Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2014 December 10

< Wikipedia:Reference desk | Archives | Language
Language desk
< December 9 << Nov | December | Jan >> December 11 >
Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.


December 10

edit

Formal reading of ordinal numbers

edit

Are these correct?

  • 850th = eight hundredth [and] fifty,
  • 1999th = one thousandth nine hundred [and] ninety nine,
  • 2014th = two thousandth [and] fourteen.

Thanks. --183.89.89.108 (talk) 17:56, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • No, the "th" always goes at the very end. 850th is said "eight hundred and fiftieth" and 1999th is "one thousand nine hundred and ninety ninth". Also applies to first and second too, so 251st is "two hundred and fifty first". --Jayron32 17:58, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
OP: I'm curious: is "100th and 50" (instead of "150th") the way it goes in your own language? Contact Basemetal here 18:15, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  1. @Jayron32: Thank you so much :)
  2. @Basemetal: My native language is Thai. To form an ordinal number, the word thi (ที่; literally "place, position, etc.") is placed in front of the number. For example:
    1. 850 = paet roi ha sip (แปดร้อยห้าสิบ),
    2. 850th = thi paet roi ha sip (ที่แปดร้อยห้าสิบ);
    3. 1999 = nueng phan kao roi kao sip kao (หนึ่งพันเก้าร้อยเก้าสิบเก้า),
    4. 1999th = thi nueng phan kao roi kao sip kao (ที่หนึ่งพันเก้าร้อยเก้าสิบเก้า).
--183.89.89.108 (talk) 18:31, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. So you see in Thai it is actually pretty much like in English except it is (1) simpler (only one version of the sufaffix ที่, compare English -eth, -th, -rd, -st, -nd; and no irregularity, compare English one - first, two - second, three - third, five - fifth) and (2) the sufaffix ที่ is placed always placed first whereas in English the sufaffix always comes last. Contact Basemetal here 19:16, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Except if it comes first, it would be a prefix... --Jayron32 19:19, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You're absolutely right. Corrected. In fact I'm wondering if from the point of view of Thai grammar ที่ wouldn't be analyzed as a regular word, not as an affix, but I'll let the OP or anyone who knows Thai respond. For those who like fixes affixes can be divided into suffixes (also known as postfixes), infixes, prefixes, circumfixes and suprafixes.
Thi (ที่) has many meanings and classes.
  1. As noun, it means (a) place, position, locality, etc.; (b) office, position, rank, status, etc.; (c) land. For example:
    1. ซื้อที่ (sue thi) = buy (a plot of) land
    2. ที่ประชุม (thi prachum) = auditorium, conference hall, etc. (literally "meeting place")
    3. ที่สาธารณะ (thi satharana) = public place, public space
  2. As pronoun, it means that, which, those, who, whom, where, etc. As preposition, it means in, at, on, etc. For example:
    1. อยู่ที่ไหน (yu thi nai) = where's it? / where are you? / where's he? / etc. (depending on context / When used as pronoun or preposition, thi can sometimes be omitted. Then yu thi nai can be said as yu nai.)
    2. อยู่ที่นี่ (yu thi ni) = it's here / I'm here / he's here / etc. (depending on context)
    3. ที่บ้าน (thi ban) = at home
    4. ที่วิกิพีเดีย (thi wikiphidia) = on/at Wikipedia
  3. As modifier, it is used to form ordinal numbers.
  4. It is also used as classifier. For example: ที่ 3 ที่ = three places (literally "place 3 place"), ที่นั่ง 3 ที่ = 3 seats (literally "seat 3 seat").
--183.89.89.108 (talk) 20:52, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to start a war, ask whether the item just after the nth one is the "en plus oneth" or "en plus first". --Trovatore (talk) 19:22, 10 December 2014 (UTC) [reply]

