[lg policy] bibitem: Statistical Laws Governing Fluctuations in Word Use from Word Birth to Word Death

Harold Schiffman haroldfs at GMAIL.COM
Wed Mar 21 16:10:14 UTC 2012


[image: Click here to find out
more!]<http://ad.doubleclick.net/click;h=v8/3c3f/0/0/%2a/y;254456627;0-0;0;65352596;3454-728/90;46536741/46553464/1;;%7Esscs=%3fhttp://www.nature.com/content/reviews/KeyAdvances/index.html?WT.mc_id=WBN_KAM2012>
 Scientific Reports <http://www.nature.com/srep>   Advanced
search<http://www.nature.com/search/adv_search?sp-q-1=srep>

Scientific Reports | Article Open
 Statistical Laws Governing Fluctuations in Word Use from Word Birth to
Word Death

   - Alexander M.
Petersen<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#auth-1>
   ,
   - Joel Tenenbaum<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#auth-2>
   ,
   - Shlomo Havlin<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#auth-3>
   - & H. Eugene
Stanley<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#auth-4>


   - Affiliations<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#affil-auth>
   - Contributions<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#contrib-auth>
   - Corresponding
author<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#corres-auth>

Scientific Reports 2,Article number:313doi:10.1038/srep00313 Received 17
February 2012 Accepted 24 February 2012 Published 15 March 2012
 Article tools

   - Print
   - Email<http://www.nature.com/srep/foxtrot/svc/mailform?doi=10.1038/srep00313&file=/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html>
   - pdf options
    - Download citation<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/ris/srep00313.ris>
   - Order reprints<https://s100.copyright.com/AppDispatchServlet?publisherName=NPGR&publication=Scientific+Reports&title=Statistical+Laws+Governing+Fluctuations+in+Word+Use+from+Word+Birth+to+Word+Death&contentID=10.1038%2Fsrep00313&volumeNum=2&issueNum=&numPages=&pageNumbers=pp%24%7BnPage.startPage%7D&orderBeanReset=true&publicationDate=2012-03-15&author=Alexander+M.+Petersen%2C+Joel+Tenenbaum%2C+Shlomo+Havlin%2C+H.+Eugene+Stanley>
   - Rights and
permissions<https://s100.copyright.com/AppDispatchServlet?publisherName=NPG&publication=Scientific+Reports&title=Statistical+Laws+Governing+Fluctuations+in+Word+Use+from+Word+Birth+to+Word+Death&contentID=10.1038%2Fsrep00313&volumeNum=2&issueNum=&numPages=&pageNumbers=pp%24%7BnPage.startPage%7D&publicationDate=2012-03-15&cc=y&author=Alexander+M.+Petersen%2C+Joel+Tenenbaum%2C+Shlomo+Havlin%2C+H.+Eugene+Stanley>
   - Share/bookmark

 We analyze the dynamic properties of 107 words recorded in English,
Spanish and Hebrew over the period 1800–2008 in order to gain insight into
the coevolution of language and culture. We report language independent
patterns useful as benchmarks for theoretical models of language evolution.
A significantly decreasing (increasing) trend in the birth (death) rate of
words indicates a recent shift in the selection laws governing word use.
For new words, we observe a peak in the growth-rate fluctuations around 40
years after introduction, consistent with the typical entry time into
standard dictionaries and the human generational timescale. Pronounced
changes in the dynamics of language during periods of war shows that word
correlations, occurring across time and between words, are largely
influenced by coevolutionary social, technological, and political factors.
We quantify cultural memory by analyzing the long-term correlations in the
use of individual words using detrended fluctuation analysis.
 Subject terms:

   - Evolution<http://www.nature.com/search/executeSearch?sp-advanced=true&sp-m=0&siteCode=srep&sp-p=all&sp-q-9[SREP]=1&sp-p-2=all&sp-p-3=all&subject=/631/181&sp-s=date_descending&sp-c=25&facets=new>
   - Statistics<http://www.nature.com/search/executeSearch?sp-advanced=true&sp-m=0&siteCode=srep&sp-p=all&sp-q-9[SREP]=1&sp-p-2=all&sp-p-3=all&subject=/639/705/531&sp-s=date_descending&sp-c=25&facets=new>
   - Applied physics<http://www.nature.com/search/executeSearch?sp-advanced=true&sp-m=0&siteCode=srep&sp-p=all&sp-q-9[SREP]=1&sp-p-2=all&sp-p-3=all&subject=/639/766/25&sp-s=date_descending&sp-c=25&facets=new>
   - Statistical physics, thermodynamics and nonlinear
dynamics<http://www.nature.com/search/executeSearch?sp-advanced=true&sp-m=0&siteCode=srep&sp-p=all&sp-q-9[SREP]=1&sp-p-2=all&sp-p-3=all&subject=/639/766/530&sp-s=date_descending&sp-c=25&facets=new>

 Figures at a glance
left

   1.
   2.
   3.
   4.
   5.
   6.
   7.

right
  Introduction

   - Introduction
   - Results<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#results>
   - Discussion<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#discussion>
   - Methods<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#methods>
   - References<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#references>
   - Acknowledgements<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#acknowledgments>
   - Author information<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#author-information>
   - Supplementary
information<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#supplementary-information>

Statistical laws describing the properties of word use, such as Zipf
's law1<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref1>,
2<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref2>,
3<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref3>,
4<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref4>,
5<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref5>,
6<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref6>and
Heaps' law
7<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref7>,
8<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref8>,
have been thoroughly tested and modeled. These statistical laws are based
on static snapshots of written language using empirical data aggregated
over relatively small time periods and comprised of relatively small
corpora ranging in size from individual
texts1<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref1>,
2<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref2>to
relatively small collections of topical texts
3<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref3>,
4<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref4>.
However, language is a fundamentally dynamic complex system, consisting of
heterogenous entities at the level of the units (words) and the interacting
users (us). Hence, we begin this paper with two questions: (i) Do languages
exhibit dynamical patterns? (ii) Do individual words exhibit dynamical
patterns?

The coevolutionary nature of language requires analysis both at the macro
and micro scale. Here we apply interdisciplinary concepts to empirical
language data collected in a massive book digitization effort by *Google
Inc.*, which recently unveiled a database of words in seven languages,
after having scanned approximately 4% of the world's books. The massive
“n-gram” project9<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref9>allows
for a novel view into the growth dynamics of word use and the birth
and death processes of words in accordance with evolutionary selection laws
10<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref10>
.

A recent analysis of this database by Michel et
al.11<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref11>addresses
numerous well-posed questions rooted in cultural anthropology
using case studies of individual words. Here we take an alternative
approach by analyzing the *aggregate* properties of the language dynamics
recorded in the *Google Inc.* data in a systematic way, using the word
counts of every word recorded over the 209-year time period 1800 – 2008 in
the English, Spanish, and Hebrew text corpora. This period spans the
incredibly rich cultural history that includes several international wars,
revolutions, and numerous technological paradigm shifts. Together, the data
comprise over 1 × 107 distinct words. We use concepts from economics to
gain quantitative insights into the role of exogenous factors on the
evolution of language, combined with methods from statistical physics to
quantify the competition arising from correlations between
words12<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref12>,
13<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref13>,
14<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref14>and
the memory-driven autocorrelations in
*ui*(*t*) across
time15<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref15>,
16<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref16>,
17<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref17>
.

For each corpora comprising millions of distinct words, we use a general
word-count framework which accounts for the underlying growth of language
over time. We first define the quantity *ui*(*t*) as the number of uses of
word *i* in year *t*. Since the number of books and the number of distinct
words have grown dramatically over time, we define the relative word use, *f
i*(*t*), as the fraction of uses of word *i* out of all word uses in the
same year,

 where the quantity is the total number of indistinct word uses digitized
from books printed in year *t* and *Nw*(*t*) is the total number of
distinct words digitized from books printed in year *t*. To quantify the
dynamic properties of word prevalence at the micro scale and their relation
to socio-political factors at the macro scale, we analyze the logarithmic
growth rate commonly used in finance and economics,

 Here we analyze the single year growth rates, Δ*t*≡1.

The relative use *fi*(*t*) depends on the intrinsic grammatical utility of
the word (related to the number of “proper” sentences that can be
constructed using the word), the semantic utility of the word (related to
the number of meanings a given word can convey), and other idiosyncratic
details related to topical context. Neutral null models for the evolution
of language define the relative use of a word as its
*“fitness”*18<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref18>.
In such models, the word frequency is the only factor determining the
survival capacity of a word. In reality, word competition depends on more
subtle features of language, such as the cognitive aspects of efficient
communication. For example, the emergence of robust categorical naming
patterns observed across many cultures is regarded to be the result of
complex discrimination tactics shared by intelligent communicators. This is
evident in the finite set of words describing the continuous spectrum of
color names, emotional states, and other categorical
sets19<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref19>,
20<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref20>,
21<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref21>
.

In our analysis we treat words with equivalent meanings but with different
spellings (e.g. color versus colour) as distinct words, since we view the
competition among synonyms and alternative spellings in the linguistic
arena as a key ingredient in complex evolutionary
dynamics10<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref10>,
22<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref22>.
For instance, with the advent of automatic spell-checkers in the digital
era, words recognized by spell-checkers receive a significant boost in
their “reproductive fitness” at the expense of their misspelled or
unstandardized counterparts.

In the linguistic arena, not just “defective” words die, even significantly
used words can become extinct. Fig.
1<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#f1>shows
three once-significant words: “Radiogram,” “Roentgenogram,” and
“Xray”. These words compete for the majority share of nouns referring to
what is now commonly known as an “X-ray” (note that such dashes are
discarded in Google's digitization process). The word “Roentgenogram” has
since become extinct, even though it was the most common term for several
decades in the 20th century. It is likely that two main factors – (i)
communication and information efficiency bias toward the use of shorter
words23<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref23>and
(ii) the adoption of English as the leading global language for
science
– secured the eventual success of the word “Xray” by the year 1980. It goes
without saying that there are many social and technological factors driving
language change.
 Figure 1: Word extinction.
 [image: Word extinction.]
<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/fig_tab/srep00313_F1.html>

The English word “Roentgenogram” derives from the Nobel prize winning
scientist and discoverer of the X-ray, Wilhelm Röntgen (1845–1923). The
prevalence of this word was quickly challenged by two main competitors,
“X-ray” (recorded as “Xray” in the database) and “Radiogram.” The
arithmetic mean frequency of these three time series is relatively constant
over the 80-year period 1920–2000, 〈* f *〉 ≈ 10–7, illustrating the limited
linguistic “market share” that can be achieved by any competitor. We
conjecture that the main reason “Xray” has a higher frequency is due to the
“fitness gain” from its efficient short word length and also due to the
fact that English has become the base language for scientific publication.

   - Full size image (233
KB)<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/fig_tab/srep00313_F1.html>


   - Figures index<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/fig_tab/srep00313_ft.html>
   - Next figure<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#f2>

 We begin this paper by analyzing the vocabulary growth of each language
over time. We then analyze the lifetime growth trajectories of the set of
words that are new to each language to gain quantitative insight into
“infant” and “adult” stages of individual words. Using two sets of words,
(i) the relatively new words, and (ii) the most common words, we analyze
the statistical properties of word growth. Specifically, we calculate the
probability density function *P*(*r*) of growth rate *r* and calculate the
size-dependence of the standard deviation *σ*(*r*) of growth rates. In
order to gain insight into the long-term cultural memory, we conclude the
analysis by measuring the autocorrelations in word use by applying
detrended fluctuation analysis (DFA) to individual *fi*(*t*).
  Results

   - Introduction<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#introduction>
   - Results
   - Discussion<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#discussion>
   - Methods<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#methods>
   - References<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#references>
   - Acknowledgements<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#acknowledgments>
   - Author information<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#author-information>
   - Supplementary
information<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#supplementary-information>

Quantifying the birth rate and the death rate of words

Just as a new species can be born into an environment, a word can emerge in
a language. Evolutionary selection laws can apply pressure on the
sustainability of new words since there are limited resources (topics,
books, etc.) for the use of words. Along the same lines, old words can be
driven to extinction when cultural and technological factors limit the use
of a word, in analogy to the environmental factors that can change the
survival capacity of a living species by altering its ability to survive
and reproduce.

