How confusing is it when a script's numerals are also letters?
For example, Latin language and Roman numerals. Are people likely to mistake numbers like ID (499) or VIM (994) for words, or is it always clear enough what's what from context? I think Hebrew, Braille, and maybe Greek also do this, though i'm not as familiar with those scripts as with Latin.
I ask because i'm making a conlang and having a little trouble coming up with enough letters, let alone numerals too. Reusing letters would be helpful and probably not confusing if i make sure that numbers are never pronouncable as letters, but making this easy to read is important to me.
ℕ𝕖𝕞𝕠 - 2w
It's usually clear from context, and also allows for some hilarious number puns.
7
FishFace - 2w
I believe 499 would have been written CDXCIX. 994 should be written CMXCIV. You only use a single letter prefix to subtract (hence VIii not IIX) and you only use the two symbols prior to the one you're subtracting from, so you can subtract C or D from M but not X or VI.
This kept complexity of parsing down but also produced fewer forms that could be confused with real words!
7
Lvxferre [he/him] - 2w
Besides context, like Nemo said, sequences of letters that are legit for numbers are often invalid for common words. For example, in Latin you'll never see words with "MC" (because */mk/ is phonotactically forbidden), and yet you'll see it for plenty numbers. Or "III", it pops up all the time for numbers but almost never for actual words.
On the conlanging part: if you're using an alphabet, and your phonotactics prevent consonant-only words (pretty common restriction), you can ensure the numbers are obvious as numbers by using only consonants. Another alternative would be to create one grapheme to prefix numbers with; like, instead of writing "ID" you'd write "#ID".
3
IndigoGolem - 2w
Most consonant-only syllables are forbidden, so i think i will use the non-syllabic consonants as numerals.
2
Eccentric @sh.itjust.works - 2w
There isn't really a scientific measure of how confusing something is linguistically that I am aware of. As you and other people have pointed out, there are plenty of languages that don't differentiate orthographically between numbers and letters. It's like asking whether people will confuse read and read. Yes, they probably will in some cases, but on some level speakers understand that these words are written identically and that you require context to figure it out. So they would know the difference much more often than not
2
Mechanismatic - 2w
You might follow the pattern of braille and have a prefix symbol that indicates the following letters are numbers.
⠼ functions like a number or hashtag symbol in front of letters A - J to indicate they're to be read as numbers, 1 - 9 & 0, not letters.
IndigoGollum in linguistics
How confusing is it when a script's numerals are also letters?
For example, Latin language and Roman numerals. Are people likely to mistake numbers like ID (499) or VIM (994) for words, or is it always clear enough what's what from context? I think Hebrew, Braille, and maybe Greek also do this, though i'm not as familiar with those scripts as with Latin.
I ask because i'm making a conlang and having a little trouble coming up with enough letters, let alone numerals too. Reusing letters would be helpful and probably not confusing if i make sure that numbers are never pronouncable as letters, but making this easy to read is important to me.
It's usually clear from context, and also allows for some hilarious number puns.
I believe 499 would have been written CDXCIX. 994 should be written CMXCIV. You only use a single letter prefix to subtract (hence VIii not IIX) and you only use the two symbols prior to the one you're subtracting from, so you can subtract C or D from M but not X or VI.
This kept complexity of parsing down but also produced fewer forms that could be confused with real words!
Besides context, like Nemo said, sequences of letters that are legit for numbers are often invalid for common words. For example, in Latin you'll never see words with "MC" (because */mk/ is phonotactically forbidden), and yet you'll see it for plenty numbers. Or "III", it pops up all the time for numbers but almost never for actual words.
On the conlanging part: if you're using an alphabet, and your phonotactics prevent consonant-only words (pretty common restriction), you can ensure the numbers are obvious as numbers by using only consonants. Another alternative would be to create one grapheme to prefix numbers with; like, instead of writing "ID" you'd write "#ID".
Most consonant-only syllables are forbidden, so i think i will use the non-syllabic consonants as numerals.
There isn't really a scientific measure of how confusing something is linguistically that I am aware of. As you and other people have pointed out, there are plenty of languages that don't differentiate orthographically between numbers and letters. It's like asking whether people will confuse read and read. Yes, they probably will in some cases, but on some level speakers understand that these words are written identically and that you require context to figure it out. So they would know the difference much more often than not
You might follow the pattern of braille and have a prefix symbol that indicates the following letters are numbers. ⠼ functions like a number or hashtag symbol in front of letters A - J to indicate they're to be read as numbers, 1 - 9 & 0, not letters.