Quite

[steepholm]

This is another insomnia post, but its origins go back to 1974, when I first took classes in German. Then, I noticed that the word "ganz" sometimes meant "fairly" or "moderately", and sometimes "very" or "absolutely." It's usually translated as "quite," which has the same characteristic. I thought that an interesting coincidence at the time.

Much more recently, learning Japanese, I found that "kekkou" (けっこう) shared similar characteristics. Perhaps it's a general feature of terms of degree that they're liable to semantic drift, and hence ambiguity.

But how much ambiguity? It occurs to me that there are very strong rules of thumb in place for determining the meaning of "quite." (I speak here of British English - I believe it's a bit different in America.)

In short, moderate adjectives/adverbs are made even more moderate by "quite," while intense adjectives/adverbs are intensified by it. Hence, in "She is quite pretty"="She is fairly pretty," but "She is quite beautiful"="She is very beautiful." You can try this with other pairs: "quite useful" vs. "quite essential," "quite annoyed" vs. "quite apoplectic," etc.

There are of course some borderline cases that have to be sorted out by context. "She was quite insistent," for example.

But then I noticed that "quite" has not two, but four degrees of intensity.

1: "Moderately": It is quite hot today.
2: "Above a certain threshold": He is quite tall.
3: "Extremely": This food is quite delicious."
4: "Absolute": He is quite dead.

Last thought: I wonder how much the British addiction to understatement is involved in this proliferation. For example, if I say of a maths problem, "It's quite tricky," the net meaning is that it's a very difficult problem. So, you might think I was using "quite" in sense 3 above. However, in my head I'd be using it in sense 1, but with a suitable dose of understatement. Likewise, "He is quite tall" might once have meant "He is (only) moderately tall," but a few inches have been added to allow for understatement.

I think that's all I have to say on the matter.

Comments

[calimac]

I was going to say it's British understatement, that in American usage "quite" is only an intensifier, just not an extreme intensifier, but then I was going to add, "mind, I think so, I'm not quite sure," with "not quite" here meaning "not entirely" so what usage is that?

[steepholm]

I'm sure that we have yet to plumb all the mysteries of "quite." There are also noun-modifying usages, such as "He's quite a dandy!" Do they map neatly on to what's said above? I will need to wait till my next sleepless night to find out!

[lilliburlero]

I don't think it's (quite) true that Americans only have the intensifying usages, as is sometimes stated, but American English does seem to make less use of the moderating usage. And the 1>3 switchback doesn't seem to be generally used or understood in a lot of American Englishes.

I think we actually might sort out the borderline cases by emphasis? If it falls on quite, it means "absolutely", if on whatever the normal stress-syllable is in the adjective, it means "moderately": She was QUITE insistent vs She was quite InSIStent.

[steepholm]

Although, if you stress the "quite" in "She's quite pretty" it sounds even more mealy-mouthed than before. It's quite a slippery thing, language!

[lilliburlero]

Also, "he was quite dead" is a simple absolute but "he was quite dead" belongs in a comic horror movie.

[steepholm]

True!

[thistleingrey]

The one usage I'm fairly sure US English doesn't have is standalone "Quite."

I had UK uses explained to me by an Irish friend (with a longtime London-resident parent and a longtime Glasgow-resident older sib), so I suspect my grasp is even more slippery than I can see. While I was visiting the friend, my ear began wondering whether Galway-regional "quite" and the presented-as-standard UK "quite" usages were ...quite as congruent as the friend had suggested.

If you do uncover further remarks, they'd definitely be of interest--though I wish you good sleep, by preference!

[steepholm]

Thank you!

[colorwheel]

i wonder if this relates to that book called veronica ganz.

[steepholm]

Ooh, I don't know that one!

[colorwheel]

i know i read it as a child. but reading summaries now are not making it come back to me! i think i read the great gilly hopkins in the same part of my life, and somehow in my brain they were connected (they're not really connected!), and somehow gilly became more prominent to my memory and erased veronica ganz..

[ethelmay]

According to the Kirkus review, Veronica was a bully in a previous book who in this sequel gets a backstory, which the reviewer connects (rightly, in my opinion) to the previous book pair A Dog on Barkham Street and The Bully of Barkham Street (Mary Stolz). All I remembered about it was the line about "Veronica Ganz/Doesn't wear pants." https://www.kirkusreviews.com/book-reviews/marilyn-sachs/veronica-ganz/