# What are some \*subtle\* differences among various dialects of English? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [September 12, 2017, 6:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-some-subtle-differences-among-various-dialects-of-english/796145 "2017-09-12T06:34:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 10
**Author:** ![IvoryTowerDenizen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ivorytowerdenizen/32/17937_2.png) [@IvoryTowerDenizen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IvoryTowerDenizen)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2017, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-some-subtle-differences-among-various-dialects-of-english/796145/181 "2017-09-17T14:26:25Z")
> [@hibernicus](#): > > I’m still not convinced, having read the various responses here, that there is a consistent regional difference in the usage of the word “quite”. > > For me, it is context dependent. If I say, “He speaks French quite well”, that is _less_ well than if I just say “He speaks French well”. However, if I say “I am quite sure”, than I am stating that I am _more_ sure (in fact, completely sure) than if I were to say “I am sure”. > > In other words, “quite” is functioning in one case as a de-intensifier (with the meaning of “somewhat”), and in another as an intensifier (with the meaning of “completely”). “He is speaking French quite well” means he speaks it better than “He speaks French well”. Quite acts an intensifier. It is nasty out vs it is _quite_ nasty out. The second version is more nasty out. She is lovely vs she is _quite_ lovely. The second means she is lovelier. That’s my American English experience, at least. ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2017, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-some-subtle-differences-among-various-dialects-of-english/796145/182 "2017-09-17T14:28:13Z")
> [@IvoryTowerDenizen](#): > > “He is speaking French quite well” means he speaks it better than “He speaks French well”. Quite acts an intensifier. > > It is nasty out vs it is _quite_ nasty out. The second version is more nasty out. > > She is lovely vs she is _quite_ lovely. The second means she is lovelier. > > That’s my American English experience, at least. FWIW, this American English speaker agrees with the above. ---
**Author:** ![bordelond](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bordelond/32/150_2.png) [@bordelond](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bordelond)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2017, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-some-subtle-differences-among-various-dialects-of-english/796145/183 "2017-09-17T14:40:40Z")
> [@IvoryTowerDenizen](#): > > “He is speaking French quite well” means he speaks it better than “He speaks French well”. Quite acts an intensifier. > > It is nasty out vs it is _quite_ nasty out. The second version is more nasty out. > > She is lovely vs she is _quite_ lovely. The second means she is lovelier. > > That’s my American English experience, at least. I’ll third **Ivory** ’s post for another American perspective. In my dialect, though, “_quite_” is only infrequently used outside the stock phrase “_not quite_”. ---
**Author:** ![JKellyMap](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jkellymap/32/15880_2.png) [@JKellyMap](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JKellyMap)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2017, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-some-subtle-differences-among-various-dialects-of-english/796145/184 "2017-09-17T15:29:44Z")
> [@IvoryTowerDenizen](#): > > “He is speaking French quite well” means he speaks it better than “He speaks French well”. Quite acts an intensifier. > > It is nasty out vs it is _quite_ nasty out. The second version is more nasty out. > > She is lovely vs she is _quite_ lovely. The second means she is lovelier. > > That’s my American English experience, at least. Really? Not for me. Especially your first example – “he speaks French quite well” definitely means, for me, that he isn’t (quite) fluent, whereas “he speaks French well” probably means he \*is \*fluent. Just to take a random example, here’s the OP from another current SDMB thread: “Anyone [know] of a lost film that was re-discovered and the condition was like new?” That means the film is in 100% mint condition, full stop. No room for ambiguity. But if you say: “Anyone [know] of a lost film that was re-discovered and the condition was quite like new?” To me, this means the film is in \*a little less \*than mint condition. 99%, maybe. At least, it allows for that possibility. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2017, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-some-subtle-differences-among-various-dialects-of-english/796145/185 "2017-09-17T15:42:24Z")
> [@JKellyMap](#): > > Really? Not for me. Especially your first example – “he speaks French quite well” definitely means, for me, that he isn’t (quite) fluent, whereas “he speaks French well” probably means he \*is \*fluent. As another American chiming in, I agree with the others. Someone who speaks French “quite well” speaks it better than someone who speaks it just “well.” > [@](#): > > Just to take a random example, here’s the OP from another current SDMB thread: > > “Anyone [know] of a lost film that was re-discovered and the condition was like new?” > > That means the film is in 100% mint condition, full stop. No room for ambiguity. But if you say: > > “Anyone [know] of a lost film that was re-discovered and the condition was quite like new?” > > To me, this means the film is in \*a little less \*than mint condition. 99%, maybe. At least, it allows for that possibility. To me, the “quite” adds nothing to this sentence. First, it would sound weird to me. Second, It would not occur to me that there was any meaningful difference between “like new” and “quite like new.” ---
**Author:** ![IvoryTowerDenizen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ivorytowerdenizen/32/17937_2.png) [@IvoryTowerDenizen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IvoryTowerDenizen)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2017, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-some-subtle-differences-among-various-dialects-of-english/796145/186 "2017-09-17T15:42:47Z")
Well, “new” is an end point, so you can’t get newer. The part being intensified is how “like” new something is. “Like new” is close to being new, but not mint/new “Quite like new” is closer to being new/mint, than simply “like new”. ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2017, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-some-subtle-differences-among-various-dialects-of-english/796145/187 "2017-09-17T16:07:23Z")
> [@JKellyMap](#): > > “Anyone [know] of a lost film that was re-discovered and the condition was quite like new?” I’ve never heard this construction in the positive. “Wasn’t quite like new” sounds idiomatic to me. ---
**Author:** ![Filbert](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/filbert/32/3433_2.png) [@Filbert](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Filbert)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2017, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-some-subtle-differences-among-various-dialects-of-english/796145/188 "2017-09-17T16:08:18Z")
> [@IvoryTowerDenizen](#): > > Well, “new” is an end point, so you can’t get newer. The part being intensified is how “like” new something is. > > “Like new” is close to being new, but not mint/new > > “Quite like new” is closer to being new/mint, than simply “like new”. You’re gonna be very disappointed if you come to England and go see a film someone said was ‘Quite good’. In my experience, there’s no perfect pattern to whether ‘quite’ means ‘almost’ or ‘extremely’, it’s half in the inflection and context. Someone with a big grin saying “I’m quite happy” means something very different from the guy who shrugs and says “Yeah, I’m quite happy, I guess.” To be fair, with the background level of sarcasm in the UK, that’s not much different from any other positive/negative phrasing. ---
**Author:** ![JKellyMap](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jkellymap/32/15880_2.png) [@JKellyMap](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JKellyMap)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2017, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-some-subtle-differences-among-various-dialects-of-english/796145/189 "2017-09-17T16:10:06Z")
Huh. Okey dokey. Maybe the difference is that I’m hearing (in my mind) “quite X” being said with a certain INTONATION – a slight hesitation, a bit of doubt in the tone, maybe a slight head bobble with a tight-lipped, downturned mouth. “He speaks French quite well…” – left unsaid, but understood, is the follow-up: “…but not like a native,” or, “…considering he only had three years of high school instruction.” ETA: Ninja’d! 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![IvoryTowerDenizen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ivorytowerdenizen/32/17937_2.png) [@IvoryTowerDenizen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IvoryTowerDenizen)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2017, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-some-subtle-differences-among-various-dialects-of-english/796145/190 "2017-09-17T16:26:49Z")
> [@Filbert](#): > > You’re gonna be very disappointed if you come to England and go see a film someone said was ‘Quite good’. > > In my experience, there’s no perfect pattern to whether ‘quite’ means ‘almost’ or ‘extremely’, it’s half in the inflection and context. Someone with a big grin saying “I’m quite happy” means something very different from the guy who shrugs and says “Yeah, I’m quite happy, I guess.” > > To be fair, with the background level of sarcasm in the UK, that’s not much different from any other positive/negative phrasing. As I said, this is my American English experience and I was replying to someone else describing his American usage. It wouldn’t surprise or disappoint me that other cultures do it differently. ---
**Author:** ![Miss\_Mapp](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miss_mapp/32/369_2.png) [@Miss\_Mapp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miss_Mapp)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2017, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-some-subtle-differences-among-various-dialects-of-english/796145/191 "2017-09-17T16:40:22Z")
> [@filmstar-en](#): > > In Northern English, it is common to hear very affectionate terms of endearment used in normal friendly greetings and exchanges between people who may not know each other. Hello, darling! Thank you, love! Excuse me, sweetheart! It is most common when adults talk to children or between senior citizens. I guess it arises because people feel relaxed in their community and it is certainly charming to hear. It tends to be a working class thing and is often very funny. > > It does not happen so much in London and the South, you just don’t do that with strangers, people think you are rude, over familiar or patronising. Northerners are unimpressed by that sort of attitude and will let their feelings be known. It does, or did, happen in Devon and Cornwall. The first time I was down that way–Falmouth, or maybe Truro–I asked a woman in the street for directions to wherever it was I was going. Along with the directions, she called me “my bird,” “my bride,” “my darling,” with every sentence. All very odd to the ears of an American girl, but I’ve never forgotten it. ---
**Author:** ![JKellyMap](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jkellymap/32/15880_2.png) [@JKellyMap](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JKellyMap)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2017, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-some-subtle-differences-among-various-dialects-of-english/796145/192 "2017-09-17T17:01:35Z")
> [@pulykamell](#): > > I’ve never heard this construction in the positive. “Wasn’t quite like new” sounds idiomatic to me. True. Maybe this is one reason I tend to think “\*not \*(quite) fully X” when I hear “quite X” – because it’s used more often in the negative than in the positive. For me, the positive use can mildly evoke a caricature of Victorian English speech – perhaps thanks to Commander McBragg of the Rocky and Bullwinkle Show[(jump to 1:25).](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4roxM8hUMk) ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2017, 5:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-some-subtle-differences-among-various-dialects-of-english/796145/193 "2017-09-17T17:41:12Z")
> [@Filbert](#): > > To be fair, with the background level of sarcasm in the UK, that’s not much different from any other positive/negative phrasing. That’s what I was going to suggest, that it’s just ingrained, reflexive sarcasm. They’re using for it’s opposite meaning, so “quite good” = “not good.” That makes sense especially if the intonation is so important. It’s a sarcastic usage. ---
**Author:** ![JKellyMap](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jkellymap/32/15880_2.png) [@JKellyMap](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JKellyMap)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2017, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-some-subtle-differences-among-various-dialects-of-english/796145/194 "2017-09-17T20:37:37Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > That’s what I was going to suggest, that it’s just ingrained, reflexive sarcasm. They’re using for it’s opposite meaning, so “quite good” = “not good.” That makes sense especially if the intonation is so important. It’s a sarcastic usage. Not “opposite,” just “qualified.” It doesn’t imply _not good_, but it can imply _pretty good, but could be better_. ---
**Author:** ![NAF1138](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/naf1138/32/3245_2.png) [@NAF1138](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NAF1138)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2017, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-some-subtle-differences-among-various-dialects-of-english/796145/195 "2017-09-17T20:44:49Z")
I don’t think I have seen this. The British (maybe just in London or even in North London, I’m not exactly sure) use the word “geezer” in a way that does not make sense to me. It seems to vaguely mean “dude who I don’t particularly respect but is in a traditional position of respect” but I’m not even sure that is right. It clearly does not mean “extremely old and feeble” which is what I would expect it to mean because it seems to be applied to people outside the context of age. When reading or listening to Premier League commentary I’ll frequently hear/see managers, refs, team captains, star players, commentators contemporary age group friends, random people on the street, be referred to as “this geezer” and after 7 years of following the sport I still can’t quite figure it out. ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2017, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-some-subtle-differences-among-various-dialects-of-english/796145/196 "2017-09-17T23:54:27Z")
I’ve always heard the UK usage of the word to be something like the way we use the word “dude” here in the US. ETA: Although, looking it up, it seems there’s also a meaning that connotes a sense of eccentricity, too. ---
**Author:** ![Miss\_Mapp](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miss_mapp/32/369_2.png) [@Miss\_Mapp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miss_Mapp)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2017, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-some-subtle-differences-among-various-dialects-of-english/796145/197 "2017-09-18T00:51:51Z")
> [@NAF1138](#): > > I don’t think I have seen this. The British (maybe just in London or even in North London, I’m not exactly sure) use the word “geezer” in a way that does not make sense to me. It seems to vaguely mean “dude who I don’t particularly respect but is in a traditional position of respect” but I’m not even sure that is right. > > It clearly does not mean “extremely old and feeble” which is what I would expect it to mean because it seems to be applied to people outside the context of age. > > When reading or listening to Premier League commentary I’ll frequently hear/see managers, refs, team captains, star players, commentators contemporary age group friends, random people on the street, be referred to as “this geezer” and after 7 years of following the sport I still can’t quite figure it out. As I understand it, a British “geezer” is just a guy–not especially an old one, as he would be to Americans. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2017, 1:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-some-subtle-differences-among-various-dialects-of-english/796145/198 "2017-09-18T01:13:59Z")
To this American, “geezer” definitely implies advanced age, but does not imply anything at all about frailty. You can have a tottering old geezer or a tough old geezer. And in the case of “tough old geezer”, there’s definitely an undertone of respect. ---
**Author:** ![NAF1138](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/naf1138/32/3245_2.png) [@NAF1138](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NAF1138)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2017, 1:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-some-subtle-differences-among-various-dialects-of-english/796145/199 "2017-09-18T01:42:25Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > To this American, “geezer” definitely implies advanced age, but does not imply anything at all about frailty. You can have a tottering old geezer or a tough old geezer. And in the case of “tough old geezer”, there’s definitely an undertone of respect. Maybe frail is wrong. But to me geezer conjures images of Mr Burns or Lionel Barrymore in It’s A Wonderful Life. I wouldn’t refer to LeBron James as a geezer the way I saw Messi described after the tax scandal. ---
**Author:** ![Rick\_Kitchen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rick_kitchen/32/522_2.png) [@Rick\_Kitchen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick_Kitchen)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2017, 2:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-some-subtle-differences-among-various-dialects-of-english/796145/200 "2017-09-18T02:27:02Z")
> [@Miss\_Mapp](#): > > It does, or did, happen in Devon and Cornwall. The first time I was down that way–Falmouth, or maybe Truro–I asked a woman in the street for directions to wherever it was I was going. Along with the directions, she called me “my bird,” “my bride,” “my darling,” with every sentence. All very odd to the ears of an American girl, but I’ve never forgotten it. American waitresses of a certain age will call their customers “honey” or “sweetie”. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-some-subtle-differences-among-various-dialects-of-english/796145.md?page=9) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-some-subtle-differences-among-various-dialects-of-english/796145.md?page=11)