To tell you that it's "rein" not "reign".

[FlyingElbows]

Because it is and it's doing my tits in!!

Rein. Rein. Rein. Rein. Rein.

Free rein. It's an equestrian term meaning to give the horse freedom of movement.

It is NOT reign. That's what the Queen does.

It's right up there with "intensive purposes" and "doggy dog world"!!

There is also nothing wrong with "5 items or less".

RaqMax 😂😂 at a slithering Swiss roll!

There is also nothing wrong with "5 items or less"

Yes there is - for quantifiable items it should be 'fewer'. You use the word 'less' for things that you aren't able to count like flour, liquids or temperature etc.

So you would say 'less sugar', and you would say 'fewer sugar lumps'

It depends what you think the phrase "5 items or less" is a contraction of. It could quite reasonably be a contraction of "5 items or less than that amount of shopping".

The fewer/less debate frequently rages on PC.

It's an over-correction. If you have time you can read the zillion threads about it on PC. It's a useful yardstick to spot the people who think they know about grammar.....(like the eejits who made Tesco change their (perfectly correct) sign a few years back.

Would you say "I am earning five thousand pounds less" or "fewer"

Exactly.

Prism explains it perfectly here:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/pedants_corner/a1778694-Less-than-or-fewer-than

Argh! There is everything wrong with "5 items or less"

"Less" refers to volume or mass; "fewer" refers to number.

Basic stuff.

Point immediately proven.

AddictedtoLove

Nothing wrong with "better than half price". It simply means this is a better deal than it would be were it half price. Perfectly good language

Horrible clumsy language. (imo)

Worst one of all for me is must of instead of must have

"Less" refers to volume or mass; "fewer" refers to number.Basic stuff

Except it doesn't always.

We had less than $1,000 in the bank.
We’re less than 50 miles away.
I can fix the roof in less than 12 hours.

All less, all number. And there are more.

You can even combine it with a singular unit and say you are less than six foot two tall! Isn't language fun?

But you'd say "ten or fewer items", not "ten or less items" so the standard version is "ten items or fewer" ... isn't it? I don't get how changing the word order would make the latter into a contraction.

(Personally I'm quite happy with the non-standard version, but have to use standard versions for work.)

Maybe contraction isn't quite the right phrase? I mean that we are talking about "items of shopping". Shopping isn't really countable is it? Shopping is usually treated as a mass noun.

Have a look at the link Vintage posted above for a much better explanation than I'm giving!

The less/fewer debate is something I have managed to drum into my DCs heads. They tell me it's very annoying as now they notice whenever they are wrongly used.

I was very disappointed when the new Head of M&S used less instead of fewer in press interviews recently, but so many people do, I think less will win out. It really grates.
Some of the mistakes in this thread are hilarious! Very enjoyable

Oh the draws! A friend was going through her 'draws' looking for something yesterday. I managed not to add the word DRAWERS as a comment.

Many people seem to struggle with borrow/borrowed/loan/lend. I have seen posts reading 'she asked me for a lend' or 'I took it for a lend'.

Substitute is one that people get muddled with and it does obscure the meaning.

'I had no cinnamon so I used mixed spice instead' = 'I substituted mixed spice for cinnamon'. Lots of people nowadays write that the other way around with the result that they say the exact opposite of what they intended.

Gasp0de - I find that tricky for some reason.

If I said "I substituted mixed spice with cinnamon" would that mean the opposite to your sentence or is it just nonsense? I suspect it's just nonsense.

splendide - I think you're right. Substituted with or by would be the opposite of for.

It's ASTRONAUT

NOT ASTRONAUGHT.

Seen this too much lately.

One thing that I find really find difficult not to correct whether in RL or online is 'well. I turned around and I was like xxxx and then he/she turned around and was like xxxx.'

I live in the south west and the turned of spelt turnt.

Oh the draws! A friend was going through her 'draws' looking for something yesterday.

Ah, now that's mistake that can't be blamed on Americans (or on any other group of rhotic speakers.)

One thing that I find really find difficult not to correct whether in RL or online is 'well. I turned around and I was like xxxx and then he/she turned around and was like xxxx.'

They'll be very dizzy at the end of that conversation!

splendide, I think you're right. Increasingly I get muddled with this one myself and try to reword the sentence to avoid using substitute!

basic indeed.....in very elementary English, less does indeed refer to uncountable, whilst fewer refers to countable. Once you get beyond prescriptive (and often arbitrary- look up the history of "few" v "less" usage, and you might be surprised...) elementary stuff, the nuances can not only be fascinating, but quite eye-opening.

Presuming that most native speakers are beyond basic English, then the threads on PC, and in particular Prism's contributions, are worth a read.

For the supermarket checkout, it suffices that fewer is correct, and less is not wrong.