Why is zero plural? (2024)
81–90 of 209 posts
Re: Why is zero plural? (2024)
#82Russian has singular, plural and paucal (reserved for small numbers: 2-4). Interestingly, zero is plural, not paucal: 1 kot "1 cat" 3 kota "3 cats" but: 5 kotov "5 cats" 0 kotov "0 cats"
Re: Why is zero plural? (2024)
#83Earlier quoted context omitted.
"I have no spoon." Correct in a situation where exactly one spoon is expected. "There are no spoons here." Correct in a situation where there could be zero, one or more spoons.
There is no spoon in this room. Equivalent to "There are no spoons in this room".
The information they communicate about the state of mind of the participants in the conversation is not the same.
Re: Why is zero plural? (2024)
#84Re: Why is zero plural? (2024)
#85All even numbers are plural ;-)
Re: Why is zero plural? (2024)
#86All even numbers are plural ;-)
Re: Why is zero plural? (2024)
#87For example: There are trees in this field. There are 0 trees in this field.
Singular is the special case, similar to square x rectangle relation.
Re: Why is zero plural? (2024)
#88Re: Why is zero plural? (2024)
#89More interesting is to compare languages. Other than native English, I only know Hindi (plural zero) and French (singular zero). I wonder what and why the divide is, perhaps especially when among these three at least I believe zero has a common conceptual origin in al-Khvārizmī (post Roman).
It's a little weird to use Hebrew word for zero to say that one doesn't have something: it feels like it's been copied from English, but not weird enough for native speakers not to use it. So, when someone says "there are zero pants in the shop", they'd use the dual form.
In other situations, when nouns have typical singular and plural forms, and one uses "zero" to mean that there are none available, then most of the time, they'd use plural, except for cases where singular can stand for plural, which is typical for units, currency, "times". So, while maybe not grammatically correct enough to write in a book, it doesn't sound foreign to say "zero meter" to mean "very close" or "zero shekel" to mean "free of charge".
Russian and relatives act very similar to English in this regard: I cannot think of a case where it would've been OK to use "zero" with singular noun (outside of nouns that don't have plural form). But using "zero" in this context is not a natural way for anyone to describe the absence of thing. It usually sounds as if the speaker wants to prank the listener who probably expected a non-zero value. Similar to how it would sound if in English you'd use negative numbers for the same purpose: "I have negative one apple" is, I suppose, grammatically correct, but isn't a phrase you'd expect if asking anyone about the number of apples they have.
Re: Why is zero plural? (2024)
#90Russian has singular, plural and paucal (reserved for small numbers: 2-4). Interestingly, zero is plural, not paucal: 1 kot "1 cat" 3 kota "3 cats" but: 5 kotov "5 cats" 0 kotov "0 cats"
There are websites that capture these rules for all common languages, to assist localization and translators.
https://docs.translatehouse.org/projects/localization-guide/...
English is
nplurals=2; plural=(n != 1);
Russian is much more complex:
nplurals=3; plural=(n%10==1 && n%100!=11 ? 0 : n%10>=2 && n%10=20) ? 1 : 2);