Re: Noun Number

>         Nullar: -/oU/ :: -w/oU/
>         Singular: -- :: --
>         Plural: -/I/r :: -r
>
>I seem to remember that post from a while back, or else something a lot
like it.  :-)

Yep that was mine, someone else had the same idea a few weeks later, and I
quickly followed someone else.

> Next I came up with the idea for emphatic numbers:
>
>         Nullar: -/aI/ :: -w/aI/ – translated: absolutely no --
>         Singular: -n/oU/ :: -n/oU/ – translated: only one – or the --
>         Plural:  -/I/n :: -n/I/n - infinite --
>
>Quite nice.
Thank you

> And this weekend I was stirred with the idea of the polar opposite,
> the "incomplete" numbers. That is the working title until I come
> up with a better name.
>
>         Nullar: -/i/ :: -w/i/ – Almost none
>         Singular minor: -n/i/ :: -n/E/ – Almost whole
>         Singular major: -d/U/ :: -d/A/s - Slightly more than whole
>         Plural: There is no incomplete number
>
>This is a really, really cool idea.
Thank you :)

> Now the incomplete nullar is assumed to be greater than zero, and
> the imperfect singular minor is from the low side of whole, or one.
> And the Singular major is from the high side of one, or more than
> complete. And as of now there is no Incomplete Plural.
>
>Would mathematicians in this conlang be tempted to extend this to a
>description of the real/rational numbers 'twixt other integers?  :-)
I havent ventured to mathematics yet, I am a math lover and so I am
carefully educating myself in the most basics of math. This weekend I was
studying something taken for granted.

In the decimal system, one can discern if a number is divisible by 9 if the
sum of its digits is divisible by 9. 9, 18, 27, 36, 45, 54.... well after
some careful study I found the following.

In the base N, where N is greater than 2, a number can be found to be
divisible by N - 1 by adding the sum of its digits IN the base N.

In base 3, looking for 2
    11 = 4 :: 1 + 1 = 2, 2 / 2 = 1 -- checks out
    42 = 14 :: 4 + 2 = 6, 6 / 2 = 3 -- checks out
    32 = 11 :: 3 + 2 = 5, 5 / 2 = 2.5 -- nope

in base 6, looking for 5
    14 = 10 :: 1 + 4 = 5, 5 / 5 = 1 -- checks
    17 = 13 :: 1 + 7 = 8, 8 / 5 = 1.6 -- nope

in base 16, (0 - F) looking for E (15)
    1F = 31 :: 1 + F (15) = 16, 16 / 15 = ugly -- nope
    1E = 30 :: 1 + E (14) = 15, 15 / 15 = 1 -- yep

On a side note, it does work for all bases, but when you are in binary you
would be testing to see if it was divisible by 1 (2 - 1). So of course it
would come out true 100% of the time. ANd thus be useless.

Next side note, the mathematics in my language will NOT have percents. I
find them frustrating, fractions are much easier, in my mind, to interpret.
Just another thing to consider ;)

(I would love to be a mathematician who spoke this language.)

It will definitely be fun to write out all the math :)

Patrick
Yoon Ha Lee [requiescat@cityofveils.com]
http://pegasus.cityofveils.com

Shell to DOS...Come in DOS, do you copy?  Shell to DOS...

Replies