Why are we losing the distinction between "less" and "fewer"?

Question

Why is it so difficult for some people - even apparently educated people - to work out when to use "less" and when "fewer", when they still seem to able to decide whether to ask "how much?" or "how many?", and the two are analogous?

Why would a respected company like Apple announce that it has had "less than 25 reports" of a virus on iPods?

Why would the BBC, which should be a custodian of our language, refer to there being "less birds" at a Kenyan flamingo lake, or (ironically in an article about writing standards) refer to "less than half of schools"?

Why did the HR director of Norwich Union say they needed "less people to take calls"?

Why do I have to shout "FEWER!!" at the radio almost every day?

For those who say "there's no difference" - there IS.

For instance, if a supermarket says it is putting "less additives" in its ready meals, then they are saying that the quantity of them is being reduced. If they say there are "fewer additives", then the number of different additives has been reduced, but the amount of the remaining ones may even have been increased.

Knowing the language is important to know what people really mean, and to make sure other people really understand you.

Answer 1

You are not alone. We ought to start a special group for people who shout 'FEWER!'

Answer 2

I agree with you. I get annoyed at this and also unnecessary use of the word 'myself'. People seem to use this as a superfluous qualifier. Two simple rules: if you're doing something on your own then use myself, e.g., I paint the house myself, or if you are using a reflexive verb, e.g., I dressed myself.

That and people who spell 'definitely' with an 'a'. They should be exterminated.

The simple fact is nobody cares anymore. Now that we can communicate so easily, over the phone, e-mail, etc. no-one puts any effort in to making their communications grammatically correct. The fact that Txt Spk (I think that's [inappropriately] short for Text Speak) is now a recognised dialect means it's downhill from here.

Answer 3

I wonder if there ever was the distinction that the grammarians would like there to be.

After all, it wouldn't be the first time. The grammarians of the 1700s made up all kinds of rules to tell us how to use English, but most of those rules never took because the phenomena that they were trying to prevent predated the rules by hundreds of years. English speakers simply continued doing what they had been doing: splitting infinitives, using double negatives, using two kinds of pronouns in coordinated noun phrases, and doing lots of other things that people have grammatically stigmatized. Therefore, it's quite possible that people have been doing what you're complaining about for hundreds of years, but that you just think it's a recent phenomenon because you, like many people nowadays, feel that somehow our language is "deteriorating" in comparison to how it was. That seems unlikely. Undoubtedly our language has changed since the time the rule was created, but the grammarians would have seen no need to create the rule unless they already noticed something in their language that they felt needed correcting. That means that, assuming the less/fewer rule was made in the 1700s like most of our grammar rules, the phenomenon you've noticed has existed in English at least since before then. And English speakers were getting along just fine before then without the rule.

I can actually question the less/fewer phenomenon that you are addressing here on a whole other level in addition to the historical one because this is talking about the count/noncount distinction in English nouns. In other words, many grammars of English claim that you can separate English nouns into two categories, "count" and "noncount", and that each noun belongs to one of these categories. Supposedly, things that are discrete and countable are count nouns, and things that don't come in discrete units are noncount nouns. So something like "book" is considered count, and something like "coffee" is considered noncount. "Less" is supposed to be the quantifier that goes with noncount nouns, and "fewer" is supposed to be the quantifier that goes with count nouns.

However, as linguistics progresses, many have realized that the count/noncount distinction is problematic at best. People might be able to say that sentences like
She has a lot of hair. (noncount)
She has many hairs. (count)
are some sort of exception, but I feel that this is too widespread to call it an exception, because I have been able to successfully come up with both count and noncount uses for just about any noun I can think of. I count myself among a group of interested people who are starting to see that the traditional count/noncount distinction is not an appropriate way of describing people's actual language behavior, and that we need a new system for conceiving of these differences in the use of nouns. For example, I recently heard an excellent talk by Kathrin Koslicki, a philosopher, whose investigations have led her to propose that there are actually three types of noun use: singular, plural, and noncount (while singular and plural were previously considered to be manifestations of count nouns before).

If it turns out that the count/noncount distinction is not the best way to describe how our language works, a less/fewer rule that is based on this distinction must not be logical either.

In summary, I suspect that the use of "less" in the situations you've described is well established in the history of English, not just a phenomenon that's arisen recently. And I'm not sure that the rule about how we are supposed to use "less" and "fewer" is based on good linguistics.

And, I'm sorry, but it still strikes me strange when I read the sign at the grocery store that says "13 items or fewer".

Answer 4

I know this isn't the answer you want to hear, but I will tell you anyway...

The language evolves. This has always happened. When a distinction, like the one you are currently concerned about, does not carry a difference in meaning --as perceived by the speaker--, people will stop using them "correctly".

This change is inevitable. Screaming at the inevitable will only make you unhappy. Accept that people aren't ever going to get it right, and move on, or you will ruin your vocal cords, because they aren't going to change.

Less people every day understand the difference!

Answer 5

i think of human beings have been pushed by using sexuality and choose in the time of time. Its quite no distinctive right this moment. We basically are actually and returned much less hypocritical approximately it. i think of lust may well be a great component to love besides the certainty that I do think of you have lust with out love. i think of maximum persons comprehend this. basically study some historic or medieval background from the situations whilst human beings have been supposedly extra pious. In medieval England they even had a artwork around to marriage the place possible desire to state the reason to marry sooner or later and function sexual relatives. This many times did no longer pan out incredibly. in certainty, between the claims Richard the III made replaced into that the heirs of his brother have been illegitimate because of the fact the deceased King had a woman buddy he made a sort of with in the previous. Such stuff replaced into rampant by using background. Even in the OT we see it in the story of detrimental Hagar or extra so Bathsheba. i think of we are doing extra effective with reference to marrying for romance over family contributors fortune contracts many times made with out the permission of the female in contact which has been somewhat subject-loose in the previous. God seems additionally in case you study the Bible to set a great variety of conditional limits for loving human beings.

Answer 6

My daughter refers to me as the grammar police. ;-)

"Less" and "fewer" is just the beginning.

The fact that the word "indexes" is actually in the dictionary now really gets to me. I mean, how hard is it to remember to say "indeces?"

I agree with the above poster concerning "myself." I cringe when I hear someone say, "If you have any questions, please contact John or myself." ARGH!

The big error that really turns my face red, though, is ending the sentence with "at." I work with degreed engineers, accountants, chemists, etc. I heard one state recently, "We need to meet to find out where everyone is at." I couldn't believe it!

So, I am right up there with you on your soap box. I believe that you're going to have to make room for many others, though.

Answer 7

Because thanks to the liberals who run this country it is seen as uncool to speak properly. There is the feeling that as long as you can make yourself understood good English does not really matter, when in fact the better a vocabulary a person has the more they are able to express themselves. It is for this reason that we find more and more bad language in society, and very likely even why there is more violence - the problem is that serious.

Answer 8

This is one of my pet peeves, especially at the grocery store. The sign above the express line says 10 items or less. AAARRRGGGHH!

Answer 9

I'm with you, chum. I suppose it's shorter, and people are lazy... Even fancy supermarkets like M & S have a 'Ten items or less' line (but not Waitrose). Drives me nuts. But don't give in!!!

Answer 10

I share your pain.

Try living in Washington D.C.

I actually heard a local politician utter the phrase "approximately almost" the other day.


*sigh*