Wordwizard

One for you, Bob: An old Roman fort, part of Hadrian's Wall, used to guard a bridge across the River Tyne. The legionnaires who manned it were of two nationalities: Gauls and Germanic tribesmen. They despised one another, mostly because the Gauls drank wine and the Germans beer. The Germans accused ...

I think this is one of those cases where the context determines the meaning. You could attempt to derive the meaning from the grammar, but (partly because we know a priori that individuals — whether just one or several/many — are liable to be arrested by one or more policemen), and because the sente...

It's an informal usage that (in my perception) is more commonly used in the USA than in Britain.

I agree.

However, I'd have used could instead of can in all cases.

Both sound fine to me. You've reminded me of a usage that I find particularly troublesome. It's often unclear what a person means when they speak of turning the A/C up. Do they mean that they want it to work harder (i.e. bring the temperature down further), or do they mean that they want to make the...

Friend: "Do you know what the best thing about Switzerland is?”

Me: “No, what?”

Friend: “I don’t know either... but I hear the flag is a big plus!!”

Today, I met a fairy who granted me a single wish.

"I want to live forever," I said.

"Sorry," said the fairy, "I'm not allowed to grant wishes like that!"

"Fine!" I exclaimed. "Then I want to die after the Browns win the Superbowl!"

"You crafty bastard!" said the fairy.

In trying to think of a synonym for ‘glug’ using its context, I had trouble coming up with one. ‘Drops’ seems too small. ‘Spoonfulls’ (teaspoon or tablespoon, is a possibility, but which is it?). ‘Thimbleful’ is also a possibility. All the quantities you've considered seem too small. I'd suggest 'a...

1) = c) or (arguably) a)
2) = d)

I don't think any native speaker of English would choose to utter either of those sentences.

"The bowl {has a chip/is chipped}"

is sufficient.

To my mind, 1 and 3 imply causality, whereas 2 and (especially) 4 provide more detail regarding the nature of the ailment but do not necessarily imply causality (thought they do not exclude it either). The comma in each of 2 and 4 makes the clause that follows it parenthetical.

Phil White wrote: ↑

Sat Nov 03, 2018 6:09 pm

Problem with all of the products is that they always seem to have an even number of pegs, and I always seem to have an odd number of socks...

Wear a sandal on the foot without a sock.

I met an older woman in the pub last night. She looked pretty good for a 60-year-old. In fact, she wasn’t too bad at all, and I found myself thinking she probably had a really hot daughter. We had a couple of beers, and she asked if I’d ever had a Sportsman’s Double. “What’s that?” I asked. “It’s a ...

You can use 'over' and 'regarding/concerning' with this expression as well as of/out of/about.