You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
66 points

It just feels so petty. Not a single person reading “less cops” was confused by its meaning. I get fighting against misuse of your/you’re, its/it’s, etc. because they can make things harder to read. Fewer and less, though, have the exact same underlying meaning (a reduction).

permalink
report
parent
reply
38 points

Your write. Choose you’re battle wisely

permalink
report
parent
reply
27 points

I’m something of a grammar Nazi, but just like I support letting “whom” die, “less” and “fewer” might as well just be interchangeable. There’s no loss of language utility in doing so, unlike “literally”'s tragic demise.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Ah don’t let whom die. It’s a really good lesson in subject vs object.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

Literally has been used for emphasis, hyperbole, and metaphor since at least the late 18th century.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I’m aware, but it was done so sparingly, as opposed to being used to mean its opposite far more than its original meaning nowadays.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I thought it meant cops should lose weight so there’s less of them overall.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Can we at least stop allowing people to use ‘of’ instead of ‘have’?

It doesn’t make any sense and I need to read the sentence twice to understand what they’re saying.

permalink
report
parent
reply