# Agree well



## Jellby

¿Se puede decir "agree well" en inglés para expresar, por ejemplo, que dos resultados coinciden?

These findings agree well with other published results.

(Mi duda es el "well", que no estoy seguro de que vaya bien en este caso).


----------



## victoria luz

Yo he oido/leido los dos, aunque sin well màs a menudo.


----------



## crizty

La verdad es que la expresión "agree well" no me resulta familiar, lo cual no quiere decir que sea incorrecta, por supuesto.
yo he oído a menudo " agree as well", pero eso sería más bien "también estoy de acuerdo", y no estoy segura de que sea lo que estás buscando, así que no me hagáis demasiado caso. Creo que debería contestarte alguien que hablara inglés nativo.

Un besito*


----------



## Newman

Jellby said:
			
		

> ¿Se puede decir "agree well" en inglés para expresar, por ejemplo, que dos resultados coinciden?
> 
> These findings agree well with other published results.
> 
> (Mi duda es el "well", que no estoy seguro de que vaya bien en este caso).



No creo que sea necesario el "well".  La verdad, a mi me suena mal.  No hay ningún problema con la gramática de la frase, simplemente no es algo que se dice.  Quizá sería mejor decir algo como:  These findings agree completely with other published results.  Ojalá que te ayude eso!


----------



## jdenson

Newman said:
			
		

> No creo que sea necesario el "well".  La verdad, a mi me suena mal.  No hay ningún problema con la gramática de la frase, simplemente no es algo que se dice.  Quizá sería mejor decir algo como:  These findings agree completely with other published results.  Ojalá que te ayude eso!


Not only is "well" unnecessary, it's illogical. Either the results agree or they don't. 

JD


----------



## Jellby

jdenson said:
			
		

> Not only is "well" unnecessary, it's illogical. Either the results agree or they don't.



But the agreement is sometimes qualitative or even subjective. There are different levels of agreement, and some results agree better than others. How can I quantify the level of agreement. I would like to say "these findings are in good agreement with other published results" (I guess this one is correct) but using the verb to agree directly, can it be done?


----------



## Inés06

A lo mejor puedes decir "fit well" en vez de agree...


----------



## victoria luz

Puede que sea ilogico, inecesario y redundante, sin embargo se usa:

http://www.google.it/search?hl=it&q=%22agree+well%22&btnG=Cerca+con+Google&meta=

If you google "agree well" you get nearly 1,300,000 results...most of them just exactly in the same occurrence as the opening post "results agree with other studies/findings/theories/whatever".


----------



## jdenson

victoria luz said:
			
		

> Puede que sea ilogico, inecesario y redundante, sin embargo se usa:
> 
> http://www.google.it/search?hl=it&q=%22agree+well%22&btnG=Cerca+con+Google&meta=
> 
> If you google "agree well" you get nearly 1,300,000 results...most of them just exactly in the same occurrence as the opening post "results agree with other studies/findings/theories/whatever".


If the goal is to say whatever people say, then by all means use Google as a source. If the goal is to write logically and clearly, there is no substitute for thinking.


----------



## jdenson

Jellby said:
			
		

> But the agreement is sometimes qualitative or even subjective. There are different levels of agreement, and some results agree better than others. How can I quantify the level of agreement. I would like to say "these findings are in good agreement with other published results" (I guess this one is correct) but using the verb to agree directly, can it be done?


Good English does not allow "in good agreement". If two sets of data match, then they are in agreement or they agree. If they do not exactly agree then you might say that they agree in some ways, they agree in part, they nearly agree, they very nearly agree, etc. If you want to emphasize that the data agree, you might say that they completely agree, they are in complete agreement, they are in total agreement, etc. 

JD


----------



## victoria luz

jdenson said:
			
		

> If the goal is to say whatever people say, then by all means use Google as a source. If the goal is to write logically and clearly, there is no substitute for thinking.


 
Jdenson, I stand corrected.

About Google not being the most reliable source for absolute truths, I couldn't agree more. However, if I type in the search bar an expression and I get a number of results ranging in > 1,000,000, PLUS I observe that a great many of such results belong to University Journals (of Medicine, Chemistry, Physics), and many others to institutional surveys, (at least here, I reckon, the sort of documents where you don't expect to find incorrect/idiomatic/popular/dialectal uses), as a non native speaker I do tend to trust it.


----------



## COLsass

The numbers are inflated because of things like:

Do you agree? Well it doesn't matter if you do.

If we agree, well, then it's okay.

But there are some "respectable" (I doubt them now! hehe) journals who did say agree well.

I fully agree.  There is full agreement. 

I would say these findings line up well with...bla bla bla.


----------



## victoria luz

I had taken into account the false-positives, of course (that's why I said MOST results are in the same occurrences as the given line). 
The true positives' reliable sources range from result #3 (University guidelines for engineering and scientific writing), to #5 (the .gov website of the National Institute of Standards and Technology), from #6 (Glasgow University, Department of Physics), to #11 (Institute of Astronomy - University of Cambridge), to #15 (Journal of Rheology - University of Maine).
I don't mean it makes me any righter, but it puts my wrong in good company


----------



## COLsass

Everyone knows scientists don't get trained in writing properly.  

I think it does make you more in the right because it's definitely used often enough to make sense. No other use for language other than accurate transmission of information.


----------



## estudioso

Well I think agree well is fine.  If anybody here saw it in a scientific paper written by an English speaker, I'm sure they wouldn't think twice about it.


----------



## zetnomm

"Agree well" is a rarely used expression. An example would be "Peanut butter and jelly agree well." A synonym of this is "complement" or "complementar" in Spanish. (Not to be mistaken for "compliment" which means "to give praise to".)


Language is an ever-evolving beast that will throw us for a loop sometimes. In my early years, "ain't" was completely unacceptable, but now it can be found in a Webster's Dictionary, and is widely accepted and used.


----------



## jdenson

zetnomm said:
			
		

> "Agree well" is a rarely used expression. An example would be "Peanut butter and jelly agree well." A synonym of this is "complement" or "complementar" in Spanish. (Not to be mistaken for "compliment" which means "to give praise to".)
> 
> 
> Language is an ever-evolving beast that will throw us for a loop sometimes. In my early years, "ain't" was completely unacceptable, but now it can be found in a Webster's Dictionary, and is widely accepted and used.


The fact that "ain't" appears in a dictionary means that it is "accepted" only in the sense that it exists in the language. Existence does not mean approval. Any educated English speaker knows that there is no word that more quickly identifies one to be uneducated or to be a speaker of non-standard English than the word "ain't".


----------



## jdenson

victoria luz said:
			
		

> I had taken into account the false-positives, of course (that's why I said MOST results are in the same occurrences as the given line).
> The true positives' reliable sources range from result #3 (University guidelines for engineering and scientific writing), to #5 (the .gov website of the National Institute of Standards and Technology), from #6 (Glasgow University, Department of Physics), to #11 (Institute of Astronomy - University of Cambridge), to #15 (Journal of Rheology - University of Maine).
> I don't mean it makes me any righter, but it puts my wrong in good company


Scientists, along with lawyers, are notorious for the crimes they inflict on English. Shouldn't we strive for something better?

JD


----------



## Jellby

jdenson said:
			
		

> Good English does not allow "in good agreement". If two sets of data match, then they are in agreement or they agree. If they do not exactly agree then you might say that they agree in some ways, they agree in part, they nearly agree, they very nearly agree, etc. If you want to emphasize that the data agree, you might say that they completely agree, they are in complete agreement, they are in total agreement, etc.



Really? Oh, well... then how do yo express that two data sets, even if not exactly identical, show the same trends: the agreement is not complete or perfect (this rarely happens) but the extent to which the two sets agree is satisfying?


----------



## xCyruSx

Yo diría que para decir que dos cosas coinciden perfectamente sería

"match"

This thing "matches" the other thing

Si no es completa la coincidencia, se lo dejo a los nativos, pero supongo que "like" podría ser usado

This thing is a lot like this other one...

Pero creo que no es exactamente lo que quieres decir.


----------



## zetnomm

jdenson said:
			
		

> The fact that "ain't" appears in a dictionary means that it is "accepted" only in the sense that it exists in the language. Existence does not mean approval. Any educated English speaker knows that there is no word that more quickly identifies one to be uneducated or to be a speaker of non-standard English than the word "ain't".


I would imagine that any "educated" person would know better than to generalize or judge somebody by the way they talk. Define standard. We don't use "ye" anymore, so by using "you" are we all uneducated? I would imagine that you've said "y'all" before, or have heard somebody that you consider to be educated use it, being from/in Houston. (Would that be considered generalizing?)


----------



## matthews028

Wow, there's no need to fight.

"Agree well" sounds pretty bad to me, as a native speaker. I would use:

totally agree
do agree
certainly do agree
agree a lot
agree nicely

But I suppose that in *certain scientific contexts*, "agree well" could work.

"The data we collected agrees well with the previous data"

but *never*

"We should go to the park!"   "I agree well!"


----------



## jdenson

Jellby said:
			
		

> Really? Oh, well... then how do yo express that two data sets, even if not exactly identical, show the same trends: the agreement is not complete or perfect (this rarely happens) but the extent to which the two sets agree is satisfying?


Why not say that they are not identical but show the same trends? Wouldn't that actually say something useful?


----------



## jdenson

zetnomm said:
			
		

> I would imagine that any "educated" person would know better than to generalize or judge somebody by the way they talk. Define standard. We don't use "ye" anymore, so by using "you" are we all uneducated? I would imagine that you've said "y'all" before, or have heard somebody that you consider to be educated use it, being from/in Houston. (Would that be considered generalizing?)


The way a person talks and writes tells the world who that person is. Is he educated or illiterate? Does he think in an orderly, logical way or does he blather inanities? I suspect that the person who started this thread is writing a report of some kind. He knows that he will be judged, and should be judged, by what he writes. That's why he went to the trouble to ask the question. If you think that you are not being judged every time you open your mouth or put pen to paper, you are sadly mistaken. And yes, there is a standard English, and no, "ye" is no longer part of it. Neither is ya'll. The issue here, however, is not the use of _informal_ _speech_, but rather the use of a word that doesn't make sense in the context. The native speaker who says "the data agree well" is either incapable of coherent thought or is intentionally trying to hide the fact that he has nothing useful or informative to say. Let him be so judged.


----------



## jacinta

They are a perfect match.
They go together well.
They are in perfect agreement.
They fit each other.
They fit well.
They *agree*.

They agree well???  I cannot imagine using this in a serious paper of any sort, nor saying it.  It is wrong.


----------



## thuja

Jellby said:
			
		

> ¿Se puede decir "agree well" en inglés para expresar, por ejemplo, que dos resultados coinciden?
> 
> These findings agree well with other published results.
> 
> (Mi duda es el "well", que no estoy seguro de que vaya bien en este caso).



Well, as a native speaker, I have to say it sounds fine, and makes perfect sense in the context of "findings" or research results.  I disagree with other posters who declare that "agree"  is a yes-no state. "agree", in most situations I can think of, is a continuum, from "agree exactly on every point", to agree mostly, on through "agree-sort-of". 

But aside from research findings or quantitative data of one sort or another, I cannot think of settings where "agree well" would be used.  In cases of partial agreement amongst people, for example, one might say, "I generally agree with you". or "mostly, I agree with what you say" or "I agree with some of that".


----------



## chonfi

_These findings agree well with other published results_.

Me parece que lo más apropriado sería decir: _These findings are in agreement with other published results._

También podría decirse:  _These findings are the same as other published results.
_
Otra posibilidad: _These findings are consistent with published results._


----------



## zetnomm

jdenson said:
			
		

> The way a person talks and writes tells the world who that person is. Is he educated or illiterate? Does he think in an orderly, logical way or does he blather inanities? I suspect that the person who started this thread is writing a report of some kind. He knows that he will be judged, and should be judged, by what he writes. That's why he went to the trouble to ask the question. If you think that you are not being judged every time you open your mouth or put pen to paper, you are sadly mistaken. And yes, there is a standard English, and no, "ye" is no longer part of it. Neither is ya'll. The issue here, however, is not the use of _informal_ _speech_, but rather the use of a word that doesn't make sense in the context. The native speaker who says "the data agree well" is either incapable of coherent thought or is intentionally trying to hide the fact that he has nothing useful or informative to say. Let him be so judged.


When I write a report for school, I don't use contractions or slang. I go over my grammar to make sure that everything is correct. If I'm being interviewed for a job, I'll speak at a level that is appropriate for the job I'm applying for. If I'm talking to a random stranger, I, personally, try not to judge them by their speech nor do I expect to be judged by mine. That's the definition of judgemental, in my opinion. 

I would never say "the data agree well". My original post stated that "agree well" was a rarely used expression meaning "to complement", like peanut butter and jelly, or love and marraige. It's a different meaning, and like I said, rarely used.


----------



## carlos_s_c

yo he escuchado en videoos en ingles mas "as well" al termino de una oracion, y por ahi he oido frases con "match" significa como acoplamiento o algo asi como que son dos cosas que tienen similitudes.


----------

