DOCSLIB.ORG

From Wordlists to Proto-Wordlists: Reconstruction As ʻoptimal Selectionʼ

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
From Wordlists to Proto-Wordlists: Reconstruction As ʻoptimal Selectionʼ From wordlists to proto-wordlists: reconstruction as ʻoptimal selectionʼ George Starostin* INTRODUCTION In several of my previous publications (Starostin 2010, 2013a, 2013b), I have repeatedly stressed the importance of combining, rather than opposing the classic comparative method, elaborated by several generations of historical linguists over the past two hundred years, and lexicostatistical methodology, originally introduced by Morris Swadesh and his colleagues in the 1950s and once again popular these days due to a massive influx of computational phylogenetic methods from adjacent branches of science. It was with that precise purpose — to integrate the two approaches — that a team of Moscow-based historical linguists set up The Global Lexicostatistical Database (GLD)1, a large-scale project that aims at applying a uniform, maximally formalized lexicostatistical methodology to all the languages of the world in order to arrive at a reasonable genetic classification, while at the same time corroborating the results with knowledge gained from traditional historical linguistics and philology. One of the most important postulates of the GLD is that lexicostatistics, applied on the basis of superficial phonetic comparison of words that belong to thousands of different languages (e.g. similar to the procedure that is currently employed in S. Wichmann's ASJP project, see Holman et al. 2008), will not be of much use to describe language relationships that go beyond several thousand years. In other words, the best way to explore the issue of, say, the external relations of Indo-European on a lexicostatistical basis would be to operate with a single wordlist for Proto-Indo-European, rather than with several hundred wordlists for its daughter languages. Even more than that — to explore the far less controversial, but almost as problematic issue of the internal classification of Indo-European, it would make more sense to operate with the reconstructed proto-wordlists for Proto-Germanic, Proto-Celtic, Proto-Slavic, etc., than with mass data from modern languages, which clutter the data with large amounts of secondary accumulated ʻnoiseʼ and raise the risks of distorting the resulting classification. * Russian State University for the Humanities, Moscow; Russian Presidential Academy, Moscow: [email protected] 1 The GLD currently operates as an autonomous website, subordinate to the larger ʻTower of Babelʼ project, originally launched by Sergei Starostin as a digital hub for etymological databases (http://starling.rinet.ru). 178 George Starostin Consequently, in this paper I will discuss some important, but frequently overlooked or understated details of how one should go about trying to reconstruct what might be called an ʻoptimalʼ proto-wordlist for a protolanguage. By wordlist I typically understand a Swadesh-type wordlist, i.e. a list of basic words whose meanings are relatively well defined2 and in most cases (although there may be solitary exceptions) find precise equivalents in any given language of the world. As a rule, the GLD operates with the regular 100-item Swadesh wordlist or its truncated 50-item version (see Starostin 2013a for details on the validity and usage of the shortened version), but the rules and recommendations presented below would work equally well for any other version, as long as the elements on the wordlist are assigned discrete meanings3. 1. PRELIMINARY REMARKS Although from the point of view of phylogenetic thinking, step-by-step reconstruction of proto-wordlists would seem to be a logical move, such a procedure is not commonly encountered in historical linguistics. Reconstructing a proto-wordlist is not at all the same thing as reconstructing morphemes, a far more natural occupation for etymologists all over the world. Above all, it presumes that the reconstructed morpheme (or word) (1) will be assigned a concrete, rather than vague, semantic definition, coinciding with the required meaning of the corresponding element on the wordlist (e.g. ʻseeʼ rather than ʻlook, see, observe, examine, thinkʼ; ʻliverʼ rather than ʻk. of internal organ or intestineʼ; ʻredʼ rather than ʻblood, red, brightly colouredʼ, etc.); (2) will have a better chance of representing this particular meaning in its basic (most stylistically neutral or frequent) usage on the proto-level than any other reconstructible morpheme (or word). We should stress that within the context of a lexicostatistical evaluation, the main goal of reconstructing a proto-wordlist is not a thorough and conclusive study of phonetic correspondences, including rare and non-trivial ones (although such a study is always useful). First and foremost, such a reconstruction helps define the optimal probable set of etyma4 that could have served as the main 2 It is, of course, well-known that many of the elements on the original Swadesh wordlist were not all that precisely defined in Swadesh's original works, which gave researchers a solid pretext to replace any of the elements that they deemed uncomfortable for their own purposes. An attempt to eliminate many of these problems by associating various Swadesh items with diagnostic syntactic contexts and semantic commentary has been published as Kassian et al. 2010 and is currently used as a set of guidelines in the construction of the GLD. 3 This paper essentially represents a somewhat reworked and improved English translation of one single subsection in the ʻMethodologyʼ chapter of the author's recent Russian language monograph on the lexicostatistical classification of the languages of Africa (Starostin 2013), with the addition of several important details and a special illustrative appendix. 4 We typically define an etymon as a correlated pair <sound (X) : meaning (Y)> that may be reconstructed for a proto-language based on regular reflexes in descendant languages. .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Eric Smith, Santa Fe Institute
    Dating and Relationships (or...) Computational historical linguistics and long-range reconstruction Eric Smith, Santa Fe Institute Part of the Evolution of Human Languages project at SFI <http://ehl.santafe.edu/> in collaboration with the Tower of Babel project <http://starling.rinet.ru/main.html> Thanks to Murray Gell-Mann, George Starostin, Ilia Peiros, in memory of Sergei Starostin Work done jointly with Tanmoy Bhattacharya, Jon Wilkins, Dan Hruschka, William Croft, Ian Maddieson, Logan Sutton, and Mark Pagel Outline • Goals of historical linguistics • The classical comparative method • Attempts at deep reconstruction • New observations change the landscape • Our attempts at quantitative reconstruction Goals of historical linguistics • To understand how languages change, and how they have changed historically • To identify relations among languages due to common ancestry or cultural contact • To reconstruct the languages of past speakers • To contribute to an understanding of human populations and migrations • To understand what is possible in language as a window on cognitive constraints The interaction of history with process • History-dependent phenomena combine lawful dynamics with historical accident • Accidents make branching processes -- h0ROTO 4URKICv help us infer diachronic relations from synchronic variability • Diachronic relations assign the v correct weights to processes h# h HULYM 3 h7ESTERN ENISEI A 9 Y which act probabilistically h AN v 4URKICv v v UT v LTAI /LD AK 9 ! h h 4URKIC 4 - 1YZ 3 4 8 3 . 8 9 + # $ 3 OFA UV AR AK AK YR ! HOR ALAJ HUV IDDLE# OLGAN ! OTHERCLOSELANGUAGES Y 5 G LTAI/IR A UT AS YL8 LTAI YZ ASH IGHUR AK HULYM AS OT The classical comparative method of historical linguistics: to interpret innovations • A hypothesis of relationship among a set of languages.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparative-Historical Linguistics and Lexicostatistics
    COMPARATIVE-HISTORICAL LINGUISTICS AND LEXICOSTATISTICS Sergei Starostin COMPARATIVE-HISTORICAL LINGUISTICS AND LEXICOSTATISTICS [This is a translation, done by I. Peiros and N. Evans, of my paper "Sravnitel'no-istoričeskoe jazykoznanie i leksikostatistika", in "Lingvističeskaja rekonstrukcija i drevnejšaja istorija Vostoka", Moscow 1989. I have introduced, however, a number of modifications into the final English text — basically rewritten it again, since the English version needs English examples and etymologies, not Russian ones.] The last two decades have witnessed a fundamental advance in the techniques of comparative linguistic research. A prolonged period of comparative work with a wide range of language families has laid the foundation for the study of genetic relationships between remotely related languages or language groups. The first step in this direction was taken by V.M. Illich-Svitych in his seminal work 'Towards a comparison of the Nostratic languages' in which, with a combination of rigorous methods and intuitive flare, he begins to demonstrate the relatedness of a number of languages of the Old World. This new level of comparative studies appears completely legitimate. In fact, if we take the theory of language divergence as axiomatic, we have to concede the fact that from around the sixth millenium B.C. to the first millenium B.C. there was quite a number of different reconstructable proto-languages throughout the world. Once the level of reconstruction of various proto-languages is improved, the question inevitably arises: are any of these proto-languages genetically related and, if so, can we prove this relationship? To the first part of this question we must now answer in the affirmative.
    [Show full text]
  • Current Progress in Altaic Etymology
    Blažek : Current Progress in Altaic Etymology Linguistica ONLINE. Added: January, 30th 2006. tjurkskix jazykov: obščetjurkskie i mežtjurkskie leksičeskie osnovy na bukvy "k", "q", http://www.phil.muni.cz/linguistica/art/blazek/bla-004.pdf Moskva: Jazyki russkoj kuľtury 1997). In his publications O. Mudrak especially ISSN 1801-5336 concentrates on two topics, historical phonology of Chuvash (1987, 1989, 1993, 1994) and reconstruction of Jurchen (1985, 1988). I. Gruntov has published an article on the historical phonology of Japanese in the Altaic context (2000). [*] The first version of the present review was finished in May 2005. This new version Current Progress in Altaic Etymology originates to up-to-date the sources on the one hand. The second reason consists in the Václav Blažek unexpected death of the head of the author’s team, Sergei Starostin, on 30th September 2005. Sergei Starostin, Anna Dybo, Oleg Mudrak, with assistance of Ilya Gruntov and Vladi- The Etymological Dictionary of the Altaic Languages (= EDAL) is open by Preface mir Glumov: Etymological Dictionary of the Altaic Languages, Part One [A-K], Part (pp. 7-9) where the purposes of the present dictionary and a short history of Altaic Two [L-Z], Part Three [Indices], Leiden-Boston: Brill 2003, published in the prestigeous studies are described. The Introduction (pp. 11-236) starts with the Chapter One devoted series Handbook of Oriental Studies / Handbuch der Orientalistik 8/1-3, edited by Denis to The problem of Interlingual borrowings in Altaic languages (pp. 13-21). Here it is Sinor & Nicola di Cosmo [ISSN 0169-8524]. These three volumes are of a respectable demonstrated, how the phonetic criteria may serve to distinguish the borrowings from size: pp 1-858, 859-1556, 1557-2096 respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Time Depth in Historical Linguistics”, Edited by Colin Renfrew, April
    Time Depth 1 Review of “Time Depth in Historical Linguistics”, edited by Colin Renfrew, April McMahon, and Larry Trask Brett Kessler Washington University in St. Louis Brett Kessler Psychology Department Washington University in St. Louis Campus Box 1125 One Brookings Drive St. Louis MO 63130-4899 USA Email: [email protected] FAX: 1-314-935-7588 Time Depth 2 Review of “Time Depth in Historical Linguistics”, edited by Colin Renfrew, April McMahon, and Larry Trask Time depth in historical linguistics. Ed. by Colin Renfrew, April McMahon, and Larry Trask. (Papers in the prehistory of languages.) Cambridge, England: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, 2000. Distributed by Oxbow Books. 2 vol. (xiv, 681 p.) paperback, 50 GBP. http://www.mcdonald.cam.ac.uk/Publications/Time-depth.htm This is a collection of 27 papers, mostly presentations at a symposium held at the McDonald Institute in 1999. Contributions focus on two related issues: methods for establishing absolute chronology, and linguistic knowledge about the remote past. Most papers are restatements of the authors’ well-known theories, but many contain innovations, and some do describe new work. The ideological balance of the collection feels just left of center. We do not find here wild multilateral phantasms, reconstructions of Proto-World vocabulary, or idylls about pre-Indo-European matriarchal society. Or not much. These are mostly sober academics pushing the envelope in attempts to reason under extreme uncertainty. One of the recurrent themes was that the development of agriculture may drive the expansion of language families and therefore imply a date for the protolanguage. Colin Renfrew describes his idea that that is what happened in the case of Indo-European (IE): PIE was introduced into Europe at an early date, perhaps 8,000 BC.
