10

Scenario:

I only had a cup of smoothie for lunch so I'd get hungry pretty soon afterwards. This is because smoothie is not very stuffy. It digests easily and fast so that my stomach becomes empty very soon.

Question, does the word make sense here? If not, what's the word for a food which does not digest easily and remains longer in your stomach so that you wouldn't feel hungry for a longer period of time?

(Note: "Hard" is not precise)

30

Stuffy doesn't work here. One way I see it is that the smoothie is itself clogged (doesn't really make sense). You could call it dense or thick, but I think you might be looking for filling:

filling
adjective
4. Food that is filling makes you feel full when you have eaten it.
Although it is tasty, crab is very filling.
(Collins Dictionary)

11

No, that's not a good use of stuffy.

Though Merriam-Webster only lists it as the third definition, I'd say the most common use of "stuffy" in conversational English is to mean, as MW says:

oppressive to the breathing

You might say a room that's a bit too hot and very humid is "stuffy".

The word you're looking for is probably filling:

(of food or a meal) substantial and satisfying

Although dictionary.com lists "filling" under the British Dictionary Definitions heading, as an American English speaker, I'd say it's a pretty common word in the U.S. as well.

It'd be common to hear that a certain dish or meal is "filling" because it seems to literally fill your stomach. Even if it doesn't actually literally fill your stomach all the way, something that's "filling" makes you feel full.

  • 1
    Good note, AndyT. I have updated the link to go to an actual adjective definition, as found on dictionary.com. My issue really is that I could not find a definition for the adjective "filling" on Merriam-Webster's website anywhere, whether searching for "filling" or simply "fill" (which I found surprising). The phrasing I had before wasn't the clearest; what I really should have said was something more along the lines of "it's an adjective that means something similar to this noun." – cjl750 Jun 13 '17 at 15:40
  • That is a bit surprising, true. I have no idea whether that's a common problem with MW or not; dictionary.com is my go-to online dictionary. – AndyT Jun 13 '17 at 15:47
7

As the other answers have noted, "stuffy" is not the word to use here. An alternative to "filling" might be "substantial", which seems to get to the point you were going for with "stuffy".

Indeed, Merriam-Webster has, as its second definition:

  1. ample to satisfy and nourish : a substantial meal
  • You have a minor typo that I can't suggest edit: "substatial" :) – Andrew T. Jun 14 '17 at 4:55
6

Perhaps "stodgy" would be a word that works for you/is what you're thinking of when you're considering stuffy

(of food) heavy, filling, and high in carbohydrates. "he loves stodgy puddings"

synonyms: indigestible, starchy, filling, heavy, solid, substantial, lumpy, leaden "rich, stodgy puddings"

However, the other answers are guiding you towards using a positive descriptor and that's the approach I'd take. It would be better to say a smoothie is "light and easily digested", rather than "not too stodgy", because it's better to use a "positive" than use a "not negative" even if they usually are interpreted to mean the same thing. Politicians tend to use not-negatives.. they will say "well, you're NOT WRONG", which can be interpreted to be saying "you're RIGHT", but actually still leaves them some room to say "but you're not right either"..

I agree with the others re stuffy; "stuffy" is generally used to describe an atmosphere that seems hard to breathe, like in a party where there are no open windows. It's probably due to elevated levels of carbon dioxide; humans are quite good at detecting elevated levels of CO2 and perceiving the air as being "not very fresh". It may also be accompanied by high humidity and or stale smells

  • I've never, ever heard "stodgy" used to refer to a food. I've only heard it used to refer to a person. (Interesting - I googled it, apparently it's a Britishism. Thought I was fairly knowledgeable about Britishisms, too - never heard that one.) – neminem Jun 13 '17 at 23:20
  • 1
    Out of interest: How does stodgy apply to a person? Can you give an example? – Pod Jun 14 '17 at 10:36
3

I use the word light.

If at all you want to eat, eat light food; we are having a full-course meal very soon.

light food are light in calorie, light on stomach, and digest quickly.

3

I only had a cup of smoothie for lunch so I'd get hungry pretty soon afterwards. This is because smoothie is not very stuffy. It digests easily and fast so that my stomach becomes empty very soon.

As stated above, "filling" is the one-for-one replacement here, but another option is the idiom "sticks to your ribs". This implies that the food is substantial enough that it stays in your stomach for a long time (sticking to your ribs from the inside), keeping you feeling full for longer.

An example:

I was considering getting a grilled chicken salad, but I might go for something that sticks to your ribs more, like a steak.

Additionally, some of your example sounds a little bit odd to a native speaker. We don't say "a cup of smoothie" and we don't refer to smoothie as an uncountable quantity. Also, some of your tenses are strange. I'm not sure if the speaker is speaking about a past event or relating foreknowledge of a future outcome. Assuming that it's referring to a past event (consuming the smoothie), I would change your example to the following:

I only had a smoothie for lunch so I'll be getting hungry pretty soon, considering they aren't very filling. It doesn't stick to your ribs like a burger would.

  • I've been enlightened. Thank you for you reply. May I ask why you have changed "would get hungry" to "will be getting hungry"? Can you elaborate on that please? – Will Jun 13 '17 at 20:31
  • Sure. The difference here is between the Future and Future Progressive tenses, along with the difference between will and would. I'll tackle those two first: Would is the past tense version of will. Since we are talking about a future event, would is not correct. The only exception I can think of to this is in requests, i.e. "Would you mind going to the store for me tomorrow?" This is a future event, but it's a request, so we use "would". (continued) – Nathan Young Jun 13 '17 at 20:42
  • With this in mind, let's look at the tenses. Given that one change, we could change it to "will get hungry" and be done and correct, but the act of getting hungry is not a single event. A person is not satisfied one moment and then a moment later is hungry. It is a process, a gradual event. For events that take place over a period of time, we use the Progressive tenses, and as such, for a future event over time, the Future Progressive tense. More info on tenses here and a great image representing this is here. – Nathan Young Jun 13 '17 at 20:45
  • Can't "would" be used to indicate subjunctive? Since I'm not one hundred percent sure that I will become empty-stomach in the future. – Will Jun 13 '17 at 21:06
  • You'd moreso want to use "might" or "may" in that situation. "I only had a smoothie for lunch so I may get hungry pretty soon, considering they aren't very filling." and "...so I might get hungry pretty soon..." both serve the same purpose, indicating a future possibility, and focusing on the moment of becoming hungry enough to want to do something about that. "...so I may be getting hungry pretty soon..." and "...so I might be getting hungry pretty soon..." serve the same purpose but more referring to the process and eventuality of needing to eat. – Nathan Young Jun 13 '17 at 21:31
0

This is because smoothies are not very hearty.

hearty [hahr-tee] adjective –dictionary.com

  1. substantial; abundant; nourishing: a hearty meal.
0

"Heavy" is like "Filling", but with a more negative connotation, as in

"What can I order that's not too heavy?"

"Their food is so heavy and rich, I need a diet the next day."

"I avoid a heavy breakfast on race day."

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.