Language Overflow

Anonymous

00:39

Water can be count or non-count.

Anonymous

It doesn't make sense to say it is only one or the other.

Anonymous

Instead, we should look at uses of the word and how they pattern.

Anonymous

The ellipsis-based explanation is theoretically weak.

Anonymous

There is no reason to resort to ellipsis in this case, when you can simply describe things as they are.

Anonymous

It is not true that the term loses meaning when you use it with its proper meaning.

Anonymous

00:40

Instead, you are being more precise.

Anonymous

Water is non-count in most uses and count in some.

Anonymous

We can compare it to a noun like information and see how the count and non-count uses pattern.

Anonymous

Differently, of course. (There are hardly any count uses of information.)

Anonymous

The same thing applies to transitive and intransitive verbs.

Anonymous

It's more precise to talk about transitive and intransitive uses of verbs.

Anonymous

00:42

There are very few verbs in the English language which are always transitive.

Lawrence

01:57

@snailplane I agree with your point about classifying words based on how they are used within individual contexts, but there are norms regarding typical usage, and the intent regarding specific words needs to be considered.

With restaurants, the intent is clear: specific portions are prepared, served and billed. I'd accept "5 noodles" within that context as 5 serves (plates / bowls) of noodles, not 5 strands of noodles.

The normal definition of "noodle" doesn't apply; the word "noodle" is instead used as a metonym of the portion served.

It's not useful to cite restaurant orders when discussing whether a particular noun is countable because in restaurant orders, just about every noun is a metonym for the portion served.

That is, in that context, calling a noun countable reduces to calling portions countable, and casts no light whatsoever on whether the noun itself is countable.

That's what I was trying to point out regarding my dismissal of the waters counter-example.

I concede that I wasn't sufficiently rigorous in describing water as uncountable. I should have said that in typical, non-metonymic usage, the word "water" isn't used as a countable noun.

@DamkerngT. :)

Anonymous

@V.V. Here you go:

Anonymous

2

Anonymous

Zeta the Snail is growing up :-)

Anonymous

This was Zeta three weeks ago:

Anonymous

Jim Reynolds

02:31

@CowperKettle An attempt to systematically discover information about @CowperKettle and @DamkerngT.?

CowperKettle

@JimReynolds lol

@snailplane Nice! I hope it feels okay on the mesh (0:

Anonymous

@CowperKettle Well, the snail crawled there in the first place :-)

Anonymous

I think they like it because it's high up and because it has water on it.

Anonymous

If they don't want to crawl on something, they won't. They're very insistent about it :-)

CowperKettle

(0:

Anonymous

02:38

But snails can crawl across razor blades safely.

CowperKettle

Wow

I see, their foot is very sensitive

Anonymous

The snail is unharmed and does not mind the knife's edge :-)

CowperKettle

(0:

Anonymous

3

Q: How do snails avoid being cut while crawling over a razor blade?

This YouTube video shows a snail crawling over the edge of a razor blade without being harmed. The author claims that: To us, slug and snail slime is gooey and gross but the mucus is one of nature's best lubricants and allows a mollusc to glide over sharp objects unharmed. But something a...

Anonymous

02:40

Off-topic!

Anonymous

But 3 upvotes, so it stuck around :-)

Anonymous

Aww, the OP never re-asked on Biology.SE?

CowperKettle

Yes, biologists might have more answers. (0:

Jim Reynolds

Inform European snails. That they might keep moving in order to escape the blades of the savage French chef.

CowperKettle

03:19

Is it bad to have a platelet count of 122 instead of 180-450, I wonder.

Anonymous

03:48

@CowperKettle Mine is 190.

Anonymous

I have a weekly history of my platelet count.

Anonymous

The most recent results are: 163 173 173 179 199 160 184 195 190

Anonymous

The laboratory at the hospital I go to uses a reference range of 140–450.

Anonymous

I don't know how serious 122 is (harder to clot?) but it's not too far outside their reference range.

Anonymous

Quest Laboratories uses a reference range of 140–400.

Anonymous

03:50

(That's the other place I get blood tests.)

Anonymous

@CowperKettle Are you waiting to see your doctor to ask about the results?

Anonymous

@CowperKettle Although I'm not a doctor and I don't know much about the subject, I tried searching on Google, and most people seemed to say 120 isn't usually a big deal.

Anonymous

But I'm sure your doctor will have something to say if you ask :-)

Anonymous

It doesn't look like you need to worry too much, though. It sounds like it can wait until you get a chance to ask them for a more informed answer.

CowperKettle

@snailplane Yes, I also have been googling, and it's not a big deal, it's only a big deal below 50.

Anonymous

03:56

That's good to hear :-)

CowperKettle

@snailplane My doctor said the blood count was okay, actually. He probably overlooked the 122 figure. He is not a particularly keen doctor, and likes to drink.

Anonymous

Oh. Yikes! :-)

Anonymous

Well, maybe he saw it and dismissed it as unimportant without mentioning it.

CowperKettle

I'll try to get to another doctor. (0:

Anonymous

List of countries by alcohol consumption per capita

This is a list of countries by alcohol consumption measured in equivalent litres of pure ethanol consumed per capita per year. == 2010 WHO data == The table below for about 190 countries uses 2010 data from the WHO report published in 2014. The methodology used by the WHO calculated use by persons 15 years of age or older. All data in columns refer to year 2010. The column "recorded" refers to the average recorded consumption for the period 2010. Unrecorded consumption was calculated using empirical investigations and expert judgments. Total is the sum of the recorded and unrecorded consumption...

Anonymous

03:59

It looks like you outconsume us by a fair margin over there.

CowperKettle

He is not as bibulous as the endocrinologist I attended some years back. That guy was dismissed for drinking.

Anonymous

Ooh, bibulous :-)

CowperKettle

(0:

Anonymous

Word of the day: bibulous

2

Anonymous

@CowperKettle Well, at least he understood the effects of the alcohol on his endocrine system in detail.

CowperKettle

04:01

@snailplane On some visits, I helped him fill in the forms he needed to fill in for me, he was in such a disassembled state.

I don't know what he does now, after being dismissed from the hospital.

> Garrulous gentlemen on a verandah,
Bibbers or non-bibbers of illicit potations,
Rehearsing the acta and the agenda
Of Republican or Democratic administrations,
I am not committed to taking memoranda
Culled from the lacunae of your cerebrations.

"bibbers" is also nice

Anonymous

goo.gl/jjk7xu

Anonymous

Hmm, that URL didn't work right.

CowperKettle

I use the app for Chrome that is called Goo.gl URL shortener

Anonymous

I fixed it :-)

CowperKettle

(0:

Anonymous

04:04

Blotting paper

Blotting paper, sometimes called bibulous paper, is a highly absorbent type of paper or other material. It is used to absorb an excess of liquid substances (such as ink or oil) from the surface of writing paper or objects. Blotting paper referred to as bibulous paper is mainly used in microscopy to remove excess liquids from the slide before viewing. Blotting paper has also been sold as a cosmetic to aid in the removal of skin oils and makeup. == Manufacture == Blotting paper is made from different materials of varying thickness, softness, etc. depending on the application. It is often made of...

CowperKettle

Bibulous paper (0:

Anonymous

Rarely have I seen such a bibulous paper.

Anonymous

Bibulous. I'm going to keep saying that all week, and people are going to start looking at me funny.

CowperKettle

(0:

In about 1920 people stopped saying "bibulous paper", probably due to the Prohibition

V.V.

Morning. I was just looking at that tiny snaily. Thanks, Snailplane.

CowperKettle

04:08

Morning, V.V.!

BBL, I've got to go.

V.V.

04:32

The idiom is"scrape the bottom of the barrel "

V.V.

06:25

We have already seen this film together three times.Would anyone show me all possible places of "together "? Together we have already seen this film three times.

V.V.

06:36

We have seen this film three times together already?? I am not sure about this one.

We already have seen this film three times together.Should be correct.

Or better "might be correct ".

Hi,@Lawrence.

Lawrence

If you want it at the start, try altogether, we have ...

@V.V. Hi!

V.V.

Is "together " impossible?

Cardinal

The second sentence would never be composed by a native English speaker. It is meaningless unless that or which is inserted before resulted. Please tell us why you think you could use resulted here? — P. E. Dant 45 mins ago

Lawrence

Typing is cumbersome on phones.

Cardinal

3

Q: resulted vs. resulting

Consider these sentences: The next stage is to identify the defects in the image resulting from the previous stage. The next stage is to identify the defects in the image resulted from the previous stage. Which is correct or common? why?

word-difference

V.V.

06:43

You mean "all in all"

Cardinal

Hi folks

V.V.

Hi, Cardinal.

Lawrence

Switching to PC. Much better now.

@V.V. Together and already seem to clash. "Together, we saw this film three times." = "We saw it three times when we were together."

@Cardinal Hello!

V.V.

Oh!

Cardinal

Hello there

Jim Reynolds

06:48

@DamkerngT. Once one has heard the song a few times, it tends to play on encountering the word Bobby.

The elementary school class understands biology a lot better now that their teacher wears no clothes. — Jim Reynolds 18 mins ago

I hope my comment adds to the post.

V.V.

Are the rest correct?

Lawrence

@V.V. I think the problem is that when Together is at the front of the sentence, it looks like a rallying cry - "Together, we stand!" "Together, we can do it!" But already has a grumbling tone when used in the context you're suggesting. So "Together, we have seen this film three times already." pulls in contrary directions. That's just a hypothesis, though. Someone might be in the wings, ready with a counter-example.

@JimReynolds There may be minors on the site. (Yellow thingy.)

@V.V. The rest of what?

Cardinal

Would someone help me with P.E. Dante's comment?

Lawrence

@Cardinal Can you display it again, please?

V.V.

Of my variants of this very sentence.

Cardinal

06:56

13 mins ago, by Cardinal

The second sentence would never be composed by a native English speaker. It is meaningless unless that or which is inserted before resulted. Please tell us why you think you could use resulted here? — P. E. Dant 45 mins ago

Lawrence

@Cardinal The single upvote you see on the comment is mine.

Student

@DamkerngT. @CowperKettle where have you been? :) What updates did I miss? :D

Lawrence

@V.V. Your sentence is "We have already seen this film together three times."

Cardinal

@Lawrence Why do you think "resulted " wrong and why "which" fixes it?

Lawrence

Is your intention to say that you and your friends (together) watched it, or that you watched it three times altogether?

V.V.

07:00

@Cardinal, "is" should be removed to make it a sentence.

Lawrence

@Cardinal I'm not sure. If it was "in the image produced by the previous stage", it would be fine. Likewise, "in the image grabbed from the previous stage".

Jim Reynolds

@DamkerngT. Informally, two police came seems grammaticlish.

Lawrence

@V.V. That would work, but dramatically changes the meaning of the sentence.

@Cardinal In that context, the simple past just doesn't seem to fit.

V.V.

I know,just to make it a sentence.

Cardinal

You mean Images are not resulted but produced ?

Lawrence

07:04

@V.V. Ah. It's also the reason that we so often ask what the OP's intended meaning is. :)

Cardinal

@Lawrence "single past"? o_O

Lawrence

@Cardinal You got me worried for a while there. :P

Cardinal

:-)

V.V.

We together watched it three times.

Cardinal

@Lawrence I just got up from the bed, I need a cup of tea to be revived

Lawrence

07:07

@V.V. Both your initial sentences were fine - "already" can fit in both spots.

V.V.

Btw, is it correct?

Lawrence

@V.V. "Together" can also fit in either spot, independently of already.

@V.V. All the 4 variants I just mentioned are grammatical. Whether your sentence is correct depends on how well the sentence corresponds with reality. Have you watched it three times already?

Jim Reynolds

@Lawrence We had a light dinner, as usual, and went to bed early. Is it a special event? We had an ordinary dinner. We had a dinner of sausage and vegetables.

V.V.

Let's suppose wr have.

Lawrence

@JimReynolds Hmm, you have a point. You must be quite full after all those dinners. :)

@JimReynolds It's not an ordinary dinner if you're describing it with an adjective (or list its ingredients). The use of "ordinary" is rather ordinary there. Loose, even.

Jim Reynolds

07:14

@snailplane Bilibous pauper?

Lawrence

@V.V. By the way, could I trouble you to include links in your messages? Hover over the message you're responding to, click the arrow on the left, and select "reply to this message." This helps me regain your context while other messages float around.

@V.V. If it corresponds with reality, then it's correct :) . But that's just me being pedantic. You should use the phrase "grammatically correct".

V.V.

@Lawrence Like this?

Lawrence

@V.V. Exactly! You even save a few keystrokes because the name comes up automatically.

V.V.

@Lawrence I didn't know that, thank you.

Lawrence

@V.V. You're welcome. :)

V.V.

07:18

@Lawrence and thanks for your help

Lawrence

@V.V. You can now follow the thread of discussion by clicking on the left-pointing arrows backwards through the chain. Those arrows are at the left of their respective messages.

@V.V. No problem. :)

Jim Reynolds

@Lawrence I meant to submit each example for separate consideration. I understand that adding an adjective or prepositional phrase to the NP is special in some sense. But what's your point in deeming an ordinary dinner as ordinary here? And loose?

V.V.

@Lawrence Oh, I have learned a lot today!

Cardinal

@V.V. "Why do you think (that) "resulted " is wrong ?" what is wrong with this sentence?

Lawrence

@JimReynolds Ah, I was just wondering why adding the indefinite article didn't make the dinner an event in your sentences. On reflection, I think it's because it picks one of the dinners described - a big dinner, a late dinner, a dinner of fish and chips. I'm not fully satisfied with this as an explanation for why those dinners don't sound like gala events, but it might be a useful start.

V.V.

07:25

@Cardinal I don't.

Cardinal

26 mins ago, by V.V.

@Cardinal, "is" should be removed to make it a sentence.

Jim Reynolds

@Lawrence But already is useful if, for example, we're explaining why we don't want to see it again, or to convey we've seen it thrice within a short period.

Lawrence

@JimReynolds Regarding "separate consideration" - yeah, I knew that. Just having fun. :)

V.V.

@Cardinal I just wrote it was a clumsy sentence.

Lawrence

@JimReynolds Loose with the word "ordinary" - it doesn't describe the food; it just marks the word as not referring to 'gala' dinners.

@V.V. :)

Jim Reynolds

07:30

@Lawrence I think it would most often mean comprising foods we usually eat, a typical dinner (for us).

V.V.

@Cardinal "which" should be put before resulted

Lawrence

@JimReynolds Hmm, would you consider "Together, we have already seen it three times." to be a good way of expressing the idea, compared with @V.V.'s original "We have already seen this film together three times."?

Jim Reynolds

@Lawrence No. It's ambiguous. Most likely = altogether.

@Law don't think the joke is likely to shock any reader. If such bothers you personally, we may need to talk.

Lawrence

@JimReynolds (I hope I haven't crossed any lines with my previous comments.) The phrase "a typical dinner" has the word dinner qualified by typical. Out of all the typical dinners, this was one of them. So "dinner" isn't just sitting there as a 'noun word' on its own. That's what I meant by 'ordinary'. Not that the dinner (food) was ordinary. The other ordinary in my earlier message was in the sense that my use of the word "ordinary" wasn't very good. ...

Jim Reynolds

Because I'd want to strike a balance of some sort, and certainly consider your sensibilities. Maybe consult any relevant policies. Maybe ellicit some friends' advice.

Lawrence

07:37

... It was a 'loose' use of the word "ordinary".

Cardinal

@V.V. would you write the correct sentence that is in your mind? I'm confused.

V.V.

@JimReynolds Thank you.

Lawrence

@JimReynolds Exactly!.

Jim Reynolds

I'm very frustrated with this interface when using my phone.

Anonymous

@Lawrence I try to do this, but I apologize in advance for not doing so on phone messages. The old phone interface doesn't support it :-(

Jim Reynolds

07:40

Clicking on a reply's link to its referent kicks me from the room.

V.V.

:32178930The next stage is to identify the defects in the image which resulted from the previous stage.

@Cardinal

Cardinal

@JimReynolds That shouldn't happened. Do you have an Android phone?

@V.V. Ah- I guessed you were talking about my sentences :(, thanks

@Ahmad If you really have no idea why resulted could be substituted for resulting in this sentence, why did you suggest it? (Also, "which is resulted" is nonsensical in English. That phrase can never appear in a correct English sentence.) — P. E. Dant 22 mins ago

Jim Reynolds

@Lawrence Interestingly, I think this is standard in BrE, but AmE would (almost always?) use had.

@Cardinal Yes.

Newish version of Android

Cardinal

@JimReynolds I do not share the same problem.

@JimReynolds me, too- Version 6, Marshmallow

Lawrence

@snailplane No problem. Your is now the third reference to how hard it is to use phones with SE chat, in just over an hour in this chat room.

Jim Reynolds

07:48

@Cardinal You use the new version of SE's mobile chat?

Cardinal

Oh, I do not use the app

Anonymous

@JimReynolds Wow! That's new.

Cardinal

Google does not allow Iranians to use that app.

Lawrence

@JimReynolds It is interesting. :)

@JimReynolds Does my version mark me as non-AmE?

Jim Reynolds

@Lawrence I was intending only to demonstrate that we use articles with names of meals in circumstances other than to name a "special" occasion, like the (annual Ladies' Society) lunch . . ..

@Lawrence I think so, but no one's perfect. Big smiley.

Lawrence

07:52

@JimReynolds You succeeded. :)

@JimReynolds Don't worry, you can always try harder. :P

Jim Reynolds

O.O

Lawrence

Humour.

Jim Reynolds

@Lawrence Gasp!

Lawrence

@JimReynolds Didn't you see the Level 2 smilie?

Damkerng T.

@snailplane Yay! I hope she'll be as big as a coin soon!

Lawrence

07:55

Maybe I should have used the Level 3 smilie. XD

Damkerng T.

@JimReynolds xD

@Student Quite lot! (Check out the transcript. :-) snailplane and ColleenV are our moderators now (in addition to other moderators), BTW.

Jim Reynolds

If I activate the arrow to the left of Dam's reply, just above, it will take me to the link if it's already "loaded" above. But if it's older, requiring a Load more messages operation, I'm thrown out of the room and must join again, possible by using the back function on Chrome.

Damkerng T.

@Cardinal I think it's quite straightforward: result is an intransitive verb. (cc @Lawrence)

@JimReynolds That's very strange!

In [ A results from B ], A is the result. So saying [ SUBJECT VERB A *resulted from B ] doesn't make sense.

But [ SUBJECT VERB A resulting from B ] is perfectly possible.

Lawrence

08:12

@JimReynolds I appreciate that. In this case, I'll just say that it's tickling the boundaries as a comment on Main, and leave it at that.

Anonymous

Off-topic: Did anyone here know chicken and waffles was a thing? And like, since when has it been a thing?

Anonymous

On-topic: What is this be a thing idiom?

Damkerng T.

@Lawrence Interestingly, I feel like You got me worried for a while there is more AmE than You had me worried for a while there, or maybe somewhat more contemporary. (cc @Jim)

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. Yes! :-) Moderators have an activity page, by the way, where we can see what the other moderators are doing. If you load that page right now, it shows that all five moderators have been active this week.

Lawrence

@DamkerngT. While it's true that result is intransitive as used there, the OP didn't use it as if it was a transitive verb. There's something else going there.

Damkerng T.

08:14

@snailplane I was about to type "I've never had waffles as food", but then recalled that I might've tried that once or twice when I ran out of rice!

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. I haven't had waffles in maybe fifteen years or so.

Damkerng T.

@Lawrence The way the OP tries to use it, with which or not, turns it to be a transitive verb, I think. (which makes it ungrammatical)

@snailplane Yay!

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. I feel like it's most idiomatic with had. That's just my intuition.

Damkerng T.

@snailplane nods -- Noted!

Anonymous

I'm trying to catch up with the discussion, but I can't seem to find the example under discussion. Could anyone catch me up? :-)

Damkerng T.

08:17

> ell.stackexchange.com/questions/102972/…

> a) The next stage is to identify the defects in the image resulting from the previous stage.
b) The next stage is to identify the defects in the image resulted from the previous stage.

Lawrence

@DamkerngT. As a non-American (me), what you say sounds correct. But @JimReynolds is an American, and I think he's implied the opposite. :)

Anonymous

Thank you :-)

Damkerng T.

@snailplane My pleasure!

Anonymous

@Lawrence I only have my American English impression to share. I feel like the had version is likely to be the most common or idiomatic, but I don't think there's anything wrong with the got version. With got it sounds, hmm, more colloquial?

Lawrence

@snailplane Thanks for the feedback. I was speaking informally. :)

It's nice to know I sound the way I thought I sounded, even if I didn't think too much about it at the time. :)

Damkerng T.

08:25

@CowperKettle That's great news!

@snailplane (Off topic: Something that we can claim Thailand is #1: englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/infographic/…)

Lawrence

@DamkerngT. Simply dropping "resulting/resulted" works as well.

Damkerng T.

@Lawrence Ah, yes!

Jim Reynolds

@Cardinal I don't use the APP, either. But the website runs the new version by default, or you can select the classic version. I use the new one. Maybe I'll try switching back.

CowperKettle

@DamkerngT. not so great. I've decided to decipher the values, and have just discovered that RBC and PDW (whatever that may be) are above the norm. O_O The doctor just did not look at the figures, it seems

Jim Reynolds

Does the SE APP run chat differently?

Lawrence

08:32

@DamkerngT. "the image resulted from the previous stage" isn't a noun phrase. It's an independent clause. That's why it sounds weird as the 'thing after in' (grammatical complement?). The next question is why it cannot be a noun phrase when the variant that uses resulting is a noun phrase.

Damkerng T.

@CowperKettle Maybe the doctor has looked at them and took them as nothing serious.

CowperKettle

@DamkerngT. You don't know Russian healthcare. (0:

Damkerng T.

@Lawrence Agreed, in general cases. But judging from the way the OP tries to ise it, I think it makes more sense to think of it as a noun phrase.

@CowperKettle Obviously true!

We can't parse it as a clause, technically, in [ The next stage is to identify the defects in [ the image resulted from the previous stage ] ].

A noun phrase in the form [ NOUN PP ETC ] is quite common, though.

Lawrence

@DamkerngT. But it's not a noun phrase. That's the problem. I'm not sure why resulted has this property when similar words don't - posted, produced, grabbed, chosen, etc. I think it may simply be that the sense of the words as an independent clause simply swamps its potential sense as a noun phrase. Using those other words in its place doesn't produce an independent clause. Perhaps that's all there is to it.

SpringLearner

hello everybody

Lawrence

08:39

@SpringLearner Hi! :)

SpringLearner

@Lawrence How are you doing?

Damkerng T.

@Lawrence Hmm... now I'm not sure why you can't see the difference.

@SpringLearner Hi! And welcome to the room!

Lawrence

@SpringLearner I'm ok, thanks for asking. How are you? Have we met?

SpringLearner

@DamkerngT. Thanks

Lawrence

@DamkerngT. I'm not sure which difference you're referring to.

Damkerng T.

08:41

@Lawrence resulted and posted, produced, grabbed

SpringLearner

@Lawrence I am fine too. Thanks for asking. This is my first visit to this room. As english is not good,so I am thinking to participate here to improve the same. Hope i am allowed

Lawrence

@DamkerngT. Oh, I did. The sentence is fine with any of those.

@SpringLearner Sure. You're welcome to do that here. :)

Damkerng T.

It's the only verb that (in a main clause) can't be used in the pattern [ A VERB B ].

SpringLearner

@Lawrence thanks

Lawrence

@DamkerngT. Sorry, I'm not sure what you're trying to say.

Damkerng T.

08:43

@SpringLearner You're most welcome here!

Lawrence

@SpringLearner :) . We're talking about this at the moment.

Damkerng T.

So, basically, IMHO, the rest of your message is not very relevant. (Sorry for not quoting it, but I think you know which message. ;-)

Lawrence

@DamkerngT. Ouch. :)

(Maybe he's talking about someone else. :P)

(looks around. Nope, he's talking about me.)

Damkerng T.

@Lawrence That's right! :)

Lawrence

@DamkerngT. Ok, so let's take a closer look.

What are you disagreeing with?

Damkerng T.

08:46

It's a bit inconvenient for me to scroll up and down the chat.

I remember that you try to analyze it as a clause, rather than a noun phrase, and that's the part I don't think is relevant.

Lawrence

Here are the sentences again, followed by my comment.

29 mins ago, by Damkerng T.

> a) The next stage is to identify the defects in the image resulting from the previous stage.
b) The next stage is to identify the defects in the image resulted from the previous stage.

8 mins ago, by Lawrence

@DamkerngT. But it's not a noun phrase. That's the problem. I'm not sure why resulted has this property when similar words don't - posted, produced, grabbed, chosen, etc. I think it may simply be that the sense of the words as an independent clause simply swamps its potential sense as a noun phrase. Using those other words in its place doesn't produce an independent clause. Perhaps that's all there is to it.

Student

@DamkerngT. @DamkerngT. Goodie goodie! :) I have to catch up many more updates :)

Damkerng T.

@Student Hey, there!

Lawrence

@DamkerngT. Ah, I'm saying that it's not a noun phrase. So it cannot be analysed as a noun phrase.

Student

@snailplane Congrats!

@DamkerngT. present! :)

Damkerng T.

08:48

@Lawrence My point is it's obviously a noun phrase. It's just that it's an ungrammatical one.

Lawrence

@DamkerngT. Oh, I see what you mean.

Damkerng T.

Yay! :D

Lawrence

@DamkerngT. It would be more accurate to say that it was intended to be a noun phrase. Unfortunately, it isn't one.

This isn't a case where wishing it was makes it so. :)

Damkerng T.

@Lawrence Right! Strictly speaking, yes!

@Lawrence Exactly!

Lawrence

@DamkerngT. Glad you agree. So the rest of my comment is admissible.

Damkerng T.

08:51

@Lawrence I didn't think you got the wrong idea or anything. I just thought that it was a bit too complicated.

Lawrence

@DamkerngT. Oh, you should have said that earlier. :P

Damkerng T.

@Lawrence Hehe! Sorry about that. Sometimes I can't make my point very clear. :)

Lawrence

@DamkerngT. It comes down to this: the version using the word "resulted" is so strongly the wrong type of phrase that it can't be forced to work.

Damkerng T.

nods -- It basically just doesn't work.

Lawrence

@DamkerngT. We got there in the end. :)

Jim Reynolds

08:55

@Lawrence We had there in the end.

Damkerng T.

I suppose there are many ways to skin a cat. Even more so when a cat is an ungrammatical (intended) noun phrase. :P

Lawrence

@DamkerngT. That's right. The alternatives I listed don't result in the 'wrong sort' (and yes, we're still talking about English) of phrase.

@JimReynolds I wondered where you went. :)

Jim Reynolds

@DamkerngT. :) Well digitally-produced utterance!

Cardinal

@DamkerngT. I see. Thanks

Lawrence

@Cardinal Um, read on.

Damkerng T.

08:57

@JimReynolds The bottommost turtle of mine only knows 0 and 1. :P

@Cardinal Sure! :)

Cardinal

@Ahmad "result" is an intransitive verb, we often (particularly I) forget to check some ostensible "easy" words in the dictionary, leading to such discussions. — Cardinal 1 min ago

Jim Reynolds

@Lawrence I realized that the got seems only somewhat more Americoidiomatic to me in your particular use. How about you got/had me (fooled [for a while])?

Damkerng T.

BTW (just another random thing), do people still say Hoo, boy!?

Cardinal

It is raining heavily here, I guess I saw a word for this type of precipitation, but I cannot remember that.

Jim Reynolds

@DamkerngT. How many ways are there to shell a turtle?

@DamkerngT. Yes. And girl, too.

Damkerng T.

09:03

@Cardinal Hmm... just a word? I guess it's not raining cats and dogs. (Or is it dogs and cats?)

@JimReynolds A-ha! I see. Thanks!

Lawrence

@Cardinal Single word? How about downpour?

Cardinal

@DamkerngT. Nope, It was a verb, I guess not an idiom.

Damkerng T.

@JimReynolds Probably ad infinitum.

@Lawrence Nice one!

Lawrence

@JimReynolds Had would be better there.

Jim Reynolds

@Cardinal What does torrent mean?

Lawrence

09:06

@JimReynolds Do you have any comments about my conclusion on the resulted/resulting question?

27 mins ago, by Lawrence

@DamkerngT. But it's not a noun phrase. That's the problem. I'm not sure why resulted has this property when similar words don't - posted, produced, grabbed, chosen, etc. I think it may simply be that the sense of the words as an independent clause simply swamps its potential sense as a noun phrase. Using those other words in its place doesn't produce an independent clause. Perhaps that's all there is to it.

Cardinal

@JimReynolds I know that, I think there is another word, too.

Aha- deluge

Jim Reynolds

You could be having a deluge.

Damkerng T.

@Cardinal Ahh

Jim Reynolds

We borrow that from French.

Cardinal

nods

Jim Reynolds

09:07

Time to return it, perhaps.

Cardinal

:-)

Jim Reynolds

Can have a downpour.

Damkerng T.

deluge makes me think of inundate, and time to move furniture to my 2nd floor.

Cardinal

What is the structure in this sentence:
"she lay inert in her bed".
I mean using "adjective" after a non-linking verb?
I guess I have asked this question before, but (Perhaps) I didn't understood the responses

CowperKettle

you have such floods where you live?

Cardinal

09:09

@DamkerngT. :))

The question was about "knocked inert", I guess.

Damkerng T.

@CowperKettle When it was coming, nobody knew if they would be lucky to have a free pool in the house or not!

CowperKettle

@DamkerngT. Your house has been flooded too?

Damkerng T.

I moved my furniture, and left Bangkok.

@CowperKettle Apparently, my area was the last area that was lucky enough to join the flood. :)

Though it didn't get high enough to get into my house.

