toes that won't stay warm in the duck blind
|
|
|
|
|
toes that won't stay warm in the duck blind
Good old Memorial Gym
Originally Posted by maddawg
actually, since the world started at 0, this would be the start of a new decade.
There wasn't a year zero. When 1 B.C. ended, 1 A.D. started.
At the end of the year 1 AD, we had finished a year and could start the next one. At the end of year 2 AD, we had finished 2 years. At the end of year 10, we had finished 10 years (and could start a new decade - on Jan 1., year 11).
No, because the first year of the decade would have already passed. I know it's wierd, but years count 0-9 for 10 years, not 1-0. Right now, it is 2010, because 2010 years have already passed and we are in the midst of the 2011 year.
is that a fact.......in that case, I will call my point stupid. I wasn't thinking in regards to the changing from BC to AD. Good point.
Doesn't have to start 0. When you get to 10, as in 2010, the 10 years have already passed. So every new 0 year, like 2010, is a start of a new decade. When 2011 hits, one year into the decade would have passed.
like when you are born, you begin your first year of life. Another good point.
then why shouldn't we say that we are currently in our 2011th year?
We can. It just sounds stupid. I'm not the one that makes these decisions! But, as has been said, it did 't start with 0, it started with 1. So, every year after followed the same format. 0=1. 2010=2011. crazy.
right but wrong. you've got it backwards. 1=0. 2011=2010. at the end of year 1, it had been 1 year. therefore at the end of year 10, it had been 10 years. the first day of year 11 started the second decade.
Yeah, what Bob said. When you get to 10, as in 2010, the 10 years have not passed. Only 9 years have passed. The tenth year has only just begun.
but, as the common convention is to reckon the decades by the number in the 10's place, and we're more than 2000 years removed from year 1, i'm willing to go along with it without making a fuss.
Me, too. It's a peeve, but you've got to choose your battles and that isn't a hill worth dying on.
I just tell myself that you can count any ten years as a decade if you want. I read somewhere recently that even grouping decades together as a whole is a relatively new phenomenon.
Yep. "Scores" was the the big deal about a 150 years ago.
Although he makes the mistake we've been talking about here (assuming a decade that started in 2000), here is the article I was talking about. It's about what to call the last ten years (as a nickname).Yep. "Scores" was the the big deal about a 150 years ago.
http://www.slate.com/id/2239014/
Prior to the 20th century, no one really cared about this problem. In fact, it wasn't common for English speakers to refer to decades in groups—like "the '40s" or "the '50s"—until the mid- to late 19th century.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
