Nov 25, 2016 15:28
7 yrs ago
1 viewer *
English term
This isn’t going to do any harm at all (in this context)
English
Other
General / Conversation / Greetings / Letters
Hello everyone,
Following Conor’s Cage Warriors exploits, both in the cage and in interviews, there was a lot of excitement among the MMA community as the fight approached. It peaked during an interview with well‑known reporter Ariel Helwani live on his show, The MMA Hour. Conor had never been exposed to such a large audience, particularly in North America, so it was going to be intriguing to see how it all unfolded. His charisma and sense of humour had already made him popular with fans in Ireland and the UK, but would that also translate across the Atlantic?
I watched the interview and what I saw was Conor just being Conor – no act, no gimmick, what you see is what you get – so I wasn’t anticipating the incredible reaction that followed. The internet exploded. I really didn’t expect people to be so captivated by him. They thought he was hilarious and were intrigued by his confidence. I already knew he had the ability to fight his way to the top, but as I observed how people were so taken by his personality, I thought: This isn’t going to do any harm at all. From there, the media couldn’t get enough of him.
Of course I know the usual/standard meaning of the phrase in question.
But it sounds really odd (at least to me) in this particular context.
What exactly does it imply in the context above?
Does it mean there was no need to worry about that interview? -- "Conor had never been exposed to such a large audience, particularly in North America..."
Or does it mean it's a good thing that people like Conor?
Thank you.
Following Conor’s Cage Warriors exploits, both in the cage and in interviews, there was a lot of excitement among the MMA community as the fight approached. It peaked during an interview with well‑known reporter Ariel Helwani live on his show, The MMA Hour. Conor had never been exposed to such a large audience, particularly in North America, so it was going to be intriguing to see how it all unfolded. His charisma and sense of humour had already made him popular with fans in Ireland and the UK, but would that also translate across the Atlantic?
I watched the interview and what I saw was Conor just being Conor – no act, no gimmick, what you see is what you get – so I wasn’t anticipating the incredible reaction that followed. The internet exploded. I really didn’t expect people to be so captivated by him. They thought he was hilarious and were intrigued by his confidence. I already knew he had the ability to fight his way to the top, but as I observed how people were so taken by his personality, I thought: This isn’t going to do any harm at all. From there, the media couldn’t get enough of him.
Of course I know the usual/standard meaning of the phrase in question.
But it sounds really odd (at least to me) in this particular context.
What exactly does it imply in the context above?
Does it mean there was no need to worry about that interview? -- "Conor had never been exposed to such a large audience, particularly in North America..."
Or does it mean it's a good thing that people like Conor?
Thank you.
Responses
+6
23 mins
Selected
Typical British understatement
He's saying that the people liked Conor and that was a good thing. For some reason, we British don't like to say that a thing is positive so we say the opposite and then negate it. How's the soup? Not bad!
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 55 mins (2016-11-25 16:24:12 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
As Gallagy points out, the people involved here are Irish, not British. I guess they do it too. Next time I speak to any of my Irish friends, I will ask them.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 55 mins (2016-11-25 16:24:12 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
As Gallagy points out, the people involved here are Irish, not British. I guess they do it too. Next time I speak to any of my Irish friends, I will ask them.
Peer comment(s):
agree |
B D Finch
: You were first!
8 mins
|
agree |
Jack Doughty
1 hr
|
neutral |
Yvonne Gallagher
: yes, we do it too...we actually have a lot in common with you! Just use "understatement" and it's fine//:-)
1 hr
|
Sorry about that, I hadn't realised that Conor was Irish. The name should have given me a clue :) You were entirely right to object.
|
|
agree |
Cilian O'Tuama
: no bad will come of it
11 hrs
|
agree |
Charles Davis
18 hrs
|
agree |
Christine Andersen
: I was discussing this recently about approval from west Jutland (my husband's family). People may go into ecstasies in Copenhagen, but in west Jutland, if something is 'not bad', there is almost no higher praise!
21 hrs
|
agree |
katsy
1 day 2 hrs
|
4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer.
Comment: "Many thanks to everyone.
Thank you, Terry."
+1
23 mins
Contrary to what many people had feared (including his coach), Connor was likely to become popular
P
+3
31 mins
this is going to be useful
This seems to be an example of a deliberate understatement being used to mean a positive. My father tended to use this very expression in that way. It took me years to realise that when he said something I did wasn't bad, that was his idea of praise.
Peer comment(s):
agree |
Terry Richards
: My (American) wife had the same reaction when we first met. I thought I was praising her and she thought I was being dismissive. We worked it out eventually :)
6 mins
|
Thanks Terry. She obviously twigged quicker than I did with my father.
|
|
agree |
Yvonne Gallagher
: well yes, Terry was first but "British" needs to be omitted
13 mins
|
Thanks Gallagy
|
|
agree |
Charles Davis
18 hrs
|
Thanks Charles
|
Discussion
I should have indicated it when posting the question -- sorry about that .