| Revision as of 21:19, 21 May 2016 edit213.83.153.44 (talk)No edit summaryTags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 13:28, 22 June 2024 edit undoWolfdog (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users21,889 edits ←Changed redirect target from Language family to Language family#Genetic relationshipTag: Redirect target changed | ||
| (117 intermediate revisions by 61 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| #REDIRECT ] {{R from merge}} | |||
| {{Lead too long|date=October 2015}} | |||
| In ], '''genetic relationship''' is the usual term for the relationship which exists between ]s that are members of the same ]. The term '''genealogical relationship''' is sometimes used to avoid confusion with the unrelated use of the term in biological ]. Languages that possess genetic ties with one another belong to the same linguistic grouping, known as a ]. These ties are established through use of the ] of linguistic analysis. | |||
| Two languages are considered to be genetically related if one is descended from the other or if both are descended from a common ancestor. For example, ] is descended from ]. Italian and Latin are therefore said to be genetically related. Spanish is also descended from Latin. Therefore, ] and Italian are genetically related. In a similar way, Danish, Swedish and Norwegian are genetically related through the ] branch of the Indo-European language family.<ref name="ethnologue">Lewis, M. Paul, Gary F. Simons, and Charles D. Fennig (eds.). , Seventeenth edition. Dallas, Texas: SIL International, 2013.</ref> | |||
| The classification of languages into language families begins by making a list of words in the potential languages that exhibit lexical and grammatical similarities; that is, they are similar in sound and meaning.<ref name="ruhlen">]. ''On the Origin of Languages: Studies in Linguistic Taxonomy''. Stanford, CA: Stanford UP, 1994. Print.</ref> The next step is to determine how the similarities originated. There are three possibilities: convergence, ], and common origin.<ref name="ruhlen"/> Convergence is the chance similarity of sound and meaning of a word in two different languages and “is based on the principle that a word is an arbitrary association of sound and meaning."<ref name="ruhlen"/> An example of convergence is that many unrelated languages have words similar to ] for ‘mother’ and ‘father.’<ref name="ruhlen"/> Borrowing results from the exchanging of words between languages in close contact with one another.<ref name="ruhlen"/> Once convergence and borrowing have been eliminated as possible explanations for similarities in sound and meaning of words, the last explanation is common origin. It can be assumed that the similarities occurred due to descent from a common ancestor, and the words are known as ]s.<ref name="ruhlen"/> The set of all cognates of a word is the ] of the word.<ref name="ruhlen"/> | |||
| Contact with another language (]) can result in influence (], and specifically borrowing) by it. For example, ] has been influenced by ], ] has been influenced by ], and ] has been influenced by ]. However, this influence by definition does not constitute a genetic relationship, or relates two very distantly related languages more, as with English and French, which are linked by ]. | |||
| The discipline of ] rests on the ] that almost all of the languages spoken in the world today can be grouped by derivation from common ancestral languages into a relatively small number of ]. For example, ] is related to other ] (more specifically to the ] branch), while ] is related to many other ]. | |||
| One theory concerning genetic relationships among languages is monogenesis. Monogenesis is the idea that all known languages, with the exceptions of creoles, pidgins, and sign languages, are descendant from a single ancestral language.<ref>]. Monogenesis or Polygenesis: A Single Ancestral Language for All Humanity? Ch. 58 of ''The Oxford Handbook of Language Evolution'', ed. by Maggie Tallerman and Kathleen Rita Gibson. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2012. 558-72. Print.</ref> | |||
| ==Visual representation== | |||
| A common visual representation of a language family is given by a genetic language tree. The ] is sometimes termed a dendrogram or phylogeny. The family tree shows the relationship of the languages within in a family, much as a family tree of an individual shows their relationship with their relatives. There are criticisms to the family tree model. Critics focus mainly on the claim that the internal structure of the trees are subject to vary based on the criteria of classification.<ref>Edzard, Lutz. ''Polygenesis, Convergence, and Entropy: An Alternative Model of Linguistic Evolution Applied to Semitic Linguistics''. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1998. Print.</ref> Even among those who support the family tree model, there are debates over which languages should be included in a language family. For example, within the ], there are debates over whether the ] and ] languages should be included or not.<ref>Georg, Stefan, Peter A. Michalove, Alexis Manaster Ramer, and Paul J. Sidwell. Telling General Linguists about Altaic. ''Journal of Linguistics'' 35.1 (1999): 65-98. Print.</ref> | |||
| The ] has been proposed as an alternative to the tree model.<ref name="francois">]. Trees, Waves and Linkages: Models of Language Diversification. In ''The Routledge Handbook of Historical Linguistics'', ed. by Claire Bowern and Bethwyn Evans. New York: Routledge, 2014, pp.161-189. (ISBN 978-0-41552-789-7).</ref> The wave model groups languages, represented as ]es, and tracks the progress of language variation. The wave model does not rely on the nesting pattern inherent to the tree model. While the tree model implies a lack of contact between languages after derivation from an ancestral form, the wave model shows the relationship between languages that remain in contact, which is more realistic.<ref name="francois"/> | |||
| ==Complications== | |||
| Some problems encountered by the genetic relationship group of languages include language isolates, and mixed, pigdin, and creole languages. ]s, ]s and ]s constitute special genetic types of languages. They do not descend linearly or directly from a single language and have no single ancestor. Language isolates are languages that are unrelated to other languages. Each language isolate is considered to be a single language family with one language according to the '']''.<ref name="ethnologue"/> Including language isolates when counting language families considerably increases the number of language families.<!-- For example, according to Zuckermann (2009), "Israeli", his term for ], is a hybrid language, both ] and ], and it "demonstrates that the reality of linguistic genesis is far more complex than a simple ] allows. 'Revived' languages are unlikely to have a single parent."<ref>]. 2009. ''Journal of Language Contact'', Varia 2:40-67, p. 63.</ref> --> | |||
| ==See also== | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| ==References== | |||
| {{Reflist}} | |||
| ] | |||
Latest revision as of 13:28, 22 June 2024
Redirect to:
- From a merge: This is a redirect from a page that was merged into another page. This redirect was kept in order to preserve the edit history of this page after its content was merged into the content of the target page. Please do not remove the tag that generates this text (unless the need to recreate content on this page has been demonstrated) or delete this page.
- For redirects with substantive page histories that did not result from page merges use {{R with history}} instead.