71–80 of 295 posts
"So avoid using the word ‘very’ because it’s lazy. A man is not very tired, he is exhausted. Don’t use very sad, use morose. Language was invented for one reason, boys - to woo women - and, in that endeavor, laziness will not do. It also won’t do in your essays." -- The Dead Poets Society
"So avoid using the word ‘very’ because it’s lazy. A man is not very tired, he is exhausted. Don’t use very sad, use morose. Language was invented for one reason, boys - to woo women - and, in that endeavor, laziness will not do. It also won’t do in your essays." -- The Dead Poets Society
Great movie but not the best advice - "morose" doesn't even mean "very sad", it means ill-tempered/in a bad mood. I wouldn't even say there is one good word that means "very sad", but "morose" is definitely not it. The site in question came up with "inconsolable", but that's hardly appropriate if you're talking about "very sad news" (after a few attempts it come back with "somber" which at least sort of works in that…
The important corollary here is that not all language needs to be poetical. It's OK to use generic language in a lot of situations. Sometimes "I'm very sorry to hear that ____" is the tool for the social situation.
You have to use a lot of judgment to pare these down, or you'll do more harm than good. "My car is very fast" -> "My car is breakneck" "It's going to be very cold tomorrow" -> "It's going to be Siberian tomorrow" "Those shoes are very expensive" -> "Those shoes are lavish"
I do really like "It's going to be Siberian tomorrow" though, I might start using that one.
This is missing an important factor for writing: context. There are many places where it's fine to wax lyrical and reach for the thesaurus. But if you're trying to write clearly and concisely then there is something to be said for simplicity.
Eg. many in the tech world are not native English speakers, and this surely translates to most content to be published on the web.
While I do appreciate learning a lot more of the literary English vocabulary, I prefer to do that through well known works of fiction, and only seldomly through texts I read for my work (eg. API documentation).
I ran a few words through and I am not willing to buy into the elimination of very. As noted (very or not) unique and incomparable are not the same. These words have nuanced differences. Every word I checked failed to provide the a proper equivalent. Context matters. very hard is not always demanding very clean =/= sparkling very old =/= ancient very dark =/= bleak
I've seen such advice in many writing forums (other examples include don't use adverbs, don't use passive voice, etc.), and while it certainly pays to heed your choice of vocabulary, I'm not convinced that simply avoiding a fixed set of words or forms is good advice. Let alone replacing them with a fixed set of substitutes. Open a few good books and essays, and see if there are adverbs, "very", passive voices, or oth…
(“Substitute X for Y” advice, OTOH, is usually just wrong.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Great movie but not the best advice - "morose" doesn't even mean "very sad", it means ill-tempered/in a bad mood. I wouldn't even say there is one good word that means "very sad", but "morose" is definitely not it. The site in question came up with "inconsolable", but that's hardly appropriate if you're talking about "very sad news" (after a few attempts it come back with "somber" which at least sort of works in that…
I'd just go with heartbroken. Or if we're melodic, melancholy.
On one hand, I think this kind of service can help people expand their vocabularies. On the other hand, there's a downside risk of replacing unimaginative writing with confused writing. "very + fragile -> feeble" is absolutely not a reliable translation[1]. The suggestions furnished by this service seem to generally 'work' in the sense that their possible meanings include "very + (category)," but without context you…