Cato's Grammar Grumble

[Karl Henning]

Please adverb.

[Jay F]

And at a Pepperidge Farm Bakery (a national chain) we saw this monstrosity:

"Sign Up for E-Mail Alerts:Please Print Legible!"   

Two impulses seized me: first, to pull out my pen and correct the monstrosity, and then to follow the request and print "LEGIBLE" on the paper!   

My wife pushed me out before I could cause an incident!   0:)

I edited a "less" that should have been a "fewer" on a sign in the elevator at my local supermarket. In response, the store replaced it with another copy of the sign. And yes, it still said "less," not "fewer."

I hate willful stupidity, though probably not as much as I hate "less" when it should be "fewer."

[Karl Henning]

Because stupidity.

[Jay F]

It.

[Cato]

I edited a "less" that should have been a "fewer" on a sign in the elevator at my local supermarket. In response, the store replaced it with another copy of the sign. And yes, it still said "less," not "fewer."

I hate willful stupidity, though probably not as much as I hate "less" when it should be "fewer."

Also something that chews on the old ears!

Because stupidity.

Sometimes the answer is "just because"...but not this time!    That headline writer needs to be horsewhipped!

But we are seeing the misuse or omission of prepositions ever more in our increasingly illiterate era, e.g. "I graduated high school," which mistake I find to be a reason for revoking the diploma!   

[Ten thumbs]

Sometimes usage is too general and cannot be changed. I've always been puzzled as to why accounts show:
Income
Less Expenses
Profit

rather than:
Income
Deduct Expenses
Profit

What if there were more expenses?
Income
More Expenses
Loss

[Cato]

Sometimes usage is too general and cannot be changed. I've always been puzzled as to why accounts show:
Income
Less Expenses
Profit

rather than:
Income
Deduct Expenses
Profit

What if there were more expenses?
Income
More Expenses
Loss

Very good points!

Speaking of "more," I heard a local politician say "more high" today on the news, rather than "higher."   

[Jay F]

Very good points!

Speaking of "more," I heard a local politician say "more high" today on the news, rather than "higher."   

I received an e-mail today that promised a look at "the most well-designed locales."

[The Six]

I edited a "less" that should have been a "fewer" on a sign in the elevator at my local supermarket. In response, the store replaced it with another copy of the sign. And yes, it still said "less," not "fewer."

An arbitrary and useless distinction.

Very good points!

Speaking of "more," I heard a local politician say "more high" today on the news, rather than "higher."   

Just shows what a mess English is. "More" can be easily added in front of any adjective.  If it were used all the time it would fit in nicely when using the opposite form (more high vs. less high).

[Cato]

Just shows what a mess English is. "More" can be easily added in front of any adjective.  If it were used all the time it would fit in nicely when using the opposite form (more high vs. less high).

Well, all languages are messes, more or less!   

The music of "more" in front of a monosyllable tends to be clumsier than the "-er" suffix.

e.g. This strawberry is more big than this one.  vs.  This strawberry is bigger than this one.

[Karl Henning]

I received an e-mail today that promised a look at "the most well-designed locales."

. . . the most well laid schemes o' Mice an' Men,
Gang aft agley . . . .

[mc ukrneal]

Sometimes usage is too general and cannot be changed. I've always been puzzled as to why accounts show:
Income
Less Expenses
Profit

rather than:
Income
Deduct Expenses
Profit

What if there were more expenses?
Income
More Expenses
Loss

The problem with 'deduct' is that it can have different meanings/shadings/usages and I think that could lead to (even more) misunderstandings.

[Jay F]

. . . the most well laid schemes o' Mice an' Men,
Gang aft agley . . . .

[Ten thumbs]

The problem with 'deduct' is that it can have different meanings/shadings/usages and I think that could lead to (even more) misunderstandings.

Maybe but it is better (more good?) than using less as a verb.

[bwv 1080]

Sometimes usage is too general and cannot be changed. I've always been puzzled as to why accounts show:
Income
Less Expenses
Profit

rather than:
Income
Deduct Expenses
Profit

What if there were more expenses?
Income
More Expenses
Loss

expenses and profit can be negative numbers

[Karl Henning]

I suppose, although normally negative profit is labeled loss 

[bwv 1080]

I suppose, although normally negative profit is labeled loss 

yes but to be pedantic doesn't labeling a negative number as a loss mean that it is a profit?

[Ten thumbs]

yes but to be pedantic doesn't labeling a negative number as a loss mean that it is a profit?

I think you'd cause a furore in the board room!

[Karl Henning]

Interesting question!  I suppose in most contexts which I visualize that negative number represents the loss, rather than being an arithmetic negative operand upon a negative word.

[jochanaan]

Very good points!

Speaking of "more," I heard a local politician say "more high" today on the news, rather than "higher."   

If he was from Colorado, "more high" might be an appropriate descriptor for him.