This extract is from a newsletter from Wolverhampton Libraries. The article is a follow up to a survey taken recently of members of the various writers' groups in the area.
quote:
Perhaps the last word should be left to the member who commented "It is hard to underestimate the positive effect that the writing group has had on my writing."
Two interpretations spring to mind. Either the effect isn't as great as he thinks it is or he knows perfectly well that the statement says the opposite of its apparent intention but wrote it sarcastically and the editor of the newsletter failed to notice.
"No man but a blockhead ever wrote except for money." Samuel Johnson.
That sounds like sarcasm to me. "Hard to underestimate the positive effect" implies that the "positive effect" was so low as to be nearly non-existant. Sounds like he didn't learn much in that writing class.
It reads like sarcasm to me, too. Certainly, as Bob says, its impact has not been particularly beneficial if that is an example of his current writing style.
Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
Well, I must be a dunce then because I am definitely in the minority. I take it as I wrote above, and, to me, it sounds perfectly fine...just how he intended.
What if he had said, "It is hard to overestimate the positive effect that the writing group has had on my writing." Or "It is easy to underestimate the positive effect that the writing group had on my writing." Both of those comments, edited to be the opposite, would have said that the writing group was useless.
I do think he could have said it in a much more effective way!
Originally posted by Kalleh: "It is hard to overestimate the positive effect that the writing group has had on my writing."
That would mean it would be nearly impossible to exaggerate the positive effects. In other words, it was pretty damn good.
quote:
"It is easy to underestimate the positive effect that the writing group had on my writing."
That means essentially the same thing, but with a different nuance. That sounds like the group didn't appear to be particularly good at first glance, but was seen as excellent in retrospect.
quote:
Both of those comments, edited to be the opposite, would have said that the writing group was useless.
Now, I don't know what you mean here. Both of those statements would indicate the writing group had a very positive effect on his writing. You appear to say just the opposite. I say "appear" because I don't know what you mean by "edited to be the opposite."
IT's not even as subtle as those couldn't care less/could care less debates we have from time to time.
If It's hard to underestimate something that means the thing is so bad that no matter what your judgement is, it's unlikely be as bad as the reality.
If It's hard to overestimate something that means the thing is so good that no matter what your judgement is, it's unlikely be as good as the reality.
Myself I suspect the author quoted got it wrong. After all if he feels that way about a writers' group why is he still bothering to attend and fill in the questionaire?
"No man but a blockhead ever wrote except for money." Samuel Johnson.
This is actually a well-known phenomenon. It appears to be quite difficult to get such things right consistently. It's not clear why: it's not entirely beyond the linguistic cognitive limit, the way triple negations are ("we can't fail to underestimate").
I move to suspend the vote on cloture of the motion to surpress the motion to table the motion to amend the bill so as to eliminate the expiration date thereof, and to add provision (ix) to the list of exceptionns 1.1(a)(i) through 1.1(a)(viii), inclusive, to the "notwithstanding" language of subparagraph 1.1(a) as applied to the exceptions in paragraph 1.1 to the preliminary language of Section 1.
Thank you, Aput, for the very clear and good article.
If you read Aput's link, you can see that the phrase is commonly used to mean precisely what the student was trying to say. I suppose I fell into that trap. I certainly agree that the phrase could be taken 2 ways and that it is unclear. I have always had trouble with double negatives.
quote:
Now, I don't know what you mean here. Both of those statements would indicate the writing group had a very positive effect on his writing. You appear to say just the opposite. I say "appear" because I don't know what you mean by "edited to be the opposite."
While I apparently wasn't clear to you, Tinman, you are right that we both interpret those phrases differently. By "edited to be the opposite," I merely meant that I changed the phrase so that it was opposite of the original phrase. That's all.
[Edited upon reflection.]This message has been edited. Last edited by: Kalleh,
