4 ms·

As a descriptivist[1] I’m sure you understand that languages evolve. Just as the learn/teach distinction was made up by grammarians, so was the least/fewest one

As a descriptivist[1] I’m sure you understand that languages evolve. Just as the learn/teach distinction was made up by grammarians, so was the least/fewest one. Likewise it stuck. Most attempts at linguistic innovation fail. This one didn’t. [1] https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/descriptivist https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/descript...

ryandrake 4y ago
While language can evolve, "Language Evolves" is very often just used as a blanket excuse for incorrect usage. Both can be true.
shawabawa3 4y ago
> Most attempts at linguistic innovation fail. This one didn’t. Didn't it? I've never seen a "10 items or fewer" lane at a supermarket but I sure see "10 items or less" In terms of language I see and read daily I see less occurrences of fewer than less (In London, UK. I'm sure it varies slightly by region)
- Dyac 4y ago
  I often see "up to 10 items" which sidesteps the issue neatly.
- inglor_cz 4y ago
  From the point of view of a foreigner who attempts to speak correct English, this is a beautiful nightmare. Even the natives cannot agree among themselves. Neverthefewer (/s), I try to use fewer when the items are obviously countable. But less seems to have a natural advantage of having one syllable only; people usually try to express their point as quickly as possible, and -1 syllable is better.
- david422 4y ago
  Hannaford supermarkets in New England has "10 items or fewer". At first it seems strange since "10 items or less" is so common.
- aabhay 4y ago
  > I see fewer occurrences of fewer than less Fixed that for you
- iso1631 4y ago
  Last time I was in a supermarket (Tesco near blackpool) I saw a sign for "5 items or fewer". I don't remember seeing an "or less" sign for a long time.
leoedin 4y ago
Do you have any information on the learn/teach distinction you mention? I couldn't find anything by googling - although those are very common words. Those two words seem very distinct in my mind, so it would be interesting to learn that it didn't used to be the case.
- k1t 4y ago
  Someone just needs to learn you some better Google skills. https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/14778/is-learn-the-new-teach https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/14778/is-learn-t... https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/teach-em-or-learn-em https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/teach-em-or-le...
- lioeters 4y ago
  In some languages, "learn" and "teach" are the same word. For example in Czech, the former is in reflexive form, to "teach oneself". učit se (learn) and učit (teach) And in other languages, the meaning of "teach" can be expressed using the word for "learn", by adding the learner as indirect/transitive object: to learn someone how to play the piano But I don't know what the parent comment meant by this: > the learn/teach distinction was made up by grammarians That distinction exists in some languages, and not in others. Perhaps they mean that this difference didn't used to exist in English, but in later years grammarians popularized it..? Looking up the etymology of "learn", I found the answer. > Transitive use (He learned me (how) to read), now considered vulgar (except in reflexive expressions, I learn English), was acceptable from c. 1200 until early 19c.

ryandrake 4y ago

While language can evolve, "Language Evolves" is very often just used as a blanket excuse for incorrect usage. Both can be true.

shawabawa3 4y ago

> Most attempts at linguistic innovation fail. This one didn’t. Didn't it? I've never seen a "10 items or fewer" lane at a supermarket but I sure see "10 items or less" In terms of language I see and read daily I see less occurrences of fewer than less (In London, UK. I'm sure it varies slightly by region)

Dyac 4y ago
I often see "up to 10 items" which sidesteps the issue neatly.
inglor_cz 4y ago
From the point of view of a foreigner who attempts to speak correct English, this is a beautiful nightmare. Even the natives cannot agree among themselves. Neverthefewer (/s), I try to use fewer when the items are obviously countable. But less seems to have a natural advantage of having one syllable only; people usually try to express their point as quickly as possible, and -1 syllable is better.
david422 4y ago
Hannaford supermarkets in New England has "10 items or fewer". At first it seems strange since "10 items or less" is so common.
aabhay 4y ago
> I see fewer occurrences of fewer than less Fixed that for you
iso1631 4y ago
Last time I was in a supermarket (Tesco near blackpool) I saw a sign for "5 items or fewer". I don't remember seeing an "or less" sign for a long time.

leoedin 4y ago

Do you have any information on the learn/teach distinction you mention? I couldn't find anything by googling - although those are very common words. Those two words seem very distinct in my mind, so it would be interesting to learn that it didn't used to be the case.

k1t 4y ago
Someone just needs to learn you some better Google skills. https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/14778/is-learn-the-new-teach https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/14778/is-learn-t... https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/teach-em-or-learn-em https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/teach-em-or-le...
lioeters 4y ago
In some languages, "learn" and "teach" are the same word. For example in Czech, the former is in reflexive form, to "teach oneself". učit se (learn) and učit (teach) And in other languages, the meaning of "teach" can be expressed using the word for "learn", by adding the learner as indirect/transitive object: to learn someone how to play the piano But I don't know what the parent comment meant by this: > the learn/teach distinction was made up by grammarians That distinction exists in some languages, and not in others. Perhaps they mean that this difference didn't used to exist in English, but in later years grammarians popularized it..? Looking up the etymology of "learn", I found the answer. > Transitive use (He learned me (how) to read), now considered vulgar (except in reflexive expressions, I learn English), was acceptable from c. 1200 until early 19c.