    [Show full text]
  • "Evolution of Human Languages": Current State of Affairs
    «Evolution of Human Languages»: current state of affairs (03.2014) Contents: I. Currently active members of the project . 2 II. Linguistic experts associated with the project . 4 III. General description of EHL's goals and major lines of research . 6 IV. Up-to-date results / achievements of EHL research . 9 V. A concise list of actual problems and tasks for future resolution. 18 VI. EHL resources and links . 20 2 I. Currently active members of the project. Primary affiliation: Senior researcher, Center for Comparative Studies, Russian State University for the Humanities (Moscow). Web info: http://ivka.rsuh.ru/article.html?id=80197 George Publications: http://rggu.academia.edu/GeorgeStarostin Starostin Research interests: Methodology of historical linguistics; long- vs. short-range linguistic comparison; history and classification of African languages; history of the Chinese language; comparative and historical linguistics of various language families (Indo-European, Altaic, Yeniseian, Dravidian, etc.). Primary affiliation: Visiting researcher, Santa Fe Institute. Formerly, professor of linguistics at the University of Melbourne. Ilia Publications: http://orlabs.oclc.org/identities/lccn-n97-4759 Research interests: Genetic and areal language relationships in Southeast Asia; Peiros history and classification of Sino-Tibetan, Austronesian, Austroasiatic languages; macro- and micro-families of the Americas; methodology of historical linguistics. Primary affiliation: Senior researcher, Institute of Slavic Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences (Moscow / Novosibirsk). Web info / publications list (in Russian): Sergei http://www.inslav.ru/index.php?option- Nikolayev =com_content&view=article&id=358:2010-06-09-18-14-01 Research interests: Comparative Indo-European and Slavic studies; internal and external genetic relations of North Caucasian languages; internal and external genetic relations of North American languages (Na-Dene; Algic; Mosan).
    [Show full text]
  • Tocharian Studies
    Tocharian Studies Works 1 This book was kindly reviewed by Ronald Kim & Melanie Malzahn Václav Blažek Tocharian Studies Works 1 Edited by Michal Schwarz Masaryk University Brno 2011 IV This book was published under patronage of the Centre for the Interdiscipli- nar Research of Ancient Languages and Older Stages of Modern Languages (project code: MSM 0021622435) at Masaryk University in Brno and thanks to the grants GAAV No. IAA901640805 & MUNI/21/BLA/2011. All articles are reprinted with kind permission from following journals (in alphabetical order): Archív orientální Historische Sprachforschung Indogermanische Forschungen Journal of Indo-European Studies Lingua Posnaniensis Linguistica Baltica Linguistica Brunensia Tocharian and Indo-European Studies © 2011 Václav Blažek © 2011 Masarykova univerzita ISBN 978-80-210-7645-7 (online : pdf) ISBN 978-80-210-5600-8 (brožovaná vazba) ISBN 978-80-210-5599-5 (Box Set) DOI: 10.5817/CZ.MUNI.M210-5600-2011 V Content Preface (Melanie Malzahn) VIII Introduction and Plan of the Works of Václav Blažek X Chronological list of all Tocharian articles of Václav Blažek XII with editorial notes I. Etymology 1 Tocharian Linguistics During the Last 25 Years. Archív Ori- 2 entální 56 (1988), 77-81. Slavic-Tocharian Isoglosses I. Sl. *kъpъ : Toch. *kwip- 10 “shame”. Tocharian and Indo-European Studies 5 (1991), 123-128. Slavic-Tocharian Isoglosses II. Sl. *čьlnъ : Toch. *kolmo- 15 “ship”. Tocharian and Indo-European Studies 5 (1991), 129- 133. Slavic-Tocharian Isoglosses III. Linguistica Baltica 4 (1995), 19 233-238. Tocharian-Anatolian isoglosses (1-4). Tocharian and Indo-Eu- 25 ropean Studies 7 (1997), 229-233. It is possible to restore Tocharian A ku//// “nave, hub”? Tocha- 30 rian and Indo-European Studies 7 (1997), 234-235.
