be smaller than you'll find

[neb090]

But its 17,300-acre wildlife concession is smaller than you'll find at the nearby Xaranna, and the tents lack Xaranna's soaking tubes and private plunge pools.

In this sentence, could I:

1. say "...is smaller than what you'll find at the nearby Xaranna,...?"

2. say "...is smaller than that you'll find at the nearby Xaranna,...?"

Thanks.

Source: https://www.oyster.com/articles/glamp-like-a-champ-5-awesome-spots/

 

[probus]

1 is acceptable and 2 is rather unnatural, but neither is as good as the original, which is correct and natural as written. Why would you want to change it?

 

[neb090]

1 is acceptable and 2 is rather unnatural, but neither is as good as the original, which is correct and natural as written. Why would you want to change it?

Because when I am reading an English article, I always try to find some sentences that don't seem to match the grammar points I was taught in class or in grammar books, and that's why I have this question.

Some people say in the OP sentence, I can't use what after than because the author is comparing two wildlife concessions and not one wildlife concession and something. Is that right?

And how about this sentence:

The books in this library are fewer than those you'll find across the street.
The books in this library are fewer than what you'll find across the street.

In the above two sentences, is using those better and more idiomatic than using what?

 

[Tarheel]

Try:

This library has fewer books than the one across the street.

 

[teechar]

1. say "...is smaller than what you'll find at the nearby Xaranna,...?"

OK. It means "is smaller than any wildlife concession (or such similar area/reservation) you'll find at the nearby ..."

2. say "...is smaller than that you'll find at the nearby Xaranna,...?"

OK. It means "is smaller than the particular wildlife concession (you'll find) at the nearby ..."

Some people say in the OP sentence, I can't use what after than because the author is comparing two wildlife concessions and not one wildlife concession and something. Is that right?

No. That is incorrect, because "what" has a broad range and can encompass "wildlife concession" in that context.

And how about this these sentences?

The books in this library are fewer than those you'll find across the street.
The books in this library are fewer than what you'll find across the street.

Those are unnatural. Say: "There are fewer books in this library than (what) you'll find across the street". But let's use, for instance, "older" to test your example:

The books in this library are older than those you'll find across the street.
The books in this library are older than what you'll find across the street.

Those work.

In the above two sentences, is using those better and more idiomatic than using what?

It's neither better nor more idiomatic. The same explanation I gave above applies.

 

[emsr2d2]

But its 17,300-acre wildlife concession is smaller than you'll find at the nearby Xaranna, and the tents lack Xaranna's soaking tubes and private plunge pools.

Source: https://www.oyster.com/articles/glamp-like-a-champ-5-awesome-spots/

In this sentence, could I say the following?

1. say "... is smaller than what you'll find at the nearby Xaranna, ..."
2. say "... is smaller than that you'll find at the nearby Xaranna, ..."

Thanks. Unnecessary. Thank us after we help you, by adding the "Thanks" icon to any response you find useful.

Note my changes and comments above. The original is correct, as you now know. Bear in mind that this kind of journalistic English usage is rarely replicated in everyday speech. If I were to explain the difference between the two venues in a casual chat to a friend, I'd say "The wildlife area there's smaller than the one at Xaranna. Oh, and Xaranna's tents have got soaking tubes and private plunge pools!"

 

[neb090]

OK. It means "is smaller than any wildlife concession (or such similar area/reservation) you'll find at the nearby ..."

OK. It means "is smaller than the particular wildlife concession (you'll find) at the nearby ..."

No. That is incorrect, because "what" has a broad range and can encompass "wildlife concession" in that context.

Those are unnatural. Say: "There are fewer books in this library than (what) you'll find across the street". But let's use, for instance, "older" to test your example:

So "There are fewer books in this library than (what) you'll find across the street".

And "There are fewer books in this library than (those) you'll find across the street".

Both sentences are correct and idiomatic?

Those work.

It's neither better nor more idiomatic. The same explanation I gave above applies.

 

[neb090]

OK. It means "is smaller than any wildlife concession (or such similar area/reservation) you'll find at the nearby ..."

OK. It means "is smaller than the particular wildlife concession (you'll find) at the nearby ..."

No. That is incorrect, because "what" has a broad range and can encompass "wildlife concession" in that context.

Those are unnatural. Say: "There are fewer books in this library than (what) you'll find across the street". But let's use, for instance, "older" to test your example:

So using "The books" as a beginning of this sentence is unidiomatic?

Those work.

It's neither better nor more idiomatic. The same explanation I gave above applies.

 

[emsr2d2]

So 1. "There are fewer books in this library than (what) you'll find across the street".
And 2. "There are fewer books in this library than (those) you'll find across the street".

Are both sentences are correct and idiomatic?

I wouldn't use either. You'll hear some native speakers use #1. When I was a child, I'd have been told off for using that "what". #2 is incorrect. Again, bear in mind that you're unlikely to hear that ending from native speakers. We'd just say "There are fewer books in this library than [in] the one across the street".

 

[neb090]

I wouldn't use either. You'll hear some native speakers use #1. When I was a child, I'd have been told off for using that "what". #2 is incorrect. Again, bear in mind that you're unlikely to hear that ending from native speakers. We'd just say "There are fewer books in this library than [in] the one across the street".

I am just wondering why "There are fewer books in this library than those you'll find across the street." is wrong.

For me, it is grammatically correct. Is it because it it unidiomatic?

 

[5jj]

I am just wondering why "There are fewer books in this library than those you'll find across the street." is wrong.

For me, it is grammatically correct.

It isn't.

 

[teechar]

There are fewer books in this library than those you'll find across the street.

those = books
That comparison is flawed.
Basically, "fewer" is talking about the number of books, so you can't compare the number of books with books.

 

[neb090]

those = books
That comparison is flawed.
Basically, "fewer" is talking about the number of books, so you can't compare the number of books with books.

So if I say:

"There are fewer books in this library than what you'll find across the street."
"There are fewer books in this library than that you'll find across the street." is wrong.

In these cases, "what" and "that" stand for "the number of books" not "books." Is that right?

 

[teechar]

"What" can, but "that" doesn't.

 

[neb090]

"What" can, but "that" doesn't.

How about:

The number of books in this library is smaller than that in that one across the street.
The number of books in this library is smaller than that of books in that one across the street.

Which one is idiomatic and correct?

 

[teechar]

The number of books in this library is smaller than that in that one across the street.

That one is grammatical but clumsy.

The number of books in this library is smaller than that of books in that one across the street.

That one is ungrammatical.

 

[neb090]

That one is grammatical but clumsy.

That one is ungrammatical.

So "The number of students in this school is four times as many as that of students in my school." is also wrong?

If it is wrong, how could I modify it?

 

[teechar]

"The number of students in this school is four times as many as that of students in my school." is also wrong?

Yes, it's wrong.

If it is wrong, how could I modify fix/correct it?

The number of students in this school is four times as many as that the number (of students) in my school.

See above. You can leave out the words in parentheses.

 

[neb090]

The numbers of the machines are twice as many as those of ten years ago.

In this sentence, could I use number instead of numbers?

 

[neb090]

Do you have the following usage in English:

1. The number of students in this school is three times as many as that of students in that school.

2. This school owns three times as many students as that school does.