Volume 9, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2210-2116
  • E-ISSN: 2210-2124
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



Recent applications of phylogenetic methods to historical linguistics have been criticized for assuming a tree structure in which ancestral languages differentiate and split up into daughter languages, while language evolution is inherently non-tree-like (François 2014Blench 2015: 32–33). This article attempts to contribute to this debate by discussing the use of the multiple topologies method (Pagel & Meade 2006a) implemented in (Pagel & Meade 2004). This method is applied to lexical datasets from four different language families: Austronesian (Gray, Drummond & Greenhill 2009), Sinitic (Ben Hamed & Wang 2006), Indo-European (Bouckaert et al. 2012), and Japonic (Lee & Hasegawa 2011). Evidence for multiple topologies is found in all families except, surprisingly, Austronesian. It is suggested that reticulation may arise from a number of processes, including dialect chain break-up, borrowing (both shortly after language splits and later on), incomplete lineage sorting, and characteristics of lexical datasets. It is shown that the multiple topologies method is a useful tool to study the dynamics of language evolution.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Algeo, John & Thomas Pyles
    2005The Origins and Development of the English Language (Sixth Edition). Boston: Wadsworth.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Atkinson, Quentin D. & Russell D. Gray
    2005 Curious Parallels and Curious Connections: Phylogenetic Thinking in Biology and Historical Linguistics. Systematic Biology54:4.513–526. 10.1080/10635150590950317
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10635150590950317 [Google Scholar]
  3. Beekes, Robert S. P.
    2011Comparative Indo-European Linguistics: An Introduction (Second Edition). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/z.172
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.172 [Google Scholar]
  4. Ben Hamed, Mahé & Feng Wang
    2006 Stuck in the Forest: Trees, Networks, and Chinese Dialects. Diachronica23:1.29–60. 10.1075/dia.23.1.04ham
    https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.23.1.04ham [Google Scholar]
  5. Blench, Roger
    2015 “New Mathematical Methods” in Linguistics Constitute the Greatest Intellectual Fraud in the Discipline Since Chomsky. Talk presented at theMax Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bouchard-Côté, Alexandre, David Hall, Thomas L. Griffiths & Dan Klein
    2013 Automated Reconstruction of Ancient Languages Using Probabilistic Models of Sound Change. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences110:11.4224–4229. doi:  10.1073/pnas.1204678110
    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1204678110 [Google Scholar]
  7. Bouckaert, Remco, Philippe Lemey, Michael Dunn, Simon J. Greenhill, Alexander V. Alekseyenko, Alexei J. Drummond, Russell D. Gray, Marc A. Suchard & Quentin D. Atkinson
    2012 Mapping the Origins and Expansion of the Indo-European Language Family. Science337:6097.957–960. 10.1126/science.1219669
    https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1219669 [Google Scholar]
  8. Bowern, Claire & Quentin D. Atkinson
    2012 Computational Phylogenetics and the Internal Structure of Pama-Nyungan. Language88:4.817–845. 10.1353/lan.2012.0081
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2012.0081 [Google Scholar]
  9. Bowern, Claire, Patience Epps, Russell D. Gray, Jane Hill, Keith Hunley, Patrick McConvell & Jason Zentz
    2011 Does Lateral Transmission Obscure Inheritance in Hunter-Gatherer Languages?PLOS ONE6:9.e25195. doi:  10.1371/journal.pone.0025195
    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0025195 [Google Scholar]
  10. Bowern, Claire & Bethwyn Evans
    eds. 2014The Routledge Handbook of Historical Linguistics. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Bryant, David & Vincent Moulton
    2004 Neighbor-Net: An Agglomerative Method for the Construction of Phylogenetic Networks. Molecular Biology and Evolution21:2.255–265. 10.1093/molbev/msh018
    https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msh018 [Google Scholar]
  12. Chang, Will, Chundra Cathcart, David Hall & Andrew Garrett
    2015 Ancestry-Constrained Phylogenetic Analysis Supports the Indo-European Steppe Hypothesis. Language91:1.194–244. 10.1353/lan.2015.0005
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2015.0005 [Google Scholar]
  13. Chousou-Polydouri, Natalia, Joshua Birchall, Sérgio Meira, Zachary O’Hagan & Lev Michael
    2016 A Test of Coding Procedures for Lexical Data with Tupí-Guaraní and Chapacuran Languages. Proceedings of the Leiden Workshop on Capturing Phylogenetic Algorithms for Linguisticsed. byChristian Bentz, Gerhard Jäger & Igor Yanovich. Tübingen: University of Tübingen. Available athttps://publikationen.uni-tuebingen.de/xmlui/handle/10900/68558
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Collard, Mark, Stephen J. Shennan & Jamshid J. Tehrani
    2006 Branching, Blending, and the Evolution of Cultural Similarities and Differences Among Human Populations. Evolution and Human Behavior27:3.169–184. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2005.07.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2005.07.003 [Google Scholar]
  15. Croft, William
    2008 Evolutionary Linguistics. Annual Review of Anthropology37.219–234. 10.1146/annurev.anthro.37.081407.085156
    https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.37.081407.085156 [Google Scholar]
  16. Drummond, Alexei J. & Remco R. Bouckaert
    2015Bayesian Evolutionary Analysis with BEAST. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139095112
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139095112 [Google Scholar]
  17. Dunn, Michael
    2014 Language Phylogenies. InClaire Bowern & Bethwyn Evans, eds., 190–211. London: Routledge.
  18. 2014Indo-European Lexical Cognate Data. Zenodo. Available at doi:  10.5281/zenodo.1284236
    https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1284236 [Google Scholar]
  19. Dunn, Michael, Simon J. Greenhill, Stephen C. Levinson & Russell D. Gray
    2011 Evolved Structure of Language Shows Lineage-Specific Trends in Word-Order Universals. Nature473.79–82. 10.1038/nature09923
    https://doi.org/10.1038/nature09923 [Google Scholar]
  20. Dyen, Isidore, Joseph B. Kruskal & Paul Black
    1992 An Indo-European Classification: A Lexicostatistical Experiment. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society82.1–132. 10.2307/1006517
    https://doi.org/10.2307/1006517 [Google Scholar]
  21. Edwards, Anthony W. F. & Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza
    1964 Reconstruction of Evolutionary Trees. Phenetic and Phylogenetic Classificationed. byV. H. Heywood & J. McNeill, 67–76. London: Systematics Association.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Eska, Joseph F. & Don Ringe
    2004 Recent Work in Computational Linguistic Phylogeny. Language80:3.569–582. 10.1353/lan.2004.0123
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2004.0123 [Google Scholar]
  23. Forster, Peter & Colin Renfrew
    eds. 2006Phylogenetic Methods and the Prehistory of Languages. Cambridge: McDonald Institute Monographs.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. François, Alexandre
    2014 Trees, Waves, and Linkages: Models of Language Diversification. InClaire Bowern & Bethwyn Evans, eds., 161–189.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Kalyan, Siva & Alexandre François
    2018 Freeing the Comparative Method from the Tree Model: A Framework for Historical Glottometry. InRitsuko Kikusawa & Lawrence Reid (eds.), Let’s talk about trees: Genetic Relationships of Languages and Their Phylogenic Representation (Senri Ethnological Studies, 98). Ōsaka: National Museum of Ethnology. 59–89.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Galucio, Ana Vilacy, Sérgio Meira, Joshua Birchall, Denny Moore, Nilson Gabas Júnior, Sebastian Drude, Luciana Storto, Gessiane Picançio & Carmen Reis Rodrigues
    2015 Genealogical Relations and Lexical Distances Within the Tupian Linguistic Family. Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi, Ciências Humanas10:2.229–274. 10.1590/1981‑81222015000200004
    https://doi.org/10.1590/1981-81222015000200004 [Google Scholar]
  27. Geisler, Hans & Johann-Mattis List
    2013 Do Languages Grow on Trees? The Tree Metaphor in the History of Linguistics. Classification and Evolution in Biology, Linguistics and the History of Science: Concepts – Methods – Visualizationed. byHeiner Fangerau, Hans Geisler, Thorsten Halling & William Martin, 111–124. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Gray, Russell D., David Bryant & Simon J. Greenhill
    2010 On the Shape and Fabric of Human History. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B365:1559.3923–3933. 10.1098/rstb.2010.0162
    https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2010.0162 [Google Scholar]
  29. Gray, Russell D., Simon J. Greenhill & Robert M. Ross
    2007 The Pleasures and Perils of Darwinizing Culture (With Phylogenies). Biological Theory2:4.360–375. 10.1162/biot.2007.2.4.360
    https://doi.org/10.1162/biot.2007.2.4.360 [Google Scholar]
  30. Gray, Russell D. & Fiona M. Jordan
    2000 Language Trees Support the Express-Train Sequence of Austronesian Expansion. Nature405.1052–1055. 10.1038/35016575
    https://doi.org/10.1038/35016575 [Google Scholar]
  31. Gray, Russell D., Alexei J. Drummond & Simon J. Greenhill
    2009 Language Phylogenies Reveal Expansion Pulses and Pauses in Pacific Settlement. Science323:5913.479–483. 10.1126/science.1166858
    https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1166858 [Google Scholar]
  32. Greenhill, Simon J., Thomas E. Currie & Russell D. Gray
    2009 Does Horizontal Transmission Invalidate Cultural Phylogenies?Proceedings of the Royal Society B276.2299–2306. 10.1098/rspb.2008.1944
    https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2008.1944 [Google Scholar]
  33. Grollemund, Rebecca, Simon Branford, Koen Bostoen, Andrew Meade, Chris Venditti & Mark Pagel
    2015 Bantu Expansion Shows That Habitat Alters the Route and Pace of Human Dispersals. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences112:43.13296–13301. doi:  10.1073/pnas.1503793112
    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1503793112 [Google Scholar]
  34. Hammarström, Harald, Sebastian Bank, Robert Forkel & Martin Haspelmath
    2017Glottolog 3.1. Jena: Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Heggarty, Paul
    2006 Interdisciplinary Indiscipline? Can Phylogenetic Methods Meaningfully be Applied to Language Data – And to Dating Language?InPeter Forster & Colin Renfrew, eds., 183–194.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Heggarty, Paul, Warren Maguire & April McMahon
    2010 Splits or Waves? Trees or Webs? How Divergence Measures and Network Analysis Can Unravel Language Histories. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B365:1559.3829–3843. 10.1098/rstb.2010.0099
    https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2010.0099 [Google Scholar]
  37. Holm, Hans J.
    2007 The New Arboretum of Indo-European “Trees”: Can New Algorithms Reveal the Phylogeny and Even Prehistory of Indo-European?Journal of Quantitative Linguistics14:2–3.167–214. 10.1080/09296170701378916
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09296170701378916 [Google Scholar]
  38. Hruschka, Daniel J., Simon Branford, Eric D. Smith, Jon Wilkins, Andrew Meade, Mark Pagel & Tanmoy Bhattacharya
    2015 Detecting Regular Sound Changes in Linguistics as Events of Concerted Evolution. Current Biology25:1.1–9. 10.1016/j.cub.2014.10.064
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2014.10.064 [Google Scholar]
  39. Huelsenbeck, John P., Fredrik Ronquist, Rasmus Nielsen & Jonathan P. Bollback
    2001 Bayesian Inference of Phylogeny and Its Impact on Evolutionary Biology. Science294:5550.2310–2314. 10.1126/science.1065889
    https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1065889 [Google Scholar]
  40. Huson, Daniel H. & David Bryant
    2006 Application of Phylogenetic Networks in Evolutionary Studies. Molecular Biology and Evolution23:2.254–267. 10.1093/molbev/msj030
    https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msj030 [Google Scholar]
  41. Huson, Daniel H. & Celine Scornavacca
    2010 A Survey of Combinatorial Methods for Phylogenetic Networks. Genome Biology and Evolution3.23–35. 10.1093/gbe/evq077
    https://doi.org/10.1093/gbe/evq077 [Google Scholar]
  42. 2012 Dendroscope 3: An Interactive Tool for Rooted Phylogenetic Trees and Networks. Systematic Biology61:6.1061–1067. 10.1093/sysbio/sys062
    https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/sys062 [Google Scholar]
  43. Jacques, Guillaume & Johann-Mattis List
    . This issue. Save the Trees: Why We Need Tree Models in Linguistic Reconstruction. Journal of Historical Linguistics9:1. 128–167. 10.1075/jhl.17008.mat
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jhl.17008.mat [Google Scholar]
  44. Jaeger, Gerhard & Søren Wichmann
    2016 Inferring the World Tree of Languages From Word Lists. The Evolution of Language: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on the Evolution of Language (EvoLang XI)ed. bySéan G. Roberts, Christine Cuskley, Luke McCrohon, Lluis Barceló-Coblijn, Olga Feher & Tessa Verhoef. Available atevolang.org/neworleans/papers/147.html
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Kalyan, Siva & Alexandre François
    2018 Freeing the Comparative Method from the tree model: A framework for Historical Glottometry. InRitsuko Kikusawa & Lawrence Reid (eds), Let’s talk about trees: Genetic Relationships of Languages and Their Phylogenic Representation (Senri Ethnological Studies, 98). Ōsaka: National Museum of Ethnology. 59–89.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Kelly, Luke J. & Geoff K. Nicholls
    2017 Lateral Transfer in Stochastic Dollo Models. The Annals of Applied Statistics11:2.1146–1168. 10.1214/17‑AOAS1040
    https://doi.org/10.1214/17-AOAS1040 [Google Scholar]
  47. Koonin, Eugene V., Kira S. Makarova & L. Aravind
    2001 Horizontal Gene Transfer in Prokaryotes: Quantification and Classification. Annual Review of Microbiology55:1.709–742. 10.1146/annurev.micro.55.1.709
    https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.micro.55.1.709 [Google Scholar]
  48. Lee, Sean
    2018The Best Fitting Tree Model for Japonic Languages. Zenodo. Available at doi: 10.5281/zenodo.1220896
    https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1220896 [Google Scholar]
  49. Lee, Sean & Toshikazu Hasegawa
    2011 Bayesian Phylogenetic Analysis Supports an Agricultural Origin of Japonic Languages. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 278.3662–3669. 10.1098/rspb.2011.0518
    https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2011.0518 [Google Scholar]
  50. 2014 Oceanic Barriers Promote Language Diversification in the Japanese Islands. Journal of Evolutionary Biology27:9.1905–1912. 10.1111/jeb.12442
    https://doi.org/10.1111/jeb.12442 [Google Scholar]
  51. Levinson, Stephen C. & Russell D. Gray
    2012 Tools from Evolutionary Biology Shed New Light on the Diversification of Languages. Trends in Cognitive Sciences16:3.167–173. 10.1016/j.tics.2012.01.007
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2012.01.007 [Google Scholar]
  52. List, Johann-Mattis
    2015 Network Perspectives on Chinese Dialect History: Chances and Challenges. Bulletin of Chinese Linguistics8:1.27–47. 10.1163/2405478X‑00801002
    https://doi.org/10.1163/2405478X-00801002 [Google Scholar]
  53. 2016 Beyond Cognacy: Historical Relations Between Words and Their Implication for Phylogenetic Reconstruction. Journal of Language Evolution1:2.119–136. 10.1093/jole/lzw006
    https://doi.org/10.1093/jole/lzw006 [Google Scholar]
  54. 2017Chinese Dialect Database. Jena: Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History. Available athttps://github.com/digling/cddb
    [Google Scholar]
  55. List, Johann-Mattis, Shijulal Nelson-Sathi, Hans Geisler & William Martin
    2013 Networks of Lexical Borrowing and Lateral Gene Transfer in Language and Genome Evolution. Bioessays36:2.141–150. 10.1002/bies.201300096
    https://doi.org/10.1002/bies.201300096 [Google Scholar]
  56. List, Johann-Mattis, Shijulal Nelson-Sathi, William Martin & Hans Geisler
    2014 Using Phylogenetic Networks to Model Chinese Dialect History. Language Dynamics and Change, 4:2.222–252. 10.1163/22105832‑00402008
    https://doi.org/10.1163/22105832-00402008 [Google Scholar]
  57. List, Johann-Mattis, Jananan Sylvestre Pathmanathan, Philippe Lopez & Eric Bapteste
    2016 Unity and Disunity in Evolutionary Sciences: Process-Based Analogies Open Common Research Avenues for Biology and Linguistics. Biology Direct11.360–375. 10.1186/s13062‑016‑0145‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1186/s13062-016-0145-2 [Google Scholar]
  58. Macklin-Cordes, Jayden, & Erich Round
    2015 High-Definition Phonotactics Reflect Linguistic Pasts. Proceedings of the 6th Conference on Quantitative Investigations in Theoretical Linguisticsed. byJohannes Wahle, Marisa Kollner, Harald Baayen, Gerhard Jäger & Tineke Baayen-Oudshoorn, 1–5. Tübingen: University of Tübingen.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Maddison, Wayne P.
    1997 Gene Trees in Species Trees. Systematic Biology46:3.523–536. 10.1093/sysbio/46.3.523
    https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/46.3.523 [Google Scholar]
  60. Matthews, Luke J., Jamie J. Tehrani, Fiona M. Jordan, Mark Collard & Charles L. Nunn
    2011 Testing for Divergent Transmission Histories Among Cultural Characters: A Study Using Bayesian Phylogenetic Methods and Iranian Tribal Textile Data. PLOS ONE6.e14810. doi:  10.1371/journal.pone.0014810
    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0014810 [Google Scholar]
  61. Meira, Sérgio, Joshua Birchall & Natalia Chousou-Polydouri
    2015 A Character-Based Internal Classification of the Cariban Language Family. Paper presented at the48th Annual Meeting of the Societas Linguistica Europaea, Leiden, The Netherlands, September 2–5, 2015.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Morrison, David A.
    2016 Genealogies: Pedigrees and Phylogenies Are Reticulating Networks Not Just Divergent Trees. Evolutionary Biology43:4.456–473. doi:  10.1007/s11692‑016‑9376‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11692-016-9376-5 [Google Scholar]
  63. Nakhleh, Luay, Don Ringe & Tandy Warnow
    2005 Perfect Phylogenetic Networks: A New Methodology for Reconstructing the Evolutionary History of Natural Languages. Language81:2.382–420. 10.1353/lan.2005.0078
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2005.0078 [Google Scholar]
  64. Nelson-Sathi, Shijulal, Johann-Mattis List, Hans Geisler, Heiner Fangerau, Russell D. Gray, William Martin & Tal Dagan
    2011 Networks Uncover Hidden Lexical Borrowing in Indo-European Language Evolution. Proceedings of the Royal Society B278:1713.1794–1803. 10.1098/rspb.2010.1917
    https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2010.1917 [Google Scholar]
  65. Norman, Jerry
    1988Chinese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Nunn, Charles L., Christian Arnold, Luke Matthews & Monique Borgerhoff Mulder
    2010 Simulating Trait Evolution for Cross-Cultural Comparison. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B365:1559.3807–3819. 10.1098/rstb.2010.0009
    https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2010.0009 [Google Scholar]
  67. Nunn, Charles L., Monique Borgerhoff Mulder & Sasha Langley
    2006 Comparative Methods for Studying Cultural Trait Evolution: A Simulation Study. Cross-Cultural Research40:2.177–209. 10.1177/1069397105283401
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1069397105283401 [Google Scholar]
  68. Pagel, Mark
    2009 Human Language as a Culturally Transmitted Replicator. Nature Reviews Genetics10.405–415. 10.1038/nrg2560
    https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg2560 [Google Scholar]
  69. Pagel, Mark, Quentin D. Atkinson & Andrew Meade
    2007 Frequency of Word-Use Predicts Rates of Lexical Evolution Throughout Indo-European History. Nature449.717–721. 10.1038/nature06176
    https://doi.org/10.1038/nature06176 [Google Scholar]
  70. Pagel, Mark & Andrew Meade
    2004 A Phylogenetic Mixture Model for Detecting Pattern-Heterogeneity in Gene Sequence or Character-State Data. Systematic Biology53:4.571–581. 10.1080/10635150490468675
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10635150490468675 [Google Scholar]
  71. 2006a Detecting Conflicting Phylogenetic Signal: A Mixture Model Approach with Multiple Tree Topologies. Paper presented at theNew Zealand Phylogenetics Meeting, Kaikoura, New Zealand, February 12–17, 2006. Available athttps://zenodo.org/record/1117335#.WjeEzSOZPFR
    [Google Scholar]
  72. 2006b Estimating Rates of Lexical Replacement on Phylogenetic Trees of Languages. InPeter Forster & Colin Renfrew, eds., 173–182.
    [Google Scholar]
  73. . N.d.Draft Manual for BayesPhylogenies. Available atwww.evolution.reading.ac.uk/BayesPhy.html
  74. Pereltsvaig, Asya & Martin W. Lewis
    2015The Indo-European Controversy: Facts and Fallacies in Historical Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781107294332
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107294332 [Google Scholar]
  75. Robbeets, Martine
    2015Diachrony of Verb Morphology: Japanese and the Transeurasian Languages. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110399943
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110399943 [Google Scholar]
  76. Rokas, Antonis & Sean B. Carroll
    2006 Bushes in the Tree of Life. PLOS Biology4:11.e352. 10.1371/journal.pbio.0040352
    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0040352 [Google Scholar]
  77. Ronquist, Fredrik, Paul van der Mark & John P. Huelsenbeck
    2009 Bayesian Phylogenetic Analysis Using MrBayes. The Phylogenetic Handbook: A Practical Approach to Phylogenetic Analysis and Hypothesis Testinged. byMarco Salemi, Philippe Lemey & Anne-Mieke Vandamme, 210–266. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511819049.009
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511819049.009 [Google Scholar]
  78. Shibatani, Masayoshi
    1990The Languages of Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  79. Swadesh, Morris
    1952 Lexico-statistic Dating of Prehistoric Ethnic Contacts: With Special Reference for North American Indians and Eskimos. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society96:4.452–463.
    [Google Scholar]
  80. 1955 Towards Greater Accuracy in Lexicostatistic Dating. International Journal of American Linguistics21:2.121–137. 10.1086/464321
    https://doi.org/10.1086/464321 [Google Scholar]
  81. Tadmor, Uri
    2009 Loanwords in the World’s Languages: Findings and Results. Loanwords in the World’s Languages: A Comparative Handbooked. byMartin Haspelmath & Uri Tadmor, 55–75. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110218442.55
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110218442.55 [Google Scholar]
  82. Tehrani, Jamshid & Mark Collard
    2002 Investigating Cultural Evolution Through Biological Phylogenetic Analyses of Turkmen Textiles. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology21:4.443–463. 10.1016/S0278‑4165(02)00002‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0278-4165(02)00002-8 [Google Scholar]
  83. Verkerk, Annemarie
    2014 The Evolutionary Dynamics of Motion Event Encoding. Radboud University NijmegenPhD dissertation.
  84. Wang, Feng
    2004 BCD: Basic Words of Chinese Dialects. Available athttps://github.com/​digling/​cddb/​tree/​master/​datasets/​Wang2004a
  85. Wang, William S.-Y.
    1997 Languages or Dialects?The CUHK Journal of Humanities1.54–62.
    [Google Scholar]
  86. Wang, William S.-Y. & James W. Minett
    2005 Vertical and Horizontal Transmission in Language Evolution. Transactions of the Philological Society103:2.121–146. 10.1111/j.1467‑968X.2005.00147.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-968X.2005.00147.x [Google Scholar]
  87. Wichmann, Søren, Robert S. Walker, Taraka Rama & Eric W. Holman
    2011 Correlates of Reticulation in Linguistic Phylogenies. Language Dynamics and Change1:2.205–240. 10.1163/221058212X648072
    https://doi.org/10.1163/221058212X648072 [Google Scholar]
  88. Widmer, Manuel, Sandra Auderset, Johanna Nichols, Paul Widmer & Balthasar Bickel
    2017 NP Recursion Over Time: Evidence from Indo-European. Language93:4.799–826. 10.1353/lan.2017.0058
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2017.0058 [Google Scholar]
  89. Willems, Matthieu, Etienne Lord, Louise Laforest, Gilbert Labelle, François-Joseph Lapointe, Anna Maria Di Sciullo & Vladimir Makarenkov
    2016 Using Hybridization Networks to Retrace the Evolution of Indo-European Languages. BMC Evolutionary Biology16:1.180. doi:  10.1186/s12862‑016‑0745‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1186/s12862-016-0745-6 [Google Scholar]
  90. Xie, Wangang, Paul O. Lewis, Yu Fan, Lynn Kuo & Ming-Hui Chen
    2010 Improving Marginal Likelihood Estimation for Bayesian Phylogenetic Model Selection. Systematic Biology60:2.150–160. 10.1093/sysbio/syq085
    https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syq085 [Google Scholar]
  91. Zhou, Kevin & Claire Bowern
    2015 Quantifying Uncertainty in the Phylogenetics of Australian Numeral Systems. Proceedings of the Royal Society B282:1815.20151278. 10.1098/rspb.2015.1278
    https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2015.1278 [Google Scholar]
  92. Zhou, Zhenhe
    1991 Migrations in Chinese History and Their Legacy on Chinese Dialects. Journal of Chinese Linguistics Monograph Series3.29–49.
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error