Articlegreen2015

A comparison of worldwide phonemic and genetic variation in human populations

Nicole Creanza · Merritt Ruhlen · Trevor J. Pemberton · Noah A. Rosenberg · Marcus William Feldman · Sohini Ramachandran

174 citations0/0 files storedProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Language and cultural evolution Linguistics and language evolution Forensic and Genetic Research

Abstract

Worldwide patterns of genetic variation are driven by human demographic history. Here, we test whether this demographic history has left similar signatures on phonemes-sound units that distinguish meaning between words in languages-to those it has left on genes. We analyze, jointly and in parallel, phoneme inventories from 2,082 worldwide languages and microsatellite polymorphisms from 246 worldwide populations. On a global scale, both genetic distance and phonemic distance between populations are significantly correlated with geographic distance. Geographically close language pairs share significantly more phonemes than distant language pairs, whether or not the languages are closely related. The regional geographic axes of greatest phonemic differentiation correspond to axes of genetic differentiation, suggesting that there is a relationship between human dispersal and linguistic variation. However, the geographic distribution of phoneme inventory sizes does not follow the predictions of a serial founder effect during human expansion out of Africa. Furthermore, although geographically isolated populations lose genetic diversity via genetic drift, phonemes are not subject to drift in the same way: within a given geographic radius, languages that are relatively isolated exhibit more variance in number of phonemes than languages with many neighbors. This finding suggests that relatively isolated languages are more susceptible to phonemic change than languages with many neighbors. Within a language family, phoneme evolution along genetic, geographic, or cognate-based linguistic trees predicts similar ancestral phoneme states to those predicted from ancient sources. More genetic sampling could further elucidate the relative roles of vertical and horizontal transmission in phoneme evolution.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 174 citations exist upstream.

References

1993Spatial Autocorrelation: Trouble or New Paradigm?2022The World Atlas of Language Structures Online 2014Ethnologue. Languages of the World 2014Ethnologue. Languages of the World 2004The Growth and Maintenance of Linguistic Complexity 2012Mapping the Origins and Expansion of the Indo-European Language Family 1998Historical Linguistics: An Introduction 1987A Guide to the World’s Languages

Cited by

2019The areal typology of western Middle and South America: Towards a comprehensive view 2017Kinship structures create persistent channels for language transmission 2021Long-term gene–culture coevolution and the human evolutionary transition 2022Best practices for spatial language data harmonization, sharing and map creation—A case study of Uralic 2017Inferring patterns of folktale diffusion using genomic data 2019Exploring correlations in genetic and cultural variation across language families in Northeast Asia

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.