To think that grammar matters and to ring Tesco to berate them for their "Same luxury, less lorries" sticker on my loo roll?

[SmiteYouWithThunderbolts]

As the title says really... As if "10 Items or Less" wasn't infuriating enough, Tesco have now extended this to proudly proclaiming that they use LESS lorries to transport their packs of loo roll.

I would like to ring them just to scream the word "FEWER" down the phone at them.

It does matter, doesn't it? Ok, so perhaps in forums and private emails it matters less if there are a handful of errors here and there, but on advertising and packaging from a national supermarket chain, AIBU to expect them to at least use the correct words?

Did that bit of packaging really make it through every level of their massive marketing department without a single person pointing out the erroneous use of "less"? Or was it a conscious decision because... well... Nope, I cannot fathom the logic of why anyone would knowingly use the wrong word.

This actually made me cross enough to take a photo of the offending item and tweet it to Tesco. That was maybe slightly U of me.

tesco are (in the main) aiming to sell to the sort of people whose level of education is such that they are unaware that 'fewer' should be used instead of 'less'

if Tesco were grammatically correct they might well alienate their target market

Smite, come and join us. I came over all warm and fuzzy when I discovered that special place on MN for pedants. I've since learned that you can now start a sentence with 'and' and splitting an infinitive is no longer a capital offence.

Drop, fewer is usually used for something which can be counted. For,example less bread and fewer slices of bread. In the Tesco case, fewer lorries and, perhaps, less fuel.

As I understand it, anything that can be counted individually, e.g. lorries, sweets, people, bananas, pens, items or whatever, would be "fewer."
If you are talking about an amount of something, e.g. sugar, grass (unless it was individual grains or blades), then it would be "less."

Exactly, less mash, fewer chips.

Clam - my hero! It drives me mad when they talk about amount of people. NO! NO! NO! You can count the blooming people so it's a number of people. Same rule applies to fewer and less. Really not that difficult or complicated at all.

Can be counted -> number or fewer
Can't be counted -> amount or less

Ah, but before I get too big-headed, what about fractions? Would it be fewer than half, or less than half? Or does it depend on half of what? An amount or a number?
So, fewer than half of the people were running?
Less than half the lawn needed mowing?

GAAAAHHH!

if Tesco were grammatically correct they might well alienate their target market

how would their target market know the difference?

The correct grammar would sound pretentious or just feel out of line with their everyday way of speaking.

Let's not forget that language is dynamic, meaning shifts constantly.
Different social groups distinguish themselves in part by the way they speak.

Birds!

It's the "better than half price" that really gets me. What the hell does that mean?

"The correct grammar would sound pretentious"

So lets dumb everything down?

Clam, I am attempting to explain, not exonerate!

OK, sorry.

Correct grammar is exactly that - nothing pretentious about it!

FWIW, my local American supermarket has '15 items or fewer' signs.

Tesco should know better, YANBU OP.

Tesco are motivated by the desire to make a profit, not educate people, they want customers to feel comfortable with the language that they use in their ads....so that they identify with the brand and feel at home shopping in tesco.
(it makes me cringe too)

Oooh, thanks everyone for your lovely explanations. Understand now. Every day`s a school day!

I'm not saying it IS pretentious, I'm suggesting it may feel pretentious to tesco customers.

I'd imagine a company with the resources of tesco would put alot of thought into the wording of it's ads...I doubt that the grammar is accidental!

I would complain. I saw an advert with the same mistake recently; I can't remember which company's marketing it was but it infuriated me! These things do matter - otherwise we might as well just grunt at each other.

But why should correct grammar and syntax be alienating? I really don't understand. It's as though you're suggesting that people do/should take pride in their ignorance.

I think my explanations are clear and adequate..if you still dont get it too bad, I'm not going to write an essay

CailinDana Read the thread - " aiming to sell to the sort of people whose level of education is such that they are unaware that 'fewer' should be used instead of 'less' " that is the poster calling people stupid?

For those asking WHY? the explanations aren't very good, since while that is the justification (counting nouns) it doesn't explain where the rule came from. And it's a rule with very little evidence behind it, none of the great English authors obeyed it, it's not a common feature of other languages - even ones who have a prescriptive grammar, which English generally never has because dialects make for such different usage.

It almost certainly came from a style guide by Robert Baker in 1770, who preferred it - ie thought it looks better, and in many cases it does, but equally often the reverse is clearer. I think "10 items or less" is clearer and sounds better.

These style decisions were elevated into "rules" during the late 19th century when people tried to regularise the language, and like much to do with language it was often used as a way to help control people

"That's one less thing I have to do today".
vs
"That's one fewer thing I have to do today".

Do people really prefer the second one (which follows the rule) than the first?

Merriam-Webster Dictionary of English Usage is fine with the usage of less, The Cambridge Guide to English Usage is fine, Shakespeare and Dickens think it's fine. It's pretty much just grammar pedants who don't.

But "thing" is in the singular there, which is what I think makes the difference.
You would say "I had fewer things to do yesterday than today."