New article out of Australia challenges the current view that Polynesian agriculture and language arrived together from Taiwan. A cite from the news article:A detailed look at the linguistics of the region also casts doubt on the explanatory power of the “out of Taiwan” model, according to Donohue and Denham. Languages change over time and as populations move around. If the Austronesian languages came to the region through a southward Taiwanese migration of peoples, one would expect that the languages spoken in the northern part of the region would be more similar to the original source language than the ones spoken in the southern part, which matches the dispersal of some archaeological markers. But that is not the linguistic pattern in Island Southeast Asia. According to Donohue and Denham, there is no linguistic evidence for an orderly north-to-south dispersal.Here's a link to the journal article: http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/650991
Irregular patterns in the vocabulary and grammar and other linguistic anomalies throughout the region call into question the idea that the language came to the region through mass migration. Rather, Donohue and Denham suggest that the profile of the Austronesian languages in Island Southeast Asia is “consistent with the mechanisms of language shift and abnormal transmission.”
Taken as a whole, the evidence from genetics, archaeology and linguistics calls into the question the idea that agriculture and language spread together, Donohue and Denham conclude.
“The demonstration that farming and language did not reach Island Southeast Asia together has implications for other places where that idea has been applied, including Europe and sub-Saharan Africa,” Denham said.
_______________________
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums!
I would hate to call on a bias, but Australia is no friend to Taiwan, so why would they support the Taiwan origination hypothesis?
ReplyDeleteCall me oversensitive, but I know that the research (meaning the funding) can be influenced by politics, so what may appear objective in form, may be selectively biased in perspective to please certain governments who do business with China.
And I'm certain that China would not like to prevent any academic study from being published that increases the status of Taiwan, such as the origination hypothesis.
Michael, your link appears to be behind a paywall, so I can't see who's funding the project to lend some credence to my theory. Care to share that with us?
http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/business/04/10/10/govt-sees-drop-tourists-investments-taiwan
ReplyDeleteThis short article highlights an aspect of ECFA I hadn't thought of - worries from the Philippines that as the jobs in Taiwan dry up, a lot of their overseas workers in taiwan will have to return home.
Pardon my error...
ReplyDeleteI meant to say:
And I'm certain that China would like to prevent any academic study from being published that increases the status of Taiwan, such as the origination hypothesis.
hmm interesting
ReplyDelete"And I'm certain that China would like to prevent any academic study from being published that increases the status of Taiwan, such as the origination hypothesis."
ReplyDeleteWhy not? Now they can claim that Australia has been an undisputed part of China since the last Ice Age.
I hear they have ores China would like to get. Just as Rio Tinto.
This study sounds like garbage.
ReplyDelete"one would expect that the languages spoken in the northern part of the region would be more similar to the original source language than the ones spoken in the southern part"
So New York English should be closer to Oxford English than Auckland English is? Come on. The Taiwan origin hypothesis is accepted by the vast majority of historical linguists.