mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest
Profile: sureshot
User Name: sureshot
Forum Rank: Advanced Member
Gender: Male
Joined: Wednesday, September 16, 2015
Last Visit: Wednesday, May 25, 2022 9:23:44 PM
Number of Posts: 3,786
[0.35% of all post / 1.55 posts per day]
  Last 10 Posts
Topic: large vs larger
Posted: Wednesday, May 25, 2022 9:04:45 PM
Koh Elaine wrote:
Excluding the board of directors, the CEO is like an administrator who has a complete view of the company. For small companies, he or she may report to himself or herself, if the person is the founder too. In larger companies, the CEO may often have to discuss key business decisions with and answer to investors and the board of directors.

Can "large" be used in place of "larger"?



In my view, the word "larger" is okay. The word "larger" includes both mid-cap and large-scale companies. Both these type of companies are larger than small-cap companies. Using the word "large" will imply only large-cap companies and the sentence will be silent on mid-cap companies. "Larger companies" has the sense of "larger than itself companies". There are some "small- cap" companies that are on the verge of becoming mid-cap companies. Such companies also get included in the word "larger".
Topic: Diet of Worms
Posted: Wednesday, May 25, 2022 11:54:09 AM
PlanetOfGiants wrote:
Should that be Edict of Worms?

The expression "Diet of Worms" is definitely not talking about eating worms!
Both the expressions "Diet of Worms" and "Edict of Worms" exist. The "Diet of Worms" was an imperial diet held in 1521. Here the word "Diet" means "Assembly". It is clarified that an imperial diet has nothing to do with food; instead, it is basically a formal assembly or council meeting, kind of like a parliament. During the Middle Ages, the Holy Roman Empire frequently held diets (assemblies) in various cities in order to decide important political and religious questions. Heads of state, princes, royals, and church leaders typically participated in these Imperial Diets.

The Diet of Worms of 1521 was convened to determine how authorities (both political and religious) should respond to Martin Luther's teachings. The diet was held in Worms, Germany (pronounced 'Vurmz' and hence the name). So, the word "Worms" exists in the phrase "Diet of Worms".

The Diet of Worms of 1521 was presided over by Holy Roman Emperor Charles V. The diet (assembly) issued the Edict of Worms, which basically forbade anyone to shelter Martin Luther or provide him with any aid. The edict stated that Luther should be capt huured and punished as a heretic. The Diet of Worms in 1521 was a critical moment in the Protestant Reformation.

I hope this clarifies the origin of these two expressions.

Topic: National borders
Posted: Wednesday, May 25, 2022 10:36:22 AM
Penz wrote:
So it doesn't say that "compact excuse of a history" like "a hell of a history"?
I mean for derogatory effect?

In my view, it does not imply this meaning.
Topic: texting
Posted: Wednesday, May 25, 2022 10:16:38 AM
Ivan Fadeev wrote:
The best decision will be to text him first.
The best decision will be texting him first.

I think 1 is correct. Is 2 wrong?


Your query is related to use of "gerund" and "to infinitive" after the noun "decision".

We do not use a gerund with decision when this noun is not followed by a preposition. The correct pattern is "decision to do ...". Your first sentence has not used a gerund with "decision". It is the correct option.

"Decision" refers to a choice or judgment that you make after a period of discussion or thought. It usually refers to your final choice of judgement after making a decision. If you intend to talk about a future event, it is better to say "The best course of action is (will be) to...." or "The best option is (or will be) to..." If you insist on using "decision" it is better to use simple present instead of future indefinite in this sentence.
Topic: National borders
Posted: Wednesday, May 25, 2022 8:30:25 AM
Penz wrote:
I realized I can kill everyone once I cross national borders.

Why not "border"? Plural? You only have to cross one border to go to the other side. And since they are definite why not "the bordes"?


They have popular support, they will be the ones to run this island.

Does it mean "support of people" or "those in Power"?

Everything we do now is going down in the compact excuse of a history we are writing.

Compact? Excuse of a?


1. A country can have different borders with different countries that are adjoining its territory. The plural form " borders" implies that the country has more than one national border.

2. In the given context, "popular support" means "popular support of the of the inhabitants/people of the island.

3. In my view, here, "compact excuse of a history we are writing" means "brief justification of doing something that will be remembered or will influence the course of history".

Topic: spelling out
Posted: Wednesday, May 25, 2022 8:21:18 AM
Tara2 wrote:
Many thanks both!!!!!!!!!
Sorry why isn't it 'spell' just'? 'spell' also has that meaning

Both "spell" and "spell out" have a variety of meanings. If you look up various standard dictionaries, you will find several meanings. I am only talking about "spell" and "spell out" as applicable to spelling a name or a word. In the mentioned context of spelling out your name while talking on a telephone, you usually say "spell out". It means "to say the letters of a word (includes a name) in the right order without using any abbreviation". “Out” is a particle and functions as an intensifier. It really stresses the thought of “letter by letter.”

When you tell someone "spell it out loud” or “spell it out”, the person will read/speak out one letter at a time. It is clarified that both “Spell it” “Spell it out loud” convey a similar sense and both the phrases imply a requirement for the listener to spell the word, but not by writing it. It is clarified that it is not essential for you to use the particle "out" in the given context.

Topic: the fine line
Posted: Wednesday, May 25, 2022 6:25:24 AM
Ivan Fadeev wrote:

I wonder where the line is between enjoyment of food and gluttony.

You have changed "which" to "between". I think it's another thing. Or is this OK?

I wonder where the line is which separates enjoyment of food and gluttony.


The complete phrase is "a fine line between something" (Refer TFD). It is also possible to use only "a fine/thin line" in a sentence. You will also come across "a thin line between two things" or "a narrow line between two things". The idiom refers to a very small difference between two things that may seem different. Usually, one of them is worse than the other. It is natural and most usual to use the pattern "between ... and ..." after "a fine/thin line" when you are talking about difference. So, the most natural sentence is:

- I wonder where the (fine/thin) line is between enjoyment of food and gluttony.

There is no inversion in subordinate clauses. In the above sentence, the verb "is" has been correctly positioned immediately after the noun "line". Also, a prepositional phrase is not positioned between the subject and the verb in such a subordinate clause, especially when the prepositional phrase is a long structure.

Your sentence is:

- I wonder where the line is which separates enjoyment of food and gluttony.

First, you should pair "separates" with "from" and say:

- I wonder where the line is which separates enjoyment of food from gluttony.

A better sentence is:

- I wonder what separates enjoyment of food from gluttony.

Your sentence gives the impression that you are literally trying to ascertain the position of line between enjoyment of food and gluttony. Obviously, this isn't the case. You are most unlikely to use such a sentence in formal English. You need to ask yourself why you want to deviate from the usual phrase "line between ... and ..." I can think of two more variations to convey a similar sense:

- I wonder if there is a fine/thin line that separates enjoying one's food from being a glutton. (Note the pairing "separates ... from ...)
- I wonder where the fine/thin line is between what's considered enjoying one's food and what's being a glutton. (Note the pairing "between ... and ...")
- I find it difficult to draw a line between enjoying one's food and being a glutton. (Here, "draw a line (between something)" means "to think or show that one thing is different from another")

Topic: by morning
Posted: Wednesday, May 25, 2022 1:03:49 AM
roy rja wrote:
I got a question here about ‘by morning’

ex-She’d made it clear that she could fire me by morning.

I’m not sure exactly what the sentence mean.

1. She said that I could be fired overnight or at any time.
2. She said frequently every morning that I could be fired.

Please give me some advice.


The sentence means that she could fire the listener latest by the end of morning. Let us assume that it is night now. Then she could fire the listener before 1200 hours the next day. Note the use of "could". It implies that there is an element of uncertainty even at the time of making the statement.
Topic: all-country popularity
Posted: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 1:50:16 PM
Ivan Fadeev wrote:
Does this make sense?

He enjoys all-country popularity. (It should mean that almost every body knows him in his country)


"Nationwide popularity" is a very common phrase. I would prefer to use it in this sentence.
Topic: Is "to" the correct word?
Posted: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 1:14:48 PM
Koh Elaine wrote:
I am very grateful and appreciative to all the people who took care of me when I was depressed.

Is "to" the correct word?


When two adjectives require the same preposition, the first preposition can be omitted. In this case, the adjective phrases are "grateful to" and "appreciative of". So, you should use both the adjective phrases and say:

- I am very grateful to and appreciative of all the people who took care of me when I was depressed.