3 ms·
It’s “aughts”, which is a term for zero, but rarely used outside certain contexts. I prefer it, but it’s not surprising it didn’t catch on. Otherwise I greatly
by cgriswald 8y ago
It’s “aughts”, which is a term for zero, but rarely used outside certain contexts. I prefer it, but it’s not surprising it didn’t catch on.
Otherwise I greatly prefer “the early 2000s”. It’s not very precise, but it’s more precise than “the 2000’s” which can include the year 2999.
- parrellel 8y agoAh, spelling, old foe. What contexts do you generally see it used in, out of curiosity? I'm assuming it still appears in places besides revivals of "The Music Man"
- cgriswald 8y agoThis is the first thing that comes to mind: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/.30-06_Springfield https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/.30-06_Springfield I’ve only ever heard this pronounced thirty aught-six.
- geggam 8y agoand for the sophisticated redneck https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.25-06_Remington https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.25-06_Remington
- mieseratte 8y agoAlso double-aught buckshot.
- dasil003 8y agoThat'll sort it itself out over the coming decades; but the other interesting one to me is that a sizeable group (majority?) of people are still saying "two thousand nineteen" instead of "twenty nineteen". I'm pretty sure I stopped using the former shortly after 2009 ended. I wonder if that'll stick for the whole century. In the other language I speak fluently (Portuguese) there never was an abbreviation, it was always the full "one thousand nine hundred ninety" as opposed to "nineteen ninety". In that case "two thousand" is already an improvement, but for some reason it bothers me in English.
- cgriswald 8y agoInteresting. I definitely prefer “twenty nineteen”, but can’t swear I would never call it “two thousand nineteen”. It might end up sticking around until 2100.