Taipei’s MRT just hit 5 billion trips or 50?
Back in February Taipei’s Mass Rapid Transit System (MRT) welcomed its 5 billionth passenger trip. Opened in 1996 and serving roughly 1.66 million individual trips a day, hitting 5 billion in total trips is a noteworthy milestone.
Personally though I try to avoid the MRT as I prefer hitting the roads on the bicycle or scooter. Crowds just don’t do it for me and believe it or not it’s still massively cheaper to ride around on a scooter than catch the MRT.
Still, amidst thunderous storms hitting Taiwan’s capital yesterday, for the first time in a good few months I found myself waiting to catch a MRT train.
When one did finally arrive, here’s how it looked:

Colored pink and emblazoned with children wearing celebratory themed tshirts, probably not the way I would have advertised a 5 billionth trip, but each to their own. At least they were getting the message out there.
Hopping onto the train, inside you had a series of posters also creating awareness of the milestone:

You can’t see it in the above photo but where I’ve indicated with an arrow, the following English text appears:
Accumulated ridership has exceeded 5 billion journeys.
Shortly after reading that… I took stock of the whole poster and it was then I questioned the use of the number ’50′.
Somebody’s obviously decided the design a logo to mark the milestone and for some reason, rather than go with 5 for 5 billion they’d chosen 50. The number 50 featured prominently on the signage as well as on all the tops the little kids were wearing.
Naturally I turned to my girlfriend for an explanation and turns out that the use of 50 has something to do with how 5 billion is denoted in Chinese.
‘Fair enough… by why use English numbers to represent that then?’
This of course then deteriorated into one of our ‘it’s not English, it’s Chinese!’ ‘Of course it’s English, the numbers five and zero aren’t Chinese!’ type discussions, with both us eventually agreeing to disagree.
From my side of the fence the inclusion of the English text about 5 million trips means that Taipei Rapid Transit Corporation (TRTC) do intend for non-Chinese reading patrons to read the signs. With the only other recognizable English on there being the number ’50′, surely I’m not the only one who was confused (I originally thought it was a massive numerical fuckup on the TRTC’s behalf).
On the flipside if I was to write whatever denotes 5 billion using only Chinese characters but then tried to change the numerical value using English words, that would most definitely confuse people… so why do it at all?
Especially when you’ve gone to the trouble to whack the literal numerical value for 5 billion on the outside of the train.
It’s not that much of a big deal I know but if I didn’t know any better, I could just have easily have come away thinking whoever is running the MRT has no idea how to count… either that or they’d buggered the English and meant to write ’50 billion’ rather than 5.
Meanwhile the kids tshirts don’t even have any text on them other than the number 50, so it reads ‘yay we’re celebrating 5 billion trips by handing out tshirts with the number 50 on them!’
Good thing I don’t ride the MRT too often…



April 30th, 2012 at 12:20 pm Hans(Quote)
Man, decadic number system is originally Chinese, do you have to be so egocentric that you can’t allow other nations use numerals (arabic, although modified) 0-9?
As English has got a word for “thousand” and “million”, Chinese has got monosyllabic words for “ten thousand” and “hundred millions”.
Lucky you didn’t visit some European countries, your blog would explode with posts about billion or billiard
April 30th, 2012 at 12:25 pm ozsoapbox(Quote)
Yes, yes I do.
If there was no English on the sign it wouldn’t have even rated a mention as it’d make sense to use the numbers to represent whatever the denotation was in Chinese.
With English on the sign though 50 is 50… and it aint 5 billion.
Got my hands full here!
April 30th, 2012 at 12:38 pm Hans(Quote)
Time to crawl out of your shell and get over banalities
April 30th, 2012 at 12:39 pm ozsoapbox(Quote)
Nevar! I kinda at least expect the MRT people to get their numbers right.
April 30th, 2012 at 12:49 pm Hans(Quote)
They did. You didn’t have the capacity to understand that there’s more than just One Right Way™.
And please stop pretending you don’t get it or I will have too much fun this morning
April 30th, 2012 at 12:52 pm ozsoapbox(Quote)
I’m being completely honest here, had my girlfriend not been there I’d have no idea why they used 50 instead of 5. I do try and work out things like on my own before throwing up my hands and going ‘I don’t get it’.
Like I said, I originally thought it was a fuckup on the TRTC’s behalf. Anyone would… who doesn’t read Chinese.
Show that ad to anyone who doesn’t speak Chinese and they too will wonder why there’s a 50 there when they are talking about 5 billion trips in English. And if you’re going to put English on signs you need to take this into consideration, or you just come off looking stupid.
Think about the same in reverse, using English text and whatever the Chinese character is to depict 50… tell me that shit would fly in Taiwan?
