mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest
Profile: thar
User Name: thar
Forum Rank: Advanced Member
Gender: None Specified
Joined: Thursday, July 8, 2010
Last Visit: Wednesday, May 25, 2022 5:48:58 PM
Number of Posts: 26,437
[2.44% of all post / 6.09 posts per day]
  Last 10 Posts
Topic: spelling out
Posted: Wednesday, May 25, 2022 10:15:08 AM
Because English is so unphonetic, people are often asked to spell out their names.

The question could be 'how do you spell that' (ie how do you spell your name'
Or 'could you spell that, please'.

'out' can just be an intensifier of you saying it simply and clearly. Out loud, as clear individual letters. It does have the idiomatic meaning of explaining something to someone as if they are an idiot, but you would'nt take that meaning from someone on the phone asking you to spell it out.

My name is Sinjun Chumley
How do you spell that, please? St John Cholmondley.

My name is

Could you spell that out, please...Whistle
Topic: you wanna say that again?
Posted: Wednesday, May 25, 2022 4:28:29 AM
Penz wrote:
You can be that person we liked. You can again be that cocky, son of a bitch.
- You wanna say that again?

literally 'do you want to say that again?'
ie do you really want to challenge me, to insult me? Or do you want to back down, not repeat it?

What does that say?

Context: The fleet has lefts it army members.
Now, we are officially out of options.

What does "officially" say here?
I have never heard it used like "really"?

In any situation there is a point where the chance of happening goes from 99.999% to 100%. When it is an absolute fact, when nobody can argue that 'there is still a tiny chance it will be OK' - then that is as if an 'official' decree has been made - this is how it is. So 'officially' is commonly used as slang to mean 'there is no more chance of it not happening. This is the fact.

Context: A soldier is going to kill someone which was with them before but more like an allies who were not of the same nation.
I would never submit...
(At the same time, someone say)
-- Salute this man!

Here it could mean "salute this man" could refer to "saluting the person who is killing and said to the one being killed" or is it a tradition to salute someone before they are about to be dead?

I doubt they are referring to "those who are about to die salute you [to the emperor]". It would be too odd to just throw that in. It just means the speaker is showing their approval, by inviting others to share his feeling. Without context it is impossible to say to whom or why.
Topic: his close friend and assistant
Posted: Wednesday, May 25, 2022 2:39:59 AM
Neither implies exclusivity.

'his' means 'of him'. Not someone else.

There is only one person there. That person is his "friend and assistant" .

He may have many friends - this is the one you are talking about.

He probably only has one assistant, due to the nature of that job. But it does not exclude there being others.

The possessive pronoun does not replace the definite or indefinite article.

His friend - hopefully one of several.
His teacher - presumably one of many, in a school
His mother - probably the only one

It describes the relationship with that person.

If you need to specify, then:
Heintroduced me to his only friend.
He only has one.
He introduced me to one of his friends.
He has several

But usually that is irrelevant.
He introduced me to his friend.
The person who was there was friends with him.

Topic: moire
Posted: Wednesday, May 25, 2022 1:18:30 AM
This is a double-back word. Somehow got from goat hair to watered fabric!

from Arabic مُخَيَّر‎ (muḵayyar, “choice”), past participle of خَيَّرَ‎ (ḵayyara, “to choose”)
> Italian mocaiardo, mocaiarro
> Middle French mocayart
> English mocayre
> French moire
> English moire


→ Azerbaijani: müxəyyər
→ Italian: mocaiardo, mocaiarro
→ English: mocayre, mohair
→ French: moire (semi-learned), → mohair
→ Italian: amoerro, amoerre, moerro, muerre (semi-learned), → moire
→ Italian: mohair
→ Japanese: モヘア (mohea)
→ Portuguese: mohair
→ Russian: мохе́р (moxér)
→ Spanish: mohair
⇒ Chinese:
Mandarin: 馬海毛/马海毛 (mǎhǎimáo)
Cantonese: 馬海毛 (maa5 hoi2 mou4)
→ French: moucayar, moucayard, mocayar, mocaiar
→ Middle Armenian: մուխայեար (muxayear)
Armenian: մուխայար (muxayar)
→ Old East Slavic: мухояръ (muxojarŭ)
Russian: мухоя́р (muxojár)
→ Ottoman Turkish: مخیر‎ (muhayyer)
Turkish: muhayyer
→ Persian: مخیر‎ (muxaiyar)

Topic: give utterance to
Posted: Wednesday, May 25, 2022 1:06:21 AM
No, it just keans 'give words to, to say', not to talk about.
So you can give utterance to your thoughts. You give utterance to your concerns, to your fears.

But not give utterance to the tragedy. Because a tragedy doesn't have anything to say.
Topic: chattel
Posted: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 7:30:49 PM

From Middle English chatel,
from Old French chatel,
from Medieval Latin capitāle (English capital),
from Latin capitālis (“of the head”),
from caput (“head”) + -alis (“-al”).

Compare the doublet cattle (“cows”), which is from an Anglo-Norman variant.

1chattels, property:
Eg ( c.1275 ) E ke chescun de ceus eit en chatel quatre libres vaillant u plus

catel m (oblique plural cateaus or cateax or catiaus or catiax or catels, nominative singular cateaus or cateax or catiaus or catiax or catels, nominative plural catel)
(Anglo-Norman, Old Northern French) Alternative form of chatel

Topic: Years' worth of memories
Posted: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 7:12:34 PM
It is possessive if you are sorting through them though, isn't it?

Eat a week's worth of food in one day.
Clean off ten years' worth of dirt.
Go through a week's worth of newspapers looking for the story.
Go through years' worth of memories.

Ie go through the memories that have been accumulated over many years.
That is a lot of memories. Going through that many memories will be a big task.

Our accompanying ruin. Meaning we are the ones suffering ruin. That accompanies /comes along with us sinning.

Topic: for long has
Posted: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 4:06:41 PM

You can say 'not for long' in the negative, but you can't say 'for long'. It has to be 'for a long time' if it is a separate adverbial phrase.

The role of language exposure [in language acquisition] has been drawing the attention of researchers for a long time, but it has particularly sparked their curiosity over the past ten years.

"a long time" really means nothing. Twenty minutes is a long time if you are waiting in tbe rain. A hundred million years is a short time in the life of a planet. How long is long? More than ten years, obviously. But twenty years or five hundred years? Two thousand?

You can say, 'long' but only when it is directly attached to the verb.
Researchers have long been interested in the role of exposure in langage acquisition, but this interest has increased significantly within the last ten years.

In prose writing you can use 'long' + inversion, but it really doesn't work here.
Long have I wandered, far have I journeyed, much have I seen.
Topic: If you ate that burger, you wouldn't be hungry now
Posted: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 12:57:33 PM
Only if you are not sure if they ate it or not.

If you had eaten that burger, you wouldn't be hungry now.
Topic: the fine line
Posted: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 12:54:22 PM
Also, you don't normay combine those two ideas.

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

The fact the line is so thin:
There is a thin line between enjoying your food and being a glutton.

I changed it from "eating" , because eating is the act of consuming food. If you eat too much, that is gluttony. But it is still eating.