How Do Social and Economic Factors Influence Fertility Forecasts?

[momentum]

Please see this English text

In the the last two decades,corporate america have placed a number of entrepreneurs in the limelight who have marched to the tune of a different drummer.

I don't get the wording 'to the tune of a different drummer' here . I don't get analogy here .
Is not drummer beats with hammers to correct tuning of drums . but how does that relate here?
I don't get the overall meaning.

any english native speaker or someone knows better english could you please explain this ?

 

[lisab]

You should http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/" ...I hope it's useful to you.

 

[momentum]

You should http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/" ...I hope it's useful to you.

Thanks for the link...I am aware of that site though :)

anyway, did you get the matching ? I pasted the search key 'tune of a different drummer' over there but no record returned...Let me know if you used any other keywords for this and got matching.

 

[tiny-tim]

Hi momentum!

(It's usually "march to the beat of a different drummer" )

It means to march at a different speed.

(And the drummer is the person who plays the drum, not the person who tunes it.)

 

[lisab]

I am aware of that site :)

anyway, did you got the matching ? I pasted the search key 'tune of a different drummer' but no record returned...Let me know if you used any other keywords for this and got matching ?

It's usually used as "march to the tune of a different drummer" and it means to be different, unique...often quirky.

 

[momentum]

It's usually used as "march to the tune of a different drummer" and it means to be different, unique...often quirky.

still have some hesitation ... not completely clear . Let me explain the hiccups

it says "different drummer" ( // drummer are the person who beats the drums ... different drummer ...so many drummers here say logically )

I have seen republic day celebration in our country on TV , troops march forward with the beats of different drummer (?) ( many drummers are there in the troops ) ...is it same thing ?Now coming to back to the usage here . it says ...a number of entrepreneurs in the limelight who have marched to the tune of a different drummer

umm ...now things are not clear ... entrepreneurs are marching forward with the tune/beat of a drummer ...confused here . by the way I don't like the word 'tune' ...like 'beat' though...unfortunately they are using 'tune' here.

any comments ?

 

[tiny-tim]

… I have seen republic day celebration in our country on TV , troops march forward with the beats of different drummer (?) ( many drummers are there in the troops ) ...is it same thing ? …

Yes … it's like the cartoon of someone watching a parade and saying "Look, my son is the only one who's in step! "

Soldiers march to the beat of a drum.

So, if one soldier is out of step, he must be marching to the beat of a different (imaginary) drum.

 

[BobG]

The proper phrase is "beat of a different drummer" since a person marching to a drum of a different tune would be indistinguishable from the other marchers as long as the beat was the same.

People imitate what has been successful for other people. To the point that schools even teach these things to their students, meaning the overwhelming majority of people in a career field or a business wind up doing things exactly the same.

Their processes become so similar that it almost seems as if they're all marching in step to the same drummer.

If one person is doing something radically different from his competitiors, he stands out in the same way a person marching out of step would (Except if you were actually talking about people marching across a field, it wouldn't be polite to say the person marching out of step was an idiot. It would be kinder to say he must be listening to the beat of a different drummer - some imaginary drummer only he can hear.)

In other words, if a person is marching to the beat of a different drummer, then he's doing things in a non-standard way; doing things in a way other people wouldn't try.

 

[Evo]

Momentum, remember what I told you, no more new threads for these questions, I will allow you to do this as long as all questions keep going into the "same" thread, maybe you thought that meant going forward, so I will let this one slide.

Lisab is correct, all the quote means is that the person does their own thing, they don't follow the rules everyone else does, and they might be considered different or unusual.

They probably got the idea for the saying from Thoreau's book Walden.

If a man does not keep pace with his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music which he hears, however measured or far away.
Henry David Thoreau

Or from a popular song by Linda Rondstadt.

You are taking the words too literally, and if you do that, you will miss the intended meaning.

Edit: I see BobG has provided an excellent explanation.

 

[momentum]

Momentum, remember what I told you no more new threads for these questions, I will allow you to do this as long as all questions keep going into the same thread, maybe you though that meant going forward, so I will let this one slide.

yea, I remember . the reason I did not was this would become highly inconvenient for others to post because it would be hard to find the start and end of the discussion really . As these questions are varied hence the complete structure will be a chaos. And people will loose interest browsing pages after pages and post replies. So keeping them separate will simplify the life a lot...you must be knowing this technically.
Had it been a single question , there would have been definitely no problem at all. Anyway, I just raised my concern . If you are still stringent about your rules , then I have to quit from this forum because I'll loose interest gradually here for no replies. good thing is every time I get some nice replies and so I come back ... to learn more...to do something better...I understand as you are the Mod/Forum owner , your words are the last talk here.

Yea, just read BobG , Lisab Explanation ...things are making sense now...good discussion.
Thanks guys

 

[Evo]

yea, I remember . the reason I did not was this would become highly inconvenient for others to post because it would be hard to find the start and end of the discussion really . As these questions are varied hence the complete structure will be a chaos. And people will loose interest browsing pages after pages and post replies. you must be knowing this technically.
Had it been a single question , there would have been definitely no problem at all. Anyway, I just raised my concern . If you are still stringent about your rules , then I have to quit from this forum because I'll loose interest gradually here for no replies. good thing is every time I get some nice replies and so I come back ... to learn more...to do something better...I understand as you are the Mod/Forum owner , your words are the last talk here.

Yea, just read BobG , Lisab Explanation ...things are making sense now...good discussion.
Thanks guys

I can't have you cluttering the forum with a separate thread for each one sentence definition that you want. Every time you ask a new question your thread will be bumped up and people will see it and respond, if they are so inclined.

You may have a single thread for your questions. Other people confine themselves to single threads where they post multiple new entries, you must do the same. Unless it is an entirely new topic that warrants a new thread for a new discussion, please continue to post all new definition requests in *this* thread.

 

[momentum]

Ok. I'll check it out .

though , I doubt this system. but anyway , let me experience this . So far all of my threads have been replied adequately . If this new system works the same way then I have no issue at all. After all , learning is the purpose ... it does not matter in what form . I accept this proposal . I'll post new question in this thread and will observe the progress.
Thanks for the suggestion.

 

[BobG]

They probably got the idea for the saying from Thoreau's book Walden.



Or from a popular song by Linda Rondstadt.

You are taking the words too literally, and if you do that, you will miss the intended meaning.

Edit: I see BobG has provided an excellent explanation.

I'd take quotes from Thoreau and Rondstadt over my explanation any day.

 

[momentum]

Please see this English text...

enterpreneurs showed that bigger isn’t always better and that the legacy systems and bureaucratic practices of most established firms can be like anvils that keep them from keeping pace with changes in the marketplace

Is not http://www.wordwebonline.com/search.pl?w=anvil"means 'iron block'

what it is doing here . ... see the usage 'like anvils that keep them from keeping pace with changes in the marketplace'

Not quite clear as to what does it mean by 'keeping pace with changes in the marketplace'

Can anyone understand this english part ? Can you please explain this .

 

[lisab]

Please see this English text...

enterpreneurs showed that bigger isn’t always better and that the legacy systems and bureaucratic practices of most established firms can be like anvils that keep them from keeping pace with changes in the marketplace

Is not http://www.wordwebonline.com/search.pl?w=anvil"means 'iron block'

what it is doing here . ... see the usage 'like anvils that keep them from keeping pace with changes in the marketplace'

Not quite clear as to what does it mean by 'keeping pace with changes in the marketplace'

Can anyone understand this english part ? Can you please explain this .

That's an unusual use of the word 'anvil,' so I understand your confusion. I take it to mean 'a burden' in this context.

 

[Evo]

An anvil is heavy and difficult to move. What they're saying is that old pratices can tie you down and/or hold you back.

In other words, prevent you from changing, moving forward, etc...

Were there no anvils in your culture?

 

[rewebster]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/KPvqFkCtAqw&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/KPvqFkCtAqw&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

 

[momentum]

Ok... Feeling better now...that makes sense now.
Thanks for the post.

 

[BobG]

Please see this English text...

enterpreneurs showed that bigger isn’t always better and that the legacy systems and bureaucratic practices of most established firms can be like anvils that keep them from keeping pace with changes in the marketplace

Is not http://www.wordwebonline.com/search.pl?w=anvil"means 'iron block'

what it is doing here . ... see the usage 'like anvils that keep them from keeping pace with changes in the marketplace'

Not quite clear as to what does it mean by 'keeping pace with changes in the marketplace'

Can anyone understand this english part ? Can you please explain this .

What country's English are these people using? "Tune of a different drum"; carrying around "anvils"; ...

The American terms would be "anchor" or "a ball and chain". Either way, the article means that the burdens of their business practices can sometimes outweigh the benefits.

From the little snippet you've provided, I assume the article says these disadvantages are inherent in big organizations and, therefore, unavoidable. They need standardization in order for the different departments to work together. The larger the company, the harder it is to maintain that standardization and the more bureaucratic overhead a company carries around trying to maintain that standardization.

Humans work best in small groups (in fact, humans could be considered to be small group primates). The larger the group, the harder it is for us to make it work very efficiently.

 

[momentum]

What country's English are these people using? "Tune of a different drum"; carrying around "anvils"; ...

The American terms would be "anchor" or "a ball and chain". Either way, the article means that the burdens of their business practices can sometimes outweigh the benefits.

From the little snippet you've provided, I assume the article says these disadvantages are inherent in big organizations and, therefore, unavoidable. They need standardization in order for the different departments to work together. The larger the company, the harder it is to maintain that standardization and the more bureaucratic overhead a company carries around trying to maintain that standardization.

Humans work best in small groups (in fact, humans could be considered to be small group primates). The larger the group, the harder it is for us to make it work very efficiently.

This is from a book

Extraordinary Entrepreneurship: The Professional’s Guide to Starting an Exceptional Enterprise, by Stephen C. Harper (Wiley Publishing, 2004).

I am a voracious reader . love to read books , journals , articles of interests .

 

[Ben Niehoff]

People in the business world are notorious for using mixed metaphors, or simply poor metaphors, and are especially notorious for being unable to express themselves except by using a fixed collection of figures-of-speech. Don't worry if you don't understand them at first; they often sound like nonsense to native speakers as well.

If you keep reading, though, it should be easy enough to learn. Like I said, there is a fixed collection of metaphors that businesspeople use; they are not creative enough to come up with new ones. So once you learn the current stock of catchphrases, you're good to go.

 

[momentum]

Today’s entrepreneurs have been heralded for having the same qualities exhibited by this country’s first colonists. The colonists had contempt for the way things were done, and they weren’t afraid to break away from the establishment. The entrepreneurs who are heralded by the media created their own firms so they could be free to pursue new opportunities.[/color]

Can you please take a look at those lines .
Not getting the clear idea because of these two bad wordings...heralded for and heralded by


I did a look up for 'herald' here http://www.google.co.in/dictionary?aq=f&langpair=en|en&hl=en&q=herald

but things are not matched contextually in those two places hence not the getting essence of those lines...but I smell something there.

Also,any idea on that 'first colonists' history talked about here ?

Thanks for your time. ...any comments are appreciated.

 

[dotman]

Hey there,

Looking at the site you linked, the first few definitions for 'herald' are not the way it is used here... here they use it as in 'praise voraciously', as your site lists as a later definition.

If you substitute the word 'praised' for the word 'heralded', you should get the meaning.

Finally, by 'first colonists', the book is referring to the pilgrims who first came to America in the 1600s or so. The stereotype being that those colonists were willing to do what it took to get away from the establishment that held them back, and were able to fend for themselves, and make their own way. Much like an entrepreneur must. Or so this passage would have you believe.

 

[tiny-tim]

"heralded"

Today’s entrepreneurs have been heralded for having the same qualities exhibited by this country’s first colonists. The colonists had contempt for the way things were done, and they weren’t afraid to break away from the establishment. The entrepreneurs who are heralded by the media created their own firms so they could be free to pursue new opportunities.[/color]

d, the first few definitions for 'herald' are not the way it is used here... here they use it as in 'praise voraciously', as your site lists as a later definition.

If you substitute the word 'praised' for the word 'heralded', you should get the meaning.

Yes, those lines in blue are bad.

"Herald" means to announce, or praise, something/someone that is coming in the future (or has just arrived).

(from "herald", a man with a trumpet who announces the arrival of someone important)

You shouldn't herald something which has already happened.

 

[momentum]

Yes, those lines in blue are bad.
Today’s entrepreneurs have been heralded for having the same qualities exhibited by this country’s first colonists. The colonists had contempt for the way things were done, and they weren’t afraid to break away from the establishment. The entrepreneurs who are heralded by the media created their own firms so they could be free to pursue new opportunities.
[/color]

"herald" has been used twice here ... both of them with same meaning ? that's the biggest concern to me .

I am rephrasing this way..


Today’s entrepreneurs have been PRAISED for having the same qualities exhibited by this country’s first colonists. The colonists had contempt for the way things were done, and they weren’t afraid to break away from the establishment. The entrepreneurs who are PRAISED by the media created their own firms so they could be free to pursue new opportunities.
[/color]

is that the correct version now . I can understand this version well...if not , can you please put down the alternative easy phrase there.

 

[f95toli]

I think you picked a bad book..
I am not a native English speaker, but even I can see that the author just seems to be using "big words" here and there in an attempt to make himself look clever(proably using the "synonyms" function in Word). This wouldn't neccesarily be a bad thing if it wasn't for the fact that he is using some of the words in the wrong context.

And yes, the second version looks fine.

 

[dotman]

"herald" has been used twice here ... both of them with same meaning ? that's the biggest concern to me .

Yes, they absolutely have the exact same meaning in both cases.

I am rephrasing this way..

Today’s entrepreneurs have been PRAISED for having the same qualities exhibited by this country’s first colonists. The colonists had contempt for the way things were done, and they weren’t afraid to break away from the establishment. The entrepreneurs who are PRAISED by the media created their own firms so they could be free to pursue new opportunities.
[/color]

is that the correct version now . I can understand this version well...if not , can you please put down the alternative easy phrase there.

Yeah, that's pretty close... I mean it's not exactly the same, because for one, they aren't exact synonyms, for one because of the reason Tiny-Tim wrote... they're not using the word exactly properly here, and for another reason I go into at the bottom.

Presently, though, I can't think of any better word, and you should get the meaning close enough to move on.

Don't let this next part confuse you, but the way they're using 'heralded' here is more like (and you can't substitute this directly) 'sing the praises of'. Now no one literally sings anymore, as they did in the olden days, so that phrase today means more like 'exclaim to other people the great things about'. So if something is 'heralded', it means people are talking, approvingly, about what is coming or just came (although here, it is slightly mis-used in that the thing (entrepeneurs) has already come). So when you substitute 'praised', it's pretty close, but the new version with the word 'praised' implies something that isn't the case-- let me give an example:

The entrepreneurs who are PRAISED by the media created their own firms so they could be free to pursue new opportunities.[/color]

So this line implies that the media are directly calling out the entrepeneurs for honor. For example, that the newspaper has put out an article that has the line, "Entrepeneurs, we honor you for your courage and dedication to your work!" Heralding, on the other hand, is not so direct; it wouldn't really be addressed directly to the person or thing being heralded; it would instead be addressed to all of the other folks who are listening. So in the original case:

The entrepreneurs who are heralded by the media created their own firms so they could be free to pursue new opportunities.[/color]

This would be more akin to our fictional newspaper putting out an article that has the line, "Readers, entrepeneurs are out there, every day, showing great courage and dedication to their work." It's addressed to the reades, not to the entrepeneurs themselves.

Subtle differences in language interest me, which is why this is so long. Don't let any of this confuse you; if it doesn't make sense, ignore it, it's not necessary to get the gist of what they're saying here.

 

[momentum]

<scrapped>

 

[momentum]

Please see this ..


One of the factors that the IRS considers when deciding whether to audit a tax return
is the dollar amount of the deduction claimed for business travel. Salespeople and self-employed entrepreneurs often claim large deductions for mileage on their tax returns. If the IRS does decide to audit such a return, one of the things the auditors expect to see is a mileage log.


whats is a 'mileage log'

 

[Evo]

Please see this ..


One of the factors that the IRS considers when deciding whether to audit a tax return
is the dollar amount of the deduction claimed for business travel. Salespeople and self-employed entrepreneurs often claim large deductions for mileage on their tax returns. If the IRS does decide to audit such a return, one of the things the auditors expect to see is a mileage log.


whats is a 'mileage log'

It's a record of a trip, usually consisting of the date, the miles, the mode of transportation, plane, car, etc... and the reason for the trip.

 

[tiny-tim]

log

Log (or log-book) is the book kept by the captain of a ship, recording everything that happens, and in particular speed, compass direction, wind direction, weather, and other ships nearby.

If there is a trial, the log is produced as evidence. If there is no log, that counts against the person who should have kept it.

So log is also the name of any record which the law requires you to keep … in this case, a record of mileage (ie, the number of miles traveled on each journey).

 

[momentum]

Here they used as 'for mileage on their tax returns'.

also 'auditors expect to see is a mileage log.'

it does not look like any record trip now.

 

[Evo]

Here they used as 'for mileage on their tax returns'.

also 'auditors expect to see is a mileage log.'

it does not look like any record trip now.

It is a record of a trip as I described above. I've had to keep mileage logs for my job for over 20 years.

 

[momentum]

Oh...Ok ... I got it now .

 

[momentum]

Please see this text...

Diseases that quickly kill more than 75 percent of their infected hosts usually die off with their host’s extinction.

I am not able to conceptualize this. Can you give some example to get this point . my troubled area is "die off with their host’s extinction" .

an example will be better to grasp this . I am not getting the connection properly.

any comments ?

 

[lisab]

Please see this text...

Diseases that quickly kill more than 75 percent of their infected hosts usually die off with their host’s extinction.

I am not able to conceptualize this. Can you give some example to get this point . my troubled area is "die off with their host’s extinction" .

an example will be better to grasp this . I am not getting the connection properly.

any comments ?

That doesn't sound like it was written by a native speaker...just a hunch. But I think I understand what the writer is trying to say.

I think it means: if a disease kills its victims too quickly, then there will not be enough time for it to spread it to new victims. The outbreak will die out quickly, in that case.

 

[DaveC426913]

I think it means: if a disease kills its victims too quickly, then there will not be enough time for it to spread it to new victims. The outbreak will die out quickly, in that case.

It would help to have a little more context in the quote, so we can tell why the author has stated it, and thus tell his meaning.

That being said, I agree with lisab's interpretation.

Diseases that do not immediately kill their hosts (and thus themelves shortly thereafter) will tend to be selected-for. A disease that kills its host too quickly will not have much change to propogate.

BTW, the "diseases" in this context are limited to living invaders: bacteria, parasites, virii. Diabetes and cancer are diseases too, but they are not alive and so can not modify their behaviours to affect their hosts.

 

[momentum]

<scrapped>

 

[momentum]

do they differ in meaning ?

john, who passed the test, was elated.john who passed the test was elated.


see , I just removed commas in the second . I probably have seen this kind of usage in newspaper. do they differ in meaning ?

 

[DaveC426913]

do they differ in meaning ?

john, who passed the test, was elated.


john who passed the test was elated.


see , I just removed commas in the second . I probably have seen this kind of usage in newspaper. do they differ in meaning ?

The former is correct grammar. Dropping commas can be bad, often resulting in ambiguity or misrepresentation (in the same vein as the famous "Eats Shoots and Leaves") but I can't see any subject/object ambiguity that creeps in in the latter. Though it does read a bit awkward.

Verdict: you should stick to the former, though I can't cite you for an offense for the latter.

 

[momentum]

The former is correct grammar. Dropping commas can be bad, often resulting in ambiguity or misrepresentation (in the same vein as the famous "Eats Shoots and Leaves") but I can't see any subject/object ambiguity that creeps in in the latter. Though it does read a bit awkward.

Verdict: you should stick to the former, though I can't cite you for an offense for the latter.

Ok ..thanks ...glad to know this info.

 

[DaveC426913]

Ok ..thanks ...glad to know this info.

Do you know the story of the Panda that walks into a restaurant with a loaded gun?

 

[momentum]

Do you know the story of the Panda that walks into a restaurant with a loaded gun?

No...why ?

 

[DaveC426913]

A panda walks into a restaurant, sits down and orders a sandwich. He eats the sandwich, pulls out a gun, and shoots the waiter dead.

As the panda stands up to leave, the manager shouts, “Hey! Where are you going? You just shot my waiter and you didn’t pay for your sandwich!”

The panda yells back at the manager, “Hey man, I’m a PANDA! Look it up!”

The manager opens his dictionary and sees the following definition for panda: “A tree dwelling marsupial of Asian origin, characterized by distinct black and white coloring. Eats shoots and leaves.”

 

[momentum]

ha ha ha ...good stuff

 

[momentum]

Here I am writing a English in two ways ..

Sam and Frank founded an organic plastic company, and they are now the largest
employers in the county.
Sam and Frank founded an organic plastic company which is now the largest employer in
the county.


are these correct ? I experimented this way just to know whether I can use 'employer' to persons as well as for a company . In first place I used for persons and in second place its for a company .

comments please.

 

[lisab]

Here I am writing a English in two ways ..

Sam and Frank founded an organic plastic company, and they are now the largest
employers in the county.


Sam and Frank founded an organic plastic company which is now the largest employer in
the county.

are these correct ? I experimented this way just to know whether I can use 'employer' to persons as well as for a company . In first place I used for persons and in second place its for a company .

comments please.

In the first sentence, change "employers" to "employer": "they are the largest employer".

Btw, what exactly is an organic plastic company...is that like free-range plastic ?

 

[DaveC426913]

In the first sentence, change "employers" to "employer": "they are the largest employer".

I'm not sure I agree.

 

[lisab]

I'm not sure I agree.

Hmm...now that I think about it, I would change it to:

Sam and Frank founded an organic plastic company, and it is now the largest employer in the county.

 

[momentum]

I'm not sure I agree.

just would like to know ...why ? want to listen your voice.

In fact , me too was not happy ...my reason was "they" is a plural ...so expecting "employers" instead of "employer".