AD versus Common Era
- Thread starter Ultramann
- Start date
- Status
I dunno, I am pretty sure that was Lincoln we saw in that old episode...
Who was offended, Rush? It's an honest question; I don't recall seeing anyone in this thread offended by the use of BC/AD.
Even at my most militant, I wasn't offended by BC/AD. I personally don't use the term -- and when copy crosses my desk that uses BC/AD I change it to BCE/CE -- but I'm no more offended by AD than I am by Wednesday or March.
Hey, some old fogies still don’t know how to use the internet at all, so no apologies necessary.
Multi-quoting is easy. Just click the “Multi-Quote” box for each post you want to reply to (the word “Multi-Quote” should turn yellow), then click on “Quote” for the last one. Or, if it’s too hard to remember what you wanted to say, just copy and paste each post into your word processor and respond to them one at a time. Then paste the whole thing into the Reply box.
They still make sense if we start the year in March, like the Romans did.. . .If you want to rename the calendar to remove any religious connotations, why not go whole hog? Bonus: you can make the names of the last four months make sense.
What's the difference between Wednesday/March and BC/AD though? (Unless it's just a matter of most commonly used)
They still make sense if we start the year in March, like the Romans did.. . .If you want to rename the calendar to remove any religious connotations, why not go whole hog? Bonus: you can make the names of the last four months make sense.
Oh? I was pretty sure the Celts began their year at spring, but didn't think the Romans did. Why then "Janus" if it's not the turning of the year? I just figured when Augustus (was it him?) plopped in July and August he didn't bother changing September-December.
Kudos to you, then, sir.
But seriously...to the question of "who was offended", I refer you to the claims that the use of BC/AD as a societal norm is "imposing" beliefs on others.
I basically have an equal-and-opposite mindset to your own. When I see BCE/CE, I internally roll my eyes in wry amusement--and continue to use BC/AD. I'm not offended by this "secularized" labeling...I'm just amused at the movement to replace the traditional labels.
Frankly, if more had your attitude and mine, we could have more discussion on serious matters, and less on what to label the stinking years!
All of these terms reference mythologies which, as a non-theist, I hold no belief in.
Wednesday references Germanic mythology -- Woden's Day.
March references Roman mythology -- named after Mars, the Roman god of war.
BC ("Before Christ") and AD ("Anno Domini," "in the year of the lord") reference Christian mythology -- Christ is the human aspect of the Christian god.
I'm not putting it this way to be offensive to anyone. I was just trying to explain why I would equate AD to Wednesday and why neither bothers me, even though I hold no belief in the etymological origins of either.
Right, so as I understand you're saying they're all the same thing, references to things you don't believe in. I agree with you, I equate AD to Wednesday also (though I believe in one but not the other). I'm just wondering that if that's the case why change AD but not change Wednesday?
Unless it's just a matter of CE being the more common expression where you are and clearing up confusion, which would be more like changing Fourth Day to Wednesday in my mind.
What's the difference between Wednesday/March and BC/AD though? (Unless it's just a matter of most commonly used)
They still make sense if we start the year in March, like the Romans did.. . .If you want to rename the calendar to remove any religious connotations, why not go whole hog? Bonus: you can make the names of the last four months make sense.
Oh? I was pretty sure the Celts began their year at spring, but didn't think the Romans did. Why then "Janus" if it's not the turning of the year? I just figured when Augustus (was it him?) plopped in July and August he didn't bother changing September-December.
they didn't have January or February in their calender originally. they vieweed winter as a 'month-less' period. january and february were added later and then augustus added july and august.
True nuff, I was just using the first example that came to my mind from upthread, where Sunday is First Day.
So... that means that September - December still don't make sense then, because it makes them months 5-8 instead of 7-10.
Why expect language change to be consistent? Language evolves in unpredictable ways. There's no sense in trying to impose regular rules on it, and no sense dwelling on etymological history. As I've said, what matters is how effective a term is at communicating its intended ideas today and tomorrow. Regardless of the reasons, CE/BCE has increasingly become the preferred terminology. There's no point in arguing whether that's right or wrong, whether the reasons for it are valid or not. Lots of linguistic change happens for nonsensical reasons or because errors come to be accepted as standard usage. So the whys and wherefores are beside the point. What matters is what people actually use.
don't ask me, i'm just telling what it said on wikipedia. go read their articles and see what tehy say.
Ok, that just struck me as funny for some reason, almost spewed my coffee. I am sure there is unknown context somewhere that I missed."Ain't" that the truth....
Oh. I write marketing copy for a merchandise distributor. I've just finished writing June's catalog. Next week I'll start writing July's.
Sometimes I'm given someone else's copy to use, in which case I edit (and sometimes rewrite) the copy to fit the in-house style. One of the changes I make is BCE/CE, on those rare instances when I have to.
Then I stand corrected. I’ll sacrifice a goat to Janus so he won’t be displeased.They still make sense if we start the year in March, like the Romans did.. . .If you want to rename the calendar to remove any religious connotations, why not go whole hog? Bonus: you can make the names of the last four months make sense.
Oh? I was pretty sure the Celts began their year at spring, but didn't think the Romans did. Why then “Janus” if it's not the turning of the year? I just figured when Augustus (was it him?) plopped in July and August he didn't bother changing September-December.
While Ianuarius and Februarius were added at in place of the month-less days, Julius and Augustus were substituted in place of the already existing Quintilis and Sextilis.
-- (Ianuarius)
-- (Februarius)
1. Martius
2. Aprilis
3. Maius
4. Junius
5. Quintilis (July)
6. Sextilis (August)
7. September
8. October
9. November
10. December
The goat should be bi-curious.
Maybe I'm an angry Christian that feels like my religion's being "erased."
Maybe I'm genuinely curious and interested about what causes one change and not another.
Maybe I'm just a Star Trek fan that likes to make everything tie together.
There's always an explanation, even if it's an irregular or illogical one. I'm not demanding people switch back even if I think it's silly, I want to know why this change and not another. It seems silly to say "it's because I don't believe in x and so won't use its reference" when you almost certainly don't believe in "y" but still use "y."
Ahh, that makes sense! Something tells me I probably learned that in Latin years ago, but thanks for explaining it!
- Status