MbrlCatalogueTitleDetail

Do you wish to reserve the book?
Do ‘language trees with sampled ancestors’ really support a ‘hybrid model’ for the origin of Indo-European? Thoughts on the most recent attempt at yet another IE phylogeny
Do ‘language trees with sampled ancestors’ really support a ‘hybrid model’ for the origin of Indo-European? Thoughts on the most recent attempt at yet another IE phylogeny
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
You are currently in the queue to collect this book. You will be notified once it is your turn to collect the book.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Do ‘language trees with sampled ancestors’ really support a ‘hybrid model’ for the origin of Indo-European? Thoughts on the most recent attempt at yet another IE phylogeny
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Title added to your shelf!
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Do you wish to request the book?
Do ‘language trees with sampled ancestors’ really support a ‘hybrid model’ for the origin of Indo-European? Thoughts on the most recent attempt at yet another IE phylogeny
Do ‘language trees with sampled ancestors’ really support a ‘hybrid model’ for the origin of Indo-European? Thoughts on the most recent attempt at yet another IE phylogeny

Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
How would you like to get it?
We have requested the book for you! Sorry the robot delivery is not available at the moment
We have requested the book for you!
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Do ‘language trees with sampled ancestors’ really support a ‘hybrid model’ for the origin of Indo-European? Thoughts on the most recent attempt at yet another IE phylogeny
Do ‘language trees with sampled ancestors’ really support a ‘hybrid model’ for the origin of Indo-European? Thoughts on the most recent attempt at yet another IE phylogeny
Journal Article

Do ‘language trees with sampled ancestors’ really support a ‘hybrid model’ for the origin of Indo-European? Thoughts on the most recent attempt at yet another IE phylogeny

2025
Request Book From Autostore and Choose the Collection Method
Overview
In this paper, we present a brief critical analysis of the data, methodology, and results of the most recent publication on the computational phylogeny of the Indo-European family (Heggarty et al. 2023), comparing them to previous efforts in this area carried out by (roughly) the same team of scholars (informally designated as the “New Zealand school”), as well as concurrent research by scholars belonging to the “Moscow school” of historical linguistics. We show that the general quality of the lexical data used as the basis for classification has significantly improved from earlier studies, reflecting a more careful curation process on the part of qualified historical linguists involved in the project; however, there remain serious issues when it comes to marking cognation between different characters, such as failure (in many cases) to distinguish between true cognacy and areal diffusion and the inability to take into account the influence of the so-called derivational drift (independent morphological formations from the same root in languages belonging to different branches). Considering that both the topological features of the resulting consensus tree and the established datings contradict historical evidence in several major aspects, these shortcomings may partially be responsible for the results. Our principal conclusion is that the correlation between the number of included languages and the size of the list may simply be insufficient for a guaranteed robust topology; either the list should be drastically expanded (not a realistic option for various practical reasons) or the number of compared taxa be reduced, possibly by means of using intermediate reconstructions for ancestral stages instead of multiple languages (the principle advocated by the Moscow school ).

MBRLCatalogueRelatedBooks