How dare you bring up statistic and differing points from the poster? I'm warning you, young/medifum/old man.View attachment 38508
Cope and seethe, less information dense languages. All these other languages have to literally talk faster in order to convey as much information per syllable as english (and many literally do).
![]()
View attachment 38508
Cope and seethe, less information dense languages. All these other languages have to literally talk faster in order to convey as much information per syllable as english (and many literally do).
![]()
Added note: - Other languages are like, "English is just borrowing from all these other languages". I prefer the interpretation that we had a marketplace of languages, and the free market of ideas allowed the best words and grammar rules to survive, leading to our superiority.
I decided to come in here and see what this thread was all about and I immediately misread the first five highlighted languages as "luggage" and I was trying to figure out where it was going with the joke. But the joke was me all along!
A compound word is going to have more syllables than a single english word that describes the same thing.This study seems highly dubious. I am not sure how English can beat proper compound words.
Waldkampf?A compound word is going to have more syllables than a single english word that describes the same thing.
For example: Streichholzschachtel -> Matchbox
Strike-wood-box. 4 syllables -> 2 syllables
English has a lot of words like this that other languages prefer compound descriptive words for.
This isn't necessarily a bad thing, since obviously in german, the word is also acts as instructions for the object in this case. However, it also makes the information density per syllable less, as they both communicate the object concept. It is easier to learn the german version, since a learner would likely already know the simpler base words (strike, wood, box) as well. In English, you'd know box, but Match would require context (i.e. having seen the matches in a matchbox, not to be confused with a match as in a game). English requires a lot of conceptual understand and context interpretation, which both lead to it conveying ideas in a more dense manner per syllable, but also making it more complex and harder to hop in to the middle of a random conversation.
Yes. There are examples in every language that go either direction. The density difference is like 5-10% or something. On the average though, English is more dense. For every forest combat, there is an ice skating. On the balance, as demonstrated by the study, English is slightly more dense (concept to concept, syllable to syllable).Waldkampf?
Yes. There are examples in every language that go either direction. The density difference is like 5-10% or something. On the average though, English is more dense. For every forest combat, there is an ice skating. On the balance, as demonstrated by the study, English is slightly more dense (concept to concept, syllable to syllable).
And for a handful of them, where an English phrase WOULD be longer, like schadenfreude, we just use the german itself. (A lot of english is germanic origin ~25%)
Sounds like coping and seething to me.The reality of the study is very much doubted. It is an opinion. And not a particular good one.
In fact, your first example as your entire argument hinges on a peculiar definition of the concept of "information". A premise is not exactly information.
Sounds like coping and seething to me.