April 30th, 2012 at 1:38 pm Hans(Quote)
You back yourself with English here and English there, do you realize even English is not consistent when it comes to numbers? One time billion means 1,000,000,000 and the other 1,000,000,000,000. Now that is some serious Engrish!
I don’t get why you bring up your so-called “same in reverse” example, when I decide to write 五十 in an English paragraph, who are you to stop me?
April 30th, 2012 at 2:37 pm Nil(Quote)
I feel for you Oz, but this presumes Taiwanese care about anything outside of the Chinese-speaking world. It’s like trying to explain to Chinese why they can’t call Americans “foreigners” when they are visiting America.
That being said, it definitely adds to the number conversion confusion: it’s great for us foreigners trying to learn Chinese (I know the number starts with “wu-shi”) but misleading for Taiwanese who might want to say the number in English (leading them to think it starts with “fifty” in English).
I’ve found even the most educated bilingual people have difficulty with number conversion from time to time.
April 30th, 2012 at 2:59 pm ozsoapbox(Quote)
@Hans
One billion is a thousand million. I know other countries use other figures (100 million or one million million) but for me if it’s anything other than a thousand million, you’re wrong. End of story as far as I’m concerned.
It’s not about stopping you, but if you want to write whatever ‘五十’ is and put with English words that make it incorrect, you’re also wrong. Again, end of story as far as I’m concerned.
@NeilThat’s a concern for the other side of the fence and valid one at that.
‘yo guess what, the MRT just hit 50 billion trips.’
’50 billion wtf? That can’t be right…’
‘Nah it’s what the sign said, 50 billion!’
‘Sounds nuts to me’.
April 30th, 2012 at 3:14 pm mike(Quote)
“Man, decadic number system is originally Chinese…”
Actually Hans, base-ten number systems were used across several civilizations independently of one another. It’s just logic after all and no one particular culture has a monopoly on logic.
I often find the difference in notation causes confusion though – I can handle the Chinese numbers well enough (-萬, 十萬, -百萬, -千萬, -億, -兆, but after that I don’t know!), but Taiwanese people don’t always render their equivalent in English accurately. A recent example: I was doing some background reading on the Chia-nan canal from Wushantou reservoir here in Tainan, and in one document the total length of the canal system (trunk plus branches, plus minor ditches) was rendered in English as over sixteen thousand kilometers (16,000 km)! That is something like the distance between Tainan and Texas. I figured it was a number confusion, because if the total distance is given as over one thousand six hundred kilometers (1,600km) then it is just about believable.
@Oz… the thing is Taiwanese people will often use English as a kind of marketing gimmick rather than for the benefit of foreigners – after all, there are not that many of us.
April 30th, 2012 at 3:20 pm mike(Quote)
“It’s not about stopping you, but if you want to write whatever ‘五十’ is and put with English words that make it incorrect, you’re also wrong.”
No, I think it’s fine as long as you understand the difference in how the scale of numbers is registered (the higher numbers are calculated from the base of ten thousand). Besides, it’s not a difficult thing to understand.
April 30th, 2012 at 3:20 pm Hans(Quote)
End the story as far as you’re concerned?
Oz, you’re wrong when it comes to the original etymology of billion: bi- means two and million represents 10 to the power of 6, so billion should have 12 zeroes, billion with mere 9 zeroes is a French mistake that made it to American English.
If you couldn’t understand it from my point about English inconsistency, then I’ll write it here: it’s common in British English to still use billion in its original meaning.
Numbers are important part of the language, I wonder how you explain it to your students? Get cocky and repeat you’re right and it’s the end of the story as far as you’re concerned?
What an unqualified Engrish teechur :-/
One would say living in a foreign country, you would open your eyes rather than become outspoken about your own blindness and stubbornness.
April 30th, 2012 at 4:31 pm ausGeoff(Quote)
Uh… hardly worth arguing over…
Billion =
1,000,000,000 (number), one thousand million, 10^9, in the short scale, and
1,000,000,000,000 (number), one million million, 10^12, in the long scale.
Obviously, here in Australia we use ’50′ as in $50 billion, so I agree that the prominent ’50′ on everything could be interpreted incorrectly by a Westerner.
Interestingly, the signage on the train carriage uses the numerical 5 billion correctly. Go figure!
April 30th, 2012 at 4:44 pm Hans(Quote)
Hi mike!
What are the other origins of decadic (base-ten) numder systems? I thought it was invented once and adopted worldwide (obviously, with some variations), that’s why numbers tend to be kind of language-independent (that notion is probably Oz’s source of confusion, firmly believing anything that uses 0-9 digits has to be English).
And I totally agree it’s a source of confusion. For me, the Am. E. billion was a huge source of confusion too. But that’s exactly the reason for inter-cultural educators why they should understand the matter well and be able to explain it, not to shy away from it or even refute as wrong.
April 30th, 2012 at 6:17 pm James(Quote)
Firstly, mate, how long have you been here? The difference in units was one of the first major divergences I came across and that was after a couple of months max, I reckon. Maybe thats because I was around locals all the time when I first arrived.
But I have to concur with others here that you are being incredibly obstinate and not a little obtuse in your comments here. Like Hans, I half thought you were pulling legs.
‘English’ numbers? Dear me … They use Arabic numerals, they have different divisions – that’s it.
Besides … even in English there’s scope for things like this: http://www.15hundredlives.co.uk/
Imagine a big ’15′ on an ad, with the ‘hundred’ tucked away below, not prominent. A native might even get confused.
Seriously, you come off as pretty culturally superior here: for the guy mentioning Taiwanese abroad calling people ‘foreigner’ (see it plenty of times) – pots and kettles? I think the analogy is much more apposite in reference to the stance Oz is trying to maintain here.
Amazed your missus ‘agreed to disagreed’ – mine would have been plastering me with invective …
April 30th, 2012 at 6:21 pm mike(Quote)
Hans,
Indian* and Greek; Sanskrit and Tamil have decadic number systems and the ancient Greeks used “Aegean numerals” prior to their alaphabet. There are others too I think, but I can’t be bothered to check.
To be fair to Oz though, his use of “billion” to refer to 10 to the power of 9 is to be expected; in current usage, the word “milliard” has become very old-fashioned, if not archaic.
So as a brutally practical matter, Oz wouldn’t be teaching students the wrong use of “billion”, but as an intellectual matter I agree: if it occurs to a student to ask this question, then, at the very least, it should not be dismissed out of hand and preferably the teacher should be able to explain the point.
A similar problem sometimes arises with grammar; students will ask questions about say, the perfect aspect (often misleading called “perfect tense”) because the way in which it is taught in grammar textbooks is… utterly shite.
One of the most popular grammar textbooks in Taiwan contains questions on the use of perfect aspect which are literally impossible to answer correctly, because the question itself is imperfectly formed. It’s also often the case that the teachers themselves only have a tacit understanding of grammar and are therefore unable to explain the function of perfect aspect and to distinguish it from simple aspect.
*As a rule of thumb, whenever you hear a claim that something or other is unique to China, or was developed in China first, it’s a good idea to check whether the same thing didn’t occur first in India, as the spread of Buddhism from India to China brought a lot of things with it (though I’m not saying this applies in the case of the base-ten nuber system).
April 30th, 2012 at 10:27 pm Thoth Harris(Quote)
These are Arabic numerals we’re working with. As for Chinese speakers here in Taiwan, they often can only conceive of a civilisation which is Chinese and Chinese-derived, and then the Other, which is American English.
So if you are Australian (as you are, Oz – yeah, not Kiwi, haha), or British, as Mike is, or Canadian, as I am…you don’t exist – or you might as well not. But the fact is, whether Chinese speakers in Taiwan like it or not, English-speaking, and by extension, Western civilisation is somewhat based on Middle Eastern civilisation.
Alexander, and later Caesar, from the Hellenic world controlled Egypt for a while. For quite a while, actually. After Alexander invaded, it was called the Ptolemaic Dynasty or Ptolemaic era.
And as for Hans, and his ad hominem attacks on Oz, hey, get off your high horse. You just WANT to be offended it seems. Your argument about the etymology if billion is useless IN THIS CONTEXT (there, I all-capped it, in case you don’t read carefully and purposely overlook my critique, which is at least more nuanced than yours.
What we need to realize here is that using language by itself to refer to numbers is useless for most proper math (and I’ll be the first to admit I’m no mathematician – an understatement, really). Roman numerals were quickly abandoned.
How can one really do complex math problems using X’s and V’s and L, and what-have-you? Chinese symbols are just as useless in the same way. It’s about time they were used properly.
I don’t mind being confused by how 10,000′s are used in Chinese, but really, math is math (Arabic until recently) so let’s not use a 50 when one means 5000,000,000.
And Hans, 5000,000,000,000 is 5 trillion. I don’t know where you come off claiming 5 billion is the same is 5 trillion. You, in fact, said this: “One time billion means 1,000,000,000 and the other 1,000,000,000,000. Now that is some serious Engrish!”
April 30th, 2012 at 11:29 pm TaiwanTeacher(Quote)
Geez..
It’s a Flame War about numerical systems, with the “As a citizen of the Commonwealth, I insist on properly Anglicizing everyone” rogue versus the “If you don’t like the way it is, then either grow up or GO HOME!” crowd.
I enjoy a good debate. Thanks.
May 1st, 2012 at 12:22 am mike(Quote)
“I don’t know where you come off claiming 5 billion is the same is 5 trillion.”
Thoth: ausGeoff already pointed out why with the “long scale, short scale” distinction.
May 1st, 2012 at 10:20 am ozsoapbox(Quote)
@Hans
Uh does it? I know bi means two but does it specifically mean it in “billion”, any more than the “bi” in “bin” means two?
Taiwan ironically uses the thousand million model, which makes this discussion all the more stupid.
Yeah… and maybe I should “go home” too. What an apologetic cop out.
@ausgeoffI’ve actually been waiting for someone to notice that. It kind of negates all the long form/short form arguments. They’ve clearly written 5 billion as a thousand billion and at the end of the day ’50′ doesn’t factor into that any way you cut it.
@JamesNot fussed about the differences in Chinese.
I don’t mangle Chinese numbers to express myself in English, so why do the same for Chinese?
What does that have to do with anything? In this instance there is no English explaining or signifying why TRTC used ’50′ when they are harping on about 5 billion trips.
Worse still are the tshirts that just have the number 50 on them and nothing else.
…might be time to grow a pair then.
May 1st, 2012 at 11:09 am James(Quote)
No, because – as argumentative and cantankerous as I am – she would be right. Maybe your missus should stick to her guns but that is probably no mean feat in the face of a pig-headed refusal to get your head around a pretty easy concept.
You’re totally missing my point mate about the 15 hundred – it’s just an illustration of how using a combination of figures and words could be misleading at a prima facie glance.
Seriously, literally everything you’re saying is based on a fundamental category error. I genuinely thought this post was a tongue-in-cheek bit of satire at first but as you’ve continued, it’s clear you are serious.
I have to say, and it’s been remarked elsewhere before, you do seem to have a pretty tough time following fairly basic reasoning. As with the misunderstanding over my example,the following illustrates this pretty neatly:
Hans et al did not bring up the short and long models to say Taiwan might be using a different model but simply to demonstrate that your black and white “this is this and that’s my final say” type mentality doesn’t allow for any variables.
Then, with the flimsiest of strawman rebuttals:
Very frustrating. The ‘just get back to your own country foreigner’ line is very, very annoying and is a tacit admission that something is awry but that – rather than address it – we’ll just say “this is Taiwan get used to it”. As someone who may well spend the rest of his life here, I find such retorts lazy and specious.
But it’s pretty obvious that is not what people are doing here. I certainly am not, at any rate. What I am saying, once again, is that your position is founded on a fundamental category error – namely the notion that Chinese are using ‘English’ numbers incorrectly. They aren’t. You’re wrong. That’s it.
All the rest is just stuff and nonsense but keep blustering away by all means.
Oh and
Seriously, mate. Do yourself a favour. This is just embarrassing.
I like your blog Oz as a place for banter and some often amusing views on news and local issues but sometimes you come across as seriously naive, wet behind the ears and, surprisingly, for someone who says he likes a bit of banter, not engaging your critical faculties.
May 1st, 2012 at 2:10 pm ozsoapbox(Quote)
She did, but rather than cave in so did I.
No I’m not, you cited the use of the word hundred. There’s no such comparable text in this example.
Yes, whacking the number 15 on something talking about 1,500 with no signifier or explanation is equally as stupid as putting 50 up on a sign that is advertising 5 billion trips in English.
Mate stupid is stupid. I don’t care how you spin it, at the end of the day 50 has nothing to do with, nor does it represent 5 billion. Especially when the TRTC have used 5,000,000,000 to signify 5 billion as opposed to any other value.
Nope. If it’s got English on it, it’s not a ‘Chinese‘ sign anymore is it. Again, had there of been no English on there this wouldn’t have bugged me.
Sorry, you were just saying about black and white and a lack of variables?
Then you like it for the same reasons I do, and I find using 50 to represent 5 billion stupid.
As other readers have commented in the past, it’s often amusing to watch people justify stupid shit like this. And quite often one of the first retorts is ‘*snort* so how long have you been here again?‘ Which has already been trotted out in this particular discussion.
Anyone would think the longer you were in Taiwan the quicker common sense flew out the window. I hope to be an exception to this rule and you’ll never catch me accepting that 50 can be used to depict 5 billion in English.
May 1st, 2012 at 2:33 pm TaiwanTeacher(Quote)
As long as you are objecting to combinations of “English numbers and Chinese text” being on things in Taiwan, I’ll be happy to relieve you of the frustration you must be encountering anytime you see a “1000″ yuan banknote.
You can simpy take it back to a bank and transfer the money to my account. Thanks!
May 1st, 2012 at 3:02 pm ozsoapbox(Quote)
Why, does 1000 yuan not accurately represent 1000 yuan?
…or did you just miss the point entirely?
May 1st, 2012 at 5:06 pm James(Quote)
You win. Just like you did against your missus. Why? Because nothing anyone is saying is going into that porcine bonce of yours. For the millionth time: The number ISN’T ENGLISH any more than the pi sign is! So they have the ridership line in English (that’s been on the MRT for months btw)? So bloody what? English-speakers are clearly not the main target.
You still don’t get that point about the 15 hundred do you?
YES THERE IS. Very clearly underneath there is are the characters 千億, which – combined with the figure 50 (WHICH IS NOT ENGLISH) = five billion (5,000,000,000). Again, let me try and paint a clear picture:
You are on the subway in New York. You see a sign for A Chinese New Year’s celebration. It happens to have a bit of Chinese text on with, say, the words for Happy New Year. It also has some figures and words saying come and celebrate 25 hundred years of history. Big 25, small hundred next to it.
Now, by your brand of reason, this is ‘wrong’ because it could confuse Chinese tourists/residents or migrant workers who can’t read English.
Let me preempt your answer. Don’t say the analogy is flawed because the figure 15 is English. That is my very point about your argument being based on fundamental category error, namely the claim that the number 50 is English. IT IS NOT.
This is why it is YOU and not TaiwanTeacher who is missing the point. Again, you don’t seem to be able to follow pretty basic arguments: in this case an argument ad absurdum. His point is that the key premise in your argument is that English text is being used incorrectly alongside Chinese. Since – as I shall say repeat for the 5th (or 50th [:p] ) time – it is NOT, all that is left is an objection against using these numbers at all. Hence the cheeky NT$1,000 jibe.
Basically, you seem to think these Arabic numerals and what they denote are somehow objectively embedded in the English language, like Platonic ideals. Any culture that has different unit divisions and employs these figures is obliged to do so using divisions that are alien to them. Utterly barmy.
And you talk of people justifying stupid shit with a straight face …
May 1st, 2012 at 5:32 pm ozsoapbox(Quote)
Well it aint Chinese, and I don’t see any other language written on the sign.
Be that as it may, if I can read something on the sign someone at TRTC decided I was a target and needed to know.
You don’t get to choose who reads their sign.
And that’s not English. ’50′ is English, in the absense of any other language being represented on the sign.
Nope, because ’25′ and ‘hundred’ is English. There’s no mishmash.
Except that it is. There’s only English and Chinese on that sign, and ’50′ isn’t Chinese.
Yeah… I’m missing my own point. No worries champ.
So are you gunna tell me a 1000 TWD banknote isn’t worth 1000 taiwanese dollars? Sorry, what was the point again given that there’s no English on a Taiwanese banknote?
Well seeing as I don’t speak Arabic and there’s no Arabic on the sign, the number 50 in this context is English. I’ve said it three times now, it aint Chinese.
You wanna put 5 billion in English on a sign> Fine but don’t then try represent it with a giant 50 if you’ve written 5 billion in English.
If you want to use 50 to represent 5 billion don’t confuse the issue by putting 5 billion in English on the sign too. Simple.
Next you’ll be telling me I speak Latin.
May 1st, 2012 at 6:32 pm TaiwanTeacher(Quote)
Refer: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabic_numerals
First off, the “0″ you see isn’t English at all, it was invented as a numerical placeholder in India sometime around 500AD. The number “5″ is not English either. It’s derived from Arabic.
Now… if you wish to return to the Roman numeral system (I, V, X, L, C, and M) in your daily life, being as how it had far earlier usage in English (predating the Arabic forms by some 1000 years; ca. 1400, and about 200 years AFTER the Arabic-Hindi forms were introduced to China), then that’d be ok by me.
Care to see ” L億 ” ? Anyone?
But, of course, that would be silly, right?
Yep. Silly. It would be nearly as silly as your conflicting statements that:
1) ” ’50′ is English”
2) “there’s no English on a Taiwanese [1000] banknote”
Did you by chance register your own a Commonwealth copyright on the number ’50′ so as to claim it is “English”, and have you failed to inform the rest of the world of your conquest?
Let’s talk about fanatical Euro-ethnocentrism for a awhile. Veni, Vidi, Vici!
May 1st, 2012 at 6:37 pm James(Quote)
What in god’s name are you talking about? THERE IS CLEARLY CHINESE ON BOTH OF THOSE SIGNS.
You’ve finally admitted what grates: ‘them’ using ‘our’ numbers. But ‘they’ are using them incorrectly only if one accepts that Arabic numerals belong to exclusively to cultures that employ the same unit divisions as most Western countries.
