Wordwizard

They are both good in the contexts you give.

Yes, although they are a little more unusual.

The French reads "compère Tourangeau". "Compère" generally means something akin to "accomplice". In the same way that "partner in crime" is used colloquially to mean a "bosom buddy", I believe that "compère" carries a similar meaning. So the meaning 4 as given by Erik is there or thereabouts. Having...

More generally, I think we would just use "curled up". "The foetal position" is not really a colloquial expression, although pretty well everyone understands it:

"I always sleep curled up."
"Ah, look at him sleeping all curled up."

To put it another way:

"How did you do in the exam?"
"All right."

"How did you do in the exam?"
"Alright."

Insofar as "abstract" can mean "dissociated from reality", it would appear to refer to the way in which politicians and May in particular, always speak.

Bobinwales wrote: ↑

Wed May 01, 2019 11:02 pm

I will be interested to see if anyone agrees with me that "alright" is not a word.

Some people are simply all ways all together wrong...

In the UK, we often talk about "air ambulances" (invariably helicopters) and people are "taken to hospital by air ambulance".

We also talk about people being "airlifted to hospital".

I have always been aware of both "legitimate" and "legitimize". I would certainly use "legitimate" in meaning 2 and "legitimize" in meaning 3. I am unsure whether I would use either in the strict constraints of meaning 1. I see a very clear distinction between meanings 1 an 3. Meaning 1 refers to th...

Yes, it's the only way I can read it as well. "Poor soul" refers to the speaker.

Another example: A: Have you got the passports? B: Yes. A: And did you top up the oil and water in the car? B: Yes. A: Where are the euros? B: In my wallet. A: Have you got your wallet? B: Yes. A: Tickets? B: Will you stop froomwindling and get in the car! "Froomwindle" has no inherent meaning. It d...

The words do not intrinsically convey either meaning exclusively. Only the context does. I am reminded of the mantra of a former contributor, now deceased, Louis Bussey, aka Mongrowl: "Words do not have meaning, people do." Louis upset many on the forum with his incessant chanting of that principle,...

Sentence b only works in speech with a very heavy emphasis on "was". It does not really work in writing. The meaning is then as you surmise. Sentence a could have either meaning. Given the correct context and a heavy spoken stress on "very much", the meaning could be the same as above. "Very much" w...

No. The very definition of "cousin" is somebody descended from a grandparent or older ancestor but in a different line . Your grandparents are in your direct line of descent and cannot therefore be cousins of any sort. What this means is that there must be at some point a skip from the direct line o...

tony h wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 26, 2019 11:07 pm

So, as in the above, your grandparents can be described as your first cousin twice removed.

No, your grandparents are your grandparents, not cousins of any degree or removal. The chart makes that clear.