Complexity counts: global and local perspectives on Indo-Aryan numeral systems
This research addresses a linguistic typology problem for linguists and anthropologists, providing insights into the persistence of complex numeral systems, though it is incremental in extending existing typological frameworks.
This paper tackles the problem of understanding the complexity of numeral systems in Indo-Aryan languages, such as Hindi and Bengali, by developing cross-linguistic metrics to quantify complexity and showing that these languages have decisively more complex systems than the global average, with variations among them.
The numeral systems of Indo-Aryan languages such as Hindi, Gujarati, and Bengali are highly unusual in that unlike most numeral systems (e.g., those of English, Chinese, etc.), forms referring to 1--99 are highly non-transparent and are cannot be constructed using straightforward rules. As an example, Hindi/Urdu *ikyānve* `91' is not decomposable into the composite elements *ek* `one' and *nave* `ninety' in the way that its English counterpart is. This paper situates Indo-Aryan languages within the typology of cross-linguistic numeral systems, and explores the linguistic and non-linguistic factors that may be responsible for the persistence of complex systems in these languages. Using cross-linguistic data from multiple databases, we develop and employ a number of cross-linguistically applicable metrics to quantifies the complexity of languages' numeral systems, and demonstrate that Indo-Aryan languages have decisively more complex numeral systems than the world's languages as a whole, though individual Indo-Aryan languages differ from each other in terms of the complexity of the patterns they display. We investigate the factors (e.g., religion, geographic isolation, etc.) that underlie complexity in numeral systems, with a focus on South Asia, in an attempt to develop an account of why complex numeral systems developed and persisted in certain Indo-Aryan languages but not elsewhere. Finally, we demonstrate that Indo-Aryan numeral systems adhere to certain general pressures toward efficient communication found cross-linguistically, despite their high complexity. We call for this somewhat overlooked dimension of complexity to be taken seriously when discussing general variation in cross-linguistic numeral systems.