> You have ignored the questioner’s question. Why?
First, I have not ignored the question. My answer to the question is right there is in my dissection and rephrasing of the question.
Second, the question as asked doesn’t make sense. Number scales are arbitrary; there is no ‘point’ for any one scale over another. Long, short, Chinese, Indian — so long as your interlocutor understands what you mean in the language and culture in which you’re speaking, neither has any more point than another.
Which is basically what my comment said, and plenty of people have thus far been able to interpret that without me needing to explain such.
First, I have not ignored the question. My answer to the question is right there is in my dissection and rephrasing of the question.
Second, the question as asked doesn’t make sense. Number scales are arbitrary; there is no ‘point’ for any one scale over another. Long, short, Chinese, Indian — so long as your interlocutor understands what you mean in the language and culture in which you’re speaking, neither has any more point than another.
Which is basically what my comment said, and plenty of people have thus far been able to interpret that without me needing to explain such.