@snailboat In case you have both LPD and CEPD, I am wondering how they compare. Which do you think is better and why?

Place of the day: Uktus Hills Park, Yekaterinburg

I composed an ode to Uktus

I have a huge table the ECG results for 200 people. In the 90% of cases, the result in the table cells is норма

I've translated it as normal

I wonder if other words\phrases are more conventional

Within limits, maybe?

@JasperLoy , @userr2684291 , @snailboat , Thank you for your answer. I finally found the pronunciation in Merriam-Webster dictionnary which is perfect for me now :)

@CowperKettle I think what word you use depends on what you exactly mean by normal.

@JasperLoy What I mean is, for instance, that this particular patient's ECG has no signs of pathology

And this is true for 90% of the patients in the study, so this column in the table is replete with "normal"

@CowperKettle I see. I think you can call the results normal or pathological otherwise in that case.

@snailboat I also prefer LDOCE to CALD. I think overall, Longman does a better job than Cambridge in their dictionaries.

@snailboat I don't know how often they update the online edition, but the printed edition was published in 2003 and there is no twelfth edition in sight.

@snailboat It is not IPA, but in what sense is it inferior?

Anyway, I now use a combination of the ODE and the SOED.

The former has more examples for current English and more shades of meaning for current English, while the latter gives the pronunciation for every headword, has rare words, and has less restrictive definitions for some words.

I thought the LPD wasn't quite the same thing as the LDOCE.

But anyway, I really dislike the design of the Cambridge dictionary website, so I never really use that. The same with Collins. Sometimes it's alright, but I don't think the layout with multiple dictionaries on one page is that great. Even thefreedictionary.com does a better job at clearly separating different dictionaries (granted, on the Cambridge and Collins websites, we're talking learner's vs. ... adult dictionary versions, but still).

@userr2684291 Yes, they are different.

The same with MW, really. I remember when I figured out that there are other entries if you scroll further down. And have you seen their latest attempt at design? What's up with those commented-out example sentences? Haha.

@userr2684291 I emailed Collins long ago and asked them why they had so many dictionaries on the same site. In particular, Webster's New World College Dictionary really should not be there. I don't know how it is related to Collins, but really American and British definitions are 99 per cent the same.

@userr2684291 At least the MW site looks clean and simple enough for me though. But MW learner's can be found at learnersdictionary.com.

// TODO fire the designers

@JasperLoy I like their learner's dictionary, but the search function isn't as good as on ldoceonline.com.

Even Google is changing the design of the mail, contacts, youtube, etc. Things are becoming from bad to worse, as far as my aesthetics judgement is concerned.

But as long as many people like it and they make money, they are happy. Maybe my taste is just weird.

Haha. Eh, we'll get used to it. I don't even remember that original Google logo anymore, and when I first saw this one I thought it absurdly cartoonish.

You probably know my favourite colour by now.

Da ba dee.

@JasperLoy The MW website doesn't look as clean anymore. It looks cluttered and... compressed and... right-justified.

There's some sort of discord between the fonts or whatever, I find.

@userr2684291 I asked them about a new edition of the unabridged, and they said there probably would not be any, and I asked them about a new edition of the collegiate, and they said nothing.

I haven't subscribed to their website.

So I don't even know what it looks like in the privileged mode.

I don't subscribe to anything either. I only subscribe to some channels on youtube.

Haha.

I intend to make more vids and keep my channel for a while. =)

I realised I should write music by who and lyrics by who in the songs, which I just did.

I hope you earn money off that stuff, haha.

I can't, because nobody watches them except myself, mostly. It would need 1000 times more activity before I can even try to monetize it.

Lol.

Even on a channel with say 100 subscribers, there are no ads.

Even if I don't delete my channel again, I would at most get 5 subscribers.

You can always buy views, etc.

LOL

Fake it till you make it, I think is the pertinent expression.

But I am quite happy with the two vids there now. To me, it is masterpiece, lol.

I will be wearing the same shirt in all my vids, because that is the only thing I wear at home, lol.

Of course, I have many copies of the shirt, so I do wash and change them, lol.

Haha.

I do the same; I have a couple of shirts which look almost identical and I wear them a lot. I like to think of it as consistent, rather than incredibly boring.

On Monday night, a tourist couple asked me to take pictures for them.

It happens very often, people asking me to take pics.

I hope a beautiful girl asks me to take pics for her soon, then I can ask her out on a date conveniently, lol.

Just don't do it while her boyfriend is there.

I think I know why people often ask me for directions and pics instead of asking others. It is because I am usually alone while others go out in groups.

So the band The HARDKISS showed up on my iTunes suggestions and now I may have to learn some Ukrainian. Julia Sanina has a nice voice.

@snailboat This is a very good answer!

:>

One might well argue they're dictionary-adults.

It would be a silly argument but one nonetheless!

(0:

It's not a problem for me in most of the cases not to have the pronunciation. I am trying to reach C2 level in English so archaic words are always good to know.

@snailboat I am more than a basic learner even though sometimes I may look like not English at all :p

@Hexacoordinate-C I don't think that's what C2 is about.

It's scarcely about learning archaic words, at any rate. Present-day English has so many words and idioms that you don't really have time to learn the archaic ones.

But even the exams for these proficiency levels aren't that insane to require you to learn archaic words.

Different dictionaries will also mark different words as archaic or rare. I find that ODE considers many words rare even though these are found in smaller dictionaries.

Rare words are truly the best words.

But yeah, anyway. You only need to know archaic words if you're reading older texts or such.

ODE is the only big dictionary that defines the countable noun youth as a young man, while other big dictionaries define it as a young person, especially a young man.

The difference is that the former allows for men only strictly, while the latter also allows women.

Haha, obviously.

I have done a lot of checking on this youth thing. That is my conclusion, but I might be wrong.

Well... LDOCE says "a teenage boy – used especially in newspapers to show disapproval".

I do not like how the Cambridge Guide to English Usage mentions that youth can only refer to a young man.

A usage guide should at least mention that women are allowed too.

But then again one can argue that ODE and CGEU write this way because they are meant to guide the reader to the majority of cases.

But maybe it doesn't anymore.

Now the learner's dictionaries define it the restrictive way. That is understandable because learner's dictionaries are meant to have fewer definitions anyway.

@JasperLoy Would you use youth to refer to a young woman?

True dat.

@userr2684291 I myself would avoid using the countable noun completely, but if questioned, I would say this use to refer to a woman is acceptable. I cannot call it wrong.

I think I have seen in the full OED at least one citation from a long time ago where it refers to a woman.

But there are no recent citations for that.

Who knows? Maybe it's because people follows these dictionaries and guides and so they stop using it to refer to women.

I also think it can refer to a young woman. I'm sure I've heard it somewhere, but the especially remark is rather pertinent.

I don't think that's how that works. No one uses dictionaries.

I do, lol. But I am mad, lol.

(:

Anyway, say Jane is a young woman. I would say something like 'That youth Jane has a lot of energy!'

How can that be wrong?

To say it is wrong is just very wrong.

In fact, a long time ago, I posted an answer on ELU about this youth thing, and mentioned the especially part.

It is Saturday morning here, and it is raining.

I vaguely remember sentences like X is a youth and she's...

@JasperLoy That's great.

I have another week or so before I have to move back to my apartment.

My friend from uni is currently staying in someone's living room, lol.

He pays for it as well. He told me the owner walks in casually in speedos, turns his TV on and nestles in his armchair.

He laughed at me when I was looking for a place back in the... fifth month (whatever that is).

Thankfully the previous landlord likes me and he's even saving the room for me over these few months without me paying for it or anything.

No one does that, especially not during tourist season. So yeah, good guy, him.

Now my friend's willing to stay at my place and sleep on the floor, just because I have a freaking desk, lol.

He doesn't even have a coffee table in that living room.

I have no idea how he studied for his exams a month ago.

At least I helped him (and the whole group) with this project we had. I'm never doing a group project alone again.

Ah, I remember staying in various hostel rooms long ago when I was in uni.

@snailboat ell.stackexchange.com/a/180436/3395 Is this correct?

I think either is fine, but they each express a slightly different meaning. Which day do you think should I come over? regards do you think as supplementary, while Which day do you think I should come over? builds upon Do you think I should come over?.

Maaybee? Haha.