I have a question about the use of the word to as a time proposition. Is to inclusive in the following sentence?
I worked at company X from April 2012 to April 2013.
-
1I read it as from April 1st to April 1st. Add the days or "end of " or "inclusive" – mplungjan Apr 22 '13 at 13:00
-
Strongly related to, and almost certainly a duplicate of one or more of the following: english.stackexchange.com/q/43926 english.stackexchange.com/q/38169 english.stackexchange.com/q/56335 english.stackexchange.com/q/111057 english.stackexchange.com/q/16017 english.stackexchange.com/q/56335 english.stackexchange.com/q/96097 english.stackexchange.com/q/38169 english.stackexchange.com/q/80000 english.stackexchange.com/q/30927 english.stackexchange.com/q/83897 – tchrist♦ Apr 22 '13 at 13:25
-
1I would guess it means you stopped working there sometime after 12:01AM on April 1, but before (or at) 12:00PM on April 30. – GEdgar Apr 22 '13 at 13:56
It's ambiguous.
Some may read it as including April 2013, others may not. I'd probably read it as inclusive.
American English uses the inclusive word through:
- I worked at company X from April 2012 through April 2013.
For unambiguous British English, add extra wording:
I worked at company X from April 2012 to April 2013, inclusive.
I worked at company X from April 2012 through to April 2013.
I worked at company X from April 2012 up to and including April 2013.
-
-
@mplungjan: American uses "through". British uses "to" but it's ambiguous so "through to" is a British compromise that doesn't sound too weird and American. – Hugo Apr 22 '13 at 13:44
-
From a British perspective, it's not really necessary to add those extra wordings. They come across as unnecessarily formal and long-winded. It would be much simpler and more natural as I worked at company X from April 2012 to April 2013 or I worked at company X from April 2012 until April 2013. – Tristan Apr 22 '13 at 15:20
