548:"It may be worth while to illustrate this view of classification, by taking the case of languages. If we possessed a perfect pedigree of mankind, a genealogical arrangement of the races of man would afford the best classification of the various languages now spoken throughout the world; and if all extinct languages, and all intermediate and slowly changing dialects, had to be included, such an arrangement would, I think, be the only possible one. Yet it might be that some very ancient language had altered little, and had given rise to few new languages, whilst others (owing to the spreading and subsequent isolation and states of civilisation of the several races, descended from a common race) had altered much, and had given rise to many new languages and dialects. The various degrees of difference in the languages from the same stock, would have to be expressed by groups subordinate to groups; but the proper or even only possible arrangement would still be genealogical; and this would be strictly natural, as it would connect together all languages, extinct and modern, by the closest affinities, and would give the filiation and origin of each tongue."
463:, 1861) and aryaque (H. Chavée, 1867). These men were all polyglots and prodigies in languages. (Klaproth, for example, the author of the successful German-language candidate, Indo-Germanisch, who criticised Jones for his uncritical method, knew Chinese, Japanese, Tibetan and a number of other languages with their scripts.) The concept of a Biblical Ursprache appealed to their imagination. As hope of finding it gradually died they fell back on the growing concept of common Indo-European spoken by nomadic tribes on the plains of Eurasia, and although they made a good case that this language can be deduced by the methods of comparative linguistics, in fact that is not how they obtained it. It was the one case in which their efforts to find the Ursprache succeeded.
699:"Any language consists of thousands of forms with both sound and meaning ... any sound whatever can express any meaning whatever. Therefore, if two languages agree in a considerable number of such items ... we necessarily draw a conclusion of common historical origin. Such genetic classifications are not arbitrary ... the analogy here to biological classification is extremely close ... just as in biology we classify species in the same genus or high unit because the resemblances are such as to suggest a hypothesis of common descent, so with genetic hypotheses in language."
956:
which are closest only to each other, are assumed to have a common ancestor, a-b. The next closest language, c, is assumed to have a common ancestor with a-b, and so on. The result is a projected series of historical paths leading from the overall common ancestor (the root) to the languages (the leaves). Each path is unique. There are no links between paths. Every leaf and node have one and only one ancestor. All the states are accounted for by descent from other states. A cladogram that conforms to these requirements is a perfect phylogeny.
1015:
was obtained; that is, the compatibility of the network was highest. As it turned out, the number of compatible networks generated might vary from none to over a dozen. However, not all the possible interfaces were historically feasible. Interfaces between some languages were geographically and chronologically not very likely. Inspecting the results, the researchers excluded the non-feasible interfaces until a list of only feasible networks remained, which could be arranged in order of compatibility score.
952:, a special kind of tree in which the links only bifurcate; that is, at any node in the same direction only two branches are offered. The input data is a set of characters that can be assigned states in different languages, such as present (1) or absent (0). A language therefore can be described by a unique coordinate set consisting of the state values for all of the characters considered. These coordinates can be like each other or less so. Languages that share the most states are most like each other.
960:
researchers. In order to find the factors that did bear on phylogeny the researchers needed to have some measure of the accuracy of their results; i.e., the results needed to be calibrated against known phylogenies. They ran the experiment using different assumptions looking for the ones that would produce the closest matches to the most secure Indo-European phylogenies. Those assumptions could be used on problem areas of the Indo-European phylogeny with greater confidence.
371:. In it he applied the logic of the tree model to three languages, Greek, Latin and Sanskrit, but for the first time in history on purely linguistic grounds, noting "a stronger affinity, both in the roots of the verbs and in the forms of grammar, than could possibly have been produced by accident; ...." He went on to postulate that they sprang from "some common source, which, perhaps, no longer exists." To them he added Gothic, Celtic and Persian as "to the same family."
235:
31:
676:
1027:, a historical linguist and Indo-Europeanist. The trees differed mainly in the placement of the most ambiguous group, the Germanic languages, and Albanian, which did not have enough distinctive characters to place it exactly. Tree A contained 14 incompatible characters; B, 19; C, 17; D, 21; E,18. Trees A and C had the best compatibility scores. The incompatibilities were all lexical, and A's were a subset of C's.
786:
495:
165:
299:"I will now hoist sail for the Netherlands, whose language is the same dialect with the English, and was so from the beginning, being both of them derived from the high Dutch : The Danish also is but a branch of the same tree ... Now the High Dutch or Teutonick Tongue, is one of the prime and most spacious Maternal Languages of Europe ... it was the language of the
990:, which explained borrowing, were a complete explanation of the group's characters, no phylogeny at all could be found for it. If both models were partially effective, then a tree would exist, but it would need to be supplemented by non-genetic explanations. The researchers therefore modified the software and method to include the possibility of borrowing.
691:). To discover a cladistic relationship researchers relied on as large a number of morphological similarities among species as could be defined and tabulated. Statistically the greater the number of similarities the more likely species were to be in the same clade. This approach appealed to Greenberg, who was interested in discovering
977:
876:
historical linguistics landscape, the numbers in both cases were necessarily small. The effect was of trying to depict a photograph using a small number of large pixels, or picture units. The limitations of the Tree Model were all too painfully apparent, resulting in complaints from the major historical linguists.
1014:
None of the original candidate trees were perfect phylogenies, although some of the subtrees within them were. The next phase was to generate networks from the trees of highest compatibility scores by adding interfaces one at a time, selecting the interface of highest compatibility, until sufficiency
884:
to study phylogenies. The Indo-European family is a major topic of study. As of
January, 2012, they had collected and coded a "screened" database of "22 phonological characters, 13 morphological characters, and 259 lexical characters," and an unscreened database of more. Wordlists of 24 Indo-European
568:
implies that languages must "progress" or "advance." These ideas foreshadow evolution of either biological species or languages, but after the contact of
Schleicher with Darwin's ideas, and perhaps Darwin's contact with the historical linguists, Evolution and language change were inextricably linked,
1086:
Tree A with the edges described above is described by the authors as "our best PPN." In all PPNs, it is clear that although the initial daughter languages became distinct in relative isolation, the later evolution of the groups can be explained only by evolution in proximity to other languages with
993:
The researchers introduced into the experiment the concept of the interface, or allowed boundary over which character states would flow. A one-way interface, or edge, existed between a parent and a child. If only one-way edges were sufficient to explain the presence of all the states in a language,
959:
At first there seemed to be little consistency of results in trials varying the factors presumed to be relevant. A new cladogram resulted from any change, which suggested that the method was not capturing the underlying evolution of languages but only reflecting the extemporaneous judgements of the
955:
The software massages all the states of all the characters of all the languages by one of several mathematical methods to accomplish a pairwise comparison of each language with all the rest. It then constructs a cladogram based on degrees of similarity; for example, hypothetical languages, a and b,
424:
type is most ancient and primitive, spoken in Asia, to the east of Eden, in the direction of Adam's exit from Eden. Then follows Jones' group, still without a name, but attributed to Jones: "Another ancient and extensive class of languages united by a greater number of resemblances than can well be
1006:
The generation of networks required two phases. In the first phase, the researchers devised a number of phylogenies, called candidate trees, to be tested for compatibility. A character is compatible when its origin is explained by the phylogeny generated. In a perfect phylogeny, all the characters
755:
enables absolute dates to be estimated. Shared cognates (cognates meaning to have common historical origin) are calculate divergence times. However the method was found to be later discredited due to the data being unreliable. Due to this historical linguists have trouble with exact age estimation
212:
not unlike those of later historical linguists, that the family of Heber "preserved that language not unreasonably believed to have been the common language of the race ... thenceforth named Hebrew." Most of the 72 languages, however, date to many generations after Heber. St. Augustine solves this
985:
Despite their care to code the best qualitative characters in sufficient numbers, the researchers could obtain no perfect phylogenies for some groups, such as
Germanic and Albanian within Indo-European. They reasoned that a significant number of characters, which could not be explained by genetic
963:
To obtain a reasonably valid phylogeny, the researchers found they needed to enter as input all three types of characters: phonological, lexical and morphological, which were all required to present a picture that was sufficiently detailed for calculation of phylogeny. Only qualitative characters
875:
The comparative method compares features of various languages to assess how similar one language is to another. The results of such an assessment are data-oriented; that is, the results depend on the number of features and the number of languages compared. Until the arrival of the computer on the
280:
The confusion at the Tower of Babel was thus removed as an obstacle by setting it aside. Attempts to find similarities in all languages were resulting in the gradual uncovering of an ancient master language from which all the other languages derive. Browne undoubtedly did his writing and thinking
1030:
Subsequent generation of networks found that all incompatibilities could be resolved with a minimum of three contact edges except for Tree E. As it did not have a high compatibility, it was excluded. Tree A had 16 possible networks, which a feasibility inspection reduced to three. Tree C had one
997:
A tree so modified was no longer a tree as such: there could be more than one path from root to leaf. The researchers called this arrangement a network. The states of a character still evolved along a unique path from root to leaf, but its origin could be either the root under consideration or a
275:
contendeth, the
Scythian language as the mother tongue runs throughout the nations of Europe, and even as far as Persia, the community on many words, between so many nations, hath more reasonable traduction and were rather derivable from the common tongue diffused through them all, than from any
763:
methods. Techniques such as using models of evolution improves accuracy of tree branch length and topology. There for, using computational phylogenetic methods computational methods enable researchers to analyze linguistic data from evolutionary biology. This further assists in testing theories
879:
In the late 20th century, linguists began using software intended for biological classification to classify languages. Programs and methods became increasingly sophisticated. In the early 21st century, the
Computational Phylogenetics in Historical Linguistics (CPHL) project, a consortium of
255:
This is an inkling of a tree. In Browne's view, simplification from a larger aboriginal language than Hebrew could account for the differences in language. He suggests ancient
Chinese, from which the others descended by "confusion, admixtion and corruption". Later he invokes "commixture and
250:
had brought knowledge of numbers of new languages far beyond the 72 calculated by St. Augustine. Citing the Native
American languages, Browne suggests the "confusion of tongues at first fell only upon those present in Sinaar at the work of Babel ...." For those "about the foot of the hills,
521:, "Darwinism tested by the Science of Language." In a scenario reminiscent of that between Darwin and Wallace over the discovery of evolution (both discovered it independently), Schleicher endorsed Darwin's presentation, but criticised it for not inserting any species. He then presented a
652:. Over the decades after Darwin it became clear that the ranks of Linnaeus' hierarchy did not correspond exactly to the lineages. It became the prime goal of taxonomy to discover the lineages and alter the classification to reflect them, which it did under the overall guidance of the
885:
languages are included. Larger numbers of features and languages increase the precision, provided they meet certain criteria. Using specialized computer software, they test various phylogenetic hypotheses for their ability to account for the characters by genetic descent.
723:
and languages and dialects are like species and varieties. Greenberg formulated large tables of characteristics of hitherto neglected languages of Africa, the
Americas, Indonesia and northern Eurasia and typed them according to their similarities. He called this approach
756:
when pinpointing the age of the Indo-European language family. It could range from 4000 BP to 40,000 BP, or anywhere in-between those dates according to Dixon sourced from the rise and fall of language, (Cambridge
University Press). As seen in the article here.
994:
then there was no need to look beyond the perfect phylogeny. If not, then one or more contact edges, or bidirectional interfaces, could be added to the phylogeny. A language therefore might have more than one source of states: the parent or a contact language.
1011:, no networks are warranted. Candidate trees were obtained by first running the phylogeny-generation software using the Indo-European dataset (the strings of character states) as input, then modifying the resultant tree into other hypotheses to be tested.
935:
An additional limitation of the tree model involves mixed and hybrid languages, as well as language mixing in general since the tree model allows only for divergences. For example, according to
Zuckermann (2009:63), "Israeli", his term for
1441:
A sketch of the history of the East-India company, from its first formation to the passing of the Regulating act of 1773; with a summary view of the changes that have taken place since that period in the internal administration of British
980:
A phylogenetic network, one of many posited by the CPHL. The phylogenetic tree appear in black lines. The contact edges are the red lines. Here there are three, the most parsimonious number required to generate a feasible network for
295:, quasi-fictional letters to various important persons in the realm containing valid historical information. In Letter LVIII the metaphor of a tree of languages appears fully developed short of being a professional linguist's view:
748:
has been used by historical linguists to piece together tree models utilizing discrete lexical, morphological, and phonological data. Chronology can be found but there is no absolute date estimates utilizing this system.
940:, which he regards as a Semito-European hybrid, "demonstrates that the reality of linguistic genesis is far more complex than a simple family tree system allows. 'Revived' languages are unlikely to have a single parent."
230:"Though the earth were widely peopled before the flood ... yet whether, after a large dispersion, and the space of sixteen hundred years, men maintained so uniform a language in all parts, ... may very well be doubted."
1060:
Trees B and E offer the alternative of Proto-Germano-Balto-Slavic (northern Indo-European), making Albanian an independent branch. The only date for which authors vouch is the last, based on the continuity of the
909:. They provide varieties that are not unequivocally one language or another but contain features characteristic of more than one. The issue of how they are to be classified is similar to the issue presented by
221:
St. Augustine's hypothesis stood without major question for over a thousand years. Then, in a series of tracts, published in 1684, expressing skepticism concerning various beliefs, especially Biblical, Sir
436:), the African and the American, which depend on geography and a presumed descent from Eden. Young does not share Adelung's enthusiasm for the language of paradise, and brands it as mainly speculative.
429:
was using "Indo-European commerce" to mean the trade of commodities between India and Europe. All the evidence Young cites for the ancestral group are the most similar words: mother, father, etc.
339:
if one believed it was Hebrew. This mysterious language had the aura of purity and incorruption about it, and those qualities were the standards used to select candidates. This concept of
156:
was developed in response and refers to a group of languages that evolved from a dialect continuum rather than from linguistically isolated child languages of a single language.
968:
and parallel development, which reverted a character to a prior state or adopted a state that evolved in another character, respectively, were screened from the input dataset.
532:, who had appeared to be modifications of a common ancestor. Selection of domestic species to produce a new variety also played a role in his conclusions. The first edition of
394:, continued by Johann Severin Vater. Adelung's work described some 500 "languages and dialects" and hypothesized a universal descent from the language of paradise, located in
113:. However, this is largely a theoretical, qualitative pursuit, and linguists have always emphasized the inherent limitations of the tree model due to the large role played by
1023:
The researchers began with five candidate trees for Indo-European, lettered A-E, one generated from the phylogenetic software, two modifications of it and two suggested by
1933:
82:. As with species, each language is assumed to have evolved from a single parent or "mother" language, with languages that share a common ancestor belonging to the same
1072:
Given the phylogeny of best compatibility, A, three contact edges are required to complete the compatibility. This is group of edges with the fewest borrowing events:
893:
One endemic limitation of the tree model is the very founding presumption on which it is based: it requires a classification based on languages or, more generally, on
528:
The evolution of languages was not the source of Darwin's theory of evolution. He had based that on variation of species, such as he had observed in finches in the
632:), descended in a tree structure over time from simplest to most complex. The Linnaean hierarchical tree was synchronic; Darwin envisioned a diachronic process of
569:
and would become the basis for classification. Now, as then, the main problems would be to prove specific lines of descent, and to identify the branch points.
1034:
Tree A, the most compatible and feasible tree, hypothesizes seven groups separating from Proto-Indo-European between about 4000 BC and 2250 BC, as follows.
1387:
Epistolae Ho-Elianae, Familiar Letters, Domestic and Forren, Divided into Four Books, Partly Historical, Political, Philosophical, Upon Emergent Occasions
315:, who have a Dialect of hers for their vulgar tongue ... Some of her writers would make this world believe that she was the language spoken in paradise."
683:
Greenberg began writing during a time when phylogenetic systematics lacked the tools available to it later: the computer (computational systematics) and
796:
964:
produced meaningful results. Repeated states were too ambiguous to be correctly interpreted by the software; therefore characters that were subject to
506:, or family tree of languages, to Darwin's presentation of evolution shortly after that presentation, is proved by the open letter he wrote in 1863 to
656:, rule books kept by international organizations to authorize and publish proposals to reclassify species and other taxa. The new approach was called
425:
altogether accidental." For this class he offers a name, "Indoeuropean," the first known linguistic use of the word, but not its first known use. The
1887:
Browne, Thomas (1852) , "Miscellany Tracts; Miscellanies; Tract 8, Of Languages, and Particularly of the Saxon Tongue", in Tenison, Thomas (ed.),
1552:
Greenberg, Joseph H. (1990) , "A Quantitative Approach to the Typological Morphology of Language", in Denning, Keith M.; Kemmer, Suzanne (eds.),
101:, which involves using evidence from known languages and observed rules of language feature evolution to identify and describe the hypothetical
1044:
Shortly thereafter, about 3250, Proto-Italo-Celtic (western Indo-European) separated, becoming Proto-Italic and Proto-Celtic at about 2500 BC.
1917:
1536:
271:
made no doubt that he could contrive a letter that might be understood by the English, Dutch, and East Frislander ... And if, as the learned
998:
contact language. If all the states of the experiment could be accounted for by the network, it was termed a perfect phylogenetic network.
1609:
491:
and the regularity of the process. The linguist perhaps most responsible for establishing the link to Darwinism was August Schleicher.
1107:
413:
94:
1627:
1592:
1472:
1898:
200:, and so on. In all he identified 72 nations, tribal founders and languages. The confusion and dispersion occurred in the time of
1653:
745:
920:
The limitations of the tree model, in particular its inability to handle the non-discrete distribution of shared innovations in
552:
Schleicher had never heard of Darwin before Haeckel brought him to Schleicher's attention. He had published his own work on the
439:
Young's designation, successful in English, was only one of several candidates proposed between 1810 and 1867: indo-germanique (
2081:
1076:
First, an edge between Proto-Italic and Proto-Germanic, which must have begun after 2000, according to the dating scheme given.
374:
Jones did not name his "common source" nor develop the idea further, but it was taken up by the linguists of the times. In the
811:
581:
in a series of essays beginning about 1950. Since the adoption of the family tree metaphor by the linguists, the concept of
1050:
At about 3000 Proto-Greco-Armenian (southern Indo-European) divided, becoming Proto-Greek and Proto-Armenian at about 1800.
319:
The search for "the language of paradise" was on among all the linguists of Europe. Those who wrote in Latin called it the
141:
854:
114:
1494:
On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or, The preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life
826:
1879:
881:
760:
476:
356:
130:
390:("Mithridates, or a General History of Languages"), Volume I of which had come out in 1806, and Volumes II and III,
347:
adopted it for their proto-languages. The gap between the widely divergent families of languages remained unclosed.
2064:
1978:"Perfect Phylogenetic Networks: A New Methodology for Reconstructing the Evolutionary History of Natural Languages"
426:
272:
833:
1580:
1557:
618:
251:
whereabout the ark rested ... their primitive language might in time branch out into several parts of Europe and
2043:
924:, have been addressed through the development of non-cladistic (non-tree-based) methodologies. They include the
1132:
1127:
1102:
925:
383:
379:
267:
conceiveth that a dialogue might be composed in Saxon, only of such words as are derivable from the Greek ...
1929:"Splits or waves? Trees or webs? How divergence measures and network analysis can unravel language histories"
1891:, Bohn's Antiquarian Library, vol. III, Lincoln's Inn Fields: Cox (Brothers) and Wyman, pp. 223–241
1524:
840:
733:
729:
578:
110:
98:
1992:
1079:
A second contact edge was between Proto-Italic and Proto-Greco-Armenian, which must have begun after 2500.
456:
47:
1122:
1112:
929:
898:
894:
688:
598:
444:
421:
153:
1503:
it may be worth while to illustrate this view of classification by taking the case of languages Darwin.
822:
769:
213:
first problem by supposing that Heber, who lived 430 years, was still alive when God assigned the 72.
2056:
1667:
692:
641:
452:
291:
75:
1082:
The third contact edge is between Proto-Germanic and Proto-Baltic, which must have begun after 1000.
1997:
1047:
At about 3000, Proto-Albano-Germanic separated, becoming Albanian and Proto-Germanic at about 2000.
725:
649:
106:
1727:
1464:
234:
2010:
1691:
1097:
653:
590:
432:
Adelung's additional classes were the Tataric (which would later be known as the disputed family
177:
1400:
Jones, William (1807) , "Third Anniversary Discourse, on the Hindus", in Lord Teignmouth (ed.),
30:
1528:
1960:
1913:
1683:
1623:
1588:
1584:
1532:
1468:
1305:
1194:
1176:
1066:
921:
906:
901:, there is the possibility for information loss during the translation of data (from a map of
765:
720:
661:
529:
484:
440:
398:
central to the total range of the 500. Young begins by pointing out Adelung's indebtedness to
264:
185:
90:
71:
1056:
Finally, Proto-Indo-European became Proto-Indo-Iranian (eastern Indo-European) at about 2250.
2002:
1950:
1942:
1675:
1658:
1615:
1516:
1456:
1184:
1168:
1053:
Balto-Slavic appeared about 2500, dividing into Proto-Baltic and Proto-Slavic at about 1000.
1008:
1007:
are compatible and the compatibility of the tree is 100%. By the principle of parsimony, or
752:
561:
268:
149:
1498:
675:
1301:
1276:
1255:
1157:"Networks of lexical borrowing and lateral gene transfer in language and genome evolution"
1117:
937:
617:, or most general groups, branching ultimately to the various species. The basis for this
448:
364:
137:
122:
83:
35:
1977:
1457:
544:, suggesting that it be replaced by a "natural arrangement" based on evolution. He says:
1671:
1031:
network, but as it required an interface to Baltic and not Slavic, it was not feasible.
847:
136:
The tree model also has the same limitations as biological taxonomy with respect to the
1955:
1928:
1488:
1189:
1156:
1024:
965:
712:
684:
637:
633:
586:
344:
102:
2050:. Vol. 3: Cognition and Cultural Factors. UK: Wiley-Blackwell – via Scribd.
1259:
1069:
and known Indo-Aryan speaking cultures. All others are described as "dead reckoning."
540:
under the topic of classification. Darwin criticises the synchronic method devised by
2075:
1654:"Language-tree Divergence Times Support the Anatolian Theory of Indo-European Origin"
1573:
1517:
1062:
594:
541:
507:
472:
460:
399:
223:
1155:
List, Johann-Mattis; Nelson-Sathi, Shijulal; Geisler, Hans; Martin, William (2014).
1973:
1699:
1311:
1288:
910:
625:
282:
259:
Browne reports a number of reconstructive activities by the scholars of the times:
145:
97:
between languages since the first attempts to do so. It is central to the field of
2014:
1492:
1713:
1695:
38:, going back 4000 years. (The numbers represent proposed historical dates in the
986:
descent from the group's calculated ancestor, were borrowed. Presumably, if the
785:
645:
67:
1402:
The Works of Sir William Jones with the life of the Author, in Thirteen Volumes
695:. Altering the tree model to make the family tree a phylogenetic tree he said:
133:
as an alternative to the tree model that incorporates horizontal transmission.
2061:
The syntax of natural language: An online introduction using the Trees program
987:
669:
494:
488:
480:
209:
126:
39:
1619:
1180:
276:
particular nation, which hath also borrowed and holdeth but at second hand."
1909:
1767:
949:
657:
610:
582:
565:
243:
164:
1964:
1946:
1687:
1385:
Howell, James (1688) . "Letter LVIII To the Right Honourable the Earl R.".
1198:
1172:
564:, a devout linguist himself, had proposed that the continual necessity for
412:
2006:
510:, published posthumously, however. In 1869, Haeckel had suggested he read
902:
609:
name to every known living organism. These were arranged in a biological
577:
The old metaphor was given an entirely new meaning under the old name by
247:
118:
66:) is a model of the evolution of languages analogous to the concept of a
17:
1728:"Hybridity versus Revivability: Multiple Causation, Forms and Patterns."
1679:
976:
2022:
Young, Thomas (October 1813). "Adlung's General History of Languages".
