4 ms·
> 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
by 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 agoI often see "up to 10 items" which sidesteps the issue neatly.
- inglor_cz 4y agoFrom 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 agoHannaford 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 agoLast 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.