[Grammar] 89 days old or 89 day old; which one is correct?

[Victor Sales]

Hi,
I would like to know which alternative is better in a regular document in which a description of the age is mentioned.

ie.
89 days old or 89 day old?

Thank you,
Victor

 

[susiedq]

More context is needed.

 

[Barb_D]

Specifically, does it come immediately before a noun?

I found an 89-day-old package of ham in my fridge.
Don't eat that! It's at least 89 days old!

(I'd say "3-month-old" in most cases rather than 89 days, unless each day were really that important.)

 

[Barb_D]

(I'd say "3-month-old" in most cases rather than 89 days, unless each day were really that important.)

Hmm. Have I misused the subjunctive here?

 

[SoothingDave]

I think the subjunctive is OK if you are in disbelief that each day could really be that important.

 

[susiedq]

unless each day was really that important.)

 

[5jj]

Hmm. Have I misused the subjunctive here?

I don't think so.You have present a true hypotheical situation. I'm sure you would not have had any doubt if you had rephrased it with 'if':

I'd say "89 days", if each day were really that important.

 

[5jj]

unless each day was really that important.

That's fine, unless you are one of those who insist that the subjunctive be (;-)) used in such cases.

 

[Barb_D]

Well, I don't insist -- it just comes naturally. I've ready many times that the subjunctive is used far more often in the US than in other English-speaking nations.

My doubt was that it's no longer hypothetical if it IS important, but as Dave says, it expressed my own skepticism that it was.

Sorry to derail - and thanks!