Quantitative Linguistik
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (21)
- Part of a Book (19)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
- Other (1)
- Working Paper (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (43) (remove)
Keywords
- Sprachstatistik (16)
- Deutsch (13)
- Korpus <Linguistik> (11)
- Wortschatz (10)
- Lexikostatistik (8)
- COVID-19 (6)
- Online-Medien (6)
- Sprachwandel (6)
- Vielfalt (6)
- Statistik (5)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (24)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (18)
- Postprint (9)
Reviewstate
Publisher
- Wilhelm Fink (6)
- Leibniz-Institut für Deutsche Sprache (IDS) (5)
- de Gruyter (4)
- De Gruyter (3)
- Institut für Deutsche Sprache (2)
- MDPI (2)
- Springer Nature (2)
- Benjamins (1)
- Buske (1)
- Erich Schmidt (1)
One of the fundamental questions about human language is whether all languages are equally complex. Here, we approach this question from an information-theoretic perspective. We present a large scale quantitative cross-linguistic analysis of written language by training a language model on more than 6500 different documents as represented in 41 multilingual text collections consisting of ~ 3.5 billion words or ~ 9.0 billion characters and covering 2069 different languages that are spoken as a native language by more than 90% of the world population. We statistically infer the entropy of each language model as an index of what we call average prediction complexity. We compare complexity rankings across corpora and show that a language that tends to be more complex than another language in one corpus also tends to be more complex in another corpus. In addition, we show that speaker population size predicts entropy. We argue that both results constitute evidence against the equi-complexity hypothesis from an information-theoretic perspective.
This paper argues that a lectometric approach may shed light on the distinction between destandardization and demotization, a pair of concepts that plays a key role in ongoing discussions about contemporary trends in standard languages. Instead of a binary distinction, the paper proposes three different types of destandardization, defined as quantitatively measurable changes in a stratigraphic language continuum. The three types are illustrated on the basis of a case study describing changes in the vocabulary of Dutch in The Netherlands and Flanders between 1990 and 2010.
In the first volume of Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, Gries (2005. Null-hypothesis significance testing of word frequencies: A follow-up on Kilgarriff. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 1(2). doi:10.1515/ cllt.2005.1.2.277. http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/cllt.2005.1.issue-2/cllt.2005. 1.2.277/cllt.2005.1.2.277.xml: 285) asked whether corpus linguists should abandon null-hypothesis significance testing. In this paper, I want to revive this discussion by defending the argument that the assumptions that allow inferences about a given population – in this case about the studied languages – based on results observed in a sample – in this case a collection of naturally occurring language data – are not fulfilled. As a consequence, corpus linguists should indeed abandon null-hypothesis significance testing.
This thesis consists of the following three papers that all have been published in international peer-reviewed journals:
Chapter 3: Koplenig, Alexander (2015c). The Impact of Lacking Metadata for the Measurement of Cultural and Linguistic Change Using the Google Ngram Data Sets—Reconstructing the Composition of the German Corpus in Times of WWII. Published in: Digital Scholarship in the Humanities. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [doi:10.1093/llc/fqv037]
Chapter 4: Koplenig, Alexander (2015b). Why the quantitative analysis of dia-chronic corpora that does not consider the temporal aspect of time-series can lead to wrong conclusions. Published in: Digital Scholarship in the Humanities. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [doi:10.1093/llc/fqv030]
Chapter 5: Koplenig, Alexander (2015a). Using the parameters of the Zipf–Mandelbrot law to measure diachronic lexical, syntactical and stylistic changes – a large-scale corpus analysis. Published in: Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory. Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter. [doi:10.1515/cllt-2014-0049]
Chapter 1 introduces the topic by describing and discussing several basic concepts relevant to the statistical analysis of corpus linguistic data. Chapter 2 presents a method to analyze diachronic corpus data and a summary of the three publications. Chapters 3 to 5 each represent one of the three publications. All papers are printed in this thesis with the permission of the publishers.
The annual microcensus provides Germany’s most important official statistics. Unlike a census it does not cover the whole population, but a representative 1%-sample of it. In 2017, the German microcensus asked a question on the language of the population, i.e. ‘Which language is mainly spoken in your household?’ Unfortunately, the question, its design and its position within the whole microcensus’ questionnaire feature several shortcomings. The main shortcoming is that multilingual repertoires cannot be captured by it. Recommendations for the improvement of the microcensus’ language question: first and foremost the question (i.e. its wording, design, and answer options) should make it possible to count multilingual repertoires.
cOWIDplus Analyse ist eine kontinuierlich aktualisierte Ressource zu der Frage, ob und wie stark sich der Wortschatz ausgewählter deutscher Online-Pressemeldungen während der Corona-Pandemie systematisch einschränkt und ob bzw. wann sich das Vokabular nach der Krise wieder ausweitet. In diesem Artikel erläutern die Autor*innen die hinter der Ressource stehende Forschungsfrage, die zugrunde gelegten Daten, die Methode sowie die bisherigen Ergebnisse.
cOWIDplus Analyse ist eine kontinuierlich aktualisierte Ressource zu der Frage, ob und wie stark sich der Wortschatz ausgewählter deutscher Online-Pressemeldungen während der Corona-Pandemie systematisch einschränkt und ob bzw. wann sich das Vokabular nach der Krise wieder ausweitet. In diesem Artikel erläutern die Autor*innen die hinter der Ressource stehende Forschungsfrage, die zugrunde gelegten Daten, die Methode sowie die bisherigen Ergebnisse.