Dr. Simon J. Greenhill
I research why and how people created all the amazing languages around us, and what they tell us about human prehistory.
I use (mainly) Bayesian phylogenetic methods to tackle these questions and have investigated everything from how the Austronesian peoples settled the Pacific, to modelling the co-evolution of linguistic structure. And I have built a number of large-scale databases to help answer these questions.
You can find me on Twitter or Mastodon, at the University of Auckland.
Languages vary in how they signal “who does what to whom”. Three main strategies to indicate the participant roles of “who” and “whom” are case, verbal indexing, and rigid word order. Languages that disambiguate these roles with case tend to have either verb-final or flexible word order. Most previous studies that found these patterns used limited language samples and overlooked the causal mechanisms that could jointly explain the association between all three features. Here we analyze grammatical data from a Grambank sample of 1705 languages with phylogenetic causal graph methods. Our results …
Abstract PDF 10.1038/s41598-024-51542-5For over a century, the phoneme has played a central role in linguistic research. In recent years, collections of phoneme inventories, originally designed for cross-linguistic purposes, have increasingly been used in comparative studies involving neighbouring disciplines. Despite the extended application of this type of data, there has been no research into its comparability or tests of its reliability. In this study, we carry out a systematic comparison of nine popular phoneme inventory collections. We render them comparable by linking them to standardised formats for the handling of …
Abstract PDF 10.1093/jole/lzad011Many recent proposals claim that languages adapt to their environments. The linguistic niche hypothesis claims that languages with numerous native speakers and substantial proportions of nonnative speakers (societies of strangers) tend to lose grammatical distinctions. In contrast, languages in small, isolated communities should maintain or expand their grammatical markers. Here, we test these claims using a global dataset of grammatical structures, Grambank. We model the impact of the number of native speakers, the proportion of nonnative speakers, the number of linguistic neighbors, and the …
Abstract PDF 10.1126/sciadv.adf7704Greenhill SJ. 2023. A shared foundation of language change. Science, 6656, 374-375.
As the world changes, humans encounter new things that need to be described using a finite set of words. A common strategy for labeling these novelties is to reuse existing words—i.e., word meaning extension. For example, “mouse” can refer to a computer control device. Children also creatively overextend word meanings as they learn their languages. The need to name novelties has been present during the evolution of language, often resulting in the use of one word to express two different meanings. For example, Russian labels (colexifies) both “tree” and “wood” with “derevo” (1); this is a …
Abstract 10.1126/science.adj2154