Can anyone make sense of seriously as an intensifier? On the outside, I would not expect to find this use in writing, except in dialogue, or in a very pacy excited style of writing.

In any case, that meaning, while not impossible, is strange here – to say she is extremely good at hiding her emotions but that he read them is not very consequent.

Edit : strike the second paragraph.

As a secondary answer, “Typically” is better than “seriously”

The usage in the question is clearly as an adverb enhancing the descriptor “was good.” Being all-around excellent, I found her “normally good at covering”. Was? It is not an adverb modifying the state of being “was” in a given manner. She was serious while she was good at covering.

Also, considering the chosen conjunction “but” (indicating contrary to her normally good ability to cover), the primary best answer “normally” makes the most sense. Even if the conjunction used in the question was “yes” (which might better indicate in spite of her seriousness while being good at covering), the secondary possible answer “seriously” still sounds awkward with “good” is.

The secondary possible answer “seriously” can be interpreted as the newer, very informal meaning (seriously = not joking and no kidding = very?). Technically it works, but does not fit the context of the question at all. The sentence used within the question gives no indication of the appropriateness of such an informal and logical answer.

Should I answer “normally”? The best answer among the choices offered would be “usually” which has close meaning and makes a good comparison of support.

What are some tips from The Free Dictionary? Is

there a way to come to com/seriously?

Can anyone make sense of seriously as an intensifier? On the outside, I would not expect to find this use in writing, except in dialogue, or in a very pacy excited style of writing.

In any case, that meaning, while not impossible, is strange here – to say she is extremely good at hiding her emotions but that he read them is not very consequent.

Edit : strike the second paragraph.

The only possible adjective is normally modifying was.

Normally, she was good at covering the

emotions she didn’t want to show,… or, with a difference in meaning, She was good

at covering the emotions she didn’t

want to show,. No other option works.

We both know that in colloquialism both sounds perfect natural not just made up speech for. I think working with “seriously” as a qualifier like that is quite informal, and I would wager the “correct” answer ought to be, “normally,” which also sounds more natural across most

situations (such as writing).

The only possible adjective is normally modifying was.

Normally, she was good at covering the

emotions she didn’t want to show,… or, with a difference in meaning, She was good

at covering the emotions she didn’t

want to show,. No other option works.

Can anyone make sense of seriously as an intensifier? On the outside, I would not expect to find this use in writing, except in dialogue, or in a very pacy excited style of writing.

In any case, that meaning, while not impossible, is strange here – to say she is extremely good at hiding her emotions but that he read them is not very consequent.

Edit : strike the second paragraph.

The only possible adjective is normally modifying was.

Normally, she was good at covering the

emotions she didn’t want to show,… or, with a difference in meaning, She was good

at covering the emotions she didn’t

want to show,. No other option works.

The only possible adjective is normally modifying was.

Normally, she was good at covering the

emotions she didn’t want to show,… or, with a difference in meaning, She was good

at covering the emotions she didn’t

want to show,. No other option works.

The only possible adjective is normally modifying was.

Normally, she was good at covering the

emotions she didn’t want to show,… or, with a difference in meaning, She was good

at covering the emotions she didn’t

want to show,. No other option works.