Live data from Hacker News

Why Some Languages Sound Faster Than Others

time.com

51–58 of 58 posts

Re: Why Some Languages Sound Faster Than Others

#51
post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Vietnamese is much like Chinese, I wouldn't be surprised. Chinese speakers don't specify much. They tend to hollar low-context imperatives at each other, and hope that everyone already knows their job. Linguists call this a "high context" language, because if you don't have a good idea of the existing context you won't figure much out. I suspect it's related to the extremely strict and ridged hierarchies in China,…

Funnily, "let" and "make" are the same word in Chinese. In Mandarin, the words for "buy" and "sell" are the same phoneme with different intonation. To my untrained ear, they both sound like "my" -- but they mean opposites.

Chinese and English are remarkable in how they address ideas. In Chinese, for the most part, there are only basic words -with little available in the way of synonyms for supplying nuance.'

So you ask someone how do you say big. How do you say gigantic, how do you say long, how do you say capacious, etc. It's all "da" ”大“。

So when people come to me in English and say something like you know, capricious is not exactly the same as whimsical, I can say, that's only because you think it can't be. But it can be. It only is because we've integrated words from French, Latin, Scandinavian, etc. which give us the breadth of choice. But it's kind of artificial anyway and if you force yourself to think about basic meanings -there is little difference. (Law excluded).

Re: Why Some Languages Sound Faster Than Others

#52
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is completely wrong...Do not listen to this person. I have studied Chinese my entire life and I can assure you, tones are extremely important. Tones are not "dropped", even in fast speech. The problem is actually that the above poster cannot hear them. This idea, that tones are not important, is an extremely widespread misconception, and as I see it, relates to three factors: 1) the general poor quality of weste…

When you listen to chinese songs, there are no tones. People still understand the songs. One cannot sing tones.

In Thai [also tonal] people definitely sing tones. The tone is a deviation from the baseline, either up or down or falling or rising or whatnot. So even if you're singing high, you can do a low tone. May be different in Chinese [or just some Chinese music].

Re: Why Some Languages Sound Faster Than Others

#53
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What word is this? Learning Chinese now, curious. Thanks.

You can figure it out with google translate. Traduce "made me" and "let me" from english to chinese. I think it is 让.

Google Translate notwithstanding, I don't really feel like 讓 means 'make'. It feels much closer to 'allow, give permission, let'. 逼 seems closer to 'make' then 讓.

Re: Why Some Languages Sound Faster Than Others

#54
post #53
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can figure it out with google translate. Traduce "made me" and "let me" from english to chinese. I think it is 让.

Google Translate notwithstanding, I don't really feel like 讓 means 'make'. It feels much closer to 'allow, give permission, let'. 逼 seems closer to 'make' then 讓.

Yea, I asked because I don't know of any word in Chinese that met his description.

Re: Why Some Languages Sound Faster Than Others

#55

This article pretty much confirms a suspicion of mine that I've had for a while: strongly syllabic languages like Spanish, Japanese and Tagalog, with their paltry use of consonant clusters, speak/sound faster because (1) scarcity of consonant clusters without tones means that words require more syllables to be uniquely identifiable, and (2) sounds flow more easily when there is a vowel between every consonant. Unlike…

Slightly related - twitter is much more verbose in Japanese purely due to the fact that 140 chars can pack in a lot more information than in English

didn't the study state just the contrary: that english is more dense than japanese?

Re: Why Some Languages Sound Faster Than Others

#56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Slightly related - twitter is much more verbose in Japanese purely due to the fact that 140 chars can pack in a lot more information than in English

didn't the study state just the contrary: that english is more dense than japanese?

This study was about syllables, not characters vs symbols.

Example:

Japanese for mouth 口 = 1 "character" English = 5 charachters

The syllables are irrelevant, though above they match; twitter care about characters.

Also note the:

> "Slightly related"

Re: Why Some Languages Sound Faster Than Others

#57
post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google Translate notwithstanding, I don't really feel like 讓 means 'make'. It feels much closer to 'allow, give permission, let'. 逼 seems closer to 'make' then 讓.

Yea, I asked because I don't know of any word in Chinese that met his description.

It's 让. I think 逼 is vicerally forceful, also meaning "press" (physically or metaphorically). I think you use 让 in most circumstances.

Re: Why Some Languages Sound Faster Than Others

#58
The interesting thing this article seems to suggest is that languages and speaking styles naturally seems to self-correct to provide the same amount of information, i.e, as density goes down, speed goes up- the ratio is essentially always the same.

I'd be interested to see a larger sample of languages, that is, is there a language in which the decrease of either density or speed isn't combined with an increase of the other. (or the opposite) Or are humans all naturally predisposed to generate/accept information at a similar rate?

Post reply on HN