krtisfranks wrote:
> nor do I understand how the first letter was chosen, nor why you
stopped where you did.

I stopped at twenty-one as base twenty is the second most common number
base cross-linguistically if we ignore the hybrid base vigesimal-decimal
which is a bit more common than pur vigesimal (
https://wals.info/chapter/131 ), so this would make Lojban a little more
culturally neutral; having a digit for twenty and not just stopping at
nineteen makes the declaration of application of base twenty (e.g. with
ju'u more convenient (otherwise you need to say "in base ten × 2" or so,
unless you decide that radix declarations are always in base ten, which
isn't culturally neutral). But I think adding a digit for twenty-one was a
simple mistake of me. :)
But if going up to base twenty-four is desirable, we may add a few more in
accordance to the set pattern.

Comment #6: Re: Pattern

Ilmen (Fri Nov 27 10:20:09 2020)

s/of me/of mine