|
If you are seeing this message, you may be experiencing temporary network problems. Please wait a few minutes and refresh the page. If the problem persists, you may wish to report it to your local Network Manager.
It is also possible that your web browser is not configured or not able to display style sheets. In this case, although the visual presentation will be degraded, the site should continue to be functional. We recommend using the latest version of Microsoft or Mozilla web browser to help minimise these problems.
Wiley InterScience | |||||||||||
  Transactions of the Philological SocietyVolume 103 Issue 2, Pages 193 - 219 Published Online: 13 Jul 2005 Journal compilation © 2009 The Philological Society Published on behalf of the Philological Society
Abstract | References | Full Text: PDF (Size: 318K) | Related Articles | Citation Tracking  From words to dates: water into wine, mathemagic or phylogenetic inference? Copyright 2005 The Philological Society Abstract
Gray & Atkinson's (2003) application of quantitative phylogenetic methods to Dyen, Kruskal & Black's (1992) Indo-European database produced controversial divergence time estimates. Here we test the robustness of these results using an alternative data set of ancient Indo-European languages. We employ two very different stochastic models of lexical evolution – Gray & Atkinson's (2003) finite-sites model and a stochastic-Dollo model of word evolution introduced by Nicholls & Gray (in press). Results of this analysis support the findings of Gray & Atkinson (2003). We also tested the ability of both methods to reconstruct phylogeny and divergence times accurately from synthetic data. The methods performed well under a range of scenarios, including widespread and localized borrowing. | 
|
 | |||||||||
