So I am a university English Lit student of about three years, and I have to admit, I don’t exactly know the meaning of this phrase. I came across it while reading “Long Day’s Journey Into Night” and was reminded how much this phrase has always annoyed me, because I have a general idea of what it means, but couldn’t specifically define it. I am also curious as to where this phrase originated from. Any ideas?
Which of the following is correct?
It is I. It is me.
A grammar teacher mentioned to me something about the nominative case being used after the verb “to be” and not the usual objective case (”me”) that I thought it should be. He said the verb “to be” was an exception, but I can’t find anywhere that this is written down as such. Anyone any thoughts?
From a grammar test this was a correct sentence:
Dr. Stephens is one of those professors who do whatever it takes to get his point across to his students.
It still sounds odd to me, however. Should it perhaps say:
1. Dr. Stephens is a professor who does whatever it takes to get his point across to his students.
2. Dr. Stephens is one of those professors who do whatever it takes to get their point across to their students.
I recently used the phrase (?) “thisclose.” A friend asked me what it’s called when the literal writing matches the meaning. Is there a word for that? What is it?
I like to think I’m pretty swell at English grammar, punctuation, and usage, etc. But there’s at least one thing I have never gotten down, and that is, when do you use “title” versus “entitle.” For example, would I write: “She read a book titled ---”? Or is it “She read a book entitled ---”?
In what circumstances would either one be used?
I was watching the news today, and the title of a story they presented was “Legacy of Don Knott’s”.
Now, at first glance, I was positive that it was a grammatical mistake. I mean, why say “Legacy of Don Knott’s” when saying “Legacy of Don Knott” would do the job?
But then I replaced “Don Knott’s” with “his” (the phrase thus becoming “legacy of his”) and the latter phrase seemed to make sense. We say things like “that book of his”, so why not “legacy of his”?
So here comes the question: Are both the phrases “Legacy of Don Knott’s” and “Legacy of Don Knott” correct? Is there such a thing as double possesive? And why, for goodness sakes, can’t we just simply say “Don Knott’s Legacy”?!
And whatever happened to the man, anyway? Why are they all of a sudden presenting a story on his legacy? (Or, shall I say, legacy of his.)
According to the Oxford English Dictionary...
forum n. (pl. forums) 1) a meeting or medium for an exchange of views. 2) (pl. fora) (in an ancient Roman city) a public square or marketplace used for judicial and other business. Origin ME: from Latin, lit. what is out of doors.
But everywhere else I’ve looked, it seems that forums and fora are interchangable. I personally prefer to use the word forums, when referring to a group of workshops and meetings.
I want to argue for this at my work because the term fora is being used and I want to know if there’s more evidence that I’m actually correct, besides what the Oxford English Dictionary tells me.
What does it mean when someone says you have cow eyes? I’ve heard a bunch of answers but I don’t know which is right. I have been told it means:
- Your eyes kind of stick out (like Steve Buscemi) - Your eyes are different colors (I guess this is common among cows? I know it’s common among certains dogs and cats) - Your eyes have a sad look to them (cause cows look sad?) - You have a stare that suggests you are “hot to trot” - You have a blank, empty stare.
Any ideas what this really means?
I am recently married and don’t really understand how to pluralize (is that a real word?:)) my new last name, Nash. For example, if I want to have a party at my house, would I invite people to meet at “The Nashes” house or “The Nash’s” house? My husband and in-laws state that the first use is correct but my friends seem to want to use the latter version. Some enlightenment please!
Imagine the title of an essay:
A Study of Molecular-Based Reactions A Study of Molecular-based Reactions
(I’m not a scientist so ignore whether or not the title makes sense!)
Which is correct, or more widely accepted? Personally I think the first one looks best.
If you have cc’s in a letter, when you mail it, should the “copy” be signed?
Can I use a colon and a semicolon in the same sentence? Here’s my example, “There were no known friends or family members, so besides his physical symptoms he was admitted with only one certainty: his longstanding IV drug use; he had numerous track marks and was noticeably malnourished.” Is there a better way to structure this?
Why are latin expressions written differently in English and in French? Example: “ne plus ultra” in English is “nec plus ultra” in French.
A TV ad about a food company uses the phrase: I’m loving it! how can I explain the use of the verb ‘I love’ in the Present Continuous? According to the British English Grammar, some verbs such as ‘I love’ have no continuous form.
I never paid this much attention until my dad mentioned today that it’s never sounded right to him when people say “hey” instead of “hi” or “hello”. I’ve been using it this way for at least 20 years, but I looked it up in various dictionaries and haven’t yet found a definition consistent with this usage. Most references just define it as “an interjection used to call attention” or something similar and leave it at that. Any thoughts or references that might shed some light?
Does a phrase exist (english or other) that describes a situation in which something that normally would not occur takes place, solely because the circumstances surrounding it (themselves possible anomolies) make it possible.
Example: A “perfect storm” can take place because wind speeds reach the correct speed at the correct moment, water temperatures are at the right temperature at the correct time, etc., etc.
as dry as a bone as cold as ice as sick as a dog as wet as ??? a fish? water? what’s right?
Both “if” and “whether” can introduce a subordinate clause: “I was wondering if you would come” and “I was wondering whether you would come”. However, the phrase “whether or not”, as in “I was wondering whether or not you would come” is okay, but “if or not” in the same context seems not okay - google searches bring up 100 million hits for the first phrase, but just 15,000 for the second. This came up in a class I was in, and I was surprised because I do use “if or not” in informal speech; why are these two phrases different? In both cases the “or not” is redundant, if you think about it.
I hear this all the time while in a hold queue on the phone, but it sounds like bad English to me. I would prefer “...in the order in which it was received”, although that does sound a little overwrought. I just can’t think of anything better. What do you experts say?
Am I not right in thinking that the phrase “discussion forum”, as often used to refer to bulletin boards on websites, is a tautology?