you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

What "experts" argue about that?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Literally Cambridge University in 2004 and recently again

    You will often hear less used with plural countable nouns in informal spoken situations, but traditionally it is not considered to be correct:

    We’ve got less pizzas than we need. There’s ten people and only eight pizzas. (traditionally correct usage: fewer pizzas)

    And a good blog post on the topic that actually fits to this situation

    He goes on to point out what less/fewer purists often ignore: that even countables may, in a given context, be considered as quantities rather than numbers. "For instance: 'Not many of these buildings are fewer than thirty years old.’ The thought here is not of individual years but of a period of time; therefore, less."

    Which is precisely what's happening here.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    This is the same "argument" that says "literally" can mean "figuratively".

    Not a particularly interesting argument to point put that common misusage can alter meaning.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Oh no, language is evolving! Best be angry.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments