Print

Print


li [Jens Wilkinson] mi tulis la

> Yes, that's correct. Maybe I was a bit too loose with
> my terminology. I didn't mean to say optional plural
> in the sense that "you can put an 's' at the end of a
> word if you like," but rather, "the option of
> expressing the fact that something is plural." So for
> example, you can say "in my garden be tree." If you
> want to make sure the other person will know it's
> plural trees, you can say "in my garden be more than
> one tree." I just meant to say that even in a language
> with no grammatical singular vs. plural distinction,
> you can still express the fact that there is only one
> of something or more than one of something if
> necessary. 

I was just wondering if there would be any value to creating a
derivative form of number to mean "more than x".  I modern English we
often say things like "There were thirty plus (30+) people there!"  or
"He makes $100,000+ per year." so we do have usages where we say => or >
a certain amount.