Editor for this issue: <>
Re: Poser's recent posting, I would like to ask: How many forms are required to be shared between two or more languages for us to be able to tell that they are related? Meillet,who should have known, seems to have felt that ten forms was plenty in some cases he discussed, although he did not specify a minimum. Alexis MRMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
Bill Poser notes that the data used by Greenberg for some of his
classifications is less than overwhelming. In my check of Greenberg's
classification of the Mura family, more than half (19) of the
approximately 30 forms he lists are wrong. Of the remaining forms, only
four are (in my opinion - and how, in the absence of independent evidence
can we say whether my opinion is right or wrong?) really similar (in their
recorded or "phonological" forms) to other Chibchan-Paezan forms (where G
puts Muran). One of those four, ?ii wood, might be discounted as a
coincidence, since it is also like other, unrelated families' forms for
wood (e.g. Hokan and Tucanoan). The remaining forms are four segments or
fewer in length (and Muran languages had small phonemic inventories;
Piraha, the only surviving member has 7 consonants and three vowels;
Greenberg's forms don't include tones), which could easily be the result
of chance with such small sets of phonemes. This reduces his entire basis
of classification of Muran to ONE word, the word for 'flower', which he
lists as ?iobai (no tones given, again), but which is actually ?ao'bai'
('=high tone).
For his work on Arawan and Chapakuran, Bob Dixon and I have agreed that
there is NOT ONE proto form for Arawan that supports Greenberg's
comparison with Arawakan. Moreover, I have found no convincing
similarities in lexical items between Chapakuran and Arawakan. The *only*
similarity I have noticed is that Arawan, Arawakan, and Chapakuran all
have gender (Chapakuran has three genders, the others have two). But
so do two other close-by languages - Spanish and Portuguese.
Hardly overwhelming.
Dan Everett
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue