http://www.englishforums.com/search/pro.htm?q=user%3aTidus&o=DateDescendingSearch results for 'user:Tidus'en-USXMOD (Build: 3614.32638)http://www.englishforums.com/English/OnOrFor/hzdkq/post.htm#610289Fri, 12 Dec 2008 14:26:13 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:610289tidusThat is the dictionary definition of what sweat is. In writing or conversation, the term is simply 'sweat'. It is not sweat water, or sweat liquid, it is simply 'sweat'.http://www.englishforums.com/English/TownLivingLivingNow/hzdlv/post.htm#610278Fri, 12 Dec 2008 14:05:26 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:610278tidusThey both look fine to me although if ending the sentence with it, then I would probably use 'living now', ie "I have no idea where she is living now." If continuing the sentence then I would probably use 'now living' - "the town where she is now living has a really bad reputation".http://www.englishforums.com/English/Junior/hzckn/post.htm#610006Thu, 11 Dec 2008 18:07:05 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:610006tidusIn the absence of further information, I have no idea. In the UK though, at the age of 12, he would've been in first year at high school, which would be junior high in the countries that split between junior and senior.http://www.englishforums.com/English/Junior/hzckn/post.htm#609993Thu, 11 Dec 2008 16:58:34 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:609993tidusI think some high schools used to split the pupils between junior & senior, so it could mean that.http://www.englishforums.com/English/ImNotSureI/hzclh/post.htm#609990Thu, 11 Dec 2008 16:47:12 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:609990tidusI'm not sure I really believe it's true . He can't believe it? I think it just means that her leaving for good has not been confirmed yet because of the word 'might' in the previous sentence. If it was in the sense of 'can't believe it' then usually whatever it is has been confirmed. Clark: That's intense . Extreme? Yes. Lana: He told me he was doing it for us... and asked if I'd wait for him. Clark: Really. What did you say? Lana: Nothing. I kind of just stood there in stunned silence .( wordless ?) Disbelief. Clark: So you didn't commit? Promised him? Didn't promise him .http://www.englishforums.com/English/TheBoard/hzclv/post.htm#609987Thu, 11 Dec 2008 16:40:09 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:609987tidusYes re investers, and not necessarily re directors. The board doesn't have to be made up of directors, it could be a board of senior managers depending on the type of company it is. So, the 'board' is generally made of people in the most senior positions, but not necessarily directors.http://www.englishforums.com/English/GiveMeAWayToUnderstand/hzbpm/post.htm#609972Thu, 11 Dec 2008 16:17:14 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:609972tidusAlso note: Normalness should be 'normality' from here on out should be 'from here on in'http://www.englishforums.com/English/NeitherOrNor/hzbnm/post.htm#609961Thu, 11 Dec 2008 15:51:38 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:609961tidusJoe didn't take my pen today, neither did Jane take my pencil the other night . Joe didn't take my pen today, nor did Jane take my pencil the other night. Joe didn't take my pen today. Neither did Jane take my pencil the other night. Joe didn't take my pen today. Nor did Jane take my pencil the other night. I think the only one that is correct is the second. Used on its own, neither is usually used relative to the same thing ie "I have two pens and neither of them work". Where neither is relative to separate things or people, then it is usually followed by nor ie "Neither Joe nor Jane took my pen today". So, the only one that looks ok to me is: Joe didn't take my pen today, nor did Jane take my...http://www.englishforums.com/English/ImpressedMoved/hbdgq/post.htm#590556Sat, 22 Nov 2008 06:16:07 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:590556tidusAvoid 2, 3, 4 and 6. The others look ok. 4 in particular is completely wrong. Nobody gets 'deeply impressed' about anything.http://www.englishforums.com/English/ConsistOfContains/gjjbz/post.htm#547973Tue, 29 Jul 2008 12:06:37 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:547973tidusOranges contain s vitamin C. - Yes, this is fine. Oranges contain s a lot of vitamin C. - You can say that, but we would normally say Oranges are high in Vitamin C Oranges consists of / comprises Vitamin C. No, we wouldn't say that .http://www.englishforums.com/English/NotSoNewCar/2/gjrdn/Post.htm#547915Tue, 29 Jul 2008 10:21:42 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:547915tidusTidus: I just wander why took but would watch in terms of consistency Was trying to keep it as close as possible to the original. If I was saying it, I would probably say "I always watched", but in this context "would watch" means the same thing and is something that people do say.http://www.englishforums.com/English/NotSoNewCar/gjrdn/post.htm#545411Wed, 23 Jul 2008 12:09:32 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:545411tidusThis is better: When I had just bought my brand new car, I would take took good care of it. Whenever I took it out I would watch for bumps, and park in well-lit areas. Now that it's no longer perfect from and has scratches and dents, I speed through over bumps and potholes.http://www.englishforums.com/English/ATermCoined/ghczg/post.htm#536209Thu, 03 Jul 2008 09:49:11 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:536209tidusYes, "by" has been omitted. I'm not sure what your second question is asking, but the clause basically describes Amory Lovins's vision of the future as he/she seen it in the 1970s. I think "would" is used because it's an idea/vision of the future rather than anything definate and he/she couldn't say ".... will gradually replace.. "http://www.englishforums.com/English/CallUpon/ggpjb/post.htm#535228Tue, 01 Jul 2008 16:07:56 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:535228tidusUsually, if you "call upon" a person or group of people, you are asking them for their assistance or support. So, whilst you may "call upon teachers to be judges", it is unlikely that you would "call upon the teachers to come down from the staff office", unless perhaps they were staging some kind of protest and had locked themselves in it. It's quite a formal expression as well and most commonly used in the sense of "call upon the leaders of the world...", or "call upon the people of the country", or "call upon the Transport minister... ". It's not something you would use for people you know, you wouldn't, for example "call upon your friends to go to a party"http://www.englishforums.com/English/HistoricallyWomenRightsEntitlements/ggpxm/post.htm#535209Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:50:34 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:535209tidusThe first one sounds best. There are various ways of saying it, for example: Historically, women have not had many of the rights and entitlements that men have had. Historically, women have not had the same rights and entitlements that men have had. Historically, women have not enjoyed many of the rights and entitlements that men have. Historically, women have been denied many of the rights and entitlements of menhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/HasAbilityAblityAbility/zkchv/post.htm#467465Tue, 22 Jan 2008 16:04:52 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:467465tidusNo. Although to say "Everyone has ability to contribute..." isn't wrong, it's more common to use the article.http://www.englishforums.com/English/HasAbilityAblityAbility/zkchv/post.htm#467447Tue, 22 Jan 2008 15:36:35 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:467447tidusDepends. If you mean each individual has a specific ability to contribute, then use "an ability". If you mean everybody is competent enough to contribute, then use "the ability".http://www.englishforums.com/English/ToJackOneselfClear/zkczg/post.htm#467444Tue, 22 Jan 2008 15:32:16 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:467444tidusIn this context, Jack means to lift verticallyhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/LimitCorrectlyUsed/zjmmj/post.htm#465512Thu, 17 Jan 2008 16:37:01 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:465512tidusYes, although it could be better worded. Something like "I can tolerate a lot, but I have my limits", or, "I can tolerate a lot, but there's a limit".http://www.englishforums.com/English/DistributeToFor/zjmzm/post.htm#465396Thu, 17 Jan 2008 12:18:25 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:465396tidusEither is ok, but I also think there could be a slight difference between them. I think that "to" implies that the gifts are from the teacher to the children, and "for" implies that the gifts came from somewhere else and that the teacher is distributing them.http://www.englishforums.com/English/WeSometimesTurnBestWork/zjkgh/post.htm#464860Wed, 16 Jan 2008 10:38:05 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:464860tidusYou could use either of them.http://www.englishforums.com/English/WhichChooseAnythingEverything/zjkhv/post.htm#464859Wed, 16 Jan 2008 10:35:45 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:464859tidusYou could use either 'something' or 'everything', but not 'anything'.http://www.englishforums.com/English/DanFeltTensionBuilding-Body/zjkhj/post.htm#464857Wed, 16 Jan 2008 10:33:09 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:464857tidusYes. Both are fine and mean the same.http://www.englishforums.com/English/MySupportSystem/zjkhk/post.htm#464854Wed, 16 Jan 2008 10:30:45 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:464854tidusAngliholic wrote: Does "my support system" in the above equate "my supports?" I suppose it does, but i don't think "my supports" is something we'd usually say. "My support system" just means the people you turn to for help/advice.http://www.englishforums.com/English/Confer/zhwhb/post.htm#454488Tue, 18 Dec 2007 12:40:24 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:454488tidusIt is correct, but it's very formal. In that situation, it's more likely that the sentence would read along the lines of The company "Employee of the Quarter" award went to John.http://www.englishforums.com/English/ThinkOneselfOneself/zgknq/post.htm#450282Thu, 06 Dec 2007 10:26:39 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:450282tidusIn that context it would be "work it out for yourself" rather than "think it". If you wanted to use "think", then say "have a think about it yourself", or, "think it through yourself", or "think it over yourself/by yourself". "Work it out for yourself" is probably the most common though.http://www.englishforums.com/English/OnTheWay/zglrb/post.htm#450281Thu, 06 Dec 2007 10:21:55 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:450281tidusNo, it doesn't.http://www.englishforums.com/English/WithKidsOfTheirOwnAge/zglrm/post.htm#450280Thu, 06 Dec 2007 10:21:01 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:450280tidusBoth are ok I think, but I would probably say "kids their own age", and "teaches strategy"http://www.englishforums.com/English/AdultsEnjoyPlayingGamesClearMinds-ChangeMoods/zglrx/post.htm#450279Thu, 06 Dec 2007 10:18:22 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:450279tidusYes.http://www.englishforums.com/English/Assumption/3/zzxqr/Post.htm#447426Wed, 28 Nov 2007 14:51:04 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:447426tidusDifferences of opinion going on there as well I see! Glad to see someone agrees with my original "B". Do you know who set this question, and what their suggested answer is?http://www.englishforums.com/English/HisTwentyFourCows/zgbrx/post.htm#447388Wed, 28 Nov 2007 13:03:54 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:447388tidusBoth are ok, although I'd be more likely just to say "all his cows were killed"http://www.englishforums.com/English/IndefiniteArticleProper-Name/zgrxr/post.htm#447328Wed, 28 Nov 2007 09:44:53 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:447328tidusIf the word begins with a vowel - ie 'unsuspecting' then it is preceded by 'an', if it doesn't ie 'sympathetic', then it is preceded by 'a'.http://www.englishforums.com/English/Assumption/2/zzxqr/Post.htm#447322Wed, 28 Nov 2007 09:33:43 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:447322tidusYou're welcome. I'm really going on the basis that one of those A-E options is indeed correct. At first read of it, I would probably have said that none of them fit very well.http://www.englishforums.com/English/WouldntBeTooStrongAWord/zgrzw/post.htm#447192Wed, 28 Nov 2007 01:46:30 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:447192tidusIn English, you can't 'a' too (unless you're sneezing? ) Don't use 'a' if the next word is going to be "too".http://www.englishforums.com/English/Estranged/zzqhx/post.htm#447178Wed, 28 Nov 2007 01:07:22 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:447178tidusIn the UK, 'estranged' always applies to a husband and wife no longer living together. I've never heard it used in UK English in any other way. In the UK, we'd say we'd distanced ourselves from friends rather than estranged ourselves from them. Also, there will be a reason for it - not just the fact that one moves to the other side of the world, but more that one does not want to be in contact with the other anymore.http://www.englishforums.com/English/BegTheQuestion/2/zzpzp/Post.htm#447170Wed, 28 Nov 2007 00:59:06 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:447170tidusCertainly, in everyday English in the UK, to beg the question, will be to ask a question based on what information has just been given. Sounds like the true meaning has been lost in translation long ago. In fact, this has got me a bit intrigued, so I've checked both Oxford and Cambridge Dictionaries. They both list "inviting an obvious question" as the primary usage of the phrase, with "accepting something as true without arguing it" as a secondary use.http://www.englishforums.com/English/AFairCase/zzqpm/post.htm#447124Tue, 27 Nov 2007 21:54:38 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:447124tidusIt means that they think they have a case, but don't have any evidence to back it up - ie they think that Shane was suicidal, but they can't prove it. However, they think that messages on his cell phone might help to prove that they are right in thinking that he was suicidal, and if they do, then they'll have "a fair case" - ie evidence to back up their suspicions.http://www.englishforums.com/English/HavingImmenseFathomlessExtension-DownwardBackward/zgrrd/post.htm#447117Tue, 27 Nov 2007 21:35:04 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:447117tidusit's ok, I see where you got it from. It also dates it as circa 1656. I'd ignore that definition. You also might be better sticking to Oxford or Cambridge dictionaries.http://www.englishforums.com/English/HavingImmenseFathomlessExtension-DownwardBackward/zgrrd/post.htm#447102Tue, 27 Nov 2007 20:49:46 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:447102tidusWhere did you get that definition? Abysmal means very bad - and it tends to relate to things like "the weather was abysmal", "his job prospects are abysmal". I've never known it relate to a cliff! "Abyss" on the other hand, means a long way down - seemingly bottomless usually. Are you sure there's no confusion going on between the two words?http://www.englishforums.com/English/Assumption/2/zzxqr/Post.htm#447093Tue, 27 Nov 2007 20:27:24 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:447093tidusHaving had rethink on this, the answer is probably A. There is no alternative method to application of fungicide for eliminating powdery mildew from rose plants without harming other garden plants. This is because of the opening sentence: "A certain experimental fungicide causes no harm to garden plants if it is diluted at least to ten parts water to one part fungicide". The fungicide being experimental, suggests that no others are as yet available that do not cause harm, otherwise, it probably wouldn't be an experiment.http://www.englishforums.com/English/Assumption/2/zzxqr/Post.htm#447033Tue, 27 Nov 2007 17:17:22 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:447033tidusI think I might go with B. When the fungicide is sufficiently diluted, it does not pose any harm to people, animals, or beneficial garden insects. After all, what's the point of a fungicide harmless to rose plants if it's dangerous to anything/anybody around it, and therefore the assumption is that it is is also harmless to everything else.http://www.englishforums.com/English/BegTheQuestion/zzpzp/post.htm#447025Tue, 27 Nov 2007 17:00:40 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:447025tidusbeg the question basically means being given information which automatically leads you to question something about it. For example, "The boy who died today fell off the roof, which begs the question - how did he get onto the roof in the first place"?http://www.englishforums.com/English/RenownedKnownFamousScientistAlbert-Brown/zzqcb/post.htm#447014Tue, 27 Nov 2007 16:35:04 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:447014tidusRenowned and famous mean much the same thing. I think renowned tends to be used to describe people in the literary arts/sciences - a renowned author or scientist, whilst famous is more used for people in entertainment - famous actor or pop star. Well known can apply to either, and just means without particular achievements to get them the status of renowned or famous.http://www.englishforums.com/English/ParticipateEngageInvolve/zzqvb/post.htm#447008Tue, 27 Nov 2007 16:23:10 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:447008tidusParticipate & Involve, are fairly interchangeable, whilst engage tends to relate to conversation, or action of a joint nature. It really all depends on the surrounding context, for example, in a dispute between management and employees: * Management agreed to participate in talks with employees; * Management agreed to involve themselves in talks with employees; * Management agreed to engage in talks with employees; Engage would be the most suitable. Or, if the employees are arranging a fun day: * Management agreed to participate in the preparations for the employee fun day * Management agreed to be involved in the preparations for the employee fun day * Management agreed to engage with the employees in...http://www.englishforums.com/English/ThatCouldSwimAcrossRiverBecause-HighSpirits/zvbgb/post.htm#437676Thu, 01 Nov 2007 16:45:56 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:437676tidusI think this should really read: "That day, I could have swam across the river because I was in such high spirits", if talking about the past. If talking in the present: "I could swim across the river because I am in such high spirits" Yes, it can relate to an accomplishment, or something that has happened, to have put you in such high spirits. Using it (ie could) is to illustrate just how happy you are. Other examples are "I'm so happy I could skydive from the moon"; "I'm so hungry I could eat a horse"; "I'm so angry I could burst" Hope this helps.http://www.englishforums.com/English/DifferenceBetweenSaleSales/zvbgx/post.htm#437664Thu, 01 Nov 2007 16:29:29 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:437664tidusSales is plural of sale.http://www.englishforums.com/English/ZeroTolerance/zdhnh/post.htm#434646Thu, 25 Oct 2007 11:28:23 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:434646tidusZero tolerance simply means making no allowances or accepting no excuses for something. For example, where I live there is a zero tolerance of anybody dropping litter. So, if you are caught dropping litter, you will be fined and no excuses will be accepted. I'm still not sure about "for my money", but I think it just means "In my opinion".http://www.englishforums.com/English/CanISayIGoThereUsually/zdhnc/post.htm#434642Thu, 25 Oct 2007 11:20:40 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:434642tidusDepends. For example, there may be a restaurant that you go to sometimes, or a restaurant that you go to usually. The difference here is that 'usually' implies that the restaurant is the one you're most likely to go to. So, you could be saying I go to restaurant A sometimes, but I go to restaurant B usually. In other words, you go to restaurant B more often than restaurant A. I'm not sure whether the comma in "I'm not late, usually", is required. Personally I wouldn't use a comma if I was saying that though.http://www.englishforums.com/English/TakeEyesOffOf/zdhnm/post.htm#434632Thu, 25 Oct 2007 11:00:34 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:434632tidusYes.http://www.englishforums.com/English/PleaseHelpMe/zdgdr/post.htm#434290Wed, 24 Oct 2007 17:06:56 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:434290tidusThe main difference is that a Takeover usually means acquire enough shares in company to have control over it ie more than 50%. A Buyout means to the accquire no less than 100% of the company. "all you wanted to do was your job" difficult to explain this without further context. "for my money", again, difficult to explain without further context. "The office" & "Yes Minister" are both comedy programmes on UK television. In 'the office', the staff ridicule the management, and in "Yes Minister" the junior minister ridicule the Prime Minister. In the context of the paragraph, it basically means that the manager can expect to be made fun of/ridiculed by the staff - in partiulcuar without his knowledge.