Hot answers tagged homophones
“Bear with me,” the standard expression, is a request for forbearance or patience. “Bare with me” would be an invitation to undress. Source
Here's what you get: bye 1 |bī| noun 1 the transfer of a competitor directly to the next round of a competition in the absence of an assigned opponent. [From the New Oxford American Dictionary.]
Homonym. In linguistics, a homonym is, in the strict sense, one of a group of words that share the same spelling and the same pronunciation but have different meanings. Thus homonyms are simultaneously homographs (words that share the same spelling, irrespective of their pronunciation) and homophones (words that share the same pronunciation, irrespective ...
Ball as in 'sphere' comes from Norse 'bǫllr' /bɔlːr/, while ball as in 'dance party' comes from Latin 'ballare', which in turn became 'bal' (French for 'a dance'). Totally different roots, it's just one of those quirks of English having absorbed bits of so many different languages. Edit as requested to provide a bit more detail: 'Ball' meaning 'sphere' ...
According to the OED, bye is correct word. b. The position of an individual, who, in consequence of the numbers being odd, is left without a competitor after the rest have been drawn in pairs. (OED also points out a few other uses of bye in sports, but with different meanings.) And while it specifically doesn't clarify whether the competitor ...
No. "All together" is used to refer to a collection of people or things that are in the same place; for example, "The spoons are all together in the left drawer." "Altogether" means "in sum" or "in total"; for example, "Altogether, the repairs to my car cost $4000."
The answer is simple. You just need to think about how you learned your native language. By ear. Children learn how to speak their native tongue first, and only then learned the grammar and spelling. Thus, many will "sound" a word out to spell it. English language learners, on the other hand, usually learned how to spell a word first, and focused on ...
Remove the modal verb (would, could, should, etc.) from the sentence, and see if it still makes sense. I would have won. -> I have won. (works!) *I would of won. -> I of won. (nope, that's not right...) You can be sure that if the sentence is supposed to have have, then you can always remove the modal.
I have never seen it written phantasy much, except in medical texts. The NOAD seems to confirm this: phantasy (noun): variant spelling of fantasy (restricted to archaic uses or, in modern use, to the fields of psychology and psychiatry).
The real difference between these pronunciations is that use (the noun) is pronounced with an /s/ and use (the verb) is pronounced with an /z/ (except in the construction used to). In American English, vowels that are followed by a voiced consonant are longer than those followed by an unvoiced consonant (see this wikipedia page), and this is the source of ...
Defuse the situation is the more sensible of the two: It employs the metaphor that the situation is a bomb, and may explode. Defusing it will render it harmless. Diffusing a situation would mean to spread it out and make it less concentrated. You can make a case that the intensity of the situation needs diffusion to make it less dangerous, but I believe ...
The word is eggcorn a word or phrase that results from a mishearing or misinterpretation of another, an element of the original being substituted for one which sounds very similar. We even have an eggcorn tag.
complimentary: free on the house complementary: to go with something
First of all, it helps to enclose the phrase in quotes when googling: "bear the shame" — 607,000 "bare the shame" — 83,400 Secondly, having looked through the first 10 pages of the Google results for "bare the shame", exposing would not work in most of those contexts at all, it's quite obviously carrying. And quite a few of those contexts feature ...
The OED notes that fantasy and phantasy are usually considered separate words in modern use: In mod. use fantasy and phantasy, in spite of their identity in sound and in ultimate etymology, tend to be apprehended as separate words, the predominant sense of the former being ‘caprice, whim, fanciful invention’, while that of the latter is ‘imagination, ...
The words flour and flower do not only have the same root, but they were also spelled the same until around 1830. (See etymonline.) Not only did Shakespeare rhyme hour with flower, but he also sometimes spelled them the same. It fears not policy that Hereticke, Which works on leases of short numbred howers, But all alone stands hugely pollitick, ...
Your is almost universally used these days for you're. This is simply not true. A quick glance through newspapers, magazines, websites and other particularly current writing, finds many instances of you're. It is true that your is sometimes written when one means you're. A large number of these are mistakes rather than the result of ignorance or ...
Context. "The Black Knight" isn't going to provide enough context to determine which (k)night is meant; "The black knight rode in on his charger" probably will. The presence of an article might help; knight will usually need some determiner and night often does not. However you will still encounter a sentence like "the night was dark" where you have to ...
Since a homophone is defined as: Each of two or more words having the same pronunciation but different meanings, origins, or spelling, e.g., new and knew. I guess that means that may ("allowed to"), May (the month), and Mae (the female name) are homophones.
You're is a contraction of you are whereas your solely refers to possession. So Your free to... is entirely incorrect.
I don't know about regional or dialect changes, but "use" has only one pronunciation for what concerns the "vowel" sound in it. The last consonant sound changes, being [s] and [z]. It's [juːs] when it's a noun and [juːz] when it's a verb, becoming [ju:st] when we have the construction "used t-o".
Both pronunciations are used in the US, but only root in the UK.
In my local dialect (Toronto, Canada), it is root for a roadway, and rowt (but that's very approximate; see Canadian raising ) for the act of specifying a path (and rowter for the computer networking device)
For most English dialects, there is no difference in pronunciation between rowed and rode, and so there would be no "way to pronounce these words unambiguously so a discerning listener could tell them apart."
The contraction is not dead, despite what Nietzsche may have argued. It is simple a misuse in written English. And some people may also just be writing too quickly and not proof their work. Rest assured, you’re is alive and well in the kingdom of the English tongue.
'Defuse is a verb, which means 'to remove the fuse'. But it is often used figuratively, such as in 'UN forces were sent in to help defuse the tensions between the warring parties'. 'Diffuse, is also a verb, meaning to 'spread over a wide area, or among a larger number of people' such as 'the problem is how to diffuse power without creating anarchy'. But ...
According to OED, the word defuse is coined in 1943, by combining de- and fuse(v.) (which is invented in 1680s as a back-formation from fusion, a noun came from Middle French fusion, from Latin fusionem), while the verb form of diffuse is coined in 1520s from Latin diffusus, past participle of diffundere "to pour out or away". Despite the similarities in ...
I think that the same goes for all languages. Native speakers that do not take the time to learn their own language properly, or that do not read much, tend to misspell homophones. In French, for instance, many people will replace infinitive form (« manger », to eat) with past participle (« mangé », eaten), or confuse « ses » and « ces » (his,her vs these). ...
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slang_terms_for_money: ...the $20 bill [can be referred to] as a "double sawbuck," or a "Jackson"
Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible