Folks

Status
Not open for further replies.

NewHope

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2004
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Chinese
Home Country
China
Current Location
China
Doese 'folks" here man 'Down-to-earth, open-hearted"?

Context:
That's not all folks.

If the consensus view of Wednesday's Bank of England policy minutes is anything to go by, Britain's central bank has turned even more dovish, U.K. interest rates have just about peaked and the pound has only one way to go - down.

'We expect sterling to lose 10% in trade-weighted terms,' predicted Hans Redeker, currency strategist with BNP Paribas in London.
 

Casiopea

VIP Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2003
Member Type
Other
NewHope said:
Doese 'folks" here man 'Down-to-earth, open-hearted"?

Context:
That's not all folks.

If the consensus view of Wednesday's Bank of England policy minutes is anything to go by, Britain's central bank has turned even more dovish, U.K. interest rates have just about peaked and the pound has only one way to go - down.

'We expect sterling to lose 10% in trade-weighted terms,' predicted Hans Redeker, currency strategist with BNP Paribas in London.

It's an informal term for people. In the above context it refers to the audience to whom the speaker is addressing.

All the best, :D
 

shane

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2003
Member Type
Student or Learner
I'd add a comma to that:

'That's not all, folks.'
 

NewHope

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2004
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Chinese
Home Country
China
Current Location
China
Are you absolutely sure for this? :D
 

Casiopea

VIP Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2003
Member Type
Other
NewHope said:
Are you absolutely sure for this? :D

I agree with Shane :D on adding a comma after 'folks':

That's not all (I have to say), folks.
That's not all folks . (That's not all (the) people who will be upset....)

I am certain that 'folks' in the context you provided means, people. :D
 

Wai_Wai

Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2004
Folk is not just to mean people. There are differences!

Folks (noun, usually plural)
Informal Usage.
It is used to mean people, especially from a particular region or country/city or group; or who have their particular lifestyle, folklore; or whose have something in common (eg characteristics)

Another usage is to address/call a person in a friendly way.
 

Wai_Wai

Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2004
"Adding a comma" makes the sentence clearer. Unlike Chinese, English tends to leave out commas that is not a good behaviour in my view.

Take yours as an example
"That is not all folks"

One might mislead to understand as follows
That's not || all folks.

In fact, we have to read in this way:
That's not all || folks.

With a comma, life will become easier. ^^
 

Wai_Wai

Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2004
Hi, NewHope,
Where do you read this from?
I would like to take a deep look at it.
Would you mind to provide the website address?
 

Tdol

Editor, UsingEnglish.com
Staff member
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Member Type
Native Language
British English
Home Country
UK
Current Location
Japan
In this context, 'folks' doesn't have the accoiations of custom and tradition that it might elsewehere. Here, it's a jovial term for 'people' borrowed from showbiz,etc. ;-)
 

Casiopea

VIP Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2003
Member Type
Other
tdol said:
In this context, 'folks' doesn't have the accoiations of custom and tradition that it might elsewehere. Here, it's a jovial term for 'people' borrowed from showbiz,etc. ;-)

My folks have spoken. :up:
 

Wai_Wai

Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2004
tdol said:
In this context, 'folks' doesn't have the accoiations of custom and tradition that it might elsewehere. Here, it's a jovial term for 'people' borrowed from showbiz,etc. ;-)

Thanks for your ideas.
In fact my intention is:
I explain more about "folks", so NewHope has a better idea about this word.

tdol, I'm afirad you got me wrong. I didn't say "folks" in the context is definitely associated with custom and traditon. Rather the word is defined without particularly considering the context.
Also if you look at my definition carefully, I use "or". That means we don't need to satisfy all in order to use "folks". Anyway, it is just the usual meaning of "folks".

Regarding the context,
It does not just mean "people" and that's it:
- it does not really mean "people (in general)" here. Rather it is the readers/listeners who read/listen the passage/to the speaker.
- this again qualifies the definition that folks are from a particular group
- It can bring some friendly atmosphere. "Folks" is a good word to express this, not "people".

Anyway just my silly two cents.
 

Wai_Wai

Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2004
Casiopea said:
It's an informal term for people. In the above context it refers to the audience to whom the speaker is addressing.

Dear tdol,

If you look at the sentence carefully, the first part is more to do with explaination of the meaning of "folks" in general . The second part is to more to do with explaination of the meaning of "folks" in the context :p

Simply "people" is insufficient to explain the word "folk". That's why I added more explanations (and sent my post). ^^
 

NewHope

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2004
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Chinese
Home Country
China
Current Location
China
Wai Wai, here is the aritcle, but no link attached.

That's not all folks.

If the consensus view of Wednesday's Bank of England policy minutes is anything to go by, Britain's central bank has turned even more dovish, U.K. interest rates have just about peaked and the pound has only one way to go - down.

'We expect sterling to lose 10% in trade-weighted terms,' predicted Hans Redeker, currency strategist with BNP Paribas in London.

He echoed the overriding sentiment in the market that the pound is soon to lose the interest rate support that has kept it relatively firm for most of this year.

And if the International Monetary Fund is to be believed, the U.K. housing market also is cruising for a bruising, with real house prices set to fall over the next 18 months as previous interest rate rises hit home.

However, not everyone agrees that it is curtains for sterling just yet.

John Butler, U.K. economist at HSBC in London, argues that the Bank of England minutes are actually more hawkish than they first appear and with the bank still worried about 'unwelcome strength' in the household sector being rekindled, interest rates may be further from their peak than some think.

'The message is that everything is still to play for,' he said.

Certainly, the market had been expecting the minutes to be dovish. Economic data in recent weeks have continued to show house prices cooling down and even consumer behavior starting to respond.

As Redeker pointed out, real estate equity withdrawals that contributed 6% to disposable income last year are hardly likely to be repeated this year because of reduced real estate price expectations.

'With the savings ratio already at low levels it means that a decline in disposable incomes should translate directly into lower consumption expenditure,' he said.

With Stephen Nickell, a member of the monetary policy committee, also hinting strongly in an interview last week that rates are near their peak it isn't surprising the market was only too keen to take the sterling minutes at face value.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top