Is “A.D.” is traditionally placed before the year number?
From Washington State University:
Traditionally “A.D.” was placed before the year number and “B.C.” after, but many people now prefer to put both abbreviations after the numbers.
Is this claim true?
history language
New contributor
|
show 1 more comment
From Washington State University:
Traditionally “A.D.” was placed before the year number and “B.C.” after, but many people now prefer to put both abbreviations after the numbers.
Is this claim true?
history language
New contributor
11
You have two claims, neither is strange enough to warrant a question IMO, and especially not here. This is a question about the English language and there is a complete stack for that.
– pipe
18 hours ago
1
Related: english.stackexchange.com/questions/19895/…
– Cœur
18 hours ago
2
@pipe: the question title make it pretty obvious what the question is (out of those two). It's also a reasonable history question, albeit history of language... .
– Fizz
17 hours ago
5
@Fizz Of course it's a reasonable history question. Surely this stack is not created to argue simple historical facts.
– pipe
17 hours ago
3
@fizz This question is trivially answered with a Google search. That makes it not notable to me. Common knowledge is not contentious.
– fredsbend
12 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
From Washington State University:
Traditionally “A.D.” was placed before the year number and “B.C.” after, but many people now prefer to put both abbreviations after the numbers.
Is this claim true?
history language
New contributor
From Washington State University:
Traditionally “A.D.” was placed before the year number and “B.C.” after, but many people now prefer to put both abbreviations after the numbers.
Is this claim true?
history language
history language
New contributor
New contributor
edited 12 hours ago
Oddthinking♦
102k31427531
102k31427531
New contributor
asked 22 hours ago
J. DoeJ. Doe
285
285
New contributor
New contributor
11
You have two claims, neither is strange enough to warrant a question IMO, and especially not here. This is a question about the English language and there is a complete stack for that.
– pipe
18 hours ago
1
Related: english.stackexchange.com/questions/19895/…
– Cœur
18 hours ago
2
@pipe: the question title make it pretty obvious what the question is (out of those two). It's also a reasonable history question, albeit history of language... .
– Fizz
17 hours ago
5
@Fizz Of course it's a reasonable history question. Surely this stack is not created to argue simple historical facts.
– pipe
17 hours ago
3
@fizz This question is trivially answered with a Google search. That makes it not notable to me. Common knowledge is not contentious.
– fredsbend
12 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
11
You have two claims, neither is strange enough to warrant a question IMO, and especially not here. This is a question about the English language and there is a complete stack for that.
– pipe
18 hours ago
1
Related: english.stackexchange.com/questions/19895/…
– Cœur
18 hours ago
2
@pipe: the question title make it pretty obvious what the question is (out of those two). It's also a reasonable history question, albeit history of language... .
– Fizz
17 hours ago
5
@Fizz Of course it's a reasonable history question. Surely this stack is not created to argue simple historical facts.
– pipe
17 hours ago
3
@fizz This question is trivially answered with a Google search. That makes it not notable to me. Common knowledge is not contentious.
– fredsbend
12 hours ago
11
11
You have two claims, neither is strange enough to warrant a question IMO, and especially not here. This is a question about the English language and there is a complete stack for that.
– pipe
18 hours ago
You have two claims, neither is strange enough to warrant a question IMO, and especially not here. This is a question about the English language and there is a complete stack for that.
– pipe
18 hours ago
1
1
Related: english.stackexchange.com/questions/19895/…
– Cœur
18 hours ago
Related: english.stackexchange.com/questions/19895/…
– Cœur
18 hours ago
2
2
@pipe: the question title make it pretty obvious what the question is (out of those two). It's also a reasonable history question, albeit history of language... .
– Fizz
17 hours ago
@pipe: the question title make it pretty obvious what the question is (out of those two). It's also a reasonable history question, albeit history of language... .
– Fizz
17 hours ago
5
5
@Fizz Of course it's a reasonable history question. Surely this stack is not created to argue simple historical facts.
