Let's stop counting centuries • Hacker News Board

Re: Let's stop counting centuries

#301

Post by PopAlongKid » Sat, Jul 06, 2024, 1:18 PM UTC

navane wrote: post #285

MobiusHorizons wrote: post #270

> there's no good way to write 2000 - 2009 I have heard people use "the aughts" to refer to this time range [1]. I guess if I was trying to be specific about which century one could say "the two thousand aughts" or "the eighteen hundred aughts". But I think in that context i'd be more likely to say "in the first decade of the 1800s" 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aughts

I call them the two thousand zeroes (2000s). Or, when people ask me from which year my car is, I say two thousand zero -- emphasizing the smallest digit.

Why not twenty hundred for 2000, just like 1900 is nineteen hundred?

Similarly, I never understood why people still say things like "two thousand ten" instead of twenty-ten for year 2010. No one ever went around saying "one thousand nine hundred ten" for 1910, did they?

Re: Let's stop counting centuries

#302

Post by PopAlongKid » Sat, Jul 06, 2024, 1:19 PM UTC

dkdbejwi383 wrote: post #226

networked wrote: post #9

> This leaves ambiguous how to refer to decades like 1800-1809. There is the apostrophe convention for decades. You can refer to the decade of 1800–1809 as "the '00s" when the century is clear from the context. ( The Chicago Manual of Style allows it: https://english.stackexchange.com/a/299512 .) If you wanted to upset people, you could try adding the century back: "the 18'00s". :-) There is also the convention of re…

How do you speak it though? The “oh ohs”? “Noughts”? “Zeroes”?

Aughts.

Re: Let's stop counting centuries

#303

Post by dgb23 » Sat, Jul 06, 2024, 1:20 PM UTC

tempodox wrote: post #190

gcp123 wrote: post #2

Author makes a good point. "1700s" is both more intuitive and more concise than "18th century". The very first episode of Alex Trebeck's Jeopardy in 1984 illustrates how confusing this can be: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDTxS9_CwZA The "Final Jeopardy" question simply asked on what date did the 20th century begin, and all three contestants got it wrong, leading to a 3-way tie.

Logic is in short supply and off-by-one errors are everywhere. Most people don't care. I think it's more doable to learn to just live with that than to reprogram mankind.

Specifically I agree, but generally I disagree. I’m very glad we got the metric system, standards for commonly used protocols and so on.

Re: Let's stop counting centuries

#304

Post by __MatrixMan__ » Sat, Jul 06, 2024, 1:49 PM UTC

tempodox wrote: post #212

zepolen wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's what most people think and the world keeps trucking along. It's the rare people that don't who actually change the world.

You can change the world if you make it easier to meet a need enough people have. Persuading everyone they're holding it wrong is not that.

Persuasion by argument, maybe not. But if you simply ask for clarification when you hear "nth century" but not when you hear "n-hundreds" then you've effectively made it easier for the speaker to meet their need one way over the other way.

Same thing for "this weekend" when. Not spoken during a weekend.

Re: Let's stop counting centuries

#305

Post by the__alchemist » Sat, Jul 06, 2024, 1:58 PM UTC

Confusing convention. I think most pre teens realize this when learning history, then move on to accept it as a quirk. I would prefer we stop propagating it, as the author says. Don't accept confusing notation when a better alternative is also in common use!

Re: Let's stop counting centuries

#306

Post by Tao3300 » Sat, Jul 06, 2024, 2:08 PM UTC

networked wrote: post #12

James_K wrote: post #8

One point, the singular they has been in use for centuries, where this essay suggests it's a recent invention.

The essay doesn't really say anything about when the singular "they" was invented . What it says is that it used to be low-status and unsophisticated language. > In the 1970s, fancy people would have sniffed at using “they” rather than “he” for a single person of unknown sex like this. But today, fancy people would sniff at not doing that. How did that happen? > I think “they” climbed the prestige ladder—people slowl…

Yeah, I'm old enough that I remember being taught not to use singular they in elementary school, but I'm young enough that he/she was given as the preferred alternative.

Re: Let's stop counting centuries

#307

Post by cabalamat » Sat, Jul 06, 2024, 2:11 PM UTC

You need to count from 0.

1 BC should be renamed year 0. Then the years 0-99 are the 0th century, the years 1900-1999 are the 19th century, etc.

To avoid confusion between new style and old style centuries, create a new word, "centan", meaning "100 years" and use cardinal instead of ordinal numbers, for conciseness. Then the years 1900-1999 are the 19-centan.

Re: Let's stop counting centuries

#308

Post by lobsterthief » Sat, Jul 06, 2024, 2:13 PM UTC

m2f2 wrote: post #295

rcoveson wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no year zero according to first-order pedants. Second-order pedants know that there is a year zero in both the astronomical year numbering system and in ISO 8601, so whether or not there is a year zero depends on context. It's ultimately up to us to decide how to project our relatively young calendar system way back into the past before it was invented. Year zero makes everything nice. Be like astronomers an…

Talking about standards let's not pick and choose. First, let's get rid of miles and feet, then we could even discuss this.

If only—I think most US citizens who actually work with units of measurement on a daily basis would love to switch to the metric system. Unfortunately, everyone else wants to keep our “freedom units” (and pennies)

Re: Let's stop counting centuries

#309

Post by _dain_ » Sat, Jul 06, 2024, 2:18 PM UTC

They should have names:

    - 1500s: The Columbian Century
    - 1600s: The Westphalian Century
    - 1700s: The Century of Enlightenment
    - 1800s: The Imperial Century
    - 1900s: The Century of Oil
    - 2000s: The Current Century (to be renamed in 2100)

You might think it's Eurocentric, and you'd be right. But every language gets to name them differently, according to local history.

Re: Let's stop counting centuries

#310

Post by cm2187 » Sat, Jul 06, 2024, 2:19 PM UTC

jrockway wrote: post #58

gcp123 wrote: post #2

Author makes a good point. "1700s" is both more intuitive and more concise than "18th century". The very first episode of Alex Trebeck's Jeopardy in 1984 illustrates how confusing this can be: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDTxS9_CwZA The "Final Jeopardy" question simply asked on what date did the 20th century begin, and all three contestants got it wrong, leading to a 3-way tie.

On the other hand "1700s art" sounds like trash compared to "18th century art".

And 1700s already has a different meaning, i.e. early 18th century.