Posted by
Andrews on Friday, December 19, 2008 12:18:00 PM
I have complained about this before, but since the grammatical error is being used to promote broadcasts of the
Wizard of Oz, I suppose it is fair to rerun my own complaints as well. On TNT this morning I saw a commercial which touched on one of my grammar pet peeves, and, to make it worse, broadcast the mistake in letters which filled the entire screen, being the theme of the commercial. That theme being, "More movies, Less commercials."
Let us cover this one more time. More is used as the opposite of both "less" and "fewer", and that confuses a lot of people. "Less" is used when the item in question is not made up of distinct, countable units. "Less time", for example, or "less water". "Fewer" is used when you are dealing with something that can be counted, such as, oh, commercials. I know there has been a tendency to use "less" for both cases, but the rules have not yet been changed, so, despite the claims of all those "living language" folks out there, the distinction still exists.
And honestly, just as the actor/actress distinction, this is one of those differences which should not be evolved away in the name of simplicity, as it caries useful information, namely whether we are dealing with a steady decline or the removal of discrete units. It may not always be important to know that, but when dealing with unfamiliar items, sometimes the choice of fewer or less helps to provide additional information. So should the same people who dumbed down "indices" in "indexes" have their way and make everything "less", we will end up losing that sort of linguistic clue.
And honestly, in response to those people who tell me it is an evolving language and I shouldn't hold on to words such as "indices", I have a simple response. If there is no reason to
prefer "indices" to "indexes", why should I prefer "are" to "r" or "your" to "ur" or "later" to "l8r"? Once we say that any whim can overcome a standard, and that anything "easier" is better, what is to stop LOLspeak from becoming the fate of the English language.
I know I may sound stodgy, but I think I would prefer having to remember the words ending in "ex" or "ix" form a plural by using "ices", rather than seeing formal writing English including the phrase "kewl, l8r d00dz".
POSTSCRIPT
I have said this before, but it has been long enough since my last Grammar Nazi or Spelling Nazi post, I probably need to repeat it. I do not claim to have perfect grammar or spelling. In fact, my spelling is rather mediocre at times, and I know my poor typing skills introduces countless typos which make my spelling appear even worse. However, I am not demanding perfection, simply a respect for the rules, or, even more important, for a recognition that there
ARE rules. Just as morality does not demand perfection, the same with spelling and grammar. People can be moral even if they fall short of perfection, and people can respect the rules of spelling and grammar without being perfect in either respect.
In addition, I recognize that context colors how strictly one must adhere to the rules. In an informal setting one is free to violate most rules, and that is perfectly acceptable. However, in formal setting I would argue that there are clearly rules and one should do his best to adhere to them.
I won't go into it here, but I have written several pieces arguing the significance of spelling and grammar (as well as a few simply griping about specific errors -- you didn't expect me to pare this list down to just relevant articles, did you?):
Spelling Nazi
HILARIOS DANCEING CAT
Badly Chosen PC Words
Why Worry About Grammar?
Spelling Nazi Part 2
Why Spelling Matters (Again)
Spelling Nazi Part 3
It Warm's The Cockle's of my "Heart"
Tiny Grammar Gripe
Grammar Nazi Extra
Poor Grasp of the Meaning of Hypocrisy
Pronunciation Nazi
Grammar Nazi
I think these older essays make the case well enough that I don't need to add anything more.