• stoly@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    “Fewer” since they are countable.

    ETA this is basic grammar and not something you can just take exception with because you feel like it. The responses I’m receiving are very odd.

    • uis@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      If there are two bike lanes merging into one, there are one, two or three bike lanes?

            • chumbalumber
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              3 months ago

              Depends on if you’re using water to include types of water (if, like a maniacal madman, you have mixed Evian, Buxton and Harrogate mineral water into one jug). Then ‘i mixed fewer waters’ or ‘there are fewer waters in that glass’ would be valid.

              To be clear: I’m not the person you replied to, just someone who finds it quite interesting (in the same way that the plural fishes is valid if you’re talking about different species of fish).

              And yes, I know prescriptivism is bad, but also it is quite fun.

              • stoly@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                3 months ago

                Those are homonyms. Water versus waters. The second one is metaphorical.

                I did enjoy your comment and you sound like you’ve had some linguistic training.

                • chumbalumber
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Eh, you wouldn’t use the noun water to refer to atoms of water. ‘How many waters are there?’ to refer to atoms of water is the statement of someone deranged

                  • aidan@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    Water only exists as atoms. There is no non-discrete water, it is inherently in reality discrete.

            • aidan@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              I believe there are about 55.508435 moles of H2O in a liter of water at sea level (basically assuming 1 liter of water = 1kg of water)

                • aidan@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Atoms of water are measured in moles. Atoms are discrete units, a mole is just a certain number of them

                  • stoly@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    So you understand then why water is uncountable but atoms are not. Congratulations. What a strange pedantic hill you choosing to die on.

            • uis@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              If there are two bike lanes merging into one, there are one, two or three bike lanes?

              Water isn’t countable but lanes are.

              What question are you answering?

    • sem
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      They are indeed… Where did the whole “if two bike lanes converge” question come from??

      I was going to make the same joke.

      “Fewer. I mean more. More bike lanes.”