# kahdeksan, yhdeksän



## 盲人瞎馬

Hello. I've noticed that kahdeksan and yhdeksän use the root forms of the words yksi and kaksi.

Yksi - Yhde - Yhdeksän
Kaksi - Kahde - Kahdeksan

I was looking to know if there was a second way with which the numbers 8 and 9 could be translated to English, like when translating quantities:

Kuusi ihmistä is generally translated as "six people", but literally it means "six of a person". Can the same be done with yhdesksän and kahdeksan, since they come from yksi and kaksi?

I can clarify in case my question sounds unclear. It is just a curiosity.

Thanks.


----------



## DrWatson

Their etymologies notwithstanding, which incidentally are not even that transparent to the modern Finnish speaker, _kahdeksan _and _yhdeksän _are perfectly normal cardinal numerals:

_kahdeksan ihmistä
yhdeksän ihmistä

_Only the number one, _yksi_, behaves differently from rest of the numerals. Even zero, _nolla_, gets singular partitive:

_yksi ihminen
nolla ihmistä_


----------



## akana

I don't think I understand your question. Are you wondering if ksan/ksän is an archaic case ending or something?

It is an interesting curiosity. When I was learning numerals, the instructor used it as a handy learning aid: 10-1 (1 as in yhde) = 9 (yhdeksän). 10-2 (2 as in kahde) = 8 (kahdeksan).


----------



## Gavril

DrWatson said:


> Even zero, _nolla_, gets singular partitive:
> 
> _yksi ihminen
> nolla ihmistä_



This makes some sense given the connection between the negation of a verb and the partitive of the verb's object/complement:

Minulla *ei* ole pistet*tä*kään "I don't have any points"
Minulla on *nolla* pistet*tä* "I have zero points"

Sorry to digress from the main topic.


----------



## sakvaka

That is indeed where the numbers 8 and 9 comes from, at least if my old etymology source from the 1950s is to believe in. -_deksan_ is the same Indo-European root 'deca' (10) that is used in many languages' indications for the number ten. There might even be a remnant of _'ei'_ (not) in the words themselves, so "10 without 2" and "10 without 1" are indeed quite good explanations. To the modern speaker, of course, this most likely comes as a surprise.

Still I can't really see what you are asking. Perhaps you could clarify a bit.


----------

