It’s not so much that people get tripped up by the different terms used to quantify things; speakers and even writers of Canadian English increasingly default to one term, and have either forgotten or do not bother with the precision available in our language.
Perhaps people just don’t like the way it sounds—“fewer”—sounds like “ewww.” Whatever the reasons, it is becoming rarer to hear “fewer” when denoting numbers of things that can be counted individually. “Less” has become the default, when it should be reserved for indicating quantities that can be measured but not counted individually. Here are a few examples showing the distinction:
- Less sugar, fewer calories.
- Less snow, fewer snow days.
- Fewer letters sent, less mail delivered.
A corollary of this is the default to “amount” when “number” would be more correct. Like “less,” “amount” refers to a quantity of something that we can measure, but not count individually; whereas “number” refers to items we can count. Some examples of correct usage:
- The amount of snow that fell overnight promised a great day on the slopes.
- The number of skiers on the hill delighted the owner.
This is one of those usage issues that makes me sound like a persnickety grammarian; but it is really about precise communication and making full use of our rich English language.
Using the right words to say exactly what you mean will always help your message.