Blog

I just watched the movie The apartment (by Billy Wilder, 1960) and hear the main character say: That's the way it crumbles, cookie-wise I kind of understand it as "that's life", as someone would say while sighing. But I wonder: what is the origin of it? Am I right about its meaning? Answer According to A Dictionary of Catch Phrases, American and British... by Eric Patridge, That's the way it crumbles, cookie-wise meaning: that's how (the situation) has turned out, and there is nothing you can do about it has been a frequent catch phrase from the 50's in the US and in the UK from the mid 60's. An early usage example is from the "Michigan Courthouse Review" 1951 : Just shrug your shoulders and say, "Well, that's the way the ball bounces" or, " That's the way the cookie crumbles" or some similar parrot-like phrase. Sit back. Let the world pass by. If you don't like what you see, imitate the ostrich and stick ..

So often people tell me they have had an 'invite' to something, I am wondering if the word can actually be accepted as correct English, as opposed to 'invitation'. In a similar vein people, more usually in the north of England, will use the present participle of verbs in situations which call for the past. E.g. Waiter in restaurant asks you 'how would you like your eggs cooking?'instead of 'cooked'. Are these not simply incorrect expressions in English? It just seems to me that nowadays if enough people start saying something it becomes acceptable.

This is a question about American English usage of the word "already". As a UK resident I don't completely understand when I hear Americans give commands like "Stop it already!" In the UK the word already is not normally used in the imperative mood and the sentence I've just quoted would leave an English person thinking "If you're saying I've already stopped it why are you asking me to stop it again?"

My colleague and I have a hot discussion about which is correct. My version is: If you don't fix the bug I will send you a patch. and his one is: I would send you a patch if you don't fix the problem. Discussion context is: there is a bug in a project. I will send a patch in case that it will not be fixed this evening. I've written mine following academic definitions of "future conditionals" and my colleague's version looks unnatural for me. So who is right? If neither - what would be a correct sentence? Answer Yours is the correct option, but not because of clause order. The main difference is that you use if ... then I will , and your friend uses I would ... if . Both the following are correct: If you don't fix the bug I will send you a patch. I will send you a patch if you don't fix the bug. However, replacing the will with would makes either one incorrect, since the do in don't refers to an event which is likely to happen (known as First C

Possible Duplicates: Gender neutral pronoun Is it correct to use “their” instead of “his or her”? I am writing software documentation. I have this issue: I am talking about a generic user of the software. Should I say “his preferences”, “his/her preferences” or “its preferences”? Answer The links Reg supplied are good advice, but be aware that gender-neutral language used at length can start to become clunky and unnatural to the ear. One trick I have seen to avoid that problem is to assign genders to particular use cases. In your case, you might refer to a generic user using male pronouns, while an administrator gets female pronouns. Obviously this only works when you have a reasonably good mix of cases or relative importance.

For example, the sentence, "The Premier of China drank vodka and beer in his car with Obama." A BBC presenter would pronounce it like: The Premieh of Chiner drank vodker and bee'h in his ca' with Obam-er . In other words, they add 'r's where they don't belong and eliminate them where they do. Is there any linguistic explanation for how this evolved? Are there any formal rules regarding this?

Similar to this question , is it correct to use have or has with any* (any/anything/anyone/...) in a question? Examples: Have/Has any of my advices help you? Have/Has anyone of you seen it? Does it depend on the context, or is there a general rule?

Is there a specific word for the type of person who always corrects misspellings? Something exact, not something like perfectionist, grammar nazi or anal. Something that describes the person, like the word ultracrepidarian does for a person who gives advice outside their knowledge. Answer I don't believe there's an exact word for " someone who corrects others' spelling errors ", but there is one for a person who is meticulous in spelling , generally: orthographer ( lit. " right writer "): One versed in orthography; one who spells words correctly, according to approved usage. If there is a single word which indicates (as @ermanen puts it) a " spelling Nazi ", it will almost certainly be derived from " orthography " or " orthographer "; you might consider deriving one yourself, or popularizing a new sense for an existing word, such as: " orthographizer ", derived from " orthographize " meaning " to

You get a look at him? Little thing. Buck ten, buck fifteen, tops. Maybe he’s Filipino. The above sentences are in the movie Mr and Mrs Smith . Could you pls explain the meaning of the phrase buck ten, buck fifteen, tops .

