5.0257 Number Words; BC/BCE (2/25)
Elaine Brennan & Allen Renear (EDITORS@BROWNVM.BITNET)
Mon, 29 Jul 1991 22:18:42 EDT
Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 5, No. 0257. Monday, 29 Jul 1991.
(1) Date: Wed, 24 Jul 1991 23:29 EDT (12 lines)
From: Gordon Dohle <DOHLE@Vax2.Concordia.CA>
Subject: Re: 5.0246 Number Words -- The Teens
(2) Date: Thu, 25 Jul 91 07:45 CDT (13 lines)
From: Robin Smith <RSMITH@KSUVM.KSU.EDU>
Subject: C.E./B.C.E
(1) --------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 1991 23:29 EDT
From: Gordon Dohle <DOHLE@Vax2.Concordia.CA>
Subject: Re: 5.0246 Number Words -- The Teens (2/133)
The very informative notes on the teens made interesting reading - but
raises other questions. For example, why does French abandon the rational
progression of numbering at 69 and move first to '60 plus ten, plus eleven,
etc, and then confusingly jumps to four times twenty, and then four times
twenty plus ten, plus eleven, etc.
Gordon
Dohle@Vax2.Concordia.ca
Dohle@Conu2.Bitnet
(2) --------------------------------------------------------------23----
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 91 07:45 CDT
From: Robin Smith <RSMITH@KSUVM.KSU.EDU>
Subject: C.E./B.C.E
I have nothing to add about the origins of the abbreviations C.E./B.C.E, but I
have heard more than one person claim that 'C.E.' is preferable because it fits
syntactically with centuries. The point may seem pedantic, but strictly spea-
king 'A.D.' ought to precede (not follow) a year number: 'A.D. 1991' means 'in
the year of the lord 1991,' whereas '1991 A.D.' would be nonsense, as would
'5th century A.D.' (= '5th century in the year of the lord'). I don't know
whether this actually motivated the introduction of the term at all, since the
Latin meaning of 'A.D.' has little to do with actual use and pretty much every-
one is happy saying '1991 A.D.'