This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential to the operation of the site, while others help to improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used. For more information, please see the ProZ.com privacy policy.
Cookie settings
general meaning of the sentence
general meaning of the sentence
Mar 10, 2017 17:56
7 yrs ago
3 viewers *
English term

Is it unforgivable to write \'over 1000\'?

English Other General / Conversation / Greetings / Letters usage of more than / over
This morning I was asked to write to a client´s end client to explain that a translation is excellent, precisely BECAUSE it is a little free, and does not always slavishly follow the words and syntax of the source.

The end client wants firm rules, and I have to admit that where English is concerned, they are few and far between.

The client doesn't like split infinitives, and I avoid them, but have come to the point where I will not turn a sentence inside out either, just to officiously stick to a rule. ;-)

I caught myself writing 'over 1000' - which I have happily said when applicable, until someone ticked me off a few years ago and told me: 'If it's countable, you have to say more than.
Like the less versus fewer discussion.'
'Over 1000' could be source language interference - in Danish you can say 'langt over 1000' if that is what you mean.

However, to me, not allowing it is just one of those things pedants like to hit the rest of us on the head with.

I personally have no problem with 'less than ten biscuits' or the 'five items or less' checkout in the supermarket either. Except when I have too many items in my basket, of course.

Is this total heresy? Suddenly the ex-pat in me wonders whether I am getting too old and out of touch.
In the case of the message to the client, I amended the sentence to 'more than 1000', because I did not want to discuss anything controversial with them. (Or him/her? There were two sets of initials, I think...)

Sorry about the silly question - don't let it spoil your weekend!
Responses
4 +9 Over one thousand
Votes to reclassify question as PRO/non-PRO:

Non-PRO (2): Edith Kelly, Yvonne Gallagher

When entering new questions, KudoZ askers are given an opportunity* to classify the difficulty of their questions as 'easy' or 'pro'. If you feel a question marked 'easy' should actually be marked 'pro', and if you have earned more than 20 KudoZ points, you can click the "Vote PRO" button to recommend that change.

How to tell the difference between "easy" and "pro" questions:

An easy question is one that any bilingual person would be able to answer correctly. (Or in the case of monolingual questions, an easy question is one that any native speaker of the language would be able to answer correctly.)

A pro question is anything else... in other words, any question that requires knowledge or skills that are specialized (even slightly).

Another way to think of the difficulty levels is this: an easy question is one that deals with everyday conversation. A pro question is anything else.

When deciding between easy and pro, err on the side of pro. Most questions will be pro.

* Note: non-member askers are not given the option of entering 'pro' questions; the only way for their questions to be classified as 'pro' is for a ProZ.com member or members to re-classify it.

Discussion

jccantrell Mar 12, 2017:
Just to add another log to the fire Read this, in your spare time:
http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/20170301-why-all-english-sp...
Christine Andersen (asker) Mar 12, 2017:
THANK YOU, EVERYONE! Thank you for a brilliant discussion while I was out getting some air and in offline contact with the neighbours...
Thanks too for the reminder to write one thousand out in full. I definitely prefer to write all round numbers, small numbers and so on as text when basically they are text.

One of the issues with the translation we were discussing was the comma in four-figure numbers, and how to write numbers generally - there were one or two places where the decimal comma had not been changed to a point. Many Scandinavians leave out the comma with four figures, as in dates, and use a space for 10 000, 12 000 and so on... Thant can be dangerous over line breaks! In Danish there is a tendency to write everything in figures, down to 1 week, 4 weeks´ notice and so on... but it is not always good English.
Churchill may have been quoting someone else with the ´up with which I will not put´ remark, but he gets the credit for making it famous!
Charles Davis Mar 11, 2017:
I thought it was Churchill who said it That's what I was told long ago, and apparently Ernest Gowers attributed it to him, but it may not be true:
http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/001715.h...
B D Finch Mar 11, 2017:
@Jack The only refs I can find to GBS as originator of "This is a sentence up with which I will not put," are ProZ.com ones, to which you have just added one more. I claim better authority for "There are some things up with which I will not put," as a quote from Tony Hancock (I remember him saying it). I strongly recommend the latter to Christine as a response to her client.

Re comma use in 1,000, I prefer to use a comma in non-technical writing and for money, when it helps get figures to line up in columns. For technical writing I prefer 1000, 2000, 10,000 etc.
David Hollywood Mar 11, 2017:
not at all unforgivable and having read the entire discussion, I would say that you can quite happily put "over" or "more than" "1000" or "1,000" (I personally prefer 1,000 but no big deal). Anyone who "hits you over the head" for this is to be totally ignored :)
Charles Davis Mar 10, 2017:
a thousand/1000/1,000 I don't think there's anything wrong with writing it in figures, with or without a comma (the practice of not using a thousands separator with four digits is now widespread). But in defence of JW Narins, I agree that writing round numbers like a thousand in words is quite often recommended, and I personally prefer it.
Charles Davis Mar 10, 2017:
@Björn Thanks for the links. I was interested, though not really surprised, to discover that the origin of this "rule" was the whimsical and unsupported prejudice of a couple of self-appointed arbiters of usage in the nineteenth century. It seems incredible to me that people allow such crackpots to tell them how to use their own language. The outraged reactions to AP's change of heart are frankly hilarious.
Charles Davis Mar 10, 2017:
@Robin I still prefer Christine's version: it's idiomatic, and I don't think yours is. That's what nearly always happens when people strain to avoid ending with a preposition where's it's natural to do so: the result sounds strained and unnatural.
Jennifer Levey Mar 10, 2017:
@Charles Whatever are you thinking?! Of course I wouldn't "seriously recommend" your abhorrent version of Christine's sentence.
I'd much prefer: --> "one of those things pedants like to use to hit the rest of us on the head."
Björn Vrooman Mar 10, 2017:
@Christine and Charles
I think the issue stems from the AP Stylebook, which many journalists in the US (and abroad) treat like a bible. It's my guide too, but I don't and wouldn't follow all the "rules" - basically, they are suggestions anyway. As Charles noted, the authors of the Chicago Manual of Style see no problem with using "over." However, it seemed to have been a big issue for AP until pretty recently (2014). Cf.:
https://www.poynter.org/2014/ap-removes-distinction-between-...
http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/more-than...
Charles Davis Mar 10, 2017:
@Robin Don't tell me you're one of those people who object to ending a sentence with a preposition! I'm disappointed in you.

Would you seriously recommend "one of those things with which pedants like to hit the rest of us on the head"?
Jennifer Levey Mar 10, 2017:
@Christine I can (and do, regularly) live with "over 1000".

But your:
"However, to me, not allowing it is just one of those things pedants like to hit the rest of us on the head with"
is, IM(v)HO, going a (nay, "one small" ...) step too far.
Charles Davis Mar 10, 2017:
As far as I'm concerned the idea that "over" is inferior to "more than" is bogus, and pretty well confined to the United States, where arbitrary and uninformed language mavenry is unfortunately quite common. The Chicago Manual has no truck with it:

"As an equivalent of more than, this word [over] is perfectly good idiomatic English."

Garner's Modern American Usage: "The charge that over is inferior to more than is a baseless crotchet."

Fowler regards them as equally acceptable.

See http://www.businesswritingblog.com/business_writing/2008/09/...

Where does this nonsense come from and how on earth do people justify it? Why should anyone take any notice?
Jack Doughty Mar 10, 2017:
Unputupwithable As George Bernard Shaw once said, "This is a sentence up with which I will not put."
Sheila Wilson Mar 10, 2017:
There are rules, traditions and common usage My father infuriated me as a kid by answering "You can; but you may not" - not just once, of course. I was ecstatic as a trainee teacher to find that it was (by 1995, at least) perfectly acceptable. "Over/more than 1000/1,000" - all fine, but I do prefer "fewer than #". I only learnt of the (not) "over #" rule a few years back too. There are a lot of grammar pedants around and I'll only go so far towards meeting them, and that means avoiding split infinitives only when it's easily done. I do like your examples - KudoZ :).
philgoddard Mar 10, 2017:
I don't see anything wrong with it ... except for the missing comma in "1000".
What's the context?

Responses

+9
17 mins
Selected

Over one thousand

...is entirely acceptable. What's more problematic is failing to write out simple numbers like "one thousand" - almost every style guide will tell you this, and it's important, because most other languages don't do that (many, anyway).

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 17 mins (2017-03-10 18:14:02 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Or "over a thousand," of course.
Peer comment(s):
agree AllegroTrans : the better option
2 hrs
Thank you
agree Patricia Fierro, M. Sc.
4 hrs
Patricia, thank you!
neutral philgoddard : I don't agree that almost every style guide will tell you this - it's a matter of personal preference. A lot of people spell it out in words up to 12, or 100.
4 hrs
Not a fixed rule, sure; note "less than" is probably not the best criterion - "thousand" is a far stronger candidate for spelling out than, say, three hundred and twenty-seven.
agree Charles Davis
4 hrs
Charles, thank you.
agree Jennifer Levey : Inasmuch as your answer implies that the answer to Christine's question, as posed, is "No", then I agree with you.
4 hrs
It does - in fact, it does more than imply it! Thank you, Robin.
agree David Hollywood : ok and wouldn't worry
6 hrs
agree Sarah Bessioud
12 hrs
agree Edith Kelly
14 hrs
agree Victoria Britten
17 hrs
agree acetran
2 days 23 hrs
Something went wrong...
4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer. Comment: "Thank you very much!"
Close search
Term search
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search