Tuesday, March 23, 2021

Recent Questions - English Language & Usage Stack Exchange

Recent Questions - English Language & Usage Stack Exchange

"Neither" plural agreement

Posted: 23 Mar 2021 09:39 AM PDT

There are four different forms of verb pluralisation agreement I'm curious about:

  1. neither thing [has/have] an attribute
  2. neither of the things [has/have] an attribute
  3. both of the things [has/have] an attribute
  4. both things [has/have] an attribute

For each of these forms, should "have" be pluralised, or not? My intuitive guesses are singular, singular, plural and plural; but I have no specific justification.

Question about parallel structures

Posted: 23 Mar 2021 09:37 AM PDT

One of the tasks that we have to do on PTE exam is to paraphrase a writtent text. I have prepared a template for myslef which is

While the impacts of N and N such as N and N are important, the effects of N and N such as N and N are significant, and the influences of N and N such as N and N are remarkable.

Now, my questions is, when using this template as there is a coordinating conjunction of " and" should all the noun phrases be in the same structure, namely both gerund, infiniting, adj+noun and so forth? Or there is no need for that?

Example :

While the impacts of making money and modern approaches Such as Different books and collections of assignments

What is wrong in the following sentence?

Posted: 23 Mar 2021 09:22 AM PDT

If we look at people's behaviour from an economic perspective, we can shed new light on people's actions in a community

I want to know if there is any error, be it word form, tense, spelling or formality

time expression for hour ending in 00? [duplicate]

Posted: 23 Mar 2021 09:20 AM PDT

I have the following case: "This will be triggered from hour to hour". So if it is 9:32 the trigger will activate on 10:32. My question is: If I want to say from hour to hour BUT I want to say every hour ending in 00. So if it is 9:32 the trigger will be at 10:00.

Is there some kind of expression for that?

habitual voice with "been -ing" form?

Posted: 23 Mar 2021 09:13 AM PDT

I am wondering about express something in the habitual voice over time. As an example of something non-habitual, I might say:

  • I have been running through the park for 30 minutes.

I think that'd be interpreted by anyone to indicate for the last 30 minutes the speaker has been actively running through the park.

But what about?

  • I have been running through the park for two weeks.

Grammatically the same as above, but I think one has to take a habitual interpretation that maybe every day the speaker has ran through the park, but not all day and maybe not even at the time of speech. That habbit extends from two weeks ago up until the time of speech.

I wonder, for this habitual sense, is it the same or better to say:

  • I have ran through the park for two weeks.

I'm not sure how using the present tense (ran) here instead of be+[-ing] changes. Does it make it clearly habitual? Or is it indicating we don't know when the two week period ended (as opposed to knowing it referes to the last two weeks)?

"There are" or "there is"? [duplicate]

Posted: 23 Mar 2021 08:52 AM PDT

  1. "There are Mary and Nat"
  2. "There's Mary and Nat"

Which sentence is correct and why?

Thanks in advance!

Participial phrase separating main verbs

Posted: 23 Mar 2021 08:45 AM PDT

Let's say you have the following sentence:

I stood there and wondered what to do next.

Now, let's say you insert a participial phrase after "there."

I stood there looking at her and wondered what to do next.

Does the verb "wondered" have to become part of the participial phrase (i.e., "wondering what to do next"), or can it remain "wondered"?

I stood there looking at her and wondering what to do next vs. I stood there looking at her and wondered what to do next.

"Berning out", "BolsoNero" - What do you call the phenomenon of coining such words?

Posted: 23 Mar 2021 09:22 AM PDT

I'm writing my thesis on blend neologisms in The Economist (splinter/portmanteau/telescopic words, contaminants, frankenwords - whatever you may call them).

Blending process happens when:

  • 2 or more morphemes are combined after at least 1 of them is shortened OR
  • some part of the syllables between the two is joined

I frequently stumble upon some newly coined words containing the names of famous politicians that resemble some other well-known and absolutely ordinary words. What are they?

I have got some questions and would be truly grateful for your help:

  1. What word-formation type is implemented in coining such occasionalisms?

    Berning out (Bernie+burning out), BolsoNero (Bolsonaro + Neron), > Shel-no (Shelton+hell+no), Priti difficult (pretty), Reade's digest > (Reade + Reader's digest)

  2. What do we call those words? Are they blends?

  3. Déjà flu(Déjà vu + flu) - What is that? A blend?

  4. AI-ssembly line (AI+assembly line) - What is that? A blend?

  5. TIPSy (Abbreviation TIPS + -y) - What is that?

  6. Reargardère action (rearguard action + Lagardère) - What is that? A blend, a sandwich word, or something else?

What did Lord Byron mean by "Away with this cant about nature!"?

Posted: 23 Mar 2021 08:25 AM PDT

In Oscar Wilde's A Sentimental Journey Through Literature, he suggests that the literary critic 'Mr Noel' thought Lord Byron was a "true nature worshipper and Pantheist".

Wilde provides evidence to the contrary, saying Byron spoke with contempt of

'twaddling about trees and babbling o' green fields'

And that Byron also said:

'Away with this cant about nature! A good poet can imbue a pack of cards with more poetry than inhabits the forests of America,'

What is meant by these quotes?

What is the meaning of POLLITICATION?

Posted: 23 Mar 2021 08:17 AM PDT

In his Six Wives:the Queens of Henry VIII (2003) the distinguished historian Professor David Starkey, describing a tactic used by Henry during his long legal campaign for a divorce from Catherine of Aragon, says Acting on Henry's orders, Wolsey tried to tie his fellow legate's hands by getting him to sign a written undertaking or 'pollitication'.

The OED has no entry whatever for pollitication. But it does have an entry for pollicitation - meaning The action of promising; a promise; a document conveying a promise. Also Civil Law: a promise not yet formally accepted, and therefore in certain cases revocable. 1528 S. Gardiner in N. Pocock Rec. Reformation (1870) I. li. 133 As yet the pope's holiness hath not required the king's pollicitation.

Is the redoubtable Starkey guilty of a malapropism?

When a substitute response is given, although it does not address the main issue, is called?

Posted: 23 Mar 2021 09:46 AM PDT

This is not done to evade the question, but rather offered perhaps in consolation. Such as when one is looking for the doctor, who is currently out of reach, and you say, "how about I give you a cup of coffee and a magazine (while you wait)."

The counter proposal does not address the question at all, but it is not done in trickery. I don't mean it as a non sequitur. It means something closer to "in lieu" of... I just forgot the phase or term that defines this situation.

Could you help me the meaning of highlighted parts please?

Posted: 23 Mar 2021 08:08 AM PDT

When you arrive at work you'll plug in your car once again, this time into a socket that allows power to flow form your car's batteries to the electricity grid. One of the things you did when you bought your car was to sign a contract with your favourite electricity supplier, allowing them to draw a limited amount of power from your car's batteries should they need to, perhaps because of a blackout, or very high wholesale spot power prices. The price you get for the power the distributor buys form your car would not only be most attractive to you, it would be a good deal for them too, their alternative being very expensive power form peaking stations.

If, driving home or for some other reason your batteries looked like running flat, a relatively small, but quiet and efficient engine running on petrol, diesel or compressed natural gas, even biofuel, would automatically cut in, driving a generator that supplied the batteries so you could complete your journey.

Could you let me know why it is " form your car"? What is the meaning of running flat and driving a generator.

let me tell you or let me inform you [closed]

Posted: 23 Mar 2021 07:45 AM PDT

Which sentence is gramatacally correct?

  1. let me inform you how glad we are that you arrive.
  2. Let me tell you how glad we are that you arrive.

Can/Should I put a comma before "for" in this sentence?

Posted: 23 Mar 2021 07:58 AM PDT

  • China's domestic brands have made huge strides in the years since 2012, creating new features and products that take into account what Chinese users want, for a small fraction of the price.

i can't understand the usage of "for" in this sentence. Is this usage a conjunction or a preposition?

Sequence of tenses with the hypothetical use of "would"

Posted: 23 Mar 2021 06:38 AM PDT

I know that there have been a lot of threads on this topic, but I couldn't find a response to my question in the threads which had been posted before. And so my question is as follows: Which of these two sentences is correct?

  1. I would wait until the police came.
  2. I would wait until the police comes.

Saying these sentences I have the hypothetical meaning of 'would' in mind. I just want to express that if something bad happened I would wait for the arrival of the police.

Thank you in advance for all the responses.

Why was "a world" used in this sentence of Melville?

Posted: 23 Mar 2021 09:11 AM PDT

I cannot make much sense of a world in the following passage from Moby-Dick:

There's your law of precedents; there's your utility of traditions; there's the story of your obstinate survival of old beliefs never bottomed on the earth, and now not even hovering in the air! There's orthodoxy!

Thus, while in life the great whale's body may have been a real terror to his foes, in his death his ghost becomes a powerless panic to a world.

Methinks Melville referred to the existing world he knew (the world of traditions, of old beliefs, of orthodoxy) and not to an imaginary word (when referring to such a non-existing world the indefinite article is frequently used). Therefore, the definite article would make more sense to me in this sentence, like so:

Thus, while in life the great whale's body may have been a real terror to his foes, in his death his ghost becomes a powerless panic to the world.

Would such sentence be incorrect in the context of the passage in question? Why was the indefinite article chosen by Melville?

Word for "evaluating only the necessary components"

Posted: 23 Mar 2021 06:17 AM PDT

I am looking for a noun whose definition resembles "evaluating only the necessary components".

This is for our research, Chapter 3 under Ethical Considerations. The first two on the list are Beneficence, and Confidentiality.

I am looking for a single word (as much as possible) to parallel the first two on the list.

Is this correct? Canada, Spain, and USA

Posted: 23 Mar 2021 07:27 AM PDT

Substitute USA with UK, UAE, and the equivalent, is it correct?

Or do I have to add the definite article prior to USA?

Make or do a drawing

Posted: 23 Mar 2021 08:30 AM PDT

Please help me out: When asking young children to use their pencils or markers do they: 1.do a drawing or make a drawing? 2. If the instruction is to draw a circle( with their marker or pencil) do they " do a circle or make a circle?"

What's it called when someone insults you for not knowing something that you've never learnt or that's not in your field? [duplicate]

Posted: 23 Mar 2021 07:28 AM PDT

For example, let's say I'm a physicist, so I'm not stupid. But, I'm talking to someone who is an accountant and they insult me for not knowing accounting jargon or how to do things involved in their field during a conversation.

What is it called when you raise a problem and someone else makes it seem like you're entitled by bringing up something far worse?

Posted: 23 Mar 2021 09:15 AM PDT

For example, you say "These working conditions are subpar. We don't get any breaks." and then someone else says "You're entitled. You know who has it bad? People that work in sweatshops!"

You raised a valid point, but now someone has completely dismissed it by bringing up something unrelated.

A more well known example is "I'm hungry." to which a parent might reply "You're not hungry. Children in Africa are hungry."

I feel like there should be a word for this kind of fallacy.

What are the rules for pluralising abbreviations?

Posted: 23 Mar 2021 09:40 AM PDT

Especially in academic writing, pluralisation of abbreviations is a very handy device: 'p'→'pp'¹ is 'page'→'pages', 'ed'→'edd' becomes 'editors', 'll' is 'lines', 'nn' is 'notes'.² The rule (given 'ed'→'edd') appears to be that the final letter of the abbreviation is doubled in order to pluralise it, but is this correct? So, as the question states: What are the rules for pluralising abbreviations? From this follows two sub-question: Are there any notable differences between academic writing and writing for a general audience (except perhaps avoiding too many such abbreviations)? And when using established Latin phrases in English writing, are there any special rules to consider for pluralisation of Latin abbreviations in English texts?

With reference to note 2 below, I am conscious that these abbreviations might have been inherited from mediaeval scribal practice. Could the answer perhaps be found there?³

───

1.   Or 'pp.', henceforth without the full stop.

2.   Or 'pāginæ', 'ēditorēs', 'līneæ', 'notæ'.

3.   Could perhaps 'qq.v.' be a legitimate variant of 'q.v.', ɔ: for 'quibus vidē' rather than 'quō vidē'? An example (if correct) could be 'These issues have been discussed earlier, qq.v. nn. 13, 27 and 29.'

───

Comment 1

I considered adding the latin tag, but chose not to, as this question isn't about Latin specifically, but rather what is customary in English. Should you consider that the latin tag indeed belongs to this question, do please say so in the comments, and I will edit it.

Comment 2

As pointed out in the comments, we are here dealing with abbreviations renegated to footnotes. I still believe the question holds relevance, though, but it is worth keeping in mind.

Phrase meaning which is critical

Posted: 23 Mar 2021 08:22 AM PDT

  • We can rightfully take pride in the fact that this day has been recognised universally by the UN as International Mother Language Day.

What is the meaning of the phrase "the fact that"? What does it actually mean in a word? Is this phrase a conjunction?

Can "comply with" here be replaced by "abide by"?

Posted: 23 Mar 2021 08:08 AM PDT

The key explains that when using the phrase "abide by" you must ensure that "a person" serves as the subject of the sentence. Is that true?

  • 6 All the activities of a joint venture shall ____ the provision of laws, decrees and pertinent regulations of the People's Republic of China.

a obey ... b abide by ... c comply with ... d observe

[istack:imgur]

Which sentence is better, if I change "in a way that" to "how", should I leave "in"?

Posted: 23 Mar 2021 07:07 AM PDT

As I am learning English, the more I study, the more I am confused...

Termite mounds are built in a way that hot air rises out and cool air comes in.

in that sentence, if I want to change "a way that" to "how", should I still use "in" or removing "'in" is better?

Has a dead metaphor ceased to be a metaphor?

Posted: 23 Mar 2021 09:50 AM PDT

In its simplest sense, a metaphor is a figure of speech where, essentially, a simile is ellipted to what is apparently a false statement, but as the intention is to emphasise the similarity rather than deceive, this is an accepted linguistic device.

Bob is like a tiger.

Bob is a tiger.

John Lawler is an expert on pointing out in his invaluable and fascinating contributions the extended metaphors on which a lot of our language is built, such as the container metaphor(s) and up-is-achievement metaphor. In a recent post, he pointed out that 'zenith' is used metaphorically as 'high point [of eg a career]'.

However, Wikipedia has this to say about dead metaphors:

There is debate among literary scholars whether so-called "dead metaphors" are dead or are metaphors. Literary scholar R.W. Gibbs noted that for a metaphor to be dead, it would necessarily lose the metaphorical qualities that it comprises. These qualities, however, still remain. A person can understand the expression "falling head-over-heels in love" even if they have never encountered that variant of the phrase "falling in love."

Analytic philosopher Max Black argued that the dead metaphor should not be considered a metaphor at all, but rather classified as a separate vocabulary item.[2] If the verb "to plough" retained the simple meaning of "to turn up the earth with a plough," then the idea of a car "ploughing through traffic" would clearly be a metaphor. The expression would be a comparison between the motion of the plough cutting through the soil and a car speeding through traffic. In order to understand it, one would need to grasp the comparison. However, "to plough" has taken on an additional meaning of "to move in a fast and uncontrolled manner," and so to say that a car "ploughed through the traffic" is a literal statement. No knowledge of the original metaphorical symbolism is necessary to understanding the statement.

For 'zenith', Elliott Frith found a dictionary definition:

Zenith noun

the strongest or most successful period of time

Should we revise our usage of the word 'metaphor' in such cases?

Can "somethings" be used as a plural?

Posted: 23 Mar 2021 08:23 AM PDT

I heard the soft thumps of somethings heavy on cloth.

This looks wrong, but changing it to singular makes it work.

I heard the soft thump of something heavy on cloth.

I want to keep the operational definition of "something" to emphasize the unknown quality of the items. "Some things" and "several things" sound too vague and passive. I'm also curious at this point about the answer for the answer's sake. Can "somethings" be used as a plural?

Is it wrong to use the word "codes" in a programming context?

Posted: 23 Mar 2021 07:27 AM PDT

Is it wrong to use the word "codes" in programming context?

I shall use these codes.

Can something be a parent or child "to"/"of" something?

Posted: 23 Mar 2021 08:35 AM PDT

I am writing some software documentation. There are data structures that are organized in trees and every element in the structure can be child or parent "to"/"of" every other element.

I am not a native speaker and my instincts are pretty divided on the matter themselves, so I guess I have to turn to higher powers to answer that question. Hence, I turn to you:
Is it "to" or "of" in that case?
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)