3 ms·
> You see that the older applicants consistently receive less responses. Less responses? Do you mean physically smaller responses, on little note-cards instead
by lutusp 13y ago
> You see that the older applicants consistently receive less responses.
Less responses? Do you mean physically smaller responses, on little note-cards instead of letter stock? Or did you perhaps mean fewer responses?
http://afterdeadline.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/01/fewer-vs-less/ http://afterdeadline.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/01/fewer-vs-l...
- DanBC 13y agoPrescriptivists demand a difference between less and fewer. Those poor fools have lost! Thanks for the link though. HN has an international audience and people who speak English as a second language need to know that some people see a difference between less and fewer. (I have upvoted your comment in an effort to cancel out the downvote that someone gave you.)
- lutusp 13y ago> Prescriptivists demand a difference between less and fewer. Those poor fools have lost! Yes, I agree it's a lost battle. I also don't generally prescribe. But I make an exception for this and a handful of other usages, with the understanding that I can't tell people they're wrong -- which, if you noticed, I didn't do. I instead give both definitions and invite the recipient to choose between them. My other recent pet peeve are the many people who say "reign in" when they mean "rein in". Reigning is what a monarch does to a kingdom, reining is what a cowboy does to a horse. But these are annoyances, not a matter of right versus wrong.
- mikeash 13y agoI love to see usage explained and corrected, but doing to with sarcasm and disrespect achieves the opposite of what you presumably intend.
- lutusp 13y ago> ... but doing to with sarcasm and disrespect ... A little sarcasm, but no disrespect.