Blog

Could anyone clarify once and for all the usage of suggest ? All the grammars I have consulted allow for only four possibilities: Suggest + ing form Suggest that + direct object + should + bare infinitive Suggest that + direct object + bare infinitive Suggest that + direct object + simple past They all say that suggest must never be followed by an indirect object. However, I keep finding sentences that seem to contradict these rules: "We suggested to the committee that they review the case again." (Merriam-Webster online dictionary." "Can you suggest to them that Company Name develop the Italian version of the website?" (this website's thread of some months ago) to mention only a few. Could anybody please help?

I was prompted by this question (difference between ecosystem and eco-system ) to wonder whether word-hyphenation can ever be semantically significant. My gut instinct is to say that since hyphenation is normally an intermediate step before a compound form becomes a single word, the answer should be "No". But if my experience here at ELU has taught me anything, it's that opinions often differ in matters of language usage. I hate to ask something that looks like a request for a "list". A single undisputed example would do. Does the presence/absence of a hyphen ever change a compound word's meaning? EDIT: I was specifically thinking of cases where a single "compound word" either does or doesn't have a hyphen, not where two component words may or may not be separated by a space. I understand whiteboard has a specific meaning distinct from white board - but if white-board exists at all, I at least can't distinguish that from whiteboard .

What do you call a word with vowels removed as a form of abbreviation? Often, when using this form of abbreviation, the initial vowel is kept intact. Example: asterisk -> astrsk This is sometimes informally known as disemvowelling , but I'm looking for a more technical term.

I have been encountering possessive constructions with the preposition "of" and a possessive form of pronoun frequently, but I do not fully understand what it means and when to use it. In particular, "of mine" seems to occur only in "a friend of mine". Question 1: In how far can these forms be used interchangeably? Is "of mine" to be considered archaic? Question 2: While it is pretty clear that "of me" means "my", is it true that "of mine" should be understood as "of my ones"? Answer To express a possessive you can say "my X" or you can say "X of mine". The two constructions mean pretty much the same thing. No, "of mine" is not archaic, it's routinely used. But it is far less common than the "my X" form. Bob is my friend. Bob is a friend of mine. Both mean essentially the same thing. It's not limited to "friend", though now that you mention it, that

What is gatcha short for? Is it standard English, or is it used in the spoken language only? Answer I've got you! I imagine it was derived like this: I've got you! → Got you! → Got ya! → Gotcha! → Gatcha!

Is there any saying in a complete sentence including “a dog which is cornered”? I have tried to find a complete one, but there seems to be no one. Actually, what I want to know is how to explain the situation in North Korea. Since I think North Korea has been going through hard times and now they have nothing to lose, they keep threatening with their nuclear weapons as their last resort. So, I want to use a saying. Is there one like “When a dog is cornered, it bites or attacks or something else?” I want to get a fixed sentence, which is cliché. If there is another saying that can show the situations above, please give that, too. Answer Yes.There is a saying which relates to this. Corner a dog in a dead-end street and it will turn and bite Also,I have read this "back a dog up in the corner it's gonna bite" , which means 'If you annoy/irritate something long enough and don't leave an escape route, then they will attack if they feel threatened'

My first reaction to aircrafts was to think it was a typo, but I just checked usage on NGrams... ...and compared it to usage for the singular / collective noun form aircraft ... ...which seems to indicate that the "regular" plural form is gradually being taken up. Does this represent a tendency for English speakers to enforce regularity on the language? Are there any other examples? I'm not expecting to find that "sheeps", for example, is displacing "sheep" for the plural meaning, but maybe there are other "less established" usages that could be changing. EDIT Please note that I'm not asking whether "aircrafts" is correct, or common. I'm asking if there's any reason why it seems to be occurring more often over recent decades (even though it's still pretty rare). And whether this effect occurs with other nouns having "non-standard" plural forms. Answer Well, this is an example of why Google NGrams isn

I was recently called out for using the phrase " the point is moot " incorrectly. My intent was to indicate that I felt that the point wasn't really worth debating or discussing. I was then shown that the definition also includes "open to discussion" which left me scratching my head. While the two definitions are not strictly opposing, they do seem to go off in rather distinct yet related directions. I am left feeling like this discussion is perhaps moot — is it best to just avoid using the word entirely? Is there a proper or accepted way to use it correctly? Answer A "moot" point is debatable and open for discussion but may not come to any satisfactory conclusion or whose conclusion may be meaningless. Some examples from Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary: The court ruled that the issue is now moot because the people involved in the dispute have died. I think they were wrong, but the point is moot. Their decision has been made and it can't be chan

I would like to learn how to reconstruct this sentence to use it at the beginning: The reason why they chose this way looks weird to me. I think we could form it as follows, but of course I am not really sure about it: It looks weird to me the reason why they chose this way. And, could you please also explain the grammatical approach to form sentences like the above starting with it ? Answer It seems to me that you want to use "it" as a Dummy Pronoun (like I have in this sentence). However, you are actually using "it" to refer to "the reason". Furthermore, I would not use "looks" to describe the intangible noun "reason". A suitable replacement might be "seems" or "feels". A possible reconstruction (with the substitution) could be: It seems weird to me that they chose this way. or It seems weird to me that they chose this way for the reason that they did.

I wonder if "owed" and "due" mean the opposite in the following quote from Wikipedia ? In banking and accountancy, the outstanding balance is the amount of money owed , (or due ), that remains in a deposit account (or a loan account) at a given date, after all past remittances, payments and withdrawal have been accounted for. It can be positive (then, in the balance sheet of a firm, it is an asset) or negative (a liability). I think owed and due both mean someone owes someone else another something. But in the quote, it looks like owed means someone else owes someone something, and due means someone owes someone else something. I am confused. Thanks! Answer Owed and due are closely related. Owed , without more explanation, means the total amount of debt obligated to be paid by A to B Due means the amount of debt that is expected to be paid by a given date (a due date ) from A to B . At times they are the same, at times due is a subset of owed . This assumes tha

In Cakes and Ale, Maughm writes, She was a pattern of propriety and she would never have women in her house, you never knew what they were up to ("It's men, men, men all the time with them, and afternoon tea and thin bread and butter, and openin' the door and ringin' for 'ot water and I don't know what all"); but in conversation she did not hesitate to use what was called in those days the blue bag . (146–7) I can't find the meaning of blue bag in this context. Anyone?

I came across the phrase off you go which has been frequently used in many movies. Especially, the movie John Carter impressed me with this phrase. What does it mean in different scenarios/cases?

I love the subset of collective nouns known as the terms of venery . These are collective nouns specific to a particular group of animals. Some of the more inventive examples are: a murder of crows, a crash of rhinos, a mischief of mice, and a puddling of ducks (specifically swimming ducks). Is there a standard for these group names and is there a central reference for them as with other zoological taxonomy? I can see in the Wikipedia articles that the practice has its origins in Medieval Hunting tradition, but the Kangaroo (Mob), for instance would have been unknown at that time, so how do new collections come into being? Answer If you have interest in this subject, James Lipton's An Exaltation of Larks is the chief reference work. What you'll learn is that there are usually two (and sometimes three) group nouns for animals and birds. There will be a term of venery of a classical nature, often coined by hunters or gamekeepers (a murder of crows, an unkindness of ravens, a pa

I've searched websites, written to Mr. Barth and William Safire, scanned bookstore shelves, and buttonholed likely prospects in search of a grammar text that would address matters in the manner of the following, which is from John Barth's "The End of the Road". If such a text exists, I'd be much obliged to learn of it: " ... it gives a man a great sense of lucidity and well-being, if not downright formidability, to be able not only to say, but to understand perfectly, that predicate complements of infinitives of copulative verbs without expressed subjects go into the nominative case, whereas predicate complements of infinitives of copulative verbs with expressed subjects go into the objective case. I made this observation to my assemblage of young scholars and concluded triumphantly, "I was thought to be he , but I thought John to be him ." Thank you. Answer Books employing the particular terminology that Barth echoes in the cited passage from The

What is the difference between a legend or a key? Is it still called a legend if it is located at the top, rather than the bottom of results? Answer "Legend" implies that its entries are generics , as with terrain types on a map, while "key" implies that its entries are specific, as with one symbol designating the Museum of Natural History, another the Metropolitan Museum of Art, etc. Generally, nobody is going to get real mad no matter which you use. It doesn't matter where they're located.

