|
|
| Author |
Message |
eprom
|
|
Random Thoughts
| 
Aug 22 03:19 UTC 2003 |
some random thoughts....
|
| 39 responses total. |
eprom
|
|
response 1 of 39:
|
Aug 22 03:19 UTC 2003 |
hmmm......I was just thinking....
almost all the years of the last millenium were pronounced
in a two digit by two digit format; such as ten-sixty-six
for (10)(66). And all last century everything was:
nineteen-oh-one, nineteen-ten, nineteen-ninety-nine, etc..
so shouldn't this year be refered to as twenty-oh-three
instead of two-thousand-three?
|
gelinas
|
|
response 2 of 39:
|
Aug 22 03:33 UTC 2003 |
Probably, but I suspect folks will stick with "two-thousand" at least
through the end of this decade. I started to write, "through the end of
this century", but I think "twenty-ten" will turn the trick.
|
tod
|
|
response 3 of 39:
|
Aug 22 13:21 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
gull
|
|
response 4 of 39:
|
Aug 22 13:44 UTC 2003 |
I think it's because 'twentyhundred' just doesn't sound right, so people
said 'two thousand' instead. It's sort of stuck after that.
|
novomit
|
|
response 5 of 39:
|
Aug 22 13:46 UTC 2003 |
They dont have to say 'twenty hundred', they could say something like 'twenty
oh three'.
|
gull
|
|
response 6 of 39:
|
Aug 22 13:52 UTC 2003 |
Right, but I'm saying that when the year rolled over to 2000, people
said 'two thousand'. In 1900, I bet they said 'nineteen hundred'. I
think that set the pattern of speech for at least the next few years.
|
novomit
|
|
response 7 of 39:
|
Aug 22 13:58 UTC 2003 |
Yeah, I agree. But then again "Nineteen hundred" rolls off the tongue a little
easier than "one thousand nine hundred and naught". ;)
|
tod
|
|
response 8 of 39:
|
Aug 22 16:00 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
albaugh
|
|
response 9 of 39:
|
Aug 22 16:47 UTC 2003 |
All things purchaseable from a TV ad are $19.95.
|
tod
|
|
response 10 of 39:
|
Aug 22 17:06 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
albaugh
|
|
response 11 of 39:
|
Aug 22 19:47 UTC 2003 |
"If you order now..."
|
remmers
|
|
response 12 of 39:
|
Aug 23 02:28 UTC 2003 |
I pronounce the current year "EM EM EYE EYE EYE".
|
gelinas
|
|
response 13 of 39:
|
Aug 23 04:16 UTC 2003 |
(I suspect at least part of the usage of '2000' stems from the wide-spread
discussion of the "Y2K bug.")
|
twenex
|
|
response 14 of 39:
|
Aug 23 14:32 UTC 2003 |
From an amateur quasi-linguist perspective, (make of that what you will), the
"two thousand and three" usage probably arises from the fact that the word
"twenty" ends in a vowel, whereas (for example), "nineteen" in "nineteen oh
one" ends in a consonant, which makes it easier to say (some languages either
reduce one vowel in a group of two or more to a diphthong - like "Bay" - or
prohibit anything but consonant-vowel or vowel-consonant combinations).
|
sno
|
|
response 15 of 39:
|
Aug 23 14:55 UTC 2003 |
I prefer duo-deca-centa-trey
|
rcurl
|
|
response 16 of 39:
|
Aug 23 20:40 UTC 2003 |
Re #14: you can avoid that problem by giving the date in octal, which
is "thirty seven twenty three" (base 8).
|
pvn
|
|
response 17 of 39:
|
Aug 23 22:42 UTC 2003 |
God, what a geek.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 18 of 39:
|
Aug 23 23:59 UTC 2003 |
Thank you!
|
pvn
|
|
response 19 of 39:
|
Aug 24 01:57 UTC 2003 |
You should.
|
jaklumen
|
|
response 20 of 39:
|
Aug 24 05:22 UTC 2003 |
*chuckle*
|
sholmes
|
|
response 21 of 39:
|
Aug 24 07:21 UTC 2003 |
re 16: No such number as thirty seven in octal :)
|
gelinas
|
|
response 22 of 39:
|
Aug 24 15:07 UTC 2003 |
37[8] would be 31[10]. 3700[8] is 1984[10].
Why not pronounce "37[8]" as "thirty-seven"?
|
russ
|
|
response 23 of 39:
|
Aug 24 20:24 UTC 2003 |
Know why programmers can't tell the difference between
Christmas and Halloween?
31(OCT) = 25(DEC).
|
rcurl
|
|
response 24 of 39:
|
Aug 24 20:56 UTC 2003 |
Re #21: interesting point. "thirty" is certainly a decimal quantity - but
then we don't have a compact way of *stating* octal numbers. How should
one state 3723[8]? Just saying "three seven two three" works, but we use a
verbal shorthand in [10] by saying "thirty seven twenty three". What is
the verbal shorthand for 37[8] since, as pointed out, "thirty" is not an
octal quantity?
|