Uporabniški pogovor:Anton Mravcek~slwiki/Pogovor2005

Search for Slovene words for totients, etc.

Hm. Now I am in a little doubt. In that list we have to find Slovene words for these English terms:

• nontotient, noncototient, highly totient number, highly cototient number

Why is there a negation in nontotient? In »comprime count« there is no negation. Is nontotient really the same as comprime count? Or it should be totient or noncoprime? I've made one confusion here, since I haven't seen a term »highly cototient number«. How this term would sound in a manner of »coprime count«? Since it is a negation I guess »highly (co-co)prime count«, but it sounds terrible. I guess that in fact »nontotient« is a negation of »coprime count«, right. It is just a matter of speaking. If we agree that we would count a number of coprime numbers then we might say »coprime count«, and if we say that we would count non-coprime numbers, then we'll say »nontotient« (similar as for even or odd numbers..). If this is the case, then »nontotient« in Slovene should be »netuještevno število« and all terms as:

• netuještevno število, nesotuještevno število, zelo tuještevno število, zelo sotuještevno število.

I guess this would be the right way to coin term in Slovene. Perhaps you gave term »coprime count« without direct link to »nontotients«, since we haven't spoken about this yet. And one more thing. A term »netuještevno število« now shows to something that counts coprime numbers (or that it lacks of them), but it should show a property which is related to totient function, or is within its range.

The confusion is my fault. I should've said at the beginning that »coprime count« is »totient«, a fact that I myself later forgot. Then, 4 is a »coprime count« to 10 and a couple of other numbers, while 14 is »never a coprime count«, that is, a »netuještevno število«.

I'm going to go ahead and start using these terms in edit summaries and things like that, but not in articles yet. Anton Mravcek 20:23, 7 jan. 2005 (CET)

Yes and please use given terms just for sumamries. Andrej in our private conversation doubted about their linguistic validity.

Grammatical case

At 23 I have corrected your sentence from ~ rešitev to ~ rešitve since ending in Slovene in this instance demands this form. Then you've changed also at 35 and 47 but there it was OK and I've reverted back. So, if I summarize this sentence for some examples:

~ ima enačba x - φ(x) = n natanko 1 rešitev.

~ ima enačba x - φ(x) = n natanko 2 rešitvi.

~ ima enačba x - φ(x) = n natanko 3 rešitve.

~ ima enačba x - φ(x) = n natanko 4 rešitve.

~ ima enačba x - φ(x) = n natanko 5 rešitev.

~ ima enačba x - φ(x) = n natanko 6 rešitev.

...

~ ima enačba x - φ(x) = n natanko 102566 rešitev.

and so on

I guess now you understand these endings for this (forth case - četrti sklon) and also it is harder for you to distinguish such details. I wonder how good I am in English. Other cases would be:

1. 1 rešitev, 2. 1 rešitve, 3. 1 rešitvi, 4. 1 rešitev, 5. pri/o 1 rešitvi, 6. z 1 rešitvijo

1. 2 rešitvi, 2. 2 rešitev, 3. 2 rešitvama, 4. 2 rešitvi, 5. pri/o 2 rešitvah, 6. z 2 rešitvama

1. 3 rešitve, 2. 3 rešitev, 3. 3 rešitvam, 4. 3 rešitve, 5. pri/o 3 rešitvah, 6. s 3 rešitvami

1. 4 rešitve, 2. 4 rešitev, 3. 4 rešitvam, 4. 4 rešitve, 5. pri/o 4 rešitvah, 6. s 4 rešitvami (the same as for 3)

1. 5 rešitev, 2. 5 rešitev, 3. 5 rešitvam, 4. 5 rešitev, 5. pri/o 5 rešitvah, 6. s 5 rešitvami

and so on (see also Slovene Nouns). --xJaM 01:11, 8 jan. 2005 (CET)

All the talk about the Slovene dual case and I allowed myself to neglect paying attention to the other cases! Thanks for the explanation.

You're pretty good at English, at least written. Occasionally you use a slightly odd word order or forget an article ("an", "the") but these are very minor things. I don't know how good you're at spoken English.

And talking about spoken language, could you clarify one point for me: how is the word "v" pronounced (as in "je v Sloveniji")? I haven't seen anything in the Albretti book about it, while the English Wikipedia article says "The preposition "v" is always bound to the following word; however its phonetic realization follows the normal phonological rules for /v/." which just confused me more. Anton Mravcek 20:58, 10 jan. 2005 (CET)

Yes I know for the articles. I have to compel myself someday to write them correctly. And the odd word order is a fact that I think in Slovene, which has its own order, although I try to sort words in a proper way or to form the right sentence of course. For the word »v« in Slovene I would simply say that it is spoken like »v« in an English word very. I hope this helps you a bit. Yes, and sometimes we might find, specially in many dialects, that people pronounce »v« as (Slovene) »u«. Not English »u« [yu], (like in uberous) nor »u« [ó], (like in ugly), more like »'u'« in a word fool. --xJaM 21:08, 10 jan. 2005 (CET)

That helps. I find »v« a little hard to say (especially when the next word begins with a consonant) but at least now I know that's the correct way. Anton Mravcek 21:58, 10 jan. 2005 (CET)

P.S. Do you know a good classical station with Slovene DJs on the Web?

No, unfortunately I do not know for any. Yes, try to say »vključiti«, to turn on or »vzpostaviti«, to reestablish or »vbrizg« an injection, for instance :-).

Number names in "slovenščina"

Hi Anton! I've just corrected name of 119 , stodevetiinajst |--> stodevetnajst or even better sto devetnajst.

I can send you small aplication that convert number into name (just send me you mail). --AndrejJ 09:57, 17 jan. 2005 (CET)

Thanks. The form you give as "better," with sto devetnajst as two words, agrees with the book I'm studying, by Andrea Albretti. However, I notice XJam runs them all together, for example, 1729 and 5555. Anton Mravcek 18:19, 18 jan. 2005 (CET)

Well, actually our "language law" (Slovenski pravopis) says that numbers higher than 100 must be written apart:

• 5555: pet tisoč pet sto petinpetdeset,
• 1729: tisoč sedem sto devetindvajset.

For some technical reasons this rule can be ignored e.g. when numbers are written on bills. I'm note sure if this case is valid in Wikipedija? --AndrejJ 18:30, 18 jan. 2005 (CET)

Well, I guess I should also have to follow the SP's rules. I'll correct names for numbers higher than 100, then. --xJaM 20:26, 18 jan. 2005 (CET)

First 100 numbers

One to go (57 (število)), nice work! --AndrejJ 00:49, 27 feb. 2005 (CET)

Thanks. Now the real work begins: turning these stubs into full articles with smoothly flowing language. Anton Mravcek 17:17, 28 feb. 2005 (CET)

Here we are! Let's do it! :) --AndrejJ 17:33, 28 feb. 2005 (CET)

'Lychrelovo število'

Hi, Anton - me again. These numbers (Lychrel number) have some interesting properties, don't they. But problem is again a Slovene name. As it is written in English article they were named by Wade VanLandingham, but no explanation of the name itself is given. Is 'Lychrel' here a noun or an adjective, or perhaps even a surname of a certain person? --xJaM 20:57, 20 apr. 2005 (CEST)

xJam, lep pozdrav! It's always good to hear from you. I iterated a lot of numbers like that with pencil and paper, but didn't give a second thought to the name.

The name Lychrel does not appear to be universally accepted among mathematicians, it seems. Mathworld doesn't mention it once, preferring to call the concept 196-Algorithm instead, and (OEIS A023108) prefers to call them "Positive integers which apparently never result in a palindrome under repeated applications of the function f(x) = x + (x with digits reversed)", but it does give "Lychrel number" as an alternate name. I think Wade VanLandingham is alive, I'll drop him a line and ask him his thoughts on the matter. Anton Mravcek 03:19, 22 apr. 2005 (CEST)

Great. Until then I shall make an article at problem 196 and also I shall change a sentence Verjetno najmanjše Lychrelovo število (Probably the least Lychrel number) to Verjetno najmanjše število v problemu 196 (Probably the least number in the 196 problem). --xJaM 00:19, 23 apr. 2005 (CEST)