6 ms·

Not a specialist, but the complex grammar of German tends to carry more information than English, which draws on a much larger vocabulary but flattened a former

Not a specialist, but the complex grammar of German tends to carry more information than English, which draws on a much larger vocabulary but flattened a formerly complex grammar into more words to say the same.

simulate-me 4y ago
German is famous for its compound nouns. My feeling is compound nouns are noticed by English speakers due to their explicit verbosity, but I don't have any data to back that up.
- emteycz 4y ago
  It's just like any other language, except without spaces. Czech language can do exactly the same, but we usually use the space - looks nicer. For example, the longest Czech word: Nejnezdevětadevadesáteroznásobovávatelnějšími = [do something] by those most not multipliable by 99.
  - simulate-me 4y ago
    My impression when studying German is that the German language has more compound words that are singular words in English. e.g. Armbanduhr (watch), Aussehen (appearance), Hauptstadt (capital), Staubsauger (vacuum), anything ending with Zeug, etc. That doesn't necessarily mean German is longer on average.
    - gnud 4y ago
      An Armbanduhr is a wrist watch, not just a watch. I'm sure the Germans often shorten to it 'uhr', just like the English do. Capital is short for capital city. Vacuum is also short for vacuum cleaner. I'll grant you Aussehen - that's a single word in english. But longer than the German one.
      - simulate-me 4y ago
        Yes, you can make the English words longer if you wish. But it’s very common to shorten them.
- 1ris 4y ago
  And English also features compound nouns, for example "compound noun". Usually (but not always) a space is within the word, so it's not that obvious. This language feature is a little less popular in english, but works very similar.
- lgessler 4y ago
  It's ironic because English is just as compound friendly. Take a German compound like Sprachwissenschaft ("language-science", i.e. linguistics). Now consider an English compound like "Earth science". The only difference is that it is convention in English to put a space between the words in a compound, whereas in German they are written without spaces. Things only seem different because of the impressive length some single "words" can reach in German, but English is just as capable of crazy compounds. Take this example that was discussed in a linguistics paper: "gay clergy book row priest", i.e. the priest who was involved in a controversy about a book about gay clergy. Quite convoluted, but we're not as awed by it, just because it happens to be spelled with spaces in between each part.
  - simulate-me 4y ago
    I think you're missing why people find German compound nouns interesting and notable. Does English have compound nouns and noun phrases? Certainly. But take your example: "gay clergy book row priest." The noun phrase literally represents the sum of its parts, i.e. a priest involved in a row over a gay clergy book. The phrase is complicated, but its meaning is straightforward. In German, however, it seems as if two unrelated nouns come together to form something unexpected. For instance the word for tortoise is "Schildkröte", translated literally as "shield toad." Is a tortoise a toad? Most native English speakers would say no. Does it have a shield? Again, most native English speakers would say no. So you have a case where there are two easily understood German words that come together to form something unexpected (to an English speaker). Perhaps a German would say that yes, a tortoise is a toad and yes, it has a shield. This is probably my own bias, but I don't think compound nouns in English form nouns in the same way as some German compound nouns do, or at least it feels to happen more often in German than in English.
    - lgessler 4y ago
      Again, I don't think German is exceptional in this regard: we have English "catbird" (so called for its call), "bush baby" (for a small primate which is not a baby), "lady finger" (a regional name for okra), "buttercup" (a kind of flower), "kangaroo paw" (a kind of flower), etc. I'd be pretty shocked if a German speaker thought a tortoise had a Schild or really was a Kroete, in the same way I'd be shocked if an English speaker said that a bush baby was an actual baby. Non-compositional noun compounds occur in both languages.
vmception 4y ago
That's generous. I see differences, I don't see more/less or any tendencies between German and English. I see some areas where inefficiencies are introduced in German, I see some areas where more information information is conveyed. Somewhat curious about this topic of more data per second, by language, so anything that reduces the anecdotes in favor of a study would be welcome!
- uniqueuid 4y ago
  Yeah, I'd be interested in a proper study of this. There are tons of papers on speech information density, which is not the same as character information density. One thing that provides a lot of contextual information in German are the inflections and suffixes, i.e. "Köchin" - female cook "Koch" - male cook "Köchchen" / "Köchle" ... - diminuitive cook "Kochs" - possessive / "the cook's ..." etc.
vinay427 4y ago
That's perhaps true, but not necessarily relevant to word length. Much of the added information in German relative to English is encapsulated in articles, which are around 3-5 letters, which I suspect is not the most significant factor for German word length. As an aside, German also relies heavily on modal verbs (nearly as much as English does), far more than even related languages such as Spanish. There are many distant or unrelated languages with more informative verb conjugations/inflections.
pjlegato 4y ago
Linguists refer to these traits you're describing by classifying languages as being more or less "synthetic" or "analytic."[1] Broadly speaking, synthetic languages tend to encode information by modifying words (e.g. the articles "der" vs "dem" in German); analytic languages tend to encode information via adding words and word order (e.g. "the" versus "to the" in English.) Real languages exist somewhere on a spectrum. Languages in the Indo-European family show an empirical historical tendency to become less synthetic and more analytic over time and via contact with other languages. German is more synthetic than English, but less synthetic than Russian, and much less synthetic than very old IE languages such as Vedic Sanskrit. English is more analytic than German, but less analytic and more synthetic than Afrikaans. Some non-IE languages such as Finnish are extremely synthetic. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_language https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_language , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytic_language https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytic_language
- uniqueuid 4y ago
  Excellent, that's precisely the pointer I was looking for. Thanks!
- c0mptonFP 4y ago
  How does Mandarin compare on that scale
  - robbedpeter 4y ago
    It's a stereotypically analytic language. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytic_language https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytic_language >>For example, Mandarin Chinese has many compound words, giving it a moderately high ratio of morphemes per word, but since it has almost no inflectional affixes at all to convey grammatical relationships, it is a very analytic language.
- bencollier49 4y ago
  Does this mean that languages become more synthetic if they're left on their own? Did Latin and Sanskrit develop in greater isolation? This is a fascinating subject.
ineedasername 4y ago
I asked one of my comp ling profs, who cut their teeth at Bell Labs, about this question. She said that, as spoken, information density is fairly similar from language to language. Languages that express the same information using more phonemes tend to be spoken using more phonemes per unit of time, and it what (in some circumstances though not all) can contribute to the perception that people speaking in one language speak much faster. I suppose that might not help much when the issue is writing though, or any circumstance where phonemic production is at a fixed rate regardless of language.
- treeman79 4y ago
  I think it was 39 bits per second of information. Regardless of language. Languages with denser information are spoken slower. Vice versa. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aaw2594 https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aaw2594
  - rich_sasha 4y ago
    I find French full of nuance (=bits of information) and habitually spoken very fast.
  - ineedasername 4y ago
    Thanks for the reference to back up my recollection of a lecture, nice to know my memory (and professor) are correct. It was (and is) fascinating to me that there are these sorts of constants.

simulate-me 4y ago

German is famous for its compound nouns. My feeling is compound nouns are noticed by English speakers due to their explicit verbosity, but I don't have any data to back that up.

emteycz 4y ago
It's just like any other language, except without spaces. Czech language can do exactly the same, but we usually use the space - looks nicer. For example, the longest Czech word: Nejnezdevětadevadesáteroznásobovávatelnějšími = [do something] by those most not multipliable by 99.
- simulate-me 4y ago
  My impression when studying German is that the German language has more compound words that are singular words in English. e.g. Armbanduhr (watch), Aussehen (appearance), Hauptstadt (capital), Staubsauger (vacuum), anything ending with Zeug, etc. That doesn't necessarily mean German is longer on average.
  - gnud 4y ago
    An Armbanduhr is a wrist watch, not just a watch. I'm sure the Germans often shorten to it 'uhr', just like the English do. Capital is short for capital city. Vacuum is also short for vacuum cleaner. I'll grant you Aussehen - that's a single word in english. But longer than the German one.
    - simulate-me 4y ago
      Yes, you can make the English words longer if you wish. But it’s very common to shorten them.
1ris 4y ago
And English also features compound nouns, for example "compound noun". Usually (but not always) a space is within the word, so it's not that obvious. This language feature is a little less popular in english, but works very similar.
lgessler 4y ago
It's ironic because English is just as compound friendly. Take a German compound like Sprachwissenschaft ("language-science", i.e. linguistics). Now consider an English compound like "Earth science". The only difference is that it is convention in English to put a space between the words in a compound, whereas in German they are written without spaces. Things only seem different because of the impressive length some single "words" can reach in German, but English is just as capable of crazy compounds. Take this example that was discussed in a linguistics paper: "gay clergy book row priest", i.e. the priest who was involved in a controversy about a book about gay clergy. Quite convoluted, but we're not as awed by it, just because it happens to be spelled with spaces in between each part.
- simulate-me 4y ago
  I think you're missing why people find German compound nouns interesting and notable. Does English have compound nouns and noun phrases? Certainly. But take your example: "gay clergy book row priest." The noun phrase literally represents the sum of its parts, i.e. a priest involved in a row over a gay clergy book. The phrase is complicated, but its meaning is straightforward. In German, however, it seems as if two unrelated nouns come together to form something unexpected. For instance the word for tortoise is "Schildkröte", translated literally as "shield toad." Is a tortoise a toad? Most native English speakers would say no. Does it have a shield? Again, most native English speakers would say no. So you have a case where there are two easily understood German words that come together to form something unexpected (to an English speaker). Perhaps a German would say that yes, a tortoise is a toad and yes, it has a shield. This is probably my own bias, but I don't think compound nouns in English form nouns in the same way as some German compound nouns do, or at least it feels to happen more often in German than in English.
  - lgessler 4y ago
    Again, I don't think German is exceptional in this regard: we have English "catbird" (so called for its call), "bush baby" (for a small primate which is not a baby), "lady finger" (a regional name for okra), "buttercup" (a kind of flower), "kangaroo paw" (a kind of flower), etc. I'd be pretty shocked if a German speaker thought a tortoise had a Schild or really was a Kroete, in the same way I'd be shocked if an English speaker said that a bush baby was an actual baby. Non-compositional noun compounds occur in both languages.

vmception 4y ago

That's generous. I see differences, I don't see more/less or any tendencies between German and English. I see some areas where inefficiencies are introduced in German, I see some areas where more information information is conveyed. Somewhat curious about this topic of more data per second, by language, so anything that reduces the anecdotes in favor of a study would be welcome!

uniqueuid 4y ago
Yeah, I'd be interested in a proper study of this. There are tons of papers on speech information density, which is not the same as character information density. One thing that provides a lot of contextual information in German are the inflections and suffixes, i.e. "Köchin" - female cook "Koch" - male cook "Köchchen" / "Köchle" ... - diminuitive cook "Kochs" - possessive / "the cook's ..." etc.

vinay427 4y ago

That's perhaps true, but not necessarily relevant to word length. Much of the added information in German relative to English is encapsulated in articles, which are around 3-5 letters, which I suspect is not the most significant factor for German word length. As an aside, German also relies heavily on modal verbs (nearly as much as English does), far more than even related languages such as Spanish. There are many distant or unrelated languages with more informative verb conjugations/inflections.

pjlegato 4y ago

Linguists refer to these traits you're describing by classifying languages as being more or less "synthetic" or "analytic."[1] Broadly speaking, synthetic languages tend to encode information by modifying words (e.g. the articles "der" vs "dem" in German); analytic languages tend to encode information via adding words and word order (e.g. "the" versus "to the" in English.) Real languages exist somewhere on a spectrum. Languages in the Indo-European family show an empirical historical tendency to become less synthetic and more analytic over time and via contact with other languages. German is more synthetic than English, but less synthetic than Russian, and much less synthetic than very old IE languages such as Vedic Sanskrit. English is more analytic than German, but less analytic and more synthetic than Afrikaans. Some non-IE languages such as Finnish are extremely synthetic. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_language https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_language , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytic_language https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytic_language

uniqueuid 4y ago
Excellent, that's precisely the pointer I was looking for. Thanks!
c0mptonFP 4y ago
How does Mandarin compare on that scale
- robbedpeter 4y ago
  It's a stereotypically analytic language. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytic_language https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytic_language >>For example, Mandarin Chinese has many compound words, giving it a moderately high ratio of morphemes per word, but since it has almost no inflectional affixes at all to convey grammatical relationships, it is a very analytic language.
bencollier49 4y ago
Does this mean that languages become more synthetic if they're left on their own? Did Latin and Sanskrit develop in greater isolation? This is a fascinating subject.

ineedasername 4y ago

I asked one of my comp ling profs, who cut their teeth at Bell Labs, about this question. She said that, as spoken, information density is fairly similar from language to language. Languages that express the same information using more phonemes tend to be spoken using more phonemes per unit of time, and it what (in some circumstances though not all) can contribute to the perception that people speaking in one language speak much faster. I suppose that might not help much when the issue is writing though, or any circumstance where phonemic production is at a fixed rate regardless of language.

treeman79 4y ago
I think it was 39 bits per second of information. Regardless of language. Languages with denser information are spoken slower. Vice versa. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aaw2594 https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aaw2594
- rich_sasha 4y ago
  I find French full of nuance (=bits of information) and habitually spoken very fast.
- ineedasername 4y ago
  Thanks for the reference to back up my recollection of a lecture, nice to know my memory (and professor) are correct. It was (and is) fascinating to me that there are these sorts of constants.