Enduring patterns in world languages: One-third of grammatical universals stand up to rigorous testing: Difference between revisions
Daikyukim.kr (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
Daikyukim.kr (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
||
| (5 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
= | == To the Point == | ||
* '''Linguistic universals:''' Of the 191 proposed linguistic universals, about one-third are statistically supported across more than 1,700 languages. | |||
* '''A wealth of data and state-of-the-art statistical methods:''' Using Grambank and Bayesian statistical models that control for genealogical and geographic influences, the strongest evidence emerges for patterns of word order and hierarchical agreement. | |||
* '''Evolutionary framework:''' The repeated evolution of these patterns suggests there are shared cognitive and communicative constraints, which narrows the search for truly universal features of human language. | |||
Despite the vast diversity of human languages, specific grammatical patterns appear again and again. A new study reveals that around a third of the long-proposed “linguistic universals” — patterns thought to hold across all languages — are statistically supported when examined with state-of-the-art evolutionary methods. | |||
An international team led by Annemarie Verkerk (Saarland University) and Russell D. Gray (Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology) used Grambank, the world’s most comprehensive database of grammatical features, to test 191 proposed universals across more than 1,700 languages. Traditionally, linguists have attempted to circumvent the genealogical and geographic non-independence of languages by sampling widely separated languages. | |||
However, sampling can fail to remove all dependencies, reduce statistical power and does not identify historical pathways. The Bayesian spatio-phylogenetic analyses used by the authors accounted for both the genealogical and geographic non-independence of languages — a level of statistical rigour rarely achieved in previous work. | |||
However, sampling can fail to remove all dependencies, reduce statistical power and does not identify historical pathways. The Bayesian spatio-phylogenetic analyses used by the authors accounted for both the genealogical and geographic non-independence of | |||
== Languages do not evolve at random == | == Languages do not evolve at random == | ||
“In the face of huge linguistic diversity, it is intriguing to find that languages don’t evolve at random,” says Verkerk. “I am delighted that the different types of analyses we did converged on very similar results, suggesting that language change must be a central component in explaining universals.” | |||
The study found strong evidence for patterns involving word order (such as whether verbs precede or follow objects) and hierarchical universals (such as dependencies in which arguments are marked in grammatical agreement). The patterns predicted by the supported universals have evolved repeatedly across the | The study found strong evidence for patterns involving word order (such as whether verbs precede or follow objects) and hierarchical universals (such as dependencies in which arguments are marked in grammatical agreement). The patterns predicted by the supported universals have evolved repeatedly across the world’s languages, suggesting deep-rooted constraints in how humans structure communication. | ||
Senior author Russell Gray reflected, | Senior author Russell Gray reflected, “We discussed whether to write this up as a glass-half-empty paper — 'look how many proposed universals don’t hold' — or a glass-half-full paper — 'there’s robust statistical support for about a third'. In the end, we chose to highlight the patterns that evolve repeatedly, showing that shared cognitive and communicative pressures push languages towards a limited set of preferred grammatical solutions.” | ||
By demonstrating which universals truly hold up under evolutionary scrutiny, the study narrows the field for future research into the cognitive and communicative foundations of human language. | By demonstrating which universals truly hold up under evolutionary scrutiny, the study narrows the field for future research into the cognitive and communicative foundations of human language. | ||
'''Attributions:''' | |||
Republished from Max Planck Society. https://www.mpg.de/25723124/1114-evan-enduring-patterns-in-the-world-s-languages-150495-x | |||
Based on paper by Annemarie Verkerk et al, Enduring constraints on grammar revealed by Bayesian spatiophylogenetic analyses, ''Nature Human Behaviour'' (2025). DOI: 10.1038/s41562-025-02325-z https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-025-02325-z | |||
Tag: kimbo.wiki private wiki collection. Kimbo's log: Earthdate 20251119.3z | |||
Latest revision as of 03:47, 19 November 2025
To the Point
- Linguistic universals: Of the 191 proposed linguistic universals, about one-third are statistically supported across more than 1,700 languages.
- A wealth of data and state-of-the-art statistical methods: Using Grambank and Bayesian statistical models that control for genealogical and geographic influences, the strongest evidence emerges for patterns of word order and hierarchical agreement.
- Evolutionary framework: The repeated evolution of these patterns suggests there are shared cognitive and communicative constraints, which narrows the search for truly universal features of human language.
Despite the vast diversity of human languages, specific grammatical patterns appear again and again. A new study reveals that around a third of the long-proposed “linguistic universals” — patterns thought to hold across all languages — are statistically supported when examined with state-of-the-art evolutionary methods.
An international team led by Annemarie Verkerk (Saarland University) and Russell D. Gray (Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology) used Grambank, the world’s most comprehensive database of grammatical features, to test 191 proposed universals across more than 1,700 languages. Traditionally, linguists have attempted to circumvent the genealogical and geographic non-independence of languages by sampling widely separated languages.
However, sampling can fail to remove all dependencies, reduce statistical power and does not identify historical pathways. The Bayesian spatio-phylogenetic analyses used by the authors accounted for both the genealogical and geographic non-independence of languages — a level of statistical rigour rarely achieved in previous work.
Languages do not evolve at random
“In the face of huge linguistic diversity, it is intriguing to find that languages don’t evolve at random,” says Verkerk. “I am delighted that the different types of analyses we did converged on very similar results, suggesting that language change must be a central component in explaining universals.”
The study found strong evidence for patterns involving word order (such as whether verbs precede or follow objects) and hierarchical universals (such as dependencies in which arguments are marked in grammatical agreement). The patterns predicted by the supported universals have evolved repeatedly across the world’s languages, suggesting deep-rooted constraints in how humans structure communication.
Senior author Russell Gray reflected, “We discussed whether to write this up as a glass-half-empty paper — 'look how many proposed universals don’t hold' — or a glass-half-full paper — 'there’s robust statistical support for about a third'. In the end, we chose to highlight the patterns that evolve repeatedly, showing that shared cognitive and communicative pressures push languages towards a limited set of preferred grammatical solutions.”
By demonstrating which universals truly hold up under evolutionary scrutiny, the study narrows the field for future research into the cognitive and communicative foundations of human language.
Attributions:
Republished from Max Planck Society. https://www.mpg.de/25723124/1114-evan-enduring-patterns-in-the-world-s-languages-150495-x
Based on paper by Annemarie Verkerk et al, Enduring constraints on grammar revealed by Bayesian spatiophylogenetic analyses, Nature Human Behaviour (2025). DOI: 10.1038/s41562-025-02325-z https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-025-02325-z
Tag: kimbo.wiki private wiki collection. Kimbo's log: Earthdate 20251119.3z
