When I was but a sprout in school they stressed that two hundred and sixty five was the wrong way and two hundred sixty five was the correct way.
It’s one of the reasons that translating newspaper articles is included in the more advanced classes of serious language instruction. The language in newspapers is universally stilted and difficult to read, and therefore a challenge to non-native speakers.
That’s because of where you live.
Source: Space saved
For many U.S. newspapers, the typesize in headlines is an important style issue, one that trumps many of the style rules followed in the text of articles. And at large typesizes, the difference between and and , is huge. Many newspapers have flat rules: The main headline on the front page shall be no smaller than X points. The secondary headline on the front page shall be no smaller than Y points.
I’m sure British newspapers have the same criteria about printed headlines - they have just made different choices on how to achieve it.
Interestingly, though, I just reviewed both the Times and the Guardian online, and there wasn’t a single “and” to be found in any headline. Most headlines dealt with one thing only and didn’t require a conjoiner. Which indicates they may be more simplistic (or more direct).
Wouldn’t ‘Answers Simulposted: Lemur Enraged’ be even more correct?
I learned the same thing. If I recall correctly, the reasoning was to distinguish “200+65” from “265”. Which are the same, but different. :dubious:
When I was in school they said that the and some how implied a decimal point it was to distinguish between 200.65 and 265. Like how you write checks for three hundred seventy five and 31/100. Not that this explanation is that much better than the one you got.
I never knew that there was active discouragement from the “British” way of saying it. Interesting, nonetheless.