OT: - Grammar controversy | Page 4 | The Boneyard

OT: Grammar controversy

Artifical is highly subjective in this context as fewer is for countables, while less is for uncountables.
Is furniture countable or uncountable? It logically should be countable, but the noun (for no fathomable reason) is in the form of an uncountable.

If the distinction were real and important, there would be two different forms of more.
 
Fewer versus less is a debate in English grammar about the appropriate use of these two determiners. Linguistic prescriptivists usually say that fewer and not less should be used with countable nouns,[2] and that less should be used only with uncountable nouns. This distinction was first tentatively suggested by the grammarian Robert Baker in 1770,[3][1] and it was eventually presented as a rule by many grammarians since then.[a] However, modern linguistics has shown that idiomatic past and current usage consists of the word less with both countable nouns and uncountable nouns so that the traditional rule for the use of the word fewer stands, but not the traditional rule for the use of the word less.[3] As Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of English Usage explains, "Less refers to quantity or amount among things that are measured and to number among things that are counted."

The Cambridge Guide to English Usage notes that the "pressure to substitute fewer for less seems to have developed out of all proportion to the ambiguity it may provide in noun phrases like less promising results". It describes conformance with this pressure as a shibboleth and the choice "between the more formal fewer and the more spontaneous less" as a stylistic choice.” “

source:

As with many so-called rules, if enough self-styled experts proclaim loudly for a long while, and ignore the way native speakers actually use the language, we have these debates.

View attachment 110266
No! Now the discussion will turn to the grocer's apostrophe!!


And the second sentence h that article references another of my pet hates: diffuse/defuse. And don't get me started on people conflating imply and infer...

BTW, I come from a country where we use, to the most part, the King's English (the language formerly known as the Queen's English). When I was in the States people often though I was English*, although I live almost as far as physically possible from the Mother Country!

* Apparently a US student expressed surprise that people in the UK spoke English. She said "I thought they would have their own language."
 
No! Now the discussion will turn to the grocer's apostrophe!!
Ah! The Guardian. As a (presumed) Commonwealth citizen, you are doubtless aware of its common sobriquet, “ The Grauniad”. There is certain irony to a journal famed for spelling indiscretions writing about greengrocers and their superfluous marks. Or is that marx, as in Harpo?

As to the US student's hopelessly ignorant remark, people in the U.K. speak RP, and hundreds of local variants of English, Welsh, Gaelic, Scottish, etc. The notion that any one dialect of English is more correct than others is patently false. Of course my spouse, a native BE (British English) speaker, frequently reminds me that my colonial dialect is not quite so good as what's spoken across the puddle.
IMG_2926.jpeg
 
Ah! The Guardian. As a (presumed) Commonwealth citizen, you are doubtless aware of its common sobriquet, “ The Grauniad”. There is certain irony to a journal famed for spelling indiscretions writing about greengrocers and their superfluous marks. Or is that marx, as in Harpo?

Ah yes, I believe it was Private Eye that coined that name. At least the Grauniad exhibits typical British self-deprecating humour, in that they're not afraid to make fun of themselves:


I had an interesting discussion with a USAian a while back regarding space shuttle names: Endeavour is spelled the British way as it was named after one of James Cook's ships. He visited our islands during his explorations.

I'm unrepentantly unilingual, while my spouse has English as her third language, although the second has largely atrophied through lack of use.

I'm tempted to hijack this thread into a discussion of mispronunciation. It appears that the rule of silent 'e' has been repealed in the US. Refer to this gem from Tom Lehrer:



My kids grew up watching Sesame Street, so I spent a lot of time correcting their pronunciation - including 'Z' as "zed" not "zee"!
 
From Cheers. Sam to Diane ‘don’t you have customers to deal with?’; Diane ‘you just ended a sentence with a preposition’; Sam ‘don’t you have customers to deal with, mullethead?’
 
A wise and thoughtful gent who used to post prolifically here sent me a link to a wapo article about the decline of the semicolon. Out of a lack of respect for the tacky publisher, my subscription has lapsed. I make no promises about the accessibility of the link.


I confess to using semicolons now and then. They serve a purpose; in fact, they serve a few.
 
I confess to using semicolons now and then. They serve a purpose; in fact, they serve a few.
I see what you did there.

Back in the day before all the graphical nonsense, when real Internet users had ASCII only, they were used to make a winking emoticon - ;-)
 
Last edited:
There's a new documentary out about a grammarian called "Rebel with a Clause." There was a spot about the film and its subject, Ellen Jovin, on Here & Now yesterday. For some years, she's been going to different cities and setting up a little "Grammar Table."

 

Online statistics

Members online
217
Guests online
2,353
Total visitors
2,570

Forum statistics

Threads
163,958
Messages
4,376,695
Members
10,168
Latest member
CTFan142


.
..
Top Bottom