Papers › The optimality of word lengths. Theoretical foundations and an empirical study
The optimality of word lengths. Theoretical foundations and an empirical study
Sonia Petrini, Antoni Casas-i-Muñoz, Jordi Cluet-i-Martinell, Mengxue Wang, Christian Bentz, Ramon Ferrer-i-Cancho
Zipf's law of abbreviation, namely the tendency of more frequent words to be shorter, has been viewed as a manifestation of compression, i.e. the minimization of the length of forms -- a universal principle of natural communication. Although the claim that languages are optimized has become trendy, attempts to measure the degree of optimization of languages have been rather scarce. Here we present two optimality scores that are dualy normalized, namely, they are normalized with respect to both the minimum and the random baseline. We analyze the theoretical and statistical pros and cons of these and other scores. Harnessing the best score, we quantify for the first time the degree of optimality of word lengths in languages. This indicates that languages are optimized to 62 or 67 percent on average (depending on the source) when word lengths are measured in characters, and to 65 percent on average when word lengths are measured in time. In general, spoken word durations are more optimized than written word lengths in characters. Our work paves the way to measure the degree of optimality of the vocalizations or gestures of other species, and to compare them against written, spoken, or signed human languages.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections