Blog

There is a proverb in Hindi language हाथी चले बाज़ार कुत्ते भौंकें हज़ार Literal English translation: Elephant goes to the bazar; Thousands of dogs bark It figuratively means when a person progresses with something or succeeds, the people often vilify him and protest. (So let them do what they do. A high-level person doesn't need anything to stop progressing or succeeding)

Why do people say "I want it done fast"? Fast is modifying 'done' which is the past tense of a verb. Verbs are modified by adverbs - which end with 'ly'. They should say "I want it done quickly". A similar mistake arises about cars (and other the things). It may be a fast car, but you drive it quickly - you do not drive it fast. I discussed this with a professor of computing who said "It doesn't matter - it's common usage". Common or not, it is wrong. Yes, or no? Does anyone care anymore? Does anyone know anymore?

There was the following passage in the New Yorker’s (September 22, 2014) article titled “Field trip” describing a photographer who travels to take pictures of oldest living things in the world: The one she photographed was a 3500 year-old tree just outside Orlando, Florida – actually the original tourist attraction before Disney. Meth heads snuck into it to do meth , and they accidentally burned it down. One of them later said, ‘Oh shit, we killed something that was older than Jesus.’ As I had no idea about ‘meth,’ I checked Readers English Japanese Dictionary at hand, which defines it as a slang to mean methyl alcohol or drug, methadone. Urban Dictionary defines meth as an abbreviation for methamphetamine, a drug that stimulates the central nervous system by causing it to release more dopamine, a neurotransmitter that gives someone a feeling of satisfaction. Does ‘meth’ in the above quote means methadone or methamphetamine, and 'do meth' mean to take or inhale it? Is it a popu...

"Y'all" is the famous southern US form of the 2nd person plural. The Brooklyn / Italian-American "youse" might be another. While the existence and usage of "y'all" has been addressed somewhat thoroughly here: What is the proper usage of "Y'all" in southern American dialects , I've found nothing else on EL&U regarding 2nd person plural forms in other English dialects. I know there was a dual form in Old English ( Dual (grammatical number) ) does that survive in any of the dialects in the Danelaw? Do Scots / Gaelic / Welsh / Australian / other dialects retain any type of 2nd person plural / dual in modern usage? Answer Taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You#Informal_plural_forms : y'all, or you all - southern United States and African American Vernacular English you guys - U.S., particularly in the Midwest, Northeast, and West Coast; Canada, Australia. Used regardless of the genders of those referred to you lot - UK ...

In Measure for Measure 2.2.785, Shakespeare wrote the following sentence: I have a brother is condemned to die. I am wondering why he omitted the relative pronoun and left the helping verb. Isn't it correct to say? I have a brother condemned to die. Answer TL;DR In the half a millennium since Shakespeare was writing, English has evolved new and different rules of grammar. In early modern English, relative pronouns were omissible when they represented the subjects of relative clauses. This is not possible in modern standard English. This has nothing particularly to do with the fact that Shakespeare was writing in verse. It was just the standard English of his day. Full answer In modern standard English, when a relative clause contains an expressed subject, we can omit the relative pronoun (except in the case of whose ). In such cases, the relative pronoun most often represents the object of the relative clause. However, when the relative pronoun is co-indexed with the subject of...

Is a company always plural, or are small companies singular? When I'm referring to a group of multiple things , should it be considered singular or plural for the purposes of applying a verb to it? For example, which is correct in the examples below? A sentence is a group of words that is followed by a period. A sentence is a group of words that are followed by a period. The group of people constitutes a jury. The group of people constitute a jury. A group of crows is called a 'murder'. A group of crows are called a 'murder'. My instinct is that it depends on whether the verb is referncing the group itself or the members of the group directly, but is that right? Answer According to the OALD, group can actually serve as either a plural or singular noun. The category they give is "countable + singular or plural verb". So, an example of correct use is: A group of us is/are going to the theatre this evening. For any of your examples, both is and are can be...

So, I'm reading up on a list of English Idioms and I see two that bear a striking similarity. "Take the biscuit (UK) : To be particularly bad, objectionable, or egregious. "Take the cake (US)" : To be especially good or outstanding. Now I can understand why cake is "good" and "outstanding". In the USA we're rational, and that makes sense to me. However, why are biscuits "bad", "objectionable" or "egregious"? It would seem to me that if the country thought so poorly of biscuits they'd naturally go away. Personally, I like biscuits too; and, I especially like biscuits with gravy. Why do people in the UK hate biscuits, and how did the saying "take the biscuit" come to be? You can hear an example of "taking the biscuit" thanks to Thunderf00t Answer I'm afraid I may know where the negative meaning comes from. People of weak stomach are recommended not to read... The name probably comes fro...

Is the following sentence grammatically correct in regards subject-verb agreement? One of the main facets of the soul is the feelings humans treasure above all: love and compassion. The sentence seems to retain its meaning when flipped around, revealing that "the feelings" might be the true subject, and indicating that the verb form "is" could be incorrect. For example: The feelings humans treasure above all -- love and compassion -- are one of the main facets of the soul. Answer Yes. What you are referring to is called subject-complement agreement . When you have a subject and complement that differ in number, the conjugation of the verb is determined by the number of the subject, not the complement. Example 1: One of the things is feelings. ("One" - singular subject; "is" - third-person singular) Feelings are one of the things. ("Feelings" - plural subject; "are" - third-person plural) Example 2: The States are the Union. T...

To what extent, if any, do lingo and jargon differ? Answer I’d use lingo to characterize a style of speaking, characterized by words both newly-minted and appropriated for a specific meaning. For example, using drag to mean boring or tedious, bread to mean money, or man as a form of address all contribute to the lingo of counterculture in the 60s. Jargon refers to a technical vocabulary that is shorthand for complex or elaborate concepts and practices. In technology, for example, it’s often characterized by acronyms and other terms coined by inventors and innovators. In law, medical practice, and academic research, it’s a combination of terms and concepts owed to history that are often anchored to their language of origin.

I've often heard writers say they don't like using colons and semi-colons in dialogue specifically and I don't often see colons and semi-colons in dialogue, but sometimes it just seems like it's by far the best option. For example: "I told you: John doesn't work on Mondays." Is there any real alternative to this? "Don't worry; I only get drunk on Sundays." Is the semi-colon ok, or is it awkward in dialogue? Putting a full stop after Don't worry seems strange to me. "I’ll do anything it takes: rehab, counseling, therapy, whatever I need to do.” Is the colon ok here or is an em-dash better? "It's an article about all the types of things you hate: the environment, animal rights, veganism, that kind of thing." Is the colon above ok in dialogue? "Trust me; the WASPy stuff is nothing in comparison." Is a semi-colon appropriate above? Once again, it seems strange to me to put a full-stop. "Those things I said—I...

Answers to this question show that it is quite common to use the 'ellipsis' (three dots) in English writing to indicate a pause in speech for reasons of "confusion, insecurity, distress, or uncertainty". I agree with this usage, but is it still appropriate to call the 3 dots an 'ellipsis' in this case? I generally associate 'ellipsis' with omission; indeed, that's its primary meaning , with the reference to the typographical 3 dots being secondary. Is there a better word or phrase to use to refer to the 3 dots being used to indicate a pause in speech (either real as in quotes, or abstract as in written prose)? Answer The better phrase to use to refer to the 3 dots being used to indicate a pause in speech is Suspension point , as we can read on Wikipedia : The triple-dot punctuation mark is also called a suspension point , points of ellipsis, periods of ellipsis, or colloquially, dot-dot-dot. However, Collins English Dictionaries defines suspensi...

We have easy go-to terms for the X and Y axis, as row and column, respectively. However, I have never heard a similar term applying in the Z axis. Does such exist? Cell is not appropriate, as as cell refers to a specific position, where the word in question would refer to some grouping of cells along the same position in the third axis. Example: Add another ______ to the input for temperature data Row is to X axis as ______ is to Z axis . Answer There is no standard term. There is no a strict association between "x axis" and "row". (For that matter, rows are generally indexed vertically, which would associate them with the y axis, not the x axis.) A figure (or feature space) with a y axis won't necessarily have anything you could point to as a "row". Pixel-based images do have rows and columns that are often indexed with y,x values, in which case z often means depth (thus, "layers"), but that's specific to graphics. If you're talki...

