Diversity Between ‘Whoever’ And ‘Whomever’

Diversity Between ‘Whoever’ And ‘Whomever’

By KAS   11:51   1 comment:

Both words are very similar in meaning and usage. However, the words, although both pronouns, cannot be used interchangeably because of grammar. Which word is correctly used in a sentence requires some understanding of the complexity of English grammar rules.

‘Whoever’ is a pronoun that is a compound word made up of ‘who’ and ‘ever’. It indicates which person or persons. For example: Whoever is going will have to ride the bus. It is used as the subject of a sentence, such as in this example, and it can be used when asking questions. This is especially the case when expressing surprise. For example: Whoever could be at our door this late at night! ‘Whoever’ can also be used when it is part of the predicate of a linking verb. For example: He realized whoever was not already there wasn't coming. These usage rules are the same ones that apply to the pronoun ‘who’.

‘Whomever’ is also a pronoun, made up of ‘whom’ and ‘ever’, but it is the objective form of ‘whoever’. It is used when it is the object of a verb. For example: He gave the mail to whomever lived at the house. Just like ‘whoever’ it follows the same grammatical rules as ‘whom’. While this is the grammatically correct way to use ‘whom’ and ‘whomever’, it should be noted that many English speakers avoid using ‘whom’ and ‘whomever’ in everyday conversation. This is because ‘whom’ has a formal or pretentious sound to many native English speakers. For example, this sentence is correct but sounds overly formal: The winners whom won the race are celebrating. A more natural way to say the sentence in casual conversation is to use ‘that’ instead: The winners that won the race are celebrating. Some speakers may simply use ‘who’ instead of ‘whom’, and although technically incorrect, it is widely accepted in informal conversation. For example: Whom did you meet? Although correct, it is likely ‘who’ would be used instead of ‘whom’ by many native English speakers.

So deciding which word to use in a sentence primarily has to do with its placement in the sentence. Either word can be used with a dependent clause, or a group of words with both a subject and verb, but it does not express a complete thought like a sentence. Whether ‘whoever’ or ‘whomever’ is used depends on agreement with the verb in the dependent clause, not the rest of the sentence. For example: I will give it to whomever needs it the most. ‘Whomever’ agrees with the verb in the dependent clause ‘needs it the most.’ However, if the entire clause that contains either ‘whoever’ or ‘whomever’ is the subject of the verb that follows the clause, then it must agree with that verb. For example: Whoever left the door open must shut it. ‘Whoever left the door open’ is the subject, and ‘must’ is the verb it agrees with.

Read More

The Misuse Between Prediction And Inference

The Misuse Between Prediction And Inference

By KAS   04:32   2 comments:

Both words refer to a conclusion based on some sort of fact, experience or observation. However, the difference lies in the slight variance of usage in one word over another in certain circumstances.

‘Inference’ is a noun and its meaning is the act or process of deriving logical conclusions about something from known facts or assumed to be true. An ‘inference’ can be a verbal statement, but more commonly it refers to a thought process. For example: It seems like a reasonable inference that it is cold outside, because everyone I see is wearing a coat. An inference is usually made about something with a degree of certainty, based on facts like statistics, calculations, observations or generalizations. ‘Infer’ is the verb form of ‘inference’, having the same meaning, to form an opinion or reach a conclusion based on known facts. For example: We can infer that it is cold outside based on what we see people wearing. Synonyms include words like ‘surmise’, ‘deduce’, ‘reason’ and ‘conclude’.

‘Prediction’ is also a noun. It means a statement about the way things will or might happen in the future, often but not always based on experience or knowledge. A ‘prediction’ generally is a verbal statement, but it can mean just a mental thought. For example: I made a prediction that it will snow tomorrow. There is also a commonly used verb form of ‘prediction’, ‘predict’. ‘To predict’ means to say that something might or definitely will happen in the future. For example: I predict it will snow tomorrow. While ‘prediction’ and ‘predict’ are usually based on some sort of fact, observation, experience or scientific reason, these meaning behind these words does not have definite certainty of occurring. Something that someone predicts may or may not actually happen. A good example of an everyday prediction is the weather forecast. What is forecasted, or predicted, is based on scientific evidence, but it is not a known certainty, just a probability.

The difference in usage with these words depends mostly on time. ‘Inference’ is used when a conclusion is reached from known evidence, and an ‘interference’ does not necessarily have to be about future events, just a conclusion about something that is not currently known or understood that can be reached by some means of reasoning. Usually when future events are involved, ‘prediction’ rather than ‘inference’ is used, because the future is always unknown, even with evidence and reason. For example, one could make an inference that the boy with untied shoes will trip and fall, and this technically would be a correct usage. There is logical evidence and reason tells us that this is likely, however, the word ‘prediction’ is more likely to be used because it is still in the future. We might say in this situation: I predicted that the boy with the untied shoes would fall, and since I see him crying, I can infer that he did in fact fall down and hurt himself. In this example, ‘prediction’ is used for the future event, and ‘inference’ for the conclusion based on observable facts.

Read More

The Rivalry Between Await And Wait

The Rivalry Between Await And Wait

By KAS   13:02   1 comment:

The words are very similar, only the addition of a single letter ‘a’ differentiates them. Clearly the meanings are related, however, the words have different usages. ‘Wait’ and ‘Await’ cannot be used interchangeably.

‘Wait’ has a broad usage and meaning. It is most often used as a verb. It means to stay somewhere until an expected event happens, until someone arrives, something happens, something is ready or it is one’s turn. For example: We had to wait a long time in line at the store to buy our groceries. It also has the significance of stopping what one is doing and staying in one place and not doing something until something else happens. For example: Wait here, until I come back. It can also simply mean to delay doing something. For example: I will wait until summer before I take a vacation. Along with that meaning, ‘wait’ can mean to remain in a state of readiness in which you expect or hope that something will happen soon. For example: She waits for the bus every morning. As a noun, ‘wait’, means a period of time when you must wait or be in a state or attitude of watchfulness and expectancy. For example: There is a long wait to get into the movie.

‘Wait’ also has another side to its meaning and usage. When it is used as a verb, ‘wait’ has a meaning and usage associated with restaurant service or attendance as a servant. It can mean to serve a meal or beverage. For example: I wait on tables at work as a waiter. When referring to a servant, it means to be ready to do what is asked. For example: The butler waited upon the old man for years. It also has an old-fashioned, or seldom used meaning that is close to this which means to formally call upon someone in a social visit. For example: The lady waited upon the countess in the Victorian novel.

‘Await’ is only ever used as a verb to mean to wait for something or someone or to be in a state of readiness. For example: We were awaiting the arrival of friends.  It implies anticipation, expectation, hope and watchfulness. It is not used indicate a delay in doing something, but it can be used in place of the verb phrase expressions ‘to wait for’ or ‘to wait on’ and as a synonym for ‘wait’ when used to mean to stay in a place and be ready until something happens. ‘Await’ also does not have a usage as concerns restaurant or service usage. So while using ‘await’ may be correct in some usages of ‘wait’, it cannot always be used in place of ‘wait’.

Read More

Difference Between Conference and Meeting

Difference Between Conference and Meeting

By KAS   02:27   No comments:

Conference vs Meeting

“Conference” and “meeting” refers to the getting together of many people and holding some kind of discussion on certain topics. Their basic goal is the same which includes people gathering to discuss something which is common to all who are attending. The dictionary meanings of “conference” and “meetings” are not too different either, but in practice they have some basic differences which cannot be neglected.

Conference

The dictionary meanings of “conference” are:

A meeting especially with an agenda which is formal for consultations, discussions, or exchanging information.

In politics, government, and diplomacy, it is defined as a formal meeting between political groups, two or more states, etc. to discuss issues and formulate policies.

Religiously in Christianity or ecclesiastical terms, it means an assembly of clergy.

Conferences are held on a large scale. People come to attend conferences from different fields of life, business, society, and religion, etc. to discuss a particular subject. They are formal affairs where invites are sent in advance, and a particular agenda has to be discussed and focused upon. The discussions, the topics are all prioritized in advance.

The number of attendees is large so that it needs to be organized in hotels or specially designed conference rooms or training centers where the environment is right for discussions amongst a very large group.

The people who are invited for conferences are accommodated in hotel rooms as guests as conferences may be planned for more than one day and spread over a span of three to four days or more.

Meeting

The dictionary meanings of “meeting” are:

It is the process or act of coming together of people, also considered an encounter.

Assembly of people for different social, business, or religious purposes.

Meetings are more casual than conferences; they may or may not be planned in advance. Meetings can be called informally at any time by the people in office or people belonging to a group.

Meetings can be held at home or in an office at any given time in any given space, and does not include a very large number of people. Meetings are usually called to discuss something which came up, and the topics may or may not be planned in advance. They usually carry on for less time than conferences.

Summary:

1.A conference is a more formal affair than a meeting.

2.Conferences are preplanned and held on a large scale where a lot of people attend; meetings may or may not be preplanned, and attendees are fewer in number.

3.Conferences have a particular agenda for discussion; meetings may or may not have a particular subject to be discussed; they may have many points to focus on.

4.Conferences are usually held in hotels or conference rooms, etc. as they are on a large scale; meetings can be held at home, an office, or at any given space.

5.Conferences may be held over a span of a few days; meetings are shorter than conferences and usually end the same day they start in a few hours.

Read More

Difference Between Big and Large

Difference Between Big and Large

By KAS   01:51   No comments:

Big vs Large

“Big” and “large” are both adjectives, and sometimes they can be used interchangeably while sometimes they cannot be as the meaning of the statement changes by their interchanging, or it becomes incorrect. They can both be used with countable nouns, meaning anything which can be counted or measured, for example, a large house, a big garden. However, they cannot be used with uncountable nouns, for example, traffic. “Large” and “big” both refer to more than average size, height, weight, length, etc.

Big

“Big” is a very common adjective. It is one of the most used words in the English language whereas it has been observed that “large” is not used as much as the word “big.” “Big” has many meanings one of which is “important,” 

for example:

“The decision of starting a new business is a big decision.”

Here “big” refers to “something very important.”

In informal situations, “big” refers to “older or elder,” 

for example:

“He is like a big brother to him; he looks after him as his own kid brother.”

“Big” also refers to “powerful or successful.” It might refer to a successful or powerful person or successful and powerful thing, city, center, etc. 

For example:

“Las Vegas is a big tourist attraction.”

“Big” is used in the case of an action which is considered, informally, of a large degree, for example:

“People of our generation are big spenders.”

Here “big” refers to “a lot of spending.”

“Big” refers to great strength and force, 

for example:

“A big storm was gaining ground.”

It can be used for popularity also, for example, “The show ‘Voice’ is big in the U.S.”

“Big” is used as fixed phrases and cannot be interchanged with “large,” 

for example,

“He has a big mouth”; “It is no big deal.”

Large

“Large” is used less commonly than “big.” It is used with quantity words, for example, large scale, a large number, a large amount of something, a large proportion, to a very large extent, large volume, large part of something, large area, etc.

It refers to a greater than average size, 

for example:

“A large house or large garden.”

It also refers to more than average breadth, capacity, or scope, 

for example:

“Things of large proportion.”

Significance is also indicated by the word “large,” 

for example:

“India is a large producer of rice and wheat.”

“Large” also refers to “liberal or tolerant,” 

for example:

“She had a generous spirit which was large and kind.”

“Large” can be used informally for pretentious and boastful actions or nature, 

for example:

“He had a large ego which got hurt easily.”

“Large” is also used in some fixed phrases where it cannot be changed with “big,” 

for example:

“Somebody being larger than life. Convicts being at large.”

Summary:

1.“Big” is one of the most common adjectives used and is one of the most used words in the English language; “large” is not as commonly used as “big.”

2.“Big” is used for many different meanings like, elder, important, successful, powerful, etc; “large” has many different usages where it is used for more than average breadth, capacity, or scope. It also means “significant, liberal, pretentious,” etc.

