# EN: twice bigger / twice as big



## b.abybloom

Is the following sentence incorrect ?
" He was twice taller than his father"

I have always thought that the only way of saying that was
"He was twice as tall as his father"

Or are both correct?

Thanks for helping

Bloom


----------



## smurf25

I would say 'he was twice as tall as his father'


----------



## Arcaani

I agree with smurf25, but as for the thread title, I would say "twice as large". I believe you have to use the "template" "<number> (i.e. twice, thrice, four times, a thousand times, etc) as <adjective in absolute form> (absolute being the "non-comparative" form of an adjective, for instance large, tall, small, thin, green, rich, etc...)


----------



## Arcaani

So.... Twice as large. Four times as fat. Seventeen times as far.


----------



## samavecelan

But you could say twice bigger, I'm pretty sure, it just sounds...like something you're more likely to see in a poem or other piece of literature than hear someone saying in real life.  Stick with twice as big, it sounds much better, more natural.


----------



## b.abybloom

Thanks for answering guys.
My intuition was right but I couldn't find anything about it in grammar books. I had taught it to my pupils but a very helpful colleague contradicted me in my back, which of I appreciated.

thanks again.

Bloom


----------



## b.abybloom

Sticking with the same subject, can you say twice less big than?


----------



## djweaverbeaver

Hello, B.abybloom,

I agree with what has already been mentioned.  I'm not sure if this was by accident or not, but I would change a few things in last sentence of your post. 
"I had taught it to my pupils but a very helpful colleague contradicted me *behind *my back, which I *didn't* appreciate."
Hope this helps.


----------



## Maître Capello

b.abybloom said:


> Sticking with the same subject, can you say twice less big than?



That sounds really odd to me… Why not simply _twice as small as_?


----------



## floise

Hi b.abybloom,

If you want, you can say '*two times bigger*', '*three times faster*', ' *ten times smaller*'. Here you use the formula:

*cardinal number* (two, three, ten, one hundred, etc.) plus *times* plus the *comparative form of the adjective*. ('*twenty times heavier*')

floise


----------



## samavecelan

Instead of "twice less," use "half as," as in "This plate is half as big," or "He is half your size"


----------



## b.abybloom

thanks again everyone!


----------



## beardfisher

Hi
I'm reopening this thread because my question is related to it.

Aren't there any ways of translating "X fois moins + adjectif " else than putting it the other way around (X times + as + opposite adjective) ?

Eg: I want to say "ma maison est trois fois moins grande que la tienne"

 I know I could say:
- my house is thrice/three times as small as yours
- your house is thrice/three times as big as mine

Isn't there a way using "less" and the direct translation of the adjective ? (something like _...is thrice less big than ...)
_
Thanks a lot in advance


----------



## Kelly B

I'd follow floise's advice here: _three times smaller_. Edited to add: or _a third the size of mine_.

There are times you could use _less_, for example _Medication A is three times less effective than Medication B_, but I don't know whether there's a rule associated with that, or whether it's simply a matter of how it sounds.


----------



## radagasty

Kelly B said:


> I don't know whether there's a rule associated with that, or whether it's simply a matter of how it sounds.



There are two unrelated questions here. I agree that _less_ can be used in such a construction, and the example you gave is a good one: 'three times less effective than...'. Whether or not _less _can be used is unrelated to the 'X times' construction though, and I think it is just a matter of how it sounds; 'less big' sounds strange, so 'three times less big' doesn't really work, but 'less effective' is fine.

However, mathematically speaking, it is not clear what 'three times less effective' actually means. Consider the following:

If medication B is as effective as A, then B has 100% of the effect of A.
If B is three times (=300%) as effective as A, then B has 300% of the effect of A.
If B is three times (=300%) more effective than A, then, logically speaking, B has 400% (= 100% + 300%) of A's effect (though many mean simply 300% by this).
IF B is three times (=300%) less effective than A, then, logically speaking, B has -200% (= 100% - 300 %) of A's effect, which is not usually the intended meaning.

I must say, this kind of phraseology does my head in, and I would advocate 'one third the size of...' or 'a third as effective as...', which makes logical sense and is mathematically clearer, except when meant to be taken in a figurative sense: _His speech was a hundred times less eloquent that yours!_


----------



## beardfisher

Thanks to both of you.

I just wanted to know whether you could say it or not. However, I totally agree that it doesn't sound great, especially with the example I provided, but I would be tempted to use it in a figurative sense. 

Actually, saying "X fois moins" is as common as saying "X fois plus" in French. And yet, I agree here with Radagasty that mathematically speaking such a construction doesn't make any sense. It sounded wrong to me when I was younger. I even remember thinking the same (to me, "deux fois plus" meant + 200% too).
But I would say that when it comes to French language, you have to forget about logic


----------



## frenchifried

All these are possible (and I am sure there are more ):
My house is bigger than yours
My house is two (or whatever the figure) times bigger than yours
My house is twice as big as yours
My house is twice the size of yours
My house is three times (thrice) the size of yours
My house is three times bigger than yours 
My house is smaller than yours
My house is not as big as yours
My house is not bigger than yours (which implies that the houses are about the same size)
My house is a third of the size of yours (i.e. it is smaller by a third)
My house is half the size of yours

And so on . . .


----------



## funnyhat

Arcaani said:


> I agree with smurf25, but as for the thread title, I would say "twice as large". I believe you have to use the "template" "<number> (i.e. twice, *thrice*, four times, a thousand times, etc) as <adjective in absolute form> (absolute being the "non-comparative" form of an adjective, for instance large, tall, small, thin, green, rich, etc...)



For the record, "thrice" is almost never said or written nowadays.  It's very archaic.  We would always say, or write, "three times as [adjective]."

"Twice as big" is very common in conversational English.  "Twice as large" is a slightly more refined level of language and better for writing.


----------

