I am wondering which prep is more idiomatic to follow dated: to or at?
I have read such sentences as: The skull is dated at about 36,000 years old. But I also find such sentences as: we can date the skeleton to approximately 2500BC.
So, to and at are interchangable in those cases? In addition, can I use "to be" in a sentence, for example, the skull is dated to be about 36,000 years old?
Thanks in advance.
Top answer
Not interchangeable, as you can see by your samples: dated at + number of years; dated to + date. I don't like the 'to be' form at all.
— Mister Micawber
Not interchangeable, as you can see by your samples: dated at + number of years; dated to + date.
I don't like the 'to be' form at all.
Free · every Monday
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.