Pedroski Posted August 25, 2014 at 02:00 AM Report Posted August 25, 2014 at 02:00 AM Found this interesting: Researchers have shown: Spanish people speak 7.8 syllables per second, Germans 6.0. Among Asians, Japanese speak 7.8 syllables per second, but Mandarin Chinese only 5.2. Wolfgang Pape, and in 'Die ZEIT from 21.8.14 1 Quote
ZhangJiang Posted August 25, 2014 at 04:40 AM Report Posted August 25, 2014 at 04:40 AM Seems that Chinese is "denser" in speech. And I've also found it's "denser" printed. Quote
Shelley Posted August 25, 2014 at 02:33 PM Report Posted August 25, 2014 at 02:33 PM Ha from my point of view its because I need more "thinking time before I speak. Very interesting fact, thanks for sharing. Quote
French Posted August 25, 2014 at 02:56 PM Report Posted August 25, 2014 at 02:56 PM Spanish always seemed to be a fast spoken language, well, guess it's true. Thanks for the info. Quote
陳德聰 Posted August 25, 2014 at 05:01 PM Report Posted August 25, 2014 at 05:01 PM I'm a bit too lazy to look it up right now but didn't the same research find that despite varying rates of syllable production, blocks of meaning were produced at roughly the same speed? Quote
Silent Posted August 25, 2014 at 05:51 PM Report Posted August 25, 2014 at 05:51 PM Ha from my point of view its because I need more "thinking time before I speak. I guess this is an important factor too. Maybe they should measure speed in syllables but correct it for information density. Quote
Pedroski Posted August 25, 2014 at 11:22 PM Author Report Posted August 25, 2014 at 11:22 PM This was some research done in Berkeley Ca. in 1985. They did find that Chinese people read only minimally faster than English, or anyway, a language written with letters 380 English words per minute as opposed to Chinese 390 words. That seems to suggest that, cultural differences notwithstanding, there is a maximum information absorption rate. Quote
imron Posted August 26, 2014 at 09:04 AM Report Posted August 26, 2014 at 09:04 AM 380 seems a little on the high side for English, and 390 a little on the low side for Chinese. Quote
Michaelyus Posted August 26, 2014 at 10:58 AM Report Posted August 26, 2014 at 10:58 AM I believe this is based on this 2011 paper from the Université de Lyon. It's based on a reading a set text, and interestingly Vietnamese was the "base language", set at 1. It was adjusted for Information Density. See the release from ScienceDaily and from the blog "all things linguistic". Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and select your username and password later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.