Blog

Which one should should I use? For some reason I have always used "towards", but I see some people saying "toward", like here : A great deal of his work in economic theory has been directed toward strengthening the foundations of our understanding of central banking and social insurance--indeed, one of my most advanced macroeconomic classes was nothing but a set of changes rung upon a particular model that Peter Diamond had advanced at... Is there a difference between the two? When should they be used? Answer The Common Errors in English Usage site mentions: These two words are interchangeable, but “toward” is more common in the US and “towards” in the UK. Some people, probably influenced by “forwards,” write “torwards” instead of the correct “towards.” The merriam-webster simply list both words under the same entry, with similar ethymology: toward: Middle English toward , from Old English tōweard facing, imminent, from tō , preposition, to + -weard -ward towar

When is a gerund supposed to be preceded by a possessive pronoun? I am a German mathematician. In some research papers I find grammatical constructions like the one in the title, e.g.: "Because of our ignoring the boundary conditions, the following analysis is easier." I wonder whether this is grammatically and stylistically correct English. I know there are some original constructs in "mathematical English", so if it is not standard grammar, it might very well be an import from another language. Can you help me?

I was recently in a bar in Prague, Czech Republic. When I was going to leave I said to a waiter: Excuse me, I would like to pay. He laughed a bit and explained that I should have said: I want to pay. because when I say I would like to pay. it means that I want to pay for him (i.e. pay his bill). Was he right indeed? I thought both forms have the same meaning, besides the second one is more polite. Answer He was not right. If you had said, “I'll pay!”, it would be expected that you were talking to someone that you'd just shared a meal (or similar) with, and that you were offering to pay for them. Variants of this include, “I'll get this one” and “This one’s on me”. If you say to a waiter, “I'd like to pay, please”, however, there is no such implication. “I want to pay” is stronger and might even be considered a bit rude in tone by some. The most common (and easy) thing to say, however, would be, “Check, please!”, which is used by patrons of restaurants, bars, cafes, e

In today’s post, “What’s the antonym for recommend?” an answerer answered " I discourage the blue sweater sounds perfectly cromulent.” As I am utterly unfamiliar with the word, “cromulent,” I looked for its meaning in Oxford, Cambridge and Merriam-Webster online dictionaries to find none of them registers this word. And Window Word 7 spelling checker keeps suggesting me to correct “cromulent” into “corpulent” or “crapulent” at this right moment I’m writing this question. However, Wikitionary registers “cromulent,” and provides the definition as: Fine, acceptable or normal; excellent, realistic, legitimate or authentic. (Origin) 1996 February 18, Matt Groening et al., “Lisa the Iconoclast”, The Simpsons, Season 7, Episode 16. I wonder how popular this word is among English speaking world. If a non-native speaker like me whose stock of vocabulary is very limited and are totally unsure of the good command of English uses this word in conversation with you - native speakers, does it

to reach a mutually-agreed long-term comprehensive solution that would ensure Iranˈs nuclear program will be exclusively peaceful. As I see, in the noun phrase a mutually-agreed long-term comprehensive solution , all the three adjectives describing the head noun are coordinate. Then, shouldn't there be commas between them making it look like a mutually-agreed, long-term,/and comprehensive solution ? Is putting a comma between coordinate adjectives a must? If so, what has happened here? Answer Here's how I would word the sentence fragment (which I've turned into a full-blown sentence: To reach a mutually agreed upon, long-term, comprehensive solution which would ensure Iran's nuclear program will be exclusively peaceful, is a worthy goal for the latest round of talks initiated by Slovenia. The way in which I've punctuated the sentence illustrates how the rules apply in a situation such as this.

Is it meant as a compliment or is it more acceptance of a situation? For instance, having loved a partner who died and feeling that you could never feel that way about anyone again and then describing the person you have just fallen in love with you say it's as good as it gets.

There is a curious construct in American English in which a word is stated and then repeated with the prefix "schm-" or "shm-" in order to indicate the speaker's dismissive attitude toward a concern that somebody else has. For example: "Smokers have lower life expectancies? Correlation, schmorellation—I'm going outside for another cancer stick." Is the commoner or more "correct" spelling "shm-" or "schm-"? Is this construction used outside the US? What is its origin? Answer This is called shm-reduplication : Shm-reduplication is a form of reduplication in which the original word or its first syllable (the base) is repeated with the copy (the reduplicant) beginning with shm- (sometimes schm-), pronounced /ʃm/. The construction is generally used to indicate irony, derision or skepticism with respect to comments about the discussed object: He's just a baby! "Baby-shmaby". He's already 5 years old! Per W

I was wondering what number the verb 'to snowboard' should take in the following sentence: A group of men, led by Olympic athlete John Rider, snowboard(s) down the gently sloping hills. Because 'a group snowboards', but 'they snowboard'. The second one sounds better to me. But can anyone explain me the difference, and which one is right or wrong?

I've been reading Trollope's The Way We Live Now , and have noticed a little stylistic quirk; that the words devil and damned appear blanked out, as d----- and d------ . They appear in sentences like... The d---- you do! and It's all d----- nonsense. The Victorians have an unenviable reputation for prudery, but surely those words can't have been so taboo as to need blanking out, could they? Or is Trollope rendering them this way for comic effect (it certainly makes me smile)? Answer Yes, the Victorians were that prudish, or at least pretended to be in public. In Wuthering Heights (published 1847) there's a mention by the "everyman" character Mr. Lockwood of words being blanked out in this way, when he has difficulty sleeping during his stay at Wuthering Heights, and notes Heathcliff's anger: 'And you, you worthless—' he broke out as I entered, turning to his daughter-in-law, and employing an epithet as harmless as duck, or sheep, but gene

but = 5. {with negative} {archaic} Without its being the case that OED 's longness overwhelmed me. Etymonline neglects this definition. What bridges the original meaning (of but ), with the semantic jumps (which induced the meaning of ‘ Without its being the case that ‘)? Please help me dig deeper than definition 5, which I already understand and so ask NOT about. Please expose and explain all hidden, missing semantic drifts and links. How should the etymology be interpreted, to understand how the semantic drifts abstracted and severed from the original literal meaning (of but )? Answer The first example for this usage (in your first reference) is well known and should be clear: "It never rains but it pours". The other two show that "without its being the case that" isn't actually a good definition. There may not be any single English alternative phrase that really works for all such uses of but , but the somewhat non-idiomatic phrase "other than&quo

I'm struggling with a way to describe one of a series of datetime values that has the greatest value. My first thought would be to call it the "latest", but the suggests that the event is in the past, not possibly in the future. How would you describe an event at a time which is after all previous events in the series, and can have already happened or is possibly in the future? Answer The OP has described a scenario where there is a multiplicity of separate events on different dates, forming a series, such as multiple episodes of a television series. The series of events may be: wholly in the past , including the distant past and/or the immediate past; straddling the past, present and future , i.e. at least one of the events in the series is in the past, one may be in the present, and at least one is in the future; wholly in the future , including the immediate future and/or the distant future. The OP wants a word (or phrase) to describe the chronologically last event i

While adding to an Answer to this question, I needed to use the above phrase, and I suddenly realised I was unsure whether to write "is" or "are". There is more than one way to skin a cat. If there are more than one species of cat, we will flay each species differently. I don't think that second example above sounds quite right to me (disregarding the meaning - sorry!), but in my original Answer I felt "is" would have been even worse. Is "are" always wrong here? If so, what exactly is the rationale? If not, is there a case where it's unquestionably preferred – and why is that? Note that in both the problematic Answer and my example attempting to mimic the same context more briefly, the writer doesn't know how many there are . There may be one, more, or even none. Getting even more specific, the writer might have an opinion on how many there might be, and wish to convey his leanings by choice of verb form if language allows this to b

A: I can't understand why my parents keep me from buying fast food. B: Me, too. It's delicious. Does B's answer sound natural? In Korea, we usually teach that we should use 'me, neither' in a negative sentence, 'me, too' in a positive sentence. But I am not sure if this is always true. I think that 'me, too' is a valid response in this particular case, but one of my students said that 'me, too' is grammatically incorrect, so it is unnatural. Who is right?

I think this is originally a term used in biology or evolution theory. I heard it in a youtube video but I cannot find it now. Edit: This word does not have negative connotations. For instance, an animal may develop a different way to use an organ intended for something else. Or you can use a big book as a door stop.

When and where was the phrase olden days coined? Answer According to Google's Books Ngram Viewer , the phrase was coined some time around 1800 and peaked around 1930: The oldest reference I could find for "olden days" is the 1805 Tobias: a poem : in three parts by Rev. Luke Booker : And the oldest I found for "olden times" is Poems on Affairs of State from 1620 to this Present Year 1707 , in a poem called "GIGANTOMAXIA, or a full and true Relation of the Great and Bloody Fight between three Pagan Knights and a Christian Giant" by an unknown author and originally published in 1682: I suspect these stem from the Romantic era : Romanticism is a style of art, literature and music in the late 18th and early 19th century in Europe. This movement said that feelings, imagination, nature, and old folk traditions such as legends and fairy tales were important. In part, it was a reaction to the aristocratic social and political ideas of the Age of Enlightenmen

How should one address a police officer in English speaking countries? More specifically, in a non-emergency situation—asking directions for example—what is the expected form of address used to call a police officer's attention? Answer They are all officers of the law, so " officer " applies no matter what their rank ("Pardon me, officer...").

"I'll always remember this rule as if I had just learned it" Do you consider this sentence grammatically correct? The main clause refers to the future, so I guess that the Past Simple would convey the same meaning and would at the same time be grammatical. Nonetheless, the choice of the appropriate tense is problematic here. Which one would you go for, and why? Answer In formal speech and writing, counterfactual clauses beginning with as if and as though take imperfect subjunctive , which means the were form in the case of to be , the only verb in English specifically marked for that tense. This the same tense you use with wish . For example, It looked as if it were already done. I wish it were done already. She dressed herself up as though she were a little princess. She wishes she were a little princess. He orders me about as if I were his wife. (but I’m not) He wishes I were his wife, but I’m not. For other verbs, you just use the pluperfect there by using had lear

If you tell a person to have someone do something, is that considered a command? Our boss sent an email which told us to "have your peer partner send you her plans". Should that be considered a directive? Our union is actually filing a grievance over this language. Our contract states that we cannot be forced to give our lesson plans to anyone. Our principal, as part of a professional development activity wrote "have your peer partner send you her plans," as opposed to "send your peer partner your plans". Since I have no means of "having" (forcing) her do this (I am not her boss), the implication to me is is that we should "request" this of our peer partners. I think she deliberately chose "have" over "request" (in fact the union asked her to amend the email to state this was voluntary, and she refused) to confuse people into thinking she was telling them to send their plans to their partner since indeed, "have

I was reading an online editorial a week or so ago in which its author employed an awesome word, the meaning of which was "to intentionally and deliberately withhold information [essential to the endeavor at hand, with the underlying purpose of misleading others by its omission]". Yeah, all of that in one word. Alas, I can't seem to find the editorial online anymore, I've now I forgotten the word!

Q)Fill in each gap with an appropriate word from the list : -The writer ....... novels were translated into many languages won the Nobel Prize. Choices : a)whose b)who c)which

Are there any differences when asking the following? Would that be fine with you? Would that be fine by you? Would that be fine to you? What if we switch you and that around? Do they still make sense? Would you be fine with that? Would you be fine by that? Would you be fine to that? Answer This is somewhat idiosyncratic, as the specific choice of preposition depends on the adjective that you use preceding. However, with both of the examples that you've given, my judgements are the same: With is preferred: Would that be fine with you? Would you be fine with that? By is acceptable in the first form, but marginal in the second: Would that be fine by you? ? Would you be fine by that? And to is wrong in both forms.

I'm really lost for words... For example, I like people with short hair. But then someone could say, so you hate people with long hair? But, of course, I did not give any information on people with long hair. I could've liked/hate it. What is this called? I'm sure there was a name to this, maybe an expression?

We were discussing humbugs in the office the other day (principally arguing over whether the ones with brown stripes were real humbugs), so I looked up the etymology and found plenty of information about the origin of the word humbug to mean deception or dishonesty (see Wikipedia ). One might argue that in this context lots of explanations are the same as no explanations, but none of them mention the minty meaning. So I was wondering if anyone knew how a word that used to mean what is reported by the Online Etymology Dictionary also came to mean a black-and-white striped peppermint sweet: 1751, student slang, "trick, jest, hoax, deception," also as a verb, of unknown origin. A vogue word of the early 1750s; its origin was a subject of much whimsical speculation even then. Answer The Glutton's Glossary by John Ayto says: The use of the word humbug for a stripy peppermint-flavoured boiled sweet seems to date from the nineteenth century: the Oxford English Dictionary n

Given that the two "th" sounds don't actually sound like a combination of "t" and "h" why was that particular combination selected or become adopted by the majority ? Answer The "TH" being pronounced as an interdental fricative is called digraph , which is a " pair of characters used to write a single phoneme " (a single sound, said in plain words). EDIT: @z7sg and @mP01; I found the historical course of this sound/letter: The first one was Greek which had θ (Theta) that had it pronounced as a T (a stop). Many languages, Latin included, used "TH" to write the θ for words loaned from Greek, but since /tʰ/ and /θ/ were not native phonemes in Latin, ‹th› came to be pronounced /t/; so did the other languages (German, etc). Plus, the "th" was preserved . Later, when Greek changed the θ letter sound from /tʰ/ to /θ/, all the languages that took loan words, changed the sound accordingly which was already writte

In order to convey excitement to being a part of a team, which one would you use? I’m so looking forward to be a part of [team name] that I can barely sleep. or I’m so looking forward to being a part of [team name] that I can barely sleep. Is any of these correct? If not, what would be the proper way of conveying this? Answer Looking forward is always followed by the +ing (gerund). A simple way to check this is to ask it in a question: "What are you looking forward to?" ...being part of the team. I think if this were rephrased as, "I'm looking forward to being part of the team so much that I can barely sleep", might sound a bit more natural.

What is a word to describe a person who is really interested in learning new aspects and new things in a specific programming language? (We could call this person a seeker.) Answer Wikipedia suggests: Neophile : A lover of new things, especially new technology.

What is the negative form of "I used to be" ? I often hear "I didn't used to be" but that sounds awfully wrong in my ears.

Which of the following two sentences is correct? He must decide who to be. He must decide whom to be. I can think of arguments for both sides, but I'm not sure. To elaborate, is who(m) the object of decide , the subject of be , or the object of be ? Does the infinitive form of be have any bearing on the answer? And is there anything else to consider about the position or role of who(m) in this particular sentence that would inform the answer? The answers to the linked question What’s the rule for using “who” and “whom” correctly? say to "substitute he and him for who and whom ." However, that doesn't give a clear answer in this context, because neither of those pronouns sounds right: "He must decide to be he"? "He must decide to be him"? Normally we'd use a reflexive pronoun here ("He must decide to be himself") and it's not clear what case that corresponds to. Answer The Wikipedia link about the accusative case explai

In a comparative sentence, like the one below, we use the singular form in the second clause: Rebecca is the most beautiful girl in the school. She is more beautiful than any other girl and not: *[...] She is more beautiful than any other girls . Why do we use the singular and not the plural? Why is the second example not acceptable? Answer The "any other" construction takes the singular because the comparison is one-to-one . She is more beautiful than any other girl . is equivalent to: She is more beautiful than any other individual girl . You could express a similar sentiment with a construction that takes the plural "girls" like so: She is more beautiful than other girls . But this works because, in this case, the comparison is one-to-many . In short: as an adjective in this case, 'any' can take the singular

What intensifier would be good for "EXCITED"? And why? I would also need an article or something to strengthen my knowledge of intensifiers, whether (and why) adjectives (or whatever) are gradable or ungradable. Thank you.

I've come across the term "Ocean Sea" and wonder what it means, especially compared to simpler terms like "ocean" or "sea"? Is this a recognized term in English, either current or historical? Answer The Romans recognized two major seas: the mare mediterraneum or “sea in the middle of the earth”, and the mare oceanum , or “Sea of Oceanus” — Okeanos being the Greek name for and personification of the great “river” believed to encircle the earth. In English, mare oceanus was translated Ocean Sea , as opposed to the Mediterranean Sea , and it was only about 1650 (according to the OED , volume 7, online here ) that ocean started to appear alone as a noun designating the vast outer water, so much greater than mere local seas .

I often come across the use of "she" not as an gender neutral pronoun as such but as the pronoun of choice when the gender is unknown. This is particularly common in scientific/technical documents but not exclusive to them. The following are four of the first google hits when searching for "the user can" "if she" : Example 1: The user can type anything to identify the file. When coming back to the data she would expect to see exactly the same string she typed in. Example 2: In this page the user can add a new entity, if she follows the link labelled Add entity. Example 3: To continue with our ergonomic program, imagine that you would really like the user to sit down and your program would continue only once she answers that she is sitting down, you can use the do…while statement to wait for the user to sit down; Example 4 : The user can program the alarm to go off at a particular time -- for example, the user can enter the time when she expects to get hom

My mother language does not have articles, so I still struggle to choose when to use the indefinte and definite article. The other day, I learned: "The dog is an animal" is acceptable. "The iron is a metal" is not acceptable. (By the iron , I mean the metal, not the device.) Is that true? If so, could anyone explain why? Answer Yes, the pattern that you mention is true. The reason for the difference is that "iron" is considered to be a so-called mass noun , or "uncountable". When you say something like "The dog is an animal" or "The corkscrew is a useful invention" etc, what you are basically saying is "Any prototypical example of a dog/corkscrew is...". In other words, for the sentence to work, you have to be able to conceptualise a "single example instance" of the thing/animal etc in question. For nouns that represent non-specific quantities of things, the construction isn't possible. (For what it

Does such a word exist? It has occurred to me that the "woman" part is redundant, since only women can be pregnant (except for Arnold Schwarzanegger in Junior ) Answer Primagravida is a medical term for somebody pregnant for the first time, and multigravida is in the OED for somebody pregnant not for the first time, so you could coin gravida , I suppose. But in normal usage, I'd say there is no such noun.

Which one is correct? You heard it correct or You heard it correctly Does the same apply to read it correct[ly]? Answer Correct is an adjective and correctly is an adverb. In Standard English, but not necessarily in other varieties of the language, verbs are modified by adverbs, so You heard it correctly is grammatical in Standard English and You heard it correct is not.

I recently heard someone use the expression "Now that's a whole different bag of dog food". While highly unusualy, the meaning was well understood by the audience. I know there is an actual idiom/expression used more normally than this one, but I cannot recall what it is. "Horse of a different color" comes to mind, but I don't think that's it. Is there another equivalent expression in common use? I'd prefer one centered around the words "whole different/whole new", since I believe this expression was a play one such a phrase. Answer I've figured it out. The expression I was looking for was "a whole new ball game". I wonder - is this a uniquely American expression?

What is the general scale for rarity adjectives? On a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being 'abundant' and 10 being 'extremely scarce', what adjectives could be used to describe the areas in between? For example, what would a two be?

I am confused: on the one hand, many of my native-speaker friends keep telling me that the f-word is very, very bad. Much worse than the s-word for example. On the other hand, I see it being used everywhere; for example, in the blogosphere, even by respectable economic blogs (e.g. http://www.zerohedge.com/article/guest-post-fuck-deficit-or-will-deficit-end-fucking-us ). Is the former intensity of the word decreasing? Is its usage becoming more acceptable in everyday language? Answer This is a difficult question, because English is in the middle of a shift of social mores with regards to obscenities and vulgarities. The "traditional" swear words (fuck, shit, ass, damn, etc.) have had their offensiveness gradually worn down over the past century, to the point where in many communities they're generic modifiers. Large parts of the Internet hold to this ethos. However, this shift is by no means complete or universal, as many people will still be offended by those words. Be v

Is there an adjective meaning “from or pertaining to the British Isles” (or if you prefer “from Great Britain, Ireland or surrounding islands”, or “from the Atlantic Archipelago”, or whatever floats your boat)? I'm obviously not looking for British , but for a term that could be acceptable to an Irish person. I'm primarily looking for an adjective applicable to concepts relating to this geographical region, but if there's a demonym, that would be interesting too. In other words, if Webster's is English beer, Tennent's is Scottish beer, both are British beer, and Guinness is Irish beer, what adjective can apply to all three? Answer The name of the British and Irish Lions suggests that, in practice, the term you seek is "British and Irish".

A homonym is a word with two distinct meanings, for instance: chase (from dict.org ) To pursue for the purpose of killing or taking, as an enemy, or game; to hunt. [1913 Webster] To cut, so as to make a screw thread. [1913 Webster] Does homonym apply to terms (esp. colloquial) or phrases as well? For instance, wife beater refers to either a type of shirt or a person who physically abuses their wife. Is there a word or term that describes this type of word or phrase? Answer It does feel strange to apply the term 'homonym' to a multi-word phrase. There is no special word that is an alternative to 'homonym' that is specific to terms of more than one word. That is, there is no such word 'X' to say 'The phrase "wife beater" is an X'. However, one can describe the -situation- as polysemy or amphiboly (and their derived forms). For example, The term 'wife beater' is polysemous ; it can have its literal meaning, or by metonymy, it can ref

Sometimes an entity's (be it a person, company, or a government) predictions/choices/decisions seem to be completely arbitrary (based on no evidence or observation). A very colorful example of this is South Park's Margaritaville episode . When learning that a bank is going bankrupt, a board of judges or whatever decapitate a chicken, and throws its beheaded body into a pit divided into different areas with actions written on them, such as "Bail out", "Do nothing", "Pay $10000", "Sue", etc. The headless chicken runs around for a while until it finally drops motionless on one of the areas in the pit. The judges' verdict is based on where the dead chicken lands. In Armenian we have an idiom "մատից հոտ քաշել", which literally means "to smell one's finger". Smelling one's finger, of course, does not give one any useful informations, so basing one's forecasts/choices on the "results" of smelling one

What is the English term for when someone thinks they are doing something nice for you but it ends up making things worse. EX: Someone buys you an elephant -- nice gesture and cool! But now you have to take care of it, and it becomes a burden on you.

Bird: (Brit.) a girl or young woman, esp one's girlfriend ( Collins Dict. ) According to Etymonline, bird : "maiden, young girl," c.1300, confused with burd (q.v.), but felt by later writers as a figurative use of bird (n.1). Modern slang meaning "young woman" is from 1915, and probably arose independently of the older word. also : As early as 1300 , bird was used for ‘girl’, but this was probably owing to confusion with another similar middle English word, burde, which also meant ‘young woman’. The usage crops up from time to time in later centuries, clearly as an independent metaphorical application, but there does not really seem to be an unbroken chain of occurrences leading up to the sudden explosion in the use of bird for ‘young woman’ in the 20th century . (www.dictionarycentral.com) Modern usage of bird meaning girl appears to be unrelated to the old Middle Ages meaning. Etymonline dates it back precisely to 1915. What is the modern origin of bird

To illustrate the question, badroit used the word "meretricious" meretriciously. Is there an English word that describes highfalutin words like "meretricious" that are (gratuitously) used in place of better-understood words like "garish"? The word may or may not be self-describing. Answer Sesquipedalian literally means 'a foot and a half long', and was originally applied to unnecessarily long words (in Latin); it has expanded in English to include people who use such words.

I was just reading something that suggested a very, umm, risqué interpretation of the phrase, "up for it". It made me wonder where and when this phrase actually originated. Does anyone know? Collins Dictionary limits itself by saying: (informal) keen or willing to try something out or make a good effort: it's a big challenge and I'm up for it

Is there a word or concise term for attempting to appear intelligent or refined by taking an unpopular opinion? I'm not sure how to best describe this concept. The best term I can think of at the moment is to be contrarian , but it doesn't seem completely satisfying.

Sometimes, others just inform us about things without us asking them, other times they do not do that even if we ask them. I want a verb for when others do not give us information — whether because they do not like to or they just don't give it, but we cannot directly ask them to — but we actively extract the information from them sometimes without them being aware of it. So the word I am looking for shouldn't be only for cases where we coerce or force others to give us information, and it shouldn't be only for cases where others do not like to give us information. Example: I needed that information. But I couldn't ask her for it, or most probably she would not give to me even if I asked her. So, I .... the information I wanted. It could be a phrasal verb and so not just a single word, but I couldn't devise a blank suitable for all possibilities! Two verbs I've already had but I think are not suitable: to give someone the third degree Source To prize somethin

I found this behind a medicine. At first thought, the sentence looks like it suggests avoiding exercise during the medication. However, I remember reading somewhere that in US English, when there is a list of items, the last item is NOT preceded by "and" unlike in British English. E.g.: American English: "item1, item2, item3 are the items in this list." British English : "item1, item2 and item3 are the items in this list." This being an American medicine, should I infer that I should avoid oral calcium, dairy products and shark cartilage, and do exercise during the medication? I know it sounds trivial, but something like this on a medicine, I better get the facts right. And for the record: The medicine is not for me. I was asked this question and was wondering myself. Edit: The original text was "Avoid oral calcium, dairy products, shark cartilage & exercise during the cleanse". I had to change "during the cleanse" to "durin

Please consider the following sentence "Oh my god, bad opening for the day", the shopkeeper _ __ _ while seeing the trouble making customer and flashed a smile when customer approached him. Which word of the below suits for the blank. Please find the words along with dictionary meanings: Whisper= speak very softly using one's breath without one's vocal cords, esp. for the sake of privacy Murmur = a soft, indistinct sound made by a person or group of people speaking quietly or at a distance Mutter = say something in a low or barely audible voice, esp. in dissatisfaction or irritation: Mumble = say something indistinctly and quietly, making it difficult for others to hear Seems to be all words are suitable for the blank.

Given the Wikipedia's list of profanities , you will see that it's somehow detached from the rest of curse words. The most commonly recognized profanities usually describe a body part, person or an (usually inappropriate) act. However, 'hell' is the only one that actually bears the negative connotation as a result of its origin - which is strictly of religious background. Why is it then, that while still being considered inappropriate to use, you can hear it on the radio, tv and in other media without being censored or blacked-out? Is there any source in form of a dictionary that could point out the severity of the word's usage, or some kind of category that would help in categorizing, and perhaps distinguishing it from the other, way more vulgar, curse words? Answer Today in English most taboo or "curse" words have to do with sex or scatology in some way. However, this was not always the case. It turns out that up until about the time of WWI blasphemy, t

My work ethic together with belief in my ability has led to progress. Can linking phrases with together with/combined with/along with/as-well-as be seen as using conjunction-reduction so that the first "my" applies to "belief" too? If ethic and belief were connected by "and" then certainly it would apply but the question is whether it does for the above linkers without other modifications to the sentence.

I am working on an invitation design for a charity. I am wondering which one of these is correct, Young Men's Committee or Young Mens Committee

Is the following sentence correct? As of next year, I will be studying [insert a field of study]. I know that "From next year on, ..." and "Starting next year, ..." are better options, but just want to check.

I need a word to describe someone who knows better than to expect the best, but can be happy in unfortunate circumstances. I know phrases like "positive outlook" and "good disposition" could describe such a person, but I don't know any single words that would. To differentiate between an optimist and the person I'm trying to describe: When asking for a promotion, an optimist will expect to receive the promotion. The other person will hope for a promotion, but won't be disappointed without it.

For words like ear , year , hear etc., most dictionaries only give the pronunciation /-ɪr/ (with the vowel as in the word it ). But I think some native speakers pronounce them /-ir/ (with the vowel as in the word eat ). Is my observation correct? If so, are both pronunciations acceptable, and what is the difference between them? Are they specific for any dialects? Answer Before the phoneme /r/, the English contrast between lax and tense vowels is neutralized. That means no English words exist that distinguish lax /ɪr, ɛr, ɔr, ʊr/ from tense /ir, er, or, ur/. This varies in many dialects; in Rhode Island (and many other NE N.Am locations), for instance, speakers distinguish the words Mary /'meri/, merry /'mɛri/, and marry /'mæri/; but in the Midwest all three words are pronounced /'mɛri/. In practical terms, anticipating the /r/ in hear changes the vowel to something that is different from both the normal tense and the normal lax vowel, and the same thing happens

These are the three most common ways to say "I think." (At least, I believe so. I mean, I think so. Um...) Are there any subtle differences between them? Are there situations where one of the three is more suitable than the others? Can you say you hear a particular form all the time in the streets, while the other two are much less common? Answer "I think" is a statement of cursory conclusion, while "I believe" indicates a more deeply considered and committed position. Note that someone may say "I think" when they actually mean "I believe", simply because it might be received as less confrontational. "I reckon" carries an ever lower level of assertion than "I think", (or perhaps an even higher level of conciliation).

When is it appropriate to use assure vs. ensure vs. insure ? Answer Assure : promise, as in I assure you the car is safe to drive. Ensure : confirm, as in Ensure that you have plenty of gas in the tank before going on a long trip. Insure : protect with an insurance policy, as in Insure the car before your trip.

What is the difference between the following sentences? Your car is black. The car of yours is black. Answer Your is a possessive adjective : Your car is black! Yours is a possessive pronoun : That car of yours is black! It is " used to refer to a thing or things belonging to or associated with the person or people that the speaker is addressing ". Basically, those two sentences have the same meaning.

Is the male version of a mistress, a mastress? It's a term I would use, but I don't know if it is just slang or if it is formal... P.S. I mean a male that sleeps with a married woman (love, not business)

In the 1950's, the primary uses of the word "bugged" was to describe a room that contained a hidden microphone, or to refer to a telephone line that was being tapped. Over the last few years, I've seen more and more people use the word "bugged" to refer to a software bug. For example, someone recently wrote, "That function returns the wrong value, it is bugged ." In contrast, I am used to people writing, "That function returns the wrong value, it has a bug ." Is the use of the word "bugged" to refer to software bugs now universally understood in the English language, or is it predominately used in specific regions? As a bonus, does anyone know where this particular use of the word "bugged" (as opposed to "bug" or "buggy") originated, and when . Also, was the origin fostered by a specific cultural group ? UPDATE: The number of programmers with decades of experience stating they have never encountere

Is staff plural? The family is on a tour The family are on a tour Which one is correct and why? Answer The family is on a tour The family are on a tour Both are correct, as the collective noun family can both be treated as singular or plural. However, one is less likely to hear the second sentence in the US, for collective nouns are usually treated as singular in American English, while they can be treated as both singular and plural in British English. See the note on collective noun concord at Oxford Dictionaries Online . You may want also want to consider a related answer here .