QUESTION

What is the difference between "I feel good" and "I feel well"?

To feel good is to feel at peace (free from worry), fulfilled (satisfied with life), positive/cheerful, or even jubilant (feeling great joy), thrilled (very excited/filled with pleasure), and even triumphant (Oh my GOD I won. I’m feeling so good and happy that I’m going to run a victory lap around the neighbourhood!). To feel well is to be in good physical and/or mental condition. It’s to feel healthy, robust, thriving, solid/strong, able, and so on.
In everyday conversation, depending on the context, they could mean the exact same thing, when you don’t even need conversation. You can, for example, wake up and think/realise, “I feel good/well.” The “choice” of vocabulary does not affect the proposition. If you’re recovering from illness and someone asks how you’re feeling, you can say, “I feel good/well,” with both meaning the same thing.

#Manuel_Humberto
⭕️Unknown English

JUXTAPOSITION
ˌdʒʌkstəpəˈzɪʃn

сопоставление, соприкосновение, наложение

•juxtaposition of colors — наложение цветов
•juxtaposition of light and dark — контраст света и тьмы
•The film uses the juxtaposition of humor and tragedy.▫️Фильм использует сочетание юмора и трагедии.
•It is the result of the juxtaposition of contrasting colors▫️Это результат наложения контрастных цветов.
•The book is notable for its juxtaposition of past and present.▫️Книга примечательна сопоставлением прошлого и настоящего.

⭕️Unknown

CREPUSCULE
ˈkrepəskjuːl

сумерки

•deep crepuscule — густые сумерки
•The city faded into crepuscule as the sun set.▫️Город погрузился в сумерки с заходом солнца.
•A crepuscule settled over the valley.▫️На долину опустились сумерки.

⭕️Unknown

QUESTION

Which is correct, "May I know who is this?" or "May I know who this is?"?
The correct version is May I know who this is?
This sentence contains two parts: May I know? and Who is this?
These two are interrogative sentences.
Two interrogative sentences cannot be combined into a single sentence as they are.
So, the second part needs to be converted into an assertive sentence with subject-verb order.
That’s why we retain the first part as question but change the second part into who this is.
Accordingly, May I know who this is? is justified as the correct sentence.

▪️interrogative [ˏɪntəˊrɒgətɪv] a
вопроси́тельный
▪️assertive [əˊsɜ:tɪv] a утверди́тельный;
in an assertive form в утверди́тельной фо́рме

⭕️Unknown English

ULULATE
ˈʌljʊleɪt

выть, завывать, рыдать, плакать навзрыд

•ululate with grief — выть от горя
•ululate in pain — завывать от боли
•She put back her head and ululated.▫️Она запрокинула голову и завыла.
•The cat made a deep, ululating yowl.▫️Кот издал глубокий, завывающий вой.
•The savage, whoever he was, ululated twice.▫️Дикарь, кем бы он ни был, дважды взвыл.
•He could hear wolves ululating in the night.▫️Он слышал, как ночью воют волки.

⭕️Unknown

PEREGRINATE
ˈperɪɡriːneɪt

путешествовать, странствовать, бродить, чужеземный

•peregrinate the streets — бродить по улицам
•peregrinate the world — странствовать по миру
•He spent years peregrinating through Europe.▫️Он провёл годы, странствуя по Европе.
•She peregrinated from city to city in search of work.▫️Она скиталась из города в город в поисках работы.
•The poet peregrinated widely in his youth.▫️Поэт много странствовал в молодости.

⭕️Unknown

Would it be grammatically correct to use the word "would" twice in a sentence? For example: “I would not be surprised if he would win”.

It isn’t wrong in English to use would twice in a sentence, but in standard constructions a would in the if-clause (“… if he would win.”) should be avoided. In your example, the acceptable form is “I would not be surprised if he won,” keeping would in the main clause and using a past-tense verb in the if-clause.
Note: Some dialects accept would in if-clauses, but in general writing it is best to avoid it.

#Frank_Dauenhauer
⭕️Unknown English

FULMINATE
ˈfʊlmɪneɪt

громить, взрываться, взрывать, сверкать, греметь, изливать гнев

•fulminate against — метать громы и молнии
•fulminate anathemas — сыпать проклятиями; осыпать бранью
•fulminate orders — издавать громовые приказы
•Many people are fulminating against the cruelty of blood sports.▫️Многие люди негодуют по поводу жестокости охотников.
•The editorial fulminated against the proposed tax increase.▫️Редакционная статья метала громы и молнии в адрес предлагаемого повышения налога.
•He fulminated against the Republicans' plan to cut Medicare▫️Он подверг разгромной критике план республиканцев сократить правительственную программу социальной медицинской помощи.

⭕️Unknown

DEIGN
deɪn

соблаговолить, снисходить, изволить, удостаивать

•deign no reply — не удостоить ответом
•He did not deign an answer.▫️Он не снизошёл до ответа.
•He did not deign to speak.▫️Он не соизволил заговорить.
•I wouldn't deign to answer that absurd accusation.▫️Я бы не удостоил ответом столь нелепые обвинения.

⭕️Unknown

EFFACE
ɪˈfeɪs

стирать, изглаживать, вычеркивать, принижать, затмевать, превосходить

•the image on the coin is effaced — изображение на монете стёрлось
•efface the boundaries — уничтожить границы; стереть границы
•efface from mind — вычёркивать из памяти
•Time cannot efface the memory of that day.▫️Время не может стереть память о том дне.
•Nothing could efface her grief.▫️Ничто не могло стереть её горе.
•She effaced all traces of her involvement.▫️Она стерла все следы своего участия.

⭕️Unknown

SALUBRIOUS
səˈluːbrɪəs

целебный, целительный, здоровый, полезный для здоровья

•the salubrious mountain air and water — целебный горный воздух и вода
•salubrious food — полезная еда
•salubrious exercise — полезное упражнение
•Fresh air and exercise are always salubrious.▫️Свежий воздух и физические упражнения всегда благотворно сказываются на здоровье.
•'Salubrious'! That's just the word I was looking for.▫️"Целебный"! Это именно то слово, которое я искал.
•The doctor recommended a more salubrious environment.▫️Врач рекомендовал более здоровую среду.

⭕️Unknown

QUESTION

Is "according to me" correct?

There is nothing wrong with it grammatically, but it is logically awkward.
We use “according to” only when we want to present some other source as the authority for what we are saying. If we are the source of the information, then it is not “according to”, since we are speaking on our own authority.
If I know that something is true, I can say with confidence that it is true and explain why I know that it is true. Perhaps I saw it myself, and I am convinced that it is true. It is only when we cannot provide such an explanation that we use “according to” and we then provide the source of the information.

•According to the weather forecast, tomorrow will the the hottest day on record since 1959.
•You are supposed to take your shoes off before entering a house, according to the custom of our culture.

These are appropriate uses of “according to”, since we are providing some source other than ourselvesas the source of the information we are presenting.

We might use “according to me” in a “joking” sort of way in, as in the following brief dialogue:
A: The final match of the tournament has been postponed until tomorrow.
B: Really? According to whom?
A: According to me.

#Mike_Mendis
⭕️Unknown English

QUESTION

Why is it correct to say "Thirty pounds is a lot of weight to lose," even though pounds seem plural? What's the rule here?

It is not helpful to think in terms of “rules”. There is a logical relationship involved, and if you understand the logical relationship you will understand why the third-person singular form of the verb is used.
“Thirty pounds” is a quantity and as such it is uncountable. It is measurable, but not countable. Each pound does not operate separately. All thirty pounds operate together as one single amount or quantity. That quantity “is” singular.
This applies to any quantity, not just a quantity of weight.
For example, money is an uncountable noun, even though we count dollars or euros or yen or rupees or some other currency. No matter how many “dollars” there are, the amount is always one amount, and that amount is therefore singular.
$1,500 has been set aside for repairs to the roof of the school library. [→ NOT: “$1,500 have been set aside …” (X).]
If we were to ask about the amount of money involved in the repairs, we would say:
How much money has been set aside for the repairs? (→ NOT: “How much money have been set aside …?)
and the answer obviously would be:
$1,500 has been set aside.
Similarly, if we were to ask about the amount of weight that needs to be lost, we would say:
How much weight needs to be lost? (→ NOT: “How much weight need to be lost?)
There can hardly be any doubt that the quantity is logically singular, not plural.
We would never say:
$1,500 are a lot of money to lose. (X)
In the same way, we could not logically say:
Thirty pounds are a lot of weight to lose. (X)
Here are some other examples:
250 ml of olive oil is added to the mixture a little at a time. [NOT: “250 ml of olive oil are added …” (X)]
Twenty-five miles is a long way to run for most people. [→ NOT: “Twenty-five miles are a long way to run” (X).]

#Mike_Mendis
⭕️Unknown English

QUESTION

Is this grammatically correct: “He should have arrived here by six o’clock, because he had taken the early bus”?

No. It should be “He should have arrived here by six o’clock, because he took the early bus.”

#Frank_Dauenhauer
⭕️Unknown English

QUESTION

Is “she is beautiful than me” grammatically correct?

No, the statement “She is beautiful than me…” is not grammatically correct.
When you are comparing one person to another (or one thing to another, one place to another, etc.) you have to use comparative adjectives. The comparative form of “beautiful” is “more beautiful.”
Hence, the correct version would be “She is more beautiful than me.”
However, please bear in mind that a strict prescriptivist would say that using “me” here is incorrect. You should use “I” and complete it like this: She is more beautiful than I am.
In normal, everyday English, it is considered fine to say “She is more beautiful than me.”

#Mohammad_AbuBakar
⭕️Unknown English