> I’d like to see metrics for Turkish. Turkish is in figure 1; its blob is on the lower end. > developed over the years for efficient military communication p

> I’d like to see metrics for Turkish. Turkish is in figure 1; its blob is on the lower end. > developed over the years for efficient military communication purposes A crude statement of this view would be pseudohistory. It’s common enough for registers of language to develop (and even diverge) in particular social circumstances, and so it wouldn’t be wholly surprising of a military register of Turkish were to have emerged. But there have been lots of other influences on the historical development of Turkish: for example, Arabic and Persian influence, especially in literary Ottoman Turkish; the natural evolution of the vernacular during the Ottoman period; and language reform under the Türk Dil Kurumu to remove Arabic and Persian vocabulary. Any plausible claim of this kind would have to be about the relative influence of military registers. It’s also not obvious whether the needs of military communication would be particularly different from e.g. industrial communication, or whether that would prioritise speed over e.g. accuracy gained from redundancy.