Blog

Not sure if this only happens in my country, but a university student can go to a class without actually being enrolled. The student is either there because he wants to "try" the class first, or because the registration capacity is full. What's the word for that? Example: Mary wasn't sure whether to take the biology course, so she went to [...] first. Answer A common term is audit North American - Attend (a class) informally, not for academic credit. Oxford Dictionaries Online

I'm writing a rather tehnical report with a lot of abbreviations such as QoS (quality of service) , AES (Advanced Encryption Standard) and HMAC (Hash-based Message Authentication Code) . When should the explanation of the abbreviation be capitalized? For example, should it be quality of service or Quality of Service ? How does one know what to use for the vast majority of technical abbreviations?

People are quite stingy lately about anything with religious connotations, so I'm worried that the phrase "thank God" might tick some people off. Is "thank god" acceptable? Would that offend people of monotheistic faiths? Or would "thank God" be acceptable to atheists/polytheists too? Answer Are you worried about offending atheists/polytheists by being too monotheistic, or about offending monotheists by being blasphemous? In any case, I think that in most contexts, anyone offended by “thank God” would still be offended by “thank god”, and vice versa. In informal contexts, I’d be surprised if either offended anyone; extremely devout monotheists might perhaps consider them blasphemous. In some official contexts (if you were acting as spokesperson for a school, say), both forms could upset people who have strong feelings about separation of church and state. “Thank goodness!” is probably an unobjectionable alternative. In case you’re not familiar with t

Is it correct to say: We shall discuss it in our today's meeting. Or would it be more correct to say something longer like: We shall discuss it in our meeting that is scheduled for today. ADDED: There is now also a related thread that is attempting to address the grammaticality of the expression "our today's meeting" : Why is “our today's meeting” wrong? -- Though, personally (F.E.), I haven't found their arguments for proving that it is ungrammatical to be convincing.

In common American English usage, these two questions elicit the same response: Do you have a ticket? Don't you have a ticket? These are the usual answers (I was going to say "possible answers" but I can think of a whole host of situations where one could get other answers, e.g. wake up someone in the middle of the night and ask it, the answer might easily be "I don't know" or "maybe" or "hey, just let me sleep!"... but that's neither here nor there... :-) Positive: "Yes" or "Yes, I do". Negative "No" or "No, I do not". But consider this: the questions are logically equivalent to: You have a ticket, right? You do not have a ticket, right? Here I am not so sure that a "Yes, that's right" response means the same thing to each question. (One could still, however, use "Yes, I do" as @F'x answer in How to answer a negative question without ambiguity? illustrates, to r

I am the third daughter (or son) of my parents. OR I am the third child of my parents How should a question that is answered with the above sentences be framed? Answer 'Among your sisters, where do you fall with respect to birth order?' Is that what you're looking for?

Prompted by comments against this question , I'd like some help figuring out why some people (myself included) prefer yours over the apparently more logical/grammatically consistent your in this kind of sentence... Yours and my native languages have co-existed for hundreds of years. Google Books has Your:Yours ratios for languages:2:2, parents:9:10, houses:4:2 . That's a very small sample size, admittedly - but even without anything like that, I know my own usage. So I'm not really interested in being told which is correct, except insofar as this has a bearing on my question itself - why do some people, (including some "careful speakers", which I don't necessarily claim to be) use the apparently incorrect form? EDIT: It may be important to note (as @Gnawme guessed without it being explicitly stated in the first version of this question) that I personally would use singular language in the above. It was just too difficult to search Google Books for that pa

Say a child says: I want some ice cream! The parent's response is: Well , you can't have ice cream right now, we need to have dinner first. Why is the word "well" used as a conversational introduction to an argument? Is it a shortened form of another phrase? Answer Well might originally be a shortened form of a phrase, but I think it is safe to say that people who use it are generally treating it as a distinct entity (not short for something); it is a grammatical particle that is used to "facilitate discourse". In this situation, it is being used by one speaker to acknowledge what the other speaker said. It can also be used to additionally indicate "I'm about to say something now, so wait a moment and don't say more until I've taken my turn." We have many discourse markers, and in general they are used to assist turn-taking and comprehension in a conversation. Every language (as far as I know) has them.

This is a quote from a Gwyneth Paltrow interview where she talks about her miscarriage: "It was awful," she told the Daily Mail's You magazine. "It happened really late, and I wasn't expecting it at all. "For a long time I just couldn't understand that it had happened and why. I was like 'But I can't not be pregnant. I'm already past the first trimester, and I have three car seats in my head.' To this day I feel like I'm missing that kid. But it wasn't meant to be and you have to trust the universe. " What does she mean by saying "I can't not be pregnant?" Is this "can't not" construction a grammatical and common usage?

In the case of an archbishop, or archvillian it is pronounced arch . In the case of archetype, it is prounounced ark-e-type In the case of an archenemy I think you would say ark - enemy Is it simply the fact of a vowel following the arch that turns it from arch to ark ?

Although once a word that dared not speak its name, thanks to popular-culture references as well as the devastating AIDS tragedy, condom seems to be on everyone’s lips these days. But does anybody really know where the word condom (BrE /(ˈ)kɒndɒm/, AmE /ˈkɑnd(ə)m/) ultimately comes from? The OED says: Etymology: Origin unknown; no 18th-cent. physician named Condom or Conton has been traced though a doctor so named is often said to be the inventor of the sheath. It is probably a coïncidence that it first appeared in the same century as shag , as the device surely predates the word. It just must have been called something else back then . Even if you allow that trees can be barked, folk etymologies related to an apocopation of condominium , amusing though they may sometimes be (particularly as blue punch-lines), seem to be barking up the wrong tree. So where do we anglophones (and others?) get the modern word condom from? Answer A likely origin of the word could be latin condere th

An excerpt from the movie 49th Parallel (1941) , a dialogue between heroes. (the bulk of it by an anthropologist (A) writing about Indian tribes of Canada) (A) Yes, I've discovered some rather amusing things during my researches. Blackfoot tribal customs, for instance, closely resemble those of a certain modern European tribe. I'm gonna read you something about that. Where are we? "From the earliest age, their small boys were trained in the arts of war which they considered to be the only pursuit worthy of a man. But they preferred to attack by night, rather than by day and wherever possible, to shoot the enemy in the back. Their smaller neighbors lived in constant danger from them. They also believed in first terrorizing their opponent by covering themselves in war paint and beating loudly on their tribal drums." Well, doesn't that sound familiar to you? (B) Familiar? I don't quite understand. (A) Well, what price Goebbels , eh? And listen to this.. When a t

In this sentence: This book cost me 20 dollars. Is 20 dollars a direct object or a predicative complement?

According to Wikipedia: … a device driver or software driver is a computer program allowing higher-level computer programs to interact with a hardware device. What is the origin of the term driver as used in the above reference? I’ve googled around a bit but haven’t been able to find an answer. Answer Device drivers as we know them (i.e. code that's loaded into the kernel to control a device) have probably been around since UNIX and VMS in the mid-1970s. Operating systems have always had to control devices (tape drives, paper tape and punch card readers), so device drivers in terms of software for controlling devices have probably been around at about as long as there have been operating systems. A driver (or driver circuit ), an electronic circuit used to control another circuit or component, is an old concept. Since hackers tend to "borrow" hardware terms, I would guess that the term for software drivers or device drivers came from there.

Calf's liver as an item on a restaurant menu is certainly correct, but one also sees calves liver written down. What certainly is wrong is calves' liver , except if one assumes that many calves were part of the contribution to what is being cooked and served (hardly the case, and even if correct, not worth mentioning). What is the correct way of writing this?

Human tests—called clinical trials—are the gauntlet of drug development , and have three phases What does "gauntlet" mean in the above context? "throw down the gauntlet" is an idiom "to issue a challenge" where gauntlet refers to a type of glove. In the above extract the word gauntlet alone has been used as a noun, what does it mean there?

Was the usage “Spaghetti were” ever acceptable or common? What does Maugham mean by “his spaghetti were”? Is it proper to say spaghettis for more than one spaghetti noodle? What about macaronis as a plural for more than one macaroni noodle?

Be it surfing the net, doing work, playing games, what do you call such person who loves to stick in front of the computer? I know of some word like netizen and cybernaut but mostly they are referring to someone who is Internet-obsessed. Answer From merriam-webster.com : mouse potato (noun) slang : a person who spends a great deal of time using a computer

Could you tell me which of these phrases is grammatically correct — "anything but" or "anything except"? If the use depends on context, what are the instances when each must be preferred? Answer Anything but can be a phrase used to emphasise that something is not what was expected Example from the dictionaries: She's meant to be really nice but she was anything but nice when I met her. In sentences where such meaning is not intended, except (as mentioned by Kris) is preferred since it does not interfere with the above meaning. "I can't give you anything but love" would be more correctly written "I can't give you anything, except love".

inching. moving slowly/small degree of progress. As in “Elon is inching his way towards Mars”. “Metering closer to his goal” sounds … totally off. So how do I avoid using arguably antiquated measurements (which has contributed towards the loss of one space mission ) without sounding totally crazy? Are there equivalent expressions using metric units, or do we need a work-around, or ...?

This a question about how to pronounce the "s" in "parmesan". Where I come from (Australia), it's said as a "z", or almost an "s", with only the first syllable stressed. But a friend from the USA heard me say it like that, laughed, then confidently corrected me saying it is pronounced "zh" (like "je" in French) ie like "Parmezhan", and with primary stress on the last syllable (secondary on the first). Searching Google, an American company, for "define paramesan" shows the "s" should be said as "z". Which is it?

I am aware of the lightning rod used to protect buildings and structures. But, what does it mean to refer to a person as a lightning rod ? Also, when is it appropriate to use and when should it be avoided? See this NY Times article for example, which is titled James Franco’s 2 Roles at Yale - Scholar and Lightning Rod . Answer A real lightning rod attracts lightning to it. A person is said to be a lightning rod to suggest they attract something to them, most often criticism, controversy, or negative comments. Usually the thing they attract is indicated in the same sentence or nearby in the context. In the referenced NY Times article, the something is not very explicit, but they seem to be saying he naturally attracts attention to himself.

Is there a word that describes a spoken error wherein the speaker accidentally replaces a phoneme with an incorrect one? For example, an English teaches I had in high school once uttered the response "Yef" instead of "Yes", purely by accident. We all understood what he meant, as in the case of a typo, he just misspoke. Answer Wikipedia calls this a speech error or slip of the tongue (noted in the comments). A speech error, commonly referred to as a slip of the tongue 1 (Latin: lapsus linguae, or occasionally self-demonstratingly, lipsus languae), is a deviation (conscious or unconscious) from the apparently intended form of an utterance.

It seems to me that the "from" is unnecessary and perhaps redundant.

Is there a word for the beginning of a street? What word would be used to describe where a street begins? I have a friend who says that in Persian, it's described as the "head" of the street, but I can't think of how it would be described in English. Does anyone know? Answer The "end of the street (or block)" works regardless of which end - but to determine which end requires context. For example, if I am going to meet my friend at one end or the other of Lowe Ave., which end would be determined by where we are going. If we were going to walk to the bar, my friend would know to meet me at the north "end of the street" . If we were going to the deli, she would know to meet me at the south "end of the street" .

Why is Exodus pronounced like "Exidus"? Is there any historical reason for the "O" to be silent and "i" pronounced instead? I understand from the comments that it is not "I", but a case of " O" not stressed. So to rephrase, how is this different from "exotic"? As a foreign language speaker, I am interested to know if there are similar words like this? Somehow Exodus doesn't fit with the generic pattern, I tend to say it with a stressed "O".

Throughout our marriage, my wife would occasionally come in from shopping and hand me a bag containing an unexpected gift...anything from a small bag of candy to a shirt. When I'd ask why she got it for me, the word she would use was pronounced " sir'-see ". I've tried a variety of spellings, but cannot find a definition that fits those gifts. Does anyone know what word she's using?

I wanted to leave the question title as is so as not to take away from my amusement :) . Anyway, It's raining. What is raining? Is it the sky? The clouds? The weather? The rain? What is "it"? Any historical insights on the statement? Answer Definitions for it in my Webster's 3rd New International Dictionary include: 2a used as an expletive subject of an impersonal verb that expresses a simple condition or an action without implied reference to an agent about the weather ... or time. It is raining or It is two o'clock are examples of 2a. 2b used as an expletive subject in other statements or questions having an undefined subject If it hadn't been for your help, I couldn't have finished in time is an example of 2b. 3a used as an anticipatory subject of a verb whose logical subject is another word or phrase or clause It is I who have the answer to the question is an example of 3a.

Within Biology, there are some biological terms that differ in spelling between the British English and American English dictionaries. For example, oestrogen and oesophagus , as well as the word oestriol are all spelled differently in British English dictionaries. Is there anything in particular that makes this so? Answer The word oestrogen comes from the Latin word oestrus , and oesophagus is a Latin word as well. The oe spelling in Latin originally represented a diphthong [oj] ("oy"), but then later (in Latin) became a long vowel [ee]. When we borrowed such words into English, it was pronounced more like [i], [e], or [ɛ] (depending on the word), following English pronunciation rules. And since we pronounce them like "estrogen" and "esophagus", the US English spelling was changed to reflect the English pronunciation more closely, by dropping the o . In British English, the connection to the original Latin spelling was retained. (Something similar to

I was walking past a high school and I saw a container of cookies sitting on the handrail to one of its portables. The cookies: (I use an iPad so couldn't scale it down unfortunately :() And I was wondering what do you call these containers, these transparent plastic containers? Is there a name for them? Answer Um, it looks like a "tray" to me. Perhaps the food packaging industry has a jargon name for it, but if so, I am unaware of it.

Is there an antonym for lying? The lyric "You keep lying, when you oughta be truthin'" in "These boots are made for walkin'" made me wonder: does a single word exist which means to speak the truth? Answer There is truthing , to truth (as in the lyrics) but it seems like it is a nonce word or neologism. Though there is a colloquial usage. Wiktionary mentiones as obsolete: (obsolete, transitive) To assert as true; to declare. Had they [the ancients] dreamt this, they would have truthed it heaven. — Ford. Etymonline says that: English and most other IE languages do not have a primary verb for for "speak the truth," as a contrast to lie (v.). You can see example usages in literature and technical books also if you check Google Books . (Note: Some examples may have different senses and gerund form of the word seems more common) There is a technical usage as " ground truthing " as well. Furthermore Wikipedia says under " Conversion &q

I’m looking for the origin of the idiom “to be a thing”. It means roughly “exist” or more specifically “be recognised” or “be a phenomenon”. I first noticed it around 2008–2009. It seems to come from the use of thing in the sense of a popular phenomenon—cf. “Ecigs are the new thing”. However, its meaning also extends to differentiating set phrases, names, or terms of art from normal productive constructions. For example: — If you assign the mutable reference… — Is that a thing? [Is “mutable reference” different from “mutable” + “reference”?] — Hm? Oh, no, a variable can be mutable or be a reference, or both; they’re separate. — Oh, okay. So if we assign this here… So I’m wondering how it was originally used and whether any authorities recognise it yet. Answer I'd guess this fairly recent use is related to the rise of internet memes, and whether an item is widespread or just someone's own: "Is this a thing? Is this a trend?" It dates back to at least 2006 on blogs a

What is the difference between "audio" and "sound"? Is it possible that a beeping noise could be considered one but not the other?

While Urban Directory is by no means a reliable source, I see the word shipped used in the sense they describe: the strong desire for 2 or more fictional characters to be in a romantic relationship. For example, https://twitter.com/PANDAEMONlUM/status/743419040337661953 i always shipped tom hiddleston and emma watson Or check https://www.reddit.com/r/zootopia/comments/4m08f0/the_reason_why_people_love_to_ship_nick_and_judy/ Everyone says they ship Judy and Nick because of their amazing chemistry. This is obviously slang and new slang at that but where does it come from? Answer TVtropes has some ideas on where the phrase could come from: ostensibly derives from "Relationship" (though it might as well be "Worship"; in some fandoms, it's Serious Business) — was originally coined by fans of The X-Files, who were divided between "relationshippers" pushing for romance and "noromos" who would rather have No Hugging and No Kissing. the Pokémon ani

Sometimes I read a sentence containing the word canonical , but I cannot find appropriate meaning of the word. For example, in this link : Returns a canonical representation for the string object. It's hard for me to find an appropriate definition from Google : ca·non·i·cal Adjective /kəˈnänikəl/ According to or ordered by canon law the canonical rites of the Roman Church Included in the list of sacred books officially accepted as genuine the canonical Gospels of the New Testament Accepted as being accurate and authoritative the canonical method of comparative linguistics (of an artist or work) Belonging to the literary or artistic canon canonical writers like Jane Austen According to recognized rules or scientific laws canonical nucleotide sequences Of or relating to a general rule or standard formula Of or relating to a cathedral chapter or a member of it Answer When this word is used by programmers, it is a synonym for "authoritative," "standard," or "

(This question was inspired by comments in a similar – but not duplicate – question .) Suppose I'm tasked with transcribing a physics lecture, and the instructor says that the answer is “42 km/s.” In this case, it's important to note that the instructor did not say the words, “kilometers per second”, but instead said (phonetically), “kay em per ess”. As the transciber, I want to somehow capture this subtle distinction – that is, I want it clear that the letters were spoken, not the words . I can think of a few possible ways to do this. One is to spell out the letters phonetically: “...and that gives us our answer of 42 kay em per ess” 1 Advantage : How the answer was enunciated is clearly communicated. Disadvantage : The resulting form is ugly as muck. Another option is: “...and that gives us our answer of 42 km per s” Advantage : It's easy to read and pleasing on the eye. Disadvantage : It's ambiguous; the reader might assume the lecturer said “kilometers”, but I'

Is there an English word for the practice of analysing texts to determine their authors? For example, comparing three texts A, B and C and realising that the choice of words, grammar and style of writing between A and B is so similar that they're likely of the same author, while C is clearly by a different author. Answer Yes, you're looking for Stylometry : Stylometry is the application of the study of linguistic style , usually to written language. Stylometry is often used to attribute authorship to anonymous or disputed documents. It has legal as well as academic and literary applications, ranging from the question of the authorship of Shakespeare's works to forensic linguistics.

What's the difference between 'cutlery', 'silverware' and 'crockery'? Are there any differences between them? Answer Cutlery has two definitions: 1. cutting/edged implements used for serving or eating food; 2. eating utensils in general. Without further context, an American is likely to assume the first definition (knives), while a Brit is more likely to go for the generic meaning. Silverware also means eating utensils, especially silver-colored ones, though nowadays, most silverware is not actually made of silver. An American synonym that does not imply anything about the silver content (or lack thereof) is flatware . Crockery is completely different: in British English usage, it means the things on the dinner table that are usually made of china or porcelain -- plates, bowls, saucers, cups, serving bowls, etc. In American English, crockery is used for certain earthenware cooking pots, but given enough context, an American would probably understand cro

They knew what mercy is. They knew what mercy was. Mercy is something that always exists so can I say is as in the quoted example?

I am under the impression that both coterminous and conterminous have exactly the same meaning. There was a remark that Latin purists prefer conterminous . Why? Is there any significant difference between the two? Do co- and con- have same effect on words? I am looking for any additional information about these two words which would help me understand them better. Answer Yes, conterminous and coterminous both mean "to share a boundary". According to the entries for co- and con- , below, co- is an Anglicising of con- , which is possibly why Latin purists prefer con- In this instance co- and con- both mean together or with . Etymology of co- in Latin, the form of com- in compounds with stems beginning in vowels and h- and gn- (see com-). Taken in English from 17c. as a living prefix meaning “together, mutually, in common,” and used promiscuously with native words and Latin-derived words not beginning with vowels, sometimes even with words already having it (e.g. co-

How long is a snooze? My boyfriend will invariable take an afternoon snooze which might last anything up to two hours. A nap on the other hand, can be short , quick or even long , and sometimes they are called power naps . Is 40 winks shorter than a snooze but longer than a kip ? Am I right in thinking that kip is considered old-fashioned although etymologically speaking it is probably one of the most recent. And what about the term siesta ? OD states 2 Siesta: an afternoon rest or nap, esp. one taken during the hottest hours of the day in a hot climate. But I'm sure one can take a siesta in the middle of winter. Questions: Which of the above terms has the oldest, (and consequently the longest) history? Has anyone ever specified the length or duration of any of these terms? For example, when does a nap stop being a nap ? And when did power nap first appear? Answer Nap and 40 Winks , at least, are interchangeable synonyms, both meaning a short period of sleep, with a special

I remember reading somewhere that if a unit is abbreviated as one character , there must not be a space between the number and the unit (e.g., 5m , 26K ). If the unit is abbreviated as two or more Characters , there must be a space between the number and the unit (e.g., "10 km", "USD 5"). Can you please help me find the source again? Is this recommendation correct? Answer If you're typesetting SI units, it seems logical to follow the conventions of the Bureau international des poids et mesures . From the SI Brochure , §5.3.3 : The numerical value always precedes the unit, and a space is always used to separate the unit from the number. (…) The only exceptions to this rule are for the unit symbols for degree, minute, and second for plane angle, ° , ′ , and ″ , respectively, for which no space is left between the numerical value and the unit symbol. §5.3.7 goes on to say that “When it is used, a space separates the number and the symbol % .” In practice, it is q

What's correct? If both, what is the difference between these questions? An example from The Valley of Fear by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle: MacDonald turned over the letter which Holmes had handed him. «Posted in Camberwell – that doesn't help us much. Name, you say, is assumed. Not much to go on, certainly. «Twice.» «And how?» «In notes to Camberwell postoffice.» « Did you ever trouble to see who called for them?» «No.» The inspector looked surprised and a little shocked. «Why not?» «Because I always keep faith. I had promised when he first wrote that I would not try to trace him.» «You think there is someone behind him?» «I know there is.» «This professor that I've heard you mention?» «Exactly!» and «Well, Mr. Holmes, I admit that what you say is interesting: it's more than interesting – it's just wonderful. But let us have it a little clearer if you can. Is it forgery, coining, burglary – where does the money come from?» « Have you ever read of Jonathan Wild?» «Well

Should the first word after a colon be capitalized? Which of the following is correct? For example: This. For example: this. Answer This can go either way. If you are starting a complete sentence that represents a summation of what came before, you are certainly entitled to capitalize the sentence. Here's an example of such a sentence: There is a sentence after the preceding colon. But if you are using the colon to offset a list or other material that does not form a complete sentence, it makes no sense to capitalize what follows: Here are some examples of breakfast foods: eggs, bacon, toast, hash browns, orange juice, coffee.

How should often be pronounced in formal speech? "off-ten" or "of-fen"? Answer "Should" is inappropriate in the question. Both pronunciations occur. In the 19th century /ɔ:fn/ ("aufn") was the normal pronunciation, so in The Pirates of Penzance , there is an elaborate joke on the confusion of 'often' and 'orphan'.

When is “Y” a vowel? Why are 'w' and 'y' called semi-vowels in English?

I can't think of the word and it's been bothering me for some time now. I have attempted to reverse search it, to no avail. If someone could oblige me with the word whose definition means to oversimplify an often complex issue, I would most appreciate it!

When talking about the source code of a program, my Computer Science teacher sometimes refers to single pieces of code as 'a code'. For example: For today's task, you need to write a code which outputs " Hello World ". I feel that this is terribly wrong as I would say 'some code' or 'a piece of code'. E.g.: For today's task, you need to write some code which outputs " Hello World ". Who is right, me, my teacher or both of us? Answer "Code" as usually used in the field of IT refers to source code of computer programs. My own intuition is that this is clearly uncountable, so you can speak of "some code" but not "a code". You can also speak of "the source code of a program", which means "the [representation of the program] as source code". However, "code" alone remains uncountable. You could speak of "a code" when used in a different meaning, such as: "he gave me

What do you call words with identical spelling but different meaning and different pronunciation? A couple examples are bass and resume . Answer They are also called heteronyms .

A depends on B, is A dependant, or is B dependant? “Employee” is to “employer” as “dependent” is to what? A and B are two persons. When A is a dependent of B, what of A is B?

Duplicate: Is the usage of “are” correct when referring to a team/group/band? What is correct to say? Korn* is a great band OR Korn* are a great band. (* You can replace your favourite band's name here) Of course everybody there is no doubt about the following sentences: The Beatles are a great band Led Zeppelin is a great band But with certain kinds of names, the situation becomes difficult. Metallica are a great band OR Metallica is a great band Is there any consensus on this matter?

I am new to the English language and I am going to English classes. In the middle of my book, we have a lesson about foods. In this lesson, food names are explained but I do not understand something. We say and write the sandwich or the hamburger . However, when we say and write pizza , coffee , chocolate or noodles , we do not use the . What is there such a difference? Answer There are some non-standard things going on here, but for the most part this is the basic countable versus non-countable rule. In general, if a noun refers to something that you can count, you must precede it with an article, a number, or some word indicating a quantity. If a noun refers to something that you can't count, then you don't use the article or number. So for example, "I ate a sandwich." Sandwich is countable: you could have one sandwich, two sandwiches, etc. But "I drank milk." You don't normally talk about "one milk" or "two milks". (But we'l

All my life I have known people with reddish, orangey hair, to be termed ginger haired. Just as you don't call a blonde a 'yellow head' red head just wasn't a word that was said (wouldn't orange head be more accurate for most anyway?). However these days I increasingly find people using the term 'red head'. At first it seems to have been a term restricted to magazines with attractive ginger models, as if the media couldn't admit that attractive gingers exist, but it has slowly spread to the general population and these days I often hear it. My guess is that that redhead is an old term that then fell out of use with the (then) more exotic ginger taking its place, and that in modern times with ginger no longer being an exotic food and anti-ginger stuff in culture redhead has somehow re-emerged. Is there any truth to my guess? What is the actual history of the terms redhead/ginger? When did ginger come into use? Why did redhead fall so out of use in favour

I was wondering if interchange and exchange are equivalent and can be used interchangeably or exchangeably (okay this is an example already)? What are the differences between their prefixes, inter- and ex- ? It is common for XML to be used in interchanging data over the Internet.

How should I phrase a question that must be answered with an ordinal number (e.g., the third prime)? Framing a question to which the answer is an ordinal number I know the title sounds stupid, but this is one question that has left me stumped for quite some time. I hope to get an answer in this forum. If the answer is "I am the fourth son of my father", what should be the question? In general, how do you ask questions with ordinal numbers? Answer I don't think you can ask that question directly. The conversation could go something like the following: How many children does your father have? To which the answer could be three . You could go on and say: Which one are you? To which the answer could be I am the youngest, oldest, second, third, etc. Now the last question might seem ambiguous if it's standing all by its own. But it would make sense once it's in context.

What is the origin of the phrase “hunky dory”? Answer Nobody really knows. There's no agreed derivation of the expression 'hunky-dory'. It is American and the earliest example of it in print that I have found is from a collection of US songs, George Christy's Essence of Old Kentucky, 1862. We do know that 'hunky-dory' wasn't conjured from nowhere but was preceded by earlier words, i.e. 'hunkey', meaning 'fit and healthy' and 'hunkum-bunkum', which had the same meaning as 'hunky-dory'. 'Hunkey' was in use in the USA by 1861, when it was used in the title of the Civil War song A Hunkey Boy Is Yankee Doodle. 'Hunkum-bunkum' is first recorded in the US sporting newspaper The Spirit of The Times, November 1842.

