7 ms·

Doing god's work. There used to be a sign posted in a parking lot near me that said "METER'S TAKES QUARTER'S ONLY" that used to drive me nuts. Someone (likely

Doing god's work. There used to be a sign posted in a parking lot near me that said "METER'S TAKES QUARTER'S ONLY" that used to drive me nuts. Someone (likely an APS agent) even typed up a list of the grammatical errors made on the sign, and taped it to the bottom of it: https://i.imgur.com/y5ENADH.jpg https://i.imgur.com/y5ENADH.jpg Now we just need an agency to safeguard us against misusing "less" when "fewer" would be correct (like Avril Incandenza in Infinite Jest).

jancsika 3y ago
> There used to be a sign posted in a parking lot near me that said "METER'S TAKES QUARTER'S ONLY" that used to drive me nuts. Right, a meter's coin slot takes a quarter's unit of value. :)
- cantSpellSober 3y ago
  > a meter's There were multiple meters, the intent was to pluralize "meter." Which makes "takes" incorrect (vs "take"). Maybe I should get out more.
  - dragonwriter 3y ago
    “Each meter’s..." Just a poor choice if which words to elide for space. :)
    - cantSpellSober 3y ago
      Perhaps there was a single meter which only took dimes? :)
dduugg 3y ago
> Now we just need an agency to safeguard us against misusing "less" when "fewer" would be correct Genuinely curious, is this for pedantry, or does the word choice matter? Since the opposite of both is "more", why is there a need for a distinction in one direction and not the other?
- cantSpellSober 3y ago
  Does "The tank is too full, fill it with fewer water next time" sound correct to you? "Fewer" typically refers to countables, "10 items or fewer." "Less" is used for things that don't have a plural form or are not countable, "there's less water in the pool this morning."
  - etothepii 3y ago
    The opposite of few maybe many, but many is not the opposite of fewer as the parent asks. Consider There are fewer people on the West Coast. There are many people on the East Coast. "Many," is not a comparator.
    - cantSpellSober 3y ago
      Fair enough, "additional" is an opposite of "fewer." I'll concede "more" is also. > The opposite of few maybe many "Maybe" is an adverb. Perhaps you meant "may be?" :)
      - mc32 3y ago
        Morether. Like further but with more.
        teddyh 3y ago
        Moreover.
- ghaff 3y ago
  Less instead of fewer sort of bugs me. But I've even seen less used in The Economist when I would have thought fewer was more correct so I think the answer is it's pedantry at this point. (To be clear, pedantry in the sense that less can be (usually?) substituted for fewer but not the other way around.)
- cbsmith 3y ago
  I read that as, "we've already committed atrocities with more, why wouldn't we do the same with less"? ;-)
kstrauser 3y ago
They didn't apostrophize TAKE'S? Barbarian's.
rvbissell 3y ago
I'm actually more upset that I can't find a readable closeup of the affixed corrections, than I am about the posted sign.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- cantSpellSober 3y ago
  Sadly taken at a time when phones with cameras were fairly new (with poor resolution), and taking photos in public spaces was largely considered uncouth (imagine!)
xkekjrktllss 3y ago
The owner (dictator) of the parking lot can do whatever he wants. His intelligence is evidenced in his wealth. That's how the free market works.
- autoexec 3y ago
  > His intelligence is evidenced in his wealth. That's how the free market works. Yet we have so so many stupid rich people and many many more brilliant poor people.
13of40 3y ago
Not apostrophe-related, but you just reminded me of a sign I kept seeing at my local hospital a while back. It said (and I took a picture of it, because it bugged me so much): NO PETS No Dogs or Pets Trained Guide Dogs or Service Animals Welcome No dogs or pets are allowed. When I read this, I imagine a guy with thick glasses and a white lab coat feeding these rules into a wall-sized 1950s computer and smoke coming out.
- kzrdude 3y ago
  There is something subtly nostalgic and pleasant with how that notice is written. (The old-fashioned style.)
- oxonia 3y ago
  Have you ever read ‘The Monkey Wrench’, by Gordon Dickson? https://archive.org/details/Astounding_v47n06_1951-08_MadMaxAU/page/n65/mode/2up?view=theater https://archive.org/details/Astounding_v47n06_1951-08_MadMax...
- mike_hock 3y ago
  No dog's or pet's allowed!
- firejake308 3y ago
  Feels like the same kind of language I use when trying to get ChatGPT to stop doing the thing. Just repeat my negative commands in various, slightly different wordings and hope one of them sticks
ShadowBanThis01 3y ago
In a time when a more and more people can't spell "too," it seems ambitious to school them on "less" vs. "fewer." But when I do try to explain why "less" and "fewer" are not interchangeable, I usually just say, "Do you want fewer syrup on your pancakes?" Then there's "transition" as a verb: Do you illumination a room when it's dark? We can go on and on, but we can't leave this one out: "would of." I always call that out in any comment forum. This just can't be let go. And now, Weird Al has some words: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Gv0H-vPoDc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Gv0H-vPoDc
- BalinKing 3y ago
  > But when I do try to explain why "less" and "fewer" are not interchangeable, I usually just say, "Do you want fewer syrup on your pancakes?" This feels like a strawman: As evidenced by the fact that everyone would agree your example sentence is ungrammatical, clearly "less" and "fewer" are not strictly interchangeable, either prescriptively or descriptively. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I don't see how your example is relevant to the cases where people do in fact use "less" to mean "fewer" (or vice versa).
  - ShadowBanThis01 3y ago
    First: That's not what a strawman is. Second: If the relevance isn't clear, I leave it to you to suggest a better example.
    - Skeime 3y ago
      The problem with the example is: Some has used less where you would have preferred fewer. You answer with an example, where fewer is used but only less is generally considered grammatical. (In other words, the replacement goes in the opposite direction.) But it is perfectly consistent to say that fewer is restricted to countable nouns while less can be used universally.
      - ShadowBanThis01 3y ago
professoretc 3y ago
There's a donut shop near me named Loi's Donuts. Not Lois's or Lois'. Yes, the owner's name is Lois, not Loi. I guess the apostrophe just means, Hey, there's an "S" coming up!

jancsika 3y ago

> There used to be a sign posted in a parking lot near me that said "METER'S TAKES QUARTER'S ONLY" that used to drive me nuts. Right, a meter's coin slot takes a quarter's unit of value. :)

cantSpellSober 3y ago
> a meter's There were multiple meters, the intent was to pluralize "meter." Which makes "takes" incorrect (vs "take"). Maybe I should get out more.
- dragonwriter 3y ago
  “Each meter’s..." Just a poor choice if which words to elide for space. :)
  - cantSpellSober 3y ago
    Perhaps there was a single meter which only took dimes? :)

dduugg 3y ago

> Now we just need an agency to safeguard us against misusing "less" when "fewer" would be correct Genuinely curious, is this for pedantry, or does the word choice matter? Since the opposite of both is "more", why is there a need for a distinction in one direction and not the other?

cantSpellSober 3y ago
Does "The tank is too full, fill it with fewer water next time" sound correct to you? "Fewer" typically refers to countables, "10 items or fewer." "Less" is used for things that don't have a plural form or are not countable, "there's less water in the pool this morning."
- etothepii 3y ago
  The opposite of few maybe many, but many is not the opposite of fewer as the parent asks. Consider There are fewer people on the West Coast. There are many people on the East Coast. "Many," is not a comparator.
  - cantSpellSober 3y ago
    Fair enough, "additional" is an opposite of "fewer." I'll concede "more" is also. > The opposite of few maybe many "Maybe" is an adverb. Perhaps you meant "may be?" :)
    - mc32 3y ago
      Morether. Like further but with more.
      - teddyh 3y ago
        Moreover.
ghaff 3y ago
Less instead of fewer sort of bugs me. But I've even seen less used in The Economist when I would have thought fewer was more correct so I think the answer is it's pedantry at this point. (To be clear, pedantry in the sense that less can be (usually?) substituted for fewer but not the other way around.)
cbsmith 3y ago
I read that as, "we've already committed atrocities with more, why wouldn't we do the same with less"? ;-)

kstrauser 3y ago

They didn't apostrophize TAKE'S? Barbarian's.

rvbissell 3y ago

I'm actually more upset that I can't find a readable closeup of the affixed corrections, than I am about the posted sign.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
cantSpellSober 3y ago
Sadly taken at a time when phones with cameras were fairly new (with poor resolution), and taking photos in public spaces was largely considered uncouth (imagine!)

xkekjrktllss 3y ago

The owner (dictator) of the parking lot can do whatever he wants. His intelligence is evidenced in his wealth. That's how the free market works.

autoexec 3y ago
> His intelligence is evidenced in his wealth. That's how the free market works. Yet we have so so many stupid rich people and many many more brilliant poor people.

13of40 3y ago

Not apostrophe-related, but you just reminded me of a sign I kept seeing at my local hospital a while back. It said (and I took a picture of it, because it bugged me so much): NO PETS No Dogs or Pets Trained Guide Dogs or Service Animals Welcome No dogs or pets are allowed. When I read this, I imagine a guy with thick glasses and a white lab coat feeding these rules into a wall-sized 1950s computer and smoke coming out.

kzrdude 3y ago
There is something subtly nostalgic and pleasant with how that notice is written. (The old-fashioned style.)
oxonia 3y ago
Have you ever read ‘The Monkey Wrench’, by Gordon Dickson? https://archive.org/details/Astounding_v47n06_1951-08_MadMaxAU/page/n65/mode/2up?view=theater https://archive.org/details/Astounding_v47n06_1951-08_MadMax...
mike_hock 3y ago
No dog's or pet's allowed!
firejake308 3y ago
Feels like the same kind of language I use when trying to get ChatGPT to stop doing the thing. Just repeat my negative commands in various, slightly different wordings and hope one of them sticks

ShadowBanThis01 3y ago

In a time when a more and more people can't spell "too," it seems ambitious to school them on "less" vs. "fewer." But when I do try to explain why "less" and "fewer" are not interchangeable, I usually just say, "Do you want fewer syrup on your pancakes?" Then there's "transition" as a verb: Do you illumination a room when it's dark? We can go on and on, but we can't leave this one out: "would of." I always call that out in any comment forum. This just can't be let go. And now, Weird Al has some words: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Gv0H-vPoDc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Gv0H-vPoDc

BalinKing 3y ago
> But when I do try to explain why "less" and "fewer" are not interchangeable, I usually just say, "Do you want fewer syrup on your pancakes?" This feels like a strawman: As evidenced by the fact that everyone would agree your example sentence is ungrammatical, clearly "less" and "fewer" are not strictly interchangeable, either prescriptively or descriptively. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I don't see how your example is relevant to the cases where people do in fact use "less" to mean "fewer" (or vice versa).
- ShadowBanThis01 3y ago
  First: That's not what a strawman is. Second: If the relevance isn't clear, I leave it to you to suggest a better example.
  - Skeime 3y ago
    The problem with the example is: Some has used less where you would have preferred fewer. You answer with an example, where fewer is used but only less is generally considered grammatical. (In other words, the replacement goes in the opposite direction.) But it is perfectly consistent to say that fewer is restricted to countable nouns while less can be used universally.
    - ShadowBanThis01 3y ago

professoretc 3y ago

There's a donut shop near me named Loi's Donuts. Not Lois's or Lois'. Yes, the owner's name is Lois, not Loi. I guess the apostrophe just means, Hey, there's an "S" coming up!