Please note the wording bellow.
It seems completely relatively great but actually its final impact is not that great.
Relatively speaking, It completely seems great but actually its final impact is not that great.
Do they sound natural?
Please note the wording bellow.
Do they sound natural?
Completely can be used as a modifier, but it's not a very good modifier for the word great. NOAD has a good example sentence:
Moreover, I think utterly may sound more natural in some contexts:
Here's a good test to use: Only use completely when you could also use a little. In other words:
Those are okay, but it's hard to imagine contexts where we'd say:
In several contexts, I think using "complete" as an adjective might be a better way to go; for example, although both are grammatical:
sounds better than:
As for your sentence, I'm having trouble squeezing the word completely in there; I'd suggest:
As for how to work completely into that context:
(We can use completely fooled because we can also be a little fooled.)
"Completely" and "relatively" do not go together. If it is "relatively great", then it's not "completely great", and vice versa. "Relatively" in such a context means "only in comparison to others". Like if I say, "He was a relatively honest man", I mean that he wasn't very honest, but compared to other men, he was okay. That is, other men aren't very honest either, so he was average or maybe a little above average. "Completely" means almost the opposite, that something is true to an extreme. Like if I say, "He was a completely honest man", I mean that he was 100% honest, that he was as honest as one could possibly imagine. So you can't be "completely relatively" something. That doesn't make sense.
As others note, "completely" doesn't really go with "great". Neither does "relatively". "Great" implies an extreme, so to say "relatively great" is something of a contradiction. You could say "relatively good" to express the idea that something is good, but only when compared against other things that aren't all that good either. "Completely great" is redundant. I guess you could use it as an intensifier, but it just isn't something that fluent speakers often say.
I think what you are trying to say is something more like: "It seems good, but its final impact will not be that great." Or if you're trying to say that it seems to be very very good but really isn't, maybe "It seems great, but its final impact will not be so good." I wouldn't use "great" twice in the sentence on the general principle of avoiding using non-trivial words repeatedly.
I don't think that " completely" fits the sentence.
"It seems great, but it's final impact is not what we expected, on a relative base"
I hope that I understood what you mean to say.
I'd make it simple to understand without superfluous words.
In your first sentence:
I cannot clearly see which word "completely" is intended to modify. I doesn't seem possible that it modifies "great" because then "completely" and "relatively" are almost contradictory modifiers.
From your second sentence it would appear that you want it to modify "seems". You can modify a verb with a following adverb, as in "I run quickly", but I suspect it's archaic to do that other than at the end of a clause, and it's very confusing to do it immediately before another adverb that applies to something else.
It's also possible that "completely" is intended to modify "relatively", which is the other side of that confusion.
So I'm afraid the sentence come across as confused/ambiguous. And therefore wrong even if you can justify its grammatical construction one way or another. It doesn't sound natural to me.
If you want to emphasise the relativity (as you ask in your title) I think to be clear you must say more. You could say:
However you run into anther issue there: when you should say "completely" vs. when you should say "entirely". As a native English speaker I unfortunately don't know that rule for that, I just have an instinct that "entirely" would be better.
Getting away from the word "completely":
"completely" does not pair with "relatively", because completeness carries the idea of an absolute measure.
Something is complete relative to an incomplete version of itself, not relative to something else.
It would never make sense to say, "relative to your slow progress, my tasks are all complete".
"Relatively speaking" is usually a rhetorical hedge device. A good test is to ask the question, "relatively to what?" If there is no clear answer, then it is just an empty phrase. For instance, it contributes nothing in the following example:
Even if "completely" and "relatively" are used as rhetorical words without a precise meaning, they are still not compatible.
This is because "relatively" is a downtoner, whereas "completely" is an intensifier: they are essentially opposites.
Also, the word "great" (in our particular usage) is an intensified form of "good". When speaker calls something "great", it means that it exceeds the speaker's expectations.
Because it is an intensified word, it is not compatible with "relatively": "relatively great" makes no sense and is not used by native speakers, except maybe as a joke.
When a speaker uses "relatively good", it usually means "good, and better than some reference standard such as an average, but leaving plenty of of room for improvement; acceptable, but not necessarily meeting my highest expectations".
"completely great" is funny sounding, because "great" expresses something which has no attainable limit, whereas completeness requires a limit. That is to say, it is not possible for something to be so great that it cannot be greater; yet that is what "completely great" asserts. The word for something which cannot be further improved is "perfect"; someone who uses "completely great" seems like someone who lacks the vocabulary to use "perfect", or "couldn't be better".
Which is not to say that "completely" can only be applied to objectively measurable situations. For instance, you can be "completely astonished" by something, which means that you feel you cannot be astonished any more than you are. Although astonishment is subjective, it is perceived to have a limit.
"Completely" is also not applicable to situations that are either true or false. For instance, "she is completely pregnant" can only be said as a joke. The situation has to have a gradation of possibilities with a limit. If that limit is perceived by a speaker as being attained, then the situation is "completely" that way.
Someone can be "completely wrong": but not with regard to a simple yes/no proposition or elementary fact:
A cannot be completely wrong because it is either Tuesday today or it isn't; there is no way to be "half wrong" about that. Correct example: