Saturday, July 31, 2021

Recent Questions - English Language & Usage Stack Exchange

Recent Questions - English Language & Usage Stack Exchange

Acceptability of "I'm trying to think if..."

Posted: 31 Jul 2021 10:26 AM PDT

The following sentence recently came out of my mouth: "I'm trying to think if I've seen that before." In a rare moment of self-reflection immediately after saying this, it occurred to me that this construction - i.e. "trying to think if [X]" -- sounds wrong. Do any other native speakers have a similar/different reaction, or for what it's worth, any authority on the rightness or wrongness of this construction?

It's actually difficult for me to think of a generally applicable rephrasing of "I'm trying to think if [statement that could be true or false]." The closest I can come is "I'm thinking about whether," which is pretty much fine, but for me, it doesn't really have the same feel of rifling through one's mind for a bare yes/no answer.

What's the single word for Skip-Level? [closed]

Posted: 31 Jul 2021 08:57 AM PDT

I can't use the word Grand-Parent as Parent-Child has a different meaning in the context I wish to use these words. So, I am using the terms Container and Member.

Take the example of a Container -contains-a-> Member relationship. How should a member nested in another level deep call the top-most container? Like Container -contains-a-> Container -contains-a-> Member

On Liberty by John Stuart Mill- please explain the meaning of following sentence [closed]

Posted: 31 Jul 2021 09:32 AM PDT

If all mankind minus one were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind.

Please help me understand the exact meaning being conveyed here.

What is the grammatical function of the infinitive 'to aid them' in the following sentence? 'He could do nothing to aid them.'

Posted: 31 Jul 2021 08:46 AM PDT

I am aware that infinitives can serve as the subject of a sentence (as in 'To underestimate her would be foolish'), as the object of a sentence ('I found talking to her helpful'), and as the predicative complement of a sentence ('My aim is to help you').

What is the grammatical function of the infinitive 'to aid them' in the sentence 'He could do nothing to aid them'?

Is there an idiom or expression in English for the following situation? [closed]

Posted: 31 Jul 2021 08:58 AM PDT

You scold or tell off someone (or say anything to someone, doesn't have to be negative necessarily) but your true intention is for someone else to hear/see it, and you're just using the first person to get your meaning across indirectly.

Thank you

Word for "object of malignant joy"

Posted: 31 Jul 2021 05:20 AM PDT

I would need a literary synonym of toy, but which would also have the nuance of object of malignant joy. I would like to use it in the context of someone becoming the toy (?) of some evil powers because of lack of strength of character.

I considered plaything and toy, but they are too modern, and besides, they do not have the intrinsic nuance of malignant joy.

I also considered laughingstock and derision which, although literary and even slightly antiquated, are too abstract. I wish to express that these forces play with such a person, as a cat plays with its prey before devouring it. Is there such a word in English?

He gave himself over to rioutous living and became the __________ of demons.

I wouldn't mind an archaic word, but it needs to be still understandable today.

Is it correct to say, “justification for and reference to your answer”?

Posted: 31 Jul 2021 03:29 AM PDT

I want to shorten the words "justification for your answer and reference to your answer" by saying, "justification for and reference to your answer". Is this shorter form correct? If not, how should I say it?

Antonym of "target"

Posted: 31 Jul 2021 06:41 AM PDT

I am looking for antonyms (nouns) of "target". Here, I meant target in the sense

"something that one hopes or intends to accomplish" (https://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/target)

or in my words

"something that one aims to hit".

So my antonym would be "something that one aims to miss". So for example, when I am have a shooting target, that would be the outside of the middle, e.g. where the straw is.

"Taiwan" as an adjective versus "Taiwanese"

Posted: 31 Jul 2021 04:06 AM PDT

I hope this question is not too simplistic for the "linguists ..." forum, but I couldn't seem to find an answer elsewhere.

I am helping a non-native speaker proofread his Ph.D. dissertation regarding archeology in Taiwan. Is it acceptable to use "Taiwan archeology" instead of "Taiwanese archeology" (as in "the history of Taiwan archeology") for archeological work conducted in Taiwan but not necessarily by Taiwanese (e.g., during the Japanese occupation)?

And if it is to refer to the discipline of archeology as developed in Taiwan by Taiwanese academics, would it not then need to be "Taiwanese archeology"?

I suppose "archeology in Taiwan" or "the archeology of Taiwan" could be used, but he has consistently used "Taiwan + NP" (e.g., "Taiwan indigenous people") throughout the work, and I'd like to know if such is ever acceptable.

Can one use the expression "[feel/experience/...] dissonance [... with]" to express antipathy?

Posted: 31 Jul 2021 04:55 AM PDT

I'm unsure how to correctly use the word dissonance in relation to myself - do I feel dissonance, do I experience it, or something else?

The sentence I have is:

I have been open regarding the dissonance I experience with the values, culture and decisions of the department.

Is it ok to use the word dissonance in this way?

What is a word for a thing that is overlooked/a thing of negligence?

Posted: 31 Jul 2021 01:02 AM PDT

A "crack" in the system, but it's not damaged or harmful. I'm not looking for synonyms of negligence/overlooked, it's a word for the thing, conceptually, that is a result of negligence/being overlooked, like the word crack but not that exactly. All synonyms for crack don't work, either. Like, "an overlooking" or "an ignorance" but those words aren't used that way.

It's driving me nuts that this word is missing, or I'm missing it, so I'm reaching out.

Is “summer is back again” a figurative statement?

Posted: 30 Jul 2021 11:26 PM PDT

The season is changing, but then summer is back again. Several days might pass, and then we experience that sharpness again, notice the few scattering ...

Is "summer is back again" a figurative statement?

The reason I doubt is that time cannot return. I think "summer comes" is appropriate.

The usage of "WHO" as a conjuction

Posted: 30 Jul 2021 11:12 PM PDT

I've just started reading the Booker Prize-winning novel "The Sellout".

I don't know the narrator has omitted " who" here or he is talking about himself when he says "indifferent to ...":

... I Never snuck into the movies or failed to give back the extra change to a drugstore cashier indifferent to the ways of mercantilism and minimum-wage expectations...

I mean who is indifferent here, The Cashier or the Narrator?

Is "who" a deleted conjunction?

to be N,A and N,A

Posted: 31 Jul 2021 12:01 AM PDT

I have heard that cognitive verbs such as 'think, believe, consider, suppose, understand, imagine...etc.' should use 'to be noun' or 'to be adjective' in the object complement.

She believed him to be a teacher.

She considers him (to be) rich.

Or, there is a saying that 'to be' cannot be omitted before a noun, but 'to be' can be omitted before an adjective.

Which one is right?

  1. Is 'to be' always something that can be omitted?
  2. Please let me know if there is a subtle difference in meaning between the presence and absence of 'to be'.

"whose" vs "who/that + possessive"

Posted: 31 Jul 2021 09:41 AM PDT

A man that his kids want to call 'daddy.'

Apparently this sequence is correct. Would it remain so adding on object pronoun, ...call him 'daddy'?

However, substituting whose for that + possessive might demand a resumptive pronoun, a man whose kids want to call him 'Daddy.'

Why is it so?

Right Siding - To correct a wrong - I'm sure this is an expression but Google is failing me

Posted: 31 Jul 2021 09:00 AM PDT

I have been using an expression (which no one corrected me on) of "Right Siding" , with the understanding that it means "to correct a wrong" (assuming it was a convenient combination of the idea of "making right", "getting the right side up" or returning to the correct place)... but upon being questioned about it and doing some googling, it looks like I'm alone – did I some how make this expression up and use it for years!?

Double comparatives: "more preferable"

Posted: 31 Jul 2021 03:08 AM PDT

Fowler reads

Sometimes the double comparative form more preferable is used. The word more is of course unnecessary, since preferable by itself means 'more desirable (than)'. Like other comparatives, it is therefore intensified by far, much, infinitely, etc.

Garner adds that it's "inherently a comparative adjective taking to, not than".

For the ahdictionary "It is often claimed that certain is an absolute term like unanimous or paramount and cannot be modified, yet phrases such as fairly/quite certain are readily understood as expressing varying degrees of confidence, especially when they refer to a person. Since certain must always suggest overall confidence, its range is restricted to the upper range; one is less likely to be slightly, somewhat, or a little bit certain."

What other adjectives/adverbs follow this pattern?

definition and usage for whipsaw?

Posted: 30 Jul 2021 10:32 PM PDT

My understanding of the whipsaw term is that can, according to Wiktionary, be used rhetorically as in these examples:

verb (transitive) To defeat someone in two different ways at once.

2014 November 1, Peter Baker & Michael D. Shear, "Braced for a shift in Congress, Obama is setting a new agenda [print version: Obama plots a route for compromise after election, International New York Times, 3 November 2014, p. 1]", in The New York Times‎1:

Whipsawed by events and facing another midterm electoral defeat, President Obama has directed his team to forge a policy agenda to regain momentum for his final two years in office even as some advisers urge that he rethink the way he governs.

So that, informally, an argument might be classified as a "whipsaw" using the above definition.

Is this correct understanding?

As events can cause whipsaw action might not rhetoric similarly cause a whipsaw as defined above?

(None of the linked articles is exactly on-point, those are just along the lines of the unusual usage.)

Here's an explicit usage of the term "whipsaw" in the media:

When MSNBC host Chris Hayes asked Mr Fauci if he understood why people "might feel a little whipsawed",

"Sure, yeah, it's thoroughly understandable," he replied. "But there really is a pretty clear explanation of it."

which would generally be where it's most employed.

When a noun followed by a restrictive clause is preceded by "whichever" or "whatever", it is incorrect to introduce the clause with *that*

Posted: 31 Jul 2021 06:47 AM PDT

When a noun followed by a restrictive clause is preceded by whichever or whatever, it is incorrect to introduce the clause with that in formal writing:

Whatever book (✳that) you want to look at

Whichever book (✳that) costs less is fine with us.

https://ahdictionary.com/word/search.html?q=whatever

What are the grammatical reasons for this?

Is "was" being left out of the following translation before shown because of parallelism?

Posted: 31 Jul 2021 02:08 AM PDT

"If this work could be discovered, it might, he thought, in all probability be restored. Some of the country people were therefore seized, and, inquiry being made of them, the line of the canal was pointed out, and the place shown at which it had been derived from the Nahr-Malcha."

Which followed by although

Posted: 30 Jul 2021 10:00 PM PDT

I'm curious to hear some thoughts on whether this sentence is gramatically acceptable. Although it reads fine in my head, I feel a bit uncomfortable placing 'although' after the word 'which'.

...our process which, although terribly undefined, had sufficient similarities to...

Reading books and checking websites has/have helped them

Posted: 31 Jul 2021 08:08 AM PDT

Which is more correct to say?

Reading books and checking websites has helped them.

Reading books and checking websites have helped them.

What does the idiom “funny as hell” mean?

Posted: 31 Jul 2021 09:12 AM PDT

I really don't understand this idiom, hell is supposed to be a horrible place. I understand the saying which is present in dictionaries "hot as hell", but I could not find "funny as hell" in any online reference.

Can anyone explain this to me?

What does it mean to beat one's hands together?

Posted: 30 Jul 2021 10:51 PM PDT

In Bram Stoker's Dracula, characters are described as beating their hands together (see chapters 21, 17, and 11), typically in situations of stress or helplessness. What is this gesture? At first, I read it like "clapping", but that makes no sense in context. Is it to clasp the hands and move them up-and-down in a mime of supplication? If so, how do you do this with "open hands", as in chapter 17?

As a follow-on, has anyone seen this phrase elsewhere?

Difference between what he is doing and what is he doing [closed]

Posted: 30 Jul 2021 10:29 PM PDT

May I know the difference between

what he is doing

and

what is he doing

Which is more correct?

English versus French grammar

Posted: 31 Jul 2021 09:34 AM PDT

Recently, on the internet, I have heard people say that one should conjugate certain adjectives that are closely related to French. For example, blond for males and blonde for females in the singular form. More recently I have heard someone say that certain nouns should be declined for male and female, -I can't think of an example currently, but the declension would be where one would add an extra e and then make the second to last e have an acute.- Is this technically correct, or is it just using French grammar in English?

Is there a difference between "subsidy" and "subvention"?

Posted: 31 Jul 2021 10:30 AM PDT

Is there a difference between subsidy and subvention? If yes, what is it? When should I use either?

"Hence" and "hence why"

Posted: 31 Jul 2021 03:01 AM PDT

My question is, is the use of the word "hence", used in it's most common sense as an alternative to "therefore", strictly acceptable in English usage in the following example:

I like bananas, hence why I eat them.

I see a lot of people using the word "why" after the word "hence", and I have always considered it, at the very least, inefficient use of English. Happy to find out other views. Many thanks for all comments.

Which is correct: The rest of the staff is or are? The rest of my family is or are?

Posted: 31 Jul 2021 04:10 AM PDT

I hope you can enlighten me. I get varying answers in Google and I need to find out which is the correct grammatical structure for these sentences.

The rest of the staff is/are on leave at the moment.

The rest of my family is/are arriving late.

Are collective nouns always plural, or are certain ones singular?

Posted: 31 Jul 2021 04:10 AM PDT

I'd say Microsoft have a way of bending the rules and I know that McLaren have won the championship. While this sounds strange, I believe it is correct English (sorry, I'm not native).

But when it's a small company, would you still use it this way? Is a company always plural, or are small companies singular? I.e., would you say Bakery Johnson makes fine bread or Bakery Johnson make fine bread? Is it My book seller, Woody's, have moved or is it has moved?
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)