Linguistics more robust than genetics (original) (raw)

How Accurate and Robust Are the Phylogenetic Estimates of Austronesian Language Relationships?

PLOS One, 2010

We recently used computational phylogenetic methods on lexical data to test between two scenarios for the peopling of the Pacific. Our analyses of lexical data supported a pulse-pause scenario of Pacific settlement in which the Austronesian speakers originated in Taiwan around 5,200 years ago and rapidly spread through the Pacific in a series of expansion pulses and settlement pauses. We claimed that there was high congruence between traditional language subgroups and those observed in the language phylogenies, and that the estimated age of the Austronesian expansion at 5,200 years ago was consistent with the archaeological evidence. However, the congruence between the language phylogenies and the evidence from historical linguistics was not quantitatively assessed using tree comparison metrics. The robustness of the divergence time estimates to different calibration points was also not investigated exhaustively. Here we address these limitations by using a systematic tree comparison metric to calculate the similarity between the Bayesian phylogenetic trees and the subgroups proposed by historical linguistics, and by re-estimating the age of the Austronesian expansion using only the most robust calibrations. The results show that the Austronesian language phylogenies are highly congruent with the traditional subgroupings, and the date estimates are robust even when calculated using a restricted set of historical calibrations.

Language continuity despite population replacement in Remote Oceania

Recent genomic analyses show that the earliest peoples reaching Remote Oceania – associated with Austronesian-speaking Lapita culture – were almost completely East Asian, without detectable Papuan ancestry. Yet Papuan-related genetic ancestry is found across present-day Pacific populations, indicating that peoples from Near Oceania have played a significant – but largely unknown – ancestral role. Here, new genome-wide data from 19 South Pacific individuals provide direct evidence of a so-far undescribed Papuan expansion into Remote Oceania starting ~2,500 years before present, far earlier than previously estimated and supporting a model from historical linguistics. New genome-wide data from 27 contemporary ni-Vanuatu demonstrate a subsequent and almost complete replacement of Lapita-Austronesian by Near Oceanian ancestry. Despite this massive demographic change, incoming Papuan languages did not replace Austronesian languages. Population replacement with language continuity is extremely rare – if not unprecedented – in human history. Our analyses show that rather than one large-scale event, the process was incremental and complex, with repeated migrations and sex-biased admixture with peoples from the Bismarck Archipelago.

Resolving the ancestry of Austronesian-speaking populations

There are two very different interpretations of the prehistory of Island Southeast Asia (ISEA), with genetic evidence invoked in support of both. The “out-of-Taiwan” model proposes a major Late Holocene expansion of Neolithic Austronesian speakers from Taiwan. An alternative, proposing that Late Glacial/postglacial sea-level rises triggered largely autochthonous dispersals, accounts for some otherwise enigmatic genetic patterns, but fails to explain the Austronesian language dispersal. Combining mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), Y-chromosome and genome-wide data, we performed the most comprehensive analysis of the region to date, obtaining highly consistent results across all three systems and allowing us to reconcile the models. We infer a primarily common ancestry for Taiwan/ISEA populations established before the Neolithic, but also detected clear signals of two minor Late Holocene migrations, probably representing Neolithic input from both Mainland Southeast Asia and South China, via Taiwan. This latter may therefore have mediated the Austronesian language dispersal, implying small-scale migration and language shift rather than large-scale expansion.

Language and Genes Attest Different Histories in Island Southeast Asia

Recent work on autosomal DNA genetic variation across Southeast Asia suggests that genetic diversity largely reflects Pleistocene colonization by modern humans, and was not influenced to any significant degree by major cultural and linguistic changes during the mid-to-late Holocene (roughly, from ~5,000 years ago to the present). These results seemingly show that the spread of Austronesian languages across Island Southeast Asia was not associated with population movements that were significant enough to affect the overall phylogeny of the autosomal DNA tree. Consequently, the spread of genes is not significantly linked to the spread of languages in Island Southeast Asia; each represents different processes of different antiquity.

The flaws of phylogeny as history: A Pacific Islands case study

Society for American Archaeology Annual Meeting, March, 1998

Prehistorians have long been interested in tracking the histories and migrations of past populations in a regional context. Phylogenetic reconstructions drawn largely from the methods and assumptions of historical linguistics have been a popular tool for achieving this goal, particularly among the island societies of the Pacific. Some scholars believe such reconstruction faithfully track population histories and reflect coherence in the evolution of human biology, language, and culture. In this paper, we examine the assumptions ...