« first day (34 days earlier)      last day (464 days later) » 
00:00 - 06:0006:00 - 20:00

12:10 AM
@snailboat That is interesting! Thanks for asking them. Hmm. I really need to go and do a poll at work tomorrow. I'm taking it that you were asking about the eloquent snail as opposed to the happy I?
 
Anonymous
@Araucaria I was asking about the eloquent snail
 
@snailboat, @DamkerngT. I'll do the poll tomorrow and let you know about the BritE straw poll experiment ... :)
 
@Araucaria I'd love to hear the results!
 
12:28 AM
I'll definitely let you both know :)
 
Thanks in advance!
 
See you guys. Am off to hit the hay in a sec. Ciao!
 
Sleep tight!
 
1:10 AM
Hello, @StoneyB!
 
Hi there guys!
 
One day I'm gonna find out the exact rules of English comma. When should we use it? When should we not? When is it optional, and in what dialect? etc. :-)
 
@DamkerngT. There are very few exact rules of pointing. Punctuation is more like gesture than language: an ancillary tool for clarifying your structure.
And it is only used in written dialects ;)
 
True, indeed!
 
Anonymous
@DamkerngT. Other people have tried to find that out before, too! :-)
 
1:19 AM
Gesture and pointing do have this in common with languge: they change over time.
 
@snailboat Did they succeed? :D
 
Anonymous
1:30 AM
@DamkerngT. Well, lots of people are interested in how commas are used. Other punctuation, too
 
Anonymous
Linguists have been doing a famous job of pretending it doesn't exist
2
 
@snailboat Hah!
 
Anonymous
Just a few have dared to acknowledge it in recent years
 
@snailboat They've been doing a pretty good job of pretending that writing doesn't exist, too!
 
Anonymous
Two of them, Geoffrey Nunberg (The Linguistics of Punctuation) and Ted Briscoe (The Syntax and Semantics of Punctuation and its Use in Interpretation) worked on a punctuation chapter for CGEL, which I think is a nice reference, although I don't think it can be called anything like a complete and accurate description of English punctuation
 
1:33 AM
Oh, it's still incomplete and not as accurate as we'd wish for even after two books. That tells us something.
 
Anonymous
But you can find lots of other folks who have written stuff about commas. :-)
 
Oh, I found this: It was Ben Jonson, in his English Grammar, a work composed about 1617 and published ...
(Probably a bit too old...)
But it gives me this term: "syntactical punctuation".
 
Anonymous
That said, I have no idea what direction to point you in.
 
> It was the lexicographers Henry Watson Fowler and Francis George Fowler in The King's English, published in 1906, who established the current British practice of light punctuation.
A-ha!
I guessed right! They are the Folwers who published Folwer's Modern English Usage.
 
I think Jonson is in fact the first English grammar.
 
Anonymous
1:39 AM
I do, think there, are some, fairly well, established rules, of comma, use that, people generally, respect but, never write, down because, they're so, obvious
 
Anonymous
Like don't do this,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, for example
 
@snailboat That reminds me of our ELL user. :-)
@StoneyB Oh, his book was named English Grammar.
I found the version that was copyrighted 1909 on Archive.org: archive.org/stream/englishgrammar00jons
 
Only H.W. published MEU; his brother George died before that was written.
 
@StoneyB Ahh... I see. So it's only one Fowler in Fowler's.
Wow, lots of Latin in Ben Jonson's English Grammar!
 
Latin was the only language they had then for talking about language.
 
1:51 AM
A-ha! The comma is first mentioned in the book in Chapter IX (OF THE DISTINCTION OF SENTENCES).
And very briefly.
> These distinctions are either of a perfect or imperfect sentence. The distinctions of an imperfect sentence are two, a subdistinction and a comma.
> [...] A comma is a distinction of an imperfect sentence, wherein with somewhat a longer breath, the sentence following is included ; and is noted with this shorter semicircle (,).
> Hither pertaineth a parenthesis, wherein two commas include a sentence : [...]
That's all there is about commas!
 
And quite enough, too!
 
Anonymous
 
Anonymous
I should add woke to that
 
@snailboat Yay! The results agree with Macmillan.
 
Anonymous
There are few enough results for waked that we can count how many are past tense forms and how many are past participle forms
 
2:14 AM
Most seem to be in the past participle form, I think.
 
Anonymous
Yes
 
Anonymous
I count 5 past tense forms and 24 past participle forms. I threw out the remaining 5 results
 
Anonymous
They were all from one source that was deliberately playing with words
 
Anonymous
Now compare this to woke up/woken up
 
Anonymous
4477/(4477+5) = 99.9% of the time we find woke up, not waked up for the past tense
 
Anonymous
2:20 AM
374/(374+24) = 94.0% of the time we find woken up, not waked up for the past participle
 
Anonymous
It looks like waked is chosen significantly more often for the past participle than the past tense
 
Anonymous
At least based on this data, which looks at only forms of wake up
 
nods -- So the claim on LawProse Blog is probably incorrect: For the past participle, American English prefers “waked”; British English prefers “woken.”
 
Anonymous
Oh, waked is attested in AmE and BrE both
 
Anonymous
But it's not the usual choice in either
 
Anonymous
2:26 AM
> Some attested examples from the British Isles are: catched, drawed, fighted, gived, holded, knowed, runned, seed, telled, waked [...] Most of these weak forms also occur in the USA [...] Similar forms are found in Australia: [...] breaked, catched, costed, fighted, hitted, goed, lied, seed, spreaded, teared, winded [...]
 
Anonymous
Generally non-standard
 
Ugh... who says "waked"? I was trying to come up with any use that sounded correct to me and I can't come up with one. Whenever I hear someone (usually a less-educated person) use it, it grates on my nerves.
 
Anonymous
@Catija I think every form in that quote is non-standard
 
Anonymous
So unsurprisingly, a good portion of the waked examples are in the fiction subcorpus in COCA. They're from dialogue
 
Anonymous
Other examples are from magazines and from spontaneous spoken English
 
2:29 AM
@snailboat Yes, definitely. I wonder if there's a correlation between those and the language of origin of the words.
 
Anonymous
There are zero examples of waked up in the academic or newspaper subcorpora
 
Anonymous
@Catija Those are Germanic verbs
 
@snailboat That's a very good point!
Hello, @Catija!
 
Hi @DamkerngT.
@snailboat Ah, that makes sense. I was thinking there must be a linguistic reason for the non-standard past tense.
 
Anonymous
@Catija Generally, there was a shift across centuries from strong forms to weak forms
 
Anonymous
2:31 AM
In some cases the two coexist (weaved, wove)
 
Oh, there's another one I run into all the time that doesn't seem to be on the list (or at least the part you quoted: Cast vs casted.
 
Anonymous
But mostly we've been regularizing verbs.
 
I work in the casting industry (casting films//commercials etc) and it really annoys me when people say "I was casted in three projects last year"
 
Anonymous
Interesting!
 
Anonymous
It looks like historically casted and casten were in wide use
 
2:36 AM
@Catija I learned the correct form for cast only after I joined ELL, I think. :-)
 
@snailboat That's interesting. Hmmm... It just sounds so wrong to me. And I'd bet that it's non-standard now, as well.
 
Anonymous
@Catija That was centuries ago.
 
Anonymous
> Mr-HARPER: Absolutely. And sometimes, you just don't make it. It's not a personal thing. They know exactly what they want and you don't fit in that. And some people have actually been casted for other shows after being rejected from, you know, like "Hell's Kitchen."
 
Anonymous
I'm looking at corpus examples for casted in COCA now :-)
 
@DamkerngT. Trust me, native speakers get it wrong all the time... as snail seems to be noticing.
@snailboat Yeah, I'd bet that it'd be an interesting one to look at as the use is still current... though still incorrect. When I'm working and talking to people (actors or their parents) I hear it pretty regularly.
 
Anonymous
2:40 AM
Ah, casted in a John King transcript! :-)
 
@snailboat Hah!
Word of the Day: synecdoche
 
Anonymous
I pronounced that word wrong for years
 
@snailboat Did you use it often enough to pronounce it incorrectly often?
Considering the "key" ending, that would imply that it's Italian in origin to me...
Though, apparently they do that in Greek, too? I've never studied Greek, but I do know that they don't use the letter "c" much... but they don't use our alphabet, anyway.
 
Anonymous
2:58 AM
Not terribly often, no
 
Anonymous
But I learned a lot of words by reading, and it took me a long time to learn how some of them were actually supposed to be pronounced :-)
 
Ah, I see, they have the "chi"... my name is "Catherine"... and I always insist that it's spelled correctly as I'm ethnically Italian... the original Greek would be spelled with a "k" but they don't use ks in Italian, so, as an Italian, mine is correct.
 
Anonymous
I always liked it better with a 'c' anyway
 
@snailboat Yeah! I've done that a lot... and my husband will sometimes say a word that he'd read in a book and we argue about the "correct" pronunciation until we go and look it up. Though this happens more often for proper nouns and made-up words.
 
Anonymous
3:01 AM
But then, that might be because I'm tired of people misspelling my name with a 'k' on receipts and such ;-)
 
Hello @unarist! Welcome to the room!
 
Anonymous
Hello!
 
@snailboat 80% of the time, people will misspell my family name in my first language!
 
@snailboat It's pervasive! I have to spell it constantly... they're always trying to add ys too!
@DamkerngT. Is it an uncommon name? Or is your name spelled differently than it usually is? How phonetic is the Thai alphabet?
 
@Catija I think if they really cared to hear my family name, they wouldn't misspell it. :-)
But it has a less frequently used word in it.
So almost every time I say my name, I have to spell it out, just in case. :-)
Oh, welcome back! @JimReynolds
Where had you been these two weeks?
 
3:05 AM
Hi. Long time, no see!
 
@DamkerngT. Ah, I see. I have a last name that is a very common word but because it's of German origin, it's spelled completely different. I usually spell it out before I say the name... and they still get confused.
 
@DamkerngT. I didn't know this room, so I added to my favorite rooms. :-)
 
Hi @JimReynolds
 
BTW, I'm now very curious about Scribd. I wonder if it's really legit.
@unarist Welcome!
@Catija LOL
I think I know that feeling!
 
It's at least shorter than my maiden name, so it doesn't take as long to spell out.
 
3:08 AM
At $8.99 a month, it could be very cost effective.
@Catija Sadly, my family name is a bit long.
All credit cards have to chop off a few letters of my name if they'd want to spell my name in full.
 
@DamkerngT. Oh, wow... that's really long. I mean... they can fit a lot of characters, usually.
 
Yep! In English, it would need 26 letters.
Ahh... It looks like the field on the card can have at most 21 characters.
 
For your family name only?
 
@Catija For my first and family names combined.
My first name is Damkerng. That's 8. My family name is 17 characters long.
 
@DamkerngT. Ah, ok. I was going to say. I had 18 in my first and family name before I married plus a five-letter middle name, so 23 total... though they usually just put middle initials on credit cards.
 
3:12 AM
Neat!
I have no middle name, though.
 
@DamkerngT. Ah, well, you'd hugely outstrip me if you did... and you've already got more than I did to start with. Have you considered shortening your name? I hear it was really popular at Ellis Island in the 1800s... "I can't understand what you said, you're illiterate so you can't spell it for me... your family name is now Smith!"
 
@Catija That's why I simply go with "Damkerng T." :-)
 
Smart choice!
 
Some credit cards opted to shorten my first name instead. So it'd look like "D TXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX" on my card. :-)
Ah, some added . after D. :D
 
That works.
 
3:20 AM
Indeed!
However, my brother's first name starts with D, too. :D
 
Hopefully your cards aren't identical other than the numbers, then! That wouldn't be fun to switch cards accidentally.
 
Hehe!
 
Anonymous
@JimReynolds Welcome back, Jim!
 
Anonymous
@DamkerngT. I just realized we discussed that-relatives modifying head nouns with human reference before. Yesterday, in fact!
 
@snailboat Yes!
 
Anonymous
3:25 AM
23 hours ago, by snailboat
> The girl [who had the red hair] dyed it black.
> The girl [that had the red hair] dyed it black.
> *The girl [∅ had the red hair] dyed it black.  ← ungrammatical in Standard English
 
I didn't notice the that, I think.
Maybe because the original sentence was about the omission.
BTW, Wren and Martin's grammar book arrived today!
It's not as thick or as heavy as I thought. (It's 700+ pages on Google Books, but this one has only 376 pages.)
(It has this stamp "Upgraded Format" on the cover, anyway, though.)
 
Anonymous
Now you can find out how English is taught in India!
 
Yes!
If every high school student could remember everything in the book, it'd be quite intimidating!
(The book's title is High School English Grammar & Composition.)
It also discusses Precis-Writing.
 
As far as I can remember about that book from my school days (and that is very long time ago), this book contains only definitions of traditional grammar terms and examples below those definitions...
@DamkerngT. Yes, because here a high school student needs to write precie in examination :-)
 
Eh? Hmm... It looks much denser for me. Full of exercises, too.
@Man_From_India A-ha! :-)
 
3:35 AM
oh yes they contain exercises also at the end of each chapters :-)
but u shouldn't have bought that book, i don't think it will help you in any way.
 
I'd not been aware of the differences between AmE/BrE and InE before I started hanging out on ELL... does the book teach the more standard AmE/BrE English?
 
@Catija It looks like BrE to me.
 
@DamkerngT. That would make sense.
 
An example from the book:
 
@Catija hmm can't remember properly, but I don't think it does teach that. It is written for Indian high school students only. And in schools here BrE is generally followed for obvious reason :-)
 
Anonymous
3:39 AM
I believe the book is about a hundred years out of date, so it probably doesn't take into account a lot of Indian English―as I understand it, the language has changed considerably in that time (as have AmE and BrE)
 
> 113. If I say--
I have a black and white dog.
I mean a dog that is partly black and white.
But if I say--
I have a black and a white dog.
I mean two dogs, one black and the other white.
 
Personally, I'd tend to say "I have a black dog and a white dog."
 
So I think, it's bit mechanical, but quite precise. This section (PART I) is about 260 pages long (of 376).
 
Anonymous
I don't a lot about Indian English, but I can point to three sources if anyone's interested
 
@Catija nods -- I think that'd be clearer.
 
Ooof. That's a lot of grammar.
 
Anonymous
Indian And British English: A Handbook of Usage And Pronunciation (Nihalani, updated 2004)
 
Anonymous
And A Handbook of Varieties of English
 
The last of those three sounds the most interesting from the point of view of being able to compare different versions.
 
Anonymous
@Catija It's a great resource, but you'll need to go to a library to use it
 
3:43 AM
@snailboat Out of print? Gigantic tome?
 
Anonymous
It's priced well beyond what you'll want to pay for it :-)
 
Anonymous
It is pretty giant, actually.
 
$800... wow.
 
Anonymous
2388 pages
 
3:44 AM
But hey, free shipping with Prime!
 
@snailboat I checked them out on Scribd. The last one is on Scribd! :-)
 
Multi-media? Does it come with CDs to listen to samples of spoken English?
And, no... I can't read.
 
Eh?
 
Ooooh, interactive maps. Fun.
 
Anonymous
@DamkerngT. Scribd is sort of a pirate site, like the Internet Archive
 
Anonymous
3:46 AM
People can upload whatever they want
 
@DamkerngT. Because the description snailboat posted clearly says there's CDs.
 
Anonymous
It has legit stuff too
 
Anonymous
But they make no effort to get rid of stuff that isn't
 
@snailboat Oh, I see. That's what I'm not sure about the site. I mean, it looks a bit too good to be true, but $8.99 a month is not nothing.
 
You have to pay for it but it has questionably legal content? That's... interesting. I mean, I can get tons of questionably legal content without having to pay for it.
 
3:51 AM
Oh, From 'English in India' to IndE: 1857-1947. That section sounds interesting.
Aww... pages 19-21 are out of my reach.
So is 25-26.
10
A: Want to understand "the Duchess of Cambridge was safely delivered of a daughter" further

StoneyBBE delivered of is the original idiom, and it goes back to a time when deliver meant "relieve (of a burden), disencumber". Note that the Lord's Prayer has the line deliver us from evil, which means relieve us of the burden of evil. So delivery is something which happens to the mother, not the ch...

Oh, the shift in the meaning of deliver reminds me of a few words in my first language that now mean opposite or almost the opposite of their original meanings.
 
"Literally" = "figuratively"
 
That, too!
 
Anonymous
4:06 AM
@DamkerngT. Compare awesome and awful
 
They should be close to synonymous.
 
@snailboat Oh, no! That was my embarrassment.
> I'm not sure what would be wrong with this. Maybe this belongs over on English Language & Usage instead?
Oh, no!
> “I don't know how this thing works, either...I'm sorry I've been unable to help you, Susan.”
This is, as you can see, a present perfect sentence. However, it sounds a bit off to my ear, as the main verb in the sentence is not an active verb, as in the following sentence: "I have just finished doing the dishes."
Is my intuition reasonable, or am I just missing something here?
Why does that have to be moved to EL&U?
0
Q: What is the meaning of "in season as well as out"?

VivaceWhat is the meaning of "in season as well as out" ? Full sentence: It is more likely to stay that way if we continued to do what's right — in season as well as out.

Apparently, it was shorten from in season as well as out (of season).
But how good is that shortening?
 
@DamkerngT. This implied "of season" is why I didn't understand why there was confusion. My head naturally adds it so I wasn't sure why the concept was confusing.
 
Anonymous
@DamkerngT. It sounds fine to me
 
@Catija Ahh... I see. I think it's not that obvious for learners to know that of season was dropped.
@snailboat nods -- It sounds fine to me too, but when I try to analyze it, I can't explain why of was dropped too.
(Although I think in season as well as out of would be awkward.)
 
4:21 AM
In season as well as out of it would be OK... but not great... but you couldn't just end the sentence with of like that.
 
Anonymous
4:35 AM
@DamkerngT. Yes! It's very interesting in terms of theory :-)
 
Anonymous
Can we come up with any similar examples?
 
Hmm... maybe opposite of.
Though opposite of is usually used as opposite already.
> Especially in dances involving crossings, performers must be aware of those beside them, as well as opposite.
 
Anonymous
That sounds like as well as opposite [them]
 
nods
@Chenmunka: I agree with Araucaria that this is not a simple question. Frankly, I think some people are moving questions that they don't understand because they don't understand them, rather than because they'll get a better answer on ELL. — John Lawler Jun 6 '14 at 16:43
Hee
 
Anonymous
4:52 AM
> I ran [ through the tunnel ].
 
Anonymous
> I ran [ through ].
 
Anonymous
> I ran [ out of the house ].
 
Anonymous
> I ran [ out ].
 
Neat!
 
Anonymous
In the former, the complement of the preposition is the tunnel; in the latter, it's of the house
 
Anonymous
4:55 AM
(CGEL p.616)
 
Anonymous
In in season as well as out of season, it's the complement of out that is optional
 
That's a very good trick!
So it's "out (of season)" rather than "out of (season)".
But why is it "in (season)"?
(and not "in (of season)".)
Sorry for sounding like a broken record...
 
OMG... look at this one:
0
Q: GRE verbal questions

SH.CBelow is the question. Can someone explain to me what does the extant coins means? There was something ineffably ______ about Cleopatra’s personality that drew many to her – extant coins, bearing the Egyptian queen’s visage, however, have led many to believe that this attribute did not ...

I'm not complaining that ELU sends us questions but I don't get why they think this isn't appropriate for ELU.
 
As far as I know, GRE is for native speakers. But ELL doesn't exclude native speakers learning English.
 
Really? Foreigners coming to grad school don't have to take it?
 
5:06 AM
@Catija Oh, sure. But isn't it the same for native students?
 
I thought everyone who went to grad school, regardless of their native language, had to take the GRE.
 
nods
I think I should've said GRE is for native speakers, too. :-)
 
I'm just saying that I don't feel there's anything about the question that is inappropriate for ELU.
 
nods -- I agree.
 
I mean, to be honest, if it was on ELL, it might get closed as a simple dictionary answer but it ended up that there was a lot more to the question that he didn't understand.
 
5:09 AM
Hmm... I'm sure that this kind of question (GRE) is a bit too difficult to answer by looking the words up in dictionaries.
GRE vocab questions usually require the test taker to know almost all the words in the questions.
Though some people still try to come up with their own ways to answer GRE questions without having to really know all the words.
Frankly, I don't know what's the best word to fill in the blank.
Oh, I can choose two. Then, it's easier.
 
This makes me feel like I have a huge vocabulary... I've never taken the GRE but the question and answer were really obvious to me, even before he posted the options.
 
Hehe!
I've observed these tests for a while. Usually, they don't give us the most likely word in the choices.
 
"Attractive" was what I'd slated for it before he posted the answers and "winsome" was my second choice by process of elimination. The other four were just completely wrong.
 
So, students usually need to know how to deal with the second-best choices almost all the time.
nods
Anyway, the OP asked "Can someone explain to me what does the extant coins means?" -- I think that's answerable by looking it up in dictionaries, though.
 
Yeah, the process of elimination method can usually get you down do a 50/50 chance.
 
5:16 AM
@Catija Yes! And he test designers usually know how to make us hesitate!
Though it's a bit different in other language proficiency tests (for non-native speakers).
 
@DamkerngT. I agree, that's why I said it'd likely have been closed on ELL... but the comments make it clear that he wasn't sure what the sentence really meant as a whole, which was why my quick and dirty rewrite of the sentence helped.
 
Common sense is usually enough.
nods
 
Anonymous
@DamkerngT. Yay! You use the comma before too! That's my favorite comma. A lot of people don't like it.
 
Anonymous
(In other words, I've spread the comma to you like a contagion. Mwa, ha, ha!)
 
@snailboat You should know whom I got that from. :P
 
Anonymous
5:18 AM
Wow! Whom!
 
@snailboat Ah, that probably shows that I'm a non-native speaker, among other things. :-)
 
Anonymous
You can whom all you like
 
Greeting, a passer-by from Code Review! @jibinjacobjose
 
Anonymous
Not me. I'm not classy enough. I'm a who-er
 
Code review?
 
5:21 AM
Hmm... I kinda want to add my missing s, but I don't want to edit it the third time
@Catija Code Review is another stack on SE.
 
Anonymous
@DamkerngT. I can't find your missing 's'
 
Anonymous
Is that because it's missing? :-)
 
@snailboat I think Greetings would be better.
 
Anonymous
@DamkerngT. Oh! Yes! I agree.
 
Anonymous
But I didn't notice until you mentioned it.
 
5:23 AM
Did you realize that every time you edit a post with a ping, it re-alerts the person in the post?
 
Perhaps because it's old-fashioned?
@Catija Yes. That's why I don't want to do it too often.
 
Ah, I wasn't trying to warn you off it, it was just something I'd not realized for a bit.
 
Well, I'm a typo guy, anyway. :-)
 
I'm obsessive about fixing typos... which is probably why I don't direct address people as often.
 
Anonymous
@Catija That is the single best part about being a moderator.
 
Anonymous
5:26 AM
You see, I can edit my typos forever! :-)
 
Anonymous
Non-moderators on chat have a two-minute limit.
 
Every now and then I revisit questions I've commented on and I see comments with typos that I'd made weeks ago... and I can't fix them!
 
Anonymous
On Japanese.SE, I can fix a typo I made years ago in a comment
 
Anonymous
(Moderators can edit any comment at any time)
 
:K
 
5:27 AM
We can fix our comments only within 5 minutes!
 
Anonymous
But on ELL.SE, I'm stuck with my five-minute limit!
 
I've actually asked mods to fix comments I made that were outside the five-minute edit window... just one time, though.
 
Anonymous
@Catija It's silly, but I've occasionally asked users if they minded me fixing a typo... :-)
 
Anonymous
Compulsive typo fixing.
 
Anonymous
It's too difficult to resist!
 
5:28 AM
LOL
Sometimes I just leave my typos there, and comment on my mistake in non-verbal mode instead. It's kinda fun for me.
I mean, I can see my mistakes clearly in the chat log.
 
I won't bump really old questions but I will edit them for typos... there was one on that Wizard of Oz question but Maulik just fixed it.
I'd been holding off because I wasn't absolutely sure.
 
Oh, I can see the question now.
Eh? But that Wizard of Oz question is new.
 
OH, sorry, I had two completely different topics in that statement.
 
Umm... It's okay (I think :-).
 
I meant to say "I will edit them for typos if someone else bumps them"... and then add the bit about the Wizard of Oz question.
 
5:34 AM
A-ha!
 
Anonymous
@DamkerngT. By the way, there's a general principle I didn't mention before
 
Anonymous
> I watched him bake a cake.
 
Anonymous
In general, pronouns only take their nominative forms (he, she) when they're the subjects of finite clauses
 
Anonymous
So:
 
Anonymous
> I watched you bake a cake.
 
Anonymous
5:39 AM
Although there's no distinction in form between nominative and accusative here (they're both you), we'd expect accusative here based on that principle
 
nods
 
Anonymous
Although it actually just predicts "other than nominative". We find genitives, too:
 
Anonymous
> [You/your baking a cake] surprised me.
 
0
Q: "Wait a minute" Vs "Wait for a minute" Vs "Wait five more" (when minutes are already said)

Maulik VThe question roots from this question on ELL and the comment there down my answer. Wait a minute ~ sounds fine But then, how is wait for a minute is different? Also, if 'minutes are already described', dropping 'for' is okay in AmE and BrE as the comments there say: 10 minutes have pa...

Let's see if Wren and Martin wrote anything about for is mandatory...
 
Anonymous
Wait a minute is an idiom.
 
Anonymous
5:45 AM
> 1. Wait a minute! That can't be right...
> 2. #Wait for a minute! That can't be right...
 
Oh, the book doesn't have one crucial part that most good books would have!
 
Anonymous
Example two is marked with the # symbol, indicating that it doesn't make sense in context (even though it's grammatical)
 
Anonymous
@DamkerngT. An index?
 
Yep!
 
Anonymous
It's an idiom, and like many idioms it allows some variations but not others
 
Anonymous
5:46 AM
> 3. Wait a sec! That can't be right...
 
Anonymous
> 4. Wait a moment! That can't be right...
 
Anonymous
It won't tolerate for, though.
 
Anonymous
When you insert for, you don't have the idiom anymore.
 
nods -- though I think it's still perfectly understandable.
 
Anonymous
If someone said "Wait for a moment. That can't be right." I think it might be at least a little bit confusing
 
Anonymous
5:48 AM
I don't know. It's hard to imagine.
 
Anonymous
Since I already know what's intended, it's impossible for me to figure out if I'd be confused by it or not.
 
nods
 
Anonymous
But I think I'd understand it literally
 
Anonymous
"Wait for a moment. That can't be right." "Okay, what am I waiting for?"
 
I see. I think it's in conflict with another usage, i.e. wait for something.
 
Anonymous
5:51 AM
I guess this is as good a time as any to link to a cat picture from the internet.
 
Anonymous
 
Anonymous
But it's not a cat!
 
Anonymous
It's...
 
Anonymous
A raccoon?
 
Anonymous
What is going on here?
 
5:52 AM
It looks like a ball or a rugby ball!
And the guy does that by himself!
 
Anonymous
Oh! I know a cat picture.
 
Anonymous
Remember the cat picture I uploaded the other day?
 
Anonymous
When I uploaded it, Robusto said it looked like one of his :-)
 
Anonymous
Such a good kitty!
 
5:54 AM
Cute!
I wish my cat were as slim as this one.
 
Anonymous
Okay, our cat picture interlude is complete. We now resume your regularly scheduled grammar-and-technobabble-fest
 
Anonymous
@DamkerngT. Do you ever take pictures of Hagu?
 
Yes, a few.
 
Anonymous
You should share them! :-)
 
Anonymous
Hagu is cute.
 
5:55 AM
Hmm.. I think I uploaded his picture when MAR was here.
 
Anonymous
I've seen two pictures of Hagu
 
Have you seen Hugu with his food?
 
Anonymous
I don't remember seeing that!
 
Argh! I remember I posted that one here but I couldn't find it...
 
Anonymous
Aww
 
5:59 AM
 
Anonymous
Oh!! I haven't seen this one before :-)
 
00:00 - 06:0006:00 - 20:00

« first day (34 days earlier)      last day (464 days later) »