Yes, generally in the sense of "to give birth to". The eggs of amphibians, especially frogs are known as spawn.
The original meaning of "spawn" was, indeed, to deposit eggs into the water, hoping that they will be fertilized by a male, the way fish, amphibians, crustaceans and other water-breathing animals reproduce. Mushrooms do something like this too, but don't ask me to describe it. Since spawning typically releases a great volume of eggs at once, "spawning" came to be used as an insult to women who give birth to a large number of children. (Not all at once of course, since our biology doesn't work that way. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! ) Ultimately, the word was rehabilitated, and now can be used in polite company to describe, for example, an author who writes two books reliably every year, or a company that invents a new product every few weeks. Nonetheless, the word is still used in its original derogatory sense: a large number of children born to the same woman.
carnage = great and usually bloody slaughter or injury (as in battle) Why did he use the word carnage?
I believe you are reflecting US usage. In the UK, in my experience, in writing and orally, the term has typically a neutral or positive tone. The only negative connotation I can think of off hand would be in paperback horror novels: "the devil's spawn".
While the original meaning of the word refers to the death and dismemberment of humans, it is now used colloquially to mean any kind of extremely terrible destruction.
Are ox and bull the same? How about buffalo? I know cow, we have cow here, not meant for milk but to be slaughtered for meat. Are mule and donkey the same?
Ox and Bull: A bull is a male member of the bovine family, while an Ox is a bull that has reached full maturity and has been castrated. They are usually put to different uses (Ox for carrying or pulling equipment, Bulls for being male etc). A buffalo is a specific genus of the bovine family, distinct from the domestic cattle for example. But the term Ox and Bull might still apply to the Buffalo... Hence a buffalo bull. Cows are female members of the bovine family, and here in the uk we really only have the domestic cattle, which we use for milk and meat. A mule is the product of a male donkey and a female horse, somewhat stronger and hardier than donkeys, but also sterile. If you "shrug at" something is usually a sign of indifference (I.e. "so what?") or ignorance. In the example you gave it seems to be a sign of indifference: the shale recovery is not something that concerns them. To "shrug off" is to ignore something or to dismiss it, to act as though it didn't have an effect. E.g. If you have shrugged off an illness then you are back to health. Not sure where the term "shrug" comes from, possibly a garment that covers the shoulders and arms, hence the term for the raising of the shoulders being "to shrug". A caveat is a warning, e.g. of the specific limitations of the assumptions being used in some analysis. It comes from the Latin and literally means "let him beware". So if you are giving some advice that is based on on a key assumption, you would caveat that the conclusion is only applicable while the assumption is true. Not just "not afraid" but "unperturbed", or not negatively affected, often in an emotional sense but not always. E.g. A ship might be unfazed by the strong winds or large waves as it makes its way across an ocean.
Coleslaw is basically a salad of sliced cabbage with a dressing of some sort or other, such as vinaigrette dressing, mayonnaise etc. Some variations of coleslaw use other ingredients as well, but cabbage is the basis. It comes from the Dutch work "koolsla" meaning cabbage salad (kool = cabbage; sla = salad). It is mostly served cold, in my experience, although warmed up slightly might be possible.
A bull is a male bovine that has not been castrated. The word "Ox" is also used this way, but it's more likely to refer to a castrated bull. "Buffalo" refers to several different species of bovines in various countries. Here in the USA, the word usually refers to the American bison, a native species that was a major food source for the Native Americans. There are still wild bison, but farmers have also begun to raise them for meat. They have also been cross-bred (hybridized) with common cattle. The resulting animal has several names, such as "beefalo." In English, "cow" often refers to the female of many different species of animal, for example, whales. It is far more economical to raise cows for their milk than their meat. One hectare of pasture land used to raise dairy cattle will yield about ten times as much food as the same hectare used to raise beef cattle. When a society eats more beef and drinks less milk, it's a sign that the people are very prosperous. Many people are lactose-intolerant, which means that their body cannot digest milk--I am one of these people. People whose ancestors raised dairy cattle are usually able to digest milk, because without it they would have starved. Obviously, my ancestors ate beef instead of milk. "Donkey" is another name of the "ass," a wild relative of horses and zebras. A mule is a hybrid of a female horse with a male donkey. They are strong and can work harder than horses, but they have a reputation for being obstinate and very difficult to train. It is also possible to breed a male horse with a female donkey, and the hybrid animal is called a "hinny." The donkey and hinny are quite similar, but they do have some different characteristics. Both mules and hinnies are almost always sterile, so it's very rare for anyone to have a second-generation hybrid.
It's an inflection of the verb cavere, meaning "to take care." The word "caution" is also derived from this root. In earlier times, "shrug" also meant "to shudder," and also used as a noun meaning "a tug." Prior to that, the origin is lost. Apparently there are no cognates in the other Germanic languages. The word has two different meanings that are very similar, and this can be confusing. The most common use of "people" is the plural of "person." It's perfectly correct and acceptable to say "three persons," "many persons," or "thousands of persons." Yet (at least here in America) we seem reluctant to speak that way. I confess that I (a professional writer) always say and write "three people," "many people," or "thousands of people"--almost never "persons." If I submitted a report with the sentence, "The demonstration was a great success: hundreds of persons attended," my manager would send it back and tell me to change it to "people." This is a word we borrowed from Medieval French many centuries ago, when England was ruled by the Norman French people. French was the official language in government, education, diplomacy and commerce--although the citizens spoke Anglo-Saxon, the earliest form of English, among themselves. We have many vestiges of this influence; the easiest way to show it concerns the words for various animals. The farmers used English words for their animals: cow, pig, lamb, chicken, deer. But when the farmer took his meat to the market, which was administered by the French overlords, they acquired French names: beef, pork, mutton, cock, venison. (This etymology is even more complicated than what I wrote, but I didn't want to bore or confuse everyone. "Person" is also a French word of Latin origin. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! )
My previous short answer of yes to people becoming plural with the addition of s I think as being correct and true Reading FR stimulated my two remaining brain cells one of which recalled a class in English where people was / is plural along with peoples Am I correct FR or am I down to 1 brain cell?
You're right, "people" can sometimes be used with an "s". FR stated the most common usage of "people" but then didn't go on to explain that "people" can also be used to express a group of persons under a common culture, race, nation etc. So in this sense I can talk of "my people" (e.g. The U.K.) and you can talk of "your people" (e.g. The USA) and we can also talk of "our peoples" (meaning the two separate groups) while still referring to the fact the two groups are different.
