# Blutgruppe O



## cheshire

Ich bin Blutgruppe *O*. 

(1) About what percentage of German speakers say "null" for "O"?
(2) Which should be pronounced as, "null" or "awe"?


----------



## Hutschi

Hi Cheshire,

about 100 percent of German speakers say "Blutgruppe Null".

You should correct it to "Blutgruppe *0*", because there is no "Blutgruppe "O".

This is, because it is not A-B-O system but A-B-*0* system.

But also in other contexts (telephone numbers, numbers) "0" is called "Null" (if you speak them separately, for example "Eins-Null-Null-Eins" instead of "Tausendundeins" or "Tausendeins") and "O" or "o" are called /'o/.

(in some fonts, "0" and "O" have the same appearance. In programs this may be confusing, and so the differences may be marked graphically strike through either the "0" or the "O" in the font.)

Best regards
Bernd


----------



## PhilFrEn

Hi,

Interesting to see that in Germany you say AB*0* when in France we say AB*O*.

Do you know where such a difference could come from?


----------



## Kajjo

"Blutgruppe 0" = gesprochen "Blutgruppe Null"

Es gibt im Deutschen keine Alternative zu dieser Sprechweise. Das AB0-System wird mit einer Null und nicht mit dem Buchstaben O geschrieben. Inhaltlich ist dies auch sehr passend, denn es gibt Antigene Typ A und Typ B. Die Blutgruppe 0 weist keines dieser Antigene auf, die Blutgruppe AB hat beide.

Kajjo


----------



## Kajjo

PhilFrEn said:


> Interesting to see that in Germany you say AB*0* when in France we say AB*O*. Do you know where such a difference could come from?


Maybe from the old-fashioned English way of spelling a zero as "oh"?

Kajjo


----------



## PhilFrEn

The fact that there is no antigen could make sence. Your second explanation is also an interesting alternative.

Thank you .


----------



## Hutschi

It may also be, that it was a misinterpretation. If you only see A-B-0, and you have no idea about antigenes for a and b, you would easily read "O" (oh) - and this may be supported by the two letters. But this is just a hypothesis and must be proofed. One of the two may be falsified. Once it is established in the language (for what reason ever) it usually stays there.


----------



## cheshire

Quite interesting!
I never dreamed of it as zero!


----------



## Hockey13

Kajjo said:


> Maybe from the old-fashioned English way of spelling a zero as "oh"?
> 
> Kajjo


 
I wouldn't call it old-fashioned.


----------



## Hutschi

I asked a friend, a native speaker of English, and he confirms, that it is not a zero spoken "oh" in the English language but a letter.

So you have to translate it. "0" and "O" are "false friends" in this way.


----------



## werrr

Hutschi said:


> I asked a friend, a native speaker of English, and he confirms, that it is not a zero spoken "oh" in the English language but a letter.
> 
> So you have to translate it. "0" and "O" are "false friends" in this way.


Yes, the AB0 system is a Central-European deviation. According to World Health Organisation, the ABO system is standard.

Sorry Hutschi, but the system wasn't introduced by Karl Landsteiner. He found only three groups and named them A, B, C. The ABO system was firstly completely described by Jan Janský, but he used different terminology - I, II, III, IV (still used in Russia). The ABO terminology emerged in 30's.


----------



## Hutschi

Sorry. I misunderstood an  article. I will remove it in the message, to avoid confusion for other readers.

Thank you.


----------



## Kajjo

Hockey13 said:


> _Maybe from the old-fashioned English way of spelling a zero as "oh"?_ I wouldn't call it old-fashioned.



I do. This stems from a time where typewriters had only the numbers 1-9 and no zero character. We still have such a typewriter in the family.

Modern typewriters and computer keyboards do have different characters for zero and the letter O, as do have computer fonts. Thus, I call spelling a zero as "O" very much old-fashioned. It causes a lot of problems when spelling passwords or codes of any sort, like security numbers, car plates and so on, if both numbers and letters are possible.

Kajjo


----------



## Lykurg

Regardless whether WHO standard or not, AB0 makes sense, while ABO doesn't.

