Probably the reason is that Roman numerals, esp. in
> their medieval versions, e.g. xx with iv written above for 80, do
> something that Indian/Arabic ones don't, which is to follow
> contemporary speech patterns (4 score; 500 less 3; one hundred
> and thirty four or whatever).
I would have thought that Arabic numerals had a very simple and
transparent way of writing one hundred and thirty four, namely 134.
Much more in tune with speech patterns than cxxxiv.
Oriens.
____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk
or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|