Relative choronology

Three methods of reconstruction

Datos Bibliográficos

ID10141386
AutoresMatthew Y Chen (University of California San Diego, autor de correspondencia)
Año1976
Volumen12
Número2
Páginas209-258
Fecha de publicación1976-09-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaJournal of Linguistics (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0022-2267 • E-ISSN: 1469-7742
EditorialCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/s0022226700004977
OpenAlexW2015525331
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas2
Referencias citadas18

In reconstructing protoforms and linguistic histories, many methods can and have been employed with varying degrees of effectiveness (cf. Bonfante, 1945, for a general discussion). For the specific purpose of establishing the time sequence of phonological changes according to which sound systems have evolved, traditionally two procedures have been most frequently followed: one is to sift the historical records for clues to the dates of linguistic innovations, and the other is to infer from the systematic correspondences between protoforms and their modern reflexes the internally motivated order of diachronic rules

Biology · Comparative method · Linguistics · Natural language processing · Phonology · Sequence (biology · Sound change · Computer Science · History · Linguistic Variation and Morphology · Philosophy · Phonetics and Phonology Research · Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation