On Jan 25, 11:26 am, K Richard Pixley <r...@noir.com> wrote: > I disagree on all points. > > "Pretty" means "mostly". The difference in meaning is significant. > "I'm sure" is definitive. "I'm pretty sure" leaves room for variation.
But "pretty" does not translate well as a quantifier, even though that's exactly what you are doing when you use "pretty" to QUANTIFY another word. Let's look at all the improper uses of "pretty" as a quantifier in the month of September 2011... py> lst = re.findall(r'pretty \w+', s, re.I) py> lst.__len__() 71 py> set(lst) set(['pretty cool', 'pretty quick', 'pretty nasty', 'Pretty easy', 'pretty useless', 'pretty logical', 'pretty rare', 'pretty sure', 'pretty straight', 'pretty optimistic', 'pretty unimportant', 'pretty easy', 'pretty damn', 'Pretty much', 'pretty obvious', 'Pretty fast', 'pretty be', 'pretty good', 'pretty off', 'pretty inefficient', 'pretty bizarre', 'pretty minimal', 'pretty much', 'pretty cleanly', 'pretty natural', 'pretty mean', 'pretty acceptable', 'Pretty immaterial', 'pretty common', 'pretty well']) Wow, why i am not surprised! Let's pick one usage at random and try to understand it. "I think XYZ is pretty easy." You don't even need "pretty" to get your point across. You could simply say "I think XYZ is easy". Furthermore, if you insist on QUANTIFYING a QUANTIFIER, simply use any number of legal QUANTIFIERS. "I think XYZ is VERY easy" or "I think XYZ is SOMEWHAT easy" or "I think XYZ is difficult". Let's see which combination is most pervasive in this group: py> d = dict([(lst.count(x),x) for x in setlst]) py> d[max(d)] 'pretty much' So i suppose that "pretty much" sums it up folks. > My dictionary lists "arduous" as the second, (of 17), definitions for > "hard". Again, like "pretty", this usage is a perversion of the word "hard". Hard should ONLY be used to describe the tangible properties of a physical object. You CANNOT use a tangible word to describe an intangible action; like "work", or "task". Work can be difficult, and tasks can be difficult, but there is NO way in heaven or earth that work can be "hard", or "soft", or "squishy". Maybe an "object" you are working ON can be hard, soft, or squishy -- but work, no way. You are short circuiting intelligence when you use words in this manner. In the general sense, I take no issue with words that carry more than one meaning when used in different contexts. I DO however take issue when words are used superfluously, or in a manner that is non intelligent, or when people choose to use misleading words simply because those words have less syllable than the proper word. PS: Just like i suspected; not one single use of "pretty" was wielded to describe the pleasurable attributes of a person, place, or thing. Mind boggling! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
