3 ms·

Non native speaker here, can you detail why the later is incorrect?

• cole-k 3y ago
  I'm guessing that "amount" is not quantized ("number" is). Let me be absolutely clear that most native speakers will not notice the distinction (even pedants like me missed this one). You'll also see people being pedantic about "less" versus "fewer," e.g. complaining about the "12 items or less" line being improper usage since items are quantized and therefore it should be "12 items or fewer."
  • rpdillon 3y ago
    Yes, less vs fewer always catches my ear. If you can count it, it's 'fewer', if not, it's 'less'.
• Alex63 3y ago
  It's probably mostly idiomatic. For native English-speakers it is more natural to use "number" when talking about things that are counted units that would be represented by integers (like marbles, or children, or features). "Amount" would be more appropriate when talking about something that you measure and represent with a floating point number (like butter, or gasoline/petrol, or risk). But an English-speaker will understand what you mean if you say "amount of features" instead of "number of features." And since we're being picky, it should be "the latter is correct", not "the later is correct."
• CharlesW 3y ago
  "Number" is correct when referring to countable items (like "features"), while "amount" is correct for non-countable things (like "water" or "time").
• whiddershins 3y ago
  Sorry, sibling responses still aren’t quite answering this correctly. Number is for countable distinct things, and amount is for a quantity of a single thing. (Often a substance) So a number of sticks, a number of socks, a number of people. A number of eggs. An amount of flour, sugar, water, money, time. A number of minutes equals an amount of time.
  • jaktet 3y ago
    > A number of minutes equals an amount of time This is short and succinct and sums it up pretty well