ENGLISH

 

If you want to discuss the meaning of a word, it helps to know the difference between denotation and connotation. These two terms are easy to confuse because they describe related concepts. Additionally, both denotation and connotation stem from the Latin word notāre, meaning “to note.”

The denotation of a word or phrase is its explicit or direct meaning. Another way to think of it is as the associations that a word usually elicits for most speakers of a language, as distinguished from those elicited for any individual speaker because of personal experience.
The connotation of a word or phrase is the associated or secondary meaning; it can be something suggested or implied by a word or thing, rather than being explicitly named or described.
For example, the words home and house have similar denotations or primary meanings: a home is “a shelter that is the usual residence of a person, family, or household,” and a house is “a building in which people live.” However, for many, these terms carry different associations or secondary meanings, also known as connotations. Many people would agree that home connotes a sense of belonging and comfort, whereas house conveys little more than a structure.
The connotation of a word depends on cultural context and personal associations, but the denotation of a word is its standardized meaning within the English language. One way to remember the difference between the terms is to take a hint from the prefixes: con- comes from Latin and means “together; with,” reminding us that the connotation of a word works with or alongside its more explicit meaning or denotation.

                      must watch

Q: We feel difficulty/ difficult whenever/ when we are asked to explain punctuation marks, how can it be overcome? 

Moreover is it necessary to learn punctuation marks and simple, complex & compound sentences to speak English fluently?

 

A: If it is only to speak English, you need not know punctuation marks and simple, complex and compound sentences.

However knowing simple, complex and compound sentences can help you to have variety in your speech

Both different from and different than are accepted in standard American English, and both have been in use for the last 300 years. But is one of these phrases more correct than the other?
In formal writing, different from is generally preferred to different than. This preference has to do, in part, with the historical use of the word than. This term entered English as a conjunction often used with comparative adjectives, such as better, taller, shorter, warmer, lesser, and more, to introduce the second element in a comparison. Different is not a comparative adjective. Thus, when different than first started appearing in English, it sounded grating or less natural to discerning ears.
From has been used with the verb differ since at least the 1500s, which paved the way for different from to be readily accepted into the lexicon. William Shakespeare used different from in The Comedy of Errors: “This week he hath been heavy, sour, sad, / And much different from the man he was…” Other pairings have popped up over the years, including different against, but  different from and different than remain the two most useful among English speakers. Different than is common in American English, but might sound strange to British ears, and in the UK, different to is a common alternative that is seldom used in the US.
When in doubt, stick with different from. However, note that there is a time and place for different than. When what follows is a clause, than can be the more elegant choice: My grandmother looks different than I remember. From works best when what follows is a noun or noun phrase: My grandmother looks different from that old photograph of her.

The difference between the verbs lay and lie is one of English’s thornier cases of confusion. Both words involve something or someone in a horizontal position, but where the two words deviate has to do with who or what is horizontal—the subject of the verb (the one doing the action) or the direct object (the person or thing being acted upon).
To lay means “to put or place in a horizontal position,” and is a transitive verb, meaning it requires a direct object (e.g. I lay the quilt on the couch. I lay the book on the table). To lie means “to be in a horizontal, recumbent, or prostrate position” and “to rest, remain, be situated, etc.” Lie is an intransitive verb, meaning it does not take a direct object (e.g. I lie on the couch). If you’re the one lying comfortably on your back you want the verb lie, but if you can replace the verb with “place” or “put” (e.g. I place the book on the table) then use the verb lay.
Transitivity is a basic distinction between verbs, and the lay/lie distinction is by no means unique. You’ve probably already mastered when to use rise over raise, or sit instead of set. Lie and lay are no different—the words may be similar, but they are not interchangeable.
Unfortunately, the straightforward answers stop there. Once you move into the past tense it gets trickier. The past tense of lay is laid, but the past tense of lie takes the irregular form lay. So although lay and lie are two different verbs, lie in the past tense looks like lay. The past participle forms of lay and lie (formed with the helping verb “have”) are also distinct: lay maintains its past form laid , but lie takes the new ending lain. To complete the paradigm, the present participle form of lay is laying, and the present participle of lie is lying.
Let’s explore these nuances with a few example sentences:
Present
·    Lie:  The cat hops up on the bed and lies down.
·    Lay: You lay your book down and pet her.
Past
·     Lie:  Last night, you lay awake for hours, unable to go to sleep.
·     Lay:  Last night, you laid all of the ingredients on the kitchen counter for the upcoming feast.
Past participle
·     Lie:  You had just lain down to sleep when a noise jolted you awake.
·     Lay:  The book, which you had laid on the bedside table, had fallen.
Present participle
·     Lie: You are lying on the grass in the park and soaking up the sun.
·     Lay:  Your friend is laying a towel on the grass beside you.
So, how to remember? First, take comfort in the fact that few of us do. But it’s a good idea to know the distinction for formal writing (and to impress your friends with your grammar prowess).
Simple expressions like lay it on me are useful tools to remember that lay always takes a direct object (in this case “it”). And when in doubt, if you can replace the verb with “place” or “put” then the verb you want is lay. As for lie, its homophone lie (as in “to fib”) can actually help, because both forms of lie are intransitive. If you can replace the meaning of lie for the meaning of fib and the sentence is still grammatical, you’re using the correct term (e.g. I lie on the couch is grammatical; I lie the cat next to me is not.)

Have you ever heard someone use the word supposably and wondered what they meant? Maybe it’s a synonym for supposedly? Or a mistake? Supposedly and supposably are often confused, most famously by Joey from Friends. Both of these words come from the English word suppose, which is a combination of sup- (a variant of sub- meaning “slightly,” “imperfectly,” “nearly”) and pose meaning “to assert, state, or put forward.” Supposedly predates supposably by more than 100 years. What is the difference between these two words today?
Supposedly is an adverb that means “according to what is accepted or believed to be true; seemingly, purportedly.” It is typically used when someone wants to convey doubt, as in this recent op-ed from the New York Times: “The other risk, raised by some City Council members and advocates for the poor and working class, is that supposedly ‘affordable’ rents can still be too high for too many struggling New Yorkers.”
Though the strict grammarians at BuzzFeed have lamented that our world is ending because so many people use supposably, it is a valid word that is recorded in several dictionaries of English, including Dictionary.com. However, it has historically carried a slightly different meaning than supposedly; supposably means “conceivably.” Most people use it interchangeably with supposedly, which is technically incorrect (despite the fact that the meaning is typically understood).
In this 1845 example, the author considers scenarios in which a parent’s authority may be revoked: “The only justifiable, or supposeably proper, occasion for taking this business out of the hand of the parent [...] is, that he will not attend to it [...]. This is a case which may be supposed.”
In our research, we encountered a strange and extreme spike in the use of the word supposably between the 1860s and the 1930s in Google Ngram. This word never came close to the usage volume as supposedly, but the trend is notable.
Which one should you use? Since there is much ado about supposably and its meaning is very specific, we recommend that you stick with supposedly.

Both for all intents and purposes and for all intensive purposes are widely used to mean “for all practical purposes” or “virtually.” But which one is correct? The standard idiom is for all intents and purposes, not for all intensive purposes, though if you were to say these two forms out loud it might be hard to tell the difference between the two.
The cause of the confusion is rooted in this phonetic similarity. For all intensive purposes is what is known as an eggcorn, a label invented in the early 2000s by linguist Geoffrey Pullum to describe words or phrases that are misheard and consequently reform into a new word or phrase. Like, for example, hearing someone say “acorn” and thinking they said “eggcorn,” which is how this phenomenon got its name. The difference is stark when written down, but when spoken, the two words sound very much alike. Unlike mondegreens, eggcorns generally retain the same meaning as the original form, as in the case of for all intensive purposes.
The nonstandard for all intensive purposes seems to have first appeared in the 1950s according to the Google Books Ngram Viewer, while a version of the standard idiom, “to all intents, constructions, and purposes,” is cited in the OED as early as 1546. Historically, the dominant form of the idiom was to all intents and purposes, but over the past several decades that has gradually waned as the “for” form has increased in popularity.
The number of linguistic features that change due to a simple mishearing are numerous. The word apron, for instance, used to begin with the letter n, but the audible difference between “a napron” and “an apron” is so infinitesimal that speakers removed the n entirely, assuming it was part of the word “an” rather than “napron.” The word orange has a similar story, as do scads of other words and phrases across numerous other languages.
All in all, right and wrong can be a bit fuzzy in language, but for now, for all intents and purposes, you should opt for the proper idiom over the eggcorn alternative. This is especially important in your writing, where the nonstandard for all intensive purposes cannot be misheard