Language Overflow

CowperKettle

00:39

yes, Trump vs Clinton

> Researchers, for the first time, have decoded and predicted the brain activity patterns of word meanings within sentences, and successfully predicted what the brain patterns would be for new sentences.

sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/08/160815094623.htm

> "Using fMRI data, we wanted to know if given a whole sentence, can we filter out what the brain's representation of a word is -- that is to say, can we break the sentence apart into its word components, then take the components and predict what they would look like in a new sentence,"

> ... For example, the computer model could predict the brain pattern for a sentence such as, "The family played at the beach," even though it had never seen that specific sentence before. Instead, it had only seen other sentences containing those words in different contexts, such as "The beach was empty" and "The young girl played soccer."

Nihilist_Frost

01:17

0

Q: Pronunciation of "gender"?

Recently I heard native speakers pronouncing 'gender' with a soft 'g', almost sounding like 'jan' from 'January'. I've instantly looked it up at dict.cc and YouTube: seems like this is the correct pronunciation. However, I'm wondering why the 'g' isn't a hard 'g'. I mean 'get' or 'git' (the soft...

pronunciation

Catija

02:28

@CowperKettle ... Huh? On ELL...

CowperKettle

@Catija Ah!

Make ELL Great Again!

CowperKettle

03:00

Namaste, @V.V. ji!

V.V.

Oh, we are having elections!

Sawasdee kha!

CowperKettle

Yes, USA in November, Russia in September, and ELL right now

V.V.

And ELU.

CowperKettle

Ah, yes

V.V.

And as I am curious, I got a new badge.

I'm sleepy, it's six.

Very early morning.

A...

CowperKettle

03:09

It is 8:10 am here

V.V.

Are you translating anything?

CowperKettle

Yes, a Product Quality Review

ICH Q7

EU Guidelines Volume 4 Chapter 1 "Pharmaceutical Quality System", page 7

(0:

These are the regulatory documents describing the contents of a PQR

> Обзор обязательств проведения мониторинга после регистрации в случае получения новых регистрационных удостоверений или внесения изменений в регистрационное досье

This kind of stuff

V.V.

I always get confused when you write abbreviations

CowperKettle

ICH is a regulatory body, inter-governmental

For standards in the pharma industry

> The International Conference on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH)

They post recommendations which all pharma producers should try to adhere to

V.V.

It's not allowed to use two or tree nouns in genitive in fiction (in Russian )

Thre

Three

CowperKettle

03:21

That could be, but it's not me who wrote the sentence

I'm translating into English

> Review of post-marketing commitments for new marketing authorizations or for changes made to the Drug Master File

I should remodel this sentence

> Review of post-marketing commitments in case of obtainment of new marketing authorizations or introduction of changes to the Drug Master File

V.V.

Introduction can be removed.

CowperKettle

nods

V.V.

A useless word.

CowperKettle

I don't want the reader to read it as "in case of obtainment of changes to the Drug Master File"

> Состояние квалификации соответствующего оборудования и технических средств

> The qualification status of relevant equipment and utilities

V.V.

In case of obtainment --don't like it

CowperKettle

03:32

> In case new marketing authorizations are obtained or changes are made to the Drug Maste File

I don't know how to word it overwise

V.V.

When, if

CowperKettle

> Review of post-marketing commitments if new marketing authorizations are obtained or changes are made to the Drug Maste File

That looks odd

Maybe my original attempt is okay: "Review of post-marketing commitments for new marketing authorizations or for changes made to the Drug Master File"

V.V.

Yes, and remove the second "for"

CowperKettle

nods

> Review of post-marketing commitments for new marketing authorizations or variations of the Drug Master File

V.V.

Can you give R-E full variants now?

CowperKettle

03:36

For the sentence?

Or the whole document?

V.V.

Ugu.

CowperKettle

Ugu, sentence?

> Обзор обязательств проведения мониторинга после регистрации в случае получения новых регистрационных удостоверений или внесения изменений в регистрационное досье

> Review of post-marketing monitoring commitments for new marketing authorizations or variations of the Drug Master File

V.V.

Not changes in...?

CowperKettle

The EU Guideline uses "variations", so I decided to use the same word

V.V.

Ins

What about the preposition?

CowperKettle

03:42

How would you translate this monster:

> Обзор любых контрактных соглашений, с целью подтверждения соответствия ЛС действующим требованиям возвратов, претензий и отзывов продукции, а также проведенных в это время расследований

@V.V. What preposition?

V.V.

В досье.

CowperKettle

Not needed. We mean "variations of the DMF". In case any DMF variations arise, the firm undertakes new commitments

Someone made a change to the DMF, that's a new variation of the DMF

The EU Guideline uses this phrase.

> For new marketing authorisations and variations to marketing authorisations, a review of post-marketing commitments. (EU Guideline)

V.V.

Ok

CowperKettle

I don't like "to"

The EU Guideline was clearly written by non-native speakers of English, so IMHO there are mild mishaps in terms of grammar

V.V.

However I don't think it's the right place to discuss.

CowperKettle

03:47

Why?

It's not sensitive information, because it's a boilerplate piece of text described in openly available guidelines

Boilerplate (text)

Boilerplate is any text that is or can be reused in new contexts or applications without being greatly changed from the original. == Etymology == "Boiler plate" originally referred to the sheet steel used to make water boilers. The analogy between the curved steel used to make water boilers and curved metal used to print prepared text was based both on the curved shape of the plate and to the fact that it had been prepared elsewhere before being incorporated into a downstream producer’s finished product. In the field of printing, the term dates back to the early 1900s. From the 1890s onwa...

CowperKettle

04:09

The March of Nestor Makhno's Army:

Розпрягайте, хлопці, коней. Національна заслужена капела бандуристів України ім Г І Майбороди

►

I never knew it was the march of his army

I just came across this record a couple of days back while jogging

CowperKettle

05:11

> July Was the Single Warmest Month Ever Recorded

time.com/4453038/heat-wave-july-temperature

Morning, @snailplane!

Anonymous

@CowperKettle Good evening! :-)

Krishn Shweta

Morning!! Evening!!

I thought to ask about difference of "I was" and 'I were"... But found the same question

CowperKettle

Morning, @KrishnShweta!

Krishn Shweta

86

Q: "If I was" or "If I were". Which is more common, and which is correct?

My question of whether to use if I was or if I were. Which one is incorrect or nonstandard?

word-choice grammaticality subjunctive-mood

CowperKettle

"I were" can be used in subjunctive constructions

> If I were a carpenter, and you were a lady,
Would you marry me anyway, would you have my baby?

Krishn Shweta

05:27

I see...

@CowperKettle I can understand now....

@CowperKettle thanks

CowperKettle

You're welcome!

Krishn Shweta

:)

CowperKettle

Ой, дівчино, шумить гай Л. Маковецька i O.Трофимчук

►

A song about the same

A Cossack who owns no house tries to court a girl

If I have a table that lists glass vials of differents sorts, do I write "34244 pieces" or "34244 units"?

Meaning, 34244 vials.

3

Q: Stock quantity of products — the most proper abbreviation

What is a commonly accepted abbreviation with regard to stock quantity of (countable) products? As in: "200 units" of sth, just shorter. I've come across the form "200 pc.", but as it's coming from a non-native speaker and I haven't seen it before, I can't help having some doubts. Is this form ...

abbreviations business-language

Should one pluralize pc to "pcs" or is it okay to just write "21341 pc"?

This varies by region. The United States almost invariably uses periods for abbreviations, while Britain doesn't. — chrylis Oct 17 '13 at 20:29

OMG, so it should be pcs.?

CowperKettle

06:14

> Stavropol Cossacks will conduct raids against Pokemon GO players

Now I truly believe that we're having the warmest weather on record

Heat got to their heads.

Damkerng T.

06:53

@Catija Strange! I thought it would be lifetime.

"Coffee has a color, smell, you can drink it -- coffee makes you feel good -- it has sensory, emotional, and social aspects," said senior author Raizada.

I guess all the subjects were coffee lovers!

Anonymous

07:11

@CowperKettle I don't know what it should be, but "pcs." looks okay to me :-)

Anonymous

I think it's probably fine without the 's', too.

Anonymous

I guess there are four possibilities!

Damkerng T.

08:01

@snailplane I'll admit that "pc." looks strange to me!

Cardinal

08:32

Hi

Damkerng T.

Hi!

Cardinal

Can we replace "will" with "would" in conditional sentences so that it sound polite?

Damkerng T.

Could be, but it's probably not a good idea to understand it that way.

Cardinal

I am just checking different ideas

Damkerng T.

Today, I'm an unorthodox guy! :-)

Anonymous

08:35

@Cardinal Can you give an example?

Damkerng T.

Ah, you're here! @snailplane

Cardinal

If you clean the room I will/would be grateful

I will/would be grateful if you solve my problem

@DamkerngT. How?

What happened to you?

Damkerng T.

I think it's possible that some speakers will object to If you clean the room I would be grateful.

To these speakers, it doesn't work unless it's hypothetical.

Cardinal

I am indexing conditionals

in mind

That "would" is a ubiquitous word !

Damkerng T.

This may be helpful:

18

A: Difference between "if + present, will + infinitive" and "if + present, would + infinitive"

This is a very good question, and you are smart to raise it. Both your sentences are indeed grammatical,³ which is why you often find both sorts. In a nutshell, the one with would expresses a proposition that is less likely than the one that uses will. That’s because backshifting is used to indi...

Cardinal

08:41

I mean it has a lot of usage

Damkerng T.

I didn't talk about it as a rigid or even universal rule.

> If the pump still will not run ... it is probably in need of serviceable ...

An interesting usage from BNC (via the paper in the answer).

I suppose it's a bit like You and her are ... Some speakers consider this incorrect as well.

Some funny site behavior:

My answer should be viewed in the "descriptive" tradition, since most modern speakers no longer have a conscious understanding of the subjunctive mood or modality. However, note that it is compatible with Damkerng's answer. — user21820 43 mins ago

I saw that comment so I upvoted their answer to make his and my answers tied at one vote.

Now his is at 3, mine is at 2. :-)

Jim Reynolds

09:01

@DamkerngT. At least in speech, I suspect we might say this not uncommonly.

Damkerng T.

Should I understand this not uncommonly as "commonly" or "uncommonly"?! :D

> read extensively and intensively for different purposes in varied sources and increasingly demanding texts.

> (via: ell.stackexchange.com/q/100665/3281)

(Ah, I was going to write something about the sentence before I was interrupted!)

I think the sentence is awkward. That's what I was thinking.

But I don't know how to fix it,

assuming that extensively, intensively, different purposes, varied(various?) sources, and increasingly demanding must be in that order.

I think it's because the author chose to use read intransitively and introduced the object of read with in that makes me think the sentence is awkward.

Though I think it may still be grammatical.

Hmm...

Maybe the intended meaning was ...

> = read extensively and intensively texts (that are written) for different purposes (, texts that are) in varied sources and (text that are) increasingly demanding.

Plausible?

@user21820 This crossed my mind and maybe it was the root cause of the OP's problem. It looks plausible to me that the intended meaning was something like "read extensively and intensively texts that are written for different purposes, (that are) in varied sources, and (that are) increasingly demanding." In other words, the author might've tried to use "for different purposes in varied sources and increasingly demanding texts" as a single noun phrase, and the whole sentence can be reduced to "read extensively and intensively these kinds of texts". ("for different purposes" is ambiguous to me.) — Damkerng T. 1 min ago

Cardinal

09:34

@DamkerngT. I think "on" and "about" are better choices rather than "for"

Damkerng T.

@Cardinal I kept for because it was in the original, and it was ambiguous.

@DamkerngT.: And only now do I realize the sheer irony of this being the description of an English course! — user21820 4 mins ago

Haha!

Cardinal

:V

Jim Reynolds

10:24

@Tchrist is

No one can disagree with that, but I further claim that he's engaging in Trumpian strategies (making him a Christian?) to gain free media attention by expressing outrageous utterances. To wit: I know the current mod team and most site regulars, and with much of the site’s history.

In his campaign statement here:

english.stackexchange.com/election

The commission of such a blatant act of dysgrammicalitiosity must be designed to generate sensationalistic reactions, for which he has some response pre-prepared designed to whip up his angry base.

Damkerng T.

10:51

@JimReynolds But it's true!

CowperKettle

11:06

@snailplane thanks!

(0:

> Cossack! Protect your motherland from enemies!

I knew there would be photophops to this

The granite ball in Yekaterinburg was painted over again

The previous Pokemon painting was removed as 'vandalism"

Damkerng T.

@CowperKettle :D

CowperKettle

(0:

Some Cossacks should come over and take a group photo there.

Damkerng T.

Can't say if the ball is happy or sad!

CowperKettle

It looks sad to me

Damkerng T.

It's multi-emotional!

CowperKettle

11:13

nods

Jim Reynolds

11:39

@DamkerngT. I was trying to joke about the fact that his sentence is ungrammatical.

Him, of all people, with his command of the language. He was likely revising or something, and left it with a little mistake!

I'm trying to joke that such a mistake is outrageouos, given his knowledge and skill, in the context of a "campaign" statement on an English Usage site, and drawing a comparison to Trump's frequent remarks characterized as shocking, outrageous.

Phew.

Cardinal

12:02

@JimReynolds Which sentence?

Perfect, KSA planes drop bombs on hospitals

Sounds very civilized

Damkerng T.

12:55

@JimReynolds I wonder that, too!

Jim Reynolds

14:09

I know the current mod team and most site regulars, and with much of the site’s history. @Dam @Car

The with can't be there.

Damkerng T.

Hmm... I can understand why you don't like that with, but I don't think it's really ungrammatical.

Jim Reynolds

Or perhaps he first started the sentence with I'm familiar with ... then changed to ... It's ungrammatical as it stands.

Damkerng T.

(It's easier to read than read extensively and intensively for different purposes in varied sources and increasingly demanding texts!)

Jim Reynolds

After completing the course, students will be able to read extensively and intensively, (choosing whichever method suits the different purposes they will have when confronted with various types of texts). They will also be able to read increasingly demanding texts

That's one interpretation.

Damkerng T.

I was thinking about it in terms of grammaticality.

Like, is it really a good sentence?

Jim Reynolds

14:17

The reading one, or Tchrist's?

Damkerng T.

The reading one.

I think tchrist's sentence is much better.

Jim Reynolds

It's ambiguous, first of all.

My point is that his is not grammatical. And making a joke.about it. It's # officially ungrammatical! :-)

A typo, essentially.

Damkerng T.

I'd argue that it's more grammatical than the reading one, at least on my scale. :-)

Jim Reynolds

It can be better or worse than something else, but it contains a mistake (obviously an oversight).

Sometimes ungrammatical is ungrammatical.

Damkerng T.

In formal writing, maybe. I read it as spoken English and I can't see any problem with it.

Jim Reynolds

14:22

I know people and with history.

Ungrammatical

Damkerng T.

> Yes, I did that, and with your approval.

Fine with me.

> I'm telling you. I know them, and with all the history.

Jim Reynolds

Not a valid comparison, friend.

Damkerng T.

Also fine with me.

Jim Reynolds

:)

Damkerng T.

:)

Jim Reynolds

14:24

Yes, your second one is also ok.

But not Tchrist's

Haha

Damkerng T.

Hmm... they aren't similar?

Jim Reynolds

Not similar enough to render the former grammatical.

Damkerng T.

Interesting!

Jim Reynolds

If it were , and with their history or something, then maybe.

CowperKettle

> Remarkably 30% of participants who previously consulted the Internet failed to even attempt to answer a single simple question from memory. (unremarkably, no comma after 'remarkably')

sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/08/160816085029.htm

Jim Reynolds

14:27

# I know you, DEAD, and with much of this room's history.

I would prefer a comma there, but ....

Damkerng T.

@CowperKettle They may need the internet to be able to answer a simple question from memory. :P

Jim Reynolds

@Dam, you want to assess the original "reading" sentence's grammaticality?

Damkerng T.

@JimReynolds Very much!

Jim Reynolds

Can we repeat it here?

It was a list item, right?

Damkerng T.

I did quick little research and I think it was mutated from a stock phrase in an academic circle.

@JimReynolds It's ambiguous. I'll repost the sentence. A moment.

> The students will:
## Reading/Comprehension
- read extensively and intensively for different purposes in varied sources and increasingly demanding texts.

Jim Reynolds

14:31

I assume you know what extensive reading and intensive reading are?

Educator's terms.

Damkerng T.

@JimReynolds That part is not quite as exciting as the rest of the sentence. :D

Jim Reynolds

It's ungrammatical. Coordination issue.

There are at least two forks in the garden path, as well.

Damkerng T.

For me, The students will read in the class, fine. The students will read in varied genres, fine. The students will read in varied sources, um, hmm... The students will read in varied sources and increasingly demanding texts, what?!?

Jim Reynolds

Usually the objectives of a course say what students should be capable of doing upon successful completion of the class.

This suggests to me that it's not written by a native speaking experienced/professional teacher or administrator. For starters.

Is it supposed to be a description of what students will do in the class?

I guess. But "course objectives" has a standard meaning.

The confusion begins thus.

Damkerng T.

@JimReynolds Seems so.

Jim Reynolds

14:40

My mind prefers to choose one, then analyze.

But yes, we have a mess either way.

Multiple overlapping problems with grammar and semantics

Damkerng T.

A quick repair I might suggest would be: (The students will) read increasingly demanding texts extensively and intensively for different purposes in varied sources.

It could salvage the sentence in an important way, IMHO.

DEAD

Tries to find a way to make @Dam and @Jim nominate

Jim Reynolds

Agreed, robot.

Damkerng T.

@DEAD I'm sorry to say that I'm gonna pass (again!).

DEAD

@DamkerngT. (╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻

But then who'd nominate?

I want someone who's a chat regular to become a mod.

Damkerng T.

14:43

I hope at least J.R. and wendi will nominate.

Jim Reynolds

You both know that I'd get in trouble within 10 minutes

DEAD

@DamkerngT. They don't need to.

Damkerng T.

How about Catija and Kettle? :D

DEAD

You stay a mod as soon as you get appointed a mod.

Damkerng T.

Or you and Jim. :D

Jim Reynolds

14:44

My prejudice against Farsi-speakers disqualifies me

Damkerng T.

I don't know the rules, the numbers, etc. of this election even! (See how active I am!)

Jim Reynolds

Would you consider being a mod, @DEAD?

I think you are qualified

DEAD

@JimReynolds If no other good candidates nominate.

Damkerng T.

nods vigorously!

DEAD

But I'm sure I'd persuade @Dam to nominate.

Damkerng T.

14:49

just smiles

DEAD

Look, @Dam. I couldn't do it last time, and I'm not a popular guy.

I don't even have much rep.

You have better chances.

You should do it.

Jim Reynolds

@DamkerngT. One possibility means that students will read intensively (which serves one kind of reading purpose) and extensively (which serves a different reading purpose).

Damkerng T.

I don't think I'm that popular, but I agree that I may have some chances, but then again, I don't know how long I can stay active.

DEAD

@DamkerngT. But you're one of the most respectful and respected members of ELL.

If @Arau runs, he should take one of the positions.

But we don't have any other strong candidates for the other spot.

Damkerng T.

@DEAD What's the point if I somehow got elected and can't do the job?

DEAD

14:52

Unless Nathan or Catija nominate, but they're meh like me right now.

Damkerng T.

Yes, I would vote for Araucaria!

Jim Reynolds

You'd certainly be very helpful, @Dam.

DEAD

@DamkerngT. Why wouldn't you be able to?

Damkerng T.

@DEAD Aww... how so?!

@DEAD Well, I have my reasons.

DEAD

@DamkerngT. They'd nominate if no one else does.

Damkerng T.

14:53

@DEAD Let's hope they will, then!

DEAD

@DamkerngT. Dude, if this about robots taking over humans, don't worry. I'll take care of the whiny humans.

Jim Reynolds

I thought you just didn't want to feel responsible.

Damkerng T.

smiles, as it's the best thing he can do...

Jim Reynolds

But did you review the responsibilities and "qualifications?*

Damkerng T.

@JimReynolds I haven't read it yet this time. I guess it's more or less the same as the last time.

Jim Reynolds

14:55

If you'd consider it, maybe we can look at them together and help you evaluate.

Damkerng T.

@CowperKettle I'd like to see you being a mod! :D

CowperKettle

@DamkerngT. As soon as they start paying for that, I'm in.

Jim Reynolds

I encourage you if you think you might enjoy it.

Damkerng T.

@JimReynolds I wish I could enjoy it. I know I would, if I could.

Jim Reynolds

O.O

You doubt your capability to do it well?

Damkerng T.

14:57

In a way, yes, but probably not in the way you're thinking about.

Jim Reynolds

In what way?

Damkerng T.

So, let's move on to some other subject. :D

DEAD

@Dam thinks his Natural Language Processing might fail.

@DEAD thanks :) — Aamirah 34 secs ago

Now you don't see that everyday

Jim Reynolds

Oh, maybe you doubt the, sort of personality requirements.

Damkerng T.

@DEAD :D

DEAD

14:59

@JimReynolds This must be it, but I think @Dam has the ideal personality for modship.

Jim Reynolds

I am sure you can do it well with your natural personality.

Transcript for