Well, you still have Jeti "7" for Kazakh, which ought to be z with haczek. (I don't have that sign on my mobile. )zompist wrote: I think I've incorporated everyone's suggestions
Edit: typo corrected.
Well, you still have Jeti "7" for Kazakh, which ought to be z with haczek. (I don't have that sign on my mobile. )zompist wrote: I think I've incorporated everyone's suggestions
All's good except you forgot the last vowel in Mandan mą́xaną, and the Caddo column formatting is messed up.zompist wrote:I think I've incorporated everyone's suggestions above.
Code: Select all
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Akhmimic: we sno khamᵊt ftau ? se sahᵊf ? ? met
Bohairic: wai snau šomᵊt ftōw tiw sow šašᵊf šmēn psit mᵊnt
Sahidic: wa snau šomᵊnt ftow tiw sow šašᵊf šmoun psis mᵊnt
I would estimate: all of them, assuming by 'brythonic numeral' you mean cumbrian counting numbers. [how many are aware of the original proto-brythonic, or indeed of modern welsh numbers? virtually none, but that wouldn't seem relevant]. The yan-tan-tethera may not be used on a daily basis anymore, but remains an iconic feature of the region.Yng wrote:would modern-day welsh speakers be familiar with them though? how many modern-day english speakers in cumbria are familiar with the brythonic numerals?dyolf wrote:All I've gathered from a Celtic Studies professor on Facebook is that the modern belief is that any use of these numerals was done by Irish labourers in the area around the 17C, not by Welsh speakers themselves, but may have been written down by Welsh speakers (hence the spellings). No Welsh-speakers from Cardiganshire use them, nor have ever heard of them, unless they're familiar with Irish, nor have these numbers impacted the Welsh of the area, where the standard un, dau/dwy, tri/tair, pedwar/pedair, pump, chwech, saith, wyth, naw, deg are used. So these numbers are not a "Cardiganshire dialect" but just Irish people using Irish numbers in Wales.Richard W wrote:What do you mean by 'Goidelic survival hypothesis'? It sounds like a theory that some areas had remained Q-Celtic, rather than being Q-Celtic because of an invasion from Ireland. I'm not disputing that these 'Cardiganshire' numerals are of Irish origin - it's the date that's of greater interest.dyolf wrote:Since that paper was published (in 1924) scholarly opinion has moved far away from the Goidelic survival hypothesis.
They arguably pre-date English being Celtic-origin numbers used by English speakers and had a specific uses limited to one or two social settings, being used some 700 years after the collapse of the Celtic languages in those areas.Vijay wrote:But are these any more notable than numbers in any non-standard dialect of English/Anglic variety/whatever indigenous to Britain? So far, all there is there is English and Scots (and that too apparently only one variety of Scots); there's no Anglo-Cornish numbers or Geordie numbers or whatever.Richard W wrote:I can't find any sign of the English sheep-counting numbers of Brythonic origins in the file.
They're notable, but they're not a part of the Cardiganshire dialect of Welsh or English.Gulliver wrote:They arguably pre-date English being Celtic-origin numbers used by English speakers and had a specific uses limited to one or two social settings, being used some 700 years after the collapse of the Celtic languages in those areas.Vijay wrote:But are these any more notable than numbers in any non-standard dialect of English/Anglic variety/whatever indigenous to Britain? So far, all there is there is English and Scots (and that too apparently only one variety of Scots); there's no Anglo-Cornish numbers or Geordie numbers or whatever.Richard W wrote:I can't find any sign of the English sheep-counting numbers of Brythonic origins in the file.
So yeah, they're notable.
I should probably add that in the transcription used for the other Mordvin (Erzya + Moksha) forms <ä> = /æ/. Thus, the Moksha list should probably have <nʲilʲä> instead of <nʲilʲæ> or alternatively replace <ä> with <æ> for both "1" and "5".Tropylium wrote:4 should be Erzya /nʲilʲe/, Moksha /nʲilʲæ/
I've spent several years collecting PDFs, particularly in areas of interest (which includes NAmerican languages).zompist wrote:Just curious, how do you have access to such a quantity of new books on North American Indian languages? The NU and U. Illinois libraries are not gifted in those areas...
