515
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] doggle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 day ago

So Thai is the current meta

[-] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 20 points 2 days ago

Cowards left out Navajo.

[-] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago

Wonder how Thai is the zipfile of languages.

[-] acchariya@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago

It is multiplexed with five tones and a variety of different registers to signify relationship, status, and variable interplay between the two based on situation.

  • University Thai language learner, linguist, and professional Thai reading, writing, speaking in Thailand for several years
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] lugal@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Syllables can vary in length. Japanese has very short syllables while English has rather long ones. Counting phonemes would make more sense

[-] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 20 points 2 days ago

As someone who speaks both French and English, I'm surprised to see French as leading "information density" language. Most French terms have been incorporated into English. Language tends to be behind on technology terms. Language doesn't have any noticeable difference in short syllable common words to English. It also seems to me that French speakers have an easier time in being vague. I have the impression that English is more precise.

[-] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 12 points 2 days ago

Looking at the two curves, it looks like they are pretty close but French edges out English because of the speed it's spoken at.

Even when it was fresh in my mind, I was never able to follow French tv because they just go so fast.

[-] untorquer@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Both were massive empires. Makes sense that imperialism would put selective pressure on language. Historically you're either limited in words by space on a paper or what can be easily repeated by messengers.

[-] mtchristo@lemm.ee 2 points 2 days ago

I feel like the multitude of tenses in French help with being more precise.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 days ago

I had the same feeling. I honestly just feel like English is a junk drawer of depth borrowing various languages, but maybe average speakers don't try to dig deep into it?

[-] WoahWoah@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

In most cases, being vague requires more informational transfer. To be vague but still connected to whatever is the signified, you need to give more information around the idea rather than simply stating the idea. Think about being vague about how you feel versus being blunt about it.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 111 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Poor Thai down there at the bottom, speaking slowly and transferring information slowly.

Thai, the PNY USB stick of languages, apparently.

[-] errer@lemmy.world 22 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Actually fewer syllables per second is good, means you’re spending less effort speaking. It’s the ratio of information/syllables you want to maximize. Which means German/English/Mandarin/Vietnamese are roughly on par as the most “efficient” languages.

[-] modeler@lemmy.world 11 points 3 days ago

Some languages have fewer vowel sounds while others have an insane number (in Europe that would be Danish).

Thai has a lot, so speakers need to speak more slowly so the listener has time to distinguish words. But it also means that you can have more words per syllable.

It's not about efficiency per se - it's data and error correction

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] CptEnder@lemmy.world 22 points 3 days ago

LMFAO PNY USB that's poetic

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] nialv7@lemmy.world 45 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

I am pretty skeptical about these results in general. I would like to see the original research paper, but they usually

  1. write the text to be read in English, then translate them into the target languages.
  2. recurit test participants from ~~US~~ western university campuses.

And then there's the question of how do you measure the amount of information conveyed in natural languages using bits...

Yeah, the results are mostly likely very skewed.

[-] nialv7@lemmy.world 24 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

So I did a quick pass through the paper, and I think it's more or less bullshit. To clarify, I think the general conclusion (different languages have similar information densities) is probably fine. But the specific bits/s numbers for each language are pretty much garbage/meaningless.

First of all, speech rates is measured in number of canonical syllables, which is a) unfair to non-syllabic languages (e.g. (arguably) Japanese), b) favours (in terms of speech rate) languages that omit syllables a lot. (like you won't say "probably" in full, you would just say something like "prolly", which still counts as 3 syllables according to this paper).

And the way they calculate bits of information is by counting syllable bigrams, which is just.... dumb and ridiculous.

[-] WoahWoah@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Alright, but dismissing the study as “pretty much bullshit" based on a quick read-through seems like a huge oversimplification. Using canonical syllables as a measure is actually a widely accepted linguistic standard, designed precisely to make fair comparisons across languages with different structures, including languages like Japanese. It’s not about unfairly favoring any language but creating a consistent baseline, especially when looking at large, cross-linguistic patterns.

And on the syllable omission point, like “probably” vs. “prolly," I mean, sure, informal speech varies, but the study is looking at overall trends in speech rate and information density, not individual shortcuts in casual conversation. Those small variations certainly don’t turn the broader findings into bullshit.

As for the bigram approach, it’s a reasonable proxy to capture information density. They’re not trying to recreate every phonological or grammatical nuance; that would be way beyond the scope and would lose sight of the larger picture. Bigrams offer a practical, statistically valid method for comparing across languages without having to delve into the specifics of every syllable sequence in each language.

This isn’t about counting every syllable perfectly but showing that despite vast linguistic diversity, there’s an overarching efficiency in how languages encode information. The study reflects that and uses perfectly acceptable methods to do so.

[-] nialv7@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Well I did clarify I agree that the overarching point of this paper is probably fine...

widely accepted linguistic standard

I am not a linguist so apologise for my ignorance about how things are usually done. (Also, thanks for educating me.) But on the other hand just because it is the accepted way doesn't mean it is right in this case. Especially when you consider the information rate is also calculated from syllables.

syllable bigrams

Ultimately this just measures how quickly the speaker can produce different combinations of sounds, which is definitely not what most people would envision when they hear "information in language". For linguists who are familiar with the methodology, this might be useful data. But the general public will just get the wrong idea and make baseless generalisations - as evidenced by comments under this post. All in all, this is bad science communication.

[-] WoahWoah@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

But the general public will just get the wrong idea and make baseless generalisations - as evidenced by comments under this post. All in all, this is bad science communication.

Perhaps, but to be clear, that's on The Economist, not the researchers or scholarship. Your criticisms are valid to point out, but they aren't likely to be significant enough to change anything meaningful in the final analysis. As far as the broad conclusions of the paper, I think the visualization works fine.

What you're asking for in terms of methods that will capture some of the granularity you reference would need to be a separate study. And that study would probably not be a corrective to this paper. Rather, it would serve to "color between the lines" that this study establishes.

[-] Firoaren@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 days ago

I take your point without complaint, but I still think you're an alien for saying "prolly"

I mean, probs. It's right there. Use that if you have to

load more comments (1 replies)

This conjecture explains the results surprisingly well. If the original was written in French, which then got translated to English, which was then used as the basis of translation for the other languages that would explain the results entirely.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Dkarma@lemmy.world 12 points 2 days ago

I always thought that English was an efficient language.

[-] teft@lemmy.world 53 points 3 days ago

This was one of the weirdest things I had to learn when I was learning spanish. The sounds are much faster but the information density was similar. For me as an english native speaker it felt like I was listening to a machine gun at first. Eventually I trained my ear and now both languages sound the same speed.

[-] A_Union_of_Kobolds@lemmy.world 19 points 3 days ago

This is also why, to me, rapidly spoken natural Spanish and Japanese sound oddly similar if I hear it out of "the corner" of my ear, so to speak.

Which is funny cause I kinda speak Spanish lol

[-] _stranger_@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago

I recently had a conversation with a native Spanish speaker who lived in Japan and spoke Japanese fairly fluently. He said the exact same thing, it was surprising how similar they can be in this regard

[-] bradboimler@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

Spanish and Japanese use the same sounds. For the most part, anyway; there are probably a few exceptions. This was unexpected and utterly blew my mind as a native Spanish speaker when I took Japanese lessons.

Take the longest, most complicated Japanese word. Write it out in romaji (Latin letters). And ask a native Spanish speaker to pronounce it. One who knows nothing of Japanese. They'll pronounce it pretty much correctly. I was fascinated.

[-] HonoraryMancunian@lemmy.world 26 points 3 days ago

So if I'm reading this right, French (closely followed by English) tends to convey the most info per unit time?

[-] CluckN@lemmy.world 13 points 3 days ago

Yes but they also utilize smell.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] ContrarianTrail@lemm.ee 29 points 3 days ago

In Finnish, I can simply ask, "Juoksenneltaisiinko?" whereas in English, I have to say, "Should we run around aimlessly?"

[-] Nomecks@lemmy.ca 21 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Traipse?

That's the full sentence asking if you want to run around aimlessly.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] Jumpingspiderman@reddthat.com 4 points 2 days ago

Is that a common question to be asked in Finland?

[-] ContrarianTrail@lemm.ee 8 points 2 days ago

Depends on how good drugs you've got

[-] Mango@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

It's long been suspected that Koreans are really fast with rhythm games and have high APM because of their language getting to the point faster.

[-] ladicius@lemmy.world 24 points 3 days ago

What produces the stretched graphs like Italian and German? What do these humps mean?

[-] SnokenKeekaGuard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 22 points 3 days ago

Variability in the length of words, loads of very short and very long words? Just a guess

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 23 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Inaccurate for Italian because 50% of the language is conveyed by auditory volume, hand gestures and body language .... and espresso, lots and lots of espresso.

Turkish is also inaccurate because 25% of the language is in the eyes .... those intense eyes where you can't tell if someone is excited, energetic, full of life or psychotic / murderous.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] mtchristo@lemm.ee 2 points 2 days ago

I am curious about Arabic. I feel like it should be having the highest information rate.

[-] lambdabeta@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 days ago

What makes you think that? I'm curious. I would've assumed something like Inuktitut (1 word conveys subject verb object tense ...) or something like toki pona (removes unused information) or maybe a highly analytical language like one of the Chinese languages.

[-] mtchristo@lemm.ee 3 points 1 day ago

I was comparing Arabic to other languages with the most speakers in the world. I have no idea what those languages you mentioned sound like. And I bet conlangs could be designed to fulfill such requirements as well.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 01 Nov 2024
515 points (97.4% liked)

Data is Beautiful

4821 readers
113 users here now

A place to share and discuss visual representations of data: Graphs, charts, maps, etc.

DataIsBeautiful is for visualizations that effectively convey information. Aesthetics are an important part of information visualization, but pretty pictures are not the sole aim of this subreddit.

A place to share and discuss visual representations of data: Graphs, charts, maps, etc.

  A post must be (or contain) a qualifying data visualization.

  Directly link to the original source article of the visualization
    Original source article doesn't mean the original source image. Link to the full page of the source article as a link-type submission.
    If you made the visualization yourself, tag it as [OC]

  [OC] posts must state the data source(s) and tool(s) used in the first top-level comment on their submission.

  DO NOT claim "[OC]" for diagrams that are not yours.

  All diagrams must have at least one computer generated element.

  No reposts of popular posts within 1 month.

  Post titles must describe the data plainly without using sensationalized headlines. Clickbait posts will be removed.

  Posts involving American Politics, or contentious topics in American media, are permissible only on Thursdays (ET).

  Posts involving Personal Data are permissible only on Mondays (ET).

Please read through our FAQ if you are new to posting on DataIsBeautiful. Commenting Rules

Don't be intentionally rude, ever.

Comments should be constructive and related to the visual presented. Special attention is given to root-level comments.

Short comments and low effort replies are automatically removed.

Hate Speech and dogwhistling are not tolerated and will result in an immediate ban.

Personal attacks and rabble-rousing will be removed.

Moderators reserve discretion when issuing bans for inappropriate comments. Bans are also subject to you forfeiting all of your comments in this community.

Originally r/DataisBeautiful

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS