Approaching language levels and registers in written Chinese with the Menzerath–Altmann Law

Abstract

The length of language units, such as word length or sentence length, plays a critical role in register classification studies. However, in this line of work, little attention has been paid to the relationship between the lengths of language units at different levels. The Menzerath–Altmann law (MAL) reflects the functional relationship between the lengths of linguistic units at different levels, and its parameters were shown to be register-sensitive. This article focuses on two interrelated questions based on the MAL: (1) whether there are variations in the hierarchical relationships between language units at different levels and (2) whether such variations will influence register classifications. The results based on written Chinese show that (1) the MAL fittings at the ‘sentence > clause > word’ levels outperform that at the ‘clause > word > character’ levels and (2) the classifications based on two registers, i.e., Press (reportage) and Science (academic prose), demonstrate that the fitting parameters at the ‘sentence > clause > word’ levels also outperform those at the ‘clause > word > character’ levels. These indicate that the variations of hierarchical relationships between language units at different levels should be considered in register analysis. Further interpretations were given from perspectives of the information-theoretic principle and language evolution.

Regional varieties and diachronic changes in Chinese political discourse

“…In the written Chinese language, characteristics of speech are marked by punctuation at the end of a sentence. Thus, the sentence is defined as the Chinese text separated by periods, exclamation marks, and question marks operationally (Hou et al, 2017(Hou et al, , 2019aChen and Liu, 2022). The sentence length is measured in the number of its immediate constituents, clauses (Hou et al, 2019a;Chen and Liu, 2022).…”

“…Thus, the sentence is defined as the Chinese text separated by periods, exclamation marks, and question marks operationally (Hou et al, 2017(Hou et al, , 2019aChen and Liu, 2022). The sentence length is measured in the number of its immediate constituents, clauses (Hou et al, 2019a;Chen and Liu, 2022). In Köhler (1982), the number of clauses is determined by counting the number of finite verbs in a sentence.…”

“…In Köhler (1982), the number of clauses is determined by counting the number of finite verbs in a sentence. In this study, however, the number of clauses is determined by the number of commas, semicolons or colons in a Chinese sentence (Hou et al, 2017;Chen and Liu, 2022).…”

“…or synchronic variations (e.g. Hou et al, 2019aHou et al, , 2019bChen and Liu, 2022), but not to both changes and variations simultaneously.…”

“…In the meantime, some studies examine variations of the hierarchical relationships between language units at different levels. Chen and Liu (2022) showed that the MA law fittings at the 'sentence > clause > word' levels outperformed the 'clause > word > character' levels and classified the texts from Press and Science registers using the fitted parameters based on the MA Law. Lastly, Fenk-Oczlon and Pilz (2021) found significant and complex correlations between the length of linguistic units and the number of words, phonemes, and population.…”