<p>To put it bluntly, not really.</p>
<p>We already have a standard method for converting letters to numbers: Unicode. In Unicode, the capital &quot;A&quot; is the number 65, lowercase &quot;a&quot; is 97, a space is 32, the cuneiform sign AŠ is 73784, and so on. This is how computers work with text; it's how this message is being transmitted to your computer, how your web browser is looking up the right shapes to display it with, and so on. There used to be dozens of these standards, but now Unicode's pretty much universally won out.</p>
<p>What about for human use? Well, if people wanted to, they could write &quot;hello&quot; as &quot;0x68656c6c6f&quot; (the bytes that make up its Unicode encoding), but that's a lot harder for humans to read and doesn't really come with any benefits. We already have an encoding of the letter &quot;A&quot; that's easy for humans to read, and it's the letter &quot;A&quot;.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-05-12T14:40:28.737Z
I am proposing to my government (Kenya) that we adopt a Numerical number plate system. For example if a vehicle registration number is KUM 291 it be written as 11 21 13 291 this is why I am raising the issue
Nelson Njagi
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-05-12T16:34:03.300Z
@NelsonNjagi What would be the benefit of that? It just takes more space.
Draconis
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-05-14T16:25:34.423Z
Numbers streamline the data processing criteria to a more effective and efficient form. This is an assumption
Nelson Njagi
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-05-15T13:27:10.147Z
@NelsonNjagi it is an incorrect assumption. Letters are not significantly easier to process digitally and they make the system vastly easier for human users (e.g. a police officer entering a number plate in a form is less likely to enter a mistake entering `KUM 291` than `11 21 13 291`)
Tristan
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-05-19T22:35:48.483Z
@NelsonNjagi --- One issue is that in Kenya vehicle plates carry much more meta information than a simple string of numbers will allow. KUM seems to indicate a registrant living in Kisumu (regional code KU); GK indicates a federally plated vehicle; KN a Naval vehicle; CD for chartered diplomat. And I think it's cool that diplomatic tags are arranged in order of independence recognition (1CD being Germany). Part of the issue is that those letter codes become, in a sense, a kind of pictogram: the symbols "KAF" and "CG" themselves have meaning to anyone who knows the code.
elemtilas
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-05-11T22:56:21.553Z
2024-05-11T22:56:21.553Z
Draconis
<p>Last year on October I applied for a Guinness World Record where I proposed to write the Bible in numbers using a concept I refer to as the Universal Tongue. My proposal was declined because it didn't meet the breakable criteria.
The Universal Tongue is a concept where words are represented by numerical sequences that correspond to the position of each letter in the alphabet. For example, the word 'hello' can be written as 7, 5, 12, 12, 15, where each number corresponds to the position of the respective letter in the alphabet (H=7, E=5, L=12, O=15).</p>
<p>This numerical representation allows for a standardized and universal way of communicating words across different languages, as the numerical sequence remains consistent regardless of the language's alphabet or pronunciation. It can be particularly useful in cryptography, data encoding, or communication systems where a common and easily translatable format is required. Would this be considered for adoption globally?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-05-11T17:52:47.393Z
How does that "remain consistent regardless of the language's alphabet or pronunciation"? 7-5-12-12-15 is just as dependent on the English alphabet as HELLO is; a Spanish-speaker would instead say HOLA or 7-15-12-1, and a Mandarin-speaker would find both of them equally meaningless.
Draconis
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-05-11T19:05:08.793Z
Everyone would have to learn English then they learn the numerical tongue
Nelson Njagi
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-05-11T21:15:46.927Z
So what advantage does it have over the English alphabet that people already know?
Draconis
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-05-12T13:55:40.760Z
In a few years we could be speaking in one language if it is adopted globally just as in the times of Babel
Nelson Njagi
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-05-12T16:34:45.950Z
Why would using numbers help that at all? You said yourself that everyone learning English would be required first, at which point we already have one language.
Draconis
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-05-14T16:24:20.753Z
Words are heavy numbers are weighty. A rock is heavy, sand is weighty. To build a strong and firm house you need both rock and sand
Nelson Njagi
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-05-16T00:02:34.863Z
To the people who close-voted: I don't think this question is necessarily opinion-based. Even if the answer is no, that's still an objective answer.
Draconis
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-05-19T22:08:49.450Z
If everyone has to learn English (and to be fair, many people around the world already use English), why burden the system with a numeric alphabet? What you're proposing is, essentially, a spelling reform. The concept of spelling reform is broken, because it doesn't meet a need. You'd have to overcome the already useless nature of spelling reform and then you'd have to convince billions of individual English users that numbers are better than letters.
elemtilas
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-05-19T22:12:55.203Z
I think you also might be confusing *language* with *orthography*.  We would NOT actually be speaking one language just because of universal adoption of your numeric alphabet. The world will largely speak one language because it is useful and convenient to do so.  Your analogy of rock and sand doesn't make sense. English language, orthography and alphabet are already an integrated whole. We don't actually need to keep reinventing the wheel. We just have to let people learn how to use the wheel that already exists!
elemtilas
<language-change>
Would the Numerical Tongue be adapted?
# Would the Numerical Tongue be adapted?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2024-05-11)

Last year on October I applied for a Guinness World Record where I proposed to write the Bible in numbers using a concept I refer to as the Universal Tongue. My proposal was declined because it didn't meet the breakable criteria.
The Universal Tongue is a concept where words are represented by numerical sequences that correspond to the position of each letter in the alphabet. For example, the word 'hello' can be written as 7, 5, 12, 12, 15, where each number corresponds to the position of the respective letter in the alphabet (H=7, E=5, L=12, O=15).

This numerical representation allows for a standardized and universal way of communicating words across different languages, as the numerical sequence remains consistent regardless of the language's alphabet or pronunciation. It can be particularly useful in cryptography, data encoding, or communication systems where a common and easily translatable format is required. Would this be considered for adoption globally?

**Tags:** language-change

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: How does that "remain consistent regardless of the language's alphabet or pronunciation"? 7-5-12-12-15 is just as dependent on the English alphabet as HELLO is; a Spanish-speaker would instead say HOLA or 7-15-12-1, and a Mandarin-speaker would find both of them equally meaningless.  
> **username_0**: Everyone would have to learn English then they learn the numerical tongue  
> **username_1**: So what advantage does it have over the English alphabet that people already know?  
> **username_0**: In a few years we could be speaking in one language if it is adopted globally just as in the times of Babel  
> **username_1**: Why would using numbers help that at all? You said yourself that everyone learning English would be required first, at which point we already have one language.  
> **username_0**: Words are heavy numbers are weighty. A rock is heavy, sand is weighty. To build a strong and firm house you need both rock and sand  
> **username_1**: To the people who close-voted: I don't think this question is necessarily opinion-based. Even if the answer is no, that's still an objective answer.  
> **username_2**: If everyone has to learn English (and to be fair, many people around the world already use English), why burden the system with a numeric alphabet? What you're proposing is, essentially, a spelling reform. The concept of spelling reform is broken, because it doesn't meet a need. You'd have to overcome the already useless nature of spelling reform and then you'd have to convince billions of individual English users that numbers are better than letters.  
> **username_2**: I think you also might be confusing *language* with *orthography*.  We would NOT actually be speaking one language just because of universal adoption of your numeric alphabet. The world will largely speak one language because it is useful and convenient to do so.  Your analogy of rock and sand doesn't make sense. English language, orthography and alphabet are already an integrated whole. We don't actually need to keep reinventing the wheel. We just have to let people learn how to use the wheel that already exists!  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2024-05-11. Score: 6

To put it bluntly, not really.

We already have a standard method for converting letters to numbers: Unicode. In Unicode, the capital "A" is the number 65, lowercase "a" is 97, a space is 32, the cuneiform sign AŠ is 73784, and so on. This is how computers work with text; it's how this message is being transmitted to your computer, how your web browser is looking up the right shapes to display it with, and so on. There used to be dozens of these standards, but now Unicode's pretty much universally won out.

What about for human use? Well, if people wanted to, they could write "hello" as "0x68656c6c6f" (the bytes that make up its Unicode encoding), but that's a lot harder for humans to read and doesn't really come with any benefits. We already have an encoding of the letter "A" that's easy for humans to read, and it's the letter "A".

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: I am proposing to my government (Kenya) that we adopt a Numerical number plate system. For example if a vehicle registration number is KUM 291 it be written as 11 21 13 291 this is why I am raising the issue  
> **username_1**: @username_0 What would be the benefit of that? It just takes more space.  
> **username_0**: Numbers streamline the data processing criteria to a more effective and efficient form. This is an assumption  
> **username_3**: @username_0 it is an incorrect assumption. Letters are not significantly easier to process digitally and they make the system vastly easier for human users (e.g. a police officer entering a number plate in a form is less likely to enter a mistake entering `KUM 291` than `11 21 13 291`)  
> **username_2**: @username_0 --- One issue is that in Kenya vehicle plates carry much more meta information than a simple string of numbers will allow. KUM seems to indicate a registrant living in Kisumu (regional code KU); GK indicates a federally plated vehicle; KN a Naval vehicle; CD for chartered diplomat. And I think it's cool that diplomatic tags are arranged in order of independence recognition (1CD being Germany). Part of the issue is that those letter codes become, in a sense, a kind of pictogram: the symbols "KAF" and "CG" themselves have meaning to anyone who knows the code.  

---

