Declination is change. Case change. Plus, the numbers. Declension of numerals provides rich food for exercises in classifications. Substantive declension, for example. Or adjectival. Here you can not do without immersion in the world of phonetics, where it is easy to get lost in search of coincidences of inflections. Linguists have not created an iron system of declension types for numerals. And we need guidelines in order to incline any language figure without errors. They, these landmarks, are very much needed.
Talking confuses us
"To a hundred-o-o-three-and-twenty three-and-and add fifteen," the baby's governess trains. The teacher with red crusts does not know how compound cardinal numbers decline? Why is that? It's not just that knowledge sometimes disappears like the smell of strawberries. In oral speech, we more and more often do not take into account the rule of declension of compound cardinal numbers. “Out of three hundred and sixty-five days, two hundred must be crossed out, which were lost on this drearyservice." Does your ear hurt? It seems to be no, that's all. But let's correct the excellent governess and the unfortunate servant: we will add to one hundred (!) Thirty (!) Five (!), And delete from three hundred (!) Sixty (!) Five.
Non-accounting approach
But it is not necessary every time to make a meaningful pause before the "digital" remark, painfully thinking how compound cardinal numbers decline. Let's deal once and for all with the composite declinable digit. Simple and compound cardinal numbers are one and the same! How so? Yes so. We're not at the congress of morphologists. And not in an accounting course. We are talking about the features of the declension of compound cardinal numbers. Them, these features, and no. Each component in the form of a numeral must be declined separately. This is the relationship between simple and compound cardinal numbers.
Souls and money - there is a difference
Learn about the life of Primorye people in the southern town. In total, it has 314,453 inhabitants.
Nominative case. Three hundred (first numeral) fourteen (second) thousand (third) four hundred (fourth) fifty (fifth) three (sixth) citizens live in prosperity.
Genitive case. Three hundred (1st numeral) fourteen (2nd) thousand (3rd) four hundred (4th) fifty (5th) three (6th) townspeople have prosperity.
Dative. Prosperity came to three hundred (that's 300) fourteen (14) thousand (1000) four hundred (400) fifty (50) three (3) citizens.
Accusativecase. For all constituent numerals, except for the last one, it is the same as the nominative case. If the last numeral is “attached” to an animate noun, the accusative case copies the genitive. And if to the inanimate - nominative. The mayor will congratulate three citizens and spend three rubles.
The instrumental case. The City Hall is proud of three hundred (three hundred) fourteen (fourteen) thousand (thousand) four hundred (four hundred) fifty (fifty) three (three) citizens.
Prepositional case. The Mayor’s Office takes care of three hundred (three hundred) fourteen (fourteen) thousand (one thousand) four hundred (four hundred) fifty (fifty) three (three) citizens day and night.
So, the correct form of a compound cardinal number is the correct form of individual numbers. Whether it is the designation of our twenty-five years or the most astronomical numbers - there is no difference. Any numeral behaves independently, no matter what composition it falls into. Knowing the main thing, we remove from the agenda the question of how compound cardinal numbers decline. Ordinals too?
One for all, or the last word
In compound ordinal numbers, all numbers behave the same as cardinal numbers. But for the "order" in all declensions, only one word is responsible - the last. It is the last car in the entire echelon that agrees with the noun. Only the last word is changed. After the thousand and first attempt, he succeeded. There could have been 11 attempts362. After eleven (11) thousand (1000) three hundred (300) sixty (60) second (!) attempts, everything worked out.
Why judges make mistakes
But let's get back to the seemingly completed analysis of how compound cardinal numbers decline. We have one rule: each word in the line is inclined by itself. Hence the problem - the constituent cardinal numbers do not stand in front. This is only for ordinal numbers - the ideal order. Everyone is at attention. Except one last one. It turns out that the conversation about how to decline compound cardinal numbers has not yet ended. Every corporation, and sometimes even an individual entrepreneur, has features and the rule to which these features are subject in the linguistic empire of numbers.
Servant of Themis announces the decree: "The minister shared five hundred tugriks with his assistants." No one will condemn a judge for disrespect for the literary language. The audience in the majestic hall will not shout: “Five hundred! Five hundred!" And if he is holding a speech (literally - holding a piece of paper), the face is more important … "Guys, with our five hundred kilograms of waste paper, we will win the competition!" These are the words of the teacher. The mine for numerals in the language is based on the ability to indicate the number of numbers in written speech. Those who write reports to superiors use this opportunity. And the bosses on the podium have to make decisions with lightning speed. Not always true.
Anumerals stubbornly - by our conscious efforts - protect the tradition. And they take not by number, but by the depth of time. We can blame them for being "archaic", but we are not yet able to offer something in return.
To get the whole picture of how compound cardinal numbers decline, let's study the behavior of all numbers by name. Well, almost by name.
One: What's with the adjective?
One barber works. One pot was lost. There is only one window. This is the nominative case. Let's clarify: the number is the only one; genus - complete set. Compare: the barber is skilled, the saucepan is good, but the window is small. It is clear that this numeral took its ending from another part of speech. At the adjective. And adjective short.
Found one cabinetmaker in the whole city. Lost one boot. We saw only one sun (let's say it takes place on a planet that is warmed by several suns). Let's look at the situation we've already discussed. If the numeral is attached to an animate noun, it is transformed into the accusative case according to the model of the genitive. And with an inanimate construction, everything is clear: the accusative is a copy of the nominative. If we were looking not for a cabinetmaker, but for a loft-style wardrobe, we would say: “Here, we found one wardrobe.” The point is not that the furniture is of different styles, the point is in the category of animation. If we leave the genitive case with the cabinetmaker as an animate noun, then we see: endings, like short adjectives.
