Is "lots" a grammatically correct synonym for "a lot"?
In today's synonym/antonym thread, one of our faithful and excellent contributors used the word "lots". I have always been told that this was slang for "a lot". I commented that this should be changed, but then doubted myself.
After making a search, I am still not able to come up with a conclusive answer. Some dictionaries include the word "lots", others use it only to define the idea of "drawing lots", etc.
I'm sure someone out there has an opinion and an answer. I'm interested to know what others think.
8 Answers
This is dictionary that I use as my reference dictionary. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/lots
14. Often, lots. a great many or a great deal: a lot of books; lots of money.
In the context of meaning a "bunch" of something, I'd say "lots" and "a lot" are often synonymous.
Both of these are correct, for example:
"I get lots of mail" and "I get a lot of mail."
"I have lots of friends" and "I have a lot of friends."
Nevertheless, I feel more comfortable saying "a lot." Using "lots" in most cases feels...um...uneducated?
Who has the final say in matters of the English language. Although I feel like this is something I should know, sadly I do not.
This might sound strange to hear, but "usage" is based on...usage, and not on dictionaries. For this reason, it is often said that dictionaries by nature can only be "descriptive" and not "prescriptive."
In regards to the RAE, there has never been a successful undertaking to "fix" or "purify" a language. However, if you are looking for a comprehensive study on the evolution of word usage in English, I have not found a better source for this purpose than the Oxford English Dictionary.
I agree with everything that has been written, but wanted to add that the Brits would also say 'loads' as well as 'lots'. I.e. 'I get loads of mail', 'I have loads of stamps'...
Also, you're right in that you do 'draw lots' as well
I have "looked into" lots and "cannot".
I can not (can't) find a reference to "cannot" but have used it all my life.
In speaking you can't hear that it is different from "can not" but I have written "cannot" more times than I could possibly count.
As for "lots" that is in the Oxford Thesaurus of English / alongside "a lot" - and I have wriiten and said it all my life.
Ian said:
I can not (can't) find a reference to "cannot" but have used it all my life.
Izanoni said:
Hi Ian...."Can't," "cannot," and "can not" are all acceptable spelling. If you have any doubts, you can try looking them up here:
This is the thing that has been driving me crazy today. It seems that some dictionaries list these words and/or spellings, while others do not.
I have heard that the Real Academia Español has the final say in all things Spanish. Who has the final say in matters of the English language. Although I feel like this is something I should know, sadly I do not.
Re can not v cannot, I've always thought they had slightly different uses.
Cannot is abbreviated to can't, but adds emphasis. E.g. 'I cannot believe that you can't read' is more emphatic than using can't.
Can not is used to suggest something that it is possible for you not to do, e.g. 'you can not study today', meaning 'it is possible for you to not study today'.
At least that's what I've always thought!!!