All three versions are correct.
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2548023/how_to_say_2010_twenty_ten_or_two_thousand.html?cat=37
And here �s a somewhat long but interesting view:
How do you say
"2010"?
Coming off of "two
thousand nine," you �ll probably say "two thousand ten." In fact,
4 out of 5 YouTube videos randomly reviewed by The Chronicle have people
pronouncing it that way.
But you would be wrong, so
wrong, according to the National Association of Good Grammar.
"NAGG has decided to
step in and decree that (2010) should officially be pronounced �twenty ten, �
and all subsequent years should be pronounced as �twenty eleven, � �twenty
twelve, � etc.," proclaims the association �s news release.
The National Association of
Good Grammar - essentially a guy named Tom Torriglia and some friends who also
paid attention in English class - say people have been mispronouncing the year
for 10 years.
"NAGG is here to put everybody back on the correct path,"
Torriglia said by phone from his home in San Francisco. "We lost the
battle when we went from 1999 to 2000 - but now we �re hoping to win the
war."
The "20" should
have been pronounced "twenty" all along, he said, pointing out that
every year in the 20th century was pronounced "nineteen something."
" �Twenty � follows
�nineteen. � �Two thousand � does not follow �nineteen. � It �s logical."
Companies pay Torriglia,
who has written technical manuals for two decades, to be logical and clear in
explaining the least clear concepts, like how to use their own computer
software. He �s also taught writing to aspiring technical writers and to junior
college students.
Torriglia created NAGG in
1986 when he found himself calling publications about their grammatically
incorrect ads.
"I would nag
them," he said.
Torriglia, who is writing a
book he calls "The Grammar Police Never Sleep," believes the time has
come to nag again.
To punctuate the idea that
"two thousand ten" is the wrong way to say it, Torriglia, 56, pointed
out that no one would ever say, "I was born in one thousand nine hundred
and fifty-three."
Yet that �s how people keep
saying "2010." In one YouTube video, a preteen promises to make more
YouTube videos in "two thousand ten." Another has a guy on a yellow
dirt bike saying he �s "amped about the all-new �two thousand ten � "
model. A third features people trying to design novelty eyeglasses in the shape
of "two thousand ten."
To Torriglia, it �s
relentless.
"I �m hearing it on TV
commercials. I heard an announcer say it during �Monday Night Football. � You
cringe."
Torriglia cringes, anyway.
But he �s the kind of guy who cringes at the Safeway checkout line where the
sign reads "10 items or less."
"It should be fewer."
He �s right.
Maybe not.
But what choice did anyone
really have this past decade? Were they going to start off the new millennium
with a "twenty oh oh" hiccup, while avoiding the melodious "two
thousand"?
There �s a reason Arthur C.
Clarke didn �t call his book "Twenty Oh One: A Space Odyssey."
It �s been a difficult
decade for Torriglia, phonologically speaking.
"It was never �two
thousand nine � for me," he sighed. "It was always �twenty aught
nine. � "
So the people hawking next
year �s car models, the newscasters on TV and anyone else with a reason to say
"2010" aloud should embrace good grammar and say "twenty
ten" right now, Torriglia said.
Not exactly, according to
noted linguistics Professor George Lakoff of UC Berkeley.
"It �s not wrong to say
�two thousand ten, � " Lakoff said. "And it �s not like �twenty ten � is
the right way."
His explanation involves
cognitive reference points, standards of speech and recognizing as
anachronistic the notion that grammar can be right or wrong as people and
cultures evolve.
Nevertheless, Lakoff
predicted, " �Twenty-ten � is gonna take over. It �s shortest. It �s easiest
to understand."
On that point - if not on
the syntax - the master linguist and the grammar police agree.