ADVERTISEMENT

Should we change how we refer to numbers in the english language?

Ranger Dan

Ranger Dan

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Aug 31, 2003
19,928
10,651
1
York PA
I read an article this morning where the author was talking about overcoming his poor academic record in his early HS years. The focus of the article wasn't particularly about math, but he quoted the following: "According to Matthew Syed in the book Bounce, Asian children have an automatic advantage in math that is baked into the languages they speak. In most Asian languages, spoken numbers are composed simply, as in three-one-four (for 314), compared with three-hundred-and-fourteen in English. Also, all the numbers from zero to nine in most Asian languages are represented by one syllable each. English has seven (two syllables), plus all the other anomalous number words like eleven, twelve, seventeen, twenty, ninety, etc. This language simplicity translates into easy mental arithmetic for small children, which quickly gives them a higher base confidence and competence with math than comparably-aged non-Asian children. That competence and confidence feeds a cascade of growing mastery in math".

I don't know whether Matthew Syed's assertion is true or not, but if it is, then why not change it? Do you think that those of us who speak English as our primary language have a disadvantage because of the way we refer to numbers? I don't speak any other languages fluently enough to know, but would this also be a problem for all western languages or just English?
 
  • Like
Reactions: fairgambit
Ranger Dan said:
I read an article this morning where the author was talking about overcoming his poor academic record in his early HS years. The focus of the article wasn't particularly about math, but he quoted the following: "According to Matthew Syed in the book Bounce, Asian children have an automatic advantage in math that is baked into the languages they speak. In most Asian languages, spoken numbers are composed simply, as in three-one-four (for 314), compared with three-hundred-and-fourteen in English. Also, all the numbers from zero to nine in most Asian languages are represented by one syllable each. English has seven (two syllables), plus all the other anomalous number words like eleven, twelve, seventeen, twenty, ninety, etc. This language simplicity translates into easy mental arithmetic for small children, which quickly gives them a higher base confidence and competence with math than comparably-aged non-Asian children. That competence and confidence feeds a cascade of growing mastery in math".

I don't know whether Matthew Syed's assertion is true or not, but if it is, then why not change it? Do you think that those of us who speak English as our primary language have a disadvantage because of the way we refer to numbers? I don't speak any other languages fluently enough to know, but would this also be a problem for all western languages or just English?
Click to expand...

I think there are two issues here:

1) It would relatively easy to change the number convention so that we say "314" instead of three hundred and fourteen. The only issue I can see with this is that if you are saying a large number (6247432) it would be hard to keep track of how many numbers it was (when saying verbally). So did you just say six million or six hundred thousand (or sixty million).

2) Of the other western languages, Spanish definitely has multi-syllable numbers. French and German has some. This would be harder to change because you'd actually be suggesting to change the language instead of the convention of saying numbers.

While I am not a developmental scientist, kids are good at learning things. I have a hard time believing this is a huge issue. I see this as less of an issue with our STEM learning when compared with parents not being engaged with their kids schooling/homework.
 
  • Like
Reactions: psu1969a, Nitwit, psugrad85 and 1 other person
Ranger Dan said:
I read an article this morning where the author was talking about overcoming his poor academic record in his early HS years. The focus of the article wasn't particularly about math, but he quoted the following: "According to Matthew Syed in the book Bounce, Asian children have an automatic advantage in math that is baked into the languages they speak. In most Asian languages, spoken numbers are composed simply, as in three-one-four (for 314), compared with three-hundred-and-fourteen in English. Also, all the numbers from zero to nine in most Asian languages are represented by one syllable each. English has seven (two syllables), plus all the other anomalous number words like eleven, twelve, seventeen, twenty, ninety, etc. This language simplicity translates into easy mental arithmetic for small children, which quickly gives them a higher base confidence and competence with math than comparably-aged non-Asian children. That competence and confidence feeds a cascade of growing mastery in math".

I don't know whether Matthew Syed's assertion is true or not, but if it is, then why not change it? Do you think that those of us who speak English as our primary language have a disadvantage because of the way we refer to numbers? I don't speak any other languages fluently enough to know, but would this also be a problem for all western languages or just English?
Click to expand...

Only problem is that he's wrong. In Japanese, half of the numbers from zero two nine are two syllables, with the other half one. For numbers greater than ten, the verbal structure is similar to English. There is no evidence that the Japanese suffer in math.
 
  • Like
Reactions: psugrad85, Ranger Dan and anon_xdc8rmuek44eq
Ranger Dan said:
I read an article this morning where the author was talking about overcoming his poor academic record in his early HS years. The focus of the article wasn't particularly about math, but he quoted the following: "According to Matthew Syed in the book Bounce, Asian children have an automatic advantage in math that is baked into the languages they speak. In most Asian languages, spoken numbers are composed simply, as in three-one-four (for 314), compared with three-hundred-and-fourteen in English. Also, all the numbers from zero to nine in most Asian languages are represented by one syllable each. English has seven (two syllables), plus all the other anomalous number words like eleven, twelve, seventeen, twenty, ninety, etc. This language simplicity translates into easy mental arithmetic for small children, which quickly gives them a higher base confidence and competence with math than comparably-aged non-Asian children. That competence and confidence feeds a cascade of growing mastery in math".

I don't know whether Matthew Syed's assertion is true or not, but if it is, then why not change it? Do you think that those of us who speak English as our primary language have a disadvantage because of the way we refer to numbers? I don't speak any other languages fluently enough to know, but would this also be a problem for all western languages or just English?
Click to expand...

You're one of them there rabble-rousers ain't ya? ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: john4psu, Ranger Dan and LionJim
A good case study for him would be metropolitan French vs. other varieties of French. Metropolitan French has soixante (60), soixante-dix (70), quatre-vingts (80) and quatre-vingt-dix (90). They are literally sixty-ten (70), four twenties (80) and four-twenty-ten (90). To go further, 91 is quatre-vingt-onze or "four-twenty-eleven", 92 is quatre-vingt-douze or "four-twenty-twelve", etc. It seems very arcane and would be like English speakers still using four score for 80.

On the other hand, many French speakers outside France use septante (70), huitante (80) and nonante (90). These are more in line with the single digit numbers sept (7), huit (8) and neuf (9).

He should try to determine if students outside France benefit from the simplified counting system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ranger Dan
NittPicker said:
A good case study for him would be metropolitan French vs. other varieties of French. Metropolitan French has soixante (60), soixante-dix (70), quatre-vingts (80) and quatre-vingt-dix (90). They are literally sixty-ten (70), four twenties (80) and four-twenty-ten (90). To go further, 91 is quatre-vingt-onze or "four-twenty-eleven", 92 is quatre-vingt-douze or "four-twenty-twelve", etc. It seems very arcane and would be like English speakers still using four score for 80.

On the other hand, many French speakers outside France use septante (70), huitante (80) and nonante (90). These are more in line with the single digit numbers sept (7), huit (8) and neuf (9).

He should try to determine if students outside France benefit from the simplified counting system.
Click to expand...

Interesting, thanks for sharing that.

One might actually make the argument that the arcane way would be more useful to learning math, because it is inherently teaching addition (60+10=70) and multiplication (4 x 20= 80).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ranger Dan
Ranger Dan said:
I read an article this morning where the author was talking about overcoming his poor academic record in his early HS years. The focus of the article wasn't particularly about math, but he quoted the following: "According to Matthew Syed in the book Bounce, Asian children have an automatic advantage in math that is baked into the languages they speak. In most Asian languages, spoken numbers are composed simply, as in three-one-four (for 314), compared with three-hundred-and-fourteen in English. Also, all the numbers from zero to nine in most Asian languages are represented by one syllable each. English has seven (two syllables), plus all the other anomalous number words like eleven, twelve, seventeen, twenty, ninety, etc. This language simplicity translates into easy mental arithmetic for small children, which quickly gives them a higher base confidence and competence with math than comparably-aged non-Asian children. That competence and confidence feeds a cascade of growing mastery in math".

I don't know whether Matthew Syed's assertion is true or not, but if it is, then why not change it? Do you think that those of us who speak English as our primary language have a disadvantage because of the way we refer to numbers? I don't speak any other languages fluently enough to know, but would this also be a problem for all western languages or just English?
Click to expand...

We should go 'all in' like Hebrew numerology....
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ranger Dan
psuro said:
Maybe the reason Asian kids are better at math has more to do with their parents forcing them to spend more time doing math, and less time focusing on nonsensical things, such as travel sports.

And that is reflected in the median income, based on ethnic groupings, in the United States.

Off my soapbox now.
Click to expand...
Or less time on nonsensical things like buying a decrepit sail boat and thinking they have the ability to travel around the world. :eek:
 
  • Like
Reactions: anon_xdc8rmuek44eq
psuro said:
Maybe the reason Asian kids are better at math has more to do with their parents forcing them to spend more time doing math, and less time focusing on nonsensical things, such as travel sports.

And that is reflected in the median income, based on ethnic groupings, in the United States.

Off my soapbox now.
Click to expand...

Has more to do with the emphasis on and importance of education in their culture. When I lived in Japan, we often had cultural cross over days where a group of Japanese students would spend a day at our school (note: this was a DODDS school - !) to see what it was like. The gist is they did not like to stand out and worked extremely well together in groups. They were patient, considerate, and attentive. Man, I loved living there...

young-woman-in-furisode-kimono-standing-in-shibuya-crossing-at-night-picture-id831529934
 
  • Like
Reactions: 91Joe95 and Ranger Dan
At what point does the Super Bowl drop the Roman numerals? After the Steelers win Super Bowl 106? Or the Eagles win Super Bowl 108? The years make a lot more sense the longer it goes. The 2017 World Series champion Houston Astros.

On the very few checks I occasionally write, I still use the word hundred so what then Joe Paterno will have four zero nine wins?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ranger Dan
Ranger Dan said:
In most Asian languages, spoken numbers are composed simply, as in three-one-four (for 314), compared with three-hundred-and-fourteen in English.
Click to expand...

By the way, Three hundred and fourteen in the US of A equals 300.14 ;)
 
Ranger Dan said:
First of all, I was providing a direct quote from the article, which quoted some other author. Second, 300.14 would be three hundred and 14/100ths, correct?
Click to expand...
300 and 14 being 300.14 only applies if you know you are dealing with money. Otherwise it is just as correct to say 300 and 14 for 314.
 
psuro said:
Maybe the reason Asian kids are better at math has more to do with their parents forcing them to spend more time doing math, and less time focusing on nonsensical things, such as travel sports.

And that is reflected in the median income, based on ethnic groupings, in the United States.

Off my soapbox now.
Click to expand...
I think in general they just have much better work ethic. This translates to school, their jobs, and obviously winter Olympic sports. It just seems like most of the US athletes are of Asian descent. Half of my grad school class was Chinese National and I guarantee you that they were going to outwork their American counterparts every day. Now of those that I know that work with Asian manufacturers, they tell me that while the Asian countries work incredibly hard, they have other flaws such as not making common sense modifications to processes that they are told to follow or not admitting when things are not going as designed.
 
Ranger Dan said:
I read an article this morning where the author was talking about overcoming his poor academic record in his early HS years. The focus of the article wasn't particularly about math, but he quoted the following: "According to Matthew Syed in the book Bounce, Asian children have an automatic advantage in math that is baked into the languages they speak. In most Asian languages, spoken numbers are composed simply, as in three-one-four (for 314), compared with three-hundred-and-fourteen in English. Also, all the numbers from zero to nine in most Asian languages are represented by one syllable each. English has seven (two syllables), plus all the other anomalous number words like eleven, twelve, seventeen, twenty, ninety, etc. This language simplicity translates into easy mental arithmetic for small children, which quickly gives them a higher base confidence and competence with math than comparably-aged non-Asian children. That competence and confidence feeds a cascade of growing mastery in math".

I don't know whether Matthew Syed's assertion is true or not, but if it is, then why not change it? Do you think that those of us who speak English as our primary language have a disadvantage because of the way we refer to numbers? I don't speak any other languages fluently enough to know, but would this also be a problem for all western languages or just English?
Click to expand...

Hasn't it already changed to uno, dos, tres?
 
  • Like
Reactions: psu1969a, 91Joe95 and Ranger Dan
LionJim said:
How tall is Lamont Wade in Chinese numbers?
Click to expand...
Checking in to look at some threads. Jim, that is very very funny. Thanks.

I bet you don’t miss my 90-47 reminders:). This year’s 90-62 score was a little better for your Quakers:p:).

Hope you’re well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back