From pycyn@aol.com Fri Dec 08 11:00:46 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 8 Dec 2000 19:00:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 68298 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2000 19:00:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Dec 2000 19:00:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r14.mail.aol.com) (152.163.225.68) by mta1 with SMTP; 8 Dec 2000 19:00:45 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-r14.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v28.34.) id a.23.49a866e (16485) for ; Fri, 8 Dec 2000 14:00:40 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <23.49a866e.276289d8@aol.com> Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2000 14:00:40 EST Subject: Re: [lojban] Triple number To: lojban@egroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_23.49a866e.276289d8_boundary" Content-Disposition: Inline X-Mailer: Unknown sub 171 From: pycyn@aol.com --part1_23.49a866e.276289d8_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/8/2000 12:29:28 PM Central Standard Time, slobin@ice.ru writes: > can > anybody give an example of (natural) language which triple (as opposed > do single, dual and multiple) grammatical number? Any references are > very welcomed. > I don't think so. All I know are two jokes that bear on the issue. One is that Eskimos (not further identified, so probably including Aleuts and the like) have a number system based on threes, with no larger number word than "three." They can nevertheless perform fairly complex operations with this sytem if the need arises. The other is really a joke: a Hungarian nobleman (both characterizations apparently essential) was asked the highest number he could think of and said "Three" So, two possible places to look. --part1_23.49a866e.276289d8_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/8/2000 12:29:28 PM Central Standard Time, slobin@ice.ru
writes:



can
anybody give an example of (natural) language which triple (as opposed
do single, dual and multiple) grammatical number? Any references are
very welcomed.




I don't think so.  All I know are two jokes that bear on the issue.  One is
that Eskimos (not further identified, so probably including Aleuts and the
like) have a number system based on threes, with no larger number word than
"three."  They can nevertheless perform fairly complex operations with this
sytem if the need arises.  The other is really a joke: a Hungarian nobleman
(both characterizations apparently essential) was asked the highest number he
could think of and said "Three"  So, two possible places to look. --part1_23.49a866e.276289d8_boundary--