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

Profile: thar
About
User Name: thar
Forum Rank: Advanced Member
Occupation:
Interests:
Gender: None Specified
Home Page
Statistics
Joined: Thursday, July 8, 2010
Last Visit: Sunday, September 22, 2019 5:49:02 PM
Number of Posts: 20,282
[2.12% of all post / 6.03 posts per day]
Avatar
  Last 10 Posts
Topic: to or for
Posted: Sunday, September 22, 2019 3:51:05 PM
No, that sounds right. There are consequences to your actions.
Like there are 'answers to your questions'. It is not consequences 'for them', here. It is consequences 'to their actions'.
Topic: coriaceous
Posted: Sunday, September 22, 2019 3:47:48 PM
Another word in English from two sources

Anglo-Saxon leather (compare Icelandic leður, German Leder)

being a fairly common and working word, the Old English version is the common one.

And Latin/French/Norman corium/cuir (compare Latin corium /French cuir, Italian cuoio)
Latin being used in botany and medicine as more precise, 'educated' and higher class. Whistle


It is found in other words as well
eg excoriate (take the hide off) - usually metaphorical = flay

Topic: Is the sentence correct?
Posted: Sunday, September 22, 2019 3:30:15 PM
It makes sense to me, although I am not sure it is the most natural way to say it.

Giving tuition - providing tuition - giving private lessons - tutoring.

More natural in BrE would be 'giving private lessons', I think. Ie outside the formal education system. 'Tuition' has different implications in AmE because the education setup is so different there.
Topic: give way
Posted: Sunday, September 22, 2019 1:10:37 PM
estate > state
ie state of being a child, state of being an adult

way > path, route, travel, movement

give way > allow the other boat or vehicle to use that route first, or cross in front of you. They have priority, and you have to stop to let them through.



(I think the US version of this traffic instruction is 'yield'.)






ie childhood stops and allows adulthood to move on

Of course this is not like a traffic sign, so childhood doesn't start again once adulthood is under way. It just ends.
Unless you are really lucky. Whistle


Topic: Shadow
Posted: Sunday, September 22, 2019 8:01:59 AM
Thanks for clarifying that - I tend to avoid politics so I don't know as much as I should about the details.

I originally intended to just call it a Conservative government, but then I thought that might be oversimplifying and not technically correct, but the only description I knew for any 'arrangement' was a coalition. That or something more derogatory.
Confidence-and-supply agreement, huh?
Yes, that sounds an apt euphemism for 'you scratch my back...I'll do whatever you want'. Whistle
Topic: presumption against
Posted: Sunday, September 22, 2019 7:04:36 AM
A presumption is what you think before you hear the evidence. Pre = before.

Ie, in court there is a presumption of innocence. You must go into court thinking the accused in innocent, and it is the duty of the prosecution to change your opinion (and the duty of the defence to weaken the arguments of the prosecution). If they don't convince you 'beyond reasonable doubt' then you have to find the defendant 'not guilty'.

In the same way, the magistrate should go into the case thinking 'even if they are found guilty, I will not send them to prison if the sentence would be less than six months'.
But it may be that during the case facts are presented that change their opinion, and the magistrate decides that a prison sentence is warranted. But you can't go into the case thinking 'if they are guilty of this crime I will give them three months in prison'. The presumption is that for petty crimes there will not be a prison sentence, and other methods will be used.

edited to change from maximum sentence to no prison time.

Bob - I don't think this is about maximum sentences, it is about minimum sentences. Ie nothing under six months.
If they are sentenced to more than six months - fine, send them to prison.
but
If they would be sentenced to less than six months - don't do it - don't send them to prison for a short time for non-violent offence like shop-lifting. Send them to drug treatment/probation/job training - whatever.
Topic: following
Posted: Sunday, September 22, 2019 6:57:53 AM
He had to be in that job - Justice Secretary - to make that decision on sentencing.
Topic: two thirds
Posted: Sunday, September 22, 2019 6:41:25 AM
Yes - six months or less [than six months] (that includes 3 months or less [than 3 months]).
Not 'six months' exactly.
≤ 3 months
≤ 6 months

not
= 6 months

Their point is how short the sentences are. They are approaching it from that side - x months or less.
67% - 6 months or less [than 6 months]
50% - 3 months or less [than 3 months]
(from that you can work out what proportion is less than 6 but not less than 3)

and only 33% more than six months. Ie most women are in for short sentences of a few days, weeks or a few months. Only a a minority are sentenced to more than six months. That statistic does suggest the question: is putting them in prison for a few weeks the best and most efficient solution to stop them shop-lifting and committing other petty crimes? (Apart from for the few weeks they are in prison. Whistle )

Topic: Shadow
Posted: Sunday, September 22, 2019 6:32:36 AM
From the last general election, the government is currently a Conservative-DUP coalition. With the next largest share of the vote, the official opposition is currently the Labour Party, so they form a shadow cabinet.
It is the duty of the opposition to call the government to account and serve the people, but they sometimes forget that and just try to score points and get power for their own party. (Not aimed at Labour, everyone seems to do it).

From the Labour Party website

Quote:
Our Shadow Cabinet
The Shadow Cabinet is Labour’s top team in Parliament, joining Jeremy Corbyn to hold the Tories to account across lots of policy areas. Take a look at who’s on the team.

Jeremy Corbyn
Leader of the Labour Party

Tom Watson
Deputy Leader of the Labour Party, Shadow Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport

John McDonnell
Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer

Diane Abbott
Shadow Home Secretary

Emily Thornberry
Shadow Foreign Secretary

Rebecca Long-Bailey
Shadow Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

Jonathan Ashworth
Shadow Secretary of State for Health

Angela Rayner
Shadow Secretary of State for Education

Keir Starmer
Shadow Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union

Richard Burgon
Shadow Secretary of State for Justice, Shadow Lord Chancellor

Sue Hayman
Shadow Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Dawn Butler
Shadow Minister for Women and Equalities

Dan Carden
Acting Shadow Secretary of State for International Development

Cat Smith
Shadow Minister for Voter Engagement and Youth Affairs

Baroness Smith of Basildon
Shadow Leader of the House of Lords

Valerie Vaz
Shadow Leader of the House of Commons

Jon Trickett
Shadow Lord President of the Council and Shadow Minister for the Cabinet Office

John Healey
Shadow Secretary of State for Housing

Margaret Greenwood
Shadow Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

Andrew Gwynne
Shadow Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Co-National Campaign Coordinator

Peter Dowd
Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury

Christina Rees
Shadow Secretary of State for Wales

Andy McDonald
Shadow Secretary of State for Transport

Ian Lavery
Co-National Campaign Coordinator and Party Chair

Nick Brown
Opposition Chief Whip

Nia Griffith
Shadow Secretary of State for Defence

Shami Chakrabarti
Shadow Attorney General

Barry Gardiner
Shadow Secretary of State for International Trade

Barbara Keeley
Shadow Minister for Mental Health and Social Care

Lesley Laird
Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland

Tony Lloyd
Shadow Secretary of State for Northern Ireland



For clarity, 'the Tories' are the Conservative Party. It is a common term, and is a neutral name, not offensive or supportive.
{It actually started off a long time ago as a term of abuse but as with so many offensive names, it became normal over time and now is just a nickname}
Topic: where
Posted: Sunday, September 22, 2019 4:39:06 AM
Yes, this doesn't really describe the accident. It is a contrasting piece of information.


If the clause describes the accident

There was an accident in which two people were injured.
There as an accident where two people were injured.
There was an accident and two people were injured.


There was an accident but the authorities don't know how many people have been injured.

Main Forum RSS : RSS
Forum Terms and Guidelines | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2008-2019 Farlex, Inc. All rights reserved.