Comparative Methodology

[LV Hayes]

----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 12:41:15 -0400 (EDT)
>From: Rich Alderson <alderson+mail at panix.com>
>
>>I have a half dozen or more historical linguistics textbooks,
>>as well as other books and articles that contain pertinent
>>information ...
>
>It would be very helpful to know *what* books you have, or
>have access to.  For example, are you familiar with Anthony
>Fox's excellent textbook _Linguistic Reconstruction_, or Henry
>Hoenigswald's monograph _Language Change and Linguistic
>Reconstruction_?

I have Hoenigswald's monograph.  A respondent recommended Fox's textbook,
but I do not have it and there's no library near me that would have it, so
I'd have to buy a copy to get a look at it.  The book is available in
paperback edition from the US office of Oxford University Press.

The other items of relevance I have on hand are as follows.

Anttila, Raimo. 1972. An Introduction to Historical and Comparative
Linguistics.
Arlotto, Anthony. 1972. Introduction to Historical Linguistics.
Ellis, Jeffrey. 1966. Towards a General Comparative Linguistics.
Hockett, Charles F. 1958. A Course in Modern Linguistics.
Hoenigswald, Henry M. 1950. The Principal Step in Comparative Grammar.
Katicic, Radoslav. 1970. A Contribution to the General Theory of
Comparative Linguistics.
King, Robert D. 1969. Historical Linguistics and Generative Grammar.
Lehmann, Winfred P. 1973. Historical Linguistics, an Introduction, Second
Edition.
Lehmann, Winfred P. 1992. Historical Linguistics, Third Edition.
Lord, Robert. 1966. Comparative Linguistics.
Meillet, Antoine. 1967. The Comparative Method in Historical Linguistics.
Paul, Hermann. 1970. Prinzipien der Sprachgeschichte.
Shevoroshkin, Vitaly and Paul J. Sidwell (editors). 1999. Historical
Linguistics & Lexicostatistics.

>You seem to have the basics already in hand, perhaps only
>missing the point that your steps 1-4 are an iterative process,
>repeating any number of times until confidence is reached.  This
>portion of the method is quite often left aside by popularizers,
>and almost always by crackpots.

Please note the distinction I make between 'phase' and 'step'.  A phase is
a stage in the implementation during which one or more (related) steps are
performed, a step is a specific process conducted within a phase.  I also
didn't include a phase that would cover situations where the languages
compared split off the ancestral node at different times, such that
reconstruction of one or more intermediary proto-languages might be
necessary.  This phase would also require iteration of at least some of the
preceding phases.

LV Hayes
lvhayes at worldnet.att.net