Slide 1
Slide 1 text
The Future of the Comparative Method
Towards a Computer-Assisted Framework of Linguistic Reconstruction
Johann-Mattis List
DFG research fellow
Centre des recherches linguistiques sur l’Asie Orientale
Team Adaptation, Integration, Reticulation, Evolution
EHESS and UPMC, Paris
2015-06-22
1 / 20
Slide 2
Slide 2 text
Background
Background
2 / 20
Slide 3
Slide 3 text
Background Definitions
Definitions
3 / 20
Slide 4
Slide 4 text
Background Definitions
Definitions
In linguistics, the comparative method is a technique for
studying the development of languages by performing a
feature-by-feature comparison of two or more languages with
common descent from a shared ancestor, as opposed to the
method of internal reconstruction, which analyses the internal
development of a single language over time.
Wikipedia s.v. "Comparative Method"
The method of comparing languages to determine whether and
how they have developed from a common ancestor. The items
compared are lexical and grammatical units, and the aim is to
discover correspondences relating sounds in two or more di�erent
languages, which are so numerous and so regular, across sets of
units with similar meanings, that no other explanation is
reasonable.
Oxford Dictionary of Linguistics (Matthews 1997)
The comparative is both the earliest and the most important
of the methods of reconstruction. Most of the major
insights into the prehistory of languages have been gained by
the applications of this method, and most reconstructions
have been based on it.
Fox (1995)
The Comparative Method is the central tool in
historical linguistics for historical
reconstruction and also classifying languages.
A classi�cation done with the Comparative
Method is called a genetic classi�cation. The
result is that languages are arranged in language
family trees. This means that languages are
classi�ed according to their genealogical
relationships2 and are interpreted as being in
relation of child- or sisterhood to other
languages. Such a way of classifying entities is
called phylogenetic classi�cation in biology; a
classi�cation by genealogical relationships.
Fleischhauer (2009)
The method of comparatistics today is generally known
under the not very well-chosen term "comparative-historical
method". It constitutes a huge complex of abstract and
concrete procedures for the investigation of the history
of related languages which genetically go back to some
unofrom tradition of the past.
Klimov (1990), my translation
→ comparative linguistics, reconstruction
Routledge Dictionary of Language and Linguistics
(Bussmann 1996)
3 / 20
Slide 5
Slide 5 text
Background Definitions
Definitions
Scholar
Proof of
Relationship
Study of
Language History
External
Reconstruction
Linguistic
Reconstruction
Language
Classification
Anttila (1972) ✓ ✓
Bußmann (2002) ✓
Fleischhauer (2009) ✓
Fox (1995) ✓
Glück (2000) ✓
Harrison (2003) ✓
Hoenigswald (1960) ✓
Jarceva (1990) ✓
Klimov (1990) ✓ ✓
Lehmann (1969) ✓
Makaev (1977) ✓
Matthews (1997) ✓
Rankin (2003) ✓
3 / 20
Slide 6
Slide 6 text
Background Definitions
Definitions
Working Definition for the Comparative Method
The comparative method is a bunch of techniques that are
commonly used by historical linguists in order to reconstruct
the history of languages and language families.
3 / 20
Slide 7
Slide 7 text
Background Workflows
Workflows
4 / 20
Slide 8
Slide 8 text
Background Workflows
Workflows
Workflow by Ross and Durie (1996)
1. Determine on the strength of diagnostic evidence that a set of languages are
genetically related, that is, that they constitute a ‘family’;
2. Collect putative cognate sets for the family (both morphological paradigms and
lexical items).
3. Work out the sound correspondences from the cognate sets, putting ‘irregular’
cognate sets on one side;
4. Reconstruct the protolanguage of the family as follows:
a Reconstruct the protophonology from the sound correspondences worked out
in (3), using conventional wisdom regarding the directions of sound changes.
b Reconstruct protomorphemes (both morphological paradigms and lexical items)
from the cognate sets collected in (2), using the protophonology reconstructed
in (4a).
5. Establish innovations (phonological, lexical, semantic, morphological, morpho-
syntactic) shared by groups of languages within the family relative to the recon-
structed protolanguage.
6. Tabulate the innovations established in (5) to arrive at an internal classification
of the family, a ‘family tree’.
7. Construct an etymological dictionary, tracing borrowings, semantic change, and
so forth, for the lexicon of the family (or of one language of the family).
4 / 20
Slide 9
Slide 9 text
Background Workflows
Workflows
PHONOLOGICAL
AND MORPHOLOGICAL
RECONSTRUCTION
IDENTIFICATION
OF
INNOVATIONS
RECONSTRUCTION
OF
PHYLOGENIES
PUBLISH
ETYMOLOGICAL
DICTIONARY
PROOF OF
LANGUAGE
RELATIONSHIP
SOUND
CORRESPONDENCE
IDENTIFICATION
COGNATE
SET
IDENTIFICATION
Tentative Visualization of the Workflow by Ross and Durie (1996: 6f) 4 / 20
Slide 10
Slide 10 text
Background Workflows
Workflows
proof of
relationship
identification
of cognates
identification of
sound correspondences
reconstruction
of proto-forms
internal
classification
revise
revise
revise
revise
Simplified Version of Ross and Durie’s Workflow (List 2014: 58) 4 / 20
Slide 11
Slide 11 text
Problems
Problems
5 / 20
Slide 12
Slide 12 text
Problems Application
Application
6 / 20
Slide 13
Slide 13 text
Problems Application
Application
PHONOLOGICAL
AND MORPHOLOGICAL
RECONSTRUCTION
IDENTIFICATION
OF
INNOVATIONS
RECONSTRUCTION
OF
PHYLOGENIES
PUBLISH
ETYMOLOGICAL
DICTIONARY
PROOF OF
LANGUAGE
RELATIONSHIP
SOUND
CORRESPONDENCE
IDENTIFICATION
COGNATE
SET
IDENTIFICATION
6 / 20
Slide 14
Slide 14 text
Problems Application
Application
PHONOLOGICAL
AND MORPHOLOGICAL
RECONSTRUCTION
IDENTIFICATION
OF
INNOVATIONS
RECONSTRUCTION
OF
PHYLOGENIES
PUBLISH
ETYMOLOGICAL
DICTIONARY
PROOF OF
LANGUAGE
RELATIONSHIP
SOUND
CORRESPONDENCE
IDENTIFICATION
COGNATE
SET
IDENTIFICATION
TIME CONSUMING...
6 / 20
Slide 15
Slide 15 text
Problems Application
Application
PHONOLOGICAL
AND MORPHOLOGICAL
RECONSTRUCTION
IDENTIFICATION
OF
INNOVATIONS
RECONSTRUCTION
OF
PHYLOGENIES
PUBLISH
ETYMOLOGICAL
DICTIONARY
PROOF OF
LANGUAGE
RELATIONSHIP
SOUND
CORRESPONDENCE
IDENTIFICATION
COGNATE
SET
IDENTIFICATION
TIME CONSUMING...
TEDIOUS...
6 / 20
Slide 16
Slide 16 text
Problems Representation
Representation
7 / 20
Slide 17
Slide 17 text
Problems Representation
Representation
Frucht, ferner fruchten, befruchten, Befruchtung,
fruchtbar, fruchtig
Frucht f. ‘der Fortpflanzung der eigenen Art dienendes
Produkt einer Pflanze’, auch ‘ungeborenes Lebewesen’,
übertragen ‘Ertrag’, ahd. fruht (9. Jh.), mhd. vruht,
asächs. fruht, mnd. mnl. nl. vrucht beruhen auf einer
frühen Entlehnung von gleichbed. lat. frūctus,
abgeleitet vom Verb lat. fruī (frūctus sum) ‘genießen,
Nutzen ziehen’ (verwandt mit brauchen, s. d.). Das
Deminutiv Früchtchen hat die spezielle Bedeutung
[...]
German "Frucht" in Pfei�er (1993, also at http://dwds.de)
7 / 20
Slide 18
Slide 18 text
Problems Representation
Representation
Frucht, ferner fruchten, befruchten, Befruchtung,
fruchtbar, fruchtig
Frucht f. ‘der Fortpflanzung der eigenen Art dienendes
Produkt einer Pflanze’, auch ‘ungeborenes Lebewesen’,
übertragen ‘Ertrag’, ahd. fruht (9. Jh.), mhd. vruht,
asächs. fruht, mnd. mnl. nl. vrucht beruhen auf einer
frühen Entlehnung von gleichbed. lat. frūctus,
abgeleitet vom Verb lat. fruī (frūctus sum) ‘genießen,
Nutzen ziehen’ (verwandt mit brauchen, s. d.). Das
Deminutiv Früchtchen hat die spezielle Bedeutung
[...]
German "Frucht" in Pfei�er (1993,
also at http://dwds.de
7 / 20
Slide 19
Slide 19 text
Problems Representation
Representation
Frucht, ferner fruchten, befruchten, Befruchtung,
fruchtbar, fruchtig
Frucht f. ‘der Fortpflanzung der eigenen Art dienendes
Produkt einer Pflanze’, auch ‘ungeborenes Lebewesen’,
übertragen ‘Ertrag’, ahd. fruht (9. Jh.), mhd. vruht,
asächs. fruht, mnd. mnl. nl. vrucht beruhen auf einer
frühen Entlehnung von gleichbed. lat. frūctus,
abgeleitet vom Verb lat. fruī (frūctus sum) ‘genießen,
Nutzen ziehen’ (verwandt mit brauchen, s. d.). Das
Deminutiv Früchtchen hat die spezielle Bedeutung
[...]
inherited from
borrowed from
derived from
PIE *bhreu◌◌̯
Hg◌
◌
̑
-
“to use”
PIE *bhruHg◌
◌
̑
-ié-
“to use” (present tense)
PGM *ƀrūkan-
“to use”
OHG brūhhan
“to use”
G brauchen
“to use”
G Brauch
“custom”
OHG fruht
“profit, fruit”
G frugal
“modest (food)”
Fr fruit
“profit,fruit”
Fr frugal
“modest (food)”
Lt fruor, fruī
“I enjoy”
Lt frūctus
“profit”
Lt frux
“fruit, grain”
Lt frugalis
“bring profit”
Adapted from an Illustration by Hans Geisler (University Düsseldorf)
German "Frucht" in Pfei�er (1993,
also at http://dwds.de
7 / 20
Slide 20
Slide 20 text
Problems Representation
Representation
Entry for PIE *kʷetware in Tower of Babel (http://starling.rinet.ru) 7 / 20
Slide 21
Slide 21 text
Problems Representation
Representation
Insufficiencies of Data Representation
data in “textual form” (impossible to search it efficiently)
no standardized phonetic representations
no standardized glosses for meanings
no standardized names or abbreviations for language
and dialect names
no standardized representation of sound
correspondences
no standardized assignment of cognate sets and
borrowings
...
8 / 20
Slide 22
Slide 22 text
Problems Replication
Replication
9 / 20
Slide 23
Slide 23 text
Problems Replication
Replication
Gloss Blust Pawley Distance
“day” *qaco *qaco 0
“to spit” *qanusi *qanusi 0
“person” *taumataq *tamwata 3
“to vomit” *mumutaq *mumuta 1
“name” *ŋajan *qajan 1
“snake” *mwata *mwata 0
“man” *mwa ruqane *taumwaqane 5
“four” *pani *pat 2
“one” *sakai *tasa 3
... ... ... ...
Disagreement between experts on PO reconstructions (Bouchard-Côté et al. 2014) 9 / 20
Slide 24
Slide 24 text
Problems Replication
Replication
Reproducability Problems in Historical Linguistics
Scholars disagree on many points in historical linguistics, be
it the number of laryngeals, the position of Baltic and Slavic,
or whether a given word was borrowed or not.
We know well that no two etymological dictionaries for the sa-
me language or language families are completely identical.
Unfortunately, we lack a rigorous check to which degree ex-
perts actually agree or disagree in their judgments. We also
lack methods for evaluation which would help us to show to
which degree a given hypothesis (a reconstruction, a family
tree, or an etymology) corresponds with our linguistic data.
9 / 20
Slide 25
Slide 25 text
Towards a Computer-Assisted Comparative Method
Towards a Computer-Assisted
Comparative Method
10 / 20
Slide 26
Slide 26 text
Towards a Computer-Assisted Comparative Method
P(A|B)=(P(B|A)P(A))/(P(B)
FRANZ BOPP
VERY,
VERY
LONG
TITLE
11 / 20
Slide 27
Slide 27 text
Towards a Computer-Assisted Comparative Method
PRO:
- intuition
- background knowledge
- can juggle with multiple types of evidence
CONTRA:
- has to sleep and rest
- does not like to count and do boring work
- can oversee facts when doing boring work
CONTRA:
- no intuition
- no background knowledge
- can't juggle with multiple types of evidence
PRO:
- doesn't need to sleep
- is very good at counting and boring work
- doesn't make errors in boring work
P(A|B)=(P(B|A)P(A))/(P(B)
FRANZ BOPP
VERY,
VERY
LONG
TITLE
11 / 20
Slide 28
Slide 28 text
Towards a Computer-Assisted Comparative Method
PRO:
- intuition
- background knowledge
- can juggle with multiple types of evidence
CONTRA:
- has to sleep and rest
- does not like to count and do boring work
- can oversee facts when doing boring work
CONTRA:
- no intuition
- no background knowledge
- can't juggle with multiple types of evidence
PRO:
- doesn't need to sleep
- is very good at counting and boring work
- doesn't make errors in boring work
P(A|B)=(P(B|A)P(A))/(P(B)
FRANZ BOPP
VERY,
VERY
LONG
TITLE
11 / 20
Slide 29
Slide 29 text
Towards a Computer-Assisted Comparative Method
PRO:
- intuition
- background knowledge
- can juggle with multiple types of evidence
CONTRA:
- has to sleep and rest
- does not like to count and do boring work
- can oversee facts when doing boring work
CONTRA:
- no intuition
- no background knowledge
- can't juggle with multiple types of evidence
PRO:
- doesn't need to sleep
- is very good at counting and boring work
- doesn't make errors in boring work
P(A|B)=(P(B|A)P(A))/(P(B)
FRANZ BOPP
VERY,
VERY
LONG
TITLE
COMPUTER-ASSISTED LANGUAGE COMPARISON
11 / 20
Slide 30
Slide 30 text
Towards a Computer-Assisted Comparative Method Standards
Standards
12 / 20
Slide 31
Slide 31 text
Towards a Computer-Assisted Comparative Method Standards
Standards: Concept Labeling
12 / 20
Slide 32
Slide 32 text
Towards a Computer-Assisted Comparative Method Standards
Standards: Concept Labeling
Concept List # Items Concept Label Concept ID
Allen (2007) 500 animal oil; 动物油(脂肪) GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID: 3232)
Gregersen (1976) 217 fat-grease*fat-grease GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID: 3232)
Heggarty (2005) 150 fat (grease); grasa GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID: 3232)
Swadesh (1955) 100 fat (grease) GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID: 3232)
Alpher and Nash (1999) 151 fat, grease GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID: 3232)
Hale (1961) 100 fat, grease GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID: 3232)
OGrady and Klokeid (1969) 100 fat, grease GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID: 3232)
Blust (2008) 210 fat/grease GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID: 3232)
Matisoff (1978) 200 fat/grease GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID: 3232)
Samarin (1969) 218 fat/grease GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID: 3232)
Dunn et al. (2012) 207 fat GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID: 3232)
Swadesh (1950) 215 fat GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID: 3232)
Zgraggen (1980) 380 fat GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID: 3232)
Jachontov (1991) 100 fat n. GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID: 3232)
Wiktionary (2003) 207 fat (noun) GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID: 3232)
Starostin (1991) 110 fat n.; жир GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID: 3232)
TeilDautrey et al. (2008) 430 fat, oil GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID: 3232)
Swadesh (1952) 200 fat (organic substance) GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID: 3232)
Shiro (1973) 200 grease (fat) GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID: 3232)
Samarin (1969) 100 grease; graisse; Fett; grasa GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID: 3232)
Wang (2006) 200 pig oil; 猪油 GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID: 3232)
Haspelmath and Tadmor (2009) 1460 the grease or fat GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID: 3232)
Concept labels for “GREASE” in 22 different concept lists (see List et al. 2015,
online at http://concepticon.clld.org)
12 / 20
Slide 33
Slide 33 text
Towards a Computer-Assisted Comparative Method Standards
Standards: Concept Labeling
Concept labels for “GREASE” in 22 different concept lists (see List et al. 2015,
online at http://concepticon.clld.org)
Concept List # Items Concept Label Concept ID
Allen (2007) 500 animal oil; 动物油(脂肪) GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Gregersen (1976) 217 fat-grease*fat-grease GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Heggarty (2005) 150 fat (grease); grasa GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Swadesh (1955) 100 fat (grease) GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Alpher and Nash (1999) 151 fat, grease GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Hale (1961) 100 fat, grease GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
OGrady and Klokeid (1969) 100 fat, grease GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Blust (2008) 210 fat/grease GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Matisoff (1978) 200 fat/grease GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Samarin (1969) 218 fat/grease GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Dunn et al. (2012) 207 fat GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Swadesh (1950) 215 fat GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Zgraggen (1980) 380 fat GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Jachontov (1991) 100 fat n. GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Wiktionary (2003) 207 fat (noun) GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Starostin (1991) 110 fat n.; жир GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
TeilDautrey et al. (2008) 430 fat, oil GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Swadesh (1952) 200 fat (organic substance) GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Shiro (1973) 200 grease (fat) GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Samarin (1969) 100 grease; graisse; Fett; grasa GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Wang (2006) 200 pig oil; 猪油 GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Haspelmath and Tadmor (2009) 1460 the grease or fat GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
12 / 20
Slide 34
Slide 34 text
Towards a Computer-Assisted Comparative Method Standards
Standards: Concept Labeling
Concept labels for “GREASE” in 22 different concept lists (see List et al. 2015,
online at http://concepticon.clld.org)
Concept List # Items Concept Label Concept ID
Allen (2007) 500 animal oil; 动物油(脂肪) GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Gregersen (1976) 217 fat-grease*fat-grease GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Heggarty (2005) 150 fat (grease); grasa GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Swadesh (1955) 100 fat (grease) GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Alpher and Nash (1999) 151 fat, grease GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Hale (1961) 100 fat, grease GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
OGrady and Klokeid (1969) 100 fat, grease GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Blust (2008) 210 fat/grease GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Matisoff (1978) 200 fat/grease GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Samarin (1969) 218 fat/grease GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Dunn et al. (2012) 207 fat GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Swadesh (1950) 215 fat GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Zgraggen (1980) 380 fat GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Jachontov (1991) 100 fat n. GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Wiktionary (2003) 207 fat (noun) GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Starostin (1991) 110 fat n.; жир GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
TeilDautrey et al. (2008) 430 fat, oil GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Swadesh (1952) 200 fat (organic substance) GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Shiro (1973) 200 grease (fat) GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Samarin (1969) 100 grease; graisse; Fett; grasa GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Wang (2006) 200 pig oil; 猪油 GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
Haspelmath and Tadmor (2009) 1460 the grease or fat GREASE (CONCEPTICON-ID:323)
12 / 20
Slide 35
Slide 35 text
Towards a Computer-Assisted Comparative Method Standards
Standards: Lexical Representation
13 / 20
Slide 36
Slide 36 text
Towards a Computer-Assisted Comparative Method Standards
Standards: Lexical Representation
Dialect Entry IPA Segments Morphemes
Beijing 大油 ta⁵¹ iou³⁵ t a ⁵¹ i o u ³⁵ t a ⁵¹ + i o u ³⁵
Changsha 油 tɕy³³ iəu¹³ tɕ y ³³ i ə u ¹³ tɕ y ³³ + i ə u ¹³
Chengdu 猪油 tsu⁴⁴iəu³¹ ts u ⁴⁴ i ə u ³¹ ts u ⁴⁴ + i ə u ³¹
Fuzhou 猪油 ty⁴⁴iu⁵² t y ⁴⁴ i u ⁵² t y ⁴⁴ + i u ⁵²
Guangzhou 猪膏 tʃy⁵⁵kou⁵³ tʃ y ⁵⁵ k ou ⁵³ tʃ y ⁵⁵ + k ou ⁵³
Meixian 油 jiu¹² j i u ¹² j i u ¹ ²
Nanchang 油 iu⁵⁵ i u ⁵⁵ i u ⁵⁵
Taibei ti44 iu13豬油 ti⁴⁴ iu¹³ t i ⁴⁴ i u ¹³ t i ⁴⁴ + i u ¹³
Wenzhou 猪油 tsei⁴⁴ ɦiau³¹ ts e i ⁴⁴ ɦ i a u ³¹ ts e i +⁴⁴ ɦ i a u ³¹
Xiamen 油 iu²⁴ i u ²⁴ i u ²⁴
Lexical entries for “GREASE” (“pork fat”) in 10 Chinese dialect varieties
(data taken from Wang and Hamed 2006)
13 / 20
Slide 37
Slide 37 text
Towards a Computer-Assisted Comparative Method Standards
Standards: Lexical Representation
Lexical entries for “GREASE” (“pork fat”) in 10 Chinese dialect varieties
(data taken from Wang and Hamed 2006)
Dialect Entry IPA Segments Morphemes
Beijing 大油 ta⁵¹ iou³⁵ t a ⁵¹ i o u ³⁵ t a ⁵¹ + i o u ³⁵
Changsha 油 tɕy³³ iəu¹³ tɕ y ³³ i ə u ¹³ tɕ y ³³ + i ə u ¹³
Chengdu 猪油 tsu⁴⁴iəu³¹ ts u ⁴⁴ i ə u ³¹ ts u ⁴⁴ + i ə u ³¹
Fuzhou 猪油 ty⁴⁴iu⁵² t y ⁴⁴ i u ⁵² t y ⁴⁴ + i u ⁵²
Guangzhou 猪膏 tʃy⁵⁵kou⁵³ tʃ y ⁵⁵ k ou ⁵³ tʃ y ⁵⁵ + k ou ⁵³
Meixian 油 jiu¹² j i u ¹² j i u ¹ ²
Nanchang 油 iu⁵⁵ i u ⁵⁵ i u ⁵⁵
Taibei ti44 iu13豬油 ti⁴⁴ iu¹³ t i ⁴⁴ i u ¹³ t i ⁴⁴ + i u ¹³
Wenzhou 猪油 tsei⁴⁴ ɦiau³¹ ts e i ⁴⁴ ɦ i a u ³¹ ts e i ⁴⁴ + ɦ i a u ³¹
Xiamen 油 iu²⁴ i u ²⁴ i u ²⁴
13 / 20
Slide 38
Slide 38 text
Towards a Computer-Assisted Comparative Method Standards
Standards: Lexical Representation
Lexical entries for “GREASE” (“pork fat”) in 10 Chinese dialect varieties
(data taken from Wang and Hamed 2006)
Dialect Entry IPA Segments Morphemes
Beijing 大油 ta⁵¹ iou³⁵ t a ⁵¹ i o u ³⁵ t a ⁵¹ + i o u ³⁵
Changsha 油 tɕy³³ iəu¹³ tɕ y ³³ i ə u ¹³ tɕ y ³³ + i ə u ¹³
Chengdu 猪油 tsu⁴⁴iəu³¹ ts u ⁴⁴ i ə u ³¹ ts u ⁴⁴ + i ə u ³¹
Fuzhou 猪油 ty⁴⁴iu⁵² t y ⁴⁴ i u ⁵² t y ⁴⁴ + i u ⁵²
Guangzhou 猪膏 tʃy⁵⁵kou⁵³ tʃ y ⁵⁵ k ou ⁵³ tʃ y ⁵⁵ + k ou ⁵³
Meixian 油 jiu¹² j i u ¹² j i u ¹ ²
Nanchang 油 iu⁵⁵ i u ⁵⁵ i u ⁵⁵
Taibei ti44 iu13豬油 ti⁴⁴ iu¹³ t i ⁴⁴ i u ¹³ t i ⁴⁴ + i u ¹³
Wenzhou 猪油 tsei⁴⁴ ɦiau³¹ ts e i ⁴⁴ ɦ i a u ³¹ ts e i +⁴⁴ ɦ i a u ³¹
Xiamen 油 iu²⁴ i u ²⁴ i u ²⁴
13 / 20
Slide 39
Slide 39 text
Towards a Computer-Assisted Comparative Method Standards
Standards: Lexical Representation
Lexical entries for “GREASE” (“pork fat”) in 10 Chinese dialect varieties
(data taken from Wang and Hamed 2006)
Dialect Entry IPA Segments Morphemes
Beijing 大油 ta⁵¹ iou³⁵ t a ⁵¹ i o u ³⁵ t a ⁵¹ + i o u ³⁵
Changsha 油 tɕy³³ iəu¹³ tɕ y ³³ i ə u ¹³ tɕ y ³³ + i ə u ¹³
Chengdu 猪油 tsu⁴⁴iəu³¹ ts u ⁴⁴ i ə u ³¹ ts u ⁴⁴ + i ə u ³¹
Fuzhou 猪油 ty⁴⁴iu⁵² t y ⁴⁴ i u ⁵² t y ⁴⁴ + i u ⁵²
Guangzhou 猪膏 tʃy⁵⁵kou⁵³ tʃ y ⁵⁵ k ou ⁵³ tʃ y ⁵⁵ + k ou ⁵³
Meixian 油 jiu¹² j i u ¹² j i u ¹ ²
Nanchang 油 iu⁵⁵ i u ⁵⁵ i u ⁵⁵
Taibei ti44 iu13豬油 ti⁴⁴ iu¹³ t i ⁴⁴ i u ¹³ t i ⁴⁴ + i u ¹³
Wenzhou 猪油 tsei⁴⁴ ɦiau³¹ ts e i ⁴⁴ ɦ i a u ³¹ ts e i ⁴⁴ + ɦ i a u ³¹
Xiamen 油 iu²⁴ i u ²⁴ i u ²⁴
13 / 20
Slide 40
Slide 40 text
Towards a Computer-Assisted Comparative Method Standards
Standards: Representation of Cognate Judgments
14 / 20
Slide 41
Slide 41 text
Towards a Computer-Assisted Comparative Method Standards
Standards: Representation of Cognate Judgments
Language Lexical Entry Cognacy Alignment
Central Amis simar 2 s i m a r
Thao lhimash 2 lh i m a sh
Hanunóo tabáʔ 23 t a b á ʔ
Nias tawõ 23 t a w õ -
Mailu mona 1 m o n a -
Maloh -iñak 1 - i ñ a k
Tetum mina 1 m i n a -
Banggi laːna 24 l aː n a -
Berawan (Long Terawan) ləməʔ 24 l ə m ə ʔ
Iban lemak 24 l e m a k
Cognate judgments for “grease/fat” across 10 Austronesian languages
(data taken from Greenhill et. al 2008, online at
http://language.psy.auckland.ac.nz/austronesian/)
14 / 20
Slide 42
Slide 42 text
Towards a Computer-Assisted Comparative Method Standards
Standards: Representation of Cognate Judgments
Cognate judgments for “grease/fat” across 10 Austronesian languages
(data taken from Greenhill et. al 2008, online at
http://language.psy.auckland.ac.nz/austronesian/)
Language Lexical Entry Cognacy Alignment
Central Amis simar 2 s i m a r
Thao lhimash 2 lh i m a sh
Hanunóo tabáʔ 23 t a b á ʔ
Nias tawõ 23 t a w õ -
Mailu mona 1 m o n a -
Maloh -iñak 1 - i ñ a k
Tetum mina 1 m i n a -
Banggi laːna 24 l aː n a -
Berawan (Long Terawan) ləməʔ 24 l ə m ə ʔ
Iban lemak 24 l e m a k
14 / 20
Slide 43
Slide 43 text
Towards a Computer-Assisted Comparative Method Standards
Jena Wordlist Standard
15 / 20
Slide 44
Slide 44 text
Towards a Computer-Assisted Comparative Method Standards
Jena Wordlist Standard
JENA
WORDLIST
STANDARD
The Jena Wordlist Standard is being developed by the NESCent style working group
“GlottoBank: Towards a Global Language Phylogeny” under the direction of Russel Gray
15 / 20
Slide 45
Slide 45 text
Towards a Computer-Assisted Comparative Method Standards
Jena Wordlist Standard
The Jena Wordlist Standard is being developed by the NESCent style working group
“GlottoBank: Towards a Global Language Phylogeny” under the direction of Russel Gray
JENA
WORDLIST
STANDARD
DEFINE STANDARDS FOR
- Wordlists
- Cognate Sets
- Alignments
PROVIDE TOOLS FOR
- Data Validation
- Data Exchange
- Data Enrichment
15 / 20
Slide 46
Slide 46 text
Towards a Computer-Assisted Comparative Method Standards
Jena Wordlist Standard
The Jena Wordlist Standard is being developed by the NESCent style working group
“GlottoBank: Towards a Global Language Phylogeny” under the direction of Russel Gray
JENA
WORDLIST
STANDARD
arbitrarité
Glottolog
http://glottolog.clld.org
Phoible
http://phoible.clld.org
CONCEPTICON
http://concepticon.clld.org
[ˈfɔi.bł]
INTEGRATE EXISTING STANDARDS
15 / 20
Slide 47
Slide 47 text
Towards a Computer-Assisted Comparative Method Standards
Jena Wordlist Standard
The Jena Wordlist Standard is being developed by the NESCent style working group
“GlottoBank: Towards a Global Language Phylogeny” under the direction of Russel Gray
PROVIDE TOOLS FOR
EDITING AND ANALYSIS
LingPy
http://lingpy.org
TSV EDICTOR
http://tsv.lingpy.org
JENA
WORDLIST
STANDARD
15 / 20
Slide 48
Slide 48 text
Towards a Computer-Assisted Comparative Method Standards
Jena Wordlist Standard
The Jena Wordlist Standard is being developed by the NESCent style working group
“GlottoBank: Towards a Global Language Phylogeny” under the direction of Russel Gray
JENA
WORDLIST
STANDARD
LexiBank
- Cross-Linguistic Database
of Lexical Cognate Sets
PhonoBank
- Cross-Linguistic Database
of Regular Sound Change
Patterns
USE THE STANDARD TO BUILD
NEW DATABASES
15 / 20
Slide 49
Slide 49 text
Towards a Computer-Assisted Comparative Method Workflows
Workflows
16 / 20
Slide 50
Slide 50 text
Towards a Computer-Assisted Comparative Method Workflows
Workflows
P(A|B)=(P(B|A)P(A))/(P(B)
FRANZ BOPP
VERY,
VERY
LONG
TITLE
Semantic
Tagging
Segmentation
Cognate
Detection
Alignment
Analysis
Linguistic
Reconstruction
Phylogenetic
Reconstruction
HAND [hænd]
FOOT [fʊt]
EARTH [ɜːrθ]
TREE [triː]
BARK [bɑːrk]
RAW
DATA
HAND [hænd]
FOOT [fʊt]
EARTH [ɜːrθ]
TREE [triː]
BARK [bɑːrk]
WORDLIST
DATA
HAND [hænd]
FOOT [fʊt]
EARTH [ɜːrθ]
TREE [triː]
BARK [bɑːrk]
TOKENS,
MORPHEMES
HAND [hænd]
FOOT [fʊt]
EARTH [ɜːrθ]
TREE [triː]
BARK [bɑːrk]
COGNATE
SETS
HAND [hænd]
FOOT [fʊt]
EARTH [ɜːrθ]
TREE [triː]
BARK [bɑːrk]
SOUND
CORRESPON-
DENCES
HAND [hænd]
FOOT [fʊt]
EARTH [ɜːrθ]
TREE [triː]
BARK [bɑːrk]
PROTO-
FORMS
HAND [hænd]
FOOT [fʊt]
EARTH [ɜːrθ]
TREE [triː]
BARK [bɑːrk]
PHYLO-
GENIES
PROVIDES
AUTOMATIC
ANALYSES
REVISES
AUTOMATIC
ANALYSES
A possible computer-assisted, iterative workflow with automatic and manual components.
16 / 20
Slide 51
Slide 51 text
Towards a Computer-Assisted Comparative Method Workflows
Workflows: Tools
17 / 20
Slide 52
Slide 52 text
Towards a Computer-Assisted Comparative Method Workflows
Workflows: Tools
LingPy
http://lingpy.org
TSV EDICTOR
http://tsv.lingpy.org
17 / 20
Slide 53
Slide 53 text
Towards a Computer-Assisted Comparative Method Workflows
Workflows: Tools
LingPy and EDICTOR: Two tools for computer-assisted language comparison.
TSV EDICTOR
http://tsv.lingpy.org
Software Library for Automatic
Tasks in Historical Linguistics
- phonetic segmentation
- phonetic alignment
- cognate detection
- ancestral state reconstruction
- borrowing detection
- phylogenetic reconstruction
17 / 20
Slide 54
Slide 54 text
Towards a Computer-Assisted Comparative Method Workflows
Workflows: Tools
LingPy and EDICTOR: Two tools for computer-assisted language comparison.
TSV
LingPy
http://lingpy.org
Online Tool for Computer-
Assisted Language Comparison
- server- and client-based
- data validation
- phonetic segmentation
- cognate set editor
- alignment editor
- correspondence evaluation
17 / 20
Slide 55
Slide 55 text
Towards a Computer-Assisted Comparative Method Workflows
Workflows: Test Cases
Reconstruction of Tukano Languages (with T. Chacon)
15 Tukano languages
140 concepts
cognate sets are aligned with proposed reconstructions
Reconstruction of Burmish Languages (with N. Hill)
8 Burmish languages
about 500 concepts
cognate sets were determined automatically and are currently being reviewd by the expert
Lexical Homology Database of Sino-Tibetan Languages (with L. Sagart and G. Jacques)
more than 50 Sino-Tibetan languages
about 240 concepts
data is currently being assembled
18 / 20
Slide 56
Slide 56 text
Towards a Computer-Assisted Comparative Method Challenges
Challenges
P(A|B)=(P(B|A)P(A))/(P(B)
FRANZ BO
PP
VERY,
VERY
LO
NG
TI TLE
19 / 20
Slide 57
Slide 57 text
Towards a Computer-Assisted Comparative Method Challenges
Challenges
P(A|B)=(P(B|A)P(A))/(P(B)
FRANZ BO
PP
VERY,
VERY
LO
NG
TI TLE
Modeling of Morphological Change
morphological change is not systematic (as opposed to sound change)
morphological differences in cognate sets distort the alignments
Modeling of Semantic Change
semantic shift is not systematic but has general tendencies
we need to incorporate known tendencies in our analyses
Modeling of Irregular Sound Change
irregular or sporadic sound change is problematic for reconstruction
we need to find ways to incorporate our uncertainty in our alignments
19 / 20
Slide 58
Slide 58 text
Concluding Remarks
Many hypotheses have been proposed regarding
the deeper phylogeny of the Austronesian and
many other language families. Unfortunately, the
current practice of data presentation makes it dif-
ficult to compare and test these hypotheses. If we
want to gain new insights into the past of our lan-
guages, we need to find ways to integrate both
the knowledge which experts have been accu-
mulating over centuries and the new computa-
tional tools which help to organize, analyze and
integrate this knowledge.
20 / 20
Slide 59
Slide 59 text
Thanks for Your Attention!
20 / 20