least likely to succeed? really?

[David Bowie]

From:    Grant Barrett <gbarrett at WORLDNEWYORK.ORG>
> On Jan 8, 2010, at 23:42, Laurence Horn wrote:

>> she clearly intended her use of "the two
>> thousands" to refer to the decade just ended.  So another expression
>> successfully used (not just mentioned or proposed) for that
>> unnameable decade.

> I've been telling people that's already the name of the decade for
> years, as long as one ignores the "what shall we call it?" uses.
> Listening to unselfconscious talk in the media and in public shows it
> and a search of Google can show it (many of these are good hits for
> it: <http://tinyurl.com/yez8klk>).

I suspect you're right, -except- that i also suspect that it will cease
to be the name of the decade just past* around, say, the moment we need
to call the 201x decade something different.

<snip>

* Note to the pedants: I know, i know. But remember, 1983-1992 was a
decade, too, so we can call xyz0-xyz9 a decade if we want to.

--
David Bowie                                  http://www.pmpkn.net/lx/
    Jeanne's Two Laws of Chocolate: If there is no chocolate in the
    house, there is too little; some must be purchased. If there is
    chocolate in the house, there is too much; it must be consumed.

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org