Damon L. Chesser wrote:
Daniel B. wrote:Damon L. Chesser wrote: ... You can say eighty-two fifty ($82.50), eighty-two and fiftycents, eighty-two dollars and fifty cents. All are understood.Well, not clearly: "eighty-two fifty" is said both for 82.50 and for 8250.Except one and 23 is = 1.23 = 1 and 23Wait a minute. Now you're talking about "one and twenty three"-- weren't you arguing about "one hundred and twenty three" before? Those forms are significantly different. "One and twenty three" can never mean 123.I agree.This is interesting. What is the difference between "one and twenty-three" and "one hundred and twenty-three" ( I mean aside from the numeric amount). Both could mean X + 23, or X .23. "One" is the amount, "hundred" is the unit. In "one and twenty-three" it is understood the unit is "one". There is often a difference between the way words, counts or systems are used *technically* and the way normal people use the terms. It is understood most of the time(at least in English, both Brit and American) what form is used and you just go on down the road. I have said this before, and it was ignored. I learned this in school. It was not *new math* (what ever that is) it was algebra. I went to school in the USA, in 1979. The *rule* could have changed due to common usage in that time. I just thought it would be an interesting bit of info for you guys. It is not my rule. I just listen to the words and I know what is meant by the context. I am not arguing anything.I think we all should be Lawyers the way the hair is being split here (I assume that phrase is understood by English speakers? I try not to use figures once I found out they are not universal). Anyway, this was an interesting diversion.Daniel
-- Damon L. Chesser dchesser@bigfoot.com