Add a Comment

Comment by Veronica Kubat on June 2, 2009 at 5:43

Thanks, all. I feel better now.

V.

Quyen, leave the gouge with the (sic). It's technically accurate.

Comment by Brenda Rogers on June 1, 2009 at 21:33

Veronica, I always use numerals when referring to numbers on a scale, like the pain scale: 0-10, 0 being no pain, 10 being the worst pain imaginable. That type of thing.

The numbers on the scale itself, if you were to look at it, are numerals; they're not words. So I think it's not only clearer to use numerals or a style preference; I think it is correct to use numerals in that case because of the way they are represented on the chart.

Comment by Quyen on June 1, 2009 at 21:14

Oh, Veronica, I use numerals for ALL measurements just as a format/style preference: scale of 1 to 10, 8 miles, 2 centimeters, 9-inch nails.

But: five days a week, seven-page document, etc.

Comment by Quyen on June 1, 2009 at 21:09

I'm not sure if this is the right place to post this, but it didn't quite fit the Word Help group description.

Anyway, the attorney said "gouge," like "ow," but I know she meant "gauge," like "age." So what would you write: "gouge" or "gauge." If I write "gouge," it just makes her look illiterate. But she got the rough, and in the rough, I sic'd her "gouge." :/

Thanks!

Comment by Veronica Kubat on June 1, 2009 at 12:31

Okay, does this make sense or am I just wrong?

When one through ten refers to an actual number - i.e., a scale from 1 to 10, document number 10, age 8 -- as opposed to several totaling a number of them - i.e., ten toes, nine days, etc. -- do you use numbers for the first example when it's 1 through 10 or is it correct to ALWAYS use numbers written out from one to ten?

Comment by Jennie Ann on May 30, 2009 at 4:16

I used to write a monthly article for a pool magazine. In this one article, I made mention of the score of a pool match, a race to 9 which ended up being 9-zip, meaning one competitor never won a game.

I wrote the score as 9-0, not 9-zip. I did not realize until the magazine was published that the editor corrected the score to "9-oh."

I do use "oh" when the speaker says "0" meaning zero in my transcripts, and so I would have done it like Phil. However, I do enjoy reading how others handle things because it gives me food for thought. I'm always changing my style, it seems.

It was just within the last year or two that I quit putting a comma before "too" and "also" at the end of a sentence.

Comment by Brenda Rogers on May 29, 2009 at 7:53

LOL That spoils the fun of trying to recognize them, Marla! :P

Phil and I go round and round with this one (we have a couple pet disagreements - lol) so I kind of thought it might be rhetorical, but also figured it was a good opportunity to explain the rationale to others.

Comment by Marla Sharp on May 29, 2009 at 7:47

I vote for all tongue-in-cheek comments to be italicized, underlined, and bold from now on.

:)

Comment by Brenda Rogers on May 29, 2009 at 7:44

It's actually a good question, though. It does matter. I saw someone suggest 20'3 once, and that doesn't make sense if you break it down. I still think 2'03 is no less verbatim than '99.

The one that someone mentioned not long ago that really makes no sense and is hard to reflect in numerals OR words and clearly reflect what they mean is "2 3" (2-3, 2'3, two-three) for 2003. I want to say, "Use your big boy and big girl words, people!"

Comment by Phil Stillerman on May 29, 2009 at 7:39

Brenda
Those were really rhetorical, tongue-in-cheek questions. Although we disagree on how to transcribe such drivel, and I know and understand your argument for the way you do it, I just prefer to be more verbatim in this instance.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 44
• 45
• 46
• 47
• 48
• …
• 59
• Next ›
• Page