Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T17:38:25.277Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Methodological Reflections on Typologies for Numerical Notations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 April 2012

Theodore Reed Widom  and
Dirk Schlimm
Theodore Reed Widom
Affiliation:
McGill University E-mail: [email protected]
Dirk Schlimm
Affiliation:
McGill University E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Argument

Past and present societies world-wide have employed well over 100 distinct notational systems for representing natural numbers, some of which continue to play a crucial role in intellectual and cultural development today. The diversity of these notations has prompted the need for classificatory schemes, or typologies, to provide a systematic starting point for their discussion and appraisal. The present paper provides a general framework for assessing the efficacy of these typologies relative to certain desiderata, and it uses this framework to discuss the two influential typologies of Zhang & Norman and Chrisomalis. Following this, a new typology is presented that takes as its starting point the principles by which numerical notations represent multipliers (the principles of cumulation and cipherization), and bases (those of integration, parsing, and positionality). Many different examples show that this new typology provides a more refined classification of numerical notations than the ones put forward previously. In addition, the framework provided here can be used to assess typologies not only of numerical notations, but also of many other domains.

Type
Research Article
Information
Science in Context , Volume 25 , Issue 2 , June 2012 , pp. 155 - 195
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Biot, Édouard. 1839. “Notes sur la connaissance que les Chinois ont eue de la valeur de position des chiffres.” Journal Asiatique 8:497–502.Google Scholar
Boyer, Carl B. 1944. “Fundamental Steps in the Development of Numeration.” Isis 35 (2):153–168.Google Scholar
Chrisomalis, Stephen. 2003. “The Comparative History of Numerical Notation.” Ph.D. diss., McGill University.Google Scholar
Chrisomalis, Stephen. 2004. “A Cognitive Typology for Numerical Notation.” Cambridge Archaeological Journal 14 (1):37–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chrisomalis, Stephen. 2006. “Comparing Cultures and Comparing Processes: Diachronic Methods in Cross-Cultural Anthropology.” Cross-Cultural Research 40 (4):377–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chrisomalis, Stephen. 2009. “The Cognitive and Cultural Foundations of Numbers.” In The Oxford Handbook of the History of Mathematics, edited by Robson, Eleanor and Stedall, Jacqueline, 495–517. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Chrisomalis, Stephen. 2010. Numerical Notation: A Comparative History. Cambridge UK and New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Cruz, Helen, Hansjörg, Neth, and Schlimm, Dirk. 2010. “The Cognitive Basis of Arithmetic.” In PhiMSAMP: Philosophy of Mathematics: Sociological Aspects and Mathematical Practice, edited by Löwe, Benedikt and Müller, Thomas, 39–86. London: College Publications.Google Scholar
Dehaene, Stanislas. 1997. The Number Sense: How the Mind Creates Mathematics. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H. 1968. Anthropological Linguistics: an Introduction. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H. 1969. “Language Universals: a Research Frontier.” Science 166 (3904):473–478.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Greenberg, Joseph. 1974. Language Typology: a Historical and Analytic Overview. The Hague and Paris: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H. 1978. “Generalizations about Numeral Systems.” In Universals of Human Language, Vol. 3, edited by Greenberg, Joseph H., 249–295. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Guitel, Geneviève. 1966. “Classification hiérarchisée des numérations écrites.” Annales 21 (5):959–981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guitel, Geneviève. 1975. Histoire comparée des numérations écrites. Paris: Flammarion.Google Scholar
Hollings, Christopher. 2009. An Analysis of Nonpositional Numeral Systems. The Mathematical Intelligencer 31 (2):15–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ifrah, Georges. 1985. From One to Zero: a Universal History of Numbers, translated by Blair, Lowell. New York: Viking.Google Scholar
Kennedy, James G. 1981. “Arithmetic with Roman Numerals.” American Mathematical Monthly 88 (1):29–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lengnink, Katja and Schlimm, Dirk. 2010. “Learning and Understanding Numeral Systems: Semantic Aspects of Number Representations from an Educational Perspective.” In PhiMSAMP: Philosophy of Mathematics: Sociological Aspects and Mathematical Practice, edited by Löwe, Benedikt and Müller, Thomas, 235–264. London: College Publications.Google Scholar
Macbeth, Danielle. 2005. Frege's Logic. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Menninger, Karl. 1969. Number Words and Number Symbols. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Monod, Théodore. 1958. “Un nouvel alphabet ouest-africain: Le bété (Côte d'Ivoire).” Bulletin de l'Institut Français d'Afrique Noire, Série B, 20 (3–4):432–553.Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna. 2007. “What, if Anything, is Typology?” Linguistic Typology 11:231–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nickerson, Raymond S. 1988. “Counting, Computing, and the Representation of Numbers.” Human Factors 30 (2):181–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rotman, Brian. 1987. Signifying Nothing: The Semiotics of Zero. London: Macmillan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salzmann, Zdeněk. 1950. “A Method for Analyzing Numerical Systems.” Word 6:78–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saxe, Geoffrey B. 1981. “Body Parts as Numerals: A Developmental Analysis of Numeration among the Oksapmin in Papua New Guinea.” Child Development 52:306–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schlimm, Dirk and Hansjörg, Neth. 2008. “Modeling Ancient and Modern Arithmetic Practices: Addition and Multiplication with Arabic and Roman Numerals.” In Proceedings of the 30th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, edited by Sloutsky, Vladimir, Love, Brad, and McRae, Ken, 2007–2012. Austin TX: Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar
Schmandt-Besserat, Denise. 1980. “The Envelopes that Bear the First Writing.” Technology and Culture 21 (3):357–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stigler, James W. 1984. “‘Mental Abacus’: The Effect of Abacus Training on Chinese Children's Mental Calculation.” Cognitive Psychology 16:145–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, Jiajie and Norman, Donald A.. 1995. “A Representational Analysis of Numeration Systems.” Cognition 57 (3):217–295.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed