Declination is a change. Change in cases. And in addition - by numbers. The declension of the numerals provides rich food for exercise in classifications. Substantive declination, for example. Or an adjective. 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 never created an iron system of types of declensions for numerals. And we need landmarks in order to persuade any language digit without errors. They, these landmarks, are needed very much.
Conversation confuses us
“To a hundred-o-o-three-and-twenty three-and-and add fifteen,” the governess of the baby coaches. A teacher with red crusts is not aware of how composite quantitative numbers are inclined ? Why is that? The point is not only that knowledge is sometimes eroded, like the smell of strawberries. In oral speech, more and more often we do not take into account the rule of declination of composite quantitative numbers. “From three hundred and sixty-five days it is necessary to delete two hundred that disappeared in this dreary service.” Doesn't the ear cut? It seems to be not, everything is so. But let's fix the excellent governess and the unfortunate servant: we will add to one hundred (!) Thirty (!) Five (!), And cross out from three hundred (!) Sixty (!) Five.
Accounting approach
But it’s not necessary at all times to take a meaningful pause before the “digital” replica, painfully understanding how the composite quantitative numbers are inclined. We will figure it out once and for all with a composite declined digital. Simple and compound quantitative numerals are one and the same! How so? Yes so. We are not at the congress of morphologists. And not at accounting courses. We are talking about the features of declination of compound quantitative numbers. There are none of these features. Each component in the form of a numeral should be declined separately. This is the relationship of simple and compound quantitative numbers.
Souls and money - there is a difference
We learn about the life of the Primorye in the southern town. In total there are 314,453 inhabitants.
Nominative case. They live in abundance of three hundred (first numeral) fourteen (second) thousand (third) four hundred (fourth) fifty (fifth) three (sixth) city dwellers.
Genitive. Three hundred (1st numeral) fourteen (2nd) thousand (3rd) four hundred (4th) fifty (5th) three (6th) townspeople have prosperity.
Dative. Wealth came to three hundred (300) fourteen (14) thousand (1000) four hundred (400) fifty (50) three (3) city dwellers.
Accusative. For all components of the numerals, except the last one, it is the same as the nominative case. If the last numeral is “attached” to the animated noun, the accusative case copies the genitive. And if to the inanimate - nominative. The mayor will congratulate the three citizens, and spend three rubles.
Instrumental case. City Hall is proud of three hundred (three hundred) fourteen (fourteen) thousand (thousand) four hundred (four hundred) fifty (fifty) three (three) city dwellers.
Prepositional. City Hall, day and night, cares for three hundred (three hundred) fourteen (fourteen) thousand (thousand) four hundred (four hundred) fifty (fifty) three (three) townspeople.
So, the correct form of a composite quantitative numeral is the correct form of individual numerals. Whether it is the designation of our twenty-five years or the most astronomical numbers - there is no difference. Any numeral behaves independently, in whatever composition it may fall. Knowing the main thing, we remove from the agenda the question of how composite quantitative numbers are inclined. And ordinal - too?
One for all, or the last word
In composite ordinal numbers, all numerals behave in the same way as quantitative numbers. But for the "order" in all declensions, only one word is responsible - the last. It is the wagon in the whole echelon and is consistent with the noun. Only the last word changes. After a thousand first attempts, he succeeded. Attempts could have been 11 362. After eleven (11) thousand (1000) three hundred (300) sixty (60) second (!) Attempts everything worked out.
Why are the judges wrong
But back to the seemingly completed analysis of how composite quantitative numerals are inclined. We have one rule: each word in a line bends on its own. Hence the problem - the components of quantitative numerals do not stand in the front. This is only for ordinals - the perfect order. All - at attention. Except one, the last. It turns out that the conversation on how to incline composite quantitative numbers is still not over. Features and the rule to which these features are subordinate to, in the linguistic empire of numbers, every corporation, and sometimes - an individual entrepreneur.
The minister of Themis announces the decree: "The Minister shared the five hundred Tugriks with his assistants." No one will judge a judge for disrespect for the literary language. The audience will not scream in the magnificent hall: “Five hundred! Five hundred! ” And if he holds a speech (literally - holds a piece of paper) his 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. Mina under the numerals in the language lies in the ability to designate the number in numbers in written language. Those who write reports to superiors use this opportunity. And the bosses on the podium have to make a decision with lightning speed. Far from always true.
And the numerals stubbornly - by our conscious efforts - protect the tradition. And they take not the number, but the depth of time. We can blame them for “archaism,” but so far we are not able to offer something in return.
In order to present the whole picture of how composite quantitative numerals bow, we will study the behavior of all numerals by name. Well, almost by name.
One: what does the adjective have to do with it?
One barber works. One pan was lost. There is only one window. This is a nominative case. To clarify: the number is the only one; gender - a complete set. Compare: the barber masters, the saucepan is good, and the window is small. It is clear that this numeral has drawn its ending from another part of speech. At the adjective. And an adjective short.
Found one cabinetmaker in the whole city. We lost one galosh. They saw only one sun (for example, it’s happening on a planet that warms several suns). Let us again pay attention to the situation that we have already talked about. If the numeral is attached to the animated noun, it is transformed into the accusative case according to the genitive model. And with the inanimate design, everything is clear: the accusative is a copy of the nominative. If we were not looking for a cabinetry, but a loft-style wardrobe, we would say: "Here, we found one wardrobe." It’s not that the furniture is different styles, it’s in the category of animation. If we leave to the genitive case the cabinetmaker as an animated noun, then we see: endings, as in short adjectives.
We move on from case to case. Do not be lazy, do it yourself. Watch the endings. And you will see that they are the same as adjectives, but complete. We are children of the same time and one country (genitive). The grant was given to one writer and one artist (dative).
A similar picture is in the plural. Full adjectives 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 brief adjectives). At the exhibition, we met some onlookers (genitive). Airship tickets were given to one official (dative). With some hopes, we are still alive (instrumental). I’m just thinking about pennies (prepositional).
Why in the women's team do not command one and a half employees
We keep the account further. Two? No, one and a half.
The speaker at the podium, lulling the meeting with sales percentages (academic performance, GDP), prudently uses a fractional numeral instead of a deafening one and a half.
... This is half past one. Long gone one and a half. This is the origin of the word "one and a half". Of course, we do not divide the two in half, but stop exactly halfway, in the middle of the moment between the first and second. Why all this archaic? But to what. The word has two parts. Do they both change? Or not both? But first, let's compare one and a half kilometers and a half miles. The metric difference does not interest us, of course. For us, the ability of a word to change by gender is important. Male and middle - one and a half. Female - one and a half. All cases, except nominative and accusative, are one and a half. Easy to remember. But. You can give benefits to one and a half poor (dative). You can command one and a half employees (instrumental) 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 — not bulls, but cows. The above cases in the feminine gender (one and a half) are not used. "I ask about a month and a half of vacation." The same number of weeks will have to be requested somehow differently. And finally, it is clear that both parts of the word are changing. Sex - half (one and a half - one and a half). We will keep this in mind when dealing with the “one and a half” category above. One and a half hryvnia (nominative). One and a half hryvnia (the form of all cases, you can check).
Is it possible to use one and a half in composite numerals? Why not? One and a half thousand two (1502) rubles. Such is accuracy. Does one and a half always act as a steam locomotive? Is it possible to put these words in the second or even the last carriage? Let's try it. He is lacking for happiness two million and a half hundred subscribers (2 000 150). These are the whims. The main thing is that everything should be functional. If the conversation does not take care of syntagms, then in the latter case, the recipient may think that from 2 to 150 million subscribers are missing. In fact, the request is limited to a more modest amount.
A thousand or a thousand?
Only in the instrumental case is this variation possible. The actress 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 case with instrumental case shows that the word thousand is unlikely to finally go into the camp of nouns.
200 to 900
We bow both parts. We create combinations of numerals with the word 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 do not care about them, up to two hundred astronauts, three hundred rockets, four hundred suns, five hundred holes and nine hundred 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 (instrumental). But why do we care about thoughts about them, about two hundred astronauts, three hundred rockets, four hundred suns, five hundred holes and nine hundred aliens? (prepositional).
One hundred. Unit of account. Numeral. And she showed herself as a noun!
Anniversary
50. Endings, as in 5. The Ruler traveled around fifty countries and acquired fifty allies. We will do the same with all other numerals up to 80. 80? So, the reference point will be 8. Thought of eight penguins. Thought of eighty penguins. Or maybe eighty-eight. This is how compound quantitative numerals are formed; there are enough examples.
100, 90, 40. Very convenient. One single form for all cases (except nominative and accusative). By the age of forty, you think about a lot. And to ninety - about the small. In the latter case, be careful: in an unstressed ending you will not hear “a”. The difference is oh, only in the letter.
5 to 20
Take as a model any noun of the third declension. No salt. Fifteen coins are missing. We follow the stress. Eleven - emphasis based.
And now we again return to the “middle moment” between the first and second left somewhere far behind.
Two as well as three and four
Two. Well, we will “anatomize” the endings, although this is not at all an interesting occupation. Two astronauts and two suns. Two stars. We see two generic forms. One is for the male and middle. The second is for the female. This is a nominative case. In the accusative, everything will be the same. In addition to the already known nuance: with animated nouns we will use the form of the genitive case. Well, actually, try to get rid of the question “who?” When it comes to an animate subject. We can make two mistakes, but 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 wholeheartedly attached 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 (instrumental). The care of two horses, two cats, two fields and two apple trees knows no bounds (prepositional). Once again, recall the accusative case. The farmer watered two horses and processes two fields. He feeds two cats and fertilizes two apple trees.
As you can see, the analysis of the endings in this case does not lead to anything. Two, two. And case forms are the same.
In the case of three and four, we focus on the same model. Only instrumental can be of some difficulty. The farmer is proud of four objects.