So, I think context, how well you know said person and cultural differences matter a lot. Not being a native speaker myself, I'd say generally means 'in general with no negative or positive load added to it'. I had no idea people could perceive it any other way.
-
-
W odpowiedzi do @Sakirth @sarahlongthorne
But, why can't it be neutral? If it can be perceived in a positive way and a negative way, maybe the truth is somewhere in the middle?
1 odpowiedź 0 podanych dalej 2 polubione -
W odpowiedzi do @Sakirth
I don’t know that there is really a universal truth with it being used and received so subjectively. Someone might mean is neutrally, but we can’t guarantee it’ll be received that way. What’s more, what would be a neutral usage?
1 odpowiedź 0 podanych dalej 1 polubiony -
W odpowiedzi do @sarahlongthorne @Sakirth
If I say ‘you’re awesome’, that’s a firmly positive statement. If I say ‘you’re generally awesome’, half of recipients will think you went out of your way to add doubt, whereas half will think you did to to bolster its truth.
1 odpowiedź 0 podanych dalej 1 polubiony -
W odpowiedzi do @sarahlongthorne @Sakirth
Using that example, is there a way that it could be neutral? Any less than positive is surely negative, no? Or maybe that’s just my flawed psyche at play.
1 odpowiedź 0 podanych dalej 1 polubiony -
W odpowiedzi do @sarahlongthorne
I see it this way. Awesome in general is a positive statement, yes. But you could also be brilliant or very awesome. That's definitely more positive than just awesome. So with that in mind 'generally awesome' could go both ways. But maybe I'm being too analytical about this.
1 odpowiedź 0 podanych dalej 0 polubionych -
W odpowiedzi do @Sakirth
so would your argument be that ‘generally brilliant’ is neutral because the tier below brilliant is still good?
1 odpowiedź 0 podanych dalej 1 polubiony -
W odpowiedzi do @sarahlongthorne
Yeah, I guess that's what it boils down to. Generally is dependant on the adjective following it imho.
1 odpowiedź 0 podanych dalej 0 polubionych -
W odpowiedzi do @Sakirth
In that case isn’t it better to drop the ‘generally’ and instead just use that lower tier word outright? ‘You’re good’ would sit better with me than ‘You’re generally amazing’.
1 odpowiedź 0 podanych dalej 0 polubionych -
W odpowiedzi do @sarahlongthorne
Agreed. I think that might have something to do with most people wanting to present things in a more positive way than they are (even if they're already positive). I can't come up with a very good example right now. But most people would rather have 100p than 1 Pound.
2 odpowiedzi 0 podanych dalej 1 polubiony
I mean, I wouldn’t, but only because 100 pennies would be an absolute faff
Agree though. I skew most of what I say as positive as I feel can while remaining honest in order to ensure others get the most possible joy from what I’m saying.
-
-
W odpowiedzi do @sarahlongthorne @Sakirth
I think I therefore have it in my head that if others aren’t doing the same thing, there must be some malicious intent — they made an active choice to make me feel worse than was needed. I’d rather have the same info in the most positive packaging.
1 odpowiedź 0 podanych dalej 1 polubiony -
W odpowiedzi do @sarahlongthorne
There you go, you basically answered your own question! :D
0 odpowiedzi 0 podanych dalej 1 polubiony
Koniec rozmowy
Nowa rozmowa -
Wydaje się, że ładowanie zajmuje dużo czasu.
Twitter jest przeciążony lub wystąpił chwilowy problem. Spróbuj ponownie lub sprawdź status Twittera, aby uzyskać więcej informacji.
MCV 30 Under 30 2021