Re: Italian vs Turkish

From: John Atkinson (johnacko_at_bigpond.com)
Date: 12/30/04 

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 09:49:29 GMT

"Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@worldnet.att.net> wrote :
> >
> > Isn't it highly probable that all languages did not have one common
> > ancestor?
>
> No.

For something about which we have absolutely no evidence one way or another,
and can see no way in which we're ever likely to get any, to say it's
"probable" or "improbable" is rather meaningless.

Though, if I had to make a bet on this (which I wouldn't, because it could
never be determined who'd won), I'd plump for monogenesis like Peter, as the
(marginally) more economical hypothesis.

John.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Italian vs Turkish
    ... "Peter T. Daniels" writes: ... >> Isn't it highly probable that all languages did not have one common ... There's a common ancestor of Nicuraguan Sign Language and Basque? ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: Italian vs Turkish
    ... Isn't it highly probable that all languages did not have one common ... Regards, ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: What Came Before Monkies?
    ... man is thought to have evolved from the great Ape about 130,000 years ... So whether you accept common descent or not, ... recent common ancestor was with chimps. ... -- to find the common ancestor of all the mammals. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: More on Kitz/Dover
    ... >>>common ancestor. ... >>than the length of time their linages have been separate. ... > "ticking" after a split so that A and B begin accumulating differences ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: parser
    ... be more general than just being 'Common Lisp'... ... lots of brittle glue code and crap to marshall between the respective ... So you have only used languages that require you to write FFI code by ... Market share is a useful measure if you want to make money. ...
    (comp.programming)