texts: Which is correct "we will soon be" or we will be soon"?

texts:
Actually someone said to me

  we are not friends

But I know we will be friends in the near future. So how should I reply?

1)

  We will soon be.

2)

  we will be soon.

Which one seems nice and which one is actually correct ?


texts:
Should I use "on the report" or "in the report" ?
in the below sentence:

  The material properties are presented in the report

Thank you.


texts: Why the speaker did not use "to" after "want"?

texts:
First of all, I don't know the sentence exactly so it may be one of them :

It's hardest nails for me to want not do anything about it.
It's hard as nails for me to want not do anything about it.

I think it should be "to want not to do anything". Why the second " to" is missing? Does this add something to the meaning? Or is it just contraction?

Edit:
Here's a link to the audio. Please, listen starting from 1:40

https://www.wnycstudios.org/story/death-sex-money-lets-talk-about-porn-again


texts: How to write "just so you know" politely in formal letters?

texts:
In my first language (Thai), a typical formal letter usually has quite a similar format to English letters, with one exception...

Between the last paragraph of the body of the letter and that "Yours sincerely" line, we usually insert another short paragraph, usually with only one sentence, typically can be translated literally to,

  then-inform-to-know

which means something similar to the phrase "just so you know".

Today I was asked how one should translate that line to English. I realized at once that I never wrote that line in English before, because I haven't seen such phrase used in any formal letters. And to me, saying "just so you know" sounds almost rude.

If I really have to translate that line, how should I express it in a more polite way?
(I am thinking about "Pleased to have you informed," but not sure if it really works.)


texts: Could you simplify the highlighted parts

texts:
To achieve PTCB Certification, candidates must satisfy the following eligibility requirements:
*High school diploma or equivalent educational diploma (e.g., a GED or foreign diploma).

Full disclosure of all criminal and State Board of Pharmacy registration or licensure actions .

Compliance with all applicable PTCB Certification policies .

Passing score on the Pharmacy Technician Certification Exam (PTCE).

A candidate may be disqualified for PTCB Certification upon the disclosure or discovery of:

Criminal conduct involving the candidate;

State Board of Pharmacy registration or licensure action involving the candidate;

Violation of a PTCB Certification policy, including but not limited to the Code of Conduct .

PTCB reserves the right to investigate criminal background, verify candidate eligibility and deny certification to any individual.

Although I got the gist of the text, but it is still difficult to get the idea of what the highlighted part are about, let alone googleing the concept I do not understand.
I am sure that if you simplify the parts, it will certainley cast a light on the concept of the text and would help me to understand my following research conception.
I wonder when it says Pharmacy registration or licensure actions , does it talk about a resume ?
A million thanks in advance.


texts:
I'm reading a book on modality where the author gives the following examples of possibility with "can":

  It can be cold in Stockholm in winter - okay
  It can be cold in Stockholm now - wrong
  It can be cold in Stockholm tomorrow - wrong

Why 2 and 3 are considered wrong? What picture would they bring to your mind if you heard them?


texts: Unreal conditional inversion with "Should"

texts:
Unreal conditional sentences with Past Perfect, Were and Should may suffer inversion to show more formality. "Past Perfect" and "Were" exist in the original regular Unreal Conditional but how does "Should" work? Where does it come from? From another S.Past verb different from "were"?

Is it correct, for ex? "If he knew it, he would tell me".
       INVERSION.....Should he know it, he would tell me.


texts:
Is popcorns a used word, for example in "popcorns are ready"?

If I cook meat rolls, and I want to announce they are ready, I would say "Meat rolls are ready." Can I say the same for popcorn?


texts: It intends to say , 'hence, spring force will increase'.Is it a wrong way?There should be an oxford comma as ' ,and the system will '.Shouldn't there be?


texts: How do you say someone writes a lot of unnecessary words?

texts: Let's say that you read a book or a newspaper and you find that the writer writes too much unnecessary information. Is there a word to describe that? Also is there a word that describes exactly the opposite situation?


texts: is frola paste an accurate translation of this pastrie/cake or is it a translator failed attempt to translate a name?

texts: How is this cake/pastrie called in English? The name it's from spanish. The red paste is membrillo (quince)


texts: Using an adverbial phrase between the object and the participle?

texts:
There's been a gentleman here asking for you, sir.

As far as I know, In this form the participle always comes immediately after the object of the main clause.

After I saw this sentence above. A question came to my mind: Can I use an adverbial phrase between the object of the main clause and the participle clause? I think the question I quoted above does that.

For example:

  1- I found him under the tree waiting for me.

  2- I left my cat on my bed lying down.

  3- Stream pushed the ducks along the riverside whistling to each
  other. (In the meantime, the ducks were whistling to each other.)


texts: should know better than + the perfect infinitive

texts:
Is this construction possible?
1 You should know better than to have bought this car.
if it's possible, how does it differ from:
2 You should have known better than to buy this car.


texts: Break down a sentence into few simple sentences

texts:
I am having the following construction.

  In regularization of outer-boundaries, outer-boundary line segments
  fitted from irregularly distributed contour points as described by
  Horde and Susan (2012) are rectified by rotating their mid-points
  until orthogonality or parallelism is met with respect to the
  identified direction.

But, I have been advised to break them in to simple sentences.

Now, my question is what would be the most beautiful way to represent whole idea by few simple sentences.

Here is my try. But I feel my way is not the best way and looking for some advanced way.

  In regularization of outer-boundaries, boundary line segments can be
  first fitted from irregularly distributed contour points as described
  by Horde and Susan (2012).

  The fitted line segments can then be rectified by rotating their
  mid-points until orthogonality or parallelism is met with respect to
  the identified direction.


texts: Question and a sentence in the same sentence

texts:
We were also innocent people, but who helped us?

What is wrong with the above sentence? Can't I put a question and a sentence in the same sentence. My grammar checking software throws following error:

  This clause may not be clearly phrased as a question, despite the use of a question mark. Consider putting the auxiliary verb first, or using a question tag.


texts:
I'm not really sure if this is an opinion-based question or not but as a non-native speaker I always wanted to know at least a basis for how things work, so I've got two questions:

1) I know we have small and big families; do we have medium-size families, too? Do we have this concept at all in English?

2) How many is normally considered a small or a big family? What's the criterion?

I'm asking these to be sure before answering the question if I'm from a big or small family.

Thanks


texts:
While I was reading Practical English Usage by M.Swan I came across 'situation could be willing' phrase (unit about wish...would usage).

  Sometimes we talk as if things or situations could be willing or
  unwilling, or could insist ot refuse to do things.

  I wish it would stop raining.

I can't get the point of the phrase. 'Willing' as an adjective means to ready to do something to me. I know 'willing' could be use along with a noun, for instance 'willing helper', but the phrase situation could be willing seems strange to me.


texts:
The sentence is:

  To solve a complex problem, there is always a simple way which everyone can understand.

Do you think that this sentence is grammatically OK?

Why I am asking it is because I would like to put "to solve.." after "a simple way" but it is really confusing.

  There is always a simple way to solve a complex problem, which everyone can understand.

I think it is really confusing so the first one is better.

Do you agree?


texts:
I want the children to enjoy learning while creating a fun enviroment.

What does this sentence mean? Does it mean that the children should create the fun enviroment while learning or that I am creating the fun enviroment? I want it to mean that the children have enjoy learning in the fun enviroment that I created.


texts: Is it "placing her hand in his" or "placing her hand on his"?

texts:
"Placing her hand in his" has 2K hits on Google Books.
"Placing her hand on his" has 14K.

Both had a lot of results. Are both equally correct?


texts:
Is it common to hear fast food restaurant staff say "Do you want to eat in or take out?"?

If this usage is natural, I'm wondering whether "take out" can be used intransitively, i.e. without an object in this sense, in other contexts. For example, can I say "I'd like to take out tonight and enjoy my dinner at home."?

Also, I'd like to know whether "take out" can naturally take an object, as in "I'd like to take out a cheeseburger, please."

I'd appreciate your help.


texts:
Below are three examples:

That's all I know to do.
That's all I know how to do.
That's all I know what to do.

Which of the three is the most idiomatic way of expressing the idea that what was mentioned was all that I can do, since I don't know how to do anything else.
To me, 'how to do' sounds the most natural but lacks logic, since it's about WHAT I can do and not HOW I do them.
Also, as much as I am tempted to go with 'All I know to do', isn't the verb 'know' usually not followed by infinitives?

Thanks in advance.


texts:
I was told to that it was incorrect to say:

I had finished it by 11 am

The person was saying Past Perfect could be used only with Past Simple, not times like this one.  What do you think about it?


texts:
I have an issue where some ESL students frequently use 'what' in sentences like this i.e. 'It was the first cake what I tried.' (I always prefer 'that' to which in sentences like this.) I at first claimed that you can't use 'what' in non-interrogative sentences, which is not true and the students called me on it.

I only corrected this error in a lesson about determiners and quantifiers, but I'm thinking a separate explanation of relative pronouns is in order.

Do you have any suggestions for an explanation that would make it clear to them and nip this mistake in the bud?


texts:
Is there an abbreviation for "skill"?
I know the s-k-i-l-l is not a long word but still want to know whether there's some extreme expression.


texts:
Can collective nouns be plural?
For example,  can I say armies instead of army if I'm talking about different types of armies, or crowds. crowd and army are already plural but can I add an s after them if I'm talking about different armies and crowds?


texts: What does "Considered for the Vacancy" mean?

texts:
I am trying to understand this paragraph after taking an exam for USPS.

What does "to be considered for the vacancy" in this context mean?
Does it mean, I am not fit to become hired? or does it mean the opposite?

1. If you are under the age of 26.
If you are under the age of 26, you will continue to be considered for the vacancy for which you
have applied if you immediately register with the Selective Service System and submit to
HRSSC External Hiring at ***@***.gov written proof of such registration so that it is
received on or before the 10th calendar day from the date of my message.


texts: "Started the washing machine" vs "started the washing machine up."

texts:
What's the correct construction? Example sentences:

  I didn't start the watching machine (up).

  The washing machine is spinning. Who started it (up)?


texts: "Ice cold" vs. "___ hot" in a professional context?

texts:
Suppose I just had Iced Coffee with hot chocolate cake and I want to describe it to others.

