Bipartite structure

[Rankin, Robert L]

 Yes, it often comes as a great surprise to biologists that this model is
based to no small degree on Linguistics rather than the other way around.

Bob

-----Original Message-----
From: Joel David Schudlich
To: siouan at lists.colorado.edu
Sent: 1/10/02 5:20 PM
Subject: Re: Bipartite structure

Just an observation:
re
> grammaticalization/lexicalization chains leading up to them, much as
in
> genetics where as spread of mutations allows one to zero in on the
archetype.
>

I'm sure this is so besides the point that it might not even qualify as
a
tangent, but the direction of causality of the parallels between
genetics
and historical linguistics is not what most people assume: Indo-European
philology is one of the models Darwin based his theories on (or at the
very least, the "family trees" common to both theories predate Darwin,
and I have been assured by those who have better reason than I to know
that he was aware of them) so if the parallels persist, it may simply
reflect the common origins of the models.

Just an observation, feel free to ignore me.


p.s. Hi Randy! Long time no see.


:::::::::::::::::::::
"...in accordance with an elaborate and secret code that is written
nowhere, known by none, and understood by all."
						-Edward Sapir, 1927
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Joel D Schudlich
2351 Worthington Lane
Bloomington, IN 47401
(812) 336-2898
jschudli at indiana.edu

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~