Networks of lexical borrowing and lateral gene transfer in language and genome evolution

BioEssays

Volumn 36, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 141-150

  List, Johann Mattis ^a   Nelson Sathi, Shijulal ^b   Geisler, Hans ^b   Martin, William ^b  

^a PHILIPPS UNIVERSITY MARBURG   (Germany)

^b HEINRICH HEINE UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

Borrowing; Language evolution; Lateral transfer; Network approaches; Prokaryotic evolution

Indexed keywords

ALLELE; ARTICLE; EVOLUTION; GENE MUTATION; GENOME; HORIZONTAL GENE TRANSFER; LANGUAGE; LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT; NONHUMAN; PROKARYOTE; GENETICS; METABOLISM; PROKARYOTIC CELL;

EUKARYOTA; PROKARYOTA;

BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION; GENE TRANSFER, HORIZONTAL; PROKARYOTIC CELLS;

EID: 84892434805     PISSN: 02659247     EISSN: 15211878     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/bies.201300096     Document Type: Article

References (89)

1. Kiparsky P. 2014. New perspectives in historical linguistics. In Bowern C, Evans B, eds; The Routledge Handbook of Historical Linguistics. London and New York: Routledge.
2. Kroeber AL, Chrétien CD. 1937. Quantitative classification of Indo-European languages. Language 13: 83-103.
3. Ross ASC. 1950. Philological probability problems. J R Stat Soc 12: 19-59.
4. Swadesh M. 1952. Lexico-statistic dating of prehistoric ethnic contacts. Proc Am Philos Soc 96: 452-63.
5. Swadesh M. 1955. Towards greater accuracy in lexicostatistic dating. Int J Am Linguist 21: 121-37.
6. Sankoff D. 1970. On the rate of replacement of word-meaning relationships. Language 46: 564-9.
7. Embleton SM. 1986. Statistics in Historical Linguistics. Bochum: Studienverlag Brockmeyer.
8. Starostin SA. 1989. Sravnitel'no-istoričeskoe jazykoznanie i leksikostatistika [Comparative historical linguistics and lexicostatistics]. In Kullanda SV, Longinov JD, Militarev AJ, Nosenko EJ, et al., eds; Materialy k Diskussijam na Konferencii [Materials for the Discussions at the Conference]. Moscow: Institut Vostokovedenija. p. 3-39.
9. Holden CJ. 2002. Bantu language trees reflect the spread of farming across sub-Saharan Africa: a maximum-parsimony analysis. Proc Biol Sci 269: 793-9.
10. Ringe D, Warnow T, Taylor A. 2002. Indo-European and computational cladistics. Trans Philol Soc 100: 59-129.
11. Gray RD, Atkinson QD. 2003. Language-tree divergence times support the Anatolian theory of Indo-European origin. Nature 426: 435-9.
12. Atkinson QD, Gray RD. 2006. How old is the Indo-European language family? Illumination or more moths to the flame? In Forster P, Renfrew C, eds; Phylogenetic Methods and the Prehistory of Languages. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research. p. 91-109.
13. Bouckaert R, Lemey P, Dunn M, Greenhill SJ, et al. 2012. Mapping the origins and expansion of the Indo-European language family. Science 337: 957-60.
14. Dunn M, Levinson SC, Lindstroem E, Reesink G, et al. 2008. Structural phylogeny in historical linguistics: methodological explorations applied in island Melanesia. Language 84: 710-59.
15. Gray RD, Jordan FM. 2000. Language trees support the express-train sequences of Austronesian expansion. Nature 450: 1052-5.
16. Pagel M. 2009. Human language as a culturally transmitted replicator. Nat Rev Genet 10: 405-15.
17. Holm HJ. 2007. The new arboretum of Indo-European "trees". J Quant Linguist 14: 167-214.
18. Donohue M, Denham T, Oppenheimer S. 2012. New methodologies for historical linguistics? Calibrating a lexicon-based methodology for diffusion vs. subgrouping. Diachronica 29: 505-22.
19. Geisler H, List J-M. 2014. Beautiful trees on unstable ground. Notes on the data problem in lexicostatistics. In Hettrich H, Ziegler S, eds; Die Ausbreitung des Indogermanischen. Thesen aus Sprachwissenschaft, Archäologie und Genetik [The Spread of Indo-European. Theses From Linguistics, Archaeology, and Genetics]. Wiesbaden: Reichert.
20. Häkkinen J. 2012. Problems in the method and interpretations of the computational phylogenetics based on linguistic data. An example of wishful thinking: Bouckaert et al. 2012. URL: http://www.elisanet.fi/alkupera/Problems_of_phylogenetics.pdf.
21. Schleicher A. 1853. O jazyku litevském, zvlástě na slovanský [On the Lithuanian language, and specifically on Slavic]. Časopis Čsekého Museum [J Czech Mus] 27: 320-4.
22. Schleicher A. 1853. Die ersten Spaltungen des indogermanischen Urvolkes [The first splits of the Proto-Indo-European people]. Allgemeine Monatsschrift für Wissenschaft und Literatur [Mon J Sci Lit] 3: 786-7.
23. Sutrop U. 1999. Diskussionsbeiträge zur Stammbaumtheorie [Discussing the theories of family trees]. Fenno-Ugristica 22: 223-51.
24. Čelakovský FL. 1853. Čtení o Srovnavací Mluvnici Slovanské [Readings on the Comparison of Slavic Languages]. V komisí u F. Řivnáče: Prague.
25. Schleicher A. 1848. Zur Vergleichenden Sprachengeschichte [On Comparative Language History]. Bonn: König.
26. Schleicher A. 1863. Die Darwinsche Theorie und die Sprachwissenschaft [Darwin's Theory and Linguistics]. Leipzig: Hermann Böhlau.
27. Darwin C. 1859. On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or, the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. London: John Murray.
28. Oppenheimer JM. 1987. Haeckel's variations on Darwin. In Hoenigswald HM, ed; Biological Metaphor and Cladistic Classification: An Interdisciplinary Perspective. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. p. 123-35.
29. Fitch WM, Margoliash E. 1967. Construction of phylogenetic trees. Science 155: 279-84.
30. Woese CR, Kandler O, Wheelis ML. 1990. Towards a natural system of organisms: proposal for the domains Archaea, Bacteria, and Eucarya. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 87: 4576-9.
31. Geisler H, List JM. 2013. Do languages grow on trees? The tree metaphor in the history of linguistics. In Fangerau H, Geisler H, Halling T, Martin W, eds; Classification and evolution in biology, linguistics and the history of science. Concepts - methods - visualization. Stuttgart: Steiner. p. 111-24.
32. Schmidt J. 1872. Die Verwantschaftsverhältnisse der Indogermanischen Sprachen [The Relationship of the Indo-European Languages]. Leipzig: Hermann Böhlau.
33. Schuchardt H. 1900. Über die Klassifikation der Romanischen Mundarten. Probe-Vorlesung, Gehalten zu Leipzig am 30. April 1870 [On the Classification of the Romance Dialects. Test lecture, held in Leipzig 30th of April 1870]. Graz.
34. Campbell L. 1999. Historical Linguistics: An Introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
35. Anttila R. 1972. An Introduction to Historical and Comparative Linguistics. New York: Macmillan.
36. Hoenigswald HM. 1990. Does language grow on trees? Proc Am Philos Soc 134: 10-8.
37. Stefenelli A. 1992. Das Schicksal des Lateinischen Wortschatzes in den Romanischen Sprachen [The Fate of the Lexicon in the Romance Languages]. Rothe.
38. Schulte K. 2009. Loanwords in Romanian. In Haspelmath M, Tadmor U, eds; Loanwords in the World's Languages. Berlin and New York: de Gruyter. p. 231-59.
39. Thomason S, Kaufman T. 1988. Language Contact, Creolization, and Genetic Linguistics. Berkeley: University of California Press.
40. Haspelmath M, Tadmor U. 2009. The loanword typology project and the world loanword database. In Haspelmath M, Tadmor U, eds; Loanwords in the World's Languages. Berlin and New York: de Gruyter. p. 1-34.
41. Tadmor U. 2009. Loanwords in the world's languages. In Haspelmath M, Tadmor U, eds; Loanwords in the World's Languages. Berlin and New York: de Gruyter. p. 55-75.
42. Dunn M, Terrill A, Reesink G, Foley RA, et al. 2005. Structural phylogenetics and the reconstruction of ancient language history. Science 309: 2072-5.
43. Colonna V, Boattini A, Guardiano C, Dall'ara I, et al. 2010. Long-range comparison between genes and languages based on syntactic distances. Hum Hered 70: 245-54.
44. Longobardi G, Guardiano C, Silvestri G, Boattini A, et al. 2013. Toward a syntactic phylogeny of modern Indo-European languages. J Hist Linguist 3: 122-52.
45. Campbell L, Poser WJ. 2008. Language Classification: History and Method. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
46. Dybo A, Starostin G. 2008. In defense of the comparative method, or the end of the Vovin controversy. In Smirnov IS, ed; Aspekty Komparativistiki [Aspects of Comparativistics]. Moscow: RGGU. p. 119-258.
47. Swadesh M. 1950. Salish internal relationships. Int J Am Linguist 16: 157-67.
48. Grant AP. 2009. Loanwords in British English. In Haspelmath M, Tadmor U, eds; Loanwords in the World's Languages. Berlin and New York: de Gruyter. p. 360-82.
49. Holm HJ. 2011. " Swadesh lists" of Albanian revisited and consequences for its Position in the Indo-European Languages. J Indo-Eur Stud 39: 43-99.
50. Kluge F, Seebold H. eds; 2002. Etymologisches Wörterbuch der Deutschen Sprache [Etymological dictionary of the German language]. Berlin and New York: de Gruyter.
51. Barbançon F, Evans SN, Ringe D, Warnow T. 2013. An experimental study comparing linguistic phylogenetic reconstruction methods. Diachronica 30: 143-70.
52. Dyen I, Kruskal JB, Black P. 1992. An Indoeuropean classification. Trans Am Philos Soc 82: 1-132.
53. Greenhill SJ, Blust R, Gray RD. 2008. The Austronesian basic vocabulary database: from bioinformatics to lexomics. Evol Bioinforma 4: 271-83.
54. Dunn M, Greenhill SJ, Levinson SC, Gray RD. 2011. Evolved structure of language shows lineage-specific trends in word-order universals. Nature 473: 79-82.
55. Zhang J. 2003. Evolution by gene duplication: an update. Trends Ecol Evol 18: 292-8.
56. Treangen TJ, Rocha EP. 2011. Horizontal transfer, not duplication, drives the expansion of protein families in prokaryotes. PLoS Genet 7: e1001284.
57. Popa O, Dagan T. 2011. Trends and barriers to lateral gene transfer in prokaryotes. Curr Opin Microbiol 14: 615-23.
58. Lukjancenko O, Wassenaar TM, Ussery DW. 2010. Comparison of 61 sequenced Escherichia coli genomes. Microb Ecol 60: 708-20.
59. Bapteste E, O'Malley M, Beiko R, Ereshefsky M, et al. 2009. Prokaryotic evolution and the tree of life are two different things. Biol Direct 4: 34.
60. Puigbo P, Wolf YI, Koonin EV. 2010. The tree and net components of prokaryote evolution. Genome Biol Evol 2: 745-56.
61. Southworth FC. 1964. Family-tree diagrams. Language 40: 557-65.
62. Holzer G. 1996. Das Erschließen Unbelegter Sprachen [Reconstructing unattested languages]. Frankfurt am Main: Lang.
63. Huson DH, Rupp R, Scornavacca C. 2010. Phylogenetic Networks. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
64. Morrison DA. 2011. An Introduction to Phylogenetic Networks. Uppsala: RJR Productions.
65. Bandelt HJ, Dress AW. 1992. Split decomposition: a new and useful approach to phylogenetic analysis of distance data. Mol Phylogenet Evol 1: 242-52.
66. Bryant D, Moulton V. 2004. Neighbor-net: an agglomerative method for the construction of phylogenetic networks. Mol Biol Evol 21: 255-65.
67. Hamed MB, Wang F. 2006. Stuck in the forest: trees, networks and Chinese dialects. Diachronica 23: 29-60.
68. Hamed MB. 2005. Neighbour-nets portray the Chinese dialect continuum and the linguistic legacy of China's demic history. Proc R Soc B 272: 1015-22.
69. Heggarty P, Maguire W, McMahon A. 2010. Splits or waves? Trees or webs? How divergence measures and network analysis can unravel language histories. Philos Trans R Soc B 365: 3829-43.
70. McMahon A, Heggarty P, McMahon R, Slaska N. 2005. Swadesh sublists and the benefits of borrowing: an Andean case study. Trans Philol Soc 103: 147-70.
71. Bowern C. 2010. Historical linguistics in Australia: trees, networks and their implications. Philos Trans R Soc B 365: 3845-54.
72. Saitou N, Nei M. 1987. The neighbor-joining method: a new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees. Mol Biol Evol 4: 406-25.
73. Ronquist F. 2004. Bayesian inference of character evolution. Trends Ecol Evol 19: 475-81.
74. Gray RD, Bryant D, Greenhill SJ. 2010. On the shape and fabric of human history. Philos Trans R Soc B 365: 3923-33.
75. Wichmann S, Holman EW, Raman T, Walker RS. 2011. Correlates of reticulation in linguistic phylogenies. Lang Dyn Chang 1: 205-40.
76. Koonin EV, Makarova KS, Aravind L. 2001. Horizontal gene transfer in prokaryotes: quantification and classification. Annu Rev Microbiol 55: 709-42.
77. Huson DH, Scornavacca C. 2011. A survey of combinatorial methods for phylogenetic networks. Genome Biol Evol 3: 23-35.
78. Wang WS-Y, Minett JW. 2005. Vertical and horizontal transmission in language evolution. Trans Philol Soc 103: 121-46.
79. Minett JW, Wang WS-Y. 2003. On detecting borrowing. Diachronica 20: 289-330.
80. Nakhleh L, Ringe D, Warnow T. 2005. Perfect phylogenetic networks: a new methodology for reconstructing the evolutionary history of natural languages. Language 81: 382-420.
81. Nichols J, Warnow T. 2008. Tutorial on computational linguistic phylogeny. Linguist Compass 2: 760-820.
82. Dagan T, Artzy-Randrup Y, Martin W. 2008. Modular networks and cumulative impact of lateral transfer in prokaryote genome evolution. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105: 10039-44.
83. Mirkin BG, Fenner TI, Galperin MY, Koonin EV. 2003. Algorithms for computing parsimonious evolutionary scenarios for genome evolution, the last universal common ancestor and dominance of horizontal gene transfer in the evolution of prokaryotes. BMC Evol Biol 3: 2.
84. Dagan T, Martin W. 2007. Ancestral genome sizes specify the minimum rate of lateral gene transfer during prokaryote evolution. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104: 870-5.
85. Cohen O, Pupko T. 2011. Inference of gain and loss events from phyletic patterns using stochastic mapping and maximum parsimony - a simulation study. Genome Biol Evol 3: 1265-75.
86. Nelson-Sathi S, List J-M, Geisler H, Fangerau H, et al. 2011. Networks uncover hidden lexical borrowing in Indo-European language evolution. Proc R Soc B 278: 1794-803.
87. List J-M, Moran S. 2013. An open source toolkit for quantitative historical linguistics. Proc ACL 2013 Syst Demonstr 13-8.
88. Lewis MP, Fennig CD. 2013. Ethnologue. Dallas: SIL International.
89. Harbert W. 2007. The Germanic Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.