914:
708:
628:, hypothesized that the groups of the Linnaean classification (today's
602:
395:
312:
304:
79:
93:
in 1853, the tree model has always been a common method of describing
614:
433:
368:
308:
193:
660:, the "generation of phyla," which devised a new tree metaphor, the
593:, the classification of living things, had already been invented by
1404:, vol. III, London: John Stockdale and John Walker, p. 34
1774:, Appendix A. The details of the dataset are stated in Appendix B.
975:
716:
704:
674:
665:
629:
606:
560:
in 1859. The concept of descent of languages was by no means new.
525:
of languages, which, however, was not the first he had published.
493:
411:
300:
233:
201:
189:
184:
founded a nation and that each nation was given its own language:
163:
29:
897:. Since a variety represents an abstraction from the totality of
451:, 1823), indisch-teutsch (F. Schmitthenner, 1826), sanskritisch (
1519:
In search of Jefferson's moose: notes on the state of cyberspace
281:
well before 1684. In that same revolutionary century in Britain
205:
197:
181:
1899:"Trees, Waves and Linkages: Models of Language Diversification"
1389:. Vol. II (6th ed.). London: Thomas Guy. p. 356.
759:
Possible solutions for Glottochronology are forthcoming due to
803:
779:
1714:"CPHL: Computational Phylogenetics in Historical Linguistics"
556:
in an article of 1853, six years before the first edition of
1455:
Williams, D. M.; Ebach, Malte C.; Nelson, Gareth J. (2008).
1647:
1645:
664:. One unit in the tree and all its offspring units were a
621:
was the observed shared physical features of the species.
420:
Young undertakes to present Adelung's classification. The
1842:
1840:
406:
of 1555 and other subsequent catalogues of languages and
1927:
Heggarty, Paul; Maguire, Warren; McMahon, April (2010).
624:
Darwin, however, reviving another ancient metaphor, the
807:
471:
The model is due in its most strict formulation to the
455:, 1827), indokeltisch (A. F. Pott, 1840), arioeuropeo (
1150:
1148:
331:
In English it was the Adamic language; in German, the
144:
a continuous phenomenon that includes exceptions like
1652:
Gray, Russell D.; Atkinson, Quentin D. (2003-11-27).
1554:
On language: selected writings of Joseph H. Greenberg
1444:. London: Black, Parry, and Co. pp. xxxiv–xxxv.
776:
Computational phylogenetics in historical linguistics
948:
The purpose of phylogenetic software is to generate
772:, both claiming origins of Info-European languages.
2044:"15. The Diffusion of Language from Place to Place"
1038:
The first to separate was Anatolian, about 4000 BC.
1572:
1307:The Works of Aurelius Augustine: A New Translation
905:) into a tree. For example, there is the issue of
519:Die Darwinische Theorie und die Sprachwissenschaft
1934:Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B
1087:which an exchange takes place by the wave model.
2030:(XIX Article XII). London: John Murray: 250–292.
1906:The Routledge Handbook of Historical Linguistics
1611:The Rise and Fall of Languages by R. M. W. Dixon
880:historical linguists, received funding from the
536:in 1859 discusses the language tree as though
129:was developed in 1872 by Schleicher's student
703:In this analogy, a language family is like a
475:. The model relies on earlier conceptions of
307:, and continueth yet of the greatest part of
8:
2055:Santorini, Beatrice; Kroch, Anthony (2007).
1904:, in Bowern, Claire; Evans, Bethwyn (eds.),
812:introducing citations to additional sources
1459:Foundations of systematics and biogeography
679:Classification of African language families
105:ancestral to each language family, such as
1230:
388:Mithridates, oder allgemeine Sprachenkunde
1996:
1954:
1188:
416:Kashmir (red), Adelung's location of Eden
180:supposed that each of the descendants of
125:that have multiple mother languages. The
1666:(6965). Nature Publishing Group: 435–9.
802:Relevant discussion may be found on the
1858:
1846:
1831:
1819:
1807:
1795:
1783:
1771:
1754:
1742:
1225:
1223:
1144:
1019:Most feasible network for Indo-European
589:and was generally accepted in biology.
487:by adding the exceptionlessness of the
1372:
1360:
1348:
1336:
1324:
404:Mithridates, de Differentiis Linguarum
1426:
1414:
367:as its president on the topic of the
238:Garden of Eden, home of the Ursprache
7:
1575:Language, culture, and communication
1210:
1208:
1041:Tocharian followed at about 3500 BC.
928:; and more recently, the concept of
117:in language evolution, ranging from
217:Ursprache, the language of paradise
89:Popularized by the German linguist
1463:. New York, NY: Springer. p.
1302:Saint Augustine (Bishop of Hippo.)
1108:Genetic relationship (linguistics)
517:After reading it Schleicher wrote
25:
1571:Greenberg, Joseph Harold (1971).
640:, which were consistent with the
1310:. T. & T. Clark – via
795:relies largely or entirely on a
784:
764:against each other, such as the
668:and the discovery of clades was
208:, son of Noah. Augustine made a
34:Cladistic representation of the
2048:Principles of Linguistic Change
728:classification", arrived at by
636:. Where Linnaeus had conceived
173:Old Testament and St. Augustine
1889:The Works of Sir Thomas Browne
719:, the language tree is like a
343:came into use well before the
168:Family tree of Biblical tribes
152:in language. The concept of a
1:
1874:Bloomfield, Leonard (1984) .
1766:The technical details of the
1497:. London: J. Murray. p.
1242:
1234:
1214:
1002:Compatibility and feasibility
972:Perfect phylogenetic networks
1897:François, Alexandre (2014),
1972:Nakhleh, Luay; Ringe, Don;
1880:University of Chicago Press
1731:Journal of Language Contact
1726:Zuckermann, Ghil'ad. 2009.
917:classification in biology.
882:National Science Foundation
361:Third Anniversary Discourse
2098:
2065:University of Pennsylvania
761:computational phylogenetic
740:Dates and glottochronology
502:That he was comparing his
447:, 1815), Indo-Germanisch (
427:British East India Company
242:By then, discovery of the
1581:Stanford University Press
1558:Stanford University Press
707:, the languages are like
619:biological classification
376:(London) Quarterly Review
355:On February 2, 1786, Sir
1620:10.1017/CBO9780511612060
1608:Dixon, R. M. W. (1997).
1133:Father Tongue hypothesis
1128:Wave model (linguistics)
1103:Evolutionary linguistics
889:Limitations of the model
384:Johann Christoph Adelung
2042:Labov, William (2010).
1525:Oxford University Press
1515:Post, David G. (2009).
734:comparative linguistics
730:descriptive linguistics
579:Joseph Harold Greenberg
498:Schleicher's tree model
246:and exploration of the
204:, son of Heber, son of
115:horizontal transmission
111:Indo-European languages
99:comparative linguistics
36:Mayan linguistic family
2082:Historical linguistics
1947:10.1098/rstb.2010.0099
1878:. Chicago and London:
1439:Grant, Robert (1813).
1173:10.1002/bies.201300096
982:
701:
680:
550:
499:
457:Graziadio Isaia Ascoli
417:
382:published a review of
317:
278:
239:
232:
169:
48:historical linguistics
43:
2007:10.1353/lan.2005.0078
1123:Linkage (linguistics)
1113:Indo-European studies
979:
697:
693:linguistic universals
689:molecular systematics
678:
599:binomial nomenclature
585:had been proposed by
546:
497:
445:Rasmus Christian Rask
415:
297:
261:
237:
228:
167:
95:genetic relationships
33:
27:Theory in linguistics
2024:The Quarterly Review
1912:, pp. 161–189,
1523:. Oxford; New York:
808:improve this article
715:is like an ancestor
642:great chain of being
453:Wilhelm von Humboldt
337:hebräische Ursprache
292:Epistolae Ho-Elianae
76:biological evolution
1941:(1559): 3829–3843.
1786:, pp. 388–391.
1770:used are stated in
1757:, pp. 384–385.
1680:10.1038/nature02029
1672:2003Natur.426..435G
1375:, pp. 226–228.
944:Perfect phylogenies
899:linguistic features
648:, Darwin conceived
467:Neogrammarian model
443:, 1810), japetisk (
378:of late 1813–1814,
351:Indo-European model
107:Proto-Indo-European
1614:. Cambridge Core.
1327:, pp. 223–241
1098:Comparative method
983:
913:to the concept of
895:language varieties
746:comparative method
681:
654:Nomenclature Codes
500:
418:
329:lingua primigenia.
240:
178:Augustine of Hippo
170:
44:
1919:978-0-41552-789-7
1538:978-0-19-534289-5
1067:Andronovo Culture
873:
872:
858:
721:phylogenetic tree
662:phylogenetic tree
573:Phylogenetic tree
558:Origin of Species
534:Origin of Species
530:Galapagos Islands
512:Origin of Species
485:August Schleicher
441:Conrad Malte-Brun
91:August Schleicher
72:phylogenetic tree
70:, particularly a
16:(Redirected from
2089:
2068:
2057:"Node Relations"
2051:
2031:
2018:
2000:
1982:
1968:
1958:
1922:
1903:
1892:
1883:
1862:
1856:
1850:
1844:
1835:
1829:
1823:
1817:
1811:
1805:
1799:
1793:
1787:
1781:
1775:
1764:
1758:
1752:
1746:
1740:
1734:
1733:, Varia 2:40–67.
1724:
1718:
1717:
1710:
1704:
1703:
1649:
1640:
1639:
1637:
1636:
1605:
1599:
1598:
1578:
1568:
1562:
1561:
1549:
1543:
1542:
1522:
1512:
1506:
1505:
1485:
1479:
1478:
1462:
1452:
1446:
1445:
1436:
1430:
1424:
1418:
1412:
1406:
1405:
1397:
1391:
1390:
1382:
1376:
1370:
1364:
1358:
1352:
1346:
1340:
1334:
1328:
1322:
1316:
1315:
1298:
1292:
1286:
1280:
1274:
1268:
1267:
1252:
1246:
1227:
1218:
1212:
1203:
1202:
1192:
1152:
922:dialect continua
907:dialect continua
868:
865:
859:
857:
816:
788:
780:
770:Anatolian theory
753:Glottochronology
562:Thomas Jefferson
459:, 1854), Aryan (
409:
393:
288:
254:
150:dialect continua
131:Johannes Schmidt
123:creole languages
21:
2097:
2096:
2092:
2091:
2090:
2088:
2087:
2086:
2072:
2071:
2054:
2041:
2038:
2021:
1980:
1971:
1926:
1920:
1901:
1896:
1886:
1873:
1870:
1865:
1857:
1853:
1845:
1838:
1830:
1826:
1818:
1814:
1806:
1802:
1794:
1790:
1782:
1778:
1765:
1761:
1753:
1749:
1741:
1737:
1725:
1721:
1712:
1711:
1707:
1651:
1650:
1643:
1634:
1632:
1630:
1607:
1606:
1602:
1595:
1570:
1569:
1565:
1551:
1550:
1546:
1539:
1514:
1513:
1509:
1489:Darwin, Charles
1487:
1486:
1482:
1475:
1454:
1453:
1449:
1438:
1437:
1433:
1425:
1421:
1413:
1409:
1399:
1398:
1394:
1384:
1383:
1379:
1371:
1367:
1359:
1355:
1347:
1343:
1335:
1331:
1323:
1319:
1300:
1299:
1295:
1287:
1283:
1275:
1271:
1256:Saint Augustine
1254:
1253:
1249:
1243:François (2014)
1233:, p. 311;
1231:Bloomfield 1933
1228:
1221:
1215:François (2014)
1213:
1206:
1154:
1153:
1146:
1142:
1137:
1118:Language family
1093:
1021:
1004:
974:
946:
891:
869:
863:
860:
817:
815:
801:
789:
778:
742:
732:rather than by
644:adopted by the
575:
469:
449:Julius Klaproth
407:
391:
365:Asiatic Society
353:
345:neo-grammarians
325:lingua primaeva
286:
252:
219:
175:
162:
148:in biology and
138:species problem
103:proto-languages
84:language family
64:cladistic model
28:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
2095:
2093:
2085:
2084:
2074:
2073:
2070:
2069:
2052:
2037:
2036:External links
2034:
2033:
2032:
2019:
1998:10.1.1.65.1791
1991:(2): 382–420.
1969:
1924:
1918:
1894:
1884:
1869:
1866:
1864:
1863:
1861:, p. 407.
1851:
1849:, p. 401.
1836:
1834:, p. 398.
1824:
1822:, p. 400.
1812:
1810:, p. 396.
1800:
1798:, p. 387.
1788:
1776:
1759:
1747:
1745:, p. 383.
1735:
1719:
1705:
1641:
1628:
1600:
1593:
1563:
1560:, pp. 3–4
1544:
1537:
1507:
1480:
1473:
1447:
1431:
1419:
1407:
1392:
1377:
1365:
1363:, p. 228.
1353:
1351:, p. 225.
1341:
1339:, p. 224.
1329:
1317:
1293:
1281:
1269:
1247:
1219:
1204:
1167:(2): 141–150.
1143:
1141:
1138:
1136:
1135:
1130:
1125:
1120:
1115:
1110:
1105:
1100:
1094:
1092:
1089:
1084:
1083:
1080:
1077:
1058:
1057:
1054:
1051:
1048:
1045:
1042:
1039:
1025:Craig Melchert
1020:
1017:
1003:
1000:
981:Indo-European.
973:
970:
966:back formation
945:
942:
890:
887:
871:
870:
806:. Please help
792:
790:
783:
777:
774:
741:
738:
713:proto-language
685:DNA sequencing
634:common descent
613:under several
587:Charles Darwin
574:
571:
473:Neogrammarians
468:
465:
359:delivered his
352:
349:
218:
215:
174:
171:
161:
158:
26:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2094:
2083:
2080:
2079:
2077:
2066:
2062:
2058:
2053:
2049:
2045:
2040:
2039:
2035:
2029:
2025:
2020:
2016:
2012:
2008:
2004:
1999:
1994:
1990:
1986:
1979:
1975:
1974:Warnow, Tandy
1970:
1966:
1962:
1957:
1952:
1948:
1944:
1940:
1936:
1935:
1930:
1925:
1921:
1915:
1911:
1907:
1900:
1895:
1890:
1885:
1881:
1877:
1872:
1871:
1867:
1860:
1855:
1852:
1848:
1843:
1841:
1837:
1833:
1828:
1825:
1821:
1816:
1813:
1809:
1804:
1801:
1797:
1792:
1789:
1785:
1780:
1777:
1773:
1769:
1763:
1760:
1756:
1751:
1748:
1744:
1739:
1736:
1732:
1729:
1723:
1720:
1715:
1709:
1706:
1701:
1697:
1693:
1689:
1685:
1681:
1677:
1673:
1669:
1665:
1661:
1660:
1655:
1648:
1646:
1642:
1631:
1629:9780511612060
1625:
1621:
1617:
1613:
1612:
1604:
1601:
1596:
1594:9780804707817
1590:
1586:
1582:
1577:
1576:
1567:
1564:
1559:
1555:
1548:
1545:
1540:
1534:
1530:
1526:
1521:
1520:
1511:
1508:
1504:
1500:
1496:
1495:
1490:
1484:
1481:
1476:
1474:9780387727288
1470:
1466:
1461:
1460:
1451:
1448:
1443:
1435:
1432:
1429:, p. 255
1428:
1423:
1420:
1417:, p. 251
1416:
1411:
1408:
1403:
1396:
1393:
1388:
1381:
1378:
1374:
1369:
1366:
1362:
1357:
1354:
1350:
1345:
1342:
1338:
1333:
1330:
1326:
1321:
1318:
1313:
1309:
1308:
1303:
1297:
1294:
1290:
1285:
1282:
1278:
1273:
1270:
1265:
1261:
1257:
1251:
1248:
1244:
1240:
1238:
1232:
1226:
1224:
1220:
1216:
1211:
1209:
1205:
1200:
1196:
1191:
1186:
1182:
1178:
1174:
1170:
1166:
1162:
1158:
1151:
1149:
1145:
1139:
1134:
1131:
1129:
1126:
1124:
1121:
1119:
1116:
1114:
1111:
1109:
1106:
1104:
1101:
1099:
1096:
1095:
1090:
1088:
1081:
1078:
1075:
1074:
1073:
1070:
1068:
1064:
1063:Yamna culture
1055:
1052:
1049:
1046:
1043:
1040:
1037:
1036:
1035:
1032:
1028:
1026:
1018:
1016:
1012:
1010:
1009:Occam's razor
1001:
999:
995:
991:
989:
978:
971:
969:
967:
961:
957:
953:
951:
943:
941:
939:
938:Modern Hebrew
933:
931:
927:
923:
918:
916:
912:
908:
904:
900:
896:
888:
886:
883:
877:
867:
856:
853:
849:
846:
842:
839:
835:
832:
828:
825: –
824:
820:
819:Find sources:
813:
809:
805:
799:
798:
797:single source
793:This section
791:
787:
782:
781:
775:
773:
771:
767:
766:Kurgan theory
762:
757:
754:
750:
747:
739:
737:
735:
731:
727:
722:
718:
714:
710:
706:
700:
696:
694:
690:
686:
677:
673:
671:
667:
663:
659:
655:
651:
647:
643:
639:
635:
631:
627:
622:
620:
616:
612:
608:
604:
600:
596:
595:Carl Linnaeus
592:
588:
584:
580:
572:
570:
567:
563:
559:
555:
549:
545:
543:
539:
535:
531:
526:
524:
520:
515:
513:
509:
508:Ernst Haeckel
505:
496:
492:
490:
486:
482:
478:
477:William Jones
474:
466:
464:
462:
458:
454:
450:
446:
442:
437:
435:
430:
428:
423:
414:
410:
405:
401:
400:Conrad Gesner
397:
389:
385:
381:
377:
372:
370:
366:
362:
358:
357:William Jones
350:
348:
346:
342:
338:
334:
330:
326:
322:
316:
314:
310:
306:
302:
296:
294:
293:
284:
277:
274:
270:
266:
263:"The learned
260:
257:
256:alteration."
