« first day (43 days earlier)      last day (455 days later) » 
01:00 - 17:0017:00 - 22:00

1:39 AM
Hi @M.A.Ramezani I don´t can talk to you today.
But I came back to chat tomorrow. thanks.
2:29 AM
In They laughed at me, me is the direct object of the phrasal verb Laugh at. But in this sentence, at is not a preposition, but a particle. (See my answer). And in stand by, by is a particle of the intransitive phrasal verb stand by. Also @Sander — pazzo 11 hours ago
That makes me want to review the difference between particles and prepositions.
I think by in the OP's sentence is just a preposition. Someone standing by a gate is not like someone standing by me or something.
2:47 AM
Q: What's the meaning of 'it' in this sentence?

Rok SimI am not sure about the meaning of value it. Is this idiom-like expression? Or if not, what does it refer to? Giving gay and lesbian couples the same rights in a union - that would not dilute Mom and Dad's marriage, make it any less binding or strong. We so value it that we want to share it....

Actually, that's an interesting so ... that.
> We so value it that we want to share it.
Though somehow it's so natural. :D
A: What is the meaning difference between two sentences?

SanderThere is not a real difference here. Both sentences each time mean the same thing. It is often used as a provisional subject or object (object in this case) this way to perhaps improve readability. It can also simply be used for matters of style.

Though I think I (sort of) agree with his assertions, I'm not really sure if it's correct.
Hmm, I don't really know how to answer that question
I don't think the meaning really changes much (or at all?)
Good evening!
Good tide! :-)
@snailboat The deem it that, love it that one?
He asserted that "It can also simply be used for matters of style," which to me is quite right.
3:02 AM
Yeah. At least the love case
I'm not sure what to think of the deem sentences
Me either, but I thought it could happen in archaic contexts.
I don't know, I'm not a native speaker of archaic English. (But then, no one is)
Deem that is much better than deem it that, I think
3:06 AM
I've only heard of deem (to be) necessary.
Love it that is at least more markedly colloquial than love that
Oh, yes.
Love that is probably more common than love it that
I was trying to figure out if the it versions in either case should be considered non-standard
But I can't really make a sound judgment there
3:08 AM
I think it started from the I take it that ... pattern.
And then it spread out.
Just my speculation.
In They laughed at me, me is the direct object of the phrasal verb Laugh at. But in this sentence, at is not a preposition, but a particle. (See my answer). And in stand by, by is a particle of the intransitive phrasal verb stand by. Also @Sander — pazzo 12 hours ago
What sentence are we talking about?
That's what I wondered.
We got one in the question, and another in the answer.
Particle in this context basically means an intransitive preposition with special properties
> OP: An old baggar stood by the gate.
Phoenix: An old beggar stood by...
3:11 AM
Let's look at the example of turn on the light
On is intransitive. How can we tell that the light isn't its complement? Simple: the particle can appear on either side: turn the light on
If it were a regular (transitive) preposition, it couldn't do that because on the light would be a single constituent
But we can only say stand by someone, not stand someone by, at least in that meaning, which is anyway different from the OP's sentence.
Yes, so we can tell by is not a particle
3:14 AM
Note that if the direct object is an unstressed personal pronoun, a particle must follow rather than precede: He turned it on.
That's about it for the basic difference
There's more to discuss of course (e.g. pronunciation)
The thing that puzzled me about pazzo' comment is that I couldn't find a sentence with at
Oh! I didn't know if the pronunciation would be different.
Sorry as usual for phone typos :-)
3:17 AM
(I can't see any typo!)
I tried to type 's but failed!
I think pazzo just wanted to give an example of a phrasal verb to relate it to stand by that can take an object.
Which is a bit confusing, imho.
Okay, compare turn on X (meaning something like "betray and attack an ally"), which is a verb-preposition idiom, with turn on X (meaning "switch from the off position to the on position, e.g. supplying electricity to something"), which is a verb-particle idiom
Ah, I didn't mean that the concept is confusing, I meant that his way of giving examples is confusing.
Oh, sorry, I was trying to start a discussion about pronunciation
3:21 AM
Ahh... I see. Sorry!
But I'm getting tired so maybe I should try that tomorrow :-)
No worries!
Oh, yes. It's past midnight already over there.
I think I did the math wrong. :-)
I think Araucaria had a post somewhere describing it better than I would anyway
3:23 AM
My phone claims it is now 20:23
But I got up very early!
Funny that 10:24am minus 14 got me 00:24am a moment ago. :D
In any case, Maulik's and Phoenix's answers make me wonder about the transitivity of the verb stand in other languages.
Though I think it's unlikely that standing near something is transitive in any languages.
Oh, Brighton is pronounced "brig-ton"!
(I just heard that on BBC Radio.)
Hmm... Wikipedia says it's /ˈbraɪtən/.
Maybe I misheard it (though I don't think so).
I pronounce it [bɹaɪʔn]
I don't know of any language where the direct object of a stand-like verb represents the place where you're standing
In English stand is transitive when you stand something somewhere
3:37 AM
In colloquial BrE stood has what looks like a passive use, but it isn't oassive semantically and has no corresponding active use, so it's probably best analyzed as an adjective. IIRC it's like I was stood on the corner.
= was standing
@snailboat Oh, that's interesting!
I was stood on the corner
I only learned about that last year
A: Are the following intransitive verbs, or transitive verbs?

pazzoAt in Laugh at is not a preposition. It is a particle in the phrasal verb laugh at. You cannot just add a preposition to an intransitive verb and make the verb transitive, or, in your words, "convert intransitive verbs into transitive by using prepositions with them," as you state in your answer...

Oh, that's from a while ago!
3:51 AM
That can't be—we say "They laughed at me", but not "They laughed me at". If it were a particle, the opposite would be true
Ahh... that's the source of the more recent question!
So it must be a preposition
Is there any answer on our site that we can point the OPs to?
@Sander, please delete your answer! I want to delete the question.Thank you. — AmD 8 hours ago
That's interesting!
-1 because I think your first sentence is incorrect. The main verb in OP's text is to base, which in this context must be transitive (the authority based its decision [on something]). Disregarding the matter of singular/plural, on consideration[s] that [blah blah] is an adverbial modifier - it can't serve as the grammatical object for to base. — FumbleFingers 12 hours ago
It took me a while before I can read on consideration[s] that [blah blah] as an adverbial modifier.
Anyway, I think it's a marginal case.
@FumbleFingers I disagree. Appropriate is the only meaning of apropros that I have heard before. — DJ McMayhem 12 hours ago
Oh, I thought DJ McMayhem is American!
(I heard apropos often used in Whad'ya Know.)
4:08 AM
I'm with FF on this one
On both questions?
On apropos
Me too.
The on-PP is a complement of base
It's not a modifier
4:11 AM
You can't just say "he based his decision" and leave it at that
nods -- Perhaps that was why the claim surprised me a bit.
Oh, yes!
It's an inomissible complement and is necessary to complete the construction
FF is probably just using modifier without a specific definition
Modifiers vs. complements is something I'm still working on.
Though I think I've got its basic idea right: modifiers are omissible.
Seeing the deleted answer (by Araucaria) below, I can see immediately that I misread the sentence. I thought bent referred to grass in lawns or pastures (which made "It is their inherited bent to find pleasure in ..." sound odd). This bent actually means "inclination" (which makes "It is their inherited bent to find pleasure in ..." make perfect sense). IMHO, the author might choose to use this word intentionally to allude to both pastures and the inclination. — Damkerng T. 13 hours ago
It's funny how I read it the first time. :-)
A: Basketball equivalent to soccer's "goal"

J.R.I agree with Maulik, in that basket qualifies as a generic term roughly equivalent to goal in some contexts: Ronaldo scored a goal on the play. Lebron made a basket on the play. However, it's not a perfect synonym. We're all familiar with the ecstastic call from the broadcasters at World C...

I can't recall any commentator shouting "B-A-S-K-E-T!!!" in any NBA matches I've watched.
Q: Noodles: it/ them

Joe KimIt's noodles. It looks great. / they look great. You don't like it / them? Don't spit it / them out. Don't play with it/ them. Noodles are plural, but when can I take and replace with singular pronouns?

This could be an interesting question if the OP phrased it differently.
2 hours later…
5:59 AM
@DamkerngT. Probably, but I find that he never explains his questions at all and I ignore them because he will never respond to requests for clarification.
Hi. But his question looks clear enough to me: He wants to know if noodles, plural in form, can be treated singularly.
@JimReynolds But he just opens by saying "it's noodles". If you're talking about "noodles", it would be plural but if it's a "plate" of noodles, or your "meal/dinner", it can be singular.
Also, for #3, you're likely spitting out a single noodle... so the singular could be perfectly find there, too.
His questions always look like someone only interested in extremely specific cases without caring that a lot of people wouldn't speak the way he's forcing them to.
Hi Catija. It's a matter of how much precision or detail we want to demand from the OP, then. I have no problem inferring that the message is, "(Consider the phrase) 'it's noodles", or "I read this phrase."
I can't argue that it may not be "clear" enough for some. I'm just saying that it's clear enough for me.
Noodles are plural, but when can I take and replace with singular pronouns?
6:15 AM
@JimReynolds Honestly, this one isn't that bad, in the long run... some of the others have been much more confusing.
That's his question, which also shows his problem. I'm not familiar with his previous questions.
Then, apparently he's Korean.
Deciding whether someone from another culture "cares" or intends to be polite or not can sometimes be a tricky business.
I mean, both being form another culture, and being an ELL. Hard to say.
Q: Go chum chum chum

Joe Kim It went chum chum. (the chewing movement) It is going chum chum. It goes chum chum. (I don't know what it means but) Are these all correct?

Not that your feelings or thoughts about it are invalid in any way. I never intended to say that.
It's just frustrating... it's like he's actually posting questions from a text book and we're just hopping to answer them... which we usually don't do.
He gives no research, which we usually ask for...
He doesn't say what he thinks the answer should be, which we also usually request.
There is another Korean guy, right?
I had that exact same reaction to him.
6:21 AM
I'm not sure. Are you guessing he's Korean because his surname is Kim?
I'm surprised you aren't familiar with the other guy. @Dam ... what's his name?
It's interesting for me to notice the reactions I have to people here, their questions, and people and their answers and comments!
Sometimes, I catch myself experiencing some strong negative emotion.
Usually, it's anger over someone violating some kind of standard.
@JimReynolds You mean jimsug, probably?
I'm still having a little problem with my connection.
Yeah. I try to help as much as I can but I get frustrated sometimes. And then I go for a break. There's one user, saySay? Who throws in "may" and "seem" constantly
I gots to walk my doggies!
Is it raining in BKK, Dam?
6:26 AM
@JimReynolds Last two days, yeah.
Probably today, too.
Don't get rusty.
I'll try to come back and say hello later. I hope your connection improves.
It's my main server. I think it's running out of space.
I miss y'all, but the break has also been good for me, in a way.
6:28 AM
Miss you too.
Make another one out of paper clips and flashlight batteries.
See you later, @Cat
I am willing to listen to what you had to say about your reaction to the guy. I'm sorry for going on and on with my own different reaction first.
See, I even get angry at myself. O.O
Bye @JimReynolds
@JimReynolds Don't worry about it. Everyone's entitled to their opinions. :)
I still think their English is a bit curious.
Now go tell this most recent OP whether or not the IELTS is hard!
They've cross posted on ELU... but it should probably be on Academia?
Tell them, "If you don't know that, then you certainly won't pass it."
Judging from their writing, I think they should get above the 7.0 band of IELTS without any problem.
I've certainly never taken it :P
Your English is better, @DamkerngT.
Ah, thanks! :-)
Hmm... I remember IELTS provides some examples of the tests on their website, along with some evaluation criteria.
Let's see...
Q: Are IELTS past tests available for students preparing for the exam?

Débora I want to know a way to find past IELTS questions. If they are available freely? Are there good exams for all modules? (Specially Listening)

6:36 AM
Yes. ielts.org is definitely the source.
If I understand correctly, IELTS Academic emphasizes reading and writing skills, though I think they tests the speaking and listening skills too.
From what I've heard, TOEFL's speaking/listening test is more difficult.
@Catija I posted a comment telling the OP about that Academia post. Hope you don't mind.
7:09 AM
Ah, weird. I thought IELTS Academic as a singular they, maybe; or maybe I was thinking of something else when I was talking about IELTS emphases. The misconjugated verb is funny. :-)
3 hours later…
10:03 AM
A "singular they"?
10:28 AM
10:51 AM
@JimReynolds Not really. More like a brain burp. :-)
@user62015 Hello!
Let's try a couple of simpler sentences, and see if you still think it's weird: How tall is he? How long have you been sitting here? She'd lived there for three years by 1986.Damkerng T. 6 hours ago
Aww... My message didn't come across.
Q: Confirming a statement in the simple past with the present perfect

PerfectGundamIs this really necessary or natural to use the present perfect to confirm a statement with the simple past ? Q: I saw the Eiffel Tower. A: Oh, you have seen the Eiffel Tower ?

(by the same OP)
Sounds like someone corrected him.
You were just talking about whether IELTS Academic is singular or plural (collective noun)?
I definitely thought of them as singular, but I usually use they/them later to refer back to people work in such and such organizations.
So, it's weird that I said they tests. :D
That's a big UK/US difference, you know.
UK would say [organization] are, while we almost always say is.
I think so. -- I remember so, but I think I mix it up somehow.
10:59 AM
See, that's a problem of using only 75% AmE. :-)
Though I try to use 100% AmE spellings.
Actually, there is something to that question about 1) assertion in simple past 2) confirmation or really inquiry using present perfect.
Lacking the context, I assumed that speaker 1 is a non-native speaker.
The way the OP uses Q and A for the two speakers is also interesting. :D
Anyway, gotta go. I'll be back later in half an hour or so. Have a nice evening!
Well, there is great randomness between present perfect and simple past when talking about a finished past event.
OK. :D
Randomness . . . I mean flexibility, especially in American English.
British will say it must be present perfect when there's a "connection to the present", which is a criterion that becomes more meaningless the closer we look at it.
11:29 AM
@JimReynolds Somehow I saw the Eiffel Tower feels weird to me, unless it's in a narrative.
12:18 PM
@JimReynolds O.O
1 hour later…
1:48 PM
A: How hard is IELTS for me

AraucariaFor most native Dutch speakers who have been studying in English for several years, an IELTS score of 7.0 should be achievable - with practice. There is no limit on the amount of times you can sit an IELTS exam. My advice to any student who needs to attain a specific grade at IELTS within a short...

@Araucaria It took me about three seconds to figure what those F's stand for. :-)
2:07 PM
@DamkerngT. That's a sly teaching technique! :-) You never actually tell the students what the Fs are for, you just let them guess. But they never forget the golden rules!
@Araucaria Nice trick. :D
BTW, I really like your bent question. It's too bad that everyone seems to overlook that dropping it would make it not as good.
@DamkerngT. Actually there's a third rule for (English) exams in general: "Give the monkey what he wants". This basically means that often students are right and, for example, something may not be stated as "false" in a text for example. But you need to know how the exam writer is thinking, and if you give the wrong right answer, you won't get any marks. You need to give the examiner (the monkey), what they want.
@DamkerngT. Thanks old bean :-)
@Araucaria Hehe! That's actually my only rule for this kind of test. :-)
Yes, it's the most important one!
@DamkerngT. Have you ever done IELTS?
Or is everything TOEIC round your way (or perhaps TOEFL)?
@Araucaria Not really.
2:36 PM
@DamkerngT. I've been reading some of your posts. Most recent was your schwa one - which is very, very good. I left some comments there, but actually now I'm thinking they might be more useful here (if you want to read them that is :)). Shall I transfer them?
@Araucaria I'm reading your first comment. :-)
Let's post them here.
@DamkerngT. Or if you want, I can just delete them after you've read them ...
OK, I'll move them over :)
@Araucaria Oh, I think we should leave them there.
So they will be useful for others too.
Okay, I'd better let you post them here.
"This is a really, really good post. But there's one little niggle. The IPA vowel schema that you use is the one for narrow transcription, in other words the one that can be read by speakers of any language and they'll know what sound (more or less) you're aiming for. The problem is that that [e] sound on the chart is not the English /e/. The English /e/, the one with the slanty brackets and the one you'll see in dictionaries is actually [e̞] or [ɛ̝] in narrow IPA ..."
@DamkerngT. Oops, double posting. Oh pants I'm going to have to disappear for 15 mins or so in a sec. I'll move them over fist. Will you be around when I get back?
I hope so. :-)
2:39 PM
Just ping me when you're back.
"For the phonemic transcription of English we use the /e/ symbol because as opposed to /ɛ/ because it fits better with the orthography, but we could have chosen either. The (British) English vowel is exactly halfway between the two cardinal vowels. What this means is that you shouldn't drop your jaw at all for the schwa compared to the /e/ sound. It's more or less the same openness.
... Normally, when you are relaxed your teeth don't meet. The natural setting is that they're slightly apart. This is the exact amount of openness you need for a really good schwa. If you practice a schwa ..."
" in the mirror and filmed yourself, when you play the film back you shouldn't be able to tell when you were silent and when you were making the schwa, because a schwa doesn't require any articulation with any of the active articulators (tongue or lips) ..."
As I said originally though, this post is very, very good!!!!! And very helpful :)
@DamkerngT. Cool, will give you a ping when Iget back :)
3:41 PM
Oh my god.
@Arau scared me.
3:54 PM
@M.A.Ramezani Hi, sorry about that!
I was just back from the gym when I was struck by the majesticness of "phonemic transcription"...
@DamkerngT. You about?
I think he's making tea.
3:57 PM
@M.A.Ramezani Ah, I see.
> How hard is IELTS for me?
@M.A.Ramezani You've heard of 'phonemic transcription' before?
Hmm... Seems kinda off-topic.
@Araucaria Maybe...But my brain doesn't like to think about it now.
It's officially closed.
Let me pressurize my brain.
@M.A.Ramezani Well, kind of off topic. But doing English exams is a large part of learning English for a lot of poeple. I agree it's not the best way to frame the OP's concerns really, but there it is ... :)
Oooh, it's already closed.
> You won't be able to do the speaking on your own...
Kinda disagree.
4:00 PM
Yes, I know. Never mind.Gave a bit of an answer I hope ...
I always talk to myself if I wanna improve speaking.
I know I'm crazy, but...
It's scientifically proven that for a normal human being eighty percent of what they talk is aimed at themselves.
Hi @Araucaria...how r u doing?
@M.A.Ramezani Ah, see what you mean. What I meant to say was that you can't really score yourself. You can see what your marks might be for the other stuff (maybe the writings a bit hard), but scoring yourself on speaking's very hard to do in any meaningful way.
Hullo @Man_From_India!
@Man_From_India Great cheers!
4:02 PM
Hi @M.A.Ramezani...after a long time....what's going on?
@Man_From_India I'm sitting on a sofa.
Fine @Araucaria..thanks for asking ...have not seen u for last few days :-)
@M.A.Ramezani Yes, my girlfriend's always saying that to me .... :(
@Man_From_India Have been trying to do PhD stuff ...
@Araucaria However, I can estimate my fluency.
@Araucaria What major?
I mean what major do you have a PhD in?
Phonemic transcriptions?
4:04 PM
@M.A.Ramezani Sure, but you can't tell how you've actually performed in a one man speaking! For example, you can't see whther you've been demonstrating good turn-taking skills ...
@M.A.Ramezani No, but I teach that at UCL a bit!
@Araucaria Oh I see...that's great! But do visit here often, we will be benefited from u :-)
@M.A.Ramezani My PhD's in philosophy of language and linguistics. I study conditionals ...
Oh man!
@Man_From_India I benefit too from reading all your interesting ideas!
@M.A.Ramezani I know, I'm a freak ... :)
4:06 PM
Hehe...@Arau does eff in RTFI stand for the F-word?
@M.A.Ramezani You'll need to ask @Dam about that!
@Araucaria Donchuworry. I already reloaded my shotgun.
@Araucaria Nah...I mean in your answer.
> RTFI - Read the instructions
ATFQ - Answer the question
LOL - classic!
@Araucaria thanks :-)
@M.A.Ramezani Erm, yes, it's the F-word ... It's just there so that students never forget the rules!
@M.A.Ramezani But I never actually say it!
Back a bit later guys! Ciao!
Hey, @M.A.Ramezani, I have a chemistry question c:
4:16 PM
@Araucaria Ba bye!
@HarryCBurn Hullo!
@HarryCBurn Bring it on!
Ah...Great! Now I can do @Harry and ping Harry.
Aww... I think I just missed Araucaria.
Why is Helium in group 0, but has a group number of 18? Are they different things?
@M.A.Ramezani Yup! :)
@DamkerngT. Why did I read that as messed?
@HarryCBurn Huh?
Oh, I see. They also call group XVIII as group 0.
4:19 PM
Q: toggling in the binary machine instructions -- I don't understand that

