Generate the answer for a given question. The question requires common knowledge of English. Make sure that the answer is in detail, long, consistent with the context, and requires general knowledge of English. To be less repetitive, please vary your language for each question. Give a proper explanation to answer, and if necessary, provide the definition of various terms. And conclude your answer if it's long. If you have used other resources (e.g., Merriam Webster's.) to answer the question, include citations in your answer. You don't need to paraphrase the context of your resources, but make sure that your answer is consistent and complete.

Q: Does 'egoistic' and 'egotistic' mean the same thing?.

A: No. While similar, they have some important differences. Consider this note on usage from the Oxford Dictionaries: The words egoism and egotism are frequently confused, as though interchangeable, but there are distinctions worth noting. Both words derive from Latin ego ('I'), the first-person singular pronoun. Egotism, the more commonly used term , denotes an excessive sense of self-importance, too-frequent use of the word 'I,' and general arrogance and boastfulness. Egoism, a more subtle term , is perhaps best left to ethicists, for whom it denotes a view or theory of moral behavior in which self-interest is the root of moral conduct. An egoist, then , might devote considerable attention to introspection, but could be modest about it, whereas an egotist would have an exaggerated sense of the importance of his or her self-analysis, and would have to tell everyone
****
Q: Possible Duplicate: Is a company always plural, or are small companies singular? When I'm referring to a group of multiple things, should it be considered singular or plural for the purposes of applying a verb to it? For example, which is correct in the examples below? A sentence is a group of words that is followed by a period. A sentence is a group of words that are followed by a period. The group of people constitutes a jury. The group of people constitute a jury. A group of crows is called a 'murder'. A group of crows are called a 'murder'. My instinct is that it depends on whether the verb is referncing the group itself or the members of the group directly, but is that right?.

A: According to the OALD, group can actually serve as either a plural or singular noun. The category they give is 'countable + singular or plural verb'. So, an example of correct use is: A group of us is/are going to the theatre this evening. For any of your examples, both is and are can be used. I think the difference between them is as you say: use is when you are referring to the group, and use are when you are referring to the members of a given group. This page on when to use 'group' as plural from Washington State University backs this up, saying: When the group is being considered as a whole, it can be treated as a single entity: 'the group was ready to go on stage.' But when the individuality of its members is being emphasized, 'group' is plural: 'the group were in disagreement about where to go for dinner.' To analyze your given examples, here are some notes: A sentence is a group of words that is followed by a period. Use this form if you're talking about the group itself. That is, a sentence is a group of words followed by a period. A sentence is a group of words that are followed by a period. This implies that 'This. Is. A. Sentence' is a sentence. The group of people constitutes a jury. The group of people constitute a jury. This would be more correct, since you are describing the nature of the group. A group of crows is called a 'murder'. This would be correct, since you're again describing an entire group. A group of crows are called a 'murder'.
****
Q: Does this Bible verse have the same unfortunate double meaning in American English as it does in British English? The photo is taken from the 1984 translation of the (US) NIV. It looks as though the UK edition of the 1984 NIV had the same text; but in the 2011 update, the UK edition has ill in place of sick, while the US edition remains unchanged. I have visions of people bringing little pots of vomit...

A:
The referent is just elided here. You can read this as meaning 'sick [friends]' or 'sick [relatives].' The reason it sounds odd to British ears is that the current British colloquial usage of 'sick' as a euphemism for 'vomit' is overpowering any other interpretation for you. Since that colloquial usage is relatively unheard of in America, you are correct that the phrase sounds less odd to American ears. Perhaps that did influence the translation choices made by the NIV.
****
