Japanese is one of the least dense languages in the sense of bits-per-syllable, but one of the most dense languages when talking about bits-per-character.
or maybe we should say bits-per-unicode-glyph
@PeterCxy how do you compare it with Chinese?
@squirrel_publicist If you compare it with classicial chinese then chinese is definitely more dense in both bits-per-syllable and bits-per-glyph. But I am not sure how does it compare with modern chinese. The modern form has a lot of auxillary words that are unnecessary in the classical form and I don't really know if those are more or less dense than japanese auxillary words / kana endings / inflections. Plus that modern chinese also has a lot of loan words originating from japanese, which also decreased the overall density.
@PeterCxy the distinction between modern and classical chinese is an interesting point. I guess that also is part of the rise of mandarin or beifang dialect as the national language, which I hear is simpler than the other chinese languages?
@squirrel_publicist yes, but generally the whole family of languages are developing towards the direction of simplification. Classicial Chinese (or at least the "Literary Chinese") is a frozen form of Chinese from nearly 2000 years ago and hasn't changed a lot since -- any colloquial form is thousands of times easier than that. I think the main reason Mandarin today being less dense is that it was "colloquialized" around 100 years ago to reflect what people actually say better.
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!