Are we sure we're spelling it right? Is it an abbreviated version of "I know, totally"?
What part of “No, Totally” don't you understand?
41–50 of 82 posts
Re: What part of “No, Totally” don't you understand?
#42French has an interesting word which somewhat clarifies this situation: "si" (not the conditional "if" in this case). For lack of a better explanation, it's essentially a negative "yes", used to negate a negation. For instance: A: "Don't you understand?" B: "Si" Meaning "No, I don't agree with you, but yes, I do understand". I find it very simple yet quite powerful.
I don't think it actually means ""No, I don't agree with you." I think it's just an unambiguous "Yes, I do" answer to a negated question.
I was mostly trying to emphasize my perception of the meaning as a native french speaker. Not saying this necessarily makes me right, I just wanted to highlight both the negation of the question itself as well as the confirmation of the underlying statement.
Re: What part of “No, Totally” don't you understand?
#43I think with "No, Totally" in particular, the "no" is refuting something implied. So with "Makes you want to hit them", you are instinctively saying "no" the cultural prohibition against violence. "No that's not normal behavior, but yeah, totally I want to hit them." For "Would you like ice cream?" you'd say "Totally" because the connotation is good. "Don't you just want to eat the whole tub of ice cream" -- "no, tot…
Yes, totally. :) I read the whole article waiting for this explanation to be brought up.
Re: What part of “No, Totally” don't you understand?
#44Seems simple enough to me. The "No" is directed at defusing a redundant introductory lecture. Translate as: "No, you don't have to explain further, I completely understand" "No, stop, I've already heard of that and I'm totally onboard with your opinion" I spend a lot of time being introduced to topics I'm already familiar with, but just nodding politely or saying "yeah" is interpreted as active listening, as "I'd lik…
The "no" might be short for "I know".
Re: What part of “No, Totally” don't you understand?
#45Seems simple enough to me. The "No" is directed at defusing a redundant introductory lecture. Translate as: "No, you don't have to explain further, I completely understand" "No, stop, I've already heard of that and I'm totally onboard with your opinion" I spend a lot of time being introduced to topics I'm already familiar with, but just nodding politely or saying "yeah" is interpreted as active listening, as "I'd lik…
The "no" might be short for "I know".
From the article:
> Or maybe—and this is the theory I like best, but can least substantiate—“No, totally” is really a contraction of “I know, totally.” That is linguistically improbable; I know of no instance in the English language where a homophonic slippage of this sort has taken place. But I like the theory anyway, because it captures what is often the semantic intent of “No, totally” with uncanny precision: I understand, and I am fully in accord.
Re: What part of “No, Totally” don't you understand?
#46Seems simple enough to me. The "No" is directed at defusing a redundant introductory lecture. Translate as: "No, you don't have to explain further, I completely understand" "No, stop, I've already heard of that and I'm totally onboard with your opinion" I spend a lot of time being introduced to topics I'm already familiar with, but just nodding politely or saying "yeah" is interpreted as active listening, as "I'd lik…
I think this is the correct explanation. Can someone find a counter-example where "no" is used in the weird way the New Yorker piece is describing, but where it can't be taken to mean "No, you don't have to go on; I know exactly what you're talking about/asking"?
The example given by yathern...
> A: I wasn't sure if you'd like to go to the park - do you want to?
> B: No, totally! Definitely want to go.
...seems to fit.
Re: What part of “No, Totally” don't you understand?
#47I didn't know this bit:
'Back when English was a four-form system, it, too, had a si—a word used specifically to contradict negative statements. That word was “yes.” To affirm positive statements, you used “yea”'
(Then continues about the similar no / nay.)
Anyway, I'm surprised the writer did not work in the joke about the lecturer saying:
"As you know, a double negative becomes a positive, but the reverse does not happen."
Voice from the back of the room: "Yeah, yeah ..."
Re: What part of “No, Totally” don't you understand?
#48[deleted]
Re: What part of “No, Totally” don't you understand?
#49Seems simple enough to me. The "No" is directed at defusing a redundant introductory lecture. Translate as: "No, you don't have to explain further, I completely understand" "No, stop, I've already heard of that and I'm totally onboard with your opinion" I spend a lot of time being introduced to topics I'm already familiar with, but just nodding politely or saying "yeah" is interpreted as active listening, as "I'd lik…
The "no" might be short for "I know".
As a counterexample, in spanish, we say "No, claro", and we don't have anything similar to "know".
Re: What part of “No, Totally” don't you understand?
#50> At first blush, “no” does not appear to be the kind of word whose meaning you can monkey with. For one thing, there is its length. At just two letters and one syllable, it lacks the pliable properties of longer words. You can’t stuff stuff inside it. [...] I guess these 'long form' articles have to be long, but some of these paragraphs seem pretty forced.
This article seems particularly bad (I stopped reading halfway through), but a lot of articles published in The New Yorker seems to do this kind of meandering. The other day I was reading a story about Jake Leg[0], and if you compare it to the corresponding Wikipedia article[1] the difference is really striking---the Wikipedia article tells you straight away what caused the contamination, while the New Yorker story s…
I respectfully disagree. I thought this "no, totally" article was entertaining and enjoyable.
It's strange to me that you're comparing The New Yorker and Wikipedia. One publishes stories. The other publishes reference articles. I appreciate suspense in a story; I appreciate a quick summary of the facts in a reference article. They are very different forms of writing.