Search results for 'tag:Expressions tag:Analogies' matching tags 'Expressions' and 'Analogies'

Re: What does this sentence mean?

Avangi — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 02:20:05 GMT

Hi, charlis, Welcome to English Forums. Thanks for joining us!

I think both the bold expressions mean about the same thing, although I agree they're a bit strange.

Someone seems to have written some advisory instructions for "Member States" to use in formulating the wording of their submissions for approval.

They're suggesting that an approximately similar existing law or description of a proposed substance be emulated in submitting requests for approval. Personally, I think "verified by analogy" is particularly dumb, in view of the old saw that "analogy is the weakest form of argument."

I may be way off base. A directive is like "orders from headquarters." Please do it this way: Etc. It sounds like they're saying if you can't find an example similar to what you want to propose, don't waste our time.

- A.

some words I didn't understand

Darene — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 10:17:41 GMT

Hello,

I'm sorry I have more than one question today, and I will post them all here because I'm supposed to hand this part in on Sunday.

Help me explain what's in red please:

A) The implications 1 for parents and educational policy makers is to realize that intense intellectual input and development should be situated at the spurt ages. And further, that rigorous intellectual development (three R's) 2 at the period of little or no brain and mind growth raises the possibility that attempts to inject novel intellectual competencies not only will fail if tried at certain age periods, but that such attempts may be counterproductive.

1: Does it mean the( role) of parents?

2: I search the net and I found that it is reading and writing... but what's the third one?

B) What Epstein is suggesting is that the conditions for enrichment might well change from periods of growth to periods of "dormancy". Perhaps in the "dormant" periods, when the "red lights" are on, we need to focus on "emotional intelligence" character education, collaboration, citizenship and service to others.

what does it mean in this context?

C) I remember my first job as a teacher was with junior high school seventh graders who were, according to the brain spurt theory, in the cusp of brain dormancy. Rather than lecture to them, I took them outside and we built replicas of Onondaga Indian Long Houses and artifacts, with many, many field trips.

Can you please paraphrase it or give me the meaning of it, ( I don't know what the "field trip" is)

D) On the other hand, the sophomores in high school could not seem to get enough of the intrigue of Hamlet and the horror of Gettyburg 1. They loved writing poesm and collecting art to express their ideas. It seemed as if they emerged out of a cocoon of "I can't" and "Not for me to question 'why,' but for me to do or die 2"

1:What is the author trying to convey here? I didn't understand.

2: please paraphrase the meaning

E) And the fastest growing commercial construction industry is "prisons,' whose industry leaders target fourth grade reading levels in communities, since the fourth grade reading level is predictive of incarceration.

Does it mean that the person reads as a fourth grader? or is it a fourth level on a scale pertaining to reading? i'm confused.

F) One extrapolation from the arts in the pursuit of learning and utilizing the brain and mind most affectively is in the use of storytelling and visual or guided imagery.

The dictionary provides no suitable equivalent for it in this context, please provide me with one.

G) Th faculty of fantasy and imagination was held in high esteem in the West until the Renaissance.

Does it mean that it was there and welcomed? or was it forbidden?

H) Through Ramus' work, a major shift away from the scholastics occurred. The scholastics used imagery, methaphor and analogy as a part of prudence and the creatice process.

Does he mean the scholastics as a group or the members of the sholastics as "religious philosophers"?

I) Jeasus used the same parabolic teaching in His communication with the children, the general people, the Apostles, therabbis and government leaders.

What is parabolic teaching? I searched the net but I didn't find a definition, I only know the "parabolic" of math

J) They see imagery as a vehicle for affective development, such as the increase awareness of inner senses and feelings and the expression of theses wherever appropriate, expanded inner cognizance of personal images and symbols, introspective means to conflict resolution, culling feelings of self-love and appreciation...

is it verb + noun (which I belive is true but it didn't make sense to me that's why i'm confused) ? what does it mean?

Thank you so much.

Re: In according to?

Goodman — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 10:42:01 GMT

Schetin,

I am still trying to dial to the right frequency so that we can communicate. I am afraid I have failed because I realize we are not talking in the same wave length. I find your pattern of thought difficult to understand. I once heard this analogy "there is only a thin line between a moron and a wiz". I surely can't tell which one are you. You at times sounded smart but when listened carefully, the words coming out of your mouth proved otherwise. I think you like to talk in riddles to confuse people.

Would you care to elaborate? <<<Since Americans started their expansion by means of language, the rule "but don't ask me why" has become nearly universal. >>>

<<<There's a rule and it can be explained. That one thinks an expression sounds fine doesn't mean it is correct. I have explained why expression "in according" can't have preposition "to" - because it requires a direct object. Because the verb "accord" is transitive. ( I don't know what brand of English you are studying in Russia. In my 20 years of learning, I've never come across this explanation, Sorry!)You can't just accord, you have to accord [TO] something.

Accordance is a noun and can be used with preposition "with", "on", "of", about, whatever. (Wow! this is new to me)

It's not a matter of lexis - it's grammar.>>> (Really !!)

Re: words "box spring"

Believer — Sat, 24 Feb 2007 12:51:36 GMT

Hi, GG.

I googled the phrases "box spring is in good" and "box springs are in good" and the results seem to be 68 and 12 respectively, so the phrase "box spring is in good" seems to be in vogue?? (Is this the right BLOCKED EXPRESSION.

I think I can lay out the rationale like this:

Analogy??:

You don't need a new box of appples. The apple is still good.

Yours:

I need a new mattress, but the box spring is still in good shape.

In both sentences, yours and mine, a general reference is made using a definitely articled noun.

Re: doored and roomed

Cool Breeze — Wed, 20 Sep 2006 09:24:44 GMT

Yoong Liat wrote:
Hi guys

Why do we say 'a three-doored vehicle' and 'a three-roomed flat'? I believe 'a three-door vehicle' and 'a three-room flat' are also correct grammatically. There are no such words as 'doored' and 'roomed'. How did the former version originate?

The -ed ending is frequently added to nouns: a long-legged girl, a brown-haired boy. Contrary to what Inchoateknowledge says, door is not a verb. Your expressions have been formed on the analogy of the above expressions. I won't take a stand regarding their correctness. I can only say that all languages change and people usually object to most changes because they are not used to them. Every change that has happened in English since c. 448AD must have been viewed with suspicion and resistance, but most people think that there is nothing wrong with the outcome, modern English.

Cheers
CB

Re: Is 'rave' a verb here?

CalifJim — Fri, 10 Mar 2006 07:53:31 GMT

This is an unusual use of to. It is used by analogy with sentences like The actors played to an enthusiastic crowd. The expression after to tells to whom the acting is directed, so to speak, while telling, more obliquely, how the action was received, i.e., enthusiastically. It is this more oblique connection that is emphasized in expressions like opened to rave reviews, which says that the opening was greeted by rave reviews or received with reviews which were extremely positive.

The play opened to rave reviews.

Another possible paraphrase is accompanied by, although this minimizes the idea that we are talking about a reaction to the situation.

The play opened accompanied by rave reviews.

Another example:

The graduates entered the hall to the strains of solemn music.

This says:

When the graduates entered the hall, [they were greeted by / they immediately heard / they were accompanied by] the strains of solemn music.

CJ

Re: as . . . that

CalifJim — Sun, 05 Mar 2006 21:49:09 GMT

Diamondrg,

It seems you are stuck on the idea that as goes with that in the sample sentence! It doesn't!
chances goes with that. The chances that you will ...
good / not as good / not so good also goes with chances. The chances are good. The chances are not as good. The chances are not so good.

The replacements you suggest will make sense or not based on their relationship to the facts outlined above -- not by any analogy with as ... as or so ... that or not so ... as or more ... than.

So not as good can be replaced by not so good or (what is equivalent to *more good) better. In all cases -- the original sentence and the derivatives -- the comparative clause with than or as is omitted.

chances are good means the likelihood/probability is high.
chances are not [so / as] good means the likelihood/probability is not very high.

The comparison portion of the full expression, shown in brackets below, may be omitted, as it is in the sample sentence.

The chances are better [than you might expect] that you will go to a bookstore. That is, the likelihood that you will go to a bookstore is higher [than you might expect].
The chances are not as good [as the chances of my doing something else] that I will visit Turkey within the next week. That is, the likelihood that I will visit Turkey within the next week is not as high [as the chances of my doing something else].

Think of the sentence which precedes the problem sentence like this:
If you're going in to buy a camera and there's book on the counter on how to use that camera, the chances are (good) that you may buy it, i.e., the chances that you may buy it are good, i.e., the probability that you may buy it is high.
That may help you see the structure of the following (problem) sentence better.

I hope some of this helped.

CJ

(The font seems to change size whether I want it to or not!)

Re: Linguistics not science

Randy_Tam — Sat, 31 Dec 2005 18:57:46 GMT

ah... it seems nobody is reading. Anyway, this thing has gone really too far - fetched.

No offense, but that it pains and is time - consuming to do the a - level is a rather common opinion among high school students. At any rate, this is a conclusion that information available to me has led me to draw.

As to the jargon thing, if 'etymon' be defined as 'the root of a lexical item', and given one is going to use the word many times... haha, this is going to be a lot of fun: the root of a lexical item (an etymon) is something that students should at any rate have some knowledge about; however, the study into the root of lexical items (etymology) is par excellence a profound subject that is worth as much attention as such other linguistic subjects as phonetics and semantics.

'Why use jargons when simple words will do?'

in the very same manner, I will ask, 'why use a long expression when a shorter and plainer one is available'? (again, the 2 arguments are treated as 'equally important' in George Ornwell's 1946 essay...) An analogy could be observed from maths:

1. (2x + 2y)

2. 2(x + y)

is the latter one not more palatable?

'Last time I checked, linguistics is still in the Faculty of Arts. Never seen it listed among the sciences. '

That's why every year members and professors from that field take pain in explaining the nature of THEIR linguistics. Go to the open days of those institutes where linguistics classes are given. You will find them all stressing on the irrelevance of studying languages (presumably an arts matter) to linguistics defined in their own fashion. Taxonomy is one thing; the nature of what is taught can be another. Economics is, as a tradition, treated as an arts subject (though yes... it is changing). But does it not fall under a branch of science, with a coherent framework of theories and tools for predictions?

'Your prof. is right to keep your project in hiatus. Students should be well-rounded before they become specialized--there's plenty of time for that yet! Again, going back to what I've said about a lopsided education. '

Not really... linguistics in its own right is a subject, English is another. That I skim through linguistics issues does not mean I am leaving other subjects high and dry. A history major fella tells me he is doing some sort of research into the military history of the Chinese warlords, 1911 - 1927. (a field on which few historians even bother to write). I am somehow envious of him not really because of the freedom (I am going to study myself anyway) he is given, but because somebody is serving for him as a good 'reader'.

' Linguistics is like åµæ³. Too much strategems on paper will turn anybody into a é¦¬è¬.'

That depends on how you define 'linguistics'. If you mean to be so ambitious as to include language phenomena into 'linguistics', then yes. But if the usual sense of this word is preserved, then I must decline. Linguistics, treated on a par with 'French studies', 'Literary analysis', or 'history', is a STUDY of human linguistic behaviour, but not 'human linguistic behaviour' itself: I do not need to know linguistics in order to speak my mother tongue or English, or French. By the same token, an apple does not need to 'know' Newton's laws so that it will fall from a tree. Linguistics is (currently) a study concerned with the nature of the language faculty. So it is appropriate to speak of L1 acquisition, X' theory, etc.

BUT to study the subject is one thing, to APPLY it is another. This is true of... I am sorry to say, everything. One can well attend a so - called 'leadership training camp' and score high, but fail to manage his subordinates in an orderly manner. One may well recite the X theory and Y theory, but still doesn't know to deal with the lack of initiation (on which X theory is based) among his subordinates. But that does not mean a study into such phenomena as aforementioned is unnecessary or will turn a chap into a pedant. That is a matter of how one understands the relationship between a study and the practical application the knowledge he possesses.

Re: Inferior dialects?

Randy_Tam — Sat, 10 Dec 2005 16:55:40 GMT

O, I thought you were, as your quote is in Chinese.

Yes, L(x) is a function indicating whether a language is 'native' or 'foreign' to a person. It is not restricted to Language Acquisition though, as it is widely used in such topics as Language Teaching (see for example, Eric Hawkin's <Awareness of Language>, Psycholinguistics (Fodor's <Language of Thought>... If I remember the name aright), Applied Linguistics (eg. Andrew Radford et al., <Linguistics: an Introduction>.

I am not a specialist in the development of Sino languages though. I am only taking Mandarin as a complusory second language credit course, my L1 being Cantonese Chinese, now considered a 'dialect' for no justifiable reasons, as there has never been a clear distinction drawn between a 'dialect' and a 'language': do the 2 not share the very same traits of a 'language' (a consistent grammar embedded so that an L1 speaker can tell whether an expression is acceptable in his language)? I feel really sorry for my professor, whose views as to a 'language' seem to me simply ignoring the dynamic nature of language. According to her (and the course book), Putonghua was 'designed and standardized (by a committee of linguists... sadly enough), where the lexicon and pronunciations are fabricated according to the dialects spoken around the northern provinces, to be the common language of the entire Chinese population'. Anything that is not in the prescribed list (of words, of the so - called 'syntax', and of pronunciation) is considered 'wrong', the list's constantly changing and being enlarged notwithstanding (direct sources are not available, as I am, as always, but a small potato). The matter on which I want to draw you attention is not this bare matter of fact, but the reason why the list requires constant change.

Given the assumption that the government policy of 'linguistic genocide' (as my French teacher, who used to teach in China and can speak Putonghua even better than most of my classmates, calls that prescription and its making compulsory Putonghua learning in primary schools) is effective, the initial linguistic state of the country ought to be homogeneous, ie. people speaking the 'very same language' at a 'very same standard'... um... to take an analogy from English, if a British calls a person a 'chap', given that policy exists among English speaking countries, you would expect an American, instead of calling a person a 'guy', a 'noob', or a 'pal', to say 'chap' as well. This might well have worked perfectly if 1: people were brainless and non - innovative such that they don't know to invent new expressions or words. 2. if the community (in this case, China) were close against contact with other communities. But neither is true of China (although, from a racist point of view, one may talk of '*** noobs' as he talks of 'frogs'... no puns here, again... just to name an example). As a language is used in daily discourse, deviations related to 1. the phonemic form 2. syntactic constructions 3. pragmatic uses 4. stylistic variations 5. logical interpretations and the like, make language change inevitable. I quote again the examples I came across earlier: 1. the use of 'er' being more flexible these days (as more non - L1 speakers of Putonghua now communicate in that language, whereas the use of 'er' is simply insane in their native language, Cantonese for example) 2. the more flexible use of the '5th tone' (probably brought about by intercourse between Mainlander Chinese and Taiwanese Chinese) 3. words borrowed from other Chinese 'dialects'. All these blur, if not make impossible, the precise definition of the shape of a language. It is for this reason that even though Putonghua was intended as a prescribed language for the entire population, speech variations nevertheless take place (Though asserted as 'wrongs', Chinese linguists have devoted much effort in addressing 'common errors' of a particular group of speaker, a prelude to 'language variations') and eventually prevail over such prescriptions.

Re: A problem with 'problem'

komountain — Sat, 08 Oct 2005 19:41:27 GMT

You are right, Paco. The word 'problem' is definitely a countable noun. That's why when I first encountered the expression 'have x problem -ing,' perhaps decades ago, I thought it's a rather unusual construction. This peculiarity compelled me to memorize the expression by rote then. Along the way, the eccentricity, if you will, seemed to have been supported by the sentences I occasionally came across. Here is another sentence retrieved from my personal data. If my memory serves me right, the sentence was taken from either a newspaper or a magazine.

Small- and medium-sized businesses have problem getting people to work for them.

If it's a typo, the case is settled.

(p.s.: Remember I always enjoy reading your posts.)

Davkett.

Thank you for your comments. Can't the indefinite article 'a' be an optional item in this particular construction? Well, it could have derived from its analogy, in terms of both construction and meaning, to the expression 'have difficulty -ing' where 'a' is not used.