As an American who learned her cursive penmanship in the early 60s, I am shocked to see cursive capitals J and G, respectively, written that way. They seem to be switched in my humble opinion ("G" for "J", and vice-versa), but just the capitals; the lower case look fine.
Is it possible they write these differently in the UK? I would tend to doubt it. My ...
I wouldn't use "white glass"; just look it up on Google, that means something made of glass but with a white tint, and you can't see through that kind of glass.
The glass in a household mirror is transparent, but since all glass in those kind of mirrors is transparent, you don't need to mention it. In fact, they all contain glass, so even saying &...
Yes, in standard written English, we always capitalize I.
From a Wikipedia page,
I (and only this form of the pronoun) is the only pronoun that is always capitalized. The practice became established in the late 15th century, though lowercase 'i' was sometimes found as late as the 17th century.
Additional information (to the question "Why are other ...
As a Brit, I agree with the previous answer, that the capital letters are the wrong way round.
Here is an example picture which looks correct for all letters to me:
It's worth mentioning that, although technically correct, I tend to use roman capitals (as mentioned by @JamesK) to avoid any confusion.
The symbol "=" is an "equals sign" and is normally a substitute for the word "equals". It is almost always used in writing mathematical equations or in writing about mathematics. It is sometimes, in informal writing, used is a sort of metaphorical way. For example someone might write "killing = murder" to indicate that ...
A mirror is usually referred to as "silvered glass", since it was often made by depositing silver nitrate on one side, as the Wikipedia entry describes.
"White glass" would (to me) be more an antique glass called "milk glass", because it's milky white. "Transparent glass" is, well, a window.
In the Palmer Method (1888) the G has the form shown next to the J above. You can see that the G is just a big version of the g, with a hugely exaggerated back-and-forth motion for the tail. The Palmer Method emphasized muscle motion, and the exaggerated stroke led to more movement of the arm as well as giving the letter a more distinctive shape.
Civil discourse rests on the cooperative principle, and any response should rest on the assumption that your interlocutor is following that principle.† Whatever your private opinion, your public posture should be that an inappropriate or irrelevant Comment derives from a misunderstanding of your Question.
And for that no one can be held responsible ...
This is a question for your editor, as there is no single convention. Whether and when to capitalize will be determined by the style guide in use, and for the sake of the reader, you should strive for consistency throughout the work.
APA, for example, says to use lowercase when referring to a chapter or section generically, but to capitalize when referring ...
In English, the common indication is "(cont.)", an abbreviation of "continued". Your list would look like this:
--------------- Next page --------------
Programming languages (cont.)
However, in general I would recommend not breaking a list over two pages if it's at all avoidable. Readers will appreciate having the content all on one ...
Referencing this article:
According to Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English, "in terms of" can be used for describing either plural or singular fact or event.
Here are two examples from the dictionary:
1. Femininity is still defined in terms of beauty. (Beauty is singular)
2. It's too early to start talking in terms of casualties. (...
I would not refer to X as applicant. That is X' role vis-à-vis the people you are writing to, not a role in which you know X.
Instead, I would replace he at every third or fourth opportunity with X' name, particularly if I were eager for X to succeed in his application. Keep in mind that you are dealing with a correspondent who is probably dealing with ...
In my experience, in scholarly papers, when a new concept is defined or introduced, the article is never italicized, and the rest of the noun phrase is usually italicized.
Here are several examples from the book Category Theory by Steve Awodey. In all cases, the italics are quoted exactly as they appear in the original text.
A category consists of the ...
You need to do the following things:
Create a strong context for the language you are teaching. Make it meaningful and important for them before you teach it.
Make sure your students get controlled and also free practice of the target language.
Build your syllabus around functions, and - as you have already mentioned - skills for independent and future ...
Disciplines which follow the APA's Publications Manual are sternly (and to my mind ludicrously) literal-minded about such temporal references, but to the best of my knowledge everybody else in academe accepts the ancient convention that a text which still 'speaks' to a present-day audience does so in the present tense.
However: if you're going to shift your ...
If you are sending a thank-you card, then it is perfectly OK to be informal and you can say pretty much whatever you like so long as it is polite.
If you know the person only by their surname, then maybe you should be a little more formal. Start with "Dear Mr. Jones," and end with "Yours sincerely, your name".
A normal everyday mirror that isn't colored is just a "mirror". There's no need to specify that it DOESN'T have an unusual quality.
While "white glass" would mean translucent milky glass, and window glass could be called "clear glass", a "clear glass mirror" is a confusing contradiction in terms. A mirror isn't clear,...
Generally, don't use italics for emphasis! the APA guide says:
In general, avoid using italics for emphasis. Instead, rewrite your sentence to provide emphasis.
You should only use italics if there is a chance of misreading, or if the emphasis changes the meaning of the sentence.
The APA do, however, recommend italics for the first mention of a term, ...
Shelfful is different from scaffold because it is a compound word (shelf + full), so the two f's are truly separate. Removing the ligature between the f's re-emphasizes this construction. Selffulfilling is another one that makes a little more sense without the ligature (selffulfilling).
Not all fonts ligature anyways, so in my browser shelffull and "...
Graeme Kennedy, ‘Preferred ways of putting things with implications for language teaching’, in Jan Svartvik, ed., Directions in Corpus Linguistics: Proceedings of Nobel Symposium 82 (Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs ; 65), 1991, gives this table of results from corpus studies carried out in the 1960s.
This is just a start to an answer. Kennedy'...
I prefer your wording over Someone's alternative. Yours is simpler, more direct, and fits better with the overall tone of the paragraph. If you wanted, you could make it a single sentence by using conjunction:
I had a girlfriend at that time and didn't want to leave her.
Another possible improvement (although improvements, like beauty, are in the eye of ...
It's perfectly fine to use the present tense for all research, even going back to ancient times; see here for another question about this.
However, there is a way that you can usefully shift tense in a literature review in a scientific paper. You can use the present tense for recent research that is still a topic of current conversation—especially if your ...
It's perfectly grammatical.
In the same way that ditransitive verbs (like give and show) can be used in two ways,
I gave the book to her.
I gave her the book.
many verbs can have a benefactive "for X", which can be treated the same way:
I baked a cake for her.
I baked her a cake.
So "I found you this" is identical in meaning to "I ...
Sure ay and ah are reasonable ways to express /ei/ and /a:/ informally. Splitting into syllables helps signal that these are phonetic spellings.
But note that while there is a difference in British and American pronunciation of Tomato (Brits say to-mah-to, Yanks say to-may-to) The same is not true of "potato". Brits and Yanks both say "Po-...
I love you.
"It's me who loves you." This would be said in the context where you're contrasting with someone else:
"He likes you, but I love you!"
I love you.
You're emphasizing the fact that it's love, rather than anything else. This is also the emphasis you would use if you want to emphasize the whole sentence.
In conversational or informal speech, of the 1960s and in the 1960s may be treated as equivalent, but there is a slight difference in meaning. In refers to a defined time period, whereas of refers to the historical epoch, aspects of which may not correspond to exact dates.
To say something took place in the 1960s is the basic sense of in as
And joins constituents which play the same syntactic role.
The sentence you have written may be reduced to
I chose XXX University not just because [A and B], but also ...
In that construction, both A and B must be able to serve as complements of because. Because takes a clause as its complement:
okbecause [it is a well known university in the ...
I think you're trying to say something like "not only because of A and B, but also Z".
Here is my suggestion (I changed your wording a little, but tried my best to convey the same meaning):
I chose XXX University not only because of its invaluable education and its reputation in the scientific community, but also ...