c4countdown

This is one of my pet bugbears so I thought I'd canvass opinion and see if it's only me!!

I notice a lot of adverts etc saying that something has 'four times more' whatever than something else. I think they mean to say 'four times as much'.

If I have £10 and you have 'four times as much' as me, then you have £40. But if you have 'four times more' than me, surely you have £50, don't you?

Any thoughts welcome as I think I'm getting on my husband's nerves pointing these out all the time!!

I think you're right, Karen, and I empathise.
I'm also the kind of person who gets annoyed at '8 items or less' which should be '8 items or fewer', and misplaced apostrophes.

For our sanities' sake, the thing to do is realise that many people aren't as pedantic as us, and that really we know what they mean, even if it's inaccurate.

Julie T wrote:I'm also the kind of person who gets annoyed at [...] misplaced apostrophes.

Julie T wrote:For our sanities sake

Matt Morrison wrote:

Julie T wrote:I'm also the kind of person who gets annoyed at [...] misplaced apostrophes.

Julie T wrote:For our sanities sake

LOL! oops!

Been trying to work out how I feel about your post Karen. I've decided I'm totally okay with 'four times more' and 'four times as much' being used interchangeably.

If Cheese A is 10% fat and Cheese B is 100% fat, it just doesn't seem intuitive to say Cheese B has 'nine times more' fat. I think it's as much about the way our brains process the numbers as it is about the actual definition of the words.

Matt Morrison wrote: If Cheese A is 10% fat and Cheese B is 100% fat, it just doesn't seem intuitive to say Cheese B has 'nine times more' fat.

I'd just say 'Cheese B has ten times as much fat'.

I think those involved in advertising must have decided that the word 'more' is much more powerful than saying 'as much' - which is fine I guess. But it really shouldn't feature in news bulletins (which it does).

Karen Pearson wrote:

Matt Morrison wrote: If Cheese A is 10% fat and Cheese B is 100% fat, it just doesn't seem intuitive to say Cheese B has 'nine times more' fat.

I'd just say 'Cheese B has ten times as much fat'.

Thats' ridiculous.

'Cheese B is 10 times as much tastier then Cheese A' makes many more sense.

There was an advert I saw a while ago for some sort of hair product, which featured the line "doctor - her hair is up to 5 times as shiny" (although I've probably got the number wgon).

Worst ever form of ignorant advertising I saw was for some car by Ford. It had the phrase "our lowest friction tyres ever, for a smoother ride"
Of course, tyres need lots of friction else they can't move. The lower friction they are, the more it feels like your car is driving on ice...

In terms of grammar, look out for:
10 items or less (10 items or fewer)
Fill out a form (Fill in a form)
Off his own back (Off his own bat)
Fine Toothcomb (Fine-tooth comb)
Just desserts (Just deserts)

But don't hate us grammar-nazis, we're upset by society enough as it is...

Michael Wallace wrote:There was an advert I saw a while ago for some sort of hair product, which featured the line "doctor - her hair is up to 5 times as shiny" (although I've probably got the number wgon).

Haha yeah, "up to" is a fucking classic. "A teensier bit shinier", "about the same shininess you cunt", "0.1% more shiny" and "barely shiny at all" are all "up to 5 times as shiny".

Karen Pearson wrote:

Matt Morrison wrote: If Cheese A is 10% fat and Cheese B is 100% fat, it just doesn't seem intuitive to say Cheese B has 'nine times more' fat.

I'd just say 'Cheese B has ten times as much fat'.

Ah, sorry Karen, I follow now - I thought you were recommending both could be used but more accurately (as you perceived it) but you were just trying to cut out the confusion by losing the 'times more' route.
In which case: I agree.

Especially as statements such as "I masturbated ten times more this week than I did last week" are very ambiguous - 10 individual occasions more frequently, or on 10 times as many occasions?

Kieran Child wrote:But don't hate us grammar-nazis, we're upset by society enough as it is...

Shouldn't Nazi be capitalised?

^Oooooh, this is more adverts than grammar.
Yes I like the "up to x times" as well
Also, things that work "with" a healthy lifestyle. Note that holding a pineapple in your hand all the time, when combined with a healthy lifestyle, will help you lose weight.

The old Dolmio adverts were the best for tiny text at the bottom. It had some Italian stereotype saying "aaaah, this-a pasta source is just-a like mama used to make" then at the bottom of the screen in tiny white text were the words "made in Holland"

More recently, that's changed to "Made in the EU" which is a shame, but it was still good.

One that annoys me is when newsreaders say things like "interest rates have been cut to half a per cent". "Per cent" means "for each hundred", so "ten per cent" is "ten for (or in) each hundred". Saying "half a per cent" is therefore saying "half a for each hundred" which is total nonsense. It should be "half of one per cent".

I don't know why it does but it infuriates me when a shop assistant tells me to enter my 'PIN Number'......

Matt Morrison wrote:statements such as "I masturbated ten times more this week than I did last week" are very ambiguous - 10 individual occasions more frequently, or on 10 times as many occasions?

Thanks for reminding me of my favourite Thom Gunn poem.

Darren Carter wrote:I don't know why it does but it infuriates me when a shop assistant tells me to enter my 'PIN Number'......

D DAY
HIV Virus
ATM Machine

They're everywhere

Kieran Child wrote:

Darren Carter wrote:I don't know why it does but it infuriates me when a shop assistant tells me to enter my 'PIN Number'......

D DAY
HIV Virus
ATM Machine

They're everywhere

PCB Board
ISP Provider

Darren Carter wrote:I don't know why it does but it infuriates me when a shop assistant tells me to enter my 'PIN Number'......

Actually they're saying PINumber so they're correct.

Kieran Child wrote:Fill out a form (Fill in a form)

How is this a grammatical error? It's just a different phrase.

Off his own back (Off his own bat)

Again, the same amount of sense (not much) either way.

And nazi can be lower case (at least in Collins, I don't have a dictionary to hand.) It could be useful to distinguish the general idea of "person with forceful ideology" from an actual member of the Nazi Party.

I'm sure I read once that the "El" in El Alamein means "The". But Alamein comes from another Arabic language, and is two words run together, the first of which, "Al", means "The". So when one speaks of, say, the El Alamein campaign, that's a pretty classy turn of phrase. (For younger readers. It was a battle. Somewhere near Carthage probably.)

David Williams wrote:I'm sure I read once that the "El" in El Alamein means "The". But Alamein comes from another Arabic language, and is two words run together, the first of which, "Al", means "The". So when one speaks of, say, the El Alamein campaign, that's a pretty classy turn of phrase. (For younger readers. It was a battle. Somewhere near Carthage probably.)

Yeah, the El is Spanish and the Al is Arabic. It's similarly awkward when you have titles which start with an article, so you have to say odd things like "I would like a The Dark Knight figurine."

Charlie Reams wrote:

David Williams wrote:I'm sure I read once that the "El" in El Alamein means "The". But Alamein comes from another Arabic language, and is two words run together, the first of which, "Al", means "The". So when one speaks of, say, the El Alamein campaign, that's a pretty classy turn of phrase. (For younger readers. It was a battle. Somewhere near Carthage probably.)

Yeah, the El is Spanish and the Al is Arabic. It's similarly awkward when you have titles which start with an article, so you have to say odd things like "I would like a The Dark Knight figurine."

"I would like to buy the The The album The Singles Of The The."

Kieran Child wrote:The old Dolmio adverts were the best for tiny text at the bottom. It had some Italian stereotype saying "aaaah, this-a pasta source is just-a like mama used to make" then at the bottom of the screen in tiny white text were the words "made in Holland"

Lol I remember another one aaaages ago for some pizza, Dr Oetker, that's it! And the announcer's all like "In real Italian pizzeria we use...." all the while some Italian tenor is warbling away, and then at the bottom of the screen... Made in Germany! Not even fine print. Plain as day!

I've always taken "off his own bat" to be a cricketing reference, something about how it's him scoring the runs rather than... I dunno, if he's the other batsman and just runs up and down a bit? (I don't know much about cricket, can you tell?). So "off his own back" does sound incorrect to me.

I don't mind being pedantic when incorrect use of words actually clouds meaning, but things like "fewer" vs. "less" just seem like arbitrary rules. In practice, those words are essentially synonyms when applied to quantities, regardless of petty distinctions between countable and uncountable quantities. "Less than ten items" is perfectly clear.

"Fill in" a form is correct as you are completing the form. People "fill out" if they get heavier. "Fill out a form" is an Americanism, which should be sufficient reason not to use it!

You use "fewer" for numbers, so "8 items or fewer" is right (as used by Waitrose!) It is OK to say someone weighs "100 kg or less", as that is an amount. The meaning is still clear if you say "8 items or less", and perhaps we should only worry with ambiguity results.

For example, "bimonthly" means "once every two months" or "twice a month".

Of course the language changes, as we have said before...

Percentages are great fun - when a company was increasing the amount they deducted from salary, they said the amount would increase from 2.5 % of salary, to 3.5 %, which they called an increase of 1 %, so I said, "er, actually it's a 40 % increase." [For example 2.5 % of £20000 is £500; 3.5 % of £20000 is £700, so you are paying £200 more, which is 40 % of £500.... but lots of people continue to disagree]

A genuine case in a previous financial crisis saw a company telling its staff they must take a 10 % pay cut, but when things improved they would get a 10 % pay increase. As this was better than being out of work, they agreed. But, if you get £100 a week, a 10 % pay cut takes you to £90 a week - then increase that by 10 % takes you to £99 a week...

But my favourite was when someone said they wanted to reduce costs by 200 %. A laudable aim, until you think that once you have reduced costs by 100 % you are paying nothing, so how can you reduce them more?

The "fine-toothed comb" has been around for ages, then someone decided they would omit the "fine", and you hear ludicrous comments like, "police are going through the evidence with a toothcomb". Do these people really imagine that you would comb your teeth?

Kevin

Karen, after reading your post carefully I agree with you. Four times more would be 50, while four times as much would be 10,000 pounds! What were you watching, a car commercial?

And Darren, I know what you mean about your post. The term "PIN number" sounds like a weapon to you, doesn't it?

PIN number - obviously it should be PI number, but then everyone's would be the same, although it would take infinitely long to type it in so there would be no fraud.

That five times shinier thing must be rubbish. What are the units of shininess anyway? How do you measure it?

I actually disagree with the "8 items or less" complaint that people have. As I said here: http://www.c4countdown.co.uk/viewtopic. ... 064#p36064

On a vaguely related note, I think it's OK to say "less" instead of "fewer". "more" works with both count nouns and mass nouns and I see "less" as just the opposite of "more". It just happens that there is also an extra word "fewer" that only works for count nouns and has no opposite.

A couple of bits of "journalese" that annoy me:

When the news talks of five troops being killed - surely that doesn't make sense. As far as I understand "troops" is a term for a number of soldiers that can't be singularised in that context. It's like referring to lots of people as the masses and then calling one of them a mass.

And when they say that some criminals have been sentenced to a total of 20 years in prison. That is complete bollocks and has no relevance to anyone. So there are five of them and got four years each. Why not look at the total number of atoms and say how many years they've been sentenced to? Cunts.

Gavin Chipper wrote:That five times shinier thing must be rubbish. What are the units of shininess anyway? How do you measure it?

That was the main thing I found funny about it, that and the awkward phrasing (thanks to the 'up to' having to be shoe-horned in). Although I'd imagine there might be some measure of reflectiveness, since you can presumably shine a light at something and see how much comes back, or whatever.

Kevin Thurlow wrote:"Fill in" a form is correct as you are completing the form. People "fill out" if they get heavier. "Fill out a form" is an Americanism, which should be sufficient reason not to use it!

I was subtly alluding to the fact that it's just xenophobia, but thanks for making it nice and clear in case anyone thought you had an actual point.

Michael Wallace wrote:Although I'd imagine there might be some measure of reflectiveness, since you can presumably shine a light at something and see how much comes back, or whatever.

Indeed, although of course that would be a dimensionless quantity.