The UPenn IE Tree
kurisuto at unagi.cis.upenn.edu
Tue Aug 24 02:59:14 UTC 1999
On Sat, 21 Aug 1999 X99Lynx at aol.com wrote:
> I was not after deeper truths in my message. Just trying to figure out what
> assumptions were behind this tree model. Sean Crist revealed a lot of that
> in his post in response. I don't think the model would yield any direct
> conclusions on relative intelligibility - but you might ask Sean.
That's correct; as far as I'm aware, Ringe et. al. don't make any
statements regarding mutual intelligibility. It's a matter of innovations
being shared or not shared.
Presumably, two dialects which had recently branched (i.e., undergone
innovations which are not shared) would remain mutually intelligible for a
while, much as the dialects of modern English are mutually intelligible,
despite there having been innovations not shared by all dialects.
\/ __ __ _\_ --Sean Crist (kurisuto at unagi.cis.upenn.edu)
--- | | \ / http://www.ling.upenn.edu/~kurisuto/
_| ,| ,| -----
_| ,| ,| [_]
| | | [_]
More information about the Indo-european