Does the word "quite", when modifying an adjective, mean "very" or "fairly"?

Tuomas, are you quite sure she's the one for you?

*he

quite upset we weren't invited to the nuptials

fairly shook

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.

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.

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)

This was quite fun.

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"

^^^latter often with an edge of irony tho

there can only be one english

*he

Sorry, I meant "she", when I'm typing fast I still occasionally forget your gendered nouns, since we don't have those.

the soup is quite hot - the soup is rather hot. Discuss.

i grew up in england and use "quite" as a modifier to mean "fairly".

there can only be one English

and it quite resembles the ever-accreting garbage patch in the Pacific Ocean

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

sorry, xps back to stan

*he

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

*typO ffs

i am hearing clair foy saying all these, so jim_in_vancouver's point is well made

tough question guys

Definition of quite

1 : wholly, completely not quite finished
2 : to an extreme : positively quite sure —often used as an intensifier with a quite a swell guyquite a beauty
3 : to a considerable extent : rather quite near
— quite a bit
: a considerable amount
— quite a few
: many

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?)

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?

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)

I like this usage.

It's a British - American difference for sure, but it's also about the intonation. Rising means 'a little' and falling means 'very'

rising/falling also different for uk and us i think

actually is "not quite" (as in "not exactly" i.e. "fairly") where the contradictory double meaning comes from?

SOED (1933 edn) doesn't include the modified-downwards meaning, interestingly (unless i'm being dim, but it's a short uncomplicated entry)

Nor does Fowler's Modern English Usage (1933), though by 1965 it is acknowledged, as colloquial and by implication recent

(sorry, Fowler 1st edn is 1926 not 1933, i was muddling it with the SOED date)

Fake tuomas

Thanks guys for clearing this up, seems like we were both right/wrong. The wife says she won't have to divorce me now. :)

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.

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.

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.

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.

quite the most confusing adverb

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?

Yes

Massively so, the "loose woman" usage by a UKer would feel affected or at least unusual

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.

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

“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

My teacher English once wrote on my test. “Your English is quite good.” I had to look up quite. Lol

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.

(xp)

"Maybe you think I look a tramp" - Herman's Hermits, "Leaning on the Lamp Post" - earlier version by George Formby

Herman's Hermits' song must have confused American fans.

Not as much as the Kinks with "and he likes his fags the best" from "Well Respected Man"

I don't think so. Lady & the Tramp came out in 1955 so that usage must have been still relatively current

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

Carla calls Otis a tramp in that song, not the other way around

“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)

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

"tramp" has a connotation of vagrancy, e.g., a homeless person who wanders from place to place; from "tramp" as a verb

Carla calls Otis a tramp in that song, not the other way around

Would also assume Cher means vagrant in "Gypsies, Tramps and Thieves" (1971)

although maybe not, maybe that is the exact point when the two meanings transferred

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

"Harry Ramp" for "tramp" is more usual rhyming slang but that stuff changes rapidly

"Harry Rag" is actually Harry Wragg though? I would have thought? (Harry Wragg was a famous jockey, American, Finnish + elsewhere chums).

wragg and bone, where does that leave us

tramp is such a beano word, i mean does anyone use it

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

"Tramp" = "loose woman" was well established by 1937 at least: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lady_Is_a_Tramp

Earliest attribution in OED is 1922, quoting Eugene O’Neill, so no doubt predates that if he heard it in the wild.

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.

quite out of the question old boy

its almost....clarifying as certain, but not strengthening as such?

'was it difficult?'
'well, it was quite difficult'

If you use it twice it definitely strengthens: "it was quite, quite difficult"

but what idiots do that?

(a: me)

It's more than strengthening, it's making it absolute.

"It is quite difficult"
"It is quite impossible"

using 'quite' as a caveat is quite hors de question!

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

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!"

hmm i feel like the rejoinder is saying 'yes, it was very difficult, BUT....'

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.

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.

Quite!

I wonder if the word 'trollop' influenced the tramp shift somehow

tracer it's saying "difficult? difficult to YOU maybe (you lump)"

"very difficult? yes, if by very difficult you mean quite difficult"

hahah this usage has utterly passed me by then. what a lump indeed!

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.

Ok found it on urban dictionary. I move in genteel circles which explains my naivety.