From cbmvax!uunet!cuvma.bitnet!LOJBAN Tue Feb 11 08:49:31 1992 Return-Path: Received: by snark.thyrsus.com (/\==/\ Smail3.1.21.1 #21.19) id ; Tue, 11 Feb 92 08:49 EST Received: by cbmvax.cbm.commodore.com (5.57/UUCP-Project/Commodore 2/8/91) id AA23589; Tue, 11 Feb 92 07:58:27 EST Received: from rutgers.edu by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP (5.61/UUNET-internet-primary) id AA05127; Tue, 11 Feb 92 07:49:27 -0500 Received: from cbmvax.UUCP by rutgers.edu (5.59/SMI4.0/RU1.4/3.08) with UUCP id AA01043; Tue, 11 Feb 92 07:10:38 EST Received: by cbmvax.cbm.commodore.com (5.57/UUCP-Project/Commodore 2/8/91) id AA17516; Tue, 11 Feb 92 06:13:17 EST Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU (via uunet.UU.NET) by relay2.UU.NET with SMTP (5.61/UUNET-internet-primary) id AA12954; Tue, 11 Feb 92 05:11:20 -0500 Message-Id: <9202111011.AA12954@relay2.UU.NET> Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU (IBM VM SMTP R1.2.1) with BSMTP id 1206; Tue, 11 Feb 92 05:10:08 EST Received: by CUVMB (Mailer R2.07) id 1959; Tue, 11 Feb 92 05:07:59 EST Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1992 09:44:35 GMT Reply-To: CJ FINE Sender: Lojban list From: CJ FINE Subject: Re: Digit strings X-To: ucleaar@ucl.ac.uk X-Cc: Lojban list To: John Cowan In-Reply-To: ; from "And Rosta" at Feb 7, 92 3:33 pm Status: RO And suggests: > > > Given Lojban's kill-one-bird-with-many-stones principle, I wonder whether > the option of listing digits in order of increasing magnitude has been > considered. I.e. 1,234,567,890 comes out as 0987654321. > > The disadvantage with this is you don't know how big the number is going > to get. But there could be some way of announcing its level of magnitude > prior to listing the digits. Anyway, this solution is still needed even > if digits are listed in decreasing magnitude, else you still have to wait to > the end of the number before you know how big it is. The advantage of > starting units first is you can compute the number as you go by a process > of addition. > > Another disadvantage is where 'decimal' places go - my suggestion is only > nice for integers. > > This seems like an area where it would be good for Lojban to provide > constrained flexibility and let usage determine the preferred options. > I think this is worth considering, but it opens up a number of related areas: specifically, the order of dates and times. When I read the chapter of the textbook on dates, my immediate response was "What, you're constraining me to quoting them in a particular order?" I note, for example, that both ISO dates and everyday Japanese usage go consistently from larger to smaller. For a direct supporting argument for And, I believe that in Arabic, numbers are consistently read from smaller to larger (as numbers between 20 and 99 in German). I don't think this is high priority, though. kolin c.j.fine@bradford.ac.uk