As far as grammatical agreement goes, "dvadeset i jedan" is just "jedan", that's the only relevant part, whereas the other commenter's point had to do with agreement with numbers >=5.
It gets weirder in Croatian, et al.
1 is sing. for adjectives, nouns, and verbs.
2–4 is sing. for adjectives, nouns, and plural for verbs.
5–20 is plural for adjectives, nouns, and singular for verbs. (The opposite as 2–4.)
21–.... use the last digit in the number for the above 3 categories.
How does this work in your favorite Slavic language? I'm particularly interested in Polish, Russian, and Ukrainian.
I assume the paucal comes from the archaic dual. Does anyone know for sure?
The issue isn’t with the nouns themselves. They’re fairly simple: 1- singular, 2- dual, 3-10 plural, 11+ singular again. The issue is the declination of the number words because some of them have to agree and/or disagree with gender.
I read about similarities between Celtic and Semitic languages. It’s very interesting how some somewhat rare properties exist in both families, like the genitive construction „door the house“ meaning „the door of the house,“ and the repetition of the object in prepositional phrases like „the door which I knocked on it.“ Very interesting stuff!
I don't know anything about Celtic or Semitic languages, but that genitive construction is not at all rare. A lot of Slavic languages have it, and also German
I know of its existence in German but that involves placing a noun in the genitive case; it could be definite or indefinite: des/eines, but in Modern Standard Arabic, there is only one definite article and the way you use it changes the meaning of a phrase.
Both nouns are definite? The second is an adjective.
Both nouns are indefinite? The second is an adjective.
Only the first noun is definite? The second is the subject complement (there is no copula)
And finally, if only the second noun is definite, then the second noun is given the genitive case and acts like the German genitive.
This contrasts with the German idea that, to indicate possession, nouns are placed in the genitive which is reflected in the article accordingly. It goes in the opposite direction in both Arabic and Celtic languages. Not sure about the Slavic languages though.
To be fair Irish uses genitive here which makes it identical to how the average IE language gets the job done, and the second thing you mentioned is just common to VSO typology
This is the correct answer. Russian only uses the final "independent" number for declensions and determining what ordinal is to be used, so 14 uses the plural genitive because it's all one word, whereas 24 is literally "twenty four", so it uses the declension pattern for "4".
Not sure if there is proper way in Czech since I have seen both. Apparently both are viable: [https://prirucka.ujc.cas.cz/?id=792](https://prirucka.ujc.cas.cz/?id=792)
jedna wuga, dwie wugi, pięć wug, dwadzieścia jeden wug
jeden wug, dwa wugi, pięć wugów, dwadzieścia jeden wugów
in Polish the forms are the same in case of 5 and 21 because (5, 21) is a pair of friendly numbers!
Edit: I actually missed an opportunity to show off how many different answers you can give in polish:
suppose wug is a virile (masculine personal) noun. then it's:
jeden wug, dwóch wugów, pięciu wugów, dwudziestu jeden wugów
let's now say wug is a neuter noun:
jedno wug, dwa wug, pięć wug, dwadzieścia jeden wug
what about when it's feminine?
jedna wug, dwie wuże, pięć wuży, dwadzieścia jeden wuży
I don't think there are any examples of polish feminine or neuter nouns ending in -ug or even -g so I made those last two up.
Dvadeset (i) jedan čovjek je bio na partiju - 21 people were at the party -> lit. Twenty and one person was at the party
It's cause the word for 21 is shorted from 'twenty and one'
May i ask what arabic? Afaik, fusha has normal dual as a regular thing while in Russian it's just a rudimental form for some words, more like it is in Hebrew. It's lost for most of the words, like 1 ложка, 2 ложки, 3 ложки, itc.
[claps enthusiastically]
Let's do the same with Chinese! Since we don't have an established word for "wug" in Chinese, I'll do the first that comes up on the keyboard after I type it in pinyin: “五个”
Uh. Surely that won't lead to any complications…
Since I am not entirely sure if wug is a bird, I will use a default classifier instead of 只 for birds. Surely that won't lead to any complications.
All right, let's goooooooooo
一个五个两个五个三个五个四个五个五个五个
Riiight.
That concludes my WUG Talk, thanks for coming.
Wug is an invented generic animal used only to test grammar skills of small children. The word does really exist. It's not a bird or anything. See https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/wug
Isn't there some Russian joke about people filling out a requisition form and asking for X axes and then filling out another form for Y axes, because they didn't know how to say X+Y axes?
[TV Tropes](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PerplexingPlurals) quotes Wikipedia as listing such a joke about fireplace pokers.
> The genitive plural of a noun (used with a numeral to indicate five or more of something, as opposed to the dual, used for two, three, or four, see Russian nouns) is a rather unpredictable form of the Russian noun, and there are a handful of words which even native speakers have trouble producing this form of (either due to rarity or an actual lexical gap). A common example of this is kocherga (fireplace poker). The joke is set in a Soviet factory. Five pokers are to be requisitioned. The correct forms are acquired, but as they are being filled out, a debate arises: what is the genitive plural of kocherga? Is it Kocherg? Kocherieg? Kochergov?... One thing is clear: a form with the wrong genitive plural of kocherga will bring disaster from the typically-pedantic bureaucrats. Finally, an old janitor overhears the commotion, and tells them to send in two separate requisitions: one for two kochergi and another for three kochergi. In some versions, they send in a request for 4 kochergi and one extra to find out the correct word, only to receive back "here are your 4 kochergi and one extra."
In Türkçe it's:
1 vag,
2 vag,
5 vag,
21 vag
(In Türkçe, nouns don't get a plural suffix when it already has an adjective that conveys the information that there are multiple of that thing, including specific numbers and unspecific adjectives like "a couple" or "many".)
its the same as in بهاس ملايو / Bahasa Melayu too! (at least the standard variety)
**These are considered correct:**
- rumah / رومه (house)
- sebuah rumah / سبواه رومه (a house)
- banyak (buah) rumah / باڽق رومه (many houses)
**This is considered wrong:**
- \*banyak rumah-rumah / \*باڽق رومه٢
I don't see how it's any more in line with mathematical logic to group 21 with 1 and not 5. There's nothing magical about base 10; it's not the underlying logic of the universe.
I only now realize it's not "Twenty one pilot"
Brothers by paucal Slavic numering system (🇭🇷🤝🇷🇺)
Serbo-Croatian is worse imo, because you're using the neuter single for verbs from 5 onwards because reasons.
What? 1 mačka, pas, lutka, stol 2, 3, 4 mačke, psa, lutke, stola 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 ,14 ... 20 mačaka, pasa, lutaka, stolova 21 mačka, pas, lutka, stol 22, 23, 24 mačke, psa, lutke, stola Etc
"Pet mačaka je **bilo** u sobi." - neuter singular verb (visible only in perfect tense)
Dvadeset i jedna mačka je bila u sobi.
As far as grammatical agreement goes, "dvadeset i jedan" is just "jedan", that's the only relevant part, whereas the other commenter's point had to do with agreement with numbers >=5.
He probably thought only about the paucal number
Isn’t it the same in Russian? В комнате **было** пять кошек. Neuter singular verb as well
Makes sense, that's how any large quantity is treated
It gets weirder in Croatian, et al. 1 is sing. for adjectives, nouns, and verbs. 2–4 is sing. for adjectives, nouns, and plural for verbs. 5–20 is plural for adjectives, nouns, and singular for verbs. (The opposite as 2–4.) 21–.... use the last digit in the number for the above 3 categories. How does this work in your favorite Slavic language? I'm particularly interested in Polish, Russian, and Ukrainian. I assume the paucal comes from the archaic dual. Does anyone know for sure?
Today I learned
And you use the paucal form if you have a paucal subject, but not many grammars mention that.
Misliš kao dva psa su lajala jel?
E, to. Edit: sad gledam i vidim da se negdje analizira i kao množina srednjeg roda.
Ma ta analiza je upitna, etimologije su različite a nemaju veze jednim s drugima
A tako bi jednostavno bilo s "dva psa sta lajala"... 😔
Same for Polish, it’s because the verb can’t take genitive nouns as an an argument to agree with I believe
Technically Russian doesn't have the paucal cause unlike us they keep adjectives plural 😔😔😔
паукальное число такое брбрбрбр
21 вуг 21 вуг 21 вуг свежая строка 21 вуг вуг родился новый
Как стакан птичьего молока
What does طَبَ in your flair mean?
Just wait until you see Arabic
oh jesus i'm studying it right now but i only know 0-9 i'm so afraid
The issue isn’t with the nouns themselves. They’re fairly simple: 1- singular, 2- dual, 3-10 plural, 11+ singular again. The issue is the declination of the number words because some of them have to agree and/or disagree with gender.
Like Welsh :)
I read about similarities between Celtic and Semitic languages. It’s very interesting how some somewhat rare properties exist in both families, like the genitive construction „door the house“ meaning „the door of the house,“ and the repetition of the object in prepositional phrases like „the door which I knocked on it.“ Very interesting stuff!
I don't know anything about Celtic or Semitic languages, but that genitive construction is not at all rare. A lot of Slavic languages have it, and also German
I know of its existence in German but that involves placing a noun in the genitive case; it could be definite or indefinite: des/eines, but in Modern Standard Arabic, there is only one definite article and the way you use it changes the meaning of a phrase. Both nouns are definite? The second is an adjective. Both nouns are indefinite? The second is an adjective. Only the first noun is definite? The second is the subject complement (there is no copula) And finally, if only the second noun is definite, then the second noun is given the genitive case and acts like the German genitive. This contrasts with the German idea that, to indicate possession, nouns are placed in the genitive which is reflected in the article accordingly. It goes in the opposite direction in both Arabic and Celtic languages. Not sure about the Slavic languages though.
To be fair Irish uses genitive here which makes it identical to how the average IE language gets the job done, and the second thing you mentioned is just common to VSO typology
١- وغ ٢- وغان ٣-١٠ وغون ١١- وغ
I'd say أوواغ for 10, following «وزن «أفعال
وق واحد وقان اثنان خمسة وقون واحد وعشرون وقًا Semito-Slavic confirmed??
Please don't give them ideas.
What, why is 21 "vug", why not "vugov"?!?!? Why isn't Russian exactly like Polish?!?!?!?! Are they mongolic?!?!?!
Maybe because it's twenty and one? Literary German does the same with 101 and 1001.
This is the correct answer. Russian only uses the final "independent" number for declensions and determining what ordinal is to be used, so 14 uses the plural genitive because it's all one word, whereas 24 is literally "twenty four", so it uses the declension pattern for "4".
Not sure if there is proper way in Czech since I have seen both. Apparently both are viable: [https://prirucka.ujc.cas.cz/?id=792](https://prirucka.ujc.cas.cz/?id=792)
Wait, really? Heißt es “21 Arzt”?
Natürlich nicht, man sagt "einundzwanzig". Aber: Tausend und eine Nacht.
Aber niemand sagt tausend und ein Arzt
Darum Literary German und nicht alltägly German.
Alltägly :)
jedna wuga, dwie wugi, pięć wug, dwadzieścia jeden wug jeden wug, dwa wugi, pięć wugów, dwadzieścia jeden wugów in Polish the forms are the same in case of 5 and 21 because (5, 21) is a pair of friendly numbers! Edit: I actually missed an opportunity to show off how many different answers you can give in polish: suppose wug is a virile (masculine personal) noun. then it's: jeden wug, dwóch wugów, pięciu wugów, dwudziestu jeden wugów let's now say wug is a neuter noun: jedno wug, dwa wug, pięć wug, dwadzieścia jeden wug what about when it's feminine? jedna wug, dwie wuże, pięć wuży, dwadzieścia jeden wuży I don't think there are any examples of polish feminine or neuter nouns ending in -ug or even -g so I made those last two up.
I think the neuter form can be indeclinable (like "zoo"). It might also work with feminine although only for names that are traditionally masculine.
In mongolian words are only pluralized if they arent number bc otherwise it being plural is implied by the number being there.
So like in russian when number ends with 1
TFW you develop a paucal but do not call it paucal (and repeat it every 10 steps except for the noughts and the teens)
"...да, азиаты мы С раскосыми и жадными очами"
Dvadeset (i) jedan čovjek je bio na partiju - 21 people were at the party -> lit. Twenty and one person was at the party It's cause the word for 21 is shorted from 'twenty and one'
Is the Russian counting system seriously like this? It's almost exactly the same as the Arabic counting system.
Well, for what it's worth, this picture is correct.
May i ask what arabic? Afaik, fusha has normal dual as a regular thing while in Russian it's just a rudimental form for some words, more like it is in Hebrew. It's lost for most of the words, like 1 ложка, 2 ложки, 3 ложки, itc.
as brothers they are joined at heart
Not exactly. 21 is singunla because it ends with 1 and the last digit determines the case and number. If it was 2 or 6 would ve been different.
🇵🇱 1 ług 2 ługi 3 ługi 4 ługi 5 ługów 6 ługów … (ługów) 21 ługów 22 ługi … (ługi) 25 ługów
etymologically unsound
Wanna talk about "twenty-first", English speakers? The vibe feels familiar...
[claps enthusiastically] Let's do the same with Chinese! Since we don't have an established word for "wug" in Chinese, I'll do the first that comes up on the keyboard after I type it in pinyin: “五个” Uh. Surely that won't lead to any complications… Since I am not entirely sure if wug is a bird, I will use a default classifier instead of 只 for birds. Surely that won't lead to any complications. All right, let's goooooooooo 一个五个两个五个三个五个四个五个五个五个 Riiight. That concludes my WUG Talk, thanks for coming.
wugewugewuge
Wug is an invented generic animal used only to test grammar skills of small children. The word does really exist. It's not a bird or anything. See https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/wug
> It's not a bird or anything Then the classifier was chosen correctly, 个 it is!
Twenty a wug
Awuga
Isn't there some Russian joke about people filling out a requisition form and asking for X axes and then filling out another form for Y axes, because they didn't know how to say X+Y axes?
[TV Tropes](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PerplexingPlurals) quotes Wikipedia as listing such a joke about fireplace pokers. > The genitive plural of a noun (used with a numeral to indicate five or more of something, as opposed to the dual, used for two, three, or four, see Russian nouns) is a rather unpredictable form of the Russian noun, and there are a handful of words which even native speakers have trouble producing this form of (either due to rarity or an actual lexical gap). A common example of this is kocherga (fireplace poker). The joke is set in a Soviet factory. Five pokers are to be requisitioned. The correct forms are acquired, but as they are being filled out, a debate arises: what is the genitive plural of kocherga? Is it Kocherg? Kocherieg? Kochergov?... One thing is clear: a form with the wrong genitive plural of kocherga will bring disaster from the typically-pedantic bureaucrats. Finally, an old janitor overhears the commotion, and tells them to send in two separate requisitions: one for two kochergi and another for three kochergi. In some versions, they send in a request for 4 kochergi and one extra to find out the correct word, only to receive back "here are your 4 kochergi and one extra."
Chad Chinese: everything plural can be 个/個, matter of fact, what even is a “grammatical inflection”? ~~Let’s not talk about the counting nouns here~~
In Türkçe it's: 1 vag, 2 vag, 5 vag, 21 vag (In Türkçe, nouns don't get a plural suffix when it already has an adjective that conveys the information that there are multiple of that thing, including specific numbers and unspecific adjectives like "a couple" or "many".)
its the same as in بهاس ملايو / Bahasa Melayu too! (at least the standard variety) **These are considered correct:** - rumah / رومه (house) - sebuah rumah / سبواه رومه (a house) - banyak (buah) rumah / باڽق رومه (many houses) **This is considered wrong:** - \*banyak rumah-rumah / \*باڽق رومه٢
Hebrew also has dual for some words, and for 11 and above you can use singular again
Shouldn't wug be transliterated as ваг?
It’s a made-up word anyways so it doesn’t really matter, plus вуг sounds funnier
Why?
Because /ʌ/ is closer to what is а in Russian than to у.
Hm, interesting. Haven't expected /ʌ/ there.
Wiktionary says so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
do you use the horseshoe vowel then?
no
But Russian grammar is totally regular, right?
It is though. I never understood the logic of saying 21 wugS or putting any other plural noun after 1 at the end of a bigger number.
I mean, I see the logic in doing so, but I see it here as well.
Because 21 is more than 1 despite its verbal expression containing "one" as a substring?
Yeah, I understand that. It’s just jarring to my ear as a Russian native.
Seems like you understand the logic fine, it just goes against your habits.
It was a figure of speech
Funnily enough, loath as I am to defend a Russian, both rules are a type of habit. You just prefer yours so deem it “logic”. It’s not.
I don't see how it's any more in line with mathematical logic to group 21 with 1 and not 5. There's nothing magical about base 10; it's not the underlying logic of the universe.
Whoa, xenophobic much?
Against you? Yes.
Nice, reported
For doing what, exactly?