Blog

I wrote: The ability to guarantee that a batch of writes occurs together. One reviewer wanted to change that to occur . I'm not sure if this is my idiom (Australian of U.K. origin) vs American or if I'm wrong. I regarded batch of writes as a singular collective noun. This English Club reference and others suggest using a plural verb with collective noun is less common in American English. edit To clarify, the sentence is in a book about programming computer databases and the full sentence is much longer, possibly too long! Those three operations are all we need; everything else is sugar on top (or maybe something a bit more nutritious, like the ability to guarantee that a batch of writes occurs together). Answer You are correct. It should be occurs because you are talking about a batch. Now, a batch of what? That is something else.

I am writing a technical letter for my (and my lab partner’s) senior design project (we are engineering majors) and I would like some help on properly phrasing part of the letter. The project belongs to my partner and I . I was always taught in school that in cases of dual possession, I should always proceed the other possessors. Suppose for a moment that the project was just mine. Then in that case, the sentence below would be grammatically correct. Attached to this email is my project selection. Now if the project only belonged to my partner, this sentence would also be grammatically correct. Attached to this email is my partner's project selection. However, since this project belongs to both of us, I need to phrase the sentence accordingly. The sentence below doesn’t appear to be correct in my opinion. Attached to this email is my partner and I's project selection. This one sounds better, but doesn’t follow the rules I was taught. Attached to this email is mine and my partn

English is not my first language, so I'm not sure what you commonly call one of these: I'm trying to choose between blackboard, white blackboard, or maybe just 'slate'. Answer That is quite simply a whiteboard. Blackboard can be defined as: A smooth, hard, dark-colored panel for writing on with chalk. Whiteboard can be defined as: A panel covered with white, glossy plastic for writing on with erasable markers.

Which would be more appropriate in this case? I currently do not have any affiliation that would be notable in the context of this election I currently do not have any affiliation that would be noteworthy in the context of this election Or maybe something else altogether? Answer According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the words are very similar and used in each other's definitions. For example, the main definition of notable is: Worthy or deserving of attention, esp. on account of excellence, value, or importance ; significant in size or amount; noteworthy, remarkable, striking, signal, eminent. While noteworthy has the main meaning: Worthy of attention, observation, or notice; notable, remarkable. Note, however the bolded portion of the definition for notable --it refers to something as being noticeably and especially great , while something can be noteworthy without having excellence. That is, according to these definitions something which is notable is noteworthy fo

Is there an idiom or expression which means diverting somebody's attention with profuse talk about irrelevant things and trying to change a topic which is unpleasant to you or which you just don't want to discuss? Like this: “Why did you lie?” ”Uh, such nice weather, isn't it? You know, last weekend when we were on vacation on the lake....” I have heard of to talk one's head off , but as far as I understand it means just talking a lot and being boring, doesn't it?

In this sentence Green tea contains the vitamins and healthy properties of the green tea leaf, which makes green tea popular among health-conscious people. what is the "which" referring to?? Is it referring to the green tea leaf or the vitamins and healthy properties?

How should I begin an official e-mail if I don't know who I am writing to? I mean, normally I would write "Dear x", but when I have to send an e-mail to an institution, what should I write?

Is struck or stricken correct in these sentences? The house was stricken / struck by lightning. The house had been stricken / struck by lightning. He was stricken / struck by grief, cancer, etc. Can by be replaced with with in the sentence above (Sentence No. 3)? The judge had struck / stricken it from the record. It was struck / stricken from the record. Thank you. Answer You assume that there’s exactly one “right” answer and exactly one “wrong” answer, and that just isn’t the way things work in language. Different speakers will use different variants at different times (so will the same speaker), whether this is the participle or the preposition that goes with it. That does not mean one is wrong and the other right. If you play around with Google Books, you find plenty of variation even in recent years, particularly in North America. Don’t speak of correctness ; look instead at usage . That said, under most circumstances the past participle of strike is now simply st

