Timeline for The position of time (e.g. year) in a sentence
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 27, 2014 at 18:29 | answer | added | Jon Hanna | timeline score: 1 | |
| Dec 27, 2014 at 14:26 | comment | added | Rusty Tuba | Preposterous to us snoots, but most people wouldn't even notice (nor misunderstand what was intended) | |
| Dec 27, 2014 at 14:21 | answer | added | Stephen Gosden | timeline score: 1 | |
| Dec 26, 2014 at 22:30 | comment | added | Brian Hitchcock | To day someone was a graduate in 2000 is to subtly imply that they are no longer a graduate now. This is preposterous. The person IS, and always will be a graduate, but saying she WAS "a 2000 graduate" states directly that she graduated in 2000. Which is what you meant to say. | |
| Dec 26, 2014 at 11:15 | comment | added | Erik Kowal | In the context you have provided, both variants work equally well. | |
| Dec 26, 2014 at 11:08 | history | asked | kitty | CC BY-SA 3.0 |