I can use "I had an ice cold coffee" but then I'm stuck with the second part. None of the things I can think of really fits, e.g. "steam hot", "sun hot", "oven hot", etc.

Is there any noun I can use in this context to describe something hot?


texts: How to Grammatically Parse This Sentence?

texts:
A world in which there are monsters, and ghosts, and things that want to steal your heart is a world in which there are angels, and dreams and a world in which there is hope. ― Neil Gaiman

Could you grammatically analyse:

A world in which there are monsters, and ghosts, and things that want to steal your heart [subject?]
a world in which there are angels, and dreams and a world in which there is hope [object?]
a world in which there is hope [appositive phrase and noun phrase?].

Can one phrase seem like two phrases? I think I maybe thought an appositive phrase places information on a nearby noun. I may not get what noun it places that information on, if that is indeed an appositive. I guess I thought appositive phrases go something like My uncle, a lawyer, is visiting us, maybe?

Does it seem grammatically alright to place a comma after and dreams?

Does and ghosts maybe seem like a parenthetical - and so maybe a comma gets placed before and after and ghosts?


texts:
I read on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sankey_diagram:

  Sankey diagrams are a specific type of flow diagram

Isn't saying "a specific type of" redundant? I see that the expression "a specific type of" has 67,900,000 results in Google. What is the difference between "X is a type of Y" and "X is a specific type of Y"?


texts: Is it idiomatic to say "you're eating like you're starving"?

texts:
be starving  (also be starved American English) to be very hungry

  You must be starving!

When a person eat quickly and take large mouthfuls of food because he is starving.

What is the idiomatic way to say in English?

In English, people often say "You must be starving".

Is there any other ways to say it?

Can I say "you're eating like you're starving" (it sounds a lit cumbersome) or "you're eating like starving"? Are they idiomatic?


texts: Word order and auxiliary verbs in questions (present simple tense)

texts:
I'm using an app to learn/practice English and I had a task to translate a question into English.
My answer was:

May I know why exactly does he think so?

But the app said that it was incorrect and the correct answer was:

May I know why exactly he thinks so?

Can anybody, please, explain to me why my answer is wrong and the answer with no auxiliary verb is correct?


texts:
I've seen it written this way a couple of times, e.g. in oxford entry for dame: 'There's must be a wealthy society dame (preferably played by Margaret Dumont) who is entirely smitten with Groucho, though he walks all over her'.

What does the phrase mean / how is it different from  just 'there must be'?

And BTW what does 'there's' mean in such a phrase? Is it 'there is' or 'there has' or?..


texts:
I'm using a grammar checking service. It tells me these kind of projects is wrong and should be changed to these kinds of projects. I'm not sure about the correctness of this suggestion, so I googled it on the Google Books website. You can take a look at the result here and here.

Both searches returned many results, and these are from books, which I assumed to be correct. Could anyone help to explain? Thanks in advance.


texts: Difference between Maverick and eccentric

texts:
I was reading GRE vocabulary when i came across these two words. There dictionary definition is very similar to each other. They both stand for unconventional behaviour. Two examples :

  He is a maverick who sometimes rebels against his own party.

  Most of the artists are mavericks.

In the second sentence it looks eccentric can also go there.


texts:
I heard it in an Adele song (He won't go), and I know she's using not-exactly-proper english sometimes (like "she ain't gon' be"), but I can't tell if I've just never heard it or if it's not correct.

Is it OK to say in an informal conversation?

Here is the verse from the song (full lyrics here):

  So petrified, I'm so scared to step into this ride,
  What if I lose my heart and fail the climb
  I won't forgive me if I gave up trying
  I heard his voice today
  I didn't know a single word he said
  Not one resemblance to the man I met
  Just a vague and broken boy instead


texts: in the face vs on the face; in a mobile vs on a mobile

texts:
Fear rises on her face
  Fear rises in her face
  She is playing in a mobile phone.
  She is playing on a mobile phone.

Which are correct? My grammar checking softwares says, 2nd and 4th are correct. But I believe 1st and 3rd are correct.


texts:
I've been working on these sentence structures lately:

  It has been... since...
  It had been... since...

I've learned that we can use past simple and present perfect after since with "it has been" + "since".

For example:

  It's been years since I rode a bike.
  It's been years since I've ridden a bike.

As for "it had been" + "since", it seems I should use the past perfect after since. For example:

  It'd been years since I'd ridden a bike.

My question is: Can I use past simple and present perfect with "it had been" + "since"? For example:

  It'd been a whole two hours since he texted me.
  It'd been way too long since he has had sex.


texts: "date only someone" vs. "only date someone"

texts:
Two friends are talking about their loving lives.

  A: Do you date only women who have something wrong with them?

  B: I'm not dating anyone.

Usually, adverbs are between subject and main verb, so "only date ..." is more likely right.

Should I use "date only ..." or "only date ..." or both are fine?

It seems a pattern "verb only". I cannot find this rule/pattern in  https://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/only

Could someone help me on this?


texts:
The past simple, past simple progressive, past perfect and the present perfect have been giving me the worst of all headaches recently. Can anyone correct me on this, please?

Let's say that I decided to set aside 2 hours yesterday to study, would it be correct to say: I was studying for 2 hours yesterday? Is it wrong to use the past continuous to emphasize the duration of something that was taking place at a certain point in the past?

Would it also be correct if I say: I was working for 2 hours yesterday, when something else interrupted me?

why is it correct or incorrect?

Can you also suggest a book that may help me with this?


texts: The purpose that "in order to" introduces is related to the main subject?

texts:
This question might sound stupid, but I found that the purpose that "in order to" introduces is related to the main subject.
I don't know if there is a term for this and I don't know if there are somewhere else this concept can also apply.
Is there a name or concept for this? Do you agree on what I found?
Examples:

(1) I want to give my girlfriend a gift so that she can be happy.

can not be changed to:

(2) I want to give my girlfriend a gift to be happy because (2) sounds like I want to be happy by giving my girlfriend a gift.

(3) I throw the glass at the wall so that it breaks into pieces.

can not be changed to:

(4) I throw the glass at the wall in order to break into pieces.
because (4) sounds like "I" break into pieces.

(5) I picked up trash along the beach in order to save the planet Earth.
=> Although what I did isn't really helpful in terms of saving the planet, the sentence just works. I think it is because "I picked up trash along the beach" and "I save the planet Earth" have the same subject "I".


texts:
Which would be correct?

  His staff and him are influential.

or

  His staff and he are influential.

If we removed "his staff" it would just be

  He is influential.

So I think the second choice is correct.

Similar to "There he and his friends come." or "There come he and his friends." and Pronoun use with preposition: "with *he* and his wife" or "with *him* and his wife"? but I believe the usage would be different in this case.


texts:
I found the below examples in Cambridge dictionary under Defining or non-defining relative subject.

  non-defining: His brother, who works at the supermarket, is a friend of mine.

  He has only one brother, and that brother works at the supermarket.

  His brother who works at the supermarket is a friend of mine.

  He has more than one brother. The one I’m talking about works at the supermarket.

How do they determine if he has only one or more than one?

Let's say I don't know how many brothers he has, Which one should I use?


texts: Luxurious detailing, such as chrome-accented hardware and rich suede fabric, set a new style standard in travelware.


texts:
The guests were greeted to our home.

Someone told me that the construction "greeted to a place" was ungrammatical, but that's weird, because I have seen it in a number of places. Is this the case? Why is it ungrammatical? I thought greeted to was similar to welcomed to.


texts: what are the appropriate prepositions for this case? python, termial, ubuntu, vmware, MacOS

texts:
I am running a wmware on my Mac.

the host OS is MacOS, the guest OS is ubuntu.

I am running a python script in terminal the guest OS (ubuntu).

should I say, I am running a python script in the terminal of guest ubuntu in vmware on MacOS?


texts:
I placed the order on two pizzas and two sauces. but I received two pizzas and one sauce.

In the above situation. Can I say "I didn't get receive one more sauce.", "I received less sauce", "I need one more sauce"
or are there other expressions to clarify my purpose ?


texts: The usage of word that can be both plural and singular

texts:
Words such as Infantry and Cavalry according to Oxford Learner's Dictionary can be both singular and plural.

Here is a specific example from their site.

  The infantry was/were guarding the bridge.

So I can choose either was or were. My question is whether the meaning is exactly the same. If there is a slight difference in meaning or nuance could you please explain what it is?

Another example:

  Five hundred infantry was marching to the north.

  Five hundred infantry were marching to the north.

  Five hundred infantries were marching to the north.

Are they have the same meaning?


texts: Construction of future tense with 'when'

texts:
Consider this expression

This knowledge will come handy, when I am going to go there this summer.
This knowledge will come handy when I go there this summer.

I would like to know if the previous expression is correct. If yes, what is the difference between the two constructions?


texts: What is the pun of "If I could keep my Gmail account, I’d be okay with that."

texts:
The following is from the sitcom "The Big Bang Theory"

  Leonard: My point is, immortality is not only a possibility, it is
  real.

  Raj: Only if you’re this jellyfish which periodically reverts to a
  mass of undifferentiated protoplasm.

  Sheldon: If I could keep my Gmail account, I’d be okay with that.

I was just wondering what is humorous in the last line?


texts: A problem about the etymology of “expiate”

texts: How to explain the etymology of the word “expiate”? I found that ex means “out, for” and piate means “pious”. But I dont see how they combine to mean “to atone for”


texts: What's the difference between " there is not" and "there does not"?

texts:
What is the difference between "there is not" and "there does not" ?
For example:

there does not exist a unique optimal solution for such problems.

versus

there is not exist a unique optimal solution for such problems.


texts: Which is the difference between "interesting things of" vs interesting things about"?

texts:
Is it wrong to say:

  One of the most interesting things of my job...

instead of

  One of the most interesting things about my job...

And to be broad, when should the writer use "about" instead of "of" to express origin?


texts:
When and how to use word "fragile" for people like

  He is fragile.

Please explain with examples.


texts: What do you call it when a company is sold for one dollar/euro etc.?

texts: Suppose, there's a company with huge debts and it's sold for one dollar to a new owner. What do you call this amount of money (not necessarily one dollar)? A symbolic sum? A token sum?


texts:
He took them in at a swift glance. No use. No one he knew, except—he
  responded to the greeting listlessly—a gentleman to whom he had spoken
  on the train, and farther off a familiar face from the
  metropolis. (The Burning Secret, Stefan Zweig)

What does the marked phrase above mean?


texts:
Which is right: 'I cannot open the door. It has stuck' or 'I cannot open the door.
It has been stuck'?


texts:
I have difficulty in finding out which one is the object in this sentence:
"I learn much more by traveling by myself."
Can 'by myself' become the object in this case? Then 'by traveling' would be the complement?
Can you please help me on this?


texts: Usage of "regulatory testing" in the mentioned text?

texts:
In industry, decisions to go ahead with animal experiments will be
  based on an internal scientific discussion and economic evaluation.
  For the other main area of animal experiments, the so- called
  regulatory testing, it is the legal requirements for testing new substances and devices which provide the reason for using animals.
  (Source)

Is "the regulatory testing" an elaboration on "other main area of animal experiment"? Is "regulatory resting" a professional expression, as the "so-called" indicates?


texts:
I was reading other questions and came up with a question regarding the usage of "had".

So, does "had" signify past events or make phrases more polite?

I've heard my friends say "I had heard" and "you had mentioned" without any reference to other related actions.

Please read some examples:

  "You had mentioned that your sister had been kidnapped by him."

It's not that I don't understand what this sentence is saying, but why should I say "had mentioned" and "had been kidnapped" when the sister is still kidnapped at the point of saying this?

  "It's really nice as I had heard."

I really have no idea why this person would say "had heard" instead of saying "I've heard" or "I heard".


texts: What should we say to a child when you mean "Where have they injected you"?

texts:
in‧ject /ɪnˈdʒekt/ ●●○ verb [transitive]     1 to put liquid,
  especially a drug, into someone’s body by using a special needle

  inject something into somebody/something

  The drug is injected directly into the base of the spine.

  inject somebody with something

  I have to inject myself with insulin.

Ok, say your wife have just brought your son home after getting him vaccinated (you didn't go there with them). Then, you ask this to your son:

Where have they injected you? (I expect the answer such as "into my arm / thigh
 etc")

My question is

Do we have a simpler way to express the above question to a child?


texts: is it correct in grammar to compare a plural noun to a singular noun?

texts: For example, "their salaries are higher than mine". Is this sentence grammatically correct? Or we have to say "each of their salaries is higher than mine"?


texts: Meaning of "attract to date" in the sentence

texts:
While I was reading an article related to renewable energy, I found this and could not see the meaning of the part of the sentence.

The good news is that a decade of subsidy-driven growth has brought with it falling costs. Renewables are still on the pricey side in many places, but they are getting less so; in some places wind, in particular, is reasonably competitive. This suggests that their growth might soon need a lot less subsidy than it has attracted to date.


texts:
Link:

  A carry trade is a strategy in which an investor borrows money at a low interest rate in order to invest in an asset that is likely to provide a higher return. This strategy is very common in the foreign exchange market. For example, in the period up to 2007 many investors borrowed in Japanese yen or Swiss francs, taking advantage of very low interest rates in Japan and Switzerland, and used the money to take long positions in currencies backed by high interest rates, such as the Australian and New Zealand dollars and South African rand.
  This strategy relies on relative stability in asset prices, as an adverse exchange rate movement can easily wipe out the returns from the underlying interest rate differential. This leads some to refer to the carry trade as akin to picking up pennies in front of a steamroller.The yen carry trade reversed sharply in 2007 as global interest rate differentials narrowed, causing the yen to rally against currencies such as the antipodean dollars.

to rally against something obviously means to protest against something. But I don't really understand what that means in the context of foreign currencies. Any idea?


texts: "to let fall is"... A complete clause? What is the subject?

texts:
“There are two ways of ridding ourselves of a thing which burdens us, casting it away or letting it fall. To cast away requires an effort of which we may not be capable, to let fall imposes no labour, is simpler, without peril, within reach of all. To cast away, again, implies a certain interest, a certain animation, even a certain fear; to let fall is absolute indifference, absolute contempt; believe me, use this method, and Satan will flee.”
  ― Joris-Karl Huysmans, En Route

Is  to let fall is absolute indifference, absolute contempt a complete sentence? A complete sentence I think requires a verb and an argument. is seems a verb here, but I do not see a noun or subject. to let fall almost seems like an infinitive phrase. I have frequently seen infinitive phrases like To win at chess. In such phrase, is to a preposition, win an infinitive verb,  at another preposition, and chess a noun?

But I don't get it —It seems that in my sample above,  to is a preposition followed by two verbs let and fall. If so, what would be the subject of the  clause?


texts: "in 60 seconds or less" or "in 60 seconds or fewer"?

texts:
Tell me please which sentence is correct.

  I want you to articulate your ideas in 60 seconds or less.

  I want you to articulate your ideas in 60 seconds or fewer.

The word second is a countable noun, so theoretically it should be 60 second or fewer, but what I heard English native speakers say is 60 seconds or less.


texts:
From the poem "Opportunity" by Walter Malone:

Each morning gives thee wings to flee from hell,
Each night a star to guide thy feet to heaven.

What does "a star" symbolize here? Can anyone tell me the meanings of this verse?


texts: Could 'a' and 'single' be used together?

texts:
I wrote this sentence:

How can a single photon be detected?

I think it could mean one of the photons while emphasizing its singleness.
But I feel something's wrong with it because a and single are the same meaning and redundant.
Is the sentence idiomatic?


texts: Is it correct to say "walk down the corridor and take the second left. The elevator is on the left"?

texts:
I am standing at 1 end of a corridor as shown in the above picture.
I want to go to the elevator 2.
Is it correct to say "walk down the corridor and take the second right. The elevator is on the left" or "the elevator is just around the second corner on the left"?


texts: Difficulties with deciding whether it is a plural or singular

texts:
I was solving some general questions about plural and singular. Then I came across a specific type of questions that have a hard time understanding.

Peter and Danny (is/are) going on a walk.
--> here we use 'are' because the subject of the sentence is "Peter AND Danny"

Peter, along with 100 other village people, walks.
--> here, we use "walk's'" because the subject of the sentence is Peter(singluar).

But the problem here is, why is the subject of the first sentence plural, while the subject of the second sentence is singular? Both of the sentences seem to talk about more than one person doing the action (walking), and yet, the subject of the first sentence is pleura, and the subject of the second sentence is singular...

Is it because of the difference between 'and' and 'along with'? If so, what happens if I use 'with', 'or', 'combined with', and so on? In what situation, does the thing become singular or plural?

I know that 'each, every, any, group of people' these types of words and phrases are singular. But if there are other nouns or phrases that I may be confused (like the one written above), it would be very nice if you could mention or talk about such additional things, as it would help me learn more about subject verb agreement. Thank you!


texts:
What is the best answer about using a word as the difference?

If someone ask me like what are they difference?
So I reply like this " they are not much different" .
Is this good answer or is there any sentence wrong?


texts:
"So far we have used things like old car tires and rope, but we have a plan to carry out a more detailed study to test out a variety of artificial structures and see whether the sea creatures in the harbor find these as attractive a home as the rubble of the past. "

Source : Oxford grammar book

The sentence "find these as attractive a home as the rubble of the past" is so confusing that I cannot figure out what does it mean?

Could you please explain in more details?

Is there 'a fixed rule' for the following pattern:
"As + adjective + noun +as "

As I don't want to only memorize .I also want to know in more details to be able to understand such forms whenever I come across such structures.

Can I rewrite the sentence as following?

"So far we have used things like old car tires and rope, but we have a plan to carry out a more detailed study to test out a variety of artificial structures and see whether the sea creatures in the harbor find these a home that is as attractive as the rubble of the past. "

Thanks


texts:
Question regarding the use of apostrophe/ownership in the case of twins.

Noun: The Night Sisters (who constitute a twin object).

Sentence: Mary tended John throughout the Night Sisters passing.

Would this be:

Mary tended John throughout the Night Sister's passing.
Mary tended John throughout the Night Sisters' passing.


texts:
I saw a book is titled "Of human bondage" which was translated into Korean as "인간의 굴레 (bondage of human)" ?"

Does "Of human bondage" mean "bondage of human"?

If so, Is "Of human bondage" the inversion of "bondage of human"?
Is the sentence, "Of human bondage" grammatically correct?


texts:
I understand "comment about her sexual anatomy" as "comment about her based on her gender (it is apparently of sex discrimination)" Am I on the right track?

That same week on Twitter, the neuroscientist also lashed out at Rasmussen, who has tried to explain studies suggesting a natural origin of SARS-CoV-2 to the public. He called her fat, and then posted a derogatory comment about her sexual anatomy. Rasmussen says, “This debate has moved so far from the evidence that I don’t know if we can dial it back.”

Source: Nature


texts: "... not only does it ..." vs. "... not only it ..."?

texts:
What structure the two following expressions follow? More specific, what is the role of "does" in the first expression?

This is mainly because not only does it positively affect students' opinions, but it also ... .

This is mainly because not only it positively affect students' opinions, but it also ... .

Does the removal of "does" in the second structure make it wrong. If not, what is the first one is benefitted from "does"?


texts:
During the final minutes of his speech the speaker requested to the audience to hold its applause...

In the above sentence, there should not the word "to" after requested...
But why and how to recognize these kind of words like "request".


texts: The use 'revenge' in "The poor murdered girl must be revenged."

texts:
The poor murdered girl must be revenged.

I saw the sentence in the dictionary on my cellphone. I doubt the use of 'revenged' in that sentence and I think it should use 'avenged' instead because, as I know, 'revenge' can't take a direct object (as in "she vowed to revenge her brother's death."). But I might be wrong. Any thoughts?

Edit:

The reason why I was confused is that I found this Grammar Point in Oxford dictionary.

  Grammar Point

  avenge / revenge

  Avenge is a verb; revenge is (usually) a noun.

  People avenge something or avenge themselves on somebody:She vowed to
  avenge
  her brother’s death. He later avenged himself on his wife’s killers.
  You take revenge on a person.

