Re: [cybalist] Re: Glottochronology.

I believe there could be some laws hidden in those numbers and models
disturbed in their Mathematical aesthetics by another minor phaenomena.
What I mean is the following:
The languages, their behaviour and evolution could be modelled in the same
way we model other kind of phaenomena v.g. the physical ones. This modelling
could emerge as soon as we begin to scope our studies in long term
evolutions; possibly we are far from solving these matters. The mathematical
approximations on languages evolutions are just beginning and the evidences
for attesting those conclusions are lying underneath so we have to wait
until other sciences come in our help.
I don't know if this could sound mechanicist! I have been involved with
models which help me to understand the Reality and solve problems. I see no
danger of mathematicalisation of Linguistics.

>From: "John Croft" <jdcroft@...>
>Reply-To: cybalist@egroups.com
>To: cybalist@egroups.com
>Subject: [cybalist] Re: Glottochronology.
>Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2000 02:05:18 -0000
>
>Mark wrote
>
> > Glottochronology is beguiling, but ultimately, it's dangerous.
> > Everything I've read says the methodology is unsound. At best,
> > some broad educated guesses are being made in assembling the
> > figures. At worst, it's based on unsupportablely wild guesses.
> > It's like trying to externally calculate the velocity of a
> > moving object without calculus; until we get a Leibnitz/Newton
> > to give us such a calculus, any claims made by
> > glottochronology have to be taken with several
> > salt-mines-worth of salt.
>
>Originally Glottochronology was based upon historically known
>rates of linguistic change (eg. Romance, Germanic and Slavic
>langauges) which not only began diverging at relatively known
>points in time, but also had deep literatures as well. Recent work I
>have seen on the subject based on other languages, gives quite
>radically different results.
>
>For instance, there is now evidence for the rates of movement of
>Bantu
>languages out of the Camerouns that are fairly well established and
>the glottochronological calculations here seem quite different to the
>European ones. This provides the subject with one line of evidence.
>
>Another altogether different line of approach lies with work being
>done on the dissemination of other cultural innovations through a
>population. A number of factors have been found that is beginning to
>make calculations possible from "the bottom up" rather than the top
>down. The Russian Mathematician Nicholas Rashevsky began some of
>this
>work in the late 1960s, but it has since been extended elsewhere. I
>don't know too much about this, but I know the literature has
>recently
>been picked up by those interested in Mimetics to see how fast
>"memes"
>pass through populations, and what factors increase or decrease the
>velocity by which they spread.
>
>Ultimately both the glottochronological and cultural dissemination
>approaches need to come together, but we are still awaiting our
>Darwin, Einstein or Newton in this field. If that ever happens,
>though, it will still be difficult and the debates will still be
>there
>as most of the evidence on which such calculations will be based will
>be missing (i.e. the historic size of population, its objective
>"need" (i.e. how close to the subsistence breadline they are), the
>nature of the connectivity with neighbours of equivalent cultural
>level, and the amicability or otherwise of those relations etc).
>Thus
>the debates will still occur, afterall the acceptance of Darwinian
>evolution has not abolished the debates within the science of
>cladistics (although modern molecular genetics might!)
>
>Hope this helps
>
>Regards
>
>John
>

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com