User talk:GraemeMcRae

Allow Myself to Introduce, my, umm
Hi, my name is Graeme McRae, and this is my User talk page. If you want to get my attention, [ please click here] to leave me a new message. Then watch the page; I'll reply right here. Thanks! &mdash;GraemeMcRaetalk 00:34, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Quick question

 * If everyone sticks to proper word usage and grammar, then how will new word usage and grammar evolve? Remember, the main goal of English is to communicate. As long as this is successful, then so what if the word usage is off a little. Also, it is better to reply on my talk page as I will receive a note to let me know that I have a new message.Gmcfoley 00:43, 31 October 2005 (UTC)


 * That's a good point, Gmcfoley. As a stickler for proper usage, I see my role as slowing down the rate of decline in our ability to communicate.  For example, if someone writes "The freeways in California are better than Kansas" I might take issue with an apparent effort to compare freeways with a state.  That whoever wrote the sentence seems unaware he's comparing dissimilar things concerns me.  By correcting this kind of mistake, I feel I'm not only clarifying the information presented here, but also helping people to learn to communicate more clearly. &mdash;GraemeMcRaetalk 00:53, 31 October 2005 (UTC)


 * I don't think that many people would notice the mistake without it being pointed out to them, but it is good to fix it when you see it. What does annoy me is people who complain about obscure grammar not being followed. For example, recently on T.V. an English expert said she hates seeing the sign "10 items or less". Apparently the correct grammar is "10 items or fewer. In this situation most people will not see the mistake even when it is explained. "10 items or less" is so popular that I would argue is is correct. Gmcfoley 16:59, 31 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Funny you should mention that. I was in an Albertsons store recently, and laughed out loud when I read the sign over the checkout lane, "10 items or fewer".  There are some cases &mdash; this one may be a good example &mdash; where we have two words that mean the same thing.  Over time, I would expect one of the words to fall into disuse.  The fact that "less" and "fewer" are still both commonly used, however, makes me think there is some reason to keep them both.  Like "road" and "street", there is enough of a difference in meaning that we just like them both.&mdash;GraemeMcRaetalk 17:26, 31 October 2005 (UTC)


 * I decided to look this one up. There is a usage note on Wiktionary, but I think that it's a little hard to understand (maybe that's something for you to do!). This is the note from the Oxford Paperback Dictionary:
 * The word less is used of things that are measured by amount (e.g. in eat less butter; use less fuel). Its use of things measured by number is often regarded as incorrect (e.g. in we need less workers; correct usage is fewer workers).
 * Fewer workers sounds a little better, but I wouldn't consider less to be incorrect. Gmcfoley 17:56, 31 October 2005 (UTC)


 * I took you up on it, and boldly changed the wording of the Usage sections of the two entries less and fewer, and then I got even bold er and template-ified them. That may have been too bold.  We'll see.&mdash;GraemeMcRaetalk 19:40, 31 October 2005 (UTC)


 * It's better. Moving it to a template makes sense, now the text only needs to be edited in one place. Gmcfoley 22:15, 1 November 2005 (UTC)