phrases, sayings, idioms and expressions at

Phrases, Sayings and Idioms Home > Discussion Forum

Are you Voldemortette?

Posted by Word Camel on November 23, 2002

In Reply to: Re: I'm a ninny, that's who I am! posted by she who shall be nameless on November 23, 2002

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : Please I would like to know the meaning and origin of this expression:
: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : "A hundred and five"

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : Thanks, anyway

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : Depending on context, it could mean 105 or 100.05. If the meterologist says it's a hundred and five in the shade, he or she means it's 105 F. However, if you are told to make out a check for a hundred and five, better write it out as "one-hundred-and-05/100 dollars."

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : How about "one hundred five and 0/100 dollars".
: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : No??

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : I think you answered your own question. If one hundred and five dollars properly meant $105.00, wouldn't you have written that as "one hundred AND five and 00/100?" When talking about money, the 'and' indicates the decimal.

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : We can talk about "One Hundred and One Dalmations" without confusion because the idea of .01 of a dalmation is absurd.

: : : : : : : : : : : : : Why does the "and" indicate the decimal when the units are dollars but not when they're degrees Fahrenheit? I understand "a hundred and five dollars" to mean 105 dollars, not 100 dollars and 5 cents. After all, we don't say "four and twenty-five" for $4.25.

: : : : : : : : : : : : Thank you for pointing that out. I was trying to indicate informality with the weather example. A radio DJ might slip that phrase in his commuter report, but I doubt a reputable meteorologist would use "in the shade" without indicating centigrade or Fahrenheit. It was a poor choice.

: : : : : : : : : : : : As for $4.25, if you were writing a check you certainly would write "four and 25/100".

: : : : : : : : : : : : I had a summer job in a bank back in college, but that hardly makes me an expert, so I went looking for one.

: : : : : : : : : : : : To summarize: Dr. Ian in the "Ask Dr. Math" column of the Drexel University Math Forum was taught "and" should only indicate a decimal. He goes on to cite the Gregg Reference Manual allows "and" but says it may be omitted. Strunk and White retains and in "one hundred and one" but implies it's otherwise omitted.

: : : : : : : : : : : : A Dr. Peterson weighs in that proper British usage allows use of the 'and", but proper American usage does not. He or she provides a link to yet another discussion.

: : : : : : : : : : : : -Woodchuck, the Ugly American

: : : : : : : : : : : I'm not sure about Dr. Ian's construal of Strunk and White. On the page you cited, Dr. Ian says: "_The Elements of Style_ (Strunk and White) says that the 'and' should be retained in the phrase 'one hundred and one', which suggests that it should not normally be included." I can't find that passage in my Strunk & White (1972 ed.). If I could, its context might confirm whether S&W were giving the form for writing out 101 as an exception to the general rule or as an example of how to deal with all such numbers. Strunk was famously terse. He may have meant "Retain the 'and' in 'one hundred and one' in contrast to other numbers over 100" (Ian's interpretation). He may have meant "Retain the 'and' in 'one hundred and one' and likewise in 'four hundred and seven' and so on" (an interpretation that I find more reasonable; I don't see why 101 should be an exception to a general rule, and if it is, I don't see why 201 isn't an exception of the same kind).

: : : : : : : : : : : At any rate, we don't have to do what Strunk & White said, even if we can figure out what it is. It's clear from the discussion on the math page that authorities differ on the "and" question.

: : : : : : : : : : I honestly don't know why you US lot confuse yourselves so thoroughly> In the UK it's easy - we differentiate between the integer of our currency (the pound) and its fractions (the pennies or pence). So, on that basis, nobody over here would say "Write me a cheque for one hundred and five." They'd either say "Write me a cheque for one hundred and five pounds" or "Write me a cheque for one hundred pounds and five pence", dependant upon the amount owing. Why you gius don't do the same, given that you have dollars and cents as your "integers" and "fractions" beats the heck out of me - though perhaps I shouldn't expect too much currency common sense from a nation that insists on printing *all* its bills the same size and colour, regardless of denominational value :)

: : : : : : : : : : On another topic, am I to understand that if you were asked the following question in a math(s) class:-

: : : : : : : : : : "Add one hundred and five and two hundred and nine."

: : : : : : : : : : ...some of you would honestly come up with 301.4, rather than 314? Or maybe even 305.9 or 319.5, dependant upon your understanding of the various "ands"? We in the UK don't use "and" in speech to represent a decimal point - we use the word "point". It just seems to be a tad less confused.

: : : : : : : : : : Oops. Make that 4th potential answer 309.5, instead of 319.5 - see? I've even confused myself.

: : : : : : : : : "A hundred and five" doesn't mean $100.05 (the sum of one hundred dollars and five cents) to this American. It means $105.00 (the sum of one hundred dollars and five dollars).
: : : : : : : : : I agree that the currency should be different colo(u)rs. For easier identification by people with low vision, our new $20 bills have a large, bold sans-serif "20" in one corner of the back.

: : : : : : : : Yes, different hues would be nice. Just this morning I tried to feed a $10 bill into a vending machine. No one should be expected to do more than point and grunt pre-coffee.

: : : : : : : : In response to TheFallen's question: I would add 100+5+200+9 and Ms. Berg would possibly add 105+209. We'd get the same sum. No harm, no foul. What if TheFallen had asked, "Please make groups of one hundred and five and two hundred and nine?" There's the rub: four groups or two?

: : : : : : : : So, I will continue to consider "a hundred and five" sloppy language. The whole number is one hundred five. "And" is used to tack on a fraction: one hundred and five hundredths.

: : : : : : : With respect, Woodchuck, your last post is self-contradictory. You state (and I quote ;):-

: : : : : : : "The whole number is one hundred five. "And" is used to tack on a fraction: one hundred and five hundredths."

: : : : : : : So, when I pose the sum "Add one hundred and five and two hundred and nine", to use your preferred
: : : : : : : interpretation, it seems that you'd therefore happily treat this sum as possibly meaning 100.05 + 200.09? How even do you know the fractions concerned are hundredths, and not sevenths or twelfths? What if I had asked "what does one hundred and three added to two hundred and six equal?" Would this HONESTLY mean 100.03 + 200.06 in your eyes???

: : : : : : No, the fraction has to be express, not simply understood. I think something I wrote about writing checks at the beginning of the thread is coloring/colouring your understanding of my later statements.

: : : : : : In Britain, you write out a check for "Two Hundred & Six Pounds & 66p only", correct? In America, the blank line is immediately followed by the pre-printed word 'Dollars'. Americans must write checks expressing the cents as a fraction of a dollar: "One Hundred Six and 99/100 (Dollars)."

: : : : : : If you re-read my last post with this in mind, you'll understand it was intended as an example of usage, and not a statement that all numbers after and are understood to be fractions of a hundred!

: : : : : : I was trying to impress upon you the idea of a mathematical set. One Hundred and 06/100 = 1 set of 100.06 One Hundred Six = 1 set of 106. One Hundred and Six = 1 set of 100 and 1 set of 6.

: : : : : : If these are subsets of one larger set and you only care about the larger set (your addition example), both understandings will arrive at the same result. The confusion arises when you try to break the set back down into its subsets as in my sorting example.

: : : : : The post immediately above would make more sense had it been written by Woodchuck. But it's signed TheFallen. Author! Author!

: : : : Oh Good Lord... it's me. I had "TheFallen" in the cut/paste buffer because I caught myself writing TheJudge and pasted over. I must've managed to accidentally paste it in the name field when the mouse fell off my desk.

: : : : My apologies to TheFallen. I hope he won't Judge me too harshly for klutzy keyboarding.

: : : I have to disagree with Ms. Berg. That post up above that I didn't write doesn't make any sense to me anyway, regardless of who wrote it ;)

: : Let's blame Beppo.

: No, Beppo is innocent. I'm the addlepated twit.

: TheRealFallen had better re-read my prior post until he understands it. My God, you don't want me to try explaining AGAIN, do you? *shudder*

I'm going to re read it all in the morning when it doesn't hurt my head anymore