Y2K or Not Y2K?:
A Critical Analysis of Epistemics in Corporate Y2K Readiness Statements

Donald Weasenforth

weasenf@gwu.edu

Paper presented at "Before Y2K Conference: Before and After Studies of Y2K"
at The George Washington University on September 10, 1999

Protections provided by the "Year 2000 Information and Readiness Disclosure Act" passed in the fall of 1998 prompted the publication of corporate "disclosure statements" in which businesses defined Y2K readiness and described their state of readiness for the "millenium bug." For a variety of reasons, including the threat of legal retribution and a counterbalancing threat of losing business, corporations are walking a thin line between claiming full readiness and declaring lack of preparedness. Facing a number of difficulties, businesses have to assure customers of their preparedness while also being careful not to claim too much in light of possible post-Y2K reactions from customers, suppliers, distributors, and other third parties.

The need to appear competent enough to handle the Y2K threat but cautious in light of the many unknown factors and the possible legal ramifications has led to an interesting deployment of epistemic modalities in disclosure statements. This paper presents a critical linguistic analysis of epistemic modalities in corporate Y2K readiness disclosure statements, attributing their use to legal, technical and commercial issues—including latitude allowed by federal policy, definitions of "critical systems," definition of testing and contingency plans as "readiness," and the relation between date integrity and business operations.

The study focuses on the international express delivery services—including DHL, Federal Express and UPS—industry for several reasons. Their business depends on timely service, making them particularly vulnerable to the Y2K threat; their aircraft and IT equipment is the type which is most likely to be affected; international service makes them vulnerable to third party suppliers and outsourcing services; and a high level of competition drives the companies to present themselves as confident of compliance.

This preliminary descriptive analysis from a critical discourse analysis approach focuses on the corporate discourse of Y2K readiness statements. It attempts to associate selected linguistic features of the statements with elements of the environment in which they were written.

Methods

This paper assumes an analysis associated with critical discourse analysis (CDA). The main goal of CDA is to attribute linguistic variation to sociopolitical positions of users of language. While the main goal of other branches (e.g., syntax, phonology, morphology) of theoretical linguistics is to describe language as an independent system or to describe variations—usually at the discrete levels of phonology, morphology or lexicon—dependent on sociocultural variables (sociolinguistics), CDA seeks to associate more global elements (e.g., rhetorical and semantic features) of language with sociopolitical contexts.

It locates discourse within a particular conception of society and assumes a critical attitude toward society. Basic premises are: a) that language is mediated by value, social, and power structures in which it is employed, and b) that any social phenomenon (e.g., linguistic) must be analyzed against the wider social context in order to be fully understood. Thus, power structures—commercial and legal powers as impacted by technological phenomena—are of particular interest to CDA analysts.

Given the bipolar interests of linguistic analysis and sociopolitical critique, let us take a brief look at the linguistic elements of interest in this paper, followed by a brief summary of the social contexts in which they occur.

Linguistic Analysis

The linguistic feature of interest in this paper is epistemic modalities. This is a particularly interesting feature to analyze within the context of Y2K readiness statements because of the thin line which corporations must walk in making reasonable claims of readiness which will assure customers, corporate affiliates, insurance providers, and political offices that the corporation will be reasonably ready for the advent of January 1, 2000, but at the same time not claim too much so as to put the corporation in legal jeopardy.

Epistemic modality is a linguistic mood that indicates how much certainty or evidence a speaker/writer has for his proposition (Chung and Timberlake 1985, Palmer 1986). One’s epistemic stance can be realized at various levels of discourse: phonological (Intonation is a good example.), lexical, syntactic (e.g., use of tag questions), and rhetorical (e.g., the use of contextualization and questions). This analysis focuses on lexical and rhetorical forms of epistemics.

Epistemic modality not only reflects the absence or presence of certainty in propositions, but they are used to indicate the degree of certainty. Levels of qualification which indicate the degree of certainty or doubt about a proposition are often realized lexically and syntactically. Perhaps one of the most obvious examples of lexical instantiation of epistemic modality at various levels of certainty are modal auxiliary verbs:

a. The company may develop contingency plans.

b. The company will develop contingency plans.

However, epistemic modality may be expressed lexically without modal verbs:

a. Perhaps the company will develop contingency plans.

b. I think that the company will develop contingency plans.

c. I believe that the company will develop contingency plans.

d. I am certain the that the company will develop contingency plans.

Although there will be some variation in interpretations of the level of certainty entailed by each of the above sentences, it can be agreed that the progression of sentences reflects a respectively increasing sense of certainty.

Before moving on to a discussion of the social contexts associated with these linguistic features, let us take a look at the two types of epistemic modalities identified in the disclosure documents and examples of them. These two types of epistemics play a crucial role in the documents in that they not only reflect the companies’ stance regarding their Y2K readiness vis a vis activities within their control, but they also reflect the companies’ stance vis a vis evidence provided by their lawyers, outsourced computer services and affiliates.

Evidential modality is a type of epistemic modality which indicates the writer’s assessment of the evidence supporting his proposition. There are two types of evidential epistemic modality: quotative and sensory. Quotatives are signals that someone else is the source of a statement often marked in marketing through various types of referencing devices. Sensory modalities, in contrast, are signals that the truth of a statement is from the writer’s own experience. In Figure 1, several examples of evidential modality are provided, the first three being quotatives and the last one sensory.

Figure 1: Examples of Evidential Modality

Nearly 90% of all subsidiaries have reported compliance.

Continued testing of systems indicate full compliance.

About 20% of suppliers noted in the survey that they were not yet Y2K ready.

Based on our compliance test results, program XYZ should not be affected by the

date change on January 1, 2000.

A second type of epistemic modality, judgement modality, reflects the extent of the writer’s confidence in his proposition. This type of modality is associated with propositions which do not include a reference to evidence. Figure 2 provides examples of judgement modalities which imply various degrees of certainty.

Figure 2: Examples of Judgement Modality

All systems will be compliant August 1, 1999.

Our target is to have all systems compliant August 1, 1999.

Our target is to have nearly all systems compliant mid-1999.

Social Context

The social contexts in which the observed linguistic behaviors take place are much too complex and complicated to explain in detail in this paper. My main purpose thus is to provide a small glimpse at the various contexts—technological, commercial, legal and political—and a brief discussion as to how corporations are affected. While the Y2K problem is at heart a technological one, it has become a commercial, legal and political problem as well. Below I will very briefly discuss these various contexts and provide statistics from the international air courier service industry to illustrate the seriousness of the problems entailed by Y2K.

Technological Context

The technological challenges facing international corporations providing air courier services are astounding and staggering, even without the threat of Y2K. Consider the following statistics for several of the largest corporations. DHL serves more than 85,000 destinations in 227 countries/territories with more than 200 aircraft (Business Times 1999a, DHL 1999, The Gale Group 1999b). UPS has approximately 329,000 employees with more than 100,000 PCs plus DIAD terminals (hand-held devices used to record deliveries) plus devices mounted in vehicles (The Gale Group 1999c). It ships packages with the help of more than 40 cargo aircraft and 10,000 vehicles. The UPS West Coast distribution center alone represents a great technological challenge with a mile of conveyor belts and 150 electronic eyes. To underscore the seriousness of the threat that Y2K poses for UPS, consider that 50% of all its orders are received electronically (Bartholomew 1998, The Gale Group 1999c). Finally, FedEx employees around 145,000 people in 210 countries, using 624 aircraft and 42,800 vehicles (Business Times 1999b, The Gale Group 1999a).

Consider the difficulties inherent in the general types of software, including in-house, third party, customer access systems, country-specific applications, operating systems, desk-top systems, development software, communications and messaging systems. Consider also the hardware, some of which was identified above: PCs and terminals, servers, recognition equipment (e.g., scanners and scales), communications equipment (e.g., modems, routers and other data and telecommunications devices).

In addition to the internal components partially enumerated above, consider the external components of suppliers and affiliates which may also impinge on the companies’ abilities to operate. Consider then that for these various pieces of software and hardware located throughout the world the process of determining Y2K readiness, including identification of code, expansion/windowing, multiple testing, recording meetings and test results, developing contingency plans, and contacting customers and third parties (suppliers, distributors, political offices) regarding compliance/readiness. By any estimate the technological burden of preparing for Y2K is massive (cf. Dickey 1998).

Commercial Context

The potential commercial risks involved in an industry that depends so heavily on various technologies to run its everyday operations are perhaps obvious. Operational losses due to delays or shut downs which could in turn lead to loss of customers and suppliers/distributors could easily run into the millions of dollars per company, this added to the millions of dollars already spent in preparation for Y2K.

The potential problems could be disastrous for UPS which serves 1.6 million customers per day and delivers 12.1 million units daily (The Gale Group 1999c). Similarly for FedEx which moves 3 million units each day with revenues of $13.3 billion (FY98) and $560 million (FY99) (Forbes 1999, The Gale Group 1999a).

The problems are exacerbated by the recent trend toward providing more electronic mail services. Airborne Express has, for instance, claimed that "IT is the centerpiece of our strategy for going forward" (Nelms 1998). Similarly, Federal Express has recently expanded its e-commerce services in Latin America (Gazeta Mercantil 1999), and DHL has expanded its tracking system to electronic mail.

Legal Context

Although limited by "The Year 2000 Information and Readiness Disclosure Act" (9P.L. 105-271), the threat of legal retribution for post-Y2K losses are still real. In fact, Y2K-related lawsuits have already been filed, and at least 200 law firms are preparing groups of lawyers with necessary expertise to process Y2K-related suits (Kirsner 1999). Some organizations, including Lloyd’s of London, are predicting that Y2K litigation could reach or even surpass $1 trillion (Kirsner 1999, Virtual Dynamics Corporation 1999).

The sensitivity of corporations to the legal threats are apparent. It is, after all, the limited immunity provided by the US government which prompted the publication of corporate readiness statements.

Political Context

The US Senate Special Committee on the Year 2000 Technology Problem concluded that the Y2K problem is real and has pushed risk management efforts (Virtual Dynamics Corporation 1999). The Committee found that in general large corporations and the telecommunications industry have prepared themselves well for Y2K, relieving political pressure from the corporations represented in this paper.

The Securities and Exchange Commission required corporations to file 10-Q Statements which outline the readiness of the business and the plans to complete readiness for Y2K (Securities and Exchange Commission).

Analyses and Discussion

I will now present excerpts from various companies’ disclosure documents, identify the epistemics used and interpret them in light of the context in which they occur. The order in which I present the excerpts follows the general order in which the information is presented in the statements, beginning with introductory information about the historical reliability of the company, proceeding to definitions, then to descriptions of approaches and procedures used to prepare for Y2K, followed by caveats.

Introductions: Standing Firm on Reputation

The following four excerpts were culled from the introductions of disclosure statements and represent the confident stance that all companies take in breaching the issue of Y2K compliance. Nonetheless, a close look at the lexical choices and the rhetorical structure reveals an uncertainty or a carefulness in light of the potential legal retributions.

Excerpts I.1 and I.2 are taken from Airborne Express’s statement and reflect an ambivalence typical of the introductions. In excerpt I.1 the syntactic use of the superlative (the fastest) and the historical perspective of (nearly) two decades of growth introduce an element of corporate confidence which might be carried over into the company’s management of the Y2K management. Perhaps in contrast, the choice of the verbal item "intended" in the context of the development of their IT systems might seem misplaced given the obvious expectation that the IT systems would be designed to support their operations. But this choice of words could be interpreted as a resolute intention or commitment to seeing that their IT systems are ready for this new challenge as would be consistent with their past performance and the tone of the first part of the paragraph.

Excerpt I.2, also drawn from Airborne’s introductory remarks, reveals a unique defensive move by minimizing its IT operations and comparing them, not to similar businesses but to those in different industries or sectors (financial services, health care and manufacturing). Yet there is some allowance reserved through the use of "tend" although its not quite clear what is meant by this term.

Otherwise, in excerpt I.2, Airborne is resolute in pointing out that its customers and affiliates need not worry due to its "much simpler" business environment and the fact that "nearly all" of its computer systems are located in Seattle. They go on to argue very definitively that date representation is not an issue once their transactions are completed although it is not clear how post-transaction reporting is not susceptible to the same Y2K-related problems.

In a similar vein, RPS in excerpt I.3 rather comfortably expresses its appreciation to a concerned affiliate, going on to assure the affiliate that RPS is clearly "aware of" the potential impacts of Y2K and that the affiliate need not worry since its Y2K team has brought Y2K into its control. But then, maybe not. RPS then indicates that it may not have complete control of Y2K, telling the affiliate that it is its "goal" to address the problem (Or is it to enter the year 2000?) in a manner "as seamless as possible." The use of the lexical items "goal" and "as…as possible" introduce, as seen in Airborne’s introduction, an element of doubt or hedging, both understandable given the mammoth technological tasks and the implicit legal battles if interruption of business does occur.

Federal Express’s disclosure statement somewhat follows suit in terms of its amalgam of resoluteness and ambivalence (See Excerpt I.4). They start off on sure footing, arguing consistency with past performance, particularly with regard to its reputation for its technological edge (The Gale Group 1999). FedEx also points out its goals, but they are very well defined by FedEx by specific dates and specific percentages of the IT and non-IT systems compliant as of the end of July 1999. This level of specificity is indicative of FedEx’s more than 20 page-long disclosure statement, making it far longer than that of any other international courier service. They point out in no uncertain terms that "all" work on non-IT systems "continue[s] to be monitored", indicating a steadfast vigilance.

The development of contingency plans by this time is required and thus not seen as an indication of weakness, but rather a sign of prudence and strength. FedEx insists on its September 1 deadline for "all" of its IT systems and assures readers that contingency plans without doubt "will be in place" in the event that there is "any" impact. Note the implicit minimization of the phrase "any negative impact" with the use of "any" and the non-count form of "impact."

FedEx gives little ground, admitting only that it was not sure whether some activities "may take place after May 31" and that some upgrades "may require" development on the part of some customers. Even in these instances, FedEx makes it clear that it was aware of these possibilities and stated so in its 10Q. Federal Express thus reflects a sure position, not only in light of the commercial risks at stake, but most likely also due to its strong reputation as the industry’s leader in the use of technology (The Gale Group 1999).

Definitions: Nailing it Down

Providing a definition of "readiness" offers the companies an opportunity to "nail down" the concept in terms which will allow them to appear prepared for Y2K. In this part of the disclosure statements, the corporations typically use strong epistemics reflecting a secure understanding of what it means to be ready for Y2K and suggesting a state of readiness which would assure customers and affiliates.

In the following excerpt, DHL leaves itself no room for negotiation. They leave no possibility for malfunction due to date recognition.

• General Integrity: No value for current date will cause any interruption in operation or erroneous processing.
• Date Integrity: Date-based functionality must behave consistently for dates prior to, during and after Year 2000.
• Explicit/Implicit Century: In all interfaces and data storage, unambiguous algorithms or inferencing rules must specify the century in any date, explicitly or implicitly.
• Leap Year: Year 2000 must be recognized as a leap year.

Similarly, the language Airborne uses in Excerpt D.2 rules out any miscalculation by any of their "products, applications, and systems" between 1980 and 2079.

UPS, although it raises questions about recommended uses and the "operating environment", also appears resolute, stating matter-of-factly what it means to be "ready".

Federal Express provides in their disclosure statement a list of software along with a statement as to whether each software is Y2K compliant. The following excerpt exemplifies FedEx’s compliance statement for individual software. The company is quite forthright and resolute in its statements of compliance but allows for the possibility of not covering all situations. SHIP11XX, as stated below, is compliant with the exception that it will not recognize leap year dates. The company, however, recognizes that not all copies of the software will necessarily be affected, pointing out, "If you are not affected…" This may be due to local reconfigurations of the software as well as hedging for legal purposes.

• Version SHIP11XX-Compliant with the following exceptions.

Caveats: Just in Case!

In contrast to the sections—introductions and definitions—previously illustrated, the discussion of caveats is replete with ambiguous language, epistemics which reflect insecurity with technological issues and hedging to avoid legal repercussions. While caveats exist throughout some of the statements, some also reserve a separate section of the statement for this type of discussion. Of particular interest is Federal Express’s which is lengthy and which exhibits fascinating uses of epistemics.

Before looking at two especially interesting examples from Federal Express’s document, note UPS’s terse statement below indicating the its software and hardware "may" not actually be compliant. This general statement is rather in character with its general definition in Excerpt D.3 above. Its general definition of "readiness" allows the company to more readily make such a caveat.

Unlike UPS’s statement above, Federal Express gives a couple pages of discussion of its uncertainty over the actual events that may occur come the Year 2000. This discussion surprisingly following 20-some pages of relatively resolute statements on its readiness, its definition of "readiness" and descriptions of a long list of software and hardware as illustrated above, reflects a fundamental uncertainty about Y2K.

Excerpts C.2 and C.3 below are both taken from this latter part of Federal Express’s disclosure statement which also appears in its 10Q submitted to the SEC. Comparing the following excerpts with the previous excerpts from the corporation’s statement, I.4 and D.4, one might come to the conclusion that they came from separate documents or that they were written be different authors. The epistemic stance represented in the previous excerpts and that in the following excerpts are strikingly different.

Federal Express prefaces its discussion by pointing out the "general uncertainty" of its compliance and attributing the uncertainty mostly to its connections to other organizations. In the sense that FedEx previously focused solely on its internal compliance, this discussion could be considered consistent with the previous discussion. Otherwise, it is uncharacteristically conciliatory. Continuing in the same tone, the verb "believe" is used to predict possible scenarios, but in fact the corporation is not able to clearly identify what might happen. In rather confusing, convoluted, obscure language, it proposes that there is no "single most reasonably likely worst case scenario" but in fact any number of them. This language engenders a pessimism and uncertainty which is not seen in the previous 20-some pages of the FedEx document.

Following the list of possible detrimental events, the company admits that its plans were developed to "substantially lessen the possibility of significant interruptions" without a clear indication of what "substantial" would mean or how great the possibility of significant effects is. They go on to more directly indicate that the company "may" experience serious failures in spite of its plans "as Y2K problems become known." It thus admits that not all problems may be identified at this time, let alone developing plans to address them. Note the use of "could" and "uncertainty", additional lexical realizations of the company’s uncertainty. Note also the phrase, "reduce significantly the level of uncertainty about the impact of Y2K issues."

Excerpt C.3 continues the same use of weak epistemics which apparently underlie an uncertainty of how Y2K may affect Federal Express. This excerpt could be rather alarming as the corporation announces that it is making efforts to "understand" the status

of third parties. This is less than an ideal position to be in as the new year is only several months distant. The only strong epistemic, in the last sentence, may do little to allay concerns raised in this unsettling part of the statement.

These excerpts and the brief discussion of them illustrates an interesting interplay of epistemics in Y2K disclosure statements which have been published following the "Year 2000 Information and Readiness Disclosure Act" in the fall of 1989. It would be interesting to pursue a more detailed analysis of the deployment of epistemics in one statement, particularly their role in defining the rhetorical development of the statement. This would be helpful since individual excerpts, especially when taken from various documents, provide only a piecemeal view of the documents.

It has also been suggested that a comparative analysis of the published disclosure statements and the 10Q’s would lead to an enlightening view of how corporations portray their positions differently depending on their audience (North 1998b). Allegedly some published statements present more optimistic views than are presented in the 10Q’s.

Of interest to many people is what the advent of the Year 2000 will bring. An analysis of language used in post-Y2K corporate documents may be of interest whether the next year bodes good or ill.

References

Airborne Express. Public Relations. 7/23/99. About Airborne Express. 9/3/99.

http://www.airborne-express.com/about/year2000.htm

Bartholomew, Doug. 1998. IT Delivers for UPS. Industry Week. 247. 23. 58+. RDS

Business and Industry Index. http://www1.xls.com/cgi-bin/bnisuite.exe

Bracher, Mark. 1993. Lacan, Discourse, and Social Change. Ithica, NY: Cornell

University Press.

Business Times. 1999a. DHL Unveils E-Track Service. Business Times (Malaysia).

March 9, 1999. RDS Business and Industry Index.

http://www1.xls.com/cgi-bin/bnsuite.exe

Business Times. 1999b. FedEx Plans to Set Up Two Express Centres in Malaysia.

Business Times (Malaysia). February 24, 1999. RDS

Business and Industry Index. http://www1.xls.com/cgi-bin/bnisuite.exe

Bybee, Joan L. 1985. Morphology: A Study of the Relation between Meaning

and Form. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Chung, Sandra and Alan Timberlake. 1985. Tense, Aspect, and Mood . In

Shopen 1985c, pp. 202-258.

Dahl, Osten. 1985. Tense and Aspect Systems. New York: Basil Blackwell.

DHL Airways, Inc. Year 200 Readiness Disclosure. 25 June 1999. http://www.dhl-usa.com/y2k

Dickey, Sam. 1998. Y2K Compliance Solution Delivered to DHL Worldwide. Midrange

Solutions. 11. 3. 12.

Duffy, Daintry. 1999. Y2K Contingency Planning: Better Safe than Sorry. CIO

Enterprise. February 15. 36-44.

Fairclough, Norman. 1989. Language and Power. New York: Longman.

Fairclough, Norman (ed.). 1992. Critical Language Awareness. New York: Longman.

Fairclough, Norman. 1995. Critical Discourse Analysis: the Critical Study of Language.

New York: Longman.

Fairclough, Norman. 1995. Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.

Fairclough, Norman and Ruth Wodak. 1997. Critical Discourse Analysis. In Teun van

Federal Express. 1999a. About FedEx: FedEx Year 2000 Readiness Disclosure. 9/3/99.

http://www.fedex.com/cgi-bin/DS_y2k.cgi?index&us

Federal Express. 1999b. About FedEx: Year 2000 Readiness Disclosure. 9/3/99.

http://www.fedex.com/cgi-bin/DS_y2k.cgi?y2kfaq&us

Federal Express. 1999c. FedEx SEC 10Q Statement. (filed May 31, 1999) 9/3/99.

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/230211/0001047469-99-014629.txt

Forbes. 1999. Absolutely, Positively Overblown. Forbes. 163. 6. 80. RDS Business and

Industry Index. http://www1.xls.com/cgi-bin/bnisuite.exe

The Gale Group. 1999a. Federal Express Corporation—History. Gale Business

Resources. 9/9/99. http://www.galenet.com/servlet/GBR/

The Gale Group. 1999b. DHL Airways Inc.—History. Gale Business

Resources. 9/9/99. http://www.galenet.com/servlet/GBR/

The Gale Group. 1999c. United Parcel Service of America Inc.—History. Gale Business

Resources. 9/9/99. http://www.galenet.com/servlet/GBR/

Gazeta Mercantil. 1999. Transportadoras centram foco na Internet. Gazeta Mercantil.

Givón, T. 1984. Syntax: A Functional-typological Introduction. Volume I.

Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Kirsner, Scott. 1999a. War Games: Attacking the Millennium Bug Calls for a Prudent

Battle Plan. CIO. Winter/Spring 1999. 18-22.

Kirsner, Scott. 1999b. The Ripple Effect: No One’s Immune to Compliance Problems.

CIO. Winter/Spring 1999. 24-28.

Kirsner, Scott. 1998. Test Patterns. CIO. March 1, Section 1. 52-58.

Mills, Sara. 1997. Discourse: The New Critical Idiom. New York: Routledge.

Mumby, Dennis and Robin Clair. 1997. Organizational Discourse. In Teun van Dijk (ed.)

Discourse as Social Interaction. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. 181-205.

Nelms, Douglas. 1998. Airborne-All the Way. Air Transport World. 35. 8. 96+. RDS

Business and Industry Index. http://www1.xls.com/cgi-bin/bnisuite.exe

North, Gary. 1998a. Federal Express: Absolutely, Positively Compliant in September,

1999. 9/6/99. http://www.y2k-links.com/garynorth/3222.htm

North, Gary. 1998b. White Collar Man Speak with Forked Tongue. 9/6/99.

http://www.garynorth.com/y2k/detail_.cfm/3139

Orenstein, David. 1999. Y2K Crunch Time is Here for Retailers. Computerworld. 33. 4.

16.

Palmer, F. R. 1986. Mood and Modality. Cambridge, England: Cambridge

University.

RPS. 1999a. About RPS: RPS Year 2000 Readiness Disclosure. 9/4/99.

http://www.shiprps.com/about/y2k.htm

RPS. 1999b. About RPS: FAQ About TPS Year 2000 Initiatives—Year 2000 Readiness

Disclosure. 9/4/99. http://www.shiprps.com/about/y2kfaq.htm

Securities and Exchange Commission. http://www.sec.gov

Ulrich, William. 1999. Year 2000 Aftershock. Presentation given at "Before Y2K

UPS Year 2000 Readiness Disclosure. 1 June 1999. http://www.ups.com/about/y2k.html

Van Dijk, Teun. 1997. Discourse as Interaction in Society. In Teun van Dijk (ed.)

Discourse as Social Interaction. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. 1-37.

Virtual Dynamics Corporation. 3/2/99. Senate Y2K Committee Report. 9/7/99.

http://www.y2ktool.com/year2000/tip61.shtml