CowperKettle

@DamkerngT. Nice! There should be a law for building houses on columns (0:

Damkerng T.

@CowperKettle Haha!

Jim Reynolds

09:12

@Cardinal It maeans she now has a nert in her bed

CowperKettle

@DamkerngT. Why not? That would provide good protection

Damkerng T.

:)

Cardinal

@JimReynolds I understand the sentence, but I cannot justify the grammar.

CowperKettle

In Siberia where I lived, all houses were held by columns, because the soil does not have enough strength

Damkerng T.

@CowperKettle I suppose people in the bottom rows wouldn't be very happy. :)

@CowperKettle Interesting!

CowperKettle

09:14

@DamkerngT. What are "bottom rows"?

Damkerng T.

@CowperKettle Like basement, first floor, or even the first few floors!

CowperKettle

@DamkerngT. Basically the construction of each house started with forcing hundreds of concrete columns deep into the ground using a special machine, very loud-sounding

I forgot its name..

Cardinal

@CowperKettle without columns, how a building will resist against earthquaks?

Damkerng T.

It was as high as 6.5m in some areas.

CowperKettle

@DamkerngT. But they would live above ground, why be unhappy?

Pile driver

A pile driver is a mechanical device used to drive piles (poles) into soil to provide foundation support for buildings or other structures. The term is also used in reference to members of the construction crew that work with pile-driving rigs. One traditional type of pile driver includes a heavy weight placed between guides so that it is able to freely slide up and down in a single line. It is placed above a pile (pole). The weight is raised, which may involve the use of hydraulics, steam, diesel, or manual labour. When the weight reaches its highest point it is then released and smashes on to...

This one. (0:

Damkerng T.

09:15

@CowperKettle I suppose the 2nd and 3rd floors are quite far from the ground. But even so...

@CowperKettle Haha! That makes me think of wrestling! :)

CowperKettle

Basically, why not build houses where the ground floor would be 5 meters above ground?

Cardinal

I mean building a house without using columns is dangerous in any corner of the globe including Siberia.

CowperKettle

When I was a kid, our city was only being built, and these pile drivers were heard all the day..

... beating concrete piles into the ground.

Damkerng T.

@Cardinal It's like She lay back flat on her bed or something like that, I think.

CowperKettle

@Cardinal It may be so, I'm not an engineer. (0:

Damkerng T.

09:18

@CowperKettle Ahh... I don't like that sound much.

CowperKettle

A good protection against floods (0:

Damkerng T.

@CowperKettle We just need to lift the columns a few more meters. :P

CowperKettle

Yes. (0:

Cardinal

@DamkerngT. I see. I understand the meaning, I cannot justify the grammar

CowperKettle

Stiltsville

Stiltsville is a group of wood stilt houses located one mile south of Cape Florida on sand banks of the Safety Valve on the edge of Biscayne Bay in Miami-Dade County, Florida. The structures stand on wood or reinforced concrete pilings, generally ten feet above the shallow water which varies from one to three feet deep at low tide. == History == Most sources claim the first stilt shack was built in the early 1930s, but some Dade County historians say that there were a dozen shacks in "the flats" as early as 1922. === Crawfish Eddie === "Crawfish" Eddie Walker built a shack on stilts abo...

Damkerng T.

09:23

@Cardinal I think it's an adjunct. a depictive one, but I don't know if it helps.

@CowperKettle Nice!

Cardinal

@DamkerngT. So I should read about depictive adjuncts?

Damkerng T.

Maybe. Though I think you seem to have a good grasp on the usage already.

Deo

And now I'm thinking about Howl's moving castle.

Damkerng T.

@Deo Hee

Jim Reynolds

patient.info/health/piles-haemorrhoids

Who has piles on their bottom?

Damkerng T.

09:26

o_O

Deo

Yeap. Some chatrooms are more interesting than others.

Jim Reynolds

If Dam has been programmed for that, his engineers really have gone too far!

Damkerng T.

@JimReynolds Some motto: Ford. Go further.

Jim Reynolds

:D

Damkerng T.

:D

SpringLearner

09:44

@Lawrence sorry I was late and could not participate. I am basically a software engineer and there is heavy loan on me for now

CowperKettle

09:54

Somebody over-stamped the United Russia party slogan with "We have no money for you! But you hold on there!"

And firefighters were called on to fix it.

Transcript for