please empty your brain below

"Quick now, because there's less than 24 hours before Pudding Lane burns."

Question for today... what is wrong with this sentence?

I really couldn't care fewer

I still believe:
a) it is absolutely correct
b) it is arguable whether one can legitimately criticize using an expression/sentence construction in a language that evolves by usage and has no definitive rules that are laid down by a recognised authority.

23 hours 30 minutes, for example, is less than 24 hours. It is not fewer than 24 hours.

I can see why Samuel Pepys wrote everything in shorthand.

Oh Lordy. Does that mean I've got to finish that Pepys book I've been wryt'ng?

Not what I meant

It'll be fascinating to see what Pepys actually wrote during the Great Fire. I wonder how many visits the Diary of Samuel Pepys will receive tomorrow?

chose the lesser evil.

Ah

'There's less than 24 hours until Pudding Lane burns'

or

'It's less than 24 hours before Pudding Lane burns'

Oh sod it

'Pudding Lane burns in less than 24 hours.'

(In fact, it's probably gone up in flames while I was working that out)

One could argue that one should say there are less than ...
However I would argue that there's is such a standard expression it is acceptable to use it in both singular and plural in a similar way to il y a (French) or es gibt (German).

But then I am probably on the wrong track, again.

It's a human trait to go instinctively for the most euphonious arrangement of words, even in writing, because both the writer and the reader still "hear" the words. And music is a core component of human nature.
"There's less than 24 hours" flows just a little better than "There are fewer than 24 hours".
That's my theory anyway.











TridentScan | Privacy Policy