I am writing a book about illicit antiquities. Some of my resources spell this word, artefact; others, artifact. Is one right and the other wrong?
123739
Is there any usage preference between artifact and artefact?  My understanding was that an artifact was properly applied to physical, historical objects, while an artefact was more correct for more abstract, intangible, error-ish concepts, for example a compression artefact.   However, the couple of   I checked suggested that the difference was merely spelling, and that both were usable for both definitions.
124163
I usually use the plural form after "some."   Example:     I bought some books about France   But I would also say some source states that France is best toured in fall.  Is there a specific grammar rule? May I say that in the second sentence I am really thinking at a very specific source, so singular is needed?
26490
I am writing a literature review. My question is which sentence is correct?   Most of the existing work focus on... Most of the existing work focuses on ... Most of the existing studies focus on ...   Thanks
81935
The vast majority of the time when I see the word "myriad" it is in a sentence like "He had a myriad of things."  However I don't like the extraneous words so I normally use it like "He had myriad things." My boss corrected the latter usage while editing something I wrote.  I averted an argument by simply changing the sentence to "He had various things." but was I incorrect?
92630
In a sentence like     Should we host them on imgur et cetera?   where I want to abbreviate the "et cetera", what is the correct punctuation? Using a period after the "etc." like mid sentence usages seems wrong as it looks like a full stop when I read it.     Should we host them on imgur etc.?   Or is this the correct usage?
120876
When I have these facts,   French coins were not found in the ruin. German coins were not found in the ruin.   which of these sentences are grammatically correct?  1.     No French and German coins were found in the ruin.   2.     No French or German coins were found in the ruin.   3.     No french nor German coins were found in the ruin.   I think 1 is correct but I'm not sure.  By the way, I can also say     Neither German nor French coins were found in the ruin.   Also, when you have an additional fact   Italian coins were not found in the ruin   which of these statements are grammatically correct?  1.     No French, German and Italian coins were found in the ruin.   2.     No French, German or Italian coins were found in the ruin.   3.     None of French, German and Italian coins were found in the ruin.   4.     None of French, German or Italian coins were found in the ruin.   Thanks,
110139
I'm trying to improve on the last part of this sentence:      Mirabeau pointed out that the text was not his, although he did not provide the names of its authors, either.   My first instinct is:      Mirabeau pointed out that the text was not his, although he neither provided the names of its authors.   But something feels wrong here, and I can't explain why.   Any ideas?
41842
I remember when staying a few months in the US years ago that I saw some people using the abbreviations below. However, I can't exactly remember in which contexts I encountered them, (whether I saw my teachers using them when writing something on the board, in papers or in personal notes etc.)  So my question is: Are those abbreviations below commonly used and in which contexts is it okay to use them (e.g. formal texts, personal notes,... or better only used in personal note taking?)         w/o without   w/ with   b/c because      PS: Are there similar abbreviations that are commonly used?
108299
Over on Stackoverflow, I keep seeing questions wherein posters say:  *I have an item named SoAndSo (a table, a file, etc.).  Shouldn't it be:  *I have an item called SoAndSo.  Is "named" an acceptable word in this context?  Are those words specific to a particular English speakers, e.g. UK vs. USA vs. Australia, etc.?
74979
As a programmer, I have no problem with seeing or using "and/or" in technical documentation. For example,     I can upvote an answer that satisfies me and/or mark it as accepted.   That's perfectly good English to me. However, if I were writing a novel, or even just an essay, or — heaven forbid — a poem, "and/or" would seem extremely out of place.  My question is, what should I be using instead? (I solemnly swear I will not use that knowledge to actually write a poem.)
7400
I was reviewing an English text as an exercise, English not being my mother tongue, and I came to this sentence:     (...) with the two other articles that conclude several things about customers e.g.. It is (...)   Note the double periods at the end of the sentence. Now I've got a gut feeling that this isn't right, but I can't find any rules about it. Is it even 'allowed' to put 'e.g.' at the end of a sentence, where something like 'etc.' would suffice?
28407
Here are my constructions:        Only minimal signs of corrosion on the vehicle body surface which have been removed.   Only minimal signs of corrosion on the vehicle's body surface which have been removed.      So my question is, should I use 'vehicle body' or 'vehicle's body'?
7481
Is this the proper way to use two possessive nouns in a row?     I am going over to Lauren's parents' house this evening.   or     The store's manager's niece was quite attractive.   What about three?*     The United States Army's general's wife's dog is on the lamb, somebody stop it.   *Three seems both unrealistic, and in the specific example I used you could make a case for adding a fourth United State's Army's but I think that seems even more unrealistic.  Additionally, I would never write this in any sort of setting other than the purpose of knowing what the rules are.  Thanks in advance, I apologize in advance if this is duplicate
18450
My colleagues are in the design department of a given product, and when asked to add that information to the e-mail signature, they have written:     ProductName's Design   I'm objecting that the usage of the Saxon genitive there is incorrect, because the product is neither a person or animal owning anything, and Design in this context is not even a property of the product (Maybe I would admit the Saxon genitive in a context like "I think ProductName's design is not fail-safe"), but an activity.  Am I right? ^_^  update:  After reading the answers and the comments, I think the issue has been clarified a little bit. In this case ProductName is acting as an adjective qualifying Design [Department], so that's the actual reason for not using the genitive case (rather than the product being a "weak entity" unable to possess things, that is merely an stylistic rule of thumb).
4654
I can’t for the life of me figure out where to use a and where to use the — and where there is no article at all. Is there a simple rule of thumb to memorize?   The standard rule you always hear:     “If a person knows which item you are talking about then use "the"   . . . doesn’t clear things up for me, as I have no idea whether or not they know.
19987
Our proofreader, a native speaker of American English, just won't let me use this word. Every single time I try to sneak it onto one of our sites, she replaces it with three times. Now, I do realize that thrice is quirky, but how quirky is it really? Is it awfully archaic? Is there a chance that native speakers won't understand it at all?  I know I could just search a corpus or five, but I don't feel like looking at cold stats (or the , for that matter). Instead, I am asking members of this community for their very personal, highly subjective, extremely biased opinions.
22106
Consider the following sentence:     We assume that the individual(s) possesses some general knowledge of the rules of football.   Is "possesses" correct there? Should it be "possess"? Is the rule more complex than always using one or the other?