A place for those passionate about port, and for those new to it. We hold lots of Port tastings: please join us!
https://www.theportforum.com/
I was hesitating. You have decided it.djewesbury wrote:The second. Just sounds better to my ear, irrelevant /non-existent grammatical rules notwithstanding.
The line break is mine.jdaw1 wrote:I haven’t seen the context, but it is possible to construe a non-crime.
E.g.:
Title = ‟Understanding a wine”;
Sub-title = ‟journalists rant”, as in, plural noun and verb, as in, a capitalisation crime rather than an apostrophe crime.
But that depends on the context.
That strengthens the prosecution’s case.djewesbury wrote:The line break is mine.
I have now.jdaw1 wrote:That strengthens the prosecution’s case.djewesbury wrote:The line break is mine.
Have you written to RAH drawing his attention to your accusation, and thereby giving him an opportunity to respond?
I think there might be an issue of whether the action is by self (or the quoted party) rather than another. Against is usually in opposition to an action, for example "protection against attack"; even when used shorthand e.g. "protection against water" it really means "protection against water ingress" or "protection against water affecting it in some unwanted, though unspecified manner"; you could not have "protection to water" in the same way. By comparison "to" seems to usually relates to the preceding word, so "resilient to" but not "protection to"; in the "to" case it seems the item can be an item "resilient to low temperature" or "resilient to attack".jdaw1 wrote:Preference?
• The new widget is designed to be robust to bankruptcy.
• The new widget is designed to be robust against bankruptcy.
And, of course, why?
Well quite.PhilW wrote:I think there might be an issue of whether the action is by self (or the quoted party) rather than another. Against is usually in opposition to an action, for example "protection against attack"; even when used shorthand e.g. "protection against water" it really means "protection against water ingress" or "protection against water affecting it in some unwanted, though unspecified manner"; you could not have "protection to water" in the same way. By comparison "to" seems to usually relates to the preceding word, so "resilient to" but not "protection to"; in the "to" case it seems the item can be an item "resilient to low temperature" or "resilient to attack".jdaw1 wrote:Preference?
• The new widget is designed to be robust to bankruptcy.
• The new widget is designed to be robust against bankruptcy.
And, of course, why?
However, in analysing your sentence to make the suitable choice, we get stymied by the fact that a "widget" could not be solvent or bankrupt, nor could a company or person be "designed", which makes the choice somewhat arbitrary without more suitable contextual example.
jdaw1 wrote:Glenn needs a day at Lords.
{Sackcloth and ashes}djewesbury wrote:jdaw1 wrote:Glenn needs a day at Lords.
But is it supposed to be "Lord's" or "Lords'"?jdaw1 wrote:{Sackcloth and ashes}djewesbury wrote:jdaw1 wrote:Glenn needs a day at Lords.
It doesn't happen often; but when it does, it's important that we show how egalitarian this court is.jdaw1 wrote:{Sackcloth and ashes}djewesbury wrote:jdaw1 wrote:Glenn needs a day at Lords.
Lord's. It's named after a man called Lord who owned the land and started the cricket club there.Glenn E. wrote:But is it supposed to be "Lord's" or "Lords'"?jdaw1 wrote:{Sackcloth and ashes}djewesbury wrote:jdaw1 wrote:Glenn needs a day at Lords.
I fear I've just committed a crime because I can't be bothered to use proper quotes on an American keyboard.
As I recalled, rather too late. Hence: {Sackcloth and ashes}, that being an acknowledgement of a penance.djewesbury wrote:Lord's. It's named after a man called Lord who owned the land and started the cricket club there.
I wasn't rubbing your nose in it; rather, answering Glenn's query. Your penance is noted. You have done your time.jdaw1 wrote:As I recalled, rather too late. Hence: {Sackcloth and ashes}, that being an acknowledgement of a penance.djewesbury wrote:Lord's. It's named after a man called Lord who owned the land and started the cricket club there.
Whatever it was I plead temporary insanity due to man-flu.PhilW wrote:Hmm. I noticed a horrendous crime the other day which had not been picked up; unfortunately I failed to write my proof in the margin, and can no longer find it. I am therefore not accusing anyone of anything. Especially DRT
Surely that would have been The Sheilas' Cup, unless you were deliberately quoting an Australian crime<cough>.[url=http://www.theportforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=7654&start=825#p71540]here[/url] DRT wrote:I think the Australian's wanted to call it The Sheila's Cup, which would have been more appropriate.
There are two crimes in one sentence here. Derek are you still double dosing on the Tramalisker?PhilW wrote:Surely that would have been The Sheilas' Cup, unless you were deliberately quoting an Australian crime<cough>.[url=http://www.theportforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=7654&start=825#p71540]here[/url] DRT wrote:I think the Australian's wanted to call it The Sheila's Cup, which would have been more appropriate.
Perhaps harsh to classify as a crime, but the accused is known to prefer a high bar.jdaw1 wrote:An decanting experiment done with these six would have been meaningless.
+1, for both the ‟harsh” and the accurate statement of the accused’s preference.PhilW wrote:Perhaps harsh to classify as a crime, but the accused is known to prefer a high bar.jdaw1 wrote:An decanting experiment done with these six would have been meaningless.
The BBC, in an article entitled [url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-25940865]Lancashire Fusiliers Gallipoli Victoria Cross sought by museum[/url], wrote:"Our mission is to find it so it can take its place alongside the other VC's in the exhibition."
Lord Ashcroft, who has loaned three VCs to the museum for the exhibition, said the "'Six before Breakfast' comprise one of the most celebrated batches of gallantry medals from any action of the entire Great War".
[url=http://www.theportforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=71801#p71801]Here[/url] PhilW wrote:we will invite one industry guest, who's costs will be covered by the attendees.
{Sackcloth and ashes}jdaw1 wrote:[url=http://www.theportforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=71801#p71801]Here[/url] PhilW wrote:we will invite one industry guest, who's costs will be covered by the attendees.
Aren't you English? I think this year you'll have to make do with just sackcloth.PhilW wrote:{Sackcloth and ashes}jdaw1 wrote:[url=http://www.theportforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=71801#p71801]Here[/url] PhilW wrote:we will invite one industry guest, who's costs will be covered by the attendees.
Glenn E. wrote:Aren't you English? I think this year you'll have to make do with just sackcloth.PhilW wrote:{Sackcloth and ashes}jdaw1 wrote:[url=http://www.theportforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=71801#p71801]Here[/url] PhilW wrote:we will invite one industry guest, who's costs will be covered by the attendees.
Why is higher better? Same problem, different word. Just wondering.jdaw1 wrote:There will be three numbers, and I am instructing somebody to take the average of the better two of them. Or should that be the best two of them?
So if the numbers are 10, 11 and 12, the result should be Average(11, 12) = 11½.
Better two of three, or best two of three?
I should have said that the context makes very obvious that higher = better.djewesbury wrote:Why is higher better?
Best two of three. Two of them may be better than the other, but you have select the best two (i.e. better is always a comparative between at least two elements or groups, while best is a single element or group based on a criteria).jdaw1 wrote:There will be three numbers, and I am instructing somebody to take the average of the better two of them. Or should that be the best two of them?
So if the numbers are 10, 11 and 12, the result should be Average(11, 12) = 11½.
Better two of three, or best two of three?
hencejdaw1 wrote:But the same question could be asked of ‟higher two of three” versus ‟highest two of three”.
djewesbury wrote:Same problem, different word.
My choice as well. Possibly even "best two of the three."PhilW wrote:Best two of three. Two of them may be better than the other, but you have select the best two (i.e. better is always a comparative between at least two elements or groups, while best is a single element or group based on a criteria).jdaw1 wrote:There will be three numbers, and I am instructing somebody to take the average of the better two of them. Or should that be the best two of them?
So if the numbers are 10, 11 and 12, the result should be Average(11, 12) = 11½.
Better two of three, or best two of three?