Re: [tied] Re: IE right & 10

It seems that we misunderstand each other. I've never claimed I'd known a
base-6 system, not me. My body-tally examples were just "formal", i.e. to
show you what kind of example I would've liked you to give me :-). Thank you
for Ndom :-) Exxxactly what I wanted to see! :-) If you'd read thoroughly
what I'd have written, you wouldn't have written the funny "Yes. But no base
6" reply so many times - why, didn't I write "thus not on 6's" (Yuma),
"paired numerals" (Nama) or wasn't it simply clear from the examples (about
which I had written they'd be or had been "formal", i.e. as for the "form"
of the example) that I was aware of the systems no being base-6 ones??? I
might be a crazy fool, if so, I'm sorry for that.

As far as my last paragraph is concerned, yes, the listing might exhaust
"Terrestrial" systems ;-) (as intended)...

It would certainly be interesting to make a database of all the systems and
to cathegorize them properly, and perhaps, make all that stuff available
on-line, so if you'd like to participate...

Nevertheless, we shall be careful and aware of the fact that this is, again,
an out-of-topic point! ;-)

Petusek

----- Original Message -----
From: Harald Hammarström
To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 8:32 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] Re: IE right & 10


> >There are (or were) attested true base-6 systems in Frederik-Hendrik
island
> >outside Papua New Guinea. But it is 6, 2x6, 3x6 etc (see source below).
>
> I see, could you possibly cite the source - just a brief excerpt or
example,
> please?
>
> Something like this - in a Trans-New Guinean language (Indo-Pacific
> macrophylum?) called Aghu (="person", aghu-bigi = "person-bon" = "20"),
the
> numeral 6, 12 & 18 are as follows:
>
> (bidikimu/bidikuma = "one hand", bifidikimu/a "the one hand")
> "6" bidikuma-fasike "hand + one"
> "12" kito wodo womu "the toe next to the middle toe"
> "18" afi-kito efe womu "the other toe in the middle"
>
> or like this:
>
> Telefol (Trans-New Guinean phylum of the Indo-Pacific macrophylum):
>
> "6" bukubkal "fist of the left hand"
> "12" tulunkal "left ear"
> ...
>
> Kombai; Korowai; Wambon (three languages of the same phylum)
>
> "1" raga; senan; sanop "little finger"
> ...
> "6" go; gédu; kumuk "wrist"
> "12" khabiya (head); khotokhal (ear); silutop (ear)
> ...

No, no, not body-tally systems (which are usually weakly integrated into
the language) but bona-fide base-6 systems e.g Ndom:
1 sas
2 thef
3 ithin
4 thonìth
5 merègh
6 mer
7 (mer) abo sas
8 (mer) abo thef
9 (mer) abo ithin
10 (mer) abo thonìth
11 (mer) abo merègh
12 mer an thef
13 mer an thef abo sas
..
18 töndör
19 töndör abo sas
..
36 nif
72 nif thef
108 nif ithìn
..


> >There is other evidence of base-6 in Guinea (in Africa) as well as in
> >some North American Indian lgs but it's not so systematic nor
> >well-attested (ask for sources).
> >
>
> Well, maybe. I am aware of the first decade in Yuma (Hoka family), but it
is
> based on multiplication in general (thus not on 6's), e.g.:
>
> "2" xavik < *xwak
> "3" xamók < *xmuk
> "6" xuumxuuk = 2x3
> "9" xamxamok = 3x3

Yes. But no base 6.

> or Chumash of Santa Barbara:
>
> "2" ickomo
> "3" masex
> "4" ckumu = "2x2" or "2^2"
> "8" ckomo (Chumash of San Luis Obispo) = "2x2x2" or "2^3"
> "12" masex-eskumu = "3x4"

Yes. But no base 6.

> or Nama of the Khoi-San macrophylum (paired numerals):
>
> "3" !nona
> "6" !nani

Yes. But no base 6.

> These were just formal, typological examples I would like you to present,
if
> possible.
>
> To sum it up, I have encountered following systems of (creating) numerals:
>
> Two basic types:
> A: Direct (transparent) semantic motivation (most often body parts,
> sometimes pronominal, verbal or dif. origin)
> B: Transparent application of arithmetic operations (sum, substraction,
> multiplication, etc.)
> C: Combination of A & B, often analysable only when using etymological
> approach
> And, just as any part of lexicon, sometimes, numerals were and are
borrowed,
> of course.

Doesn't this exhaust all the logical possibilities? (Except perhaps numerals
created by aliens from outer space).

/Harald