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

Profile: leonAzul
About
User Name: leonAzul
Forum Rank: Advanced Member
Occupation: musician, computer consultant
Interests: reading, bicycling, taijiquan
Gender: None Specified
Home Page
Statistics
Joined: Thursday, August 11, 2011
Last Visit: Sunday, July 23, 2017 2:49:15 PM
Number of Posts: 7,973
[0.97% of all post / 3.66 posts per day]
Avatar
  Last 10 Posts
Topic: Graph description
Posted: Sunday, July 23, 2017 2:38:21 PM
In addition to what FounDit has suggested, I would not describe them as "mail companies", but rather as "delivery services".

"Make it go away, Mrs Whatsit," he whispered. "Make it go away. It's evil."
Topic: I am a not looking scabs doctor
Posted: Sunday, July 23, 2017 2:28:47 PM
Joe Kim wrote:
Thank you everyone.

Not scary looking docor. Scabs--the hard dark layer over a wound on skin. And a doctor who wouldn't look at scabs on the skin while treating the wound.

(It's just children's play)

What would be the right answer?



As child's play, the more natural version would be "a scabs-looking doctor", as in a doctor who examines and treats scabs, but that is far from standard English. A more mature child might improvise: "I am not a scab healer; show that to the nurse!"

"Make it go away, Mrs Whatsit," he whispered. "Make it go away. It's evil."
Topic: You will hear a man talking/talk about his hobby.
Posted: Sunday, July 23, 2017 2:00:21 PM
EnglishFanatic92 wrote:
Hello all!


1) You will hear a man talking about his hobby.

2) You will hear a man talk about his hobby.

In which context could I use the second example? Could the second one have the same meaning as the first one in certain situations?

I thought I knew the rule for these verbs of senses but it seems to me it works differently with the future tenses. But I might be wrong.

Thanks.


I hear the difference as being quite subtle. Sentence 1) means literally hearing the man uttering words in a particular instance. Sentence 2) means something more like hearing a man expressing himself on a particular topic. In most cases, the interpretation is the same. The difference would come about if greater emphasis were to be made on the sounds a man is making or the ideas he is expressing.

"Make it go away, Mrs Whatsit," he whispered. "Make it go away. It's evil."
Topic: IF/WHEN in this sentence and context
Posted: Sunday, July 23, 2017 1:51:31 PM
EnglishFanatic92 wrote:
Hello all :)

I have got the following sentence:

As well as the streets that sell a wide range of clothes and shoes, there are also streets famous for high quality antiques. Unfortunately, most of the bargains disappeared many years ago.
However, if (when??) you look around carefully, you could still come across an interesting souvenir.


Is it true that "when" would not be correct here? My teacher told me that in colloquial speech it might occur but it is not something she would recommend that I use. In other words - it would NOT be a standard language. Is she right? Please, tell me.

Thank you very much.


Your teacher is right. The word "if" usually sets up a subjunctive-conditional (or the relatively tensed equivalent) pair of clauses, whereas the word "when" typically requires the two clauses to be the same tense and mood. Informally, "if" and "when" are often interchangeable, so be aware of it, but you shouldn't make it a habit in your own speech.



"Make it go away, Mrs Whatsit," he whispered. "Make it go away. It's evil."
Topic: difference between religion and morality
Posted: Sunday, July 23, 2017 10:59:00 AM
Drag0nspeaker wrote:

Religion your beliefs about the beginnings of the universe, its purpose, man's role in it and so on.
(This even makes atheism a religion basically.)


This is where I respectfully disagree. Historically, and even in the present times, there are a number of "congregations" that are bound together not so much by a common credo, theology, dogma, or even institutional hierarchy, but are rather formed around traditional rites and rituals which express communal religiosity. There is a folkloric tradition as well that touches on creation stories and eschatology, yet these are mostly considered "true" in the sense that they incarnate principles based on observable natural phenomena and human behavior. To be sure, there are the superstitious who take these things literally, but the well-informed understand them correctly and take them to heart as guidance, not literal law.

An historical example is Buddhism. The original teachings attributed to Siddhārtha Gautama say nothing at all of theology, and in fact would be mostly described as naturalistic. To be sure, there are many references to techniques that facilitate escape (moksha) from the cycle of rebirth (samsara). As summed up in the catchphrase, "Be here now", this has little to do with the supernatural, but rather a great deal to do with the common human feeling of a need to continually re-invent oneself, a metaphorical renaissance. It was Siddhārtha Gautama's insight that setting a course for continuous improvement based on real exigencies and needs would free a person from that feeling. Yet as with so many other great initiatives, it didn't take long for various sects to arise among his disciples that included specific rituals and creeds.

