English q

[karlhenning]

"get" is perfectly acceptable in spoken English, and it's broader in meaning than simply "persuade"; e.g. "I can't get this piece of junk computer to work!"

Right; the arts of persuasion hardly apply to junk! ; )

[Ten thumbs]

"get" is perfectly acceptable in spoken English, and it's broader in meaning than simply "persuade"; e.g. "I can't get this piece of junk computer to work!"

Persuade was only a suggestion. Get is so broad in meaning as to be practically meaningless.

[Scarpia]

Persuade was only a suggestion. Get is so broad in meaning as to be practically meaningless.

You just don't get the meaning of the word get.  "I can't get him to drive more slowly" is similar but not identical to "I can't persuade him to drive more slowly"   The proper meaning of get is "obtain for myself" and "get him to drive more slowly" is more like "I can't force him to give in to my wishes and drive more slowly."  There is an implication of obtaining a concession, rather than persuading.

[MishaK]

Persuade was only a suggestion. Get is so broad in meaning as to be practically meaningless.

Its meaning in context is perfectly clear. Get = obtain [a result].

[Lethevich]

Get is simply the more informal of the two words - it's a more natural choice for casual conversation.

[Ten thumbs]

I agree that 'get' is fine in conversation because any misunderstanding can be removed immediately.
The 'it' in "I don't get it" can be clarified if necessary.

So "I can't get this piece of junk computer to work!" isn't confused with the message that your car has broken down.

[Lethevich]

Is preferable pronounced:

pref-rable
prefer-able

[CD]

I mostly hear "pref-rable"

but weirdly I always hear "preferably" pronounced "préfer-ably"

[rhomboid]

In

threshold

is the h mute?

[karlhenning]

In

threshold

is the h mute?

You hear it both ways (both ways are considered correct).

[Gurn Blanston]

You hear it both ways (both ways are considered correct).

I don't know, Karl, I think tress-hold sounds rather silly. Just sayin'...   

[rhomboid]

Could you help me with the grammar in this question?:

Is it possible Earth to be an experiment of ETs?
Is it possible for Earth be an experiment of ETs?
Is it possible that Earth be an experiment of ETs?
Is it possible that Earth is an experiment of ETs?

[chasmaniac]

Yes, it is possible that earth is an extraterrestrial experiment.

[Karl Henning]

Possible, but unlikely.

[rhomboid]

Possible, but unlikely.

Which is the correct grammar? Thanks.

[Karl Henning]

Which is the correct grammar? Thanks.

Yes, it is possible that earth is an extraterrestrial experiment.

[rhomboid]

Ok, then this is the correct question:

Is it possible that Earth is an experiment of ETs?

I thought the correct was "be".

[Karl Henning]

Ok, then this is the correct question:

Is it possible that Earth is an experiment of ETs?

That is correct; the subjunctive mood is very rare in English.

[PaulSC]

How do we know that this question isn't part of the experiment?

[chasmaniac]

I'm concerned about the genitive noun "ETs". It's inelegant and its point better expressed by an adjective. If you must have a noun there, try this form:

Is it possible that earth is an experiment conducted by extraterrestrials?