AARoads Forum

For instance, if you're asked to sign something and date it, what do you write down.

I'd write down today as "Jan 23/2017"

I notice that the nonsensical DD-MM-YY format is used by many especially around here. Which I thought makes no sense.

1/23/17

You BOTH got the year wrong, lol  :rofl:

In a hurry: 1/23/2018
For any formal purpose: January 23, 2018
In the UK they put the day first: 23/1/2018

As someone who speaks both French and English and who often writes dates in both, I always spell out the month as a way to avoid ambiguity. So, today would be either January 23, 2018 or le 23 janvier 2018. If there's dates I'll need to sort, I'll write them in YYYY-MM-DD format, or if I'm feeling whimsical, the Julian date.

Quote from: MisterSG1 on January 23, 2018, 09:32:04 PM
I notice that the nonsensical DD-MM-YY format is used by many especially around here. Which I thought makes no sense.

I'm not sure why you think the D-M-Y format makes no sense. Even if it's relatively unfamiliar to you, certainly it seems reasonable to write a date from the smallest units to the largest.

Quote from: CtrlAltDel on January 23, 2018, 09:45:15 PM
As someone who speaks both French and English and who often writes dates in both, I always spell out the month as a way to avoid ambiguity. So, today would be either January 23, 2018 or le 23 janvier 2018. If there's dates I'll need to sort, I'll write them in YYYY-MM-DD format, or if I'm feeling whimsical, the Julian date.

Quote from: MisterSG1 on January 23, 2018, 09:32:04 PM
I notice that the nonsensical DD-MM-YY format is used by many especially around here. Which I thought makes no sense.

I'm not sure why you think the D-M-Y format makes no sense. Even if it's relatively unfamiliar to you, certainly it seems reasonable to write a date from the smallest units to the largest.

The problem with it is cultural, yes, the logic you use from smallest to largest is similar to those who adamantly see the metric system as being superior in every way to the imperial system.

D/M/Y makes sense if like in your French example, that's how the date is written formally and spoken out loud. For instance, people around here would call it January 23rd, not the Twenty-Third of January. It may be common in practically every other English speaking country to think of today as 23 January, but that's not how we culturally refer to the date in North America.

Always "23 January 2018" - written and said.   :cool:

I know I'm in the minority but here goes. To me, it makes the most sense to state the time frames in order: 23 (the day), then the month (January), and then the year (2018).  It doesn't make sense to write "8:49 PM" (or 20:49 which I also prefer) as "49:8 PM" does it?  :-D

For short forms, unless requested otherwise, always YYYY/MM/DD (which I believe is the international standard and makes the most sense).

EDIT: not the standard, but very close: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_8601

I NEVER use MM/DD/YYYY (I know you Americans love this format) because of the reasons stated above.

DD/MM/YYYY is more common in Canada (and other non-US countries) but I still don't really like it simply because it can often be confused with MM/DD/YYYY.

By carrier pigeon, I've yet to get a response in kind....


But in all seriousness two ways:

Normally:  01/012018
At work:  01/JAN/2018

Quote from: SignGeek101 on January 23, 2018, 09:54:19 PM
DD/MM/YYYY is more common in Canada (and other non-US countries) but I still don't really like it simply because it can often be confused with MM/DD/YYYY.

I'd really like to know why you think that. I've always known M-D-Y, as it is how I learned to say the date. I was also familiar with Y-M-D, as it does keep the month before day format intact. Tell me this, how long have your ancestors been in this country.

I would pretty much either say January 23, 2018 or 1/23/18 or 1/23/2018.

I don't think I would ever write it any other way, but that's just me.  :D

ISO 8601 :thumbsup: (ex: 2018-01-23). If you see the year first (especially with four digits), you know the next two are the month and day respectively. 01-02-2018 is too ambigous (Jan 2nd or Feb 1st?).

Canada is terrible with date formats. All three formats are commonly in use and as you can imagine, it sucks.

Although I write 1/23/18 and type 23 JAN 2018, I love the Russian notation:

23/I - 18 y.   

The "y" would actually be a lower case Cyrillic "g," but I don't have Cyrillic on my phone. :D

Quote from: 7/8 on January 23, 2018, 10:13:48 PM
ISO 8601 :thumbsup: (ex: 2018-01-23). If you see the year first (especially with four digits), you know the next two are the month and day respectively. 01-02-2018 is too ambigous (Jan 2nd or Feb 1st?).

Canada is terrible with date formats. All three formats are commonly in use and as you can imagine, it sucks.

ISO 8601 may be the most logical, especially with writing it purely in numbers, as it keeps month before day, and largest to smallest increments exist. (Much of the rest of the world uses D-M-Y), and it may be official government policy doesn't mean it's in everyday use. For instance, saying a Y-M-D format would be incredibly awkward "Today is 2018, January the twenty-third" .

Unless all 4 Year digits are there, especially with the current part of the century we are in, ambiguities are still possible. 12-1-18 could be January 12, 2018 or January 18, 2012 depending on what date format you expect.

I grew up in a military household, so "23 Jan 2018". Using just numbers, I used to write 1/23/18, but I've transitioned to 23.1.2018. Day.month.year just makes too much damn sense (I prefer full stops to hyphens for personal reasons).

At work, I write "23rd Jan 2018" on my paperwork, which is ostensibly British. But it's just military style + ordinal indicator. I only use the ordinal indicator on my work paperwork because everyone else does.

I use dashes:  1-23-18

Quote from: MisterSG1 on January 23, 2018, 10:25:18 PM

Quote from: 7/8 on January 23, 2018, 10:13:48 PM
ISO 8601 :thumbsup: (ex: 2018-01-23). If you see the year first (especially with four digits), you know the next two are the month and day respectively. 01-02-2018 is too ambigous (Jan 2nd or Feb 1st?).

Canada is terrible with date formats. All three formats are commonly in use and as you can imagine, it sucks.

ISO 8601 may be the most logical, especially with writing it purely in numbers, as it keeps month before day, and largest to smallest increments exist. (Much of the rest of the world uses D-M-Y), and it may be official government policy doesn't mean it's in everyday use. For instance, saying a Y-M-D format would be incredibly awkward "Today is 2018, January the twenty-third" .

Unless all 4 Year digits are there, especially with the current part of the century we are in, ambiguities are still possible. 12-1-18 could be January 12, 2018 or January 18, 2012 depending on what date format you expect.

I don't think it matters much if the order is written differently than it's said. I would still read all three formats as January 23rd, 2018. But ISO 8601 is the least ambiguous and it sorts file/folder names in chronological order. I agree that YY-MM-DD is terrible; the year HAS to be four digits to keep it unambiguous.

As a side note, it's somewhat funny that americans write 07/04, but call it the fourth of July. :hmmm:

Quote from: 7/8 on January 23, 2018, 10:43:02 PM
As a side note, it's somewhat funny that americans write 07/04, but call it the fourth of July. :hmmm:

In my experience, both fourth of July and July fourth are used about equally. Never July the fourth though. That's unbelievably ugly sounding  :-D

1 moon with 23 suns during 2017 earth-revolutions/sun of the mythical sky-god-kid era.

23.1.2018 in short form, 23rd January 2018 in long form, and reversed: 2018-01-23 for file sorting.

P00I

In report writing: January D, YYYY
On the rare check I write: MM-DD-YYYY (or the report writing way - depends on how lazy/in a hurry I am)
For any filename or folder: YYYYMMDD or YYYY.MM.DD

Quote from: 7/8 on January 23, 2018, 10:43:02 PM
As a side note, it's somewhat funny that americans write 07/04, but call it the fourth of July. :hmmm:

It's probably the most common for Independence Day, but I've head that format said for just about any date that is spoken.

Quote from: MisterSG1 on January 23, 2018, 10:04:16 PM

Quote from: SignGeek101 on January 23, 2018, 09:54:19 PM
DD/MM/YYYY is more common in Canada (and other non-US countries) but I still don't really like it simply because it can often be confused with MM/DD/YYYY.

I'd really like to know why you think that. I've always known M-D-Y, as it is how I learned to say the date. I was also familiar with Y-M-D, as it does keep the month before day format intact. Tell me this, how long have your ancestors been in this country.

I learned the date as "January 23 2018" as well, but have since switched (about six or so years ago) just because of personal preference, nothing to do with my family or anything (we're not new immigrants).

I think I've seen DD/MM/YYYY more (I could be wrong, my memory sometimes betrays me), but of course it depends on who is printing the date (grocery stores versus the bank or the government). I checked a few (about half a dozen) receipts I have just now, and most of them were either MM/DD/YYYY or YYYY/MM/DD but I also saw DD-MMM-YYYY and YY/MM/DD.

Quote from: 7/8 on January 23, 2018, 10:43:02 PM

Quote from: MisterSG1 on January 23, 2018, 10:25:18 PM

Quote from: 7/8 on January 23, 2018, 10:13:48 PM
ISO 8601 :thumbsup: (ex: 2018-01-23). If you see the year first (especially with four digits), you know the next two are the month and day respectively. 01-02-2018 is too ambigous (Jan 2nd or Feb 1st?).

Canada is terrible with date formats. All three formats are commonly in use and as you can imagine, it sucks.

ISO 8601 may be the most logical, especially with writing it purely in numbers, as it keeps month before day, and largest to smallest increments exist. (Much of the rest of the world uses D-M-Y), and it may be official government policy doesn't mean it's in everyday use. For instance, saying a Y-M-D format would be incredibly awkward "Today is 2018, January the twenty-third" .

Unless all 4 Year digits are there, especially with the current part of the century we are in, ambiguities are still possible. 12-1-18 could be January 12, 2018 or January 18, 2012 depending on what date format you expect.

I don't think it matters much if the order is written differently than it's said. I would still read all three formats as January 23rd, 2018. But ISO 8601 is the least ambiguous and it sorts file/folder names in chronological order. I agree that YY-MM-DD is terrible; the year HAS to be four digits to keep it unambiguous.

As a side note, it's somewhat funny that americans write 07/04, but call it the fourth of July. :hmmm:

You know, I figured I'd look at some historical documents, as for the Fourth of July. The actual Declaration of Independence has a date of "July 4, 1776" .

The original BNA Act, which essentially established Canada as a unified dominion of British territories is dated "29th March 1867"

I'm not sure when the change occurred, but bills today that are heard in Ottawa acknowledge dates in the American format "MONTH DAY , YEAR"




As for how we say the date, you are right, however it should be understood that writing the date in numbers in MM/DD/YYYY came from the logic in that's how we normally say the date, so that would be a quick way to write it. Hence to avoid confusion, I always write the date with the first three letters of the month followed by day and year. This is more logical and prevents ambiguity.

On paper when the date format is not specified I usually write the date like so:

Jan/January 23 2018/18 (slashes meaning i'll use either of the two)

23 JAN a.D. 2018

Quote from: 1 on January 23, 2018, 09:33:03 PM
1/23/17

Quote from: 02 Park Ave on January 23, 2018, 11:43:07 PM
23 JAN a.D. 2017

Nope.

---

I use month/day/year, using numbers. I almost never actually spell the date out, but on the rare occasion that I do, I’ll write Month Day, Year.

Quote from: 1 on January 23, 2018, 09:33:03 PM
1/23/18

I write it the same way however when I was in elementary school I wrote it as 1-23-18

Quote from: 7/8 on January 23, 2018, 10:13:48 PM
ISO 8601 :thumbsup: (ex: 2018-01-23). If you see the year first (especially with four digits), you know the next two are the month and day respectively.

This is the only correct answer. Not only is it sensible (largest to smallest) but it also means that an alpha sort (like you might see in a file manager) will also sort the dates in the correct order.

If I cannot use this date format (e.g. on my checks which have a dateline formatted "_______ 20____") I tend to write the day first, then first three of the month (24 Jan 2018).

I also use the 2018-01-23 format whenever possible if using just numbers (though sometimes an electronic form may require another form and then obviously I just deal with it). It's the least ambiguous, and it's the most useful for making an electronic file sort chronologically. That is, the date Windows assigns to a file may not be the actual date of the document, so I might save something as "2018-01-23 Motion to Convene an Inquisition." Using the date that way ensures all the filenames sort into correct chronological order. If there's more than one item for a given day, I add a letter suffix (such as 2018-01-23-a, etc.).

I always prefer hyphens to slashes and particularly to periods when writing a date. I don't like the current fad of using periods in phone numbers, either. To me periods in a phone number or a date look too much like an IP address (yes, I know it's a different number of digits and spacing).

Whether I use day-month-year (with no punctuation) or month-day-year (with appropriate commas) when using a text date depends on the context, where I'm using it, and who will be reading the material (if I know). If I need to use a date as an adjective, I always prefer the day-month-year style because I find the commas around the year to be awkward in an adjectival date. That is, because the month-day-year format takes a comma both before and after the year, you would write "your January 23, 2018, letter." I don't especially like the way that looks; I find "your 23 January 2018 letter" to be preferable. But if I do that, I'll then use that date format throughout the document because mixing formats is bad. (More likely I will word the sentence so as to avoid the issue: "I received your letter dated January 23, 2018, in which you stated blah blah blah.")

A lot of people these days inexplicably omit the comma after the year even when the date is not being used as an adjective, but that doesn't make sense. The year is in the nature of an appositive. It tells you which January 23 and it isn't necessarily essential to the sentence. "On February 4, 2018, Minneapolis will host the Super Bowl." "On February 4, Minneapolis will host the Super Bowl." Both sentences work equally well for most purposes unless there is a particular reason why you need to specify 2018 (say, if you were typing that sentence two years ago and needed to clarify it was a future year). Since the "2018" isn't grammatically essential and is there solely to provide clarification, it gets set off by commas.

M-D-Y or M/D/Y

I find myself interchangeably using hyphens or slashes, but if I'm thinking about it I will defer to hyphens because a slash could easily be mistaken for a "1" when handwritten.

I most often use MM/DD/YY and sometimes use MM/DD/YYYY.  I never use leading zeroes for the month and day if they are single digits.

1-24-18

If I'm saving a file on the computer and want to incorporate the date (say, on a file I update daily but need to maintain for historical reasons), then I usually will do "File Name 012418.xlsx"

DD/MM/YYYY. Thus, when I see a date in the format MM/DD/YYYY I get confused, especially up to the 12th day of each month. My birthday and Independence Day are almost three months apart.

Quote from: cabiness42 on January 24, 2018, 09:55:26 AM
I most often use MM/DD/YY and sometimes use MM/DD/YYYY.  I never use leading zeroes for the month and day if they are single digits.

I find the leading zeroes to be essential for computer purposes because otherwise it may sort incorrectly, depending on what software I'm using: 1-24-2018, or 2018-1-24, might be followed by, say, 10-24-2018 or 2018-10-24 prior to 2-24-2018 or 2018-2-24 because it doesn't know to read "10" as "ten." Using the leading zero solves the problem.

FYI - The ITU format for telephone nimbers is:  +  Country Code  NUmber with no dashes or periods.  Here is an example:  +1 856 555 1234

As a software developer, avoiding ambiguity is of major importance. So I stick with the ISO 8601 format whenever practical (2018-01-24), though in some non-computer-based scenarios I'll still use the classic 1/24/18 (writing the date on my rent checks, for instance). "24 Jan 2018" is acceptable, "24/1/18" certainly not.

Quote from: Scott5114 on January 24, 2018, 05:00:09 AM

Quote from: 7/8 on January 23, 2018, 10:13:48 PM
ISO 8601 :thumbsup: (ex: 2018-01-23). If you see the year first (especially with four digits), you know the next two are the month and day respectively.

This is the only correct answer. Not only is it sensible (largest to smallest) but it also means that an alpha sort (like you might see in a file manager) will also sort the dates in the correct order.

If I cannot use this date format (e.g. on my checks which have a dateline formatted "_______ 20____") I tend to write the day first, then first three of the month (24 Jan 2018).

"This is the only correct answer."  Come on, now.  The correct answer is the one that's most appropriate to the context in which you're writing, the way most likely to be understood in a given scenario.

In business correspondence: January 24, 2018
When writing checks, which I still do on rare occasion: 24 Jan 2018
When naming files: 2018-01-24
When I am feeling lazy and I know for certain that the recipient will know what I mean: 1/24 or 1/24/18
When filling out forms for filing in government agencies: whatever the instructions say, and heaven forbid they should be consistent

Quote from: MisterSG1 on January 23, 2018, 09:53:55 PMThe problem with it is cultural, yes, the logic you use from smallest to largest is similar to those who adamantly see the metric system as being superior in every way to the imperial system.

No it's not. I'm definitely not in the former category, but I can't understand not sorting by size with dates - there's no reason not to. middle/little/big is a really weird of formatting numbers with no rhyme nor reason why. For a start, it's burying the important info, the day, in the middle.

If you are going to do month-day numerically then put the year at the beginning like the ISO standard! If you spell out the month, it doesn't matter as the ambiguity issues are gone.

That most American of dates, is typically said the British way - the 4th of July, not July 4.  :)


I usually use slashes, sometimes use dashes, as separators. I typically go smallest to biggest, as the computers I'm using have the date as an option to sort files by, so I rarely use the date in file-names, preferring something descriptive of what it is. It's always <ordinal number> of <month> when I say it, so that's the full hand version.

Full-hand: 24^th of January, 2018
Cheques, etc: 24^th Jan 2018
Just noting the date: 24/1/18 (occasionally 24-1-18, and depending on task, I might put in a leading zero on single digit numbers)

Thing is, I rarely write the date nowadays, especially with a year. Registers and rotas, where it's a simple 24/1 to convey the minimum information needed the most efficient way. Otherwise it is just stuff like "we're doing this on the 24th" without even a month.

January 24, 2018. I will never use "and" within a year. Did people ever party like it was 19 hundred-and-99? Of course not!

In emails or accompanying my signature, I use MM-DD-YYYY.

For file names that I want to be sorted chronologically, I use YYYY-MM-DD.

Quote from: MisterSG1 on January 23, 2018, 10:25:18 PMFor instance, saying a Y-M-D format would be incredibly awkward "Today is 2018, January the twenty-third" .

Indeed, what weirdos say "January the twenty-third" rather than "the twenty-third of January"? Is it like Richard the third, where it's the third Richard?  :-D

Quote from: MisterSG1 on January 23, 2018, 10:25:18 PMUnless all 4 Year digits are there, especially with the current part of the century we are in, ambiguities are still possible. 12-1-18 could be January 12, 2018 or January 18, 2012 depending on what date format you expect.

The era-changing demolition of a structure that happened on 9/11 was the fall of the Berlin wall in November '89, not the fall of the WTC on 11/9. ;)

This is why I would spell out the month (well 3 letters at least) in a Transatlantic conversation - it kills the ambiguity.

At least with the 7/7 London tube bombings, Americans wouldn't get confused by the date it happened.

As for the year, ISO specifies four numbers.

Quote from: jakeroot on January 23, 2018, 10:32:37 PM
I grew up in a military household, so "23 Jan 2018". Using just numbers, I used to write 1/23/18, but I've transitioned to 23.1.2018. Day.month.year just makes too much damn sense (I prefer full stops to hyphens for personal reasons).

Full stops (periods to our yankee friends) was how I initially learnt dates. I'm pretty sure it still is now. But people use slashes, and if not dashes. It's most odd.

Quote from: KEVIN_224 on January 24, 2018, 12:39:13 PMI will never use "and" within a year.

Two-thousand-one just sounds horrible to my ears.

QuoteDid people ever party like it was 19 hundred-and-99? Of course not!

Not least as they said it like 19-99, not 1999!

It didn't happen for 20- until 20-10, for the obvious ambiguity of how 20-1 sounds (some have tried to back number those years as 20-o-1, but it's not taken off) which didn't happen with 19-5. Plus there was the whole emphasising the new millenium (2x1000, rather than 20x100) and Two Thousand and One: A Space Oddessy (EN(US) speakers might have dropped the 'and' bit even though Arthur C Clarke says the and) stuff. It took a while for 20-xx format to stick in the UK: it was two thousand and ten for many, even though it was (finally) 20-10 for others. What killed the say the whole number out format dead was the 20-12 branding for the Olympics. We're yet to get to the default being to drop the century: back in '13 isn't that common.

British and Americans (at least US Americans) speak different when it comes to numbers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBbBbY4qvv4

I use the ISO date format when it is just the date and I do not have to fight date preformatting (e.g., paper or Web forms with discrete blanks for day/month/year).  For combined date/time in connection with scripts and logfiles therefor, I use YYYYMMDD-HHMMSS where HH uses the 24-hour clock.  For my purposes the ISO format for combined date/time is overpunctuated and overprecise.

I try to avoid omitting the year because I have found that apparently quotidian paperwork can linger well beyond the current year.

MM/DD/YY through 1999, MM/DD/YYYY starting in 2000.

I use M-D-Y (1-24-18) or M/D/Y (1/24/18) most of the time, probably with a slight favoring of the former. I'll also write out the date as Month Day, Year (January 24, 2018) if I have to though.

24-Jan-2018 OR 24 Jan 2018

Quote from: Pete from Boston on January 24, 2018, 11:15:46 AM

Quote from: Scott5114 on January 24, 2018, 05:00:09 AM

Quote from: 7/8 on January 23, 2018, 10:13:48 PM
ISO 8601 :thumbsup: (ex: 2018-01-23). If you see the year first (especially with four digits), you know the next two are the month and day respectively.

This is the only correct answer. Not only is it sensible (largest to smallest) but it also means that an alpha sort (like you might see in a file manager) will also sort the dates in the correct order.

If I cannot use this date format (e.g. on my checks which have a dateline formatted "_______ 20____") I tend to write the day first, then first three of the month (24 Jan 2018).

"This is the only correct answer."  Come on, now.  The correct answer is the one that's most appropriate to the context in which you're writing, the way most likely to be understood in a given scenario.

YOUR POST JUST GOT TEN MORE INCORRECT

When signing and dating a document by hand (like my time sheet for instance): 1/25/18

When making a post about something I usually post the date like I would write it, or I may type out Jan 25th 2018.

When corresponding with family members who are in the military: either 25 JAN 2018, or 180125 (when I reported to Navy boot camp on 890821 the year was only 2 digit, not sure on the proper format now post Y2k but my family members haven't complained so.....)

My CAD system at work shows the date as 01/25/2018 but uses the military 24hr clock.

Quote from: english si on January 24, 2018, 01:47:49 PM
The era-changing demolition of a structure that happened on 9/11 was the fall of the Berlin wall in November '89, not the fall of the WTC on 11/9. ;)

You write your disasters your way and we'll write our disasters our way.

Period / Full stop.

End of that discussion.

Quote from: formulanone on January 25, 2018, 06:44:28 AMYou write your disasters your way and we'll write our disasters our way.

Fall of the Berlin Wall wasn't a disaster.

We call 2001-09-11 '9/11' here outside America too, normally followed by a (pointless as people know what referring to date is talking about) disambiguation to say that we're talking about September 11th not 9th of November, because we cannot resist a jokey dig at Americans being different*. My point was that the existence of the US system makes the first 12 days each month ambiguous, and I took the example most used to point it out.

*I don't know whether jokes about 'Five Kilometre Island' exist.

Quote from: english si on January 25, 2018, 07:16:00 AM

Quote from: formulanone on January 25, 2018, 06:44:28 AMYou write your disasters your way and we'll write our disasters our way.

Fall of the Berlin Wall wasn't a disaster.

We call 2001-09-11 '9/11' here outside America too, normally followed by a (pointless as people know what referring to date is talking about) disambiguation to say that we're talking about September 11th not 9th of November, because we cannot resist a jokey dig at Americans being different*. My point was that the existence of the US system makes the first 12 days each month ambiguous, and I took the example most used to point it out.

*I don't know whether jokes about 'Five Kilometre Island' exist.

(You'd mentioned 7/7 upthread.)

It's called "culture" for everyone else who does something "different", but if you're an American, it's "foolish behavior".

Wake me when this re-run programme is over.

Quote from: formulanone on January 25, 2018, 07:22:28 AMIt's called "culture" for everyone else who does something "different", but if you're an American, it's "foolish behavior".

Where did I say that?

Sure, I said month-day-year is illogical, but this was talking about month-day vs day-month where both are equally logical, but there's ambiguity as to which different system is being used.

I really don't get why you are being so huffy about this.

Quote from: english si on January 25, 2018, 07:41:55 AM

Quote from: formulanone on January 25, 2018, 07:22:28 AMIt's called "culture" for everyone else who does something "different", but if you're an American, it's "foolish behavior".

Where did I say that?

Sure, I said month-day-year is illogical, but this was talking about month-day vs day-month where both are equally logical, but there's ambiguity as to which different system is being used.

I really don't get why you are being so huffy about this.

Some people just don't understand dry humor.

Quote from: MNHighwayMan on January 25, 2018, 07:43:51 AM

Quote from: english si on January 25, 2018, 07:41:55 AM

Quote from: formulanone on January 25, 2018, 07:22:28 AMIt's called "culture" for everyone else who does something "different", but if you're an American, it's "foolish behavior".

Where did I say that?

Sure, I said month-day-year is illogical, but this was talking about month-day vs day-month where both are equally logical, but there's ambiguity as to which different system is being used.

I really don't get why you are being so huffy about this.

Some people just don't understand dry humor.

Nonsense. I even wrote "programme" out of the cultural sensitivities of my audience. :)

I think due to confusion it could cause, the numerical date format won't easily change in America. There's not even a consensus on how to pronounce February.

Quote from: formulanone on January 25, 2018, 07:22:28 AM
It's called "culture" for everyone else who does something "different", but if you're an American, it's "foolish behaviour" .

Fixed ;) But +1.

As long as we are talking about dates of terrorist attacks, I'd comment that "11-M" (the usual Spanish contraction for "11 de marzo de 2004") is nicely unambiguous.  Searches on "7-J" and "11-S" (using browser plugin) also go directly to the appropriate articles in Spanish Wikipedia.

Quote from: english si on January 24, 2018, 01:47:49 PM
Indeed, what weirdos say "January the twenty-third" rather than "the twenty-third of January"? Is it like Richard the third, where it's the third Richard?  :-D

Verbalizing the "and" between month and date, to us, sounds like verbalizing the "and" between hundreds and tens when saying a number.  You probably say 320 as "three hundred and twenty," whereas a good many Americans say it as "three hundred twenty," and sticking the "and" in there sounds a little weird.

"January the twenty-third" is only like Richard the Third (being the third Richard) insofar as "Third February" is like him as well.

Quote from: kphoger on January 25, 2018, 01:48:09 PM

Quote from: english si on January 24, 2018, 01:47:49 PM
Indeed, what weirdos say "January the twenty-third" rather than "the twenty-third of January"? Is it like Richard the third, where it's the third Richard?  :-D

Verbalizing the "and" between month and date, to us, sounds like verbalizing the "and" between hundreds and tens when saying a number.  You probably say 320 as "three hundred and twenty," whereas a good many Americans say it as "three hundred twenty," and sticking the "and" in there sounds a little weird.

....

I think you mean "verbalizing the 'the' between month and date," don't you?

Regarding "and" between hundreds and tens, this thread is making me vaguely recall a grammar-school teacher who was adamant that we not use the "and" because she insisted the "and" is correct only when referring to a decimal point or, more likely, a fraction, such as if you wanted one and a half pounds of fish or whatever. Her position never made any sense to me, but I certainly wasn't going to suffer a lower grade over something stupid like that, and the habit has just stuck with me for all these years. It sounds weird to me when my wife's Garmin says to "take Exit One Hundred and Seventy-Three on the right." I would say it as "Exit One Seventy-Three." If I were writing a check for $173, I would write "One Hundred Seventy-Three" (and whatever cents, of course, usually "and no cents" because most checks I write are to move money between our own bank accounts).

Edited to add: The thing that teacher was right about is that if a number is a decimal, you state each digit after the decimal point individually: 173.35 is "one hundred seventy-three point three five," not "one hundred seventy-three point thirty-five." But this made her idea that "one hundred and seventy-three" allegedly means 100.73 all the more illogical: If you have to state each digit after the decimal separately, then it makes no sense whatsoever to interpret the "and seventy-three" as referring to a ".73," does it?

I kind of like the idea of changing all of those titles of Shakespeare's plays.

The Third Richard
The Fifth Henry

The Fourth Henry, The Part of the First... :D

Quote from: 1995hoo on January 25, 2018, 04:49:50 PM

Quote from: kphoger on January 25, 2018, 01:48:09 PM

Verbalizing the "and" between month and date, to us, sounds like verbalizing the "and" between hundreds and tens when saying a number.  You probably say 320 as "three hundred and twenty," whereas a good many Americans say it as "three hundred twenty," and sticking the "and" in there sounds a little weird.

....

I think you mean "verbalizing the 'the' between month and date," don't you?

Regarding "and" between hundreds and tens, this thread is making me vaguely recall a grammar-school teacher who was adamant that we not use the "and" because she insisted the "and" is correct only when referring to a decimal point or, more likely, a fraction, such as if you wanted one and a half pounds of fish or whatever. Her position never made any sense to me, but I certainly wasn't going to suffer a lower grade over something stupid like that, and the habit has just stuck with me for all these years. It sounds weird to me when my wife's Garmin says to "take Exit One Hundred and Seventy-Three on the right." I would say it as "Exit One Seventy-Three." If I were writing a check for $173, I would write "One Hundred Seventy-Three" (and whatever cents, of course, usually "and no cents" because most checks I write are to move money between our own bank accounts).

Edited to add: The thing that teacher was right about is that if a number is a decimal, you state each digit after the decimal point individually: 173.35 is "one hundred seventy-three point three five," not "one hundred seventy-three point thirty-five." But this made her idea that "one hundred and seventy-three" allegedly means 100.73 all the more illogical: If you have to state each digit after the decimal separately, then it makes no sense whatsoever to interpret the "and seventy-three" as referring to a ".73," does it?

I'd say it's a difference in usage between number as identifier ("take exit one-seventy-three...") and number as quantity ("...and drive for two hundred and twenty-nine miles").

For numbers as quantities, I generally omit the "and" in written form, but use it when speaking. Dropping the "and" in speech sounds overly formal to me.

With a pen or a pencil, otherwise with a keyboard.


There, It has been said.

Quote from: SSOWorld on January 25, 2018, 08:18:27 PM
With a pen or a pencil, otherwise with a keyboard.


There, It has been said.

You forgot to add crayon and magic marker, too.  :bigass:

Quote from: slorydn1 on January 25, 2018, 08:20:03 PM

Quote from: SSOWorld on January 25, 2018, 08:18:27 PM
With a pen or a pencil, otherwise with a keyboard.


There, It has been said.

You forgot to add crayon and magic marker, too.  :bigass:

Chalk, paint brush, stamps, spray can, quill, appendage  :sombrero:

I use MM-DD-CCYY.

Note the dashes (not slashes) for better readability, and the full year to avoid any confusion with the years 01 thru 31.

Today is 01-26-2018 or 1-26-2018. 

Leading zero can be suppressed, while they are stored in computer data files, usually they would be suppressed on a generated report.

Quote from: DaBigE on January 25, 2018, 08:39:25 PM

Quote from: slorydn1 on January 25, 2018, 08:20:03 PM

Quote from: SSOWorld on January 25, 2018, 08:18:27 PM
With a pen or a pencil, otherwise with a keyboard.


There, It has been said.

You forgot to add crayon and magic marker, too.  :bigass:

Chalk, paint brush, stamps, spray can, quill, appendage  :sombrero:

Laser cutter, 3d printer? Ink. They all print dates   :bigass:

Quote from: Takumi on January 25, 2018, 09:35:53 AM

Quote from: formulanone on January 25, 2018, 07:22:28 AM
It's called "culture" for everyone else who does something "different", but if you're an American, it's "foolish behaviour”.

Fixed ;) But +1.

I can never remember if the u goes before the o; I'm terrible at remembering multiple-vowel spellings, except for "beautiful".

Worst case example is asking me to spell that piece of furniture / government department that begins with B and I'll mentally spell it buryirow if there's no spell-checker*.

* foolish behaviour

Quote from: Beltway on January 26, 2018, 01:20:02 AM
I use MM-DD-YYCC.

....

What does "CC" indicate in this notation ("notation" meaning as quoted above, not the actual numbers themselves)? If you'd written "MM-DD-CCYY," I'd understand "CC" to denote "century," but that doesn't appear to be the case.

Me?  Unless requested otherwise, I always do the 'ISO 8601' thing (YYYY-MM-DD).  It's the least ambiguous format that I know of.

Mike

I write it 2018 C.E. :) :-D

Quote from: english si on January 25, 2018, 07:41:55 AM

Quote from: formulanone on January 25, 2018, 07:22:28 AMIt's called "culture" for everyone else who does something "different", but if you're an American, it's "foolish behavior".

Where did I say that?

Sure, I said month-day-year is illogical, but this was talking about month-day vs day-month where both are equally logical, but there's ambiguity as to which different system is being used.

I really don't get why you are being so huffy about this.

'Cause you hurt his feelings by dissing America.

P00I

The day is the most variable number and the most important.  I would write 26 Jan 2018 or 26.01.18, which is the international standard anyways... 

Quote from: 1995hoo on January 26, 2018, 09:45:20 AM

Quote from: Beltway on January 26, 2018, 01:20:02 AM
I use MM-DD-YYCC.
....

What does "CC" indicate in this notation ("notation" meaning as quoted above, not the actual numbers themselves)? If you'd written "MM-DD-CCYY," I'd understand "CC" to denote "century," but that doesn't appear to be the case.

Misprint.  Should have been MM-DD-CCYY

[fixed it]

Quote from: KEK Inc. on January 26, 2018, 11:20:36 PM
The day is the most variable number and the most important.  I would write 26 Jan 2018 or 26.01.18, which is the international standard anyways... 

The day is the most important number?

When did Thomas Jefferson become President? The 4th.

Wikipedia's article on date formats by country references endianness:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Date_format_by_country

Apropos of the discussion upthread about the UK, it also specifies instances where the date is written month first in Britain (newspaper banner dates and the like).

By the way, I mentioned earlier my standard is Day/Month. However, with the month spelt out I allow for regional variations, and thus in this forum and also in the Chinese metro threads over at Skyscrapercity I quote dates as Month/Day to reflect local usage.

Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on January 26, 2018, 12:00:32 PM
I write it 2018 C.E. :) :-D

Hunh?

:confused:

Mike

Quote from: mgk920 on January 27, 2018, 10:37:10 AM

Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on January 26, 2018, 12:00:32 PM
I write it 2018 C.E. :) :-D

Hunh?

:confused:

Mike

People who object to "BC"  and "AD"  often use "BCE"  and "CE,"  respectively, to denote "Before Common Era"  and "Common Era."  I suppose you could suggest that since Jesus is generally agreed to have been a real person, regardless of whether you believe he should be assigned any religious significance, it could be appropriate to date the years as before and after his estimated birth (you wouldn't use "Christ"  because that's a title–his parents weren't Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Christ). Problem with that is, "Before Jesus"  would lead to an unfortunate abbreviation:

"Julius Caesar was assassinated on March 15, 44 BJ."  

"Hmmm. I hadn't realized assassination was a happy ending."

With AD and BC the convention for many years was to write BC after the year and AD before the year (e.g., "44 BC," "AD 64").  In full in English the phrase goes something like "in the year of our Lord 1066."

Another comparatively recent change in terminology is the substitution of "late antiquity" for "Dark Ages."  The latter phrase is considered both pejorative and historically inaccurate given the technological changes that occurred during the period, such as introduction of the horse collar, moldboard plow, three-field crop rotation system, etc.

Quote from: J N Winkler on January 27, 2018, 11:50:39 AM


Another comparatively recent change in terminology is the substitution of "late antiquity" for "Dark Ages."  The latter phrase is considered both pejorative and historically inaccurate given the technological changes...

Are we hurting anyone's self esteem/feelings or being insensitive by saying Dark Ages?



Z981

"2018.01.23" except in school districts where I use "1/23/18".

Quote from: 1995hoo on January 27, 2018, 11:26:20 AM

Quote from: mgk920 on January 27, 2018, 10:37:10 AM

Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on January 26, 2018, 12:00:32 PM
I write it 2018 C.E. :) :-D

Hunh?
:confused:
Mike

People who object to "BC"  and "AD"  often use "BCE"  and "CE,"  respectively, to denote "Before Common Era"  and "Common Era."  I suppose you could suggest that since Jesus is generally agreed to have been a real person, regardless of whether you believe he should be assigned any religious significance, it could be appropriate to date the years as before and after his estimated birth (you wouldn't use "Christ"  because that's a title–his parents weren't Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Christ). Problem with that is, "Before Jesus"  would lead to an unfortunate abbreviation:
"Julius Caesar was assassinated on March 15, 44 BJ."  
"Hmmm. I hadn't realized assassination was a happy ending."

There were many people named Jesus back then in Israel.

The one we are referring to is fully named Jesus Christ or the Lord Jesus Christ.

Quote from: jwolfer on January 27, 2018, 05:48:19 PMAre we hurting anyone's self esteem/feelings or being insensitive by saying Dark Ages?

Not at all:  we merely make it harder for ourselves to see the technological progress that actually occurred.

Quote from: J N Winkler on January 27, 2018, 11:50:39 AM
In full in English the phrase goes something like "in the year of our Lord 1066."

Interesting year to use for your example.

Quote from: J N Winkler on January 28, 2018, 12:11:46 AM

Quote from: jwolfer on January 27, 2018, 05:48:19 PMAre we hurting anyone's self esteem/feelings or being insensitive by saying Dark Ages?

Not at all:  we merely make it harder for ourselves to see the technological progress that actually occurred.

It was much more than technological, here is how Encyclopædia Britannica defines it --

Migration period, also called Dark Ages or Early Middle Ages, the early medieval period of western European history–specifically, the time (476—800 ce) when there was no Roman (or Holy Roman) emperor in the West or, more generally, the period between about 500 and 1000, which was marked by frequent warfare and a virtual disappearance of urban life. The name of the period refers to the movement of so-called barbarian peoples–including the Huns, Goths, Vandals, Bulgars, Alani, Suebi, and Franks–into what had been the Western Roman Empire. The term "Dark Ages"  is now rarely used by historians because of the value judgment it implies. Though sometimes taken to derive its meaning from the dearth of information about the period, the term's more usual and pejorative sense is of a period of intellectual darkness and barbarity.

...
Add to that the deep decline and corruption of the institutional church, and the massive plagues.

I write 2018-1-28.

Quote from: Beltway on January 27, 2018, 11:55:12 PM

Quote from: 1995hoo on January 27, 2018, 11:26:20 AM

Quote from: mgk920 on January 27, 2018, 10:37:10 AM

Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on January 26, 2018, 12:00:32 PM
I write it 2018 C.E. :) :-D

Hunh?
:confused:
Mike

People who object to "BC"  and "AD"  often use "BCE"  and "CE,"  respectively, to denote "Before Common Era"  and "Common Era."  I suppose you could suggest that since Jesus is generally agreed to have been a real person, regardless of whether you believe he should be assigned any religious significance, it could be appropriate to date the years as before and after his estimated birth (you wouldn't use "Christ"  because that's a title–his parents weren't Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Christ). Problem with that is, "Before Jesus"  would lead to an unfortunate abbreviation:
"Julius Caesar was assassinated on March 15, 44 BJ."  
"Hmmm. I hadn't realized assassination was a happy ending."

There were many people named Jesus back then in Israel.

The one we are referring to is fully named Jesus Christ or the Lord Jesus Christ.

Your first sentence is correct, but–no offense–your second sentence misses the point in the context of the "BCE"/"CE" usage. "Christ" is a religious term–it's derived from a Greek translation of a Hebrew word meaning "anointed" that's usually rendered in English as "Messiah." It's not part of his name, and that's one reason why people whose use of "BCE" is predicated on religious grounds use that form. Otherwise, they could just use "BC" if "Christ" were part of his name–but if you feel strongly about him not being the Messiah, then you wouldn't use "BC."

Quote from: 1995hoo on January 28, 2018, 09:31:43 AM

Quote from: Beltway on January 27, 2018, 11:55:12 PM

Quote from: 1995hoo on January 27, 2018, 11:26:20 AM

Quote from: mgk920 on January 27, 2018, 10:37:10 AM

Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on January 26, 2018, 12:00:32 PM
I write it 2018 C.E. :) :-D

Hunh?
:confused:
Mike

People who object to "BC"  and "AD"  often use "BCE"  and "CE,"  respectively, to denote "Before Common Era"  and "Common Era."  I suppose you could suggest that since Jesus is generally agreed to have been a real person, regardless of whether you believe he should be assigned any religious significance, it could be appropriate to date the years as before and after his estimated birth (you wouldn't use "Christ"  because that's a title–his parents weren't Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Christ). Problem with that is, "Before Jesus"  would lead to an unfortunate abbreviation:
"Julius Caesar was assassinated on March 15, 44 BJ."  
"Hmmm. I hadn't realized assassination was a happy ending."

There were many people named Jesus back then in Israel.

The one we are referring to is fully named Jesus Christ or the Lord Jesus Christ.

Your first sentence is correct, but–no offense–your second sentence misses the point in the context of the "BCE"/"CE" usage. "Christ" is a religious term–it's derived from a Greek translation of a Hebrew word meaning "anointed" that's usually rendered in English as "Messiah." It's not part of his name, and that's one reason why people whose use of "BCE" is predicated on religious grounds use that form. Otherwise, they could just use "BC" if "Christ" were part of his name–but if you feel strongly about him not being the Messiah, then you wouldn't use "BC."

Also not everyone is Christian or from a Christian background.. with that being said getting all offended by BC and AD is silly.  Using the terms doesn't acknowledge the divinity of Christ or the existence of God any more than saying you are taking a trip to Salvador, Brazil.

Z981

When writing (including electronic correspondence):  01/28/2018.  Always eight digits with a leading zero if needed, mm/dd/yyyy.

But when saving computer files, YYYYMMDD followed by any description elements.  This sorts my files chronologically when looking at directories.

28 January 2018, 28 /1/2018 or occasionally a Roman numeral (28/I/2018) for the month.  All resulting from having grown up in Germany in the 1950s. Also do dashes sometimes depending on space available and mood, but usually the first format, and I never abbreviate the month.

Today is 28 January 2018, or in short form 2018-01-28.

Quote from: 1995hoo on January 28, 2018, 09:31:43 AM

Quote from: Beltway on January 27, 2018, 11:55:12 PM

Quote from: 1995hoo on January 27, 2018, 11:26:20 AM

Quote from: mgk920 on January 27, 2018, 10:37:10 AM

Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on January 26, 2018, 12:00:32 PM
I write it 2018 C.E. :) :-D

Hunh?
:confused:
Mike

People who object to "BC"  and "AD"  often use "BCE"  and "CE,"  respectively, to denote "Before Common Era"  and "Common Era."  I suppose you could suggest that since Jesus is generally agreed to have been a real person, regardless of whether you believe he should be assigned any religious significance, it could be appropriate to date the years as before and after his estimated birth (you wouldn't use "Christ"  because that's a title–his parents weren't Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Christ). Problem with that is, "Before Jesus"  would lead to an unfortunate abbreviation:
"Julius Caesar was assassinated on March 15, 44 BJ."  
"Hmmm. I hadn't realized assassination was a happy ending."

There were many people named Jesus back then in Israel.

The one we are referring to is fully named Jesus Christ or the Lord Jesus Christ.

Your first sentence is correct, but–no offense–your second sentence misses the point in the context of the "BCE"/"CE" usage. "Christ" is a religious term–it's derived from a Greek translation of a Hebrew word meaning "anointed" that's usually rendered in English as "Messiah." It's not part of his name, and that's one reason why people whose use of "BCE" is predicated on religious grounds use that form. Otherwise, they could just use "BC" if "Christ" were part of his name–but if you feel strongly about him not being the Messiah, then you wouldn't use "BC."

Even if you use CE/BCE instead of BC/AD, you're still basing the numbering system on the birth of Jesus (though off by a few years).  If BC/AD really offends someone that much, then they should just not use that reference point at all.  Call this year 5778 if you're Jewish or 4,540,002,018 if you're atheist/agnostic.

Quote from: cabiness42 on January 28, 2018, 05:28:07 PM
Even if you use CE/BCE instead of BC/AD, you're still basing the numbering system on the birth of Jesus (though off by a few years).  If BC/AD really offends someone that much, then they should just not use that reference point at all.  Call this year 5778 if you're Jewish or 4,540,002,018 if you're atheist/agnostic.

Except nobody knows what 4,540,002,018 is supposed to refer to, and won't fly on legal documents (or really any other type of document that has to be shared with anyone). As you point out, Jesus was theoretically born 4 to 6 years before 1 AD, so 0001-01-01 is a fairly arbitrary date anyway (akin to the arbitrary selection of 1970-01-01 as the epoch by which Unix-style dates are calculated).

ISO 8601's solution to the problem is to refer to 1 BC as 0000, 2 BC as —0001, and so on, which seems like a rational enough way of solving the problem to me.

The points you guys are making are the reason why some people use "BCE" and "CE"–basically, those abbreviations are a way of saying something like, "OK, this system for dating the years is widely accepted and I have no problem with that, but I don't want to use the religious-based terminology." Doesn't bother me. I seldom have reason to distinguish between BC and AD anyway (as I'm sure is true for most of us unless someone teaches ancient history). I don't care if someone else prefers "BCE"/"CE" as long as that person doesn't complain if I use "BC"/"AD."

Quote from: cabiness42 on January 28, 2018, 05:28:07 PM
Even if you use CE/BCE instead of BC/AD, you're still basing the numbering system on the birth of Jesus (though off by a few years).  If BC/AD really offends someone that much, then they should just not use that reference point at all.  Call this year 5778 if you're Jewish or 13,800,002,018 if you're atheist/agnostic.

FTFY :sombrero:.

Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on January 29, 2018, 10:08:20 AM

Quote from: cabiness42 on January 28, 2018, 05:28:07 PM
Even if you use CE/BCE instead of BC/AD, you're still basing the numbering system on the birth of Jesus (though off by a few years).  If BC/AD really offends someone that much, then they should just not use that reference point at all.  Call this year 5778 if you're Jewish or 13,800,002,018 if you're atheist/agnostic.

FTFY :sombrero:.

Was going by age of earth not age of universe since what is being measured are earth years.

It could always be worse. The Japanese calendar resets to 1 every time a new Emperor takes the throne. The current year there is 30. There is a "era name" that gets attached when you need to define which Emperor you're talking about (so it's currently "Heisei 30" or "H30" if you need to be more precise).

The current Emperor is planning to retire in April 2019, so the year is only going to get up to 31. The year 31 will only have January through April, then the year will reset to 1, which will have only May through December, with year 2 starting on January 1, 2020.

The only nice thing about this system is that you don't have to write a lot of numbers: the highest the year ever has gotten is 64!

Quote from: formulanone on January 26, 2018, 09:40:52 AMI can never remember if the u goes before the o; I'm terrible at remembering multiple-vowel spellings, except for "beautiful".

Worst case example is asking me to spell that piece of furniture / government department that begins with B and I'll mentally spell it buryirow if there's no spell-checker

Damn Norman Yoke making French seem fantastically fashionable for the bourgeoisie!

Then again, the Celtic languages (well Q-Celtic ones like Gàidhlig and Gaeilge) love their multiple vowels and while they are phonetic (with different phonemes to English - cf Siobhan 'shivon') they have often loads of letters Dún Laoghaire is pronounced Dunleary. However, unlike the French-based English spellings, those long formations aren't pointless and the extra letters merely about showing off - two good English examples being Cholmondeley (pronounced Chum-lee), Beaulieu (Bew-lee) and both are frivolous spellings of names rather than the name being shortened but spelt the same (Gloucester = Gloster, etc).

The Webster dictionary/American mindset mostly got rid of/didn't readd such things, unlike the Oxford dictionary/British mindset. cf the difference between Peterborough, England and Greensboro, NC or colour/color.

Quote from: jwolfer on January 27, 2018, 05:48:19 PMAre we hurting anyone's self esteem/feelings or being insensitive by saying Dark Ages?

No, but snowflakes aren't the only reason to change prejudicial terms.

Medievalists really don't like terms like 'Dark Ages' and 'Middle Ages' not only as they play down their favourite era as irrelevant, but as they elevate the classical and modern eras, especially the latter. These notions feed myths in society - trying to build a golden age by either chasing Greco-Roman culture, or (more common now) purging the past as progress is the key. We have terms like "Renaissance" (returning to a distant past thinking that's better than modernity) and "Enlightenment" (saying we are better than everyone before) for periods at the end of the Middle Ages and start of the Modern Era respectively for a reason - we re-found what made the 'classical' period (ie antiquity) 'classic' and then we became Enlightened beyond it. Antiquity is the start of history, Modernity is the End of History, we are the pinnacle of history apparently.

Emphasising the classical period as better than what came afterwards pushed for Empire and 'civilisation' of barbarians, emphasising the modern period as better than what came before pushed for totalitarian pushes for a future with mass murders of those who wouldn't get with the modernisation programme, vandalism of the past's treasures, etc, etc. Historians take a step back, try and see things from outside our time-bound culture (CS Lewis talks of 'the Breeze of the Centuries' cleaning out the cobwebs in your mind), and want to address our destructive narcissistic myths of self-importance - and one of those is viewing the period in Europe / Middle East / North Africa between ~400 and ~1600 as just the stuff that comes in-between.

Quote from: Scott5114 on January 30, 2018, 04:18:39 AM
It could always be worse. The Japanese calendar resets to 1 every time a new Emperor takes the throne. The current year there is 30. There is a "era name" that gets attached when you need to define which Emperor you're talking about (so it's currently "Heisei 30" or "H30" if you need to be more precise).

The current Emperor is planning to retire in April 2019, so the year is only going to get up to 31. The year 31 will only have January through April, then the year will reset to 1, which will have only May through December, with year 2 starting on January 1, 2020.

The only nice thing about this system is that you don't have to write a lot of numbers: the highest the year ever has gotten is 64!

Date and time is a social construct, if you think about it.

Quote from: Scott5114 on January 30, 2018, 04:18:39 AM
The only nice thing about this system is that you don't have to write a lot of numbers: the highest the year ever has gotten is 64!

The Showa era (the previous to the current one) got that far. Interestingly enough, Showa 64 lasted just seven days, as the Showa Emperor (Hiro Hito) died on January 7, 1989 and thus from January 8 onwards the year was known as Heisei 1 instead.

Quote from: Scott5114 on January 30, 2018, 04:18:39 AM
It could always be worse. The Japanese calendar resets to 1 every time a new Emperor takes the throne. The current year there is 30. There is a "era name" that gets attached when you need to define which Emperor you're talking about (so it's currently "Heisei 30" or "H30" if you need to be more precise).

The current Emperor is planning to retire in April 2019, so the year is only going to get up to 31. The year 31 will only have January through April, then the year will reset to 1, which will have only May through December, with year 2 starting on January 1, 2020.

The only nice thing about this system is that you don't have to write a lot of numbers: the highest the year ever has gotten is 64!

The only drawback is that you have to remember new kanji, but after that, you're set for a while.

I forget if we wrote month (月) before day (日) in class, it's been a few decades...but I recall the reign+year came first.

Quote from: formulanone on January 30, 2018, 11:22:26 AM

Quote from: Scott5114 on January 30, 2018, 04:18:39 AM
It could always be worse. The Japanese calendar resets to 1 every time a new Emperor takes the throne. The current year there is 30. There is a "era name" that gets attached when you need to define which Emperor you're talking about (so it's currently "Heisei 30" or "H30" if you need to be more precise).

The current Emperor is planning to retire in April 2019, so the year is only going to get up to 31. The year 31 will only have January through April, then the year will reset to 1, which will have only May through December, with year 2 starting on January 1, 2020.

The only nice thing about this system is that you don't have to write a lot of numbers: the highest the year ever has gotten is 64!

The only drawback is that you have to remember new kanji, but after that, you're set for a while.

