• nova@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        64
        ·
        5 months ago

        It just feels so petty. Not a single person reading “less cops” was confused by its meaning. I get fighting against misuse of your/you’re, its/it’s, etc. because they can make things harder to read. Fewer and less, though, have the exact same underlying meaning (a reduction).

        • samus12345@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          27
          ·
          5 months ago

          I’m something of a grammar Nazi, but just like I support letting “whom” die, “less” and “fewer” might as well just be interchangeable. There’s no loss of language utility in doing so, unlike “literally”'s tragic demise.

            • samus12345@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              4 months ago

              I’m aware, but it was done so sparingly, as opposed to being used to mean its opposite far more than its original meaning nowadays.

              • Jiggle_Physics@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                4 months ago

                That is how language works. It starts off small, then it catches on over time, and after a long time has passed, it either gets filtered out, or it becomes commonly used. The case for literally being used, for reasons other than its original one, started a couple hundred years ago. Today it is super commonly used that way, as it didn’t get abandoned. You are mad at the nature of the beast.

        • Rinox@feddit.it
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          Can we at least stop allowing people to use ‘of’ instead of ‘have’?

          It doesn’t make any sense and I need to read the sentence twice to understand what they’re saying.

      • ryven@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        4 months ago

        This one isn’t even real. “Fewer” can only refer to countable things, but “less” can refer to both countable and uncountable things, and has been used that way for hundreds of years. It has never been wrong to say “less.”

      • tacosanonymous@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        4 months ago

        I’m a grammar loving curmudgeon. Even I check myself more often than not after I realized the kind of classist tones that come through when arguing against lexicon.

      • Dagnet@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        Me trying to get people to say they “are doing well” not “doing good” when asked “how are you doing?”

      • kspatlas@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        Language prescriptivism is a useless endeavour, let the language evolve as it wants, I personally don’t mind the use of less in this situation

    • casmael@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      I actually kind of disagree in this context. Less is sharper and more readable while conveying the same meaning. The grammar books might say it’s technically incorrect, but I think it was the right word to use here.

    • Underwaterbob@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      4 months ago

      Ahh, I went on a rant about this, and someone already did it for me much more concisely.

      • MisshapenDeviate@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        https://www.merriam-webster.com/grammar/fewer-vs-less

        Essentially, fewer is normally used for discrete numbers of things (e.g. “fewer apples”, “fewer boats”, or “fewer cops”) while less is used for amounts (e.g. “less water”, “less sand”, or “less money”).

        As noted in the above link, there are exceptions. However, the exceptions listed are all with “than” or “or” added. Specifically, it’s pointing put that while “fewer items” is correct, “3 items or less” is also considered correct.

        In the case of the sign, it is referring to the specific number of officers in the city, so it should use “fewer”. Does it matter? No, not really. Why did I bother saying anything? I got a chance to rep grammar and quote Stannis Baratheon at the same time.