Recent Questions - English Language & Usage Stack Exchange

---

• "information": "formal" vs "informal"
• Are adjectives and adverbs just collapsed version of adjuncts?
• how we can use omit the subjects in "not only but also" structre?
• What does "river" means in this sentence? [closed]
• What does the word save mean in this context? [closed]
• Cancellation vs cancelation [closed]
• Article before nouns determined by their name [closed]
• N-times differentiable function should go with hyphen? [duplicate]
• Usage of being in English
• '' to '' meaning ? which one?
• About Grammar and usage [closed]
• SHIFT BACK TENSE IN REPORTED SPEECH [migrated]
• Precis the following sentences [closed]
• lie vs fabricate. When to use which one in what situation?
• Word for a statement which would not be true in the future?
• 'Day' as a preposition [closed]
• What is the difference between "this" and "that" in "How much is this/that watch"?
• Looking for word describing Brave New World's consumerism practices and the reinventing of pre-existing products
• "For THE use in a virtual power plant" or "for use in a virtual power plant" and other "the" cases
• Word that means make something available to all / to the working classes
• Student t-distribution: why the dash [sic, EA; hyphen]
• proud to be & proud of being
• Starting sentence with subject and not including it in verbs later on
• Is there a good alternative to "low man on the totem pole"?
• Possessive-S/apostrophe in a list, including the first and second person
• Do I need to use "to" in sentences such as these?
• Is "has or will read" grammatical?
• Use of "elide" --common or esoteric? [closed]
• Must a coordinating clause always have a subject?

"information": "formal" vs "informal" Posted: 07 Aug 2021 10:47 AM PDT We know "information" means the gathering of some data, messages, or part of historical event in a certain coded or decoded format. We also know that "formal" vs "informal" means whether the setup is rigorous or casual. My question is that whether "information" has an origin related to "informal", instead of "formal"? Another way to say it is that whether "information" has an interpretation from "information" -> in+formation or "information" -> informal + formation or "information" -> inform + formation What is the original root of "information"?

Are adjectives and adverbs just collapsed version of adjuncts? Posted: 07 Aug 2021 10:07 AM PDT Modifiers for verbs/ nouns can come in 3 main types: adjectives, adverbs & adjuncts. These all provide specific details about corresponding noun/ verbs e.g: Manner, means (instrumental) - with, using, by (way of) Positional (in space, time) - to, at, in, on,under stative (being) - is, are etc... take the phrase: "he draws With a pencil", the adjunct modifier comprises: A Word communicating the nature of the modification (e.g. Spatial vs instrumental) + noun i.e. With + a pencil. Such constructions make more sense than having separate words that each mean "with a paintbrush" "with a pencil" etc. Instances where particular nouns are used commonly in these constructions it makes sense to collapse the construct into a single word which captures both meanings, e.g. "with + speed" = quickly. The same goes for adjectives - where "red" = is + red. "A Word communicating the nature of the modification" generally words that fulfil this role are considered to be prepositions, but somethimes words which traditionaly fall into other word classes can be used - like verb participles. Is this a reasonable summery? or am I seriously misunderstanding something?

how we can use omit the subjects in "not only but also" structre? Posted: 07 Aug 2021 08:41 AM PDT When we can omit the subject (or sometimes the verb) in the second part of "not only... but also" structure? I have seen some examples: Not only is he handsome but also intelligent Not only does he speak English but he also speaks French In the first example the "he is" is omitted, however in the latter the "he speaks" seems to be mandatory, hence we cannot write "Not only does he speak English but also French". I want to know in which situations we can prevent repeating the subject in the second part? Only when we want to mention an adjective? Or every time that we have similar subjects we can ignore it in the "but also" part? Any help would be appreciated.

What does "river" means in this sentence? [closed] Posted: 07 Aug 2021 08:36 AM PDT I was reading an article and I came across the passage below: When I was young and writing sad songs about how terrible life can be, I never thought like this. But you have to find the good in things. The river is calling, you know. I'm wondering what "river" means in the last sentence. Is it a metaphor? Note: here is the link to the whole article, just in case anyone needs it. https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2021/aug/07/this-much-i-know-martha-wainwright-my-divorce-has-given-me-wisdom

What does the word save mean in this context? [closed] Posted: 07 Aug 2021 06:42 AM PDT A man wakes up in present-day Alaskan wilderness with no idea who he is, nothing on him save an empty journal with the date 1898 and a mirror. I was reading the synopsis for a novel called The Ancestor, and I 've never come across the word save being used in this manner. Can someone explain what it means?

Cancellation vs cancelation [closed] Posted: 07 Aug 2021 10:34 AM PDT cancel, vb., makes canceled and canceling in AmE. Yet, in cancellation the -l- is doubled (-ll-) because the accent falls on the third syllable. It's etymology is Can·ce(l)·la·tion Mid-16th c. Latin cancellat-, past participle of cancellare (cf. can·cel·(l)ing) American English spelling an informal description reads: The nineteenth-century formation parcellation can be seen as reflecting earlier English spelling, or it can be seen as a very conservative instance of British twinning, parallel to, say, cancellation, so rare that there has been no pressure to recognize a more regular variant spelling I don't grasp how to generalize the spelling rule behind Garner's statement, so I'd appreciate any help.

Article before nouns determined by their name [closed] Posted: 07 Aug 2021 04:13 AM PDT Is it necessary to include (definite) articles in front of nouns determined by their particular name? For example, which sentences would be correct? 1a) Yesterday we went to Copacabana beach? 1b) Yesterday we went to the Copacabana beach? 2a) The vessel "Atlantic" is in the harbor. 2b) The "Atlantic" vessel is in the harbor. 2c) Vessel "Atlantic" is in the harbor.

N-times differentiable function should go with hyphen? [duplicate] Posted: 07 Aug 2021 07:31 AM PDT Suppose that I would like to say "Let f(x) be an N-times differentiable function." Should it be "N-times" or "N times", and why?

Usage of being in English Posted: 07 Aug 2021 04:12 AM PDT Someone has written I would like to be a human being rather than being a feminist. Is it correct grammatically to use 'being' here after 'than'? What is the grammar behind it?

'' to '' meaning ? which one? Posted: 07 Aug 2021 05:16 AM PDT What is the meaning of the preposition "to" in these sentences? The shoulder is proximal to the elbow. The ribs are lateral to the lungs. to : used for saying where someone or something is in relation to the position of another person or thing used as a function word to indicate addition, attachment, connection, belonging, possession, accompaniment, or response Which one ?

About Grammar and usage [closed] Posted: 07 Aug 2021 02:52 AM PDT I want to know the usage of 'with that of' in a sentence and also the meaning of it, please explain it

SHIFT BACK TENSE IN REPORTED SPEECH [migrated] Posted: 07 Aug 2021 01:48 AM PDT I have a situation as below: A:Who read my diary? B:I didn't read it A:It is only you who read it. B:I told you I didn't read it/ I told you I hadn't had read it. Is that both sentences are correct for this situation ? Grammar books write that the standard way is to back shift, but sometimes we don't need to back shift But I don't know if we need to back shift for this situation or not, if not, why?

Precis the following sentences [closed] Posted: 07 Aug 2021 01:48 AM PDT Precis the following sentences: a. The manger asked the foreman what he thought about the proposal. b. He refused to accept the explanation given by the shopkeeper. c. The man who is standing over there is our new civil engineer. d. I cannot do this unless I have the equipment which is necessary. e. The job that the worker was given was dull and tiring. f. As they have been exhausted by the work, the workers sat down. g. The explanation that you have given is not satisfactory. h. Certain parts of the country are completed barren and unproductive. i. In spite of the fact that he was not really fit, he decided to take part in games. j. Owing to the fact that there is a shortage of paper, the Government has restricted the size of the newspaper.

lie vs fabricate. When to use which one in what situation? Posted: 07 Aug 2021 09:26 AM PDT I'm having hard time distinguishing between these words and come to ask you gracious people for help. I recently learned the word "fabricate". I got into the dictionary for more details, and found as follows. According to Cambridge Dictionary Fabricate to invent or produce something false in order to deceive someone: At first glance, I thought the word "lie" (in verb form). However, in google, I could not able to find useful comparison between those words, like 'which context are they used differently?' or 'what vibe are they used in diverse situations?'. And I think the reason why I can't find comparison in google is that they are used in very different situation. What word to choose in what situation?

Word for a statement which would not be true in the future? Posted: 07 Aug 2021 06:05 AM PDT I am trying to explain to somebody why the statement "technology A will soon replace technology B" is not a good idea to write in a book. The reason I want to provide is that, in a few years time, indeed technology A might have replaced technology B, in which case the statement "will soon replace" will not be true anymore. I am searching for a single word or a short phrase to describe statements like this, which are currently true but will not be true in the future. Example This is another example of a ________ statement, since you would need to update it in a few years' time. Research I have tried to use a search engine to find a suitable word, and to think of something myself, but without much success. The best I could come up with is "non-future-proof", which is vague and also describes what these statements are not instead of what they are. Another word is "short-lived", but I find it a bit too general. Similar Question Word for something that can be obsolete in the future, obsolete-able sounds similar, but there is a significant distinction. The definition of obsolete, according to Oxford Languages, is no longer produced or used A statement like this does not become "obsolete", as in "no longer produced or used". Instead, it becomes no longer true.

'Day' as a preposition [closed] Posted: 07 Aug 2021 07:50 AM PDT 'The next day, they woke up early to find that it had disappeared.' Does 'day' function as a preposition here? That is, should the above sentence not read 'On the next day...'?

What is the difference between "this" and "that" in "How much is this/that watch"? Posted: 07 Aug 2021 10:04 AM PDT I am studying English and I would like to know the difference about "this" and "that" at this phrase translating to Portuguese. In the image, the subject held the watch and said "that", so I was in doubt. How much is that watch? - Quanto é esse relógio? How much is this watch? - Quanto é esse relógio? I saw the difference about this and that here Difference between this and that.

Looking for word describing Brave New World's consumerism practices and the reinventing of pre-existing products Posted: 07 Aug 2021 05:05 AM PDT I cannot remember the term for a system in which an existing product was redefined and developed into a new product and then marketed as better and sold to the public, even though it works almost exactly the same as the product that came before its generation. I believe there is an ‑ism word in Brave New World which describes part of this about their society and I can just not remember what it is and it is killing me not knowing. Does anyone know what this word is?

"For THE use in a virtual power plant" or "for use in a virtual power plant" and other "the" cases Posted: 07 Aug 2021 04:02 AM PDT So a friend of mine just proof read my masters thesis and pointed out some errors which I think sound weird. He is probably right, but since one is in my title (*facepalm) and I need to fill in some special request to change it I wanted to double check. Is it: "Simulation of ... for THE use in a virtual power plant" or is the "the" wrongly placed there? Also: I am using some components from an online library called "Windpowerlib". So I always referred to it as: These functions are implemented from THE windpowerlib. He told me the "the" is wrongly placed there as well. Can someone confirm? (and maybe explain because it sounds superweird to me)

Word that means make something available to all / to the working classes Posted: 07 Aug 2021 04:44 AM PDT I am seeking a verb that essentially means 'Bring to the reach of everybody'. For example: Travel was for the wealthy but the introduction of the package holiday xxxx travel. Xxx is a word, like 'democratised', but it's not democratised and I can't think what it is! Any thoughts?

Student t-distribution: why the dash [sic, EA; hyphen] Posted: 07 Aug 2021 04:58 AM PDT In statistics, the t-distribution is important. It is an approximation to the normal distribution. Of course we don't say "normal-distribution" (with the dash). Well then, what exactly is the grammatical justification for calling it t-distribution as opposed to just t distribution ? Or to put it another way, is there a good name for the practice of using a dash in this kind of context?

proud to be & proud of being Posted: 07 Aug 2021 08:34 AM PDT I have the following two sentences which I would like to confirm the difference in meaning for. I am proud to be a nurse. I am proud of being a nurse. I'm mainly wondering about the difference in the current status of the person saying such sentences. The way I read it, 'I am proud to be a nurse' = I am a nurse now, and 'I am proud of being a nurse' = I was a nurse previously, but not anymore. I'm looking for confirmation because of the use of 'being' in the second sentence and how that relates to time in this phrase. Thank you.

Starting sentence with subject and not including it in verbs later on Posted: 07 Aug 2021 09:51 AM PDT When creating longer sentences, I am apt to say something like "I love it when he visits and am looking forward to his next one." where I say "I ...", using a subject and verb, but then say "and am" without including the subject pronoun again. Is this acceptable in English? Are there any situations in which only mentioning the subject pronoun once at the beginning of sentence would be incorrect? The meaning does not seem unclear because of it, but saying "I" again sounds repetitive and unnatural.

Is there a good alternative to "low man on the totem pole"? Posted: 07 Aug 2021 08:19 AM PDT Since "low man on the totem pole" is potentially ambiguous (and is possibly offensive to some), are there any good alternative idioms to mean someone of low rank who gets stuck with undesirable things? "Drawing the short straw" doesn't quite fit since that implies randomness.

Possessive-S/apostrophe in a list, including the first and second person Posted: 07 Aug 2021 01:07 AM PDT When adding possessive-S/apostrophe to a list, the rule is only the last person has the apostrophe if the item is shared, or everyone has one if they have the items each, e.g. John and Mary's houses = the houses that belong jointly to John and Mary. John's and Mary's houses = the houses that belong to John and Mary as individuals, at least one each. However, I am curious if the rules are slightly different when possessive pronouns are used for a single item. You and Mary's house OR your and Mary's house? I'm even more unclear when the first person is involved. Mary and my house OR Mary's and my house? Finally, when there are at least three people, including the first person, does the last named person have the possessive-S/apostrophe, or all/none of them? John, Mary and my house John, Mary's and my house John's, Mary's and my house I'd be very grateful to anyone able to clarify this, ideally with a some form of reference, as I can't find it anywhere. There have been several suggestions to use "our", yet if the text refers to a group of people, all of whom own co-own houses with some others within the group*, then the above style wording would be necessary, so my question stands. * eg I own a house with John and Mary, I co-own another with Peter and yet another with Philip and Sarah.

Do I need to use "to" in sentences such as these? Posted: 07 Aug 2021 10:10 AM PDT What I want is (to) go to the cinema. What you should do is (to) shut up and dance. I know that "to" is frequently omitted in such cases, but if you were to write a formal paper, would you include it or not?

Is "has or will read" grammatical? Posted: 07 Aug 2021 09:59 AM PDT I just wrote [he] has or will read [some text] in an ELL chat room. But looking at it (or more accurately, listening to my "inner voice" trying to "read it aloud"), I find it bothers me a lot. A quick check on Google Books finds a claimed 432 written instances of has or will read, and 910 instances of has read or will read, which suggests a significant minority of writers don't have a problem with the fact that the two different read's don't sound the same. When I check the same construction with other verbs that don't have the same written form for past participle and present tense, it seems people nearly always include both (e.g. has worked or will work:1230, has or will work:8; has arrived or will arrive:357, has or will arrive:7). I'm not usually a big fan of "grammatical rules", but it seems to me there "ought" to be a rule that you shouldn't delete one instance of the verb unless it's "the same" as the one you're keeping. And it also seems to me that since language is primarily spoken, "the same" ought to mean "sounds the same when spoken", not "looks the same when written". Can anyone who knows more than me about formal rules of grammar settle this one? As an aside, offhand I can't think of any verb where the past participle and present tense sound the same but are written differently (maybe there aren't any), but would deletion be okay in that case?

Use of "elide" --common or esoteric? [closed] Posted: 07 Aug 2021 09:47 AM PDT Is the word "elide" a word commonly used by English speakers, or is it a more esoteric word used in law or crossword puzzles?

Must a coordinating clause always have a subject? Posted: 07 Aug 2021 10:03 AM PDT E.g., (1) You are getting yourselves into a very dangerous situation; get out of there at once. The imperative following the first clause has an implied subject, so would this mean it is a coordinating clause? If the above sentence was coordinated with so, would that change the status of the clause? (2) You should wear a suit, a clean shirt and a tie for the interview, and be punctual. Is and be punctual a coordinating clause? (3) Worcester is a very sought after porcelain, and is regarded as the finest of the period by many experts. The following clause of this sentence contains a passive structure with an implied subject, so does this make it a full coordinating clause? How would the status of the sentence change if by many experts were omitted?

You are subscribed to email updates from Recent Questions - English Language & Usage Stack Exchange. To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.	Email delivery powered by Google
Google, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, United States