Re: Computational Historical Linguistics

>I think that what I am saying is not so different from the currently
>accepted views in the field of historical linguistics. [...] Forcing
> >linguistic evolution to fit a "branching tree" model
>is truly a Procrustean exercise. It seems to me just an example how
>sophisticated mathematics can be abused, to give an aura of >"exactness"
>which obfuscates rather than enlightens.

Your views sound perfectly normal. The wave model is a good view of how a
dialects within an area can influence each other with special developments.
It's true too that the tree model is not exactly the best way to think of
language change since languages obviously don't suddenly "split" apart at
some precise time like 5:34 PM EST :)

However, I think tree diagrams are still a good way to get a handle on
linguistic relationships at a glance. A wave model diagram needs a longer
examination to understand the relationships. But while we're on this
subject, I'd kill for a good representation of a wave model represented on a
geographical map showing hypothetical IE dialect borders. I can't seem to
find any at my impoverished library.

>P.S. I would also be interested on peoples' ideas on the
>Germano-Balto-Slavic "m" in the dat.ins. pl. cases, vs. the "bh" in >the
>rest of IE.

Well, like you say, the wave model explains this well as a local innovation.
Perhaps influenced by the gen.pl.?

- gLeN

______________________________________________________