5 ms·

Chinese (and derivatives) basically just count like English, but without the inconsistencies. 4444 = Four thousand, four hundred, four ten, four. Though it is

Chinese (and derivatives) basically just count like English, but without the inconsistencies. 4444 = Four thousand, four hundred, four ten, four. Though it is interesting that they group by powers of 10k instead of powers of 1k.

thaumasiotes 5y ago
> Chinese (and derivatives) basically just count like English, but without the inconsistencies. Not really. "One thousand five" is 1,005 in English, but it's 1500 in Mandarin. For 1005 you'd need to say "one thousand zero five".
- numpad0 5y ago
  Could that be where “3V3” style notation came from? In electronics, 3V3 means 3.3V, not 3/3V or 3x3V or 3.003V, and likewise 1R5 means 1.5 Ohm. It’s handy but took me a while to get used to.
  - thaumasiotes 5y ago
    Don't know; Chinese usage seems unlikely to have been influential in the relevant time period. There is another oddity in Chinese numbers which requires a bit of grammar explanation: Chinese requires measure words when applying numbers to nouns. English has count nouns and mass nouns ("three crackers", where "cracker" is a count noun, versus "three loaves of bread", where "bread" is a mass noun); Chinese has only mass nouns. [1] Thus: 三个人 "three (三) people (人)", with 个 being a measure word appropriate for people 一只狗 "one (一) dog (狗)", with 只 being a measure word appropriate for animals 一首歌 "one song (歌)", with 首 being a measure word appropriate for poetry Most nouns use 个. The oddity is that 半 ("one half") occurs before the measure word when it represents the total amount, but after when it's a modification. 一个小时 "one hour (小时)" 两个小时 "two (两) hours" 半个小时 "half an hour" 一个半小时 "an hour and a half" This also occurs with money, where it's probably the same grammatical rule: 三块 "¥3" 三块二 "¥3.20" But for this to be fully consistent, I'd expect 零个半小时 "zero and a half hours" where in reality 半个小时 is used. [1] Some people have argued that since e.g. "one day" 一天 has no measure word between 一 and 天, 天 must be a noun that requires no measure word. This is wrong; it is a measure word that requires no noun. An easy way to see this is that reduplication carries the same meaning that generally applies to reduplicated measure words, and not the meaning that applies to reduplication of nouns -- 天天 means "every day" in the same way that 个个 means "every [one]"; it does not mean "cute little day" in the same way that 狗狗 means "doggie".
    - novok 5y ago
      Can you just say the measure words like you do in English then? Like "I'll have 3 loaves please". I guess it would be like 三个 or similar? Also thanks for saying that they're equivalent to things like "Schools of fish" or "loaves of bread". They make way more sense to me now!
      - thaumasiotes 5y ago
        > Like "I'll have 3 loaves please". I guess it would be like 三个 or similar? That's it exactly, and it's very common. Any time the noun is clear from context, you can leave it out. (You shouldn't leave out the measure word though - where in English you might have "I'll take three", in Chinese you'd still want 三个.) If you walk into a restaurant, someone will ask 几位 "how many?". 几 is a question word for small numbers, and 位 is a (formal, polite) measure word for people.
    - pezezin 5y ago
      Japanese is like that too (probably got it from Chinese), with the added fun that it has two sets of numerals: the indigenous Japanese one and the borrowed Chinese one. So you not only need to memorize the counting word but also which kind of numeral to use.
  - quesera 5y ago
    No, that's just pragmatism. The origins happen to be US/American: It's the most compact, non-ambiguous representation, and avoids symbols that print poorly or are not available everywhere.
- jmchuster 5y ago
  Ah, yes, shorthand, which the language loves. So the shorthand here is that if you don't add a unit qualifier then by default it's the next largest power of 10. So, "1,500,000" can be shortened from "1 million 5 hundred thousand" to "1 million 5", based on the theory that you're much more likely to use "1,500,000" in real life than "1,000,005". So then of course, to handle the latter use case, you now have to add the qualifier "1 million 0 ten 5", and then we shorten that of course to "1 million 0 5".
  - thaumasiotes 5y ago
    > "1,500,000" can be shortened from "1 million 5 hundred thousand" to "1 million 5" Is this actually true? There is no "million" form in Chinese. Powers-of-1000 separators don't make any sense in the language either[1]. 150,0000 is, fully, 一百五十万 "one hundred five ten 10,000". And you obviously can't shorten that to 一百五 "one hundred five" because that's 150, not 150,0000. You could try saying 一百五万, but I don't think that makes much sense. [1] The incompatibility between the Chinese number system and the English number system has resulted in Chinese speakers in America innovating the unit-of-salary "K". 工资几十K？ One K is, of course, USD 1000.
    - jmchuster 5y ago
      That's more of an analogous example. In Chinese you would shorten 一万五千 to 一万五.
didip 5y ago
Chinese is sweet and consistent until 10,000. They introduced a new word for it, wan(万) instead of 10 x 1000.
- School-Cotton 5y ago
  Why is that inconsistent? There are also separate words for 1, 10, 100, and 1,000, so why not 10,000 ?
  - novok 5y ago
    If your number separators are every 3, then it feels weird. If it's every 4, then it does not. Change numbers into 1, 10, 1000, 1'0000 and then it doesn't feel like it's going against your writing habits.
    - pezezin 5y ago
      Dunno about China, but Japan is a weird mix of two systems: - Groups of 4 digits separated by the corresponding power-of-10000 kanji, e.g. 1億2345万6789. Makes sense, I would say it's actually better than just separating the digits, as it makes easier to recognize the size of the number. - Groups of 3 digits separated by commas, e.g. 123,456,789. I asked around how they do to mentally regroup digits by four, and everybody told me that is quite difficult and don't understand why they don't group digits by four. Then again, they have the most difficult writing system in the world and a ridiculous calendar, maybe they just like challenges.

thaumasiotes 5y ago

> Chinese (and derivatives) basically just count like English, but without the inconsistencies. Not really. "One thousand five" is 1,005 in English, but it's 1500 in Mandarin. For 1005 you'd need to say "one thousand zero five".

numpad0 5y ago
Could that be where “3V3” style notation came from? In electronics, 3V3 means 3.3V, not 3/3V or 3x3V or 3.003V, and likewise 1R5 means 1.5 Ohm. It’s handy but took me a while to get used to.
- thaumasiotes 5y ago
  Don't know; Chinese usage seems unlikely to have been influential in the relevant time period. There is another oddity in Chinese numbers which requires a bit of grammar explanation: Chinese requires measure words when applying numbers to nouns. English has count nouns and mass nouns ("three crackers", where "cracker" is a count noun, versus "three loaves of bread", where "bread" is a mass noun); Chinese has only mass nouns. [1] Thus: 三个人 "three (三) people (人)", with 个 being a measure word appropriate for people 一只狗 "one (一) dog (狗)", with 只 being a measure word appropriate for animals 一首歌 "one song (歌)", with 首 being a measure word appropriate for poetry Most nouns use 个. The oddity is that 半 ("one half") occurs before the measure word when it represents the total amount, but after when it's a modification. 一个小时 "one hour (小时)" 两个小时 "two (两) hours" 半个小时 "half an hour" 一个半小时 "an hour and a half" This also occurs with money, where it's probably the same grammatical rule: 三块 "¥3" 三块二 "¥3.20" But for this to be fully consistent, I'd expect 零个半小时 "zero and a half hours" where in reality 半个小时 is used. [1] Some people have argued that since e.g. "one day" 一天 has no measure word between 一 and 天, 天 must be a noun that requires no measure word. This is wrong; it is a measure word that requires no noun. An easy way to see this is that reduplication carries the same meaning that generally applies to reduplicated measure words, and not the meaning that applies to reduplication of nouns -- 天天 means "every day" in the same way that 个个 means "every [one]"; it does not mean "cute little day" in the same way that 狗狗 means "doggie".
  - novok 5y ago
    Can you just say the measure words like you do in English then? Like "I'll have 3 loaves please". I guess it would be like 三个 or similar? Also thanks for saying that they're equivalent to things like "Schools of fish" or "loaves of bread". They make way more sense to me now!
    - thaumasiotes 5y ago
      > Like "I'll have 3 loaves please". I guess it would be like 三个 or similar? That's it exactly, and it's very common. Any time the noun is clear from context, you can leave it out. (You shouldn't leave out the measure word though - where in English you might have "I'll take three", in Chinese you'd still want 三个.) If you walk into a restaurant, someone will ask 几位 "how many?". 几 is a question word for small numbers, and 位 is a (formal, polite) measure word for people.
  - pezezin 5y ago
    Japanese is like that too (probably got it from Chinese), with the added fun that it has two sets of numerals: the indigenous Japanese one and the borrowed Chinese one. So you not only need to memorize the counting word but also which kind of numeral to use.
- quesera 5y ago
  No, that's just pragmatism. The origins happen to be US/American: It's the most compact, non-ambiguous representation, and avoids symbols that print poorly or are not available everywhere.
jmchuster 5y ago
Ah, yes, shorthand, which the language loves. So the shorthand here is that if you don't add a unit qualifier then by default it's the next largest power of 10. So, "1,500,000" can be shortened from "1 million 5 hundred thousand" to "1 million 5", based on the theory that you're much more likely to use "1,500,000" in real life than "1,000,005". So then of course, to handle the latter use case, you now have to add the qualifier "1 million 0 ten 5", and then we shorten that of course to "1 million 0 5".
- thaumasiotes 5y ago
  > "1,500,000" can be shortened from "1 million 5 hundred thousand" to "1 million 5" Is this actually true? There is no "million" form in Chinese. Powers-of-1000 separators don't make any sense in the language either[1]. 150,0000 is, fully, 一百五十万 "one hundred five ten 10,000". And you obviously can't shorten that to 一百五 "one hundred five" because that's 150, not 150,0000. You could try saying 一百五万, but I don't think that makes much sense. [1] The incompatibility between the Chinese number system and the English number system has resulted in Chinese speakers in America innovating the unit-of-salary "K". 工资几十K？ One K is, of course, USD 1000.
  - jmchuster 5y ago
    That's more of an analogous example. In Chinese you would shorten 一万五千 to 一万五.

didip 5y ago

Chinese is sweet and consistent until 10,000. They introduced a new word for it, wan(万) instead of 10 x 1000.

School-Cotton 5y ago
Why is that inconsistent? There are also separate words for 1, 10, 100, and 1,000, so why not 10,000 ?
- novok 5y ago
  If your number separators are every 3, then it feels weird. If it's every 4, then it does not. Change numbers into 1, 10, 1000, 1'0000 and then it doesn't feel like it's going against your writing habits.
  - pezezin 5y ago
    Dunno about China, but Japan is a weird mix of two systems: - Groups of 4 digits separated by the corresponding power-of-10000 kanji, e.g. 1億2345万6789. Makes sense, I would say it's actually better than just separating the digits, as it makes easier to recognize the size of the number. - Groups of 3 digits separated by commas, e.g. 123,456,789. I asked around how they do to mentally regroup digits by four, and everybody told me that is quite difficult and don't understand why they don't group digits by four. Then again, they have the most difficult writing system in the world and a ridiculous calendar, maybe they just like challenges.