Any thoughts on what the rule should be here? My sense is that numbers written using digits are much easier to quickly absorb, so I tend to write them that way whenever they refer to something that people might want to use in calculations or comparisons. I’d say, for instance, that “These books tend to sell for 20% below their list price of $8 to $10,” rather than “These books tend to sell for twenty percent below their list price of eight to ten dollars.” But when counting people or things in contexts where the count likely doesn’t need to be grasped as a number suitable for calculation or comparison, I spell out the number, for instance in “There are eight reasons why this law is a bad idea.” And I of course also spell out numbers when there’s no conventional numerical equivalent, for instance in phrases such as “millions of people.” The line is not always clear, and there are probably situations where I’d be on the fence about this; but that doesn’t trouble me much, just as it doesn’t trouble me that I’d sometimes use one synonym and others time another, based just on rules of thumb about what tends to sound better to me.
But I’ve found that many journal editors suggest that many of these numbers be spelled out, for instance in the “twenty percent below their list price to eight to ten dollars” context. My sense is that some common rules are to spell out numbers that are under 100, or spell out numbers that are unhyphenated single words, or some such, though I can’t vouch for what the most popular standard is at various journals.
I wonder what people think about this: Is there some clear merit in spelling out all small numbers, including percentages and prices and other things that one might want to calculate or compute with? Is it especially necessary to have a sharp rule that distinguishes numbers by their size rather than by their likely use (and, if so, shouldn’t the sharp rule at least sharply exclude things like prices and percentages)? I’d love to hear what people think.
By the way, I should note that none of this strikes me as a matter of “grammar” or “correctness” under any linguistic standard; the question is what looks better, and therefore what authors should do, and what publications should prefer.
Order of the Coif says:
Actually, I like your rules of thumb. L. J. editors are all over the place on this applying one arbitrary rule after another.
Quote
November 22, 2009, 5:01 pmMike McDougal says:
If we’re excluding tradition, there is absolutely no merit in spelling out small numbers. Arabic numerals are easier to read, easier to find, easier to remember, and easier to think about. Virtually everything about them is better. Numbers written out in Roman text tend to be inferior when measured against standards of good writing (e.g., clarity, memorability).
Quote
November 22, 2009, 5:08 pmTexEd says:
Haven’t you overlooked something? You are suggesting numbers or text for numbers but haven’t mentioned the symbols that go with them; here, % and $s.
Another alternative, the one I’ve always preferred because it leaves no room for misunderstanding, is to use both. Write out “twenty eight dollars ($28.00)” or “sixty two percent (62%).”
Quote
November 22, 2009, 5:08 pmRandom_Physicist says:
I know back in grade school we were taught the “write it out if it’s under 100″ rule. Personally I think I choose numerals over the words depending on the units. Saying 20% seems to look better than twenty percent, but I’d rather say thirty dogs than 30 dogs.
I think that’s why you said you’d normally say “$8 to $10″ or eight to ten dollars, but I’m guessing if you were talking about textbooks instead of money you’d say “This class requires eight to ten textbooks”.
Quote
November 22, 2009, 5:10 pmMike McDougal says:
Tell me about instances in which a person independently reads “twenty eight dollars” and “$28.00″ and thinks the mean different things. In other words, what is the misunderstanding you think you’re eliminating?
Quote
November 22, 2009, 5:10 pmMike McDougal says:
Why do you think that is? The best distinction I can come up with is already suggested in Eugene’s post. It’s a narrative/rhetorical vs. computational distinction. The former is more oral, the later more visual.
Quote
November 22, 2009, 5:13 pmJohn A says:
Matter of preference and context, I think.
Analogy — When I was in computer application programming some programs used Julian dates ([yy]yyddd) for ease of calculation, which was fine in that context — but some lazy programmers used that format instead of mmddyyyy for printed reports to the end users (think burger-franchise second-tier manager with a GED who has probably never heard of Julian dating) and scoffed when I said that was not a good idea. Quick: what month-day was 08217?
Quote
November 22, 2009, 5:15 pmRob A says:
The rule I’ve followed since elementary school was write out numbers under 20. I remember I had heard that somewhere and I’ve continued to follow that advice up to this point
Quote
November 22, 2009, 5:38 pmJohnF says:
The Chicago Manual of Style says [section 9.3]: “In nontechnical contexts, the following are spelled out: whole numbers from one through one hundred, round numbers, and any number beginning a sentence. For other numbers, numerals are used.”
Quote
November 22, 2009, 5:49 pmMalvolio says:
The wisdom I received was write out numbers under 10, and the variations on that rule that I’m hearing here give as good a reason as any for following Dr. Volokh’s rule. I would say, write a number in digits if you mean that number and not just “a lot” or “a little” or “around that number”. So, “There are 191,241,714 Brazilians” but “There are millions of Brazilians.”* “There are ten guys in the bar” but “There are 10 men in a minyan.” Of course, that still leaves judgment calls like “eight to 10 textbooks” and “There are two hundred million Brazilians.”
[* Since it is Sunday, I can ask: does anyone know the song that revolves around the lyric, “There are millions of Brazilians”? Google can’t seem to find it for me, and it’s driving me mad.]
Quote
November 22, 2009, 5:58 pmGlenn Bowen says:
You discorrected us, man.
Quote
November 22, 2009, 5:59 pmgeorge weiss says:
since the bluebook has a rule (with exceptions) for this if one is writing lots of academic things (which use bluebbok format) he should just use that rule and get used to it.
Quote
November 22, 2009, 6:02 pmDavid Welker says:
I think you should use numbers, unless it is distracting. In general, I think the advice to spell out every number under 100 or anything like that is lame advice.
The thing about using numbers is that they are both easier to read, but they also tend to stand out.
There are 4 reasons why we the Court should rule....
Here, the number 4 stands out, but in this case, you probably don’t want the number 4 to stand out, because it is the arguments themselves that you want to stand out, and all of your four arguments are probably not equal.
I don’t think there should be any rule here. I think you should make intelligent decisions, keeping in mind that (1) numbers are easier to read and instantly comprehend and (2) for that reason, they tend to stand out. If you don’t want to emphasize the number, then you probably should spell it out.
Quote
November 22, 2009, 6:07 pmMike McDougal says:
Why does it say that and why should we follow it?
Quote
November 22, 2009, 6:25 pmRichard Riley says:
No idea of the source, but the rule I read somewhere and usually follow in legal writing is to spell out numbers under 10 and use numerals for 10 and over. (Somebody above mentioned that rule too.) ALSO, spell out numbers at the beginning of a sentence.
Quote
November 22, 2009, 6:36 pmChrisIowa says:
Lacking an upper case 2, I spell out numbers beginning a sentence unless I can craft a reasonable substitute sentence beginning with a letter. I also write out a number as a word when there are two different numbers that I cannot separate in a sentence, usually the easier to write as words will be in words, the other in digits. If its a critical number in a contract, such as the contract sum, I spell it out followed by (the digital amount).
It’s only the last that I was taught. The rest I adopted because they seemed right.
Quote
November 22, 2009, 7:18 pmpjohnson says:
I’m probably older than most here, but I was taught to spell out numbers less than 10 (rather than 20 or 100), and numbers beginning a sentence, and to use numerals for numbers equal to or greater than 10; but to consider the context and to be consistent within a sentence. In other words, “Eight out of 10 prefer Oreos to Hydrox,” or “In a recent survey, 8 out of 10 preferred Oreos to Hydrox” would be correct; “In a recent survey, eight out 100 preferred Hydrox to Oreos” would not be. I’m not persuaded that it matters; the idea is to communicate, and there are so many variations that a fast rule would be absurd. But Oreos are far superior to Hydrox, 1 out of one of this commenter agrees.
Quote
November 22, 2009, 7:29 pmGordo says:
What’s the rule in Russian?
Quote
November 22, 2009, 7:31 pmKharn says:
FedGov contracts spell out all numbers and include the digits in parenthesis, if a discrepency exists the words are binding instead of the digits.
“Five hundred eighty four thousand one hundred and seventeen dollars ($584,117)”
I write significantly more contracts than I do journal articles, so that’s what I default to.
Quote
November 22, 2009, 7:34 pmSteven Den Beste says:
One I ran into happened when one of my blog posts got picked by James Taranto to go into WSJOnline. He changed “1st Infantry Division” into “First Infantry Division”. I didn’t spot it when I proofread his editing (I was pretty blown away by the whole business, frankly) and I regret it. In this context, “1st” is correct.
Quote
November 22, 2009, 7:35 pmSuperSkeptic says:
I can’t back this up, but I believe 10 out of 10 people prefer Oreos to Hydrox. I cannot think of one person in my entire life who would prefer Hydrox.
I hate the 100 rule.
My instincts are similar to the professor’s and David Welker’s instincts with regards to numbers.
[* of course, common sense flexibility will never fly with the LJ people]
Quote
November 22, 2009, 7:39 pmLeo Marvin says:
I agree with EV’s sense of this. The only thing I’m rigid about is not starting a sentence with a numeral.
Quote
November 22, 2009, 8:00 pmkdackson says:
With the contract thing, it used to be far too easy to change a digit using a typewriter, but much more difficult to change the word. I guess that convention still rules.
On checks I write, I put the digits in the box nex to the “Pay to the order of” line and spell out the dollars and use “& xx/100″ for the cents. Again tougher to forge.
But in prose, I use what looks least confusing.
Quote
November 22, 2009, 8:07 pmDan says:
I edited encyclopedias for several years in the ‘90s. We followed Chicago Manual of Style as a guide but modified it for the our products, which were heavy with stats and numbers sprinkled throughout the text. Our method was to spell out single numbers one through nine, 10 and up as digits. Don’t begin a sentence with digits. Use the % symbol and any currency symbol like $. Following that style condenses the space and increases ease of use. Looking at a page, it’s easy to spot the digits from the letters at a glance–not so easy when numbers are spelled out.
Quote
November 22, 2009, 8:07 pmpublic_defender says:
I hadn’t thought about it it this way before, but as a lawyer writing a brief, the answer is probably whether I want to emphasize or de-emphasize the number. If I want the reader to get the full impact of the number, use Arabic numerals. If I want the reader to pass over the number, write it out.
Quote
November 22, 2009, 8:09 pmD.R.M. says:
The most common style guides in the U.S. are the Chicago Manual of Style (for non-journalism) and Associated Press Stylebook (for journalism). Assuming you have not been given a specific style to use by a publisher, conformance with one or the other will meet the (unconscious) expectations of most readers in the United States.
One can, of course, argue that the rules in these guides are arbitrary and often sub-optimal. However, in matters of style, as well as grammar and spelling, it is usually most effective to conform to the standard which your audience will, through repeated exposure, expect.
Chicago’s approach was mentioned above. AP has fairly extensive guidance, but in general swaps to numeric representation with numbers 10 or greater (historically because it saved space compared to writing numbers out.)
Quote
November 22, 2009, 8:10 pmloki13 says:
EV–
Not sure I understand this. As I’m sure you know (and was pointed out above) the Bluebook has a specific rule for this, with exceptions. Law Reviews / Journals follow the Bluebook. So... that’s the answer. Whether it should be the rule, or if there should be a rule in the Bluebook for it (instead of just a rule of thumb) is an open question...
but us Law Review types love our rules. ;)
Quote
November 22, 2009, 8:13 pmvepxistqaosani says:
As a former copyeditor, I can say that most publishers will default to the Chicago style. It doesn’t matter why — it’s simply a good thing to have a default style everyone can refer to. The idea is to ensure that busy people don’t waste time on minutiae. (This does, of course, rather overlook the need of busy people to justify their procrastination!)
The New Yorker — admired and reviled for its idiosyncratic approach to copyediting standards (really, ‘coöperate’?), which they adhere to with unusual rigor — featured this sentence in the 9 Nov 09 issue (pp. 86–7): “Romer had run simulations of the effects of stimulus packages of varying sizes: six hundred billion dollars, eight hundred billion dollars, and $1.2 trillion.”
Anyone see a rule at work here? Seems to have to do with the presence of the decimal point, but I would have revised to ‘twelve hundred billion dollars’ for parallelism. Or, better, ‘six, eight, and twelve hundred billion dollars’.
Certainly a fertile field for argument!
I think I prefer numerals for exact numbers and words for estimates (but I’m sure I’m not consistent!). So, in Prof. Volokh’s example, I’d write ‘These books tend to sell for 20% below their list price of eight to ten dollars.’ However, if the ’20%’ stands in for a range, then I’d spell that out, too, and add the word ‘around’. But the range in the price implies a certain degree of imprecision, so words are appropriate there.
Quote
November 22, 2009, 8:18 pmSara says:
Re contracts: I think it’s custom to write out the number and symbol, followed by ($x). I often see this in briefs, too.
Quote
November 22, 2009, 8:22 pmKenB says:
I’m surprised no one has mentioned Brian Garner in this context. My “Elements of Legal Style” is at the office, but I believe his rule is essentially that stated by pjohnson: Spell out numbers at the beginning of a sentence and under 10, but use numerals for other numbers. If numbers both under and over 10 appear in close proximity, use numerals for all.
I’m particularly resistant to the combined formulation, e.g., two hundred forty-three (243). Even though Moses came down from the mount with the Ten (10) Commandments, the formulation is redundant and dangerous. In case of conflict, the law gives priority to the words, but in proofreading, the eye tends to gloss over the words and focus on the numerals. I don’t like my documents to contain traps for the unwary. Sooner or later, that will be me.
Quote
November 22, 2009, 8:41 pmM.L.Johnson says:
Hmmm,hmmm,hmmm...I’m just waiting around for someone to help Malvolio out with the source of “There are millions of Brazilians”. Now he’s got me wondering.
Quote
November 22, 2009, 9:29 pmHarryEagar says:
I suspect Malvolio is misremembering the lyrics of “The Coffee Song”:
‘Way down among Brazilians coffee beans grow by the billions.’
As for numbers, Associated Press style is spell out one through nine, numerals above, same for ordinals.
Quote
November 22, 2009, 9:51 pmBobB says:
It seems to me that you would spell the number values when communicating with politicians/lawyers and journalists. Most of the rest of us can deal with the real numbers.
Quote
November 22, 2009, 9:54 pmNowMDJD says:
I find this set of five rules clearest– easy to comprehend and the numbers don’t look weird on the page:
1. Spell out numbers at the beginning of a sentence. Numerals look funny. If the number is large, just try not to use it as the first word in a sentence. (“There are 37,834 people living in Muncie” not “Thirty seven thousand, eight hundred thirty-four people live in Muncie.”). Numbers that designate outline headings don’t count.
2. Use numerals for numbers over 10.
3. Use numerals for all numbers with decimals, fractions, or units (2.5, 2 1/2, 2 cm.).
4. Use 0 instead of “zero.”
5. Otherwise, spell out single digit numbers I bought three blind mice).
Quote
November 22, 2009, 10:31 pmTyrone Slothrop says:
Tyrone’s Rule sez:
“If you’ve been assigned a five-page paper and are having trouble filling it out, spell all your numbers out. Otherwise write digits because they’re faster.”
Quote
November 22, 2009, 11:23 pmSean M. says:
Professor Volokh,
As JohnF says, this matter is–at least in theory–governed by the Bluebook and the Chicago Manual of Style (which most law reviews, including mine, use for issues not governed by the Bluebook).
Bluebook Rule 6.2 and Chicago Manual of Style Rule 9.3 give the general rules. The inconsistency that you see is that both rules have enough exceptions to make many particular cases a judgment call.
One may ask why these particular authorities are “right” and that’s a good question. But in general, one commits to a style guide for the very reason that many of these things are a judgment call, and these authorities tend to have good insight on them. (For instance, legal writing guru Brian Garner is a major contributor to the Chicago Manual of Style).
But the straight-forward answer to your question is: Because our style guides say-so.
Quote
November 23, 2009, 1:04 amsitzpinkler says:
It’s the open question that virtually no one has bothered to comment on. Eugene’s post nowhere suggests that he has a problem looking up rules in style guides, yet you people are running around parroting rules as though its somehow responsive.
Quote
November 23, 2009, 1:48 amsitzpinkler says:
You’re wrong. It does matter. If there’s a better system, one that improves clarity, comprehension, or similar things, that’s what we should use. This slavish adherence to conflicting, arbitrary, and conflicting standards is complete madness. Not one of you rule fans has bothered asking what’s so special about 10 or 20 or 100. Why use numerals for all numbers? Can you even think about that question without deferring to a style manual?
Quote
November 23, 2009, 1:52 amsitzpinkler says:
It’s also custom to use the funny “ss.” things on acknowledgments, jurats, and other notarized certificates. But no one really knows why anyone does it.
Quote
November 23, 2009, 1:55 amsitzpinkler says:
Why? Why not write out “ten”? After all, “ten” is easier to type than “seven.” Why don’t “seven” and “eight” qualify for numeral status?
Quote
November 23, 2009, 1:58 amsitzpinkler says:
And what, EXACTLY, is that “good insight”?
Quote
November 23, 2009, 2:01 amD.O. says:
J. Littlewood A Mathematician’s Miscellany
By the way, here’s a nice anecdote (from A Mathematician’s Miscellany ), which always makes me smile. I converted it to a problem for more zest
Why?
Quote
November 23, 2009, 4:05 amDuffy Pratt says:
No 1 has mentioned the all important rule to use roman numerals when referring to Super Bowls.
Quote
November 23, 2009, 5:06 ammk says:
Thank you!
One of the things that has long annoyed me about legal writing (and wanna-be legal writing) is the tendency two both spell out and use the number. As you said, exactly what sort of ambiguity is being avoided? If both are the same (e.g., twenty dollars ($20)) then we get no where; if they are different, there is no clear rule about which takes priority (e.g., twenty dollars ($21)).
Quote
November 23, 2009, 7:57 amBill Harshaw says:
These sorts of rules and much more are covered in the GPO Style Manual. Used to be any Federal government writing for the public was processed through GPO, but that monopoly has been disrupted by the advent, first of photo offset, and now by PC’s and the Internet. (I remember we had to capitalize “Federal” as in the preceding sentence.) At least in the instance of hot typesetting, there was a logic for style guides so the copy writer/editor and the typesetter were on the same page.
Quote
November 23, 2009, 8:34 amSara says:
You don’t think ‘because it’s custom’ is a reason? To parrot you parroting a five year old: “Why?”
The general rule is that the written words control.
Quote
November 23, 2009, 8:50 amCYW says:
I think the Bluebook really handles your concern nicely. In general, any decimals and numbers less than 100 are given as numerals. When you have a mixed group (some numbers that would be spelled out under the rule and some that would be given as numerals), you make them all numerals for consistency. When there are a lot of percentages or dollar amounts jumbled together, you use numerals regardless of what the numbers are. Basically, in a situation where you’re giving numbers people might want to toy with, the Bluebook would have them as numerals. When you’re dealing with numbers less likely to be the subject of calculations by the reader, they are spelled out.
The Bluebook rules would demand all the results you suggest:
- “These books tend to sell for 20% below their list price of $8 to $10,” rather than “These books tend to sell for twenty percent below their list price of eight to ten dollars.”
