In message <mailman.2.1376949654.29631.genbrit@rootsweb.com>, singhals <singhals@erols.com> writes: [] >I've found that saying "18th century" when meaning the years between >1700 and 1800 confuses the casual reader, and most of the people who >read my family histories ARE fairly casual about it. Stopping a minute >to think, to remember, interupts the flow of the narrative. It >therefore makes the life of my reader easier (and my point easier to >find) when I say "The 1700s..." instead "The 18th century". > >Your readers may be less casual than mine, of course. > >Cheryl > Yes; when I was little, I couldn't understand why everyone said we were in the 20th century, since all the dates were 19xx. Though I obviously understand it now, I still avoid talking about xxth century if I can: I say 17xx or whatever, if possible. -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf A man is not contemptible because he thinks science explains everything, and a man is not contempptible because he doesn't. - Howard Jacobson, in Radio Times 2010/1/23-29.