I work in the data science, where we tend to use "batch" to refer to collections of data points composed as follows: Biosamples 1-10, processed as per A, on Day 1 = batch 1 Biosamples 2-20, processed as per A, on Day 2 = batch 2 Biosamples 3-30, processed as per A, on Day 3 = batch 3 We're now working with another institution and will be combining data between the two. The data are inherently different (DNA sequencing depth, experimental platform etc.). Biosamples 1-10, processed as per A, at location 1 Biosamples 2-20, processed as per B, at location 2 Is "batch" still the most appropriate term? I've seen "tranche" used in finance but wondering if "tranche" MUST be finance. p.s. I don't think "treatment" is appropriate because it's not the same samples treated in two different ways

I have been working on a software where there is a section to promote and/or demote other users. For last two days, I have been thinking and searching for a common term to group both of these terms together but it seems like I am out of luck or I am searching in the wrong direction. I was wondering if anyone is aware of a proper term or word which can convey the meaning of promotion/demotion or level change on itself without requiring any further explanation to the user? Update To make it clear, it's promotion/demotion just like done in school. So Level, Rank etc are out of question. Also the term will be better suited if it's a verb for Promotion/Demotion.

Which is correct? Given 240 kph (240 kilometres per hour) = 149 mph (149 miles per hour) How does one say this? -240 kph equal 149 mph. -240 kph equals 149 mph. -240 kph is equal to 149 mph. -240 kph are equal to 149 mph. Is 240 kph singular or plural (kilometre or kilometres)? Or 240 kph is a separate kind of thing? Answer Correct ones are: 240kph equals 149mph; 240kph is equal to 149mph; In 240kph, kilometres is plural.

There was the following sentence in the article written by Maureen Dowd titled, “Where the boys aren’t,” sketching the life of Dolores Hart in New York Times February 19 issue: “I had no idea that it was going to mean singing seven times a day, working in the garden, 10 people in one bathroom, the sternness.” She compared it to being skinned alive.” I thought “ being skinned alive ” means “live like a stuffed bird (or a living corpse)” from the context of the above sentence, and checked Cambridge, Oxford, Merriam-Webster online dictionaries for confirmation. None of them registers the word, “(be) skinned alive.” Although the Free Dictionary and Online slang Dictionary provide with similar definitions of “skinned alive” as “to be very angry with someone; to scold someone severely. - FD” and “to reprimand severely – OSD,” I don’t think both applies to the above Dowd’s quote. What does “being skinned alive” here mean? Is “skinned alive” a well-established phrase, though I can’t find the p

I am trying to find idioms that could express "looking for something" and "trying to find something in a room full of mess". One that I could find was "hunt high and low," but for some reason I don't really feel satisfied using it. Can someone please suggest some other phrase? I would like to use in a context like this: "I tried to look for the pen in my dorm room (which was messy) but couldn't find it". For e.g. I would want to tell someone that every time I want something, I have to search the place thoroughly to locate it. Answer These are not idioms, but they may be useful hyperboles: You could say "Every time I need something from there, I need to call search-and-rescue to find it." Or "Only a search dog can find what I need in there."

If one writes a word in italics, say the name of a movie, and wants to put apostrophe s at the end to form the possessive, is the apostrophe s italicised with the title? Chinatown's or Chinatown 's?

It seems to me that many, including myself recently, are applying this "extreme contrast" rule to the wrong cases. (See #2 in link below.) https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/punctuation/commas/extended_rules_for_commas.html Specifically, I mean...you can't put a single comma between the two verbs of a compound predicate just because the second one follows "but" and seems 'extremely contrasty' (more than "but" can handle alone?), can you? That's comma abuse according to the link above. (See #13.) Basically, I was taught rules like the ones in these links: https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/commas/ https://www.grammarly.com/blog/comma-before-but/ But, I thought they might be outdated, so I started...abusing commas, I think, like in a recent comment I made: That's what I was thinking, but couldn't articulate--the "or" being inclusive... That doesn't seem correct to me...most of the time, and this is def

I am writing an article about a service that is provided by my company and I really want to highlight the fact that it is a non-stop service, since it is active every single day of the year, 24 hours a day. Here is my approach: Our service is provided in a 24/7/365 environment. Do you know a more idiomatic way to express this concept or do you find this solution acceptable?

