Glenn Linderman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> David Cantrell wrote:
>
> > And in any case, I can think of three different ways of saying 1821 in
> > English alone.
> >
> > One thousand eight hundred and twenty one
> > One thousand eight hundred twenty one
> > Eighteen hundred and twenty one
> >
> > As far as *I* am concerned, the middle one is wrong (although I believe it
> > is considered correct in some parts of the world), and whether to use the
> > first or the thrid form would depend on context.
>
> At the grade school I attended here in the United States, I was taught
> that the first and third forms would represent the number 1800.21 --
> the "and" is used to represent a decimal point or the beginning of a
> fraction (as in "one and one quarter" or "one and two thirds"). And
> there is a good bit of ambiguity without a trailing "hundredths",
> because it could be "thousandths" or even "millionths".
But, but... 0.21 is *not* 'point twenty one', it's 'point two one',
otherwise you get into weirdness with: .21 and .210 being spoken as
'point twenty one' and 'point two hundred (?:and)? ten' and all of a
sudden the '2' in that figure has gained an order of magnitude which
is just plain *wrong*.
Ghod knows how this GST would have you pronounce 5.6.0, 'five and six
and oh'?
--
Piers
