Welcome to Dozensonline. We hope you enjoy your visit.
You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, and sending personal messages. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. (You will be asked to confirm your email address before we sign you on.)
Join our community!
If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Name:   Password:


Pages: (2) [1] 2  ( Go to first unread post )

 Systematic Vigesimal Nomenclature?, and other transdozenal bases
Double sharp
Posted: Jan 15 2017, 04:47 AM


Dozens Disciple


Group: Members
Posts: 1,402
Member No.: 1,150
Joined: 19-September 15



Given that the even bases from senary to vigesimal inclusive seem to have a chance at being used as a human-scale base, by memorising the multiplication tables, it seems to stand to reason that one should, in principle, have a way to construct a metrology for each of them, and a sort of SDN-analogue. (I probably would not actually construct them, but I would like it if there was a way to flesh out whatever one needed.)

The bases smaller than twelve are no problem. All one needs to do is change "-qua/-cia" to "-senqua/-sencia" for senary, "-osqua/-oscia" for octal, and "-desqua/-descia" for decimal, and stop using the unnecessary digit particles.

The problem comes from the bases higher than twelve. I know Oschkar suggested transdozenal roots as {zen, cist, frat, gim, kix, mipt, ruct, vinn}. (He got a bit further, with {ald, ift} and supplemented by my {wel, xor} for base twenty-four, but I think most people would have to do 24 as a mixed radix of 4 on 6 instead.) These fulfil the requirements that every root must start with a different letter, but are essentially ad hoc constructions that are unfamiliar (well, except possibly the first).

And then we have the problem of the power prefixes. Oschkar suggested "-frasqua/-frascia" for tetradecimal, and I suppose I could use the argam to suggest "-tessqua/-tesscia" for hexadecimal, and "-scorqua/-scorcia" for vigesimal, but "-dinequa/-dinecia" for octodecimal suggests the wrong pronunciation.

So now I'm wondering if Kode has a brilliant suggestion for SVN and its slightly smaller-sized siblings for {14, 16, 18, 20}.
Top
Paul Rapoport
Posted: Jan 15 2017, 07:04 PM


Dozens Disciple


Group: Members
Posts: 510
Member No.: 697
Joined: 26-December 12



Why change the basic terminology for each number base? That may be anaolgous to rewriting and renaming every digit for each base. Sure, you need terms for items above eleven (beyond the current SDN); but what's the need for such as senqua or oscia? Triqua may still mean 1000, whatever the base.
Top
Dan
Posted: Jan 15 2017, 07:17 PM


Dozens Disciple


Group: Members
Posts: 1,463
Member No.: 19
Joined: 8-August 05



It's going to be quite a challenge to come up with mnemonic names for base 20 while preserving the distinct initial letter requirement.

Recall that the existing SDN number roots are:

0 = nil
1 = un
2 = bi
3 = tri
4 = quad
5 = pent
6 = hex
7 = sept
8 = oct
9 = enn
ten_doz.JPG = dec
elf_doz.JPG = lev

This uses up twelve letters (NUBTQPHSOEDL), leaving fourteen available (ACFGIJKMRVWXYZ). Now then, how do we map these to the "teen" numbers?

Consider, for example, thirteen. AFAIK, the words for thirteen in all major European languages all start with either D (German dreizehn, Dutch dertien, Greek dekatreis [although in this case the D comes from the "ten" part instead of the "three" part]) or T (English thirteen, Spanish trece, Polish trzynaście). But we've already used up both D and T for lower numbers.
Top
Kodegadulo
Posted: Jan 15 2017, 10:56 PM


Obsessive poster


Group: Moderators
Posts: 4,192
Member No.: 606
Joined: 10-September 11



QUOTE (Double sharp @ Jan 15 2017, 04:47 AM)
And then we have the problem of the power prefixes. Oschkar suggested "-frasqua/-frascia" for tetradecimal, and I suppose I could use the argam to suggest "-tessqua/-tesscia" for hexadecimal, and "-scorqua/-scorcia" for vigesimal, but "-dinequa/-dinecia" for octodecimal suggests the wrong pronunciation.