Why do we use the verb help in sentences such as the following to mean something like refrain from ? I try not to eat junk, but I can't help it. I couldn't help laughing. I can't help but admire her bravery. Answer Two of the OED’s definitions of help are relevant. Definition 11a is: To remedy, obviate, prevent, cause to be otherwise. (With can, cannot, or some equivalent.) In earlier use usually in passive ‘it cannot be helped’, later in active with personal subject ‘I cannot help it’ = I cannot do anything to remedy or prevent it. Definition 11b is: To prevent oneself from, avoid, refrain from, forbear; to do otherwise than. (With can, cannot.) It is true that in both senses help is often used with a negative word such as no, scarcely or hardly , but that is not always the case. For one thing, it can be used in a question, as in Trollope’s ‘How can I help it that I am not a man and able to work for my bread?’ It can also occur in an if clause following a negative,

If I am writing a poem, I might use the word peaches to symbolize all fruit. Is there a specific word for this type of symbolism? Answer It's called metonymy . For example, sword for "war" or Washington for "the US Government". Cf. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metonym

I know what this means, but can't figure out why ponds, lakes, or oceans might be referred to as "the drink." From Wiktionary : (colloquial, with the) Any body of water. If he doesn't pay off the mafia, he’ll wear cement shoes to the bottom of the drink!

I was wondering why nation is pronounced nay-shun and national is pronounced nah-shu-nal . My question relates to the difference between pronouncing "Nay" and "Nah". The spelling of "nation" in "national" is the same as "nation", but the "na" parts of the word are pronounced differently. Is there some kind of rule or pattern for this? Answer There isn't a pattern or rule; nation/national is unique. Of all -ational words , only national and rational are pronounced with /ˈæʃən/ (rhymes with "ashen"). Ration/rational , however, is usually consistently /'ræʃən/ and /'ræʃənl/ ( or /ˈreɪʃən/ and /ˈreɪʃənl/ , though sometimes, as Peter Shor points out , /ˈreɪʃən/ is paired with /'ræʃənl/, using the same respective pronunciations as nation/national ), even though the two terms are not closely related in meaning. National is therefore an oddball, being pronounced /ˈnæʃənl/ when nation is (as normal -a

What happened to the art in "Our Father who art in Heaven"? And why is it art , and not is ? Answer Art was the second person singular form of the verb "to be" in older versions of English. Over the centuries, it eventually became are (along with the disappearance of the -st suffix across all 2nd person singular verb forms). Is , on the other hand, would be the 3rd person singular form. The reason are is used instead of is is because the prayer is speaking directly to "Our Father": i.e. "You, who are in Heaven".

A restaurant offers "Takeout or Pickup" and it appears the difference is that takeout are orders placed onsite to be consumed offsite, and pickup are orders placed offsite that are retrieved from restaurant to be consumed offsite; delivery being orders that are both orders and consumed offsite? Is this correct, what is the history of the use of these terms? Answer The words are used in different contexts. When you call in an order by phone, it's clear that the food will be consumed offsite. However, the restaurant needs to know whether you will pick it up yourself ( pickup ) or you want them to deliver it to you ( delivery ). When you place the order at the counter, delivery is not a possibility. In that situation, they need to know whether they should serve it on a plate so you can eat it in the restaurant ( eat-in ) or package it so you can take it out of the restaurant ( takeout ). When explained this way, the origins of the terms become fairly obvious. They're ju

The use of "used to" is much more frequent than "use to", but what about "did used to" vs. "did use to"?

I know palindrome is the term for a word that works backwards and forwards, but is there a similar term for a word that can be flipped/reversed and remain the same? For example, the word SWIMS or the number 6009 . Answer The examples, SWIMS and 6009 , aren't the same upside down, so I assume you mean under a 180 rotation. I've always heard them referred to as rotational ambigrams .

A good attitude, that's what counts. At first I saw this and thought comma splice ; but that can't be because a splice requires two clauses. In this sentence "a good attitude" is in apposition to the pronoun "that;" that's why this sentence is grammatically correct? (if I'd divided these two clauses by a comma then I'd be splicing with a comma.)

Many native speakers expressing sentences without verbs while speaking, For instance, What you doing now? How you doing? Is it appropriate?

What are the rules for choosing whether to use "of" or "for" before a word ending in "-ing?" Example: We propose a method of simplifying algebraic expressions. We propose a method for simplifying algebraic expressions. I have seen it written both ways, and would like to know which way is proper. Or is this a case where "it depends?" Answer The choice of preposition has less to do with the following gerund (-ing word; in your example, the word simplifying ) than with the word method . It appears from the following NGram (corpus English, 1800 to 2008) that "method of" is much more commonly used than "method for." I think both are understandable, however, and both are used.

Often, I have come across sentences that begin with "So". Should such an usage of "So" be followed by a comma? Are the following examples correct. He is very good at computers. So, I think he can fix your computer. When we multiply an even number with another even number, the result is an even number. So, the square of an even number is an even number. What happens if we choose to use "Therefore", "Hence", or "Thus" instead of "So"? Do the rules still remain the same? When we multiply an even number with another even number, the result is an even number. Therefore, the square of an even number is an even number. When we multiply an even number with another even number, the result is an even number. Hence, the square of an even number is an even number. When we multiply an even number with another even number, the result is an even number. Thus, the square of an even number is an even number.

In my essay (MLA), I talk about Kendrick Lamar's album titled good kid, m.A.A.d city (stylized like that). Which of the following ways would be the correct way to title my essay: Kendrick Lamar's good kid, m.A.A.d city as a Coming of Age Story Kendrick Lamar's Good Kid, M.A.A.D City as a Coming of Age Story Also, in essay titles, titles of works are not placed in quotation marks right?

There's a film just out called Salmon fishing in the Yemen . I've also heard people talk about the country Yemen as "the Yemen". Is it wrong to call Yemen "The Yemen" - or does it date back to some colonial era, where that was what people said? Answer See also Using the definite article before a country/state name . The names of regions often take the definite article, especially if they are named after a natural feature such as a river or mountain, as in "the Congo" or "the Lebanon." Before Yemen was the name of a country, it was a historical region, and called "the Yemen" much like "the Argentine" or "the Gold Coast." The article has fallen out of use in some cases (e.g. Sudan for the Republic of the Sudan), in other cases it is officially discouraged (e.g. Ukraine, not the Ukraine), in others it is part of the name and always included (e.g. The Gambia), and in still others it is not considered part of th

What's the difference between the titular expressions? if any, at all. Oxford and Cambridge dictionaries could not help!! Answer The phrase "you belong to me" is an expression in English (at least American English) most often used in an address to a romantic partner. The phrase belong to , in this case, clearly conveys possessiveness (belong to) Be the property of: the vehicle did not belong to him Oxford Dictionaries Online There is a bit of a chattel tone to the overall phrase, and may stem from a period when a man was seen as owning his wife and children (but not necessarily vice-versa). Such usage dates back to at least the early 19th century. In The Ariel: A Literary Gazette , in 1827 we find You are my betrothed wife, and as such, you belong to me alone! However, in current marriage ceremonies in the US, the phrase Do you take this [man/woman] ...? is used bilaterally. Another meaning of the phrase belong to is a bit less possessive, but still obligatory (follo

I just realized there are some people around my workplace who always try to correct me when using a certain word, saying that that's not how I should speak, and I should use other words (the ones they provide me with) or pretend they didn't understand what I was saying, but it's pretty clear that they did understand. This again with the same purpose, of making me rephrase, or use the words they expect. When doing this, they use, among others, the argument that they sure have understood, but others might not. But then, nobody else complains of not having understood what I was saying. Another argument they use is that even if they understood it, what I said was incorrect. I make the assumption that when I express my ideas in words, I use enough details to get the point across. I would call this type of non-constructive attitude a 'hater' attitude, but I'm curious whether there's a more specific word for this. meta: I'm not a native English speaker, and I

I am in favour of compromises and I am glad that Gabriel also is. Is it okay here to end the sentence with "also is"? Is there a better/more proper way to express this? Answer Your sentence is grammatical, but not very idiomatic, at least in US English. My impression is that in ordinary speech: too is used most frequently, almost always at the end of the clause: Bob's driving, and John's driving too. or Bob's driving. John too. Bob's driving, and he's buying the food, too. also is used less often and is usually put before the added element: Bob's driving, and also John. or Bob's driving. Also John. Bob's driving, and he's also buying the food. In formal writing, you may put also just about anywhere, and you may put too immediately after the added element. You may put either at the head of the clause: Bob's driving. John, too, is driving. or John is driving also. or John, also, is driving. Bob's driving. Too, he's buyin

I find Maureen Dowd’s article in November 24 NY-Times titled “But can they eat 50 eggs?”amusing. She compares the leadership and charm of character between President Obama and Robert Griffin III, the quarterback of the Washington Redskins in the article. But I was caught by the word, “a prewin slump,” which I’ve never heard of, in the following sentence: "While Obama has developed an unnerving and enervating pattern of going into a prewin slump — as in New Hampshire and Texas in the 2008 primaries or the first debate with Mitt Romney — RGIII never allows his batteries to run down while he’s playing." I thought it’s “pre-winning” meaning pre-victory, and I checked Cambridge, Oxford and Merriam-Webster online dictionaries as I always do before posting a question. None of them registers “Prewin” nor “Pre-win.” Google Ngram neither shows any incidence of “Prewin” and “Pre-win.” What does “Prewin” slump mean? Is this a well-received English noun or adjective, or Dowd’s customary

i'm looking for a word for a person who is cynical, judgmental, nitpicking, condescending but also flawed, gawky and timid (in an unfamiliar setting), and is harboring some kind of jealousy towards other people, especially those whom he/she hates. An example of this kind of person is Lizzy Caplan's Janis in Mean Girls . you know the girl who first befriended Lindsay Lohan's character and convinced her to get along with the the plastics in order to exact revenge on Regina george? Also, the word (or words) could be formal or slang.

Sorry has two pronunciations in my dictionary: ˈsärē and ˈsôrē . The first is the one I am interested in because, as someone pointed out to me, the or pattern in English is nearly always pronounced as "oh-r" not "ah-r". At the time, I couldn't think of any other words that pronounced or as "ah-r" but overheard someone say "tomorrow" and realized there are a few others: tomorrow sorrow morrow horror (the first o and only in some places) The question is this: Is there a commonality between these words that allow for a är (ah-r) pronunciation? Perhaps a similar history? Does the double-r make the difference? Answer The words you list all contain what is called an "intervocalic /r/". As danorton mentioned in his answer , in Received Pronunciation an "o" preceding an intervocalic "r" is pronounced as /ɒ/ (like the "o" in "l o t" or " o range"). This pronunciation also occurs in B

Is it considered grammatical to refer to a gerund in the subject position with the pronoun "it"? Example: Visiting a dentist regularly is recommended as it can contribute to overall health.

When speaking with my mother a couple of days ago, I read to her a message I was sending to my cousin on her behalf ending with: "... the birthday of your youngest." [implying her child] She immediately leapt on this and said that as my cousin only had two children, the use of the superlative was not permitted and the comparative must be used instead: "... the birthday of your younger child." She was adamant that this was a solid grammatical rule that she was taught throughout her education. As a younger Briton, I have relatively little formal grammatical education to older people who were better taught in this regard, so I usually defer to her on grammatical rule knowledge. Is she right? Are superlatives not permitted when the domain of the object is only two? To me it seems bizarre. The minimum or maximum of any set does not only exist when there are different minima and maxima, or indeed something which is neither. Answer It certainly used to be a rule, but th

Growing up in Australia (and with an English mother) we would say "I hate it when " It seems, based on TV and movies, that in the USA it's more common to say "I hate when " The two phrases mean the same thing, but the word "hate" is used slightly differently; one seems directed (they hate the bad thing) where the other describes the emotion. Is one more correct, or is it just a case of common usage? Is it related that I find the phrase "write me" or "I'll write you" odd? We tend to say "write to me" or "I'll write to you". Though we do say "[phone|email|text] me" not "[phone|email|text] to me" Answer I hate it when he does that. I hate when he does that. This is very common (22.8 million Google hits for “I hate when” this morning). It is informal and maybe not completely standard English. As you note, whether it is present or dropped does not affect the meaning. The verb hate in thi

Which one would sound better? Terrified, John locked the door and switched off the lights. OR Terrified John locked the door and switched off the lights. Answer The first one is best, because John is a name and terrified is an adjective describing John. If you don't add a comma, then you're naming him Terrified John . If you need a grammatical explanation (the rule), then I'll let the other people explain.

In my school and university I was taught to say "Not at all" or "Don't mention it" in response to "Thank you!" . Now I rarely hear these phrases used, but rather something like "You're welcome" , "It's OK" , "My pleasure" , or "No problem" . My real life conversation experience is very poor. I often listen to some English learning podcasts, and watch some films in English. So I listen to dialogs, which are probably not from the modern real life world. How do native English speakers tend to respond to "Thank you!" now? What I should care about, when choosing from the available options? Answer In common conversation in the US Midwest I rarely hear "Not at all" or "Don't mention it." "No problem" is very common, and "You're welcome" is also pretty well-used. My personal usage: I use "Not at all," "Don't mention it," and &qu

Using "more of a" and "too much of a" is quite common, but when it comes to pluralizing these expressions, things become more complicated. I've never seen someone use these with a plural subject – I just see people rephrasing: "He is too much of an idiot to understand." "They are too stupid to understand." Something I have always wondered about is whether you can pluralize those two expressions, something like "They are too much of ... ". But I cannot think of any way it would be used in the plural. Answer I believe there are two things at play here. One is the fact that "too much of an" is dependent on a singular-typed characteristic, so it sounds clunky when converted directly to plural. The other is whether the phrase type is an established convention or not. Consider these examples: He is too much of an idiot to understand. They are too much of idiots to understand. While the above transmutation looks like it would fi

I am travelling geographically down the country from north of the city of London. Do I state "I am travelling down to London" or do I state "I am travelling up to London" in reference to its capital city status?

Is there a single word that denotes the belief that women are or should be inferior to men? For example, That ideology advocates murder, rape, slavery, homophobia, xenophobia and [insert the requested word here]. The word patriarchy comes to mind but I am not sure if it fits in the sentence above. I am also thinking of sexism , but it denotes prejudice based on sex, which, although in practice usually against women, can work both ways. Any suggestions? Answer Misogyny ?

The meat of an adult sheep is called mutton. The meat of an adult goat is called chevon or mutton. In the English-speaking islands of the Caribbean, and in some parts of Asia, particularly Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Pakistan and India, the word “mutton” is often used to describe both goat and sheep meat, despite its more specific meaning (limited to the meat of adult sheep) in the UK, US, Australia and several other English speaking countries. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goat_meat Questions: Why mutton is used for goat meat in some Asian countries (and Caribbean)? Is this a semantic extension? What is the origin of this usage? Is mutton ever used for goat meat in North America? What word is common for goat meat in North America? For example: "goat meat" or "chevon"? (You can talk about UK, NZ, AU etc. also) (Though, goat meat itself is not that common in North America comparing to other parts of the world) Answer My answer addresses the questions What w

"Anniversary" comes from Latin: "anni" [genitive of annus = year] + "vers(us)" [past participle of vertere = to turn]. I am interested in constructing a similar word which means "reoccurring every 1000 days". "One thousand", in Latin, is mille and the genitive plural of "day" is dierum . Hence: mille-dierum-versary. However, this doesn't sound brilliant -- I know very little about Latin, so am not sure how its affixation works -- so does anyone have any better suggestions? Answer The Urban Dictionary lists an obvious choice: kiloversary , also known as k-day . (Coming soon to a Hallmark card near you.)

In the book The Wealth of Nations , (Adam Smith, 1776), the words an yearly are used. Why was this an exception to the indefinite article rules? Chapter VI, Book I: At the rate of ten per cent therefore, the undertaker of the one will expect an yearly profit of about one hundred pounds only... Answer At first I thought OP had just found a bad transcription. The copy I just picked up from Pennsylvania State University says a yearly , as you would expect (ditto gutenberg.org ). Thanks to @D Krueger for ferreting out Google Books scanned copy of the 1778 edition , which has an yearly . A few centuries before Adam Smith, the indefinite article was always an . As Wikipedia says , 'an' and 'a' are modern forms of the Old English 'an', which in Anglian dialects was the number 'one' . I can't say for sure if Adam Smith himself actually wrote an , or if it was a well-intentioned typesetter preparing the text of those early editions. At that time I suspect

How do you indicate the title of a major work if neither italics nor underline are available? Would you fall back on quotes or should you use something else? Text messages are an example of where this may come up. Answer According to the Associated Press Stylebook , you should use quotation marks around the titles of books, songs, television shows, computer games, poems, lectures, speeches and works of art. You don't need to use quotations around the names of magazine, newspapers, the Bible or books that are catalogues of reference materials. None of them are required to be underlined or italicized. Considering that this is for text messages, there doesn't seem to be a good reason to apply the rules of MLA or Chicago style. Your priority should be to effectively communicate to your reader, regardless of style. That said, Chicago style includes this recommendation : When composing Web documents, avoid underlining. Instead, use italics for titles, for emphasis, and for words, le

The question : in their song: Such a shame (video), Talk Talk (album It's my life, 1984, remember, old folks), with the voice of Mark Hollis , sings ( full lyrics ): Such a shame to believe in escape; 'A life on every face', but that's a change. Until I'm finally left with an '8' ; Tell me to relax, I just stare. What does left with an '8' number reference mean in that context? Some other verses in the song play in the same field, apparently: Number me with rage Number me in haste The dice decide my fate The meaning seems related to dice cast. A single standard 6-face die cannot yield 8, but other less standard polyhedral dice (8-, 12-, 20-face polyhedra, used in war-games and role-playing games) can: Since they are non-standard, I will assume two 6-face dice are cast. Probabilities for the two dice cast is about 14 % for an eight. Answer The lyrics are inspired by this story of a psychiatrist who bases his actions/decisions on the cast of a dic

Basically, what's the difference between this: However, it didn't mean that I didn't have the potential to become a rock star. and this? It didn't mean, however, that I didn't have the potential to become a rock star. Or does it mean exactly the same thing? Answer The Ancient Romans knew about the power of word placement in sentences, and used it to great effect in their particular culture. In Latin , the relationship of words to each other did not depend on their position. To keep people guessing as they spoke, they often saved the most important word in the sentence - the verb - for last. The others they arranged however they liked to achieve the greatest effect. We have lost most of that ability in English, and changing word order often means having to change the entire construction of the sentence. Your sentence has the same meaning wherever you place However . You, though, have a choice in a word you can place to your desired effect: what do you want to empha

what will be the question of he is from the USA? Is it "where he is from?"/"where is he from?". And why is it so? Answer To convert the statement He is from the USA. into a Yes/No question, one moves the first auxiliary verb ( is in this example; all forms of be are auxiliaries) to a position before the subject noun phrase ( he in this example), and adds a question intonation if speaking, or a question mark if writing. So the result is Is he from the USA? That's an actual question; if you say it, you're requesting the addressee to give you information. However, Yes/No questions can also be signalled just by the intonation in a simple sentence. This is mostly done in speech, so He is sounds wrong, since pronouns are usually contracted. You could just say He's from the USA? ( with the question intonation -- it can't be left out) and folks will generally interpret it as a Yes/No question. If you want to make a Wh -question, first you make a Y

Should I say "Where are you at now?" or "Where are you now at?" Which is grammatically correct? And is there any difference in meaning between the two? Answer Both are possible in speech, although the first is probably more likely. They can be: a) an inquiry about someone's location; b) an inquiry about someone's mental, spiritual or emotional state; or c) an inquiry about which page someone has reached in a book.

My textbook sets this question: In each of the following sentences, a word has been used in sentences in different ways. Choose the option corresponding to the sentence in which the usage of the word is incorrect or inappropriate. The average of 3, 4, 5, 7. and 10 is 6 whereas the mean is 5. The books says that it is wrong and median should be used instead: In this sentence, mean has to be replaced with median for the sentence to make sense. My question is: isn't mean correct? For years I've studying the word mean in mathematics, and now the book says: use median . I don't think the sentence is wrong due to the mean being written as "6", because even if I write the wrong mean, the usage of the word is correct, I'm just writing the wrong answer. If you look at this link, it says, mean should be used for symmetrical data sets, and median for skewed data, In the above sentence, the data being skewed my guess is that is probably the reason median is being used

I'm looking for a word that refers to one who x es a piece of media or describes the action of x ing a piece of media, where x is the act by which one experiences that work, and where "piece of media" means an informative (i.e. characterized by its provision or conveyance of information, but not necessarily edifying or educational) work. Viewer/viewing works for film and television, reader/reading for prose and poetry, listener/listening for music and spoken word, but none are agnostic to the type of its respective medium. I'm specifically avoiding consumer , partaker , and user due to the implication that the work is destroyed when one x es it. I'm not averse to simply writing reader/viewer/listener, but if a briefer alternative exists I would be glad to learn of it. Answer A participant : one who participates in an activity. A subject . Perhaps it's a little off the beaten path, but a subject subjects himself or herself to an informative medium. They then

E.g. "geek" or "queer" were originally meant as an insulting term, but were taken by the recipients as titles of pride. Is there a term for this phenomenon? Answer Reappropriation is the word you are looking for. ... the cultural process by which a group reclaims— re-appropriates —terms or artifacts that were previously used in a way disparaging of that group. For example, since the early 1970s, much terminology referring to homosexuality—such as gay and (to a lesser extent) queer and poof—has been reappropriated. [...] A reclaimed or reappropriated word is a word that was at one time a pejorative but has been brought back into acceptable usage —usually starting within the communities that experienced oppression under that word, but sometimes also among the general populace as well. [...] This can have wider implications in the fields of discourse, and has been described in terms of personal or socio political empowerment. [...] Politics However, the phenomenon

