Quite a good lesson to learn

[girlyswot]

Among the many linguistic differences between the US and the UK, the use of the word 'quite' is one of the most subtle and least known, I think.

In the US, 'quite' means 'very, completely'. Merriam-Webster has, 'wholly, completely, positively.'

In the UK, 'quite' can have this sense, though often in the negative. 'I'm not quite done yet' = 'I'm not completely done yet.'

However, in the UK 'quite' is much more often used to indicate something completely different. The online Cambridge dictionary gives as the first definition of 'quite', 'Not very.' I'm not sure that's exactly right. I'd say that 'quite' means 'fairly', 'nearly', or 'moderately'. But it is very often used with a negative, deprecating overtone, which means that it does end up meaning something more like 'Not very'.

So a school report in the UK that said a child was 'quite good' at something, should not be taken as glowing praise but as a slightly pointed put down. Similarly if we say that something is 'quite interesting' we're really saying 'Shut up and get to the point.'

Obviously, this information is quite interesting in its own right, but I really mention it here because I've had a number of reviews and comments which I've had to do a double take on. When someone I knew, who had previously told me how much they enjoyed my work, first left a comment on a story of mine to say that it was 'quite good' or 'quite clever', I was slightly taken aback. It wasn't until months later that I realised she meant it quite differently(!) from the way I had understood it. And I'm guessing that there will be others who have had similar experiences and may have been unintentionally discouraged.



Separated by a common language? Quite.

Comments

[bookwormsarah.livejournal.com]

That was fascinating, I had no idea that there were such different meanings. I have used 'quite' in a 'completely/exactly' sense on occasion but have never really thought about the linguistic connotations before.
("She spends £60 on a skirt and has the nerve to moan that she is really hard up?"
"Quite.")

[girlyswot.livejournal.com]

Yes. That's an interesting example where presumably 'quite' means 'very' or 'completely' but yet is used with a clearly negative connotation.

[sam-t.livejournal.com]

I disagree: in the UK examples (the school report, for example), in the absence of context suggesting otherwise, I read 'quite' as meaning 'moderately'. The school report is positive, although not greatly so, and the interesting thing, while probably not pulling people away from their favourite pastime, is probably something they'd note for future reference (see QI the programme, for example).

A review saying that something is 'quite good' may be damning with faint praise, but that's not the same thing.

[girlyswot.livejournal.com]

You might read 'quite' as meaning 'moderately' but when I was writing school reports, that wasn't necessarily what I intended...

But even so, 'moderately' is not 'wholly' or 'very', which is, I think, the only meaning the word takes in the 'US'.

[coughingbear]

In UK English I suppose we might get near the US meaning by saying 'quite quite brilliant' (if we were in a 1920s novel, anyway).

[girlyswot.livejournal.com]

I say that all the time. Maybe I should be in a 1920's novel.

[sam-t.livejournal.com]

Definitely agree about the UK and US meanings being different, but I still think that the UK meaning in the absence of other information is usually 'moderately'. The trouble is that, at least in the examples I can think of offhand, it seems to be enormously sensitive to context. For example:

"I'm quite worried about my exams" = "I'm very worried about my exams", but only because the listener expects emotional descriptions to be understated.
"I think that film is quite good" = "It brightened a dull afternoon but I wouldn't necessarily buy the DVD."
"I think that film is quite good, actually" = "Say that about my favourite film again, why don't you?"
"What do you think of the cake I made you, dear?" "Quite good." = Depends entirely on tone of voice; it may be a put-down of the 'least positive comment I can get away with' type.
"You say that quite a lot, don't you?" = Row tactics on the order of 'you always...' and 'you never...'.

When were the school reports written, and for what sort of academic expectations? I'd honestly be surprised if I was the only person to have a scale going 'could do better' < 'competent' < 'quite good' < 'good' < 'excellent'.

[girlyswot.livejournal.com]

Definitely agree about the UK and US meanings being different, but I still think that the UK meaning in the absence of other information is usually 'moderately'. The trouble is that, at least in the examples I can think of offhand, it seems to be enormously sensitive to context.

Yes, I think this was what I was trying to say. I think the basic definition is something like 'fairly, nearly or moderately'. But it is so often dependent on things like tone and context and is very often used with negative connotations.

The school where I wrote reports had a policy of having to say at least one positive thing about each student. Sometimes that was quite(!) difficult, and the word 'quite' with its natural ambiguity came in very handy. 'X is quite good at algebra but...'

[sam-t.livejournal.com]

Ah. That makes it much clearer. If it's the one positive thing in a report, it's not too hard to spot "The best thing I can say about you is that you're not absolutely incompetent at algebra, and I had to have my arm twisted to say that". People who aren't familiar with the 'one positive thing' strategy would still spot that as a consolation prize, I think.

[zia-montrose.livejournal.com]

So I shouldn't tell you that I find this post 'quite interesting'? ; )

[girlyswot.livejournal.com]

You can say that if you like. Just know that I shall be mortally offended. *g*

[nineveh-uk.livejournal.com]

My grandmother used to say that things were "quite nice". THough it wasn't damning with faint praise, it did have a slightly "meh" feeling about it!

On the other hand, I have called something "quite interesting" in a positive way - to mean that something is not riveting, but more interesting than I had expected. Perhaps a bit like the "quite good, actually" film comment above, but without the preceding hostile negative.

[moonette1.livejournal.com]

I'm American, and you've totally lost me. (Therefore, I suppose I should NOT say I'm quite lost.)

This is sort of like Opposite Day.

[girlyswot.livejournal.com]

LOL! Just don't tell me my writing is 'quite good' and you'll be fine.

[moonette1.livejournal.com]

How about 'Your writing is extremely good.'? And that's the truth! :)

[girlyswot.livejournal.com]

I don't think this is precisely reserve vs. extroversion. I do think it's a reflection of the two cultures in terms of the British preference for understatement, irony, sarcasm and caution vs. the American preference for overstatement and superlatives.

[megan29.livejournal.com]

Yes, that's what I was going for, and I thought that reserve vs. extroversion summarized it quite well (by which I mean fairly well, really, in this case).

Sorry, I deleted the original comment to edit it and repost, since part of it was eaten out. ah, well.

[girlyswot.livejournal.com]

Reserve and extroversion are, I think, predominantly character traits, rather than linguistic traits. You can be very extrovert and still speak in ways that use devastating understatement, irony, sarcasm and caution. You just do it a lot and with a lot of other people around!

[megan29.livejournal.com]

Ok, ok, you're right. I was just trying to be brief(er). Actually, I first typed "flamboyant Americans," but I thought that might be a bit much.

Btw, while possible in principle, I have yet to see an extrovert speaking with understatement and sarcasm. The extroverts I met couldn't get the words fast enough out of their mouths - no time for their (possibly) sarcastic brains to catch up. Maybe I'll find your type of extroverts in England, who knows?

[tdu000.livejournal.com]

You will find quite a number of extroverts who talk like that in England.

[owl]

And Ireland. Although the national character is not the same as England's, it's closer to it than either are to the American.

[megan29.livejournal.com]

Be careful. She might question what extreme you're talking about. You never know with these Brits. :-)

As for myself, I am now quite mystified - in a 'very' sort of way - about the proper use of the word. Apparently, even though I learned British English in school, I acquired quite a few verbal skills in US, since Ros's post left me open-mouthed. My hypothesis is that the evolution of the meaning of the word on either side of the ocean has to do with cultural attitudes: the reserved British vs. the extroverted Americans.

This reminds me of a story my French teacher told us: When she was in college, she did an exchange program in France. She addressed her French professor 'Monsieur [Last Name]' each time, fully believing she was being polite. He looked embarrassed each time. It was only later that she found out that her manner was a subtle put-down. She was supposed to address him as 'Monsieur.' You only add the name when you address someone you consider inferior in social status (like your cleaning lady, I suppose). Ah, the vagaries of language subtleties...

[girlyswot.livejournal.com]

*blushes*

[sam-t.livejournal.com]

You can say that you're quite lost! As with 'moderately lost', it'd be interpreted as conventional understatement, meaning that you are in fact very lost. 'Really quite lost' = 'as lost as it's possible to be'.

Um. It's a bit complicated.

[girlyswot.livejournal.com]

Ah yes, the further complicating factor of conventional understatement. I do think that 'quite' is possibly one of the most complicated (because so subtly context-dependent) words in English. At least in the kind of English we speak in England!

[girlyswot.livejournal.com]

The more I think about it, the more complicated it gets. And yet, it's almost never misunderstood. Which just goes to show how sophisticated we all are at giving and picking up non-verbal signals.

[dogstar101.livejournal.com]

I'm unconvinced by Merriam-Webster. I think I need an American to explain it to me. ;)

Next time I get a 'quite' review I shall demand an explanation and ask them why they didn't use 'very' if that's what they meant!

[tdu000.livejournal.com]

This is obviously quite a problem, when taking into acount the quite large number of trans-Atlantic correspondnces that the quite excessive use of the internet by quite a surprisingly large number of individuals. If only we were quite happy only to comunicate with individuals of our own nationality these quite ridiculous misunderstandings wouldn't occur, or at least not with quite this level of frequency.

Of course your writing is quite, quite good!

[amamama.livejournal.com]

LOL! You are quite the humorist... Or should that be quite quite? Urk. I love it, I thank that's safer to say. Quite.

[alkari.livejournal.com]

Quite so, tdu000!

This is quite obviously one word where context and intonation have a marked effect on the meaning.

[tdu000.livejournal.com]

And it might have been quite clever if only I had quite managed to construct my sentences correctly!

[ladywhizbee.livejournal.com]

I had no idea! Yikes. Just how many insults have I hurled unintentionally?

I'm baffled by how differently the word can be interpreted. Obviously, the sarcastic 'quite' is very understood--but the slight put-down of 'Tommy is quite good at algebra, but...'

I would never have interpreted that one correctly.

This is quite (as in 'very') interesting. I'm sure that I've left you a 'quite good' type of review before(!)--and in my case, I've always meant, 'very good'. This may put me off of using 'quite' altogether--particularly in posts where the tone of it may be taken completely out of context.

Very enlightening...

[tdu000.livejournal.com]

If I read a review like that I would think what a snarky so-and-so the reviewer was. If they didn't really like the story why did they bother to review at all, or even read the whole story? Obviously I would have completely misinterpreted what you were trying to say.

[ladywhizbee.livejournal.com]

And all the while I would have thought I left you a perfectly lovely review, never suspecting that I'd upset you in any way.

It's so hard to fanthom that one little word (and its interpretation) could cause so much havoc!

[girlyswot.livejournal.com]

That's what I thought. Except it was Grandma Kate, I think, and I just couldn't imagine her ever being snarky. So then I was just baffled, until I finally worked it out months later.

[ankaret.livejournal.com]

*is sorry to rake up old post*

I just got a comment on one of my Yuletide fics from someone saying they thought it was 'quite good' in the middle of an otherwise positive review. She's American, from her LJ. Does she not mean 'this is a decent enough effort', then?

*scratches head*

[girlyswot.livejournal.com]

If she's American, then I think you can assume that she means it's excellent. As I'm sure it is...

[ankaret.livejournal.com]

Thank you! And I'm glad I rembembered you posted about this, because I would have never worked that out in a million years.

I have been stalking likely fandoms for long fics, but I still can't guess which Yuletide fic is yours.

[girlyswot.livejournal.com]

Really? I thought it was completely obvious which was mine.

I think I've found one of yours, but not your main story, so I'm guessing that's from a fandom I don't read.

[ankaret.livejournal.com]

I can't wait for the reveal! Though it's also nice to get comments whilst the fic's anonymous, because then you know it's the fic alone that earnt it. :)

[girlyswot.livejournal.com]

Yes, exactly. None of the commenters on my fics at the moment are people I know, so I know they're not just saying nice things because they like me.

[gabrielladusult.livejournal.com]

This is as good a reason as any to dispense with enhancing adverbs like extremely, very, and quite. They are for the lazy (at least, my Vocabulary Building teacher in High School used to say so).

Which reminds me of this teaser for The West Wing episode, "Galileo." If you don't want to watch the whole four minutes, just skip to the last one where the President tells the poor PR guy from NASA that something can't be "very unique" (since unique already means one of a kind) or "extremely historic". It is one of my favorites from the show:



BTW. When you said the informations was "quite interesting in its own right" and "quite differently" -- which meanings were you intending us to take from that?

[owl]

I would consider quite=completely to be archaic, which would fit in with American (and to a lesser extent, Hiberno-) English using it that way.

Actually, I use it more as an intensifier when I'm agreeing with something ("Oh, quite." or "Quite correct.") than when I'm making a statement of my own.

Ah, the pitfalls of an unwary right-pondian attempting to write fanfiction in an American canon! Although I think we have the advantage over the Americans trying to do the opposite.