This is a forum to discuss the gray areas of the English language for which you would not find answers easily in dictionaries or other reference books.
Do You Have a Question?
Andrew Cuomo, in his popular COVID press conferences, often uses the words “dose” and “dosage” interchangeably (at least so it seems). Here is an example:
“We have the operational capacity to do over 100,000 doses a day — we just need the dosages.”
Here is another:
“To date, New York has administered 2.5 million dosages, with about 10% of New Yorkers receiving their first dose. Ninety-two percent of dosages allocated to the state to date have been used.”
I thought “dosage” refers to the amount in a dose, like x milligrams. A single dosage can have multiple milligrams, so, when you pluralize “dosage,” what exactly are you referring to, if not the number of doses?
I recently ran across the working word in a document that was: “re-substantial.”
Even if it were only listed as "resubstantial," my question is this: Is this even a real word? If it is, what on earth does it actually mean?
Your help is greatly needed.
1. You don’t know how I am delighted to have you as a friend
2. You don’t know how delighted I am to have you as a friend.
3. I hope one day I can do something for you to show you how you are lovable in my heart and mind.
4. I hope one day I can do something for you to show you how loved you are in my heart and mind.
Sentences 2 and 4 are correct; sentences 1 and 3 are not. Please could you explain why? Thank you.
Is it grammatically ok to use the adjective “respective” with a singular noun ?
Many dictionaries such as Longman define the term “respective” as follows.
used before a plural noun to refer to the different things that belong to each separate person or thing mentioned.
But, I often see “respective” used with a singular noun as follows (cited from an Internet site).
Each of the Division’s three regional offices - in Chicago, New York, and San Francisco - handles criminal matters arising in its respective area and serves as the Division’s liaison with U.S. attorneys, state attorneys general, and other regional law enforcement agencies.
I wonder if the above usage is now common, though it is gramatically incorrect.
Is it possible to say “by the time we arrived at the cinema, the film was starting”? Or do I have to say “the film had started”?
Both structures sound ok to me if I use another verb (sleep) instead of “start” (“by the time I got there, he was already sleeping”) so I do not know if I am using the structure right (perhaps I should use “when” and not “by the time”) or if it is the verb “start” (due to its meaning) what makes “by the time we arrived, the film was starting” sound strange.
I’ve read a sentence like this:
Not only did George buy the house, but he also remodeled it.
I think this counts as a complex sentence, but I want to get some extra opinions. Doesn’t “Not only did George buy the house” modify “remodeled,” thus making the first clause dependent? In common English usage, the position of the subject “George” after “did” is fine in an interrogative sentence, but it’s not in a declarative sentence. Does the departure from standard declarative syntax suggest that the first clause is not independent (and therefore dependent)?
In our office we are advocates for our client and in representing what we do with a client we have times that we advocate for our clients. I am under the impression that you can advocate for your client to do something with them and several of my co workers disagree stating that you can only advocate for them to receive something with another provider or resource. Who is corrent? examples:
Can you correctly say:
“the care support provider provided advocacy in encouraging the client to participate in therapy” or the “Care manager advocated with the client to participate in therapy weekly.”
Can we advocate for a client to do something that they are recommended to do. Using advocated in the place of “encouraged”
office question responses appreciated.
I have recently been seeing rejections of many phrases with ‘of’ in them because they are “less concise.” An example of this would be changing “All six of the men were considered dangerous” to “All six men were considered dangerous.” Recently, someone corrected a sentence I wrote and it just doesn’t sound right even though it may be concise. They changed “There are six species of snakes and four species of butterfly on the list” to “There are six snake species and four lizard species on the list.”
Bonus question: Is it “species of butterfly” or “species of butterflies”?