    [Show full text]
  • ON APPLICATION of GLOTTOCHRONOLOGY for CELTIC LANGUAGES Dedicated to the Memory of Sergei Starostin (March 24, 1953 – September 30, 2005)
    SBORNÍK PRACÍ FILOZOFICKÉ FAKULTY BRNĚNSKÉ UNIVERZITY STUDIA MINORA FACULTATIS PHILOSOPHICAE UNIVERSITATIS BRUNENSIS A 54, 2006 — LINGUISTICA BRUNENSIA PETRA NOVOTNÁ – VÁCLAV BLAŽEK ON APPLICATION OF GLOTTOCHRONOLOGY FOR CELTIC LANGUAGES Dedicated to the memory of Sergei Starostin (March 24, 1953 – September 30, 2005) The present article continues in the series of studies published in this journal, demonstrating the application of lexicostatistics and glottochronology for vari- ous Indo-European branches, namely Germanic (Blažek & Pirochta 2004), Slavic (Novotná & Blažek 2005). Especially in the latter study the various modifications of glottochronology are explained in details. For Celtic languages two main alternative models of their internal classifica- tion were proposed. The traditional, p/q-model, is based especially on phonology, the Insular/Continental dichotomy has been argumented by morphology. Goidelic Goidelic q-Celtic Insular Celtiberian Brittonic Gaulish & Lepontic Gaulish & Lepontic p-Celtic Continental Brittonic Celtiberian (H. Pedersen, K.H. Schmidt) (P. Schrijver, C. Watkins) The lexicostatistic approach for a study of genetic relations of the Celtic lan- guages was introduced by Robert Elsie (1979; 1986; 1990). Applying lexicostatis- tic method with 100–word-list and excluding synonyms, he has got the following results for the Brittonic languages: Breton-Cornish 84.8%, Cornish-Welsh 78.8%, Breton-Welsh 73.7% (Elsie 1979, 48). In the case of the Goidelic languages, Elsie studied in details together 58 various Goidelic dialects and varieties on the basis of 184–word-list. He concludes that Manx is closer to any of the dialect group of Irish than to any of the dialect group of Scottish Gaelic (Elsie 1986, 244). The second attempt to apply the lexicostatistic approach for classification of the Celtic languages was realized, unfortunately not published, by Sergei Staros- tin, who used his own modification of glottochronology.
    [Show full text]
  • Seeking the Traces of the Indo-European Homeland
    FROM AUGUST SCHLEICHER TO SERGEI STAROSTIN On the development of the tree-diagram models of the Indo-European languages Václav Blažek The purpose of the present study is to confront most representative models of the internal classification of Indo-European languages and their daughter branches. 0. Indo-European 0.1. In the 19th century the tree-diagram of A. Schleicher (1860) was very popular: Germanic Lithuanian Slavo-Lithuaian Slavic Celtic Indo-European Italo-Celtic Italic Graeco-Italo- -Celtic Albanian Aryo-Graeco- Greek Italo-Celtic Iranian Aryan Indo-Aryan After the discovery of the Indo-European affiliation of the Tocharian A & B languages and the languages of ancient Asia Minor, it is necessary to take them in account. The models of the recent time accept the Anatolian vs. non-Anatolian (‘Indo-European’ in the narrower sense) dichotomy, which was first formulated by E. Sturtevant (1942). Naturally, it is difficult to include the relic languages into the model of any classification, if they are known only from several inscriptions, glosses or even only from proper names. That is why there are so big differences in classification between these scantily recorded languages. For this reason some scholars omit them at all. 0.2. Gamkrelidze & Ivanov (1984, 415) developed the traditional ideas: Greek Armenian Indo- Iranian Balto- -Slavic Germanic Italic Celtic Tocharian Anatolian 1 0.3. Vladimir Georgiev (1981, 363) included in his Indo-European classification some of the relic languages, plus the languages with a doubtful IE affiliation at all: Tocharian Northern Balto-Slavic Germanic Celtic Ligurian Italic & Venetic Western Illyrian Messapic Siculian Greek & Macedonian Indo-European Central Phrygian Armenian Daco-Mysian & Albanian Eastern Indo-Iranian Thracian Southern = Aegean Pelasgian Palaic Southeast = Hittite; Lydian; Etruscan-Rhaetic; Elymian = Anatolian Luwian; Lycian; Carian; Eteocretan 0.4.
    [Show full text]
  • Permutation Test Applied to Lexical Reconstructions Partially Supports the Altaic Linguistic Macrofamily
    Evolutionary Human Sciences (2021), 3, e32, page 1 of 10 doi:10.1017/ehs.2021.28 RESEARCH ARTICLE Permutation test applied to lexical reconstructions partially supports the Altaic linguistic macrofamily Alexei S. Kassian1* , George Starostin2,3* , Ilya M. Egorov1 , Ekaterina S. Logunova4 and Anna V. Dybo5 1School of Advanced Studies in the Humanities, The Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, Moscow, Russia, 2Institute for Oriental and Classical Studies, National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russia, 3Santa Fe Institute, New Mexico, USA, 4Institute of Linguistics, Russian State University for the Humanities, Moscow, Russia and 5Institute of Linguistics, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia *Corresponding authors. E-mails: [email protected], [email protected]. Abstract In this paper, we present the results of our analysis of the 110-item basic wordlists for four reconstructed and one ancient languages, the linguistic ancestors of five language families which are hypothesized to constitute the Altaic (a.k.a. Transeurasian) macrofamily: Proto-Turkic, Proto-Mongolic, Proto- Tungusic, Middle Korean and Proto-Japonic wordlists. Protolanguage wordlists were reconstructed according to strict criteria of semantic reconstruction, based on accurate semantic glossing of forms in daughter languages. Each involved form was encoded into a bi-consonantal CC-shaped sequence using the consonant class method, after which a recently developed weighted permutation test was applied. In a typical situation, our algorithm makes a small number of type 1 errors (false positive), but the num- ber of type 2 errors (false negative) can be substantial. Our main finding is that pairs between the Nuclear Altaic taxa – Turkic, Mongolic and Tungusic – as well as the Turkic-Japonic and Tungusic-Japonic pairs demonstrate significant p-values.
    [Show full text]
  • Mother Tongue 24 Must Be Put Out, After All! the Key Findings Will Simply Be Numbered- No Special Order
    MOTHER CONTENTS ASLIP Business plus Important Announcements TONGUE 4 Obituaries: John Swing Rittershofer (1941-1994) 6 Reviews of Cavalli-Sforza et al's History and Geography of Human Genes. Reviewed by: Rebecca L. Cann, Frank B. Livingstone, and NEWSLETIER OF Hal Fleming THE ASSOCIATION 30 The "Sogenannten" Ethiopian Pygmoids: Hal Fleming FOR THE STUDY OF 34 Long-Range Linguistic Relations: Cultural Transmission or Consan­ lANGUAGE IN guinity?: Igor M Diakonoff 41 Statistics and Historical Linguistics: Some Comments PREHISTORY Sheila Embleton 46 A Few Remarks on Embleton's Comments: Hal Fleming 50 On the Nature of the Algonquian Evidence for Global Etymologies Marc Picard 55 Greenberg Comments on Campbell and Fleming Joseph H. Greenberg 56 A Few Delayed Final Remarks on Campbell's African Section Hal Fleming 57 Some Questions and Theses for the American Indian Language Classification Debate (ad Campbell, 1994): John D. Bengtson 60 A Note on Amerind Pronouns: Merritt Ruhlen 62 Regarding Native American Pronouns: Ives Goddard 65 Two Aspects of Massive Comparisons: Hal Fleming 69 Proto-Amerind *qets' 'left (hand)': Merritt Ruhlen 71 Arapaho, Blackfoot, and Basque: A "Snow" Job: Marc Picard 73 World Archaeological Congress 3. Summary by: Roger Blench 76 Comment on Roger Blench's Report on World Archaeological Congress: Hal Fleming 77 Announcement: Seventh Annual UCLA Indo-European Conference 78 Announcement: 11th Annual Meeting of the Language Origins Society 79 Quick Notes 86 A Valediction of Sorts: Age Groups, Jingoists, and Stuff Hal Fleming Issue 24, March 1995 MOTHER TONGUE Issue 24, March 1995 OFFICERS OF ASLIP (Address appropriate correspondence to each.) President: Harold C.
