Reputation
102,524
Next tag badge:
390/400 score
81/80 answers
Badges
24 186 343
Newest
 Nice Answer
Impact
~13.3m people reached

Apr
30
awarded  Nice Answer
Apr
29
comment Pronunciation of /ə/ followed by /r/ in words such as “history”, “accelerate”, “memorize”, etc.
I'm not quite Jonathon Woss, but you're right to suspect I'm pretty sparing with my r's. Even flaw and floor are normally homophones to me, so the chances of me enunciating an /r/ after a schwa at the end of a word are pretty much zero. I can in principle differentiate flaw/floor with unnatural / exaggerated enunciation of the /w/, but since I'm not-rhotic and can't "roll" my r's, all I could do with cheetah/cheater would be to "extend" the schwa for the latter, and hope my audience knew what that meant! :)
Apr
29
comment Simultaneous usage past & present Part. in the same sentence
The man who has never failed has never tried - first recorded 1876.
Apr
28
comment What are other ways to say “he failed to realize that…”?
I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because although OP may be unaware of this, it's an open-ended request for "writing advice".
Apr
28
comment Pronunciation of /ə/ followed by /r/ in words such as “history”, “accelerate”, “memorize”, etc.
For me, I think apart from the initial consonant, marine / serene is another one of those pairings like prints / prince, where although I might like to think I'm saying them differently, if a linguist got down and dirty with an oscilloscope he'd prove conclusively that I'm just imagining things (being influenced by orthography rather than the actual mechanics of articulation).
Apr
28
comment Pronunciation of /ə/ followed by /r/ in words such as “history”, “accelerate”, “memorize”, etc.
@PellMel: My (two-syllable) history certainly doesn't rhyme with story. But it doesn't normally even have a schwa, so I agree your general point that OP is making too much of pronunciations as given in dictionaries. For words like this there's a lot of scope for "regional and personal variation".
Apr
28
comment Using “as” in an introductory clause
@Carrie: You probably haven't understood the correct use of this construction. A statement of the general form As A happened, B happened doesn't mean as = when = [immediately] after - it means as = while = at the same time as. In short, unless the people ran because / at the same time as lightning was repeatedly striking the tree, it's not really a very "accurate" usage.
Apr
28
comment Two relative clauses together before the main verb
It might be helpful to note that we could easily introduce a more specific noun to be the "subject" of the participle: He [did something], which action resulted in [some outcome].
Apr
28
comment Two relative clauses together before the main verb
He drove his car at a youth. That action resulted in the youth being flung onto the car roof. Just the same as The CEO resigned, resulting in a boardroom power struggle, where the subject could be referred to as The CEO who resigned, resulting in a boardroom power struggle, issued a statement last night explaining his actions. What don't you understand?
Apr
28
comment Archaic verb form “bare”, its semantics
@Andremoniy: I didn't mean to imply the meaning is "obvious" to the average reader on first encounter (not 1 in 10 native speakers would understand the KJV text without help). That's why more recent translations completely rephrase to, for example, *...not because he cared about the poor, but because he was a thief; he kept the common purse and used to steal what was put into it. I don't know ancient Greek so I've no idea why "continuous/repeated action" is relevant here, but apparently that's important to scholars.
Apr
28
comment Archaic verb form “bare”, its semantics
Any connection between the KJV bare as a past tense of bear = take/carry [away] and bare = open to view is purely coincidental, since the two words have completely different etymologies. I think it's pretty clear from context that the sense is of Judas bearing away = taking, stealing from the [money] bag, nothing to do with bare = naked.
Apr
27
comment What do you call a sentence that reverses parts of the first clause in a second clause that makes sense, too?
Wordplay?
Apr
27
comment if and while: are they interchangeable as contrasting agents?
In your example, the difference is that if implies the assertion might not actually be true (that's to say, If [statement A], [statement B] is equivalent to something like If we accept A as true, it can be contrasted with B). Using while more explicitly assumes that A is a known and undisputed fact to be contrasted with B.
Apr
27
comment Please help me in choosing between too / also / as well in a specific case
In your context, such a listing is pretty "stuffy" phrasing. Better might be, for example, a listing like this. I wouldn't bother with any of too, as well or also, since they're completely redundant.
Apr
27
comment Who/whom + who relative clause
Regardless of whether it might be "grammatical" (which I kinda doubt), no-one would ever say that. At the very least it's tautological - just discard who was for a more natural form.
Apr
26
comment Usage of Too… to
...it is not so long as to make you tired. You can't use too there.
Apr
26
comment “… multiple of **the** Lebesgue measure.” vs “… multiple of Lebesgue measure.”
...OOPS! I should have said the "articled" 30% in my NGram above are making the same assumption as me (i.e. - the 70% that don't include an article should really be seen as even more significant, since they're going out of their way to use what superficially seems an "unusual" form).
Apr
26
comment using the phrase “what a…” to compliment someone
What a question! You'll have to decide for yourself whether this comment is complimentary or disparaging, but I would add that I don't think the construction can ever be "neutral".
Apr
26
comment Using (or not) the word “to” at the end of a question with “be able”
I think both are "valid", but I couldn't easily explain why. I'd probably duck the issue and use ...as effectively as we can myself, but if I were forced to use able I probably wouldn't include to.
Apr
26
comment “… multiple of **the** Lebesgue measure.” vs “… multiple of Lebesgue measure.”
I've no idea what "Lebesgue measure" means, but my natural inclination would have been to suppose it's a thing, so I'd expect an article. On the other hand, most written instances don't have an article. That seems like an unlikely error, so probably the "articleless" 30% in that chart includes many people making the same "erroneous assumption" as me.