Is English Your Second Language?
Want to make sure that there are no embarrassing errors in your job application, résumé, or marketing copy? Don’t want to sound awkward or strange? We can help you.
Upload your Microsoft Word (.docx) file here:
Or, share your Google Doc with firstname.lastname@example.org. Within seconds, you will receive a notification with our price, and a link to place your order.
Once we have received your order, we will edit your document within 24 hours. All our editors are American (mostly New Yorkers). We do not outsource overseas. Learn More »
Recently on Discussion Forum
I was quite comfortable with the concept of direct and indirect speech that had been drummed into my head by a succession of teachers at the schools I attended in the 50s and 60s.
However the term “indirect speech”, like so many other facets of the English language, has now apparently undergone a change.
At least that is what one noted linguist would have us believe.
As in: the pie charts give information about the water used for residential, industrial and agricultural purposes ...
To me, “give” here sounds crude, as if the writer could not come up with the right verb; whereas “provide” sounds more appropriate, albeit just a bit high official.
So in an English exam I would have to mark the writer down? Am I correct in my thinking?
“I had a talk with so and so,” is a common phrase, so I would imagine that “I had a small talk with so and so,” is equally correct. But “small talk” appears to be treated as an uncountable noun most of the time. Is it countable or uncountable? If both, in what contexts does it become one or the other?
I’ve been listening to Van Morrison’s “Friday’s Child” for quite some time now because I love this song so much. I tried to look up the meaning of ” Friday’s Child” but onbly found a reference to an old rhyme. Can anybody tell me the meaning of the saying “Friday’s Child” and when and why it is used? Many thanks.
“By securing a permanent US commitment to the defence of all its members from 1949 onwards, Nato changed the calculus confronting potential aggressors.”
appeared in this Daily Telegraph article.
I think I grasp what the author is getting at, but it does seem a most unusual and perhaps incorrect use of “calculus.”
Or am I behind the times once again?