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.