We define the birth year *y*0,*i* as the year *t* corresponding to the
first instance of , where is median word use of a given word over its
recorded lifetime in the *Google* database. Similarly, we define the death
year *yf,i* as the last year *t* during which the word use satisfies . We
use the relative word use threshold in order to avoid anomalies arising
from extreme fluctuations in *fi*(*t*) over the lifetime of the word. The
results obtained using threshold did not show a significant qualitative
difference.

The significance of word births Δ*b*(*t*) and word deaths Δ*d*(*t*) for
each year *t* is related to the vocabulary size *Nw*(*t*) of a given
language. We define the birth rate *γb* and death rate *γd* by normalizing
the number of births Δ*b*(*t*) and deaths Δ*d*(*t*) in a given year *t* to
the total number of distinct words *Nw*(*t*) recorded in the same year *t*,
so that

 This definition yields a proxy for the rate of emergence and disappearance
of words. We restrict our analysis to words with birth-death duration *yf,i*−
*y*0,*i* + 1 ≥ 2 years and to words with first recorded use *t*0,*i* ≥
1700, which selects for relatively new words in the history of a language.

The *γb*(*t*) and *γd*(*t*) time series plotted in Fig.
2<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#f2>for
the 200-year period 1800–2000 show trends that intensifies after the
1950s. The modern era of publishing, which is characterized by more strict
editing procedures at publishing houses, computerized word editing and
automatic spell-checking technology, shows a drastic increase in the death
rate of words. Using visual inspection we verify most changes to the
vocabulary in the last 10–20 years are due to the extinction of misspelled
words and nonsensical print errors, and to the decreased birth rate of new
misspelled variations and genuinely new words. This phenomenon reflects the
decreasing marginal need for new words, consistent with the sub-linear
Heaps' law observed for all Google 1-gram corpora
in24<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref24>.
Moreover, Fig. 3<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#f3>shows
that
*γb*(*t*) is largely comprised of words with relatively large *f* while *γd*
(*t*) is almost entirely comprised of words with relatively small *f* (see
also Fig. S1<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#supplementary-information>in
the Supplementary
Information<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#supplementary-information>(SI)
text). Thus, the new words of tomorrow are likely be core words that
are widely used.
 Figure 2: Dramatic shift in the birth rate and death rate of words.
 [image: Dramatic shift in the birth rate and death rate of words.]
<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/fig_tab/srep00313_F2.html>

The word birth rate *γb*(*t*) and the word death rate *γd*(*t*) show marked
underlying changes in word use competition which affects the entry rate and
the sustainability of existing words. The modern print era shows a marked
increase in the death rate of words which likely correspond to low fitness,
misspelled and (technologically) outdated words. A simultaneous decrease in
the birth rate of new words is consistent with the decreasing marginal need
for new words indicated by the sub-linear allometric scaling between
vocabulary size and total corpus size (Heaps'
law)24<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref24>.
Interestingly, we quantitatively observe the impact of the Balfour
Declaration in 1917, the circumstances surrounding which effectively
rejuvenated Hebrew as a national language, resulting in a 5-fold increase
in the birth rate of words in the Hebrew corpus.

   - Full size image (351
KB)<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/fig_tab/srep00313_F2.html>


   - Previous figure<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#f1>
   - Figures index<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/fig_tab/srep00313_ft.html>
   - Next figure<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#f3>

  Figure 3: Survival of the fittest in the entry process of words.
 [image: Survival of the fittest in the entry process of words.]
<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/fig_tab/srep00313_F3.html>

Trends in the relative uses of words that either were born or died in a
given year show that the entry-exit forces largely depend on the relative
use of the word. For the English corpus, we calculate the average of the
median lifetime relative use, 〈Med(*fi*)〉, for all words born in year
*t*(top panel) and for all words that died in year
*t* (bottom panel), which shows a 5-year moving average (dashed black
line). There is a dramatic increase in the relative use (“utility”) of
newborn words over the last 20–30 years, likely corresponding to new
technical terms, which are necessary for the communication of core modern
technology and ideas. Conversely, with higher editorial standards and the
recent use of word processors which include spelling standardization
technology, the words that are dying are those words with low relative use.
We confirm by visual inspection that the lists of dying words contain
mostly misspelled and nonsensical words.

   - Full size image (250
KB)<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/fig_tab/srep00313_F3.html>


   - Previous figure<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#f2>
   - Figures index<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/fig_tab/srep00313_ft.html>
   - Next figure<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#f4>

 We note that the main source of error in the calculation of birth and
death rates are OCR (optical character recognition) errors in the
digitization process, which could be responsible for a significant fraction
of misspelled and nonsensical words existing in the data. An additional
source of error is the variety of orthographic properties of language that
can make very subtle variations of words, for example through the use of
hyphens and capitalization, appear as distinct words when applying OCR. The
digitization of many books in the computer era does not require OCR
transfer, since the manuscripts are themselves digital, and so there may be
a bias resulting from this recent paradigm shift. We confirm that the
statistical patterns found using post 2000- data are consistent with the
patterns that extend back several hundred
years24<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref24>
.

Complementary to the death of old words is the birth of new words, which
are commonly associated with new social and technological trends. Topical
words in media can display long-term persistence patterns analogous to
earthquake shocks25<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref25>,
26<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref26>,
and can result in a new word having larger fitness than related
“out-of-date” words (e.g. blog vs. log, email vs. memo). Here we show that
a comparison of the growth dynamics between different languages can also
illustrate the local cultural factors that influence different regions of
the world. Fig.
4<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#f4>shows
how international crisis can lead to globalization of language
through common media attention and increased lexical diffusion. Notably, as
illustrated in Fig.
4(a)<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#f4>,
we find that international conflict only perturbed the participating
languages, while minimally affecting the languages of the nonparticipating
regions, e.g. the Spanish speaking countries during WWII.
 Figure 4: The significance of historical events on the evolution of
language.
 [image: The significance of historical events on the evolution of
language.]
<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/fig_tab/srep00313_F4.html>

The standard deviation *σ*(*t*) of growth rates demonstrates the
sensitivity of language to international events (e.g. World War II). For
all languages there is an overall decreasing trend in *σ*(*t*) over the
period 1850–2000. However, the increase in *σ*(*t*) during WWII represents
a“globalization” effect, whereby societies are brought together by a common
event and a unified media. Such contact between relatively isolated systems
necessarily leads to information flow, much as in the case of thermodynamic
heat flow between two systems, initially at different temperatures, which
are then brought into contact. (a) *σ*(*t*) calculated for the relatively
new words with *Ti* ≥ 100 years. The Spanish corpus does not show an
increase in *σ*(*t*) during World War II, indicative of the relative
isolation of South America and Spain from the European conflict. (b) *σ*(*t*)
for 4 sets of relatively new words that meet the criteria *Ti* ≥ *Tc* and *t
i*,0 ≥ 1800. The oldest “new” words (*Tc* = 200) demonstrate the most
significant increase in *σ*(*t*) during World War II, with a peak around
1945. (c) The standard deviation *σ*(*t*) for the most common words is
decreasing with time, suggesting that they have saturated and are being
“crowded out” by new competitors. This set of words meets the criterion
that the average relative use exceeds a threshold, 〈*fi*〉 ≥ *fc*, which we
define for each corpus. (d) We compare the variation *σ*(*t*) for
relatively new English words, using *Ti* ≥ 100, with the 20-year moving
average over the time period 1820–1988. The deviations show that *σ*(*t*)
increases abruptly during times of conflict, such as the American CivilWar
(1861–1865), World War I (1914–1918) and World War II (1939–1945), and also
during the 1980s and 1990s, possibly as a result of new digital media (e.g.
the internet) which offer new environments for the evolutionary dynamics of
word use. *D*(*t*) is the difference between the moving average and *σ*(*t*
).

   - Full size image (335
KB)<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/fig_tab/srep00313_F4.html>


   - Previous figure<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#f3>
   - Figures index<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/fig_tab/srep00313_ft.html>
   - Next figure<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#f5>

 The lifetime trajectory of words

Between birth and death, one contends with the interesting question of how
the use of words evolve when they are “alive.” We focus our efforts toward
quantifying the relative change in word use over time, both over the word
lifetime and throughout the course of history. In order to analyze
separately these two time frames, we select two sets of words: (i)
relatively new words with “birth year” *t*0,*i* later than 1800, so that
the relative age *τ* ≡ *t* − *t*0,*i* of word *i* is the number of years
after the word's first occurrence in the database, and (ii) relatively
common words, typically with *t*0,*i* < 1800.

We analyze dataset (i) words (summary statistics in Table
S1<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#supplementary-information>)
so that we can control for properties of the growth dynamics that are
related to the various stages of a word's life trajectory (e.g. an “infant”
phase, an “adolescent” phase, and a “mature” phase). For comparison with
the young words, we also analyze the growth rates of dataset (ii) words in
the next section (summary statistics in Table
S2<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#supplementary-information>).
These words are presumably old enough that they are in a stable mature
phase. We select dataset (ii) words using the criterion 〈*fi*〉 ≥ *fc*,
where is the average relative use of the word *i* over the word's lifetime *
Ti* = *t*0,*f* − *t*0,*i* + 1, and *fc* is a cutoff threshold derived form
the Zipf rank-frequency
distribution1<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref1>calculated
for each corpus
24<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref24>.
In Table S3<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#supplementary-information>we
summarize the entire data for the 209-year period 1800–2008 for each
of
the four *Google* language sets analyzed.

Modern words typically are born in relation to technological or cultural
events, e.g. “Antibiotics.” We ask if there exists a characteristic time
for a word's general acceptance. In order to search for patterns in the
growth rates as a function of relative word age, for each new word *i* at
its age *τ* , we analyze the “use trajectory” *fi*(*τ*) and the “growth
rate trajectory” *ri*(*τ*). So that we may combine the individual
trajectories of words of varying prevalence, we normalize each *fi*(*τ*) by
its average 〈*fi*〉, obtaining a normalized use trajectory . We perform an
analogous normalization procedure for each *ri*(*τ*), normalizing instead
by the growth rate standard deviation *σ*[*ri*], so that (see the Methods
section for further detailed description).

Since some words will die and other words will increase in use as a result
of the standardization of language, we hypothesize that the average growth
rate trajectory will show large fluctuations around the time scale for the
transition of a word into regular use. In order to quantify this transition
time scale, we create a subset {*i* |*Tc*} of word trajectories *i* by
combining words that meets an age criteria *Ti* ≥ *Tc*. Thus, *Tc* is a
threshold to distinguish words that were born in different historical eras
and which have varying longevity. For the values *Tc* = 25, 50, 100, and
200 years, we select all words that have a lifetime longer than *Tc* and
calculate the average and standard deviation for each set of growth rate
trajectories as a function of word age *τ*.

In Fig. 5<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#f5>we
plot for
the English corpus, which shows a broad peak around *τc* ≈ 30–50 years for
each *Tc* subset before the fluctuations saturate after the word enters a
stable growth phase. A similar peak is observed for each corpus analyzed (Figs.
S4–S7<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#supplementary-information>).
This single-peak growth trajectory is consistent with theoretical models
for logistic spreading and the fixation of words in a population of learners
27<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref27>.
Also, since we weight the average according to 〈*fi*〉, the time scale
*τc*is likely associated with the characteristic time for a new word
to reach
sufficiently wide acceptance that the word is included in a typical
dictionary. We note that this time scale is close to the generational time
scale for humans, corroborating evidence that languages require only one
generation to drastically
evolve27<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref27>
.
 Figure 5: Quantifying the tipping point for word use.
 [image: Quantifying the tipping point for word use.]
<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/fig_tab/srep00313_F5.html>

(a) The maximum in the standard deviation *σ* of growth rates during the
“adolescent” period *τ* ≈ 30–50 indicates the characteristic time scale for
words being incorporated into the standard lexicon, i.e. inclusion in
popular dictionaries. In Fig.
S4<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#supplementary-information>we
plot the average growth rate trajectory 〈
*r*′(*τ*|*Tc*)〉 which shows relatively large positive growth rates during
approximately the same 20-year period. (b) The first passage time
*τ*153<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref53>is
defined as the number years for the relative use of a new word
*i* to exceed a given *f*-value for the first time, *fi*(*τ*1) ≥ *f*. For
relatively new words with *Ti* ≥ 100 years we calculate the average
first-passage time 〈*τ*1(*f*)〉 for a large range of *f*. We estimate for
each language the *fc* representing the threshold for a word belonging to
the standard “kernel”
lexicon4<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref4>.
This method demonstrates that the English corpus threshold *fc* ≡ 5 ×
10–8maps to the first passage time corresponding to the peak period
*τ* ≈ 30 – 50 years in *σ*(*τ*) shown in panel (a).

   - Full size image (502
KB)<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/fig_tab/srep00313_F5.html>


   - Previous figure<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#f4>
   - Figures index<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/fig_tab/srep00313_ft.html>
   - Next figure<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#f6>

 Empirical laws quantifying the growth rate distribution

How much do the growth rates vary from word to word? The answer to this
question can help distinguish between candidate models for the evolution of
word utility. Hence, we calculate the probability density function (pdf) of .
Using this quantity accounts for the fact that we are aggregating growth
rates of words of varying ages. The empirical pdf *P*(*R*) shown in
Fig. 6<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#f6>is
leptokurtic and remarkably symmetric around
*R* ≈ 0. These empirical facts are also observed in studies of the growth
rates of economic
institutions28<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref28>,
29<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref29>,
30<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref30>,
31<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref31>.
Since the *R* values are normalized and detrended according to the
age-dependent standard deviation *σ*[*r′*(*τ*|*Tc*)], the standard
deviation is *σ*(*R*) = 1 by construction.
 Figure 6: Common leptokurtic growth distribution for new words and common
words.
 [image: Common leptokurtic growth distribution for new words and common
words.]
<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/fig_tab/srep00313_F6.html>

(a) Independent of language, the growth rates of relatively new words are
distributed according to the Laplace distribution centered around *R* ≈ 0
defined in Eq. (4). The the growth rate *R* defined in Eq. (11) is measured
in units of standard deviation, and accounts for age-dependent and
word-dependent factors. Yet, even with these normalizations, we still
observe an excess number of |*R*| ≥ 3*σ* events. This fact is demonstrated
by the leptokurtic form of each *P*(*R*), which exhibit the excess tail
frequencies when compared with a unit-variance Gaussian distribution
(dashed blue curve). The Gaussian distribution is the predicted
distribution for the Gibrat proportional growth model, which is a candidate
neutral null-model for the growth dynamics of word
use29<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref29>.
The prevalence of large growth rates illustrate the possibility that words
can have large variations in use even over the course of a year. The growth
variations are intrinsically related to the dynamics of everyday life and
reflect the cultural and technological shocks in society. We analyze word
use data over the time period 1800–2008 for new words i with lifetimes *Ti*≥
*Tc*, where we show data calculated for *Tc* = 100 years. (b) PDF *P*(*r*′)
of the annual relative growth rate *r*′ for all words which satisfy 〈*fi*〉
≥ *fc* (dataset #ii words which are relatively common words). In order to
select relatively frequently used words, we use the following
criteria: *Ti*≥ 10 years, 1800 ≤
*t* ≤ 2008, and 〈*fi*〉 ≥ *fc*. The growth rate *r*′ does not account for
age-dependent factors since the common words are likely in the mature phase
of their lifetime trajectory. In each panel, we plot a Laplace distribution
with unit variance (solid black lines) and the Gaussian distribution with
unit variance (dashed blue curve) for reference.

   - Full size image (501
KB)<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/fig_tab/srep00313_F6.html>


   - Previous figure<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#f5>
   - Figures index<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/fig_tab/srep00313_ft.html>
   - Next figure<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#f7>

 A candidate model for the growth rates of word use is the Gibrat
proportional growth
process29<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref29>,
30<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref30>,
which predicts a Gaussian distribution for *P*(*R*). However, we observe
the “tent-shaped” pdf *P*(*R*) which is well-approximated by a Laplace
(double-exponential) distribution, defined as

 Here the average growth rate 〈*R*〉 has two properties: (a) 〈*R*〉 ≈ 0 and
(b) 〈*R*〉 ≪ *σ*(*R*). Property (a) arises from the fact that the growth
rate of distinct words is quite small on the annual basis (the growth rate
of books in the Google English database is *γw* ≈
0.01124<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref24>)
and property (b) arises from the fact that *R* is defined in units of
standard deviation. Being leptokurtic, the Laplace distribution predicts an
excess number of events > 3*σ* as compared to the Gaussian distribution.
For example, comparing the likelihood of events above the 3*σ* event
threshold, the Laplace distribution displays a five-fold excess in the
probability *P*(|*R* − 〈*R*〉| > 3*σ*), where for the Laplace distribution,
whereas for the Gaussian distribution. The large *R* values correspond to
periods of rapid growth and decline in the use of words during the crucial
“infant” and “adolescent” lifetime phases. In Fig.
6(b)<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#f6>we
also show that the growth rate distribution
*P*(*r′*) for the relatively common words comprising dataset (ii) is also
well-described by the Laplace distribution.

For hierarchical systems consisting of units each with complex internal
structure32<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref32>(e.g.
a given country consists of industries, each of which consists of
companies, each of which consists of internal subunits), a non-trivial
scaling relation between the standard deviation of growth rates *σ*(*r*|*S*)
and the system size *S* has the form

 The theoretical prediction
in32<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref32>,
33<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref33>that
*β* ∈ [0, 1/2] has been verified for several economic systems, with
empirical *β* values typically in the range 0.1 < *β* <
0.333<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref33>
.

Since different words have varying lifetime trajectories as well as varying
relative utilities, we now quantify how the standard deviation *σ*(*r*|*Si*)
of growth rates *r* depends on the cumulative word frequency

 of each word. We choose this definition for proxy of “word size” since a
writer can learn and recall a given word through any of its historical
uses. Hence, *Si* is also proportional to the number of books in which word
*i* appears. This is significantly different than the assumptions of
replication null models (e.g. the Moran process) which use the concurrent
frequency *fi*(*t*) as the sole factor determining the likelihood of future
replication10<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref10>,
18<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref18>
.

We estimate Eq. (5) by grouping words according to *Si* and then
calculating the growth rate standard deviation *σ*(*r*|*Si*) for each
group. Fig. 7(b)<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#f7>shows
scaling behavior consistent with Eq. (5) for large
*Si*, with *β* ≈ 0.10 – 0.21 depending on the corpus. A positive *β* value
means that words with larger cumulative word frequency have smaller annual
growth rate fluctuations. We conjecture that this statistical pattern
emerges from the hierarchical organization of written
language12<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref12>,
13<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref13>,
14<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref14>,
15<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref15>,
16<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref16>and
the social properties of the speakers who use the words
8<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref8>,
17<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref17>,
34<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref34>.
As such, we calculate *β* values that are consistent with nontrivial
correlations in word use, likely related to the basic fact that books are
topical3<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref3>and
that book topics are correlated with cultural trends.
 Figure 7: Scaling in the growth rate fluctuations of words.
 [image: Scaling in the growth rate fluctuations of words.]
<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/fig_tab/srep00313_F7.html>

We show the dependence of growth rates on the cumulative word frequency using
words satisfy the criteria *Ti* ≥ 10 years. We verify similar results for
threshold values *Tc* = 50, 100, and 200 years. (a) Average growth rate 〈*r*〉
saturates at relatively constant values for large *S*. (b) Scaling in the
standard deviation of growth rates *σ*(*r*|*S*) ∼ *S–β* for words with
large *S*. This scaling relation is also observed for the growth rates of
large economic institutions, ranging in size from companies to entire
countries31<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref31>,
33<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref33>.
Here this size-variance relation corresponds to scaling exponent values
0.10 < *β* < 0.21, which are related to the non-trivial bursting patterns
and non-trivial correlation patterns in literature topicality as indicated
by the quantitative relation to the Hurst exponent, *H* = 1 – *β*
shown in35<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref35>.
We calculate *βEng.* ≈ 0.16 ± 0.01, *βEng.fict* ≈ 0.21 ± 0.01, *βSpa.* ≈
0.10 ± 0.01 and *βHeb.* ≈ 0.17 ± 0.01.

   - Full size image (477
KB)<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/fig_tab/srep00313_F7.html>


   - Previous figure<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#f6>
   - Figures index<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/fig_tab/srep00313_ft.html>

 Quantifying the long-term cultural memory

Recent theoretical
work35<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref35>shows
that there is a fundamental relation between the size-variance
exponent *β* and the Hurst exponent *H* quantifying the auto-correlations
in a stochastic time series. The novel relation *H* = 1 − *β* indicates
that the temporal long-term persistence is intrinsically related to the
capability of the underlying mechanism to absorb stochastic shocks. Hence,
positive correlations (*H* > 1/2) are predicted for non-trivial *β* values
(i.e. 0 ≤ *β* ≤ 0.5). Note that the Gibrat proportional growth model
predicts *β* = 0 and that a Yule-Simon urn model predicts *β* =
0.533<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref33>.
Thus, *fi*(*τ*) belonging to words with large *Si* are predicted to show
significant positive correlations, *Hi* > 1/2.

To test this connection between memory correlations and the size-variance
scaling, we calculate the Hurst exponent *Hi* for each time series
belonging to the more relatively common words analyzed in dataset (ii)
using detrended fluctuation analysis
(DFA)35<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref35>,
36<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref36>,
37<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref37>.
We plot in Fig.
S2<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#supplementary-information>the
relative use time series
*fi*(*t*) for the words “polyphony,” “Americanism,” “Repatriation,” and
“Antibiotics” along with DFA curves from which we calculate each *Hi*. Fig.
S2(b)<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#supplementary-information>shows
that the
*Hi* values for these four words are all significantly greater than *Hr* =
0.5, which is the expected Hurst exponent for a stochastic time series with
no temporal correlations. In Fig.
S3<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#supplementary-information>we
plot the distribution of
*Hi* values for the English fiction corpus and the Spanish corpus. Our
results are consistent with the theoretical prediction 〈*H*〉 = 1 −
*β*established in
35<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref35>relating
the variance of growth rates to the underlying temporal
correlations in each *fi*(*t*). Hence, we show that the language evolution
is fundamentally related to the complex features of cultural memory, i.e.
the dynamics of cultural topic
formation17<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref17>,
25<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref25>,
26<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref26>,
34<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref34>and
bursting
38<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref38>,
39<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref39>
.
  Discussion

   - Introduction<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#introduction>
   - Results<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#results>
   - Discussion
   - Methods<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#methods>
   - References<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#references>
   - Acknowledgements<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#acknowledgments>
   - Author information<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#author-information>
   - Supplementary
information<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#supplementary-information>

With the digitization of written language, cultural trend analysis based
around methods to extract quantitative patterns from word counts is an
emerging interdisciplinary field that has the potential to provide novel
insights into human
sociology3<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref3>,
17<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref17>,
25<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref25>,
26<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref26>,
34<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref34>,
40<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref40>.
Nevertheless, the amount of metadata extractable from daily internet feeds
is dizzying. This is highlighted by the practical issue of defining
objective significance levels to filter out the noise in the data deluge.
For example, online blogs can be vaguely categorized according to the
coarse hierarchical schema: “obscure blogs”, “more popular blogs”, “pop
columns”, and “mainstream news coverage.” In contrast, there are
well-defined entry requirements for published books and magazines, which
must meet editorial standards and conform to the principles of market
supply and demand. However, until recently, the vast information captured
in the annals of written language was largely inaccessible.

Despite the careful guard of libraries around the world, which house the
written corpora for almost every written language, little is known about
the aggregate dynamics of word evolution in written history. Inspired by
research on the growth patterns displayed by a wide range of competition
driven systems - from countries and business
firms28<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref28>,
29<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref29>,
30<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref30>,
31<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref31>,
32<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref32>,
33<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref33>,
41<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref41>,
42<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref42>,
43<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref43>,
44<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref44>to
religious activities
45<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref45>,
universities46<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref46>,
scientific journals47<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref47>,
careers48<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref48>and
bird populations
49<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref49>-
here we extend the concepts and methods to word use dynamics.

This study provides empirical evidence that words are competing actors in a
system of finite resources. Just as business firms compete for market
share, words demonstrate the same growth statistics because they are
competing for the use of the writer/speaker and for the attention of the
corresponding reader/listener18<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref18>,
19<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref19>,
20<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref20>,
21<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref21>,
27<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref27>.
A prime example of fitness-mediated evolutionary competition is the case of
irregular and regular verb use in English. By analyzing the regularization
rate of irregular verbs through the history of the English language,
Lieberman et al.50<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref50>show
that the irregular verbs that are used more frequently are less likely
to be overcome by their regular verb counterparts. Specifically, they find
that the irregular verb death rate scales as the inverse square root of the
word's relative use. A study of word diffusion across Indo-European
languages shows similar frequency-dependence of word replacement
rates51<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref51>
.

We document the case example of X-ray, which shows how categorically
related words can compete in a zero-sum game. Moreover, this competition
does not occur in a vacuum. Instead, the dynamics are significantly related
to diffusion and technology. Lexical diffusion occurs at many scales, both
within relatively small groups and across
nations27<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref27>,
34<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref34>,
51<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref51>.
The technological forces underlying word selection have changed
significantly over the last 20 years. With the advent of automatic
spell-checkers in the digital era, words recognized by spell-checkers
receive a significant boost in their “reproductive fitness” at the expense
of their “misspelled” or unstandardized counterparts.

We find that the dynamics are influenced by historical context, trends in
global communication, and the means for standardizing that communication.
Analogous to recessions and booms in a global economy, the marketplace for
words waxes and wanes with a global pulse as historical events unfold. And
in analogy to financial regulations meant to limit risk and market
domination, standardization technologies such as the dictionary and spell
checkers serve as powerful arbiters in determining the characteristic
properties of word evolution. Context matters, and so we anticipate that
niches34<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref34>in
various language ecosystems (ranging from spoken word to
professionally
published documents to various online forms such as chats, tweets and
blogs) have heterogenous selection laws that may favor a given word in one
arena but not another. Moreover, the birth and death rate of words and
their close associates (misspellings, synonyms, abbreviations) depend on
factors endogenous to the language domain such as correlations in word use
to other partner words and polysemous
contexts12<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref12>,
13<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref13>as
well as exogenous socio-technological factors and demographic aspects
of
the writers, such as
age13<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref13>and
social niche
34<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref34>
.

We find a pronounced peak in the fluctuations of word growth rates when a
word has reached approximately 30–50 years of age (see Fig.
5<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#f5>).
We posit that this corresponds to the timescale for a word to be accepted
into a standardized dictionary which inducts words that are used above a
threshold frequency, consistent with the first-passage times to *fc* in Fig.
5(b)<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#f5>.
This is further corroborated by the characteristic baseline frequencies
associated with standardized
dictionaries11<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref11>.
Another important timescale in evolutionary systems is the reproduction age
of the interacting gene or meme host. Interestingly, a 30–50 year timescale
is roughly equal to the characteristic human generational time scale. The
prominent role of new generation of speakers in language evolution has
precedent in linguistics. For example, it has been shown that primitive
pidgin languages, which are little more than crude mixes of parent
languages, spontaneously acquire the full range of complex syntax and
grammar once they are learned by the children of a community as a native
language. It is at this point a pidgin becomes a creole, in a process
referred to as nativization22<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref22>
.

Nativization also had a prominent effect in the revival of the Hebrew
language, a significant historical event which also manifests prominently
in our statistical analysis. The birth rate of new words in the Hebrew
language jumped by a factor of 5 in just a few short years around 1920
following the Balfour Declaration of 1917 and the Second Aliyah immigration
to Israel. The combination of new Hebrew-speaking communities and political
endorsement of a national homeland for the Jewish people in the Palestine
Mandate had two resounding affects: (i) the Hebrew language, hitherto used
largely only for (religious) writing, gained official status as a modern
spoken language, and (ii) a centralized culture emerged from this national
community. The unique history of the Hebrew language in concert with
the *Google
Inc.* books data thus provide an unprecedented opportunity to
quantitatively study the emerging dynamics of what is, in some regards, a
new language.

The impact of historical context on language dynamics is not limited to
emerging languages, but extends to languages that have been active and
evolving continuously for a thousand years. We find that historical
episodes can drastically perturb the properties of existing languages over
large time scales. Moreover, recent studies show evidence for
short-timescale cascading behavior in blog
trends25<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref25>,
26<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref26>,
analogous to the aftershocks following earthquakes and the cascades of
market volatility following financial news
announcements52<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref52>.
The nontrivial autocorrelations and the leptokurtic growth distributions
demonstrate the significance of exogenous shocks which can result in growth
rates that significantly exceeding the frequencies that one would expect
from non-interacting proportional growth
models29<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref29>,
30<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref30>
.

A large number of the world's ethnic groups are separated along linguistic
lines. A language barrier can isolate its speakers by serving as a screen
to external events, which may further slow the rate of language evolution
by stalling endogenous change. Nevertheless, we find that the distribution
of word growth rates significantly broadens during times of large scale
conflict, revealed through the sudden increases in *σ*(*t*) for the
English, French, German and Russian corpora during World War
II24<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref24>.
This can be understood as manifesting from the unification of public
consciousness that creates fertile breeding ground for new topics and
ideas. During war, people may be more likely to have their attention drawn
to global issues. Remarkably, the pronounced change during WWII was not
observed for the Spanish corpus, documenting the relatively small roles
that Spain and Latin American countries played in the war.
  Methods

   - Introduction<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#introduction>
   - Results<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#results>
   - Discussion<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#discussion>
   - Methods
   - References<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#references>
   - Acknowledgements<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#acknowledgments>
   - Author information<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#author-information>
   - Supplementary
information<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#supplementary-information>

Quantifying the word use trajectory

Once a word is introduced into a language, what are the characteristic
growth patterns? To address this question, we first account for important
variations in words, as the growth dynamics may depend on the frequency of
the word as well as social and technological aspects of the time-period
during which the word was born.

Here we define the age or trajectory year *τ* = *t* – *t*0,*i* as the
number of years after the word's first appearance in the database. In order
to compare trajectories across time and across varying word frequency, we
normalize the trajectories for each word *i* by the average use

 over the lifetime *Ti* ≡ *tf,i* – *t*0,*i* + 1 of the word, leading to the
normalized trajectory,

 By analogy, in order to compare various growth trajectories, we normalize
the relative growth rate trajectory by the standard deviation over the
entire lifetime,

 Hence, the normalized relative growth trajectory is

 Figs. S4–S7<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#supplementary-information>show
the weighted averages 〈
*f *′(*τ*|*Tc*)〉 and 〈*r*′(*τ* |*Tc*)〉 and the weighted standard deviations
*σ*[*f *′(*τ*|*Tc*)] and *σ*[*r*′(*τ*|*Tc*)] calculated using normalized
trajectories for new words in each corpus. We compute and for each
trajectory year *τ* using all *Nt* trajectories (Table
S1<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#supplementary-information>)
that satisfy the criteria *Ti* ≥ *Tc* and *ti*,0 ≥ 1800. We compute the
weighted average and the weighted standard deviation using 〈*fi*〉 as the
weight value for word *i*, so that and reflect the lifetime trajectories of
the more common words that are “new” to each corpus.

Since there is an intrinsic word maturity *σ*[*r*′(*τ*|*Tc*)] that is not
accounted for in the quantity , we further define the detrended relative
growth

 which allows us to compare the growth factors for new words at various
life stages. The result of this normalization is to rescale the standard
deviations for a given trajectory year *τ* to unity for all values of .
Detrended fluctuation analysis of individual *fi*(*t*)

Here we outline the DFA method for quantifying temporal autocorrelations in
a general time series *fi*(*t*) that may have underlying trends, and
compare the output with the results expected from a time series
corresponding to a 1-dimensional random walk.

In a time interval *δt*, a time series *Y* (*t*) deviates from the previous
value *Y* (*t* – *δt*) by an amount *δY* (*t*) ≡ *Y* (*t*) – *Y* (*t* – *δt*).
A powerful result of the central limit theorem, equivalent to Fick's law of
diffusion in 1 dimension, is that if the displacements are independent
(uncorrelated corresponding to a simple Markov process), then the total
displacement Δ*Y* (*t*) = *Y* (*t*) – *Y* (0) from the initial
location *Y*(0) ≡ 0 scales according to the total time
*t* as

 However, if there are long-term correlations in the time series *Y* (*t*),
then the relation is generalized to

 where *H* is the Hurst exponent which corresponds to positive correlations
for *H* > 1/2 and negative correlations for *H* < 1/2.

Since there may be underlying social, political, and technological trends
that influence each time series *fi*(*t*), we use the detrended fluctuation
analysis (DFA) method35<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref35>,
36<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref36>,
37<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref37>to
analyze the residual fluctuations Δ
*fi*(*t*) after we remove the local trends. The method detrends the time
series using time windows of varying length Δ*t*. The time series corresponds
to the locally detrended time series using window size Δ*t*. We calculate
the Hurst exponent *H* using the relation between the root-mean-square
displacement *F*(Δ*t*) and the window size
Δ*t*35<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref35>,
36<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref36>,
37<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref37>,


 Here is the local deviation from the average trend, analogous to Δ*Y* (*t*)
defined above.

Fig. S2<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#supplementary-information>shows
4 different
*fi*(*t*) in panel (a), and plots the corresponding *Fi*(Δ*t*) in panel
(b). The calculated *Hi* values for these 4 words are all significantly
greater than the uncorrelated *H* = 0.5 value, indicating strong positive
long-term correlations in the use of these words, even after we have
removed the local trends using DFA. In these example cases, the trends are
related to political events such as war in the cases of “Americanism” and
“Repatriation”, or the bursting associated with new technology in the case
of “Antibiotics,” or new musical trends illustrated in the case of
“polyphony.”

In Fig. S3<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#supplementary-information>we
plot the pdf of
*Hi* values calculated for the relatively common words analyzed in
Fig. 6(b)<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#f6>.
We also plot the pdf of *Hi* values calculated from shuffled time series,
and these values are centered around 〈*H*〉 ≈ 0.5 as expected from the
removal of the intrinsic temporal ordering. Thus, using this method, we are
able to quantify the social memory characterized by the Hurst exponent
which is related to the bursting properties of linguistic trends, and in
general, to bursting phenomena in human
dynamics25<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref25>,
26<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref26>,
38<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref38>,
39<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref39>.
Recent analysis of Google words data compares the Hurst exponents of words
describing social phenomena to the Hurst exponents of words describing
natural phenomena(54<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#ref54>
). Interestingly, Gao et al. find that these 2 word classes are described
by distinct underlying processes, as indicated by the corresponding Hivalues.
  References
 Acknowledgements
Author information

   - Introduction<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#introduction>
   - Results<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#results>
   - Discussion<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#discussion>
   - Methods<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#methods>
   - References<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#references>
   - Acknowledgements<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#acknowledgments>
   - Author information
   - Supplementary
information<http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html#supplementary-information>

 Affiliations

   1. Laboratory for the Analysis of Complex Economic Systems, IMT Lucca
   Institute for Advanced Studies, Lucca 55100, Italy
      - Alexander M. Petersen
   2. Center for Polymer Studies and Department of Physics, Boston
   University, Boston, Massachusetts 02215, USA
      - Joel Tenenbaum &
      - H. Eugene Stanley
   3. Minerva Center and Department of Physics, Bar-Ilan University,
   Ramat-Gan 52900, Israel
      - Shlomo Havlin

 Contributions

A. M. P., J. T., S. H. & H. E. S., designed research, performed research,
wrote, reviewed and approved the manuscript. A. M. P. and J. T. performed
the numerical and statistical analysis of the data.
 Competing financial interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.
 Corresponding author

Correspondence to:

   - Alexander M.
Petersen<http://www.nature.com/srep/foxtrot/svc/authoremailform?doi=10.1038/srep00313&file=/srep/2012/120315/srep00313/full/srep00313.html&title=Statistical+Laws+Governing+Fluctuations+in+Word+Use+from+Word+Birth+to+Word+Death&author=Alexander+M.+Petersen>



-- 
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+

 Harold F. Schiffman

Professor Emeritus of
 Dravidian Linguistics and Culture
Dept. of South Asia Studies
University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, PA 19104-6305

Phone:  (215) 898-7475
Fax:  (215) 573-2138

Email:  haroldfs at gmail.com
http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~haroldfs/

-------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lgpolicy-list/attachments/20120321/4350d912/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
This message came to you by way of the lgpolicy-list mailing list
lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu
To manage your subscription unsubscribe, or arrange digest format: https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/listinfo/lgpolicy-list


More information about the Lgpolicy-list mailing list