or five and four tens in German.  But the general method is the same the world over, presenting us with nothing but local variations, which are, relatively speaking, entirely unimportant.  With this fact in mind, we can cease to wonder at the small number of simple numerals in any language.  It might, indeed, be queried, why do any languages, English and German, for example, have unusual compounds for 11 and 12?  It would seem as though the regular method of compounding should begin with 10 and 1, instead of 10 and 3, in any language using a system with 10 as a base.  An examination of several hundred numeral scales shows that the Teutonic languages are somewhat exceptional in this respect.  The words eleven and twelve are undoubtedly combinations, but not in the same direct sense as thirteen, twenty-five, etc.  The same may be said of the French onze, douze, treize, quatorze, quinze, and seize, which are obvious compounds, but not formed in the same manner as the numerals above that point.  Almost all civilized languages, however, except the Teutonic, and practically all uncivilized languages, begin their direct numeral combinations as soon as they have passed their number base, whatever that may be.  To give an illustration, selected quite at random from among the barbarous tribes of Africa, the Ki-Swahili numeral scale runs as follows:[53]

   1. moyyi,
   2. mbiri,
   3. tato,
   4. ena,
   5. tano,
   6. seta,
   7. saba,
   8. nani,
   9. kenda,
  10. kumi,
  11. kumi na moyyi,
  12. kumi na mbiri,
  13. kumi na tato,
  etc.

The words for 11, 12, and 13, are seen at a glance to signify ten-and-one, ten-and-two, ten-and-three, and the count proceeds, as might be inferred, in a similar manner as far as the number system extends.  Our English combinations are a little closer than these, and the combinations found in certain other languages are, in turn, closer than those of the English; as witness the once, 11, doce, 12, trece, 13, etc., of Spanish.  But the process is essentially the same, and the law may be accepted as practically invariable, that all numerals greater than the base of a system are expressed by compound words, except such as are necessary to establish some new order of unit, as hundred or thousand.

In the scale just given, it will be noticed that the larger number precedes the smaller, giving 10 + 1, 10 + 2, etc., instead of 1 + 10, 2 + 10, etc.  This seems entirely natural, and hardly calls for any comment whatever.  But we have only to consider the formation of our English “teens” to see that our own method is, at its inception, just the reverse of this.  Thirteen, 14, and the remaining numerals up to 19 are formed by prefixing the smaller number to the base; and it is only when we pass 20 that we return to the more direct and obvious method