The meaning of the word overestimate. The meaning of the word overestimate What does it mean it is very difficult to overestimate

Is there an expression "hard to underestimate"? And what does it mean?

There is an expression " it's hard to overestimate" - about something that deserves the highest rating. "It's hard to underestimate" - apparently about the opposite.

Dear philologists! Please tell me how to correctly formulate the phrases that appear in advertisements? “Treatment of impotence”, “treatment of potency”, “restoration of potency”? Restoring potency or treating impotence are the only possible correct options. Potency cannot be treated; it is a normal physiological state; if it is impaired, it can only be restored. If I'm wrong, please explain to me. Thank you for your service and interesting site. It's hard to overestimate your work for society. Once again, please accept my and not only my GRATITUDE. I wish you health and happiness.

Russian help desk response

Dmitry, thank you for your kind words!

You are absolutely right: the combinations are correct impotence treatment And restoration of potency, but not potency treatment: potency – a man’s ability to have sexual intercourse and produce offspring; Potency is not a disease; it cannot be treated.

Good afternoon

"It's hard to overestimate your contribution to the education of the younger generation of Russia, this is not a simple, but very important and noble cause, on which the future of our country depends."
The question is how we write the word “difficult” in this context. we have doubts... together or separately?

Thank you!

Russian help desk response

Correctly continuous writing(can be replaced with a synonym without Not:"complicated") Opposition expressed by conjunction But, does not affect continuous writing (unlike the opposition expressed by the conjunction A).

Please note the stylistic error. Correctly: It's hard to overestimate your contribution to the education of the younger generation of Russia, to this difficult, but very important and noble cause, on which the future of our country depends.

Hello!

Please tell me why, when they talk about the significance of something, they write something like: “Goethe’s contribution to the development of German poetry cannot be overestimated.” Wouldn't it be correct to use the word "underestimate" here?

Russian help desk response

Combinations cannot be overestimated it's hard to overestimate are true. Overestimate – rate too highly, higher than it should. The meaning is this: Goethe’s contribution to the development of German poetry is so great that even the highest assessment of it will be correct; it cannot be said that this contribution was appreciated higher than it should be.

TO better life- ready! Is this sentence punctuated correctly?

Such punctuation is possible.

Please answer how to write the highlighted words: “The issue of the possibility of starting a court hearing IN THE ABSENCE OF AN APPEARING administrative plaintiff is being decided”? In the word “IN ABSENCE” what should you write at the end, in the word “NOT APPEARING”, NOT together or separately? Thank you.

Russian help desk response

Right: in the absence of the plaintiff who failed to appear.

Energots ex, steam supply shop - the boiler shop did not immediately receive its current name. Is the punctuation correct?

Russian help desk response

The punctuation is correct.

Hello! Did I use the dash correctly in this case? There is only purpose, everything else is garbage. Thank you in advance for your help!

Russian help desk response

The punctuation is correct.

Hello. Is a comma needed before “as” in sentences: She has the hearing of a she-wolf. He has legs (teeth, ears) like a wolf. He has the vision of an eagle.

Russian help desk response

No commas needed.

Why is Zedong written with a hyphen in Mao Q's dictionary of proper names? - http://www.gramota.ru/slovari/dic/?word=maots zedun&all=x Thanks in advance.

Russian help desk response

It's a typo. Corrected. Thank you for your comment!

upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ru/1/1f/Yat-Baryshnikov-1899.png At the bottom left is the word nadvan (from put on), i.e. This is a rather old word, it’s in the textbook, but you say it’s colloquial.

Russian help desk response

There is no contradiction between these facts. First, spelling codes provide examples and spoken words, because their spelling must also be codified. Secondly, words that were stylistically neutral 100 years ago may well turn out to be colloquial in modern Russian. Conversely, options that were considered erroneous a hundred years ago may be facts today literary language, because language is constantly changing.

Hello. Is the punctuation correct? Today, in addition to breaking the kaleidoscope, my son uttered his first understandable phrase.

Russian help desk response

The punctuation is correct.

Hello. Is a comma necessary before “what”? The next day all he talked about was yesterday's triumph.

Russian help desk response

No comma needed. The comma is not placed before the conjunction What in expression that's all... that followed by a noun or pronoun. But if a structure containing complex particles in the first part that's all, verb do (do, know) and union What, has a verb in the second part, then before What a comma is added. Wed: ABOUT All he did was talk about yesterday's triumph.

In the dictionary of proper names, in my opinion, there was a typo in the word FRG. - http://gramota.ru/slovari/dic/?lop=x&bts=x&zar=x&ag=x&ab=x&sin=x&lv=x&az=x&pe=x&word=frg. It says Federal Republic of Germany instead of Germany. Thank you in advance.

Russian help desk response

There are no typos. The official name of the state is Federal Republic of Germany. See also the answer to question no.

Hello. Question about the difficulties of punctuation. What should be at the end of such an anecdote, completely taken in quotation marks in the text: “”. OR "." OR." "At his mother-in-law's funeral, the son-in-law lowered his head into her coffin and froze for a long time in a mournful pose. Finally they pulled him away from the coffin. Friends ask: “Do you love your mother-in-law so much?” - “No, after drinking yesterday, my head is pounding, I pressed my forehead to the cold one... It became easier.”

Russian help desk response

The period is placed after the closing quotation marks. Correctly: ...became"".

Hello, dear editorial staff of Gramota.ru! Tell me, please, is a comma necessary in the following case? If we were to implement this new printing technology, we would be able to print much more more books, (?) than was printed before. Thank you!

Russian help desk response

A comma is needed, particles a would extra: If we implement this new printing technology, we will be able to print many more books than were printed before.

Hello. How do you spell, with or without a hyphen, Mao Tsze-tung (Mao Ts Zedong)? There is a lot of confusion in the dictionaries.

Russian help desk response

Right: Mao Zedong.

Dear editor, tell me how to correctly write the following expression, which is my epigraph in the poem: “the festival of the author’s song “Your Island”, dedicated to the memory of Vladimir Vysotsky...” or “the festival of the author’s song “Your Island”, dedicated to the memory Vladimir Vysotsky..." I consider my first option to be correct, but they are persistently trying to persuade me to the second. Please give a somewhat detailed answer so that I can appeal to it or agree with my opponents. Sincerely...

Russian help desk response

The first option is incorrect: there is no noun in the form genitive case, to which the word in the genitive case could refer dedicated. Right: festival... dedicated... Word dedicated is in the same case form as the word festival, to which it refers.

“You have no idea how magnificent he is” - Punctuation error Tell me what is the error? The sentence looks like this: You can’t imagine how magnificent, majestic and luxurious he is.

Russian help desk response

Between parts complex sentence comma required: You can't imagine how gorgeous he is...

Why do they say this? Well, how is it “difficult to overestimate”?? Now I came across this phrase again and decided to write it anyway. Always when I hear or see such an expression, I briefly freeze in a stupor. How did it happen?? Why is “overestimating” such a problem? Maybe I'm misunderstanding something? In my understanding, “overestimate” is to value something more highly than it actually is. Isn't that right? In my opinion, “overestimating” any event, action, deed or anything else is even easier than ever! Especially if it is truly a “thing” worthy of attention. Well, that is, for example, a person did something useful and everyone shouted in one voice “oooh!! Cool!! Yeees!! Super!!" but in fact, it may not be as cool as they shout about it. Useful, of course, but not that much. Well, or even better example- someone or something has been well promoted and it’s on everyone’s lips and everyone is talking about it just non-stop, everyone is praising and rejoicing! Although in reality this someone or something is not worth a penny! It can not be? Yes, easily! And everyone who is trending about this has “overestimated” what was presented to them. And plus everything, I think this expression is simply insulting to really important events... For me, it’s correct to say “it’s difficult to underestimate.” This seems very logical to me. Especially if the person, thing, or whatever really represents something significant or grandiose. This is simply hard not to notice, i.e. hard to underestimate. It's hard to underestimate. In my understanding, the ceiling of the expression “it is difficult to overestimate” rests on the “final figure (value) of the assessment,” so to speak. Those. Well, there’s no way to rate such a grandiose event any higher. It seems to me that this is a humiliation for a grandiose event. And for the expression “it is difficult to underestimate” it (ceiling) only begins with this value! And I think this is absolutely correct! Because great people, deeds and things deserve this! They deserve to be said about them with a little exaggeration... They are difficult to underestimate! Those. It’s simply impossible to value it any lower than it actually is! This is simply impossible! And I think this is right.

P.S. Another example has come to my mind here. A student comes to take an exam in the first year, and tells the teacher the entire program on the subject, starting with the first year and ending with the master's degree and even beyond, even what the teacher himself did not know! Tells everything, everything, everything!!! And in fact, the student needs to be given even higher than an A (if such a thing were possible). Because he knows kuuuuud more than 5. Well, or at least you need to give it a 5 plus! And the teacher says: “You know, you know the material so well, just perfectly!” It’s hard to overestimate your knowledge!” - it even sounds somehow ridiculous - “That’s why, in order not to do this, I’ll give you four, so as not to overestimate you.”

This is how my thoughts turned out... Maybe a little chaotic, but still. Or maybe I understand something wrong?..

Or "don't get me wrong".

I used to often amuse myself with such logically impeccable phrases, which, upon closer examination, cause a slight the cognitive dissonance(need any explanation as to why? ;)).

But today I realized the depth of my ignorance.
And what’s the matter?! In the simplest electronic device - an elementary RS trigger!

It will be difficult for those not familiar with logic and electronics to appreciate (or overestimate... or underestimate). But I’ll write anyway, because it’s educational. And because I remember that I am, after all, a programmer, and it wouldn’t be at all bad to present discussion questions and thoughts on a blog, and not just on specialized forums.

In general, they asked me about this formula in the Wikipedia article about the trigger:

To my shame, I saw the sign in the form of a tick lying on its side (venjunction) for the first time.
In general, it is immediately clear that the state of memory has been crammed into a formal mathematical notation. Well, there is a link where it says what kind of beast this is - sequential logic.

A small “philosophical” digression is appropriate here.
Mathematics is special language(for formalization), one of the properties of which is to simplify the recording, condensing ordinary text describing a phenomenon or process.
Well, we have a large and healthy file, and we compress it with an archiver to reduce the size, save traffic and all that. And here we have a description of the behavior of the trigger on a normal human language, which goes through a series of successive transformations (translations into formal mathematical languages), as a result of which the record becomes increasingly shorter and less understandable;)

We start, as usual, with an informal verbal description: the trigger output signal Q is set to 1 by a pulse at the S (Set) input and reset by a pulse at the R (Reset) input, maintaining the state in the absence of both input signals.

An attempt to formalize the description begins by listing all possible cases. This results in a table of states:

Of course, a table is usually more compact than a verbal description, but, most importantly, it will not allow you to forget or lose sight of any option! Which is why it is valuable.

Well, the considered case couldn’t be simpler, and for real logical circuits the table will grow to the point of impossibility, so it is rarely used directly.
Let's conduct the next packing session with mathematical formalism (algebra of logic).
But ordinary (combination) logic does not allow such concepts as “undefined”!
What to do? Agree on what the result should be equal to one at both inputs.
The easiest way is to reset it. Then we get the system:

1) Q = 0, R=1
2) Q = Q | S, R=0

That is, the reset input gets priority, and doesn’t care about the other signal at all, as well as the previous output value.

In fact, this is what I have always done in my simulation systems. Simply because I once made such a rather logical decision - and today I completely forgot that from a purely mathematical side (as well as from the electronics side) uncertainty is resolved differently...

Thus, everything looks exactly like in the given analogy with file size: a higher compression ratio requires a more complicated packaging method and, accordingly, an increase in the overhead costs of the archiver! ;)

Everything would be fine, but let's return to ignorance.
To be honest, I don’t like this record at all. Because even though it is compact, I don’t understand it at all. Yes, I read Wikipedia and the reference book. And that wasn't enough. And yes, I'm lazy to search and read the textbook. So I see that there is a mistake here somewhere. But serious people think that everything is fine. And I leave my misunderstanding until better times, which are unlikely to ever come.

“Pangs of conscience are bearable” - this is one of the small unpleasant discoveries that you make with age.(Strugatsky, “Waves extinguish the wind”)...