Re: Types of numerals

Tom Chappell wrote:
> --- In conlang@yahoogroups.com, John Vertical
[snip]
>>
>>That there are no primitive non-cardinals
>>relating to numbers other than 1 or 2.
>
>
> But I think there are, though they may be rare.
> What about English "quarter"?

English "half" is surely a better example. English "quarter" is derived
through Old French from Latin 'quartarius' = "a fourth part", which in
turn is derived from the ordinal 'quartus'. So I don't think "quarter"
is a 'primitive'.

Most languages seem to have a word for 1/2 which is not related to their
word for 2. But 1/4 seems generally (always?) to be derived from a word
for 4, either in the language itself or, as in English, from another
language.

What about the Ancient
> Egyptian words for "2/3" and "1/3", whatever they
> were? (Does someone know?
AFAIK there were not separate root words for these. You may be thinking
of the fact that in writing fractions were expressed as additions of
reciprocals_unit fractions_ (1/n). My understanding is that the unit
fractions were expressed by the symbol _r_ (which, inter alia, was the
word for "part" - the Egyptians only expressed consonants, never vowels)
followed by the numeral. So 1/3 would be: rIII.

To do more complicated fractions you just added unit fractions, so for
example, 2/5 would be expressed by; rIII rXIIIII (1/3 + 1/15).

(I've used the familiar Roman symbols for 10 & 1 instead of the Egyptian
symbols).

There was, however, a symbol for 2/3 - but it wasn't a 'primitive'. It
was the symbol for _r_ (which was a stylized mouth, as the word for
mouth was also _r_), with two small vertical lines beneath signifying
the _dual ending_. In other words, it was the dual of the word for
"part", i.e. 'two parts'. But it came to have the specialized meaning of
"two parts (of three)", i.e. 2/3. It is read as _rwjj_ (IPA values) or
_rwy_, depending upon the transliteration system used.

[snip]
>>>
>>>"Two-thirds" was indeed "lexicalized" in Ancient
>>>Egyptian, so I've read;
No - a specialized meaning given to the dual of the lexical word for
"part" - see above.

On the other hand, Classical Latin did have a lexeme meaning 2/3 - it
was the masculine noun _bes_ (genitive: _bessis_ )

[snip]
>>>and I wager "three-fourths" is lexicalized in
>>>some natlangs, as well.
>
You mean, like the Latin _dodrans_ (gen. _dodrantis_)

> Does anyone know for sure?
I know that one for sure   :-)

--
Ray
==================================
ray@carolandray.plus.com
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
MAKE POVERTY HISTORY

Replies