0
   

Trying to Get the Meaning of A Word more Accurately

 
 
Reply Mon 27 Oct, 2003 07:21 pm
I could not figure out the accurate meanings of the three words below. Need your opinion, thanks.

(1)

Question 1 -- "rising" possibly means:
a) Ascending, sloping upward, or advancing.
b) An uprising; an insurrection.

Choose a or b?

(I prefer a, cos in the text of the article there is a paragraph:
Commanders have noticed that more attacks are being launched from a distance, said Odierno, head of the 4th Infantry Division. That is probably because attackers realize they will suffer more casualties if they come in direct contact with coalition troops, he said. )

(2)

Question 2 -- "spike" means:
A sharp-pointed projection along the top of a fence or wall -- it can be amplified as "barrier" in some context.
Thus, the spike here means "Chinese wall"?

(3) Last week, the White House threatened to veto the overall $87 billion aid package for Iraq and Afghanistan if any of the Iraqi reconstruction money was structured as a loan.
Question 3 -- "threaten" means:

a) To give signs or warning of; portend.
b) To announce the possibility of in a threat.

I prefer a, cos it is more relatively tenderer than b.
Am I right?


The context of all quotes above, check out the link below:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-10-27-iraq-meeting_x.htm

PS. The title of the report -- Bush: Iraq attacks signs of desperation

"Sign", noun, not verb -- why not use "sign"? Rolling Eyes
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 1,317 • Replies: 16
No top replies

 
Craven de Kere
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Oct, 2003 07:30 pm
1) a

and it's a but of a trick because it's an 'uprising' whose level of violence is 'rising'.

2) Spike in this context means a 'spike' on a graph. when something spikes it goes up or down dramatically on a graph.

3) Both fit to some degree, I think a is more accurate because they are not announcing the possibility of a threat they are announcing the threat itself.
0 Replies
 
oristarA
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Oct, 2003 07:44 pm
Thank you Craven de Kere.
I should not ignore "that graph"! My bad (Oh God, this "my bad" is a slang with imperfect grammar.).
Does "the threat itself" mean "the potential danger within itself" -- that is, the loan itself is a dangerous means of aid?
0 Replies
 
Craven de Kere
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Oct, 2003 09:00 pm
Nah, this is because a threat IS the possibility of something bad. So 'to threaten' is not to announce the possibility of a 'threat', it's to announce the possibility of something bad.

Doing this is a threat. So the definition of 'threaten' as 'to announce the possibility of a threat' can be construed to be redundant. 'To threaten' is to state the possibility of something bad, not the possibility of the possibility of a threat.
0 Replies
 
oristarA
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Oct, 2003 09:23 pm
Comparing "something bad" to "a threat", the former is expressing itself in a friendly way, while the latter is in a harmful way.
Am I on the right track?
0 Replies
 
Craven de Kere
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Oct, 2003 09:50 pm
Hmm, not really.

To threaten = to alledge a possible danger or bad situation

So to define 'to threaten' as 'To announce the possibility of in a threat' is to use the idea within the definition.

It might be the answer that the teacher is looking for but it's a bad one.
0 Replies
 
oristarA
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Oct, 2003 10:52 pm
I don't yet get it well.

The usage of threaten:

Threaten most often refers to an indication of something disquieting or ominous, to appearance or action calculated or serving to deter, or to something that is a source of danger:
"A crack that threatened to become a split" (Booth Tarkington). "


But when the subject of the verb threaten is a man, does it often refer to speak in an evil manner? (Uh, I didn't think Bush spoke to Congress with an evil manner...)

If it is not in the evil manner, how about warn instead of threaten?
0 Replies
 
Craven de Kere
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Oct, 2003 12:09 am
What language is your native tongue? It might help me answer this question.
0 Replies
 
Roberta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Oct, 2003 01:14 am
Oristar, "Rising" in the above context means increasing.

Hey, Oristar, if you don't answer Craven's question, I'm gonna stop answering all of your questions. Not true, but that's a threat. A threat is usually accompanied by an "if." If you do this, then I'll do that. So the administration said--if the money is in the form of a loan, then we will veto the bill. A threat.
0 Replies
 
oristarA
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Oct, 2003 05:54 am
Hehe, Roberta, Craven de Kere in fact knows where I come from. Since he is a teacher of ESL, so knowing my first language might help him to teacher more properly. But I think you Roberta's first language is English, and you might know Latin, French, but don't know other languages, esp. Eastern languages, so telling you my native language will not help us communicating more efficiently. So I would not tell here which language i my first language is.
But if you were so curious to know it, I would like to tell you via PM. Very Happy
0 Replies
 
Roberta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Oct, 2003 08:22 am
Oristar, I wasn't really asking you about your native language. I was illustrating a threat. However, you're wrong in assuming that knowing your native language wouldn't be helpful to me. I've tutored ESL for over ten years. I've had students from many European countries (eastern central, and western), and I'm familiar with the kinds of problems confronted by speakers of different languages. If you want to provide me with this info via PM, that would be fine.
0 Replies
 
Roberta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Oct, 2003 08:37 am
BTW, I don't know Latin. But I've studied Spanish, French, Italian, and Russian (just a tiny bit the last). I also know a bit of German. Don't be such a smarty-pants.
0 Replies
 
oristarA
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Oct, 2003 09:41 am
Sorry Roberta, if you felt my acting smarty I am sorry. But I didn't mean to act smarty.

PM is made.
0 Replies
 
Wy
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Oct, 2003 04:16 pm
Re: Trying to Get the Meaning of A Word more Accurately
oristarA wrote:

PS. The title of the report -- Bush: Iraq attacks signs of desperation

"Sign", noun, not verb -- why not use "sign"?


It's because there's more than one sign (of desperation)...
0 Replies
 
Roberta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Oct, 2003 04:29 pm
Hi Oristar, I was teasing you. Sorry. I should have used one of the faces to let you know. This is the one-- :wink: Or maybe this one-- Razz How about this one-- Very Happy

BTW, "smarty-pants" is an expression often used when someone knows less than he thinks he does.
0 Replies
 
oristarA
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Oct, 2003 06:21 pm
Thank you Wy. Smile

Hi Roberta, I've checked AHD out before using "smarty" instead of "smarty-pants".
Smarty: (1) A smart aleck. (2) A quick-witted person.
Smarty-pants: A smart aleck.
Why I chose "smarty"? Cos I was not so courageous to admit I was a smart aleck; using smarty instead of smarty-pants may make me feel a bit more comfortable. Very Happy
0 Replies
 
Roberta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Oct, 2003 06:49 pm
I'm sorry I made you uncomfortable. I've been called both (smarty and smart aleck). :-)
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

deal - Question by WBYeats
Drs. = female doctor? - Question by oristarA
Let pupils abandon spelling rules, says academic - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Please, I need help. - Question by imsak
Is this sentence grammatically correct? - Question by Sydney-Strock
"come from" - Question by mcook
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Trying to Get the Meaning of A Word more Accurately
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 09/18/2019 at 10:46:15