Blog

Searching on Google Books I discovered that 'a day that never comes' has 2.060 results. As an example usage, among a lot of others, in 'Healing Words' by Susan Brozek it is written: If we wait until we feel like obeying, we will be waiting for a day that never comes ! I would like to know whether there is a short phrase or expression to refer to a day that never comes . I focused my attention on 'a never day', but, checking for this phrase, I didn't found anything confirming it is a common usage. Thus, what do you call a day that never comes ?

I'm writing something—a story to be exact—and I am looking for a word which means "the top of a person's head." I remember seeing a word in which its meaning is exactly this one from a book that I'd read— Crispin: The Cross of Lead . I think it was something like "tope", but I looked at its meaning and it did not match. Can anyone help me? I don't have the book with me because I just borrowed it at my previous school.

I was drawn to the word, “blood-dimmed tragedy” in the following statement of Maureen Dowd’s article titled, “Peeping Barry” in June 8 New York Times: You could see the fear in his eyes, the fear that froze him in place, after Andy Card whispered to W. in that Florida classroom that a second plane had crashed into the twin towers. The blood-dimmed tragedy of 9/11 was chilling. But instead of rising above the fear, W. let it overwhelm his better instincts. I know ‘blood-chilling’ and ‘blood-curdling’. But as I don’t know the word, “blood-dimmed,” I consulted English dictionaries at hand and online. None of OED, CED and Merriam-Webster includes this word and nor does Google Ngram register any incidence of “blood-dimmed.” However, I found that “blood-dimmed tragedy” is a twist of “the blood-dimmed tide is loosed,” in William Butler Yeats’ “The Second Coming.” "Turning and turning in the widening gyre The falcon cannot hear the falconer; Things fall apart; the center cannot hold; Mer...

What would be an appropriate word for "A journey of self discovery and introspection" or possibly, "To discover that you are not how you conceptualized yourself"? Answer Self-actualization has this sense in it. The term was originally introduced by the organismic theorist Kurt Goldstein for the motive to realize one's full potential. Expressing one's creativity, quest for spiritual enlightenment , pursuit of knowledge, and the desire to give to society are examples of self-actualization. A detailed explanation from the book "Emotional Intelligence in Action: Training and Coaching Activities for Leaders, Managers, and Teams" by By Marcia Hughes, L. Bonita Patterson, James Bradford Terrell :

I found out recently that there are 2 different accepted ways to spell the word "adjuster". My question is whether or not there is a difference between the two spellings and when it's appropriate to use one over the other. I've read similar questions with answers that seem to vary depending on the word and was wondering if there is a distict difference in meaning or application between the two spellings. Thanks!

Why is there no the before president and captain ? They elected him president. She was made captain of the team. Answer The ‘Longman Student Grammar of Spoken and Written English’ (LSGSWE) explains it thus: When a predicative noun phrase names a unique role or job, either a zero article or the is used. The is not normally found after words like elected (and re-elected ) which show that someone has been appointed to an office. The LSGSWE’s own example is ‘Lukman was re-elected OPEC President in June.’ In other cases, however, it’s optional. The LSGSWE’s second example is: ‘Simon Burns is the chairman of the appeal board.’ That could equally well appear as ‘Simon Burns is chairman . . .’

Sentences constructed with a word written in the singular and parenthetically in the plural are straightforward when that word does not end in -y , e.g.: List all applicable employee(s) . How does one handle words ending in -y ? Is this correct: I will attend the party(ies) . Answer An alternative to the use of parentheses to provide both singular and plural forms is to separate them with a slash: party/parties This would be preferred in this and other similarly awkward formations such as wife/wives , and in special cases such as mouse/mice .

I'm asking about north-American English. In words like "refu nd ", "ba nd " and "diamo nd ", is the /d/ is fully released (as an un-aspirated /d/ ), or stopped, like the /nt/ combo? (different can and usually pronounced as [dɪfɹənt̚] )?

What are the rules on when to use commas, colons, semicolons and dashes? Answer These are my rules of thumb (so they are not meant to be rigorous specifications of when each mark is to be used and when each is not to be used): First, the comma and semicolon have similar functions (though the former is more flexible than the latter), but the colon has a very different function. Either a comma or a semicolon can be used to separate independent clauses. Generally a semicolon carries greater weight and offers a more noticeable sense of separation between the clauses than does a comma. It's notable that when a comma is used for this purpose a conjunction must follow the comma, but no conjunction is necessary when a semicolon is used. Often the conjunction conveys a small bit of extra information, so to use a semicolon is to sacrifice this information. ("I like this band, but my brother doesn't." -- "I like this band; my brother doesn't." In this example ...

Why are certain words pronounced with diphthongs on their own but with monophthongs in compounds? For example: Words pronounced with diphthongs on their own: Michael , Christ , wise , drive Their pronunciations with monophthongs in compounds: Michaelmas , Christmas , wizard , driven All of these changes occur in stressed syllables. Compare that of cycle and bicycle , tricycle which occurs in unstressed syllables. P/s: Just to be clear, I added the "historical-change" tag because I suspected this phenomenon had something to do with the Great Vowel Shift. Answer Short answer The PRICE vowel that we hear in the word wise , /waɪz/, has a systematic relationship with the KIT vowel which we hear in the word wizard , /'wɪzəd/. As we add syllables to the base of a word in English, we tend to reduce the length of the vowel in the base. This is so that we can accommodate the new syllables and still preserve the perceived stress timed rhythm of English. When we add syllables to ...

What is this type of word called: Mr. , Ms. , Dr. ? In the document I am using, it is referred to as the "prefix", but I don't think that is correct. Answer "Title" and "honorific" both describe that type of word.

What is the type of sentence exemplified below called? Is it appropriate to use it in a scientific paper and formal written English in general? 1. The more pronounced the variation, the more the waste. 2. The more you give, the more you get. 3. The longer I live, the more I realize the impact of attitude on life. Answer I don't know if there's a name for such sentences themselves, but they are surely appropriate in formal English: Bible search results for "the more" . Here are only some of the various possible syntactical structures: But the more they were oppressed, the more they multiplied and spread; so the Egyptians came to dread the Israelites. (Exodus 1:12) For with much wisdom comes much sorrow; the more knowledge, the more grief . (Ecclesiastes 1:18) The more priests there were, the more they sinned against me; they exchanged their glorious God for something disgraceful. (Hosea 4:7) British National Corpus search results for "the more" . Again,...

As in the following: A common proverb is: “A rolling stone gathers no moss.” A common proverb is: “A rolling stone gathers no moss”. A common proverb is: “A rolling stone gathers no moss.”. If the proverb weren't a full sentence, I would immediately put a single period after the quote, at the very end. But if it is a sentence, which period should be removed so that there is only one period? Two periods look absolutely dorky. Answer Like all comprehensive answers about English (or those attempting to be so), this answer begins with, “it depends”. A quotation that is not a complete statement should never have a period within its quotation marks: The senator, when asked why he refused to support the measure, said that the language of the bill was “confusing and verbose”. “Confusing and verbose” is not a complete statement; the quotation is simply attributing these exact words to the senator, while summarizing his complete statement largely through omission. By contrast, a more comple...

How can I explain briefly (like in a headline) that the city is covered with snow? Are the following examples correct, or do you suggest something else? Istanbul beneath ( the? ) snow ( piles? ) Istanbul under ( the? ) snow ( piles? ) Answer You could say that the city is blanketed in snow.

This is a question more concerning the word poisonous and venomous than poison vs. venom. I'm wondering about the following, specifically the last sentence: Don't eat the plant, it is poisonous . The plant has dripped poison onto you. Be careful, the liquid is poisonous . The snake is venomous . The snake has been milked to help us create an antidote. Be careful, the contents of the jar are poisonous (or should it be venomous ?). Can you use poisonous and venomous to describe both the creature/plant AND the substance it produces? Answer Poison is absorbed or ingested ; a poisonous animal can only deliver toxic chemicals if another animal touches or eats it. Venom, on the other hand, is always injected . Every venomous animal has a mechanism to inject toxins directly into another animal. Stab with tails. Slash with spines. Pierce with fangs or stings. Spike with spurs. Shoot with harpoons. Chew with teeth.- http://www.diffen.com/difference/Poison_vs_Venom Don't eat th...

Maybe this is not really the right place to ask this, I hope I will not be penalized for asking this. I am a webdeveloper, and I do most of the stuff myself, from the basic idea, till the final design and implementation. It's like when a baker has his own farm with grain, creates his own wheat, makes the bread, and sells it in his own shop. Some time ago I heard a nice English expression for this, but I forgot what it was. It was something like producing from grain to bread . Does anyone know this expression, or can think of something that would nicely fit. Answer Something I hear quite commonly is "end to end", although this originally had a somewhat different meaning .

I have heard the terms go dutch and AA used to mean that, when two or more people eat at a restaurant, each will pay only the price of their own dish. Also treat is used to describe the act of one person paying for the meal of themselves and another. Has anyone conducted a study on the terms used and their geographic distribution? In which regions of the world are these terms used? Are there other terms which might be more popular in North America, the UK, Australia, and New Zealand?

I'm not sure which of these is more correct. Your 1 hour is up. This is easy. Singular. Your 5 minutes are up Again, simple enough. Plural. Your 1 hour and 6 minutes is up. Your 3 hours and 1 minute are up. Should the plural be based on the hours or minutes?

Is there a great deal of difference in meaning between the following sentences? These looked very different. They looked very different. They seem the same to me, but perhaps I am wrong. These is a pronoun. So it can be a subject, can't it?

For example, A: - Look! There is a centipede on the table! B: - (interjection)! Answer A: I woke up to find a centipede in my hair. (creepy / frightening ) B: Yikes! A: I had almost finished my salad when a centipede crawled out from under a lettuce leaf. (disgusting) B: Ugh!

What is the difference between “no” and “not”? there is a question always confusing me. Is it 'no good' or 'not good'? How do I use them? I guess they are different, but I never know what is the difference! Thank you in advance!

In everyday speech, the terms jail and prison are used interchangeably in many situations. However, my understanding is that, at least in the US, they actually refer to slightly different things. For instance, it appears to me that it would be rather unusual for an American to use the expression federal jail . He'd most probably say federal prison instead. Am I right? What is the correct usage of jail vs prison ? Are there any (historical or legal) differences between the US and the Commonwealth?

In this sentence: "We would also accept an international transfer, but in that case we would ask you to pay your bank's charges at the time of the instruction to ensure that we received the full amount" is it correct to use "received" or should it be in present tense?

I am never quite sure whether to use nevertheless or nonetheless; they seem almost synonymous to me, but I think I might be missing a subtle distinction. Is there a difference, and if so, how do I determine which is right in different circumstances? I am specifically thinking of sentences such as these: I am busy Saturday; nevertheless I will come to your party anyway. I am busy Saturday; nonetheless I will come to your party anyway. There is a question here that deals with a specific idiomatic usage, but I was thinking of the general type of usage, as given in the party example above. Answer The regular MW dictionary entry for nonetheless actually just says "nevertheless," and I'm not personally familiar with a situation when you could justifiably use one but not the other. According to merriam-webster.com's Learner's Dictionary, they have the same definition as well: in spite of what has just been said …although nonetheless is marked as somewhat formal , w...

In many cases in English, vowels followed by a single consonant are pronounced short (also called lax ) when followed by the suffix -ic or -ical, even if they are long in other related words. Some examples of this alternation: cr i sis , cr i tic(al) (/aɪ/,/ɪ/); tr o pe, tr o pic(al) (/oʊ/,/ɒ/); m a nia, m a nic (/eɪ/,/æ/). There are exceptions, however, such as b a se, b a sic (/eɪ/,/eɪ/). What is a list of these exceptional/irregular -ic words, and are there any generalizations or rules about them? *For further description of this phenomenon from a linguistic perspective, see for example " English Word Stress: An Examination of Some Basic Assumptions ," by Eric Fudge, in Essays on the Sound Pattern of English, edited by Didier L. Goyvaerts and Geoffrey K. Pullum, 2013. Answer There are a large number of words pronounced with a long vowel before -ic. However, there are some rules that can help predict when a word will be an exception to the shortening rule. For man...

I'm reading a technical documentation so every quirky detail, that a normal human being easily realizes to be a typo or just a less well chosen formulation, can, in fact, be a profound base for a concept and can fundamentally affect the future design. In the said document I can find the term " numeric digit ". What is this? Also, what is it not? In my mind a digit is a character in the set of " 0123456789 ", while something numeric is a a set of characters consisting of characters in the set of " 0123456789 " (yes, it's the same set). Perhaps we can define the term in question by exclusion from all the other possible cases' definition. So what would be a good example of the following? a non-numeric digit a numeric non-digit a non-numeric non-digit My guestimation is this. NST, unless we switch the base (which is too mathematical). NST, unless we declare a string of a digit (which is too programmatic). Anything sans digits (which is a superfluou...

I'm looking for a word that can best describe a thing that you see when you first come to a place, a thing so strange or unusual that you didn't think something like that could exist (or you have been aware of it, but it's far more than you expected), even though it is normal stuff in the area. It can be a (strange) custom of a country that a visitor came across for the first time, or the bookworm's house, filled with books. It can be the gorgeous sight of the Pyramids and the fact that you have never thought how small your are compared to it, even though you have known almost everything about it. In my language (Vietnamese), there is a phrase for it: hit the eyes. Do we have any equivalent phrase for hit the eyes in English? Note: The meaning in the Vietnamese phrase is mostly for t he first thing you see . It may be something special to the person, it may be not. But it is the first that this person see. The thing may be (or even just) a normal thing of the place/obj...

"It is the same old, same old style." In this sentence, what kind of phrase is same old same old ? Is it a adjective?

When I read a sentence, I can identify nouns. But now I need to give proof that they are indeed nouns, and that is where it goes wrong. I can think of one or two things sometimes (like combining it with an adjective), but that is not enough proof. So my question is, how can I prove in multiple ways that the word is actually a noun?

So do Smith St and Wesson St meet: "at the corner of Smith & Wesson Streets"; or "at the corner of Smith & Wesson streets"? Answer In British English, it does survive. In fact, the properness of Street generally precludes the treatment you propose. An accident at the junction of Queen Elizabeth Street and Tooley Street. One might possibly hear “Queen Elizabeth and Tooley Streets,” perhaps in a radio traffic report, but since that’s spoken any capitalisation is unclear. We don’t write it that way.

I have two questions. Is there a noun for something which should be deferred? What would be the opposite for something which should be "fetched later"? Answer It's not exactly an everyday word, but deferrable - [item] capable of or suitable or eligible for being deferred is listed as a noun by Merriam-Webster. Here are some instances in print from Google Books (and some deferables ), where OP might be gratified to see that the antonym non-deferrables is also used. The fact that it's not common isn't an issue - the meaning should be obvious on first encounter. Contexts vary, but often a deferable (my preferred spelling) means a "major purchase" (car, house, etc.) that can be delayed if money is tight - as opposed to non-deferables (food, toilet paper, etc.).

What are the main purposes to ask someone 'Where do you work?' apart from to find out the type of place he or she works in? I can answer: I work in a shop. I work in a hospital. I work in an office. But what other things can (or should) I use as a reply to this question? Extra question: sometimes I see I work at a shop. I work at a hospital. I work at an office. What's the difference between 'at' and 'in' in this case?

I want to say that in the past I decided something that I will do in the future: Already in my bachelor years I decided that I want work at [. . .] after my master. Is want here correct, or should it be written in another tense? Answer For consistency, it should be "I decided that I would want work at...". "I want work at..." is the present tense ( ie. it implies that I currently want work there) - "I decided that I would want work at..." implies that at that time in the past, I made up my mind that at some point in the future, I would want work there.

