I'm curious if the order implies anything here. I'm pretty sure "Mom and Dad" is standard in English. The issue was hard for me to google, so I'm asking it here:  Is using "Dad" before "Mom" incorrect, or is it just not often seen/bad practice? I see both, but "Mom and Dad" is far more prevalent.  Edit: What puzzles me is that usually masculine comes before feminine. The given umich article on word order is quite instructive, and I have yet to read all of it. In Chinese and I think Spanish, the father comes first usually.  Now that I think of it, I think German features  "Mutter &amp; Vater" more often. Probably carried over into English.  Edit 2: Some  reveals that "Mom and Dad" is far more prevalent during 2005-2013.  It can make a difference though, as in an example I found: "I became my girls’ Dad and Mom when one was four years, the other three months old." This is quite clearly in the voice of the father, as shown .
48487
Is there a word or phrase for two nouns or adjectives joined by a conjunction (usually "and") in a fixed sequence?        alive and well           fast and furious   hat and gloves   pen and pencil   law and order   wit and wisdom   salt and pepper   bacon and eggs   horse and carriage   Adam and Eve   ladies and gentlemen   loud and clear   heads or tails   yes or no   dead or alive
61543
Tom, who was working for my father in the 1990s, is now living in Ohio.   Is it correct or should it be in Past Simple? I think it is correct because it is an action which was in progress in the past and also we have the "1990s" expression which refers to a duration.
11182
I want to talk to someone about the house that my wife and I own.  Saying, for example, "My wife's and my house is awesome," sounds a bit funny to me.  What's the best way to express this?  Clarification  I'm asking specifically about the grammar of multiple nouns in possessive form.  I'm particularly curious if it's possible to do this with a first-person pronoun (me).  I am capable of rephrasing this in other ways - my question is not how to express the idea, but about this particular grammatical construction, if it is even legal.
57094
I don't know if this is a good question. But as far as I know, and as I do it, American English also say "after" other than "past" in expressing times.   For example, a quarter after six instead of, a quarter past six as in British English.  The other difference I know, so far, is that the British use dots to separate "hour" and "minute" in digital times like "08.35" while Americans use a colon e.g; "08:35".  So is what I know, so far, correct? Or are there any other differences that I don't know about?
105671
Yoda  speaks using the OSV (object, subject, verb) word ordering     Much to learn, you still have.   rather the SVO ordering used in English      You still have much to learn.   How is this dealt with in translations to other languages, particularly languages which don't use SVO word order, for example Japanese or Albanian? Do they just switch the words to OSV order? Does that even make sense in most other languages?
37880
I have seen them both in my reference book, which is written by a native speaker. I wonder why there are two different phrases to describe the same meaning and am looking forward to some reasonable details to explain why this is so.
52730
Rarely do we hear "should have gone" in common speech.  Some background: My father immigrated to the US in the late 60s. He learned English first overseas, British English. Then he studied extensively in America.   He always corrected me and my brothers on us saying "you/I/they should have went".  And after the 2,762nd time, finally I say "should have gone"  The reason I think it's a valid question is that go/gone/went are pretty ABC words. My guess is that the contraction "should've" is partly to blame - i.e. we speak so fast that we pick the more natural-sounding thing.
14645
Is this the correct use of an apostrophe when showing a name and relationship?     When was your father, Robert's, wedding?   Thanks!
95541
Given the sentence: "A mother beat up her daughter because she was drunk".  Is there a grammar rule that can help resolve the ambiguity of whether "drunk" refers to the mother or the daughter?  Update: The question isn't about how to rewrite the sentence. If you found the sentence already written and had no access to the author in order to sort out the ambiguity, what would be the most correct interpretation?
51413
From Grammar Workshop: "Lydia's father is a master chef he oversees the kitchen at a five-star restaurant."   Can someone explain whether to use a semicolon or a colon?
98871
I have seen the word 'only' placed both before and after a noun. Where should the word 'only' go in this sentence? Is it the writer's choice?   If you have attended every lesson, only the songs need to be rehearsed at home. If you have attended every lesson, the songs only need to be rehearsed at home.
65178
Does it sound unnatural to you (natives) when people skip 's' ending of the verb in 3rd person? Heard it many times (e.g. in 50 cent songs - she go, she have, etc.) and always wondered how much it sounds ok.
56495
It's convention and polite to always list yourself last in a list. I say "John and I went to the store" and not "I and John went to the store."  So does that mean that I should always list myself last, even in the case when the pronoun that represents me is first person, plural (i.e. "us" or "we")? In my case, I'm writing a recommendation letter about my experience on a team with "John," who is the highlight of the letter. I hit a point where I was about to write something similar to:     John and we got a lot of experience working on the project.   or     That project's experience really benefited John and us.   Clearly, he is mentally separated from the others of us who were on the team, at least in this context, so I was just wondering if there were some grammatical conventions to govern this situation.
71266
In this case what is correct?        Keep Tom and I updated.      or         Keep Tom and me updated.      I understand that me is an object pronoun. And therefore I feel the second option is correct.  Especially, because I would say "Keep him updated" and also "Keep me updated". Instead of "Keep he updated" or "Keep I updated". But something about saying "Keep him and me updated" feels wrong.  However I am not sure, because several people have told me that in this case I is the correct option because it is being used in conjunction with a name (Tom) and not a pronoun. Is that correct?
9633
I just stumbled upon a :     My wife and I's seafood collaboration dinner. How does it look?   Sure enough, the top comment immediately points out that it should be "my wife's and my". However, a cross-post to the Grammar subreddit produced :     It's fine as it is written. "my wife and I" is a noun phrase, functioning as a subjective pronoun in the singular and made possessive with the apostrophe. It is exactly the same as "our".      It seems weird because you would never use "I's" on its own but it is not on its own here - it is part of a noun phrase.   That's a rather intriguing argument. Does it hold any water?
109858
I have read the excellent answers to  - my question is specifically about usage.   Is there a best practice for deciding between the variants geometric and geometrical in writing? A  shows that geometrical was more popular until about 1965, when they switched. What grammatical rules, if any, would be relevant here?
59146
In short, why is it not oneteen and twoteen, and we start at thirteen in English?  In another thread, I supposed that despite that fact that people have ten fingers, amounts of items leading up to and including twelve were more common because twelve is more easily divisible evenly by two, three, four, and six. Both English and German (which are related) switch to a -teen (-zehn auf Deutsch) ending after twelve. Based on that thread, so does Norwegian. Could this be the explanation?  Looking at other languages (Arabic, Japanese, even a related romance language of French), this doesn't seem to apply, and you'd think that if something so fundamental as divisibility were the explanation, we'd see a more universal distribution across them.