I read somewhere about replying vs answering and cannot exactly remember the key difference when used in different contexts. I just need to know the difference between using these words in different contexts such as emails, phone calls, messaging etc.
How is answering to say an email is differen...
Yet considering the provided context of the question, and the various definitions of the word Dr. Webster gives, esp. given No. 8, it isn't so obviously the case.
And that's only addressing things from the answer side of the dictionary. The reply side isn't much better, since most definitions of the word use the word answer to explain it in some manner or another. The context provided is particularly interesting since the words are used near interchangeably in it.
@Tonepoet 1) Yeah, comparisons of close words are not covered well by dictionaries
2) "I... cannot exactly remember the key difference" - that's exactly when we'd expect the asker to do something rather than have us do all the work for them. Close with contempt!
3) Webster's 1828? Come on already, at least join the 20th century. Those definitions never touch on the true difference. MW online 21st century in the first entry says it, an answer is a reply to a question.
@Mitch Mitch, the first dictionary I referenced was the Am. Heritage 5th ed, which was updated just last year. Don't complain about a problem that doesn't even exist.
@Mitch Not exactly. "As to a question" only suggests an example of an instance where the word would be used, not a requisite, and for this it is clearly the better definition over Merriam-Webster, unless you've never answered a call in your life.
@Mitch Yes yes, the lack of research... I'd wish we'd treat questions with the more careful discrimination of determining just what a "commonly available resource" is. Automatic closure when no "perfect" resource exists strikes me as much too hasty.
Not having a perfect answer in a reference is not the point of the close reason. The close reason is to prevent wasting time with frivolous questions. If the OP says 'I vaguely can't remember X' and that's it, then they haven't even tried.
@Mitch That's not actually so clear. The original purpose of gen. ref. closure wasn't "haven't even tried" so much as "lazy answer with no effort to further explain put into it." and while the sitewide standard has been discontinued in 2013, there isn't really too much of an explanation regarding how our closure reason differs from the older one when you consider the qualifying sentence is the second one.
It has come up in other threads that we have a lot of "basic" or "lowest common denominator" questions. However, a few myths about this need to be put to rest.
First, we do have a general reference close reason, and we do use it. Questions which really are as basic as they seem can be closed, an...
But lack of effort is very annoying. 'What is a good word for X?' can certainly be interesting, but the lack of just checking a thesaurus is just irresponsible.
The syntax questions usually do get a free pass on the research requirement, as do the single word requests (provided that no rough equivalent was suggested for a thesaurus to be checked).
@M.A.R. I'm not sure anymore. The Gen. Ref. flowchart in Basic Questions Are Not So Basic looks like it was meant to function that way, but Gen. Ref. isn't a closure reason anymore.
The thing is, a newbie closer comes along a good question with no effort provided, and VTCs anyway, because that's what the policy allows by definition
So unless three people realize it and leave the question open, people are gonna jump on the bandwagon
@MetaEd That's an impractical and vaguely defined sentence
@M.A.R. Upon reconsideration, I think the only thing that actually qualifies a question as off-topic is the "commonly-available resource" criterion. There's a "Please include the research" clause, but it doesn't really seem to indicate any actual requirement. Maybe if the word "Please" was removed it would read more like an imperative command...
"Please include the research you've done, or consider if your question suits our English Language Learners site better. Questions that can be answered using commonly-available references are off-topic."
I don't need proof for the fact that there are good questions that drive experts here and do not show research. In real life, research is not a prerequisite, so why should every good question include effort?
There's a counterargument that this "research" which shouldn't lead to an answer or it would've been a self-answer, is wasting reader's time when the question is clear enough
@M.A.R. Some SE policies exist to help foster expert community. The expectation that askers give details and do some homework before asking is partly out of respect for the experts. It's also, of course, to help prevent confusion about what the question means.
@MetaEd And the problem here is there can be 1-rep experts, so either there should be double standards and people would invoke Godwin's law on meta or everyone would take some flack, good and shitty posters alike
@M.A.R. That vaguely makes sense if the only reason a question can be closed on E.L.L. for lack of research is "answerable by a dictionary", esp. since we can assume that people just learning English would not be adequately helped by the sort of definitive resources designed to aid English users.
@Tonepoet Sometimes "Please" something something sentences look like orders or commands. I mean the tone, but that's just me I guess, feel free to disagree.
@englishstudent You might not be mistaken in regards to actual meaning, but you're neglecting to consider why the word "please" is inserted into these sentences in the first place. It's what I'd call a passive-aggressive command, for lack of a better way of putting it. =P
@Tonepoet Yes, exactly. I was making a general comment, not related to the site or anything. I mean for example, um, thinks. Like someone says "Please don't talk to me" that's kind of passive aggressive and doesn't sound very nice. On the other hand, they could have just said "I'm busy man" or "I can't talk right now, busy" or something like that. That is straightforward and doesn't sound passive aggressive or jittery or rude or whatever.
I mean I have noticed such uses of "Please". And in such instances that word does the opposite and makes the whole damn thing, well, kind of impolite and rude.
But like I said, that's me, you can disagree.
Yeah I know. I am not saying that word shouldn't be used.
I wish there was open corpora that didn't have a search limitation. I don't particularly like citing The Contemporary Corpus of American English due to the 10 search limit for unregistered members.
The B.N.C. was decent but they stopped hosting it independently.
It's more of a measure of months than minutes if I recall correctly, or at least weeks. Also, the only reason to use it is to verify something to somebody else, so unless I can guarantee somebody else will register the account then it's more or less pointless.
I mean I am registered on COCA and I have to wait a little between searches sometimes. I don't know what you mean by "months" or "weeks" here @Tonepoet
I hope we are talking about the same thing here lel.
What troubles me is the possible misunderstanding of the preposition of between two nouns (defining a part/portion vs. just separating the nouns).
Let's say a province of country X is called Bumba. In a report on that province, the English version would be:
"In the southern province of Bumb...
And in any case, the question is basically about German:
> And what about the translation into German of "the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland", which should perhaps go without the "von"? In the same way as the "German capital of Berlin" is "die deutsche Hauptstadt Berlin" and of course not the "Hauptstadt von Berlin". And the United States of America? An altogether different affair because they are just part of (the) America(s)?
> Question #A: How many words are in the list: red, blue, green. Question #B: How many words are in the list: green, green, green. Question #C: How many words are in the list: read, read, read. Question #D: How many words are in the list: back scratcher, back-scratcher, backscratcher. Question #E: How many words are in the list: back scratcher, backs cratcher, backscratcher.
@terdon: No. Words are not defined in terms of their origin for me. For me "words" are not defined at all. I'm a professional linguist and if I'm trying to be precise (as one should in definitions), I wouldn't use the term "word" at all. I'd talk about lexical items, semantics, etymologies, pronunciations, phonosemantics, and probly a few other terms. What I'm trying to say is that "How many words?" questions, or "Are X and Y considered single words?" questions are the wrong question. There's nothing to count. "Word" is a popular term, and does not represent real language. — John LawlerAug 24 '13 at 16:27
@tchrist Also, to be fair, lexeme is probably a decent answer to your current subject of complaint, if it's looking for a single word for a semantic item...
Oh how nice! I have the 1987 C.E.O.E.D. volume III now, to supplement the other two and it came with the slipcover, so that makes all but 5,000 words from the O.E.D. 2nd Ed. in print.
A - 3 B - 3 tokens or instances, 1 word or type or concept C - same (it's typed and no context so I can't hear you pronounce them or what you meant) D - 5 words/tokens (the hyphen depends), 3 concepts E - 5 words/tokens, 3 concepts, that middle one might be autocorrected
@Tonepoet I just created a new word so it is now out of date.
Most play with a dictionary (a physical one) as a standard (doesn't matter which one, just an external judge for game play). I prefer no dictionary, and there's the secondary game of convincing others about your (possibly made-up new) word. It's like playing poker at the same time
@Tonepoet haha. wiktionary is crap.
If I find a word in wiktionary, I start to doubt that it really is one.
@tchrist You hadn't mentioned that sense of the word, so I figured you meant that the putting green, the color green or the green party member was a verb.
@tchrist Sigh, Portuguese should probably be bumped up the prioritized list of languages I'll never get around to learning =P. It's not just you, but Vampire Princess and also Mythological of the Wesnoth community who speak it too.
@tchrist Or maybe I should've said It's all Green to me. Meh, what a lost opportunity. I suppose I can salvage it though but I don't know whether to reference Kermit or the Orion dancing girl...
What troubles me is the possible misunderstanding of the preposition of between two nouns (defining a part/portion vs. just separating the nouns).
Let's say a province of country X is called Bumba. In a report on that province, the English version would be:
"In the southern province of Bumb...
English Language & Usage: Multi-Layer…
English Language & Usage: Multi-Layer…