Accessible Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published online by De Gruyter Mouton November 17, 2021

Statistical bias control in typology

Matías Guzmán Naranjo and Laura Becker
From the journal Linguistic Typology

Abstract

In this paper, we propose two new statistical controls for genealogical and areal bias in typological samples. Our test case being the effect of VO-order effect on affix position (prefixation vs. suffixation), we show how statistical modeling including a phylogenetic regression term (phylogenetic control) and a two-dimensional Gaussian Process (areal control) can be used to capture genealogical and areal effects in a large but unbalanced sample. We find that, once these biases are controlled for, VO-order has no effect on affix position. Another important finding, which is in line with previous studies, is that areal effects are as important as genealogical effects, emphasizing the importance of areal or contact control in typological studies built on language samples. On the other hand, we also show that strict probability sampling is not required with the statistical controls that we propose, as long as the sample is a variety sample large enough to cover different areas and families. This has the crucial practical consequence that it allows us to include as much of the available information as possible, without the need to artificially restrict the sample and potentially lose otherwise available information.


Corresponding author: Matías Guzmán Naranjo (/matias gusman naɾanxo/), Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany, E-mail:

  1. Author contributions: M.G.N: initial idea and statistical modeling, evaluation of results, writing; L.B.: background and overview of previous typological work, evaluation of results, writing.

References

Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2006. Grammars in contact: A cross-linguistic perspective. In Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald & R. M. W. Dixon (eds.), Grammars in contact: A cross-linguistic typology, 1–66. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. & R. M. W. Dixon. 2006a. Areal diffusion and genetic inheritance: Problems in comparative linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. & R. M. W. Dixon. 2006b. Grammars in contact: A cross-linguistic typology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Aurenhammer, Franz. 1991. Voronoi diagrams—a survey of a fundamental geometric data structure. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 23(3). 345–405. https://doi.org/10.1145/116873.116880.Search in Google Scholar

Baayen, Harald & Maja Linke. to appear. An introduction to the generalized additive model. In Stefan Gries & Magali Paquot (eds.), A practical handbook of corpus linguistics. Berlin: Springer.Search in Google Scholar

Bakker, Dik. 2010. Language sampling. In Jae Jung Song (ed.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic typology, 100–127. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Becker, Laura. 2021. Articles in the world’s languages (Linguistische Arbeiten 577). Berlin: De Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Bell, Alan. 1978. Language samples. In Joseph H. Greenberg & Charles Albert Ferguson (eds.), Universals of human language. Volume 1: Method and theory, 123–156. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Bentz, Christian, Annemarie Verkerk, Douwe Kiela, Felix Hill & Paula Buttery. 2015. Adaptive communication: Languages with more non-native speakers tend to have fewer word forms. PLOS ONE 10(6). e0128254. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0128254.Search in Google Scholar

Bentz, Christian & Bodo Winter. 2013. Languages with more second language learners tend to lose nominal case. Language Dynamics and Change 3. 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1163/22105832-13030105.Search in Google Scholar

Bickel, Balthasar. 2008. A refined sampling procedure for genealogical control. Language Typology and Universals 61(3). 221–233. https://doi.org/10.1524/stuf.2008.0022.Search in Google Scholar

Bickel, Balthasar. 2011. Statistical modeling of language universals. Linguistic Typology 15(2). 401–413. https://doi.org/10.1515/lity.2011.027.Search in Google Scholar

Bickel, Balthasar. 2013. Distributional biases in language families. In Balthasar Bickel, Lenore A. Grenoble, David A. Peterson & Alan Timberlake (eds.), Language typology and historical contingency (Typological Studies in Language 104), 415–444. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Search in Google Scholar

Bickel, Balthasar. 2015. Distributional typology: Statistical inquiries into the dynamics of linguistic diversity. In Bernd Heine & Narrog Heiko (eds.), Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis, 2nd edn. (Oxford Handbooks in Linguistics). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Bickel, Balthasar. 2017. Areas and universals. In Raymond Hickey (ed.), The Cambridge handbook of areal linguistics (Cambridge Handbooks in Language and Linguistics), 40–55. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Bickel, Balthasar & Johanna Nichols. 2006. Oceania, the Pacific Rim, and the theory of linguistic areas. Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 32(2). 3–15. https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v32i2.3488.Search in Google Scholar

Bickel, Balthasar & Johanna Nichols. 2013. The Autotyp genealogy and geography database 2013 release. Available at: .Search in Google Scholar

Bisang, Walter, Laura Becker, Andrej Malchukov & Marvin Martiny. 2020. Grammaticalization scenarios: Constraining typological variation. Submitted for publication.Search in Google Scholar

Blasi, Damián, Steven Moran, Scott R. Moisik, Paul Widmer, Dan Dediu & Balthasar Bickel. 2019. Human sound systems are shaped by post-neolithic changes in bite configuration. Science 363(6432). eaav3218. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aav3218.Search in Google Scholar

Bouckaert, Remco R., Claire Bowern & Quentin D. Atkinson. 2018. The origin and expansion of Pama-Nyungan languages across Australia. Nature Ecology & Evolution 2(4). 741–749. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-018-0489-3.Search in Google Scholar

Bowern, Claire & Quentin D. Atkinson. 2012. Computational phylogenetics and the internal structure of Pama-Nyungan. Language 88(2). 817–845. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2012.0081.Search in Google Scholar

Bürkner, Paul-Christian. 2017. Brms: An R package for Bayesian multilevel models using Stan. Journal of Statistical Software 80(1). 1–28.Search in Google Scholar

Bürkner, Paul-Christian. 2018. Advanced Bayesian multilevel modeling with the R package brms. The R Journal 10(1). 395–411.Search in Google Scholar

Bybee, Joan L., William Pagliuca & Revere Dale Perkins. 1990. On the asymmetries in the affixation of grammatical material. In William Croft, Suzanne Kemmer & Denning Keith (eds.), Studies in typology and diachrony. Papers presented to Joseph H. Greenberg on his 75th birthday, 1–42. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Search in Google Scholar

Bybee, Joan L., Revere Dale Perkins & William Pagliuca. 1994. The evolution of grammar. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar

Campbell, Lyle. 2010. Language isolates and their history, or, what’s weird, anyway? Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 36(1). 16–31. https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v36i1.3900.Search in Google Scholar

Carpenter, Bob, Andrew Gelman, Matthew Hoffman, Daniel Lee, Ben Goodrich, Michael Betancourt, Marcus Brubaker, Jiqiang Guo, Peter Li & Allen Riddell. 2017. Stan: A probabilistic programming language. Journal of Statistical Software, Articles 76(1). 1–32. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v076.i01.Search in Google Scholar

Comrie, Bernard, Matthew S. Dryer, David Gil & Martin Haspelmath. 2013. Introduction. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.Search in Google Scholar

Croft, William, Tanmoy Bhattacharya, Dave Kleinschmidt, D. Eric Smith & T. Florian Jaeger. 2011. Greenbergian universals, diachrony, and statistical analyses. Linguistic Typology 15(2). 433–453. https://doi.org/10.1515/lity.2011.029.Search in Google Scholar

Cutler, Anne, John A. Hawkins & Gary Gilligan. 1985. The suffixing preference: A processing explanation. Linguistics 23. 723–758. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1985.23.5.723.Search in Google Scholar

Cysouw, Michael. 2005. Quantitative methods in typology. In Quantitative Linguistik/Quantitative Linguistics (HSK 27), 554–578. Berlin: De Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Cysouw, Michael. 2010. Dealing with diversity: Towards an explanation of NP-internal word order frequencies. Linguistic Typology 14(2–3). 253–286. https://doi.org/10.1515/lity.2010.010.Search in Google Scholar

Cysouw, Michael. 2011. Understanding transition probabilities. Linguistic Typology 15(2). 415–431. https://doi.org/10.1515/lity.2011.028.Search in Google Scholar

