Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter Mouton November 30, 2019

Beyond edit distances: Comparing linguistic reconstruction systems

Johann-Mattis List
From the journal Theoretical Linguistics

Acknowledgments

This research was funded by the ERC Starting Grant 715618 “Computer-Assisted Language Comparison” (http://calc.digling.org).

References

Amigó, E., J. Gonzalo, J. Artiles & F. Verdejo. 2009. A comparison of extrinsic clustering evaluation metrics based on formal constraints. Information Retrieval 12(4). 461–486.10.1007/s10791-008-9066-8Search in Google Scholar

Bouchard-Côté, A., D. Hall, T. L. Griffiths & D. Klein. 2013. Automated reconstruction of ancient languages using probabilistic models of sound change. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 110(11). 4224–4229.10.1073/pnas.1204678110Search in Google Scholar

Brugmann, K. 1904. Kurze Vergleichende Grammatik Der Indogermanischen Sprachen. Photomechanischer Nachdruck 1970. Walter de Gruyter & Co., Berlin. Strassburg: Karl J. Trübner.10.1515/9783111556857Search in Google Scholar

Ciobanu, A. M. & L. P. Dinu. 2018. Simulating language evolution: A tool for historical linguistics. Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Computational Linguistics: System Demonstrations, 68–72. ACL.Search in Google Scholar

de Saussure, F. 1879. Mémoire Sur Le Système Primitif Des Voyelles Dans Les Langues Indo- Européennes. Leipzig: Teubner.Search in Google Scholar

de Saussure, F. 1916. Cours de Linguistique Générale. C. Bally (ed.) Lausanne: Payot.Search in Google Scholar

Hall, R. A. 1960. On realism in reconstruction. Language 36(2). 203–206.10.2307/410985Search in Google Scholar

Hauer, B. & G. Kondrak. 2011. Clustering semantically equivalent words into cognate sets in multilingual lists. Proceedings of the 5th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing, 865–873. AFNLP.Search in Google Scholar

Hill, N. W. 2016. A refutation of Song’s (2014) explanation of the ‘stop coda problem’ in Old Chinese. International Journal of Chinese Linguistic 2(2). 270–281.10.1075/ijchl.3.2.04hilSearch in Google Scholar

Hill, N. W. & J.-M. List. 2017. Challenges of annotation and analysis in computer-assisted language comparison: A case study on Burmish languages. Yearbook of the Poznan Linguistic Meeting 3(1). 47–76.10.1515/yplm-2017-0003Search in Google Scholar

Jacques, G. & J.-M. List. Forthcoming. Save the trees: Why we need tree models in linguistic reconstruction (and when we should apply them). Journal of Historical Linguistics 9(1). 128–167.10.1075/jhl.17008.matSearch in Google Scholar

Jäger, G. & J.-M. List. 2018. Using ancestral state reconstruction methods for onomasiological reconstruction in multilingual word lists. Language Dynamics and Change 8(1). 22–54.10.1163/22105832-00801002Search in Google Scholar

Jäger, G., J.-M. List & P. Sofroniev. 2017. Using support vector machines and state-of-the-art algorithms for phonetic alignment to identify cognates in multi-lingual wordlists. Proceedings of the 15th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics. Long papers, 1204–1215. Valencia: ACL.10.18653/v1/E17-1113Search in Google Scholar

Jakobson, R. 1971. Typological studies and their contribution to historical comparative linguistics. In Roman Jakobson (ed.), Selected writings, vol. 1, 523–532. The Hague: Mouton.Search in Google Scholar

Joseph, B. D. 2006. On projecting variation back into a proto-language. With particular attention to Germanic evidence and some thoughts on “drift”. In T. D. Cravens (ed.), Variation and reconstruction, 103–118. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.268.06josSearch in Google Scholar

Lass, R. 2017. Reality in a soft science: The metaphonology of historical reconstruction. Papers in Historical Phonology 2(1). 152–163.10.2218/pihph.2.2017.2506Search in Google Scholar

Levenshtein, V. I. 1965. Dvoičnye Kody S Ispravleniem Vypadenij, Vstavok I Zameščenij Simvolov. Doklady Akademij Nauk SSSR 163(4). 845–848.Search in Google Scholar

List, J.-M. 2014. Sequence comparison in historical linguistics. Düsseldorf: DUP.Search in Google Scholar

List, J.-M. 2018. More on network approaches in historical chinese phonology (音韵学). The 2nd Li Fang-Kuei Society Young Scholars Symposium, 157–174. Taipei: Li Fang-Kuei Society for Chinese Linguistics.Search in Google Scholar

List, J.-M. 2019. Automatic inference of sound correspondence patterns across multiple languages. Computational Linguistics 1(45). 137–161.10.1162/coli_a_00344Search in Google Scholar

List, J.-M., S. Greenhill, T. Tresoldi & R. Forkel. 2018. LingPy. A python library for quantitative tasks in historical linguistics. Jena: Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History. http://lingpy.org.Search in Google Scholar

List, J.-M., S. J. Greenhill & R. D. Gray. 2017. The potential of automatic word comparison for historical linguistics. Plos One 12(1). 1–18.10.1371/journal.pone.0170046Search in Google Scholar

List, J.-M., J. S. Pathmanathan, P. Lopez & E. Bapteste. 2016. Unity and disunity in evolutionary sciences: Process-based analogies open common research avenues for biology and linguistics. Biology Direct 11(39). 1–17.10.1186/s13062-016-0145-2Search in Google Scholar

Mann, N. W. 1998. A phonological reconstruction of proto Northern Burmic. Arlington: The University of Texas PhD.Search in Google Scholar

Meier-Brügger, M. 2002. Indogermanische Sprachwissenschaft, 8th edn. Berlin: de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110850550Search in Google Scholar

Ross, M. & M. Durie. 1996. Introduction. In M. Durie (ed.), The comparative method reviewed. Regularity and irregularity in language change, 3–38. Oxford: OUP.Search in Google Scholar

Salmons, J. C. 1993. The Glottalic Theory: Survey and Synthesis. Washington: Inst for the Study of Man.Search in Google Scholar

Schleicher, A. 1868. Eine Fabel in Indogermanischer Sprache. In A. Kuhn & A. Schleicher (eds.), Beiträge zur Vergleichenden Sprachforschung auf dem Gebiete der Arischen, Celtischen und Slawischen Sprachen, 5. 206–208. Berlin: Ferdinand Dümmler.Search in Google Scholar

Schleicher, A. [1861] 1866. Compendium der Vergleichenden Grammatik der Indogermanischen Sprache, vol 1, 2nd edn. Weimar: Böhlau.Search in Google Scholar

Schmidt, J. 1872. Die Verwantschaftsverhältnisse der Indogermanischen Sprachen. Weimar: Hermann Böhlau.Search in Google Scholar

Schrodt, R. 1989. Neue Forschungen zur Germanischen Lautverschiebung – Ein Fall von Paradigmenwechsel? In T. Vennemann (ed.), The new sound of Indo-European: Essays in phonological reconstruction, 137–152. Berlin: de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Serva, M. & F. Petroni. 2008. Indo-European languages tree by Levenshtein Distance. EPL 81(6). 1–5.10.1209/0295-5075/81/68005Search in Google Scholar


Article note

The code and the data to calculate the B-Cubed scores for different reconstruction systems is available for download from Zenodo (https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3242122).


Published Online: 2019-11-30
Published in Print: 2019-12-18

© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Scroll Up Arrow