Read 1900s as nineteen hundred's?

Forums: Esl, English
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Context:

Russell led the British "revolt against idealism" in the early 1900s. He is considered one of the founders of analytic philosophy along with his predecessor Gottlob Frege and his protégé Ludwig Wittgenstein, and is widely held to be one of the 20th century's premier logicians.[4] He co-authored, with A. N. Whitehead, Principia Mathematica, an attempt to ground mathematics on logic. His philosophical essay "On Denoting" has been considered a "paradigm of philosophy."[7] His work has had a considerable influence on logic, mathematics, set theory, linguistics, and philosophy, especially philosophy of language, epistemology, and metaphysics.

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Question • Score: 0 • Views: 6,241 • Replies: 8

No top replies

View best answer, chosen by oristarA

@oristarA,

Yes. Nineteen hundreds is an accurate reading of the era.

1 Reply

@tsarstepan,

Thanks.

1 Reply

@oristarA,

Beware of a possible source of confusion. When I was young, the first decade of a century was called the 'hundreds', the second the 'tens', the third the 'twenties', etc, up to the 'nineties'. Or in figures one wrote e.g. "the 1900s", "the 1910s", "the 1920s" etc.

Thus during the 1900s, you had the Wright Brothers, early cars, the Philippine War of Independence, the end of the Boer War, the Boxer Rebellion, etc.

Nowadays many people say (or write) the 'hundreds' when they mean the whole century! This leads to people saying that "Queen Victoria was queen of England during the 1800s". I want to say "She couldn't have been, because she wasn't even born until 1819, and didn't start to reign until 1837!"

2 Replies

@contrex,

Good point, Contrex; I was just coming on to say something similar, and I believe you have already said it better.

1900s is not the same as 20th c.

1 Reply

@McTag,

Couldn't resist this - (Imagine Richard Burton)

No one would have believed in the last years of the nineteenth century that this world was being watched keenly and closely by intelligences greater than man's and yet as mortal as his own; that as men busied themselves about their various concerns they were scrutinised and studied, perhaps almost as narrowly as a man with a microscope might scrutinise the transient creatures that swarm and multiply in a drop of water. With infinite complacency men went to and fro over this globe about their little affairs...

0 Replies

Veritable Wells of wisdom . . .

0 Replies

By the way, Oristar, in your title there should be no apostrophe after "hundred".

Quote:

Read 1900s as nineteen hundred's?

0 Replies

@contrex,

contrex wrote:

Beware of a possible source of confusion. When I was young, the first decade of a century was called the 'hundreds', the second the 'tens', the third the 'twenties', etc, up to the 'nineties'. Or in figures one wrote e.g. "the 1900s", "the 1910s", "the 1920s" etc.

Thus during the 1900s, you had the Wright Brothers, early cars, the Philippine War of Independence, the end of the Boer War, the Boxer Rebellion, etc.

Nowadays many people say (or write) the 'hundreds' when they mean the whole century! This leads to people saying that "Queen Victoria was queen of England during the 1800s". I want to say "She couldn't have been, because she wasn't even born until 1819, and didn't start to reign until 1837!"

Thank you for reminding me of that.

But how to read it without arousing any misunderstanding? It seems a headache. Very Happy

0 Replies

Read 1900s as nineteen hundred's?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know