The Great Typo Hunt

jamie writes "Incensed by a 'no tresspassing' sign, Jeff Deck launched a cross-country trip to right grammatical wrongs. He enlisted a friend, Benjamin D. Herson, and together they erased errant quotation marks, rectified misspellings and cut unnecessary possessive apostrophes. The Great Typo Hunt is the story of their crusade." We have already covered the duo's fight with The National Park Service.

Comments

Re:Kind of douchey.

[MarkGriz]

Kind of? More like supremely...

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/2008/08/22/20080822grammarcops0822.html

On March 28, while at Desert View Watchtower on the South Rim, they used a white-out product and a permanent marker to deface a sign painted more than 60 years ago by artist Mary Colter. The sign, a National Historic Landmark, was considered unique and irreplaceable, according to Sandy Raynor, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Attorney's Office in Phoenix.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Bullshit.

[lgw]

If you're actually interested: fewer relates to countable nouns, less to uncountable. Less water, fewer glasses. "Less glasses" sounds as wrong as "fewer water".

Of course, few people read edited prose these days, and so most lack the "ear" for poor usage. It will be an odd time for language, with almost everyone literate but not reading books.

Re:less / fewer

[uglyduckling]

"Data" is plural; the singular is "datum". Just like errata and erratum. In a sense you're right, "data" has turned into a popular word and its meaning is changing, but trying to claim that it has recently become popular to use it as plural is completely wrong; rather the reverse is true.

You may want to finish that quote.

[Estanislao Mart�nez]

From dictionary.com: "Even though less has been used before plural nouns ( less words; less men ) since the time of King Alfred, many modern usage guides say that only fewer can be used in such contexts. Less, they say, should modify singular mass nouns ( less sugar; less money ) and singular abstract nouns ( less honesty; less love ). It should modify plural nouns only when they suggest combination into a unit, group, or aggregation: less than $50 (a sum of money); less than three miles (a unit of distance). With plural nouns specifying individuals or readily distinguishable units, the guides say that fewer is the only proper choice: fewer words; fewer men; no fewer than 31 of the 50 states."

You know, that quote continues. The next sentence after you cut it off: "Modern standard English practice does not reflect this distinction."

Note that they said standard. The entry is actually endorsing the use of constructions like less words and less men.

It's no surprise that people don't understand this distinction. Look at the confusion around the word data, which has become popular over the last decade or two to treat as a plural ("The data suggest..." when it should be "The data suggests..."). I'm quite certain that many people will protest this post, that "data" is plural, and treating it as such is correct.

Um, from dictionary.com: "data (noun): a pl. of datum." Yes, the very same source that you misleadingly cite as an authority above for less/fewer.

If "data" is plural, then so are the following: sugar, information, hair, media, agenda...

Care to actually argue why? I can't tell you how wrong you are about that unless you spell out why you think so.