Whenever I try translating some math or programming stuff from Russian into English or vice versa, the Russian version ends up about 20% longer. Maybe it’s because many useful connective words in Russian are polysyllabic, e.g. “kotoryi” (which) ,”chtoby” (to), “poetomu” (so), making sentences with complex logical structure sound clumsy. Translating into Russian always feels like a poetic jigsaw puzzle to make the phrase sound okay, while translating into English feels more anything-goes at the expense of emotional nuance. YMMV.
It seems that, at least in this usage, English better approximates the ideal expressed in Entropy, and Short Codes:
People have a tendency to talk, and presumably think, at the basic level of categorization—to draw the boundary around “chairs”, rather than around the more specific category “recliner”, or the more general category “furniture”. People are more likely to say “You can sit in that chair” than “You can sit in that recliner” or “You can sit in that furniture”.
And it is no coincidence that the word for “chair” contains fewer syllables than either “recliner” or “furniture”. Basic-level categories, in general, tend to have short names; and nouns with short names tend to refer to basic-level categories. Not a perfect rule, of course, but a definite tendency. Frequent use goes along with short words; short words go along with frequent use.
Whenever I try translating some math or programming stuff from Russian into English or vice versa, the Russian version ends up about 20% longer. Maybe it’s because many useful connective words in Russian are polysyllabic, e.g. “kotoryi” (which) ,”chtoby” (to), “poetomu” (so), making sentences with complex logical structure sound clumsy. Translating into Russian always feels like a poetic jigsaw puzzle to make the phrase sound okay, while translating into English feels more anything-goes at the expense of emotional nuance. YMMV.
It seems that, at least in this usage, English better approximates the ideal expressed in Entropy, and Short Codes: