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: Thursday, April 19, 2018 5:25:31 AM
Number of Posts: 13,901
[1.58% of all post / 4.30 posts per day]
Avatar
  Last 10 Posts
Topic: yet
Posted: Sunday, April 1, 2018 2:56:08 PM

NK's reply is not more "plausible" - it is merely the usage in a particular context: - that of someone who has taken a long time to get ready.

If someone is to pick one up at 10, but they ring at 9.45 to say they're ahead of time and could come now if it was convenient, they'd ask "Are you ready yet? I could come now, if so."

If your house-mate has finished her chores and dressing and is ready to leave for work, she would ask "Are you ready yet?" to see if the two of you could leave together.

If you yourself are running late and haven't even had your shower, let alone got dressed, you might ask your Mum "Are you ready, yet?" to see how much you have to hurry.

etc. etc. etc. Context is king. Always.

Topic: When does Santa Claus come?
Posted: Sunday, April 1, 2018 2:43:48 PM

But never before 12 midnight!!
Topic: gives up
Posted: Sunday, April 1, 2018 2:42:40 PM

Like Foundit, I think that "gave up" has a particular meaning. You 'give up' your place in a queue to someone in a tearing hurry; you 'give up' your seat on public transport to someone who needs it more; you 'give up' your plans for a picnic because someone else would rather go to the beach; you 'give up' your concert ticket to someone who is very ill and will otherwise not get to see their favourite band before they die.

If someone offered to simply "give" me their seat,I'd expect them to rip it up from the floor and let me take it home!!
Topic: ...there was no electricity or copy machines...
Posted: Sunday, April 1, 2018 2:30:23 PM

1. The phrase is "by hand" not "using their hands". e.g. "Mary made the whole basket by hand." NOT "Mary made the whole basket using her hands."

2. The first part contains a redundancy: if there was no electricity then of course there were no copying machines. There is no reason at all to list them as two different reasons.

If one really thought readers would be so thick they couldn't work out that no electricity would mean no copying machines then it could be phrased "there was no electricity and hence no copying machines or other modern technologies."
Topic: During vs Over vs For
Posted: Sunday, April 1, 2018 2:21:47 PM

To me all sound weird because of the use of the word "never". Another reason I agree with Wilmar that those just aren't the kinds of sentences a native user would use.

In BE at least, "never" isn't used like this. It means just that....never, ever, did someone do something.

If one is only talking about a particular period of time we would say "Not once, in those 14 years, did she...." "At no time in those 14 years did she...." - the word "never" simply doesn't work like that for us - in fact the incorrect usage of "never" is considered a give-away that the speaker is not well-educated.

"I have never smoked" - not once in my entire life has a cigarette met my mouth.
"I didn't smoke for 25 years" - for years I didn't smoke; but now I do. "For 25 years I never smoked" would be considered, by pundits, to be bad English.

Certainly, in academic writing it would be a huge no-no. But if you aren't writing for academe, and you aren't worried about what pundits say, continue to use it by all means - very few people would even notice!
Topic: They showed their passport(s).
Posted: Sunday, April 1, 2018 2:05:41 PM

Applause Applause Applause

Thanks Thar!!

Every few months someone objects to the "new" style of singular "they" - usually blaming "shrill-voiced feminists" or " wacky Leftists". And every few months I - and others - explain that it's not a 21stC or even a 20thC usuage; it's been part of the language since long before feminists, Lefties, 'new-fangled' ideas, or political correctness were ever dreamt of.

I gave up in the end. But perhaps, now that a man has explained it, perhaps those who continue to rail against it will take notice?Think
Topic: clobber
Posted: Thursday, March 22, 2018 5:49:21 AM

And, in England, it's also a noun meaning "clothes/possessions" - and one I dearly love!
Topic: Did You Know? Series #3
Posted: Thursday, March 22, 2018 5:46:26 AM
Indeed - no-one ever sat on the floor - the floor was covered in rushes. They used trestle benches.

And the word "gossip" is not only much also much earlier - but it became common currency as referring to a woman's female friends. Thus it was used as a very common noun right into the early 19thC.

Unfortunately the exact derivation of "It'll cost you an arm and a leg" is not actually known - but it derives from the 20thC. It is commonly thought to have derived either from the 1st or 2nd World War - for reasons which are a bit obvious: if a little gruesome!

Though there certainly was a tax once on playing cards, that was about 500 years ago. The "not playing with a full deck" idiom has only been with us since the 1980s - a long time after George Washington's day!It sprang up in America along with a lot of other ways to describe someone who wasn't too bright. In Australia the favourite for a while was "He's a stubby short of a six-pack." (a stubby being a bottle of beer.)

Drago - the 'p's and 'q's debate has been going on a while, with most people placing it in the early days of printing - even though that was considered spurious to many scholars. It's good the Oxford has finally sorted that one out!!





Topic: Put the blame on...
Posted: Wednesday, March 21, 2018 6:11:13 AM
The paragraph is about "Leaders who cannot recover..." .

"Well-meaning colleagues, families and friends" thinking to help, may lay blame on others so that the "leader" will feel better.

This isn't a good idea ("can be more damaging than helpful") as it will confuse the "Leader" even more.
Topic: gerund
Posted: Wednesday, March 21, 2018 6:01:15 AM

Actually, I see no reason "Performing better than him will make him angry..." can't be used for both instances - I certainly would.

If you are talking to a specific person, they will understand you mean "those who perform better" make him angry- which, of course, includes the person you are talking to. So "your" is unnecessary.

"Performing better than him will make him angry" also informs that "anyone" doing it will make him cross - so 'someone' is equally redundant.

I agree with pjharvey that the grammatically correct pronoun is "he" - and would write it that way in any formal context. However, in casual conversation such as this, the average English speaker - correct or not - will use "him" as "he" sounds jerky and forces one to pause, as for a comma, after the "he".

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