Network Perspectives on Chinese Dialect History (original) (raw)
Related papers
Using Phylogenetic Networks to Model Chinese Dialect History
2014
Ever since August Schleicher first proposed the idea that the language history is best visualized with the help of a tree, this view has been controversially discussed by linguists, leading to various opposing theories, ranging from wave-like evolutionary scenarios to early network proposals. The reluctance of many scholars to accept the tree as the natural metaphor for language history was due to conflicting signals in linguistic data: Many resemblances would simply not point to a unique tree. Despite these observations, the majority of automatic approaches applied to language data has been based on the tree model, while network approaches have been rarely applied. Due to the specific sociolinguistic situation in China, where very divergent varieties have been developing under the roof of a common culture and writing system, the history of the Chinese dialects is complex and intertwined. They are therefore a good test case for methods which no longer take the family tree as their primary model. Here we use a network approach to study the lexical history of 40 Chinese dialects. In contrast to previous approaches, our method is character-based and captures both vertical and horizontal aspects of language history. According to our results, the majority of characters in our data (about 54%) cannot be readily explained with help of a given tree model. The borrowing events inferred by our method do not only reflect general uncertainties of Chinese dialect classification, they also reveal the strong influence of the standard language on Chinese dialect history.
Stuck in the forest: Trees, networks and Chinese dialects
Diachronica, 2008
This paper discusses the validity of the tree model of evolution for the particular case of Sinitic languages (or Chinese dialects). Our approach is lexically based, using standardized word lists. First, these lists were tested for their congruence, as they are supposed to have evolved at different rates. Then, we undertook a phylogenetic analysis, using both a distance-based lexicostatistical method and a character-based maximum parsimony method. The traditional classification of Chinese dialects is recovered to various extents depending on the method and on the word list used, but the character-based analysis of the 200 Swadesh word list outperforms all other analyses. Finally, the validity of the branching patterns obtained was tested using a variety of techniques. Although the data fits the inferred trees well, the topology of these trees is collapsed to a star-like pattern when investigated through resampling methods. The application of a network method confirms that the development of these Sinitic languages is not tree-like, highlighting the fact that in cases like this tree-reconstruction methods can be misleading.
Proceedings of The Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 2005
As with species studied by evolutionary biologists, languages are evolving entities. They can evolve in tree-like patterns, possibly blurred by borrowing, but they can also develop in non-tree-like schemes. For instance, diglossia, as in the case of Chinese, can counterbalance the hierarchical pattern expected from differentiation by internal change associated with isolation by distance of speech communities. Using two lexical datasets, either the basic lexicon supposedly more immune to borrowing or a representative sample of the whole lexicon, we investigate the development pattern of Chinese dialects using a neighbour-net approach, which is an unprejudiced technique for representing object relationships. The resulting graphs are consistent with a dialect continuum shaped by counterbalanced effects of homogenizing diglossia and borrowing versus differentiating spread of speech communities. Historical events and linguistic claims can be mapped on these graphs.
Linguists, as well as biologists, study historical objects that form lineages, undergoing transformations over time. Biologists, as well as linguists, therefore, are very dependent on comparative analyses to structure and analyze their data. Thus, it seems intuitive that conceptual and methodological researches in both ields could inform each other, and beneit to both ields. In particular, the comparative approaches elaborated in biology are experiencing massive developments that could be explored in linguistic studies.
Chinese dialects classified on shared innovations
Two unpublished documents from a 2011 seminar on Chinese dialect phylogeny combined into a single pdf file; I am putting it online because the tree is occasionally being referred to in current literature on Chinese dialect classification. At the time, only the hand-drawn tree at the top was distributed to the audience. The accompanying text was meant as a canvas to aid in oral presentation, which explains its unpolished aspect. Exclusively cosmetic changes were made to the text, and the hand-drawn tree was added, immediately before putting it online on Academia. I am no longer certain that the evidence putting Waxiang and Caijia into a single branch is strong. Some lexical evidence for Wu being a bona fine group can now be cited. There still is no evidence that Gan is a valid group.
REFLECTION ON 200 YEARS OF LINGUISTIC HISTORY THROUGH THE CASE OF CHINESE LANGUAGE
Ha Van Thuy, 2024
Historical language appeared 200 years ago with the purpose of exploring the relationships of human races based on language. But the results are very limited. Only with the Chinese language, people have come up with many different options with different names, and controversy continues to this day. There are clearly methodological problems. Using basic phonetics, grammar and vocabulary to classify language proved ineffective. We propose another methodology that is based on the history of population formation and language to discover the relationships between languages and thereby identify language families.
Studies in Honor of Jerry Norman, 2010
Jerry Norman is one of the world’s most widely acknowledged and respected experts on the Min dialects. Yet his crowning achievement in the field, his reconstruction of Proto-Min phonology, has not received widespread acceptance. Many scholars have argued that Norman’s reliance on the comparative method is misguided, and that in researching the history of peculiar features in Chinese dialects emphasis must be placed on uncovering the lexical layers resulting from dialect contact. Yet the opposition between a comparative-reconstructive approach and a lexical layering approach, which appears to lie at the heart of the disagreement, is not sufficient to account for the different conclusions of these scholars. I argue that a major reason lies instead in fundamental differences of opinion about data collection and interpretation, rather than in differences of methodology and analysis. Because these differences in underlying assumptions have for the most part not been explicitly addressed in the academic literature, it has not been possible to reconcile the two competing storylines about the history of the Min dialects. This study focuses in particular on Norman’s proposal for the reconstruction of a series of Proto-Min “softened” stop initials and on the data that appears to support or refute the proposal. Refutations by scholars like Hirata Shōji, Lǐ Rúlóng, and Wáng Fútáng appear to simply present alternative explanations for the same phenomena that Norman seeks to explain. In fact, however, the data sets on which these and other scholars’ work is based overlap only partially with the supporting data presented by Norman. It is only through a careful examination of how these data sets differ that the basic differences in assumptions, and the way they shape methodology, can be brought out into the open. By doing so, I hope to take a step toward providing a common framework that will allow competing hypotheses to stop “talking past each other” and instead to contribute to the development of a comprehensive natural history of Chinese dialects."
Typological variation across Mandarin dialects: An areal perspective with a quantitative approach
Linguistic Typology, 2018
This study explores the range and diversity of the typological features of Mandarin, the largest dialect group within the Sinitic branch of the Sino-Tibetan family. Feeding the typological data of 42 Sinitic varieties into the phylogenetic program NeighborNet, we obtained network diagrams suggesting a north-south divide in the Mandarin dialect group, where dialects within the Amdo Sprachbund cluster at one end and those in the Far Southern area cluster at the other end, highlighting the impact of language contact on the typological profiles of various Mandarin dialects.
Networking Phylogeny for Indo-European and Austronesian Languages
Nature Precedings, 2009
Harnessing cognitive abilities of many individuals, a language evolves upon their mutual interactions establishing a persistent social environment to which language is closely attuned. Human history is encoded in the rich sets of linguistic data by means of symmetry patterns that are not always feasibly represented by trees.