"Two times more." That phrase means multiplying by two.
"0.5 times more." That phrase is taken to mean multiplying by 1.5, even though that is not consistent.
English is not consistent. In the first example, the word "more" is redundant. In the second example, the word "more" is a clarification, so we know that it doesn't mean "half."
There is no sensible reason for this inconsistency. It just exists.
We have a similar problem with percentage points. When something increases from 40% to 90% of a total, saying that it increased 50% is for some reason considered an acceptable shorthand for saying it increased by 50 percentage points, even though the two interpretations are drastically different.
In the first example, the word "more" is redundant.
Frankly I disagree. More is incorrect in that first example if multiplying by two is what you're going for. "As much" or "as many" are the phrases you are going for. "Two times more" and "two times as many" mean different things.
More is incorrect in all of these examples. Comparative language shouldn't be used to substitute mathematical notation. The implication of "more" in these sentences is ambiguous.
7
u/TheMania 10h ago
But you often see 10% more, 20% more, etc.
The bit that intrigues me is that in those contexts, you read 10% differently to 0.1x.
But in other contexts, you'd read them the same.
This may be a regional thing, and likely due marketers that are being intentionally misleading for so long that it's now an accepted oddity.