#94860
02/07/2003 12:04 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 161
member
|
|
member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 161 |
from todays AWAD letter:
"The sorts of people who feel that special blend of
wincing despair and sneering superiority when they see EXPRESS LANE - 10 ITEMS OR LESS..."
well, I think you are this special people so can you explain why do you feel despair seeing the sign? what's wrong with "10 or less"?
|
|
|
#94861
02/07/2003 12:11 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,156
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,156 |
The grammar gurus would tell you that "less" is reserved for things you can't enumerate, like "sugar" or "sand" or "wind", and you should use "fewer" if you can reasonably count the things you're talking about. Since a number is given expressly (10), it really should be "10 items or fewer" but most people don't worry too much about that distinction. I get the feeling that by "popular vote" this particular rule will eventually fade away. Edit: Should I have used "less" or "fewer" quotation marks in the above post? 
|
|
|
#94862
02/07/2003 1:38 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803 |
The grammar gurus
I doubt that any of these grammar gurus can tell you why we would need two words for comparison of countable (fewer) and measurable (less) quantities if the one being spoken of is of a smaller value than the other but manage to scrape by quite well with only one if the one is of a greater value (more).
|
|
|
#94863
02/07/2003 1:57 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,156
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,156 |
manage to scrape by quite well with only one if the one is of a greater value (more).
Yes, after I posted that, I pondered that problem, too. But I'd already self-replied once today so I thought I'd let it go.
|
|
|
#94864
02/07/2003 2:07 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 320
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 320 |
It's one of those distinctions I just have to shrug off. Ten items or less doesn't bother me, but I'd have a problem with "The guy in front of me has less items than I do." But still, more is always more.
|
|
|
#94865
02/07/2003 5:10 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,511
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,511 |
But still, more is always more.
... unless you're Mies van der Rohe.
|
|
|
#94866
02/07/2003 7:27 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 320
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 320 |
|
|
|
#94867
02/07/2003 7:28 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 320
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 320 |
|
|
|
#94868
02/07/2003 7:29 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,511
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,511 |
Somebody hadda say it, slithy.
|
|
|
#94869
02/09/2003 5:05 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 618
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 618 |
...only one if the one is of a greater value (more).
Surely there's manyer than that.
|
|
|
#94870
02/10/2003 10:00 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 833
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 833 |
It's one of those distinctions I just have to shrug off.
I dunno....It still bugs me. But then, I'm keen on precision in language and grammar (though I will confess to being a bit of a baddie when it comes to splitting infinitives). "Due to" when people mean "owing to" or "because of" drives me absolutely bananas!
|
|
|
#94871
02/10/2003 10:41 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803 |
Due to/owing to
Due, owing, what's the difference?
|
|
|
#94872
02/10/2003 11:21 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858 |
Dear MG: my dictionary says:
due to
1 caused by; resulting from !an omission due to oversight"
2 [Colloq.] because of: widely so used despite objections by some grammarians !the name was omitted due to oversight"
|
|
|
#94873
02/11/2003 12:25 AM
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803 |
OK, what's the difference between caused by and because of?
And note: I did not ask above what the difference was between due to and owing to, I asked what the difference was between due and owing.
|
|
|
#94874
02/11/2003 2:16 AM
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542 |
I think this speaks to the point, Faldage..
Due to has been widely used for many years as a compound preposition like owing to, but some critics have insisted that due should be used only as an adjective. According to this view, it is incorrect to say The concert was canceled due to the rain but acceptable to say The cancellation of the concert was due to the rain, where due continues to function as an adjective modifying cancellation. This seems a fine point, however, and since due to is widely used and understood, there seems little reason to avoid using it as a preposition. [emPHAsis mine]
The American Heritage® Book of English Usage. Copyright © 1996 by Houghton Mifflin Company
|
|
|
#94875
02/11/2003 2:22 AM
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542 |
and while I'm there..
The traditional rule says that you should use fewer for things that can be counted (fewer than four players) but less with mass terms for things of measurable extent (less paper, less than a gallon of paint). But people use less in certain constructions where fewer would occur if the rule were being followed. You can use less than before a plural noun that denotes a measure of time, amount, or distance: less than three weeks, less than $400, less than 50 miles. You can sometimes use less with plural nouns in the expressions no less than and or less. Thus you can say No less than 30 of his colleagues signed the letter and Give your reasons in 25 words or less.
The American Heritage® Book of English Usage. Copyright © 1996 by Houghton Mifflin Company
|
|
|
#94876
02/11/2003 10:54 AM
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 679
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 679 |
what's wrong with "10 or less"?
Nothing. Apart from the obvious grammatical error it's just an abbrevaition of "10 items or less than 10 items". But that's just stupid.
Now, what's wrong with "Special today!"?????
|
|
|
#94877
02/11/2003 11:38 AM
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803 |
You can use less than before a plural noun that denotes a measure of time, amount, or distance: less than three weeks, less than $400, less than 50 miles.
Well, duh! Even though it appears to be counting, it is, in fact, measuring and less is the "proper" word to use in those circumstances. You could hardly expect one to say, "Buffalo is expecting one inch or fewer of snow today."
|
|
|
#94878
02/11/2003 11:53 AM
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 1,055
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 1,055 |
> What's wrong with "10 or less"?
Doesn't touch me at all (since the medication).
>Special today? ...
I had a special yesterday, but will tomorrow turn out special too?
Speaking of signs, The Wall Street Institute has a sign up here that reads:
'Learn English Free!'
..but from who, huh.. [g]
Just 'member: DRIVE SLOW!
|
|
|
#94879
02/11/2003 6:43 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 833
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 833 |
Urgh.
Harking back to due to/owing to:
I would say, "The concert was due to start at 8 pm, but owing to one performer's illness, it began late."
I wouldn't say, "The concert was due to start at 8 pm, but due to one performer's illness, it began late."
I would say, "The Weather Network claims a snowstorm is due to begin this evening." (if I wanted to phrase it that way - in reality I'd probably say, "The Weather Network says we'll have a snowstorm tonight.")
I would NOT say, "Due to climactic conditions, we're supposed to get a snowstorm this evening."
"Due" is an indication of something forthcoming; not an indicator of reason.
It's like "light years" - another usage that is often mangled these days. Light years measure distance, not time. You cannot ACCURATELY say, even in jest, "He's light years older than I am." You CAN say, "Your modification of this plan is light years from my original idea."
And it's not, "He's older than me." It's, "He's older than I [am]."
ron pedantic [/rant]
|
|
|
#94880
02/12/2003 3:00 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 161
member
|
|
member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 161 |
thanks, everybody. very enlightening, keep going
|
|
|
#94881
02/12/2003 4:43 PM
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 679
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 679 |
There are 10 types of people in this world. Those who understand binary, and those who don't.
|
|
|
#94882
02/12/2003 5:54 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803 |
No, no, Rube. There's *three kinds of people; those that count and those that don't count.
|
|
|
#94883
02/12/2003 9:29 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 11,066 Likes: 2
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 11,066 Likes: 2 |
There are ten types of people in this world. Those who understand binary, and those who don't.
Yes, but. We write a one and a zero in binary, which looks like 10, but it's still "two," meaning successor-of-one, no matter what base we use. Binary writes "1, 10, 11, 100," but those numerals still mean "one, two, three, four".
|
|
|
#94884
02/12/2003 9:35 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542 |
wofa, sure and it should have been written There are 10 types of people in this world. Those who understand binary, and those who don't.
-ron o.
|
|
|
#94885
02/13/2003 3:23 AM
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613 |
There are 10 types of people in this world. Those who understand binary, and those who don't.
NOW I get it! :-)
|
|
|
#94886
02/13/2003 8:50 AM
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 679
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 679 |
Damn. I shouldn't have tried to write it so fast. I've edited it above to make more sense.
|
|
|
#94887
02/13/2003 10:32 AM
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,210
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,210 |
no, now you've edited it and made it more confusing! 
formerly known as etaoin...
|
|
|
#94888
02/13/2003 11:17 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,819
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,819 |
In reply to:
I would NOT say, "Due to climactic conditions, we're supposed to get a snowstorm this evening."
I hope you wouldn't, although it would be interesting to see (or experience) a climax that altered the weather.
|
|
|
#94889
02/13/2003 1:43 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613 |
it would be interesting to see (or experience) a climax that altered the weather. 
|
|
|
#94890
02/13/2003 1:55 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,210
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,210 |
aw, we all've had a few that made the earth move...
formerly known as etaoin...
|
|
|
#94891
02/13/2003 2:42 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613 |
|
|
|
#94892
02/13/2003 3:35 PM
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 679
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 679 |
I hope you wouldn't, although it would be interesting to see (or experience) a climax that altered the weather.
Gives a whole new meaning to a wet and warm front.
|
|
|
#94893
02/13/2003 4:06 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613 |
Ohmigawd--I am dying, you-all! Geez! Don't you dare mention this if I do get to meet you face-to-face!
|
|
|
#94894
02/13/2003 6:25 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,819
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,819 |
|
|
|
#94895
02/13/2003 6:29 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,819
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,819 |
Due to anticlimactic conditions, a cold front is moving in.
|
|
|
#94896
02/14/2003 1:01 AM
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613 |
Are you callin' me frigid, Bub?!?
|
|
|
#94897
02/14/2003 10:50 AM
|
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 2,636
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 2,636 |
Ahhhhh! For a minute there, I thought Jackie was reverting to her old gutter police action. I guess we corrupted her better than we thought  C'mon back to the gutter, luv. It's warmer here. <EG>
|
|
|
#94898
02/15/2003 6:43 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 11,066 Likes: 2
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 11,066 Likes: 2 |
But seriously, folks. There is some hope after all. I just saw in my local Stop-and-Shop that the sign reads "Express Lane - 12 items or fewer"
|
|
|
#94899
02/15/2003 8:06 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,661
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,661 |
Following binary *style sequences 12 would actually® *be "6" in... would it be called "trinary"?
(e.g. 000=1, 001=2, 002=3, 010=4, 011=5, 012=6, 020=7, 022=8, 100=9, 101...)
|
|
|
|
|