(In fact you aren’t even saying that but claiming that these numbers are ‘English’ as opposed to, Western European. They were in use in England as early as the 14C but several centuries earlier in Italy/Southern Europe where the influence of Islamic science was strongest. Meanwhile, Arabic numerals were in use as early in China as the England (possibly earlier), with the European version introduced a few centuries later.)
I actually frequently banter with the missus and Taiwanese friends about English words that have been co-opted and are now used completely differently from their original meaning (often by people who have no idea). As an editor, and lifelong pedant, I’ve also got issues with the use of ‘our’ punctuation symbols in Chinese script.
But this is completely different. You quite simply don’t know what you’re talking about (in that you can’t seem to get your head round the basic bones of the argument). As it’s apparent that you will never back down on this, this time, I really will leave it at that.
May 1st, 2012 at 6:39 pm ozsoapbox(Quote)
Jesus Christ.
Can I reiterate that I don’t give a shit if 0 is Arabic, Chinese, Doggish or from the moon.
50 is fifty and you’re deluding yourself if you think otherwise or that it represents 5 billion in English.
There are no English written words on a Taiwanese banknote, so I don’t care what numbers they use.
Whether you like it or not, numbers do make up the English language and when you use English on a sign and include numbers you either get it right or don’t use them at all.
50 is not Chinese and there are no other languages on that sign so deal with it.
May 1st, 2012 at 6:41 pm ausGeoff(Quote)
On another tangent…
Many believe that the ‘one-many’ concept must have developed long before the concept of “counting”.
There were many symbols used to represent the counts. The Roman numerical system (I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX, and X which are letters of the Latin alphabet and nominally represent the decimal system) was one of them, but it wasn’t practical. It also failed to include a symbol for ‘zero’. The set of mathematical symbols that we use today originated with the Hindus, and was then improved by the Arabs—it might also be a decimal system simply because we have 10 fingers LOL.
Our ancestors probably used words for ‘one’ and ‘many’ long before abstracting the metanumeric concept of “number” from, presumably, the tally.
If a dog has two bones and I take one away, the dog will undoubtedly notice. But do dogs understand “number” thereby?
There may also be a parallel with language. Children acquire numerous words before they acquire the metalinguistic concepts “word’” and “meaning”. Possibly the human grasp of numbers and language evolved together following their discovery as metacategories?
Anyway, from this point on, I think it’s time we agreed to disagree on this—relatively unimportant—marketing campaign? I’ll need a walking frame before it’s resolved!
May 1st, 2012 at 6:45 pm ozsoapbox(Quote)
@James
Oh dear… who said there wasn’t? I said there’s Chinese and English on those signs, there’s no Arabic, Roman numerals or whatever the fuck else you lot are going on about.
Entirely within the context of that sign, 50 is English. I don’t give a shit about Islam, Arabic numbers, Western Europe, England or all the other crap you’re going on about.
Oh please, don’t even try to turn this into a race thing.
There are two languages on that sign, English and Chinese. ’50′ aint Chinese. And ’50′ in no shape or form represents 5 billion in English.
Period.
May 1st, 2012 at 6:47 pm TaiwanTeacher(Quote)
To clarify:
It seems the zero was invented by the Hindus, and it joined up with the Arabic numeral system before finally being used in “English” via its travels through the Germanic languages.
Meanwhile, the Arabic-Hindi numeral system was introduced by the Muslim people during the Mongol Empire period in China.
Basically, the numerals you are referring to are WORLDWIDE, not just “English”. Get off your high horse.
May 1st, 2012 at 6:50 pm ozsoapbox(Quote)
Mate, you show me the Arabic, Hindi, Mongol or Germanic text on that sign and I’ll concede.
For the purpose of this discussion I really couldn’t give a shit how the numbers are used outside of the context of English and this particular signage.
50 != 5 billion.
May 1st, 2012 at 6:53 pm mike(Quote)
This thread reads like a sketch that John Cleese would’ve chucked back in the early ’70s.
Oz you daft banana: the digits 0-9 are not English in the same way that the alphabet is not English.
Having said that, I think there is something more interesting going on here in your reaction to the sign.
What seems to be getting you worked up is a tacit expectation that, in the prescence of corresponding English words (the “Accumulated ridership has exceeded 5 billion journeys…” bit), the use of numerals (whether 5 or 50) should accord with Anglospheric convention (the aforementioned “short scale”, and thus the number “should” have been 5 rather than 50).
There are two senses in which that expectation might be justified, the first is probabilistic – i.e. that the Anglospheric convention is likely to be used and so it jars when it isn’t; the second sense is imperative – i.e. that the Anglospheric convention should be used.
Reading James’ comments it seems to me he suspects you of holding that second sense of expectation which he regards as unjustified arrogance, but it may be that your irk over this is caused by having held the first sense of expectation.
Enlighten us.
May 1st, 2012 at 6:57 pm ozsoapbox(Quote)
That one.
I honestly stood there for 10 minutes or so trying to work out why on Earth they’d used 50 everywhere.
You guys have been reading me for a while. Do you honestly think I’d get worked up over Chinese signs displaying non-Chinese characters? Or that it’d be some sort of race or us vs. them thing?
…
May 1st, 2012 at 7:13 pm James(Quote)
Egad! I’ve been stuck in the house all say, had my first gout attack in years and have to go into town to teach for three hours as the mean ol’ Buxibans don’t exempt you on Labour Day, unlike me day job (yeah, for all you fulltime cram school, I know, shouldn’t moan).
What Mike said.
Wasn’t bringing race into it in any way – you say you fall under the second of Mike’s descriptions but you are the only one insisting ’50′ is English. Everyone else seems to see how silly that is. If French text was on there, then the numbers are suddenly French.
May 1st, 2012 at 7:29 pm ozsoapbox(Quote)
Within the context of the sign yes and it’d be mighty stupid to use the numbers in a way that made no sense.
May 1st, 2012 at 9:10 pm blobOfNeurons(Quote)
50 myriad. Problem solved.
Well not really.
But printing ’50′ is the only way to go because, probabilistically speaking, anyone reading the sign is going to be able to read the Chinese characters as well, and will formulate the thought as (literally) ‘fifty myriad’. If a ’5′ were used, there would be a discrepency between the numerals and the text.
I think the simpliest way they could have avoided causing confusion would have been to print all occurences of ’5000000000′ as 5000000000 or similar.
May 1st, 2012 at 9:27 pm mike(Quote)
Oi James – is gout English you reckon?
May 1st, 2012 at 11:30 pm TaiwanTeacher(Quote)
The little “0″ in the “50″ is meant to accommodate persons who can’t read Chinese. You see… They gave you that nice big “5″ to keep you happy, and compromised on the 0.
However, some people just insist on criticizing other persons for they way they do things in THEIR COUNRTY,
and for NO APPARENT OR LOGICAL REASON other than boldfaced arrogance.
On the sign, the 億 (= 100,000,000) is clearly written in Chinese, preceded by 五十 (= 50).
If you can’t figure out what the 億 and 五十 mean when translated to your English, then I gather you just want everyone to pity you. Obviously, assisting you is clearly precluded by your expressesd arrogance, ignorance, and inability to adapt to foreign cultures and surroundings.
Now, please explain why English doesn’t have a suitable word for 億 (i.e., 100,000,000) that the bilingual Chinese writers and speakers can use in combination with the number 50 to better accommodate your specific needs.
If they had chosen to write “50 hundred-million” in lieu of “5 billion”… then I am quite certain that you would have objected to that as well.
May 2nd, 2012 at 12:06 am ozsoapbox(Quote)
Except that it doesn’t…
Yes yes “their country” and I should toddle off back “home”.
Got it. Yawn.
One hundred million.
Perhaps if you spent a little less time wallowing in linguistic self righteousness and looking down upon us mere “visitors” that’d have been obvious.
If that’s what they’d written I’d not have given a crap. Fail.
May 2nd, 2012 at 1:53 am James(Quote)
That’s not a word, mate -it’s three, which is his point.
As i commented before, this is strawman stuff. No one is saying that or anything close to it. I certainly wouldn’t because it is the response I despise the most when I criticize some aspect of life/society here, particularly from foreigners who have no investment in this country.
No, you are not being told to do one if you don’t like a bloody sign on the MRT, and I think you are being disingenuous to suggest that’s what anyone is saying.
Instead you are being told to stop telling people how to use numbers that have been in use in their culture for hundreds just because it might be confusing to a small minority.
(This is why, despite your pompous dismissals about not giving a shit about the origin and background of these ‘English’ numerals, it is NOT irrelevant. They have just as much right to them as we do).
Sorry but I do not believe you. Again, I think you’re being disingenuous: if it had had 50 hundred million you would have been harping on about how they couldn’t write English properly.
And, unlike with 99% of what you’ve said here, you would have been right as that would have been to use English incorrectly!
May 2nd, 2012 at 10:20 am ozsoapbox(Quote)
Doesn’t matter, one hundred million accurately describes that number and leaves no room for interpretation or confusion.
Actually in this instance yeah, I am. TaiwanTeacher has a bit of a chip on his shoulder jumping to the ‘why don’t you leave Taiwan, how dare you tell them what to do’ everytime he disagrees with criticism. It’s his first line of defense.
Of course they do, but not when there’s English on the sign and the use of said numbers causes confusion. Bilingual signs are supposed to be helpful, not confusing.
This is the ‘this is Taiwan, things are like this here’ argument and it doesn’t fly. All it’d take is replacing 50 with Chinese characters and you’d have all confusion removed for anyone.
Given that’s all that’d be required, ‘this is Taiwan’ just isn’t good enough.
Well… not much I can do about that. You’ve already told me I don’t get my own point… now you’re telling me what I would and wouldn’t do on a hypothetical.
What should I eat for breakfast today son? I was gunna have a bananna but you seem to know best.
May 2nd, 2012 at 12:24 pm James(Quote)
Seriously, mate, it’s unreal how you are missing so many of the points made here. Almost wilfull … Any use of irony, reductios ad absurdum, arguments from analogy or thought experiments seem to fly clean over your head.
Engage your critical faculties, and don’t just look at the words without some attempt to see where the person might be going with them.
TT’s point about the Chinese character for 100,000 simply illustrates how absurd it would be for a Chinese person to start shouting the odds abroad if the positions were reversed.
Again, consider: Chinese tourist sees a sign on the Sydney monorail that has a sentence (yup, that’s all it was mate – what’s the line you draw? Does having the letter/word ‘A’ on the poster constitute it being ‘bilingual’?)in Chinese alongside some English and a big number 5, with the words “billion”.
Shame on those Aussies for pigheadly sticking to their unit divisions. If they are going to put some Chinese words on the poster, they should really make it clear what is being said by writing 50 with “hundred million” underneath.
If your argument is fuelled by anything other than the clarity issue, rather than, say, a claim that ’50′ is objectively English, then this appears to be the logical conclusion.
Meanwhile, I’ve aleady said what I feel about the ‘this is Taiwan’ mentality. It’s drivel – a tacit admission that the person doesn’t have, or care to think about, an answer to the problem.
Once again, I probably have more reason to detest this lazy response than you, as I may be here for most of my life. I especially don’t want my kids growing up with such modes of uncritical thinking.
However, in this case, this is clearly not what is going on here. You are quite simply wrong and all your bluster about bananas and being told to get back to your own country cannot obfuscate that.
As for any previous between you and TT – I wasn’t erallya ware of that, though it does half ring a bell. I stop by here only intermittently. Haven’t even had a mo to attend to my own ramblings of late. Anyway, I can’t speak for him, but I am definitely not on the ‘don’t like it, then do one’ tip. Possibly the most irritating response ever.
May 2nd, 2012 at 12:55 pm ozsoapbox(Quote)
The number ’5′ isn’t a Chinese character. Epic fail.
If they combined the words “billion” with a Chinese character that didn’t equate to 5 billion they’d be well within their rights to wonder why the sign was wrong.
I’m not going to bother engaging in discussion about Australia vs. Taiwan as it’s not relevant. But please, keep trying to dig up ever increasing far fetched tangents to try to convince me that 50 can be used to represent 5 billion.
I’d tell you that you were wasting your time (because at the end of the day it simply doesn’t) but that seems to have no effect.
May 2nd, 2012 at 7:59 pm ausGeoff(Quote)
Okay; back to basics…
In British English, a billion is equivalent to a million million (I.E. 1,000,000,000,000), hence the bi- prefix, while in US English it has always been equal to a thousand million (I.E. 1,000,000,000).
British English has now largely adopted the American figure, though, so that—generally speaking—a billion equals a thousand million in both varieties of English.
In British English, a trillion means a million million million (i.e. 1,000,000,000,000,000,000), hence the tri- prefix. However (and this is where it gets sticky!) it’s now generally held to be the equivalent of a million million (1,000,000,000,000), as it is in US English.
And of course etymologically the word “million” originated with the Latin mille meaning thousand, plus the augmentative suffix -one.
My point being? English people and American people represent—graphically, with ‘ones’ and ‘zeros’—exactly the same number differently; why then can’t the Taiwanese (or the Chinese or Arabs or Indians or Greeks)?
At any rate, the English part of the poster (for tourists and/or non-Chinese speakers?) says “Accumulated ridership has exceeded 5 billion journeys.”
I see no problem.
May 4th, 2012 at 1:24 pm Jason Zhou(Quote)
Actually #s (1,2,3,etc) are neither English or chinese- they’re actually Arabic.
May 4th, 2012 at 2:15 pm ozsoapbox(Quote)
Guess you didn’t read any of the discussion before throwing your 2c in then hey.
May 4th, 2012 at 9:04 pm ausGeoff(Quote)
Depends on your interpretation…
It’s generally considered that the glyphs we call “numbers” in English were originated by the Indians, and latterly modified by the western Arabs.