Re: auxlang for "foreign telephone operators"

Raymond Brown wrote:


> Umm - doesn't seem a good idea to me - and, suprisingly, his system has no
> representation for zero (which de Kolovrat's system does).
The Leibniz system you outline doesn't need a zero, any more than Roman
numerals do.  And it shares the same weakness: it can only represent
numbers of a limited magnitude.  Roman numerals dry up at 4999, and
the Leibniz system at 99999.

ObConlang:

The Lojban system has ten short digit words:  no = 0, pa = 1, re, ci,
vo, mu, xa, ze, bi, so ("c" = /S/, otherwise IPA).  Note the aeiou-aeio
pattern in the vowels of the non-zero digits, and the fact that
the consonants are distinct.

The additional digits for hex numbers are dau = A, fei, gai, jau, rei,
vai = F.  Note the au-ei-ai-au-ei-ai pattern in the vowels, and the
alphabetical order and distinctness of the consonants.

The decimal point is pi, and the numeric comma is ki'o (related to
kilo).  When using bases bigger than 16, pi'e is used to separate
the digits: thus in base 20, 400 is pa pi'e no pi'e no (1;0;0).
+ and - signs (when part of numbers) are ma'u and ni'u.

The words for "all of", "a large part of", "a medium part of", "a small
part of", "too much", "enough", and "too few" are also considered
numbers.

--
There is / one art             || John Cowan <jcowan@...>
no more / no less              || http://www.reutershealth.com
to do / all things             || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
with art- / lessness           \\ -- Piet Hein