- “There are eight reasons why this law is a bad idea.”
- “millions of people.”
So if you are publishing in journals that ostensibly abide by the Bluebook rules, take a look at Bluebook Rule 6.2(a) and ask them to do the same. You’ll probably find that the rule is actually on your side and the journal editors are just mistaken. It should make sticking to your guns all the easier.
Quote
November 23, 2009, 8:53 amSteve says:
At our Web site (radioviceonline.com) I try to get the authors to stick to the current AP Style Guide.
If the number is under 10, it is written out as one, two, three, four ... An exception would be when referencing a page number as in page 3 of the document, and when referring to percentages, as in 6 percent. Note we use the % sign in tables, not in a paragraph.
Pricing is written in numerals. $10, $10 million, $10 billion ...
Ratios are written in numerals 2–1 ratio or 2-to-1 ...
If you are starting a sentence ... Six of the teachers attended the meeting would be correct, not 6 of the...
My suggestion is to pick a style guide that currently exists and use that as a base to ensure consistency. If something comes up not in the guide, you can have add own supplement.
The AP Style Guide is updated frequently. The rules for numbers generally do not change, but they keep up-to-date with newer words frequently used such as al-Qaida. Ever wonder why Internet is spelled with a capital I .... check the AP Style Guide...
Quote
November 23, 2009, 8:55 amegd says:
I’ve seen this written as both “one through one hundred” and “one through 100″. Is “through” used inclusively, or exclusively, or is at least one of the rules internally inconsistent?
It’s not about avoiding ambiguity, it’s about avoiding typos and confusion.
If I spell out in a contract “five thousand, three hundred and seventy one dollars and forty five cents ($5,381.45)” it’s easy to see that there’s an error (somewhere). Legal rules say that we default to the $5,371.45 construction, but presumably someone would catch the error during editing.
Quote
November 23, 2009, 9:02 amBama 1L says:
I thought most journals used the Bluebook (citation) plus the Texas Law Review Manual of Style (style).
Professor Volokh noted that the law reviews in which he publishes do this inconsistently and that he “can’t vouch for the most popular standard.” The rules pertaining to law reviews are easily discoverable.
I think the rules for academic or legal writing should be something like this:
1. Never begin a sentence with a numerals or symbol.
2. Prefer words for numbers intrinsic to the text. (“The district court should be affirmed for three reasons.”)
3. Prefer numerals for numbers extrinsic to the text.
4. But normally use words for integers smaller than ten. (“This dispute arose when Martha died intestate, leaving two grandchildren as her closest relations.”)
5. And if these rules suggest using numerals for any numbers in a sentence, use numbers for all parallel constructions.
6. Use symbols with numerals, never with words.
Quote
November 23, 2009, 9:08 amYankev says:
MK, this is also one of Ken Adams’ pet peeves. His legal drafting blog is always worth a visit. According to Adam’s “A Manual of Style for Contract Drafting”, the practice arose to make it more difficult to alter notes and similar instruments, and he recommends against it where fraudulent alteration is not a concern. FWIW, he also recommends spelling out numbers under 10 and using numerals for 10 and above. As to Sitz’s question why 10 and not 100, well, why not $1,000,000,000? The answer is simply that documents are easier to read if we all draw the same line in more or less the same place. That’s called convention, and sometimes it has its uses. Why is it any more arbitrary than printing our documents on 8–1/2 by 11 paper instead of foolscap, A4, postcards or folio?
Quote
November 23, 2009, 9:48 amTitus says:
Bama 1L’s assessment is excellent. I would add only a few additional thoughts:
— whole numbers under 100 should be written out when not used as part of a calculation or in some other arithmetic function (e.g. “five dogs”);
— conversely, equations and calculations should probably be written in numerals (e.g. “it is important to carry properly when performing an equation like 45x * 14″);
— numerals should be used, generally speaking, in lists and statutes, where the numerals stand out more easily (and where the number is generally the operative element).
Quote
November 23, 2009, 9:58 amGabriel McCall says:
I occasionally use both digits and text numbers when trying to refer to two separate classes of numbers simultaneously: “the restaurant had 6 tables for two and 4 tables for four” is more readable than using all digits or all text.
Quote
November 23, 2009, 10:14 amtroll_dc2 says:
I worked for a publishing company that used the AP stylebook rules detailed by Steve. Consistency is a really important virtue, especially in a situation in which the same copy could wind up in more than one publication.
If you don’t like the AP’s rules, pick your own–but follow them consistently. When you don’t, you come across as something less than professional.
Quote
November 23, 2009, 10:25 amEric Rasmusen says:
Great idea, Prof. Volokh! You are right, and the standard rule is wrong. I would reinforce that one part of your rule, though, is to spell out even big numbers if it is appropriate for the reader to read flowingly past them rather than be jerked into the world of integers, eg.
“Bureaucratic mistakes have made me learn all forty-seven hundred and twenty-one different varieties of frustration.”
Quote
November 23, 2009, 11:43 amjheath says:
I distinguish categories by using digits for one and written numbers for another: ten students read 5 books each, but twenty students read 7 books each.
I think the visual distinction between categories helps the reader keep them straight. I am a technical project manager so deal with this often.
JNH
Quote
November 23, 2009, 12:03 pmMike McDougal says:
I am comfortable saying that useless acts of custom are useless.
Quote
November 23, 2009, 12:13 pmMike McDougal says:
Eugene: “Any thoughts on what the rule should be here?”
Why should I write out “seventy-seven” instead of “77”? The latter is easier to read. It’s more memorable. It’s clearer. It’s shorter. What virtue does your rule possess?
A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines.
Quote
November 23, 2009, 12:22 pmJane Ashen Turkewitz says:
My understanding has always been that the rule is: if you use a number below 10, the number is spelled out. If the number is 10 or above, you use the digit. Now, that said, each publication and publishing house has their own style guidelines and sometimes they alter the rules. I found this out recently when I wrote a cover story for imedia.
Quote
November 23, 2009, 12:39 pmKirk Parker says:
David Welker has the best rule (and good explanatory commentary, too!) Alas, it’s not a rule that can be mechanically applied; instead it requires judgment and understanding. But it is human language we’re talking about here, right?
Although Tyrone gets special mention for humor...
sitzpinkler (and Mike McDougal),
To paraphrase someone I’m not going to name, “Consistency has a quality all of its own”.
Quote
November 23, 2009, 1:33 pmDuffy Pratt says:
And of course, Bama 1L’s name, under these rules, should be Bama OneL
Quote
November 23, 2009, 3:23 pmCyfir says:
The rule we have in for military reporting is: units of measure, numerals; ordinals, words; references to report numbers or other documents, numberals; quantities, words for one through nine, numerals for larger numbers.
Quote
November 23, 2009, 6:26 pmEric Wilner says:
I just saw the definitive answer in someone’s email .sig block:
“The numbers one through ten should be spelled out, while numbers greater than ten are products of the Illuminati and should be avoided.”
Quote
November 23, 2009, 7:53 pmRichard Aubrey says:
In quoting someone, it will probably fall in with the question of whether the guy said. “U. S.” or “yoo ess”.
We say he said “U.S.” which, of course, he did not.
He didn’t say “$14.36″. He said, “fourteen dollars and thirty six cents.”
Quote
November 23, 2009, 10:11 pmD.R.M. says:
So, do you intend to change your method of spelling words from the customary to a phonetic system?
Quote
November 25, 2009, 12:03 pmC.J. says:
I remember, i think in skol... high or junior high... the rule i was told... was to spell out numbers ten and lower. Above ten — use numbers. i write by this rule.
thank you
Quote
November 29, 2009, 4:20 am