|
|
|
|
SUBSCRIBE The leading Copyright |
The Appropriate Use Of Less And Fewerby Diane Sandford
After
watching a particularly annoying television commercial for a new local
bank that promised less paperwork to set up an account, less
time to process transactions, and less lines at the counter, I
realized that many of us do not understand the appropriate use of less
and fewer. In the bank commercial, grammar fell victim to a
misguided attempt for consistency in sentence structure.
It’s
difficult to master the subtleties of English and, in particular, the fine
distinction between fewer and less. Even some well-respected
authors have had trouble with it.
When the late
Isaac Asimov, author of
more than 400 science and science fiction books,
was asked if he followed the fewer/less
rule, he told the editors of the
Harper Dictionary of Contemporary Usage
that he had never heard of it.
So
why is it important to commit this rule to memory when some notable writers
aren’t familiar with the rule? The answer is
simple: The grammatical misuse of less and fewer can be a
jarring distraction. Whether you’re writing a formal document or a simple
email, keep your reader focused on the message by avoiding grammatical stop
signs.
If you can substitute much as the modifier, then use less; if you can substitute many, use fewer.
Look at some examples: And
point of view can complicate the issue: Do I
have fewer or less children than you? If children is an amount
in my mind, then I should use less; if I mean children as a number of
distinct individuals, then I should use fewer.
Does Option A have
fewer or less advantages than Option B? If the advantages are
fewer in number, use fewer. If they are less in degree,
then use less.
Nevertheless, these sentences are risky. What was the author’s intent? If
the reader has the opposite interpretation in mind, then the author appears
to have made a mistake—or worse, doesn’t know the difference. Always look
for possible misinterpretations of your word choice and, if necessary,
recast the sentence to eliminate the ambiguity.
Who
creates such rules? This particular rule can be traced to Robert Baker, who
in 1770 suggested that “No Fewer than a Hundred appears to be not
only more elegant than No Less than a Hundred, but more strictly
proper.” Perhaps his remark had a significant influence on the grammar
mavens of his age. Perhaps others reached the same conclusion on their
own. Who knows? But Baker’s suggestion is now a strict rule in most
grammar books. Even Strunk and White’s
Elements of
Style includes an elementary form of the rule. If you’re
interested in a more extensive discussion of less and fewer,
you may wish to take a look at
Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of English Usage. Can
you trust your ear when deciding whether to use less and fewer?
Probably not. Unless you have good reason or expert justification,
follow the rule (and keep some reference sources nearby).
By the way,
I’ve decided I’ll stick with my old bank. It offers fewer services,
but is less grammatically offensive.
Do you have a grammar question? Comments? Suggestions?
Please let me know.
Copyright 2003 Diane Sandford. All rights reserved. First published on LLRX.com (TM) on August 31, 2003. [ Ed. corrected 8/11/2004 ]
Diane Sandford is the Director of Library Services for the
Washington, DC office of Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP. She has many years of editing experience, and has
co-authored a book with her husband, "Twenty Years Before the Blackboard", contributed a chapter to "Multiple Award Schedule
Contracting" by John W. Chierichella and Jonathan S. Aronie, and now writes a monthly grammar column for LLRX
|
||||||
Add to del.icio.us