substance Dislodge as in 'liberate beer' and in 'gratis speech' English Words & Exercise Smokestack Exchange > 자유게시판

• 목록
• 답변
• 글쓰기
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Employers' advertisement is today organism subsidized by the taxpayers, rather a few of whom are, of course, workings populate. In some of this advertising, propaganda is made for "free enterprise" as narrowly and intolerably settled by the Subject Association of Manufacturers. Passably oft these subsidised advertisements nail Labor Party. It would be regretful adequate if industriousness were spending its have money to test to set up misbegotten ideas in the public mind, merely when industry is permitted to do it "for free," someone in a high place ought to stand up and holler. In recent decades, however, use of "for free" to mean "at no cost" has skyrocketed. Search results for the period 2001–2008 alone yield hundreds of matches in all sorts of edited publications, including books from university presses. There is no denying that, seventy years ago, "for free" was not in widespread use in edited publications—and that it conveyed an informal and perhaps even unsavory tone. Such pasts are not irrelevant when you are trying to pitch your language at a certain level—and in some parts of the English-speaking world, "for free" may still strike many listeners or readers as outlandish.
But in the United States the days when using "for free" marked you as a probable resident of Goat's Whiskers, Kentucky, are long gone. Connect and share knowledge within a single location that is structured and easy to search. The statement, 'You can take your baby on the flight free of charge' would be in opposition to 'You have to pay to take your baby on a plane' or 'It's not free', or informally, 'You gotta pay for it'. To say something is not included (if, for example, popcorn weren't free of charge, even with ticket) one could say 'The popcorn is not included in the ticket price'. It is commonly claimed that reflexive pronouns are only permitted when the subject and object are the same. While this is certainly a common usage of reflexive pronouns, this rule would reject such common constructions as, "I had to pickle it myself."
As the above commentator suggests, one can never say "in the Sat afternoon" -- but i think you already know that. In any event, from the above two examples i think it's clear that the choice of "in the afternoon" versus "on Saturday afternoon" depends on the temporal frame of reference, and the context in which you're speaking. I believe the puzzle comes from the common but mistaken belief that prepositions must have noun-phrase object complements. Since for is a preposition and free is an adjective, the reasoning goes, there must be something wrong. The fact is that even the most conservative of dictionaries, grammars, and usage books allow for constructions like although citizens disapprove of the Brigade's tactics, they yet view them as necessary or it came out from under the bed. That is, they tacitly accept prepositions with non-object complements while claiming that all prepositions must be transitive.
If we extend the conceptualization to the word "freedom," I think we'll find more basis for differentiation in the choices between "exempt of" and "absolve from." So let's try a few examples. In the labor leader's book of foul names the free rider is all kinds of a slacker, slob, and heel—the lowest type of cheapskate and the most vicious type of ingrate—an individual unworthy to ride on the bandwagon of unionism beside those who have paid their fare. I would note though that probably thanks to the appropriation of free rider by economics, the term free rider is today more often used in that more specialized context, while freeloader is more often used in informal colloquial contexts. If you are seeking price-related antonyms, try expensive, pricy, costly. Otherwise, it is common to use a phrase such as "price of admission send applies", "subject field to payment" etc. It's not correct to use a reflexive pronoun unless the recipient of the action is the person doing that action. Because this question may lead to opinionated discussion, debate, and answers, it has been closed. You may edit the question if you feel you can improve it so that it requires answers that include facts and citations or a detailed explanation of the proposed solution. If edited, the question will be reviewed and might be reopened.
Although the earliest match for "for free" in my original answer was from the August 16, 1947 issue of The Billboard magazine, I have subsequently run more-extensive searches in Google Books and Hathi Trust and turned up multiple matches from as early as February 1943. Here is a rundown of the matches I found from 1943 and 1944. Because free by itself can function as an adverb in the sense "at no cost," some critics reject the phrase for free. A phrase such as for nothing, at no cost, or a similar substitute will often work better. The phrase is correct; you should not use it where you are supposed to only use a formal sentence, but that doesn't make a phrase not correct.
If so, my analysis amounts to a rule in search of actual usage—a prescription rather than a description. In any event, the impressive rise of "relieve of" against "disengage from" over the past 100 years suggests that the English-speaking world has become more receptive to using "relieve of" in place of "free from" during that period. I don't know that we've come up with a precise answer to the question.
Clearly the word "for" can't be omitted from those paraphrasings. Thus many people will say that for free equates to for for free, so they feel it's ungrammatical. Finally, my answer is based not only on the reference I cited but also on my 28 years of experience as a copy editor (and a reader of books on usage) and on my 45+ years as a close reader of literature and nonfiction. All of the preceding examples are from the nineteenth century, when "free people of" was far less common than "relieve from" overall. In each case, the phrase "release of" means "clear up of," "unsullied by," or simply "without." In contrast, "loose from" suggests "emancipated from" or "no longer oppressed by." If you can remove these things from your life, you are "resign from" the undesirable attention (attack) of these things.
But since free-loading means exactly the same thing as free-riding, they could (and some do) also speak of the "free-dock-walloper problem" though this is less common. From (at least) Olson (1965), it has been common for economists to speak of the "free-rider problem". When I started to read about libertarianism as well as study economics in the 90s "the free-rider problem" was a common subject. Agree with Jimi that the most appropriate antonym for "unfreeze of charge" is "for cut-rate sale." But, "purchased" or "priced" could work as the opposite of "dislodge of level." This book is free of charge. Perhaps surprisingly, there isn't a common, general-purpose word in English to mean "that you take to devote for", "that incurs a fee". You have not mentioned the sentence where you would like to use it. They will say that something is free as in 'free beer' and free as in 'free speech'.
These matches cast a rather different light on the probable locus of early use of the expression. Although the 1947 instance of the expression cited in my original answer appears in The Billboard, I interpreted it as an attempt at faux hick talk by the reporter. But The Billboard is also the source of four of the eleven matches from 1943–1944, including the earliest one, and none of those instances show any sign of working in an unfamiliar dialect. In addition the four Billboard occurrences, three others come from the world of entertainment, one from advertising, one from military camp talk, one from organized labor, and one from a novel. An advertising agency in Cambridge, Mass., throwing caution to the winds, comes right out and invites businessmen to send for a pamphlet which explains in detail how much money a company can spend for advertising without increasing its tax bill.
As the Pepper Bill is set up, it contains a proviso that permits the cutting of e. On the other hand, he said, it might also prove a plague to stations tight on time who don't want to handle Congressional effusions. Camp shows and, watch top porn videos without giving any exact figures, we have entered every zone of operations [in World War II], men and women actors, entertainers well up into the hundreds. We send them by bomber to Alaska, Hawaii, Australia; we have had them in Salamaua, Guadalcanal, and the Caribbean; and our biggest group is at the moment in London, going to the European theater of operations. Camp shows, to go as far away as a night's journey in any direction. Especially are we anxious to go to the ports of embarkation, where those boys go in and do not come out until they get on the transport. They are given the best that the theater has to offer, and they get it "for give up." In these days of high overhead of running a private business a "free" engineering service probably would be worth just about that much to the city. The old saying, "Nothing comes for free" could never be so readily applied.