An diofar eadar na mùthaidhean a rinneadh air "The new-old numerals or Why this sucks"

O Goireasan Akerbeltz
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(12 mhùthadh eadar-mheadhanach le 2 chleachdaiche eile nach eil 12 'gan sealltainn)
Loidhne 1: Loidhne 1:
−
Well, it does suck.  To begin with, calling it the ''new numbers'' is something of a contradiction, because although they haven't been in colloquial use for a long long time, they are actually very old numbers.
+
Well, it does suck.  To begin with, calling it the ''new numbers'' is something of a contradiction, because although they haven't been in colloquial use for a long long time, they're actually very old numbers. It works this way:
  
−
It works this way:
+
#Q-Celtic inherits a decimal system (based on 10s) from Indo-European.
 +
#This develops into a vigesimal system (based on 20s) from the old, "outdated" decimal system. This is because Old Irish educators decided it was too difficult for children to learn maths in a decimal system. Swipe at the people who came up with this nonsense about vigesimal number systems being too unwieldy for maths intended.
 +
#This vigesimal system was in use for a long time until "modern educators" got their hands on Irish and Gaelic and changed it all back.
  
−
#Q-Celtic inherits a decimal system (based on 10s) from Indo-European
+
...Talking nonsense, are we? Well, let's take an excerpt from a Basque textbook from a land where where language planning is lightyears ahead of Gaelic. We find equations which read <span style="color: #6600CC;">hirurehun ta larogeita hamabi zati berrogeita bederatzi berdin zortzi</span>, literally "three hundred and four-twenty-and ten-two divide two-twenty-and nine equal eight".
−
#This develops into a vigesimal (based on 20s) system from the old "outdated" decimal system.  This is because Old Irish educators decided it was too difficult for children to learn maths in a decimal system. Swipe at the people who came up with this nonsense about vigesimal number systems being too unwieldy for maths intended.
 
−
#This system is then in use for a long time until "modern educators" get their hands on Irish and Gaelic and change it all back
 
  
−
...Talking nonsense, are we?  Let's take an excerpt from a Basque textbook then, a people who is lightyears ahead of Gaelic in terms of language planning. We find equations which read hirurehun ta larogeita hamabi zati berrogeita bederatzi berdin zortzi, literally "three hundred and four-twenty-and ten-two divide two-twenty-and nine equal eight".
+
Incidentally, the Basques do calculus with these numbers and no children have been diagnosed with cortical meltdown, yet...
  
−
Incidentally, the Basques do calculus with these numbers and no children have been diagnosed with cortical meltdown yet ...
+
For those who are curious, the Old Irish numbers were as follows. The modern forms are in green, and interestingly, they're derived from the old genitive forms:
  
−
For those who are curious the Old Irish numbers were as follows (modern forms in green - interestingly, they are derived from the old genitive forms):
+
{| style="width: 50%;" border="0" align="center"
 +
|-
 +
| 10 || 20 || 30 || 40 || 50
 +
|-
 +
| <span style="color: #6600CC;">deich</span> || <span style="color: #6600CC;">fiche</span><br/>(gen. <span style="color: #6600CC;">fichet</span>) || <span style="color: #6600CC;">tricho</span><br/>(gen. <span style="color: #6600CC;">trichot</span>) || <span style="color: #6600CC;">cethorcho</span><br/>(gen. <span style="color: #6600CC;">cethorchat</span>) || <span style="color: #6600CC;">coíca</span><br/>(gen. <span style="color: #6600CC;">coícat</span>)
 +
|-
 +
| <span style="color: #008000;">deich</span> || <span style="color: #008000;">fichead</span> || <span style="color: #008000;">trithead</span> || <span style="color: #008000;">ceathrad</span> || <span style="color: #008000;">caogad</span>
 +
|-
 +
| || || || || ||
 +
|-
 +
| 60 || 70 || 80 || 90 || 100
 +
|-
 +
| <span style="color: #6600CC;">sesca</span><br/>(gen. <span style="color: #6600CC;">sescot</span>) || <span style="color: #6600CC;">sechtmogo</span><br/>(gen. <span style="color: #6600CC;">sechtmogat</span>) || <span style="color: #6600CC;">ochtmoga</span><br/>(gen. <span style="color: #6600CC;">ochtmugat</span>) || <span style="color: #6600CC;">nócha</span><br/>(gen. <span style="color: #6600CC;">nóchat</span>) || <span style="color: #6600CC;">cét</span><br/>(gen. <span style="color: #6600CC;">céit</span>)
 +
|-
 +
| <span style="color: #008000;">seasgad</span> || <span style="color: #008000;">seachdad</span> || <span style="color: #008000;">ochdad</span> || <span style="color: #008000;">naochad</span> || <span style="color: #008000;">ceud</span>
 +
|-
 +
|}
  
−
   
+
==Choices, choices==
−
deich
+
Which one to use? Up to you, but you'll have to learn both, anyway.  Children in GME learn only the new-old system, but you'll come across the traditional system all over, and many older speakers don't know the new-old system. So, at least for the time being we're stuck with TWO of them <sigh>.  Almost as efficient as Great Comrade Mao Zedong's spelling reform.  Don't ask.
  
−
deich fiche
+
On the other hand, having the two systems side by side has its uses, too. In the traditional way talking about decades is slightly cumbersome, at least with certain numbers e.g. the thirties as <span style="color: #008000;">na deich ar fhicheadan</span> is just weird - but the new old numbers work excellently here:
−
(gen. fichet)
 
−
fichead tricho
 
−
(gen. trichot)
 
−
trithead cethorcho
 
−
(gen. cethorchat)
 
−
ceathrad coíca
 
−
(gen. coícat)
 
−
caogad
 
−
10 20 30 40 50
 
−
sesca
 
−
(gen. sescot)
 
−
seasgad sechtmogo
 
−
(gen. sechtmogat)
 
−
seachdad ochtmoga
 
−
(gen. ochtmugat)
 
−
ochdad nócha
 
−
(gen. nóchat)
 
−
naochad cét
 
−
(gen. céit)
 
−
ceud
 
−
60 70 80 90 100
 
  
−
Which one to use?  Up to you, but you'll have to learn both anyway.  Children in GME learn only the new-old system, but you will come across the traditional system all over and many older speakers don't know the new-old system ... so at least for the time being we're stuck with TWO of them <sigh>.  Almost as efficient as Great Comrade Mao Zedongs spelling reform.  Don't ask.
 
  
−
On the other hand, having the two systems side by side has its uses too.  In the traditional way talking about decades is slightly cumbersome, at least with certain numbers e.g. the thirties as na deich ar fhicheadan is just weird - but the new old numbers work excellently here:
+
{| style="width: 50%;" border="0" align="center"
 +
|-
 +
| <span style="color: #008000;">na ficheadan</span> || <span style="color: #008000;">na tritheadan</span> || <span style="color: #008000;">na ceathradan</span> || <span style="color: #008000;">na caogadan</span>
 +
|-
 +
| the twenties || the thirties || the fourties || the fifties
 +
|-
 +
| <span style="color: #008000;">na seasgadan</span> || <span style="color: #008000;">na seachdadan</span> || <span style="color: #008000;">na h-ochdadan</span> || <span style="color: #008000;">na naochadan</span>
 +
|-
 +
| the sixties || the seventies || the eighties || the nineties
 +
|-
 +
|}
  
−
+
I recommend you learn the old system and use it. Simply be aware of the new-old system, perhaps just using the above terms for decades in the new-old system.  And pay attention who you are talking to - children from GME often mistake <span style="color: #008000;">trì fichead</span> for <span style="color: #008000;">trithead</span>!
−
na ficheadan na tritheadan na ceathradan na caogadan
 
−
the twenties the thirties the fourties the fifties
 
−
na seasgadan na seachdadan na h-ochdadan na naochadan
 
−
the sixties the seventies the eighties the nineties
 
  
−
We recommend you learn the old system and use it and simply be aware of the new-old system, perhaps just using the above terms for decades in the new-old system.  And pay attention who you are talking to - children from GME often mistake trì fichead for trithead!
+
Other reasons this sucks is that it not only forces learners to learn '''two''' number systems and the new-old system is not as straightforward as some may think.  Although, the general approach in counting is to say the number and then the object being counted, for example, <span style="color: #008000;">ochdad is a seachd guib</span> ''87 beaks''. However, there seems to be a certain amount of confusion about this, even amongst the propagators of the new old system.  Apparently, you have a choice of saying <span style="color: #008000;">ochdad gob is a seachd</span> or <span style="color: #008000;">ochdad is a seachd guib</span> - except when doing calculations when you're always supposed to put the noun being counted at the end. Confused?  You're not on your own then. At least the traditional system is consistent.
−
 
 
−
Another reason this sucks is that it does not only force learners to learn TWO number systems, but the new-old system isn't that straightforward either as they may think.  Although in counting the general approach is to say the number and then the object being counted e.g. ochdad is a seachd guib '87 beaks' there seems to be a certain amount of confusion even amongst the propagators of the new old systems about this.  Apparently you have a choice of saying either ochdad gob is a seachd or ochdad is a seachd guib, except when doing calculations when you are supposed to put it at the end always ... confused?  You're not on your own then ... at least the traditional system is consistent.
 
  
 
<br />
 
<br />
 
<br />
 
<br />
 
{{BeaganGramair}}
 
{{BeaganGramair}}

Am mùthadh mu dheireadh on 02:17, 20 dhen t-Sultain 2013

Well, it does suck. To begin with, calling it the new numbers is something of a contradiction, because although they haven't been in colloquial use for a long long time, they're actually very old numbers. It works this way:

  1. Q-Celtic inherits a decimal system (based on 10s) from Indo-European.
  2. This develops into a vigesimal system (based on 20s) from the old, "outdated" decimal system. This is because Old Irish educators decided it was too difficult for children to learn maths in a decimal system. Swipe at the people who came up with this nonsense about vigesimal number systems being too unwieldy for maths intended.
  3. This vigesimal system was in use for a long time until "modern educators" got their hands on Irish and Gaelic and changed it all back.

...Talking nonsense, are we? Well, let's take an excerpt from a Basque textbook from a land where where language planning is lightyears ahead of Gaelic. We find equations which read hirurehun ta larogeita hamabi zati berrogeita bederatzi berdin zortzi, literally "three hundred and four-twenty-and ten-two divide two-twenty-and nine equal eight".

Incidentally, the Basques do calculus with these numbers and no children have been diagnosed with cortical meltdown, yet...

For those who are curious, the Old Irish numbers were as follows. The modern forms are in green, and interestingly, they're derived from the old genitive forms:

10 20 30 40 50
deich fiche
(gen. fichet)		 tricho
(gen. trichot)		 cethorcho
(gen. cethorchat)		 coíca
(gen. coícat)
deich fichead trithead ceathrad caogad
60 70 80 90 100
sesca
(gen. sescot)		 sechtmogo
(gen. sechtmogat)		 ochtmoga
(gen. ochtmugat)		 nócha
(gen. nóchat)		 cét
(gen. céit)
seasgad seachdad ochdad naochad ceud

Choices, choices

Which one to use? Up to you, but you'll have to learn both, anyway. Children in GME learn only the new-old system, but you'll come across the traditional system all over, and many older speakers don't know the new-old system. So, at least for the time being we're stuck with TWO of them <sigh>. Almost as efficient as Great Comrade Mao Zedong's spelling reform. Don't ask.

On the other hand, having the two systems side by side has its uses, too. In the traditional way talking about decades is slightly cumbersome, at least with certain numbers e.g. the thirties as na deich ar fhicheadan is just weird - but the new old numbers work excellently here:


na ficheadan na tritheadan na ceathradan na caogadan
the twenties the thirties the fourties the fifties
na seasgadan na seachdadan na h-ochdadan na naochadan
the sixties the seventies the eighties the nineties

I recommend you learn the old system and use it. Simply be aware of the new-old system, perhaps just using the above terms for decades in the new-old system. And pay attention who you are talking to - children from GME often mistake trì fichead for trithead!

Other reasons this sucks is that it not only forces learners to learn two number systems and the new-old system is not as straightforward as some may think. Although, the general approach in counting is to say the number and then the object being counted, for example, ochdad is a seachd guib 87 beaks. However, there seems to be a certain amount of confusion about this, even amongst the propagators of the new old system. Apparently, you have a choice of saying ochdad gob is a seachd or ochdad is a seachd guib - except when doing calculations when you're always supposed to put the noun being counted at the end. Confused? You're not on your own then. At least the traditional system is consistent.



Beagan gràmair
᚛ Pronunciation - Phonetics - Phonology - Morphology - Tense - Syntax - Corpus - Registers - Dialects - History - Terms and abbreviations ᚜


Air a tharraing à "http://www.akerbeltz.org/index.php?title=The_new-old_numerals_or_Why_this_sucks&oldid=2172"