Both phrases are idiomatic but they don't mean the same thing. The difference between "water bottles" and "bottles of water" is the water.
Bottles of water have water in them.
Water bottles can be empty.
An empty water bottle is not a bottle of water, though it might be a bottle of air.
Seldom is a word and you have used it correctly, however not very naturally!
Seldom - not often; rarely (def. from google)
I disagree with the correction. A better way to say this is:
I also know, but seldom use, the meaning of the word in the context of musical instruments.
I think the issue with the sentence, and the reason your original one sounds ...
It's wrong. This is deliberate on the part of the game designers. Peons are not known for being highly educated or well-spoken.
However, babies sometimes speak this way before they learn the difference between objective pronouns (me) and subjective pronouns (I). For that reason, incorrect constructions like "me (verb)" or "me (adjective)" are associated ...
Presumably, you are talking about this cat:
If not, that's OK.
Hat on a cat describes a hat being atop a cat, as you say. Cat in the hat can mean what you describe, the cat being inside the hat (e.g. the cat being inside a much larger hat). However, there is a different usage of in here:
If you are dressed in a piece of clothing, ...
Concur and agree are synonyms, but "I couldn't agree more" is a set phrase. While they technically mean the same thing, replacing agree with concur in that phrase sounds a little peculiar.
Concur is highly formal, commonly found in legislative or judicial settings. Agree is a more frequent and common word. "I couldn't agree more" is somewhat colloquial, so ...
It's a figure of speech, known as anthimeria: the use of a word in a part of speech other than its customary usage.*
Ordinarily, Frankenstein is a proper noun referring to a fictional monster originally from the 1818 novel Frankenstein by Mary Shelley and later made into numerous horror movies, most famously a 1931 movie starring Boris Karloff. The movie ...
"Let's hear it for..." is an idiomatic way of inviting the audience at a stage show or live television show recording to applaud for somebody. This is particularly common in television when cues for the audience are important for the recording process.
The expression can also be used just to express appreciation for somebody or something - this latter usage ...
Yes, it's fine in everyday life. For example, in this recent headline from Metro, the free London newspaper:
Panic buyer screams at Tesco staff for refusing to let him buy 24
bottles of water
I think you have misparsed this. It seems you treat "worry" as a noun and an object of stroke "to stroke his whiskers" and "to stroke his worry". That's not correct.
"Worry" is a verb, and so there is a list of two actions: "to stroke his whiskers" and "to worry". Worry is being used as a quotative verb like "say" or "ask". It introduces the direct speech....
This is called verbing, the practice of using a word, most likely a noun, as a verb. The most effective and popular way to verb is with new/unique/special concepts, as in your example.
Frankenstein, as you probably know, is a well-known and well-popularized book by English writer Mary Shelley. Here the author of the ESPN piece uses this cultural reference ...
Agree and concur are synonyms, but the English usage of them corresponds to their etymology.
"Concur" derives from Latin concurrere, which literally means "to run (currere) together with (con) something or someone", and was also used for people gathering together in a crowd.
"Agree" derives from Latin "ad gratus" meaning "to be pleasing to (someone)".
"Lingua" is not an English word. To my knowledge it is only found (in English) in the expression lingua franca which comes from Italian and refers to a "common language" between two or more groups of people. It is a loan word.
When referring to the anatomical thing, we always say "tongue" and never "lingua."
"Lingua" itself is Latin, and this root is the ...
No, it does not quite get the meaning you want.
"Under" could only be used with "water."
The way you have your sentence means that there is a limitation of the word "under." That is, the only place you could use "under" would be with "water." That is, you are saying you can't use "under penalty of law" or "under duress" or "under budget."
You might try ...
Looks like T.O. could be tick off:
Definition of tick off
1: to make angry or indignant
the cancellation really ticked me off
The language is flexible enough to allow us to say T.O.’d. This kind of usage is not unprecedented (e.g. K.O.’d for knocked out). We understand T.O.’d to mean ticked off.
It seems to fit, as the ...
"Plague" can have several different meanings depending on context:
In its most technical form, "plague" is used to refer specifically to diseases caused by the bacterium Yersinia pestis (e.g. "bubonic plague", "pneumonic plague", etc). This has historically also been known by names such as "the black death", etc. In this sense, COVID-19 is definitely not ...
You can see the same structure used with all sorts of English phrases, e.g.
Bottle of beer vs beer bottle
Soda can vs can of soda
Packet of crisps vs crisp packet
Paint tin vs tin of paint
If you say "water bottle" you're using "water" as an adjective to describe the type of bottle it is — a bottle (usually) used to store water. So that could be a branded ...
If you look at the graphic you attached to the question, you'll see the answer already provided.
At a supermarket, where you've already paid, you get a receipt:
1 a : a writing acknowledging the receiving of goods or money
It's only at a restaurant, for example, when you're given a statement of what you ate and how much you still owe,...
While "literally" and "in the true sense of the word" can mean essentially the same thing, they do not both always suit the same situations and are not interchangeable in the same sentence structure.
For example, I would probably not say:
He's literally a gentleman.
This is because "gentleman" has more than one "literal" meaning - one dictionary ...
Is it a verb? Yes. Is it a new verb? No!
The book Frankenstein was published in 1818 and the verb popped up less than 10 years later:
I want some Howard Paine to sketch a skeleton of..scenes..and I'd Frankenstein them there.
Letters by Charles Lamb, 1827 (via the OED)
Even if someone hasn't read the book, most people will know who Frankenstein (more ...
Contrary to most answers here, I think there are mutiple meanings here.
Doubts about Dumbledore had riddled him
You could argue (as others have) that the doubts he had about Dumbledore were puzzling to Harry.
However, unless Dumbledore actually set him some riddles/puzzles to solve, I think it really means that Harry is:
Riddled with doubt
This is a ...
The other answers do a fine job explaining how the you can use in to describe someone wearing clothing. However, there is another difference between the two alternatives you give that I would like to highlight.
The phrase "cat in the hat" focuses on the cat (who is wearing a hat), while the phrase "the hat on the cat" focuses on the hat (which is being worn ...
The pairing of "basically literally" is very colloquial/informal and skews young. I hear it moderately frequently, mostly when people are recounting stories about personal interactions.
It means "I am emphatic that my description conveys an accurate feeling of a moment/interaction, but it isn't literally true--I am exaggerating or simplifying for story ...
Imagine a man who was raised in the jungle by animals ever since he was a child. He was not taught English since animals don't speak English. He has only recently met his first human, and is currently being exposed to speaking English (or any civilised language, for that matter) Which statement would make more sense to come from him, in this context:
In US English (and likely most non-India regions), we refer to these persons as simply brother-in-law or sister-in-law. My wife has a sister, and that sister is married. I refer to both husband and wife as my brother and sister-in-law.
In the same way, my mother has a brother who is married. I refer to both husband and wife as my aunt and uncle. In both ...
It's not an exact opposite, but the mythical animal "unicorn" is sometimes used as a description for people and things that are so rare and special that they may seem nearly mythical. For instance, at my company, the most senior developers are jokingly referred to as "unicorns" because it's very rare for a developer to get promoted to that level --there are ...
"Brothers in arms" is an idiom and a fixed expression. We don't tend to use "in arms" except in this expression.
"Brothers in arms" means men who are as close as brothers because they have fought alongside each other in a war.
Jack and Arthur were infantrymen in the second world war. They both fought on the Beaches on D-day. After the war they met most ...
It sounds much more correct to use "to", as saying "at", to me, sounds like you are "coming back" in terms of a "comeback", as though the door has insulted you, and now you're "going back at" it. It's as though you are attacking the door in some way.
Also, I don't know what the context is, but I imagine that in the vast majority of cases you'd actually be ...
The word "open" here is NOT a verb. "To swing something open" is a verb phrase. In your case. it means he swings the plastic strip in a way that it makes the plastic strip open. To swing is the main verb, and open is the state the plastic strip is in after the action of swinging it.