 |
 | 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 2009Items or less/fewer
I was pleased to note that the signs above the express lines in the Safeway on Bainbridge Island, Washington read "15 items or fewer" rather than the common "X items or less." I'd be interested in knowing whether this is a corporate policy at all Safeway stores or just a peculiarity of some. What's your local Safeway say? Paul Brians >I was pleased to note that the signs above the express lines in the > Safeway on Bainbridge Island, Washington read "15 items or fewer" [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Paul Brians I don't have a local Safeway? Paul Brians wrote, in <b83cac89-4112-4ed7-807c-b0f0629859e0@k1g2000prb.googlegroups.com> on Mon, 12 Jan 2009 08:46:38 -0800 (PST): > I was pleased to note that the signs above the express lines in the > Safeway on Bainbridge Island, Washington read "15 items or fewer" [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > What's your local Safeway say? My local shop has "About 10 items".  SignatureNick Spalding BrE/IrE >Paul Brians wrote, in ><b83cac89-4112-4ed7-807c-b0f0629859e0@k1g2000prb.googlegroups.com> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > >My local shop has "About 10 items". Well, that's the recession for you. Cheers - Ian > I was pleased to note that the signs above the express lines in the > Safeway on Bainbridge Island, Washington read "15 items or fewer" > rather than the common "X items or less." This was the subject of a recent change at Tesco (UK) stores, which prompted some debate. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7591905.stm -- WH > I was pleased to note that the signs above the express lines in the > Safeway on Bainbridge Island, Washington read "15 items or fewer" [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Paul Brians I don't have a local Safeway. But shirley the sign is cool 'coz Bainbridge is cool, no? What does the sign at that fabulously tempting market in Poulsbo whose name I can't remember say? cheers, Stephanie in Brussels On Jan 12, 1:14 pm, stephanie.mitch...@telenet.be wrote: > What does the sign at that fabulously tempting market in Poulsbo whose > name I can't remember say? That would be Central Market. I haven't noticed and shop go there often. I'll try to check next time I'm there. The same company owns Town & Country Market on the Island, but they don't have an express line. How do you know (very cool) Bainbridge Island? Paul Brians >I was pleased to note that the signs above the express lines in the > Safeway on Bainbridge Island, Washington read "15 items or fewer" [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > What's your local Safeway say? My local store quite sensibly kicks for touch and states 'maximum of 12 items'. Certainly the distinction between less and fewer is important, and it would certainly be wrong to refer to 'less items'. Few would argue with that. But when pointing at the number, e.g. 12 items or less (than 12), there is no ambiguity, so what does it matter? Paul Brians: >> I was pleased to note that the signs above the express lines in the >> Safeway on Bainbridge Island, Washington read "15 items or fewer" >> rather than the common "X items or less." I am sorry to hear it. >> What's your local Safeway say? I have never been there. My local Metro, however, has "1-12 items". > ...it would certainly be wrong to refer to 'less items'. No, it wouldn't; for example, the signs we're talking about commonly refer to "X items or less". SignatureMark Brader, Toronto | "I wish to God these calculations had been msb@vex.net | executed by steam!" -- Charles Babbage, 1821 > Paul Brians: >>> I was pleased to note that the signs above the express lines in [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > No, it wouldn't; for example, the signs we're talking about commonly > refer to "X items or less". Which means that they don't, in fact, say "less items". Even going by a "means the same" notion (which doesn't necessarily mean "will be treated the same grammatically"), the equivalence would be "less than X items", not "less items", and, introspecting, the latter is far less acceptable than the former. SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |The body was wrapped in duct tape, 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |weighted down with concrete blocks Palo Alto, CA 94304 |and a telephone cord was tied |around the neck. Police suspect kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com |foul play... (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ > I was pleased to note that the signs above the express lines in the > Safeway on Bainbridge Island, Washington read "15 items or fewer" [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > What's your local Safeway say? My local supermarket simply says "Express Lane 12 items". Another one I visit occasionally says "Baskets only". Neither seems to do anything about the people who regularly present themselves with full trolleys. SignatureRob Bannister >> I was pleased to note that the signs above the express lines in the >> Safeway on Bainbridge Island, Washington read "15 items or fewer" [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >visit occasionally says "Baskets only". Neither seems to do anything >about the people who regularly present themselves with full trolleys. Because of the relative strengths of the currencies in the Irish Republic and Northern Ireland a large number of shoppers from the Republic are travelling sometimes considerable distances to do their shopping in Northern Ireland. This has resulted in crowding and long waits at supermarket checkouts. This is accepted by those who have travelled long distances but is frustrating for locals. Because the long-distance shoppers tend to stock up on alcohol at least one supermarket in a border city has managed to ease the situation for many of its locals by classifying some of the checkout lanes as "No alcohol". Incidentally, a couple of days ago after dark in a supermarket car park I had just finished loading my purchases into the car and was starting to walk back to the building to use the toilet when I saw three young men moving very quickly away from the supermarket building in a close V-formation. I watched as they ran past me. The one in the lead stumbled. I then realised what was going on. Two of the men were in uniform, security guards. They got hold of the other man and firmly "assisted" him back to the building. A third supermarket employee collected a shopping trolley (cart) which I had earlier seen rolling unattended at right angles to the direction of the running men. The miscreant had apparently attempted to leave the supermarket without paying. One giveaway was that none of the items in the trolley had been bagged. SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) > > I was pleased to note that the signs above the express lines in the > > Safeway on Bainbridge Island, Washington read "15 items or fewer" [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > > What's your local Safeway say? I don't have one. The Safeway in Los Alamos was an icon (iconic status is conferred very quickly there) till it turned into a Furr's. If memory serves. Some stores in Santa Fe have "X items or fewer" signs. I think the Grammar Police finally got noticed. > My local supermarket simply says "Express Lane 12 items". Another one I > visit occasionally says "Baskets only". Neither seems to do anything > about the people who regularly present themselves with full trolleys. The "Baskets only" one sure wouldn't work in the little town where I live; "basket" is the usual word for what I call a (shopping) cart and you call a trolley. I think this is widespread in rural America. Are they baskets with wheels or carts with open-weave sides and bottom? In my experience, Americans use "trolley" only for things that have a fixed track. (Someone has a counterexample.) -- Jerry Friedman >> > I was pleased to note that the signs above the express lines in the >> > Safeway on Bainbridge Island, Washington read "15 items or fewer" [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >you call a trolley. I think this is widespread in rural America. Are >they baskets with wheels or carts with open-weave sides and bottom? In BrE a supermarket shopping basket is as shown in the bottom image on this page: http://www.green-magic.co.uk/page/Baskets It is a plastic derivative of the traditional woven basket: http://www.greatbritishbaskets.co.uk/subprod/shopping-baskets-0001748.aspx >In my experience, Americans use "trolley" only for things that have a >fixed track. (Someone has a counterexample.) SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) On Jan 12, 7:20 pm, "Peter Duncanson (BrE)" <m...@peterduncanson.net> wrote: > On Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:01:54 -0800 (PST), "jerry_fried...@yahoo.com" > [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > In BrE a supermarket shopping basket is as shown in the bottom image on this > page:http://www.green-magic.co.uk/page/Baskets Yes, we have those too. I'm not sure how the people who call the raised wire carts "baskets" would distinguish, but probably by mentioning hands or wheels. I have the impression, possibly wrong, that the people who call them all "baskets" are unlikely to use the hand kind--as they're unlikely to drive a small car if they can afford a big one. Or a dually pickup. Or a Hummer. -- Jerry Friedman >In my experience, Americans use "trolley" only for things that have a >fixed track. (Someone has a counterexample.) You bet. We have "trackless trolleys" (also known as "electric trolleybuses") here in Boston (and also in San Francisco and Philadelphia if memory serves). They don't use trolleys any more, though: the contact at the end of each 'trolley' pole is a carbon block that slides along the wire, rather than a brass wheel. The streetcars here use pantographs. -GAWollman SignatureGarrett A. Wollman | The real tragedy of human existence is not that we are wollman@csail.mit.edu| nasty by nature, but that a cruel structural asymmetry Opinions not those | grants to rare events of meanness such power to shape of MIT or CSAIL. | our history. - S.J. Gould, Ten Thousand Acts of Kindness > In article <d7cfa52b-e311-459e-b09e-135a35fbd...@a26g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > block that slides along the wire, rather than a brass wheel. > The streetcars here use pantographs. I've even heard the phrase "trackless trolley", now that you mention it, but it's sort of the exception that proves the rule. If we didn't think of trolleys as things that run on tracks, you wouldn't have to call those "trackless". By the way, the NSOED's meanings in order and shortened are: 1. A low cart (local) 2. A low truck running on a track 3. A wheel for conducting electricity, hence elliptically a trolley- car or trolley-bus 4. "A small table, stand, or basket on wheels or castors..." such as a supermarket trolley. -- Jerry Friedman might enjoy having some useful public transportation around. >> In article <d7cfa52b-e311-459e-b09e-135a35fbd...@a26g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, >> [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > 1. A low cart (local) I certainly called the thing we built with pram wheels and terrorised the neighbourhood on "the trolley". The really neat thing was to tow it behind one or - for maximum effect two - bicycles. SignatureOnline waterways route planner: http://canalplan.org.uk development version: http://canalplan.eu >I certainly called the thing we built with pram wheels and terrorised >the neighbourhood on "the trolley". The really neat thing was to tow it >behind one or - for maximum effect two - bicycles. I'm pretty sure that was a go-cart WIWAL. SignatureKaty Jennison spamtrap: remove the first two letters after the @ >> I certainly called the thing we built with pram wheels and terrorised >> the neighbourhood on "the trolley". The really neat thing was to >> tow it behind one or - for maximum effect two - bicycles. > > I'm pretty sure that was a go-cart WIWAL. "Billy-cart" WIW. SignatureMike. >>> I certainly called the thing we built with pram wheels and terrorised >>> the neighbourhood on "the trolley". The really neat thing was to [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > "Billy-cart" WIW. 'Soap box cart' in my bit of Lincolnshire. -- Mike Page [trolley] > > By the way, the NSOED's meanings in order and shortened are: > > > 1. A low cart (local) > > I certainly called the thing we built with pram wheels and terrorised > the neighbourhood on "the trolley". I conclude that you were local. > The really neat thing was to tow it > behind one or - for maximum effect two - bicycles. Not to be ludicrously pedantic again, but what would you say to putting the first dash after "one", or putting the second after "effect"? -- Jerry Friedman > [trolley] [...] >> The really neat thing was to tow it >> behind one or - for maximum effect two - bicycles. > > Not to be ludicrously pedantic again, but what would you say to > putting the first dash after "one", or putting the second after > "effect"? ... or write "too" instead of "two". SignatureLes (BrE) More ludicrous than pedantic > jerry friedman wrote: >> [trolley] [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > ... or write "too" instead of "two". "Too bicycles"? SignatureMaria C. >> jerry friedman wrote: >>> [trolley] [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > "Too bicycles"? No, "for maximum effect too". SignatureLes (BrE) > [trolley] > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > putting the first dash after "one", or putting the second after > "effect"? Absolutely right - the sentence as intented would have it after "effect". In the other position I'd see them as a bit German, and call them hyphens. SignatureOnline waterways route planner: http://canalplan.org.uk development version: http://canalplan.eu > The "Baskets only" one sure wouldn't work in the little town where I > live; "basket" is the usual word for what I call a (shopping) cart and > you call a trolley. I think this is widespread in rural America. Are > they baskets with wheels or carts with open-weave sides and bottom? A "basket" is a plastic basket, ie a container, usually with 2 folding handles, that you carry when you know you only want a few items and don't want to bother with a monstrous trolley that refuses to move in the direction you want. SignatureRob Bannister Robert Bannister wrote, in <6t4n4tF8t6m7U6@mid.individual.net> on Wed, 14 Jan 2009 08:41:17 +0900: > > The "Baskets only" one sure wouldn't work in the little town where I > > live; "basket" is the usual word for what I call a (shopping) cart and [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > don't want to bother with a monstrous trolley that refuses to move in > the direction you want. Except when it is made of wire as the local ones are. SignatureNick Spalding BrE/IrE >I was pleased to note that the signs above the express lines in the > Safeway on Bainbridge Island, Washington read "15 items or fewer" > rather than the common "X items or less." I'll chip in my usual comment when this comes up. If less is wrong with numbers, when did it become wrong and why? King Alfred used it. Shakespeare used it. The broad mass of the common people use it. Who first set themselves up as an authority to say it is wrong? And before someone says it maintains an important distinction, we don't need separate words for 'more', do we. -- Mike Page >> I was pleased to note that the signs above the express lines in the >> Safeway on Bainbridge Island, Washington read "15 items or fewer" [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > someone says it maintains an important distinction, we don't need > separate words for 'more', do we. Hm. I thought I was doomed to argue with you about this for as long as we continued to write together, but I may be coming round to your way of thinking, now that you've raised the issue of "more". "More or less" sounds normal but "more or fewer" sounds very odd. While I ponder this, I should point out that your last sentence lacks a question mark. And rest assured that I shall never concede on the "however" issue. SignatureLaura (emulate St. George for email) >>> I was pleased to note that the signs above the express lines in the >>> Safeway on Bainbridge Island, Washington read "15 items or fewer" [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > >And rest assured that I shall never concede on the "however" issue. As "more-or-less" means "approximately", and is essentially all-one-word, I always make a point of writing it with hyphens. SignatureIan >>>> I was pleased to note that the signs above the express lines in the >>>> Safeway on Bainbridge Island, Washington read "15 items or fewer" [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > As "more-or-less" means "approximately", and is essentially > all-one-word, I always make a point of writing it with hyphens. Do you think there should be more or less than ten hyphens in a typical sentence? More or fewer does sound odd. SignatureRob Bannister >>>>> I was pleased to note that the signs above the express lines in the >>>>> Safeway on Bainbridge Island, Washington read "15 items or fewer" [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] >Do you think there should be more or less than ten hyphens in a typical >sentence? More or fewer does sound odd. Agreed. On first hearing, it does sound a bit odd. But that's a different "more or less". It's not the all-one-word "more-or-less". It's the "more - or less - than ten" version, where "less" is offered as an alternative to "more". And, of course, it really should be "more - or fewer - than ten". I think (or hope) that I would say "more than ten, or fewer than ten", but even I have my failings. SignatureIan [...to Mike Page in particular...] > And rest assured that I shall never concede on the "however" issue. Attagirl! If it means "but", it shouldn't begin a sentence; this is to avoid any flicker of doubt about which "however" it is. SignatureMike. >[...to Mike Page in particular...] >> >> And rest assured that I shall never concede on the "however" issue. > >Attagirl! If it means "but", it shouldn't begin a sentence; this is to >avoid any flicker of doubt about which "however" it is. But I find that assiduously avoiding stating a sentence with "but" - and especially "however" - often makes what you are trying to say very tortuous and stilted. I'm all for preserving standards, and I try to avoid doing it unnecessarily. However, it is the way we talk, and usually it doesn't sound obviously wrong. SignatureIan >> [...to Mike Page in particular...] >>> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > avoid doing it unnecessarily. However, it is the way we talk, and > usually it doesn't sound obviously wrong. But I don't mind starting a sentence with "but": it's only "however" which needs that special care. But I don't imagine I'm anything like so careful in ordinary speech, where tone should prevent ambiguity. Come to that, I probably don't use adversative "however" very much in conversation unless I'm trying to slow things down, in which case, I often would put it first. (As students, we had a thing for beginning sentences with a Mummerset " 'Owsomedeverr". Rather like calling an organ scholar an "orrgan scholarrd".) SignatureMike. >>I was pleased to note that the signs above the express lines in the >> Safeway on Bainbridge Island, Washington read "15 items or fewer" [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > -- > Mike Page Up to C17 we had "mo" for number and "more" for quantity, but admittedly the distinction wasn't precisely made (and the fact that it died out might argue that it carried a low functional load). I prefer "few" for count nouns on aesthetic grounds, though it can still make useful distinctions in the comparative: "Thanks to the energy crisis, we're making fewer powerful cars" vs. "Thanks to the energy crisis, we're making less powerful cars". Peter Groves >>>I was pleased to note that the signs above the express lines in the >>> Safeway on Bainbridge Island, Washington read "15 items or fewer" [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > comparative: "Thanks to the energy crisis, we're making fewer powerful > cars" vs. "Thanks to the energy crisis, we're making less powerful cars". But as Mike says (and I confess I agree with him and have posted to this effect in another group), we find no problem with avoiding "Because energy is cheap we're making more powerful cars". SignatureOnline waterways route planner: http://canalplan.org.uk development version: http://canalplan.eu >> I was pleased to note that the signs above the express lines in the >> Safeway on Bainbridge Island, Washington read "15 items or fewer" [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > before someone says it maintains an important distinction, we don't > need separate words for 'more', do we. Dunno. No comment in Nesfield. OED simply says of "less" = "a smaller number of; fewer", <Freq. found but generally regarded as incorrect> without further comment. I did notice the following in the OED entry for that sense of "less": <1874 Rep. Brit. Assoc. Adv. Sci. 1873 53 To return to the history of logarithmic tables to a less number of figures.> Is it just me and the lateness of the hour, or is that actually /not/ an example of "less"="fewer"? It seems to me to mean "smaller" or "lesser" in that case. SignatureMike. >>> I was pleased to note that the signs above the express lines in the >>> Safeway on Bainbridge Island, Washington read "15 items or fewer" [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >number of; fewer", <Freq. found but generally regarded as incorrect> >without further comment. Fowler (who is in favor of the distinction) call it "the modern tendency" and "the general tendency", which suggests both that there was an unmodern time when it was not observed and that making it was not universally accepted as a test of correctness even in his own time. SignatureDon Aitken Mail to the From: address is not read. To email me, substitute "clara.co.uk" for "freeuk.com" > I was pleased to note that the signs above the express lines in the > Safeway on Bainbridge Island, Washington read "15 items or fewer" > rather than the common "X items or less." I thought that I, too, would be pleased with signs saying "fewer" rather than "less," but instead, the new "fewer" signs seem insufferably precious. My conclusion: Signs saying (as Evan mentioned) "less than X items" would be preferable. By the by, I've received your book from Amazon.* I'll be starting it very soon. (Actually, I've flipped through a few pages, and such flipping has whetted my appetite.) *_Common Errors in English Usage._ SignatureMaria C. |
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.