We changed our privacy policy. Read more.
30

Very little difference. Perhaps "It's okay with me." would be how you respond if you were being asked for your approval. "I'm okay with it." is how you would respond if you were being asked your opinion. But I'm not sure that you could really detect an actual difference in usage.


23

"You're too kind", as already mentioned, is hyperbole. They're simply complementing you for being kind and it's basically an alternative to or extension of "thank you". Most of the ways you can say "you're welcome" would be fine responses. You can respond with: "You're welcome" or "my pleasure": It can be ...


21

Maybe I am in the geographical preference category, but in my usage the two have slightly different, but very specific meanings. For me, answering the question "Do you like this color?" with "I'm OK with it", very clearly means "I would prefer you to choose a different color, but if you really like it that much, or you have different ...


6

For me, the difference is subtle enough that it probably won't matter in most cases. I will say that there is a difference, if used in spoken language, depending on where the emphasis is placed. If the speaker puts any emphasis on themself ("it's okay with me") then they are seeking to draw attention to the fact that their opinion may differ from ...


5

One thing nobody has mentioned is that potentially no verbal response at all is warranted but just non-verbal one, like a smile, eye contact and nod while passing by. The sequence of events was that you made a compliment, and the addressee thanked you for it. All intended information has been exchanged, symmetry in communicative and social terms is now ...


3

"I know, I am." or "I know—I am." is essentially two statements. They could be a response to a reminder ("Remember that you're supposed to take out the garbage. - I know, I am [taking out the garbage]."). "I know I am." is probably one statement with subordination, equivalent to "I know that I am." It could ...


3

One thing other answers miss is the "other" reason why someone could say this: sarcasm. I don't know how it works in other languages or cultures, but sarcasm in English can be quite understated. It can be a blank expression, a lack of voice inflection, or a dozen other things I sure don't understand all the time. If you can recognize that it's said ...


2

I see three versions of "you're too kind" : the most common one means "you're very kind" as explained in other answers sarcasm was also mentionned in other answers and means "you're not offering much" but it could also be litteral : a friend could warn you that you're being overly generous, but he would insist on the "too&...


2

The words "it" and "that" are often used interchangeably in the English language, and, for whatever reason, the collective subconscious deems an object labeled by speech with "it" as more likely to potentially be animate than objects labeled with "that". For example... "That's OK with me." and "I'm OK ...


2

It's worth it, usually means, it's worth the effort/time/money to acquire "it". A colloquialism that you wouldn't find in formal writing.


2

To this US English speaker, of the two choices given above, only the past tense sounds correct. Whether the fact is still true or not, we are talking about what was true at the time the speaker last checked, which must be in the past. Consider an alternative example which might make it clearer: The last time I visited Spain, the beaches are/were closed. ...


2

Both idiomatic expressions can be used to mean it's clear that someone is lying, but the they have different grammatical structures and meanings. The meaning of "plain as the nose on your face" is "obviously true". The phrase can only be used to describe statements of fact. "He's lying" is a statement of fact. This sentence ...


2

Yes, they both mean 'obvious', but slightly different usages. "As plain as the nose on your face" means that something should be obviously apparent/true. We tend to say this when someone has not noticed something glaringly obvious that is 'right in front of them'. Example -"You really think John and Jane are having an affair?" -"Yes!...


2

Welcome to SE !! Here, "mug in hand" should ideally be "mug in one hand" ; then "the other" will imply "the other hand". Also, "clip" should be "clips". The way I see it, using in: Ben is slumped, pasha-style, in his chair, with a large iced-coffee mug in one hand, and one of Lili's hair clips in ...


2

No, you cannot change the order and keep the meaning. Unlike some other languages (most notably Latin), most English nouns are not inflected. Whether a particular noun is a subject or direct object or indirect object is entirely dependent on its placement in a sentence; its form remains the same regardless. He keeps telling me a truth. ...means "he ...


2

Maybe he wants to remember images that he saw on his stay in the south, and will use the attempt to paint the images on canvasses to do that.


1

A couple of suggestions. Both variants are correct in isolation but the sentence structure as a whole is not clear. -"playing with something in the other hand" means that he is playing with something that is in his other hand (but which hand is doing the playing is not specified, although people would assume his other hand). -"playing with ...


1

If it's that simple, maybe skip 'latter'. Alice wrote this book in the 1790's. She was born sometime in the 1750's. During the 1750's Alice's family discovered a tiny cat in their barn.


1

I guess that you are asking this question because عـَمـَل means both make and do. Here is the definition of make from the Cambridge Dictionary: "to produce something, often using a particular substance or material". You are right: in writing or in formal conversation, make is the best verb to describe what a manufacturer does. This company makes ...


1

You need left (somewhere) or left behind. For the second one, somewhere is optional. So: I left my wallet behind (at home). or I left my wallet at home. (it's not perfect tense as it's a past action.) and We left in a hurry and I must have left my keys behind (at home). or We left in a hurry and I must have left my keys at home. So you can get away ...


1

These don't mean the same thing. "Barely managed" means "he struggled and succeeded by the barest margins". It usually implies the problem was with his capacity to do the work itself. "Had a hard time" has a more general meaning, like "he had some problems while doing something". It doesn't suggest anything about how ...


1

Grammatically they're all fine, but needs and demands aren't exactly the same thing. Needs = food, water, baby powder, and so on. Demands = those things + the latest iPhone, a bigger room, and so on. Which are you referring to? "a lot of" sounds neutral. "full of" sounds a tiny bit more informal.


1

I agree with those who say that the two expressions are essentially synonymous. I think the main difference is actually just this: "I'm OK with it" is newer. See, for instance, Google ngrams. (I wouldn't trust the sharp recent dropoff in "It's OK with me" - Google ngrams gets unreliable after about 2008.) But I don't know if that says ...


1

They're for all intents and purposes identical But if you like the color, you should just say "yes" or "I do" or "I like it" If somebody says "I don't have a problem with it" or "it's okay" it sounds like it wouldn't have been their first choice and they're just trying to be polite.


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible