Y_B Posted November 25, 2010 Posted November 25, 2010 (edited) A funny thought popped in my head the other day so I asked a friend of mine and my parents back home. They all thought differently. What about you? Do you count 2010 as the end of the 2001-2010 decade or did you count the decade as 2000-2009 and 2010 as a new beginning? I count 1-10. Edited November 25, 2010 by Yang Bang
Tiger Posted November 25, 2010 Posted November 25, 2010 It's the beginning. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decade#Distinctions
DragonFire Posted November 25, 2010 Posted November 25, 2010 Beginning without a shadow of a doubt. You can't discount 2000 & considering a decade is only 10 years, 2009 would have been the end of the last one.
Y_B Posted November 25, 2010 Author Posted November 25, 2010 It's the beginning. http://en.wikipedia....de#Distinctions Wikipedia explained it as ambiguous depending on context and personal interpretation.
BroncoNation Posted November 25, 2010 Posted November 25, 2010 I vote for the beginning of the decade. 1
x Trevor x Posted November 25, 2010 Posted November 25, 2010 Well given that every decade began with a 0 and ended with a 9 (1990 - 1999) I would say that 2000 - 2009 is a decade and 2010 starts a new one. So we're in the next decade 2010 - 2019 Anyone already nostalgic for the last decade? I miss the early 2000s already! 1
Ara Posted November 25, 2010 Posted November 25, 2010 Wasnt the first year in the Current Calendar 1AD. In which case each decade runs from 1 to 0 so this decade would technically run from 2001 to 2010. However for the sake of nostalgia etc people group the 80s the 90s etc. I suppose it doesnt really matter but if somebody put a gun to my head and made me pick one I would have to say the end from a mathematical point of view 1
x Trevor x Posted November 25, 2010 Posted November 25, 2010 Wasnt the first year in the Current Calendar 1AD. In which case each decade runs from 1 to 0 so this decade would technically run from 2001 to 2010. However for the sake of nostalgia etc people group the 80s the 90s etc. I suppose it doesnt really matter but if somebody put a gun to my head and made me pick one I would have to say the end from a mathematical point of view Interesting point. I always wondered what the very first year was. I think technically that would be correct. I guess it all depends on perspective. I tend to like to keep with the trend of grouping them like the 80's and the 90's. 1
Caedus Posted November 26, 2010 Posted November 26, 2010 I always thought that it made more sense mathematically to go with 2010 as the end of the decade. But I have no problem going with the standard, its just funny thinking about how inconsistent these type of things can be at times with other standards. 1
Y_B Posted November 26, 2010 Author Posted November 26, 2010 meh ! im not sure it really matters :S Of course it doesn't. But it's interesting to see who thinks what, which I guess you don't. Anyone already nostalgic for the last decade? I miss the early 2000s already! Haha, I think I have more nostalgia for the '90s than '00s. No comparison.
x Trevor x Posted November 26, 2010 Posted November 26, 2010 Of course it doesn't. But it's interesting to see who thinks what, which I guess you don't. Haha, I think I have more nostalgia for the '90s than '00s. No comparison. I have alot more nostalgia for the 90's for the purpose of childhood but the early 2000's were my younger teen years so I kinda miss them aswell. 2002 - 2004 was awesome but after that the world kinda started going down hill. I agree though, the 90's were better than the '00s in my opinion.
Krista Posted November 26, 2010 Posted November 26, 2010 Kind of like the cup is half empty, half full type of deal? I think it's the end since 2000 was the beginning - 2010 would have to be the end... with 2011 being the beginning of the new decade.
Menorain Posted November 26, 2010 Posted November 26, 2010 2000 was the start of the last decade. As all decades go, the tenth year, which was 2009, is the end of the decade. 2010 is the beginning of a new decade and it will end in 2019.
Y_B Posted November 26, 2010 Author Posted November 26, 2010 Kind of like the cup is half empty, half full type of deal? I think it's the end since 2000 was the beginning - 2010 would have to be the end... with 2011 being the beginning of the new decade. If 2000 is the beginning, then 2009 would be the end. Including 2010 in there would make it 11 years.
