tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post115534344290478992..comments2024-03-16T00:21:43.240+00:00Comments on Separated by a Common Language: telling (the) time and dateslynneguisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.comBlogger71125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-56958483895771449512023-09-05T16:49:59.529+01:002023-09-05T16:49:59.529+01:00Your grandparents were born in the 1890s and would...Your grandparents were born in the 1890s and would always write August 26th, 2020? Goodness, Mrs Redboots, they must be very old!<br /><br />Yes, my grandmother (also born in the 1890s) used to say five-and-twenty as well. I wonder if it was more of a rural thing, as my London-born grandmother (twenty years younger than rural Granny, admittedly) never said it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-74757863206752027262021-04-23T09:42:45.637+01:002021-04-23T09:42:45.637+01:00The back of ten is the middle of the forenoonThe back of ten is the middle of the forenoonSum Wunhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10886686660217528749noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-63612172569510462662020-08-26T17:29:27.051+01:002020-08-26T17:29:27.051+01:00(Elderly, BrE). Yes, my grandmother always said f...(Elderly, BrE). Yes, my grandmother always said five-and-twenty-past five, and my mother did to a certain extent. I occasionally do, but what I'm most likely to say - and I haven't seen covered in the comments - is Five Twenty-five. Thinking about it, I almost always use that format - "I have a meeting at 7:30" or "Our tickets are timed for 11:30". I'd also say "noon" and "midnight" for the relevant times.<br /><br />Re dates, my grandparents, born in the 1890s, would always write August 26th, 2020 (note the comma!); my father did when I was young, I think, but in later years he wrote 26th August. I would always write 26 August....Mrs Redboots (Annabel Smyth)https://www.blogger.com/profile/11270027663691257254noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-37975685432240287182020-08-21T21:59:08.559+01:002020-08-21T21:59:08.559+01:00Interesting. I live in downstate New York (Long Is...Interesting. I live in downstate New York (Long Island to be precise) and I've NEVER said "quarter of 10", nor have I ever heard anyone here say it that way. I always said (and heard it as) "quarter to 10." <br /><br />As for that particular day in September of 2001, I was affected very much by those events, given it'd happened so close to me and people I'd known were killed that day. I still get a bit emotional whenever anyone mentions it, and maybe that's why I'm a bit confused when you say that calling it "9/11" seems jingoistic and disrespectful. Are you referring to hearing British English speakers saying it that way? Or are you talking about anyone in the world referring to it that way in general? I could see the name sounding so simplistic that it doesn't properly symbolize the horrors that took place that day, but apart from that I haven't really given it much thought. So much time has passed since then (and of course since you first posted this blog entry). *shrugs* That's just the way I see it.JessMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07645180879633754691noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-80634706607844305272018-04-10T16:07:11.849+01:002018-04-10T16:07:11.849+01:00As someone who experiences 9/11 first-hand, I too ...As someone who experiences 9/11 first-hand, I too had reservations at first about adopting "9/11" as the name I'd forever remember that day by. On the other hand, I reject the somber, significance-laden sound of "September 11th" (or "the 11th of September" etc). Discussing my experience often involves finding the energy to climb out of a potential well of fear and trauma. When I start takingt, my first words burst through in a torrent, and once the subject is loosed, I can speak freely. "9/11" rolls off the tongue, is a phrase I can blurt like ripping a bandaid off. It lacks significance, it is light. It's not a date, it's 2 numbers, it's a song. Having been through that experience, and another terrorist attack, I can state with some personal authority that it is often the people who did not have to see these atrocities with their own eyes who desire signifiers laden with meaning.Emilynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-5097205241558229982017-08-03T03:43:10.423+01:002017-08-03T03:43:10.423+01:00I'm surprised, in the discussion above regardi...I'm surprised, in the discussion above regarding how numbers are said, that breaking them down into smaller (one or two digit) components hasn't been addressed. For 121, 1138, and 1050, I'd be most likely to say "one twenty-one," "eleven thirty-eight," and "ten fifty." 104 would usually be "one-oh-four," although 100 would be "one hundred" and 1,004 would be "one [/a] thousand [and] four."CChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09668474441900682619noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-85401224397698440772016-08-27T22:17:58.722+01:002016-08-27T22:17:58.722+01:00One difference I noted while in New England recent...One difference I noted while in New England recently was that times seemed often to be printed with a/p after them to indicate morning/afternoon. This would never happen in BrE to my knowledge - am and pm are always written with both letters (without or without punctuation)Michael Tiddhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11551397738522540838noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-53504664282659155002015-10-21T04:40:02.106+01:002015-10-21T04:40:02.106+01:00Thank u this is helpful Thank u this is helpful Jsfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06453826455978267635noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-60659644147692395002015-01-06T17:05:11.781+00:002015-01-06T17:05:11.781+00:00For the past several decades (in the US), I've...For the past several decades (in the US), I've seen colons used for times almost exclusively. Only within the last few years have I seen periods/full stops being used to separate the hours and minutes. I was under the impression that this was a result of texting habits though - the period key is easier and faster to use than a colon on most phone keyboards (and still makes it fairly clear we're talking about times). Other countries may have developed this habit way before, but for the American general public, I think it's just a reflection of texting laziness/efficiency. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-68285218792831704362014-12-15T19:17:36.705+00:002014-12-15T19:17:36.705+00:00When I learnt Catalan, which was a year before I b...When I learnt Catalan, which was a year before I began learning Spanish, I was blown away by the time-telling format, which is gradually being replaced by a much more (to my mind) logical "seven forty-five" etc.<br />Starting at "x.15",Catalans count towards the next hour, so that "Un quart de vuit" (a quarter from eight) is actually 7.15. It then continues "two quarters from" and "three quarters from" with five or ten being added as required. Thus 7.55 is "tres quarts y deu de vuit" ("Three quarters and ten from eight")Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-26336873701962392522014-09-23T17:35:45.782+01:002014-09-23T17:35:45.782+01:00American, reporting in on the colon controversy. (...American, reporting in on the colon controversy. (Oh dear, that sounds a little too, um, digestive. Anyway.)<br /><br />I remembered having found a website devoted to old airline timetables -- yes, some poor soul(s) have rounded up masses of printed timetables, scanned them, and posted them on the web. <br /><br />I chose Braniff Airlines, as (a) it's conveniently out of business, so I don't feel any copyright qualms, (b) it has a long history, and © (fercrissakes, I hate Safari sometimes for its autocorrection) I used to fly it when I was a kid in the 1970s. (For the uninitiated, Braniff was memorable then: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3_aNtQFsLk. <br /><br />Here's a timetable from 1938: All colons: http://www.timetableimages.com/ttimages/complete/bn38/bn38-2.jpg. (Note the phonetic spelling "Flites" -- I suspect that one was fashionable in the 30s, when flying was still New and Modern.)<br /><br />Or another airline I flew, the late and slightly-lamented Northwest (Orient) Airways/Airlines. Here's its 1928 timetable, all colons: http://www.timetableimages.com/ttimages/complete/nw28/nw28-4.jpg. <br /><br />Contrast Imperial Airways, 1925. All periods/full stops: http://www.timetableimages.com/ttimages/iaw/iaw25/iaw25-11.jpg. <br /><br />The site is quite a rabbit hole, though.Christian Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17561529462675001889noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-35071406427190099542014-07-13T23:48:34.347+01:002014-07-13T23:48:34.347+01:00Yes, indeed. So I wonder what tradition Pulsar we...Yes, indeed. So I wonder what tradition Pulsar were drawing on when they decided to include a colon in their display.Grhmnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-21648868341560875632014-07-13T22:15:32.228+01:002014-07-13T22:15:32.228+01:00Grhm
appears to have had no punctuation in its di...Grhm<br /><br /><i>appears to have had no punctuation in its display</i><br /><br />Well, it does if you count a space as punctuation. Clive Sinclair chose to carry on the tradition of George Bradshaw.David Crosbiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01858358459416955921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-84221171702064414802014-07-13T00:53:34.980+01:002014-07-13T00:53:34.980+01:00PS
Interestingly, this British digital watch from ...PS<br />Interestingly, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Watch_(wristwatch)" rel="nofollow">this British digital watch from 1975</a> appears to have had no punctuation in its display.Grhmnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-42513869714967871542014-07-13T00:15:06.999+01:002014-07-13T00:15:06.999+01:00If you are right and this use of the colon isn'...If you are right and this use of the colon isn't an import from America, where did it come from, do you suppose?<br /><br />It can't be simply an innovation by the authors of ISO-8601, because that standard wasn't published until 1988, and the practice was definitely established by then. See, for example, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PulsarLED.jpg" rel="nofollow">this picture of an (American) digital watch from c.1976</a>.<br /><br />The idea must have come from somewhere.<br />My money's still on the US.Grhmnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-18937096805793478322014-07-10T00:12:27.356+01:002014-07-10T00:12:27.356+01:00Anonymous
But both of us are speculating.
Not re...Anonymous<br /><br /><i>But both of us are speculating.</i><br /><br />Not really. I've searched through illustrations of US railway ephemera. The only format I've found uses a full stop.David Crosbiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01858358459416955921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-53408561664406869432014-07-09T21:45:04.613+01:002014-07-09T21:45:04.613+01:00"It would seem that the colon is a relatively..."It would seem that the colon is a relatively modern device, replacing the previous full stop in many countries — including Britain and, I suspect, the US."<br /><br />And I suspect not. But both of us are speculating. We need to hear from an American.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-873721826657772662014-07-08T15:26:22.055+01:002014-07-08T15:26:22.055+01:00Grhm
ISO-8601 permits both 23:20 and 2320
In ot...Grhm<br /><br /><i> ISO-8601 permits both 23:20 and 2320</i><br /><br />In other words, both options are international.<br /><br /><i>in my youth, regardless of the merits of the practice, we British did not insert colons in times</i><br /><br />In my youth, the twenty-four hour clock was not generally used. And the time was <b>never</b> represented by a number. In speech, we had the alternative <i>nine fifteen</i> to the more usual <i>quarter past nine</i>. This was written <b>9.15</b> — as it still is unofficially by many Brits. In Russia and France, and no doubt many more countries, the full stop is still used in timetables. I'm not sure about Russia, but we have a French railway timetable with no preceding zero. The only old text I've seen with American train times has the format <b>9.15 p.m.</b>.<br /><br />Curiously, the separator chosen by the Victorian Bradshaw was neither a full stop nor a colon but a space. Thus <b>9 15</b>.<br /><br />It would seem that the colon is relatively modern device, replacing previous full stop in many countries — including Britain and, I suspect, the US. <br /><br />Perhaps this was due to the increasing use of the decimal system with the full stop used as a <b>decimal point</b> at its centre. As I remember it, fractions were the norm when i was a small boy. I first encountered them in school maths lessons.<br /><br />Numbers were used, but not for times. <i>Twelve fifteen</i> when written <b>1215</b> was the date of Magna Carta. As a time it was written <b>12.15</b>.<br /><br />From the Forces (most adult men) and from the movies/the pictures (most people, young and old), we were aware of the new usage. But it was a singular practice, rather uncommon in chivy street, not in popular use — except in play. We said <b>Oh nine hundred hours</b> and <b>Oh nine fifteen hours</b>. I think comics and novels would write <b>0900 hours</b> and <b>0915 hours</b>.<br /><br />I don't really see the point of <b>0915</b> and <b>2115</b>. I say <b>Oh nine fifteen</b> and <b>twenty-one fifteen</b>. I would never (never when telling a time, that is) say <b>oh nine one five</b> — let alone <b>one thousand nine hundred and fifteen</b>. Your allegedly 'British' written format is completely at odds with the spoken form. The forms <b>9.15</b> and <b>9:15</b> at least correspond to the way we say things.David Crosbiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01858358459416955921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-88055061729509761182014-07-08T03:08:08.485+01:002014-07-08T03:08:08.485+01:00PS
I suddenly realised '2320' was a bad ex...PS<br />I suddenly realised '2320' was a bad example as you don't use the 24-hour clock much over there. But would you always write '11:20 pm', or might you sometimes write '1120 pm' ? And how are the times punctuated in American timetables? (="transportation schedules"?)Grhmnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-79044317768290546762014-07-08T02:06:32.114+01:002014-07-08T02:06:32.114+01:00Actually, according to the excellent article by Ma...Actually, according to the excellent article by Markus Kuhn, to which David Malone provides a link above, the colon is optional. ISO-8601 permits both 23:20 and 2320.<br /><br />(I wish Microsoft had taken cognizance of this when they programmed their Office Suite, which, irritatingly, insists on always putting punctuation in times.)<br /><br />I'm not going to pursue my observations about punctuation in dates, as I am British, not Swedish. So I have narrowed my remarks to times. But not solely to timetables.<br /><br />I remain of the opinion that in my youth, regardless of the merits of the practice, we British did not insert colons in times. I think I can even remember the first occasion I saw a colon used in this exotic way - it was when I saw my first digital watch.<br /><br />So my totally on-mission question, addressed to Americans, is this:<br />Are times invariably punctuated in the US, or do you also use unpunctuated formatting along the lines of '2320', which, in the teeth of David Crosbie's disdain, remains quite common practice in the UK?Grhmnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-4733518838083116532014-07-07T23:20:14.360+01:002014-07-07T23:20:14.360+01:00Grhm sorry about the thread confusion. I appended ...Grhm sorry about the thread confusion. I appended the <i>on lunch</i> comment in an attempt to get back to the core business of British vs American English.<br /><br />You've narrow your abjection to comments <b>in timetables</b>. Well, I won't go to the wall defending them in this instance. Everybody knows that they are<b> times</b>, and the tables provide other prompts to focus the <b>hour</b> part or the <b>minute</b> part or to ignore the number altogether.<br /><br />Out of that timetable context, the colon is often invaluable — as are the slashes in dates.<br /><br />Returning to British English, I think you've established that different British transport providers have different policies as to colons. If you look back at the very first comment (by David Malone), you'll see that the colon is an <b>international</b> convention, which individual British or American may choose to adopt.David Crosbiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01858358459416955921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-6127077352904208292014-07-07T22:37:49.965+01:002014-07-07T22:37:49.965+01:00Ah, sorry David, our comments crossed there. But ...Ah, sorry David, our comments crossed there. But I disclaim 'at/on lunch'. It wasn't one of my complaints - that was a different over-opinionated fella, on a different thread.Grhmnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-41968264524671122642014-07-07T14:28:54.891+01:002014-07-07T14:28:54.891+01:00Oooh. I was generalising from the documents produ...Oooh. I was generalising from the documents produced by my local bus company, but I've just picked up a South West Trains timetable and I'm delighted to report there's not a colon in sight. <br />Which leads to the question relevant to this blog: do American times invariably include colons, or is the (I think) more traditionally British, colonless, representation (e.g. 1046 instead of 10:46) common in the USA too? Grhmnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-50648998705222966992014-07-07T13:07:11.881+01:002014-07-07T13:07:11.881+01:00OK, so maybe 'redundancy' is the wrong wor...OK, so maybe 'redundancy' is the wrong word. "Emptiness of information" is what I meant. (Is there a decent word for that?)<br /><br />I'm curious to know exactly what meaning you think is conveyed by those myriad unchanging colons that march in columns through modern timetables.<br /><br />Edward Tufte would call them "non-data ink".<br /><br />If you've not read him, I heartily recommend that you get him out of the library. Despite the unpromising title, "The Visual Display of Quantitive Information" is a delight to read. He argues his case wittily and cogently, and the book is physically a very beautiful thing.<br /><br />Someone recommended it to me some years ago, and it completely revolutionised the way I think about documents.Grhmnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-87498562692040133132014-07-07T12:57:21.198+01:002014-07-07T12:57:21.198+01:00Grhm
PPS
The important meaningful information th...Grhm<br /><br />PPS<br /><br />The important meaningful information that slashes add to a string of numerals is <b>that it is a date</b>.<br /><br />The important meaningful information that a colon add to a string of numerals is <b>that it may be a time</b>.<br /><br />Equipped with this information, the brain may choose to focus on <b>one</b> string (before the first slash, between slashes, after the second slash, before the colon, after the colon) — to the exclusion of the other numerals, if he/she is only interested in the day or whatever. Alternatively, the reader may direct the brain to choose a careful processing of each 'number'. Or again, the reader may tell the brain to ignore the numbers entirely, if dates or times are irrelevant for the current purpose in reading — or if they're so obvious as not to merit attention.<br /><br />We've come a long away from the 'mission' of this blog. Where these considerations become more pertinent is in cases like your <i>on lunch</i>. <br /><br />For most communicative purposes in most settings, the word <i>lunch</i> conveys all the information the hearer needs to 'get the message'. <i>'John. Lunch'</i>, for example, would suffice most of the time. But we do value our redundancy so we add <i>is</i> — something that Russian doesn't bother with. And we add a preposition. <br /><br />The beauty of this is that different speech communities are free to add their own preposition. So when some speakers (Americans, you believe) use <i>on</i> it remains totally intelligible virtually all the time to those of us who use <i>at</i> (all Brits, you believe).<br /><br />When <i>at</i>-users change their habits to become <i>on</i>-users, they are merely copying the speech group that they now identify with. It's a <b>fashion</b>. Some fashions come and go; others create lasting change — in a culture or in a sub-culture.David Crosbiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01858358459416955921noreply@blogger.com