Oleg Belyaev

Automated dating of the world’s language families based on lexical similarity

This paper describes a computerized alternative to glottochronology for estimating elapsed time since parent languages diverged into daughter languages. The method, developed by the Automated Similarity Judgment Program (ASJP) consortium, is different from glottochronology in four major respects: (1) it is automated and thus is more objective, (2) it applies a uniform analytical approach to a single database of worldwide languages, (3) it is based on lexical similarity as determined from Levenshtein (edit) distances rather than on cognate percentages, and (4) it provides a formula for date calculation that mathematically recognizes the lexical heterogeneity of individual languages, including parent languages just before their breakup into daughter languages. Automated judgments of lexical similarity for groups of related languages are calibrated with historical, epigraphic, and archaeological divergence dates for 52 language groups. The discrepancies between estimated and calibration dates are found to be on average 29% as large as the estimated dates themselves, a figure that does not differ significantly among language families. As a resource for further research that may require dates of known level of accuracy, we offer a list of ASJP time depths for nearly all the world’s recognized language families and for many subfamilies.

Using WALS and Jazyki mira

Abstract The articles primary concern is to address the usage of The world atlas of language structures through comparing it with another typological database of similar scope, Jazyki mira. Such a comparison is carried out based on a set of criteria. First, the scope of the databases is compared, as well as their differences and similarities in structure, in the number of errors, and in the existing user interfaces. Then calculations of typological similarity and temporal stability of language features based on the data provided by both databases are compared. Finally, conclusions are drawn as to the relative efficiency and usefulness of these databases for different aims of research or educational goals.

Systematic mismatches: coordination and subordination at three levels of grammar

In this paper, I analyze two clause combining strategies in Ossetic that exhibit mixed properties between coordination and subordination. I argue that the ‘mismatch approach’ proposed by Culicover & Jackendoff (1997) and Yuasa & Sadock (2002) is best suited to account for their properties. However, in order to adequately describe the behavior of these constructions in terms of the mismatch approach, appealing to three levels of grammar is required instead of two levels (syntax and semantics) discussed in previous works. This provides a clear argument in favor of models of grammar such as Lexical Functional Grammar (LFG), where the syntactic level is split between constituent structure (c-structure) and functional structure (f-structure). The properties of semantic coordination and subordination that have been proposed in earlier work mostly belong to the level of f-structure, and not semantics proper. I argue that the only substantial semantic difference between coordination and adverbial subordination is that the former introduces discourse relations between speech acts, while the latter introduces asserted predicates that link two propositions within the same speech act. I provide definitions of coordination and subordination at all the three levels of grammar formalized in terms of the LFG framework, and discuss the tests that can be used for each of these levels.

Glottochronology as a Heuristic for Genealogical Language Relationships

Abstract This paper applies a computerized method related to that of glottochronology and addresses the question whether such a method is useful as a heuristic for identifying deep genealogical relations among languages. We first measure lexical similarities for pairs of language families that are normally assumed to be unrelated, using a modification of the Levenshtein distance as our similarity measure. We then go on to study how the similarities are statistically distributed. The average similarity is slightly greater than zero, suggesting a small effect of sound symbolism. The upper tail of the distribution extends to similarities comparable to what is typically found for well-established families or highest-order subgroups of old families, but the pairs of unrelated families with the highest similarities contain only a few languages. We conclude that the method may work as a useful heuristic, provided that the number of languages compared is taken into account.

Evolution of Case in Ossetic

Ossetic sets itself apart from the other New Iranian languages by having a relatively elaborate system of nine cases. Since most of them are relatively late innovations, and only four cases (Nom., Gen, Abl., and Iness.) can be traced back to Proto-Iranian, many scholars tend to ascribe the development of the case system to Caucasian influence. The exact nature of this influence, however, has never been demonstrated. The aim of this paper is, first, to not only reconstruct the etymologies of Ossetic cases, but also to provide a chronology of how the case system developed. The second aim pursued here is to give a systematic comparison of the case system of Ossetic with those of the neighbouring languages and to determine if there is any external influence on the case system and, if so, what languages this influence came from. I conclude that Ossetic developed from a case system identical to those of Khotanese and Sogdian towards the present state under the influence of contact with Georgian and, later, with Turkic and Vaynakh languages. In the process of the discussion, I also argue that two new cases, the Directive and Regressive, are undergoing grammaticalisation in contemporary Ossetic.

Word order and focus particles in Nakh-Daghestanian languages

[Extract] This paper offers an account of how information structure is expressed in the Nakh-Daghestanian languages. The focus of this paper is on word order and focus particles which can be regarded as the most important means of manipulating the information structure because they are to varying degrees employed in all languages of the family. Other means such as a special cleft-like focus construction (cf. Xaidakov 1986, Kazenin 2002), the opposition between certain verb forms (cf. Sumbatova 2004), the use of so-called ‘predicative particles’ (Kalinina & Sumbatova 2007), or intonation are either not very prominent or restricted to a subset of the languages.