Since language evolves over time — the best example I can think of is slang where it mostly doesn't follow grammar rules — why is there a need to preserve grammar or stress that proper grammar be used? My second question is if someone can get their exact point across to another person without using proper grammar, then why does grammar matter? Could the reason be that if grammar is used then it implies that there is a standard way of communicating, thus people would be able to spend the least amount of effort getting their point across? Wait! Doesn't slang already do this? Answer Your question mostly turns on the definition of grammar . From a linguistic point of view, grammar is simply the set of patterns and rules that speakers use to structure their utterances. Grammar is absolutely necessary for communication. A sentence with literally no grammar cannot be understood, and a sentence that abuses grammar will be understood the wrong way. Here's a no-grammar sentence:

Coming from "Changes in English names of people" telling: Richard → Dick Can I substitute Dick by Richard? I need it to know because my Emails with the use of name Dick are being returned by Email filtering as obscene Or what is substitute for name Dick? I already asked it before but my question was deleted Update: Why is Dick Cheney , former Vice President of the USA, is always written/addresses everywhere in a tone of familiarity? How can I call/address him without a tone of familiarity by a synonymous name? So, I should address Dick Cheney as Richard Cheney instead? Have I understood correctly the answers?

What does this phrase mean? And in what cases is it appropriate to use it? Answer Two phrases: "X is good for you." This just means something is healthy for you, beneficial for you, etc. "Good for you!" This can be used in seriousness, such as Bruno said. It can either mean "Congratulations!" and "That's great!", or as a word of praise. The phrase can also be used sarcastically, especially if delivered with an overly enthusiastic tone. In this case, it carries the connotation of, "Wow, that's great. Do you want a pat on the back or something?"

In the United States, the long/expanded/full form of a date with day of the week is: Monday, February 24, 2014 I understand in other countries the long date form is often: 24 February 2014 So where does the day of week go with this format and is there a comma between the month day and day of week?

I can't recall term used for duplicating extraneous words e.g. VIP person (Very Important Person Person), first question what is this term? Second question, is the same term used when the duplicated term is a synonym? Answer It's called RAS Syndrome (Redundant Acronym Syndrome Syndrome).

What is the best word or way to describe a person who just has to try and do everything themselves because they think, either rightly or wrongly, that only they are good enough to do the task in hand? The type of person I'm thinking of will attempt to take over any situation. So if you're having a BBQ only they are good enough to cook the food or if you're planning a day out then they decide only they are good enough to drive you there. Answer Friends may half-jokingly call that person the little dictator/tyrant . This is slang but good. However I think the best word for your details is imperious . assuming power or authority without justification; arrogant and domineering Some other words to describe this person would be: overbearing ... unpleasantly or arrogantly domineering to be "nice" you can say assertive ... having or showing a confident and forceful personality usually used for a woman (by other women) would be haughty ... arrogantly superior and disdainf

What word describes someone who offers unsolicited advice? For example I might write: "At the risk of being called a [..........], I will offer you some unsolicited advice."

While watching American movies and TV series, I notice that in dialogue very often the usage of a proper adverb is replaced by the corresponding adjective (in the case where the adverb is formed by the suffix "-ly"). I don't have lots of examples, but one would be to say You came across very strong. instead of "strongly". Thanks to Anthony's answer, here's another example: I'm gonna go to the store real quick. Is this a general tendency in current spoken American English? I believe this is not the same as this question , where in the same word context both an adjective or an adverb can be appropriate. In my example sentence, it is clearly about a property of the action (adverb) and not about the person performing the action (adjective).

There seems to be some inconsistency on whether people capitalize the words internet and web (as in World Wide Web ) as proper nouns. What is the official ruling on when or if these words should be capitalized? Obviously, I am not asking about when they are the first word in a sentence or in the title of a book or other publication. Example: "The web is the most commonly known feature of the Internet ." Answer My reasoning is that there is really only one network named Internet - therefore it's the Internet, while "web" is a more generic term, meaning any network (but probably referring to YouTube anyway ;).

A tall tale is a folkloric story that is generally wildly exaggerated and told for the amusement of the listeners. Tall tale tellers usually claim some sort of personal involvement in the story. I was curious about the origin of the phrase itself, and in the course of poking around, I found that tall in this phrase means exaggerated , so "tall tale" means an "exaggerated story." What I can't seem to find is where this term originated. It seems to be sometime in the middle to late 1800s in the US, but who coined this term? Was it a famous author? Did someone publish a book of tall tales around that time? (More specifically, the argument revolves around whether or not Mark Twain was responsible, although if it's not him, then who?) EDIT: According to Etymology Online, tall "meaning 'exaggerated' (as in tall tale ) is Amer.Eng. colloquial attested by 1846." (Now I will look to find where it is attested in 1846.) Another Edit: An additional

There's one thing about Simple Present versus Present Progressive which is still not quite clear to me. The rough overview is 1 : Use simple present for repeated actions, general things. Use present progressive for actions happening right now or temporarily. Well, sometimes I'm not quite sure if something is rather considered a general thing or just temporarily. Here's an example: I'm a software engineer and while coding I for sure comment my code. I just wrote the following comment: // [...] As some services are holding instances of the view, we need to remove the service provider to release the view. I'm not sure if Present Progressive or Simple Present would be the right/better choice. 2 On the one hand, it's a general thing or repeated action, because each time we run through that code the services hold instances. On the other hand, right in that moment we run through that code, services are holding instances of the view. I can't quite guess which ver

According to Etymonline , ammo has been used as a shortened form of ammunition since 1917. Why does the shortened version end in o instead of u ? The only reason I can think of is that it matches other shortened forms like info and photo , but information and photograph actually have an o in them, so I'm not sure that's it. Does anyone have any insight into this? Answer I think it's part of a larger pattern in English in which long words truncated at the second syllable often pick up an -o ending instead of retaining the natural vowel sound and spelling that occurs in that second syllable. Here are some examples: aggro [aggravation/aggression] ambo [ambidextrous] ammo [ammunition] camo [camouflage] combo [combination] convo [conversation] distro [distribution] invo [invitation] limo [limousine] mono [monaural/monophonic] provo [provisional] Valpo [Valparaiso University] When a phenomenon occurs repeatedly, as this one does, it suggests that the tendency to favor -o

BBC quotes President Obama: America is "not a deadbeat nation", US President Barack Obama has said, as he warned Republicans unconditionally to approve a rise in the US debt ceiling. It appears to me that deadbeat in this context is an adjective. The definition of deadbeat lists it solely as a noun. Has President Obama used deadbeat incorrectly?

In the following conversation from the Gilmore Girls episode "The Breakup, Part 2," what is the meaning of nailed : Summer: Tristan, stop. Tristan: You are making me chase around the party. Summer: Just trying to have fun. Tristan: You won't talk or dance with me. Why the hell did you come with me to the party? Summer: Stop yelling. Tristan: Summer, please, can we just go? Summer: No, I am sick of fighting with you. ... Summer: I think we should break up. Tristan: I want to go outside and talk about this.. Summer: Then go. Bye. ... Tristan (to Rory): You just loved it, don't you? Rory: loved what? Tristan: Seeing me nailed like that. I did the research. Here is what I found: pin someone down ( on something ) and nail someone down ( on something ) Fig. to demand and receive a firm answer from someone to some question. (Alludes to shifting from answer to answer; commit to one answer or another.) I tried to pin him down on a time and place, but he was very evasive. D

We use simple past to state a hypothetical present situation that we would like to speculate about (If they were here, I would be happy), past perfect for a hypothetical past (had they been here, I would have been happy), and simple present to a hypothetical future. Any explanation why this makes sense, as opposed to past for past, present for present, and future for future? Answer You seem to be confused both about terminology and tenses, so let's try to get this straight: For present hypotheticals we use a form that is technically referred to as the subjunctive . The subjunctive is identical to the simple past in most forms, but you'll notice that it differs for the first-person singular: If they were here, I would be happy. If I were rich, I would be happy. (Not: If I was rich.) (Just to make things complicated, this form of the subjunctive is disappearing and many people do, in fact, say If I was rich . But for the purposes of illumination, let's treat this as a

Starting with the Fifth Edition (1936), seven generations of the Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary have included (under the entry for tap ) three definitions of "on tap," currently worded as follows: on tap 1 : ready to be drawn from a large container(as a cask or keg) ["ale on tap"] 2 : broached or furnished with a tap 3 : on hand : available. ["services instantly on tap" —Hugh Dwan] (The first two of these three definitions go as far back as the 1864 edition of Webster's American Dictionary of the English Language .) But the Tenth Collegiate (1994) introduced a fourth definition for "on tap": 4 : coming up ["other matches on tap" —H. W. Wind] The "H. W. Wind" cited by Webster's appears to be Herbert Warren Wind (1916-2005), an American sportswriter who wrote most often about golf. I have frequently heard "on tap" used in this relatively new fourth way in recent years, mostly in connection wi

Nosey Flynn was sitting up in his usual corner of Davy Byrne's and, when he heard the story, he stood Farrington a half-one, saying it was as (1) smart a thing as (2) ever (3) he heard. (James Joyce, Dubliners) The meanings of the (1), (2), and (3) seem like: (1) as : “to the same degree or amount” ( Webster’s Learner’s, adverb, 1 ) : this meaning requires “indirect complement ( CGEL ’s term)”, i.e. as ever ~. (2) as : “used to make comparisons” ( Webster’s Learner’s, conjunction, 1a ) : in “as A as ever B,” A has equal importance as ever B. (3) ever : “used as an intensive” ( Webster, 3 ) : the best so, I suspect the highlighted part means: ‘it was as smart a thing as the smartest ones he’d heard.’ Is that a way to understand the construction? Answer Your analyses of (1) and (2) are both correct. They do indeed refer to the ‘as X as Y (is)’ construction. Your analysis on (3), however, is not quite right. ‘Ever’ when used as an intensifier is confined (as far as I can think of)

I read somewhere (I don't remember the source and I'm not sure if it's true) that Americans tend to replace the "ng" sound with only "n" in casual/fast speech. For example: Who's calling? sounds like [huz ˈkɔ lɪn] instead of [huz ˈkɔ lɪŋ]. The difference is between the two sounds: n and ŋ Is it true?

A friend claims that the phrase for free is incorrect. Should we only say at no cost instead?

"Offense" vs. "offence", which is more correct? If both are correct, are there any differences in shades of meaning and/or usage? Answer There is no difference in meaning between offence and offense . They're exactly the same in all their definitions. The difference is that offense is the preferred spelling in American English, while offence is preferred in British, Indian, Canadian, and Australian English. These American publications use offense : The veteran tight end never found a home in Mike Martz’s offense and was inactive for all but five games. [Chicago Sun-Times] If people take offense at hackneyed phrases it’s because they’re hackneyed . . . [The Atlantic] And these non-American publications use offence : Both offences can exploit some areas that play to their strengths. [CBC] Parents who fail to keep air guns away from their children will be fined up to £1,000 under a new offence from next month. [Telegraph] Pulpit choice gives offence [Sydney Morni

Certain words you hear in English are only ever heard in a single context. For example, skirl is used to describe the sound a bagpipe makes . Etymonline generously says the word is "rarely" heard outside that context, but I can't recall ever hearing it used for anything else. I imagine one could use it figuratively to describe another godawful high-pitched screech (sorry, bagpipe lovers), but there's no other bona fide usage for it. What I want to know is stated in the title of the question: Is there a term for these one-off words? I'm sure there must be, but I can't think of what it might be. Edit: Judging from some of the head-scratching comments I've received, there seems to be some confusion. Perhaps I did not make my meaning clear. I'm not looking for a word to describe the single instance of skirl . I'm asking about a class of words like skirl . I know there exist other examples of words that are only ever used in one context, but I can'

My husband always corrects me when I say "I'm done... (with whatever it is I'm doing.)" He says that proper grammar requires you to say "I have finished." As Saying "I'm done" refers only to the "done-ness' of food. Help me!

I used to know this word but cannot remember it. Basically it’s someone who likes the prospect of being knowledgeable about many things, or at least wants the appearance of erudition, but who is unwilling to put in the time and effort to learn new things. He may put in just enough effort to learn some trivia to impress others. And pretentious isn’t the word I was thinking of.

Which of the following is accurate in British English to describe our own wedding? Alex and Jen's Wedding Alex's and Jen's Wedding Alex and Jens' Wedding

I think the following sentences are all grammatical. So I am wondering whether there is a phrasal verb "rub on" that has the same meaning as "rub"-as-a-transitive-verb. If there is no phrasal verb, I guess I don't know how to describe the grammar of sentences 2 & 3 below. You should rub some lotion on your hands. You should rub on some lotion. You should rub some lotion on.

In this question we learn that toward and towards are interchangeable, but that the former is somewhat more typical of U.S. English and the latter of British English, although there is some indication that this does not always hold true. But how about actual use? Being a non-native speaker, I cannot completely trust my intuition about what "sounds right". Is it true that toward sounds more formal than towards to a native English speaker? Does it vary between different variants of English? Should I use one in academic text and the other in casual communication? What are the nuances? In summary, how should I choose which one to use if I want to be consistent in my writing style? I'm looking for intuition for different kinds of situations. Answer Right - American English favors "toward," and UK standard tends to add an 's.' This also applies to "forward," "backward," etc. These are explained in more detail by Fowler, Merriam-Webste

A recent Economist article (see The drug war hits Central America ) uses something called a Hobbesian trap like this: Central America has fallen into a Hobbesian trap : the better-off make private arrangements—there are five times as many private security guards as policemen or soldiers in Guatemala, and four times as many in Honduras—and therefore block efforts to levy the tax revenues necessary to strengthen the state. A simple Google search turns out to be unhelpful. What is this Hobbesian trap ? What is the origin of it? What is a typical context where a writer can employ it?

I think I know that media is a plural word. So then which of the following is correct? All the media is... All the media are... When you search Google, both seem to appear at the same frequency. Answer Actually, when I google for these phrases, I'm seeing this: The Corpus of Contemporary American English paints a similar picture, though the sample size is rather small (1 vs 3 cites). You get more results if you leave out the "all" (445 vs 602). These numbers also include a few cites of the form "the quality of the media is..." or "many in the media are...", which are obviously not relevant here, but the overall trend is still rather clear. The British National Corpus , on the other hand, favors the plural form. There are fewer results overall, so I took my time to check every single one for relevance, and here's the overview: BNC COCA Google the media are 43 445? all the media are 1

My native language is German and although many people find German to sound like a coughing fit, the language totally lacks an onomatopoeia for coughing (real coughing). Nor can I think of one in English. Is there an onomatopoeia for coughing? If not, how can I capture it in writing?

My wife was discussing pudding consistency this morning and used a sentence along the lines of, "I only like the pudding you make". I blinked and asked if she really liked the pudding I make and she replied, "No, I mean the pudding you make, you know, like if I were to make some pudding". She was using the "you" in a sense of a hypothetical person, I guess, like saying, "That's what you do in a crisis" when commenting on a riot scene in the news. You're not using "you" to refer to the person you're speaking to, but rather a form of general humanity. Anyhow, is there a term for such a usage such that you might be able to answer, "Oh, sorry, I was using 'you' in the [term] context, not referring to you specifically"? Answer This is (according to Wikipedia at least) known as "generic you". http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generic_you In more formal English one might use "one" instead of a ge

In the vein of historical linguistics, what languages (modern or dead) are considered genetically related to English? Also what differences mark a language as a genetic relative vs a language that had a developmental impact on English in its past? To what degree are they related? Presumably most all mutual intelligibility has been lost, but when and how? What artifacts can be found in modern English from this relationship? Answer What linguists call "genetic relatives" are languages that were spoken natively by the same groups of people that later split up. Languages constantly evolve, and historically, new languages form when two dialects become so different that they are no longer mutually intelligible. These new languages are considered genetically related. Other types of language relations—word borrowing, pidgins, creoles, etc.—are the result of the influence of non-native speakers.. English is an Indo-European language, meaning that it comes originally from the Indo-Eur

The terms "spelling" and "orthography" seem to be largely synonymous. What is the difference really? Is it that "orthography" is a more formal or technical term and hence more well-defined? Or is it just a fancy word to make me sound smarter when saying the same thing? (-: Answer I agree, they sound similar and synonymous, but they have a definite difference. Like Lefteris Gkinis said, orthography comes from the Greek and means "Correct way of writing". It includes also punctuation and spelling . So, rather than a mere activity, it's the part of the Grammar that studies, and is related to, the correct way of writing, whether it is about single words, punctuation, etc. The spelling , like the NOAD says, is " the process or activity of writing or naming the letters of a word. " So it's something more specific, since it's only related to how the single words are "made".

I've seen the expression in some company names; for example All things data , All things gym . Is the expression "All things X" a parody of some other popular phrase, or does it have its own meaning? Or is it just a misuse of grammar? Answer FTR, Is the expression "All things X" a parody of some other popular phrase, Not really. Traditionally it is an "old-fashioned sounding" phrase. The phrase has, let us say, "dignity" and "charm". As Morton mentions, there is a Church Song "All things bright and beautiful." Traditionally, you would use the phrase it for shop names such as - let's say - All things lace. (wedding gowns!) All things gentle. (they sell kittens!) And so on. IF you use it for something modern or fun , like "All things gym" or "All things data": it's not really a parody, it's more just a slight twist. The form "All things ___" is usually used for more old-fashioned,

