User:Dpbsmith/Billion

In most English-speaking countries today, one billion equals 1,000,000,000, or 10⁹: a one followed by nine zeros. (This is also the meaning of the word when used in Wikipedia, though it is preferable to avoid the term altogether, for reasons given below.) One billion (American usage) is thus equal to one thousand millions, or one thousandth of a trillion (American usage). For a list of occurrences of numbers of this magnitude, see the article 1 E9.

In most other countries, a word similar to "billion" indicates 1,000,000,000,000, or 10¹², or one million millions. For example: Norwegian, Dutch biljoen, German, French billion, Spanish billón, Italian bilione and Swedish billion or biljon. The value 10⁹ is called something similar to the English word "milliard" in these countries. For example, French and Norwegian milliard, Dutch miljard, German Milliarde, Spanish millardo, Italian miliardo, Polish miliard and Swedish miljard or milliard. (Spanish commonly uses "thousand million": mil millones.) See also False friends.

Origin late 17th century: From French, prefix bi- (twice) and -illion (from million). In imitation of one million million. Trillion: one million million million and so on.

Britain and Australia traditionally employed the international usage of 10¹², but have recently largely switched to the U.S. version of 10⁹.

Some non-English speaking countries are exceptions to the above rule and match the U.S. usage. A Brazilian Portuguese dictionary indicates 10¹² = trilhão, 10⁹ = bilhão. Similarly, transliterating from Greek, 10¹² = trisekatommyrio, 10⁹ = disekatommyrio (see myriad).

History[edit]

In 1475, Jehan Adam recorded the words "bymillion" and "trimillion" (for 10¹² and 10¹⁸).
In 1484 the French mathematician Nicolas Chuquet in his article "Triparty en la science de nombres" [1] used the words byllion, tryllion, quadrillion, quyllion, sixlion, septyllion, ottyllion, and nonyllion. Although Chuquet is often cited as defining these words to mean powers of a million, Robert Munafo has pointed out [2] that this is incorrect. Oddly enough, there is one passage in the work where they clearly refer to 10¹², 10¹⁸, etc. and another passage in which he is clearly using them to mean 10⁹, 10¹².

Au lieu de dire mille milliers, on dira million, au lieu de dire mille millions, on dira byllion, etc..., et tryllion, quadrilion ... octylion, nonyllion, et ainsi des autres si plus oultre on voulait proceder. French: "Instead of saying one thousand thousand, one may say million; instead of saying one thousand million, one may say billion, — and trillion, quadrillion, ... octillion, nonillion, and others as well, as far as you wish to go."

Chuquet's work had little direct influence because his work was not published until the 1870s, but most of it was copied (without attribution) by Estienne de la Roche for a portion of his 1520 book, Larismetique.

Around 1550 Pelletier used the system based on powers of 10⁶, adding the term "milliard" for 10⁹. This system was used in England and Germany and part of the rest of Europe, but in France and in the USA a different system became established where the term billion signifies 10⁹.
In 1926, H. W. Fowler's Modern English Usage noted "It should be remembered that this word does not mean in American use (which follows the French) what it means in British. For to us it means the second power of a million, i.e. a million millions (1,000,000,000,000); for Americans it means a thousand multiplied by itself twice, or a thousand millions (1,000,000,000), what we call a milliard. Since billion in our sense is useless except to astronomers, it is a pity that we do not conform."
1948 the "Conférence des Poids et des Mesures" proposed to use the original Pelletier system in France.
1961 the "Journal Officiel" (the French official gazette) decided in favor of this proposal.
Some dictionaries recommend: "The terms billion, trillion, quintillion, quatrillion, quintillion and sextillion are to be avoided because of the ambiguity"
In 1974 British prime minister Harold Wilson abandoned the use of billion for 10¹², by explaining before the House of Commons the fact that "billion" from now on in British government statistics has the American use i.e. means 10⁹.

But there seems still to be uncertainty about this:

On one side, Graham Dane, a native English speaker, writes in the forum of the Online-vocabolary LEO.org:

The term milliard is very rare in British English. Billion has meant thousand million in financial writings for many years now, and is almost universal in other fields. Anyone using billion to mean million million is likely to be misunderstood.

On the other side, in the FAQs of alt.usage.english (the part by Ken Moore) states:

Despite this, the U.S. meaning is still rare outside journalism and finance, its introduction having served merely to create confusion. Throughout the U.K., a common response to the question "What do you understand by 'a billion'?" would be: "Well, I mean a million million, but I often don't know what other people mean." Few schoolchildren are confident of the meaning, though, again, 10¹² seems to be preferred.

One alternative approach is to use SI prefixes, that is, "Giga" for 10⁹ and "Tera" for 10¹². However, this alternative is often only used with specific units that commonly have such magnitudes. An additional problem is that if the unit is a computing term, the term may be interpreted as being a power of 2 instead of a power of 10 (see Binary prefix for more information on one approach to avoiding this).

Sources[edit]

Non-English words: Pocket dictionaries from Collins (London), Oxford, and Kunnskapsforlaget (Oslo).
millardo: The Royal Spanish Academy web site There are still two meanings of the number "billion".

The original meaning, since the beginnings of Modern Times, is "a million of a million" (= 10^12). This system, the so-called "long scale", was maintained or readopted all around the world, excepting the USA, Puerto Rico and Brazil.
In the late 17th Century made one a change in the way of writing of the large numbers. Before the numbers were separated in groups of six digits, afterwards one came to the modern grouping to only three digits. Now, a minority of scientists, especially in Italy and France, would change the original meaning of the number billion to be equal to 10^9, but there are no reason to. Under influence of these French advisers and to be distinguished from British use, the USA adopted this reformed meaning finally during the 19th century. Currently it's the system preferred in financial world (it looks like to be more); therefore journalism in many English-speaking countries like the United Kingdom, South Africa, and Australia often uses this meaning, termed the "short scale".

In France, the reformed system—an erroneous system, according to the Littré dictionary—had never obtained the unanimity. The French government clarified the situation while confirming, officially and explicitly, the original system. Décret 61-501 (page 14, note 3A). So they switched back to the main system in use all around the world. Russia and Turkey, however, use officially the short scale for numbers above billion, but 10^9 is called communally "milliard", like for example, French and Norwegian milliard, Dutch miljard, German Milliarde, Spanish millardo, Italian miliardo, Polish miliard and Swedish miljard or milliard. (Spanish commonly uses "thousand million": mil millones.)

Other examples of countries where "billion", according the original long scale, indicates (1 Million)² or 1 000 000 000 000 or 10¹² or one million millions: French, Norwegian, Dutch biljoen, German Billion, Spanish billón, Italian bilione and Swedish billion or biljon.

Brazil is the only not English-speaking country using entirely the short scale with 10¹² = trilhão, 10⁹ = bilhão.

In Greece the international word "billion" is not in use, but similar to short scale: 10⁹ = disekatommyrio (("two hundred myriad"), 10¹² = trisekatommyrio, ("three hundred myriad").

History[edit]

In 1475, Jehan Adam recorded the words "bymillion" and "trimillion" (for 10¹² and 10¹⁸).
In 1484 the French mathematician Nicolas Chuquet in his article "Triparty en la science de nombres" [3] used the words byllion, tryllion, quadrillion, quyllion, sixlion, septyllion, ottyllion, and nonyllion. Robert Munafo now affirms (without any proof ! ) that, there were one passage in which Chuquet was using them to mean 10⁹, 10¹², etc. [4] But the original writing clearly refers to 10¹², 10¹⁸, etc. Chuquet's work had little direct influence because his work was not published until the 1870s, but most of it was copied (without attribution) by Estienne de la Roche for a portion of his 1520 book, Larismetique.
Around 1550 Pelletier while maintaining the system of the great scale of Chuquet, proposed to call the traditional "thousands of millions" now "milliards". This system was largely adopted in England and Germany and the rest of Europe.
Early 17th Century, in France and Italy a minority of scientists would change the sens of billion to be now 10⁹.
Middle 18th Century, this reformed meaning of the term "billion" was brought to the New-England colonies.
Early 19th Century the first attested schoolbooks teaching the system of the short scale in the USA.
In 1926, H. W. Fowler's Modern English Usage noted "It should be remembered that this word does not mean in American use (which follows the French) what it means in British. For to us it means the second power of a million, i.e. a million millions (1,000,000,000,000); for Americans it means a thousand multiplied by itself twice, or a thousand millions (1,000,000,000), what we call a milliard. Since billion in our sense is useless except to astronomers, it is a pity that we do not conform."
1948: the "International Conférence des Poids et des Mesures" proposed to use the original Adam-Chuquet-Pelletier system.
1961: the "Journal Officiel" (the French official gazette) confirms the system of long scale.
Some dictionaries recommend: "The terms billion, trillion, quatrillion, quintillion and sextillion are to be avoided because of the ambiguity"
In 1974 British prime minister Harold Wilson abandoned the use of billion for 10¹², by explaining before the House of Commons the fact that "billion" from now on in British government statistics has the American use i.e. means 10⁹.
In 1994 the Italian government too confirms officially the international use of the term "billion" [5] (.pdf page 12)

Confusing use[edit]

Conclusion: The confusing use exists only in English language (USA) and Portuguese language (Brazil).

On one side, Graham Dane, a native English speaker, writes in the forum of the online dictionary LEO.org:

The term milliard is very rare in British English. Billion has meant thousand million in financial writings for many years now, and is almost universal in other fields. Anyone using billion to mean million million is likely to be misunderstood.

On the other side, in the FAQs of alt.usage.english (the part by Ken Moore) states:

Despite this, the U.S. meaning is still rare outside journalism and finance, its introduction having served merely to create confusion. Throughout the U.K., a common response to the question "What do you understand by 'a billion'?" would be: "Well, I mean a million million, but I often don't know what other people mean." Few schoolchildren are confident of the meaning, though, again, 10¹² seems to be preferred.

Alternative approaches[edit]

One alternative approach is to use SI prefixes, that is, "Giga" for 10⁹ and "Tera" for 10¹². However, this alternative is often only used with specific units that commonly have such magnitudes. An additional problem is that if the unit is a computing term, the term may be interpreted as being a power of 2 instead of a power of 10 (see Binary prefix for more information on one approach to avoiding this).

Sources[edit]

Non-English words: Pocket dictionaries from Collins (London), Oxford, and Kunnskapsforlaget (Oslo).
millardo: The Royal Spanish Academy web site

User:Dpbsmith/Billion

History[edit]

See also[edit]

Sources[edit]

History[edit]

Confusing use[edit]

Alternative approaches[edit]

See also[edit]

Sources[edit]