SumerianGrammar

NUMERALS 65
Note: In view of 50 = 40 + 10, one might venture an evolution *ni“-u 20+10
> *(n)u“u. But an independent word is possible as well. For independent 30 cf.,
e.g., Turkish otuz.
40: [nimin], [nìn]: Powell 1971, 48, CAD E 255 erbà lex. No references
are available before the 1st mill.
[nimin], glossed ni-mìn, ni-mi-in, ni-in, may be explained as a
reduced form of *[ni“-min] “two twenties”.
50: [ninnû], Powell 1971, 49; CAD ›, 81 ¢am“à lex.
[ninnû], glossed ni-/ni-in-/nin-nu-u is a short form for *[ni(“)min-u]
“forty + ten”. No references are available before the 1st mill.
Note: ninnû (not “ninnu”, pace Edzard 1997 passim in “Eninnu”) is certainly a
far shot from the contemporary—and virtually unknown—pronunciation of Nin-
Girsu’s ª ziggurat complex at ª Girsu, é-ninnû “50 houses” during the 24th to 21st
centuries B.C.
60: [∞ge“(d)]. The reading of 60 was definitely settled by Steinkeller
1979, 176–87. For lex. evidence see Powell 1971, 50–53; CAD ”/3,
380 “u“i lex.
Whereas multiples of 60 have been glossed, e.g., 120 = ∞ge“-min,
we do not know how 61, 62 etc. were pronounced. It is hardly possible
in a society permeated with calculation and accountancy, that
62 *∞ge“+min “sixty (plus) two” and *∞gé“-min “two sixties” should
have been homophonous.
600: [∞ge“(d)u] “ten sixties”. Again, we may ask how 600 was distinguished
in fast speech from 60 + 10 = 70.
Akkadian had an individual word for 600, nèru of unknown origin,
remembered by Greek n∞row.
600 became a new basic number so that 1200 was *∞ge“(d)u-min
“two six-hundreds”.
Note: Let it be asked how 2002 (3 × 600 + 3 × 60 + 22) was pronounced. Was
it something close to *[∞ge“(d)u-e“ ∞ge“-e“ ni“-min]
3600: [“ar] “ár “circle” represents both the concrete figure and the
“myriad”. It was borrowed by Akkadian as “àr and, finally, by Greek
as sãrow. See Powell 1971, 78; CAD ”/2, 36.
36,000: [“aru] is spelled ”ÁR × U until at least Ur III and later on
”ÁR.U.