Language Overflow - 2015-07-11 (page 1 of 2)

« first day (22 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (3511 days later) »

Damkerng T.

00:03

Preposition of the Day: They invented coins ___ different sizes. a) of; b) in; c) on; d) at; e) for; f) to.

(See also: ell.stackexchange.com/q/61563/3281)

macrothink.org/journal/index.php/ijl/article/download/5998/…

A Closer Look at the English Article System: Internal and External Sources of Difficulty Revisited. Mustafa Ali Harb (Ph.D. Candidate in Linguistics)

Worth taking a closer look at the paper itself. Solving one is to solve all.

Damkerng T.

00:47

More lines of code == more bugs.

More rules in ESL grammar == more confusions.

Damkerng T.

01:08

For tomorrow: 13 He has lost his key. -- 5 minutes later -- 10 minutes later

Anonymous

01:33

@DamkerngT. I know what they mean because it's clear from context, but "like English" is a confusing way to express "like an English speaker from England"

CopperKettle

03:53

@DamkerngT. Do you consider this book a good book? In Russia, the so-called "Blue (cover) Murphy" is very popular.

1 hour later…

Anonymous

05:07

@CopperKettle Even I've heard of it!

Anonymous

Though I'm not familiar with it.

CopperKettle

05:25

@snailboat Great!

This is a good testimonial!

A nice song I've just heard:

Phil Ochs Draft Dodger Rag

Gotta add it to the jogging folder in my MP3 player (0:

Anonymous

Yay!

Damkerng T.

@CopperKettle It looks like a good book to me. IMHO, most grammar books out there are good if used right. Then again, if all the grammar books out there were right-right (not only correct, but also explain things the right way), none of us wouldn't have even the slightest problem dealing with English grammar and usage.

It's just my view. I also think it needs people like you and me to fill in the remaining gaps.

(BTW, I've got the whole In Use series, three of them. They are the 2nd edition of the In Use series my brother bought.)

The illus. don't look as good as those in the screenshot of the latest edition, though. :-)

Anonymous

05:45

@DamkerngT. Well, in very broad terms, you can get a lot of explanatory power out of a very simple theory. It'll be wrong about the details, of course...

Anonymous

But as you refine your description, you get diminishing returns.

Damkerng T.

Yes, I can see that. The last 2% is usually the hardest.

Anonymous

A 95% accurate theory usually takes more pages to describe than a 90% accurate theory

Anonymous

Like, a lot more

Damkerng T.

Agree.

Still, I wonder if we can do better.

Anonymous

05:46

On the other hand, there are those simplifications which simultaneously increase explanatory power and reduce the # of pages :-)

Anonymous

Well, these are my thoughts as I'm back to being half-asleep...

Damkerng T.

Aww

Anonymous

Of course we want our explanations to be correct

Anonymous

But we also want them to be useful

Damkerng T.

One main problem I can see with a typical grammar book is that grammar is described more or less as rules.

Anonymous

05:48

@DamkerngT. No matter the description, there will always be gaps.

Damkerng T.

So, it will be taken as rules, instead of explanations.

Anonymous

If you memorized CGEL end-to-end, there'd be all sorts of things left you couldn't explain. (Or places where you'd find yourself disagreeing with the book.)

Damkerng T.

@snailboat I guess so, but I hope we can narrow down the gaps.

@snailboat I take that kind of disagreement as a good thing. :-)

Anonymous

It is, as long as you aren't doing it out of ignorance (as some people sometimes do)

Damkerng T.

nods

In the note to self above:

5 hours ago, by Damkerng T.

For tomorrow: 13 He has lost his key. -- 5 minutes later -- 10 minutes later

Anonymous

05:52

I don't understand your note

Damkerng T.

I spotted something which I think not wrong, but it may either mislead the reader or leave the reader wondering about the unexplained usage.

I can take the screenshot and have a short discussion in a moment.

Anonymous

Yay

Anonymous

Is it tomorrow yet?

Anonymous

Tomorrow happens in 67 minutes for me.

Damkerng T.

Looks like it's tomorrow for me already. :D

Anonymous

05:53

Time traveler!

Damkerng T.

user image

CopperKettle

@snailboat The 11th of July? We're in the middle of it!

Damkerng T.

@CopperKettle True!

CopperKettle

We're in your tomorrow, Snaily!

Anonymous

Yay! I'm Snaily!

CopperKettle

05:55

(0:

Damkerng T.

> Tom is looking for his key. He can't find it.
He has lost his key.
...
10 minutes later:
Now Tom has found his key. He has it now.
Has he lost his key? No, he has found it.
Did he lose his key? Yes, he did.
He lost his key
but now he has found it.

It's quite lovely. It looks neat and clean.

Anonymous

Hypocorism pleases me.

Damkerng T.

@snailboat Ahh

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. It does. Though a bit too neat and clean. Where's all the contractions?

Damkerng T.

Should I call you Snaily too?

Anonymous

05:57

It always bugs me when I read a bunch of sentences in a row without any contractions. I feel like a robot is talking.

Anonymous

Well, it's okay if the style is formal enough.

Damkerng T.

Hmm... I think -- yes, that.

Anonymous

Anyone and everyone can call me Snaily. Some of my friends call me Snails.

Damkerng T.

Got it. :D

Anonymous

But in the example above, it seems a bit textbook-ish.

Anonymous

05:59

Artificial.

Anonymous

Nothing's wrong with it, exactly. It just doesn't feel real.

Damkerng T.

nods -- And what hit me was this: the book didn't say anything about the right tense for the 5 minutes after his losing the key.

In order to understand my thoughts, you may have to pretend that you don't know how English works.

Anonymous

A-ha!

Damkerng T.

And you have only this book.

See the gap?

Anonymous

Yuh-huh.

Damkerng T.

06:02

At 0:05, Tom still doesn't have his key...

Has he lost his key?

Student (not very confidently): Yes, he has.

Did he lose his key?

Student (not very confidently): Yes, he did?

The sames goes for 0:15 (five minutes after the time Tom found his key).

(At 0:15) Has Tom found his key?

Student: Umm...

Did Tom find his key?

Student: ???

Has Tom lost his key? (more questions keep coming at the student :-)

And that we consider only two choices.

Which is unrealistic.

I can tell you that in every utterance, a non-native speaker always has to choose from 8 possible choices of tense.

(With or without knowingly)

Just in these basic utterances. Not to mention anything more complicated.

Anonymous

[±past ±perfect ±progressive]?

Damkerng T.

Exactly!

8 choices don't seem too many, so it shouldn't be a problem.

But in reality, it's really, really difficult to always choose right.

What's even more difficult is to know that sometimes more than one choice may be possible.

user62015

@DamkerngT. @snailboat Hi!

Damkerng T.

Hi!

Anonymous

Sure. Idiom, dialect, lexical aspect, context, the way you've conceptualized the situation, and so on can all influence your choice

Anonymous

06:16

Hello!

user62015

Which one sounds more natural to your ears?

You will find all necessary study materials on this website which you may need to improve your programming skills vs You find all necessary study materials on this website which you may need for improving your programming skills.

You will find all necessary study materials on this website which you may need for improving your programming skills.*

Anonymous

On this website, you'll find all the study materials you need to improve your programming skills.

Damkerng T.

will is better, in my opinion. I think I may use can.

Anonymous

I agree with Damkerng. Will is better than no modal auxiliary.

Damkerng T.

Yes, I think it's better without which.

user62015

06:20

Okay. Thanks.

Damkerng T.

BTW, @snailboat, I've just read a summary of Dante's Inferno! It's very tempting for me to change my username to Victor. :P

Ah, sorry, I meant Virgil.

user62015

@DamkerngT. @snailboat @Man_From_India Would you like to prefer me any grammar checker?

Anonymous

Oh! Even if you don't read it yourself, it pays to be familiar with it. There are just so many cultural references to it!

Anonymous

@user62015 I don't use grammar checkers. No one's written a good one yet.

Anonymous

I don't even use spell checkers...

Anonymous

06:26

I can't stand having red squigglies underneath perfectly legitimate words like squigglies.

Damkerng T.

@snailboat I suppose so! I've just realized how What Dreams May Come is similar to Dante's Inferno!

user62015

@snailboat Yes, they are just software. And can't work like humans.

Anonymous

And even humans can't agree on what's grammatical :-)

user62015

@snailboat I agree.

Damkerng T.

What snailboat said. I take it that by grammar checker, you mean software.

1 hour later…

Damkerng T.

07:49

0

Q: Should I use "was" or "could be" in the following sentence?

I let out a sigh. Talking to my mom was/could be tiring sometimes. Like she would focus on my individual words instead of what they said as a whole. Maybe I have to use could because there's a would in the next sentence? Or it doesn't matter?

I have no problem with either was or could be, but I think using like for because is not really kosher. (?)

Damkerng T.

08:32

Hmm... It looks like I wrote something good in another room:

> One problem for me to proofread a piece of writing is that I'm not 100% sure about some marginal sentences. I mean, I can rephrase it into something I'm more sure that it'd be safer. But it will change the structure of the sentence.

For example, this is grammatical: "Tom played football with his friends. He won a gold medal."

But if I have to proofread it, I will ask myself, how could he win a medal by just playing football with his friends? And I may do one of a few possible things.
- I may try to repair the missing context by adding words or phrases or sentences. (Which may change the…

3 hours later…

M.A.Ramezani

11:07

@DamkerngT. Hmm you sometimes get philosophical.

Damkerng T.

11:24

@M.A.Ramezani Just practical. :-)

1 hour later…

Damkerng T.

12:24

Sometimes, these tests can make a non-issue an issue. (For some unknown reason.) For example, here is my imaginary test:

> Which sentence is correct?

> a) I told my wife that I didn't want a party on my 50th birthday.

> b) I told my wife which I didn't want a party on my 50th birthday.

> c) I told my wife I didn't want a party on my 50th birthday.

M.A.Ramezani

Yeah, they'd say only 1 is correct.

Oversimplifications. They're a way of teaching teachers has chosen for centuries. Unfortunately, in the language learning context, it doesn't make things simpler. It incorrects them.

O.o I realized I never have found the word correct in a wordament puzzle.

Hey Cu!

CopperKettle

Hey Muhammad!

M.A.Ramezani

12:39

That's not the correct spelling.

CopperKettle

In Russian it's either Мохаммед or Мухаммед

Damkerng T.

@M.A.Ramezani It's funny that a lot of these tests (I mean the tests on the web) don't say anything clear about the purpose of the test. They just give you a sentence as a question, and some choices to choose from.

M.A.Ramezani

Yep.

Damkerng T.

Evening, @CopperKettle!

M.A.Ramezani

@CopperKettle That looks cool!

CopperKettle

12:41

@DamkerngT. Evening, @DamkerngT.

M.A.Ramezani

Those. Whatever.

Damkerng T.

@M.A.Ramezani But when they give us the answer, they will say that it's the "correct" answer, sometimes the "right" answer. :-)

CopperKettle

@M.A.Ramezani You can even say Магомет (in oldish Russian) - "Magomet"

Damkerng T.

Some websites avoid this by using an icon instead. :D

M.A.Ramezani

@DamkerngT. Yeah like grammar monster.

@CopperKettle Nah I vote for Myxammea.

CopperKettle

12:42

"Dostoyevsky is a Russian writer. He has written Crime and Punishment." - I wonder if this is okay.

@M.A.Ramezani okay!

M.A.Ramezani

In a historical context, I guess so.

Damkerng T.

I'm not very sure in the crit-lit context.

M.A.Ramezani

@DamkerngT. We had a question on ELL about the Chinese have invented. . .

Damkerng T.

He has written Crime and Punishment has no time phrase, but "Crime and Punishment" is a definite entity.

CopperKettle

24

Q: Why is 'The Chinese have invented the printer' wrong?

In the textbook by by Raymond Murphy, Intermediate English Grammar, 2nd edition, on page 26: "The Chinese invented the printer." Raymond Murphy says that we can't use the present perfect here. I question why? According to Murphy: "We can't use the present perfect if there's n...

difference past-tense present-perfect

M.A.Ramezani

12:44

Aha!

Damkerng T.

That's quick! Thanks!

CopperKettle

@DamkerngT. The thanks go to the StackExchange search engine. (0:

Damkerng T.

Well, you sure know how to use it better than me. :D

CopperKettle

(0:

M.A.Ramezani

I wonder. . .

Damkerng T.

12:47

Even with that question, I'm not quite sure how we can apply it. -- I think I should get back to my computer.

M.A.Ramezani

If the answer to thanks is you be welcome or I'll kill you on the Net!, then what's the answer to tanks?

Is it fighter jets?

Damkerng T.

@M.A.Ramezani You b welcome?

M.A.Ramezani

Nah.

Be more imaginative.

Damkerng T.

On the scale of 1-7, I will give "Dostoyevsky is a Russian writer. He has written Crime and Punishment." 3.

(7 is the most natural/idiomatic.)

M.A.Ramezani

I'll give X.

Damkerng T.

12:51

The sentence is grammatical, when we consider it a a standalone sentence.

Somehow it doesn't feel right to me when being used after the other sentence.

M.A.Ramezani

You're right.

That's why I said historical context.

Damkerng T.

(Is it the only book he has written? Is there any other books? Is he still alive? Is this his biography? etc.)

M.A.Ramezani

It's a perfectly natural sentence to be seen in an article.

Damkerng T.

nods -- I think this sounds better to me: "X is a writer. He has written A, B, C, and D. He lives in ..."

CopperKettle

0

Q: "Dostoyevsky is a Russian writer. He has written Crime and Punishment." or "he wrote"?

Which of the two sentences would look more natural in this short text: Dostoyevsky is a famous Russian writer. He has written Crime and Punishment. or Dostoyevsky is a famous Russian writer. He wrote Crime and Punishment. There's no specific time expression in sentence 2, and "Crime a...

present-perfect

Damkerng T.

12:56

Upboted! (It's a new upvoted. :P)

CopperKettle

@DamkerngT. Banks! (It's a new thanks!)

Damkerng T.

Good idea! :D

CopperKettle

(0:

Damkerng T.

Ahh... this is one thing I feel shaky when I discuss tenses in lit-crit.

From amazon.com/State-Fear-Michael-Crichton/dp/0061782661

> A Michael Crichton Timeline
Amazon.com reveals a few facts about the "father of the techno-thriller."
1942: John Michael Crichton is born in Chicago, Illinois on Oct. 23.

Note the part is born.

In lit-crit, everyone can be thought of as still alive.

I think in the timeline, they purposely use the present narrative.

In most of the reviews on that page, people seem to prefer the present perfect.

> Crichton has written a surprisingly serious and well researched indictment of the favorite sacred cow of the environmental movement ...

> As usual, Michael Crichton has written a compelling action drama.

> ... but he has written so many brilliant novels

M.A.Ramezani

> Variations of upvote: (Written by The Stryker Lord, edited by M.A.) Upboat, upcoat, upgoat, uploot, upmote, up-oat, uproad, uptote, upvote.

Damkerng T.

13:04

But some use wrote too.

> Crighton wrote a great fiction story that deals with a lot of the liberal vs. conservative slants on environmental issues, ...

> Everything Dr. Crichton wrote was gold. I can't put this book down, like every other of his that I've read.

Heh! The spelling Crighton discredits the creditability of that sentence a little. :P

CopperKettle

13:20

One guy at Lang-8 fixed the first sentence to "Fyodor Dostoyevsky was a great Russian writer."

M.A.Ramezani

@CopperKettle That's too pedantic.

Damkerng T.

I think it's a free choice. (Maybe not so free as in free-free.)

But it should be safe.

Also, I think I would rephrase the 2nd sentence anyway.

M.A.Ramezani

He is still a writer in our minds.

Damkerng T.

He is/was the writer/author of ...

But this would be a perfect use of the present perfect, imo: X is a writer. He has written one of the most intriguing books on Y, Z. (Z is the title of the book; Y is its subject.)

@CopperKettle We can retest the commenter's judgement with something like this: Francis Ford Coppola is a filmmaker. He has directed Dracula.

CopperKettle

@DamkerngT. But Coppola is still alive.

Damkerng T.

13:30

Yes, which may help narrow the problem down to directed vs. has directed.

CopperKettle

oh.. I'd better disconnect and read up some Quirk et al on this

(0:

BBL (0:

M.A.Ramezani

Later!

Damkerng T.

See you later!

The biggest problem about that sentence is that when we use the present perfect, we need it to somehow relate to the present.

One possible way is the context itself makes it possible.

But two sentences are barely a context.

I believe that it's not wrong-wrong, but may be frown upon if the context doesn't license it.

Oh, I forgot to mention another natural way to write it.

> Francis Ford Coppola is a filmmaker. He directed Dracula in 19XX.

But on Lang-8, I think I agree with this:

22 mins ago, by CopperKettle

One guy at Lang-8 fixed the first sentence to "Fyodor Dostoyevsky was a great Russian writer."

Problem solved. It's safe to use on all occasions.

M.A.Ramezani

BTW @Dam could you proofread this?

2

Q: Humanoid chemists have five senses, only one "taste" tag isn't enough (AKA reaching a consensus about the "sense" tags)

I'm not interested in the history of how this taste got through and was made, but it has done a fairly successful job as a tag: 13 questions currently tagged; more or less, it does make sense on them. No serious mistags observed (Depends on how we look at it though) There's some expectation of ...

discussion tags

It's the meta Q I told you about yesterday.

Damkerng T.

I ran out of my proofread quota at the moment. Maybe next hour.

M.A.Ramezani

13:45

Whee-yay! I earned a high score!

@DamkerngT. Whenever you say.

Damkerng T.

:D

But I trust that most of your writing would be fine.

Like 95-98% fine.

M.A.Ramezani

Yay!

Damkerng T.

?

M.A.Ramezani

I was yaying at the results of your analysis.

Damkerng T.

Ahh... :-)

I skimmed through hour question. I think most of the things I may write differently are just the matter of style. I spotted one strange phrase, and one missing period, though.

M.A.Ramezani

13:57

Cool.

Strange phrase?

Damkerng T.

> Currently there are 158 results searching for smell.

> And we have five senses: Taste, sight, sound, touch and smell

M.A.Ramezani

@DamkerngT. Hmm, that's better off with a comma..

Damkerng T.

The part results searching bothered me a bit.

I mean, we search for something and get the results.

The results don't do the searching.

M.A.Ramezani

@DamkerngT. Read it like searching for smell, currently there are 158 results.

Damkerng T.

Ahh... I see.

M.A.Ramezani

14:00

Ahh. . . I see.

I get what you mean, but that wasn't what I meant. I added a comma though.

Damkerng T.

nods

Oh!

~~Why~~ What causes the old book smell?

This is debatable, but I think it's safer with it: What was it that I observed?

M.A.Ramezani

Right. . .

Up high sir.

Damkerng T.

Yay! I finished reading the question!

M.A.Ramezani

The answer is even better.

Damkerng T.

The answer has to wait until the next hour, though. :P

M.A.Ramezani

14:06

NNnnnnooooooooooooooooooOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooOOOOOOOOOOOO!

Damkerng T.

Okay, okay, I will try...

Not sure what this means: This is less a meta tag than everyday-chemistry.

But I guess it makes sense in your context.

> Having tags for only two senses outta five might make our tagging system look incomplete and unreasonable.

Perhaps consider: our tag system

But this is just a matter of style.

> We'd have less headaches with all this meta discussion.

Perhaps consider: less headache, or fewer headaches

M.A.Ramezani

The third one is actually a thing.

Damkerng T.

> Instead of little little tags we'd have a universal tag.

How about: "a bunch of little tags"?

Done!

Yay!

M.A.Ramezani

14:23

@DamkerngT. Nah. That's the art in it.

Little little is redup.

Damkerng T.

Ahh... got it.

A-ha!

1 hour ago, by Damkerng T.

@CopperKettle We can retest the commenter's judgement with something like this: Francis Ford Coppola is a filmmaker. He has directed Dracula.

I found a good way to check its acceptability...

Googling for "is a writer who has written the"

and compare that to "is a writer who wrote the"

The results support my first few hunches:

2 hours ago, by Damkerng T.

(Is it the only book he has written? Is there any other books? Is he still alive? Is this his biography? etc.)

2 hours ago, by Damkerng T.

nods -- I think this sounds better to me: "X is a writer. He has written A, B, C, and D. He lives in ..."

2 hours ago, by Damkerng T.

He has written Crime and Punishment has no time phrase, but "Crime and Punishment" is a definite entity.

So, even if the writer were still alive, the present prefect is probably less preferred.

Original:

2 hours ago, by CopperKettle

"Dostoyevsky is a Russian writer. He has written Crime and Punishment." - I wonder if this is okay.

M.A.Ramezani

14:41

هدفثقسفهدل.

I mean interesting.

I forgot to switch the languages again.

Damkerng T.

@M.A.Ramezani See the difference between the number of results of "is a writer who has written the" and "is a writer who wrote the", right?

M.A.Ramezani

Yes. I mean not just yet. But I know the result will be interesting, no matter what it is.

Holy!

The results are almost the same though - 4 versus 91100.

Damkerng T.

(BTW, the number is not that different, just about 9-10-fold.)

M.A.Ramezani

Nice conclusion.

Damkerng T.

I remember that the present perfect doesn't work with a specific instance (i.e. something definite, like a specific book) very well.

Man_From_India

14:50

Good evening @DamkerngT. @M.A.Ramezani

Damkerng T.

Good evening!

M.A.Ramezani

Evening!

Man_From_India

I was just thinking about not less than vs no less than. no and not determiner and less determiner.

I found that not less than is very very rare.

no less than is idiomatic

Damkerng T.

nods

Man_From_India

In fact in dictionary it has an entry :-)

Here comes the concept of postdeterminer.

I was thinking about copperkettle's has written answer..

Damkerng T.

14:57

@Man_From_India nods

Man_From_India

Sometimes I think has written is correct, sometimes wrote seems correct. But from the very start has written somehow sound good to me without any grammatical reason or anything.

Damkerng T.

BTW, I think both not less than and no less than are possible.

Man_From_India

Yes both are possible. But as a NP? Most of the examples in corpus is like It's not less than [n*]

Damkerng T.

@Man_From_India What about something like: "Remember? I've played that match with you."

Man_From_India

hmmm right

Damkerng T.

15:01

It's not less than,It's no less than -- goo.gl/eLTPsQ

M.A.Ramezani

@DamkerngT. *against you.

Damkerng T.

@M.A.Ramezani No, with you. As in basketball or football.

M.A.Ramezani

So the you is plural?

Damkerng T.

The context I was thinking of was like two old friends meeting each other once again.

M.A.Ramezani

Then with you doesn't work.

There comes @snail to prove me wrong.

Morning @snail!

Man_From_India

15:04

@DamkerngT. Haha :O what I meant is that in most not less than examples that not is a part of the verb, most of the time.

Damkerng T.

@M.A.Ramezani "Remember? I played that match with you. We beat them hands down."

@Man_From_India Hah!

Man_From_India

books.google.com/ngrams/…

Damkerng T.

Hmm... I think not in not less than would modify the verb (very likely, the copula verb).

M.A.Ramezani

@DamkerngT. Oh, not against against, but for for.

Man_From_India

@DamkerngT. yes

Damkerng T.

15:07

@M.A.Ramezani Yup. That's what I was thinking of.

Anonymous

Dead people don't usually appear in the present perfect.

Damkerng T.

@Man_From_India I can see where you're getting at! Now I wonder what the most frequently used word before not less than is!

Anonymous

The present perfect tells you about their current state, and they don't have a current state.

Damkerng T.

@snailboat nods -- I wasn't sure about that (whether it's possible; I only know that the past tense is safer).

@snailboat But CopperKettle's question makes me think of those who are still alive.

@Man_From_India is not less than,* not less than -- goo.gl/T7laA5

It's be!

Oh, no, it's of.

Wait, that Ngram chart looks fishy!

> Search for "is not less than" yielded only one result.

Man_From_India

@DamkerngT. Ah...those are consists of not less than X, total of not less than X etc

Damkerng T.

15:13

Ahh

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. That's just a bug in their software. It didn't actually yield only one result.

Damkerng T.

nods

I found a lot of "is not less than" on Google Books!

Damkerng T.

15:42

books.google.com/…

@Man_From_India ^Check out that page. Look for no less, B. And not less.

1 hour later…

Man_From_India

16:45

@DamkerngT. Thank you. This is so helpful.

Damkerng T.

@Man_From_India My pleasure!

I've got that book, a used one.

Man_From_India

17:12

I think it's a really good book. Sometimes the difference in meaning is also needed apart from grammatical analysis.

M.A.Ramezani

Not as good as the FLAWLESS.

Damkerng T.

:D

M.A.Ramezani

No seriously.

Damkerng T.

:D

M.A.Ramezani

No akh. Why don't you take me seriously? That book is good, but FLAWLESS is the FLAWLESS.

You can't beat something FLAWLESS.

Damkerng T.

17:21

I see, I see. :-)

Damkerng T.

17:58

0

Q: What is difference between "faith" and "hope"

One day I was thinking about these two words hope and faith. If a man is drowning in the water then he should have faith/hope that somebody will come and save him. Faith and hope have different meaning in dictionary but in a statement I do not find any difference between hope and faith. Are th...

word-usage synonyms

Hmm... [H]e should have faith that(?) ...

M.A.Ramezani

I think they're VERY different.

But I can't explain why.

Damkerng T.

I wonder if have faith that something will happen really works.

« first day (22 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (3511 days later) »

Transcript for

Jul '1511

Language Overflow

This is the main chat room for ell.stackexchange.com. Welcome!

join this room
about this room

00:00

06:00

12:00

18:00

all times are UTC

site design / logo © 2025 Stack Exchange Inc; legal

mobile