This classic xkcd webcomic (#386, Duty Calls) captures the common online absurdity of exerting great effort to prove to a stranger that he is wrong and you are right about something that doesn’t matter to anyone. I mean, who would do something like that?

Me, that’s who.

It’s Friday. Indulge me. Or not – see you tomorrow, in that case. I want to see if I can explain this clearly enough to communicate to somebody – anybody:

In a Facebook comment about this week’s special election in Kansas, a friend – let’s call him RAF – noted that a candidate had lost that friend’s precinct “by less than 40 votes.”

Another friend – lets call him MEB – responded, “If you had said ‘fewer’ I would have been more sympathetic.”

Feeling frisky, I jumped in with “Meh. He’s taking ‘40 votes’ as a single quantity, not a collection of multiple objects,” meaning that either “fewer” or “less” could be correct, depending on whether you saw “40 votes” as singular or plural. (Don’t make up your mind yet – it’s a legitimate point of grammar.)

Then a stranger – we can call him either KNC or The Man Who is Wrong on the Internet – refuted my explanation with this elegant takedown, “Ardis E. Parshall No, that would not be grammatical!”

As persuasive as “Nunh-unh!” is as an argument, I persisted, with a more detailed explanation:

KNC It very much *is* grammatical, and expresses a subtle difference from the way MEB read it. When each unit of a plural noun (each individual vote, in this case) is considered as a separate item, then it is plural and takes ‘fewer’ (and any affected verb is plural). When, however, multiple items are considered as a mass (a block of votes, a single unit containing 40 votes), then it is singular and takes ‘less’ (and any affected verb is singular).

The way RAF wrote it treats the votes as an undifferentiated mass — the losing margin. Whether he thought about that and consciously chose his grammar to suit is irrelevant: the grammar expresses this distinction. MEB’s version is also correct, but expresses something subtly different.

To which The Man Who is Wrong on the Internet responded: “Ardis E. Parshall ‘less’ refers to quantity; ‘fewer’ to numbers.’ See page 51 of Strunk and White’s ‘The Elements of Style,’ fourth edition. 2000. Allyn and Bacon publishers. and other grammar books.”

True. Oh, so very true. There can really be no argument whatsoever that “less” is used in reference to quantity, while “fewer” is used in reference to number.

That’s entirely beside the point of my argument, though, which already embraces the use of “less” for quantity and “fewer” for number.

The issue, which The Man Who is Wrong on the Internet skips blithely by without consideration, is the question of whether “40 votes” is intended to be singular, or plural. Treating it as singular calls for “less” (RAF’s version) while treating it as plural (MEB’s version) calls for “fewer.”

Of course “40 votes” can easily be seen as plural – the noun ends in -s, the usual English marker of plurality. Hurray! On that we can all agree.

But there is also such a thing as a “mass noun” – a noun that while apparently plural can be read as singular, or that while apparently singular can be read as plural:

It’s easiest to grasp this concept with words that are in a singular form but which can logically refer to number: Team, for example, is a word that looks singular (there is no -s or other marker of plurality), but which logically refers to multiple people. Herd is a singular word, while the thing it refers to is composed of multiple, countable, individual parts. Ditto for class, and company and many similar words. For a Mormon history blog, maybe we should throw in quorum and mob and presidency and council.

American English almost always puts these words in singular contexts: “The herd was sold” uses a singular verb. “The platoon is standing at attention.” When it’s awkward to treat multiple parts as a single unit, we might insert another word to make it all easier: Instead of “The team put its hands over its hearts,” we might alter it to “Team members put their hands over their hearts.”

British English often goes the other way, though, putting a mass noun into a plural context despite its apparent singular form: “The Board are expected to decide in favor” or “The faculty are meeting at noon.”

So you see how a noun, although in a singular form, may very well be understood and treated grammatically as plural.

It’s possible to go the other way, too: A noun in a plural form may be treated as singular; a mass noun referring to multiple, countable, individual parts may be grammatically treated as a singular unit:

“Five minutes is all I can spare for this conversation” is grammatically correct – even though the word minutes ends with the plural marker -s, even though you can count 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, the term refers to a block of time, a singular unit of time, one that it doesn’t make sense to subdivide.

“Ten dollars is too much to pay.” Plural word, with countable components, but you’re treating it as a singular mass, with a singular verb.

RAF’s original “40 votes” is countable – or it would be, if The Man Who is Wrong on the Internet used all his fingers and toes, and his best friend let him borrow his fingers and toes – but it still makes perfect sense, logically and grammatically, to treat that “40 votes” as a single unit: It is a block of 40 votes, the margin of loss in that precinct. If you think of the votes as a single unit, a mass noun, then the word should be in a grammatical context of singular verbs and adjectives and adverbs.

So “40 votes” can logically and grammatically be considered plural, which would rightly call for the modifier “fewer.”

But “40 votes” can also logically and grammatically be considered a singular mass, which would rightly call for the modifier “less.”

That, my dear Man Who is Wrong on the Internet, is the point – not whether “less” accompanies singular and “fewer” accompanies plural, but whether the speaker is treating “40 votes” as singular or plural.

Thank goodness we’ve got that settled! Thank goodness I am Never Wrong on the Internet! {wink}

For my next act, who has a dead horse I can beat?