Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Árticulo Zalsman
Árticulo Zalsman
Árticulo Zalsman
Zdeněk Salzmann
To cite this article: Zdeněk Salzmann (1950) A Method for Analyzing Numerical Systems,
<i>WORD</i>, 6:1, 78-83, DOI: 10.1080/00437956.1950.11659369
Article views: 48
Levi Leonard Conant, The Number Concept, New York 1931; W. J. McGee, Primitive
Numbers, Bureau of American Ethnology Annual Report 19.821-51, Washington 1900; Cyrus
Thomas, Numeral Systems of Mexico and Central America, ibid., 19.853-955; Roland B.
Dixon and A. L. Kroeber, Numeral Systems of the Languages of California, American
Anthropologist, n.s. 9.663-90, 1907; A. R. Nykl, The Quinary-Vigesimal System of Counting
in Europe, Asia, and America, Language 2.165-73; Ewald Fettweis, Das Rechnen der Natur-
volker, Berlin 1927; Theodor Kluge, (1) Die Zahlenbegrijfe der Sudansprachen, Berlin 1937,
(2) Die Zahlenbegrijfe der Australier, Papua und Bantuneger, Berlin 1938, (3) Die Zahlenbe-
grijfe der Volker Americas, Nordeurasiens, der Munda und der Palaioafricaner, Berlin 1939,
(4) Die Zahlenbegriffe der Dravida, der Hamiten, der Semiten und der Kaukasier, Berlin
1941, (5) Die Zahlenbegriffe der Sprachen Zentral- und Sudostasiens, Indonesiens, Micronesiens,
Melanesiens und Polynesiens, nebst einer prinzipiellen Untersuchung uber die Tonsprachen,
Berlin 1941-2 (cf. review by J. Rahder, Language23.181-5). However, as far as this paper
is concerned, I am indebted rather to Professors George Herzog and C. F. Voegelin for
their encouragement and valuable suggestions.
2 Cf. George Peter Murdock, The Common Denominator of Cultures, The Science of Man
in the World Crisis, ed. Ralph Linton, p. 124, New York 1945. Also, Burt W. and Ethel G.
Aginsky, The Importance of Language Universals, Word 4.168-72 (1948).
3 Morris Swadesh, South Greenlandic (Eskimo), Lingui8tic Structure8 of Native America,
'two'. The numeral •qati·mx 'six' could not be analyzed. It is not improbable,
however, that it may signify 'one (finger) up,' in which event 'seven' could be
explained as denoting 'two (fingers) up,' while 'eight' could be rendered by
'three (fingers) up.' In spite of incessant attempts, the numeral for 'nine' could
not be analyzed. Its probable rendering may be suggested as 'one (lacking to)
ten.' " 7
Here it seems necessary to justify our scheme of language A with respect to
the numerals '6' and '9' of Siuslaw by setting forth the postulate8 underlying
our decision: a numeral is to be analyzed in terms of a numerical operation if it
morphemically resembles some other numeral of the same language and employs
at least one different morpheme in its construction.9
With the foregoing introduction to the problem, it must now be quite ob-
vious that the application of certain analytic principles or patterns to the nu-
merical systems is bound to be fruitful.
If one studies the arrangement of morphemes for numerals in various langu-
ages, it soon becomes apparent that there are three general structural patterns
which underlie and determine the divergent numerical systems. These three
patterns are not mutually exclusive; rather, they are in almost all systems
coexistent. It is the arrangement of their interdependence which makes up a
system, and it is the system which functions as a cultural entity and is com-
parable with the systems of other languages on the basis of identical function
and different cultural exposure.
The three patterns mentioned are (1) the frame pattern, (2) the cyclic pattern,
and (3) the operative pattern. All three can be well defined in terms of morphology.
The frame pattern is a succession of two or more separate morphemes or
groups of morphemes. In most languages, however, this pattern introduces
additional separate isolated morphemes or groups of morphemes, and thus new
large cycles may be set up and rather complex morphological constructions
avoided.
In English, for instance-analyzed strictly synchronically-the frame pattern
would be made up of morphemes for '1' thru '12', and then for '100,' '1000,'
'1000,000,' etc.10 The rest would be analyzable in terms of our other two patterns.
7 Leo J. Frachtenberg, op. cit., p. 586; transcription of linguistic forms was simplified by
higher numbers-roughly those from 50 or 100 up-for two reasons: the data are in most
ANALYSIS OF NUMERICAL SYSTEMS 81
4 = mc:yakan
3 = m~yakan 12
cases not available, and if they are, they frequently represent a laboriously constructed or
even non-existing answer of the informant to the investigator, and hence are not reliable;
secondly, the structure of almost any numerical system would transpire quite sufficiently
within the range of a few decades.
11 An independent linguistic family on the upper Paragua River in Venezuela.
this cycle is seldom found alone, as in the case of the aforementioned Encabellado
language; it usually combines with the decimal cycle.
To refer to the English numerical system again, we would render its cyclic
pattern as 10, 100, 1000, .. and their combinations.
Our third pattern, the pattern of operative morphemes, is not of the same
order as the two preceding ones, but is rather an additional working criterion.
We define this pattern as follows: a pattern in which the juxtaposition of mor-
phemes or groups of morphemes functions in terms of the basic arithmetical
operations, such as addition, subtraction, multiplication, etc.
The most common operation is the additive operation; the great majority of
American native languages employ addition very extensively. Multiplication
comes next in the distribution of the different types of the operative pattern.
Subtractive operation is usually of the Latin type undeviginti and is bound to
the cycle boundary.
Other types of this pattern are quite rare. Raising to a power may be regarded
as implicit in Tacana, 15 in tunka-tunka-tunka '1000,' where tunka means '10,'
which, according to linguistic construction is, of course, more properly inter-
preted as a complex multiplication.
There is a great variety of arrangements employed by the operative pattern,
but it would be outside the scope of this paper to try to survey them.
Instead, we want to demonstrate the type of analysis that we suggest and its
usefulness for a structural treatment of numerical systems from the point of
view of areal linguistics. There follows a list of several South American native
languages, all of which have the quinary cycle as the initial cycle. 16 Their division
into groups is based on our frame and operative patterns. Only the first decade
of the numerical systems was considered for our purpo8es (R 1-10). C 5 (con-
stant thruout)
F 1-5
0 1 + 5, 2+ +
5, 3 +5, 4 5, 2.5: Chorotf, Tariana
0 5 + 1, 5+ +
2, 5 3, 5+ 4, 2.5: Chirip6, Vilela
+ + + +
0 1.5, 1 5, 2 5, 3 5, 4 5, 2.5: Arawak
+ + + +
0 1.5, 5 1, 5 2, 5 3, 5 4, 2.5: Bara, Buhagana-Omoa, Tucano,
Tuyuca
+
0 1.5, 1 + + +1.5, 2 1.5, 3 1.5, 4 1.5, 2.5: Achagua
+
0 5.1, 5.1 + + + 1, 5.1 2, 5.1 3, 5.1 4, 5.2: Rama
0 1 + + +
5, 2+ 5, 3 5, -1 2.5, 2.5: Siusi
F 1-5, 10
0 1 + + + +
5, 2 5, 3 5, 4 5: Cayuvava, Guat6, Taruma, Wapishana
F 1-6, 10
0 2 + + +
5. 3 5, 4 5: Allentiac, Baure, Sapibocona
F 1-3, 5, 10
Theodor Kluge, op. cit. (3), pp. 45f.
16
Theodor Kluge, op. cit. (3). We use the following abbreviations in our analysis: R-
16
range, C-cyclic pattern, F-frame pattern, 0-operative pattern. In spelling the indi-
vidual languages, we follow the practices of the Handbook of South American Indians.
ANALYSIS OF NUMERICAL SYSTEMS 83