– pipe
17 hours ago
@Fizz Of course it's a reasonable history question. Surely this stack is not created to argue simple historical facts.
– pipe
17 hours ago
3
3
@fizz This question is trivially answered with a Google search. That makes it not notable to me. Common knowledge is not contentious.
– fredsbend
12 hours ago
@fizz This question is trivially answered with a Google search. That makes it not notable to me. Common knowledge is not contentious.
– fredsbend
12 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
Here is an example like you wish it :
Roof of Gunmakers House in London
On Commercial Road, E1 is a rather curious-looking little building, out of scale with the structures surrounding it. An inscription rises above the facade:
THE PROOF HOUSE OF THE GUNMAKERS COMPANY OF THE CITY OF LONDON.
ESTABLISHED BY CHARTER ANNO DOMINI 1637.
And here you can find additional informations about this house:
Worshipful Company of Gunmakers
New contributor
This is the example I was looking for and isn't cut/paste of Wikipedia. Thanks!
– J. Doe
4 hours ago
add a comment |
Certainly. A.D. is short for the latin anno domini (in the year of the lord), and in latin grammar that phrase is placed in front of the year number.
English Example (Dickens's Dictionary of London, 1885: Seventh Year: an Unconventional Handbook)
The Chicago Manual of Style notes that the usage in English should follow that - unfortunately I can only provide secondary references for that.
New contributor
Firstly, for A.D. you provided a Latin example. Could you provide an English example? Secondly, is the Chicago Manual of Style not publicly available?
– J. Doe
21 hours ago
10
@J.Doe the phrase is Latin, its correct use is the Latin form. It was in use long before such a thing as English even existed.
– jwenting
21 hours ago
@jwenting I meant an english example where the numbers are in english (although A.D. is in latin).
– J. Doe
21 hours ago
1
@J.Doe see, for example, Dickens' Dictionary of London, Charles Dickens reports an inscription in English: "... on Sunday, 22nd September, A.D. 1560."
– muru
19 hours ago
1
I can confirm the CMS says "Note that the Latin abbreviations AD and AH precede the year number, whereas the others [non-Latin origin] follow it".
– Fizz
17 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Here is an example like you wish it :
Roof of Gunmakers House in London
On Commercial Road, E1 is a rather curious-looking little building, out of scale with the structures surrounding it. An inscription rises above the facade:
THE PROOF HOUSE OF THE GUNMAKERS COMPANY OF THE CITY OF LONDON.
ESTABLISHED BY CHARTER ANNO DOMINI 1637.
And here you can find additional informations about this house:
Worshipful Company of Gunmakers
New contributor
This is the example I was looking for and isn't cut/paste of Wikipedia. Thanks!
– J. Doe
4 hours ago
add a comment |
Here is an example like you wish it :
Roof of Gunmakers House in London
On Commercial Road, E1 is a rather curious-looking little building, out of scale with the structures surrounding it. An inscription rises above the facade:
THE PROOF HOUSE OF THE GUNMAKERS COMPANY OF THE CITY OF LONDON.
ESTABLISHED BY CHARTER ANNO DOMINI 1637.
And here you can find additional informations about this house:
Worshipful Company of Gunmakers
New contributor
This is the example I was looking for and isn't cut/paste of Wikipedia. Thanks!
– J. Doe
4 hours ago
add a comment |
Here is an example like you wish it :
Roof of Gunmakers House in London
On Commercial Road, E1 is a rather curious-looking little building, out of scale with the structures surrounding it. An inscription rises above the facade:
THE PROOF HOUSE OF THE GUNMAKERS COMPANY OF THE CITY OF LONDON.
ESTABLISHED BY CHARTER ANNO DOMINI 1637.
And here you can find additional informations about this house:
Worshipful Company of Gunmakers
New contributor
Here is an example like you wish it :
Roof of Gunmakers House in London
On Commercial Road, E1 is a rather curious-looking little building, out of scale with the structures surrounding it. An inscription rises above the facade:
THE PROOF HOUSE OF THE GUNMAKERS COMPANY OF THE CITY OF LONDON.
ESTABLISHED BY CHARTER ANNO DOMINI 1637.
And here you can find additional informations about this house:
Worshipful Company of Gunmakers
New contributor
edited 3 hours ago
Brythan
8,85653750
8,85653750
New contributor
answered 19 hours ago
AllerleirauhAllerleirauh
763
763
New contributor
New contributor
This is the example I was looking for and isn't cut/paste of Wikipedia. Thanks!
– J. Doe
4 hours ago
add a comment |
This is the example I was looking for and isn't cut/paste of Wikipedia. Thanks!
– J. Doe
4 hours ago
This is the example I was looking for and isn't cut/paste of Wikipedia. Thanks!
– J. Doe
4 hours ago
This is the example I was looking for and isn't cut/paste of Wikipedia. Thanks!
– J. Doe
4 hours ago
add a comment |
Certainly. A.D. is short for the latin anno domini (in the year of the lord), and in latin grammar that phrase is placed in front of the year number.
English Example (Dickens's Dictionary of London, 1885: Seventh Year: an Unconventional Handbook)
The Chicago Manual of Style notes that the usage in English should follow that - unfortunately I can only provide secondary references for that.
New contributor
Firstly, for A.D. you provided a Latin example. Could you provide an English example? Secondly, is the Chicago Manual of Style not publicly available?
– J. Doe
21 hours ago
10
@J.Doe the phrase is Latin, its correct use is the Latin form. It was in use long before such a thing as English even existed.
– jwenting
21 hours ago
@jwenting I meant an english example where the numbers are in english (although A.D. is in latin).
– J. Doe
21 hours ago
1
@J.Doe see, for example, Dickens' Dictionary of London, Charles Dickens reports an inscription in English: "... on Sunday, 22nd September, A.D. 1560."
– muru
19 hours ago
1
I can confirm the CMS says "Note that the Latin abbreviations AD and AH precede the year number, whereas the others [non-Latin origin] follow it".
– Fizz
17 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
Certainly. A.D. is short for the latin anno domini (in the year of the lord), and in latin grammar that phrase is placed in front of the year number.
English Example (Dickens's Dictionary of London, 1885: Seventh Year: an Unconventional Handbook)
The Chicago Manual of Style notes that the usage in English should follow that - unfortunately I can only provide secondary references for that.
New contributor
Firstly, for A.D. you provided a Latin example. Could you provide an English example? Secondly, is the Chicago Manual of Style not publicly available?
– J. Doe
21 hours ago
10
@J.Doe the phrase is Latin, its correct use is the Latin form. It was in use long before such a thing as English even existed.
– jwenting
21 hours ago
@jwenting I meant an english example where the numbers are in english (although A.D. is in latin).
– J. Doe
21 hours ago
1
@J.Doe see, for example, Dickens' Dictionary of London, Charles Dickens reports an inscription in English: "... on Sunday, 22nd September, A.D. 1560."
– muru
19 hours ago
1
I can confirm the CMS says "Note that the Latin abbreviations AD and AH precede the year number, whereas the others [non-Latin origin] follow it".
– Fizz
17 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
Certainly. A.D. is short for the latin anno domini (in the year of the lord), and in latin grammar that phrase is placed in front of the year number.
English Example (Dickens's Dictionary of London, 1885: Seventh Year: an Unconventional Handbook)
The Chicago Manual of Style notes that the usage in English should follow that - unfortunately I can only provide secondary references for that.
New contributor
Certainly. A.D. is short for the latin anno domini (in the year of the lord), and in latin grammar that phrase is placed in front of the year number.
English Example (Dickens's Dictionary of London, 1885: Seventh Year: an Unconventional Handbook)
The Chicago Manual of Style notes that the usage in English should follow that - unfortunately I can only provide secondary references for that.
New contributor
edited 11 hours ago
aloisdg
1054
1054
New contributor
answered 21 hours ago
WolfgangGroissWolfgangGroiss
1594
1594
New contributor
New contributor
Firstly, for A.D. you provided a Latin example. Could you provide an English example? Secondly, is the Chicago Manual of Style not publicly available?
– J. Doe
21 hours ago
10
@J.Doe the phrase is Latin, its correct use is the Latin form. It was in use long before such a thing as English even existed.
– jwenting
21 hours ago
@jwenting I meant an english example where the numbers are in english (although A.D. is in latin).
– J. Doe
21 hours ago
1
@J.Doe see, for example, Dickens' Dictionary of London, Charles Dickens reports an inscription in English: "... on Sunday, 22nd September, A.D. 1560."
– muru
19 hours ago
1
I can confirm the CMS says "Note that the Latin abbreviations AD and AH precede the year number, whereas the others [non-Latin origin] follow it".
– Fizz
17 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
Firstly, for A.D. you provided a Latin example. Could you provide an English example? Secondly, is the Chicago Manual of Style not publicly available?
– J. Doe
21 hours ago
10
@J.Doe the phrase is Latin, its correct use is the Latin form. It was in use long before such a thing as English even existed.
– jwenting
21 hours ago
@jwenting I meant an english example where the numbers are in english (although A.D. is in latin).
– J. Doe
21 hours ago
1
@J.Doe see, for example, Dickens' Dictionary of London, Charles Dickens reports an inscription in English: "... on Sunday, 22nd September, A.D. 1560."
– muru
19 hours ago
1
I can confirm the CMS says "Note that the Latin abbreviations AD and AH precede the year number, whereas the others [non-Latin origin] follow it".
– Fizz
17 hours ago
Firstly, for A.D. you provided a Latin example. Could you provide an English example? Secondly, is the Chicago Manual of Style not publicly available?
– J. Doe
21 hours ago
Firstly, for A.D. you provided a Latin example. Could you provide an English example? Secondly, is the Chicago Manual of Style not publicly available?
– J. Doe
21 hours ago
10
10
@J.Doe the phrase is Latin, its correct use is the Latin form. It was in use long before such a thing as English even existed.
– jwenting
21 hours ago
@J.Doe the phrase is Latin, its correct use is the Latin form. It was in use long before such a thing as English even existed.
– jwenting
21 hours ago
@jwenting I meant an english example where the numbers are in english (although A.D. is in latin).
– J. Doe
21 hours ago
@jwenting I meant an english example where the numbers are in english (although A.D. is in latin).
– J. Doe
21 hours ago
1
1
@J.Doe see, for example, Dickens' Dictionary of London, Charles Dickens reports an inscription in English: "... on Sunday, 22nd September, A.D. 1560."
– muru
19 hours ago
@J.Doe see, for example, Dickens' Dictionary of London, Charles Dickens reports an inscription in English: "... on Sunday, 22nd September, A.D. 1560."
– muru
19 hours ago
1
1
I can confirm the CMS says "Note that the Latin abbreviations AD and AH precede the year number, whereas the others [non-Latin origin] follow it".
– Fizz
17 hours ago
I can confirm the CMS says "Note that the Latin abbreviations AD and AH precede the year number, whereas the others [non-Latin origin] follow it".
– Fizz
17 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
11
You have two claims, neither is strange enough to warrant a question IMO, and especially not here. This is a question about the English language and there is a complete stack for that.
– pipe
18 hours ago
1
Related: english.stackexchange.com/questions/19895/…
– Cœur
18 hours ago
2
@pipe: the question title make it pretty obvious what the question is (out of those two). It's also a reasonable history question, albeit history of language... .
– Fizz
17 hours ago
5
@Fizz Of course it's a reasonable history question. Surely this stack is not created to argue simple historical facts.
– pipe
17 hours ago
3
@fizz This question is trivially answered with a Google search. That makes it not notable to me. Common knowledge is not contentious.
– fredsbend
12 hours ago