Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1.1 9/4/83; site scc.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!houxm!houxz!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!pesnta!scc!steiny From: steiny@scc.UUCP (Don Steiny) Newsgroups: net.nlang Subject: Re: Linguistic evolution; American/British English Message-ID: <265@scc.UUCP> Date: Wed, 8-Aug-84 13:02:49 EDT Article-I.D.: scc.265 Posted: Wed Aug 8 13:02:49 1984 Date-Received: Fri, 10-Aug-84 02:28:15 EDT References: <11557@lanl-a.UUCP> Organization: Santa Cruz Computer, Aptos, Calif. Lines: 38 **** > Biologically, isolation increases evolution rates. > This is clearly true of linguistic evolution. Anthropological linguists believe the reverse to be true. I learned the "age/area" hypothesis in a linguistics field studies course. The hypothesis is that the denser the population, the faster language changed. This was a heuristic that allowed them to look for genetic relationships. An example is the Cacus mountians. In a small region, presumably the original home of Cacasians, many distinct languages are spoken in a small area. Georgan, Ukrainian, Russian, and others. Of course, this kind of evidence is pure speculation, and thus it is merely a hypothesis. English underwent an incredibly dramatic change from the time of the Norman Conquest (1066) to the publication of "The Caterberry Tales" in the 1300's. Besides just increasing its wordstock, its entire syntax changed. It changed from a synthetic language to an analytic language. It went from a language with a syntax sort of like German to a language with a syntax sort of like Chinese. "Clearly" the presence of the Norman French had something to do with the rapid change. I am skeptical that isolation increases the rate of biological evolution. Wouldn't fierce competition for a nitch increase the rate of evolution? Don Steiny Personetics 109 Torrey Pine Terr. Santa Cruz, Calif. 95060 (408) 425-0382 ihnp4!pesnta -\ fortune!idsvax -> scc!steiny ucbvax!twg -/