CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 332Complex Network Analysis TechniquesSyntax, Semantics, Linguistic VariationLanguage and cultural evolution

Patterns in syntactic dependency networks

Open access
Ferrer i Cancho, Ramon, Solé, Ricard V., Köhler, Reinhard·2004·Physical Review E
DOI 10.1103/physreve.69.051915
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Many languages are spoken on Earth. Despite their diversity, many robust language universals are known to exist. All languages share syntax, i.e., the ability of combining words for forming sentences. The origin of such traits is an issue of open debate. By using recent developments from the statistical physics of complex networks, we show that different syntactic dependency networks (from Czech, German, and Romanian) share many nontrivial statistical patterns such as the small world phenomenon, scaling in the distribution of degrees, and disassortative mixing. Such previously unreported features of syntax organization are not a trivial consequence of the structure of sentences, but an emergent trait at the global scale.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1103/physreve.69.051915

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Small-world and scale-free properties are universal features of human language on a macro scale.

    “Consequently, small-world and scale-free properties are seen as universal features of human language on a macro scale (Ferrer i Cancho et al., 2004; Cong and Liu, 2014).”

    From Syntactic Networks of Interlanguage Across L2 Modalities and Proficiency Levels (2021) · cites this paper as Ferrer i Cancho et al., 2004

    The Results and Global Versus Sentence-Level Patterns sections report scale-free degree distributions and small-world properties emerging at the macroscopic scale in the networks studied. But the Discussion says these patterns are only candidates for linguistic universals and that more work is needed to establish them; the paper does not establish them as universal features of human language. Page numbers were not provided in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Syntactic networks of different language types have the same small-world and scale-free properties as other complex networks.

    “By analyzing complex networks, researchers have found that the syntactic networks of different language types have the same small-world and scale-free properties as other complex networks.”

    From Syntactic Networks of Interlanguage Across L2 Modalities and Proficiency Levels (2021) · cites this paper as Ferrer i Cancho et al., 2004

  • Highly connected words tend not to be interconnected.

    “Second, in terms of syntactic connectivity, highly connected words tend not to be interconnected (Ferrer i Cancho et al., 2004).”

    From Syntactic Networks of Interlanguage Across L2 Modalities and Proficiency Levels (2021) · cites this paper as Ferrer i Cancho et al., 2004

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 42

  1. D. Crystal, The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language (Cam- bridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1997).
  2. G. K. Zipf, Human Behaviour and the Principle of Least Ef- fort. An introduction to Human Ecology, 1st ed. (Addison- Wesley, Cambridge, MA, 1949); reprinted by (Hafner, New York, 1972).
  3. R. Köhler, J. Quantitative Linguistics 6, 46 (1999).
  4. R. Köhler and G. Altmann, J. Quantitative Linguistics 7, 189 (2000).
  5. L. Hřebíček, Quantitative Linguistics, edited by G. Altmann, R. Köhler, and B. Rieger (Wissenschaftlicher Verlag, Trier, 1995), Vol. 56.
  6. M. D. Hauser, N. Chomsky, and W. T. Fitch, Science 298, 1569 (2002).
  7. M. Donald, Origins of the modern mind (Cambridge Univer- sity Press, Cambridge, MA, 1991).
  8. M. Donald, in Approaches to the Evolution of Language: So- cial and Cognitive Bases, edited by J. R. Hurford, M. Studdert- Kennedy, and C. Knight (Cambridge University Press, Cam- bridge, 1998), pp. 44-67.
  9. A. E. Motter, A. P. S. de Moura, Y.-C. Lai, and P. Dasgupta, Phys. Rev. E 65, 065102 (2002).
  10. M. Sigman and G. A. Cecchi, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 99, 1742 (2002).
  11. M. Steyvers and J. Tenenbaum, e-print cond-mat/0110012. · arXiv
  12. O. Kinouchi, A. S. Martinez, G. F. Lima, G. M. Lourenço, and S. Risau-Gusman, Physica A 315, 665 (2002).
  13. R. Ferrer i Cancho and R. V. Solé, Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. B 268, 2261 (2001).
  14. S. N. Dorogovtsev and J. F. F. Mendes, Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. B 268, 2603 (2001).
  15. A.-L. Barabási and R. Albert, Rev. Mod. Phys. 74, 47 (2002).
  16. S. N. Dorogovtsev and J. F. F. Mendes, Adv. Phys. 51, 1079 (2002).
  17. M. E. J. Newman, SIAM Rev. 45, 167 (2003).
  18. R. Hudson, Word Grammar (Blackwell, Oxford, 1984).
  19. I. Melčuk, in International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences, edited by N. J. Smelser and P. B. Baltes (Pergamon, Oxford, 2002), pp. 8336-8344.
  20. B. Bollobás, Modern Graph Theory, Graduate Texts in Math- ematics Vol. 184 (Springer, New York, 1998).
  21. D. J. Watts and S. H. Strogatz, Nature (London) 393, 440 (1998).
  22. A.-L. Barabási and R. Albert, Science 286, 509 (1999).
  23. J. Uriagereka, Rhyme and Reason. An Introduction to Minimal- ist Syntax (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1998).
  24. L. Uhlírova, I. Nebeská, and J. Králík, in COLING 82, Pro- ceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Computa- tional Linguistics, Prague, edited by J. Horecký (North- Holland, Amsterdam, 1982), pp. 391-396.
  25. M. E. J. Newman, J. Stat. Phys. 101, 819 (2000).
  26. E. Ravasz, A. L. Somera, D. A. Mongru, Z. N. Oltvai, and A.-L. Barabási, Science 297, 1551 (2002).
  27. E. Ravasz and A.-L. Barabási, Phys. Rev. E 67, 026112 (2002).
  28. K.-I. Goh, E. Oh, H. Jeong, B. Kahng, and D. Kim, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 99, 12583 (2002).
  29. M. Barthélemy, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 189803 (2003).
  30. U. Brandes, J. Math. Sociol. 25, 163 (2001).
  31. M. E. J. Newman, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 208701 (2002).
  32. M. E. J. Newman, Phys. Rev. E 67, 026126 (2003).
  33. L. A. Adamic, Proceedings of the ECDL'99 Conference, LNCS 1696 (Springer, Berlin, 1999) pp. 443-452.
  34. S. Valverde, R. Ferrer i Cancho, and R. V. Solé, Europhys. Lett. 60, 512 (2002).
  35. H. Jeong, S. Mason, A.-L. Barabási, and Z. N. Oltvai, Nature (London) 411, 41 (2001).
  36. R. Ferrer i Cancho and R. V. Solé, in Statistical Mechanics of Complex Networks, edited by R. Pastor-Satorras, J. M. Rubi, and A. Diaz-Guilear, Lecture Notes in Physics Vol. 625 (Springer, Berlin, 2003), pp. 114-125.
  37. M. A. Nowak and D. C. Krakauer, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 96, 8028 (1999).
  38. M. A. Nowak, J. B. Plotkin, and V. A. Jansen, Nature (London) 404, 495 (2000).
  39. M. A. Nowak, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London, Ser. B 355, 1615 (2000).
  40. D. Bickerton, Language and Species (Chicago University Press, 1990).
  41. J. A. Hawkins, in Innateness and Function in Language Uni- versals, edited by J. A. Hawkins and M. Gell-Mann (Addison- Wesley, Redwood, CA, 1992), pp. 87-120.
  42. P. Lieberman, Uniquely Human: The Evolution of Speech, Thought and Selfless Behavior (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1991).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ferrer i Cancho, R., Solé, R. V., & Köhler, R.
Affiliations
  • Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats (ES)
  • Universität Trier (DE)
ORCID
Venue
Physical Review E
Publisher
American Physical Society (APS)
Published
2004-05-26
Volume
69
Issue
5
Pages
051915-051915
ISSN
  • 1539-3755 (ISSN-L)
  • 1550-2376
DOI
10.1103/physreve.69.051915
OpenAlex
W2105544934
Cited by
332
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 11
FWCI
7.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
link.aps.org/licenses/aps-default-license (vor)
Locations
  • Physical Review E (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RECERCAT (Consorci de Serveis Universitaris de Catalunya) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
  • UPCommons institutional repository (Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
  • LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
Funders
  • Santa Fe Institute
  • Generalitat de Catalunya
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Complex Network Analysis Techniques
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
  • Social Sciences › Cultural Studies › Language and cultural evolution
Keywords
language universals, small-world networks, disassortative mixing, complex networks, Czech, German, Romanian language
MeSH terms
Germany, Humans, Language, Linguistics, Phonetics, Romania, Speech, Speech Perception, Models, Statistical, Czech Republic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review