 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / January 2004"More Than" versus 'Less Than"
Hi All, How do you interpret the meaning of "more than" and "less than"? If someone says "more than 30", does it mean a value greater than 30 (30 excluded) or a value greater than 30 (30 included)? If someone says "less than 30", does it mean a value smaller than 30 (30 excluded)? Do you personally think that there is a cultural difference in the perception of "more than" and "less than" across different native language speakers? Thanks in advance for your input > Hi All, > > How do you interpret the meaning of "more than" and "less than"? If > someone says "more than 30", does it mean a value greater than 30 (30 > excluded) or a value greater than 30 (30 included)? If someone says > "less than 30", does it mean a value smaller than 30 (30 excluded)? The usual assumption is that if one number is more than another, it is not the same as the other. That's what it means to be more. When you want to specify the "inclusive" idea, there are various ways to say it, such as "30 or more" "30 and above," "30 and up," "greater than or equal to," and so on. > Do you personally think that there is a cultural difference in the > perception of "more than" and "less than" across different native > language speakers? I've never noticed any regional difference, but I suppose it's possible. You're getting me curious as to how this question arose.  SignatureBest -- Donna Richoux In our last episode, <4a214d7c.0401270722.15a27120@posting.google.com>, the lovely and talented Celery broadcast on alt.usage.english: > Hi All, > How do you interpret the meaning of "more than" and "less than"? If > someone says "more than 30", does it mean a value greater than 30 (30 > excluded) or a value greater than 30 (30 included)? "More than 30" does not include 30. IF you wish to include 30 the expression would be "at least 30" or "no less than 30." > If someone says "less than 30", does it mean a value smaller than > 30 (30 excluded)? Yes. Otherwise it would be "at most 30" or "no more than 30." > Do you personally think that there is a cultural difference in the > perception of "more than" and "less than" across different native > language speakers? I doubt it. I expect you would get much the same answer from any native speaker. I cannot imagine that anyone would say "yes" to "Is 30 more than 30?" Whether everyone would be careful to be so precise in every communication is another issue. > Thanks in advance for your input SignatureLars Eighner -finger for geek code- eighner@io.com http://www.io.com/~eighner/ War on Terrorism: Treat Readers like Mushrooms "If the story needs rewriting to play down the civilian casualties, DO IT." -Memo, _Panama City_ (FL) _News Herald_ > I doubt it. I expect you would get much the same answer from any > native speaker. I cannot imagine that anyone would say "yes" to "Is > 30 more than 30?" Whether everyone would be careful to be so precise > in every communication is another issue. The one that still strikes me as strange is that in the past several years, at least, for sportscasters, "within" has become inclusive in just this way. "The team pulled to within ten points of the other team" usually means that they now trailed by exactly ten points. I'm not sure when this started. SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |If the human brain were so simple 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |That we could understand it, Palo Alto, CA 94304 |We would be so simple |That we couldn't. kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ >Hi All, > >How do you interpret the meaning of "more than" and "less than"? ... I see your question has been answered, but it prompts an observation: The frequency (as observed while Googling the 'net) of "more then", "less then" etc is increasing. I suspect this is another example of what happens when people learn language by listening, and don't subsequently consolidate their knowledge by reading (correctly-written material, of course). SignatureJohn W Hall <wweexxsseessssaa@telus.net> Cochrane, Alberta, Canada. "Helping People Prosper in the Information Age" > The frequency (as observed while Googling the 'net) of "more then", > "less then" etc is increasing. I am curious how you can show this. It is easy enough to Google for "more then". But how can you show that it used to be less in the past, say, five years ago? Ten, twenty, fifty years ago? I suppose if you *could* find those numbers from five years ago, the values for "more than" could serve as a control. Otherwise, the misspelling might have gone up simply because Net use has gone up. Then there's the valid hits like "It cost more, then" that would have to be screened out. If you know some way of doing this, it would be most interesting. > I suspect this is another example of what happens when people learn > language by listening, and don't subsequently consolidate their > knowledge by reading (correctly-written material, of course). Every native speaker learns their language by listening, of course. SignatureBest -- Donna Richoux >> The frequency (as observed while Googling the 'net) of "more then", >> "less then" etc is increasing. > >I am curious how you can show this. It is easy enough to Google for >"more then". But how can you show that it used to be less in the past, >say, five years ago? Ten, twenty, fifty years ago? I can't show it, Donna, it's a gut feel. Perhaps I'm just noticing it more, now that I'm sensitised >... >> I suspect this is another example of what happens when people learn >> language by listening, and don't subsequently consolidate their >> knowledge by reading (correctly-written material, of course). > >Every native speaker learns their language by listening, of course. Agreed, of course, but we often don't learn correctly by merely listening/hearing. I grew up thinking that the (Brit) garbage receptacle was a "dus pin", it became a "dust bin" only when I began reading. Likewise (I suspect) that people hearing "is bin" won't realise that the words are "really" (whatever that means) "has been", or that "rider" (in the USA) may be someone that writes, or someone that rides - only the context gives a clue. BTW this posting should not be counted as one of my annual two-peeves quota. SignatureJohn W Hall <wweexxsseessssaa@telus.net> Cochrane, Alberta, Canada. "Helping People Prosper in the Information Age" >Every native speaker learns their language by listening, of course. Except for those hard of hearing. (the hearing impaired?). > >Every native speaker learns their language by listening, of course. > > Except for those hard of hearing. (the hearing impaired?). Well, that's whatcha might call a whole nuther subject. But I'll agree that those whose native language is one of the various sign languages, do not learn it by listening. SignatureBest -- Donna Richoux >Well, that's whatcha might call a whole nuther subject. But I'll agree >that those whose native language is one of the various sign languages, >do not learn it by listening. You're right, sign language is "a whole nuther subject". Like, is it a native language? Definitely no native tongue. I believe that "sign language" is an artificial language, like esperanto, created to facilitate communication among certain people. > >Well, that's whatcha might call a whole nuther subject. But I'll > >agree that those whose native language is one of the various sign [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > "sign language" is an artificial language, like esperanto, created > to facilitate communication among certain people. Pretty much unequivocally, what you believe is wrong. There has been a lot of research on the structure, development, and acquisition of sign languages (especially, but not limited to, American Sign Language), and while there was clearly an attempt to do what you say in France in the eigteenth century by the Abbe de l'Epee, it didn't work out the way they expected. While many (but still a small part) of the current words in ASL and FSL (French Sign Language) and others derived from Old French Sign Language can be traced back to that first school, the grammar very quickly became nothing like that of any European spoken language. Also, the signs themselves were altered by the speakers to be more regular and more like the signs spontaneously invented by deaf speakers. As for it being a native tongue, acquisition studies have shown that it is learned in precisely the same way as spoken languages, including "babbling", "babytalk", "one word", and "two word" phases...with the exception that the process starts about six months earlier for manual languages than for spoken languages. This holds whether the baby is deaf or not, so many non-signing parents are modeling signs for their non-deaf infants. We only did one for our son ("milk") but it's amazing how useful it was for him to be able to let us know that the reason he was upset was that he was hungry. Having dealt with people (both deaf and not) who grew up in ASL- speaking households with deaf parents, it's pretty clear that ASL is a native tongue and that the non-deaf people are truly bilingual. SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |If you think health care is 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |expensive now, wait until you see Palo Alto, CA 94304 |what it costs when it's free. | P.J. O'Rourke kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ >> >Well, that's whatcha might call a whole nuther subject. But I'll >> >agree that those whose native language is one of the various sign [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >sign languages (especially, but not limited to, American Sign >Language), If you think of the etymology of "language" (lingua= tongue), "sign language" seems like an oxymoron. But the word "language" has evolved since the Latin "lingua" to "sign language" or "computer language", where the tongue has no use. This is what I had in mind when I thought that sign language is an artificial language, because it doesn't use the tongue for communication. But after reading your message below, I think that sign language is more natural than the verbal language. >and while there was clearly an attempt to do what you say >in France in the eigteenth century by the Abbe de l'Epee, it didn't [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >speaking households with deaf parents, it's pretty clear that ASL is a >native tongue and that the non-deaf people are truly bilingual. I always admired those bilingual people, especially those who don't have anyone close who is deaf, and learn the sign language for sheer joy of expanding the limits of communication and for being helpful. >How do you interpret the meaning of "more than" and "less than"? If >someone says "more than 30", does it mean a value greater than 30 (30 >excluded) or a value greater than 30 (30 included)? If someone says >"less than 30", does it mean a value smaller than 30 (30 excluded)? "More than 30 "and "less than 30" are self-explanatory. "More" and "less" both alter (qualify) the "30" in a different direction. The same goes for "40", or "41", "42"etc, you got the point. >Do you personally think that there is a cultural difference in the >perception of "more than" and "less than" across different native >language speakers? Only if the translation of "more that" / "less than" is inaccurate. There may be a problem with the qualifier "almost", but I don't think it's cultural. For instance, can I say, without misleading, that "I'm almost 40" when I'm a few years over 40? If the answer is positive, until what age can I claim that "Im almost 40"? > There may be a problem with the qualifier "almost", but I don't > think it's cultural. For instance, can I say, without misleading, > that "I'm almost 40" when I'm a few years over 40? Not to me. I agree with the RHUD: "ALMOST implies very little short of: almost exhausted; almost home". Over 40 is not 'short of' it. > If the answer > is positive, until what age can I claim that "Im almost 40"? If you're 43, tell people you're "three years away from forty". Everyone will think you're 37. SignatureRay Heindl (remove the Xs to reply) >> There may be a problem with the qualifier "almost", but I don't >> think it's cultural. For instance, can I say, without misleading, >> that "I'm almost 40" when I'm a few years over 40? > >Not to me. I agree with the RHUD: "ALMOST implies very little short >of: almost exhausted; almost home". Over 40 is not 'short of' it. I knew that. Actually, what I had in mind was not "almost 40", since I don't qualify by any stretch of imagination, but "pushing 40", because I can push 40 for the rest of my life. Of course, from the other side of 40. >Hi All, > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >perception of "more than" and "less than" across different native >language speakers? Some people are more precise than others in how they communicate. Science and engineering types, as well as most authors, would tend to be more careful about that sort of thing. That's a kind of cultural difference, though probably not the one you were thinking of. My own observation is that people are more likely to interpret statements such as "more than 30" as including 30 when the variable being considered is continuous, rather than when it is discrete. The more granularity there is to the variable, the more likely people are to differentiate. If an ad for some tchotchke says "best offer over $30", then we tend to assume he'll take $30 if he gets no better offers. If only people over 18 are admitted, they will certainly admit an 18-year-old. A voltage of more than 5 volts would include 5.000V. If I throw more than 5 coins into a pond then I threw at least 6 coins. There does seem to be some asymmetry in this, as you imply. If someone said that the price was less than $30, I'd not expect to see a higher price than $29.99. Best regards, Spehro Pefhany Signature"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward" speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com >>How do you interpret the meaning of "more than" and "less than"? If >>someone says "more than 30", does it mean a value greater than 30 (30 >>excluded) or a value greater than 30 (30 included)? If someone says >>"less than 30", does it mean a value smaller than 30 (30 excluded)? >>Do you personally think that there is a cultural difference in the >>perception of "more than" and "less than" across different native >>language speakers? >Some people are more precise than others in how they communicate. >Science and engineering types, as well as most authors, would tend to >be more careful about that sort of thing. That's a kind of cultural >difference, though probably not the one you were thinking of. The problem seems to be the clumsiness of being precise and saying "more than or equal to 30". But that can be said quite unambiguously and simply by saying "not less than 30". -- Chris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk +44 (0)131 651 3445 DoD #205 IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/] |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.