It seems that the exact meaning of between is very tied to its specific usage. What should I assume in a general situation about the inclusivity of between ? Consider: "Pick a number between 1 and 10." Most people would consider between inclusive. "How many numbers are there between 1 and 10?" Most people would consider between exclusive, i.e. 8 to be the correct answer. Could the meaning of the word between have something to do with the grammatical structure of the sentence in which it is used? Answer There is no rule as to when between can be considered inclusive or exclusive, and the grammatical structure of the relevant sentence would not affect this. You may be able to make deductions or assumptions from the subject and context of the sentence itself or surrounding sentences, but that would be only assumptions . If the question of inclusion or exclusion were critical, the only way to determine what was intended would be to ask the author or speaker. Perso

Is the correct to say A pack of wolves run through the woods or is the correct English A pack of wolves runs through the woods The former sounds right. However, I think the subject is a pack and of wolves adds a description to the subject. In this case the subject is singular, so therefore the verb must be singular. Am I correct? It just doesn't feel right.

How do we pronounce the http status code 404 not found : four hundreds and four , four-zero-four or four-four ? We usually use 200, 201, 302, 401, 403, 404, 412, 500. I have read How to pronounce "720p" and "1080p" . Answer It is pronounced as Four-o-Four not found . Other codes can be pronounced as Dusty mentioned. Along with that: 720p = Seven Twenty P 1080 = Ten Eighty P 201 = Two O One 302 = Three O Two These are just the common pronunciation notations. I hope this helps.

I know that there are six forms of this word, but "great-uncle" is most common ("great-aunt" has a similar graph ). Why is this, if "grandfather" and "grandmother" are common? http://ngrams.googlelabs.com/chart?content=great+-+uncle%2Cgreat+uncle%2Cgrand+-+uncle%2Cgranduncle%2Cgreatuncle%2Cgrand+uncle&year_start=1800&year_end=2008&corpus=0&smoothing=3 Answer Both grand- and great- seem to be translating the French grand- , as in grand-oncle and so on. French uses grand- consistently for the upward direction, and petit- for the reverse, as in petit-fils (grandson). In Latin your great-uncle is patruus magnus if he is on your father's side, and avunculus magnus on your mother's side; magnus , like French grand , can mean both "big" and "important". The root of our problem is that there are two ways to receive that into English: grand via Anglo-Norman graunt , Old French grant ; and the Germanic

My father called our TV "the idiot box". Implying either that it had idiots on it, was targeted at idiots, or you were an idiot if you watched it too much. Is there any similar term in use but referring to mobile phones?

Once when I was having a hard time a guy said to me, "I'm sorry you're having a hard time, I'll pray for you," in a way that made it clear that he was glad I was having a hard time because it gave him the opportunity to pray for me and feel good about himself. I am interested in this phenomenon but also the much more general (probably universal) phenomenon of human beings finding justification for things they want to do, often by lying to themselves about the utility of the behavior to other people. The best single word I can think of for this is contrived , but it is not close to precise. Similarly, dissembling, insincere , and so on don't really cut it. I also looked at this list of cognitive biases but was unable to find one that expressed this idea. Is there a single word for this? If not, a short phrase? Answer I am not sure if you are stuck to the notion of altruism , but in the context of making a show of being nice to others to make themselves feel

I'm busy working on a ladle model at the moment, and as I am idle and inattentive this phrase sometimes comes out as ladel model , sometimes ladle modle , and sometimes ladel modle in addition to the occasional correct spelling. Is there any particular reason for the two differently-spelt but identically sounded endings? Perusing the dictionary suggests that model is from French and ladle from Old English. Is that why the words are spelt differently? Answer The correct answer is that it is linked to the root source of the word as modified by various dictionary inclusions. Was the root Latin, Greek, was it a verb or a noun, who put it into a Dictionary first, was that dictionary in the UK or in the US of A. The practical answer is that there is no real rule or logic. Just some vague guidelines with 1000 years of exceptions. When the Normans conquered Briton in 1066 the formal languages spoken by the educated people in charge were French, Latin and Greek. The vast unwashed masse

The American Heritage Dictionary states that the origins of "sheeny," a pejorative slang word for a Jew, are unknown. As a Jew, I am interested in finding out where and when this word developed. Any clues?

In what context would you use "stop it!! you are too cute"? Isn't that negative to say "stop it!! first? Is there a degree or a connotation to it? (i.e, flirty, embarrassed, flattered, etc) There are two contexts. romantic — a girl saying to a guy "Stop it! This is too much" but she's not annoyed. "stop it!! This is too cute" about a kid doing something cute. I don't understand why you need the "stop it".

I keep wanting to say "the handwriting on the wall," but that's not correct. The place I'm trying to use it is, "Alice likes Bob, Carol likes Bob, Alice thinks Bob likes her, but Bob dates Carol, and so as anyone can see, Bob did not like Alice." What is the appropriate idiom here?

Although the rule was made by ....., the director rarely enforced it. Should it be "him" or "himself"? Answer You can use either word. If you use him , there is the potential for ambiguity - the person who set (made) the rule might be the director, or he might be some other male, although this might be clarified in the broader context. If you use himself , it's pretty clear that the director is the one who set the rule.

A sentence like Could you please pass me the pepper shaker is not really a question. Should I use a question mark or a period to end this sentence? What about: Could you let me know when the meeting begins Could you tell me when the meeting begins Could you let me know if you are attending the meeting ... Any guidance? Is there a general rule? Answer Actually, sentences that begin with 'could', 'should', or 'would' are questions and should have a trailing question mark. Your original quote, "Could you please pass me the pepper shaker?", could be answered with a "yes" or "no." Although we usually use this syntax as a command it is not the same as the command "Pass me the pepper shaker," or "Please pass me the pepper shaker." Etiquette tells us that it is more polite to ask for a response than it is to command a response.

I have googled this one and seen arguments for both sides. Say your piece would imply that you've had the opportunity to make your part of the statement on the subject. Say your peace would imply that you've had the opportunity to speak and set your mind at ease. Clearly, they both make perfect sense in those contexts. To be clear, I want to know which is the form used by most people? Answer It seems to be say your piece and hold your peace . Because 'peace' and 'piece' are homophones , they are easily confused. Google Ngram shows piece being 20X more common than peace in 2008, but 45X more common in 1999 (acknowledging the horrendous predictive value of Ngrams). So, in a decade or so... it may well be; not based on the Ngram, but based on how misuse has so often turned into common usage.

Is there any difference between Warm regards and Best regards ? Answer Regards is a synonym for greetings . Either phrase would be used in a formal letter; you wouldn't use these greetings in a letter to a close friend or family member. Warm sounds a bit warmer than best , but basically the two are interchangeable. "Warmest regards" I use for close friends and relatives.

Consider the case where a professor is erasing a board and one of the teaching assistant tries to help him by erasing part of the board. Unfortunately, while trying to pick up the eraser, the teaching assistant bumps into the professor and they both drop their erasers. An outside observer sees this and says the TA is ______, rather than helping. The missing word or phrase would capture the good intentions but also express the fact that the intended help had the opposite of the intended effect. In Mandarin Chinese, the phrase 帮倒忙 comes to mind, but the Google translation "disservice" does not quite capture it. Answer Counterproductive . The TA is being counterproductive. His uncontrollable anger is very counterproductive to his attempt at saving his marriage. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/counterproductive

I was surprised to see that Wiktionary states few be pronounced as /ˈfjuː/ or /ˈfju/. I have always pronounced it as [ˈfjyu̯]. Furthermore, I've copied the pronunciation from what I've heard and when I pronounce few as indicated in Wiktionary – as [ˈfjuː] – it sounds wrong and different than what I usually hear. I barely even recognize few as [ˈfju(ː)]. My question: Am I pronouncing few incorrectly or is [ˈfjyu̯] an accurate description of the pronunciation of few ? Other possibly useful information: I'm Dutch; The sound [yu̯] is natively in Dutch and generally appears in words ending in uw . Answer Dutch /u/ is not necessarily the same as English /u/. I think you may be confusing the concepts of " phoneme " (which corresponds to the adjective "phonemic") and " phone " (which corresponds to the adjective "phonetic"). A phonetic transcription, using square brackets, represents a specific physical sound. When comparing sounds from

I'm looking for a noun to use in place of "comparable object," which would make sense in the following context: Four "comparable objects" were ranked based on their performance in a recent comparison. I keep thinking of the word "competitor," but I'm not satisfied with it, which made me think of the following analogy: competitor : competition :: ??? : comparison Answer One possible word is comparate , defined as follows: Com"pa*rate\, n. [L. comparatum, fr. comparatus, p. p. of comparare. See 1st Compare.] (Logic) One of two things compared together.