jack passively-aggressively said nothing. Jack passively-aggressive said nothing. Answer Given that in other similar formations you only inflect the final word (nobody says something "selfly-conscious", for example), I think "passive-aggressively" is definitely the way to go.

Which is correct? There are no comments. There is no comment. Which would you use for a web application, i.e. what to display when a blog post or an article has no comment attached? Actually, I am trying to fix an application that says: "There is no comments"! Would that ever be right? More generally speaking, it feels wrong to have a plural after the negative no/none or with the preposition without (see my previous question "Without reason" or "Without reasons"? ). Those words imply zero, i.e. less than one, while plural is two or more. Yet, I know that phrases like "There are no comments" or "He is without friends" are common. It seems illogical to me. Are the majority of people making a grammar mistake when using such expressions, or else can you explain why this is correct? Answer "No comments" is correct, and this construction is common in English. For example, we get singular agreement for number for the value of 1, a...

When are “if” and “whether” equivalent? Do these two have the same meaning: To determine if something is correct. To determine whether something is correct. Answer In familiar conversation, your two examples have the same meaning, but it's a better idea, in my opinion, to use 'whether' when you're introducing two possibilities like this, because it avoids potential ambiguity. For example, the following sentence is ambiguous if people use 'if' as a substitute for 'whether' :-). Tell John if the car breaks down. That ought to mean that somebody is only to tell John anything on the condition that the car breaks down. If you want to indicate that somebody is to tell John either way, you could use: Tell John whether the car breaks down.

in spite of = 1. Without being affected by the particular factor mentioned [From the same page as above:] spite = [mass noun] 1. A desire to hurt, annoy, or offend someone I substitute the definition of spite : X's being in spite of Y = X's being in a desire to hurt, annoy, or offend Y. So, X IS affected by Y. Yet this is the opposite of the definition of in spite of ? How do we make sense of and reconcile the two definitions above? Answer OED's entry for in spite of dates its earliest citation to 1400: "But for noy of my nobilte & my nome gret, I shuld..spede the to spille in spite of þi kynge." I have no idea what most of that means, but "in spite of the king" is clear. in defiance (†scorn or contempt) of; in the face of; notwithstanding. This is not too far removed from the noun spite from around that time: Action arising from, or displaying, hostile or malignant feeling; outrage, injury, harm; insult, reproach. Obs. The defiance of the f...

I am quite confused. It seems that sometimes people use the active voice " sell out " & sometimes they use the passive voice " be sold out " to express the idea of " (of tickets for a concert, sports game, etc.) to be all sold ". The tickets sold out within hours (active voice i.e, The tickets did sell out within hours). Source This week's performances are completely sold out. (passive voice) Source Sometimes it is not " the performance " that is sold out, it is " we're sold out. " (passive voice) Source . And sometimes it is " we've sold out " (active voice) Source I have evidence that " to sell out " = " to be sold completely ". E.g., The tickets will sell out by tomorrow but " We can't get into the theater because the tickets are sold out. " Source Could you explain how to use " sell out " & " be sold out "? Answer The term sell out is sometimes ...

Is it correct to use “their” instead of “his or her”? Plural versus singular: Anyone can learn to dance if they want to. Anyone can learn to dance if he or she wants to. Resources online tell me that anyone is a singular indefinite pronoun. Then why is it sometimes acceptable to use the plural 'they' with 'anyone' in some cases? Does it substitute and replace 'he/she'? note: this previous posts also says anyone is [singular]: "Anyone has" or "anyone have" seen them? Answer Singular They : Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of English Usage remarks that “ They, their, them have been used continuously in singular reference for about six centuries, and have been disparaged in such use for about two centuries. Now the influence of social forces is making their use even more attractive.”

There is a term or word that describes why people with average intelligence tend to be managers because their perceptions of their own capabilities are more in line with what they are actually capable of. As intelligence increases, the perception of one's capabilities tends to be underestimated while lower intelligence tends to yield an overestimation of one's capabilities. I'm not saying this statement is true or otherwise, I just know that there's a word or term that describes the phenomenon. What is that word or expression? Answer You are describing results of the Dunning-Kruger Effect

In the office, we've been having a discussion about the grammar in a sentence and have differing opinions about what is right and what is wrong... It is a very minor issue but is still bugging me :) The sentence in question is: A wide range of features is available. Which sounds more natural to me if it is written as: A wide range of features are available. The justification for it is that the "is" is referring to the "wide range of features" as a whole rather than just the "features". I was just about getting used to it when I decided to substitute a different word instead of "features". I just can't get my head around something like: A wide range of sausages is available. Further to this, if I substitute "a wide range of" with "various" then it has to be are . Which one is right? Edit: Thanks for all of the responses. I didn't expect to open up such a can of worms but now I understand the technicalities. I stil...

I would like to know when to say think(s) that , say(s) that and mean(s) that and when to omit that . Answer In most cases, if any of these verbs is followed by an embedded clause, that is completely optional. He said he was coming. He said that he was coming. are both completely grammatical, and normal in speech. The form with that is probably slightly more formal, so you're more likely to encounter it in writing than in speech; but both occur in both speech and writing. There is a lot of scholarly literature on the subject of "that-deletion", for example this paper , which says "It has implicitly been assumed in the literature that the language arbitrarily allows sentence-embedding predicates, such as the ones in (1), to embed their sentential complements with or without the complementizer that". But the paper does give some cases where that may not be deleted, such as Mary said in a very loud voice that she would not eat the cookies. where, apparently b...

What are the differences between: subject , subjective , nominative , and the nominative case ? If there aren't any substantial ones, why are there so many terms for basically saying the same thing? Answer Nominative and (the) nominative case mean the same thing. It's just a normal shortening of a noun compound, like future and the future tense , optative and the optative mood , middle and the middle voice . These are all technical names for grammatical phenomena, none of which occur in English. Subjective means the opposite of objective ; i.e, a subjective judgement is not objective. If you see it used as a grammatical term in a discussion of grammar, it's a sign that the author is parroting opinions instead of facts. It's not a grammatical term used by grammarians, but it used to be part of old handwaving terminology like "subjective complement". There are subject complements and object complements, but they're types of noun clauses functioning...

I have heard this word in other languages. It refers (in the bad sense) to those persons who are really hard working, study a lot, memorize, but in fact do not have the intelligence knack. They are not wise, but hardworking.

"Way better" and "way more" are popular expressions, but they both seem incorrect to me. "Far better", "far more", "much better", and "much more" all seem correct. Is this true? If so, why? Answer Apparently, "way" was a contraction of "away" . It took on an adverbial meaning in the early 1900s: In the 19th century, “‘way” was also used for “away” in the sense of a great distance: “way towards Tupper’s Lake” (1849); “He sat ‘way under the mantle” (1888); “way below cost” (1890); “mere specks, ‘way down the road” (1927), and so on. (Note that some writers used an apostrophe to show the “a” had been dropped from “away.”) In addition, since the 19th century both “away” and “way” have been used as adverbs to add emphasis. These usages are heard chiefly in the US, the OED notes, though it includes some British citations. Here are some “away” citations: “away up in Canada” (1818); “away down east” (1825); “away ...

There was the following sentence in the pretty old article of Daily Finance titled “How to avoid getting nickel and dimed with fee: “These days, it seems as if everyone's trying to squeeze every penny out of us. From banks to colleges, American consumers are being nickeled and dimed like never before. Here are some of the biggest offenders, and your best defense against them.” OALD at hand defines hyphenated ‘nickel-and-dime’ as an adjective (Ame. informal) ‘involving only a small amount of money; not important.’ Oxford Online Dictionary defines hyphenated ‘nickel-and-dime’ as an adjective meaning ‘of little importance,’ and as a verb meaning ‘harass someone by charging for many trivial items or services.’ Cambridge Online Dictionary defines ‘nickel and dime’ as an adjective meaning ‘something that is not important, usually because it does not involve much money.” Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary defines hyphenated ‘nickel-and-dime’ as an adjective meaning ‘involving or offering ...

In W. Somerset Maugham's The Moon and Sixpence , there is a line about Dirk Stroeve which goes His spaghetti were … . Spaghetti is plural in Italian, but is this ever a normal usage in English? Spaghetti seems to be entrenched as an uncountable (mass) noun these days.

