hyphenate it
Back

The Quest for the Perfect Hyphenation Algorithm: Franklin Mark Liang's Algorithm

AF
Alexandru Furculita

Jul 13, 2024•13 min read

When you think about the intricacies of text processing, hyphenation probably isn’t the first thing that comes to mind. It might not even make the top ten. But if you’ve ever been jarred by a word split awkwardly at the end of a line in a book or a paper, you’ll appreciate that hyphenation is more than just a minor detail. It’s one of those small but vital aspects of typography that can make or break the readability of a text. Franklin Mark Liang, under the mentorship of the legendary Donald Knuth, took on the challenge of developing a hyphenation algorithm that would become a cornerstone of modern typesetting.

Setting the Scene: The Problem of Hyphenation

Before we dive into the technicalities, let’s set the stage a bit. Typesetting—especially computerized typesetting—was undergoing a revolution in the 1970s and 1980s. Donald Knuth, dissatisfied with the state of computerized typesetting, embarked on a mission to create a typesetting system that could produce professional-quality documents. This led to the development of TeX, a system that has become the gold standard for typesetting, particularly in academic and scientific communities.

TeX was (and still is) brilliant, but there was a catch: it needed a way to automatically hyphenate words. Hyphenation isn’t just about sticking a dash in the middle of a word wherever it fits. There are rules—lots of them. English, with its bizarre mix of linguistic influences, presents a particular challenge because many of these rules have exceptions, and some exceptions have exceptions.

A poor hyphenation algorithm would produce text that was hard to read, with words broken at points that made them look ugly or even confusing. Imagine reading a paragraph and seeing words like “rel- ationship” or “fin-ance” broken in the middle of a line. It’s not just visually jarring; it can slow down reading and comprehension, turning a smooth reading experience into a choppy one. That’s where Liang’s work comes in.

The Early Approaches: Rule-Based and Dictionary-Based Methods

Before Liang’s algorithm, most hyphenation systems relied on two main approaches: rule-based methods and dictionary-based methods.

Rule-based methods attempted to hyphenate words based on a set of predefined rules. For example, one common rule might be to hyphenate compound words or to split between double consonants (e.g., “sum-mer”). This method works reasonably well, but English, being the unruly language it is, has plenty of exceptions to these rules. Plus, this method doesn’t account for the subtleties of pronunciation or the more complex words that don’t follow simple rules.

Dictionary-based methods were another approach. Here, the system would check each word against a precompiled list of words with their hyphenation points marked. If the word was in the dictionary, the system could hyphenate it correctly. This method could be highly accurate, but it had a significant downside: it required a massive dictionary, which took up a lot of memory and could slow down the typesetting process. Additionally, any word not in the dictionary—new words, technical terms, or even common words with multiple acceptable hyphenation points—would be left out in the cold.

Neither method was perfect, and both had serious drawbacks that made them less than ideal for use in a system like TeX, which was designed to be highly efficient and adaptable.

The Inspiration: A Better Way to Hyphenate

Liang, working under Knuth’s guidance, was inspired to find a middle ground between these two approaches. He wanted an algorithm that was as accurate as a dictionary-based method but without the heavy memory demands. At the same time, it needed the flexibility of a rule-based method but without the brittleness that comes from strict, inflexible rules.

This led him to think about hyphenation in a new way—not as a problem of finding rules or building a massive word list, but as a problem of pattern recognition. After all, many hyphenation rules could be seen as patterns in the way letters and syllables are arranged in words.

The Core Idea: Patterns and Tries

Liang’s breakthrough idea was to use patterns of letters to identify potential hyphenation points. These patterns would essentially serve as mini-rules that could be applied to any word. For example, the pattern “tion” could suggest that a word ending in these letters could be hyphenated as “ti-on.” Similarly, the pattern “con” might indicate that words beginning with these letters could be hyphenated as “con-” at certain points.

But how do you efficiently store and search through all these patterns? That’s where the data structure known as a trie comes into play. A trie (pronounced like “try”) is a tree-like structure that allows for fast retrieval of strings, making it perfect for storing the patterns Liang wanted to use.

What is a Trie?

Let’s take a quick detour to explain what a trie is. Imagine you have a bunch of strings—say, words in a dictionary—and you want to organize them in a way that allows you to find any word quickly. You could just list them all out, but that’s not very efficient. Instead, you could create a tree structure where each level of the tree corresponds to a letter in the string.

For example, suppose you have the words “cat,” “car,” and “dog.” In a trie, you would start with a root node, then create branches for each letter. The first branch might split into “c” and “d” for “cat/car” and “dog,” respectively. From the “c” branch, you would then branch out again for “a,” leading to further branches for “t” and “r.” This way, common prefixes like “ca” are shared, which saves space and allows for fast lookup.

Liang’s Innovation: The Packed Trie

Liang didn’t just stop with a basic trie. He realized that while tries are efficient, they can still end up wasting space—especially when dealing with English words, which share a lot of common prefixes and suffixes. So, he developed what he called a packed trie.

The packed trie is an optimized version of the trie that minimizes wasted space by carefully packing the data into a structure that leaves no room unused. It’s like taking a suitcase and fitting every single item into it with no wasted space—no gaps, no empty corners. Every byte of memory is used as efficiently as possible.

The Packed Trie in Action

Here’s how it works in practice. When you’re storing patterns in a trie, many branches may have only one or two children. In a standard trie, this could lead to a lot of empty space where branches don’t go anywhere. But in a packed trie, Liang’s algorithm would pack these branches together tightly, reusing space where possible.

This might sound like a small improvement, but it had a significant impact. The packed trie allowed Liang’s algorithm to store a large number of patterns in a relatively small amount of memory. This made the algorithm both fast and space-efficient—two critical factors for any typesetting system.

Generating the Patterns

Okay, so Liang had figured out how to store the patterns efficiently. But how do you come up with the patterns in the first place? After all, English words can be pretty unpredictable.

Liang’s approach was to generate patterns automatically from a list of words with known hyphenation points. Essentially, he used a dictionary of words that were already correctly hyphenated and analyzed them to find patterns that could be generalized.

Analyzing the Words

Let’s say you have a word list with words like “computer,” “nation,” and “understand.” Liang’s algorithm would look at where these words are hyphenated and try to find commonalities. For example, if “nation” is hyphenated as “na-tion,” and “station” is hyphenated as “sta-tion,” the algorithm might identify “tion” as a pattern that suggests a hyphenation point just before the “t.”

But it’s not just about finding one pattern—it’s about finding the right set of patterns that work together to cover as many words as possible, with as few mistakes as possible. This process of generating and selecting patterns is a bit like trying to find the perfect combination of puzzle pieces that fit together just right.

Patterns and Heuristics

To make the pattern generation process more effective, Liang also employed heuristics. Heuristics are rules of thumb—guidelines that help the algorithm make decisions when there isn’t a clear-cut answer. For example, a heuristic might prioritize shorter patterns because they’re more likely to match multiple words, or it might favor patterns that have fewer exceptions.

These heuristics allowed Liang’s algorithm to strike a balance between finding as many hyphenation points as possible and avoiding errors. It’s like teaching the algorithm to have a bit of judgment—knowing when to follow a pattern strictly and when to be a bit more flexible.

Handling Exceptions: Because English is Weird

Of course, no matter how many patterns you have, there will always be exceptions—those weird words that don’t fit the mold. English is full of them. Words like “knight” or “island” don’t follow the usual rules, and trying to hyphenate them based on patterns alone could lead to some odd results.

To handle these exceptions, Liang’s algorithm included a small exception dictionary. This dictionary wasn’t meant to store every possible word—just the ones that couldn’t be correctly hyphenated by patterns alone. Think of it as a VIP list for words that needed special treatment.

Balancing Patterns and Exceptions

The challenge, of course, was to keep the exception list small. If the list grew too large, it would defeat the purpose of the algorithm, which was to avoid the need for a massive dictionary. Liang had to strike a balance, including just enough exceptions to handle the trickiest cases while relying on patterns for the vast majority of words.

This balance between patterns and exceptions is one of the reasons Liang’s algorithm was so successful. It was comprehensive enough to handle most words correctly, but lean enough to be fast and efficient.

The Results: A Nearly Perfect Hyphenation Algorithm

After all this work—designing the trie, generating patterns, and handling exceptions—what were the results? In short, Liang’s algorithm was a huge success. It could correctly hyphenate about 89% of the words in a typical dictionary, with almost no errors. For comparison, earlier attempts at hyphenation were lucky to get anywhere near that level of accuracy.

Memory Efficiency

One of the most impressive aspects of Liang’s algorithm was how little memory it used. Thanks to the packed trie and the careful selection of patterns, the algorithm was incredibly space-efficient. This was critical in the days when computer memory was a precious resource, but it’s still valuable today in applications where efficiency matters.

Speed and Accuracy

The algorithm wasn’t just space-efficient—it was fast too. Because the patterns were stored in a packed trie, the algorithm could quickly look up hyphenation points without having to sift through a massive dictionary. This speed, combined with its high accuracy, made it perfect for use in TeX and other typesetting systems where performance is key.

The Legacy: Liang’s Algorithm in the Real World

Liang’s hyphenation algorithm didn’t just stay in the realm of academic research. It became a core component of TeX, which is still widely used today for typesetting books, academic papers, and other documents that require high-quality typography.

Impact on Typesetting

TeX is known for producing beautifully typeset documents, and part of that beauty comes from its ability to hyphenate words correctly. Liang’s algorithm plays a big role in this, ensuring that text is split in a way that’s both aesthetically pleasing and easy to read.

If you’ve ever read a math textbook, a scientific journal, or even a well-formatted PDF, there’s a good chance you’ve seen Liang’s work in action. His algorithm helps to make sure that the text flows smoothly from line to line, without awkward breaks or distracting hyphenations.

Influence on Other Systems

Liang’s work has also influenced other hyphenation systems. While TeX might be the most famous application of his algorithm, the ideas behind it—especially the use of patterns and tries—have been adopted in various forms in other text processing and typesetting systems.

The Bigger Picture: What Liang’s Work Teaches Us

At first glance, hyphenation might seem like a minor problem. But Liang’s work on this topic illustrates something important about computer science and problem-solving in general: even the smallest details matter, and solving these details can have a big impact.

The Power of Data Structures

One of the key takeaways from Liang’s work is the power of data structures. The packed trie wasn’t just a clever solution; it was the foundation that made the entire algorithm possible. Without it, Liang’s algorithm wouldn’t have been nearly as efficient or effective.

This highlights the importance of choosing the right data structure for the problem at hand. In computer science, the way you organize and store information can be just as important as the algorithms you use to process it.

Balancing Generality and Specificity

Another lesson from Liang’s work is the importance of balancing generality and specificity. The patterns in his algorithm are general enough to apply to a wide range of words, but specific enough to avoid most errors. The use of heuristics helps the algorithm to strike this balance, making it both powerful and flexible.

This balance is crucial in many areas of computer science, where the goal is often to create solutions that work well in a variety of situations, without being too rigid or too vague.

Wrapping Up: Liang’s Lasting Contribution

Franklin Mark Liang’s work on hyphenation algorithms might not be as flashy as some other breakthroughs in computer science, but its impact is undeniable. His algorithm has stood the test of time, continuing to be used in TeX and influencing other systems as well.

Liang’s approach to hyphenation—using patterns, packed tries, and a careful balance of general rules and specific exceptions—turned what could have been a mundane problem into a fascinating and elegant solution. It’s a reminder that even in the world of algorithms and data structures, there’s room for creativity, innovation, and a bit of artistry.

So next time you’re reading a beautifully typeset book or a perfectly formatted academic paper, take a moment to appreciate the work that went into making sure every word is hyphenated just right. Somewhere in the background, Liang’s algorithm is hard at work, making sure your reading experience is as smooth and seamless as possible.

And who knows? Maybe the next time you’re faced with a tricky problem—whether it’s in computer science or elsewhere—you’ll find inspiration in Liang’s approach: look for the patterns, choose the right structure, and remember that even the smallest details can make a big difference.

References