Difference between revisions of "Years in English"
Firespeaker (talk | contribs) m (moved Dates in English to Years in English) |
Firespeaker (talk | contribs) (→Possible explanation) |
||
Line 153: | Line 153: | ||
Because "twenty hundred" is not okay in English, the previously only formal pattern was used colloquial, and the year 2000 was called "two thousand". Subsequent years followed this pattern due to the restriction on "{20, 30, etc.) oh ...": i.e., "two thousand one", "two thousand two", etc. | Because "twenty hundred" is not okay in English, the previously only formal pattern was used colloquial, and the year 2000 was called "two thousand". Subsequent years followed this pattern due to the restriction on "{20, 30, etc.) oh ...": i.e., "two thousand one", "two thousand two", etc. | ||
− | With the year 2010 a problem arose. The "two thousand ''n''" pattern was already in standard colloquial usage (and even before the year 2010 came around, foreseeable to be in standard usage), though the restriction which caused it (*"twenty hundred", *"twenty oh five") no longer applied. This meant that (by analogy?) "two thousand ten" became the preferred colloquial reading of what might otherwise be "twenty ten". | + | With the year 2010 a problem arose. The "two thousand ''n''" pattern was already in standard colloquial usage (and even before the year 2010 came around, foreseeable to be in standard usage), though the restriction which caused it (*"twenty hundred", *"twenty oh five") no longer applied. This meant that (by analogy?) "two thousand ten" became the preferred colloquial reading of what might otherwise be "twenty ten", though both appear to be used in current colloquial usage (in mid 2010). |
== Follow-up research == | == Follow-up research == | ||
There should be some research done to determine how the year was pronounced before the year 2000 rolled around, and before its first decade was commonly referred to in English. An example would be to see how Arthur C. Clarke pronounced the name of his 1982 novel and the subsequent 1984 film named "2010: Odyssey Two". This sort of information would help to sort out whether the preference for "two thousand ten" was due to ten years of saying "two thousand ''n''", or whether it would've been the default way of saying it before that too. | There should be some research done to determine how the year was pronounced before the year 2000 rolled around, and before its first decade was commonly referred to in English. An example would be to see how Arthur C. Clarke pronounced the name of his 1982 novel and the subsequent 1984 film named "2010: Odyssey Two". This sort of information would help to sort out whether the preference for "two thousand ten" was due to ten years of saying "two thousand ''n''", or whether it would've been the default way of saying it before that too. |
Latest revision as of 17:15, 7 June 2010
This page is about how years are said and read (and written) in English.
Judgements
key:
- preferred
- nothing wrong
- sounds odd in most contexts or only okay formally
not okay
20th century | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1900 | nineteen hundred | one thousand nine hundred | |||
1905 | nineteen oh five | nineteen hundred five | one thousand nine hundred five | one thousand nine hundred and five | |
1910 | nineteen ten | nineteen hundred ten | one thousand nine hundred ten | one thousand nine hundred and ten | |
1911 | nineteen eleven | nineteen hundred elevent | one thousand nine hundred eleven | one thousand nine hundred and eleven | |
1920 | nineteen twenty | nineteen hundred twenty | one thousand nine hundred twenty | one thousand nine hundred and twenty | |
1995 | nineteen ninety five | nineteen hundred ninety five | one thousand nine hundred ninety five | one thousand nine hundred and ninety five | |
21st century | |||||
2000 | two thousand | two thousand | |||
2005 | twenty oh five | two thousand five | two thousand and five | ||
2010 | twenty ten | two thousand ten | two thousand and ten | ||
2011 | twenty eleven | two thousand eleven | two thousand and eleven | ||
2020 | twenty twenty | two thousand twenty | two thousand and twenty | ||
2095 | twenty ninety five | two thousand ninety-five | two thousand and ninety-five | ||
22nd century | |||||
2100 | twenty one hundred | two thousand one hundred | |||
2105 | twenty one oh five | twenty one hundred five | two thousand one hundred five | two thousand one hundred and five | |
2110 | twenty one ten | twenty one hundred ten | two thousand one hundred ten | two thousand one hundred and ten | |
2111 | twenty one eleven | twenty one hundred eleven | two thousand one hundred eleven | two thousand one hundred and eleven | |
2120 | twenty one twenty | twenty one hundred twenty | two thousand one hundred twenty | two thousand one hundred and twenty | |
2195 | twenty one ninety five | twenty one hundred ninety-five | two thousand one ninety-five | two thousand one ninety-five |
The problem
As seen in the chart, the 20th and 22nd centuries have the same rules for pronunciation of the year, but the 21st century seems to have its own rules.
Possible explanation
The problem seems to stem from the fact that in English, hundreds can be counted by any number lower than 100, except for the tens higher than 10 (i.e., 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, and 90). If hundreds could be counted by 20, then "twenty hundred" would okay, whereas if hundreds couldn't be counted by 19, then "nineteen hundred" would not be okay. The restriction on using "oh" in nn0n combinations seems to be identical.
Because "twenty hundred" is not okay in English, the previously only formal pattern was used colloquial, and the year 2000 was called "two thousand". Subsequent years followed this pattern due to the restriction on "{20, 30, etc.) oh ...": i.e., "two thousand one", "two thousand two", etc.
With the year 2010 a problem arose. The "two thousand n" pattern was already in standard colloquial usage (and even before the year 2010 came around, foreseeable to be in standard usage), though the restriction which caused it (*"twenty hundred", *"twenty oh five") no longer applied. This meant that (by analogy?) "two thousand ten" became the preferred colloquial reading of what might otherwise be "twenty ten", though both appear to be used in current colloquial usage (in mid 2010).
Follow-up research
There should be some research done to determine how the year was pronounced before the year 2000 rolled around, and before its first decade was commonly referred to in English. An example would be to see how Arthur C. Clarke pronounced the name of his 1982 novel and the subsequent 1984 film named "2010: Odyssey Two". This sort of information would help to sort out whether the preference for "two thousand ten" was due to ten years of saying "two thousand n", or whether it would've been the default way of saying it before that too.