5 ms·
DLM minimization doesn't seem to be a generative feature of language, just a constraint. Languages have to be understood and used by humans, and all this paper
by akud 11y ago
DLM minimization doesn't seem to be a generative feature of language, just a constraint. Languages have to be understood and used by humans, and all this paper seems to show is that humans have limitations on working memory. Anything, language or otherwise, that expects to be used by humans would minimize the load on working memory.
- kuschku 11y agoEspecially because they admit themselves that two of the languages in their set don’t even minimize. Even with short sentences, German and Japanese often have large DLM values. With more complex, nested sentences (which are really common in Germany), this becomes more of an issue, because between two connected words you can have 7 subclauses. (Seriously, read Karl Marx’ Das Kapital, or Günther Grass’ Der Krebsgang, or read any other German author.)
- canjobear 11y agoAll of the languages are "minimized" in that dependency length is below the random baseline. German, Japanese, etc. are just much less minimized than other languages like English and Indonesian. Working out why is the next step for us. I don't think it's because these languages are inherently harder to understand. They just represent different solutions to the communication problem.
- kuschku 11y agoGerman, especially, loves deeply nested sentences. This means, on the other hand, though, that we use far less sentences. The grammar of an average english article in a science magazine reads for me, a native German speaker, like first-grader text.
- conceit 11y agoRun-on sentences are bad style, if I'm any judge. Although, I wonder how much this relies on normal forms and getting normalization wrong. The grammar of an average english science magazine reminds me of German first-grader text.
- kuschku 11y agoWell, not run-on sentences. Those are different from nested sentences. A nested sentence is a sentence structure, a combination of main sentences, which are sentences that could stand a lone, and a subclauses, which are clauses that are dependent on main sentences, in a specific way that allows for easier understanding, which is done by providing an explanation for a specific part in a subclause. As you can see, this doesn’t really work well in english, but in German sentences actually become MORE readable if done like this.
- conceit 11y agoI doubt there's any difference, because the example and my modification translate to German exactly, word by word.
- andreasvc 11y agoCould it be that the dependency representation has an influence on this? Perhaps the dependency lengths are shorter with non-projective dependencies?
- canjobear 11y agoWe included both projective and nonprojective dependencies. Interestingly, there isn't any evidence that nonprojective dependencies are harder for people to understand than projective ones, so I wouldn't expect nonprojective arcs to be shorter on average than projective ones.
- compbio 11y agoThank you! Very interesting research all around. I think these old German and Japanese languages may have been hard to understand for outsiders, but were used with high sophistication (you have to invest energy to access this information) among insiders. For instance the Japanese pillow words / Makurakotoba or German words for hard to translate concepts like "Weltschmerz", "Kummerspeck" and "Torschlusspanik". All short, useful words for communicating complex rich concepts, provided the agent knows the meaning of these words.
- conceit 11y agoweltschmerz - pity, sorrow Torschusspanik (sic!) - fear of quick commitment