View previous topic | View next topic

7

Page 2 of 4
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Hans Mof
76310.  Fri Jun 23, 2006 12:19 am Reply with quote

Quote:
He didn't use the symbol "7" though, so it's not what we're looking for.


Okay. If it helps, try it with:

4 four
8 eight
9 nine
or even 3,605,712 three million six hundred five thousand seven hundred and twelve

I'll leave you to it. It's quite nice to see you agonising over this.


Quote:
FALSE

. o O (Awaits Klaxon again)


No, no klaxon. :)
But then, why?

 
Southpaw
76320.  Fri Jun 23, 2006 2:28 am Reply with quote

ASIDE

The Arabic/Indian figure for 8 is identical to the Chinese one.

/ASIDE

 
suze
76360.  Fri Jun 23, 2006 6:50 am Reply with quote

Aha, maybe I've seen something else (or more likely, something else totally irrelevant).

The word "seven" has five letters, and so doesn't "equal 7". The only number in English that does "equal itself" in this way is four.

It's the only one in Dutch and German as well (vier, in both cases). In Norwegian and Danish two, three and four all work (to, tre, fire) while in Swedish it's just three and four (tre, fyra). In Spanish and Portuguese it's just five (cinco) as it is in Romanian (cinci) and Finnish (viisi), while in Italian it's three (tre), as in Russian, Belarussian and Ukrainian (tri, in each case).

French, Polish and Inuktitut* don't have any numbers with this property, and that's about the limit of languages I can comment on.

Another minor aside, or is this what Hans was after?


* in Baffin Island Inuktitut - the de facto standard - one to ten goes: atausiq, marruuk, pingasut, sitamat, tallimat, arviniliq, aggartut, pingasunik, qulingiluat, qulit. Just in case anyone didn't know ...


[Third attempt - nice Mr Server, please don't throw me out this time.]

 
grizzly
76362.  Fri Jun 23, 2006 7:39 am Reply with quote

Q. Are there any languages where the same will go for 0? (i.e. a language with no word for 0)

 
Southpaw
76363.  Fri Jun 23, 2006 7:45 am Reply with quote

A QI related link

http://www.livescience.com/animalworld/050708_parrot_zero.html

 
Hans Mof
76365.  Fri Jun 23, 2006 8:26 am Reply with quote

grizzly wrote:
Q. Are there any languages where the same will go for 0? (i.e. a language with no word for 0)


When you say 0, do you mean o, nought, nil or zero?

Are you still having fun, or is there a desperate longing for an answer?

Just to repeat the question:

'7' = 'seven'
true or false

or the refrased question:

How do you pronounce '7'?

 
suze
76372.  Fri Jun 23, 2006 8:47 am Reply with quote

Well I pronounce "seven" as [sεvn]. That isn't proper IPA, but it's the best I can do without using fonts that some people won't be able to see on their screens.

Most British people are closer to [sevn] - we General Americans use a different variation on the "e" sound than do the British. (My vowel is similar to the one a British person would use in saying "Sarah".)

Note that we don't normally pronounce any kind of vowel sound between the "v" and the "n".

Another unique thing about "seven" - at least as regards the numbers up to ten - is that it has two syllables.

Are we getting any warmer?

 
Andrew
76424.  Fri Jun 23, 2006 2:16 pm Reply with quote

suze wrote:
Note that we don't normally pronounce any kind of vowel sound between the "v" and the "n".


Speak for yourself ;-)

 
suze
76433.  Fri Jun 23, 2006 3:55 pm Reply with quote

I was doing, but I was speaking for most of the rest of you as well.

If you consciously insert a schwa (neutral vowel - the IPA symbol for it is an "e" upside down) between sev- and -n, it sounds a bit odd. You might do it in a formal situation, but you don't in everyday conversation - what you actually say is something like "sev'n".

 
mckeonj
76449.  Fri Jun 23, 2006 4:59 pm Reply with quote

I think I've got it.
First, a teaser for Hans (whom God preserve) Mof.
Lewis Carroll, who was no mean setter of mathematical puzzles, suggested a similar thing in 'Through the looking glass'; when the White King proposes to sing a song. Oh, go on, go and read it.
Here is your equation, expanded.
111=7=seven
true false

 
Andrew
76458.  Fri Jun 23, 2006 5:26 pm Reply with quote

huh? I'm confused....just been trying to stay awake in a boiling hot cinema!!

 
Hans Mof
76460.  Fri Jun 23, 2006 5:41 pm Reply with quote

Quote:
111=7=seven


What? I don't know. But, surely no!
No maths needed in this equation.

 
Me
76493.  Sat Jun 24, 2006 3:59 am Reply with quote

mckeonj wrote:
I think I've got it.
Oh, go on, go and read it.
Here is your equation, expanded.
111=7=seven
true false


We haven't all got the book, kindly enlighten us.

 
Lumpo31
76495.  Sat Jun 24, 2006 4:05 am Reply with quote

mckeonj wrote:
I think I've got it.
First, a teaser for Hans (whom God preserve) Mof.
Lewis Carroll, who was no mean setter of mathematical puzzles


An Oxford Mathematics Don, no less!

Lisa

 
Lumpo31
76496.  Sat Jun 24, 2006 4:08 am Reply with quote

Me wrote:
mckeonj wrote:
I think I've got it.
Oh, go on, go and read it.
Here is your equation, expanded.
111=7=seven
true false


We haven't all got the book, kindly enlighten us.


Project Gutenberg is your friend in this case:
http://www.gutenberg.org/catalog/world/readfile?fk_files=34643

Definitely well worth reading!

Lisa

 

Page 2 of 4
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group