Yet another example would be the so-called animist religions in the world today. The sum of their theology is largely similar to the deistic point of view, a distant and unknowable Creator who set the universe in motion but is no longer involved in it, and a world of forces that are personified as "gods" (loa, djinn, devi and deva, angels, etc.) that are not so much worshipped as they are propitiated and respected. Interestingly, I am not aware of any of these that hold a particular story or text as canon, but rather consider them as inspirational rather than The Inspred Inerrant Word of The Eternal.



"Make it go away, Mrs Whatsit," he whispered. "Make it go away. It's evil."
Topic: Is religion the opium of the people?
Posted: Sunday, July 23, 2017 9:53:27 AM
Харбин Хэйлунцзян 1 wrote:


will wrote:
my point has always been that we should not base any ideologies on beliefs without reason.

Did I say we should? But the only time atheists could come to power they managed to turn science into ideology.



Are you sure you are not a "red neck"? That last comment sounds like something straight out of the John Birch Society's playbook.

The plain but simple truth is that Communism was not a philosophical stance but rather a power trip that initially sought to usurp the wealth and authority of the Tsar and his Orthodox partners. Marxism was a passport of convenience, as it were, as a means to convince the working man to redirect his tithes from the Church to the party leadership's pockets. In truth, the so-called Communists were not so much Marxist, as they were followers of Nietsche, as in Sie waren der Wille zur Macht.

Furthermore, this is not the first time a government was formed based on secular or atheistic principles. There was a certain Akhenaten who abolished the state supported priesthood and tried to establish a personal monolatristic rite that would be separated from public authority. That took place over 16 centuries before Constantine established Christianity as the state religion, and 32 centuries before Trotsky was a twinkle in his father's eye.

Yet that is really besides the point of this topic, which is: What did Marx mean by "[religion] is the opium of the people", and does it make sense?

"Make it go away, Mrs Whatsit," he whispered. "Make it go away. It's evil."
Topic: the idiot
Posted: Sunday, July 23, 2017 8:39:46 AM
Харбин Хэйлунцзян 1 wrote:
leonAzul wrote:
One way to interpret this is that the speaker recognizes that he himself is the "ignorant one" [...], and not the persons who are attacking him.

There's nothing about him thinking they were idiots.

That's the point. By the use of the definite article, more is suggested than what is literally stated.



Харбин Хэйлунцзян 1 wrote:
leonAzul wrote:
In everyday English, "an idiot" is someone who is foolish, or not completely aware of what is going on around them. [...] The change in article indicates that a more particular meaning is intended.

I do not quite understand this. How do I guess what particular meaning should be applied?


By reading more English, engaging in conversations with native speakers, and asking questions when something is not clear. Eventually, the natural "logic" of the language will become second nature to you.

The story you are reading appears not to have been written in simple declarative language, but is rather more creative. I'm sure quite a few native speakers would notice the unusual article or merely ignore it.

"Make it go away, Mrs Whatsit," he whispered. "Make it go away. It's evil."
Topic: the idiot
Posted: Sunday, July 23, 2017 7:42:54 AM
Харбин Хэйлунцзян 1 wrote:
A Fountain Filled With Blood, by Julia Spencer-Fleming

Quote:
Another thump, more crunching, several whoops almost drowning out the stifling beat of the bass. Dvorak's hand froze on the door handle. The idiot. He was the idiot.

Why is it not 'an idiot'?



One way to interpret this is that the speaker recognizes that he himself is the "ignorant one" (the literal etymological meaning of "idiot"), and not the persons who are attacking him. In everyday English, "an idiot" is someone who is foolish, or not completely aware of what is going on around them. (There is a neologism gaining traction, "obliviot", that combines the ideas of oblivious and idiot.) The change in article indicates that a more particular meaning is intended.

Without further context, I might also recognize that as a reference to Dostoyevsky.

"Make it go away, Mrs Whatsit," he whispered. "Make it go away. It's evil."
Topic: glue
Posted: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 8:17:54 AM
nani_n wrote:
leonAzul Thank you for answering.
These wires are not broken. If they were broken, we should solder them.


Understood. ;-)

Even in engineering jargon, in English one would need to be more specific and, as Drag0speaker has suggested, state that the damage is to the insulation, which requires varnish, epoxy, enamel, etc. to repair, and glue or epoxy to hold the form of the toroid or choke.

ETA

In some jargon, especially with regard to audio transducers such as electric guitar pickups, the process of immersing a coil in wax, epoxy, glue etc. to hold the form and reduce vibration is called "potting".

"Make it go away, Mrs Whatsit," he whispered. "Make it go away. It's evil."
Topic: a time machine?
Posted: Tuesday, July 18, 2017 9:00:05 AM
Gary Burton - Time Machine

"Make it go away, Mrs Whatsit," he whispered. "Make it go away. It's evil."

Main Forum RSS : RSS
Forum Terms and Guidelines. Copyright © 2008-2017 Farlex, Inc. All rights reserved.