Securing Electricity Meter Cupboard

[JohnW2]

However, I'm still trying to explain, with an alternative definition, of how "I can't believe (it's incredible) you just said that" is something better than an 'informal' (i.e. wrong) meaning and so "incredibly commonplace" would be acceptable and not just mean 'very'..

It surely depends upon what you are trying to say. "Incredibly commonplace" seems to mean that you find it impossible (or, at least, difficult) to believe that the thing in question is actually "commonplace". If that's you're intended meaning, then that is presumably a correct use of the (proper meaning of) the word.

However, I think the 'common usage' (of incredibly) is to mean "very", or probably "very very", and that is the 'informal', not 'proper' meaning. Consider the following examples, all of which I would say represent very common usage .......

The chance of one ticket winning the Lottery is incredibly small
Even the nearest galaxy is an incredibly long distance away
A neutron star is incredibly heavy in relation to its size
Top snooker players have an incredibly high level of skill
The food in this restaurant is of incredibly high quality
etc., etc., etc. .....
​

In all those cases (and millions of others like them), "incredibly" is being used to mean "very very" (i.e. the 'informal {aka 'wrong'} meaning), with not the slightest suggestion or implication of any disbelief in, or difficulty in believing, the truth of what is being stated. Do you agree?

Is "It's incredible that such a thing has happened" merely totally oxymoronic and wrong?

See above. If the meaning is "I do not believe [or 'find it difficult to believe'] that such a thing has happened", then I think that is a 'proper' use of the word. If (more likely) the meaning is that "it is surprising/amazing/astonishing that such a thing has happened" (the implication being that one accepts/believes that it has happened) then, yes, I think it would be an oxymoron, and 'wrong'.

What about definition 2? It doesn't say informal.

It doesn't, but definition 2.1 ("very good") does.

Kind Regards, John

 

[EFLImpudence]

It surely depends upon what you are trying to say. "Incredibly commonplace" seems to mean that you find it impossible (or, at least, difficult) to believe that the thing in question is actually "commonplace". If that's you're intended meaning, then that is presumably a correct use of the (proper meaning of) the word.

Yes, quite - so Bas did mean it as very. Wrongly?

However, I think the 'common usage' (of incredibly) is to mean "very", or probably "very very", and that is the 'informal', not 'proper' meaning. Consider the following examples, all of which I would say represent very common usage .......

The chance of one ticket winning the Lottery is incredibly small
Even the nearest galaxy is an incredibly long distance away
A neutron star is incredibly heavy in relation to its size
Top snooker players have an incredibly high level of skill
The food in this restaurant is of incredibly high quality
etc., etc., etc. .....
​

In all those cases (and millions of others like them), "incredibly" is being used to mean "very very" (i.e. the 'informal {aka 'wrong'} meaning), with not the slightest suggestion or implication of any disbelief in, or difficulty in believing, the truth of what is being stated. Do you agree?

Mostly, although most people would not believe (i.e. don't know/can't imagine) how small,far,heavy.
Snooker players, yes, just 'very'.
Restaurant, this is my dilemma. It may be so much higher than other restaurants that people wouldn't believe how high even though they may not dispute it.
I am sure there is a degree of believability and credibility involved.

See above. If the meaning is "I do not believe [or 'find it difficult to believe'] that such a thing has happened", then I think that is a 'proper' use of the word.

Yes. So that is what I had in mind but I attributed it wrongly to Bas' reference.

If (more likely) the meaning is that "it is surprising/amazing/astonishing that such a thing has happened" (the implication being that one accepts/believes that it has happened) then, yes, I think it would be an oxymoron, and 'wrong'.

Yes.

So, "I can't believe you said that" doesn't mean I don't believe you said it or even think what you said was untrue - but
I am astonished that you said it.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

 

[ban-all-sheds]

So, "I can't believe you said that" doesn't mean I don't believe you said it or even think what you said was untrue - but
I am astonished that you said it.

[RINGS BELL]Is it time to resurrect the "Is it not raining?" thing?[/AND RUNS AWAY]

 

[JohnW2]

Mostly, although most people would not believe (i.e. don't know/can't imagine) how small,far,heavy. ...

I don't think that's really relevant. The person saying those things would simply mean "very", and the people listening would think that it just meant "very", regardless of their knowledge/feelings about the 'quantitative' aspects. I really don't think that many people would think that the statement meant that what was being said (about heaviness, skilfulness, probability of whatever) was "impossible (or even difficult) to believe".

So, "I can't believe you said that" doesn't mean I don't believe you said it or even think what you said was untrue - but I am astonished that you said it.

Indeed so. They obviously cannot fail to believe that something was said if they heard it being said, but they can certainly be astonished/surprised/whatever that it was said.

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Let's all start saying things like

The chance of one ticket winning the Lottery is hyperbolically small
Even the nearest galaxy is a hyperbolically long distance away
A neutron star is hyperbolically heavy in relation to its size
Top snooker players have a hyperbolically high level of skill
The food in this restaurant is of hyperbolically high quality
etc., etc., etc. .....​

 

[JohnW2]

Let's all start saying things like

The chance of one ticket winning the Lottery is hyperbolically small
Even the nearest galaxy is a hyperbolically long distance away
A neutron star is hyperbolically heavy in relation to its size
Top snooker players have a hyperbolically high level of skill
The food in this restaurant is of hyperbolically high quality
etc., etc., etc. .....​

​

That would be an usual construct (is "hyperbolically small" even a valid construct?) and would nearly always change the intended meaning.

Assuming that one was not talking about the mathematical meaning of the word, virtually all dictionaries agree that "hyperbole"/ "hyperbolic" / "hyperbolically" relate to 'deliberate exaggeration' - which is not what most people (including myself) would usually be intending if they made any of the statements (with "incredibly" {intended to mean "very", or "very very"}, rather than "hyperbolically").

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Maybe not, but it might drum home the point that that is what they are doing.

 

[JohnW2]

Maybe not, but it might drum home the point that that is what they are doing.

Well, I can't speak for whatever circles you move in, but I'm personally not aware of the word "hyperbolically" being used incorrectly in the manner you suggest - so if anyone did/does do that, they would just be just plain wrong (quite possibly not understood 'as intended', and not currently supported by any dictionary of which I am aware), both in terms of original definitions and 'common usage'.

Kind Regards, John

 

[stillp]

whatever circles you move in

Ellipses, surely?

 

[JohnW2]

Ellipses, surely?

Even ellipses are not hyperbolic!

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I'm personally not aware of the word "hyperbolically" being used incorrectly in the manner you suggest

Nor am I.

The point is to indicate that "unbelievably", and "incredibly" are hyperbole.

 

[JohnW2]

The point is to indicate that "unbelievably", and "incredibly" are hyperbole.

I would personally say that that is somewhat of an understatement. Per most dictionaries, hyperbole implies exaggeration, and most dictionaries define "hyperbolic" as relating to deliberate exaggeration.

I doubt that most people who use "unbelievable" or "incredibly" to mean "very" (or "very very") are deliberately exaggerating - they are merely using the words to mean "very" and therefore probably don't think/know that they are exaggerating at all. I'm also not sure that stretching something to the extent that it becomes plain incorrect necessarily qualifies as mere 'exaggeration'.

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I doubt that most people who use "unbelievable" or "incredibly" to mean "very" (or "very very") are deliberately exaggerating - they are merely using the words to mean "very" and therefore probably don't think/know that they are exaggerating at all.

If they use one of those words instead of just "very" it is because they want to express something more exaggerated than just "very".

And if they are not aware of what they are doing, they should be.

I'm also not sure that stretching something to the extent that it becomes plain incorrect necessarily qualifies as mere 'exaggeration'.

Until we can lock them up for it, I'll take anything which might cure the rash of links to "stories" (usually clickbait) with descriptions along the lines of

"You won't believe what happened next", "... jaw-dropping ...", "... shocking ..."

 

[JohnW2]

If they use one of those words instead of just "very" it is because they want to express something more exaggerated than just "very".

Since "very" is not quantifiable, it can't really be exaggerated. "Very very", "very very very" etc. really just mean "very". A bit like multiplying infinity by anything!

As I said, "impossible to believe" is not an exaggeration of "very" - it's a totally different concept and, unless it's really true that the something is "impossible to believe", then is just plain wrong, not a mere exaggeration.

Kind Regards, John