Read More

Difference Between Legal and Ethical

Difference Between Legal and Ethical

By KAS   11:20   No comments:

Legal vs Ethical

“Legal” and “ethical” are often used and breathed in the same sentence. Though there is a relationship between the two, the concepts are mutually exclusive of each other. They often clash and work with each other. Both words are often used in the same context in terms of issues and social situations. Both “legal” and “ethical” can be applied in almost any situation, private or public, even in the realm of professions.

“Legal” is an adjective and a noun used to describe anything that concerns the law or its workings. Legal is associated with all equipment, processes, procedures, practices, languages, cultures, and other relative concepts in the system of the law. “Legal” is a derived term from the word “law.” It originated from the Anglo-French “legalis” which stems from the Latin “lex,” which means “law.” It was first used as a word in 1562.

Related forms of legal include a bunch of other adjectives like post legal, pre-legal, pseudo-legal, quasi-legal, and as an adverb, which is legally. “Legal” as a noun is also observed in “paralegal” and as a label for people who are represented as legitimate or sanctioned by implementation in a given set of rules and regulations.

On the other hand, “ethical” is also an adjective as well as a noun and is used to associate with the word “ethics.” The word came from the Middle English “etik” which in turn came from the Latin “eticus” and the earlier Greek “ethikos.” It was created formally as a word in 1588. “Ethical” also has derived terms in forms of other parts of speech. Nouns include “ethicality” and “ethicalness” while an adverb comes in the word “ethically.”

Today, many issues are brought up and questioned whether they are legal or ethical. The curious relationship between the two is evident since the base word or concepts of legal (law) as well as ethical (ethics) have the same kind of relationship. Many of the existing laws have originated in ethics while ethics, in turn, is rooted in morals and the perception of the rightness or wrongness of an act or conduct. Another distinction between the two is that the two concepts are not exactly equivalent words for each other. There are some instances where legal acts can be unethical, and there are also times when an ethical act is considered as illegal. It all depends on the current governing laws and perceptions of the people in the act as well as outside of the act.

Aside from the nature of both concepts, there is also a difference in how it is applied. Any legal act is applicable to all people in a society that implements a particular set of laws. On the other hand, any ethical part is considered as a voluntary and personal act of an individual all based on that individual’s perceptions or stand between right and wrong.

In determining what is a legal act or an ethical act, the bases are also different. A legal act is an act that meets the terms of rules and regulations of a particular but massive and collective entity, like a society or a country. It is different when it comes to ethical acts since the act is compliant to the ethical principles or justifications of an individual or a small and specific organization.

Summary:

1.“Legal” and “ethical” both function as nouns and adjectives. They have different origins as “legal” derives from Anglo-French while “ethical” has Middle English and Greek roots. However, both share a common ground in Latin.
2.Both “legal” and “ethical” are considered as standards and methods to conduct a certain kind of behavior and action. 3.However, there is the difference in scope and application. “Legal” can apply to a more widespread scope while “ethical” applies on an individual basis.
4.“Legal” has its basis in ethics while “ethics” has its basis in morals. They both judge a certain behavior or action either as right or wrong in their respective opinions.
5.“Legal” has a more objective view while “ethics” has a personal and varied view depending on the individual.

Read More

Difference Between Character and Personality

Difference Between Character and Personality

By KAS   08:33   No comments:

Character vs Personality

Character and personality are subjects which have been widely researched, thought about, written about, and explained in many different ways. They are sometimes, in general use, interchanged but have very different meanings and implications. According to the dictionary, “personality” refers to “the quality of being a person” whereas “character” refers to “the ethical and mental traits of a person which give the person his individuality.”

Character
The main idea behind character is that character comes into play when the mind is involved. The mind and its capacities are the central focus of the character. A person with character is capable of achieving anything by himself in the society. It helps a person in carrying out tasks with a direction that is self-motivated and self-realized. People with character can start a business if they want, raise a family well, earn as much as they want, and accomplish almost anything they desire but require the acceptance of society.

The character of a person is evident in every situation, no matter what the situation. The character of a person does not change or alter. The behavior might change, but the character doesn’t. The behaviors of people are directed by the character of the person. For example, if a person is a high achiever and ambitious, his character is visible and experienced in all situations whether they are domestic or professional. Character comes from feelings and the mind. Emotions do not play much of a role in the character of a person. Pure, simple, mental capacities drive the character of a person.

Personality
Personality is supposed to be more intense and deep than the character of a person. A person with personality does not look for the validation of society or its acceptance and can start anything new. People with personality have followers, and they are capable of starting new things in society which may or may not be acceptable at that time. The personality of a person does not originate only from his mind and values; it does not require the sanction or the support of society.

Personality involves mental capacities as well as the enthusiasm of the heart. Once the mind accepts a new idea of a person with personality, the heart encourages the person to go ahead and begin something which has never been done or something that needs to be done but has not been attempted. This happens because one’s personality is supposed to be the state of being which does not only include the mind. It is the state of existing and not just existing through thinking and organizing. Personality is an energy. It is above and more than the mind.

Summary:
The central focus of the character is the mind. Character needs the validation and support of society and functions according to the approved social norms. One’s personality is more of an energy which does not require social validation and sanctions and involves the enthusiasm of the heart along with mental capabilities.

Read More

Difference Between Respect and Honor

Difference Between Respect and Honor

By KAS   07:03   No comments:

What is the difference between respect and honor? Both words are used in conjunction with admiration for someone or something. ‘Respect’ is even found in the dictionary definition of ‘honor’. However, the words can vary slightly in the scope of their usage.

‘Respect’ can be used as either a noun or an intransitive verb. As a noun, it means a feeling of admiration for or understanding the specific value and importance of someone or something. For example: I had respect for the way the soldier handled himself in battle. It can also be used to mean a way of thinking about or viewing someone or something. For example: I felt respect for the soldier’s effort. Respect in this sense can also take on the feeling of consideration, appreciation or concern. For example: I have respect for his privacy. When using the word ‘respect’, it implies understanding and agreement.

As a verb, ‘respect’ is used for admiration or regard of someone or something. For example: I respect people that speak up for others. This includes a person’s rights, wishes or desires. For example: I respect your decision to not attend the ceremony. When used in conjunction with an object, it can mean to treat something in a proper way. For example: Please show respect for the furniture and not jump on it.

‘Honor’ also can be used as a noun or a transitive verb. ‘Honor’ as noun is used to mean respect that is given to someone who is admired. It often is used in a slightly more formal way than ‘respect’. For example: They showed the solider honor. It has a more extended usage as well. It can also be used to mean a good reputation or character and high moral standards of behavior. For example: He showed honor in his conduct. Finally, it can be used to mean a badge, award, privilege or title of distinction. For example: They bestowed an honor on the soldier. In this way, it is even used as a title for a judge, ‘Your Honor’, and to mean someone’s moral virtue.

‘Honor’ as a verb means to regard or treat someone or something with admiration and respect. Honor used in this way too often has a formal ceremonial or public connotation to it. For example: They honored the wounded solider during the ceremony. To ‘honor someone or something’ can also be used to mean to do what is required or desired. For example: They honored the contract. In this way as well, it can be used to mean accept. For example: They honored the coupon I had.
Because of the sense of recognition and admiration in their meanings, the words ‘respect’ and ‘honor’ are synonyms of each other. They can both be used to show esteem or regard for someone or something. You can show both honor and respect to someone you admire. It is also possible to both honor and respect a person’s particular wishes.

Read More

Difference Between How Come and Why

Difference Between How Come and Why

By KAS   09:51   No comments:

How Come and Why

People ask for reasons in certain situations. To satisfy someone’s curiosity, people often use “how come” and “why” to inquire for reasons, causes, or purposes for things.

There are many acceptable instances where “how come” and “why” can be used interchangeably. However, there are also instances wherein they cannot be substituted for one another. Substituting “how come” for “why” sometimes ends up with a sentence or question that doesn’t make sense. Therefore, usage of both openers should always be appropriate within the context.

Although “how come” and “why” are similar in function, there are slight differences in many areas. One of these notable areas is the situation or the time of the utterance. In formal situations, “why” is always used and the correct opener. It is also the preferred opening for writing interrogative sentences. Meanwhile, “how come” is used for informal or casual situations. This is also a phrase often used by children and second-language learners at the start of their language education.

Another difference is that question openings are different in tone. “How come” can indicate a soft inquiry (usually on the subject of the method and not of a general inquiry), disbelief, or accusation in the context of its usage. On the other hand, “why” can also sound or be interpreted as authoritative and demanding in its use.

Another concern regarding their usage is the presence of a presupposition or an assumption of an event. In “how come,” there is an element of presupposition that often results in a disbelief or accusatory tone of voice. In contrast, “why” doesn’t have this presupposition or any background belief.

“How come” is the short form or abbreviated version of “How come it came to be that way?” While “why” is not an abbreviated word of any long phrase or a set of words. In addition, “how come” is considered to be grammatically incorrect.

A slight difference is also noticeable in writing. “How come” added with the verb form “be” will express a pattern of no inversion of noun and verbs. The same is not true for “why.” There is an inversion of the noun and verb under the same conditions (“why” plus the verb form “be”).

Summary:

1.“How come” and “why” perform the same function as a sentence opening for questions. Both terms are probing terms to determine purposes, justification, motive, and intention.

2.“How come” is an abbreviated form originating from the longer phrase “How come it came to be that way?” It is the standard question form for children or language learners. On the other hand, “why” is used by learned language users and is not an abbreviated form of any phrase or sentence.

3.“How come” is often used in informal occasions while “why” is the norm in formal instances like writing. The reason for the informality of “how come” has its origins as an American slang.

4.The formal use of “why” makes it a standard question form and commonly used word compared to “how come.”

5.The tone of “why” can be interpreted as authoritative and demanding while “how come” can imply an accusation, disbelief, or surprise. “How come” can also give a softer and less confrontational tone or attitude from the asking person.

6.The matter of presupposition is also an area of difference between the two terms. “How come” indicates a sense of presupposition. In contrast, “why” doesn’t imply any presupposition on the user’s part.

7.Context is a great judge on what sentence or question opener should be used. Both “how come” and “why” can be used interchangeably in many situations. However, there are instances where the use of “how come” in replacement for “why” ends up in a confusing sentence or question.

Read More

Difference Between Are and Were

Difference Between Are and Were

By KAS   05:23   No comments:

Are vs  Were

English is a complicated yet very interesting language, and because of this complexity, even native speakers make mistakes when using it. Being well versed in English, both spoken and written, takes time and effort. Most students find verbs and verb tenses very confusing, and the proper usage and forms of the verb ‘be’ are no exception.

Like the Greek sea god Proteus who was capable of changing forms, the verb’be’ too, is notorious for its various forms and is in fact one of the most irregular among all verbs. Among its present forms are ‘are.’ This form is the counterpart of the singular ‘is,’ which naturally means that ‘are’ should be used when the subject is plural. The arbitrariness of subject-verb agreement in English creates complications when using the verb ‘are.’

However, generally speaking, the verb ‘are’ is used when the subject of the sentence involves two or more persons or things. And since ‘are’ is in present tense, it must be used to denote an action that is being done in the present time. Its counterpart, ‘were,’ is used when the subject of the sentence is plural and the action or condition that is expressed has already been completed or the event has happened in the past.

Both ‘are’ and ‘were’ are linking verbs. Linking verbs function as the connectors of the subject and the main verb and to additional information about the subject. In the example, ‘The dogs are running around the backyard,’ the verb ‘are’ connects the complete subject ‘The dogs’ to the main verb ‘running’ and ‘around the backyard’, which is an adverb of place. Since ‘are’ is used and not were, this means that the dogs were presently running when the statement or sentence was written or uttered.

If you want to state something that was already done, you would say, ‘The dogs were running around the backyard.’ This means that the action ‘running’ was already completed in the past, thus the dogs were no longer running around the backyard when the statement was made. With this being said, the verb ‘were’ is used to denote past actions or past conditions. Similar to the verb ‘are,’ ‘were’ is used when the subject is plural or is plural in form. Subjects that may look singular but plural in form include the pronoun ‘you.’ It may pertain to one person or it could be addressed to many individuals.

An example is, ‘You are a good singer.’ ‘You’ in this case is referring to one person only but the verb ‘are’ is used. This is because ‘you’ is a special kind of pronoun that takes a plural form. The verb ‘are’ is used so it means that the subject in the sentence is still a good singer when the statement was made. The verb ‘were’ should be used if the person is not singing anymore or is no longer a good singer like he or she was before.

If you want to express a condition or state of being that is still true upon the utterance of the statement, you may use the verb ‘are’ as long as your subject is plural or more than one. So you can say, ‘My parents are teachers,’ if your parents are teachers until the time you said the statement. However, if your parents used to teach before but are no longer teaching at present, then you should say ‘My parents were teachers.’ The verb ‘were’ is also used to say something that is no longer true. This is used especially when the person or the subject of the sentence has already passed away. You can say, ‘My grandparents were the sweetest folks I have ever had.’

Summary:
1. The verb ‘are’ is a plural variation of the ‘be’ verb and is used in sentences where the subject is plural or plural in form and if the action or condition happens in the present time.
2. The verb ‘were’ is a plural variation of the ‘be’ verb and is used in sentences where the subject is plural or plural in form and if the action or condition is completed in the past.

Read More

Difference Between Fact and Fiction

Difference Between Fact and Fiction

By KAS   08:51   No comments:

Fact vs Fiction

Fact is defined as a piece of information about a circumstance that existed or events that have occurred. It is merely saying the information that is verified to be true or had actually occurred.

Fact came from the Latin word “factum” meaning “event or occurrence or something done”. So in essence, it is a circumstance that had happened. In ancient times, people refer to “fact” as a finished event. This is mainly why the justice system simply wants the facts ‘“ a report of the event.

In the modern sense, fact is often considered as the truth. It can be defined as “something that is known to be true” or “something that has actually occurred”. However there are lots of debates whether to consider facts as true because , if one has to report something that occurred, it is limited or exaggerated by one’s own perception. What can be considered as a fact for, as one may not be the same for the other.

Even long established historical accounts that are long considered to be facts by many are debated to be not true. Other parties may shun declared facts as they perceive the occurrence otherwise. So the term “historical fact” can still be subjective and not considered as the truth.

Having said that, the definition “something that is known to be true” is rather correct. It means that a thing to be considered as fact,it must at least be known by the majority as the truth. Nevertheless, it can still be debated and proved otherwise. Take this for example, the world being flat is considered by ancient people as truth, therefore a fact at that time. Only a few discard this assertion in which some believed that it was spherical. Eventually, the earth was indeed proven to be not flat but spherical and now, that new fact remains to be known as true.

So in essence, fact should be defined as “something collectively perceived to be true”.

Fiction, on the other hand, is defined as “an imaginative creation or a pretense that does not represent actuality but has been invented”. It came from the Latin word “fictio” meaning “the action of shaping, a feigning, that which is feigned”. From its root word it is apparent that fiction comes from a verb which means feign or pretend.

When one pretends, it comes from the mind or imagination and it is something artificial. Fiction is definite in its meaning that it is not true but a product of the mind. That is why when people say fiction, they often think about novels and movies because such things are product of imagination and artistic creativity. Fiction is never considered to be true like fact is. It is clear in its presentation that it is only an invention.

Summary:

1. Fact comes from the latin word “factum” meaning “event or occurrence or something done” while fiction comes from the latin word “fictio” meanning “the action of shaping, a feigning, that which is feigned”

2. Modern meaning of Fact is “something collectively perceived to be true” while Fiction is “an imaginative creation or a pretense that does not represent actuality but has been invented”.

3. Facts can be true while fiction is pure imagination.

4. Fact may start from perceived occurrence or incidence while fiction always begins in the mind.

5. Fact is not created but perceived while fiction is always created by imagination.

Read More

Difference Between Would and Should

Difference Between Would and Should

By KAS   05:46   No comments:

Would vs Should

By its strictest definition, “would” is the past tense verb form of the word “will” while “should” is the past tense verb form of “shall.” However, this should not limit their roles in sentences as they can be used as modal verbs and auxiliary verbs that make them quite tricky. Thus, it is best to learn how they are used by looking into actual sentences where they are used rather than purely relying on its superficial definitions.

One of the most obvious differences, though, between “would” and “should” is on how it is being used. “Should” is primarily used as an auxiliary verb to express a sense of obligation. “Would,” on the contrary, is something that’s used for more customary actions. In the sentence, “When I was a young boy, I _____ usually take a long walk back home rather than riding in a cab,” the word “would” is best suited for that purpose because it’s just an optional choice of either taking a hike or riding in a cab.

In another sentence, “All of us ______ try to become more adept to each other’s personalities,” the best verb to be used is “should” because the sentence seems to require the subject(s) to do such an action. In this sense, the act becomes a form of obligation than a mere customary action.

“Would” can be used to ask questions as in the example: “Would she like some ice cream?” It can also be used to mean the same exact thing as the word “will” like: “How would they react to what I’ve done?” “Would” can tone down a powerful message embedded in some statements like: “He would have missed the cab if she had not stayed.” It can even be used to air some doubt: “I would hold off on the promotion if I could!”

The only problem is when these verbs are used to fit in the same exact sentence. For example, “The institution, through its president, said that its operations should get better next year.” Ironically, using “would” in place of “should” will also be grammatically correct. The question now is deciphering the message of the subject. If the subject uses “should,” then it is saying something for the future, and it means that the institution is more likely to get better (although not that certain). If the subject uses the verb “would,” then it would mean that the end statement “would get better next year” is already in the past. This means that it has already been forecasted some time ago.

Summary:

1.“Would” is the past tense of “will” while “should” is the past tense of “shall.”
2.“Would” is used in statements that have customary actions while “should” is for more required or obligatory actions.
3.“Would” can be used to tone down the meaning and even air some doubt in the message of some sentences.
4.“Would” and “should” can sometimes be used interchangeably depending on the context of the sentence.

Read More

Difference Between Been and Being

Difference Between Been and Being

By KAS   02:41   No comments:

Been vs. Being

The proper usage of grammar has been a very big issue, most especially for those who are not native English speakers. It has also been a challenge for many, as to how to properly use some of the English language’s tenses, when there seems to be a lot more than just the plain old past, present and future tenses. In this regard, two words have been quite a nuisance for English beginners, and these are been and being.

If you are confused with the usage of the two, here is a simplified explanation of its proper usage and differences. Foremost, both words are classified as participles, which is simply explained as their ‘to be’ notations. Being is specifically identified as the present participle, whereas been is the past participle. In this connection, it is important to note that almost all present participles have their verb forms ending in ‘ing’, like walking and dancing, (so these verbs are in their present participle tense). The ending of past participles, on the other hand, happen to be in ‘ed’ form, like walked or danced, but there are a few irregular notations, such as swum and spoken.

Being as the present participle, can be used in situations that happen in the present, in a continuous or progressive sense, and in the passive voice or tone. For example, French subjects are being taught in Washington. Thus, it is clear that the action is being done in a continuous fashion. Similarly, being can also be applied in past situations that are still continuous, like, ‘French subjects were being taught when I came to Washington’. Clearly, it is evident that the action was continuous at a certain point in the past.

On the contrary, been as the past participle, and in its passive voice, is applicable in many tenses or situations like the following:

Ø Present perfect tense ‘“ She’s been to Washington thrice.

Ø Present perfect progressive tense ‘“ She’s been working in Washington thrice.

Ø Past perfect tense ‘“ She’s never been in Washington before.

Ø Past perfect progressive tense ‘“ When she came to Washington for the first time, she had been learning French for four years.

Ø Present perfect tense in its passive notation ‘“ French students have been educated sufficiently.

Ø Past perfect tense in its passive form ‘“ John did very well in his exam. The lesson had been taught very objectively.

In summary:

1. Being is present participle, whereas been is past participle.

2. Been can be applied to more tenses compared to being.

Read More