I'm not sure what these are called, but how can I form a word like "quadruple" for any number I want? Like 5× as much is quintuple, what is 31× as much or 147× as much? I want to know how they are formed so I can make my own. Similarly, how do I construct the prefixes, such as unicycle, bicycle, tricycle, quadricycle? I figured out 12 is duodeci-, but how can I form any prefix like this? Answer The usual way is just to find the Latin root and add the suffix: quintuple, sextuple, septuple, nonuple, etc. For numbers beyond eight or nine, the -uple construction sounds rather strained, if not downright silly. (Duodecuple? Really?) I'd recommend -fold as an alternative ("a ninety-fold increase"), or substitute another counter noun altogether: an "eighty-one piece orchestra"; "a sixteen-part vocal arrangement"; "a 48-pin connector."

Whilst plodding through Patrick Rothfuss' "The Name of the Wind", I came across: Our dinner was nowhere near as grand as last night's. We made due with the last of my now-stale flatbread, dried meat, and the last potatoes baked on the edge of the fire. I've seen "make do" mangled into "make due" before on the Interwebz. But this is the first time that I've run across it in a professional work. A quick search on Google Books reveals that Rothfuss and his editor are not the only ones who are happy to let this one pass. Most language sites on the net including this one continue to gently correct the questioner by pointing out the correct form. Yet, there are some which appear to condone this practice with a dispassionate that-is-the-way-language-works stance on the matter. So, what's the deal? Is "make due" now considered acceptable? P.S. It might be relevant to note that Rothfuss is a professor of English at the University o...

How do we understand the "like" in "like father, like son"? Is it an adjective? Or is it short for "is like"?

In a test, I was asked to choose between will and be going to forms in a sentence expressing futurity: The next century __ (to begin) on the 1st of January 2001. My guess is that the choice lacks a third option: Present Simple. Am I right, or is it fine to use "will" in order to express inevitable events? Answer Future tense is certainly used to express events that are going to happen, but you can say "The next century begins in 2101". Notice that this is only because you are treating it as a measurable quantity; you could, in theory, say ? This century begins in 2001 and ends in 2100 , though it sounds odd. You certainly can't say * It rains tomorrow . Edit; the point about It rains tomorrow , though interesting, is not what OP was asking about. "The next century will begin..." is the usual form. "The next century begins..." is not wrong, but could be considered odd, depending on context. "The next century is going to begin..."...

Dear language professionals, What are grounds for using shortish phrase "Life vest under your seat" on the warning sign on the planes. Is it stylistically caused? If this style allows main verb omission? Or it is just an unmotivated verb omission? Answer It's a feature of a lot of texts exhibiting frozen style . It's a highly predictable and regular style found in newspaper headlines, signs, notices, instructions, lab reports, technical reports, legal documents, public declarations and so forth. In this kind of style in certain text-types, auxiliary verbs are regularly omitted when we can recover them from the context. So are articles and other determiners, as well as pronouns, prepositions and quantifiers. These words are highly predictable from the context and so this causes very little problem in terms of communication: Mystery Objects Seen in Sky over LA. (Some) Mystery Objects (have been) seen in (the) Sky over LA. The one thing that all these types of text hav...

"Yours" is usually a possessive pronoun with an implicit noun. What is the implicit noun in the case of "yours sincerely"?

Why is the spelling of pronounce and pronunciation different? If one originally did not know the spelling of pronunciation , one would when hearing it verbally deduce its spelling to be pronounciation , which is the incorrect spelling. Why is the difference in spelling so? Also, are the two words pronounced differently? (I think I am using the American pronunciation for pronunciation ( pro-noun-ciation ), but according to howjsay.com , it's pronounced as pro-nun-ciation . Is this just for British English or universally?) Answer pro-NOUN-ciation is universally wrong. Even the highly permissive Merriam-Webster dictionary marks it with an obelus (÷). Here is what they say about pronunciations marked with an obelus: The obelus, or division sign, is placed before a pronunciation variant that occurs in educated speech but that is considered by some to be questionable or unacceptable. This symbol is used sparingly and primarily for variants that have been objected to over a period o...

I can say "I feed someone". Am I forced to say "I give someone a drink", or is there a single word for this (as in "I [verb] someone")? Unfortunately my thesaurus can't really help me. Answer I don't think there is a single transitive verb for "give drink to [someone]". If that someone is an animal, you could use water , as in to feed and water a horse : I didn't go anywhere the next day except up to Grandpa's to feed and water the horse and mule and Granny's chickens. However, it's unlikely you would use this for a person; the phrase fed and watered refers almost exclusively to livestock, and watered, alone, more to plants, as in I watered the geranium today. It can be used humorously, for example, if you say to a host upon your arrival, to mean that you've already eaten, "No worries; we've already been fed and watered." If that someone is a baby, you can also suckle them—but this word has even narr...

The regular English-language column in this week's Spectator (by one 'Dot Wordsworth') examines the opaque but not uncommon construction "I can't help but be reminded of the relationship...", which has been discussed at various times here, notably at this question . I call it "opaque" because, as Dot points out, I can't help loving you means the same as I can't but love you , which are both the opposite of I can't love you . I can't help but love you would therefore be a double negative and express lack of affection. As mentioned by several users in the linked question, usage trumps logic and nowadays "I can't help but..." means the same as "I can't help...", while "I can't but..." though it means the same, has an archaic feel. However, nobody would say this is an obvious way for a construction to evolve, and Dot proposes the (startling to me) thesis that it was invented by the author Thoma...

What words can be used to describe someone who likes to talk continuously and unstoppably? Would that be a gabber? What else could you call them? How do these words relate to the way the person is feeling while they are talking?

what is the meaning of the logical fallacy "shifting issues"? I have tried a web search on many different forms of the question "what is the definition of the logical fallacy shifting issues. I have tried purdue owl and texts such as The Little Brown Handbook. I cannot find either a definition or synonym for "shifting issues".

A common grammar lesson that was taught to me in the US and that I've had to teach abroad in EFL classrooms is that we're not to use adverbs of emphasis with absolute modifiers, just as we're not supposed to use them as comparatives or superlatives. Classic egregious examples of this mistake include very unique and more perfect , which seem obviously flawed to me. Other instances of further modified absolute modifiers are similarly meaningless or contradictory in nature. I wonder, though, if the rule that I learned isn't overly broad, and whether it's taught similarly in the UK and elsewhere. I find myself modifying absolute modifiers quite regularly, and in some circumstances I think it's not only logical and correct, but quite meaningful. Phrases like almost exactly or virtually all or practically infinite possess a specific meaning that can't really be replicated using nonabsolutes like very nearly or most or quite long . In my own speech and writin...

I doubt they will exchange the 20 inch monitor. OR I doubt they would exchange the 20 inch monitor. Which is correct, and why? Answer Both are acceptable, but the usage is slightly different. The following extensions to the sentence illustrate the most common usage: I doubt they will exchange the 20 inch monitor when I take it back. I doubt they will exchange the 20 inch monitor if I take it back (but I may try to). I doubt they would exchange the 20 inch monitor if I took it back (but I'm not going to). In general, would is used in situations hypothetical, or contingent on some unfulfilled condition; will is used in situations that are more certain. The first sentence takes will because the speaker definitely intends to take the monitor back. The second uses will because, although there is a condition, there is a definite possibility of it being fulfilled. The third sentence takes would because the speaker has no intention of taking it back—and therefore the condit...

He swam slowly to the island. He slowly swam to the island. Some experts say that there is a “slight difference” in meaning. Would you please tell me that difference?

I am wondering why would someone say " I can't seem to " instead of simply saying " I can't ". Is there any specific difference between the two? Is the former usage informal? Is it correct to say that the following two phrases are equivalent? I can't seem to do something. It seems that I can't do something. Some sample sentences: I can’t seem to subscribe to a Google Reader ‘starred items’ feed that I’ve created. I can't seem to stop arguing with my partner. I can't seem to make friends. I can't seem to transfer my videos directly from one playlist to another. Client : I can’t seem to find the search box, can you please make sure it’s working? Me : The search box is in the top left hand corner of every page. Client : Is that on your left or my left? Answer The use of seem to is usually a hedge, or a softener. The examples above are suggesting that the person feels they should be able to do something but cannot find the right way t...