I've always opted for "nth plus one" - EronTalk 19:37, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If the nth item = 17, then the "nth plus one" = 18, which may not be the value of the (n+1)th item. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 19:45, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You mean (N+1)th or (N+1)st? I don't wanna start a war but I've only ever seen the first. Contact Basemetal here 19:47, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"I've only ever seen the first." Nice ambiguity! I could argue that, if you were comparing two things, you'd say "former" rather than "first", so you must mean "I've only ever seen (N+1)st".
In any case, I use (N+1)st, mostly because I think "en plus oneth" sounds really really bad. It would be interesting to see a breakdown of scholarly papers by which one they use, but I'm not sure how to craft a good search for this. --Trovatore (talk) 20:50, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I meant the former i.e. (N+1)th. As to your 'latter' question ( ) you could try Ngrams but it probably wouldn't work well with mathematical expressions. Contact Basemetal here 20:58, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Apart from forms ending in "-oneth" (like "en-plus-oneth"), nothing else rhymes with "month". --Theurgist (talk) 19:55, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
IMO you're right. Who says "hundred and oneth"?. Contact Basemetal here 20:06, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I understand Trovatore's preference for (N+1)st on linguistic grounds, but I think (n+1)th is more common amongst mathematicians, at least on this (UK) side of the pond. It sounds odd but it reduces confusion with "n + first". Dbfirs 21:51, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, my experience is the reverse. Maybe it is indeed pondial. --Trovatore (talk) 22:01, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The -st ending only applies to the word "first". If however you say the expression does not end with the word "first", then -st is not appropriate. Neither is -nd or -rd. Only -th applies to multiple words, and only it could be considered the general ending for an unspecified ordinal. Imo. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 22:18, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps I did not explain myself well. I write (n+1)st, and pronounce it "en plus first". --Trovatore (talk) 22:58, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
After further research, I learn that Donald Knuth does the same, and that both conventions are common amongst mathematicians. Both "en plus tooth" and "en plus toond" sound even sillier, but, personally, I would avoid saying "en plus second" because I see it as ambiguous. Fortunately, the written notation is unambiguous whatever symbol we use to make the ordinal. Dbfirs 23:31, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand how "en plus second" can be ambiguous. What else could it mean? --Trovatore (talk) 23:34, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose one would need a perverse lack of understanding to interpret it as either the number n plus the second term, or as the nth term plus the second, but I learnt never to underestimate the ways in which students can misunderstand. Dbfirs 23:48, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
People who want to give Paul Revere a hard time: One hundred oneth by land, one hundred twoeth by sea. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:26, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Regarding unusual ordinal formations in English: it seems (see Wiktionary) that there are quotations for (at least) 101th hundred-and-oneth, 41th forty-oneth, (-1)th minus-oneth (used as ordinals), and 1/31 thirty-oneth (used as a fraction, e.g. 20/31 read as "twenty thirty-oneths"). All (except (-1)th minus-oneth) strike me as odd sounding. On the other hand (-1)st minus-first (to me) sounds even worse than (-1)th minus-oneth. What do you think? Well, at least that will give us more "month" rhymes. This can only be to the good. As they say, 'tis an ill wind... In any case the "oneth" thing (for those who use it) is surely an isolated exception. I cannot imagine anyone says anything but (N+2)nd "en plus second", (-2)nd "minus second", (N+3)rd "en plus third", (-3)rd "minus third", (N+5)th "en plus fifth", (-5)th "minus fifth". Has anyone ever heard "infinitieth"? (I haven't). Contact Basemetal here 22:35, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rhyming "oneth" with "month" is dialect-specific. In my speech "one" sounds exactly like "won", so "oneth", if I said it, would have no rhyme that I can think of. But for me, n+1 forms the ordinal (n+1)st anyway. And it's written without a stupid superscript. --65.94.50.4 (talk) 18:32, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What's the difference in your dialect between the vowels of won and month? In mine they're the same (/ʌ/). —Tamfang (talk) 10:06, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
For me "one" and "won" have a short O and rhyme with con, don, gone, John, on, Ron, and upon. This is the vowel that Americans often pronounce the same as "aw" (the "cot-caught merger").
For me "month" has a short U (which I think is what your "^" means) and if the "th" was dropped it would rhyme with bun, done, fun, gun, hon (short for honey), nun, pun, run, sun, and ton.
--65.94.50.4 (talk) 22:59, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I advocate thirty-next. I wonder whether any language expresses ‘third’ as ‘after two’. —Tamfang (talk) 10:06, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The usual suffix for ordinals ending in digits other than 1, 2 or 3 is "nth". The terms "first", "second" and "third" come from elsewhere,[1][2][3][4][5] and there are no such words as "oneth", "twoth" or "threeth". (Not that that stops anyone from trying to use them anyway.) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 11:53, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oneth is used and also in fact, amazingly to me, and contrary to what I was saying: Infinitieth, Twoth (I would tend to spell it twoeth, now that I know it exists, but that's apparently wrong, it's twoth), Threeth and Fiveth. There are quotations available for all except threeth (but the one provided for fiveth is several centuries old). Contact Basemetal here 12:12, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Peculiar usage. I first heard "infinitieth" a long time ago, but the others are non-standard, as wiktionary notes. Also, "oneth" sounds like "once" said with a lisp. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 12:20, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As a working mathematician, I routinely hear both "n-plus-oneth" and "n-plus-first", and haven't really paid enough attention to say which is more common. Similarly for "minus-oneth" and "minus-first". But in cases that go farther than one, the usage I hear almost invariably switches to standard ordinals: "n-plus-first", "n-plus-second", "n-plus-third", etc., and "minus-first", "minus-second", etc. -- Elphion (talk) 21:38, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The more far-fetched Mathlish examples I see the more I no longer know: which of "the (n2 + n - 2)nd term" or "the (n2 + n - 2)th term" would sound more natural? See what happens? Contact Basemetal here 22:36, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but nobody actually says that kind of stuff; it would be "the term for n-squared plus n minus 2". But "n-plus-third" turns up in real speech. -- Elphion (talk) 02:51, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a word for a household or family with three or more income earners?

edit
  • Two middle-class parents may work outside the home. They may have children who are in school full-time and work part-time locally in their teens. In the United States, would they still be recognized as a "dual-income household"?
  • Two middle-class or working-class parents have retired from the workforce, and somehow their place of employment doesn't pay into social security. And, the little money they've saved up is not enough for retirement to continue the same standard of living for very long. Luckily, their children have won scholarships to college and become college-educated. Their children may attend a local university or attend a faraway university and return home. When they find jobs, the grown children find jobs locally, or if not possible, move to a separate location and send money to their parents on a regular basis. In this case, the elderly parents receive money from their kids' incomes or may choose to live in one of their kids' homes. 71.79.234.132 (talk) 20:46, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
A single word ? No. For a term, how about "multi-income household" ? StuRat (talk) 21:10, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That's what I thought. The question is, is that the official term? 71.79.234.132 (talk) 21:47, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"Official" in what sense? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:09, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
whatever term the government uses 71.79.234.132 (talk) 22:34, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I googled "us government term for types of household income", and some variants on that, and I'm not sure there is such a term. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:11, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Mormon or possibly Islamic. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:20, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Language/2014_December_10&oldid=1073940135"