  In more formal or literary English, revenge can also be a verb. People
  revenge themselves on somebody or
  are revenged on them (with the same meaning):He was later revenged on
  his wife’s killers. You cannot revenge something: She vowed to revenge
  her brother’s death.


texts: Is it ok to use "spit" as past tense of "spit" or should I use "spat"?

texts:
I was actually going through lyrics written by Eminem and there was a part where it was written

  Went to Burger King, they spit on my onion rings

So my question is since this is in simple past so shouldn't this be

  Went to Burger King, they spat on my onion rings


texts: What is the present perfect form of verb can?

texts:
For example, I want to say that I have done some task (in sense, that I was able to do it). It resembles a form like this, but I am not sure that it is correct:

  Yes, I could have (do something)

In other words, I want to say "Yes, I can" in present perfect tense.


texts:
Are both "stay late" and "stay until late" correct and do both have the same meaning? I usually hear/read only the first one. Example:

I am going to stay late in the office today.
I am going to stay until late in the office today.


texts: What is the difference between "which" and "in which"?

texts: I always confuse these both. When should we actually use them in a sentence?


texts:
I found this sentence:

  The relationship the develops among the people from the common understanding in a multiracial community makes life in such a community is very exciting.

I think is should be deleted right?

Source: English study app, Essay, “Living in a multiracial community", 4th paragraph


texts: Difference between "regard of" and "regard to"

texts: I want to apologize in an official letter. Do I start it with "Apologizing in regard of this incident" or "Apologizing in regard to this incident"?


texts:
But Douglas now used no such precaution; and the consequence was, that
his people, drawn up on the face of the hill, presented one general
mark to the ...
Wikipedia

What does “face of the hill” mean? Does it refer to the peak or to the lateral parts of the hill? But the lateral parts is a circle, so I am not sure why we say "face".


texts: Hard to understand Hazlitt's comments on Coleridge here.

texts:
I am reading a book about Coleridge who has been praised by William Hazlitt with below sentence.

  As Hazlitt said, "To the man had been given in high measure the seeds
  of noble endowment, but to unfold them had been forbidden him."

While this comment is quite difficult to me. “had been forbidden” is a passive voice, and why it follows a pronoun (him)? Can anyone paraphrase it to plain English for easy comprehension?


texts:
What do English spokers say when they want to mention last class? "Previous session" or "Last session"

  As I recall, teacher wrote something on the board last session.
  As I recall, teacher wrote something on the board previous session .

Which one seems more normal in everyday English?


texts:
No matter how many times I've studied this point of grammar, I am still struggling with using it properly.

I was taught that I should use the unrealistic subjunctive (like 'would've written') for something that is only a failed possibility in the past, that is, it never happened, but is merely a product of your imagination projected on the past.

And I was also taught that the realistic subjunctive (like 'would write') should be used for such cases when something has a chance of happening, but may also not happen; therefore, it is also a product of your imagination, except it is applied either to the present situation or to the future, and never to the past.

But what about such cases when we talk about an outcome in the present of some situation that never happened in the past?

For example, here we have a conversation in American family:

  Son: - Dad, if the Beatles didn't come to the USA, what would happen?

  Dad: - Then, I guess, there would be no British invasion and we would
  still listen only to rock-and-roll music today.

or

  Son: - Dad, if the Beatles hadn't come to the USA, what would've happened?

  Dad: - Then, I guess, there would've been no British invasion and we would've
  still listened only to rock-and-roll music today.

On one hand, the Beatles did come to America, so the son is talking about a situation that never took place in the past; thus, it's only a product of his imagination. But on the other hand, he is inquiring his Dad about the outcome (of that situation that never happened) as if it were now in the present. In other words, he he extends his imagination to the present.

So what kind of sequence should I use here then?
Should I use:

  If they hadn't come, then we would've...

or

  If they didn't come, then we would...

?


texts:
Which of the following sentences is correct?

1) If Found, Please return to

2) If Find, Please return to

Please give me reason too


texts:
About 2nd conditionals...

  If cars could fly, we would commute faster.

why is the verb not in the simple past?  and, in this sentence:

  If children got everything they wanted, they wouldn't learn the value of things.

why is the verb wanted in the simple past?


texts: "places where something is" vs. "places ∅ something is" vs. "places ∅ something is in"

texts:
I've been a few places gang wars were prevalent.
  I've been a few places gang wars were prevalent in.
  I've been a few places where gang wars were prevlant.

I've seen people use place(s) both with and without a preposition, still the first example sounds a tad weird, which is why I post this question. Is the first sentence grammatically correct? If so, can we drop these prepositions anytime we want, or does it always depend on the context?


texts:
This constitutive element of the modern world (man, as the producer of rational hypotheses) and its articulation with the ideology of techno-scientific progress and the development of the machine that transforms the methods and theories of natural sciences, (1) arming (2) these with new tools and constantly (1) renovating their research and experimental capabilities, finally led to the replacement of religious and metaphysical dogmas by the blind faith to the dogma of technical and scientific progress. (source: The Self-criticism of Science)

The sentence is from a book called the Self-criticism of Science.  I have been trying to understand what the sentence is saying but I am still having a hard time understanding it.  Basically, I have two questions on the underlined parts.
Underlined words (1): I think that arming & renovating seem to be participial construction, which modifies the verb transforms.  Then, what connotation do arming & renovating have, I mean, do they mean "While/As" "And" or "After"?   Which meaning of the three is correct?
Underlined word (2): What does the word these imply?  I think they refer to "the methods and theories of natural sciences", which are located right before the underlined word "arming."   I am not sure though.  Could you help me clarify it?   Thanks.


texts:
Is the sentence B not correct and is only A valid? Or are the both ok?

A. I'd like to know all the problems we've had so far.
B. I'd like to know the all problems we've had so far.


texts: Is "actual hands-on" SYNONYMOUS with "hands-on experience"?

texts:
I need to confirm if the word can be used as an alternative to: EXPERIENCE.

Example sentence:

  These days, working people not only need experience, but also soft skills.

Or

  These days, working people not only need hands-on experience, but also soft skills.

Or (I want this to work):

  These days, working people not only need actual hands-on, but also soft skills.

I don't want to repeat experience, experience, and then experience again in an essay. So I am asking if "actual hands-on" is grammatical.

P.S.: Since I already know the hands-on experience word, please don't insist that ONLY two synonyms are fine for better essay.


texts: "another", "an another" or "a another" which one is grammatically correct?

texts: Should I use "an" or "a" before the word "another"? If yes, when should use it. Or I can just use "another" without any of those articles(a/an).


texts: What does "in an awful lot of good ways" mean?

texts:
I used this link https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/47601/an-awful-lot-any-negative-connotation, but I couldn't understand what he meant.

“It’s hard for me to figure out how this period stands out in an awful lot of good ways,” Bogle told MarketWatch.

Source: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/jack-bogle-on-how-to-invest-in-a-time-of-trump-be-realistic-2017-04-13


texts:
Which preposition is idiomatic to use in this context?

  This skeleton is naked of / from its meat.

I mean to say that this animal / human skeleton which is from 500 years ago,  is without meat / tissues.


texts:
Is there any slight difference between these two sentences?

You cannot drink it alone.
and
You cannot drink it by yourself.


texts: What does it mean to say " i think it's safe to say ( that ) ... "?

texts:
What NAm/BrE Native speakers exactly mean when they say " i think it's safe to say ( that ) ... " ?

I mean if it's used in only one possible correct way and therefore doesn't need any further or other context.

My current understanding of it is that it is said to show that you think  that what are you going to say is based on some good reason/s and therefore it has a higher likelihood of being true or possible, is my understanding any correct or accurate?


texts:
Am I correct that this "10 dollars' worth of" works differently depending on what type of noun follows it:

I bought 10 dollars' worth of vases. - CORRECT (plural)
I bought 10 dollars' worth of a vase. - WRONG (singular)
I bought 10 dollars' worth of cheese. - CORRECT (uncountable)

THIS INFO was added later. (Because I heard that this is also possible in a jocular way)

I bought 10 dollars' worth of vase. - WRONG/CORRECT??? (uncountable)


texts:
I intended that the sentence means "Meaning Of The Sentence Comes Here".
I intended for the sentence to mean "Meaning Of The Sentence Comes Here".

Are above sentences correct and natural?
What I want to mean by the above sentences is:

The previous sentence I said/wrote is intended to mean "Meaning Of The Sentence Comes Here".


texts: How to say "sublease" if it is not about real estate

texts:
If I rent a house and lease it to another person, it's called "sublease".

Then how can I say if it it not about real estate?
For example a company rent money from a bank, and lend it to another company or person.

Can I also use the verb "sublease"?


texts: "but also he’s going to Greece..." or "but he’s also going to Greece..."?

texts:
This site says:

we can say

He’s not only funny, but also he’s intelligent. or

He's not only funny but also intelligent.

And we can say as showed in the site

Not only is Matthew going to Egypt for a month, but he’s also going to Greece for a couple of weeks.

My question is that, can we put "also" before "he"

Not only is Matthew going to Egypt for a month, but also he’s going to Greece for a couple of weeks.

In this site, they say

"but also" before "the band"

Not only was it raining all day at the wedding but also the band was late.

but, "but she also"

Not only did she forget my birthday, but she also didn’t even apologise for forgetting it.

Can I say:

Not only did she forget my birthday, but also she didn’t even apologise for forgetting it.

Also, this site says:

Not only did my uncle bring me to the city, but he also found a good job for me.

=

Not only did my uncle bring me to the city; he also found a good job for me. (we can obmit "but")

Note: this site says

  not only… (but) also…: used to emphasize that something else is also true

  She not only wrote the text but also selected the illustrations.

However

  not only… but (also)…: both… and…

  He not only read the book, but also remembered what he had read.


texts:
Can we change Verb tense in passive voice.

e.g.1

X killed Y. (Active Voice)

Y Killed by X (Passive Voice)

e.g.2

X died in the earthquake. (Active Voice)

X was killed in the earthquake. (passive Voice)

Can we change verb Died to killed in passive voice.

Also, I passive voice doer is either present or absent but from sentence we come to know that some has done to action.

But,

Was killed in accident.

Was killed in earthquake.

Was killed in landslide.

who is the doer in my above examples.


texts: Is past perfect necessary in 'It had been here before we came.'?

texts:
Would you use past perfect in following sentence or would you rather go with other tense?

  It had been here before we came.


texts:
This is from the novel Tales of War, about German Navy at the time of Great War.

  There was he, who should have been breasting the
  blue, or at any rate doing something salty and nautical, far out in
  the storms of that sea that the Germans call an Ocean, with the
  hurricane raging angrily in his whiskers and now and then wafting
  tufts of them aloft to white the halyards; there was he constrained to
  a command the duties of which however nobly he did them could be
  equally.

I do not understand the meaning of part in bold:

  and now and then wafting tufts of them aloft to white the halyards;

Is that wafting tufts of whiskers? What does "aloft to white the halyards" mean?

I am glad if some one kindly give me some advice.


texts:
Which prepositional construction would be more/most appropriate?

Where did you go on the excursion

or

Where did you go for the excursion

Both sounds quite natural to me, but it feels like that there exists a nuance I cannot pinpoint.

Please elaborate on your answer wherever possible. In addition, I think there might be case of US/UK difference.

Finally, is it grammatically correct to rephrase the question to

"Where was the excursion (or trip) to?"


texts: I don't know when she laughed last time vs. I don't know when did she laugh last time

texts:
I am always confused about the second part. Because it seems to me that the second part is kind of a question so i should use do/ did according to tense but at the Same time it also feels weird to add do/did because it makes the whole sentence sound weird. Another example of such  sentence is - "I don't know why he asked me" or "I don't why did he ask me". So please tell me which one of them is correct and if possible with examples. And I also want to  Thank u
you guys. You do a very good job by answering these question. This help goes a long way towards learning English.


texts:
Where the police at the scene?
  Were the police at the scene?

Surely the correct word would be "were"?


texts: "in a known concentration" vs. "at a known concentration"

texts:
Prepare samples containing Host Cell Protein in a known concentration.

I wrote this, but then looked up Google Ngram:

"At a known concentration" is more prevalent.

In Google Books, I found this example:

  Calibration Gas means a gas standard containing Hg0 or HgCl2 at a known concentration that is produced and certified in accordance with an EPA traceability protocol for certification of Hg calibration standards.

Would in a known concentration in my sentence be wrong? If not, what is the difference between the two expressions?


texts: A term to refer to the process of making travelling by airplanes more convenient

texts: I need a one-word or a two-word term that would refer to the process of making travelling by airplanes for people more convenient. That would include both the flight schedules arrangement and the convenience of passengers while they are inside airplanes.


texts: What does it mean "To pull out on someone?"

texts:
Kindly help clarify the phrase

  to pull out on you/someone.

I've heard it very often. Examples of usage would be great.

EDIT:

Here is the context: I was talking to Jacky who is my colleague at work. Jacky told me that she'd planned to go on a road trip with friends for the coming weekend. She'd asked Litz to cover her Friday shift, so that she could be worried free. Litz promised to do Jacky a favor. However, Litz called in sick on Friday morning, making Jacky frustrated about coming to work. Jacky called me on my phone and told me about the story. She got mad and said, "Litz can't pull out on me like that."

I hope my explanation is clear to you.


texts:
I'm trying to construct a sentence, but I can't describe it clearly in English according to what I'm really trying to say. First off, the english words that I find malicious-worthy:

to jack up (to increase, to raise, and the like...)
to jerk off (a sexual reference to a man... you know this)

So, let's say you have used ''jack up'' in a sentence when speaking with a non-native speaker, but you have nagging doubt that it may be rude due to it sounding like ''jerk off''. Then you researched it online, and fortunately, there is no sexual connection to it. And you say:

  ''I've already looked it up online, carefully and thoroughly, and there is no sexual reference to it in any sort of way wherever website I've visited.

And

  ''I've already looked it up online, carefully and thoroughly, and there is no sexual reference to it in any way wherever website I've visited.

Are the bold letters really exist in English?, I must have heard them from somewhere. Moreover, the google results can't provide a clear explanation if there is ''in any sort of way'' or "in any way".

P.S.: there is a slight correlation between my question and the other question topics on this website, but those links were asking a different type of query.


texts: What is the difference between "the way/how I was" vs. "similar to the way/how I was"

texts:
"He's the way I was when I was young."

"He's how I was when I was young."

"He's similar to the way I was when I was young."

"He's similar to how I was when I was young."

Are all the above sentences grammatically correct?
What's the difference in their meaning?


texts:
In Hot pursuit movie, when Randy beats up the police officer who was looking after the girl, she (Cooper) says I'll call you while running. And Randy asks How you gonna find me?, Then Cooper answers.

  I'll run your plates!

I'm wondering what does it means.

Randy is a convicted felon who had an ankle monitor on him, if that helps.

Thank you.


texts: Why no article preceding "owner" in the phrase "owner Intercontinental Terminals Co. said"

texts:
The benzene probably arose from charred chemical tanks as overnight winds stirred remnants of their contents, owner Intercontinental Terminals Co. said.

  Full source

I'm wondering why there is no article preceding the noun word 'owner' in this case.


texts: Meaning of "icon bashing as well as the next fellow"

texts:
What is the meaning of “icon bashing as well as the next fellow” in the following text?

  It implies that a large proportion of contemporary epistemologists,
  including myself, have been misguided in their researches, fighting
  under a false banner, engaged in a quixotic tilting at windmills. But
  though I enjoy icon bashing as well as the next fellow, I can't continue in this vein, lest I am guilty of false advertising myself. (Source)

The writer is saying first that epistemologists have been in a fight with an unreal enemy as in the Don Quixote story. First, I don't know what "icon bashing" means in this context. Second, I don't know what "the next fellow" means here. Does these refer to Don Quixote story too?


texts: What is the meaning of "based as it is"?

texts:
I can hardly say I understood the sentence as a whole but the most complex part for me to get is the one with "based as it is."

The sentence:

  The distinction between activity and passivity as well as that between mediated and unmediated communication falls well within the interactive paradigm, based as it is on the face-to-face or ‘transmission’ analogue for communication.

Source: Communication Theory by David Holmes


texts: Can I shorten the word "subtitles" to "sub's"?

texts:
I wanted to use the form of colloquial speech in my writing, having the word abbreviation in context to simplify speech.

"It's cool that you to create english sub's"

and

"It's cool that you to create english subtitles"

In this form, the meaning of the word has not changed?


texts: Can "should be able to" be interpreted as "can"?

texts:
A user with this permission should be able to run, upload, and
  download applications.

In the example above, does it mean "a user (...) can run, upload, (...)"?

or

"a user (...) will be able to run (....)"?


texts: What's the difference in meaning between infinitive and gerund?

texts:
(1) They love to walk in the woods.
  (Angela Downing, English Grammar: A University Course)

  (2) They love walking in the woods.

She says (1) will be interpreted as potential, while a gerund means actual or habitual. But, in fact, they seem to be very similar. How do I understand the difference in meaning?


texts: Understanding separate parts of passage from The Ferryman

texts:
I'm having trouble understanding of the separate parts of passage from The Ferryman (Jez Butterworth) What are the meanings of these sentences according to the passages: "spread-eagled round the back of the bingo"
Me and Diarmaid in the Shanty, we’re in the alley there, the Paras’ve got the nine-mill Browning in my ear. ‘I’m gonna scone you, you Irish fuck. Knock your fuckin’ cunt in.’ One of ’em sees I got the Republican News there sticking out my arse pocket. They’ve rolled it up and tried to shove it up my hole. Me and Finn Bailey, spread-eagled round the back of the bingo, this Para pulls the bolt of his
Sterling down. ‘Can you do an Irish jig?’ I’ll do no fucking Irish jig. I don’t even know one. They kicked us in the bollocks so hard Finn had an epileptic fit. His ma went to the police station. Waited seven hours. They made her fill out a form. ‘When did your boys get lifted and what happened?’ Then they whip out the lighter there and burn the fucking form and drop it in her lap.
Next part: What is the meaning of " brings out peat"?
SHANE. You a whiskey man? Here.
He pours him some in a cup.
Drop of water? Lots of men do, and there’s no shame to it. It brings out
the peat. Me, I like that punch in the back of the throat. That fire. You
want water?
and Final part: What's the meaning of "eat the bake off me"?
OISIN smashes the kite on the kitchen table, tearing it with his hands.
And runs out.
QUINN. Oisin!
CAITLIN. Let him go.
Silence.
MICHAEL. Well, that’s grand. Grand sense of humour on your man.
JJ. You was winding him up.
MICHAEL. Jesus Christ, it was just a bit of fun… We always have a bit of a
roar. It’s tradition.
JJ. You knew what you were doing.
MICHAEL. There’s no need to eat the bake off me. I was just having a laugh.
CAITLIN. Let him go. The boy’s had a head a steam up all summer. I’ll
speak to him later.


texts:
Few, indeed, were the folks that ever came this way, for it was in the loneliest
  part of Barnisdale Forest. Besides, who had any right to come here save it was
  the king's foresters keeping strict watch and ward over the king's deer?

This phrase confused me does it mean: consider?

Source: The Merry Adventure of Robin Hood


texts:
I want to figure out how to properly say "I have to (e.g., leave)" in past tense.

"I had have to leave", is that correct?


texts: Could someone explain the bold sentence in simple words?

texts:
We need not be surprised that standing as it did further from the support of written records than the legends of Western Iran, this
  oral tradition could have given rise to a few false affiliations and
  chronological anomalies. (Bivar, A. D. H., 1981. Gondophares and
  Shāhnāma, p150)


texts: One can only be so unsensible, you know. -> explain please?

texts:
One can only be so unsensible, you know.

That line came from an Anime, so it's Japanese to English translation. The original Japanese line is something like "A lack of common sense is allowed only to a certain extent(= Just get some common sense!)", which is my translation anyway.

But here I was wondering how that line could be translated into the one at the title. I'm not questioning the translation quality, just not getting used to the sentences start with One, always. And the key point, I think, lies with the word Only, but I can't quite grasp the whole idea.

