Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ways to avoid using the word 'very'

writerswrite.co.za

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 156 posts

Re: Ways to avoid using the word 'very'

#141

Post by RogerL »

glomph wrote: post #80
adriand wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not used in place of "very", it means "somewhat" or "mostly". "Pretty good" means not all good but not all bad either. If a server at a restaurant asks you, "How is your meal?" and you respond, "Pretty good", you should be prepared to have them ask, "What's wrong with it?"

I think this varies a lot depending on which english speaking communities you are in and your tone of voice. Personally I often say something was pretty good and mean it as quite high praise or at least better than I expected. I think (hope) my tone of voice would make that apparent though.

Same here. I grew up in New England, where I think this usage is pretty common. People delight in giving me grief "you are only 'pretty happy'? Shouldn't you be happy...."

Re: Ways to avoid using the word 'very'

#142

Post by RogerL »

jimmaswell wrote: post #124
habosa wrote: post #100

When I was in high school we couldn't use the verb "to be" in assignments for English class. No is, am, are, was, were, has been, will be, etc. Of course this is overly restrictive, but 80-90% of the time there was a better way to phrase the sentence if you thought about removing the "be" verb. 10% of the time it was awkward, which sucked. Aside: also taught me that MS Word has a very advanced find feature where I co…

That is just completely absurd. How would I even say that without using "is"? That .. is, no .. Complete absurdity is , no.. Complete absurdity dwells in that concept? That sounds like I'm trying to write some kind of poetry. The verb "to be" is one of the most important verbs of the entire language. Of any language, even in cases like Latin where it's not said but implied to be there. It is a fundamental tool of com…

If you intend to emphasize the object in that first sentence, the passive voice is correct (as in this sentence). However, we usually do not want to do that. Consider:

The chair leg has been chewed by my bored dog.

vs

My bored dog chewed the chair leg.

The former, being passive, emphasizes the chair leg rather than the subject.

Anyway, a non-passive rewrite of your first sentence is: "I find that completely absurd". Note the active voice. I find it a truer representation of your thoughts. You are making a judgement on the concept, and this wording makes that clear.

Re: Ways to avoid using the word 'very'

#144

Post by thirsteh »

notlisted wrote: post #140
thirsteh wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a bad idea to encrypt passwords, but that's beside the point. > If a dictionary visit is required, you've failed the audience. If you take this to its logical conclusion, we end up in a world where English ceases to be the language of Shakespeare and more like dogespeak. No one will be morose anymore, just very sad, and no one will know what it means to be awestruck. Someone will always need a dictionary. That s…

Ooopsie. Deleted the word 'intended'. Write for your intended audience and not people like you/your friends (or english professor). In our international/global economy the audience often extends to non-native English speakers. Simple words on e-commerce sites generate more international sales. PS Morose is not "very sad" :-)

You missed both of my points:

No matter your intended audience, there is always somebody who will need a dictionary. It's not shameful to look up words, and it's easier than ever to do so. You've shifted to arguing about conversion rates for non-English speakers, which is a fair, but separate point. (I'm also curious if small words and simple sentences really do translate to higher conversion rates.) I am talking about prose in general.

> PS Morose is not "very sad" :-)

Nor is awestruck "very amazed." The smaller your vocabulary is, the less you can communicate (as redblacktree pointed out, this is demonstrated quite dramatically by George Orwell's 1984, wherein the language is dumbed down so much and has so many words removed that the citizenry can't express emotions the state deems negative.)

This is the truly tragic thing about this incessant anti-intellectualism: people lose some measure of ability to express what they really mean or feel, all in the name of meeting the lowest common denominator.

(For the record, I am not a native speaker, and I love seeing words that I don't understand.)

Re: Ways to avoid using the word 'very'

#145

Post by notlisted »

Timmmmbob wrote: post #138
notlisted wrote: post #110

Let me disagree. Many words in the "rather say" column hinder clear communication. * If a dictionary visit is required, you've failed the audience. * If multiple interpretations are possible, you've failed yourself. Ex: - Sagacious is out of favor since 1920 (google ngram). - Solemn vs 'very serious' (implies religious aspects where there were none) - Accomplished vs 'very capable (implies having attained something,…

Only an idiot would think she was suggesting blindly replacing every instance of "very capable" with accomplished. Clearly they are merely suggestions to consider.

You'd be surprised how many idiots do just that after bookmarking the page. You overestimate her/the audience.

Re: Ways to avoid using the word 'very'

#146

Post by notlisted »

thirsteh wrote: post #144
notlisted wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ooopsie. Deleted the word 'intended'. Write for your intended audience and not people like you/your friends (or english professor). In our international/global economy the audience often extends to non-native English speakers. Simple words on e-commerce sites generate more international sales. PS Morose is not "very sad" :-)

You missed both of my points: No matter your intended audience, there is always somebody who will need a dictionary. It's not shameful to look up words, and it's easier than ever to do so. You've shifted to arguing about conversion rates for non-English speakers, which is a fair, but separate point. (I'm also curious if small words and simple sentences really do translate to higher conversion rates.) I am talking abo…

There's a difference between "somebody" needing a dictionary, and "20% of your audience".

If you write a book, go ahead and insert "fluffy" words. If you write a blog post or create site copy, assume the worst and keep it simple.

I like Steinbeck and Hemingway. Simple and powerful.

PS Neither am I.

Re: Ways to avoid using the word 'very'

#147

Post by notlisted »

thirsteh wrote: post #144
notlisted wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ooopsie. Deleted the word 'intended'. Write for your intended audience and not people like you/your friends (or english professor). In our international/global economy the audience often extends to non-native English speakers. Simple words on e-commerce sites generate more international sales. PS Morose is not "very sad" :-)

You missed both of my points: No matter your intended audience, there is always somebody who will need a dictionary. It's not shameful to look up words, and it's easier than ever to do so. You've shifted to arguing about conversion rates for non-English speakers, which is a fair, but separate point. (I'm also curious if small words and simple sentences really do translate to higher conversion rates.) I am talking abo…

There's a difference between "somebody" needing a dictionary, and "20% of your audience".

If you write a book, go ahead and insert "fluffy" words, if they are more precise. If you write a blog post or create site copy, assume the worst and keep it simple.

(PS Neither am I, and so do I, but I admire writers like Steinbeck and Hemingway. Simple and powerful. It's actually harder, not easier.)

Re: Ways to avoid using the word 'very'

#149

Post by Flenser »

bane wrote: post #92
gruseom wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How interesting that the French use food for superlatives. Do we have anything like that in English? It feels weird to me, so I'm guessing no.

Not all that common, but sometimes. "He's quite the meat head." "He's an old salt." "Her personality was rather spicy." "He's a chicken." "Don't be a fruit." "Talking to her is like talking to a vegetable." "She's such a potato." "He's pretty corny around executives." "That guy is a rotten egg." "Her mind is like a pretzel." "She was such a cute pumpkin." "He's such a pig." "He's nuts." "What a cow."

"any more would be gravy"

(although that's from old French, like a lot of English food words)

Re: Ways to avoid using the word 'very'

#150

Post by qbrass »

jimmaswell wrote: post #125
grecy wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I prefer 'double plus tired'.

Reminds me of how I thought those forms in that book weren't really such a bad idea but were presented in such a negative way.

Imagine the comments section of every website filtered to Newspeak.
Post reply on HN