ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2015
Support for linguistic macrofamilies from weighted sequence alignment.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Maltese as a merger of two worlds: A cross-language approach to phonotactic classification.PloS one · 2023Article
- Proxyeconomics, a theory and model of proxy-based competition and cultural evolution.Royal Society open science · 2022Article
- The vocal tract as a time machine: inferences about past speech and language from the anatomy of the speech organs.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021Article
- At the boundaries of syntactic prehistory.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021Article
- Article
- Article
- Formal Syntax and Deep History.Frontiers in psychology · 2020Article
- Global-scale phylogenetic linguistic inference from lexical resources.Scientific data · 2018Article
- Article
- Tracking modern human population history from linguistic and cranial phenotype.Scientific reports · 2016Article
- Sound-meaning association biases evidenced across thousands of languages.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2016Article
- Unity and disunity in evolutionary sciences: process-based analogies open common research avenues for biology and linguistics.Biology direct · 2016Review
- Human population history revealed by a supertree approach.Scientific reports · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Computational phylogenetics is in the process of revolutionizing historical linguistics. Recent applications have shed new light on controversial issues, such as the location and time depth of language families and the dynamics of their spread. So far, these approaches have been limited to single-language families because they rely on a large body of expert cognacy judgments or grammatical classifications, which is currently unavailable for most language families. The present study pursues a different approach. Starting from raw phonetic transcription of core vocabulary items from very diverse languages, it applies weighted string alignment to track both phonetic and lexical change. Applied to a collection of ∼1,000 Eurasian languages and dialects, this method, combined with phylogenetic inference, leads to a classification in excellent agreement with established findings of historical linguistics. Furthermore, it provides strong statistical support for several putative macrofamilies contested in current historical linguistics. In particular, there is a solid signal for the Nostratic/Eurasiatic macrofamily.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.