[Lingtyp] small language families and typological rarities

[Ian Joo]

Dear Peter,

I’m not aware of the source you have in mind, but maybe such statement can be simply logically inferred?
A feature being “typologically rare” means fewer lects have it.
A family being smaller or isolate means it has fewer lects (minimally one).
Also, features are commonly shared by the lects of the same family, by the virtue of common heritage.
So smaller family = smaller sibling lects to share inherited features with = more likely to have “rare” features.
For example, if all Indo-European lects suddenly disappeared except for English, English would be one of the very few lects with typically Indo-European traits (along with some other lects that happen to share them due to contact or coincidence).

From Japan,
Ian

- - - - -
JOO, IAN 朱易安
Lecturer 助教
Faculty of International Studies 国際学部
Nagoya University of Commerce and Business 名古屋商科大学
Nisshin, Aichi, Japan 愛知県日進市
https://ianjoo.github.io
- - - - -

> 20.11.2023 19:55, Peter Arkadiev <peterarkadiev at yandex.ru> 작성:
> 
> 
> Dear typologists,
>  
> I vaguely recall having read or heard that it has been claimed that small language families and language isolates have a greater probability of possessing typologically unusual and rare features, however, I cannot locate any references discussing this issue (the two volumes of Rara et Rarissima published in 2010 do not, as far as I can tell). I would be grateful for any references that either espouse such a claim or explicitly disconfirm it.
>  
> Thanks in advance!
>  
> Peter
>  
> -- 
> Peter Arkadiev, PhD Habil.
> https://peterarkadiev.github.io/
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20231120/1dd15ecb/attachment.htm>