|
| ▲ | CGMthrowaway 4 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| Cambridge does not have the best definition, imo, but even going by that the first definition would mean any plurality would qualify as "most" - setting the threshold potentially lower than 50%. I prefer Merriam Webster, which is far more clear. Definition 2 (defn 1 does not apply in this context): https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/most |
| |
| ▲ | bbarnett 4 days ago | parent [-] | | We have multiple parties in Canada. There may be a minority government elected, with 40% of the seats, and 30%, 20%, 10% to other parties. The 40% party will be described as winning the most seats. | | |
| ▲ | harmmonica 4 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Ha, I gotta say after reading your reply I feel kind of dumb for even saying the 80%; I had blinders on. Most, when it's relative, is the highest of a set even if that number is super low. Totally spaced on that when I asked, but I was fixated on how it's used to define something that's a percentage like in the 65% example. It happens so frequently in journalism and it's frustrating because it's trying to make an argument that sometimes the numbers themselves don't support. Anyway, appreciate you reminding me (and I deserved to feel dumb so also making me feel a bit dumb about it). | |
| ▲ | CGMthrowaway 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Yes, that is definition 1 (merriam-webster). This definition is often invoked by saying "the" before "most," as you did. It's a different definition than defn 2 (m-w), which is what is used when saying "Most farms are not owned by farmers." "The 40% party won the most seats" carries a different meaning than "The 40% party won most seats" | |
| ▲ | Dylan16807 4 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | It's more complicated. They got "the most" seats but they didn't get "most" seats. Pure "most" is implicitly that option versus all the rest. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | leptons 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| No, "most" is not a high threshold. You can say "most" about 30% of something in a group, if the rest are splintered between other groups getting less than 30%. Maybe you should read the link I provided. It would likely clear up a lot of misconceptions for you. |
|
| ▲ | LastTrain 4 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| You have a misconception about what the word means. Most has a meaning: more than any other quantity. > 50% meets that definition every time, but even 2% could mean ‘most’ if everything else in the comparison is less than 2%. |
| |
| ▲ | harmmonica 4 days ago | parent [-] | | You're right about the 2% and I just totally had blinders on when thinking of "most" used when comparing a set of numbers (where one of those numbers is the most in the set). I disagree with your ">50% meets..." comment, but pretty sure we're not going to agree on that one so I'll just shut up now. |
|
