The Free Dictionary  
mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest Forum Search | Active Topics | Members

Profile: mactoria
User Name: mactoria
Forum Rank: Advanced Member
Gender: None Specified
Home Page
Joined: Wednesday, August 13, 2014
Last Visit: Friday, September 21, 2018 8:18:41 PM
Number of Posts: 587
[0.07% of all post / 0.39 posts per day]
  Last 10 Posts
Topic: Is "enactment" the right word?
Posted: Wednesday, September 19, 2018 1:52:59 AM
Robjen hasn't responded yet to Romany's request for clarification on what 'antique club' refers to, so I'll just toss in my agreement with Sureshot's suggestion that the word "ploy" is the better word to be used in the sentence's context. The sentence describes a situation in which the seller is using a ploy/strategy/scam/etc to drive up the price buyers are willing to pay for the seller's other merchandise (ie if Buyer A is willing to pay $ for the Seller's antique, then gosh the Seller must be selling really legitimate antiques at a good price).

There are 'antique clubs' as well as 'antique furniture clubs' and 'antique auto clubs,' etc. It might have been less confusing to some if the club had a name (e.g. New York City Antiques Club, Jones' Antique Club, etc.) or was capitalized as a proper name. I'm reading the sentence literally and as it would commonly be read (at least in the US I believe) to refer to a place where antiques are sold, not where a re-enactment of something would occur which seems least likely. The choice of 'enactment' is an inaccurate word choice for the assumed context (a place/club where antiques are sold), which seems to be why Robjen asked if it was correct or not.
Topic: Trump is Taking Children from Parents Who Are Asylum Seekers
Posted: Saturday, September 15, 2018 12:20:41 AM
This thread seems to have a long life, because the original issue --- detention of children away from their parents at the US/Mexico border --- just doesn't ever get resolved.

We/media focused so intensively on those children just recently separated at the border from their parents under the new Trump policy, the fact that there were thousands of children and adolescents already in detention around the country never really came up. 12,800 adolescents, mainly those who came alone without a parent (or got separated from a parent before ICE took them into custody) is a huge number of children for the US to have in custody for any amount of time, much less indefinitely as Hope123 informs us from Thursday's announcement. As for the indefinite detention policy, I take solace only in that the ACLU, RAICES, and other advocacy/civil rights organizations will be filing for an injunction shortly to stop this policy from being put into effect. Of course, the Administration also is known for flouting court rulings and implementing policies regardless of what our legitimate courts say.

But back to the existing 12,800 adolescents in detention now around the US: aside from issues of humanity and compassion and due process, US citizens should be in arms because we're paying huge amounts of money for their care/housing while ICE and the federal courts twiddle their thumbs. Earlier this week Senator Jeff Merkley made public information showing that the Feds have transferred $20milion or more this year from non-immigration line items (e.g. FEMA...right before a big hurricane) to pay for these incarcerations; the Feds didn't announce these transfers or the reason for them, they did them in the dark.

These young people are being held in a variety of environments, many in the child-version of 'private prisons,' a bad concept that some states and now the Federal gov't have embraced. 'Private prisons' are less accountable and less accessible to those who want to assure safe and decent accommodations. They aren't cheap for the taxpayer (private prisons once were advertised as a cheaper way to incarcerate prisoners, to get around paying union wages as well as a faster-to-build option for states with crime problems and inadequate jail space), and depending on how DHS/HHS wrote and supervises the contracts with them, may be a honeypot for the investors who scrape off a big-sized chunk for profits so money for food, quality housing, trained and screened staff, etc. is inadequate. Even those lucky enough not to be detained in institutional 'private prisons for kids,' are taking up the already inadequate child foster/foster-like system; across the country county child agencies go begging to find homes for kids removed from parents in prison or found abusive/negligent. What are we doing with almost 13,000 non-American kids under gov't custody for long periods of time, why won't the Feds increase the number of Federal judges and prosecutors to move these kids in/out of the system: let them live with sponsors or let them have refugee status, or send them back to their home countries. But don't keep adolescents in limbo for long periods of time during their developmental phase, many in institutional prison-like environments.

Topic: Op ed
Posted: Sunday, September 9, 2018 12:57:47 AM
Pantuflas is correct based on a search of definitions. And "op-ed" (or "op ed") stands for 'opposite the editorial page' instead of what most of - me included - though was 'opinion editorial.' It's name is derived from the fact that in most if not all major papers that publish 'op-eds,' it's positioned on the page opposite, or across from, the official editorial page written by the paper's own paid staff.
Topic: hardworking
Posted: Sunday, September 9, 2018 12:51:11 AM
Koh Elaine: Interesting question. The Cambridge and Collins on-line dictionaries indicate that in both the UK and US it should be "hard-working." However, the Google Ngram analysis shows that a few decades ago "hardworking" became the more popular spelling, though both spellings are used. So it seems technically it should be "hard-working" but in practice we use both spellings, with more analyzed printed material using "hardworking." So as NKM indicates, I guess either spelling is acceptable in everyday usage. A strict grammarian/speller (as in a teacher) might require it to be written "hard-working" though.
Topic: Lower than crouching poison
Posted: Wednesday, September 5, 2018 2:34:39 AM
Joe Kim: I know what sleeping position you mean, but can't think of a single word or phrase that describes it. It isn't the embryo position (the face is sideways instead of downward in the embryo) or the spread-eagle/face-down position (spread-eagle means arms/legs out or up, while a turtle pulls arms/legs in and under itself as you described). I know a few people, mainly young children, who sleep as you describe: face-down with arms and legs pulled in under a person gets older, most of us lose the limberness to get into this position, but it is cozy! Good luck getting the answer you're looking for.
Topic: Trump is Taking Children from Parents Who Are Asylum Seekers
Posted: Saturday, August 11, 2018 9:16:17 AM

So I googled (using several different key phrases) about the child who allegedly died in custody at the US border, and at least as of early August 11th, there is no proof that a child did indeed die 'in custody at the border.' As well, the stories that hit the media on August 1st, quoting immigration advocates who would provide no name, dates, or facts, indicate that the child (if he/she exists) died after he/she had been held in custody at the Dilley relocation center in Texas, not during custody, though allegedly negligent care while in custody of ICE/border authorities led to the alleged death. I saw a couple of media stories that quoted a tweet (tweets now seem to be the official communication of all federal gov't agencies these days) from an ICE representative flatly denying a child had died in custody...then asking the immigrant advocates for a name and some details so they could research whether it was true or not. Flatly denying something reflexively, then asking for info so it can be researched is a dead give away that our Fed gov't agencies are being running politically and defensively, instead of neutrally and according to their legal missions. So a child could have died post-custody, perhaps or from poor care under ICE custody, or it could be a false rumor calculated to inflame already high levels of anger.

To be clear: I don't support the 'no tolerance' ICE program or how it's been implemented; it horrified me too. But "fake news" and "fake facts" are wrong no matter whose side they come from. Those against the way the Trump Admin has handled border refugees and undocumented crossers only give ammunition to those supportive of the Admin and hold back the drive to get us going back in the direction of adhering to facts, truth, the Constitution, the American way, American values. Let those in the Admin and who support the Admin (in this as well as the Russia investigation, jacked up tariffs, insulting NATO, etc.) who try to make truth and facts unnecessary and inconvenient things in their effort to divide us be obvious in their deceit; if both or all sides are deceitful, then how can we reasonably expect people to see the light? I may be foolish, but I still hope that when most Americans are pounded with the weight of real facts, they'll see what the right side of matters is and take the country back in the right direction.

So I felt the need to weigh here. My argument is that we have to deal with facts and the truth, not rumors, gossip, fake facts, or hyperbole.

Topic: My kind of loyalty was loyalty to one's country, not to its institutions or its office-holders. The country is the real...
Posted: Thursday, August 9, 2018 1:02:22 AM
Timely quote for Americans (and for other countries undergoing leadership shifts toward autocracies). A definition for patriotism really, though for me I think patriotism in the US should include loyalty to our institutions as they have been conceived in our Constitution...not perhaps as they get distorted from time to time by political or social whims. Loyalty to one's country and the basis (ie Constitution in the US) on which it's conceived is patriotic; loyalty, particularly blind loyalty to specific individuals or platforms can be the opposite of patriotism if the individual/platform is inconsistent with the country's constitution/mission.
Topic: Progressive Liberals Get Their Own "Disease"
Posted: Friday, August 3, 2018 12:35:14 AM
The import of the cited article isn't it's subject, it's the author. Tammy Bruce is a purposely controversial 'celebrity' who has for a few decades now been on one side or the other of just about every real or potentially controversial issue. She was president of NOW for some years, pro-choice to the point of advocating beating up anti-abortion protestors, then somewhere along the line she leaped to being aggressively anti-choice. She's been anti-gay, but now calls herself bisexual though sometimes she's a lesbian and other times she's been heterosexual. She used to advocate liberal issues, now she's a radical conservative contributor to Fox News, commenting on all sort of matters regardless of her expertise. She likes to make fun of people she disagrees with, embracing the epithet "snowflake" for people who were upset by Trump's victory; one of her most recent demeaning statements was about a little kid with autism who, when accidentally hit by VP Pence in a room, asked Pence for an apology...and then she had to walk back her demeaning of the kid as a "snowflake" when she was told (she didn't bother to get the facts first) that he was autistic and had been taught to stand up for himself when hit (being autistic and young, he didn't have the ability to make a lot of distinctions between accidents, the mash of being in a political room, etc.). Bruce grabs at headlines and either makes fun of the issue/people involved, or takes a contrary view, depending on what would make the biggest splash for her. The fact that Bruce is still whipping the dead horse of pro-Clinton voters feeling negative about Trump winning, long after everyone else has moved on to other matters is indicative of her style: take a controversial side of a new issue, or whip up frenzy about an old issue that no one cares about anymore, anything to be in the headlines and get a few minutes of publicity. To paraphrase an old adage (there is no there, there): there is no real Tammy Bruce there.
Topic: Does "staff" refer to both paid and unpaid staff?
Posted: Sunday, July 29, 2018 12:12:07 AM
Koh Elaine: I think in normal US English conversation, most us would use the word 'staff' to mean both paid and volunteer workers in a place/store. We might make the distinction of calling some 'paid staff' and some being 'unpaid staff' or 'volunteer staff.' But practically speaking, we tend to say a place is 'staffed' these days. 'Manned' might also be used, but isn't used as much by most people because of the gender identification inherent in 'manned' when some workers may well be (or could be at some point) female instead of male.
Topic: ward
Posted: Sunday, July 29, 2018 12:06:19 AM
Koh Elaine: I didn't check other dictionaries since another commenter did, but I inserted 'warded' into the TFD dictionary function and the it does come up, but it only refers to something that is ridged or notched, like a key or lock. Per the TFD dictionary, which I think isn't the only or best dictionary reference but is handy here, 'warded' has nothing at all to do with a hospital ward, or being admitted to a hospital ward. However, it does seem that in some places where English is spoken to some extent, it may have been used as your example sentence suggests, ie as another way of saying a person has been admitted to a hospital ward. As several people have written though, it's not standard or common or even heard by the average American or British speaker of English (I don't even think the average English speaker would use 'warded' to refer to the notching of a key).

The most common way of saying what you're example is about would be "admitted to the hospital" and these days in the US at least, a 'ward' is a section of a hospital that contains numerous rooms with one or two beds in each. The old days of 'wards' being large open rooms with 4, 8, 12 or more beds/cots for patients is pretty much gone, except possibly in real rural or poor areas of the US.

Main Forum RSS : RSS
Forum Terms and Guidelines | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2008-2018 Farlex, Inc. All rights reserved.