[language] "Comments on Clifton's review of Kessler in issue

[H.M. Hubey]

<><><><><><><><><><><><>--This is the Language List--<><><><><><><><><><><><><>


  I would like to review Kessler's book for the LinguistList.

Please reply.



-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Kessler's book
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:37:02 -0500 (EST)
From: Terry Langendoen <terry at linguistlist.org>
To: "H.M.Hubey" <hubeyh at mail.montclair.edu>
References: <3E112ADE.10800 at mail.montclair.edu>



Dear Ms/Mr Hubey, If you'd like to comment on either the book or the
review, I suggest you send your comments as a regular email message to
linguist at linguistlist.org. In the subject line include a reference to the
original positing, e.g. "Comments on Clifton's review of Kessler in issue
13.491". Terry

Terry Langendoen, Linguist List book review editor
  http://linguistlist.org/issues/indices/Review2002r.html/
Co-Principal Investigator, EMELD Project
  http://emeld.douglass.arizona.edu/  &  http://emeld.org/
Department of Linguistics, University of Arizona
PO Box 210028, Tucson AZ 85721-0028, USA
  http://linguistics.arizona.edu/~langendoen/


On Tue, 31 Dec 2002, H.M.Hubey wrote:

>
>   Hello,
>
>
> I just read Kessler's book and would like to write a
> review since this one does nit do it justice.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>   LINGUIST List 13.491
>
>
>     Fri Feb 22 2002
>
>
>     Review: Kessler, The Significance of Word Lists
>
> Editor for this issue: Terence Langendoen  >
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> What follows is another discussion note contributed to our Book
> Discussion Forum. We expect these discussions to be informal and
> interactive; and the author of the book discussed is cordially invited
> to join in. If you are interested in leading a book discussion, look for
> books announced on LINGUIST as "available for discussion." (This means
> that the publisher has sent us a review copy.) Then contact Simin Karimi
> at simin at linguistlist.org  or Terry
> Langendoen at terry at linguistlist.org .
> Subscribe to Blackwell's LL+ at http://www.linguistlistplus.com/ and
> donate 20% of your subscription to LINGUIST! You get 30% off on
> Blackwells books, and free shipping and postage!
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>     Directory
>
>    1. John & Debbie Clifton, Review of Kessler: The Significance of Word
>       Lists
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>       Message 1: Review of Kessler: The Significance of Word Lists
>
> Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2002 20:59:53 +0400
> From: John & Debbie Clifton  >
> Subject: Review of Kessler: The Significance of Word Lists
>
> Kessler, Brett. 2001. The Significance of Word Lists. CSLI Publications,
> x+277pp, hardback ISBN 1-57586-299-9, paperback ISBN 1-57586-300-6,
> Dissertations in Linguistics.
>      Announced at http://linguistlist.org/issues/12/12-790.html#1
>
> John M Clifton, Summer Institute of Linguistics and University of North
> Dakota
>
> DESCRIPTION OF THE BOOK
> The two major issues addressed in this book can be characterized in terms of
> two senses of the word 'significance' as used in the title of the book. The
> first issue is how significant word lists are to determining language
> relatedness. The second issue is what is involved in showing that hypotheses
> made on the basis word lists are statistically significant.
>
> In chapter 1, 'Introduction', Kessler (K) addresses the two major positions
> on the first issue. On the one side are those like Greenberg and Ruhlen
> (1992) who feel that the analysis of word lists can be used to demonstrate
> the links between remotely related languages. On the other side are scores
> of more traditional historical linguists who claim that the similarities
> used to establish these putative links are due to chance. K proposes a third
> option: word lists can be used to establish linguistic relationships, but
> only when following a rigid methodology designed to ensure the results will
> be statistically significant.
>
> Chapters 2, 'Statistical Methodology', and 3, 'Significance Testing', are
> the heart of the book. In these chapters K discusses statistical methodology
> in general, and then details the specific methodology proposed for the
> analysis of word lists. K then applies this test to Swadesh 100 word lists
> from eight languages: Latin, French, English, German, Albanian, Hawaiian,
> Navajo, and Turkish. With a few exceptions, the results of the procedure
> indicate that the first five are related, and the others are not. At the
> risk of over-simplifying a complex procedure, I will attempt to summarize
> the contents of the methodology. Feel free to skip the next paragraph if it
> is too obtuse.
>
> The methodology involves constructing a table of correspondences of
> word-initial segments in semantically related words in two languages. This
> table can then be analyzed using the chi-square test for significance. From
> a statistical point of view, the problem is that the number of occurrences
> of specific correspondences is too low for the chi-square test to be
> meaningful. To remedy this, K proposes the use of a Monte Carlo technique.
> Applying this technique, one of the word lists is randomized, a new table is
> constructed, and the chi-square test is applied to the new table. This
> procedure is repeated 10,000 times. Now the value of the original table is
> compared with the values of these 10,000 tables generated by the Monte Carlo
> technique, and a valid level of significance can be attached to the original
> value.
>
> As indicated above, the methodology as proposed does not always correctly
> identify which languages are related. There are both false positives in
> which a relationship is posited between apparently unrelated languages like
> Latin and Navajo, and false negatives in which no relationship is posited
> between related languages like Albanian and German. K points out that false
> positives are unavoidable in statistics; the goal is to minimize them. False
> negatives, on the other hand, should be eliminated. In addition, it would be
> nice if the methodology could distinguish between  closer relationships like
> those between English and German, and more distant relationships like those
> between English and Albanian. In chapters 4-10, K discusses various ways in
> which the methodology might be improved.
>
> In chapter 4, 'Tests in Different Environments', K concludes that
> predictions are not improved by comparing features other than the
> word-initial consonant, for example, the first consonant of the second
> syllable, or the first vowel, or some combination of the above. Then in
> chapter 5, 'Size of the Word Lists', K shows that increasing the size of the
> word lists by using the Swadesh 200 word list instead of the Swadesh 100,
> does not improve the predictions.
>
> Chapter 6, 'Precision and Lumping', deals with the implications of two types
> of historical changes. First, phonemes can split or merge so that, for
> example, /t/ in language A may correspond to /t/, /tj/, and /tw/ in language
> B. Second, semantic shifts occur which result in, for example, the lexical
> item for 'skin' in language A being related to the lexical item for 'bark'
> in language B. K rejects attempts to incorporate such factors into the
> procedures on the basis of practical considerations related to the
> methodological requirement that lexical items be chosen without reference to
> their similarity to forms in other languages.
>
> Chapters 7-9 deal with what lexical items may need to be eliminated from the
> analysis. In chapter 7, 'Nonarbitrary Vocabulary', K discusses forms in
> which the phonetic form may be at least partially determined by sound
> symbolism including, but not limited to, onomatopoeia and nursery words.
> Then K discusses loan words in chapter 8, 'Historical Connection vs.
> Relatedness', and language-internally related forms in chapter 9,
> 'Language-Internal Cognates'. Language-internally related forms include such
> phenomena one phonetic form for related meanings (for example, 'skin' and
> 'bark' or 'egg' and 'seed') and derivationally related forms. K argues that
> if the goal of the analysis is determining whether two languages are
> genetically related, the nonarbitrary aspects of such forms needs to be
> eliminated.
>
> Then, in chapter 10, 'Recurrence Metrics', K introduces some statistical
> methods that might be used in place of the chi-square test.
>
> In the final chapter, 'Conclusions', K summarizes the actual procedures
> proposed in the book, and then offers observations on what such procedures
> have to offer the practice of historical linguistics.
>
> The book concludes with an appendix that includes all eight word lists that
> are used to test the methodology presented in the book, references, and an
> index.
>
> CRITICAL EVALUATION
> It should be obvious by now that this book may be hard going for readers who
> have an aversion to mathematics in general or statistics in particular. At
> the same time, I feel K does a good job of presenting the material in a form
> that should be accessible to readers who do not have a strong background in
> statistics. The book is full of examples illustrating the various points.
> And the fact that the same eight word lists are used throughout the book
> makes it easier to follow the arguments related to variations in the
> procedures.
>
> I feel K has demonstrated that it is possible to develop procedures that
> yield statistically significant results (that is, issue two from above). At
> the same time, I do not feel K demonstrates how the procedures will bring
> together the two sides regarding the issue of how significant a role word
> lists should play in determining language relatedness. The problem is that
> most of the discussion regarding this issue deals with languages whose
> relationship is very remote, while the methodology presented here only seems
> to be applicable to languages related at the level of Indo-European. K never
> shows how the methodology could be adapted to test more remote
> relationships.
>
> In addition, I am not sure that K's requirement that the analysis must be
> based on a pre-determined procedure, on word lists that are chosen without
> reference to any of the other languages to be analyzed, will be acceptable
> to those interested in determining remote relationships.
>
> This is not so say, however, that the methodology is without merit. In some
> areas like Papua New Guinea and Africa, relationships have not been firmly
> established even at the level of Indo-European. In addition, the chapters on
> lexical items that should be eliminated from the analysis (7-9) discuss
> issues that are important for anyone involved in the analysis of word lists.
> I have seen many analyses (my own included) that fail to take into
> consideration internal cognates.
>
> A major thrust of the book is that 'more is not necessarily better'. K
> demonstrates the importance of choosing carefully the words to be analyzed.
> It is better to analyze a smaller set of words that have been screened in
> terms of origin than to analyze a large number of words that are of
> questionable status. In other words, K argues that attempts to bolster an
> analysis based on word lists of questionable status by simply adding more
> words actually works against the trustworthiness of the analysis. At the
> same time, this will make the procedure more difficult to apply in
> situations as in Papua New Guinea where it is difficult to gather the
> information necessary to compile trustworthy word lists. Technical
> dictionaries of the caliber used by K simply do not exist in many of the
> languages there.
>
> K also makes it clear that the procedures proposed in this book are not a
> replacement for the more traditional tasks of establishing cognates.
> Instead, the procedures are meant to show which languages are good
> candidates for such a task.
>
> In conclusion, while I am not sure how influential the book will be in the
> debate over the use of word lists for determining remote relationships, I
> feel the book has a lot to offer to those involved in more mundane analysis
> of word lists.
>
> BIBLIOGRAPHY
> Greenberg, Joseph H. and Merritt Ruhlen. 1992. Linguistic origins of
> Native Americans. Scientific American 267:94-99.
>
> ABOUT THE REVIEWER
> John M Clifton has been involved in sociolinguistic research involving,
> among other aspects, language relationships, in Papua New Guinea from 1982
> to 1994. More recently, he has just finished coordinating the work of a team
> of researchers working in language use and attitudes among speakers of
> less-commonly-spoken languages in Azerbaijan.
>
>


--
M. Hubey
-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o
The only difference between humans and machines is that humans
can be created by unskilled labor. Arthur C. Clarke

/\/\/\/\//\/\/\/\/\/\/ http://www.csam.montclair.edu/~hubey



---<><><><><><><><><><><><>----Language----<><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Copyrights/"Fair Use":  http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html
The "fair use" exemption to copyright law was created to allow things
such as commentary, parody, news reporting, research and education
about copyrighted works without the permission of the author. That's
important so that copyright law doesn't block your freedom to express
your own works -- only the ability to express other people's.
Intent, and damage to the commercial value of the work are
important considerations.

You are currently subscribed to language as: language at listserv.linguistlist.org
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-language-4283Y at csam-lists.montclair.edu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/language/attachments/20030203/cd8af23f/attachment.htm>