Japanese plurals

[Mark Davis ☕️]

Nobody is proposing that. If the language *doesn't* *require* a different
message for "abc {0} def" when {0} is "1" vs when {0} is "2" (for example),
then we would not distinguish 'one' from 'other'.

Note that this need not result in an increase in CLDR data; one thing that
we've done with the grammar data is to add scope parameters, so that we can
limit the data we collect to what is needed. So I'd already been thinking
about applying that to plural rules. That way, for example, if currencies
are invariant in the language (wrt plural categories) as they are in
Japanese, we set the scope to exclude anything but 'other' from data
gathering.

Mark


On Wed, Dec 1, 2021 at 4:01 PM Markus Scherer <markus.icu at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 1, 2021 at 3:48 PM Mark Davis ☕️ <mark at macchiato.com> wrote:
>
>> That's not our principle for the plural categories. In many languages the
>> contents of 'one' are already exactly 1.
>>
>> If the language really *requires* a different message for "abc {0} def"
>> when {0} is "1" vs when {0} is "2", then we need two plural categories
>> where one of them contains 1 (at least) and the other contains 2 (at least).
>>
>
> Except that we have the =1 mechanism for this specific case.
>
> My point is, surely Chinese and French and lots of other languages have
> words and phrases specific to an exact singular, but I don't think we want
> to split plural keyword "one" for every language to turn it into a keyword
> equivalent of =1.
>
> markus
>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://corp.unicode.org/pipermail/cldr-users/attachments/20211201/2a191e7b/attachment.htm>