I got into a bit of an argument with my spouse over the phrase "quite difficult"... Neither of us is a native English speaker, but we use English between us. Anyway, he thinks "quite difficult" means something is more difficult than if it was just "difficult", whereas I think it means something is a bit less difficult (though still fairly difficult) than if it was just "difficult", without the qualifier.There might also be a difference between the kinds of English we use, because she learned gringo English in Costa Rica, while I was taught the Queen's English here in Finland... Who do you think is right here?
― Tuomas, Tuesday, 12 December 2017 19:08 (six years ago) link
both
― -_- (jim in vancouver), Tuesday, 12 December 2017 19:09 (six years ago) link
Fairly
Does depend on inflection tho
― remember the lmao (darraghmac), Tuesday, 12 December 2017 19:09 (six years ago) link
in american english it tends to be an intensifier, in uk english it tends to be a modifier
― mark s, Tuesday, 12 December 2017 19:10 (six years ago) link
xps. although the one were quite means "very, almost completely" is a little archaic and bougie/anglo seeming to me (i.e. you would only hear it from an older person who speaks british english in a middle to upper class register)
― -_- (jim in vancouver), Tuesday, 12 December 2017 19:10 (six years ago) link
Tuomas, are you quite sure she's the one for you?
― ♫ very clever with maracas.jpg ♫ (Le Bateau Ivre), Tuesday, 12 December 2017 19:11 (six years ago) link
*he
quite upset we weren't invited to the nuptials
― mookieproof, Tuesday, 12 December 2017 19:13 (six years ago) link
fairly shook
― ♫ very clever with maracas.jpg ♫ (Le Bateau Ivre), Tuesday, 12 December 2017 19:13 (six years ago) link
Yeah jim basically otm although I like to affect the older usage sometimes and I'm not much bougie. Tho I guess I affect it in gentle mockery of bougieness so as you were.
― The Dearth of Stollen (Noodle Vague), Tuesday, 12 December 2017 19:13 (six years ago) link
In US English I only hear "quite" as an intensifier, so "quite difficult" suggests more difficulty than "difficult" ... it's not a large difference, though, and could easily be offset by context or intonation.
― Brad C., Tuesday, 12 December 2017 19:15 (six years ago) link
if you just use the word on its own (or with "well" in front of it) it's neither amplifier nor modifier, it means "exactly right"
(this usage even more old-fashioned uk posh tho)
― mark s, Tuesday, 12 December 2017 19:17 (six years ago) link
This was quite fun.
― A is for (Aimless), Tuesday, 12 December 2017 19:17 (six years ago) link
Yeah over here if you say "I'm quite cold" it means "I'm kinda cold". And yet if you said here that x was "quite the gourmet", it would be understood as "very much the gourmet"
― sonnet by a wite kid, "On Æolian Grief" (wins), Tuesday, 12 December 2017 19:20 (six years ago) link
^^^latter often with an edge of irony tho
― mark s, Tuesday, 12 December 2017 19:21 (six years ago) link
there can only be one english
― brimstead, Tuesday, 12 December 2017 19:22 (six years ago) link
*heSorry, I meant "she", when I'm typing fast I still occasionally forget your gendered nouns, since we don't have those.
― Tuomas, Tuesday, 12 December 2017 19:22 (six years ago) link
the soup is quite hot - the soup is rather hot. Discuss.
― StanM, Tuesday, 12 December 2017 19:26 (six years ago) link
i grew up in england and use "quite" as a modifier to mean "fairly".
― new noise, Tuesday, 12 December 2017 19:27 (six years ago) link
there can only be one English
and it quite resembles the ever-accreting garbage patch in the Pacific Ocean
― A is for (Aimless), Tuesday, 12 December 2017 19:28 (six years ago) link
second is likely a warning, first might be but as likely to be a recommendation or tamping down a worry (differentiated by tone)
swap in nice, first is a tepid warning or an expression of surprised pleasure (after expectation it wd only be ordinary), second very much a recommendation
― mark s, Tuesday, 12 December 2017 19:29 (six years ago) link
sorry, xps back to stan
Sorry, I meant "she", when I'm typing fast I still occasionally forget your gendered nouns, since we don't have those.
― Tuomas, Tuesday, December 12, 2017 7:22 PM (six minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
I'm Dutch tbh, and it was just a type, no worries
― ♫ very clever with maracas.jpg ♫ (Le Bateau Ivre), Tuesday, 12 December 2017 19:30 (six years ago) link
*typO ffs
― ♫ very clever with maracas.jpg ♫ (Le Bateau Ivre), Tuesday, 12 December 2017 19:31 (six years ago) link
i am hearing clair foy saying all these, so jim_in_vancouver's point is well made
― mark s, Tuesday, 12 December 2017 19:31 (six years ago) link
tough question guys
Definition of quite1 : wholly, completely not quite finished2 : to an extreme : positively quite sure —often used as an intensifier with a quite a swell guyquite a beauty3 : to a considerable extent : rather quite near— quite a bit: a considerable amount— quite a few: many
1 : wholly, completely not quite finished2 : to an extreme : positively quite sure —often used as an intensifier with a quite a swell guyquite a beauty3 : to a considerable extent : rather quite near— quite a bit: a considerable amount— quite a few: many
― k3vin k., Tuesday, 12 December 2017 19:32 (six years ago) link
https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51EQGwtWq-L._SX324_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg
Tuomas's question reminded me of this book title, which I *think* is playing off the two contradictory meanings? i.e. "quite the diplomat" is an arch or semi-ironic way that you might call someone very diplomatic, "not quite the diplomat" = Patten is a diplomat who is being 'undiplomatic' by writing this sprightly wry etc book about diplomacy? (also he was in a diplomatic role as HK gov even though he wasn't a career diplomat)
(the book was published in the US as 'Cousins and Strangers: America, Britain, and Europe in a New Century', which could be because the double meaning wouldn't be understood there? But I suppose it's also because ppl in the US don't know who Patten is, so there's no point giving it an arch jokey title that plays on his public persona?)
― soref, Tuesday, 12 December 2017 19:39 (six years ago) link
as well as 'quite' meaning 'very' often being used semi-ironically, 'quite' meaning 'fairly' is *also* used ironically a fair bit in UK English I think, as comic understatement, when you actually mean 'very', which confuses this question further?
― soref, Tuesday, 12 December 2017 19:42 (six years ago) link
I like this usage.
― Action of Boyle Man Prompts Visitor to Stay (Tom D.), Tuesday, 12 December 2017 19:45 (six years ago) link
It's a British - American difference for sure, but it's also about the intonation. Rising means 'a little' and falling means 'very'
― mfktz (Camaraderie at Arms Length), Tuesday, 12 December 2017 19:48 (six years ago) link
rising/falling also different for uk and us i think
― mark s, Tuesday, 12 December 2017 19:50 (six years ago) link
actually is "not quite" (as in "not exactly" i.e. "fairly") where the contradictory double meaning comes from?
― soref, Tuesday, 12 December 2017 19:55 (six years ago) link
SOED (1933 edn) doesn't include the modified-downwards meaning, interestingly (unless i'm being dim, but it's a short uncomplicated entry)
― mark s, Tuesday, 12 December 2017 20:06 (six years ago) link
Nor does Fowler's Modern English Usage (1933), though by 1965 it is acknowledged, as colloquial and by implication recent
― mark s, Tuesday, 12 December 2017 20:10 (six years ago) link
(sorry, Fowler 1st edn is 1926 not 1933, i was muddling it with the SOED date)
― mark s, Tuesday, 12 December 2017 20:11 (six years ago) link
Fake tuomas
― remember the lmao (darraghmac), Tuesday, 12 December 2017 20:53 (six years ago) link
Thanks guys for clearing this up, seems like we were both right/wrong. The wife says she won't have to divorce me now. :)
― Tuomas, Wednesday, 13 December 2017 09:53 (six years ago) link
Interestingly(?), a similar thing exists in Norwegian: "ganske" usually means "fairly", but in a more archaic sense (and, I think, modern-day Danish?) it can mean "very" or "fully", compare "ganz" in German. In the latter case it can also be used adjectivally as well as adverbially: "det ganske land" -- "the whole country" -- is still a quite common, if a bit stilted, idiom.
― anatol_merklich, Wednesday, 13 December 2017 10:04 (six years ago) link
In my experience it tends to mean "fairly" when modifying a normal adjective, eg "good", and "very" when modifying an extreme adjective, eg "brilliant". This is not always the case though.
― chap, Wednesday, 13 December 2017 13:19 (six years ago) link
Funny, I was just remembering an incident in my youth when I, gracelessly, told a female friend she was "quite intelligent". When she took offence I lied and kept lying that by quite I had meant very. She may have been no Einstein, but she wouldn't fall for that.
― Eyeball Kicks, Wednesday, 13 December 2017 17:25 (six years ago) link
Funny because the original meaning would have been something like “wholly intelligent, completely intelligent.” I guess what it implies, though, is “intelligent enough to suit”. Which, there’s no backpedaling from that.
― bumbling my way toward the light or wahtever (hardcore dilettante), Wednesday, 13 December 2017 17:46 (six years ago) link
quite the most confusing adverb
― jmm, Wednesday, 13 December 2017 17:48 (six years ago) link
Here's another question about the differences between US and UK English... I know that in the US the older meaning of the word "tramp", i.e. "drifter", "hobo", has long since become less common than the more modern meaning, i.e. "loose woman". But someone I know is claiming this is not the case in the UK, that in there "tramp" is still more commonly used to describe a homeless person. Is this true?
― Tuomas, Monday, 4 November 2019 12:52 (four years ago) link
Yes
― Xia Nu del Vague (Noodle Vague), Monday, 4 November 2019 12:54 (four years ago) link
Massively so, the "loose woman" usage by a UKer would feel affected or at least unusual
― Xia Nu del Vague (Noodle Vague), Monday, 4 November 2019 12:55 (four years ago) link
Ok, thanks!
Do you UK folks still use the word "tramp" in regular speech when talking about homeless people? It sounds kinda old-fashioned to me.
― Tuomas, Monday, 4 November 2019 12:55 (four years ago) link
it's not a word I use often and I think travelling homeless ppl are somewhat less common than in the past but where applicable, sure
― ogmor, Monday, 4 November 2019 13:03 (four years ago) link
“Tramp” would be equivalent to something like “bum”, it’s a little more derogatory than just saying “homeless person” so ppl avoid it if they don’t wanna be dicks
― YouGov to see it (wins), Monday, 4 November 2019 13:07 (four years ago) link
My teacher English once wrote on my test. “Your English is quite good.” I had to look up quite. Lol
― nathom, Monday, 4 November 2019 13:27 (four years ago) link
Yes, haven't heard anyone use it describe a homeless person directly in a long time. I suppose you might say, of someone dressed badly, they look like a tramp though.
― Michael Oliver of Penge Wins £5 (Tom D.), Monday, 4 November 2019 13:32 (four years ago) link
(xp)
"Maybe you think I look a tramp" - Herman's Hermits, "Leaning on the Lamp Post" - earlier version by George Formby
― Josefa, Monday, 4 November 2019 13:50 (four years ago) link
Herman's Hermits' song must have confused American fans.
― Michael Oliver of Penge Wins £5 (Tom D.), Monday, 4 November 2019 13:54 (four years ago) link
Not as much as the Kinks with "and he likes his fags the best" from "Well Respected Man"
― Josefa, Monday, 4 November 2019 13:56 (four years ago) link
I don't think so. Lady & the Tramp came out in 1955 so that usage must have been still relatively current
― rob, Monday, 4 November 2019 13:57 (four years ago) link
Actually Otis Redding & Carla Thomas used "tramp" in the traditional way in their 1967 hit "Tramp," so the two meanings coexisted in the US for a while
― Josefa, Monday, 4 November 2019 13:59 (four years ago) link
Carla calls Otis a tramp in that song, not the other way around
― YouGov to see it (wins)
the tramps i knew would be very offended at being told they were equivalent to bums
"Not as much as the Kinks with "and he likes his fags the best" from "Well Respected Man"
― Josefa"
god, "harry rag" confused the hell out of me; uk "fag" i can get, but the rhyming slang for it doesn't cross my mind
― tantric societal collapse (rushomancy), Monday, 4 November 2019 14:39 (four years ago) link
"tramp" has a connotation of vagrancy, e.g., a homeless person who wanders from place to place; from "tramp" as a verb
― Brad C., Monday, 4 November 2019 14:50 (four years ago) link
― Tuomas, Monday, 4 November 2019 15:04 (four years ago) link
Would also assume Cher means vagrant in "Gypsies, Tramps and Thieves" (1971)
― Josefa, Monday, 4 November 2019 15:11 (four years ago) link
although maybe not, maybe that is the exact point when the two meanings transferred
― Josefa, Monday, 4 November 2019 15:14 (four years ago) link
"Harry Ramp" for "tramp" is more usual rhyming slang but that stuff changes rapidly
― Xia Nu del Vague (Noodle Vague), Monday, 4 November 2019 15:31 (four years ago) link
"Harry Rag" is actually Harry Wragg though? I would have thought? (Harry Wragg was a famous jockey, American, Finnish + elsewhere chums).
― Michael Oliver of Penge Wins £5 (Tom D.), Monday, 4 November 2019 16:14 (four years ago) link
wragg and bone, where does that leave us
tramp is such a beano word, i mean does anyone use it
― deems of internment (darraghmac), Monday, 4 November 2019 18:20 (four years ago) link
https://img.discogs.com/9A7IMcnDbklZrg0uS0A6laFLmN8=/fit-in/600x536/filters:strip_icc():format(jpeg):mode_rgb():quality(90)/discogs-images/R-2148061-1490651898-1921.jpeg.jpg
― Michael Oliver of Penge Wins £5 (Tom D.), Monday, 4 November 2019 18:28 (four years ago) link
"Tramp" = "loose woman" was well established by 1937 at least: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lady_Is_a_Tramp
― Brad C., Monday, 4 November 2019 20:59 (four years ago) link
Earliest attribution in OED is 1922, quoting Eugene O’Neill, so no doubt predates that if he heard it in the wild.
― Dan Worsley, Monday, 4 November 2019 22:00 (four years ago) link
the 'quite' discussion is blowing my mind. i feel like it's one of those pictures that you can see as either convex or concave and once you see it a certain way you can't see it the other way no matter how hard to you try. for me it's always an intensifier, magnitude depending on emphasis
'was it difficult?''yes, it was quite difficult'
'was it difficult?''yes it was QUITE difficult'
even if i pushed out my lower lip and looked up at the ceiling and shrugged my shoulders and made diffident noises when saying either of these i'd be affirming the difficulty, and adding another little dollop of difficulty onto it. or basically what Brad C. said.
― Li'l Brexit (Tracer Hand), Tuesday, 5 November 2019 00:51 (four years ago) link
quite out of the question old boy
― deems of internment (darraghmac), Tuesday, 5 November 2019 12:14 (four years ago) link
its almost....clarifying as certain, but not strengthening as such?
'was it difficult?''well, it was quite difficult'
― mark s, Tuesday, 5 November 2019 12:22 (four years ago) link
If you use it twice it definitely strengthens: "it was quite, quite difficult"
― the creator has a mazda van (NickB), Tuesday, 5 November 2019 12:24 (four years ago) link
but what idiots do that?
(a: me)
― the creator has a mazda van (NickB), Tuesday, 5 November 2019 12:25 (four years ago) link
It's more than strengthening, it's making it absolute.
"It is quite difficult""It is quite impossible"
― fetter, Tuesday, 5 November 2019 12:29 (four years ago) link
using 'quite' as a caveat is quite hors de question!
― Li'l Brexit (Tracer Hand), Tuesday, 5 November 2019 12:37 (four years ago) link
just to be clear, when it's preceded with "well" (as in my example) it's clearly a limiting-via-precision and NOT an intensifier
― mark s, Tuesday, 5 November 2019 12:56 (four years ago) link
actually precision is always to the point with this word: other elements in the sentence indicate where on the scale the precision occurs -- "up at the top end!" or "further back than you think!"
― mark s, Tuesday, 5 November 2019 12:57 (four years ago) link
hmm i feel like the rejoinder is saying 'yes, it was very difficult, BUT....'
― Li'l Brexit (Tracer Hand), Tuesday, 5 November 2019 12:58 (four years ago) link
I'd argue that etymologically 'tramp' for 'loose woman' probably comes from the same place as 'tramp' for 'vagrant' / 'hobo' etc, ie not having / maintaining a home, but the connotations for a woman are different for a man in what that means.
'Tramp stamp' I still hear in the UK every so often and everyone gets what that means.
― Hey Bob (Scik Mouthy), Tuesday, 5 November 2019 13:15 (four years ago) link
Also 'quite' as a modifier in the UK I'd suggest denotes very mild surprise in either direction depending on context - either more easy or more difficult than was expected. All about inflection.
― Hey Bob (Scik Mouthy), Tuesday, 5 November 2019 13:30 (four years ago) link
Quite!
― Michael Oliver of Penge Wins £5 (Tom D.), Tuesday, 5 November 2019 13:32 (four years ago) link
I wonder if the word 'trollop' influenced the tramp shift somehow
― Josefa, Tuesday, 5 November 2019 13:32 (four years ago) link
tracer it's saying "difficult? difficult to YOU maybe (you lump)"
― mark s, Tuesday, 5 November 2019 13:35 (four years ago) link
"very difficult? yes, if by very difficult you mean quite difficult"
― mark s, Tuesday, 5 November 2019 13:37 (four years ago) link
hahah this usage has utterly passed me by then. what a lump indeed!
― Li'l Brexit (Tracer Hand), Tuesday, 5 November 2019 13:47 (four years ago) link
Tramp stamp' I still hear in the UK every so often and everyone gets what that means.
Can't say I've ever heard that and must admit I'm not 100% sure what it means.
― Dan Worsley, Tuesday, 5 November 2019 17:02 (four years ago) link
Ok found it on urban dictionary. I move in genteel circles which explains my naivety.
― Dan Worsley, Tuesday, 5 November 2019 17:03 (four years ago) link