« first day (1468 days earlier)      last day (3469 days later) » 
00:00 - 15:0015:00 - 00:00

3:00 PM
@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Exactly. Which is why I feel a greater/larger number of X is more natural sounding than a bigger number of X. Especially in scientific literature which is what the Q was about.
 
does it mean there was a gap of ten years between the two tests?
like in July and May
two tests
 
@terdon Here is a link where a math teacher of some sort claims that "bigger/smaller" refers to absolute value whereas greater/lesser refers to numerically ordered value (so -20 is bigger than 1 but lesser than 1)
 
kind of a retest
 
@user08742 "The results haven't changed over a 10 year interval" doesn't imply anything about how many tests there were, just that the values haven't changed during that time period.
 
@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Ah, that's interesting. I think that's how I would do it myself as well.
 
3:03 PM
@terdon I think I'd do that too, but I'm not sure how strongly I feel about it.
If someone asked me to hand them a card with a number written on it that was bigger than 1 I'd never hand them -20
unless I'd already determined ahead of time that they meant it in absolute terms
 
@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 No, fair enough. I think I would use it in a paper but not in speech.
 
but what if I say...
They were tested in July, and the May survey finds that over the ten-month interval, the results haven't changed at all.
interval means a space of gap...like after an interval of ten years, hence implies two events
 
@user08742 I wouldn't read it that way.
definition 2 of interval in the OED: The space of time intervening between two points of time; any intervening time.
So 10 years ago is point 1, now is point two, I tested it every day and over that 10 year interval the results didn't change.
An interval is between two things, but two whats? Two tests? Or just two points in time?
More context is needed before you can know.
 
3:29 PM
i see
thank you
what about..."the condition of interest." could this mean this is the condition we are discussing here?
 
 
2 hours later…
5:56 PM
english.stackexchange.com/q/208692/96028 Could I have a statement on why this question hasn't been reopened since it was edited 7 hours ago, please?
 
because not enough people have voted to reopen it
 
6:14 PM
As I acted to close it, and there is now evidence of research and it's been made a substantive question, I've reopened it.
 
 
1 hour later…
7:36 PM
The reopening process is deficient.
 
and inefficient
 
7:55 PM
Yes.
Hmm I can't ping myself.
 
:O
i just found out how to get them fancy letters on my iphone
press and hold the letter key :D
i'm such a n00b...
 
8:14 PM
@terdon 'big' is a more informal word than 'large'. So I think your distaste for 'bigger' stems from its incongruity with the register of the rest of the sentence, which is scientific. How's that for a fancied up conversion of "sounds plain wrong to me" to judicial fact?
@skullpatrol what? tries it out
Holy crap...why can't that work on a regular keyboard!
 
@Mitch Haha that is science.
@Mitch You do not have an Iphone, don't you dare!!
 
@Mitch in some ways, these tiny gadgets are more powerful than a regular desktop
 
@Cerberus Here's another "Um.. I... don't really know." -> "The data are underspecified, making it difficult to extract a consistent ajudification"
@skullpatrol If only it weren't for the eye-shattering tiny screen.
@Cerberus um... looks embarassed
@skullpatrol I want a desktop-sized smart phone.
 
that would be awesome :D
 
Notice how I treat 'data' snobbishly as a plural, and made up a word (I'm not sure which one, but I'm sure that at least one of the words s made up).
@skullpatrol People's heads would turn.
Also, yours, from the weight of the phone.
 
8:23 PM
like the old days, when they carried ghetto blasters around on their shoulder...
 
@Mitch Very good!
@Mitch You di'int!
@Mitch Not snobbishly: correctly.
 
8:41 PM
@Mitch Perhaps. I have a nagging suspicion that, as Mr Shiny pointed out, we associate bigger with differences in size more than arithmetical distance. Yet, I'm fine with bigger problem. Sigh. I might be posting a Q about this.
 
@terdon problems are not numerically ordered by size, so "bigger" is fine.
 
Bigger is Better
 
@Cerberus yeah I done did it.
 
never forget the power of press AND HOLD!
 
@Cerberus argh... 'data' matched with a plural verb is like a a cat's claws scratched across a black board. It's worse than "the hoi polloi".
 
8:48 PM
1
A: Oil is slippery; rubber is _____?

changcc5oil is slippery, rubber is "not".

lol
 
somebody upvoted that.
Why?
 
@Mitch It is the only correct option. Don't let popular the press influence you.
 
@Mitch those accursèd data
@Mitch no idea. it makes me laugh though
 
@Cerberus data is like water. show me an individual piece of data and I'll show you a mass noun.
@MattЭллен I think you upvoted it. Which does make it even funnier
 
@MattЭллен i still like rubbery, dunno why :/
 
8:51 PM
yeah, I upvoted that one
 
@skullpatrol 'grippy' is not a word
 
@Mitch nah. I was going to delete it, but I thought I'd share the funny
 
@Mitch 1.) that is a fallacy. 2.) A datum is one piece of information, one "data point", if you will.
 
it just feels right?
 
saying that it is is what Urban Dictionary does.
@MattЭллен can't you convert to a comment?
 
8:53 PM
@Mitch yeah
like that
 
@Cerberus Sure, but 'data' is a mass noun in English so takes the plural (except for people who want to make other people think that they look smart). English ain't Latin, no matter how much it borrows.
 
Oil is slippery; rubber is ... not?Beta yesterday
That answer is a dupe of a comment
 
well, now it's a dupe comment of a comment :D
and now I've deleted the comment
because comments are bad enough
 
@MattЭллен Et tu, dat..., what is the vocative plural of 'datum'?
 
dupe comments are the worst
 
8:56 PM
@MattЭллен that's fine, as long as it goes through a process.
 
@Mitch I think you mean "singular" but I appreciate the Freudian error.
 
@MattЭллен that's weird though that they are so similar but not.
 
I'm not a number! I'm a real boy!
 
It is not right to not respect the number of borrowed words in any language if it is at all possible to do so.
 
@Cerberus oh it was no slip. I'm calling out all of the individuals together at once.
 
8:57 PM
Some people say "this jeans is" in Dutch. It is illiterate and indefensible.
@Mitch Then I don't understand your "but", nor you "mass noun".
 
@Cerberus I respect English for the large number of borrowings it has. Wait...what is respect good for?
 
For good style.
 
@Cerberus Why shouldn't native speakers change the word to fit their language? Who are you to tell people how to speak?
 
Because I am semi-literate? Because it is proper style?
 
It's not a matter of literacy.
 
8:59 PM
It is.
 
politeness too
 
But I do not want to have a discussion about this, not even a fun one like "it is, it isn't".
 
Yeah @Cerberus. You're trying to oppress us with your hegemony of Romance syntactic incongruities.
 
This has nothing to do with Romance.
 
9:00 PM
People take foreign words and make them native words. The words change in that process. That's how it works. There is not, and cannot be, a "rule" that says we have to respect the word's foreign etymology or foreign rules.
 
no he's not
 
Cf. my example from English above.
 
@Cerberus how about a discussion of food?
 
Food is always good.
I have just finished my quiche.
 
why no fancy "e"?
 
9:01 PM
pronounced "kwitch"
 
OK. Food is great and you are wrong about data because it is a mass noun in English.
 
@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Haha silence!!
 
@Cerberus sorry. kwitch-ay
 
@Mitch Isn't. Oops.
@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Stop it!!
We do have a song, though, that goes "sah-lah-day, nee-kwa-zay".
My friend and I made it.
 
Latin, what a bastardized mish-mash of broken rules from the superior enlightened parent language of proto italic, which itself a sickly shadow of proto indoEuropean
 
9:03 PM
It is spelled salade niçoise.
 
@Cerberus mmm...with an-choys.
anyway, I've never seen a datum. show me one. I only ever see them as a collective.
 
Anchois is ansjovis in Dutch, and vis is fish. It is a case of folk etymology.
 
For example, you might have a grain (of cooked rice), but then what do you have on your plate? Some rice. The rice is good. Not the rice are good. Ick. Spit out that rice. It's nasty when it's plural.
 
Your knickers is in a twist, methinks.
 
@Cerberus like outrage.
I just have one knicker.
 
9:08 PM
Ah, is it?
I knew there was something odd about outrage.
 
yeah. from 'outre' but in English sounds mad.
 
From French, I believe, outrage.
Ah.
To be beside oneself with anger?
In Dutch: buiten jezelf van woede.
Buiten = outside.
 
no it's just not that strong in french. I think of it as 'beyond-ness'. I'm so angry that I'm beyond myself, so it is an outrage'
or yes, beside oneself for the more common preposition.
 
Yeah okay, so the angry sense was invented in English.
Beware if you meet an angry sense in a dark alley.
 
Is 'v' in Dutch voiced (as in English) or unvoiced (like 'f' in English), or does it depend?
 
9:12 PM
Officially, always voiced.
 
so 'vis' is pronounced /vis/?
 
In practice, in the standard accent, semi-voiced.
Yes. Hence the spelling.
 
ohhhhhh.....
 
Or, rather, /vɪs/.
 
/wis/
 
9:13 PM
Nooo not w.
 
what? oh semi-voiced, not semi vowel
 
It is more like in between /v/ and /f/.
 
what the hell is semi-voiced?
 
In lower-class Dutch, it will often be entirely voiceless, just as with z.
Not sure when.
 
is voice onset time something... well I don't know how to interpret that without a n oscilloscope.
poor people can't afford to voice things for fear of the government
 
9:14 PM
Mm I understand what it must mean?
 
If you pronounce, say, zelf with a very flat z, almost like a weak s but not quite, that is standard. If you pronounce it with a clear, non-weak s, like self, that's lower class.
@skullpatrol Tsk.
 
Quichè
 
èéêëēėę
 
9:19 PM
Notice how the man from Holland has the wrong stress: it should be on the second syllable.
Notice how the woman from Belgium has a stronger v than the man from Holland.
 
ĕ
Ĕ
 
>8(
 
@#*@$#
 
show off
 
9:22 PM
abc
 
123
 
!!!
 
$$$
 
€€€
 
...
 
9:23 PM
<space><space><space>
 
___
 
thehunter
Or what was my password again?
 
nvm, i gotta go, see ya'll later :-)
 
@Cerberus pfft...people from Holland, I'm surprised they can even speak.
 
9:25 PM
@Cerberus notes Cerb's password
 
@Mitch I know!
@Mitch Shit, again...
Now everybody knows my password is all asterisks.
 
:D
Doesn't include a number or mixed case
But nobody can tell what it is.
 
You know what you should do with your number and your mixed case?
***** it in your ****
 
'Place', 'book'?
 
9:28 PM
shocking use of stars
 
@Cerberus flagged
 
here come the mods
run @Cerberus!!
 
bbl
 
@Mitch Big Black Ladies?
 
later
RÜN
 
9:32 PM
@Mitch Thank you.
But the asterisks stood for a very pleasant action that you would no doubt like.
 
-_-
 
9:50 PM
hello - i was wondering if you could help me with something
 
@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Be Back Later?
@swasheck go for it.
@Cerberus Whisk it in your cake?
Saute it in your dish?
 
could the word "deletion" ever possibly be a passive gerund?
(settling a debate)
 
It can't be a gerund because it doe snot end in '-ing'.
Do you have an example of a passive gerund to start off with?
 
apparently "being deceived"
 
10:11 PM
@Mitch Something like that.
@swasheck That would be equivalent to being deleted.
But I'm not sure I understand your question, especially the word "be".
 
yeah --- well that's our contention. there's someone who's being nit-picky about using the "passive gerund" word "deletion"
it's not making a lot of sense to me
 
@swasheck You can tell him that gerunds end on -ing in English, that passive forms include a past participle in English, and that deletion is neither a gerund nor passive.
And ask him what he means exactly.
 
@Cerberus awesome. thanks so much
 
Good luck!
 
10:27 PM
@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Well, for me, the main difference is between a bigger number and _a bigger number of. _
 
@terdon Perhaps because a number of x is a construction reserved for slightly higher registers?
 
Why have I suddenly getting people upvoting an ancient hat posting of mine? Is there discussion about this somewhere?
29
A: What are the fantasy secret hats you'd wish to get?

tchristFor ninja-editing a +1’d post, and finishing editing it, within 60 seconds of when it was first posted.

 
10:42 PM
@tchrist Hat Dash is coming.
Notice went out to the mods today for preparations.
 
@Cerberus I don't think so. There were a number of people is fine, there was a greater number of people than I expected is also fine. There was a bigger number of people than I expected sounds just plain wrong.
 
@terdon I went to the gym with a number of buddies.
 
@Cerberus Yes, but not with a bigger number of buddies. It's the bigger combined with of that bugs me.
 
The reason why that sounds odd to me is the register connected with a number of.
 
@Cerberus Can you come up with an example where bigger number of sounds OK?
 
10:49 PM
Probably not.
So if we agree that bigger is a lower register, this might be the same issue as in my example.
At least I can't think of any other reason.
Not that there has to be a knowable reason...
 
@Cerberus Not sure what you mean by register here.
@Cerberus Anathema!
 
Register = formality
Lawyers and newspapers don't use 'bigger'
Kids and advertisements is 'bigger'
 
hat.stackexchange.com/
Huh.
What the hell was that?
 
@Cerberus Did you forget a leading s?
 
Register doesn't necessarily mean formality, but for the moment that's mostly what we're talking about.
 
10:53 PM
@terdon Haha. No!
But I feel like SE is messing with me.
 
It has nothing to do with formality for me. I wouldn't say bigger number of X in any context I can think of.
 
Sanathema?
 
@terdon You're not getting it.
What the hell is happening to my browser?
I search for register in Wikipaedia, and the address says SE?
 
I think we're saying 'bigger' and 'number' are incongruous, from different registers, that's why you don't like saying it.
 
@Cerberus OK, I scanned that and I still don't think that register plays a role.
 
10:55 PM
@Mitch Only with respect to the construction a number of.
 
It's not ungrammatical just incongruous like saying 'wacky colon'
 
@Mitch No, 10 is a bigger number than 3 is OKish, there was a bigger number of bears than yesterday is not.
 
In linguistics, a register is a variety of a language used for a particular purpose or in a particular social setting. For example, when speaking in a formal setting contrary to an informal setting, an English speaker may be more likely to use features of prescribed grammar— like pronouncing words ending in -ing with a velar nasal instead of an alveolar nasal (e.g. "walking", not "walkin'"), choosing more formal words (e.g. father vs. dad, child vs. kid, etc.), and refraining from using contractions like ain't. Like with other types of language variation, there tends to be a spectrum of registers...
This is the article I tried to link to.
 
@Mitch That's what you think. Spend a few days with my digestive system and we'll talk again.
 
:D
 
10:56 PM
@terdon Don't you agree that a number of is of a higher register than a couple of?
 
@Cerberus I know, I found it. I still don't think that the register is the issue. Yes, I would not use bigger number in a scientific paper if I could avoid it but I might use it in normal speech. I would not, however, use a bigger number of.
@Cerberus Of course.
 
Okay.
So I think a number of might be too high of register to combine it immediately with bigger, which is significantly lower.
 
Good point ...bigger # than.... Sounds better than ...bigger # of...
 
@Mitch Yes, that's my main beef with it.
 
Why don't you think it could be about register?
 
10:58 PM
@Cerberus I don't see why. For example, a bigger issue is fine on any register. As is a bigger problem.
 
No, no, you're still not getting it.
 
Terdon, we're all following this line of argument because there is nothing -grammatically- wrong with using 'bigger # of'
 
@Cerberus Because 1) I think it is the specific combination of bigger and number of and 2) I can't think of any register where I would be likely to use it.
 
The word issue as such is not of a similarly high register as a number of, is my contention.
 
@Mitch No, not grammatically. Not as far as my limited knowledge goes anyway.
@Cerberus Ah, so your point is that number of is more highbrow than bigger?
 
11:00 PM
@terdon 1 is the premise of our discussion, I agree with it. 2 means you don't understand my point.
 
You have a greener number of problems, or maybe just greener problems.
 
@terdon Yes, a number of.
I am not 100% sure.
 
@Cerberus :) OK, explain.
@Mitch That's fine. I can have a fegeteer number of problems as well. It's bigger + number + of that I think is somehow "wrong".
 
@terdon Ad 2, I am not saying anyone would. We're just trying to come up with hypotheses why not.
 
flagged
"Fegeteer" please
 
11:02 PM
It is about using bigger and a number of in the same sentence; the combination of the two I am assuming to be just infelicitous in any register. That is a given.
 
OK. But you think the reason is that one is of a "higher", or more formal, or whatever the term is, register than the other. Correct?
 
Yes.
That is: I know for a fact that that one is more formal than average and the other less; what I am not 100% sure about is whether the discrepancy is great enough to explain the infelicitude of the combination.
 
Well that's one explanation. Another (which is really just a generalization) is that the contexts in which 'bigger number than' can occur is more likely than 'bigger number than' whatever the underlying grammar
 
I don't understand.
You name the same phrase twice, and then...?
 
^^
I think it's a tribute to the respect we hold Mitch in that both of us spent a good few seconds trying to decipher that :)
 
11:06 PM
Haha.
Always!
 
"He has a bigger piece of pie"
 
@Mitch I assume there is a typo somewhere.
 
Ok?
 
He does.
 
So far, so good.
 
11:07 PM
sits back, makes melba toast with Castello
 
"He has a bigger butt than me"
Both sound equally ok, right?
Oh...(reading transcript) really? I wrote the same thing twice?
Look at what I typed really closely.
Because I can't!!
Replace one of those 'than' with 'of'
Your chiice
Choice dammit!!
 
@Mitch No comment.
 
I still have to get a Time magazine article to show you their style.
I think Die Zeit does it too but it's hard for me to tell because my German isn't good
 
But go on.
What style?
 
Yes, than sounds fine where of doesn't.
 
11:13 PM
The style starting an article seemingly going off on a tangent, bit only after a couple paragraphs bringing it back to the headline.
 
Many newspapers do that. It's annoying.
 
It's very hard for a learner because you don't know what the hell is going on, nothing to anchor on.
 
An article about some new policy of the ECB starting with "it was cold and rainy in Frankfurt that morning. The city was founded in...".
 
I find newspapers annoying for a different reason. The headline says something and then the contents if the article are about the headline but aren't ever answering the question the headline implicitly poses...
 
If so, that sucks.
 
11:16 PM
"Assistant prosecutor found dead" gives time of death and name and who he worked with and blah blah blah but not _ whatever the hell he died of_
 
The reason may still be waiting for the coroner (or even an inquest).
Or even discretion. You wouldn't want to report a naked MP autoerotically asphixiated with an orange in his mouth, after all.
 
11:35 PM
@AndrewLeach I would! Can I? Please?
By the way, @Mitch @Cerberus:
0
Q: Why does "a bigger number of" seem wrong?

terdonI noticed when answering this related question that I would never say a bigger number of. I have no issues with 5 is a bigger number than 3, but a bigger number of people than expected sounds just plain wrong. I also don't seem to be alone in this: It was suggested to me in chat that this migh...

 
@AndrewLeach Darn! Why is it always conservatives who get themselves in that kind of situation?
Though, admittedly, the poor sod was just naked. No oranges or other strangeness. And what anyone chooses to get off on is none of my business as long as everyone involved is a consenting adult.
 
I'm sure there was an orange involved. But perhaps that was just the Sun over-egging it. I don't think there were eggs, though.
And yes, quite. But for someone in the public eye (like an MP) to die getting off on it is fairly newsworthy.
 
What puzzles me is
> "The body was naked except for a pair of stockings and suspenders."
Why was he wearing suspenders if he was naked? He had no pants to hold up!
 
British suspenders aren't braces. They are clips on garters, not straps over the shoulders.
Or, if not garters, then a suspender belt (a girdle with clips on which hold up stockings).
 
11:44 PM
@AndrewLeach Yeah, I was thinking of garters as the likeliest. Might even have been something as innocent as this:
 
Possibly. Yeah, right.
 
posted on November 18, 2014 by sgdi

I’m writing this one in a huff I really have had quite enough Of writing these things No joy does it bring It’s more of the stupid same guff

 
00:00 - 15:0015:00 - 00:00

« first day (1468 days earlier)      last day (3469 days later) »