English Language Learners

happenask

02:35

hi guyz

Damkerng T.

09:27

0

A: What does the sentence "What do you understand about your business that other companies in it just don't get" mean?

"It" refers to "your business." We can rephrase the sentence to: What do you understand about your business that other companies in [your business] just don't get? The word "get" in "just don't get" means: Meaning of "get" from Wiktionary 15. To understand (often used as get it). ...

I didn't see anything wrong with the answer, so I voted it up.

Hello!

Anonymous

Hello!

Anonymous

Okay, I've read the question . . .

Anonymous

> "It" refers to "your business."

Anonymous

That's how I read it, too. It's slightly confusing (the original sentence, not the answer)

Damkerng T.

It's sure a pun.

Anonymous

09:33

It made me re-interpret business as referring to a general industry rather than the specific business owned by, well, a business owner.

Anonymous

I haven't found any puns yet.

Anonymous

> The word "get" in "just don't get" means: 15. To understand (often used as get it).

Anonymous

That too looks correct.

Damkerng T.

Isn't using a word and having us reinterpret it in another meaning a pun?

Anonymous

A pun is a type of joke. This isn't a joke.

Anonymous

09:35

It's more along the lines of a garden path sentence.

Damkerng T.

Ah, I see. I just thought that a wordplay can be called a pun.

Anonymous

You read it partway, then you realize you understood it incorrectly and have to re-read it

Anonymous

Yes, some types of wordplay can be called puns. This is not wordplay, as far as I can tell.

Anonymous

In context, you'd presumably read your business with the correct meaning the first time.

Anonymous

Perhaps not, but even if not, that only makes it slightly unclear, not wordplay.

Anonymous

09:36

It's not supposed to be funny, I don't think.

Damkerng T.

Maybe it's the question that made me think of it as a wordplay.

skullpatrol

A "pun" is usually ironic :-)

Damkerng T.

nods

My usage of pun is perhaps unsuitable indeed, I think.

Anonymous

I edited Sandeep Dhamija's answer.

Damkerng T.

Mostly formatting.

Anonymous

09:40

Yes.

Anonymous

I changed a couple bits of word order to be more natural and added a couple contractions

Damkerng T.

Interesting that you edited "he would" to "he'd", though. :-)

But I think it goes better together with "Let's".

Anonymous

The uncontracted versions sound very stilted in what is clearly an otherwise informal style

Anonymous

It's strange to read something that switches between informal and formal like that.

Anonymous

That doesn't mean the more formal wording was wrong.

Anonymous

09:42

The inconsistency could have been fixed by making the entire answer formal in tone.

Anonymous

But I felt that would have been a bigger change.

Damkerng T.

nods

Anonymous

On ELL, I sometimes edit things more than I might on a site not dedicated to learning English

Damkerng T.

Would it sound too weird saying "I suggest Jane for your consideration." or even "I suggest Jane to you"?

(In the case the first is not weird enough. :-)

Anonymous

Both sentences sound possible.

Anonymous

09:46

I admit I have to come up with a fairly contrived scenario for the second sentence :-)

Damkerng T.

Oh, this one might sound worse: "I suggest to you Jane."

Anonymous

It puts more emphasis on Jane.

Damkerng T.

Ah, so it's fine grammatically?

Anonymous

When you ask me about sentences out of context, I have to invent my own contexts.

Anonymous

I am fairly good at doing that, so I can contextualize a lot of sentences you might not normally say. :-)

Damkerng T.

09:50

(I'm more used to "I suggest to you that ..." or a clause.)

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. It's not exactly a normal sentence, but it sounds possible to me.

Anonymous

You wouldn't be able to move Jane to the end of the sentence unless you put rather heavy stress on it

Anonymous

I think.

Damkerng T.

With a little pause before Jane, probably?

Anonymous

Yeah.

Anonymous

09:51

@DamkerngT. I suggest waffles.

Anonymous

Waffles are tasty.

Anonymous

I suggest waffles [to you].

Anonymous

I suggest [to you] waffles.

Anonymous

Saying to you is a little strange.

Damkerng T.

@snailboat They are indeed. -- eyes widen

Anonymous

09:52

It seems like it'd be most okay if you were using it contrastively.

Anonymous

I suggest waffles [for you].

Damkerng T.

That's what I speculated. Inserting [to you] after or before sounds a little weird to me.

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. That would be considerably more normal, I think.

Damkerng T.

Hmm... for you somehow sounds a little better than to you in the waffles example.

Actually, it's a lot better.

Anonymous

> A painless polyp of unusual appearance with facial nerve palsy and mastoid air cell destruction should suggest [to the clinician] [the possibility of a malignancy in the middle ear].

Anonymous

09:55

This is a different sense of suggest

Damkerng T.

It sounds like "indicate".

Anonymous

Yes, though less certain

Anonymous

When you gave me your original sentence, I thought that the to-phrase could work contrastively:

Anonymous

But it's definitely better with a that-phrase than a simple NP

Anonymous

> I suggest Jane to you.

Anonymous

09:58

I'll go out on a limb and call that sentence bad. :-)

Anonymous

Having now thought about it way too much.

Damkerng T.

It sounded rather bad for me the first time I wrote it. :-)

By the way, poor Jane.

Anonymous

I still think it's possible, though.

Damkerng T.

10:26

0

Q: Present Perfect

How do I know when to use the present perfect ? I often get confused when I have to use for certain situaions Present Perfect or Past simple. When exactly can I use the Present Perfect.

grammar

Should I close it as "too broad"?

Anonymous

11:24

@DamkerngT. Sure, why not?

Damkerng T.

Okay, I voted to close it.

It's just because it's the OP's first question on ELL, I think.

Anonymous

I don't understand ELU's the-that tag.

Damkerng T.

Do we have it?

Anonymous

Not on ELL.

Anonymous

On ELU, it seems like it's on a lot of questions that are about that, but not the

Damkerng T.

11:26

Ah, I misread it. I see.

Have you seen this one?

1

Q: What's the meaning of "normalizing and centripetal power"?

What's the meaning of "normalizing power"? For example: Macedonia epitomizes borderlands because it is associated with heterogeneity, complexity, and overlapping identities, qualities that distinguish it from the state’s normalizing and centripetal power.

meaning

@snailboat I think it would be better to separate the from that.

I think it's possible to read "Normalizing power is a force that normalizes things, that is, it sets a norm and makes sure that it is observed."

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. There are cases where discussions of the two overlap.

Damkerng T.

However, I think this usage of "normalizing" is a little strange.

Anonymous

But I'd rather only see the-that on questions contrasting the and that

Damkerng T.

I might choose to say "normativizing" instead, even though it's not a real word.

@snailboat nods

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. Erm.

Damkerng T.

11:30

And if I had to choose an existing word, I think "standardizing" might be what the writer intended.

Anonymous

Normalizing and centripetal power to me, in this context, sound like they both mean roughly the same thing

Damkerng T.

I think the writer wanted to write centripetal in the sense of centralizing.

Anonymous

Figuratively drawing toward the center, toward the norm, toward the mean

Anonymous

A force which works against heterogeneity

Damkerng T.

So, it reads fine to you, normalizing as making things conform to the norm, or making things conform to the normality.

Anonymous

11:33

Normal + -ize, to make things normal

Damkerng T.

Yes, and dictionaries also say that norm is normal, though I use them differently.

Anonymous

Well, they're two different words with some amount of overlapping meaning.

Anonymous

Consider peak normalizing a set of audio files. In each file, you measure the peak, how far below 0dBFS the absolute value of that peak is, and then you multiply every sample by the ratio between 1 and that peak. That normalizes the audio file; do this to a set of files, and you've made sure they all have the same peak (0dBFS). They're all normalized (made the same).

Anonymous

When you normalize a vector, you keep its direction but change its length to 1.

Anonymous

Normalizing things is making them the same in some sense.

Anonymous

11:38

Centripetal force pulls things toward the center.

Damkerng T.

Somehow I feel that these two normalize(s/d) (vector and audio) are similar to each other, but they are not the same as the one used in the text.

Anonymous

Well, it has a slightly more specific meaning in mathematics.

Damkerng T.

Though I can extend my idea for the word to cover it.

Anonymous

But centripetal isn't normally used in this non-technical sense. It's figurative.

Anonymous

I understand both normalizing and centripetal here as meaning, figuratively, to move things toward the center, toward the mean, toward the average

Anonymous

11:41

Working against "heterogeneity, complexity, and overlapping identities"

Damkerng T.

Perhaps, I felt that saying normalizing those borderland people would make those people sound quite abnormal.

Anonymous

I read it as making them the same rather than different from one another.

Damkerng T.

While normativizing or standardizing can keep those people just being "deviated from the norm or the standard".

Anonymous

Hmm... I don't think I'd replace the authors words with either of those, personally

Anonymous

Normativize is "to make normative", that is, to declare that something should be done

Damkerng T.

11:43

I see. That's why I think I should check it with you first.

Anonymous

Sure. Though you are of course allowed to disagree with me :-)

Anonymous

I think I will +1 oerkelens' answer.

Damkerng T.

Oh the subtleties of English, I think I should trust you more than myself. :D

I think he read the text just fine, I just doubted the original a little.

Anonymous

It's fair to doubt the original. I don't think the words are commonly used that way.

Anonymous

But people often use words in ways they normally aren't--and that's okay, because context helps us understand

Anonymous

11:47

I'm reminded of all the things Ice Girl asks about here that she'll probably never see anyone say, ever again

Damkerng T.

Huh? I can't recall that.

Anonymous

Because language is productive, and people say things all the time that no one has ever said before

Anonymous

Her assignments are typically full of figurative language.

Anonymous

And the authors she's quoted often prefer to use their own figurative speech, not rely on stock metaphors

Damkerng T.

Oh, I think I can imagine that.

Her assignments are usually non-trivial.

Anonymous

11:49

A lot of figurative language is standard. Everyone knows it, everyone uses it.

Anonymous

A lot of metaphors are just part of the language, and we don't even think of them as metaphors anymore.

Damkerng T.

I just realize one thing--what she read were mostly non-technical stuff.

Anonymous

But writers often use their own metaphors.

Anonymous

At some point, understanding has to come from looking at context, understanding what the author is trying to say and interpreting their words, rather than from memorization of a lexicon and an exact set of meanings ascribed to each lexeme.

Damkerng T.

I think you're right.

Anonymous

11:51

Of course, you need to do a lot of memorization, too.

Anonymous

I'm surprised that someone suggested that the "centripetal and normalizing" question was entirely answerable by a dictionary and was therefore off-topic.

Anonymous

It seems to me like a good question, and a challenging one at that

Damkerng T.

I think "centripetal" is answerable by a dictionary, but the OP wasn't really asking about it.

The OP was rather specific about "the normalizing power".

Anonymous

I'm not so sure. I think it's figurative language here.

Damkerng T.

Presumably, the OP had already looked it up before posting the question.

Anonymous

11:54

And I don't think centripetal is normally used that way.

Damkerng T.

I mean, I think the OP might be able to understand it figuratively too.

Anonymous

(Though I don't think the author is the first one to use it that way, either.)

Damkerng T.

However, I also had a problem with this normalizing, so I think the OP and I might share the same problem.

I mean, norm, normal, and normalization (in other contexts) are fine to us, but this normalizing power, in this context?

Anonymous

A power which makes normal (= "the same")

Damkerng T.

That's what I thought before our chat.

Anonymous

11:57

"The same" isn't a perfect gloss, but

Damkerng T.

(Btw, I also guessed that the OP might be able to read it the way it should be read, but it might be a little too far of a stretch.)

Hmm... I think I remember you said that CGEL doesn't call a determiner an adjective.

Anonymous

Determiners aren't adjectives.

Damkerng T.

So aren't quantifiers, probably?

This question made me think of them: ell.stackexchange.com/q/23315/3281

> **More than one** student knows the answer.
**Many a** student knows the answer.

Anonymous

They're a type of determiner.

Anonymous

Depending on what you mean by quantifier.

Anonymous

12:07

And heck, what you mean by adjective.

Anonymous

Although there's no reasonable definition by which a determiner is a type of adjective.

Damkerng T.

I think both more than one and many a can be said that they work as a quantifier.

Anonymous

If you're going to lump them in with adjectives, you should just call them adjectives.

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. I think many and more than one quantify.

Anonymous

The a doesn't really seem to do any quantifying.

Damkerng T.

12:09

nods -- That's more concise!

Oh, that's your point.

Anonymous

But you could say many a is a single word.

Anonymous

After all, you can never put anything between the two.

Anonymous

And that solves the problem of explaining why you have two determiners.

Anonymous

Many a could just be considered a single determiner.

Anonymous

In that case, you could call it a quantifier.

Anonymous

12:11

In CGEL, determinative is the part of speech, not determiner

Anonymous

This is confusing because most people who acknowledge determiners have followed Quirk et al 1985, who swapped the two

Anonymous

And CGEL says that determiner is a function, like attributive

Anonymous

Determinative is a part of speech, like adjective

Anonymous

So in that analysis...

Anonymous

One, two, three, ... are determinatives, and so are articles like a and the

Anonymous

12:12

In fact, there are a bunch of determinatives. Their main function is the determiner function.

Anonymous

Usually they stand alone, but sometimes you can make determinative phrases with a determinative as the head.

Damkerng T.

Oh, they separate PoS from functions?

Anonymous

Yes.

Anonymous

Traditional grammar conflates category and function.

Anonymous

But that makes it complicated to describe the functions a particular word can have.

Anonymous

12:14

Because word classes often overlap in particular functions.

Damkerng T.

nods -- That's quite true.

Anonymous

So it's simpler if you separate the two.

Anonymous

This is why I say things like attributive adjective

Anonymous

Attributive is a function, adjective is a part of speech

Damkerng T.

A-ha!

Anonymous

12:15

Other things can be attributive. Adjectives sometimes aren't attributive.

Anonymous

> the red dog　←　red has attributive function

Anonymous

> The dog is red　←　red has predicative function

Anonymous

In CGEL's terms, be is the actual verb there, and red is a "predicative complement", a type of complement which is semantically like a predicate, but syntactically is a type of complement to a verb

Damkerng T.

nods I think I begin to get their ideas.

Anonymous

Parts of speech in modern grammar are typically distinguished on morphological or syntactic grounds.

Damkerng T.

12:18

Hmm... what about things like "The facts mentioned above". A postpositive?

Anonymous

> The facts ~~that were~~ mentioned above

Damkerng T.

I meant it as a noun phrase.

Anonymous

Me too.

Anonymous

> the facts [ ~~that~~ ~~were~~ mentioned above ]

Anonymous

Well, you can explain that phrase more than one way.

Anonymous

12:21

You could call it postpositive.

Anonymous

Maybe I should abandon the ellipsis analysis

Anonymous

I've been clinging to it :-)

Damkerng T.

I think explaining it as ellipsis is possible, but when we use the phrase often enough, it somehow doesn't feel like ellipsis anymore.

Anonymous

2

A: Include relative pronouns or not?

SHORT ANSWER: No, the writer did not omit a relative pronoun (and linking verb) and Yes, the sentence may be written with ... actions which are necessary ... LONGER ANSWER: It is true that many grammarians treat constructions of this sort as you suggest. They call this construction a reduced rel...

Anonymous

CGEL just calls it postpositive function.

Anonymous

12:26

They give an analysis similar to StoneyB's here

Damkerng T.

Ahh.. our good o' StoneyB.

We can always count on him.

Reading his answer, I found a lot of complements, and "Jerry McGuire" is on HBO now, so the phrase "You complete me" just popped up in my head. :-)

Anonymous

Hehe, I'm not familiar with that show

Damkerng T.

It was a very nice movie.

I think you'd love to watch it. :-)

Well, if love to watch is a bit too much, you could read it as like to watch, btw.

Anonymous

Adjectives also appear in predeterminer position

Damkerng T.

Eh?

trying to think of an example...

Anonymous

12:34

I have to look up an example.

Anonymous

Ah, adjectives modified by so

Anonymous

> so big a fuss

Anonymous

That makes sense

Anonymous

I should read this whole chapter

Damkerng T.

Ahh... too smart a man.

Anonymous

12:37

Ah, I found it

Damkerng T.

Yay!

Anonymous

> The AdjP begins with one of the modifiers how, so, as, too, this, that

Anonymous

Gee, that looks familiar! ;-)

Anonymous

> The AdjP has such or exclamative what as head

Anonymous

Those are before the article a

Damkerng T.

12:38

Eh? The AdjP has such or exclamative what as head?

Anonymous

> [ What a waste of time ] it was!

Damkerng T.

Ah, I see. It's part of a noun phrase.

Anonymous

> It's [ such a pity ] you can't come.

Anonymous

They classify those as adjectives in pre-determiner position inside the NP.

Damkerng T.

Oh! They are indeed AdjPs!

Anonymous

12:40

I haven't read all of any reference grammar.

Anonymous

Not even Martin 1975.

Anonymous

Though I really should.

Damkerng T.

What is the full name of that book (by Martin)?

Anonymous

Martin 1975 is A Reference Grammar of Japanese, and I'm sure I'd learn a lot from reading it :-)

Anonymous

By Samuel Elmo Martin

Damkerng T.

12:42

Oh! It's about Japanese!

:D

Anonymous

You'd figure that since Japanese is my primary interest I might have gone through the whole thing.

Anonymous

Every reference grammar I'm familiar with invents its own grammatical terminology.

Anonymous

Because they all come up with their own theoretical analyses to account for various minutiae

Anonymous

And although they often build on earlier work, you can usually find terms in one grammar or another you can't find anywhere else

Anonymous

And usually these correspond to minor theoretical contrasts not drawn elsewhere

Parth Kohli

12:45

Hello.

Anonymous

Hello!

Damkerng T.

Hmm... I'm sure that those minutae in Japanese grammar are quite different.

Hello!

Anonymous

Welcome to ELL chat!

Anonymous

Don't mind my blathering on about details :-)

Parth Kohli

Looks like we don't actually have any learners here.

Damkerng T.

12:46

How are you?

I am, really.

Parth Kohli

I've been here. And I'm all right - thanks! Yourself?

Damkerng T.

I'm quite fine. Nice to see you again!

Anonymous

I think I may be the only native speaker here out of the six icons I see. But I am not sure whether everyone here would call themselves "learners"

Anonymous

@ParthKohli Oh! In that case, welcome back!

Anonymous

I didn't recognize the name

Damkerng T.

12:48

@snailboat I remember him. :-)

Parth Kohli

I'd definitely like to improve my speaking skills. I'm OK with writing.

@snailboat That's not your fault: I don't think our visits have ever coincided.

A friend of mine shared this with me.

Damkerng T.

@ParthKohli Just pretend that you were really speaking. :D

Oh, you're the second one who mentioned the Linguistics Olympiad!

Parth Kohli

Oh, have they been mentioned here?

Damkerng T.

Yes, Fantasier mentioned the LO once.

Black letters on that kinda blue background is really hard to read, for me I mean.

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. It's hard generally. Blue is the color your eye is least sensitive to, if you have normal color vision.

Parth Kohli

12:51

You're not alone.

Damkerng T.

They should change the color, either of the text or the background.

Parth Kohli

I used inspect element and changed the colours.

Anonymous

Hooray!

Damkerng T.

Ah, that's a good idea!

Parth Kohli

@snailboat Dogs sense blue the best.

Anonymous

12:53

@ParthKohli Oh, I did not know that!

Anonymous

psychologytoday.com/blog/canine-corner/200810/…

Damkerng T.

Oh, they can see colors!

Parth Kohli

Also... this. dog-vision.com

I actually got this on one of CGPGrey's videos.

Damkerng T.

So, they designed that website for our K9 friends?

Parth Kohli

@DamkerngT. "K9" lol.

Damkerng T.

12:56

:D

Parth Kohli

Damkerng T.

A wheel of emotions?

Parth Kohli

Quite so.

Damkerng T.

Oh, I think it's useful!

Most learners are not very good at these words.

Parth Kohli

Yes, there should be a way to pin this on ELL's sidebar. These charts are precious.

Does ELL have a wiki or something?

Damkerng T.

13:01

Hmm.. probably not.

We have something called a "Community Wiki", but that's actually an answer marked as CW.

But we can write a lot in the description of a tag.

Parth Kohli

There should be a wiki on each SE website for useful information.

Damkerng T.

nods

Parth Kohli

That's how it is on reddit.

Damkerng T.

I think ELL has a kind of initiative called Canonical posts.

But so far, we have only two Canon posts.

Oh, somehow, this (lingclub.mycpanel.princeton.edu/challenge/thai.php) is easy for me.

Parth Kohli

@DamkerngT. Hahahaha.

Damkerng T.

13:06

;-)

Anonymous

An actual wiki could be nice.

Anonymous

It's possible to make a CW question here, including on meta.

Anonymous

Does reddit have a site corresponding to ELL?

Anonymous

Does reddit have a site corresponding to ELL?

Parth Kohli

There are many - neither are they famous, nor active.

reddit.com/r/Englishlearning

reddit.com/r/languagelearning

Anonymous

13:28

Ahh, I see

Anonymous

I don't really use Reddit

Anonymous

I used it a little bit this week though.

Damkerng T.

I think "non-standard use of modals for politeness reasons" is quite prominent in non-native speakers from various L1s.

Anonymous

Ah, generalization errors from standard uses of modals for politeness?

Damkerng T.

Chiefly, Hong Kong and Indian Englishes.

Singaporeans seem to be better in this respect.

Anonymous

13:34

Keep in mind that Indian English is usually not an L1.

Damkerng T.

nods

The study uses the term indigenized L2.

Anonymous

Ahh

Damkerng T.

13:48

"You had me at hello."

I like this line (from "Jerry Maguire").

Oh, I spelled the name incorrectly all along, it's Maguire, not McGuire!

Anonymous

Ah, I see

Anonymous

I edited an answer which referred to Macmillan dictionary as McMillan today.

Damkerng T.

Ahh... Not mine, I hope. :-)

Anonymous

One of Maulik's.

Damkerng T.

Phew!

Anonymous

13:51

Whether it should be MacMillan or Macmillan was hard for me to figure out at first.

Anonymous

I don't own the print dictionary, and the website uses small caps

Anonymous

macmillandictionary.com

Damkerng T.

It says "Macmillan Dictionary" in the title bar.

Anonymous

Yeah!

Anonymous

Which I totally missed.

Damkerng T.

13:51

(in or on?)

Anonymous

I eventually figured it out :-)

Anonymous

Hmm... I guess I'd say in.

Anonymous

I guess I'd be fine with either.

Damkerng T.

Yeah! I guessed right.

Anonymous

Prepositions are hard!

Damkerng T.

13:52

Indeed!

2

Q: Who is a person with 'integrity'?

The dictionary says that integrity is the quality of being honest and having strong moral principles that you refuse to change Still difficult to imagine what it means. For example, in a movie there was a guy, very successful, and he had an ugly wife. And other people, when they saw his wi...

vocabulary

Interesting.

Anonymous

Word of the day: hendiadys

Damkerng T.

Oh, never heard of it!

Ah, it must be related to normalized and centripetal power. ;-)

Anonymous

I'm curious who first used the term "unbounded dependency construction"

Fantasier

@DamkerngT. There are quite a lot of errors...

Damkerng T.

I think I found it earlier this morning.

Anonymous

14:01

When I search for it in quotes, I find a PDF scan of the relevant section of CGEL: lingo.stanford.edu/sag/L222B/papers/HuddlestonPullum-1.pdf

Damkerng T.

@Fantasier They missed the transcriptions, and misplaced tonal marks. What else?

Fantasier

@DamkerngT. Meanings.

Damkerng T.

They look mostly fine. Did I miss something?

Fantasier

Well, yes, mostly. | ทัน, to have time? (I don't think this is accurate enough); หลัง, thorn?

Damkerng T.

ทัน is passable, probably. I agree with you about หลัง. (I missed it indeed.)

How could they go from หลัง to "thorn"?

Fantasier

14:07

I haven't the faintest idea.

But then again it's just a challenge, not a lesson :P

Damkerng T.

Yep. :D

@snailboat So H&P are the ones who used it first?

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. No, it was just the top Google result.

helix

@snailboat Awww. You removed "snail" as a benchmark. :)

Anonymous

@helix I saw Damkerng's comment and realized I should probably suggest an alternative! So I stole his... :-)

Damkerng T.

Eh? I can still see "snail".

Anonymous

14:21

Click the refresh thingy

Damkerng T.

sobbing -- I couldn't see any change.

helix

@DamkerngT. Maybe the browser didn't update your cache. Try hitting Ctrl+F5.

Damkerng T.

@helix Thanks. But I tried that, and still can't see any effect. -- still sobbing

Back to the "integrity" question.

I think the word is usually translated into a Thai word which means honest, something sounds almost like loyal.

So, besides being about high morality, integrity for me always has a touch of being loyal or faithful, which is suitable in Graduate's context.

Transcript for