Fancy houses to neat houses

< Previous | Next >


The ladder (from homeowner to homeless):

Fancy houses (for the rich and the middle class) --->>> neat houses (for common people) --->>> slum houses (for the poor) --->>> tents (for the homeless) --->>> living on streets without a tent (for the inscrutably miserable)

Source: English sentence making practice by me.

The question of this thread is whether the words "fancy" and "neat" are used properly here.
  • owlman5

    Senior Member
    Neat isn't a good way to express the idea of average in a remark about the type of houses that common people have, NA. Neat refers to tidiness and cleanliness, but it doesn't really refer to how much a house costs.

    I don't know exactly what middle-class means to you, but I associate that term with people who earn enough money to afford a mortgage. Not necessarily a mortgage for a fancy house, however, which would be very expensive in the U.S. today.

    Fancy is a good adjective to describe the type of houses that rich people are likely to have.
    Last edited:


    Senior Member
    English - US and Canada
    You probably mean something like modest houses / ordinary houses / small houses. Whether the houses are neat or messy depends on the people who live in them.
    < Previous | Next >