By Professor Olatunji Abanikanda
Few, Several, and Many: The Politics and Arithmetic of Approximation in the recently released Advertisement for the Position of Vice Chancellor, Lagos State University.
Caveat: May I start by stating unambiguously and unapologetically that I am NOT a trained English Language Linguist, and neither have I ever pretended to be one. In fact, I do not possess a Credit grade in English Language in WAEC (It was cancelled) or GCE (where I had just a “P”). Do not be in a hurry to ask how I got admitted into the University of Ibadan: at the time of my admission, there was a general waiver for Science students regarding possession of Credit in English, just as those in Arts and Humanities were waived a Credit in Mathematics. Having said that, I still cannot be pushed aside as a dumb non-native speaker or writer of English Language. I provided this background so that no one will assume that I have arrogated on myself the toga of an English Language expert!
Prologue: Few, Several, and Many are common English quantifiers that describe approximate quantities, and their meanings overlap and depend on context.
It must be noted that language is imprecise by design, whereas mathematics demands exactitude! Ordinary speech operates in the comfortable middle ground of approximation, and among the most commonly used and least carefully examined words in the English language are FEW, SEVERAL, and MANY.
Each carries a numerical implication, yet none commits to a specific figure, and understanding what ranges these words actually cover is both a linguistic exercise and a practical necessity for clear communication.
“Few” is the most modest of the three, signaling a small number, but a number greater than one. One cannot say “a few” to mean a single thing; that would be “one” or “just one.” Few begins at two and typically extends no further than four or five! Most usage guides and linguistic studies place the core range of few at two to four (2-4), with five (5) representing the outer boundary before the word begins to strain credibility.
“Several” on the other hand occupies the middle ground, that is more than a few, but not yet many. It is perhaps the most contested of the three in terms of its numerical range, but common usage and reference works converge on a core range of five to seven (5-7), with some extending the upper boundary to nine or ten (9 or 10), before MANY becomes the more natural word.
The etymology of “several” is instructive, as it derives from the Medieval Latin “separalis”, from “separ”, meaning separate or distinct.
Originally, several meant separate or individual rather than a moderate number. Over time, it evolved to denote a collection of distinct items, distinct precisely because each could, in principle, be individually counted, which explains why several feels more countable and more enumerate-able than MANY.
“Many” however, begins where several ends and, in principle, has no upper ceiling. It is the most elastic of the three words. However, its lower threshold is important to establish: many credibly begins at around ten (10) and extends indefinitely. In practice, speakers tend to use many for numbers they do not intend to, or cannot specify precisely, where the quantity is large enough that enumeration feels unnecessary or impossible.
The word many carries a different cognitive weight from few and several. Where few and several imply that the speaker has at least a rough count in mind, many often signals that the count has become irrelevant, where the point is abundance, not arithmetic.
What is particularly interesting linguistically is how these words shade into each other at their boundaries. The transition from few to several happens somewhere around five (5), while the transition from several to many around ten (10).
It must be noted however, that “Few”, “Several”, and “Many” are not interchangeable, nor are they random. They occupy defined, if overlapping, numerical territories that competent speakers navigate intuitively. In professional, academic, and consultancy writing especially, the precision with which approximating words are used reflects the precision of the underlying thought. When in doubt, give the number. When a number is unavailable or unnecessary, choose the approximating word that honestly represents the scale you have in mind.
In formal technical writing you should prefer exact numbers, even though in casual speech or narrative, these words carry tone and emphasis beyond their numeric value. Avoid use of the three words for legal, technical, scientific, academic or statistical writing, and give exact numbers or ranges. When precision matters for decisions (budgeting, safety, scheduling or appointments), replace with exact counts or clear numeric ranges.
The Advert: The said advert is a prelude to setting the stage for commotion, which by design is to culminate in the appointment of an Ag. Vice Chancellor. Like my Son would say, “Format yen ti cast”, meaning such tricks cannot work again.
Lagos State University is endowed with more than enough human and material resources and getting a suitably qualified person to occupy the position of Vice Chancellor should not be rocket science!
Let us review the 24 criteria set by the advert in the light of compliance and deviance from the benchmark of advertisement for the office of Vice Chancellor across various Universities (Federal, State or Privately owned) and see the comedy associated with this instant advertisement. I deliberately attach images of advertisements from other Universities for the same position for your candid perusal and comments.
Criteria 1: This is in partial congruence with existing practice except that it deliberately excludes potential applicants with Medical Fellowships, even though this exclusion was what led to various advertisements in the appointment of the incumbent and the associated brouhaha (see last image).
Inclusion of supervision of Ph.D. candidates is another debatable criteria. If this is easily actionable by those in Arts and Humanities, I just wonder how achievable that would be in the core Sciences and Medical studies. Or is it ceremonial Ph.Ds that are expected? How many laboratories have sufficient facilities to fully handle such elitist programmes.
Criteria 2: This is the most laughable, debatable, vexatious and contentious criteria. If you look through all adverts previously and currently released by the other Universities, and even Lagos State University previous advertisements, you will see a marked deviation from the norm in this instant advertisement under review. Since when has SEVERAL replaced exact figures in advertisements, which prompted the prologue to this post. Equally troubling is the inclusion of MUST have presented his / her Inaugural Lecture.
I wish to be educated if Inaugural Lecture is a COMPULSORY strictly Academic event especially in the light of the way and manner it is been organized and delivered in Lagos State University. In fact, it has become a strategic weapon, whereby political opponents have been deliberately denied opportunity for presentation when the drive for the imposition of a successor has become obvious. The use of the word MUST is deliberate to exclude some other interested candidates from participating. It is a known fact that Inaugural Lectures in LASU are more of social function and capital intensive than academic. Even the University despite being the host of the event, only provides a fraction of what it entails, which has led some professors to become “Fine Bara, Decent Bara” and be willing to do anything and everything to ensure their participation, while some others had to pull out of it as a consequence of its financial burden.
Criteria 3-8: These are in line with guidelines for best practices to ensure growth and development of the University.
Criteria 9-20: These are about deliverables expected of the candidate and not a reflection of the past achievements of prospective candidates. There is no problem with a University setting agenda for the achievement of its vision and mission, but definitely not in abeyance of the laws establishing the University.
Criteria 21-23: These are virtues expected from candidates for this position and should naturally be in line with the triad of University establishment; teaching, research and community service.
Criteria 24: “Must be in excellent physical and mental health, with verifiable certificates to that effect”. This looks great and innocent, but some questions that should be asked is, if the candidates are expected to go for medical, behavioural or psychiatric evaluation, and where such test will be conducted and by whom. Verifiability means the results of such test would be made freely available for assessment of those we are not sure of their suitability (mental and physical status) for such tasks. By the way, what test can detect those who are wont to mismanage, fritter away or outrightly steal the University common patrimony.
In conclusion, now is the time for well-meaning people entrusted with the superintending functions of the University to quickly see the booby traps in this current advertisement and avert unnecessary bickering that may arise due to the subtle and blatant intricacies woven around the advertisement.
As a guide to those in power, they should be reminded of a Yoruba saying that “Ori buruku lo nmu omo kekere pin eran ninu ile, nibo ni awon agba ibe wa?” loosely translated to mean “it is only ill luck that will permit the sharing of meat in the house by a youngster, when the elderly are very much around.
What could have prompted the imposition of a candidate who became a Professor on 1st October 2023, which technically is not even up to three years on the expected date of assumption of duty on 19th September 2026. That explains why those that were “elected” to be members of the selection committee from the University Senate were in the same sub-groups (1-5 years) of Professors in the same University that have several Professors of over 15 years standing.
Surprisingly, the same University was unambiguous in stipulating the minimum benchmarks in the advertisement for the positions of the recently appointed Registrar and Bursar. There was nothing like “Several” but a figure of five (5) years post deputy experience! Even the last advertisement that brought in the incumbent was specific on number of years of post-professorial experience (check last image). So, why is this current advert different, if the intent was not to cause commotion?
Now is the time to rise and protect whatever is left of Lagos State University in order not to put to final waste the efforts of those that established it and the resources the State Government and successive Visitors have invested on the University. This is a clarion call on all stakeholders to rescue LASU from the grips of those emasculating it.
