Brain Teasers
Close Encounter
What's the rule?
What comes after the sequence? 1, 9, 19, 99, 109, 119, 199, 999...
What comes after the sequence? 1, 9, 19, 99, 109, 119, 199, 999...
Hint
Read the title.Answer
The rule is that each number has one more "N" in it than the one before it as per:oNe, NiNe, NiNeteeN, NiNety NiNe, oNe huNdred aNd NiNe, oNe huNdred aNd NiNeteeN etc...
The next number is 1199.
Hide Hint Show Hint Hide Answer Show Answer
What Next?
View a Similar Brain Teaser...
If you become a registered user you can vote on this brain teaser, keep track of which ones you have seen, and even make your own.
Solve a Puzzle
Comments
Close, but not quite. This is a common mistake: the word AND is not used when naming whole numbers. 109 is one hundred nine, NOT one hundred and nine. The word AND is used to represent the decimal point. For example, 109.9 is one hundred nine and nine-tenths.
when writing the number 109 do you write "one hundred nine" or "one hundred and nine"?
in a way you are right gizzer, but when writting the numbers down you cannot ignore the "And" as an integral part of the written number.
so as it stands the teaser is correct as there is no such number as "one hundred nine", or "nine hundred ninety nine"
in a way you are right gizzer, but when writting the numbers down you cannot ignore the "And" as an integral part of the written number.
so as it stands the teaser is correct as there is no such number as "one hundred nine", or "nine hundred ninety nine"
When you are writing out numbers such as 109 and 119, you should not write the "and", this is a common error because people say "and" when they pronounce the words out loud. "One Hundred Nine", and "One Hundred Nineteen" are the proper ways the write those numbers.
I think this appears to be another one of those cultural factors that influence some of the answers to teasers. I agree with Mad- Ade. In our system, the word "and" is always written between numbers as in 109 = "one hundred and nine."
The proper pronunciation and spelling of 109 in “one hundred nine.†The “and†is not supposed to be used. It is so widely missed used that it is almost accepted. But most teachers will not accept the “and†as a correct answer. I was helping my stepson with homework recently and I said the answer was “one hundred and nine†(or a similar number) and his teacher marked it incorrect. I don’t believe it is a cultural thing, I just think most of us forget about it after the third grade.
I agree with jmcleod in that most of us forget this after the third grade, but no matter where you are, in the English language, and is only used in writing out numbers with decimals. (109.9) One Hundred Nine and Nine Tenths.
surely you jest, no one when using correct spoken english says "one hundred nine" or "one hundred nineteen". As for decimals no would say 109.9 as "one hundred nine and nine tenths" they would say "One hundred and nine point nine"
It is truly crazy to say that the "and" part of these numbers are not spoken, when clearly they are. In all my years I have never heard anyone ever pronounce 109 as "One hundred nine" or 199 as "one hundred ninety nine".
It is truly crazy to say that the "and" part of these numbers are not spoken, when clearly they are. In all my years I have never heard anyone ever pronounce 109 as "One hundred nine" or 199 as "one hundred ninety nine".
Mad, just because you've never heard anyone speak the names of numbers correctly, doesn't mean all these people are correct. I've heard people use the correct nomenclature, and I've heard people get it wrong. I also know people who think it is correct to say "I been to the store", simply because they have only heard it that way, and not as "I've been to the store". Doesn't make them right.
I have been to university lectures and listened to math and physic proffesors recite a plethora of numbers and digits, I have watched hundreds perhaps even thousands of tv programs from a collection of countries and cultures where numbers are mentioned, I have heard a myriad of radio broadcasts from all corners of the globe where numbers are used, I have had countless conversation with untold amounts of different people from different cultures and races and yet have never in all my 35 years heard a single person NOT pronounce the "And" in numbers such as 109 or 199 when speaking them in the "One Hundred and Nine" manner. I have heard them say "One zero Nine" or "One nine nine" but never "one hundred nine".
Just because you have heard some people say the word with out the the "And" does not mean that they are correct or indeed that it is correct or common practice to do so. It may just be a common thing with in a certain group of people that does not apply to the rest of the world, but this does not mean it is correct.
so to say I have never heard the words pronounced correctly is a big judgement to make considering the age of gobal media we live in and the countless amounts of different accents and regional slants and cultures we here on a daily basis. I have probably heard some one from every English speaking country in the world at some point, but I have never in any of them heard the "And" being dropped from the spoken numbers.
Just because you have heard some people say the word with out the the "And" does not mean that they are correct or indeed that it is correct or common practice to do so. It may just be a common thing with in a certain group of people that does not apply to the rest of the world, but this does not mean it is correct.
so to say I have never heard the words pronounced correctly is a big judgement to make considering the age of gobal media we live in and the countless amounts of different accents and regional slants and cultures we here on a daily basis. I have probably heard some one from every English speaking country in the world at some point, but I have never in any of them heard the "And" being dropped from the spoken numbers.
Mad: 1) There is, and likely always will be, a difference between common usage and correct grammar. 2) I already said most people are unaware of this rule. This includes university educated people, too. 3) I only thought people might be interested in the rule. I hardly expect that anyone will change their habits. 4) It's not worth the time to continue this discussion, as it is not that big a deal.
So are you suggesting that we ignore the world wide and most popular and common usage and reject this teaser because it doesn't suit a small group of users?
There are a great number of teasers on this site that ignore true Grammar and deal with only the common and wide spread usage of word, and as this is a world wide site for all ages and users it would be ridiculous to disbar or class as incorrect every one that does not conform to exact grammatical rules.
There are a great number of teasers on this site that ignore true Grammar and deal with only the common and wide spread usage of word, and as this is a world wide site for all ages and users it would be ridiculous to disbar or class as incorrect every one that does not conform to exact grammatical rules.
I never said anything about rejecting the teaser. I made a comment about a grammatical rule. Sheesh!
You didn't actually just make a comment about grammer you implied that the teaser was incorrect, if so then incorrect teasers need rejecting.
What you meant was it wasn't to your liking. In that case vote and move on.
Sheesh yourself.....
What you meant was it wasn't to your liking. In that case vote and move on.
Sheesh yourself.....
I never said I didn't like the teaser either. I attempted to correct a commonly held misconception. I'm sorry I bothered.
You are not the only one.....
An interesting arguement between two of the sites big guns, but I have to agree with Mad Ade, AND is an integral part of the numbers
Not nice, Mad. Not nice at all. I would love to be able to direct you all to a website that explicity quotes this rule, but as yet, I haven't found one. I'm still looking. In the meantime, check out this site: http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/57113.html - the math expert gives the name of 73.78007 as "seventy-three" and "seventy-eight thousand seven" hundred thousandths.
Ok, lets play silly games. Here are some that say "And" is included http://www.learnenglish.de/Level1/Basics/Numbers.htm http://www.grammarstation.com/KnowYourMath/numbers_symbols.html http://esl.about.com/library/beginnercourse/bl_beginner_course_numberbasic.htm it took me about 2 minute to find these, I bet I could find hundreds more if i could be bothered to look deeply enough. What exactly does it prove, other than different cultures have different grammar. There is no reason to get shirty and start claiming teasers are wrong because your culture is different to another. I am english and as such spell words differently to Americans, but i do not go around saying some teasers are wrong because of spelling. The truth is you wanted to sound all superior because you thought you knew better, but it backfired and now you feel embarased and you don't like it, hence the "I am going to find a website to back me up" post. I wouldn't mind so much but the site you posted does not even back you up, instead you babble on about decimal points, which has absolutely nothing at all to do with the teaser or any of the points I have made about "And" being part of a written number such as 109, 119 or 199. (note that none of these are decimals). At the end of the day the word "and" is considered part of written numbers by most of the English speaking cultures and therefore this teaser is valid and correct and your intitial post was completely unnecessary.
May I say something before someone gets murdered? First of all, the initial post was not unnecessary, because it brings up a good point---most of us have bad English. Now, may I remind you that you are arguing about the pronunciation of words like "One Hundred Nine", when what is important is how you write out the word...I may not have some fancy college education, but even my third grade teachers know that "One Hundred and Nine" is wrong. Try putting that on your spelling test! It might be, that since it has been taught to me that way, I believe it to be that way. I will always think that the "proper" and "correct" written forms of numbers will not have "and".
Yes a great deal of us do have bad English, that is if you only assume your cultures version of English is the only one or at least the most important but we are talking about variations in the english language between different English speaking countries. Is some Countries the "and" IS considered correct, and in some it isn't. You, like Gizzer, are only drawing from your own culture and assuming that anything else is incorrect, when this is not the case. Braingle is a world wide site for ALL English speaking people from every corner and culture of the planet. It would be silly to claim that one cultures ideas are greater than others. it is arrogant and small minded to say that because you were taught one thing then everything else taught anywhere else is incorrect. Gizzers first post said that the teaser was incorrect because she had been taught or heard differently. In a further post she claimed that " just because you've never heard anyone speak the names of numbers correctly, doesn't mean all these people are correct." when what she really mean't was, "I say it this way therefore everyone else is wrong" in a further post Gizzer was still unable to accept that anything other than what she knew could possibly be correct.. "I already said most people are unaware of this rule. This includes university educated people" This RULE is not universal, but Gizzer still insists that her interpretation is the only correct one....even later on Gizzer still could not see that anything but her knowledge could be wrong and still insisted that the skipping of the "and" was a rule. She was either unwilling or unperpared to accepted that anything outside her own culture could possibly be correct or effect what she already thought she knew..."I made a comment about a grammatical rule" ..a grammatical error that is not universal...even later Gizzer still would not accept that cultural difference occur and single minedly insisted that she was anything less than 100% correct with her follow up post..."I attempted to correct a commonly held misconception", this being a commonly held misconceptuion that is actually correct and valid in many countries !! ..even further to this Gizzer openly said she could not find anything to back up what she said, and then posted some nonesence about decimals, but never said anything about the fact that she could possibly be incorrect or that not everywhere in the world follows the same set of rule. I posted some links that clearly state that the "And" is acceptable and correct, I also found some that said the both versions are acceptable in different parts of the world, and as I stated early this is a world wide site for all English speaking people, thus this teaser is correct and Gizzers original comments were invalid. If Gizzers post began "In some countries the 'AND' would have been missed" Then this wopuld have been sharing cultural information with other people, but this is not what happened what happened was a post that tried to discredit a perfectly valid teaser by trying to point out the teaser was incorrect... "Close, but not quite. This is a common mistake: the word AND is NOT used when naming whole numbers"...this is not sharing information as Gizzer later tried to say .." I only thought people might be interested in the rule"...What it really was, is one persons attempt to try and sound superior by pointing out somes mistake..only it back fired because Gizzer failed to realise or acknowledge that things happen out side her own country or culture.
Mad, I don't appreciate being personally attacked like this. I do indeed realize that things can be different outside my country and culture. I don't need to be called crazy, silly or shirty. I have not called you names.
Why is it everytime someone airs a view that differs from yours, or uses something you said as an example or as a basis for a narrative or text, you claim that it is a personal attack. All I did was quote you, if you don't like the quotes, then all I can say is that you said them not me, I just repeated your words.
Seeing as most of this thread of conversation is made up of yours and my opposing comments then it would be a safe bet that I would indeed use what you have said to support anything further i would say. This isn't the first time you have yelled "personal attack" when things don't pan out the way you would like them to be. Gizzer believe me If I made a real personal attack on you, you would certainly know about it, make no mistake. What we have here was me trying desperately to make you see that what you were saying was not true, and you refusing to accept that you could be wrong. I offered evidence to back up my side of the argument, you on the other hand did not. I said that both versions were acceptable, you still insisted yours was the correct one. I tried to reason and say that cultures differ, but you implied that we were all wrong and didn't know the correct rules. I did not called you shirty, I said there was no reason to get shirty, in the same way you would say, "there is no need to get angry" it is not an insult. I said that posting links was a silly game, not that you personally was silly, there is a difference. I also did not call you crazy, I said that not pronouncing the "And" was Crazy, not you. In fact I resent these liablious comments and false accusations Gizzer. I feel you only hear or see what you want to hear or see, and you don't let fact interfer with your views. If as you claim " I do indeed realize that things can be different outside my country and culture" then you would have not posted your first comment as you would have known what you said is not universally true. The conclusion is that you were the one that was wrong, not the teaser, but it is easier not to admit it.
Seeing as most of this thread of conversation is made up of yours and my opposing comments then it would be a safe bet that I would indeed use what you have said to support anything further i would say. This isn't the first time you have yelled "personal attack" when things don't pan out the way you would like them to be. Gizzer believe me If I made a real personal attack on you, you would certainly know about it, make no mistake. What we have here was me trying desperately to make you see that what you were saying was not true, and you refusing to accept that you could be wrong. I offered evidence to back up my side of the argument, you on the other hand did not. I said that both versions were acceptable, you still insisted yours was the correct one. I tried to reason and say that cultures differ, but you implied that we were all wrong and didn't know the correct rules. I did not called you shirty, I said there was no reason to get shirty, in the same way you would say, "there is no need to get angry" it is not an insult. I said that posting links was a silly game, not that you personally was silly, there is a difference. I also did not call you crazy, I said that not pronouncing the "And" was Crazy, not you. In fact I resent these liablious comments and false accusations Gizzer. I feel you only hear or see what you want to hear or see, and you don't let fact interfer with your views. If as you claim " I do indeed realize that things can be different outside my country and culture" then you would have not posted your first comment as you would have known what you said is not universally true. The conclusion is that you were the one that was wrong, not the teaser, but it is easier not to admit it.
