> MP>  I may be using "singular" and
"uncountable" interchangably
> MP>  (and incorrectly!), but I would use MEANS in your example
> MP>  also.
>
>           IMHO your usage is correct, although you're not sure how to explain
> it.  Maybe I can help a bit re the latter....  :-)

That is a good way to put it.  :)

>           As a native speaker, you may not have heard the terms
"countable" &
>"uncountable" in school.  I think I probably learned them
from Alexander.  But
>you may recall being taught about stuff which is usually measured by weight or
>by volume... e.g. various liquids, meat/fish/poultry, cheese, and salt because
>it's okay to say "less" whereas with countable objects one
should say "fewer".

Thanks, I am not sure I did ever hear those terms used, but you have
successfully reminded me of the difference between using "less" and
"fewer."  I shall have to admit that it this part of the US, you are not
likely to hear "fewer" used much... although I agree it is correct, I
believe most Kentuckians would use "less" in both instances.  :)

>           I reckon where some of the confusion lies is that we treat abstract
>nouns as singular.  Your teachers & mine may not have gone into
detail re such
>concepts because... while the average student in junior high is experiencing a
>phase of rapid brain growth which is the ideal time to introduce them... other
>students will claim loudly & adamantly that abstract nouns don't
exist because
>Miss Grinch in grade three never mentioned them.  OTOH, the common parlance is
>rife with examples many native speakers will have seen or heard before:

I am not certain that we spent much time on abstract nouns, either.  We did
learn that they could be used as nouns but I don't think much emphasis was
put on the "abstract" bit.  :)

Mike

---
 þ SLMR 2.1a þ Gender: ___ Male ___ Female _X_ Wraeththu