249:
245:
236:
231:
227:
225:
224:Thomas Browne
216:
214:
211:
207:
203:
199:
195:
191:
187:
183:
179:
172:
166:
159:
157:
155:
151:
147:
143:
139:
134:
132:
128:
124:
120:
116:
112:
108:
104:
100:
96:
92:
87:
85:
81:
77:
73:
69:
65:
61:
57:
53:
49:
41:
37:
32:
19:
2060:
2047:
2027:
2023:
1988:
1984:
1938:
1932:
1905:
1888:
1875:
1868:Bibliography
1859:Nakhleh 2005
1854:
1847:Nakhleh 2005
1832:Nakhleh 2005
1827:
1820:Nakhleh 2005
1815:
1808:Nakhleh 2005
1803:
1796:Nakhleh 2005
1791:
1784:Nakhleh 2005
1779:
1772:Nakhleh 2005
1762:
1755:Nakhleh 2005
1750:
1743:Nakhleh 2005
1738:
1730:
1722:
1716:. 2004–2012.
1708:
1700:Google Books
1698:– via
1663:
1657:
1633:. Retrieved
1610:
1603:
1579:. Stanford:
1574:
1566:
1556:, Stanford:
1553:
1547:
1518:
1510:
1502:
1493:
1483:
1458:
1450:
1440:
1434:
1422:
1410:
1401:
1395:
1386:
1380:
1368:
1356:
1344:
1332:
1320:
1312:Google Books
1306:
1296:
1289:1 Chronicles
1284:
1272:
1263:
1250:
1236:
1164:
1160:
1085:
1071:
1059:
1033:
1029:
1022:
1013:
1005:
996:
992:
984:
962:
958:
954:
947:
934:
919:
911:ring species
892:
878:
874:
864:October 2013
861:
851:
844:
837:
830:
823:"Tree model"
818:
794:
758:
751:
743:
702:
698:
682:
646:rationalists
626:tree of life
623:
601:to assign a
597:. It used a
576:
557:
553:
551:
547:
537:
533:
527:
522:
518:
516:
511:
503:
501:
470:
438:
431:
422:monosyllabic
419:
403:
387:
380:Thomas Young
375:
373:
360:
354:
340:
336:
332:
328:
324:
321:lingua prima
320:
318:
298:
290:
283:James Howell
279:
262:
258:
241:
229:
220:
176:
146:ring species
135:
88:
63:
59:
55:
51:
45:
1373:Browne 1684
1361:Browne 1684
1349:Browne 1684
1337:Browne 1684
1325:Browne 1684
1264:City of God
1260:"XVI: 9–11"
726:typological
605:name and a
68:family tree
1908:, London:
1768:algorithms
1635:2017-09-26
1583:. p.
1527:. p.
1427:Young 1813
1415:Young 1813
988:wave model
950:cladograms
926:Wave model
903:isoglosses
834:newspapers
670:cladistics
566:neologisms
489:sound laws
481:Franz Bopp
461:Max Müller
408:alphabets.
285:published
273:Buxhornius
253:Asia ...."
210:hypothesis
142:quantizing
127:wave model
52:tree model
40:Common Era
1993:CiteSeerX
1910:Routledge
1235:Heggarty
1181:0265-9247
1161:BioEssays
804:talk page
658:phylogeny
611:hierarchy
583:evolution
554:Stammbaum
523:Stammbaum
504:Stammbaum
392:1809–1812
341:Ursprache
333:Ursprache
287:Volume II
269:Verstegan
244:New World
119:loanwords
56:Stammbaum
18:Stammbaum
2076:Category
1985:Language
1976:(2005).
1965:21041208
1876:Language
1688:14647380
1491:(1860).
1304:(1871).
1258:(1948).
1199:24375688
1091:See also
768:and the
650:lineages
591:Taxonomy
542:Linnaeus
265:Casaubon
248:Far East
186:Assyrian
109:and the
1956:2981917
1668:Bibcode
1277:Genesis
1190:3910147
930:linkage
915:species
848:scholar
709:species
603:species
538:de novo
396:Kashmir
363:to the
335:or the
327:or the
313:Hungary
305:Vandals
226:wrote:
160:History
154:linkage
80:species
74:in the
60:genetic
2015:162958
2013:
1995:
1963:
1953:
1916:
1694:
1686:
1659:Nature
1626:
1591:
1535:
1471:
1239:(2010)
1237:et al.
1197:
1187:
1179:
1065:, the
850:
843:
836:
829:
821:
711:, the
434:Altaic
369:Hindus
323:, the
309:Poland
194:Hebrew
54:(also
50:, the
2011:S2CID
1981:(PDF)
1902:(PDF)
1696:42340
1692:S2CID
1442:India
1291:1:19.
1279:10:25
1140:Notes
855:JSTOR
841:books
717:taxon
705:clade
666:clade
638:ranks
615:phyla
607:genus
301:Goths
202:Peleg
198:Heber
190:Assur
62:, or
1961:PMID
1914:ISBN
1684:PMID
1624:ISBN
1589:ISBN
1533:ISBN
1469:ISBN
1229:See
1195:PMID
1177:ISSN
827:news
744:The
630:taxa
483:and
311:and
303:and
206:Shem
196:for
188:for
182:Noah
2003:doi
1951:PMC
1943:doi
1939:365
1676:doi
1664:426
1616:doi
1585:113
1529:125
1499:422
1185:PMC
1169:doi
810:by
402:'s
386:'s
289:of
140:of
121:to
78:of
46:In
2078::
2063:.
2059:.
2046:.
2026:.
2009:.
2001:.
1989:81
1987:.
1983:.
1959:.
1949:.
1937:.
1931:.
1839:^
1690:.
1682:.
1674:.
1662:.
1656:.
1644:^
1622:.
1587:.
1531:.
1501:.
1467:.
1465:45
1262:.
1241:;
1222:^
1207:^
1193:.
1183:.
1175:.
1165:36
1163:.
1159:.
1147:^
932:.
736:.
672:.
514:.
479:,
192:,
86:.
58:,
42:).
2067:.
2028:X
2017:.
2005::
1967:.
1945::
1923:.
1893:.
1882:.
1702:.
1678::
1670::
1638:.
1618::
1597:.
1541:.
1477:.
1314:.
1266:.
1245:.
1217:.
1201:.
1171::
866:)
862:(
852:·
845:·
838:·
831:·
814:.
800:.
724:"
687:(
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