Suggesting that I cry personal attack "everytime" is both an exaggeration and libelous. Furthermore, when I referred to a personal attack, ONCE, on the boards, I wasn't referring to you, although you apparently assumed I was. (Is that a guilty conscience or egotism? ) I am willing to admit that the rule may not be universally true. But if it does apply somewhere, which it does, how can I be wrong for mentionning it?
No one said you were wrong for mentioning it, but you were wrong for implying that the teaser was incorrect, which has been the whole point of this discussion, or did you miss it? There really wasn't a problem if all you were doing was sharing some information, but that isn't what you did is it? What you actually did was try and claim the teaser was wrong and you were right, which we have established is not the case.
As for me saying you cried "personal attack" as being libelous, well that is pure and utter nonsense as I can show two instances in the past week or so were you have done just that. . Were is the libel in that? The truth is not libelous..Maybe "always" was and exaggeration, but twice in a week is the start of a trend. I appologised last time because i did not wish you to think that I was trying to use the boards as a method of attack. Wether you were refering to me or not is not really the issue, I just wanted to clarify my intentions, there is no guilt or ego in that!
As for me saying you cried "personal attack" as being libelous, well that is pure and utter nonsense as I can show two instances in the past week or so were you have done just that. . Were is the libel in that? The truth is not libelous..Maybe "always" was and exaggeration, but twice in a week is the start of a trend. I appologised last time because i did not wish you to think that I was trying to use the boards as a method of attack. Wether you were refering to me or not is not really the issue, I just wanted to clarify my intentions, there is no guilt or ego in that!
1) From my perspective, the teaser IS poorly constructed, as I follow a rule, which I freely admit is not necessarily universal and not widely known even where it applies. I am not wrong in saying this, it is my opinion, and I stand by it. As I stated in an earlier comment, this does not necessarily mean that the teaser should have been rejected, because many people don't follow the rule. No such teaser could be accepted if it had to be correct in all countries with Brainglers. 2) I don't usually comment when I detect such "errors", but I thought this would be an interesting one to comment on, and yes, I suppose I wanted to show off a little. That's not a crime, at least not here 3) You're right, I did cry personal attack, as I felt it was true. That part of your statement was not libelous. Characterizing me as someone who does it "everytime" is - in spite of your twice in one week trend theory. Twice in more than two years also applies, and is at least as accurate, if not more accurate. 4) The guilt or ego comment was a joke, hence the wink icon, or did you miss THAT?
Your intitial comment was to say the teaser was incorrect "Close but not quite. This is a common mistake" it matters not that your perspective varies, or that you follow a different rule, that does not make the teaser incorrect. You are indeed entitled to your opinion, but that does not give you the right to say teasers are wrong because you don't agree with them. To state in the comments box that a teaser is incorrect is as good as saying it needs rejecting. After all what is the point of an incorrect teaser?...I had to laugh when you last post said "I don't usually comment when I detect such 'errors'" ...still you consider it an error!! ... the whole point is that the teaser is not in error and never was. As you say It was all an attempt to show off that failed and left you with egg on your face. Why keep pretending it was anything else?
Hey, can you two stop argueing? This isn't a political debate, we are just simply trying to figure out how to write out certain numbers. You two should see how silly you both sound.
Well, I agree this is a pointless debate, I said it wasn't worth arguing about several comments back. Mad and I will never agree: as he says "To state in the comments box that a teaser is incorrect is as good as saying it needs rejecting." I have stated this isn't true - I recognize that it is an error only to some people (like me). Whatever. You're right, andrew, enough said.
Actually, I would like to say one more thing: I think the title is quite clever!
I just noticed that someone (NOT ME!) submitted a correction to this teaser, removing the ANDs from the answer, claiming it doesn't affect the answer. If you are verifying corrections, you should vote no - it does affect the answer, because the Ns in the ANDs are counted too!
Gizzer I am with you. I voted no on the correction too.
I justy hope some day I can write a teaser that sparks this much debate.
I justy hope some day I can write a teaser that sparks this much debate.
I had a cheque returned by a bank once because the written amount didn't have the word "and" in it.
i don't know if the bank was being particularly pedantic that day (they have been known).
i don't know if the bank was being particularly pedantic that day (they have been known).
All I would like to say is I loved the teaser and the pun in the title as well and I really enjoyed the comments, especially the one by MrIx.
To post a comment, please create an account and sign in.
Follow Braingle!