Cookie MonsterExample with a context (Java: A Beginner's Guide, 6th Edition by Herbert Schildt): OOP is a powerful way to approach the job of programming. Programming methodologies have changed dramatically since the invention of the computer, primarily to accommodate the increasing complexity of programs....

Aww... that reminds me of the way I entered computer instructions manually when I was a freshman.
It's a bit hard to imagine for younger people, I think.
My imagination is broken.
It was a very cumbersome and tedious task.
@DamkerngT. Reminding yourself? :}
@HarryCBurn Harry, no. The better number to use is XVIII, then VIII (A), then 0.
There are the same things.
But don't ask me about the history. Cuz this was the first time I heard group 0!
4:28 PM
God damn ;-;
@M.A.Ramezani I thought there were about 8 groups ;-;
Nah, there are 18 groups.
Two are s block, 10 are d block, and six are p block.
The f block ones are down there, group 3.
Actinides and lanthanides.
Oh, right, I think this is where we're lied to throughout secondary for the sake of simplicity. Like how we're taught about the shape of atoms.
Trust me. When it gets to quantum chemistry, you're lied to all the time, until the third term of nuclear physics in university.
Ah ;-;
4:36 PM
@DamkerngT. You're making yourself sound old :P. For some reason I'd always imagined you as being younger... The wonder of the internet, the true "fountain of youth".
@Catija That could be the reason. :-)
BTW, awesome photos out there!
Thanks :D
@Catija Hullo! FYI, @Dam is 484195698445419187...
...18154165641616354165 years old.
Hi @M.A.Ramezani :D That's ancient!
@Catija Well, don't look at his innocent face/helmet.
He's observed three universes till now.
4:39 PM
That number doesn't make me just old; it makes me a relic!
Or an antique.
Is he really The Doctor?
The Doctor was a cheap copy of @Dam.
4:46 PM
This sucks!
@M.A.Ramezani What?
I have to study English for Tuesday's end-of-the-term exam.
Don't get me wrong.
I love English.
But not the "English" taught officially in Iran.
Oh, so the "official" English isn't "natural" English?
In one exam, the teacher asked me to write a question for this sentence:
> He makes a cake for himself.
@Catija what would your made-up question be for this sentence?
For whom does he make a cake?
4:51 PM
(Note that the consensus is that he makes the cake for himself and no one else.)
I wrote
> Who will he make a cake for?
Or maybe I wrote
> For whom will he make a cake?
I don't have a clear mind on that.
What was the "correct" answer?
But guess what... My interrogatory sentence was wrong.
@Catija He didn't say.
He said that I mustn't use will!
I wouldn't use will... because it's future. "Makes" is present.
That's why I said "does" instead of "will".
But dunno...I remember the case was exactly like you should make a future tense question.
What's wrong with chat? O.O
Oh, I remembered a way better example:
ok. Hit me. :D
4:55 PM
Which rule in English says that the world record is wrong?
It's a noun phrase.
World is a modifier. Right?
Yes, as opposed to "American" record or whatever.
He says it's wrong.
That's odd. Does he say why?
Since in our book, the world's record is documented!
That's highly logical.
I mean, thousands of sporting events every year are using it, so whatever he thinks, it's still correct due to usage.
4:58 PM
Now there was none of us that would tell him "You idiot! The book had to use one of them. It used the form with the apostrophe."
I mean, originally, it probably was "world's record"... Technically "American" is possessive, too.
I'm not saying you're wrong, just that I can understand. Regardless, most people use "world record".
Bottom line is, our English Temporary book for idiots is 17 years old.
@Catija Exactly! But our teacher this year... Sigh
01:00 - 17:0017:00 - 22:00

« first day (43 days earlier)      last day (455 days later) »