The English Language

[Ian Thompson]

soheil hooshdaren wrote:
Is it that the exchange just refer to Rook vs. Bishop/Knight?

Yes. That's exactly right.

The index entry reads:

Code: Select all

exchanging. see also[i] trading[/i]
   example 123

You're mixing up two different things here I think.

1. Winning the exchange means winning a rook for a bishop or a knight.
2. Exchanging (English) or trading (American) just means both sides capture pieces of equal value. For example, to exchange (or trade) rooks means White captures a black rook and Black captures a white rook, so neither side has gained a material advantage from the moves.

[IM Jack Rudd]

"Black is reduced to answering white's threats" - there is nothing constructive black can do in this position; all he can do is answer white's threats.

"Black is forced to answer white's threats" - white has such strong threats that black must answer them, but black may or may not have constructive things to do if white gives him the opportunity.

[Roger de Coverly]

The BBC series "The Master Game" back in 1970s and early 1980s gave insights into how non-native speakers would talk of concepts. Rather than exchange pieces they would talk of changing pieces and instead of winning or sacrificing the Exchange, they would talk of the Quality. I think that's the German idiom, which also has the idea that a free pawn is a passed pawn.

[soheil_hooshdaran]

"Black is reduced to answering white's threats" - there is nothing constructive black can do in this position; all he can do is answer white's threats.

"Black is forced to answer white's threats" - white has such strong threats that black must answer them, but black may or may not have constructive things to do if white gives him the opportunity.

Wow!
Thanks. Very clear.

[soheil_hooshdaran]

These issues [..] are rich enough that we will devote Chapter 20 to a more detailed study of the small-world phenomenon and its consequences.

Means
as a consequence of their being rich?
they are so rich that ....?

why did he not say:
These issues [..] are rich enough that we devote Chapter 20 to a more detailed study of the small-world phenomenon and its consequences.
?

[Barry Sandercock]

Yes, he could have said that. Means the same thing.

[soheil_hooshdaran]

"What's the difference between "small" and "short" distances?

[soheil_hooshdaran]

I don't understand the meaning of the underlined phrase:

In this case, enormous as the Microsoft IM study was, it remains some distance away from Milgram's goal:

Any help?

[IM Jack Rudd]

It's saying that study was enormous, but... {some consequence that renders it not perfect for the task}

[Barry Sandercock]

Soheil Hooshdaran wrote:
What is the difference between "small" and "short" distances ?

No difference. Although, one would normally say a short distance, rather than a small distance.

[soheil_hooshdaran]

What is the supporting cast of a movie?

[Michael Farthing]

Star parts: Famous actors that will bring in the public
Leading Parts: The main characters of the film
Supporting parts: People who have smaller parts but still say something
Extras: People in the film who don't say anything (eg people in the crowd; soldiers in a battle)

[soheil_hooshdaran]

What does "begin to" mean in:

a scale and character that begins to approximate the global friendship network.

?

[Barry Sandercock]

Begins to means to start.

[soheil_hooshdaran]

Begins to means to start.

But it does not make sense here, does it?