Hi all,
Has anyone had to deal with someone shortening the year? Is this common? I was in a depo the other day and the witness kept referring to the years as Aug 208 or Jan 209 versus 2008 or 2009. They were talking a lot about contract dates and things. The attorney would say the full actual date, but when the witness would respond he shortened the year, so it looks like I missed a "0" in some of my years. My proofreader said it's not common and I should 'sic' it. Has anyone else ran into this? No one in the depo seemed to think it was odd, so I thought maybe it was common.

Views: 95

Replies to This Discussion

It's become quite common. 2'09. Apostrophe to show the absence of a digit, just like '99 for 1999.
It's becoming more common, I think. It's very strange, isn't it? I mean, we all know when people say '09 that they mean this century. Why go with the awkward 2'09? Who knows? My vote is to use the apostrophe to show the omission of the first zero. Others may do it differently.
Oh, I get it. I don't like the way it looks, but I get it.

Thanks, ladies!!
Your proofreader must not frequent Internet forums. It has come up a lot in discussions in many forums in the last couple of years (including here on CSRNation, if I'm not mistaken). Some reporters write it 2'09 or 20'9, others write is out as if the unspoken 0 was actually spoken (2009), and some actually write it in words (two-oh-nine). I haven't heard of anyone "sic"ing it, but I suppose that would be another way to do it. Only you can decide which way you want to handle it, but it would probably be a good idea to make a decision. I'm sure it'll come up again sooner or later.
I would argue against 20'9 because that could indicate any number in the 10s position. We know for sure we're not in the 2100s. :)
And I take that back. My proofreader suggested that I put the missing "0" in, but I was unsure about it because he specifically left it out. I just felt funny putting it in when everyone in the room heard him leave it out.

Thanks for responding so quickly everyone!
I am in the "replacing the missing 0" camp, but it looked like you were uncomfortable with that solution. People may have heard the witness say it, but remember it? Even take note of it? Unlikely. It's very common. And it certainly isn't misunderstood for anything else.

So if you need the justification by way of someone else doing it that way *waving hand*.
I'm in Brenda's camp too. As a scopist, it's not my decision to make; but if the reporter asks my opinion, I would suggest just writing it out. There comes a point where trying to be verbatim becomes more onerous than just using common sense, and I think this is one of them.
Okay. That feels better. I guess I'm still stuck in the school mind-set.

You know, if the speakers said that and I added the "0" that was left out in my transcript, it would count as an error in a qualifier ;D. I guess I'm finally beyond those days and in the working world now.
I hear this fairly often and use the apostrophe -- 2'09.


© 2022   Created by Kelli Combs (admin).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service