There are cough, tough, bough, through, and though (and "hiccough", if you're not from the U.S.); each of which has a different pronunciation for the ending "-ough". Why is this? Edit for clarification: I'm trying to figure out why cough is spelled with an "-ough", if it's pronounced with an "-off". And then tough, pronounced "tuff". Why is that not spelled "tuff"? Bough, through, and though should be spelled "bow", "thrue" (or "thru"), and "thoe". Where did "-ough" come from? And then hiccough. Since that derives from cough, it should be pronounced "hickoff", but it isn't. Answer Short answer : English spelling does not display a one-to-one correspondence with pronunciation, and certainly not with modern pronunciation. You shouldn't expect it to. Medium answer : These words are spelled with the same letter combination but pronounced with ...

Is it more correct to say "I climbed up the stairs" or "I walked up the stairs"? Climb is defined as go or come up a (slope or staircase); ascend. Walk is defined as an act of travelling or an outing on foot. Both are theoretically correct, but is one more correct than the other? Answer From Merriam-Webster: climb : to move or go up (something) using your feet and often your hands From Dictionary.com: climb : to ascend, go up, or get to the top of, especially by the use of the hands and feet or feet alone or by continuous or strenuous effort: to climb a rope; to climb the stairs; to climb a mountain Because climb when used without an adverb or prepositional phrase (e.g., over , over the rocks , down , down the stairs ) implies "up", one should leave out "up" in this case. So, either of the following would be equally correct: I climbed the stairs. (Not "I climbed up the stairs.") OR I walked up the stairs.

I know that a gerund is a noun , so it should be modified by an adjective . However, it is also a verb form . Can I modify it by using an adverb ?

I am looking for a verb that describes speaking with a full mouth, like a child asking something at the dinner table before swallowing, because they are so anxious/curious for the answer. Anything come to mind? I didn't find ANY.

Why do some English speakers have different starting pronunciations of station and sun ? Station is pronounced as e-station while sun simply as sun . Is the difference due to the fact that the second letter is a vowel in sun but not in station ? Answer If you look up the official pronunciation of 'sun' and 'station' you get respectively sun - /sʌn/ station - /ˈsteɪʃən/ with no notated difference. No standard or dialectal variety of English has any difference either. But it is the case in many foreign languages that they do not allow the complicated consonant cluster of /s/ followed by a harder consonant, or some change is needed to the /s/. Then this gives a sound change when they try to speak English. This is especially true of Spanish where there are many close cognate words or borrowings from the same source (Latin). For example: school (En) - escuela (Sp) This is a pattern for 's' followed by 't', 'p', or 'k'. There is a tendenc...

I've been wondering if the term 'dope' as used in reference to drugs somehow originated from the plumbing terminology. When connecting cast iron drainage pipes, the traditional practice is to take a strand of hemp (called oakum ) and stuff it around the pipe and then pour molten lead over that. Plumbers also use the term 'dope' to mean a sealant that is used to make connections watertight. Typically the term refers to a liquid but I've heard the term used for teflon tape that is used for the same purpose. The hypothesis: When marijuana smoking was first widely introduced to North America, the fact that it comes from the same plant as hemp lead to people referring to it as "smoking dope". This would require that the term 'dope' was commonly used to refer to 'oakum'. This is completely a guess on my part. Is there any evidence for or contrary to this idea? Answer @Jim noted though EtymOnline puts forward the following theory: 1807, Ame...

I thought "intermediate" was the appropriate label for the second of a three-level system of grading skills level, but I just saw a CV template on which the levels are defined as "basic", "medium", and "advanced". This made me wonder which one is more appropriate. Answer Intermediate is used for skill level. he is taking a class in intermediate ballroom dance. Medium is used for measurements like clothes size or temperature. set your microwave at high, not medium, to warm up your soup. the shirt is medium size for an adult but extra large for a teenager.

What is the difference between thee and thou and how are they used? Answer Thee , thou , and thine (or thy ) are Early Modern English second person singular pronouns. Thou is the subject form (nominative), thee is the object form, and thy/thine is the possessive form. Before they all merged into the catch-all form you , English second person pronouns distinguished between nominative and objective, as well as between singular and plural (or formal): thou - singular informal, subject ( Thou art here. = You are here. ) thee - singular informal, object ( He gave it to thee. ) ye - plural or formal, subject you - plural or formal, object Interestingly, when the first English translations of the Bible were being made, the informal thee and thou were used specifically in reference to God to indicate an approachable, familiar God, but as the language changed this paradoxically brought thee and thou to sound more formal to the modern English speaker.

English questions and negation with do in syntax I've always wondered why English insists on pairing not with do , when negating an action. For example, you say: I do not like that coat. Instead of: I not like that coat. When you're not negating, however, there is no need for do (except that it can optionally be used as an intensifier): I like that coat. Dictionary.com describes the word not in this contect as an adverb. Shouldn't it be OK just to add it in to the sentence on its own, so that one of the following should be acceptable?: I not like that coat. I like not that coat. Why must do be added before?

I noticed that in the English language words ending in "ip" often suggest a brisk, quick movement, as with clip , flip , skip and tip . In other terms, the closing part of these words seems to be suggestive of the meaning itself. Presumably, that circumstance helps advertisers in promoting their products, as, for example, one can see in the picture below. I'm wondering if there is a name for sounds, like the above mentioned, which seem to express a particular quality whatever words they appear. Obviously, there are a lot of other cases. For example, it seems as if "sk" at the start of words such as scoot , skip , scuttle expresses the quick movement implied in all of them, while "sl" suggests either a falling or sliding in movement as in slip , slither , slouch , or something slimy or slushy, as in those words and in sludge , slobber , and slobby .

Source: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26868119 The interior minister also showed a number of slides and photos illustrating where he said police snipers were firing from. He named two buildings on Khreshchatyk and Kostyolna streets, saying other spots were still being investigated. I would like to know why is there not a definite article such as the in front of Khreshchatyk and Kostyolna streets ? Or, do you think, it's totally alright as far as grammar goes? If so, could you please explain the rules governing this particular usage? An example where street names are used along with articles. Source: http://rt.com/news/157884-shooting-mariupol-eastern-ukraine/ The outlet also reported that “on the Lenin avenue , two people were seriously wounded – one in the head and another in the stomach. A huge pool of blood is next to the “Arbat” café. It’s not known whether the wounded people have survived. Witnesses say they were driven away in a passenger car. The fighting is on next ...

Can someone explain the origin of this symbol, and deconstruct the name "ampersand"? I vaguely recall my mother's saying she learned her alphabet (early 1920s) with this symbol being the "27th letter".

Is it true that people are generally unfamiliar with abbreviations like "i.e." and "e.g." and therefore it is best to avoid using them in technical writing? Avoid abbreviations such as “i.e.” and “e.g.” (Many people don’t know what they mean.) I saw this advice at https://www.dartlang.org/articles/doc-comment-guidelines/ . Answer Avoid abbreviations such as “i.e.” and “e.g.” (Many people don’t know what they mean.) The problem with this statement is that it is neither quantified nor backed up with any research. How many is 'many'? Is it 70% of people? 20% of people? 1% of people? The word many just indicates a guess by the person who wrote the article. Maybe the writer has met one or two people that didn't understand and has generalised to the whole population based purely on his/her own experience. The truth of the matter is that there are many people who do not know what 'abbreviation' means, that don't know what a document is or don't...

I am struggling to understand the following sentence. Many Roman emperors were known for their dissolution, indulging in unspeakable desires of the flesh . Does the phrase "desires of the flesh" mean killing people for fun, or does it mean having sex with women, or does it mean cannibalism, or something else? Answer I think it refers to a broad range of sins (where "flesh" hints at man's mortality and susceptibility to being tempted into doing morally questionable things), including lust, greed, violence, etc. It most likely does not refer to cannibalism. One controversial Roman emperor who comes to mind and who fits this description is Caligula : Philo of Alexandria and Seneca the Younger describe Caligula as an insane emperor who was self-absorbed, angry, killed on a whim, and indulged in too much spending and sex. He is accused of sleeping with other men's wives and bragging about it, killing for mere amusement, deliberately wasting money on his bridge, ...