How to correctly name this in English (in an official documentation for an IT system or in an instruction for filling up some form): Should I name this: a radio button, a radio-button, a radiobutton, an option button, an option-button, and optionbutton other name .

I was reading this question on meta.ELU and was struck by what, to me, was a strange use of the phrasal verb to stand up : The site for English Language Learners was stood up in large part so that non-native speakers could have a place where their questions, which would be regarded by some to be "too basic" for ELU, could ask their questions. The site was stood up in January of this year. Now, to me that means that the poor site was left waiting for someone who never showed up. However, the author of the question ( J.R. , one of our highest rep users) seems to be using it to mean was set up . Is this common usage? Is it from a particular dialect? I have never come across it before and cannot find it in the dictionary definitions that I checked. Answer This is very interesting; as the offending writer, I had no idea this would sound so strange to so many. I did some research, and I found that the term seems to be used almost exclusively by two communities: Computer system...

I am unsure on when to use from instead of among and vice versa. Here is the question that I missed on an exam: The man had to choose [ _ _] 6 ties for the interview. I chose from which apparently was wrong, even if, to me, from sounds correct as well as among sounds correct. I have tried to look this up on the Internet with no avail, so any help would be appreciated.

For my entire life, I thought the correct word was Renumeration. But after reading a document that used Remuneration I checked google and apparently I was wrong. The oxford dictionary has a link to Remuneration under the entry for Renumeration but it neglects to say why. Are they both interchangable? I live in the UK, if it is a regional thing. Answer According to the OED renumeration / remuneration are interchangeable. So too are the associated verbs - renumerate / remunerate . However, some commentators have strong feelings about renumeration being used with its first-cited meaning (i.e. remuneration , see below) " ... to be avoided at all costs is the metathesized form renumeration." (R. W. Burchfield New Fowler's Mod. Eng. Usage (1996) 666/2). Remuneration is much more commonly used than renumeration ( https://goo.gl/44GQRa ). Remuneration is first cited c.1400, comes from Middle French ( remuneracion ) and Latin (remūnerātiō), and means reward, recompense; (n...

I found the word “ laser-focused on the bottom line” in the following sentence of the New York Times (August 6) op ed titled, “Dream, Baby, Dream!” “We also know – look at Syria – dictators who have spent decades ruling through fear do not go quietly into the night any more than great powers readily abandon their profitable dominions. And I thought these finance guys were hard-nosed realists laser-focused on the bottom line. Dream on, Mitt, dream on! Even if your dreams, to use that word you let drop on the Olympics in London and then scrambled to retract, are “disconcerting.” I think laser-focused simply means “pinpointed” or “sharply focused.” It doesn’t seem to be any foreign word to me. However, curiously enough, this apparently easy-to-relate word is not found in any of Oxford, Cambridge, and Merriam-Webster online dictionary, or in Ngram inventory. Other online vocabulary site e.g. www.wordnik.com says 'laser-focused' hasn't been added to any lists yet . But I fou...

Comma or semicolon after “No” when responding to a question It started because of this: "No; I found the behavior off-putting." I believe "no", as an answer, can stand alone. I believe a semicolon is more appropriate than a comma, because of my intent. Therefore, I ask: Is the semicolon okay? What is "no" called here? It expresses a complete thought, but doesn't fit the textbook definition of an independent clause. Is it clausey? If the semicolon is okay, how would its usage here be described (in grammatical terms)? Answer 1) Yes, it's fine. Semicolons are OK wherever there is a full stop intonation ; they indicate that "there is still some question about the preceding full sentence; something needs to be added", as Lewis Thomas puts it. 2) "No;" is called an Utterance . As you point out, it's not a clause -- no subject, no verb, etc. -- much less a sentence. But it does get full-stop intonation, and it's exactly the...

From the grammatical point of view all are correct, just the meaning are different, please bring your clarification, thank you. The Train will leave at 10:00 tomorrow morning. The Train is going to leave at 10:00 tomorrow morning. The Train leaves at 10:00 tomorrow morning. The Train is leaving at 10:00 tomorrow morning.