Wednesday, September 8, 2021

Recent Questions - English Language & Usage Stack Exchange

Recent Questions - English Language & Usage Stack Exchange

Is this phrase wrong written? [closed]

Posted: 08 Sep 2021 10:16 AM PDT

"Always celebrate every small bit of success in your life" "One that forgets what celebrating is, will forget for what is worth working hard"

I have a question about what "how is imagery used" means [closed]

Posted: 08 Sep 2021 10:16 AM PDT

"How is imagery used and what effect does it have?"

I have to answer this question but I don't know what it means by "how is imagery used?". Can you give me an example of an answer to this question?

The text that the question applies to:

A Note about Witches

In fairy-tales, witches always wear silly black hats and black cloaks, and they ride on broomsticks.
But this is not a fairy-tale. This is about REAL WITCHES.
The most important thing you should know about REAL WITCHES is this. Listen very carefully. Never forget what is coming next.
REAL WITCHES dress in ordinary clothes and look very much like ordinary women. They live in ordinary houses and they work in ORDINARY JOBS.
That is why they are so hard to catch.
A REAL WITCH hates children with a red-hot sizzling hatred that is more sizzling and red-hot than any hatred you could possibly imagine.
A REAL WITCH spends all her time plotting to get rid of the children in her particular territory. Her passion is to do away with them, one by one. It is all she thinks about the whole day long. Even if she is working as a cashier in a supermarket or typing letters for a businessman or driving round in a fancy car (and she could be doing any of these things), her mind will always be plotting and scheming and churning and burning and whiz-zing and phizzing with murderous bloodthirsty thoughts.
"Which child," she says to herself all day long, "exactly which child shall I choose for my next squelching?"
A REAL WITCH gets the same pleasure from squel-ching a child as you get from eating a plateful of strawberries and thick cream.
She reckons on doing away with one child a week. Anything less than that and she becomes grumpy.
One child a week is fifty-two a year.
Squish them and squiggle them and make them disappear.
That is the motto of all witches.
Very carefully a victim is chosen. Then the witch stalks the wretched child like a hunter stalking a little bird in the forest. She treads softly. She moves quietly. She gets closer and closer. Then at last, when everything is ready...phwisst! ... and she swoops! Sparks fly. Flames leap. Oil boils. Rats howl. Skin shrivels. And the child dis-appears.
A witch, you must understand, does not knock children on the head or stick knives into them or shoot at them with a pistol. People who do those things get caught by the police.
A witch never gets caught. Don't forget that she has magic in her fingers and devilry dancing in her blood. She can make stones jump about like frogs and she can make tongues of flame go flickering across the surface of the water.
These magic powers are very frightening.
Luckily, there are not a great number of REAL WITCHES in the world today. But there are still quite enough to make you nervous. In England, there are probably about one hundred of them altogether.
Some countries have more, others have not quite so many. No country in the world is completely free from WITCHES.
A witch is always a woman.
I do not wish to speak badly about women. Most women are lovely. But the fact remains that all witches are women. There is no such thing as a male witch.
On the other hand, a ghoul is always a male. So indeed is a barghest. Both are dangerous. Bu neither of them is half as dangerous as a REAL WITCH.
As far as children are concerned, a REAL WITCH is easily the most dangerous of all the living creatures on earth. What makes her doubly dangerous is the fact that she doesn'tlook dangerous. Even when you know all the secrets (you will hear about those in a minute), you can still never be quite sure whether it is a witch you are gazing at or just a kind lady. If a tiger were able to make himself look like a large dog with a waggy tail, you would probably go up and pat him on the head. And that would be the end of you.
It is the same with witches. They all look like nice ladies.

What part of speech is 'neither'?

Posted: 08 Sep 2021 10:09 AM PDT

What part of speech is 'neither' in the below sentence?

He desired neither to participate in the game nor [to] watch it.

Can the word collective be used for a thing/content created by group of people [closed]

Posted: 08 Sep 2021 09:54 AM PDT

In a tweet, I want to refer a group as collective and the things they create together as a collective. Will that be right.

Is my grammar checker missing an obvious grammar error?

Posted: 08 Sep 2021 09:56 AM PDT

I am a non-native English speaker, and I have used this (paid) grammar checker for some time now. The tool is called LanguageTool. Today I noticed the tool is potentially missing an obvious grammar mistake, but I am not 100% sure. Shouldn't "have" be "has" in the sentence below?

enter image description here

"reveal itself" expression in a sentence?

Posted: 08 Sep 2021 08:41 AM PDT

I want to know if the expressions "reveal / prove, itself to be useful" is a formation that makes sense ?

Thanks.

Question about comparative adjectives (see description)

Posted: 08 Sep 2021 08:04 AM PDT

In the below sentence, the article 'the' precedes several comparative adjectives: 'deeper', 'bitter', 'greater', and 'stronger'. Now, for context, this sentence is the beginning of a text, and the adjectives are not compared with anything.

Terry soon became jealous of Sabina, and this rivalry turned at last to a hatred, the deeper for being concealed, and the more bitter in that he knew she had the greater power and the stronger will.

My question is: Why are the comparative forms of the adjective used when there is no comparison (and no, there is no 'implied' comparison to my knowledge), and why does the definite article precede them? I am aware that there are similar constructions to this (I believe they are called 'comparative correlatives'):

The sooner, the better.

The more one eats, the larger one will get.

The faster we run, the sooner we will get there.

However, in most of these, there is a comparison. Here, there are not any comparisons (and, before someone in the comments yells 'Context! Context!', there is no implied comparison available from the context). Is this a special use of the comparative adjective?

"interesting to read" vs "are interesting to read" in a sentence [closed]

Posted: 08 Sep 2021 07:34 AM PDT

I just want to know which of the following sentences is correct:

  1. I found books such as The Story of a Primate, Human Evolution, and Physics in the Human body are very interesting to read

  2. I found books such as The Story of a Primate, Human Evolution, and Physics in the Human body very interesting to read

Please help... Thank you....

as mine - as I (am). semantics

Posted: 08 Sep 2021 07:51 AM PDT

I've asked a similar question before, but my thread is closed. As I've learned from previous thread, both these sentences are grammatical. My question is: what is the meaning difference between these two?

You're in the same situation as mine.

You're in the same situation as I (am).

As mine vs. As I am - academical

using "specialized" in a sentence

Posted: 08 Sep 2021 08:14 AM PDT

I am a bit confused about how to use the word "specialized" in a sentence as in the following sentences:

  1. The courses he took in medical school, made him specialize in medicine.

  2. The courses he took in medical school, helped him to be specialized in medicine.

which one is correct? Or please suggest a better option.....

Please help....

A, B and C led to Q vs Q was caused by A, B and C, when should one be used over other? [closed]

Posted: 08 Sep 2021 04:40 AM PDT

While these two forms are doing the same thing i.e, establishing the cause and effect relationship, I am intrigued by when should one be used over the other when writing, as the writer should have different motives when expressing information in such a way especially when arguments A, B and C are long, Ex:

A: Neglect by those around him

B: his General state of depression

C: his closed-off nature from the society

&

Q: to become a loner

What is the term for a noun or phrase that is used in place of a longer list of nouns?

Posted: 08 Sep 2021 06:17 AM PDT

For example, I could refer to 'the big five', instead of listing the five animals considered dangerous to hunt. I've replaced the list of animals with the noun phrase 'the big five'.

I know this could be a form of substitution but it's a clearly recognisable phrase with specific meaning.

What's an alternative term for "age groups"?

Posted: 08 Sep 2021 05:13 AM PDT

I want to employ the formation "age groups" in a sentence worded in a different way, is "age fragments" right to employ ? If not, what else could be used ?

How first statement feels more natural, when both statements are conveying the same information?

