The ocean is about 9 inches higher than it was in 1900. It has risen about 3 inches in the last 20 years.

The rate of sea level rise will only increase going forward (we should be at a foot by about 2030). Two to 3 feet by 2100 .

Cheers.

Ah I see, in this example the rule is "broken" because we know that "Sam" is the subject, but it can be interpreted as a grammatically correct, semantically meaningless sentence where "Reddit" is the subject instead.

I guess that makes sense, but I wouldn't say that both the grammar rule has been broken AND the result is a grammatically correct sentence; rather, it's one or the other. Either the grammar rule has been broken because the subject is in the wrong place, or the grammar rule has not been broken but the subject is such that the sentence becomes meaningless.

That example is way too tame. Criticizing upper management's decisions might get you a reprimand and might make it hard for you to get a promotion but it's unlikely to be career-ending.

Career-ending would be:

• Overt racism or sexism (e.g. I don't like working with X because they're a <racial slur>)
• Taking credit for someone else's work
• Embezzling money
• Committing fraud
• Making up outright lies to explain a negative outcome (e.g. we failed to sell more widgets because our whole sales team quit halfway through the quarter)
• Offering or accepting a bribe

[removed]

I was a TEFL/Academic English teacher for 5 years. Grammar is a set of generalisations rather than 'rules', some with looser and with more irregular forms than others. Adjective order is more collocation (sounds natural to native speakers) than consistent generalizations that might be found elsewhere.

I was a TEFL/Academic English teacher for 5 years. Grammar is a set of generalisations rather than rules that matter, some with looser and with more irregular forms than others. Adjective order is more collocation (sounds natural to native speakers) than hard and fast rules than might be found elsewhere.

Even if it wasn't lexicalized, brick still wouldn't be an adjective, would it? I could pile up tomatoes (although they might have to be in tins) and have a tomato wall. That wouldn't make tomato an adjective. I think it's a noun adjunct.

Well the body doesn’t kill itself, it’s just that eventually it doesn’t have any way to generate more heat and your insides where your organs are gets so cold that they can’t function anymore. Before that it will sacrifice your extremities and let your outer skin and stuff die to keep as much as heat as possible deep inside, since you can still survive if some extremities or patches of skin die but not if your heart stops beating.

The stages of hypothermia are defined by your body temperature. Stage 1 is around 90-95 F, you’ll shiver a lot and feel freezing but otherwise mostly normal. Stage 2 is around 82-90 F and you’ll stop shivering and start to become delirious or lose consciousness. Stage 3 is around 75-82 and you’ll be unconscious with weak vital signs (your heart is barely able to beat anymore). Stage 4 is 59-75 F, you’ll appear dead but it’s possible that you might be revived. Below 59 F and you’ve definitely frozen death. How long it takes depends on a lot of things, like the temperature outside and what you’re wearing. That’s why you might see warnings about hypothermia and dressing appropriately when it’s really, really cold - like if its -50 F, your body temperature can drop into stage 1 hypothermia in less than 5 minutes if you aren’t covering your head and hands and feet.

What about the subject-verb-object order rule? I can say "Sam reads Reddit", or I can switch the subject and object and say "Reddit reads Sam". Breaking the rule didn't make an ungrammatical sentence, it made one with different meaning.

> most other grammar rules are broken pretty often in really informal settings

I don't think this is true. There are lots of grammar rules that are followed in any setting. They have to be because they're a big part of how we make ourselves understood. Generally if people don't want to be understood they don't bother speaking at all.

The grammar rules people like to talk about for fun are the ones that are frequently broken, and may even be fake rules that were just made up to give grammarians something to write about.

Real rules that everyone follows are taught to language learners but are not very entertaining for people who already speak the language - like the rule that singular improper nouns must have an article or other determiner, but determiners are optional for plurals and proper nouns. Or the rule that verbs must be inflected for past tense.

I think adjective order is distinctive in being a rule that feels surprising even to native speakers - we imagine we have a free choice and then enjoy learning that we've been following a complex seeming rule that we didn't even know existed.

Sorry, I was confusing you with the commenter above who made the claim I'm referencing. I was curious about grammar rules that, when you break the rule, you still end up with a grammatically correct sentence that means something different from what you may have intended.

I'm still not sure why you referenced "colorless green ideas sleep furiously". It's a grammatically correct, semantically meaningless sentence but it doesn't appear to break any grammar rules, which is what I was originally asking for.

Does it mean I should stop putting Pineapple in my daily fruit salad?

Stupid autoerect.

A fun little chart showing the various origins of the different elements is here.

Yep, no reason a CPU couldn’t output video, in fact some do! And I’m not even referring to integrated graphics in APU’s, I’m talking about arduinos and stuff. Hook them up to little LED matrices, 32x128 oled displays, or whatever else you desire, and boom, you have a CPU giving a display output. These are just very low resolution, low refresh rate, and often black and white. Could obviously do better with a real CPU, but it would still be reallly bad

Exactly what it sounds like.

It's not a super common term, so it really doesn't have a firm definition. But it's an email that you either get or receive that does damage to your professional reputation such that your career is effectively over, either in general or at a particular place.

For example, sending an email to the entire company criticizing upper management's decisions is likely to end your career at a particular place.

Where do I claim this? I simply point out that "He will run yesterday" is grammatically correct even if it does not make sense. It follows all the rules of standard English grammar. You would presumably not object to the sentence "She will jog tomorrow" which is identical in grammatical structure and equally grammatically correct in standard English. But grammar, again, is not the sole determiner of what makes something acceptable English.

Words are getting a bit too big for five year old. Lol Thank you for your response. But still I ask: Is there no marginable percentage increase if I do, say B and C for my answers and go through and randomly select a few B's along side majority C's? Given you have reasonable expectation that the correct answers won't be a straight line of ALL C's. Would this not give any slight increase in score? Given answers are distributed randomly.

Is there no marginable percentage increase if I do, say B and C for my answers and go through and randomly select a few B's along side majority C's? Given you have reasonable expectation that the correct answers won't be a straight line of ALL C's. Would this not give any slight increase in score? Given answers are distributed randomly.

It's not killing itself, the process is trying to extend the life span. Humans are basically leather bags filled with water. If that water freezes those cells and that part of our body is dead. Hypothermia happens when the cooling of the environment outpaces our ability to produce heat.

Imagine a case of bottled water left outside in the winter. Eventually the cold air will cool the bottles until they freeze. We can delay this by adding some heat by lighting a candle. The candle will provide heat to slow or stop the bottles' temperature from dropping. But what happens when the candle burns through all its wax?

You could pack all the bottles close together so the outside ones protect the inside bottle from the cold. Eventually the cold ones will freeze but as long as a few important bottles are still warm it's ok. Hopefully that gives the inside bottle enough time for someone to rescue them from the cold.

The switch to to maximize overall survival by sacrificing less important bottles or body parts.

Online search was partly successful. It is either an i7-7500U, i5-8250U, i5-7200U. Iirc I think it's the i5-8250U

I think there's just a word gap. When sending old school paper mail you can say all of the following;

there's a lot of mail today

has the mail arrived

mail me the details

--BUT you would typically not say

i sent two mails

--INSTEAD you'd likely say

i sent two letters

When we replace mail with e-mail we have also replaced letter with e-mail. So when I say:

i sent two e-mails

Anyone trying to reverse engineer the obvious rule would see that as synonymous with;

i sent two mails

Thus because there's not a 1-to-1 relationship between the 'old' and the 'new' many who are applying the old grammar will not accept the new method, which when you fill in the gaps (ie with e-mail=letter) is perfectly fine

Right - but in the dragon example I don't think the second word in either phrase could be considered an adjective, if it's part of the name of the species.

I mean, I am a scientist and I don't know. ¯_(ツ)_/¯ But like you said, maybe it has to do with the goggles being sensitive to infrared and red is close enough in wavelength to infrared that it can overload the gogs.

As long as we're speculating - here's a substantially unsubstantiated web page about it. It says green light at low levels also doesn't mess up night vision. And green can be used at lower brightness, has better contrast and color discrimination, and is better for common tasks like reading maps.

I understand this and it makes sense but is there no marginable percentage increase if do, say B and C for my answer and go through and randomly select a few B's along side majority C's. Given you have reasonable expectation that the correct answers won't be a straight line of ALL C's. Would this not give any slight increase in score?