Sure, but you also have to remember the order the kanji came in and how long each era was. If someone was born in Showa 59, how old are they? You can't just subtract–you have to know that Showa was immediately before Heisei and how long Showa lasted before you can do the math.

Quote from: Scott5114 on January 30, 2018, 01:16:48 PM
Sure, but you also have to remember the order the kanji came in and how long each era was. If someone was born in Showa 59, how old are they? You can't just subtract–you have to know that Showa was immediately before Heisei and how long Showa lasted before you can do the math.

I'm going to make a totally absurd and totally random connection between this and the "mileage vs. sequential" exit number debate. One requires memory (or contextual knowledge), the other doesn't. Obviously, we prefer not to use our memories unless we have to  :D

Quote from: english si on January 30, 2018, 06:22:12 AM

Quote from: formulanone on January 26, 2018, 09:40:52 AMI can never remember if the u goes before the o; I'm terrible at remembering multiple-vowel spellings, except for "beautiful".

Worst case example is asking me to spell that piece of furniture / government department that begins with B and I'll mentally spell it buryirow if there's no spell-checker

Damn Norman Yoke making French seem fantastically fashionable for the bourgeoisie!

Then again, the Celtic languages (well Q-Celtic ones like Gàidhlig and Gaeilge) love their multiple vowels and while they are phonetic (with different phonemes to English - cf Siobhan 'shivon') they have often loads of letters Dún Laoghaire is pronounced Dunleary. However, unlike the French-based English spellings, those long formations aren't pointless and the extra letters merely about showing off - two good English examples being Cholmondeley (pronounced Chum-lee), Beaulieu (Bew-lee) and both are frivolous spellings of names rather than the name being shortened but spelt the same (Gloucester = Gloster, etc).

The Webster dictionary/American mindset mostly got rid of/didn't readd such things, unlike the Oxford dictionary/British mindset. cf the difference between Peterborough, England and Greensboro, NC or colour/color.

I would like to see more English spelling reforms. Each letter should have a consistent set of phonemes, much like Spanish. This is especially important on loanwords from other languages. In pretty much every other language, loanwords are adjusted to fit the adopting language's phonemes, but in English we're often stuck with a pileup of letters that barely makes a token attempt at approximating how the word is pronounced. This is especially a problem in the modern day, where we have access to vast amounts of written material with no context for how the word is spoken. More than once I've attempted to use a word I see all the time, know the meaning of intimately, and then completely butcher when I try to say it out loud.

This also becomes a problem with names. I worked for a woman named Sheree–Sherree?–for years, and to this day I still have no damn idea how her name is spelled without looking it up. Because the name Sheree can be spelled Sherree, Sherry, Sherrie, Sherie, Shari, Shary, Cherie, and dozens more ways that look even more stupid. It becomes a game of memorization, which is silly. The problem is worse with names like the aforementioned Siobhan, which–since nobody is named that here–had I not seen a character named that on a British TV show with the closed captioning on, I would have assumed is pronounced See-ob-han.

The obvious problem with this is that English has no governing body to make the reform, unlike French and German, and the culture of English-speaking countries is such that the idea of such a body would be a non-starter.

Quote from: webny99 on January 30, 2018, 01:22:10 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on January 30, 2018, 01:16:48 PM
Sure, but you also have to remember the order the kanji came in and how long each era was. If someone was born in Showa 59, how old are they? You can't just subtract–you have to know that Showa was immediately before Heisei and how long Showa lasted before you can do the math.

I'm going to make a totally absurd and totally random connection between this and the "mileage vs. sequential" exit number debate. One requires memory (or contextual knowledge), the other doesn't. Obviously, we prefer not to use our memories unless we have to  :D

It's not so much a memory problem–I love learning new things and recalling them isn't a problem. But any time you have a system such as this that's linked to outside information, it causes complications when someone runs across it that doesn't have all of the information they need, because why would you need to know the order and lengths of service of Japanese emperors otherwise?

Quote from: Scott5114 on January 30, 2018, 01:59:27 PM

Quote from: webny99 on January 30, 2018, 01:22:10 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on January 30, 2018, 01:16:48 PM
Sure, but you also have to remember the order the kanji came in and how long each era was. If someone was born in Showa 59, how old are they? You can't just subtract–you have to know that Showa was immediately before Heisei and how long Showa lasted before you can do the math.

I'm going to make a totally absurd and totally random connection between this and the "mileage vs. sequential" exit number debate. One requires memory (or contextual knowledge), the other doesn't. Obviously, we prefer not to use our memories unless we have to  :D

It's not so much a memory problem–I love learning new things and recalling them isn't a problem. But any time you have a system such as this that's linked to outside information, it causes complications when someone runs across it that doesn't have all of the information they need, because why would you need to know the order and lengths of service of Japanese emperors otherwise?

Perhaps "memory" wasn't the greatest word choice, but that's my point, that similar problems are created by sequential numbering systems - not everyone has all the information they need in either case.

Quote from: Scott5114 on January 30, 2018, 01:16:48 PM

Quote from: formulanone on January 30, 2018, 11:22:26 AM

Quote from: Scott5114 on January 30, 2018, 04:18:39 AM
It could always be worse. The Japanese calendar resets to 1 every time a new Emperor takes the throne. The current year there is 30. There is a "era name" that gets attached when you need to define which Emperor you're talking about (so it's currently "Heisei 30" or "H30" if you need to be more precise).

The current Emperor is planning to retire in April 2019, so the year is only going to get up to 31. The year 31 will only have January through April, then the year will reset to 1, which will have only May through December, with year 2 starting on January 1, 2020.

The only nice thing about this system is that you don't have to write a lot of numbers: the highest the year ever has gotten is 64!

The only drawback is that you have to remember new kanji, but after that, you're set for a while.

Sure, but you also have to remember the order the kanji came in and how long each era was. If someone was born in Showa 59, how old are they? You can't just subtract—you have to know that Showa was immediately before Heisei and how long Showa lasted before you can do the math.

Probably no different than memorizing the Presidents; for media and historical examples, everything seems to be highlighted as Reagan-era or Clinton-era, et al. If someone says they were born "when Nixon was still President", or if something happened during the Eisenhower Administration you have a pretty good grasp of its age, if you're around 20-25.

Of course, mention FDR, and that's a long spell of time for precision. And I think you'd probably stump the Average Joe with something from President McKinnley's time. With the exception of history buffs, locally-important dates, and major national/world events, the focus on American history is typically bottled up to the events from vaguely 1941-on...I suppose a lot of that is due to radio, television, and other mass-media, as well as the availability of archived materials, but I also think a lot of that has to do with the ages of our eldest living generation.

I do recall that much of Japan also goes by Common Era...they'd typically write 2018年 for most world events, and be done with it. Their New Year is the same as the one celebrated by 50-60% the world.

Quote from: formulanone on January 30, 2018, 02:54:42 PMI do recall that much of Japan also goes by Common Era...they'd typically write 2018年 for most world events, and be done with it.

I think it is a question of context.  I tend to associate era dating with formal contexts--e.g., I've run across a Japan Road Association catalog for standards publications where the publication date for the direction sign design manual is given as "Showa 37" rather than "1962."

Quote from: Scott5114 on January 30, 2018, 01:59:27 PMThe problem is worse with names like the aforementioned Siobhan, which–since nobody is named that here–had I not seen a character named that on a British TV show with the closed captioning on, I would have assumed is pronounced See-ob-han.

One of the few memes I see floating around that I actually like goes something like this:  don't mock spelling pronouncers--when they mispronounce a word, it means they first encountered it in a book.

As regards Siobhán and other Irish names, it helps greatly to have studied just enough Irish Gaelic to recognize diphthongs and the usual markers for aspiration and elision.  For example, the h in Siobhán is not a consonant in its own right, but rather an indication that the preceding b is aspirated.  In traditional Irish orthography, aspiration would be indicated by a dot over the b and the h would be omitted.  And b and v are close enough to each other that in other languages they are minefields for English speakers.  E.g., Sevilla in Spanish pronunciation sounds a little like "Sebiya."

I don't doubt if you lived in Japan, or if you grew up with that system, it would become second-nature to you after a while.

Regarding names and spelling, I think regardless of whether we had more "phonetic letters" there would still be people coming up with unusual spellings just for the sake of being different. That's pretty common as it is. Basketball player Dwyane Wade comes to mind–his first name does not look like it should be pronounced "Duane" given where that "y" is positioned. It looks like "dweye-ane." He's a "Jr.," so it's also his father's name. I saw an interview in which he said the spelling is simply how his grandmother thought it should be spelled. Not much you can do when people want to come up with things like that. Or you have plain old misspellings–basketball player Antawn Jamison's first name is pronounced like "Antoine" but is spelled the way it is because of a mistake on his birth certificate that was never corrected.

I have first name Jonathan, spelled the classic way, but often misspelled Jonathon, Johnathan, etc., and there are other people out there for whom these different spellings are their actual names.  This drives me crazy, as do the attempts of others to justify the alternate spellings by pointing out that vowelization of Hebrew trigeminals is essentially arbitrary.

Quote from: J N Winkler on January 30, 2018, 03:35:52 PM
I have first name Jonathan, spelled the classic way, but often misspelled Jonathon, Johnathan, etc., and there are other people out there for whom these different spellings are their actual names.  This drives me crazy, as do the attempts of others to justify the alternate spellings by pointing out that vowelization of Hebrew trigeminals is essentially arbitrary.

My brother's first name is Terence, with one "r." Our father's mother apparently was livid at this, got mad at my mother, asked her who in the world spells "Terrence" with only one "r." My mom says she looked our grandmother in the eye and answered, "Terence Cardinal Cooke." End of discussion. Of course the classic Latin form associated with the Roman playwright is "Terence," but citing Cardinal Cooke would have been more convincing since he was the archbishop of New York at the time and our grandmother lived in Brooklyn.

Our last name is frequently misspelled by people who want to add an extra letter (a superfluous one, IMO, even if there are some famous people who use that extra letter). I figure if a misspelled last name is the worst thing anyone ever calls me, I'm probably doing OK.

Quote from: 1995hoo on January 30, 2018, 03:43:04 PM
Our last name is frequently misspelled by people who want to add an extra letter (a superfluous one, IMO, even if there are some famous people who use that extra letter). I figure if a misspelled last name is the worst thing anyone ever calls me, I'm probably doing OK.

Is your last name 1995hoo?
It always cracks me up when you say "Ms 1995hoo".

Quote from: webny99 on January 30, 2018, 05:25:40 PM

Quote from: 1995hoo on January 30, 2018, 03:43:04 PM
Our last name is frequently misspelled by people who want to add an extra letter (a superfluous one, IMO, even if there are some famous people who use that extra letter). I figure if a misspelled last name is the worst thing anyone ever calls me, I'm probably doing OK.

Is your last name 1995hoo?
It always cracks me up when you say "Ms 1995hoo" and the likes.  :rofl:

On a UVA forum there is a user named CFHoo, "CF"  denoting Clifton Forge. His wife started posting and set up own username as MsCFHoo. I picked up the Ms1995hoo usage from her. I suppose I could use "Mrs1995hoo,"  but I had used "Ms"  to refer to her before we were married and so it stuck, plus it's one fewer letter to type.

Quote from: J N Winkler on January 30, 2018, 03:13:19 PM

Quote from: formulanone on January 30, 2018, 02:54:42 PMI do recall that much of Japan also goes by Common Era...they'd typically write 2018年 for most world events, and be done with it.

I think it is a question of context.  I tend to associate era dating with formal contexts--e.g., I've run across a Japan Road Association catalog for standards publications where the publication date for the direction sign design manual is given as "Showa 37" rather than "1962."

Quote from: Scott5114 on January 30, 2018, 01:59:27 PMThe problem is worse with names like the aforementioned Siobhan, which–since nobody is named that here–had I not seen a character named that on a British TV show with the closed captioning on, I would have assumed is pronounced See-ob-han.

One of the few memes I see floating around that I actually like goes something like this:  don't mock spelling pronouncers--when they mispronounce a word, it means they first encountered it in a book.

As regards Siobhán and other Irish names, it helps greatly to have studied just enough Irish Gaelic to recognize diphthongs and the usual markers for aspiration and elision.  For example, the h in Siobhán is not a consonant in its own right, but rather an indication that the preceding b is aspirated.  In traditional Irish orthography, aspiration would be indicated by a dot over the b and the h would be omitted.  And b and v are close enough to each other that in other languages they are minefields for English speakers.  E.g., Sevilla in Spanish pronunciation sounds a little like "Sebiya."

A lot of the weird spellings in English were phonetically correct when English was first written down.. i.e. knife "k-nifa".  We just retained the spelling when the pronunciation changed.

At one point b and v(voiced bilabial consonant vs  labiodental consonanat) were pronounced in Spanish more like  like English.. ( Portuguese retains the difference) .

The difference between Spanish and Portuguese is interesting.. the lexicon is about 85% the same. Spanish speakers have few problems reading Portuguese. But Portuguese has a larger phonemic inventory.. 13 vowel sounds vs 5.. Portuguese speakers generally find it easier to understand and speak Spanish than the other way around.

Z981

I adhere to preferred format whenever required but I'm usually DDMonthYYYY.

01/31/17

Quote from: jwolfer on January 30, 2018, 08:52:34 PM
A lot of the weird spellings in English were phonetically correct when English was first written down.. i.e. knife "k-nifa".  We just retained the spelling when the pronunciation changed.
At one point b and v(voiced bilabial consonant vs  labiodental consonanat) were pronounced in Spanish more like  like English.. ( Portuguese retains the difference) .
The difference between Spanish and Portuguese is interesting.. the lexicon is about 85% the same. Spanish speakers have few problems reading Portuguese. But Portuguese has a larger phonemic inventory.. 13 vowel sounds vs 5.. Portuguese speakers generally find it easier to understand and speak Spanish than the other way around.
Z981

English has 13 vowel sounds, and Spanish has only 5.  That is why Spanish speakers generally have a harder time learning to speak English than vice versa.

Quote from: J N Winkler on January 30, 2018, 03:35:52 PM
I have first name Jonathan, spelled the classic way, but often misspelled Jonathon, Johnathan, etc., and there are other people out there for whom these different spellings are their actual names.  This drives me crazy, as do the attempts of others to justify the alternate spellings by pointing out that vowelization of Hebrew trigeminals is essentially arbitrary.

I won't even tell you how badly people butcher my family name. There's always an "i" that sneaks into it somewhere. That wouldn't be so bad, if they would spell it the French way "Ravier" but a class foe once deliberately wrote it as "Ravioli" in the school bulletin back in the days when it had to be read out loud in each class.

I also pronounce my first name with a short "i". In fact, I have a karaoke album called '(short "i")'.

Quote from: Beltway on January 31, 2018, 09:45:17 AM


English has 13 vowel sounds, and Spanish has only 5.  That is why Spanish speakers generally have a harder time learning to speak English than vice versa.

Native Spanish speakers who live in the United States and speak English have an easier time understanding and learning Portuguese than monolingual native Spanish speakers because they have the vowels from English that are also in Portuguese.. for example the the "J" is pronounced the same in English and Portuguese... The name "Jose" in Portuguese is "Joe-Ze" not "Ho-say".

Also English and Portuguese will link words together when speaking.. Spanish generally does not



Z981

Sunday, February 4, 2018
OR
Sun., Feb. 4, 2018
OR
2/4/18

If I'm writing in a sign-in list somewhere (like my grandmother's nursing home), I'll usually write "Feb 4th". I always find it interesting to look at such lists, and if someone writes it was say "2-4", you will see a few people below it write it the same way, until someone changes it. I've seen people write it as "Feb 4th" below my sign-in.

Quote from: Jordanes on February 04, 2018, 12:24:07 PM
Sunday, February 4, 2018
OR
Sun., Feb. 4, 2018
OR
2/4/18

If I'm writing in a sign-in list somewhere (like my grandmother's nursing home), I'll usually write "Feb 4th". I always find it interesting to look at such lists, and if someone writes it was say "2-4", you will see a few people below it write it the same way, until someone changes it. I've seen people write it as "Feb 4th" below my sign-in.

Interesting psychology.

I have another way of writing the date that I only use on documents nobody else will need to read, and when space is tight. I condense the month to a single letter, A-L, and then write the day. So, today would be B05 (second month, fifth day), Christmas would be L25, July 4th would be G04, etc. If I need to include a year, I throw the last digit of it on the end there (B058).

Obviously this is useless for communicating the date with most other people, but the date box in my check register is just so tiny...

Quote from: Scott5114 on February 05, 2018, 12:11:17 PM
I have another way of writing the date that I only use on documents nobody else will need to read, and when space is tight. I condense the month to a single letter, A-L, and then write the day. So, today would be B05 (second month, fifth day), Christmas would be L25, July 4th would be G04, etc. If I need to include a year, I throw the last digit of it on the end there (B058).

Obviously this is useless for communicating the date with most other people, but the date box in my check register is just so tiny...

That sounds like a really interesting way to do it, but I do have a question:

Should the year be necessary in a given scenario when doing this, how would you distinguish between 2008 and 2018 if you were dealing with a decade or more of information (even if that is a rare occurrence)?

If that's necessary, I don't use that format and use typical ISO format instead.

The only thing that I use this format on other than personal notes is coupon codes on my business website. So a coupon issued today would be of the format B068xxxxxA. The longest I would ever issue a coupon code for would be a year, meaning that by the next time B068 came around (February 6, 2028) the coupon would long since be expired.