[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-i18n-doc
Subject:    Re: plural
From:       "Erik K. Pedersen" <erik () binghamton ! edu>
Date:       2003-05-24 17:19:37
[Download RAW message or body]

Mandag den 5. maj 2003 12:40 skrev Jacek Stolarczyk:
> On Mon, 5 May 2003, Stephan Kulow wrote:
> [...]
>
> > Guys! This doesn't make sense. The plural handling is for handling
> > different translations for different values. But 0 replacements is a
> > correct form! When will you start adding a special form for two
> > replacements because 2 replacements sounds strange? Stop it NOW!
>
> It is indeed a correct form  in but a language that only computer
> scientist
> think is a normal spoken language :-) It leads to nice phrases like:
> "There are 0 customers in the queue" or "The queue is empty". The rest of
> the world would probably say "There is no queue". We have to be careful,
> because what we treat as an empty object in "normal" world means "no
> object at all". Hence: 0 is a special case.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jacek Stolarczyk

This is from awhile ago, but Stephan really is totally wrong on this one. 
It would be totally trivial to have a ThreeForm, I looked at the code, and 
without even knowing any C or C++, I believe I could do it.
Linguistically it is absurd to claim that 0 and many are treated the same way 
at least in Danish.
If there was aThreeForm each language team could decide on its own whether to 
use it.
It would lead to enormous advantages in many languages. 

I would really like to have a Threeform with 0,1,many and the arguments I have 
heard against it are mathematical in nature (I am a mathematician myself) not 
linguistic.

Erik


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]