There's a new add for Burger King on TV in which the narrator talks about the new patty as having "less calories." And watching Dee Drummond (The Pioneer Woman) on the food channel this morning, I heard her say something about having "less things to do." And on the radio, I often hear people refer to "less taxes." Wow! All of these are wrong, people. WRONG! "Less" is used for singular objects. For plural objects, the correct word is "fewer." Burger Kind has "fewer" calories, Dee Drummond has "fewer" things to do and wouldn't it be nice if we had "fewer" taxes?
I forgive Dee Drummond, partly because she's talking off the cuff (unscripted) and as a pioneer woman, I suppose she has some leeway in her use of grammar. And she has a foolproof recipe for pie crust, made with vinegar, like my grandmother's recipe. So she gets a pass. But a tax spot on FM or Burger King on TV? You know someone in an ad agency scripted both messages. How that message was phrased had to have gone through a whole vetting process including a review by the ultimate client. And when the message was recorded, it was spoken by a real live person with real live people listening in. How did "less calories" get by all of them?
Well, maybe it didn't. Perhaps the hucksters of the world are beginning to use the word "less," even though they know it to be incorrect because it has a more immediate connotation of fewer than "fewer." I hope not. I wouldn't want "less" to creep into our lexicon and suddenly be accepted like "looking to" has displaced a perfectly good "wants to" or "searching for." "George is looking to become a lawyer." Fah! And we have less things to do? What a shame. "Less" is no longer more. It's definitely less.
Stay tuned.
I forgive Dee Drummond, partly because she's talking off the cuff (unscripted) and as a pioneer woman, I suppose she has some leeway in her use of grammar. And she has a foolproof recipe for pie crust, made with vinegar, like my grandmother's recipe. So she gets a pass. But a tax spot on FM or Burger King on TV? You know someone in an ad agency scripted both messages. How that message was phrased had to have gone through a whole vetting process including a review by the ultimate client. And when the message was recorded, it was spoken by a real live person with real live people listening in. How did "less calories" get by all of them?
Well, maybe it didn't. Perhaps the hucksters of the world are beginning to use the word "less," even though they know it to be incorrect because it has a more immediate connotation of fewer than "fewer." I hope not. I wouldn't want "less" to creep into our lexicon and suddenly be accepted like "looking to" has displaced a perfectly good "wants to" or "searching for." "George is looking to become a lawyer." Fah! And we have less things to do? What a shame. "Less" is no longer more. It's definitely less.
Stay tuned.
No comments:
Post a Comment