@twiane
Is it possible to query ‘‘how many common names are added under each lexicon’’ for @fffffffff ?
I think the smallest lexicon can be discarded cause no one will use them…
SELECT lexicon, COUNT() count
FROM taxon_names
GROUP BY lexicon
HAVING COUNT() > 10
ORDER BY count DESC;
lexicon | count
---------------------------------------------------+---------
Chinese (Traditional) | 23853
Chinese Traditional | 414
are you running sql against your own copy of this table, or are you querying the actual database? if the latter, how are you querying against the database?
Here’s a list of name counts for reptiles, mammals, amphibians and birds in all the site translated languages and a few others (there are over 400 lexicons). The data is a few months old, was not collected all at the same time and has changed since. It was originally gathered to find names with missing lexicons.
Yes anyone can create a lexicon, which has lead to duplicates like Norwegian Bokmål and Norwegian Bokmal; and Nonbre Comun, Nombres Científicos, Nomes Científicos, Nomi Scientifici, Noms Scientifiques, Научные названия and 學名. There are about 670 lexicons at this moment!
Data 1-1-2023, threshold 10.000. there are over 1015 lexicons.
language
lexicon
COUNT
en
English
262888
zh-CN
Chinese (Simplified)
100218
cs
Czech
79038
ja
Japanese
67281
es
Spanish
60175
ru
Russian
58002
zh
Chinese (Traditional)
55315
fr
French
45777
de
German
43379
nl
Dutch
36845
fi
Finnish
36241
pt
Portuguese
29258
sv
Swedish
28531
nb
Norwegian
26996
da
Danish
20267
af
Afrikaans
19030
ko
Korean
18465
ar
Arabic
14960
th
Thai
13253
it
Italian
12938
pl
Polish
12876
lt
Lithuanian
12350
et
Estonian
12132
Interesting idea and maybe also valid for ‘common names’. But it has the same issue as a taxon name: if the correct name is not available the observation will get an incorrect name or a taxon at a higher value.
More than 12,000 names in Estonian. Estonian is rather a niche language, with a bit over 1 million speakers according to Omniglot. This is similar to Fang and only half as many as Fante. Then there is Yoruba, with 42 miliion speakers.
I note that of the top 23 in your embedded image, the majority are European languages, and the one that could be thought of as African is of European origin (Afrikaans, genetically related to Dutch). Ethnologue estimates that there are 448 Indo-European languages as compared with 1,553 Niger-Congo languages. Niger-Congo is the largest language family, followed by Austronesian with 1,257 languages and Trans-New Guinea with 481. Indo-European is fourth.
What if the three largest language families had proportionately as many common names in iNat’s database as the fourth-place family?
You need to find people to add those, I’m saddened to know how few names have many languages, of them top is Kazakh with 230, that’s unacceptable, no wonder there’re so few observers.
I agree that there is a relation between the number of common names in iNaturalist and the use of the platform. But most people are too busy to add them… But does my reaction answer your question? What statistics you mean?
names=common names?
names=contributor? I do not get it.
Names meaning common names, I wouldn’t refer to people as names.)
Your doc gives a current statistics, I don’t know what is needed to find it a year later or any random day, by statistics Iean just that, number of names in each language (added on iNat).