Consider the sentence "I can run faster than 15 miles per hour." Its meaning is clear and to my eyes obviously grammatically correct. Now let me present some variations that have given me trouble for a long time. I am faster than 15 miles per hour. – To me this is clearly incorrect. Directly comparing me to a speed doesn't seem right. We need to compare my speed to a speed, or me to another person . I can run faster than him. – Compared to the base sentence, there is a distinct shift in meaning of the comparison. While before I named a speed faster than which I can run, now I am naming a person. It doesn't seem quite right. I realize the parts of speech can change, but my initial objection is that "him" is not a speed. I can run faster than he. – This seems most correct to me, but still somehow feels objectionable. Is this in fact the correct way to say it? And if so, is it proper as is or need I say "... faster than he can" or even "... fas...

Marry can be used both transitively: "Paul Married Jane" and intransitively: "I got married". Thus making the word ambitransitive But it has a third use: "Paul, the vicar Married Jane to Bob" The last use is certainly transitive, but what is the word for this use? Is this to do with (un)accusative and (un)ergative verbs? Answer "Words like Marry " are called Reciprocal Verbs, or Predicates, or Constructions. They refer to sets (normally couples) of agents, instead of to a single agent. Marry is prototypic. Reciprocal predicates have unusual syntactic affordances, like the ability to swap subject and object without altering meaning. Note: Bill and Sue married yesterday (dual subject, intransitive) Bill married Sue yesterday ~ Sue married Bill yesterday (subj~obj swap, transitive) These meanings of marry are Inchoative -- they refer to change of state. Bill and Sue entered the state of being married , a Stative meaning. The adjective marrie...

What is the true meaning of "psychic grossness" and "want" at this paragraph? Swedenborg claimed that a heavy cloud was formed round the earth by the psychic grossness of humanity, and that from time to time there was a judgment and a clearing up, even as the thunderstorm clears the material atmosphere. He saw that the world, even in his day, was drifting into a dangerous position owing to the unreason of the Churches on the one side and the reaction towards absolute want of religion which was caused by it. Modern psychic authorities, notably Vale Owen, have spoken of this ever- accumulating cloud, and there is a very general feeling that the necessary cleansing process will not be long postponed.

Why is “to get” sometimes used where “to be” could be used? Sometimes I hear people say things like this: I just got robbed. (Personally I would rather say 'I was robbed' or something.) It seems correct to me, but is this a good style ? And if so, in which cases is it possible to replace a word with get or got ? Answer In American usage, got means became . Just as I just became robbed , while technically correct, is not used, I would not use I just got robbed , preferring was . In some cases became would work, and so, then, would got . ( I just got married comes to mind.) I can't speak for British English.

Suffixes indicating people and language of country vary by country: _an: American, German, Italian, Belgian, Australian, Russian, Ukrainian, Korean, Mexican, Brazilian, Chilean, Argentinean, Indonesian, Malaysian, Iranian, Egyptian, Somalian, Palestinian _sh: English, British, Polish, Danish, Swedish, Turkish, _ch: French, Dutch _ese: Chinese, Taiwanese, Japanese, Vietnamese, Portuguese _no: Filipino, Latino _i: Israeli _: Thai Among the above, _an seems to outnumber other suffixes. Are there any simple rule to govern appropriation of suffix turning a country name into adjective, indicating people and language of countries in the world in terms of say, region, race, or cultural background? Or is it just discretional? Answer Identifying the Relevant English Suffixes First, let’s consider the English suffixes that are most commonly used to create adjectival forms of country names, and the situations in which they arise. The following distinctive forms struck me as being especially preva...

I've often seen the sentence structure "____ does not a ____ make" which I've now discovered is called hyperbaton . the use, especially for emphasis, of a word order other than the expected or usual one — from Dictionary.com I'm wondering though if it would be considered correct use of English? Answer Hyperbaton correct is indeed—from the Germanic side of the ancestry of English, a holdover must I'd wager it be—though usually archaic it is considered, and thus poetically and dialectically it is used. To see it with objects quite unusual it is, as in: One swallow does not a summer make. Rather more common it becomes when prepositions more involved do themselves become. Some rise by sin, and some by virtue fall. —Escalus in Shakespeare's Measure for Measure , Act II, Scene 1 And poetry let us not forget: I will arise and go now, And go to Innisfree, And a small cabin build there, Of clay and wattles made; Nine bean rows will I have there, A hive for the h...

