<p>"Myriad" is the Greek word for the number 10,000. But of course it usually doesn't mean literally ten thousand, but rather is used express the concept of "many". But for grammatical constructions you usually won't go wrong if in your mnd you just substitute 10,000 for myriad and see what fits best.</p>
<p>Thus, "10,000 stores", probably works better than "10,000 of stores".</p>
<p>it is the greek word for 10,000. But, you can also probably assume that it can be used as term for "thousands". </p>
<p>So, "thousands of stores" > " thousands stores"</p>
<p>Whatever, myriad stores is grammatically correct. "Myriad of" is heard more often, but myriad as an adjective was the original use of the word, before it became so commonly misused. (in fact, there was thread on the parents board about annoyingly misused words, "myriad of" being one of them.) This discussion has gone on for far too long! :)</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>it is the greek word for 10,000. But, you can also probably assume that it can be used as term for "thousands".<<</p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>You can assume that, but you would probably be wrong if you did. I've seen it mean an undetermined "many" and specifically 10,000 but never "thousands"</p>
<p>10,000 stores - yes
Many stores - yes
thousands of stores or many of stores - no</p>
<p>The OED documents this usage of myriad as a noun:</p>
<p>[1609 A. CRAIG Poet. Recreations sig. A4v, Thus feeling ill, and fearing worse each day, A miriad of mis-fortunes I embrace.]</p>
<p>As noted in the dictionary.com quote somewhere on page one, isn't myriad generally accepted in either form? Why does someone have to be wrong :)?</p>
<p>Another possibility is our completely rejecting the use of myriad for the alternative "myriadfold," which apparently can also function as either a noun or an adjective, heh. But I guess that wouldn't end this little dispute...</p>
<p>wow i looked up the whole grammar thing on myriad when i read that post too, but i didnt post a reply cuz i didnt want to seem obsessive.</p>
<p>ahh man, and look how much we've talked about this? we are SUCH nerds. i love it. yay for yale! i can't wait.</p>
<p>Whatever happened to the original topic of this post...</p>
<p>Well, let's be optimistic and assume that people have stopped caring about which college is "better" for a variety of reasons based on largely subjective criteria... Heh :). Boola boo.</p>
<p>"Now I'll tell you one neighborhood that gave me pause; Middleton Conn. To get directions to Wesleyan I accidently stopped into some creepy homeless men's workforce and spent the entire time feeling them eyeing my dior bag"</p>
<p>Wow!!! I went through middletown conn on my way to west point and felt that it was the most beautiful small town in conn. And I grew up in Newport, RI so its not like i have been living in the slums. I was thinking about applying to that school until i realized it was all girls lol. But yea, thats weird. I deff did not get that impression when i passed through it.</p>
<p>Middletown is the county seat for Middlesex County, one of the largest counties in Connecticut and is the natural venue for a lot of social services. Nevertheless, it is a solid, middle-class bedroom community for nearby Hartford and increasingly for New Haven as well. The OP's description sounds like one the proverbial blind men trying to describe an elephant. </p>
<p>I trust you were kidding about the all-girl part? :)</p>
<p>Voice from the dead!</p>
<p>Not dead. Just spread thin. I predict this will be a banner year for Wes admissions. The number of apps, by no means record-breaking, will yield slightly more highly qualified matriculants for the second year in a row. There will be more southerners, more westerners and a slight bump in board scores. I call it, "the Gatekeeper Effect".</p>
<p>The "Gatekeeper effect" eh? </p>
<p>What do the 2009 stats show? </p>
<p>Oddly, according to USNews, the admit rate for Wes was actually lower in 2001 before the book was published in 2002 than it was in the two subsequent years!</p>
<p>Are you talking popularity, or "diversity" stats?</p>
<p>Depends on what you mean by popularity. More people, especially from outside the Northeast, are hearing about Wesleyan and applying; conversely, it really puts the pressure on New Yorkers to accurately self-assess their chances. The results are good academically and from a diversity standpoint, but a wash in terms of overall popularity.</p>
<p>Seriously, just for a minute: do you really think that, overall, the effect of "The Gatekeepers" was positive, because, as you may recall, I didn't think it would be. </p>
<p>I'm pretty sure that several schools declined the "privilege" of having the author sit in with their adcomms in order to get a "warts and all" inside view of the admissions process.</p>
<p>Like a lot of things, the admissions process isn't very pretty under a microscope.</p>
<p>Some have compared reading "The Gatekeepers" to watching sausage being made. Yes, Steinberg has implied rather strongly that Middlebury was among his original choices for a typical institution of "moderate difficulty" in admissions; and in light of recent events at Midd, perhaps it was predictable they would have turned him down.</p>
<p>Nevertheless, my sense of the Wesleyan CC community is that nearly everyone read "The Gatekeepers" at some point during the admissions process; some thought it put the school in a bad light; others thought it made the college look good. Few thought it so bad as to deter them from applying altogether. If the same 50/50 split holds true for applicants from Topeka, Kansas and Tupolo, Mississippi as it does for New York and Los Angeles, it can't help but be a net gain for Wesleyan.</p>
<p>Did I miss something?</p>
<p>I would hasten to point out that it isn't the racial overtone of the article and subsequent thread that is relevant here; rather, a certain opaqueness in Midd's internal proceedings which seems to be making the situation worse: </p>
<p>non-functioning link</p>
<p>Try it again. :p</p>