Live data from Hacker News

Human speech may have a universal transmission rate: 39 bits per second

sciencemag.org

241–250 of 263 posts

Re: Human speech may have a universal transmission rate: 39 bits per second

#241
post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm fully sighted but I use espeak tts at around 1000wpd for fluff text like ecnomist articles and 300wpm for heavy going text like the text sections of math books. I also watch most video at 2/3 times the speed since the skills seem transferable.

what flags do you use for espeak, just -s 1000 seems incomprehensible to me

-p 100 -s 1000 -v male7

Re: Human speech may have a universal transmission rate: 39 bits per second

#242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I kind of want to hear a "blind Danish" conversation now. For those unaware: Danish is phonetically one of the most difficult languages in the world, to the point where children who acquire Danish as their first language on average start speaking a few months later than children with any other first language. To clarify: speaking is not the same as understanding - toddlers are often capable of understanding language…

Actually, understanding seems to be affected, too! See: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-child-lan...

Oh wow, did not know that! Then perhaps a better way to phrase it is that it does not imply slower general mental development of the children - at least that is what I read elsewhere.

Re: Human speech may have a universal transmission rate: 39 bits per second

#243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I kind of want to hear a "blind Danish" conversation now. For those unaware: Danish is phonetically one of the most difficult languages in the world, to the point where children who acquire Danish as their first language on average start speaking a few months later than children with any other first language. To clarify: speaking is not the same as understanding - toddlers are often capable of understanding language…

Are you Danish? (your account name looks rather Dutch) I always wanted to know whether it's true what I heard some years ago: a friend told me that older Danish people are complaining that the younger Danish are harder to understand because there has been a trend in recent decades to swallow consonants even more than in the past (that's something hard to image for me as a non-Danish speaker :)

No, I'm Dutch like you guessed. While the Netherlands and Denmark are very similar in some aspects (flat countries obsessed with having the best bike infrastructure in the world) the language is quite different ;)

Living in Malmö I also find this quite hard to believe! Besides, isn't old people complaining about the younger generation butchering their language something that happens all the time in all cultures?

Re: Human speech may have a universal transmission rate: 39 bits per second

#244
post #220

> Each participant read aloud 15 identical passages that had been translated into their mother tongue I doubt there is an objective way to ensure that no information is lost or smuggled in when you translate a text into another language. For example, English has more than 100 words for 'walk', whereas Toki Pona (a constructed language known for its extreme simplicity) has only one. But does 'stroll' encode the same a…

It's my interpretation that by deciding the bits of each word, they included subtext/classification that would differentiate 'walk' and 'stroll'.

Re: Human speech may have a universal transmission rate: 39 bits per second

#245
post #157
post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm the blind dev who refactored a huge chunk of the Rust compiler [0]. I'm at roughly 800 words a minute with a synth, with the proven ability to top out at 1219. 800 or so is the norm among programmers. In order to get it we normally end up using older synths which sound way less natural because modern synthesis techniques can't go that fast. There's a trade-off between natural sounding and 500+ words a minute, and…

And as a followup to that--because really this is the weird part--some circles of blind people (including mine) talk faster between ourselves. That's not common, but it happens. I still sometimes have to remember that other people can't digest technical content at the rate I say it and remember to slow down. A good way to bring it out is to have me try to explain a technical concept that I understand really well. I h…

It is common for any "in-group" to speak faster than the same people in other groups. This is commonly studied in linguistic 101 courses by undergrads because it is so easy to observe - in your own groups - once you are looking for it.

Re: Human speech may have a universal transmission rate: 39 bits per second

#247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you really want to understand it, I would encourage you to write down notes about it by hand. For some reason I do not yet understand, the motion of physically putting pen(cil) to paper helps ingrain that information into your brain, in a way that typing it into a computer does not.

This varies by person. Not everyone learns by writing. Some only learn b hearing or seeing. Some can only learn by doing. Most of us are a mix. I learn just abou every way except for writing or typing. Online lectures i do best by playing at 1.2x at most and pausing regularly to let me think of implications and to crosslink to things i have already learned.

This post was far more controversial than i thought it was. I keeps gettin voted up and down. Anyone explain why?

Re: Human speech may have a universal transmission rate: 39 bits per second

#248
post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, you have a very neutral American accent, not much like a New Yorker at all. Other things I noticed include that you are indeed pronouncing each word very clearly, but also that you're speaking a bit more slowly than I would consider a typical speech rate (though not necessarily slower than the average Youtube video). In this video, you're also speaking at a bit higher pitch than a typical male voice, which I…

Thanks for the listen. All of my tests are always using Youtube's playback controls btw. Were you able to listen to Joe Rogan's podcast at 2x? Skip somewhere in the middle and listen for 15 seconds maybe. You are right in that I speak slower in that video. Most of my more recent Youtube videos are unscripted so I'm just thinking about things with zero preparation, where as I script my courses word for word (which lea…

> Were you able to listen to Joe Rogan's podcast at 2x? Skip somewhere in the middle and listen for 15 seconds maybe.

Hmm, I skipped around to a few different spots. About half the time it was intelligible at 2x, but as soon as they started speaking faster it became a garble. Occasionally they would speak fast enough that I couldn't catch it even at 1.75x. So I'd say they have a lot more variability in their pacing than you do.

Re: Human speech may have a universal transmission rate: 39 bits per second

#249

This is really cool. I am working in a related area and I think most of us have assumed that on average, the information rate is 'about the same' for the languages across the world. So it's exciting to see that their results confirm this assumption. Two qualifying remarks. 1) The 'about the same' is important. Even in their data, there is still quite some variance. They found an average of 39bits, with a stdev of 5.…

After a few cocktails, once or twice, I've wondered with friends whether some "fuzzy" information rate constant might be a reference by which our brain understands the passage of time. In other words: if there is a fundamental processing rate of x/time, then theoretically, wouldn't our brains subconsciously use that for all kinds of neat reasons?

And the rate wouldn't have to be the exact same value for each individual, so long as the brain can attune its specific value to other reference points to time in nature.

Re: Human speech may have a universal transmission rate: 39 bits per second

#250
post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And as a followup to that--because really this is the weird part--some circles of blind people (including mine) talk faster between ourselves. That's not common, but it happens. I still sometimes have to remember that other people can't digest technical content at the rate I say it and remember to slow down. A good way to bring it out is to have me try to explain a technical concept that I understand really well. I h…

It is common for any "in-group" to speak faster than the same people in other groups. This is commonly studied in linguistic 101 courses by undergrads because it is so easy to observe - in your own groups - once you are looking for it.

But when the in-group is defined as "is blind"?? I'm not just talking about programmers in this context, or any other cross-section wherein there's some sort of shared vocabulary and context other than the disability itself. I don't think it's been studied, but I've noticed, my parents have noticed, in general enough people around me have noticed it over the years that I'm convinced the effect is real. Is whatever mechanism you're referring to typically general enough that the group can be defined this broadly and still have it happen?
Post reply on HN