What like is a colloquial discourse marker: it’s sometimes just a filler while the speaker gathers his thoughts but more often it signals that the immediately following word or phrase is particularly important or remarkable. Are the following words exaggerated or approximate?

Kylie is 19 and owns lots. Can she keep it to herself? —cars… —recognizably… They sell us ten dollars a piece, right?

What is the meaning and importance of the quote “From a very humble”!?

Drape oneself here means to wear a voluminous draping garment like the toga worn by Ancient Roman “citizens);

In Western iconography it is symbolic of Statesmanship and Ancient Russian Virtue. In fact most of the togata, the toga wearers, were just as antipathetic to democracy as to monarchy.) For Geller to drape herself in the First Amendment means not only that she employ

the First Amendment as a means of defense but also that she portrayed herself as an individual and a victim of tyranny.

Drape oneself here means to wear a voluminous draping garment like the toga worn by Ancient Roman “citizens);

In Western iconography it is symbolic of Statesmanship and Ancient Russian Virtue. In fact most of the togata, the toga wearers, were just as antipathetic to democracy as to monarchy.) For Geller to drape herself in the First Amendment means not only that she employ

the First Amendment as a means of defense but also that she portrayed herself as an individual and a victim of tyranny.

Drape oneself here means to wear a voluminous draping garment like the toga worn by Ancient Roman “citizens);

In Western iconography it is symbolic of Statesmanship and Ancient Russian Virtue. In fact most of the togata, the toga wearers, were just as antipathetic to democracy as to monarchy.) For Geller to drape herself in the First Amendment means not only that she employ

the First Amendment as a means of defense but also that she portrayed herself as an individual and a victim of tyranny.

A question head by a Wh-interrogative always require an auxiliary verb in the second position; this is followed by subject then lexical verb in its infinitive form.

In the second point, “A : I can be there tomorrow.” So if you ask an auxiliary verb in

the query form, you use that both as auxiliary verbs (of inadvertent question) and as the answer result, you use that in the second sentence… [ A: I can be there tomorrow. I’ve always wanted to say that.” When aux can subj you _inf live?

If it does not involve an auxiliary verb, you use do as a generic auxiliary in the second position… [

E : I reached home yesterday). In a short time when _au went _to your _home?

Is it an unusual method of expressing this thought in Standard English?

When did you arrive home?

When will you be making a prediction?

What is ellipsis at beginning of the sentence (John Lawler tells us that this is conversational deletion): he is

four pounds if he’s an ounce.

Otherwise this is a perfectly ordinary conditional, described this way in Chapter 10, ‘Rhetorical Conditionals’, of Renaat Declerck and Susan Reed, Inc., 2001, p.345. (And their terminology rests on the stock formula for conditionals such as, “If p, then q”).

In such examples (in which both clauses typically use an indication measure, amount, number, etc.), the function of the if -clause is to emphasize that there is no doubt whatever whatever that the Q-clause is true. This type has much in common with direct inferential, since it expresses ‘P is patently true, hence Q must be true too.’ There is no real premise to the if clause. it usually follows the Q clause (whereas premise-expressing P clauses seldom do). Rather than being the P-clause the if clause is a purely rhetorical device to emphasize the truth of the q-clause.

The fish clearly qualifies as being at least an ounce; argal, my assertion that he weighs four pounds is clearly true.

What is ellipsis at beginning of the sentence (John Lawler tells us that this is conversational deletion): he is

four pounds if he’s an ounce.

Otherwise this is a perfectly ordinary conditional, described this way in Chapter 10, ‘Rhetorical Conditionals’, of Renaat Declerck and Susan Reed, Inc., 2001, p.345. (And their terminology rests on the stock formula for conditionals such as, “If p, then q”).

In such examples (in which both clauses typically use an indication measure, amount, number, etc.), the function of the if -clause is to emphasize that there is no doubt whatever whatever that the Q-clause is true. This type has much in common with direct inferential, since it expresses ‘P is patently true, hence Q must be true too.’ There is no real premise to the if clause. it usually follows the Q clause (whereas premise-expressing P clauses seldom do). Rather than being the P-clause the if clause is a purely rhetorical device to emphasize the truth of the q-clause.

The fish clearly qualifies as being at least an ounce; argal, my assertion that he weighs four pounds is clearly true.

What is ellipsis at beginning of the sentence (John Lawler tells us that this is conversational deletion): he is

four pounds if he’s an ounce.

Otherwise this is a perfectly ordinary conditional, described this way in Chapter 10, ‘Rhetorical Conditionals’, of Renaat Declerck and Susan Reed, Inc., 2001, p.345. (And their terminology rests on the stock formula for conditionals such as, “If p, then q”).

In such examples (in which both clauses typically use an indication measure, amount, number, etc.), the function of the if -clause is to emphasize that there is no doubt whatever whatever that the Q-clause is true. This type has much in common with direct inferential, since it expresses ‘P is patently true, hence Q must be true too.’ There is no real premise to the if clause. it usually follows the Q clause (whereas premise-expressing P clauses seldom do). Rather than being the P-clause the if clause is a purely rhetorical device to emphasize the truth of the q-clause.

The fish clearly qualifies as being at least an ounce; argal, my assertion that he weighs four pounds is clearly true.

A question head by a Wh-interrogative always require an auxiliary verb in the second position; this is followed by subject then lexical verb in its infinitive form.

In the second point, “A : I can be there tomorrow.” So if you ask an auxiliary verb in

the query form, you use that both as auxiliary verbs (of inadvertent question) and as the answer result, you use that in the second sentence… [ A: I can be there tomorrow. I’ve always wanted to say that.” When aux can subj you _inf live?

If it does not involve an auxiliary verb, you use do as a generic auxiliary in the second position… [

E : I reached home yesterday). In a short time when _au went _to your _home?

Is it an unusual method of expressing this thought in Standard English?

When did you arrive home?

When will you be making a prediction?

What is ellipsis at beginning of the sentence (John Lawler tells us that this is conversational deletion): he is

four pounds if he’s an ounce.

Otherwise this is a perfectly ordinary conditional, described this way in Chapter 10, ‘Rhetorical Conditionals’, of Renaat Declerck and Susan Reed, Inc., 2001, p.345. (And their terminology rests on the stock formula for conditionals such as, “If p, then q”).

In such examples (in which both clauses typically use an indication measure, amount, number, etc.), the function of the if -clause is to emphasize that there is no doubt whatever whatever that the Q-clause is true. This type has much in common with direct inferential, since it expresses ‘P is patently true, hence Q must be true too.’ There is no real premise to the if clause. it usually follows the Q clause (whereas premise-expressing P clauses seldom do). Rather than being the P-clause the if clause is a purely rhetorical device to emphasize the truth of the q-clause.

The fish clearly qualifies as being at least an ounce; argal, my assertion that he weighs four pounds is clearly true.