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 ...
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.
Although I understand that you are very busy, I would appreciate it if you could provide a response as soon as possible. I very much appreciate your time.
My exact wording might change according to the circumstances – How well do I know the person? How important is it that I get timely feedback? Is this the first time I'm asking, or the third? What is the ...
The precise name of a symbol in mathematics sometimes depends on what you're using it for. For example, × is often referred to simply as the multiplication sign, but if you need to distinguish scalar from vector multiplication, you might refer to it more specifically as the cross multiplication sign, vector multiplication sign, or something similar.
No, standard English only ever uses the double-quotes (or, if quoting something inside the double-quotes, single-quotes) for its delimitation of quotations.
(As noted in the comments, if you need to go more than two layers deep, just keep alternating single and double.)
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.
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 ...
A few is a positive term that indicates a small number. When we use it we are asserting the positive existence of a small number of something.
Few is a negative word. It has a negative meaning. It means not many. If we use few, we are stressing there were not many, when perhaps people thought there were.
If someone offers you a job and you ask:
Are there ...
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 ...
Hereinafter and henceforward are best avoided unless you are writing a formal legal text. If you are, then you should take legal advice. Otherwise, you can just say something like:
In the rest of this text I use the word ‘client’ to refer to a
smartphone using Android.
It depends on context.
For scalar values (all "normal" numbers that we know and love are scalar), all of those operators are the same, and are called multiplication, and the operator is called the multiplication operator, or much less frequently as the times operator.
When reading the equation "3 x 2" out loud, natives would typically use ...
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 ...
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".
The difference between formal and informal registers lies in the rules which are followed, not the medium of delivery. They are for all practical purposes different dialects of the language.
Formal utterances follow the rules which obtain in written academic works. They characteristically strive for careful construction with complex subordination, close ...
I believe that in this context, the two words are completely interchangeable with no change in meaning or register.
I can't actually think of a context where one would be preferred over the other, but I'm willing to be proven wrong on that.
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.
This issue has been addressed several times on ELU, including Plurals of acronyms, letters, numbers — use an apostrophe or not?
, and What is the correct way to pluralize an acronym?
The bottom line is it's largely a matter of stylistic preference whether to include an apostrophe or not in OP's exact context. To some extent, the average preference varies ...
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 "...
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. (...
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-...