Why is zero plural? (2024) • Hacker News Board

Re: Why is zero plural? (2024)

#11

Post by gerdesj » Wed, Jan 22, 2025, 2:10 AM UTC

readthenotes1 wrote: post #2

Funny that 1 litre is singular but 1.0 lires is plural even though 1.0 is more precisely singular than 1. IOW, English is screwy

[flagged]

Re: Why is zero plural? (2024)

#12

Post by post-it » Wed, Jan 22, 2025, 2:10 AM UTC

JadeNB wrote: post #5

thrance wrote: post #3

In French, the official rule from our (way too expensive) Académie Française is, that it's plural if you have at least x of it, where |x|≥2.

What would it mean for x to be negative, if x is how many of something you have?

You can have negative dollars.

Re: Why is zero plural? (2024)

#13

Post by stephen_g » Wed, Jan 22, 2025, 2:14 AM UTC

readthenotes1 wrote: post #2

Funny that 1 litre is singular but 1.0 lires is plural even though 1.0 is more precisely singular than 1. IOW, English is screwy

I might just take it that the special case is more for the word 'one', not the value of one.

Or perhaps more for one of a discreet object, where the litre is considered as a single thing but 1.0 is implying a continuous measurement so it changes how we think of it?

Re: Why is zero plural? (2024)

#14

Post by Terr_ » Wed, Jan 22, 2025, 2:20 AM UTC

I think it extends from whatever rules govern the much-more-influential word "No", particularly for items which aren't normally capped at 1.

Notice how these are all plural, and in each case "no" could be substituted with "zero":

* "My shelf contains no books."

* "Snails have no legs."

* "What if there were no stars in the sky?"

You can't simply replace those examples with a singular noun: You're either forced to refactor the grammar or you end up with something that sounds weird/archaic. Ex:

* "My shelf contains no book." [Weird/archaic]

* "My shelf does not contain a book. [Refactored]

Re: Why is zero plural? (2024)

#15

Post by ks2048 » Wed, Jan 22, 2025, 2:22 AM UTC

The answer says zero is treated as "plural" because we say "0 books".

Interestingly, we can say either:

1. "There are no books on this subject"

2. "There is no book on this subject"

Re: Why is zero plural? (2024)

#16

Post by Terr_ » Wed, Jan 22, 2025, 2:31 AM UTC

cies wrote: post #10

readthenotes1 wrote: post #2

Funny that 1 litre is singular but 1.0 lires is plural even though 1.0 is more precisely singular than 1. IOW, English is screwy

I disagree 1.0 is more precise one than 1. Both in speaking language, and in quite some programming languages "1" is assumed to be an integer, and "1.0" is assumed to be a number with one decimal (something akin to a float). And I'd say integer "1" is the most precise type of one. If we are rounding numbers you are right though... round_to_int(0.5000000 to 1.499999) -> 1 round_to_one_decimal(0.9500000 to 1.049999) ->…

> I disagree 1.0 is more precise one than 1.

It depends on the context/subtext: Is the other person trying to communicate something extra by adding the .0 portion?

Some are, some aren't. A programmer might use it to distinguish a data-type even though they are otherwise equal, an engineer might use it for significant-figures, etc.

Re: Why is zero plural? (2024)

#17

Post by remram » Wed, Jan 22, 2025, 2:34 AM UTC

hyrix wrote: post #8

gerdesj wrote: post #4

[flagged]

The answer is obviously because programmers want to be able to write f”{n} result{‘s’ if n == 1 else ‘’}”

> f"{n} result{'s' if n == 1 else ''}"

n>1 is even shorter than n!=1

(also you wrote == instead of != your code is backwards)

Re: Why is zero plural? (2024)

#18

Post by thfuran » Wed, Jan 22, 2025, 2:41 AM UTC

hyrix wrote: post #8

gerdesj wrote: post #4

[flagged]

The answer is obviously because programmers want to be able to write f”{n} result{‘s’ if n == 1 else ‘’}”

Then they had best steer well clear of Poland.

Re: Why is zero plural? (2024)

#19

Post by inopinatus » Wed, Jan 22, 2025, 2:45 AM UTC

ks2048 wrote: post #15

The answer says zero is treated as "plural" because we say "0 books". Interestingly, we can say either: 1. "There are no books on this subject" 2. "There is no book on this subject"

I use Xero's books.

Re: Why is zero plural? (2024)

#20

Post by 9rx » Wed, Jan 22, 2025, 2:47 AM UTC

Terr_ wrote: post #14

I think it extends from whatever rules govern the much-more-influential word "No", particularly for items which aren't normally capped at 1. Notice how these are all plural , and in each case "no" could be substituted with "zero": * "My shelf contains no books." * "Snails have no legs." * "What if there were no stars in the sky?" You can't simply replace those examples with a singular noun: You're either forced to re…

> You can't naively rewrite those examples with a singular

"What if there was no star in the sky?" does not sound particularly weird, and we can find instances of people using that exact phrase. If we focus on the key aspect of that statement, "no star in the sky" appears to be commonly used.