Re: CHAT: Genetics: was: CHAT: minimum phonemes, was vrindo

>On Wed, 23 Jun 1999, alypius wrote:
>
>>
>> Sometime last year, Discover magazine had an article about how DNA
testing
>> had shown that the Japanese were definitely descended from Korean
>> immigrants.  Of course, both these peoples will likely be displeased by
this
>> discovery.  This seems like very strong supporting evidence that Japanese
is
>> an offshoot of the Korean tongue.  ~alypius
>>
>
>I think it is rather dangerous to try and link genetic descent
>and linguistic descent - the two don't have anything to do with
>each other. While linguistic ability is 'in the genes', as the
>phrase goes, the language itself is not. Linking the genetic
>affilations of an ethnic group with the linguistic affiliation
>of that group is a lot like the discredited practice in Indo-European
>archeology of linking a certain kind of pottery to a certain
>linguistic subgrouping.
>
>Boudewijn Rempt  | http://www.xs4all.nl/~bsarempt
Cavilli-Sforza, in connection with the human genome research project, has
demonstrated that there is a very strong--not perfect, but very
strong--relationship between genetic relatedness and linguistic relatedness.
Of course, this relationship is breaking down in modern assimilationist
cultures with diverse immigrants, but it is true of people who continue to
live in their native lands.  When one combines the genetic evidence with the
linguistic evidence for "Niplang's" relationship to Korean, I would not
regard the evidence as merely additive, but multiplicative.  I was not
making my statement on the basis of genetic evidence *alone*.  In
comparison, the Finns are genetically Germans, but no one claims that
Finnish is related to German--it was clearly learned from the Saami.
However, if Finnish had numerous similarities to German--which it does
not--it would then be logical to conclude, with a high degree of
probability, that Finnish was a derivative of German, as are the people.

A note on English:  in spite of its many romance loanwords, no one would
mistake English for anything other than a Teutonic language.  Its most
"basic" wordstock, its grammar, its propensity for compounding all mark it
as a relative of German.  And, indeed, the English are descended from low
German tribes--if there were any debate as to whether English was a Teutonic
or Romance language,  this additional knowledge--in addition to the other
evidence--would argue very heavily in favor of English's Germanic origins.

Sidenote:  I think of English as the ultimate Franglais--a linguistic
Frankenstein's monster.  Old English and French both strike me as possessing
a kind of internal harmony, but they are two good things that don't go well
together.  Yuck.  ~alypius