This is actually the easy part: coming up with a syllable to distinguish a Systematic Nomenclature (SN) for a base other than dozenal. All of these suggestions are pretty much the way I was thinking they could be done. We might give them some spelling tweaks: -"tesqua/-tescia" for unquadral, "-dynqua/-dyncia" for unhexal. For unoctal, "-scorqua/-scorcia" is perfect and indeed practically self-evident.

QUOTE
I know Oschkar suggested transdozenal roots as {zen, cist, frat, gim, kix, mipt, ruct, vinn}. (He got a bit further, with {ald, ift} and supplemented by my {wel, xor} for base twenty-four,

This is the hard part: how to deal with digit roots. As creative as Oschkar's suggestions are here, they suffer from the fact that most people will find them utterly unfamiliar, so will have a hard time remembering which syllable goes with which value. I agree with you here:

QUOTE
These fulfil the requirements that every root must start with a different letter, but are essentially ad hoc constructions that are unfamiliar (well, except possibly the first).


Perhaps we can get a little better result if we give up on the letter associations of SDN, and instead use "computerese" style digits as the abbreviations, perhaps following the Doublesharp "curly-brace" convention:

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 a b c d e f g h i j k ...

We could associate the decimal digits with the original IUPAC roots, and the letters with single-syllable contractions of the NATO phonetic alphabet:

... alf, brav, charl, delt, eck, fox, golf, hoet, ind, juel, keel, ...

There is also the question of how to represent the base syllable itself. I would recommend using an instance of "curly-brace" annotation for that. So we would have, for example:

101{k} = unscorqua = 1{k}\(\uparrow\)
10-1{k} = unscorcia = 1{k}\(\downarrow\)

105{k} = pentscorqua = 5{k}\(\uparrow\)
10-5{k} = pentscorcia = 5{k}\(\downarrow\)

10a{k} = alfscorqua = a{k}\(\uparrow\)
10-a{k} = alfscorcia = a{k}\(\downarrow\)

10j{k} = juelscorqua = a{k}\(\uparrow\)
10-j{k} = juelscorcia = a{k}\(\downarrow\)

1010{k} = unnilscorqua = 10{k}\(\uparrow\)
10-10{k} = unnilscorcia = 10{k}\(\downarrow\)

We would have to be careful to separately annotate a mantissa to distinguish its digits from power digits, e.g.:

"enn dot alf brav charl delt penta alfscorqualengthels" = 9.abcd5{k} a{k}\(\uparrow\)Lg\(\ell\)

"eck dot fox golf hoet ind juela charlscorquamassels" = e.fghij{k} c{k}\(\uparrow\)Ms\(\ell\)

But most people are even going to have a hard time associating "computerese" digits and syllables with numeric values. It's just not something we're all trained on in grade school.

QUOTE
but I think most people would have to do 24 as a mixed radix of 4 on 6 instead.)


I'm thinking along similar lines, except that I'd go for a pattern of "base-N-mapped base 2N". That's effectively equivalent to mixed binary-on-base-N, but I think we could use the digit root for N as a "teen" marker. For instance, decimal-mapped vigesimal could use the following as digit roots:

nil un bi tri quad pent hex sept oct enn
dec decun decbi dectri decquad decpent dechex decsept decoct decenn

The second line would represent decimal teens. So my previous examples would be:

"enn dot dec decun decbi dectri penta decscorqualengthels" =
09.10'11'12'13'05{2*a} d{2*a}\(\uparrow\)Lg\(\ell\)

"decquad dot decpent dechex decsept decoct decennea decquadscorquamassels" =
14.15'16'17'18'19{2*a} dq{2*a}\(\uparrow\)Ms\(\ell\)

We can do unhexal as {2*9}, with the following digit roots:

nil un bi tri quad pent hex sept oct
enn ennun ennbi enntri ennquad ennpent ennhex ennsept ennoct

So the second line would be the unhexal equivalent of "teens". A couple examples

"oct dot enn ennun ennbi enntri penta enndynqualengthels" =
08.10'11'12'13'05{2*9} e{2*9}\(\uparrow\)Lg\(\ell\)

"ennquad dot ennpent ennhex ennsept ennocta ennquaddynquamassels" =
14.15'16'17'18{2*9} eq{2*9}\(\uparrow\)Ms\(\ell\)

We can do unquadral as {2*8}, with the following digit roots:

nil un bi tri quad pent hex sept
oct octun octbi octtri octquad octpent octhex octsept

So the second line here would be unquadral "teens". Examples:

"sept dot oct octun octbi octtri penta octtesqualengthels" =
07.10'11'12'13'05{2*8} o{2*8}\(\uparrow\)Lg\(\ell\)

"octquad dot octpent octhex octsepta octquadtesquamassels" =
14.15'16'17'18{2*8} oq{2*8}\(\uparrow\)Ms\(\ell\)

Likewise we can do something similar for unbinal, using "sept" as the "teen" marker. In the other direction, we can even cover binilial without too much of a stretch, using the following as digit roots:

nil un bi tri quad pent hex sept oct enn dec lev
zen zenun zenbi zentri zenquad zenpent zenhex zensept zenoct zenenn zendec zenlev

So in this case "zen" will act as the binilial "teen" marker. I think by now "zen" is familiar enough, at least to folks here, and not too much of a stretch for the general public. As for a base syllable, I suggest using "chron" for binilial, in honor of the traditional two-dozen hour day, depicted on traditional "chronometers". Some examples:

"lev dot zen zenun zenbi zentri penta zenchronqua"
0E.10'11'12'13'05{2*c} z{2*c}\(\uparrow\)Lg\(\ell\)

"zenquad dot zenpent zenhex zensept zenoct zenenn zendec zenleva zenquadchronquamassels" =
14.15'16'17'18'19'1X'1E{2*c} zq{2*c}\(\uparrow\)Ms\(\ell\)

Oh well, just some ideas. Perhaps you all can suggest improvements. We're really stretching the original Systematic Nomenclature idea pretty far here.
Top
Kodegadulo
Posted: Jan 15 2017, 11:09 PM


Obsessive poster


Group: Moderators
Posts: 4,192
Member No.: 606
Joined: 10-September 11



QUOTE (Paul Rapoport @ Jan 15 2017, 07:04 PM)
Why change the basic terminology for each number base? That may be anaolgous to rewriting and renaming every digit for each base. Sure, you need terms for items above eleven (beyond the current SDN); but what's the need for such as senqua or oscia? Triqua may still mean 1000, whatever the base.

Paul, I think we need something that audibly indicates the base, distinguishing a power prefix from the default SDN assumption of dozenal. (I make no bones of the fact that SDN is biased in favor of dozenal, and therefore requires any other form of Systematic Nomenclature to be marked in some way.) I've already got threads characterizing SN for unquadecimal/decanunqual ("-longua/-longia"), for hexadecal (sexagesimal) ("-shocqua/-shoccia"), hexal ("-senqua/-sencia"), and even decimal ("-desqua/-descia"), and I believe I've alluded to the possibility of octal ("-osqua/-oscia") and even unquadral ("-tesqua/-tescia") before.
Top
Oschkar
Posted: Jan 16 2017, 02:54 AM


Dozens Disciple


Group: Members
Posts: 575
Member No.: 623
Joined: 19-November 11



QUOTE (Kodegadulo @ Jan 15 2017, 10:56 PM)
As creative as Oschkar's suggestions are here, they suffer from the fact that most people will find them utterly unfamiliar, so will have a hard time remembering which syllable goes with which value. I agree with you here:

QUOTE
These fulfil the requirements that every root must start with a different letter, but are essentially ad hoc constructions that are unfamiliar (well, except possibly the first).

