[Grammar] several hundreds

[Kotfor]

1) There are a few hundred people in the street.
2) There are a few hundreds of people in the street.

As far as I know 1 is correct. As for 2 many will say that it's not. But I am not sure. Can 2 mean that the people are divided in hundreds (that is, groups of one hundred) hence, 2 may mean there are a few groups of one hundred people in the street. It's the same as one-hundred-dollar bill. There are a few hundreds of dollars = there are a few one-hundred-dollar bills.

What do you think?

 

[bhaisahab]

2) is not natural.

 

[Kotfor]

2) is not natural.

I suppose. What bothers me is this explanation.

If you were to say

We need a few more hundreds.
​

it could be construed as meaning the need was specifically for hundred-dollar bills, instead of a quantity of money that is merely in the hundreds of dollars.

 

[MikeNewYork]

Without a context, that sentence is ambiguous. It is not even clear that the sentence is about "dollars".

 

[Kotfor]

Without a context, that sentence is ambiguous. It is not even clear that the sentence is about "dollars".

The point is not in dollars but in the word "hundred".

 

[Kotfor]

Here is another example

In Anglo-Saxon England, and for many centuries after, the hundred—approximately, a territory supporting one hundred households—was a fundamental administrative division. By the middle of the 19th century few hundreds had any legal role.

 

[MikeNewYork]

If someone handed you 5 one-hundred dollar bills and you said "I need a few more hundreds", the sentence would make sense.

 

[Kotfor]

If someone handed you 5 one-hundred dollar bills and you said "I need a few more hundreds", the sentence would make sense.

Then, I suppose, sentence 2 may make sense either?

 

[MikeNewYork]

Are you talking about the original #2? That sentence does not work for me. It certainly does not mean that the people in the streets are bundled up in groups of 100.

Note: We do not use "either" in positive sentences to indicate agreement. We use "too", "also" and "as well". Your sentence is not a question.

 

[Kotfor]

Are you talking about the original #2? That sentence does not work for me. It certainly does not mean that the people in the streets are bundled up in groups of 100.

Note: We do not use "either" in positive sentences to indicate agreement. We use "too", "also" and "as well". Your sentence is not a question.

OK. What if the people were really bundled up in groups of 100? Wouldn't this sentence work?
Note: I took that sentence as an interrogative one.

 

[MikeNewYork]

I don't spend much time analyzing highly improbable/impossible sentences.

 

[Kotfor]

I don't spend much time analyzing highly improbable/impossible sentences.

You have just analyzed one telling about a few hundreds of dollars. Seems like you don't like "people", though. Odd!

 

[Kotfor]

Moreover, the situation is not improbable/impossible in our world. You, personally, might not find yourself dealing with it daily, but some people do. I see nothing impossible in a situation where people are divided into groups of 100.

 

[MikeNewYork]

Then write what you want. Why ask questions if you think you already have the answers?

 

[lotus888]

1) There are a few hundred people in the streets. (200-500)
2) There are hundreds of people in the streets. (200-999)

To me, #1 implies less people than #2. That's a fine distinction.

We don't usually "bundle" people in exact hundreds. If we did, we might say:

There are people in the field grouped in one hundreds.

Sometimes, hundreds of people really mean a thousand or more. That's because it's really hard to make an accurate estimate on a large group/crowd of people.



--lotus