美洲的已知语言包括世界上近一半的语言家族和广泛的结构类型,需要相当长的时间来发展的多样性水平。本文提出了一种定居和扩展模型,旨在将当前的语言分析与其他史前研究相结合,以研究美洲人口的最早时期。比较了语音和形态学的诊断结构特征,选择了60种北美语言,以覆盖地理和语言家族以及描述的充分性。当可以从西伯利亚进入北美时,频率比较和图形聚类分析用于评估语言类型和家庭与晚更新世时间窗口的适合性。语言证据与早期沿海进入〜24,000和〜15,000年前定义的两个人口阶层一致,然后是内陆入境流,开始~14000ff。和混合沿海/内陆~12,000ff。创始人语言中占主导地位的结构属性仍然反映在现代语言人群中。现代语言地理仍然由进入窗口期间的冰川程度决定。结构概况意味着两个语言上不同且内部不同的古代西伯利亚语言种群提供了创始美国人口。
目的:描述早期北美语言人口结构和年代;将结构类型的分布与最早定居点的考古学和古气候学证据保持一致。提出了一种改进的早期结算和扩展模型,并提出了一些优先研究问题。
方法:基于地理和语言证据的三方地理语言学划分的语言分类。对60种代表结构的语言的语音和形态模式的调查,地理,和北美的家谱多样性。调查这些语言中已知或可能具有高稳定性和家庭识别价值的16种形态和语音特征。频率比较和聚类分析,以阐明三方分析,并与古气候和考古学工作所隐含的年代学和地理语言学进行比较。
结果:有足够的证据(语言,考古,遗传,和地质)表示允许进入北美的四个冰川年龄开口:沿海c。24,000和15,000年前;内陆c。14,000年前并持续;和沿海c。12,000年前并持续。现代语言的地理分布反映了开口的地理和年代以及它们形成的两个人类和语言人口阶层,似乎还有创始语言的结构类型。
结论:北美定居的改进模型(两个年代地层,四个条目);与其他拟议模型的比较。语言学的进一步问题和研究问题,遗传,和考古研究。
The known languages of the Americas comprise nearly half of the world\'s language families and a wide range of structural types, a level of diversity that required considerable time to develop. This paper proposes a model of settlement and expansion designed to integrate current linguistic analysis with other prehistoric research on the earliest episodes in the peopling of the Americas. Diagnostic structural features from phonology and morphology are compared across 60 North American languages chosen for coverage of geography and language families and adequacy of description. Frequency comparison and graphic cluster analysis are applied to assess the fit of linguistic types and families with late Pleistocene time windows when entry from Siberia to North America was possible. The linguistic evidence is consistent with two population strata defined by early coastal entries ~24,000 and ~15,000 years ago, then an inland entry stream beginning ~14,000 ff. and mixed coastal/inland ~12,000 ff. The dominant structural properties among the founder languages are still reflected in the modern linguistic populations. The modern linguistic geography is still shaped by the extent of glaciation during the entry windows. Structural profiles imply that two linguistically distinct and internally diverse ancient Siberian linguistic populations provided the founding American populations.
OBJECTIVE: Describe early North American linguistic population structure and chronology; align distribution of structural types with archeological and paleoclimatological evidence on the earliest settlements. Propose an improved model of early settlement and expansion and pose some priority research questions.
METHODS: Classification of languages based on a tripartite geolinguistic division based on geographical and linguistic evidence. Survey of phonological and morphological patterns of 60 languages representing the structural, geographical, and genealogical diversity of North America. Survey of 16 morphological and phonological features of known or likely high stability and family-identifying value across those languages. Frequency comparison and cluster analysis to elucidate the tripartite analysis and compare to the chronology and geolinguistics implied by paleoclimatological and archeological work.
RESULTS: There is enough evidence (linguistic, archeological, genetic, and geological) to indicate four glacial-age openings allowing entries to North America: coastal c. 24,000 and 15,000 years ago; inland c. 14,000 years ago and continuing; and coastal c. 12,000 years ago and continuing. Geographical distribution of modern languages reflects the geography and chronology of the openings and the two human and linguistic population strata they formed, and plausibly also the structural types of the founding languages.
CONCLUSIONS: Improved model of North American settlement (two chronological strata, four entries); comparison to other proposed models. Further questions and research issues for linguistic, genetic, and archeological research.