Could you be so nice and parse it step by step?


texts: Do I need to know something except phrasal verbs and collocations to use colloquial English?

texts: What do I really need to know about colloquial English except phrasal verbs and collocations?


texts: Can Comma be used for introducing a substitute?

texts:
Example: But it was your barbaric friends, the huns, the ones that caused so much damage to the world.

Can Comma be used to introduce substitute(s) for the subject?


texts: Should I use "force" or "squeeze" in the following sentence?

texts:
I want to write the following sentence; it sounds a bit strange to me, but I couldn't find a better way to write it.

  Moreover, having more then one (something) force/squeeze us to take into account (something) in addition to the (something).


texts: "Approaching" or " Finally, as I approached" as an introductory phrase

texts:
Approaching Paris, the city's beautiful architecture came into focus

Finally, as I approached Paris, the city's beautiful architecture came into focus

I cannot differenciate between these statements. According to the answer key, 2nd statement is correct.


texts: I am confused about the uses of the prepositions "by" and "in" when they go with year

texts:
By 2008, the percentage of students choosing science subjects had decreased markedly.

Why don't we use "in" instead? I'm a non-English native speaker, and I don't know the differences between those two prepositions when they go with year.


texts: Can the present perfect continuous say anything about the future?

texts:
The present perfect continuous is a tense that relates a past action to the present, but does it say anything about the future?

I have read that the present perfect continuous often suggests that something said in the present perfect continuous that has just stopped may start again in the future.

For example: "It has been raining, the street is wet." If the rain has stopped it will probably rain again in the near future. Is this true?

Because to me it means that until recently it was raining and as a consequence the street is wet in the present. It says nothing about whether it will rain again soon.


texts: "Will Have Done" tense- meaning and examples

texts: Looking for sufficient definitions and explanations of this tense, I noticed that one meaning will usually refer to something someone "will have done" as something that "will have been done\completed". While I do realize this is one independent reason to use this tense, I don't quite get a lot by a definition of a tense which uses the tense it attempts to define. It would really help me if someone could clarify the subject, including regarding similar forms, such as: Will Have: gone, finished, completed, ended...All(Or most V3 verbs).


texts: Choice of punctuation: Which is easier for the native speaker to read

texts:
Which of these sentences is easier to read and understand for the native speaker? I guess it should also be the most correct of these options. Please note that the question is directed at the punctuations here.

Option A

Looking into recent trends in engineering literature, advances in mechatronics; commerce and trade; agric and chemical engineering are expected to present new challenges thereby opening further opportunities.

Option B

Looking into recent trends in engineering literature, advances in mechatronics, commerce and trade, agric and chemical engineering are expected to present new challenges thereby opening further opportunities.

Option C

Looking into recent trends in engineering literature; advances in mechatronics, commerce and trade, agric and chemical engineering are expected to present new challenges thereby opening further opportunities.

Note: I would like to refer to commerce and trade as a single entity


texts: Is "Has your headache gone?" grammatically correct?

texts:
I saw on one site that you usually don't say "My headache has gone," and "My headache is gone" is commonly used instead.

However, there is this "Has your headache gone?" question in my textbook.
Is this question grammatically correct?


texts:
You can’t do that sort of thing. (Random House Unabridged)
  You can't leave until you finish washing the dishes. (Webster’s Learner’s)

When ‘can’ is used for prohibition, does it have to stuck with not, that is, do cannot or can’t have to be used; not permitting 'can not'? I thought that ‘you can not do that sort of thing’ has equal meaning of the dictionary's example, but I don’t find any examples of ‘can not’. Can’t we use ‘can not’, when we do not give permissions?


texts: to let something into the hand of chance

texts:
Imagine for instance that you let the learning of a particular skill to "the hand of chance". Nothing is planned, nor organised to learn this skill, you might just learned it by chance, if you do, but... there is good chance you won't.

What about this one:

  "you let your education into the hand of chance"

I want to keep the idea of hazardous and high risk of failure.

Any other suggestion?


texts: How to make an embedded question from "What time is it?"

texts:
If the original question is "What time is it?" and I want to communicate it to another person, are these Embedded Questions OK?

  I don't know what time is it.

or

  I didn't know what time was it. (if communicated later)


texts:
Example with a context (The Object-Oriented Thought Process by Matt Weisfeld, 3rd Edition):

  There are a lot of variables involved in building a design and producing a software product. The users must work hand-in-hand with the developers at all stages. In the analysis phase, the users and the developers must do the proper research and analysis to determine the statement of work, the requirements of the project, and whether to actually do the project.The last point might seem a bit surprising, but it is important. During the analysis phase, there must not be any hesitation to terminate the project if there is a valid reason to do so. Too many times pet project status or some political inertia keeps a project going, regardless of the obvious warning signs that cry out for project cancellation.Assuming that the project is viable, the primary focus of the analysis phase is for everyone to learn the systems (both the old and the proposed new one) and determine the system requirements.

I don't quite understand the phrase pet project status. Status in this context evidently means high social standing or something of that nature. If the phrase is to be understood as the status of a pet project, then why not say it exactly like that? I'm actually not even sure if my guess is even remotely correct. Clear things up for me please.


texts: What is the meaning of "one of the crews' not-always-legal jobs -- this time a bank heist"?

texts:
Source

  one of the crews' not-always-legal jobs -- this time a bank heist.

So can anyone explain this sentence to me.


texts: Is this part of a sentence grammatically correct? "I ride a bicycle 'to or not to' go to the school"

texts:
I ride a bicycle to or not to go to the school.

Is to or not to correct expression? I doubt joining two words which have not a lexical meaning but a grammatical meaning with a conjunction is possible as 'or' in 'I may or will play soccer' or in 'I am or was happy'.


texts: A phrase or word that describes a group of people who are considered the best at something

texts: "Seal Team 6" has become synonymous "elite". Is there a more generic term that can be used to describe a group considered the best at something?


texts: Is the use of past perfect tense here correct? "When I... I had been..."

texts:
I encounter this past perfect tense structure very often:

When I joined X company, at that time I had been unemployed for the last 3 years.
When I started leaning to swim, I had been practicing soccer for the past nine months.

I don't see any grammatical error with these, but are they idiomatic?


texts: "Advances in the past have inspired expectations that have not been met."

texts:
Advances in the past have inspired expectations that have not been met.

Does this sentence only mean that 'inspiring expectations' has been made after 'advances in the past'? Because if 'inspiring expectations' had been made as 'advances in the past' was made, I think the simple past tense(just 'inspired') should have been used. I would really appreciate your help if you give me a thorough explanation.


texts: Wondering why the writer used the grammar structures “would also be bidding” and “would have to pay” here

texts:
At last Mr. Smith came upon the rare stamp he had been seeking at an auction. Since many other stamp collectors would also be bidding for it, he realized that he would have to pay through the nose in order to have it.  After considering the increasing value of the stamp, he decided that he would not mind paying such a high price for something so rare.

I am wondering if you could say what the grammar is used in these parts of the text:

Would also be bidding for it (why not “were going to bid for it too”?)
Would have to pay (why didn't the writer just write “should pay”?)

This is my gloss.  Is my perception correct?

  At last Mr. Smith came upon the rare stamp he had been seeking at an auction. Since many other stamp collectors were [going to bid for it too], he realized that he [should] to pay through the nose in order to have it.  After considering the increasing value of the stamp, he decided that [it is not important for him] paying such a high price for something so rare. [So he paid a lot of money.]


texts: Is it "is buried" or "was buried" in the following sentence?

texts:
Below is an example sentence from Collins English Dictionary. I wonder if there is a mistake in this sentence and if we should replace "is buried" with "was buried," as the first part of the sentence is past tense.

He died a pauper and is buried in an unmarked grave.


texts: Putting the indefinite article before the second noun

texts:
Which of the sentences below is correct and why?

  I'm not a loser or pessimist.

  I'm not a loser or a pessimist.


texts: ("Divorced", "get a divorce", "get divorced") + from (each other / one another)

texts:
I was wondering which one of the choices below sounds natural when they are followed by "from each other" or "from one another":

  David’s parents divorced from each other when he was six.

  David’s parents got a divorce from each other when he was six.

  David’s parents got divorced from each other when he was six.

I have no idea whether normally people use "from each other" or "from one another" after "divorce" in English.

I think they all should be correct and see nothing wrong with them.


texts: how to understand this attributive clause?

texts:
“We believe a product that addresses the more than 70 percent of global wireless subscribers that are unsubsidized pre-paid is necessary in order for Apple to grow its EPS next year,” Piecyk writes.

What are unsubsidized pre-paid?  "Global wireless subscribers" or "the more than 70 percent of global wireless subscribers"?


texts:
What's the difference between a single and a double quotation mark in English? I've heard that it only depends on where you live the US (for double quotation mark) or the UK and Australia (for single quotation mark).

Does it depend on anything else?


texts:
I assume that this is one of the US English and UK English differences. Which is the most common phrase:

  1) I need new "wheels" for my car.

or

  2) I need new "tires" for my car.


texts: In what cases do we have to use "hold true"?

texts:
That analysis still holds true today.

↑ I've seen that sentence from an article, and I have a question.
In my opinion, just saying "that analysis is still true today" can be also correct gramatically.

Can you tell me the difference between hold true and be true?


texts: What's the word for someone who loves two entities, like bilingual is one who knows two languages?

texts:
I saw the movie Isle of Dogs (2018) yesterday. The narrative described a kingdom of cat-loving humans waging war against the dog kingdom.1 Later, some characters spoke only Japanese without subtitles or interpreters. Since I understand some Japanese, I got some Bilingual Bonus (warning: tvtropes). In real life, I am not a
"cat-person" or a "dog-person", but a "both"-person.

So, all of this got me into world building mode. I started writing a story involving three kingdoms, the cat-lovers, the dog-lovers, and the "both"-lovers. This is where my question comes:

What's the word to describe a person who loves two entities?

I would like to form a sentence like below:

  The cat-loving kingdom and the dog-loving kingdom have been at war for centuries, with the bi<what?> kingdom acting as the peacemaker to prevent a catastrophe.

so that it reads similar to:

  The English kingdom and the French kingdom have been at war for centuries, with the bilingual kingdom acting as the peacemaker to prevent a catastrophe.

Obviously, I don't want to go with "bi-lover" (or similar) due to certain connotations.

1 It is from one of the earliest scenes and not particularly relevant to the plot, so not a spoiler.


texts: meaning of "along" in the sense of "further"

texts:
First of all, could you please tell me whether "along" can mean "further" or "further on"?

Are the following sentences correct?

"His power was drawing to a close, but nevertheless he moved/went along."
(so he kept moving)

"He decided to work along."
(this is wrong, isn't it? to keep working?)

"Without saying anything he just grabed him by his hand and pulled him along."

"She walked along."
(straight forward?)


texts:
how can I correctly say:

  I thought about asking my girlfriend to marry me there.

This sentence looks like that I thought about asking my girlfriend to marry me in someplace when I want to actually say that I thought about proposing my girlfriend there.


texts: in love with the change vs in love with a change vs in love with change

texts:
Is it "in love with the change", "in love with a change", or maybe "in love with change"?
For instance,

I am pretty future-oriented person. Always in love with the change. You could even say that I am lost in the future.


texts:
What is the polite and formal way to say if I would like to split the bill?

That was a time I went to a casual business meeting and the person was kind enough to pay for my bill. And all I said is thank you but the person doesn't have to do so and I was wondering what is the polite way to say split the bill and in fact, I would like to pay on my own. But I don't think "Let's go Dutch" or "Let's split the bill" will be the formal way in this situation. Any suggestion?


texts:
John won't be driving to work any more after his arrest for being drunk at the wheel.
  John won't drive to work any more after his arrest for being drunk at the wheel.

Do these sentences mean the same? Does the first mean that is a temporary situation that will last a long time? Does the second mean that he is not allowed to drive to work anymore?


texts: meaning of 'tick off something to someone" here

texts:
This is from an article in The New York Times: Fox News v. Robert Mueller

  If only we could dismiss Sean Hannity, Jeanine Pirro, Laura Ingraham
  and the other well-paid propagandists at Fox News as though they were
  harmless drunks at the end of the bar, ticking off their
  conspiracy theories to anyone who will listen. Unfortunately, the guy
  sitting on the next stool is the president of the United States, and
  he’s all ears.

I've looked up several dictionaries for "tick off." Mainly there are three meanings: "infuriate", "reprimand", and "to mark some item on a list"

I am going with the last one, but having a hard time clearly understanding the context.
I kind of have a guess though. Is it something like "enumerating/pointing out/laying out their conspiracy theories to someone"?


texts: Is "the team HAD not won any match last year" correct? Shouldn't it be "the team DID not win..."?

texts:
The West Indies team had not won any match last year.

This question came in my exam , I corrected 'did not win'

But they are saying no error ....

Is there any possibility to use HAD like this?


texts: How to read this mathematics value: 10^9

texts:
I have this value

How to read that in English? translating from my native language, I would say

  Ten base of nine.

but is that really correct?


texts: Is there a verb to convey the meaning of memorizing too much?

texts:
Is there a verb to use for expressing memorizing something too much to the extent that the speaker wouldn't be concentrating on what s/he is actually saying, so the words would come out as meaningless to him/her.

It may appear as a positive or negative thing depending on the situation.

We have it in Arabic "بَصَمَ" (pronounced as Basama), it is in its past simple form.

Example:

  He _______ (memorized) his section after getting rebuked by his teacher.

The word would fill the blank instead of "memorized".


texts: Ability in the future: Can vs Will be able to?

texts:
According to the Oxford Grammar Course (Intermediate) book by Swan & Walter, we CAN use Can if we are deciding now what to do in the future. In other cases, we use will be able to.

I need some help with the questions number 8, 10 and 11 in the first exercise of the page:

  8 I'm free at the weekend, so the kids __[can]__ come round.

  10 We're busy this week, but we __[can]__ repair it by next Thursday.

  11 I __[can]__ pay on Saturday – I promise.

I put can, as indicated here.

My reasons for all three:

8) I think can is correct because the speaker is deciding to allow the kids to come round in the weekend though he is busy.
10) I think can is correct because the speaker is deciding when exactly what to do the next Thursday.
11) I think can is correct because the speaker is deciding (and consequently promising) what to do on Saturday.

But the answer key says these three sentences should have will be able to.

UPDATE: Some serious misunderstandings:

1) The authors know both can and will be able to can be correct in some questions. They are saying in the first line that it is possible to use can for the future if we're deciding now. So as a whole, it means we CAN use can. Actually, They aren't saying we MUST use can if we're deciding now.

2) The goal of the exercise isn't clear for some guys. Read the title of exercise. It asks us to use can if it's possible (= if the mentioned condition is met). So "saying both are possible" sounds like nonsense.

Silly Example: Imagine we only have 2 kinds of drugs. Drug M specifically is designed for men and Drug H is designed generally for all human beings including men and women. So let fill the blank using more accurate drugs!

1- John Smith can use ...... {Preferable Answer: M}.

2- Ada Wong can use ....... {Preferable Answer: H}.

It's clear. Without any doubt Drug H can be used by men (John Smith!) but no anyone choose it as a correct answer. When we have a more specific answer why don't use it? So just behave like this with my questions too.

The authors in the title of the question say exactly this : "Put in Can or Can't if possible; if not, use will(won't) be able to."

So we conclude we are talking about Correct&MoreCorrect, not Correct&Wrong.

After this cheap example, guys, I expect you not to say that we can use both of those modals. Please don't say there isn't a definite answer.

Now anybody can help me know what's the actual answer to these ESL book questions? I'm not talking about a subtle difference between those two modals in real life. The question is clear. If we're deciding now put can there (though will be able to is correct with slightly potential different meaning). So please just focus on the information provided by the author and select the correct one!


texts:
A quote from an English mini-lesson at a Russian social network:

  In 2011 the April 12 was declared as the International Day of Human
  Space Flight in dedication of the first manned space flight made on
  April 12, 1961.

Is the use of the definite article grammatical here, or should it be:

  In 2011 April 12 was declared as the International Day of Human
  Space Flight in dedication of the first manned space flight made on
  April 12, 1961.

In my guessing, the use of the numeral 12 might make it ungrammatical. But I'm unsure.

I also forgot whether we're supposed to pronounce 'April the 12th' despite writing it without 'THE' .. or 'April 12th' is OK.


texts:
The original sentence:

  Above all the car changes everything: rising incomes and rising
  populations can make urban car density increase by something like four
  and five per cent in a decade; traffic flows rise to fill whatever
  scale of highways are provided for them.

My question is on the last sentence. It's my understanding that a noun (phrase) is expected as the object of the verb "fill." But it is a sentence in the book. It would be easier for me to comprehend the sentences without "are."

  Above all the car changes everything: rising incomes and rising
  populations can make urban car density increase by something like four
  and five per cent in a decade; traffic flows rise to fill whatever
  scale of highways provided for them.

Or "fill" is used as an intransitive verb here as below, which means "fill full":

  Above all the car changes everything: rising incomes and rising
  populations can make urban car density increase by something like four
  and five per cent in a decade; whatever scale of highways are provided for them, traffic flows rise to fill.

Well, on the second thought, I feel "fill" can be followed by a complete sentence as its object, which means the original text is perfectly fine. But I would like to keep the question on to get some feedback.


texts: collocation: perform / expand its purchase of

texts:
Can the verbs "expand" and "perform" be used in the following?

  The company decided to perform / expand its purchase of real estate in Japan.

I'd appreciate your help.


texts:
I heard the phrase on a American radio. What does "a three-one decision" truly mean?

I figure there might be three people to make one decision. But i'm not quite sure.


texts: Expressing that there was no need to worry

texts:
Which is correct?

  All the work was completed on time, so you need not to worry
  All the work was completed on time, so you need not have worried
  All the work was completed on time, so you did not need worry
  All the work was completed on time, so you need not worrying


texts: How to understand "things flying through the air experience drag because of the momentum of the air they're shoving out of the way"?

texts:
In the article Weightless Arrow from the What If? book, I meet this sentence:

  That means things flying through the air experience drag because of the momentum of the air they're shoving out of the way - not from cohesion between air molecules.

How should I understand the sentence before the dash? Intuitively, I understand that it's the air which shoving out of the way dragging the things. But since only things flying through the air is in plural form, then they should be a substitution of it. With that in mind, I break down the logic of the sentence:

  Things flying through the air → they're shoving out of the way of the air → this creates air momentum → the air momentum dragging them

Or, to modify the original sentence:

  That means things flying through the air experience drag because of the momentum of the air [created when] they're shoving out of [its] way - not from cohesion between air molecules.

Is this correct?


texts:
Harry swung at it with the bat to stop it from breaking his nose, and
  sent it zigzagging away into the air. (Harry Potter and the
  Sorcerer's Stone)

‘Zigzagging’ seems to be a predicative adjunct as the case below. Can both be the same case?

  They served the coffee blindfolded. [predicative adjunct]
  (The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language, p529)


texts: "How couldn't I do" vs. "how couldn't I have done" in the sense of criticiizing oneself for failure to do something in the past

texts:
Could you tell me if I have to use how couldn't I or how couldn't have I in the sense of criticizing oneself for failure to do something in the past? For example:

The problem turns out to be so easy. How couldn't I figure it out/how couldn't have I figured it out.


texts: Are both sentences completely the same in meaning?

texts:
It's good to stay active. (vs) To stay active is good.

I've learned that both sentences are completely the same.

That because "it" is the 'expletive it' and indicate "to stay active" in grammar.

But I'm wondering if "it" could be another situations.

What if someone says that,

"You need to have a hobby. It's good to stay active."

Is it possible?

Thank you for your help.

Modified (any hobby -> a hobby)


texts:
Someone asked me whether the term "royal court" could also mean the king's dukes, viscounts, barons, counts, earls, etc.  I know it contains his retinue, i.e. his advisors, servants, ministers, but does it also mean the entire nobility?  I'm not sure of this since I've never really studied monarchical hierarchy and terminology.  The definition of royal court on freedictionary.com is as follows:

  "The family and retinue of a sovereign or prince."

Definition No. 2b of "court" states:

  "The retinue of a sovereign, including the royal family and personal
  servants, advisers, and ministers."

My question is simple: Can it ever include the nobility such as a duke or earl?  Is it different depending upon the monarchy? User3169 below has mentioned the "Royal Court of England".  Can an earl or duke or baron be a part of the "Royal Court of England"?  That would be a starter.

If anyone should know the answer to this, please inform me.  Thanks.


texts: "With no jobs Bobby would be happy." and "With no jobs would Bobby be happy." What's your interpretation of these?

texts:
For this couple of days, I'm reading a book titled English sentences Japanese people always get wrong (Written by Toshiya Echizen), and have some questions regarding the interpretation of some example sentences introduced in it.
First of all, I would like to know what your immediate interpretation for the following two sentences would be like when you just read them.

With no jobs Bobby would be happy.
With no jobs would Bobby be happy. (Note: This is not a question sentence.)

Secondly, I would like to know if you agree with the below explanation given by the author of the book. (Note: The original explanation is written in Japanese in the book, and the English explanation below is my translation.)

With no jobs Bobby would be happy.
(Author’s interpretation)
a) Because Bobby has no job, he must be happy.  or
b) Although Bobby has no job, he must be happy.

With no jobs would Bobby be happy.
(Author’s interpretation)
No matter what kind of job Bobby takes, he won't be happy.

The author explains that:
The "no" in the first example sentence modify just the subsequent word "jobs", not the entire sentence, so it does not cause a subject-auxiliary inversion within the sentence. (Bobby would be happy.)
In the second example, on the other hand, the words "With no jobs" suggest "No matter what jobs ....., someone/something won't be.....", and the negation refers to the entire sentence, so it causes a subject-auxiliary inversion within the sentence. (would Bobby be happy)
Do you agree to this explanation? Is there anything you disagree or anything you can add?
With this question, I have no intention to challenge the author’s explanation. I'm just curious whether the explanation is the common understanding for most native English speakers.


texts: What do you call the thing that allows the thing that holds the drill to rotate in a power drill?

texts: What do you call the thing that allows the thing that holds the drill to rotate? I understand that the motor powers the drill, but I would like to know what allows it to rotate in the first place. I am thinking this thing is a generic object that exists in other tools and machines.


texts:
I am trying to find a phrase to explain that I am extremely interested in doing something. That means that I will do something whenever I have a chance.

For example, I've found this phrase

  I am always passionate about learning something new

Does this sentence sound good? Can I use it for my purpose?

Otherwise, please suggest any good alternative to express the idea.

Thanks


texts:
Please take a look at the sleeve notes of the revolving paint dreams lp "off to heaven"creation lp a great record by the way.

  The last story I heard that Alan Mc Gee (boss label) had tried to organise a come back concert. After hearing about the plans, however, the band had gone to the studio and burned all the tapes they had ever recorded, then demolished everything in the studio. By the time Mc Gee got there, the studio was a smouldering ruin. After that .....silence

  Silence, that is until late last year.

Are "burned" and "demolished" past perfect or are they past simple? Note "had" is not written, but I think it might be left out to avoid repetition.

So if they are past perfect: is it because the destruction happened before McGee arrived (the time reference)?

And if they are not past perfect but past simple, I dont see the necessity of the first past perfect "had gone over."

Is it be possible to write

  the band went to the studio, burned all the tapes they had ever recorded and then demolished everything in the studio.

So, again, if it is past perfect to emphasize their intention to destroy what they did. Or maybe is it because the time reference is "burned." As the arrival in the studio was before the destruction I would understand the use of past perfect "had gone over."


texts: Using can't / shouldn't for disappointment and must / should for unfulfilled obligation

texts:
Suppose we have the following example situation:

  Martin is obliged to paint the walls red, but he has painted them green. I'm disappointed. I say:

  Oh, Come on! You can't have painted the walls green. You must have painted them red.
  Oh, Come on! You can't have painted the walls green. You should have painted them red.
  Oh, Come on! You shouldn't have painted the walls green. You must have painted them red.
  Oh, Come on! You shouldn't have painted the walls green. You should have painted them red.

Can we use can't / shouldn't have (done) for expressing disappointment and must / should have (done) for unfulfilled obligation in the past?

Which ones of the above would be the correct ways of expression?


texts: Why isn't a Future Simple ("After that I will have vacation for a month") used here?


texts: "I put a fix for this in develop" - now did he do that?

texts:
My Scottish colleague chatted: "I put a fix for this in develop". I was wondering if he was still doing that, or if he already did that (I'm Dutch). Is he right? By the way, "develop" is a noun here. The chat went:

**Guy·Dec-18 2:11 PM**
I put a fix for this in develop

**Albert Hendriks·Dec-18 2:12 PM**
ok. Did you do that or will you do that?
"put" can be past tense or present tense :)

**Guy·Dec-18 2:13 PM**
i put a fix in already

**Albert Hendriks·Dec-18 2:13 PM**
ok, I''ll merge thanks

**Guy·Dec-18 2:14 PM**
'I will put a fix for this in develop' would be present tense
'I put something' would be past tense

**Albert Hendriks·Dec-18 2:15 PM**
ok :)


texts: downplay, play down; downscale, scale down

texts:
There are quite a few words that are formed with down/ up either preceding the actual rootword, or as a particle making for a phrasal verb. But does it change the meaning in any way or carry different connotations?
Play down - downplay
Scale down- downscale


texts: Help to understand: "this Medium Rich South Asian thot"

texts:
A “Medium Rich South Asian” was deeply moved by a beautiful and underappreciated bond that was highlighted in the film “Crazy Rich Asians.”

  On Monday, Mindy Kaling decided to express how much she loved the new,
  Asian-led romantic comedy on Twitter.

Quick Crazy Rich Asian thoughts from this Medium Rich South Asian thot:
         — Mindy Kaling (@mindykaling) September 3, 2018

As I saw the very first sentence, I thought “Medium Rich South Asian” refers to 'Mindy Kaling'. But latter context changed my mind a bit, because Mindy Kaling post this on tweeter: "Quick Crazy Rich Asian thoughts from this Medium Rich South Asian thot". I'm kind of getting lost from here.

What does "this Medium Rich South Asian thot" truly mean in this context?

The full source.


texts:
Please clarify the category that "used" belongs in the sentence below.

It is used for cold places.

Thanks in advance.


texts: Is it grammatically correct to use noun after "in order to"

texts:
For example;

  I suggest you to edit your question and state what exactly your question is in order to the question to be opened.

Is using a noun after in order to in such a sentence grammatically correct ?


texts: Are can and could interchangeable in probabilistic situation?

texts:
There was a scenario in which I and my co-worker were finding a piece of laminate, and then my co-worker said "it could be in the racks". Then I asked him can we say "it can be in the racks" and he said that both mean the same. I asked this to other co-workers (all of them are native Aussie and one is from England) and they said the same.

Even with different scenarios like someone called you and you couldn't recognise him then you can say "it can be John" or "it could be John". I asked three or four of my co-workers and they said in all scenarios where possibility is involved "can" and "could" are synonyms.

I always thought that "could" signify a greater uncertainty than "can". Also, this post completely rejects the usage of "can" in specific situations which is even more strange.


texts:
From the Faraway Tree

  They showed him the bed he was to sleep on.

And

  Dick peered in at his window and saw the big owl asleep on a bed.

Considering this answer what context should I understand by the above sentence?

https://ell.stackexchange.com/a/20115/5198


texts: Understanding the `green triangale by default`

texts:
From the link:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/47988796/how-to-debug-python-in-visual-studio

I saw the commenter says:

  The green triangale by default should run python in Debug mode.

I do not understand the green triangale by default.

So, whats that mean there? I checked dictionary, there is no answer for it.


texts: What's the difference between "two story books" and "two story-books"?

texts:
There are many books, including two story-books, three picture books,
  four English books and one Chinese book.

What's the difference between two story books and two story-books? When should the hyphen be used?


texts: Difference between archive and collection

texts:
I was trying this question of a Proficiency English Language Test (fill the blank), and for me both options are possible. But only one is marked as right. I cannot understand why one option would be right over the other. Can someone explain the difference? I looked at dictionaries but I haven't found the answer to my question.
anyways, the possible options are either collection or archive.

This is the TEXT

  Humans of New York, the photographic __________ of the amazing people roaming around the streets of the Big Apple, was started by Brandon Stanton in the summer of 2010. What began as a journey for a young photographer, exploded into a visual story, twisting its way through the tourist-filled streets, traffic-packed asphalt and winding subway tunnels of this manic city that millions of unique and beautiful individuals call home. Here are the 25 most romantic photos and stories throughout the history of HONY.

Thanks in advance.


texts:
What is the meaning of the following sentence? Is "pour off" a phrasal verb?

  Water poured off the roof.


texts: Meaning of "was having", "had" and "have had" in English

texts:
How to tell someone that I have observed fast full day?

1 I was having fast whole day
2 I had fast today
3 I have had fast today

I feel all are correct to say
Please, help me to understand the meanings of the above sentences.


texts: Is "worldly-renowned" a correct way to express "world-famous"?

texts:
I've been encountering "worldly-renowned" or "worldly-known" used as an expression of "world-famous". Here is one of the examples:

Several worldly-renowned car manufacturers (e.g., Piaggio, GE, Fiat
India, M. Benz, Porsche, Jaguar, VW, Bajaj Auto, Force Motors, and
Mahindra Navistar) also set up their own plants or made investment in
the region, which are not far away from the exhibition centre,
offering some opportunities to relevant fastener suppliers to connect
their business with these potential customers.

Personally I found this expression odd and have done research to find that "wordly" is used to describe things that are physical instead of spiritual, or people who are more experienced or well-rounded.
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/worldly
https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/worldly
However, if you do a Google search with the keyword "worldly known",
you'd find tens of thousands of usage, some of which seemingly express "world-famous".
Is "worldly-renowned" or "worldly-known" an actual word and can it mean "world-famous" to your ears?


texts:
She won't open the door.
She is not willing to open the door.
Probably she may not open the door.

Does #1 mean #2 or #3?
When won't is stressed strongly, it seems to mean #2. When won't is not stressed strongly, #1 means #3. It is a simple future. Am I right?