Newsgroups: sci.lang,alt.folklore.computers,alt.folklore.science
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!nntp.sei.cmu.edu!news.psc.edu!hudson.lm.com!godot.cc.duq.edu!news.duke.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!news.nic.surfnet.nl!sun4nl!cwi.nl!dik
From: dik@cwi.nl (Dik T. Winter)
Subject: Re: Arabic numbering system
Message-ID: <DFC35n.26D@cwi.nl>
Sender: news@cwi.nl (The Daily Dross)
Nntp-Posting-Host: bever.cwi.nl
Organization: CWI, Amsterdam
References: <Pine.HPP.3.91.950919151234.7640A-100000@weber.ucsd.edu> <DF8BBA.861@cwi.nl> <Pine.HPP.3.91.950922143521.19439C-100000@weber.ucsd.edu>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 1995 01:08:10 GMT
Lines: 62

In article <Pine.HPP.3.91.950922143521.19439C-100000@weber.ucsd.edu> Daniel Kian Mc Kiernan <dmckiern@weber.ucsd.edu> writes:
 > On Thu, 21 Sep 1995, Dik T. Winter wrote:
 > >>>                                         Eleven and twelve are the
 > >>> only ones I've never been able to figure out why in both English and
 > >>> German they don't follow any pattern.
 > >> 
 > >> According to what I've read, the words for 11 and 12 in some
 > >> languages are linguistic fossils of a base 12 number system.
 > >> 
 > > You remember wrong, or you read wrong, or your source was wrong.
 > > Well, how is that for folklore?  (One left, two left.)
 > 
 > I remember correctly.  What I read may have been wrong, but noting
 > the etymology of "eleven" and "twelve" in isolation doesn't refute
 > what I read.

It must have been a bad night when I wrote that (I made errors in at
least two other articles...).  While in both English and German the
words for 11 and 12 are certainly not linguistic fossils of a base 12
number system, it is possible that there are languages where they are,
although for the about 80 languages (yes, it is only a very small part)
for which I know approximately how counting works, none displays a
base 12 fossil.  Other bases, yes (20, 5).

 >                                             Why is it that we don't
 > use something like "trelve"?

French uses treize (and other Romance languages use similar words).
Although in the Germanic languages words like eleven and twelve are
not universal, some use something similar to oneteen, twoteen.

 >                              Arguing for the claim that they are
 > fossils of a base 12 system, one would claim that they are distinct
 > because a base 12 system was still in use when their peculiar source
 > words were formed, but refer to a base of ten because a base of 10 was
 > =also= in use.

In that case at that time in France a base 16 system was still in use.

In all cases I have seen the etymology suggests either base 5, 10 or 20,
never another base.  That some special numbers that are not rounded
numbers in the base (like 12 and 16) play a special role has nothing to
do with the number base used.  A good question is of course, why are
numbers like 12 and 16 so special.  So, why is a foot 12 inches (and
this is general in most of Europe, in the Netherlands a voet was 12 duim
although there were very strong variations in the value of the voet).
Why is a pound either 12 or 16 ounce.  Why is a gill 4 or 5 fluid ounce?
On the other hand I just checked an interesting book (%) according to
it the Dutch roede (something equivalent to the English rod) varies from
12 to 21 voet (the equivalent of the English foot) depending on the
place where you were.

My conclusion is that these special numbers do not come from some
base system used but from the speciality in the measuring system,
which comes from rationalization of originally unrelated measures.

% J.M. Verhoeff, De oude Nederlandse maten en gewichten, Amsterdam 1983.
English tile: the old Dutch measures and weights.  It enumerates *all*
measures and weights known to be used in the Netherlands.
-- 
dik t. winter, cwi, kruislaan 413, 1098 sj  amsterdam, nederland, +31205924098
home: bovenover 215, 1025 jn  amsterdam, nederland; e-mail: dik@cwi.nl
