More or less? 7

[Dimandja]

I was explaining the finer points of OO programming, when I stopped and asked if I was still making sense. The answer was "more or less".

Although I understood the meaning of that phrase, it still grates my ears.

Is this phrase correctly used in this context? I have heard it a lot in similar contexts.

 

[craigsboyd]

Star to you Dimandja for putting your finger on what was bothering me about the phrase as well. When there isn't a well defined reference (whether implicit or explicit), I am left wondering, "More or less than what?".

http://www.sweetpotatosoftware.com

 

[Dimandja]

Y'a pas de problème, Tracy, tout est oublié! In other words, hakuna matata! (trans: no problem at all).

Except of course for "They were more willing to help" or "They were less willing to help". Those two sentences strike me as incomplete.

 

[earthandfire]

I agree with Dimandja, the first two sentences seem incomplete whereas the third, whether or not you like the construction, at least appears complete.

 

[Thadeus]

One cannot state that the scope doesn't matter and then present an example where the scope is used to justify the example.

Since the pronoun is "they"...

Either the phrase "more or less" doesn't require a scope to have it make sense, or (as in this case) we need to consider that the use of "they" implies that maybe some are "more" entities and some are "less" entities. This is the scope.

Additionally, I have to agree that the phrase as used in Tracy's example does make clear sense to me. I believe the reason it makes sense though is because it meets the criteria for the second m-w definition: an Approximation.

"Help" is not an absolute term and so it can be provided in varying degrees. Much like Dimandja's "sense", in my opinion.

"Sign into the application, click on the File menu option, and choose Open File. Am I making sense?"
"More or less"

[possible translation]
"I follow everything you said, but you didn't explicitly tell me how to sign into the app. I have signed into other apps and assume that this is the same procedure so I won't ask you to detail it now... I guess you could have been more clear or explicit, but I'm gonna allow that the signing-in part is probably self explanatory."

~Thadeus

 

[tsdragon]

What if I had said:

"They were more than willing to help," or
"They were less than willing to help,"

Then would

"They were more or less willing to help"

make sense?

I disagree that the pronoun "they" provides scope. It may provide context, but the kind of scope dimandja was talking about was a quantitative scope to which the more or less could be applied. There is no scope in that sentence for the amount of willingness.

This sentence doesn't use m-w's 2nd definition or "approximately", it uses the first definition of "somewhat". I still think it does so acceptably.

Tracy Dryden

Meddle not in the affairs of dragons,
For you are crunchy, and good with mustard.

 

[CajunCenturion]

If have to wonder if the problem is not the answer, but rather, it's due to a lack of specificity in the question.

How many times have you answered a question, "well, yes and no"? The problem is not that the answer is un-clear or contradictory; it's the question that is multi-faceted, so both answers make sense, but to different aspects of the question.

In the original post,

I was explaining the finer points of OO programming, when I stopped and asked if I was still making sense.

First, what are the finer points of OO (object oriented) programming, and 'finer' from whose perspective? Could that be such a broad scope that no simple answer makes sense? Perhaps the 'more' aspect of the answer relates to inheritence, and the 'less' answer relates to polymorhpism.

In any event, the answer is as clear and specific as the question.

Good Luck
--------------
To get the most from your Tek-Tips experience, please read FAQ181-2886
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[Dimandja]

>First, what are the finer points of OO (object oriented) programming, and 'finer' from whose perspective? Could that be such a broad scope that no simple answer makes sense? Perhaps the 'more' aspect of the answer relates to inheritence, and the 'less' answer relates to polymorhpism.

This is besides the point, I'm afraid. Would it have helped if I had said "Does my explanattion of polymorphism make sense so far?". I seriously doubt it. But if you have an example question that would make the "more or less" answer a good answer, I'd like to know it.

 

[Dimandja]

Also, I need to add that the person who gave that answer was not being flippant or stupid (as you seem to suggest). This person is always neatly professional, and did not intend malice.

 

[CajunCenturion]

Huh? Where did that come from?

Good Luck
--------------
To get the most from your Tek-Tips experience, please read FAQ181-2886
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[Dimandja]

>Huh? Where did that come from?

From your post -- you may want to read it again.

In any event, I'm satisfied with the feedback I received so far.

 

[CajunCenturion]

==> From your post -- you may want to read it again.

Would you please be specific? What did I say that suggested your associate was being flippant or stupid?

Good Luck
--------------
To get the most from your Tek-Tips experience, please read FAQ181-2886
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[Dimandja]

I don't wish to engage in yet another senseless debate. Let it go.

 

[UniqueFD]

Dimandja,
sometimes I wonder if you seek willfully to misunderstand people's comments.

I think we've already seen some reasonable examples of when this phrase is used appropriately. CC was taking another angle on the context and question - I see no malice, or implied flippancy or stupidity on anyone's part.



Tony
___________________________________________________
Reckless words pierce like a sword,
but the tongue of the wise brings healing (Solomon)

 

[Dimandja]

<sigh>

 

[CajunCenturion]

Dimandja - You have publically accused me of suggesting that your associate was being flippant or stupid.

To understand the basis of these charges is not engaging in a senseless debate. Would you please explain your allegation?

Good Luck
--------------
To get the most from your Tek-Tips experience, please read FAQ181-2886
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[Dimandja]

Ok. If CC did not imply what I said, all he has to do is clarify his post, not engage in polemics. When TSDragon was called for his post, he explained it, and we moved on.

All CC has to do is clarify his post. Easy.

 

[AnotherHiggins]

I've gotta side with CC on this one. This forum is all about language and its effective use. If something CC wrote can be interpreted the way you seem to have interpreted it, Dimandja, I think it is perfectly reasonable for CC (and me) to want to know what gave offense.

This falls under the "... to improve our ability to communicate effectively ..." part of this forum's description.

I'm not trying to give you a hard time. This could be a good learning experience for me.

[tt]_____
[blue]-John[/blue]
[/tt][red]"I'm against picketing, but I don't know how to show it."[/red]
-Mitch Hedberg

Help us help you. Please read FAQ181-2886 before posting.

 

[Dimandja]

All right, John.

Here are excerpts from that CC's post:

>If have to wonder if the problem is not the answer, but rather, it's due to a lack of specificity in the question.

>In any event, the answer is as clear and specific as the question.

To summarize: the question is vague, and the answer is as clear as the question. Does it take rocket science to conclude that the answer is as vague as the question? Or that since the question was worthless, the answer given matches the worthlessness of the question? Or did CC mean something entirely different?

In my follow up post, I said what I understood from that post, and I saw it fit to clarify that the answerer was not being flippant: giving a bum answer to a bum question.

Instead of answering my requests for clarification, I get "Huh? Where did that come from?". That's when I decided to stop that line of conversation. So far, I am still waiting for clarification; but I guess my asking for clarification is verbotten?

 

[CajunCenturion]

Instead of answering my requests for clarification, I get "Huh? Where did that come from?".

Perhaps the display order is different between us. I do not see a question -- other than your own self-answered rhetorical one -- between my original post and my 'Huh' post.

So far, I am still waiting for clarification; but I guess my asking for clarification is verbotten?

I did not imply anything about your associate. I merely stated that a 'more or less' answer to what could be considered a multi-faceted question make sense.

If there is something else is the post that you'd like clarified, please ask a specific question, and I'll do my best to answer it.

Good Luck
--------------
To get the most from your Tek-Tips experience, please read FAQ181-2886
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[UniqueFD]

Dimandja,
I think the problem here is your interpretation of 'lack of specifity' as worthlessness. This is not a valid or objective interpretation.


The implication of CC's conjecture seems, to me, to be that the question included more than one piece of information (multiple 'finer points') to which the response 'more or less' is appropriate, however unpalatable. They could equally have replied, "Generally", "Mostly", or "For the most part, yes", but the actual response has prompted an interesting discussion (more or less).



Tony
___________________________________________________
Reckless words pierce like a sword,
but the tongue of the wise brings healing (Solomon)