Live data from Hacker News

The architecture of “not bad”: Decoding the Chinese source code of the void

suggger.substack.com

31–40 of 154 posts

Re: The architecture of “not bad”: Decoding the Chinese source code of the void

#31
In Australia from my experience "not bad" = "good", "pretty good" = "amazing", "bit shit" = "really shit".

I don't think its as much that everything positive is just a non-negative, but that everything (especially emotions) is shifted towards the medium. Maybe it comes from a desire to not be abrasive and always soften everything, but I'm not sure.

Re: The architecture of “not bad”: Decoding the Chinese source code of the void

#32
I find the original post confused. What it has to with code? Why putting the US as "the West"? Why the Eastern void is bad? (Oftentimes it's the Western void which is oblivion, Eastern which is nirvana.)

In Polish, 'niezły' (literally 'not bad') means 'very good'. Even in English there are many such things, e.g. 'indestructible', 'immortal'.

When it comes to labels on food there is "no preservatives" or similar. It even has its parodies, e.g. "asbestos-free oat cereal" (https://xkcd.com/641/).

Re: The architecture of “not bad”: Decoding the Chinese source code of the void

#35
post #31

In Australia from my experience "not bad" = "good", "pretty good" = "amazing", "bit shit" = "really shit". I don't think its as much that everything positive is just a non-negative, but that everything (especially emotions) is shifted towards the medium. Maybe it comes from a desire to not be abrasive and always soften everything, but I'm not sure.

Related also to the way Australians and New Zealanders use understatement for humorous effect, e.g. that last example you gave could be used to describe any condition up-to the point of death.

Re: The architecture of “not bad”: Decoding the Chinese source code of the void

#36
post #18
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not quite right, but not quite wrong, no? The pattern seems similar, but I think of litotes (as the Wikipedia article suggests) as a rhetorical device: the assertion-by-negation carries an ironic charge, and strikes the (Western) ear by standing out from the ordinary affirmative register. If I'm understanding the author's account of Chinese assertion-by-negation correctly, doesn't it sound like assertion-by-negation…

I think it's especially American English that doesn't use litotes as much as British English or the other Western European languages. This piece seems to be very much about American English, when I read something like: > In English, this feels bizarre. If something is good, you say: Nice Great Perfect Brilliant

Yes, that sentence is simply untrue for, at the very least, BrE. For example: https://www.the-independent.com/news/uk/home-news/chart-show... (2015)

Re: The architecture of “not bad”: Decoding the Chinese source code of the void

#37

This makes me think of a tool from semiotics called the Greimas square where you can have opposing concepts e.g. A and B (ugly & beautiful, for & against, legal & illegal). At the surface level they can appear as binaries, but the negation of A is not equivalent to B and vice versa (e.g. illegal is not equivalent to not-legal) and encourages the consideration of more complex meta-concepts which at surface level seem…

native Americans or Native Americans? the latter would be more like the Moriori and fit the context better, but somehow native English speakers who arent interlegible are also interesting.

Re: The architecture of “not bad”: Decoding the Chinese source code of the void

#38
post #7

As a Brit, I'm not quite sure this article is right in it's declaration it's a universal "English" thing and not more "American English".

I would say Australian English relies on this negation even more than British English, to the point of being confusing without more cultural context.

Yeah nah... nah yeah, you're right.

Re: The architecture of “not bad”: Decoding the Chinese source code of the void

#39
post #33

There are some direct ways to express agreement in Chinese, like 對 or 好. At the same time, the negative statements described are not unique to Chinese at all. It's not that deep, really.

The author states outright that this is not unique to Chinese, it's just much more prevalent than in American English.

不错 is literally "not bad", but it's more positive than the American English equivalent, being basically semantically equal to 很好 (lit. "very good", although in practice just plain old good/OK). You can even say seemingly absurd things like 很不错 "very not bad" (= excellent); or you can tamp it down with 还不错 "also not bad".

Funnily enough, in British English, "not bad" is high praise; but you still wouldn't say "very not bad".

Re: The architecture of “not bad”: Decoding the Chinese source code of the void

#40
post #15
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, "not bad" is very very common here - definitely more so than "decent".

"How are you?" "Not too bad" always makes me smile. Such a British answer.

"Can't complain"
Post reply on HN