It doesn’t sound very idiomatic to me.
It would depend on the exact movement, but when I’m doing this myself, I would usually wring the clothes in the suds rather than rub them together. In rubbing the clothes together I’d perhaps worry about damaging them.
Of course, if you are actually rubbing the clothes together, then “rub” would work.
However, at least ...
One word that comes to mind, since you use the word “negative”, and also suggest that the relationship isn’t worthy of explanation, is:
Negligible: so small or unimportant as to be not worth considering; insignificant.
I am not sure what you are doing exactly, but normally the word "correlation" is used to describe how two variables are related to each other.
If you say they are negatively correlated, this means that as one increases the other decreases, so this is probably not what you mean.
You can say the correlation is "weak" or "moderate"....
Considering the context of feeding a small child, it would not be inappropriate at all to use a small, simply understood word like bite. If in the context of offering food to an adult you use the term, you can generally assume that a table fork or spoon will only contain enough quantity of a food to be considered a bite. So, in essence, you are not ...
Check out this noun meaning of "bite".
Merriam-Webster "bite" noun 2
noun 2: food: such as
a : the amount of food taken at a bite : morsel couldn't eat another bite
b : a small amount of food : snack have a bite to eat
So, "take/have a bite" can mean to eat a small amount of food.
For soup, "bite" is less likely.
... he is a surgeon in name only.
There is a comment that mentions this phrase, and also "nominally", but it is harder to 'naturally' use "nominally" in the sentence as you have it. One could say something like
He is nominally a surgeon, but has always had actual surgery performed by his assistants.
This is a good question. Personally, I think the ambiguity would be resolved by several factors.
Firstly, voice tone; there would likely be a tone of voice that conveys sympathy towards the child.
Secondly, I think context plays a part. If the mother were sad and the child were crying for her, that phrasing would probably only be used in a situation where we ...
"Professional" is the wrong word in this context. Professional doesn't mean "skilled," professional means "a trained/experienced person doing work for money," which doesn't make sense here. (I see how it's confusing, as many people paid to do work are skilled at their jobs.) You need a different word. Are you thinking of "...
"Don't cry for me/us/them/him/etc" is actually a pretty unique sentence in English — we don't use the same sentence structure for other situations, really. Or at least, I can't think of a case where I would. If the child were crying because her mom was hurt, you wouldn't say "The child is crying for Mom," you'd say something like "...
You're sitting sideways in the stroller.
This is fine.
Please turn to face forward*!
Please turn to face straight ahead!
These are fine. However, "turn to" is somewhat redundant. There's nothing wrong with that, but face forward/straight ahead is sufficient:
Please face forward!
Please face straight ahead!
It looks like you want the child to ...
jaati (जाति) in Hindi is the word for caste.
jaativaadee (जातिवादी) in Hindi is the word for casteist. They modifier "vaadee" translates to plaintiff in English, the person bringing the suit in court, or pointing out a difference with an public objection, like "you are drinking from the wrong fountain", or the NYC Central Park Karen who ...
Certainly you can speak of climbing out of a window.
I think it would be more idiomatic to say 'climb' or 'lean in through a window'. We speak of a bird flying into a window when it crashes into the glass because it doesn't understand about windows.
You may say
She cut herself, and her blood was coming out of her thumb.
There is nothing ungrammatical in that. It is, however, redundant: how could someone else's blood come out of her thumb. In fact, however, neither sentence is highly idiomatic; what is far more likely is
She cut herself, and her thumb was bleeding.
Your mosquito example is more ...
English tends to evolve more quickly than some other languages. In particular, there is a tendency for words that were once only used as nouns to become verbs. This will happen particularly often in technical contexts (for example, medicine), where the existing language lacks a detail that is useful, or where creating a new verbs 'saves time' by eliminating ...
I've heard a few ways of saying it, probably in this order of likelihood:
[You can pay by] card
Credit or debit card
[We accept all] cards
I also hear "credit card" in some circumstances where the meaning actually also includes debit cards.
According to Wikipedia they are, as you suggest, known as payment cards.
If you are in a shop or restaurant and you have some doubts about acceptance though you would just ask "Do you take cards?" or some variant of that. The phrase payment card is somewhat technical.
Balloons are said to have necks:
Whether or not it has a knot in it.
Neck The neck of a round balloon is the portion which connects its
body to its inflation outlet. It is also the portion of a balloon
which is tied into a knot to keep it inflated.
Anatomy of a balloon
Nobody has come out and said it yet, so I will.
There's nothing whatsoever wrong with "next".
The classmate who's bullying Mark must be sitting next to him.
This is perfectly normal, acceptable, every-day English that will be perfectly understood and will not seem awkward or weird at all. It applies perfectly well to the seats ahead and behind ...
I think either would work, especially if you're trying to add a bit of hyperbole to stop a child accidentally doing something silly.
To an adult, I'd likely use caught because to me that feels more temporary. But you could also consider just being more direct:
You might fall into the box.
Your leg might break the lid.
Or to use a more colloquial phrase:
Saying “in the corner of the wall and the wardrobe” sounds wrong to me; generally speaking I think a corner should be said to belong only to one thing.
While much better, in my opinion, I also think that “in the corner between the wall and the wardrobe” could be confusing, as I might find myself looking for a corner of the room between a wall and a wardrobe. ...
You could say that those positions are immediately surrounding the central point
If we look at the definitions for "Immediate", we can see:
Having no object or space intervening; nearest or next
Having a direct bearing
This becomes more clear if we remove the space from between the objects in the image.
The green objects are ...
In this particular case, I would probably say, "The classmate who's bullying Mark must be sitting in one of the four adjacent seats."
Saying "the four adjacent seats" makes the sentence unambiguous, and it avoids using the word "orthogonally", which is a technical term that I wouldn't expect every native speaker to know.
The classmate who's bullying Mark must be sitting in a cardinal point
Each of the four main points of the compass (north, south, east, and west).
‘More interestingly, under the dome, four chiming clocks were set facing in the four cardinal points.’
They are orthogonally adjacent to the red square.
The green squares at the corners of the red square are diagonally adjacent.
If you want to be very general and elicit a subsequent barrage of clarifying questions from your ...
It's not as easily understandable as the Russian phrase, but there's a word euonym
a name well suited to the person, place, or thing named
The name is derived from ancient Greek 'eu' meaning 'good' and the 'onym' suffix is often used to denote some kind of word (synonym, homonym).
Lexico lists aptronym / aptonym:
A person's name ...
You could use a number of words including:
Adjacent would be my preference - note that the word has a more specific meaning in mathematics, but in English grammar can mean "next to" in any direction, including to the sides, in front or behind. On its own, "next to" does tend to mean to the left or right sides.
The yellow squared are "adjacent" to the red square.
Definition of adjacent
1a: not distant : NEARBY the city and adjacent suburbs
b: having a common endpoint or border adjacent lots adjacent sides of a triangle
c: immediately preceding or following
In this case "b" is the ...
First, the transitive use of "sneak" as "give secretly" does not usually convey the idea that the recipient is unaware of the gift.
Second, in my part of the US, "snuck" is more common than "sneaked." (The "sneaked" "snuck" dichotomy is in large part regional, but my impression is that "snuck&...
I think it is correct to say "The Lego got broken apart." You could also say "The Lego broke apart." Either way is correct. As suggested in the comments, it is also correct to say "The Lego came apart." I agree that "separated" may be too a big word for a young child.
It's easier to understand if you mark out the phrases and see the roles they play in the sentence:
Variable A and B show strong correlation only at either (both upper and lower corners) or (at one corner only).
You can now clearly see that both is not related to either, but rather part of the first phrase of the pair connected by the either...or... ...
(To start, I don't understand what correlations at corners are, but I assume you have explained it beforehand in the document you are writing.)
Now, your first statement,
these two variables are correlated either at both corners (first group) or at the upper corner only (second group)
is understandable, but when you rephrase it as
Variable A and B show ...
A handle is normally a solid and rigid piece of something that is attached to the main body.
A balloon has a knot and usually a string, or sometimes a plastic stick, which are considered separate from the balloon.
So I would not say "handle" nor "itself". I would simply say:
"Hold the string, not the balloon."
He's "bobbing up and down", or "bouncing up and down" (a more energetic movement) (from comments)
You mention "when they sing" or "while playing the guitar" so perhaps it would be be better to say "swaying" or "rocking to the music". or "feeling the movement in the music". The presence ...
There are many different expressions that can be used depending on context, but if you didn't want too many additional connotations, I would use "trial and error".
I would say: You can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs. See this Wiktionary definition:
In order to achieve something, it is inevitable and necessary that some mistakes are made or some sacrifices must occur.
"Spinning" sounds more natural and is less likely to be ambiguous in this case. A person spinning a table is almost certainly doing it on the vertical axis as in your picture, and could be spinning it around and around multiple times. If you say someone is turning a table around I would normally imagine them only turning it around once, so that it ...
You only get 'in' a boat if it is the 'hollowed-out' type like a dingy, rowing boat or the lifeboats from the Titanic. You sit in it and are enclosed by the sides. Boats with decks, like yachts, you would be 'on'
Do we say "we leapt off the large ship" and "we leapt out of the small boat"?...........Yes, if the boat is as have I ...
Anton Sherwood is right in his comment. “Where” is associated with space, not with time. The use of “where” in any form is not appropriate for a period of time. Use terms such as “when”, “during” and “sometime”. So 1 and 4 are correct.
I don't like "take" there; I would use "bring", unless the parent and the child are going to different places (i.e., the child is being taken somewhere else by someone else).
You could simply say
I will bring the bag after ... or I will get the back after I put you ...
If you said you "put the leash on the dog" it would be understood to mean that you attached the leash to the dog's collar. It wouldn't imply that anybody kept hold of the other end of the leash.
If you "put the dog on the leash" it implies that somebody is holding the other end of the leash and using it to control the dog.
There are many types of barriers.
Yes, and therefore it might be a little tricky to pick the right preposition in certain cases. For example, in your second picture, "on the barrier" does not work because the child's foot is going through the barrier ("on the barrier" would work if the foot was resting above the upper/top rod/pipe). But &...