• brsrklf@jlai.lu
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          2 days ago

          Is that a French stereotype I am not aware of?

          Because, I’ve got a bit of experience in teaching math, and I wish most kids in that class could speak math naturally.

          • teft@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            They count very weird. For example to say 87 in french you say four twenties seven (quatre vingt sept) 92 in french is four twenties twelve (quatre vingt douze).

                • TabbsTheBat@pawb.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  I lucked out living in a place with a completely logical numbering system thankfully :3… even english is slightly weird with 11 and 12 not following the -teen pattern (guessing a holdover for using dozens/base12)

                  • enkers@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    2 days ago

                    Eleven and twelve still do kinda follow base 10 rules. They literally mean “one left” (ain-lif) and “two left” (twa-lif) with the “over ten” being implied.

                    I’m not quite sure why we have different words for those two, though. Maybe when we added the 'teens, those two just sounded better than firsteen and seconteen?

            • brsrklf@jlai.lu
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              2 days ago

              Oh, it’s about that. It’s just leftover from an old base 20 counting system really. Kind of like how time is still using base 60 (though it’s kinda convenient for dividing), stuff like that.

              Really, English is not completely safe from that. Ask yourself why eleven to nineteen instead of, you know, ten-one, ten-two…

      • otp@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        2 days ago

        14 isn’t old, it’s not even legal age to buy cigarettes.

        I’ll do some weird math.

        The first computer game could be argued to have been released in 1950, and the first commercial video game was released in 1971. Let’s call it either 70 or 50 years ago.

        14 years is 20~28% of the entire history of video games.

        The first feature film came out in 1906; let’s call it 120 years old. So let’s calculate what 20~28% of this history of film is.

        20% of 120 years is 24 years, and 28% is 33.6, rounded to 34.

        So if you compare them by the “commercial video game vs. feature film” definition, a 14-year old game is like Beauty and the Beast, Hangin’ with the Homeboys, or Showdown in Little Tokyo.

        If you want to use the “youngest” ratio, then we can compare Skyrim to films that are just 24 years old, like Shrek, Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within, or Spy Kids.

        I dunno, I think 14 years old is an old game! Haha

        • CrazyLikeGollum@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          Sure, you could look at it that way, but an equally valid way to look at it would be based on human life spans.

          Average human life expectancy is 72 years. Which is, conveniently very close to the age of the oldest video game (an implementation of tic-tac-toe from 1950).

          Would you call a 14 year old human old? At that point they’d be ~20% of they way through their life.

          • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            2 days ago

            an equally valid way to look at it would be based on human life spans.

            We’re not talking about humans or their lifespans so no, that is not equally valid

            Else this 30 year old apple I have is just fine and not old at all, it’s not old til it’s closer to 72!