"Quintessential" is possibly the most pretentious word in the English language. What, you couldn't just say "essential" even though it means the exact same thing? What a ridiculous waste of ink on every dictionary it has the gall to be printed on. You can practically sense the pinky-extending every time some neckbeard types it."Irregardless" comes close, of course, and many would agree. Most would say it isn't even a real word. It's such a redundant prefix to use, moronically cancelling out the meaning of the word even if it's used interchangeably. To me, however, it's not as intrusive to the original word as the pompous "quint-" is, and may be mistakenly used by somebody who doesn't know any better. But the use of "quintessential" is deliberate; that is to say, if somebody is using it then there's undoubtedly a level of intent behind it and they know exactly what they're doing.Pretentious know-it-alls.
best thread on /lit/ right now
>>25202306One could even call it the quintessential /lit/ thread.
dekessentially
It’s outdated too, in the sense that it’s etymology is in reference to aether, a redundant element.
>>25202304>What, you couldn't just say "essential" even though it means the exact same thing?Except it does't, dumbass. Quintessential means "to the most refined degree.">Pretentious know-it-alls.Keep projecting, sonny.
>>25202304you remind me of the kind of guy who thought that penultimate means very ultimate
>>25202304Essential is archetypal. Quintessential is ultimate. Observe:>An essential piece of Western Literature.A very good book. One of the best even.>The quintessential piece of Western Literature.Eponymous, defining, singular. The best book, bar none. Sure I used a definite article, because that's the nature of quintessential as a descriptor in context, it would not be grammatically correct to say "a quintessential piece of western literature".
>>25202406You could just as well say "The essential piece of Western Literature." It would mean the same thing.
>>25202421No it wouldn't. It would still say a very good piece of literature that may be archetypal, or later surpassed, rather than the definitive, superlative piece of literature from which all aspire.
>>25202361>the ultimate pen
>>25202421that implies there's only one essential piece of literature which is retarded, nor is quintessential implying that
>>25202479isn't saying "this is the most essential and best piece of literature" the same thing
>>25202421Please go back to high school and pay attention in english class this time, retard
>>25202483no. most essential implies the existence of other essentials. 1st place implies 2nd place. you couldn't figure that out on your own?
>>25202487so if there can only be one "quintessential" how is it any different than just saying "essential"? what does the "quint" add to the context?
>>25202489i'm going to stab you and feed your corpse to pigs
>>25202406Is "quintessential" just a way to say "best of its kind" then?
>>25202489essential means must have or must readquintessential means the most important or most representative of the essentialsgo see a doctor about possible tumors on your brain stem
>>25202498"The most essential of essentials" is redundant. It's either essential or it isn't.
>>25202503>"The most essential of essentials" is redundant.I agree. Too bad I didn't say that.>t's either essential or it isn't.Essential and quintessential material are all, by definition, essential. Hope this helps, Dasari!
>>25202513I am genuinely not fucking getting it so bear with me, I cannot understand the difference between "the most important of the essentials" and "the most essential of the essentials". Is that seriously not the same idea?Essential means "SO important you can NOT do without". So if something is already essential how do you make it the most essential?
>>25202515You are autistically obsessing on the essential part. Think of it like this, essential is the foundation, quintessential is the peak.
>>25202435You could say "a quintessential piece of Western Literature" in a context in which you were referring to a particular language of the West, with the assumption that other books have a claim in their respective languages. So, "Don Quixote is a quintessential piece of Western Literature, on the Spanish front, as is Green Eggs and Ham in the Anglosphere." Perhaps your understanding of the term doesn't brook that use. Mine, personally, does. Though I sense we may differ in our exact conceptions here, because I feel as though the definite article in your example does carry the bulk of the idea. Thus >>25202421 has a point. "Essential" on its own at least could convey the THE status of it. Though I'd agree that 'quintessencial' grants it an unmistakeable emphasis. And even if OP the faggot had a point, and the two were lexicographically indistinguishable, there is no telling when and how someone may be invoking the etymology for Lord-knows-what purpose, literary, or phonetic, conscious or unconscious. More to the point, in the flow of ordinary speech, there are situations in which I would use "quintessential" and there are situations in which I would use "essential" and these do not always overlap. One might work in place of the other, crudely, semantically speaking, but the fluency, undoubtedly, would suffer.
I did not care for "quintessential"It insists upon itself
>>25202521So would quintessential mean it's most representative of its specific qualities? Like you would say "pens are the quintessential method of writing". Pencils, pens, even crayons could be considered "essential" to write something down but the "pen" would be the most broadly used method.
>>25202304>"Quintessential" is possibly the most pretentious word in the English language. What, you couldn't just say "essential" even though it means the exact same thing?mostly because they don't actually mean the same thing, you window-licking retard
>>25202489>if there can only be one "1st place" how is it any different than just saying "place"
>>25202496tough but fair
>>25202536that's not what was said. it's either essential or it is not essential, there's no "kind of" essential or otherwise grey area. as far as I can tell they're all "1st place" but then making one "super 1st place" doesn't make sense.
>>25202522Great post, I dont really have anything to add other than I am a filthy English only casual who entirely forgot other languages exist on the western cannon for my silly example.>>25202527Nope, it would mean things that are similar to the "quintessential" object stem from it, and your example is tricky but your thought process is getting better. Kleenex is the quintessential facial tissue brand would be more apt, because the brand name is so strongly associated with the idea of the product that it gets a coloquial applied to all things that are similar. I think that's the cleanest example I can think of. Or Picasso is the quintessential cubist, though I'm personally a big fan of Duchamps, but that gets a bit trickier.
>>25202304needlessly florid language has it's uses. what would you do if you had a character who was so totally up himself that he can only speak like that? name is something like Basil Fotherington-Thomas and he is destined to lose all his teeth in a bar fight?
>>25202347OUTDATED. PRE-RIGHTTHINK MODE UNREFS BADTHINK
>>25202489quintessential means it is beyond the mutable elements of fire, water, earth, and air. it is of the aether, which is to say, ideal, maybe? anyways, it's saying it's "of the fifth element" which is not of this earth.
>>25202540"essential" means "necessary", "quintessential" means "the purest form of"
>>25202542So then it would be more accurate to use an example like "Google is the quintessential search engine". Nobody says "I'm going to go search this on Bing!" They outright use "Googling" as a term.Would it be then, that when the example itself is as dominant (if not more dominant) than the thing it's describing, it would be quintessential?
>>25202304>>25202421>>25202497>i share a board with these high school dropoutsfuck this fucking site to hell
>>25202554REPORT POST TO MINITRU FOR WRONGTHINK
>>25202563Yeah, great example. The later half gets confusing, so I'd skip it. It isnt quite the progenitor or about the outsized impact, but closer to the best example of a thing by a good margin; the one that defines it the most.
>>25202585>The later half gets confusing, so I'd skip it.I'll have to think more on it. I won't say I fully understand it yet but I'd say I feel like I learned more about the word today.
>>25202585>The later halfplease start proofreading your goddamn posts
>>25202607I also typed "on" instead of "in". PBR will do that to a retard. We all friends here.
>>25202614it's ok just do better in the future or else
It means of the fifth essence.That is: Aether.Aka heavenly hyparxis.It has no nothing to do with 'essential'.
>>25202406This is wrong. There can be numerous quintessentials of the same kind.Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert, Vivaldi, Brahms... These are the quintessential composers.Someone like Bach is "essential" to have a grasp of good music, but he's not quintessential. Quite overrated in fact.The angels are quintessential.
>>25202882>essence has nothing to do with essentialthis better be bait
>>25202304Quintessence is embodied, essence is/remains abstract.
Well, check out these quints!
>>25203003Where?
>>25203005These!
>>25203032dang, /v/ is really slow these days
>>25202908Essential means the thing can't exist as Y without X qualities.It's essential that you have normal body temperature because you're human. It's not essential for a computer because it's not human.The essence of a thing determines what's essential. Quintessential does not mean essential,.
>uses 'pretentious' to add weightPretentious is more pretentious.
>>25202304'quintessential' also implies that the thing is the missing piece
>>25202304This is the quintessential nu-/lit/ rant, irregardless of whatever you might have to say.
there is a reason why borges said that english is the best literary language. it filters retards like OP that dont even understand the difference between "quintessential" and "essential"
>>25203611And yet you have ESLs here seething at Shakespeare’s existence.
>>25203138Pretentious isn't a pretentious word. It wasn't even used to exaggerate, it was just a statement.
>>25205255Words are not pretentious in of themselves, they are just words.