Hello, this is Melanie Brown from Central Bank. Can I speak to Mr. Clark? Please (hold on / hang on) I'll put you through. Which one - hold on or hang on - is the more appropriate, frequently used, or correct? Are they interchangeable in British and American English?

I have searched lots of websites to understand which one is correct in this sentence: It is too hard to (be) explain(ed). Some people say that after some adjectives called tough adjectives you can't use the passive form of verbs. I have heard from some native speakers that It is too hard to be explained is very strange to their ears. So I search on the Internet and I found that at least 14 million people think that to be explained is correct and they actually have used it. I am sure that I am missing something here. Maybe they are used in different situations. But I couldn't find any real difference between them. Any help is more than welcomed. P.S: To further complicate the situation for a word like pass , when I searched it on the Internet, you can't really say " Exam was too difficult to be passed ".

Is there any way to determine if a vowel is short or long in English words of Latin origin? I've noticed that u is usually long in Latin words (e.g., Jupiter ) but what about other vowels?

My college-age son and his friends use the terms "retarded" and "gay" pretty much interchangeably to mean substandard, bad, lame (in the sense of ineffectual or weak) or just plain wrong. I've suggested that he might want to be careful about where he uses such language, but he clearly isn't worried about being offensive with those terms. Now add this to the equation: Last night we watched a recorded version of Comedy Central's "A Tribute to Sam Kinison." Comedy Central censors a lot of words, including names of body parts (although, curiously, they let "dick" remain unbleeped), terms for sex acts, and so on. And we could clearly see that the word "retarded" had been bleeped (it's a very easy word to lip-read). Note that Comedy Central does not censor the word "nigger" on the Dave Chapelle show, although this is a word Jon Stewart goes to great lengths to avoid saying on his own show (also, of course, on Comedy ...

What is the difference between relation and relationship ? Some say that relationship often refers to social connections. For instance, She has a close relationship with her daughter. How about the following? the relationship between poor housing and health problems (Longman Dictionary) the special relationship between Britain and the US (Longman Dictionary)

I was taught at the university that the correct usage of this verb is increase by , for example, like in the sentences stated below: The company's income increased by 10%. By 2015 the population of this city will have increased by 10%. Nowadays I see the verb increase used without any prepositions and I wonder if anyone knows if there is any difference between these two options and whether both of them are considered to be gramatically correct.

"What does the fox say?" Onomatopoeia, and Alien Languages claims there's no onomatopoeia for foxes: But you don't find fox onomatopoeia in this context. Foxes tend to do one of two things: either they are silent, or they speak like humans do. It's certainly a testament to the fox's slyness that it's attributed with human speech, which fits quite well with its trickster qualities (and of course there are many myths that have the fox transforming itself into human shape, too). The article goes on to cite a Wired article claiming that some of the sounds made in the Ylvis song The Fox (What Does the Fox Say?) , such as "Chacha-chacha-chacha-chow", are accurate, but it doesn't indicate that they are commonly used onomatopoeia. Are there any commonly used onomatopoeia for foxes in English? Answer Short answer: No - hence the joke. You can make one up that matches the sound they actually make or use the word "Bark" Longer answer: Here...

I'm looking for a single word that describes a person who often overreacts to things. Answer You could perhaps try touchy (meaning 1) (American Heritage Dictionary via the Free Dictionary):- Tending to take offense with slight cause; oversensitive. or perhaps hysterical (meaning 2) (Random House Dictionary via Dictionary.com):- uncontrollably emotional. or possibly histrionic (meaning 2) (Random House Dictionary via Dictionary.com):- deliberately affected or self-consciously emotional; overly dramatic, in behavior or speech. depending on the reason for the overreaction or the exact shade of meaning you are attempting to convey.

Consider the statement "I like to have fun" or "I like to spend time with my friends" . These border on tautologies though I don't think they would be considered as such by most. Although these statements purport meaning, the are in fact devoid of it. For example, "fun" is by definition something people like to do, so to say "I like to have fun" is redundant. Similarly, "friends" are people that you like to hang out with, so to say "I like to spend time with my friends" is again redundant. To me, these statements are empty of meaning but don't quite fully fall under the category of something that is trite or vapid . The fact that their opposites, "I don't like to have fun" or "I don't like to spend time with my friends" would rarely, if ever, be in circulation (except in some pathological cases), begs for a term that reaches beyond the concept of a "empty" or "unorigin...

Smart phone Smartphone Smart-phone I am really looking for some help regarding hyphen (-) issue in text found in research article. Is there any standard method how to use it? Answer This is a good question for referring to the Google Ngram Viewer, to see which is most popular lately. If you look here : You see that since 2000, smartphone has increasingly surpassed smart phone , with smart-phone virtually nonexistent.

I don't know how 'worthy' came to be pronounced with a /ði/ whereas 'healthy' , 'wealthy' , 'stealthy' etc., are pronounced with a /θi/. I am aware that theories of pronunciation in English are far too complex and often seem illogical. But with a curious student in my front wanting to know why 'worthy' has the /ði/, my task becomes very difficult. I would appreciate if you could let me in on something that might help.

I'm looking for some slang terms for a newspaper, whether they are archaic terms that nobody has used in the past 70 years or modern, obscure terms. Answer ass-wipe birdcage liner black and white and "red" all over bladder blatter blat blanket bunk sheet butter wrapper Captain Grimes croaker extra fish wrapper fly-blister huey jeames long acre leer morning nursery rhymes pap paper post red top sheet stiff tab tibby toerag weekly Sources: Cassell's Dictionary of Slang , The Slang Dictionary , Urban Dictionary , Wikipedia , Wordnik 's got a nice list of words used in actual newspaper names.

Most of the frequency adverbs can live at the start, in the middle and at the ending of the sentence. In Does adverb placement affect meaning? , in the answer analyzed the difference between the end placement and others. But what is the difference between the start and middle placement? Does these placements make some difference for the meaning: Sometimes I fly. I sometimes fly. Do those sentences mean the same or not? If not, is there any difference in feeling, mood or something else? Is there some context in which they have different use?

Is it disrespectful to use "mister" with a person's first name? Examples: Mr. Tom, Mr. Phil, etc.

If I wanted to write about 1899, would I call it the turn of the 19th century or the turn of the 20th century? Basically: does 'turn of the century' refer to the beginning or end of a century? Answer It depends. In British English, according to Wikipedia, you would call it the turn of the 20th century. The turn of the 20th century includes the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th. In American English it can be as above, but it could also be referred to as the turn of the 19th century, i.e. viewing it as the century turning from the 19th century rather than as turning to(wards) the 20th. See Wikipedia

The context: I have 2 databases. The source database where I retrieve data and the target database where I insert data. What is the collective name I can use for source and target in this context? Target can also be called destination . Answer Endpoint may work: Merriam-Webster : either of two points or values that mark the ends of a line segment or interval Wikipedia : either of the two nodes of a graph; either of two extreme points on a line segment

In the context of the discussion in this blog post and comments on using await as a keyword for a potentially asynchronous operation in C#5, I wondered if there is any real difference between await and wait? Already as a dictionary definition, but also in common usage.

As stated by title, I was wondering if there's any noun that means "strange object". For example, it would be something like this: He found many [xxx] in the abandoned house. Answer oddity : a strange or unusual person or thing M-W

Do native speakers use like as an adjective? Is it a preferred usage?

Since June 2015, use of the word lit has exploded on Twitter . Here's some recent examples. Nena Marie : My Year is starting off lit af👌🏼 ...but is gonna be TD by Monday morning Nick : Jason got lit last night. Was the show for at least half the snapchat stories this morning. Summer Monae' : When you and bae both lit and give each other that look The @lovihatibot Twitterbot routinely finds it in searches for "I love the word [X]" and "I hate the word [X]", in fact it's the third most hated ) and eighth most loved over 30 days , and fourth most hated and 10th most loved in all of 2015 . That's a lot of love and hate for a little word, it can't be random babble to cause such a reaction. Similarly it regularly shows up in @favibot 's searches for "[X] is my new favorite word" and came in as third favorite for all 2015. What does lit mean here? Where does it come from and when was it first used? Was there a single person or event...