Abstract
AbstractTwo families of quantitative methods have been used to infer geographical homelands of language families: Bayesian phylogeography and the ‘diversity method’. Bayesian methods model how populations may have moved using a phylogenetic tree as a backbone, while the diversity method assumes that the geographical area where linguistic diversity is highest likely corresponds to the homeland. No systematic tests of the performances of the different methods in a linguistic context have so far been published. Here we carry out performance testing by simulating language families, including branching structures and word lists, along with speaker populations moving in space. We test six different methods: two versions of BayesTraits; the relaxed random walk model of BEAST 2; our own RevBayes implementations of a fixed rates and a variable rates random walk model; and the diversity method. As a result of the tests we propose a hierarchy of performance of the different methods. Factors such as geographical idiosyncrasies, incomplete sampling, tree imbalance, and small family sizes all have a negative impact on performance, but mostly across the board, the performance hierarchy generally being impervious to such factors.
Publisher
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
Reference51 articles.
1. Three tree priors and five datasets
2. Areal pressure in grammatical evolution
3. A test of Generalized Bayesian dating: A new linguistic dating method
4. Lexical cues to Uto-Aztecan prehistory. Int. J. Am;Linguist.,1983
5. Campbell L . 1978. Quichean prehistory: linguistic contributions. Papers in Mayan Linguistics, ed. England NC , 25–54. Miscellaneous publications in Anthropology, 6. Columbia: University of Missouri.
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献