Code: Select all
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Walapai sit hwak hmuk hopaʔ θrap tispeʔ wakspeʔ mukspeʔ halθu·y vwa·v
Havasupai síta həwáka həmúka hopá θitápa tispé həwakspé həmukspé halaθúya vəwáava
Yavapai sit-i hwak-i hmuk-i hopa θrap-i tspe hwakspe hmukspe halθuy-i vwa·v-i
Moj. (att) ʔasent havik hamok čumpap θarap ʔamaykʔasentknʸ ʔamaykhaviknʸ ʔamaykhamoknʸ halʸu·θuy rap havik
Moj. (cnt.) seto havik hamok čumpap θarap si·nt vi·k mu·k pay ʔarap
Yuma ʔašent xavik xamok cu·mpap sa·rap xu·mxu·k pa·xkʸe· si·pxu·k xamxamok ša·xu·k
Maricopa asʸéntik xavík xamók tsʸumpáp saráp xumxók paxkyék sepxók xᵘmxᵘmók sʸaxók
Dieg. (MG) ʔəxink xəwak xəmuk čəpap sa·rap - - - - -
D. (Campo) ʔəṣin xəwak xəmuk čəpap sa·rap xəmxu·k pəxka·y čəpxu·k yamxəmuk ṣaxuk
Cocopa šiṭ xwak xmuk spap ṣrap xmxu·k pxka· spxu·k xmxmuk ṣa·xu·k
Paipai šit xəwak xəmuk xopa-k sərap təšpé-k pəxkáy čipxó·k xámxəmúk vəmás
Kiliwa msir xwaq xmuq mnaq sal čpam msir-lhpa·ypʰ xwaq-lhpa·yp xmuq-lhpa·yp msirtqmat čpam msir
Code: Select all
1 nakaməy, nak, nə
2 viti
3 mugul
4 a:li
5 taba:b
6 abun a:b + [1] ?
7 abəti a:b + [2]
8 abumugul a:b + [3]
9 aba:li a:b + [4]
10 tabəti, tabati ta:b + [2]
Code: Select all
1 ki'ta
2 vi'li'vi'li'k
3 kuvuk
4 ainak
5 taba-nak
6 si'la-ki'ta si'la [1]
7 si'la-vli si'la [2]
8 si'la-kuvuk si'la [3]
9 si'la-ainak si'la [4]
10 taba-vli taba [2]
Code: Select all
1 nakurak
2 vétik
3 kupuk
4 nakwasa, wan vétik wan vétik
5 naktaba
6 naktaba sékét naktaba kayék nakurak
7 naktaba sékét naktaba kayék vétik
8 naktaba sékét naktaba kayék kupuk
9 naktaba sékét naktaba kayék wan vétik wan vétik
10 taaba vétik
Code: Select all
1 natapa
2 yéték
3 hupuk
4 yétiyéti [2] [2]
Code: Select all
1 áling
2 hìngtung
3 héngtong
4 nongpong
5 nápang
6 nápánghì [5] + hì
7 nápang héngtong [5] [3]
8 náhìpa
9 náhìpa pa áling [8] pa [1]
10 náhìpa pa hìngtung [8] pa [2]
Code: Select all
1 opa
2 yumono
3 ɛ̃du
4 noɔ
5 no mlɛ o
6 no mlɛ yumono
7 no mlɛ ɛ̃du
8 buyɵ
Code: Select all
1 oɸa
2 yumɔno
3 ɛnu
4 nuɔ
5 nuɔ mlɛ oɸa
6 nuɔ mlɛ yumɔno
7 nuɔ mlɛ ɛnu
8 nuyu
Code: Select all
1 ɔpa
2 yumonu
3 inɔ
4 noɔ
5 noɔ kã be
6 noɔ kã u
7 noɔ kã yumonu
8 noɔ kã inɔ
Code: Select all
1 ɔfa
2 hnyɔmɔ
3 hɛnɔ
4 nɔu
5 nɔi
6 nɔtʃiɔ
7 nɔtʃi nyũ
8 nɔtʃi hɛnɔ
Code: Select all
1 kaipa
2 sie
3 sie kaipa
4 sie sie
5 sie sie kaipa
6 dóu keni(ki) bai kaipa
7 dóu keni(ki) bai sie
10 dóu sie
I have Dunn's 1995 grammar at home. IIRC, he lists Gitksan forms for at least some lexemes.Xephyr wrote:(I'm still working on getting Southern Tsimshian and Gitksan.)
The 'Cumbric' forms are, technically, specialist English numbers - the 'sheep-counting' numerals. It's not even certain that they derive from Cumbric. Even if they do, they've changed a lot since they were part of the Cumbric language. It's been claimed, on the basis of the combining element 'a' corresponding to Welsh ar, that they're actually Welsh.dyolf wrote:The Cornish numbers can be found here with links to all the Celtic languages, even the extinct Cumbric and older forms of Welsh and Irish.