back
8 comments
So it's not the first time this chart is actually posted on HN but actually almost everything is wrong on it. German does not include Austria, French does not include African countries, Chinese should be splitted, English and Russian numbers are way too low (I suspect at least half of the population of Ukraine speaks Russian). And there is I'm sure lots of other mistakes.
The premise of a countable number of languages should tip off the reader that this is mostly for entertainment value; Africa appears to be entirely missing (bad data source?). I like the visualization though, in that it relates nation-states to linguistic identity. It shows a generally strong correspondence between these two variables, with some outliers, generally related to colonial history: people in India speak many languages; Spanish is spoken by people in many nations.
But that correspondence is artificial. For example, the Latin languages are more similar than the Chinese dialects. The main reason why Spanish is a language and Mandarin is a dialect is political.
I thought Austria was the grey spot at the lower right hand corner? Seems a bit small for 8+ million people, though, maybe 3 million in my eyes.

It also says "first language speakers" in the overview circle towards upper left hand corner of the whole infographic, so maybe that's what they counted, not native or fluent speakers. That could perhaps explain the perceived low number of Ukrainian speakers of Russian?

this assumes one language per country. it would be more interesting to see a multilingual visualisation, eg how many people are able to communicate in english vs. french, even if it's not their first language. that would give a good idea which languages are winning the homogenization.

also cantonese and mandarin people cannot understand each other, despite sharing some written characters, so lumping them together seems inaccurate, like lumping spanish and italians together because they have the same script.

It does say "'Chinese' as macrolanguage includes different languages and dialects", probably to avoid arguments about whether they're languages or dialects.

Cantonese is a dialect of Yuht Yúh (粵語), which is, as you say, a distinct language as it is mutually unintelligible with other varieties of Chinese. Though Cantonese speakers usually write in Standard Chinese (i.e. the written form of Mandarin), Yuht Yúh also has its own distinct written form (https://zh-yue.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%B2%B5%E8%AA%9E), as it often uses different words from Mandarin.

It's interesting to compare with the Italic languages (Italian, Spanish, Catalan, Portuguese, French, and Romanian). These are similarly far apart as the Chinese 'dialects'. The Chinese situation is as if the Roman Empire never collapsed, and the Italic language speakers continued to use Classical Latin as a written language, then about 100 years ago decided to replace Latin with Spanish as the written standard throughout the Empire, as it was the most widely spoken language.

Well, that's certainly the best linguistic analogy I've heard in a while.
6.3 billion people included in the study? Why does that seem dishonest. Maybe I'm one out of seven?