You are still leaving words out. Under a standard analysis of English, the full sentence would be:
More people have been to Berlin than I have been to Berlin.
In my judgement as a native English speaker (with an undergraduates degree in linguistics), both that and the original sentence are grammatical. However, it is not obvious to me what they mean.
Looking at it as a linguist, I could hypothesise that the meaning is:
A) The number of people who have been to Berlin is greater than the number of times I have been to Berlin.
Going back to the original sentence, I could also hypothesise (as others in this thread have) that the underlying sentence is
More people have been to Berlin than I have people.
Meaning that I posses a quantity of people, and that quantity is smaller than the quantity of people who have been to Berlin.
Neither of these meanings are intuitive to me (a native speaker), and I would struggle to produce a coherent analysis of either of them. To be clear, that last part is not disqualifing, there are plenty of things in language that have elluded coherent analysis. And many more that have done so from me.
That goes to show how easy it is to leave words out and not realize it!
In my other answer to the post, I try to explain what possible reasons there might be for the sentence making intuitive sense to me, even though I missed all the possible ambiguities until they were pointed out.
You are still leaving words out. Under a standard analysis of English, the full sentence would be:
In my judgement as a native English speaker (with an undergraduates degree in linguistics), both that and the original sentence are grammatical. However, it is not obvious to me what they mean.
Looking at it as a linguist, I could hypothesise that the meaning is:
A) The number of people who have been to Berlin is greater than the number of times I have been to Berlin.
Going back to the original sentence, I could also hypothesise (as others in this thread have) that the underlying sentence is
Meaning that I posses a quantity of people, and that quantity is smaller than the quantity of people who have been to Berlin.
Neither of these meanings are intuitive to me (a native speaker), and I would struggle to produce a coherent analysis of either of them. To be clear, that last part is not disqualifing, there are plenty of things in language that have elluded coherent analysis. And many more that have done so from me.
That goes to show how easy it is to leave words out and not realize it!
In my other answer to the post, I try to explain what possible reasons there might be for the sentence making intuitive sense to me, even though I missed all the possible ambiguities until they were pointed out.