Timeline for American vs. British English: meaning of "One hundred and fifty"
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 22, 2014 at 2:38 | comment | added | Peter Shor | Oops. I meant 354/100 or 300 54/100 above. | |
| Aug 22, 2014 at 1:15 | comment | added | Peter Shor | @tchrist: Suddenly, I see where this "rule" might have come from. If you say three hundred and fifty-four hundredths, is it 354/100, or 354 1/100? Somebody came up with the idea that you should leave the "and" out of "three hundred and fifty-four" to avoid this ambiguity, and somebody else completely misunderstood this. I don't believe anybody says "three hundred and fifty-four" to mean "three hundred point fifty-four". | |
| Feb 25, 2014 at 20:30 | comment | added | tobyink | @tchrist, but if someone says "three hundred and forty-four", is your natural inclination to assume that they must have forgotten to add "hundredths" or "eightieths" or similar? Or is your natural inclination to assume that they've inserted an "and" which is superfluous to your ears? | |
| S Aug 27, 2013 at 22:58 | review | Late answers | |||
| Aug 27, 2013 at 23:00 | |||||
| S Aug 27, 2013 at 22:58 | review | First posts | |||
| Aug 27, 2013 at 23:57 | |||||
| Aug 27, 2013 at 22:47 | comment | added | tchrist♦ | Three hundred and forty-four hundredths. | |
| Aug 27, 2013 at 22:46 | comment | added | Michael Lorton | I've always agreed with the "and" rule, but I've noticed it as often honored in the breach as in the observation. | |
| Aug 27, 2013 at 22:42 | history | answered | user50663 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |