# Ancient forms of the numerals 5...10 (Russian but also other IE languages)



## franknagy

You have explained the usage of Genitive Plural after numerals 5...10 so that the present -ь cardinal forms have been deduced from ordinals, and the ancient cardinal numbers disappeared because they _could not be declined_.
When did these ancient cardinal numbers disappeared?
Before or after the separation of Polish and Russian language?
Is there a record of the disappeared forms?
If not, how could they be reconstructed?


----------



## ahvalj

The IE developed the declension some time in the middle of its history. The neuter nouns had less case forms than the masculine and feminine ones (no Vocative, the Nominative always identical with the Accusative). The oblique cases in the Plural, except for the Genitive and Accusative still don't exist in Anatolian, the probably earliest divergent branch (the Hittite uses the same forms as in the Singular, the Luwian has developed a special suffix -_nz_- to which the Singular case endings are attached). The Dual had only three or four endings for eight cases. The declination of many pronouns was radically different from that of the nouns. In this context it doesn't seem that strange that some numerals were not involved in the declension in the course of history of the IE. The main problem was the same as with the indeclinable nouns and adjectives in the modern Russian: the endings of these numerals didn't correspond to those of any declension pattern. IE "5" was *_penk˚e_, "6" was *_swek's_, "7" was *_septm_, "8" was *_ok'toHu_, "9" was *_newn_, "10" was *_dek'm_ — of these only *_ok'toHu _had a Nominative Dual ending and in principle was able to decline. Some ancient IE languages left these numerals indeclinable. Lithuanian and Latvian have normalized most of them as masculine and feminine adjectives (i. e. Lithuanian "5" _penki_ (m), _penkios_ (f) as _žali_ (Nom. Pl. m), _žalios _(Nom. Pl. f) "green"). Slavic, as I had written, dropped the reflexes of these forms and used the -(t)i- nouns for 5–9 and the t-noun for "10" (_*penktiṣ, *__ṣ__eśtiṣ, *sebdmiṣ, *aśmiṣ, *dewintiṣ_ and _*deśimt_).

That happened in the common Slavic. No traces of old indeclinable numerals are preserved in the attested Slavic languages, as far as I know. 

The original numerals can be reconstructed as any other words — by comparing forms across various IE branches.


----------



## ahvalj

Update. The name of the plant _девясил_ reflects an original form of the numeral, without the final *-_tiṣ _(http://fasmer-dictionary.info/word/d/Devesil-357.html), the Common Slavic proto-form being something like _*dewinseilas _or probably even _*newinseilas _(if the Czech and Serbo-Croatian initial _n _is original).


----------



## jakowo

ahvalj said:


> of these only *_ok'toHu _had a Nominative Dual ending and in principle was able to decline.




An interesting mystery: why twice four?
Could be the source of fantastic theories.


----------



## jakowo

ahvalj said:


> The name of the plant _девясил_ reflects an original form of the numeral, ... the Common Slavic proto-form being something like _*dewinseilas _or probably even _*newinseilas _(if the Czech and Serbo-Croatian initial _n _is original).


 

Could even reflect the more original form *newn, considering the cz. and scr n- , and the German 'Neunkraft'.


----------



## ahvalj

jakowo said:


> An interesting mystery: why twice four?
> Could be the source of fantastic theories.


This is rather clear: one can count by fingers, the basic number being thus 5, or by knuckles (or how is it called? http://lifehacker.ru/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/p_37520_1_gallerybig-500x400.jpg), with the basic number 4.


----------



## ahvalj

jakowo said:


> Could even reflect the more original form *newn, considering the cz. and scr n- , and the German 'Neunkraft'.


Yes, of course. Slavic, Lithuanian and Latvian have d- in "9" while Prussian had n- suggesting that this d- is rather young.


----------



## jakowo

Slavic d- for "9" from d- for "10"  just like Latin qu- in "5" from qu- in "4".


----------



## ahvalj

jakowo said:


> Slavic d- for "9" from d- for "10"  just like Latin qu- in "5" from qu- in "4".


Latin also has _quercus_ from *_perk__˚us. _I think, d- in _*dewin _is rather a result of anticipation in the sequence _..., *dewin, *__deśimt, _like in the modern Russian we have rhyming_ ..., семь, восемь._


----------



## franknagy

ahvalj said:


> This is rather clear: one can count by fingers, the basic number being thus 5, or by knuckles (or how is it called? http://lifehacker.ru/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/p_37520_1_gallerybig-500x400.jpg), with the basic number 4.


The advantage of number system of 12 over 10 is that 12 has more divisors (namely 1,2,3,4,6,12) than 10 (divisible by 1,2,5,10 only).

I know the algorithm using of _knuckles to determine which months have 31 and which ones have less days.

Left hand
Knu-gap-Knu-gap-Knu-gap-Kn_
jan-feb-mar-apr-may-jun-jul
 31--28--31--30--31--30--31
_Right hand
Knu-gap-Knu-gap-Knu-gap-Kn_u
aug-sep-oct-nov-dec
 31--30--31--30--31
-------
My math teacher's quiz: 
The terrified antropologist asked the head hunter:
- How many missionary heads are hanging in your hut?
- On my other leg three.

Which number system did the head hunter use?


----------



## ahvalj

franknagy said:


> The advantage of number system of 12 over 10 is that 12 has more divisors (namely 1,2,3,4,6,12) than 10 (divisible by 1,2,5,10 only).


Unfortunately, the anatomy of terrestrial vertebrates does not provide ground for this system. Had we 6 fingers, arithmetics would have been easier.


----------



## franknagy

English and German languages have some residues of number system 12: eleven, twelve; elf, zwölf.
Fortunately these languages have not words for powers of 12: 144, 1728, so on.

Russian has two interesting difference form Western slavic languages: *сорок и девяносто*.
I understand *девяносто. *It is (9/10)*100.
Where does *сорок *comes from?
How are 40 and 90 said in Belarus and Ukrainian languages.


----------



## ahvalj

Maroseika was kind enough to finally release this thread, so let's continue.



franknagy said:


> English and German languages have some residues of number system 12: eleven, twelve; elf, zwölf.
> Fortunately these languages have not words for powers of 12: 144, 1728, so on.


It is not that simple. Lithuanian has the same element as in Germanic (_vienuo-lika, dvy-lika, try-lika, keturio-lika_...) used all the way till 19, with -lik- meaning "to remain" (_vienuolika_ = 1 remains (over 10), _dvylika_ = 2 remains etc.) — so either the Baltic languages have extended the old system (that originally ended on 12) to the rest of the ten, or the Germanic has lost everything but forms for 11 and 12.




franknagy said:


> Russian has two interesting difference form Western slavic languages: сорок и девяносто.
> I understand девяносто. It is (9/10)*100.
> Where does сорок comes from?
> How are 40 and 90 said in Belarus and Ukrainian languages.


The Belarusian and Ukrainian have the same forms for both. 

_Сорок_ seems to be a recent borrowing, either from Greek, or from Germanic, or from Turkic: nobody knows for sure. 

As to _девяносто_, I like the etymology deriving it directly from the IE word (http://www.classes.ru/all-russian/russian-dictionary-Vasmer-term-3079.htm): _(H1)newnH2k'mtH2_ > _*newinaśumta_ > _девѧносъто_ > _девяносто_ (_ѧ_ thus secondary after _девѧть_). Note the characteristic IE consonant clusters: the IE was a consonant-rich language of the Caucasian type.


----------



## Apollodoros

franknagy said:


> How are 40 and 90 said in Belarus and Ukrainian languages.



Just thought to add that Slovak has a form of 40 which is said to be ancient: _meru_ as opposed to _štyridsať. _It is (was) typically used for the year (18)48 - _meruôsmy_ _rok _by Slovak writers in the XIX. century and on. I think it also occurs in some folklore songs etc. 

I am not sure what its etymology is, the only I can think about is deriving from _miera (measure).

_In my mind I've been somehow always connecting it with a special forms for 40 in Russian/Ukrainian although the word is probably unrelated.


----------



## jakowo

ahvalj said:


> Latin also has _quercus_ from *_perk__˚us. _



Maybe a hapax. 
Normally, the IE *p- remains in Latin, e.g. *ped- > pēs, pedis; *tep 'warm' > tepeo; *upper(i) > s-uper etc. 
So we can assume *penkṷe > (Latin) *pinque > quinque - according to quattuor.


----------



## jakowo

ahvalj said:


> I think, d- in _*dewin _is rather a result of anticipation in the sequence _..., *dewin, *__deśimt, _like in the modern Russian we have rhyming_ ..., семь, восемь._



That's what I said, isn't it?


----------



## jakowo

franknagy said:


> Where does *сорок *comes from?


 
One possibility:
http://enc-dic.com/fasmer/Sorok-12617.html


----------



## ahvalj

jakowo said:


> Maybe a hapax.
> Normally, the IE *p- remains in Latin, e.g. *ped- > pēs, pedis; *tep 'warm' > tepeo; *upper(i) > s-uper etc.
> So we can assume *penkṷe > (Latin) *pinque > quinque - according to quattuor.


There is a number of words with p…k˚ > k˚…k˚ in both Italic and Celtic, which long served a _Paradebeispiel_ for the Italo-Celtic unity.


----------



## ahvalj

jakowo said:


> One possibility:
> http://enc-dic.com/fasmer/Sorok-12617.html


The article actually lists the three possibilities I had mentioned: from Greek, from Germanic and from Turkic. There is no evidence to choose either one.


----------



## ahvalj

jakowo said:


> That's what I said, isn't it?


Isn't since I don't think the Latin case is related.


----------



## jakowo

ahvalj said:


> There is a number of words with p…k˚ > k˚…k˚ in both Italic and Celtic, which long served a _Paradebeispiel_ for the Italo-Celtic unity.



Yes, of course, but it is not the normal rule for IE *p- > Latin. Is it?


----------



## ahvalj

jakowo said:


> Yes, of course, but it is not the normal rule for IE *p- > Latin. Is it?


Of course not. But _quinque, quercus, coquo_ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italo-Celtic) + some other examples I can check in the literature, found both in Italic and Celtic, suggest this assimilation in _quinque_ was not related to _quattuor_.


----------



## Maroseika

Apollodoros said:


> Just thought to add that Slovak has a form of 40 which is said to be ancient: _meru_ as opposed to _štyridsať. _It is (was) typically used for the year (18)48 - _meruôsmy_ _rok _by Slovak writers in the XIX. century and on. I think it also occurs in some folklore songs etc.
> 
> I am not sure what its etymology is, the only I can think about is deriving from _miera (measure).
> 
> _


According to Max Vasmer, Slovak *meru *is from Hungarian *mérő *- a sack.
This is very interesting fact, as it may refer to the same logic, as Russian *сорок*. Vasmer used it to reinforce etymology of сорок - 40 from сорок - a bunch of 40 sable skins. Also he mentions Ancient-Scandinavian *serkr *- shirt and 200 skins (cf. Russian сорочка - a shirt).
Yet another example - Danish *snes *- 20, originally meaning a twig suitable to string 20 fish.


----------



## ahvalj

jakowo said:


> Yes, of course, but it is not the normal rule for IE *p- > Latin. Is it?


I am going to check de Vaan's Latin etymological dictionary this evening: may it be so that all Latin occurrences of *p…k˚ turned into k˚…k˚?


----------



## jakowo

ahvalj said:


> I am going to check de Vaan's Latin etymological dictionary this evening: may it be so that all Latin occurrences of *p…k˚ turned into k˚…k˚?



1) This would really be quite surprising and give a lot of linguists reason for publishing a lot of new thick books. 

2) Have you by chance the link (URL) to Vaan's Etym. Dic.?


----------



## vianie

Maroseika said:


> According to Max Vasmer, Slovak *meru *is from Hungarian *mérő *- a sack.



This seems like an arc loan (old Slovak -> Hungarian -> Slovak), not uncommon event in the relationship of these two languages.


----------



## ahvalj

jakowo said:


> 1) This would really be quite surprising and give a lot of linguists reason for publishing a lot of new thick books.


Don't think so: how many p…k˚ roots can we expect for the IE? pek˚, peyk˚, pewk˚, pelk˚, perk˚, penk˚ + the same with laryngeals within or after the root. 



jakowo said:


> 2) Have you by chance the link (URL) to Vaan's Etym. Dic.?


https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_7IkEzr9hyJS1ZxV2dpdnhzUEk/edit?usp=sharing


----------



## jakowo

ahvalj said:


> Don't think so: how many p…k˚ roots can we expect for the IE? pek˚, peyk˚, pewk˚, pelk˚, perk˚, penk˚ + the same with laryngeals within or after the root.
> 
> 
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_7IkEzr9hyJS1ZxV2dpdnhzUEk/edit?usp=sharing


 

Ok. Thin books then, doesn't matter.

Thank you very much for the link. Very helpful. 
Bye, Wo.


----------



## Lugubert

franknagy said:


> English and German languages have some residues of number system 12: eleven, twelve; elf, zwölf.
> Fortunately these languages have not words for powers of 12: 144, 1728, so on.




Yes we have! From Wiki[url]:



> A *gross* refers to a group of [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/144_%28number%29"]144





> items (a dozen dozen).
> A *great gross* refers to a group of 1728 items (a dozen gross).
> A *small gross* or a *great hundred* refers to a group of 120 items (ten dozen).



Swedish has the gross and had the storhundrade = 120. Norwegian Wiki mentions storgross for 1728.


----------



## ahvalj

jakowo said:


> 1) This would really be quite surprising and give a lot of linguists reason for publishing a lot of new thick books.


First about the sound change _p…k°_>_k°…k°_: it is accepted for Celtic (Matasović R · 2009 · Etymological dictionary of Proto-Celtic: 8 & 11–12 — https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_7IkEzr9hyJRlVOVHlzSWRZUm8/edit?usp=sharing), though only as a development parallel to the Italic one. Nevertheless, we have the same trio _*k°enk°e_ (pp. 176–177), _*k°erk°-_ (p. 178) and _k°ok°-_ (p. 180) as in Latin.

Then, the verbal roots (Rix H · 2001 · Lexicon der indogermanischen Verben — https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_7IkEzr9hyJTHRoeWJYZW5uWEk/edit?usp=sharing). I have found only two roots with the structure p…k°:
_*pek°-_ (p. 468): Latin _coquō_
_*pek°- _(p. 469): only Tocharian

Now, the overall vocabulary (Pokorny J · 1959 · Indogermanisches etymologisches Wörterbuch. 3. Band — https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_7IkEzr9hyJN3BxamRiZWV6WDA/edit?usp=sharing)
_*pek°-_ (p. 798)
_*penk°e_ (p. 808)
_*pro-k°e_ (p. 815) — an inverse assimilation to _prope_ (though I think it could be a Sabellian form as well, as with other p and b in Latin from the labiovelars), plus it is a compound word
_*perk°us_ (p. 822–823)
That's all, though I may have overlooked some root extensions due to the bad formatting of Pokorny's book.

Finally, de Vaan (de Vaan M · 2008 · Etymological dictionary of Latin and the other Italic languages — https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_7IkEzr9hyJS1ZxV2dpdnhzUEk/edit?usp=sharing)
p. 8: _p…k°_>_k°…k°_ as a Common Italic sound change
p. 134: _coquō, praecox_
p. 506: _quercus_
p. 509: _quīnque
_I didn't search all the _c, q_ and _p_ lemmas because these three roots are the only ones circulating in the literature. Anyway, since there are no other words with _p…k°_ in the dictionaries, I think it is safer to assume that k° in _quīnque _did not appear because of_ quattuor._


----------



## jakowo

ahvalj said:


> I didn't search all the _c, q_ and _p_ lemmas because these three roots are the only ones circulating in the literature. Anyway, since there are no other words with _p…k°_ in the dictionaries, I think it is safer to assume that k° in _quīnque _did not appear because of_ quattuor._



Helpful links again, thank you once more.
Maybe, you're right, yet I'm still hesitating: Rix' predecessor as professor in IE linguistics in Freiburg (Germany) O. Szemerényi wrote in his 
"Einführung in die vergleichende Sprachwissenschaft", p.58: "... lat. quinque (für *pinque nach quattuor).. "

On the other hand, there is a lot of evidence in favour of your meaning,
http://tinyurl.com/pdnwfj3  , as well. 

Unfortunately, I haven't got at hand:
Karl H. Schmidt. Latein und Keltisch: genetische Verwandtschaft und areale Beziehungen, 1992 (51 p.)
which possibly could supply some further enlightenment. [He was a celticist]

Bye, Wo.


----------



## franknagy

Thank you for the links to the mathematical peculiarities of 144 and 1728,
Is *gross* used widely outside commerce?


----------



## franknagy

jakowo said:


> One possibility:
> http://enc-dic.com/fasmer/Sorok-12617.html


Quotes from above link:
Может быть, это объясняется тем, что в ряду от 1 до 9 лишь четыре – слово трехсложное.
Сидела (или: служила) сорок лет, высидела сорок реп.


----------



## jasio

Lugubert said:


> Swedish has the gross and had the storhundrade = 120. Norwegian Wiki mentions storgross for 1728.



Are these words still used nowadays? I remember old numerals in Polish for:
12: tuzin
15: mendel
60: kopa
144: gros

But I doubt if they are actually used nowadays, perhaps somewhere in the country.


----------



## Lugubert

Swedish enterprises used to buy for example pencils by the _gross_. I haven't seen it for quite some time. But I like the _dussin _(dozen) and _tjog _(score), and use them whenever I can. For 10, especially when not the exact number, I almost normally use _halvtjog _(half score).


----------



## Maroseika

jasio said:


> Are these words still used nowadays? I remember old numerals in Polish for:
> 
> 60: kopa



Same in Russian - копа, originally 60 haycocks.


----------



## francisgranada

Maroseika said:


> According to Max Vasmer, Slovak *meru *is from Hungarian *mérő *- a sack.
> This is very interesting fact, as it may refer to the same logic, as Russian *сорок*. Vasmer used it to reinforce etymology of сорок - 40 from сорок - a bunch of 40 sable skins ...


The Hungarian *mérő *was a unit of capacity, once used to measure the grain. The proper word comes from the verb _mérni _(to measure), so the original "full" construction could be something like _mérő zsák_ (measuring sack). 

For curiosity, there were 3 kinds of _mérő _used in the past: _pesti mérő _(of Pest - 93,7 liter),_ pozsonyi mérő_ (of Pressburg/Bratislava - 62,53 liter),_ bécsi mérő _(of Vienna - 61,487 liter), but none of them had the value of 40 .  Of course, this may not be relevant at all, as the metric system is not compatible with the old units ... 

However, it would be interesting to know the history of the Slovak _meru _as the Hungarian _mérő _was not used in other contexts. Is there any occurence of this word other than referring to the year 1848? E.g. *_merutretí _(43rd), *_meru rokov_ (forty years) _*meru zrna_ (sack of grain)...


----------



## ahvalj

Isn't the Hungarian _mérni_ in its turn a borrowing from the Slavic _měriti_ with the same meaning? (The Slavic word is inherited).


----------



## francisgranada

ahvalj said:


> Isn't the Hungarian _mérni_ in its turn a borrowing from the Slavic _měriti_ with the same meaning? (The Slavic word is inherited).


This is one of the possible etymologies. The other is the Finno-Ugric origin from a supposed root _*mere_, as there are derived words (e.g. _mertal, murtal,._..) with the same or similar meaning in other Finno-Ugric languages as well. 

The "problem" with the Slavic etymogy is that the infinitive ending _-ni_ is attached directly to the root _mér-, _which should not happen with borrowd verbs. The expected form should be in this case _*mérelni_ (or something similar).


----------



## ahvalj

By the way, this entire thread seems to be a continuation of that one:
http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=2796280


----------

