5 ms·
> 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
by 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 agoFirst: 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 agoThe 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"Consistent" with what?
- Skeime 3y agoConsistent with how language works. Words have partial overlaps and “subset” relations all the time. In the case of less and fewer, there isn’t even really a problem, because there are very few cases where using less when fewer would (also) be appropriate leads to confusion. (Otherwise the same distinction would surely also exist for more.) I’m afraid, the only real “problem” is that for people who are accustomed to the distinction, using the “wrong” one gives a nails-on-chalkboard sensation.
- tuatoru 3y agoWith people, for instance? I commonly hear "less people" these days. It's weird to me to think of people as being like water or sand.