English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

or are both correct?

=> additionally: Can anybody give me a link where to find answers to this kind of language questions?

Thank you very much for your answer!!!

2007-01-17 20:28:36 · 10 answers · asked by Japos 1 in Society & Culture Languages

10 answers

A small volume almost always refers to something that is made up of material and can be measured, such as a small volume of water in the water tank. BUT, you can easily say, "The tank's water is low." "The air pressure is low." Putting 'volume' together with 'low' often sounds awkward when measuring concrete, physical things--but not always. For example, you wouldn't say, "My tire has a small volume of pressure." But you would say, "My tire has low air pressure. And you could say, "My tire has a low volume of air pressure."

Low volume often refers to sound. "Please turn the volume down low." But it can refer to other things, such as electricity: "The current is on low volume." You would never say, "The current is on small volume." It just sounds awkward.

And this case of awkwardness gets to the heart of the matter. Usage determines correctness over time. You can try this little trick out for yourself: Say the sentence you want to say both ways with 'low' and 'small'. You will get the feel of it quickly, as one will sound better to you, and it will sound better to you probably because that is the way you have heard it or read it before, and it is in common usage.

When in doubt and nothing else works, leave the word 'volume' out all together, and you can say just about anything correctly: The water level is low. The water pressure is low. The sound is on low. And so on. . . .

You ask about a link to help you out with such questions. Far better than a link, I would recommend "The Elements of Style", by Strunk and White (for American-style English), and "Eats, Shoots and Leaves", by Lynne Truss (for British English and American English, Aussie English, Canadian English, and so on). Both should be available at any bookstore with any sense of pride in the English-speaking world. Either will serve you very well throughout life, believe me.

I hope this helps.

2007-01-17 20:47:40 · answer #1 · answered by Marion111 3 · 0 0

Low volume

2007-01-17 20:32:47 · answer #2 · answered by Deb 4 · 0 1

I believe both are correct/acceptable. Volume is measured in numbers, and those numbers can be small or large relatively, and the actual thing that is being measured for volume can been visually gauged as being high or low.

Sorry I know of no such site.

2007-01-17 20:37:42 · answer #3 · answered by john k 4 · 0 0

It depends on what you mean buy volume. Volume can mean quantity in which case a small volume might mean few.

Low volume is likely to be used with respect to how loud something is, in which case low volume could mean quiet

2007-01-17 20:33:41 · answer #4 · answered by Nemesis 7 · 0 1

both are correct.. low volume for sound.. small volume for quantity like liquids..

sorry, no idea abt the site..

2007-01-17 20:36:50 · answer #5 · answered by mcsteamyandme 3 · 0 0

Both are good ,I use low Volume ,as in sound,,
For others ,,you can say ,low volume in ,water ,air ,etc etc,

2007-01-17 20:33:34 · answer #6 · answered by JJ 7 · 0 0

well, it depends!
by volume do you mean as the measurement for liquids? or volume of sound?
small volume for the former, and low volume for the latter..
i think :D

2007-01-17 20:34:06 · answer #7 · answered by mel 2 · 0 1

this might or won't relate on your undertaking, yet there is something referred to as "Infrasonics". Infrasonic frequencies are under what we can hear, yet at extreme ranges you may experience the vibration - attempt status marvelous in front of a loudspeaker at a rock stay overall performance and you will experience the vibration. (you will additionally injury your listening to!). yet at a undeniable frequency, someplace around 8 Hertz, it is going to reason a resonance on your physique and reason nausea, disorientation and different sick outcomes. prolonged exposure could probably convey approximately an enormously unsightly loss of life. This exchange into got here across by utilising accident whilst production facility workers in a undeniable section have been getting ill on the activity. The reason exchange into traced to an air coping with unit in the section which exchange into flooding the section with a sturdy yet inaudible "tone" of around 8 Hz.

2016-12-16 07:24:49 · answer #8 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

depends on how you use the word volume..

It would be wrong to say "the volume is to small"
the correct way is the "the volume is to low"

but you could use small volume.. like this.
There was a small volume change when the explosion occured.

Where to get more answers i dunno.

2007-01-17 20:36:02 · answer #9 · answered by sarcasm1743 2 · 0 1

low volume is better

2007-01-17 21:14:52 · answer #10 · answered by snakesneez 1 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers