Origins of human language in Southern Africa?
Bill Croft
wcroft at unm.edu
Sat Apr 16 19:19:19 UTC 2011
I have just read Atkinson's article, including the supplementary
materials - the supplementary materials for a Science or Nature
article are essential reading, because the actual article is too
short to be more than just a long abstract for the real paper.
A number of linguists, here on Funknet just now but also in the
comments section of the NY Times article by Nicholas Wade, have
pointed out languages that are at a substantial distance from Africa
but have large phoneme inventories as evidence against the
hypothesis. It is worth putting this in context of what the paper
actually says:
"We expect the number of phonemes present in a language today to reflect past
phoneme inventory size, combined with complex group dynamic processes driving
relative rates of merging, splitting and borrowing of phonemes. Many
factors are likely to influence the rates at which these processes occur, and
their relative rates will determine the trajectory of phonemic
diversity in a language
through time." (supplementary materials, p. 8)
"It is worth noting that fitting a serial founder effect model to
phoneme inventory data
describes an inherently stochastic (probabilistic) process and does
not entail that
phonemic diversity is entirely determined by population size via a
serial founder
effect. Distance from the best-fit origin in Africa and population
size are shown to be
significant predictors of phonemic diversity, explaining
approximately 30% of global
variation, but other sociolinguistic processes and more recent population
movements clearly also play a role. Neither of these factors are expected to
systematically bias results to produce the observed global cline in
phonemic diversity."
(supplementary materials, p. 11)
"In a general linear model,
language family as a factor explains 50% of the variance in phonemic diversity
(adjusted r-squared=0.502, df=49, p<0.001) and 48% of the variance in phonemic
diversity across the largest 10 families (adjusted r-squared=0.476,
df=9, p<0.001).
This level of conservation within major language families indicates that robust
statistical patterns in global phonemic diversity can persist for
many millennia and
could plausibly reflect a time scale on the order of the African
exodus." (supplementary materials, p. 7)
In other words, Atkinson argues that distance from Africa is only one
of many factors accounting for phoneme inventory size, and explains
only part of the variance in phoneme inventory size. The conclusion
of the main article states that distance from Africa explains 19% of
the variation in phonemic diversity (p. 348). Population size (also
documented by Hay & Bauer, Language 2007) explains another part, and
language family explains yet another, quite large, part of variation
in phoneme inventory size. These statistical models are examples of
the competing motivation models that many functionalists argue for.
The point of the article is that there is still a signal of an
African phylogenetic origin of modern human language in the
geographical distribution of this typological trait.
Atkinson offers an explanation based on the small size of founder
populations leading to the reduction of phoneme inventories, in
turned based on the correlation between population size and phoneme
inventory. So the explanation is in turn based on whatever
explanation is offered for the latter correlation. That is the most
interesting and most problematic part of the whole story, in my
opinion. Atkinson presents an implausible explanation on p. 3 of the
supplementary materials, but the more extended discussion on pp. 8-10
is better. Hay and Bauer do not endorse any specific explanation, but
suggest that in small social networks context allows more ambiguity
to exist (hence fewer phonemes are necessary), and exposure to a
larger number of interlocutors may enhance the creation and
maintenance of a larger number of phonemic distinctions, citing
respectively social network theories and frequency- and
exemplar-based theories of phonology.
Atkinson's conclusion seems reasonable to me. The statistical signal
seems robust, even if we have difficulty in explaining it. I
encourage you to read the article and supplementary materials and
judge for yourself.
Bill
More information about the Funknet
mailing list