From "Hogwarts Ghosts" by JK Rowling on Pottermore:
>Hufflepuff house is haunted by the Fat Friar, who was executed because senior churchmen grew suspicious of his ability to cure the pox merely by poking peasants with a stick, and his ill-advised habit of pulling rabbits out of the communion cup. Though a genial character in general, the Fat Friar still resents the fact that he was never made a cardinal.
Note that "the pox" is syphilis.
The definition of cultural appropriation is when someone takes something significant from another culture and uses it or capitalizes off of it without understanding the significance or is disrespectful of it. No one can claim this situation as cultural appropriation because it's someone sharing their own culture.
I'd thought 'salary' was usually monthly, and 'wage' weekly.
May be a dialect thing.
PS: Not just me
Collins dictionary says, "A salary is the money that someone is paid each month"
Cambridge English dictionary says, "wage definition: 1. a particular amount of money that is paid, usually every week"
A guy on a forum in 2010 said, "They can mean the same, but it used to be the case that "Wages/a wage" meant weekly pay and "salary" meant monthly pay. I think that this is still true in some cases in the UK."
The term “allies” only seems to imply “moral high ground” in the modern mindset because that is the way the narrative of World War II is taught in most countries today: simply put, “allies” equals “good” and “axis” equals “evil”. However, the word “ally” itself does not intrinsically carry a moral connotation. The Cambridge Dictionary defines “ally” as: “a country that has agreed officially to give help and support to another one, especially during a war”, and gives as an example: “During the First World War, Turkey and Germany were allies/Turkey was an ally of Germany.”
In other wars throughout history which are not viewed as clear-cut conflicts between “good” and “evil” the way World War II is, there have been alliances, and referring to the countries in such alliances as “allies” does not confer them the “moral high ground”. In fact, the whole matter of the “moral high ground” can be a subject for a lengthy philosophical debate, but while an alliance can be entered into for moral reasons, usually all countries view their own actions as “right” and “just” and those of their enemies as “wrong”, even though the ulterior motives for such an alliance can be later judged as immoral by others.
In other words, the term “allies” has a distinct positive moral connotation in modern use due to the perception of the “good” vs “evil” fight of World War II. I’d like to add that in a similar way, terms like “empire” and “dictator” now tend to have a negative connotation, which they did not have historically (e.g. during the time of the Roman Empire) because of how they are viewed retrospectively today.
I would pronounce those differently. "Oooooooh" would be a drawn out version of this, while "Ohhhhhh" would be a drawn out version of "oh".
>The definition of doxing is the publication of a physical residential address, or information protected by law (social security numbers, medical records, and so forth).
Let's consult the dictionary!
>slang : to publicly identify or publish private information about (someone) especially as a form of punishment or revenge
>Slang. to publish the private personal information of (another person) or reveal the identity of (an online poster) without the consent of that individual
>to publish private information about someone on the internet, without their permission and in a way that reveals their name, where they live, etc.
It sounds like you don't know the definition of the word you're defining.
Ban and suspend have always been used interchangeably because neither word has some time frame inherent to their definition. Ban means forbid. Suspend means to stop an activity. "Lifetime suspension" is a pretty common term.
>"It has always seemed strange to me," said Doc, "The things we admire in men, kindness and generosity, openness, honesty, understanding and feeling are the concomitants of failure in our system. And those traits we detest, sharpness, greed, acquisitiveness, meanness, egotism and self-interest are the traits of success. And while men admire the quality of the first they love the product of the second."
>"Yeah, but who wants to be good if he has to be hungry too?"
-- Cannery Row, John Steinbeck
I see a lot of uh-LEESE but I would adjust that slightly to ih-LEESE. Like when you say the words elide or elapse. The ih sound is a little more quick/clipped than the uh.
Nerd here. All it does these days is likely get you a steady paycheck and job and people still hate you for it.
Source: social outcast in high school, now social outcast with high paying job in San Francisco.
> social outcast definition: a person who is not accepted or has no place in society or in a particular group
I'm sure this won't help but the irony of being downvoted as a nerd, for pointing out that being a nerd is still unpopular, is fantastic.
Uh, what? What kind of mental and grammatical gymnastics is this?
Weekend means Saturday and Sunday together. End of story. (Note that the meaning in American English is the same)
You don't ask people what are they doing "on the weekends" when you want to ask them what are they doing this weekend.
Jealous can be a synonym of envious, at least now. Words can have their meaning changed over time, depending on how we use them. Language is flexible and adapts to our speaking habits.
Sources: <strong>1</strong>, <strong>2</strong>, <strong>3</strong>
>come out of your shell - If you come out of your shell, you become more interested in other people and more willing to talk and take part in social activities, and if someone brings you out of your shell, they cause you to do this:
>Derek has really come out of his shell since he started working here.
Have GC never heard this phrase, or is this transphobia for the sake of transphobia?
“involving only a close or limited group of people, who do not communicate or do business with people outside the group:
Journalists and politicians often have a rather incestuous relationship. “
Language evolves as people use it.
a little tip (just cause I saw this so much the last few days irl)
use for if you describe a time span (for 2 minutes, 20 years, 1337 millennia)
use since if you describe a point back in time (since 1998, since last week)
You've been living in Germany since 2 years ago.
~~You're~~ You've been living in Germany for 2 years now.
Maybe that confusion comes from the German "seit" which works for both time spans and points in time.
Satire is a genre of literature, and sometimes graphic and performing arts, in which vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings are held up to ridicule, ideally with the intent of shaming individuals, corporations, government, or society itself into improvement. Although satire is usually meant to be humorous, its greater purpose is often constructive social criticism, using wit to draw attention to both particular and wider issues in society.
A feature of satire is strong irony or sarcasm—"in satire, irony is militant"—but parody, burlesque, exaggeration, juxtaposition, comparison, analogy, and double entendre are all frequently used in satirical speech and writing. This "militant" irony or sarcasm often professes to approve of (or at least accept as natural) the very things the satirist wishes to attack.
Satire is nowadays found in many artistic forms of expression, including internet memes, literature, plays, commentary, television shows, and media such as lyrics.
We good boys Wikipedia is with us, we can shitpost all we want!
EDIT: Since some redditors can't see the satirical nature of the post here are more definitions to help you understand.
Satire is the use of humour or exaggeration in order to show how foolish or wicked some people's behaviour or ideas are.
A humorous way of criticizing people or ideas to show that they have faults or are wrong.
> used to describe people or animals that are easy to love because they are so attractive and often small
Puppies and kittens are adorable. Small children are adorable. Soft furnishings can be adorable.
"Japanese" is correct for a gender nuetral singular noun, even though it sounds odd. "I was speaking to a Japanese the other day and he said konichiwa," is fine.
Here is a good example in source: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/japanese
> ethnic minority
A group of people of a particular race or nationality living in a country or area where most people are from a different race or nationality
They aren't racially different than us Irish people. They aren't culturally different either unless you consider a life of crime and unfinished education a culture.
They are by no means different from us other than how they live and with many of them living in a house these days, they aren't even different that way.
Straight from the Cambridge's dictionary:
>[fascism is] a political system based on a very powerful leader, state control, and being extremely proud of country and race, and in which political opposition is not allowed.
You are right, it seems like an apt description of China's current political system.
Zero is used in British English. I can't fathom why you'd think we'd say "zed-ro", since it is a word not an acronym. Hopefully that was an attempt at a joke.
Whilst that might be how you feel, you are not correct. This situation is literally the dictionary definition of something to be disgusted by. From the Cambridge Dictionary:
>disgust noun/verb: a strong feeling of disapproval and dislike at a situation, person's behaviour, etc.:
>She walked out in disgust.
>We are demonstrating to show our anger and disgust at the treatment of refugees.
The bolded emphasis above is mine.
The Oxford dictionary agrees, stating disgust is "A feeling of revulsion or strong disapproval aroused by something unpleasant or offensive." This describes the situation in question quite accurately.
> political ideas and activities that are intended to get the support of ordinary people by giving them what they want source
Most of the population are not experts, so populism has always been about believing / doing whatever the majority wants. Despite whatever experts or science or facts have to say on the matter lol
There's a difference between monopoly and competition. I've taken the liberty to link the definition of monopoly below
Monopoly is :
"complete control of the supply of particular goods or services, or a company or group that has such control: "
Valve does not force any developer for exclusive rights to only sell games on Steam. Nor do they bribe developers for exclusive platform rights. Steam does not control where developers can or cannot sale their games in. They do not enforce a cut of the profit when developers generate thousands of their game keys from Steam and sell it on third party sites where Steam sees no profit.
What Valve has done is create a digital platform for PC gamers that is user friendly, has tons of features and is convenient. They've been in this for 15+ years. If no one has / can compete with Steam, that's their problem. Steam didn't just pop up one day and became the PC market leader. They worked hard to be where they are today. Valve stepped up to the plate and created Steam when no one else had the balls to do so. It is because of them that the PC gaming industry enjoys such a massive success. Both developers and consumers choose Steam because its the best there is, has the best consumer practice, has the biggest playerbase on PC, has numerous features both for consumers and developers, has the biggest gaming library on PC and NOT because of lack of competition.
Let me introduce you to the concept of an Analogy
It is sometimes easier to illustrate an abstract concept by analogy with something concrete.
Merriam Webster was the first to do it. Whereas Cambridge Dictionary and Oxford English Dictionary both list them as informal variations.
I've never actually used any other dictionary myself than OED, but I once had a bunch of sources off of other redditors because I said how it's completely wrong.
If you search for the word classic up on Oxford Dictionary, a classic is described as " Judged over a period of time to be of the highest quality and outstanding of its kind". Both Merriam Webster and Cambridge Dictionary says the same thing (though different wording). And it's pretty obvious that Fornite is outstanding for it's kind since it's the most popular game right now wether you like it or not.
It definitely will be a Battle Royale classic.
> pulled the rug over their eyes, so to speak
Nothing at all to do with the point you're trying to make but I think you mean either, "Pull the <em>wool</em> over their eyes" or "Pull the rug <em>from under them</em>".
The Cambridge Dictionary begs to differ, specifically listing "long-winded" as the first synonym of verbose. Collins Dictionary goes a step further, and uses "long-winded" in the definition. Every other online dictionary I've checked uses similar definitions that don't mention redundancy, simply using more words than necessary.
In addition, one of the most common uses of the word verbose today is when you're using some sort of program and you want more detailed output. The verbose output isn't redundant, it doesn't repeat anything, it simply adds more detail (words) than necessary. So not only do the dictionaries agree with /u/TheCapo024, colloquial usage does as well.
Cambridge English Dictionary lists "lounge" as being UK-specific, interestingly enough:
> lounge noun
> UK the room in a house or apartment that is used for relaxing and entertaining guests in:
> All the family were sitting in the lounge watching television.
My parents always called it a "sitting room" to add some further confusion to the list.
I assume it's a play on the old phrase "Behind every successful man, is a women".
I know, for myself, I had a lot of very patient people explaining stuff to me -- and still do.
TIL when used as a verb the order of words is the opposite than when used as noun.
This is the very first time I've seen the word "substitute" used in this way.
TL:DR Both are fine.
Well I suppose if we're just throwing appeals to authority at each other here's the Cambridge Dictionary definition that says:
"one of the religious wars (= crusades) fought by Christians, mostly against Muslims in Palestine, in the 11th, 12th, 13th, and 17th centuries" (Emphasis mine)
You can't disagree with that definition btw cause it's from a University dictionary. Looks like I win again kiddo
I dunno, you guys are generally corrupting our english with the internet. Most of our generation now mispronounces advertisement as "ad-ver-tize-ment" rather than "ad-ver-tiss-ment" and wrath as "rath" instead of "roth". We use "train station" instead of "railway station" now etc.
We still have some good'uns like how we say saxophonist. (The american one sounds really on the nose).
You guys also say "burglarise" instead of "burgled" which is weird and sounds pretty working class. Like, "burglarise". Which is insane, it's like saying "I was at the casino gamblarising the other day when I started tremblerising and dribblarising. Turns out I got bramblarised when I was ramblarising".
Also I've heard a lot of americans who think that "upper class" means "rich" rather than "landed gentry". Like they think the Obamas are upper class. Americans don't generally seem to get the class system or understand classism in general (although recently it seems like you're making strides there).
You also think some kind of scone thing is a biscuit and you aren't aware of the whole array of biscuits that are available and their subcategories (like a cookie, which you use to refer to nearly all biscuits except some far out ones like garibaldis).
It should have a k as far as I'm aware.
If having a dictionary back you up helps then knob for your old gentleman, nob for a better class of old gentleman.
Thos people are very conservative which mean they are, by definition, not usually liking or trusting change, especially sudden change
Computers, smartphones and social media are a change
> a film in which very frightening or unnatural things happen, for example dead people coming to life and people being murdered
> a book, play, or film that has an exciting story, often about solving a crime
æ/Æ is similar to the A in the American pronunciation of "after", that should help clear things up i think.
The bosses name is also similar to the sound sheep make in norwegian
Edit: specifically this "american" one:
> Never in my life have I heard a straight guy use the word “crush” to describe a romantic attraction towards someone.
Is it uncommon? Sometimes; but I think everyone in the united states, if not the world, knows what "a crush" is.
And yes sometimes even guys say it. Believe it or not, words can be used by everyone, if someone chooses to use it.
More about the word "crush":
>a secret plan made by two or more people to do something bad, illegal, or against someone’s wishes.
It is not a synonym for myth or falsehood or fringe opinion
Thanks for bringing my attention to it. I am not a native English speaker and always look for a chance to improve my skills. A little research revealed that following sources find "alright" acceptable at least in informal environments:
I also use an advanced spell/grammar checker that indicated that it was an acceptable form.
As to my education, I graduated as a Master of Computer Engineering in a non-English speaking country, so English skills were not a large factor of it.
There is a prescribed order of adjectives that you are at least unconsciously aware of, so when someone goes out of order (putting a physical quality adjective like "warm" before an opinion one like "nice") it sounds weird even if you don't know exactly why.
That's not what it means. A serial monogamist is someone who never stays single for long, they just jump from one monogamous relationship to the next. It doesn't imply cheating. Cite: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/serial-monogamy https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Serial%20Monogamist
The thing you're describing would be better termed a parallel monogamist.
I agree with /u/hwamplero, the sentence didn't sound wrong to me when I read it. Being pushed to think about it, I think "...before he could/was able to..." or "...before finishing..." is what I would actually use.
This might not be as technical as you're looking for, but:
>Before with past tenses
>We sometimes use before clauses in a variety of tenses to say that the action or event in the before clause did not or may not happen:
Before I had a chance to thank him, he’d gone.
You’re interrupting her before she has even spoken.
Before he had finished his training, he was sacked.
We should stop shopping now before we spend all our money.
>Before as an adjunct
>We use before to connect earlier events to the moment of speaking or to a point of time in the past:
I’m so looking forward to the trip. I haven’t been to Latin America before. (up to the moment of speaking)
I introduced Tom to Olivia last night. They hadn’t met before. (up to that point in the past)
From here: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/linking-words-and-expressions/before
> in Britain can't, aunt, and taunt all rhyme
Can't: Sounds like Carn't
Aunt: Sounds like Ant/aren't (depends on region)
Taunt: Sounds like Torn't
No-one in the UK rhymes taunt with can't/aunt.
Editing to add a source(rhymes with horse, of course): https://dictionary.cambridge.org/pronunciation/english/taunt
"a member of the UK parliament who does not have any official position in the government or in one of the opposing parties: The advantage of being a backbencher is that you can speak your mind."
Off the wall website?
>See suggestion 2.
>See suggestion 1.
Edit: Oh, wait, know what's incredible? Merriam-Webster doesn't even have a definition of loses, going by your bizarre requirements: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/loses
I just think that's fantastic.
Yeah, like what the fuck? Have the 12k people who upvoted this not actually tried this??
Squawks Forwards: Sk - woo - aa - ks
Squawks Backwards: Sk - aa - oow - ks
This is why I have trust issues
Edit: So there seems to be two things going on here.
Although if you pronounce the "au" in "skwauks" like the "au" in "sauce", "haunt", "jaunt" then it works too. Maybe reading backwords works in UK English too.
Passenger: a person who is travelling in a vehicle but is not driving it, flying it, or working on it
The vehicle is Real Madrid. The players are the ones driving/flying/working on it. Ronaldo's contribution is below what is expected to keep the vehicle moving, which makes him a passenger.
Sorry I'm being pedantic here. In the UK, "the dog's bollocks" usually means something or someone who is extremely good. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/dog-s-bollocks
The pub definitely isn't the best. They are just bollocks.
The Cambridge English Dictionary website offers both 'standard' UK and US pronunciations, and IPA are, as with the OED, /blʌd/ and /ɡʊd/:
When a first or second name ends in -s, we can either add ’ or ’s. It is more common to use ’ than ’s. When we speak, we usually pronounce the final part of the word as /zɪz/ or /sɪz/:
Is that James’ car? (or Is that James’s car?) (both usually pronounced /ˈdʒeɪmzɪz/)
I love Keats’ poetry. (or I love Keats’s poetry.) (both usually pronounced /ˈki:tsɪz/)
"Ironmonger" was/is an old-fashioned name for someone who specifically sells tools. Obediah specifically uses the term earlier in the film to justify weapons sales, saying that it's just their job and it's not up to them what happens to the "tools" that they sell.
It makes perfect sense to Obediah if not the Iron Monger suit itself, more sense than in the comics at least.
You can listen to the pronunciation for British English [which I speak] and see from the phonetics that there are only two syllables for those of us with the Received Pronunciation.
For us, the second syllable is a diphthong or gliding vowel.
It's the same diphthong as in 'near' and 'hear' for us.
You don’t need a rope to lynch someone. And it happens, shit, damn near every week in this country. A hell of a lot more often than illegals murdering and raping. But once again they’re brown so I know you dont care.
And like you said. Even one death is too many. Oh wait you must be referring to white people only. Because we can all assume you think black lives don’t matter.
This one is correct and anyone translating trash-talk with Unsinn, Mist, Gelaber, or Scheiss has misunderstood what trash-talking is. It is not the same as talking trash.
That word is one of my biggest pet peeves, because people tend to use it for anything they don't understand. Instead of saying "I don't understand this." they say "I'm too smart to fall for that." That whole attitude just jangles my nerves.
Here's the Cambridge definition: "Trying to appear or sound more important or clever than you are, especially in matters of art and literature". It's trying to appear smart and failing miserably. And of course that's a thing in music, most prominently in lyrics writing. When someone who's clearly not a good writer throws in an obscure quote from a Shakespeare play. Or if someone who's clearly not a competent musician incorporates some Persian scale in the oddest time signature. But the key word here is "clearly". I wouldn't pronounce that sentence on anyone who doesn't clearly suck at what he does. Because more likely than not, the artist did mean something by that thing he did, even if I don't get it.
> Go work your fuckin minimum wage job and jerk off about basic income so you can sit on your ass and be a useless degen without having to flip burgers to afford an eighth.
Notice this common response from racists, it speaks volumes regarding their modus operendi. Take the time to notice how vocal anti-racists are systematically economically marginalized. Gain an understanding of psychology and an appreciation for each choice of word and manner of expression a mind makes and what it expresses regarding their psyche.
to be very lucky:
>(colloquial, idiomatic, US, Canada) To experience great luck; to be extremely fortunate or lucky.
I've never seen it being used to describe bad luck before. A reasonable etymology can be seen here https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/9654/why-is-lucked-out-such-a-good-thing-to-be
>71/101 isn't really most.
Let's look at the definition of the word "most".
Obviously, 70% is the majority, so Syrian air-defenses intercepted most of the missiles in this attack.
How is communism a religion?
>Religion: The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.
>religion: the belief in and worship of a god or gods, or any such system of belief and worship
You can at best call it religion in an informal, metaphorical sense.
Marxists are materialists who deny the existence of gods or souls or afterlife etc.
> the USSR became the first state to have as one objective of its official ideology the elimination of existing religion, and the prevention of future implanting of religious belief, with the goal of establishing state atheism (gos*ateizm*).
This is literally what you were describing earlier and the person you are replying to correctly pointed it out.
I can think of 2 meanings:
When you die, a eulogy will be delivered during the funeral, everyone will talk about how 'wonderful' you are and they will miss you dearly.
Here's the definition of the word:
> a speech, piece of writing, poem, etc. containing great praise, especially for someone who recently died or retired from work:
If you are an enemy, a criminal, fugitive, apostate etc. (anything that your society shows extreme intolerance for), everyone 'loves' you when you are finally dead as you won't be a problem to be 'fixed' anymore.
Small point, but there is no Capitol in Lebanon; Beirut is the <em>capital</em> city.
I dont get why people keep redfining the meaning of a hard border, its in the dictonary ffs.
> a border between countries that is strongly controlled and protected by officials, police, or soldiers, rather than one where people are allowed to pass through easily with few controls.
Think I'll stick with the dictionary defination rather than some anon on the web.
You will hopefully welcome this opportunity to strengthen your own as well then. 'Theory' has multiple meanings, dependent on the context within which it is used.
/u/thisguyknowswhtsup was right to use it the way he did in that sentence.
If he was discussing a new idea in a scientific context you'd be right to insist on 'hypothesis', but in general speech/writing 'theory' is understood to mean:
"1.2 An idea used to account for a situation" - Oxford University Press
"or, more generally, an opinion or explanation” - Cambridge English Dictionary
"3b : an unproved assumption" - Merriam Webster
a person who is not loyal or stops being loyal to their own country, social class, beliefs, etc. Cambridge Dictionary
a person who is not loyal to his or her own country, friends, etc. : a person who betrays a country or group of people by helping or supporting an enemy. Merriam Webster
The definition of traitor was changed in US law to:
> Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.
This was in part because government officials found opposition parties, criticism and dissenting opinions to be treason and could have been punished accordingly.
It's a pole-shaped block of ice, hence ice poll.
Ice pop? It's made of ice, yes. But why pop? (the term 'pop' for fizzy drinks is American slang, apparently: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/pop)
In situations where you don't seem to get your point across, you should try phrasing yourself differently in order to better get your point across. But hey, calling people retarded is also a viable strategy.
I know that what is correct grammar depends entirely on the usage among people. In fact, this is exactly the argument I am using. My use of "indexes" is not wrong, because enough people use that word. It is even in the dictionary. If enough people started using "indexxy" I would argue that "indexxy" would not be wrong either.
Do you agree with the premise that: If people use a word so much that it is both accepted in general speech, and added to the dictionary, that word is not "wrong"?
Inconvenience is a transitive verb. He used it as a past participle and here it is as a gerund:
> I apologise for inconveniencing you.
Point is that France has already been forcing it's way and is unlikely to be able to push for more and that they're running border control for themselves just as much as they are for the UK. Put that aside, it's a French problem first and foremost and they should be handling it more than anyone else. They expect Italy/Spain/Greece/Morocco to do the same with their migrant crisis and they should be held to the same standard.
From Cambridge Dictionary, online:
> a man, especially one who is rich or with a high social position, who lives in an immoral way, especially having sex with a lot of women
Edit: Considered archaic
No, that’s the actual definition.
Tending to emphasize the importance of preserving traditional cultural and religious values, and to oppose change, esp. sudden change
I still don't understand what minmaxing has to do with this, why would interpreting Charisma as the dictionary definition of charisma, rather than as attractiveness be minmaxing? Minmaxing is focusing on getting the best stats you can over RP, not having such a narrow definition of Charisma allows you to RP what you want and have a high Charisma character who is ugly but persuasive, or a low charisma character who is beautiful but a dick. And I also don't think you have a point either, because Saunders' 'low charisma score' clearly is because she constantly fucks up every bit of PR she can.
For reference, here are previous editions described Charisma:
>Charisma (Cha) measures your force of personality,
persuasiveness, and leadership.
3.5e (I'm assuming that 3e is much the same):
>Charisma measures a character’s force of personality, persuasiveness,
personal magnetism, ability to lead, and physical attractiveness. This
ability represents actual strength of personality, not merely how one
is perceived by others in a social setting.
>The Charisma (Cha) score measures a character's persuasiveness, personal magnetism, and ability to lead. It is not a reflection of physical attractiveness, though attractiveness certainly plays a role.
>Charisma is the measure of the character's combined physical
attractiveness, persuasiveness, and personal magnetism. A generally nonbeautiful
character can have a very high charisma due to strong measures
of the other two aspects of charisma.
So, as you can see, you have probably not been reading carefully enough for the last 35 years if you have been assuming high Charisma means someone is attractive or vice versa.
It's a reference to the idiom "stranger things have happened." It means that anything is possible.
More information: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/stranger-things-have-happened
That's not true. Avenge and revenge are the same thing just from the perspective of different people.
I get revenge when I hurt someone who hurt me.
I avenge my friend who was hurt by someone by hurting that same someone.
Nothing to do with justice.
If we define inequality as "a <strong>lack of equality</strong> or fair treatment in the sharing of wealth or <strong>opportunities</strong>," then I think this is clearly a case of inequality. Whether it's fair/just or not is more debatable, but the lack of equality is clear.
People who like units that have been made available through GHB/TT are able to obtain the unit for sure, as long as they were playing the game during the event, especially for TT. But they are not, as yet, able to reach high merges on these units.
People who like units that have been made available in the summoning pool are not guaranteed a copy of the units. But they are able to reach high merges on these units.
These circumstances are clearly not equal because the opportunities (to obtain the unit and to get a highly merged unit) are unevenly distributed. People who prefer male characters or like certain ones simply do not have the same opportunity to get many merges when so many are limited in availability.
"Never mind" is literally what it means, where mind is a verb meaning to pay attention to something.
Attack - verb - to criticize someone strongly:
She wrote an article attacking the judges and their conduct of the trial.
The report attacks the idea of exams for seven and eight-year-olds.
Do you know what it means?
> the quality of lacking transparency or translucence
> the quality of being difficult to understand or know about, especially because things have been intentionally kept secret or made complicated
Lol, not the best choice to get back trust, or the team is epic trolling the community😄
Yup, but that's what basically happened. In the end I got warned because I said they were disrespectful, not the guy that went on a rant how he hates feminists. I'm leaving that community, that's beyond stupidity.
r/dictionary definition of a robbery
robverb [ T ] UK /rɒb/ US /rɑːb/ **-bb-**
C2 If someone is robbed of something they <strong>deserve</strong>, it is taken away from them: ~~unless it is a close fight~~
GGG was robbed by the judges of two wins over Canelo.
My non-Korean-speaking-person guess is that they had a debate about how to pronounce yippee and Jimin turns out to be right.
Also interesting to note that Naver has the UK pronunciation: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/yippee
To those of us serving then and many other sources it seems like it fits the definition of a war.
Please dont play the my deployment or war was more important or harder than the last guys game.
> The term cuck comes from raising another person's kid
Wrong. A "cuck" is a man whose wife cheats on him.
Everything else you wrote is hilarious in just how stupid it is. You've basically proven my previous statement for me. Let's look at your posting history shall we?
... The_Donald, Nicegirls, Yep, checks out. Oh and some comments about how all immigrants in Sweden are rapists. I'd say my brush was exactly the right size.
Actually, uk pronunciation is La-tay, us is Lar-tay.
Now go argue with the dictionary.
You explained fine, you just dont read, because you just repeated the same point I already addressed.
> provides nothing additional of value to the land or building itself,
Irrelevant. A service is provided by allowing you ..the renter to stay there. That's the service.. that's what you are paying for.
You get to the live there, for money. Thats a service.
> business activity that involves doing things for customers rather than producing goods, or a single act of doing something for a customer
> Most of them are done for simple socio-economical whims
> is too immature or young to have child - 11%
> unready for responsibility - 21%
> has problems with relationship or wants to avoid single parenthood - 12%
> can't afford baby now - 21%
whim - a capricious or eccentric and often sudden idea or turn of the mind : FANCY
whim - an odd or capricious notion or desire; a sudden or freakish fancy
whim - a sudden desire or idea
It is remarkable the way many pro-life people have disdain for the women who need abortions.
> That first retort is lazy, that's like saying people opposed to murder should just not commit murder.
It is legitimate against vegetarians, it legitimate here, too. Fetuses aren't people with rights.
No, "sitting" is the correct word to use in that idiom.
It's enough of a thing to make it into a documentary about Agincourt
Edit: so I did not know that apparently that's just a British idiom that never really made it into America.
Cool, well your definition is totally arbitrary, and kinda ridiculous to be honest.
Is Paul Ryan not a leader? What about Pelosi? McConnell? I don't think virtually anybody would agree they are not leaders of their party.
Your time period is also built to juke this stat. In your time period, their are 6 republican presidents and 3 democratic presidents. Turns out being the president means you appoint a lot of people in your own party. So if their are more republican appointees, chances are there will be more convicted.
And based on the wiki link, I can find two executive branch convictions in the Clinton years, so your 1 stat is pretty shaky.
You can stick your head in the sand and claim your metric is the right way to define leaders, but it's obviously cherry picking the stats, since my stat refutes your findings.
>Slice it any way you like it
You're definitely using this statement wrong:
I sliced it a different way, and came up with an opposite conclusion, so the way you slice it matters. That should cause concern for your arbitrary definition.
By this, don't you know what I mean?
I mean, by this - don't you know?
Don't, by this, you know what I mean?
Don't you know what I mean by this?
All intelligible, albeit the second only with an added pause. There's a difference between word salad and reordering phrases, even potentially with interruptions.
DarthSloth is referring to the difference between "a big, blue balloon" and "a blue, big balloon." To a native speaker, the latter usually seems incorrect.
What? Irving and Greagoir were far better than leaders than Orsino and Meredith. And just how is Irving Greagoir's yes-man?
To run a circle a First Enchanter needs a good working relationship with the Knight-Commander especially to protect the mages from morons like Jowan and Uldrid. Irving certainly is far more independent and wise than you give him credit. Does he not send you after Jowan despite knowing Greagoir would disagree with that course of action? Greagoir objects to Mage warden's recruitment but does not Irving steps in to settle the matter against Greagoir's wishes? I did not know having a good relationship and mutual respect meant being a yes-man of someone.
If you say a word in English it has the meaning of the English word. The definition doesn't change because you can't properly translate it to another language.
They are all consistent.
"(of a person) too young to engage legally in a particular activity, especially drinking alcohol or having sex."
The context is sex. So age of consent defines the underage limit in this case. If you can follow a discussion in English. This should be a no brainer.
That’s not talking about usage of neither/nor, though. That article is just talking about or/nor by themselves, excluding the warning section which is irrelevant.
It should be neither/nor.
Edit: This link talks about usages of neither, including neither/nor, and there’s no instance of neither/or.
Will is used to form the future tense but it is also one of the modal verbs of English. Modality is a grammatical feature that allows a speaker to indicate their personal attitudes or opinions about what they are saying. For example take the sentences, "Kevin is the killer" and "Kevin must be the killer". The word "must" in the second sentence doesn't simply mean that Kevin is obligated to be the killer as it would suggest if you just looked up must in the dictionary. It expresses a degree of certainty on the speaker's part. On the other hand, the first sentence is a simple declaration of a fact.
Similarly, will has a modal quality when used in this way to express a degree of willingness, choice, or consent on behalf of the speaker. "I admit that I have..." is therefore a simple statement admitting what follows while "I will admit that I have..." emphasizes the speaker's willingness to make the admission. While it doesn't change the overall meaning much, the distinction is important.
For more on modal verbs, I'd suggest the Cambridge grammar page which also has further links discussing the ways that each modal verb is used. For example, this is the page on will
> Google dictionary says that recess is a North American word. How is it called in the UK for example?
It's a British English word as well, and means something similar but in a very different context:
> a period of time in the year when the members of a parliament, court of law, or other government organization are not meeting
As others have mentioned "break" is the word in school. When I was at school it was more specifically called "morning break" to differentiate it from "lunch break".
YTA. You're trying to derail a conversation just because someone didn't use the "correct" word that you would have used. You're literally arguing semantics, and trying to put other people down and make yourself look like a know-it-all in the process. It's rude and trivial, and childish as fuck.
By the way, "devious" has more than one commonly-accepted definition. She wasn't even wrong, you're just being overly-anal because you have some sort of bullshit superiority complex.
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/devious - The second definition has "dishonest" as a synonym. Pretty sure that fits what she was saying.
And this is the icing on the cake - "mattered for us to be able to have a coherent conversation and that if, in fact, it didn't matter, I didn't understand why she had to stand by what she said when it was incorrect."
How the fuck is what she said not coherent? That is such a fucking douchy thing to say. She used one word that you didn't like, and you're now saying that the conversation is no longer coherent?
If you're going to argue semantics, then the definition of "coherent" is "logically or aesthetically ordered, having clarity or intelligibility". Are you saying that you were literally unable to comprehend the point she was trying to make, or that it was totally unintelligible? Because that's fucking ridiculous.
Everyone at the table told you to drop it and move on, and yet you couldn't. You just have to be right at all costs, I guess.
TL;DR: You're wrong, and you're an asshole.
>in order to distinguish who is a member of which house, a member of the Senate is typically referred to as Senator (followed by "name" from "state"), and a member of the House of Representatives is usually referred to as Congressman or Congresswoman (followed by "name" from the "number" district of "state"), or Representative ("name" from the "number" district of "state"). Although Senators are members of Congress, they are not normally referred to and addressed as "Congressmen" or "Congresswomen" or "Congresspeople".
> a man who belongs to a congress, especially a member of the US House of Representatives
>in a simple factual issue that you are absolutely wrong
Am I? Tell me a single openly LGBTQ congressman or congresswoman in Brazil other than Jean Wyllys. Hell, include senators if you want (hint hint, there aren't any).