“on cloud nine”

Posted on June 4, 2011 by Robert D. E. Senior

I was asked where the phrase ‘on cloud nine’, which means to be in a state of blissful happiness, originates from. So I’ve started a new category called “idiomatic expressions” and this is the first entry. This was sourced from:

http://tinyurl.com/7pl3jt

The usual explanation of its origin is that it comes from the US Weather Bureau.The story is that this organisation describes (or once described) clouds by an arithmetic sequence. Level Nine was the very highest cumulonimbus, which can reach 30,000 or 40,000 feet and appear as glorious white mountains in the sky. So if you were on cloud nine you were at the very peak of existence.

However, according to Thomas Veil on the Phrase Finder website:

The true and original origin of “Cloud 9” is derived from Buddhism.

The state of being in “Cloud 9” is the penultimate goal of the Bhodisattva.

Check on Martin Luther King’s paper on
“The Chief Characteristics and Doctrines of Mahayana Buddhism”.

“The Mahavastu, a late Hinayana work, gives a list of ten stages in the progress of the Bodhisattva, and the same number is retained, with modifications in detail, by the Mahayana authorities… In the ninth stage the seeker reaches the point when all his acts are unselfish, done without desire. Finally the Bodhisattva reaches the tenth stage in which he becomes a tathagata, a cloud of dharma.[Footnote: Radhakrishnan, op. cit., pp. 601, 602.]

I believe that the ninth cloud is also referred to as “The Bright Cloud of Great Refuge”.

Finally, we have Christi the Wordsmith, who weighs in with:

In Dante’s Paradise, the 9th level of heaven is closest to the Divine Presence, which itself dwells at the 10th and highest heaven. This notion may have enhanced the popularity of the expression on cloud nine.

Sources:

http://www.phrases.org.uk/bulletin_board/18/messages/721.html

http://www.wordsmithradio.org/scripts/cloudnine.html

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in Idiomatic Expressions | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

graphic / graphical: what’s the difference?

Posted on June 4, 2011 by Robert D. E. Senior

Another -ic or -ical adjective question came up recently. This answer is sourced from http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=11622 from the member Focalist:

graphic
1. relating to visual art, especially involving drawing, engraving, or lettering.

2 giving vividly explicit detail.

3 of or in the form of a graph.

graphical
1. of or in the form of a graph.

2 relating to visual art or computer graphics.

(Note that the adverbial form of both is: graphically)

Notice that, despite the overlaps, only the “giving vividly explicit detail” and “relating to computer graphics” are not common to both.

Posted in Easily Confused Words | Tagged , | 1 Comment

Relative Clauses

Posted on May 29, 2011 by Robert D. E. Senior

I’ve been promising to post on this for some time, so here it is finally. Basically everything is clearly expressed here:

http://www.ego4u.com/en/cram-up/grammar/relative-clauses

and there are also exercises for you to do, with instant feedback.

Nonetheless, I would like to add a few things. First of all, here are the examples that I always use in order to clarify the difference between defining relative clauses and non-defining relative clauses:

1. Defining relative clause: “The girl at the bar who is smoking a cigarette keeps looking at me.”

2. Non-defining relative clause: “The girl at the bar, who is smoking a cigarette, keeps looking at me.”

In 1 there are several girls at the bar, and therefore you have to make it clear which girl you are referring to. Hence the name “defining relative clause”, as you must define who or what you are talking about.

In 2 there is only one girl at the bar, and coincidentally she is smoking a cigarette. It is not necessary to add the information about the cigarette because your friend will know who you are talking about anyway – there is only one girl. It is simply extra information, and indeed if you remove the clause then the sentence still makes perfect sense. Hence non-defining relative clause, as you are not defining anything.

Of course, it’s very clear here in our examples, but that’s not always the case. Nonetheless, if in doubt compare the sentence you are writing with these two examples and think: what am I doing here? Am I defining something or am I just adding some extra information?

Finally, I was asked about this particular clause in class:

1. “A group of archeologists who are exploring the island have discovered….”

In this example, it is a defining relative clause. We know this because there is no comma after ‘archeologists’. However, we could just as easily say:

2. “A group of archeologists, who are exploring the island, have discovered…”

In 1 we are defining what the archeologists are doing on the island and we consider it essential information. In 2 we are more focused on the fact that a group of archeologists have discovered something and the fact they are in the process of exploring the island is just given as extra information. We could happily leave it out.

Of course, this is an example where the difference in meaning between the two possible sentences is not very clear and not very important, and therefore not very good for the purpose of highlighting when, how and why we differentiate between defining and non-defining relative clauses. Well, that’s just how it goes sometimes! Focus on the clear examples given above and nine times out of ten, you’ll be fine. And as for the tenth time? Easy, don’t worry about it 🙂

Posted in Grammar, Writing | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Independent and Dependent Clauses

Posted on May 29, 2011 by Robert D. E. Senior

This is just about the most basic concept in language. Note that every known language in the world has the ability to construct independent and dependent clauses. Knowing this fact makes your life easier when you come to learn a new language. Knowing how you do this in your mother tongue makes it easier still!! Because then all you have to do is say to yourself: “Ok, this is how I do it in my language, how do they do it in the target language?” Answer this question and you are well on your way to an in depth understanding of how the target language works and you are immediately leaps and bounds ahead of 99% of all other people engaged in learning that language.

So yeah, it’s kinda important!!

So how does it work in English? Well, it’s actually pretty simple and pretty formulaic. Which means it can be memorized. And then you will write like a pro! 🙂 Almost everything you need to know is very neatly and nicely explained here:

http://www.towson.edu/ows/sentences.htm#COMPLEX SENTENCE

However, please note that although number two above shows you how to correctly use a semi-colon, in reality this is very infrequently used nowadays. Most people will either use a comma, eg.”Tom reads novels, however, Jack reads comics” or split it into two sentences, eg. “Tom reads novels. However, Jack reads comics.” As most of YOUR sentences will be expressing more complicated ideas than that, may I once again strongly recommend splitting them,eg. “X. However, Y” as X, however, Y is damn ugly (too many commas).

Please also note that the subordinating conjunction ‘so that’ can also be expressed with the one word ‘so’, which is admittedly confusing because ‘so’ is normally a coordinating conjunction and would therefore be preceded by a comma. Here’s how it works, using a sentence that came up in the CAE Result student’s book:

1a. The shops were closed so (that) I couldn’t buy anything.

Here ‘so’ means ‘so that’ and it introduces a dependent clause (also known as a subordinating clause) i.e. I couldn’t buy anything. The whole sentence could be rewritten as:

1b. The shops were closed in order to prevent me from buying anything.

Which would be unusual but is possible. You can clearly see that there is a relation of dependence between the two clauses/ideas being expressed in the sentence.

In the following example:

2. The shops were closed, so I couldn’t buy anything.

We have two independent clauses (also known as main clauses) joined together. Here ‘so’ is a coordinating conjunction which simply links two ideas, or complete thoughts, and a comma is required.

The same idea in 2 could also be expressed (and more clearly defined) as:

3. I couldn’t buy anything because the shops were closed

‘because’ is a subordinating conjunction and once again no comma is required.

Hope that helps, but if you find it all to dry and theoretical then just do what natives do: don’t worry about it!! 🙂

 

Posted in Grammar, Punctuation | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

affect / effect: what’s the difference?

Posted on May 12, 2011 by Robert D. E. Senior

The following explanation was sourced from http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-difference-between-affect-and-effect.htm:

The word affect is primarily used as a verb in English. It has two main meanings, which are closely related. Affect may mean to alter the feelings of, or to change the mental state of someone or something. It may also mean, in a broader sense, to change or affect someone or something in any way. So it is that we might say: How will the election affect the course of history? We might also say: The painting affected him so deeply he could not speak.

The word effect, in contrast, is used primarily as a noun in English. It has a number of related meanings, but generally speaking refers to the result of something, the power something might have to get that result, or a phenomenon in the world. An example of the word used to refer to the result of something would be: The election had no effect on the course of history. We might also say: The effect of the painting on him was profound. Phenomena are often also referred to as effects, such as the photoelectric effect or the greenhouse effect.

Affect may rarely be used as a noun, but this usage is esoteric and somewhat archaic. In psychology one may speak of a person’s affect, which refers to their mood or mental state. So we might say: The patient exhibited a flat affect, responding to no stimuli.

Effect may also be occasionally used as a verb. When it is used in this way, it refers to something having a direct effect, or making it happen. It is usually suffixed by -ed, and takes an object. An example of this usage would be: The election at last effected the change the people had been hoping for.


Posted in Easily Confused Words | Tagged , | Leave a comment

dramatic / dramatical: what’s the difference?

Posted on May 12, 2011 by Robert D. E. Senior

Dramatical: 

overly dramatic eg. That outburst was entirely unnecessary. You are so dramatical! (source: http://onlineslangdictionary.com/meaning-of/dramatical) 

Dramatic: 

1. Of or relating to drama or the theater.
2. Characterized by or expressive of the action or emotion associated with drama or the theatre: a dramatic rescue at sea.
3. Arresting or forceful in appearance or effect: a dramatic sunset.
4. Music Having a powerful, expressive singing voice: a dramatic tenor.
Posted in Easily Confused Words | Tagged , | Leave a comment

economic / economical: what’s the difference?

Posted on May 12, 2011 by Robert D. E. Senior

The following explanation was sourced from http://www.english-test.net/forum/ftopic9464.html and posted by Yankee on 12th June 2006:

If something is economical, it saves money or resources. It’s similar in meaning to “not wasteful” eg. “An economical car uses a minimum amount of gasoline (petrol) to drive a maximum number of miles (kilometers).”

The word economic is related to the economy or finances, money matters, or wealth eg. “There was a rise in unemployment due to the economic downturn.”

Posted in Easily Confused Words | Tagged , | Leave a comment

electric / electrical: what’s the difference?

Posted on May 12, 2011 by Robert D. E. Senior

This was sourced from http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=1620395 and adapted from the contribution by Imber Ranae dated 1st december 2009:

electric = runs on electricity eg. electric car, electric fan, electric appliance, electric guitar etc. It’s also used metaphorically to mean: exciting, energetic eg. the atmosphere at the U2 concert was electric.

electrical = having to do with/concerning electricity eg. electrical engineer, electrical wiring, electrical tape, electrical shortage, electrical energy etc

I’m sure there are many exceptions, of course, such as “electric company” for the organization that runs a power-plant. Sometimes the two words may be used interchangeably, as in “electrical/electric shock”.

Posted in Easily Confused Words | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

higher / further education: what’s the difference?

Posted on May 12, 2011 by Robert D. E. Senior

The following explanation is taken almost verbatim from Wikipedia at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Further_education

“Further education is a term mainly used in connection with education in the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland. It is post-compulsory education (in addition to that received at secondary school), that is distinct from the education offered in universities (higher education). It may be at any level above compulsory education, from basic training to Higher National Diploma or Foundation Degree.

A distinction is usually made between FE and higher education (“HE”) which is education at a higher level than secondary school, usually provided in distinct institutions such as universities. FE in the United Kingdom therefore includes education for people over 16, usually excluding universities. It is primarily taught in FE colleges, work-based learning, and adult and community learning institutions. This includes post-16 courses similar to those taught at schools and sub-degree courses similar to those taught at higher education (HE) colleges (which also teach degree-level courses) and at some universities.”

I would just add that the term FE also includes A Levels, which is the British equivalent of the Austrian matura.

Posted in Easily Confused Words | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

horrific / horrendous / horrible / horrid: what’s the difference?

Posted on May 7, 2011 by Robert D. E. Senior

These words are often used synonymously but there are some differences worth bearing in mind. First of all, according to http://thesaurus.com/browse/horrendous they go in decreasing degree of horror: horrific, horrendous, horrible, horrid.

Indeed if we check the British National Corpus at http://www.natcorp.ox.ac.uk/ we can see that there are 12 entries for “horrific accident” but only two each for “horrendous accident” and “horrible accident” and none at all for “horrid accident” (although the latter would still be correct). But then that would only work when the meaning was “something that means that it makes us feel horror”. This is certainly how we feel when we see a “horrific accident” but we also have the following usage, taken from http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/learningenglish/grammar/learnit/learnitv154.shtml

horrible: You can describe something as horrible (or dreadful or awful) when you do not like it at all eg. The hotel was horrible – just awful. The walls were all painted a horrible colour and I’ve never had such dreadful meals.

You would not say “horrific” in the context above.

horrific: You would describe something as horrific when it is really upsetting or frightening to think about it or speak about it eg:

Having to survive in the desert for eight days with very little water and practically no shelter from the sun was horrific.

It was a horrific motorway accident: twelve people died, a further twenty four suffered horrendous burns.

You could say horrible in both these examples but “horrific” and “horrendous” makes it sound much more extreme, which is probably more what you want to communicate.

horrendous – horrifying

Horrendous can mean horrifying, describing something you feel dismay or disgust about, but it can also be used in a less extreme way, meaning unpleasant or shocking.

Compare the following:

The traffic this morning was horrendous. It took me seventy-five minutes to travel eleven miles.

It was a horrifying picture: the dead and the wounded had all been left by the roadside.

As for horrid, this is more of an old-fashioned word, often associated with posh, public school types (think Enid Blyton).  It can be used just the same as horrific/horrible but frankly always sounds a bit ridiculous to my ears.

Posted in Easily Confused Words | Tagged , , , , , | 2 Comments