Pedants' Paradise

[gurnemanz]

The Radio 4 News has just stated that "farmers will be harvesting 30% fewer crops this year". Although it is usually appropriate to use "fewer" rather than "less" with a plural noun, it struck me that this might actually be a case of hypercorrection. Wouldn't "fewer crops" be a smaller number of types of crop? Wouldn't it be permissible to refer to "30% less crops" with "crops", though plural in form actually behaving like a non-count? As with "Eat less sweets!" Am I being hyperpedantic or maybe just wrong?

[jean]

...it struck me that this might actually be a case of hypercorrection...

Most definitely.

[french frank]

I know it's late, but conjugations, please. This thread is for pedants, after all.

(Should you wish to edit, I'll delete evidence of my objection.)

No. I'll leave the evidence of my shame as an exercise in humbleness

Coniug-are, conjug-ation being an example of the verbal pattern I was burbling about.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

The Radio 4 News has just stated that "farmers will be harvesting 30% fewer crops this year". Although it is usually appropriate to use "fewer" rather than "less" with a plural noun, it struck me that this might actually be a case of hypercorrection. Wouldn't "fewer crops" be a smaller number of types of crop? Wouldn't it be permissible to refer to "30% less crops" with "crops", though plural in form actually behaving like a non-count? As with "Eat less sweets!" Am I being hyperpedantic or maybe just wrong?

How about 30% smaller crops. It isn't always a choice between "less" and "fewer"' as in the ....emissions debate, where lower emissions would be a better choice.

[jean]

How about 30% smaller crops.

That would imply dwarf varieties, which I don't think is what was meant.

[Bryn]

So, 30% lower crop yield, yes?

[Pabmusic]

The Radio 4 News has just stated that "farmers will be harvesting 30% fewer crops this year". Although it is usually appropriate to use "fewer" rather than "less" with a plural noun, it struck me that this might actually be a case of hypercorrection. Wouldn't "fewer crops" be a smaller number of types of crop? Wouldn't it be permissible to refer to "30% less crops" with "crops", though plural in form actually behaving like a non-count? As with "Eat less sweets!" Am I being hyperpedantic or maybe just wrong?

The trouble is that the Radio 4 news item means something different from what I'm sure was meant. "30% fewer crops" suggests (or ought to suggest) that, instead of wheat, barley and oats, they'll harvest just the wheat and barley. The problem is caused by using 'crops' as a singular collective noun. "Farmers will harvest 30% less" or "harvests will produce 30% less" would have been better. What else do farmers harvest but crops?

[Boilk]

The Radio 4 News has just stated that "farmers will be harvesting 30% fewer crops this year". Although it is usually appropriate to use "fewer" rather than "less" with a plural noun, it struck me that this might actually be a case of hypercorrection. Wouldn't "fewer crops" be a smaller number of types of crop? Wouldn't it be permissible to refer to "30% less crops" with "crops", though plural in form actually behaving like a non-count? As with "Eat less sweets!" Am I being hyperpedantic or maybe just wrong?

Without even seeing Bryn's post above, it immediately stuck me that what they really meant was "30% lower crop yield". 'Yield' clears up the 'fewer crops' error - it will presumably be the usual number of crop varieties! Silly BBC R4 news editor - and not for the first time.

[Pabmusic]

Without even seeing Bryn's post above, it immediately stuck me that what they really meant was "30% lower crop yield". 'Yield' clears up the 'fewer crops' error - it will presumably be the usual number of crop varieties! Silly BBC R4 news editor - and not for the first time.

The more I think of it, the more I feel it would have been better to recast the sentence entirely. "This year's harvest will be only 70% of last year's" or better still "the size of this year's harvest will be about two-thirds of last year's".

[mercia]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22866982

"wheat crop down by third" - "wheat harvest could be 30% smaller" - "a smaller area was planted" - "lower-than-normal crop yield"

I guess if you plant less, inevitably you will harvest less

[french frank]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22866982

"wheat crop down by third" - "wheat harvest could be 30% smaller" - "a smaller area was planted" - "lower-than-normal crop yield".

Which article contains a usage which I immediately thought of in connection with 'plethora', namely the phrase 'a myriad of factors'.

I admit that my own usage would be 'myriad factors', though I see a discussion of this point here which makes sense. Adjective or noun?

[mercia]

Adjective or noun?

Oxford online says both

http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/myriad?q=myriad

[french frank]

Was just wondering today whether there was any sociological significance to the change (has there been one?) from 'swimming baths' to 'swimming pool'? Our old Bristol North Baths were closed recently for conversion, so no longer contain the swimming pool (replaced by the '(swimming) pool' at the new Leisure Centre up the road. And I see the 'Acton Swimming Baths' are of a similiar date (1904) - and are being also converted.

[mercia]

in ye olden days weren't the public baths somewhere one could go literally to take a bath (and wash your clothes) as well as go for a swim ?

[french frank]

in ye olden days weren't the public baths somewhere one could go literally to take a bath (and wash your clothes) as well as go for a swim ?

I assume so, though I'm not sure whether you took your 'bath' in the swimming pool or whether there were separate bathing facilities (in baths).