Metropol

nodnirG kraM wrote:V's next to C on the keyboard I suppose.

What are you saying you cheeky monkey? (1957) I can assure you my 21st birthday was not in that year!

I'd never really thought about it till I just read this thread, but "twenty ten" would be consistant with the previous centuries pronunciation - i.e. "eighteen ten" / "nineteen ten" etc. - so I'd be very happy going with that myself.

Aston wrote:I'd never really thought about it till I just read this thread, but "twenty ten" would be consistant with the previous centuries pronunciation - i.e. "eighteen ten" / "nineteen ten" etc. - so I'd be very happy going with that myself.

I believe (not from personal experience you understand) that there was similar dupilcity in the way the year was pronounced at the beginning of the last century.

It seems that until after the first decade has passed the first two digits should not be referred to as if they were isolated numbers (ie "nineteen" or "twenty"). I always assumed that by the time we got to 2010 we would revert to the former standard and refer to it as "twenty-ten". Once this is commonplace we will probably refer back to 2007 as "twenty-oh-seven" in a similar fashion that we do with 1907.

My mother, who would be clocking up her ton later this year if she was still with us, always referred to her year of birth as "nineteen-oh-seven", if that's any help.

Well people generally refer to 1900 as 'Nineteen Hundred' (but 1901 as 'Nineteen Oh One'), so logic would dictate that we refer to 2000 as 'Two Thousand') and 2001 as 'Twenty Oh One'. But somehow we have continued on the 'Two thousand one.....' path.

It's all very confusing.

No doubt the US will opt in having something totally different to what we will refer to it as. I'll stick with Two Thousand and Ten, 11, 12 and so on.

I've never really thought about it, but at the moment I think I still call anything above 2010 "two thousand and ...".
It does seem easier to use "twenty ...", though I'll find out when we get there!

Who cares?

rfrancis51284 wrote:Who cares?

Nobody does, Rob, but then that doesn't stop him.

Yeah, brilliant of him to zombify this thread from a year ago to yammer away about his little naming convention for years as if anyone besides himself (and I even doubt he does) gives that much of a fuck about it.

He must be very proud but I doubt his tenure here will be anything but short.

Tumble Tower wrote:The sequence is as follows:
2008: two thousand and eight
2009: two thousand and nine
2010: twenty ten
2011: twenty eleven
2012: twenty twelve
2013: twenty thirteen
:
2019: twenty nineteen
2020: twenty twenty
2021: twenty twenty-one
etc. through two

2099: twenty nintety-nine.

Perhaps you could fill in the gaps between 2013 and 2019, and between 2021 and 2099. I don't feel you've quite patronised us enough.