# hundreds, thousands, millions, billions



## sawyeric1

My grammar book states that _Hundreds are always feminine, even for masculine nouns, because they’re counting how many hundreds of items there are, not how many actual items. _Does this same thing happen with thousands, millions, and billions then too?

Thanks


----------



## Drink

Yes, but also note that for hundreds and thousands, the number takes the construct form:
תְּשַׁע מֵאוֹת (t'sha me'ot, not tesha me'ot)
תִּשְׁעַת אֲלָפִים (tish'at alafim, not tish'a alafim)

But for millions and billions, the number takes the normal masculine form (while the word מיליון and ביליון remain singular, as with many measurement related loanwords):
תִּשְׁעָה מיליון (tish'a milyon)

Also, for hundreds and thousands there is a special dual form (for two hundred and two thousand), while for millions and billions there is not:
מאתיים (matayim)
אלפיים (alpayim)
שני מיליון (sh'nei milyon)

UPDATE:
I forgot to mention that when you have numbers like "nine hundred and six", the "six" would have to agree in gender with the noun:
תשע מאות ושישה אנשים (t'sha me'ot veshisha anashim)
תשע מאות ושש נשים (t'sha me'ot veshesh nashim)


----------



## shalom00

מילארד is usually used for a billion.


----------



## sawyeric1

So it sounds like for all four, the gender of the number is determined by the given number group instead of the actual items being counted. 

I've heard numbers like 60,000 and 430,000 pronounced with the singular - אלף. Is there any rhyme or reason to this? - and the same question for מאה (hundred) if it applies.


----------



## Drink

In traditional Hebrew grammar, the plurals are only used for the numbers 2-10. Other numbers go with the singular. In modern Hebrew this rule is not strictly followed for most nouns, but for the numbers themselves (מאה, אלף) the rule is followed.


----------



## sawyeric1

How do trillions work?


----------



## sawyeric1

Also, what's the register difference if you pronounce numbers like the 4 in 400 as arBA instead of ARba? Aren't numbers next to hundreds supposed to be pronounced with their normal stress?


----------



## shalom00

In correct modern Hebrew, it should always be arBA. (מלרע - stress on the last syllable vs. מלעיל - stress on the next to last syllable)


----------



## sawyeric1

I've heard 900 as "cha me'ot". Is that slang or something?


----------



## sawyeric1

I also heard 400 as "arba mot". Is that just how it's pronounced when you speak quickly? It sounds sloppy to me.


----------



## shalom00

Both.
When people speak quickly, pronunciation sounds different, in any language.
In addition, many people speak sloppily.


----------



## sawyeric1

One of my tutors pronounced the numbers before the hundreds regular - not construct, so I was getting confused about that. Are there register differences between them or something? Which one is the correct form?


----------



## sawyeric1

shalom00 said:


> In correct modern Hebrew, it should always be arBA


"Always" as in "always before מאות", or as in "ארבע should never be pronounced ARba under any circumstances"?


----------



## shalom00

sawyeric1 said:


> One of my tutors pronounced the numbers before the hundreds regular - not construct, so I was getting confused about that. Are there register differences between them or something? Which one is the correct form?


The construct form.


----------



## shalom00

"ארבע should never be pronounced ARba under any circumstances" in correct Hebrew, but many people do it some of the time.

As a side note, a common occurence which is painful to my ears is when a word that is pronounced by everyone מלרע as a regular word (e.g., "zaKEN") suddenly is pronounced by many of those same people מלעיל when it turns into a last name (e.g, "Shula ZAken" or "Danny ZAken"). Same with "Dan CHAlutz" and many others. I see no logic in it and many people still pronounce it the correct way and then you hear both pronounciations.


----------



## sawyeric1

Wow. Hebrew has some problems! LOL. So now I'm wondering if it should be esER, teSHA, shmoNE, and sheVA too. Because unless they come before hundreds, like 700, I've learned to pronounce them with stress on the first syllables.


----------



## Drink

sawyeric1 said:


> Wow. Hebrew has some problems! LOL. So now I'm wondering if it should be esER, teSHA, shmoNE, and sheVA too. Because unless they come before hundreds, like 700, I've learned to pronounce them with stress on the first syllables.



ESer, TEsha, shmoNE, SHEva

But in the case of TEsha and SHEva, the constructs are t'SHA and sh'VA


----------



## shalom00

Of those, only שמונה is pronounced with the stress on the last syllable.
When you have a two-syllable word where the first vowel is segol, then the accent is on the first syllable.


----------



## Drink

shalom00 said:


> When you have a two-syllable word where the first vowel is segol, then the accent is on the first syllable.



Although not always. You have words like בַּרְזֶל, בָּבֶל, עֲרָפֶל, which are all supposed to be stressed on the last syllable.


----------



## shalom00

Those are with segol on the last vowel, not the first.
Actually בבל is pronounced with the stress on the first syllable.


----------



## Drink

shalom00 said:


> Those are with segol on the last vowel, not the first.



Ok, הֶפְסֵק, אֶחָד, הֶתֵּר, אֶחָיו, אֶשָּׂא.



shalom00 said:


> Actually בבל is pronounced with the stress on the first syllable.



That is incorrect. Check the te'amim in your chumash (for example, Genesis 10:10).


----------



## shalom00

You're right about בבל. I don't know how I made that mistake.

I was imprecise about the general rule, which I don't remember exactly.
More precise is something like this: In a two-syllable word, where the first vowel is segol or tsere and the second is a short vowel (e.g., segol, patach, but not tsere or kamatz), then the stress is on the first syllable.
So sefer (ספר) is also stressed on the first syllable, as is shefa (שפע), but not heter (התר).

So generally, stress is on the last syllable, but there are a few rules specifying exceptions.


----------



## Drink

You're getting closer. The first vowel can also be a cholam, as in בֹּקֶר, תֹּאַר, or a patach, as in פַּחַד, פַּעַם, or a kamatz in pausal position, such as בּוֹרֵא פְּרִי הַגָּפֶן; and the last vowel can also be chiriq male, as in יֹפִי, בֶּכִי. But there are still exceptions, such as אַחַת, אַחַר, which are stressed on the last syllable. There are also verbs, such as the pual verb תֹּאַר which looks exactly like the noun תֹּאַר, but is stressed on the last syllable.


----------



## shalom00

Thanks.
I was referring only to nouns.
As for בּוֹרֵא פְּרִי הַגָּפֶן, that is really gefen, where the segol was converted to a kamatz.
Anyway, the point was that, ignoring the occasional exceptions, there are rules about when the first syllable is stressed, and it is not random.


----------