I'm looking for a word or phrase that describes a statement that is neither a scientific fact nor an opinion. Google defines opinion as "a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge" but I'm looking for something that is based, at least indirectly, on knowledge. For example, if I believe it is pointless to brush teeth in the morning since no food has been eaten since the previous night, what would this statement be called? I don't think it's a scientific fact since no studies or experiments have been made to prove it, but I don't think it would be called an opinion either, because it is at least logical. Would it be correct to call it a philosophy ? Another example I came across is as follows: one person was arguing that if a person (i.e. a hacker) was trying to guess the password to something, nothing is known about which order or which passwords they would try. Therefore, having minimum requirements for passwords

I am confused about the preferred way to combine an em-dash insertion with a comma occurring in the outer sentence. Until now, I had preferred to write: The erosion responsible for residuals is less related to the material process of creation—e.g., rewriting in the sense of Mondrian or blurring the edges in the sense of Rothko—, but to the double nature of time. Consulting another question on the web , I convinced myself that em-dash and comma are complementary and there is nothing wrong in combining them. However the example on that linked page indicates that perhaps the comma should precede the insertion, like so: The erosion responsible for residuals is less related to the material process of creation,—e.g., rewriting in the sense of Mondrian or blurring the edges in the sense of Rothko—but to the double nature of time. Is there any advice on which variant would be preferred in academic British English? Answer Functionally speaking, the two em-dashes function almost like a set of p

If I have the following sentences, which version is correct: This chapter provides.... or This Chapter provides.... Note the capitalisation of 'c'. Chapter 1 provides.... Chapter One provides... Note the use of numbers This model was discussed in Chapter One This model was discussed in chapter one This model was discussed in Chapter 1 This model was discussed in chapter 1 Note the use of capitalisation and numbers in the last part of the sentence. Many thanks. Answer Here is what I do: When referring to a chapter generically, do not capitalize it: This chapter talks about the exciting lives of carrier pigeons. Refer to the chapter about carrier pigeons for more information. When referring to a specific chapter, capitalize it: The exciting lives of carrier pigeons are addressed in Chapter 5. There are other purported "style guides" and grammar advice available via web search saying the same thing, but notably the Chicago Manual of Style disagrees : Chicago prefers to

The word salient is pronounced with a "long a" sound; Wiktionary gives the US pronunciation as /ˈseɪ.ljənt/, /ˈseɪ.li.ənt/. Is there any reason why the vowel letter here receives its "long" pronunciation (IPA /eɪ/) rather than its "short" pronunciation (IPA /æ/)? The vowel does not seem to have been long in the Latin ancestor of the word, saliens . We use a "short a" in the word valiant /ˈvæljənt/, which has the same spelling pattern. Answer The long vowel in salient is caused by a lengthening rule that originally applied in Middle English to stressed vowels followed by a single consonant (not including x ) and two unstressed vowels. In most cases, the first unstressed vowel was i , as it is here, but it could also be e, as ocean . In other words, the general resulting pattern is V̄CiV or V̄CeV , where V̄ represents a long vowel (ā, ē, ō or ū), C represents any single consonant letter apart from x, and V represents any vowel letter. No

What does "all but" mean in this expression? Today, under pressure from P2P distribution, optical disc piracy in wealthy countries is "all but eliminated" and profit margins elsewhere are slim. Major report debunks alleged link between piracy and terrorism, Ars Technica I have seen this used as an intensifier to mean "I only have gratitude", but logic says the sentence means "I have all kinds of feelings towards you, except gratitude." Answer The apparent contrariness of the meaning of this term has often intrigued me, so I thought I'd do a bit of light research on it. Wiktionary defines it as follows: Adverb all but (not comparable) 1. Very nearly. The food is all but finished. Now, I think that when most people encounter this term, they want to interpret it more as a negative. For example, "The food is all but finished." might be interpreted as: The food is everything except finished. However, reverse the two words and it star

What is the right verb for when we want others' trust for a long period? Do we keep , retain or preserve their trust ... ? Example: By speaking only the truth I can ... their trust for a long time. For sure, all of the above suggestions are here or there used. Google Ngram seems to confirm this. But I want to know which one sounds the most idiomatic. Answer To keep their trust , or retain, their trust means simply that you will continue to be trusted by them. It does not imply any action on your part. To preserve something usually means to take some action that will have the effect of keeping it. In the example given: By speaking only the truth ... you are taking some action (telling the truth) to achieve your purpose, that of keeping, or retaining, something. The action you are taking is a method of preservation, the tactic by which you intend to keep their trust. So By speaking only the truth I can preserve their trust for a long time. is most appropriate here. You are expla

Which preposition is correct in the phrase " proficient in/at/with English "? Answer With is an instrumental usage, as if English is being considered as a tool -- proficient with knives, proficient with horses, proficient with languages, especially English . Perfectly cromulent, but not often encountered, I suspect. At is a punctual locative, locating some spot in a larger area or metaphoric space (e.g, in May, on Tuesday, at 2:34 pm ) -- proficient at getting his deer every year, proficient at locating the fault in my argument, proficient at language and language games . In is the general case with proficient (or skilled ), though in can't take just any clause or phrase as its object; it has to at least be some activity that is learnable, repeatable, and worth repeating. These examples are terrible, for instance -- * proficient in going down to Joe's and bringing me a ham on rye, right now , * proficient in being late three times out of four , etc. I'm su

I was authoring a letter and made a joke about body odor. Regarding the visual sense: "... the beauty is in the eye of beholder..." Regarding the olfactional sense: "... the fragrance is in the nostril of..." Well, of what? Of besmeller ?! That can't be right... Also, I'm curious if my usage of olfactional is correct. Answer I offer inhaler as a simple alternative, but I love @Janus Bahs Jacquet's olfactor .

If I only say something as below without further more explanation, will a native speaker understand me? He may be sexually dysfunctional, lately he can't do that his best. That's why I am here to help. If I said it out loud and stressed "that", would you then ask me what is "that" ?

I have always believed that articles (a/an, the) are a special type of adjective.. In watching a TV show recently (Smarter than 5th Grader) - A question was - "How many adjectives are in the following sentence: "Sierra ran down the hill."? - They claimed the answer is 'zero'! I would have said 'one'. Who is correct?

I was just reading a news article about a couple of French men and was wondering what (if any) the difference between that and Frenchmen is? Answer " Frenchmen " could refer to French people collectively, including French women. For example: National Stereotypes in Perspective: Americans in France, Frenchmen in America [ 1 ] It seems that many lower-class Englishmen still harbour a Napoleonic dislike of Frenchmen [ 2 ] It can, of course, also refer to any smaller group of French persons: Where would you take a couple of Frenchmen [in L.A. area]? [ 3 ] " French men " refers just to men from France (all of them or a specific group, depending on context), but not women. Example: French men are three times more likely than French women to kill themselves [ 4 ] I think that is the principal difference. So, in the context of a news article about a couple of people, using "French men" at least makes it clear right away that all of them were men. Using "

The children are eager to start the novel. or The children are eager to begin the novel. Answer Begin , when used as transitive verb, means "start, perform, or undergo the first part of an action or activity." Start , when used as transitive verb, means "cause (an event or process) to happen", or "cause or enable someone or something to begin doing or pursuing something." In "the children are eager to start reading the novel," start means "embark on a continuing action."

You're standing in front of a ticket vending machine and it says "The ticket is printing". Is that correct or should it be "The ticket is being printed"? EDIT: If both are correct, which one should be preferred or is more common? Answer The Middle Construction "The ticket is printing" is something known as a middle construction. It is called "middle" because it is not exactly a passive sentence ("The ticket is being printed") and not exactly an active sentence (because the "ticket" is not really the agent of the action). Some examples of middles from "An Introduction to English Syntax" : This sweater washes well. These cars sold very quickly last week. This sort of construction is extremely common. Sometimes, it conveys basically the same information as the passive, like in your examples about tickets printing. In that situation, either construction is completely valid in any context. "The ticket is printin

I have a question about verb agreement. Can I use "has" after [ being + noun]? For example, is has the correct form of the verb in the following sentence? Being a celebrity has both some advantages and some disadvantages.

What is the origin of English plurals and possessives? English plurals look more French plurals, but I am not sure that is where they come from. As for possessives, I don't know where they come from. Answer The short answer is that they fell together when most of the other inflections were lost. For the plural, many, many Germanic and Indo-European inflections used -s; it was one category of plural noun marker in just about every IE language. It was the only marker left when the others were elided. Possessive '-s', on the other hand, has a very checkered history, which I won't touch. As to the superficially related third person singular verb inflection, the '-s' is a Scandinavian loan, replacing original OE '-th', which came via Grimm's Law from PIE third person singular '-t'.

Is there are rule when to use opened vs open ? I always get confused even though I've been speaking English as the dominant language for more than half my life. E.g. Is the door open(ed)? Which file do you have open(ed) in your editor? Answer The word open can be an adjective describing the door, or it could be a verb, which can be in the past, future, or present tense. Open in your first example is an adjective meaning "not closed or blocked up." (There are other meanings to open as well.) The same pertains to the second example. Someone has a file that is open, not closed. If you did the action of opening the door (or file), then you opened it. If the door opened itself, you can say, "The door opened." Or, you could run away. I'm pretty sure that's the right move, based on what happens to people in films who stick around after a door opens itself. Under open , Merriam-Webster uses the example to illustrate being in a position or adjustment to pe

Statistics shows that people are having fewer children these days! Statistics show that people are having fewer children these days! Which one is grammatical? Answer When considering the 'discipline of statistics' as a field of study or body of knowledge, it is singular: Statistics shows that people are having fewer children these days! When considering the figures from statistical data, as is often the case in comparative analysis, the figures themselves may be regarded as 'statistics', hence plural: Statistics show that people are having fewer children these days! Both are correct. It depends on the context and the author's intent.

"I don't mean to change the subject, but..." but you are changing the subject. "I don't mean to interrupt, but..." but you are interrupting. Is there a name for these type of "polite" phrases? Answer It is a fairly well known figure of speech: Apophasis or paralipsis, meaning to mention something by saying you're not going to mention it.

“User's guide” vs. “users' guide” I prefer non-possessive form of the name of the club: photographers club of Detroit. Is it correct?

I guess “optional plural” is the correct term. I’m referring to things like It can be found at the following location(s) . Please pick up your ticket(s) . But how do I do that to a word that ends in  ‑y ? Take category for example: “category(s)” doesn’t seem correct, because categorys is a misspelling. But everything else I have tried looks ridiculous. What’s the correct approach here? Answer Words that end in - C y regularly go to -ies , while those that end in - V y regularly go to - V ys (where C means a consonant and V means a vowel). bunny > bunnies, telly > tellies, category > categories Monday > Mondays, boy > boys, monkey > monkeys But money > monies is irregular. You could write Please select your preferred category or categories. Please select your preferred category(-ies). Please select one or more categories. Stackoverflow Content If you have a computer program that does the equivalent of: printf("%d %s(s) selected.\n", count, thingie

Why does English use singular they instead of making up a new word for this? In my native language there’s a word dia which has the same meaning as he/she , but it doesn’t give information about the gender of that person. I’ve seen questions close to this, but they don’t provide the reason for not making up a new word for this distinct meaning.

IOU stands for I owe you and we pronounce each letter separately. But how do we classify that construction"? abbreviation : a shortened form of a word or phrase acronym : an abbreviation formed from the initial letters of other words and pronounced as a word Initialism : an abbreviation consisting of initial letters pronounced separately back-formation : a word that is formed from an existing word which looks as though it is a derivative, typically by removal of a suffix All definitions provided by Oxford Dictionaries Online It can't be an abbreviation because there is no shortening, clipping or back-formation. Take for example phone which is an abbreviation of telephone , or edit which is a back-formation of editorship and editor . I would argue that abbreviations are words that have been shortened, a faster way of writing or saying something. Another example would be Prof for professor. It can't be an acronym because we don't pronounce IOU as one word, whereas w

New Yorker (March 4) carries the article titled “Ann and Mitt Romney’s lost fairy tale” portraying an interview of Mr. and Mrs. Mitt Romney by Chris Wallace on Fox News on Sunday, which ends up with the following statement: “Romney said, “We were on a roller coaster, exciting and thrilling, ups and downs. But the ride ends. And then you get off. And it’s not like, Oh, can’t we be on a roller coaster the rest of our life?” Maybe Congress thinks that we can. As for Romney, the G.O.P. is over him —mostly. “ Though it may look quite obvious to native speakers, I’m at fault to interpret the phrase, “the G.O.P. is over him.” Does it mean that the G.O.P. forsook Mr. Romney, or the G.O.P. is the past tense to Mr. Romney ? Can it be possible for any major, decent political party to dump its former leader or champion like old shoes - 弊履の如く捨てる- in Japanese expression, simply because of his not making it, or vise versa? Is “over” used here in the same way as ‘over’ in ‘game over' or 'done’

I was reading a traveling novel and came across this sentence: We all caught the metro back to the centre of town at about midnight, drunk and very happy. It goes without saying that the carriage was crammed full of people drinking beer and snogging. The native-English author used "goes" instead of "went." My question is: Would it be awkward to say "It went without saying..."? I've googled both. Although "goes" appears a hundred times more than "went," there're still around 692,000 results of the latter. Answer It went without saying and it goes without saying differ in literary voice. The past tense reflects a judgment made at the time that was considered obvious, i.e. it went without saying that I too was drunk and the girl on my arm was my girl The present tense means the author writes the piece in a conversational voice intending the reader view what it is stated as obvious. (This sort of usage can also include things tha

There are several words (mostly related to food) which are shortenings of their historical forms. For example, the cold treat ice cream was originally known as iced cream in the 1680s. The -ed ending dropped off in about 1744. A similar example is skim milk , which derives from the term skimmed milk which is apparently still in use in the UK . Other examples are popcorn , wax paper and whip cream . What is the name for the historical process in which the -ed ending is dropped? Language Log talked about the phonology of this phenomenon, referring to it as t/d -dropping, but they did not give a name to the process each word went through. I was thinking that abbreviation might work, but is there a specific term available? Answer I don't think there is a specific term for the loss of -ed in these contexts. Rather, what you have is the interplay of a few different general trends. The first factor is simply phonological. Iced cream , pronounced very deliberately, has a [stkr] c

What is a word for a person with more expertise (in certain field) than an intermediate but less so than an expert? Answer Depending on the field (and potentially how close to intermediate/expert you want to be), a variety of words are viable: Advanced Seasoned Experienced

Reading about the movie character, Dexter, a fan was wondering about how the series will end: Why can't they have him get caught or killed? It got me thinking..it is "have sb do smth" used here? I somehow cannot understand the usage of "get" which I can (from context) see references to passive. Answer I will have him killed. Would mean that I will arrange for someone to be killed. He will get killed. Would mean that some circumstances would lead to someone's death. Now, in terms of how we would talk about the real world, "I will have him get killed" would be strange and unwieldly - just about justifiable, but pretty bad phrasing. In talking about producers of fiction (specifically, the writers of Dexter in this case), there is a remove between the effect of characters upon characters - such as say a policeman character who kills Dexter - and the writers who have control over the circumstances Dexter encounters in a way that no one does over anyon

The word dilemma has caused a dilemma. According to Oxford Dictionary ( http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/dilemma ) Pronunciation is : /dɪˈlɛmə, dʌɪ-/ Which is di-lema or dye-lema. The website "howjsay" ( http://www.howjsay.com/index.php?word=dilemma ) also gives two pronunciations. I just don't understand why it has two pronunciations. Also, is one UK and the other US? I am unclear as to which pronunciation I should stick to. Does it vary according to its position in the sentence? Or should I randomly shoot the one the pops up in mind? Any assistance would be highly appreciated. Answer Generally the difference in pronunciation is regional or personal. Both pronunciations are acceptable. Choose the one that feels the most natural for you.

In looking at the answers for this question, Using "quite" with a noun , it occurred to me that "quite," although having a dictionary definition, might be used differently by AmE and BrE speakers such that it is not correct to speak about "the correct" use of "quite." Case in point, WS2's example sentence: There were quite a few hundred at the gathering to my ear (AmE) sounds "wrong," but in the UK this might be everyday usage. Also the following: There were quite 50 people at the house is something I would express using about / actually / around instead of quite . Is there a significant usage difference between BrE and AmE usage of "quite?" This could be viewed as "opinion based" but perhaps there is an objective answer.

I was talking to a person who said that there were only two. I think she said that the "ou" in house is one of the two. I told her that the way the letter "i" is pronounced is a diphthong, and she said it wasn't. She said it was just one vowel, "i" and that that was that. She said she studied phonics and was writing her thesis (on child development, I think) on this kind of stuff. She said her book said there were only two diphthongs and that I was wrong. So, how many are there? I told her I think there are probably more like ten. I thought of six immediately, but she said they weren't diphthongs because her book didn't say they were. "i" in time "i" in bite "o" in bone "a" in bane "oi" in boink "ou" in house Answer Certainly the i in words like bite and fright represents an /aɪ/ diphthong. Phonemically , I come up with these: /aɪ/ as in price, my, high, flight, mice /aʊ/ as in

What is the origin of the word cum ? I'm trying to find the roots for its prevalent usage, especially in North America. Answer It's an informal way of spelling 'to come' , which can mean having an orgasm . How exactly that verb has become associated with sexual acts is unclear (to me). My best guess would be that it was commonly used in a phrase similar to: I'm coming to an orgasm!

What does "too on the nose" mean, especially as applied to art? I use the expression but struggle to explicitly articulate what I mean. My best attempt is that I use it to refer to film, music, etc. that lacks subtlety and nuance, for example cheaply getting emotional heft from very directly stating cliched and unsubtle emotions. Too : In addition; also More than enough; excessively To a regrettable degree - AHDEL/TFD Obviously, I'm using too in the sense of #2 or #3. And the idiom on the nose : Exactly, precisely; ...This term... may come from boxing, where the opponent's nose is a highly desired target. - AHDI/TFD I haven't been able to find reliable definitions for too on the nose online (they're swamped by definition of 'on the nose', which is apparently often a positive phrase meaning exact or precise). You can't be "too on the nose" in boxing. Can it have a negative meaning or is this a misuse of the phrase? Answer In the acting/

"I couldn't sleep last night. I bet you guys couldn't either". Does the second sentence mean " I bet you too, guys "? Is it correct to use " either " like that or is it just slang?

I've been searching both my mind and several thesauruses attempting to find the adjective that best describes this type of person. The term " thick-skinned " is the closest to what I am trying to convey, but that carries the connotation that he/she is callous and does not care about others. Is there a word that describes someone who is not easily offended -- able to withstand criticism, ridicule, or jokes made at his/her expense -- without also implying that the person is emotionally callous? Answer good sport someone who can accept a loss in a competition or can accept being the butt of a joke. It is used as a noun. The definition is related to being able to take a joke but it also covers accepting criticism with grace. As an adjective, I would say easygoing . This would describe the type of person. relaxed in manner or attitude; inclined to be excessively tolerant As a phrase, there is have a broad back : not be easily hurt by criticism It helps to have a broad back i

The verb let means “allow”, “permit”, “not prevent or forbid”, “pass, go or come” and it's used with an object and the bare infinitive. Are you going to let me drive or not? Don't let him off the hook. Before we let our children surf the Internet, they have to do their homework. She lets the cats out before leaving. He let us into the house. The full form let us can be used similarly Let us know as soon as possible. Please, let us help you. They will never let us forget. None of the above can be contracted; however, when let us is used for making a suggestion; giving self-encouragement; expressing a consequence or plea, it is often contracted to let's Let's go out Let's have a party Let's see what happens Let's stand together in this emergency Let's not forget those who sacrificed their lives Questions I believe that let + us is the only instance where this type of contraction occurs. Is there an explanation as to why verbs such as (i) g

In particular, think of the home air conditioner or the power setting on the kitchen refrigerator: the intensity of effort is opposite to the numbering of the related quality . So "Turn up the air conditioner" can be interpreted as a request to set it colder (make the machine work more) or warmer (change the control to a larger number). What terms would be good to use instead, that are grammatically equivalent so they are drop-in replacements and don't require re-arranging the sentence, are succinct, and are understandable (even if not immediatly familiar) by folks lacking a Chirchhillesque vocabulary? And, the whole point is that they are completely unambiguous. Ideally the pair of terms should match nicely, but that's not necessary. I know the confusion can be avoided by phrasing it differently, and that's what I actualy do if I notice it. But I've wondered if there's a better term that could be used in this place that is simply not ambiguous at all.

I have the following two examples: Our proposed cost is expensive. Our cost proposed is expensive. Is there any difference between them? Or is the second sentence wrong?