Here is the situation: Kids in a small yard are about to play soccer. There are no goalposts in that yard (or "goals" or whatever you call it, I mean those metal frames on each side of the soccer field that have nets on them. Once the ball is in the net, the score changes). So, one boy picks up some sticks from the ground and tries to mark out the goalposts for each team. While doing that he says: "This will be your team's goal and that will be our team's goal" Is the first goal that he mentioned the one that his team will be defending or trying to get the ball into? Answer "Your team's goal" refers to the goal you are defending. It's the one your goal-keeper is guarding. "Our team's goal" refers to the goal we are defending, in front of which our goal-keeper stands.

When I call the buzzer outside my girlfriend's flat, she sometimes says * "I'll open you the door" . I correct this to "I'll open the door for you" . I've never heard a native speaker say it the first way, which is why I think it's wrong. But I can't explain why. There is a pattern in lots of English phrases that would suggest both are correct. A few common examples: Give the keys to me before you go — Give me the keys before you go I'll buy a coffee for you at the cafe — I'll buy you a coffee at the cafe We sent a text to Martin on his birthday — We sent Martin a text on his birthday The left-hand side is more formal, and the right-hand side is more common in everyday speech. What do you call this pattern? What makes the 'open-the-door' sentence an exception? Answer The answer to the presenting question is: * I'll open you the door. is ungrammatical because you won't wind up owning the door by virtue of my open

In my native language, we can say: I have dog Because I don't want to say a dog (one dog, how many dogs) or the dog (that dog, the listener don't care which dog). p.s. after 3 years later, I have to say, why I ask this question, is I still cannot grasp how to use the right 'article word'. sometimes, a noun will use an article, sometimes, a noun could not(or omit) the article word before it. there aren't a formula for this. So, I have to remember all the time! I feel so frustrate Answer Well, first of all, we don't need an article before any noun. I can say: I like dogs. As to your question of why, the answer is, "because that is how English works". The articles perform a discourse function, by indicating new and old information. They often evolve from demonstratives (e.g. "this" and "that"). They evolve independently in unrelated languages. Normally, once an article system becomes a part of a language, it is an all-or-nothing thi

Can anyone provide some insight into the pronunciation of the word algae ? Various dictionaries give either the /g/ version as in gear or the /dʒ/ version as in jeep . For example: Is there an American or British convention for pronouncing this word? Are these conventions the same on both sides of the Atlantic? Is one pronunciation more common in biology circles or technical circles that the other one?

I'm writing a technical report and must use the plural form of LASER. Seeing as it is an acronym, how does one add the 's'? Answer The acronym LASER describes a process, not equipment. Modern usage is lasing for the process, and laser has become an ordinary noun. So for multiple devices operating on the LASER principle: "lasers" or "LASERs". Preferably the first, without all caps.

As a non-English speaker whose native language does not have articles I am always unsure about the use of them. This time I would like to clarify the use of the article "THE" together with positions of persons. For example: John Smith and the director of my department Adam Gray went to a meeting yesterday. If I state the name of the person do I need "THE"? I understand that if I said just "John and the director of my department went..." "THE" would be necessary but does that change when stating the name also? Similarly, do I need to put "THE" in this type of sentence: The Prime Minister of the United Kingdom David Cameron announced changes in immigration policy. If I don't need the definite article here then why so? Are the two examples equal? Answer You can use them with or without an article, but the meaning is ever so slightly different. When you use them without the definite article, THE , then you are using an official title

What is the English word that best captures "what if" situation? Something along the lines of "What if something goes wrong". It is close to being pessimistic. But pessimistic is too negative. I am basically looking for a word that captures "what-if situations" rather than the expression "what if" itself. "Worst-case" is not a choice for me.

I'm updating my résumé and I'm trying to describe myself as "someone who learns on his own", though more briefly. I think the word "autodidact" fits but an informal survey around the workplace showed that many people don't know what the word means. I'm concerned that using the word will leave those reading my résumé scratching their heads, or worse, make me appear pretentious. Does "autodidact" fall into the category of "five dollar words" and should I just replace it with a brief phrase? Answer I think it probably is too obscure. Put "self-learner", "self-starter", "self-taught in (some skills you want it to apply to)". The only place where I'd expect to see such a word in a resume would be applying to an academic position where use of such words is common. I think in general it's a bad idea to confuse the people who might be reading your resume as it could cause them to pass it over.

In order to understand the English grammar, I have to read the Grammar Section in OALD. I don't understand the grammar constituents of to-infinitives in these sentences. How can I understand them? OALD said Eat and to eat are both the infinitive form of the verb. Eat is called a BARE INFINITIVE and to eat is called a TO-INFINITIVE. Most verbs that take an infinitive are used with the to-infinitive. the goldfish need to be fed . she never learned to read . Some verbs can be used with both a noun phrase and a to-infinitive. The noun can be the object of the main verb. Can you persuade Sheila to chair the meeting? or the noun phrase and infinitive phrase together can be the object. I expected her to pass the driving test first time. We'd love you to come and visit us. My question is that in 1, can I think of the to-infinitive ( to be fed and to read ) is the object of need and learn , respectively？ And in 2, why can her to pass or you to come be bound together to be th

Are these adjectives interchangeable? I always hear: 'An Arab man.' but never 'An Arabic man.' and I always hear 'Arabic coffee' but never hear 'Arab coffee.' Answer As adjectives, the New Oxford American Dictionary defines Arabic a related to the language or the literature, while Arab is the more generic term (“of or relating to Arabia and the people of Arabia”) and Arabian is a historical variant of Arab . Some dictionaries (including WordNet ) report a wider meaning of Arabic as being roughly synonymous with Arab and Arabian . In some established expressions, like “arabic coffee”, arabic is favoured. Note, however, that usage favours “arab cuisine”, for example!

I need a verb that expresses the concept of transforming a raw material into currency, as in this sentence "The bitcoin manufacturing process currenciates digital information." New coinages are fine if they make sense and are less clumsy than the one I used above, but an existing term would be preferred. I've considered the word mint but that seems to relate more to the final product than the raw material -- in other words, you mint coins (the finished product), you don't mint gold (the raw material). Answer Monetize to coin into money; also : to establish as legal tender

On occasion, I end up writing sentences that contain a duplicate word, often what is probably a preposition (or better yet, an adposition ). The specific example that I just ran into involves a duplicate 'to' in this sentence: I think we really ought to leave that up to the people we're assigning the label to to judge. Is this proper grammar? If it is so technically, is it proper style to leave it like that, or should it be rephrased, so one doesn't stumble over it when reading? Should there be a comma between the two? Answer While your sentence I think we really ought to leave that up to the people we're assigning the label to to judge. is not grammatically incorrect, it would be considered inelegant by many writers, especially because it involves a duplicate preposition. (It is not uncommon to find "...had had..." in formal contexts and this is not usually frowned upon.) So, you are right your construction is not stylistically preferred. Also, there sh

I was asked an interesting question today, is there an English equivalent of the saying Zwijgen is instemmen , that is "since you didn't answer, then you agreed with me". I could not come up with any good example; although I could think of a few similar, but not quite the same, including the following: I'll take that as a 'yes' then. I don't hear any No's. The first is different, since you could also use it if an answer was given, but was not sufficiently clear. The second is different since it is much weaker, it is tacitly agreed that you didn't agree, but you also didn't disasgree . Is there any idiom for your silence implies your consent ? Answer I am not sure this qualifies as an idiom, but is a common enough expression: I would express it "unless I hear otherwise". Unless I hear otherwise, I am going to leave at 4:00.

A little anecdote to illustrate my question: Say I've been an aspiring poet all my life but I've never dared to tell anyone. Then the local TV station has an anonymous poetry contest. Since I've by now written a lifetime's worth of poems, I enter the one I consider the very best. However, to my utter horror, at the night of the screening, my poem is analyzed and burned down to the ground. Which would of course sadden me very much. But it's not just saddening. It's more than that, as I actually considered poetry one of my strong suits. What is the word capturing this emotion? My best guess would be crestfallen, however this can only be used as a past tense "adjective verb" (I'm not sure that is the proper term, so if I'm wrong please tell me). Is there a word that I could use in the present tense? So the sentence would look something like this: The analysis of my poem was very to me. My closest guess for this case would be humiliating . However

Abigail Adams wrote to John Adams when he was at Philadelphia for Second Continental Congress in 1776. "I wish most sincerely there was not a slave in the province. It always seemed a most iniquitous scheme to me to fight ourselves for what we’re daily robbing and plundering from those who have as good a right to freedom as we have." It caught my attention with the sentence "I wish ... there was not..?" Shouldn't it have been "there were not a slave?" Maybe it was a simple typo or maybe that's how they wrote back then. By the way, I am in no way trying to belittle her English ability here. She was one of the greatest New Englanders in her generation I know. Any comment?

I want people to enjoy the show. or I want people enjoying the show. Is it possible to use both? I know it's a duplicate but the answers were not clear in the other posts.

If I conduct an experiment and get results, and I can then relate those to real life in a way, what is the verb that this link to is doing? My first thought was validate, but that isn't correct. Answer It seems easier to come up with an adjective than a verb. My first thoughts were relevant and pertinent (as in, “These results are relevant because...” ), but you're looking for a verb. There's the verb pertain , which means (according to NOAD): pertain ( intrans. verb ) be appropriate, related, or applicable and also apply : apply ( intrans. verb ) be applicable or relevant ( trans. verb ) bring or put into operation or practical use : the oil industry has failed to apply appropriate standards of care . So, you might say, “We can apply these results to...”