I hear both "two thousand eight" as well as "2000 and 8". As Travis said, sometimes the "and" is reduced and almost suggested rather than prnounced, but just as often the "and" is not included at all. I personally never include the "and" in my speech and for me it's the complete opposite feeling from Travis... It feels unnatural to me to say "two thousand and eight", no matter how much I reduce the "and".
2008
>> The only argument I can imagine is that 'and' would be better placed between the tens and units <<
It's mostly math books that prescribe this rule. It actually has to do with decimals: the word "and" indicates a decimal point: 5.2 is read as 5 and two tenths. They deprecate its use when there is no decimal point: 256 is two hundred fifty-six.
To my ears I read 256 as two hundred and fifty six, as that sounds more natural (yeah I know, I'm not following the rule). However I would read 10,024 as ten thousand twenty four, as that sounds more natural. Dates from 2001-2009 never get the "and", as that sounds rather stilted and unusual. Reading the date 2008 as twenty oh eight, sounds rather odd to me--about as much so as reading the date 2010 (twenty-ten) as "two thousand ten", or even worse "two thousand and ten".
It's mostly math books that prescribe this rule. It actually has to do with decimals: the word "and" indicates a decimal point: 5.2 is read as 5 and two tenths. They deprecate its use when there is no decimal point: 256 is two hundred fifty-six.
To my ears I read 256 as two hundred and fifty six, as that sounds more natural (yeah I know, I'm not following the rule). However I would read 10,024 as ten thousand twenty four, as that sounds more natural. Dates from 2001-2009 never get the "and", as that sounds rather stilted and unusual. Reading the date 2008 as twenty oh eight, sounds rather odd to me--about as much so as reading the date 2010 (twenty-ten) as "two thousand ten", or even worse "two thousand and ten".
<<It's mostly math books that prescribe this rule.>>
I've taught on both sides of the pond, but I've never seen anything in a maths text book describing how to read numbers, although I wasn't teaching at primary schools. In any case, can you give me a reference? I would be interested to see it.
I have seen similar things for dates in grammars for learners of a foreign language and obviously there it is useful and I imagine that's why discussions like this are useful (?). I think we all agree it's a matter of style, where, for the large part, the British always have an 'and' and the Americans do a bit of both (again leaving years read as two two-digit numbers (eg 1066; ten sixty six) aside).
The decimal argument (or rather fraction argument) is interesting, but still inconsistent. It's saying a number is read as a list to be added, but the usual 'and' before the last entry in a list is only sometimes present.
To take the fraction example further, I would view a number written as a whole number plus a fraction as two entities, a number and a remainder. So, for example, '256 3/5' is read 'two hundred and fifty six, and three fifths'. This leaves 5.2 equal to five and two tenths, or five and one fifth. :)
On a more general note, it seems stupid to deprecate one style over the other unless it has some significant disadvantage. In fact, here the opposite seems to be true as the 'consistent and' style seems to be more straightforward.
I've taught on both sides of the pond, but I've never seen anything in a maths text book describing how to read numbers, although I wasn't teaching at primary schools. In any case, can you give me a reference? I would be interested to see it.
I have seen similar things for dates in grammars for learners of a foreign language and obviously there it is useful and I imagine that's why discussions like this are useful (?). I think we all agree it's a matter of style, where, for the large part, the British always have an 'and' and the Americans do a bit of both (again leaving years read as two two-digit numbers (eg 1066; ten sixty six) aside).
The decimal argument (or rather fraction argument) is interesting, but still inconsistent. It's saying a number is read as a list to be added, but the usual 'and' before the last entry in a list is only sometimes present.
To take the fraction example further, I would view a number written as a whole number plus a fraction as two entities, a number and a remainder. So, for example, '256 3/5' is read 'two hundred and fifty six, and three fifths'. This leaves 5.2 equal to five and two tenths, or five and one fifth. :)
On a more general note, it seems stupid to deprecate one style over the other unless it has some significant disadvantage. In fact, here the opposite seems to be true as the 'consistent and' style seems to be more straightforward.
>> I've taught on both sides of the pond, but I've never seen anything in a maths text book describing how to read numbers, although I wasn't teaching at primary schools. <<
It's in most of the primary school textbooks and standardized testing materials. In many tests it specifically instructs the teacher to omit the and: e.g. "If Johnny has 645* grapes" *Be sure to read as "six hundred forty five, NOT six hundred and forty-five.
I've noticed that many students tend to forget this rule completely. Even many teachers slip up on it quite often.
It's in most of the primary school textbooks and standardized testing materials. In many tests it specifically instructs the teacher to omit the and: e.g. "If Johnny has 645* grapes" *Be sure to read as "six hundred forty five, NOT six hundred and forty-five.
I've noticed that many students tend to forget this rule completely. Even many teachers slip up on it quite often.
That's hilarious. It would be funnier if it were actually true, but you're obviously talking shite.
Can you imagine this? On the script of a television presenter: 'Tonight President George W* Bush will give his last State of the Union address... *Be sure to pronounce it "dub-ya".' :)
Can you imagine this? On the script of a television presenter: 'Tonight President George W* Bush will give his last State of the Union address... *Be sure to pronounce it "dub-ya".' :)
>> Can you imagine this? On the script of a television presenter: 'Tonight President George W* Bush will give his last State of the Union address... *Be sure to pronounce it "dub-ya".' :) <<
I'm absolutely serious. There are actually tests like this for grades K-5. The teacher is required to read the instructions to the students exactly as the testing booklet says. It always goes something like this: the teacher must read this out loud: "Welcome to the ... Test. I will read the question aloud and you must fill in the blanks with a number 2 pencil. If you wish to change your answer, you must completely erase your first answer and then completely fill in the correct blank. If you mark two answers, you will not get credit for the problem a one half point will be deducted from your score. If you fail to complete a problem, a one half point will be deducted from your score. You have 20 minutes to complete the test. The test will end at <insert time 22 minutes from now>. Open your test booklet. On your answer sheet write your name on the line marked "name". Then fill in the bubbles below to indicate your name. Here is an example on the overhead projector. Do not write the words "Your name", or copy someone else's name. You must write your own name on the test. Now go on to the next section and fill in the required material in the same manner. Fill in your student ID number. Do not include the dashes. If you do not remember your student ID number, raise your hand and I will write it down for you. You may not turn the page until you are instructed to do so. Are you ready to begin? Turn to page 1. You may continue to turn the page until you say the word 'Stop' on the bottom of the page. You are not allowed to talk during the test. All right, you may begin now."
I'm absolutely serious. There are actually tests like this for grades K-5. The teacher is required to read the instructions to the students exactly as the testing booklet says. It always goes something like this: the teacher must read this out loud: "Welcome to the ... Test. I will read the question aloud and you must fill in the blanks with a number 2 pencil. If you wish to change your answer, you must completely erase your first answer and then completely fill in the correct blank. If you mark two answers, you will not get credit for the problem a one half point will be deducted from your score. If you fail to complete a problem, a one half point will be deducted from your score. You have 20 minutes to complete the test. The test will end at <insert time 22 minutes from now>. Open your test booklet. On your answer sheet write your name on the line marked "name". Then fill in the bubbles below to indicate your name. Here is an example on the overhead projector. Do not write the words "Your name", or copy someone else's name. You must write your own name on the test. Now go on to the next section and fill in the required material in the same manner. Fill in your student ID number. Do not include the dashes. If you do not remember your student ID number, raise your hand and I will write it down for you. You may not turn the page until you are instructed to do so. Are you ready to begin? Turn to page 1. You may continue to turn the page until you say the word 'Stop' on the bottom of the page. You are not allowed to talk during the test. All right, you may begin now."