    [Show full text]
  • Proof of the Algonquian-Wakashan Relationship
    Sergei L. Nikolaev Institute of Slavic studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences (Moscow/Novosibirsk); [email protected] Toward the reconstruction of Proto-Algonquian-Wakashan. Part 1: Proof of the Algonquian-Wakashan relationship The first part of the present study, following a general introduction (§ 1), presents a classifi- cation and approximate glottochronological dating for the Algonquian-Wakashan languages (§ 2), a preliminary discussion of regular sound correspondences between Proto-Wakashan, Proto-Nivkh, and Proto-Algic (§ 3), and an analysis of the Algonquian-Wakashan “basic lexi- con” (§ 4). The main novelty of the present article is in its attempt at formal demonstration of a genetic relationship between the Nivkh, Algic, and Wakashan languages, arrived at by means of the standard comparative method, i. e. establishing a system of regular sound cor- respondences between the vocabularies of the compared languages. Proto-Salishan is con- sidered as a remote relative of Proto-Algonquian-Wakashan; at the same time, no close (“Mosan”) relationship between Wakashan and Salish has been traced. Additionally, lexical correspondences between Proto-Chukchi-Kamchatkan, Proto-Algonquian-Wakashan, and Proto-Salishan are also reviewed. The conclusion is that no genetic relationship exists be- tween Chukchi-Kamchatkan, on the one hand, and Algonquian-Wakashan, languages (Nivkh included), on the other hand. Instead, it seems more likely that Proto-Chukchi-Kamchatkan has borrowed words from Wakashan, Salishan, and Algic (but probably not vice versa; § 5). The Algonquian-Wakashan, Salishan and Chukchi-Kamchatkan common cultural lexicon is also examined, resulting in the identification of numerous “cultural” loans from Wakashan and Salish into Proto-Chukchi-Kamchatkan. Borrowing from Salishan into Proto-Nivkh was far less intensive, as there are no reliable Nivkh-Wakashan contact words.
    [Show full text]
  • Titelblatt 37
    Glottometrics 37 2017 RAM-Verlag Glottometrics Glottometrics ist eine unregelmäßig er- Glottometrics is a scientific journal for the scheinende Zeitdchrift (2-3 Ausgaben pro quantitative research on language and text Jahr) für die quantitative Erforschung von published at irregular intervals (2-3 times a Sprache und Text. year). Beiträge in Deutsch oder Englisch sollten Contributions in English or German writ- an einen der Herausgeber in einem gängi- ten with a common text processing system gen Textverarbeitungssystem (vorrangig (preferably WORD) should be sent to one WORD) geschickt werden. of the editors. Glottometrics kann aus dem Internet her- Glottometrics can be downloaded from the untergeladen, auf CD-ROM (in PDF For- Internet , obtained on CD-ROM (in PDF) mat) oder in Buchform bestellt werden. or in form of printed copies. Herausgeber – Editors G. Altmann Univ. Bochum (Germany) [email protected] K.-H. Best Univ. Göttingen (Germany) [email protected] R. Čech Univ. Ostrava (Czech Republic) [email protected] F. Fan Univ. Dalian (China) [email protected] P. Grzybek Univ. Graz (Austria) [email protected] E. Kelih Univ. Vienna (Austria) [email protected] R. Köhler Univ. Trier (Germany) [email protected] H. Liu Univ. Zhejiang (China) [email protected] J. Ma čutek Univ. Bratislava (Slovakia) [email protected] G. Wimmer Univ. Bratislava (Slovakia) [email protected] P. Zörnig Univ. Brasilia (Brasilia) [email protected] External academic peers for Glottometrics Prof. Dr. Haruko Sanada Rissho University ,Tokyo, Japan (http://www.ris.ac.jp/en/ ); Link to Prof. Dr. Sanada: http://researchmap.jp/read0128740/?lang=english ; mailto:[email protected] Prof.
    [Show full text]