Cysouw, Michael, Dan Dediu & Steve Moran. 2012a. Comment on “Phonemic diversity supports a serial founder effect model of language expansion from Africa”. Science 335(6069). 657. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1208841.Search in Google Scholar

Cysouw, Michael, Dan Dediu & Steven Moran. 2012b. Supporting online material for: Comment on “Phonemic diversity supports a serial founder effect model of language expansion from Africa”. (accessed 27 August 2020).Search in Google Scholar

Dahl, Östen. 2001. Principles of areal typology. In Martin Haspelmath, Ekkehard König, Wulf Oesterreicher & Wolfgang Raible (eds.), Language typology and language universals, vol. 2, 1456–1470. Berlin: De Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Dahl, Östen. 2008. An exercise in a posteriori language sampling. Language Typology and Universals 61(3). 208–220. https://doi.org/10.1524/stuf.2008.0021.Search in Google Scholar

Dediu, Dan. 2011. A Bayesian phylogenetic approach to estimating the stability of linguistic features and the genetic biasing of tone. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 278(1704). 474–479. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2010.1595.Search in Google Scholar

Dediu, Dan & Michael Cysouw. 2013. Some structural aspects of language are more stable than others: A comparison of seven methods. PLOS ONE 8(1). e5500. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0055009.Search in Google Scholar

Dediu, Dan & Stephen C. Levinson. 2012. Abstract profiles of structural stability point to universal tendencies, family-specific factors, and ancient connections between languages. PLOS ONE 7(9). e45198. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0045198.Search in Google Scholar

de Villemereuil, Pierre & Shinichi Nakagawa. 2014. Modern phylogenetic comparative methods and their application in evolutionary biology. Berlin: Springer.Search in Google Scholar

Donohue, Mark & Johanna Nichols. 2011. Does phoneme inventory size correlate with population size? Linguistic Typology 15(2). 161–170. https://doi.org/10.1515/lity.2011.011.Search in Google Scholar

Donohue, Mark & Bronwen Whiting. 2011. Quantifying areality: A study of prenasalisation in Southeast Asia and New Guinea. Linguistic Typology 15(1). 101–121. https://doi.org/10.1515/lity.2011.005.Search in Google Scholar

Dryer, Matthew S. 1989. Large linguistic areas and language sampling. Studies in Language 13(2). 257–292. https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.13.2.03dry.Search in Google Scholar

Dryer, Matthew S. 1991. SVO languages and the OV: VO typology. Journal of Linguistics 27(2). 443–482. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022226700012743.Search in Google Scholar

Dryer, Matthew S. 1992. The Greenbergian word order correlations. Language 68. 81–138. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1992.0028.Search in Google Scholar

Dryer, Matthew S. 2011. The evidence for word order correlations. Linguistic Typology 15(2). 335–380. https://doi.org/10.1515/lity.2011.024.Search in Google Scholar

Dryer, Matthew S. 2013a. Order of object and verb. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. Available at: .Search in Google Scholar

Dryer, Matthew S. 2013b. Prefixing vs. suffixing in inflectional morphology. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. Available at: .Search in Google Scholar

Dryer, Matthew S. 2018. On the order of demonstrative, numeral, adjective and noun. Language 94(4). 798–833. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2018.0054.Search in Google Scholar

Dryer, Matthew S. & Martin Haspelmath (eds.). 2013. The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. Available at: .Search in Google Scholar

Dunn, Michael, Simon J. Greenhill, Stephen C. Levinson & Russell D. Gray. 2011. Evolved structure of language shows lineage-specific trends in word-order universals. Nature 473. 79–82. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature09923.Search in Google Scholar

Enfield, Nick. 2005. Areal linguistics and mainland Southeast Asia. Annual Review of Anthropology 34(1). 181–206. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.34.081804.120406.Search in Google Scholar

Enrique-Arias, Andrés. 2002. Accounting for the position of verbal agreement morphology with psycholinguistic and diachronic explanatory factors. Studies in Language 26(1). 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.26.1.02enr.Search in Google Scholar

Faraway, Julian J. 2006. Extending the linear model with R. London: Taylor & Francis.Search in Google Scholar

Foster, Joseph F. & Charles A. Hofling. 1987. Word order, case, and agreement. Linguistics 25(3). 475–500. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1987.25.3.475.Search in Google Scholar

Gabry, Jonah, Daniel Simpson, Aki Vehtari, Michael Betancourt & Andrew Gelman. 2019. Visualization in Bayesian workflow. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society) 182(2). 389–402. https://doi.org/10.1111/rssa.12378.Search in Google Scholar

Garland, TheodoreJr. & Anthony R. Ives. 2000. Using the past to predict the present: Confidence intervals for regression equations in phylogenetic comparative methods. The American Naturalist 155(3). 346–364. https://doi.org/10.1086/303327.Search in Google Scholar

Gaudette, Lisa, Japkowicz, Nathalie. 2009. Evaluation methods for ordinal classification. In Gao, Yong, Japkowicz, Nathalie (eds.), Advances in artificial intelligence. Canadian AI 2009. Lecture notes in computer science, vol. 5549, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.Search in Google Scholar

Gelman, Andrew & Jennifer Hill. 2007. Data analysis using regression and multilevel/hierarchical models. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Gelman, Andrew & Eric Loken. 2013. The garden of forking paths: Why multiple comparisons can be a problem, even when there is no “fishing expedition” or “p-hacking” and the research hypothesis was posited ahead of time. Unpublished manuscript.Search in Google Scholar

Gelman, Andrew & Eric Loken. 2014. The statistical crisis in science: Data-dependent analysis-a “garden of forking paths”–explains why many statistically significant comparisons don’t hold up. American Scientist 102(6). 460–466. https://doi.org/10.1511/2014.111.460.Search in Google Scholar

Gray, Russell D., Alexei Drummond & Simon Greenhill. 2009. Language phylogenies reveal expansion pulses and pauses in Pacific settlement. Science 323. 479–483. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1166858.Search in Google Scholar

Greenberg, Joseph H. 1978. Diachrony, synchrony and language universals. In Joseph H. Greenberg, Charles Albert Ferguson & Edith A. Moravcsik (eds.), Universals of human language, vol. 1: Method & Theory, 61–92. Standford: Standford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Hammarström, Harald & Mark Donohue. 2014. Some principles on the use of macro-areas in typological comparison. Language Dynamics and Change 4(1). 167–187.Search in Google Scholar

Hammarström, Harald, Robert Forkel, Martin Haspelmath & Sebastian Bank. 2020. Glottolog 4.3. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.Search in Google Scholar

Hammarström, Harald & Tom Güldemann. 2014. Quantifying geographical determinants of large-scale distributions of linguistic features. Language Dynamics and Change. 4(1). 87–115. https://doi.org/10.1163/22105832-00401002.Search in Google Scholar

Hawkins, John A. & Anne Cutler. 1988. Psycholinguistic factors in morphological asymmetry. In John A. Hawkins (ed.), Explaining language universals, 280–317. Oxford: Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar

Hawkins, John A. & Gary Gilligan. 1988. Prefixing and suffixing universals in relation to basic word order. Lingua 74. 219–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(88)90060-5.Search in Google Scholar

Hetterle, Katja. 2015. Adverbial clauses in cross-linguistic perspective. Berlin: De Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Hickey, Raymond. 2010. The handbook of language contact. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar

Hickey, Raymond (ed.). 2017. The Cambridge handbook of areal linguistics (Cambridge Handbooks in Language and Linguistics). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Himmelmann, Nikolaus P. 2000. Towards a typology of typologies. Language Typology and Universals 53(1). 5–12. https://doi.org/10.1524/stuf.2000.53.1.5.Search in Google Scholar

Himmelmann, Nikolaus P. 2014. Asymmetries in the prosodic phrasing of function words: Another look at the suffixing preference. Language 90(4). 927–960. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2014.0105.Search in Google Scholar

Holman, Eric W., Christian Schulze, Dietrich Stauffer & Søren Wichmann. 2007. On the relation between structural diversity and geographical distance among languages: Observations and computer simulations. Linguistic Typology 11(2). 393–421. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty.2007.027.Search in Google Scholar

Housworth, Elizabeth A., Emilia P. Martins & Michael Lynch. 2004. The phylogenetic mixed model. The American Naturalist 163(1). 84–96. https://doi.org/10.1086/380570.Search in Google Scholar

Hua, Xia, Simon J. Greenhill, Marcel Cardillo, Hilde Schneemann & Lindell Bromham. 2019. The ecological drivers of variation in global language diversity. Nature Communications 10(1). 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-09842-2.Search in Google Scholar

Jaeger, T. Florian, Peter Graff, William Croft & Daniel Pontillo. 2011. Mixed effect models for genetic and areal dependencies in linguistic typology. Linguistic Typology 15(2). 281–319. https://doi.org/10.1515/lity.2011.021.Search in Google Scholar

Jäger, Gerhard. 2013. Phylogenetic inference from word lists using weighted alignment with empirically determined weights. Language Dynamics and Change 3. 245–291.Search in Google Scholar

Jäger, Gerhard. 2018. Global-scale phylogenetic linguistic inference from lexical resources. Scientific Data 5(1). 1–16.Search in Google Scholar

Jäger, Gerhard. 2019. Computational historical linguistics. Theoretical Linguistics 45(3–4). 151–182.Search in Google Scholar

Jäger, Gerhard & Johanes Wahle. Forthcoming. Phylogenetic typology. (accessed 1 June 2021).Search in Google Scholar

Kälin, Fabiola. 2017. Global analysis of the influence of geographical factors on contact-induced language change. Zürich: Geographisches Institut der Universität Zürich.Search in Google Scholar

Kimeldorf, George S. & Grace Wahba. 1970. A correspondence between Bayesian estimation on stochastic processes and smoothing by splines. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics 41(2). 495–502. https://doi.org/10.1214/aoms/1177697089.Search in Google Scholar

Koch, Harold. 2014. Historical relations among the Australian languages: Genetic classification and contact-based diffusion. In Harold Koch & Rachel Nordlinger (eds.), The languages and linguistics of Australia: A comprehensive guide (The World of Linguistics), 23–89. Berlin: De Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Levinson, Stephen C., Simon J. Greenhill, Russell D. Gray & Michael Dunn. 2011. Universal typological dependencies should be detectable in the history of language families. Linguistic Typology 15(2). 509–534. https://doi.org/10.1515/lity.2011.034.Search in Google Scholar

Levshina, Natalia. 2019. Token-based typology and word order entropy: A study based on Universal Dependencies. Linguistic Typology 23(3). 533–572. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2019-0025.Search in Google Scholar

van Lier, Eva. 2016. Lexical flexibility in Oceanic languages. Linguistic Typology 20(2). 197–232. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2016-0005.Search in Google Scholar

List, Johann-Mattis. 2019. Automated methods for the investigation of language contact, with a focus on lexical borrowing. Language and Linguistics Compass 13(10). e12355. https://doi.org/10.1111/lnc3.12355.Search in Google Scholar

List, Johann-Mattis, Nelson-Sathi Shijulal, William Martin & Hans Geisler. 2014. Using phylogenetic networks to model Chinese dialect history. Language Dynamics and Change 4. 222–252. https://doi.org/10.1163/22105832-00402008.Search in Google Scholar

Louagie, Dana & Jean-Christophe Verstraete. 2016. Noun phrase constituency in Australian languages: A typological study. Linguistic Typology 20(1). 25–80. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2016-0002.Search in Google Scholar

Lupyan, Gary & Rick Dale. 2010. Language structure is partly determined by social structure. PLOS ONE 5(1). e8559. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0008559.Search in Google Scholar

Martowicz, Anna. 2011. The origin and functioning of circumstantial clause linkers: A cross-linguistic study. PhD dissertation, University of Edinburgh.Search in Google Scholar

Maslova, Elena. 2000. A dynamic approach to the verification of distributional universals. Linguistic Typology 4(3). 307–333. https://doi.org/10.1515/lity.2000.4.3.307.Search in Google Scholar

