tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Feb 16 15:14:42 2006
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Negative numbers
Cassandra:
> >Perhaps try saying nothing minus one or whatever number. Or perhaps
> >juse say minus then the number.
QeS:
>In the absence of a canon way of doing it, unfortunately any suggestion I
>could make would be speculative and would require some imagination on the
>part of the listener. {pagh boqHa'bogh wa''e'} "one which is taken away from
>zero"? {pagh nungbogh wa''e'} "one which precedes zero"? I'm very
>dissatisfied with both.
Mark Okrand (HolQeD 9.3:10):
>> {wej boqHa' loS} would be "3 - 4" and the answer would be a negative
>> number (a concept Maltz wanted to postpone for another time).
Until we hear from Maltz, if you absolutely must refer to negative numbers
in some way you might use {taH} "be at a negative angle" or -- even better
-- {yoy} "be upside down" as a work around: e.g. *{wa' taH}
"negative-angle one" or *{mI'mey yoy} "'upside down' numbers" (normal
numbers being right side up or vertical {chong} as it were).
Another option would be to contrast a *{mI'na'} "definite/real number" with
a {mI'qoq} "so-called number".
But either way, no one will understand what you mean until you
explain. Call it informal mathematician's slang. <g>
--
Voragh
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons