Best practices in justifying calibrations for dating language families

dc.contributor.authorMaurits Luke
dc.contributor.authorde Heer Mervi
dc.contributor.authorHonkola Terhi
dc.contributor.authorDunn Michael
dc.contributor.authorVesakoski Outi
dc.contributor.organizationfi=ekologia ja evoluutiobiologia|en=Ecology and Evolutionary Biology |
dc.contributor.organizationfi=maantiede|en=Geography |
dc.contributor.organization-code1.2.246.10.2458963.20.20415010352
dc.contributor.organization-code2606901
dc.converis.publication-id44164994
dc.converis.urlhttps://research.utu.fi/converis/portal/Publication/44164994
dc.date.accessioned2022-10-28T14:07:24Z
dc.date.available2022-10-28T14:07:24Z
dc.description.abstract<p>The use of computational methods to assign absolute datings to language divergence is receiving renewed interest, as modern approaches based on Bayesian statistics offer alternatives to the discredited techniques of glottochronology. The datings provided by these new analyses depend crucially on the use of calibration, but the methodological issues surrounding calibration have received comparatively little attention. Especially, underappreciated is the extent to which traditional historical linguistic scholarship can contribute to the calibration process via loanword analysis. Aiming at a wide audience, we provide a detailed discussion of calibration theory and practice, evaluate previously used calibrations, recommend best practices for justifying calibrations, and provide a concrete example of these practices via a detailed derivation of calibrations for the Uralic language family. This article aims to inspire a higher quality of scholarship surrounding all statistical approaches to language dating, and especially closer engagement between practitioners of statistical methods and traditional historical linguists, with the former thinking more carefully about the arguments underlying their calibrations and the latter more clearly identifying results of their work which are relevant to calibration, or even suggesting calibrations directly.<br /></p>
dc.format.pagerange17
dc.format.pagerange38
dc.identifier.eissn2058-458X
dc.identifier.jour-issn2058-458X
dc.identifier.olddbid186397
dc.identifier.oldhandle10024/169491
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.utupub.fi/handle/11111/38206
dc.identifier.urnURN:NBN:fi-fe2021042825194
dc.language.isoen
dc.okm.affiliatedauthorMaurits, Luke
dc.okm.affiliatedauthorHonkola, Terhi
dc.okm.affiliatedauthorVesakoski, Outi
dc.okm.discipline1181 Ecology, evolutionary biologyen_GB
dc.okm.discipline6121 Languagesen_GB
dc.okm.discipline1181 Ekologia, evoluutiobiologiafi_FI
dc.okm.discipline6121 Kielitieteetfi_FI
dc.okm.internationalcopublicationinternational co-publication
dc.okm.internationalityInternational publication
dc.okm.typeA1 ScientificArticle
dc.publisherOxford University Press
dc.publisher.countryUnited Kingdomen_GB
dc.publisher.countryBritanniafi_FI
dc.publisher.country-codeGB
dc.relation.doi10.1093/jole/lzz009
dc.relation.ispartofjournalJournal of Language Evolution
dc.relation.issue1
dc.relation.volume5
dc.source.identifierhttps://www.utupub.fi/handle/10024/169491
dc.titleBest practices in justifying calibrations for dating language families
dc.year.issued2020

Tiedostot

Näytetään 1 - 1 / 1
Ladataan...
Name:
lzz009.pdf
Size:
432.09 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Publisher's PDF