Let's move on from case to case. Don't be lazy, do iton one's own. Watch for endings. And you will see that they are the same as adjectives, but complete. We are children of the same time and one country (parental). The grant was given to one writer and one artist (dative).
A similar picture in the plural. Full adjectives have extended their influence to all cases of the numeral "number one", except for the nominative and accusative, where the influence of the short adjective is observed. Notice how the base softens! Yes, there are only mistakes … (nominative, analogy with short adjectives). At the exhibition, we met some onlookers (parental). Tickets for the airship were given to one officials (dative). By hope alone we are still alive (creative). I only think about pennies (prepositional).
Why don't they command one and a half employees in the women's team
We keep counting. Two? No, one and a half.
The podium speaker, lulling the meeting with percentages of sales (graduation, GDP), wisely uses a fractional number instead of a deafening one and a half.
… It's half past one. Long gone half a half. This is the origin of the word "one and a half". Of course, we do not halve the two, but stop exactly half way, in the middle of the moment between the first and second. Why all this archaism? And here's what. The word has two parts. Do they both change? Or not both? But first, let's compare one and a half kilometers and one and a half miles. The metric difference does not interest us, of course. For usthe ability of a word to change by gender is important. Male and medium - one and a half. Female - one and a half. All cases, excluding the nominative and accusative, are one and a half. Easy to remember. But. You can give benefits to one and a half poor people (dative). You can command one and a half employees (creative) in the workshop. You can take care of one and a half bulls on the farm. However, nothing will come of it, they receive benefits and work in the woman’s workshop, and on the farm there are not bulls, but cows. The cases mentioned above in the feminine gender (one and a half) are not used. "I'm asking for a month and a half vacation." You will have to ask for the same number of weeks in some other way. And finally, it is clear that both parts of the word are changing. Paul - semi (one and a half - one and a half). Let's keep this in mind when dealing with "one and a half" ranks higher. One and a half hryvnia (nominative). One and a half hryvnia (the form of all cases, you can check).
Can one and a half be used in compound numbers? Why not? One and a half thousand two (1502) rubles. Such is the accuracy. Does one and a half always act as a locomotive? Is it possible to seat these words in the second or even the last carriage? Let's try. He lacks two million and a half hundred subscribers (2,000,150) for happiness. These are the whims. The main thing is that everything is functional. If syntagmas are not taken care of in a conversation, then in the latter case, the addressee may think that there are not enough from 2 to 150 million subscribers. In fact, the request is limited to a more modest amount.
A thousand or a thousand?
Only possible in instrumental casethis variability. The artist was presented with a thousand bouquets (=a thousand bouquets). In all other cases, we act by analogy with any noun of the first declension. For example, spring. But the instrumental case shows that the word thousand is unlikely to finally pass into the camp of nouns.
From 200 to 900
We decline both parts. We create combinations of numerals with the word one hundred - as with a noun.
Here they are, two hundred astronauts, three hundred rockets, four hundred suns, five hundred holes and nine hundred aliens (nominative). We don't care about them, 200 astronauts, 300 rockets, 400 suns, 500 holes, and 900 aliens (genitive). We have no reason to be grateful to them, two hundred astronauts, three hundred rockets, four hundred suns, five hundred holes and nine hundred aliens (dative). We should not be interested in them, two hundred astronauts, three hundred rockets, four hundred suns, five hundred holes and nine hundred aliens (creative). But why do we care about them, about 200 astronauts, 300 rockets, 400 suns, 500 holes, and 900 aliens? (prepositional).
One hundred. Account unit. Numerals. And she showed herself as a noun!
Anniversary
50. Endings, as in 5. The ruler traveled about fifty countries and acquired fifty allies. We will do the same with all other numbers up to 80. 80? So, the reference point will be 8. I thought about eight penguins. I thought about eighty penguins. Or maybe all eighty-eight. This is how composite quantitativenumerals, examples are enough.
100, 90, 40. Very comfortable. One and only form for all cases (except nominative and accusative). By the age of forty, you think about many things. And by ninety - about the small. In the latter case, be careful: you won’t hear “a” in an unstressed ending. The difference o-a is only in writing.
From 5 to 20
Let's take as a model any noun of the third declension. No s alt. Fifteen coins are missing. We follow the accent. Eleven - accent based.
And here we are again returning to the "middle moment" left somewhere far behind between the first and second.
Two, as well as three and four
Two. Well, let's "anatomize" the endings, although this is not at all an interesting exercise. Two astronauts and two suns. Two stars. We see two generic forms. One - for male and medium. The second is for women. This is the nominative case. In the accusative, everything will be the same. In addition to the already well-known nuance: with animate nouns, we will use the genitive case form. Well, in fact, try to get rid of the question “who?” when it comes to an animated object. We can make two mistakes, but we rely on two comrades.
Other cases. A farmer cannot imagine life without two horses, two cats, two fields and two apple trees (genitive). Yes, he is attached with all his soul to two horses, two cats, two fields and two apple trees (dative). He is proud of two horses, two cats, two fields and two apple trees (creative). His concern for two horses, two cats, two fields and two apple trees (prepositional) knows no bounds. Let's look at the accusative case again. A farmer waters two horses and cultivates two fields. He feeds two cats and fertilizes two apple trees.
As you can see, the analysis of endings in this case does not lead to anything. Two, two. And the case forms are the same.
In the case of three and four, we focus on the same model. Only the instrumental case can present some difficulty. The farmer is proud of four objects.
