[Tlhingan-hol] 125,000

[Felix Malmenbeck]

> The Chinese system is a useful and productive
> one, but the pattern that we see in Klingon from
> ten to a million is that there is a new word for
> every factor of ten, just as American English has
> a new word for every factor of a thousand.

I'd argue that that's *a* pattern one could see, but not the only possible one.

This is probably the sort of thing that one could ask him to elaborate on when one sees him at a qep: Even if he doesn't reveal the next number-forming element, he may be able to say how he imagines that the pattern would evolve.

________________________________________
From: Robyn Stewart [robyn at flyingstart.ca]
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2012 18:12
To: Felix Malmenbeck; De'vID jonpIn; tlhIngan-Hol
Subject: RE: [Tlhingan-hol] 125,000

The Chinese system is a useful and productive
one, but the pattern that we see in Klingon from
ten to a million is that there is a new word for
every factor of ten, just as American English has
a new word for every factor of a thousand.

I like your attention-span-saving suggestion.

- Robyn

At 10:02 '?????' 6/6/2012, Felix Malmenbeck wrote:
>I've always just assumed that Klingon numbers
>work in such a way that it'd be wa'bIp cha'netlh
>vaghSaD, but I see now that that's not strictly
>stated in TKD. I would assumed, however, that
>it's sort of like the system commonly used in
>modern-day China: You have names for 0-9, and
>then words for 10, 100, 1 000 and - unlike in
>English - 10 000 ("myriad"). Then, instead of
>saying "one hundred thousands", you say "ten
>myriads". Likewise, 1 000 000 is "100 myriads",
>and 10 000 000 becomes "1 000 myriads". Then,
>you have the next step: A y¨¬, which is ten
>thousand squared, or 100 million.  To say "one
>billion", you say "10 y¨¬", and ten billion is
>"100 y¨¬", and so forth up to the zh¨¤o, which
>is 10 000 to the third power, or a myriad myriad
>myriads. Next is j¨©ng (10^16), g¨¡i (10^20),
>z¨« (10^24) and so forth.
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_numerals#Large_numbers
>In other words, while most of us are used to a
>convention which needs a new name for every
>factor 1 000 (or, by the long count, 1 000 000),
>most Chinese people [as I understand it] would
>be used to one which takes a new step for every
>factor 10 000. Therefore, I'd guess that the
>next [commonly used but unknown to us] Klingon
>number-forming element would be one for a 10^2;
>the number which is 1 greater than
>999,999,999,999 (which, similar to you, I think
>would probably be called <HutbIp Hutnetlh HutSaD
>Hutvatlh HutmaH Hut'uy' HutbIp Hutnetlh HutSaD
>Hutvatlh HutmaH Hut>)*. Perhaps when explaining
>such big numbers to laymen, Klingon
>mathematicians refer to this element as
><wa''uy''uy'>.
>-----------------------------------------
>WARNING: Going off on a tangent.
>-----------------------------------------
>*Another alternative, which requires more
>syllables but may not be as demanding on your
>attention span, is <HutbIp'uy' Hutnetlh'uy'
>HutSaD'uy'...>. That way, you don't have to wait
>twelve syllables before you find out what order
>of magnitude you're dealing with; it'll always
>be right there in the third. One could of course
>imagine all sort of systems. For example, one
>that squares upwards after 'uy': If the next
>number-forming elements is called X, and 1X =
>1'uy''uy' = 10^12, then the next one, Y, would
>be 1'uy'X (10^18), but 1XX (10^24), and Z would
>be 10^48. So, if you wanted to say 24*10^42 (24
>tredecillion), you'd have to say cha'maH'uy'XY
>loS'uy'XY. Dunno if that'd be practical, but you
>never know with alien species :P
>________________________________________ From:
>Qov [robyn at flyingstart.ca] Sent: Wednesday, June
>06, 2012 17:17 To: De'vID jonpIn; tlhIngan-Hol
>Subject: Re: [Tlhingan-hol] 125,000 I see that
>TKD says "some of the number forming elements
>for higher numbers are ..." and stops at 'uy'.
>Clearly there are more we don't know. That
>suggests to me that there is one for each place
>up as high as Klingons need to count before
>whatever their scientifix notation is cuts in.
>But just as people who want to be clear when
>talking to an international audience avoid words
>like billion and say "a thousand million" or "a
>mllion million,"  I imagine 423,198,765,432
>could be understood as loSbIp cha'netlh wejSaD
>wa'vatlh HutmaH chorgh'uy' Soch bIp javnetlh
>vaghSaD loSmaH wejmaH cha'. - Qov At 01:56
>'?????' 6/6/2012, De'vID jonpIn
>wrote: >Qov: > >>> qepHomwIjDaq jatlh ghojwI',
>"chay' <125,000> jIjatlh?" > >*{wa' chorghvI'
>'uy'} > >No, not really, but I wish *{-vI'}
>generalised in this way (from
>{vatlhvI'}). > >qurgh: > >> wa'bIp cha'netlh
>vaghSaD > >Qov: > > That makes sense. Is that
>canonical, qurgh? > >Why else would we have
>{bIp} and
>{netlh}? > >-- >De'vID >_________________________
>______________________ >Tlhingan-hol mailing
>list >Tlhingan-hol at stodi.digitalkingdom.org >http
>://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
>_______________________________________________
>Tlhingan-hol mailing list
>Tlhingan-hol at stodi.digitalkingdom.org
>http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol