Twice faster

alleycat

Still around
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
72,873
Reaction score
12,224
Location
Tennessee
Twice as fast sounds more normal to me.
 

Vemy Paw

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 20, 2011
Messages
75
Reaction score
7
I can understand twice faster, but as Alleycat said, I see twice as fast used more often.
 

tmesis

bibbidi bobbidi boo
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 25, 2011
Messages
180
Reaction score
24
Location
UK
"Two times faster" or "twice as fast" would be more much more usual and therefore far more understandable. Google backs this up:

"Two times faster": 13.7 million hits.
"Twice as fast": 23.6 million hits.
"Twice faster": < 0.5 million hits, many of which seem to be saying it's not an expression.
 

QuantumIguana

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 18, 2012
Messages
133
Reaction score
8
If there are so many hits saying it isn't an expression, that is pretty solid evidence that it IS an expression. I don't think I would use 'twice faster', but I'd have to see how it was used in a given text.
 

tmesis

bibbidi bobbidi boo
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 25, 2011
Messages
180
Reaction score
24
Location
UK
If there are so many hits saying it isn't an expression, that is pretty solid evidence that it IS an expression. I don't think I would use 'twice faster', but I'd have to see how it was used in a given text.

I'd agree if there were, say, 5m hits instead of 0.5m. As it is, I'd guess that those 0.5m might stem from non-native speakers trying it out as an expression, or maybe academic writers using it in a specific context.
 

boron

Health writer
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 6, 2009
Messages
995
Reaction score
46
Location
Europe
Website
www.healthhype.com
Ben is twice faster than Jen.
Chronic alcoholics may eliminate alcohol twice faster than moderate drinkers.
 

Captcha

Banned
Joined
Jan 27, 2010
Messages
4,456
Reaction score
637
Ben is twice faster than Jen.

Chronic alcoholics may eliminate alcohol twice faster than moderate drinkers.

No to both, to my ear. 'Ben is twice as fast as Jen' or 'may eliminate alcohol twice as fast'. I don't think it's just idiomatic, either. I don't know the words, but 'faster' is comparative, so 'twice faster' isn't really clear...

Like, say Jen travelled at 15 km/h. If Ben is twice as fast, he travels at 30 km/h. But if he's twice faster, there's an element of comparison in the word 'faster' and I don't know what to compare the speed to. If there was a third speed, somewhere...
 

Jamesaritchie

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
27,863
Reaction score
2,311
It not only sounds strange, it's horribly incorrect, no matter who uses it, or how.
 

CaroGirl

Living the dream
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 27, 2006
Messages
8,368
Reaction score
2,327
Location
Bookstores
What? Why not?

Because, well, that's what the word twice is for. And it sounds childish. Like I can picture someone (generally a three-year-old) holding up two fingers to illustrate.

"He ran around the track two times! Yesterday night."
 

tmesis

bibbidi bobbidi boo
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 25, 2011
Messages
180
Reaction score
24
Location
UK
Because, well, that's what the word twice is for. And it sounds childish. Like I can picture someone (generally a three-year-old) holding up two fingers to illustrate.

"He ran around the track two times! Yesterday night."

"Two times" gets 26.8m google hits. That's a lot of three-year-olds cluttering up the internet. Where are their parents during all this? That's what I'd like to know.
 

tmesis

bibbidi bobbidi boo
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 25, 2011
Messages
180
Reaction score
24
Location
UK
The point is that 'two times' makes you sound childish

I understand the point, however I see no evidence for it, because no evidence has been offered for it. Repetition of the claim does not make it true.
 

CaroGirl

Living the dream
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 27, 2006
Messages
8,368
Reaction score
2,327
Location
Bookstores
I understand the point, however I see no evidence for it, because no evidence has been offered for it. Repetition of the claim does not make it true.

I have a question for you. Why would you want to use two times when there's a more succinct single word for it and using the term sounds childish to many readers?

In my opinion, it's equivalent to saying, "She was more brave than her brother" instead of "She was braver than her brother." Why use two words to say what can be said (more correctly and succinctly) in one? Again, it sounds "off" and childish to my ear.
 

QuantumIguana

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 18, 2012
Messages
133
Reaction score
8
I see nothing childish about 'two times'. People might say 'two times' or might say 'twice', neither one is going to raise eyebrows.
 

mirandashell

Banned
Joined
Feb 7, 2010
Messages
16,197
Reaction score
1,889
Location
England
I understand the point, however I see no evidence for it, because no evidence has been offered for it. Repetition of the claim does not make it true.


And you have offered no evidence against it. So there you go.

Repetition of the counter-argument doesn't make it false.
 

mirandashell

Banned
Joined
Feb 7, 2010
Messages
16,197
Reaction score
1,889
Location
England
I disagree, with the meaning "multiplied by two" (c.f. your example which means "twice") it is a perfectly normal expression.

Two times meaning multiplied by two is a mathematical usage. And that's already been exempted.
 
Last edited:

tmesis

bibbidi bobbidi boo
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 25, 2011
Messages
180
Reaction score
24
Location
UK
I have a question for you. Why would you want to use two times when there's a more succinct single word for it and using the term sounds childish to many readers?

In my opinion, it's equivalent to saying, "She was more brave than her brother" instead of "She was braver than her brother." Why use two words to say what can be said (more correctly and succinctly) in one? Again, it sounds "off" and childish to my ear.

Quite frankly, I don't care if you think it sounds childish, because as far as I can tell you just pulled that opinion out of nowhere.

I can think of many reasons why it might be better to use two words than one, e.g. rhythm/flow/cadence/alliteration, etc.

And you have offered no evidence against it. So there you go.

Oh for...

"Burdon of proof". Google it.