In my defence, my roots from sixteen to nineteen were derived from the existing IUPAC roots from six to nine. The initial consonant is replaced by the earliest possible in the alphabet (skipping over J), the vowel is moved over one in alphabetical order, and the coda is retained.

hex > kix
sept > mipt
oct > ruct
enn > vinn

I really don't remember where I got "cist", "frat" and "gim" from, but I guess the latter two can be regularized to follow the same pattern:

quad > fed (echoing Proto-Germanic *fedurtehun)
pent > gint (maybe reminiscent of Latin quindecim, but with a voiced initial consonant)

I like Kodegadulo's suggestion to have digit roots only up to half the base for the higher natural scale, but tetradecimal as the largest unambiguously human-scale base should probably have its own digit roots for twelve and thirteen.
Top
Double sharp
Posted: Jan 16 2017, 03:56 AM


Dozens Disciple


Group: Members
Posts: 1,402
Member No.: 1,150
Joined: 19-September 15



I tend to mentally blow a fuse when dealing with bases past 18 as pure, with 20 as marginal. (Maybe it will be able to go a bit higher to 24 if I try.) So Kode's suggestion of using the "teens" is plausible. But I agree with Oschkar that 14 (and probably 16) do need a few transdozenal roots. Given the constraints associated with making such roots, I would probably just use his choices, because as Dan implies, you can't both have familiarity and different-letter abbreviations.

Regarding the difficulty of associating numeric values with alphanumeric digits, I will note that in my old kana convention going up to 160, I really don't remember anything past 30 (except 60 and 120). It used to be 20, but writing in the higher natural-scale thread at least makes the range up to 30 convincing. I recognise now how the lines look up to five in an abbreviated trigesimal multiplication table: "2468acegikmoqs"; "369cfilor"; "48cgkos", "5afkp". I still can't add them without blowing a fuse and falling back on their decimal representation, so I would think that vigesimal with a-j might be the hard limit for most people.
Top
Kodegadulo
Posted: Jan 16 2017, 10:13 AM


Obsessive poster


Group: Moderators
Posts: 4,192
Member No.: 606
Joined: 10-September 11



QUOTE (Oschkar @ Jan 16 2017, 02:54 AM)
I like Kodegadulo's suggestion to have digit roots only up to half the base for the higher natural scale, but tetradecimal as the largest unambiguously human-scale base should probably have its own digit roots for twelve and thirteen.

For twelve, there is of course the syllable "zen", abbreviated "z".

For thirteen, there is the argam syllable "thise", which I think is pronounced "thighs". If we tweak the spelling to "thyz" then we can embed it without the silent e implying a false syllable. Or we could just contract "thirteen" to "thirt". Either way, to abbreviate it, I suggest the Greek theta "θ".

It gets progressively harder to extend this to support unquadral. "Fort" for fourteen and "fift" or "femt" for fifteen will both fight over the abbreviation "f". Perhaps one of them could take the Greek phi "φ" instead. The dilemma is which. The circle embeded in phi is suggestive of the "o" in "fort". But phi also looks something like a merged "q" and "p", which would be evocative of both "quinceanera" and "pentadecimal". Should we take a poll? smile.gif
Top
Double sharp
Posted: Jan 16 2017, 11:13 AM


Dozens Disciple


Group: Members
Posts: 1,402
Member No.: 1,150
Joined: 19-September 15



I would probably rather stick to ASCII abbreviations so that it would degrade gracefully. I always mentally pronounced "thise" with an /s/ instead of a /z/, incidentally. I tend to use "ten, eleven, twelve" instead of "dess, ell, zen". But the suggestions for e and f rankle to me because they are decimally biased.

I suppose it's kind of a losing battle, because all familiar words for numbers above 12 will be decimally biased. I might use Oschkar's and my set to tetravigesimal, after all. If you think about it, "tess" is not any more connected to sixteen in most people's minds than "kix". To most people, "trick" is something you play on people, "tess" is a girl's name, "dine" is what you do at a restaurant, and "ax" is something you use to chop wood. The fact that these feel familiar to us and parsable is primarily because they have gained this meaning in Argam as a constructed language for numbers.

After base twenty-four and perhaps thirty, the bases fly up into the stratosphere and I can't imagine a civilisation using them without some sort of alternating scheme like Babylonian six-on-ten sexagesimal. Indeed, the tens and ones are equally spaced in Babylonian inscriptions, instead of bunched up together as the Mayan fives and ones are, even though both use seperate-identity subdigits. Using a base like pure base 60 is about as human-hostile as base 17 or binary. So I think that all we really need for bases up to sexagesimal is the phonetic Latin alphabet and the names for the letters of the Greek alphabet, with a few disambiguating accents:

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
a b c d e f g h i j
k l m n o p q r s t
u v w x y z α β γ δ
ε ζ η θ ί κ λ μ ν ξ
ό π ρ σ τ υ φ χ ψ ω

Different pronunciations for every digit (unlike my other convention with 36-61 corresponding to A-Z). This caters for all the bases which have φ(n) / d(n) <= 4/3, or {1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 20, 24, 30, 36, 60}, and is fine if v and nu are distinguished. That would be the "default convention" for bases up to sixty that nobody would want to consider. The power suffixes are then simply argam names.

We'd only need dedicated nomenclatures for perhaps bases {14, 16, 18}. 20 and 24 are fine as {2:10} and {2:12} and can't be acquired in any other way save perhaps {4:5, 4:6}.
Top
Dan
Posted: Jan 16 2017, 12:05 PM


Dozens Disciple


Group: Members
Posts: 1,463
Member No.: 19
Joined: 8-August 05



QUOTE (Kodegadulo @ Jan 16 2017, 05:13 AM)
It gets progressively harder to extend this to support unquadral. "Fort" for fourteen and "fift" or "femt" for fifteen will both fight over the abbreviation "f". Perhaps one of them could take the Greek phi "φ" instead. The dilemma is which. The circle embeded in phi is suggestive of the "o" in "fort". But phi also looks something like a merged "q" and "p", which would be evocative of both "quinceanera" and "pentadecimal". Should we take a poll? smile.gif

You could have one of them use "v", which is the voiced version of "f".
Top
Paul Rapoport
Posted: Jan 16 2017, 04:28 PM


Dozens Disciple


Group: Members
Posts: 510
Member No.: 697
Joined: 26-December 12



Many scripts distinguish the letter v from Greek nu, although it's a close call sometimes. Iota doesn't use a dot and may thus be distinguished from the letter i.
Alpha, kappa, rho, tau, and u psilon could be tough. Maybe just put accents on them. Even if it's weird to see such on consonants, there are languages that do that.
Top
Double sharp
Posted: Jan 17 2017, 01:38 AM


Dozens Disciple


Group: Members
Posts: 1,402
Member No.: 1,150
Joined: 19-September 15



In my handwriting, because I need the Greek letters fairly often, all of them are distinct in lowercase except o and omicron. I use a loop instead of a slash to distinguish O vs 0 because that would make it look like ō or φ. I usually put a hook on the left on the rho so that it really doesn't look like a p, and that habit spills over to argam "tess". Actually, the only way argam "zen" and "tess" are distinguished for me from gamma and rho is that the argam are the height of a majuscule and the letters have descenders.

I don't use argam beyond twenty except in "numerical abecedaria" up to sixty, both because I need to spend time thinking of the decimal values, and because the higher ones (for large non-human-scale bases) can obviously no longer look like the familiar Hindu-Arabic 0-9 that the teens succeed in doing.
Top
Oschkar
Posted: Jan 17 2017, 02:23 AM


Dozens Disciple


Group: Members
Posts: 575
Member No.: 623
Joined: 19-November 11



QUOTE (Double sharp @ Jan 17 2017, 01:38 AM)
I don't use argam beyond twenty except in "numerical abecedaria" up to sixty, both because I need to spend time thinking of the decimal values, and because the higher ones (for large non-human-scale bases) can obviously no longer look like the familiar Hindu-Arabic 0-9 that the teens succeed in doing.

I do, but only because they keep their decimal (or dozenal or tetradecimal) values in my mind while Iím using them. If Iím taking notes quickly and I come across a number whose argam I can instantly remember, or a 7-smooth number that factors easily, I will write its argam to save strokes. But beyond about 28 or so, I canít remember their names: the digit that looks like |> glued together isnít so much "lume" as it is "forty-one", "thirzen-five", or "twenzeff-thise", depending on what base I was last dealing with. I know that itís prime, and I know that it comes between 2≥ ◊ 5 and 2 ◊ 3 ◊ 7, so I would say that I have a significantly strong number sense when dealing with argam, possibly more than I do in dozenal or tetradecimal, but notably less than I do in decimal. I do have to break argam down into a human-scale base to add or subtract them.

Some of them have even acquired variants in my handwriting, either because theyíre a little too difficult to write neatly fast (39, 44, 69), or too hard to distinguish (26 and 45). I have a little trouble keeping the orientation of 59, 61, 67, 71, 73 and 79 straight. All primes from 89 are completely lost on me, mainly because I donít know by memory either the atomic numbers of many elements or the ordinal number of each prime in sequence. I know that 113 is preceded by 109 and followed by 127, but I donít know for what value of n it is the n-th prime.
Top
Double sharp
Posted: Jan 17 2017, 04:13 AM


Dozens Disciple


Group: Members
Posts: 1,402
Member No.: 1,150
Joined: 19-September 15



I know all the atomic numbers, but indeed I can't associate them with primes, except the conveniently placed ones in the range of 360 (so I know that 179 and 181 are Nb and Mo, and that 359 is Hf, but no others past about 127, which is Ga). To me, hafnium is primarily associated with 72 (its atomic number), secondarily associated with 178.5 (its atomic weight), and not at all associated with 359.

I know prime factorisations up to about 128, but that's mostly decimal number sense for me. I don't think you can teach kids that "score" is "dess" with a twofoldness radical, because k=a◊2 forms part of multiplication, which has to be taught after addition, which has to be taught after counting, which involves teaching the numerals, and the cycle is inescapable without running for the safety of a smaller base. The range below twenty is okay because it does not rely very much on multiplication, instead imitating the letters a to j, and I'm confident that a vigesimal civilisation could teach those.

I find 39 quite annoying to write as well; it seems to require a sharp turn, as does 69. 44 has two strokes for me: I first write the 11 and then the _| shape over it. For 45, I draw a very large serif (almost half the height of the numeral) and draw the whole numeral in one sweep, crossing the bottom loop out the other side, whereas my 26 is closed on the left.

There are already a few possible confusions in the early argam. I usually put serifs on 12 to distinguish it from gamma, which should have none, but then it can look like 8 or 48 and similarly 18 can easily look like 54. I also find it difficult to get the loops right for 120 and the other form of 360 (a six-petalled rose, IIRC).

Truth be told, I only really have fixed argam names up till tetravigesimal. After that, I tend to lack consistency and use names like "koct" or "cadess" for 40. Essentially, I can't quite remember what the name is supposed to be (checking, it should be "kinoct"), so I might use different factors (like "sezzen" for "octove"), shorten the name too much ("kintove" or "koctove" for "kinoctove") and so on. Sometimes I even recompose the symbols if I don't remember them immediately, though common highly composites tend to have more fixed forms.

This said, the range up till trigesimal is fairly constant, so I'll write mine here from memory: "dess ell zen thise zeff; trick tess zote dine ax; score tress dell flore cadex; quint dithe trine cadeff neve". Sometimes 24, 26, 28, 29 become "dex, dise, deff, neo", but mostly they stay constant. I'm pretty sure that some of these variants actually do stem from Icarus, but I'm not really sure.
Top
Oschkar
Posted: Jan 17 2017, 05:28 AM


Dozens Disciple


Group: Members
Posts: 575
Member No.: 623
Joined: 19-November 11



QUOTE (Double sharp @ Jan 17 2017, 04:13 AM)
There are already a few possible confusions in the early argam. I usually put serifs on 12 to distinguish it from gamma, which should have none, but then it can look like 8 or 48 and similarly 18 can easily look like 54. I also find it difficult to get the loops right for 120 and the other form of 360 (a six-petalled rose, IIRC).


The end of my gamma turns inward, like lowercase b, v and w in Palmer cursive without the exit stroke, whereas my zens are slightly concave outward.

I havenít seen the other form of 360, the one I know is a 18 on top of a 20.

QUOTE
This said, the range up till trigesimal is fairly constant, so I'll write mine here from memory: "dess ell zen thise zeff; trick tess zote dine ax; score tress dell flore cadex; quint dithe trine cadeff neve". Sometimes 24, 26, 28, 29 become "dex, dise, deff, neo", but mostly they stay constant. I'm pretty sure that some of these variants actually do stem from Icarus, but I'm not really sure.

My names are the same, except that I consistently use "dex" for 24 (which Iím fairly sure that I took from you) and "caven" for 28 (from icarusís 2009 version of the argam).
Top
Double sharp
Posted: Jan 17 2017, 06:01 AM


Dozens Disciple


Group: Members
Posts: 1,402
Member No.: 1,150
Joined: 19-September 15



I suppose it is a data point that we can't handle a pure base past about twenty-four, since we keep changing the names!

The six-petalled rose form of 360 can be found on page 3 of Icarus' Rykami Argam. A circle drawn around this form is a different form of 2520.
Top
Double sharp
Posted: Oct 17 2017, 05:07 AM


Dozens Disciple


Group: Members
Posts: 1,402
Member No.: 1,150
Joined: 19-September 15



Due to the lack of anything very much better, and because most number names above 12 will be decimally biased anyway, I'm going to just adopt Oschkar's roots when I need them (which I anticipate would be mostly for tetradecimal and hexadecimal, so just {zen, cist, fed, gint} for c, d, e, and f).

It's not a terribly elegant solution, but at least it has the distinct benefit of working. "Ununzenium, ununcistium, ununfedium, unungintium" at least sound plausibly serious, whereas the higher ones {kix, mipt, ruct, vinn} for g, h, i, and j somehow sound less so to me. (Oschkar, is "gint" meant to have a hard or a soft g? I think it sounds better to me with a hard one.) I am not the greatest fan of having the letter-digits {d, e, f} correspond to the initials {c, f, g}, but there's nothing better since "dec" and "enn" have already swiped two of them.
Top
wendy.krieger
Posted: Oct 17 2017, 08:28 AM


Dozens Demigod


Group: Members
Posts: 2,432
Member No.: 655
Joined: 11-July 12



QUOTE (DoubleSharp)
Oschkar, is "gint" meant to have a hard or a soft g? I think it sounds better to me with a hard one.


If you mean to not soften the g, you need to write it 'gh', eg 'ghint'. Ghent in belguim is said with a hard g (gent), while gent the man is said with a soft g (ʒent). This needs to be done before an i or e.
Top
Kodegadulo
Posted: Oct 17 2017, 10:07 AM


Obsessive poster


Group: Moderators
Posts: 4,192
Member No.: 606
Joined: 10-September 11



QUOTE (wendy.krieger @ Oct 17 2017, 08:28 AM)
QUOTE (DoubleSharp)
Oschkar, is "gint" meant to have a hard or a soft g? I think it sounds better to me with a hard one.


If you mean to not soften the g, you need to write it 'gh', eg 'ghint'. Ghent in belguim is said with a hard g (gent), while gent the man is said with a soft g (ʒent). This needs to be done before an i or e.

Wendy's assertion here is altogether unnecessary. The English letter G often gets a hard pronunciation, even if it is given a following I or E or Y, without necessarily requiring an intervening H or U. Wendy seems eager to make English into a ghost of Dutch or Italian, or French or Spanish, which must resort to this kind of orthographic girdle to prevent G from softening. English does borrow words that do this from those tongues, rendering any supposed rules of English so much spaghetti. But English itself is neither Dutch nor Italian nor French nor Spanish, and therefore need not strictly adhere to their orthographic guidelines. It's a rebellious sort of language, not even adhering to its own rules! Yet geese still manage to fly south for the winter every year, I guess, without needing to be spelled *gueese or *gheese. Even a gearhead geek soused to the gills and swinging from a girder like a gibbon, or a giggling school-girl giddily obsessing over her gewgaws like Miss Piggy in a Geisha outfit, would know that. Not to gild the lily, but I wager even the Geico gecko might have an opinion on this; given his dialect, I expect it might be "Bugger all we can do about it, just learn the exceptions, mate!"

smile.gif

P.S. I'd vote for going with a hard G in gint, despite the soft G in Septuagint.
Top
wendy.krieger
Posted: Oct 17 2017, 01:32 PM


Dozens Demigod


Group: Members
Posts: 2,432
Member No.: 655
Joined: 11-July 12



ʒin a drink or the aboriginal for woman, even though they don't have that sound, ʒinʒer the colour, ʒerry and ʒerman, ʒill a quarter pint,

ghecko, if i recall,
Top
icarus
Posted: Oct 17 2017, 02:10 PM


Dozens Demigod


Group: Admin
Posts: 1,913
Member No.: 50
Joined: 11-April 06



guys guys why so guttural? gosh my golly can't we all get along ; ) I likes gint but I can see Wendy's point. Still I think the h makes it overly complicated.
Top
Paul Rapoport
Posted: Oct 17 2017, 02:51 PM


Dozens Disciple


Group: Members
Posts: 510
Member No.: 697
Joined: 26-December 12



I'd spell it dʒindʒer if pushed, but no one's pushing. English orthography has pushed back for quite some time and shows no sign of losing that strength.
Top
Kodegadulo
Posted: Oct 17 2017, 05:49 PM


Obsessive poster


Group: Moderators
Posts: 4,192
Member No.: 606
Joined: 10-September 11



QUOTE (Paul Rapoport @ Oct 17 2017, 02:51 PM)
I'd spell it dʒindʒer if pushed ...

As Paul is hinting here, an English soft G is pronounced as the affricate cluster /dʒ/ (like the j in joy or juice), not as the simple fricative /ʒ/ (like the s in leisure or measure). I can think of no English dialect where gin might be pronounced /ʒɪn/ -- although someone with a thick French accent might mistakenly pronounce it that way, as if it were a French word. Slurred speech due to intoxication (perhap from imbibing too much gin) might also induce such a pronunciation, but I hardly think "inebriated" counts as an English dialect. So anyone claiming this pronunciation is either ignorant of English, or ignorant of phonetics, or likely both.
Top
Dan
Posted: Oct 18 2017, 12:36 AM


Dozens Disciple


Group: Members
Posts: 1,463
Member No.: 19
Joined: 8-August 05



If English ever gets a spelling reform, one of the first things to get rid of should be this "hard"/"soft" consonant nonsense. Just change all the soft C's to S, and all the soft G's to J.
Top
« Next Oldest | Systematic Dozenal Nomenclature | Next Newest »


Topic OptionsPages: (2) [1] 2 



Hosted for free by zIFBoards* (Terms of Use: Updated 2/10/2010) | Powered by Invision Power Board v1.3 Final © 2003 IPS, Inc.
Page creation time: 0.0612 seconds · Archive