Skip to main content

numbers - Saying dates in English



Are these dates correctly pronounced? Should it be 'dash' or 'hyphen'? Roman one, or '/aɪ/'?


27/I-1980, twenty-seven, slash, Roman one, dash/hypen, nineteen eighty


4/II-1936 Four slash Roman two dash nineteen thirty-six


11/III-1908 eleven slash Roman three dash nineteen-eight


1/IV-1981 one slash Roman four dash nineteen eighty-one


29/V-1949 twenty-nine slash Roman five dash nineteen forty-nine


13/VI-1946 thirteen slash Roman six dash nineteen forty-six


14/VII-1959 fourteen slash Roman seven dash nineteen fifty-nine


12/VIII-1967 twelve slash Roman eight dash nineteen sixty-seven


4/IX-1966 four slash Roman nine dash nineteen sixty-six


28/X-1965 twenty-eight slash Roman ten dash nineteen sixty-five


5/XI-1964 five slash Roman eleven dash nineteen sixty-four


3/XII-1927 three slash Roman twelve dash nineteen twenty-seven.



Answer



I would say no, those aren't the correct pronunciations.


The problem with dates is that they have written representations, and they are also spoken, but the two aren't necessarily intertwined. In other words, when saying a date aloud, I don't generally read it, I simply say it.


As an analogy, this is not unlike reading math equations. I might see one of these on a written page:




  • a2 + b2 = c2

  • f(x) = x3 - cos(x)



but I would never say (or pronounce) those as:




  • a superscripted two plus b superscripted two equals sign c superscripted 2

  • f open parenthesis x close parenthesis equals x superscripted 3 dash cos open paren x close paren



(not unless I was in a typesetting shop).


Instead, I would say (or "pronounce") those as:




  • a-squared plus b-squared equals c-squared

  • f of x equals x cubed minus cosine x



There's a difference between a notation and a pronunciation; dates work much the same.


As an example, a letter might have a date in the upper right-hand corner, and it could look like any of these:




  • September 13, 2012

  • 13 Sep 12

  • 9-13-2012

  • 9/13/12 (or, 13/9/12)

  • 13/IX-2012 (as pointed out earlier, this format would be very rare)



But, let's say I was going to read this letter aloud to an audience. Irrespective of how the date is written on the letter, I might say any of the following:




  • This letter is dated September 13th, two-thousand twelve

  • This letter is dated 13 September, two-thousand twelve

  • This letter is dated the 13th of September of this year (assuming it's still 2012)



This all varies according to the speaker, of course – some speakers might say the date a little differently. What's worth noting, however, is that, if I was doing the narration, I would almost assuredly NOT say any of these:




  • This letter is dated September thirteen comma, two thousand twelve

  • This letter is dated thirteen Sep twelve

  • This letter is dated nine dash thirteen dash twenty twelve

  • This letter is dated nine slash thirteen slash twelve

  • This letter is dated thirteen Roman twelve dash twenty twelve



Pretty much the only time I can imagine myself speaking a date in that fashion is if someone asked me a question such as:




  • How would you like me to write that date down? or,

  • How did the author write that date on the letter?



In that case, I might say something like "nine dash thirteen dash twenty twelve" – but that is a rare exception.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.