# 2003

## English translation: two thousand and three ...

GLOSSARY ENTRY (DERIVED FROM QUESTION BELOW)
 English term or phrase: 2003 English translation: two thousand and three ... Entered by:

 23:42 Jan 15, 2003
English to English translations [Non-PRO]
 English term or phrase: 2003 How do you say this? twenty hundred and three ?
 Juan Carlos
 two thousand and three Explanation:I am giving the same answer as the first three, but I thought I would offer my comments on it. Up until 1999 - nineteen hundred and ninety-nine for the full form, but usually said as nineteen ninety-nine - everything seemed perfectly clear. As we approached 2000 - two thousand - there was some uncertainty how this would be said, until we got there. By then everyone knew it was two thousand - well, by the previous system it would be twenty hundred, like nineteen hundred for 1900, but that somehow seems stupid, we don´t say that for numbers, we say two thousand, so the year was the same. (Though we also say one thousand nine hundred for the number 1900, but nineteen hundred for the date - it is not logical!) 2000 was such a big turning point that I don´t think many people looked beyond it until 2001 came along. Well "twenty one" is just hopeless, it sounds like 21, and "twenty hundred ... " still seems stupid. Anyway, there was that by Arthur C. Clarke film, which had firmly established "two thousand and one", so that was that. I see the Americans are throwing in their habit of dropping the "and", making this year "two thousand three", but for British English it has to be there. We also don´t drop it when writing a cheque (check :-). I hadn´t heard the Canadian "twenty-oh-three". This is consistent with the old system, where 1903 is sometimes said "nineteen three", but it feels a little uncertain, so it´s more usually "nineteen-oh-three". Now I am fascinated to see what will happen in 2010 and 2011 - maybe it will revert to the old system with "twenty ten" like nineteen ten for 1910, or maybe the switch has been permanent and it will be two thousand (and) ten ...--------------------------------------------------Note added at 2003-01-16 10:43:47 (GMT)--------------------------------------------------And \"twenty hundred\" is somehow unthinkable - even though \"nineteen hundred\" is perfectly normal in dates!
Selected response from:

Chris Rowson (X)
Local time: 15:11
 4 KudoZ points were awarded for this answer

5 +18two thousand and three
 Oso (X)
5 +10Two thousand and three
 NancyLynn
5 +9two thousand and three
 Chris Rowson (X)
5 +3Two thousand three
 LaCat
4 +2two thousand and three
 Kim Metzger
4Two thousand three
 Christopher Crockett

1 min   confidence: peer agreement (net): +18
two thousand and three

Explanation:
Hello Juan Carlos,
Good luck from Oso ¶:^)

 Oso (X)Native speaker of: SpanishPRO pts in pair: 138

agree
 11 mins
-> Thank you, Nikita ¶:^)

agree
 58 mins
-> Thank you, Ruth ¶:^)

agree  writeaway: oror two thousand three
 1 hr
-> thank you, writeaway ¶:^)

agree
 1 hr
-> thank you, Drak ¶:^)

agree  Gabriela Tenenbaum (X): #:)
 1 hr
-> ¡La Carita +linda del 2003 lo confirma! ¡Gracias, Gaby! ¶:^)))

agree
 1 hr
-> Thank you, Rebecca ¶:^)

agree
 1 hr
-> Thank you, Andrea ¶:^)

agree  María Alejandra Funes: Por supu :-) ¡Hola, Oso!
 1 hr
-> ¡Hooola Ale! Muchas gracias ¶:^)

agree
 2 hrs
-> Thank you, Pats ¶:^)

agree
 2 hrs
-> Thank you, Nina ¶:^)

agree
 4 hrs
-> Thank you, Rusinterp ¶:^)

agree  Tanja Abramovic (X)
 6 hrs
-> Thank you, olyx ¶:^)

agree
 7 hrs
-> Thank you, EdithKelly ¶:^)

agree  EDLING (X)
 7 hrs
-> Thank you, Edling ¶:^)

agree
 7 hrs
-> Thank you, Sarah ¶:^)

agree
 8 hrs
-> Thank you, Jacqueline ¶:^)

agree
 9 hrs
-> Thank you, Paula ¶:^)

agree
 10 hrs
-> Thank you, Peter ¶:^)

1 min   confidence: peer agreement (net): +10
Two thousand and three

Explanation:
or: twenty -oh- three, for the year

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2003-01-16 12:16:39 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

And oh-three, for short, means the year. I love all the comments! Fascinating how something so simple that it\'s taken for granted in one country can be so foreign right next door! :)

 NancyLynnCanadaLocal time: 09:11Native speaker of: EnglishPRO pts in pair: 473

agree
 1 min
-> merci !

agree
 5 mins
-> merci !

neutral  Refugio: Twenty-oh-three? I have never heard that. Is that a Canadian thang?
 57 mins
-> not to you guys down there? surprise!

 1 hr
-> yes

agree  Valeria Verona: I've heard twenty-oh-three for the year
 3 hrs
-> Thanks!

agree  GoodWords: "Yes", to Ruth and writeaway. I'm a Canadian expat, and it took me by surprise the first time I was "home" in Canada in the new millenium. I didn't know it was unique to Canada.
 3 hrs
-> Thanks!

agree
 4 hrs
-> Thanks!

agree  EDLING (X)
 7 hrs
-> Thanks!

agree
 8 hrs
-> thanks for the overwhelming support guys!

agree  Ino66 (X)
 1 day 23 hrs

agree  Fuad Yahya: "Twenty O Three" has been heard down here in Sugar Land, Texas.
 3 days 8 hrs

1 min   confidence: peer agreement (net): +2
two thousand and three

Explanation:
That's the customary way.

 Kim MetzgerMexicoLocal time: 08:11Native speaker of: EnglishPRO pts in pair: 2249

agree
 4 hrs

agree  EDLING (X)
 7 hrs

1 hr   confidence: peer agreement (net): +3
Two thousand three

Explanation:
The "and" actually denotes a fraction, not a whole number. It's like when one writes a check; the number is written out, but the "and" is reserved for the end before amount of cents is stated.
For example: \$103.03 is said "one hundred three dollars and three cents.

 LaCat

agree  Nina Engberg: I think we say both, but this one more when we say a date...
 59 mins
-> Gracias Nina :)

agree
 2 hrs
-> Gracias Rusinterp :)

agree  Christopher Crockett: Both are heard, with and without the "and" but I agree that the "and" should be left out.
 15 hrs
-> Gracias Christopher :)

5 hrs   confidence: peer agreement (net): +9
two thousand and three

Explanation:
I am giving the same answer as the first three, but I thought I would offer my comments on it.

Up until 1999 - nineteen hundred and ninety-nine for the full form, but usually said as nineteen ninety-nine - everything seemed perfectly clear. As we approached 2000 - two thousand - there was some uncertainty how this would be said, until we got there. By then everyone knew it was two thousand - well, by the previous system it would be twenty hundred, like nineteen hundred for 1900, but that somehow seems stupid, we don´t say that for numbers, we say two thousand, so the year was the same. (Though we also say one thousand nine hundred for the number 1900, but nineteen hundred for the date - it is not logical!)

2000 was such a big turning point that I don´t think many people looked beyond it until 2001 came along. Well "twenty one" is just hopeless, it sounds like 21, and "twenty hundred ... " still seems stupid. Anyway, there was that by Arthur C. Clarke film, which had firmly established "two thousand and one", so that was that.

I see the Americans are throwing in their habit of dropping the "and", making this year "two thousand three", but for British English it has to be there. We also don´t drop it when writing a cheque (check :-). I hadn´t heard the Canadian "twenty-oh-three". This is consistent with the old system, where 1903 is sometimes said "nineteen three", but it feels a little uncertain, so it´s more usually "nineteen-oh-three".

Now I am fascinated to see what will happen in 2010 and 2011 - maybe it will revert to the old system with "twenty ten" like nineteen ten for 1910, or maybe the switch has been permanent and it will be two thousand (and) ten ...

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2003-01-16 10:43:47 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

And \"twenty hundred\" is somehow unthinkable - even though \"nineteen hundred\" is perfectly normal in dates!

 Chris Rowson (X)Local time: 15:11Native speaker of: EnglishPRO pts in pair: 243

agree  Nina Engberg: Good comments, Chris.
 1 hr

agree  Attila Piróth: Good points.
 2 hrs

agree  jerrie: Although on BBC Breakfast the other morning the female presenter did say Twenty 0 Three, or Twenty Three...can't remember which, but I remember thinking it sounded really wrong!
 3 hrs
-> I really have difficulty feeling that twenty-oh-three is a date - which is ridiculous, as I often refer to seventeen-oh-three and suchlike in the context of music history. But that´s how it is. :-)

agree  Paula Ibbotson: Great comments! and Canadians usually follow the British lead and keep the "and"... why not, the queen is still on our money ;)! Cheers!
 3 hrs

agree  Peter Coles: Spot on Chris, a worthwhile addition.
 4 hrs

agree  NancyLynn: and even oh-three, for short
 6 hrs
-> Ah yes, I forgot that angle. That would seem to apply unchanged regardless of the millennium. Another logical inconsistency.

agree  PAS: well, 97 years from now everything will probably go back to good ol' twentyonehundredsomething, but I don't know if any one of us will hang around long enough to check :-)
 8 hrs

agree  Andy Watkinson: "In the year twenty-five twenty-five, if Man is still alive", remember....?
 9 hrs
-> Yes, I was wondering about the verdict of sci-fi, but I am still trying to think of a book that has 2011, and 2101 - or of course 3101, etc.. What was the sequel to 2001?

agree  David Knowles: I agree thatthink the film 2001 definitely had something to do with it, and I wonder if/when we will revert
 1 day 13 hrs
-> Maybe in the year Two thousand and twenty-five (if Man is still alive)?

17 hrs   confidence:
Two thousand three

Explanation:
I'm going to go with LaCat on this one.

Certainly in informal speech (and where is Jane, the consistant Champion of the informal, on this one?) we will not hear "two thousand and fifteen", much less "two thousand and twenty five."

Though we *might* hear the Very Formal, Complete and Unmistakable :

"In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand and Fifteen", etc.

Two thousand *and* three is not wrong, just unnecessary and rarely heard, here in Southern Indiana.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2003-01-16 17:15:35 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Sorry, Chris is every bit a Champion of the Informal as Jane is --maybe more.

Clearly, I myself haven\'t lost my Amateur Standing in this arena.

 Christopher CrockettLocal time: 09:11Native speaker of: EnglishPRO pts in pair: 128

Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.

You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs (or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.

## KudoZ™ translation help

The KudoZ network provides a framework for translators and others to assist each other with translations or explanations of terms and short phrases.