I'm helping someone learn English (second language), and I'm having trouble explaining when to use the and when not to. For example: Students learn better when teachers are passionate about teaching. versus The students learn better when the teachers are passionate about teaching. There's a subtle difference. The first one is a general statement, whereas the second might imply a study where a group of students learned better than another. Is the difference simply that, general v. specific? Answer Is the difference simply that, general v. specific? No, but it is the starting point for teaching English as a foreign language. I suggest starting out with only general vs. specific usage, and then adding other rules bit by bit (giving precedence to those most used): general vs. specific always before ordinal numbers (but never with possessives) always before superlatives (but never with possessives) always before river names etc. The point is to avoid drowning the learner in ru

I discovered on a quiz show the other day that the word "dog" appears to have come from nowhere and displaced the German word "hund". Has any research revealed how it arrived in the English language? Answer The Wiktionary entry for "docga" suggests a possible origin in the root of a word originally meaning "power, strength, muscle" along with a diminutive suffix -ga. It occurs to me that single-syllable words (or single syllables plus a suffix) can come about onomatopeoiacally. The root "dog"/"doc" doesn't necessarily have had to have come from "somewhere". If the Wiktionary entry is correct that there is only one known attestation of "docga", it is striking that it became the word that eventually ousted "Hund" (as the generic word). On the other hand, I guess it's possible that "docga" was widely used, just not in the kinds of register that tended to be written down. (It'

A location, A, is said to be equidistant from two other locations, B and C, if the distance from A to B is the same as the distance from A to C. What is the equivalent word to use in the context of time? That is, suppose that the distance from A to B is different from the distance from A to C, but it takes the same amount of time to get from A to B as it does from A to C. Answer Both equitemporal (which Zairja mentioned) and isochronal , “... having equal duration” might work. Google shows about 475 times as many web instances of isochronal as of equitemporal (2.4M vs 5K). Also consider isochronous , in its sense “happening at the same time; isochronal”. Edit: The word that occurred to me immediately upon reading the question is isochronic : “performed in equal times; said of motions and vibrations occurring at the same time and being equal in duration”. Another interesting word is isochron , which (in much the same sense as in isochron dating ) means “an imaginary line or a line

What is the difference between the sentences "I would love/like to play cricket" and " I want to play cricket." Is there any difference in the moods? Answer Further to tchrist's answer, they're different, but it's more complicated than it looks. I want to play cricket: whether the option to play cricket is available or not, to play cricket is what I want to be doing right now. I don't want to be sitting at my boring office job wasting time on ELU; I want to play cricket, dammit. I would love to play cricket. I read this as one of: 1) My friend has asked me if I want to play cricket right now and I've replied "I would love to play cricket!" This could be followed by me saying either "So let's play!" or "But unfortunately I can't because I'm at my boring office job wasting time on ELU." OR 2) If it were possible to play cricket right now, I would gladly do so, but alas it is not possible at all.

Is there a special word/name/phrase for the money/income generated by a student while he is in college by working part time?

In dictionaries you'll often see a pronunciation guide next to words like (bakery would be beɪkəri). Are there different standards of these pronunciation guides? Also, where can I learn how to understand the pronunciation guide? Answer The pronunciation is normally given using the International Phonetic Alphabet , but some other pronunciation guides are also used. For English, it is used also the Pronunciation respelling for English ; other languages will adopt a similar system that is specific for the language, differently from the IPA that can be used for any languages.

What is the right form to use when talking about plural citizenship? "We are Italian" or "we are Italians"? (or American, Or German or any other ending with "*an") Same issue for "Saudi" or "Saudies", "Israeli" or "Israelies", etc. I understand that one is used as a noun and one as an adjective, but which is right and why? And on the same topic, how can for example, "Chinese", "Taiwanese" or "Japanese" be used differently for plural and singular? And what should one do with "Korean" - is "Koreans" even valid? Somehow it sounds strange to say "Koreans". EDIT I : as result of the comments : I am not specifically talking about "nationality" . the same can be asked about a city: would It be "Londonian" or "Londonese" , "New-Yorkean" or "New-Yorker" "New Yorkian" or "New-yorkese"? ..and also a

Is the saying "It's not that big of a deal" incorrect? I would really like an answer to this as my children think it is correct.

Actually I am confused between get and be as there are so many sentences in which get can be replaced with b without changing their meaning. So I just want to know what are the differences between get and be? And when can I interchange them without changing the meaning of the sentence?

"gourmand" means someone who is excessively fond of eating and drinking, while "gourmet" someone who is a connoisseur of food and drink. Does "gour-" mean food?, "-mand" command and demand, and "-met" enjoy? Etymology says "gourmand" is not connected with "gourmet".

[I'm not really on a Sailor Moon kick. ^_^] Still, the use of the word kick to denote the feeling of a "current or temporary pleasure" is pretty strange, isn't it? How did it evolve from its original root, which I presume is the sense of striking something with the foot, to that meaning? My question is: Can anyone draw a plausible pathway from the most original meaning to this colloquial meaning of kick ? EDIT : Er, my example sentence didn't say, I get a kick out of Sailor Moon. It said, I'm on a Sailor Moon kick . I think these senses are very distinguishable, and thus the answers I've received thus far strike me as wrong. Answer There's a reasonable progression from "getting a kick out of something" to "being on a Sailor Moon kick." This is through references to alcohol or drugs; here being on a kick could mean an extended period of using alcohol or drugs. From James Jones' Here to Eternity (1951): He had seen members

What is the proper way of writing an exclamative question: What are you doing!? What are you doing?! or is it better to just leave it as a simple question? Answer According to the Interrobang wikipedia page , this symbol [‽] has been created to convey the meaning of your question. Using it you ask " a question in an excited manner, express excitement or disbelief in the form of a question, or ask a rhetorical question. " But, always in that page, you can see it's a nonstandard symbol , so like it says, " in standard English, the same inflection is usually notated by ending a sentence with first a question mark and then an exclamation mark. " Now, it's also true that in an informal context , most people won't really care about it, but if you must choose a "line", it's that one. Concerning formal writing , I'd suggest to avoid any of these and focus on the wording to convey the "exclamative" tone of the question.

Is the sentence below grammatically correct? I repeatedly punched his face until I passed out, my arms sliced a few times by his blade." I know what participial phrases are; I read about them here . I know how they describe a noun. For instance: Watching the TV, I heard a sudden yelling from my mom forcing me to turn off the TV. Here, the sentence has two participle phrases (both are verb-ing modifiers) modifying different nouns: the first one is "watching the TV," which tells us what the subject is doing; and "forcing me to turn off the TV," which describes what the mom was doing. And I also know that "yelling" is just a gerund and not a participle phrase. I also know when to use a comma on sentences with the participle phrase showing at the end of a sentence. My mom screamed when she saw her, terrified. Here, the mom is the one being modified by the verb-ed modifier, or generally the participial phrase, not the person the mom was scared at. But if a

When should “into” be used rather than “in to,” and vice versa? I am sorry if the question is silly, but I think I heard both options spoken by native speaker. So, which one is correct? Answer I agree with Steve Melnikoff that put something in sounds more natural. Put something into puts the emphasis on the motion, put something in on the target. Examples for use of put something into that portray that fact are: put something into motion (formerly motionless) put into play put into effect There is a verb put in something , meaning to apply, plant, spend (time/money), introduce, (nautically) enter a harbor or port.

There is a person in my current daily life who never admits his wrongs. He is always quick to blame others first and always believes that he is not wrong. Even when he is proven wrong, he still believes he shouldn't be sorry and isn't wrong. Is there a single-word adjective to describe this behavior? If not, a better way to describe this person would also make do. While stubborn and irresponsible fit, I feel like they don't tell the whole story. By this, I mean if I were to say to others that he is very stubborn and irresponsible, it is not implicitly implied that he blames others and never acknowledges his own fault. Edit: I believe my question is different because the person will also never acknowledge their wrongdoing. On top of blaming others, even after it has been proven to be their fault, they will not admit wrong doing. So aside from blaming others, they refuse to acknowledge the possibility that they have committed a mistake. Answer Sounds like a remorseless/unr

For some reason I thought "egrarious" was a word, but I cannot find any authoritative reference to the word. I thought it meant "ostentatiously bad". I am aware there is a word "egregious". Answer It does now that you've asked about it, but I've no idea what it means. It could indeed be a misspelling of egregious , which has the distinction of describing something that is remarkable in both a good sense and a bad sense.

I once read about a nice word that describes the specific noise made by a helicopter in flight. It wasn't a generic verb like "rattling" or "juddering", but one that only applies to helicopters. It may have been onomatopoeic, but I'm not sure. I'm almost sure it was a verb (as in "the [...]ing noise of the helicopter"), but it could have been a noun (as in "we could hear the helicopter's [...] from a mile off"). I've hunted on the internet to try to find this word again, but to no avail. I'm sure I'll know it when I see it though. Does anyone else know this word?

Which is correct? How much is the two fares? How much are the two fares?

Please tell me the passive form (if there is) of the following sentence: Leave at once. ???