I believe that the number words in Toki Pona, "wan", "tu", and "ala", could be used for a ternary or binary counting system. A number, for example the decimal 28, would be "wan ala ala wan" or 1001.

Both systems -- in several forms -- have been presented over the years. None have achieved any popular support in the community, which seems evenly split between not thinking that large numbers (bigger than three, say) are important and thinking that only a decimal place notation system can replace the present system. The systems work fine, but no one wants to relearn mathematics (or learn it for the first time, for that matter).

Yes. I've recently posted about this using a reverse positional notation because we do not have place names (hundreds or thousands etc)

I think you can find the thread here with an introductory video.

viewtopic.php?f=29&t=2605

I think you can find the thread here with an introductory video.

viewtopic.php?f=29&t=2605

I answer to jan Linja Sinpin Loje but you can call me jan Loje

Škjakto wrote:I believe that the number words in Toki Pona, "wan", "tu", and "ala", could be used for a ternary or binary counting system. A number, for example the decimal 28, would be "wan ala ala wan" or 1001.

There other possibilities we could borrow from the history. In ancient Slavic languages there were no numbers. So them used letters or words as numbers. Just marked "number letters" with diacritics. We may use the similar tactic. First make an agreement which word means which number and later use them in a way ancient Slavs did. For example we agreed that first ten words are correspond numbers . Except those 3 we already have. So there will be a list

ala -0 wan -1 tu -2 a -3

akesi -4 alasa -5 ante -6 anpa -7

anu -8 awen -9

Then we can say nanpa anu anpa. = 87 using our beloved Decimal system. But it will require an extra negotiations which are almost not an option. So I propose to tackle the math using an ancient Roman stile. It is gonna be pretty strait forward. Especially if we are agree on math operations. I think we are already agree on them. Try to find out what numbers did I meant when saying this...

tu tu wan kulupu tu =

tu tu kulupu tu tu kulupu tu tu =

tu tu wan kulupu tu en wan =

ali weka tu tu kulupu tu wan =

The answers are: 10, 64, 11, 88

I believe you got them right Yeah it is verbose. But Toki Pona is designed to be verbose. You may say we would better use "mute" or "suli" instead of "kulupu" but I think you've got the idea anyway.

Of course I'm a big fan of ternary and binary systems. And I even being thinking myself to propose those as a TP standard.

But those systems are much less intuitive for non IT people. And they also would require negotiations and extra learning. Which makes binary system an improbable candidate for a standard. So old Roman looks most plausible for me.

Last edited by jan Pina on Mon Nov 14, 2016 4:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Well, not quite Roman style, but I get the idea. There would be a number of problems to iron out -- grouping, for example, and the possibility that one might want to use 'kulupu', say. just to refer to groups and 'nanpa' can't be used to demarcate number usage. And, of course, we still don't have a solution here for telephone numbers or PINs or other ID numbers, which pretty much force decimal notation.

Did Slavic languages really have no numbers or just no numerals, like Greek and Hebrew?

I don't get the technique of the last example and the second one is ambiguous (although the result is the same either way).

Did Slavic languages really have no numbers or just no numerals, like Greek and Hebrew?

I don't get the technique of the last example and the second one is ambiguous (although the result is the same either way).

Yeah. Phone numbers or other id's will be a pain without a Decimal notation. So old Slavic way or conventional Arabic numbers looks like only possible solution for this.

Old Slavic alphabet got no special characters for numbers. So they used alphabet letters to encode numbers.

See a table

Each Slavic letter used to have a word associated with it. This word being a name for a number associated with the letter.

To distinct numbers from letters they used diacritic sign ~ above the letter.

Old Slavic alphabet got no special characters for numbers. So they used alphabet letters to encode numbers.

See a table

Each Slavic letter used to have a word associated with it. This word being a name for a number associated with the letter.

To distinct numbers from letters they used diacritic sign ~ above the letter.

So Slavic had numbers, just not numerals and they made up that lack with a fairly clunky system -- as did all Europe until the arrival of Hindarabic numbers in the Crusades. This doesn't help tp a lot, although it does have nine consonants which would do nicely for numerals in a decimal system. But it seems to have the usual numerals already, so that is not the problem. The problem is an open-ended system of words to express any number (whole, for now -- fractions and the like come a lot later).

Hi

I just learned that TP has more numbers than we even actually need.

There is luka -5 mute-20 ali-100 so by using multiplication we can easily represent any number we need.

You know. To learn an extra hundred words and get an extra language as a bonus is a great bargain.

But to forget a few numbers in order to relearn all the math... Such trade sucks a big time.

For scientific and trade purposes people would use decimal notation anyway.

I just learned that TP has more numbers than we even actually need.

There is luka -5 mute-20 ali-100 so by using multiplication we can easily represent any number we need.

You know. To learn an extra hundred words and get an extra language as a bonus is a great bargain.

But to forget a few numbers in order to relearn all the math... Such trade sucks a big time.

For scientific and trade purposes people would use decimal notation anyway.

But that notation has no verbal equivalent, so is outside the language.

As for multiplication, we have no agreed on way to do that, but, if we did, the addition of a few more words would not make a significant difference ( how have you missed 'luka' up to now?).

As for multiplication, we have no agreed on way to do that, but, if we did, the addition of a few more words would not make a significant difference ( how have you missed 'luka' up to now?).

janKipo wrote:But that notation has no verbal equivalent, so is outside the language.

sina toki e lon. taso jan ali pilin ala tawa ni.

janKipo wrote:As for multiplication, we have no agreed on way to do that,

mi pilin e ni:

nanpa luka li kulupu e tu tu la sama e nanpa mute.

nanpa luka li weka tu la sama e tu wan.

nanpa tu li kipisi e nanpa luka wan la sama tu wan.

sina pilin anu seme?

Return to “jan nasa li wile ante e toki pona”

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 2 guests