Networking Phylogeny for Indo-European and Austronesian Languages

Harnessing cognitive abilities of many individuals, a language evolves upon their mutual interactions establishing a persistent social environment to which language is closely attuned. Human history is encoded in the rich sets of linguistic data by means of symmetry patterns that are not always feasibly represented by trees. Here we use the methods developed in the study of complex networks to decipher accurately symmetry records on the language phylogeny of the Indo-European and the Austronesian language families, considering, in both cases, the samples of fifty different languages. In particular, we support the Anatolian theory of Indo-European origin and the ‘express train’ model of Austronesian expansion from South-East Asia, with an essential role for the Batanes islands located between the Philippines and Taiwan

Temporal Phylogenetic Networks and Logic Programming

The concept of a temporal phylogenetic network is a mathematical model of evolution of a family of natural languages. It takes into account the fact that languages can trade their characteristics with each other when linguistic communities are in contact, and also that a contact is only possible when the languages are spoken at the same time. We show how computational methods of answer set programming and constraint logic programming can be used to generate plausible conjectures about contacts between prehistoric linguistic communities, and illustrate our approach by applying it to the evolutionary history of Indo-European languages. To appear in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP)

Kernelizations for the hybridization number problem on multiple nonbinary trees

Given a finite set $X$, a collection $\mathcal{T}$ of rooted phylogenetic trees on $X$ and an integer $k$, the Hybridization Number problem asks if there exists a phylogenetic network on $X$ that displays all trees from $\mathcal{T}$ and has reticulation number at most $k$. We show two kernelization algorithms for Hybridization Number, with kernel sizes $4k(5k)^t$ and $20k^2(\Delta^+-1)$ respectively, with $t$ the number of input trees and $\Delta^+$ their maximum outdegree. Experiments on simulated data demonstrate the practical relevance of these kernelization algorithms. In addition, we present an $n^{f(k)}t$-time algorithm, with $n=|X|$ and $f$ some computable function of $k$

Networks uncover hidden lexical borrowing in Indo-European language evolution

Language evolution is traditionally described in terms of family trees with ancestral languages splitting into descendent languages. However, it has long been recognized that language evolution also entails horizontal components, most commonly through lexical borrowing. For example, the English language was heavily influenced by Old Norse and Old French; eight per cent of its basic vocabulary is borrowed. Borrowing is a distinctly non-tree-like process—akin to horizontal gene transfer in genome evolution—that cannot be recovered by phylogenetic trees. Here, we infer the frequency of hidden borrowing among 2346 cognates (etymologically related words) of basic vocabulary distributed across 84 Indo-European languages. The dataset includes 124 (5%) known borrowings. Applying the uniformitarian principle to inventory dynamics in past and present basic vocabularies, we find that 1373 (61%) of the cognates have been affected by borrowing during their history. Our approach correctly identified 117 (94%) known borrowings. Reconstructed phylogenetic networks that capture both vertical and horizontal components of evolutionary history reveal that, on average, eight per cent of the words of basic vocabulary in each Indo-European language were involved in borrowing during evolution. Basic vocabulary is often assumed to be relatively resistant to borrowing. Our results indicate that the impact of borrowing is far more widespread than previously thought

Networks of lexical borrowing and lateral gene transfer in language and genome evolution

Like biological species, languages change over time. As noted by Darwin, there are many parallels between language evolution and biological evolution. Insights into these parallels have also undergone change in the past 150 years. Just like genes, words change over time, and language evolution can be likened to genome evolution accordingly, but what kind of evolution? There are fundamental differences between eukaryotic and prokaryotic evolution. In the former, natural variation entails the gradual accumulation of minor mutations in alleles. In the latter, lateral gene transfer is an integral mechanism of natural variation. The study of language evolution using biological methods has attracted much interest of late, most approaches focusing on language tree construction. These approaches may underestimate the important role that borrowing plays in language evolution. Network approaches that were originally designed to study lateral gene transfer may provide more realistic insights into the complexities of language evolution