Live data from Hacker News

Language homogenization at Harvard

inteoryx.com

11–20 of 87 posts

Re: Language homogenization at Harvard

#11

Noam Chomsky on suicide watch In my point of view this is actually good news; Since I'm not a native english speaker and since this language has become the world's lingua franca it's very nice being able to understand an article just because the author's didn't waste time looking for bombastic synonyms just to sound smarter. I applaud this and projects like Simple English Wikipedia which allows us, non-native english…

> bombastic

Esoteric synonyms, perhaps? :-)

Re: Language homogenization at Harvard

#12
I would guess that the increased rate of information transmission across society has contributed to this trend. Copying is a key mechanism in how culture develops and propagates, and information moving more easily makes it easier for different groups to copy the dominant examples for any particular activity or discipline. A lot of information systems and cultural phenomenons have winner-take-all / power-law dynamics. Combined with increased information transmission, this would cause the leading styles and practices to become even more dominant.

Re: Language homogenization at Harvard

#13
post #3

> Suppose we were going to rate words on a scale of one to ten in two dimensions. First, we are going to rate how old fashioned a word is. Second, we will rate how funny the word seems to us. > For example, if we wanted to rate "poppycock" we might say that it's a 9 for "old fashioned" and an 8 for "Funny". Poppycock would be 9, 8. Another word, like snail, isn't especially old fashioned or funny. Though, the word ha…

I suppose "old fashioned" is much more of a subjective measurement than an objective one. At first I was going to rate "snail" as not at all old fashioned, since we still use the word. But then, I thought of medieval snail drawings, and felt like the word has some element to it that does harken back to older days. "Citadel" is kind of a similar example. There is a modern hedge fund named Citadel and we still use that…

> like the word has some element to it that does harken back to older days

It's more interesting than you might think! Turns out snail is a diminutive form of snake[1], from a root referring to creeping over the ground.

The other aspect of judgments of old-fashionedness is that things that are really old-fashioned, like being named Etheldreda, will tend to be rated as less old-fashioned than things that are pretty recent but out of current fashion, like being named Gertrude. The old old things are too forgotten to be "old".

My other question would be "why 'cosine similarity' rather than 'correlation'?". Same thing, but people are a lot more familiar with the term 'correlation'.

[1] OE snaca preserved the /k/ sound, but OE snægl voiced it, and the /g/ then predictably turned into a Y sound (compare "yard" / "day"), giving us the I of modern snail.

Re: Language homogenization at Harvard

#14
> Rasmussen connects the decline in lexical diversity with an increase in diversity words - equity, diversity, inclusion, gender, marginalize, underrepresented, and disparity.

You know it can't be right--too good to be true.

Re: Language homogenization at Harvard

#15
Maybe we've discovered diversity etc is worth studying, in part because it does have such a profound effect on the world. There's a reason these words and studies are considered "politicized" and that's because understanding them threatens the status quo. Just because something is politicized doesn't mean it isn't worth studying.

Re: Language homogenization at Harvard

#16

Maybe we've discovered diversity etc is worth studying, in part because it does have such a profound effect on the world. There's a reason these words and studies are considered "politicized" and that's because understanding them threatens the status quo. Just because something is politicized doesn't mean it isn't worth studying.

But, how does that explain the decline from, say, 1900 to 1990? The decline appears fairly steady over the 120 year period.

Re: Language homogenization at Harvard

#17
Lexical homogenization is not the same as idea homogenization, and it does not surprise me that as time goes on the word choice in a given category of writing (esp an insular one like grant applications) would constrict.

It also wouldn't surprise me a huge amount if the idea space was constricting, but just looking at the cosine distance is not enough to establish that. There probably are meaningful ways to exploit and analyze the representations inside language model transformers to better capture the idea-space geometry, but that's a big research project.

Re: Language homogenization at Harvard

#18
The second and third graphs aren't zero-based, which exaggerates the effect.

Also, the author may be over-interpreting the result: it's odd that very different fields are showing roughly the same change in cosine difference, and it is a measurement over individual words. I think a deeper analysis is needed to figure out in more detail what is going on.

Re: Language homogenization at Harvard

#19

Lexical homogenization is not the same as idea homogenization, and it does not surprise me that as time goes on the word choice in a given category of writing (esp an insular one like grant applications) would constrict. It also wouldn't surprise me a huge amount if the idea space was constricting, but just looking at the cosine distance is not enough to establish that. There probably are meaningful ways to exploit a…

Yea exactly. This is survivorship bias - the prospects of today look at the winners of yesterday to guide their entry on how to communicate, they’re slightly more likely to get funded, etc

It’s reinforcement learning over decades

Re: Language homogenization at Harvard

#20

> Suppose we were going to rate words on a scale of one to ten in two dimensions. First, we are going to rate how old fashioned a word is. Second, we will rate how funny the word seems to us. > For example, if we wanted to rate "poppycock" we might say that it's a 9 for "old fashioned" and an 8 for "Funny". Poppycock would be 9, 8. Another word, like snail, isn't especially old fashioned or funny. Though, the word ha…

I think that's why they say "old-fashioned" instead of "has an extremely old (attestable) etymology." As a native English speaker, "poppycock" sounds more "old-fashioned" (maybe "quainter") than "snail," even though "snail" might actually be older.

Well, it's pretty easy to assume that snail is very, very old. As I said above, in my opinion it doesn't sound "old-fashioned" because it's still current, and how old it might be is irrelevant.

But see also my observation about the English female names Gertrude and Etheldreda. Which one is more old-fashioned?

Post reply on HN