In order to begin this hip hop analysis, I will explain how I conducted my research and how statistical measurements were gathered. In doing so, one critical reader may be able to deduce how I approached these statistics in order to replicate it. This study was performed in a detailed manner, analyzed in depth for both lexical density and lyrical quality.

Lexical Density vs. Lyrical Quality:

While lexical density and lyrical qualities are different, this study analyzed the characteristics of such differences. It’s clear that greater lexical density does not necessarily equate to lyrical quality–this distinction is critical for this lyrical analysis. The thesis for this analysis is very clear–the lyrical density and lyrical quality of underground hip hop is significantly greater and drastically different than that of mainstream hip hop. As such, this study attempts to chart these differences. One must not presuppose that all underground hip hop artists will have lyrics significantly different than that of their mainstream counterparts; however, this study will oversee whether there is a difference or not. In the end, this study will chart these differences in order to inspire future studies in the topic.

Lexical Density:

Lexical Density reviews the text’s readability, as such, it is a measure of how easily or difficult the text is to read. It uses the following formula:

Lexical Density = (Number of different words / Total number of words) x 100

According to UsingEnglish.com: ”The lexical density of a text tries to measure the proportion of the content (lexical) words over the total words. Texts with a lower density are more easily understood.” Essentially, a text that is dense has a percentage around 60-70%, while a text with low density has around 40-50%. Furthermore, lexical density measures how much information there is in a text, as such, it provides the depth of meaning through the use of content words and information words (PrimarySchoolScience.com). While these texts may not appear inherently difficult and challenging, it is highly dependent on the structure of the sentences and its complex characteristics. Texts may convey both technical vocabulary (that listeners may not know, or names), as well as unfamiliar vocabulary which produces an increase in such densities. As such, I will be analyzing texts not only for its lexical density, but of lyrical quality in order to illustrate how these artists are significantly different, or may be similar to their mainstream counterparts.

SMOG Index

The SMOG (Simple Measure of Gobbledygook) Index was used in this study to analyze what grade level one must be in order to comprehend the lyrics of these rappers. It’s important to consider the level simply because the texts convey very different lexical densities than their mainstream counterparts. Clearly, one must be of adequate grade level in order to comprehend individuals like Immortal Technique, Aztlan Underground and even Apathy, for they use lyrics and diction that are not so easily digested by mainstream hip hop listeners. According to its founder, G. Harry McLaughlin (1969), “It is to be understood that SMOG Grades 13-16 indicate the need for college education; 17-18 the need for graduate training; and 19 and above, the need for a higher professional qualification” (SMOG grading: A new readability formula. Journal of Reading, 12 (8) 639-646).

The SMOG Index formula “yields an outstandingly high 0.985 correlation with the grades of readers who had 100% comprehension of test materials.” This means that often, the grade levels indicated by the SMOG Index are accurate to the grade levels required to comprehend the lexical densities of these lyrics.

SMOG Index Formula

Gunning-Fog Index

The Gunning-Fog Index is a statistical measuring tool used to assess how easy, or hard a text is easy to read. This essentially serves as a double check to the Lexical Density measurement already explained above. The reason for this is to assess the validity of both statistical values and compare their findings. In doing so, these rap lyrics will undergo more scrutiny statistically. The formula is as follows:

Gunning-Fog Index Formula

Similarly to the SMOG Index, the Gunning-Fog Index calculates the hypothetical age required to understand the text. Furthermore, this value determines the difficulty level of the text. According to UsingEnglish: “The Gunning Fog Index formula implies that short sentences written in plain English achieve a better score than long sentences written in complicated language.” The Fog Index is a useful value that will show the complexity of the text and adds as a comparison with the SMOG Index & Lexical Density. The complexities of the lyrics are ranged between 11 (average readability, ease of understanding) to 18 (technical prose, difficult to understand, requires some vocabulary).

Limitations

This study does not go without its limitations. Firstly, words like “y’all” and words that end with an apostrophe, like: nothin’, somethin’, etc… have been corrected in order for them to be analyzed properly. Furthermore, I broke down the lyrics via stanzas, lines separated by commas until the end of each stanza.