BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//Talks.cam//talks.cam.ac.uk//
X-WR-CALNAME:Talks.cam
BEGIN:VEVENT
SUMMARY:Phylogenetic approaches to language history and diversity - Annema
 rie Verkerk\, University of Reading
DTSTART:20141127T163000Z
DTEND:20141127T183000Z
UID:TALK54378@talks.cam.ac.uk
CONTACT:Jamie Douglas
DESCRIPTION:There are three major scientific fields that use quantitative 
 methods to study the evolution of complex entities: biology\, anthropology
 \, and linguistics. Conceptual parallels have encouraged cross-fertilisati
 on among these fields regarding both the theory and the methods of the stu
 dy of evolution. One of the latest instances of such cross-fertilisation i
 s the recent adoption of phylogenetic methods from biology into anthropolo
 gy and linguistics. First\, this was limited to the use of statistical met
 hods for phylogenetic tree inference\, i.e. analyses of how languages are 
 related (Nichols and Warnow 2008). More recently\, methods for comparative
  analysis of anthropological and linguistic features on the branches of a 
 phylogenetic tree have been adopted as well (Dunn et al. 2011\; Levinson a
 nd Gray 2012). These latter type of methods can be subsumed under the phra
 se ‘phylogenetic comparative methods’ (Harvey and Pagel 1991).\n\nPhyl
 ogenetic (comparative) methods can be used to investigate a range of diach
 ronic questions\, including those about 1) homelands of language families\
 , 2) sequences of linguistic change\, 3) dating language family trees\, 4)
  rates of  linguistic change\, 5) correlations between linguistic\nfeature
 s\, and 6) ancestral states of linguistic features (Gray et al. 2007). In 
 this talk I will first give an overview of recent work on phylogenetic tre
 e inference\, focusing on those approaches who go beyond inferring topolog
 ies and answer questions regarding the social and\ngeographical context of
  language change. Then\, I will illustrate the potential of phylogenetic c
 omparative methods using a range of case studies\, including examples on c
 orrelations\, model testing\, ancestral state reconstruction\, and rates o
 f change\, using data on different features from different language famili
 es. I will conclude by pointing out future developments in doing (comparat
 ive) phylogenetics in\nlinguistics.\n\nDunn\, Michael\, Greenhill\, Simon 
 J.\, Levinson\, Stephen C.\, & Gray\, Russell D. (2011). Evolved structure
  of language shows lineage-specific trends in word-order universals. Natur
 e\, 473\, 79-82.\n\nGray\, Russell D.\, Greenhill\, Simon J.\, & Ross\, Ro
 bert M. (2007). The pleasures and perils of Darwinizing culture (with phyl
 ogenies). Biological Theory\, 2(4)\, 360-375.\n\nHarvey\, Paul H.\, & Page
 l\, Mark D. (1991). The comparative method in evolutionary biology. Oxford
  Oxford University Press.\n\nLevinson\, Stephen C.\, & Gray\, Russell D. (
 2012). Tools from evolutionary biology shed new light on the diversificati
 on of languages. Trends in Cognitive Sciences\, 16(3)\, 167-173.\n\nNichol
 s\, Johanna\, & Warnow\, Tandy. (2008). Tutorial on computational linguist
 ic phylogeny. Language and Linguistics Compass\, 2(5)\, 760-820.
LOCATION:GR06-7\, English Faculty\, 9 West Road (Sidgwick Site)
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR