Not sure if I’m going round the twist or there really are some truly bizarre exchanges on the Gasroom today. Time for cocoa and bed, methinks. No, forget the cocoa.
OI, my wife and I have spent years drumming into our kids to ask "please may I have". Don't see myself or the current encumbent to the title of Mrs EwanHoosaami as posh! Particularly me, if I'm posh then gawd help the majority.
Three items or less looks and sounds fine, and everyone knows what it means. What is the advantage of 'three items or fewer' other than following an arbitrary rule?
Strong disagree. If you know the literal meaning of "less" and "fewer" then "three items or less" is fingernails down a blackboard.
Edit: to expand on that, try using "fewer" where "less" should be, ie: "The match was much fewer enjoyable than I expected" - "three items or less" sounds just as wrong as that.
Know what you're saying, as I'm an absolute grammar and spelling pedant, but often write "less" and have to correct it to "fewer", before some bastard points it out.
But when you say following an "arbitrary rule", that's called the English language pal!
There's 100s of things that don't make sense at times.
Speaking of corporate language, we had a huge corporate client who would insist on using "drive the bus" for decision making, so "we want you to go ahead and drive the bus on these kind of things." Ugh.
On the subject of bus drivers, have you noticed how the uncertainty of death's arrival is often presented as "I could get hit by a bus tomorrow"? I always feel a little sad for bus drivers, as I can imagine them all thinking "Hey! We drive very carefully, you know."
It seems possible that the expression throw/push/shove someone under the bus comes from Britain in the late 1970s or early 1980s.[1][2] The earliest known usage of this phrase was 21 June 1982, when Julian Critchley of The Times (London) wrote "President Galtieri had pushed her under the bus which the gossips had said was the only means of her removal."[3]
Either way, we can all agree buses feature rather prominently in this colloquiallisms. I suppose "threw him under the tractor" does not have the same oomph.
"ten items or less" isn't actually wrong, nor is it wrong to say "it took less than two hours to get here" for example (interestingly I think everyone instinctively knows that, no-one would say "it took me fewer than two hours to get here").
Comments
Anyone who says "it is what it is" can get in the sea
Can we spitball your suggestions?
Not sure if I’m going round the twist or there really are some truly bizarre exchanges on the Gasroom today. Time for cocoa and bed, methinks. No, forget the cocoa.
Language can actually devolve instead of evolve.
Just as The Beatles and laptop-generated bleeps and bloops are both technically music, one demonstrates significantly more skill and creativity.
OI, my wife and I have spent years drumming into our kids to ask "please may I have". Don't see myself or the current encumbent to the title of Mrs EwanHoosaami as posh! Particularly me, if I'm posh then gawd help the majority.
Can I just flag that old chestnut ‘three items or less’
NO as all Gasrooomers know it’s ‘three items or fewer’
When asked at the fixture list breakfast about Tools going he said that his distribution was not as strong as other centre back options.
Ah right, I wondered why I couldn't find it! I agree 100%.
Three items or less looks and sounds fine, and everyone knows what it means. What is the advantage of 'three items or fewer' other than following an arbitrary rule?
Strong disagree. If you know the literal meaning of "less" and "fewer" then "three items or less" is fingernails down a blackboard.
Edit: to expand on that, try using "fewer" where "less" should be, ie: "The match was much fewer enjoyable than I expected" - "three items or less" sounds just as wrong as that.
It’s still wrong even if people understand it.
If you can count something, it’s fewer. if you can’t count it, it’s less.
I have less dislike for Colchester these days as we’ve played fewer matches in recent years.
I have fewer dislikes on the Gasroom since talking less about crisps.
Alexei Sayle once said: "Anyone attending a workshop, who isn't a light engineer, is a tw@t."
I had better spend less time on the gasroom or I'm going to have fewer friends then I already do.
Wow. Assume you have some office job and this isn't some masons esque cult?
Team huddle or the absolute loathsome "teamo" are the ones that get me wanting to punch.
But why?
But ‘three items or less’ doesn’t feel instinctively wrong in that way, or it wouldn’t be used as often.
Why are their rules to language?
Presumably so we can understand each other!
50+ posts of complete off season thread hijacking and less than 20 posts about the squad.
At least I’m not a Derby fan!
The driver of the train I was on the other week pronounced Beaconsfield 'Beak-onsfield'. Sent a shiver down my spine.
Know what you're saying, as I'm an absolute grammar and spelling pedant, but often write "less" and have to correct it to "fewer", before some bastard points it out.
But when you say following an "arbitrary rule", that's called the English language pal!
There's 100s of things that don't make sense at times.
You've either been exceptionally cute there, or very dim. Love that it's unclear.
Speaking of corporate language, we had a huge corporate client who would insist on using "drive the bus" for decision making, so "we want you to go ahead and drive the bus on these kind of things." Ugh.
On the subject of bus drivers, have you noticed how the uncertainty of death's arrival is often presented as "I could get hit by a bus tomorrow"? I always feel a little sad for bus drivers, as I can imagine them all thinking "Hey! We drive very carefully, you know."
@Shev my favourite Americanism is ‘threw him under the bus.’
Not sure that is an americanism?
Origins[edit]
It seems possible that the expression throw/push/shove someone under the bus comes from Britain in the late 1970s or early 1980s.[1][2] The earliest known usage of this phrase was 21 June 1982, when Julian Critchley of The Times (London) wrote "President Galtieri had pushed her under the bus which the gossips had said was the only means of her removal."[3]
Either way, we can all agree buses feature rather prominently in this colloquiallisms. I suppose "threw him under the tractor" does not have the same oomph.
"ten items or less" isn't actually wrong, nor is it wrong to say "it took less than two hours to get here" for example (interestingly I think everyone instinctively knows that, no-one would say "it took me fewer than two hours to get here").
As with all rules, there are exceptions.
Every days a school day!
Even the supermarket signs here say "10 items or less."
Many supermarket signs have apostrophes all over the place and countless typos, so not the place to look for exemplary English 😚
"ten items or less" is wrong
"less than two hours" isn't because expressions of time are treated like uncountable nouns