I understand they might write a number out in words in a script, and this is done on other more formal things, such as wedding invitations and graduation programmes, but the exact formate would just be a matter of style. Why go to any length to avoid the another style in this case? The reader will be better understood be their students if they read as they usually do.
Give me an actual reference.
Give me an actual reference.
>>
Give me an actual reference. <<
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_numbers_in_English
"Note that in American English, many students are taught not to use the word and anywhere in the whole part of a number, so it is not used before the tens and ones. It is instead used as a verbal delimiter when dealing with compound numbers. Thus, instead of "three hundred and seventy-three", one would say "three hundred seventy-three"."
I think that pretty much sums it up. People who use "and" either have never been taught the rule, or are not North American, or prefer to ignore the rule.
Give me an actual reference. <<
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_numbers_in_English
"Note that in American English, many students are taught not to use the word and anywhere in the whole part of a number, so it is not used before the tens and ones. It is instead used as a verbal delimiter when dealing with compound numbers. Thus, instead of "three hundred and seventy-three", one would say "three hundred seventy-three"."
I think that pretty much sums it up. People who use "and" either have never been taught the rule, or are not North American, or prefer to ignore the rule.
<<It's in most of the primary school textbooks and standardized testing materials. In many tests it specifically instructs the teacher to omit the and: e.g. "If Johnny has 645* grapes" *Be sure to read as "six hundred forty five, NOT six hundred and forty-five.>>
If I were a teacher, I'd just ignore the book and say "645" as I normally do, "six hundred and forty-five". It sounds weird without the "and", and I'm American. It's not like I'd get fired because I wasn't doing my job right.
If I were a teacher, I'd just ignore the book and say "645" as I normally do, "six hundred and forty-five". It sounds weird without the "and", and I'm American. It's not like I'd get fired because I wasn't doing my job right.
>> If I were a teacher, I'd just ignore the book and say "645" as I normally do, "six hundred and forty-five". It sounds weird without the "and", and I'm American. It's not like I'd get fired because I wasn't doing my job right. <<
While you're at it, you might as well let the students say things such as "I brang the book to school." and "I ain't got nothing." It's the teacher's job to teach the rules whether they agree or disagree with them. Of course you wouldn't get fired for something like that--indeed now it is almost impossible to fire teachers except in very extreme situations.
While you're at it, you might as well let the students say things such as "I brang the book to school." and "I ain't got nothing." It's the teacher's job to teach the rules whether they agree or disagree with them. Of course you wouldn't get fired for something like that--indeed now it is almost impossible to fire teachers except in very extreme situations.
<<While you're at it, you might as well let the students say things such as "I brang the book to school." and "I ain't got nothing.">>
Those are an entire diffrent thing from including "and" in numbers like "645".
Those are an entire diffrent thing from including "and" in numbers like "645".
>>
Those are an entire diffrent thing from including "and" in numbers like "645". <<
Not really. They're both Prescriptivist rules.
Those are an entire diffrent thing from including "and" in numbers like "645". <<
Not really. They're both Prescriptivist rules.
The references aren't what I was asking for, sorry if I wasn't sufficiently clear. I was repeating my request for a reference where the 'and' style is deprecated. We all seem to agree on how usage is distributed geographically.
I'm not surprised that there are webpages describing either style, what surprised me was the claim that one was deprecated in published books. Moreover, it was the one that Americans see as more formal (for example, frequently used in wedding invitations). Prescriptivists usually tend to be more formal, for example, sentences ending in a preposition tend to be more informal.
(As for decimals, yep, '5.2' being 'five point two' seems universal.)
I'm not surprised that there are webpages describing either style, what surprised me was the claim that one was deprecated in published books. Moreover, it was the one that Americans see as more formal (for example, frequently used in wedding invitations). Prescriptivists usually tend to be more formal, for example, sentences ending in a preposition tend to be more informal.
(As for decimals, yep, '5.2' being 'five point two' seems universal.)