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

Profile: Romany
About
User Name: Romany
Forum Rank: Advanced Member
Occupation:
Interests:
Gender: None Specified
Home Page
Statistics
Joined: Sunday, June 14, 2009
Last Visit: Wednesday, July 18, 2018 4:42:12 AM
Number of Posts: 14,144
[1.58% of all post / 4.26 posts per day]
Avatar
  Last 10 Posts
Topic: exact same clothes
Posted: Wednesday, July 18, 2018 4:24:31 AM
Agree Drago. In BE students are are corrected for using the collocation "exact same", on exactly the grounds you state.
Topic: Grammar
Posted: Wednesday, July 18, 2018 3:56:00 AM
Drago,
Not just in the UK.
"Muderess" sounds very Victorian!
Topic: Grammar
Posted: Tuesday, July 17, 2018 6:50:38 AM
Well yes. Queen Elizabeth is our queen and has ruled the United Kingdom for nearly 70 years.
Topic: Between vs between
Posted: Sunday, July 15, 2018 12:55:58 PM
I'm assuming that you mean in a book/film title? Because there's certainly no room for the word "between" in a person's title!

And yes, if it's the name of a book, film, poem, or song, every word needs to be capitalised. In a very long title e.g. "Conversations Between the North and South Concerning Trade Agreements, Treaties and Immigration" 'little' words like 'and' and 'the' are sometimes not capitalised.
Topic: Stiff
Posted: Sunday, July 15, 2018 12:48:05 PM

Foundit's "stilted" is probably the best option - because "wooden" is the only other one that comes readily to mind; and isn't as good.

BTW, Why do you want to replace "stiff"? What's wrong with it, in your opinion?
Topic: Ways Trump Insulted the Queen Exploded on Twitter
Posted: Sunday, July 15, 2018 12:42:04 PM
Lazarius -

The operative word in the quote you gave is "obligatory". In days of yore one would have run the risk of having one's head cut off or, more commonly, of being sent to The Tower.

In today's world there is no punishment for for acting like a lout in the presence of the Queen.

However there is still such a thing as good manners and protocol - and no-one comes into the Queens presence ignorant of these. The Palace issues explanations of these codes to everyone: so even those who are are louche enough not to represent their country with dignity can understand what good manners are. Thus, behaving like the gutter-snipe he is, is seen to be deliberate and calculated disrespect.

Also: it's the other way round to us: if you are someone's guest - especially in their own home - you are obliged to them: and that obligation warrants at least basic good manners. Punctuality is not just reserved for the Queen of England - in all diplomatic or even social circumstances lack of punctuality is bad behaviour of the highest order and shows blatant disrespect.

These were part of the reasons people showed up in their thousands to protest. It's why people didn't wanted him to come even close to our Queen. He, and everyone else who is invited to meet her or any monarch, has two choices: they can accept the invitation and the protocol that goes with it. Or they can consider it all an outmoded load of nonsense and decline the invitation.

This hoodlum was desperate to meet her, because he thought it would give him some sort of prestige. Instead it presented him to the world as a complete and utter slob.

None of the rest of the Royals would come within ten feet of him so she had no choice other than to go it alone. So, had she not been the Queen, but your Grandmother or Great-Grandmother, how happy would you be if someone left her standing in the hot sun, dressed in her best as a mark of respect to them, while they flaunted their disrespect to her?

I think most of us would have loved Phil to have been with her: because he wouldn't have have stood for it and would have put him in his place in public!

But we all knew he was not fit to meet her and that he would disgrace himself and his Government so, in a way, breathed a sigh of relief that he didn't act even worse. After all, as Sarries said, we have so much more of his bad behaviour, boorishness, and ignorant meddling to cope with. Not to mention the indignation that our taxes had to be spent on keeping him safe when he finally plucked up enough courage to come to a place he knew he wasn't wanted!
Topic: Please/kindly/Please kindly
Posted: Sunday, July 15, 2018 7:54:19 AM
Well observed,Dave.

I think the only time most of us remember people using "kindly" in the way Koh indicates, is when our teachers used it... And there was nothing "kind" about it!

"Kindly bring me the note that's being passed around"
"Kindly stop interrupting."

those were stern commands and you knew you HAD to obey. So we see sentences using "kindly" as orders that must be obeyed - and don't take kindly to them in the slightest!
Topic: an idiom meaning help
Posted: Sunday, July 15, 2018 7:40:58 AM

"We can't coddle you all the time."
" We can't prop you up all the time. "
"We can't shore you up all the time."
" We can't be available for you all the time. "
"We can't be checking you all the time. "
"We can't look after you all the time."
" We can't make allowances for you all the time"
"We can't be with you all the time."
"We can't be at your elbow all the time."
" We can't be here for you all the time. "
"You can't fall back on us all the time."
" We can't be your nanny/tutor all the time. "
"We can't stop you making mistakes all the time."
"We can't pull your coals out of the fire all The time."

The more I looked back, the more phrases occurred to me! Obviously it depends on who is saying it to whom (parents,teachers,colleagues,boss) and in what circumstances.

Topic: Correct expressions
Posted: Saturday, July 14, 2018 1:09:19 PM

Those are both sentences that are used regularly - but the other way round.

If you're too cold you ask for the air con. to be turned "down", if you're too warm you ask for it to be turned "up".
Topic: Blunt-spoken, coarse-tongued, profane?
Posted: Saturday, July 14, 2018 1:05:39 PM


I think BuffaloBill's suggestion of "colourfully direct" is the best. Being up-front and outspoken is being direct. There's nothing coarse or crude about it: it describes someone who is honest about their feelings and doesn't hide them behind platitudes or meaningless banalities. You know where you are with people like that: what you see is what you get.

As for the swearing bit? That's cultural. My experiences around the world have shown me that those who still find swearing "profane" or call it "using cuss words" are usually elderly or come from religious or highly conservative backgrounds.

There are also a few groups of people who think swearing is just something men do and that, for some reason, that's "manly" and forgivable, but if a woman does it it's coarse and the sky will fall on our heads.

So it would depend on who it is your description is aimed at?

If it's the last group, I wouldn't worry: it's a ridiculously outmoded concept - and they are probably not play-goers anyway. If it's religious and conservative people - also usually not avid modern theatre-goers either - a woman who was forthright and direct probably wouldn't appeal... without one even mentioning their vocabulary. But if it's people who regularly go to plays or engage in other kinds of cultural entertainment "colourful" signals that this person will probably swear, and is a bit of a character, but would add interest to the character line-up.

Whatever one writes and whomever one is writing for, what one says has always to be tailored to the expected readership.

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