Home Forums Mini-Lessons 2014年3月29日 – 数えることができるっすよね

This topic contains 18 replies, has 5 voices, and was last updated by  Joel 10 years, 3 months ago.

Viewing 4 posts - 16 through 19 (of 19 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #44795

    Joel
    Member

    Of course, your wikipedia link is also correct. You can have 百 or 一百. However, you cannot have something like 四千百. It would have to be 四千一百.<br>

    Wait, you’ve just taken a whole extra step away from what I’d learnt. I thought we were talking specifically about when 千 directly follows 万, but now we’re talking about every power of ten? I’m just going to say it straight, now: I think you’re wrong. I was prepared to chalk that one up to a hole in my knowledge when I thought it was a specific exception to do with the powers of ten thousand, but there’s no way you must insert an 一 every time. 百 on its own is enough to say “a hundred” without needing to say 一百, even when it’s part of a bigger number.

    The observation Michael was drawing from the quote he posted is that the non-formal version is 百十 as opposed to 百一十. I think. Note that further up the article, this number is given as an example of regular counting:

    20 3652 1801 : 二十億 三千六百五十二万 千八百一 (ni-jū oku, san-zen rop-pyaku go-jū ni-man, sen hap-pyaku ichi)

    There’s nothing between the 万 and the 千.

    By the way, why are we insisting on 一百 but not 一十? =P

    Well, if you still disagree with me, then it can’t be helped.

    This isn’t a “oh well, let’s just agree to disagree” thing. Either you’ve learnt something wrong, or both Michael and I have. I mean, it’s probably not something so severe as winding up with a listener going “wait! You’ve put an extra 一 in there! I have no idea what you’re trying to say!”, but it’s still something we ought to be confident about.

    #44796

    Anonymous

    Well, I’ll respect your opinion, at least…

    In my honest opinion, everything that has been stated so far doesn’t seem like sufficient evidence…yes, even my own posts. So now I really don’t know what to think.

    Well, don’t take it personally, please. I was just trying to help everyone with this mini-lesson, though I may be incorrect. Joel, now that you have mentioned that number example, my perspective is no longer stiff. I don’t have any confidence to do another mini-lesson now, but…

    #44797

    “Either you’ve learnt something wrong, or both Michael and I have.”

    To be honest, this isn’t really something I’ve specifically *learned*, it’s just what seems most plausible given the information I have, something I’ve inferred myself. I’m not sure I’d even thought about it before now.

    Even though I’m still not 100% sure, to sum up, it seems to me like 一千 and 一万 (and higher numbers) are correct, while 一百 and 一十 are not. 壱百 and 壱十 are also correct, but are possibly *read* like regular numbers i.e. ignoring the 壱.

    It’s not even that big a deal, I just find it interesting :D
    Plus I don’t like scoring 99% on this quiz ;)

    @Tsetycoon13: Please do another mini-lesson! Don’t let this stop you! Also, your image is very appropriate, even though I’d never heard the phrase 何が何だか分からない before (I learned something!).

    #44799

    Joel
    Member

    Please do another mini-lesson! Don’t let this stop you!

    Yeah. Asking probing questions just means I’m paying attention. =)

    Even though I’m still not 100% sure, to sum up, it seems to me like 一千 and 一万 (and higher numbers) are correct, while 一百 and 一十 are not. 壱百 and 壱十 are also correct, but are possibly *read* like regular numbers i.e. ignoring the 壱.

    The purpose of the formal numbers (which I’d assume you read off the Wikipedia page as well) is to prevent some unscrupulous type with a pen changing, say, an 一 to a 三 – basically, for the same reason you always write “and zero cents” on a cheque. One would assume that including the 壱 for every power of ten would have the same function – prevent someone from inserting some other number into the gap.

Viewing 4 posts - 16 through 19 (of 19 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.