• Donkter@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 hours ago

    How so? I would certainly call something from 1894 to be from the "late 1800s’ or late 19th century. I mean, we’re a quarter of the way through this century, at some point it turns into history.

    • jerkface@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      When most of your life occurred in the 20th century, it looks a lot different.

      • Saleh@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        Because you still had to watch things from poor quality VHS tapes on CRT monitors. Of course it looked different.

    • go $fsck yourself@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Because people don’t use that terminology when referring to a time period within a majority of living people’s lifetime.

      • Donkter@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Sure they do. I’m sure the century cutoff helps too.

        If someone one would refer to the 1920s as “the early 1900s” cause it’s over 100 years ago it follows logically to call other parts of the 1900s the mid and late period.

      • broken_chatbot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 hours ago

        This may be a “loanword” from the student’s native language. In Swedish, they use “1900-talet” (1900s) instead of “twentieth century”