@werr:
Landsteiner found three (of four existing) groups in 1902, Decastrello and Sturli added the fourth in 1907. Janský independently found all four in 1907 - but since he wasn't noticed in the western world, I consider it wrong to state Landsteiner didn't introduce the AB0 system.


----------



## Hutschi

werrr said:


> Yes, the AB0 system is a Central-European deviation. According to World Health Organisation, the ABO system is standard.


 
I found in an German article both writing methods: ABO, and AB0.

If this is no spelling error, it may be a hint to changes.

http://www.drk-blutspende.de/wissenswertes_ueber_blut/blutgruppen.php


----------



## Lykurg

It looks like a mistake: ABO is used in the heading and a chart, only.


----------



## werrr

Lykurg said:


> Regardless whether WHO standard or not, AB0 makes sense, while ABO doesn't.


Yes, I agree.



> @werr:
> Landsteiner found three (of four existing) groups in 1902, Decastrello and Sturli added the fourth in 1907. Janský independently found all four in 1907 - but since he wasn't noticed in the western world, I consider it wrong to state Landsteiner didn't introduce the AB0 system.


Landsteiner did introduced the differentiation into groups but didn't introduced all the antigen stuff. Therefore he didn't introduced the ABO system and terminology based on it. Yes, Landsteiners A and B groups are identical with A and B groups in ABO system, but that's just a coincidence. Landsteiners categorization was based on transfusion compatibility.


----------



## Lykurg

> Landsteiner did introduced the differentiation into groups but didn't introduced all the antigen stuff. Therefore he didn't introduced the ABO system and terminology based on it. Yes, Landsteiners A and B groups are identical with A and B groups in ABO system, but that's just a coincidence. Landsteiners categorization was based on transfusion compatibility.


Ah, I agree to that. Thank you!


----------



## Hockey13

Kajjo said:


> I do. This stems from a time where typewriters had only the numbers 1-9 and no zero character. We still have such a typewriter in the family.
> 
> Modern typewriters and computer keyboards do have different characters for zero and the letter O, as do have computer fonts. Thus, I call spelling a zero as "O" very much old-fashioned. It causes a lot of problems when spelling passwords or codes of any sort, like security numbers, car plates and so on, if both numbers and letters are possible.
> 
> Kajjo


 
Oh, I'm sorry. I thought you wrote "The old-fashioned way of _saying_..." My mistake. We still _say_ "oh" all the time.


----------



## gaer

The problem may be that "O" means the letter "O" in English. Type "OH". At least this is what I've always heard.

"Null" (0 [zero]) makes more logical sense to me. 

Link

Note: those of you who are scientists may be able to find something that is more scholarly (in English). 

Gaer


----------



## Kajjo

gaer said:


> "Null" (0 [zero]) makes more logical sense to me. Link


 The Wiki link you provided mentions that blood group O is spelled with the letter O but said as "zero" or "null". I do not know whether this is true, though.

Kajjo


----------



## gaer

Kajjo said:


> The Wiki link you provided mentions that blood group O is spelled with the letter O but said as "zero" or "null". I do not know whether this is true, though.
> 
> Kajjo


It's definitely a mistake. I started a link to make sure!

link

It's type "oh" in English. Weird! 

Gaer


----------



## elroy

Lykurg said:


> Regardless whether WHO standard or not, AB0 makes sense, while ABO doesn't.


 "What makes sense" is in the eye of the beholder.

Perhaps in English whoever came up with the names wanted to be consistent and use letters to identify all the different blood types, so for "null" he chose the letter most similar in appearance to "zero."  

Or maybe it was just arbitrary. 

On my college transcript, "W" meant "withdraw" (for a course you signed up for but then withdrew from mid-semester), "S/U" meant "satisfactory/unsatisfactory" (for a course you did not take for a letter grade), and "O" meant "not graded" (for a course like "swimming" that you got a credit, but no grade, for).

You would probably say that "O" doesn't make sense.  

To me, mixing letters with numbers doesn't "make sense."  Besides, in a language where we drive on parkways and park on driveways, you're expecting way too much logic.


----------



## Hutschi

I think, the letter "O" will come more and more into the German language, too.

We can notice: "make sense" has different meanings, depending on context.


----------

