# scarcely suffice



## Andrew7371

The sentence-For him,ten years can scarcely suffice to realize that thing 
means that there are low or very low probabilities for him to realize that thing?
low or very low probabilities means something like 2% probabilities or 1 % probabilities or somethong close of that percent?


----------



## Barque

"Can scarcely suffice" means "is hardly enough". It means ten years isn't enough.


----------



## Andrew7371

probably not enough-there are few probabilities to be enough
Scarcely mean almost not-scarcely doesn't mean not


----------



## Thomas Tompion

Andrew7371 said:


> probably not enough-there are few probabilities to be enough
> Scarcely mean almost not-scarcely doesn't mean not


As you present it, we are not dealing with a question of probabilities, just about how long a time would be sufficient for the completion of the task.


----------



## Andrew7371

so what is the exactly meaning?i think-ten years are almost not suffice to realize that thing-
or for him at least ten years are enough to realize that thing
Probably ten years are not enough?


----------



## Thomas Tompion

Andrew7371 said:


> so what is the exactly meaning?i think-ten years are almost not suffice to realize that thing-
> or for him at least ten years are enough to realize that thing


It's hard to say, because the sentence is scarcely in English and you don't give us any context.

_*For him,ten years can scarcely suffice to realize that thing*_ - Ten years may not be quite enough for him to complete this task.


----------



## Andrew7371

Anyway if the context is so general i suppose scarcely mean almost not-only in special context scarcely means certainly not- i speak about the probabilities becouse in that case you must be cool,gifted etc to do that thing in 10 years,so it is more likely to take more than 10 years,in that sens it is a law probability to realize that thing in 10 years


----------



## Thomas Tompion

Andrew7371 said:


> Anyway if the context is so general i suppose scarcely mean almost not-only in special context scarcely means certainly not


I'm sorry, Andrew, you've lost me now.

When people say it will take them ten years to do something, they aren't necessarily saying they cannot do it.


----------



## Andrew7371

i m sure of that-i explained in the last post what i ment to say-
It is possible to realize in ten years only if you are super cool, gifted, etc. It may take more than 10 years, moreover, it is very likely to be so- in that meaning i speak about probabilities.What i ment to say-scarcely means probably not ant that imply that you will think of a probability...i don't say that scarcely mean an exact probability


----------



## Thomas Tompion

Some people speak very loosely, and other try to say what they mean.  Without context, knowing something about the person speaking, you are inviting us to speculate, and that's an invitation I nearly always decline here.


----------



## velisarius

Where did you find the sentence, Andrew?


----------



## Andrew7371

it is not about a certain context...it is something general


----------



## Andrew7371

Thomas Tompion said:


> It's hard to say, because the sentence is scarcely in English and you don't give us any context.
> 
> _*For him,ten years can scarcely suffice to realize that thing*_ - Ten years may not be quite enough for him to complete this task.





Thomas Tompion said:


> It's hard to say, because the sentence is scarcely in English and you don't give us any context.
> 
> _*For him,ten years can scarcely suffice to realize that thing*_ - Ten years may not be quite enough for him to complete this task.


sorry i dont understand in context the meaning of your sentence-'Ten years may not be quite enough for him to complete this task.'is:
Ten years *may not* be quite enough for him to complete this task or
Ten years may *not be* quite enough for him to complete this task.
I asked becouse my experience with such sentences is limitated
So *not* is the negation for the verb *be* in your sentence?or *not *is the negation for the verb *may*?


----------



## velisarius

Andrew7371 said:


> it is not about a certain context...it is something general


Th sentence sounds rather antiquated, so it may not be a good example sentence if all you are doing is trying to understand how to use the word "scarcely". 

If you came across it in your reading, and want to understand it fully, it might be helpful if you told us where you found it.


----------



## Andrew7371

velisarius said:


> Th sentence sounds rather antiquated, so it may not be a good example sentence if all you are doing is trying to understand how to use the word "scarcely".
> 
> If you came across it in your reading, and want to understand it fully, it might be helpful if you told us where you found it.


i compose these sentence in a general manner,without a certain context....


----------



## velisarius

So what exactly did you want the sentence to mean? What was the thing, and in what sense did you use "realise"?


----------



## Andrew7371

velisarius said:


> So what exactly did you want the sentence to mean? What was the thing, and in what sense did you use "realise"?


i mean that in ten years he might achieve a performance


----------



## Andrew7371

Andrew7371 said:


> i mean that in ten years he might achieve a performance


for example he might realize the performance of be a professional sportsman


----------



## velisarius

_ In ten years he might achieve X. _This sounds quite positive, if X is "fame as a composer" but if it's something simple like being able to tie his shoelaces, it would sound more doubtful.

_For him, ten years can scarcely suffice to achieve X. _Do you mean that he is going to need a little more than ten years to achieve his goal, or to imply that he is never going to achieve it?


----------



## Andrew7371

velisarius said:


> _ In ten years he might achieve X. _This sounds quite positive, if X is "fame as a composer" but if it's something simple like being able to tie his shoelaces, it would sound more doubtful.
> 
> _For him, ten years can scarcely suffice to achieve X. _Do you mean that he is going to need a little more than ten years to achieve his goal, or to imply that he is never going to achieve it?


i dont want to say that he is never going to achieve it...i want to say that i m not sure about the fact that ten years are enough to achieve x


----------



## Andrew7371

Andrew7371 said:


> i dont want to imply that he is never going to achieve it...i want to say that i m not sure about the fact that ten years are enough to achieve x


so  the answer is uncertain,there are much more chances to not realize but there are also a small posibility to realize-so in that case i can use the word scarcely?


----------



## velisarius

Andrew7371 said:


> for example he might realize the performance of be a professional sportsman



We aren't supposed to rewrite sentences, but I would express it like this:

_He is unlikely to achieve professional status in only ten years/in less than ten years._


"Scarcely suffice" is very stiff and old-fashioned, so it may not be what you are looking for. 

_The murderer has been sentenced to only ten years' imprisonment.Ten years will *scarcely suffice* to expatiate his sins. _(It isn't long enough - he deserves a much longer sentence.)


----------



## Andrew7371

velisarius said:


> We aren't supposed to rewrite sentences, but I would express it like this:
> 
> _He is unlikely to achieve professional status in only ten years/in less than ten years._
> 
> 
> "Scarcely suffice" is very stiff and old-fashioned, so it may not be what you are looking for.
> 
> _The murderer has been sentenced to only ten years' imprisonment.Ten years will *scarcely suffice* to expatiate his sins. _(It isn't long enough - he deserves a much longer sentence.)


ten years hardly suffice or ten years are hardly enough-it is better to say in that way?


----------



## Andrew7371

Andrew7371 said:


> ten years hardly suffice or ten years are hardly enough-it is better to say in that way?


however if i saw that sentence in an old book,in a book of one hundred years old-ten years can scarcely suffice to achieve x
-the meaning is -
_He is unlikely to achieve x in ten years??_


----------



## velisarius

_It scarcely suffices_  - can mean "it is not enough", but it can also mean "it is only just enough" (it's barely enough).

Your use of the phrase in your first post made me unsure which meaning you intended. When it comes to _scarcely_ and _hardly, _I find that context is crucial.


----------



## Andrew7371

velisarius said:


> _It scarcely suffices_  - can mean "it is not enough", but it can also mean "it is only just enough" (it's barely enough).
> 
> Your use of the phrase in your first post made me unsure which meaning you intended. When it comes to _scarcely_ and _hardly, _I find that context is crucial.


i specified that the answer is uncertain,there are much more chances to not be enough,but there is a posibility to be enough.There are more chances to not be enough,but it is not impossible to be enough


----------



## Andrew7371

Andrew7371 said:


> i specified that the answer is uncertain,there are much more chances to not be enough,but there is a posibility to be enough.There are more chances to not be enough,but it is not impossible to be enough


so in that case when there it is still a probability to be enough,even this probability is low,i think that the meaning is:
It is improbable that ten years are enough (but it still exist a small posibility to be enough)


----------



## RandomQuestion

Alright.

'For him,ten years can scarcely suffice to realize that thing'

"Scarcely" - almost certainly not.
"Suffice" - be enough.

The sentence basically means: "For him, ten years can almost certainly not be enough to realize that thing."
The probability he will realise whatever he is supposed to realise is close to zero.
Hope that helps.


----------



## Andrew7371

RandomQuestion said:


> Alright.
> 
> 'For him,ten years can scarcely suffice to realize that thing'
> 
> "Scarcely" - almost certainly not.
> "Suffice" - be enough.
> 
> The sentence basically means: "For him, ten years can almost certainly not be enough to realize that thing."
> The probability he will realise whatever he is supposed to realise is close to zero.
> Hope that helps.


yes...the probability is very low...that was the question actually-what means this sentence basically.Thanks!


----------



## Edinburgher

If you look up "scarecely" in our dictionary here: scarcely - WordReference.com Dictionary of English
You will see three meanings: (1) Not quite = almost not; (2) definitely not; (3) probably not.

I would say that when you use the word in combination with "enough", only meaning (1) is possible, so unless context implies differently, your sentence says nothing about the probability that ten years will suffice.

If you want to say that ten years is probably not enough time for him to achieve his goal, then it is better to use a different word instead.
For example you could say "Ten years is *unlikely to* suffice."


----------



## Andrew7371

Edinburgher said:


> If you look up "scarecely" in our dictionary here: scarcely - WordReference.com Dictionary of English
> You will see three meanings: (1) Not quite = almost not; (2) definitely not; (3) probably not.
> 
> I would say that when you use the word in combination with "enough", only meaning (1) is possible, so unless context implies differently, your sentence says nothing about the probability that ten years will suffice.
> 
> If you want to say that ten years is probably not enough time for him to achieve his goal, then it is better to use a different word instead.
> For example you could say "Ten years is *unlikely to* suffice."


almost not dont say anything about the meaning....so you have to choose between definitely not and probably not(almost certainly not)...but basically as he said RandomQuestion scarcely mean almost certain not....only in a context there are possible both definetely not and almost certain not


----------



## Andrew7371

Andrew7371 said:


> almost not dont say anything about the meaning....so you have to choose between definitely not and probably not(almost certainly not)...but basically as he said RandomQuestion scarcely mean almost certainly not....only in a context there are possible both definetely not and almost certainly not


in other dictionaries one of the sense of scarcely is almost certainly not


----------



## RandomQuestion

Let me put this straight.

Probability is something I just assumed myself. The sentence itself didn't imply 1% or 2% probability.
The sentence implied: 10 years is probably not enough for him to realise something.
The word "*can*" implies that he has already proven to be *incapable of realising things quickly*, and even when given an extensive period of time to do so, he was still *not that likely* to realise them.
Now comes the "thing". The "thing" mentioned is something that he is supposed to realise. The thing that, as you said in the sentence, *might* not be realised by him even in 10 years time. Because, I assume, he has already proven to have problems with realising things quickly.

Btw Edinburgher, "unlikely to" is a probability in itself. It is used when we say that something has more chances of not occurring than occurring.
Not a probability given in percentages. No.
But a rough probability that we use when casually guessing how likely something is.

And OP. The sentence is not wrong but first, it is difficult to understand because you provided little context, and second, simpler words would be more appropriate to express that.
Unless you want to insist on your choice of words.
In that case, let me introduce you to a better alternative:
"Considering how long it usually takes him to realise things, I suspect ten years will scarcely suffice for him to realise that (particular thing)."
"Particular thing" at the end is optional.


----------



## Andrew7371

RandomQuestion said:


> Let me put this straight.
> 
> Probability is something I just assumed myself. The sentence itself didn't imply 1% or 2% probability.
> The sentence implied: 10 years is probably not enough for him to realise something.
> The word "*can*" implies that he has already proven to be *incapable of realising things quickly*, and even when given an extensive period of time to do so, he was still *not that likely* to realise them.
> Now comes the "thing". The "thing" mentioned is something that he is supposed to realise. The thing that, as you said in the sentence, *might* not be realised by him even in 10 years time. Because, I assume, he has already proven to have problems with realising things quickly.
> 
> Btw Edinburgher, "unlikely to" is a probability in itself. It is used when we say that something has more chances of not occurring than occurring.
> Not a probability given in percentages. No.
> But a rough probability that we use when casually guessing how likely something is.
> 
> And OP. The sentence is not wrong but first, it is difficult to understand because you provided little context, and second, simpler words would be more appropriate to express that.
> Unless you want to insist on your choice of words.
> In that case, let me introduce you to a better alternative:
> "Considering how long it usually takes him to realise things, I suspect ten years will scarcely suffice for him to realise that (particular thing)."
> "Particular thing" at the end is optional.


"Considering how long it usually takes him to realise things, I suspect ten years will scarcely suffice for him to realise that (particular thing)."
That imply also that it is not impossible to realise that in ten years?
I think the meaning-definitely not it is exaggerated and it is not available here


----------



## RandomQuestion

Ten years might not be enough for him.
It might prove to be too little time.
It does not have to be the case.
But it could.

So it is possible.
But there are reasons to believe that, even though possible, it is highly unlikely.


----------



## Andrew7371

RandomQuestion said:


> Ten years might not be enough for him.
> It might prove to be too little time.
> It does not have to be the case.
> But it could.
> 
> So it is possible.
> But there are reasons to believe that, even though possible, it is highly unlikely.


in the sentence-he can hardly live 110 years 
we have the same meaning?


----------



## RandomQuestion

We do.
He can live 110 years. It is possible.
But it's highly unlikely.


----------



## Andrew7371

Edinburgher said:


> If you look up "scarecely" in our dictionary here: scarcely - WordReference.com Dictionary of English
> You will see three meanings: (1) Not quite = almost not; (2) definitely not; (3) probably not.
> 
> I would say that when you use the word in combination with "enough", only meaning (1) is possible, so unless context implies differently, your sentence says nothing about the probability that ten years will suffice.
> 
> If you want to say that ten years is probably not enough time for him to achieve his goal, then it is better to use a different word instead.
> For example you could say "Ten years is *unlikely to* suffice."


not quite is used to express that he is not certain about something
in that case the meaning of the sentence is:
For him it may *not be sure *that ten years are enough to do that thing?
I am surprise of that possible solution-could you please explain me why do  you think so?


----------



## Andrew7371

RandomQuestion said:


> We do.
> He can live 110 years. It is possible.
> But it's highly unlikely.


not quite=almost not
not quite is used to express that he is not certain about something
in that case the meaning of the sentence is:
For him it may *not be sure* that ten years are enough to do that thing?
what is your opinion please?is that solution something viable?and if it is in what condition?


----------



## Edinburgher

RandomQuestion said:


> Btw Edinburgher, "unlikely to" is a probability in itself. It is used when we say that something has more chances of not occurring than occurring.


Exactly.  That's why I suggested using "unlikely" instead of "scarcely" if you want to say how improbable it is.


----------



## Edinburgher

Andrew7371 said:


> For him it may *not be sure* that ten years are enough to do that thing?
> what is your opinion please?is that solution something viable?and if it is in what condition?


For me "ten years can scarcely suffice" is not about probability or being sure.  I feel that when you combine "scarcely" with something like "enough" or "sufficient", its meaning is more about the quantity than about certainty or likelihood.  See #4.

It is not good to ask us what the sentence means.  You should tell us what you want it to mean, and then we can advise on how good a job it does of delivering that meaning.


----------



## Andrew7371

Edinburgher said:


> For me "ten years can scarcely suffice" is not about probability or being sure.  I feel that when you combine "scarcely" with something like "enough" or "sufficient", its meaning is more about the quantity than about certainty or likelihood.  See #4.
> 
> It is not good to ask us what the sentence means.  You should tell us what you want it to mean, and then we can advise on how good a job it does of delivering that meaning.


k...
not quite=almost not
not quite is used to express that he is not certain about something
in that case the meaning of the sentence is:
For him it may *not be sure* that ten years are enough to do that thing?
the question was if- For him it may *not be sure* that ten years are enough to do that thing-is a corect translate if i consider that scarcely=not quite?
it is only an ask related to a correct translation...


----------



## Edinburgher

Andrew7371 said:


> not quite is used to express that he is not certain about something


That is where (in my opinion) your misunderstanding lies.
It is not about being *not quite sure* that ten years are enough.
It is about ten years being *not quite enough*.


----------



## Andrew7371

Edinburgher said:


> That is where (in my opinion) your misunderstanding lies.
> It is not about being *not quite sure* that ten years are enough.
> It is about ten years being *not quite enough*.


understand....it is about being not quite enough=being almost not enough
And what is the concret meaning of that?what is the translation?


----------



## Edinburgher

Translation into what?  I don't speak Romanian.   

Suppose you are having a party and there will be eight people.  They are all very thirsty and you estimate that on average they will each drink four bottles of beer.  You check your supplies and see that you have 30 bottles.  That is *not quite enough*, because you estimate you will need 32.

Suppose instead you have 36 bottles.  You might then say this is *scarcely enough*, because you think your safety margin of 4 bottles is too small.

This is just an example.  Please remember that the exact meaning will always depend on context.


----------



## Andrew7371

Edinburgher said:


> Translation into what?  I don't speak Romanian.
> 
> Suppose you are having a party and there will be eight people.  They are all very thirsty and you estimate that on average they will each drink four bottles of beer.  You check your supplies and see that you have 30 bottles.  That is *not quite enough*, because you estimate you will need 32.
> 
> Suppose instead you have 36 bottles.  You might then say this is *scarcely enough*, because you think your safety margin of 4 bottles is too small.
> 
> This is just an example.  Please remember that the exact meaning will always depend on context.


and in the example with ten years?i am not sure how function your example  in that case
ten years may *not be* enough to realize that thing??
you can give an example using years as you use the bottles?
you say in your post -
''You will see three meanings: (1) Not quite = almost not; (2) definitely not; (3) probably not.

I would say that when you use the word in combination with "enough", only meaning (1) is possible, so unless context implies differently, your sentence says nothing about the probability that ten years will suffice. ''
i dont understand what is exactly that meaning (1)-and i understand that the meaning (2*)definetely not* is not possible here for you


----------



## Edinburgher

Andrew7371 said:


> i dont understand what is exactly that meaning (1)


 On reflection, forget that I said "not quite" equals "almost not"; it's a little misleading.  In fact, "almost" would be better here than "almost not".

Think of "scarcely enough" as meaning "not quite enough", which in turn means "almost enough" or "a little bit less than enough".

Example:  "George is not quite 16 years old" can mean that he is almost 16 years old. He is still 15, but his birthday is in three weeks and he will turn 16 then.

Back to the original:  He might need a little bit longer than ten years for the task.  He might need ten years and four months, so if you only allow him ten years, this will be not quite enough time.


----------



## Andrew7371

Edinburgher said:


> On reflection, forget that I said "not quite" equals "almost not"; it's a little misleading.  In fact, "almost" would be better here than "almost not".
> 
> Think of "scarcely enough" as meaning "not quite enough", which in turn means "almost enough" or "a little bit less than enough".
> 
> Example:  "George is not quite 16 years old" can mean that he is almost 16 years old. He is still 15, but his birthday is in three weeks and he will turn 16 then.
> 
> Back to the original:  He might need a little bit longer than ten years for the task.  He might need ten years and four months, so if you only allow him ten years, this will be not quite enough time.


it is clear now...it is about something close,near....thanks


----------

