Feedback for Written Numerical System

A forum for all topics related to constructed languages
Post Reply
gusjl
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 1
Joined: 28 May 2022 19:16

Feedback for Written Numerical System

Post by gusjl »

Hey everyone, first post here and first project so don’t go too hard on me.
Okay, so I’m working on a written numerical system for fun (separate from any full conlangs) based on Romance languages. It mainly uses particles attached to the end of basic numbers in order to reach more precise numbers, and the same particles attached to the front of a number to multiply it by 2-10 times. The particles can also be attached to the end of a noun to signify extra numerical info about said noun. The particles are marked with a horizontal line above them for simplicity. In the below drive link there are all my notes so far, meant to be read from figure 1 to figure 4 in that order.
I would appreciate greatly any piece of constructive criticism everyone has! It has a few kinda confusing quirks that I dislike but don’t know how to fix (like the fact that particles on the back of a number work well but are kinda confusing to understand), but I hope it’s not that awful for a first attempt. Thanks!

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/ ... De4NjEcgjp
User avatar
collect_gluesticks
hieroglyphic
hieroglyphic
Posts: 27
Joined: 27 Nov 2021 00:49
Contact:

Re: Feedback for Written Numerical System

Post by collect_gluesticks »

So rabbitse is seven rabbits, but cenose is not seven hundred... it's 100 + 70, is that correct? I found that confusing.

Would it be valid to say "to meno se ceno" ? Would that mean 3700? Or would it only be proper to say "to meno se". I'm assuming only the latter is allowed, because allowing both introduces too much ambiguity.

What's a superword? I presume it's polymorphemic, as opposed to isolated, single morpheme digits. If your audience includes other conlangers, I might look for a better way to say that, as superword isn't a term of art, and could be confusing (but it's mostly clear to me what you mean).

When you say it's "always better to use a superword" do you mean the language prefers that way? If I understand you correctly, "focenokonodonuso" is preferred in writing, whereas "focenokonu et donuso" is the preferred spoken form.

Is naturalism one of your goals? If so, I haven't seen any numeral systems in the real world that work like this, though there are so many numeral systems I haven't seen, so who knows! I suspect this wouldn't be practical for humans to use day to day. In your example focenokonu et donuso, for example, in order to know what "so" at the end means, you have to keep the rest of the number in your head, and work backwards from ceno to determine its place value. And in it's written form, I think it would look too busy. The markers above the particles don't really help, since in a word like focenokonodonuso, everything but ceno would get a line above it.
:con: website for my conlang, Yeh.
Post Reply