# Slovenian: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4



## janecito

Hi!

Now, this might sound like a silly question, specially coming from a native speaker, but... How do we count in Slovene? I mean, I know how to count, but what are the correct forms (according to the grammatical normative) of cardinal numerals in Slovene (that is, when you simply count, without any nouns accompanying the numerals). I'd say these two ways are most in use (might depend on the region though):

*NIČ, ENA, DVA, TRI, ŠTIRI*

*NIČ, EN, DVA, TRI, ŠTIRI*

But somehow I feel this one should be “the right” one:

*NIČ, ENA, DVE, TRI, ŠTIRI*

Somehow it would make sense to use them all in the same gender. But I don't have any books here with me at the moment, so I can't check it up. Any suggestions? Opinions?


----------



## Thomas1

janecito said:


> Hi!
> 
> Now, this might sound like a silly question, specially coming from a native speaker, but... How do we count in Slovene? I mean, I know how to count, but what are the correct forms (according to the grammatical normative) of cardinal numerals in Slovene (that is, when you simply count, without any nouns accompanying the numerals). I'd say these two ways are most in use (might depend on the region though):
> 
> *NIČ, ENA, DVA, TRI, ŠTIRI*
> 
> *NIČ, EN, DVA, TRI, ŠTIRI*
> 
> But somehow I feel this one should be “the right” one:
> 
> *NIČ, ENA, DVE, TRI, ŠTIRI*
> 
> Somehow it would make sense to use them all in the same gender. But I don't have any books here with me at the moment, so I can't check it up. Any suggestions? Opinions?


Hi Janecinto, 


I don’t speak Slovenian so sorry if my message doesn’t answer your question. I looked that up in a grammar of Slovenian language I have (it is at the academic level). What I found out is that in reading off numbers (as for instance in dictating someone a phone number) the feminine form, i.e. _é̡na,_ is preferred, its declination paradigm is that of a noun here and its masculine equivalent is é̡den. The forms you gave; èn, é̡na behave like an adjective and they agree in case, gender and number with the head noun (if there’s one).
My source also says that 0 is nîčla in Slovene but your form is also acceptable.


For what it's worth,
Tom


----------



## janecito

Thomas1 said:


> Hi Janecinto,
> I don’t speak Slovenian so sorry if my message doesn’t answer your question. I looked that up in a grammar of Slovenian language I have (it is at the academic level). What I found out is that in reading off numbers (as for instance in dictating someone a phone number) the feminine form, i.e. _é̡na,_ is preferred, its declination paradigm is that of a noun here and its masculine equivalent is é̡den. The forms you gave; èn, é̡na behave like an adjective and they agree in case, gender and number with the head noun (if there’s one).
> My source also says that 0 is nîčla in Slovene but your form is also acceptable.
> For what it's worth,
> Tom


 
Thanks for your post, Tom. That was actually what I was looking for – what a Slovene Grammar has to say about it.  About ENA I was quite sure the feminine form is correct. Does it say anything about DVA/DVE? 

NIČLA, on the other hand, sounds like a noun (like ENKA, DVOJKA, TROJKA, etc.)

And, EDEN is a masculine form, but is usually used as a pronoun, not as an adjective. It definitely sounds more natural to use the form EN when accompanied by a noun: EDEN, but EN AVTO (not EDEN AVTO).


----------



## Irbis

I think that ENA, DVE is more correct for counting, but ENA, DVA is more usual in colloquial Slovenian (and EN, DVA is even more colloquial, in this case one would probably also use ŠTER instead of ŠTIRI).
And we use NIČ for counting.
NIČLA is name for number (like ENKA, DVOJKA ...).

EDEN is like noun and EN is like adjective (for masculine).

Eden je prišel.
En človek je prišel.


----------



## Tolovaj_Mataj

Moje mnenje je, da se šteje takole:
ENA, DVA, TRI, ŠTIRI, PET, ...

Po analogiji števil, večjih od dvajset:
ENAindvajset, DVAindvajset, TRIindvajset, ŠTIRIindvajset, ....

Saj nikoli ne rečemo:
_en_indvajset, _eden_indvajset, _eno_indvajset, _dve_indvajset, _trije_indvajset, _štirje_indvajset.

Našla sem starejšo slovnico, vendar v njej ni niti besede, kako se pravilno šteje.

My thinking is that we count like this:
ENA, DVA, TRI, ŠTIRI, PET, ...

By analogy with numbers bigger than twenty:
ENAindvajset, DVAindvajset, TRIindvajset, ŠTIRIindvajset, ....

We never say:
_en_indvajset, _eden_indvajset, _eno_indvajset, _dve_indvajset, _trije_indvajset, _štirje_indvajset.

I found an older grammar book, but there's not a single word about a proper counting.


----------



## Irbis

Janez Sršen has in "Jezik naš vsakdanji" this:

dva : dve

npr. nogometaši Smelta Olimpije so izgubili tekmo z izidom ena proti dva
pravilno je ... so izgubili z izidom ena proti dve, kajti so pet ločimo oblike po spolu, tako da z moškimi oblikami štejemo eden, dva, trije, štirje,  z ženskimi pa ena, dve, tri, štiri.


I can't find some definite source for counting now but I remember that I read or heard about this counting somewhere, that "dve" should be used with counting. But I think this is one of the more puristic rules and it is not enforced very strictly.


----------



## Tolovaj_Mataj

Irbis said:


> npr. nogometaši Smelta Olimpije so izgubili tekmo z izidom ena proti dva
> pravilno je ... so izgubili z izidom ena proti dve, kajti so pet ločimo oblike po spolu, tako da z moškimi oblikami štejemo eden, dva, trije, štirje, z ženskimi pa ena, dve, tri, štiri.


 
Če to drži, potem mi, prosim, razloži, kaj je mišljeno v tem zgledu: ena _kaj_ : dve _kaj_? Glede na to, da je govor o nogometu, bi se pričakovalo "eden/en : dva" --> en gol proti dvama goloma. Tudi beseda zadetek je moškega spola. Prav noben smiselen samostalnik ženskega spola mi ne pade na misel.

Zganjanje takšnega purizma je traparija.

If this is true, then please explain to me, what was meant in this example: one _what_ : two _what_? Speaking about football one would expect "eden/en : dva" --> (1 goal vs 2 goals). Also the word _zadetek _is of male gender. There's no relevant noun of female gender falling on my mind.

Forsing such a purism is nonsense.


----------



## Irbis

Ideja je predvsem v tem, da naj ne bi mešali ženskega in moškega spola, kolikor sem razumel stvar. In iz tega naj bi izhajalo, da če začneš z "ena" moraš nadaljevati z "dve", če pa z "en" oz. "eden" pa z "dva", "trije".
Osebno se pri pisanju tega držim, neformalno pa tako uporabljam "en, dva, tri, šter".

Bom pobrskal, če bom našel še kaj na to temo, ne v Toporišiču ne v Žagarju ne v Herrityju nisem našel nič pametnega o tem. Mogoče je bila o tem ena od objav Jezikovnega razsodišča, ampak tega nimam pri roki.


----------



## Tolovaj_Mataj

Mogoče tudi SP. 
Jaz svojega nikjer ne najdem.


----------



## Irbis

Sem neuspešno preveril tudi v SP2001, sem pozabil napisati.


----------



## Tolovaj_Mataj

Poglej, kako je SSKJ nedosleden:

geslo:

- en: http://bos.zrc-sazu.si/cgi/a03.exe?name=sskj_testa&expression=ge=en&hs=1
*en dva tri* in že ga ni več _v trenutku,_

- dva: http://bos.zrc-sazu.si/cgi/a03.exe?name=sskj_testa&expression=ge=dva&hs=1
v medmetni rabi: otroci so korakali: leva, desna, *ena, dve*; daj, skoči: *ena, dva, tri* 

- trije: http://bos.zrc-sazu.si/cgi/a03.exe?name=sskj_testa&expression=ge=trije&hs=1
ekspr. *ena dva tri* in že ga ni več _v trenutku_;


Mislim, da je vse skupaj mlatenje prazne slame.


----------



## Irbis

Tudi SP2001 ni čisto dosleden:

krat2 povdk. (a) Dva ~ tri je šest <2 × 3 = 6>;

proti:

nič2 -- s (i) število ~; ~ deljeno z dve; Prva štiri števila so ~, ena, dve, tri;

pét1 -- s (ẹ) Tri plus ~ je osem <3 + 5 = 8>; Deset deljeno s ~ je dve <10 : 5 = 2>; 

Ampak zgornji primer so pa spremenili:

*dve* -- s (ẹ) Ena in ena je ~ <1 + 1 = 2>; ~ deljeno z ~ je ena <2 : 2 = 1>; Otroci korakajo: leva, desna, ena, ~; *Daj, skoči, ena, ~, tri;* poud. Ena, ~, tri, že ga ni več |v trenutku, hipu|


----------



## Tolovaj_Mataj

Irbis,

tukaj je zanimiva razlaga: http://www2.arnes.si/~lmarus/suss/arhiv/suss-arhiv-000111.html

Mislim, da so avtorji verodostojen vir, saj gre za jezikoslovce. Viri, ki jim služijo, pa so tisti, ki so že zgoraj omenjeni.

Skratka, vsi skupaj se lahko strinjamo, da imamo Slovenci kaos in lahko bi bili ponosni nanj, ne pa, da ga hočemo za vsako ceno urediti.  



Here is an interesting explanation: http://www2.arnes.si/~lmarus/suss/arhiv/suss-arhiv-000111.html
I think the authors are reliable source, because they are linguists. The sourses, they use are those mentioned above.

In sum, we all together could agree that we, Slovenians have chaos and we should be proud of it instead of trying to solve it at any price.


----------

