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 29, 2012 at 2:10 | comment | added | ukayer | @Martha, I re-read nohat's answer and don't understand the "no more than one and" rule. I think this is just a British/American English difference. | |
| Aug 28, 2012 at 15:34 | comment | added | Marthaª | @EdwinAshworth: really, people need to read nohat's answer. Also, note how I said "... schoolchildren are taught to omit the 'and'...". | |
| Aug 28, 2012 at 14:58 | comment | added | GEdgar | Sir Richard Francis Burton's translation was entitled "The Book of the Thousand Nights and a Night". | |
| Aug 28, 2012 at 13:29 | comment | added | Edwin Ashworth | @Martha: So would you go the whole way with this system, and call say 1 000 000 001 'one billion one'? Have the book title changed to "One Thousand One Nights"? | |
| Aug 28, 2012 at 13:24 | comment | added | tchrist♦ | No one omits the and with fractions, do they? It just doesn’t sound right, as you rightly observe. | |
| Aug 28, 2012 at 13:21 | comment | added | Marthaª | "One three quarters" is clearly an incorrect way to say 1 ¾. Read nohat's answer: the reason American schoolchildren are taught to omit the "and" from numbers like "one hundred twenty-three" is precisely because the "and" is reserved for numbers like "one and three quarters". | |
| Aug 28, 2012 at 13:16 | history | edited | tchrist♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
formatting
|
| Aug 28, 2012 at 4:13 | history | answered | ukayer | CC BY-SA 3.0 |