Search is not available for this dataset
query
stringlengths 1
13.4k
| pos
stringlengths 1
61k
| neg
stringlengths 1
63.9k
| query_lang
stringclasses 147
values | __index_level_0__
int64 0
3.11M
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
Are there one or more words that take only a singular form? In a Cambridge dictionary, it distinguishes a singular form from a countable form, but, in an Oxford dictionary, it only says the word is uncountable or countable. | Does English have any singularia tantum besides mass nouns? and are, respectively, nouns that have only a singular form and nouns that have only a plural form. In English, we have a handful of pluralia tantum that are mass nouns which take the plural form (e.g. "riches" and "remains"), a whole load of pluralia tantum that refer to things that come in pairs (e.g. "trousers", "sunglasses", "knickers", or "scissors"), and at least one plurale tantum that fits into neither of the above categories ("clothes", meaning multiple items of clothing - it's clear what the hypothetical singular "clothe" would mean, yet it mysteriously isn't a word). Singularia tantum, on the other hand, seem less varied. As far as I can tell, they are all - things like "information", "milk", and "racism". One can imagine there being a singulare tantum that is not a mass noun. For example, we can imagine an alternate universe in which it is still correct English to talk about "a dog", but talking about "dogs" in the plural is incorrect and funny in the same way that it is incorrect and funny to talk about a "scissor". It might seem unintuitive to think that such a noun even could exist - surely, if it is not a mass noun, then people would just pluralise it with an "s" on the end like most other words? But the converse argument could just as well be made about countable pluralia tantum, and I still cannot go to a shop and buy a "clothe". Hence my question: do we have any such countable singularia tantum in the language? Have we in the past? | Should I capitalize the word "that" in a title? Since the version of the word "that" might matter to the correct answer, I'll provide the actual title in question: Title: Existing Solutions that Didn't Work If someone could explain the why of the answer, I would be appreciative. EDIT: It has been suggested that this is a duplicate, and that may be, in a sense. However, the after reading the suggested prior question, I'm no closer to my answer. I think it may have to do with my use of the word "that." Perhaps it is incorrect? Using these definitions of the word "that:" I'm having trouble figuring out which definition of that matches my title. Am I even using it correctly? Perhaps I should use which instead: Possible Title: Existing Solutions which Didn't Work If my original usage is incorrect, and I should use which, then the answer is simple since which is always a pronoun or adjective, and those are both capitalized in a title. However, I'm having difficulty understanding which part of speech that is in my original title. | eng_Latn | 16,900 |
She is a girl vs it is a girl There is a photo of a baby girl with her brother but the baby can't be much Of differentiated as a girl or boy. What would it be right to say? It is a girl. Or She is a girl. | Is "Is it a girl or a boy?" really calling the infant an "it"? So, my boss comes in, railing that "English is a stupid language!" Since this is pretty much a thrice-weekly occurrence 'round these parts, I barely raised an eyebrow, and waited for him to continue. "Mary just wrote to tell us that she's back from maternity leave, and I want to congratulate her and ask whether she had a girl or a boy, but I can't do it without calling the child an 'it'!" I blinked, then confirmed that yes, he believes the it in "Is it a boy or a girl" is the impersonal pronoun, the same word you'd apply to an apple or a house. Is it the 'thing' pronoun, really? Or is it just a placeholder of some sort? I used to believe the latter: I gave the boss a mini-lecture about and the . He wasn't convinced, however, and now he's got me doubting too. (Harumph. I really should know better than to listen to the boss.) I'm not asking about politeness, here; the former title was to be taken somewhat facetiously. I'm wondering about the grammar: what role is that "it" playing in that sentence? Is it a personal pronoun (and thus the infant has grounds for feeling offended) or a dummy pronoun (and thus those who perceive a politeness issue are just misunderstanding the grammar)? | A significant amount of zombies were detected in your city Can anyone please help and tell me if this sentence is correct? "A significant amount of zombies were detected in your city." In my opinion it should be "A significant amount of zombies was detected in your city." because "amount" should be in agreement with "was" even though amount usually refers to something plural. Are both (was and were) acceptable in this case? Edit1: Yes, "number" would be the correct one in this case. So allow me to ask one more thing. "A significant amount of purchases were detected..." Does the use of "number" apply in this case also? As purchase is not exactly a thing/person. And if no, is it correct to say "A significant amount of purchases were detected..."? Edit2: So, please tell me what is the correct phrasing? "A significant amount of purchases were detected..." "A significant amount of purchases was detected..." Or, since purchases are countable, is the use of "number" instead of "amount" correct here, as in: "A significant number of purchases were detected..." "A significant number of purchases was detected..." Or would amount be correct since a purchase involves money and it refers to the amount of money? Would greatly appreciate an answer, and if possible a detailed explanation. | eng_Latn | 16,901 |
Can “it is” always be shortened to “it’s”? For example, can we change The car is blue, but the truck next to it is red. into The car is blue, but the truck next to it’s red. | Is there an exception to the prohibition against ending a sentence with “ ’s ” at work here? The ’s can be used as a contraction representing a weak, unstressed word that is not pronounced. It allegedly cannot occur in sentence final position. She is not ready, but he is. She’s not ready, but he is. She’s not ready, but *he’s. The last one is not grammatical there. Similarly, here the last one is not grammatical: He has not started yet, but she has. He’s not started yet, but she has. He’s not started yet, but *she’s. claims this is because you cannot end a sentence with a weak form. It backs up its point with reasonably scholarly documentation. However, this does not seem to be invariably true. Shall we go to the movies? Yes, let us go. Shall we go to the movies? Yes, let’s go. Shall we go to the movies? Yes, let’s. Unlike the third example in the first two sets, here in this case the third example is indeed grammatical, despite ending with a weak form. Is this an exception to the rule, or is there another rule at work here? | What is the purpose of -e in sed command? I can't find any documentation about the sed -e switch, for simple replace, do I need it? e.g. sed 's/foo/bar/' VS sed -e 's/foo/bar/' | eng_Latn | 16,902 |
How to use possessives when the subject has a number after? I have a question about possessives. While "Peter's ball" is easy and clear. How do I express the notion of "the ball that belongs to agent 2"? Would it be "agent's 2 ball" or "agent 2's ball" or what else? | "The queen of England's crown" or "The queen's of England crown"? Possible Duplicate: What is the correct way of these two sentences? The queen of England's crown The queen's of England crown Strictly linguistically, sentence 2 should be the correct one, since the crown belongs to the queen and not to England but it sounds really awkward to pronounce. | "Nikki's and Alice's X" vs. "Nikki and Alice's X" Which option is grammatical? There will be readings from Nikki Giovanni’s and Alice Walker’s writings. There will be readings from Nikki Giovanni and Alice Walker's writings. Saying it out loud the latter sounds right, but looking at it the former looks better. | eng_Latn | 16,903 |
Does an adjective before "or" apply to the noun that comes after "or"? Have you come across any frilly dresses or blouses? Does this mean [frilly dresses or frilly blouses], or does it mean [frilly dresses or blouses]? I want to know whether an adjective so placed only applies to the noun that comes immediately after it, or to the noun that comes after "or", too. Or is there ambiguity here? | Does an adjective or longer modifier apply to both nouns when they are joined with 'and' [or 'or']? Can you grab the blue shirts and socks? Is the above sentence stating that both the shirts and the socks are blue? Or only the shirts? At this stage, I am leaning towards the earlier (only the shirts) — though writing "Can you grab the blue shirts and blue socks?" seems redundant. | How does deleting work? What can cause a post to be deleted, and what does that actually mean? What are the criteria for deletion? What circumstances can cause a question or answer to be deleted, and what does that actually mean? How can a post be deleted? When can't I delete my own post? Can I still see my post even after it's deleted? Can I see a list of my deleted posts? How can I undelete one of my posts? What does deletion mean for a post? How do votes to delete work? What are the criteria for deletion? What else should I know about deleted posts? If I flag my question with a request to delete it, what will happen? For more information, see the articles about and in the . | eng_Latn | 16,904 |
offers vs offer ABC is an online platform providing technology and software that offer XYZ and YXV with insights using environmental data. In the sentence above, should it be phrased technology and software that Offers OR Offer? Normal subject and verb agreement rules state that it should be offers, but it doesn't sound right. Can anyone explain what is the correct term to be used and why is it so? Thanks in advance. | "One of the children who was" vs. "one of the children who were" In the construction "one of the [plural noun] who ...", should the verb agree with "one" or "[plural noun]"? For example, which of the two following sentences is grammatically correct? Or are both acceptable? She was one of the several children who was sold at the auction She was one of the several children who were sold at the auction. | "Has/Have/Had" as a main verb and auxiliary verb I need help regarding the use of has/have/had both as a main verb and as an auxiliary verb. In the sentence below, the word has acts as the main verb. I would normally follow it with the phrase "so do I." Kenny has a car, and so do I. On the other hand, the word has in the following sentence acts as an auxiliary verb. I would normally follow it with the phrase "so have I." Kenny has bought a car, and so have I. a) Are sentences 1 & 2 above correct? I'm under the impression that so do I is used when has/have/had is the main verb of a sentence, and so have/had I if it's an auxiliary verb in a sentence. b) Does the verb has/have always need a supporting "auxiliary verb" (either implied or mentioned)? (e.g., Kenny has a car = Kenny does have a car.) | eng_Latn | 16,905 |
"It is we whose" vs "It is us whose" I'm a bit confused about writing the correct sentence: It is we whose flat was robbed. It is us whose flat was robbed. The context is this, A family was robbed and they are in a police department waiting when the police officer calls, "Who's here about the robbery?" What bothers me is that both sound okay with whose but I somehow feel that "we" is incorrect although it corresponds to "whose" much better than "us". It is we whose flat was robbed. - We are the family whose flat was robbed. Here are examples from google search: Or maybe it's we whose lives are impoverished. Before we parted ways, Philip told me he'd very much like to have a wife just like me someday ... () It's we whose eyes can fill with tears, We yet can be aggrieved. We're prone to all our human fears; It's we who feel bereaved. () It's we, whose destiny it is to serve others, who are There were shouts, a confusion of commands and of hands of their filthy wishes. () But it's we whose meager earnings are at stake that get caught. I call it an outrage." Miss White snapped on the radio, tuned in on Babson's reports, and went on: ... () and It is us whose flat was robbed. - It is us, the family, whose flat was robbed. Here are examples from google search: “Our guys know that going over there it's us whose back is up against the wall because I give Westfield a lot of the advantages..." () It's us that he 'walks with purpose' towards and it's us whose senses he 'overwhelms with his passion'. Ergo, the many thousands of female authors with... () It's us whose freedoms are at risk. And it's MPs who retire on a generous, safe pension. Most politicians are not venal - and we need them. () I'm unsure whether a comma is needed after "it's we/us"! Edit: In all your duplicates it's who/whom which does differ from whose. Not one of your duplicates explains the pronoun to use with "whose". | "It was me" or "It was I" It was ... salted the earth around your flower deck. I wrote the second form "It was me". I have chosen the most "appropriate" answer to this question as somebody who is learning English. This decision was made on a phonetic basis so it's for sure I made a mistake. Surely you have a rational explanation to this exercise, maybe a grammar rule, or is it an English expression? | Clarify an idiom in a political text Please carefully read the text below: On 24 November, 1993, a meeting of Leftist intellectuals occurred in London under the auspices of the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR), which is a Labour-leaning think-tank. A short document was circulated in advance of the said meeting to clarify its purpose. Among other things, the document declared that the task of the IPPR was: "To do what the Right did in the seventies, namely to break through the prevailing parameters of debate and offer a new perspective on contemporary British politics." The explanatory document also said, "Our concern is not to engage in a philosophical debate about foundations of socialism." If this meant that those foundations were not the appropriate thing to talk about at the 24 November meeting, then that might have been right; not every thing has to be discussed at every meeting. But if what was meant was that discussion of philosophical foundations is not what the Left now needs, then I disagree, and if that indeed is what was meant, then it is curious that the breakthrough by the Right should have been invoked as an achievement for the left to emulate, for if there is a lesson for the Left in the Right's breakthrough, it is that the Left must repossess itself of its traditional foundations on pain of continuing along its present, politically feeble, reactive course. If the Left turns its back on its foundations, it will be unable to make statements that are truly its own. Since I've heard only one definition of the part identified in bold, I am at a dead end. As you know, and according to Oxford's dictionary, the verb "repossess" means: To take back property or goods from SB who has arranged to buy them and can not pay. Here, the object of verb is a thing not a person, but in the text, first,itself comes before of and its traditional foundations. As a result, I thought that this phrase might be an idiom and so has a different meaning with the original verb. Please explain the meaning of this phrase. | eng_Latn | 16,906 |
I'm tired of writing out the phrase "himself or herself". What are my options? Because of English's lack of a gender neutral third person singular possessive pronoun, whenever the need for such a referent presents itself in the course of writing, we seem to be left with alternatives that are either cumbersome or otherwise awkward. There is the informal gender neutral "himself", and the informal singular "themself", and of course there is the more formal "himself or herself" which is both grammatically and politically correct but has the disadvantage of being incredibly annoying to write very quickly. Are there any other ways to truncate this expression, particularly (but not limited to) ways that stay within the bounds of standard correct English usage and grammar? For example, I thought of shortening it to "his or herself", but upon second thought this feels akin to what mathematicians would call can . | Is there a correct gender-neutral singular pronoun ("his" vs. "her" vs. "their")? Is there a pronoun I can use as a gender-neutral pronoun when referring back to a singular noun phrase? Each student should save his questions until the end. Each student should save her questions until the end. | Usage of singular or plural SI base units when written in both symbol as well as name I have multiple doubts related to the usage of singular or plural SI base units when written in both symbol as well as name. I have framed this question under two parts, namely, Part (a) and Part (b). Each part has three sentences which I have written on the basis of my understanding. Please answer these 6 sentences/questions. Part (a): says that while using prefix for e.g., centi as in centimeter, it is l = 75 cm long.(correct) l = 75 cms long. (wrong) Does this rule is used for all SI prefixes (having powers of 10)? In this regard, we should be saying, or writing that, "how many cm are there in one metre?" (while saying we should say centimter or centimetres?) Please strike-through the wrong SI unit in the following sentences. My weight is 70 kg / kgs, or My weight is 70 kilogram / kilograms. Part (b): and the page next to above web link says, we should write: 2.6 m/s, or 2.6 metres per second. In this regard, we should say, or write: Its speed is 0.26 metres per second. This pipe is 0.75 metres long. How many cm are there in 2 metres? | eng_Latn | 16,907 |
"Real": adjective or adverb? "Real" or "really" as an adverb? According to Oxford Learner's Dictionary: real adverb (North American English, Scottish English, informal) very That tastes real good. He's a real nice guy. I'm real sorry. So, is it correct to use "really" instead of "real" in the examples above? Now, let's put some other examples: a. It's a real small town b. It's a really small town c. It's really a small town Are all these three correct? Do they mean the same? | Can "real" be used as an adverb to describe an adjective? Is this correct? That is a real cool answer. I learned that that was incorrect, since "real" is an adjective which can describe a noun, e.g. "real answer" but it is not an adverb which can describe an adjective, "real cool". Instead you would have to say: That is a really cool answer. Since "really" is an adverb. | Could "them" mean "those"? Background Nowadays, I see "them" used to mean "those" a lot. I don't know if it was as common in the past. For example, take "one of ". On researching about it, I found some people say it comes from a dialect of British English. Some others say it is a "non-standard" usage. I see this usage in Canadian English also, and it seems some people use it in a sarcastic way. Moreover, I have seen a song titled "one of them days". I also read, in the book called "A Broken Promise", "" Finally, Wikipedia says that it is a usage in (a common name for the Southern Midland dialect of American English): Pronouns and demonstratives "Them" is sometimes used in place of "those" as a demonstrative in both nominative and oblique constructions. Examples are "Them are the pants I want" and "Give me some of them crackers." Question(s): What would you say about the usage of this word? Is it correct? Could we use it in daily speech? Could this usage go beyond a specific dialect and be used in other dialects, regions, etc.? Does it really originate from Appalachian English? Why did this usage become popular among other English speakers? Note: I have already seen a similar question: However, it only says, "ungrammatical," there. This question is specific to this situation only, and there is more to it. | eng_Latn | 16,908 |
"Which type of nuts ARE/IS the heathiest?" It seems that people overwhelmingly prefer to write Which type of nuts are the healthiest? to Which type of nuts is the healthiest? However, type is singular, so why isn't is the correct choice? Edit if you type these sentences with quotes into Google (phrase search), you'll see that the first one occurs about 3000 times on the web, and the second one basically never. | Can "what kind" be plural? Is it correct to say, "What kind of patents are being issued in these sophisticated times?" It seems like it should be What kind of patents is being issued..., but that sounds wrong. What kind of patent is being issued... is correct and sounds right, but loses a little bit of the original meaning. Is there something magic about what kind that allows it to be plural, or do people just misuse it a lot? | How do you use plural or singular form of an adjective? So I was taught that you should almost always use singular form of an adjective instead of plural form. But recently, I've seen people using plural form and it sounds quite weird and I don't know if it is correct. For example, "Salary tax" instead of "Salaries tax" "Office supplies" instead of "Offices supplies" "Product demo" instead of "Product demo" In the above cases, the word "Salary" is used as an adjective to describe the type of "tax", so it will be in singular form. But I saw people using salaries tax and not sure if it is grammatical. So my question is if there are any general rules on how to use the singular/plural form of an adjective? | eng_Latn | 16,909 |
How to Write Possessives in Multiple Nouns when Using "Attention" Which is correct? He raised his hands to get John, Stephen and Joyce's attention. or He raised his hands to get John's, Stephen's and Joyce's attention. Since attention is something that can't be counted, do I leave the 's in the last noun, or does each noun need it? | "Nikki's and Alice's X" vs. "Nikki and Alice's X" Which option is grammatical? There will be readings from Nikki Giovanni’s and Alice Walker’s writings. There will be readings from Nikki Giovanni and Alice Walker's writings. Saying it out loud the latter sounds right, but looking at it the former looks better. | How do you pluralize the acronym "POC" ("proof of concept")? Possible Duplicate: What's the plural form of the acronym , short for proof of concept? ...for his contributions to many POCs or ...for his contributions to many POC is not a duplicate as it is focused on cases like "ATMs" where the expanded form "automated teller machines" ends in a noun with a regular plural form ending in "s." In "proof of concept," the noun is in the middle of the abbreviated phrase. If we pluralize the uncontracted phrase, we get "proofs of concept," which has an "s" in the middle rather than at the end. It's unclear from the linked answers how abbreviations with this structure should be pluralized. (POC, POCs, PsOC?) | eng_Latn | 16,910 |
Is this grammatically correct: "Will he roll the dice, and follow it to Vegas?"? I want to use the following line in a poem: Will he roll the dice, and follow it to Vegas? A couple of things to note; firstly, obviously I'm using "roll the dice" in both a figurative/idiomatic sense (as in taking a risk), and in a somewhat more literal sense (painting the image of the person actually following the dice that have been rolled to Las Vegas). That being said, my confusion here is if I can get away with using "follow it" or if I need to say "follow them" .... As I've read online "dice" traditionally refers to more than one die (i.e., the plural of die), but in the modern usage, "dice" can also be used to refer to the singular (i.e., just one die). So, it seems like if I was referring to the image of just one die, then the way I phrased it could be correct. However, the image I'm trying to paint is the one usually associated with the phrase "roll the dice" (i.e., rolling two dice)... So could "follow it" still be considered acceptable in this sense... or would I need to use "follow them"?... And if not referring to the dice themselves, could using, could the "it" be taken to refer to the act of rolling the dice, or would that not work either? | Is this a grammatically correct line in a poem: “Will he roll the dice, and follow it to Vegas?”? I want to use the following line in a poem: "Will he roll the dice, and follow it to Vegas?" A couple of things to note; firstly, obviously I'm using "roll the dice" in both a figurative/idiomatic sense (as in taking a risk), and in a somewhat more literal sense (painting the image of the person actually following the dice that have been rolled to Las Vegas). That being said, my confusion here is if I can get away with using "follow it" or if I need to say "follow them" .... As I've read online "dice" traditionally refers to more than one die (i.e., the plural of die), but in the modern usage, "dice" can also be used to refer to the singular (i.e., just one die). So, it seems like if I was referring to the image of just one die, then the way I phrased it could be correct. However, the image I'm trying to paint is the one usually associated with the phrase "roll the dice" (i.e., rolling two dice)... So could "follow it" still be considered acceptable in this sense... or would I need to use "follow them"?... And if not referring to the dice themselves, could using, could the "it" be taken to refer to the act of rolling the dice, or would that not work either? Thanks so much in advance!! | Smaller vs. less vs. lesser I am confused as to some of the vocabulary that can be used to compare numbers and quantities, and would very much appreciate some clarification. I suppose it is safe to say that 1 is smaller than 2. Can I also say that 1 is less than 2, and if so, which form is preferable? It seems that saying that 1 is lesser than 2 is uncommon - but is it incorrect? Finally, -2 is clearly less than -1, but is it true that -2 is smaller than -1? (If I have 2$ of debt, then I would say that I have less money than if I had 1$ of debt, but I would also say that my debt was larger, not smaller). | eng_Latn | 16,911 |
'Alert whomever may read' - should it be 'whoever'? I read this morning : ... words which leap from the second verse and alert whomever may read the epistle ... to the fact that ... I am not clear with what exactly is going on with 'alert whomever may read'. Is 'whomever' the grammatical object of 'alert' or is it the grammatical subject of 'may read' ? Or is it both ? So should it be 'whoever' ? | Whoever or whomever: 'happy for ___ has the pleasure of working with you next.' So sad to lose you, yet happy for whomever has the pleasure of working with you next. | Is it correct to say "I write children books" (not possessive case)? Although Children's books is what everybody says, I would like to understand why the genitive case is applied in such case. If I write books for children, children is an adjective here; not the owners of my book! The word "children" just defines or characterizes the type of books I write. Therefore, it's an adjective. So, I understand that genitive/possessive case ("I write children's book") is incorrect grammar. My question is: is the genitive case here really accepted as right? If I use "I write children books" (following the grammar principle) as as I say "I write pets books" (books about pets, and not possessions of pets) - would I be incorrect? Why? | eng_Latn | 16,912 |
uncountable noun + and + uncountable noun Which sounds better? There is water and butter in my fridge. There are water and butter in my fridge. I think it should be: is. But what if we said: How much flour and butter is needed to make a pizza? How much flour and butter are needed to make a pizza? In that case, I think the plural verb: are, is the correct choice, which means (I think) there is a contradiction between both sentences. | "There Is"/"There are" depends on plurality of the first list element or not? It seems I put a Bounty assigned by outside party, two lengthy, reference-citing answers, one "-1" (awarded the bounty), one "-2", two others scored "0" and "-2" respectively, the answers suggesting one or the other is correct, 73 comments and no consensus so far - and me, as the asker, lost without a clue what to think of the answers anymore - this is no longer "Learners' Level" question, so I thought I'd bring it here and hear what the experts have to say. Original question: Plurality of verb depending on plurality of list elements An edit was suggested to my sentence. There was were an orange, some grapes, two apples and a small pile of cherries on the plate. In my native language plurality of the verb always follows plurality of the first element on the list. There were an orange,... sounds awkward to me, no matter what follows up. My simple solution was reordering: There were some grapes, an orange, two apples and a small pile of cherries on the plate. But that's not the first time I faced this situation and I'd like to know what the rules of grammar say about that - was my editor overzealous or am I trying to copy rules of my language that don't apply in English? Someone linked a for negatives, where the situation is more clear-cut ("There is no..."). Same applies to connection with "or" apparently, per accepted answer there. Still, nothing for "and". It seems there is a consensus that in that if the verb goes after the list, it will be plural. an orange, some grapes, two apples and a small pile of cherries were on the plate. There doesn't seem to be clear consensus for: On the plate { was | were } an orange, some grapes, two apples and a small pile of cherries Adding more to the confusion is the abbreviated form: "There's" One last note. In North America, at least, there is a widespread use of using a singular form like "there is" and "there was", without regard for the subject item or items, and this "there is" is often shortened to "there's": There's three apples on the table! Could you please clarify this mess? | Pluralization of names If I were to use the sentence "There are lots of John Smiths" in the world, would that be the correct use for saying that there are a lot of people named John Smith in the world? I don't think there should be an apostrophe as that would imply ownership of something. If my first example is correct, then what would you do if the name referenced already ended with an 's'? | eng_Latn | 16,913 |
Is there a linguistic reason why we sometimes use a singular pronoun and verb even when it refers to a plural subject? Here is the from Why is a Red Herring Red? by Mitchell Symons (2020): Consequently, when the herd is hunted, it is the slowest and weakest ones at the back that are killed first. | Can "it" be used with plural subject? Several years ago I heard of something called dummy subjects in high school. It was then stated that, for example, it is a dummy subject when it starts many instances of sentences, e.g. It is rainy today. It is hard to imagine how hard is to live alone. It is not my university degree that matters here. My question is if we can use it with plural subjects? For example in If some think that in Mahmoud Dowlatabadi’s works it is only social themes that matter and the writer is ignoring fictional arrays and artistic techniques, at least, endings of his stories show wrongness of this idea. My question deals with the italicized part. If this usage is OK, can we also write they are social themes that matter? I mean can they also play the role of a dummy subject? | The user who first created a tag wiki is treated as owner for suggested edits was declined by the user who created the tag wiki excerpt, who doesn't yet have the reputation to be a trusted user. (The site is still in beta, and the reputation necessary to be a trusted user is 4000.) Should the user who first proposed a tag wiki, or a tag wiki excerpt be the one who can unilaterally decide about a proposed edit for a tag wiki? The user who first proposed it isn't necessarily the one who knows if the tag's purpose can be better described with different words, nor does that user necessarily know if the tag has been lately used differently from how it was first used. Since a tag wiki is different from other posts, there should be an exception to the rule "the author of a post can unilaterally decide about any edits." The paradox is then that the creator of a tag wiki still needs two users to approve their suggested edit. That's what happened in . The funny fact is that in the revisions for the tag wiki, or tag excerpt (as in the screenshot), the tag wiki/excerpt is said to be created from the Community user. This bug is definitely . | eng_Latn | 16,914 |
Linking words pronunciation /ng/ Just wondering if the [g] sound is sometimes used to link a word ending in [ŋ] and a word beginning with a vowel sound. For example, can "hang out" be pronounced as /hang-gout/? If you know any helpful source about this inquiry, can you share it with me? Thanks a bunch! | How to pronounce '-ing' followed by a vowel I'm getting into English recently and I'm a little confused by the way people pronounce a word that starts in a vowel right after a word ending in -ing. For example: You have to bring it up now? I don't know if I should pronounce it as: bring /ŋit/ brin' /nit/ bring /git/ Another example would be "I'm coming out". Likewise, what about the ending -ang? For example: We can just hang out and have a good time. And to round it all up, what about a combination of the two? For example, He got sick of hanging around waiting for you and went home. I've been asking myself these questions for weeks. | Singular to plural noun Many nouns that end in ‑f are made plural by changing the ‑f to ‑v‑ and adding ‑es. +----------+-----------+ | Singular | Plural | +----------+-----------+ | half | halves | | leaf | leaves | | shelf | shelves | +----------+-----------+ But some nouns that end in ‑f are made plural simply by adding ‑s. +----------+-----------+ | Singular | Plural | +----------+-----------+ | chief | chiefs | | roof | roofs | | cliff | cliffs | +----------+-----------+ Some nouns that end in ‑f can be made plural in two ways, either by adding ‑s or ‑ves: +----------+--------------------+ | Singular | Plural | +----------+--------------------+ | scarf | scarfs or scarves | | hoof | hoofs or hooves | | dwarf | dwarfs or dwarves | | wharf | wharfs or wharves | +----------+--------------------+ Now my question is how to determine whether to use only ‑s or to change the ‑f to ‑v‑ and add ‑es? | eng_Latn | 16,915 |
Why are ships always female? I was reading and it it's always refered as female. Is it unique to ships? I've learn in school that words in english does not have a sex, you can call a cats and dogs as "it". | Is it a good practice to refer to countries, ships etc using the feminine form? While talking about ships and countries, is it a good practice to use the feminine form? For example: "Her economy" - while referring to a country's economy "Her flag (or deck etc)" - while referring to a ship Is this practice common? Is it used today? | Is this a grammatically correct line in a poem: “Will he roll the dice, and follow it to Vegas?”? I want to use the following line in a poem: "Will he roll the dice, and follow it to Vegas?" A couple of things to note; firstly, obviously I'm using "roll the dice" in both a figurative/idiomatic sense (as in taking a risk), and in a somewhat more literal sense (painting the image of the person actually following the dice that have been rolled to Las Vegas). That being said, my confusion here is if I can get away with using "follow it" or if I need to say "follow them" .... As I've read online "dice" traditionally refers to more than one die (i.e., the plural of die), but in the modern usage, "dice" can also be used to refer to the singular (i.e., just one die). So, it seems like if I was referring to the image of just one die, then the way I phrased it could be correct. However, the image I'm trying to paint is the one usually associated with the phrase "roll the dice" (i.e., rolling two dice)... So could "follow it" still be considered acceptable in this sense... or would I need to use "follow them"?... And if not referring to the dice themselves, could using, could the "it" be taken to refer to the act of rolling the dice, or would that not work either? Thanks so much in advance!! | eng_Latn | 16,916 |
Pluralizing an irregular family name I have a doubt about the pluralization of irregular family names. What if the family name is an irregular plural form like "mice"? Should you say "the Mice" or "the Mices"? | Family name pluralization When pluralizing family (last) names that also happen to be common English words, does the pluralization follow the same rules as the common word? For example, "the Smith family" can be pluralized as "the Smiths", but what if the family name is "Wolf" or "Fish"? Would the correct pluralization be "the Wolfs" or "the Wolves"? | Is this a grammatically correct line in a poem: “Will he roll the dice, and follow it to Vegas?”? I want to use the following line in a poem: "Will he roll the dice, and follow it to Vegas?" A couple of things to note; firstly, obviously I'm using "roll the dice" in both a figurative/idiomatic sense (as in taking a risk), and in a somewhat more literal sense (painting the image of the person actually following the dice that have been rolled to Las Vegas). That being said, my confusion here is if I can get away with using "follow it" or if I need to say "follow them" .... As I've read online "dice" traditionally refers to more than one die (i.e., the plural of die), but in the modern usage, "dice" can also be used to refer to the singular (i.e., just one die). So, it seems like if I was referring to the image of just one die, then the way I phrased it could be correct. However, the image I'm trying to paint is the one usually associated with the phrase "roll the dice" (i.e., rolling two dice)... So could "follow it" still be considered acceptable in this sense... or would I need to use "follow them"?... And if not referring to the dice themselves, could using, could the "it" be taken to refer to the act of rolling the dice, or would that not work either? Thanks so much in advance!! | eng_Latn | 16,917 |
Understanding why this is a complete sentence: 'Not happy or content.' I'm perplexed why the grammar check considers this a grammatically complete sentence: Not happy or content. To me, it's missing both a subject and a verb. Could someone shed some light on this for me? Thanks. | Verbless sentence I thought I heard my teacher said: 'Don't construct a sentence without a verb.' Is there such rule in english grammar? She looks like 70 years old. Perhaps older. How about the question above? Is it correct? Is there any book that can be used references for wide range of topics in grammar(including syntax, morphology et cetera)? I have finished oxford grammar in use recently and think it wasn't enough for me. | "Has/Have/Had" as a main verb and auxiliary verb I need help regarding the use of has/have/had both as a main verb and as an auxiliary verb. In the sentence below, the word has acts as the main verb. I would normally follow it with the phrase "so do I." Kenny has a car, and so do I. On the other hand, the word has in the following sentence acts as an auxiliary verb. I would normally follow it with the phrase "so have I." Kenny has bought a car, and so have I. a) Are sentences 1 & 2 above correct? I'm under the impression that so do I is used when has/have/had is the main verb of a sentence, and so have/had I if it's an auxiliary verb in a sentence. b) Does the verb has/have always need a supporting "auxiliary verb" (either implied or mentioned)? (e.g., Kenny has a car = Kenny does have a car.) | eng_Latn | 16,918 |
There's and enumeration There is one cup, one plate, and one spoon in the drawer or There are one cup, one plate, and one spoon in the drawer Which one should i use? There's sounds more natural, but I feel like I'm talking about multiple items, so I should use There're. | "There Is"/"There are" depends on plurality of the first list element or not? It seems I put a Bounty assigned by outside party, two lengthy, reference-citing answers, one "-1" (awarded the bounty), one "-2", two others scored "0" and "-2" respectively, the answers suggesting one or the other is correct, 73 comments and no consensus so far - and me, as the asker, lost without a clue what to think of the answers anymore - this is no longer "Learners' Level" question, so I thought I'd bring it here and hear what the experts have to say. Original question: Plurality of verb depending on plurality of list elements An edit was suggested to my sentence. There was were an orange, some grapes, two apples and a small pile of cherries on the plate. In my native language plurality of the verb always follows plurality of the first element on the list. There were an orange,... sounds awkward to me, no matter what follows up. My simple solution was reordering: There were some grapes, an orange, two apples and a small pile of cherries on the plate. But that's not the first time I faced this situation and I'd like to know what the rules of grammar say about that - was my editor overzealous or am I trying to copy rules of my language that don't apply in English? Someone linked a for negatives, where the situation is more clear-cut ("There is no..."). Same applies to connection with "or" apparently, per accepted answer there. Still, nothing for "and". It seems there is a consensus that in that if the verb goes after the list, it will be plural. an orange, some grapes, two apples and a small pile of cherries were on the plate. There doesn't seem to be clear consensus for: On the plate { was | were } an orange, some grapes, two apples and a small pile of cherries Adding more to the confusion is the abbreviated form: "There's" One last note. In North America, at least, there is a widespread use of using a singular form like "there is" and "there was", without regard for the subject item or items, and this "there is" is often shortened to "there's": There's three apples on the table! Could you please clarify this mess? | "A few" takes a singular or plural verb in present simple tense? Does "a few" take a singular or plural verb in present simple tense? A few men lifts the table. A few men lift the table. A few frogs jumps out of the lake. A few frogs jump out of the lake. I have searched the same question in google, but I see both answers. Which one is correct? How come "a few" is plural? Even though it refers to many, "a" makes "few" a singular, so it should take a singular verb, right? Should I always put "a" in front of "few"? For example, are the following correct? Few men lift the table. Few frogs jump out of the lake. | eng_Latn | 16,919 |
confusion of dont vs doesnt i have heard that it should does/does not for he/she/it and do/don't for i/you/we/they But I am confused when i always get to hear people talking do and don't for he/she Even in a lecture i listened now it was said as, "That lady don't" instead of "that lady does not" Which one is correct? | The grammaticality of "that don't impress me much" I'd like to know how the sentence "That don't impress me much" sounds to a native English speaker. The phrase is the title of a song by Shania Twain, and to my eyes it contains a clear error. It is obviously intended, and I want to know what was the effect that the author wanted to obtain. Other examples that come to mind: “She's got a ticket to ride, but she don't care” — The Beatles “My love don't cost a thing” — Jennifer Lopez “It don't matter” — Akon “She don't care about me” — heard in the Lost series “It Don't Mean a Thing” — a jazz album title “The Sun Don't Lie” — another album title | What does the Code of Conduct say about pronouns? Please leave any feedback or questions about this FAQ on . Two weeks ago, we to directly address concerns over pronoun usage. We tried to anticipate likely questions, but… missed the mark by quite a lot. Based on Gareth McCaughan’s excellent post, “”, we’ve gone back to the drawing board and written a new FAQ that aims to address actual questions that have been frequently asked in these discussions. If you read only one thing, the answer to question #1 under The Basics sums up our goals in publishing this guidance: It would be rude to refer to a man as "she" or a woman as "he". Some people are neither male nor female and might, for instance, ask to be referred to as "they". When someone indicates what pronouns should be used to refer to them, please use the pronouns they state as you would others. This is a learning process for most of us - from authors to readers to moderators to employees of Stack Exchange, Inc. Let’s all try to approach this with good intentions and a willingness to learn from one another. Big thanks to Gareth for leading by example here, and to everyone who has stepped up to ask and answer the important questions! What's all this stuff about pronouns in The Code of Conduct? The has two direct references to pronouns: “Use stated pronouns (when known).” “Prefer gender-neutral language when uncertain.” What does all of this mean and how can I as a user understand and follow the CoC guidance? | eng_Latn | 16,920 |
Is repeating the word "that" ok, if it is technically, grammatically correct? E.g.: "... with all the sustainability considerations that that entails." If I'm correct, the above example is relative pronoun followed by pronoun - it just happens to be the same word for both grammatically legitimate, albeit adjacent words. Or, even an example with three that's in a row: "It wasn't that that that was referring to." The above sentence may even sound natural in common speech if delivered fluently and in a context in which it was fully understood. So if one accepts grammatical correctness and one is being clear in it being known what the examples of that are adjuncts for, are repeated that's acceptable after all? | How do you handle "that that"? The double "that" problem Have you ever had a case where you felt compelled to include strange things like a double that in a sentence? If so, then what did you do to resolve this? For me, I never knew whether it was acceptable grammar. However, what I did learn was that it was a logic distractor, could lead to confusion, and therefore should be reworded to avoid this. | Reason for the current trend to use «she» as the gender-neutral pronoun? There are some questions on gender-neutral pronouns both and on . User Christine Letts : In academia, there is currently a movement toward using the feminine pronoun at all times. I wonder why that is. I came across several examples on papers I read, but the only one I can remember at the moment is a book: Seth Godin's . While some might not be comfortable labeling it as part of academia, it suits my point perfectly. Every time he refers to a person, he uses the feminine pronoun. User Senseful the following, potentially identifying affirmative action as the precursor for this trend. I remember reading somewhere that it was recommended to use the opposite of what most people stereotype the profession as. So, for example, when talking about a chiropractor, you would use "her", and when talking about a secretary, you would use "his". So, where do you think this trend comes from? | eng_Latn | 16,921 |
Grammatical number of compound subjects with indefinite pronouns Nobody from the Police Department and nobody from the Fire Department is/are going to the rescue. Which verb agreement is grammatical or preferable for other reasons? Similar examples: Everyone that you know and everyone that you don't know is/are going to be there. Anything you read and anything you hear affects/affect you. I have read that if parts of a compound subject are joined together by the conjunction and, then one should use a plural verb. But in these examples with indefinite pronouns, I feel like a singular verb should be used. Another rule on verb agreement with compound subjects: When using or, either/or, or neither/nor, the compound subject might be singular or plural. Generally, if all elements are singular, then the compound subject should be treated as singular. But again it doesn't cover use of indefinite pronouns with and. | Do compound subjects like "everyone ... and everyone..." take singular or plural verb agreement? Here are the examples of compound subjects: Everything on the bed and everything in the closet was organised in under an hour. Everybody who witnessed the shooting and everybody in the room were interviewed. Anyone on the soccer team and anybody on the basketball team was eligible for the scholarship. Should I also use was instead of were in the second example? Or the first and the third examples are incorrect that I should use were instead of was. | Possessive Form of a Proper Noun Ending in a Plural Noun Ending in "s"? I don't think this has yet been covered in . There was , however, it was not specifically talking about the case where the proper noun ends in a plural noun. Feel free to vote to close if I am wrong. What is the correct way to make a proper noun ending in a plural noun ending in an "s" possessive? This frequently happens with corporations, e.g., "Dunkin' Donuts." Should one work off of the fact that the entity is singular—suggesting Dunkin' Donuts's—or should one work off of the fact that "Donuts" is plural and ending in an "s"—suggesting Dunkin' Donuts'? I expect that the answer might depend on dialect because some regions refer to corporations in the singular form ("Dunkin' Donuts is a company") while other regions refer to corporations in the plural form ("Dunkin' Donuts are a company"). I am specifically interested in American English, but would be interested in hearing answers for other dialects too. | eng_Latn | 16,922 |
Is "The crowd are loving this.", from a UK newspaper, acceptable? Is "The crowd are loving this." acceptable grammar? I think it should be "The crowd is loving this." Does it matter if it's a UK newspaper? | Are collective nouns always plural, or are certain ones singular? I'd say Microsoft have a way of bending the rules and I know that McLaren have won the championship. While this sounds strange, I believe it is correct English (sorry, I'm not native). But when it's a small company, would you still use it this way? Is a company always plural, or are small companies singular? I.e., would you say Bakery Johnson makes fine bread or Bakery Johnson make fine bread? Is it My book seller, Woody's, have moved or is it has moved? | Formal writing: "…for my colleagues and {I/me/myself}."? I'm currently using Cambridge English Advanced 1. It's a book that contains past examination papers, and includes numerous samples of authentic writing. This material helps, candidates and teachers, understand what the examiners are ‘testing’ and how these papers are marked. The assessment covers four categories: content, communicative achievement, organisation and language. Each category is awarded a mark between 1 and 5, so the maximum score is 20, and each mark has a brief note attached by the examiner. Any errors of punctuation, orthography, grammar, appropriacy, and vocabulary are left intact. In fact, there are no corrections because the ‘examiner’ does not specify where the errors lie. This can be frustrating, even though spelling mistakes are rare at the advanced level, and errors in style, collocation or register are still relatively easy to identify, sometimes I'll read a phrase that forces me to ponder. Dear Director, [ TEXT ] To conclude, this letter is a polite request to cover the costs of a 2 month language course for my colleagues and me. We would be very pleased if the company would do us this favour. Yours sincerely John Smith The following marks were awarded Content 5 blah, blah, … Communicative Achievement 2 blah, blah, … Organisation 3 blah, blah, … Language 3 blah, blah, … I am able to pick out six minor errors in that brief extract, maybe some users will identify more, maybe some will identify fewer, and maybe some will say that the language used is perfectly acceptable. But if I can help a candidate attain that elusive B, I would be delighted. I am interested in (what could be) the 7th error, emphasised in bold. Because the letter of proposal is formal, I feel the phrase, for my colleagues and me, is jarring. I want to change it to for my colleagues and I, but the antecedent requires an object. You would not say: “This is a request to cover the cost […] for I”. So, why use the subject pronoun I in the expression “my colleagues and…”? Could I use instead, myself? Which of the following is preferable in a formal written proposal? …for my colleagues and me …for my colleagues and I …for my colleagues and myself EDITED: I found a of the writing sample (11/11) if anyone is interested. I've looked at the following question, Some answers appear to be contradictory, the accepted answer says using I and me are both grammatical, which in my example is not true. Moreover, there's no mention of myself, as a possible solution, in the question. | eng_Latn | 16,923 |
Use of reflexive pronoun (you or yourself)? Given the choice in sentences: I appreciate the help from both yourself and Bob. I appreciate the help from both you and Bob. Which is correct? I'm stuck because I can't seem to understand reflective pronouns. Can "yourself" only be used when the subject is also "you"? | When is it correct to use "yourself" and "myself" (versus "you" and "me")? I'm confused by why people use the following: It's up to yourself. Rather than: It's up to you. Another example of this would be: Please feel free to contact ourselves if you have any problems. Rather than: Please feel free to contact us if you have any problems. Are both of these correct? Is there any reason for using the former? | "Subject, verb, direct object, object complement" versus "subject, verb, indirect object, direct object" Reading English Grammar (HarperCollins College Outline, published by HarperResource, an imprint of HarperCollinsPublishers) I found a chapter (Sentence Basics) that explains that in English there are different sentence patterns; in particular Subject, verb, direct object, object complement Subject, verb, indirect object, direct object The chapter reports the following example for the patterns: Alice called Charles Professor Miller. Alice gave Charles the rabbit. What is the difference between the two kind of sentences? What is the difference between the object complement in the first case, and the indirect object in the second case? PS: The question, which could appear silly, comes from the fact in my first language there is only the object complement. | eng_Latn | 16,924 |
Gerund usage in sentences The other day, I read this sentence " I don't like your bossing me around". I was wondering if this sentence should be " I don't like you bossing me around". Shouldn't be? Would you please explain it to me? Many many thanks in advance. | When is a gerund supposed to be preceded by a possessive adjective/determiner? I assume that the following sentences are grammatically correct: He resents your being more popular than he is. Most of the members paid their dues without my asking them. They objected to the youngest girl's being given the command position. What do you think about his buying such an expensive car? We were all sorry about Jane's losing her parents like that. I'm still getting used to this possessive gerund structure. It sounded so weird to me at first. Is the structure used in both formal and informal contexts? Are there any alternative structures that result in the same meaning and are more frequently used? (Examples taken from ) | Making adult decisions "is" or "are" really not fun: Which is correct? Making adult decisions are/is really not fun. What is the proper answer and why? My gut says "is" but I can't explain why. | eng_Latn | 16,925 |
What is the maximum number of consecutive periods can be used in a grammatically-correct sentence? I'm curious how many period characters can be in a row in a valid sentence. I acknowledge that there are different conventions for how to treat dots (e.g. treating an ellipsis as a single character or putting a space before and after an ellipsis), but for the purposes of this question, I think we should allow reasonable conventions that could be considered acceptable, even if they aren't perhaps recommended. I'm also fine ignoring whitespace. Examples Here's a sentence with one period. This sentence combines two periods into one, according to some prof. This sentence ends with an ellipsis.... This sentence also might make sense, according to Knowsalot et al..... Clarification Please read the question carefully and in its entirety before voting to close a question. Some closed this question because they thought this question has an answer here: . Those people have made unreasonable assumptions about what this question is asking. For clarity: I am not asking whether or not the period following an abbreviation gets put at the end of a phrase. I am not asking about a period before or after an ellipsis. I am asking how many periods can be in a row for any reason. Clearly, those other questions are relevant to my question, but to answer my question, you'd need the answers to all of those kinds of questions and combine their answers to be able to answer this question. | When "etc." is at the end of a phrase, do you place a period after it? Example: It's all about apples, oranges, bananas, etc. VS. It's all about apples, oranges, bananas, etc.. Update What happens if the abbreviation is inside parentheses, do you place a dot after and before the closing parenthesis? It's all about fruit (apples, bananas, etc.). | "Dangling Participles" My case here is that I was writing something for school, and my teacher explained an error which I really can't see. She referred to articles about "dangling participles", which was previously unknown to me. I find it hard to relate the examples I've found about it to my situation. So this is a text I've written and the bold part is where the problem arises: (You could read only the bold part if you please) Wandering, and lost in his thoughts, there is a deep despair occupying the mind of this man. He is barely aware of his surroundings, except for those few moments when the loud blissful voices break through the protective barriers, developed by his immense sadness and grave frustration, into his mind. ”How can they all possibly be so happy?” he thinks to himself. Staring blindly, with his head low, as he walks in a slow pace, whispering ”Mary, Mary, my Mary,” over and over again. Yesterday was her funeral. She had passed away from a severe type of cancer, at a relatively young age. It was his wife. They had been together since high school and were greatly attached to each other. Having spent nearly half his life by her side, we cannot but imagine his grief. Indeed, he could hardly picture a life without her. So, alone he roams in the midst of all the seemingly incessant cheering and noises, drowned by his sorrow. Her comments on that part was: we is slightly out of place here – see my comment below These few sentences are about him and his emotions, so ‘we’ seems out of place. If the sentence starts: ‘Having spent nearly half his life by her side’, the reader expects it to continue: ‘he’. After all we have not spent half our lives by her side. Is she right? If so, could anyone try to explain why? | eng_Latn | 16,926 |
Me or I as a subject I am reading an example off a grammar book. Snow white smiled at the dwarves and me/I. "Me" or "I" should I choose and in which situation should I use me or I? | Is it "I" or "me" in "Keep Tom and I/me updated"? In this case what is correct? Keep Tom and I updated. or Keep Tom and me updated. I understand that me is an object pronoun. And therefore I feel the second option is correct. Especially, because I would say "Keep him updated" and also "Keep me updated". Instead of "Keep he updated" or "Keep I updated". But something about saying "Keep him and me updated" feels wrong. However I am not sure, because several people have told me that in this case I is the correct option because it is being used in conjunction with a name (Tom) and not a pronoun. Is that correct? | When should I use the subjunctive mood? In which cases should I use the subjunctive mood? I suggest that every applicant fill out the form carefully. If she were rich, she would live on Long Island. | eng_Latn | 16,927 |
How do you make a phrase possessive? I just read a post where someone said "That's a friend of mine's house." My first thought was, "mine's" is a double possessive! The friend owns the house, and the one posting the comment owns the friend. Anyway, is there a grammatically correct way to say this without rearranging the sentence or should you just rewrite it as "A friend of mine owns that house." Is there some kind of rule for turning a whole phrase possessive? Thanks. | "My wife and I's seafood collaboration dinner" I just stumbled upon a : My wife and I's seafood collaboration dinner. How does it look? Sure enough, the top comment immediately points out that it should be "my wife's and my". However, a cross-post to the Grammar subreddit produced : It's fine as it is written. "my wife and I" is a noun phrase, functioning as a subjective pronoun in the singular and made possessive with the apostrophe. It is exactly the same as "our". It seems weird because you would never use "I's" on its own but it is not on its own here - it is part of a noun phrase. That's a rather intriguing argument. Does it hold any water? | Is this a grammatically correct line in a poem: “Will he roll the dice, and follow it to Vegas?”? I want to use the following line in a poem: "Will he roll the dice, and follow it to Vegas?" A couple of things to note; firstly, obviously I'm using "roll the dice" in both a figurative/idiomatic sense (as in taking a risk), and in a somewhat more literal sense (painting the image of the person actually following the dice that have been rolled to Las Vegas). That being said, my confusion here is if I can get away with using "follow it" or if I need to say "follow them" .... As I've read online "dice" traditionally refers to more than one die (i.e., the plural of die), but in the modern usage, "dice" can also be used to refer to the singular (i.e., just one die). So, it seems like if I was referring to the image of just one die, then the way I phrased it could be correct. However, the image I'm trying to paint is the one usually associated with the phrase "roll the dice" (i.e., rolling two dice)... So could "follow it" still be considered acceptable in this sense... or would I need to use "follow them"?... And if not referring to the dice themselves, could using, could the "it" be taken to refer to the act of rolling the dice, or would that not work either? Thanks so much in advance!! | eng_Latn | 16,928 |
Hoard of bugs was/were squashed? Is hoard of bugs to be treated as singular or plural? ...and what we mean by that is that a hoard of bugs were squashed relentlessly in this release ...and what we mean by that is that a hoard of bugs was squashed relentlessly in this release | More than 1000 gallons of paint is/are sold each day Possible Duplicate: Can anyone help me determine the correct verb in this sentence? I am not sure what to do. If it were not such a complex introductory phrase, it would be more obvious. The general consensus of my friends who are not professional writers is that the verb should be are. To me the question is whether or not the subject is singular (i.e., “a large collective volume of paint”, perhaps in a tank) or plural (a lot of the individual gallon containers of paint). If simplified to other options, it would be like these: Paint is sold. Gallons of paint are sold. More paint is sold. More gallons of paint are sold. More than 1000 gallons of paint is sold. [emphasis on total volume] More than 1000 gallons of paint are sold. [emphasis on individual containers] | "Ten times fewer the number" versus "one-tenth the number" Lately I've been hearing and reading statistics that are communicated in wording that, frankly, confuses me. Forgive me for not citing specific instances, but I can give a hypothetical statistic that exemplifies the kind I'm referring to: Comparing the number of tax returns the IRS audited in 2002 and 2010, the number of unlucky folks who had their returns audited in 2002 was ten times fewer than the number in 2012. There is something about that wording that bothers me, and I'm not sure why. After a fruitless search on the internet using numerous combinations/permutations of words and phrases such as "X times fewer," "X times less," "mathematical expressions of 'times fewer' as opposed to 'a fraction fewer,' or 'a fraction less,'" and more, I came up empty. Perhaps this question is more appropriate on a math website, but in the off-chance members of EL&U might give their imprimatur to this question, here goes: Here's a second hypothetical example. Is it grammatical—not to mention mathematical—to say the following?: There are ten times fewer pollinating honeybees worldwide today than there were in 1912. [Though this is a made-up statistic, there has been a dramatic reduction in the number honey bees in America of late!] Should not the expression be: There are one-tenth fewer honeybees worldwide today than there were in 1912. On the surface, the "ten times fewer" locution seems to me to be a contradiction in terms. How can something less be 10 times fewer? I can understand readily how, for example, 2012's bee population of, say, 90 million can be one-tenth (point one) less than 1912's population of 100 million, but ten times fewer? I'm confused. Which expression is "more" correct? | eng_Latn | 16,929 |
Each of us is responsible for their conduct Each of us is responsible for their conduct. or: Each of us are responsible for their conduct. Is this correct? Or I have to use the verb in plural? | Is "each" singular or plural? You goes with are. Does the presence of each change this? How satisfied are each of you with the time you've spent in your respective universities. How satisfied is each of you with the time you've spent in your respective universities | More than 1000 gallons of paint is/are sold each day Possible Duplicate: Can anyone help me determine the correct verb in this sentence? I am not sure what to do. If it were not such a complex introductory phrase, it would be more obvious. The general consensus of my friends who are not professional writers is that the verb should be are. To me the question is whether or not the subject is singular (i.e., “a large collective volume of paint”, perhaps in a tank) or plural (a lot of the individual gallon containers of paint). If simplified to other options, it would be like these: Paint is sold. Gallons of paint are sold. More paint is sold. More gallons of paint are sold. More than 1000 gallons of paint is sold. [emphasis on total volume] More than 1000 gallons of paint are sold. [emphasis on individual containers] | eng_Latn | 16,930 |
What personal pronoun should be used with the noun "sheep"? I would like to know what personal pronoun would be correct to use instead of the word "sheep" in a sentence? It is a sheep. or She is a sheep. I'll try to explain myself in a better way. I know that when we speak about an animal, in general, we use the pronoun "It" : it is a dog for ex. but I read some were that "sheep" is an exception and has to be referred to as a "she" . But I can't find any confirmation to that. | is a dove a "she"? how to use "he" and "she" for animals? In the song "Blowing in the Wind" by Bob Dylan, there's a verse that reads: Yes, and how many seas must a white dove sail Before she sleeps in the sand? My question is, why he used "she" for a dove? What about other animals and other non-humans? Is there a general rule? | Could "them" mean "those"? Background Nowadays, I see "them" used to mean "those" a lot. I don't know if it was as common in the past. For example, take "one of ". On researching about it, I found some people say it comes from a dialect of British English. Some others say it is a "non-standard" usage. I see this usage in Canadian English also, and it seems some people use it in a sarcastic way. Moreover, I have seen a song titled "one of them days". I also read, in the book called "A Broken Promise", "" Finally, Wikipedia says that it is a usage in (a common name for the Southern Midland dialect of American English): Pronouns and demonstratives "Them" is sometimes used in place of "those" as a demonstrative in both nominative and oblique constructions. Examples are "Them are the pants I want" and "Give me some of them crackers." Question(s): What would you say about the usage of this word? Is it correct? Could we use it in daily speech? Could this usage go beyond a specific dialect and be used in other dialects, regions, etc.? Does it really originate from Appalachian English? Why did this usage become popular among other English speakers? Note: I have already seen a similar question: However, it only says, "ungrammatical," there. This question is specific to this situation only, and there is more to it. | eng_Latn | 16,931 |
Use of an indefinite article associated with a particular person's name Indefinite (and definite) articles are sometimes associated with a person's name. is the best summary of the uses I have found. Also, addresses the issue that was not mentioned in the summary with the example sentence "when a defeated Napoleon rode off the battlefield and into exile", and it is followed by a couple of useful answers. My question is related to the latter. Let me add three more examples to clarify the point. "muttered a startled [Michael] Fallon" (Author or ) "an elated Sarah Storey after her victory" () "one photo showing an unsmiling Francis standing next to a beaming Trump" ( In any of these cases, as well as the Napoleon-related example, the person(s) referred to is precisely specified in the text and only one in the world. I have heard of a hypothesis (from a friend) people sometimes use an indefinite article before a particular person's name when it is accompanied with a preceding modifier, which tends to be (though not necessarily limited?) the present or past participle form of a verb; in other words, the modifier is sandwitched between the article and person's name. All the cases listed above fit the hypothesis and the modifiers are "startled", "elated", and "unsmiling" and "beaming". If this hypothesis is correct, there is no expression like "a John Smith delighted with blah-blah" (as long as the referred John Smith is already narrowed down to a particular person in the given context). to the aforementioned question explains It's a literary/oratorial device. You certainly wouldn't often come acrosss it in normal speech - only somewhat flamboyant prose or speechifying. Think of it as meaning that Napoleon is a man of many aspects, victorious on other occasions, but defeated this time. Using the article implies that this is only one of several possible Napoleons that have or will exist. The first part fits my little Googling research; it seems this use of the indefinite article is more commonly seen in novels and fictions than other types of writings. Applying the second part to my examples, the three example sentences are interpreted as "Fallon/Storey/Francis/Trump is a person of many aspects, but in this case s/he is only one (=startled/elated/etc) of several possible Fallon/Storey/etc", which seems fitting. Now I am asking for further clarifications: What is the condition where this use of an indefinite article is accepted? Is the above-mentioned hypothesis (i.e., always(?) having a modifier in between) correct? Are standard adjectives like "happy", as opposed to verbs in conjugation, accepted for it? What is the nuance of the expression? Specifically, what is the difference from the phrase without an indefinite article? For example, how about "'blah-blah', muttered startled Fallon"? I think the definite article "the" would feel a little unnatural in this case, as explained in detail in . | Why is it “a defeated Napoleon, not “the defeated Napoleon” who rode off the battlefield and into exile? I noticed an infinite article; ‘a’ was used before ‘defeated Napoleon’ in the following sentence of Jeffery Archer’s novel, "Fales Impression" : “General Sir Harry Wentworth sat at the right hand of the Iron Duke that night, and was commanding his left flank when a defeated Napoleon rode off the battlefield and into exile." I’m curious to know why it should be “a defeated Napoleon,” not “the defeated Napoleon” or simply “defeated Napoleon.” Isn’t it only one Napoleon who was defeated the battle and exiled (to St. Helena). It looks like as though there were many (defeated) Napoleons who were exiled. It’s always headache for me to handle articles as we Japanese (I think Chinese too) don’t have article as the basic part of speeches in our language system. I’ve studied it on English grammar text books at school, but have never reached full understanding of the usage of articles, because we don’t have that practice. Is there any special knack to master how to use articles? | Formal writing: "…for my colleagues and {I/me/myself}."? I'm currently using Cambridge English Advanced 1. It's a book that contains past examination papers, and includes numerous samples of authentic writing. This material helps, candidates and teachers, understand what the examiners are ‘testing’ and how these papers are marked. The assessment covers four categories: content, communicative achievement, organisation and language. Each category is awarded a mark between 1 and 5, so the maximum score is 20, and each mark has a brief note attached by the examiner. Any errors of punctuation, orthography, grammar, appropriacy, and vocabulary are left intact. In fact, there are no corrections because the ‘examiner’ does not specify where the errors lie. This can be frustrating, even though spelling mistakes are rare at the advanced level, and errors in style, collocation or register are still relatively easy to identify, sometimes I'll read a phrase that forces me to ponder. Dear Director, [ TEXT ] To conclude, this letter is a polite request to cover the costs of a 2 month language course for my colleagues and me. We would be very pleased if the company would do us this favour. Yours sincerely John Smith The following marks were awarded Content 5 blah, blah, … Communicative Achievement 2 blah, blah, … Organisation 3 blah, blah, … Language 3 blah, blah, … I am able to pick out six minor errors in that brief extract, maybe some users will identify more, maybe some will identify fewer, and maybe some will say that the language used is perfectly acceptable. But if I can help a candidate attain that elusive B, I would be delighted. I am interested in (what could be) the 7th error, emphasised in bold. Because the letter of proposal is formal, I feel the phrase, for my colleagues and me, is jarring. I want to change it to for my colleagues and I, but the antecedent requires an object. You would not say: “This is a request to cover the cost […] for I”. So, why use the subject pronoun I in the expression “my colleagues and…”? Could I use instead, myself? Which of the following is preferable in a formal written proposal? …for my colleagues and me …for my colleagues and I …for my colleagues and myself EDITED: I found a of the writing sample (11/11) if anyone is interested. I've looked at the following question, Some answers appear to be contradictory, the accepted answer says using I and me are both grammatical, which in my example is not true. Moreover, there's no mention of myself, as a possible solution, in the question. | eng_Latn | 16,932 |
Answer should be 'her' or 'their'? Neither Nancy nor Loma remembered to bring _______ camera ] Her Their Them Neither In this questions option C "their" was given correct answer but I need an explanation to it as I read the rule that the pair "Neither + nor" agrees with the nearest subject. | pronoun agreement in neither nor Which one is correct? Neither my friend nor I feel my best in the morning. Neither my friend nor I feel her best in the morning. Neither my friend nor I feel our best in the morning. I already know that the verb agrees with the subject closer to the verb: Neither my friends nor my brother understands me. (correct) Neither my friends nor my brother understand me. (wrong) AND Neither my brother nor my friends understand me. (correct) Neither my brother nor my friends understands me. (wrong) | A case of optional “that”: “check the” vs. “check that the” Consider the following use case: Please check the username and password are correct. Please check that the username and password are correct. In this case, I would say that that is required because it feels more natural to me and so the flow is better. However, is the lack of that wrong in this case? The question boils down to: when is that optional? See . A quick summary: That is optional if the pronoun is the object. That is required if the pronoun is the subject. I think that we fall into the second case: that is required because the relative pronoun is the subject. But I'm not sure if I'm interpreting these rules correctly. Can someone please advise? | eng_Latn | 16,933 |
Can you put the article ‘a’ after the verb ‘are’? So, I just read an article, and was confused by the sentence: In the study we just described, we found evidence that people’s self-discerning reflections — musings on whether parts of their identity truly define who they are or merely reflect their cultural upbringing — are a critical ingredient in the relationship between living abroad and self-concept clarity." Source: From How Living Abroad Helps You Develop a Clearer Sense of Self I always thought that plural verb can't come with the articles 'a' and 'an', as they are incompatible (plural and singular). Well, there are some exceptions like, 'They are a bunch of students'. However, the 'a' in this case is describing one group; it's not a problem. The quoted sentence is a grammatically correct sentence too, as I've checked on Grammarly. So, can anyone explain to me why is it correct? | Agreement in "[Singular Noun] Is/Are [Plural Noun]"? My fish's native habitat is rice fields. My fish's native habitat are rice fields. Which one is correct? I'm pretty sure it's the first, since 'is' modifies 'habitat,' but it still sounds weird... | Which form should be used for attributive nouns like “student union”: singular or plural, or possessive singular or possessive plural? When should a noun that’s used attributively to describe another noun be plural, and when should it be singular? And when should it be possessive, like baker’s dozen and when should it be plural possessive, like farmers’ market? In other words, why do we say teachers union rather than teacher union? And why do we say wedding planner rather than weddings planner? Which of these variants is or are correct? student union students union student’s union students’ union What about community values versus community’s values? Please note I am looking for a general rule or at least some tips. These are only examples. Update: It seems even native speakers follow their personal style to write such compound words. I wonder why in the IELTS listening section, the language learner has to write a specific form and there is no rule for this. | eng_Latn | 16,934 |
Is "What can I help with?" proper English? "What can I help with?" Part of our team is claiming it is not proper english and another part is claiming its the correct way for us to say it. For context this is in reference to working on a chat bot that will be helping customers so we are trying to keep it concise and at a simple level to be approachable to all users. | When is it appropriate to end a sentence in a preposition? Like many others, I commonly find myself ending a sentence with a preposition. Yes, it makes me cringe. I usually rewrite the sentence, but sometimes (in emails) I just live with it. To, with... you know who you are. Should I keep fighting myself on this one, or is it okay in some circumstances? | What does the Code of Conduct say about pronouns? Please leave any feedback or questions about this FAQ on . Two weeks ago, we to directly address concerns over pronoun usage. We tried to anticipate likely questions, but… missed the mark by quite a lot. Based on Gareth McCaughan’s excellent post, “”, we’ve gone back to the drawing board and written a new FAQ that aims to address actual questions that have been frequently asked in these discussions. If you read only one thing, the answer to question #1 under The Basics sums up our goals in publishing this guidance: It would be rude to refer to a man as "she" or a woman as "he". Some people are neither male nor female and might, for instance, ask to be referred to as "they". When someone indicates what pronouns should be used to refer to them, please use the pronouns they state as you would others. This is a learning process for most of us - from authors to readers to moderators to employees of Stack Exchange, Inc. Let’s all try to approach this with good intentions and a willingness to learn from one another. Big thanks to Gareth for leading by example here, and to everyone who has stepped up to ask and answer the important questions! What's all this stuff about pronouns in The Code of Conduct? The has two direct references to pronouns: “Use stated pronouns (when known).” “Prefer gender-neutral language when uncertain.” What does all of this mean and how can I as a user understand and follow the CoC guidance? | eng_Latn | 16,935 |
Are all three sentences OK? One of the cops escorts Tim out of the house and toward a police car. Curious neighbors have gathered outside. Tim spits on the cop escorting him. (1) - Tim spits on the cop who's escorting him. (2) - Tim spits on the escorting cop. (3) Are the three suggested sentences all OK or are some of them awkward-sounding? | the cop (who's) escorting him One of the cops escorts Tim out of the house and toward a police car. Curious neighbors have gathered outside. Tim spits on the cop (who's) escorting him. Is "escorts" the more natural choice of verb to use in this context? Is the emboldened sentence phrased naturally without adding "who's"? | Is this a grammatically correct line in a poem: “Will he roll the dice, and follow it to Vegas?”? I want to use the following line in a poem: "Will he roll the dice, and follow it to Vegas?" A couple of things to note; firstly, obviously I'm using "roll the dice" in both a figurative/idiomatic sense (as in taking a risk), and in a somewhat more literal sense (painting the image of the person actually following the dice that have been rolled to Las Vegas). That being said, my confusion here is if I can get away with using "follow it" or if I need to say "follow them" .... As I've read online "dice" traditionally refers to more than one die (i.e., the plural of die), but in the modern usage, "dice" can also be used to refer to the singular (i.e., just one die). So, it seems like if I was referring to the image of just one die, then the way I phrased it could be correct. However, the image I'm trying to paint is the one usually associated with the phrase "roll the dice" (i.e., rolling two dice)... So could "follow it" still be considered acceptable in this sense... or would I need to use "follow them"?... And if not referring to the dice themselves, could using, could the "it" be taken to refer to the act of rolling the dice, or would that not work either? Thanks so much in advance!! | eng_Latn | 16,936 |
When did it become common to 'double the conditional'? Twins is a 1988 comedy featuring Arnold Schwarzenegger and Danny DeVito as genetically engineered twins. The fact that they’re genetically engineered is used to explain the differences between Arnold and Danny, but the movie would’ve probably worked as well if they would’ve been regular brothers. , . If they would have been is something I would never say. In my dialect, if they had been is the correct choice. And I don’t think I’ve ever heard the if they would’ve been construction from anyone here in the middle of Ireland, or even from anyone on this side of the Atlantic, but it is certainly common online. I suspect that this is currently a purely American phenomenon, but I could well be wrong about that. I am not sure what search terms to use to do my own research. The phrase “double conditional” is one I came up with as I asked this question. I’m certain it’s not the standard term used to describe this usage. And most results from a search are about programming languages. However, I did turn up a couple of relevant references. DEAR GRAMMAR LADY: A prominent scholar made the following statement in a recent article. “If we would regard religion as a work of art — as a piece of music — we would have a different understanding of it.” The “would” in the first clause strikes me as being incorrect usage/phraseology; i.e., I had expected “If we regarded or if we were to regard.” (sic) Could it be that even scholars of great renown are capable of such blatant mistakes? ANSWER: You are correct. She is guilty of what I call the “double conditional.” Mary Newton Bruder, The Grammar Lady, . I also found , but it goes off topic almost immediately. | Use of "would" for subjunctive phrases This has been bugging me for some time; I tried to look for previous questions here but my language tools may not be sharp enough to phrase my query correctly so please forgive me if this has already been posted here. Speakers of English as a foreign language tend to incorrectly use the word "would" when using some particular subjunctive constructs. Here is (this time presumably by a native English speaker): If that would happen, you won’t be alone. (One correct version being "If that happens, you won't be alone".) I have detected this in speakers of a number of languages so I feel this is more likely to be a feature of the English language itself than a carry-over from their native language. I have a faint intuition that this is because , and it certainly doesn't help that , but I can neither make that precise nor even really phrase a concrete question. Can someone shed some light on this? Edit: just to provide some real-world examples of what I mean, here is one example taken from : Publish or Perish is designed to empower individual academics to present their case for research impact to its best advantage. We would be concerned if it would be used for academic staff evaluation purposes in a mechanistic way. This is obviously ungrammatical (to me), but I'm not sure how to characterize the mistake, or what the likely causes are (e.g. whether it follows from analogous constructions in other languages). | Usage of singular or plural SI base units when written in both symbol as well as name I have multiple doubts related to the usage of singular or plural SI base units when written in both symbol as well as name. I have framed this question under two parts, namely, Part (a) and Part (b). Each part has three sentences which I have written on the basis of my understanding. Please answer these 6 sentences/questions. Part (a): says that while using prefix for e.g., centi as in centimeter, it is l = 75 cm long.(correct) l = 75 cms long. (wrong) Does this rule is used for all SI prefixes (having powers of 10)? In this regard, we should be saying, or writing that, "how many cm are there in one metre?" (while saying we should say centimter or centimetres?) Please strike-through the wrong SI unit in the following sentences. My weight is 70 kg / kgs, or My weight is 70 kilogram / kilograms. Part (b): and the page next to above web link says, we should write: 2.6 m/s, or 2.6 metres per second. In this regard, we should say, or write: Its speed is 0.26 metres per second. This pipe is 0.75 metres long. How many cm are there in 2 metres? | eng_Latn | 16,937 |
Which has the correct usage? "You, my peer, who know no more than I" or "You, my peer, who knows no more than I" I am leaning toward the first one, but the second one sounds more natural. Which one should I choose? | "I who has" vs "I who have." Possible Duplicate: Am aware it is correct to say "I have written..." and "I am a doctor who has writen..." I have, however, severally come across the sentence "I, Tertius, who have written...". Shouldn't it be "I, Tertius, who has written..."? | Conjugation: Do we cite authors or papers? When referencing to another work in a scientific paper, do we cite the paper or its author(s)? This question is intended to clarify the conjugation of the verb that follows the reference -- especially in these cases: One author, two papers: Jane Doe (2015a, 2015b) list-s the very specific conditions under which... -> lists (singular: referencing to Jane Doe) or list (plural: referencing to both papers) Several authors, one paper: John Doe, et al. (2015) claim-s this and that. -> claim (plural: referencing to the multiple authors of the paper) or claims (singular: referencing to the single paper). | eng_Latn | 16,938 |
Two-thirds or two-third share? Please, if I say four-wheel-drive, can I say two-third share? Thank you | Is it two-third or two-thirds? Is it two-third or two-thirds? If both are correct, how does their usage differ? | Spaces and em-dash In using the em-dash, where do you put the spaces? Which of the following is correct? School is based on the three R’s —reading, writing, and ’rithemtic. or School is based on the three R’s— reading, writing, and ’rithemtic. or School is based on the three R’s — reading, writing, and ’rithemtic. | eng_Latn | 16,939 |
does the word PERSONS exist? Should I only use it for singular? PERSON I need to know the correct use of this word, I am quiet confused about the plural form and singular form due to some people use it as plural persons and I was taught that the plural is people1 | Person, Persons, People, Peoples Can you please clarify the relation and differences between these nouns? For example, is it proper to use "persons" instead of "people"? Are they the same? As I believe that "people" is plural, how come there exists the plural of the plural (=peoples)? Does it have any usage? | How do you pluralize the acronym "POC" ("proof of concept")? Possible Duplicate: What's the plural form of the acronym , short for proof of concept? ...for his contributions to many POCs or ...for his contributions to many POC is not a duplicate as it is focused on cases like "ATMs" where the expanded form "automated teller machines" ends in a noun with a regular plural form ending in "s." In "proof of concept," the noun is in the middle of the abbreviated phrase. If we pluralize the uncontracted phrase, we get "proofs of concept," which has an "s" in the middle rather than at the end. It's unclear from the linked answers how abbreviations with this structure should be pluralized. (POC, POCs, PsOC?) | eng_Latn | 16,940 |
Is "Is it a girl or a boy?" really calling the infant an "it"? So, my boss comes in, railing that "English is a stupid language!" Since this is pretty much a thrice-weekly occurrence 'round these parts, I barely raised an eyebrow, and waited for him to continue. "Mary just wrote to tell us that she's back from maternity leave, and I want to congratulate her and ask whether she had a girl or a boy, but I can't do it without calling the child an 'it'!" I blinked, then confirmed that yes, he believes the it in "Is it a boy or a girl" is the impersonal pronoun, the same word you'd apply to an apple or a house. Is it the 'thing' pronoun, really? Or is it just a placeholder of some sort? I used to believe the latter: I gave the boss a mini-lecture about and the . He wasn't convinced, however, and now he's got me doubting too. (Harumph. I really should know better than to listen to the boss.) I'm not asking about politeness, here; the former title was to be taken somewhat facetiously. I'm wondering about the grammar: what role is that "it" playing in that sentence? Is it a personal pronoun (and thus the infant has grounds for feeling offended) or a dummy pronoun (and thus those who perceive a politeness issue are just misunderstanding the grammar)? | Will some parents be offended when being asked, "Is it male or female?" If I ask the parent about a baby's gender, will it be impolite or not appropriate to say, "Is it male or female?" Is there any subtle difference, in terms of politeness, among "Is it a boy or girl?" "Is it he or she?" "is it male or female?" | Is this a grammatically correct line in a poem: “Will he roll the dice, and follow it to Vegas?”? I want to use the following line in a poem: "Will he roll the dice, and follow it to Vegas?" A couple of things to note; firstly, obviously I'm using "roll the dice" in both a figurative/idiomatic sense (as in taking a risk), and in a somewhat more literal sense (painting the image of the person actually following the dice that have been rolled to Las Vegas). That being said, my confusion here is if I can get away with using "follow it" or if I need to say "follow them" .... As I've read online "dice" traditionally refers to more than one die (i.e., the plural of die), but in the modern usage, "dice" can also be used to refer to the singular (i.e., just one die). So, it seems like if I was referring to the image of just one die, then the way I phrased it could be correct. However, the image I'm trying to paint is the one usually associated with the phrase "roll the dice" (i.e., rolling two dice)... So could "follow it" still be considered acceptable in this sense... or would I need to use "follow them"?... And if not referring to the dice themselves, could using, could the "it" be taken to refer to the act of rolling the dice, or would that not work either? Thanks so much in advance!! | eng_Latn | 16,941 |
What is the verbless clause? I want to give some examples of a special type of clause. 1) Too tall to enter the room, he remained standing at the door. 2) Whether successful or unsuccessful, he always puts his best efforts in his work. 3) To nervous to move, she stood on the floor, trembling. 4) Laughed at, they lose heart. 5) He declares the meeting open. This are the some examples of verbless clause. I want to know more about verbless clause. I searched in net a lot, but unfortunately what I found were not sufficient. Those were not enriched with proper description. I want to know the ways used to express verbless clauses into other way. I want to learn how these clauses are being formed. Please mention some useful links/PDF files that are related to this topic and able to fulfill my demand. | Does English allow a zero copula in subordinate clauses? In a casual search of the web, I found a few indications English does not allow zero copulas (). However, I frequently see sentences with subordinate clauses that juxtapose a noun phrase with an adverb phrase, such as the following from a contemporary sci-fi author: Kai stares up at me from the grave, his eyes hard as obsidian. If this clause were made into a sentence, it would take an obligatory verb: *His eyes hard as obsidian. His eyes are hard as obsidian. The original clause seems to contain an implicit "to be." Is it an example of a zero copula? If not, what is this construction called? | Can cited works hold grammatical positions in sentences? Though I read this style quite often, I was recently told unambiguously by a reviewer that I was NOT supposed to use citations "as if they are objects in a sentence." The following sentence is an example of what the reviewer considered unacceptable: We analyzed the data using the Wilmerding method, guided by [12]. The references section might include the following: [12] Smith, D., Marshawn, J., & Devenshaw, A. 2011. Techniques and Procedures for Applying the Wilmerding Method. Prince Publications, Inc, New York, NY. The Wilmerding method1 is not a step-by-step algorithm that can be precisely followed as if by a machine, and thus [12] does not provide a step-by-step algorithmic description but rather guidance for using the method. [12] is a relatively slim but authoritative textbook about how to use the Wilmerding method. Within this question, for the purpose of discussion, I have intentionally put [12] in grammatical positions where it's an important element of the sentence and the sentence would make less sense without the reference. Sometimes that seems to be the most efficient way to communicate the intended message. Is using a reference as a grammatical sentence element like this OK? Why might this not be considered acceptable? Should I be rewording those sentences? Is it enough of a violation to be worth passing the note on to authors of papers I review? I considered posting this on but it seems more specific to academia than general English usage, and the comment came from a content reviewer rather than a copy editor. is related but it seems to be more about when to put authors names' in vs. outside of the parentheses in an APA-like style. The numbered citation style (as opposed to following APA, for example) is required by the venue. 1: Fictionalized for the purpose of this discussion | eng_Latn | 16,942 |
Should I use the singular or plural verb form with "one or more"? Which of these is correct? "If one or more of these situations apply to you ..." or "If one or more of these situations applies to you ..." I think that "more" takes precedence over "one," so I would use the plural, "apply." Am I right? | Which is correct: "one or more is" or "one or more are"? Should the phrase be "one or more is...", or "one or more are..."? | Is this a grammatically correct line in a poem: “Will he roll the dice, and follow it to Vegas?”? I want to use the following line in a poem: "Will he roll the dice, and follow it to Vegas?" A couple of things to note; firstly, obviously I'm using "roll the dice" in both a figurative/idiomatic sense (as in taking a risk), and in a somewhat more literal sense (painting the image of the person actually following the dice that have been rolled to Las Vegas). That being said, my confusion here is if I can get away with using "follow it" or if I need to say "follow them" .... As I've read online "dice" traditionally refers to more than one die (i.e., the plural of die), but in the modern usage, "dice" can also be used to refer to the singular (i.e., just one die). So, it seems like if I was referring to the image of just one die, then the way I phrased it could be correct. However, the image I'm trying to paint is the one usually associated with the phrase "roll the dice" (i.e., rolling two dice)... So could "follow it" still be considered acceptable in this sense... or would I need to use "follow them"?... And if not referring to the dice themselves, could using, could the "it" be taken to refer to the act of rolling the dice, or would that not work either? Thanks so much in advance!! | eng_Latn | 16,943 |
Repeated elements following an “and”: Use ’em or Lose ’em? Here is a sentence: You have to be nice to alleviate the social anxiety and start a healthy relationship. Should it be like that or like this: You have to be nice to alleviate the social anxiety and to start a healthy relationship." The first does not have a to, but the second does. Which should I use, and why? Or doesn’t it matter? | I and am I sometimes find myself writing something like this: XXX is a project I admire and am very interested in. The "I <verb> and am <something>" feels strange here. It somehow sounds more natural in the third person: "He admires and is very interested in...." Am I just imagining things – is it OK to use this construction, or should I use something completely different? | Help to do something or help do something? I wrote: I will help you to acquire Russian. A native English speaker corrected me saying that 'to' is unnecessary here. Is it correct to say "I will help you acquire Russian" | eng_Latn | 16,944 |
When is the omission of relative pronouns acceptable? So I learned that I tend to forget and unconsciously omit relative pronouns from my sentences, because apart from the fact that the meaning of some clauses without them remain clear and obvious, I find that relative pronouns make sentences superfluous. Instead of writing “the meat that are chilling in the freezer are spoiled”, I write “the meat chilling in the freezer are spoiled.” Or, “I believe it's true” instead of “I believe that it's true.” I find that many people do this, too. At first, I thought it's grammatically incorrect and is not acceptable in formal writing, but I recently came across a professional article that did the same thing. I'm just wondering whether it was a mistake or the editors deliberately left it that way because it's not really incorrect. So my question is, is the omission of relative pronouns acceptable? Or better yet, are relative pronouns always necessary? | Are there rules about using "that" to join two clauses? He will understand that I was not joking. He will understand I was not joking. Which of the sentences is correct? Are there any specific rules about the use of "that" in the sentences I reported as example? | How to analyze lightly varying senses of adjective *very* Use of very as an adjective is (in my experience) most frequently attested in phrases like ...the very person I was looking for. To use adjective very with the indefinite article sounds quite bizarre in this case: ?...a very person I was looking for. But consider this sentence, where indefinite a is used: Visualizing a very transformation of the master-slave relation, Thomas presses further: the slave is brother to the master, even doubly a brother. OED treats the two uses as separate senses of the word, with the following definitions: (first use): With limitation (usually expressed by the or a possessive) to particular instances (second use): Really or truly entitled to the name or designation Here are two respective examples quoted in OED: What would you say to me now, and I were your verie, verie Rosalind? (1616) Thence we went into Queen Mary's room, and saw that beautiful portrait—that very queen and very woman. (1857) Clearly, the difference in meaning between the two senses is quite light, and it seems to me like a kind of difference which is recurrent enough to have its own term. What is the proper term? Are there other English words having similarly related pairs of senses? And lastly, is OED jumping the gun in treating these as two senses? Could the difference in meaning instead be due to the choice of determiner? | eng_Latn | 16,945 |
'0 result' vs '0 results' I am developing a search control, where user types in and it returns search results. When I get no matching result what message would be correct in that case? a) 0 result b) 0 results | Correct plural form of a noun preceded by "zero" When using zero as a quantifier, is it correct to use the singular form on the object of the quantifier, or the plural form? It sounds confusing when I put it that way, but what I mean is: Which is correct? Your password expires in 0 days. Your password expires in 0 day. Essentially I suppose I'm asking, does "singular" mean "one" or "the opposite of more than one", as zero is not "plural" in the traditional "more than one" sense? I'm pretty sure "days" sounds correct, but I can't be sure. | I got a stomach flu or I got the stomach flu or I got stomach flu? When I googled stomach flu, there were many questions and statements like How do you get the stomach flu? Or Difference between a stomach flu and food poisoning Or Six facts about stomach flu When do you use the, a or nothing? And which should I use for a sentence like "I got a stomach flu from someone" ? | eng_Latn | 16,946 |
Teaching one student who is very good and another who is bad was a learning experience. Teaching a student who is very good and the other who is bad was a learning experience. One side of the coordinating conjunction uses "one student", the other side only uses "another." The parallelism of this usage depends on whether the term "student" carries over from first clause of "and" to the second clause that begins with "another" making it "another student." does it need to be "another/other student?" Cite the rule for why or why not. | ...on Finnis's view all distinct instances of basic goods are incommensurable — none is of more, less, or equal value with any other. — I expect to see more or less than any other, but then equal shows up, and is followed by with. But since with any other cannot replace than any other, do you think this sentence illegitimately omits something? | Some conditions require that a person lie in bed all the time until recovered. Is there a name for such conditions or people experiencing them at the moment? For example, I am currently <bed sick> and can't help you with your homework. I tried looking for bed sick but hit a dead end. | eng_Latn | 16,947 |
Having a little debate here at work... What is the correct way to pluralize an acronym where the last initial represents a word that itself is a plural / ends with a "s" ? Our specific example, for context: COW (Cellular On Wheels). If it makes a difference, we are saying this acronym as the word "cow", not C.O.W. Is it COWs? or just COW? My thought is it should be COWs. The counter point is that this would then make it Cellular On Wheelss (double s) | In computer science we discuss an abstract machine called a "deterministic finite automaton". The standard initialism for this term is "DFA". This makes sense in the singular usage of the initialism. However, the pluralization of the word "automaton" is "automata". One speaks of "an automaton" or "many automata". Consequently, it seems intuitive to form an initialism of the phrase "deterministic finite automata" as "DFA". This does not seem correct, as "DFA" could be either plural or singular. On the other hand, "DFAs" also does not seem correct because it would seem to expand to "deterministic finite automatons", a phrase which no self-respecting computer scientist would ever utter. This appears to be a duplicate of the question here But that question was never clearly resolved. What to do? | I have realized that to pronounce the plural form of words ending in -th, we have to drop the letter "h". e.g. Months is pronounced /mʌnts/. But I have never seen this point mentioned in any context. I just want to make sure that this rule is correct and can be always applied. | eng_Latn | 16,948 |
I'm not a native English speaker. From time to time I see the following structure when referring to a person: ... a(n) [adjective] [person's name] ... example: "Meanwhile, an increasingly sadistic Henry begins focusing his attention..." / Wikipedia: It (novel) / I'm pretty sure that the following is correct as well: "Meanwhile, the increasingly sadistic Henry begins focusing his attention..." What's the difference between these? | Sometimes, on the internet, particularly in online games, I see people using the indefinite article before someone's name: "I see a Joey" or "I hug a Polly". I know some of these people and I'm positive that they are from English-speaking countries, which means it is not a mistake, they do it intentionally. I was always taught that articles are not used in front of people's names. Maybe it is some sort of slang? What does it mean, when the indefinite article is put in front of someone's name? Edit: There is a group of people standing somewhere. And somebody, named Joey, appears. They all know Joey. And someone in this group says "I see a Joey". So it is used when someone sees his or her friend. But I don't understand why they use the indefinite article here. | The entire site is blank right now. The header and footer are shown, but no questions. | eng_Latn | 16,949 |
I think "Mary and me," even though it sounds odd to the ear, is correct, but my choice is between: "I've forgotten everything about the deal between Mary and me" and "I've forgotten everything about the deal between Mary and I." I'm wondering if the words "deal between" have any grammatical significance on whether I should be using "I" or "me" here. Any thoughts? | When the phrase is used as an object, why so many native speakers are saying "you and I" instead of "you and me"? I'm not a native speaker but I thought "you and me" is correct. Not sure if this falls into the same category, but "Just between you and me" sounds more natural than "Just between you and I". | When the phrase is used as an object, why so many native speakers are saying "you and I" instead of "you and me"? I'm not a native speaker but I thought "you and me" is correct. Not sure if this falls into the same category, but "Just between you and me" sounds more natural than "Just between you and I". | eng_Latn | 16,950 |
Michael Wolff's new book Fire and Fury sure has generated quite a lot of controversy. However, one important topic seems to have been overlooked by the Mainstream Media: Wolff (or his editors) consistently use the singular verb form when describing actions taken by 'Jarvanka', Steve Bannon's catchy nickname for the Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump duo. (For example, "Jarvanka was surprised" instead of "Jarvanka were surprised.") Is this correct? or does Jarvanka take a 'were' as it most certainly is two people? (Note: IMHO, this is not comparable to plural nouns such as media, because here Jarvanka is (or are) obviously two different distinct persons, unlike media which is merely a collective noun.) | I'd say Microsoft have a way of bending the rules and I know that McLaren have won the championship. While this sounds strange, I believe it is correct English (sorry, I'm not native). But when it's a small company, would you still use it this way? Is a company always plural, or are small companies singular? I.e., would you say Bakery Johnson makes fine bread or Bakery Johnson make fine bread? Is it My book seller, Woody's, have moved or is it has moved? | Which is correct? Everyone were convinced that he would go to the game. Everyone was convinced that he would go to the game. I think it's "was", because "everyone" is singular, but I just wanted to check. | eng_Latn | 16,951 |
What's the difference between them, and I know that their meanings or the same but I don't know how they both are grammatical. I have no car. I don't have a car. | Would you please tell me which of the following terms is correct? If both are correct, are they equal? I have no [...] I don't have any [...] | That car is way better than any car any of us have/has ever driven. None of us know/knows which direction Ron's house is (in). I have two questions here. In both the cases, are we to use the singular verb, or the plural? In the end of the second sentence, is using the preposition where it's been used, necessary? Would it be okay if it had no prepositions in it? | eng_Latn | 16,952 |
I want to say that "Feeding from a human doesn't mean killing them" (yes, vampire stuff), but I feel like the them I'm using isn't correct. But I don't want to use he/she because a human can be either, and I don't want to use it because it sounds weird. What is the best option here? | Is there a pronoun I can use as a gender-neutral pronoun when referring back to a singular noun phrase? Each student should save his questions until the end. Each student should save her questions until the end. | Example sentence: I love when your dog just lets you sit there to pet them. You don’t necessarily know if they are enjoying it, but they love you enough to just sit there with you for a bit. Is this correct? We assume the words "you" and "your" refer to the speaker of the sentence, and not to the listener, as second-person usually does. But it also refers to dog owners in general. I have always been curious about this. | eng_Latn | 16,953 |
I hear people saying, "He said it to my wife and I" when they would never say, "He said it to I." Why are people so inconsistent? | I've always been taught to put myself last when referring to myself in the same sentence as others but the usage of "me and..." seems to be everywhere these days. The misuse of the word "me" instead of "I" aside, is there some new rule I haven't heard of? Shouldn't we put ourselves last regardless of the "me"/"I" usage? Examples of "correct" usage: My friends and I went for some ice cream. Did you see my friends and me at the ice cream stand? Examples of "incorrect" usage: Me and my friends went for some ice cream. Did you see me and my friends at the ice cream stand? Note: I was also taught that the only person who could put themselves first was the queen. | Example sentence: I love when your dog just lets you sit there to pet them. You don’t necessarily know if they are enjoying it, but they love you enough to just sit there with you for a bit. Is this correct? We assume the words "you" and "your" refer to the speaker of the sentence, and not to the listener, as second-person usually does. But it also refers to dog owners in general. I have always been curious about this. | eng_Latn | 16,954 |
I was struck by PM Johnson's 'neither he nor I are' a few days ago, which seemed to me obviously ungrammatic, and searched this site, where I found this: where the answer claims that 'neither you nor I is' is 'of course .. totally wrong,' and that it would have to be 'neither you nor I am,' since the verb is closer to 'I' than to 'you.' I am unconvinced. What are some authoritative sources on this issue? And is there really no authority, grammatic or literary, in support of 'neither you nor I is'? My sense is that it must be 'neither you nor I is' and 'neither he nor I is.' It seems to me that, regardless of what the pronoun closest to the verb is, the third person ''wins'' when there is conflict, even when the contestants are the 2nd & 1st persons. (As regards the number of the verb, it seems to me that it must be singular, seeing as what is being denied is a statement about a singular thing, namely that (at least) one of two is something.) NOTE that my bold-faced question has been implied but neither focused nor answered in the other post. | I was watching the film A Game of Shadows starring Robert Downey Junior and Jude Law when this line came up, "...neither you nor I is in control..." (I can’t remember the exact words that ended the phrase; if anyone can supply them, it would be much appreciated.) It immediately struck me as being odd. When I mentioned this to my boyfriend; an English native speaker, with a PhD in something sciency, he told me it was correct. When I asked why, he couldn't explain but put forward the following sentence as an example. "Neither of us is in control..." However, I disagreed with the wording and said the sentence should have been: "Neither one of us is in control..." The genderless third person, one, is singular, and hence, so too the verb that follows. And we say, "one is" NOT "one are". "Neither you nor I are in control over ..." I believe the above sounds better, but it is more logical to say: "Neither you nor I am in control..." because the verb agrees with the subject closest to it; however, I'm not sure if I have ever read or heard this solution. So, I tried inverting the subject and auxiliary verb order and the resulting phrase was: "Neither you nor am I in control..." which sounds very formal, pompous, and ... odd. Am I imagining things? The two subjects you and I are two separate individuals who are not joined together, I agree the verb should be in the singular; but why should we use "is"? We don't say, "you is" or "I is". Before anyone rushes off to claim my question is a duplicate of a previous Stackexchange one: I want to explain why the answer to that question fails to explain why my boyfriend and the film makers consider the sentence below correct: Neither you nor I is in control... As I see it, Michael and Albert are two separate individuals, it therefore stands to reason that the verb should be singular, and "is" agrees with the subject. If I rephrase the neither and nor construction, I would get: Michael is not correct but neither is Albert OR Michael is not correct and Albert isn't either. Which have the same meaning, (either being the negative equivalent of neither) the sentences are grammatical which leads me to conclude that the verb must be singular and hence Neither Michael nor Albert is correct However, when I rephrase the "neither you nor I" sentence following the same procedure I have to say this: You are not in control but neither am I (‘I am’ is ungrammatical) OR You are not in control and I’m not either. which leads me to surmise that the sentence below must be grammatically correct Neither you nor I am in control" So, why does my boyfriend insist that the sentence ought to be: Neither you nor I is in control Which one of us is right and why? | This question is here just to avoid you choosing the wrong Ubuntu version number. So, this is not about: nor about nor nor nor nor . So in the answer below a simple guide as to what Ubuntu version is good for you, independent of future releases! | eng_Latn | 16,955 |
Why do we write. He talks as if he were my master? Shouldn't the verb be singular in this case? And if not then why? | In which cases should I use the subjunctive mood? I suggest that every applicant fill out the form carefully. If she were rich, she would live on Long Island. | According to this , if at least one of the nouns involved is plural then it should take the plural form of the verb. Otherwise, it should take the singular form of the verb. But in the last part it says not all grammars agree to those rules thus proximity rule applies. However, it doesn't explain when to apply the proximity rule and when not to use the former rules. | eng_Latn | 16,956 |
which one is correct ? 1- this kind of toothbrushes (has) sensors to detect... etc 2- this kind of toothbrushes (have) sensors to detect... etc | I have a question about using the phrase "some kind of _". Is it incorrect to say "some kind of + plural noun"? For example, is it wrong to say "are these rock-like things some kind of chocolates?" I didn't use "kinds" and that kind of adds to my question. Is "kind" always plural, like "some kinds of chocolates"? Because although I'm using "some", it feels like "kind" shouldn't be a countable noun. Anyway, I don't think I've heard of "some kind of + plural", but I think it makes more sense then using singular, since I think chocolates are countable. Please help! | I'm from Western Pennsylvania. Until I moved away, I never realized that when I omitted the to be from phrases like needs to be cleaned, my usage was different than what most English speakers are accustomed to. Is it wrong? | eng_Latn | 16,957 |
I already wrote a paper draft using inline citations like the following: However, [12] argues that ... Here I use "argues" instead of "argue" because the citation "[12]" acts as a singular noun (i.e., the paper), regardless of how many authors that paper has. Now, I must change my citation style to the following format: However, Smith et al. [2018] argues that ... Must I change "argues" to "argue", since the subject is plural (i.e., multiple authors)? Or can the phrase "Smith et al. [2018]" still refer to a singular paper, meaning "argues" is still correct? Is it better to be consistent and always use a singular verb (I have many such constructions with single and multiple authors), or should the verb plurality depend on the number of authors? | What is the British English way of referring to a source in-text. Is it plural because there are two authors, like this: X and Y (2011) describe ... Or is it singular because you are referring to a singular source, like this: X and Y (2011) describes... So what I am asking is whether you refer to the source or to the authors? | Example sentence: I love when your dog just lets you sit there to pet them. You don’t necessarily know if they are enjoying it, but they love you enough to just sit there with you for a bit. Is this correct? We assume the words "you" and "your" refer to the speaker of the sentence, and not to the listener, as second-person usually does. But it also refers to dog owners in general. I have always been curious about this. | eng_Latn | 16,958 |
First of all sorry for not asking a technical question. Actually I need to know the best English grammar book in terms of completeness and depth of every topic. Any help would be appreciated. | Before marking this post duplicate or voting to get it closed (the reason for which I simply don't get just because it is a grammar forum after all! If I am seeking recommendation for a book that means I will be coming back someday to the same site for my doubts also provided I get a not so harsh reply!), please read this and help this MBA aspirant. A little about myself and my research so far. I am a very critical reader of English Grammar and the kind of person who aims at perfection. Currently, I am keen on taking on English grammar again after a certain gap. Well, I am aiming for MBA, so preparing for entrance exams for the same. I bought the religiously followed Wren and Martin and started studying it chapter by chapter. I was surprised when I read the pronouns chapter. I studied all the rules given and then started practising but it came as surprise when I found when many of the attempted questions were wrong. The reason simply being the rules for those specific sentences were not given. For example: We scored as many goals as they/them? According to me, the answer should be they, but it's them according to the solution manual. Worse still, the solution manual offers no explanation for this. So after a chat with my teachers I was suggested to follow the blogs of grammarians and look for any rules for the sentences that have contradictory answers! I did so and was clarified by post of pronouns, Rule 5. Then I saw a book by the same author. I was momentarily happy. It was Momentarily because the reviews on Amazon were too bad about this book. After reading a couple of forums about the book I found a common statement saying that no grammar book is exhaustive. So, it's okay for me to have more than one. And my simple question is what will be a good and almost exhaustive (if not fully exhaustive) book of English grammar to help get through the subtle usages of English in my management entrances which is crisp and to the point and yet covers all important rules and syntax, and most importantly having practice tests at the end with solutions and explanations? | In .NET, what's the best way to prevent multiple instances of an app from running at the same time? And if there's no "best" technique, what are some of the caveats to consider with each solution? | eng_Latn | 16,959 |
For example, let's say I'm a physicist, so I'm not stupid. But, I'm talking to someone who is an accountant and they insult me for not knowing accounting jargon or how to do things involved in their field during a conversation. | Usage in sentence: Person A: Ooh - look at that crow! Person B: Well, actually, as someone who is a scientist who studies crows, I am telling you, specifically, in science, no one calls jackdaws crows. They're not the same thing. If you're saying "crow family" you're referring to the taxonomic grouping of Corvidae, which includes things from nutcrackers to blue jays to ravens. It's not one or the other, that's not how taxonomy works. Person A: Are you always such an XXX? "Pedant" is close, but not quite. It would be a mix of "know-it-all", "condescending" and "arrogant". | What is a general rule for use of auxiliary verbs in sentence? Should we duplicate it or not? For instance, It is available for every item and (is) used with . . . | eng_Latn | 16,960 |
I am writing a neural network application. In this application, a neural network can have one or more hidden layers, which can have different sizes (neuron counts). Which label would be correct: "hidden layer sizes" or "hidden layers sizes" and why? I realize this is a more general grammar related question and I'd love to learn about it. EDIT: the label is for a text box, where user will enter numbers separated by commas. | Possible Duplicates: I'm wondering whether or not I should use a plural form noun with a collection name. For example, which one is correct, bookList or booksList (obviously they are variables in a programming language)? | Question: A man like you should not do this, _______? Which question tag should I use in the blank space? should he? should you? Which would be grammatically correct? I think 1 is true. | eng_Latn | 16,961 |
should a verb after the phrase "a series of" be singular or plural? A series of incidents has taken place since the accident. A series of incidents have taken place since the accident. | Formally, is it correct to write: A number of questions has been asked here. or: A number of questions have been asked here. As a non-native speaker of English, I would prefer the former: the subject seems to be "number", therefore the verb ought to be singular, I'd say. However, the latter seems more common, and therefore I believe that my gut feeling is just plain wrong — but I would really like to have a definite answer. Moreover, is it the same for "a myriad of", "a plethora of", and so on? | That car is way better than any car any of us have/has ever driven. None of us know/knows which direction Ron's house is (in). I have two questions here. In both the cases, are we to use the singular verb, or the plural? In the end of the second sentence, is using the preposition where it's been used, necessary? Would it be okay if it had no prepositions in it? | eng_Latn | 16,962 |
One question please. I am translating a web form into english. In this specific case what is correct? Passenger quota or Passengers quota ? Vehicle quota or Vehicles quota ? Thanks! | Is it correct to say user accounts or users account when referring to the accounts any user has on a site like this one? In general, in the case of a noun that is used as adjective for the noun that follows, is it better to use <plural-noun> <singular-noun> or <singular-noun> <plural-noun>? | I'm looking for a single word, for someone who... keeps seeing everything that is wrong with everybody else. never seems to see the good of other people, only the bad things. points at others, as if he forgets he has weaknesses himself. does not brag about himself, he just seems to be dissatisfied with everyone else. I prefer a word that is as unambiguous and clear-cut as possible. | eng_Latn | 16,963 |
As we know, when the pronoun someone is used, the succeeding verb will be conjugated in the 3rd-person singular. Thus, the following sentence demonstrates legal usage: I cannot enter the room; someone is cooking. However, note the following sentence: I cannot enter the room; someone is cooking, are they not? As can be seen in the second sentence, when a question tag is used, it doesn't use the corresponding conjugation of the 3rd-person singular previously used, but rather, it takes on the 3rd-person plural. Why is this the case? What is more, why is the following sentence illegal? I cannot enter the room; someone are cooking, are they not? I thank you, in advance, for your responses. | Is there a pronoun I can use as a gender-neutral pronoun when referring back to a singular noun phrase? Each student should save his questions until the end. Each student should save her questions until the end. | If I am talking to somebody about a certain group of people in the third person, and then want to refer to the person I am talking with as one of those people, which do I say? One of them were you One of them was you. | eng_Latn | 16,964 |
Which of these is correct? 1.) "Nobody move and nobody gets hurt." or should it be, 2.) "Nobody move and nobody get hurt." Here's some related info in . | In English, the number 0 is treated as plural. It is then: 0 seconds 1 second 1.2 seconds 2 seconds Shouldn't it be "nobody want to go there," instead of "nobody wants to go there"? I also saw in TOEFL that "any __" should be used with a singular. But I see it very common that it is a plural also. Why is that? (updated: example, "we don't have any apples any more" vs "If you get any apple, please let me know.") | The keyboard I am trying to create has a lot of Unicode and looks like this: Being unsuccessful with the following tutorial: (There are a few errors in the tutorial, and it uses imprecise language such as "Cutting" things instead of "Deleting" them, and it is formatted strangely) I was wondering if anybody would be so kind to provide a better tutorial with step by step instructions? | eng_Latn | 16,965 |
I know that "children" is a plural noun and "birthday" is a countable noun, but I saw this sentence in a book: Children have a birthday cake at their birthday. Why is "children" (which is a plural noun) followed by "a birthday cake" instead of by "birthday cakes," and why is "their" followed by "birthday" instead of by "birthdays"? | In a situation where say a group (or at least a plurality) of men is being addressed — for example on a sign passed by many married men — which is correct? "Remind your wife." or "Remind your wives." | Please don't throw this one out as a duplicate of I'm not asking about the plurality of the noun immediately following those two words - I'm interested in exactly why the example below is problematic (context: I have several children, one named John)... 1: One of my children's name is John. I can't see any obvious reason why singular name there is completely unacceptable, but it certainly doesn't sit well with me. It seems to turn on whether one of my children can be treated collectively as the "subject" of the Saxon genitive 's, but I don't see a problem with... 2: It's actually one of my children's, but you can sleep in this bed. I realise that in practice we'd normally pluralise names in the first example. But of course, this implies that one of attaches to my children's names, which isn't really the same construction. So - is there some kind of "rule, principle" debarring #1 above? Or is it just "one of those things"? (Apologies if my later switch from brothers to children invalidates any comments or answers.) | eng_Latn | 16,966 |
Can "individual" be referred to as "it"? Or only he/she/they? | I would like to treat a user as a non-gender noun and refer to it with the gender-neutral pronoun, it. E.g., The user defines two variables, x and y. It then multiplies each variable by a prime number. However, on I found this: The word "it", however, has an extremely impersonal connotation, even offensive, in common usage and is rarely used in English to refer to an unspecified human being or person of unknown gender. This is because the word "it" connotes that the person being specified is inferior to a person or is an object. Is to appropriate to refer to a person of unknown sex as it? Should I rephrase my sentence as follows: The user defines two variables, x and y. The user then multiplies each variable by a prime number. | I came across this : Unbelievable as it may seem, many individuals that fought in the American Revolution were still alive in 1839, the year the world was introduced to photography. (choose the error - the 'answer' is in bold) It noted that the reason "that fought" is wrong is that 'The relative pronoun “that” may not be used to refer to people (“individuals”) and should be replaced with the relative pronoun “who.”' I had thought that the word "that" could refer to both people and objects (while which was reserved for objects and who reserved for people). Am I wrong? | eng_Latn | 16,967 |
I'm looking for a short and precise word to describe the use of the pronoun them with plurals, i.e. Let's kill them zombies! Them townsfolk sure are full of baloney. I hate them bees. It appears to be a fairly common solecism (?) in some areas/communities. It's also quite common in prose and pop culture. Does this convention have a name? Inhabitants of the rural mid-west of Foobarland are in the habit of prefixing nouns with the word them, using the combined phrase as the subject or the object of a sentence. Descriptive grammarians refer to this pattern as the/a _______. | I've seen a lot of times the pronoun them used like an article. For example, in the title of the Delta Rhythm Boys Them bones, or in the first sentence of "Money for nothing": Now look at them yo-yo's, that's the way you do it. I know that it's not "proper English" (i.e., not something you'll use in a serious writing), but I'd like to know when it's commonly used, and why. Is there any difference between using it and using the? | The sentence Women driving cars is, of course, such a foreign sight to a society like Saudi Arabia The subject is not "women" (otherwise, the verb would have been 'are'); the subject, as I mean to use it, is the rarity of seeing women driving cars. The subject, in other words, is "women driving cars" as a thing. Does this give me licence to use 'is' here? Thank you. | eng_Latn | 16,968 |
Are the following contractions okay to use: The man's working on the roof for The man is working on the roof The dog's running behind the ball for The dog is running behind the ball | How compelled should I feel to use non-contracted forms (do not rather than don't and so on) when writing in a rather formal text, say an academic paper? In one case I am afraid to seem too stilted, in the other, too casual. Are there good guidelines? And are there differences in this regard between British and American English? (In this there was not much more than "Contractions are more frequent in informal than formal contexts".) | The usage of singular and plural has always been confusing for me. I often see sentences like these People are using cell phones. People are using a cell phone. Does the first sentence mean everyone has a phone and they are all using their own? Does the second sentence mean they are sharing one cell phone? If I see a group of people holding a cell phone in their hand(s), <- even this is confusing for me, should I use the first sentence then? Another example: you see two men, and both of them are carrying a bag. Which sentence should I say/use? They are carrying backpacks They are carrying a backpack Could you please make it clear for me? | eng_Latn | 16,969 |
Is this grammatically and syntactically correct? … by a) studying and b) helping – or should it be: … a) by studying and b) by helping | When one wants to list various cases/classes/categories/types of objects in a string of conjunctions, is it preferable (or even mandatory) to keep on using (the same) preposition in front of each one them? Moreover, does singular or plural form of the word "case", "class", "category" make any difference in the previous question? Examples: In the present article, we study the case of X, of Y and of Z objects. (in this example, as in most of the ones I have in mind, it is the preposition "of" which is relevant to my question). We study the cases/classes of X and of Y objects. vs. We study the cases/classes of X and Y objects. Although it is rather clear that, in the singular case, the absence of "of" in later conjuncts may lead to a logical confusion (e.g., mistakenly taken as the one class/case of objects which are both X and Y), when it comes to plural of the words "case", "class", etc., this might not be an issue. Still, there might anyway be a rule in the plural setting as well. | The entire site is blank right now. The header and footer are shown, but no questions. | eng_Latn | 16,970 |
Take the sentence: Isn't there a bunch of laws around who can stay open until what time though based on location and # of residential buildings around the bar? Bunch is singular, and the sentence is referring to a bunch of laws. Another example, not using bunch: Isn't there a collection of paintings? That uses "Isn't" not "aren't" Can you throw the prepositional phrase, and consider what comes directly after is irrelevant in terms of plurality? | In the following sentence: The city is populated by many people. "many" can be replaced by something like "a great number of" (let us leave the perceived differences between the meanings of these two modifiers out of discussion): The city is populated by a great number of people. I understand that this replacement does not change the object "populating the city" from the original "people" to a "number", but rather shows the ability of expressions in the form "[numeral] of" to provide information about the quantity of nouns they modify. Is this ability due to some special qualities of nouns such as "number", "quantity", "fraction", &c., or is it just one usage of the preposition "of"? | Which is correct? Everyone were convinced that he would go to the game. Everyone was convinced that he would go to the game. I think it's "was", because "everyone" is singular, but I just wanted to check. | eng_Latn | 16,971 |
I'm writing a song, and I'd like to know if the pronoun "you" should always take a plural form. I wrote these two lines: It's You who never lies It's You who purifies I think it sounds wrong to say, "It's You who never lie." The subject "it" is singular, and "You" refers to one person, so maybe the s-form is correct? | Possible Duplicate: This is a line spoken by the . I always wondered if this is grammatically correct. Luke says something like "You are mistaken ..." which the Emperor answers with No, it is you who are mistaken! Why wouldn't he say No, it is you who is mistaken! instead? I don't know what rules apply here but my stomach tells me the latter is (at least also) correct, although you would say "you are mistaken". It feels as if he should be referring to "you" in the third person. Could you please shed some light? Are both correct or – if not – which one is correct? And why? | Example sentence: I love when your dog just lets you sit there to pet them. You don’t necessarily know if they are enjoying it, but they love you enough to just sit there with you for a bit. Is this correct? We assume the words "you" and "your" refer to the speaker of the sentence, and not to the listener, as second-person usually does. But it also refers to dog owners in general. I have always been curious about this. | eng_Latn | 16,972 |
Is it good English to say "They have just left", when talking about a single person (perhaps someone you don't know the gender of)? (I am a native English speaker, I'm looking for the view held by lexicographers). | Is there a pronoun I can use as a gender-neutral pronoun when referring back to a singular noun phrase? Each student should save his questions until the end. Each student should save her questions until the end. | Is it good English to say "They have just left", when talking about a single person (perhaps someone you don't know the gender of)? (I am a native English speaker, I'm looking for the view held by lexicographers). | eng_Latn | 16,973 |
Find correlation between grades from two raters The question is whether we can find a correlation between two sets of grades (categorical data). Let’s say we have a dog competition and there are 1000 dogs participating. There are two rounds of assessment first round dog owners give their assessment on the scale from A to C. Where A is excellent and C is bad. There are four criteria for assessment during both tours (behaviour etc). second round one judge gives his assessment of one dog based on the same assessment criteria as in round 1. however, grades vary from M - meeting expectation, E - exceeding expectation, B - Bellow expectation. We understand that M is B, E is A and B is C. After two rounds our table would look like: | dog | round one | round two | | --------------- | --------- | --------- | | Dog1_criteria1 | A | B | | Dog1_criteria2 | A | E | | Dog1_criteria3 | A | E | | Dog1_criteria4 | B | M | | Dog2_criteria1 | A | E | | Dog2_criteria2 | B | M | | Dog2_criteria3 | A | E | | Dog2_criteria4 | C | B | .... How do we find a correlation between the two sets of answers? Thank you! | How to get correlation between two categorical variable and a categorical variable and continuous variable? I am building a regression model and I need to calculate the below to check for correlations Correlation between 2 Multi level categorical variables Correlation between a Multi level categorical variable and continuous variable VIF(variance inflation factor) for a Multi level categorical variables I believe its wrong to use Pearson correlation coefficient for the above scenarios because Pearson only works for 2 continuous variables. Please answer the below questions Which correlation coefficient works best for the above cases ? VIF calculation only works for continuous data so what is the alternative? What are the assumptions I need to check before I use the correlation coefficient you suggest? How to implement them in SAS & R? | Formal writing: "…for my colleagues and {I/me/myself}."? I'm currently using Cambridge English Advanced 1. It's a book that contains past examination papers, and includes numerous samples of authentic writing. This material helps, candidates and teachers, understand what the examiners are ‘testing’ and how these papers are marked. The assessment covers four categories: content, communicative achievement, organisation and language. Each category is awarded a mark between 1 and 5, so the maximum score is 20, and each mark has a brief note attached by the examiner. Any errors of punctuation, orthography, grammar, appropriacy, and vocabulary are left intact. In fact, there are no corrections because the ‘examiner’ does not specify where the errors lie. This can be frustrating, even though spelling mistakes are rare at the advanced level, and errors in style, collocation or register are still relatively easy to identify, sometimes I'll read a phrase that forces me to ponder. Dear Director, [ TEXT ] To conclude, this letter is a polite request to cover the costs of a 2 month language course for my colleagues and me. We would be very pleased if the company would do us this favour. Yours sincerely John Smith The following marks were awarded Content 5 blah, blah, … Communicative Achievement 2 blah, blah, … Organisation 3 blah, blah, … Language 3 blah, blah, … I am able to pick out six minor errors in that brief extract, maybe some users will identify more, maybe some will identify fewer, and maybe some will say that the language used is perfectly acceptable. But if I can help a candidate attain that elusive B, I would be delighted. I am interested in (what could be) the 7th error, emphasised in bold. Because the letter of proposal is formal, I feel the phrase, for my colleagues and me, is jarring. I want to change it to for my colleagues and I, but the antecedent requires an object. You would not say: “This is a request to cover the cost […] for I”. So, why use the subject pronoun I in the expression “my colleagues and…”? Could I use instead, myself? Which of the following is preferable in a formal written proposal? …for my colleagues and me …for my colleagues and I …for my colleagues and myself EDITED: I found a of the writing sample (11/11) if anyone is interested. I've looked at the following question, Some answers appear to be contradictory, the accepted answer says using I and me are both grammatical, which in my example is not true. Moreover, there's no mention of myself, as a possible solution, in the question. | eng_Latn | 16,974 |
usage of their for singular This is from a lesson at the . The stove should be positioned so a person using it doesn't have their back facing a doorway. Why in the above sentence there is "their" instead of "he" or "she"? | Is there a gender-neutral pronoun that can replace “his” or “her”? This post has two parts: (a) a question and (b) a proposal. (a) Often, particularly while writing technical papers or user's manuals, I have come across a situation where I need to say: A user of this software may not need to use it from his personal computer. He can use it from a phone or even from his tablet. I have seen many authors use female pronouns (i.e. “she” and “her”), but lately this trend seems to have ebbed somewhat. I, and (I suspect) many other authors, do not want to use passive voice to avoid this. Is there a gender-neutral way to describe the same situation? (b) If there is none, I would like to propose using “ze” (for “he” or “she”) and “zir” (for “his” or “her”, rhyming with “fir”) as gender-neutral pronouns. I want to know how you feel about these words. | taller than any student or taller than any other student Which of the following sentences is correct? a) 1. John is taller than any student in his class. 2. John is taller than any other student in his class. b) 1. No student is taller than John in his class. 2. No other student is taller than John in his class. | eng_Latn | 16,975 |
Subject–Predicate Errors The following quotes all seem to contain agreement errors between their subjects and predicates: A total of five youths were arrested in both incidents. Shouldn't it be "A total . . . was"? The sense is plural overall, but the subject is the singular "total." The object of the preposition is "five youths." Nonetheless, the verb should be the singular "was," agreed? Early returns from rural areas indicated that support from the Communists remain strong. Shouldn't it be ". . . support . . . remains strong"? A group of neighborhood volunteers are identifying these houses and forcing owners to fix them up or tear them down. Shouldn't it be "A group . . . is"? The council's actions, concluding more than six hours of testimony on the matter, effectively nullifies a city hearings officer's decision. Shouldn't it be "The council's actions . . . nullify"? | Is "a total of 10 payments" singular or plural? A total of 10 payments were made. OR A total of 10 payments was made. Which is correct? Or can both be correct? | Possessive Form of a Proper Noun Ending in a Plural Noun Ending in "s"? I don't think this has yet been covered in . There was , however, it was not specifically talking about the case where the proper noun ends in a plural noun. Feel free to vote to close if I am wrong. What is the correct way to make a proper noun ending in a plural noun ending in an "s" possessive? This frequently happens with corporations, e.g., "Dunkin' Donuts." Should one work off of the fact that the entity is singular—suggesting Dunkin' Donuts's—or should one work off of the fact that "Donuts" is plural and ending in an "s"—suggesting Dunkin' Donuts'? I expect that the answer might depend on dialect because some regions refer to corporations in the singular form ("Dunkin' Donuts is a company") while other regions refer to corporations in the plural form ("Dunkin' Donuts are a company"). I am specifically interested in American English, but would be interested in hearing answers for other dialects too. | eng_Latn | 16,976 |
What to use after a word which ends with "se" to indicate possession? I apologize for the seemingly simple question. I've searched on Google for this, but could not find anything. The word "Recluse", meaning (noun) "a person who lives a solitary life and tends to avoid other people." I would normally put an 's after it to indicate possession, like "Recluse's Home". But saying it out loud it doesn't sound quite right. Is 's the proper way to indicate possession after a word ending in "se"? Extra: How about possessive form of Jesus (no pun intended), and how is that pronounced? I always pronounced it like "Jesuses", but that doesn't flow very well. | What is the pronunciation of the possessive words that already end in s? Possible Duplicate: My name is Greg — this is Greg 's post. If my name ended with an 's', I am aware of the proper apostrophe usage (James → James'), but how should this be pronounced? Phonetically, am I Jameses best friend or James best friend? | Singular to plural noun Many nouns that end in ‑f are made plural by changing the ‑f to ‑v‑ and adding ‑es. +----------+-----------+ | Singular | Plural | +----------+-----------+ | half | halves | | leaf | leaves | | shelf | shelves | +----------+-----------+ But some nouns that end in ‑f are made plural simply by adding ‑s. +----------+-----------+ | Singular | Plural | +----------+-----------+ | chief | chiefs | | roof | roofs | | cliff | cliffs | +----------+-----------+ Some nouns that end in ‑f can be made plural in two ways, either by adding ‑s or ‑ves: +----------+--------------------+ | Singular | Plural | +----------+--------------------+ | scarf | scarfs or scarves | | hoof | hoofs or hooves | | dwarf | dwarfs or dwarves | | wharf | wharfs or wharves | +----------+--------------------+ Now my question is how to determine whether to use only ‑s or to change the ‑f to ‑v‑ and add ‑es? | eng_Latn | 16,977 |
Which is the correct gerund clause? 'People's killing animals', or 'People killing animals ... '? Which is the correct gerund clause that should be used here? People killing animals is a bad thing.. or People's killing animals is a bad thing.. John being late is a bit inconvenient. or John's being late is a bit inconvenient. (At the beginning of sentence,Is the subject before the gerund expressed as a possessive noun?) | When to use an object pronoun or a possessive adjective before a gerund The rule says that we can use a possessive adjective or an object pronoun before a gerund. Is there a rule that says when to use each or are they interchangeable? Some say that it's wrong to use an object pronoun before a gerund. | Can cited works hold grammatical positions in sentences? Though I read this style quite often, I was recently told unambiguously by a reviewer that I was NOT supposed to use citations "as if they are objects in a sentence." The following sentence is an example of what the reviewer considered unacceptable: We analyzed the data using the Wilmerding method, guided by [12]. The references section might include the following: [12] Smith, D., Marshawn, J., & Devenshaw, A. 2011. Techniques and Procedures for Applying the Wilmerding Method. Prince Publications, Inc, New York, NY. The Wilmerding method1 is not a step-by-step algorithm that can be precisely followed as if by a machine, and thus [12] does not provide a step-by-step algorithmic description but rather guidance for using the method. [12] is a relatively slim but authoritative textbook about how to use the Wilmerding method. Within this question, for the purpose of discussion, I have intentionally put [12] in grammatical positions where it's an important element of the sentence and the sentence would make less sense without the reference. Sometimes that seems to be the most efficient way to communicate the intended message. Is using a reference as a grammatical sentence element like this OK? Why might this not be considered acceptable? Should I be rewording those sentences? Is it enough of a violation to be worth passing the note on to authors of papers I review? I considered posting this on but it seems more specific to academia than general English usage, and the comment came from a content reviewer rather than a copy editor. is related but it seems to be more about when to put authors names' in vs. outside of the parentheses in an APA-like style. The numbered citation style (as opposed to following APA, for example) is required by the venue. 1: Fictionalized for the purpose of this discussion | eng_Latn | 16,978 |
Are there rules in 5e for shooting into combat? What rules govern "shooting into combat" -- that is making a ranged attack on an enemy who is partially obscured by other creatures. I know that the rules regarding cover may give the enemy an AC bonus in this case. Is there any risk of hitting an unintended target on a miss? | Are there any rules for adjudicating a ranged attack fired at a target engaged in melee combat with an ally? While running a session recently, one of the players chose to "assist" his companion who was in melee with a goblin, by firing an arrow at the pair of them. I couldn't find any particular rules for this scenario so just had him roll at a disadvantage, counting a miss as a hit on his companion (damage to be ascertained by a second roll). This seemed to work okay, and became a running joke for the night as the arrow bounced off the companions back, but are there specific rules for this scenario? | Is this a grammatically correct line in a poem: “Will he roll the dice, and follow it to Vegas?”? I want to use the following line in a poem: "Will he roll the dice, and follow it to Vegas?" A couple of things to note; firstly, obviously I'm using "roll the dice" in both a figurative/idiomatic sense (as in taking a risk), and in a somewhat more literal sense (painting the image of the person actually following the dice that have been rolled to Las Vegas). That being said, my confusion here is if I can get away with using "follow it" or if I need to say "follow them" .... As I've read online "dice" traditionally refers to more than one die (i.e., the plural of die), but in the modern usage, "dice" can also be used to refer to the singular (i.e., just one die). So, it seems like if I was referring to the image of just one die, then the way I phrased it could be correct. However, the image I'm trying to paint is the one usually associated with the phrase "roll the dice" (i.e., rolling two dice)... So could "follow it" still be considered acceptable in this sense... or would I need to use "follow them"?... And if not referring to the dice themselves, could using, could the "it" be taken to refer to the act of rolling the dice, or would that not work either? Thanks so much in advance!! | eng_Latn | 16,979 |
Why "Kant says that people are not capable of thinking" if Kant isn't alive When I’m watching American lectures I hear all the time the problems with the grammar rule “sequence of tenses”. Some professors say, for instance: “Kant says that people are not capable of thinking...” But it has to sound: “Kant said that people were not...”, isn’t it? (Because Kant is not alive.) Don’t Americans know sequence of tenses? Why do they speak so? Because of the convenience, or are there any other reasons? | Great Expectations [is written vs has been written] by Charles Dickens I had a grammar quiz at the university today. One of the questions was: "Great Expectations" ____ by Charles Dickens. a) is written b) has been written c) was written Undoubtedly, the c option isn't correct since the time (the publication date) isn't stated or implied. I crossed the a option out because it is neither a general truth nor a law. It is not a well-known fact to use present simple here. Finally, I have chosen b. I still have doubts if a is the only right option. It is unclear to me. Could you clarify it? Any help would be appreciated. | Why isn’t singular ‘they’ used with 3Sg verb forms? There are many (duplicate) questions about the acceptance, popularity and history of singular they (and their, them and themself) around here, it even got a tag of its own. If I didn’t miss anything, however, the proper verb form hasn’t been questioned yet. As we all know, English third person singular pronouns (it, she, he and one, +body), names (Alice, Bob, …) and nouns (student, teacher, …) demand the +(e)s suffix be added to the finite verb form in simple present, where some auxiliary verbs have a “special” form (is < *bes / *ares and has < *haves). All other subjects don’t, including plural third person pronoun they. When the plural you replaced thou (with thee, thy / thine), the other marked verb form that had remained in English – i.e. suffix +(e)st or +t – vanished, too. The first and second persons only ever appear as pronouns (I, we; you), not names or nouns, so there was no strong inclination to keep the verbal inflection. The second person precedent would suggest that singular they be used with uninflected verb forms which is how it’s usually encountered in the wild. Assuming that they someday replaces he and she (and maybe it) it would lead to disagreement with the words the pronoun stands in for: Alice goes to her place by herself. Bob goes to his place by himself. Alice and Bob go to their place by themselves. – (common) Alice and Bob go to their places by themselves. – (separate) She goes to her place by herself. He goes to his place by himself. They go to their place by themselves. They go to their places by themselves. They ?goes to their place by themself. ditto They go to their place by themselves. They go to their places by themselves. They ?go to their place by ?themselves. ditto They go to their place by themselves. They go to their places by themselves. So why doesn’t singular they afford s on present-tense verbs like all other third person singular subjects do? I learned about singular they only long after I had been taught English as a second language in school. That’s why it’s still a conscious decision to use it and hence I could easily adapt to use s forms with it, but would that sound and look funny / strange / wrong to native speakers? | eng_Latn | 16,980 |
What rule forbids "To boldly go where no man has gone before"? I heard in an old British TV program (it was a funny sitcom, not an English teaching program) that it should be "To go boldly", due to some grammar rule about infinitives Is it incorrect to say "To boldly go where no man has gone before"? What is the grammatical rule behind it if it is incorrect? | Adverb between conjugated verb and infinitive? The judicial function in considering and applying statutes is one of interpretation and interpretation alone. The duty of the court in every case is loyally to endeavour to ascertain the intention of the legislature; and to ascertain that intention by reading and interpreting the language which the legislature itself has selected for the purpose of expressing it. 1. What's this phenomenon called? Is this placement unusual or due to my English's primitiveness? 2. Why not situate the adverb after 'endeavour', or even split the infinitive 'to endeavour' and wedge it in between? What are the similarities and differences due to a different position? | Is this a grammatically correct line in a poem: “Will he roll the dice, and follow it to Vegas?”? I want to use the following line in a poem: "Will he roll the dice, and follow it to Vegas?" A couple of things to note; firstly, obviously I'm using "roll the dice" in both a figurative/idiomatic sense (as in taking a risk), and in a somewhat more literal sense (painting the image of the person actually following the dice that have been rolled to Las Vegas). That being said, my confusion here is if I can get away with using "follow it" or if I need to say "follow them" .... As I've read online "dice" traditionally refers to more than one die (i.e., the plural of die), but in the modern usage, "dice" can also be used to refer to the singular (i.e., just one die). So, it seems like if I was referring to the image of just one die, then the way I phrased it could be correct. However, the image I'm trying to paint is the one usually associated with the phrase "roll the dice" (i.e., rolling two dice)... So could "follow it" still be considered acceptable in this sense... or would I need to use "follow them"?... And if not referring to the dice themselves, could using, could the "it" be taken to refer to the act of rolling the dice, or would that not work either? Thanks so much in advance!! | eng_Latn | 16,981 |
Is there any phrase 'use to" in english phrase use to I want to know is there any phrase use to in english if yes then how to use it | "I use to", or "I used to" Which is the correct sentence, if there is a correct one? I use to be a hitman. I used to be a hitman. I've read the second sentence recently in a book, but I was sure it should be I use to be a hitman. | Help + Noun + Gerund or Infinitive Help my sister peel oranges. Help my sister to peel oranges. Help my sister peeling oranges. Help my sister with peeling oranges. Which of the above is/are correct, and why are the others incorrect? | eng_Latn | 16,982 |
What is the plural of the name Jess? I understand it's grammatically correct to use apostrophe s for the plural of letters. Dot your i's and cross your t's. But not for proper nouns that end with s. Here come the Jones's Joneses. What would the plural of the name Jess be? Jesses? Which is also the plural of Jesse. So... Both Jesses are dating both Jesses. Wait what? English is just silly indeed peculiar. I understand Jess can stand for Jessica and to reduce confusion we could use Jessicas. However not all Jess..es (lol) are birthnamed Jessica. And if that wasn't bad enough, we can give the plurals possession... Both Jesses's cats are playing with the Jesses's dogs. Now answer this, do the Jesses own cats or dogs? Oh English, you. If Jesses is the correct plural for Jess, how can English avoid confusion with the plural for Jesse? | Family name pluralization When pluralizing family (last) names that also happen to be common English words, does the pluralization follow the same rules as the common word? For example, "the Smith family" can be pluralized as "the Smiths", but what if the family name is "Wolf" or "Fish"? Would the correct pluralization be "the Wolfs" or "the Wolves"? | Usage of singular or plural SI base units when written in both symbol as well as name I have multiple doubts related to the usage of singular or plural SI base units when written in both symbol as well as name. I have framed this question under two parts, namely, Part (a) and Part (b). Each part has three sentences which I have written on the basis of my understanding. Please answer these 6 sentences/questions. Part (a): says that while using prefix for e.g., centi as in centimeter, it is l = 75 cm long.(correct) l = 75 cms long. (wrong) Does this rule is used for all SI prefixes (having powers of 10)? In this regard, we should be saying, or writing that, "how many cm are there in one metre?" (while saying we should say centimter or centimetres?) Please strike-through the wrong SI unit in the following sentences. My weight is 70 kg / kgs, or My weight is 70 kilogram / kilograms. Part (b): and the page next to above web link says, we should write: 2.6 m/s, or 2.6 metres per second. In this regard, we should say, or write: Its speed is 0.26 metres per second. This pipe is 0.75 metres long. How many cm are there in 2 metres? | eng_Latn | 16,983 |
has vs have on a singular noun that represents a plural idea In the sentence: I suspect 99% of the world’s population has never even heard of the term ‘Deep Learning’. is the 'has' correct, or should it be 'have'? | Does a percentage quantity take singular or plural verb agreement? Does a percentage require a singular or plural verb, for example, do we say ten percent "go" or "goes"? | Can I use 'in' instead of 'at'? -- "I have more books in my house." I am learning English using the Duolingo English course, one of correct solution was I have more books at my house. Can I use I have more books in my house. If it is OK, what is the difference between both? | eng_Latn | 16,984 |
"If you don't mind me asking" or "If you don't mind my asking"? Which one is more appropriate - "If you don't mind me asking" or "If you don't mind my asking"? I always thought that it was "If you don't mind me asking", but I recently heard "If you don't mind my asking" (more precisely, whilst watching True Detective, I heard "If you don't mind me asking" but the subtitles read "If you don't mind my asking"). Now, the latter makes sense if "asking" is referred to as a noun, but it sounds a little twisted. Which one is the right one? Thanks | When is a gerund supposed to be preceded by a possessive adjective/determiner? I assume that the following sentences are grammatically correct: He resents your being more popular than he is. Most of the members paid their dues without my asking them. They objected to the youngest girl's being given the command position. What do you think about his buying such an expensive car? We were all sorry about Jane's losing her parents like that. I'm still getting used to this possessive gerund structure. It sounded so weird to me at first. Is the structure used in both formal and informal contexts? Are there any alternative structures that result in the same meaning and are more frequently used? (Examples taken from ) | One of us is wrong, aren't we? I have just learned from what I consider a reliable source, that the following sentence is correct: One of us is wrong, aren't we? I would never in my life have written this, but I am assured that As I realize comments don't live forever I will quote the relevant parts: oerkelens : So you would really write One of us is wrong, aren't we? I guess by analogy you would not bat an eyelid at One of these balls is blue, aren't they? Matt Эллен : yes, "Then one of us is wrong, aren't we?" is exactly how it would be written. Same for the balls. Could someone please enlighten me how it is possible that the number in a question tag supposedly has to be in discordance with the subject of the main clause? I admit that I am not the youngest any more, and my school days are long gone, but back in the days, I was taught that 1. a verb and its subject concord in number 2. a question tag concords with the subject of the main clause I was given examples like: It is warm today, isn't it? We will be on time, won't we? Mary is pretty, isn't she? John isn't the brightest, is he? Some people may notice that the subject of the main clause seems to determine every time the subject of the question tag. When the main clause subject is singular, so are verb and subject in the question tag. I was under the impression that a) this made sense and b) this would be a general rule. I fully realize that grammar does not have to make sense, so a) is immaterial. As for b), today I learned I was wrong :) So when (and possibly why?) do we form question tags that are different in number from their main clause? To exemplify, also the other example sentence that I used and was corrected on: One of these balls is blue, isn't it? (so this is wrong) One of these balls is blue, aren't they? (and this is correct) As an afterthought, does this strange grammatical number mix-up only appear in question-tags, or should I always refer to singular subjects in the plural if certain conditions are met? And what are those conditions? Which versions are correct? One of the cars is broken, aren't they? They (the car(s?) that is(are?) broken) should be fixed. One of the cars is broken, aren't they? It (the car that is broken) should be fixed. One of us must be wrong, mustn't we? We (the one(s?) that is (are?) wrong) should make amends. One of us must be wrong, mustn't we? He (the one that is wrong) should make amends. (In the last one, they could of course be used as the singular they, but that would avoid the issue...) | eng_Latn | 16,985 |
men's vs mens which is correct I am working on an invitation design for a charity. I am wondering which one of these is correct, Young Men's Committee or Young Mens Committee | Is "mens" a valid word? I've been living in Ireland for almost a year now and I start noticing they use the word "mens" a lot. I can see it used in: Shops, to denote the area where you can find men's clothes In sport, when they talk about "mens team". My guess is just that they are lazy about the use of quotes, so that mens should actually be men's. However, there may be some rule I'm not aware of. So, is "mens" only limited to Irish English? When I'm allowed to use it? | How do you pluralize the acronym "POC" ("proof of concept")? Possible Duplicate: What's the plural form of the acronym , short for proof of concept? ...for his contributions to many POCs or ...for his contributions to many POC is not a duplicate as it is focused on cases like "ATMs" where the expanded form "automated teller machines" ends in a noun with a regular plural form ending in "s." In "proof of concept," the noun is in the middle of the abbreviated phrase. If we pluralize the uncontracted phrase, we get "proofs of concept," which has an "s" in the middle rather than at the end. It's unclear from the linked answers how abbreviations with this structure should be pluralized. (POC, POCs, PsOC?) | eng_Latn | 16,986 |
Everyone and plural usage "Everyone want their homes to be at the centres of cities" Is this correct usage or is there any alternative way to convey the same? | Is "everyone" singular or plural? Which is correct? Everyone were convinced that he would go to the game. Everyone was convinced that he would go to the game. I think it's "was", because "everyone" is singular, but I just wanted to check. | Is "choose from one of four options" wrong? I need backup in pressing my case that the phrase “choose from one of four options” is grammatically incorrect. Is there some resource that can prove my case, that the incorrect phrase should be replaced with one of the two following ones? Choose one of four options Choose from four options | eng_Latn | 16,987 |
Omission of the indefinite article to eliminate ambiguity love between husband and wife What is the reason that there is no article (e.g. "love between a husband and a wife") in the above? Has some kind of a rule been identified grammatically when it comes to such a case? If I were to guess I think it's because the indefinite article 'a', the purpose of that, is taking a generic sample (or 'instance') from a 'class' (the class of husbands), but in the above sentence you want to refer to the class itself... the husband class and the wife class... and not an 'instance' of them, because it just is more to the point. Do you think this is a fair reasoning? Also, a thought came to me that with the use of the indefinite article, you get a generic husband and a generic wife, which, may not necessarily love each other (for they are not a specific pair of a specific husband and a specific wife who in fact love each other). | "He was neither seer nor prophet" How would you explain the absence of an article? Here's a fragment from Jack London's Star Rover: Wordsworth knew. He was neither seer nor prophet, but just ordinary man like you or any man. What he knew you know, any man knows. But he most aptly stated it in his passage that begins "Not in utter nakedness, not in entire forgetfulness. To the best of my — admittedly sketchy — knowledge of grammar, the second sentence should read neither a seer nor (a) prophet, but just an ordinary man. Even if we accept the seer and the prophet as "poetic entities" ("father and son," "robber and robbed," "man to man," or whatever), logic would still dictate that ordinary man should be preceded by an an. It is a well-known fact that Jack London's usage wasn't always up to par; his grammar, on the other hand, was always top-notch. Logically, the sentence is grammatically incorrect (correct me if I'm wrong: no pun intended). Illogically, it reads smoothly: intuitively, a native speaker understands that there's nothing wrong here. However, those to whom English is not the first language cannot be expected to be intuitive in this case and would want an explanation. Any suggestions? | Using "that" and "this" interchangeably Learning and using English I'm always confused about what word to use for referring to things that have been described by me a few sentences earlier: "that" or "this". Confusion comes from the fact that only the equivalent of "this" is always used in my native language for such referring. But I've noticed that in English for such referring "that" is used as often as "this" (or maybe even more often). Some examples for illustrating (just tried to google something appropriate to convey my idea better): We assess local... the demographics of the local population. What are the natural traffic drivers in the area. Things like cinemas and pubs and retail and office and all that type of things and we now put together a bit of a matrix and actually give a weighted score to each of the things we know help our business. That helps us decide in a more scientific fashion. or: The problem of Cervantes' origin became after that into a tough matter. Some experts believed that the Cervantes from Alcázar, in the times of the Lepanto Battle, was in the age of a child, more concerned about gathering nests and that type of things than about fighting as a soldier. and for "this": I believe lot of people who involved fishery industries in Mexico Gulf are suffering now but as for economic issues, U.S government and other countries will support them and give an utmost response to it. Important thing is that we learn from this mistake and make sure this type of things will never happen in the future and protect nature environment thus we have to take this technology to get energy from water very seriously. I really hope this technology will be available and used for everybody as soon as possible. Is there a rule describing proper usage of these words in cases like this? (or should I have written "..in cases like that"?) | eng_Latn | 16,988 |
"returns" or "is returning", which one of the followings is true? The question is, "Fay ------ from her holiday tomorrow evening." Fill the blank with "is returning" or "returns". Which one would be true if used? | "We plan" versus "we are planning" Is there a semantic difference between the following two sentences? In the future, we are planning to migrate our tool to the Z3 solver. In the future, we plan to migrate our tool to the Z3 solver. | Is this a grammatically correct line in a poem: “Will he roll the dice, and follow it to Vegas?”? I want to use the following line in a poem: "Will he roll the dice, and follow it to Vegas?" A couple of things to note; firstly, obviously I'm using "roll the dice" in both a figurative/idiomatic sense (as in taking a risk), and in a somewhat more literal sense (painting the image of the person actually following the dice that have been rolled to Las Vegas). That being said, my confusion here is if I can get away with using "follow it" or if I need to say "follow them" .... As I've read online "dice" traditionally refers to more than one die (i.e., the plural of die), but in the modern usage, "dice" can also be used to refer to the singular (i.e., just one die). So, it seems like if I was referring to the image of just one die, then the way I phrased it could be correct. However, the image I'm trying to paint is the one usually associated with the phrase "roll the dice" (i.e., rolling two dice)... So could "follow it" still be considered acceptable in this sense... or would I need to use "follow them"?... And if not referring to the dice themselves, could using, could the "it" be taken to refer to the act of rolling the dice, or would that not work either? Thanks so much in advance!! | eng_Latn | 16,989 |
my friends who have cars a. My cousins who have cars like the new regulation. Can I use use (a) if all my cousins who are car-owners own one car each? b. My cousins who have a car like the new regulation. Can I use (b) if all of my cousins who are car-owners have more than one car each? Can I use (b) if some of my cousins who are car-owners have more than one car each? | Is “all women who are mothers of daughters” right? Is the expression All women who are mothers of daughters are here. correct? I mean every woman who has at least one daughter is here. | Is this a grammatically correct line in a poem: “Will he roll the dice, and follow it to Vegas?”? I want to use the following line in a poem: "Will he roll the dice, and follow it to Vegas?" A couple of things to note; firstly, obviously I'm using "roll the dice" in both a figurative/idiomatic sense (as in taking a risk), and in a somewhat more literal sense (painting the image of the person actually following the dice that have been rolled to Las Vegas). That being said, my confusion here is if I can get away with using "follow it" or if I need to say "follow them" .... As I've read online "dice" traditionally refers to more than one die (i.e., the plural of die), but in the modern usage, "dice" can also be used to refer to the singular (i.e., just one die). So, it seems like if I was referring to the image of just one die, then the way I phrased it could be correct. However, the image I'm trying to paint is the one usually associated with the phrase "roll the dice" (i.e., rolling two dice)... So could "follow it" still be considered acceptable in this sense... or would I need to use "follow them"?... And if not referring to the dice themselves, could using, could the "it" be taken to refer to the act of rolling the dice, or would that not work either? Thanks so much in advance!! | eng_Latn | 16,990 |
'Is' or 'are' – which is correct in this example? Which is correct?: "One in seven people worldwide is living on $x per day." "One in seven people worldwide are living on $x per day." | "1 in 10 are" or "1 in 10 is"? Take the examples: "One in ten children are dyslexic." "One in ten children is dyslexic." "One in ten children has dyslexia." "One in ten children have dyslexia." The "one" is singular so 2 and 3 should be correct. But the "one in ten" is a fraction" so 1 and 4 should be correct. And yet I think I usually say 1 and 3. Which is/are correct?! | "some " vs. "some of " Some of rules can be the same for most websites. vs. Some rules can be the same for most websites. I think I want to say Some of these rules can be the same for most websites. | eng_Latn | 16,991 |
"Above thing" or "thing above" I don't know which is correct, it seems both can be used? "The above gun shows..." or "the gun above shows.." Also the below gun or the gun below, which is correct? | "Above"/"below" before/after a noun I have seen sentences similar to the following: (1) See the reference above. (2) See the reference below. And, (3) See the above reference. But not, (4) See the below reference. Are all these forms acceptable? Which is/are preferred in formal writing? | "They interviewed several candidates who/whom he thought had the experience he required." They interviewed several candidates who he thought had the experience and qualifications he required. My test prep book says this should be "who" because of the subordinate clause's predicate: They interviewed several candidates who he thought had the experience and qualifications he required. I feel like it should be "whom" as it's the object of the main clause. The interviewed several candidates whom he thought had the experience and qualifications he required. Who's right? | eng_Latn | 16,992 |
Use of object pronouns after the verb "to be" and in the presence of a conjunction. The other day my friend and I were playing darts with several other players. We selected teams. When I learned that my partner would be Jordan, I enthusiastically announced, "Hey Jordan, it's you and me!" My friend objected that I should have said "Hey Jordan, it's you and I," for the same reason that one announces at the door of a friend who wonders who is outside, "It is I." I find "It is I" rather pompous, but it seems correct. "Hey Jordan, it's you and I," on the other hand, seems incorrect. What is the rule here? | "Who wants ice-cream?" — Should I say "(not) I" or "(not) me"? With the enthusiastic question of "Who wants ice-cream?", what is the more correct response? (Not) I. (Not) me. Neither response is a sentence. The first response of "(not) I" sounds stuffy, like it should be followed with an indignant sniff. The second sounds like American idiom and acceptable for casual speech. What do you say? | Making adult decisions "is" or "are" really not fun: Which is correct? Making adult decisions are/is really not fun. What is the proper answer and why? My gut says "is" but I can't explain why. | eng_Latn | 16,993 |
Is it correct to use "their" when referring to a single person when the gender is known? I have come accross this sentence: There is a 2.5% probability that whenever we measure a woman, their height will be less than 142 centimeters. Is the use of their correct here? Shouldn't it be rather her? | Is there a correct gender-neutral singular pronoun ("his" vs. "her" vs. "their")? Is there a pronoun I can use as a gender-neutral pronoun when referring back to a singular noun phrase? Each student should save his questions until the end. Each student should save her questions until the end. | What is the correct way to write 1.5 hours? I'm a bit confused in describing 1.5hrs in words. Is writing one and a half an hour correct or should it be one and half hour? E.g: I'll see you there in one and a half an hour. OR I'll see you there in one and half hour. Or is there any other correct way of writing this? | eng_Latn | 16,994 |
Using 'her' vs. 'its' to refer to a country I am currently reading Liddell Hart's "History of the Second World War", and I'm wondering why he sometimes uses her/she when talking about Japan. In my understanding of English, it should be its or their (if you want to refer to the Japanese people). For instance: From 1931 onward the Japanese were aggressively engaged in expanding their footholds on the Asiatic mainland at the expense of the Chinese, ... makes sense to me, but: It is remarkable that she deferred striking for more than four month, while trying to negotiate a lifting of the oil embargo or Until early in 1941 Japan's plan in case of war against the United States was to use her main fleet in the southern Pacific in conjunction with an attack on the Philippine Islands, ... does not. Can somebody explain why Japan is female, and are there more countries for which her should be used? | Is it a good practice to refer to countries, ships etc using the feminine form? While talking about ships and countries, is it a good practice to use the feminine form? For example: "Her economy" - while referring to a country's economy "Her flag (or deck etc)" - while referring to a ship Is this practice common? Is it used today? | Inversion/non-inversion in wh-questions with long phrases after the wh-words Can a sentence like this: "I don't know who the first man that made such and such thing in such and such place was," be grammatically correct if we don't put "was" at the end of the long phrase, that is, if we write: "I don't know who was the first man that made such and such thing in such and such place"? I can see in Google Books examples that in such cases the verb is often put after the wh-word, but I don't know if there is a grammar rule to support this. Some examples: "We do not know who was the first man who ascended above a poor and humble people to become Egypt's first king ..." "... we do not know what was the ultimate judgment of the various members of the community ..." "I do not know who was the first to suggest a connection between the problem of free will and the breakdown ..." "I do not know what was the date of this change in me, nor of the train of ideas ..." "We do not know what was the primitive text from which Codex Bezae derived its Latin or its Greek ..." "We do not know what was the practice in the days of the monarchy, but the story of Athaliah shows ..." | eng_Latn | 16,995 |
Use of plural pronoun to avoid mentioning of gender I'm aware that (at least today's) English allows the use of a plural pronoun to avoid mentioning a gender of the subject. Example: _"Everybody can do what they want to" instead of "Everybody can do what he wants to." A typical use seems to be whenever the speaker does not know the sex of the actors and thus does not want to state it wrong or to let the phrase apply to both sexes alike. As this example clearly shows, the numerus of the predicate then matches the numerus of the subject: "he wants" vs. "they want". This leads me to a dilemma if there are several predicates, associated to both the "everybody" and the neutral pronoun: "Everybody pays for what they get." The first verb feels better to be in singular case ("pays"), the latter obviously must be in plural case ("get"), yet both refer to the same entity which can hardly be singular and plural. To use plural case for both verbs ("Everybody pay for what they get") sounds strange in the beginning of the sentence, and the mixed numerus given before sounds a little as if it isn't reflexively meant, i. e. as if everybody has to pay for whatever some other group of individuals ("they") get. What is the typical solution to my problem? EDIT: To make this clear: I'm not asking about the singular they and its use, I'm asking about the "pay" vs. "pays" in my example (i. e. the verb of the "everybody") and about the observed or felt dichotomy of using a plural verb and a singular verb for the same actor in one sentence. Is there a more detailed answer to that besides "'they' can refer to a singular object and is to be used in plural form"? | Is there a correct gender-neutral singular pronoun ("his" vs. "her" vs. "their")? Is there a pronoun I can use as a gender-neutral pronoun when referring back to a singular noun phrase? Each student should save his questions until the end. Each student should save her questions until the end. | Equivalent of "both" when referring to three or more items? What would be the correct word to use when referring to three or more items, in the same manner as the word both? For example, using two words, with the word both: "There are several recommendations I have to further improve the sites — both to improve their profit, and decrease their cost." Using three words, with a blank space in place of the correct word: "There are several recommendations I have to further improve the sites — _ to improve their profit, decrease their cost and improve their usability." So, what would be the correct word to use in place of the __? | eng_Latn | 16,996 |
What possessive forms are used for mutual 1st person ownership? I want to talk to someone about the house that my wife and I own. Saying, for example, "My wife's and my house is awesome," sounds a bit funny to me. What's the best way to express this? Clarification I'm asking specifically about the grammar of multiple nouns in possessive form. I'm particularly curious if it's possible to do this with a first-person pronoun (me). I am capable of rephrasing this in other ways - my question is not how to express the idea, but about this particular grammatical construction, if it is even legal. | "My wife and I's seafood collaboration dinner" I just stumbled upon a : My wife and I's seafood collaboration dinner. How does it look? Sure enough, the top comment immediately points out that it should be "my wife's and my". However, a cross-post to the Grammar subreddit produced : It's fine as it is written. "my wife and I" is a noun phrase, functioning as a subjective pronoun in the singular and made possessive with the apostrophe. It is exactly the same as "our". It seems weird because you would never use "I's" on its own but it is not on its own here - it is part of a noun phrase. That's a rather intriguing argument. Does it hold any water? | Singular vs. Plural with Multiple Gerunds as Subject (IE: [Gerund] and [Gerund] are/is [something].) I'm trying to find out whether I should use a singular or plural verb when there are multiple gerunds as the subject of the sentence. For example: Running the correct course and keeping a steady pace are/is necessary in order to win. With either one of these by itself, "is" would be correct: Running the correct course is necessary in order to win. Keeping a steady pace is necessary in order to win. With both gerunds combined, I can't seem to figure out whether the verb should stay singular since each phrase is singular, or if it should become plural since there are two connected by "and". If we just treat the gerunds as regular nouns, then obviously it would become "are", but I'm not sure if gerunds have the exact same rules as regular nouns. I know that if the sentence was: Running the correct course and keeping a steady pace are both necessary. That "are" would be correct, but without the "both" it sounds incorrect to me. Does anyone know the official rule here? | eng_Latn | 16,997 |
Can we use "some X" when X is definite? Consider: Some men like doing housework. Vs. We interviewed ten men. Some of the men liked doing housework. Can one say "some men" in the second sentence? Can I conclude when the noun x is definite we can't use "some x"? I think it's the case for other articles like "all" and "most", right? For example We interviewed ten men. Most of the men (not most men) liked doing housework. We also can't say "some the men" can we? | "some " vs. "some of " Some of rules can be the same for most websites. vs. Some rules can be the same for most websites. I think I want to say Some of these rules can be the same for most websites. | Could "them" mean "those"? Background Nowadays, I see "them" used to mean "those" a lot. I don't know if it was as common in the past. For example, take "one of ". On researching about it, I found some people say it comes from a dialect of British English. Some others say it is a "non-standard" usage. I see this usage in Canadian English also, and it seems some people use it in a sarcastic way. Moreover, I have seen a song titled "one of them days". I also read, in the book called "A Broken Promise", "" Finally, Wikipedia says that it is a usage in (a common name for the Southern Midland dialect of American English): Pronouns and demonstratives "Them" is sometimes used in place of "those" as a demonstrative in both nominative and oblique constructions. Examples are "Them are the pants I want" and "Give me some of them crackers." Question(s): What would you say about the usage of this word? Is it correct? Could we use it in daily speech? Could this usage go beyond a specific dialect and be used in other dialects, regions, etc.? Does it really originate from Appalachian English? Why did this usage become popular among other English speakers? Note: I have already seen a similar question: However, it only says, "ungrammatical," there. This question is specific to this situation only, and there is more to it. | eng_Latn | 16,998 |
"This includes me" or "This includes myself"? Which of the following is correct - or are both of these examples grammatical? This includes me, my friend and my brother. This includes myself, my friend and my brother. EDIT NOTE: Pleas note that this question here: only talks about the use of "myself" when it refers to the same person as the Subject of the verb. This is not the case in examples (1) and (2) above. | Rules for the usage of "me" VS. "myself"? What are general guidelines for the use of "me" and "myself"? Did I describe me or did I describe Maria? OR Did I describe myself or did I describe Maria? | What does the Code of Conduct say about pronouns? Please leave any feedback or questions about this FAQ on . Two weeks ago, we to directly address concerns over pronoun usage. We tried to anticipate likely questions, but… missed the mark by quite a lot. Based on Gareth McCaughan’s excellent post, “”, we’ve gone back to the drawing board and written a new FAQ that aims to address actual questions that have been frequently asked in these discussions. If you read only one thing, the answer to question #1 under The Basics sums up our goals in publishing this guidance: It would be rude to refer to a man as "she" or a woman as "he". Some people are neither male nor female and might, for instance, ask to be referred to as "they". When someone indicates what pronouns should be used to refer to them, please use the pronouns they state as you would others. This is a learning process for most of us - from authors to readers to moderators to employees of Stack Exchange, Inc. Let’s all try to approach this with good intentions and a willingness to learn from one another. Big thanks to Gareth for leading by example here, and to everyone who has stepped up to ask and answer the important questions! What's all this stuff about pronouns in The Code of Conduct? The has two direct references to pronouns: “Use stated pronouns (when known).” “Prefer gender-neutral language when uncertain.” What does all of this mean and how can I as a user understand and follow the CoC guidance? | eng_Latn | 16,999 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.