Maslova, Elena & Tatiana Nikitina. 2007. Stochastic universals and dynamics of cross-linguistic distributions: The case of alignment type. Unpublished manuscript. Available at: .Search in Google Scholar

Matras, Yaron & Jeanette Sakel (eds.). 2008. Grammatical borrowing in cross-linguistic perspective. Berlin: De Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Maurits, Luke & Thomas L. Griffiths. 2014. Tracing the roots of syntax with Bayesian phylogenetics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 111(37). 13576–13581. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319042111.Search in Google Scholar

Miestamo, Matti. 2003. Clausal negation: A typological study. Helsinki: Helsingin Yliopisto.Search in Google Scholar

Miestamo, Matti. 2005. Standard negation: The negation of declarative verbal main clauses in a typological perspective (Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 31). Berlin: De Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Miestamo, Matti, Dik Bakker & Antti Arppe. 2016. Sampling for variety. Linguistic Typology 20(2). 233–296. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2016-0006.Search in Google Scholar

Murawaki, Yugo. 2015. Continuous space representations of linguistic typology and their application to phylogenetic inference. In Proceedings of the 2015 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, 324–334. Denver: Association for Computational Linguistics.Search in Google Scholar

Murawaki, Yugo. 2018. Analyzing correlated evolution of multiple features using latent representations. In Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, 4371–4382. Brussels: Association for Computational Linguistics.Search in Google Scholar

Murawaki, Yugo & Kenji Yamauchi. 2018. A statistical model for the joint inference of vertical stability and horizontal diffusibility of typological features. Journal of Language Evolution 3(1). 13–25. https://doi.org/10.1093/jole/lzx022.Search in Google Scholar

Murdock, George Peter. 1967. Ethnographic atlas. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.Search in Google Scholar

Nettle, Daniel. 1999. Is the rate of linguistic change constant? Lingua 108(2). 119–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0024-3841(98)00047-3.Search in Google Scholar

Nichols, Johanna. 1986. Head-marking and dependent-marking grammar. Language 62(1). 56–119. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1986.0014.Search in Google Scholar

Nichols, Johanna. 1992. Linguistic diversity in space and time. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar

Nikolaev, Dmitry & Eitan Grossman. 2018. Areal sound change and the distributional typology of affricate richness in Eurasia. Studies in Language 42(3). 562–599. https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.17043.nik.Search in Google Scholar

Pagel, Mark. 1994. Detecting correlated evolution on phylogenies: A general method for the comparative analysis of discrete characters. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences 255(1342). 37–45.Search in Google Scholar

Parkvall, Mikael. 2008. Which parts of language are the most stable? Language Typology and Universals 61(3). 234–250. https://doi.org/10.1524/stuf.2008.0023.Search in Google Scholar

Perkins, Revere Dale. 1980. The evolution of culture and grammar. New York: State University of New York at Buffalo.Search in Google Scholar

Perkins, Revere Dale. 1989. Statistical techniques for determining language sample size. Studies in Language 13(2). 293–315. https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.13.2.04per.Search in Google Scholar

R Core Team. 2020. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: Manual.Search in Google Scholar

Rasmussen, Carl Edward. 2003. Gaussian processes in machine learning. In Olivier Bousquet, Ulrike von Luxburg & Gunnar Rätsch (eds.), Advanced lectures on machine learning. ML 2003. Lecture notes in computer science, vol. 3176, 63–71. Berlin: Springer.Search in Google Scholar

Rijkhoff, Jan & Dik Bakker. 1998. Language sampling. Linguistic Typology 2(3). 263–314. https://doi.org/10.1515/lity.1998.2.3.263.Search in Google Scholar

Rijkhoff, Jan, Dik Bakker, Kees Hengeveld & Peter Kahrel. 1993. A method of language sampling. Studies in Language 17(1). 169–203. https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.17.1.07rij.Search in Google Scholar

Schmidtke-Bode, Karsten. 2009. A typology of purpose clauses (Typological Studies in Language 88). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Search in Google Scholar

Seifart, Frank. 2015. Does structural-typological similarity affect borrowability?: A quantitative study on affix borrowing. Language Dynamics and Change 5(1). 92–113. https://doi.org/10.1163/22105832-00501004.Search in Google Scholar

Siemund, Peter & Noemi Kintana (eds.). 2008. Language contact and contact languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Search in Google Scholar

Siewierska, Anna & Dik Bakker. 1996. The distribution of subject and object agreement and word order type. Studies in Language 20. 115–161. https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.20.1.06sie.Search in Google Scholar

Sinnemäki, Kaius. 2010. Word order in zero-marking languages. Studies in Language 34(4). 869–912.Search in Google Scholar

Sinnemäki, Kaius. 2014. A typological perspective on differential object marking. Linguistics 52(2). 281–314.Search in Google Scholar

Sinnemäki, Kaius. 2020. Linguistic system and sociolinguistic environment as competing factors in linguistic variation: A typological approach. Journal of Historical Sociolinguistics 6(2). 20191010.Search in Google Scholar

Sinnemäki, Kaius & Francesca Di Garbo. 2018. Language structures may adapt to the sociolinguistic environment, but it matters what and how you count: A typological study of verbal and nominal complexity. Frontiers in Psychology 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01141.Search in Google Scholar

Song, Jae Jung. 2012. Word order. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Song, Jae Jung. 2018. Linguistic typology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Stassen, Leon. 1985. Comparison and universal grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar

Steele, Susan. 1978. Word order variation: A typological survey. In Joseph Harold Greenberg, Charles Albert Ferguson & Edith A. Moravcsik (eds.), Universals of human language IV: Syntax, 585–623. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Thomason, Sarah Grey. 2001. Language contact: An introduction. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Urban, Matthias, Hugo Reyes-Centeno, Kate Bellamy & Matthias Pache. 2019. The areal typology of western Middle and South America: Towards a comprehensive view. Linguistics 57(6). 1403–1463. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2019-0032.Search in Google Scholar

van Gijn, Rik, Harald Hammarström & Simon van de Kerke. 2017. Linguistic areas, linguistic convergence and river systems in South America. In Raymond Hickey (ed.), The Cambridge handbook of areal linguistics (Cambridge Handbooks in Language and Linguistics), 964–996. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Vehtari, Aki, Andrew Gelman & Jonah Gabry. 2017. Practical Bayesian model evaluation using leave-one-out cross-validation and WAIC. Statistics and Computing 27(5). 1413–1432. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11222-016-9696-4.Search in Google Scholar

Vehtari, Aki, Daniel Simpson, Andrew Gelman, Yuling Yao & Jonah Gabry. 2021. Pareto smoothed importance sampling. Unpublished manuscript. Available at: .Search in Google Scholar

Verkerk, Annemarie. 2019. Detecting non-tree-like signal using multiple tree topologies. Journal of Historical Linguistics 9(1). 9–69. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhl.17009.ver.Search in Google Scholar

Voegelin, Charles Frederick & Florence Marie Voegelin. 1977. Classification and index of the world’s languages. New York: Elsevier.Search in Google Scholar

Wichmann, Søren & Harald Hammarström. 2020. Methods for calculating walking distances. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications 540. 122890. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2019.122890.Search in Google Scholar

Wieling, Martijn, John Nerbonne & R. Harald Baayen. 2011. Quantitative social dialectology: Explaining linguistic variation geographically and socially. PLOS ONE 6(9). e23613. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0023613.Search in Google Scholar

Williams, Christopher K. I. & Carl Edward Rasmussen. 2006. Gaussian processes for machine learning, vol. 2. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Ye, Jingting. 2020. Property words and adjective subclasses in the world’s languages. PhD dissertation, Leipzig University.Search in Google Scholar

Supplementary Material

The online version of this article offers supplementary material (https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5576242).

Received: 2021-01-09
Accepted: 2021-10-05
Published Online: 2021-11-17

© 2021 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston