More vs. Greater and Less vs. Fewer : Magoosh

Dear Mike,

I have read your great article about using More/Less & Greater/Less & More/Fewer. It stimulate some questions.

1- If we have uncountable words that relate to feelings such as anger, love, grief....etc, can we use 'greater' to describe level or degree??? I have added some examples

I have more love for her than you do.

My love for her is greater than your love.

I have more grief than ever.

My grief was greater than my father's after my mother had passed away.


2- Countable word such as cars, skills, friends...etc take 'more' but what if I add 'the number' before them, is it valid to use 'greater'???

The number of skills I acquired is greater than the number of skills that joe did.

The number of opportunities he sacrifices is greater than the number of opportunities that Joe does.


Thanks in advance for your help

Mo2men wrote:Dear Mike,

I have read your great article about using More/Less & Greater/Less & More/Fewer. It stimulate some questions.

1- If we have uncountable words that relate to feelings such as anger, love, grief....etc, can we use 'greater' to describe level or degree??? I have added some examples

I have more love for her than you do.

My love for her is greater than your love.

I have more grief than ever.

My grief was greater than my father's after my mother had passed away.


2- Countable word such as cars, skills, friends...etc take 'more' but what if I add 'the number' before them, is it valid to use 'greater'???

The number of skills I acquired is greater than the number of skills that joe did.

The number of opportunities he sacrifices is greater than the number of opportunities that Joe does.


Thanks in advance for your help

Dear Mo2men,
Great questions, my friend.

1) The word "greater" fundamentally means having a larger size.
The Pacific Ocean has a greater depth than any other ocean.
When we talk about intense emotions, it is not unusually to use the metaphor of physical size to discuss them. In this vein, we use "greater" for these emotions. Both of your examples are 100% correct. Similarly, if I tell someone that "My understanding of GMAT Math is greater than yours," essentially I am saying that the two understandings can be thought of as having physical size, and my understand has a larger size that that of the other. We can use "greater" with any capacity ("...greater tolerance ...", "...greater patience ...", "...greater fortitude ...", etc.)

2) For the countable nouns themselves, of course we use "more" and "fewer."
The cars on my street are declining in number. There are fewer cars now than a few days ago.
Notice that "cars" is a plural subject that takes a plural verb. Once we start talking about "the number of cars," then the entire grammatical scenario changes. Now we are no longer talking primarily about "cars"---instead, we are talking about a number. We are not talking about physical things out there in the world: we are talking about an idealized mathematical abstraction. If "number of cars" is the subject, it's singular, because there's only one number of cars out there. As with all numbers, we use "greater than" and "less than."
The number of cars on my street is declining. The number of cars is less than a few days ago.

Does all this make sense?
Mike
_________________

mikemcgarry wrote:Dear Mo2men,
Great questions, my friend.

1) The word "greater" fundamentally means having a larger size.
The Pacific Ocean has a greater depth than any other ocean.
When we talk about intense emotions, it is not unusually to use the metaphor of physical size to discuss them. In this vein, we use "greater" for these emotions. Both of your examples are 100% correct. Similarly, if I tell someone that "My understanding of GMAT Math is greater than yours," essentially I am saying that the two understandings can be thought of as having physical size, and my understand has a larger size that that of the other. We can use "greater" with any capacity ("...greater tolerance ...", "...greater patience ...", "...greater fortitude ...", etc.)

2) For the countable nouns themselves, of course we use "more" and "fewer."
The cars on my street are declining in number. There are fewer cars now than a few days ago.
Notice that "cars" is a plural subject that takes a plural verb. Once we start talking about "the number of cars," then the entire grammatical scenario changes. Now we are no longer talking primarily about "cars"---instead, we are talking about a number. We are not talking about physical things out there in the world: we are talking about an idealized mathematical abstraction. If "number of cars" is the subject, it's singular, because there's only one number of cars out there. As with all numbers, we use "greater than" and "less than."
The number of cars on my street is declining. The number of cars is less than a few days ago.

Does all this make sense?
Mike

Thanks Mike for your great explanation with examples

In your article, you mentioned the following:

'When something uncountable increases, we also use also “more”', So do you think that the above example f Pacific Ocean should be;

The Pacific Ocean has a MORE depth than any other ocean.


if I want to use 'greater', it could be:

The depth of the Pacific Ocean is GREATER than the depth of any other ocean.

What do you think?

Mo2men wrote:Thanks Mike for your great explanation with examples

In your article, you mentioned the following:

'When something uncountable increases, we also use also “more”', So do you think that the above example f Pacific Ocean should be;

The Pacific Ocean has a MORE depth than any other ocean.


if I want to use 'greater', it could be:

The depth of the Pacific Ocean is GREATER than the depth of any other ocean.

What do you think?

Dear Mo2men,
I'm happy to respond.

In your first sentence, the presence of the indefinite article is 100% wrong. It's one of these funny things about articles in English. Without the article, we have:
1) The Pacific Ocean has more depth than that of any other ocean.
Technically, that is correct, but it sounds awkward, because "more depth" is close enough to "more deep," which is the incorrect form of "deeper." Overall, that sentence sounds like an unnecessarily wordier version of this:
2) The Pacific Ocean is deeper than any other ocean.
That version is a gem of clarity and concision, so #1 looks awkward by comparison.

It's funny. When we use "greater" with the noun, we use the article, and the whole sentence sounds more sophisticated.
3) The Pacific Ocean has a greater depth than that of any other ocean.
Again, it's funny: #2 is about as direct and concise as we could possibly convey this information, but this is a very plain way to say it. Any reasonably bright middle school student could say #2. By contrast, #3 has an air of sophistication: it's the way a professor might express the same idea in academic writing.

Your other sentence is correct.
4) The depth of the Pacific Ocean is GREATER than the depth of any other ocean.
Notice that now, we are not talking about a countable or uncountable quantity---instead, we are talking about a number. Depth of an ocean is a number, a measurement, and for numbers we use "greater" & "less." Similarly,
5) The depth of the Atlantic Ocean, at its deepest, is LESS than the depth of the deepest parts of the Pacific.
Of course, while that sentence is 100% grammatically correct, it's a bit wordy and indirect. An improvement would be
6) The Atlantic Ocean, at its deepest, is not as deep as the deepest parts of the Pacific.

Does all this make sense, my friend?
Mike
_________________

mikemcgarry wrote:Dear Mo2men,
I'm happy to respond.

In your first sentence, the presence of the indefinite article is 100% wrong. It's one of these funny things about articles in English. Without the article, we have:
1) The Pacific Ocean has more depth than that of any other ocean.
Technically, that is correct, but it sounds awkward, because "more depth" is close enough to "more deep," which is the incorrect form of "deeper." Overall, that sentence sounds like an unnecessarily wordier version of this:
2) The Pacific Ocean is deeper than any other ocean.
That version is a gem of clarity and concision, so #1 looks awkward by comparison.

It's funny. When we use "greater" with the noun, we use the article, and the whole sentence sounds more sophisticated.
3) The Pacific Ocean has a greater depth than that of any other ocean.
Again, it's funny: #2 is about as direct and concise as we could possibly convey this information, but this is a very plain way to say it. Any reasonably bright middle school student could say #2. By contrast, #3 has an air of sophistication: it's the way a professor might express the same idea in academic writing.

Your other sentence is correct.
4) The depth of the Pacific Ocean is GREATER than the depth of any other ocean.
Notice that now, we are not talking about a countable or uncountable quantity---instead, we are talking about a number. Depth of an ocean is a number, a measurement, and for numbers we use "greater" & "less." Similarly,
5) The depth of the Atlantic Ocean, at its deepest, is LESS than the depth of the deepest parts of the Pacific.
Of course, while that sentence is 100% grammatically correct, it's a bit wordy and indirect. An improvement would be
6) The Atlantic Ocean, at its deepest, is not as deep as the deepest parts of the Pacific.

Does all this make sense, my friend?
Mike

Thanks Mike for you clarification. You are always precise when you present your ideas. However, the more you explain, the more questions the conversation stimulates

If I apply the same for #3, which one is correct:

I have greater love than you do.

I have more love than you do.

What is the difference between the two above sentences?

Mo2men wrote:Thanks Mike for you clarification. You are always precise when you present your ideas. However, the more you explain, the more questions the conversation stimulates

If I apply the same for #3, which one is correct:

I have greater love than you do.

I have more love than you do.

What is the difference between the two above sentences?

Dear Mo2men,
Thank you for your kind words, my friend.

There really isn't much difference between those two sentences. Both are correct and natural sounding. Here's the funny thing---as long as "love" is not qualified, then we can just say "greater love." But, if we add a qualification, "love of X," then we need the article "a" before "greater." The word "more" never never takes an article.

Theodore Roosevelt had a greater love of Nature than did any other 20th-century US President.
Theodore Roosevelt had more love for Nature than did any other 20th-century US President.
Theodore Roosevelt loved Nature more than did any other 20th-century US President.

The first might be a wee bit more sophisticated, but all three of these are fine. Any of the three would be correct on the GMAT.

Does all this make sense?
Mike
_________________

mikemcgarry wrote:

Mo2men wrote:Thanks Mike for your great explanation with examples

In your article, you mentioned the following:

'When something uncountable increases, we also use also “more”', So do you think that the above example f Pacific Ocean should be;

The Pacific Ocean has a MORE depth than any other ocean.


if I want to use 'greater', it could be:

The depth of the Pacific Ocean is GREATER than the depth of any other ocean.

What do you think?

Dear Mo2men,
I'm happy to respond.

In your first sentence, the presence of the indefinite article is 100% wrong. It's one of these funny things about articles in English. Without the article, we have:
1) The Pacific Ocean has more depth than that of any other ocean.
Technically, that is correct, but it sounds awkward, because "more depth" is close enough to "more deep," which is the incorrect form of "deeper." Overall, that sentence sounds like an unnecessarily wordier version of this:
2) The Pacific Ocean is deeper than any other ocean.
That version is a gem of clarity and concision, so #1 looks awkward by comparison.

It's funny. When we use "greater" with the noun, we use the article, and the whole sentence sounds more sophisticated.
3) The Pacific Ocean has a greater depth than that of any other ocean.
Again, it's funny: #2 is about as direct and concise as we could possibly convey this information, but this is a very plain way to say it. Any reasonably bright middle school student could say #2. By contrast, #3 has an air of sophistication: it's the way a professor might express the same idea in academic writing.

Your other sentence is correct.
4) The depth of the Pacific Ocean is GREATER than the depth of any other ocean.
Notice that now, we are not talking about a countable or uncountable quantity---instead, we are talking about a number. Depth of an ocean is a number, a measurement, and for numbers we use "greater" & "less." Similarly,
5) The depth of the Atlantic Ocean, at its deepest, is LESS than the depth of the deepest parts of the Pacific.
Of course, while that sentence is 100% grammatically correct, it's a bit wordy and indirect. An improvement would be
6) The Atlantic Ocean, at its deepest, is not as deep as the deepest parts of the Pacific.

Does all this make sense, my friend?
Mike

If we consider depth as countable, then the sentence should be instead:

"The depth of the Atlantic Ocean, at its deepest, is fewer than the depth of the deepest parts of the Pacific

faltan wrote:If we consider depth as countable, then the sentence should be instead:

"The depth of the Atlantic Ocean, at its deepest, is fewer than the depth of the deepest parts of the Pacific

Hi faltan,

Happy to help Notice that Mike said:

Notice that now, we are not talking about a countable or uncountable quantity---instead, we are talking about a number. Depth of an ocean is a number, a measurement, and for numbers we use "greater" & "less."

So "depth" is not a countable quantity, and so we use "less", not "fewer".

I hope that helps!
-Carolyn

mikemcgarry: To enhance my understanding of more versus greater
I have more pencils than ram has --correct
I have 2 pencils more than ram has --correct
I have 2 pencils greater than ram has --incorrect

GMATNinja bb VeritasKarishma

@mikemcgarry:I want to enhance my understanding on Less versus fewer:
Correct- The population of Malaysia is less than that of LA.
Since population is countable like 2 million people, 30 million people,
Than why use of "less than" is correct for this countable "Population" >> What i understand is that "less than" is used for uncountable + weights & measures
Why "fewer than" is incorrect for this countable "Population"? >> What I understand is that "fewer than" is used for Countable

Please help me to build my concepts


GMATNinja bb VeritasKarishma MartyTargetTestPrep egmat