Menorain Posted November 29, 2010 Posted November 29, 2010 A decade doesn't last eleven years, guys. GOD.
scotchirish87 Posted December 5, 2010 Posted December 5, 2010 A decade doesn't last eleven years, guys. GOD. A baker's decade does. And at least for the time being I tend to consider 2000 to be the beginning and 2010 to be the conclusion of this "decade" although I'm sure as we get further into the '10s my view will correct itself.
thephoenix Posted December 6, 2010 Posted December 6, 2010 Wikipedia article quote: The absence of a year 0 leads to some confusion concerning the boundaries of longer decimal intervals, such as decades and centuries. For example, each decade begins with a year ending in 1, not 0. The third millennium of the Gregorian calendar began on 1 January 2001, rather than the widely celebrated 1 January 2000. Likewise, the 20th century began on 1 January 1901. This rule results from the fact that the Gregorian calendar begins with a year 1 instead of 0. Cardinal and ordinal numbering of years is therefore identical: The year 10 is the tenth year of the calendar and the end of the first decade. The year 11 is the first year of the second decade, and so on. In spite of this rule, years ending in 0, rather than 1, are commonly perceived as marking the beginning of a new decade, century, or millennium. If the Gregorian calendar had begun with a year 0 as its first year, then the year 10 would have been the 11th year of the calendar and the first year of the second decade. Similarly, the year 2000 would have been the 2,001st year of the calendar, therefore the actual first year of the 21st century and the third millennium. Despite that, I still celebrated January 1st 2000 as the beginning of a new millennium, and January 1st 2010 as the beginning of a new decade. I suppose it looks tidier that way as "2000" is a nice round number to start fresh.
glomph Posted December 6, 2010 Posted December 6, 2010 (edited) The differences of convention for centuries and decades is like the difference between cardinal and ordinal numbers. Centuries are named with ordinal numbers: the sixteenth century, the twentieth century, e. g. If we used ordinal numbers for decades, we'd talk about the 198th decade (1971-1980, I guess), but we don't. We talk about the '80s (1980-1989). 2000 and 2009 are in different centuries, different millennia, but the same decade, the '80s. I sometimes see the confusion about ordinal number in stories. "My Fifteenth Year" is when I'm 14 years old, because my first year comes before my first birthday when I become one year old, and start my second year. (Maybe horses and Chinese people count that differently.) {corrected a typo} Edited December 6, 2010 by glomph
bigbear427 Posted February 7, 2011 Posted February 7, 2011 (edited) Wasnt the first year in the Current Calendar 1AD. In which case each decade runs from 1 to 0 so this decade would technically run from 2001 to 2010. However for the sake of nostalgia etc people group the 80s the 90s etc. I suppose it doesnt really matter but if somebody put a gun to my head and made me pick one I would have to say the end from a mathematical point of view Here's another way of looking at the subject... There are actually two different units of measurements here. In my job, I've had to write programs that dealt with calendars and date calculations, so I was forced to research this craziness. The statement that 1 AD was the first year is correct, and so it was the first year of the first CENTURY and also the first year of the first DECADE, thus the year 11 AD was the first year of the second DECADE, etc. But the 'teens, 20's, 30's, etc., measure the number ranges of years, and as such are out of sync with the measurement of centuries and decades. Example: "The 20's" refers to the LAST year of the SECOND decade in any century (say, 1920), and also 9 of the 10 years of the THIRD decade in any century (in this example, 1921 - 1929). It's no wonder people were confused about the beginning/end of the MILLENNIUM! Crazy, huh? Remember to take notes, there will be a short quiz at the end of the period... Edited February 7, 2011 by bigbear427
FrenchCanadian Posted February 7, 2011 Posted February 7, 2011 The scholar side of me know and agree that, looking at calendar perspective, 2010 was the end of the decade... Just like the 21st century started in 2001 not in 2000. In a popular culture way (as in the '80s, the '90s,, 2010 would be the end...
Johnathan Colourfield Posted February 12, 2011 Posted February 12, 2011 its both really Beginning : a new chance to live out another decade. redo the mistakes you made etc. Ending : A chance to leave the past behind and move on. It can get incredibly philisophical if we wanted to let it
Freddyness Posted February 15, 2011 Posted February 15, 2011 The beginning Because I work through history like that XD 1
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now