Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

5

Are there any English dialects where you isn't simply used for any possible reference to the second-person? Y'all is often considered as a rough approximation of ustedes and vosotros. Is this as far as it goes? Any others? There are still a few spots of dialects left in the northern parts of the UK and Scotland where a different second person singular ...


4

Themself is himself or herself when you don't know the gender or simply wish not to disclose it. There's even something more intricate here. There's "they" that is singular too! Don't be fooled by the them part. It's still a singular. I find that confusing too. In the future, provided that your English is at a beginner level, you might want to get more ...


4

You might try: The performance of the proposed scheme, and the dependence of that performance on various parameters, including X and Y, is reported. This is strictly a personal view — although seeing as this question is regarding style, I do not see how it could be otherwise — but the substitution of the definite article the with the determiner that ...


2

It's the regular form for 'something' all over the northern part of the English world, including southern Scotland. Very common to hear it in my Manchester (alongside owt and nowt). It's thus neither 'Scottish' nor 'Yorkshire' but of a far wider area, more or less coterminous with the old Kingdom of Northumbria. Ere's a bit out of an old translation of ...


2

This passage is indicating when "individuals are entitled to notice and hearing" of "facts that will produce adverse consequences to them". Two cases are contrasted: adverse adjudicative facts, and adverse legislative facts. The passage is saying individuals can expect be notified of the former (adjudicative) but not the latter (legislative) . The final ...


2

I have as much right as you. You have as much right as me. You and I have as much right as them. They have as much right as you and me. You have as much right as I do. They have as much right as you and I do. As a rule: Remove the 'you and' part and decide what you would say. You would say animals have the same rights as me, not animals have the same rights ...


2

This is not a reflexive pronoun usage of 'yourself' ('Have you washed yourself?') Neither is it an emphatic usage ('You yourself should phone him') or (AHDEL) 1c. Used in an absolute construction: In office yourself, you helped push the bill along. or this set expression (AHDEL) Your normal or healthy condition: Are you feeling yourself ...


2

This is one of the solutions to the classic usage problem of what pronoun to use for a generic or hypothetical human individual of indeterminate sex. See Is there a correct gender-neutral, singular pronoun (“his” versus “her” versus “their”)? This particular possibility is taken up in Caleb Thompson’s answer, and his example does involve using one ...


1

The phrase is not correct. Presumably the author started with the phrase: the object which you want to measure the movements of, and said "oh no! that ends with a preposition!" So they moved the of and obtained the object of which you want to measure the movements, changing a grammatical phrase to a patently ungrammatical one. What they ...


1

The phrase is correct, at least in the sense that it is in accordance with the precepts of Latin grammar as they have been applied to English. There is no particular reason, other than arbitrary decree and academic habit, why the sentence should have been constructed in that way (which was very likely in order to avoid ending the sentence/clause with a ...


1

I interpret 1) "I pity them who lost their money in gambling" as a reduction of 2) "I pity them -- those who lost their money in gambling" or, with a minor variation of punctuation, 3) I pity them, those who lost their money in gambling. Your query sentence 1) may not be regarded as Standard English written usage, but I think it's ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible