Question about the usage of 'satiety'

April 15, 2009 1:30 PM

Question about the usage of 'satiety'

Is this correct usage of the word 'satiety'? Ignore the fact itself, just the grammar: "Carbohydrates give you satiety."

posted by puloxor to Education (13 answers total)

Carbohydrates satiate you is a better way to say it. Or carbohydrates provide satiety. I guess your sentence isn't technically incorrect, but it reads kind of weird to my eye.
posted by sickinthehead at 1:40 PM on April 15, 2009

Well, when Homer listens to cassette tapes to subliminally increase his vocabulary, he says:

My gastronomic rapacity knows no satiety.

I assume that's a good way to tell someone you're still hungry.
posted by King Bee at 1:42 PM on April 15, 2009

Your sentence is akin, as sickinthehead indicates, to "Carbohydrates give you happiness".

It would be more direct to write "carbohydrates make you happy", ergo "carbohydrates make you satiated" or "carbohydrates provide satiety". Or perhaps simply, "carbohydrates satiate."
posted by GuyZero at 1:56 PM on April 15, 2009

Don't be afraid of the verb 'sate'. 'Satiate' sounds to my ear like one of those words people use when they're trying to sound competent.
posted by le morte de bea arthur at 1:58 PM on April 15, 2009

"satiety" is a condition. It sounds odd to be "given" a condition.

Carbohydrates increase your satiety.

or

Carbohydrates cause satiety.

Sound a lot better to me.
posted by jefftang at 2:18 PM on April 15, 2009

Not authoritative, but this guy goes over sate versus satiate.
posted by GuyZero at 2:32 PM on April 15, 2009

Satiety = The state of having had enough of a good thing.

I would write that a person has "reached satiety."

I would write that a person, perhaps, "retired to bed in satiety."

I probably wouldn't use it at all unless I was being ironic and/or post-modern. It makes one sound like an awkward Victorian-era novelist.
posted by swellingitchingbrain at 3:35 PM on April 15, 2009

I've only recently heard this word used out loud in the context of work at the Center for the Study of Weight Regulation. In my brain, I can hear people saying the phrase "reach satiety" when talking about their studies.
posted by oreonax at 4:56 PM on April 15, 2009

Many modern linguists (e.g. Stephen Pinker) consider the notion of "correct grammar" useless, preferring instead "what people say" or "what sounds funny to a native speaker" as a better indication of goodness of language use regardless of what someone somewhere asserted as "correct".

Most all the constructions offered above sound ponderous compared to "Carbohydrates satisfy your hunger". If, on the other hand, you are using the jargon of a specific field such as nutritionology or what have you, use what ever you hear or see your associates use. cf. AskMeFi: Why not just say price?
posted by fydfyd at 5:12 PM on April 15, 2009

"Carbohydrates give you satiety."

No this isn't quite correct and it's awkward. Satiety is a physiological state. Carbohydrates cause satiety (or possibly induce it, depending on the exact mechanism involved), they don't give it to you. I wouldn't use the word 'provide' either, although increase could be correct (in that satiety can be increased or decreased, I don't know if carbs do that specifically).

Carbohydrates cause satiety.
posted by shelleycat at 5:13 PM on April 15, 2009

Compare "Carbohydrates give you fullness." Not wrong, but it's pretty awkward.

Standard rewriting pattern, by the way: The verb 'give' is pretty empty, semantically, and the noun 'satiety' is extra-heavy because it's got a meaningful verb hidden inside it. So you cut out the slacker verb and let that noun be the main verb it wants to be: "Carbohydrates sate you."

I prefer sate for simplicity, but you probably need to conform to the standard usage of your field, if there is one.

That said, orientate is right out, because Talking Without Even Thinking is not a field at all, and therefore cannot have a standard usage.
posted by eritain at 5:22 PM on April 15, 2009

Compare "Carbohydrates give you fullness." Not wrong, but it's pretty awkward.

Actually I think it is wrong, biologically speaking. Satiety and fullness aren't things, they can't be given as such. No biologist would ever use a sentance construction like this.
posted by shelleycat at 6:05 PM on April 15, 2009

There's also satiation: "Carbohydrates provided satiation." But something like "Carbohydrates sated my appetite," is probably best.
posted by ragtimepiano at 11:33 PM on April 15, 2009