16.1018, Disc: Re: 16.970: Historical Ling: Punctuated Equilibriu

LINGUIST List linguist at linguistlist.org
Mon Apr 4 03:58:04 UTC 2005


LINGUIST List: Vol-16-1018. Sun Apr 03 2005. ISSN: 1068 - 4875.

Subject: 16.1018, Disc: Re: 16.970: Historical Ling: Punctuated Equilibriu

Moderators: Anthony Aristar, Wayne State U <aristar at linguistlist.org>
            Helen Aristar-Dry, Eastern Michigan U <hdry at linguistlist.org>

Reviews (reviews at linguistlist.org)
        Sheila Collberg, U of Arizona
        Terry Langendoen, U of Arizona

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org/

The LINGUIST List is funded by Eastern Michigan University, Wayne
State University, and donations from subscribers and publishers.

Editor for this issue: Michael Appleby <michael at linguistlist.org>
================================================================

To post to LINGUIST, use our convenient web form at
http://linguistlist.org/LL/posttolinguist.html.


===========================Directory==============================

1)
Date: 31-Mar-2005
From: Jose-Luis Mendivil < jlmendi at unizar.es >
Subject: Re: 16.970: Historical Ling: Punctuated Equilibrium Model

	
-------------------------Message 1 ----------------------------------
Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 23:55:01
From: Jose-Luis Mendivil < jlmendi at unizar.es >
Subject: Re: 16.970: Historical Ling: Punctuated Equilibrium Model


Fund Drive 2005 is now on! Visit http://linguistlist.org/donate.html to donate now!

Marinus Van der Sluijs' remarks on Dixon's model are really
interesting, but I think he does not show that Dixon's model is flawed.
Ven der Sluijs identifies convergence with 'punctuation of equilibrium',
and this is a wrong way. 'Convergence' is just a (putative)
consequence of a period of equilibrium, as a result of intense
borrowing between languages in a (perhaps just ideal) equalitarian
situation (see Campbell 2004 for a recent critical review of this point
and others).

But Dixon's model does not identify every effect describable
as 'convergence' with a period of equilibrium. In fact, Van der Sluijs
uses the term 'convergence' in a different sense. In Dixon's
book 'convergence' refers to the effect of the spread of linguistic
features amongst languages in a linguistic area, not to the possible
assimilation of a substratum language.  Dixon's model may have
problems (again see Campbell 2004), but I do not see anyone in
Marinus's message.

Reference:
Campbell, Lyle (2004) ''Historical Linguistics. The State of the Art''. In
Piet van Sterkenburg (ed.): Linguistics Today - Facing a Greater
Challenge. John Benjamins, Amsterdam/Philadelphia: 109-139.


Best regards:

Jose-Luis Mendivil
Universidad de Zaragoza
Spain


Linguistic Field(s): Historical Linguistics





-----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-16-1018	

	



More information about the LINGUIST mailing list