| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 23 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 52:12:38 |
| Calls: | 583 |
| Files: | 1,139 |
| D/L today: |
47 files (845K bytes) |
| Messages: | 111,533 |
Den 23.08.2025 kl. 18.05 skrev Hibou:
French numbering is weird. I can't imagine English speakers putting up
with saying "four twenties nineteen" for 99.
Can you imagine them saying "three scores and twelve"?
Can you imagine them saying "three scores and twelve"?
Even worse than Hibou's unreal example.
"Four twenties" is odd, but obvious.
"Three scores" is obvious only if you know what "score" means as a number.
Can you imagine them saying "three scores and twelve"?
Of course I can imagine it. I, and virtually every English speaker would never use it in ordinary speech or written communication. It's a old
term, and likely the only place you'll run across it is in /The
Gettysburg Address/ by Abraham Lincoln, or in fiction set in times a few centuries ago.
No, Bertel, in English, we no longer use it in everyday speech or
writing. We have not carried it with us the way the French or Danes have carried the old ways into the present.
Look at an Ngram with "three scores,five scores,seven scores,nine
scores". It suggests that "scores" is not rare as a number (5 zeros).
In article <108eips$2lvoa$2@dont-email.me>,
Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> wrote:
Look at an Ngram with "three scores,five scores,seven scores,nine
scores". It suggests that "scores" is not rare as a number (5 zeros).
The traditional expression is "three score", not "three scores".
Den 24.08.2025 kl. 07.03 skrev lar3ryca:
Of course I can imagine it. I, and virtually every English speaker
would never use it in ordinary speech or written communication. It's a
old term, and likely the only place you'll run across it is in /The
Gettysburg Address/ by Abraham Lincoln, or in fiction set in times a
few centuries ago.
No, Bertel, in English, we no longer use it in everyday speech or
writing. We have not carried it with us the way the French or Danes
have carried the old ways into the present.
But it takes away any reason to call Danish and French numbers weird
that something similar is well-known in English.
Le 24/08/2025 |a 09:36, Bertel Lund Hansen a |-crit :
Den 24.08.2025 kl. 07.03 skrev lar3ryca:
Of course I can imagine it. I, and virtually every English speaker
would never use it in ordinary speech or written communication. It's a
old term, and likely the only place you'll run across it is in /The
Gettysburg Address/ by Abraham Lincoln, or in fiction set in times a
few centuries ago.
No, Bertel, in English, we no longer use it in everyday speech or
writing. We have not carried it with us the way the French or Danes
have carried the old ways into the present.
But it takes away any reason to call Danish and French numbers weird
that something similar is well-known in English.
I'm afraid I don't agree. One sense of 'weird' is strange or bizarre,
and, given that we usually count in tens, 'quatre-vingt-dix-neuf' is a strange way of saying 99. The fact that 'score' is known in English
doesn't make it any less strange; it's the strangeness that has made
'score' obsolete.
"The days of our years are threescore years and ten; and if by reason
of strength they be fourscore years, yet is their strength labour and sorrow; for it is soon cut off, and we fly away" - Psalm 90.10, KJV
(1611).
"We live for 70 years, or 80 years if werCOre healthy, yet even in the
prime years there are troubles and sorrow. They pass by quickly and we
fly away" - International Standard Version (2011).
(Four hundred years have made things clearer, but, alas, less poetic.)
French telephone numbers are usually given as five groups of two
digits. Pity those with numbers like 06.79.81.99.77!
Treebeard was, as usual, right when he said: "You must understand,--
young Hobbit, it takes a long time to say anything in Old Entish." For
'Old Entish', read 'French'.
Look at an Ngram with "three scores,five scores,seven scores,nine
scores". It suggests that "scores" is not rare as a number (5 zeros).
On 2025-08-23 10:19, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
Den 23.08.2025 kl. 18.05 skrev Hibou:
French numbering is weird. I can't imagine English speakers putting
up with saying "four twenties nineteen" for 99.
Can you imagine them saying "three scores and twelve"?
Of course I can imagine it. I, and virtually every English speaker
would never use it in ordinary speech or written communication. It's a
old term, and likely the only place you'll run across it is in /The Gettysburg Address/ by Abraham Lincoln, or in fiction set in times a
few centuries ago.
No, Bertel, in English, we no longer use it in everyday speech or
writing. We have not carried it with us the way the French or Danes
have carried the old ways into the present.
English perhaps has no weird numbers, but what with decimality in >(historical?) distances:
Op 24/08/2025 om 7:03 schreef lar3ryca:
On 2025-08-23 10:19, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
Den 23.08.2025 kl. 18.05 skrev Hibou:
French numbering is weird. I can't imagine English speakers putting up >>>> with saying "four twenties nineteen" for 99.
Can you imagine them saying "three scores and twelve"?
Of course I can imagine it. I, and virtually every English speaker
would never use it in ordinary speech or written communication. It's a
old term, and likely the only place you'll run across it is in /The
Gettysburg Address/ by Abraham Lincoln, or in fiction set in times a
few centuries ago.
No, Bertel, in English, we no longer use it in everyday speech or
writing. We have not carried it with us the way the French or Danes
have carried the old ways into the present.
English perhaps has no weird numbers, but what with decimality in (historical?) distances:
Inch (in or rC|): The smallest common unit, historically based on a barleycorn or the width of a thumb.
Foot (ft or rC#): Equal to 12 inches.
Yard (yd): Equal to 3 feet, it was historically based on the length of
a human arm or a staff.
Mile (mi or m): Equal to 1760 yards or 5,280 feet.
or in monetary history:
The *shilling* is a historical coin, and the name of a unit of modern currencies formerly used in the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, other British Commonwealth countries and Ireland, where they were
generally equivalent to *12 pence or one-twentieth of a pound* before
being phased out during the 1960s and 1970s.
or in the messy weights, etc.
In article <108ffcg$2t4sd$1@dont-email.me>,
guido wugi <wugi@brol.invalid> wrote:
English perhaps has no weird numbers, but what with decimality in
(historical?) distances:
When I started school we had to do arithmetic in pounds, shillings,
and pence, and in miles, furlongs (optional), chains (very optional),
yards, feet, and inches
. Which made it trivial when we came to do
bases later on. I remember having to work out how many inches there
are in a mile (63,360).
As for weird numbers, my grandmother would refer to 4:25 as "five
and twenty past four",
so perhaps some special cases still hang on.--
-- Richard
Yes, but we're talking about numbers, not about units of measurement.
Most or all of those mentioned were used historically in French (pouce, pied, mille), and one French unit (point) has survived in typography. I should be surprised if there weren't equally bizarre units in German, Italian, Spanish etc. The first time I flew to Santiago there was a sign
on the runway saying that the height was 1555-apies, no mention of metres
as far as I remember.
maybe inspired by the four and twenty blackbirds baked in a pie
1 t|+nde land = 13.824 alen-#
When I started school we had to do arithmetic in pounds, shillings,
and pence, and in miles, furlongs (optional), chains (very optional),
yards, feet, and inches
not to mention rods, poles or perches
On 2025-08-24 16:41:52 +0000, guido wugi said:
Op 24/08/2025 om 7:03 schreef lar3ryca:
On 2025-08-23 10:19, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
Den 23.08.2025 kl. 18.05 skrev Hibou:
French numbering is weird. I can't imagine English speakers putting >>>>> up with saying "four twenties nineteen" for 99.
Can you imagine them saying "three scores and twelve"?
Of course I can imagine it. I, and virtually every English speaker
would never use it in ordinary speech or written communication. It's
a old term, and likely the only place you'll run across it is in /The
Gettysburg Address/ by Abraham Lincoln, or in fiction set in times a
few centuries ago.
No, Bertel, in English, we no longer use it in everyday speech or
writing. We have not carried it with us the way the French or Danes
have carried the old ways into the present.
English perhaps has no weird numbers, but what with decimality in
(historical?) distances:
Inch (in or rC|): The smallest common unit, historically based on a
barleycorn or the width of a thumb.
Foot (ft or rC#): Equal to 12 inches.
Yard (yd): Equal to 3 feet, it was historically based on the length of
a human arm or a staff.
Mile (mi or m): Equal to 1760 yards or 5,280 feet.
or in monetary history:
The *shilling* is a historical coin, and the name of a unit of modern
currencies formerly used in the United Kingdom, Australia, New
Zealand, other British Commonwealth countries and Ireland, where they
were generally equivalent to *12 pence or one-twentieth of a pound*
before being phased out during the 1960s and 1970s.
or in the messy weights, etc.
Yes, but we're talking about numbers, not about units of measurement.
Most or all of those mentioned were used historically in French (pouce, pied, mille), and one French unit (point) has survived in typography. I should be surprised if there weren't equally bizarre units in German, Italian, Spanish etc. The first time I flew to Santiago there was a sign
on the runway saying that the height was 1555-apies, no mention of metres
as far as I remember.
In article <108ffcg$2t4sd$1@dont-email.me>, guido wugi
<wugi@brol.invalid> wrote:
English perhaps has no weird numbers, but what with decimality in
(historical?) distances:
When I started school we had to do arithmetic in pounds, shillings,
and pence, and in miles, furlongs (optional), chains (very
optional), yards, feet, and inches. Which made it trivial when we
came to do bases later on. I remember having to work out how many
inches there are in a mile (63,360).
As for weird numbers, my grandmother would refer to 4:25 as "five and
twenty past four", so perhaps some special cases still hang on.
Le 24/08/2025 |a 09:36, Bertel Lund Hansen a |-crit :
Den 24.08.2025 kl. 07.03 skrev lar3ryca:
Of course I can imagine it. I, and virtually every English speaker
would never use it in ordinary speech or written communication. It's
a old term, and likely the only place you'll run across it is in /The
Gettysburg Address/ by Abraham Lincoln, or in fiction set in times a
few centuries ago.
No, Bertel, in English, we no longer use it in everyday speech or
writing. We have not carried it with us the way the French or Danes
have carried the old ways into the present.
But it takes away any reason to call Danish and French numbers weird
that something similar is well-known in English.
I'm afraid I don't agree. One sense of 'weird' is strange or bizarre,
and, given that we usually count in tens, 'quatre-vingt-dix-neuf' is a strange way of saying 99. The fact that 'score' is known in English
doesn't make it any less strange; it's the strangeness that has made
'score' obsolete.
Apparently many cultures counted by twenties in the past. We're just
seeing a remnant of this practice.
I've seen the number twenty describe as "the count of a man". (Fingers
and toes.) I would have expected twenty-one.
When I started school we had to do arithmetic in pounds, shillings,
and pence, and in miles, furlongs (optional), chains (very optional),
yards, feet, and inches. Which made it trivial when we came to do
bases later on. I remember having to work out how many inches there
are in a mile (63,360). [...]
On 25/08/25 03:38, Richard Tobin wrote:
As for weird numbers, my grandmother would refer to 4:25 as "five and
twenty past four", so perhaps some special cases still hang on.
You can still see that on Aidan's postings. "On the third day and twenty
of month August, wrote somebody".
Peter Moylan hat am 25.08.2025 um 02:34 geschrieben:
Apparently many cultures counted by twenties in the past. We're just
seeing a remnant of this practice.
I've seen the number twenty described as "the count of a man". (Fingers
and toes.) I would have expected twenty-one.
"The count of a man": man = human being or man = male?
Your suggestion is conceivable only in the second case. W hat about women? How do you distinguish the two meanings in English?
In German we have Mensch = human being and Mann = male.
Den 24.08.2025 kl. 07.03 skrev lar3ryca:
Can you imagine them saying "three scores and twelve"?
Of course I can imagine it. I, and virtually every English speaker
would never use it in ordinary speech or written communication. It's a
old term, and likely the only place you'll run across it is in /The
Gettysburg Address/ by Abraham Lincoln, or in fiction set in times a
few centuries ago.
No, Bertel, in English, we no longer use it in everyday speech or
writing. We have not carried it with us the way the French or Danes
have carried the old ways into the present.
But it takes away any reason to call Danish and French numbers weird
that something similar is well-known in English.
Apparently many cultures counted by twenties in the past. We're just
seeing a remnant of this practice.
I've seen the number twenty describe as "the count of a man". (Fingers
and toes.) I would have expected twenty-one.
"The count of a man": man = human being or man = male?
Your suggestion is conceivable only in the second case. W hat about women? How do you distinguish the two meanings in English?
In German we have Mensch = human being and Mann = male.
Peter Moylan hat am 25.08.2025 um 02:34 geschrieben:
Apparently many cultures counted by twenties in the past. We're
just seeing a remnant of this practice.
I've seen the number twenty describe as "the count of a man".
(Fingers and toes.) I would have expected twenty-one.
"The count of a man": man = human being or man = male?
Your suggestion is conceivable only in the second case. W hat about
women? How do you distinguish the two meanings in English? In German
we have Mensch = human being and Mann = male.
Le 25/08/2025 |a 06:15, Silvano a |-crit :
How do you distinguish the two meanings [of 'man'] in English?
In German we have Mensch = human being and Mann = male.
In the past that was easy to answer. Women didn't count.
'Man' as 'human being' works if one uses one's nose. Privates should be
used only in private.
On 24/08/2025 18:45, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
On 2025-08-24 16:41:52 +0000, guido wugi said:
Op 24/08/2025 om 7:03 schreef lar3ryca:
On 2025-08-23 10:19, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
Den 23.08.2025 kl. 18.05 skrev Hibou:
French numbering is weird. I can't imagine English speakers putting up >>>>>> with saying "four twenties nineteen" for 99.
Can you imagine them saying "three scores and twelve"?
Of course I can imagine it. I, and virtually every English speaker
would never use it in ordinary speech or written communication. It's a >>>> old term, and likely the only place you'll run across it is in /The
Gettysburg Address/ by Abraham Lincoln, or in fiction set in times a
few centuries ago.
No, Bertel, in English, we no longer use it in everyday speech or
writing. We have not carried it with us the way the French or Danes
have carried the old ways into the present.
English perhaps has no weird numbers, but what with decimality in
(historical?) distances:
Inch (in or rC|): The smallest common unit, historically based on a
barleycorn or the width of a thumb.
Foot (ft or rC#): Equal to 12 inches.
Yard (yd): Equal to 3 feet, it was historically based on the length of
a human arm or a staff.
Mile (mi or m): Equal to 1760 yards or 5,280 feet.
or in monetary history:
The *shilling* is a historical coin, and the name of a unit of modern
currencies formerly used in the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, >>> other British Commonwealth countries and Ireland, where they were
generally equivalent to *12 pence or one-twentieth of a pound* before
being phased out during the 1960s and 1970s.
or in the messy weights, etc.
Yes, but we're talking about numbers, not about units of measurement.
Most or all of those mentioned were used historically in French (pouce,
pied, mille), and one French unit (point) has survived in typography. I
should be surprised if there weren't equally bizarre units in German,
Italian, Spanish etc. The first time I flew to Santiago there was a
sign on the runway saying that the height was 1555-apies, no mention of
metres as far as I remember.
A news item frm nos.nl a couple of days ago described how two Belgian kitesurfers crossed the channel from Zeebrugge to Ramsgate without the proper permission. I was interested to see that the report mentioned
that anyone who wants to indulge in watersports more than 'twee zeemijl
(3.7 kilometer)' from the coast must apply for a permit.
It seems that the nautical mile survives as an international standard distance equal to 1852 meters, and divided into ten cable lengths.
Actually, that's probably been mentioned here before -- now that I--
think, I seem to remember a recent discussion about speeds that
included reference to knots.
Le 25/08/2025 |a 06:37, Hibou a |-crit :
Le 25/08/2025 |a 06:15, Silvano a |-crit :
How do you distinguish the two meanings [of 'man'] in English?
In German we have Mensch = human being and Mann = male.
In the past that was easy to answer. Women didn't count.
'Man' as 'human being' works if one uses one's nose. Privates should
be used only in private.
More seriously, I'd say that one knows from context (some native
speakers have difficulty with this).
Le 23/08/2025 a 09:14, Aidan Kehoe a ocrit :
Ar an tr0. lb is fiche de m0 L.nasa, scr0obh Bertel Lund Hansen:
> [...] For those interested:
>
> https://tools.lundhansen.dk/Danish_numbers.html
Thanks!
> And a question:
>
> I have used the phrase "names for the tens". Is there a better
>expression?
I would phrase it as "those multiples of ten under one hundred," but that's unwieldly and not clearly better than how you have phrased it.
I think "names for multiples of ten" is about the best one can do.
French numbering is weird. I can't imagine English speakers putting up
with saying "four twenties nineteen" for 99.
Hibou hat am 25.08.2025 um 09:00 geschrieben:
Le 25/08/2025 |a 06:37, Hibou a |-crit :
Le 25/08/2025 |a 06:15, Silvano a |-crit :
How do you distinguish the two meanings [of 'man'] in English?
In German we have Mensch = human being and Mann = male.
In the past that was easy to answer. Women didn't count.
We know, but Peter has written it today, not in a far away past.
'Man' as 'human being' works if one uses one's nose. Privates should
be used only in private.
More seriously, I'd say that one knows from context (some native
speakers have difficulty with this).
Not so seriously, I am not a native speaker.
On 25/08/25 03:38, Richard Tobin wrote:
In article <108ffcg$2t4sd$1@dont-email.me>, guido wugi
<wugi@brol.invalid> wrote:
English perhaps has no weird numbers, but what with decimality in
(historical?) distances:
When I started school we had to do arithmetic in pounds, shillings,
and pence, and in miles, furlongs (optional), chains (very
optional), yards, feet, and inches.-a Which made it trivial when we
came to do bases later on.-a I remember having to work out how many
inches there are in a mile (63,360).
Those complications in school were insignificant with what I (and of
course many others) had to face in my engineering studies. Horsepower, British Thermal Unit, and so on made rods, poles, and perches sound
easy. In those days electrical engineering was purely metric, but
mechanical engineering wasn't, so we had to change gears when moving
between subjects.
I've just remembered that my slide rule has a lot of conversion factors
on the back. And I still have a book of steam tables somewhere on my bookshelves.
As for weird numbers, my grandmother would refer to 4:25 as "five and
twenty past four", so perhaps some special cases still hang on.
You can still see that on Aidan's postings. "On the third day and twenty
of month August, wrote somebody".
Op 25/08/2025 om 2:31 schreef Peter Moylan:
On 25/08/25 03:38, Richard Tobin wrote:
As for weird numbers, my grandmother would refer to 4:25 as
"five and twenty past four", so perhaps some special cases still
hang on.
You can still see that on Aidan's postings. "On the third day and
twenty of month August, wrote somebody".
Eh? Not the three and twentieth, as in Dutch and German?
By the way, are others finding that Google Translate seems to be broken?
On two of my web browsers it doesn't work at all. On a third (dooble) it works but has become painfully slow, and it sometimes gives faulty
answers. Damage caused by AI?
By the way, are others finding that Google Translate seems to be broken?
On two of my web browsers it doesn't work at all. On a third (dooble) it
works but has become painfully slow, and it sometimes gives faulty
answers. Damage caused by AI?
By the way, are others finding that Google Translate seems to be broken?
On two of my web browsers it doesn't work at all. On a third (dooble) it works but has become painfully slow, and it sometimes gives faulty
answers. Damage caused by AI?
On 25/08/25 20:42, guido wugi wrote:
Op 25/08/2025 om 2:31 schreef Peter Moylan:
On 25/08/25 03:38, Richard Tobin wrote:
As for weird numbers, my grandmother would refer to 4:25 as
"five and twenty past four", so perhaps some special cases still
hang on.
You can still see that on Aidan's postings. "On the third day and
twenty of month August, wrote somebody".
Eh? Not the three and twentieth, as in Dutch and German?
No. I can't locate one of his posts at the moment, but as I recall it he writes "tri|| l|i is fiche". The Irish word for "three" is tr|! (unless you're counting people, which uses different number words), and the word
for "third" is tri||, so the phrase is literally "third day and twenty". "Twentieth" would be fichi||.
I've just looked it up in Welsh. "Twenty-third" is traean ar hugain,
which I'm guessing means third on twenty. But don't quote me on that, because my ignorance of Welsh is profound.
By the way, are others finding that Google Translate seems to be broken?
On two of my web browsers it doesn't work at all. On a third (dooble) it works but has become painfully slow, and it sometimes gives faulty
answers. Damage caused by AI?