# as splendid as any



## thetazuo

The room was *as splendid as any* that Sansa had ever seen.  (Game of Thrones)

Hi. I have two interpretations of this sentence. Which do you think makes more sense?
1. As far as Sansa is concerned, there is no other room more splendid than this one.
2. This room is the most splendid one Sansa has ever seen.

Thank you.


----------



## SwissPete

I vote for 2.


----------



## thetazuo

Thank you. And I'd like to how others would comment on it?


----------



## london calling

2. is the nearest.


----------



## lingobingo

Only 2 means the same as the original.


----------



## Edinburgher

I take it to mean that this room is *at least as splendid* as any other she had seen.  In effect, this means (1).
Taken literally, (2) excludes the possibility of any other room being equally as splendid as this one, but the original does not exclude that possibility.  The original means that this room wins first prize in a splendour competition, but it could be a "joint first" prize.


----------



## GreenWhiteBlue

I concur with Edinburgher.


----------



## Myridon

1) allows comparison to any room that Sansa has heard of or even to rooms she can imagine so 1) is not the same as the original statement.
Edinburgher's point is correct though that 2) needs to be changed to allow for equally splendid rooms.


----------



## thetazuo

Thank you all. I come up with interpretation 1) because I have previously read this thread: As nice a place as any
XYZ is *as nice a place as any* to hold this ceremony 


wandle said:


> This states that there is no other place nicer than this one.
> It does not say that this place is the nicest one, since it allows that there are other places equally nice.


So I still don't understand why 1) doesn't work. If interpretation 2) needs to be changed to including the possibility of other rooms being equally splendid, then 2) becomes 1).


----------



## Barque

I agree with Edinburgher.

Sansa had seen splendid looking rooms before and this room was as splendid as the most splendid ones he had seen till then.

So both 1 and 2 fit by implication, though as mentioned above, 2 needs to take into account that this room was not the only one that could be called the most splendid he'd seen.


----------



## Scrawny goat

wandle said: ↑
This states that there is no other place nicer than this one.
*It does not say that this place is the nicest one, since it allows that there are other places equally nice*.


----------



## Schizophrenic Cat

Edinburgher said:


> I take it to mean that this room is *at least as splendid* as any other she had seen.  In effect, this means (1).
> Taken literally, (2) excludes the possibility of any other room being equally as splendid as this one, but the original does not exclude that possibility.  The original means that this room wins first prize in a splendour competition, but it could be a "joint first" prize.



+1


----------



## thetazuo

Thank you. I see. So I should interpret topic sentence as this:
Possibility 1) This room is the most splendid one Sansa has ever seen ---- no other room matches this one in Sansa's mind;
Possibility 2) This room is not the only one which can be called "the most splendid" ---- other rooms matching this one exist in Sansa's mind
Do I get it?


----------



## Barque

thetazuo said:


> Possibility 1) This room is the most splendid one Sansa has ever seen ---- no other room matches this one in Sansa's *experience* mind;


No. This room _is one of the most_ splendid ones he'd seen. Others might match it, but none _exceed_ it.


thetazuo said:


> Possibility 2) This room is not the only one which can be called "the most splendid" ---- other rooms matching this one exist in Sansa's *experience* mind


Yes.


----------



## Schizophrenic Cat

thetazuo said:


> Thank you. I see. So I should interpret topic sentence as this:
> Possibility 1) This room is the most splendid one Sansa has ever seen ---- no other room matches this one in Sansa's mind;
> Possibility 2) This room is not the only one which can be called "the most splendid" ---- other rooms matching this one exist in Sansa's mind
> Do I get it?



I think only the second one is OK. "As.....As" is used when two things are equal in something. So " This room was as splendid as any that Sansa had ever seen" cannot be paraphrased as " This room was the most splendid one Sansa had ever seen". Because "most" means "to the uppermost degree" while as + adj + as means "equal in something".


----------



## thetazuo

Hi. Sorry for doing this topic again. But my recent questions wake my memory of this thread.

Just a quick question: Can I say the sentence means "there was no other room *Sansa had ever seen* more splendid than this one"? (This is in response to #8 and I think the amended version 1) equals the "joint first prize" idea and is more accurate)


----------



## Edinburgher

thetazuo said:


> Can I say the sentence means "there was no other room *Sansa had ever seen* more splendid than this one"?


Yes.

On reflection, by the way, I wish to withdraw my statement in #7 where I say that "In effect this means (1)", because  "there is no room more splendid than this one" is too broad: it includes rooms Sansa has not seen.


----------



## thetazuo

Edinburgher said:


> Yes.
> 
> On reflection, by the way, I wish to withdraw my statement in #7 where I say that "In effect this means (1)", because "there is no room more splendid than this one" is too broad: it includes rooms Sansa has not seen.


Thank you so much. It's very helpful. 
So I think without context, the most accurate way to interpret the "A is as xxx as any" construction is "no other thing is more xxx than A". And any other readings (e.g. <among> the most xxx) would be assuming too much because we need context to be sure of them. Right?

Besides, the reason why I think this question is that if I translate the construction literally then it doesn't make sense in Chinese. So I have some trouble understanding it. Up to this point, I start thinking the superlative reading is just a translation technique instead of being an intrinsic meaning of the construction.


----------



## Edinburgher

thetazuo said:


> And any other readings (e.g. <among> the most xxx) would be assuming too much because we need context


Well, context always helps, but the usual meaning of "among the most xxx" is completely different from "no other is more xxx".  It is not simply the same as the difference between "greater or equal" and "greater".
If I say that Heinz baked beans are among the most expensive brands of baked beans you can buy, this does not exclude the possibility that some brands might be more expensive than Heinz.  It just means that most other brands are less expensive.


----------



## thetazuo

Thank you for your teaching. So is this thinking right?
The established meaning of the "A is as xxx as any" construction is "no other thing is more xxx than A".
Right?


----------



## Edinburgher

Yes, but you need to be careful not to be too categorical about it, because "more xxx" sometimes doesn't have an exact meaning.
We know what "more expensive" means, or "more big" (except that we don't say "more big", we say "bigger" instead), because size and cost are easy to quantify and compare.
But "more splendid" or "more evil" are problematic because splendour and evilness are difficult to quantify and compare.  They are more qualitative than quantitative.

PS:  I don't follow "Game of Thrones", and the name Sansa means nothing to me.
It always makes me think of *Santa*, particularly because this thread was started in December.


----------



## thetazuo

A young septon galloped past upon a palfrey as fine as any lord’s, ...

Hi. I have found another sentence in Game of Thrones.
Does the underlined part mean no lord’s palfrey is finer than the young septon’s palfrey?

Thank you.


----------



## Barque

No. I understand this as meaning his horse was as fine as a horse belonging to a lord.

Lords presumably would have fine horses. This was just as fine as a lord might have.


----------



## lingobingo

A young septon galloped past upon a palfrey as fine as any lord’s, ...

A young septon galloped past upon a palfrey [that was every bit] as fine as [that which] any lord [might ride]


----------



## thetazuo

Hi. Thank you both. But I wonder why this example is not interpreted the same way as the op one? And it doesn’t seem to be in keeping with the established meaning of the construction which has been stated in post 21.


----------



## Truffula

To me, "the most splendid room Sansa had ever seen" also allows for other equally splendid rooms.  It just means no other room she had seen was more splendid.

"As tall a man as I have ever seen" means the tallest man I have seen, but I may have seen two men both of that same height (unlikely due to bell curve distribution of height, but allowable).  This is the same usage as the original with splendid rooms.

"As tall a man as you'd see playing professional basketball" means a man of the typical height of pro basketball players, which is quite tall, but a range - it doesn't mean as tall as the tallest professional basketball player ever.  This is the same usage as the young septon's horse.


----------



## thetazuo

Thank you. I seem to understand. I think the reason why the septon example is interpreted differently than the op one is in the septon example, the subject and the thing it is compared with don’t fall into the same category; the subject is the septon’s palfrey while the comparable object is a lord’s palfrey.

So I think if we say “Lord Tywin galloped past upon a palfrey as fine as any lord’s”, then it means “no other lord’s palfrey was finer than Lord Tywin’s. (Or “the septon galloped past upon a palfrey as fine as any septon’s” ———-> no other septon’s palfrey was finer than this septon’s .)
Is this thinking right?


----------



## bennymix

GreenWhiteBlue said:


> I concur with Edinburgher.



I do too.   With slight clarification 1) fits:   The room was *as splendid as any* that Sansa had ever seen. (Game of Thrones)

//Hi. I have two interpretations of this sentence. Which do you think makes more sense?
1. As far as Sansa is concerned[=in Sansa's experience], there is no other room more splendid than this one.
2. This room is the most splendid one Sansa has ever seen./

2. Plainly does NOT fit.  It says "The", i.e. single most, splendid, whereas the original say 'as splendid as any" = equally splendid to others.


----------



## Truffula

Yes, thetazuo, I think you have it.

If the comparison is within the category (type 1), it means it's the best in the category (allowing there may be multiple tied for best).

If the comparison is to another category (type 2), it means it's equivalent of the typical quality of the other category.

Compare:
Sansa's room in the inn was as splendid as any room in any inn in the land (type 1 - best inn room)
Sansa's room in the inn was as splendid as any room in a king's palace (type 2 - inn room would be as good as a typical palace room is)


----------



## Edinburgher

thetazuo said:


> Does the underlined part mean no lord’s palfrey is finer than the young septon’s palfrey?





Barque said:


> No. I understand this as meaning his horse was as fine as a horse belonging to a lord.


Actually, that should be yes, or perhaps yes and no. Note that the original version uses "*any* lord's", not "a lord's".

Logically, this therefore means that if you pick *any* lord's palfrey, even the finest in that category, then our humble septon's will be as fine as that one (and hence no other in the category will be finer).  Add the unstated assumption that nobody who is not a lord has a palfrey finer than a lord's, then it follows that the septon's has the highest possible level of fineness in all the land.

Pragmatically, however, we must detect a certain amount of exaggeration in the text.  What it really means is not what it actually says.  It means that the septon's palfrey is really rather fine-looking.  Almost  as fine as a lord's.


What's a septon, anyway?   Seven sixths of a sexton?  The word is in OED, but not with a meaning that fits here.


----------



## bennymix

Edinburgher said:


> Actually, that should be yes, or perhaps yes and no. Note that the original version uses "*any* lord's", not "a lord's".
> 
> Logically, this therefore means that if you pick *any* lord's palfrey, even the finest in that category, then our humble septon's will be as fine as that one (and hence no other in the category will be finer).  Add the unstated assumption that nobody who is not a lord has a palfrey finer than a lord's, then it follows that the septon's has the highest possible level of fineness in all the land.
> 
> Pragmatically, however, we must detect a certain amount of exaggeration in the text.  What it really means is not what it actually says.  It means that the septon's palfrey is really rather fine-looking.  Almost  as fine as a lord's.
> 
> 
> What's a septon, anyway?   Seven sixths of a sexton?  The word is in OED, but not with a meaning that fits here.



You're sticking with 1., then?


----------



## Truffula

1. in the original post differs in meaning from the book quote, because it doesn't limit the rooms to ones Sansa has *seen.*  As Myridon pointed out in post #8 above.


----------



## bennymix

Truffula said:


> 1. in the original post differs in meaning from the book quote, because it doesn't limit the rooms to ones Sansa has *seen.*  As Myridon pointed out in post #8 above.



Yes, the thread title quote is clearly related to S's experiences.  1. is ambiguous, but one plausible reading limits it to S's experiences and another possible one does not.


----------



## Edinburgher

bennymix said:


> You're sticking with 1., then?


Well, in effect there is no difference between 1 and 2, once you apply your clarification from #28.  If you interpret "as far as Sansa is concerned" as "as far as Sansa is aware", then both (1) and (2) from #1 refer to her experience (basically what she has seen).
Then the core meanings of statements (1) (there is no other room more splendid) and (2) (this is the most splendid room) are identical.

Furthermore, I see no real difference between #1 (Sansa) and #22 (the septon).  There is no "within category" vs "in a different category" issue as suggested in #29.  The literal meanings of "as (splendid/fine) as" are the same.  In both cases there can be other rooms as splendid or other palfreys as fine, but none more splendid or finer.

But we do need to be aware of how much hype is likely to lie behind the respective assertions.


----------



## Semiotician

thetazuo said:


> The room was *as splendid as any* that Sansa had ever seen.  (Game of Thrones)
> 
> Hi. I have two interpretations of this sentence. Which do you think makes more sense?
> 1. As far as Sansa is concerned, there is no other room more splendid than this one.
> 2. This room is the most splendid one Sansa has ever seen.
> 
> Thank you.



With the greatest respect to the sound reasoning behind the opinions conveyed in the above posts suggesting 1) as the correct conclusion, contrarily I believe 2) is the plausible extrapolation.

I assert the importance of placing the sentence within its contextual background. I am intimately familiar with George Martin’s writing and genre in which it resides. The later being of greater significance for the  interpretation of this sentence.

English in its everyday modern use has never been the genre’s intent. Instead what is utilised is a style of old English, which helps set a time and a place where the story is told, with a certain atmosphere. This often occurs at the expense of misinterpretation. The use of this lexicon, in this instance, also significantly portrays the small, sheltered existence of Sansa Stark.

It is not meant merely as a representation of the room Martin is describing, rather containing subtext of at least one concurrent message. This being that Sansa is experiencing child like awe in confronting an outside world she had been completely ignorant of. The second option is alone in creating this duality and, for that matter, it would be absurd to assume Sansa, a sheltered little princess of an isolated keep, could possibly make an assertion as to the beauty and splendour of the world’s finest and most breathtaking chambers. Martin probably wouldn’t insert such a statement, as it in some respects undermines and diminishes his authoritative naration.

1) In knowing the character well, which none of the above analysis appears to consider, Sansa is an innocent, humble and unassuming young woman, despite being extremely strong and holding a lofty social position. I believe she would not presume that other rooms be as or not as splendid because it would be inconsistent with the character. Knowing her place very well in the world, particularly now she is seeing it through the eyes of a burgeoning adult, gives her an internal perspective of just how little she knows of the outside world. This received perspective would not allow her to arrogantly condemn all other rooms that exist to be no better than matching this or less.

2) Fits the character perfectly as one who is overwhelmed by seeing such splendour, as Winterfell was all that she knew and it was unspectacular in comparison, and as per my aforementioned reading of Sansa’s character, allows her innocence and humility to win through. 

Therefore it is my proposition that it is a depiction only of the rooms she has personally encountered.

However this is but my humble opinion.

D


----------



## bennymix

Semi: Therefore it is my proposition that it [the original] is a depiction only of the rooms she has personally encountered.

I completely agree.    That is why I said the 1. in the OP required clarification to state a limitation to her experience.

It's true that 2. is clearer on this point, but its incorrect talk of 'the most splendid'  makes one lean toward rejecting it as an exact elucidation.

My car is as beautiful as any of yours I've ever seen {analogue of original}  certainly does NOT state*  My car is the most beautiful of those I've ever seen {analogue of 2.}.    Possibly the latter point could by argued from a character study such as you propose;   maybe the person is thinking it, but being a bit restrained.

*in my opinion


----------



## Semiotician

bennymix said:


> Semi: Therefore it is my proposition that it [the original] is a depiction only of the rooms she has personally encountered.
> 
> I completely agree.    That is why I said the 1. in the OP required clarification to state a limitation to her experience.
> 
> It's true that 2. is clearer on this point, but its incorrect talk of 'the most splendid'  makes one lean toward rejecting it as an exact elucidation.
> 
> My car is as beautiful as any of yours I've ever seen {analogue of original}  certainly does NOT state*  My car is the most beautiful of those I've ever seen {analogue of 2.}.    Possibly the latter point could by argued from a character study such as you propose;   maybe the person is thinking it, but being a bit restrained.
> 
> *in my opinion





bennymix said:


> Semi: Therefore it is my proposition that it [the original] is a depiction only of the rooms she has personally encountered.
> 
> I completely agree.    That is why I said the 1. in the OP required clarification to state a limitation to her experience.
> 
> It's true that 2. is clearer on this point, but its incorrect talk of 'the most splendid'  makes one lean toward rejecting it as an exact elucidation.
> 
> My car is as beautiful as any of yours I've ever seen {analogue of original}  certainly does NOT state*  My car is the most beautiful of those I've ever seen {analogue of 2.}.    Possibly the latter point could by argued from a character study such as you propose;   maybe the person is thinking it, but being a bit restrained.
> 
> *in my opinion



A very interesting and well made argument. Perhaps if am mistaking your point, you would be so kind as to correct me.

Firstly why is ‘the most splendid’ actually incorrect. I believe it to be entirely reasonable and it’s eludication, in my view, is unambiguous with clarification being necessary. Perhaps you could give me some feedback on that.

Secondly your analogy of the car example, I believe, does not apply primarily to the points I made concerning the termanology employed by this genre. I believe, not for one minute am I making a presumption as to your ignorance of this style of writing, it rather contextually places it in a manner of discourse consistent with representations of other experiences she has suffered where similar constructions were used in transference of analogous sentiments. You second assertion pivots on the word yours, our senario does not make mention as to any ownership. A her restraint in thinking does not appear obvious to me.


----------



## bennymix

[Semi] Firstly why is ‘the most splendid’ actually incorrect. I believe it to be entirely reasonable and it’s eludication, in my view, is unambiguous with clarification being necessary. Perhaps you could give me some feedback on that.

I simply don't see how one goes from 'as [adjective]... as'   to  '[first] is most [adjective]'.   

A is as beautiful as B**.[in their common class] ==>  ??
A is *the* most beautiful [in that class]

**or, 'any B'


----------



## thetazuo

Edinburgher said:


> What's a septon, anyway?


Thank you all. The author has imparted a different meaning to the word “septon”. In this novel it means “a priest who devoted himself to the Seven Gods”.


----------



## Edinburgher

bennymix said:


> I simply don't see how one goes from 'as [adjective]... as' to '[first] is most [adjective]'.


Indeed.  "This X is as beautiful as any other X" (A) simply means "No other X is more beautiful than this one" (B), it does not mean "This X is more beautiful than any other X" (C), because A and B admit the possibility that one or more of the other Xs are equally as beautiful as this one, whereas C does not admit that possibility.  C places this X in a position of maximum and un-equalled beauty.

But no "within class" vs "in another class" distinction is necessary.  In comparing the priest's horse (which *is not* a member of the class of lord's horses) to any member of the class of lord's horses, the situation is analogous:
"This X is as fine as any Y" means "No Y is finer than X", it does not mean "X is finer than any Y".


----------



## alexl57

The question here is what is the exact interpretation of the construction "X is as beautiful as Y".  Does it mean "X is exactly the same on the beauty scale as Y" or "the beauty of X is greater than or equal to that of Y", the latter meaning "X is at least as beautiful as Y".
Take this example: (A) "X is *not* as beautiful as Y".
(A) means that X is *less* beautiful than Y. Now think, bearing this interpretation in mind, what is it that is being negated? It seems that the speaker is, in effect, negating and refuting "X is *at least* as beautiful as Y". If we take the "as... as" structure to mean "exactly equal" then, using formal logic, (A) would strictly be valid even if X is less beautiful than Y. But is that the thing that you'd have in mind upon hearing (A)? So, the presence of a "negative polarity word" such as "not" somehow alters the meaning of "as ... as" from that of a strict equality, giving it the interpretation of "at least as ... as".

"Any" is also a kind of a "negative polarity word". It somehow presupposes a negation. Take this expression:
(B) as *good* a time/place etc as any
Longman Dictionary explains it here: used to say that although a time etc is not perfect, there will *probably* not be a *better* one (emphasis mine). Where did "probably" come from? I don't exactly know the complete answer to this. Perhaps someone could enlighten me.  "Any" somehow modifies the interpretation, hinting at some sort of negative context. "Any" entails unlimited choice. Pick any place and no matter which one you pick, the present place will at least be on par. You will *not *find a *better* one (but you may find a worse one). It could be that "probably" comes from the fact that our lifespan is limited and we cannot hope to check every single place. So the scope of "any" is somewhat restricted by this fact, hence "probably".

Coming back to the OP:
The room was *as splendid as any* that Sansa had ever seen.
Here, the unlimited choice of "any" is restricted by the clause "that Sansa had ever seen". In other words, the choice is naturally restricted by her life experience.
In all of her life experienced up to that point Sansa (probably ?) hadn't seen a room *more splendid*.
Now we can interpret this as hinting at "the most splendid" and indeed that could be the implicature, if not the implication.


----------



## Truffula

alexl57 said:


> Coming back to the OP:
> The room was *as splendid as any* that Sansa had ever seen.
> Here, the unlimited choice of "any" is restricted by the clause "that Sansa had ever seen". In other words, the choice is naturally restricted by her life experience.
> In all of her life experienced up to that point Sansa (probably ?) hadn't seen a room *more splendid*.
> Now we can interpret this as hinting at "the most splendid" and indeed that could be the implicature, if not the implication.



I 100% agree with alexi57's comment on the OP quoted above.  "In all of her life experienced up to that point, Sansa hadn't seen a room more splendid" is better than either of the two original suggested interpretations - it's more exactly equivalent to the original in every way.


----------



## bennymix

This horse is as immobile as any I've ever seen.    But is it the deadest?


----------



## thetazuo

Edinburgher said:


> But we do need to be aware of how much *hype* is likely to lie behind the respective assertions.


Hi, Edinburgher. On reading this thread again, I have a question. 
By “hype” do you mean we need to pay attention to the extent to which the expression “as [quality] as any” is enthusiastic? 
If so, why does the enthusiasm matter?


----------



## Edinburgher

By "hype" I was referring to exaggeration.  It matters because typically we are not expected to take the expression literally.
It's like someone saying that they went to dinner at a friend's house, where the lady of the house had produced a meal that was "fit for a king".  It means the meal was rather splendid, and well-presented, but in truth a real royal banquet would have been even more opulent.


----------



## thetazuo

Thank you. I see. I think the extent of enthusiasm behind the topic construction also matters because different degrees of enthusiasm can generate different readings. For example,
“This was as good a time as any.”
It can mean this was not an especially good time to do something, but not worse than any other. (not very enthusiastic)
It can also mean this was a rather good time. (enthusiastic)

But both mean there are no other times better.
Make sense?


----------



## Edinburgher

thetazuo said:


> But both mean there are no other times better.


I wouldn't say that's what they mean, or what the original means.
I would understand the original to mean more or less the same as mentioned in #41.
I am not very enthusiastic to do it now, but I recognize that my enthusiasm is unlikely to grow.  Therefore, there is no point in postponing it.  It has got to be done sometime, and it might as well be now.


----------



## kentix

Edinburgher said:


> I am not very enthusiastic to do it now, but I recognize that my enthusiasm is unlikely to grow. Therefore, there is no point in postponing it. It has got to be done sometime, and it might as well be now.


I agree with that.

I also think it can be more neutral. It's Sunday afternoon and you're not particularly busy but at some point you have to make a quick visit to a family member with your brother. At some point he says, "Do you want to go now?" And you reply, "Why not. It's as good a time as any." because it doesn't make any real difference. You could go now or an hour from now because you have no other pressing obligations. It's not that you don't want to go, it's just that no time is specifically better than any other time.

I don't think it can mean this, though.


thetazuo said:


> It can also mean this was a rather good time. (enthusiastic)



You'd have to say something like "it's a better time than any I've seen lately [to take care of this]."


----------



## thetazuo

Thank you both.


Edinburgher said:


> I wouldn't say that's what they mean, or what the original means.
> I would understand the original to mean more or less the same as mentioned in #41.


Perhaps I need to say it means “probably there were no other times better”, since you have agreed with the established meaning of the construction since post 21?
In post 41, alexl57 said:


alexl57 said:


> You will *not *find a *better* one


Isn’t it the same as my version?


----------



## Truffula

The problem with "as good a time as any" is that it isn't a fresh example of the structure, it's more of a cliche phrase.  It has a standard meaning which is as Edinburgher and kentix explain above -- a standard meaning which encapsulates resignation rather than enthusiasm.

But if you replace "good" with some other roughly synonymous word, and get:

"As wonderful a time as any" or "As ideal a time as any" or even "as appropriate a time as any" -- _then_ an enthusiastic interpretation is more natural, to feel as though the person is saying "let's do it!" rather than "let's get it over with" as it means in the case where "as good a time as any" typically is used.


----------



## thetazuo

Thank you. So you mean the expression “as good a time/place as any” can’t be interpreted as “no other times are better than ...” since it is an exception to the construction “as [quality] as any”?


----------



## Edinburgher

I wouldn't say "can't", exactly, nor is it necessarily an exception.  It has the same general meaning, but in a weak kind of way.  You're trying too much to think in absolutes, in black and white.

Context plays a role.  Suppose you are on a long-distance walk that takes several days, and you have tents and other camping equipment with you.
It is the end of a day and you are thinking about where to set up your tents.  There are several sites that you have identified as suitable.
If you say "This site is as good as any", you could mean the others are no better, but you can't completely exclude the possibility that another site might be better (perhaps because it offers slightly better shelter), but it might have the disadvantage that it would take you an extra 20 minutes to get there, and you're tired and therefore happy to compromise.  So all the expression really means in this context is that this site is "good enough" for your needs.


----------



## thetazuo

Thank you again, Edinburgher.
The “rule” I’m trying to conclude is perhaps as follows:
When it comes to qualities that can’t be quantified, there can be two cases with the construction “A as [quality] a B as any”:
(1) If we know all of the B or most of the B are [quality], then we can infer that A is on a par with the most [quality], for example, 
Euron. Crow’s Eye, they call him, *as black a pirate as* ever raised a sail.(we discussed this before, Euron was as black as the blackest since most pirates are black)
(2) If we don’t know if we can apply the [quality] to B unless the context suggests so, then A is either the [quality] in a general sense (for example, “This site is as good as any” means the site is generally/normally good) or on a par with the most [quality].
But either (1) or (2), the established meaning is *probably* no other thing is more [quality] than A.

PS: B is the group where A belongs

Does this make sense?


----------



## Edinburgher

thetazuo said:


> The “rule” I’m trying to conclude is perhaps as follows:


Well, your reasoning seems to make some sort of sense, but I should caution you, as we often do here, that English and rules make uneasy bedfellows.

Perhaps you will find it amusing if I tell you that your rule is as good as any other: it has as many exceptions as any other, namely so many exceptions as to call the usefulness of the rule into question.


----------



## thetazuo

Thank you. Perhaps I’m being too absolute in thinking that way.
But I still think there are always two possible interpretations of this construction, depending on the context (namely, on a par with the most [quality] and just generally/normally [quality]). Right?



Edinburgher said:


> Perhaps you will find it amusing if I tell you that your rule is as good as any other: it has as many exceptions as any other, namely so many exceptions as to call the usefulness of the rule into question.


So you mean my rule is no better, no worse than other rules. My rule is generally/normally good.
But I believe in other context, it can mean my rule is on a par with the best.


----------



## Truffula

OK, challenge to native speakers.

What is the difference in meaning for the following to you. 

Context: I am watching an ice skater who is trying out for my ice skating musical performance I'm going to put on.  I watch her skate for a while and then say:

A:  She's as good as any.
B:  She's as good as any ice skater.
C:  She's as good as any ice skater I've seen.
D:  She's as good as any ice skater I've ever seen.

To me, these would, uttered in such a context, mean quite different things, and are on a continuum where A is the least complimentary while D is the most.  But the literal meaning is kind of the same in all four, isn't it?

_I'd say A means she's good enough, barely, to be in the show; B means she's about average for the quality I want in the show; C means she's up with the best who've auditioned; and D means she's up with the best period_


----------



## thetazuo

Thank you. I didn’t notice these four versions are different in meaning before.


Truffula said:


> C means she's *up with* the best who've auditioned; and D means she's *up with* the best period


So do you mean “on a par with” by “*up with*”?


----------



## thetazuo

It just occurred to me that perhaps the problem lies in the word “good”; it is the word “good” that causes the ambiguity. When it comes to other adjective, it seems the construction always means x is on a par with the most [quality].


----------



## Truffula

Yes, to both.  Yes, I meant "on a par with" and yes, the word "good" has ambiguity in this structure.


----------

