Sentences with phrase «meaning in your sentence»

Define mean: to have in the mind as a purpose: intend — sometimes used interjectionally with I, chiefly in informal speech for... — mean in a sentence Meaning, pronunciation, translations and examples

I'd like to know more about what the author meant in this sentence: «It's important to point out that this type of coverage does not have the same tax benefits as traditional long - term care insurance and should never be used as primary coverage.»

You need a comma after the year in the example above (and yes, I realize the meaning in the sentence could be conveyed more easily by rewording the sentence).

Try it — it will not change the meaning in your sentence.

Not exact matches

Sounding more authoritative means finding that deeper register in your voice and avoiding the human tic to «upspeak» at the end of sentences when you're unsure of something.

As a matter of fact, there is no point in denying that by all means clichés surely increase the number of words in the text, which is clearly seen in this sentence.

Martin Shkreli can be held responsible for $ 10.4 million in losses when he's sentenced for defrauding investors, meaning the man more commonly known as «Pharma Bro» could face more prison time than he initially expected.

There are two places in spontaneous speech where filler words commonly appear, Cohen explains: at the beginning (e.g. um, uh, so) and in the middle of a sentence (e.g. like, you know what I mean).

The Bitcoin Deutschland AG is acting as tied agent of the FIDOR Bank AG within the meaning of § 2 Section 10 of the Banking Act and provides the system or the completion of financial instruments in accordance with § 1 Section 1a Sentence 2 No. 1 of the Banking Act exclusively in the name and for the account of the FIDOR Bank AG.

If I had to tell you in one sentence what Mexico means to me, I'd say «It feels the way a home should feel.»

For the purposes of the preceding sentence, «Approved Investor» means (1) a bona fide institutional investor, or (2) any investor who has invested at least $ 1 million in the Company.

If you read the sentence, the words — who the child in the mother's womb will be — mean what his / her life will lead him / her into becoming which kind of human, that is, what kind of temperament, attitudes, talents & gifts, and such that human will have.

Atheists: I know many there are many people that practice religion just by fanaticism, I've seen many people in my opinion stupid (excuse the word) praying to saints hopping to solve their problems by repeating pre-made sentences over and over, but there are others different, I don't think Religion and Science need to be opposites, I believe in God, I'm Catholic and I have many reasons to believe in him, I don't think however that we should pray instead of looking for the cause and applying a solution, Atheists think they are smart because they focus on Science and technology instead of putting their faith in a God, I don't think God will solve our problems, i think he gave us the means to solve them by ourselves that's were God is, also I think that God created everything but not as a Magical thing but stablishing certain rules like Physics and Quimics etc. he's not an idiot and he knew how to make it so everything was on balance, he's the Scientist of Scientist the Mathematic of Mathematics, the Physician of Physicians, from the tiny little fact that a mosquito, an insect species needs to feed from blood from a completely different species, who created the mosquitos that way?

To say I positively affirm that I don't believe in god, is the same as saying I don't believe in god, it does not change the meaning of the sentence in any way, shape or form.

There is actual possibility - which you are talking about and which I am talking about in this sentence about «2 possible meanings,» and then there is also theoretical possibility - which I thought it was obvious that I was talking about with respect to my comments on a / theory / of time.

Judge Baugh sentenced Rambold to 30 days in prison, saying that the girl, Cherice Moralzez, was «as much in control of the situation» as her teacher was and that she was «older than her chronological age,» whatever that even means.

To all of you quoting scripture, your not supposed to read a sentence in the bible and look for meaning to understand it's meaning you need the context which is the entire bible.

Does that mean I should cherry - pick sentences in order to use it as a moral guide while conveniently ignoring the nasty stuff?

All too frequently in contemporary American society, a sentence of «life» means something far less than «for the remainder of one's time on this earth.»

We have a few good phrases we say in our house a lot, little catchphrases or sentences that carry a lot of meaning in just a few words.

I interpret this last sentence to mean that the same God who is present in the life of humans, including Jesus, is present also in the world in which humans live.

If for Paul the kerygma means «pronouncing upon oneself the sentence of death and placing one's confidence not in oneself, but in God who raises the dead (II Cor.

We can only determine the meaning of sentences and words by examining them in context.

I mean critics who, like Rainey, love to begin sentences with formulations like the following: «If it is true, as the logic of poststructuralism asserts, that every erasure will leave its trace in such a way that the very thing one is trying to exclude is disclosed as the hidden center of a contaminated order, then...» Then what?

Forty states enacted truth - in - sentencing statutes, which require felons to serve as much as a full 85 percent of their prison terms without any chance of parole; life sentences now truly mean life.

Since there is in the rest of the sentence no corresponding image to make clear which he means.

In the second place, Whitehead's panexperientialism, combined with his doctrine of eternal objects, shows how we can speak meaningfully of the correspondence between an idea, in the sense of a proposition (the meaning expressed or elicited by a linguistic sentence), and a nexus of actualitieIn the second place, Whitehead's panexperientialism, combined with his doctrine of eternal objects, shows how we can speak meaningfully of the correspondence between an idea, in the sense of a proposition (the meaning expressed or elicited by a linguistic sentence), and a nexus of actualitiein the sense of a proposition (the meaning expressed or elicited by a linguistic sentence), and a nexus of actualities.

It is the reality of what is potential, in its character of a real component of what is actual» (PR 103; italics added), We need now a clearer grasp of the nature of this potentiality and if we really understand what Whitehead means in this last sentence, when he refers to the character of this potentiality as «a real component of what is actual,» then we will understand the nature of the extensive continuum much more clearly.

There is no infallible «dictionary,» not even in the minimal literal sense of a collection of definitions for specific words and even less in the wider sense of what symbols, sentences, and social structures mean.

But the meaning he finds in the sentence gets no support, so far as I can see, from the chapter to which Whitehead is at pains to refer us for elucidation.

In the logical reading this means that «John loves Eloise» logically follows from the statements of the program interpreted as formal logical sentences.

This, then, is the meaning I would assign to the subject of the first sentence of the Nicene Creed [«I believe in one God»]: The solitary «I» is here affirming this belief, the «I» over and beyond all collective or communal assignments - the «I» alone with reality and alone with God.

Not only that but sentences only have meanings within wider literary contexts — «a man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho» would mean one thing in a historical account, and another in a parable.

You're certainly correct that we need to be clear about the terms we are talking about, for example the first two «we's in this sentence refer to you and I specifically, or generally anyone who is engaging in a debate / discussion — but when I said «If war is wrong, then it follows that we should never go to war» the «we» meant Christians, when I'm talking to you I agree that we are talking about what we as followers of Jesus should do, not just generally members of a given country or society should do.

If he did it would mean in this connection something like thoroughgoing, unbounded, not limited by prejudice or personal interest; that is, the sentence must mean, «Your love must be all - inclusive, as God's is.»

With regard to the meaning of the last sentence, I do agree with David Boucher's interpretation of reducing its meaning to being a reference to the following term's lectures.36 In my view, however, it is the last but one sentence which is of utmost importance here, referring as it does to Collingwood's concept of objective idealism, as elaborated in «Realism and Idealism» and adumbrated in «The Function of Metaphysics in CivilizatioIn my view, however, it is the last but one sentence which is of utmost importance here, referring as it does to Collingwood's concept of objective idealism, as elaborated in «Realism and Idealism» and adumbrated in «The Function of Metaphysics in Civilizatioin «Realism and Idealism» and adumbrated in «The Function of Metaphysics in Civilizatioin «The Function of Metaphysics in Civilizatioin Civilization.

By the italicized this in the last sentence I mean to indicate Jesus Christ himself in the integrity of the event which we designate when we name him.

But instead faith in God, or the lack of it, determines the meaning of the whole sentence.

Met in the sentence «all that I have met» means to be changed.

In reading this argument it is important to recognize that the last sentence is McHenry's interpretation of the meaning of the previous ones, which closely follow Whitehead's wording.

To be a colored body was to be under sentence of death, and Morrison does not flinch from trying to communicate what it means to be living color in a racist world.

In the second place, this sentence occurs in a paragraph in which Whitehead is explaining the meaning of the reformed subjectivist principle and its relation to the fourth and ninth of his categories of explanation (the principles of relativity and process respectivelyIn the second place, this sentence occurs in a paragraph in which Whitehead is explaining the meaning of the reformed subjectivist principle and its relation to the fourth and ninth of his categories of explanation (the principles of relativity and process respectivelyin a paragraph in which Whitehead is explaining the meaning of the reformed subjectivist principle and its relation to the fourth and ninth of his categories of explanation (the principles of relativity and process respectivelyin which Whitehead is explaining the meaning of the reformed subjectivist principle and its relation to the fourth and ninth of his categories of explanation (the principles of relativity and process respectively).

Now, as we will see shortly, these two English translations can give the translated sentence in question a completely different meaning... depending on which translation you choose.

I did not mean to imply that pacifists of the messianic community have consciously built upon liberal — humanistic pacifism (though my sentence can be so read — mea culpa), but only to point out what should be obvious to all: that the inroads pacifists of the messianic community have made in Roman Catholic and Protestant mainline circles can be traced to a prior acceptance of liberal — humanistic pacifism by many in those circles.

When the lecture was finished — and without meaning, I think, to be overheard — he uttered a sentence monumental in its meaning for the preacher: «If it were true, «twould do!»

Just because one can string together English words in a grammatical sentence and add a question mark at the end doesn't mean that such a construct carries any meaning.

I'm sorry but from that point your sentence and meaning has lost its origin, I can not be in your mind trying to find out what you mean within the meandering ways you currently ascribe to when using the English Language

Likewise every assertion, every sentence has, as an entity, significance and truth primarily against the background of the whole universe, quite apart from whether or not this «universal horizon» providing meaning and unity is analyzable in terms of conceptual definitions and relationships.

It has been a long time since a «life sentence» meant that the prisoner would stay in prison for the rest of his natural life.

Micah in a single immortal sentence summed up the meaning of religion: