Episode Transcript

Less Versus Fewer
Episode 54: May 11, 2007

Grammar Girl here.

Today's topic is less versus fewer.

Less and fewer are easy to mix up. They mean the same thing—the opposite of more—but you use them in different circumstances (1). The basic rule is that you use less with mass nouns and fewer with count nouns.

Count Nouns Versus Mass Nouns


Now I'm worried that I've scared you off, but it's easy to remember the difference between mass nouns and count nouns.


A count noun is just something you can count. I'm looking at my desk and I see books, pens, and M&M's. I can count all those things, so they are count nouns and the right word to use is fewer. I should eat fewer M&M's.

Mass nouns are just things that you can't count individually. Again, on my desk I see tape and clutter. These things can't be counted individually, so the right word to use is less. If I had less clutter, my desk would be cleaner. Another clue is that you don't make mass nouns plural: I would never say I have clutters on my desk or that I need more tapes to hold my book covers together.

Sometimes it isn't obvious if something is a mass noun or a count noun because some words can be used in different ways. For example, coffee can refer to either a mass of liquid or a cup of liquid. If you're responsible for filling the coffee decanter at a wedding, and you're getting carried away, your boss might ask you to make less coffee. But if you're a waiter serving cups of coffee to the tables, and the crowd is waning, your boss might tell you to bring out fewer coffees next time. She means cups of coffee, but it's common to hear that shortened to just coffee as in “Bring me a coffee, please.” Remember that I said  mass nouns (like coffee) can't be made plural? In this example, I've made a mass noun plural, but in the process I transformed it into a count noun. So the rule still holds.

Furniture is another tricky word; it isn't immediately obvious whether it is a mass noun or a count noun. If I think of a furniture store, I think of lots of individual pieces of furniture, but furniture is a collective name for a mass of stuff. You could say, “Look at all those couches,” but you would never say, “Look at all those furnitures.” Furniture is a mass noun. Therefore, you'd say, “We need less furniture in this dance hall. Can we have fewer chairs?” 

Exceptions

There are exceptions to these rules; for example, it is customary to use the word less to describe time, money, and distance (2, 3). For example, you could say, “That wedding reception lasted less than two hours. I hope they paid the band less than $400.” So keep in mind that time, money, and distance are different, but if you stick with the quick and dirty tip that less is for mass nouns and fewer is for count nouns, you'll be right most of the time.

Memory Tricks

There are two ways that I remember when to use less and when to use fewer.

First, I think of the classic example of the grocery store express lane. Most of the signs for these lanes read, “10 items or less,” and that's just wrong. The signs should read, “10 items or fewer,” because items are individual, countable things. Between hearing people complain about the signs and seeing the signs every week or so, it sticks in my head that it should be fewer items. And when I stand in line and count the 15 items that belong to the person in front of me in the 10-items-or-fewer lane, I'm strongly reinforcing the idea that items are countable.

Second, I have a memory trick, and I've even had a cartoon drawn up so that you can see into my imagination. I think of Aardvark sitting by a lake. He's fishing. The water is low in the lake this year, so there is less water in the lake. Less and lake both begin with the letter l. There is less water in the lake. Squiggly is worried about dinner. Aardvark usually catches four fish, but what if there are only three? “We'll have fewer fish for dinner,” Squiggly thinks to himself fretfully. Fewer and fish both start with the letter f, and Squiggly is counting fish in his head. We'll have fewer fish for dinner.

If you go to the Grammar Girl website at quickanddirtytips.com you'll find a cartoon of Aardvark fishing and these two sentences to help you remember the difference between less and fewer, and you'll also find a complete transcript of the podcast.

That's all.

Announcements

This week Debra, David T., and Miss Brooks each win a copy of my downloadable audiobook, Grammar Girl's Quick and Dirty Tips to Clean Up Your Writing. The book is also available at iTunes and Audible.com.

Also, check out the Traveling Avatar podcast this week. He's talking about people getting married in Second Life.

Finally, my question line is 206-338-GIRL (4475), and the e-mail address is feedback@quickanddirtytips.com.

References

  1. Lynch, J. "Fewer versus Less." The Lynch Guide to Grammar. http://andromeda.rutgers.edu/~jlynch/Writing/f.html#fewer (accessed May 10, 2007).
  2. Burchfield, R. W, ed. The New Fowler's Modern English Usage. Third edition. New York: Oxford, 1996, p. 295.
  3. few. Dictionary.com. The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2004. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/few (accessed: May 10, 2007).

     


Comments (68) for Less Versus Fewer |  Subscribe to Comment

emma Says:
12/15/2008 7:00:51 AM
beatiful.... site
Will Says:
12/11/2008 4:49:35 PM
What drives me nuts more than anything is the people who correct others when they, in fact, are incorrect. Drew Peacock made the mistake below of correcting Grammar Girl on her use of an apostrophe in M&M's. "M&M's" is the registered trademark, including the apostrophe bonehead. C'mon Drew, you're better than that.
Ryan Says:
11/26/2008 10:29:50 PM
Is it fewer or less funds? "The school received fewer/less funds this year than it did last year." According to the rules, less is correct, but fewer sounds much better.
F. Lobel Says:
11/3/2008 2:18:47 PM
Which is correct? There will be one or two less chairs or there will be one or two fewer chairs... Or should it be, there will be one or two chairs fewer?
Drew Peacock Says:
9/17/2008 7:02:00 PM
You count M&Ms, not M&M's.
Rose Matthews Says:
9/13/2008 9:34:33 PM
I went to your website and got a better understanding about how to teach my 6 graders how to use the words, less and fewer. Thanks! I will be using it more often.
Denise Says:
9/4/2008 2:55:49 PM
fewer people or less people?
Nathan Says:
9/1/2008 4:13:06 AM
Grammar is a set of rules. Rules are usually valid generalizations. Complete the syllogism. Consider the word "usually."
DeusExmachina Says:
8/5/2008 2:38:21 AM
I take exception to one thing in the above article. In what sense do "fewer" and "less" mean the same thing? Just because both are the opposite of "more" does NOT mean they mean the same thing. Clearly they do not, or their usage would be interchangeable. "Right" is the opposite of "wrong." It is also the opposite of "left." Since the word "more" means different things in both contexts, it's opposite does as well. @Gabe. First, "fewer" and "less" have never been interchangeable in the history of English, except poor English speakers. As for why this rule matters, it be importantly from a same reasoning like other grammar error's. It is important for the same reason that grammar is important, because it imparts (sometimes non-essential but often) important information that makes the sentence more easy to process along with subtle information cues that are used by the listener to correctly parse information from a sentence in information-dense environments. Just because you can glean the meaning from the above sentence does not mean that is should be acceptable.
Rosemary Says:
8/3/2008 12:23:04 PM
Misuse of "less" when it should be "fewer" is one of my pet peeves. TV commentators make this mistake often as well as written sources such as newspapers and Web sites. I don't think the rule is taught in school. English is an evolving language. How long before ignorance will cause the rule to change?
Linda Says:
7/9/2008 8:02:16 PM
I agree with Don! The use of less calories, less cars on the road, etc. Makes me cringe. I just spotted a cartoon that shows a rabbit submitting a note in Mother Nature's Suggestion Box. The note reads "Less Predators". I think it should be "Fewer Predators". Have I entirely wrong on Grammar Girl's lesson? (Less predators -- it just sounds wrong!)
Robert Says:
7/8/2008 4:51:03 PM
Thanks for the "Aardvark at the lake" trick
gabe Says:
7/6/2008 11:02:32 PM
Another artificial rule created by... who, exactly? It's amazing that further/farther gets the "do ahead and do what you like" attitude, but less/fewer gets the prescriptive treatment. can we please stop making native English speakers thing they don't know their language based on silly little unnecessary rules such as this one, please? 'Less' has been used in the same sense as 'fewer' since the 8th century, I think. Then some Briton says that it's suddenly wrong and we must conform to that? Does it REALLY lose meaning that it's 10 items of less? In fact, who notices it until they were TOLD to notice it? Few, I imagine; less than those who did notice it, I can safely assume. Wait...? Did I use that correctly? Was that sentence undecipherable because of my maybe-misuse?
Bonnie Leitch Says:
6/30/2008 3:18:47 PM
Is "equal" as good as "equal to"?
Lee Says:
6/5/2008 2:45:16 AM
These nouns are very commonly known as countable and uncountable nouns. You could also conclude that for example, in the sentence, "Can I have 3 coffees, please", that it is assumed or known that the speaker is requesting the coffee in some kind of vessel. Another example is' "How many sugars do you want"? It is assumed or known that the speaker is talking about spoons or cubes of sugar, not pouring it out of a bag or dispenser. All the best, Lee.
Phil Kryder Says:
5/1/2008 10:17:41 PM
Regarding time and distance. They can't really be COUNTED. They can be measured, but never completely precisely. Therefore, they are not exceptions to the count versus mass rule, but rather prove the rule. Check out quatum mechanics and Planck distances and time below 10 to the minus 43 seconds. Best. Phil
johnboy Says:
4/30/2008 9:55:24 AM
Didn't know you can't have paragraphs here. This is my attempt to make it more legible: It's interesting to see that this is actually complicated for native speakers of English. For people like me who've learned rather than acquired English it's pretty obvious. The issue at hand is indeed count nouns v. mass nouns. But I think it's better understood from a slightly wider perspective: To express a small amount/number in English you use "little" for mass nouns and "few" for count nouns: There's only little milk left. (amount) | There are only few items left. (number) Nobody would ever mix *that* up. Now what you can do with these two words, as with most adjectives, is put them in their respective comparative and superlative forms, which yields these two paradigms: little > less > least (amount) | few > fewer > fewest (number) So it's: little milk > less milk > the least milk | few items > fewer items > the fewest items. As for mathematical numbers (be it distances, temperatures or percentages), they are generally considered a certain *amount*, not a certain *number*, of something. 5 tonnes, for example, is a (really) huge amount *of milk*, not a large number of milk. Measuring something is, originally, not the same thing as counting something. So if the terms count noun and mass noun confuse you, say "nouns of amount" and "nouns of number". So figures aren't really an exception to the rule.
johnboy Says:
4/30/2008 9:51:02 AM
It's interesting to see that this is actually complicated for native speakers of English. For people like me who've learned rather than acquired English it's pretty obvious. The issue at hand is indeed count nouns v. mass nouns. But I think it's better understood from a slightly wider perspective: To express a small amount/number in English you use "little" for mass nouns and "few" for count nouns: There's only little milk left. (amount) There are only few items left. (number) Nobody would ever mix *that* up. Now what you can do with these two words, as with most adjectives, is put them in their respective comparative and superlative forms, which yields these two paradigms: little > less > least (amount) few > fewer > fewest (number) So it's little milk > less milk > the least milk few items > fewer items > the fewest items As for mathematical numbers (be it distances, temperatures or percentages), they are generally considered a certain *amount*, not a certain *number*, of something. 5 tonnes, for example, is a (really) huge amount *of milk*, not a large number of milk. Measuring something is, originally, not the same thing as counting something. So if the terms count noun and mass noun confuse you, say "nouns of amount" and "nouns of number". So figures aren't really an exception to the rule.
ashley Says:
2/21/2008 12:31:12 PM
Fewer/less seems to follow the same rule as much/many. My little son says, "How much cookies can a have?" It is obvious that he should use "many". I tell him to use "many" when speaing of more that one thing, and "much" when speaking of only one. (Like, "How much soup can I have?") You can't have fewer soup either--less soup, fewer cookies. This will help my older kids with fewer/less. Thanks
anna Says:
1/22/2008 7:08:09 PM
I really need both less and fewer in a sentence and really i don't quite get this.An d i have tried to find the words less and fewer in a sentence on other sites but there wasn't any that I could find.---
school kid Says:
1/17/2008 12:26:01 PM
Thank you SO MUCH!!! This is helping me in school right NOW!!! You are amazing.
Wendyree Says:
12/19/2007 2:14:32 AM
Hey, thanks so much for making this clear. I hate seeing it in the "10 items or less" isle. I just posted a link to your website in the comments at TBS's new (revived) comedy by the same name.
Erlan Says:
11/19/2007 5:02:33 PM
1) The last stanza of the hymn Amazing Grace has the line "We've no less days to sing His praise than when we've first begun." While we normally think of "days" as a countable quantity, the context of the hymn is refering to Eternity, in which case there are an uncountable number of days, and so we might argue that less is correct. 2) Concerning the comments about the usage of less with time and money, (nearly) every example has employed "less than x" rather than "less x". I don't see it as an exception between "less x" and "fewer x" but rather a separate issue with the phrase "less than"; and in mathematics, we say that "<" is "less than", never "fewer than".
Eric Says:
9/13/2007 10:07:24 AM
There is absolutely nothing wrong with “less than 10 items”. We would not in mathematics say that “8 is fewer than 10” or, in a more advanced lesson, less still, that 13.4 is fewer than 13.7”. “Fewer items than 10” would, of course, be preferable but “fewer than a million items” or “fewer items than a million” could be confusing as “a million” is not “a few” in most contexts so is not really comparable as “a few”. The confusion is that, to most listeners, it would more likely mean “a few less than a million”, say, 999,995. Let’s forget this silly prejudice against “less”, which I can only assume stems from its lack of syallables.
Grammar Girl Says:
8/27/2007 9:42:02 PM
I'm not aware of any sites or books like this, but I'll keep an eye out, and if I find something, I'll let you know. ----- --------
Tommy Owen Says:
8/25/2007 3:51:37 PM
Dear Ms. Fogarty I am a 73 year old male with just 2 years of college. I have always been interested in the English language. I came across a web site several years ago which listed every part of speech. ex: past participle. split infinitive, adverb etc. I have lost it. Do you have a web site like this or do you know of a reference like this that I could buy. I am not an English teacher or anything like that. I just enjoy the english Language. Thanks so much Tommy -----
Ericka Says:
8/25/2007 6:03:17 AM
The easiest way for me to remember the fewer/less question is... If you have a cup of salt and pour out half, you have less than a cup and fewer grains of salt. -----
Grammar Girl Says:
8/22/2007 12:40:12 AM
There's a nuance to the "less" versus "fewer" rules that is rarely relevant and seemed too complicated for a five-minute podcast but that does apply in this case: "less" is for singular things, and "fewer" is for plural things. So it would be correct to say, "We want fewer women to get cervical cancer," but it is also correct to say, "We want one less woman to get cervical cancer." My source is Grammar Snobs Are Great Big Meanies, which has the best explanation of this rule that I've seen so far. -----
Libby Says:
8/16/2007 8:27:20 PM
Oy, I feel a sense of relief. The relatively recent ad campaign, "One Less", for the Gardasil vaccine has been driving me crazy. The ad says “I want to be one less woman to get cervical cancer” or something like that. I was pretty sure it was incorrect, but “one fewer woman” sounds even worse. Does it follow the same rule when the object is singular? -----
Nat Says:
7/24/2007 10:12:04 PM
English is my second language, and I must say that I have never heard anyone say "fewer fish" or anything like that. It is correct, surely, but it makes it extra hard for those with another language as a mother tongue, to use English correctly when native speakers have a lot of grammar mistakes. It will take me a long time to get accustomed to "fewer" (just as with "farther" in one of the other "posts"). It makes sense, but the sound of it seems wrong as I have never heard it spoken, and rarely seen it written. This site is truly amazing! Keep up the good work, and maybe my grammar will be better than many natives` in a while :D -----
Jeff Jones Says:
5/23/2007 8:50:39 PM
I think that John has a good point, and I've seen it raised elsewhere. Grammar does change over time, and given how many people *don't* use 'fewer' when they should be, we may end up using 'less' all the time. Much like we use 'more' for count nouns *and* mass nouns. I think it would be interesting to see where this gets to in, say, 25 years time. I have a feeling that there will be more less, more or less. -----
Kay Says:
5/22/2007 7:00:24 PM
Grammar rules aside, that great old song just wouldn't be the same if it said, "One fewer bell to answer, one fewer man to clean up after . . ." -----
Grammar Girl Says:
5/17/2007 5:47:16 PM
I meant for the emphasis to be on the words "less water." Although "less" and "lake" are the words that help me remember the rule, the word "less" really goes with "water" just as "fewer" goes with "fish." -----
John Says:
5/17/2007 9:31:05 AM
IMO, if the rules you are following force you to produce a sentence that doesn't sound right, then you should find new rules. :) -----
Unknown Says:
5/17/2007 12:40:28 AM
I've got a question and wish somebody could answer it although it seems like a dummy one. Here it goes: Man 1) I've never been to France Man 2) Neither have I! I wonder if it's ok to use "nor have I"; if not, why can't I use it? -----
Simple Ladybug Says:
5/16/2007 3:57:26 PM
You are right, Jenny. Congrats to your 7th grade English teacher, not only for teaching grammar, but also for giving you a Quick/Dirty way to remember this distinction. Again, the decision about whether or not to use fewer/less is made by count/no count nouns. In your example, dollars and minutes, are seen as a mass (not 2 individual dollars or 10 individual minutes). -----
Jenny Says:
5/16/2007 3:28:36 PM
Re: the exception of time and money -- My seventh grade teacher taught me that it is always fair to use "less than," "greater than," and "equal to" in reference to nouns that are quantified by a numeral (e.g. two dollars, ten minutes, etc.), so these don't really have to be considered "exceptions" to the Less vs. Fewer rule, if, like me, one is averse to the idea of "exceptions." -----
James Says:
5/16/2007 12:36:56 PM
What I meant to say was that, to me, saying "one less something" is like saying "none of something are..."; i.e. it sounds better to phrase it that way, but it is (or at least to me it seems) technically incorrect with regards to grammar. I was already familiar with the use of "none is" (Thanks, Grammar Girl!) but thank you for clearing ip up anyway, Don. -----
Tolak Says:
5/16/2007 12:24:39 PM
Nice cartoon; pity the bold emphasises the wrong words. "Less water", in stead of "less ... lake" -----
Don Says:
5/16/2007 12:16:58 PM
James, that is an easy one! The correct form is "none...is" none is (almost) always a singular. (Notice how I parenthetically hedge my bets; there may be times of which I am unaware or have forgotten for the moment where "none" is plural.) The trick I use is to remember the definition of "none" is "no one" or "not one." It is then easy to see that the number must be the same in the negative or the positive of the statement. "None of them __ here." Is the same thing as saying "not one of them __ here." If you reverse that to the positive, "one of them __ here." It's now really simple to see that "Them" is not what is being referred to by the is/are! It is the number of "them" being indicated. And as only one of them is here, when that one leaves, none of them is left to be counted. The verb/number agreement is with the number (three, two, one, none) of the noun (them) and the verb (to be or is/are). Hope that helps. Don -----
James Says:
5/16/2007 11:05:14 AM
Or, you could say that you pay less *in* taxes. -----
James Says:
5/16/2007 10:57:30 AM
However, such a technique doesn't help with the sentence: "None of them is here", which sounds awful (at least it does to me) but is undeniably correct with regards to grammar. -----
John Says:
5/16/2007 8:18:53 AM
Oh well, I think "reliably guided by your ear" is very helpful! In a case like "one less car," "less" is the only normal thing to say. -----
James Says:
5/16/2007 7:31:50 AM
I was thinking the same thing. Personally, the best solution I've found is to say "one car fewer", where "fewer" refers to an implicit "cars" noun: "one car fewer (cars)". -----
Jeff Powers Says:
5/15/2007 11:40:13 PM
If aardvark catches just one fish, will the lake have one fewer fish, or one less fish? The first sounds awkward, the latter does not seem to fit your rules. Similarly, if I ride my bike to work, can I proudly proclaim "One less car!" or should it be "One fewer cars?" -----
:Bird Says:
5/15/2007 11:01:54 AM
Hi Grammar Girl I'm your audience from Thailand. I always listen to your podcast for studying english. I love you. -----
John Says:
5/15/2007 8:49:47 AM
Exactly. Rush said that "less taxes" in the quote was a non-count noun. I was trying to prove that it wasn't. If it was a non-count noun, we would say "too much taxes," and we don't. "tax" can be a non-count noun: we can say "too much tax." But once you pluralize it, it is a count noun. -----
David Says:
5/15/2007 5:05:17 AM
Congratulations on being mentioned on the Wall Street Journal today. Your work is very much appreciated. -----
James Says:
5/14/2007 10:37:36 PM
You would say that you pay too much tax (referring to the total amount of money you spend), or too many taxes (referring to the total number of individual taxes). I don't think you would ever say that you have "too much taxes". -----
John Says:
5/14/2007 10:17:33 PM
I see the difference between "less taxes" and "fewer taxes." But this doesn't mean that "taxes" is a non-count noun. I don't think it is. Count nouns use "many" and non-count nouns use "much." We have too much furniture. (non-count) We have too many taxes. (count) *We have too much taxes. (ungrammatical) So "taxes" is a plural count noun, and you can use either "less" or "fewer" with it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_noun -----
Fabuloso Says:
5/14/2007 4:49:45 PM
I don't know who you are Grammar Girl, but In think I love you. -----
Rush Says:
5/14/2007 3:26:26 AM
How extraordinary - to do a casual "less vs. fewer" search and come across a current exchange! My comment relates to John's second cite: "...Americans pay less taxes than most of the inhabitants of developed countries - Robert Lekachman, quoted in Center Mag., Jan-Feb 1970" Here, the distinction between less and fewer is critical. To say less implies that 'taxes' is a mass noun, and that we are considering the total amount of money spent on taxes - I believe that that was the author's intent. Had he said fewer, it would imply that Americans pay fewer types of taxes (but might well pay more in total, not less). Thanks, John, for highlighting this! -----
Simple Ladybug Says:
5/13/2007 5:23:00 PM
I think the intended audience in the Grammar Girl podcasts is people who are interested in simplified grammar rules that they will remember. There are always exceptions to most every rule, many of which are clarified on the GG site by the English majors, linquistics buffs, grammar teachers, and other interested parties. Remember the goal here