Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
As far as the pronunciation is concerned there is no difference. Both words are pronounced
like the word "not". Careful users of the language use "nought" to refer to the number
"zero". The word is used mostly in British English; Americans do not employ it at all.
Both "naught" and "nought" can be used to mean "nothing". One way to remember the
difference between the two words is that the word meaning zero is spelt with an "o" —
which looks like zero! When you make an effort to do something and it doesn't succeed, you
can say that your efforts have come to naught/nought.
Some people think that "naught" and "nought" are old fashioned. Did you know that
"naughty" and "naught" are related? The original meaning of a "naughty child" was a "good
for nothing child".
No, it is not. In such a sentence you can either use "both" or "as well as". You cannot
include the two in the same sentence. You can say, "Both Rahul and Peter live in Hosur" or
"Rahul, as well as Peter, lives in Hosur". Notice that in the second case, the verb is "lives"
and not "live". When you use "as well as" the verb that follows usually agrees with the noun
that precedes "as well as" — especially when "as well as" is separated by commas.
Thought for the day: Our knowledge is a little island in a great ocean of
nonknowledge - Isaac Singer
Does the expression "in short supply" mean the same thing as "in short order"?
No, it doesn't. When you say that a commodity is "in short supply" what you mean is that it
is scarce. The item is very difficult to get hold of because there is very little of it available.
The demand for it is far greater than the supply. Here are a few examples.
*Thanks to the transport strike, fresh vegetables are in short supply.
"In short order", on the other hand, has nothing to do with demand and supply. When you
say that something was done in short order, what you mean is that it was done very
quickly. The expression is mostly used in informal contexts. *The Minister's assistant
straightened out the mess in short order.
*I don't want any excuses. I want this work done in short order.
The carrot and stick approach was first used by owners of donkeys in order to keep their
animals moving. Whenever the animal stopped, the rider used to dangle a raw carrot in
front of the animal's nose. And if the stubborn animal still refused to move, then guess what
happened? The owner gave it a sound thrashing with a stick! When you adopt the carrot
and stick approach, you are getting someone to do what you want him to by rewarding him.
You give him something valuable, something he wants. If he fails to do what you want him
to, then you punish him. You make something bad happen to him. So when a Minister says
that he is going to adopt a carrot and stick policy, is he implying that he is the master and
we are all asses? Not really. All that he is saying is that he is going to reward those who do
their job and punish those who don't.
*The teachers use both the carrot and the stick to make sure that the students do their
work.
*The Government says that it favors a carrot and stick approach to get unemployed people
back to work.
Thought for the day: When our response meets the challenge we achieve success -
Stephen Covey
A "housewife" is a married woman who looks after her house. She does not have a job
outside the house; she is not employed by anybody else. She spends all her time running
the house. Cooking, cleaning, shopping, looking after the kids and the husband. A
"housekeeper", on the other hand, is someone who is hired to look after someone else's
house. The housekeeper is usually responsible for the cooking and the cleaning of the
house. She may or not stay with the owners.
A "housesitter" is also someone who is hired. In this case, the individual is hired to look
after the house while the owners are away. For example, if you and your family decide to
take a vacation, but are scared that someone may break into your house, you may decide
to hire a housesitter. It is his/her job to take care of the house while you are away. Just like
you have "babysitters", you now have "housesitters". These people stay inside the house;
they are not like the watchman whom you post outside for security.
The first "i" is like the "i" in "bit", "pit", and "sit", while the "e" in the second syllable is
pronounced like the "a" in "china". The following two vowels are usually pronounced like the
"i" in "sit" and "bit". The "g" in the fourth syllable is like the "j" in "jam", "juice" and "Jew".
Any idea what the word means? When you say that someone is a "flibbertigibbet" it means
that the individual talks aimlessly. He/she just rambles.
"Gonna" is actually "going to" and "wanna" is "want to". In informal styles of writing, many
Americans tend to spell these words in this manner. Similarly, "got to" is often spelt "gotta".
In fact, one finds these words spelt in this manner in comic books. These spellings,
however, are not acceptable in formal contexts. Teachers tend to frown on them. So you
"gotta" know when it's OK to write "wanna" cos not everyone is "gonna" to accept it when it
is spelt this way.
Thought for the day: There are three ingredients in the good life: learning, earning
and yearning - Christopher Morley
Sometimes it so happens that the two candidates contesting for the same parliamentary
seat are both crooks. No matter whom you vote for, it isn't going to matter; either way, you
are going to elect an individual of questionable integrity. Though it seems that you have a
choice, you really don't have one. A Catch 22 situation is a no win situation. No matter what
you do, you end up on the losing side.
*The companies didn't want to hire Velu because he didn't have any experience. But he
wasn't going to get any experience unless someone hired him. It was a real Catch 22
situation.
The expression comes from the title of a novel written by Joseph Heller in 1961. Many
people consider this work of fiction set during the Second World War a classic. In the story,
the only way that air force pilots could get out of doing combat duty was by pleading
insanity. In order to be discharged these individuals had to claim that they were insane. But
the catch was that only a sane person would know that going on bombing missions was
dangerous. Therefore when an individual pleaded insanity, he was doing what any sane
person would! Asking to be certified was the act of a perfectly sane man! Since he was
acting rationally, he wasn't insane. Result? No discharge.
No, it isn't. One usually "invests in" something, not "on". For example,
This is an expression mainly used in American English. When you say that you are working
the graveyard shift in a factory, what you mean is that you are working the late night shift
— you usually work from midnight to eight in the morning.
*We have to cancel our plans. I am working the graveyard shift next week.
This expression became popular in the U.S. during World War II. It was a time when many
factories worked 24 hours a day. The people who worked the graveyard shift worked at a
time when everyone else was fast asleep; when everything in town was very quiet and as
still as a graveyard!
Thought for the day: Never stop learning; knowledge doubles every fourteen
months - Anthony J. D'Angelo
What is the difference between "figure something out" and "figure something
up"?
When you figure someone out, you begin to understand the individual better. Similarly,
when you figure something out, you begin to understand it better. Here are a few examples.
* Varsha is a new student in class. No one has been able to figure her out.
* It took Balaji some time to figure out what Malar was trying to say.
When you "figure something up", you add up the numbers. You total the amount of
something.
One can be "enamoured of" or "enamoured with" someone or something, but one cannot be
"enamoured about" something. When you are "enamoured of" something or someone you
are extremely fond of that person or thing. Here are a few examples.
* Unlike many people I know, Gauri isn't enamoured of the United States.
Thought for the day: Victory is always possible for the person who refuses to stop
fighting - Napoleon Hill
What is the difference between "I just love that movie" and "I love that movie"?
In terms of meaning, the first sentence is much stronger than the second. The word "just" is
used to emphasize the fact that you "love" the movie very much. It's another way of saying,
"I simply/really love that movie". "Just" is often used in speech to mean "there is no other
word for it".
The `oi' in the two words is pronounced like the `oi' in `oil', `boil', and `toil'. The `o' in the
first syllable of `polloi' is like the `a' in `china'. Both `hoi' and `loi' are stressed. In Greek
`hoi' means `the' and `polloi' means `many'. The term is normally used to refer to the
common people — the working class. We are not thinking of the rich, or the highly educated
class when we talk about the hoi polloi. Some people find this term offensive. Since the
word `hoi' means `the', people who have studied Greek argue that we shouldn't say `the
hoi polloi'. But `the hoi polloi' has become firmly established in English.
*The entry fee was kept very high to keep the hoi polloi out.
Is it okay to say, "Every day they have pizza and burger during the midday?"
We know when we say ‘midday', we mean 12 o'clock in the afternoon. Since we are
referring to a specific time in the afternoon, we should use `at' and not `during'. We should
say, "They have pizza and burger" at midday. If you would like to use `during', then use
`middle' rather than `midday'.
Thought for the day: If you can't feed a hundred people, then feed just one -
Mother Teresa
What is the difference in meaning between "That may be the reason she didn't
turn up" and "That might be reason she didn't turn up"?
For most people the two sentences have more or less the same meaning. Careful users of
the language, however, maintain a subtle distinction between the two. In the two examples,
"may" and "might" indicate "possibility". Some argue that "might," indicates a lesser degree
of possibility than "may". By the way, the word "might" is not the past form of "may".
* It may rain tomorrow. (50% chance of rain)
* It might rain tomorrow. (30% chance of rain)
What is the meaning of "Jack Robinson"?
The complete expression is "before you can say Jack Robinson" and it has been part of
American slang for over 200 years. When you do something before anyone can say Jack
Robinson you do it very quickly. As to who this Jack Robinson was no one is really sure.
According to one story, he was a well to do gentleman who would go around knocking on
other people's doors, but would disappear before he could be announced. Here are a few
examples.
* Before I could say Jack Robinson she shut the door.
* The lion disappeared before anyone of us could say Jack Robinson.
What is the meaning of "fait accompli"?
First, let's deal with the pronunciation. The first word "fait" is pronounced like the word
"fate". The "a" in "accompli" is like the "a" in "amount", "allow" and "aloud". The following
"o" is like the "o" in "cot", "pot", and "hot", while the final "i" is like the "ee" in "beef",
"feel", and "feet". The main stress is on the second syllable of "accompli". This is one way of
pronouncing the word. When you say that something is a "fait accompli" what it implies is
that a decision regarding a matter has already been made and cannot be changed. There is
no point in discussing it or arguing against it. The expression is French in origin. Here are a
few examples.
* Sunder married a woman his parents disapproved of and presented them with a fait
accompli.
* When they realized they were being presented a fait accompli, the members became very
angry.
Courtesy: The Hindu.
Thought for the day: None of us is as smart as all of us - Ken Blanchard
Some people think that these two words are synonyms. They are not; the two words have
very different meanings. When you are "amused" by something, you find it funny or
entertaining. It makes you laugh or smile.
"Bemuse", on the other hand, has nothing to do with humor. When you are "bemused" by
something, you are confused or puzzled. For example,
*When Malar saw the question paper, there was a bemused expression on her face.
Both are correct depending on what it is that you want to say. When you "drink something
down" what you are doing is drinking it.
When you "drink something in" what you are doing is absorbing it. When you read an
article, you drink in the information. Similarly, when you visit new places, you drink in the
sights. Here are a few examples.
*Vishnu made it to the top of the mountain and drank in the beautiful view.
Thought for the day: No one can whistle a symphony. It takes an orchestra to play
it- H.E. Luccock.
When you "deal someone in", you are permitting the individual to take part in something.
The expression can also be used to mean, "to manage someone or something".
The "o" in the first syllable is like the "o" in "hot", "pot", and "got", while the one in the
second syllable sounds like the "a" in "china". The final two vowels are like the "i" in "sit",
"pit", and "hit". The main stress is on the first syllable. This is one way of pronouncing the
word. Good-natured friendliness is usually referred to as "bonhomie". The word is usually
used in formal contexts.
Thought for the day: Character is a diamond that scratches every other stone -
Cyrus A. Bartol.
When you decide to do something on your own and everything goes completely wrong, how
do people react? Usually they criticise you; sometimes, they even punish you. When you
"face the music", you accept the criticism or punishment that is in store for you. In other
words, you take responsibility for your mistakes.
*The partners ran away and poor Venu was left to face the music.
*Listen Meera, sooner or later you will have to face the music.
There are several explanations as to the origin of this idiom. According to some scholars, it
comes from a practice that was common in the British military. When an officer was court-
martialed, the charges against him were read out for all to hear. The man was made to
stand in front of the military band and while the charges were being read out, drummers
used to tap their drums. Since the prisoner was facing the band and the drums were being
played, he was literally "facing the music". This practice of tapping the drums while the
charges were read out gave rise to another expression as well — "drummed up charges".
No, it isn't. Careful users of the language would prefer the use of "hanged" rather than
"hung". The word "hung" is usually used with objects and not with human beings. Here are
a few examples.
Secondly, considering the example, we should say, "will be hanged" rather than "would be
hanged". The use of "would" suggests that the event may not take place. For example, if
you say, "I would help you", it implies that you want to help me, but for some reason you
are not in a position to. "I would help you if I could. But I can't". The use of "would"
suggests a condition. "I would marry you," for example, implies that you would consider
marrying the person if certain other conditions were met — perhaps if he/she had more
money, or had been more handsome/beautiful! These conditions are not going to be met;
therefore, you are not going to marry the person! Your sentence should be "The convict will
be hanged tomorrow."
Thought for the day: The essential thing is not knowledge, but character-Joseph
Le Conte.
The first syllable, which has the main stress, rhymes with "moon", "soon", and "noon"; the
second sounds like the word "dog". The final "e" is silent. This is an informal word mostly
used in American English. When you refer to an organisation as a "boondoggle" what you
mean is that it is a white elephant. It wastes a lot of public money and does not achieve
anything significant. "Boondoggle" is also used to refer to complicated official activities that
are a waste of time.
*The newspaper has brought to light another one of those government boondoggles.
What is the difference between "hoodwink into" and "hoodwink out of"?
When you hoodwink someone into doing something you trick him into doing it. For example,
salesmen often try to get you to buy things that you do not really need. They trick or
hoodwink you into buying things.
It is pronounced like the word "sweet". When you reserve a suite in a hotel, you get a set of
rooms — a bedroom, a sitting room and a bathroom. Many big hotels have a "Honeymoon
suite". The word "suite" can also be used with reference to furniture. It refers to matching
pieces of furniture.
Thought for the day: A man who dares waste one hour of time has not discovered
the value of life - Charles Darwin.
Nowadays, this word is usually associated with airplanes. When you hijack a plane what you
are doing is taking control of it and forcing it to go to a destination of your choice. In the
process you make the passengers aboard the aircraft your hostage. It is not only planes
that you can hijack, but also other vehicles — cars, trucks, boats and ships. "Hijack" has
another meaning as well. It also means to steal goods from vehicles, especially from trucks.
Did you know that the original hijacker was someone who stole from other criminals? He
specialised in robbing bootleggers — people who sold illicit liquor. According to some
scholars, the "hijacker" got his name from the command he gave the people he was about
to rob. Apparently, he used to point his gun at his victim and say, "Stick them up high,
Jack." In other words, he wanted his victim to raise his hands above his head. Since "Jack"
is a very common name in the U.S., he called all his victims "Jack". From "high" and "Jack"
we get "hijack".
Which is correct? "I gave to nanny the keys" or "I gave the keys to nanny"?
It is also possible to give someone something. In this case, "to" is not used. You do not
"give to someone".
*I expected something great. The speech was nothing but milk and water.
Thought for the day: To climb steep hills requires a slow pace at first –
Shakespeare.
When you say that something is "ornate" what you are implying is that the object has been
decorated excessively or elaborately. There is too much decoration and as a result it is
showy or gaudy; the word generally has a negative connotation. The main stress, by the
way, is on the second syllable "nate", which rhymes with "eight", "bait", and "hate". Here
are a few examples.
The word "ornamental" also means decorative, but unlike "ornate" it isn't associated with
anything negative. When you say that something is "ornamental" what you are implying is
that the object has been designed to be decorative without being too vulgar or ostentatious.
The stress in this word is on the third syllable, "men". Here are a few examples.
In one of the episodes in “Law and Order” the detectives kept saying ‘DOA’. What
do the initials stand for?
This is probably how the people of Afghanistan felt a few years ago. The word ‘shell’ refers
to bombs. How would you feel if you lived in a city, which was being constantly bombed?
You would go through a lot of emotions — confusion, anger, etc. When you say that
someone is shell-shocked what you are implying is that the difficult experience, which the
individual has undergone recently has left him confused and anxious. Here are a few
examples.
*Vinita felt shell-shocked after coping with the boisterous twins all day.
Which of the following sentences is correct? "Each of the children were given
chocolates" or "Each of the children was given chocolates".
In such sentences, according to the rules of English grammar "each" should be followed by
a singular verb. Therefore your second sentence "Each of the children was given chocolates"
will meet the approval of a grammarian. Here are a few examples.
*Each of the books was gift wrapped carefully.
*Each of the teachers wants to donate a hundred rupees.
Nowadays, there is a tendency, even among educated native speakers of English, to use a
plural verb instead of the singular one in such constructions. This is especially true in
speech. Here are a few examples.
*Each of his plays have been hits.
*Each of his ideas are clearly stated.
A grammarian would frown upon these sentences, but they are becoming common.
What the meaning of "smell a rat''?
This expression has more or less the same meaning as "smell something fishy''. When you
smell a rat, you suspect or realise that something is seriously wrong. Perhaps someone is
trying to deceive you or trying to harm you. This is an expression that is normally used in
informal contexts. Here are a few examples.
* If I don't return Amarnath's calls, he will smell a rat.
* I smelt a rat when Venkat started being helpful.
Courtesy: The Hindu.
Thought for the day: Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition
from mediocre minds -Albert Einstein
What is the meaning of the idiom "to rob Peter to pay Paul"?
When you rob Peter to pay Paul what you are doing is taking money from one person in
order to pay another. You are not actually clearing your debts; all that you are doing is
paying off one person by borrowing from another. As a result, you still continue to be in
debt. Here are a few examples.
*Tara took a loan from the bank in order to clear her debts; robbing Peter to pay Paul.
*I am not going to ask my neighbor for some for money in order to pay you. It would be
like robbing Peter to pay Paul.
*Some people use one credit card to pay off the bills of another credit card. It's like robbing
Peter to pay Paul. I just don't understand it.
What is the origin of the word "villain"?
The word "villain" these days has a negative connotation. When it first began to be used, it
was a neutral term. A "villain" was actually a poor person who lived on a farm; he lived in a
"villa". When the word was borrowed into English as "villain" it was used to refer to any
lowborn rustic. The conditions in which these people lived were so bad that they often had
to resort to crime to make ends meet. As time went on anyone who lived in a "villa" was
viewed suspiciously, he was considered to be a criminal. Soon the word "villain" began to be
used with people with antisocial tendencies. It no longer mattered whether the individual
lived in a villa or not. The class distinction was lost.
What is the difference between "mentally retarded" and "mentally challenged"?
There is no difference. "Mentally challenged" is now considered the polite way of referring to
someone who has a mental disability. "Retarded" is considered offensive. Here are some
more politically correct terms that are often used these days. "Horizontally challenged" (fat
person), "vertically challenged" (short person), "aesthetically challenged" (ugly person),
"visually challenged" (needs glasses), and "physically challenged" (has a physical disability).
There are many more politically correct terms.
• Our first international contributor, Greg Young, writes from Australia about a few
things he finds peculiar to Indian English. He says he frequently gets emails from
people saying something like “request you to do the needful,” and he suggests that it
is a phrase that does not “translate well into usage in other countries”. He says that
an Australian, amidst many others – some of them Indian too – would find it pretty
brusque and officious (Now, look up the dictionary what these terms mean!) when
someone sends a note with a “request you to…” in it. “It is almost like you are giving
orders, not asking for something!” he notes. The better way to do it would be to
send a more polite, “Could you please…?” note instead.
• Continuing with the same thread as above, Greg finds ‘Do the needful’ a pretty
meaningless term, leaving to the recipients to decide what they need to do! The
recipient’s idea of ‘the needful’ could differ from the sender’s, and the recipient might
decide to do nothing at all! Greg says it is always better to be specific when asking
for something. So, he says, instead of saying something like, “Somu will meet you at
the airport tomorrow. Please do the needful,” it is better to say, “Somu will meet you
at the airport tomorrow. Could you please send the card back through him?”
We still continue to use pompous Victorian Era English as our ancestors used in the
Raj era! Consider this case – “I am in receipt of your mail dated 23rd of August, and
at the moment I am going through the same.” Why use such tactics to touch the
nose around our head when a simpler way of saying it would be something like this –
“I received your mail, sent on 23rd August, and I am going through it at the
moment”? Even better would be to say – “I am reading your mail dated 23rd
August”! The rule is simple: when it could be covered in one line, why make it two?
To Continue…
Towards Better English - XVI
Hi All,
• Often, we make the mistake of saying ‘return back’, ‘revert back’, ‘reply back’ and so
on. These are incorrect usage of the language. ‘Return’ on its own means ‘doing
something back’. Just like ‘called as’ is incorrect, so is ‘returning something back’.
So, the next time you say, “Return back my charger”, understand that you are
saying, “give me back back my charger”. One of the most (ab)used terms is ‘revert
back for any clarifications/with any comments’, usually used in emails. Since ‘revert’
already stands for ‘get back’, a ‘back’ after ‘revert’ is redundant.
• Recently, I came across a website where the following words (not verbatim, though)
were written – ‘This has become a place where fun, joy and smiles have become
anonymous with this event’. The person was obviously looking to mean ‘one and the
same’. In the purpose, he/she fumbled up on the right word, and ended up using a
word that was actually conveying the incorrect, and contrasting, meaning. The right
write-up should have used ‘synonymous’ instead of ‘anonymous’. The point I would
like to highlight is this – when you use a word, be sure what context you are using it
in, and also be sure you have the right word. If in doubt, you are probably right
about the doubt. Hence, use a simpler alternative word. You lose much more
flaunting your vocabulary at the wrong time than what you gain using high-sounding
words at the right time. It is better to use simple words all the time, unless of course
if you’re writing a GMAT Reading Comprehension Essay!
•The phrase ‘tell me about it’ in English is actually a sarcastic remark. So, when you
say something to a friend, and he/she says, “Yeah? Tell me about it.”, please do not
plunge into an excited discussion on what had happened. It actually is a sarcastic
remark, and the person is not showing any genuine interest. In fact, he/she is
piqued about it. This often happens in the case of free and unsolicited advice.
•I guess I have already had this included in an earlier session, but I thought I could
use it again… The term ‘discuss about’ is wrong English. You do not ‘discuss about’
something, but you just ‘discuss’ something.
Hi All,
• A number of people have been getting back to me with the fact that ‘stupid’ is
actually a noun as well. This is from my previous post that said that you should not
call a person ‘a stupid’. Well, you could use ‘stupid’ as a noun as well, but that is
more colloquial and a slang, as in, “It’s the economy, stupid”. In this case, it is
actually, “It’s the economy, you stupid person”, where ‘stupid’ has actually been
used instead of ‘stupid person’. Thus, I would still insist that you should not call a
person ‘a stupid’…
• Manju says that it would make sense pointing to people the difference between
‘complimentary’ and ‘complementary’. Well, ‘complimentary’ is something that is
given as a gift, a compliment. ‘Complementary’ is something that strives to act as a
complement. Well, I know I have not said much with this yet. A ‘complement’ is
something that adds on with something else to either promote it, or to complete it,
thereby offsetting mutual lacks. For example, when we say that the tennis pair of
Leander Paes and Navratilova ‘complement’ each other, it makes one (either
Navratilova or Paes) act as a good foil for the other and hence they are able to work
fine and become a complete winning unit. For more clarifications, please mail in.
• Rajesh has a point – when we say ‘Hello All’, is it actually correct? Should it not be
‘Hello all’? Well, I do not know! I’ve used the capitalised ‘A’ in ‘All’ just because I
treated it as a proper noun in the place of some name. I know it is a lame reason
and does not hold much water. If anyone has any idea on this, you could share it
with us. Someone else had a different point, and you guessed it right! Is it correct to
say ‘Thanks and Regards’ while closing a mail. He asked, “Should it not be ‘Thanks
and regards’ if at all that phrase is accepted?” Again, I do not know. With email
being as informal as it is where we have removed arcane practices and subservient
closing lines (like, ‘Forever yours, I remain’), anything gets accepted, I guess. But
then, I am using more of just ‘Regards’ on my mails these days!
Hello Again,
• Someone here had wanted to find the usage of ‘Hey’ – if it was correct. Well, it is
correct, depending on where you use it! ‘Hey’ is an informal means of hailing (in
other words, addressing, greeting, calling) a person. So, while ‘hey’ would not
warrant an entry in your covering letters to the Oxford University Press, or to the
President of India, it is not blasphemy addressing me or your friends thus.
• Suchithra points to the common mix-up of tenses when using ‘did’ and ‘does’. For
instance, she points an example that is fairly commonplace – ‘How did it happened?’
and ‘Does she knows about it?’. Well, in the first case, ‘did’ has already conveyed the
fact that the incident happened in the past. So, ‘happen’ should not be in the past
tense. So, when a sentence has the word ‘did’ in it, the main verb should not be an
explicit past tense. In the second case, ‘does’ carries the singular/plural context with
it, and hence the onus is not on the verb ‘know’. Thus, ‘she does know’, apart from
giving a stress on the fact that the matter is known to the lady, also is the same as
‘she knows’.
• There are cases where we just add an ‘ed’ to the end of a word and think it makes a
past tense. Examples for this include ‘rewinded’, ‘binded’, ‘switch off’ed, ‘finish off’ed,
‘carry forward’ed, etc. Well, if only English was that simple! In the case of the first
two examples, ‘rewind’ has a specific past-tense form – ‘rewound’, and so does
‘bind’ – ‘bound’. In the case of ‘switch off’, and the others, you have to realise that
‘switch off’ is not a single word, but a collection of words. Select the verb in the
collection of words, and add the past tense to the verb alone, and not to the whole
idiom. So, ‘switch off’ in past tense becomes ‘switched off’, ‘carry forward’ is ‘carried
forward’ and so on.
• Hareesh wants to know the difference in the usage and meanings of the words
‘whereby’, ‘whereon’ and ‘wherein’. ‘whereby’ means ‘by means of which’. For
example, ‘Towards Better English is a series, whereby I hope to point out common
mistakes people make in the English language’. ‘whereon’ means ‘on top of which’;
for example, ‘The dome is crowned by a mast whereon the Tricolour flutters proudly’.
Finally, ‘wherein’ means quite a few things – a) in regard to which (Example - "a
case wherein he took an active part"); b) in the course or during which (Example - "a
period wherein he did not work"); c) in which; where (Example - "the particular state
wherein you reside"); d) in what (Example - "wherein consists this matter?")
(Courtesy – Dictionary.com)