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.

YABU

But Tesco would probably recommend the more "down-with-the-kids" 'less stuff.'

On the other hand you may wish to congratulate Tesco for their alliteration, notwithstanding their grammatical inaccuracy.

Personally I would never shop there anyway. Tesco is the Rupert Murdoch of the retail world, as well as being only one step up from ASDA which is practically Neanderthal

Rather apt Donnie, alliteration being a technique favored by the Murdock press

yes, as well as monosyllables for the uber-dumb of its readership.

As long as Tesco never include alot in any advert, I'll be ok. But if they do.....

That would bother me too. Ring them!

I think tesco should get cilla black to do an advert as her talking is similar to tesco writing.

ha ha :o

YANBU.

I didn't understand what "more luxury, less lorries" meant. I wasn't actually being pedantic. I genuinely didn't understand what "less lorries" meant.

It was only when I read the OP that I realised it was referring to "fewer lorries"...in which case...why not use the phrase... "Fewer lorries"??

"As if "10 Items or Less" weren't infuriating enough"
Hm. I think this is correct, because it's hypothetical.

I agree with you FredFredGeorge. I think people like some of the 'rules' (which aren't actually rules but preferences) because it makes them feel superior.

On the contrary, Fayrazzled, some people dislike the use of proper grammar because it makes them feel insecure, and that is nothing whatsoever to do with the views of other people. If big companies like Tescos use the correct grammar others will follow, it becomes part of everyone's natural way of speaking and everyone is happy.

Well, grammar is grammar and there are rules. You choose to follow the rules or ignore them, as you wish. You cannot say 'less lorries' because 'less' is used to define a single quantity as opposed to a number. Therefore we have 'fewer' lorries, just as we would have 'less' water. Or would some of you think 'fewer water' or 'fewer lunch' is acceptable?

Perhaps as someone said earlier, Tesco deliberately uses poor grammar so as not to risk alienating its target market - or indeed they would likely know no better [snob emoticon]

Mathematics only uses 'less' never 'fewer' and this relates only to amounts; just a thought for all you linguists who think less is not in common usage maybe you need to broaden your horizons < just saying like>.

From the revised EYFS curriculum:
Numeracy: "Uses the language of ‘more’ and ‘fewer’ to compare two sets of objects."

I was just thinking about maths terms as well. In school we never say 2 is fewer than 3.

What about the opposite? We say more rain and more lorries but less rain and fewer lorries. I'd be quite happy for less and fewer to be interchangeable, we all know what it means.

I didn't understand what "more luxury, less lorries" meant. I wasn't actually being pedantic. I genuinely didn't understand what "less lorries" meant.

What on earth did you think it meant, Betty? Now you know it is referring to fewer lorries, are you able to explain how Tesco is managing to achieve this?

OK, so if less is the opposite to more, how come we can say "more lorries on the road," but not "less?" It should be 'fewer.' There are two antonyms to more, where quantity/amount is key, but it doesn't matter the other way round?

English language, eh?

Oops, X posted with fanny.

Well halfspam I am not from the UK and so do not follow that curriculum but I can assure you more and less than are the mathematical terms widely used here in Ireland and further afield as far as I am aware. Do you refer to the symbols I slyly inserted in my above post as more than and fewer than so?

Fanny, when I was a TA we used 2 is fewer than 3.

If big companies like Tescos use the correct grammar others will follow, it becomes part of everyone's natural way of speaking and everyone is happy.

I believe Safeway started using '10 items or fewer' about 15 years ago - not sure if Morrisons does now, but Tesco has chosen not to follow suit. Personally, I think it sounds a very clumsy way of saying 'fewer than 11 items'.

Valium do you refer to the symbol as < fewer than?