How to read out dates?

[nq:1]I have a question: how to read the following dates? And in general how to read dates with 0 inside?[/nq]
I assume that by "dates" you mean that the following things are supposed to be years. My answers are valid for Postwar Prestige American English but may not be applicable to Other Englishes.
[nq:1]1500[/nq]
"Fifteen hundred"
[nq:1]1501[/nq]
"Fifteen oh one"
[nq:1]1

[nq:2]I have a question: how to read the following dates? And in generalhow to read dates with 0 inside?[/nq]
...
[nq:2]1001[/nq]
[nq:1]"One thousand one"[/nq]
Normal UK usage is to insert "and" just before any tens/unit combo. So this would be "one thousand and one".
Istm that for years up to 1100, read it as a number of 4 (or less) digits. For years 1100-2000, read it as two

[nq:1]how to ...[/nq]
[nq:2]"One thousand one"[/nq]
[nq:1]Normal UK usage is to insert "and" just before any tens/unit combo. So this would be "one thousand and one".[/nq]
1066 is "ten sixty-six" and 1001 is "ten oh one" or "a thousand (and) one"or "one thousand (and) one". Which is most common? You'll need to poll medieval historians.
Adrian

While it was 28/10/03 11:29 am throughout the UK, Fabian sprinkled little black dots on a white screen, and they fell thus:
[nq:1]Istm that for years up to 1100, read it as a number of 4 (or less) digits.[/nq]
I'm yet to hear "ten sixty six" pronounced differently.
[nq:1]For years 1100-2000, read it as two separate 2-digit numbers (and insert an "oh" in between if the second pair would

Adrian Bailey filted:
[nq:2]Normal UK usage is to insert "and" just before any tens/unit combo. So this would be "one thousand and one".[/nq]
[nq:1]1066 is "ten sixty-six" and 1001 is "ten oh one" or "a thousand (and) one" or "one thousand (and) one". Which is most common? You'll need to poll medieval historians.[/nq]
Consistency would then demand that 1000 be "ten hundred", but this i

[nq:1]ATMS that's Arthur C. Clarke's fault.[/nq]
Inversely, if Orwell had titled his novel *Nineteen Hundred and Eight-four*, would we have used that form more often during what was left of the last century?

Ross Howard

[nq:1]Inversely, if Orwell had titled his novel *Nineteen Hundred and Eight-four*[/nq]
. . . he should have fired his proofreader.

Ross Howard

[nq:2]For years 1100-2000, read it as two separate 2-digit numbers ... 2000+ is to read it as a single 4-digit number.[/nq]
[nq:1]ATMS that's Arthur C. Clarke's fault.[/nq]
My apologies if this one's common knowledge, but... do we actually know how Arthur C Clarke pronounced "2001"?

Mike Barnes
Cheshire, England

[nq:2]ATMS that's Arthur C. Clarke's fault.[/nq]
[nq:1]My apologies if this one's common knowledge, but... do we actually know how Arthur C Clarke pronounced "2001"?[/nq]
"My re-TIRE-ment", I think.

Ross Howard

[nq:2]ATMS that's Arthur C. Clarke's fault.[/nq]
[nq:1]My apologies if this one's common knowledge, but... do we actually know how Arthur C Clarke pronounced "2001"?[/nq]It was Kubrick, not Clarke. The working title for the movie was "How the Solar System Was Won", although, according to Clarke, that was never intended as the final title. The title in the first press release was "Journe