Posted: 08 Sep 2021 03:12 AM PDT

I am new to English language, while revising I was paraphrasing the 1st statement and got the 2nd. What I don't understand is WHY the 1st statement feels more natural while reading them when both statements are conveying essentially the same information.

Statement 1

During Aurangzeb's reign, the Mughal Empire began to deteriorate, leading to utter paralysis of the empire's administration and finances during the reigns of successive generations of Mughal emperors.

Statement 2

The process of decline of the Mughal Empire had set in during Aurangzeb's reign, which during the reign of succeeding generations of Mughal rulers led to total paralysis of administration and finances of the empire.

"formed" in "This train is formed of four carriages"

Posted: 08 Sep 2021 02:24 AM PDT

Scotrail platform announcements use the phrase, "formed of four carriages". "formed", appears excessive compared to say, "this train has four carriages."

Example audio:

Can someone explain why such usage, when brevity should be more important?

Why can "winner" be considered to be about the past, even though the dictionary doesn't mention that at all? [closed]

Posted: 08 Sep 2021 01:53 AM PDT

The Oxford Dictionary of English includes a definition for "winner" that is written with only the present tense:

A person or thing that wins something

I would have expected the definition to be "a person or thing that wins or has won", otherwise how can ODE's very own example usage be explained:

a Nobel Prize winner

It is still correct to call someone a Nobel Prize winner even if they were awarded it in a previous ceremony and are not winning it right now.

Similarly one can be said to be a world record breaker even if they are not currently the world record holder. They only have to have broken it once before.

Yet the ODE definition for both is written with only present tense.

The ODE definition for teacher also uses only present tense:

a person who teaches, especially in a school

And as expected according to this definition, it is incorrect to say about a previous teacher, "they are a teacher".

I have also checked other dictionaries: Merriam-Webster, Cambridge English, dictionary.com, Collins Dictionary, and none of them say a winner can be "someone who has won ..."

Why do they neglect to mention this meaning?

Is the distinction between correct usages of "teacher" and "winner" for previous teachers and previous winners even caused by the word meanings, or something else entirely?

Help me solve this tough SAT grammar question [closed]

Posted: 08 Sep 2021 03:05 AM PDT

enter image description here

What is the answer to Q 22 (SAT passage grammar section)?
A and D are totally out of the option because they contain a question mark but I am confused between B and C. Please, I need help.

Meaning of 'as' in this sentence [closed]

Posted: 08 Sep 2021 06:27 AM PDT

What is the meaning of 'as' in the below sentence? In all of the dictionaries to which I have referred, there is not one definition that the 'as' in the sentence below can have such that the sentence does not lose its meaning.

Another set of papers from this period [the 1970s] consists of a large number of abstruse accounts of Gary's first dealings with John, especially as they [their dealings] concern the financial relationship between the companies of Alpha and Pixel.

If you need any more context, let me know (I have omitted the context since I do not consider it necessary to answer this question). PS: If you're going to close this question, please leave a comment explaining why you have done so.

"More involving" or "more involved"?

Posted: 08 Sep 2021 10:07 AM PDT

Isn't the word "involving" sometimes used as synonym for "more difficult"? An intellectual problem could be harder to solve than another one and I think people say sometimes that one problem is more "involving" than another. Or do they actually use "involved" instead and I don't realize? I'm not a native speaker, so my intuition is not very good for this.

More directly, should I write

"This will be much more involving than the previous operation."

or should I write

"This will be much more involved than the previous operation."?

What’s a word for the (process of finding) balance between two ends of a spectrum?

Posted: 08 Sep 2021 04:07 AM PDT

I'm looking for a word that fits into "An exploration of the mechanical–organic _______" (in the context of a typeface design).

Some words that crossed my mind but didn't fit the bill: balance, spectrum, dynamic, dialogue, dispute, dialectic, axis, equilibrium.

Or maybe the phrase above would sound better (and accept a word easier) if rephrased?

Edit: someone suggested dichotomy and removed their comment before I responded—this is a step in a good direction! I think I'm looking for a word that is close to axis, space, range (as in: design space—the space of parameters within which the design can be located). So yeah, gamut comes close too.

Did quotation marks have other applications or uses, like for emphasis?

Posted: 08 Sep 2021 08:23 AM PDT

I have frequently observed instances of quotation marks being used in interesting ways, often with rather funny implications.

Here are some notable examples of unnecessary or suspicious quotation marks:

drinking water refill station in a grocery store with a sign that says "natural pure" drinking water. The words "natural pure" are in quotations.

six silica gel packets. The words "throw away" and "'do not eat'" are printed on the packets, but only "'do not eat'" is in quotation marks.

The "Blog" of "Unnecessary" Quotation Marks has many other examples. Examples I've seen in my everyday life are not as funny as these examples, indicating that it's not just meta usage intended to be funny.

My question: Was using quotation marks for emphasis ever taught as a standard application of this punctuation mark?

While the examples I've included are modern, I've anecdotally noticed that older signs more frequently employ quotation marks for emphasis. (My great-grandfather was a sign painter, so this may just be my own bias towards noticing older signage.) Similarly, I've observed that in online/text communication, older people are more likely to use quotation marks in this manner (in the same fashion as the infamous overuse of ellipses...).

I wonder if 1) usage has shifted over time, 2) these are 'valid'* albeit uncommon applications of quotation marks, and/or 3) this usage isn't so common as to become a widely accepted application (hence why they're funny).

*Valid as in common enough to be considered an appropriate application of the punctuation. I don't mean valid as in the High and Mighty Arbiters of the English Language have prescribed it as correct and acceptable.

Does "I believe as strongly as anyone that" mean "as strongly as the most believing person"?

Posted: 08 Sep 2021 03:05 AM PDT

I've always been somewhat confused by this phrase because the tone of the context, which is often refuting someone else, is that they believe in it fully--to the extreme--but the actual words suggest that they mean they are in agreement with the general broad belief of society (which do not usually overlap in these usages).

When to use On/In/At?

Posted: 08 Sep 2021 02:09 AM PDT

When should I use On/In/At?

I was In/At School? In/At Home? See you On/In/At Monday? I left the book In/At my parent's house?

Other use cases I cn't think of right now?

And why is there a distinction?

Thanks!

What to call the large containers of bottled water?

Posted: 08 Sep 2021 01:34 AM PDT

The water drawn from those 2.5 gallon containers having a spigot (and air hole) is called 'bottled water', but what should we call those large containers of water? It seems like "tank" or "tankard" are the best 2 choices. I am partial to 'tankard', as 'tank' seems to imply something much larger, on the order of at least tens of gallons. However, according to the dictionary, a tankard is merely a large drinking vessel. Is it possible / plausible to extend the meaning of 'tankard' to mean 'large container of bottled water having a spigot and air hole'?

Why is soldier ˈsōljər? Where did the "j" come from?

Posted: 08 Sep 2021 06:04 AM PDT

Just a pronunciation question. Is it a vestige of the spelling battle between i and j, where in English the j lost out to the i, but with soldier we retained the sound?

Name for music that imitates speech

Posted: 08 Sep 2021 07:30 AM PDT

I have searched and asked others for the answer to this but have come up dry: what is the name or technique in music where musical notes approximate/imitate speech? Note that I am not talking about vocoders where speech is modulated by tones or notes, but rather the technique of arranging notes so they sound similar in pitch/length to spoken syllables. An example is the intro to "Hot Blooded" by Foreigner.

Onomatopoeia is really the reverse of the term or idea I'm after.

I asked in the music.stackexchange.com site and while there was no consensus one of the users suggested that I ask the question here. "Rhetoric in music" and "lyrical melody" were suggested as starting points, but I find them vague and not accurate enough to the topic at hand.
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)