A single illustration or two of this must suffice; but the ones
chosen are not isolated cases. The scale of the Macunis,[327] one of the
numerous tribes of Brazil, is
1. pocchaenang.
2. haihg.
3. haigunhgnill.
4. haihgtschating.
5. haihgtschihating = another 4?
6. hathig-stchihathing = 2-4?
7. hathink-tschihathing = 2-5?
8. hathink-tschihating = 2 x 4?
The complete absence of--one is tempted to say--any rhyme or reason from
this scale is more than enough to refute any argument which might tend to
show that the quinary, or any other scale, was ever the sole number scale
of primitive man. Irregular as this is, the system of the Montagnais fully
matches it, as the subjoined numerals show:[328]
1. inl'are.
2. nak'e.
3. t'are.
4. dinri.
5. se-sunlare.
6. elkke-t'are = 2 x 3.
7. t'a-ye-oyertan = 10 - 3,
or inl'as dinri = 4 + 3?
8. elkke-dinri = 2 x 4.
9. inl'a-ye-oyertan = 10 - 1.
10. onernan.
CHAPTER VII.
THE VIGESIMAL SYSTEM.
In its ordinary development the quinary system is almost sure to merge into
either the decimal or the vigesimal system, and to form, with one or the
other or both of these, a mixed system of counting. In Africa, Oceanica,
and parts of North America, the union is almost always with the decimal
scale; while in other parts of the world the quinary and the vigesimal
systems have shown a decided affinity for each other.
Pages:
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174